The cult against Feminism (work in progress)

Is it dangerous to speak of oppression, exploitation, discrimination? Should one be wary of challenging ideas and actions that brings forth inequality and subordination? Perhaps to utilize the term “dangerous” is insufficient or non-applicable in this case, though the ideology of oppression and exclusion is within its nature dangerous or a form of violence. Oppressive at best. Within the notion of denial though we can assume that reality is without remorse, for there may be no God, or law of Karma. Death is not an escape or the realization of release from this world differently for a Fascist, serial rapist, or child. Death is the sole motive of escape from this reality, so to declare it’s a punishment to kill or be killed is irrelevant, for death supposedly comes to us all, and unfortunately does not alleviate the pain and remorse felt through this inexplicable result of human experience and expression. Tragedy is not ended, and conflict is not resolved, for ideologies or beliefs die hard. Basically, man has a role to play and for him to utter truth or similarity in a world of distinction is a negative or narrow form of existence for it subordinates freedom and lunacy down to inclusion and exclusion. The motive of restraint is control, to enforce obedience or the saturation of law and order through a constitution, religion, or culture is degrading the modular or creative aspect that is life, which we coincidentally consider a playground for expression and differentiation, also known as freedom, but to a certain extent where our lives are monitored and enforced to be similar based on a biological phenomenon which has now been even more simplified through class, gender, and race. Stereotypes within itself is law but should not be tolerated if one were to assume that liberation is solely democratic, humanistic, and perhaps creative. The conclusion is that life cannot, and should not be controlled, and our division should not be the source of our unity. The premise of this essay lies in the subordination, whether willingly or not, of the human species towards what we call Fascism or violent discrimination through subtle means called propaganda. Subversion, whether intentional, draconic, or superficial, is enforcement and subordination, where Erich Fromm stated that liberation is found in apathy, and pacifism, or removal, and internal contemplation, within this sole form of reality or existence which we occupy for a brief amount of time, in relation to the expanse of the immortal universe or cosmos. The argument against this idea or conclusion is that separateness is the reason for individuality or respect tuned, as in democratic, the highest ideal, currently, in our technocratic society, is the answer and expression of freedom within itself, and that for it is as such, should be tolerated, and perhaps enforced through governance and welfare, though my argument against it, is that to obey one thing and disobey another is ignorance and irresponsible for it does not allow distinction and the alienation for man to find in a society expecting all, based on biological, physiological, and psychological, to conform within in all aspects, even homelessness, is tolerance of denial, and exclusion found. As in, you have a circus act, but the clowns, are not allowed to be lions and tigers, for in the circus one is a clown, and not an animal found in the Serengeti or Borneo rainforests.

 

On a side note: supposedly there’s no more need to resist, our whole structure is about the embellishment of man higher than nature and its response to protect itself from our lazy but destructive outlook on it. The so-called manufacturers of Capitalism are only despised for they have wealth beyond measure, but that stand-up entrepreneurs somehow deserve the credit, for they make us believe, while we consume it all away, that there is hope, a Socialist world required to allow man to subordinate all things but himself to tedium, abuse, and neglect. For to be strong is to be happy, and to be human is to be both, but surely the definition of totality is unity, and unfortunately this is not found due to contempt, alienation, and the disregard we have for each other, at this point in time, and later all things will be solved, as again stated by Erich Fromm, who was supposedly a Social-Anarchist. A dupe of a story found necessary, for the subservience to peace, and contemplation is not degrading to man, but expected, and if it is, in my view, is subordination and domestication, and that in turn is lunacy or selfishness. What is life, other than subordination, even though we are consciously ignorant, choose that subordination is employment, slavery, or obsession with tedium, beyond what makes us “better”, more attractive, happy, and socially content. It’s a farce prescribed by a psychologist and a president. We live in a so-called realm for our own fulfillment, yet are we even allowed to hate it, to destroy it? At what cost is our resistance towards this fancy idea of human divinity and destiny? That is where the cult against feminism begins, but not where it ends. Feminists can only be female, but some anti-feminists are also of that kind sadly, but most importantly disturbing.

 

In the celebration of diversity, and the process of improving it, we have neglected to account for past misdeeds, and hidden judgement within ourselves, ignoring how we have been part of the problem, and should perhaps not be part of the solution. In a general sense, feminists wants feminism, they do not want to be equal to men or gender-based structures, but rather have their own island, in this case, place, on this Earth, in this cosmos, apart from the reality we supposedly, all, have to abide in together, where the distinction or removal is what is needed, and not the appraisal of differences, especially since these differences are the cause for a feminist outlook.