Tuesday, October 24, 2017

6 Takeaways From The #MeToo Movement & Overall "Rape Culture"

Many people are trying to do what they see as the best response to the recent #MeToo movement. While many of these responses are coming from a good place, some of these responses are exploiting the 'movement' and/or are too extreme and would be more harmful to society than beneficial. Here are the balanced and appropriate takeaways from this chain of events:



**For the context of this conversation, let's focus on adult women and not minors.**


1. #MeToo should not be a trend. Rape should be reported to the police; not to Twitter and adult women need to speak up if they actually want to protect themselves. This is not being said to "shame victims" but to tell them the best way to respond.


If an adult woman is raped, the best chance of catching the rapist is to report the rape to the police immediately. While the Twitter movement may be nice for some victims to know they are not alone, it's not really going to stop rape, as rapists aren't going to be dissuaded by any "Me Too" stories.

Furthermore, the longer women keep these stories to themselves, the longer the rapist gets away with it and the more emboldened they are to keep raping other people.




2. #MeToo does not exclude men and should not be seen as "all victims are females and all perpetrators are men".




Since America is not a rape culture, we tend to see any rape as a bad thing and deserving punishment. However, when the victim is a male, they do tend to get less sympathy by society than female victims. That is not equality. Male victims deserve to be supported too.

As on so many occasions when the whiff of the witch-hunt is in the air, however, somebody ought to say, “Hang on: it’s not that simple”. Men whose sexual desires are out of control also prey on men; and it can happen, too, that women in positions of power will take advantage of men.



3. #MeToo should not be used to demonize men. When #MeToo is abused with false and/or exaggerated accusations, this trivializes real victims as well as creates new victims.


Women who are actually raped and/or assaulted are victims. Men who are falsely accused of rape and/or sexual assault are victims too.


Rape and sexual assault should never be tools for revenge or misandry etc.

Case continued for woman charged with making false rape accusations against SHU football players


Lesbian fantasist invented 15 rapes and sexual assaults which saw man jailed to get sympathy from girlfriends, court hears

Why were false rape claims allowed to ruin the life of a hero PC? Officer describes 'sheer hell' after being wrongly accused of attack by woman he met on Plenty of Fish dating site


UMass withholds diploma from accused student who graduated before it scheduled a hearing


If you haven't really looked into the issue, you might be under the assumption that "sexual assault and/or rape" is an epidemic on our college campuses with as many as 1 in 4 female students being a victim. However, if you do a little research, you will find that the actual rate of females to be raped or sexually assaulted on campus is more like 1 in 52, if not lower.

Just because we cannot completely eradicate rape does not mean we live in a "rape culture" [in the Western world]. Just because men are attracted to women and taught to be the "pursuer" instead of the "pursued" (by women, as well as men, and nature) does not mean we live in a "rape culture".

Rape and sexual assault are not as "muddy" and "blurry" as they are being made out to be. If women are equal to men then it is quite simple. You are only raped if you are physically forced to have sex without your consent. You are only sexually assaulted if someone physically forces you to have sexual contact without your consent. (i.e. penetration, contact/exposure of intimate body parts)

You have not been assaulted/raped if:
  • you gave consent but didn't end up liking the sexual activity you did together
  • you gave consent but didn't like his attitude/demeanor/behavior afterwards
  • you gave consent drunk, but chose to get drunk (no one spiked your drink without you knowing it)
  • you gave consent while on a drug, but chose to do the drug (no one slipped you the drug without you knowing it)
  • you gave consent but only because he kept persisting and asking you for it, yet he never physically threatened or restrained you to get it
  • you gave consent but only because you thought he wouldn't be with you if you didn't
  • you gave consent but only because you wanted to make him feel better
  • you did not give him consent to speak to you in a crude manner, but he did - this is unpleasant but it's not "assault" and certainly not "rape"


For any man or woman out there who claims to want equality for both genders and care about both genders, this will be a test for them: Will you stand up for all potential victims - male or female - including those who are victimized by false allegations?


4. Women: Decide what you want. Stop sending men mixed signals or you're just going to isolate the men who are afraid to be mistaken in a #MeToo situation.


Women will say "Never ask to kiss a girl [because it kills the romance]" yet Feminists are telling men Always ask to kiss a girl or ask her if you can "talk dirty" to her just to keep asking for constant consent all throughout any physically romantic/sexual activity. Is that really what women want? (They usually say no.) 


Men and women have evolved into different gender roles, specifically where dating is involved: Men are expected to bear the pressure of asking women out on dates and making the first moves. While many men don't mind this too much as it is in their nature, they do mind when you punish them for doing what you told them you expected from them.

This is not to say that this gives men a license to "misinterpret" signals but rather that women should not be so quick to negatively judge what might just be a "misinterpreted" signals. Men aren't perfect, women need to be willing to cut them some slack and treat them more like humans than programmed robots that are malfunctioning.

5. Women: Don't ignore gender differences, even if you choose to reject gender roles. Recognize that sex often means different things and has a different impact for men and women depending on different factors so you don't regret sex. (And remember, regret sex does not equal 'rape' or 'sexual assault', because you chose consent at the time.)




The reason why sex is more emotional for women than men is because of our natural, biological differences. Men don’t have this as much for women, although this can change as they mature. As far as teenage boys, however, it’s almost strictly clinical for them. Boys need the “release”, whereas girls don’t.

This is why men and women’s approaches to sex are so different. When teenage boys are going through puberty, they really do need sex and they struggle to find some way to handle that. Teenage girls should know this so they understand why their boyfriends are pressuring them for sex so much, or why teenage boys are more likely to cheat on you if you don’t have sex with them etc.

