JOSETTE SHINER'S CONFUSED THINKING
Josette Shiner gave a speech titled “Role of Women in the 21st Century” that was filled with vague nonsense and feminist thought while saying she was anti-feminist. She is critical of feminism saying that it’s leaders teach “how could women more successfully compete with men and learn to behave more like men?” Their writings, she says, “were often filled with resentment and anger. They were urging women to be tougher, to learn to fight, to learn to 'play the game' in the world like men.”
She says feminists are not happy in competing with men, “But I find it very interesting that when I meet with other women in media and in politics many of whom gave up having a family to pursue their goals I find them asking themselves whether their career achievements really add up to the sum of a successful life." When will Josette realize she is not living a life in which she is tuned in to true femininity?
She is right in saying feminism pushes women into the marketplace and they do not find total happiness there. She goes on saying, “The more I studied these ideas and have seen the results of this philosophy, the more I am convinced that women's value will not be in trying to imitate men, or in becoming more like men.”
“Our value will be in honoring our womanhood and femininity, and offering to the world the wisdom that is held in this other, vital half of humanity.”
Now we have a problem. How do women leave the home and not compete with men? What is “femininity?” What is the “wisdom” of women in the marketplace? Women seem to be more pacifist than men. Is this what Josette wants? Is she completely feminine? No. She is "bones," not "flesh."
She writes, “My dear friends, at this very moment, in every single city in the world from Nigeria to Nepal a girl is being born. These young ladies will become women in the new century. They will soon be looking to us for guidance on what their hopes, dreams and responsibilities will be in this new world.” Well, I don’t think Josette is a friend to women. The “guidance” she gives to girls from Nigeria to Nepal is not to take the responsibility of being a stay-at-home mom.
She says, “we must be very serious about the example we set and the legacy we leave.” Yes, and her legacy is to confuse everyone by saying in one breath, women are not to compete with men and then she presents herself as a role model of the working mom. She takes a job from a man, hires and fires men, and then thinks she is somehow “feminine.”
She deludes herself when she says, “We are not here to blame men for the current state of the world although this is a refrain often heard from bitter feminists around the world. But let us realize that the hope for the 21st century will be determined by how much women are willing to work with men to influence the direction of the world's nations.” Women working with men is the core ideology of feminism. Josette seems to want a kind of religious feminism. There is no such thing.
She goes on with her muddled thinking with these vague words: “How well can we use our natural abilities as peacemakers and mediators to begin to turn the tide against war and conflict? How well can we use our natural abilities as harmony-seekers and nurturers to insist that starvation and homelessness are unacceptable?” They are supposed to do this at home, not by being congresswomen or editors of newspapers. Women’s “natural abilities” are to have a Titus 2 lifestyle. Josette has no idea of what the Bible wants women to do. Or if she does she is against it.
Then she comes out with this idiotic statement: “Can any of you imagine two women sacrificing the lives of everyone in their nation because of some boundary dispute? Would women risk all they hold dear to satisfy some political slight? It's just not our nature. And history is now demanding that we quickly play a key role in solving our world's ills at this critical time.” Women like Golda Meir and Margaret Thatcher were leaders of countries and they were willing to sacrifice lives over disputes. And they should have. Pacifists think all disputes are a “political slight.” Josette sounds like a weak pacifist. She is a conservative and probably isn't one, but her speech gives that impression. We don’t know for sure because everything she says is so vague – except for the desire to fulfill the feminist dream of women leaving the home to lead men.
She writes, “So how can women play their part? Frankly speaking, this is a question I ask myself every day. As I leave home each morning, I know I must have a good reason and a good motivation to go into the world and leave my children.” She has no good reason to leave her home even if her motivation is good.
“We are as a trumpet of truth in these days of confusion. Having worked at the heart of the media, I have learned that we must not be intimidated into cowardice by those who despise truth and deplore values. As women we must be bold in our commitment to defending traditional values and those things we hold sacred and dear in every aspect of life.” Traditional values? Her speech is against traditional values. She is one of “those who despise truth.”
