Venus of Willendorf: a 25,000 year old fertility symbol? Nope. A pornographic icon designed exclusively to get caveman rocks off.

CONTENTS

1. The Rewriting of Sexual History
2. Feminist History in a Wombshell
3. The feminist meta-theoretical framework
4. The waves view of liberation struggle
5. Wam bam suffragette
6. The deliberation feminists
7. Third time clucky
8. Betty and Simone go boating
9. Deconstructing Herstory
10. A reappraisal of subjugation
11. Wave theory on the rocks
12. Woman makes her own History
13. Secret women's business in prehistoric societies
14. If Astrology was the first science
15. Kings but not queens you say
16. History in the Faking
17. I'm Just a girl who can't say yes!
18. I know what you did last Summers
19. Feminist history: all Greek to me
20. Men are history
21. Man makes his own history but not under conditions of her choosing
22. He who does not learn from history
23. Who Controls the Sexual Past?
25. History as propaganda
26. Can anything be concluded
27. Back to the future
28. Footnotes

The Rewriting of Sexual History

This is a chapter on the battle to control the sexual portrayal of men and women in history. The detailed analysis gives an account of the feminist position on history, which portrays a patriarchal conspiracy to boost the image of men and deny women their rightful place in the historical record.

The analysis reveals that feminists have failed to coordinate their conspiracy theories on sexual history. Also, women do have a prominent place in the western historical record, as documented here.

A study is also made of men's experience of sexual history. This indicates that men are not identified on a sexual basis in terms of their achievements, while women are.

The chapter shows that history has been one of the battlefields of sexual politics.

(To save the chapter for later reading (offline) I recommend that you save it to a file on your computer and then save the 9 pictures to an adjoining folder called 'pictures'. This is done by scrolling through the document and then saving each picture by click-holding the cursor over it on a Macintosh or right-clicking on a PC. This is possible in Netscape Navigator and Internet Explorer.)

I anticipate one day bringing this chapter into print as part of a book on sexual politics. If you have any comments on the text in terms of logic, accuracy or style they would be highly appreciated. I always welcome feedback whether it is negative or positive. Contact Sarcasmo@bigpond.com. The length of this chapter is 10,000 words.

A lot of work went into this text. If you want to make a donation to the site, for the effort then you can make a small payment through PayPal. Its a reputable and secure system owned by Ebay. Your donation will help to fund the continuing development and upgrading of the site.

Copyright © Henry Salivator 2003
All rights reserved.

The right of Henry Salivator to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with various copyright acts applicable.

http://www.users.bigpond.com/sarcasmo/sexpolitics/hystery.html

The Rewriting of Sexual History

In principle, the study of sexual history should provide insights into the historical roles of men and women. It can also provide insights into how the roles of men and women have evolved and whether that evolution has lessons, which may contribute to our ongoing development. However sexual history has been subject to significant political manipulation so that our contemporary perception has been coloured by the dominance of feminist ideology.

The following chapter is designed to expose the current mythology about sexual history and attempts to rediscover some elements of history that may be of benefit to human development. In order to achieve this task the chapter reveals the general outline of the feminist claim about the course of history in the modern age.

The chapter shows that the instruments of the media, including radio, newspapers and television, as well as bureaucracies, universities and all other social institutions have been encouraged to portray various historic eras as patriarchal and therefore repressive of women's rights.

The chapter refutes aspects of feminist claims about a history of oppression, based on the logical incoherence of feminist arguments and a lack of substantial evidence. The chapter shows instead the influence of feminism in shaping our perception of history and the role of women in making special historical achievements.

A brief investigation is made of men's contribution to history and representation in history. Although men are the main and most significant historical characters the argument made here is that their sexuality is traditionally not emphasised. Furthermore, the history of men's sexual struggle and beliefs appear to be specifically repressed. In these respects, it may be men's sexual history that has been under-represented.

The final portion of the chapter provides an overview of the issues surrounding the place of history in our education and the role of history in providing us with perceptions of sexual power. It shows that the subject of history is contentious and that almost any lesson can be drawn from it, depending on where you look. History does have characteristics that can be divided along sex lines, and women's contribution to history as a whole has distinctly different highlights to those achieved by men. This is an attempt to provide a fair assessment of those differences.

Feminist History in a Wombshell

The subject of history is one of the topics treated by feminism. It is necessary to look at this treatment because feminism has had a powerful influence on the public perception of the historical record. In newspapers, books and on television, feminism has a major influence on the characterisation of our modern view of sexual history. It is also necessary to look at the feminist perspective on history because young men and women are today being indoctrinated in universities with a feminist view of how history has occurred and what history indicates about sexual power. It is also necessary to look at the feminist portrayal of history because a critique of feminism must engage with this pillar of its ideology, one of the foundations on which the whole intellectual edifice rests.

Feminist ideology sees history as a record of struggle. For feminism, the main interest of history is in extracting a previously unappreciated record of women's role and struggle for freedom and rights against a patriarchal tyranny. This approach to studying history is taken directly from the Marxist perspective, even though feminism in not in accord with Marxism. The Marxist view of history is that it should be viewed as a record of class struggle. This struggle includes efforts by oppressed peoples to find equality, liberty and autonomy. In equal fashion feminism sees history as a struggle. But it is a struggle for women's liberation, equality and autonomy. To paraphrase Marx, all existing history is the history of sexual struggle.

Below is an account of the feminist characterisation of history. This includes a grand historical scheme to which feminists subscribe as well as a more detailed history of the modern period, in which feminists characterise bursts of intensified rebellion against patriarchy. These include most notably the three distinct waves of feminism, which occur in the 20th century. The first argument provides the grand narrative. The second argument details specific issues and struggles.

The feminist meta-theoretical framework

The idea that feminists have about grand history has uncanny parallels with the Marxist concept of the history of capitalism and human social evolution. Feminists have idealised women's history as a distinct pattern modelled on Marxist theory. This origin needs to be viewed in greater detail. According to Marx's vision of world history there was in ancient times a period of primitive communism in which small-scale tribal or village societies had a communal sharing of resources and a degree of fairness in their social arrangements.[17] This arrangement was lost when societies developed to a period in which slavery and feudalism were dominant. Slavery and feudalism are social systems occurring along the path of history. The current capitalist period of history has witnessed the emergence of large-scale industry, based on private property by which workers are alienated from their means of production. However capitalist societies make great leaps forward in their productive capacity during this historic phase. The disruptive social nature of capitalism and its innate contradictions are supposed to lead to its overthrow and a return of communism, though in a form that is scientific and modern. In other words, societies return to a non-market-based sharing of duties and privileges and access to resources. Peace and rationality eventually prevail.

