Archive for the ‘Gender’ Category

Iran and sociological time: college education and wimmin

August 2, 2010
  • See another comparative article about out-of-wedlock births in Iran
  • See a page of articles on gender issues
  • See me complain to Theda Skocpol about having to write articles like this one

    BBC reported in 2006 that in Iran, wimmin had become the majority in college: “Well over half of university students in Iran are now women.”(1) This fact is evidence that Iran has a more advanced road to wimmin’s liberation than the United $tates.

    In the news we are apt to hear about stoning of adulterous females in Iran.(2) Next door in Afghanistan a womyn with a chopped off nose is in the news as evidence of the anti-wimmin views of the Taliban. She’s the cover of “Time Magazine.”(3)

    Iran is more than 99% Muslim(4) and ruled by a theocracy. This is liable to get the journalists in the West excited, but while we hear about stoning in Iran, we also hear about a French mother who killed eight of her babies.(5) So the question begs for asking, which society is more patriarchal, the Western society or Islamic Iran.

    There is no mystery that richer people can afford more education. Poor and working-class families cannot always educate all their children equally, and so in most societies excruciating choices are made. When families start to make more money, there is no surprise that they seek to educate their children more.

    According to the UN, in 2006, when the BBC article came out, Iran had a per capita income of $3198. The year before it was $2584.(4) What is more, the United $tates also had a female majority in college in 2006. So I am not going to compare two similar proportions. What the scientist should want to know is what the U.$. female college enrollments were when the United $tates had a per capita income of about $3000 per year. That is an example of thinking in sociological time to sort out class and gender.

    The snooty can always brag that they can afford more education for their whole families. The poorest of the poor do not make it through primary school. So the question is what was the U.$. attitude toward gender when the United $tates was poorer.

    It’s tough to answer this question. In 1967, which I just got done talking about, male college enrollments among U.$. youth aged 18-24 were about 50% higher than female college enrollments. Yet the U.$. per capita income in 1967 was about five times higher than Iran’s in 2006.(8)

    I’m lazy but experienced with data, so I already know the United $tates does not have the most advanced road to wimmin’s liberation. Just to spot my critics an advantage, I went to look up figures from 1929, when per capita income in the United $tates was just over $8000 (in 2005 dollars).(8) That’s more than double the per capita income what Iran had in 2006 according to the UN. In 1934 in the depths of the Depression, the United $tates was earning $6281 per capita in 2005 dollars. That’s a much closer comparison than 1967 or 2006. (Being only a factor of two apart also brings the method of calculating comparable incomes per capita across cultures into play.)

    Tough times you say? 1929? Even 1934? It gives one a measure of how difficult it is to understand economic conditions across cultures.

    The Britannica says there is evidence U.$. female college enrollments declined after 1929. So by picking 1929, we are spotting our critics another advantage of not going into the Depression.(9) Yet in 1929 we see again about a 50% U.$. male advantage over females in college graduation if we count two-year degrees and a more than 2 to 1 advantage in four-year degrees.

    It turns out that up till 1910, if one counted teacher’s colleges (two-year programs), U.$ females had been pretty even with males for decades.(10) I found this surprising, and it was only in looking at full four-year bachelor’s degrees where there was always a difference until recent times.

    Iran also has associate degrees for two or 2.5 years, so to make an apples to apples comparison we must dig into the four-year degrees, the universities. We can go to the bourgeois think tank Brookings, and we will obtain an answer for Iran and the Arab countries generally from Djavad Salehi-Isfahani.(11)

    If we look at his figure one, it is clear that the higher the income in the country, the more females outnumber males in the universities of the Islamic world. In fact, when the United $tates is put into the data, it shows up closer to the value for Algeria, but of course much richer. I’m fairly confident that what he found is not a fluke for the United $tates, and if he put in more countries from the West, we would see two separate lines to connect, one for the more feminist Islam and one for the more patriarchal West. It would become especially clear by putting in historical data from the West in order to see the picture of how the female proportion of college enrollments grew.

    People who grew up in the United $tates of the 1930s onward have no reason to look down on Iran regarding gender in education. In sociological time, the Iranian gender revolution was much faster than the Amerikan one, because the Iranian revolution occurred when people were much poorer. That is to say the Islamic revolution has been more feminist than U.$. imperialism.

