Originally written in November 2012
A right is something which I have at the expense of other people. Even my right of not being murdered and not being made a slave is something which I have at the expense of those stronger than myself who could kill me or force me into servitude. There are no such things as ‘natural rights’; there are only adjustments of conflicting claims. What I have at your expense ought not to be more than what you have at my expense: that, whatever the practice may be, is the theory of Justice. ~ Aldous Huxey
Feminists would say, just because a rabbit does not attack a tiger, a tiger has no right to eat a rabbit; and that a rabbit has the same rights in the jungle as tiger. No, dear feminists, if tigers don’t attack rabbits in the “civilized jungle” then that’s a privilege enjoyed by rabbits for which tigers pay the psychological cost every moment. The least a rabbit has to do is not challenge the tiger’s position as a dominant animal. If we bend nature’s laws too much, either the tiger would snap or the civilization would go the way of suicide.
If it is not clear already, tiger and rabbit of the analogy are men and women in the society.
A just society is male dominated. Blame nature for “sexism”, not men.
I am not suggesting that because women are physically weak they be taken advantage of their weakness. Men and women can and must cooperate for higher mutual benefits. However, cooperation doesn’t mean perfect equality in every thing. Men not making slaves of women is cooperation, and I am totally for that sort of cooperation. Women challenging men in men’s areas and crusading to take over men’s roles, abandoning their own roles and responsibilities in the society, is something that requires careful analysis.
In the society when men and women become equal in every way there’s no incentive left for men to cooperate. When we talk about equality we have to also account for intrinsic inequality between men and women. Even though both men and women are humans, biologically they still are different in major ways. In the natural world when the (physically) weak and the strong get the same benefits, even though it looks like equality, it is not if we account for the difference of strength in the two groups. When the weak enjoy the same benefits as the strong, justice is tilted against the strong. Simple math.
When that happens men and women would become enemies, because men would incur huge psychological costs. Then either men would use their natural physical power to fight injustice (which is unlikely at this stage of civilization) or they would simply hate women and avoid associating with them. That’s what I mean by suicide of the civilization.
However sophisticated our concepts of justice may have become in today’s society, at the deepest level, the ultimate arbiter of rights and responsibilities is natural physical strength – and that’s the only way it can be.
Women are better off already
Women are naturally physically weak, but in today’s society they are no more taken advantage of their physical weakness. Therefore, at this point they already are in a better position than men who could exploit weaker creatures but don’t, thereby incurring cost. (“Even my right of not being murdered and not being made a slave is something which I have at the expense of those stronger than myself who could kill me or force me into servitude.” ~ Huxley) This puts women in a powerful position because this is the stage where they take out and start using their most powerful weapon, sexual politics, and ultimately rule over men.
Since sex is such strong and fundamental need in humans, man’s natural inclination would be to support feminism to come off as a hero in women’s eyes. In fact, I think the only thing keeping men from sincere pursuit of truth, philosophy, is the fear of losing women’s interest.
The right way to justice
The problem with most people’s conception of justice is that they have taken it for granted that humans are above other animals. Humans are animals, and it is erroneous to believe that we are free of natural laws that bind other animals.
As per popular feminist ideals what is being expected of men is Utopian. When I say just society is male dominated, that is because men naturally are strong, hence it is natural that the weaker gender be subordinated. When the weak and the strong enjoy the same benefits, that’s not justice. It’s free ride for the weak at the cost of the strong. Those who demand such equality, disregarding the natural reality, apparently believe that because we are humans we must uphold those ideals. There are feminists who fight for women’s “right” to dress provocatively and expect men to not touch women. Make no mistake, I am not in favor of raping women. But there is a limit to which the natural reality can be bent by reason. Both genders have to carefully evaluate their natural strengths and weaknesses first and then decide what rights and responsibilities each ought to bear. Any ethical theory suggesting men and women have exactly the same rights suffers from the fallacy of assuming humans to be unbound by nature’s laws.
Women should have rights, but those rights are given to women at cost to men. Hence, to offset that cost women have got extra responsibilities. To give an example, women should have a right to go out without fear of being attacked (because men can attack her for sex), but they shouldn’t wear revealing clothes or pose in any fashion which appeals to men sexually. Feminists would say: If men can wear short clothes, why can’t women? Well, because men can naturally afford to. By not going after men, women don’t have to incur any cost (because they simply don’t have the physical strength for it on the first place), but by not going after women men have to incur psychological cost when they restrain themselves from doing what they can. If in the civilization women are given the right to not be harassed by men, they have to bear the responsibility of making sure that men incur as low cost as possible because of them. Only then we are close to justice.
Giving the same rights and same responsibilities to both man and women is killing of justice.
Men and women in the just society
A just society would be patriarchal, male dominated. That doesn’t mean women should be oppressed, but women would have a different set of roles and responsibilities than men. However, when I say male dominated, even though I don’t mean oppression of women, I certainly mean that in sum men will have more rights and fewer responsibilities than women. And that’s justice. Why? Because men are favored by nature.
For clearer understanding, read my series Equality and Justice.