Monday, April 22, 2013
Women's world of spite
Women live through the tribe and the herd. More importantly today, they live through the sisterhood which actively seeks to denigrate men in relation to women. This is the foundation of feminism. That women were oppressed by men. Everything else a feminist says is derived from this erroneous assumption. So when the collective female ego sees the Sisterhood rising and men failing, she celebrates. When women yammer for gendercide, it's derived from this assumption. That women are the victims and men are the villains.
The female ego has run amok in society today. It has been propped up by an endless supply of grrlll power and female superiority articles that seem to come out of the media in a constant deluge. Collectively, women have decided that men have no feelings so anything they do and say to men is justified. In the feminist mind men oppressed women so they're just taking revenge.
Any time men surpass women it needs to be corrected. The best example is in education where men still outperform women in math. Recently, women started to outperform men in reading. Anyone who understands the arrogance of women know what the "social scientists" will conclude. Women are superior readers because of genetics. Men only outperform girls because of bias.
Men and women are complementary pairs. Comparing the two is like comparing fire to water. Feminists scream at fire and wonder why it's hot. If only they could change fire and make it more like water all the problems would be solved. Of course, changing fire means destroying it or removing it from its essence.
Amazingly, people are lead to believe that the only reason women underperform is because of bias. The belief is that women hear that men are better at math and so they believe they can't compete. If this assertion is true, that ability can be altered to a large degree by what others say, why don't these superior women believe the same thing applies to men? Why do they believe they can post and exalt women over men and it have no consequence on men?
Sensitivity to a woman's delicate nature is held as a virtue. We can't tell women they're inferior in math, that they'll likely never outperform men in any area in life but we can tell men they're worthless, obsolete, and inferior. Oh, and this magically won't have any consequences on how men perform or view women. Just how often do you think you can kick a dog before he bites?
Being sensitive to others is a virtue. If this principle is true it must be applied universally. If I say that peace is a virtue and yet I spread peace by blowing people up, I do not believe my original statement.I do not believe in peace as a virtue. I have exempted myself from my own rule. If being sensitive to the feelings of others is a virtue, than women need to apply this to everyone, not just themselves. Otherwise, sensitivity is not a virtue.
A better world cannot be built on the backs of hatred and arrogance. A better future will never be derived from the spite women hold for men any more than hate will beget love. Hate creates more hate.