    Even in regular chronological time,(12) the Amerikans and Iranians reached the state we are in now with more females than males in universities, at about the same time. One could even say that it was Amerikans that held back that change, because Amerikans backed the Shah up till the Iranian Revolution of 1979. Iran’s gains for wimmin came after Amerikan-backed puppets got the boot.

    Sensational stories about stoning and nose-chopping create the image of Islam that Amerikkkans are prepared to buy as they take military contracts to go to war. The media is filled with self-righteous questions about what will happen to Afghan wimmin if the United $tates withdraws from Afghanistan. Yet Afghanistan and Iran are not rich like the United $tates. Snooty Amerikans should learn to distinguish class and nation from gender. Bragging about how females have it so great in the United $tates is really bragging about the looting of the rest of the world via Ponzi schemes and super-exploitation. It has nothing to do with having a superior gender culture.

    When you are rich, you hire migrants to do the housework and raise the kids while you and your own female children go to university. It’s especially nasty to brag about that to people from developing countries.

    3. “Time Magazine” featured the womyn on its cover
    The same study found evidence of economic convergence only within the richer countries MIM refers to as imperialist, further evidence of MIM’s class analysis.
    U.$. GDP per capita was almost $20,000 in 2005 dollars in 1967.
    maybe citing
    11. “Are Iranian Women Overeducated?”
    12. Gulp, Iranians are at 65% female in college as of 2008,
    even higher than U.$. figures closer to 60% female.

  • 1967 flashback and how we got to crony capitalism

    July 28, 2010

    From June 5 to June 10th in 1967 there was an Arab war against I$rael. Here in 2010 we at MIM and the people in Palestine and I$rael talk about the results of that war every day. We still have not overcome that war.

    I was too young to have been in SDS contrary to some Internet web reports. However, I find Sara Evans’s account of female activists in the 1960s — Personal Politics — very enlightening.

    A month after the war, it’s no accident that females in SDS wrote the following: “As we analyze the position of women in capitalist society and especially in the United States we find that women are in a colonial relationship to men and we recognize ourselves as part of the Third World.”(1) I didn’t know that they actually said that, but now I can say that that statement did deserve ridicule, and such ridicule is not male chauvinism. The problem is that it equated oppressor nation females with Third World oppression, this in the midst of the Vietnam War and a month after the Six Day War.

    Christian Sara Evans defended the statement, but she admitted the role of Jewish females at crucial moments in 1967.

    “Black power was at its zenith. . . . Black delegates shouted ‘Kill Whitey!’ as they repeatedly insisted that should cast 50 percent of the conference vote and occupy half of the committee slots though they constituted about one-sixth of the convention. In addition they demanded from this audience full of Jewish radicals a resolution condemning Zionist imperialism.”(2)

    In the end, in the later 1960s, cross-ethnic organizing broke down in favor of “work on your own oppression,” which whites turned into “do your own thing” with sex and drugs.

    Progressive Labor (PLP) was first to blame in falsely asserting the exploitation of white workers. The budding feminist movement was derivative of derivative and thereby went one step beyond PLP. The derivative of the derivative was Zionist “feminism” and we know when the derivative of the derivative is negative, counterrevolution is on the way.

    Jewish females are the most polarized on my lynching case. I don’t want to deny their support at all. However, when we look back at the crucial moment of 1967, many things become clear. Females who did not want to take a stand on class and nation eventually took a stand on gender oppression, in isolation, in order to leave other matters unstated.

    Whereas in the earlier 1960s, the movement started with pre-scientific Christian females such as Anne Braden and earned follow-up and rumors of whites sleeping with Blacks, by the end of the 1960s white females were off to “work on their own oppression.” (Sara Evans says red diaper babies (children of Communist Party parents) were the lonely positive contribution on feminist issues, but I’m not sure I buy that.)

    Jewish female defender of I$rael Susan Estrich wrote a major paperback on acquaintance rape and how rape should expand to include it. Famous rape writer Andrea Dworkin wrote that she became Zionist via contemplation of the Black Panthers.

    Big celebrity Gloria Steinem was not so much known for rape discussions, but she spied on communists. Then there was Phyllis Chesler. A 1974 book by “New York Radical Feminists” again targeted rape. Chesler was the most analytical of the bunch of its writers. She did not start from an SDS “heavy” position on nation and class, but she opposed the Vietnam War and the U.$. prison system(3) even then when it was not as proportionately great as it has been since. Yet decades later we find Chesler openly recruiting for both the U.$. and I$raeli intelligence services while working with the Avakkkianites. Lately Chesler seems to say that opposing Islam is enough to be feminist, with no stance necessary on other typical pet issues of Amerika.

