[Today's Guest Post written by Alte]
I come to you today, my sisters, with a heavy heart. It pains me to make this proposal, but I fear that it is time for someone to brave the fierce winds of patriarchal opposition, and speak the simple truth. For quite some time, we women have become aware that there is a new “problem that has no name”. I am here today to name it, and propose a viable and humane solution.
Simply put, there are too many men about, and mostly of the wrong sort. I’m sure that you have noticed it, as well. They hang about in public places, looking around, breathing, and taking up valuable parking spots right in front of our favorite shoe stores. I know that you, same as I, find it very intimidating and are greatly impeded in your daily activities.
Why should we put up with this? Have we not fought for equal rights? How can we enjoy those rights if there are men everywhere, taking up space and menacing us? Do we not deserve to exercise those rights undisturbed?
Now, I am not some sort of radical. Of course, I am aware that there are some men who are very useful. Most of them don’t seem to do anything worthwhile except work all day, but there are some who serve as a valuable form of sexual entertainment or who could function as sperm donors. I don’t mean them. I mean all of those other men, who pester us all of the time, especially the short ones or the ones who wear ill-fitting suits. Wanting to grow food, pay taxes, build infrastructure, fiddle with electronics, repair mechanical stuff, perform cardiac surgery, or protect our interests on the military front. You know the ones I mean, and I’m sure you’re as exasperated with them as I am.
So, my sisters, we need an alternative occupation for them, and I’ve thought of just the thing: let’s harvest them sustainably for food. You see, that would hit two birds with one stone. We can cook the undesirable men for dinner and have the desirable men serve it to us. No more crime, no more cat-calling in the street, no more husbands to annoy us with their dirty laundry. Furthermore, as men are generally leaner than beef, it would be much easier to keep our figures while continuing to indulge in red meat.
It would make the most sense to separate the men by size. The thinner ones we keep to fatten up some more, the fat ones we eat immediately. We could use the older ones in stews (as the meat is bound to be stringy), and save those in the 15 to 45 age group for direct consumption in the form of steaks, fajitas, or low-sodium stir-fries. The youngest are a tender delicacy and should be saved for special occasions only. The skin would be useable for purses and shoes, and the bones could be burned for fuel. We would have to be careful to capture the carbon emissions though, in deference to Mother Earth.
I know that the mechanics of this scheme might be daunting, but it is certainly plausible. There are currently 139,267,200 men in the United States, as opposed to 145,532,800 women. We can assume that roughly 10% of those men are gay (and therefore exempt, as we need them for the vital fashion industry), and 20% of the women are vegetarians. That leaves us with 137,874,528 straight men for 116,426,240 meat-eating women, which certainly seems worth the effort. Wives should retain property rights to their husbands and sons, sharing the rest in the common herd through a voucher system.
You may be inclined to object, out of a false-sense of morality. You may say, “But men are people too!” To which I can only reply that unborn children are also people, but we murder them all of the time and nobody minds. What is the difference? Men are merely grown-up babies, after all; generally useless, and nothing but a burden on the women. They come from our bodies, and are therefore our property, to do with as we please. Are you so heartless that you have no sympathy for the many women who are being tragically inconvenienced by these men?
But that is not all. The solution itself is an act of true environmentalism. By dramatically reducing the population, we would immediately cut our carbon emissions in half, saving the planet from global warming in the process. And our girl children could finally receive their school lessons uninterrupted.
There is really nothing in this proposal that a right-thinking person can object to. I suggest we immediately nominate representatives to help us carry out this goal. Out of all humility, I nominate myself as president. I profess, in the sincerity of my heart, that I have not the least personal interest in promoting this necessary work, having no other motive than the public good of my country. I have no husband for which I will receive a single cent, so you can be assured that my motives are purely altruistic.
In sisterly love and concern,
A. Feminist
