Feminism supports the Patriarchy!

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

Feminism was established by the Patriarchy many moons ago. If there were a global domination simulator, feminism would be one of the items.

Why would the Patriarchy establish the agent of it’s own defeat? Was it Emperor Palpatine syndrome? No, feminism was not the dragon from which it came. Feminism’s agency lies with the Patriarchy. Feminism is not a turncoat to it’s fathers.

I will lay a long list of cold hard facts.

Good honest men are needed to maintain a good society.
Feminism cannot effect the 1 percent who run society, because they are shielded from it.
So if feminism blanket sweeps all men, it effects all good and bad men, except for the shielded 1 percent.
Anarchists and rebellious behavoir is needed to maintain a free society.

Let us first look at the State of China to understand this.
A thousand or two thousand years ago, Confusion layed out his thesis involving names. Confusion claimed that all things had the proper names, to maintain a stable society and maintain order. However, this was the problem, too much order. Children were taught to unconditionally respect their parents, and civilians were taught to unconditionally respect the State. Nothing about it was really that rational.

And now, look at the state of it. A bunch of filthy communist degenerates who murder their own kids and torture their own dogs. There are so many rules there that they even dictate what religion you cannot do. The water their is toxic and it is the most overpopulated and polluted nation in the world. Confucious “names” philosophy was a colossal backfire - it created a dystopia.

How does this apply to feminism, you might ask?
The feminist philosophy has a similar structure, it too follows the formula of unconditional respect. Men are expected to respect females - unconditionally. Special respect is not earned, but an innate property given to all females.
With this an underlying psychology begins to result in the male. He becomes resentful of the female, and yet, this causes him to respect her even more, putting her on a kind of pedestal in his mind.
Feminism aims to subjugate and frustrate the male on all domains. No only is the female deemed to be worthy more special respect than the male, but the male is told he is innately unsavory. He is told such ideas that all men are potential rapists, and that his bodily aesthetics are inherently offensive, such that he must maintain a certain posture (reduce manspreading) in order to conceal his inherently undesirable aesthetics. He is treated as a monster who has the burden of self-regulating his inherently monstrous tendencies. This philosophy has a potential possibility to damage his sexual psyche, as he is in the mode of second guessing himself, micro-analyzing his own thoughts and desires as not to be potentially perceived as a rapist or similarly unsavory character by any potential female. This schism in is sexual psyche is further amplified by the fact that his sexuality is deemed innately oppressive, and that drawings or depictions of females in a sexual manner are deemed as inherently bad, and unsavory. Essentially, the male is deemed to be monstrous for expressing his sexual desires.

So how does this apply to the outcome of government, you may ask.
If the 1 percent are shielded from the penetrative effects of feminism, then feminism only affects the civilian body of men. (Civilian in the sense of subjects to the 1 percent.)
If men are unable to function as men, then there are no challengers to the corruption of the 1 percent.
The majority of females will not challenge the social heirachy or the 1 percent.
So the result of feminism is to reduce the effectiveness of the virtual militia comprised of good men, and to reduce the instinct of rebellion, and the rebel’s instinct is an essential component of maintaining free society.
Furthermore, we can see the same patterns manifest in the average feminist’s actions.
If Feminism was truly about usurping power away from the Patriarchy, then how can you explain the following phenomenon?

The feminist’s response to rape, is to petition the patriarchy to pass more laws, and increase security, which gives the Patriarchy more power.
If feminism was actually against the Patriarchy, the feminist’s response would be for a rape victim’s mother, to enact justice upon the rapist.

Feminism denied.

