Re: Why did Feminism arise

From: Society (Society_at_feminism.is.invalid)
Date: 01/24/05 

Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:47:45 -0800

"Xah Lee" <xah@xahlee.org> wrote in message
news:1106300639.751311.292890@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> It is not a question, that the frail sex is of no match
> to the virile sex when conflict arises.

Yeah, the so-called "frail sex" overmatches her
"virile sex" opponent time and time again "when
conflict arises". How else do you explain such
things as women getting their way at men's expense?

> So, throughout centuries male dominate everything
> with respect to female.

That is a false assumption but one common to
acolytes of the feminist religion and its articles of faith.

   It is an amazing thing to see in our city the wife
   of a shoemaker, or a butcher, or a porter dressed in silk
   with chains of gold at the throat, with pearls and a ring
   of good value... and then in contrast to see her husband
   cutting the meat, all smeared with cow's blood,
   poorly dressed, or burdened like an ass, clothed with
   the stuff from which sacks are made... but whoever
   considers this carefully will find it reasonable, because
   it is necessary that the lady, even if low-born and humble,
   be draped with such clothes for her natural excellence
   and dignity, and that the man [be] less adorned
   as if a slave, or a little ass, born to her service.

   Lucrezia Marinella of Venice, _The Nobility and
   Excellence of Women Together With the Defects
   and Deficiencies of Men_ (1600)

> However, technology in the 19th 20th centuries
> changed all this. Brute muscle force has little
> collective value in the social structure of the post-
>industrialization or the information era of 21th century.

You have obviously never had to build your own house.
Else, you wouldn't have such a glibly dismissive
attitude toward "brute muscle force" and how
necessary it remains for you to sit in front of your
keyboard all warm and cozy even tho' you're too
stupid to be allowed to live had men not given their
lives, limbs, and blood to keep Mother Nature at bay.

Take the Farrell Test: Consider how expensive
houses would become if the wages paid to and
working conditions improved for workers in the
house building trades so that half the applications
for such jobs came from women.

> Therefore, the females of the base human animals,
> rises from below with a VENGEANCE, parallel
> to the speed of technology. [...]

There you go again, assuming that women started
out "from below" when the facts of reality show
otherwise. Sheesh.

   In fact, when visitors asked [primatologist Franz]
   de Waal which were more powerful, male or female
   chimps, he shrugged and explained it thus. If you
   look at who greets whom, males dominate females
   100 percent of the time. If you count aggressive
   interactions, males win 80 percent of the time.
   But if you measure who takes food away from whom
   or who sits in the best spots, females win 80 percent
   of the time.
   ...
   De Waal confirmed the two things that anthropologists
   have observed in human cultures: status is not a single
   monolithic quality measured in a single way; and male
   dominance, if it implies power over females in every
   sphere of life, is a myth.

   Helen Fisher, _Anatomy of Love: The Natural History
   of Monogamy, Adultery and Divorce_; W. W. Norton
   and Company, publishers (1992) p 223-4

Feminism is no more than the latest fashion
in a long historical parade of women demanding
ever more special and privileged treatment
and getting it. 

-- 
   If you can read this,
   thank a man.
Quantcast