Then she gives the usual feminist argument that since women are 50% of the human race then the U.S. Senate and every other job in society should be 50% women so women can offer their talents: “So we can no matter what our background make a difference as women. Just as a family needs a father and a mother, so too must these qualities be available to complement each other in every aspect of society.” Women “complement” men by staying home, not joining them in “every aspect of society.” Women are now leading men in “every” job there is. They are police chiefs and generals ordering men around. This excites Josette and yet she deludes herself into thinking she is not a feminist.
Then she gives what she thinks is the new, third, creative and brand new, never before seen idea that couples lead: “I believe we are entering a new age where men and women couples merge their best qualities of leadership.” We have the Clintons acting like this and it is a disaster. The idea that there are going to be couples as leaders in “every aspect of society” is ludicrous. How can there be a couple as President of the United States? How is a couple to be generals, CEO’s, etc. Do they flip a coin if they should disagree?
Then she says the Moons show how it is done: “I must say that in my experience the pioneers in this new era of joint leadership are Reverend and Mrs. Moon. Reverend Moon teaches that men and women are equal before our Creator, and with distinct and unique characteristics. While these qualities are valuable unto themselves, they can only be manifest in their fullest form when they complement each other and work together in harmony.” Mrs. Moon, she says, is “always by his side.” Yes, and it is always on his left side. Rev. Moon is the ultimate patriarch. He matched Josette to her husband along with thousands of others. Yes, Mrs. Moon was there, but they did not decide together. She sat quietly observing as he did all the work. Dual leadership is unworkable. Father guides, protects and provides for her at all times. And we have to note that her family is a disaster and the movement has not grown because he has taken her out of the home and dragged her all over the world.
She ends by saying, “Over the last two decades in America, women have been struggling to find their true role. Many women used the new feminist movement as an excuse to release years of resentment. In many ways, it has become an anti-men's movement.
“Recently The Washington Times magazine wrote about the fruits of this feminist movement, saying that women were no closer to finding internal peace, and men had begun a backlash of their own resentment against these women.
“A movement based on anger, resentment and hate can never bring good results. That is why this Federation and the hope of this new philosophy of complementary leadership is so needed.
“Women and men must work together. Women and men need each other. I am so encouraged when I see Reverend and Mrs. Moon working together. She supports his work. He uplifts and encourages her in hers. They work as a team.”
“New philosophy?” There is nothing new here. It is pure feminism. Josette does not work as a “team” with her husband. The ideal world is not couples teaming up to be construction workers, accountants, and cab drivers as a team all day, and then go home and do laundry as a team.
The only real result of women leaving the home is divorce and the breakdown of the family.
Feminism is the core ideology of the UC. Engels wrote in his book, The Origin of the Family, that the core ideology of communism was to get women out of the home and end patriarchy. Sadly, the UC has missed this and embraced feminism. UC sisters love to denounce and disparage Ozzie and Harriet. June Cleaver, the mother in the show Leave it to Beaver, is a symbol of oppression who missed out on the "challenges" of the workplace, say our confused sisters. Feminist brothers and sisters in the UC just can't see that absolute sex means absolute roles. The UC has been digested by communism and cannot see that absolute sex means there are absolute differences between men and women and when we deny this fundamental truth we destroy the family. Josette is a horrible role model. When we let women compete with men we slide down the slippery slope to the breakdown of the family.
If it is wonderful for Josette to be the one who hires and fires men, then we have to take the logic to it conclusion and say that combat fighter pilots should be women. Most people are now brainwashed by feminist leaders and believe that women should take jobs from men and defend our country. Some discrimination is of God. In her book, She's Just Another Navy Pilot, Loree Hirschman writes of her experiences of being a combat fighter pilot. She writes, "In the United States, many opponents of women in combat voice concerns that female pilots and soldiers would be raped and tortured in captivity, and men would give up military secrets in order to protect the women."
