Disclaimer: Dear Feminists, all the best. Wear a helmet.
And the rest of you, I hope you enjoy the read.
Note: All the sources are mentioned at the bottom of the article and some of them in the hyperlinks. If you notice any references are missing for the stats/facts, feel free to quote in the comments and I shall update accordingly.
“Let me sing a kutti story, pay attention, listen to me. If you want, take it or else venam tension, leave it baby” – John Durairaj, Prof. V.C Selvam’s ex-student.
I will begin this with a short tale.
Sukasaptati, A Kutti Story:
In Sukasaptati, a merchant went on a business trip. He left his wife Prabhavati alone at home. At the urging of her women friends, Prabhavati prepared to have an adulterous affair. A male parrot that her husband had received as a gift warned Prabhavati:
This is fine and merits doing.
But it is not easy for women of good families.
Moreover, it is considered disreputable.
Go if you have the wits to handle any problems which may arise.
Otherwise, you will be in for trouble.
The parrot then quoted a verse:
The wicked merely watch the fun
when problems arise.
Like the starving lady did
as another pulled the merchant’s hair.
Confused, intrigued and filled with curiosity, Prabhavati then remained at home to listen to the story about Rambhika, the wife of a village headman. She sought adulterous affairs, but no other men would have sex with her because they feared her husband. One day, she saw a handsome young Brahmin who was visiting the village. She lovingly looked at the young Brahmin and told him to come home with her, salute her husband, and affirm everything that she says. She presented to her husband the young Brahmin and described him as her long-lost cousin. The husband instructed his wife to care of the “cousin”. He then left them alone at night. Rambhika sought sex with the young Brahmin. He refused to violate his moral code. He explained that he had accepted her as his cousin, and cousins shouldn’t have sex together so as not to tarnish the family reputation. Rambhika urged him with poetry.
As if that wasn’t enough, Rambhika then declared that if a woman solicits a man for sex and he refuses her, he will be consigned to hell. After repeated attempts, one fine day, Rambhika cried out a false accusation of rape. Her husband and his relatives came running to violently attack the accused man.
The Brahmin recognized his dire predicament, bowed down and fell at Rambhika’s feet accepting his fate and her demands. Rambhika cleverly redirected her alarm and said the brahmin has cholera. The foolish husband believed her and went out again mistaking the spilled rice and milk as her genuine cry for help. Rambhika then had sex with the young Brahmin. They continued their affair throughout the month that he remained at her home on the pretext of his convalescence.
The parrot told such stories for seventy nights and kept Prabhavati at home while her merchant husband was away. When the husband came back and asked the parrot for an explanation, Prabhavati herself confessed that she had thoughts of taking a lover and almost killed the parrot who tried to stop her.
But eventually she held back -“Thus I sinned only in thought, but never by deed. Now my life and death are in your hands“, she cried to her husband. The Parrot declared that situation arose naturally from a wife being left alone. The parrot urged the husband to forgive his wife. The husband did. They all lived happily ever after.
Mind you, this is an excerpt from 12th Century stories from ancient Indian texts that depicted Women’s hypergamy. A concept that many believe to be entirely new & has nothing to do with “Sanskari” women. Everything that a modern Indian Woman does is believed to be inspired from the West. A deeper look into the past will say otherwise – that these tales were as common in India as they were everywhere else in the world.
Fast forward to 21st century, in June 2023, I attended an online seminar by a small private org that specializes in counselling the corporates how to interact with the “Trans” folk. Basically, a session explaining that we need to be “tolerant” (especially) of Trans folks and respect the “Pronouns”. After references such as – Garbopinishads, Rig Veda, 1970s MLM movement – Stonewall riot, Jamburi, Six Honest Servants, Peacock in the Land of Penguins – the person moved on to present slides explaining how corporate folks should learn to incorporate, wait for it!!! – Diversity, Equity and Inclusivity – at workplace. I was laughing my ass out behind that mute button throughout the seminar every time the bombs – Paradigm shift, LGBTQ, Pygmalion effect, Equality – dropped. The person even preaches a slogan – “I am what I am, so take me as what I am”. While I understand the sentiments and the science of LGB – this TQ is where I resisted the temptation to ask the presenter if they could present the topic from scientific POV if it’s all so easy that one could switch genders based on their “internal sense of feeling”. Whatever this counselling asks of the employees is not based on scientific literature, but FEELINGS alone. In the interest of sanity and refusal to debate clowns, I held back and collected the necessary info.
While the seminar insisted on – onboarding everyone, eliminating outsiderness and showing care – towards rainbow people in the workplace, it does the exact opposite – doesn’t onboard, pushes out and indirectly demonstrates intolerance – towards non-rainbow players that attempt to challenge their position. As a job holder, you are indirectly being made aware that outraging the modesty and feelings of these folks will get you fired. While it states that the rest of us must grow and learn to accept Rainbow people, the presenter and as well as several of the audience themselves demonstrated zero room for growth and learning.
Now you may wonder – what does this have to do with taking down Women’s studies. We’ll get there.
Let me give you another cultural example from Konkana Sen Sharma who publicly denounced the concept of gender and is often hailed as a true feminist heroine of age for her depiction of modern women and [soft] Men (meaning- Feminized Men) breaking the stereotypes, gender roles and expectations that the ‘Patriarchy’ expects people to carry.
You may think I’m exaggerating and by now you may have contemplated, “Who hurt him?”. I understand why one may think that – criticizing Feminist-Think automatically attracts attention and accusations of hating Women while subtly enquiring the status of my sexual activity because somewhere in their rotten brains they equate sexual activity with logical analysis of the argument at hand. But nowhere in the history of humans has people belonging to one ideology have quite openly, encouragingly & successfully demonstrated their hatred for half the population on the planet than the Feminists did towards Men. Misandry is ever present on feminism’s sleeves. Challenge the gynocentric view of the world and you’ll quickly see how jaundiced Feminism’s views are.
Let me provide an analysis:
In order to point out to the readers what Women’s Studies lack, we’ll take a peek into the syllabus, the authors and what is being taught. And then make observations.
Syllabus:
link 1 , link 2 , link 3, link 4, link 5 , link 6 – samples.
Whose works are taught?
Vina Mazumdar, Sharmila Rege, Simone de Beauvoir, Flavia Agnes, Judith Butler, Gayle Rubin, Kate Millet, Mary E john, Neera Desai, Linda Nicholson, Judith Lorber, Maithreyi Krishnaraj, Sylvia Walby, T N Srivastava s Women and the Law etc.,
Take it from women s studies student herself – Sanjukta Basu – who proudly says she’s a radical feminist adhering to second wave feminism.
Her PhD question papers (click here )
sample:
Her publishing:
She would even bring up Theorizing Patriarchy (Sylvia Walby), The Creation of Patriarchy (Gerda Lerner) while trying to “educate” people. She would also quote to her audiences Kimberlé Crenshaw’s books to highlight Intersectionality wrt women’s movement in India.
What do they teach & What exactly is the goal of Feminism you may wonder.
This is what Indian institutions state in general:
Women’s studies – an academic discipline taught as courses in Universities and Colleges to learn about the system of privilege and oppression, the relation between power and gender and the socio-economic class. It teaches students about concepts which are related to feminist theory, standpoint theory, multiculturalism, transnational feminism, social justice and materialism.
Today, the dominant feminism, as Paula Wright – Darwinian Scholar and Researcher- points out, is intersectional feminism (aka intersectionality) a collection of feminisms which emerged from radical feminism and which includes, inter alia, critical race theory, black socialist feminism, gender feminism, postmodern feminism, critical theory, ecofeminism and postcolonial feminism – all things which can be reliably described under the description “woke” whose goal is to dismantle the patriarchy+ : Imperialist White Supremacist Cis Hetero Sexist Capitalist Patriarchy.
“It is the job of Black, BAME and anti-colonial feminists to dismantle the “imperialist white supremacist” part; trans and gender feminists muster to dismantle “cis”; radical feminists dismantle “hetero” which of course includes the family; socialist/Marxist feminists tackle “capitalism” and they all go hell for leather on “sexism” and “patriarchy”. Crucially, unlike previous feminisms, intersectionality commands unprecedented global institutional power and influence”, she writes.
Indian Universities do not highlight these specific aspects of the actual Feminist goals. And once you go through the works and get familiar with their verbatim & vox populi, you will soon see a pattern and realize what is being taught:
1) Patriarchy is the villain
2) Women couldn’t vote, get educated, couldn’t own properties
3) Men oppressed women. Women are being seen as objects.
4) Wives are being treated as slaves. Marriage is equivalent to concentration camp.
5) Women are subjected to rape and domestic violence and they don’t have any form
of legal recourse
6) Women fought a brave grassroots war against patriarchy and won the rights – voting, jobs, abortion, control of their own bodies
7) The concept of Gender is ever-evolving. Gender roles are patriarchal. Man/Woman is interchangeable. Sex is a spectrum.
8) Violence is gendered and structured and highly directed towards Women alone.
You get the idea, right? Women have been Victims of Patriarchy at all levels and their aim is to smash the patriarchy and break the glass ceiling.
Good so far?
Ok. Now let’s see what they don’t mention.
