The process is exactly the same as for non-sexual feminist 'grievance'. The process is as follows; 1. Some women feel dissatisfied with some aspect of their life. 2. They externalize the dissatisfaction as someone is doing something to them to cause the dissatisfaction rather than resulting from their own choices. 3. The cause of the pro…
The process is exactly the same as for non-sexual feminist 'grievance'.
The process is as follows;
1. Some women feel dissatisfied with some aspect of their life.
2. They externalize the dissatisfaction as someone is doing something to them to cause the dissatisfaction rather than resulting from their own choices.
3. The cause of the problem is identified as men particularly low status men.
4. Evidence is found for 'injustice' by comparing the apparent satisfaction of the very highest status men to their own dissatisfaction. The difference is represented as evidence of unfair treatment.
It's never ending. Very few people have a perfect life so step 1 is common place. Step 2. is a natural step because no one wants to blame themselves or accept responsibility for their own situation. Step 3 is a natural step for women given human cognitive biases. Step 4 is easy because their will always be a very successful few who at least appear to be far better of.
If we actually were to talk about sexual advantage and disadvantage then do men, particularly average men really have it better than women? A moments consideration would reveal how absurd this is. Women control access to sex. The average women has far more access to sex if she chooses than the average man. Women also control all of the consequences of sex. The imbalance of power for all but a tiny elite is massively tilted in women's favour. Why else do incels exist? Is a strong generally unfulfilled desire for sex an advantage?
Very good and valid points which are ignored by feminists. Very few men get to spread their genes, apparently 17 percent. Male sexual urges may be vilified or envied by feminists but many of us would consider them inconvenient and troublesome at times. I can understand the desperation of men who will never consummate the sex act.
The process is exactly the same as for non-sexual feminist 'grievance'.
The process is as follows;
1. Some women feel dissatisfied with some aspect of their life.
2. They externalize the dissatisfaction as someone is doing something to them to cause the dissatisfaction rather than resulting from their own choices.
3. The cause of the problem is identified as men particularly low status men.
4. Evidence is found for 'injustice' by comparing the apparent satisfaction of the very highest status men to their own dissatisfaction. The difference is represented as evidence of unfair treatment.
It's never ending. Very few people have a perfect life so step 1 is common place. Step 2. is a natural step because no one wants to blame themselves or accept responsibility for their own situation. Step 3 is a natural step for women given human cognitive biases. Step 4 is easy because their will always be a very successful few who at least appear to be far better of.
If we actually were to talk about sexual advantage and disadvantage then do men, particularly average men really have it better than women? A moments consideration would reveal how absurd this is. Women control access to sex. The average women has far more access to sex if she chooses than the average man. Women also control all of the consequences of sex. The imbalance of power for all but a tiny elite is massively tilted in women's favour. Why else do incels exist? Is a strong generally unfulfilled desire for sex an advantage?
Very good and valid points which are ignored by feminists. Very few men get to spread their genes, apparently 17 percent. Male sexual urges may be vilified or envied by feminists but many of us would consider them inconvenient and troublesome at times. I can understand the desperation of men who will never consummate the sex act.