A doofus’s guide to feminism

Feminism, as we all know since we are repeatedly reminded by feminists, has flowed in from down south on three separate, crimson waves. They are referred to as First Wave Feminism, Second Wave Feminism, and – in a surprising twist on the first two – Third Wave Feminism. Having briefly read something online about writing essays and shit, and using a template to show me how to outline my ideas, I shall now attempt to demonstrate what a waste of time all three waves have been. This article fulfills the requirement for Post-Doofus Integrative Review 502. Yes, I’m going for my Master’s.

The First Wave of feminism began with machines in the nineteenth century. Prior to the invention of machines, women were far more likely to give birth multiple times, cling to a man to help provide, breast feed their babies for long periods – and pray that maybe half of their children would survive; and that at least one of them might remember enough love and affection from childhood to take care of dear mother when the provider fell over dead and she could no longer wipe her own ass. She was more likely to experience the positive outcome that she sought if she let that child suck on her breast; not for a few weeks or months, but for years. It’s that simple.

There were no machines for baby formula back then. There was no baby formula. There were no microwaves, or gas or electric stovetops. There were no convenience stores. If you lived in town, there might be a general store in your general area. If there was a blizzard in your town, the general store would probably be closed.

Oh. I just looked this up: There were also no phones.

In Doofus Babysitting 103 (and the first half of the semester of 104 that I missed because of my bruised tibia), we learned that babies back then would die without breast milk. Sometime the next year, it dawned on me that without machines, and absent any breasts, these babies would seriously die. Three weeks after that, I finally realized that roughly half of these dying babies would be girls who supposedly possess a massive amount of rights, if feminist arguments are to be believed.

The Industrial Revolution changed the landscape of this planet, and did so permanently. It changed the way we think. I had a friend who knew a man in the computer industry who told him that the Industrial Revolution did not begin with the creation of the railroad; it began when industrialists started to use the rails to transport freight. In like fashion, he felt that the Internet Revolution did not begin with the widespread use of computers; it began when entrepreneurs set their businesses up in cyber-reality and no place else, like Amazon. I agree completely with this observation.

We simply cannot comprehend a life without electricity, and I don’t care if you’re a camping fanatic who camps at least once a month. Take away machines and life is going to slow way, way down. Washing clothes is going to take all day. The man that impregnated the woman is going to be too busy working his ass off in order to stay alive in a hostile, cold, uncaring, unsparing universe to remain at home and wash clothes. The one who is busy breastfeeding is better prepared to do it and, according to one of my professors, is geographically much, much closer to the pile of dirty clothes.

The Industrial Revolution gave her one appliance after another after another after another. It liberated her. It was brought about by the tireless and largely thankless efforts of a great many male actors. Ordinary women now had access to devices that Queen Eleanor of Aquitaine would have envied, perhaps even killed for. Now there is less need to stay at home all day, because there are machines to help with raising children and keeping house.

First Wave Feminism came along under these societal circumstances, buttressed by mostly wealthy women, like the one portrayed in “Mary Poppins,” who had less need to stay at home, or to do much work at all.  This frequently led, as it always does, to feelings of boredom and uselessness. The political process, a phenomenon that the newspapers were bringing into these women’s homes, undoubtedly looked a great deal more enticing. Furthermore, what woman wouldn’t want a roomful of attractive men admiring her every word?

I propose to you that the First Wave was entirely useless based on several criteria:

1. Voting is an act of violence. If you don’t believe me, just think about what men and women have voted into place: a vast and unstoppable bureaucracy that will only cease its Industrial-Revolution-sized machinations when it collapses of its own weight, which may very well happen in our lifetime. Take any vote where you were disappointed in the outcome and think about what that did to your mind, your emotions, and your free will. Then, when the vote goes your way (as it is doing for me while one state after another embraces gay marriage, a political momentum which at least sends me a nice message), remember that your opponent is out there thinking exactly what you were thinking when you lost that other vote. That is how politics feels when you lose. It ain’t like playing Sorry. (And in politics, no one ever is.)

2. Millions of women (and men) don’t care about voting. To this day the turnout of eligible voters is roughly half. Do people really think it’s due solely to apathy or laziness? Hell, nobody’s lazier than this candidate for Master’s of Doofosity, yet even I voted when I believed in friendly neighborhood violence. It’s just that a lot of these women have better things to do.

3. Women were not oppressed. If you need further clarification on number three, scroll back up and read that cool stuff about machines and baby formula and shit.

