Friday, December 7, 2012

Hey Woman get your ass in the kitchen and make me a sandwich.

So two weeks ago FOX news published an op-ed called the war on men. See it turns out the death of traditional marriage basically can be blamed on feminism going to war to men. After all "Women aren’t women anymore." says the article.

"In a nutshell, women are angry. They’re also defensive, though often unknowingly. That’s because they’ve been raised to think of men as the enemy. Armed with this new attitude, women pushed men off their pedestal (women had their own pedestal, but feminists convinced them otherwise) and climbed up to take what they were taught to believe was rightfully theirs."

You know the things you silly girls mistakenly thought were rightfully yours, like a Job, or the ability to make equal pay, or the ability to leave the house. Foolish female, those were never yours. No see your separate but equal pedestal is in the living room (see that way when your standing on it you can dust the top of the bookshelf, naturally).

So what should you do to get your pedestal back? well first dont be a slut. Keep your legs closed.

"It’s all so unfortunate – for women, not men. Feminism serves men very well: they can have sex at hello and even live with their girlfriends with no responsibilities whatsoever. It’s the women who lose. Not only are they saddled with the consequences of sex, by dismissing male nature they’re forever seeking a balanced life. The fact is, women need men’s linear career goals – they need men to pick up the slack at the office – in order to live the balanced life they seek."

And hell of COURSE you should bear the consequences of sex. Contraception just encourages you to be slutty. But the more important point here, seems to be you need to stop trying to lead a balanced life and instead let me and my testicles handle the hard work at the office. You can make dinner.

Seriously though how do you fix imbalance and stop being so angry so you can land a "real man" and get married? easy enough "Fortunately, there is good news: women have the power to turn everything around. All they have to do is surrender to their nature – their femininity – and let men surrender to theirs".


Now here's the problem of course, assuming your the type of real woman this article was aimed it, it's actually not that helpful, other then quitting your job so I can do it, and keeping your legs closed till I put a ring on it, there isnt much help in the article to help you get a man and be happy cause you got one. Well fear not. See today FOX news published a follow up article explaining exactly how to surrender.

"You begin by accepting that men and women are different. Equal, but different."

Dont worry, Equal but DIFFERENT is a totally different policy then Separate but equal was in the south. I'm sure your allowed to use the same water fountains.....well unless they are in an office building.

"Here’s what we know: Females, in general, are nurturing and relational beings. They like to gather and nest and take care of people. They like to commiserate with other females – a lot. That’s why girls can talk for hours on end. It’s why more women stay home with their children than men. It’s why the teaching and caregiving professions are still heavily female."

Unlike men. we just like to hit things and fuck. And when we are forced to communicate we do it in grunt. Right Tim "the toolman" Taylor?.  (its also why we like blowjobs......its about the only way we get y'all to shut up for 20 minutes or so, given just how much you talk for hours on end)

And I'm glad this article finally told the truth about why teaching and caregiving fields are heavily female. Evil History Feminists will tell you its because of labor discrimination and only traditionally allowing you to work to specific fields. But as this article reveals its just that your separate but equal equal but different from Men and that is the only appropriate place outside the kitchen and bedroom for you.

And whats the roll for us men? Well "Males, on the other hand – in general – are loners. They’re content to mill about in their man caves. They like to hunt. They like to build things and kill things."

In other words "Hulk Smash". And thats actually kinda true, thats why we need you women folk to take care of us....we are really simple creatures. 

Now I know what some of you misguided and foolish females are thinking "Gone are the days of the breadwinning husband and the homemaking wife, right? So if I’m not referring to Ward and June Cleaver, what on earth do I mean? As Lia asked, what does it mean for “today’s world”?

It means women shouldn’t let their success in the workplace become the biggest thing in their lives.

If the ultimate goal is lasting love, women are going to have to become comfortable with sacrifice and capitulation".
See its easy, quit your job.....or at least make it secondary to taking care of your man and all those children your going to have with birth control (again we cant risk you being a SLUT and actually likeing sex) and then follow these simple rules:

Rule one: "Give up, your wrong I'm right"
Rule two: If I'm wrong, see rule one.

Actually to be fair, there is a bit more too it then that, as the article states:

"Love today has become a power struggle, largely because women have been conditioned to keep their guard up – as though men and marriage will swallow them whole. As Sandra Bullock once said to Barbara Walters, “I’d always had this feeling that if you got married, it was like the end of who you were.” That attitude is commonplace, and it’s the direct result of a generation of feminists who told their daughters never to depend on a man."

See thats mistake one, ALWAYS assume you cant do it and need a man to do it. Trust me you'll feel better.

"We live in a new world. But that doesn’t mean it’s a better world. Women are struggling more than ever with how to rectify their desire for independence with their desire for love. These two things can be reconciled. But you must first be open to ideas that sound blasphemous.

Just because you make your own money doesn’t mean your guy can’t pay the bill. Just because you value independence doesn’t mean you can’t take your husband’s last name. Just because you can do the same job a man can do doesn’t mean you need to let him know it."

See, just accept that Only certain jobs are open to you, accept your identity and Mrs. [ INSERT NAME OF MALE HERE] and that your just an extension of said male, and things will be easier. 

Also on dates, let us pay for EVERYTHING, its fine, really. we dont expect you to be earning money anyways. So we dont expect you to pay for a thing.

So to sum up, I turn once again to the article: "Surrendering to your femininity means many things. It means letting your man be the man despite the fact that you’ve proved you’re his equal. It means recognizing the fact that you may very well want to stay home with your babies – and that that’s normal. It means if you do work outside the home, you don’t use your work to play tit-for-tat in your marriage. It means tapping into that part of yourself that’s genuinely vulnerable and really does need a man – even though the culture says you don’t."

So yea to my female readers I hope you found this a valuable lesson in how to land a real catch for yourself. And by the way, I'm single. Just putting it out there in case you want a man who will treat you like a REAL woman. And as those articles point out, its not that bad.

Of course I do realize sadly, that many of my female readers wont actually be able to read this. After all it is near 6 o'clock, and I'm sure all the good girls are in the kitchen slaving to get dinner on the table for their men. And if your not, please ignore the preceding paragraph, your totally NOT marriage material.

And by the way. if you disagree with anything I've said, please leave me a comment and let me know. Unless your a woman cause thats totally NOT your place.

(And for those who care the FOX news articles 1st one "war on men" and the 2nd "calling a truce" )

8 comments:

  1. According to the Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network the sexual assault rate in the US has fallen more than 60% since 1993, and the decline is a direct result of the advances towards gender equality that we have made since then (http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/frequency-of-sexual-assault). You tell me if this "new" world is a better world.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually to be honest I find that kinda surprising, simply because I'm trying to think of a major advance we would have made around 1993 that would have made that kind of change and coming up with nothing, with the exception of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, and youd actually think that would have lead to a spike. Not in actual rapes and abuse but in the reporting of it (which would look like a spike).

      Although maybe as a man I'm missing something obvious.

      Delete
    2. Institutional tolerance of such things isn't just a matter of politics, and progress doesn't just happen in the White House. Social control defines a person's place in the world just as effectively as actual laws, and punishes deviants just as harshly. Gender equality doesn't just depend on political advances, social advances are every bit as important, albeit a bit harder to track. Besides, the third-wave of the feminist movement started in the early 90's.

      Delete
    3. I didnt just mean political advances though. I mean even pop culture advances or societal or cultural advances, and again I'm kinda drawing a blank.

      I suppose maybe your on to something with the "third wave of feminism" although maybe more that those who came of age from 1993-now are the first generation likely raised by the feminists of the 60's.

      Although personally I think this is going to be a lot more interesting NEXT year. The FBI finally updated their rape definitions last year, so that Rape is no longer JUST the forced vaginal penetration of a woman by a man, but it now much much broader, roughly any unwanted or forced sexual contact.

