Camille Paglia Questions & Answers

Obama's Critical Moment Approaches Plus: Letters from a tea party organizer, Palin defender, Obama critic, Polanski supporter, male soprano and more By Camille Paglia Dear Camille, I am amazed at the easy pass you still give the Obama administration. You continue to excuse his blunders and misses as the result of a lack of experience and bad advisors. Many of Obama's policies have been a scary continuation of the worst ideas of the last year of the Bush administration, while undoing some of the few things they got right. You have been hitting that note about the need to shake up his staff for quite a while. Yet isn't it true that people tend to surround themselves with like minds? You said recently that "I am hopeful that he will rid himself soon of these simplistic anti-American clichés." Has it occurred to you that maybe that is just who he is and the people he surrounds himself with are just a reflection of himself? I see Obama and his presidency as the crowning of the ideas of that northeastern liberal aristocracy you so much criticize. He appears to me as a cliché of all their pathologies, and yet you seem infatuated with him. You continually praise his speech and demeanor while to me it seems like a mask for his lack of substance. I find him to be a man of an oversized ego, with a messianic complex and a cult-like following, which would not be so scary if he didn't wear the media as his own personal lap dog. As a person born and raised in Latin America who studies history as a hobby, I can't help but see President Obama as the closest thing we have had in this country to the long line of populist leaders who have been the scourge of Latin America for decades and sent many of us here into exile. He is not a Chavez-like figure who uses vulgarity and threats as a weapon but a more sophisticated version of a young Peron. Hermes Diaz Miami Yes, ever since week one of the Obama administration, I have been doggedly calling for heads to roll. As months of crass ineptitude drag on, however, the blacklist of those who should be tagged for the guillotine gets longer and longer. The most recent fiasco, of course, was sending the president of the United States on a humiliating fool's errand to beg for the Olympics as a Chicago boondoggle. I cheered when splendiferous Rio de Janeiro rightfully got the gig. You are correct to argue that the cluster of appointees around a person in power reflects his or her belief system and modus operandi. However, it is a mark of leadership to recognize the need for professional evolution beyond an old comfort zone. Obama is approaching a turning point which will define his political future, if he has one. He is surrounded by some mighty small potatoes who need shoveling into the dumpster. The petty provincials need to go, and far more sophisticated and world-savvy analysts must urgently be brought on board. Opponents of Obama are perplexed by the disconnect in polling between Americans' rejection of Obama's policies and his personal popularity. Count me among those who are very critical of many of Obama's actions or evasions but who continue to like him and to believe in his potential as a world leader. It's true he has accomplished nothing thus far and did not remotely deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, a gift carrying a terrible curse. The Nobel should have been the crown of Obama's career and not the butt of jokes. Yet the award has tangible significance insofar as Obama has endorsed the humanistic (if unrealistic) dream of a world without nuclear weapons. The lion may never lie down with the lamb, but politics will always be mired in seething, selfish squalor unless idealistic leaders appeal to our higher nature. Hey, I'm a soldier and have been one for 30 years. My son is a soldier too. I have been deployed to the Iraqi theater, and my son is deployed to the Afghani theater. These are my credentials. I understand your opposition to Iraq and Afghanistan in an intellectual sense, but I probably am tribal, too, and can't understand it in an emotional sense. Here is my take from one who has been there and has someone I love still there. I agree the stated reasons we went to Iraq were in error, but the battles in Iraq and Afghanistan have one redeeming feature. The people we are fighting are tribal. All the nuts and haters are flocking to Iraq and Afghanistan to throw us out and kill us. That is excellent, and here is why. If you look at the terrorist attacks against American target statistics for the 10 years before the Iraq "incursion" and then look at the statistics since, you will find a significant drop. I believe this is because all the crazies are attacking us in Iraq and Afghan, along with the disruptions we are causing their planning cells. While I personally dislike being shot at and targeted for high explosives (from personal experience), I much prefer that to people targeting my family at home. Here's why. In the field I h

It seems feminists only want to address the issues that affect women/girls. If you look at male psychology, and learning males have their weaknesses. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculine_psychology "Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung argued that a father is very important to a boy's development of identity. In his book Absent Fathers, Lost Sons [2] Canadian Jungian analyst Guy Corneau writes that the presence of the father's body during the son's developmental phases is integral in the son developing a positive sense of self as masculine." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- One of the key things feminists have done is weaken the role of fatherhood. By doing so they have created disorder and chaos among males. Boys need a strong father figure as they lack maturity at a young age. Camille Paglia(a known liberal equalist feminist ) has commented that she believes that women are born, but men must "become." So this discredits away the idea that females are the more vulnerable sex psychologically at a young age. I have never heard someone say to a women who is having difficulties "be a woman", doing so would have no effect because a womans femininity does not need to be proven. In fact boys are less mature psychologically till their late teens compared to females. Yet the media and feminist always talk about how girls are disadvantaged and vulnerable. Boys lack of maturity was negated under the old education system because it was more rigid and disciplinary.

This is Camille Paglia's excoriation of The One.. That's what you get for electing an empty suited amateur to the WH... As an Obama supporter and contributor, I am outraged at the slowness with which the standing army of Democratic consultants and commentators publicly expressed discontent with the administration's strategic missteps this year. I suspect there had been private grumbling all along, but the media warhorses failed to speak out when they should have -- from week one after the inauguration, when Obama went flat as a rug in letting Congress pass that obscenely bloated stimulus package. Had more Democrats protested, the administration would have felt less arrogantly emboldened to jam through a cap-and-trade bill whose costs have made it virtually impossible for an alarmed public to accept the gargantuan expenses of national healthcare reform. (Who is naive enough to believe that Obama's plan would be deficit-neutral? Or that major cuts could be achieved without drastic rationing?) http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/09/09/healthcare/ An example of the provincial amateurism of current White House operations was the way the president's innocuous back-to-school pep talk got sandbagged by imbecilic support materials soliciting students to write fantasy letters to "help" the president (a coercive directive quickly withdrawn under pressure). Even worse, the entire project was stupidly scheduled to conflict with the busy opening days of class this week, when harried teachers already have their hands full. Comically, some major school districts, including New York City, were not even open yet. And this is the gang who wants to revamp national healthcare?

of the democrats in her most recent salon piece... "Why has the Democratic Party become so arrogantly detached from ordinary Americans? Though they claim to speak for the poor and dispossessed, Democrats have increasingly become the party of an upper-middle-class professional elite, top-heavy with journalists, academics and lawyers." "As an Obama supporter and contributor, I am outraged at the slowness with which the standing army of Democratic consultants and commentators publicly expressed discontent with the administration's strategic missteps this year." "Had more Democrats protested, the administration would have felt less arrogantly emboldened to jam through a cap-and-trade bill whose costs have made it virtually impossible for an alarmed public to accept the gargantuan expenses of national healthcare reform. (Who is naive enough to believe that Obama's plan would be deficit-neutral? Or that major cuts could be achieved without drastic rationing?)" "By foolishly trying to reduce all objections to healthcare reform to the malevolence of obstructionist Republicans, Democrats have managed to destroy the national coalition that elected Obama and that is unlikely to be repaired." "Why did it take so long for Democrats to realize that this year's tea party and town hall uprisings were a genuine barometer of widespread public discontent and not simply a staged scenario by kooks and conspirators?" "But affluent middle-class Democrats now seem to be complacently servile toward authority and automatically believe everything party leaders tell them. Why?" "The top schools, from the Ivy League on down, promote "critical thinking," which sounds good but is in fact just a style of rote regurgitation of hackneyed approved terms ("racism, sexism, homophobia") when confronted with any social issue. The Democratic brain has been marinating so long in those clichés that it's positively pickled." wow....paglia really lays on the dems...and this lady is a supporter !!! http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/09/09/healthcare/index.html bekind...i hope you had a chance to read the entire article, i was quite stunned at her scathing commentary. she also did one last month i didn't link to....but wasn't anywhere close to this. i've read her pieces for a long time, but she couldn't have hit the nail any better than she has this time....

Salon Magazine's Camille Paglia wrote, "The bureaucracy required to institute and manage a nationalized health system here would be Byzantine beyond belief and would vampirically absorb whatever savings Obama thinks could be made."

and other dems at the levers of power? Obama's healthcare horror Heads should roll -- beginning with Nancy Pelosi's! By Camille Paglia Aug. 12, 2009 | Buyer's remorse? Not me. At the North American summit in Guadalajara this week, President Obama resumed the role he is best at -- representing the U.S. with dignity and authority abroad. This is why I, for one, voted for Obama and continue to support him. The damage done to U.S. prestige by the feckless, buffoonish George W. Bush will take years to repair. Obama has barely begun the crucial mission that he was elected to do. Having said that, I must confess my dismay bordering on horror at the amateurism of the White House apparatus for domestic policy. When will heads start to roll? I was glad to see the White House counsel booted, as well as Michelle Obama's chief of staff, and hope it's a harbinger of things to come. Except for that wily fox, David Axelrod, who could charm gold threads out of moonbeams, Obama seems to be surrounded by juvenile tinhorns, bumbling mediocrities and crass bully boys. Case in point: the administration's grotesque mishandling of healthcare reform, one of the most vital issues facing the nation. Ever since Hillary Clinton's megalomaniacal annihilation of our last best chance at reform in 1993 (all of which was suppressed by the mainstream media when she was running for president), Democrats have been longing for that happy day when this issue would once again be front and center. But who would have thought that the sober, deliberative Barack Obama would have nothing to propose but vague and slippery promises -- or that he would so easily cede the leadership clout of the executive branch to a chaotic, rapacious, solipsistic Congress? House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom I used to admire for her smooth aplomb under pressure, has clearly gone off the deep end with her bizarre rants about legitimate town-hall protests by American citizens. She is doing grievous damage to the party and should immediately step down. http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/08/12/town_halls/

Face it, with ever increasing technology, we see the humanity of the unborn child. Denying the humanity is living in a dream land. I support the child's right to life over a mother's power to abort her pregnancy based on the science and technology. Camille Paglia and Ted Rall admit the humanity of the child, admit abortion is murder and support a mother's abortion powers. I like their honesty.

“The prostitute is not, as feminists claim, the victim of men but rather their conqueror, an outlaw who controls the sexual channel between nature and culture.” Camille Paglia quotes

I have always found it odd that Drudge periodically features such a small-time esoteric character as militant lesbian Camille Paglia. What spurred their unusual relationship in which he links to her stories, and she compliments him in her writing?

"Leaving sex to the feminists is like letting your dog vacation at the taxidermist." — Camille Paglia Is sex with a feminist like a holiday at the morgue? The quote is a tricky metaphor but my interpretation sums it up (ish). (Paglia is saying that if you allow feminists to create the social rules about sexual behaviour there is a serious risk that your sex life will end up dead). I think Paglia has in fact slept with several feminists.

She is mine. "Then it was the stunt of unnerving Wall Street by sending out a shrill duo of slick geeks (Timothy Geithner and Peter Orszag) as the administration's weirdly adolescent spokesmen on economics. Who could ever have confidence in that sorry pair?" Here is the rest of her great column this month: http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/03/11/mercury/ Serious question. Thanks for all serious answers, and I'm not giving the thumbs downs.

