It is sometimes said, that if only women were leaders of the world, there would be no war. This of course ignores that, this must be because women must have selected violent men, and maybe they still do: Serial killer Peter Lundin, who killed his mother, girlfriend and two kids, have always been lucky with the ladies.
It also ignores, that even if men starts the wars, it's also men who fights the wars. They are forced both legally and socially.
Men face a legal discrimination, which makes the claimed discrimination against women seem like a small issue: Men are forced to be soldiers.
This discrimination is defended in several ways. One is that women carry children. This is a non-starter: Being pregnant is not equal to fighting a war. If it is, I say ban pregnancy now! It is also a private and free choice: Though society needs children, women are not forced to become pregnant. The state owns men's bodies, but a woman's body is her own.
Another argument is that only men are fit to be soldiers. If this were true, there should at least be a fair and very large compensation for men. But it's probably not true.
Men also face a social discrimination: Men and women may look down upon them, for not wanting to be soldiers. “Soldiers are real men”, it is said. Men are expected to be violent, not pacifists. They have to accept that they are forced to kill others, and be killed themselves.
Another problem with conscription is the fact, that those fighting the war are not the ones fighting it. Women have a right to vote for politicians who start a war, but they will not be asked to fight in it. Ultimately war have often been decided by old rich men and women. It's easy for these people to talk of “sacrifice”, when the fighting is really being done by poor young men. This is not only a gender and age issue. The problem is basically: Is it ethical that some people can force other people to kill and be killed?
It's a shame, that mainstream feminists have never really cared to attack male conscription. Probably because most feminists are not really interested in carrying the same burdens as men, but only have the same rights. In fact the debate on this issue have been perverted. The feminists have succeeded to turn the issue around: They see the fact that men fight the wars, as a discrimination and exclusion of women!
And because a lot of men agree
that only men should be soldiers. This doesn't make it any more right though, in the light of the equality ideology.
tirsdag den 1. juni 2010
mandag den 31. maj 2010
The discrimination of men and homosexuality
Even if you're a Christian or Muslim and believe homosexuality to be a grave sin, the following may still be of interest to you. Homosexuality can be an interesting subject, even if you're neither homosexual nor pro-gay.
Male homosexuality is condemned and a taboo in many cultures, though it is accepted in some, most notably in ancient Greece, where it was widely accepted. Among some Christians today homosexuality is still considered a sin.
But among many young Europeans only male homosexuality is considered taboo, while female homosexuality is accepted or even met with approval. Of course female homosexuality is most accepted when it's expressed in a heterosexual context. That is, when the sexual activity takes place in film clips aimed at a heterosexual male audience. But even when it comes to exclusive lesbians, the accept is greater than the accept of male gays.
This subject is not just about discrimination of homosexuals as it is often claimed to be. It is as much about the discrimination of men.
Women have a greater range of accepted roles. For instance, they can often choose to be adult or child and they can choose career or family. Men have a much narrower range of roles to choose from.
Some feminists will say, that these men are oppressed by the "patriarchy" into these narrow roles. One could suspect that the concept of "patriarchy" is an attempt to cure the feminist theory, to explain how women can be oppressors, by stating that they are somehow working for the top males. Never the less men are oppressed. And that by both men AND women.
Male homosexuality is condemned and a taboo in many cultures, though it is accepted in some, most notably in ancient Greece, where it was widely accepted. Among some Christians today homosexuality is still considered a sin.
But among many young Europeans only male homosexuality is considered taboo, while female homosexuality is accepted or even met with approval. Of course female homosexuality is most accepted when it's expressed in a heterosexual context. That is, when the sexual activity takes place in film clips aimed at a heterosexual male audience. But even when it comes to exclusive lesbians, the accept is greater than the accept of male gays.
This subject is not just about discrimination of homosexuals as it is often claimed to be. It is as much about the discrimination of men.
Women have a greater range of accepted roles. For instance, they can often choose to be adult or child and they can choose career or family. Men have a much narrower range of roles to choose from.
Some feminists will say, that these men are oppressed by the "patriarchy" into these narrow roles. One could suspect that the concept of "patriarchy" is an attempt to cure the feminist theory, to explain how women can be oppressors, by stating that they are somehow working for the top males. Never the less men are oppressed. And that by both men AND women.
fredag den 28. maj 2010
Love – a human right?
Conservative feminists and others, having adopted the classical idea, that the woman is weak and a victim, have chosen to condemn prostitution as the exploitation of women by men.
These feminists hold, that sex is not a human right. But why not? Sex and love are parts of a healthy life. Sexuality is a basic need, that some people in the western world cannot have fulfilled the usual way, because they're too fat, ugly, unintelligent or handicapped. Compared to this complicated and basic problem of inequality, which is rarely discussed in Denmark, the debate on equal pay seems pale. It's basically only about money, and not about the basic need to feel loved and to enjoy the attention of the opposite sex.
These feminists hold, that sex is not a human right. But why not? Sex and love are parts of a healthy life. Sexuality is a basic need, that some people in the western world cannot have fulfilled the usual way, because they're too fat, ugly, unintelligent or handicapped. Compared to this complicated and basic problem of inequality, which is rarely discussed in Denmark, the debate on equal pay seems pale. It's basically only about money, and not about the basic need to feel loved and to enjoy the attention of the opposite sex.
Abonner på:
Opslag (Atom)