I have to do a public shout-out to all of the feminists among you; I had an inspiring random encounter today, and I felt the impact of those feminist ideas you're all projecting out into the world. I thought I should tell people, in the hopes of educating well-meaning people who really don't comprehend the effect their behaviors have on other members of their society. Here's what happened:
I was driving home from work on the freeway at 11 PM when I saw a car pulled off to the shoulder ahead of me. Being that there was no traffic to speak of behind me, I slowed down to see what was going on. Once the other vehicle was in range of my headlights I was able to make out a pair of women looking totally confused—and clearly freezing—as they stood behind a car with a very flat tire on the rear driver's side. I looked for signs of a jack, a spare, or a lug wrench, and saw nothing; unless they were either missing one or more of those things or there was something else wrong with the car in addition to the flat tire, there was no good reason they should be just standing around doing nothing but freezing. So, as any sensible person who gave a (small) shit would do, I partially pulled over, rolled down my window, and asked if they needed any tools or help with a spare, or if they needed to use a cell phone to call anyone.
Then, as any 30-something woman—who's learned that women of any age can get away with *absolutely any* behavior toward men, short of killing them before first coming up with at least a poor excuse—would do, one of them shouted, "Fuck off, you fucking perv." Ahh, feminism at its finest. The sight and sound of a woman fully empowered to do absolutely anything the fuck she wants—because she lives in a society where a woman's individual level of sexual and individual power over men FAR exceeds any potential social power imbalance in men's favor—with absolutely not a care in the world about her objective value or qualities as either a human being OR as a member of society, or about her obligations to the standards of behavior agreed upon by her membership in said society, or about her responsibility for the consequences of any of her own utterly whimsical actions...
... that is INSPIRING!
I'm so glad, and so privileged, to get to observe yet another in an endless series of real-life examples of the reverberations of the female-entitlement-activism running rampant through our society. Please, feminists - by all means... continue your noble quest for *overt* total social dominance, even though you've already had covert total social dominance for as long as there have been men and women.
I still don't know why they were standing outside the car when there have been constant 80-90mph gusts of wind as cold as -2 F since... yesterday... but I can only guess that it must be another symptom of their obvious stupidity. Being the models of feminism that they were, it's clearly a deeply-ingrained personality trait which they celebrate at every opportunity.
In short, all of you self-mistitled feminist "activists" hawking compulsory "equality" on your pseudo-philosophical blogging communities and internet social networks, ejaculating fallacious rhetorical bullshit while egomaniacally masturbating your daddy issues and profound lack of both useful historical education and intellectual competence... are actually just *singularly oblivious fucks.* I'm calling you out.
Feminism = willful adversely socio-repercussive egotism.
A friend of mine brought up an important fact that I may take for granted: almost everyone who uses the word "feminism" has NO CLUE what they are actually saying - so I should probably do my due diligence and explain it to them and/or you.
You have to first understand that I'm referring to *actual* feminism when I write about "feminism." I'm aware that it is popularly misused in the form of a misnomer for a significantly-lopsided and naive—but probably originally well meaning—version of "egalitarianism," but that's not the (mis-)definition I'm referring to when I invoke the word... and, honestly, that popular misuse is one of the reasons I feel it's so important to bring it up. I have no argument against egalitarianism or social *equality,* (at least in theory, though that's another matter entirely), and I have no problem with the generally constructive ideas referred to by otherwise well-meaning people when they incorrectly use the word "feminism," as I think many so-called "feminists" probably do. However, the example I described in my original post illustrates one of many inevitable behavioral consequences that follow the inappropriate misappropriation of one word—with its own very specific and strong connotations—for use as a container for quite different ideas - in this case with contradictory connotations. Language does change people's behavior, both as they use it themselves and as they are exposed to it in their environments; I think it's important to scrutinize the net results of language in general, and even more vital to do so when those results are... for lack of a better term, horrific.
Notwithstanding the vernacular misconception of its meaning, actual feminism is something else entirely different from "egalitarianism" and, in fact, exerts a force in society that is literally opposite to the notions of equality or socio-sexual balance. If the damaging and marginalizing ideas of feminism weren't so easily conveyed along with the affirmative ideas that most people *intend* when they misuse the word "feminism," I wouldn't consider it more worthy of mentioning than any other modern linguistic corruption - but sadly that's not the case. A hundred years from now, if kids started misusing the word "fascism" when they actually mean "patriotism"—an approximately equivalent analogy of "feminism" vs "egalitarianism," and, (to a well-meaning but inadequately-educated person, as are most members of modern society), a likely mistake if some faceless marketing executive decided to re-brand an old idea for a new generation after "fascism" had faded from the social vernacular—the resulting inference of anyone adjacent to such misuse will inevitably contain fundamental aspects of both - and the contradictory nuances of meaning will still be both significant and tangible... despite their invisibility to some or even most of the population.
