Why I am no Feminist
~ 1040 words
As a previous sworn eternal "feminist", I'm often asked: "How can you say that men were treated any better?", "Everyone has their flaws, you can't blame men for everything!" and the more poignant comments, "You are a female chauvinist!"
But to be honest- I don't hate them. It's just that it pisses me off that despite everything, things that hurt women at most are because of the patriarchal system. I don't believe in equality of men and women, so I'm not a feminist! Men and Women are can never be equal in all respects. Sure, the real meaning of this gender equality business was about education, freedom and financial earning and prestige. But when it comes to behaviors- no! I can't accept equality there! I can't accept to lose feminine care and male physicality or male care and female physicality.
What saddens me is that by fighting for this "equality", women are having to strive to "prove" themselves worthy and capable of doing what men can. But that is in itself a creation of hierarchy, for it places man on the throne and women on the stairs trying helplessly to tackle the hindrances obstructing her way to make it nest to the venerated lord! I mean- think about it! Women have to prove themselves as being able to use tools, display sports prowess-es, and pursue masculine jobs. They had to start wearing trousers to show their growing emancipation and adopt aggressive behaviors to be deemed as an equal!
Sure, a pair of trousers is far more comfortable and practical than a skirt or a dress but the point is, have masculine values gained so much more importance to survive in this world that feminine values have to be abandoned or adopted to make gender equality prevail? Basically this patriarchal system has wooed even women to believe that aggressiveness, masochism and dominance are the values that human civilization promulgate. Think about it. Again. I know I'm wrong here. Because I could also blame women for submitting so easily to male dominance and for being and for being quiet whenever sending men out to do the hard chores benefited them.
Men had their fair share of struggles as well.
1) Men had to compulsorily serve in the army and earn a living.
In fact as late as 1970s, the USA and USSR both had conscription for men only. Do you think it is "empowering" for men to be sent off to battle where they get killed or maimed and injured, both physically and mentally? This has been going on for millennia. Not a single society has put the burden of defence and earning livelihood on women. Men got much more harsher punishments than women in the past. Men had to work for a living in rather dangerous conditions. They had to fight off wild animals, thieves, protect and serve their wives, kids and parents. Do you think this was "empowering"?
In fact, young men still compulsorily have to serve in the army in some countries in the face of a crisis.
I have Singaporean, Russian, Korean and Armenian friends right now in college who will soon have to interrupt their college education to train in their national armies for at least 2 years before they can live life back as civilians. That only if the training doesn't rewire notions within them.
2) Some men held positions of power. So what?
Weren't they cruel towards other men? How did the ordinary man benefit from having a man in charge? To put it in perspective, have women like Sonia Gandhi done wonders for women? Does it make any difference to women if the Prime Minister or President was a woman?
3) The truth is that both men and women had roles.
They complemented each other. The society force them both to behave in certain ways. So neither side was empowered.But today, we are moving beyond roles. We should not start blaming some individuals in the past and try to punish unrelated individuals today. We should look at individual as a being in itself, rather than attaching labels.
4) Men have feelings too, you know.
5) Battlefield medicine took roots in the US Civil war of 1962-1964.
3% of the US population were battle casualties, almost all men. Penicillin was invented in 1920s. Before this, men died horrific deaths. Even a medium gash could lead to blood-poisoning and gangrene. Yet they were forced to fight, they did not have a choice in this matter. WW1 and WW2,Vietnam War, Korean War etc. all had conscripted male soldiers. And they were conscripted because they were male. I can not describe the pain and suffering they underwent. And what did the society give them in return? Some pieces of metal and ribbons, and hollow titles that glorify victims.
And today, most modern militaries are staffed by men. These men are boys at the time they join. Who has brainwashed young boys to commit suicide like this? Of course the society. Who has ensured that women are protected at all costs? That same society.
6) Even today most of the dangerous and riskiest jobs are done by men.
More men than women are today are victims of violence. More men than women commit suicide. In all our media, our films etc. , the male protagonists and antagonists are magnets for horrific violence. So even today, we live in a very anti-male society.
7) Yes women do die in childbirth and men also die of natural diseases.
But that is different from men being forced to fight and die due to unnatural causes on behalf of the society. (Ok, I do give leeway here, as women are encouraged to bear kids by the society, but childbirth is not severe as being forced into wars. Childbirth, though risky, gives life and happiness. Wars, take lives and spread misery.But point taken. Btw I fully support abortion rights)
8) Yes rapes do happen, often against men too.
And yes marital rape laws aren't there, whether for women or for men. A point I would like to make is that societies in general can't seem to understand the sexual dignity of men, which is why the rape laws are extremely sexist. Just take a look at them and try to find scenarios in which a man is capable of getting raped by a woman. You'll hardly find any. The very definition of rape, in fact, is anti-male and it denies victimhood to half of humanity. Apparently a drunk woman engaging in consensual sex is a rape victim by default since her consent is invalid. But why isn't there a similar clause for a man's consent becoming invalid? When was the last time a woman was on trial for raping a man and was asked to show she had the man's consent before engaging in sex with him? Can a man retroactively withdraw consent? A man's sexual dignity and virginity are worthless to a society, in line with the overall disposability of the male.
Apart from rapes, we have murders, eye-gougings, forced amputations, torture, kidnappings, physical assults etc. which are also heinous crimes. Are you aware of the treatment of PoWs? These men became PoWs not because they were victims of circumstances but because they were forced by the society to fight wars. And of course every individual should have the right to safety and dignity, not just women.
I believe in seeing a person based on his/her individuality, rather than his/her gender, religion, political opinions among others. But the ones which dominate today are hell-bent of men-bashing and asking privileges for women, simply for being women.
Despite how I might sound in the above para, I am neither anti-woman or pro-men as such. But I do believe that men are being treated in a disposable manner (with respect to women) and I feel that is what is causing great emotional harm to them, and turning some of them into monsters. Men today are the descendants of selectively-bred males who were strong dominating jerks ready to commit suicide for the society. Now that can't be good! But that is a recurring theme not just in our epics but all across ancient history. A corollary of this is the disposabilty of a man's virginity and sexuality. Think about it, why does the society not sanctify a man's virginity and his seed? Why is heterosexual rape such a one-sided crime?
Woman was treated like a brood-mare. And the man was treated like an ATM and a disposable pawn of the society. I can not see how "men" in general were treated any better than women. Both had it bad.
Besides, as I read a few days ago and shared on my Facebook Timeline: "Even though the term "feminism" is founded upon the basic principle of gender equality, it possesses its own fundamental gender bias, which makes it inclined towards the well being of women, over the well being of the whole society. And if history has shown anything, it is that such fundamental biases in time corrupt even the most glorious ideas and give birth to prejudice, bigotry and differentiation."- Abhijit Naskar, The Bengal Tigress: A Treatise on Gender Equality (Humanism Series)
I am not a feminist. However, I would be happy to say that I am a Humanist.
Cheers!
There isn't just a need to realise that men and women have had it bad, there is a need to not just change roles but give the choice to the individual of what he or she wants to do in life. Our choices should not be restricted by our gender.
