International Women’s Day: Taking Stock

I learned this year that International Women’s Day was March 8th thanks in large part to a number of gals on my social media platforms as well as virtue signaling men (i.e., emasculated losers) who are more than willing to capitalize on the day. Help me, Dear Reader, to understand what is being celebrated and why. I understand the reason Democrats have for employing identity politics—it is so that they can stay in office and pass the legislation they want which more minorities and women (particularly unmarried women) on average support. I understand why Soros and others funded the Day Without a Woman marches. What I do not understand is what all the excitement is about in celebrating women.

Women, of course, are fine. I happen to be one! We can have babies. But men are also vital in producing and raising children. If women are to be valued for making babies so too are men. More generally, if women are to be celebrated, why not men, humans, or living organisms more generally? (Incidentally, there is an International Men’s Day though I have never seen it widely advertised or celebrated.)

So, why all the fuss? It seems to me that some of the feminists who support the day have low self-esteem and enjoy the additional attention. And the men supporters want to be esteem boosters for obvious reasons. There is the “everyone gets a trophy” mentality pervasive on the left; they end up celebrating things which are not actual accomplishments and for which no one has done anything to deserve. But wouldn’t it be better to celebrate certain virtues or accomplishments that some women (and men) have attained rather than celebrating women in general?

There is also a sense in some feminist quarters that women are naturally virtuous and men naturally vicious. Women have special powers giving rise to feminist ethics, feminist epistemology, feminist science, feminist magic and witchcraft, etc. Now, there is some empirical support for the claim that women are not naturally as vicious. Men, especially young men, are far more likely to commit crimes than women. But I suspect there’s not much beyond that, and that women tend to have their own vices in equal proportion (equality, after all, demands it!).

However, this raises an interesting question about why women, like blacks, are simultaneously celebrated for “diversity” reasons but also treated as victims (incidentally, why isn’t there a New Jim Crow mass incarceration book about men in general?), when in fact women in the West today are one of the most privileged groups in history. Men are:

Why aren’t feminist egalitarians concerned with such issues, and instead make up specious arguments about an unjust gender wage gap? Perhaps because they are not really egalitarians in the first place? That would help explain why International Women’s Day receives far more attention than International Men’s Day.

Touchstone

Former feminist turned conservative. PhD. Proud helpmeet. Teaches at a liberal arts school somewhere in the Midwest. Enjoys hunting and eating animals. Favorite musician: Hank Williams Jr.

View All Posts

7 Comments

  1. Now, there is some empirical support for the claim that women are not naturally as vicious.

    Does the evidence change if you factor in all the unborn babies women murder?

    • Statistically speaking, men are slightly more likely to support abortion as legal under “any” or “certain circumstances” than women are, and women more likely to support reductions in limits.

      For example, US polling figures (Gallup) from 1975 up to 2009.

      1975-1979; Men (75%), Women (76%)
      1980-1989: Men (79%), Women (76%)
      1990-1994: Men (83%), Women (82%)
      1995-1999: Men (83%), Women (82%)
      2000-2004: Men (82%), Women (79%)
      2005-2009: Men (81%), Women (78%)

      http://www.gallup.com/poll/127559/education-trumps-gender-predicting-support-abortion.aspx

      Similar results are found elsewhere. E.g., based on multiple polls,

      “Polling on abortion, as highlighted by UKPollingReport back in 2012, is pretty clear when it comes to the attitudes of men and women: “Polls consistently show … that women are more likely than men to support a reduction on the abortion limit. In the 2011 YouGov poll 28% of men supported a reduction, 46% of women did. In the 2012 YouGov poll 24% of men supported a reduction, 49% of women did. In the Angus Reid poll 35% of men supported a reduction in the limit, 59% of women did. In the ICM poll 45% of men supported a reduction to 20 weeks, 59% of women did.” ”

      http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/6253

      https://www.theguardian.com/science/the-lay-scientist/2014/apr/30/why-are-women-more-opposed-to-abortion

    • Statistically speaking, men are slightly more likely to support abortion as legal under “any” or “certain circumstances” than women are, and women more likely to support reductions in limits.

      That may be, but only women can actually get an abortion.

    • Exactly, Urban. When women do it, it isn’t illegal, that’s the difference.

      I am aware of current law. I’m not sure what your point is.

  2. A man might persuade a woman to have an abortion, though the woman doesn’t want to, as she may disapprove of abortion; and it might have a serious effect on her, with her thinking she has “murdered her child”.
    These things do happen — they have happened in the philosophy world.

  3. Parse keep passing these statistics around. Feminism is probably the biggest opponent of the family in our culture. Its long overdue for some fact checking.

Leave a Reply (Be sure to read our comment disclaimer)