a look on modern feminism

in the modern age as women have been gaining more political, social, educational freedoms across the world, we are seeing a total societal upheaval of the ROLES of man vs woman that has not been explored quite so deeply ever. since the dawn of time the idea of the difference between a man and a woman was unquestionable and easy to pick apart.

 the basic concept of the nuclear family and opposing roles of man and woman was the perfect conceptualized plan for keeping both sexes complacently under the thumb of a ruling class. assigning roles to a demographic of people is a method of labeling, boxing, and ultimately control. it sets up our two most fundamental concepts, concepts we are taught as very very little children: women are always necessarily the victim of circumstance. woman is the tool by which things happen, and she, like water, bends and reacts to those circumstances. men, by consequence, must always necessarily be in control. he sets up the circumstance for which everything happens, man is the driving force that causes woman to react, man is unstoppable. 

you might think that because of the natural assumption that woman is weak for her reactions, that she will always necessarily be the emotional and irrational side, that this places woman in a worse place for systematic violence and oppression than man by default. but that’s where you are mistaken. in fact, i’d argue that even though the oppression of man and woman are not by METHOD in any way similar, they are quantitatively the same. man experiences just as much and just as deeply the violence and pain that comes with this system, but because of the way we have come to view man and woman as diametrically opposed, we view man in a sort of faux-lordship position over woman, mistaking the societal pressure for man to be the one to choose, for man to always SEEM in control, as an actual symbol of power. id argue that neither man nor woman have any inherent power over the other, and in fact it is the ruling class enforcing these beliefs that is the one with the actual power over this situation, and in turn becomes the ultimate oppressor.

hegel talks about the lord-bondsman dialectic in which two self-consciousnesses try to assert their absolute-ness over each other (attempting to gain power over the other, to prove that one over the other is the ultimate truth or better way) in a symbolic life-or-death struggle that leads to the ultimate realization that absolute truth cannot be attained without actualization from the opposing force, or the antithesis. without sublation, (or an assimilation/destruction of both man and woman into one cohesive concept,) synthesis can never be achieved and can only lead to a loop of life-and-death struggles in which the percieved opposites (in this case, masculine vs feminine, or rational vs emotional) continuously attempt to actualize themselves and fail. 

without an ultimate conclusion that both men and women are capable and hold the capacity for the same amount of logical and emotional rationalization, the dialectic continues and devolves into subcategories of the same misogyny.

even though the experienced oppression is methodically different, it DOES affect both sides just as deeply. where woman is the victim, weak, prey, man is the monster, the hunter, the forever evil. this puts man in both the position to feel as if he has power and feel as if he is subject to constantly abusing that power just for existing. this puts woman in the position to feel that she has no power and must obtain it by defeating the evil and proving herself. neither of these roles have or can obtain any actual power or truth by fighting, but are constantly squabbling for this faux sense of lordship.

to apply the hegelian dialectic to this issue of gender violence, i’m going to use this new trend of "TERFS" as an example. as a reaction to her inherently misogynyst and misandrist worldview, the TERF creates an ideology that puts woman in a roundabout manner back where she doesnt want to be.

 the woman is afraid of gender violence (thesis) so she creates an enemy of her perceived opposite, the masculine, (antithesis) to then create a fake synthesis, or an ideology. instead of sublating with the perceived opposite, the TERF attempts to assert her power in the lords-bondsman dialectic and attain the faux lordship position that she will systematically be unable to attain. so the loop starts again.

the basis of feminism is theoretically a sublation of the masculine and feminine. feminism is an ideology that attempts to attain absolute truth via the assimilation or destruction of these two previously considered opposite ideas.

 in practice, both as a reaction to the ineffectiveness of the ruling class to fix this issue AND as a reaction of these deeply ingrained world views, a lot of young women and men have been finding themselves completely misunderstanding and detached from the actual concept and instead take radical stances which reinforce the patriarchy rather than fix the heart of the issue.