Rush Limbaugh: The War on Men

Did al-Qaeda gave up bin Laden to help Obama?BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Another story I’ve been holding here in abeyance for most of the week. Well, I got back on Wednesday. The story ran on Fox News back on November 24th, which was shortly after Thanksgiving. It’s by a woman, and her name is Suzanne Venker. She works at Fox News.com. I don’t think she’s on the air anywhere. Her piece is called “The War on Men.” I’ll give you a couple pull quotes from this story.

“I’ve accidentally stumbled upon a subculture of men who’ve told me, in no uncertain terms, that they’re never getting married. When I ask them why, the answer is always the same. Women aren’t women anymore.” Here’s another pull quote. “Men want to love women, not compete with them. They want to provide for and protect their families — it’s in their DNA. But modern women won’t let them.” Modern women will not give them any credit for that. The way men used to feel like men is not permitted anymore. Being a provider, taking care of, you don’t get any credit for that anymore with today’s women. That’s her point, based on her conversation with other women.

“The battle of the sexes is alive and well,” is the way this piece begins. “According to Pew Research Center, the share of women ages eighteen to thirty-four that say having a successful marriage is one of the most important things in their lives rose nine percentage points since 1997 — from 28 percent to 37 percent. For men, the opposite occurred. The share voicing this opinion dropped, from 35 percent to 29 percent.

“Believe it or not, modern women want to get married. Trouble is, men don’t. The so-called dearth of good men (read: marriageable men) has been a hot subject in the media as of late. Much of the coverage has been in response to the fact that for the first time in history, women have become the majority of the U.S. workforce. They’re also getting most of the college degrees. The problem? This new phenomenon has changed the dance between men and women.”

By the way, she’s right about that. Fewer and fewer men are going to college. Why is that? They’re all feminized? They’ve been chickified, is that what you’re saying? The feminists have taken over the curriculum. Well, there is something to this in the sense that radical feminism — folks, here’s the thing that is a hard, cold reality to me. I’ve been doing this 25 years. I think back to previous years, in fact, eras of this program. And we did our feminist updates, and what were the feminist updates? We chronicled and laughed at what was being done in universities. We laughed at some of the radical, cockeyed ideas that radical feminists and feminazis were doing.

While we were laughing, that stuff was becoming reality. Well, I’ll speak for myself. I was laughing, and I was of the opinion that no rational majority of people is ever gonna subscribe to this radical feminism. For example, portraying men as natural predators. All sex is rape. Remember Catharine MacKinnon, all sex is rape, even the sex in marriage. And she was a professor of something at the University of Michigan. She was teaching this stuff and I remember do feminazi updates about it, laughing, “Okay, there’s always gonna be some small group of unhappy people.”

No, it’s not a small group. It has become reality for a whole lot of women. That and a lot of other things. The man, as a natural predator, had to be shielded, the children had to be protected from him. At the slightest raising of his voice, they called child protective service and said, “Come over to the house.” Maybe take the kids away if the husband was out of whack, and being out of whack didn’t take much other than raising your voice. All these things. I mean, I can’t remember, but some of them were just ridiculous. But they’ve become mainstreamed, and it’s not just with feminism. It’s a lot of other liberalism. The same kind of thing with environmentalism. The whole hoax of global warming.

While all this is being built, and while it’s happening, we’re pointing out the intellectual holes in the data. We’re pointing out the faults in the so-called logic of the argument. In the meantime it was taking hold with a whole bunch of young people starting with Ted Turner’s Captain Planet cartoon series on Saturday morning, to who knows what else was happening. Now I’ve told you, shared with you many times, I read tech blogs, because that’s my hobby, staying up to speed on tech stuff. And the tech blogs are written by a bunch of young guys — and women, too, in some cases — that are in their twenties and thirties. And you read these people’s standards, ordinary every day stuff, it’s amazing what they really believe.

They believe the stuff you and I were laughing about when they were four and five years old. They really believe, for example, that the kind of cars that we have driven has destroyed the climate, not that we are destroying it. They really believe, even though it cannot be proven, they really believe that Hurricane Sandy was because of global warming. They really believe the sea levels are rising to flood levels. They watched Algore’s movie and instead of laughing at it and seeing all the crock in it, they bought it hook, line, and sinker. And not only did they buy it, they are now arrogantly cocky about it, thinking they are the only ones who are right and anybody who doesn’t see it is a Neanderthal.

It’s really been fascinating in one regard. It’s disappointing in another, scary in another. But they bought and believe as fervently as anything you believe the stuff that we were laughing at, deservedly so. I mean, how many different people have said, “If we don’t clean up the ocean in ten years, we’re gonna die.” Ted Danson. They believe it! Starting in 1986, “If we don’t fix this, global warming, we only got 20 years.” Well, that was 2006, and the world didn’t end, and it wasn’t getting hotter in 2006. Doesn’t matter. All somebody had to do was come along and say, “Another 20 years…” and this was the brilliance of these people’s campaign to work on young people, impressionable young people.

