Blog Dis
Feminista!
2025-11-27
When I tried out @Grok for the first time, a few weeks back I asked this zippity AI engine to summarize my X profile, and the result was an efficient summation of the kind of posts one can expect from me. What made me laugh was the qualifier about how I rage over hypocrisy. 😂 True, I tell you! I certainly do rage over hypocrisy and issues that get under my skin.
I don't set out to initiate arguments. This is never my aim, tho' I'll happily wade into discussions, as I like to call them, on particular topics that I've done plenty of reading on, and often when a group of individuals are discussing hot topics on a podcast. Then I can't help myself. I have to share my opinions. We each have an arseh*le and we therefore have an opinion. Agree to disagree, if you must, though while you're alive and breathing, don't be afraid to air your opinion, as clearly I am not, and more so when you're in disagreement with your partner, boss, sibling, parent or whomever.
Funny thing how using the 'voice' works. If you don't use your voice, when given the opportunity, then the powers that be will remove the right for you to express this voice. You are entitled to your opinions, even the wrongs ones, and especially the right ones. But accept up front that everyone is free to judge your opinion, and you theirs. You may end up arriving at the same conclusion, as I so often do, that your views won't jive with those of others.
So today's discussion, my gentle readers, will centre on the third wave of feminism, owing to some recent blocks I've received from a select few young women, who've posted on how feminism is no different than patriarchy. In one notable IG post, it began with: Feminism is Patriarchy in High Heels. Sounds catchy, yet regrettably their post came off as half-baked. Allow me to take a moment to explain why.
You can of course, scroll on by, and spend your time elsewhere. Or, say nah, I want to read what this sassy chick with attitude has to say. Again, mine is just an opinion. I welcome yours too.
Firstly, the third wave of feminism is now defined as intersectionality, individualism, and a rejection of the meaning of womanhood. Don't ask me who assigned this description. I suspect it was influenced to a degree by the second wave of feminism (60s and 70s). The third wave also includes sexual assault, abortion, eating disorders, gender, beauty and sexuality in general. There's obviously a great deal to unpack, and I'm less inclined to venture into each category on its own because the majority of women online have already done their homework, and know where they stand on these subjects, as you may also know where you stand. The purpose of me making this post is to set some of the younger women straight. Ignorance, as we know, is often viewed as a form of arrogance, and too often, or more often than not, those who are ignorant are paradoxically adamant about being right.
First-person perspective: I'm not a young girl any more whose illusions are all intact. I've evolved to a point in my life where I'm quite comfortable in my skin, despite every single one of my illusions having been shattered into a million pieces of broken glass, in the course of living, and during this evolution as a woman.
According to some young women, they denounce our modernity and feel that "Feminism is a scam", and to this I'd say you're an embarrassment to women in general, and to the suffragettes who had fought tooth and nail for our rights, some of whom gave up their lives in order that women would be accorded with the same rights that men have enjoyed for thousands of years. This opinion doesn't mean that I'm stuck on the past, rather that the past is the anchor to help steady the future. Without fully comprehending the impact of the past, supercilious remarks about feminism being a scam will make you come across as ill-informed. And, ironically, even being able to speak these opinions in public, online in podcasts are all possible because women had fought for the right for you to have a voice.
So before you take a dim view of feminism, when in the context of this modern age, kindly take a step back and more importantly, accept this challenge to try and live one year without these rights. If you're of the opinion that trashing feminism is justified, then you've missed the point altogether. Give up every single one of these rights, for one year (I dare you to do so) and then come back and tell me that feminism is a scam... because apparently your ignorance is the reason why you are taking these rights for granted:
1. No credit card in your name
2. Not permitted to attend University
3. Not permitted to inherit property
4. Not permitted to sign a car loan in your name
5. Not permitted to sign your name to a mortgage
6. Not permitted to vote
7. Not permitted to be a magistrate, judge, legislator
8. Not permitted to sit on juries
9. Women lost all status when they married, not just their name but all status under civil law
10. Not permitted to keep their own wages, all of which had to be turned over to her husband
11. Not permitted to sign contracts.
12. Not permitted to initiate or enter into lawsuits
13. Not permitted to file for legal divorce; he could tho'
14. Not entitled to protection from civil laws, in the case of husbands being lawfully permitted to beat their wives. This law that put a stop to this abuse only came into effect in 1994. Yes, that's right, only 31 years ago, since women were entitled to legal protection against domestic abuse.
