Monday, March 26, 2007

Feminism: Irrational, Now Bad For You Too

I've railed repeatedly against the rational behind feminism, but it now appears that aside from being silly, feminism is actually bad for your health:

For years, feminists have fought for equality, believing it is the key to a better society.

Now researchers have found that parity between the sexes may be bad for your health.

A study in Sweden, arguably one of the most egalitarian countries in the world, discovered that men and women who are equal are more likely to suffer illness or disability.

Are they suggesting that humanity's latest attempt to create heaven on earth will lead to hell? Why I never!

The scientists, from the Swedish National Institute of Public Health, said a possible explanation for the link between equality and illness is that men's health may be adversely affected by a loss of what had been seen as traditional male privileges.

Yes, we're really flummoxed about the fact that we no longer hold a monopoly on dwelling in cubes. In reality, the sexes function much better separately. This is not to say that men should never endure the presence of a woman, but incessantly mixing the two leads to displeasure, especially for men. As all men know, we need our time alone, away from women folk. Work used to serve this function admirably--pardon the nostalgia. Now it no longer does so.

They suggested that women's health could be damaged by greater opportunities for risky behaviour as a result of increased income combined with the stress of longer working hours.

This part actually makes sense. Women have an aversion to decisions, especially important ones. I believe this aversion is innate; regardless is exists. This is not to say that women are incapable of making decisions, but it is not surprising that discomfort leads to stress and other decreases in general wellness.

My favorite part of the article comes next:

But the study, published in the journal Social Science and Medicine, also put forward the theory that equality has not yet been fully achieved in society and that these effects are part of a transitional process on the road to fairness.

Now where have we heard this before? Wasn't this the mantra of the Communists in power? If an increase in "equality"--a dubious concept, that--is proving less than benevolent, we must attempt to increase equality further. H. L. Mencken once observed that "the cure for the evils of democracy is more democracy." The cure for the evils of socialism was more socialism. So too the evils for ostensible equality is more ostensible equality.

If you are ramming your head into a wall, it is hardly prudent to increase your head's velocity. It is better to use your head to re-think matters and change course. If only feminists hadn't given up on thinking.


Donny said...

What we are doing is forgetting our individual importance as men and women.
Take bread and wine to represent men and women respectively, as well as our diet. With only bread, we will not be hungry, but our mouths will eventually dry up. Wine will keep us happy for a while, but eventually we need more to keep us alive. If wine tries to be better bread than the bread, we dry up and die, and vice versa.
We forget to play our own role on the table, and forget to thank the other for their complementarity. We also sometimes forget that God is perfectly present in both.

A Wiser Man Than I said...

I know man doth not live on bread alone, but I was really looking forward to a solid diet of straight wine. Now you've gone and foiled my plans.

troutsky said...

Sorry excuse for rational analysis in my opinion. Take a little empirical evidence and construct a theory around it? Sorry , thats not how science works, stick to metaphysical arguments where you are on solid vapor.To figure out what creates illness would take multiple studies eliminating multiple factors and variances,exigencies,etc. You took a quantum leap.

A Wiser Man Than I said...

I have to disagree with you a bit Troutsky. If my sole objection to feminism was that it was bad for you, you would be entirely right. But I have postulated reasons why this is not entirely surprising, and though the study itself should be taken with a grain of salt, it is my reasoning, however shallow, which deserves debunking.

I'm not a scientist. I'm a college student with a little too much time on my hands who offers thoughts on the world around me. It goes without saying that I don't always get things right. That's one reason I like having you around.