Applying logic, facts and accountability to the mindless droning of the feminist hate movement.

Saturday, July 21, 2007

The Female Lunatic er Eunuch: Book Review - Part One

A frequent accusation levelled at me by feminists is that I am misinformed about their hate movement. Usually this is in the form of rebutting my pointing out an action by feminists which promotes misandry or female privilege, their duly citing some definition of feminism as being about "equality" and thinking that has just trashed my entire point, but occasionally I get told to pick up a feminist book and educate myself on the movement, even though I seemed to have knowledge of what the movement was doing and this to appeared to be a standalone rebuttal to my point also.

At any rate I picked up a copy of The Female Eunuch by Germaine Greer so they couldn't complain (ie. stole it from the public library). Initially I was reluctant to post a review or comments about it because Ms Greer doesn't have a terribly large amount of friends outside the feminist movement these days due to her kiddie porn book The Beautiful Boy and her attacks on Steve Irwin following his death, not to mention her sort of recanting the whole thing by moaning about having had no children thus making my addressing her book perhaps unnecessarily taking a crazy woman more seriously than I should.

But then again, I had no idea of the insanity I would discover in its pages. The book is anti-marriage, anti-male and utterly cuckoo. So I think I'll review the book anyway in order to apply a bit of critical analysis to her claims, particularly questioning what the male point of view is in the situations she covers and how the feminist movement is going with fixing up the many complaints she outlines. This review should offer you some juicy quotes to use against any fembots you might come across, as well as alleviating you from actually having to read the pile of misandric garbage yourself.

Incidentally, doesn't look like the feminists have stopped accusing me of being misinformed or uneducated about feminism after I've read more feminist books than they have. Go figure.

Reviews on the Back Cover


A fine continuous flow of angry power...terrific polemical force...a brilliant attack on marriage. - TRIBUNE
Funny that one of the most acclaimed books on feminism should be described as an attack on marriage. Particularly when I'm frequently told feminism is not anti-marriage, nor did it have anything to do with the current fucked up state of marriage. Needless to say, you will find fembots refusing to accept this, so I will go into it's attacks on marriage later on.

A detailed exposition, of chilling clarity, that guarantees a cosmic persecution complex to any woman reading it - GUARDIAN
Of course to any reasonable person, one who believes in personal accountability, the book is qualified for the fireplace right here. A "cosmic persecution complex" is a good thing, is it? Well, I suppose so, if you want to blame all your problems on other people and refuse to accept any actual responsibility for your situation yourself; arguably the sole reason for the popularity of feminism in the first place. Again, feminists wonder where the accusation they wallow in victimhood, or that they are irresponsible comes from. Personal accountability will be applied to the contents of this book.

The first few chapters, encompassing the subject "Body", is a description of physical characteristics of women, especially as compared to men. Considering this section contained more physical descriptions than feminist theory I thought I wouldn't have much to rant about. I was wrong.

Gender

The gist of this chapter appears to be that while there are some physical differences between the two sexes you can't say one is superior or inferior on this basis. Problem is, right after she's done explaining that she jumps into a tirade about how men are inferior physically.

She mentions spends the middle of the chapter speaking of the Y chromosome as inferior, when in actual fact the Y chromosome is largely responsible for driving evolution. She alludes to the fact that men tend towards the extremes, ie. genius and idiocy but doesn't get around to completely explaining that this is because the Y chromosome contains the most mutations in the human genome. For example, the recent Time Magazine article, What Makes Us Different, reports:

Although the news was largely overshadowed by the impact of Hurricane Katrina... the publication of a rough draft of the chimp genome in the journal Nature immediately told scientists several important things. First they learned that overall, the sequences of base pairs that make up both species' [i.e., humans and chimps] genomes differ by 1.23% -- a ringing confirmation of the 1970 estimates -- and that the most striking divergence between them occurs, intriguingly, in the Y chromosome present only in males.
Illustrating the frequency of evolution in the Y chromosome and incidentally that women are closer genetically speaking to chimps than men are. (Oops).

Another claim made by Greer in this chapter is that of the XYY karyotype:

Recently criminologists have come up with another disconcerting observation about the Y chromosome. They found that there was a high proportion of males with the XYY chromosome, that is an extra Y, among those men in prison for crimes of violence and it seemed to be linked to certain deficiencies in mental ability.
The XYY karyotype appears in approximately 1 in 1000 men in the population. It is linked to learning disabilities, however the claim that it is linked to crimes of violence is a MYTH. The wikipedia entry on the Y chromosome states:

When chromosome surveys were done in the mid-1960s in British secure hospitals for the developmentally disabled, a higher than expected number of patients were found to have an extra Y chromosome. The patients were mischaracterized as aggressive and criminal, so that for a while an extra Y chromosome was believed to predispose a boy to antisocial behavior (and was dubbed the "criminal karyotype"). Subsequently, in 1968 in Scotland the only ever comprehensive nationwide chromosome survey of prisons found no overrepresentation of 47,XYY men, and later studies found 47,XYY boys and men had the same rate of criminal convictions as 46,XY boys and men of equal intelligence. Thus, the "criminal karyotype" concept is inaccurate and obsolete.
However, it does appear the finding of the single study was snapped up by feminists as a way of impugning the Y chromosome and by extension men as "inherently violent". A quite common form of misandry. Unfortunately this was given such coverage that the myth persists today, featured in Aliens 3, set in a penal colony for XYY's, and more recently CSI. As a matter of fact, considering The Female Eunuch was first published in 1971 and the myth of the criminal karyotype was proven in 1968, she should have known she was spreading lies to promote misandry.