"The evening was a near-perfect distillation of contemporary feminism. Pick up a women's studies textbook, visit a college women's center, or look at the websites of leading feminist organizations, and you will likely find the same fixation on intimate anatomy combined with left-wing politics and a poisonous antipathy to men. (Campus feminists were among the most vocal and zealous accusers of the young men on the Duke University lacrosse team who were falsely indicted for rape in 2006.) Contemporary feminism routinely depicts American society as a dangerous patriarchy in which women are under siege--that is the message of the "RAPE FREE ZONE" banner in the Garden. It therefore presents itself as a movement of "liberation," defying the patriarchal oppressor and offering women everywhere the opportunity to make contact with their "real selves." But modern "women's liberation" has little to do with liberty. It aims not to free women to pursue their own interests and inclinations, but rather to reeducate them to attitudes often profoundly contrary to their natures. In Professing Feminism: Education and Indoctrination in Women's Studies (2003), two once-committed women's studies professors, Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, describe how the feminist classroom transforms idealistic female students into "relentless grievance collectors." In 1991, the culture critic and dissident feminist Camille Paglia put the matter even more bluntly. She described women's studies as a jumble of vulgarians, bunglers, whiners, French faddicts, apparatchiks, dough-faced party-liners, pie-in-the-sky utopians and bullying sanctimonious sermonizers. Reasonable, moderate feminists hang back and keep silent in the face of fascism. The embarrassing spectacle at Madison Square Garden, the erratic state of women's studies, and the outbreak of feminist vigilantism at Duke University may tempt some to conclude that the women's movement in the United States is in a state of hopeless, hapless, and permanent disarray. Perhaps American feminism has become hysterical because it has ceased to be useful" http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.28410/pub_detail.asp

She's a libertarian, pro-sex, porn-loving, phallus-glorifying feminist. She very strongly criticizes "victim feminism" and feminists who portray men as the enemy of women. She's like the antichrist to feminists like Andrea Dworkin. She believes that society should get back in touch with its pagan origins and her theories are influenced a lot by Freud. Just wondering what mainstream male anti-feminists think of her, especially non-religious male anti-feminists. (It's more obvious why Christians don't like Paglia.) She believes that women have a lot of sexual power over men (which "mainstream" feminists don't recognise), and she believes women need to be more aware of that power they have, so they can wield it with greater skill, for everyone's benefit. It makes sense to me! No brainless, philistine answers like Rainbow's, please.

my essay is about the articles "common decency" by susan jacoby and "rape: a bigger danger than feminist know" by camille paglia, i have to choose the one that i agree with, i am still not sure with which one i agree, but how can i start it... any suggestions will help me alot! thanks :)

what is this article about, what is it trying to tell the audience, are you for or against it? what is the point of this article? i know that it has to do with rape, but what is it mostly about, can someone please explain it to me with more detail so that i can understand it better, thanks :)

1. Myth: One in four women in college has been the victim of rape or attempted rape. Fact: This mother of all factoids is based on a fallacious feminist study commissioned by Ms. magazine. The researcher, Mary Koss, hand-picked by hard-line feminist Gloria Steinem, acknowledges that 73 percent of the young women she counted as rape victims were not aware they had been raped. Forty-three percent of them were dating their “attacker” again. Rape is a uniquely horrible crime. That is why we need sober and responsible research. Women will not be helped by hyperbole and hysteria. Truth is no enemy of compassion, and falsehood is no friend. (Nara Schoenberg and Sam Roe, “The Making of an Epidemic,” Toledo Blade, October 10, 1993; and Neil Gilbert, “Examining the Facts: Advocacy Research Overstates the Incidence of Data and Acquaintance Rape,” Current Controversies in Family Violence eds. Richard Gelles and Donileen Loseke, Newbury Park, CA.: Sage Publications, 1993, pp.120-132; and Campus Crime and Security, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 1997. *According to this study, campus police reported 1,310 forcible sex offenses on U.S. campuses in one year. That works out to an average of fewer than one rape per campus.) 2. Myth: Women earn 75 cents for every dollar a man earns. Fact: The 75 cent figure is terribly misleading. This statistic is a snapshot of all current full-time workers. It does not consider relevant factors like length of time in the workplace, education, occupation, and number of hours worked per week. (The experience gap is particularly large between older men and women in the workplace.) When economists do the proper controls, the so-called gender wage gap narrows to the point of vanishing. (Essential reading: Women’s Figures: An Illustrated Guide to the Economic Progress of Women in America, by Diana Furchtgott-Roth and Christine Stolba, published by the Independent Women’s Forum and the American Enterprise Institute, Washington, D.C. 2000.) 3. Myth: 30 percent of emergency room visits by women each year are the result of injuries from domestic violence. Fact: This incendiary statistic is promoted by gender feminists whose primary goal seems to be to impugn men. Two responsible government studies report that the nationwide figure is closer to one percent. While these studies may have missed some cases of domestic violence, the 30% figure is a wild exaggeration. (National Center for Health Statistics, National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 1992 Emergency Department Summary , Hyattsville, Maryland, March 1997; and U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Violence-Related Injuries Treated in Hospital Emergency Departments: Washington, D.C., August 1997.) 4. Myth: The phrase “rule of thumb” originated in a man’s right to beat his wife provided the stick was no wider than his thumb. Fact: This is an urban legend that is still taken seriously by activist law professors and harassment workshoppers. The Oxford English Dictionary has more than twenty citations for phrase “rule of thumb” (the earliest from 1692), but not a single mention of beatings, sticks, or husbands and wives. (For a definitive debunking of the hoax see Henry Ansgar Kelly, “Rule of Thumb and the Folklaw of the Husband’s Stick,” The Journal of Legal Education, September 1994.) 5. Myth: Women have been shortchanged in medical research. Fact: The National Institutes of Health and drug companies routinely include women in clinical trials that test for effectiveness of medications. By 1979, over 90% of all NIH-funded trials included women. Beginning in 1985, when the NIH’s National Cancer Center began keeping track of specific cancer funding, it has annually spent more money on breast cancer than any other type of cancer. Currently, women represent over 60% of all subjects in NIH-funded clinical trails. (Essential reading: Cathy Young and Sally Satel, “The Myth of Gender Bias in Medicine,” Washington, D.C.: The Women’s Freedom Network, 1997.) 6. Myth: Women’s Studies Departments empowered women and gave them a voice in the academy. Fact: Women’s Studies empowered a small group of like-minded careerists. They have created an old-girl network that is far more elitist, narrow and closed than any of the old-boy networks they rail against. Vast numbers of moderate or dissident women scholars have been marginalized, excluded and silenced. (Essential reading: everything by Camille Paglia; Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge–Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies; and Christina Hoff Sommers–Who Stole Feminism? How Women have Betrayed Women) EDIT: Marx - That's why I posted it, I had more than 10, but ran out of space. Interesting silence from some.