More than anything else, the point I'm making is that misusing language—even by accident as the result of ignorance—can actually be damaging, with the potential for damage having a positive correlation to the strength of the language misused - and that said damage finds its way into real life interactions between people. Sadly, good intentions are now one of the most dangerous aspirations a human being can possess - unless they are administrated and moderated by an uncommonly critical and altruistic intellect. How many human beings would you describe as being primarily "uncommonly critical and altruistic intellectuals" above anything else? – because those individuals are your only real coefficient of constructive potential by which any social activism can be multiplied to produce a net-positive social effect. The investments of anyone and everyone else will bring about a net deficit in short order. The actual net social effect of feminism is particularly damaging - despite the good intentions of many women (and men) who don't know better. While I recognize those good intentions, in this case I cannot in good conscience *enable* the inevitable damage perpetuated by the—admittedly sincere—ignorance from which such intentions are derived.
Feminism's story isn't especially different than other historical instances of linguistic usurpation, and it could easily be considered a cliche in our current era. Even if I try to ignore the powerful ramifications of the language itself, though, the pragmatic reality stands on its own: very few spiritually-benevolent social movements in the present day are actually moving in a constructive direction, due not only to the behavioral law of numbers but also to the utter dominance of marketing in the public sphere of thought. Generally speaking, any mobilization of individuals that originated beyond the individual level will inevitably result in the corruption of its significance and consequence to and for said individuals. For more on this and other tragic social advocacy fails, see Google.
A single word cannot convey any meaningful philosophy, either. Women who want to focus on the affirmative aspects that have been colloquially/recently injected into the otherwise-contrary ideas of "feminism" should do so - but the first step should be defining those ideas properly. Even if feminism didn't mean what it actually means, using it as it is currently used would still be a problem. Actual feminism is intrinsically insecure, maliciously rhetorical, fundamentally political, and reflects an utterly demeaning and marginalizing concept of men; it is egocentric rather than altruistic, proudly hypocritical rather than reservedly intelligent, and radically fundamentalist in ways that, truthfully, are rarely seen even in the worst extremes of *male* ideology more recently than the past few hundred years. Even being the cynic that I am, I'm reasonably confident none of that reflects what otherwise reasonable people—who erroneously refer to themselves as "feminists"—actually consciously believe in.
As for me, I'm a proud supporter of conscientious, altruistic egalitarians of no political affiliation - and of no particular demographic.
— and note how I'm not calling it "masculinism."
I was driving home from work on the freeway at 11 PM when I saw a car pulled off to the shoulder ahead of me. Being that there was no traffic to speak of behind me, I slowed down to see what was going on. Once the other vehicle was in range of my headlights I was able to make out a pair of women looking totally confused—and clearly freezing—as they stood behind a car with a very flat tire on the rear driver's side. I looked for signs of a jack, a spare, or a lug wrench, and saw nothing; unless they were either missing one or more of those things or there was something else wrong with the car in addition to the flat tire, there was no good reason they should be just standing around doing nothing but freezing. So, as any sensible person who gave a (small) shit would do, I partially pulled over, rolled down my window, and asked if they needed any tools or help with a spare, or if they needed to use a cell phone to call anyone.
Then, as any 30-something woman—who's learned that women of any age can get away with *absolutely any* behavior toward men, short of killing them before first coming up with at least a poor excuse—would do, one of them shouted, "Fuck off, you fucking perv." Ahh, feminism at its finest. The sight and sound of a woman fully empowered to do absolutely anything the fuck she wants—because she lives in a society where a woman's individual level of sexual and individual power over men FAR exceeds any potential social power imbalance in men's favor—with absolutely not a care in the world about her objective value or qualities as either a human being OR as a member of society, or about her obligations to the standards of behavior agreed upon by her membership in said society, or about her responsibility for the consequences of any of her own utterly whimsical actions...
... that is INSPIRING!
I'm so glad, and so privileged, to get to observe yet another in an endless series of real-life examples of the reverberations of the female-entitlement-activism running rampant through our society. Please, feminists - by all means... continue your noble quest for *overt* total social dominance, even though you've already had covert total social dominance for as long as there have been men and women.
I still don't know why they were standing outside the car when there have been constant 80-90mph gusts of wind as cold as -2 F since... yesterday... but I can only guess that it must be another symptom of their obvious stupidity. Being the models of feminism that they were, it's clearly a deeply-ingrained personality trait which they celebrate at every opportunity.
In short, all of you self-mistitled feminist "activists" hawking compulsory "equality" on your pseudo-philosophical blogging communities and internet social networks, ejaculating fallacious rhetorical bullshit while egomaniacally masturbating your daddy issues and profound lack of both useful historical education and intellectual competence... are actually just *singularly oblivious fucks.* I'm calling you out.