Many women had access to Education, Career and opportunities and did have Property rights. They also could make respectable careers for themselves as authors, educators, scholars, and businesswomen.
Business: Read here , Authors: Read here , Educators: Read here , Scholars: Read here
American women could in fact attain higher education in the early 19th Century & Married Woman’s Property Act addressed the issues long before Feminism was even a thing.
Career & opportunities:
In 1885, at age 24, Canadian Journalist Sara Jeannette Duncan declared her era as “Golden age for Girls, full of new interests and opportunities”. She went on to work for the Washington Post and published celebrated Novels. She didn’t realize she was oppressed and marginalized.
Education:
Feminists overstate the case for Female limitation. The universities had opened to Women long before 1915. Many of the Suffragettes themselves were university graduates. Oberlin College in the US opened to Women in 1836; in Britain, Girton College, Cambridge, opened in 1869.
Marriage and Property:
Married women back in the day became one person legally with husbands upon Marriage. With Husband alone responsible for Wife’s debts & needs, her financial freedom was restricted. But the woman’s ability to own property and control her finances were remedied by successive acts in 19th Century.
Wait, what??? But Feminists say Women were oppressed everywhere in the world. Don’t they? If the original Women’s Rights Movement was so “Noble”, why would Universities and Women’s Studies professors hide this information from the students? Gee, I wonder why.
There’s more!! See below –
1) Sex differences and gender roles based on evolutionary sciences
2) Occult leanings, Pedophilia, Man hatred among the Feminists(and Women in general)
3) How Rape of Women has been considered serious across history
4) Women inciting Violence against Men
5) How Women’s distress and weeping powerfully motivates men to kill other men
6) Majority of Men lacking Voting , reproductive rights (even now)
7) False Accusations by Women
8) Paternity deception across ages and cultures
9) Compulsory Military Conscription only for Men
and how Women are accepted into Military even if they don’t meet the standards.
10) Women raping Men.
11) Male Genital Mutilation (more on this in later sections)
12) Women getting softer punishments for infanticide because of Women-sympathy card.
13) Women who murder their husbands have always gotten a lesser charge. Exonerated if she (falsely) claimed that her husband was abusive.
14) Family court bias, child support to the Wife even if the kids don’t belong to the husband
15) Indian Feminists who directly contributed to objecting Gender neutral laws while advocating for Marital Rape law that holds only a Man accountable at mere word of the Wife alone.
16) Feminists’ support for Women who kill their Children.
17) Domestic Violence by Women and how Men are turned away from DV Abuse shelters.
18) How India doesn’t recognize Men as victims of Domestic Violence
19) How Feminists ousted Erin Pizzey, the founder of the first ever Domestic Abuse shelter just because she made the observation that women can be violent too and majority of the DV was bi–directional.
Just to name a few. You can check for yourselves.
Kate Millet harassed Women ( Read here )
Simone and her partner had Pedo backgrounds: Read here
The story of Sartre, Beauvoir: Read here . Also – Read
If you still think I’m lying or that I’m wrong, you should be able to tell this – On what merit does these women’s studies programs continue to receive crores of funding when the syllabus remains outdated & unchecked for almost 5 decades? I will tell you how they did it – by weaponizing the victimhood status – a self-perpetuating status they are incapable of detaching themselves from.
Reasons why Women’s Studies must be shut down:
A 2020 study ( read here ) by 4 Israeli researchers (consisting of both Men and Women 😛 ) concluded that the tendency to victimhood is an identifiable personality type that may have no correlation with actual victimhood and that transforms the way an individual relates to others and their society. Their deep self-deception offers disturbing evidence of feminism’s corruption of academia, law.
Moreover, the researchers have found that people with the tendency to interpersonal victimhood believe themselves fully justified in taking revenge on others and are unwilling to relinquish belief in their own self-proclaimed innocence.
And thus we arrive at the central topic of this post. The reasons:
1) Gender/Women’s Studies programs teach students to emphasize the gender only during following cases:
Female victims, Male perpetrators, Female achievements, and Male failings
and forces the view that any contribution by Male counterparts is a Patriarchal conspiracy to keep women in slavery roles. There is nothing in their documents to suggest that men ever acted justly or sacrificially to protect or to provide for women with a sense of responsibility & duty. The books launch an unmitigated smear campaign from first to last. And whenever someone brings up Male victims, they shut it down with the phrase – “See? Patriarchy hurts Men too” which they state is further proof of Evil Patriarchy.
2) It presents unscientific literature as something that needs world’s attention and academic respect. Provides false notions that Male and Female are social constructs alone.
