Bottom Line: In the west, strong young men go out to die in horrific ways, so that comfortable, pampered young women can whine about how oppressed they are. In other words, and read this well, if we valued boys and men in society, and around the world, as highly as we value girls and women, you just might get rid of war altogether.
Yes, it’s obvious. women’s rights are human rights.
But, then, that means that men’s rights are human rights too. Oops! Can’t have that hanging out there in cyberspace for any length of time! And Feminism sure doesn’t want you to believe that.
The reason: the concept of “humanity,” in feminism, doesn’t pertain to men. Yes, we men are able to contribute genetics to the equation and all, but after that, we’re supposed to go away, and be visible only if we’re cleaning out the septic tank, the toilet, the sump pump, the roads, or the garbage.
That’s feminism’s view, not actual women’s view. But, then, feminism never had anything to do with actual women, else you never would have even heard these names: Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Joe Biden, Barack Obama… and a whole host of others.(1)
However, if the obvious parallel truth to “Women’s Rights Are Human Rights” were a big thing, then the calculation that determines that, overwhelmingly, we send young men and boys out to die in wars, might change.
In other words, and read this well, if we valued boys and men in society, and around the world, as highly as we value girls and women, you just might get rid of war altogether.
Everyone claps when the military announces that it will open up combat positions to women, but no one really pretends that — if push were really to come to shove — we’d depend on women combatants to save our country.
A rugged truth, maybe, but a truth nonetheless: In the case of a real existential threat, strong, young men would go out to die in horrific ways, while comfortable, pampered young women would stay behind to stare at their navels, and their painted toenails, and whine about how oppressed they are.
(1) Nor would there be a big “Gay Rights” movement. After all, a gay man is the ultimate repudiation of the only power that a woman holds over a man: the ability to bear his children…or not. No women actually approve of … gay men. Needless to say, the reverse it true as well, but in a mirror-image kind of way.