During the January 26th edition of Generations Radio, Swanson admitted that turnout for women's marches around the world was "amazing". At the 11:34 mark, he wondered aloud why women marched on January 21st.
"Why the women's march? Why were women marching? Why not the blacks, why not the liberals, why not the socialists? Why is the issue centered around women, and why did the women show up over the weekend to address and represent the greatest divide in this nation's history since the Vietnam War era? Why women?"Swanson forgets that one can be African American and female. The Women's Marches were organized and attended by women of many racial and ethnic backgrounds, so yes, Kevin, "the blacks" were in attendance. Swanson could use a crash course in intersectionality!
At the 15:19 mark, Swanson wondered why men did not take part in the marches, despite ample evidence that men attended the marches in droves.
"The reason men aren't there is probably because men are too busy playing computer games, unfortunately ... while Rome burns. Men are disengaged, more or less. Men are not as concerned as women are because men are disengaged and they just don't care."News flash, Kevin: plenty of men do care about the state of the world. Plenty of men are engaged in activism. Believe it or not, some men do respect women, unlike you and your ilk.
Swanson described some of the signs at the Women's March on Washington, such as a sign that read, 'Gender justice is racial justice is economic justice". Cynically, he claimed that racial justice was included in the march "so they'll increase their numbers somewhat". The idea that women's issues and race issues can intersect escaped him.
At the 16:06 mark, Swanson claimed that the Women's March was rooted in a Marxist ideology that seeks to destroy the family unit so that women can enjoy "freedom from marriage and freedom from family". Apparently, he failed to consider that women might have legitimate grievances about everything from President Trump's misogyny to reproductive rights to violence against women to poverty.
"I think the key issues are gender justice, economic justice, which means what? Which means that socialism and egalitarianism -- that is, the freedom from marriage and freedom from family -- is interconnected and has been since Karl Marx wrote The Communist Manifesto. The Communist Manifeso insists upon a gender egalitarianism of sorts, but also an economic egalitarianism, so these things have been interconnected since the 19th century. So ideologically, this is a no-brainer. Of course, of course, of course the largest socialist voting block in America [is] single women ... You absolutely must have the dissolution of the family in order to bring about the socialist revolutions of the day."Swanson accused Marxist "gender justice" and "economic justice" activists of striving to destroy the family, redistribute wealth, and cement women's loyalty to the state rather than "stinking husbands and stinking fathers". Swanson seemingly could not imagine women as anything but dependent, so if they are no longer dependent on husbands and fathers, they must be dependent on the state.
"Security must come from the state and not from the family. It's essential, oh so essential, to the social revolution of the day ... Gender justice, economic justice absolutely are connected, and they're fighting for their lives. If they've destroyed the family, if they've destroyed marriage, if there's no longer security found in the family, they absolutely must have it by "economic justice" and the redistribution of the wealth and the social [benefits] and Obamacare, the redistribution of wealth such that security comes from the state and not from the family, not from the stinking husbands and the stinking fathers."Swanson's facile caricature of "economic justice" ignores the economic struggles of many women, such as poverty, food insecurity, health care costs, the need for affordable childcare, and the struggle for affordable housing.
In his usual paranoid style, Swanson claimed that calls for reproductive rights were merely a means of destroying the family at the 20:22 mark. As usual, he ignored the importance of contraception and abortion to women's empowerment and health in favor of a feverish theory.
"The most core element of the liberal agenda, irreduceable essence of the modern rebellion against the old social order is the independent women must have their abortifacients and their government security. They must have their funding for contraceptives ... We have finally arrived at the core of the social revolution of the liberal agenda of the day, and this is it. This is the ultimate sacrament of the liberal left and without this, you have no liberalism ... You absolutely must dissolve the family ... Women must fight tooth and nail for government funding for their contraceptives. Of course, the dissolution of the family, the dissolution of the family economy is essential in this ... This is why 3.2 million women are going to show up after the inauguration of the president of the United States."Swanson and his co-host chuckled about a counter-demonstration with 3.2 attendees compared to the 3.2 million at the Women's March on Washington, and I couldn't tell if they were joking or being serious. They joked about signs that read, "I'm content to be at home", "I'm happy with what I have", "I'm taking dominion as a helpmeet for my husband", "I don't need no stinkin' Social Security", and "I call my husband Lord".
If you can't figure out why THAT demonstration had three attendees and the Women's Marches had millions, there's no hope for you, I thought. Their comments remind us that the Christian Patriarchy Movement has nothing material or spiritual to offer women, in that it consigns women to servitude, humiliation, and dependence on men.
Swanson resorted to paranoid theories about the Women's Marches because it was easier than stepping outside of his Christian Patriarchy bubble and learning about the real motivations behind the marches. He mocked feminist struggles because it was easier than respecting women as equals and educating himself on women's issues. Kevin Swanson, your sexism and intellectual laziness are showing.