If Feminism is about Equality I don’t want to Know the meaning of Bigotry

I have always regarded the feminist movement with amusement with it’s over sensitivity to a perceived “male-dominated” society. At first it was seeking equality with their male counterparts. Now it basically means getting ahead at all costs.

In Singapore (as with other developed “third-world” countries) women enjoy unprecedented privileges that men do not. Some examples of the privileges that are enshrined in Law are 

1) Females are spared the gallows for any offence that carries the death sentence. The funny thing about this is that the feminists who have been fighting for equality do not fight for their right to death penalty – this would ensure their equal status here because the law here (as elsewhere in the so-called developed world) despite trying to seem gender neutral is in fact gender specific in meting out justice.

2) Men here have no say if their women decide to abort their baby.  – Women here have been fighting for men to share the burden of houshold chores and child-rearing. We have not come to child bearing part yet – and I’m afraid we are not far off that time either. But I find the thought rather frightening as to what would women do if men could be biologically modified to bear children. Globalisation means the homogenisation of cultures and societies – but the western concept of gender homogenisation is a vulgarity that robs humanity of it’s distinct sacred identity.

But coming back, if they find that men should have equal share of the burden and responsibility of child-rearing and house-husbandry, then it follows that men have the right of say in an abortion decision in the first place. Equality here means half the right – and this is only fair considering the husband’s “contribution” to the pregnancy. It is manifestly unfair that the men have no say in an abortion decision by their women and yet are expected to share the responsibility in raising the baby. The responsibilty expected does not entail a privilege which renders the whole argument for equal sharing household responsibilities moot and thus discriminatory.

3) According to the woman’s charter a guy is expected to father another mans child that his wife bore even if there is conclusive medical evidence to the contrary. So long they were married, are living together or had access to each other, the law will treat the child as the legitimate child of the husband without qualification and notwithstanding any forensic/scientific evidence to the contrary . While this may be an issue of the protection of the larger interests of children who are deemed as victims of their parents actions, it does not address the issue of preserving the integrity of the family unit in it’s true sense. I for one would have found it absolutely undignifying to have fathered someone else’s child coming from my wife’s tummy! Of course it may form a valid ground for divorce but the law does not recognise the father’s right to father his own offspring

 All these laws are not just specific to Singapore. While we have made changes to our law with regards to recognition of women as being equals to men, we have ignored the rights of men being equal to women as human beings. We have brought it to absurd levels and right now we have a bunch of militant women educated in the west trying to outstrip covered muslim women whom they believed to be “oppressed” in the name of equality. What chutzpah of bigotry.

It may be interesting to note that legal discrimination against women existed in the common law system that followed forth from Church laws in the medieval times. Women basically had no legal identity to start with to be considered as human beings. They can’t own things, they can’t inherit, they can’t sue among a lot of other “cant’s”. And this was way before the coming of Islam. It took a continent wide rennaisance in Christian Europe that was disillusioned with the increasingly heavy-handed Church establishment and a few major errors in their cosmological assumptions to recognise women as being in equal status with men by Law. The underlying secular ideolgy behind the rennaisance movement sought to sort of “equalise” society by taking away the man-woman distinction in humanity. And then it moved on to reconise homosexuals and lesbians as legitimate way of life.

The absurd direction of this thinking is exposed now as we are also “equalised” with monkeys. And all these are coming in as an intellectual revolution.

So it does not matter if you have a penis or a vagina (or even if you seek or wish to have a penis or a vagina), you will be regared equally by the law. A fancy package for an absurd ideology. And this was the same reason why racism and Aparthied was abolished 200 years ago. It just did not stand in line with current mode of thinking. But racism is a habit that would never go away.

Now we are not discriminated by the colour of our skin but we are discriminated by the way we think and feel that is not in line with western secular materialism. The underlying bigotry in all this is that if we don’t think like these guys we are bigots. So this bigotry manifests itself as nationalism, freedom, democracy, human rights, animal rights among others to rightfully denude others of their right to think as they want. And by the way nationalism is just another fancy name for tribalism. It seeks to divide rather than unite. Whether one likes it or not, this is one of the core reasons for the American-led war in Iraq – an underlying hatred of the muslim identity and it’s apparent and manifested expressions.

For equality to truely happen – the veiled muslim girl should be allowed to wear her scarf. I find it exceptionally absurd that a man screwing another man is allowed to openly exist with state approval and the denial of which is regarded as discriminatory while a veiled muslim women is castigated and ostracised and this is totally legitimate. It does not take much to realise as to which is more repugnant.

The practical truth of the effect of the so-called “enlightenment” is far from this desired equality of humanity. An equality that blatantly disregards natural biological ideals that gave men and women different identities and united them beautifully in procreation.

The necessary biological difference was essentially subsumed in an absurd all-embracing raw equality policy that made no distinction and had no respect for the distinctly unique male-female identity and the special status of humans in this earth. The feminist movement (as with the gay-lesbian movements and the pseudo-scientific “we-came-from-the-monkeys” movement) primarily emanated from the secular movement of the west. These were imposed upon all other cutures of the world as legitimate and fair. This cannot be further from the truth.

The secular western thinking was diametrically in opposition with eastern thinking – and still is – and thank god the majority of the world is still straight.

Whoever said “common sense is anything but common” knew what he was saying.  Secular materialism – while it may have opened many an inroads into humanity’s intellectual development (and there is no gainsaying that) – as it is regarded these days, is flawed in it’s ideological and philosophical direction.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: