Thirty of so years ago I began to hear all these weird claims from a group of people called ‘feminists’. The claims they made were so absurd and ridiculous that they were almost unbelievable. Despite the fact that they were claiming that it was all over political and legal issues (such as equality) it became very clear that they were continually going way beyond that and bringing all this stuff into it that has nothing to do with what they were claiming. It didn’t take long for me to realize that all the political and legal overtones was, frankly, a “cover-up” for some other thing. Because of this I began an inquiry the mentality that was causing it. Every so often I hear some statements that reveals a lot of the mentality behind it. I heard a statement that was quite revealing in a speech in Dublin, Ireland, on Dec. 6, 2012, by Hillary Clinton. She was talking about what she had seen over the years in various parts of the world with special emphasis, of course, on how females are nothing but victims in the world (an all-too familiar feminist claim). One of the statements she made was this:
“ . . . there will be many sacrifices and losses until we finally reach a point where daughters are valued as sons, where girls as educated as boys, where women are encouraged and permitted to make their contributions to their families just as the men are . . .”
Here we see a number of familiar themes:
- The ‘great cause’, that they are fighting against some threat.
- That females are victims. Generally, it is the male who victimizes them.
- That it’s “bad” that females are not permitted to be like males.
- That females should be just like males. They should be treated like a male and be able to do everything a male does.
- There is a lack of recognition of being a female.
- There is a lack of emphasis on what females do.
- There is a lack of recognition of the contribution females make.
These all reflect attitudes I find continually in feminism.
Basically, my experience is that there are two forms of feminists. One type glorifies the female to no end, almost turning her into a goddess. The other type is a female who has a poor view of the female, usually thinking that they are victims. As a result, they think that the answer is to be a man and do things like a man. They treat this situation like its some sort of a legal and political fight (with some sort of a ‘high cause’). They also justify everything with legal and political ideology. In effect, to put it in its simplest form, it causes a “flight from femalehood into manhood in the name of equality”. From what I have so far seen, Hillary seems to be a part of this latter group who reflect these points of views and these are reflected in her statement.
In the many statements I’m aware she made over the years, she’s mentions all this stuff in regard to females pissing and moaning all the problems that they are having, often making them out as victims. But I’ve never heard her mention the problems males have. She even said that the “true victims” (there’s the victim theme again) of war are the females, without so much as a thought about the male who fights in wars (I wrote an article in this blog about this called, “On how I was insulted by a statement by Hillary Clinton – feminist egocentrism – feminist equality”). She never mentions the 10 or so year old boys who are wielding an AK-47 (This is a group of people that seems to of been completely forgotten by everyone). Can you imagine what would happen if these were young girls doing that? . . . We probably never hear the end of it. Something like that would be perfect for a feminist to ‘prove’ that the female is a ‘victim of a male-dominated society’. There is also no mention of how many males work themselves to death to support their family, nor the burden and stress many of these males have (which is quite prevalent in Islamic society, I’m told). There is no mention of the hard work and sacrifices the males do to maintain society either. Nor any mention of the men dying in fights. Like a good feminist, her only concern is the female-as-victim, and finding ‘proof’ of that . . . at least, that’s all I’ve seen her do.
The female-as-victim is a too common point of view with feminists (I wrote an article in this blog about this point of view called “Thoughts on the ‘female-as-victim-of-the-world’: “feminism”, a poor way to look at things”). Many feminists whole world view is based in this idea of ‘victimhood’, almost to the point of glorifying it. I’ve found that many feminists viewpoints of everything revolves around the female being a victim. They ASSUME it. They INTERPRET everything from that point of view. They SEE it everywhere and in everything. As a result, to them it is a REALITY, a reality they must FIGHT. Many have such a struggle with this feeling of being a ‘victim’ that they have created this phantisized “war” based in this idea of the female-as-victim. The male, the world, and sometimes just about anything, can be viewed as threatening them and they must fight against it. It has become a ‘great cause’, a great fight they must fight. This familiar theme is mentioned by Hillary.
As I said above, one of the things that stunned me about feminists, when I first saw them, is their claims, particularly of being ‘oppressed’, ‘enslaved’, ‘abused’ . . . in short, a victim. Many of these claims seemed out-of-context and non-existent, often involving everyday things that have been going on world-wide for thousands of years! In fact, the only people who have ever claimed this ‘victimhood’ and the fight against it are feminists. In 30 plus years, I’ve never heard of another group of people speak of this. No other type of female, no male, no other culture . . . only feminists or people who take feminists viewpoints seem to be seeing this. What this shows and reveals is that the female-as-victim and the fight against victimhood is a reflection of the feminists mentality.
And so, who is the fight against?
Frankly, themselves. The whole female-as-victim, and the fight against it, is a fabrication and illusion they’ve created in their minds. They see it because they want to see it not because it’s a reality. If it were a reality then we would be hearing other people mention it . . . but we don’t. Obviously, it’s a reflection of feminist mentality. And so, from the beginning of her statement above, she describes a “war” that is, in reality, a “war” in her own mind as well as many feminists mind. Some aspects of this “war” would be described in her later remarks.
The statement “daughters as valued as sons” is very revealing. It shows the basic sense of envy of the male that feminists seem to have. In fact, if one looks at feminists points of view one will see continual references to MALE ENVY. It can cause a number of reactions:
- It makes it so that they think the ‘female has nothing’ and the ‘male has everything’. With this point of view, how do you think they are going to view the female? How do you think they are going to view the male? Answer: the way the feminists view it.
- Sometimes, this envy can be so strong that it can develop into a very strong hatred (as I, myself, have seen).
- It can also get to the point that many females think the male is ‘plotting’ against them, or that we are purposely trying to do something against them. That is to say, it can create a paranoia. Sometimes this can even reach ‘conspiracy theory’ proportions.
- They will blame the male, usually, for much of their problems. They will use phrases like ‘male-dominated society’, and such, to describe these viewpoints.
- Very easily this envy can create a feeling that they are victims.
- They may even think they are abused in some way.
Many of Hillary’s remarks also reveal how there is an attempt at trying to turn the female into a male. This is revealed in how EVERYTHING IS LOOKED AT FROM A MALE POINT OF VIEW (“daughters are valued as sons”, “girls as educated as boys”, “where women are encouraged and permitted to make their contributions to their families just as the men are”). This shows a trait of feminism: the feminists denial of their own femininity. Many of these types of girls spend more time trying to be a man than learning how to be a female. This type of thinking makes them take certain viewpoints such as:
- They should be treated like males.
- They should be able to do whatever a male does.
- They should have everything a male has.
- Nothing should prevent them from being males.
As a result, everything tends to be looked at from a male point of view, creating a very ‘male-biased’ point of view.
Another thing to note is that there is no mention of females doing female things. Everything is looked at from what the male does and have. If the male does it, they should be allowed to do it. If the male has it, they should be allowed to have it, and so on. This shows the male envy. It creates a point of view of the female-as-a-male, which is so common with feminism.
I should point out that anyone who looks at things this way, as the female-as-a-male, will find nothing but problems in the world and in society. Why is this? Because the female-as-a-male is not the normal scenario in the ‘real human world’. Never, in the history of the world, anywhere in the world, has any society tried to make the female-as-a-male. What, then, do you think you’re going to see in the world . . . females being men? But, yet, this is what they think, and expect, they will find. And because they don’t find it they piss and moan about it, professing ‘victimhood’, ‘oppression’, and so on, accusing the males as being ‘tyrants’ and such. This again shows how this reflects, not a real problem, but a problem within themselves. Frankly, after all these years of observation, the very word “feminist” has a connotation of someone who has a ‘mental issue’ to me . . . and there’s not a whole lot to prove that wrong!
She says that females need to be “encouraged and permitted to make contributions to their families just as the men are”. If someone looks at the world and sees the FEMALE-AS-A-FEMALE and not as the FEMALE-AS-A-MALE you will find that females makes great and tremendous contributions to their families and society. But, in order to do this, you have to appreciate the female for being female. They have to see value in what the female does. This is something Hillary, and feminists in general, do not do. They are usually too busy envying the male, and trying to be a male. How, then, are they going to see the female contribution? The answer is simple: they can’t. Because of this, they never really see the contributions of the female. No wonder they see the female as being like a ‘nothing’! Again, it’s their mentality that causes them to see this . . . it’s not because that is the way it is . . . it’s all in their minds.
What do you think the females have been doing all these centuries all over the world . . . vacillating in the background? The females ARE contributing to their families and societies, but in a female way, as they have been doing worldwide since the beginning of time. Females have seldom made contributions to their families and society as a man, yet this is what the feminists are wanting and expecting . . . this is what they are fighting for!
Such unrealistic and nonsensical notions . . .
In my opinion, the female makes far more contributions to society by being a female than Hillary and feminists are willing to admit . . . since its ‘femalish’ they just pass it off as nothing. This ‘passing off the femalish’ is common with feminists. It shows how feminists points of view are not really favoring the female, as they claim. It only favors a specific type of female: the female-as-a-male. With feminists, they seldom speak of what females have done as females, nor appreciate it. Again, we see the tendency of how feminists downplay females and female contributions.
The endless downplaying of the female by the feminists . . .
You can see that a lot of these viewpoints are actually setting up a scenario that is actually a degradation of the female. It does this in a number of ways:
- Trying to turn the female into a male or something she’s not.
- By viewing the female as a victim.
- By a ridiculous envy of the male.
- By not acknowledging the contributions of the female-as-a-female.
These points of view do not create a realistic and healthy femalehood, nor one that has a good view of itself . . . as the behaviour of feminists show.
As I said above, you will find that, behind this point of view are a bunch of females who have a poor view of the female and that, really, is the base of their problem. In fact, my 30 plus years of observation of feminists is that MOST FEMINISTS HAVE A HATRED FOR FEMININITY AND IN BEING FEMALE. Almost all the feminists I have seen seem like they are trying to flee femininity than embrace it. This is one of the reasons why I consider the feminists, and feminist points of view, as so destructive. Despite all its supposed “pro-female” statements, it’s actually anti-female in the end. If they had their way, they would utterly destroy femininity.
Much of what they say is unnatural, not naturally occurring, and not part of the ‘real human world’. To show you how unnatural this stuff is we must remember that in order to achieve what the feminists want (turning the female into a male in particular) has required the manipulation of legal and political ideology. They continually have to use law and politics to get their way. Why? Because this is not the natural course of things. It’s not the way that humanity naturally goes. In effect, they have to use law and politics to force things to happen to get what they want. If we look at the history of feminism we see that it is really nothing but A FORCING OF AN UNNATURAL CONDITION USING LAW AND POLITICS. As a result, they are continually having to justify everything with law and politics – it’s their muscle, it’s the power. Everywhere you turn they whip it out like a weapon, flashing it to the left, flashing it to the right. They even threaten people with it. Feminists have to continually use law and politics in their philosophy as it is the only thing that gives their philosophy any real power in the ‘real human world.’ It was inevitable that Hillary would make a reference to law/politics.
Hillary stated later on:
” . . . as someone who believes strongly in the right of every person, male and female, to have the opportunity to live up to his or her God-given potential,”
How American . . . How democratic . . . Let freedom ring!
Her logic is most likely referring to a line of thought coming from the American Declaration of Independence which says, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”.
That, boys and girls, is an AMERICAN POINT OF VIEW. That is not a world view. It is not reflective of human reality either. And here Hillary gets into American Snobbery, of thinking that American values are the ‘standard’ of the world and are ‘correct’ the world over. If any other culture has values that disagree’s or conflicts with it then that culture is obviously wrong. This is especially true of the Middle East, whose culture is at odds with the U.S. In fact, most of the ‘victimhood’ she was describing in this speech was of the Middle East, the ‘plight of the poor oppressed enslaved women in the male-dominated Middle East’ . . . God help us all!
But the condemnation of the Middle East, or any other culture, is not what it seems. In actuality, all Hilary was experiencing is a ‘culture shock’, that she had seen things in other cultures she couldn’t understand and that seemed bad to her. But it’s not our place to make judgement on other people’s customs and way. It is not our place to try to change their culture to our way either. If one looks at what she’s saying, it basically points to the fact that these other cultures are not reflecting the American point of view of things. She, in a way, is condemning other cultures for not being “American” . . . American Snobbery.
To go even further, a lot of the problems she is describing were caused by her own country trying to instil its values into another culture! What this has done is completely upset a culture that is some-odd centuries old. The U.S., by this behaviour, is actually undermining and destroying other cultures. What do you expect people to do? Should they just automatically see the “light” of how American ways are so much better than their some-odd centuries culture? Should they just up and abandon it all?
In many ways, that is what Hillary, and many feminists, are expecting and wanting. They completely disregard a cultures ways and customs, see the wrong in it, condemn them for it, and then try to ‘convert’ them to Americanism or, rather, their feminists viewpoints. Remember, she believes in “the right of every person, male and female, to have the opportunity to live up to his or her God-given potential” . . . let freedom ring!
One of the things that has made me lose respect for America is how America looks at the rest of the world and judges it with American values. No wonder they see bad in everything . . . the world is not America! Some cultures have ways and customs that we will never understand. As I said, it is not our place to judge, condemn, or criticize other cultures, regardless of what they do. That is nothing but arrogance to me.
And speaking of cultures, we must remember that there have always been strict restrictions in regard to the male and female all over the world since the beginning of time. Often, these can be very strict and severe. In some places, transgression of these restrictions can be a life and death issue. In almost every culture, the male and female are given their specific place, purpose, role, and use in society . . . and this generally must be adhered to, often strictly. That’s how it is in the ‘real human world’. Whether we agree with it or not is neither here nor there. These are things that have been here worldwide since the beginning of time. The feminists seem to think that they can go beyond this natural human tendency. They think these should just be ‘done away with’ and, of course, they justify it with legal and political ideology. But this is not the way humanity is! Here we see the feminists denial of her femininity is now leading to a denial of human tendencies and conditions which have been here since time began. Not only that, they are now condemning cultures for maintaining things that have been here for thousands of years . . . because it doesn’t fit their philosophy! This shows the arrogance of these people.
Yeah, why don’t we just throw 10,000 years of human behaviour out the door? Why don’t we just wipe out male and female identity and roles? Just wipe it all out . . . then we’ll all be free . . . let freedom ring!
What a warped way at looking at things . . .
I’ve always said that if I were to say, in a single statement, something that describes my 30 plus years observation of feminists it would be go something like this:
“WHAT THE FEMINISTS NEED TO START DOING IS DEVELOPING A REALISTIC AND HEALTHY VIEWPOINT OF THE FEMALE, AND THEMSELVES, THEN THEY’LL FIND THAT THINGS AREN’T AS BAD AS THEY’RE MAKING THEM OUT TO BE AND THAT THE MALE AND THE WORLD IS NOT THREATENING THEM.”
In other words, feminism is really a result of the females own poor view of themselves and the female. The more I look at it the more true this becomes.