The following is an excerpt from Elizabeth Hobson’s latest article in PoliQuads Magazine.
Feminists Do Not Get To Define Feminism
By Elizabeth Hobson
Proto-feminism arose in the late Middle Ages. Queen consort of France and England, Eleanor of Acquitaine spearheaded a movement within her court to subvert the chivalric code (which had traditionally governed relations between knights and lords) to regulate the behaviour of men towards women. These women initiated a system of romantic feudalism wherein noble men were under irresistible pressure to identify a lady as midons (my lord) and to submit to her will and delicately accept any scorn that her midons saw fit to extend to him. Eleanor established “Courts of Love” in which she and her noble women would administer “justice” in romantic disputes. Not only may many men in particular recognise this state of gender relations, but the modus operandi that Eleanor and company used to achieve their supremacy is entirely familiar: generalizations about all men based on the poor behaviour of a minority, asserting that women need protection from men’s violations, and a narrative of women’s moral superiority justifying their dictatorship. Within 200 years, Eleanors’ ideas had spread and saturated throughout Europe and throughout the class system….. [continued]
*The rest of this article exploring the various waves of feminism can be read in PoliQuads Magazine
2 thoughts on “Elizabeth Hobson on ‘proto-feminism’”
Reblogged this on Patriactionary.
Interesting article with some great work. However, after all these years of reading and the more I do read, I am becoming more and more cemented in my belief/opinion that there is no such thing as 1st, 2nd, 3rd and now 4th wave feminism.
These women, from the very first moment they organised, have been an ideology of hatred toward men and an ideology hell bent on superiority for women. As Elizabeth says in her article, a “Dictatorship.”
How dare they think they can create this monstrosity of a court to deal with matters of women’s interest or marriage, where they sit in judgement over men. There already existed a court for crime. Men never needed to answer to women for anybloodything.
And the stupid men allowed this to happen. Unbelievable!
Also, men as we know have always been saddled with responsibility, while women, like children had little to none. And yet, these depraved savages thought they had the right to claim the moral high ground and subdue all men beneath their feet.
And they recon men who become dictators of countries are bad. Sheesh, the bloody women had control over the men in all these countries. So who was actually running the place?