Article in Ladies Against Feminism: Is it Really A Man’s World?

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Article in Ladies Against Feminism: Is it Really A Man’s World?

Article in Ladies Against Feminism: Is it Really A Man’s World?
Regular Contributor

Wow pretty great article concerning many aspects that effect the forgotten gender.

Feminism and Related Issues
Is it Really a Man’s World, as Feminists Insist?
By Michael
Sep 3, 2006, 01:15

Email this article
Printer friendly page
I remember my university education. I also remember two of my lecturers, both proud feminists. While my degree wasn’t in the field of sociology, my time in university was my first in-depth exposure to the feminist movement. But even before that, I remember being told how it’s ‘a man’s world’, a phrase suggesting that fulfillment in life relates more to one’s reproductive organs than anything else. The following quote didn’t come from my lecturers, but I don’t think they would reject its underlying message:

‘It is still a man’s world. And will be until women choose to become radical revolutionaries, Amazing Amazons. This revolution begins within. We must learn how we contribute to our own oppression by internalizing the very voices that hate us. We must do our own deep spiritual revolutionary work to be able to hold our sacred ground and create our own mythology. We must be willing to say no to collusion with the patriarchal mind set, which I call PMS.’ [1]

At the time, I was a 20-year-old student, on little income, with unemployed, divorced parents, and living in rental accommodation since the age of eight. I was studying under two women with well-paid jobs and homes of their own, who were teaching that women were disadvantaged.

Despite the difference in my circumstances and those of my lecturers, I had treated many of feminism’s tenets as fact. Perhaps I was too accepting of the peer-reviewed academic journal articles distributed by my lecturers. As I came to learn more about feminism, (or ‘feminisms’ as one of my lecturers said), I remember reading articles that criticized men for addressing a woman as a lady. I never thought this was a bad word, but feminists monopolized the meaning of that word based on the connotations it could have in certain contexts. The articles insisted that ‘woman’ (or ‘womyn’) was the only appropriate term, but ignored that it could also have negative connotations, as in ‘shut up, woman.’

In discussions with my lecturers, I never needed to say the word ‘lady’, but if I did, I suspect that they would have complained; I suppose I could have justified my speech with the feminist motto of ‘it’s my body and my choice’, an excuse used for killing unborn babies. In thinking about it, I couldn’t imagine them responding with ‘OK then, we respect your body and your choice; you can call us ladies.’

I’ve since graduated, and am employed. I use my wage to pay my mother’s rent—I love her. If I were as accepting of feminism as I used to be, I would probably be made to feel guilty for being a man that provides money to a woman. I’m a long way from being perfect, but I would rather embrace Biblical truth (such as 1 Timothy 5:8) instead of the secular, feminist-derived variant. I’m thankful I came across LAF, where women (Godly women) taught me that it’s OK to address them as ladies.

Language aside, my point is that it’s harmful when society abandons faith in order to accept ungodly doctrines, a little like that in 1 Timothy 4:1. Secular humanists advise that we are living in enlightened times, and that we are simply too intelligent these days to believe in something as archaic as religion.

But back to the ‘it’s a man’s world’ saying. It carries with it some connotations and assumptions, one being that men are inherently advantaged over women. Ironically, this was one feminist doctrine that I actually didn’t believe. I was recently told of Gender Indicators Online [2], produced by the Australian Institute of Social Research, and decided to put the saying to the test.

In my state of South Australia, the state government has an Office for the Status of Women [3]. The Office’s work is based upon a feminist worldview [4]. It holds that women are oppressed, and that one role of government is to address that through its policies. In this context, the Minister for the Status of Women described Gender Indicators Online as ‘…a highly regarded resource [that] has been used extensively across government to inform policy development.’ [5]. In addition, Gender Indicators Online advises:

‘Gender sensitive indicators support the development and evaluation of policies and programs designed to achieve greater gender equity in the context of gender sensitive analysis and gender mainstreaming initiatives of policy/programs and budgets.’ [6]

On first glance, these statements come across as politically neutral, but the word ‘gender’ seems only to be used by feminists, and only when they hate being women. As a result, the statistics are a resource for the advancing the feminist worldview. Although the numbers apply only to South Australia or Australia itself, I would not be surprised if they were similar to much of the western world. I say this because the capital of South Australia is Adelaide, and is nicknamed ‘The City of Churches’, a reflection of a bygone era when Christianity was more prevalent. In 2005, the government proposed legislation to amend ‘…92 State laws so that same-sex and heterosexual couples are treated equally’ [7], which I hear is happening throughout Christianized countries. I’m told that the legislation wasn’t passed, but the government has a platform that is seen to uphold a feminist and homosexual worldview. The statistics are used to support feminism (i.e. that women are oppressed), but do these statistics support that claim?

* A boy born in 2004 has a life expectancy of 78 years. A girl’s life expectancy is 83 years. [8]
* Of people who committed suicide in 2003, 78.45 % were male and 21.55% were female. [9]
* The 2005 imprisonment rate for men was 294.8 per 100,000. For women it was 20.8 per 100,000. [10]
* Of the apparent secondary school retention rate in 2005, it was 68.1% for boys but 79.1% for girls. [11]
* Of people participating in University or other tertiary education in 2001, 44.14% were men, but 55.87% were women. [12]
* Of people in 2001 who earned a bachelor’s degree, 45.27% were men. 54.73% were women. [13]

Gender Indicators Online also shows that men earn more than women, are more likely to have postgraduate degrees, and less likely to be unemployed. But these are loaded statistics; when Job’s health and prosperity were restored, was it a sin or a reward from God? Is it wrong for me to earn good money from the sweat of my brow (and when I marry, give the money to my wife)? Further, do men exist ‘as a whole’ or as individuals? Just because one man earns a high salary is no guarantee that his neighbor earns the same. If I earn more than the average male wage (and the average female wage), feminists would say I am privileged over women. But this can be pulled out of context—my organization’s team leader, director, executive director, and Minster were all women (all earning more than me).

In summary, men in South Australia (and/or Australia) are:

* Likely to die sooner than women
* Less likely to complete secondary institutional education than women (I would like to see this compared with homeschooling)
* Outnumbered in tertiary education by women
* Less likely to have an undergraduate degree than women
* Three times more likely to commit suicide than women and
14 times more likely to be imprisoned than women.

If it were a man’s world, I would be reporting the opposite. In writing this, I’m not suggesting that it’s a woman’s world. As I mentioned before, secular humanists indicate that we are living in enlightened times. Feminism (a descendant of liberalism and The Enlightenment) indicates that it’s a man’s world. A feminist-endorsed website indicates otherwise.

If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness! ~ Matthew 6:23

Women have been proving for the last 30 years that men have been right for the last 30 centuries!

09-28-2006 01:51 PM

Re: Article in Ladies Against Feminism: Is it Really A Man’s World?
Regular Contributor

Some Feminasty’s getting worked up over the thought of the website listed!!!

Whatever happened to second amendment rights?

Women have been proving for the last 30 years that men have been right for the last 30 centuries!

09-28-2006 03:23 PM

Re: Article in Ladies Against Feminism: Is it Really A Man’s World?
Regular Contributor
The only purpose of feminism is to disrupt the family unit, in order to keep it from creating and gaining too much wealth over the generations in a world that knows almost no or little hardship.

09-28-2006 10:12 PM

Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

%d bloggers like this: