熱血時報 | Feminism: The Perennial Latecomer

Feminism: The Perennial Latecomer



Feminism: The Perennial Latecomer




In 1994, former Legislative Councillor Christine Loh fought for the New Territories' indigenous women’s right to inherit land. It was a right move at the right time, as the indigenous blokes in New Territories had pretty much sold most of their land by then, leaving little land to pass onto the sons, let alone the daughters. Feminist movements often come late and lopsided; they come fighting for the right to inherit land after farmers had already lost their land, and have little regard for men’s rights or the rights of the collective after they finish fighting for women’s rights. Feminism is anti-tradition as well, which pushes itself right into the trap of the neoliberalism, setting women up for deeper sexual exploitations.

According to a report by the UK’s Daily Mail on January 30, 2018, a landlord had his female tenants provide sex in exchange for rent. This seems to have become the norm in the UK, as an estimated 250,000 women are believed to be doing the same thing. Post-war feminism has failed miserably in the 21st century, losing to the union between neoliberalism and leftards. After farmers lost their land and were forced to labour away in urban areas, they could not even own their own home. High land price policies defeated the equal pay movement for both sexes, pushing women into abject poverty despite being employed. Contemporary forms of sexual exploitation are even more brutal than those in the “old world”. At least in the “old world” there existed morals and ethics that restricted such despicable acts from landlords. Today, some landlords dare put such heinous requests right into rental ads, while feminists declare it as a form of “sexual autonomy” and are intolerant of any criticism. At the same time, Formula One organisers announced that it would discontinue having grid girls at the races due to feminist protests. Many women ended up losing the opportunity to achieve fame and make money in a rather healthy and dignified manner. It looks as if this so-called “sexual autonomy” could only occur inside a dark room.

When men lose their land, it becomes pointless for women to fight for equality in employment, education and political rights, as the most powerful guarantee to equality – permanent ownership of family land – has been taken away. Since feminism is largely a branch of socialism, it is about doing away with traditions, without realizing that those traditions serve as a powerful foundation against the exploitation and oppression from capitalism. Never could feminists imagine pushing for the revival of agrarian society, permanent ownership of private land that can be passed from generation to generation, as well as gender equality in the clergy – such as getting the Pope and his cardinals to grant equal rights to women.


Cherry-Picking after Missing the Boat: The Collusion Between Feminists and Neoliberalism


While you take to the streets holding up your equal rights protest placards, the capitalists and the government are looking at you high up in their towers. Never forget that your opponent is the deep state. You are just playing with fire if you rush into the game of “equal rights movement”. Did you ever notice that after the push for feminism, women in the workforce are made to wear makeup and change their clothes much more frequently, and their wardrobe and dressing tables have started to look more and more “feminine”? Why is that? The push for equal rights always centres around employment and public authority. The right to work, equal pay, the right to vote, the right to education, and the right to fair portrayal in mass media are all rights bestowed to the citizenry by the government, or rights granted to the working class by capitalists. What makes you think that modern governments and capitalists would give these things away for free just like that?

What about women’s biological equality? What about having the right not to endure the pain and suffering that come with menstruating and giving birth? What about having men experience pregnancy and breastfeeding as part of gender equality? What about the right for women and their children to not take up the husband’s surname? Love, marriage, family and biological differences between the genders often bring about a sense of security to women, and are the “holy ground" reserved for women during their push for equality. Yet when feminists stopped fighting for biological equality and family equality, these areas were then hijacked by LGBT activists. They, in place of women, are now fighting for these things and have usurped women’s holy ground. Same-sex marriages “equalized” the right of women to be called a “wife”, as everyone is now called a “spouse” or a “partner” rather than “husband and wife”. The titles of “father” and “mother” are next. Feminists are a bunch of cherry-picking sore losers after missing the boat. They were so busy colluding with neoliberalism and playing with identity politics since the 90’s, that they end up losing everything after making a big fuss. What is worse, they end up identifying with their oppressors, such as seeing men expressing sympathy for prostitutes or women being sexually exploited as a form of “conceited patriarchy”. Women who are suffering are left high and dry.


Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance Tamed Hong Kongers, and Men Stop Being “Men of Valour”


The Bill of Rights Ordinance that was passed during Chris Patten’s governorship in 1995 also had a part in making Hong Kongers fall into the trap of an ultra-pacifist struggle. The Bill of Rights Ordinance and the Anti-Discrimination Ordinance, intended to protect Hong Kongers, ended up taming Hong Kongers instead. This is especially true for Hong Kong men. As men gave up on their traditional male role as “men of valour”, they turned themselves into women as “everyone is equally brave (or not)”. As a result, when the Hong Kong Police set their claws upon female protesters, pushing them to the ground all bloody and bruised, while at the same time charging female protesters with the crime of “assaulting the police with their breasts”, all the men could do was to stand there dumbfounded, crying over “that wasn’t was not how things used to be……”

It is fine to read a bit on the original works of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, but you don’t need to follow the socialists’ footsteps when pushing for equal rights for women. You also need to do your own due diligence and uphold your moral obligation. Your rights might have been trod on, but that does not give you the right to seek vengeance or expect society at large to tolerate your misconduct and inappropriate behaviours after you achieve “equal rights”. It is time for us to look back as we approach the dead end of the feminist movement, and go back to the starting point of our political struggles. What we need, first and foremost, is rationality and morals; liberation and equality will come after.


(Editor’s Note: This article was published in the 55th printed edition of Passion Times. Please support us by subscribing to our printed newspaper: http://www.passiontimes.hk/4.0/regform.php)

作者
讀者回應