FROM THE BIBLE God is referred to as "Father" Women are to keep silent in church The man is the 'head' of the woman A woman should cover her head "silly women" Women lamented only having female children - they viewed it as a curse and God "blessed them" with male children. Most Christian denominations do not allow women to be in authority over men. No women priests in any religion! Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, all have a hierarchy with men over women. Why aren't more women, Atheists, like the incomparable, Ayn Rand? Or at least intelligent Pagans, like Camille Paglia? Of course there are scriptures that indicate that Jesus liberated women, Mohammad liberated women - etc, but the fact remains, in the grand scheme, women are suppressed in all the major religions, especially Christianity. WOW! Johnny! 9 women out of 825 men who are honored!!! And those women are dubious!

"Conservative though she may be, I felt that Palin represented an explosion of a brand new style of muscular American feminism. At her startling debut on that day, she was combining male and female qualities in ways that I have never seen before. And she was somehow able to seem simultaneously reassuringly traditional and gung-ho futurist. In terms of redefining the persona for female authority and leadership, Palin has made the biggest step forward in feminism since Madonna channeled the dominatrix persona of high-glam Marlene Dietrich and rammed pro-sex, pro-beauty feminism down the throats of the prissy, victim-mongering, philistine feminist establishment." "As a dissident feminist, I have been arguing since my arrival on the scene nearly 20 years ago that young American women aspiring to political power should be studying military history rather than taking women's studies courses, with their rote agenda of never-ending grievances." "Now that's the Sarah Palin brand of can-do, no-excuses, moose-hunting feminism -- a world away from the whining, sniping, wearily ironic mode of the establishment feminism represented by Gloria Steinem, a Hillary Clinton supporter whose shameless Democratic partisanship over the past four decades has severely limited American feminism and not allowed it to become the big tent it can and should be." rasta, I don't understand your criticism. I asked you to tell what you thought about what she says about Palin and you go after Paglia. I love how so many criticize Paglia the person instead of discussing her ideas//// Talk about being obsessed with personality.

“We may be seeing the first woman president. As a Democrat, I am reeling,” said Camille Paglia, the cultural critic. “That was the best political speech I have ever seen delivered by an American woman politician. Palin is as tough as nails.”

Do you like me, see the pattern that educated feminists who speak out on some of the flaws of the feminist ideology/men's rights are smeared as "in favor of" males in a gender war conceived by academic feminists as a marxist political-group war between oppressors and oppressed? Feminists such as Camille Paglia, Christina Hoff Sommers, Jean Bethke Elshtain and Elizabeth Fox-Genovese have been labeled "antifeminists", or holders of antifeminist views, by other feminists because of their positions regarding oppression and lines of thought within feminism. Authors Patai and Koerge argue that in this way the term "antifeminist" is used to silence academic debate about feminism, and represents "an enormous extension of women's power, allowing any sort of criticism of either women or feminist ideas to fall under the watchful eye of their ideological guardians." Have you experienced this smearing by other feminists with differing veiws?

I generally like Camille, but I see her as being off the mark by supporting B. Obama. To each their own, I guess. Maybe not McCain, but what about a 3rd party candidate?

I'm reading Camille's book "Vamps and Tramps" right now (and boy, is it a doozy . . . I can't believe some of her ridiculous and downright wrong beliefs). But I was intrigued by her mention of being criticized by Pat Califia, who I absolutely adore. I tried Googling for more information, but couldn't find anything about it, probably because it's decades old. Can anyone enlighten me, maybe with some links?

From the PBS Think Tank ranscript of the same name: MR. WATTENBERG: Christina Sommers, what has feminism become? MS. SOMMERS: The orthodox feminists are so carried away with victimology, with a rhetoric of male-bashing that it's full of female chauvinists, if you will. Also, women are quite eager to censor, to silence. And what concerns me most as a philosopher is it's become very anti-intellectual, and I think it poses a serious risk to young women in the universities. Women's studies classes are increasingly a kind of initiation into the most radical wing, the most intolerant wing, of the feminist movement. And I consider myself a whistle-blower. I'm from inside the campus. I teach philosophy. I've seen what's been going on. MR. WATTENBERG: Camille, what has feminism become? MS. PAGLIA: Well, I have been an ardent feminist since the rebirth of the current feminist movement. I'm on the record as being -- as rebelling against my gender-role, as being an open lesbian and so on.In the early 1960s I was researching Amelia Earhart, who for me symbolized the great period of feminism of the '20s and '30s just after women won the right to vote. When this phase of feminism kicked back in the late '60s, it was very positive at first. Women drew the line against men and demanded equal rights. I am an equal opportunity feminist. But very soon it degenerated into a kind of totalitarian 'group think' that we are only now rectifying 20 years later. http://www.pbs.org/thinktank/transcript132.html Do you believe feminism has gone too far? Rio, Sommers and Paglia have earned their stripes in terms of feminism. Why they're labeled as anti-women for speaking up against feminism is a mystery.

