Francisco Torres June 20, 2008, 6:50pm
In a long and thoughtful response, Rod Dreher ponders this question and writes:
Well, should people who choose not to go into the armed services be forced to subsidize those who do?
The answer to both is: NO. Nobody should be forced to do anything -- the question answers itself if you believe coercion is evil.
If women decide NOT to reproduce, they will simply be replaced by younger generations of women who grew up in large families, bred by cultures that reward fertility. Feminists will simply be bred out of existence by beautiful Latinas.
Guy Montag June 20, 2008, 10:18pm
Feminists will simply be bred out of existence by beautiful Latinas.
WOW, that is the most beautiful thing I have read in weeks.
Little known fact, lots of Latinas know how to weld too! At least in my fantasies anyway.
(Bold mine)
And libertarians wonder why they can't recruit more women.
There are so many things wrong with this.
1. There's the assumption that Latinas are never feminists. That would certainly come as a surprise to the valedictorian of my high school class. But then, to these assholes, she'd be invisible since she's not beautiful.
2. There's the assumption that all feminists are ugly and, for that matter, that feminists are these she-beasts that sprang out of nowhere. As if female descendants of third world immigrants wouldn't eventually become feminists themselves. Nope, only white women are feminists. Only ugly women are feminists. And feminism is absolutely not a natural progression for most women as they become better educated, wealthier, and more independent.
3. There's the general hostility on the part of all (male) libertarians towards feminists and feminism. They really believe that they can recruit women with this shit going on? It kind of makes me sad*, because, like I said, there are many libertarian issues I agree with. Libertarians could try to co-opt the feminist movement. They could make the argument that they believe in a level playing field for everyone and that women have the potential to equal, maybe even surpass, men in a libertarian society. There is one problem with that, however, it would be a lie. Libertarian men do not want to compete equally with women.
4. And that brings me to my last point: the basis of libertarian hostility toward feminism as evidenced in those quoted comments. When it comes down to it, in the battle of the sexes, libertarian men are the biggest pussies of all. The very idea of having to compete equally with women in business, let alone in the bedroom, scares the bejesus out of them. (Imagine how sad Guy Montag will be when he finds out that second generation Latinas aren't any less likely to be feminist as those white hags who fill his nightmares.) If women are equal, those guys might have to treat women as actual people with distinct personalities, with their own needs and desires, their own interests. Look at what douchebag #2 said: "...lots of Latinas know how to weld too! At least in my fantasies anyway." In his fantasies, indeed. To him, women are here for his pleasure, and his pleasure only. Ugly women need not apply. Women who want reciprocity in bed should just fuck off. Women who advocate for their own interests should shut the fuck up; men's interests are women's interests. Ultimately, when libertarian men complain about women not joining their movement, it's all about their inability to get laid at their libertarian conferences and not about wanting to see female colleagues at their side fighting for a libertarian utopia.
Oh, and, Guy, I've found your ideal girlfriend. You can thank me later.
*Although it doesn't surprise me. I've never seen a Libertarian candidate for president who wasn't anti-choice. It's a problem for the government to take people's money, but not to control a woman's uterus.
No comments:
Post a Comment