Prop 8, Feminism, And the Law of Unequaldynamics.

Unequaldynamics: (noun, Dianism* )

(see disambiguation: white people suck)

1. The process by which in a closed system, one group of humans will drain all the power and assets unto themselves, leaving the majority of people destitute and utterly void of self-determination.

2. The system pertaining to a class of ruling elites who have removed all true freedom from its conquered people, while maintaining an illusion of said freedoms.

3. The inverted pyramid model by which all empires fail.


*Disclaimer: Yes, I toyed with the idea of using the pronoun “In” rather than “Un” but inequality suggested a more random bias, while unequality an intentional one. Sue me. I reserve the right to be the last word on my made-up words.

So. Prop 8 was overturned. In a totally unrelated story, a leading feminist blames feminism for messing up the kids.

I have to look around, and ask, “Bigger picture, anyone? ANYONE?”

So the Weirding Woman must speak.

I suppose there is cause d’ celebre’ for many people in love, whose rights have been stomped on through the years. I have a heart. I am romantic enough to enjoy seeing love served. I am also a vindictive bitch that thoroughly enjoys all and any chance to stomp the faces of religinazis who use their repressive bullshit to obsess over and try and control my orgasms or anyone else’s.

My first blush logical reaction was thus last night:

If Marriage is a religious construct not a LEGAL contract – then a billion men just got out of child support, or alimony. If its a LEGAL CONTRACT than any two people who WISH to enter into it can.

Pick one, Supreme Court.

Even the religinazis won’t argue with the legalese end. Especially not all those church ladies who got turned out to pasture for office bim’s. Heh.

As usual, a good nights sleep and a morning read of other things inexplicably tied together in a potpourri of random thoughts that lead to a lightening flash of insight that I am compelled to share. Or, it might just be repetitive bullshit. I never discount my drivel factor.

Now, I sit here and wonder….

Why is it we celebrate the restoration of just one tiny inalienable human right taken from us by a State that is supposed to do nothing but ENSURE those inalienable rights?

At what point did we actually lose the ability to mate with whoeverthefuck we wished, and choose the parameters of that binding? I mean, humans have been bonding since we slithered out of the ooze, found the sweet spot and went “WOW! That was fucking awesome. Lets do it again!” Humans have chosen to share their lives, joys, pains and triumphs with people of their choosing, their kindreds, and chosen to whom they wished to give their stuff. Uga died, Uma got his shit… I mean everyone knew they shared a cave. End of story.

So where did we give this power to anyone else? Who gave it, and why wasn’t I asked? Or you?

Suddenly, the judeo-christi-allaha-tory fucktitude decided they had to “bless” and “approve” our bondings. If that wasn’t enough? The governments had to get involved.

So it is a victory, only in that “they” are allowing what was “ours” to begin with.

“Legal Contract” indeed. At what point did we give the State the right to say under which guises we as humans could bond or fuck? Now, before you say it, yes. I do realize that in this patriarchal system that contract has given women protections they never used to have. Thank you for asking that. It makes the broader point FOR me.

At what point did we buy into a Patriarchal system anyway?  Where did we lose the yin/yang balance that valued both the masculine and feminism equally? The if you act like a douche, get the fuck outta my tepee, and we don’t go to war unless the Mothers vote it too? When did it stop becoming a societal decision rather than a decision made by profiteers? Patriarchal Profiteers no less?

Now don’t get me wrong. I absolutely SUCK at being a feminist. Not to paint with a broad brush or anything, but I cannot maintain the anger needed to join their ranks. I haven’t done “Women’s Studies” nor do I get the whole hating on men thing.  I just chose to live outside the box from the start… and do not for the life of me understand why everyone else doesn’t either.

You cannot change the system from within it. First you have to change your own thinking. I mean, if women can be rocket scientists and you are all about equality – then learn to change your oil. I did. In fact by the time I was 16, I learned to fix engines themselves. And look hot as hell in a pair of spiked heels and a miniskirt. Being sexy never scared me. Being sexy is only a flaw if its THE ONLY THING YOU HAVE GOING FOR YOU.

I was too busy being the best human I could be to get all distracted by gender definition or gender wars.

That of course, lead to the real discovery. This society is crippling to every human.

But I digress.

Lets talk about the system a bit more here.

This society has not only dictated who we can fuck, but whether or not we can learn, have medical treatment, be employed, move from place to place freely… it controls every aspect of our lives. Don’t believe me? Just try to fly to Cancun without a passport. Get pulled over with no driver’s license. Walk into a University and say you are just going to take classes. Try and go to the Doctor with no insurance card. Buy a house from a friend without registering with the Registrar of Deeds.

The ease by which you can perform any of these actions is directly correlated to how much money you have. It is a system set up with inherent CLASS DIVISIONS slated to make everything unavailable to those without wealth.


Now, lets talk a little about feminist Fay Weldon’s recent article Emma Thompson’s right. And it’s children who pay for the ‘having it all’ lie, says FAY WELDON

Fifty years ago, it was the women who had a bad time. We were exploited, unable to earn or contribute to society; domestic slaves dependent for their living on the goodwill of men, too often trapped in distressing relationships.

Meanwhile, the men and the children flourished.

These days the men still flourish, and the women do, too.

Now it is the children who suffer. Children see more of their teachers and their peers than they do of their families. Mothers continue to love their children to distraction, but how much do the children of today love their mothers?


