absolutum dominium

...and it's going to be on feminism.

you know, whenever i introduce myself to people, i keep the 'dragonboat', 'police' and 'taekwondo' part out of my intros until i'm asked for them.

reason being because if i introduce myself with any one (or all) of the above 3 words in the same sentence as my name, people (guys especially) are just going to have this impression of me as some psycho crazy ball-breaking nazi feminist.

cross me and i'll break your balls. say tt women are the fairer sex and i'll break your balls. say tt women can't be in the army and i'll break your balls. forget to hold open the door for me and i'll break your balls, too.

i think tt if my eyeballs were detachable from my sockets at will, i'd be able to roll them from 1 end of a football field to another from the number of times i'd have had to roll my eyes. define feminism.

am i a feminist? yes. i am. BUT my definition of feminism isn't tt women are better than men. no, i can't possibly give you one single clear-cut definition as to what role i believe women should play, but i can tell you what i subscribe to and what i don't subscribe to.

for one, i believe tt both men and women are equal, or tt they should be treated with equal amounts of respect. this does not of course mean tt men and women should be treated equally at all times (there is a difference tt extends beyond language, but i've come to realise tt most people don't get the difference). although personally, i have no qualms being treated as one of the guys. tt's why i am able to listen and join in with guys discussing guy talk from soccer to army to sex, dirty jokes, masturbation, porn etc etc etc without flinching or complaining tt my sensibilities have been horribly assaulted. my stand on this is simple enough: either you stay and listen, or you leave and don't. there's no point in kicking up some huge major fuss. it's always your choice to stay or go anyway. i don't think tt there should be such a thing as toning down or watching your language or your verbal content just because a woman is around. if you're watching your language out of basic courtesy (i.e. meeting someone you don't really know, or someone at an important formal function where you have to try to be politically correct), then by all means go ahead. but my personal opinion is tt girls who demand tt guys stop talking about a certain topic just coz they're in the vicinity should stop pretending tt they are all sweet and innocent and fragile and sensitive because i think tt sets women's liberalisation backwards, actually.

it's not about equal treatment. it's about equal respect.

another thing i believe, is tt men and women have different areas of expertise, and therefore i don't think women should raise big hoohas about certain things just because. for one, let's face it. areas like the special ops force and the swat team will always be men-only vocations. i don't get why there are women who are complaining tt male chauvinism is being displayed by limiting these areas to men only. the fact remains tt guys have higher muscle mass and are therefore stronger and fitter physically. now, if we are able to apply the same standards of fitness - i.e. if a woman is able to take the physical fitness tests tt those guys take and do equally well (i.e. run 2.4 km under 9.45 min; do >10 pull-ups etc etc etc) - and a woman or some women are able to pass those tests, then by all means i see no reason why women should not be admitted to these areas. but if no woman is able to meet the criteria, then why should special allowances be made for her? i don't see why the standard should be lowered just because. if i had tt kind of fitness, yes, i would try my luck. i would apply and i would take the test. but i don't. and therefore i will keep my mouth shut.

if you feel tt you are as good as, or can be, better than a guy/guys, then by all means, prove it. and when you have proven it, you can call yourself a real fighter for women's rights. but if you yourself are unable to prove why you deserve equal or better treatment, then i don't see why you should be demanding such treatment all in the name of "feminism" and braying out the tired refrain of "male chauvinism". personally, even though i am a dragonboater (although currently on a 1-year sabbatical. heh), i do acknowledge tt i am not as strong as a lot of the guys on the guys' team, and i know tt as hard as i can train or as much weights as i force myself to pull, i may never be stronger than a lot of them still. so i accept tt, and i judge myself by my own standards. i don't compare, coz comparison serves no purpose at all. and even in taekwondo, yes. i might be able to hold my ground. yes, i have fought guys. but i know tt i will never be as strong as, or kick as hard as, a lot of them. i lack the height, i lack the weight. so i don't go around swaggering or pretending tt i am as good as someone else of my standard. things like these are to be proven, not assumed. and respect is also to be earned, not demanded.

so therefore, i have a problem with women who tell some guy tt in the name of feminism, they demand equal treatment and acknowledgement tt they are as good as said guy(s), and then turn around and expect same said guy to hold open the door or pull out the chair like a gentleman. i have a problem with women who cry "male chauvinist!" or "misogynist" as a refrain, not only because it shows a lack of range in vocabulary, but also narrow-mindedness and unreasonable expectations. as i have said before, if you have a brain, 2 arms and 2 legs, you can damn well think for yourself, walk around yourself, and pull up your own goddamn chair. feminism and the expectation of chivalry doesn't go hand in hand to me. it smacks of hypocrisy. how do you expect to be treated as an equal if you expect to be taken care of?

