So what of this war on women in our country? I hear it so
much, we are waging war on the women of our country, literally a war. War is
defined as a period of conflict, but I rather see it more similar to the game
of chess or checkers, the goal being submission of the other party by taking
out their protection and leadership followed by subjugation of everyone else,
or as in checkers, complete annihilation of the enemy. Sometimes it's all done
through force, other times through politics because there is the unseen essence
of a party that cannot be crushed by physical exertion. This unseen essence is the ideal they stood
for, the memory of their existence, and the legacy they leave behind. I think
this is what they are referring to when they say war on women, not women
themselves, but womanhood and femininity.
Either way, the whole concept of their being a war on the
"fairer sex" is ridiculous.
The war is spoken of widely, on every social network, poll
websites, and even on new websites that are dedicated to its awareness. This is
one from a notable news website,
that I will use to demonstrate that even through the public professes a war on
women, in truth they are divided on the subject, and I'm sure it comes to no
surprise, female democrats think there is while female republicans do not. I
also like to point out how apparently it boils down reproductive rights as the
leading cause behind the war effort.
Now there are other reasons for this war, for example
domestic violence is considered a war on women because according to NOW on a
study published by the Dept of Justice, 86% are being oppressed in their own
homes by abusive male partners. However I would like to refer you to this list
of violent women in the home. Unlike the study done by the department of
justice, the control group was not taken exclusively from women who currently
reside at battered shelters for women. There are over 1600 of these in the US
alone, but only 2 for men, despite the fact that according to the comprehensive
list of studies done on the subject, men can be safely estimated to comprise
around 40% of those abused in the domicile. So exactly who is the government waging war on
in this case? Clearly not the women.
Back to reproductive rights. The debate on US News (which
features only women interestingly enough), is about choice vs no choice. So
even though I think it provides a skewed perspective, I will honor that notion
and continue from there because it will still be easy to tackle. New health
care reform, or anti choice legislation, is designed not to take away choice,
but to enforce responsibility. Each choice has consequences, and those
consequences exist despite the fact that many seem to think filling them away
into a pile labeled "Facts that cease to exist when we ignore them"
will make them go away, but the truth is, someone will have to deal with it,
and usually, its Joe taxpayer. Sandra Fluke is a prime example of how
pro-choice, anti-consequence women can be. She thinks that the government
should stay out of her bedroom and womb, but demands it pay for all her
birthing and birth control bills. Rush Limbaugh said she wanted this for slutty
reasons or that many women will, and many flipped out on him. However, looks
like he was right.
So what about abortion? Roe v Wade already made it legal, what's the problem
ladies? Oh right, not all doctors want
to perform them, and they are not completely freeeverywhere
and there are still people (mostly religious) who are against the practice who
feel the need for at least some regulation. These all have to go clearly
because women need complete control over their reproductive rights. Sounds fair
right, except what about men? Do they deserve rights? Isn't half the child theirs?
Do they get a say in the abortion? Apparently not.
Not only are they charged with homicide for assisting in an abortion, they are
even arrested simply for being against abortion. So he has no say over whether
or not the child can be carried to term. So what about after? Well he has to
support the child, that's his responsibility, even if it's not his,
and he can even get in trouble for doing the right thing, or for donating to a clinic.
And what's the penalty? Jail of course. So basically, the birth is 0% his business, yet 100% his financial
responsibility. On top of that, anywhere from 4%-10% of fathers don't even know
the child isn't theirs, while about 20% are forced still into doing it for
children that they know aren't theirs. Why don't our women's interest groups
who claim to fight for men's rights ever say anything about this problem? Instead
they only focus on how it affects women, and call it choice. If a man gets a
woman pregnant and doesn't want to be a dad he's a dead-beat and a low life,
abandoning his responsibility, but if a woman gets pregnant and doesn't want to
be a mom, that's her choice, she's pro-choice, and to hell with taking
responsibility for the consequence of that choice.
Does what happen to men happen to women? In some instances
yes, and the law applies just the same, however where is where the outcry from women's interest groups begin,
like in this case with alimony and child support. Even though women are only 3% of the
sufferers, once again, they remain suspiciously silent about men's suffering,
despite being for equality, just like when it comes to reproductive rights. But
men have always had the rights, and they still do? Oh yea how? How? ... I think
I hear crickets chirping. No wait, its women screaming and crying calling me a
woman-hater, little dick prick, and the usual ad hominem attack on my character
in an effort to silence me.
So not only have women cornered the market when it comes to
birth control, with all the options, pill, patch, diaphragm, condom (yes one
for women), shots, morning after, abortion, post term adoption, anonymous
adoption, etc. But they want to be able
to do it and have it be paid for, with welfare
programs to boot, to ensure they not
only collect child support, but tax payer support too, while demanding more pay
in the workplace for less work. See here,
here, and here about the wage gap myth, just a few sources, there are zounds
more.
What rights do men have? Keep it in their pants. Male birth
control pill? Sure, but we diverted funds,
towards more women's health clinics and men are fine with this, so we are
shooting ourselves in the foot, with the encouraging aid of our women. Besides
men might lie about it, like women do,
according to some, but not all women's interest groups are against it, they
seem to be divided on the subject. One group that I won't link because I don't
want t traffic, thinks that if it was available, the male
"whore pills" would be free and on every street corner. Like all
other reproductive rights, they also believe there would not be any debate if
men had to deal with what the women do. I doubt it though considering how men's
reproductive rights are currently being treated. I swear it's like a tax
evasive celebrity trying to convince us that an honest low wage law abiding taxpayer
is the real crook.
This whole war on women is a joke. I mean building on my
previous example, what if our politicians started complaining about how they
have to limit the number of expense paid vacations they can take each year to
once a month, or how they have to limit their own salary increase every year to
5%, or the house they live in to 2 million dollars. Those poor souls. And the
fact that everything they do isn't already paid for, but has to come out of
their own already deep pocket? A scandal. If they want lobster and champagne
every night for dinner while relaxing on their yacht, taxpayers should pay for
it, and be grateful for doing so. And if he dare question this unfair
arrangement? Let's defame his character, talk about how there is a war on rich
politicians, and demand better treatment for only those unfortunate browbeaten
people at the average man's expense.
Women have so many rights and privileges when it comes to
reproduction, and yet we are still fighting for more. The only way to do this
of course is pretend it's a war on their freedom and focus only on their needs.
Reproduction, check; women's health initiative, check. I could go on, but I think anyone who isn't
brain dead at this point would have cause to ponder the idea that women are not
at conflict with the general political and social interest.
Of course bringing any of this to light about women's
privileges, illicitness the usual weeping and wailing. So the war continues despite the fact that the
real conflict may not even be against women at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment