I had a discussion with one of my friends who gets it, and he had a good point he elucidated. He suggested girls, especially feminists are like when a smart male is younger, he espouses all these beliefs and thinks he ‘knows’ what he is talking about when discussing with adults.
I know, because I was one such young man, I had this teacher, a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, but very coherent and a very very good debater, capable of trapping me in arguments and fallacies. I was smart when I was in high school, but my fallacious thinking was that I was somehow on par, or every surpassed this teacher. (For reference I still have no doubt I was more intelligent than most at that age, but I am comparing to true intellect, not the garbage that people get by today with.) My arguments were SOOO good, SOOO smart I thought. So what if he did not agree with me, or trapped me with witty wordplay, I had it figured out, he was just a dumb adult. Fast forward to now that I have much better introspection I can realize that while I had arguments and beliefs they lacked depth. They did not have conviction forged in the fires of life and experience.
It is VERY easy to say ‘god exists’ or ‘god doesn’t exist’ and to profess why you think such a thing. But few people truly the IMPLICATIONS of their stated beliefs. ‘If god truly existed, would it care about my personal plight compared to billions of others?’ ‘of god doesnt exist, is rampart hedonism justifiable?’
Is there always just one answer? In a lot of cases I think yes, but not always. As long as your belief is logically consistent and backed by evidence through testing it is a justified belief. My teacher is very liberal, and if we were to discuss today probably would not agree on much; but there is an important difference between him and liberal feminists: his beliefs are backed by experience, he is capable of learning, and understand the implications of his professed beliefs. This is an important point to grasp, a similar position can be held, one person justified in their belief another totally fallacious because they fail to grasp consequences.
Feminists spout all sorts of things off which upon quick glances seem like they could be true, and because few people look into points at depth, these half-truths become gospels.
One that you often will hear in one form or another is that we are ‘products of our culture’. Seems pretty true right? And certainly to a large extent true. However this argument is often twisted into ‘men are aggressive because its “our” culture’, ‘men want to rape because our culture’, ‘women only want to dress in dresses because its was the patriarchy culture’ ad nauseum.
Do I think culture influences us? Totally. I think with sufficient brainwashing we could be happy communists as easily as we could be vicious capitalists. Anyone who doubts this look at videos like ‘triumph of the will’ or read history of the USSR’s rise from near 3rd world status to educated world power pre-ww2. But to deny evolutionary heritage is the true flaw of feminism.
Males are violent and strong and competitive; women are more nurturing, less strong and competitive. Can we ‘culture’ out these tendencies? Yes. Look at America.
Any feminist is incapable of comprehending that our current ‘equal at all costs’ paradigm either might not be the best for us, or might not even be sustainable. If there was a man (because a women would probably be incapable of it) who said ‘yes, i agree feminism will ultimately destroy the productivity of the country but it is good because the experiment has never been done before’ I could at least respect his argument because he understands the implications, even if I do not agree with the conclusion.