Design For Thought

After a long time, I think that it was the article I read which awoke this need to write once more on cultural references and semantic reactions that tell the tale of a deeper, subconscious, unconscious interpretation and expression of, in this case, sexism and misogynism. Before I start the amateurish analysis of Scott Adams’ text, I have to say that I do and do not consider myself a feminist. Once again, the meaning of words and their interpretation with the weight and burden they carry for each of us needs to be clarified, needs to be determined. I am a feminist in the sense that I believe I am not inferior or superior to any man just because they are a man and I am a woman; I am equal, I am human just as a man is. I am a feminist in the sense that I refuse to indulge and mindlessly accept the beauty “ordonnances” given to women about their bodily hair, the way their genitals are supposed to smell and how they should act in the presence of a man regarding their intellectual capacities. Men do not define and filter everything in this world. On the other hand, I am not a feminist because I strongly believe that the minute a woman utters the words “women rights” women stop existing in the realm of human beings, therefore not having to speak about “human rights” anymore. I am also not a feminist in the sense of the hysteric term of the word (it is a cliche to say that feminists are hysterical, but I have experienced it first hand, they can be). There has been male oppression, but there is much that has been done, albeit there still is so much more to be done. Continue reading →