The entertainer John Mayer, ironically a well-known serial womanizer, responded to the Kavanaugh hearings and #MeToo by saying we should tear up the social contract between men and women and replace it with a new one in which men were expected to behave better. I agree with him as far as he goes, but not out of male guilt. We need to tear up the contract and renegotiate a whole slew of things between men and women. After recently learning of the female supremacist views of powerful Democratic women like Senator Mazie Hirono, I think everything up to the Nineteenth Amendment needs to be on the table.
What is at stake for society is whether we achieve the purported feminist goal of equality or whether the third-wave backlash wins and women are stuck in (and men stuck with) limbo—where women are legally equal adults to men, but “special needs children” in most other respects. Feminist women of the 1970s were tougher, more equality-minded and probably closer to the overall equality goal. Today’s third-wave feminist victims think they can have their cake and eat it too, as if “equality” could be made into a safe “equitable” space where all disparities that favor men are eliminated but those that favor women persist. That is impossible, and their continued delusion is untenable for our society.
Because the one-sidedness of feminism (literally “pro-woman”) is at odds with the stated goal of equality, there has never been a real negotiation of what equality is. There has only been demand on one side and acquiescence on the other. This has actually resulted in many double standards being enforced and great harm to society. But real equality is equality, not just whatever women decide they want.
Feminists have portrayed history falsely. Women were not legally treated as property pre-feminism, they were treated as children. Continue reading “Tear Up The Contract”
In a previous post, I outlined why I think “Believe Women” is profoundly misogynistic and misandrist at the same time. Evil. It infantilizes the women who make accusations, emotionally manipulates other women and men, and is a declaration of man-hate all in one. It is a regressive witch hunt logic that sets basic ideas of justice back a millennium.
But it is also just profoundly stupid as a practical matter. For three main reasons:
1.Some women lie about rape.
Let’s just get this one out of the way. It should be obvious, but for some reason it is controversial.
Women have the same capacity for lying as men. We don’t know how often they lie about rape, in terms of a percentage of cases, but we know some women do. Why would a woman lie? Continue reading “Unpacking “Believe Women!” – Further Thoughts”
Feminist SJWs are such profoundly stupid people they think there is such a thing as a right to an abortion in the US. There isn’t. The landmark Roe v. Wade ruling says that a woman’s constitutional right to privacy must be balanced with society’s interest in protecting human life, that until a fetus is viable outside the uterus the decision to have an abortion is a private one and therefore protected.
I agree that the compromise Roe represents is a great model for thinking of the issue, but it clearly has its flaws for absolutists on both sides. The pro-life side says that even a non-viable fetus is sacred human life and abortion at any point after conception is murder. The pro-choice side thinks viability is irrelevant and abortion on demand must be a “right” up to the moment of birth.
But there are at least two major forces at work in our society that will undo Roe v. Wade and render it moot regardless of who is on the court—one on each side of the compromise.
Continue reading “The Real Issue: Roe v. Wade”
Hello? The main plot of Harper Lee’s iconic novel revolves around a false rape accusation, and the main message was essentially not to judge a book by its cover (mostly race in this case). But despite generations of avid readers, “Anti-racism” and “anti-sexism” are now the new racism and sexism. Atticus Finch would never deprive someone of a human right like presumption of innocence based on their race or gender. Maybe they thought it took place in an alternate universe…
1 originating in and characteristic of a particular region or country; native (often followed by to)
As a white person who is indigenous to the United States of America, I wish all my fellow natural born citizens a happy Indigenous Peoples’ Day!
But that makes me wonder, why does the pro-immigrant Left think it is progressive to celebrate native, natural born citizens over immigrant ones?