From its earliest incarnations, gender studies has promoted preposterous contentions about Woman as Other (Simone De Beauvoir), the suburban family as a “comfortable concentration camp” (Betty Friedan), the social construction of gender (Kate Millett), women as Playboy Bunnies (Gloria Steinem), the female Eunuch (Germaine Greer), honorable man-hating (Robin Morgan), rape culture (Susan Brownmiller) gynocide (Mary Daly), compulsory heterosexuality (Adrienne Rich), white privilege (Peggy McIntosh), intersectionality (Kimberlé Crenshaw), family abolition (Sophie Lewis), gender as performance (Judith Butler) and the difficulty of distinguishing rape from normal sex (Catharine MacKinnon)
3) It has no intention to encourage critical thought, let alone disagreement. It exists solely to mandate acceptance and conformity, creating paper-cut-out activists who mouth repetitive mantras they can’t begin to defend if questioned. Rather than teaching students to think and write clearly, gender studies pass off as something holy and profound that doesn’t require correction. You can notice that sentiment in Marcie Bianco’s definition: Gender studies is simply the rigorous examination of how arguably the human dynamic and social and political roles of gender have acquired meaning and shaped humanity and our institutions for centuries across cultures
4) It is incapable of addressing its own Hypocrisies. Take the Freedom Trash Can movement for example. It was part of the Miss America Protest 1968 – where they burned the bras – to signify breaking the stereotypes of Women generally associated with False eye lashes, long hair, high heels, curlers, make-up, hairspray, bras. This is where its hypocrisy lies.
On one hand it remains angry about the “enforced Femininity”. But on the other hand, Feminism loudly and unequivocally supports the Trans movement where Men typically present themselves with the very stereotypes that Feminism previously fought and burned.
E.g., Dylan Mulvaney who identifies as a Woman and presents himself (with those exact stereotypes that Women in 1960’s fought against) long hair, manicured nails, make-up, women clothing and goes as far as buying tampons. #BulgeIsBeautiful
On one hand, Indian Feminists demand Gender Neutral laws in case of Same Sex Marriages because it “empowers” women but at the same time demand Gender Specific laws in case of Marital Rape because they say only Women can be victims of Domestic Violence. Keep in mind that Indian Feminists/Women’s rights activists are single handedly responsible for not letting the law protect adult male victims of violence at the hands of women.
Also look up who Karuna Nundy is and you’ll understand the shared sentiment.
On one hand, women like Deepika Padukone (and her fans) are so keen on advocating for “My Body My Choice” but remain silent in cases where Male Genital Mutilation of baby boys & elective Abortion are widely practiced. Yes. In the west, 98% of the Abortions are elective. Meaning – Women are making bad reproductive choices by participating in unsafe sex voluntarily. Abortion and other forms of contraception exist majorly to bail women out of their poor decision making so they can continue sleeping around – meaning, they want Sex minus the consequences – and has very little to do with “concern for women’s safety” as Feminists like to have us believe. There’s no verifiable data available in India as everything is concealed and seems to point out that women who opt for abortion originally conceived only out of pressure from family and has nothing to do with poor sex habits. [Keep in mind Men’s and Women’s promiscuity play out differently.]
#BelieveAllWomen , correct? 😉
Note: In Pregnancy tales, the unborn child is addressed as Baby when a mother wants to continue the pregnancy, but the language immediately switches to “clump of cells” when she doesn’t want to keep it – whether it’s week 1 or a day before the delivery date. If the fetus has no separate identity, why is it called a double homicide when a pregnant lady is killed (irrespective of whether the lady wants to keep it or not)? Look up how the law holds the person responsible for a pregnant lady’s death and how that person is also held for culpable homicide of the unborn child. Where should the pregnant lady’s Right to Abortion end and the unborn child’s Right to Live begin, if courts continue to entertain cases where a woman applies for permission to abort at 26-week pregnancy? What’s even the point of setting legal limit?
5) Feminist Academia withhold crucial information from the ordinary public, use unsubstantiated and exaggerated claims/statistics to create and sustain fear and hatred of Men. This is how they keep the “Rape culture is well and alive” narrative active and continue to mislead the masses because – when you control the past, you control the future.
Everytime they say “India is Rape capital of the world. Not a safe place for Women”, ask why the Rape, Stalking, Modesty & Domestic Violence laws don’t recognize Female to Male abuse, why there are no Reproductive rights for Men, why false rape cases are on rise more than ever and why women walk scot-free even after their allegations are found to be false and face no punishment. A peek into Ernest Belfort Bax’s Fraud of Feminism, The Legal Subjection of Men reveal that false allegations are not modern but a very common age-old tradition which eventually left an indelible mark on Indian Judiciary and the laws it retained from its Ex-Daddy.
Clearly someone is lying.