A newspaper cartoon depicting the
essence of the feminist perspective on history

In almost identical fashion to Marxism the feminist philosophy characterises women's history as a loss of the Garden of matriarchal Eden to be replaced by a period of patriarchy. This is a historical period. How long this period has existed and how long it will last is a question that has been of great interest to feminist intellectuals, as will be shown in the next section. For feminism the historical period of patriarchy lies mainly in women's ties to men and their relegation to the position of housewife and sexual slave.[18] Revolution is the main agenda of feminists, involving an overthrow of the patriarchal order. Women's sexual revolution will bring the return of women's freedom. It is only with great reluctance that some feminists acknowledge limited social progress for women in the contemporary age. Most do not dare to suggest that a utopia for women is just around the corner. Marxism and feminism represent two competing political groups, attempting to explain contemporary social disparities and issues, especially regarding women's role in society. Marxists sycophantically claim that they too believe in women's liberation and claim that capitalism is patriarchal.[19] Marxists say that the overthrow of capitalism and its replacement by socialism will bring the liberation of women. But feminists instead believe that patriarchy is autonomous from capitalism and indeed precedes it. This difference of opinion became particularly stark during the 1960s, when feminists branched off from Marxist revolutionary agendas. Feminists insisted that socialism could be equally oppressive for women if it only addressed the Marxist concepts of capitalist oppression and exploitation of the working class (male).

The period of the 1960s was crucial to the increasing organisation of feminist women separate to the socialist movement. It is arguable that feminism came to have a far greater impact on the organisation of western societies than the ostensibly revolutionary struggle of socialists. Feminism came to dominate the perception of sexual power in western societies, whereas western societies came to see themselves as having triumphed against the attacks from communism.

The waves view of liberation struggle

Women's struggle against patriarchy and against a socialist model of liberation did not begin in the 1960s. Feminists have emphasised that women's struggles can be characterised as occurring in waves. These waves are historical periods of agitation and revolt that require distinct scrutiny.

Three waves of feminism have arguably occurred over the last 100 years and have been viewed by feminists as representing crucial forward movements for women, despite periods of setback and stagnation. The waves do not represent everything that has relevance to the historical construction of female sexual experience, but it is the most important in terms of feminist goals, and the most relevant to this study.

The waves of feminism can briefly be described as firstly the suffragette movement early this century in which the main aim was to obtain voting rights. The second wave formed in the late 1960s with the uprising of left radicalism in Western societies. The main aim during this period was a call for equal wages for equal work. The final wave began probably around the late 1980s though there is no official date for this resurgence. In this wave a diversity of new issues emerged, from greater political representation of women to agitation against career restrictions. It is my argument that this wave ended very abruptly in the year 2000. Each period is looked at below.

"...nowadays we are in the presence of a powerful female sex-solidarity indicating the beginnings of a strong sex-league of women against men."

Belfort Bax, The Fraud of Feminism, 1914

Wam bam suffragette

Late in the 19th and early in the 20th century the first major modern wave of feminist struggle occurred. There had been previous important male and female figures advocating the rights and interests of women.[20] But it was only in this period that a large-scale movement significantly rocked Western societies. The era is remembered for the political agitation by Emily Pankhurst who formed a Women's Social and Political Union in 1903. Emily Pankhurst was later sentenced for inciting persons to place explosives outside the home of the Prime Minister. The most famous incident of the period is however the suicide of a suffragette filly, who threw herself under the King's horse at the races.[21] There was extensive radical activism and even terrorism conducted by groups of middle class women seeking Suffrage or the vote. Suffragist riots occurred at Whitehall in London in 1911 and in 1913.

The first wave of feminism ended abruptly with the advent of World War I. The onset of hostilities between Britain and Germany caused the feminist movement to evaporate. This was largely because some of its leaders became patriots against what was by one measure, a greater enemy. In any case, a state such as Britain could not easily tolerate both dissent within its borders while fighting an enemy without.

Contemporary feminists have criticised the aims of the first wave feminists because most women involved in the movement focussed their liberation struggle on the attainment of the right to vote (for women with property), which was already available to many men. This avenue of struggle had implied the possibility of gaining political representation that in turn would ensure the representation of women's more general interests. But it appeared to fail. The lack of women's subsequent serious representation in political parties and their apparent 'second class status' has caused more recent feminists to berate the limited objectives of their suffragette forebears.

The deliberation feminists

In the 1960s feminism once again began to grow dramatically, initially within the confines of the increase in left wing and anarchist rebellion that had exploded in this period. The agitation of radicals and students around the issue of the Vietnam War and the American Black Rights struggle saw feminists begin to emerge with an autonomous agenda for female liberation. This was ostensibly because their unique interests had been ignored in socialist rhetoric.

"We were...typing the speeches men delivered, making coffee not policy"[22]

Feminists broke away from formal left wing aims because they realised that the revolution promised by the overthrow of capitalism did not seriously promise liberation for women. Women's support of left wing revolutionary aims would diminish the struggle against women's particular oppression, which included issues related to access to abortion, equal pay for equal work, and a removal of many of the strictures of ordinary life.

Of great importance for the second wave period is the years immediately following 1970 when several of the most prominent feminists published their liberation tomes. These feminists set down in books their concept of the most fundamental issues facing modern societies. These books were to be highly influential for many women and men in their perception of the world. The most distinguished feminist writers included Robin Morgan, Shulamith Firestone, Gloria Steinem and Germaine Greer, who wrote The Female Eunuch. Gloria Steinem is remembered for claims, such as:

"A girl needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle."[23]

These writers were however relatively tame compared to Andrea Dworkin or Susan Brownmiller, wrote books that characterised society as openly hostile to women, with rape described as a feature of men's means of social control of women.

John Lennon, the former Beatle, known for political and personal song-writing, penned a song in 1977 titled "Woman is the nigger of the world." His sentiment highlighted the apparent lowly status of women but also indicated that some men were sympathetic to women's plight.

Activist events such as bra-burning are remembered easily, although some argue that such events never happened. Meanwhile, serious intellectual feminism and activism started to make inroads into academia. Feminists began to focus academic attention on the cultural imperialism of men and described a pervasive sexual repression of women. It is not surprising then that radical feminism came to dominate feminism from this period. Although there had been a "liberal feminism" espoused in this period, it was a minor and waning intellectual strand. Radical feminism became dominant, advocating separation from men and idealising lesbianism as an uncompromised sexual orientation.

