Will Wendy Squires Take The Red Pill?

By Jim Muldoon: In an article, “Teenage hook-up sex leaves feminism behind,” Wendy Squires struggles with her conscience as she tries to seriously assess how teenage girls view sexual relations. The problem, it seems, is that the actual outcomes of Feminism might not be the Utopia that the Sisterhood promised.

It is true I find this issue a conundrum, one that tests my own moral boundaries and ethics. As a feminist, I agree I should be supporting young women to live their lives the way they wish; reinforcing the idea that it is their bodies and their choices.

Yes, her body, her choice. But the difficulty here, as always, is that it ends up as her problem. And that is where Feminists get in a bind. If women are calling the shots and it all goes wrong, how can they blame men?
This doesn’t stop Squires from trying:

But, perhaps because I have also have been talking to a lot of young men lately who are either participating in or witnessing hook-up culture, I must confess I am left in despair.

The problem seems to be that these young men are not adhering to their Patriarchal assigned gender roles of providers and protectors.

From what I’m hearing, young men are happy to participate in casual sex and claim they are still friends with lots of girls they have ‘‘been’’ with. However, ask if they would consider any of them as girlfriend material and a vast majority respond with a vehement ‘‘no way’’.

Implied here is that “his body, his choice” is not an acceptable attitude. But still, we have the irony of a Feminist telling us to be concerned that these young women won’t get “their man.” Sounding perhaps like her grandmother, Squires tries to give the damsels a word to the wise.

‘‘But, don’t you worry that this is all too much, too soon? That you’ll wind up jaded or regret your choices?’’

Out of the mouths of babes (in both senses of the word, perhaps) comes an reproach for Squires.

‘‘And you call yourself a feminist!’’ one young friend admonished. ‘‘Now girls are acting like men always have, there’s supposed to be a shame around it. How hypocritical!’’

The claim that the girls are “acting like men always have,” is not accurate, but the young woman certainly has a point regarding Feminist hypocrisy.
I am reminded of the Slut Walks and other Feminist propaganda regarding a young woman’s “right” to dress up as provocatively as they like without censure. Dressing like a slut (which apparently involves fishnet stockings and showing your bra), and talking like a slut, is alright by Feminists. But hang on, missy, you can’t be a real slut.
It seems that for Squires this surface view of the issue is as far as she can go. And as long as she stays there, this conundrum will continue to confound her. The answer lies hidden in plain view as she tries again to re-state the problem:

“While I think it is commendable that young women feel in charge of their bodies and lives, I do wonder whether it comes at the cost of what is at our feminine core, whether through nature or nurture, and that is a desire to feel secure and respected in our romantic relationships.”

A central tenet of Feminism is that gender is a social construct. The theory is that, when born, each child, whilst having a sex, does not have a gender. The child’s gender is developed as it interacts with society. In most cases, those with penises are taught to be masculine, and so become men and, apparently, privileged. Similarly, those with vaginas are dressed in pink, given dolls to play with, and turn out to be girls, then women, and oppressed.
In other words, to be a Feminist, there is no “feminine core” because there is no dispute about “nature or nurture.” For them, it is all nurture. Each child may have inherent traits that are human, but feminine and masculine traits come straight from The Patriarchy.
It is difficult to overstate the importance of this. Let me explain it by way of an analogy: If a person states that they don’t believe that Jesus was the son of God, they could also claim to be a Jew, a Muslim or an atheist. But, they cannot honestly claim to be a Christian.
However, and this is the important bit, Feminism is the only ideology where an individual can declare themselves a Feminist whilst, at the same time, renouncing the ideology’s central tenets, as Squires does.
That is the real hypocrisy, and that is real Feminism.
So Squires does this pseudo-intellectual, phoney angst-ridden hand-wringing about these girls and their potential futures. Yet, the cause of this entire dilemma is her own beloved Feminism. Instead of the puppy love she herself fumbled through as a teenager, these girls are getting straight onto the hard stuff and the result is not pretty. And worse, the Social Engineering of Feminism is not producing the strong independent women they desire.

Of all the young girls I’ve spoken to recently, I’d say 90 per cent told me they want to get married and have kids one day.

Indeed, Feminism has ensured that, as long as the children and divorces are timely, marriage can still be a career for the modern women. But, as Squires notes, there’s a fly in the ointment.

All [the girls] implied they are aware that men are less likely to commit than in generations past…

For these particular girls, it seems the problem is even more acute:

‘‘I would never go out with a girl who’s been with my mates,’’ one 17-year-old told me. His friend, 19, agrees. ‘‘No guys go out with girls who screw around.’’

These young men, at least, are making some wise choices. Hooking up with these girls is like diving in the public swimming pool even when the sign outside says they’ve ran out of chlorine.
But, of course, it’s not only diseases that they might pick up. Thanks to Feminist inspired laws, they might pick up the tab for someone else’s kid. Or, it might be their own kid that they’re paying for, but that doesn’t mean they’ll get to know them.
If only the Feminist mayhem stopped there. These young men would also run the risk of a “hook up” being later described as rape in front of a judge, especially if she had any alcohol that evening.
That’s a lotta risk for a little nookie, and no incentive for “commitment.” For Squires, however, being a Feminist, there is little interest in the men’s problems. Presumably they should simply man up, bring their own chlorine and anti-biotics, and make honest women out of them regardless of the personal cost.
Squires does, obliquely, touch on one other aspect of this topic that is normally front and centre of most newspaper rants on the subject:

One just-turned-17-year-old, who will remain anonymous so her mother doesn’t kill her and then me, confessed that she has had sex with seven guys ‘‘so far’’

Squires’ view of the parents is that they don’t need to know the risks their daughter is taking. Of course, should it hit the fan, in the form of pregnancy or AIDS, Squires will probably join the rest of the mainstream media bemoaning how parents today let their children go off the rails.
However, parental authority has been undermined in so many ways by the Feminist agenda. Mostly, this comes from the Family Law Act and the Children, Youth and Families Act. Essentially, parents have no rights, and therefore no real means to assert their authority.
By this, I’m not talking about trivia like who decides what’s for breakfast. I’m talking about the point when the child wants to move into the adult world of sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll, but is in no way ready for the consequences. It is at this point that parents find out that the schools, social workers, police, lawyers , magistrates and other authorities all agree with Squires: that the child’s actions are none of the parent’s business, except when it comes to paying the fines and fees.
This in turn allows children to dictate terms to their parents, rather than the other way around. And if the parents don’t like the terms, the child can claim “abuse” and move into state care, where they can behave however they like. The more children who do this, the more other children will find out that they can push their parents even closer to the edge.
Of course, the State likes this arrangement. The more children in care, the bigger the Department of Human Services needs to be.
None of this, of course, get Squires out of her conundrum. All of this, ultimately, is detrimental to the young women themselves. In clumsily using sex to get boys to like them, they can end up doing themselves a lot more harm than good.
So the question, in the end, for Squires is: will she take the red pill and get some idea of how deep the rabbit hole goes? Or will she just keep running around in circles with her angst, looking for a man to blame?

Links

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/teenage-hookup-sex-leaves-feminism-behind-20140627-zsolw.html

About Jim Muldoon

Jim Muldoon is an Australian men's human rights activist and Australian Editor for AVfM. He is an advocate for the equal rights and responsibilities for men and women.

Source