Women are happier than they used to be. We are not as sexually neurotic as we were; we don’t worship men unthinkingly, and we can earn and spend our own money.

We aren’t disgraced if we don’t marry, and we don’t have nervous little squeaky voices when we speak in public. You may not believe it, but that’s how it was. We don’t have to put up with the indignity of being second-class citizens  –  and that is a great achievement.

But we never paid any attention to what to do with the children. We certainly never imagined handing them over to other lesser-paid women to bring up, making them strangers to us, their mothers.

Yet, that, sadly, is what has happened. We fought against the definition of women as ‘people who have children’. And now the birth rate falls and falls.


The trouble is that feminism sang to capitalism’s tune. If the women of the West went out to work, and both sexes worked equally punishing hours, male wages could, in real terms, be halved as the workforce was doubled.

So the male wage that once kept a family, mysteriously no longer can. This, too, is something that we did not foresee.

I only hope the next generation will do better. Do I feel apologetic? Yes, I do.


First off, before I rip her argument to shreds, in what thinking world is a falling birth rate a BAD thing? I mean overpopulation and declining resources are master of the totally obvious stuff.

Now as to the Blame-Game????

I think that she is naive in the idea the system was ever meant to sustain a healthy middle class. It was not. That was a concession made after the Depression to stave off the majority who at that point wanted to vote Socialist. It is the fault of the greed at the top, not the workforce, male or female that ended up making us so stressed.

And god knows, a society’s stressor indicator is always in its children.

Not to point to my Holy Bible of “The Shock Doctrine” but, seriously, it was not women entering the workforce that halved men’s salaries. It was GREED. Since the 70’s the profits of those at the top has risen 100 fold.

Children suffer because they have made us economically stressed, have made education a sham of drone-workers, and the system itself is based on the value of WEALTH, not humanity. A fucking HELL of world to grow up in.

Do not tell me its womens fault.

Anything we do within THEIR SYSTEM is tainted by that very system, the system guided by the Law of Unequaldynamics.

So any victory is tainted by our begging for scraps that we INHERENTLY ALREADY OWN.

We need to quit playing their game.

Until we take ALL our rights back, the rest is a Kabuki in a Kleptocratic machine. We are willing pawns.

So sayeth the weirding woman anyway…..


Skip to comment form

    • Diane G on August 5, 2010 at 17:37
  1. comment under link in response to Weldon

    What a load of rubbish. There has never been a “magical time” when women stayed at home all day, playing with the children and baking cakes. Life has always been hard. In the past women were restricted to menial jobs outside of the home, such as cleaning jobs or working in the “big house”, but work they did. In addition to that there were no washing machines or dish washers at home. Women were expected to cook and clean and serve and received little for it. Children were not sitting with mama in front of an open fire playing with dollies and toy soldiers they were down the pits, in the fields and up the chimneys. It seems to me that a lot of this reminiscing of our glorious past is pure fantasy. Life was always hard and it will always be hard. Get over it and stop moaning

    – Charlotte, Leeds, 04/8/2010 15:00

    Typically “feminist” mistake by Weldon.  She can not and does not have the ability to think like other people nor does she have a very good grasp of the reality of the vast majority of humans in history- who were dirt poor.  They survived by staying in family units and the older generation took care of the younger. Now we have so many other things separating generations, time, distance, where jobs are, length of job commutes, the isolation of retirement communities, drug abuse, etc, that the older, retired generation right now gets their news from Fox and is more concerned with their property taxes than they are with their local schools and the availability of decent day care.

    To have children today in America is to risk poverty- but only for the women and children….   duh, Fay Weldon, you useless sot.  It’s not the men who abandoned the process but the grandparents, as well, all in pursuit of something…. other than relationships. What about safe communities ?   We have this dual class society where the wealthiest women are expected to stay home, and the poorest women are expected to work outside the home, and this started with “welfare reform,” and modern religious conservatism in politics,  yet we still have a country here with scandalous amounts of teen pregnancies, unplanned pregnancies, and single parents, who can’t afford to raise their children by themselves…  duh again.  They feel no acceptance by their older generation so they think a baby will fulfill them.    BUT, if you look at it from a biological standpoint, not a “feminist” one, it’s a rip snorting, smashing success for the males, who are still having children and not having to put much effort into it.   Overall, the population of the world is increasing anyway at a stunning rate-  what planet  is she on ?   Birthrates falling ?  Maybe amongst her social circle of aging, wealthy feminists.  So ?

  2. I never saw feminism as “man hating” nor did I ever take “woman’s studies”. If that is what you’re using to define at least your perspective on feminism I think it is pretty narrow and dismissive. Not saying it isn’t legitimate. It is the sort of thing I hear from a lot of women and men who like to punt away the discussion.

    And awesome that you looked sexy in a mini skirt and being and more importantly feeling sexy (however we arrive at that state ) is an powerful experience.Everybody should be able to partake. But what if a woman doesn’t wear a mini skirt or feel sexy in one is she somehow less? Am I only a woman who is a legitimate member of my team if I dress or act in a way that others define as sexy? Who gets to make that definition? Why do some definitions hold more sway than others. Am I only hot and sexy if I am thin and white and under 30? And somebody else tells me I am…..generally a man? Who grants approval….

    You weren’t making those implications at all. But the assumption that feminism is about man hating and womans studies often comes from the same corner of the universe that makes all those other assumptions possible. In my opinion, of course, not suggesting my truth is any stronger or more worthy than yours. Just different.

Comments have been disabled.