      See its the FBI standards we use when we talk about national reporting of rape. So from 1993-2011 if you were orally or anally sodomized or raped by say a dildo or strap on, it didnt count officially as rape, and would have been under the "aggravated assault" statistic. Now from 2012 on it will count as rape/sexual assault/abuse.

      So it might well turn out that Monica Lewinsky was the big change in rapes sadly (which would have been in 95, so fits the time frame). by which I mean we got kinkier and not actually as much better at respecting people as we hoped....

      I hope thats wrong and it really is a basic change, but I wouldnt be surprised to see a major rape spike in the 2012 numbers and have it be totally due to the definition change and much closer to the 93 numbers.... :/

      Delete
    4. The gender equality we are experiencing now and the side effects of that (such as the decrease in the rate of sexual assault) is a result of the advances made in the past.

      Yes, things have appeared to slow down since the early days of feminism and the sexual revolution, but that does not mean that they have stopped or that things were the same during the greatest part of the struggle as they are now. The way people see themselves, both as individuals and as a member of their gender, is constantly changing. I think you are on to something with the children of the feminists of the 60's. The way members of a society raise their children really does impact the social climate.

      Anyways, things have changed and are still changing. More and more women are going to college, and not just to find a husband anymore. There are more women in the workforce, and not just as teachers and secretaries. The expectations placed on females have changed, and we are seeing the fruits of that now. The results of the social change are not going to be apparent while people are still fighting for change, but rather in the aftermath when people live with the changes made.

      As for advances still being made, just look at how the recent Republican blunders in the realm of women's rights have been shouted down. Yes, that means that the blunders are still being made, but there is no way to "shut that whole thing down", if you know what I mean. There will always be stupid people in the world, trying to pass stupid laws to control other people, what you need to look at is the response of their more reasonable counterparts to see where society stands.

      As for pop-culture, yes, we do have a lot of work to do. I never said that we have achieved gender equality, or that we ever would. I will point out, however, that there are still small changes if you look hard enough. As one example, I won't go over all of the ways that the movie Brave spits in the face of Christian patriarchy, but you can check out some good points in this review: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/phoenixandolivebranch/2012/06/pixars-brave-a-review/

      As for the change in the definition of rape and that causing the statistics to go up, I think the RAINN website will account for the definition change on their statistics page. They do a good job of giving a legal definition of rape and sexual assault, as well as giving factors that may skew their statistics either way. By the way, RAINN currently defines rape as "forced sexual intercorse, including vaginal, anal, or oral penetration. Penetration may be by a body part or an object."

      Delete
  2. In terms of attraction, gender roles & equality should not be lumped together. The minute details of "roles" that may be followed by someone of a specific gender change over time...that's why "traditional gender roles" (aka: 1950's & before) seem silly to us. What most people fail to realize is that certain actions fulfill your masculine/feminine potential on a societal level; these actions change as society does, but adhering to societal gender roles serves us evolutionarily as a species...or else they would not have arisen.

    See: in a strictly biological sense, "the purpose of life is to have sex & die"...to expand upon that biology teacher definition, your sexual nature is meant to propogate the species & help raise the next generation. Having 2 genders, promotes a natural dichotomy, a push & pull of yin & yang nature that leads to balance as the pendulum of societal standards swings back & forth throughout time. Our 2 party system swings perpetually back & forth in terms of control from one party to another
    which creates a kind of balance for our nation. Men & Women have fdifferent ways of viewing the world: while it is our similarities that help us connect & communicate, it is our differences that draw opposites to one another, or "attract" ("to pull or to draw toward oneself" based on emotion or actions), members of the opposite sex. Attraction is generated from curiosity, which is generated from difference.

    To legally achieve an equality which was already inheirently present between male & female, we have attempted to erase the differences that attracted us to one another. What then
    do we bring to the table, other than a difference in anatomy, if everything we are & everyway we view the world is the same? Traditional marriages are failing at an alarming rate...I believe this is because many men fail to balance the changes that have occurred in women's gender roles. And that topic deserves its very own blog.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with some of what you said for sure. In that I definitely agree men and women view and as a result interact with the world in different ways.