Political theorists Harvey Mansfield was bashed by feminist when he informed his female students that the sexual revolution, instead of empowering women, lowered them to the level of men. He said that women now persue sex thoughtlessly and that women will be left high and dry as men become used to "free samples." He said that "women are playing the man's game now and they're bound to lose." Feminist Camille Paglia said something along the same lines, but she's a woman and feminists just ignored her comments. Paglia said that men will marry younger women because they no longer need to get married for steady sex, and when they do get married (in their 30's), they will marry younger women while older, "liberated" women are left out to dry. Do you agree?.

The outdated feminism is of the mind set of Gloria Steinem and crew that want all the rights of men without earning it. The new feminism is of the mind set of Camille Paglia and Wendy McElroy who say that a woman can be anything she wants to be in society, they just have to earn it like anyone else has to. I support the latter.

Hillary for veep? Are you mad? What party nominee worth his salt would chain himself to a traveling circus like the Bill and Hillary Show? If the sulky bearded lady wasn't biting the new president’s leg, the oafish carnival barker would be sending in the clowns to lure all the young ladies into back-of-the-tent sword-swallowing. It would be a seamy orgy of scheming and screwing. Hillary could never be content with second place. But neither could an alpha male like Obama. The vice-president should be an accomplished but subordinate personality. An Obama-Hillary ticket might tickle party regulars, but it would be a big fat minus in the general election. Republicans have shrewdly stockpiled a mammoth arsenal of past scandals to strafe Hillary with. Only a sentimental masochist would want to relive the tawdry 1990s. -Camille Paglia http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/06/11/hillary/index.html Upset Hillary supporters should read the entire column.

June 2006 – THE WAR ON FATHERS: How the 'feminization of America' destroys boys, men – and women The June edition of Whistleblower magazine is a mega-eye-opener exploring one of the most crucial but little-reported phenomena of modern America – what WND calls "THE WAR ON FATHERS." The evidence of this almost unthinkable scenario is everywhere: SCHOOL: In public school classrooms across America, in every category and every demographic group, boys are falling behind. Girls excel and move on to college, where three out of five students are female, while young boys – who don't naturally thrive when forced to sit still at a desk for six hours a day – are diagnosed by the millions with new diseases that didn't exist a generation ago. To make their behavior more acceptable, they are compelled to take hazardous psycho-stimulant drugs like Ritalin. Boys are more than 50 percent more likely to repeat elementary school grades than girls, a third more likely to drop out of high school and twice as likely to have a "learning disability." And the suicide rate among teen boys is far higher than that of girls. "What we have done," explains Thomas Mortenson, senior scholar at the Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education, "is we have a K-12 school system that seems to work relatively well for girls and does not work for a very large share of boys." HOME: It's well known that roughly half of America's marriages end in divorce, but not nearly as well known that two out of three of those divorces are initiated by the wives. Moreover, America's family court system is scandalously biased in favor of the mother in child custody disputes. Fathers get custody of children in uncontested cases only 10 percent of the time and 15 percent of the time in contested cases. Meanwhile, mothers get sole custody 66 percent of the time in uncontested cases and 75 percent of the time in contested cases. "Where you have minor children, there's really no such thing as no-fault divorce for fathers," says Detroit attorney Philip Holman, vice president of the National Congress for Fathers and Children. "On the practical level, fathers realize that divorce means they lose their kids." Unfortunately, this loss by children of their fathers' influence is directly responsible – far more than any other cause – for the modern national scourges of gang life, crime and much more. CULTURE: Fifty years ago, "Father knows best" was a hit TV show, in which insurance agent Jim Anderson (actor Robert Young) would come home from work each evening, trade his sport jacket for a nice, comfortable sweater, and then deal with the everyday growing-up problems of his family. He could always be counted on to resolve that week's crisis with a combination of kindness, fatherly strength and common sense. Today, television virtually always portrays husbands as bumbling losers or contemptible, self-absorbed egomaniacs. Whether in dramas, comedies or commercials, the patriarchy is dead, at least on TV where men are fools – unless of course they're gay. On "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," the "fab five" are supremely knowledgeable on all things hip, their life's highest purpose being to help those less fortunate than themselves – that is, straight men – to become cool. As this issue of Whistleblower shows, experts like Ph.D. scholar Christina Hoff Sommers, author of "The War Against Boys," agree: "It's a bad time to be a boy in America." Sommers provides example after example of what can only be called an all-out anti-male campaign: "The carnage committed by two boys in Littleton, Colorado," declares the Congressional Quarterly Researcher, "has forced the nation to reexamine the nature of boyhood in America." William Pollack, director of the Center for Men at McLean Hospital and author of the best-selling "Real Boys: Rescuing Our Sons from the Myths of Boyhood," tells audiences around the country, "The boys in Littleton are the tip of the iceberg. And the iceberg is all boys." In fact, Sommers reveals, it has become fashionable in elitist circles to conspire to change boys' very identity: There are now conferences, workshops, and institutes dedicated to transforming boys. Carol Gilligan, professor of gender studies at Harvard Graduate School of Education, writes of the problem of "boys' masculinity … in a patriarchal social order." Barney Brawer, director of the Boys' Project at Tufts University, told Education Week: "We've deconstructed the old version of manhood, but we've not [yet] constructed a new version." In the spring of 2000, the Boys' Project at Tufts offered five workshops on "reinventing Boyhood." The planners promised emotionally exciting sessions: "We'll laugh and cry, argue and agree, reclaim and sustain the best parts of the culture of boys and men, while figuring out how to change the terrible parts." "Terrible"? As this edition of Whistleblower shows, there is nothing wrong – and a very great deal right – with boys and masculinity. As maverick feminist Camille Paglia courageously reminds her men-hating colleagues, masculinity is "the most creative cultural force in history." "The problem," said David Kupelian, managing editor of WND and Whistleblower, "is that misguided feminists, intent on advancing a radically different worldview than the one on which this nation was founded, have succeeded in fomenting a revolution. And that revolution amounts to a powerful and pervasive campaign against masculinity, maleness, boys, men and patriarchy." Issue highlights include: "Banning 'mom' and 'dad,'" by Joseph Farah, who exposes the latest in bizarre and dangerous legislation by the California legislature. "The fathers' war" by Stephen Baskerville, a troubling look at how increasing numbers of America's military men risk all to serve their nation in wartime, only to be divorced by their wives and lose their children. "The war on fathers," by David Kupelian, an in-depth look at what's really behind the feminization of America. "Why men are being attacked," by Dr. Laura Schlessinger, who says: "It isn't all about hating men – it's largely about disdaining and dismissing them." "Has the bias pendulum swung against men?" Fewer college-bound, higher suicide rates, shorter life spans suggest males getting shaft. "Paternity fraud rampant in U.S.," showing how 30 percent of men assessed for court-ordered child support are not actually the fathers of the children receiving the support. "'Shared parenting' seen as custody solution," a look at bills in New York that would require courts to treat mom and dad equally. "Resolving the boy crisis in schools" by Jeffery M. Leving and Glenn Sacks, showing how today's public schools are profoundly unsuited for the genuine needs of boys. "Child support gold-diggers" by Carey Roberts, who shows how frequent fraud results in fathers being victimized by the justice system. "Hating our fathers, hating ourselves" by Bob Just, a penetrating look at the high cost of resenting the fathers and husbands in our lives. And much more. "This is one of the most soulful, important and insightful issues of Whistleblower we've produced in a long time," said Kupelian. "I urge people to read it – it's much more than eye-opening. It could be life-changing. Really." Note: You can also order a subscription to Whistleblower magazine. Simply click here. If you wish to order by phone, call our toll-free order line at 1-800-4WND-COM (1-800-496-3266). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Face it Guys, watch the commercials, sit coms, court hearings, ect. And see for yourself. Do the research. I believe Men and Fathers should stand up for there Rights. women do all the time. They are Not as inocent as they would like everyone to believe.