15. Not regarded as a person in the Constitution
The legal custom of 'coverture' meant that women were inextricably linked with either their father or husband, who could deny them access and the right to get medical procedures. Thankfully, coverture has been largely dismantled since the late 19th Century and early 20th Century in common-law jurisdictions like the United State and the United Kingdom.
I read online about a real-life case of a young woman age 29 who tried to make an appointment to get her tubes tied, after having four kids. This happened less than two months ago in the United States. Her husband was in agreement. However, the hospital board voted against her right to manage her own health and body, because they felt that because she had not yet turned 30, she should still want to have more kids. So, two weeks later, her husband made an appointment for a vasectomy and was granted it immediately, not requiring the board's approval. Do you see the difference? One sex is entitled to full body autonomy, while the other does not, and to this day still does not have full body autonomy, when viewed from a Universal perspective.
Even being granted the rights to contraception had only occurred in North America in 1969; considered part of the second wave of feminism, along w/ being able to take out a credit card in her own name, as well as a car and mortgage loan.
At one time too, husbands had the power to commit their wives to mental institutions, if he felt that she wasn't being a dutiful wife. And if his wife were to receive medical treatment, for a life-threatening disease like cancer, as one example, the attending doctor wasn't required to deliver the diagnosis to the wife. Instead, the doctor was only required to tell the husband, which meant for some wives their husband withheld sharing vital health information about their wife's bodies, until it became too late. 🤬[Remember what I had typed earlier in the list of rights, one of which was not being regarded as a person under Constitutional law].
It's utterly exhausting reading or listening to any of these ignoramus young women speak negatively about feminism, when they are living freely with these rights — not one of which they had earned. 🤮🤮🤮What I'm attempting to say, in longhand, rather than shorthand, is you don't have to identify as a feminist, or as being pro-feminist, but you sure as hell need to accept that where you are in this day and age isn't because you're a special woman but because brave and fearless women came before you who had to fight for all future women.
These rights I've listed have only been in effect, incidentally, since the late 19th Century and 1, 4 and 5 since the mid 1970s. I don't think that any woman in the 21st Century can fully comprehend not being protected by civil law from assaults by their husband, to have to continue to live this harsh reality, or that women were not even permitted to file for divorce.
But, but, but... I'm not about to take my view and only my view. What I believe is occurring right now online is women attempting to define themselves as either fully empowered, independent, educated and able to earn good salaries vs women who espouse the benefits of choosing to be a Stay-at-home-mom (SAHM). Yet, and ironically, these SAHMs have college degrees, nannies, and are able to accumulate their own money, own car, own credit cards, and some reasonable sense of full control over their lives.... providing of course that their husband doesn't pull the plug, to leave them destitute for a younger model. These anti-feminism women want to eat their cake and have it too, which for me is the correct way of using this phrase, rather than to have their cake and eat it, which anyone can do.
If staying at home, and not working outside the home, is your idea of womanhood, I say all the more power to you but don't point your finger at women who choose not to live this life and cite them as being wrong, or that these women are responsible for the current woes men are grappling with, in a world where traditionalism has been usurped by individuality.
I engage with many individuals on X, Facebook, IG and Threads. I come across women in their 60s and 70s who tell me they endured this era of having no rights as women, to have survived a 48-year marriage, only then to be abandoned, and left with zero purchasing power and absolutely nothing in the end. Engage with these women and you'll understand immediately what it means to lose all power, to understand that there will be no support, not even from your children or your ex-husband coming to your rescue.
I also appreciate that traditional men are supported by many Trad Wives who concur with them that women should focus their energies on supporting their man, to help him become a huge success, and to bow down to his rule at home. However, these same men don't support their wives in the manner that modern women want them to, allowing freedom of choice, to build a life where they're empowered by their achievements. One need only look to entrenched Christian ideologies which are now linked with Christo-Fascist ideologies to see how the role of women is relegated, their idea of a meaningful and spiritual way of life, to be a baby-making machine. This is an area that I avoid like the Bubonic plague because I've long accepted that once an individual has signed over free-thinking to religious doctrine, these persons are no longer able to be reached, nor do they consider thinking outside the box. I also accept that I cannot force anyone to come to the other side of opinion, nor do I want to convince them to accept that the genie isn't going back into the bottle any time soon.