This is the thing, young males going through sexual maturity (primarily about age 15-25) are experiencing a peak where they need sex more than at any other time in their life. In countries where we do not give these young males a "professional" option for a release, such as legalized prostitution, the young males are forced to bug the young females around them for a release instead. Well, most young females don't want to take on the role of "prostitute" for them, they want the role of "girlfriend", as they want to be more special than a 1-night stand (or series of 1-night stands). So then what do you get? A bunch of young males having to either manipulate young females into helping them get a release or they have to be painfully honest and tell the young females that they can't commit to them without the assurance of getting a release. Either way, the young females often feel pressured into being sexual before they're ready or more sexual than they're ready for. Instead of forcing young males between a rock and a hard place, we should give men "equality" and "choice". In some European countries, fathers take their teenage boys to professionals, where it is legal, to help them with this. This should be done in the USA as well because if the boys are going to professionals, they aren’t going to pressure their young female peers as much.

As a result of sex differences between most males and females, most males don't regret losing their virginity, whether the girl "really cared" about them or not. They're just not wired the same way most girls are, who are more likely to be affected by those kinds of emotional factors. To think that women are just the same as men and that there's no difference, hurts women because then they think that, act accordingly and results in a lot of those women regretting their 1st time.

We’ve been ignoring and/or undermining male-female differences for a long time now and it’s given a lot of people a lot of misconceptions. That’s unfortunate because knowing these things just helps illuminate a lot and makes things easier to navigate. It’s like trying to walk through a maze in the dark, as opposed to with the light on. We're not telling you which way to go, just trying to turn the light on for you so you can actually see which way you’re going.


6. Women: Don't ignore that "gender equality" includes holding women to the same standards as men. Do not default to holding men responsible for a woman's actions. This makes women seem like children, unable to be responsible for themselves. This is especially true when alcohol and drugs are involved.


When a young couple is drinking and has sex but the young female regrets it and we blame the young male for “rape” or “date rape” or any other form of “sexual assault” because she was drunk - even though he was too, we are practicing sexism and saying women are not equal to men.

What if she had more alcohol in her system at the time than he did? If we prosecute young males for 'raping' or 'assaulting' young females because she was more drunk than he was, then we need to equally prosecute young females for 'raping' or 'assaulting' young males because he was more drunk than she was. That it authoritarianism - and sexism when only applied to males.

Furthermore, if women are "equal" to men, then we need to respect women's right to choose, even if it's not what society would choose for her. This is especially true when it comes to their romantic and/or sexual relationships. On college campuses, men are guilty until proven innocent — even when the accusations are being refuted by the supposed victim over and over again.

These kinds of sexist proclivities push the belief and attitude in society that women are lesser/weaker/etc. than men, much in the same way that society acknowledges children as being lesser/weaker/etc. than adults and therefore not responsible for their own actions in situations etc. They are in direct conflict with the notion that women and men are equal.


Overall, it is very important that we remember to balance our feelings with logic in reaction to this movement. Something as "scandalous" as this is easy to get swept up in, and we don't want to look back and regret our reactions because we reacted too impulsively, carelessly and/or narrow-mindedly.


Friday, August 4, 2017

Has Western Society Become Too Influenced By Feminist Values?

Ever since Feminism, we have been encouraging women to be more competitive and "willing to go after what they want" and encouraging men to be more sensitive and "in tune with their feelings".  Our society tells women to be more ambitious and aggressive than patient and understanding, and tells men the opposite. It hasn't really benefited women or men to follow this advice though. Even though women have gotten more "nasty" and/or assertive and men have gotten more "sensitive" and/or passive, they've still maintained a lot of the same problems they've always had respectively - except now they're worse, because they're compounded with a whole host of new emotional problems. This has resulted in more violent females and depressed males with both being overly emotional.

Many people today have become so touchy, that we have begun to change things to cater more to feelings over facts; fantasies over realities. The Millennial generation especially embodies this. Though Millennials are "passionate about social issues" in a similar manner to the Baby Boomers, they are also more widely considered to be "too soft" in a way that Baby Boomers never were - as Clint Eastwood said, "Everybody's walking on eggshells" nowadays.

Most men - and a few women - too often get turned off by the overwhelming emotional nature of everyday conversation these days. Many people have stopped wanting to confront issues that they see, for fear of facing more of the deflection and narrow-mindedness that comes with feelings-based responses. We can't solve problems in society if we can't talk honestly about the problems themselves.

This political correctness atmosphere has especially affected men - as women's narratives, values and preferences tend to dominate mainstream media and marketing. After all, women make up the majority of US consumer shopping and TV watching. We have also neglected a lot of men's narratives, values and preferences. Since there a lot of facts regarding men that women do not particularly like or want to hear, we either brush them under the rug or try to find a way to punish men - either way subjecting men to a lot of behavioral conditioning.

In addition, even though 50 years ago our society was already protecting women from feeling personally embarrassed or uncomfortable, now our society (primarily Feminist-driven) is protecting women from being accountable by automatically labeling them as "victims" and persecuting men for their gender by labeling masculinity as "toxic". We - as a society driven by Feminist narrative - either lie about women's mistakes or just pretend they don't exist but point out all of men's mistakes. 

Just look at the race between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. The majority of mainstream media outlets cried "sexism" whenever Trump attacked Clinton but praised Hillary whenever she attacked Donald - which was sexism in itself (no matter how you personally feel about either of them). This experiment organized by NYU professors switched their genders in an effort to prove that sexism was behind Trump's popularity with the public over Hillary - yet to their surprise, it proved the exact opposite:

As one of the associate professors, Joe Salvatore, said, "I was surprised by how critical I was seeing [Clinton] on a man’s body, and also by the fact that I didn’t find Trump’s behavior on a woman to be off-putting. I remember turning to Maria at one point in the rehearsals and saying, 'I kind of want to have a beer with her!'"

Feminism loves the game of "identity politics" which essentially pits everyone against one another in some way or another:

Furthermore, Feminist values are constantly asking others to put themselves in "our" shoes, but rarely encourages us to put ourselves in others' shoes - leading to a lot of self-centered and narrow-minded behavior and attitudes, which are also destructive to our society.

As a society, we are starting to choose superficial values over substantial values, as well as looking at things more from a short-term perspective rather than long-term. In addition, we are inheriting a lot of hypocrisy from Feminism. For example, we hear a lot of messages about "don't judge" yet we're all forced to make judgments every single day (and Feminism is not only founded on judgement but heavily relies on it). Women complain about "body shaming" yet women still choose to use their physical sex appeal to their advantage; women complain about "beauty standards" yet women are the ones who play the biggest role in setting them; women complain about women not being "slut-shamed" yet women - more than men - refuse to legalize prostitution; we warn women about the "mean guys" out there who want to hurt them yet women who are "mean girls" can be just as bad, if not worse; we warn women about marriages that might not work out yet women aren't warned about the jobs/careers that might not work out and we discourage adhering to gender roles yet not when females are the ones who are negatively affected in the process.

Even though most people do reject Feminism, our society is still heavily influenced by the powerful lobbyist group. Those who reject Feminism still sometimes fall victim to "sexism" towards women over men because of inherent values of society, and those who still embrace Feminism are often victims to manipulations and distortions by/of Feminism.

This is what happened with Cassie Jaye in the aftermath of releasing her film, The Red Pill, which documented the men's rights movement from a neutral perspective (though she was a Feminist at the time of making the film).

The good news - and unsurprising to anti-Feminists - is that even though Cassie Jaye was persecuted by Feminists for making this film, learning the things that Feminism had tried to keep from her knowing, elevated her relationship with her boyfriend-now fiancee. This is a recurring theme for women who either let go of Feminism entirely or at least let go of some Feminist values: their relationships with men improve. (Even Laci Green said the same thing!)

As Cassie Jaye explains, her Feminist perspective gave her a "chip on the shoulder" and made her into a more aggressive/defensive position (which inherently invites conflict). Even Marlo Thomas - former Feminist icon - has admitted, "That's how we've been married for 35 years, you don't give critiques." Feminists and modern society is very hard on men but very soft on women. We over-critique men yet under-critique women and it is creating a harmful imbalance in our society.

Cassie Jaye posed some great questions for herself that every (Western) woman should ask herself: "Who really has the privilege in our relationship? If I could change roles, would I want to?"

If the answer is no, shouldn't we steer away from Feminist values and move more towards Egalitarian ones instead?

Monday, July 24, 2017

What Does It Mean To Be Independent?

The most common notion of "independence" - at least among American women- tends to be that being single equates to being independent.

Some people even believe that Feminism started, in part, to grant women "independence". Is being independent of men the best qualification for "independence" though? After all, we all start off independent of a romantic partner, it's not something we have to try to achieve.

Do people really consider single men to be more "independent" than married men with families? That difference is usually referred to as more of a "bachelor" thing than an "independence" thing.

Most Americans see moving out of their parents' house to be their transition into "independence". After all, this is when they truly become accountable for themselves and every choice they make. No more parents at home to bail you out.

That being said, "independent" can be seen and used in a variety of ways.

When it comes to taxes, being "single" (unmarried with no children) really does coincide with "independent".

When it comes to politics however, being "independent" specifically means unaffiliated with any political party etc. - which would include Feminism.

Historically, "independent" has been used as showing a desire for freedom, such as the #WomenAgainstFeminism who show a desire for freedom from Feminist doctrine.

Feminism, on the other hand, looks at "independence" in their own, specific manner:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/1f/2b/8e/1f2b8e7f3b1346796b0d0cd55f2c0468.jpg

  1. Not be married and/or not have children.
  2. Economic independence free from men.

Feminist doctrine pushes the notion that women have no identity of their own if they only consider themselves to be a "wife" and/or "mother". They say that you have to have a job title as a woman in order to have an identity. They think that being identified as a "waitress", "maid", "secretary" or "cashier", means you have more identity than a "wife" or "mother".

This completely undermines the value that a wife and mother has on a happy and healthy, stable home. A wife is the most important woman in a man’s life; And a mother is the most important woman in a child’s life, so how does she not have an identity? How would having an easily replaceable job give a woman more identity/value?

This is not to discount the women out there who do have irreplaceable (or harder to replace) jobs like surgeon or CEO etc. However, the average working woman does not have an irreplaceable job; The average woman is a waitress, maid, secretary, cashier or other similar type of job.

Also, why is it dangerous for a woman to rely on her husband when they’re in a partnership and they equally rely on each other? If one cares about gender equality, shouldn’t it be said that it is equally dangerous for a man to depend on his wife for everything related to their health/food (mold could grow if she’s not cleaning; food poisoning could occur if she doesn’t cook right etc.) and the rearing and well-being of their children (not being neglected etc.)? Shouldn't it be equally said that husbands and fathers have no identity of their own, other than “workhorse” or “bread-provider”?

Some people (primarily Feminists) think that relying on a husband/spouse is "dangerous" because what if the relationship doesn't work out and he cheats or leaves you? Yet what if you work in the same job for 8+ years and it suddenly doesn't work out and you never get the promotions/raises you want or even worse, you get fired or let go? What if the company you work for is involved in illegal activity (that you don't know about) and not only do you lose your job of many years, but you also lose any chance of getting a "referral" for any future jobs?

You have far more choice in the matter when it comes to who you date and marry, then who you get to work for. So why would trusting your judgment in a spouse, be worse than relying on an ever-changing market that may or may not favor you at any given time?

The fact of the matter is, being independent doesn't always equal "alone". When marriage and family are done right, the couple becomes a team that is more successful together than they were alone - as they bring out the best in each other and make up for each other's weaknesses. They empower one another.

