The “feminist paradox” is the seemingly curious observation that most people are for gender equality but far fewer self-identify as feminists.
It turns out that those women who try to set the feminist agenda don’t think like relatively normal men and women. They don’t even look like us. For a brief and refreshing bit of science look at the first page that comes up when googling “2D:4D feminism.” The D’s here refer to digit lengths, the length of the first finger divided by the length of the ring finger. Typical male hands have longer 4D lengths, therefore the resulting ratio is lower. This indicates prenatal testosterone exposure. It’s a generalization, but in general this number (when low) correlates with masculization- both in body structure and in personality. Feminist activists tend to be masculized women. More guy-looking and more “assertive.” Hence uglier and angrier. That is, angrier if they can’t figure out how to harness their atypical emotional structure. (Opinion here: They might be great CEOs.)
Incidentally, it’s in the bones elsewhere as well. Similar differences occur in pelvic structure. Fingers are easier and don’t involve x-ray exposure.
Unfortunately some feminist activists have harnessed their somewhat contradictory existence to lever themselves into positions of power. They combine their male power-seeking tendencies with their female abilities to mount effective emotional arguments. (Opinion here: Also the female capacity to evade responsibility by claiming victimization.)
The result of all this is bullying. These masculinized women manage to combine the worst of middle school mean girls with worst of adolescent male bullies.
With these as our examples -- the rest of us won’t call ourselves feminists.
Adam likes the company of small domestic animals and 82% of women. Enjoys long walks in the rain (in the Pacific Northwest, he'd better).
robot, fembot, womandroid, prostitute, robohooker, whorehouse. women's studies, domestic violence, procuring, pimping