This is Kate Millet’s sister writing about her — and the consequence of her activism. The gutting of mental health acts in the USA. The consequences of the Baby boomer radicals continue to this day. Read the article, it includes a discussion of just how difficult Kate was to her family — and lovers, and everyone else.
So when it came to my attention that as a result of these adventures she and a few cohorts had concocted a new “civil rights movement” for mental patients and in her characteristic ruthlessness was determined to “liberate” NY’s mental patients I was beyond appalled. God help anyone who gets in the way of Kate and her “righteous indignation” which had already spearheaded the militant Women’s Liberation Movement. This was to be called, “The Psychiatric Survivors Movement.”
Thus, as a result of Kate’s and her pals’ agitation back in the seventies psychiatric and mental health institutions were forever changed. This culminated in the depositing on the streets of NYC thousands of confused, terrified and seriously disturbed persons left to fend for themselves in the mean streets of The City. Most people were shocked but the hapless denizens of New York simply shrugged their shoulders and left these poor souls thus deposited to the whims and cruelty of teens, gangs and other bullies. We’ve all read the accounts of sick and helpless people being kicked about, murdered, robbed and even set on fire. Yet, due to my sister’s genius for chaos creation, no one, not even the Police Department can lift a finger of mercy to help these persons because it’s a “violation of their civil rights” to do so.
As they say, “As New York City goes, so goes the country.” And so it was as most of America followed suit and dissembled their mental health institutions and systems.
When I hear the multiple reports of this catastrophe in Santa Barbara my heart swells with sorrow over the people whose lives have been irrevocably altered by the actions of this very sick young man and when I witness (and how I do identify with) the agony of his family who tried so very hard to obtain help for him; the vivid story of Elliot’s mother going to the police passionately begging for help.
DO NOT start the usual vilifying of the NRA and the constant claptrap about guns. Half of the people Elliot Rodger killed last weekend were felled by the knife. What? You want to confiscate all knives? Or make people get permits to own a knife? Most of the people injured were hurt by his car. Shall we outlaw cars? Let’s start thinking straight: Do you seriously want to blame the instrument for the actions of the user? We may as well blame the keyboard for the poison pen letter or the telephone for the obscene phone call or death threat!!! Make no mistake about it. It’s not guns, not male chauvinism, not white male privilege or male rage. It was the deconstruction of the mental health system in our country achieved in the seventies and eighties by a mad little gang of meddlers led in their mischief by Kate Millett.
The opposition from the left are generally not limited by such reasonable ideas as logic, or rationality. It is about emotion. It is about rage. And it is not about safety, or consideration of consequences.
Some more examples.
In the wake of our planned conference in June becoming the target of death threats, I thought this was a good time to make an appeal to all the feminists who aren’t like that. I know for a fact that you are out there. I have seen you for years now, in places like Reddit, on our Facebook Page, Youtube channel and in the comments of this very website.
I have even gotten emails from many of you, admonishing me to consider that in criticizing feminism that I am actually condemning a whole group of people, most of whom are only interested in gender equality and justice; who believe that all voices deserve to be heard, including men’s. Many of these same feminists have claimed that they too, are very invested in resolving gender related problems that affect men and boys. Indeed, were I to include all of my interactions with those who claim to be feminist, I would have to say that most of them fit the description of people interested in justice and equality for all.
However, what I see in the actual actions of feminists in the landscape of gender politics has often been very different from what has been claimed by so many people, both men and women, who tell me that feminism is not really about those actions.
Now is the time we can put this to the test. I am asking for the real feminism to please stand up. We have an event scheduled that includes the first Black female senator elected in North America. It also includes the woman who started the domestic violence shelter movement for women. It includes a three time board member of the National Organization for Women who was named one of the top 100 thinkers in the 20th Century by Financial Times Magazine. Another academician speaking is a gay man who has dedicated a career to understanding gender issues. This is all alongside a nationally recognized journalist, psychologists, psychotherapists and other experienced advocates for men and boys. The death threats from feminists, in the attempt to silence these esteemed speakers, has resulted in the conference incurring tens of thousands of dollars in additional security costs.
We plan on launching a fundraiser tomorrow to address those needs, but I want to give the feminists who stand by free speech and assert decisively that these thugs do not represent what feminism is about, to have an early shot at helping us address the gender issues that impact men and boys in an open forum.
The paypal button below is offered for feminists only. It is a $25.00 one-time donation to help us with security costs that were inflicted on us by others calling themselves feminists.
It took one day to raise the money. (Well it is Detroit. “Nice business you got there” and all that). Admittedly, I’m hardened. I go to psychiatry conferences. You know it is a big one when the scientologists picket it and hurl abuse at you when you enter the hall.
Surely we’re getting to fembotulism’s last gasp? They’re down to:
- micro-aggressions – you do get that that’s microscopic, right? Just how many micro-aggressions are needed to make an everyday insult, for example?
- kyriarchy – they changed the name because too many people started laughing at the concept of the west being a patriarchy. the new word sounds more impressive right up until you find out that it’s still the same ol’ shite, just with new improved exotic sounding gravy.
- intersectionality – because when the remaining issues are so banal, all you can do is starting obfuscating that fact by claiming they have some sick synergy. I can see that it’s worth a spin as it isn’t hard to confuse a fembot, and after all, there’s money to be made in prolonging the micro-issues.
- privilege – because when you’re intellectually bankrupt, all you’re left with is pointing at intangible things (see also western patriarchy kyriarchy)
- trigger warnings – because your under-developed amygdala is so highly strung you need a text warning up front so that you can put a hat on to stop it spontaneously ejecting out the top of your head and getting lost. ear plugs may also be advisable.
Fixed the formatting from the comment, by the way.
But this is the end stage. The liberals are wedded to the ideas of the hippies, despite the fact they have now failed.
But modern-day liberalism is still stranger than all that: after crafting a system of open borders and de facto amnesty that has allowed millions of impoverished from central Mexico to reside in California, the architects of such a system then shut down almost all means to provide illegal aliens a livelihood: water diversions from agriculture, the near extinction of the timber and mining industries, taboos against fracking and horizontal drilling, a virtual shut-down of new housing construction, and on and on.
The result is that the Bay Area liberal looking down from his cupola has pulled up the stairway to his perch. He has essentially decreed that the impoverished will have very little livelihood in an overregulated state other than welfare and entry-level government jobs, and will live an apartheid existence in the Central Valley and L.A. basin, shut out from the coastal corridor where new housing is permanently on hold to any other than the top 2% of the state population.
We should not use the word “progressive” or “liberal,” given that on issues like abortion, affirmative action, the environment, illegal immigration, censorship, and a host of others, the left is reactionary to the core.
In the spirit of changing words to reflect reality, I suggest that we call today’s liberals “regressives” — fundamentalists who are wedded to self-serving deductive doctrines that cannot sustain empirical scrutiny and exist mostly as fossilized theologies of the 1960s.
One is tempted to tell them what Daniel said to Belshazzer: you have been weighed and found wanting, your time will end, and your kingdom will be divided. By moving to a politics of identity you have divided nations into factions, and made the state unstable.
This cannot last. And the new, smaller state will be stable. But will probably not be liberal.
__________
Update: got an email from the author of the list of new words asking me to add trigger warnings. Which I have done.
Like this:
Like Loading...