Some femanists would answer no and no. "Turning people into sex objects is one of the specialties of our species, objectification is closely tied to (and may even be identical with) the highest human faculties toward conceptualisation and aesthetics (Camille Paglia). Individualist feminist Wendy McElroy holds that the label sex object means nothing because inanimate objects do not have sexualities. Women are their bodies and sexuality as well as their minds and souls. Veiwing or highlighting one aspect of an individual is helpful, E.g. We see Stephen Hawkin as intelegence, is this objectifying? I'm sure Stephen hawkin is a multi faceted individual I was suggesting that when we look at his work we consider only that and not his emotions and sexuality.

Yet they ignore all the great accomplishments masculinity has created. Dissident feminists like Camille Paglia and Christina Hoff Sommers state that too many feminists focus on masculinity as being the source of bad things like sexual preying and serial killings. And most feminists never have admiration and appreciation of masculinity. Paglia and Sommers assert that masculinity is the "most creative cultural force in history". How could anyone disagree? Paglia stated that when she crosses a bridge, in awe, she realizes "men designed and built this". How many of you feminists here ever appreciated the accomplishments, ideologies, and ingenuity from men? To me, if a feminist is able to ignore the innumerable great accomplishments and contributions from masculinity, while only focusing on the bad; to the point that society thinks of masculinity as being a pathology -- it allows me to believe that jealousy & envy of masculinity coupled with a feeling of self-inadequecy of femininity. ...is the source of feminist thinking. John: You are clearly misinformed and brainwashed. In SOME cases, masculinity and femininity are social constructs. In others, they are not. You can't just make a blanket statement and say that all "gender" in every shape and form is a social construct. Super-liberal apologists with a "guilt complex" like John are seething with political correctness. I do not feel guilty for being born a male, nor do I believe my maleness is a pathology. I guess that's where you and I conflict, John. And my screen name is the reverse of the famous phrase "Girls Rule, Boys Drool". Women claim that the aforementioned saying is in jest and not to be taken seriously. I am saying the same -- yet, we already are seeing feminists, women, and male apologists showing offense when the situation is reversed. moodoodoo76: You proved my point about jealous women downplaying the male accomplishment. You stated "in that men have on occasion done decent stuf". On "occassion"? And only "decent"? Men have created AMAZING things, not just "decent", and not on "occassion", but THROUGHOUT HISTORY. That keyboard you're typing on? Invented by a man. The computer you have? Invented by a man. This internet you're conversing with? Invented by a man. The house or office you're typing from? Engineered & designed and built by a man (both mentally and physically).

It seems to me that women are less likely to be with men who are emotional and sensitive, and men are less likely to stick around if a woman does not make an attempt to validate or appreciate his masculinity. Has equality done a number on our relationships? Will more people, as Camille Paglia suggests, become gay because of this? What's your take. Try to leave intelligent answers without saying something stupid like: "Well, you just dont like the fact that we can leave you if you hit us.." Those answers are straw man and victim-identity. They have no place in this question.