    Today it is painful to read the New York Radical Feminists’ book, even as many people became even more watered down and less radical since that time. The male anti-war movement petered out too.

    We know that the samples the New York Radical Feminists considered for most questions were too small. At one point we hear about a sample (n=263) of child abuse that did not include a single heterosexual adult female, “because the boys were victims of male homosexuals.”(4) Now we know that the majority of child-killers in the United $tates are female, and the anti-gay barb was typical of the SDS whites of just a few years earlier than the 1974 book.

    Young U.$. men are several times more likely to commit suicide than U.$. females, probably because of gender role rigidity. In one major study, females now also report that they are more likely to instigate domestic violence physically. Social reality is difficult. Sometimes it’s not so easy to go find something and “work on your own oppression.”

    It was tough being Phyllis Chesler at the time. SDS females knew it was men that went into the Vietnam draft. Chesler had the added disadvantage of understanding that males vastly disproportionately filled the prisons. So what was “working on our own oppression” became the question for females. To her credit, Chesler discovered that females disproportionately went the mad route, not prison, hence her book, Women and Madness.

    MIM would like to credit Betty Friedan’s work in 1963 on the idiocy of housewife suburban life. On the whole though, it was not the fault of male students in SDS that the females wrote such a poor statement for “New Left Notes” in 1967 as quoted for the first footnote. It should have been possible to raise Friedan without making her contribution the principal contradiction globally.

    No doubt the intimidation that females felt in SDS stemmed from college admissions policies and mistaken societal preferences. If males outnumber females 3 to 1 in big meetings and perhaps even more in serious sub-committee meetings, then there is going to be a problem. MIM would not deny it while not equating it with the Six Day War either. The MIM generation had none of that gender ratio problem.

    It took 20 years for Catharine MacKinnon to really reply to the male “heavies” of SDS known for their greater ideological consistency. She’s still writing that females should not surrender theory to men.(5)

    When we read Feminism Unmodified, we can say that is what SDS should have discussed in 1967, but it was not available. So we have to understand that the SDS, the student movement and civil rights movement of the 1960s had many weaknesses.

    To us of the MIM generation, SDS was from a time when a million students considered themselves revolutionary; however, we should not go too far in assuming what they figured out. In the main, the student movement embraced and then rejected Huey Newton and Arghiri Emmanuel, who tried to tell the student revolutionaries that the white workers were not a revolutionary vehicle and not exploited.

    White females in the 1960s went from receiving death threats for being “nigger-lovers” in the South to backing off class and nation entirely to write about rape. It’s not an accident. “Do your own thing” became supporting I$rael and consciously failing to wrap heads around all the intersections of class, nation and gender.

    What remained of SDS was what it always had, a white-collar career network behind it. The communists such as Huey Newton were not able to impose a single dominating view of nation, class and gender on a majority and the resulting “do your own thing” paved the way to what SDS became, the intellectual milieu that produced the crony capitalism and corporatism of 2010.

    Zionist or not Zionist, opposed to exploitation or not opposed to exploitation, the SDS movement individuals had career contacts. The ultimate expression of this fact was in vulgar sociology and the “resource-mobilization” school, which was nothing but revisionism’s Bernstein writ-large. Bernstein said the goal was nothing and the movement was everything and a wag of the “resource-mobilization” school of thought regarding social movements said that where there were resources, movements appeared later.

    That was exactly what the 1960s generation ended up doing–appropriating its share of the swag. SDS went after surplus-value first and asked questions later, the modus operandi of the petty-bourgeoisie.

    1. Sara Evans, Personal Politics: The Roots of Women’s Liberation in the Civil Rights Movement & the New Left (NY: Vintage Books, 1980), p. 240.
    2. Ibid., p. 197.
    3. New York Radical Feminists, Rape: The First Sourcebook for Women Noreen Connell and Cassandra Wilson eds., (NY: Times Mirror, 1974), p. 78.
    4. , Ibid., p. 66.
    5. “While sympathetic with the resulting impulse to jettison theory, I hope to persuade you not to give it to men. . . . New theories help make new realities.”
    Catharine MacKinnon, “Theory is not a Luxury,” Are Women Human and Other Dialogues (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006), p. 34.