She also claims men are afflicted by strange deformities like hypertrichosis which she claims are only found in the Y chromosome. This claim was rather a stretch as There are only 19 people in the entire WORLD with hypertrychosis and some of them happen to be female. Examples existed before Greer wrote this book, such as Annie Jones, the bearded woman in PT Barnum's circus. The way she makes it sound, men are running around all over the place with these deformities, when in fact this claim is a pretty far stretch to begin with, even if it didn't end up being blatantly false.

Bones

Gist of the chapter is that there are differences in the bone structure of men and women, often due to manual labour that men perform.

Curves

Basically a whinge about how having all the right curves in all the right places doesn't necessarily mean better child bearing capability. This is such a common gripe of feminists, and they should all be directed to Marilyn Monroe. Turns out this example of an archetypal attractive woman is almost the EXACT best specifications for child bearing. Feminist complaints focus around abnormal wafer thin models, which men don't particularly prefer anyway, or something equally contrived. Greer in fact complains about certain preferences for chubby women:

The female body is commonly believed to be enveloped in insulating fat, just so she is more cuddly, Nature and Hugh Hefner being alike bawds in this traffic.

Historically we may see that all repressed, indolent people have been fat, that eunuchs tend to fatten like bullocks, and so we need not be surprised to find that the male preference for cuddlesome women persists.

Uh yeah. So what are we to make of the lack of preference for chubby women today while still hearing complaints of "oppressive male preference" for women who are NOT chubby and how women with fat on them are more normal than the current preference? In the early 70s, feminists were complaining, "why do men prefer fat? why don't they want slim and fit?". Men now don't like chubby women BECAUSE they are fat and slovenly. Just doing what feminists told us. Now they're complaining about the opposite.

Hair

Point of the chapter is to suggest that because women are encouraged to shave hair from their bodies, they are encouraged to be less animal and primitive than men. Not sure what to say about this other than I don't particularly mind unshaven armpits if a chick is actually French, but if she's refusing to shave to make some sort of point about how she's liberated then she can go fuck herself. Her choice.

All this raving about men's preferences oppressing women really comes down to the fact that she is resentful that "one woman is better than another" if men have the freedom to choice their preference in partner. It doesn't matter if feminism makes men into second class citizens where the approval of women is held up as a stellar achievement or that any man is worthless for not reaching this. If men still have the small amount of power to choose one woman over another - and they will as long as women have the power to choose, because some men will be more desireable than others - there is nothing that can be done. I mean does she really think she can remove men's power to choose completely? Does she think a female will just be able to choose whatever man she wants and get him? What will other females say about her selecting the best man for herself?

Feminists fail to understand why men might have a problem with feminism considering this is a fairly noticeable part of it.

Sex

This chapter is about a couple of things, the first that distilling sex down to procedure ruins it for women which I'd have to say is correct but won't elaborate on because this is not a sex therapy blog. It then talks about women's genitalia not really being accepted as anything but dirty in today's society, I mean men's blimmen genitalia are considered equally dirty, so there's no case for oppression there. I also don't want to hear any complaints about hard core pornography if feminists are going to be advocating acceptance of female genitalia either because I remember the first time I read this sort of thing in a Nancy Friday book (before I decided feminism was a pile of steaming bullshit), I did a bit of soul searching, realised I thought hardcore pornography including closeups of said women's genitalia turned my stomach a bit so deliberately went out to desensitize myself to it because I concluded it would make me more accepting of women's sexuality.

She also concludes that women are too passive and unskilled when it comes to sex:


Love-making has become another male skill, of which women are the judges. The skills that the Wife of Bath used to make her husbands swink, the athletic sphincters of the Tahitian girls who can keep their men inside them all night, are alike unknown to us.

I'm sure there aren't a hell of a lot of men who would have a problem with something being done about this, but I can already hear the complaints of modern feminists of women being reduced to sexual slaves if they were asked to perform in this manner.

The Wicked Womb

This chapter opens with complaints that not enough attention is paid towards the vagina in the medical profession. In the course of this she admits:

I went to the V.D. clinic in despair because my own doctor would not examine my vagina or use pathology to discover the nature of an irritation, which turned out to be exactly what I thought it was.
What? V.D.? Seriously, she's been going on about how oppressive it is that promscuity is discouraged and here we have a perfect example of why promiscuity may have been discouraged in her case. Venereal Disease is a good reason to not engage in irresponsible sex. Also note that this bloody empowered woman didn't have the good sense to use a condom. Honestly, being promiscuous is not that bad as long as it is done responsibly, but if a woman can't be responsible about these matters and wear a condom, then the best advice to her IS to abstain from premarital sex completely or by the time she's thirty her vagina really is a disgusting petrie dish of chlamydia, gonnorhoea and siphillis or whatever it was that Greer contracted.

She then rants about how having a period is considered dirty and not worshipped. Does she really think that if sperm mixed with blood got splattered all over the sheets someone would say thank you? Anyway she also rants that women PMSing is looked upon as a cause of negative behaviour when instead it should be honoured. It's pretty hard to honour something which causes anger and irritability and provides a justification for said anger and irritability meaning men just have to put up with it. It's not like we're going to be giving women any slack since the spread of terms such as 'testosterone poisoning', first coined in 1975 in Ms Magazine and further promoted in the 1980s in the feminist dictionary, not to mention myths like the Criminal XYY Karyotype for that matter.

Anyway in the course of encouraging women to honour their vaginas, wombs, periods etc. she delivers this corker:

If you think you are emancipated, you might consider the idea of tasting your menstrual blood - If it makes you sick, you've a long way to go baby.


Ahem. And with that we end the Section 'Body' and will continue with our examination at a later date.