< color="#000000" size="2">25/3/01

< color="#000000" size="4">Equity Feminists?

< size="2" color="#000000">How often does one read about the distinction between 'radical feminists' (the real men-haters) and 'equity feminists' (those who supposedly believe that the genders should be treated equally)?

< size="2" color="#000000">The answer is, 'too often'!

< size="2" color="#000000">There is no validity in an ideology such as 'equity feminism' just as there is no valid, comprehensible, 'equity Nazism' or 'equity racism'.

< size="2" color="#000000">The best that can be said about equity feminists is that they, supposedly, believe that men and women are of equal value and should be treated with equal fairness. 

< size="2" color="#000000">But they do so without any regard to the men!

< size="2" color="#000000">And that's about as valid as me saying that I care deeply about my family, but couldn't give a toss for the wife!

14/12/01 

The notion that there are significant differences between 'gender' feminists and 'equity' feminists is a spurious one - particularly given that at least 90% of women wouldn't know the alleged differences between them.

Any ideology that (even by its very name in the case of 'feminism') focuses on one gender and disregards the other one is a divisive ideology, and it can have very little to offer in the way of producing ideas that are not highly prejudicial to the ignored gender, and even less when it comes to producing workable solutions for the benefit of the whole of society.

What would be the use of a naturalist concerned to preserve the rainforests focusing his entire scientific enterprise exclusively on the direct needs of trees? And what naturalist with the slightest degree of ability and understanding would actually do such a stupid thing?

In my view, 'Equity Feminism' is about as valid and as endearing a term as 'Equity Nazism'.

And, frankly, if 'equity' feminists had any sense, they would call themselves something quite different, because any group of people who have yet to recognise just how hateful, divisive and destructive have been the influences of feminism, and how deceitfully, dishonourably and self-servingly have its major proponents behaved, is not a group of people worthy of joining, nor one to which any credence should be given; because they clearly do not know their stuff.

And if they did know their stuff they would realise that they are adopting a term which will soon have very bad connotations.

Here is a parallel.

Eugenics, and its principles, provide a very powerful tool for humankind to do many wonderful things in the future. However, because the very word 'eugenics' immediately produces such a negative response in most individuals through its association with the Nazi program of creating pure Aryan offspring, many scientists now simply avoid using the term - even though some of the procedures with which they are currently experimenting are undoubtedly eugenic in type.

Well, I suggest that 'equity' feminists do the same, and ditch the 'feminist' part - for a similar reason; because, in the future, the very word will begin to leave a very bad taste in people's mouths as the truth about feminists and feminism is increasingly uncovered.

Further, and even more importantly, people who identify themselves as 'feminists', of whatever persuasion, give indirect support to the ideology of feminism - particularly in the eyes of those who know very little about gender issues. And, by doing this, they help to prop up a very hateful and destructive ideology; therefore putting themselves firmly on the side of the enemy.

(Also see The Trojan Horses Of Feminism.)