I’ve never said I’m not grateful for women’s liberation, or that I don’t believe in at least a part of our their cause. But as I’ve said before, I do take issue with someone who doesn’t even know I exist deciding what’s best for me. And I think things are getting a little out of hand.

I don’t know whether or not I agree with the conviction that’s popping up everywhere, these days. The belief that we no longer need the feminist movement. I mean, on the one hand, I think things are getting a little out of control. While I realize that not everyone involved in the feminist movement is trying to free women from even themselves, the ones that are are pretty outspoken. Sometimes, they’re the only ones who can be heard.

On the other hand, there are still women in America (Not to mention other countries, but let’s be honest. We have no right or responsibility to tell countries most of us have never even heard of, let alone visited or lived in, how they should live their lives. Seriously.) who need help. Who need someone to stand up for them. I’m just not one of them. Neither are any of my friends.

I guess it just irritates me that people are so presumptuous. We appreciate your concern, but it’s not warranted. You know?

I am absolutely for giving both men and women the right to choose how to live their lives. I think we should all have equal rights if we want them. I absolutely believe we should all be paid according to our skill set and not our gender (or race, or religion, or social status, or supposed birth right, or whatever).

I’ll admit, a perfect world, for me, would be something resembling Gor. But that’s just cause it gets my girl parts all hot and bothered. I know the reality of things is that eventually, a world like that would implode on itself. Why? Because the storyline is basically world history with a little sci-fi and sexism thrown in. And we seem damn near on the verge of imploding on ourselves all. the. time. It’ll happen one day. I hope to whatever controls the fates, if anything, that it will be long after my line has died out.  

I don’t believe gender roles, as some parts of society see them, should be written in stone. But I also believe that we shouldn’t crucify people who choose to live by them in their own life. Just because it doesn’t work for you doesn’t mean it won’t work for anyone else. That is true in all things.

Until I was older, I never really had any concept of “gender roles” or “gender-specific chores/occupations”. Probably because I never had a brother for my mother to assign the boy chores to, so I never really got the concept of boy chores, or boy occupations, or whatever. A fact that still ruffles my adopted grandfather’s feathers to this day. The last time I talked to him, he told me I should never take a job in a factory again. I can’t imagine what he’ll say if/when my mother tells him what I do now.

I usually did the boy chores. My sister wouldn’t. Course, she was little when I moved out. And she got left with all the chores, then. I kind of stopped talking to her and never asked her about herself or her life when I did. So I don’t know if my dad started doing them, or if she stepped up.

There are no boy chores in this house. They’re mostly all girl chores. Unless M’s feeling froggy or generous. Then he cleans the living room and his office, and I do the rest of the house. Actually, most of the time he cleans the living room and he always cleans the office. He doesn’t like me in his stuff. And I get too frustrated with it because, even with three closets, we have no storage space. No filing system. Maybe that’s what I’ll buy next month. A cheap filing cabinet.

(Disclaimer: Melen is the sole provider in this house, and, more often than not, works 12-18 hour days.  While I do have a writing job, it pays me in sex toys.  So from where I sit, it’s only right that I do the housework.)

On my other site, on my post about feminist propaganda, a commenter said, “Calling feminists “man-haters” is inaccurate, and an archaic stereotype that we’ve long ago disproved. We don’t hate men; we hate misogyny.“ And maybe in most cases she’s right. I hope to the Great Purple Cabbage that in most cases, she’s right.

But as I said before, I know quite a few raging feminists. They tend, as most fanatics of any cause do, to blow things way out of proportion. They take every joke and offhand comment as cognitive thought and conviction rather than the jokes and comments they were meant to be. They get offended about so much that it’s difficult to find anything you can talk to them about without stepping in their cause.

They think the people around them don’t hear the disdain in their voice when they speak to men. They think comments like “All men are potential rapists.” are fair assumptions and perfectly okay to pass as fact. They absolutely believe that every man has, at some point in his life, sexually assaulted and/or harassed at least one woman. They’ll go so far as to say a child repeating a derogatory comment he overheard some bigger, cooler kid make is sexual harassment, and they’ll berate the child rather than explaining why it’s not okay to say that. As if a child should just know, without ever having encountered the situation, what’s right or wrong to say to a woman.