Third time clucky

Feminism saw a degree of stagnation after the second wave (late 1960s-early 1970s), despite several prominent authors being published in the intervening period. However by the late 1980s feminism experienced a revival, which gained the title of The Third Wave. This upsurge now notably stood largely independent of the left with few concessions made to Marxist theory or revolutionary agendas.

Once again issues of equal pay for equal work became a rallying call for women in the 1980s. A diversity of other issues also came to prominence. This included a resurgent struggle to maintain abortion rights, which had been formally won in the US in 1973. Moves to provide better childcare facilities for mothers and to advance the opportunity for women to have careers were attributed in part to feminist struggle. The 'glass ceiling' was identified as an invisible inhibitor to women making promotional gains on their career ladder in the corporate world. Efforts were made in several countries to promote women in politics. Sexual harassment by men became a renewed concern as well as more severe forms of sexual violence against women. Sexist advertising was opposed by new agitation.

By 1990 the Third Wave was undoubtedly on full steam and authors such as Susan Faludi and Naomi Wolf became some of its most prominent international names. Susan Faludi provided an important critique of a view that women with professional ambitions could not find husbands. She revealed this 'fact' to be part of a backlash myth against women's tentative social and economic gains.[24] Naomi Wolf wrote a book that dealt with the subject of beauty and how women continued to be subjugated, due to their forced obsession with appearances:

"As the economy, law, religion, sexual mores, education, and culture were forcibly opened up to include women more fairly, a private reality colonised female consciousness. By using ideas about 'beauty', it reconstructed an alternative female world with its own laws, economy, religion, sexuality, education, and culture, each element as repressive as any that had gone before."[25]

Feminist agitation against oppressive norms has been an international movement, with women such as Wolf and Faludi touring extensively through western countries in the early 1990s. They articulated their insights on the global experience of women. However within each country particular issues emerged and individual activists gave their voice to the movement.

Lifestyle choices for women also became a major issue for feminists during the Third Wave. Of greatest significance was the emergence of lesbianism as a sexual orientation with greater acceptance. Many women have 'come out' as lesbians in much the way that homosexual males have been doing in greater numbers slightly before them. Homosexual men and women have agitated for the right to marry, to adopt children and to inherit spousal wealth.

Feminists have not declared the end of any wave and yet the third wave of feminism arguably ended with the beginning of the new Millennium. Around this period several cultural developments occurred, which suggest a significant stepping down of the feminist struggle. Newspapers suddenly no longer dealt extensively with women's issues. A number of universities in western countries suddenly abandoned courses in feminist studies, to be replaced by gender studies, a seemingly more neutral topic. Some government bodies dealing with equal opportunity issues had staff numbers drastically reduced. (See for example the Australian national organisation, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission)

Suddenly around the year 2000, men's issues emerged as a major concern. Men's health, access to children after divorce and suicide rates become prominent news. Susan Faludi released a book on the subject, Stiffed, the betrayal of modern men, symbolising the shift of emphasis. However, this apparent new agenda was short lived.

The above portrayal, while still authentic to feminist conceptions, represents a broad brushstroke introduction. It makes no reference to subtleties, causes and effects and possible mythological aspects of the developments. The notion of waves provides a guidepost. However when we look at actual developments historically: minute reforms, changes in technological effects on women and men, unique events in particular countries, then it is apparent that not all events fall within the waves. Below are some events and reference to individuals that deserve inclusion in the historical record of feminism and modern concepts of sexual power.

Betty and Simone go boating

In the period immediately after World War II both Betty Friedan and Simone de Bouvoir represented the transatlantic challengers to existing conceptions of women. They do not fit in the liberation waves chronology but they are very significant to later movements.

De Bouvoir, writing in France, believed that women were largely undefined in modern societies, existing only as the opposite of the normality of men:

"Here is to be found the basic trait of woman: she is the Other in a totality of which the two components are necessary to one another...woman has always been man's dependent, if not his slave..."[26]

The word 'other' to describe women, became an important part of later 'French School' theorising among feminists, remaining prominent in 1990s academia.[27] De Bouvoir's book, The Second Sex, remains a classic of feminist literature, although her marriage to the French philosopher Sartre, contributed to her fame.

According to Betty Friedan, who wrote of the American experience in the 1950s, women were subject to a feminine mystique that emphasised their role as housewife and mother. This was closely related to neuroses and depression and women's obsessive focus on beauty. American women were oppressed by the image to which they aspired, limiting their more worldly ambitions. Despite a variety of opportunities within an ostensibly democratic society, women were restricted to narrow lifestyle choices. Friedan saw careers as the solution.[28]

Minority viewpoints and dissent

Rene Denfield published a book entitled The New Victorians, also in 1995, drawing parallels between modern feminist ideology and puritan values. However women such as Helen Garner or Rene Denfield remain minor figures in mainstream feminism. They can be described as heretical.

No significant feminist texts have been published after 2000. We may well take Susan Faludi's book published in 1999, Stiffed, the betrayal of modern men, as an important milestone in this regard. Around this period there had been an increasing problematising of the male role in modern society. Men had become a new focus as a social subject. As Faludi said:

"In a culture of ornament, manhood is defined by appearance, by youth and attractiveness, by money and aggression, by posture and swagger and "props" by the curled lip and flexed biceps, by the glamour of the cover boy. No wonder men are in such agony." Source, article by Faludi: http://newsweek.com/nw-srv/printed/us/so/so0111-_3.htm

For the first time in 25 years there was a significant acknowledgment that men were also subject to social pressures. However the honorary victim status for men was to be short-lived. After all, men were really just victims of their own power. Nevertheless, the previous powerful feminist dominance of sexual discussion became fairly subdued. This was most likely because women had made too many overt economic and social gains to remain a subject of the constant highlighting of injustice and inequality.

Deconstructing Herstory

The above account was basically an overview of the broad feminist perspective on history on its own terms and without critical scrutiny. Below follows a critique of the feminist account of sexual history, with the purpose of revealing flaws and inconsistencies in the account.

The argument debunking feminist history occurs at several levels. This includes a critique based on the specific feminist reciting of historical events and chronologies that are supposed to reveal the origins of patriarchy. Taken in isolation, these accounts seem plausible. But when collected together, they are shown to be highly contradictory and subjective. The second major critique of feminist historical ideas occurs as a critique of the waves theory of liberation struggle and notions of a return to a lost paradise of matriarchy, which feminists use as subliminal enticement to struggle.

Feminists have argued that women have been historically subjugated and oppressed by men and that women have had no opportunity to obtain recognition for their achievements. Feminists are even willing to put precise dates on this history of oppression and this is the flaw in their collective argument that is exposed. The analysis here reveals that different feminist accounts are completely inconsistent on when the 'subjugation' of women actually began.

There are grandiose and varied definitions of the historical origins of patriarchy by a diversity of feminist authors and scholars, which range over thousands of years. All feminists are agreed that patriarchy started some time ago, but there is no plausible consensus on when it began. Highlighting these contradictory variations exposes the fundamental weakness of the feminist claim of a patriarchal history. Tracing the speculative and inconsistent account of oppression, as is done below, is sufficient to reveal a major flaw in feminist historiography. This brings us to the question of whether specific and systematic oppression of women has actually ever occurred.

The exercise of debunking feminist theories of history is not an academic exercise. This effort forms part of the project to reassess sexual history and the legitimate characterisation of men and women in the public account. The material below is not part of a critique of some obscure cult. Feminism is the dominant modern interpretation of the place of men and women in history. It is the way newspapers and books today portray sexual power in history.

The analysis of feminist claims about history follows a chronological order, starting from the earliest known times and moving all the way to the present day.

Oppression of women probably for all time...

According to the Australian feminist Dale Spender men have had power for an indefinite amount of time, to the exclusion of women, in all places on earth and at all times, throughout human history:

"...men have power...they have had it for a very long time...they seem to have had it in every known human society, and...they now use it to keep their power."[31]

It is of some interest that feminists never explain why liberation struggle by women is worthwhile in a male power-system that has maintained a relentless hold on power through all ages of human life. If males have always had absolute power in society then the only gains possible by women would be through men's acts of benevolence. Where is the motor of history that could provide an effective opening for female rebellion against the male dictatorship? Are feminists simply rebels without a clue in the mould of James Dean or Ché Guevarra, ready to die for a lost cause?

Yet not all feminists claim that patriarchy has gone on since the Stone Age.

Or at least for the last 10,000 of years

"Ironically, although women were central to its early development, farming quickly led to their general oppression. The domestication of animals and the availability of animal milk in addition to breast milk meant that women could raise children in quicker succession than before, becoming ever more tied to hearth and home in the process."

At least for the last thousands of years

Robin Morgan has a slightly different view of the longevity of women's oppression. This is revealed when she refers to:

"...the unbelievable mess men have created from their position of power during the past 5,000 years"[32]

Snake goddess from Palace of Knossos, in Crete circa 1600BC performs for an all male audience.

5,000 years is substantially less than all known human time, which scientific studies suggest is tens of thousands of years long. There were human civilisations prior to 5,000 years ago such as in Egypt or Iraq. Were some ancient Chinese or Egyptian dynasties not patriarchal? Then again, perhaps Morgan is just upholding the fundamentalist Christian doctrine that the world is only 5005 years old. This would maintain the consistency with Dale Spender's earlier speculation: Men have been screwing up the world since Adam set foot on the planet.

How about since the Hellenic era....

In a radio documentary on Greek homosexuality a male feminist commentator acknowledged that:

"Greek society was organised in the interests of the men."
(Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 576 AM 21.7.1997)

Such claims seem hasty given that the era was called Hellenic, in honour of a female figure, and there were many other important female Greek identities. Athens, the most powerful Greek city-state was named after a woman called Athena. The Oracle of Delphi, representing a powerful spiritual position in Athens, was also female. Furthermore, the prevalence of lesbianism and homosexuality in ancient Greek society suggests that there was even an opportunity for women to lead separatist lives on their very own islands like Lesbos. The poet Sappho was the primary example:

"One of the great Greek lyrists and few known female poets of the ancient world, Sappho was born some time between 630 and 612 BC. She was an aristocrat who married a prosperous merchant. While she still lived, coins of Lesbos were minted with her image. " From http://www.sappho.com/poetry/historical/sappho.html

What is also inevitably forgotten is that many Greek women had slaves, many of whom were men. In any case, there are some feminists who indicate the worship of matriarchal power to certain cultures and regions of the Hellenistic age, at the time of Athenian hegemony in the Mediterranean.[33] The ancient myths of the Amazon woman are also derived from this period. Several authors, including de Bouvoir, even claim that Sparta, part of the Greek peninsula, was actually very favourable to female interests, to the point of being matriarchal![34] Clearly this leaves the ancient Greek period contentious in terms of whether there was a dominant sexual power of men.

It gets worse. Christian men are Wiccad

According to Lady Tamara von Fausten, the founder of a new age religion which preaches neo-pagan worship:

"It's the Christian patriarchal system of the last 1000 years that has really screwed the world."[35]

This account is derived from a women's monthly fashion magazine, and highlights the diversity, perversity and commonality of feminist claims. The Church of Wicca has a project that entails regaining female powers through deference to the Goddess Within. While the religion preaches equality, there is a hint of neo-hippy sexual debauchery, just to keep things interesting.

Contrary to the above claim, many feminists believe that the middle ages were still a period of female power, such as manifested in the role of witchcraft and women's trade guilds. Iroically it is according to Simone de Bouvoir that:

"...the Church exalted the cult of the mother of the Redeemer to such a degree that we can say that in the thirteenth century God had been made a woman. And the life of ease of noble dames permitted conversation, polite manners, and poetry to flourish." The Second Sex: 120.

We find that even in 1914 men were having to defend the record on women's position in previous eras:

"One wonders why, if woman was the lustful prey of medieaval-man, there arose in this same epoch spirits like Saint Catherine of Siena, Jeanne d'Arc, Saint Cecilia, Roswitha (nun and dramatist of the 10th century), Marie de France (12th century), Mahaut Countess of Artois (14th century), or Christine de Pisan (15th century). How can we account for the presence in romance of...Tristan and Isolde, or in real life of Abelard and Heloise, and Petrarch and Laura? Dante's "Vita Nuova" is the choicest tapestry woven around the name of woman of which literature gives record." Socialist Review Vol 12, January 1914: 43.

We may well add to this list Hildegard von Bingen 1098-1179 who has been credited as a preacher, author, botanist and naturalist. Even her muscial compositions are still played on some radio stations.

