You cant fool nature, said Richard Feynmann, physicist and magician.

Trying and failing to fool nature is responsible for the confusion surrounding feminism and the misery it sows. I cant sol e that huge problem, but I can help to clear up one small matter. !nce you understand this concept, its easy to understand what pre iously was mystifying. Feminism is not women"s rights. That may ha e been true before suffrage, but it has not bee true since the #$%&s, with the ad ent of second wa e feminism. Feminism is the modern re olutionary ideology which decrees that women e erywhere are an oppressed class, and ha e more in common with one another because of their femaleness than they do with their male blood 'in. Therefore their loyalties to other women are superseded by their loyalties to their blood 'in. Feminism has nothing to do with inclusion in any male(created political)economic system. *ot that+ ,omen"s rights is a natural progression of #$th century liberalism, which is a creation of industrial capitalism. This is not -ar.ist waffle, its fact/ you cant ha e womens suffrage without suffrage, and who otes in a feudal society+ To e.tend the rights of the aristocracy to property holding males was a gigantic re olution in consciousness, which we now ta'e it for granted. 0,hy we ta'e this for granted is complicated but 1uic'ly, it is based upon the fictitious notion, shopped by #2th century liberal philosophers, of natural rights, which too' the place of *od( gi en rights, and was based upon a wholly illusory understanding of the state of man in nature.3 Thin' of it. ,hat the hell gi es -r. 4 erage -an the right to thin' he is as good as 5ord 6o(and( 6o+ 7ecause he owns a little property+ The idea8 !nce that threshold was breached, the la ali'e flow of created rights was ine itable. In the 9nited 6tates, free blac' males formally won suffrage before white females. 7eyond the brilliant theatrics, female suffrage in the 4nglo(6a.on countries was ine itable. Two e.amples suffice. The franchise was e.tended first to women in 6outh 4ustralia in #2$:. In #$&; a franchise act enabled women to ote for candidates in the federal <arliament ( and to run for office. 7y #$## all 4ustralian states ga e women the franchise. In the 96, the western states crept timidly behind 4ustralia, or boldly forged a path for 4merican women, depending on your iewpoint. It is interesting that frontier societies incorporated womens rights into their political(genetic code with little fuss. 4lso interesting is that the #$th century saw the forerunner of todays practical feminist and gender feminist radicals, with a =ew >ngland(based suffrage mo ement 0which accomplished little practically3, while the women of the ,est went ahead and secured their political rights, with the cooperation of men. If you thin' the definition of feminism I supply in the first paragraph is a self(ser ing creation of a cran'y polemicist, I respectfully as' you to read any of the boo's of the ?;nd wa e? radical feminism. =one of it so much as mentioned womens rights e.cept to scoff at them as sops. I understand that while radical feminists were re@ecting womens rights and economic empowerment, regiments of women entered the corporate wor' force. That does not dispro e the fact that radical second wa e feminism re@ected female participation in con entional society. Read the boo's8 !ne of them, The Aialectic of 6e., ad ocated creating technology to replace

pregnancy. Rather than being called the product of a diseased mind 0its author, 6hulamith Firestone, was schiBophrenic and recently died by self(star ation3, this is called a feminist classic. 0I cannot resist this parenthetical aside. ,ho would create this ad anced technology+ ,omen+ It would most li'ely be men, and if men controlled reproduction, what would stop them from getting rid of women altogether and replacing them with fembots+ I doubt this is li'ely to happen, but since Firestone brought up the sub@ect, I thought Id as'.3 !C, since I thin' feminism is fantasy, what do I propose is the truth+ This. 7lood 'in. 7lood 'in is the basis of all human interactions all human society.. 7lood is thic'er than water may be a statement intoned more ruefully than triumphantly but it is true, a.iomatically, with no e.ceptions. =o matter how hard modern capitalist society tries to o erturn it, and it is trying its damndest, with the capitalist creation of mar'ets and interest groups. -ar. misunderstood this, which is why -ar.ism will also always fail. Dlass is real, but its simply a modern, capitalistic e.aggeration of blood ties. 5i'e race, class is an e.tended family and its power deri es from blood. It is true that when one rises in class)status, blood ties become frayed, but that ta'es a generation or two of outmarrying. I am loyal to my class, because I am li'ely to be related to a member of my class, or marry one and pass my genes to the ne.t generation. ,hen a person rises in status, his children marry the children of the class he has risen to, and the old blood ties are bro'en. The mysterious failures of feminism are all around us because we dont understand what feminism is. ,hy is are there so few women in computers and science and technology and why do women gra itate to the life sciences instead of engineering and why do girls eat up Aisney princesses and whats behind slut(shaming and so on. The 1uestions are endless and will remain so as long as we dont understand what feminism is. The con entional media supplied answer is that we ha ent done feminism well enough. Eust 'eep trying and well get it, li'e piano practice. 4long with this goes the media"s constant distortion of feminism to co er e erything that it is not. <ornography is feminist. The <ussycat dolls are feminist. 6i.(inch stiletto heels are feminist. It seems as if e erything e.cept actual rape can be redefined as feminist, and Im @ust waiting for someone to do that. 0I 'id. 4ll societies ha e red lines, and that one is pretty clear.3 <eople ha e made and li ed by all sorts of craBy ideologies and feminism is no different, but that doesn"t dispro e the fact that e.cept for childless lesbians, no woman is truly a feminist. 5et me as' those of you who are mothers a direct 1uestion. ,hat means more to you, your son, or some poor woman in 4fghanistan whose husband throws acid in her face because she did something that dishonors her family+

If you answer honestly, youll tell me that your son does. 7elie e me, I understand that women in 4fghanistan, 6audi 4rabia, Dentral 4frica, India, and a host of other places labor under the most fearful handicaps. -arried off at #F, genitally mutilated, fre1uently raped, honor 'illed...the list is horrific. I truly feel terribly sorry for them. 7ut I must admit, my feelings are literally philanthropic, that is, I feel a disinterested sympathy. !ther than donating a bit of money, I e ne er really done a thing for them, nor will I. I posed my theoretical 1uestion to mothers, which I am not. 7ut few women ha e no blood ties with men. -ost women will either be a mother, a daughter of a father, a sister to a brother. I happen ha e a disabled brother. I cry about him sometimes, in a way that I ha e ne er cried about oppressed women in 4fghanistan, or Dhad. Gis situation weighs on me hea ily. This is not a play for sympathy but a fact. Im not as'ing for you to cry o er my brother and you wont. You dont care about him. I care about him because he"s my brother, no other reason. ,> 6G4R> A=4. I do not see women in the de eloped ,est putting the interests of foreign women o er the interests of their sons, husbands, brothers or fathers. They ha e my good wishes but I do not care about them and neither do you. That is why feminism will always be a failure. Its isnt because feminism lies about gender differences 0it does3, or womens willingness to ta'e on demanding @obs which re1uire sacrificing personal relationships 0it does that, too3, but because its based upon a flawed, mista'en and dishonest understanding of human relationships. 9ntil feminists admit that a womans son means more to her than the abstract cause of sisterhood, it will always be a failure, e en while feminism the brand name succeeds because it sells products. The is the greatest irony/ capitalism has made feminism the @uggernaut it is today.