I’ve heard raging feminists tell a woman she was being abused because her husband refused to give her the checkbook to go clothes shopping when he had to pay the refrigerator repairman. I’ve heard them cheer little girls on for emasculating their little boy friends with snide comments and disdain. I’ve heard them say things like, “If there weren’t any men around, the world would be perfect.” and “If we put women in control, there would be peace and plenty of resources.” and “Any situation controlled by men deteriorates into chaos and violence.”

And then, after they spend an hour arguing with a man about whether or not he’s ever sexually assaulted a woman, or if he’s ever fantasized about it, or if he’s ever treated a woman badly simply because she was a woman, or if he’s ever used his machismo to try to subdue or manipulate a woman, they say, “Oh, no! I don’t hate men! What ever gave you that idea?” and blink up at you with those blank, daft doe eyes like you don’t both know you see right through them.

I know speaking out against feminism is a death sentence in some of the places I spend my time. I don’t really care. And I guess I’m not really. I honestly only have a problem with the ones who do use it as a disguise for their man hatred and daddy issues. But I also know that not all feminists hate men and have daddy issues. And some women who aren’t feminists hate men and have daddy issues, too. That’s life, man. There are always people with things, good and bad, in common on both sides of the fence. It’s how we eventually settle our differences.

But seriously? Cut these poor men some slack. The vast majority of the men I’ve known since I removed myself from the world I used to live in completely agree that women should have equal rights. It’s not even a question in their minds. They’re just as respectful and courteous with the women they know as they are with the men. The sexist comments fly both ways and they’re jokes.

In short, I am grateful and commend the women who’ve so diligently fought to give me the right to choose, rather than be forced into submission by society’s standard. I’m glad some women have chosen to remain in the fight. I’m not sure I believe what some feminists do about things going back to the way they were the second we let our guard down. But it’s nice to know there are people who are happy to stand in the way just in case.

But the man bashing is getting ridiculous. The sheer extremes to which some feminists go to not just give women equal rights, but also put them in control, are sickening. The suggestions that so many of them make that men should be more effeminate and “more in touch with their feelings” and less manly are laughable. And we don’t have to completely obliterate all gender lines to reach equality. That’s akin to saying we have to dye everyone’s skin to be done with racism, or amass all deities into one (~snicker~) to do away with religious discrimination.

Just as with any cause, there are extremists on both sides of the fence. And just as with any cause, the extremists are the ones who make any effort to keep the cause on track seem futile.

I dunno. I guess I just feel you catch more flies with honey, and all the feminists who can be heard are spewing is vinegar. I mean, sure. Niceties don’t win wars. But feminism has long since ceased being an uphill battle. So why not man the fences with guards, but stop firing the cannons? I mean, wouldn’t it be easier to survey the damage, remove the unwanted parts and rebuild without iron flying over our heads?

(Another one of those sense of humor tests)

This post (and another that I’ll probably work on later today) has been rattling around in my head for days, but I was having trouble figuring out how to put it all down without being too offensive. I finally just decided I don’t really care if someone takes offense.

I know a couple feminists. I’m not talking about the ladies who believe that women should be treated equally in society. I’m all for that. Makes sense to me. We live in a society that claims to demand equality for all its citizens, and not allowing women who want it to be treated equally makes us hypocrites. So give them equality, I say. (Obviously, that’s not my only reason.)

I’m talking about the ladies who insist on working outside the home because being at home, barefoot and in the kitchen is sexist. Make damn certain that the household chores are shared, right down to taking out the trash, so as not to draw any gender specific lines. Refuse to operate on any other level than one that allows them to be a part of the decision-making process.

