How Large is your Penis?

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Feminism Sucks Part 3: Hypocrisy

Thus far I have explained that feminism is based on equality of results. But there is more to say on this subject. Feminists are not just happy with equal results for men and women but they are willing to gain special privledges over men. Feminists do not only want equal results, but they want more, they want to have privledges and bonuses over men even if it means they have an unfair advantage over men.

I will begin with a silly example but I think it illustrates an important point. Feminists complain when men speak of people in general as "men", they prefer for men to say "humans" or "people". Feminists have an issue when I refer to a person in general as a "he", they would want me to say "him or her". They claim equality, they want to men to speak of people equally without focusing on men. Now consider the following. In our society and other societies as well it considered to be appropriate for a man to give up his seat for a woman. It is also considered appropriate for a man to help a woman carry something up the stairs. If the situation is reversed, if a woman gives up her seat for a man, or a woman helps a man carry something up the stairs, it will seem inappropriate, it will look funny and strange. In this particular instance a woman has an advantage to a man. A man is required (by social understanding) to go out of his way to help a woman. When there is a hostage situation or a ship is sinking down under, who goes out first? It is the women who leave the scene before the men. This is who is helped first. So in this particular instance women have an advantage over men. Have you ever heard of a feminist complain about these social traditions? I never have. I hear feminists complain when I say "he" instead of "he or she" or when I say "man" instead of "person". But I never once heard a feminist complain about our social tradition and say "because we want equality in every way we do not want to be treated with special privledges". This is one example of feminist hypocrisy that I am referring to.

There are more important examples that illustrate feminist hypocrisy and show how feminists want to have special privledges over men. Take for example maternity leave. Women get leave almost all the time, while men usually do not. Do you hear feminists complain about this issue? Do you hear feminists say how it is unfair that women and men are being treated unequally? No. Because feminists are happy to have special privledges over men. I am not complaining and asking for paternity leave, I do not think there should be any kind of paternal leave. Because it is not the responsibility of the company to support kids of someone else; parents, mothers, or fathers, who want to have kids, that responsibility is on them (I will say no more on this topic for it will get off topic). My complaints are not addressed to that women get maternity leave, nor are my complaints that men do not get paternity leave. What my complaint is, is that these feminists who claim "equality" do not object to maternity leave because it benefits their own interests. If a woman was really intellectually honest and said that she would like maternity leave even though men are not likely to get them, fine, I can understand that, at least that would be honest. But what bothers me is the feminist hypocrisy. They talk about how they want to be treated in the same way as men, but the moment they get privledges over men, they forget their "equality" speech and take the benefits.

Here is another ridiculous example. Women firefighters have an easier training than male firefighters. There was a time in history when women had to go through the same hard training requirements as men did to become firefighters. As a result there was clearly a disproportiate amount of women to men because women are not as physically strong by their nature. Today this is not the case. Women have an easier training by lifting lighter dummies. Wait, I thought feminists want to have "equality". Where is their "equality" now? Besides for the fact that this firefighter policy is being hypocritical to feminists it also makes no sense. If a building is on fire or people need to be rescued a woman cannot say "sorry, I cannot do anything, I was not trained for this physically excessive job". I have also read about how in the military women do not have to do chin ups. Why the double standard?

Let us return back to the topic of feminism. I have mentioned that feminists often have this delusional view of "equality" as referring to actual equality between males and females. I have also shown that the goal of a modern feminist is to get equality of results not equality of opportunity. But now I am saying more. Feminists want more. They are not only satisfied with the same results for everybody but they want to have special privledges. This is why I am uncomfortable calling feminism a "philosophy". There is no intellectual thought in it. It is just a big giant special interest lobby group. That is it. That wants as much as it can get to itself by claiming to stand for "equality". And do not misunderstand me. I am not saying women should not be treated with a privledge over men. I realize that men are naturally stronger than women therefore I think it is appropriate, for example, for men to help women carry stuff up the stairs and not the other way around. But I am not a hypocrite, I do not preach "equality" and do something else.


  1. You are totally incorrect on many accounts.
    In New York State, the family and medical leave act applies equally to men and women. And yes, that is one of the accomplishments of feminism.
    Regarding the door opening stuff, you are also totally off. Women who do identify as feminists are much more likely to object to such chivalrous behavior than women who do not. (And MEN are much more likely to object than both). So your beef is actually with non-feminists. or with men.
    About having their lives saved first, I guess what that means is that in the face of death the first priority is to save your ass, ideology comes second.
    But those are extremes. In more common scenarios, such as women in the army, MEN are very fierce objectors.

  2. "You are totally incorrect on many accounts.": Let us assume for the sake of argument that I am totally incorrect about many things I have said. My other remaining arguments still apply. The fact that when it comes to death, women are saved first, did feminists ever object to that? Or when it comes to female firefighters, they have easier exercises. Again, it is hypocritical. My argument still stands. So even if I am wrong on some parts feminists are hypocrites. Equality means treated equally, as feminists claim, but they want special privledges. If some women cannot compete with a strength of a man in the army then too bad, she should get out of there not be given an free pass. They are therefore a special interest group.

    Just so you know, I do not treat women like garbage. I do open doors for them (in fact everybody). I carry their strollers up the strais if I see them in the subway. I give them my seat if they need to sit down. I do not help men carry stuff. And usually do not give up my seat for men.

  3. Hi....i'm a woman, and i must say that u have made an awesome point here. the ideas that feminism started with - equality for women, have been so overshadowed by ego, and attempts to fight this imaginary battle of sexes that doesn't really exist has created a monster. it's pathetic. i'm sikh, and in my religion, we are supposed to treat men and women equally, but it has become a breeding ground for feminist assholes who take things to a really stupid level. this whole women are goddesses and should be treated as such crap is for the birds. if a woman acts fake, acts like a slut, and you point that out, you're branded a woman hater and misogynist. screw that crap. thanks for taking a stand.