Monstrous, Fatal Feminism: A Review of The Gunn Brothers’ Film, The Monstrous Regiment of Women

One of our favorite documentaries is still being talked about:

“The feminist movement has, by and large, been a distinctively socialist and collectivist attach on traditional values and on Christian belief. Historian and novelist Becky Akers reviews a hard-hitting documentary that unmasks the real face of feminism.”

“Indeed, the Almighty inflicts female governors on a nation as a special curse: Isaiah’s third chapter lists the punishments He will visit on Judah in particular and sinful countries in general; Verse 12 mentions that “women rule over them.” Or, as another of the Gunns’ interviewees, Jennie Chancey of Ladies Against Feminism, paraphrases it (and I’m paraphrasing her), ‘You have messed up so badly I’m allowing women to rule you.’ Deliciously, the Gunns flash pictures of America’s female politicians across the screen as Mrs. Chancey talks.”

Read the rest of Becky’s review here.

If you haven’t purchased a copy already, get “The Monstrous Regiment of Women” by clicking here.

13 thoughts on “Monstrous, Fatal Feminism: A Review of The Gunn Brothers’ Film, The Monstrous Regiment of Women

  1. Of all the vital parts of the documentary you could have quoted, you chose one of the few bogus ones. “Inflict female governors”? My foot. We’ve had NUMEROUS excellent female leaders, including Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and Queen Elizabeth 2, who some of the most macho men I’ve seen have praised her as their queen. That passage in the Bible involved God addressing a time and place where women rulers were NOT common, and spoke of both children and women ruling. The people being described were clearly bossy wives and unruly children running the husbands and fathers; it was not describing female governors or queens anymore than child-governors! It amazes me how this has been twisted. And when looking at the work that true female leaders have done, God is letting “women rule them” because they messed up? Well, what a blessing!


    1. Jenn, I don’t think anyone is denying that there have been godly queens in history–there have been (Esther certainly comes to mind, for starters). But the point is that God has established a pattern of male leadership that is meant to be complemented by feminine influence and administrative ability (look at that incredible Proverbs 31 woman, who has real, authentic authority in her sphere–not just token authority). When women rise up and insist on taking the reins, it usually points to the effeminacy of the men of the times (see The Feminization of American Culture by Ann Douglas). In this documentary, which was inspired by John Knox’s bold stand against Mary, Queen of Scots, the interviewers are particularly highlighting the problems when women usurp authority and use it for evil (in that case, to murder Protestants and attempt to stamp out non-Catholics). Some of the best queens have ruled alongside strong kings and have complemented their rule instead of usurping it (Queen Victoria’s main grief was that her husband, Prince Albert, was never named king. The story of their marriage and her growing trust in Albert’s leadership and ability is inspiring.)


  2. This has Carolyn Graglia in it? She suggests that female genital mutilation is just a slightly too “draconian” way to achieve the worthy goal of curbing female sexual assertiveness and affirming male mastery in sex and that it’s the mother’s fault that a father sexually abuses his daughter because he’s not getting enough sex? Apparently sex is all about power, control and self gratification. If this is who you support than just come out and say it, so I know never to visit here again.

    I grow tired of this constant feminist bashing. Concentrate on raising up Godly men, who love and serve their families and we will no longer have a problem with feminists. If men did this in the first place the weaker sex wouldn’t have rebelled against their authority in such large numbers.

    Look at our politicians. The men are an embarrassment yet you keep harping on Hillary Clinton. Let’s raise some boys who grow up to be a politician with a servant’s heart and we won’t have to bother with the hillary clintons.

