Australian Feminist Seahag Wants It To Be Illegal To Be A Stay-At-Home Mother

 

http://www.chicksontheright.com/australian-feminist-seahag-wants-illegal-stay-home-mother/

How about “No” with a side of “F— the crap off!”

That being said – at least there is one militant feminist who is being completely honest in how she feels about women who choose to stay home with their kids.

A columnist from Australia named Sarrah Le Marquand has written a piece entitled “It should be illegal to be a stay-at-home mum.” And, yes, the entire thing is as ignorant and offensive as the headline sounds.

Basically, Sarrah’s agenda here is to bemoan the fact that there are more men than women in the workforce and it’s all those EEEEEEEEEVIL stay-at-home mothers who are to blame. See, the statistics of men vs. women in the workplace are so much more important than the choices of individual women. Women who decide that taking care of their children is a bigger priority that pursuing a career outside the home are just selfish, you know. There are TONS of strangers willing to take care of your kids while you go after high-powered careers and salaries. It’s just feeding and changing diapers, after all. How hard can it be?

(I’m being sarcastic here, of course.)

“One of the areas of greatest untapped potential in the Australian labour force is inactive and/or part-time working women, especially those with children,’’ concluded the landmark study. “There are potentially large losses to the economy when women stay at home or work short part-time hours.’’

Right on cue, hysteria ensued, with commentators from coast to coast howling in indignation at the very idea that the uppity OECD would insinuate Australia might have a tiny bit of a problem with our female workforce participation rates.

For days you couldn’t walk past a television, radio or computer screen without encountering a defensive rant about how the most valuable work a woman can do involves nappies, play-doh, and a strict adherence to only leaving the family home during the hours of 9am to 5pm to attend playgroup or a similar non-work sanctioned activity.

And then we wonder why Australia continues to languish in the bottom third of OECD member states when it comes to female employment. It’s no mystery; our collective support for working women makes Donald Trump’s cabinet look like Women’s March HQ by comparison.

You know, for a movement that proclaims itself to be all about “WOMEN’S CHOICE!!!”, feminists act like a bunch of totalitarian Puritans when it comes to allowing women the choice to stay home with their kids.

Sarrah’s solution to the problem? Take the choice away from women entirely! Yes, raising kids is important, but so is our feminist agenda! You’re not a real woman unless you’re gainfully employed and padding out the country’s employment statistics! Your kids can fend for themselves!

So it’s not as simple as suggesting that the OECD’s rallying call to utilise the potential of stay-at-home mums is an insult to mothers — on the contrary, it is the desperately needed voice of reason that Australians cannot afford to ignore.

Rather than wail about the supposed liberation in a woman’s right to choose to shun paid employment, we should make it a legal requirement that all parents of children of school-age or older are gainfully employed.

Yes, because mothers who stay home while their kids are in school are a total drain on the economy. All they do is sit around in their pajamas, eating bon-bons, and watching daytime trash TV. It’s not like they continue their work of making the household run or are on-call in case one of their children calls home from school sick or doing a myriad of other things that are required for the upkeep of a family.

Though there is one statement from Sarrah that I am glad to finally hear from a feminist. Namely that feminism isn’t even about choice at all. It’s about forcing equality down everyone’s throats –

Only when the tiresome and completely unfounded claim that “feminism is about choice” is dead and buried (it’s not about choice, it’s about equality) will we consign restrictive gender stereotypes to history.

Not that we didn’t already know that feminism had set itself up to be the societal police for the actions of all women everywhere. But it is good to hear one actually say it out loud.

And here’s my five-second rebuttal: 100% perfect equality blows. Especially when it comes to equal outcomes. Always has, always will. Just ask Venezuela.

So… what does Sarrah suggest for the women (and men – for there are certainly stay-at-home dads as well) who would still choose to stay home instead of working, even if it was mandated by law? Send in the police to arrest them for putting their families above their careers? What would the charges be? Being a good parent? Caring about your kids more than the state? Not being a good feminist?

I actually wouldn’t mind any of that being stated officially on my permanent record, quite frankly.