6) Given how much info is intentionally hidden, are we to believe that Feminism is full of good intentions from the start and deviated along the way? Because these same students & those half-truths they were taught, now permeated the Media, Family Law system and Positions of Power that influence policies that undoubtedly favor Women at the expense of Men.
Even as victims, they seem to compete vigorously to retain the image for they are afraid that the feminist fog would disappear, people will question the authenticity of their claims and the universities funding would quickly dry up.
7) Women’s studies program is the only place where it says it brings awareness about child abuse (only Male as perpetrator) while also including literature from women who‘re involved with pedophilic backgrounds. Otherwise, why would it entertain people like Simone de Beauvoir, Germaine Greer or Elizabeth Cady Stanton who have a history of sexually abusing underage students, going so far as writing a book about romanticizing sex with minor boys (The Beautiful Boy) and supporting infanticide respectively?
8) The feminist perspective is faulty, delusional, irrational & extremely narcissistic. The universities became so lost in congratulating themselves that they’ve become intellectually dishonest to admit that their works are nothing but a scattershot approach and hence resulted in a view of the world that is inversely related to reality.
9) It’s a reactionary dogma which teaches contempt and is allergic to debate. It dwells obsessively on group grievance & relies heavily on melodramatic cries of sexism instead of fair-minded analysis of merits of an argument and always front-footed in launching ambitious personal attacks on those who disagree.
10) Its activism is selective otherwise why would it remain Silent over concept of gender in cultures such as Islam: Homophobia, Wife beating, Male genital mutilation, No mention of oppression of Women in Islamic world, forced conversions, death penalty of apostates, phobic emphasis on sexual purity , destruction of churches, vicious dehumanization of Jews as direct descendants of apes and pigs.
11) The gender studies programs at universities are not teaching about Feminism, they are teaching Feminism. So that means every professor enters the course with a set of preconceived notions – that Men were always the oppressors and manipulates the students to focus only on the scenarios mentioned in point 1.
If you still find it difficult– I ll let Sanjukta s work speak for itself:
She says her work is focused on gender trolling
“Its not about women alone but Men too. Men shouldn’t be excluded.”
But she proceeds to exclude men in the research.
Talks about Men maintaining power, influence and privilege over Women via Rape but doesn’t talk about Women who have Rape fantasies, a widely recognized phenomenon.
Talks about Power dynamics – rape on the pretext of marriage/ job offer.
but never the Lack of due process in cases of sexual harassment and the punishment for false accusers or why POSH doesn’t address Female to Male abuse.
She says Feminism is not about hating Men.
And that Women are disadvantaged at many levels.
Women did not have any privilege whatsoever:
Take a look at how Systematic discrimination against Men remains – Only women are protected. No protection for Men under same scenarios when the perpetrator is Female.
Women centric laws:
Section 498A. Husband or relative of the husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.
Section 509. Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman.
Section 377. Unnatural offences – unnatural sex committed towards a Woman
Section 354. Assault of criminal force on a woman with intent to outrage her modesty.
Domestic Violence Act, 2005- recognizes physical, verbal, financial or sexual abuse
Section 125. Order for maintenance of wives, children & parents.
Section 375. Rape. A man is said to commit “rape”…
Section 376. Punishment for rape.
General sections:
Section 323. Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt.
Section 340. Wrongful confinement. (If the husband is restricting)
Section 506. Punishment for criminal intimidation
She, like her sisterhood uber allies, throws the word Patriarchy a lot.
But the term patriarchy itself is a lazy slogan: Read here
Did you know theory of patriarchal control was debunked in 2007 itself ?
Shulamith Firestone, a radical-libertarian feminist and an important figure in the 2nd wave (which Sanjukta claims her allegiance to) , clearly defines patriarchy as a system of oppression of women.
So whenever someone keeps blaming Patriarchy – ask why would patriarchy design the laws in such a way that benefits women and punishes men.
Why the discrimination against Men and extra privileges for Women?
If you carefully observe, everything that is happening in the world is exact opposite to the Feminists exaggerated claims such as – Rape culture, Gender Pay Gap, No laws to protect women, only Men hurt Women, Even when Men die Women are the most effected etc., Let’s explore why the world believes Women more.
The preferential treatment of Women across Human history:
You might have heard about the infamous expression: Women and Children first.
Where do you think it has originated from and why?
On one hand, it can be understood from the perspective of Moral Chivalry.
(Read here)
Another way is by understanding Sexual Behavior & Sexual Aggression in Humans.
Women’s sexual receptivity and Men’s sexual proceptivity
Women are sexually passive beings, Men are assertive
[Note: Predatory is the far end of the spectrum of assertiveness]
Women evolved to be sexually receptive because it led to higher chances of survival and high success rates of desirability in the sexual market while reducing the margin for rejection. In Male -Female relationships, Male aggression stands out.
To understand female aggression, you need to study lesbian relationships,
and females tend to be aggressive more or less to the same extent.
Women’s emotional cruelty also serves as one of the prime identifiers.
Example:
If a woman tends to grab her genitals in public, we tend to perceive that she’s saying “Come to me, i m waiting for you” – signaling AVAILABILITY.
If a man does the same thing we perceive that behavior as “I’m coming to get you” an extreme of sexually proceptive behavior – signaling INTENT.
If a woman strips naked it’s perceived as innocence, or we feel pity for her. if a man strips, it’s considered sexually aggressive.
Meaning – the actions that originate from women are generally sexually passive, non- threatening, not harmful enough.
Man does the same, it is perceived as active, threatening, strong intent to harm and that which would bring ill-will.
Next is via understanding Agent/Object dichotomy:
Society s general perception:
Female violence and hostility are either non-existent, harmless or excusable
So it pushes the notion that women are objects which are acted upon whereas Men are agents that act upon others.
In order to maintain this “women are always victims”(objects that are always acted upon) image, what feminists do is manufacture justification on behalf of women’s actions as a reaction to hypothetical action originating from the Man.
“I bet he was cheating on her. So, she hitting him is acceptable.”
They actively force the situation to comply within their instinctive gendered narrative.
The Patriarchal oppression & Male privilege are the most commonly referenced and targeted hypothetical actions.What you need to understand is Patriarchy defn is so wrong
and non-existent if we go by definition –
Power structure that is designed to benefit men at the expense of women
because , lo and behold, Men lack the mechanism that bolsters automatic own group preference. There’s little to no evidence that Men aid other Men just on the basis of gender alone unless motivated by common interests such as political inclination, chasing the same goal (not a woman) etc., Only women show in-group bias across all cultures. Read here
Another important way to understand is by exploring Neoteny.
Neoteny is the retention of the juvenile features in an adult animal
In our evolutionary path, we tend to take women (& children) seriously
when they express themselves as the objects clubbed with child-like helplessness
When they’re hurt, upset or in danger, We feel the immediate impulse to remove that hurt.
On the other end, we expect men to deal with such hurt, upset or danger in a much more adult manner because we perceive them as Agents. We don’t feel the impulse to help them out.
Neoteny in women has an evolutionary success rate whereas Neoteny in adult Men had little to no evolutionary importance. Neotenous women have had higher chances of survival compared to the non-neotenous ones.
Neoteny in women is relevant because
1) men across cultures found neotenous female faces sexually more attractive,
2) neotenous faces have been perceived more “sociable” (friendly and nice), and
3) people in general found non-neotenous faces intimidating.
Why this explanation?
Because it makes a hell of a lot more sense than gender feminist theory. Especially in the context of today’s feminist advocacy (highlighting weakness and victimhood).
simply put – women are perceived inherently valuable.
Men – inherently disposable.
In conclusion: What Feminists are doing is they are advertising that they’re strong and equal to Men. Their full potential is being oppressed due to patriarchy.
While also simultaneously projecting themselves as the victims of patriarchy who need to be rescued – asking for extra privileges as a result.
All this collective perception has aided Feminist s one-sided narrative:
i) their demands for suffrage
ii) Abortion rights
iii) Extra protection under the law
iv) Normalizing demonization of men & masculinity
v) Successful in selling the idea – Men are born defective, Feminine intervention is the cure
They were able to pull this off by alleging that Women’s behavior and bodies were strictly and inhumanely monitored by Patriarchal constructs and deny all the possibilities that even Women could be dangerous to self and the society and needed Men’s intervention.
So, the question arises, to what extent does a female have to display the sexual aggression so that it would be viewed just as harmful as men’s?
Now you may feel that this explanation is not enough.
In that case, you need to consider the direct link between a female’s physical safety/well-being and her mate’s reproductive success.
Consider the Praying Mantis example:
In captivity, females have been observed to kill and eat males during the act of mating, but the reverse has never been observed. While such inconsiderate behavior on the part of female mantises may be much rarer in the wild, females have evolved an instinct to kill and eat males during mating if necessary i.e., if they are in danger of starvation. Males have not only NOT EVOLVED a tendency to do the same to females, they’ve also not even evolved any mechanism towards self-defense when a female signals to make a meal off of them. In fact, Males have evolved some mechanism to subvert their normal survival instincts specifically during mating IN FAVOR of prioritizing the nutritional requirements of their female mate.
