Equality and Responsibility: The Feminist Paradox

Nearly a year after losing the 2016 Presidential Election to Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton released an excerpt from her memoir titled What Happened.  If the excerpt serves as a microcosm for the entire 512-page book, it will probably become required reading for many gender studies classes at colleges across the USA.  In the excerpt, Hillary Clinton complains about then-candidate Trump’s behavior at the second Presidential debate, saying “Now, we were on a small stage and no matter where I walked, he followed me closely, staring at me, making faces.”  She also fantasized about looking him in the eye and saying “Back up, you creep, get away from me!  I know you love to intimidate women, but you can’t intimidate me, so back up!”  Trump “invading her space” at the second Presidential debate had absolutely nothing to do with her losing the election; which makes me think that the whole book is just one big therapy session, with the readers acting as her therapists.  I’m sure the feminists loved the fact that she included that tidbit in her memoir; it reinforces their belief that President Trump is a misogynistic pig.       

 

As feminism continues poisoning the minds of western women, many western men have decided they have had enough.  One particular group, Men Going their Own Way (MGTOW), advises men to steer clear of romantic relationships with women; arguing that these relationships do men more harm than good.  Many MGTOW have come to feel the way they do after watching men’s lives get ruined because of false accusations of rape. When women make comments like the one made by Hillary Clinton in her memoir excerpt, it makes me think that the MGTOW might actually have a point about today’s women. If all women were like Trigglypuff or the crazy feminists at the Women’s March and/or the “Slut Walks”, I would probably join these gentlemen in taking an oath of celibacy.  However, I am not quite ready to give up on the idea of settling down with a like-minded, beautiful, conservative, and traditional woman.  Fortunately, not every western woman has bought into the radical tenets of third-wave feminism.   

 

To me, feminism comes across as quite paradoxical.  Feminists love to use their gender as both a sword and a shield. Feminists demand equality with men; going mental when a man holds the door for them because they don’t want special treatment.  Yet these same women would probably use their gender to evoke sympathy from the jury should they ever find themselves accused of committing a crime.  Note to feminists: if you really want true equality with men, it means you must accept the privileges and responsibilities that come along with equality with men.  You can’t have your cake and eat it too.      

 

Now, let’s get back to Hillary Clinton.  For those of you who don’t want to read all 512 pages of her book, I am going to give you my account of why she lost the election.  For one thing, she took the typically blue rust belt states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania for granted.  As President Obama’s former campaign manager David Axelrod correctly pointed out, “Jim Comey didn’t tell her not to campaign in Wisconsin after the convention. Jim Comey didn’t say not to put any resources in Michigan until the final week of the campaign.”  Also, many Bernie Sanders supporters decided to stay home or vote third party rather than support the woman who did everything they could to derail their guy’s chances at winning the Democratic nomination for President.  It didn’t help that Hillary’s campaign lacked a coherent message; it relied heavily on her gender as the justification for her candidacy.  Even lefties like Susan Sarandon agreed that supporting Hillary because of her gender is foolish.  Check out this video featuring Lauren Southern and Shoe0nHead mocking the SJW feminists who support Hillary solely because of her gender.  You won’t regret it.

 

 

In the actual book, due out next month, I predict that Hillary will look inward as to what she and her campaign could have done differently for only about 50 pages. This section will probably not include a passage saying something like “My campaign acted as if the number one issue the voters cared about was abortion while their number one issue was actually the economy.”  About 400 pages will talk about what an awful person Donald Trump is; and the remaining 50 or so pages will talk about how misogyny, James Comey, and Russia conspired to ensure her defeat in the 2016 Presidential Election.

 

Those hoping for a more accurate account of why Hillary lost the campaign should check out the book Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign, written by Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes.  Allen and Parnes sat down with more than 100 anonymous sources, many of whom worked on the Clinton Campaign, over a period of a year and a half; asking them for their take on the state of the campaign.  Many of the insiders painted a picture of a disheveled and disorganized campaign plagued by scandals including Benghazi, the private e-mail server controversy and the perception that the Clinton Foundation was actually a trust fund for personal enrichment.  The authors claim that Former President Bill Clinton, the Candidate’s husband, urged the campaign to reach out to swing voters; advice that they ultimately ignored.  Many Clinton loyalists are obviously not happy with the contents of this book and dispute the accuracy of many of the authors’ findings.  Allen and Parnes had previously co-written the book HRC: State Secrets and the Rebirth of Hillary Clinton, which chronicled Hillary’s tenure as Secretary of State.  Overall, this book portrayed the Former Secretary of State in a much more positive light than their second collaboration.

 

Feminists, including Hillary Clinton, will never be taken seriously as long as they claim to want to “move beyond gender” while using their gender as a crutch to avoid personal responsibility.  The frivolous grievances of feminists in first-world countries, which include insurance companies refusing to pay for their birth control, epidemics of cat-calling and airport security officials calling a woman “sweetheart”, pale in comparison to the legitimate grievances of women in third-world countries. Women in third-world countries, many of which are governed by one of the left’s favorite interest groups-the Muslims, consider themselves lucky if they can drive or go out in public without their husband’s permission. Yet, political correctness will probably prevent most feminists from speaking out against the treatment of women in these countries; many of which have donated a lot of money to the Clinton Foundation. American feminists don’t realize how good they have it here in the United States of America.  Until feminists come to their senses, I agree with those who say #FeminismisCancer.