Friday, October 07, 2016
There are any number of women who say
that they want equality. They however fail to state what equality
means.
If they want equality of power, they
have always had it. I have heard it said by a feminist graduate
student that women in “traditional” cultures had more power than
do women now, as they were in control of reproduction and sex. I have
heard it said by a feminist University of Chicago professor that
women have always been the stronger gender. I have heard it said by a
highly intelligent women that women have men by the nuts
psychologically, since they are their mothers. As a Chinese leader
once said, “There have been always mothers, and mothers have sons.”
If they want equality of value, then
they also have it already, especially in the West. There was a
conservative Christian priest in a church I attended who said that
men and women are “equal in value, different in roles.” I have a
daughter; but I value her as much – if not more – than I would
value a son.
If they want equality in relationships,
in many cases that would work against them. If a man is in love with
a woman, she has more power in the relationship than does he. I have
had a fairly equal relationship with my former wife, but that is not
the relationship that I remember the most. The relationship that I do
remember the most was one in which I completely loved the woman, and
she had all the real power. She was a very good woman, and she used
it for right things. I have known similar situations in which the
woman was not such a good woman and used that power for wrong things.
If they want economic and political
equality, they will need to understand what that means. Men aren't
all that good to one another, and a woman who wants economic or
political equality with men will have to deal with a lot of crap. She
will have to endure market competition. She will have to deal with
all sorts of scumbags. In some cases, she will have to go to war.
If they want equality in treatment,
they will also need to understand the implications. Treatment is
based upon a person's qualities. With equal treatment, people –
both men and women – would treat others – both men and women –
based on who they are. It would then make sense to be good to people
– women and men – because they are good people. It would make no
sense at all to be good to Third Wave feminists, who by and large are
horrible human beings – much worse so than most men, especially the
liberal men they like to attack the most.
A popular sticker in 1990s was
“feminism is a radical idea that women are human beings.” What it
fails to specify is what that means. There was a human being named
Joseph Stalin who treated other 60 million human beings by killing
them. Expect to be treated like a human being. Expect to be killed.
I have known any number of women who
are successful professionals, and even many of them take objection to
Third Wave feminism. What they say, again and again, is that feminism
has gone too far. They accept the parts of feminism that give them
the right to work, but they reject the parts of feminism that tells
them that they can't have children or families or that they can't be
kind and pretty. Many of these women are strong and intelligent
people. If a feminist would not take this from me, she should take it
from them. Most of them are stronger than the feminists, but they are
too gentle to confront them. At which point the task falls to less
gentle people like me.
There are any number of other women who
have no use for feminism period. They would rather be with a working
man and stay at home with children. If feminists really believe in
women's rights, they will respect these women's rights to their
choices. These are choices made in an informed way. And if they do
not respect these women's rights to their choices, then they can't
claim to be in favor of women's rights.
I will anticipate different women
choosing to act in a different manner. Some will want careers; some
will want family life; some will want both. All should have the right
to either choice. This is the true meaning of liberty. And a person
who actually believes in liberty – conservative, liberal or
libertarian – will accept the right of women, including ones in
their families or their communities, to either choice.
I have no idea which path my daughter
will want to choose, and I neither push nor discourage her in either
direction. I however will seek to protect her from – or teach her
to fight – the villains on either side. I do not want her to end up
a punching bag for some idiot. Nor do I want her to get abused by
Third Wave feminists in the academia or the marketplace for being
kind and pretty. Instead I will prepare her to deal with both sets of
scoundrels, so that she can know how to protect herself from both
sides in the gender war. In the meanwhile I will do what is in my
power to reduce the influence of both sides in the gender war in
society. I recommend that other loving parents – both men and women
– do the same.
She did not choose this set of
conditions, and I did not choose this set of conditions. Nastiness,
stupidity and worse among both women and men have created the gender
war. There are however workable solutions. The most workable solution
of all is for men and women to come together in goodwill and create
good relationships and a family life. This will refute the claim made
by both sides in the gender war – that either women or men are
evil, or that a woman who is good to a man is selling out fellow
women, or that a man who is good to a woman is not being a real man.
It will disempower the scoundrels among both women and men who take
legitimate sentiments and turn them into hideousness. It will show
the leaders on both sides of the gender war that, no, they do not
speak for 50% of humanity, nor do they have the right to claim that
they speak for 50% of humanity. And it will empower the rest of us:
the men – and the women – who are willing to treat their partners
right.
I would not dream of attempting to
stand in the way of the choice of a woman to either lifestyle.
However she will have to make that choice knowingly. There are
dangers in both situations. A woman who is economically dependent on
a man may be in a bad way if the man chooses to act like a bastard.
However she would likewise be dealing with many bastards if she were
to have a career.
If feminism really seeks to benefit
women, it would work to make both career life and family life a
better experience for women. It would fight potentials for abuses
both at home and at work. There are potentials for both; there always
will be potentials for both. A woman who chooses either one – or
both – will have to do so knowingly. And the world in general, and
feminists in particular, will have to respect that choice.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home