Granted, the industry’s antipathy towards religion as a whole, and Christianity in particular, is pretty much a given. But it appears that within this circle, no religion to them is more anathema than Roman Catholicism.

The latest swipe at the world’s largest Christian population, all 1.1 billion of us (plus another 240 million Eastern Orthodox) comes from, surprise surprise, uber-leftist Susan Sarandon. It is interesting that she should accuse Pope Benedict XVI  of being a “Nazi” at this time because I was trying to figure a way to discuss all the good that Roman Catholics have done through incredible acts of bravery and self-sacrifice over the years.

To call the Pope a Nazi because, like all German youths, he was conscripted into the Hitler Youth during the Fuehrer’s reign of absolute power may provide Ms. Sarandon with a shot of self-righteous hauteur she so desperately craves. It also shows a lack of historical understanding that seems to be a requirement if one wishes to join the coterie of far-left fantasy-performer/activists.

There is no denying the Church was engaged in a monstrous scandal and one over which it should be ashamed and contrite. For the past 50 years the figure of clergy accused of sexual abuse of parishioners is anywhere 1.5 percent to 4 percent of the total members. Today, there are more than 400,000 priests which would indicate that, although those guilty members committed vile, disgusting and inexcusable crimes — and the Church’s attempt at masking the problem was just as criminal in my mind — an overwhelming number of Catholic clergy are truly pious keepers of the faith.

Yet it is the crimes alone that the left sees when they bother to even examine Catholicism at all. Oddly enough, one positive portrayal of a truly noble Catholic in film comes from an unlikely source: accused child molester Roman Polanski. The director’s 2002 film ‘The Pianist’ spotlighted the true-life German soldier whose kindness kept the Jewish main character, Wladyslaw Szpilman (Adrien Brody), alive and in hiding until the Russians arrived in Warsaw. The German officer’s name was Hauptmann Wilhelm Hosenfeld (played with wonderful nuance by German actor Thomas Kretschmann), and he represents to me what Catholicism is all about.

Like the Pope himself, Hosenfeld started off with a Nazi affiliation. While the former Joseph Ratinzinger’s membership was compulsory, Hosenfeld willingly joined the Nazi party as did many Germans in the early 1930s looking for hope and change. A decorated veteran of World War I, he was drafted into the Wehrmacht at age 44 and, rising from the rank of Feldwebel to Hauptmann, would eventually be stationed in occupied Warsaw.

But Hosenfeld soon became disenchanted by, and then viscerally ashamed of, what was being done to the Poles, especially the Polish-Jews, under his nation’s banner. All through his military service he kept a diary of his feelings, thoughts which survived because he would send them home for safe-keeping. Witnessing the horrors of the liquidation of the Warsaw ghetto and the implementation of the “Final Solution” unfolding before his eyes, he would write such impassioned entries as: “These brutes. With horrible mass murder of the Jews we have lost this war. We have brought an eternal curse on ourselves and will be forever covered with shame. We have no right for compassion or mercy; we all have a share in the guilt. I am ashamed to walk in the city.”

Hosenfeld’s revulsion was rooted in his deep-seeded Catholicism — a religious conviction that prompted him to action, not just words. He befriended numerous Poles and even made an effort to learn their language. He also attended Mass, received Holy Communion, and went to confession in Polish churches, even though this was forbidden. His actions on behalf of Poles began as early as autumn 1939 when he allowed, against regulations, Polish POWs access to their families.

He has been directly credited with saving the lives of numerous refugees, Jews and non-Jews alike. Though he escaped the Nazi wrath, Hosenfeld was taken POW by the Russians. Despite entreaties by both Polish Christians and Jews for his release, the Soviets refused, instead (falsely) believing him to be a war criminal through his unit affiliation and convicting him in 1950 to 25 years imprisonment.  He eventually died in 1952, possibly from injuries suffered during one of his many rounds of torture at the hands of his captors.

