The theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes.
Organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests.
A basic study of these two definitions and the actions that are carried out by those who uphold their beliefs can bring about one simple conclusion. Definition one is a direct contradiction to definition two. Furthermore most feminists follow the ideals of definition two, completely ignoring definition one.
I am a humanist, something most feminists claim to be. I advocate for the equal treatment of men and women under the law. Meaning; if there is a law that gives one ethnic group, religious group, or gender legal power to discriminate against the other then there is a problem with that law and those who support it. The gender war that has seemed to spread to every populated landmass on the planet is being publicized in the wrong way by feminists. Whenever anything about gender discrimination in the legal system is brought up, feminists have nothing to say concerning women. Instead they turn the attention of the masses to the common sexism women face. Cat calls and the like. Feminists try, and succeed, with propaganda to sway public and political attention away from the legal gender discrimination to a battle over which gender is more sexist towards the other and which gender is objectified more in the media. These arguments can and have lasted decades and feminists have effectively taken the spotlight off of the justice system and shined it on women who are tired of seeing super models and beauty pageants.
One would wonder why if feminists believe in equality for the sexes as definition one states do they only advocate for the rights of women, clearly illustrated in definition two. Why is it that when legal discrimination against men is proven and protested, do feminists protest those who protest this discrimination? Why is it that every action politically influential feminist organizations take is in support of laws that give women legal power to imprison men with little to no physical evidence?
Answers to these questions can easily be ascertained from the hundreds of Men’s Rights blogs and websites. Answers that most feminists shrug off as lies, misogyny, or unimportant. However, many of these sites perpetrate a fatal flaw in their activism. They make the common mistake of replacing the word woman with feminist. This is a mistake that is always welcomed by feminists as it helps them propagate the label of misogynist to anyone who would speak out against the unjust laws they helped create and support. So in their view, as spread through the media, anyone who disagrees with a feminist is a woman hater.
This devious tactic has been recognized by the more intelligent Men’s Rights Activists and overcome with overwhelming support from women, putting a large dent in the still popular belief that any woman anywhere is a feminist. However, it is inevitable when arguing an issue of the law concerning discrimination against men that one will place a woman in the same category as a feminist. The reason for this is simple, the laws that discriminate against men in the western world were created and advocated for by feminists and they give unjust power and privilege to women. Knowing this makes it easier for one to assume that men are angry and spiteful towards women when they protest these laws. However, this is simply not the case.
At this point one must return to the first definition of feminism to understand why it is in no way a definition of feminism at all. Western women have all of the same rights granted to men under the laws of their respective countries. Yet feminists believe that women are being oppressed, denied working opportunities, and bullied out of the political arena. In response they have advocated for and helped create laws that grant women special privileges. These privileges are justified under the ideal that women need special protection, from men, under the law. This is where definition two, the one and only true definition of feminism, takes hold. Indeed, if feminists followed the ideals of definition one there would be no Fathers for Justice or other Men’s Rights Movements because there would simply be no need for them.
Women who believe that they do not need special laws and privileges to make it in the western world have been shown the misuse of power that feminists have garnered since their rise in western governments. They have shared the pain with their male friends and family members who have been unjustly imprisoned and or separated from their children on the words of women who seek to use the privileges garnered by feminism for their own selfish ends. This is where attacking feminism has been most difficult, because one cannot attack feminism without in some way attacking women. However, many men (myself included) and women have broken through this, glass shield, so to speak, and mounted an unwavering attack. Not on women, but on humans. I, as a humanist have no problem attacking women who are destroying the lives of innocent men just as I have no problem attacking men who do harm to society.
Women are human. This is something that when a feminist is backed into a corner with facts will fall back on to gain sympathy from her/his attackers. They will drop the debate completely and begin stating something like “feminism is the radical idea that women are human beings” and then attempt to shame their opponent that until recently would most likely be male by telling him how hard it is to be a woman in any society. In one debate I had with a feminist she went as far as shouting that women are afraid of men and need to be able to have them arrested with nothing more than a word and a whimper. This line of reasoning obviously contradicts the fact that women are indeed human and require no special protection to live in the world. This line of reasoning also offends a substantial amount of women who share the belief that they do not require privilege to coexist with men. These women do not attempt to end debates with sad attempts at garnering pity from their opponent with lines like, “when you walk into a club and have to be afraid that someone may drag you off into the night and rape you then you will know what it is like to be a woman” or, “women live in fear that their next boyfriend or husband will beat them.”
These “shaming tactics” as they are called by most Men’s Rights groups have been set aside because the ones who mostly hear or read them now are women. Groups such as Men and Women Against Discrimination are taking the legal battle to new heights and the old tactics of shame and blame used by feminists are falling short in the wake of the new outcry for true equality.
I am not a Men’s Rights Activist but I am a man and I find it outrageous that I can be imprisoned by a woman that I have never met because she felt the need to lie about me hitting her or sexually assaulting her. The simple fact is that there are injustices in the legal system that result in male imprisonment. Men are the only ones who can be imprisoned legally on testimony alone. This is not a theory or opinion it is a fact and it is being fought. If feminists were for equality they would fight this discrimination. However, definition one of feminism seems to belong to any group but feminism.
I will be shedding more light on the injustices men face in the legal system in future posts for this F-13 series. Until then I hereby christen feminism under the radar of another equal rights advocate that has seen through the lies of the feminist agenda.
Feminism definition one has earned its rightful place…in file thirteen.