This is the same with society. Once an adult becomes "independent" of their parents, they start to contribute to society - hopefully bringing out the best in them (work ethic and maturity) and learning from their mistakes in a productive manner (perhaps with some help from family, friends, co-workers, etc.).


Feminism is not a movement about "female independence" but rather independence from (straight) men. Feminism understands the value of teamwork, as it is always trying to make connections with other groups (gays and lesbians, transgenders, ethnic minorities, etc.)

Instead of focusing on "independence" as defined by Feminist doctrine, our society would benefit much more if we focused on "independence" as defined by accountability and maturity.

Monday, July 10, 2017

Did Sexism Create Feminism?

Feminism (in America) is a lobbyist group that acts in many ways, like a religion. They tell you what to believe, what the rules are, how you should live and how to spread this belief to others - including through "radical means". Just like religion, Feminism is a doctrine. Most of the "problems" Feminism raises are distorted or manipulated.

So how did Feminism get going mainstream in the first place?

There were two main acts of sexism that contributed to American Feminism:

1.) A distorted and manipulative, sexist narrative/fantasy that came mainly from 2 women. 

Many women today are at least somewhat familiar with the American Feminist named Betty Friedan and the impact of her book, the Feminine Mystique on Feminism as we know it.

Aside from maybe some news stories here and there in the past election year, many women today are not as familiar with the American Feminist named Gloria Steinem and her impact on Feminism, despite the fact that she may be the most powerful and influential Feminist of all-time.

While Betty Friedan may have been the one to trigger American Feminism as we know it, it was Gloria Steinem who really made it spread and get any kind of steam. Gloria Steinem capitalized on the idea of Feminism as a political lobbyist group and movement. She created the National Organization for Women (NOW) - arguably the most powerful and influential Feminist lobbyist group ever - to try and change laws etc, and she also created the Feminist magazine, Ms. Magazine to spread Feminist propaganda to the public.

Steinem had a mother who suffered from severe mental illness and had to be locked up. As we know, mothers are very important to children and Steinem blamed her father for this because he was the one who had [to have] her locked up. She internalized this and “made the personal, political”. She took the blame and subsequent hate she had for her dad and turned it onto all men and this is what resulted in Feminism - or what many people refer to as "Second Wave Feminism". Despite her emotional problems and sexist outlooks, she was an intelligent woman. She worked in the CIA for a while (not a conspiracy theory) and knew how to manipulate the public, the law and the political system - which is part of why her Feminist movement is still hanging on today despite constant and consistent failure and hypocrisy etc.

2. A “sexist” view in society that was biased in favor of women (and still is today).

Western women have always been among the most privileged in the world, in any time. It is out of that entitlement, the fact that women were used to society catering to their wants and needs, that Feminism was allowed to thrive and get support despite the fact that most women didn’t/don't actually agree with it.

Women in the West have always been respected in a way that men were not: 
  • Marriage has traditionally always been joked about as enslavement of men by women, as the saying went “happy wife, happy life”. 
  • If a woman feels embarrassed or uncomfortable about her role in a situation, their feelings are protected; whereas if a man feels embarrassed or uncomfortable about his role in a situation, he's often teased or ridiculed about it anyways and is expected to "deal with it"/"let it go". (It's even considered socially impolite to bring up a woman's age or weight but not a man's.)
  • Men were the ones who had to suck up the courage to woo and ask out women, always being expected to make the first move and be suave enough to pull it off or be rejected in public. 
  • When a little girl went missing, an entire town would take off work and go out to search for the little girl, whereas when a little boy went missing, they just put out some “Missing” and “Have you seen me?” posters. 
  • If a man ever said something that a woman didn’t like, she has a social right to slap him in public (assault) and no one cares – even if his intent wasn’t malicious. However, if a woman said something that a man didn’t like, it was not socially acceptable for a man to slap a woman in public and everyone who saw it would care and consider it assault.
  • There are thousands of domestic abuse shelters for female victims, but only a handful for male victims - despite the fact that often times, women perpetrate violence more than men. (Even lesbian women reported levels of intimate partner violence and sexual violence equal toor higher than those of heterosexual women.)
  • If a woman was raped, there were always men who wanted to kill the rapists whereas no one really cared about when men were raped. 
  • When people would start dying around a woman, no one would expect her to be the murderer until about the 3rd or 4th body; whereas most men are suspected at the 1st or 2nd body – this is how so many women got away with multiple murders by food poison, especially before they could test for it. 
  • Mothers are more likely to abuse children than fathers, yet women are still more trusted with small children than men - at home and in the workplace.
  • Women are less likely to be convicted and get shorter sentences than men for doing the same crimes. Especially if they are a parent. as mothers are more valued over fathers in our society.
  • Anytime a disaster was to happen such as the famous Titanic incident, women [and children] were always protected before men as they were seen as more valuable and sacred. 
  • After voting rights switched from property requirements to age requirements, men were expected to give up their lives in the case of war because they are considered more expendable than women. When women got the vote, they were not expected to equally give their lives in times of war. Instead, they were expected to stay back – where it was safer - and take on work, forcing women out of their chosen housewife role, so they could keep productivity going with so many men gone as in WW1 & WW2. 
  • The entire notion of Western Feminism is founded on the sexist bias that women are usually victims and men are usually perpetrators: It's easier for people to believe that Feminism started because most men were oppressing most women and women needed to rebel, then it is to believe that Feminism started because a few women had bad experiences with a few bad men.

So when Feminism started the radical claim that "marriage and motherhood were oppressive towards women", many people went along with it or gave it a pass, as they wanted to do the right thing by women - just as they had been doing all along.

