If you think misogyny is just feminist paranoia, and further, that women can’t possibly hate women, you haven’t seen the trailer for “The Monstrous Regiment of Women” that JAB posted yesterday.
It looks like the movie’s been around for a couple of years, one of those high-quality direct-to-DVD productions that serves as propaganda to ignite the social conservative rank and file, but I hadn’t heard of it until PZ Meyers unearthed it yesterday. Proudly proclaiming to “extoll femininity and blast feminism”, the trailer ironically has an all-woman cast starting with the putrid Phyllis Schlafly.
The bullshit flies fast and furious throughout, and the blatant contempt for women is sickening. Just watch:
I’m not given to using a lot of feminist jargon simply because it’s just not the way I self-express, but I can’t think of the women in that video as anything but brain-dead foot soldiers for the patriarchy. The trailer certainly highlights how the anti-choice movement is rooted in misogyny, and perpetuated by lies.
Especially vile is Carol Everett, the woman who claims that as a family planning education rep, her goal was to ensure that teenage girls were as sexually active and getting pregnant/having as many abortions as possible. All to drive the “Abortion Industry”, of course. As PZ points out, this is an odious lie, since it’s exactly the opposite of what organizations like Planned Parenthood actually do. A little research reveals that this woman was in fact FIRED from a family planning clinic, pissed off about it, and likely just looking for a way to cash in on anti-abortion wingnuttery by appearing in films like this one. A former work associate comments:
I do, however, think I have good reason to dispute her current claim of moral “conversion”. I seriously doubt that her motives have really changed. Numerous greed-struck religious frauds (and a few secular ones, as well) have in recent years developed sensationalistic, melodramatic, inflammatory, and blatantly fraudulent anti-abortion propaganda into one of their biggest and most dependable money-makers. I would not doubt that Carol Everett is being paid very well by Bill Price and his organizations to say whatever they think is likely to advance their agenda and hustle monetary contributions, with little regard for either truth or plausibility. […]
“She claims to have “seen the light” and resigned from her clinic position in 1983. Actually, she was fired and was quite bitter and fiercely vengeful about it. It seems likely that she is still seeking revenge by ragefully attacking abortion providers in general, and with outrageous dishonesty.
“Outrageous dishonesty”: add “misogyny” and that’s the anti-choice movement in a nutshell.
(h/t – JABaker)
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](https://i0.wp.com/www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/silver/tny_ag_en_usoz_2.gif)
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](https://i0.wp.com/www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/t24_au_en_usoz_2.gif)
unrepentant old hippie 
Is Carol Everett guilty of blood libel against Planned Parenthood? Discuss.
No, no. “Blood libel” is reserved for critics of Israel. “Libel” will do just fine, and yes, I think she is guilty of it.
An ingenious defence move might be, however, that she intended to parody the right-to-life movement. I almost think she could get away with it. 🙂
JAB – Only if you think fetuses are a race or class of people. Under law, no. Interesting twist, though.
JJ,
Well, the fetus fetishists sure seem to think so. I figure, why not tweak their noses about this? 🙂
I cringe to think of the mentality of those who watch and believe this untrammelled drivel. I should imagine most are red-staters.
Dr. Dawg – So blood libel is limited to Israelis? I didn’t know that, I thought it was just for accusation of any racially-specific killing. Learn something every day, I guess!
Ya think? Everett doesn’t specifically say she was working for Planned Parenthood, she only says “I was in the abortion business”. I don’t know if that’s specific enough for a libel charge to stick? This is how the anti-choice movement gets away with their outrageous claims.
JAB – 😆 I know, but it almost gave me a headache thinking about it… who would file the charge? Who believes a fetus is a class of person? But wait — she’s one of theirs! Etc.
Torontonian – The audience is hard-core stupid, social conservative nitwits. The film makers are telling them what they want to hear: more circular reinforcement that their fucked-up beliefs are the right ones.
I was just being sarcastic. The “Blood Libel” was originally the claim that Jews used the blood of Christian children in their matzohs. More recently, it’s invoked by defenders of Israel whenever we bleeding hearts talk too loudly about dead Palestinian civilians. I’m not aware that there are more general uses of the phrase, but I could be wrong.
