As a regular visitor of That Mr. G Guy’s Blog, I learned this week is time to Let National Offend a Feminist Week commence you SeXXXXXISTS! Although in some quarters I suppose I would be considered a sexist, I usually don’t take part in this week’s festivities. However, in earlier an post I considered how people lie with words, and that gave me an idea that seems appropriate to the occasion.
In AN EXAMPLE OF BIGOTRY — PART 8, we considered how over time racists have distorted the meaning of the “Uncle Tom”. Because of our ignorance, we have allowed a character that Harriet Beecher Stowe portrayed as a kind and brave Christian gentleman to become something quite different. Similarly, we have allowed the definition of “feminism” to evolve. Consider the definition provided in the 1956 edition of Funk & Wagnalls’ New Practical Standard Dictionary of the English Language.
- The existence of female characteristics in the male.
- The doctrine that embraces the industrial, mental, political, social and sexual equality of women with men.
Over the years the second usage of the word has become its primary usage.
The Online Etymology Dictionary offers this insight: feminine + -ism = feminism. Apparently the word “feminism” is French in origin. English speakers started using the word “feminism” around 1851, and in 1895 English speakers began to use the term in political advocacy. So the meaning of “feminism” has changed, and that should leave us wondering. If feminism is suppose to equal feminine + -ism, does “feminism” still mean what we think it means?
Feminists portray themselves woman’s rights advocates. Is that the same as feminism? If feminism is suppose to equal feminine + -ism, then feminists should be advocates for that which makes women feminine. Right? Is that what all feminists do? Consider the mission statement of National Organization for Women Foundation.
The Foundation works to enhance the status of women in the United States and around the world through many strategies, including advocacy, litigation and education. The litigation efforts of the Foundation seek to protect reproductive health options, as well as focusing on other areas of concern to women, such as pregnancy discrimination, employment issues, discrimination against women in the military, sexual harassment and exploitation, lesbian and gay rights, civil rights, sex discrimination in insurance, and ending violence against women. (from here)
The modern definition of feminism focuses on equality. How does NOW define equality between the sexes? What does NOW do? Doesn’t NOW work to:
- Prevent childbirth by promoting abortion as a reproductive health option”?
- Separate women from their children by denigrating motherhood and elevating careerism?
- Encourage women to assume roles traditionally understood to be masculine?
- Obscure traditional sexual roles by promoting lesbian and gay rights?
With respect to our political system, what does equality actually involve? When we speak of justice, then don’t we want a political system that is blind to our irrational prejudices? Don’t we want equality before the Law? Is that what feminists such as NOW want, or do they seek an equality of outcome, a state of affairs where Female = Male?
Does government exist to ensure equality of outcome, or is government’s role to provide for justice by protecting our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? When men and women have biologically significant differences, does it protect our rights if we ignore those differences? Does unisex restrooms make any sense to you?
Equality before the Law allows for diversity. Without suppressing the vast diversity among people, equality before the Law allows everyone to have the same opportunities to make use of their native gifts. Equality of outcome, on the other hand, requires that everyone be treated the same. Equality of outcome also requires a more powerful government. That’s because the enforcement of equal outcomes requires the brute force of government power.
Because Females and Males are not in all respects the same (or equal), without the use of the brute force of government power, we cannot in all respects be made equal. Yet is that a bad thing? Is diversity evil? The Bible says Females and Males were made to complement each other. Together, we make each other whole (Genesis 2:21-24).
Thus, I think women, for their own sakes and the sakes of the men they love, should advocate true feminism. Instead using government to force “equality” on people who don’t want it, we should all make the effort to respect and love each other as unique individuals. And since whether each of us is a man or a woman does in fact make a difference, that fact ought to make a difference as to how we treat each other. Therefore, instead of encouraging women to behave like smaller men, we should thank our Lord for making us different.
Of Twisted Words => To Be Posted.
- Mother: posted May 11, 2014.
- Secular: posted May 27, 2014.
- Purity: posted June 22, 2014.
- Liberalism: posted July 22, 2014.
- Social Contract: posted July 12, 2015.
- Xenophobia: posted on November 29, 2015.
- The “Living” Constitution.
- Compassionate Conservatism.
- Positive and Negative Rights.
- Biblical Literalism.
- Quantitative Easing.