Why, you may ask again-
If a female is extremely hungry and a male is already inseminating her, it’s actually in his best genetic interest to sacrifice himself to allow her to have him for lunch as long as his sperms are fertilizing her eggs. In this way he’s a winner. The propagation of his genes is only assisted by him letting the female have her wicked cannibalistic way with him. Every calorie of his body she consumes is a calorie devoted to the increased viability of his offspring. Praying Mantises natural selection would pass down the females’ willingness to cannibalize and the males’ willingness to be cannibalized during mating simply because those behaviors led to greater reproductive success for both males and females.
Humans may not be praying mantises, but a woman’s physical safety and well-being are integral to her mate’s reproductive success because she is the one who gestates the fetus while a man’s physical safety and well-being are simply not as directly important. Keep the agent/object dichotomy also in mind: because if you defeat her, you’re an asshole. If she defeats you, you’re a loser.
We can also draw an observation about Why Men fail to resist Rape by Women:
Given the strength differential between men and women and how violent men are known to be, it is conceivable that when faced with serious physical resistance, the Male abandons the attempt to fight back not to avoid injury to himself but to prevent the level of catastrophic injury that might be required to subdue his rapist. Male victims in relationships express a reluctance to resist/fight out of concern over serious injury to the woman raping them.
Keeping this knowledge in mind, we can also draw observation on how adult human Males exhibit – “I’m a better Man than him”
Male-Male aggression, fighting, etc during uncivilized times and the modern version: White Knighting, bad mouthing, being the go-to guy, that Women approve of – are subtle but obvious ways of dominance. These Men attempt at achieving “good guy” status by undermining other man s status relative to their own in the form of above-mentioned traits. And calling another Man a rapist ensures his highest achievement as a “better” or “Safe” guy. Looking at the other side of it, the Man who gets blamed as the Perpetrator will lose status and start losing every opportunity to pass on his genes.
So, whenever a Woman faces a Man that threatens her falsely built-up reality, she attempts at labeling that unwilling-to-affiliate Man as someone who causes her harm (casually terming any man as a Potential Rapist) and in doing so asks for help (which she gains easily) from other Men and have that particular Man eliminated from the race (of reproduction).
So, my point being –
Women’s Studies do not teach Sex differences from such perspective. Not even as a tiniest possibility or why hierarchies exist in the society under the evolutionary circumstances. Everything is about Evil Male domination towards innocent Women and children. This is how Feminists strategically plant these blind spots using Gender Studies & Media with unverifiable/faulty claims and divert the attention away from Female faults. This makes the public underestimate Female aggression and the lengths to which Women go to express that.
For example – if you take Mothers killing Children into account (including Abortion), the statistics will outnumber the people died in all the wars combined. And as such – the most dangerous place for a child is in a mother’s womb.
Now I will leave it up to you to decide which is true: the domination theory that is based on feelings & unfalsifiable data OR the dominance hierarchies, sexual behavior & aggression rooted in verifiable scientific principles. Richard Feynman famously said — It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong. Now, you can visit the point 5 I mentioned and see if you notice how Feminists exaggerate the claims and why general public fail to verify them.
What should be the goal of women s studies and final thoughts:
Now any triggered Male or Female might say – “You are a Man advocating for Men s rights. Why should your arguments AGAINST Gender studies outweigh Feminists’ advocacy FOR Gender studies?”
Education’s most important goal should be to encourage critical thinking and not to take claims at face value. Activism of any form or under any circumstance will remain greatest enemy in a classroom.
As far as women’s studies programs are concerned, Feminism ensures to gatekeep those false-origin stories. It is scared to have its theories challenged and hence has remained reactionary.
People need to understand that Women’s studies is an illegitimate offspring of general public’s ignorance and the gynocentric-inclined individuals. If women’s studies could be built based on lies, the only way to dismantle them is by truth. Do not mistake its self-righteousness for scholarly passion
When the advocacy is rooted in inflammatory accusations and howls of outrage about Patriarchy, Infantile need for centrality, an appetite for victimhood, its inability to self-correct when presented with contrary evidence, proposes policies filtered through gynocentric lens, axis of reality centered around untestable claims, breasts and vagina used as pamphlets for their activism – we must outrightly protest its unending determination to find new ways to cry inequality with its rapidly expanding list of categories of oppression added to the core narrative of victimization.
-> Having understood its tricks, why should we hold such Programs and people who teach them with mountain regard who continues to treat MENS GRIEVANCES as ACCEPTABLE LOSSES , denies the oppression faced by Men whose criminalization begins even before they are born?
Its high time we reject the idea that Women’s studies are special. We should reject the idea that Women are morally superior to Men. IMO, Women do not hold the moral ground. They do what they want in the moment. Once they sober up and can find room for regret, they act like they had morals to begin with. Then Victimhood follows.
