OK, so, I have been seeing a lot of stuff lately in regards to Gender Feminism and what it is trying to accomplish, and it's truly reaching a point where I am realizing the primary goal of Gender Feminism today isn't about empowerment of women or even equality for women as they claim. It seems to have the intent of take women as a whole(even if it means kicking and screaming) to some idea of a mythological Utopian world where women are being treated as little more than children. Children who seem to need to be cared for and coddled instead of being treated like the adults they are supposed to be. Of the myriad examples of this we can look to college campuses and other Feminist influenced institutions to see this trend isn't just rhetoric. With creations of "safe rooms" designed to prevent people from hearing dissenting voice and protecting their "feelings" over critical thinking and logical analysis.
One big example of this however, is the new Badass Feminist Coloring book that was created using kickstarter. This coloring book for Gender Feminists was created by Ijeoma Oluo, a Seattle based illustrator. Below you will find some of the images that come from this book, as well as the quotes that are made by Gender Feminists. You'll also notice these images are what the illustrators ideas of what a "Feminist" is or looks like. Anyway, let's have a look at some of these images shall we?
I don't know if you can read the text in the image, but it reads: "The beauty that is my ass sees and honors the beauty that is your ass." - Kimya Dawson
Now, the stupidity of that quote aside, it reminded me of something I saw in a video on Youtube by Paul Watson. In a video called "How to spot a Feminist" he explained that he had made the remark: "#Howtospotafeminist Usually fat & Ugly, always inherently unlikeable, supremely hypocritical, snarky, annoying, deluded, transigent" Now, aside from the fact I think he meant intransigent and not transigent at the end of his post(Transigent means willing to compromise or change ones views, and intransigent means someone who isn't), he also got the most flack in the comment section for calling (Gender)Feminists fat & ugly. Incidentally, you can find that video here: How to Spot a Feminist
The reason I bring this up though, is because it seems to me that the ideal of what a Feminist looks like even from other Feminists meet most of the criteria that Paul Watson claims of how to spot a Feminist. In the above image you can see the illustrator chose a fat & ugly representation for that image of a woman showing her ass. Now, I know, this is but one image, but there are more to come and they all seem to meet this visual standard of what a Feminist is according to feminists themselves. Now, I will admit, there are a few images I have seen of Gender Feminists in this coloring book this illustrator produce that aren't fat & ugly, but I cannot say that most of these do not meet these standards. As you'll see as we go through these, I'll explain why. Needless to say, this first image quite easily meets Watson's criteria, and not just because of the fat & ugly remark, but the snarkiness of remark as well. But before we get there, let me also point this out:
In this Bulimia.com article we see what Gender Feminists think are the "idealized" proportions athletic and obviously physically active women should look like, despite the realities that women who are as big as many of those portrayed in the "reverse photoshop" that was done(stupid saying as well, since the reverse of photoshop would be not photoshop, and these images of imaginary women are obvious a product of photoshop). If Gender Feminists don't like people saying your typical "feminist" is fat & ugly then perhaps they should stop pushing this as their view of the "idealized" woman?
Now, this is one of my biggest problems that I have with Gender Feminism. It's the delusional and often times irrational reasoning these people have. First off, it is more common for women to wear a dress than for men, that's a fact. Second, if you were new to this country and didn't speak the language very well and needed to use the restroom, how would you know which restroom to use if the images look exactly the same? The irrational and delusional way the Gender Feminist mind works is utterly astounding to me at times. And honestly, if this is a representation of the problems Gender Feminists think are of real importance, it's no wonder they seem to consider themselves(and by extension women in general according to their hypocritical beliefs) little more than children. But we'll get to that in a bit.
As can be seen in just these first two images however, they have done little do debunk the ugly or the fat criteria of what Paul Watson claims makes a (Gender)Feminist. You'll also notice that thus far, neither of these two images have quotes that really mean anything with regards to helping women, unless you count just useless whining and self aggrandizement as "helping" women. Which I suppose she could, but I fail to see how. Anyway, moving on.
