Skip to main content

Mainstream Feminism: A Paradox of Gender-Discriminatory Fuel

Think gender discrimination (or sexism) is nearing extinction? No way! The mainstream feminist movement will never allow its Sisyphus-size rock to roll off the cliff! 

Despite gender’s potentially-indefinite scale of relevance, given the not-so-controversial and even desirable positions assumed by their billions of specific representatives on either side, the controversy generator seems prepared to weather the virtuous storm of those compelling forces whose incidental consequences have long advanced more gender-blind, merit-based dynamics in the general marketplace. These phenomena are evident at both the macro and micro level, across esteemed roles in public and corporate office, shared household duties, and academic and athletic achievement. Of course, there exists plenty of idiosyncratic disparities between specific households, cultures, and interpersonal relationships, whereby gender often serves little more than incidence to complement the slight of hand of the statistician who wishes to conjure up vitriolic discontent among those intertwined within his class-action-sized assault upon visible, politically-vulnerable, and vilifiable opponents.       


HerCampus.com, in keeping with those accompanying self-satirizing TV channels and publications BET, Jet, Oxygen, and Lifetime, contribute to a self-perpetuating and
-inducing psychology of superficial sets of dispositions, whether decidedly favorable or unfavorable, which may only coarsely resemble reality while failing to clearly encapsulate it. On this website, freelancers contribute to the proclaimed global collage of what it truly means to be a girl on campus during this second decade of the twenty-first millennia. On its page currently are posts classified under sex, selfies, feminism, Netflix, hair, Greek life, and study abroad. 

It seems that the seven aspects of womanhood could never be more completely characterized than they have been so neatly and succinctly assembled on this single page of brilliantly colorful, sparkly web-text. It seems genuinely set to the tone of offering bonafide life guidance to every collegiette who prioritizes her insatiable appetite for The 16 Types of Sorority Girls, Vera Bradley study breaks, and 10 Things Nobody Told You About Sex, over tomorrow's economics exam, a serious investigation into world history, a cursory geographical survey of the Middle East, and her looming mortgage-style debt obligations complementing her graduation into a marketplace of increasing underemployment poised to land her back home with mom and dad. And of course, no editorial would be complete without a Campus Sex Survey! Never mind the classifications here employed in data collection, though, as they may reveal grave contradictory themes.

It seems important to note that there exists a market for this style of dramatic, blood-boiling publication, yet its utility has yet to be proven or even remotely harnessed in a way to advance beyond the perpetuation of their subscribers’ confused, snapshot-fueled fury. I'm convinced that this webpage and its followers would reasonably concede, away from their MacBook Pro keyboards, that the site's content only touches the surface of what it means to be a female college student these days, but I would urge them to delve even more deeply to reconsider the publication's motives, guiding principles and not-so-scientific methods of discovery, hastily-designed conclusions, and non-specific, Barnum-style generalities which widely and conveniently ignore those more inconspicuous, idiosyncratic features beyond gender.

It seems as though the incremental shift from reality may be most aptly epitomized by the generational placation exhibited in editing one of the most iconic films of that generation: Ferris Bueller's Day Off.

In a little-known segment of the script, John Hughes' 1986 hit Ferris Bueller's Day Off originally included an economically-valid statement that would later be eliminated due to the general female response to it in post-production.

In this scene, Sloane says to Cameron during their parade scene walk, "The future's worse for a boy, isn't it? A girl can always bail out and have a baby and get some guy to support her."

Cameron responds, "That's a pretty grim thought."

"True," says Sloane, "but it's an option. No options is worse."


The elimination of this scene may have singlehandedly secured any chance of economic sanity remaining part of gender politics in the United States.

What is purely a truthful remark about oft-assumed and respected gender roles has seemingly become an international rallying cry for women who pound their chests and proclaim that their femininity will overcome the supposed shackles of their domestic servitude, condescendingly ridiculing that place of solace and pride that defined the lives of many women for generations and even still today.

So while a segment of the population unwittingly derides the prideful work of the family-serving housewife in pursuit of their own myopic and ill-informed agenda against aggregates-based outcomes underlying purported inequality, men are working longer, riskier and more productive hours while their competitive counterparts are acquiring the skills and prudently planning their lives to compete in the commercial space rather than jockeying for political advantage. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Into the Wild: An Economics Lesson

The Keynesian mantra, in its implications, has its roots in destruction rather than truth: “In the long run, we’re all dead.” If this is your guiding principle, we are destined to differ on matters of principle and timeline. While it is true that our fates intersect in death, that does not mean that we ought to condemn our heirs to that view: the view that our work on this planet ought only to serve ourselves, and that we ought only to bear in mind the consequences within our own lifetimes.  The Keynesians, of course, prefer their outlook, as it serves their interests; it has the further benefit of appealing to other selfish people who have little interest in the future to which they'll ultimately condemn their heirs. After all, they'll be long gone by then. So, in the Keynesian view, the longterm prospects for the common currency, social stability, and personal liberty are not just irrelevant but inconvenient. In their view, regardless of the consequences, those in charge tod

America's Civil War: Not "Civil" and Not About Slavery

Virtually the entirety of South and Central America, as well as European powers Britain, Spain and France, peacefully abolished slavery — without war — in the first sixty years of the nineteenth century.  Why, then, did the United States enter into a bloody war that cost over half of the nation’s wealth, at least 800,000 lives and many hundreds of thousands more in casualties?  The answer: the War Between the States was not about slavery.  It was a war of invasion to further empower the central government and to reject state sovereignty, nullification of unconstitutional laws, and the states’ rights to secession.  It was a war that would cripple the South and witness the federal debt skyrocket from $65 million in 1860 to $2.7 billion in 1865, whose annual interest alone would prove twice as expensive as the entire federal budget from 1860. It was a war whose total cost, including pensions and the burial of veterans, was an estimated $12 billion. Likewise, it was a war that would

There's Always Another Tax: The Tragedy of the Public Park

In the San Francisco Bay Area, many residents work tirelessly throughout the year to pay tens of thousands of dollars in annual property taxes. In addition to this, they are charged an extra 10 percent on all expenses through local sales taxes. It doesn't stop there. In addition to their massive federal tax bill, the busy state of California capitalizes on the opportunity to seize another 10 percent through their own sizable state income taxes. But guess what! It doesn't stop there. No, no, no, no.  In California, there's always another tax. After all of these taxes, which have all the while been reported to cover every nook and cranny of the utopian vision, the Bay Area resident is left to face yet an additional tax at the grocery store, this time on soda. The visionaries within government, and those who champion its warmhearted intentions, label this one the "soda tax," which unbelievably includes Gatorade, the preferred beverage of athletes