Below is an article from the loathsome Liz Jones of the horrid Daily Mail. If you can bear it, please take a minute or two to read this article. This is an indirect link, so that the online traffic does not increase on the DM website. We wouldn’t give to give them the idea that we like them!
My problems with this are numerous, and this list is not wholly exhaustive:
1) Her ideas of feminism.
“As a feminist, I looked down on mumsy types.”
Liz says she’s a feminist, but seems to entirely misunderstand the concept. The whole idea of feminism is that women are equal to men, and should be treated as such. (There are extreme feminists however, who do say that women should be the favoured sex now given how long the world’s been male-biased, therefore not seeking equality, rather inequality but in the opposite direction). Part of this is obviously the freedom to choose, and that includes choosing to be a mother. Being a feminist is in no way incompatible with motherhood. Imagine the future of our planet if people who thought women were equal to men didn’t procreate? In addition to this, she also insults the whole female sex – again not something a woman should be doing (more about these insults in point 4).
2) Stealing Sperm.
A child is a product of two people, not one. If men and women are to be equals, then both should have a choice about parenthood. Any type of lying and underhandedness is wrong in a relationship, but to add this deceit to a life-changing decision that cannot be reneged upon is notthing shor of morally deplorable.
On the other side of my brain however is the fact that if people don’t want to accept a pregnancy then they shouldn’t have sex. If a child is conceived by accident, everyone says you must take responsibility for it – you had sex, so step up to the plate. The morally consistent argument then says that, by having sex, the man is complicit anyway. By doing so, he says he accepts that pregnancy may be an outcome. While this also makes sense, I have to say my moral compass is steal screaming out that this is wrong: that the intent is more important than the outcome (how very Kantian of me, I know). In other words, if you mean to have sex with little/no protection in order to trick someone into pregnancy, this is wrong, regardless of the outcome (pregnant or not). It’s all about the categorical imperative – essentially, don’t do it to others if you don’t want it done to you. In fact, more accurately, it’s about imagine the world as if that action was universal. So, if you wouldn’t like to be lied to, then don’t do it to others. This approach to moral philosophy does have it problems (e.g. you have to tell the axe-murder at your door where your friend is when he asks, because you’d want honesty to be a universal moral), but it’s intuitive to me here so I’m sticking to it.
3) Liz’s “Right” to It
Liz speaks as if she has earned her partner’s sperm. Her exact words are
“I thought it was my right, given that he was living with me and I had bought him many, many M&S ready meals.”
Given my argument above, when something is essentially wrong, no amount of money, dinners or any other flippant measure will justify the deceit and theft. To make the point so casually is nothing short of disgusting, especially in conjuction with the strong use the term ‘my right’.
4) Dirtying the Reputation of the Female Sex
While Liz’s actions on their own are deplorable, as an autonomous being she has a right to lead her life and to make her own mistakes. However, she makes sweeping statements that cast aspersion amongst all middle-aged women, which is just beyond despicable:
“Of course, not every woman in my position would resort to extreme measures. But I do believe that any man who moves in with a woman in her late 30s or early 40s should take it as read that she will want to use them to procreate, by fair means or foul, no matter how much she protests otherwise.”
I have no doubt that there are women out there who purposely entrap men. In fact, I know of some family members who have been entrapped by women. However, to say that it should be taken as read a middle-aged women will want your children and is prepared to go about it deceitfully is both inaccurate and digusting. To measure a whole group of people by one own’s yardstick is to have limited vision, perception and in this case, morals. What’s worse is that genuinely insecure men who read this article may end up fearing their genuine, loving, honest partner because Liz has managed to instill a fear in them. I know most people are rational enough to get beyond this, but the nature of insecurity is that it cannot be easily reasoned out of. It’s not easy for a person with low self-esteem to just say they’re wrong about themselves and remove all doubt. If this sabotages even one relationship, then this article (like Liz Jones herself) is a very very sad thing indeed.
For a variety of reasons and articles, I am predisposed to automatically dislike anything the woman writes. In this case (as in every other so far), it is wholly justified.
Liz Jones – the world’s best argument for spermicidal condoms.
I rest my case!
No comments:
Post a Comment