Feminism is rooted in deep resentment for sexual dimorphism in humans. Healthy biological reality is what they dislike the most. Of course, they would advocate for child slaughter. They do this and then further express their resentment over being the ones with wombs with slogans like “If men got pregnant, abortion would be sacrament” Every facet of feminism and every poor choice of a woman ranging from getting upset to angry to killing a baby or adult has its roots, tolerated and nurtured, only in a society filled with women eager to see themselves as victims and victims alone.
The only time I take #BelieveAllWomen seriously is when they say, “I brought you into this world. I can very well take you out of it”. Abortion is the peak expression of conveying this very sentiment that every woman holds. Feminism has made it mainstream.
Even though I’m aware that the programs are not going anywhere, I for one would be eagerly waiting for its demise at the hands of truth because Feminism indeed is the book that we can judge by its cover and we will never be wrong about its intentions because WOMENS STUDIES IS WHERE FEMINISTS FOUND ACADEMIC SHELTER TO JUSTIFY MALE HATRED.
Modern woman is a feminism incarnate – Indifferent to suffering of others other than sisterhood, insensitive to the joys of biological reality, romanticizes the rubble of banality and one who views acknowledging of Men’s issues as attention being drawn away. Feminism as such is a virulent madness. I genuinely believe it cannot corrupt the really sane people who still know how to enjoy life and reality as is while also sharing the pain of common man not due to gender preference but out of human decency, care for others and responsibility which Feminism ultimately lacks.
If you are a Woman who’s reading this and still interested in pursuing the program, I have one suggestion for you – Divorce yourself from the dogmatic approaches they teach and marry yourself to fair analysis with openness to adapt, change and evolve when presented with contrary evidence. Now I’m not denying the good work nor the smart people that genuinely care about the issues that minorities face, but what I am getting at is that in trying to address women’s issues they overcompensated Women in all areas of life leaving behind Men and Boys. So, focus on Treating the Problem, not the Gender. Because Crime has no gender. As seen in Sanjukta s case – Never confuse education with intelligence. You can have a PhD and still be an Idiot.
if you are a Man reading this, I say this to you.
Why have you not spoken up until now? You take insurance for your assets, cars, purchases, but have you ever thought of insuring your marriage, are you aware of matrimonial laws? Did you know 99% of the Married Men in India learn about the laws for the first time after entering a divorce lawyer’s office? Do you know you can be arrested based on a woman’s statement alone and serve 10 years of jail time even if you have not committed any crime? You can sit comfortably in your place and think in your foolishness that everything is fine, “My girlfriend/Wife will never do this to me”. But the laws and policies – that armed her to do so anytime at her will- convey a different picture.
Do not be afraid of losing your job, or your wife/ girlfriend or your citizenship or your status in the society when your voice can empower the silent victims that the entire country and the judiciary deliberately ignore. Well, I’m not going to stop pursuing! I want you to get mad!! Mad as hell for the unfairness and the discrimination. I don’t want you to start an agitation nor a riot, I don’t want you to protest nor take sides in an election during voting, I don’t want you to write thousands of letters begging the people in power to act against the injustices, I don’t have an antidote to your depression nor for your misery in life. All I know is that you’ve got to get Mad about your disposable position in the society and how it looks at you. Get up out of your chairs, stick your head out of the window and yell “I’m a human being, goddammit!! My life has value. I contribute to my family, friends and society through my hardships. Men’s lives matter too”. So, I want you to get up now. Get up out of your chairs and get up RIGHT NOW and wake up out of that clouded head of yours and come out of that fog and yell – like an angry prophet denouncing the hypocrisies of our times- “Things have got to change! The way this country treats Men- it is not fair! Men’s lives matter too and we’re not going to take this anymore”
You’re gonna do it, are you not?
Because they’re still gaslighting us.
“It has nothing to do with Male bashing”
Yea, right.
Sources:
- Purple Motes – Douglas Galbi
- The Fiamengo File 2.0 – Professor Janice Fiamengo
- Girl Writes What! – Karen Straughan
- Paul Elam
- Feminists Lies and Statistics – Paula Wright
- Network (1976) – Sidney Lumet
Suggested Reading:
Daphne Patai: Professing Feminism: Education and Indoctrination in Women’s Studies
Perspectives on Female Sex Offending by Myriam S. Denov,
When She was Bad: Violent Women & the Myth of Innocence by Patricia Pearson
Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy – Mothers who harm their children for attention, article by Gad Saad
Crimes by Women and how Indian Laws favor only Women.
P.B Anderson’s 1998 study on women’s Sexual initiation and aggression.
V- Blog 