On Feminism (Because it’s a Controversial Subject and I like to Make People Mad)
To reveal some of my inner feelings, I’m a little nervous about posting this. But then I thought, “Eh, why not? Hate mail is funny.” Anyway, recently I’ve had some conversations about feminism, so here are some of my thoughts about the movement in the United States of ‘Merica:
First, women already have equal rights underneath U.S. constitutional law. There is no language in our constitution that specifically refers to men only, or women only, but always to “We the people.” What is referred to as “rights” in feminist campaigns (as well as many of the LGBTQRTSFAFAACLAGWWAFDXZZXX campaigns—are there any letters I missed?) is usually cultural change rather than rights. Women already have the same rights as men, by law. Rights and cultural change should not be confused, but unfortunately most do just that. So, to be understood, a speaker must use the word “rights” unless they make a tedious aside for clarification. For feminists to desire cultural change is fine with me, but I’d rather they call it what it is.
Unfortunately, cultural roles will always differ for men and women, because women bear children, and men do not.
Which leads us to another problem. Since cultural roles will always be different for the two sexes, the word equal and all its various forms become mislabels. Why? Because of the inherent definitions of different and equal respectively. One means not the same and the other really does mean the same. They’re plainly opposites. But… there is a word out there that fits the bill precisely. You might say it’s equivalent to the word equal, because it essentially means the same but different. Can you spot it? (Hint#1: I just used it. Hint#2: It’s equal to equivalent. Yes. Definitely equal to equivalent. Hint#3: It’s in the previous sentence, after “equal to” and before the final punctuation mark.)
Thus, if you substitute what feminists are actually clamoring for in place of their mislabels, they’re really clamoring for “equivalent cultural roles” and not the badly used “equal rights.” These more precise terms put things into a new light.
…We already have women in respected, high-ranking, powerful positions in almost every aspect of society. We have female CEOs, government officials, doctors, researchers, blah blah blah, everywhere blah. We even have stay-at-home dads. The military is really the only thing left separate (to an extent) and that’s because males are biologically stronger and faster than females and therefore make better soldiers. This makes exceptional good sense as strength and speed are highly valued traits in the military.
So what do feminists really want?
The answer isn’t about rights at all, clearly, because nothing prevents them from enjoying their freedom in the same way men do, barring male prejudice (prejudiced males who also have power, that is). And besides, if you were to lump together all the males who think women are inferior (instead of just different) and then add all the females who agree with that sentiment, you would probably have a pretty lopsided equation in favor of women’s “empowerment” when comparing them against all the men and women who think females are quite as great as males,
So what do feminists really want?
They’ve seemingly gotten everything they could ever get in America. Women are being successful left and right, they’re judges and senators and secretaries of state and leaders, and it’s only a matter of time for a woman to be the leader of the U.S. as well.
So, what do feminists really want?
Well? What do you want?
WOMAN! What do you WANT!?
I don’t claim to know the answer to that question. In fact, I think that if I did, I would know what women in general want, in which case I wouldn’t be talking about this stupid subject of feminism at all. Instead I would be making millions of dollars telling every other man the answer to that question so they could all go make their girlfriends and wives happy and get laid, which is certainly what most men want. Heck, I’m not sure even feminists and women know the entire answer to that question. But I do think I know part of it, and partly what feminists want (and what women want) is for men to do what they (women) say. And don’t tell me, if you’re a woman, that you don’t like it when your boyfriend or husband does what you tell them to do. You do like it. But that’s not equal rights. That’s a dictatorial, matriarchal society.
Which I’d be fine with, actually, if I didn’t have to do what anybody says, man or woman. Call me an anarchist.
In other words, men and women are different. Fundamentally different, anatomically, psychologically, biologically, all the way down to the XX and the XY. They’re so different from men that we can and do lump them apart. We can’t lump them together because that doesn’t work, and breaking females and males up further into even smaller pieces doesn’t help because everything in the entire universe can be broken into smaller pieces. Which pieces are all different even if they’re both Carbon atoms or both Fluorine atoms. A mere electron fundamentally changes an atom. Energy states fundamentally change atoms. And yes, those things matter when looking for very specific properties (like tax breaks). Men and women are two different coins altogether, matter and dark matter, and are not two sides of the same coin. Men are from Mars and women are from Venus or something like that.
