For the record:
The “1st” wave was the suffragettes. Not so much an ideology as a movement.
2nd-wave feminism happened around the seventies. Started off as a movement, but quickly became infiltrated by cultural Marxists. Would later be used to rationalize much of the third-wave feminist nonsense.
3rd-wave (“radical”) feminism started off with the riot girl scene — female punk rockers with little to no talent or concept of propriety. It would eventually make its way to the universities to merge with what second-wave feminism had become (Womyn’s Studies) and the growing push for diversity and multiculturalism.
4th-wave feminism is characterized by intersectionality. (Because multiculturalism wasn’t “diverse” enough.) This one originated squarely in the universities with the feminist appropriation of LGBT issues and the advent of modern “Gender Studies”.
(“Gender Studies” actually used to refer to the branch of Womyn’s Studies that dealt with male/female relations. Back when there were still only TWO genders.)
NOTE: Update to follow (eventually, I swear), because there’s a Part II to the genderqueef shit, and it’s seriously one of the craziest things I have ever seen from the Regressive Left. Which is saying quite a damned bit.
October has not been a month for friendship. My friends are dropping like flies — and it’s largely the fault of Lindsey Graham. He has released from within me an utter abhorrence for unethical shams.
About a dozen people have unfriended me on Facebook since the Christine Ford farce, and I’m pretty sure the majority of those who didn’t are no longer following me.
For the most part, I have been silently unfriended. By whom, it’s hard to tell, which suggests no major loss. But here are two cases in which I played an active role in the dissolution of a friendship — for better or for worse.
Part Two of THIS
Meet Foreign Policy Magazine. Rated “Least Biased” and “Factual Reporting: High” by Media Bias and Fact Check, they are now working to throw November’s election by spreading actual Fake News — with help from #metoo’s Alyssa Milano.
Click on the above tweet from Foreign Policy’s senior foreign policy editor, or click here to go directly to the article.
The Trump administration on Monday began denying visas to same-sex domestic partners of foreign diplomats and United Nations employees, and requiring those already in the United States to get married by the end of the year or leave the country.
The U.S. Mission to the U.N. portrayed the decision—which foreign diplomats fear will increase hardships for same-sex couples in countries that don’t recognize same-sex marriage—as an effort to bring its international visa practices in line with current U.S. policy. In light of the landmark 2015 Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage, the U.S. extends diplomatic visas only to married spouses of U.S. diplomats.
”Same-sex spouses of U.S. diplomats now enjoy the same rights and benefits as opposite-sex spouses,” the U.S. mission wrote in a July 12 note to U.N.-based delegations. “Consistent with [State] Department policy, partners accompanying members of permanent missions or seeking to join the same must generally be married in order to be eligible” for a diplomatic visa.
The new policy —which enters into force Monday—requires that foreign domestic partners of diplomats and U.N. officials posted in the United States must show the State Department proof of marriage by Dec. 31, or leave the country within 30 days. As of today, domestic partners of diplomats and U.N. officials based abroad will need to show they are married in order to enter the country on a diplomatic visa. The latest policy change, the United States explained in the note, was aimed at ensuring all couples were treated equally.
Same-sex couples already inside of the United States could go to city hall and get married. […]
Visas are being denied to both same-sex and opposite-sex domestic partners!
In other words, same-sex couples are receiving equal treatment. (Wasn’t that always the point?)
Alyssa Milano — who was a personal guest of Dianne Feinstein at Thursay’s hearing — wasted no time, tweeting this out to her followers:
Who of course began freaking out en masse because nobody bothers reading past the headlines anymore. 🙄
I replied to a number of sub-threads, hoping to call attention to what was actually going on here:
But at least I didn’t get the James Woods treatment. Funny how the DNC can accuse him of trying to influence an election by making fun of soy boys, while Dianne Feinstein’s friends can blatantly work to throw one (“text and imagery that has the potential to be misleading in a way that could impact an election”) and get a free pass — if not actual help — from Twitter.
For the record, I am adding Alyssa Milano to my List of Women I Would Like to See in Refrigerators.