Feminism and the dark history of the suffragettes

Casey Anthony:grieving mother and feminist poster girl

Casey Anthony is a young woman who would make any feminist proud. She was able to murder her own child and throw men under the bus to save her own worthless hide at the same time. Feminists champion women who only accomplish one or the other so you can imagine the joy they had in their dead zombie hearts to run across a woman who was able to pull off both. She was able to get a predominantly female jury to acquit her and there has been speculation there was juror misconduct in the jury room. If this is the case then there may reasons for a new trial and finding out what happened with the jury from the first trial. I understand that Casey's brother and father don't want anything to do with her and I can understand that. Now this case is old and the public's attention is diverted elsewhere. A little girl is just as dead and no one has paid for her murdering her. And America you acted so angrily over the death of Caylee. Why is that America? I'm not asking that question to trivialize Caylee's death in fact quite the opposite. I'm asking that question is why now? What about Jon Benet Ramsey? You really didn't really care about that case. The authorities royally bungled that case and no outrage from the community. Her mother has been accused of murdering her and no arrests have been made and of course no outrage from the community. Then there was Susan Smith who murdered her two sons so she could be free to marry a man who didn't want children. At her trial she was found guilty and given a very lenient sentence. There was very little outrage over this. So I'm wondering America why Caylee? Is she the straw that broke the camel's back? Let's see.

There is probably someone out there who is asking:

Masc this can't possibly be what the founding mothers of feminism had in mind when they got women the vote and liberated them from oppression. The founding mothers were noble women.

Were they? Were they the angels of light that they are portrayed to be or were they more sinister than that?

Let's take a look at what they did and this is what the water downed,feminized version of history avoids and that is dealing with the dark side of the suffragettes. The approved version aka the PC version of history doesn't show how dangerous these women truly were but I will. Let's take a look at:

LONDON, March 10. -- The militant suffragettes were on the rampage again to-day. Five of them attempted to present petitions to King George during his progress through the Mall to open Parliament. Others set fire to two small railway stations in the neighborhood of London.
Source:click here

What if people were killed by their actions? What if some of those people were children?

Shelby’s theory is wrong.  The collapse of white moral authority is not the problem. The replacement of male authority with feminism is. To Steele’s credit — he was gazing in the general right direction – but missed the real target. In America, there is one place where white supremacy and radical feminism existed: The Ku Klux Klan.

The crucial relationship Shelby missed is this: post-modern feminism (which has clearly admitted to being a supremacist movement) is the living granddaughter of the Women’s Ku Klux Klan (WKKK), where second-wave  feminism (as we know it today) was gestated and borne. Â

It is important to recognize that the WKKK was not in the mainstream of the suffragette movement, but did strongly support it. Legitimate mainstream suffragettes, including Elizabeth Cady Stanton, my grandmother Florence Richardson Usher, and great grandmother Florence Wyman Richardson (photo), did not participate in the smaller WKKK movement or its post-Klan feminist activities. The suffragettes put up with WKKK feminists because of one common goal: passage of the 19th Amendment.
Source:click here

Well now it seems that the suffragettes have no problem allying themselves with racists. The WKKK was staffed by women who gleefully falsely accused black men of rape and what if innocent black men were possibly castrated because of their lies but if the suffragettes had no problem being allied with such a group then that is very telling of the suffragettes.

Women Throw Acid at Polls in London; Attempt to Invalidate Ballots Results in Serious Injury of Election Officials; Move Planned by League; Organization That Arranged “Grille Incident” Pleased at Opportunity to Celebrate Anniversary
Source:click here

What if some man got acid in his eyes because of what these irresponsible women did? Would they have gotten the same pussy pass they get today?

In 1905 the Rokeby Venus was bought by the National Gallery in London to stop it being sent to Berlin. On 10th March 1914 a terrorist feminist and suffragette, Mary "Slasher" Richardson attacked Venus' famous buttocks with a cleaver thrusting her chopper deep into them and inflicting severe damage on the painting.

Mary "Slasher" Richardson who had been a Drum Major in the suffragettes' "Fife and Drum Marching Band" went on to be the head of the women's section of the British Union of Fascists in 1934, a sort of British version of Gertrud Scholtz-Klink.

It is easy to understand why a fanatic might attack a hated portrait as when a Welsh nationalist slashed that of Caradoc Evans in Cardiff or a suffragette that of Thomas Carlyle. But why slash the Rokeby Venus? We can only understand why if we realise that the suffragette movement was as much about sexual frustration as about votes for women.

In the period 1900-1914 unmarried middle class women were compelled to be chaste by social convention. Their young male counterparts by contrast sought out ladies of easy virtue who sold sex. This was how it had always been and still is in many traditional societies. The suffragettes wanted equality and they could not demand sexual freedom for themselves, so they wanted to deny it to men. Their slogan was "Votes for women and chastity for men". It was probably the main reason for the fierce opposition to their otherwise reasonable demand for the vote. What Edwardian masher was going to risk having chastity imposed on him and his pals by an alliance of women and clergymen.

The suffragettes and the clergy did in fact conspire together in the Social Purity Movement and to combat what was called the "Social Evil". Street prostitution was widespread in London at the time, even though brothels were illegal and remained so until the 1959 Street Offences Act. It was the guarantor of the virtue of respectable daughters or sisters and only the moralistic clergy were daft enough to believe in male chastity even for the men of the armies of World War I.

The suffragettes put about the myth that the working girls were either "fallen women" cast aside by an evil seducer (male villain) or the victims of a "white slave trade" run by evil foreigners. What they could not accept was that for many women a period (not a lifetime) working as a prostitute was a welcome escape from their usual job with its long hours, tedious work and poor pay. Most would work on their own account and could decide when to work and when not. They may well have preferred it to being a sneered at skivvy in a household of middle-class suffragettes.

Of course prostitutes then as now faced the risk of being assaulted or worse by their clients. Some prostitutes were, it is also true, under the control of ruthlessly exploiting pimps, who then as now were often members of ethnic minorities. The feminists' response to this was to demand and get legislation providing for the flogging of men convicted of living off the immoral earnings of prostitutes. It was a wonderful moral panic with a sadistic punitive and xenophobic outcome that will have exhilarated the feminists.

We can now see why Mary "Slasher" Richardson, the future fascist, chose to attack this picture. She said at first that it had to do with Mrs Pankhurst's "beautiful character" (as distinct from physical beauty) but later Richardson admitted that the real reason was that she

hated the way men gawped at Venus.

That was why she layed into the bottom that had launched a thousand gawps, a perverse encounter that should have attracted the pen of a J. B. Priestley or a Kenneth Tynan.

As I said, it was about sex. Freud would no doubt have prescribed it for her three times a day. In our twenty-first century world of SM feminists and louche lesbians and where the womens movement's chief enemy is family values, it seems like another world. In 1914 the feminists wanted to make the world into a monastery. Now they want to turn it into an orphanage. I didn't see any visible feminists at Velázquez but then they don't do art because all the great painters are male.
Source:click here

The clergy and feminists work together now too and I'm sure their goals are the same and that is the control of men,at all costs. Religion and feminism going hand in hand.

There we have it as it turns out the suffragettes were very far from peaceful in fact they could accurately be called "terrorists" as that label would fit them well. This post goes to show that feminists did not abandon their previous ways,not by a long shot. No,this post goes to show that they have stayed the same terrorist course that they started out on.