Earlier this month, FOX News.com (“Fair and Balanced,” HA) published an article by Suzanne Venker entitled “To be happy, we must admit women and men aren’t ‘equal.’” This is not the first time Venker has written for FOX’s Opinion column on this topic. According to her, the ‘war on men’ has been raging long enough and it’s time to call a truce.
First of all, I’d like to point out that complaining about a ‘war on men’ is kind of like bombing our country every year for a century and then getting really pissed off when we start building weapons to defend ourselves. Don’t we know that they were only helping us? We should be honored that they would bestow upon us their precious bombs that they spent their life and energy building. Without them and their bombs, we would be forced to fend for ourselves and develop our own livelihoods instead of constantly picking up the mess their bombs make. We were born to live in rubble and ruin and will be much happier if we just accept that some people were born to bomb and some people were born to be bombed. Let the natural energy flow! This war on them is completely unnecessary.
Now, having said that, calling the things women do a ‘war on men’ is also kind of like equating getting an education and a job, fighting for equal pay, refusing to be patronized or mansplained, expecting the law to protect you, etc. with building weapons and dropping bombs. I don’t know about you, but I think of it more as building force-fields, stronger foundations for our houses, and bullet-proof vests in case of an attack.
If, as Venker claims, men really are ticked off at women and that’s why their interest in marriage has waned, then men need to get a frickin’ grip. If “women aren’t women anymore,” as Venker apparently hears men say, then it’s because women are now more likely to notice the tiny things men often unwittingly do to assert their dominance and control and they aren’t going to stand for it! Boo hoo. Your poor manhood can’t handle being told off when you talk down to a woman.
The saddest part of this whole mess is that a woman is making this argument. Suzanne Venker believes so strongly in the natural order of things, the supposed “feminine pedestal” which feminists have convinced us never existed, and traditional gender roles, that she is willing to put a stop to all of the progress that has allowed her to be able to publish her opinion, be interviewed by men and women, and taken seriously even without having any credentials to speak of.
Venker openly disapproves of “independent female adulthood.” In her article, she writes:
The idea that women don’t need men or marriage is palpable. It began in earnest more than forty years ago, with the modern feminist movement. Feminists assured women their efforts would result in more satisfying marriages, but the result is something else altogether.
According to Venker, the result is that women prioritize work over family at first and then when they try to settle down, their boyfriend won’t commit. The result is that marriage becomes a “competitive sport” where spouses are forced to “battle it out” on the home-front rather than accepting the divided workload dished out by age-old rules and definitions.
I’m sorry, maybe I read that wrong, but is a boyfriend’s lack of commitment really the fault of his girlfriend? Whoops, she waited too long and that made him antsy. Should’a thought of that, women! And is the forced communication and cooperation about the workload in a modern marriage really a negative aspect? Damn, I hate working together to decide what we each want to do. As I recall from history class, the reason this whole thing started is that scores of women were not satisfied with the jobs they were automatically exclusively assigned and they weren’t given any other options. That’s how this whole “war” started. So now we’ll be happier if we go back to the way things were?
This whole thing is a pathetic attempt to appease the few conservative men who are annoyed with progressive women. But as far as I can tell, based on the fact that a woman is writing this, there are still plenty of conservative women out there that would be just tickled pink to allow a conservative man to sweep her off her feet and put her back down in the kitchen.
So stop poking and prodding the women who would rather walk to the kitchen of their own accord and be able to leave at will! There are plenty of men who are just as happy to do a little laundry now and then and share the finances—after they’ve committed to a marriage, of course, which does still happen—because they understand that it means the woman they love has the agency and initiative to get what she needs and deserves. Believe it or not, SOME people respect that more than silent compliance.
And as much as Venker keeps saying that that’s not what this is about, the rest of us know there is no other way for this whole “truce” thing to end. We’ve been there before. There can be no separate but equal. No equal respect without equal power.
Feminism didn’t result in equality between the sexes—it resulted in mass confusion. . . But the truth must be heard. Being equal in worth, or value, is not the same as being identical, interchangeable beings. Men and women may be capable of doing many of the same things, but that doesn’t mean they want to.
But there are two glaring problems with this assertion. First, the primary argument of feminism is in fact that women and men are equal in value and worth, so I guess Venker doesn’t really understand feminism enough to argue against it. She believes whole-heartedly that the gender roles were already equally valued before feminism ever happened!
But before feminism, men had value in the eyes of the world, and women had value in the eyes of men. That is not equal worth. The reason that women have always been placed in the category with children is because they used to be considered children. That is not equal worth. That is sickening.
Second, the capability of the genders is the only issue that matters! Once given the right to do and be anything, women can still choose to have a traditional gender role if that’s what they want. For God’s sake.
The point of all this is that Venker thinks the way to end the gender wars is to once again divide the genders and make peace with it. In actuality, the only way to end the gender wars is to recognize that masculine and feminine are not mutually exclusive and make peace with that. The mass confusion Venker is so worried about would be put to an end if everyone relaxed and stopped trying to figure out what is supposed to be and just let be what already is.
Then we will be happy.
- Demand Fox News Stop Publishing Articles by Anti-Feminist (forcechange.com)
- Stephen Colbert: Sisters Are Doing It To Themselves (colbertnation.com)
- Want a man? Stop being a b-tch (wnd.com)
- Suzanne Venker: How To Choose A Husband author advises ‘be nice, cook and have sex!’ (dailymail.co.uk)
- LOL: Fox News Accidentally Uses Photo of Gay Couple To Illustrate Traditional Gender Roles (jezebel.com)
- ‘The View’ schooled on traditional marriage (wnd.com)
- 20-first releases its new 2013 Global Gender Balance Scorecard (prweb.com)