The Flip-Side to Feminism

We all know that the radical feminists are out there and treat men as slime that ought to be subservient to women.  The most extreme talk about the genocide of men once women figure out how to breed without us.  It is absurd to see members of one half of the human species seething with hatred against the other half and I’ve spoken out to some degree against this in the past.  However, that’s really not what this piece is about.

It’s interesting that, in recent months, I’ve started seeing a backlash against not only radical feminism, but general feminism, in that some women are vocally speaking out for men’s rights.  While I will be the first to agree that feminists tend to entirely ignore men’s rights, I will say that I fundamentally disagree with both sides, we should not be concerned about equality for men or equality for women, but equality for all.

This is especially bad when I start seeing signs suggesting that some of these women are approaching what I would call radical masculinism, the view that men are just better than women, men always get screwed over by women, women are slime, etc.  I guess I could better understand it if it was men doing this, but women?  Well, there are men in the radical feminist movement who seem only too happy to whack off their own balls to fit in, I suppose it’s only natural that the reverse be true but I see it as a trend that we really shouldn’t be having.

See, I don’t think there should be feminism, I don’t think there should be masculinism.  I don’t think there should be black pride or brown pride or white pride.  I don’t think people ought to be proud of being gay or proud of being straight.  It seems absolutely ridiculous to be proud of something over which you had no direct control or influence.  It’s about as absurd as claiming blue-eyed pride over  green-eyed pride, or brown-hair pride over blond-hair pride.  People shouldn’t be concerned about the equality of the black man or the brown woman, it shouldn’t matter if you’re white or red or yellow, to use classic terminology often considered racist.  Racism shouldn’t be a part of the human vernacular.

To be honest, in this day and age, it’s a bit absurd to see that it’s mostly the liberals who are racist, sexist, orientist, etc.  Aren’t we supposed to be going for a gender-blind world?  A color-blind world?  A sexual-orientation-blind world?  Yet if you look at the people making the biggest fuss about all of them, it’s the liberals.  Blacks are over-represented in the ghettos, it must be racism!  They don’t stop to consider the demonstrable fact that the ghetto sub-culture is precisely what puts them there and keeps them there.  Women aren’t paid as much as men are, it’s sexism!  Except that, given equal education, equal skills, equal time on the job, etc., men and women perform generally equally.  Even among atheists, who I’d hope were more rational, you see them complaining that there just aren’t a lot of open black atheists, it must be racism, ignoring the very real possibility that blacks tend to be more religious overall and often live in very religious neighborhoods where being an open atheist is detrimental.  They complain that there aren’t enough women at atheist conferences, forgetting the possibility that women don’t tend to be interested in this type of activist activity.  They want enforced equality of outcome, they want quotas whether the people involved want to be involved in those numbers or not.  You don’t see people on the right doing that.  When’s the last time you heard someone religious declare “there just aren’t enough Baptists at this conference”?  It just doesn’t happen.

It’s about time we do away with race and gender and sexual orientation as means of measuring reality and just try supporting human rights and human equality across the board.  Is this human equal to that human?  If not, fix it.  There ought not be women’s rights or men’s rights, gay rights or straight rights, black rights or white rights, there ought only be human rights.  ’nuff said.

8 thoughts on “The Flip-Side to Feminism

  1. I have seen you make this argument before.. and its just an absurd one.
    There will be interim period during which special-purpose groups have to exist to achieve redress in specific areas.
    for e.g why do we have the atheist community's orgs like AA, FFRF fighting to ensure separation of church and state etc? I can make the absurd argument that we shouldnt have "Freedom From Religion" rights organizations, and instead we should have Religious Rights orgs.. or scratch that we should have just Human Rights orgs. How about going and convincing those existing human rights organizations to fight for separation of church and state?

    Another e.g there's inactivists that are fighting to eliminate circumcision of males. "Intact (foreskin)" activism. i.e there is a special issue that needs attention, and hence a group of people focused on achieving that.

    Feminism is very much unlike that.. It was NOT a issues based activism.. it was a 'worldview' activism. So there was never any endpoint defined for it. i.e you never knew when "equality" was achieved, and when they would stop.

    Warren farrell has talked in the 90's about the need for a men's rights movement as an interim measure.. to swing back the pendulum to the middle, in response to the overreach of feminism. And after that is achieved, rest of the work (if any) can be done through a gender-transition movement.

    Mens Rights is an issue-based movement, not a worldview movement. Here's some sample issues.. I dont know about 'radical masculism' or these women leaders you talk about.. maybe some URLs will help. I hope you arent talking about GirlWritesWhat or typhonblue.. they are both MRAs, and they do talk about how women can be slimy too.. in response to the Women are wonderful effect that pervades society and results in favouritism and ultimately injustice.

  2. It’s about time we do away with race and gender and sexual orientation as means of measuring reality and just try supporting human rights and human equality across the board. Is this human equal to that human? If not, fix it. There ought not be women’s rights or men’s rights, gay rights or straight rights, black rights or white rights, there ought only be human rights.

    Funnily.. all the special interest groups are trying to do exactly that. Fix what they perceive to be inequities impacting certain groups. Once an endpoint is defined and achieved, said group should dissipate. Is this all a matter of labelling then?

  3. I don't think it's for you to say that men are better than, or worse than, or equal to women. Men are better than women in some ways, and worse in others.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Optionally add an image (JPG only)