EDIT: The line of thought in the previous paragraph may seem oddball to you, but it’s in response to the argument that since individuals are all genetically different, why call anyone equal? Either we’re all equal, or we’re all unequal, right? It’s everything or nothing. Great point to make, but foolish, because it debates against itself. If we’re all equal, say goodbye to human reproduction and hello to the extinction of our race. If we’re all unequal… well, that just describes the current state of affairs, and makes the opposite point stronger, not to mention being a terrible ideology that practically invites a caste system for society. There’s such a major difference between male and female anatomy, biology, and psychology, that no one disputes their disparity. Modern medicine is beginning to wake up to this fact in such a way that many treatments have become gender specific. Why? Because many diseases are already gender specific, partly because bacteria are way ahead of the human race, partly because body structure and function are vastly different between males and females. Not only this, but academic research in almost every field (especially psychology) is regularly dismissed for women or for men if the study only targets one group or the other. And when they target both sexes, there is usually some significant distinction in outcomes even if it’s small. In other words, impartial science confirms the two groups are different. Hugely different. So different that combining men with women can result in terrible consequences. Now compare this to the obverse, in which unique men are lumped with other unique men but kept separate from all the unique women—much less bad happens in that scenario.
So men and women can’t be treated equally, partly because of inherent differences, but mostly because they don’t actually want to be treated equally (meaning the same). But they sure wouldn’t mind being treated in an equivalent manner (meaning the same but different). You see? There’s the golden rule and there’s the platinum rule. If you know what those rules are, guess which one people prefer?
And since women are people, that’s exactly what women prefer.
(Note: I’d jut like to remind you that I’m speaking of the feminist movement in the United States only.)
Of course, there are those who read this and will perhaps immediately think I don’t understand feminism or that I’m taking a radical feminist viewpoint and unfairly generalizing it, or that I don’t understand what it’s like to be a woman because I’m a man. Well, duh… of course I’m not a woman.
But I have watched the following video (which does contain some cursing and female nudity, so beware):
Even if I was or wasn’t a woman, the particular argument that I don’t understand what it’s like to be a woman is worthless (and I can very much say I’ve never been a woman). For one thing, the reverse is true: women have never been men. It’s a two-way street, and it’s not like one side of it is hidden by a forty-foot wall. I can look down your side even if I’m going the opposite direction. I do know exactly what it’s like to be afraid on the streets, and to be assaulted for no reason except, as far as I can tell, because I was walking barefoot (as opposed to walking female). This fear, treatment, lack of respect, blah blah blah, is not solely universal to women. It’s universal to the civilized and the good people of every country, who wouldn’t dream of mugging someone or raping them, but who certainly notice those strange men looking at them when they’re alone. My answer is, buy some pepper spray, buy a knife, a handgun, hire a bodyguard, take a course in self-defense, walk in groups, get a best boy friend, blah blah blah tanks and helicopters blah, because it will never go away until crime itself is eliminated. Bad people are going to do bad things.
As for over-generalizing feminism, I agree that originally the feminist movement made some good changes in the U.S., and that some feminists are not trying to take total control over society. But… feminism certainly has a bad reputation currently, and radical feminists certainly are vocal. So to all you women out there who are the good kind of feminist, maybe it’s time to start calling yourself a humanitarian rather than be identified with a radical group.
Sure, if you’re a woman you probably sympathize with females more than males when it comes to humanitarian efforts, and I probably sympathize more with the many males who are also being mistreated, abused, killed for their views, or being forced into war and sex trafficking. These leanings are natural for us because we identify more readily with groups who are similar to ourselves. It’s a mistake, however, to classify our humanity as feminist or masculinist since those terms serve only to alienate other humanitarians who have poor views of the movements (because of the radical members, as some would say).
And please do not tell me I don’t understand feminism. I understand it just fine. Women want respect and protection and opportunity in a similar way that men have it. And that’s good. Except that respect is earned, opportunity is earned, and protection is given to those who protect themselves and who protect others. We can’t just give those things to you because that’s not how it works. There is nothing stopping a strong, intelligent woman from reaching and achieving all of those things. But if you’re weak and afraid, man or woman, then you’re not going to receive those things even if they’re offered to you on a silver platter.
Instead, it will just be a forced feeding.
Have any thoughts on feminism? Don’t want to get into the discussion? (Me neither, but too late.) What did you think of the comics? I’d love to hear your opinions, so leave your thoughts and comments below or by clicking HERE.
- Share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
- Click to email (Opens in new window)
- Click to print (Opens in new window)
This entry was posted on March 1, 2014 by The Janitor. It was filed under Life, Satire and was tagged with author, childlike, Childlike Author, Cultural Change, Cultural Roles, Equal Rights, Equality, Equivalency, Equivalent, Feminism, Feminism in America, Feminist, Humanitarian.