    Blaming abortion all on feminists is down right laughable. Who are the abortionists? Men. Who are the pro death politicians? Men. Who strong arms women into getting abortions? Men. Who gets these women pregnant and then abondons them? Men. You see them outside the abortion clinics. Over half The National Abortion Federation Board of Directors are men. pro-abortion politicians would be unseated, since the majority of pro-choice voters are white, middle-class males. polls taken by groups on both sides of the issue show that women consistently oppose abortion at a higher rate than men. They are more likely than men to call it “murder.” They are more likely to say that it is wrong. They are more opposed to government funding. Whose the majority praying outside the abortion clinics? Women!- taken from

    You have male doctors promoting contraception because that’s how they keep the money coming in. Shame on them. They don’t care about women’s health. Where are the male doctors who will come out and say that contraception destroys women’s bodies? Male doctors destroyed the breastfeeding culture so they could profit from drug companies. Never mind the health benefits for women when they breastfeed. Where are the male doctors that look at women’s health issues? It took a female Bernadine Healy to get doctors to study woman’s risk for heart disease and how their symptoms are different than men’s. If it weren’t for Dr. Healey how many more women would lose their young lives from taking HRT? Just now they came out with different knee replacements for women. They were using the same knees for men and women, obviously women’s bodies are different! It’s 2013 and we are just now getting to this?

    Women in combat? It’s a very very small group of women who want to be in combat, but because of cowardly men who selfishly hang on to their careers instead of speaking out against it women will fight. Women who don’t want to be in combat because they know it’s no place for them will be forced to combat duty because of a few small voices.

    If we want to change our culture then we need to focus on raising Holy men and stop hating on feminists. Teach them that women and men are equal in worth and dignity in God’s eyes. Raise men who love their wives and take care of them. Men who see sex as not a right of self gratification but as a giving of oneself. Men who see their wives as more than a housekeeper or nanny. Men who care about women’s health instead of exploiting women for money. I’m sick of the hatred for feminists. This is not how we are going to reach people. It’s reactive and we need to be proactive. If men want to lead, then they need to be a leader people will love and respect because they know their leader has their best interests at heart. Their leader can be trusted to make good decisions for the family.


    1. mrsbartley, I’ve never heard Mrs. Graglia defend FGM and would be truly shocked if she did so. It’s cruel and utterly barbaric and steeped in pagan practices (we live in East Africa, where dozens of religious and secular organizations are fighting FGM). As for the rest of your comments, men are also feminists! We’re not bashing women on this site at all. We are standing against the philosophies and practices that pit women against men in a neverending and senseless gender war. Men embrace those philosophies, too. And we’re completely in favor of raising godly men as well as godly women. Check out the “Responsible Manhood” section. Hope this helps clarify things.


  3. Mrs. Chancey: I agree that God’s plan for marriage and society in general shows us women in a complementary role, where strong men are leading. However, God does sometimes call women to lead , in situations where men can not or do not follow his call (so, for example, Harriet Tubman became a main liberator of slaves from the inside, to give one example). We can make a distinction between religious and formal leadership, on the one hand, and moral or societal leadership.

    One side note: the example of Mary Queen of Scots should always be paired with Queen Elizabeth I, who used her authority for evil as well, who murdered many, many Catholics who wanted to follow their consciences. She used not only the stake but was liberal was the barbarism of drawing and quartering. Edmund Campion, to name one out of hundreds, died horribly for the crime of ministering to his suffering people, many of whom later died at Elizabeth’s behest (including women and children).


  4. Mrs. Bartley is correct, Graglia used FGM as an example of what happens when men are not in control, like a scare tactic. I’ve heard far too many reveal her words thus.

    Sybil, I’ve never heard of Elizabeth persecuting Catholics for being Catholics, as she said herself in her speech about not caring to make windows into men’s souls. Her sister was nicknamed Bloody, while her reign was called the Golden Age; clearly there’s a shocking difference between the two.


  5. mrsbartley, whereas I have not read Caroline Graglia’s book myself, I have read a direct quote from it about the FGM issue from an amazon reviewer. I wish I could point to the review but the reviewer has since removed their post.