    Shades of gray

    July 27, 2010

    I’ve been accused of not seeing shades of gray. That is false. It’s just that I don’t talk about shades of gray. Lynchers #1-3 are not shades of gray. They are clearcut problems. There are many other spies and decadent females I could talk about.

    In the same vein, one of the most difficult aspects of being the focus of media lynching for five years is that Amerikan females generally ARE a shade of gray different than the lynchers. It is especially true that intellectual females think about sex the same way as spies do — that it has no intrinsic value and that it might as well be exchanged for something regarding a supposed secret of Washington, Wall Street, Moscow or Beijing.

    MIM’s approach is to defend LGBT rights and remove rigid role pressures from asexuals. In our opinion, this will also do the most to remove decadence from heterosexual relations. Too many pseudo-feminists do not understand that pursuing a man for his alleged extrinsic connections to something going on in the world in power is degrading, moreso than what they spend most of their time attacking if they do bother to attempt feminism.

    While pornography protects females, because we do not want to send our Lindsay Lohans to prison and combat, females readily assent to sending males off to war, prison, murder and a disproportionate share of youth suicide. Females are now the vast majority of college graduates being minted as well. The gender aristocracy movement simply misses cause and effect.

    In pornographic magazines, females say they like sex, and never tell us the complicated and possibly stupid and evil things they have been doing. Nonetheless, attraction to the body is at least intrinsic to the individual who has the attractive body, and it does vary from individual to individual. What spies want is the same thing as money, extrinsic to the individual.

  • An 18-year-old sleeps with an 18-year-old for the purposes of a spy database. Wrong? Yes. In Egypt it would be horrible. In the United $tates, it’s a shade of gray, to be taken lightly.

    Then there are questions of fact. I don’t always report what I have been told, because in many cases the media and secret services disinform me to protect the Democratic Party at this time. Taken together the gray areas below do complete a picture. Maybe some of them are false, but some of them likely are true, and overall the gray areas help a reader to understand what has to be evaluated.

  • A Castroite and then a Gus Hall hack date someone for the purposes of extortion 25 years later. Wrong? Yes. Factually solid? — OK, the facts add up for this tip, but I don’t report it. It’s gray. One could question whether I’m just in denial, because I don’t want to think about all females that way.

  • A Gus Hall follower blocks my career path by pushing retraction of a job offer I received from someone else. It makes sense and I did not draw the party connection. It’s a shade of gray.

  • Yahoo! says the Brits don’t do Romeo/Juliet spies, but they recruit LGBT. This I consider a joke, and put it at 15% likelihood, but an increasing likelihood over time, just given the numbers of the situation.

  • Various papers and tabloids try to tell me a whole relationship in the 1980s was CIA. This I give a higher probability rating to.

    The following points I believe might not have super-high probability alone, but together add up.

  • Out of nowhere, an Army brat tells me he is going to see if he can get me into the Cabinet — in the 1980s when I showed no such interest. Did he know something already?

  • Two NASA brats tell me one-liners out of the blue in the 1980s that would seem to point to lyncher #1.

  • A friend of mine tells me out of the blue a two-liner in the early 1980s that I will have to sue for racial discrimination or get stuck in middle management — this when I was not looking for a job and was yet to head to graduate school.

  • “Race card fraud”

    July 23, 2010

    I am glad Thomas Sowell opposes “race card fraud,” because the people involved in lynch-mob rumors also spread a race card fraud.

    I was the only one at the “Michigan Daily” to see and try to stop a racist cartoon up on a page before it went to print. My lyncher spread rumors that I was responsible for it–and people on the Internet witnessed that. Even ESPN figured that out, because it is more advanced than Obama and the R¢P.

    Sowell should get over it. Racism was commonplace at the University of Michigan in the 1980s, even among relatively enlightened young journalists who opposed me overwhelmingly at first on the cartoon. However, only some people are really recalcitrant about it. That’s what makes the difference between trivia and a hate crime. At the “Michigan Daily” I found people willing to struggle and we overturned the cartoon with outside help. Lyncher #1 had a different mission.

    The fact that I speak in the open while the racists cover up is indicative of the problem of lynching in this country. As I’ve said many times, the racists rehearse their story in Aesopian language, several times, over several years, because they know they could never come up with one story without leaks and rehearsals.

    The Sowell article is probably trying to make a deal with the White House for it to stop sending paid racist provocateurs to make the Tea Party look bad. That’s why Biden recently said the Tea Party movement is not racist. The international proletariat should beware.


    Nelson Mandela’s birthday

    July 19, 2010

    In celebration of Nelson Mandela’s birthday,(1) MIM found two Amerikan pseudo-feminist web pages about 27.6% of South African men being rapists taken down. Still that leaves many other web pages saying for instance that 31% of South African men are rapists.(2)

    It just so happens that in line with what MIM has already said about gender bureaucrats talking about rape, the author of the 31% headline is none other than a blogger in charge of “Talking Points Memo.”

    The reason MIM says that “all sex is rape” is to consider the factors that are coercive in all gender relations. Those saying that 31% of South African men are rapists are racists and decadent females.

    There is no man that would consent to dating or marriage with a female that believed 31% of men are rapists. This information is hidden from men, who then cannot have an informed consent. Decadent females who date men with the idea that large portions of men are rapists are guilty of rape themselves.

    The other parties out there do not have the gonads to take a stand on the path to wimmin’s liberation in nation and class context. MIM’s answer that all sex is rape is the only solidly internationalist one. Otherwise, we will just end up with “talking points” from the West on Third World males.

    “Oh, Happy Birthday”
    “People dying”
    “People crying”
    “Oh, Happy Birthday!”


    The reactionary “femme fatale” role

    July 1, 2010

    Arrested for spying for Russia, Anna Chapman has now had her pictures placed all over the Internet. With a little luck she will land a clothing line endorsement.

    The “New York Daily News” version of Anna Chapman via Facebook

    A few stereotyped stories appeared in the press after the arrest on June 27.(1) One report says Chapman’s latest conquest was a 60-year-old jet-setter, none too notable for his looks. Hollywood eats up these sorts of stories because we are always looking for an excuse to eroticize inequality, in this case, to come up with a reason for Chapman to date someone not equal to her in looks, but perhaps superior in wealth. Only communism will be able to eliminate that gender problem, and like it or not, females will be ‘hos till then. What it will take for communism to succeed, maybe the wider application of biological advances in hormone regulation and the likes.

    It’s been habit to blame the men for the pattern of eroticizing inequality, but females today in the United $tates do not have to play an irresponsible political role: they can look into this themselves and criticize themselves as they would criticize men. The femme fatale role encourages females toward sexual interactions with no intrinsic interest to them, only extrinsic, non-physical rewards such as money, scandal or information. Females now have more than their share of middle-management jobs and mothering is still open for some as a role. Both roles can contribute more than the femme fatale associated ideas.

    No party has managed to eliminate gender inequality, but the “femme fatale” role belongs to the Democratic Party’s arsenal disproportionately. One “Huffington Post” hacktivist defends lynching by saying “action is a bitch.”(2) He got the “bitch” part right, but action is not joining the power structure on its own terms, not according to progressives.

    While the Democrats complain about the stay-at-home role of church-abiding females, it’s no accident that the femme fatale role of seducing men for scandal purposes receives disproportionate play in Hollywood making profit from such a role. Stay-at-home mothers going to their reactionary churches do not make for good characters to sell movies, at least not proportionately speaking. We need not mention that doing the hard work of political, sociological and economic study will never sell as many movie tickets, even compared with stay-at-home mothers, because the demographics are not there to sell identity politics movies that way.

    Older people continue to defend the “femme fatale” role, because they fail to notice that society has moved on. Now the problem is that females can play too many roles, not too few. “Balance” between career and family is the mantra of ordinary U.$. females today. One role we can do without is the “femme fatale.”

    Even Dennis Rodman says the NBA is fixed, but the chances of being a successful basketball star with bona fide talents is greater than being a successful femme fatale spy. Although Chapman reportedly had training with dead drops, obtaining money and passing photos, few people do the political work to be effective spies. In addition, where there is obvious political heat being thrown, various spies have already been there.

    The 2008 election showed that the U.$. media is not able to handle femme fatale related challenges thrown its way. It suited male fantasy to believe that something politically progressive emerged from a lynching, and so the media did not vet the lynching out. Far from progressive, the lynching played a role in supporting three wars, roils Korea as we speak, set back the disarmament cause and further complicates the I$rael/Palestine situation, while gumming up Gitmo. Rather than face all that, the Democratic Party continues to rely on social forces with a self-interest in believing in femme fatales forever–Hollywood and some academic pseudo-feminists and politicians who have conducted their own local lynchings for minor career advancement purposes.

