Friday, 13 August 2010

The Society of the Clitoris

Women assault men with their bodily pheromones to sell their sex for safety and comfort. This is why it can be argued that all women are whores. This is a purely natural circumstance of evolution which has left the child-bearer weaker than the child-provider. In the 60s and 70s a group of lesbian women across the world decided to push for female dominance - although ironically this urge came from the excess of male testosterone created in their genetic lesbian bodies and minds.

As far as I can tell this goes directly against nature. I don't see that as a good sign and aren't sure where society will go with the increase in female dominance. At the very least it's not a great thing for males and we can already see many negative effects for us. I call this the Society of the Clitoris.

The problem - as ever with solutions to the various 'isms' - is that equal rights becomes mixed up with people being equal. We're not, men are generally bigger, stronger, faster and think more clinically and logically. Women are smaller, weaker, slower and think on a more emotional basis. It should be patently clear that the different sexes fit into different roles in society.

As we try to fit ourselves into the wrong shaped holes, is it any wonder than society suffers? A Swedish survey on gender equality from 2007 noted, "[n]egative effects" to health in both sexes are suggested due to increased stress of the opportunities of the workplace, observed that "one-sided expansion by women into traditionally male roles, spheres and activities will not lead to positive health effects unless men also significantly alter their behaviour".

So, to work, men should go against their nature too, to cater for the aberration of women? This seems wrong to me. Perhaps we should just say that equal rights are a great idea but admit that the sexes are different? Take it down a notch and maybe everyone would be a bit happier.

It might even help women too. I can see a future filled with 40-something women with no kids, no husband, no ability to cook or clean a house. The looks have faded and the pheromones now just smell like bad fish. What have they to offer anyone? Not much is it. All they seem to have ahead of them is 40-50 years of boredom and intense loneliness to look forward to. Thanks Germaine, Andrea and the rest.

4 comments:

  1. An interesting and oft-repeated bit of nonsense. I don't think many feminists out there are claiming that men and women are identical, just that they are of equal value.

    Why would feminism lead to a "40-something women with no kids, no husband, no ability to cook or clean a house." That future is what's in store for lots of heterosexual feminist-bashing women, too. And plenty of women choose that future for themselves, and don't think they've lost a bit in the bargain.

    Or, you're just trolling humanity and responding to this isn't worth my time. Either way, you could do better.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What does 'equal value' mean? Surely that would require a purely subjective determination of the worth of each gender as a whole? I see that as an impossible goal and worthless to know. And it's just the kind of thing that leads to a general confusion amongst the public at large.

    Feminism will naturally lead to fewer kids and more people with no partner. That will lead naturally to more lonely people in later life. It's quite simple.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Equal value means just that, of equal value. That a woman's work, or a woman's role is as valuable as a man's.

    An impossible goal? That women and men are valued equally by society? Well, because it's difficult, let's just give up. Same for world peace, and saving the environment.

    Feminism will naturally lead to fewer kids? Says who? I thought birth control lead to fewer children. And people with huge families end up lonely late in life.

    It's quite simple? I think not. You're talking about the demise of the traditional family unit, which is not the fault of feminism, but a casualty of the modern world. Quite simple? No, only if you oversimplify it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank you very much for this useful article. I like it.
    majki feromoni

    ReplyDelete