How did the global warming movement propel itself? The first thing it did was make everybody feel guilty. You have destroyed the planet. You and the way you’re living, your capitalist lifestyle — capitalism wasn’t said, but your self-indulgent lifestyle, your lifestyle of desiring more stuff, your wanting to increase your standard of living — all of that led to global warming. All of that excess wasn’t fair. And we’re sitting here thinking this stuff hasn’t worked in our lifetimes, it’s not gonna work now. It’s sophistry, but it did work, because, in addition to telling these young people — and, by the way, women, too — in addition to saying, “You are destroying the planet,” they offered them absolution: Drive this car, don’t buy that, live this way, and you can save the planet.

Well, that was a noble thing to be able to save the planet after you have been made to feel guilty for helping to destroy it. And, of course, what were the proscriptions for saving the planet? Nothing but big government liberalism. And they all bought into it and now it’s de rigueur, and it’s fascinating to expose yourself to this stuff. Stuff that you know is a crock, stuff that you know is nothing more than propaganda, and see how easily it has been inculcated in these young skulls full of mush.

No, I’m not surprised propaganda works. But this is massive. And so back to this piece. The same thing has happened with women’s studies on campus, radical militant feminism. We were laughing at it, ’cause we all knew women who thought it was a crock, as well as we who thought it was a crock. But now these people all come out, these young tech bloggers, even some in the sports media, doesn’t matter where you go, this young, hip, pop culture demographic, not only do they believe all the stuff we were laughing at, they have a moral superiority about their countenance. What they believe is morally superior to say what I believe, what they believe and what they live and how they live is morally superior. So they kind of look down their noses at people.

They do not and will not consider opposing arguments because the people who make them have been discredited with character assassination and so forth. Throughout every little tentacle of education, be it K through 12 or college, undergrad, postgrad, you name it. Even today, I don’t have one handy, but every day there’s a story about some wacko professor saying something just utterly insane. And then you stop and realize, wait a minute, this guy is a professor, and there are hundreds of kids who’ve been through this guy’s class over the years who believe this stuff. The hardest thing for me was to accept that they did believe it and absorb it, rather than laugh at it.

Now, there were people that laughed at it along with us. We heard from ‘em, little kids in college who would call, but there were also those who bought it hook, line, and sinker. All of this radical liberalism, radical feminism, radical environmentalism, all the stuff that people think about conservatives, all the things that people have been told about Republicans. Yesterday a woman called here talking about all the negative ads run against Romney. Or it was a guy, I think. Yeah, we’ve really got a problem in this country. And I mean this. We have a real problem. I’ll just put it this way. No, I’m not gonna put it that way ’cause that’s old fogyism.

Let’s put it this way. When you’ve got a majority of people this country who can be made to believe that Mitt Romney hates dogs with a commercial of a dog in a cage on the roof of a station wagon with ostensibly the Romney family inside on the family vacation, then I would suggest we’ve got a problem. Take whatever other insult or mischaracterization or character assault on conservatives that you can believe and there is a moral superiority to the people who believe this stuff. It’s not that they believe it, it is that there is an arrogant condescension about them. They’re close-minded. There’s no other possible way to explain things that are happening other than what they believe.

So here’s this piece, “The War on Men,” and this woman at Fox writes, I’ve stumbled upon a subculture of men who’ve told me they’re never getting married. I ask them why and the answer is always the same: women aren’t women anymore. Men want to love women, not compete with them. They want to provide for her, protect their families, it’s in their DNA. But modern women will not let them. Modern women will not let a man take credit for any of that. A man, in order to get credit from a woman, has to do other stuff now that’s not in his DNA. That’s the whole point of her piece.

Men throughout time have always been trying to figure out what they have to be to get where they want to go where women are concerned. I remember when I was young, the whole thing, where do you meet women. I’d go out and get women’s magazines and turn to the section on where to meet men, which would tell me where I was supposed to be. And I would go there. It was always a fun little dance and a fun little game, but the traditional way that men were rewarded by the women they loved don’t exist anymore. And a guy who wants to be appreciated and loved because of the things that are naturally in his DNA, it’s rejected. And so this woman has stumbled across a bunch of — they’re not only not going to college where women are, they’re not trying to meet women and they’re not trying to marry them.