What makes some people today so sure that women weren’t given a choice to be something other than a housewife before Feminism? Most women today, many decades after Feminism, still say they’d like to get married, have children and be at home. “The survey said that if staying at home with the children were counted as a job, it would rank as having happier workers than any other trade or profession. Only one in seven stay-at-home parents say they are dissatisified with their role, a level of unhappiness that is less than half that found among civil servants or salesmen and women.

So where is the proof that most women who were housewives, weren’t so by choice? Especially when there were already female college students, journalists, lawyers, doctors, scientists, politicians, police, etc pre-Suffragettes? (You've probably never heard about these women (or many of them) because Feminism doesn't acknowledge these pioneers since they debunk the idea that Feminism gave us the rights to do these things. In fact, Feminism pushes other women instead, modern women who are open card-carrying Feminists; It's the only "female unity" they know.) So what “sexist” law(s) did Feminism change to give women a choice (which they didn't already have all along)?

It's inaccurate to say that Feminism's “primary interest has been to help women have the same rights and respect as men, rather than 'become' a man. Women were already treated with the same respect as men but with the balance of acknowledgement of gender-differences. Feminism wanted to change the gender roles, not make them equal.

The people who claim that “women are still not there yet”, say this because they don’t want “choice” and “equality”, they want “quotas” and “conformity”. It’s not about choice for Feminists, it’s about making their fantasy/goal/doctrine into a reality. Why should Feminism tell us how many women should be in each job, especially so long as women are not limited from that job?

Feminism has never had quality significance - unlike the Suffragettes - because Western women have always had the same respect and equality that men have; they just used to choose to embrace gender differences more so than today. If we decide in modern times that we’d like to focus less on our gender differences, that’s fine but it’s historically inaccurate to say that the people before us were “sexist” or “misogynist” just because they chose differently than we do today.

Monday, July 3, 2017

Why Do So Many Women Reject "Feminism"?

Only 20% of Americans identify as Feminists, yet 82% said they believe that "men and women should be social, political, and economic equals." So why don't Americans see these two as the same thing? (Aside from the fact that they're not.) More people consider "Feminist" to be a negative term rather than a positive one. In fact, most Americans did not think that most others would identify as Feminists; Though "among those who identified themselves as either Feminists or strong feminists... 43% said they thought most women are Feminists". (Classic Feminist self-projection onto other women.)


Western women have always been among the most privileged in the world, in any time. It is out of that entitlement, the fact that women were used to society catering to their wants and needs, that Feminism was allowed to thrive and get support despite the fact that most women didn’t actually agree with it. 

When Feminism came out and said in the 1960s-70s that, “Feminism is the belief that women are human beings”, there was a social pressure not to go against it. After all, who doesn't believe that women are human beings? Even the blind know that. Feminism has always been a fascist-like group that works to pressure and bully people into what they want: 
  • They want women to stop being housewives/mothers and work? They claimed being a housewife/mother is oppressive and working is liberating. 
  • They want women to leave their men? They said “a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle” and “we’re becoming the men we wanted to marry”. (Those are clearly anti-male and anti-marriage statements. And who did the studies that said most women wanted to become like men?) 
  • They want society to have more feminine than masculine values? They claim “toxic masculinity”, put little boys on drugs to decrease their desire to be physically active (which is due to natural gender differences, not a mental illness) while cutting recess and focus on “empowering” girls while ignoring boys or telling boys they’re part of the problem and need to change.

Feminism is something entirely different than the Suffragettes, and really shouldn't be considered "Second Wave" as the Suffragettes did not share the radical, female-prejudiced doctrine of Feminism. In fact, the only thing these two groups really have in common, is that they both focused on women, which kind of makes it sexist to lump them in together for no other quality reason.

Suffragettes wanted the right to vote; Feminists (as starting in the 1960s aka "Second-Wave") wanted to change social perceptions and get special privileges and opportunities to make their dreams a reality.

Feminists created socio-economic problems to fix by challenging femininity and urging women to reject their gender role and take on a man's role instead. It backfired because many women still wanted their female role so now they were just taking on both; Meanwhile men never went with that trend of challenging their own gender role as they are generally, more utilitarian of the 2 groups. Ironically, men went with mother nature while women decided to challenge it.

So before Feminism, there weren't any problems to be addressed by Suffragettes other than voting (which they got as a privilege compared to men, since men have to sign up for the draft to vote while women are exempt). Even before the Suffragettes, women were making a lot of 1sts in politics, business, science and even military etc. However, those women were there because they wanted to be, not because a lobbyist group told them they should be.

Feminism pushed women into the workplace saying they "should be" there, regardless of whether they wanted it or not. Then when women got there, the workplace had been accustomed to males and a few women, so it was not able to accommodate the influx of women who were there for a Movement rather than because it was their genuine dream against all odds.

Feminism then used this transition to capitalize, and they manipulated women into doing a lot of things they ended up regretting (like burning their bras, hyphenating their names, divorcing their husbands or treating them badly, and putting work before their families – leading some women to pass their biological clock and lose the opportunity altogether, etc.). Studies show that women’s happiness has declined ever since Feminism. How can it not, when Feminism pressures women to be women and men at the same time? Forcing them to do twice the amount of work in half the amount of time? The only way this will be able to work, is to convince men that they should do the same thing – which most men just don’t want to do (just like most women don't really want to either).

Enter “third wave” aka newest "changes" of Feminism, which focuses more on distorted campaigns like “he for she” and “toxic masculinity”, which are just their manipulative ways of forcing men to submit to the changes they need in order to be successful.

Feminists will tell you that "Feminism is the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes", or something to that effect. Yet when you look at the etymology of the word: "femin-" comes from "femina", which is Latin for "female" and "-ism" is a Greek suffix indicating "a doctrine, system, or body of principles and practices" (or denoting a basis for prejudice or discrimination like "racism"). 

