There is a new ‘hot topic’ at various alleged Feminist sites that exemplifies yet another reason why leftist self-named Feminists should really be called Femisogynists. Their agenda is purely a political one and it’s one that is actually harmful to women. The end now justifies the means to the point that the new in thing to do in Leftist Feminist/Femisogynist circles is to “embrace sluthood”. No, really. A most recent example from that hotbed of objectification and subjugation of women disguised as feminism, Feministe.com:
I had never thought of my self as a Casual Encounters kind of girl. I’d read them on occasion, sure, out of fascination, horror, horniness. I’d even, once in a long while, in lonely desperate moments, posted an ad, not with the intention of actually meeting anyone, but because sometimes knowing you have a bunch of bad options that you’re rejecting feels better than feeling like you have no options at all. And it was that exact state I found myself in one Friday night last fall, after having been blown apart yet again by some minor rejection that felt so huge it sent me to my bed. I hadn’t showered or shaved or left the house in days. And so, glass of wine in hand, wearing a robe and dirty sweatpants, I posted an ad just so I could watch the replies come in and feel like I had some kind of choice in the world. That somebody wanted me, even if they were gross and I’d never want them back.
Um. Where to begin? Her article, term used loosely, entitled My Sluthood, Myself, is meant to show how empowering and wonderful it is to embrace always-have-antibiotics-on-hand sluthood, yet, in reality, it shows anything but. Maybe it’s just me, but if I was feeling icky and hadn’t showered nor shaved in days, I’d, you know, shower and shave, for starters. I would not post a random “hit me up for a booty call, total stranger” ad. As you read on, her own words belie her “I’m so empowered” false persona: she admits she is desperately craving being wanted and loved. How on earth does random sex, with strangers no less, achieve that? It doesn’t. What it does achieve is objectification, in the really bad way.
I’d like to think that old school feminists, many of whom were honestly trying to achieve some good, didn’t burn their bras in the hopes that women would start unhooking them for every Tom, Dick and Harry in some demented quest for acceptance and fulfillment.
The article goes on, filled with cliches such as “triggers” – femisogynist new-speak for “I want to read this so that I can get outrageously outraged and claim victimization” – and more words that belie the author’s intent. Or what I can only assume is her intent. It seems as if she was trying to make a case for “sluthood”, but she only managed to prove why it’s harmful to women as a whole and that her grip on sanity may very well be Andrew Sullivan-esque. Her conclusion contains this (bleeping of cuss word, mine. I feel no need to be “edgy” by using bad words purely for shock value):
I’m telling you this because our policymakers would rather girls get sometimes-fatal diseases than be perceived as condoning sluthood. I’m telling you this because it’s important for everyone to understand: Sluthood isn’t a disease, or a wrong path, or a trend that’s ruining our youth. It isn’t just for detached, unemotional women who “f**k like men,” (as if that actually meant something), consequences be damned. It isn’t ever inevitable that sluthood should inspire violence or shame. Sluthood isn’t just a choice we should let women make because women should be free to make even “bad” choices. It’s a choice we should all have access to because it has the potential to be liberating. Healing. Soul-fulfilling.
Firstly, a total straw-man – excuse me, straw-woman – argument. People who are against free (as in tax payer funded) universal birth control for all, of course, want girls to die! Because they are mean old Rethuglicans and subjugate-y old prudes and stuff. Probably racist somehow, too. Sigh. Secondly, it did not appear to be very healing or soul-fulfilling to the author, her false face of bravado notwithstanding. The good old “liberating” line is a fallacy as well. It’s just the new version of “sexual empowerment” which has done far more harm to women than good.
Once again proving their idiocy, leftist feminists/femisogynists cry “patriarchal oppression” at the drop of a damn hat, yet they choose to embrace lifestyles, under the self-defeating veil of sexual empowerment, that are actually geared toward and beneficial to men. And, you know, totally harmful and denigrating to them. This encouragement of “sexual empowerment” or “liberation”, the obsession with “it’s okay, just use birth control and do whatever feels good”, the pro-abortion agenda that treats a pregnancy as an inconvenient punishment that must be aborted, and the trying to turn sluthood into a politically correct lifestyle, all have resulted in the dehumanization of women and the denigration of womanhood itself.
I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating: By encouraging women to focus on sexual “equality”- or now “liberation” – they’ve taken away any requirement that women be treated as something other than a sexual toy. Why would anyone respect you as a human being, if you don’t respect yourself? Jaclyn of Feministe, who defines herself by her sexual acts only and with the words My Sluthood, Myself, has yet to learn that lesson. And neither have the leftist feminists who encourage and enable such dangerous – emotionally and physically – thinking.
(Cross-posted from NewsReal)