This is a warning to all those who may be sensitive to a stronger use of words. I’m not saying I intend to bombard you with vulgarity, but I am anticipating on using some blunt terms (we’ll call them) to get my point across.
I’ve sworn up and down that I’m not a sexist. I do not believe in “the battle of sexes” on any level. Men are not better than women, and women are not better than men. I’m an equalist, that is a certainty. But every once and awhile an extremely annoying feminist or an extremely annoying sexist spews out a few things about the opposite gender that ruins it for every other equalist out there trying desperately to keep things balanced. It pisses us off. It pisses us off because now we can’t just stand by without standing up in defense of either our own gender, or our own personal selves. Tonight, folks, it was a comedian who pissed me off. And comedians are most difficult to confront, because: “Hey! It’s a joke! It’s an act! Don’t be so uptight!”. No no. I don’t care what joke, or who’s act, if it’s creating false stereotypes and condemning a certain group of people into a false reputation, then someone has to take a stand.
A friend of mine posted a YouTube audio clip of this comedian, Bill Burr, explaining his ever ingeneous, comedic views on the women’s liberation movement and what it means for the modern woman. He joked how the reason men make a dollar an hour more than women do is because women get first dibs off the Titanic….(okay, sort of funny….) or if a burglar breaks in, the man’s off to endanger himself to check it out….or, if there’s a rabid dog coming their way, the man steps in front…
You get the idea. At first, I thought, “Heh…”. And I gave it a chuckle. I get it. I saw where he was going with it. Sort of funny. But he sort of went on and on about it. You see, the whole thing began with him trying to explain how feminists want to be equal to men, but only when it’s convenient. The funny thing is, I’ve seen that before too so I was intrigued with where he was going with it. But then it sort of morphed into “all feminists” and “all women”, and when he spewed out his description of a feminist having a butch haircut that turns into pigtails when she wants to have a man do the dirty work, I cringed. Bristled, actually. I think my eyes may have actually turned red, and I’m pretty sure I was close to breathing fire.
To begin with, the first thing I wanted to say to him when he talked about how it wasn’t fair for him to have to put himself in harm’s way should a burglar come into the house was, “What an effing pussy. Give me the damn gun, and I’ll go sacrifice myself for you, you flipping coward.” Really? Not all women are going to cower at the sound of breaking glass in the middle of the night and expect the man to go check it out. But truth be told? So what if they do. Here’s what women have to fear from a break in: kidnap, rape, then murder. How fun for us! I would much rather have to only risk getting shot in the head, like a man. Raped by a psycho? No thanks! When I’m home alone? It can be absolutely terrifying to hear bumps in the night, you have no idea. But when I know there’s a man in the house (father/brother)? Different. And for a reason. It’s not because we’re unequal to men. It’s not because we’re weaker, or less intelligent, or inferior. It’s because we’re more vulnerable. We’re more vulnerable because of the mere fact that we have vaginas that are always, constantly, in the danger of being violated by…who? By….what? Men! Bad men, sure. Rapists, psycho serial killers and the like. Creepy perverts. You know. Et cetera, et cetera. Oddly enough, our only absolute guarantee from these predators, are….well, men. Sure, we can learn a defense move or two. ‘Carry our pepper spray. I don’t doubt that there’s an olympian or two who doesn’t have to worry about getting raped…. And sure, we know not to drink from a glass that’s been left unattended, and sure we know not to get in the car with a stranger no matter how cute he is…. And sure there’s enough of us who fight when we have to and make it out okay. Sure. But the unrelenting, horrible dependence on another man to protect us is something we will never, ever be able to escape (unless you’re one of the said olympians, or some crazy street fighter or something….). I’ve met my share of wimpy men, I have. There’s a few choice ones that I would not want fighting my battles for me, no doubt about it. But tell me again: how is it going against feminism, a woman’s equal rights, to have a man defending her? ‘Not quite getting that part of the joke.
I’m an equalist, as I previously stated. I believe both men and women are equally human. Neither is superior over the other. However, we’re still very, very different. And those differences are supposed to play a part in balancing us out, not turning us against each other. Women have a certain purpose to men, and men have a certain purpose to women. ‘Generally speaking, of course. It’s pretty much as simple as this: men protect us, and we give them babies. Lovely, isn’t it?
“HOLD ON!” you say.
Isn’t it true, though? You want to know why women get to leave sinking boats first? We have one thing men don’t have that gives us first dibs on life. It’s called: a uterus. To expand a little, it’s also called: going through nine months of hell to create the fruit of a man’s loins. It’s called: he gets the fun part in pro-creating while we have to suffer through almost a whole year of gestation. Puking, swelling, pimples, hormone rages, swings of temporary insanity, leakages, unbelievable gas (which could also fall into the "leakages" catagory), weight gain, painful shape-shifting, zero sleep, aching boobs, being stripped of all sexiness entirely, constant exhaustion…..
Now, wait. Wait. Now it sounds like I’m complaining about being a woman. I’m not. I couldn’t be more proud to be one. I love the fact that I’ve been built strong enough to endure these things. But that’s just it. This, is the exact reason why men should not only respect women, but take care of us and keep us safe. It’s not because we’re lesser beings. It’s not because we’re inferior. It’s because we’re valuable. We’re valuable to men because without us we cannot give them life. And men are valuable to us because we need them to protect the family they’ve created. I really don’t see any reason either sex should find any shame in this arrangement. It’s degrading to neither party, so why is it always such a controversy of sexism? I’m more than willing to go through those nine months of agony to create a family with a man I love, if he’s willing to protect us emotionally and physically.
Am I taking this all a little too personally? Should I have really just laughed or not laughed at some stupid comedian’s jokes, gone to bed, and forgot about all of this the next morning? Most people would have. But it gave me a good excuse to express something that bothers me on a constant basis, and something that I am always, extremely passionate about. I am going to make no apologies for being offended. Change never comes from those who are too afraid to speak against their offenses. I, my dear audience, have spoken against it.
Friday, October 23, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I don't see how you can say in one sentence we are equal and in another you are dependent. Wouldn't equal mean that a woman and man would fight together against an attacker? Or neither would fight. I do agree that there is an unequal amount of risk in that being raped brings another scope of danger to a womens situation, and the fact that most men are larger then women automatically puts them at a disadvantage. In your blog you said that when there is a man in the house you feel safer. But I assume if there was another women you would not feel as safe. That is an inequality. And those men are further still unequal to other men whom you would not feel safe around at all. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that everyone is different and not equal at all? We attempt to give each other equal status as best as we can, while at the same time praising people for things that make us stand out from the crowd. I think asking for equality while still expecting praise for being extraordinary is contradictory. Just like asking for equality while not being as capable is contradictory. Just my thoughts. A woman and a man are just as unequal as a man and another man. Or a woman and another woman. Perhaps the only way we are equal is because we can share in our inequalities.
Well said, Ryan and Jess. The sad truth is, a man can be raped by another man (prison anyone?) and a woman can be raped by another woman (prison anyone?). Sure, those aren't the norm in civilian life, but my point is that no one is safe from rape. That's why I believe in arming yourself, man or woman, with a high caliber pistol, assault rifle, and a few grenades never hurt. Taking these measures will ensure to keep rape out of the equation. Or kidnapping or murder for that fact. Guns and explosives are good, don't believe the hype.
And men, yes, should defend the woman. But if your man is a total pansy and you're with him because you like his 'sensitive qualities', then be prepared to brawl or squeeze the trigger. Besides, in the wild, who protects the cubs? You never hear about the Daddy bear protecting the cubs. No, it's always Momma bear. Or lionesses, or dolphins, or Mother Goose. Point being, women have just as much responsibility in the areas of protection as men do, more in fact. But in the human society, for some reason, that task has been delegated to the man, and a lot of times, the man sucks at it.
So yes, just using the topic of protection as my base, I believe men and women are equal. As far as giving birth goes and all the horrible things that come with pregnancy, that's just God's way of punishing women for biting the forbidden fruit, therefore ruining a life of perfection for the men. Thanks alot, ladies. And without my penis, that uterus of yours would always be a useless organ. Your welcome.
AUTHOR'S NOTE: I'm Jessica's older brother so I feel it's my duty to push her buttons...with love, of course. Love you , Jess.
