The Ironies Of Female Empowerment

I am often stricken by how brazen some feminist thinkers and sympathizers can be in biting the hand that feeds them and throwing stones from glass houses. Many are bold enough to consider the end of men, or question the necessity of the male gender in its entirety, suggesting that the pace of female empowerment has rendered the male of the species obsolete or, at a bare minimum, pushed him into a position of objectively lower value than his female peer.

These women make such claims with little thought to the source of their empowerment and/or the irony behind the existence of the “empowered,” upwardly mobile woman of the “Sex and the City” mold that so many feminists hold in the highest esteem today.

Undermining anti-male feminist rhetoric are the following seven vital concerns, the analysis of which will reveal the true irony behind modern feminist “empowerment” (and, it could be said, much of the modern feminist message altogether). To the growing number of feminists (and their many male and female sympathizers who prefer not to use that label) who question the worth of the male gender in the wake of their supposed progress, I pose the following concerns:

1. Who built the advanced Western society you live in?

And when I refer to the act of “building”, I mean to describe the crafting of the laws and the actual physical establishment of a working, governable polity with all of the freedoms and liberties you now take for granted.

Who is it that, having built this society, has stood and still stands between you and that violent developing world you see on TV where the women aren’t allowed to drive, real rape culture is the norm and children still die at rapid rates?

2. Who keeps the society you live in going?

Who puts up and maintains the buildings you walk in and out of, the big suburban homes you fantasize about, the roads you (incompetently) drive on? Who keeps the power on and the (clean) water flowing?

Who is responsible for getting all of that fresh seafood to the table in that fancy urban restaurant you consider yourself so special for being able to frequent every week, or for farming the contents of your latest vegan diets?

And those clothes you wear (and spend exorbitant amounts of money on), who is responsible for getting them to you? I mean, we might as well go all out: who is largely responsible for developing and expanding the textile industry in the first place?

3. Who crafted the laws that allow you to enjoy the liberties that are denied to the vast majority of women on Earth?

Who wrote, sponsored, and actually made legal the likes of Title IX and other laws designed to mandate equality between the sexes and bring you up to the level you enjoy today?

4. Who enforces these laws, and ensures that the liberties and freedoms you take for granted aren’t ripped from you by physical force?

5. Who protects you and your children?

Aside from law enforcement, who does most of the heavy lifting when it comes to saving the free world or launching some sort of operation in a distant, undesirable part of the planet all for the sake of protecting the economic interests of your country so you can enjoy the cheap consumer products and reality TV you so desperately need?

Even more importantly, to which gender do those whose lives are most often sacrificed in the name of your safety (and “empowerment”) generally belong?

6. Who actually makes everything?

Who engineers, designs and builds the Iphones, laptops, blackberries and other devices you can’t live without? Who develops the Facebook, Instagram, Myspace and Twitter that you spend all day gossiping, attention-whoring, and otherwise bullshitting on? Who creates the Youtube for you to show off your twerk videos and share your latest views on how useless and/or silly you think men are?

Who develops the film technology (cameras, 3D, etc) you use to get on TV (also a male invention) or the big screen (once again, male invention) and go on and on about how independent you are?

7. Who made “bad” men so valuable?

Feminists often complain about the existence of aggressive, risk-taking, and sometimes violent men being an issue that society must deal with. This concern is part of what keeps their movements active and relevant, as it provides a viable “threat” for them to shout about.

Yet in their rush to neuter the male gender in the name of public safety, they fail to recognize the source of this threat, which is an internal one.

Who is it that men are trying to impress by acquiring more wealth at any cost, or subjugating the next guy/nation, making decisive and often difficult/controversial decisions, or taking the undue risk and being the often disagreeable go-getter? Who is it that rewards the men who are most successful in these endeavours by giving them the enhanced chance of siring progeny?

Feminism points the finger at men, but they do not drive these developments. Women, many of them self-proclaimed feminists, do this themselves via their own free-will.

Like children, those feminists who further anti-male arguments see a limited picture and attempt to draw a full conclusion. In this limited picture, they run shit: they’re more educated than men, they can reproduce without marrying a man, and they are even beginning to out-earn men.

Their problem? If you broaden the scope to see the full picture, you’ll realize that they only enjoy these privileges and advantages because of men. Every small, progressive step they take exists at the pleasure of men who craft these pro-feminist/equality laws and principles, enforce said laws/principles, and fight to ensure that nobody else infringes upon them and sends these women back to the sexist supposed “stone age” of gender relations (which still persists across most of the planet).

Every little privilege they get to enjoy as a result of this (dominance in higher education, increasing dominance in professional fields, increasingly higher incomes) is therefore actually provided at the pleasure of men, who also make sure that all the tools they take for granted (electricity, the internet, roadways, clubs, etc) are there and ready for use.

If men disappear or are otherwise marginalized as a whole, then so will go the progress of the “empowered” woman whose existence and persistence is largely a product of male effort. The empowerment that provides the fuel for the anti-male condescension of certain feminists is in itself a product of men, and will not continue to exist without their continued work and investment.

Like a child, the anti-male feminist sees the end result of this male effort and ignores all that came before it, assuming that the end product she enjoys is all there is. Her mind is too limited to see what goes into providing all of that, and so she instead attacks those responsible for providing it.

Unfortunately, as is often the case with children, she will probably only learn the hard way.

Read Next: Decreasing Marriage Rate Is Hurting Feminism