Feminism: Meaningless Words create Meaningless Ideals

Hitler_Socialist_SandersOne of the interesting things about dating a lot of women is that you very quickly come to realize the amount of verbal-sorcery and word-salad that comes out of many women’s mouths. They often don’t mean what they say, or the things they say are simply a reflection of how they feel at the moment.  Later they will tell you the exact opposite.

The problem is that they use a lot of words and phrases that lack a clear meaning – love, happiness, OMG LOL totes, etc. – you get the idea.

When the words we use have no grounded meaning, when they can be defined as anything by anyone, then we are no longer talking about a tangible thing or fact. Rather, we are talking about feelings.

In parallel, and perhaps not surprisingly, the words used by Feminists and Progressives and SJWs are much the same – common good, patriarchy, social welfare, equality – when we use these words we say nothing at all. We are not communicating meaningful ideas … we are simply expressing our feelings. Or what I like to call “Feels before Reals” …

Even reformed Feminists realize this. It becomes even more blatant when they redefine words with obvious meaning, like “violence”, in ways that render those words meaningless.

Public policy or serious discussion cannot be based on feelings … any more than I base my actions in the dating world on a woman’s feeling words. They are ephemeral and prone to change. They are a reflection of reality, but not reality itself.


In his book Road to Serfdom, F.A. Hayek pointed out the problem socialists and other collectivists (which the Progressives and Feminists largely fall into) suffer because of their use of meaningless words.  In their drive for greater “equality”, the policies they pursue often ironically create greater inequality. Because they abandon classical Liberal principles that create a self-correcting marketplace of freedoms that derive from competition, and replace that with central planning “committees” that decide what is important and who should get what.

Political freedom derives from economic freedom. Without economic freedom, without the resources to support yourself and your loved ones, none of us are free. And such economic freedom demands competition to fuel it. Or rather, the opportunity to compete.

In its stead, the Progressives and Feminists would dictate your opportunities, and impose gender and race-based quotas. They would strip your economic freedom. All in the name of meaningless words like “common good” and “social justice”. All in the name of ephemeral ideas that serve no one, but hurt everyone. Lest we forget, even the Nazis were originally the National Socialist party …

The first sign that someone has no idea what they are talking about is their use of meaningless words. Remember that.

Share: Share on Facebook2Share on Google+0Tweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someone
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Feminism: Meaningless Words create Meaningless Ideals

  1. Spawny Get says:

    If I were forced to identify one reason above all others for my divorce, it would be that I refused to lead a life where my happiness was ruled by the whimsical feels of my then wife. In my defence, I married my wife, she then turned into her mother. Yikes.

    Feelz are no way to go through life, especially the feelz of others. Individually or collectively.

    “Just the facts, ma’am, just the facts”

  2. fuzziewuzziebear says:

    It’s really scary when this nonsense starts getting applied to the justice system. Perspective changes in retrospect.

  3. CopperFox3c says:

    @Spawny: I think it is a common experience of many men past the age of 30, to see the way women interact with the world driven heavily thru feelings. It puts feminism in a whole new light.

    And yeah Fuzzie, the implications of all this “word redefinition” and vagueness for our legal system is very disturbing. Shades of Orwell’s 1984 …

  4. The Fighter says:

    #FeelsbeforeReals

  5. Cill says:

    Words with no grounded meaning can become indistinguishable from absolutes. White privilege, patriarchy, equal pay, mansplaining, women-are-emotionally-superior. Absolutes are beyond scrutiny, beyond mere facts. An absolute is an undeniable “truth”.

    I think the most absurd absolute of all is “women are more in touch with their feelings”. Challenge that one if ye may.

  6. Cill says:

    central planning “committees” that decide what is important and who should get what

    I think of the EU.

  7. Cill says:

    …but when I look at the top, the face on the right, I see you were already ahead of me.

  8. CopperFox3c says:

    It is the great irony of political discourse that we often inadvertently become mirror images of the things we despise the most …

  9. Very true. As a woman, I have seen women confuse their current feelings with “truth” a n’s if I am honest I have done so myself. I am more aware of it now thanks to reading about this via the red pill, but even with awareness it still happens at times. Add hormones to the mix and feelings can indeed “feel like truth” when in reality it’s my brain hijacked by hormones. I am trying to help my daughters learn to be aware of this as well.

    With politics, the tricky part is the current liberal stuff “sounds good” on the surface, so it’s easily sold. But what people don’t see is the cost to their own personal freedoms and American ideals in general of looking to govt. to “help” or “fix” to define things like “fair” or “equal” or “safe.” I see it all so much more clearly since starting my small biz and interacting with the “helpful regulations” that make the “American dream” increasingly difficult, expensive, and meddlesome. Life is easier for my next door neighbors who don’t work at all and live off govt. programs, while at times it feels like I am heavily penalized and persecuted for trying to build a dream! Less govt, small govt., common sense, free market, and self determination may not be easy, but self actualizing is better than looking to govt. to provide.

    I could rant about how I “feel” about all this for hours! 🙂 and how I feel the above doesn’t change in this case! “Liberal” ideals are a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

  10. Sorry about the typos, I am typing the above on my phone…

  11. CopperFox3c says:

    Indeed RedPillGirl. I think what is really concerning is seeing how this “feelings=facts” stuff affects my personal interactions with women on a dating level … but then considering how that same phenomena also affects the way women engage in politics and the policies they support.

    From a dating perspective, my Red Pill self can say: okay that’s a little fucked up but I navigate it …

    From a political perspective, my Red Pill self says: okay that’s a little fucked up, and I hate to say it, but maybe that’s why women’s participation in politics was historically limited … you can’t build a nation or base public policy on what “feels good” at the moment.

  12. 1111 says:

    Words do have meaning. Another thing is that you know it, or you wanna know it.

    And I find absurd to say some women don’t mean what they say. Do men always mean what they say? Is it something related to women, or something related to all humans? So… lies, insecurity and confusion were created by women, right? Only they suffer from it… Dude, everyone talks that way. Imagine today you had a bad day, you talk shit about your boss, next week you are praising him… Same goes with your favorite soccer team, movies, everything in general. No one has the same opinion all the time, and not everytime is an objective one.
    For example without going further, this is not a 100% objective post. You tag every women in the world as only driven by feelings and whatnot, judging by the dates the author had… Well, it speaks for itself.

    Those “non-liberal” groups the author mentioned early do not create inequalities. They uncover them. If a woman gets paid less than a man for the same job, some would say “Everything was OK until you said that!”… No dude. Problem was already there, but as we pointed it out, we are guilty right? No, not that way.

    “Progressives and Feminists would dictate your opportunities, and impose gender and race-based quotas”… What?? Which opportunities would they dictate? Are we really comparing them to dictators? It reminds me of Rush Limbaugh, the american conservative who worked in the radio and created the term “Feminazi” refering to pro-abortion women, who they said wanted a new Holocaust. Again, absurd.

    I really think this arcticle goes “more about the feels than the reals” as it itself condemns.

Leave a Reply