Friday, 21 December 2012

On Dying for the Matriarchy





Schoolboys in Imperial Germany were encouraged to write appreciative essays on the subject of dying for the fatherland. It won’t be too long, I fear, before Anglo-American schoolboys are writing essays about dying for the Matriarchy. Certainly, the Anglosphere seems to be moving in that direction.

With popular support for the unwinnable wars in the Near East waning, the legacy media is redefining those wars in terms of a matriarchal crusade against 'patriarchal barbarism’.

Unwitting tool of these sickly agenda is a hapless Afghan girl shot by the Taliban.  Never mind that the Taliban offer at least as much violence against subaltern males in Afghanistan – all males are the enemy in this hasty redefinition, and thus unworthy of consideration or sympathy:

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — When the time came to choose medical treatment for Malala Yousafzai, the 14-year-old Pakistani schoolgirl who defied the Taliban and then was gunned down by them, her family and doctors faced a world of possibilities after a global outpouring of advice and offers of assistance.  


Whatever they chose, a medical jet from the United Arab Emirates was waiting to take her to hospitals abroad. Pakistani and American officials had talked about arranging treatment for her at the giant American military hospital at Landstuhl, Germany. 

A well-developed offer came from former Representative Gabrielle Giffords and her husband, Mark E. Kelly, who had gone through their own treatment ordeal after she was shot in the head last year. They had gone as far as to line up a noted neurosurgeon and had even arranged a transportation option of their own to the United States — with a television celebrity offering to quietly foot the fuel bill

Those were among dozens of offers from across the world. But when the time came to fly the wounded schoolgirl out of Pakistan, in the early hours of Monday, a deal from Britain to accept Malala at a specialized hospital in Birmingham proved hard to beat. 

But first, to get her there. 

Out of worry that the Taliban would fulfill their promise to take a second shot at the teenage activist, the dawn run from the military hospital in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, to the airport was shrouded in secrecy, said Rehman Malik, Pakistan’s interior minister. 

“I directed the airport staff to remain incognito, because there was an alert, threats from the Taliban that they would kill her,” he said. “We were very careful.”

Yet there was little doubt that each of the possibilities, especially given the diplomatic tensions between Pakistan and America, carried its own political risk. 

Initially, Pakistani officials had approached the American Embassy for help, officials from both countries said. Two options were discussed, Interior Minister Malik said: the possible use of an American military facility in Oman, and evacuation to the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany. “We scrambled like hell,” one American official said. “We were standing by, ready to do anything.

There were also private American offers — from Ms. Giffords and Mr. Kelly, plus at least three other “serious” parties, the American official added. One came from an American businessman with ties to senior figures in the Pakistan government; another came from a constituent of Senator John Kerry, who has longstanding political ties to the country. 

Meanwhile Ms. Giffords’s doctor, Dr. Dong Kim, the head of neurosurgery at the Memorial Hermann-Texas Medical Center, got ready to travel to Pakistan. Mr. Kelly, a former astronaut, said he had recruited an American celebrity, whom he declined to name, to finance the fuel costs of an emergency plane trip from Peshawar to Houston. 

“We were just trying to offer the best help available, as we understand it from being down this road,” Mr. Kelly said. 

Mr. Kelly also pressed political contacts in the White House, State Department and Pakistan to help push the offer through. He said that Johns Hopkins University made a similar offer. But over the weekend, Mr. Kelly was told by a senior State Department official that “Pakistan has decided to solve this domestically.” 

The British connection, however, had already been well established at that point through two doctors, both experts in trauma injuries and one of whom was of Pakistani descent, who happened to be visiting Pakistan at the time of the shooting last week

The medics were quickly drafted into the effort to save Ms. Yousafzai’s life. They were flown to Peshawar to help with the initial diagnosis and then on to the hospital in Rawalpindi. They shared in decisions about how long to keep the patient in Pakistan, officials from Britain and Pakistan said, declining to name the two. 

Early Monday morning, the medics accompanied a Pakistani brigadier in watching over Ms. Yousafzai during the flight to Britain. The air ambulance that ferried them had been offered by the United Arab Emirates, a country with close political ties to President Asif Ali Zardari. 

By several accounts there were sound medical reasons why the American offers of help to Ms. Yousafzai were not accepted, including the lengthier flight to the United States. 

But Britain may also have held other attractions. While the United States and Pakistan have engaged in diplomatic warfare in recent years — over the Osama bin Laden raid, drone strikes and the controversy surrounding a Central Intelligence Agency contractor, Raymond Davis — Britain has carefully cultivated a less adversarial relationship. Britain has been a major aid donor to Pakistan for decades, and many high-ranking Pakistanis, in political life and in the country’s armed forces, have been educated or trained in Britain. 

“If we had an offer of British help and American help, all things being equal we would go with the British,” one senior Pakistani official said. “It makes more sense.” 