Szpilman applied to Yad Vashem in 1998 to have Hosenfeld recognized. Before the Commission for the Designation of the Righteous could award the title, it had to be verified that Hosenfeld had not been involved in war crimes. Yad Vashem reviewed his letters and diaries and also received confirmation from the Polish Commission for the Investigation of Nazi Crimes that his conduct had been untarnished. In 2009, Hosenfeld was officially recognized by the organization as a Righteous Among the Nations (a posthumous honor shared with the likes of Oskar Schindler).

Though not a true martyr in that he did not die for his actions, Hosenfeld is an exemplar of what is good and decent and honorable in the Catholic faith. As another man he saved, Leon Warm, wrote in a 1950 letter to Szpilman entreating him for help in securing their mutual savior’s release, “the villains and perpetrators are free, while a man deserving recognition is suffering.” That is the essence of martyrdom, the kind of which continues to this day.

In Baghdad on a Sunday afternoon, October 31, 2010, a young woman named Raghada al-Wafi ran into her cathedral – Our Lady of Salvation – with wonderful news to share with the priest who had married her: she was going to have a baby. The priest happily bestowed a blessing. It ended up being the last act of their lives. Moments later, the priest, Raghada and her unborn child were slaughtered. They were among the Catholic faithful killed by terrorist gunmen who stormed into the church and accused the Christians of being infidels. Then they began randomly firing on them. Dozens of worshippers sought sanctuary in the church sacristy.

But many more weren’t so lucky.

When the four-hour siege was over, more than 50 Iraqi Catholics had been killed, including two priests. It was one of the deadliest attacks on Christians in years. But certainly not the last. Since then, the 8 million Coptic Christians in Egypt have been routinely persecuted, their clergy murdered, the faithful beaten, churches burned. But apparently Ms. Sarandon feels that, despite the overwhelming good that the Church does throughout the world, often suffering along the way, all she can say about its spiritual head is that he is a “Nazi.” I guess technically then so was Wilm Hosenfeld. But what fun is learning history, when ignorant histrionics will suffice?

Now, devout Catholics like Hosenfeld, al-Wafi , the Coptic Catholics suffering alongside their more numerous Orthodox brothers and sisters and the many others throughout the world may not show as much moral conviction and courage as an actress sniping at the Pope from the plush confines of a Sag Harbor film festival.

Still, I think it’s time for the Hollywood crowd to turn its critical eye towards those who create the martyrs rather than those who bravely offer themselves upon the altar of a religion whose founding principles remain as beautifully powerful and true today as when Christ was born in obscurity two millennia ago: peace on earth and good will towards mankind.

That, of course, was their right, although they didn’t use similar discretion when some of their local radio hosts allowed Mike Tyson to fantasize about Sarah Palin being raped.

Where’s the reaction to Susan Sarandon calling the pope a Nazi? Perhaps you didn’t hear about that one, because she’s a Hollywood celebrity rather than a conservative country singer – and because Hollywood celebrities are usually granted full leeway to say idiotic things. In fact, Benedict served in the Hitler Youth unwillingly and was never a Nazi Party member. He deserted before the end of World War II and turned himself over to the Americans.

Now, I disagree with the Pope on a wide variety of issues: he received anti-Semitic priest Rev. Tadeusz Rydzyk in 2007, he made a rather rotten speech at Auschwitz in May 2006, he was slow to respond to a British-born bishop who denied the Holocaust, and his perspective on the Middle East conflict is problematic.

Nonetheless, he has stood tall against terror on many occasions, and he has criticized in strong terms both moral relativism and radical Islam.

So what prompted the Nazi reference by Sarandon?

Nothing. She just made it, as though it were perfectly obvious to everyone that the Pope is worthy of total disdain. This from a woman whose idea of fun is being on the receiving end of projectile vomit.

