[Originally published on June 5, 2018. Updated on November 5, 2018 in light of tomorrow’s Midterm Elections.]
There’s been a disturbing trend lately where some women think that men are out to get them and that the so-called “patriarchy” is the one obstacle on their path to success. These women have developed the mentality that all men are pigs, morons, or both, and they shouldn’t be on this planet.
These modern “feminists” (bless their hearts) are part of what’s wrong with this world–a world that rightfully embraces and capitalizes on the physiological and psychological differences between men and women.
These feminists believe that no, we’re ALL equal. Men are women are inherently equal, in every way possible, and as such, women deserve to be on football teams and do everything that men everywhere do (as if this wasn’t the country where women could do MOST of what men do, but I digress), and men should.. actually, they prefer a world without men, so I suppose they just want women to go out and do everything men do.
It’s not surprising that this mentality has been hurting men AND kids too. Actually, I recently wrote about how it’s doing just that. Go ahead and check these out and feel free to leave comments that’d further the discussion!
Now I’m back with the last part of my “How Feminism Hurts” series–this time I’m addressing how women are negatively affected by it.
Liberated or oppressed?
Today’s feminism has given a rise to the term “liberated woman”: She’s someone whose career matters more than the man she vowed her whole life to or the children she chose to have.
Or better yet, this “liberated woman” is one who is free from anything and everything meant to tie her to any semblance of a real, sane life. She’ll pursue the outside motivators that SHE wants and to hell with whatever gets in her way. SHE matters more than her husband and children. They’re an inconvenience to her. (Hence why she’ll kill those children before they’re born, but that’s for later.)
Truthfully, I don’t want anything with this so-called feminism. This anti-man and anti-children rhetoric is sickening and one I’ll never support because it hurts everyone it comes into contact with.
Let’s consider women dressed in outfits that leave little to the imagination–not at the beach or clubbing, but at settings that warrant more conservative attire.
<Before I proceed, it’s time for some truthiness: note the state I live in–Utah–and the religion I follow–Catholicism. Utah is a beautiful state that many think of as the “mormon capital of the world” because of how many mormons there are here in proportion to members of other religions. Mormons are more conservative than most, and while some mormon women choose to wear slacks and skinny jeans, it’s my (perhaps erroneous?) understanding that that’s not encouraged, at least not at official mormon events. This is why you’ll often see women in longer skirts and dresses around downtown SLC (near the mormon temple) and outside mormon places of worship.
Being Catholic, I’ve always sought to differentiate myself from mormons for as long as I’ve been living in Utah (16+ years). Because I act more conservatively than average non-mormon (and even some mormon) Millennials, I’ve found it’s easiest to “stand out” through the way I dress. So in the Summer I’ll wear, for example, a strappy sundress only–whereas most mormon gals choose to wear a sleeved tee underneath to hide their garments, or short shorts if I’m going out.
I explain this because normally people think that living in Utah has somehow shielded me from different ways to dress, as if good taste somehow skipped this state. But believe it or not, many women here know how to look the part and respect the setting they’re in. Being a Colombian Latina, I actually grew up with the notion that it’s OK to flaunt what you have, and that if you feel good, show it off! But I also grew knowing tact and propriety, and knowing when to show off (and to whom!) vs. not caring for such important aspects.
</end of truthiness>
Where were we? Ah yes, outfits that don’t cover much in settings where one should perhaps be a little more covered.
Picture in your mind one such setting, say a presentation or meeting with members of both sexes or mostly men, and women wearing very short dresses or miniskirts.
It’s unfortunate that this is considered normal by some. I’ve met women like that and I always wonder how it’s OK to wear notoriously short (sometimes rule-breaking?) outfits to work.
I don’t understand the point of showing off your assets (or more like broadcasting them since there’s nothing wrong with wearing clothes that flatter you) in the workplace when the workplace isn’t the right setting for that. When did wearing a “come hither” outfit in a professional setting where everyone will look at you become chic… even though it’s so tacky?
My main point is: Ladies, how do YOU want to come across? Do you want to be taken seriously for your intellect or your looks?
Nowadays, “feminism” alleges that modern representations of women (say, bikini-clad women in ads or music videos, etc.) have increasingly led to their objectification, and that women don’t deserve to be looked through such a narrow lens. But could these representations just be reflecting what’s already out there?
I’d argue the opposite: Women (and men–I’m looking at you, man buns: yuck) have for a while been influencing what the media decides to sell, and they in turn keep consuming what the media sells them.
But that’s not the media’s fault.. People are at fault for showing us an image of women that shouldn’t have gotten out in the first place. If us women want to be paid attention to for our intellect and endless capabilities, then the clothes we wear and the first impressions we make are KEY to transmitting our message successfully.
Saying that others should ignore what you look like is beside the point: If how you wanted others to see you was irrelevant, God would have let us roam around naked 24/7 after Adam and Eve’s grave mistake. But he didn’t, so now we’re at the mercy of clothes.
This has nothing to do with body- or fashion-shaming; I see it more as common sense, no?
Feminists have it all wrong. Being a woman doesn’t mean I have to expose myself and damn any man who looks–even though men are human and have eyes. It means that I have the choice between looking inappropriate (and like I crave the attention of other men) and looking normal; between impropriety and modesty.
Then when I look proper and modest I’m better able to command people’s attention to my intellect first.
And that brings me to another aspect that feminists are so wrong about: Modesty.
No, I didn’t grow up in “purity culture” or believing that pants are evil and that my hair must be concealed. Although my culture may have advocated otherwise, dressing modestly was more like a given to me: I didn’t have people in my life who wore revealing clothes so I didn’t have any interest in doing so myself.
