Stacey Eden is a young Australian woman from Sydney who recently defended a Muslim couple that were verbally accosted by a middle aged woman on a train. The woman accused Muslims in general for the atrocities of ISIS and directed her ire at the hapless couple. Stacey Eden sat there for around 10 minutes listening to the conversation before intervening on the couple’s behalf; but not before hitting the record button that captured her heroic intervention. According to the BBC: "Stacey Eden’s Facebook page got an enormous surge of interest after she posted a video of herself defending a Muslim couple"
This brings us to the obvious conclusion that Stacey Eden is an attention whore. Had she merely intervened on the couple’s behalf without submitting a recording of her “heroism” she would perhaps qualify as a decent person. This was obviously not the case as validation was her underlying motive. The online social media community burst into applause and the leftist media hoisted her on their shoulders for the world to admire. What more could a mediocre unaccomplished young woman want? The Facebook community has lavished her with accolades such as "decent" and "brave."
Let’s be honest – Stacey is not brave. She picked the most politically correct course of action which is endorsed by Western elites and the mainstream media. Had she tried defending Christians in Pakistan she would have eaten more lead than Salman Taseer. Ironically, it is the middle aged woman that is the brave one in this incident. I am not defending her gross lapse in etiquette but she chose to risk social ostracism in order to speak her mind. I do not think that accosting random people in public spaces is civilized behavior but Eden is no saint either; she seeks to profit by putting her piety on display. Social justice warriors are modern day pharisees and Cultural Marxism is their Mishnah.
Why do Anglosphere women so wholeheartedly embrace cultural marxism (beyond opportunism)? Let us examine the matter further.
The inverted conservatism of Western Women.
Those that possess even a basic grasp of history know that women have been conservative throughout history to the point of defending the excesses of their menfolk. As I've stated on numerous occasions, Indian women frequently participate in honour killings. Gujarati Hindu women have also, as noted by Aakar Patel, defended the atrocities committed against Gujarati muslims during the 2002 riots. Japanese women also possess a strong nationalist streak which sometimes translates into xenophobic anti-Korean sentiments. These are some extreme examples but women in non western countries do not easily turn their backs on their cultures and traditions. Anglo women are also conservative in their own right – they conserve liberalism.
Liberal thought has entrenched itself so deeply into modern Western culture that it is this liberal culture that Anglo-sphere women are conserving. If traditional conservatives were to somehow wrest control away from our current traitorous elites, women would go back to defending “racism” and “homophobia” within a generation. Matt Forney is essentially correct when he argues that female participation in socio/cultural movements and revolutions is largely irrelevant as women tend to sleep with whoever is in power. However, what Forney does not note is that women are still the keepers of culture and civilization. Men may invent a cuisine but it is housewives that preserve that cuisine over generations. Women's herd mentality and innate desire for social acceptance are suited perfectly to this task.
|Women are not interested in the social order.|
They are just interested in reinforcing it.
"Also accompanying the army, was a band of warlike women. Their duty was to wage 'psychological warfare' against the Muslims by reading poetry and by singing amatory songs to spur the courage and the will-to-fight of the soldiers.Not only were the Meccans victorious at Uhud, they inflicted the most devastating military defeat of Muhammad’s prophetic career. Such is the power of female shaming. Similar incidents occurred in Britain in 1915:
They knew that nothing held such terror for the Arabs as the jibes of women for cowardice, and they also knew that nothing was so efficacious to turn them into utterly reckless fighters as the promise of physical love. These amazons included the wives of Abu Sufyan and Amr bin Aas, and the sister of Khalid bin Walid."
"Chiefly a phenomenon of Britain, white feathers were typically handed over by young women to men out of uniform during wartime, the implication being that the man concerned was a ‘shirker’ or a coward."When we put female shaming in its historical context, the current trends of social media witch-hunts begin to make sense. From Adria Richards to Brendan Eich, the bands of women that initiate twitter mobs and hound politically incorrect "deviants" are only doing what comes naturally to them: conserving the social order. It just so happens that this social order is liberal. Make no mistake, it is men like the Fords and Rockefellers that created feminism and men (like Theodor Adorno) that spawned Cultural Marxism. Our elites have subverted and perverted Western culture (to further their own political/economic ends) and women are merely conserving this degenerate culture.
It is imperative for the alternative right and manosphere to correctly identify our enemies and stop assigning a disproportionate amount of blame on women for our cultural decline.
H/T to Colin Liddell as his article inspired me to write this post.
Originally published at Occident Invicta