And that’s why you get ads run by Obama on Julia. She’s single her whole life. And it’s why it works. We laughed at the Julia ad. That ad worked. The War on Women, this whole business of giving away contraceptives, we’re laughing at it. It worked. I don’t know on a majority, but it worked. There were actually enough women in this country who were made to believe that Mitt Romney was gonna take their birth control pills away from ‘em, not let them have them. And then after they got pregnant he was gonna make them not have an abortion. They believe it. They’ve been told it. They’ve been educated this way.

These guys, “I’m not even messing with this, I’m not even gonna do battle with this.” When I lived in Kansas City in the 1970s a book came out by Susan Brownmiller. It was a book about rape, and it made the case rape was not a sexual crime, it was a violent crime. Well, it became a huge fad with women. I knew guys who went out and bought the book. Whatever it took, they had a crush on a woman, the woman believed in the book, they’d go get the book, give it to her, discuss it with her. Then I found out, no, this is not the way. It was dealing with a militant, thought the guy was a predator ’cause of what was in the book. And she goes on here.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Now, I want to read to you here a brief segment from Suzanne Venker’s piece on Fox News.com, “The War on Men,” and then I want to read you some of the tweets that women who’ve read this article are saying.

She writes, “In a nutshell, women are angry. They’re also defensive, though often unknowingly. That’s because they’ve been raised to think of men as the enemy. Armed with this new attitude, women pushed men off their pedestal (women had their own pedestal, but feminists convinced them otherwise) and climbed up to take what they were taught to believe was rightfully theirs.”

See, men haven’t changed much. They’ve had no revolution. But women have. Women had a feminist revolution, and they have changed dramatically. But men have stayed the same. So women pushed men off their pedestal. Women had their own pedestal, but the feminists convinced them that it was not worthy of putting a man on a pedestal. Feminists even convinced women a relationship was not worthy of providing a woman happiness.

Okay, so, women read this. Here’s some tweets in reaction to this from women on Twitter.

“I cannot wait to bring this to my women’s studies class. She’ll be torn apart in classrooms across the country.”

Another tweet: “If she’s so unhappy as a mother and a wife, why is she writing books? Did she get her husband’s permission to write that article?”

Another tweet: “Suzanne Venker makes a solid argument to return to a time when women couldn’t vote and men could legally beat their spouse.”

Another tweet: “Shut up, Suzanne Venker. You’re just mad because you’re an idiot.”

And these are the pleasant ones. These are the ones I can read on a family show. Now, in the past, we sit here and laugh ourselves silly at this. The fact is, speaking for myself, what I have to realize is these tweets represent a whole lot of female thinking in this country. When a woman here tweets, “Well, she makes a solid argument to return to a time when women couldn’t work and men could legally beat their spouse,” I have to realize people like Catharine MacKinnon have been telling women this for 20 years. That that’s what men do, is beat their wives, and that’s what men want. And a bunch of women believe this stuff. And they vote for Obama. They vote for Democrats.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: You know, there’s a place in the world today where women can’t vote and their husbands can beat ‘em. It’s called Egypt. Barack Obama’s precious Egypt! Do you know that in Saudi Arabia, they just passed a law, or whatever, but now a man is notified by text message if his wife leaves the house or the country? A husband is informed somehow digitally/electronically if his wife leaves the house or leaves the country, leaves the neighborhood, whatever. Yeah, it’s Saudi Arabia.

(interruption)

It’s…? Is that appealing to you, Mr. Snerdley?

(interruption)

Ha-ha-ha-ha.

(interruption)

“It has possibilities.”

Anyway, this stuff that these ill-educated American women think is going on in their neighborhoods is actually happening in the world, in places supported by this government.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Here’s Darlene in Grand Junction, Colorado. Hi.

CALLER: Hi there. Dittos from western Colorado where we did elect Romney. (laughing)

RUSH: (laughing)

CALLER: Unfortunately, we couldn’t outdo the other side of the hill. Rush, my husband and I were over in Denver on one of the wide highways, and right next to us was one of these Smart Cars. It’s a golf cart with a cover.

RUSH: Yeah. In fact, I have a couple of friends who tool around in those. They go pick up the groceries in them.

CALLER: Yeah, but do you want to drive one of those on a three-lane highway at 60 miles an hour? Because if you’re in an accident, you’re toast. The woman driving it reminded me that there was an article in the Denver Post that women are the majority of drivers now, and they’re driving “smaller, safer cars.” I thought, “Wait a minute. Smaller cars aren’t safer.” (giggles) This woman was driving this Smart Car, and I said to my husband, “You know what? Women are driving these small cars that are not safe, and they’re also using — they’re getting free — condoms. And if they’re Christian, they’re having more children than the liberals are that are non-Christian. So they’re going to go extinct.” (giggling)

RUSH: Are you…? In addition to everything else, are you making a comment on women’s driving skills?

CALLER: No, I’m talking about the kind of car they choose to drive.

