As much as I would like to deny it, some people really do think that women aren't human.
Really.
Consider the Humanist. He or she says that they are opposed to Feminism. They object to the "raising of one gender above another" and would rather spend time crusading for human rights. Among those that profess such lofty sentiments are MRAs, intellectuals, liberal dudez, anti-feminist women, and control-troll writers.
So how do I know that they think women aren't human?
Simple! If they profess those who are for women's rights are against or not for human rights, they are operating under the premise that the movement for women's full agency is somehow in opposition or contrary to the movement for full human rights. The only way that an ideology that speaks for the female gender, or 51% of the global population, is not for human rights is if women are not human.
So next time someone tells you that they think feminism is anti-human rights, or that it is too myopic, tell them that you don't associate with morons who think the prerequisite for humanity is a penis.
Posts
2 comments:
Nice. :)
The logic "works" only if you postulate a feminist standpoint as the starting point for your calculations. A difficulty arises given that the feminist world-view is self-referential, i.e., positioned at its own center, hence limited to understanding the world from a privileged set of coordinates. In consequence, feminist self-definition is existentially "filtered", and as such lacks completion.
This condition is known to us in the NF Sector, as the fallacy of feminist subjectivism.
Post a Comment