If it feels as though I haven't clearly defined this issue, then try to look at it from the perspective of a woman vs the perspective of a man.
I pose this hypothetical scenario to men online all the time: Which would you rather be? A woman worth $100 Million or a man worth $1 Million? So far, not one man has come back to choose the first option and I believe this is due to their innate understanding that men have enjoyed a clear advantage for thousands of years, in this man's world, rather than to be a women, who in some countries are now having to fight all over again for the right to control their bodies, to have access to medical procedures, like elective surgery, without having to prove their case to a hospital board.
Most recently, while listening to excerpts of a podcast, one woman acknowledged that marriage benefits a man more, than a woman, and how statistics prove that men live longer when married vs women who die earlier when married, but how women will live longer if unmarried. The podcast host commented, "If marriage truly benefited women, the way it does men, the men in power would have taken it away from us already."
I've said enough now. Notice how I didn't bring up the subject of men in general, and how they feel? Based on what I read online, men are assigning blame entirely to 'delusional' women, citing how they really want to get married, and how they believe women are making it impossible, and setting their expectations of men too high, so that men are unable to compete for women, much less against each other. I can only say, in all honesty, to suck it up, buttercups! Until you view women as separate individuals, from yourselves, you are not opening your eyes to the possibility that you can align with the woman of your dreams, and to accept and support that she can continue to pursue her passions and dreams, the way that you as a man have traditionally expected women to support your endeavors in the same regard.
One guy on X had actually posted a comment on a feed from a pro-feminist poster, "We should never have allowed women to wear pants!" 🤣
Don't come back at me with, "My grandmother was the model of being a superior woman." This is utter twaddle. Your grandmother wasn't in any position to leave your grandfather, for all the unavailable rights and reasons I've highlighted in this post. This is merely a lame excuse to want to return to a period of time that is now in the rearview mirror of modernity's fast-moving car.
The decline of civilization is inevitable, as is the progression of civilization. We will continue to evolve, regardless of one person's views. You get to choose with whom you're willing to align, to give them your support. Keep in mind, however, that this doesn't necessarily mean your loyalty will be rewarded and returned to you in equal measure. This applies to both men and women. Keep in mind, too, that the advent of fully-functioning and affordable robots will invariably change the entire landscape. Modernity takes no prisoners!
There! This wasn't too painful, now was it?
I don't set out to initiate arguments. This is never my aim, tho' I'll happily wade into discussions, as I like to call them, on particular topics that I've done plenty of reading on, and often when a group of individuals are discussing hot topics on a podcast. Then I can't help myself. I have to share my opinions. We each have an arseh*le and we therefore have an opinion. Agree to disagree, if you must, though while you're alive and breathing, don't be afraid to air your opinion, as clearly I am not, and more so when you're in disagreement with your partner, boss, sibling, parent or whomever.
Funny thing how using the 'voice' works. If you don't use your voice, when given the opportunity, then the powers that be will remove the right for you to express this voice. You are entitled to your opinions, even the wrongs ones, and especially the right ones. But accept up front that everyone is free to judge your opinion, and you theirs. You may end up arriving at the same conclusion, as I so often do, that your views won't jive with those of others.
So today's discussion, my gentle readers, will centre on the third wave of feminism, owing to some recent blocks I've received from a select few young women, who've posted on how feminism is no different than patriarchy. In one notable IG post, it began with: Feminism is Patriarchy in High Heels. Sounds catchy, yet regrettably their post came off as half-baked. Allow me to take a moment to explain why.
You can of course, scroll on by, and spend your time elsewhere. Or, say nah, I want to read what this sassy chick with attitude has to say. Again, mine is just an opinion. I welcome yours too.
Firstly, the third wave of feminism is now defined as intersectionality, individualism, and a rejection of the meaning of womanhood. Don't ask me who assigned this description. I suspect it was influenced to a degree by the second wave of feminism (60s and 70s). The third wave also includes sexual assault, abortion, eating disorders, gender, beauty and sexuality in general. There's obviously a great deal to unpack, and I'm less inclined to venture into each category on its own because the majority of women online have already done their homework, and know where they stand on these subjects, as you may also know where you stand. The purpose of me making this post is to set some of the younger women straight. Ignorance, as we know, is often viewed as a form of arrogance, and too often, or more often than not, those who are ignorant are paradoxically adamant about being right.