So linguistically, feminism means: female doctrine [a belief or set of beliefs held and taught by a church, political party, or other groupor female prejudice [preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience]. As we see in practice, feminism is a lobbyist group [just like the NRA] that really only focuses on pushing their own agenda [not all women's rights or equality] and they do make plenty of prejudicial assumptions. Like any other doctrine or religion, there are different levels of adherence and extremism etc.

For example, you have those extra-radical Feminists on the street, known as Feminazis like this one:


Or these ones:
http://hellogiggles.com/things-you-need-to-know-about-free-bleeding/
https://twitter.com/KamaPost/status/637006943693967361

Who would want to be associated with a movement that attracts such people as this? Radical movements with radical ideas attract radical people. Sometimes they can be good, like the American Revolution, and sometimes they are not good, like Feminism.

As Cassie Jaye, former Feminist and filmmaker said, "It wasn't learning about Men's issues that made me part with Feminism. It was actually learning about Feminism that made me leave Feminism."

Tuesday, June 27, 2017

Is Self-Sexual Objectification Empowering?

There are many feminist agendas to eliminate or decrease men's or the media's sexual objectification of women. One of the things we don't often discuss though, are the women who objectify themselves.


From teenagers protesting school uniforms, to voluntarily sending sexually explicit photos of themselves to seeking out relationships with older men (and often lying about their age), more and more females are embracing sexual objectification. More females (now at younger ages) understand their value in terms of youth and beauty and they know how to use those benefits of theirs to their advantage.

Feminist icons and role models are constantly sexually objectifying themselves and embracing it as empowering.
So is it empowering if women do it to themselves? 

How different is that from men doing it to them, especially if the women involved give their consent - such as women who dress up for their husbands etc?

The reason why women do not like when men sexually objectify them, is because of the "dehumanization" aspect. Studies show that when women present themselves in a sexually objectified manner (such as little bikinis), men actually do see them in the same way that they see tools and objects. So is it not dehumanizing when women do it to themselves?

When it comes to nudity, this can be especially attributed to Marilyn Monroe, who was the first female to pose nude on Playboy's very first issue. She is sometimes hailed as a Feminist/Sexual icon or at least, beloved by many Feminists, despite the fact that she was a "Mean Girl" who was trying to steal a husband away from his wife and family, as well as had publicly humiliated the wife on her husband's birthday.

According to Feminist icon, Gloria Steinem, who went undercover as a Playboy Bunny, self-sexual objectification is wrong. According to the founder of Ms. Magazine and former President of the National Organization for Women (NOW), women shouldn't be able to choose to objectify themselves, whether it's just nudity or even sex for money. Ironically, Steinem now claims "Feminists can wear anything they f*****g want," (flaunting what they have).
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2016/03/11/cisgender-white-feminists/

However, some women do choose to get paid for it and they enjoy it very much. They love to flaunt what they have and to get paid for "having a good time" or just "being sexy". Of course this is not all women, but some women do find this to be empowering. Furthermore, some women rate the "empowerment" or "appropriateness" of objectivity based on it's association with "luxury" or "high value".

On the other hand, many of these women can't find other jobs, and this is either the thing that they are the most naturally skilled at, or the only thing they can do properly and get paid for. And now that they are expected to work instead of get married (thanks to Feminism), this is the only work they can find that pays what they need to make. Is it right to tell them that they cannot make money this way, because some men and women will not respect them, even though it's their choice? Is it right to tell them they cannot make money this way, but they have to make money some way and be independent, or they're "setting back the women's movement" - especially considering "by any estimate of porn pay scales, women make more"?


Whether or not you think sexual objectification is empowering, is it really fair or in the spirit of "equality" to hold "objectification" to different standards based on the gender of the person(s) involved?






So if we are going to have a problem with objectification and want to draw the line somewhere, we should really be consistent about it.


Hypocrisy doesn't equal progression.
Can't Complain About Objectification In The Media Then Objectify Yourself; It Warrants No Respect Or Credibility

Friday, June 23, 2017

Are "Mean Girls" Empowered?

We are often warned by society about looking out for guys who don't have our best intentions at heart. Until recently, however, we weren't really warned about the girls who don't have our best intentions at heart. And with this new trend of mean girls, they seem to get meaner and meaner; With more backstabbing and manipulation than previous generations. Mean Girls used to "get what was coming to them" or turn over a new leaf and become a better person. Today, they are more likely to be considered the ones "we love to hate". Today, the Mean Girls are often the fan-favorites or even the lead characters.

But wait! What happened to Girl Code and Best Friends Forever (B.F.F.) and Girl Power and Female Unity and Feminism?

One rarely-mentioned side effect of the sexual, feminist revolution, is that women have become more competitive with each other than ever before. Before feminism, most women wanted to get married, expected to be married and got married. Ever since feminism, however, most women still want to get married today (as much as 80%) yet the share of American adults who have never been married is at an historic high and many women have begun to look at marriage in a bitter way, deeming it an "unrealistic fairy tale". Furthermore, "almost 47% of U.S. workers are women" and "more than 39% of women work in occupations where women make up at least 3/4 of the workforce." So whether in love or work, women have much more competition with each other today than ever before.

Add the fact that women are encouraged to "go after what they want" to be more empowered - using their "talents" to their advantage, yet not always taught how to control their emotions in a mature manner, and you have a recipe for disaster.

The sad part, is that in many cases, being the "mean girl" is encouraged and/or glamorized. Some women think the idea of being a "nasty woman" is empowering, not really caring about how their actions affect other people. They say "if you have it, flaunt it", not seeing the connection of how they make other women jealous and insecure about their own bodies/beauty. The fact of the matter is, just as a man can have a powerful effect on a woman, so can another woman.