To Ryan:
Your very last sentence was exactly what I was trying to say. When I use the word "equal", I'm meaning: "neither is superior over the other". Which, I said. I also pointed out that we each have a dependence on each other. Being dependent on another human being is in no shape or form a status of inferiority. It's a balancing act between men and women. And yes, of course, there's those who are exceptions to the rule. Me, for example! You know me. You know how fierce I am about my independence. (Barb just called right here and I lost my train of thought...hold on, I'll get it...) If the toilet seat screws need to be adujusted, I'm not going to go running to a man to get the job done. You don't have to be a man to use a wrench. That's just stupid. But the one major thing that most women (I'm speaking generally, here) need (but don't always have and have to survive without if need be)is the dependence on a strong man to protect her from one, ultimate predator: other men. As strong as I'd like to think of myself as being, and as smart as I am to use wittful measures in battle, a vast majority of men could easily knock me out and tie me up and have their way with me. If a man's on my arm, or in the house, there's just... less of a chance of that happening so easily. Would another women in the house make me feel safer? Sure: another set of hands to get to the phone or to the gun, no doubt. I'm not saying another woman in the house couldn't protect the both of us (depending on who she is...) if need be. But say, on the street.... Two women walking alone. An attacker may or not be bold enough to think he could get away with two against one, but if one of those twos is a man? He wouldn't even consider it. That's just the way it is. And if you ever have any daughters, you'll see it that way too. Heh...
I liked your sentence: "I think asking for equality while still expecting praise for being extraordinary is condradictory." You called me out on that, which is totally cool! But, then I re-read what I wrote and I thought: I'm not REALLY saying that women are more extrordinary than men. I was trying to illustrate how we balance each other out. We're valuable because of such and such. And you're valuable because of such in such. This is my own interpretation of what equality means to me, I guess. Balancing. But it sounds cooler to call myself an equalist rather than a balancerist. Heh heh...
Well that's fine if that is what equality means to you, but as you said that is not equality. Being dependent may not make them inferior, but it does make them unequal.
An attacker is more likely to attack one or even two women than one man. This is because the odds of him being hurt or defeated (regardless of size/strength) is almost non-existant. Most women have such a fear of violence and injury that they will not fight to the best of their ability to avoid rape, kidnapping, etc.
You may not be this way...and I know other women who would not just fall over and cry. But most women do do this. A preditor looks for a weak target, a target that won't fight to hard. Does this mean you need a man to protect you? It will improve your chances...but your dependency has now made you unequal to him - or a woman is about as equal to a man as a child is to its mother. In the mind of the attacker, this is how you are precieved.
So the danger is created by how you are precieved - due to the prevous behavior of other women. Like I wrote above, most women crumble under real agression. They are dominated easily - not because they are smaller and weaker (generally) but because they have not been taught the essential ability to be violently aggressive when necessary.
It won't change until the many women out there halt that behavior and start reacting to aggression with equal or greater aggression - regardless of the relative size of the woman. The attacks will never stop, but a man will think twice if there is potential risk involved with such an attack.
In the mind of the attacker you are most definately not equal, and that is simply because of OTHER WOMEN'S BEHAVIOR - which makes you more likely to be a target than if it were common place for a woman to fight back.
So either men need to be less agressive...or women need to be more agressive. We are not equal. I would go as far to say we are not balanced either. Men have the scales tipped in thier favor because you need a man to protect you from other men. The only people as a whole that will change that is women.
Hmm. For one? This read weird to me. It doesn't sound like you for some reason....
I really, really don't understand how you're not getting the balancing thing. Every single human being HAS to depend on another human being for SOMETHING. But it evens out: I scratch your back you scratch mine. What the hell is unequal about that? That's as balanced = equal as you can get.
And wait... let me get this straight: women get raped because they're scared of injury? What? I'm sorry, but if some attacker came up behind me and bludgeoned me from behind, how the hell am I supposed to fight back? There have been rape turned murder victims who have evidence on their bodies that proove they were fighters. And, of course, like the before mentioned illustration of being blugeoned and having no chance in hell. But...
No. I can't keep saying the same thing over and over again.
I just...what? It's women's fault that men attack us? Because we give off a weak and vulnerable vibe? What? Seriously? What kind of logic is that? Men rape women because they're disgusting, vile, and they like to feel powerful. It's a power thing. Unfortunatly, not all women are built like Amazon goddesses, nor could be. Some of us are little. Some of us are naturally frail. My question is: why should women have to apologize for that. What's the big deal if those meeker women need a man's protection. For all you know, she returns the service in her own ways. Back to the whole BALANCING thing! I'm not saying a women depends on a man, end of story. Men depend on us, too. Two ways. Back and forth. You scratch my back, I....