Exact details of Ms. Yousafzai’s condition remain hazy. Doctors say she requires treatment for a serious skull fracture, caused by a bullet that passed through her head. Later, she may require long-term neurological rehabilitation.
Ms. Yousafzai’s schoolmaster father, Ziauddin, who inspired her to start her high-profile campaign for girls’ education and women’s rights in 2009, did not travel with her to Birmingham yesterday, Pakistani officials said.
SOURCE: New York Times

As if by magic, the War against Terror is becoming a war to impose Anglo feminism on unwilling lands and peoples.  Of course, both Anglo socons and feminists clamor for this – after all, both groups are bound by the same puritanical misandry that defines the Anglo nations.

The problem with their crooked agenda is this: very few Anglo-American men want to die for the matriarchy.  Apart from White Knights and lumpen-working class idiots, most men now view feminism as a threat to their lives and liberty.  Having seen so many fathers, uncles and brothers crash and burn in ‘no fault’ divorces, not to mention having experienced discrimination in every sphere of adult life,  very few Anglo-American American males will be signing up to defend women’s ‘rights’ any time soon.

I have an alternative solution. If feminists want to expand the matriarchy, perhaps they should do it themselves?

13 comments:

  1. Rookh wrote;

    "I have an alternative solution. If feminists want to expand the matriarchy, perhaps they should do it themselves?"

    I agree, women should be on the front lines in wars. They should be allowed to die for their country like men do. I want to see women in hand to hand combat.

    Millions of men have died in anglo-nations defending their country. I want to see women step up and join the military and fight for their country like men do.

    If women want equal rights, then they need to take equal responsibility.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "I have an alternative solution. If feminists want to expand the matriarchy, perhaps they should do it themselves?"

    They'd never go for it...

    They'd be too worried about breaking a nail whilst shooting guns at human beings...

    ReplyDelete
  3. We should hand out white feathers to those feminists that refuse to fight their own wars.

    By the way, there is a great irony regarding women's issues at the hands of the Taliban, in that it was Benazir Bhutto that had effectively unleashed them back to Afghanistan in order to stabilize the region. Then the chickens came home to roost.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Rookh:
    I actually remember then-president George Bush Jr making several speeches about Taliban oppression of women as a justification for US intervention in Afghanistan. White Knight pundits were everywhere too, reminding us that Afghan women were forced to wear burkhas and girls couldn't go to school.

    Nobody seemed to remember or care how many American men and women died in the 2001 terrorist attacks.

    No sooner had the US forces overthrown the Taliban than feminist 're-educators' went to Afghanistan to impose feminism on the populace. The same is happening in Libya right now, incidentally.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Not Thomas Fleming26 December 2012 at 12:57

    "As if by magic, the War against Terror is becoming a war to impose Anglo feminism on unwilling lands and peoples. Of course, both Anglo socons and feminists clamor for this – after all, both groups are bound by the same puritanical misandry that defines the Anglo nations."

    I prefer to call this a dialectic-a feminist dialectic-rather than magic. I suppose there isn't very much separating the two.

    ReplyDelete
  6. You raise an interesting point that the "wars" are now being justified via the global women's rights agenda. I never thought about that, but I agree.

    Trouble is, that goal will never be won by the west because I sense a general reversal of feminist support in the world due largely to the economic turndowns in the developed world.

    Economics always trumps social engineering, and the frothy feminist economy (service economy, non-profits, et cetera), will wither at the point where market forces demand male labor over female.

    ReplyDelete
  7. *Economics always trumps social engineering, and the frothy feminist economy (service economy, non-profits, et cetera), will wither at the point where market forces demand male labor over female.*

    Interestingly, many of the unnecessary jobs being shed in Britain by the present Conservative government are of the type you describe. When belts need to be tightened, women's 'work' is suddenly revealed for what it is - pointless.

    ReplyDelete
  8. *No sooner had the US forces overthrown the Taliban than feminist 're-educators' went to Afghanistan to impose feminism on the populace. The same is happening in Libya right now, incidentally.*

    The Anglosphere is a matriarchy. What did you expect?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Not Thomas Fleming31 December 2012 at 12:37

    "Apart from White Knights and lumpen-working class idiots, most men now view feminism as a threat to their lives and liberty."

    Under which category would you place this gem, Rookh:

    "Feminism does not cause men's failures. Men's failures cause feminism."

    http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2012/12/27/handgun-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-214877

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's a hybrid. 30% working-class idiot, 70% deluded White Knight.

      A new species, I wonder?

      Delete
    2. Not Thomas Fleming2 January 2013 at 14:08

      Rookh, the amusing thing is that his observation is partialy valid. The great irony though is that it's men EXACTLY LIKE HIM who share a large part of the responsibility for feminism.

      Delete
  10. Anglo-Prod matriarchal cult nonsense. Just like Mark Driscoll and Joel Davisson. Everything is a man's fault because a woman is a Stepford wife who cannot think for herself. It is the very anglo-puritanism Rookh has spoken of in this blog since the beginning.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Not Thomas Fleming2 January 2013 at 13:01

    Rookh, the amusing thing is that his observation is partialy valid. The great irony though is that it's men EXACTLY LIKE HIM who share a large part of the responsibility for feminism.

    ReplyDelete