Post a response:
|
It is interesting, however, how things were much better for women, in terms of functioning social relations, before the Industrial Revolution. It reinforces my prejudice that small village communities where everyone knows everyone else are really the only form of society that humans can live in without pervasive social dysfunction, mental illness and sexual neurosis! People are able to live without mental illnesses and sexual neuroses in modern society if the bigots did not incite the hysteria of political correctness, ageism, puritanism and pedophobia. Feminists achieved everything they wanted: equality, the right to vote, the right of self-expression and self-realization. Now, in order to justify the exhausted idea of the oppression of women, they began to attack sexual freedoms as a logical result of the promotion of victimological myths in the 80s. For example, she reacts to transgender surgery in the same way as I do – with visceral horror. To her, as to me, it is Meat Lego Gnosticism (a superb phrase!) predicated on alienation from our own bodies and from the material universe. This Gnostic attitude will not bring us happiness, because we are evolved creatures, and our nature is rooted in biology We must accept that the formation of the brain may be at odds with the formation of the body, and people should not be hostages of their own body. Transgender surgery is normal with a moderate approach. I would NOT want to have boobs. But I'm a cisgender guy, however I understand why a lot of trans guys don't want its I cannot see how what she advocates is in any way, shape or form still recognisably feminist. I don't understand too. This is some kind of reverse-feminism ) Her second proposal is that marriage should be considered a real, preferably lifelong, commitment, and that divorce should not be easy. Marriage should not be primarily about 'personal fulfilment', but about a commitment to work together to build a family, and the fulfilment should derive from this endeavour and the deepening spousal and familial relationships that go along with it. The third proposal is that women should stop taking the pill, and accept that (hetero)sex always involves a risk of pregnancy. She describes the deleterious side-effects that the pill has on women, but she also thinks that we should restore the connection between sex and fertility. This means that women should be less promiscuous, and aim for a relationship with one man. She even suggests that it would be best to postpone sex until the nuptials. I'd like to see all these proposals adopted, but I don't suppose they will in the west. However, maybe there's a benign Darwinism at work on the scale of civilisations. The collapse of the fertility rate in the west hardly augurs well for those societies in which feminism has been nurtured. It smells very Victorian. Instead of offering sensible progressive things, she proposes the very things that past feminists have run away from. |