Feminism = willful adversely socio-repercussive egotism.
A friend of mine brought up an important fact that I may take for granted: almost everyone who uses the word "feminism" has NO CLUE what they are actually saying - so I should probably do my due diligence and explain it to them and/or you.
You have to first understand that I'm referring to *actual* feminism when I write about "feminism." I'm aware that it is popularly misused in the form of a misnomer for a significantly-lopsided and naive—but probably originally well meaning—version of "egalitarianism," but that's not the (mis-)definition I'm referring to when I invoke the word... and, honestly, that popular misuse is one of the reasons I feel it's so important to bring it up. I have no argument against egalitarianism or social *equality,* (at least in theory, though that's another matter entirely), and I have no problem with the generally constructive ideas referred to by otherwise well-meaning people when they incorrectly use the word "feminism," as I think many so-called "feminists" probably do. However, the example I described in my original post illustrates one of many inevitable behavioral consequences that follow the inappropriate misappropriation of one word—with its own very specific and strong connotations—for use as a container for quite different ideas - in this case with contradictory connotations. Language does change people's behavior, both as they use it themselves and as they are exposed to it in their environments; I think it's important to scrutinize the net results of language in general, and even more vital to do so when those results are... for lack of a better term, horrific.
Notwithstanding the vernacular misconception of its meaning, actual feminism is something else entirely different from "egalitarianism" and, in fact, exerts a force in society that is literally opposite to the notions of equality or socio-sexual balance. If the damaging and marginalizing ideas of feminism weren't so easily conveyed along with the affirmative ideas that most people *intend* when they misuse the word "feminism," I wouldn't consider it more worthy of mentioning than any other modern linguistic corruption - but sadly that's not the case. A hundred years from now, if kids started misusing the word "fascism" when they actually mean "patriotism"—an approximately equivalent analogy of "feminism" vs "egalitarianism," and, (to a well-meaning but inadequately-educated person, as are most members of modern society), a likely mistake if some faceless marketing executive decided to re-brand an old idea for a new generation after "fascism" had faded from the social vernacular—the resulting inference of anyone adjacent to such misuse will inevitably contain fundamental aspects of both - and the contradictory nuances of meaning will still be both significant and tangible... despite their invisibility to some or even most of the population.
More than anything else, the point I'm making is that misusing language—even by accident as the result of ignorance—can actually be damaging, with the potential for damage having a positive correlation to the strength of the language misused - and that said damage finds its way into real life interactions between people. Sadly, good intentions are now one of the most dangerous aspirations a human being can possess - unless they are administrated and moderated by an uncommonly critical and altruistic intellect. How many human beings would you describe as being primarily "uncommonly critical and altruistic intellectuals" above anything else? – because those individuals are your only real coefficient of constructive potential by which any social activism can be multiplied to produce a net-positive social effect. The investments of anyone and everyone else will bring about a net deficit in short order. The actual net social effect of feminism is particularly damaging - despite the good intentions of many women (and men) who don't know better. While I recognize those good intentions, in this case I cannot in good conscience *enable* the inevitable damage perpetuated by the—admittedly sincere—ignorance from which such intentions are derived.
Feminism's story isn't especially different than other historical instances of linguistic usurpation, and it could easily be considered a cliche in our current era. Even if I try to ignore the powerful ramifications of the language itself, though, the pragmatic reality stands on its own: very few spiritually-benevolent social movements in the present day are actually moving in a constructive direction, due not only to the behavioral law of numbers but also to the utter dominance of marketing in the public sphere of thought. Generally speaking, any mobilization of individuals that originated beyond the individual level will inevitably result in the corruption of its significance and consequence to and for said individuals. For more on this and other tragic social advocacy fails, see Google.
A single word cannot convey any meaningful philosophy, either. Women who want to focus on the affirmative aspects that have been colloquially/recently injected into the otherwise-contrary ideas of "feminism" should do so - but the first step should be defining those ideas properly. Even if feminism didn't mean what it actually means, using it as it is currently used would still be a problem. Actual feminism is intrinsically insecure, maliciously rhetorical, fundamentally political, and reflects an utterly demeaning and marginalizing concept of men; it is egocentric rather than altruistic, proudly hypocritical rather than reservedly intelligent, and radically fundamentalist in ways that, truthfully, are rarely seen even in the worst extremes of *male* ideology more recently than the past few hundred years. Even being the cynic that I am, I'm reasonably confident none of that reflects what otherwise reasonable people—who erroneously refer to themselves as "feminists"—actually consciously believe in.
As for me, I'm a proud supporter of conscientious, altruistic egalitarians of no political affiliation - and of no particular demographic.
— and note how I'm not calling it "masculinism."
No comments:
Post a Comment