“I am Woman, I am Strong”.
Wiser Women Don’t Label Themselves as Feminists
There is a lot of conflict out there around the globe on the subject of ‘Feminism’- for and against. It is not just a man versus woman thing. Many women reject the feminist mentality.
Good men and women do all support equal rights for both men and women and Gays and Lesbians and all races. But we don’t need to label ourselves in self-serving bias promotion with a gender name.
Men & Women Teamwork
Not Fighting Each Other but Working United
We don’t need to be ‘Politically Correct’ by refusing to use words like, ‘He, She, Him, Her’ and ‘Mankind, and Humankind’. All of these words are appropriate. Any person who bullies a person for their choice of valid words are not worth much between the ears. Demanding that people only use certain gender deviation names like Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in bed with anti-freedom apartheid Islam, reprimanded a Canadian woman for not using the word ‘Peoplekind’. Trudeau rejects use of words like ‘Mankind and Humankind’ and sees nothing wrong with the provable fact that ‘Islamic Doctrine’ rejects ‘Freedom of Religion’ and ‘Freedom of Speech’ and ‘Freedom of Equal Rights’.
Women in Islamic Countries are denied ‘Equal Rights’.
Gays are denied equal rights in Islamic Nations like Saudi Arabia the heart of Islam and Iran; Gays are publicly hanged. In Indonesia the falsely claimed land of ‘Moderate Islam’ Sharia Law cruelly flogs/canes Gays. Trudeau obviously thinks this is okay, because he never condemns such evil punishment behaviour. Western Government Politicians are weakly afraid to criticise and reprimand governments that reject equality of rights, like that which Islamic Nations constantly enforce.
“The original definition of ‘Feminist’ was the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities.”
“Now the word ‘Feminist’ can mean anti-freedom Socialist or Reformist fighting for good or bad ideas, or a radical separatist more focused on enforcement of ‘Totalitarian’ bully ideas.”
Why would a woman call herself a feminist in the early 21st Century when the meaning of the word has drifted away from meaning a believer in equality rights and is more focused on supporting radical bully ideas?
A large percentage of women correctly believe in ‘Equality of Rights’, in equal pay for the same skills and in equal opportunities, subject to the skills level required to deliver professional performance in whatever job function the person chooses for a career. Regardless of what work choice, men and women choose for a financial living, they are still professionals in their job skills when they are focused on delivery of the right results.
Many women who believe in ‘Equal Rights’ wisely refuse to call themselves ‘Feminists’ because they are not radicals, separatists, or anti-freedom Socialists. They are simply good women who believe in equal rights. And they are focused on delivering results to the best of their ability.
One of the conflicts floating through Australian Federal Parliament in 2018 is the silly idea that sex quotas should be set, so that representatives in Parliament must by law be set at 50:50, in other words, fifty percent women and fifty percent men.
This proves once again how the human mind is wandering off path in lack of logic and worse that these degree qualified people that are supposed to be smarter are coming out of our anti-freedom of speech socialist inclined thinking Universities.
The degree qualified educated in this early 21st Century are too often becoming illogical wanderers, void of real truthful courage. ‘Anti-Freedom Socialist Politically Correct’ thinking is wrecking society and imposing volumes of nonsensical backward inferior thinking conflict upon the general population.
We should be working towards reducing conflict, not increasing it.
We don’t need Political Government and Opposition to become a battle of the sexes conflict. How is that going to achieve the best results? If a woman can deliver better results than a man in job performance, then she should get the job. If a man can deliver better results than a woman in job performance, then he should get the job.
We don’t need equal numbers of each sex, what we need is a team of professional people that can all deliver high performance results. And this is true in any work environment. If more men or more women at a moment of time hold the key performance seats, it must be because they have proven themselves to have the best skills. This pattern of which sex holds the majority may change from generation to generation. Fixed dogma quotas must never be set as to how many men or how many women can hold a working seat. It is not about sex, it is about the individual’s ability, man or woman, to deliver results. We now have male nurses that are equally as good as female nurses. And we now have female doctors that are equally as good as male doctors. There are times in work force positions when men are better on the job than available women and at times women are better than available men on the job. It’s all about opportunities and skills level ability, it is not about sex in an equal opportunity’s society.
