Christiane Amanpour Doesn’t Get What I’m Saying About Militant Feminism

0
174

RUSH: The Washington Post recently reported that I had described militant feminism as irrational, that the women are angry. Something happened to them in their lives. Their rage and anger, they take it out now on the country or on all men and so forth. This became a subject for CNN International and Christiane Amanpour talking with author Rebecca Traister about a new book: Good and Mad: The Revolutionary Power of Women’s Anger. Here’s the bite:

AMANPOUR: Rush Limbowl (sic) said something completely predictable. I’m gonna play it and then I’m gonna read something that Steve Bannon said — and he is considered the eminence grise of realpolitik today. Let’s play Rush Limbaugh first.

RUSH ARCHIVE: Militant feminism? It’s irrational. These women are angry. Something has happened to them in their lives — and their rage and anger, they take it out now on the country or on all men or men in “the powerful majority,” which is white Christian men and so forth. How do you deal with psychological disorders?

AMANPOUR: Dear, oh, dear! Poor old Rush. Well, he’ll be sorry to know, uh, that, as I said, the sort of the lion of populist politics and nationalism, Steve Bannon, had a quite different view of the #MeToo movement. He saw it for perhaps what it was. He said, “I think it’s going to unfold like the Tea Party, only bigger. It’s not #MeToo. It’s not just sexual harassment. It’s an anti-patriarchy movement. Time’s up on 10,000 years of recorded history. This is coming. This is real,” and he said that in February, and he knows a thing or two about the political waves.

RUSH: Now, here’s the guest, the author, Rebecca Traister…

TRAISTER: I have strong suspicions that his saying that — um, and this is just my interpretation — is actually probably not so totally divorced from what Rush Limbaugh was saying in that any time there is this kind of angry —

RUSH: That’s it. That’s it. I need some time. That’s it. So basically this babe was telling Christiane Amanpour, “They’re saying the same thing, Christiane. You just don’t get it.” Let me clarify. I’m not even talking about the #MeToo movement! I disagree the #MeToo movement’s gonna become the Tea Party, ’cause I don’t think that it’s organic and I don’t think it’s… I just don’t think it has much in common with what the Tea Party is or the Tea Party was.

But there really isn’t… Aside from the explanation of what’s going on, Bannon and I are in total agreement here. I don’t think it’s just sexual harassment. I think it’s hatred of men, and I said this, and I’m exploring the reasons why. I think terrible things have happened to these women, some of them, in the course of their lives, and they have become enraged. And instead of just blaming the men who did whatever happened to them, they’re gonna blame everything.

They’re gonna blame the country. They’re gonna blame all men. They’re gonna blame the founding. They’re gonna blame the majority. Because all of liberalism is the same. It’s just a coalition of a bunch of different constituency groups. But the objective of liberalism, no matter which constituency group you’re talking about is the same.

That is: Transform the country. Transform it into something socialistic or communistic and to something it was never founded to be by attacking, via blame, the power structure. The power structure they perceive to be — which, in their case, happens to be white Christian men. Call it “the patriarchy” or whatever. Bannon and I are basically saying the same thing, other than the Tea Party comparison, and she doesn’t get it. Christiane Amanpour could not understand that if she tried to.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here