Can't keep saying the same thing over and over again.
In my last post I said: "Either women need to be more agressive or men need to be less." You are right...everyone is dependent on someone. This is exactly what I am saying. But this is almost all of the time not balanced or equal.
Once in a rare case it will be truly equal and balanced. But life is full of inequality, it is the nature of everything. It's where the whole "life is unfair" concept comes from. This is my opinion. No one is equal...there are always lesser and greater people than myself. I'll agree that (for example) a women who wants the man to paint the house for her while she brings him lunch is a fair balance. But balances like this are not common place...and undoubtedly the personal opinion of either party would probably say that it is unbalanced to them. But if this is the give and take you are talking about then I can see the balance part. If a man recieves balanced compensation (in his mind) for protecting his woman, then this is surely a balanced existance. But they are not equal.
I digress. On the rape issue. I put what I mean in the last post...but I clearly did not clarify myself. So here is an interesting peer reviewed scientific book:
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=MDph13uOB3kC&oi=fnd&pg=PA265&dq=fight+back+rape&ots=B82bgcYcDl&sig=GRPdk1-5eAwlj33PNpKZjbvRE7M#v=onepage&q=fight%20back%20rape&f=false
Go to chapter eleven. Specifically pages 273-274. This is what I mean about the physical agressiveness. A page before that it says: "Only men can prevent rape...women can only avoid it." Since it is clear that men will not prevent rape, the women need to take a look at the real ways to avoid it. Not the bullshit ways. The artice will show this.
Also as far as the bludgening thing:
86% of rape victims reported the use of physical force as the only weapon used during the attack. Only about 7% of rapes involved the use of a weapon—2% used a gun, 4% used a knife and 7% were unsure. -2000 NCVS
So I think the odds are in your favor there for no weapon.
Hmmmm.....
I surely agree that equality, meaning even balances, is indefinately a fantasy, or at least a rarity, but I still believe in its potential. It's what I stand for.
Really, though? The only point I was trying to make, overall:
Can you seriously respect a man who turns to his woman when things go bump in the night and asks HER to go see who's breaking in because he's too scared to? Because I can't. Just like I can't respect a woman who's a terrible mother. Is that fair of me? Probably not. Maybe I'm a snob. Everyone has their own personal strengths to offer to another human being. Which completely supports your idea that no one, in no way, is equal to one another. And in truth, my secret confession: I believe that too. I definately consider myself of greater value than, hmmm, let's say: a child molester. Or an illiterate, racist redneck. Or... Maybe I'm a snob for that too. I don't know. But there's just something.... not quite right about a man who is too cowardly to defend a woman. It's not even about whether she can take care of herself or not. Do you know what I mean? Say, I was at a bar with a group of my friends and my boyfriend. Some creep comes up to me, hits on me, touches me inappropiatly, et cetera. Can I stand up for myself? Hell yeah. Can I dump my beer on his head? Sure. Would totally do it. I'd stab him in the eyes if I had to. But...if my boyfriend just sat there and didn't say anything? Didn't DO anything? I'd not only be hurt, I'd be furious. Now, if some WOMAN came up to me and was causing trouble, that'd be TOTALLY different. Or if a woman came up to HIM, I would totally be there to defend him....
Which....
Turns this conversation upside down a little.... Heh. Sort of wish I had used this illustration earlier... This is where I was trying to get with my equality thing. It's just not fair to say a woman is unequal because she needs/wants her man to protect her. And vice versa. A man is no less a man if the circumstance calls for her protecting him. "Needing" the protection, I suppose, was a word I now regret useing. It's just...hmm...appropriate? Appropriate for a man to protect a woman. Call me old fashioned, but I still believe in gentlemen.
And, thanks for the scientific reference, but I won't be useing it. There's absolutely no science to rape. None. Statistics say what they will, but I guarantee if you actually knew a rape victim they wouldn't appreciate being refered to as a per cent sign, nor would they appreciate being asked to take any responsibility for what happened to them. Sometimes, there is absolutely no way to avoid it. Unless you utterly lock yourself up from the entire public. How fair is that?
