*sigh*
So today in class our professor starts talking about the European rapist...er...explorers.
She tells us about how when the Europeans came here, they would often capture and have their way with native women, but would not do the same to the European women.
She also told us how European women and children were basically the "propery" of the male (she made sure to emphasize that) head of the household and that he could throw them out at any time if he so desired. That seems like a bunch of total BS to me, but I'm just repeating what she said.
She was basically knocking the fact that European society is patriarchal. She has made other offhand remarks to the class before, like how "men had their own slaves in the 50's," referring to how most women were housewives. She definitely has a feminazi streak in her.
She said that the indian societies gave their women a more equal role, and asked us to "think about what happened when these two cultures collided." (The hierarichal Europeans and complementary indian cultures.)
She was basically knocking the fact that our society is patriarchal and doing a damn good job of portraying the early European explorers as nothing but a bunch of rapist savages.
I'm not saying that it isn't necessarily true that they did certain things, but what's important isn't so much what happened, but why one focuses on certain events or facts and exactly what events or facts are being focused on.
If this class were on how women have been treated throughout history, her anecdotes would have a purpose. However, this is a United States History class, not a women's history class.
As I said in my Jefferson thread, if one paints our heroes and revered figures, be they the ForeFathers or European explorers, as merely racist, brutal savages, it makes it easier to accept the communist accusations that Western Civilization is wholly evil, racist and all around bad. No one wants to be proud of bad men, and when you paint as bad a nation's heroes, you gain a great deal of control over them.
In my opinion, she's just doing as a good communist should and denigrating the European settlers as raping savages, which fosters anti-white male sentiment and furthers the left's war against the West by denigrating more of our heroes. The communist left has made it very clear that they are out to destroy our patriarchal society, as well as foster anti-white racism, and my prof is doing exactly this.
I'm by no means saying that things like this should not be discussed, nor am I denying that they happened. I am merely stating that I very strongly suspect (and think I have good reason for it) that there is an agenda at work behind the curriculum.
For example, I'll bet we most definitely will NOT hear in class (until I state it) how the native Americans kept slaves, only about the European slave-owners.
What do you guys think? I'm going to call her on this on Thursday. (Next class session.)
Note: I'm not going to call her a communist in front of the class.
So today in class our professor starts talking about the European rapist...er...explorers.
She tells us about how when the Europeans came here, they would often capture and have their way with native women, but would not do the same to the European women.
She also told us how European women and children were basically the "propery" of the male (she made sure to emphasize that) head of the household and that he could throw them out at any time if he so desired. That seems like a bunch of total BS to me, but I'm just repeating what she said.
She was basically knocking the fact that European society is patriarchal. She has made other offhand remarks to the class before, like how "men had their own slaves in the 50's," referring to how most women were housewives. She definitely has a feminazi streak in her.
She said that the indian societies gave their women a more equal role, and asked us to "think about what happened when these two cultures collided." (The hierarichal Europeans and complementary indian cultures.)
She was basically knocking the fact that our society is patriarchal and doing a damn good job of portraying the early European explorers as nothing but a bunch of rapist savages.
I'm not saying that it isn't necessarily true that they did certain things, but what's important isn't so much what happened, but why one focuses on certain events or facts and exactly what events or facts are being focused on.
If this class were on how women have been treated throughout history, her anecdotes would have a purpose. However, this is a United States History class, not a women's history class.
As I said in my Jefferson thread, if one paints our heroes and revered figures, be they the ForeFathers or European explorers, as merely racist, brutal savages, it makes it easier to accept the communist accusations that Western Civilization is wholly evil, racist and all around bad. No one wants to be proud of bad men, and when you paint as bad a nation's heroes, you gain a great deal of control over them.
In my opinion, she's just doing as a good communist should and denigrating the European settlers as raping savages, which fosters anti-white male sentiment and furthers the left's war against the West by denigrating more of our heroes. The communist left has made it very clear that they are out to destroy our patriarchal society, as well as foster anti-white racism, and my prof is doing exactly this.
I'm by no means saying that things like this should not be discussed, nor am I denying that they happened. I am merely stating that I very strongly suspect (and think I have good reason for it) that there is an agenda at work behind the curriculum.
For example, I'll bet we most definitely will NOT hear in class (until I state it) how the native Americans kept slaves, only about the European slave-owners.
What do you guys think? I'm going to call her on this on Thursday. (Next class session.)
Note: I'm not going to call her a communist in front of the class.