RUSH: Right.

CALLER: Which is a small little what I call a “stupid” car.

RUSH: Well, in some cases that’s all they can afford. You know, they’re out there trying to get 60 miles to the gallon. Gasoline’s expensive and so forth.

CALLER: No, but they aren’t safe on a high-speed road. My goodness!

RUSH: It doesn’t matter. They think they’re saving the planet.

CALLER: (bursts out laughing) But they are going to be extinct, Rush, because they’re using these free condoms, and they’re not having children. So they’re going to be an endangered species. Liberals, I mean.

RUSH: Yeah, well… (chuckles) I’ve been waiting for that. They’ve been aborting themselves out of existence for 20 years and it hadn’t happened yet.

CALLER: Exactly. The only trouble is it’s probably gonna take another generation. (giggles)

RUSH: We’ll see. Look, I’m glad you called. I appreciate it, Darlene.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Liz, Damariscotta, Maine. It’s great to have you here on the program. Hello.

CALLER: Hi, Rush. It’s very exciting to talk to you.

RUSH: Thank you very much.

CALLER: I want to speak to your comments earlier about the men and women and the changing roles and the article that you cited from Fox News.

RUSH: Okay.

CALLER: I think that not only women are changing. I think both sexes are changing, and I don’t think that successful women are necessarily a detriment to a traditional man-and-woman dynamic. I think that specifically in my scenario my husband and I — I am… I make the majority of our money, and my husband spends a lot of time with our children, with our young children.

RUSH: Okay.

CALLER: But my husband is what I would classify as a very traditional man’s man, and I think what’s changing is men aren’t thought of or taught to be or have examples of man’s men. Do you understand what I’m saying? Like, it’s almost frowned upon to be a manly guy, or to have manly opinions.

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: I mean, it’s almost like you’re a minority to be a guy, a man!

RUSH: I know exactly what you mean when you say that.

CALLER: And I think successful women and smart women, just because we’re out there making money or educated or working hard… I don’t want a wussy guy. I don’t want some, you know, some guy sitting around.

RUSH: Look, we’re not talking about you anyway because you actually want a guy.

CALLER: (laughing)

RUSH: We’re talking about women who don’t want a guy, period, no matter what kind.

CALLER: Well, I think that the relationship between a man and a woman and the things that a man brings and the things that a woman brings to a relationship create a successful partnership. I just think that the qualities that people associate as “old school” or “tired” or “lost” on the last generation are what make for a successful partnership, and it really is upsetting to hear those disparaged.

RUSH: Let me ask you while I have you here, Liz.

CALLER: Sure.

RUSH: To you, what is a “manly man”?

CALLER: Oh. I think that, without my husband, I would be lost. If ever I’m upset or scared or nervous or need somebody to confide in, he’s just my rock, someone I can always trust. And somebody that I can rely on. I feel like if something were to happen, he would be able to protect myself and my children.

RUSH: Does he wear clothes from L.L. Bean or Ralph Lauren?

CALLER: (laughing) From L.L. Bean. He happens to be a manly man to the core.

RUSH: No, I’m seriously interested in the answer here as it relates to you. What is a manly man?

CALLER: Right.

RUSH: Because that’s gonna change from woman to woman, too. That’s what this whole argument’s about.

CALLER: Well, I like a man’s man. I like a guy that works with his hands, that physically maybe labors or at least knows how to do it.

RUSH: Yes, yes, yes. Fixes the roof.

CALLER: Right, right! I’ve never done that. (laughing)

RUSH: Changes the oil, changes the tire. He gets no credit if he can afford to have other people do that.

CALLER: Right, right.

RUSH: He gets credit if he does it himself.

CALLER: Absolutely. And it is insulting to me for people to say that you’re putting women back by having those types of ideas, because I think that we’re putting ourselves back by, you know, emasculating our men and not letting them care about us.

RUSH: You are not the kind of woman that this woman was writing about because you don’t consider men your enemy. Those are the women she was writing about.

CALLER: Well, I feel like liberal women tend to give hardworking, well-educated women like myself a bad name and a bad image.

RUSH: Well, depending on what else you do — what else they might disapprove of that you do — in many cases, you might have a point. You know, I used to think this was a joke; something to laugh at. There are women that really believe this. If you derive too much happiness from your relationship, then you’re being used. You are being taken advantage of, and you are not helping the sisterhood. I thought that was a fringe belief, but it isn’t. I don’t know how widespread it is, but it certainly isn’t fringe.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: The state of Washington is taking “bride” and “groom” off of official marriage certificates. No more “husband” or “wife.” No more “bride” and “groom” in the state of Washington’s marriage documents. Who do you think is doing that?

END TRANSCRIPT