Betty Friedan and her husband went at it hot and heavy one night in the 1950s. In a fit of ecstasy, Friedan’s husband, Mr. Betty Friedan, had what we learned in Doofus and the Little Man 245 is called an orgasm. This resulted in Mrs. Betty Friedan getting pregnant. She was fired from her job when the results were discovered by her boss, Mr. Non-Betty-Friedan. Enraged, she wrote a book entitled The Feminine Mystique, which blamed the suburban ennui of rich, white, American women on Betty’s mean boss.

Determined to do something about the “comfortable concentration camp“ in which she lived, Betty went to the garage, got some rubber-handled clippers, and snipped her way through the electric barbed-wire fence that Mr. Betty Friedan had set up around the compound to keep her in. As a result, 30% of the work force at that time that was female became more than 50% female today.

Women display a greater overall satisfaction level with employment than men. Then again, most of these women aren’t steering ships for weeks, shoveling coal, digging in dirt, and spending hours in heat, rain, or snow. Furthermore, outside of urban and suburban civilization, there always was and always will be much more ordinary work that needs to be done for many more hours per week, for both males and females. Therefore, I say that Second Wave Feminism was entirely useless based on several criteria:

1. Work, in general, sucks outside of the office or university environment, one that looks and acts remarkably like a domestic one. Other domestic work, the raising of children, is farmed out to other “equal” women to do during the day, leaving those children less attached to the breast that will desire their reciprocal “care” later in life. “Shady Pines, Ma!

2. Most women don’t want to work that much outside of domestic situations. It’s not because they’re lazy. It’s because even this long after the Industrial Revolution changed the way we think, men and women are still dealing with natural, evolutionary principles in their bodies and minds. Women walk around all day knowing full well that humanity grows in them. They also know that children, even with all the child-rearing machinery out there, need lots and lots of attention. I think a lot of working women fear that their children aren’t getting enough. I think they’re probably right.

3. Women were not oppressed. There is no evidence anywhere in history that women as a group were ever more likely to be illiterate, less educated, or denied the opportunity to do what work they really wanted, within the limited worldview that all of mankind has had throughout most of this world’s existence. This is because women, for millennia, have been given modes of education more tailored to girls. If they are going to stay at home where there are no machines while tiny people feed off of their bodies, the education they receive is bound to be different.

You can certainly find areas in previous centuries where women were prohibited from formal or institutional education, but even in the case of Elizabeth Garrett Anderson, you do not find much to complain about, and certainly nothing to be horrified by. The slight to Garrett Anderson seems to have been taken care of fairly easily, mostly due to the fact that she already knew what she was doing. Please keep in mind the big before-and-after of the Industrial Revolution, and that even after two centuries and the lesson of Garrett Anderson, we still deal with the fact that women flock to lesser jobs and careers more frequently than men due to that kid-making business, and that they then feel free to express greater job satisfaction.

When I was 14, Madonna masturbated with a bridal veil on the MTV Video Music Awards. She’s done far better performances, even masturbatory ones: she was way off key, and not a single interesting dance move, unless you’re using her performance to wank off more privately.

Regardless, mothers across America were horrified that their little girls were expressing the desire to dress like world-famous, slutty-looking, multi-millionaire, force-to-be-reckoned-with Madonna. Somewhere in the cacophony, The Feminist Matriarchy were sitting in their back room, playing cards, smoking phallic symbols, and nudging each other like mustachioed Eric Idle about the cumming Third Wave: “I’ll bet she does, I’ll bet she does, wink, wink, say no more, say no more!”

The Sexual Revolution gave women The Pill, which liberated them from baby formula and microwaves. Roe v. Wade gave women power over human life. “The Vagina Monologues” celebrates a part of the body that heterosexual men find infinitely fascinating, as Larry Flynt told the world in an interview. Women are free to express their sexuality to its fullest, to change their minds, and to receive praise for their sexual honesty and integrity.  How, then, could I conclude that this wave is just as useless as the first two?  Easy:

1. Women are far more likely than at any previous time in human history to grow old alone and childless. Where did the phrase “biological clock” come from?

2. Women are far more likely than at any previous time in human history to engage in less satisfying sexual encounters, since many more of them now come without commitment or romance, in part because of the increasing anxiety over the first criterion, which undoubtedly leads to uncertainty of self, society, and future. The actions of a porn starlet are going to seem foreign to such a woman. All of a sudden, what was voluntary seems more like exploitation, even (gasp) rape!