Voltaire's megalo-bimbos

There are a diversity of males who support the feminist world view. Some of them even become bestsellers, such as John Ralston Saul, the author of Voltaire's Bastards:

"It would...be a great error to assume that our society...has within it today the basic flexibility to allow real female participation. After all, it has been created over a period of nearly five centuries without them in mind."[37]

Saul argues that women have not been part of the formulation of the 'Age of Reason' and the last 500 years have been a "male reality". To support the claim he cites one or two obscure sexist authors and thinks this is sufficient proof. The reality is that in every age there are diverse opinions that deserve mention. There will always be sexist authors either against men or against women.

There are in fact many significant female figures appearing in the historical record, particularly during the enlightenment period that Ralston-Saul analyses. Indeed, it was prominent women of the upper class who hosted all the dinner parties where the enlightenment intellectuals gathered. And they were simply perfect hostesses!

Bubble bubble toil and trouble

The prosecution of witches is seen by many feminists as marking a decisive ascendancy of patriarchy and the loss of female status in society. The great anti witch text of the time Maleus Maleficarum describes in minute detail the characteristics of the witch and the appropriate punishment, ranging from chastisement to boiling and cutting into bits. However witchcraft was not exclusively carried out by women and many witches were male. The famous Astronomer Giordano Bruno (1548-1600) was burnt at the stake.

The periodic attack on witches mostly represents the ascendancy of more centralised and repressive states which at the same time arguably adopted new improved standards for female natal care.[38] Women performing work as witches and midwives were often less competent in assisting with childbirth than doctors, and they were therefore specifically excluded from some of its activities, perhaps even persecuted. In contrast there were men who by the 16th century saw women as making serious inroads on their rights and freedoms.[39] Several men also observed ladies adopting dress traits that bear an uncanny resemblance to modern lesbian feminism:

"they're wearing of broade brimmed hats, pointed doublets, there hayre cutt short or shornn..."[40]

Would you believe for several Centuries....

Anna Freud defended her father Ziggy, against feminist opposition, even way back in the 1930s, when he developed his theories on female neurosis. She suggested that their attacks on him were largely misplaced, although she agreed with them that women have experienced:

"subjugation in which they have in fact been held for centuries...."[41]

Anna, it would really help if it was at least ten centuries to coincide with the Wicca theory! Unfortunately she did not provide us with details on where and how this subjugation emerged precisely. What if it was only five centuries? Such a claim would tend to put the beginning of oppression around the period of the circumnavigation of the earth and the discovery of the New World by Christopher Columbus. However Spain was at that time the most powerful and dynamic state on earth and it was co-ruled by a woman, Isabella (1474-1504). She inaugurated the Spanish Inquisition in 1483.

Perhaps the oppression of women became particularly distinct during the rule of Empress Ekaterina in Russia (1762-1796). According to one source:

"Posing as enlightened she ruled as a tyrant...her largesse to the nobility was at the expense of the peasantry who were reduced to abject slavery."[42]

How about only one and a half centuries....

Naomi Wolf in her inimitable style makes one of the most dumb-arsed claims of all about women's apparent 'subjugation'. Her attention focuses on the most insidious form of oppression: 'beauty'. According to Wolf the relentless objectification and denigration of women has been around:

"...for about 160 years."!![43]

Her version emphasises the idea that it was modern technological changes which facilitated oppression, with particular emphasis on mass production and the availability of the camera. The mass circulation of printed images of women is responsible for their downfall.

In contrast to Wolf's analysis, which puts us at between 1790 and 1830 for women's downfall, there are authors who indicate that formal discrimination against men became significant precisely at this time. Belfort Bax emphasises that in 1820 the British Parliament enacted a law whereby only women would no longer be subject to the corporal punishment of flogging.[44]

Pax Britannica even....

There are now few feminists who care to attach their cart to Marxist ideology but those that do necessarily see a connection between patriarchy and capitalism. According to Eva Figes:

"The rise of capitalism is the root cause of the modern social and economic discrimination against women which came to a peak in the last century."[45]

Occasionally feminists use Marxist arguments without understanding them, though in fairness neither do most Marxists themselves. By the above definition women lost their power with the advent of the steam locomotive in the 1790s and the introduction of the automated spinning machine.

The notion that capitalism is the basis for women's oppression is simply dubious. The opposite is more likely to be true. Capitalist states such as Britain and the US both had powerful feminist movements. Britain initially had the most affluent middle class in the world, composed at least half of women. The standard of living and life expectancy was rising under capitalism. This was not automatic, but in great part due to social agitation and reforms benefiting women. The US, one of the most successful capitalist states was one of the first to give women the right to vote in various states. By the period of World War I women's suffrage was becoming universal in the advanced capitalist states.

The socialist viewpoint has lost considerable favour since 'Marxist economic systems' lost their credibility with the 'failure' of the Soviet Union in 1989. In Russia women were ostensibly liberated by the communist revolution in 1917. Unfortunately, women came out of the kitchens only to stand in the bread queues. The obvious hardship for Soviet women, despite the revolution, simply betrays any utopian idealism in regard to sexual liberation. Socialists and communists in the west have been arguing ever since whether that revolution was betrayed or half-baked.

Many feminist-socialist-environmentalists, in their desire to remain in alliance with Marxist boyfriends, got all mixed up by the liturgical nonsense of left wing ideology. More recent feminists have wisely claimed that male power has an autonomous force, thus distancing themselves from the Stalinist neckbrace.

At least until the beginning of the twentieth century

Radio and television provide important accounts of female oppression which contribute to the overall perspective promoting the idea that women's history is a history of second class citizenship. The following is a typical statement heard on Australian radio, in regard to a woman who obtained a degree in 1909 at the male ated University of Sydney:

"Women didn't have many rights in those days"
(Australian Broadcasting Corporation RN 576 AM on 14.5.1997)

It does not enter the mind of the author of the statement that universities were then far more exclusive institutions than they are today, only available to an extremely rich 1% of the population. There were not many women at universities, but it should be noted that 99% of women and men did not go to university. Any woman who managed to get to university in those days could not possibly be seen as a second class citizen, or as having an insufficiency of rights.

It is worth adding that women now constitute nearly 60% of all university places in many western countries and what do feminists think of that? Well, according to the former President of the student representative council of Sydney University, Katrina Curry:

"The fact that there are more women here doesn't make it much better for women....or that women have gained anything."[46]

Well it really takes a lot to please you ladies...methinks you want it all.

A reappraisal of subjugation

The general conclusion that we are obligated to make, based on all these authors above, is that women have had it tough, and men have had it easy, at least since we collectively dropped out of the trees. There may have been a brief few years of a lightened burden for women at some time in this century but even this is subject to dispute.