Attitudes like this are the Number One reason why I am – and never will be – a feminist. For the simple reason that feminism’s biggest enemy is the stay-at-home mother. My own mom stayed home with her children as we were growing up – even when we were all old enough to be in school all day. It was her choice, made between her and my dad when they started having kids. It was always good to know that someone was at home just in case we needed them while at school. True, emergencies didn’t happen quite that often. But when they did, I know I was grateful that Mom was available to help.

And it wasn’t just knowing that Mom was home in case we got sick or had to leave school early. And not even that Mom could come be a parent volunteer in our classes. It was also coming home after Mom had spent the day taking care of the house. We had clean clothes, a clean home, and dinner on the way. Errands had been run and it felt like a home – not just a building where we slept and ate meals with these random weirdos that we happened to be related to. Mom’s focus was 100% on her family. It wasn’t divided between a career and her kids.

Sure, things got tough and there were times that our family could have used an extra paycheck. But we didn’t have to go to some daycare after school and we always knew that we belonged wherever our parents were. At the time, I didn’t know how important that was. But looking back as an adult, I realize how different my life would have been if my mother hadn’t chosen to be a homemaker (that’s how she always described herself – if it’s good enough for her, it’s good enough for me). There’s not a day that goes by that I am grateful for the choices Mom made on behalf of her family and her children. And now, her grandchildren are benefiting from her decisions as well.

I don’t say this to disparage women who do divide their time between career and family. Like I said – it’s a CHOICE. If that is what works for your family and your situation, you go for it! The key factor in this is that you aren’t forced to do something that you wouldn’t otherwise do. You don’t let yourself be brow-beaten by these shrill harpies who are more interested in gender quotas that the well-being of individuals and families.

Also – this illustration never gets old –

 

 

Feminism isn’t about victimized women against the evil patriarchy. It’s about destroying families and the family structure.

Sarrah Le Marquand can take her idiotic idea of criminalizing stay-at-home mothers and shove it.

 

Feminism Is Literally Killing Women By Telling Them That 3rd World Countries Are Safer Than The West

 

The night before she died, Danielle had met some British tourists at Palolem.

One of them, Dave Woodruff, 37, said she was ‘free-spirited’ and ‘really interesting’ but that a group of about five [Indian] men ‘would pull her back and say, “You’re with us, remember?”.’

He told The Guardian that Danielle shrugged off the instructions…

— The Daily Mail, reporting on the events preceding Danielle McLaughlin murder in India

Feminism kills. And for Australian Elly Warren and dual British-Irish national Danielle McLaughlin it literally killed them. Years of cultural indoctrination have taught Western women that they are supposedly in constant danger at places like American college campuses, but can “find themselves” Eat, Pray, Love-style in perilous Third World countries. Even with the hazier statistics-gathering employed in poorer societies, we can easily tell that this is an unabashed lie.

Danielle McLaughlin’s rape and death by strangulation in India is the most recent high-profile example of a white girl enabled by a self-infatuated professional feminist clique. Because the white male lower middle-class accountant back home, whether in North America, the United Kingdom, Europe, or Australia, is the true embodiment of all evil, women like McLaughlin are encouraged to spread their time in far-flung, poverty-stricken countries where tourists, who live like kings compared to the locals, are prime targets for petty robbery, let alone more painful crimes like mutilation, rape, or homicide.

In a development that will shock no one, McLaughlin was travelling alone. She certainly met people along the way, including the British tourists she saw shortly before she died, but for the most part did her own thing. This is quite remarkable. Here in the West, however, even a woman walking to her dorm at the University of Texas (or any other institution of higher learning) seemingly requires a SWAT team to protect her from fellow students in “rape culture” infested campuses:

 

In a similarly preventable tragedy, Elly Warren was raped and murdered in Mozambique, which even the leftist Guardian admits has a homicide rate around double that of the United States. And this is based on what we know, as public officials in Third World countries tend to be much less accountable and more corrupt than their Western counterparts. Plus, as I have already mentioned, statistical measurements are far less reliable and crime is probably grossly underestimated in these more indigent states. Authorities actually have an incentive to fudge the numbers, as desperately needed foreign investment, tourism, and aid often depends on the perception that public safety is improving. And far more cashed-up tourists are lucrative sources of income for local criminals of modest means.