    We are all stuck in the patriarchy, but the pro-lynching forces come from the more regressive portion of patriarchy. Political obliviousness stems from male sexual fantasy, the related Hollywood and celebrity type money and the need of many to continue justifying their own lynchings after-the-fact. Combined these interests support an irresponsible politics in which people believe what they want and need instead of paying attention to what they are doing. Some people need to believe in persynality cults. Others need to believe there is a progressive role for femme fatales. When confronted with reality these racist extremist Democrats go into denial.



    Al Qaeda recruits wimmin: Pentagon responds

    May 29, 2010

    At least two Indian papers report that Al Qaeda is recruiting wimmin from Saudi Arabia to fight especially in Yemen.(1) That may be why the Pentagon announced afterwards that it is ramping up covert operations in Yemen and doubling spending there.(2)

    Having killed over 500,000 children in Iraq, the West wishes it were done there and spending is going down.


    “New York Times” credibility going down for a good cause

    May 23, 2010

    The “New York Times” of May 22nd is still rehearsing how it’s going to run my story if it ends up having to, instead of just talking about it in-between the lines. Let’s just say that diplomacy and politics should not be left to hockey announcers and if the “New York Times” is not careful it will end up with a libel suit.

    It has been my consistent position that the press has to vet this lynching out. It didn’t because it would have damaged Obama in 2008. The “New York Times” and other media outlets have been informed to that effect.

    The standards of journalism, diplomacy and politics come from journalism, diplomacy and politics, not hockey or other sports. The “New York Times” cut Bush Jr. zero slack for using Willie Horton in 1988 campaign commercials for his father, Bush Sr.. The media did not conduct an investigation whether or not Willie Horton made up with his victim’s family or whether the victim’s family made up with him or conducted any dirty work against him. Whatever happened between me and my lyncher in 2006 does not justify Obama’s or the “New York Times”‘s using the lynching in 2008.

    Had Obama not used the lynching card in 2008, it’s likely we (my lyncher and I) would have escaped being involved in grave damage to the state and society. Granted, my lyncher would have had little credit for that, but we would have escaped with far less damage to society than we did.

    Whether or not Willie Horton should have been used in a campaign commercial is the same question as whether prisoners should work at sub-minimum wages for their jailers’ profit. We do not want people rewarded for lynching stereotypes that might encourage lynching anymore than we want police or sheriffs rewarded financially for imprisoning alleged felons. These ideas are feudal, overturned since feudal times. The people espousing rewards for lynching are backward, with a focus only on persynal attacks instead of what is good for the state and society.

    The infiltration gambit cannot be denied. There was a scandal in 1989-1991 and there was Obama’s use of that and interlocking scandals in 2008 –end of story.


    May 19, 2010

    Under serfdom that existed in feudal times, the peasant serf did not have the right to leave the manor, a specific bit of land controlled by the lord.

    Those of us radicals who happen to live in deep blue bastions such as Cambridge and Ann Arbor have no right to be apart from the Democratic Party and especially the revisionist wings of “communists” who support the Democratic Party.

    The serf had various customary obligations, usually including turning over a portion of agricultural output to the lord. In contrast, a worker under capitalism can choose to leave an employer and work for another and a worker obtains a wage.

    Via KKK custom, the blue bastion female is allowed to invent accusations against any non-conforming male decades into the future.

    Recruiting females

    May 14, 2010

    Some organizations having a hard time recruiting females have historically had problems because they see the role of females as limited to sleeping with men and creating scandals with which to extort men. This approach while lending itself to the pornography so destructive in the Weimar period in Germany is an insult to professional females who believe that they have the capability to lead in politics on a substance basis, not just on the basis of how men hire them for what’s between their legs.

    MIM’s predecessor organization RADACADS founded itself as a majority of minorities and a majority of females. MIM had female leaders in the number one slot. That could have to do with the fact that we have always been about accessibility and substance on feminism, not Aesopian slander and Alinskyite extortion tactics.

    It is in the interests of wimmin globally to oust the patriarchal habits of politics. The world’s wimmin will ignore the bought-off tokens of the patriarchy clogging up the politics of the privileged.