First-person perspective: I'm not a young girl any more whose illusions are all intact. I've evolved to a point in my life where I'm quite comfortable in my skin, despite every single one of my illusions having been shattered into a million pieces of broken glass, in the course of living, and during this evolution as a woman.
According to some young women, they denounce our modernity and feel that "Feminism is a scam", and to this I'd say you're an embarrassment to women in general, and to the suffragettes who had fought tooth and nail for our rights, some of whom gave up their lives in order that women would be accorded with the same rights that men have enjoyed for thousands of years. This opinion doesn't mean that I'm stuck on the past, rather that the past is the anchor to help steady the future. Without fully comprehending the impact of the past, supercilious remarks about feminism being a scam will make you come across as ill-informed. And, ironically, even being able to speak these opinions in public, online in podcasts are all possible because women had fought for the right for you to have a voice.
So before you take a dim view of feminism, when in the context of this modern age, kindly take a step back and more importantly, accept this challenge to try and live one year without these rights. If you're of the opinion that trashing feminism is justified, then you've missed the point altogether. Give up every single one of these rights, for one year (I dare you to do so) and then come back and tell me that feminism is a scam... because apparently your ignorance is the reason why you are taking these rights for granted:
1. No credit card in your name
2. Not permitted to attend University
3. Not permitted to inherit property
4. Not permitted to sign a car loan in your name
5. Not permitted to sign your name to a mortgage
6. Not permitted to vote
7. Not permitted to be a magistrate, judge, legislator
8. Not permitted to sit on juries
9. Women lost all status when they married, not just their name but all status under civil law
10. Not permitted to keep their own wages, all of which had to be turned over to her husband
11. Not permitted to sign contracts.
12. Not permitted to initiate or enter into lawsuits
13. Not permitted to file for legal divorce; he could tho'
14. Not entitled to protection from civil laws, in the case of husbands being lawfully permitted to beat their wives. This law that put a stop to this abuse only came into effect in 1994. Yes, that's right, only 31 years ago, since women were entitled to legal protection against domestic abuse.
15. Not regarded as a person in the Constitution
The legal custom of 'coverture' meant that women were inextricably linked with either their father or husband, who could deny them access and the right to get medical procedures. Thankfully, coverture has been largely dismantled since the late 19th Century and early 20th Century in common-law jurisdictions like the United State and the United Kingdom.
I read online about a real-life case of a young woman age 29 who tried to make an appointment to get her tubes tied, after having four kids. This happened less than two months ago in the United States. Her husband was in agreement. However, the hospital board voted against her right to manage her own health and body, because they felt that because she had not yet turned 30, she should still want to have more kids. So, two weeks later, her husband made an appointment for a vasectomy and was granted it immediately, not requiring the board's approval. Do you see the difference? One sex is entitled to full body autonomy, while the other does not, and to this day still does not have full body autonomy, when viewed from a Universal perspective.
Even being granted the rights to contraception had only occurred in North America in 1969; considered part of the second wave of feminism, along w/ being able to take out a credit card in her own name, as well as a car and mortgage loan.
At one time too, husbands had the power to commit their wives to mental institutions, if he felt that she wasn't being a dutiful wife. And if his wife were to receive medical treatment, for a life-threatening disease like cancer, as one example, the attending doctor wasn't required to deliver the diagnosis to the wife. Instead, the doctor was only required to tell the husband, which meant for some wives their husband withheld sharing vital health information about their wife's bodies, until it became too late. 🤬[Remember what I had typed earlier in the list of rights, one of which was not being regarded as a person under Constitutional law].
It's utterly exhausting reading or listening to any of these ignoramus young women speak negatively about feminism, when they are living freely with these rights — not one of which they had earned. 🤮🤮🤮What I'm attempting to say, in longhand, rather than shorthand, is you don't have to identify as a feminist, or as being pro-feminist, but you sure as hell need to accept that where you are in this day and age isn't because you're a special woman but because brave and fearless women came before you who had to fight for all future women.
These rights I've listed have only been in effect, incidentally, since the late 19th Century and 1, 4 and 5 since the mid 1970s. I don't think that any woman in the 21st Century can fully comprehend not being protected by civil law from assaults by their husband, to have to continue to live this harsh reality, or that women were not even permitted to file for divorce.