Let's leave the men out of this as much as possible for a minute to focus on female-female dynamics: Even if a woman does completely trust her man and he does not do anything to make her jealous or suspicious or uncomfortable; Should we not hold the woman accountable for her actions? She sees the wedding rings, sees that the man is taken by another woman. Where is Girl Code and Best Friends Forever (B.F.F.) and Girl Power and Female Unity and Feminism in these situations?

Feminists are often quick to blame the man in this hypothetical scenario, claiming that "any man who can be baited away by Jolene isn't worth your time". What feminists tend to ignore about this song, is how inherently pro-female it is. Not only is the song written by a woman about women, but Dolly Parton says the woman has the ultimate power and tells the story of a woman choosing to trust in another woman. Men have different weaknesses than women, and Parton's song is asking women not to take advantage of their own strength, nor men's weaknesses, when they know it hurts other women.
Example of A Woman's Strength
Example of A Woman's Power
Women understand other women's strengths and advantages even better than men. This is why, sometimes, women are more suspicious of other women than men are. This is also why women partake in "slut-shaming" just as much as men, if not more. Women know how to use what they have to get what they want. Some women choose to go about this in a mature and respectful way, while other women choose to go about this in an immature and self-centered way.

This isn't limited to relationships with men, either. This female competitiveness can be seen in the workplace and even in schools for popularity and/or success. 

Mean Girls are very real and very hurtful. They can ruin your night, your job, your relationship, your career opportunities or even ruin your life. They do not care about "empowering women", they only care about themselves and getting ahead at anyone else's expense - male or female. Some of them will even pretend to be your friend, pretending to care about you, only to later use that friendship to their advantage and/or your disadvantage. Sometimes they are straightforward about their views, other times they call themselves "feminists" and pretend to care about things like true Gender Equality and/or Female Unity etc.

So how can you tell if you are dealing with a "Mean Girl"? You can't always tell. The most important thing you can do, is to remember that just as there are some males out there who will only use you to get what they want, so there are also some females out there who will only use you to get what they want. 

To undermine the impact that a female can have simply because of her gender would be a significant mistake.

Women are just as capable of hurting people, as men are capable of hurting people - it's just usually in different ways.

We wouldn't hail up "Mean Guys" as empowering, so why should we hail up "Mean Girls" as empowering?

Monday, June 19, 2017

Who Sets Beauty Standards For Women?

It is a true and common saying that women in the world today are far more beautiful than their ancestors and yet women today seem to struggle more emotionally with beauty standards than women before them.

Why is that?

Many people today will be quick to blame Hollywood and the media, laying all of the blame on the movie stars, which is a common answer.

Feminists will be the first to tell you that it's all men's fault (or society's fault, ran by men) for pressuring women into meeting "unrealistic standards".

Rarely, if ever, will you hear "I set my own beauty standards" or "women set their own beauty standards".

The truth of the matter is that it's really a combination of factors, though not all factors are equal. Beauty often works like fashion, going in and out of certain trends, while still maintaining some sense of consistency.
So let's break this down, shall we?

Hollywood's Role in Beauty Standards:
Hollywood Beauties
Beauty standards in Hollywood, as you can see from the picture above, have changed the most and have probably been the most varied. Hollywood tends to reflect beauty standards more than it pushes beauty standards, though. This is because Hollywood is in the business of making money, which means that the audience largely dictates the standards. Obviously Hollywood can try to put whatever they want in front of us, but ultimately it is our choice whether or not to financially support Hollywood's decisions every time we choose to pay for a film.

In Los Angeles, CA where Hollywood culture thrives the most, women are the least offended by "Hollywood body types" and use the term "unrealistic" the least. However, in New York City, New York where Hollywood culture is more looked down upon, women are far more offended by "Hollywood body types" and use the term "unrealistic" at much higher rates, even to the point of accusing those women in Hollywood of being unrealistic and not wanting to see advertisements that have really skinny women. (Celebrities like Katy Perry are even photo-shopped to look thicker, not thinner, than she actually is or her advertisement would make women less likely to buy the product.)

In reality, Hollywood just follows the beauty trends in our society. In the 1980's, there were many more Caucasian buxom blondes who dominated the TV screens and media ads. In the 1990's, there was a shift from buxom to skinny - regardless of race as Tyra Banks and Halle Berry showed - and an expansion from blondes to include brunettes. In the 2000's and 2010's, there was another expansion with petite and multi-ethnic women like Isla Fisher or Eva Longoria.

Hollywood has a lot of problems but setting our beauty standards is not one of them.

Society's Role in Beauty Standards:
Barbie vs. Non-Barbie
The introduction of a "perfect body" Barbie doll leads many to blame society for littering American homes with an unrealistic doll. But did you know that Barbie was created by an American businesswoman and inventor named Ruth Handler? She modeled Barbie after a German doll which was modeled after a TV show character. Are we really going to accuse this woman of having some malicious agenda just because we're not happy with our perceptions of her product? After all, if you look at life-sized mannequins used in American malls and clothes shops at the exact same time, it's easy to tell that Barbie is just a miniature fashion mannequin.
Barbie vs Mannequin
This might upset you to hear this, or it might just make you laugh, but you should know that this body form was used for mannequins - and Barbie - because of how great it highlights fashion. It was always meant to flatter the fashion styles presented as much as possible. After all, you can understand how stores would want to show their fashions in the best possible light to sell them, right? The stores were not thinking that women would suddenly develop insecurities about the mannequins so how could Barbie's inventor - a woman - think that a miniature doll version would suddenly make little girls develop insecurities?

Barbie was always meant as a fashion doll; Not a beauty standards-enforcing doll. That's why Barbie - and mannequins - are not made in "realistic" forms but fashion-flattering forms. Yes, it is an unrealistic body type but women should know that it was never made with any intent to offend or pressure. Mannequins were made to sell women clothes and Barbie dolls were made to sell doll clothes to little girls in preparation for the adult fashion they'd be buying later.