3. Women were not sexually oppressed any more than men. Feminists make a big deal about shaming language, but fail to point out that shame is a sexless human emotion. Humans tend to separate themselves by sex quite often, and unite the sexes in different ways than when they are sex-segregated. Where sex roles develop naturally they can also be developed by force, and where you are dealing with humans who are childish enough to use shame, you will find that feeling the oppression of sexual shame is not unique to women. As I pointed out in my last article, in a shotgun wedding, who is pointing the gun at whom?

However, this wave is not only as useless as the first two, but has proven to be far more insidious. Why? I believe that it has to do with something we call misandry. Let’s go back to the first act of violence to see how the hatred of men has unmistakably revealed itself the third time around by being silently present all the while.

The presumption during the First and Second Waves was that women needed a voice: first in politics, then in the workforce. This conclusion must be based on some serious wrongs. After all, we Western and American thinkers are familiar with phrases like “Freedom of Speech” and so on. We are used to living in a world where everyone, male and female, old and young, is supposedly enabled to live free from social, political, military, or legal punishments for speaking out. It would be hard for us to comprehend a time when people were not free to do so. We think about people in Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany walking through the streets with their heads down and mouths shut so as to escape notice. We think of frightened citizens in Mao’s China speaking in hushed tones so that no one finds out what they really think.

We think less about those white people who lived in the pre-Civil War South who might have actually had a problem with slavery, or someone who belongs to a fundamentalist religion that is tired of the fundamentals, and the social stigma attached to any in these situations who might want to speak up. Therefore, when First and Second Wave feminists assure us that there is a “mystique” or a “concern” about women’s whatever, then there must be some truth to it, or perhaps some evidence.

We’re waiting. While we were waiting, these same feminists came up with terms like “Patriarchy” and “glass ceiling” to persuade us that just because we don’t see it doesn’t mean…

In the meantime, what is happening with the political process embraced by these first two brands of feminists? I’ll tell you plain and simple: it is being forced. To coerce, I am convinced, is to kill. Once you convince yourself to coerce, the killing begins. It begins in your own head, coercing the mind against recognition of existent truth. I also propose to you that you often don’t realize what you’re killing. Ever been caught lying to yourself?

The dunes carved by these waves no longer look beautiful to me when I think about this operating premise (or what you would call “belief”). Here is why: When you introduce the element of violence – no matter how mild you think it is or how widely accepted or “normal” it seems – you imply that the party receiving the violence has done you a wrong and needs to be forced to stop or change.

The implication, therefore, from the first two waves, is that women have been wronged by men and society, and that both men and society need to change, or progress (a familiar term, I’m sure), by violent force if necessary. The Third Wave, since it involves self-expression guided by and using vital organs of the body, and since it is built on the misandric presumptions of the first two, has profoundly and negatively affected the most intimate relationships that men and women can have. It happened at least in part because the Second Wave encouraged so many more misandric, Second-Wave-thinking women to teach at university. Since most of those who embrace feminism are on the political Left (where all the “progress” is), is it any wonder that conservatives and libertarians are wailing about the Marxist takeover of college education? Since when do Marxists enjoy getting laid? There’re too many pamphlets to hand out.

So the angry Second-Wavers are teaching the confused Third-Wavers to treat men like dildos. Meanwhile, the culture is completely unaware of exactly what happened as a result of this triple tsunami.

Part of the end result is god-awful movies like “She-Devil,” which I’ve mentioned before, but I’ll provide more detail here. The jilted wife, played by Roseanne Barr, taking a cue from her philandering husband, sets out to accomplish the goal of taking her husband’s life from him by writing down four assets her husband had previously listed during an argument:

  • His home
  • His family
  • His career
  • His freedom

She succeeds at destroying her lousy husband’s life instead of just getting on with her own, but is nice enough to smile and talk nicely to her imprisoned husband at the end of the film.  There was no mention of her husband being raped in prison, so I’m assuming he wasn’t.  He did burn the muffins, though, yuk, yuk.