They usually have bumper stickers that say something stupid like, “I am woman. Hear me roar!” and their man-hating levels are through the roof. Occasionally, they’re victims who buy into victim mentality. Once in a while, they’re just impressionable ladyfolk who’ve been fed a bunch of bullshit. I used to be an impressionable ladyfolk who was fed a bunch of bullshit, too.

Whether you like it or not, it wouldn’t be a stereotype if it wasn’t, at some point in time, how the vocal majority behaved. Once upon a time, women were soft, impressionable and easily swayed. Or, at least, they acted like they were to win favors from their men.

I have a few fanatical feminist readers, which kinda cracks me up. I mean, it sort of confuses me. These are the women who will tell me that I enjoy allowing M to be head of household because I’ve been indoctrinated by our patriarchal society. Who would, in a heartbeat, rip me out of my happy home and loving marriage, throw M in prison and commit me until I no longer wanted to be controlled. Who are fighting to do away with the oppression of women, rather than giving women the right to choose.

Yet, they can’t look away. I wonder why that is.

I get really frustrated with the fanatical feminists. They ignore anything that might throw a wrench in what they believe. Pretend it doesn’t exist. Or, if it’s too over-the-top blatant for that, they’ll excuse it away as something men have trained us feeble-minded women folk to believe, not realizing that they’re making the chauvinists’ argument for them.

Silly feminists.

This portrayal of the Disney princesses is a perfect example.

I’ve always hated Snow White and Sleeping Beauty. Snow White’s situation reminded me far too much of the women I’ve known over the years, and Sleeping Beauty just never made sense to me. Why would some random prince kiss some woman he’s never met – In fact, a princess no one alive knows because she’s been asleep for a hundred years! – to save her and her kingdom? Why wouldn’t he just pack up her constituents, put them all in some museum somewhere and take the land by force?

Anyway…

Jasmine: Jasmine’s situation, right down to being enslaved by Jafar when he took control of Agrabah, is pretty much in line with the culture of her time, governmental structure and country. Many monarchies over the years have had very specific laws regarding how the crown could be passed around. Not only for the women, but for the men as well. The people who made the laws felt it was the only way to ensure their country is run by the right people for all eternity.

Are we really willing to tell people in the entertainment business they’re not allowed to portray the realities of situations in their work? Does that really sound like a good idea to you? It doesn’t to me. To me, it sounds kind of retarded.

I’m not entirely sure what’s wrong with being saved by an intelligent poor person. Or is it that the feminist who made this picture is scoffing at the idea of an intelligent poor person?

In any case, Jasmine advocated for being allowed to marry for the right reasons, and not because the law said she had to. In time, her father actually heard what she had to say, agreed with her and changed the law. Aladdin, contrary to what seems to be the artist’s belief, fell in love with Jasmine because, in addition to her aesthetic beauty, she showed she had a beautiful soul when she tried to help the starving boy in the market place. And then she showed she had a brain by railing against the way she was made to live.

Jasmine was portrayed as an intelligent, capable woman who didn’t need a man to save her. And in the end, while ultimately it was Aladdin’s quick thinking that saved them, everyone worked together to free Jasmine and her father from Jafar’s control.

Ariel: First and foremost, Ariel did not change her appearance to become more attractive to Eric. Ariel didn’t have a problem with the aesthetic value of her fin, so much as its complete lack of functionality on land. She asked for legs because it was impossible for her to be with Eric, otherwise. It was against “mer-law” for any merfolk to interact with humans.

You think inter-racial and/or long distance relationships are hard? Try inter-species, with a father who has lost more than a few friends to your soul mate’s hook.

And really, how could she have anything of value to say to Eric? They live in two entirely different worlds, and her only teacher is a seagull who has no idea what he’s talking about! They didn’t portray Ariel as stupid. She was living in a different world with different tools and a different culture. Any and all contact with the human world was forbidden, so it’s only natural that she knows very little about it.

For the record, it was Ariel’s voice, not her beauty, Eric was in love with in the beginning. Which makes sense, considering mermaid legend holds that mermaids can enchant people with their voices.