Interesting piece from Camille Paglia, Hillary, not all she seems then...read here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/19/wuspols219.xml trickygi... Since when should Americans be taking advice from a British Newspaper, and I use the word Newspaper loosely. Americans are not expected to take advice but its just the same sentiment I've read elsewhere and it shows how she is viewed outside the world of the USA. this is the telling part of the article... Hillary's public career has glaringly been a subset to her husband's success. Despite her reputation for brilliance, she failed the Washington, DC bar exam. Thus her migration to Little Rock was not simply a selfless drama for love; she was fleeing the capital where she had hoped to make her mark. In Little Rock, every role that Hillary played was obtained via her husband's influence - from her position at the Rose Law Firm to her seat on the board of Wal-Mart to her advocacy for public education reform. In a pattern that would continue after Bill became president, Hillary would draw attention by expressing public "concern" for a problem, without ever being able to organise a programme for reform. Hillary has always been a policy wonk, a functionary attuned to bureaucratic process, but she has never shown executive ability, which makes her quest for the presidency problematic. more... Hillary's disastrous botching of national healthcare reform in 1993 (a project to which her husband rashly appointed her) will live in infamy. Obama may also have limited executive experience, but he has no comparable stain on his record. Is one of the many reason I have seen for not voting for Hillary; whether you are woman or man!

Camille Paglia says that men are the real romantics. They are the ones that write poetry, compose music or just give flowers... I am all for equality between the sexes, but we must admit the vast majority of composers etc. are men. No?

"What do I know about sex? I'm a married man." Tom Clancy "I believe that sex is one of the most beautiful, natural, wholesome things that money can buy." Steve Martin "You know that look women get when they want sex? Me neither." Drew Carey "Sex without love is a meaningless experience, but as meaningless experiences go, it's pretty damned good." Woody Allen "If it weren't for pickpockets I'd have no sex life at all." Rodney Dangerfield "As the French say, there are three sexes - men, women and clergymen." Rev. Sydney Smith "Bisexuality immediately doubles your chances for a date on Saturday night." Woody Allen "I can remember when the air was clean and sex was dirty." George Burns "It isn't premarital sex if you have no intention of getting married." Matt Barry "Leaving sex to the feminists is like letting your dog vacation at the taxidermist." Camille Paglia "Life is a sexually transmitted disease." Unknown "My kid had sex with your honor student." Bumper Sticker "My sexual preference is not you." T-shirt "Programming is like sex. One mistake and you have to support it for the rest of your life." Michael Sinz "Remember, if you smoke after sex you're doing it too fast." Woody Allen "Sex at age 90 is like trying to shoot pool with a rope." George Burns "Sex is one of the nine reasons for reincarnation. The other eight are unimportant." Henry Miller "There are a number of mechanical devices which increase sexual arousal, particularly in women. Chief among these is the Mercedes-Benz 380SL convertible."

If I obtained an M16, what female name should I give it: “Ann” (Coulter), “Laura” (Schlessinger), or, “Camille” (Paglia) Ann Coulter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter Laura Schlessinger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Schle... Camille Paglia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camille_Pag... Maybe: Sarah Conner http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Conno... Linda Hamilton http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_Hamil... Lena Headey http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lena_Headey

I believe that sex is one of the most beautiful, natural, wholesome things that money can buy." * Tom Clancy "Sex at age 90 is like trying to shoot pool with a rope." * Camille Paglia & Bill Anderson "Women might be able to fake orgasms. But men can fake whole relationships." * Sharon Stone "My girlfriend always laughs during sex ~ no matter what she's reading." * Steve Jobs "I saw a woman wearing a sweatshirt with "Guess" on it., so I said "Thyroid problem?'" *Arnold Schwarzenegger "Women need a reason to have sex. Men just need a place." * Billy Crystal Getting married for sex is like buying a 747 for the free peanuts *Jeff Foxworthy "My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." * Jack Nicholson "Women complain about premenstrual syndrome, but I think of it as the only time of the month that I can be myself." * Roseanne "Bisexuality immediately doubles your chances for a date on Saturday .night." * Rodney Dangerfield

I remember reading an interview with feminist Camille Paglia shortly after the Columbine attack. She had some interesting perspectives, and I wanted to know what you thought. She said that boys and men are no longer able to express their masculinity in our modern society. She basically said that in America, a young man had hopes that he can get a factory job, a wife, and raise a family and how those days are over and men no longer have a place for them to be men. She said that women now have sex with no emotional attachment, dress sluttier, and act like Hollywood tarts and how these are humiliating experiences for boys and men. Do you agree with her when she suggests that loss of morality in women, and the loss of anything conducive to masculinity in our society contributes to the rage these men show? Ironically, she said that there would be a lot more of these sick attacks. I ask this question now because after what happened the other day in Ohio, her words seem prophetic. Unique - Your answers offers no insight whatsoever. Clubs? Please. Also, I reject your suggestion that: "The domestic violence rate is higher than ever..." Please state your source for this ridiculous statement. And if it's true (it's not), what does that have to do with anything we're discussing? Mrs - While we've always had mentally ill people, these shootings are a new phenomenon. I think we as a society refuse to look at the real reasons. We blame illness, video games, music, whatever. I think the the baby boomer generation failed us. Ricardo wrote: " Oh, please, Ms. Anonymous. Please, join Camille Paglia, and remain anonymous." Camille Paglia is hardly anonymous. mamamoon wrote: "So it's not the fact that it is much easier to get a gun? So we should put the blame on all women instead of mental illness, drugs, violence in the home which BTW is mostly from the men, ease of obtaining a weapon, poverty...." We should put the "blame" where it belongs. We will not know the cause if we're too politically correct that we cannot even discuss the possibility that gender crisis or gender identity might have something to do with it. The fact that you become offended at the suggestion that gender roles might be a cause speaks volumes. Why has feminism become such a sacred cow? Also, it's safe to say poverty has nothing to do with it.