yes. i make concessions for social grace. i will let a man pull out a chair or open a door for me coz it's polite, and i will be appreciative. if he offers to pay for my meal, i will accept, but i will return the favour the next time. we are in the 21st century. we can't expect to be molly-coddled, and we should not throw a big hissy fit if we don't.

i don't read women's or beauty magazines, for tt matter. i think there's too much stereotyping and too much of "we know best what you want" in them. to me, one beauty magazine is like another, and it perpetuates feminine stereotypes, which i feel are normally never for the better. i refuse to believe tt episodes like PMS or hormonal imbalances give us a right to be bitches. yes, we always feel more emotional and more depressed around our periods, but we are not unconscious animals. we have the options of choice; we can choose to be bitches and blame it all on the big red, or we can continue to live our lives and try to treat everyone else the way we would like to be treated, regardless of whether it is a little bit more difficult or a bit more painful or whatnot.

and to me, fucking around isn't a display of feminist power. no, i don't have a problem with it, and yes, i believe tt women can fuck around as much as men do. equality, remember? i'm not here to judge either anyway. but i find it awfully childish when i hear people tell me tt fucking around or dating a whole bunch of guys at the same time is liberating. if you find this kind of thing liberating, i think you need to consult your shrink. it is your life, yes. i don't see anything wrong with fucking around or dating multiple guys, so long as it makes you happy. but don't assume tt it's all for some higher purpose or to advance some greater objective, because it's not. you're just being deluded.

in any case, doesn't this contradict the whole female stereotype tt women have of guys as only thinking about sex? in the first place, i have had it with the number of people who think tt sex is wrong, dirty, a sin blah blah blah. people who have had debates with me, especially about religion and morality, know about my stand on institutionalised morality. and no, i don't have a problem with sex. i don't think premarital sex is a sin, and i think tt it's time tt we get our heads out of our rectums and realise tt the world has moved on and there's nothing shameful in describing coitus and its corresponding states. as long as you keep up the respect for your own body and tt of your partner's, as long as you take responsibility for your own actions, and as long as you do not cause harm or pain to anyone, then there is nothing wrong with sex. so, in the second place, what is with girls always giving me throwaway lines tt guys only think with their dicks? i remember one of the silliest things i'd ever heard from someone, was her telling me tt while women were complicated, guys were simple and predictable. i told her tt she was being very naive. you can't stereotype anything or anyone. everyone has different characteristics tt differ from person to person. and even if guys do have sex on their mind, it's not like everyone's just some primitive neanderthal who has to compulsively fuck everything in sight. i'm sure everyone is conscious enough to have control over their own bodies, even if some obviously have much less control than others. and thirdly, even if guys might always have sex on their mind, assuming the stereotype is true, it isn't like women are all innocent and prudish. let's face it, there's been a huge wave of publicity on liberalised women and sex aids like vibrators gaining popularity all over the world, singapore included. so maybe these activities are kept under wraps (who knows? maybe your prudish female boss keeps one of those in her 2nd desk drawer!), but even so, tt doesn't give you the right to act all high and mighty, now does it?

speaking of which, pride and hardness does not contribute towards the feminist movement. a lot of women feel tt in order to be true feminists, they have to be tough hard-ass bitches. to treat guys abrasively, to be rude and cold and hard, to assert themselves every single chance they get so tt they won't be bullied. but there has to come some point in time when you realise tt such behaviour is only counter-productive - it alienates you from people and it doesn't earn you the kind of respect tt you want. yes, i strongly believe tt women shouldn't be doormats. we shouldn't let men walk all over us. we should not be victims of domestic violence - physical or emotional. we should not allow for the patriachial "boys are better" mentality to persist.

but there is no need to be defensive. there is no need to have to force your will over others. don't be a doormat, but earn tt respect through showing others (guys and girls alike) tt same kind of respect first, by setting good examples to others and by exhibiting social grace. there is no need to be abrasive or harsh to anyone just because you don't want to appear soft. there is no need to pretend or to hide your true intentions just because you don't want to appear desperate (if you need something, you need something. there is no point in trying to hide it. it's just ridiculous). by acknowledging your own strengths and your own weaknesses, by knowing when to be strong and when to give in, you prove in tt tt you deserve the respect tt you want.

feminist values are subjective, and my own beliefs don't reflect those of a lot of other women. but i suppose at the core of my values, i feel tt it is in confidence in yourself and in recognising the importance of mutual respect, tt you are really fighting for what you believe in.

P.S. i think tt women who consider giving birth national service are seriously fucked up. honestly, i fear for their children.