As near as most observers can calculate the basis for the gender-feminist mandate to forcefeed free people from its repugnant chalice began long before the Magna Charta.  But the most recent surge in gender policing  malevolence and misandry caught even the best biologists off guard.For as long as man has existed, or to conform  -  Homo Sapiens, the foundational stress of monogamy has caused problems.   Each gender has had its historical tidal highs of influence and periods of gender recession.  These swings have been punctuated by long periods of relative calm and balance.   For the past thirty-five years America has been caught in the vortex of a nasty little social whirlpool; one in which men fear being men and women fear being women.  The biological history of gender coexistence is considered by the average gender-feminist to be  just another shaky theory in dire need of debunking.  Never mind the middle-ground of human development which got us to where we are, or where we should be.   Today the mist of political correctness and fear of challenging the activist lobby, is as deadly to the future of our society as any potential nuclear cloud.  The gender-feminist lobby, growing by judicial and legislative leaps, as "equality" becomes a memory and social dominance assumes the focus, has hitched a ride on an old train.  The movement seems to believe they have a legitimate, analogous cause with our dismal and real history of slavery.   The imaginary theme of Africans and indentured females in general being akin is fueling the twisted language and posturing of the FemGang Consortium in Washington and across the country.  As a culture we screwed up horribly in allowing African peoples to become chattel. We are and have been painfully involved in the long-term self-correction, hopefully nearing and end.   Some victims of slavery were women; that's where the comparison ends.   Social engineering at this place in time by gender is as ridiculous as reparations for African-Americans fifteen generations removed from the crime.  There seems to be, by modern gender-feminist definition, a fine line between the oppressed and the perceived oppressors.  Why else would we find such an historically rapid decline in the value of men and male traditions in our society?   Why would one gender-activist sect,  flush with enabling laws and political fear on their side systematically marginalize the other half of the population?        Why do men allow their collective futures to be mortgaged to a bank of recrimination?   The method being used by gender-feminists to tilt public opinion and subconsciously impact the vast disinterested segment in society is both subtle and glaring.  Many public fronts of opportunity have opened for them by the clearly left-leaning media.  Other vulnerable and normally intelligent public figures have, through dismissing the militant behavior as a nuisance, give credence by omission to the assault on our culture and the constitution.  Either way, communication is the key.  The feminist machine uses language effectively.  In general, men get angry when victimized and sulk or make honest but disorganized attempts to defend the perimeter of common sense with more verbs than dollars.   We treasure our language.  It is available to all those able to learn -   as a tool.  Just as any innocuous tool may become a weapon so have our words been manipulated to form the legal battering ram used to threaten the civil rights and liberties of men in America.  Legislators REALLY love words.  Courts, judges and attorneys pay attention to words.  They live by the latest popular definition of what means what.  Newspapers, movies, television and radio all deal with words and the visions they inspire.   Nowhere are words more important to a rational sense of gender equality and respect, than in the  laws, manifestos and political jargon of today.  Males and rights-conscious advocates seem to have slept though the past fifteen years.  Laws, printed policies and standard forms are riddled with presumptive-guilt and sexist language in reference to men.   Policy is made from words, policy can become law, law becomes precedent and eventually  the "truth".   One example is our own U.S. Justice Department.  Ironically, the much-maligned Immigration and Naturalization Service has apparently overlooked the 14th Amendment (that's the one with words about "due process").   In its zeal to invoke VAWA provisions or gather favor with the state-of-the-art feminist neolinguists , the INS now refers to primarily men presumptively as "abusers" in its infamous cut-and-run form INS 1-360.  That's the growingly popular application for Special Residency Status for "battered or abused" aliens.  Since the form is only an application and carries no evidence value in its own right, there is little excuse for it referring to the "alleged" abuser as the ABUSER.  Forget alleged.  Forget evidence.  Forget charges and investigation.  Forget the constitution.   Just words   Commonly men are referred to as perpetrators in a variety of settings without regard fordue process.  Women's Resource Center personnel commonly print check-in sheets for victims of abuse and name the alleged abuser in  masculine language.   Imagine the re-printing costs if a number of abused males (statistically equal in studies) suddenly showed up on their steps.  Not likely, those systems are designed intentionally to serve only one gender  despite its government funding and charter requirements.   Women's Commissions abound at state and national levels, and with the exception of tiny New Hampshire try to find an active Men's Commission anywhere, other than in the minds of the men who see the inequity.    Words made the policy that drove the law that built the house that Jack cannot enter.

The DesertLight Journal

Hunter Brooks