In any case, I suspect that there is an arguable case that claims such as those made by the person in question, where PP is implicitly implicated, are libellous. IANAL, of course.
Dr. Dawg – D’oh! I suspected but wasn’t sure.
I just looked up “blood libel” in wiki, which says:
So it looks like we’re both right, but you are more right than me 😛
As for Ms. Everett’s libel, I guess since she’s said where she worked and when, there would only be certain clinics on any kind of record so it would be obvious who she’s talking about. I guess if PP wanted to pursue it, they could make a case (IANAL either, though). It’s probably too much hassle for what it’s worth — this film obviously hasn’t gotten a whole lot of audience.
From the Gunn Brothers (producers of A Monstrous Regiment and Shaky Town) website: “Welcome to the website for Gunn Productions LLC – the home of the Gunn Brothers. We’re filmmakers with a unique, peculiarly Scottish and Christian perspective.”
Like Carol Everett, the Gunns have found a way of exploiting the blazing hate that rightwing fundamentalist so-called “christians” are dedicated to stoking, as a source of income.
deBeauxOs –
For sure. Anti-choice nitwits are big-time rubes, and their bank accounts are ripe for the picking by scam artists like this. Looks good on them.
I’ve never doubted it JJ, but then I am a self aware rational individual capable of thinking for myself, unlike those being pandered to with this video. The degree of misogyny I see still to this day in our culture let alone the American one saddens me, especially when I see conservatives claiming society is run by feminazis and feminized. Indeed, those two terms are red flags for me I expecting misogyny from people I see/hear using those terms, because while women are better off than they have been I still don’t see them as being treated let alone truly accepted as equal members of society even to this day.
That the pro-birthers are massively so comes as no surprise, indeed they tend to be some of the worst offenders IMHO.
I have no problem with a bitter boy film expressing bitter boy interests in the war between the sexes. This is nothing new, nothing inspired. In the end, western women already possess equal rights to own property, control their own bodies/reproduction and the right…of course…to vote. With that being the case, what difference do a few misogynists make?
Madeline
I am always just amazed at the elitism:
• fetus fetishists
• I should imagine most are red-staters.
• hard-core stupid, social-conservative nitwits.
• more circular reinforcement that their fucked-up beliefs…
• rightwing fundamentalist so-called “christians” [sic]
• Anti-choice nitwits
• [Anti-choice nitwits] are big-time rubes
You can just hear the sneer bihind these characterizations.
It is not just disagreement, but that anyone who disagrees is inferior (rubes, nitwits and so on).
This kind of vilification that I see so often from the left encourages me to believe that there can be no dialog. How can you dialog with someone so angry and disparaging, right?
One of the allegations by Phyllis Schlafly at the beginning of the trailer was that feminists wake up with a chip on their shoulder. Well, feminism was a topic of the movie of course. But my experience (here and elsewhere) is that it appears that many liberals have that same chip on their shoulder (or one just like it, anyway).
I agree with Brian. Also, I am amazed at the double standards of the left who are usually the first to criticise capitalism and greed, etc. A more greedy organisation than Planned Parenthood it would be hard to find. It is obvious to all who are prepared to look that PPF exists to make vast amounts of money from abortion. Any idea that this organisation actually cares about women is nothing more than wishful thinking. The sale of spare baby parts scandal itself should have been enough to see them closed down – and would have been if we’d been talking about spare parts from blue whales or some other animal creature – but because political correctness demands that not a word be said against abortion, the scandalous behaviour of this organisation continues with the blessing of the left. Furthermore, the left claims to be on the side of the weak and the vulnerable – a more weak and vulnerable group than the unborn child does not exist, and yet vast numbers of this group are wiped out via abortion every year all with the blessing of the left – but, of course, they are not really people in law – just fetuses. Well, whatever one might call them to make abortion seem ok (and after all if abortion is ok, why are we so keen not to call them babies? Why do we prefer fetuses? Could it be that really we know abortion is not ok?) the reality is we’ve all been there in our mothers’ wombs; all of us were fetuses once; and if our mothers had chosen abortion we wouldn’t be here today to comment on this article or any other for that matter. Incidentally, 50%, more or less, of fetuses are female.