Inexplicably, Warren’s body was found in a public change room at a location popular with backpackers. Yes, that’s right, in sub-Saharan Africa. The mind boggles at both the personal thought processes and the cultural conditioning back home in Australia that led her to this incredibly stupid life—and death—decision. Meanwhile, colleges in her native land, like the University of Melbourne, teach female students that an insidious rape culture on campus threatens to take them at any moment.

 

The film Eat, Pray, Love, starring Julia Roberts, is both a reflection of and a further impetus for women leaving their “stifling” homes in the West for so-called spiritually-fulfilling adventures in the Third World. It is the embodiment of what Danielle McLaughlin in particular appeared to be seeking. Ironically, if you look at Roberts’ character Elizabeth Gilbert, a stereotypical career-obsessed woman, she blames her American life—and, by extension, an implicit patriarchy—for her unhappiness at the film’s beginning, rather than the feminist dogma really behind her “empowered” but miserable existence as a corporate cog.

The Roosh V Forum has duly noted that Elizabeth Gilbert recently secured a second divorce. She is childless at nearly 50 and now in a lesbian relationship, having spoken of her previous addiction to finding multitudes of men and sleeping with them:

Seduction was never a casual sport for me; it was more like a heist, adrenalizing and urgent. I would plan the heist for months, scouting out the target, looking for unguarded entries. Then I would break into his deepest vault, steal all his emotional currency and spend it on myself.

And Gilbert can add yet another job description to divorcee, late-blooming lesbian, and self-obsessed cultural appropriator: peddler of doom for women who follow her example. Not every woman can come back and write a vapid account of how she became even more narcissistic overseas than when she originally left the West. Just ask the families of Elly Warren and Danielle McLaughlin.

 

The rise of Donald Trump in the Republican primaries and caucuses, the general election campaign, and now the White House has been greeted with calls of “Nazi!,” “deplorable!,” and “racist!” towards both him and millions of his supporters. And what’s the effect, aside from leftists getting sore throats and beating up people, including from behind and the side like against Richard Spencer? For a start, these epithets become hopeless abstractions because they can be applied to pretty much anything or anyone someone doesn’t like. Still, leftists’ obsession with overgeneralizations has a much longer history, one that intersects heavily with the deaths of Elly Warren and Danielle McLaughlin.

The advent of radical feminism and the idea that all Western men are potential rapists or plain rapists has desensitized women to the true dangers both at home and in the wider world. Through SJWs linking things like a man looking at pornography to “rape culture,” actual rape, where proper evidence shows an egregious crime, becomes rapidly devoid of its true meaning. Such madness has deleterious consequences, like men approaching women in some British metropolitan areas being called “hate criminals.”

Nevertheless, the results of this mind-warping also hit women–and very badly. After being repeatedly told they have more to fear in the First World than the Third, they are primed to meet the sort of grisly ends that found Elly Warren and Danielle McLaughlin.

http://www.returnofkings.com/117184/feminism-is-literally-killing-women-by-telling-them-that-3rd-world-countries-are-safer-than-the-west

 

Former DNC Official Partnered With Convicted Bomb Maker To Investigate Trump

A former official with the Democratic National Committee has worked in recent months with a convicted domestic terrorist-turned-activist known as the “Speedway Bomber” to gather information on Donald Trump, The Daily Caller has learned.

That work culminated in a Washington, D.C. meeting in December between the ex-DNC operative, Alexandra Chalupa, the convicted bomber, Brett Kimberlin, and a South Africa-born Israeli man named Yoni Ariel.

Ariel, whose real name is Jonathan Schwartz, traveled to Washington, D.C. to brief Chalupa and Kimberlin on his knowledge of Russia’s activities during the campaign.

Chalupa, an activist of Ukrainian heritage who is strongly opposed to Trump, also directed Ariel to the Justice Department, sources told TheDC.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/21/former-dnc-official-partnered-with-convicted-bomb-maker-to-investigate-trump/#ixzz4c0xS4Rus

The Story Behind John McCain Calling Rand Paul a Russian Agent

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh1rhbYD99Q

Did you know that Senator John McCain has been working as an insider for the Rothschild syndicate for many years? McCain helped Rothschild agent George Soros to gain control of the newly independent nation of Montenegro. This video will help you understand why Senator McCain was so angry at Senator Rand Paul for objecting to Montenegro joining NATO.