Fathers for Life
Fatherlessness, the lack of natural fathers in children's lives
| Home | In The News | Our Blog | Contact Us | Share

Fathers for Life Site-Search

Site Map (very large file)
Table of Contents
Children—Our most valued assets?
Educating Our Children for the Global Gynarchia
Child Support
Civil Rights & Social Issues
Family Law
Destruction of Families
Divorce Issues
Domestic Violence
Gay Issues
Hate, Hoaxes and Propaganda
Help Lines for Men
Law, Justice and The Judiciary
Mail to F4L
Men's Issues
The Politics of "Sex"
Our Most Popular Pages
Email List
References - Bibliography

You are visitor

since June 19, 2001



Radical feminism's absurd legacy 

Thanks to Paul Ford  <sharedparent@sprint.ca>

Radical feminism's absurd legacy
Friday, July 31, 1998

By Terence Corcoran  

[The photo to the right was not part of the article, but it does drive home the point. —WHS]

Let us first come to grips with the grotesqueness of the pay equity legal tangle that could end up costing Canadian taxpayers up to $5-billion. The federal government took the federal government before a federal government-appointed tribunal to determine whether the federal government should pay restitution to 200,000 female federal government employees because the federal government had failed to pay the women equal pay for work of equal value since 1987. Topping off the absurdity, the case is also being fought by the Public Service Alliance of Canada, the union that negotiated the allegedly unequal wages the women were earning.

Now everybody is waiting to see whether the same federal government, the godfather of this radical feminist monster, will appeal the whole mess to the Federal Court. This should be a no-brainer for the cabinet, although judging from the cowering statement the Treasury Board slipped out under the door in the wake of the Human Rights Tribunal decision on Wednesday, who can be sure? Ottawa has been picking up the tab on freeloading feminist ideology since the 1960s, so there's every reason to be concerned that the government is going to cave in again. The government is "thoroughly analyzing the pay equity ruling," according to the Treasury Board, which also noted that the ruling doesn't say how much employees will receive or when, it merely "determines the methodology of how to make the calculations."

That's not very reassuring. For all we know, this means Ottawa is already printing the cheques, it just doesn't know when they will be mailed. The only hope for taxpayers is that the cost of fulfilling the tribunal's order will strike the government as outrageous. If the total bill were to rise to $5-billion, that averages out to $350 for each of 14 million taxpayers. Since 90 per cent of all taxes are paid by eight million taxpayers, the cost of the pay equity boondoggle could run to more than an average of $600 for the majority of taxpayers. For most Canadians in middle or higher-income groups, the cost per family could easily run to more than $1,500.

And good luck reading the decision, possibly the most incoherent and disorganized collection of socio-legal-techno-pseudo-science ever produced by a judicial body. It begins in the middle, ends at the beginning and fights through 200 pages of incomprehensible analysis that attempts to prove the unprovable and justify the indefensible, which is that women are underpaid relative to men, and that the differences can be measured and corrected.

The tribunal's decision is the culmination of more than 30 years' worth of gender politics, a legacy richly chronicled and demolished by former '60s activist Martin Loney in a new book, The Pursuit of Division: Race, Gender, and Preferential Hiring in Canada (McGill-Queen's University Press, 1998). In an interview yesterday, Mr. Loney said the tribunal's decision is another step in the "ever more inventive quest to socially engineer society in a way that reflects the redfems' premise that any indication that women are underrepresented anywhere in society or paid less than men has to be evidence of systemic discrimination."

The book is a much better read than that quote. It plots, blow by blow, step by step, the grim, government-financed rise of gender politics, from the 1967 Royal Commission on the Status of Women to the Human Rights Act of 1977 to the current national disaster. Today, a giant and lucrative industry of lawyers, consultants, bureaucrats and activists feed off such organizations as the Human Rights Commission and the tribunal. In the politics of gender and race identity, Mr. Loney writes, "Canadians have financed an increasingly destructive agenda whose outcome is not unity, equality or fairness, but division."

The parade of characters, politicians, feminists, dupes and con artists — from Judy Rebick to Pat Carney to Rosalie Abella to Lloyd Axworthy — is thick and colourful. But as Mr. Loney shows time and again through his book, there is no evidence that women are underpaid or systematically and deliberately excluded from jobs or positions or promotions or raises. Whether in the civil service or elsewhere, the only way gender politics can be translated into statistical material is by hauling in socialists and statisticians to manipulate numbers and jobs to fabricate and invent proof. That goes a long way toward explaining the tribunal's convoluted decision this week.

Missing from Mr. Loney's story is the international labour movement and the Marxist origins of the gender issue. The Human Rights Act of 1977, which entrenched equal pay/equal work in law and gave the tribunal the foundation for its ruling this week, was the direct product of clauses in the 1951 Equal Remuneration Convention of the International Labour Organization, a union-controlled leftist front sponsored by the United Nations.

Whether leftist or radical-feminist, the consequences of state-forced gender equality are now in: The cost is exorbitant, the means absurd and there's no end in sight.  


See also "Dances with taxpayers" Toronto Globe and Mail, Thursday, July 30, 1998
By Jeffrey Simpson, in Ottawa.


Note [2002 12 22]:   There has been absolutely no change in these trends, other than that our taxes have gone up some more to pay for the continuing advancement of feminist social engineering, the purchasing power of the Canadian dollar has fallen quite a bit more, and Canadian society shows advanced signs of decay and impending collapse.
   Karl Marx and Frederick Engels must be dancing in their graves. —WHS

If the term "radical feminism" (a.k.a. Marxist- or socialist-feminism) is somewhat new to you, you need to expand your knowledge.  After all, radical feminism, the currently controlling faction of feminism, governs just about everything that is happening in your life.  See,

Carey Roberts column

Carey Roberts is an analyst and commentator on political correctness. His best-known work was an exposť on Marxism and radical feminism.

Carey Roberts' best-known work, his exposť on Marxism and radical feminism, is not necessarily easy to find, but this link will help with that. (Some of the URLs for the article series appear to keep changing.  For that reason the identified link leads to an Internet search for the series.  The first or second link in the return list will most likely lead you to the series.))

For other topics in this subject area, check the Table of Contents for Feminism and Related Issues.

Update 2011 04 23: An important and related book is "The satellite sex: the media and women's issues in English Canada, 1966-1971," by Barbara M. Freeman, Wilfrid Laurier University Press (May 2 2001, more at amazon.com)

A fitting subtitle for The Satellite Sex would be: "How the women's movement infiltrated, subverted and usurped the Canadian media" (excerpts at books.google.ca)

Last updated 1999 06 04
2001 01 25 (format changes)
2002 02 22 (format changes and note added)
2004 04 06 (added photo on how to prepare your son for working life)
2011 04 23 (added reference to The Satellite Sex)