Commenter Schopenhauer states that women’s power is based on their sexuality, dismissing feminism as a “pure power grab” and not in the least intellectual.
Feminism was never anything even approaching an “intellectual movement.” It was always a pure power grab. I drove this point home to my sons the night they were watching this awards show. I pointed out how every female “artist” appearing on the show was dressed provocatively to heighten her sexuality. I told my sons that this is because their sexuality is the entire basis of women’s power.
I mostly agree, and I’ve made similar statements before. However, I don’t think sexuality is all women have to offer, but considering what feminism has turned out to be it certainly can appear that way. Women have always been economically important, and a major driver of cultural innovation and change. If you have a daughter, like I do, it’s pretty clear that women and girls have a very important influence on language and customs, which remain as important today as ever. Men, for example, tend to be more conservative in speech, while women innovate. As my children have grown, I’ve had the opportunity to observe this phenomenon first-hand.
Feminism, however, has nothing at all to offer but sexuality and identity politics. I’ve compared it to prostitution before, but that might be a little hard on prostitution, because at least in those transactions a man generally gets what he paid for.
This blustering about equality we hear from feminists is pure smoke. When a feminist mentions “equality,” she knows it’s a labile concept, to be shaped into whatever is useful at any given time. Say some men discover a new source of energy and make a huge pile of money off it. Immediately, feminists will show up demanding “equality” – i.e., a piece of the pie – by virtue of their sex, and that alone.
The term equality means nothing but freedom to shift the goalposts whenever convenient, so it’s misleading to include it in the definition of feminism. But through observation and experience, we can identify an accurate definition:
Feminism is the collective promotion of women’s interests at men’s expense by the ancient and effective means of sexual leverage. It is the use of female sexuality and identity to extract social, economic and political power from men.
Women who achieve power or acclaim without using their sexuality or identity as women are not benefitting from feminism. Feminism did nothing for Marie Curie, Margaret Thatcher, or Angela Merkel, to name a contemporary example.
It has done a great deal for Madonna, Hillary Clinton and Gloria Steinem, all of whom rely on either female sexuality or identity, or both, for most of their wealth and power.
Feminism is socially harmful because its very nature is non-productive; it encourages women and girls to strive for gain without offering anything in return. Further, it explicitly tells them that they owe nothing to anyone but their fellow feminists. While something approaching this attitude might be appropriate for a young woman who is choosing a mate, when it becomes a mass social movement it has destructive long-term consequences. En masse, women are encouraged to remain in an adolescent frame of mind for the entirety of their fertile years, after which they suddenly find that it doesn’t work anymore, and it turns out they’ve squandered an enormous amount of resources on nothing but self-gratification.
To embrace modesty, humility, self-sacrifice and service to a greater cause, such as a family, is to betray feminism. Likewise, to raise oneself without resorting to the use of female status and identity is to reject the feminist path.
If more of our women disavowed feminism, we would be collectively wealthier, happier and healthier. Yes, that includes most women, too.
Source:
http://ift.tt/1ltBDZp