Tuesday, March 21, 2006

Why Feminism is Evil, Part 1

In this article, I will break every pre-conceived notion of “politically correct” known to man.
Oops, I said “man!”
Darn…well, then all the notions of PC throughout the annals of history- oh, wait, should I say “herstory?” Maybe, then, I should just say “people…”
But, wait! I have no need of such language! After all, I am a conservative, and thus aware that changing the way Americans speak in order to please the rabid, over-emotional feminists is patently ridiculous, and to do so only feeds into their evil. What evil, might you ask? And how might this relate to us as high-school students?
Well, allow me to enlighten. It relates to us for two reasons: one, we’re all voting within at most three years, and two- the feminist agenda is actually a highly persuasive force on our lives and our educations.
Don’t believe me? You should. Feminism was once an effort to promote gender equality- as in, both groups (men and women, don’t start in with me on transsexuals) have equal rights and should deserve the same level of respect. This was, indeed, a noble cause. I agree with it wholeheartedly. Women should vote. Women deserve the same level of respect. Women need their rights to property, their ability to run for election, and all of that. The Bill of Rights and Constitution should apply to both men and women equally. I’m all for that.
Modern feminism is not all for that. They are not for gender equality. They are for female superiority- a very, very different cause.
They believe they deserve more respect and rights than men, and that we should change even our language in order to satisfy their hysterics.
But, you ask, that’s all well and good, but is there any more practical examples of how they’re attacking men?
Why, indeed there is. For example: let us assume that John Smith, a high-school student like us, impregnates Jane Doe, another student (consensually). Well, first of all, that’s illegal- and who’s held for the crime? John, of course. He’s guilty of statutory rape. However, it’s not that often that the girl’s family will prosecute, so let’s go beyond that. What are John’s options in the matter of the child? The correct answer is: none. Well, he can either marry her or not, but he still has no choice concerning the child. He can either (a) watch as Jane goes off and has an abortion, killing his firstborn son or daughter, or he can (b) watch as Jane decides not to marry him and forces him to pay child support. Hopefully, (c) is chosen and John and Jane marry, but that’s not always the case.
Instead, the man in the situation can do nothing. He cannot decide whether his child lives or dies, he cannot decide that (though the woman was equally responsible for the conception of the child) he has no desire to pay child support if the wife deems not to marry him. This, ladies and gentlemen (and feminists), is not equality. It is not the way America should do things. Both he and his lover should have equal say in the fate of the child, and in no way, shape, or form should the woman in question be able to kill his child-yet another great feminist tenant- especially without his consent.
Since I label anything that goes directly against democracy as evil, and this example of feminism is decidedly undemocratic, it is no great mental leap to arrive at the conclusion that feminism is evil.
I hope I have clarified things so that each man’s mind is enlightened…
Darn, I used that word again…


Post a Comment

<< Home