Politicians really need to lift their head out of the sand and stop arguing about setting 50:50 quotas to enforce a balance of different sexes in Parliament. Could you imagine the crazy impact on society if we started setting employment quotas by belief system or by race the amount of drama and conflict this would cause? Now let’s see… 50% Asian, 50% Black, 50% White, 50%, Muslim, 50% Christian, 50% Jew, 50% Hindu, 50% Buddhist, 50% Atheist, etc. and each category divided into 50% heterosexual men and 50% heterosexual women and 50% Gay and 50% Lesbians. Obviously if we started playing the percentages game of quotas, the percentages of each group would shrink. Politicians wake up! Get Real!
Equality as a human right is essential and equality in opportunities is essential. The only belief system that will disagree with the right of sexes and belief systems to equality and freedom of speech and freedom of choice is 7th Century fixed dogma Islam, which is not compatible with freedom values, even though idiot Trudeau claims Islam is compatible with the West.
Yes, I know we do have not very bright women out there like Theresa May and Angela Merkel and Julia Gillard and Hillary Clinton, but then we have many men out there that are equally as stupid in logic as these women, and Justin Trudeau outperforms all these women and all men in politics as the cleverest in the delicate art of stupidity. The good news is that Margret Thatcher and Winston Churchill are two of the best leaders in the 20th Century. I guess that is a 50:50 result, but not achieved by quota, simply delivered by high performance common-sense skills.
Allan Ivarsson says…
September 8, 2018 at 9:22 pm
There are women out there that call themselves ‘Feminists’ and are not true ‘Feminists’.
The word ‘Feminist’ too often becomes a ‘Generalization Label’ branding every independent woman, putting them all into the same belief system bucket.
I distrust ‘Generalization Labels’ and choose to focus on individual belief system with logic and lack of logic.
I wouldn’t call Germaine Greer a feminist, I would call her a complete illogical idiot. Some independent women are very much in harmony with men.
When I was young I called some men ‘Chauvinist’ and some women ‘Feminist’, now I choose instead to challenge their wrong thinking ideas and focus on smashing the credibility of bad unjust anti-freedom ideas and the person that sells trash false knowledge beliefs.
‘Jihad Muslims’ all have a common fixed dogma mentality… brain-wrecked by an insane totalitarian Qur’an Belief System.
But ‘Feminists’ don’t all share the same logic and lack of logic. I believe it is because the word ‘Feminist’ has over decades changed in shades of interpretation and wandered off course from its original suffragette fight for equal rights.
I choose to throw the word ‘Feminist’ into the garbage bin and focus on dealing with right and wrong ideas.
I respect ‘Equality of Rights’. I don’t respect tyrannical bullies of any type.
I think independent women are not wise to describe themselves as ‘Feminists’. There are now too many shades of perception in conflict with each other, for the word ‘Feminist’ to contain an accurate meaning.
The original definition of ‘Feminist’ was the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities.
Now the word ‘Feminist’ can mean anti-freedom Socialist or Reformist fighting for good or bad ideas, or a radical separatist more focused on enforcement of ‘Totalitarian’ bully ideas.
The word ‘Feminist’ is now a wild card with no fixed sense of direction, it is a wanderer that has no common value within itself.
If we want to free the world and get rid of all forms of ‘Totalitarianism’ we must challenge ideas.
If a person is selling wrong ideas, their credibility will fall, and they will automatically go down with their wrong belief system thinking.
September 8, 2018 at 10:21 pm
I loathe the concept of “feminist” and always have.
My wife Jan was a very highly skilled Corporation Financial Accountant in both Australian and New Zealand Taxation System. Over the years she has worked in several companies. And travelled overseas to New Zealand, Spain and USA to Corporation Seminars. She is also skilled in computers and in retirement highly skilled in making Quilts and Clothes.
My wife believes in equal rights and opportunities for women, but she wisely refuses to call herself a ‘Feminist’. Like BNI she loathes the concept of ‘Feminism’.
I have an equal contempt for male chauvinists, there is no place for bully dictators in a decent just society, be they men or women.
Allan Peter Ivarsson © 2018
Includes Music Video Links…
‘Blue Light Defiance’ Books… Published on Kindle & Paperback Amazon.com