Will the media decry her in the same way it did Hank Williams Jr.? Of course not. The good news is that the public probably will. As we’ve detailed over and over on Big Hollywood, Americans aren’t fond of stars who take advantage of our goodwill to be outrageously liberal. Sarandon will surely feel the brunt of these comments at her next box office appearance.

Fund’s latest column castigates Susan Sarandon for twice calling Pope Benedict a “Nazi” on the same night.

Crowds at both venues were unfazed by the remark and lavished praise on the Oscar-winning actress for her work and her recent show of solidarity with the Occupy Wall Street protestors. That would the quick drop-by she arranged a couple weeks ago while she was on her way in a limo to catch a plane to Italy (presumably not to pay respects to the Vatican). She told reporters that she was “her to educate myself” because “greed is widespread all over the world.”

Perhaps almost as widespread as the annoying habit that celebrities have of saying stupid things.

Fund also holds Hank Williams Jr. accountable for comparing President Barack Obama to “Hitler.” But while Williams Jr. was quickly removed from his sweet perch on ‘Monday Night Football,’ Sarandon has yet to receive any brickbats from her celebrity peers.

Celebrities will always say silly, stupid things. But isn’t it time we stop putting up with it, he asks?

I guess it’s too much to ask for the general public to boycott celebrities who act stupidly – references to Hitler or Nazis being among the more egregious acts – because there simply would be too many examples for anyone to keep track of. But that shouldn’t deter people in the creative arts from raising a stink about it in an attempt to create some kind of deterrent.

That was a rhetorical question.

Via THR:

“Susan Sarandon’s ignorance is willful: those who have hatred in their veins are not interested in the truth. The fact is that Joseph Ratzinger [the Pope] was conscripted at the age of 14 into the Hitler Youth, along with every other young German boy,” says the president of the Catholic League of America, William Donohue, in a  statement.

“Unlike most of the other teenagers, Ratzinger refused to go to meetings, bringing economic hardship to his family. Moreover, unlike most of the others, he deserted at the first opportunity. Sarandon’s comment is obscene. Sadly, it’s what we’ve come to expect from her,” Donohue added.

On Monday, the Anti Defamation League also called for an apology from the actress.

So we’re clear, just as I personally wouldn’t have fired Hank Williams Jr. for his dumb remark, I’m not calling for any punitive action to be taken against Sarandon. This is about the Left’s hypocrisy.

What I love about our First Amendment is that it allows us to know who the moral cripples in our society are. This is a good thing that should be encouraged not discouraged. Sarandon is just revealing who she really is. Nothing criminal about that. In fact, it’s a public service.

Via THR:

On Monday, the Anti Defamation League also called for an apology from the actress.

Abraham H. Foxman told The Hollywood Reporter in a statement, “We hope that Susan Sarandon will have the good sense to apologize to the Catholic community and all those she may have offended with this disturbing, deeply offensive and completely uncalled for attack on the good name of Pope Benedict XVI.

“Ms. Sarandon may have her differences with the Catholic Church, but that is no excuse for throwing around Nazi analogies. Such words are hateful, vindictive and only serve to diminish the true history and meaning of the Holocaust.”

Foxman also called Sarandon’s comment “disturbing, deeply offensive and completely uncalled for.”

Read full piece here.

THR:

Sarandon was interviewed by Bob Balaban at the Bay Street Theatre in Sag Harbor on Saturday. She said she sent the pope a copy of the anti death penalty book, Dead Man Walking, authored by Sister Helen Prejean. Sarandon starred in the 1995 big-screen adaptation.

“The last one,” she said, “not this Nazi one we have now.”

Balaban tried to dance around the comment, but Sarandon just made it again, Newsday reports. The audience also laughed.

Full piece here.

Take the case of Roseanne Barr, a self-described socialist and proud ACORN member. As part of her vanity campaign for the presidency, the unfunny comedian has managed to make liberal Hollywood crusader Susan Sarandon seem like a thoughtful moderate.