Now, I admit, this one I actually didn't quite understand. How can anyone who has had a child, and claims to love that child, ever think killing such a precious gift as ones own offspring should ever be an option of convenience? I admit, I believe abortion is justified when the life of the mother or child to be are at risk. Sometimes medical needs come before preservation of life. But how can eliminating your own, still growing, offspring ever be considered an option out of convenience? And make no mistake, this is exactly what this quote is saying when it reads "consequence of circumstance" at the end of the quote. As though the much more sane and imminently more sensible choice to just not procreate at all wouldn't solve that problem at the very core of the issue to begin with. I mean, honestly, why is "I should be allowed to kill the yet to be born human life form within me" a much more preferred option for these people over just choosing not to have a sex and risk having a child in the first place? Then I came across this article: I aborted my baby because it was a boy
Now, before anyone gets their tales in a knot, assuming anyone ever reads this, let me state a few things. This story is likely fake, though it cannot be corroborated and positively identified as false it does ring rather fantastical and seems to be a anti-feminist extremists caricature of the Feminazi man hater. But this article wasn't what struck me as insane. After reading the article and doing further research into it, and finding others who also doubted the validity of the story such a Jezebel, Snopes.com, and others. What struck me as insane and possibly explains why this quote is so easily believable and acceptable as something a Gender Feminists would say or do, is this. In the comment sections of even articles that were claiming the above article to be a hoax there were Gender Feminist commenters who actually supported this idea, despite the story itself being most likely a hoax. Comment after comment I found even on sites that were supposedly debunking this story as being an anti-feminist hoax, these were still filled with apparently female commenters who were celebrating the idea of doing this, if not the actual deed itself, of aborting male babies before they are born. So it made me wonder, if there are women out there like the one who advocated for reducing the male population by 90%, perhaps this woman was still happy to have the choice to murder her unborn children because she might have had a male instead of female child. An extreme view to be sure, but one that seems to be catching on with many social media Gender Feminists like on tumblr and other such places.
You won't hear me defending anyone who rapes someone on campus, but this quote pissed me off primarily because of the wording used that tries to hide the actual agenda here. These Gender Feminists will use wording like this regularly, general wording such as "a person" or "another human being" when making these comments. But when they put them in practice the "person" who should be punished is always a male and the "human being" that was raped is always a female. This tells me two things: 1. Gender Feminists do not consider males to be victims of sexual violence by women. 2. They do not even consider males to be human beings.
This quote actually ignores something that is becoming quite common on college most American campuses as of late. Namely, false allegation of sexual assault and rape. All you have to do is look at the Hofstra case, or the UVA false rape allegations, or the Mattress Girl case at Columbia, to see the trend I am referring to. I am talking about the fact that these Gender Feminists do not consider false allegations to be a problem, and if one does happen and it ruins a male's life then as Catherine Comins put it "men who are unjustly accused can sometimes gain from the experience" as if loosely using rape accusations will make it easier to believe actual rape victims who come forward. And if you actually read Comins full comment you'll see she advocates false rape accusations as being a perfectly acceptable means for revenge.
The of course you have Clinical Psychologist Mary P. Koss of the University of Arizona in Tucson stating rather bluntly what all Gender Feminists think "It's the man's penis that is doing the raping, and ultimately he's responsible for where he puts it." But of course as the Cierra Ross case taught us back in 2013, this isn't always the case. And if a woman is too drunk to be able to consent to having a penis put in her, why is the man not too dunk to consent to where he puts? Why this double standard?
And then there are the lack of punishment for false rape accusers who actually recant their claims, even years later, or who are proven to have lied and still refuse to admit it like Mattress Girl, when they are exposed. In the Mattress Girl case for instance, not only did the girl go on to graduate despite her lies(if a rapist can be expelled for rape, why not a false accuser?), but a Senator named Kirsten Gillibrand had her as a guest for her State of the Union despite her obviously false claims of rape. Despite her refusal to admit it. Given the number of false rape allegations that are cropping up on campuses and the abuse and misuse of title IX by colleges too scared to do their fucking jobs, it's time we stopped playing with these people and start prosecuting them. Any allegation of rape should be turned over to the police, not handled by the colleges that fire(or expel to be accurate) first and seldom ask question later. As horrendous as rape is, and as much as I despise rapists, I still cannot condone the ruining of innocent people lives just to push an agenda.
In the end, it seems to me that Gender Feminists are about trying to hurt males. After all, why would you ignore forced to penetrate rape cases, lack of male consent cases, and keep excusing false rape allegations considering how damaging these things are to the males that experience them? I can answer that I think though. It's because Gender Feminism isn't about equality. It's about male hatred, misogyny that sees women as little more than children in need of coddling by society, and a push to declare female lives and experiences more important than that of males and demand women be given privileged positions in society.
No comments:
Post a Comment