And. Okay. So no actual weopon. It only takes a few seconds of chaos and confusion, a strong kick in the gut to take the wind out of you, and no matter how hard you struggle, a 200 pound man is smashing you to the ground, ripping off your pants, and getting himself inside you as quickly as possible while pinning you flat. He tells you if you scream, he'll kill you....you scream anyway...he lets go of one of your arms long enough to punch you in the face to shut you up....getting punched in the face is gonna daze you for a minute long enough for him to pin your hands again.... He gets the job done in less than ten minutes...doesn't matter if he cums or not, it's a power thing. She's been violated, raped, and there's absolutely nothing she could have done to prevent it. 86% said it was actual physical force. High percentage. You think those were unavoidable? Really?
I think we should stop talking about the rape part of this, because I'm about to get extremely, rabidly, angry. Not in a fun way.
I agree about the examples you are saying in your boyfriend girlfriend example. But I'd like to point out we have suddenly jumped from a general public equality to a relationship equality...which is different.
I don't think just he or just she should go check on a bump in the night... both should. More people would equal more success. And you both care for each other equally so you wouldnt want to the other to be hurt. I think we can agree on that.
I have seen 140 pound women submit and hold down 190lbs athletic strong men. How? Because they have learned the nessicary and important skill of being trained to do such a thing. because they know that someday...it may come down to that. And they do not want to be raped...so they take precations. It is in no way thier fault if they are raped. But...Is it my fault that I was robbed if I never lock my door? No, but I sure didn't take the proper precautions did I? Some 200 lbs normal unathletic drunkard is easily delt with...even for a girl who is only 140...if she is prepared. Not only that...you dont need to beat him..you just need to get away to other people. (unless you are in a house of gang rapists which is a whole other issue)
I think you are taking the rape to the extreme here...not every rape in the world has been commited by a huge swift man who quickly takes out the girl so he can have is way. I have heard of 15 year old boys raping 35 year old women. I have heard of one man breaking into a dorm with 3 women and raping all of them with no weapon. What of them? That is purely because they have not been taught to defend themselves. And it is because of this rapists success that he believes he can easily rape you. Which hightens the chance you will be attacked by a rapist.
I understand what you are saying and yes obviously sometimes there is nothing a women can do...no matter how trained they are. And obviously I am slightly bias because I think a nessicary skill for life is to know how to fight well.
But I think this is foolish of women to instantly say there is nothing they can do...and hopefully a nice man will be around to protect them. Hell...according to statistics that man is more likely the one to be raping you.
Statistics on the subject are important..because according to them...many if not practically all women will experience some sort of aggresive sexual pushing on some level...small or large. It certainly will not be thier fault ever, and you may still get robbed if you lock your door. But if you never lock it, when you get robbed you can get angry and mad and I can't believe the world we live in what the hell is wrong with people...but can you be surprised?
It is better for them to become the momma grizzly that is in all of them. Or this will be a trend forever.
I'll end the conversation if you want...or you can have the last word...either way we can stop here. I'll leave it to you. I think we understand what each other is saying, and maybe we will have to agree to disagree. Either way I thank you for the conversation and look forward to blabbing on here again.
Okay. I have only one thing I want to respond to here, and then we can be done:
I am in no shape or form saying that women should just "not do anything". I'm certainly not saying that a women should soley depend on a man to protect her from rape. Never, ever, ever said that. Was never, ever my point. I'm just saying, if he's there, he shouldn't be an effing baby about it. The comedian (remember him?) came off like a wuss to me... And believe you me, my doors are locked, in all meanings of the phrase. Women know a lot more about survival from the hunt of men than you may think. My point was: even then, it doesn't always save them. That's all I was saying.
And yes, I know that knowing how to fight is a pretty handy skill, but not everyone can commit to that lifestyle. They have other passions. And I'm not about to change my entire lifestyle just because I may, just possibly get raped. I know how to use a gun. I know how to scream and bite. I know how to stab eyeballs. And I really know what organs to grab and pull on if I can manage to get to them... You're right. It really is about what a woman is willing to do to fight back. But depending on her predator, he can still win sometimes. And that sucks for us. It really, really sucks for us. It sucks that we even have to fear it.
Anyway. I'm bored of this now, too. Now I have to brew up a new controversy.... Hmmmm....
Post a Comment