Barr is now calling for the forced reeducation and murder of wealthy Americans just as Bill Ayers’s Weather Underground Organization proposed decades before.

When meeting with the radical demonstrators occupying Wall Street, Sarandon recently stressed the importance of strengthening so-called campaign finance reform and improving governmental transparency.

Barr, on the other hand, communed with the hippy rabble in lower Manhattan and then took to the airwaves to urge that a French-style Reign of Terror be visited on the heads of those with incomes she considers excessive.

“Part of my platform is, of course, that the guilty must be punished and that we can no longer let our children see their guilty leaders getting away with murder,” Barr told Max Keiser of Russia Today (RT). “Because it teaches children that they don’t have to have any morals as long as they have guns and are bullies that they’ll win and I don’t think that’s a good message.”

“I do say that I am for the return of the guillotine and that is for the worst of the worst of the guilty,” Barr deadpanned.

“I first would allow the guilty bankers to pay, the ability to pay back, anything over $100 million [of] personal wealth because I believe in a maximum wage of $100 million. And if they are unable to live on that amount of that amount then they should go to the reeducation camps and if that doesn’t help, then be beheaded,” said Barr who happens to have a reported net worth of $80 million, a comfortable $20 million below her decapitation cutoff.

Barr’s proposal is eerily reminiscent of plans by the Weather Underground to intern and murder capitalists when their socialist revolution came. (The plan is discussed in my book Subversion, Inc.: How Obama’s ACORN Red Shirts are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers.)

According to Weather Underground infiltrator Larry Grathwohl, the terrorist group drew up plans to kill the one-tenth of the U.S. population they expected would turn out to be “diehard capitalists” incapable of reeducation. As Grathwohl told a documentary filmmaker in 1982, the group’s leaders:

believed that their immediate responsibility would be to protect against what they called the counter revolution and they felt that this counter revolution could best be guarded against by creating and establishing reeducation centers in the Southwest where we would take all the people who needed to be reeducated into the new way of thinking and teach them how things were going to be.

I asked well what is going to happen to those people that we can’t reeducate that are diehard capitalists and the reply was that they’d have to be eliminated. And when I pursued this further they estimated that they would have to eliminate 25 million in these reeducation centers. And when I say eliminate I mean kill 25 million people. I want you to imagine sitting in a room with 25 people most of which have graduate degrees from Columbia and other well known educational centers and hear them figuring out the logistics for the elimination of 25 million people. And they were dead serious.

The Weather Underground may have been serious, but it’s not entirely clear if Barr is.

Is Barr channeling her inner Pol Pot or is she acting more like the whimsical Red Queen from Lewis Carroll’s “Through the Looking Glass?”

Remember that Barr thinks systematic mass murder is hilarious. Even though she herself is Jewish, Barr did a 2009 photo shoot in which she sported a Hitler moustache and swastika armband as she took burnt gingerbread “Jew Cookies” out of an oven.

It says a lot that Barr feels comfortable enough in the current political climate to openly embrace mass murder. She knows she won’t be condemned by the media or by others on the Left.

In fact, the George Soros-funded Media Matters for America is already working overtime trying to downplay the borderline seditious rhetoric of prominent leftists.

The fake media watchdog accused critics of distorting the call to arms that self-described communist and former Obama green jobs czar Van Jones issued during a recent MSNBC appearance. Jones said:

And you’re going to see an American fall, an American autumn, just like we saw the Arab Spring. You can see it right now with these young people on Wall Street. Hold onto your hats. We’re going to have an October offensive to take back the American dream and to rescue America’s middle class [emphasis added].

Perhaps Media Matters missed the violence of the so-called Arab Spring in countries such as Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Bahrain, and Yemen.

Or not.

(This Front Page Magazine article is republished here with permission.)

—–

Starts around the 3:25 mark: And it’s a great opportunity that this idiot [WI Governor Scott] Walker has given us to remember our strength and to remember that we are the many and they are the few; and even though they have the wealth, we have something which is as important if not more important. And so I came just to say thank you.

“They” have all the wealth?

Brother, that’s priceless.

If you watch the whole interview you’ll hear that Susan Sarandon is “spreading her vast wealth” by donating pizzas to the cause.  Oh, and she likely paid her own airfare to get a little face time by interjecting herself in a big story in front of tens of thousands of people. What a sacrifice for an actor.  

Spread the wealth, Susan? You first, Oscar-winner. When you and yours are in a two bedroom apartment on the North side of Milwaukee in solidarity with the struggle, talk to us then.

Why it’s a left-wing film

Writer/director Tim Robbins has never made any secret of the fact that his masterpiece (and like every film in my Top 10, this is a masterpiece) “Dead Man Walking” was produced in the hopes of turning people against the death penalty, and the way he goes about it is ingenious. Combining two true stories involving Sister Helen Prejean, a Roman Catholic nun and anti-death penalty activist, Robbins makes his case from a strictly Christian point of view. But first he resolutely overcomes every possible objection those who disagree with him might have as far as how he presents his side of the argument.

Nothing in the story is manipulated. The man being executed, Matthew Poncelot (an amazing Sean Penn), is guilty as hell. For kicks, after finding them innocently necking in the woods, he and a buddy rape a teenage girl and then viciously murder both her and her boyfriend in cold blood. Covered in swastika tattoos, Poncelot rants about his love for Hitler, his desire to be an anti-American terrorist, and openly taunts the victims’ families. It’s hard to imagine a better candidate for execution.

Robbins also doesn’t shy away from showing us the raw anguish, anger and personal fallout the parents of the two victims still live with a full six-years after the loss of their beloved children. All four want this man executed and the film gives them every opportunity they deserve to make intelligent, compassionate, and logical arguments for why capital punishment is just and necessary. This isn’t about bloodlust. This is about justice and knowing that the man who punched a permanent hole in their lives, a hole that will never heal, is no longer allowed to enjoy what he ruthlessly took from others — life. These decent, everyday people have also thought well beyond the notion of an eye for an eye. When Robbins allows Clyde Percy (R. Lee Ermey, in a small but memorable role), the father of the murdered girl, to make the irrefutable argument that giving a death row inmate life in prison puts other inmates and prison guards at risk, you know this isn’t Hollywood’s typical shallow, one-sided approach to the issue du jour.

Poncelot is never presented to us as any kind of victim. Sure, he grew up poor and for the most part fatherless, but the point is clearly made that the millions who grow up under similar circumstances don’t end up rapists and murderers. Furthermore, Robbins goes so far as to inter-cut Poncelot’s rather peaceful-looking death by lethal injection with the horrific scenes that finally reveal the true monstrosity of the crime this man committed.  

What Robbins is doing here is making sure no one can argue that he didn’t present every reasonable argument for and against, or in any way whitewashed the emotional and intellectual position of the victims. No one can say the film underplays the heinousness of the crime or even attempts to ring that tired left-wing bell about the possibility of an innocent man being executed. In fact, I’ve read that the two executions upon which the film is based were actually done with the electric chair but the decision was made to use lethal injection in the film in order to take away the objection that the death penalty is now more humane.

To trump the other side’s compelling and convincing case for the death penalty, Robbins plays the Christian Card and demands that we recognize the humanity of this monster. Sister Prejean (Susan Sarandon) has one goal, to save Poncelot’s soul. He must confess to his crime, take full responsibility, and show sincere remorse if he is to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

And in the end, he does, and we are left to watch a repentant man lose his life.

By approaching the issue through a Christian point of view and not in any way giving those who disagree the excuse that the film isn’t objective, in my opinion, Robbins more than earns the right to ask whether or not it’s moral for the State to take a man’s life. And the message he respectfully sends to we Christians goes well beyond the simplistic bumper stickerism of What Would Jesus Do? The film simply asks a complicated question that lingers long after the film ends: Is it Christian to intervene and cut short the life of a man who, if given the time and ministry, might someday repent and save his own soul?

Why it’s a great film

I was blown away by “Dead Man Walking” and afterwards expected great things from Robbins. The maturity he showed as a storyteller and the courage he obviously had in his convictions — meaning, the courage to objectively present the facts on all sides and still believe his point of view would prevail — seemed to announce the arrival of an important filmmaker. Unfortunately, that ended up not being the case, and not only for Robbins, but for Hollywood as a whole. We are now in the year 2011 and “Dead Man Walking” is the last true classic left-wing film produced in 16 long years.

And all credit goes to Robbins, who not only wrote a script that miraculously avoids even a hint of sanctimony or melodrama, but he also directed Sarandon to a completely convincing, subtle, and moving Oscar-winning performance and does the same for Penn, who should’ve won. You also get a very good sense of what life is like on Death Row in a Louisiana prison, and as the execution nears, feel time closing in. The drama, and there’s plenty of it, is all a product of believable relationships and situations. You keep waiting for the clichéd last second reprieve. But it never comes. Robbins seems to understand that we’ve been conditioned by Hollywood to expect such things but still he refuses to use anything artificial to heighten the tension.

At its core, this is a fight of good against evil, something like an exorcism involving a Jesus-loving, Bible-quoting, accessible and down to earth nun in a race against the clock to free the humanity buried deep within a truly wicked man capable of unspeakable evil. The stakes couldn’t be higher. She must save his eternal soul, and when she does, thanks to two amazing actors at the top of their game, it is a profoundly moving statement that reinforces and reminds us of why God sent his only Son to die on our behalf. Jesus didn’t come to save the holy, He came to save the sinners.

The film is also a success in the arena of pure storytelling. The story is compelling, well-structured, beautifully shot, and contains a haunting score courtesy of David Robbins, the director’s brother. Closing things out is Bruce Springsteen’s Oscar-winning song. Dialogue, pacing, and all of the supporting players are top notch, especially Scott Wilson as the prison Chaplain; someone you at first think will be revealed as the stereotyped rigid, right-wing Priest, but once again Robbins avoids the traps so many other left-wing filmmakers never fail to fall into.

As a movie fanatic of the highest order, I personally love the casting of Wilson in that role, an obvious tribute to Richard Brooks’ legendary “In Cold Blood,” where Wilson played Dick to Robert Blake’s Perry, the spree killers responsible for the heinous true-life murder of a Kansas farm family. Another similar touch is the casting of Clancy Brown in a cameo role as a State Trooper who lets Sister Prejean off on a speeding ticket. Brown played Penn’s chief antagonist in the 1983 juvenile prison film “Bad Boys.”

Personally, I believe in the death penalty but I’d be lying if I said that, as a Christian, Robbins’ film didn’t create an ongoing conflict with that belief. Part of me wants to oppose cutting short a man’s opportunity to repent and save his soul. But a bigger part reads about these crimes and wants to pull the switch myself. And quite frankly, despite the other side’s insistence to the contrary, I find the idea that execution is not a deterrent absurd.  

Who knows, maybe on Judgment Day I’ll discover I was wrong. But if the Almighty is at least handing out points for taking the time to struggle with the issue, of all people, I’ll have Tim Robbins to thank.

P.S. The image above is not a director pushing his Christ symbolism too far. It’s an accurate depiction of the lethal injection procedure. 

What’s not on the list

Do the Right Thing (1989) — An outstanding film but one that is surprisingly — considering the race-baiting idiocy director Spike Lee is never above spouting – even handed in its presentation of race issues. The fact that Paul Haggis won an Oscar for the retarded version of “Do the Right Thing” and the real one wasn’t even nominated leaves me speechless.

—–

According to this latest PSA from TheBump.com, breastfeeding could save the US government some ridiculous amount of money each year in healthcare costs. First of all, no one can save the government money because the government doesn’t know how to save money. I’m curious: I wonder how much money the government will save if everyone stopped smoking. 

Gisele Bundechen, the Brazilian civil rights hero, I mean supermodel, recently pronounced “I think there should be a worldwide law, in my opinion, that mothers should breastfeed their babies for six months.” And what happens if we don’t Gisele? Do we get thrown in a Nipple Nazi lactation prison? 

Sure, breastfeeding is one of the most primitive and natural things a woman can do, similar to giving birth or going to the bathroom. But what happens to women who choose not to or can’t breastfeed? Are they to be considered as less of a mother?  Why do celebrities want to make women who can’t or choose not to breastfeed feel like they are incomplete mothers? 

These celebrity moms remind me of today’s feminist movement in that they are irrelevant at best.  With personal chefs, private trainers, and nannies at their disposal, I guess they have a lot of time to come up with laws to enforce their beliefs.  Sure, I know celebrities can’t actually make laws, but do they know that?  Their advice means nothing to a woman who is trying to hold down a full-time job, make sure her two kids are doing their homework and needs to prepare three meals a day. Quite honestly, I don’t mind if that woman decides to cut breastfeeding out of the equation to make life a bit easier.

If you don’t conform to the feminist elite’s exact definition of what a mother or woman should be then you are shunned, chided and belittled by them. I always thought that one of the main points of feminism was to give women choices. Susan Sarandon reminds us of how intolerant the feminist movement is when someone has different views. While Sarandon was being honored with the a Lifetime Achievement Award from Boston University, she was asked if she thought Sarah Palin could be considered a feminist: 

“I don’t understand how anyone can claim that she’s a feminist. Is it because she’s cute and feisty and spunky? Is it because she carries a gun and shoots animals from a helicopter? That’s not feminism — that’s the worst aspect of violent male behavior. I think she completely compromises the idea of feminism.” 

Nothing pisses off the feminist elite more than a woman who exercises her 2nd amendment rights or chooses not to abort a baby with Down Syndrome.  Feminists also expect all women to be peaceful. When accepting her Emmy in 2007, Sally Field concluded her speech with: “If mothers ruled the world there would be no god damned wars in the first place.”  Does it make me any less of a mother if I agree with Patricia Heaton’s response:  

“I’ve actually become a more violent person since I became a mother. If someone came between me and my kids, they’d be dead meat.” 

The surefire way to get booted from any feminist clique is to question Roe v Wade.   After my friends recover from their initial disgust when they find out that I am now conservative, they always ask if I am still pro-choice. When I suggest that “there should be a window for abortions and then…”, my opinion on anything immediately becomes tainted and I’m not given the opportunity to finish my sentence. 

Feminists are also confused by my fantasy of being a 1950s housewife that conjures up meals and keeps a clean home while looking fabulous.  Really, I would love that.  Most feminists scoff at the boredom of it all. Women are expected to want to work even when it is not a financial necessity. Sure, some of you think we are past this conversation, but we aren’t.  How many stay at home moms feel inferior to their working friends? Well, you shouldn’t. Women need to take responsibility for their lot in life.  Don’t count on a female co-worker or Gloria Steinem to improve your situation. Especially since Ms. Steinem is too busy defending the likes of Bill Clinton.

It’s up to each woman to personally discover what it means to be a woman and how to survive and thrive in this world.  I’m an advocate, so I understand that sometimes a movement is needed to right injustices and atrocities.  However, when one of your biggest gripes is that a vitamin company is marketing the promise of strong muscles to boys and good skin to girls then I think it’s time to move on.

Go ahead, ladies, and whip ‘em out if you want, just not next to my latte. If the baby’s needs are so important, then why are you in a Starbucks, anyway?