As I got older, I learned that my Latin body was embraceable, and by the time I met my husband and we got married and went on our honeymoon in Hawaii, I felt like I was in such great shape that I wanted to show it off w/cute bathing suits and beachy outfits. My husband’s reaction? “Yes, please!” (Men love confident women.)
However, I’m old-fashioned enough that if I think my outfit isn’t all that modest, I’ll still ask him what he thinks because there are things that should be for his eyes only. He always ends up approving; I guess I just overthink things.
Modesty lies on a spectrum and if you point out to someone that something is revealing or not appropriate, they may think you’re slut-shaming them or something along those lines. But maybe that’s the best reaction they can come up with because they know they’re in the wrong?
I don’t think one’s body is meant to be over-exposed in some settings; that’s all.
What “liberated” women do to men… and women
Feminism has taken this drive away from men. It taught them that they shouldn’t have to work so hard. It has taught them that their wives should share in their work and it doesn’t matter who does the wife’s work at home. …. –Melanie
[The language of this next quote may be a little unpalatable to some readers. Your discretion advised.]
The best thing to ever happen to young males was feminism because it saved them a lot of money paying for whores. With all the hooking up and casual sex that goes on these days, most girls act like whores–they just don’t get paid for it. And what guy wants to lay down his life for some skank who has been with 18 guys? What for? He doesn’t see her as motherhood and apple pie, he sees her as a skank. …. –Dr. Laura
(Click on each above to see it full-size.)
But what does all that do to women?
Take the first quote: A man who thinks a greater income is more important than having his loving wife take care of the children they made, who believes that an indifferent nanny or money-loving daycare can do the job just as well, isn’t worthy of the title “dad.” I mean any man can biologically produce a kid, but not as many can care for said kid. A man should want the best for his family, and that’s a parent caring for the kid(s).
The first quote also reminds me of a followup issue: And that’s when the woman in a two-parent household where both parents work wants to stay in her job because she can rely on a nanny or daycare, and the husband wants to “support” her. I always crack up when Dr. Laura says those men are scared of their wives and would rather appease them and let them do whatever at the expense of their kids’ health and wellbeing. She has a good point.
As for the second quote, this one resonates more with the term “liberated” woman, and I’ll expand how it can be more damaging in the next (and last) section: When a guy knows he can get sex for free without the commitment, WHAT incentive is there for him to make a commitment?!
(And by commitment, I actually do mean marriage. Again, call me old-fashioned, but, as I’ve written in the past, not even living together = commitment.)
A gal who gives herself away freely to anyone may be marriage material. “May” being the key word there. But a man will know that that gal doesn’t really have standards. She’s so liberated, that her body isn’t worth anything and she’s not afraid to do the deed with everyone. The man will then think, “If she doesn’t have standards, what does that make me?” Worthless, that’s what. On to the next gal with standards.
The blogosphere is old enough to have people from all cultures and walks of life, and I myself became a fan of at least two bloggers who for years lived with their significant others. Not to mention I grew up with girls and have been friends with others for whom this was the way to go. I never called them out on that because that’s their choice and I’m not their mother, but this is something I’ve been passionate about for years (as you can tell by previous posts I’ve written on the matter), and that I’m therefore going to keep blogging about.
After all, my blog’s mission has always been to be that “lone wolf”–that voice that’s right in a sea of contradictions and nonsensical claims–for the minority who may not see their point of view represented in the mainstream. I’m proud to be that voice and I’m honored to have others like me thanking me for doing so.When a guy knows he can get the goods for free without the commitment, WHAT incentive is there for him to make a commitment?! Click To Tweet
This one almost deserves its own post, and perhaps someday I will write one for it that goes into deeper issues and how abortion hurts men, but for now, suffice it to say that “liberated” women who get abortions are kind of like the skanks that were mentioned earlier.
Women who have sex with men, only to then get pregnant by those men and later abort their babies tell other women who’d never stoop so low that it’s easy to get out of problems, and that commitment is a joke. That a good time is more important than a kid.
This, in turn, makes it detrimental for women in general, because guys who are worth it will come to think that ALL women are like that: Not only will they use them for food, but they’ll also use them for a fun night and then discard the baby they made–all because it’s too inconvenient for them. What a sick type of birth control.
The so-called “Wage gap”
(Sorry, I lied about the previous section being my last one: this one is, though. It’s a short one.)
Modern feminists kicking and screaming about not making as much as men are doing normal women a disfavor by making it seem like all women are such whiny creatures who don’t know the facts:
Whenever gender differences come up in public debate, the so-called wage gap dominates the conversation. A woman makes 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. …. But that number compares all American men to all American women across all professions. No legitimate social scientist would consider that a valid measure. The number is both meaningless and intentionally misleading. ….
Once you compare men and women with similar experience working the same hours in similar jobs for the same period of time—and that’s the only way you can measure it—the gap all but disappears. In fact it may invert. One study using census data found that single women in their 20s living in metropolitan areas now earn eight percent more on average than their male counterparts. By the way, the majority of managers are now women. Women on average are scoring higher on IQ tests than men are. –Tucker Carlson
But still, there are women spouting off this nonsense, and that it’s all men’s faults that they make less–even though there isn’t even any proof of this.
_ _ _
So there you have it, dear readers and followers: A short series on how feminism hurts men, women, and children. If you want to catch those other posts–and everything I’ve written on the matter of feminism, follow them via my feminism tag.
Share your thoughts: What do you think of feminism? Who would you say it’s hurting and how?
As always, thanks for reading!