What I find instructive, however, is that like this silly movie, feminism seems to be concerned with entering wherever there are men doing something without women–based I’m assuming on the faulty operating premise that men like to oppress women–and forcing change within the all-male community.  This is where they have gone thus far:

  • Into the largely male community of politics
  • Into the largely male community of work
  • Into male sexuality

The end result of women getting involved in politics and work is that the discourse had to change.  I’m not talking about women finally getting a voice to have all of their precious programs put into place; I’m talking about how the political process actually proceeds.  Now that the discourse has been changed, how do you tell a female fellow-senator that your male opponent on some bill has got you by the balls?  The two of you won’t be continuing that conversation while standing next to each other at the urinals, either, or in the sauna, or in the locker room (unless you’re a bitchy female reporter).  Have you ever heard the relentless teasing that can ensue between men who actually like each other?  Have you ever seen a professional football player pat another player on the ass?  I have.  Repeatedly.  (Gay Doofosity 315a, extra credit.)

It is the same deal getting women into the universe of male sexuality, only far more visceral and potentially emotionally damaging.  To accept male sexuality to its fullest extent, one has to conclude that the phenomenon will involve behavior that sounds extreme for most women but a little more commonplace with many men, as well as controversial.  It will include semen shot out on the floor in the back room of an adult bookstore; men pulling their pants down at night in a park behind bushes for a quick fuck; paying a female to perform three specific sex acts in half an hour’s time in a cheap motel; strip joints; pornography; and worst of all yet far more universal, a complete change of mind and mood once ejaculation has taken place.

Like the first two waves, the Third will ultimately fail to bring the majority of women what it promises, because not only are lesbians not being arrested for cunnilingus in public parks, but women can climax multiple times during sex, and can go from almost complete disinterest to mind-blowing orgasm if he leaves his hand there long enough.  When a man’s mind is blown, it’s done.  He’s up and moving around.  His underwear is back on.  He’s getting something to eat.  The television is on.  Where are you, baby?

That’s right.  What you want is different.  A female politician is more likely to want the debate on the House floor to take a calmer, more pleasant tone.  A working woman is probably going to want a softer and more amenable workplace.  A horny lady is bound to last, by natural dictate, a lot longer than he is.  How in the hell are the sexes ever going to see eye to eye?

Answer: there’s a little something called “cooperation.”  I learned about it on “Sesame Street,” a program that taught me how to count to 20 in Spanish quite poorly, a talent that won me a scholarship to Doofus U, one that I had to turn down because I forgot that I left the offer on that other desk.  I think.  Actually, I have no idea where I left it.

Wait… I don’t have that other desk anymore.

Anyway, the difference between voluntary cooperation and the forceful intent (or is that unintent?) of political action is glaring.  The problem with feminism is not that it concerns itself with women’s concerns; the problem is that the core reason for feminism is nonsense.  The idea that men will ignore women’s issues if women don’t speak up united is laughable and demonstrably false.  It is easy, once your operating premise is flawed, to go right off the edge.  Therefore, it doesn’t surprise me that women who embrace a false and hateful premise would then go immediately on to political action to make the necessary changes.  All political actions are enforced by law.  Policemen are charged with enforcing the laws passed by the politicians and their politically-minded constituents.  Policemen are given Billy clubs, electrocution devices, and guns to enforce misandric laws.

If you are a woman, you are now free, like the mother in “Mary Poppins,” to hire a cook, a maid, a nanny, all with the money your super-smart and uptight husband makes; and go throw eggs at the Prime Minister because you’re bored.  Then, if the boredom continues (and quite unlike “Mary Poppins”), you’re free to walk out of the bedroom wearing nothing but one of his dress shirts; and lastly, as a result of the cute little outfit you’ve improvised, you’re free to play with a hard cock for a few minutes as a distraction.  This is what First Wave, Second Wave, and Third Wave feminists call “oppression.”

It doesn’t surprise me either, that Friedan couldn’t maintain control of her own organization; not because she’s a woman, mind you, but because her premise was false.  The answer to her ennui was in her own moxie, not in some Madison Avenue conspiracy about vacuum cleaners and orgasms.  The reason she couldn’t keep out the man-haters is because in her own operating premise: she resented men for a pretended offense.  If you start with a hateful premise, don’t expect a loving conclusion.

I submit for potential future personal embarrassment and forceful removal of my undergraduate, glow-in-the-dark doofosity degree, that there will be no Fourth Wave Feminism.  Once you’ve taken a man’s house, family, career and penis, what else is there to take?  Not only that, but the Internet Revolution, begun by Amazon and finished by the men’s movement, ensures that the shit emanating from the Horse’s Ass of Feminism will be called out whenever it is excreted.  It stinks.  It has always stunk.  It will stink when it comes out again.  It is perfect, however, to use as fertilizer, as we apprentice doofuses learned in Proper Uses for Modern Female Complaints 410.

Recommended Content

Skip to toolbar