But to be more serious, what these bizarre, inconsistent and largely unjustified claims highlight is that feminists simply seek to lodge oppression in some nebulous bygone age in order to build their model into current realms of social reality. Secondary to this they seek to paint every moment in human history as patriarchal or even heading in a patriarchal direction. On occasion some reference is made to obscure enclaves in some historic age where matriarchy reigned and women were held in respect. The aim is for women to be able to imagine at least some era where they did have power in order that they may reawaken (reclaim) this power. The aim is to suggest that women's scant powers, derived only through hard feminist struggle may be lost at any moment. This ideology creates an appropriate sense of urgency and paranoia which is very useful for promoting fanaticism and an evangelical female spirit.

However the conclusion must be that feminists cannot pinpoint consistently or accurately or logically the emergence of a patriarchal system and for this reason already their arguments are flawed. Aside from this their arguments for what constitutes specific repressions are most usually contentious or banal.

Wave theory on the rocks

So far an overview of the feminist perspective on history has been provided. This perspective has been debunked by revealing its inconsistency and banality. It is important to remember that the feminist perspective is hegemonic. In other words, it is the dominant perspective in society, with no alternative viewpoints available for public discussion.

It is now appropriate to continue with a reassessment of what may actually be gleaned about women's real powers and representation in the historical record, before making an assessment of the effect of the dominant ideology of sexual history on our future.

According to feminists it is men who control the making of history and therefore men attribute importance to their own actions and not to those of women. History is therefore literally "his story". In contrast to this smokescreen the following pages will reveal that women have been acknowledged as historical figures. They make history and they are recorded as such, although women's history is not always equal and identical to men. There is segregation in historical accounting. In certain areas of history women are powerful and dominant, especially regarding sexual custom. Women make history specifically as feminists, interpreting social events and repainting the colours on the historical record, especially in regard to sex.

The following account shows facets of both powerful female and feminist roles in history, from ancient times to the present day. The account suggests that there is no evidence for a systematic and relentless oppression or exclusion of women from history.

Woman makes her own History

According to feminists it is men who control the making of history and therefore men attribute importance to their own actions and not to those of women. History is therefore literally "his story". In contrast to this smokescreen the following pages will reveal that women have been acknowledged as historical figures. They make history and they are recorded as such, although women's history is not always equal and identical to men. There is a degree of segregation. In certain areas of history they are powerful and dominant, especially regarding sexual custom. However in addition women make history in another way: as feminists they construct the interpretation of events and repaint the colours on the historical record, especially in regard to sex. Their activities can be likened to that of the Soviet regime of the 1930s where certain discredited figures such as Trotsky were removed from photos to make them disappear.

The following account shows facets of both powerful female and feminist roles in history, from ancient times to the present day. The account also suggests that there is no evidence for a systematic and relentless oppression.

Secret women's business in prehistoric societies

Our knowledge of ancient ritual and social powers is highly curtailed by the lack of original accounts and documentation on this history and prehistory. So our scientific knowledge of sexual power in this long past social realm is also curtailed. However there is a possibility to gain some insight into this world by relying on alternative methods.

It is today considered completely unacceptable to describe aboriginal culture as backward or primitive. But the fact remains that in Australia Aboriginal culture has remained largely static for tens of thousands of years. In essence their culture is from the era that anthropologists describe as the stone age, and this is to make no insult to Aboriginal people. So by studying Aboriginal culture we can gain an insight into the sexual relations that may have prevailed for all human cultures in ancient times.

An incident that is of particular interest is related to the building of a bridge in South Australia, which gained notoriety as the Hindmarsh Bridge Affair, involving the Australian Minister of Aboriginal Affairs Robert Tickner.[49] A bridge linking the mainland to an island, subject to tourist development, was not built because of protests by aboriginal women. Of great importance to the credibility of their objections to its construction was an important document detailing 'secret women's business'.

It is of some interest that a 'patriarchal capitalist' society with a development agenda ground to a halt because of one document, which could not be viewed by men, including male ministers. The document which detailed women's ancient fertility rites and secrets could only be viewed by female ministers and bureaucrats.

Undoubtedly the whole event was to some extent an orchestrated stunt gaining national political notoriety. However many people took it very seriously and it reveals that women of ancient societies probably had a special power over their own men, which appears to be related specifically to the mysteries of fertility. As a study of Aboriginal culture expressed in 1913:

"...ignorance of the result of sexual intercourse is not a primitive condition but is acquired by superstition, originating in the Female mind and accepted by the Male."[50]

Women of ancient cultures are socially influential by the manipulation of men's incomprehension of women's complex physical functioning, mental processes, and their centrality to race survival. Such powers eventually evolved into witchcraft, and aspects of midwifery roles.

But it seems that this women's power also has an extraordinary influence over the contemporary Minister of Aboriginal Affairs who paid great deference to 'women's secret business.'[51]

If Astrology was the first science

For those feminists who ascribe a power to women only in antiquity, the subject of astrology inevitably appears as a subject. Invariably these women claim that the first scientists were women who made calculations about human life, based on their astrological observations.

There is no doubt that the study of the movement of Sun, Moon and stars was one of the great breakthroughs for humanity, in terms of understanding the periodicity of seasonal changes and the determination of optimal crop planting. Modern agriculture is utterly reliant on this work performed thousands of years ago. However, what is of some interest is that the natural science of astronomy was distorted from its beginning by the quasi-science of astrology. This activity has been used to befuddle the ignorant populace for centuries and allegedly even Kings....and Queens.

Astrology, an activity dominated by women, has used the movements and orientation of Sun, Moon and stars to make predictions about auspicious days for conducting war...or having an affair. It is effectively the women's science of manipulating gullibility. The ignorance of the general population about the predictive power of a quasi-science has helped to make them believe these spurious insights. Astrology allows a control over superstition and it is a realm that appears to have always been dominated by women both as clients and as agents. The Oracle of Delphi operating near Athens, is the most prominent ancient example of this art and the job was held by a female.

Undoubtedly the vast majority of soothsayers, card readers and astrologers today, and most of their clients, are still female. All women's magazines and many newspapers today include a significant section on star signs.

One can only conclude that women's power to manipulate public and private opinions and hopes goes back to the time when stars first appeared in the sky and women dreamed of meeting tall swarthy strangers.

