Welcome to the New Feminism

At one time, feminism meant elevating women to the same status as men in many areas.  Classically defined, it is: “the advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.”  Sounds good, but like all good things, they often go awry.  In other cases, they  largely achieve their goals but then look for other things to perpetuate their perceived need.  Like most things that involve the word “equality,” once achieved it is never enough.  Equal pay for equal work is largely a reality and any disparity that exists is attributable to personal choices of women.  In the political realm, there are women in positions of power at the local, state and federal levels including 20 female Senators, six female Governors, and 84 Representatives.

This diary entry deals with five ideas that define the new feminism and triviality simultaneously.  The first is the so called “free the pits” movement.  One group describes it thus:

…(we) believe that we should be deeply concerned that we live in a society where hair on adult women is seen as shocking and disgusting, to say nothing of the pressure it places on women to uphold an idealized image of beauty, and the time and money it takes to maintain this illusion…

In short, failing to shave one’s legs or armpits is now a feminist statement.  Miley Cyrus recently gained some notoriety in this area when she revealed her unshaven pits at a Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Induction ceremony.  This became apparent when she raised her arms in a two armed, one middle finger salute to something.  We can perhaps excuse the rantings of a disturbed child like Miley Cyrus, but there are now several social media websites dedicated to helping the unshaven deal with the inevitable backlash against their “statement of individuality and feminism.”  Women having hairy legs and armpits is not going to make them “equal” to men socially, economically, or politically.

A second area undertaken by the feminist community is a campaign to cease the practice of so-called “slut shaming.”  This is when women or young girls are perceived to be acting or dressing (more on this in a bit) in a socially or sexually inappropriate manner.  First, the word “slut” itself is offensive.  However, if we leave out the word, it is nothing but a perhaps a misguided and Neanderthal reaction against an over-sexualized society.  But, usually in sex, it takes two to tango.  The problem with “slut shaming” is that it singles out only women, not the male partners.  Unfortunately what happens is that instead of having intelligent and thoughtful discussion about a sexual society and the unfortunate effect it has on youth in particular, this practice should rightfully have no place in the arsenal.  The problem from the feminist angle is that now any criticism- no matter how thoughtful- devolves into accusations of “slut shaming.”  In the spirit of the “do your own thing” attitude of the feminists, the “thing” is anything.  At one time we had young girls dressing like mini-Madonnas.  Today, they are mini-Nikki Minaj’s.  Both are equally immature if they believe this advances the cause of feminism.

Speaking of Nikki Minaj, she is at the forefront of the feminist’s third area of concern- orgasm equality.  According to an online article on Bustle, there are five reasons this should be part of the feminist movement today.  First, it encourages to women to take charge of their pleasure and anything in any area where women “take charge” is empowering and thus feminist.  Second, it encourages men to work on their technique.  Third, it improves communication between the sexes.  The theory goes that if one can communicate about sexual satisfaction between the sheets, this will spill over to all areas of life.  The fourth reason is obvious: better sex, with the fifth being that pleasure itself is a right, not a privilege.  So there you have it: even though for whatever reason, nature or God has made it more difficult for a female to achieve orgasm each and every time out, we must overcome these natural differences in order to advance the place of women in the world.  Huffington Post, in their infinite wisdom on the issue, even has a whole section now dedicated to the education of the masses on a particular part of the female sexual anatomy.  And lest you think otherwise, I kid you not- modern feminists are serious about orgasm equality.

Staying with the concept of individuality and feminists, they have recently entered the dress code/no dress code debate.  Here they run into some problems vis-a-vis the “equality” issue.  For you see, dress codes in schools actually create greater equality among all students.  Equality and a sense of community among the uniform wearer is the reason why schools, the military and other institutions have dress codes.  But, that is not necessarily what the feminist is wailing about.  Instead, they are attacking workplace dress codes that prescribe, to them, outdated social norms.  This often spills over into charges that requirements to “look professional” are really code words for a dominant white male social hierarchy that only entrenches workplace sexism.  They have even borrowed terms from Critical Race Theory: workplace dress codes are a form of microaggression directed at women.  And whoa to the gay or minority woman in the workplace because they can be triple micro-aggressed against.  Seriously… I am not making any of this stuff up.

The final area, which is in keeping with a tendency on the Left, is to unleash the language police and get rid of terms that they deem are sexist.  One such example is the word “just.”  When a woman says, “I was just wondering…,” the inclusion of “just” somehow places the statement at one of lesser power.  Another example: “you guys” when the group includes non-“guys.”  The word “bossy” is also on the list of banned words because when a woman is described as being “bossy,” it is in a negative light and therefore it reinforces the notion that women cannot be “bosses.”  One cannot “master” a skill anymore because “master” implies an social hierarchy.  And my favorite: “rule of thumb” should be banned because of the erroneous feminist belief that the phrase derives from Old English law that encouraged wife beating in certain instances.

I write this article to illustrate the depths to which modern feminism has descended.  Their “demands” deny the basics of biology and commonsense.  One would think that there are greater ills to attack other than words, dress codes, body hair, and orgasms.  One would think that in an age where women are in positions of political power like never before in our past and where wage disparities are all but truly non-existent, there would be celebration of these facts.  But such is not the case.  The goal of modern feminism may be cloaked in the language of equality, but it smacks of superiority.  Having achieved the bulk of their agenda domestically, one would think they would turn their attention internationally yet many of these same feminist groups have allied themselves with other Leftist groups where great deference is made to Muslims and their assignment of third-class citizenship to women.  It illustrates their hypocrisy…and their stupidity.

Trending on RedState Video