The "Liberties" of Female Violence
Has anyone noticed the way we in society defend various forms of female violence, but are disturbed greatly by various forms of male violence?
This phenomenon is being played out in Berkeley California, where the city council made an attempt to run the Marine Corp. recruiters out of town. This was an attempt by the city council to take their anti-war stance to the next level.
It was working quite well at first, gaining national attention after the city council austerely proclaimed the recruiters are "not welcomed in this city". The council then proceeded to grant the anti-war/feminist protest group, Code Pink, the right to a privileged parking space in front of the Marine recruiting office once a week, and a sound permit allowing the group extraordinary protest rights to assist the city in its efforts to drive the Marines out of town. The council also was trying to force the recruiters out by declaring the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy is a violation of Berkeley's anti-discrimination policy towards gay and lesbians. Also on the agenda was addressing zoning changes for recruiting stations which would declare recruitment offices could not be opened within 600 feet of residential districts, public parks, public health clinics, public libraries, schools or churches. Rounding out this arduous "anti-war proclamation" was the city council advising the Marines that "if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome guests."
But then things turned sour for Berkeley. U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina viewed Berkeley's actions as "a slap in the face to all brave service men and women and their families." He then met Berkeley's bold rhetoric and actions with a little of his own. He acknowledged Berkeley has a right to their beliefs, but with that right comes a responsibility. He began measures to ensure that if Berkeley wanted to continue to protest the government, then Berkeley would have to finance it on their own. He began a process to withdraw about 2 million dollars of federal money slated for Berkeley.
Suddenly Berkeley's city council was feeling "unwelcome".
In a heated show down which drew anti-war and pro-military supporters, Wednesday the Berkeley city council voted 7-to-2 that the Marines could stay. According to CNN, "the council said it would no longer send a letter to the local Marine Corps Recruiting Station and Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway saying recruiters aren't welcome in Berkeley."
I guess it's true: Money talks and bullshit walks.
But this is not the whole story.
The hypocrisy at work here would be hilarious if it wasn't so real. Code Pink is not only a feminine anti-war protest group, but also a group that supports a woman's right to an abortion. Just as recently as last month, members of Code Pink joined other women's rights organizations in our nation's capital to celebrate and defend a woman's right to kill her unborn fetus.
I find it amazing how Berkeley, feminists, women, and society in general view female violence upon innocent lives differently from that of similar male violence. Men's wars are viewed as testosterone driven violence, foolish in its ideology, in its conception, in its implementation, and appalling in its consequences. The innocent lives lost in these wars are labeled terrible tragedies. However, men's wars cannot begin to equal the body count per year of the innocent, defenseless lives lost through the estrogen driven "liberty" of abortion.
Since the Iraq war began, it is estimated that 1.7 million people have lost their lives. This includes coalition forces and civilians (And I'm even being really nice here because I used stats from an anti-war organization - giving the advantage to the anti-war protesters). However, in that same time period, the estrogen fueled abortion machine killed almost 7 million innocent lives - in the U.S. alone!
So where is the outrage in Berkeley and elsewhere over the tragic loss of these innocent lives? There are a handful of abortion clinics in and around Berkeley, but not one city council member body is sticking his or her neck out to give anti-abortion protesters free parking spaces, permits, and other beneficial protesting tools to eradicate the senseless killing of these helpless lives. And how does Code Pink get away with such hypocrisy?
During their support of Roe vs. Wade last month, Liz Hourican, a Code Pink member, was asked this very question. According to a report from Cybercast News Service, Liz philosophized the organizations "war vs. abortion" position like this:
"With regard to the war and this issue, it's very much the same thing. This is about basic human rights - standing here and being able to take care of women. Take care of women first. This is my body. I should have the decision over my body."
Her argument that war and abortion is the same thing holds true - both take numerous innocent lives. So why establish one and try to eradicate the other? It's simple; their true mission is not to end senseless killings, it's about power, control, the female ego, and gender politics.
Code Pink, as well as other feminists and their supporters perceive abortion as a tool of liberation and freedom for women. When men kill in the name of freedom and liberty it's perceived as masculine brutality. When women kill innocent lives, it is perceived as a human rights issue, the freedom to make choices concerning a woman's well-being. It's about liberation.
Pink's hypocrisy reveals their protests are really about the female ego - the perception of females as having superior qualities over men to make life and death decisions. This is apparent in their obvious belief that when men kill, it is truly evil; it is a display of rage, selfishness, and nefarious hedonism. But when women choose to kill, it is about something greater. It's truly about sacrifices made for a greater good. In other words, they have "good reasons" for their actions.
Therefore, their cause can now be seen for what it actually is - an issue of power and control - an egomaniacal assumption that they and other women have a superior ability over men in these same situation. The need to wrestle power away from men, and place the rights and well-being of women first - as Liz so unequivocally points out - which translates into discarding the rights and well-being of men, children, and others that stand in their way . Under the Code Pink matriarchy, killing is a right reserved for women only, and should be defined only by women. Only they can do it for the greater good.
The real tragedy here is how we as a society have let Code Pink and other feminists define female violence as some sort of "benevolent violence". This is not only seen in the "war vs. abortion argument", but also in other societal tragedies. Whether it is mothers killing their children, or wives killing their husbands, female violence is endowed with numerous excuses to placate a woman's violent actions - and sadly, society buys into it. For men, as we see, their violence is devoid of those same excuses.
I could care less about whether someone is pro-abortion or anti-abortion, pro-military or anti-war. My point is, when someone begins to tell me how awful war is, and I find this individual thinks the killing of thousands of unborn children every day is not a priority, I know I'm dealing with someone who has a distorted view of life and death.
Therefore, their words, and their cause, falls on deaf ears.