      But where I disagree/believe we need to be careful is the idea that achieving equality means erasing the differences between us. I think true equality, that of "equality of opportunity" is going to erase some of the differences between the genders and thats a good thing.

      I think of it like this, in my family my father cooks the food, in part because my mom is a bad cook (sorry mom, if your reading this). Now arguably cooking is usually part of the "female gender roll" but it shouldnt be. Honestly who ever has the most skill should do the cooking. Thats an assumed difference we need to erase.

      So too do we need to erase the "assumed differences" in the "correct" jobs for men and women in the workplace, or even who should be the primary homemaker. Different people will have different skills sets, and we need to learn to use everyone's skill set/interests/desires to the fullest.

      Going back to three of the quotes I took from one of the original articles (which I think all go to make the point im trying to push against) "Surrendering to your femininity means many things. It means letting your man be the man despite the fact that you’ve proved you’re his equal. It means recognizing the fact that you may very well want to stay home with your babies – and that that’s normal."

      "Males, on the other hand – in general – are loners. They’re content to mill about in their man caves. They like to hunt. They like to build things and kill things."

      "It means women shouldn’t let their success in the workplace become the biggest thing in their lives."

      Yea not so much actually. I mean at least not for me personally, and I know for a few other people I know as well. I dont like to kill and I really suck at building things. And honestly given the chance, assuming I could afford it, I'd love to stay home with my kids as they were growing up. Most of my work experience is with young kids so I actually think i could have a lot of fun, and damn well plan to with my kids when I have some. And while I admit I wouldnt personally marry a girl who put her job above her family, thats not because I dont think she should, as much as I want to marry a women as family focused as me....even if it means we wont be filthy rich. The next guy who comes along, who doenst want kids, or prefers more of a work related drive in women...he might be thrilled to marry the woman who makes her career the most important thing is his life. And its not that either of us would have made the wrong choice from a gender role point of view. We both made the right choice from a personal outlook point of view.

      So there you are. every one is equal and all the artificial differences can be erased. And i dont see any issues

      Now all of that said, I do agree as I said before, somethings are kinda genetic and will always be different, I fully expect I will likely be more confrontational then my wife, and slightly more aggressive, simply because of genetic differences. And I agree we as a people need to accept those and move on, and even embrace them, for the differences they bring to men and women. But I dont think the genetic differences or things that result from them was the point of the fox news pieces. They seemed much more interested in the social construct of gender roles and going back to those rolls as they were in the fifties, and that was the point I was trying to mock.

      That said you make a very interesting idea for a future blog post....I might do it some day, I'll have to think about it (I'm more comfortable at the movement doing political news/facts or history but maybe when I grow in this a bit more)

      Delete
    2. P.S. (sorry but I got cut off due to a max character limit in my first post) Just for what its worth, my personal belief as to why more and more marriages are failing is not related to gender roles, its longevity.

      These days people live well into their 80's and 60 year marriages are possible and do happen. That would not have happened a few generations ago. Life expectancy was in the 60's, but more people died young, so a "average marriage" might only be 20 years, and many many people married twice or more because a spouse died

      These days if your marriage ends after 20 years we call it "failed marriage" but consider that marriages 100+ years ago that reached that same marker would be considered "long and fruitful" by comparison to the times.

      Question is, had all those people 100 years ago been living as long as we do now, how many of those "long and fruitful marriages" would have lasted the rest of those peoples lives? My guess is probably about the same that do now.

      Thats the only real difference I see. Most people over the course of history likely wouldnt make it through a 60 year marriage. But people still get married as early as they did then....and many only find their "happy marriage" on the second try...and usually that only lasts as long as marriages did 100 years ago (30 or so years).


      Also Thanks for the comment. i always enjoy hearing other peoples views :)

      Delete