"Women Can Be Sexist Too" - Article by Time Magazine Which Highlights Double Standards in the Home

Mens-Advocate · 2017-02-19T16:03:38+00:00

Slaughter is hardly a friend to men; even this article is condescending.

Slaughter made her fame complaining that women cannot have it all, even as she had a family, a high position in the State Department under Clinton, and a faculty position at Princeton.

Slaughter's arrogance was dismantled thoroughly in an article by Lori Gottlieb, who also wrote a book about women's unreasonable expectations. The book - about "settling" for a decent fellow - was met with howls of anger from feminist women.

Jack41096 · 2017-02-19T15:34:28+00:00

Correction, Are Sexist Too.

Phrased it wrong when i submitted.

This article is apparently in the midst of a lot of controversy (as you can expect). The best part is that this was written by a woman.

rocelot7 · 2017-02-19T23:08:40+00:00

Women constantly tell men how they can never be mothers, but now they're slowly starting to realize they'll never be fathers.

thrway_1000 · 2017-02-19T19:31:26+00:00

https://archive.is/3KtVU

JP_Gringo · 2017-02-19T16:40:22+00:00

Well, it's a start, but it's not much more than a small toe dipped in a very cold pool. At best, its a tentative, safe attempt to gently suggest the possibility of inherent bias to a group of bigots in aggressive denial of their bigotry...

Not surprisingly, the piece is presented in the same way an individual suggests a personal reconsideration to an abusive partner, an attempt to critique a tyrant without incurring the beating or beheading that such effrontery easily provokes.

While such a tentative approach may be necessary as a first step towards "educating women about their sexism" in the grand tradition of feminist "reeducation" schemes (that super-popular tool of history's most glorious totalitarian regimes) - feminist reform still has a long way to go in terms of acknowledging its own forms of power and privilege, as well as its hypocritical reluctance to acknowledge the benefits it enjoys within so-called "patriarchal" power structures.

Women, both traditional and progressive, have and continue to benefit from the patriarchy in terms of providence and protection, the very power structures they indict as conspiring in their oppression. At present it is a double-blind smokescreen to distract wary eyes from observing attempts at consolidating power, not an attempt to destabilize the patriarchal power structure but rather to establish hierarchies within a genderized society with themselves at the top.

Here we see how traditional conceptions of patriarchal order are employed by feminism to protect their assumed spheres of influence and control even as they employ the same order in the negative to justify the colonization of all other presumed social spheres. Next, feminism must acknowledge its parasitical manipulation of chauvinism as a means of defense against critique, demanding the right to patriarchal protection from an enemy both invented and deployed in a war against itself.

Make no mistake, the feminist agenda is largely an imperial one, no better than whatever order it claims to want to replace. Instead of battling over physical geographies, however, we are instead embroiled in a conflict over territories of behavior and belief, territories of the mind.

Fortunately, the metaphysics that underpins feminist ideologies is not only unstable, the very ideas by which it stakes its claims undermine the very claims it stakes, meaning it can be challenged and defeated in its own terms. So in the ironic words of the pink-hat protest movements, it is up to us to RESIST! First and foremost, we must RESIST the absurdity, the hypocrisy, the tyranny, and the injustice of this movement that promotes difference and disharmony and intolerance, this illness that only seeks to drive further divides between the genders by professing poisoned illusions of equality, this movement that seeds destruction and ruin no less than any other effort that characterizes itself as a war.

Because, friends, feminist sees the social arena as a battlefield. It presents itself as the ethical challenger to an enemy combatant. Feminism is trying to win what it imagines to be a gender war. But the grand irony is that it does this while claiming the enemy is war itself, the actualization of masculinity defined as a force of violence and destruction, and in this seeking the destruction of its enemy by becoming the enemy it seeks to destroy, attempting to usurp a throne it claims to want to destroy.

Or in more appropriate words, feminism is just another Donald Trump insisting it wants to drain the political swamp and rid government of corporate interests only to install a new set of corporate interests at the head of a severely broken system.

So we must first resist. Negate. Deflate. Neuter or spay this feral animal, this wild ideological beast. And then we should start turning our attention towards suitable alternatives, filling in those voids of dialectical negation with potential sublimations and look towards forging new paths forward. But first things first, specifically resisting a hell of a lot harder than this weak, sanctimonious excuse for feminist self-accountability.

Title	"Women Can Be Sexist Too" - Article by Time Magazine Which Highlights Double Standards in the Home
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	58
Comments	11
Date	February 19, 2017 3:24 PM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5uyor7/women_can_be_sexist_too_article_by_time_magazine/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/women-can-be-sexist-too-article-by-time-magazine.931639 https://theredarchive.com/post/931639

Comments