This is a quote by political lesbo-feminist Camille Paglia http://www.insurgentdesire.org.uk/patriarchy.htm

I mean a fist fight, not a debate.

I read somewhere she said she can understand why men rape women because she often has lesbian urges and when women send her mixed signals she can imagine if she were stronger or had penis might possibly do the same. What is wrong with this woman?

From the Great and Powerful Pags (as in Camille Paglia): "Hillary's willingness to tolerate Bill's compulsive philandering is a function of her general contempt for men. She distrusts them and feels morally superior to them." Is there any validity to this claim? Are women identifying with this? Did they really turn out en masse because Big Hil' turned on the waterworks? http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/01/10/hillary/index.html Bijou, I am more concerned about the people who voted for her and for what reasons, I just found this quote interesting...

v In Kentucky, it's the law that a person must take a bath once a year v In Providence, Rhode Island, it is against the law to jump off a bridge. v In North Carolina, it is against the law for dogs and cats to fight. v In Michigan, married couples must live together or be imprisoned v In Singapore, it is illegal to chew gum v In the uk Placing a postage stamp that bears the Queen (or King) upside down is considered treason. v In the uk Excluding Sundays, it is perfectly legal to shoot a Scotsman with a bow and arrow. Favorite Quotes & Sayings!!! Quote: "Love does not consist in gazing at each other but in looking together in the same direction." — Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, Wind, Sand and Stars" Quote: "I know not with what weapons WW3 will be fought, but WW4 will be fought with sticks and stones." — Albert Einstein Quote :"If you want to buy a slice of heaven, you need to make England your home." — DAZZ@ (Nicked from Rod Donald {On New Zealand....He Must Be Mad!!! }) Famous Sex Quotes "I believe that sex is one of the most beautiful, natural, wholesome things that money can buy." --Steve Martin "You know that look women get when they want sex? . . .Me neither." --Drew Carey "Having sex is like playing poker. If you don't have a good partner, you'd better have a good hand." --Unknown "If it weren't for pickpockets I'd have no sex life at all." --Rodney Dangerfield "My cousin is an agoraphobic homosexual, which makes it kind of hard for him to come out of the closet." --Bill Kelly "As the French say, there are three sexes-men, women and clergymen." -- Rev. Sydney Smith "Bisexuality immediately doubles your chances for a date on Saturday night." --Woody Allen "Homosexuality is God's way of insuring that the truly gifted aren't burdened with children." --Sam Austin "I can remember when the air was clean and sex was dirty." --George Burns "It isn't premarital sex if you have no intention of getting married." --Matt Barry "Leaving sex to the clergy is like letting your dog vacation at the taxidermist." --Camille Paglia "Sex at age 90 is like trying to shoot pool with a rope." --George Burns ** Another is...if asked, a pregnant woman can ask a Policeman for his helmet to use as a toilet under her skirt or dress... and he MUST comply!!!** LOL Oh to be a pregnant woman for a day!!! lol

How can i succeed in this class? I need tips, etc... Any books I can buy? A paragraph from an old essay in my previous course... Intro In “Rape: A Bigger Danger than Feminists Know”, Camille Paglia argues that females have been brainwashed by feminists into thinking that having an understanding of male sexuality isn’t necessary. She feels feminism has tricked women into believing that they can go anywhere and do anything without fear of rape. She believes that women should always fear the danger of sexual assault. She states, “A girl who gets dead drunk at a fraternity party is a fool” [Paragraph 8]. Her premise challenges the background of feminism as a primary reason for women being raped, but she doesn’t provide enough evidence to blame the feminists for causing rape.

I was just hoping to get all of your thoughts on some of the recent comments made by Camille Paglia (a regular pundit on Salon.com - feminist/atheist/literary critic). I argued that secular humanism has failed, that the avant-garde is dead, and that liberals must start acknowledging the impoverished culture that my 1960s generation has left to the young. Atheism alone is a rotting corpse. I substitute art and nature for God -- the grandeur of man and the vast mystery of the universe. The young, who are masters of ever-evolving personal technology, are besieged by the siren call of materialism. In this climate, it is selfish and shortsighted for liberals to automatically define religion as a social problem that needs suppression or eradication. Without spirituality in some form, people will anesthetize themselves with drink or drugs -- including the tranquilizers that seem near universal among the status-addled professional class of the Northeastern elite. and now her comments on the religious sideshow. "Nevertheless, the pervasiveness of religion in American politics is becoming a tedious distraction from urgent social problems like healthcare. I detest sanctimony in any form -- from the unctuous piety of smarmy televangelists to ostentatious badge-wearing (such as the gold-cross necklace that Hillary Clinton was regularly flaunting around Capitol Hill). Religious protestations are now a rote formula for asserting family values and opposing moral relativism, with which the Democrats have been tagged since the hedonistic '60s. One reason religion is so intrusive in the United States is because of the mammoth institutional power of our mass media, which is unparalleled anywhere else in the world. Religion has become a prophetic voice crying in the wilderness against our Hollywood Babylon. " For the record: Camille isn't some closet-theist just in case anyone was wondering. She's an atheist of the Nietzschean extraction, if i had to try and pin her down. She's also a Libertarian.

Camille PagliaAuthors | Q & A | News | Photos | Articles | Videos | Shop | Links

Camille Paglia Questions & Answers

Camille Paglia
Authors | Q & A | News | Photos | Articles | Videos | Shop | Links