Ariel was curious and eager to learn. She was talented, friendly and kind. She was headstrong and determind. And she was willing to give up her voice because she believed she would be able to find other ways to communicate with Eric and win his love. And she did. She was able to let her amazing personality shine through without the use of her enchanting vocal chords. Until Ursula spelled Eric with Ariel’s magic voice and almost ruined the day.

In the end, Ariel chooses to keep her legs so she can remain on land with the man she loves, not because they make her more attractive.

Belle: To say Belle’s only asset was sexuality is kind of ridiculous. Belle was the only person in her town who read books, besides the bookstore owner. Thinking was considered a “dangerous pass-time” for everyone in this tale, not just women. That’s a direct quote from the duet sung by Gaston and Lefou. But that’s not her only virtue.

She has strong family values, as is evident in her search for her father. She is kind and caring and tries to be polite, which is proven by how she handles Gaston in the beginning. And she’s willing to sacrifice her own safety and well-being for the safety of another.

The legend says that the beast could only be saved by true love’s first kiss. That the beast must first find a way to get the person he loved to see past his beastly exterior and love the person inside. Ironically, this meant the beast had to change the person inside because he was vain, selfish and cruel.

The entire message of this story is “Don’t judge a book by its cover.”! We’d be bitching just as much if the female character was Medusa and the male character a dazzlingly attractive prince. Then we’d be complaining about the implications of an ugly woman having to find a way to win the love of an attractive man.

Cinderella: Cinderella met her prince more than once. And the first time, he didn’t talk to her because she was beautiful. He spoke with her because she showed him kindness. Instead of kicking him off her father’s land, she offered him and his men water from her well.

Everyone loved Cinderella, which was a major point of contention with her stepmother and stepsisters. They loved her not because of her beauty, but because despite the fact that she lived in oppression, she was a good woman. She was kind and loving and caring and treated people with respect. And regardless of how bad her situation got, she remained optimistic.

The prince falling in love with her, to me, was portrayed as her deserving something wonderful and finally getting it.

Disney: First, let’s remember Disney didn’t write the majority of these stories. They just took out the parts parents wouldn’t approve of and made them into cartoons.

For as long as I can remember, the cartoon (and amusement park) part of Disney has been about family values. About giving kids something fun to watch while teaching them life’s lessons. About letting them be kids a little while longer. About keeping magic – and hope – alive.

Using beautiful people on television and the big screen, once upon a time, was our way of saying “Everyone is beautiful in their own way.” not “You have to be beautiful to be taken seriously.” And to be honest, generally speaking, beautiful men and women aren’t taken seriously. Even when they’re ridiculously intelligent. So the discrimination goes both ways.

It’s really sad that Americans, in general, have become so bored with life that we have to pick apart something that tries to be good for us and make it into something bad.

I, personally, don’t see anything wrong with girls aspiring to be princesses. I don’t see anything wrong with them wanting to live happily ever after. Who cares if they end up housewives who dote on their husbands night and day, and care for their children instead of working, and cook and clean instead of mowing the lawn and mending the fence? If it makes them happy, who cares? Wouldn’t you rather your daughters be happy living a life you wouldn’t have chosen for them than unhappy living inside this new box we’re trying to build for women?

Because that is the path feminism is walking now. The vocal majority is saying all women have to be strong and work outside the home and stand on their own two feet and have contempt for anyone who believes differently. It’s done a complete 180. Now, preferring to be home taking care of your children, cooking and cleaning for your man, is wrong.

When did feminism cease being about giving women a choice? Why can’t it just be about giving us a choice? Why does it have to be about forcing us all to live how a select group of women think we should live? Why does it have to be about castrating our men?

I have a friend who is a raging man-hating feminist. And usually, I just ignore her or smile and nod when she goes off on her “This is why men suck.” tirades. But she’s teaching her kid to believe the same things. And that sort of makes me nauseous. Cause from where I sit, it’s the same thing as teaching a kid to be racist. And that’s just disgusting.