But, but, but... I'm not about to take my view and only my view. What I believe is occurring right now online is women attempting to define themselves as either fully empowered, independent, educated and able to earn good salaries vs women who espouse the benefits of choosing to be a Stay-at-home-mom (SAHM). Yet, and ironically, these SAHMs have college degrees, nannies, and are able to accumulate their own money, own car, own credit cards, and some reasonable sense of full control over their lives.... providing of course that their husband doesn't pull the plug, to leave them destitute for a younger model. These anti-feminism women want to eat their cake and have it too, which for me is the correct way of using this phrase, rather than to have their cake and eat it, which anyone can do.
If staying at home, and not working outside the home, is your idea of womanhood, I say all the more power to you but don't point your finger at women who choose not to live this life and cite them as being wrong, or that these women are responsible for the current woes men are grappling with, in a world where traditionalism has been usurped by individuality.
I engage with many individuals on X, Facebook, IG and Threads. I come across women in their 60s and 70s who tell me they endured this era of having no rights as women, to have survived a 48-year marriage, only then to be abandoned, and left with zero purchasing power and absolutely nothing in the end. Engage with these women and you'll understand immediately what it means to lose all power, to understand that there will be no support, not even from your children or your ex-husband coming to your rescue.
I also appreciate that traditional men are supported by many Trad Wives who concur with them that women should focus their energies on supporting their man, to help him become a huge success, and to bow down to his rule at home. However, these same men don't support their wives in the manner that modern women want them to, allowing freedom of choice, to build a life where they're empowered by their achievements. One need only look to entrenched Christian ideologies which are now linked with Christo-Fascist ideologies to see how the role of women is relegated, their idea of a meaningful and spiritual way of life, to be a baby-making machine. This is an area that I avoid like the Bubonic plague because I've long accepted that once an individual has signed over free-thinking to religious doctrine, these persons are no longer able to be reached, nor do they consider thinking outside the box. I also accept that I cannot force anyone to come to the other side of opinion, nor do I want to convince them to accept that the genie isn't going back into the bottle any time soon.
If it feels as though I haven't clearly defined this issue, then try to look at it from the perspective of a woman vs the perspective of a man.
I pose this hypothetical scenario to men online all the time: Which would you rather be? A woman worth $100 Million or a man worth $1 Million? So far, not one man has come back to choose the first option and I believe this is due to their innate understanding that men have enjoyed a clear advantage for thousands of years, in this man's world, rather than to be a women, who in some countries are now having to fight all over again for the right to control their bodies, to have access to medical procedures, like elective surgery, without having to prove their case to a hospital board.
Most recently, while listening to excerpts of a podcast, one woman acknowledged that marriage benefits a man more, than a woman, and how statistics prove that men live longer when married vs women who die earlier when married, but how women will live longer if unmarried. The podcast host commented, "If marriage truly benefited women, the way it does men, the men in power would have taken it away from us already."
I've said enough now. Notice how I didn't bring up the subject of men in general, and how they feel? Based on what I read online, men are assigning blame entirely to 'delusional' women, citing how they really want to get married, and how they believe women are making it impossible, and setting their expectations of men too high, so that men are unable to compete for women, much less against each other. I can only say, in all honesty, to suck it up, buttercups! Until you view women as separate individuals, from yourselves, you are not opening your eyes to the possibility that you can align with the woman of your dreams, and to accept and support that she can continue to pursue her passions and dreams, the way that you as a man have traditionally expected women to support your endeavors in the same regard.
One guy on X had actually posted a comment on a feed from a pro-feminist poster, "We should never have allowed women to wear pants!" 🤣
Don't come back at me with, "My grandmother was the model of being a superior woman." This is utter twaddle. Your grandmother wasn't in any position to leave your grandfather, for all the unavailable rights and reasons I've highlighted in this post. This is merely a lame excuse to want to return to a period of time that is now in the rearview mirror of modernity's fast-moving car.
The decline of civilization is inevitable, as is the progression of civilization. We will continue to evolve, regardless of one person's views. You get to choose with whom you're willing to align, to give them your support. Keep in mind, however, that this doesn't necessarily mean your loyalty will be rewarded and returned to you in equal measure. This applies to both men and women. Keep in mind, too, that the advent of fully-functioning and affordable robots will invariably change the entire landscape. Modernity takes no prisoners!
There! This wasn't too painful, now was it?