"Personally I find those arguments quite shallow." I'm not going to give her "shallow" arguments for women in combat. The UC must become a place of absolutes and stop trying to mix feminism with traditionalism. It now sounds as ridiculous as this navy pilot who rarely sees her husband, drinks with the guys, gets drunk and uses the F-word on her air craft carrier. You can't have the goal of women being Senators and Managing Editors and not have women cops, firefighters, and combat fighter pilots. All of this insanity of the Last Days must be ended by the UC. We should take leadership in getting women to become feminine again. For this to happen brothers need to stand up to feminists -- in and out of the UC. The father of the navy pilot written about here is a Marine Corps General. He was a leader at the Pentagon who pushed for women to be combat fighter pilots. He is a wimp. He is a disgraceful example of a father. In the name of political correctness, he pushes his daughter to have a dangerous career. All of this feminism is disgusting. Satan is disgusting. When will the UC stop being a disgusting feminist organization?
RULE OF LAW VS. RULE OF AUTHORITY
On July 25, 2000 Balint Vazsonyi wrote an article in the Washington Times that illustrates why Father's newspaper is a voice for God. He is the author of America's 30 Years War: Who Is Winning? He explains how America is great because of the values of its Founding Fathers. He says, "It is an incontrovertible fact that the inhabitants of most countries are not only unfamiliar with what we call the Rule of Law, but find the concept virtually incomprehensible. Again, it is a miracle that so many immigrants are able to operate within the American system of laws, contracts and agreements on a handshake. ... An overwhelming majority of immigrants arrive on these shores looking, as they always have, to government as a source of benefits, and an authority to obey. It is a habit hard to break."
Father is the Messiah. He is always absolutely confident in his leadership. Does he make mistakes? Yes. Should members tell him? Yes. Do they? I don't think American members have ever done so. The main reason is that he is so intimidating. He does not create an atmosphere where he can be challenged or even talked to. He talks to us; we don't talk to him. It is understandable that American members are sycophants. He is the greatest man who has ever lived. He is the world wide Messiah who helped his Japanese torturers to escape Korea when World War II was over. That act alone on his first day of his public ministry qualifies him to be Messiah. There is no person on earth who would do such a thing. He truly loves his enemies.
The problem we have is to honor him and follow him and still not leave our brains at the door. We have to be Messiahs too. Even Father says children should go beyond their parents. Father has made the mistake of not encouraging members to think for themselves -- to take initiative. He is tuned into God and is therefore, for decentralized power, but he has sabotaged that by being too much of a micro-manager. He should be emphasizing the Rule of Law instead of the Rule of Moon's Authority. When he dies we will have to live by the values he has taught. His sons will not be revered as he was. And they shouldn't be.
ROSIE THE RIVETERS DID HARM
Father is clearly the most politically incorrect writer in the 20th century. He writes like the Victorians. But he has muddied his profound and absolute values with a few statements that act like a cancer. He has polluted his own pure logic with the satanic teaching that some women should leave the home for public service that is beyond being a volunteer. He wants some women to earn money and even lead men as they sacrifice their children who must go to day care. A favorite example of feminism is the women who made bullets and were welders in shipyards during World War II. These Rosie the Riveters were half-empty, not half-full. They did more harm than good. Volunteering outside the home is fine, but only if the home is healthy and only if the women volunteers do not earn, invest or worry about money. Mother has never earned one cent. She is totally subservient to her husband. Unfortunately, Father kept her away from the home for so many years to follow him in his work, that their family fell apart. Women should never leave the home for any extended periods of time.
Father usually doesn't send mothers away from their home. 99% of American sisters who are mothers have not left their home in the last 20 years. Some are full-time moms. But there are many who leave the home to earn money. This emasculates their husbands and men in America. This makes sisters unfeminine. Some sisters are even leaders over men in the workplace, such as Josette Shiner, and some are leaders over men in the UC, such as Catherine Ono who has held the position of State Leader in the UC. We should live by absolute values. There should be no exceptions to the rule that men lead, provide and protect while women are homemakers and can be mentors to other women when they have achieved success in building a harmonious and godly home.