As a side note, the concept of “male privilege” is the result of a logically erroneous conclusion. In actuality, a male has a higher chance of certain types of privileges, than a female, based on statistical probability. But a male is not inherently more privileged than a female. He only has a statistically higher probability of receiving certain types of privileges. This results in a flawed mechanism of denying privileges to under privileged males, by the erronously derived virtue that all males are inherently privileged. It also results in under privileged males denying themself privileges due to imaginary guilt, and undervaluing themselves. It also ignores the fact the women have their own category of privileges (such as higher probability of success with human-interpersonal manipulations) which they have a statistically higher probability of receiving than the male. This poor understanding of the relationship between causality, statistics, and privileges may stem from a global lack of consciousness, which does not play enough strategy type games such as starcraft.

2

I don’t think its ‘men’ that are needed, just non-weak people. It’s just that concepts of feminity have made women weaker than men.

Women were (many still are) brought up to believe themselves inferior to men. This normally manifests itself in a series of personality traits that I find hard to stomach, for example frequent crying, obsessive purchasing of clothes, shoes and handbags, self-claimed physical and mental weakness (not wanting simple to do stuff because its scary / wet / ‘disgusting’ / hard etc). For example when someone says they can’t use a toilet because its ‘too dirty’ or start complaining their shoes hurt but they can’t change them because they look nice, I start to despair for society. This kind of self-inflicted weakening of spirit is more common in women than men, but not exclusive to women.

The kind of feminism I like is the kind that challenges women to change perceptions of themselves, stop playing with barbies and buying pretty dresses and start acting like they are autonomous agents in charge of their own destiny . The kind of feminism I hate is the kind you are describing, which simply complains to men about the way women are treated as if, as you point out, men are the only ones who can fix the problem.

In some countries. In others, like in Muslim countries, women are made automatically inferior by the law and culture.

3

There is so much wrong with this statement that I lack the will and time to go through it all. But here are the two biggest problems

  1. Men get raped (about 1/8 as much as women, but still)
  2. Revenge is not the same as justice
4

I can’t see how either statement is relevant to the OP.

5

It responds to claims made in the OP. If that isn’t relevant then feel free to go back to talking about Grindr or cereal cafes.

6

Good reason to despair for society.

If only we could all have the stomach to use a, literally, shitty toilet.

All of society’s problems would be solved instantly.

Women certainly are inferior to men in most aspects of life that matter.

Their only relevant advantages are a slightly better instinctive people reading skills (something that males can completely counteract by simply studying human nature), having a womb which makes them more valuable in the context of a society and beauty, which makes them attractive to men. And they tend to be better nurturers and care for children better in the child’s early ages of development.

Other than that, they are on average less intelligent, weaker, slower, and less rational.

The problem is when women are taught by feminism that they have to be like men and that they should be ashamed of their femininity, which, yes, is dependence on masculinity.
And of course they can’t be like men so they fail, standards have to be lowered and males have to be excluded (female only classes and colleges f.e.) to keep up this silly illusion only gullible imbeciles can be made to believe in.
So instead of playing on their natural strengths, women are taught to try to build where there is not much foundation, and to try to compensate for the lack of masculine substance with representations of it and pretense.

Even the strongest natural female weightlifter can be beaten by an average male that begins weightlifting and lifts for a couple of months.
Even the best female fighters can be beaten by average male fighters.
Naturally imposed limits, folks.

7

You are right, it is certainly not relevant.

Females and males have significantly different brain matter, males are primarily grey matter and females are primarily white matter. Females are traditionally more empathetic/emotionally aware and males are typically more spatially/geometrically/critical-thinking skilled but they both seem to be lacking nowadays in that regard. The world seems to be filled with apathetic females and non-genius males. Genius is an inherent property to males. There have been a few genius females like the girl who discovered DNA molecules but I would like their brains to be analysed if it is the result of gray matter or anything else. The brain seems to be categorized into different sectors, for instance we have reptile minds, cat minds and also dog minds. It seems the component of genius is not actually dependent on the part of the brain related to personal identity and social function. Thus, mtf transsexuals seem to exhibit the perks of the male technical genius but have a female social personality. Further study is needed to find the causes of genius, in order to speed research on a brain enhancement device or serum

8

Boy, I’m glad I checked the updates on this thread.