Men's Role in Beauty Standards:
Victoria's Secret Ad
Straight men are attracted to the female form, it is a fact of nature. Another fact of nature is that the female form attracts men for reproduction reasons. This is why men are attracted to what they perceive as fertility factors. In fact, women even become more attractive when they are at their most fertile, according to men and women!

In different areas of the world, there are divergent perceptions of what "beauty factors" are. In colder regions, buxom women are more valued because they have a higher chance of reproduction success since they can withstand the colder temperatures better. In tropical climates, smaller women are more valued because they have a higher chance of reproduction success since they can withstand the hotter temperatures better. This is why they say "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".


Most commonly though, men just like when women look like women and have feminine features that are different from the features that men have. Believe it or not, men really value the physical differences in women and appreciate seeing a woman that doesn't look like himself. This is why the most consistent beauty factors throughout all cultures, tends to be femininity.

Just as women have standards for men, so men have their own standards for women. However, the media and feminism tends to vastly over-exaggerate what men's standards exactly are.

While it is true that men are visual creatures, they are not quite as picky nor quite as open-minded as they are made out to be. Some women think that men are so attracted to the female form that they are sexually open to any woman so long as she has woman parts, this is not true. Other women think that men focus on tons of nuances and subtleties and demand precise perfection, this is also not true.

While it does depend on a man's culture, again, for the most part men just like women to be feminine as a way to contrast their own masculinity. Young guys who are not ready for commitment are not the same as men. Young guys are much more open-minded since they have a biological necessity that pressures them to find a certain amount of release for sexual tension. Men, however, are much more balanced and do not just rely on physical beauty but personality beauty as well.

A woman's physical beauty to a man can be changed by her personality, for better or worse!

American men don't really pressure women in regards to beauty standards. Of course, they each have their own preferences in women just as all women have their own preferences in men, but that's about as far as their role goes in this context. So if you want to know what kind of beauty is the most ideal to a man, it really depends on his individual preferences and culture.

Women's Role in Beauty Standards:
Heidi Montag famously got surgeries AFTER getting married and having fame; not TO get married and have fame.
Surprise, surprise! Women play the biggest role in beauty standards as well as tend to be the most obsessed with beauty and standards of beauty.

That's right. Women notice "flaws" and criticisms that most men don't even notice!

The sad truth is that many women do far more in the beauty department than they need to because they think or feel that they have to.

In addition, most women rank themselves against other women and use other women as their beauty standards.

Just as little girls love to imitate the pretty princess and wear the princess clothes, jewelry and/or make-up; So do women sometimes end up imitating other women. Or they get jealous and criticize. Either way, this usually has nothing to do with men - aside from one thinking that men find another woman more attractive - or society - aside from one thinking that society finds another woman more attractive.

Take the picture above with Heidi Montag for example. Hollywood didn't make her get surgeries, she had more TV time pre-surgery than post-surgery. Society didn't make her get surgeries, she was known as a "hottie" long before the surgeries. Men didn't make her get surgeries, she found herself a husband who was attracted to her just the way she was before surgery. (Plus, believe me when I say that there are tons of men out there who find her to be more attractive pre-surgery than post-surgery.) The sad truth here is that this woman got all of these surgeries because she wanted them. She criticized herself, pointed out "flaws" in herself and made a drastic decision to "improve" them. She implemented unrealistic beauty standards on herself and in turn, made herself look unrealistic.

Women are each other's harshest critics. Women will notice the most nuanced of details that sometimes even other women don't even notice. We get jealous and we get competitive. Feminists don't want to admit it but the reason is that we want attention for our beauty. We like receiving positive attention for our beauty and we love when someone considers us "beautiful".

Whether you are the kind of woman who only likes that attention from your lover or the kind that likes that attention from as many people as possible, it's just a natural and innocent feminine tendency to want our beauty to be appreciated.

What is not natural or innocent, however, is an obsession with beauty. Some women allow themselves to be so overwhelmed and obsessed by beauty that they actually attack themselves or other women based on their beauty standards and they do so in harsh manners. 

Now I am not saying that women should not have beauty standards or should not allow themselves to embrace certain beauty standards. What I am saying, is that everything in life requires balance, including beauty standards.

The most important and universal beauty standard is healthiness.

As long as you are healthy, you are beautiful in your own way. If you have certain preferences for yourself, that is perfectly normal! Sometimes women prefer to look a certain way and there is nothing wrong with that but you should never destroy yourselves for beauty. In America, no man, society or Hollywood is dictating the beauty standards for women; Women have the power and control to dictate their own beauty standards.

So the next time you are feeling insecure about beauty, try not to attack yourself or another woman. Instead, try to focus on why you are feeling insecure. Should you be feeling insecure? If the only reason you are feeling insecure is because you think another woman might be more physically attractive than you are, do not let that bring you down! Part of what makes us beautiful is our individuality and uniqueness. Physical beauty is only one part of the equation of overall beauty. Personality, attitude and even values are all parts of the equation as well.

The more women choose to focus solely on physical beauty standards, the more they are choosing to objectify themselves by choosing to focus on only 1 aspect of beauty.

Women in America are fortunate because they get to decide what is beautiful:
If they chose to focus more on acting ability, then actresses in Hollywood would be more talented than beautiful.
If they chose to focus more on sociability than fashion then society would reflect personality more than looks in advertisements, etc.
If they chose to date men and not young guys who are too immature for long-term commitment, then those men will value their overall beauty more than their physical beauty.
If they chose to be more accepting and understanding than jealous and competitive, then they would have more female unity than female cattiness and "mean girls".

So remember: Women are empowered in America and women do control more than feminists want you to believe. After all, if you believe you have no control then you're more likely to submit to feminists who claim they can get that control for you, after you donate to their cause, of course.