Monday, May 24,1999
Who needs men?
Not the Liberals--the matriarchy they've created detests themLETTER FROM THE PUBLISHER
It seemed just a bit too easy, somehow. The media rumour was that federal Justice Minister Anne McLellan was going to bring in reforms to the Divorce Act which would, among other things, give children better access to non-custodial parents--mainly fathers. A Senate-Commons committee had recommended it, having studied the matter for two years, heard 500 witnesses, and received thousands of letters and depositions. But Ms. McLellan announced last week that the government will go right on studying the matter for three more years. No reforms.
Her decision crushes the hopes of a vast number of divorced fathers who have been cut off from their children by vindictive custodial mothers, and of children who have been disconnected from their natural fathers. Given the frequency of divorce, and the attitude of blind selfishness among a lot of divorced women, I assume we're talking about hundreds of thousands of people who had been yearning for justice. Well, they're not going to get it from Justice Minister McLellan.
For the truth is that under the Liberal and Tory governments of the past generation, Canada has become a matriarchy--a place ruled by women for women. Feminists will scoff, but it is true. Consider all the incredible powers and privileges women have been given.
First and most obvious, they have been given the power of life and death. If you are a "wanted" baby, or if you're lucky enough to have a good mother who will let you live whether she "wants" you or not, you survive. But if you're among the unlucky 20%, if your presence is inconvenient, Mom makes a "difficult personal choice" and you get broken into a million pieces and sucked out of her like so much trash. Don't look for any help from Dad in this decision: the Supreme
Court has said he has no more right to influence the matter than you do. Mom and Mom alone decides.
Under the new sexual assault laws, women as individuals get to define whether a particular encounter was consensual or not. Objective evidence of coercion isn't required; if you weep convincingly the judge is repuired to play along, regardless of whether the male thought you were consenting. We saw this in Edmonton's notorious Larry Ewanchuk case.
Similarly, it's no surprise, when you think about it, that women now initiate more divorces than men do. A divorcing woman usually manages to keep her children, she has rigorously enforced access to Dad's wallet, and any order giving him access to his own children can be safely ignored. If he becomes too troublesome, she simply alleges sexual abuse, and good-bye Dad.
So in all crucial aspects of intimacy, marriage and conception, women now have all the power and men have none. They are there to be used, and when they are no longer useful, to be discarded.
Needless to say, however, it doesn't stop at the family. We see an identical obsession with female "empowerment" all through our public institutions: in our courts, in our schools and universities, in our social bureaucracies. We see men routinely ridiculed in advertising, but never women. We see special recruitment drives of all kinds for women, never for men. We see special government-paid programs to advance women's power, and none to counter it. If Earl Joudrie had pumped six bullets into Dorothy's back, and not the other way around, would he have gone free? This is the matriarchy.
There's a tendency among people to shrug and say, well, men used to have it all their own way, and these things are necessary to restore balance. We used to have patriarchy, where men ran everything, and now we're going to have matriarchy.
I think this reaction reflects a woeful ignorance of the past, however. Before the feminist revolution we did not have patriarchy, we had civilization; and what we have now is social chaos, and all the rank injustice and seething resentment which ideological barbarism of this sort invariably brings with it.
Anyone who thought that a single parliamentary committee could reverse the tide of anarchy in family law was naive. The ideology is far too deeply entrenched, and it will take a lot more suffering and struggle before it's uprooted.
And one thing is certain above all: it will not be corrected by the Liberals. The Liberals have done more than anyone else to destroy the family and keep it impotent. Why? Because when families are strengthened, governments are weakened. People who can rely on each other do not need political protection by the state. Single moms by and large vote Liberal. That's why the Liberals are constantly refusing to cut family taxes and reform the divorce law, and forever nudging provinces towards a "national childcare strategy." They are endlessly eager to help, and in the process to take society hostage.
So in the calamitous event that Ms. McLellan and her loathsome gang are still running and ruining the country three years hence, there will be no more justice forthcoming for dispossessed fathers and children then than there is now. Justice is something Liberals don't understand. They understand only power and patronage. Or perhaps we should say, matronage.
-- Link Byfield
Letters to the editor of the Alberta Report can be sent to firstname.lastname@example.org
Copyright © 1999 United Western Communications Ltd.
All Rights Reserved.