Feminist history: all Greek to me

Feminist allege that since at least the Classical times of Ancient Greece women have had a poor second place in historical accounts and history depicts patriarchal power within a patriarchal system.[64] Yet a case study of any period you care to mention will reveal that this is not only wrong but blatantly so. Take for example Ancient Greek history. As another male pro-feminist historian, Robert Bell, is keen to admit:

"By and large...mythology has been the province of Gods and heroes, and women have been mentioned only in passing."[65]

A male or female novice will accept the statement as a true expert insight into patriarchal historical bias. Yet this same author in his book on Classical Mythology cites 430 pages of female heroes and Gods, many of them 'household names' today. Among them are: The Amazons, Andromeda, Antigone (daughter of Oedipus), Aphrodite (Goddess of love and beauty, her favourite lover was the God of War and her son Priapus had a permanent erection.), Arachne (she was good at spinning), Ariadne, Artemis, Athena (Goddess of "reason, intelligent activity, arts and literature." Often depicted in armour: 84.)

These are some figures under the A entry. But following this is a diversity of others including Calypso, Cassandra, Clytemnestra (murdered her husband), The Furies, Gaea (mother earth), Gorgons and Harpies, Hecate (goddess of witchery), Halcyone, Helen of Sparta (depicted in the Iliad and having many suitors), Hera (wife to Zeus), Medea, (lover to Jason of the Argonauts. She killed her children when he left her); Medusa (a violent gorgon), Nemesis (divine vengeance), Nike (Yes! That Nike, goddess of victory, a swift winged messenger. However she wore Reeboks.), nymphs, Pandora (Her box brought trouble to the world. She also shacked up with Epimetheus who was a male and naturally a fool). . . .

Most educated people have heard of the above names, which are more than 2000 years old. Having read the above and not being an expert on Greek mythology, I could easily make the claim that:

"By and large...mythology has been the province of Goddesses and heroines, and men have been mentioned only in passing."

It all just depends on what facts and figures you select, because at least one book indicates that there are just as many goddesses and heroines in Greek literature as male ones.[66] But it is surely some achievement of feminist brainwashing that even male historians cannot see the contradictory lies about history that feminism has brought about into mainstream perception.

An additional observation about the female mythological characters of ancient times is that they manifest a diversity of personalities, far wider than simply damned whores or God's police. Yet feminists want precisely to create such a history, in which women's portrayal is highly constrained. When they are not objecting that women are invisible in history, they object to the portrayals of women as powerful or tyrannical. Feminist historians vilify the male historians of ancient Greece for their portrayal of women as other than virtuous. The character Pandora is a 'classic' example, being seen as a typically sexist character devised by men. And a book on Graeco-Egyptian culture (written by a man) is disturbed by the implication that women could ever be in power over men:

"Whether free women had sexual relationships with male slaves is not easy to trace, at least in the documentary record. A stock character in Greek literature from Egypt is the cruel mistress who bribes or forces her male slaves to have sex with her, usually with catastrophic results for the slave."[67]

Surely just another male fantasy.

The fact is that feminists are hypocrites. They want to eliminate many positive female heroes which do not comply with their agenda. Powerful and tyrannical women are banned. But woman as 'earth mother' is also out and so is any nurturing image of women. They hate Florence Nightingale because she represents a 'limited' caring role model for females. Women have to be portrayed as victims of patriarchy or as successful in a male dominated world, without any negative implications to their moral superiority: talented, invisible and utterly virtuous, preferably asexual. Then feminists blame men for the stereotyped image they themselves have promoted.

Kings but not queens you say

This book is no account of female historical figures. However a brief reference is made here to a variety of historic female personalities which should give some indication of the diversity of females written into the 'patriarchal' history record. The point being made is simply that plenty of historic and heroic female figures exist from which young women or indeed men can gain role models. This fact goes against the relentless feminist argument that female figures do not exist, or are highly constrained or created solely in men's interests. Their existence proves that women are honoured or respected, even if their prominence is sometimes in small numbers or transitory.

From the very imagined dawn of civilisation to the present day men and women have in many respects been represented equally. We might well compare the story of Adam and Eve, with that of the equivalent fame today of the singers Madonna and Michael Jackson. In all eras men may have dominated in science or exploration but in the present day women's achievements at least in the arts will compensate for that.

For this exercise concentration will be focussed just on the 20th century. It is noteworthy that for each of the decades of the 20th century most people can probably nominate a fair to equal number of exceptional females in public life, compared to men. This includes a diversity of subject areas such as politics, science, sport, stage, literature, welfare work, anthropology and philosophy. The realm of cinema is a particularly poignant example too.

In the 1900s the prominent writer Beatrix Potter, created the famous character of Peter Rabbit. Marie Curie became famous for her work in science.[52] Mary Baker Eddy founded the Christian Science Church. The great philanthropic nurse Florence Nightingale died in 1910 aged 90.

And there were feminists too. Feminists such as Carrie Nation (1846-1911) were notorious for smashing up bars where men drank and by the 1920s they had succeeded in implementing the prohibition of the sale of alcohol in the US (1919-1934).

In the 1910s several prominent female political agitators emerged including Emma Goldman, Rosa Luxembourg and Alexandra Kollontai, the last becoming a member of the Russian Bolshevik government.

The dominance of feminist ideology at the beginning of the 20th century led one courageous and vilified male writer to suggest:

"...so far from women being oppressed, the very contrary is the case; that the existing law and its administration is in no essential respect whatever unfavourable to women, but, on the contrary, is as a whole, grossly unfair to men..."
E. Belfort Bax, The Fraud of Feminism, (Grant Richards, London, 1913)

Marie Stopes became famous for her advocacy of greater control of women's fertility. Stopes published several books on the subject of sex including Married Love (1918) an international best-seller.

"Stopes was also a distinguished palaeontologist, botanist and zoologist." Muriel Box, Trials of Marie Stopes, (Femina Books, London, 1967): 13.

Stopes outraged polite society by the suggestion in her several books and public commentary that sexual relations between men and women could beenjoyable. Such attitudes could surely not be entertained today.

Stopes set a precedent for the importance of women in the sexual expertise field.

Pearl Buck won Nobel Prize for literature for her novel The Good Earth, in 1930. Margaret Mitchell then wrote one of the most famous ever novelsGone with the Wind which became a movie in 1936.

Amelia Earhart was made famous simply for being the first woman to fly across the Atlantic in 1932. Who was the first man to fly across? Nobody cares!

In the film industry female characters of the 1930s are some of the most memorable, including Mae West, Marlene Dietrich and Louise Brooks. Even in cartoons there are figures such as Betty Boop or Olive Oil that represent significant characters.

Dorothea Lange was the most famous photographer to depict the hardships of the American depression, with several of her pictures capturing the bleak life of the internal migrants.

