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."