    Words have been put into Caroline Graglia’s mouth concerning the FGM issue. Graglia mentions FGM to refute a (then) common feminist belief that female sexual pleasure had up to that point been unfairly hindered by men by the repression of the clitoris. Graglia had two arguments against this claim:
    1. The positioning of the clitoris makes it impossible to repress it during sexual activity
    2.There were studies that indicated that even African women who had had their clitoris mutilated had experiences of pleasure during intercourse (i.e. the clitoris was not the only source of sexual pleasure)

    She does not refer to FGM “slightly draconian”. The mere use of the word “draconian” attests to what she believes about FGM. Whereas she does mention that one of the reasons it was practiced was to curb female promiscuity, she doesn’t give any impression of approval of it.


  6. Dlight, the very fact that she WOULD want to refute the very accurate claim of those feminists about men harming women’s ability to have pleasure by FGM shows her roof is missing several nails. Who even has such things occur to them? “Naw, men were NOT trying to hinder women’s sexual pleasure, nor were they responsible for doing so by mutilating their genitals..” What defense is there for such harmful, demonic dismissal?

    What motive could there POSSIBLY be for defending these men, fighting to remove any accusation of repression or brutality on their part? Who on earth would want to do this for any reason? If there was even the slightest absence of evil, sadistic motive on their part, who CARES?

    “The positioning of the clitoris makes it impossible to repress it during sexual activity”

    Unless, of course, it’s GONE now. We’re talking about brutally chopping it off, not taping it back. When you have a part of you, a private part, a mucus membrane loaded with nerves in its tissue, cut off, you’re in way too much pain to even urinate without acidic, blinding agony. Did you know many of these wounds were sewn up improperly so that a small hole was left, making even proper intercourse impossible?

    I’ve read direct quotes as well from her book, from several Amazon reviews. If you’ve read these quotes and even slightly defend her position of brutally ludicrous logic, you’ve got no ground with me whatsoever.


    1. Jenn, if you read Graglia in context, you see that she is not giving FGM a free pass–she’s simply stating that our simplistic beliefs of why it is practiced are misguided. I live in a country where FGM is considered a normal and “healthy” practice by many tribes. And guess who practices it? WOMEN. Grandmothers and mothers and aunts are the ones holding down screaming little girls and cutting their privates up. No men pressure them to do this. These women sincerely believe that FGM is necessary for “health” and “chastity,” and it is very, very hard to talk them out of this. They are often driven by pagan beliefs that are deeply entrenched in their tribal culture.

      How a woman who has suffered FGM can turn around and do it to a little girl is beyond my comprehension, but it happens all the time. Read Tears of the Desert by Halima Bashir. Her account is harrowing–all the more so because she acknowledges that her father (who loved her dearly and considered her the apple of his eye) did nothing to stop her mother and grandmother from “cutting” her. He wept, but he turned his back and walked away. Bashir shows that the practice is always carried out by women and that it is the women we need to reach with the anti-FGM message.


  7. I’m aware that women have done this and continue to do this, very sick women. This doesn’t change the fact that it was begun by men, for the reasons you mentioned: chastity. Graglia herself says this, and points out the male need to feel in control-as though it’s natural.


    1. Well, in pagan cultures, it is absolutely “natural,” because it’s related directly to man’s sin nature, which is to dominate others in a sinful manner (including women). The remedy is Christianity, which frees women from brutality and cultic practices by raising their status and making protection of their bodies a must-do for men (not an optional nicety). I sincerely believe that’s all Graglia is saying — that, to those tribes that practice FGM, it’s “natural.” That doesn’t make it right; it just makes it all the more urgent for Christians to communicate the complete message of the gospel and attempt to break through these horrific cultural traditions.


  8. Yes, it is right for pagans, but that was only one point in the book she seemed to use to illustrate what happens when men are not in control.


  9. 1 Chronicles 7:24 states that a woman named Sheerah built the cities of upper and lower Beth-horon, and the city of Uzzen-sheerah. And in Acts 8, the Ethiopian eunuch is an important official in charge of all the treasury of the Kandake, or queen of the Ethiopians.

    If there was something unseemly about women working outside the home in a predominantly male profession, surely the scriptures would have condemned Sheerah. And if it were wrong for women to be supervisors over men in the workplace, much less for women to be heads of state, surely Philip would have counseled the eunuch to change his job.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s