In the 1940s Margaret Mead the anthropologist increased her fame for her studies on sexuality and ethnic sexual practices:

"Perhaps no citizen in modern times has testified on so many different topics before different congressional committees."[53]

World War II bombers and even submarines were sometimes seen with decals of prominent female Hollywood identities on their side. These women were considered good luck charms and their depiction was designed to give courage to the men. These females had the status of minor deities.

The horrors of the Second World War also brought a young woman Anne Frank to literary prominence, and she has undoubtedly been read and revered by many men too. Leni Riefenstahl was possibly the world's most notorious filmmaker for her support of Nazi propaganda. Yet she created the contemporary visual style of the Olympic games.

In the 1950s Ayn Rand came to prominence as a philosopher as did Simone de Bouvoir. Lucille Ball starred as a personal secretary in I Love Lucy, Mrs Marple played an English matronly sleuth, the equal of Sherlock Holmes.

The Jazz music age brought famous female singers such as Aretha Franklin, Ela Fitzgerald and Eartha Kitt. In black music the Motown organisation seems to have spawned as many girl groups as male.

In the 1960s the model Twiggy became famous and brought in the era of the slim modern model. Jane Fonda who starred in Barbarella was an icon of dynamic womanhood, while Marilyn Monroe remains a 'pin-up' girl for men to this day.

The 1970s saw much social upheaval in the West and women did their fair share of agitating. Some of the most notorious terrorists in Germany, America and Japan were women including Ulrike Meinhoff of the Baader Meinhoff gang, Patty Hurst and members of the Red Brigade.

In the 1970s Queen Elizabeth II began to reach the peak of her fame. She was, as feminists forget, part of a line of matriarchs ruling the British Empire. This had included Mary, 1553-1558; Elizabeth I, 1558-1603; and Queen Victoria from 1837-1901.

Other famous women of the 1970s include Jackie Onassis (heiress, socialite). Indira Gandhi was Prime Minister of India from 1966 to 1977 and was voted the most admired person in the world in a 1971 US Gallup poll. Golda Meir was Prime Minister of Israel from 1969 to 1974. She had also been an important participant in the creation of the Jewish state.

The 1980s saw the emergence of two fundamentally important political figures, Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, with the female being more hated but also more respected. Nancy Reagan, was in any case almost as famous as Ronnie. (Who remembers Dennis Thatcher?) A diversity of other female political figures also came to prominence such as Pakistan's Benazzir Bhutto. One should wonder how women come to power in such 'patriarchal' countries.

Feminists love to hate Kate Moss because she is slim, glamorous and has a personality...well...ok that last point is debatable.

The 1990s is the era of the supermodels such as Elle Macpherson, Kate Moss and Cyndy Crawford. As one of them said, "I don't get out of bed for less than $30,000." There is not a single male equivalent to the female supermodels and no male model earns such astronomical sums. Ooooh we're so oppressed!

But the most famous figure of the decade must be Princess Di, whose image has graced the pages of newsmagazines as well as trash weeklies, more than any other human in history. She is the modern equivalent of Helen of Sparta despite having been a faghag and gym bunny.

Mother Theresa, the great benefactor of the poor, was almost equally revered. In politics Hillary Rodham Clinton stands alongside the world's most powerful man, and she wasn't even elected. The world's most important political dissident is Ang san Suu Chi imprisoned in Burma. An almost equally famous but less glamorous dissident politician is Winnie Mandela. Being implicated in the political murder of a young boy, suggests that women are capable of Machiavellian political actions.

In recent years the television and entertainment industry has produced a spate of female heroes and role models. This includes lesbian figures such as KD Lang (music) or Ellen Degeneres (television).

The Spice Girls are one of the most popular music acts in the world. In the realm of the computer game the female action hero Lara Croft is venerated by a legion of fans.

Lara Croft is the software computer game heroine who has broken a thousand men's hearts. Contrary to feminist ideology, men seem to love women who are strong and carry bazookas.

In Australian culture in recent years women have stood out as the most prominent dissident and dramatic figures. Helen Demidenko the author of a prize winning novel, was vilified for months in the Australian press for her controversial views and mysterious persona. Helen Garner, the author of a heretical feminist text, The First Stone, became equally famous. In politics Pauline Hanson was the most potent figure in 1996 and 1997, being loved and hated more than any Australian politician for her views on Aborigines and Asian migrants. In New South Wales Franka Arena, the state parliamentarian exposed paedophile rings in high places and became the most hated member of parliament among those defending the accused. While these figures may be of transitory historical importance they stand out in recent memory as making contemporary history and being in no way hampered by their sexuality. Indeed their sexuality may be an intrinsic part of the opportunity and bravado.

It is true that the above account can be misleading. In almost every field of historic human endeavour there are women that stand with equal fame to men. However the vast majority of lesser characters are inevitably men. There are therefore in anthropology or flying or politics many hundreds of well known or obscure males, for every prominent female. However the point being made is that women have been honoured for their achievements. A small number have made it in the 'patriarchal' system, because they chose to struggle for those elusive special achievements that bring fame and recognition.

History in the Faking

Feminism is the dominant paradigm of sex today and feminists have very large resources to perpetuate their ideologies. They also have a pervasive moral support from servile males in the ruling class who prostrate themselves to comply with feminist agendas and ideologies. That is why a feminist perspective always gains a favourable hearing in media outlets and in the corridors of learning. For this reason we are today subject to a barrage of feminist viewpoints on history. Yet at the same time feminists promote the idea of women being under-represented, invisible and unacknowledged. This propaganda helps to facilitate the ongoing hegemony of feminist ideas by suggesting that the expression of their perspective is merely redressing an oppressive imbalance. The imbalance is always present and so the feminist perspective must always be there too. It is in this context that we should review the contemporary history of the writing and recording of male and female achievements, experiences and sexual relations.

Feminists have created an extraordinary industry in the production of their version of history. There is no equivalent male version that has such a dedication to problematising the previous versions of history by suggesting a lack of a male perspective. Over the last decades, it has been feminists who have made the primary contribution to the writing of sexual history in general, and indeed with influence on the interpretation of all historical events. Feminist accounts in books, magazines and on television now represent a hegemonic perspective which means that we are taught the feminist claim that all human history is the history of female 'class' struggle against male dominance.

At university level no classroom or lecture series on history, politics, philosophy, sociology or economics is complete without the feminist 'big lie' being included. Subjects taught at Sydney University in 1998 for example included: