The Fundamental Flaws in Feminism
Channel: Mohammed Hijab
File Size: 24.37MB
Episode Transcript ©
Transcripts are auto-generated and thus will be be inaccurate and at times crude. We are considering building a system to allow volunteers to edit transcripts in a controlled system. No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever.
Sweden is the most we're here in Sweden, obviously. And it's the most feministic country in the world. According to statistics, let me just do this as a matter of
trying to see what's going on here. Put your hands up if you're a feminist, let's just put it that way.
advocating women's rights.
Okay, let's get started. I'm going to read something out, there is a gentleman.
I'm gonna read something out. I want you guys to do
to pay attention.
And I want you to tell me what you think. What I'm about to read out is sexist or not. According to feminism, according to your belief of feminism, if you think about without a doubt.
First, a woman is more emotional.
Woman is more emotional, nervous, and irritable and usually can manifest serious psychological problems.
Women have hormones which mean they are more, which means they have more stability and less control, make them more emotional, which is directly linked to vascular variations, palpitations, redness, and so on. And they are thus subject to convulsive attacks, tears, nervous laughter and hysterics, woman is weaker than mine.
She has less muscular strength, fewer red blood cells and lesser respiratory capacity, she runs less quickly lifts less heavy weights, there is practically no sports in which she can compete with him. She cannot enter a fight with a man
added to that is instability, lack of control, and fragility, that have been discussed. These are facts, how grasp of the world is thus more limited.
She has less firmness and perseverance in the projects that she is also less able to carry out. If I said something like this. It sounds as good as it sounds from a feministic perspective, very sexist, but when you see who wrote this, it becomes quite interesting.
Because the person who wrote these things,
is Simone de Beauvoir, who wrote a book called The second sex, which is a French book, which is translated into many different languages. In 1949, she rises from page 42 to 4647. You can look at this yourself, she's a feminist. In fact, not only any feminists are not radical feminists, but she is a mainstream feminist, which not only
laid the groundwork for other feminists to come.
But she led the theoretical and philosophical underpinnings of you could say even all of feminism in the second wave. She is very, very influential in the feminist movement. So why would she say these things? I mean, it sounds like she's going against women. If I said this is a man and not prefaced, or qualified, the fact that it was a woman who said it was actually a main feminist, I could be attacked. But the reason why she says this, and her argument is as follows.
Her argument is yes. And this is the argument of feminism. Okay.
The argument is, yes, there are biological differences between men and women. We agree, men are stronger, women are more emotional. We understand that. For the most part, this is a true statement. She says we know that. But her argument is as follows there is in Jeju, and you must know the argument of feminism, especially secondary feminism, the argument Yes, there are differences.
However, it doesn't matter. This is basically the argument. And why does it matter? Okay.
The feminists will argue, and this is exactly how our argument there is. And this is going to be a little bit complicated, but try your best to understand, okay, try your best to understand. In philosophy, there's something called existentialism, and there's something called essentialism. Okay. It's a bit complicated. essentialism is the fact that you have certain characteristics can be biological, it could be spiritual, it could be whatever kind of characteristics that are part of you as a human being and your function
is a result of those things which are endowed to you the things that you have. Yeah.
existentialism is the idea that you have to kind of make your own purpose in life is subjective is your purpose in life? Yeah. So essentially
ism is that you act according to what your
your composition is your essential composition and existentialism as you make your own purpose, you make your own subjective purpose. And this is espoused by someone called john Paul Sartre, existentialism and other people.
the feminist movement and the philosophy the philosophy of feminism is based really on existentialism, which means, we don't care about the differences between man and woman, for the most part, which are biological or emotional or psychological. Despite those differences, there should be equality, Jonathan, this understanding yet, despite those differences, there should be equality. But the question will come first question, we have a right to ask as critical thinkers, right towards this question.
Why should we follow something subjective? And why should we disregard the essential properties of human beings? Why should we disregard the differences between men and women? Why? What proof do you have of that?
What's the reason for that? What's the logic behind it?
And there are questions that you could ask, wouldn't it mean, you could ask, is it the case? Is it possible that when you strip men and women from their let's say paternal slash maternal instinct, meaning a man's want psychological love to be a father or mother's want to be a mother, and you strip them away from these notions? Will that have an effect on them psychologically? These are questions because you're saying,
if you're saying that children, so if you're saying that your essence your biological essence is not really, we don't care about it, so long as equalities are so much as a political concern. The question is why? Now, here's another point.
de Beauvoir, the same woman.
And this is why Personally, I cannot identify with feminism. I'll tell you the reason because of these things. She paints the picture of males, men, males, not just males in the human species, but males everywhere,
as actually inheriting a kind of original sin of being a man, necessarily what she's
talking about mammals. She goes, the most concrete and most individualized life is found in mammals, the split of the two vital moments maintaining and creating takes place definitively in the separation of the sexes, is branching out. And considering branching out only invertebrates. The mother's has the closest connection to her offspring, while the father is more uninteresting. The whole organism of the female is adapted to and determined by the servitude of the maternity, while sexual productive is the interest of the male, meaning kiyani. She's saying males by nature want to do any males by nature, not just human beings, but generally they want to they're by nature. Yeah,
dominating. They put women in servitude positions, we have to change that, you understand. So what we have to accept as men, if you want to be a feminist man, you have to accept that you are born as an oppressor, by nature. You're born as a bad man, just by virtue of being a male, that you have a prerogative which means you, you're going to want to suppress a woman in whatever which way, this is the kind of thing that's MANOVA is trying to espouse. So the question here really is,
is this substantiated? psychologically, philosophically, emotionally, and economically?
Another thing could be this, and this is something I really want to put because we talked about, number one, the philosophical underpinnings of feminism and the psychological ramifications of it. But a secondary question, are you guys with me? Yeah. A secondary question is has feminism misinterpreted history.
I want you to I'm going to give you a story. Let's make this a form of a story.
Before we make the story, I want to say something one of the things that feminism says, and if you look at almost any book of the second wave, one thing is common, which is that mothers wives their servants or slaves, Simone, Simone de Beauvoir actually calls them slaves. If you're a mother or a funeral wife, you're a slave. Yes. Why? Because you own the house. Yeah, you're doing all the work of that, man. All right. You're cooking for him. You're cleaning for him. You don't get paid for it. Okay, you're a slave.
You're looking after his children. You are a slave. This is the feminist narrative. Okay.
Let me give you a story.
Imagine we have a woman was a popular Swedish name for a woman.
given, let's go with the shirts
actually the COVID
we don't spend too much time on this.
All right. So is a popular feminist name? Sorry.
woman's name. Let's say you got it. Okay. Listen to this.
She's at home now. Yeah, she has a husband.
Anna feels obliged, in this context is his story to go out and work for her husband just to make the money in the house? Yeah. The husband stays at home.
His name is Oliver.
Oliver stays at home.
And this is the one who's making the money. Yes.
She spends the money on her husband and the children.
a big siren.
Is that yeah, it is a big seven. And it says that there's a war going on.
And it has to go out. And all of the women in society have to go out by force and fight for the lives of the men. Okay, they have to go and she has to go and fight for the lives of the men by force, not just it's not an option, she has to fight for that. And it works in a coal mining place. You know, the coal mining when you go underneath, and you try and, and every time and is in that place?
rocks, they fall majorana they fold. You know, big rocks. So Anna's everyday she's at risk of death.
And I have a friend called Lizzie. And she works in a garbage you know, cleaning garbage. And she has lots of problems hernia.
And it goes back to her husband, Oliver. And Oliver says to me, you know, I believe I'm a slave in this relationship.
you have all the power.
You're going out there
making all the money.
And you have all the power.
I'm a slave.
But then Anna says listen, actually, I don't think that's right. I risked my life for this family. How many wars have we gone through,
analyze in more analysis.
And it goes on to say,
the reason why I haven't got a finger is because it was blown up by the enemy and war.
And it continues.
And Anna says,
in fact, all the money I make most of it at least goes to you and the kids. So how can you be calling me a slave, Oliver? When it's more likely that I am the slave?
I am giving you all my money, most of my money.
And I come home tired because I've lifted lots of heavy stuff. And you're telling me that you're my slave? You're a slave to me. How Does that even make sense? I'm the one doing all the work in this relationship.
So all of us is not you know, doing all the work. And he has got a point. So look, I'm looking after the kids. I'm doing a bit of cleaning and cooking. Yeah, of course, I'm doing work. So Anasazi. I appreciate actually, you're right.
What I just described here,
I've described the reality of the feminist movement, whereby the feminist movement has forced us to reevaluate
the roles of women in society. But it has not forced us to reevaluate the roles of men in society.
the feminist movement is a movement, which calls human male sacrifice. Power, is an interesting book written by
His name is Warren Farrell.
And he wrote the myth of male power, a lot of the statistics indicate what I'm saying here, world foreign, he says in the book, that according to his research, he wrote this book in 93. And then in 2001, he kind of done a second copy of whatever. So he's constantly looking at resistance. He says,
first and foremost, men.
If you look at okay, because feminists will say, but look, there's a gender gap. It men make more than women in work, and this is lots of problems. He says, This is not true. And you know why he says it's not true. He says, You're comparing the wrong things. Why are you comparing the fact
that a man is making more than a woman as a gross income and not comparing the fact that woman have more as net profit as spending money? And he said, using statistics and his books, and you can find that in his notes of his books, that actually in the United States context, a woman have more
Net spending power than men factor have 14,000 pounds per year, $14,000 per year, and men have 10,000.
So he shows that even if you go now to any mall, that the majority of the mall is tailoring woman's preferences. Why? Because women have more spending power. So the people, the advertisers and the companies they have to facilitate for women. In other words, he says, women are too big businesses,
like bosses, because they are shaping spending habits and shaping, the products are being sold.
Because obviously demand equals supply. The supply of this is economics is basically economics.
And he says also that the draft is called the mnemonic in the draft, or the obligatory military service. If it had been imposed upon women, every feminist would say, this is something which cannot be tolerated. Because why? How can you force women to fight and die for you? Just in the same way, I would argue that you can force men to do that for all of civilization, and all of the countries of humanity. I don't know one country in the whole of human history, which has forced women to fight and die for men. I don't know our country, no one.
And you can compare this with slavery. Well, like if anything is going to be slavery is this. slaves, black slaves that works in American corn, picking farms, picking cotton and risking their lives are more closely correlated to those men in war, who are dying for the future of their countries, which means that their women and children will be protected.
There's more of a parallel with men's and men's jobs and occupations in slavery than there is with women's in slavery, because there's more hazardous occupations. 99% of hazardous occupations, according to him.
99% of 99% of hazardous occupations are occupied by men. I want you to think about one thing and this way says in the book, is this think about the fact that women occupy about 99% of safe occupations, like being a secretary? Yeah, most important to him. In American context, most equities a woman Yeah, she goes to a place the receptionist to Central traditional woman. Now imagine now,
in her workplace, this woman, the ceilings are falling down. The ceilings are falling down.
What's the feminist movement going to do? So listen, how dare you put a woman in this position of hazardous situation?
How dare you know that women are part of this? They make the largest constituents, your constituency agenda of this particular occupation, how they put them in this position? Well, no one ever says that when the rock falls from the mining from the place where the men does mining. Why because men are expected to die for women, full stop. Men are expected to die for women full stop. Don't tell us
that men are being the oppressor here, and that we have some original sin of being a man. This is not what we're gonna accept. What is the unfair analysis, all of a male history and all of history men have been protecting women. That's what's happened. If you want to call that protection.
As I believe oppression, that's the oppression.
Now, the feminists will argue Well, listen, are you are you denying the fact that a woman is unpaid? Yes, I'm trying to actually because she gets paid more than the man. If you look at the economic indicators, she gets given more by the man he works, it gives it to the woman. Now, not all the time was Batman, maybe here in Sweden don't do this kind of things. But this is the way that civilization has been working for the last 1000 9000 years. For the most part, this is the reality. Okay. Having said this, it's really important to ask a question. When a man is in a position. Listen to this, I want to know the scenario. If a man is in a position, and this is something Pharrell says also in
his book, if an if a man is in a position is working in a small business, yeah, man was in a small business. I don't know whether it's out here in Sweden. It products, okay, Sony Ericsson or something like that is working. And now he's in Sony Ericsson office. And now there are a certain amount of women, a certain amount of people that are underneath him say he's a supervisor. He's supervising two people in his office. His boss comes to and says, Listen, tomorrow you're going to supervise two people.
Yeah. So now we've expanded your your role of responsibility. You're not going to just supervise two people, you're going to supervise four people. Yeah. Would we put your hands up if you will see that this is more power given to the man be honest, as the man now got more power. It's got more power. Yeah, because now he's supervising more people. Okay.
If a woman has more children,
issue supervising more, according to the traditional roles, if she was a traditional mother in the house housewife
should be supervising people. And using the same logic, you should say she has more power.
She has more power because now she's supervising more people. But that's not recognized by feminism. Basically, the role and influence and power of mothers is disregarded by the feminist movement. Mothers are powerful agents in society, which shapes society in ways which cannot be measured.
That is the reason why, when a man his power is referred to in economic terms, and the invisible economy of the mother in the home is never measured. A woman has more power, in most cases, in most even Western countries, she can change the kids views, so she can eat, they can eat the father, she has the power to do that. And there are cases upon cases upon cases upon cases of women doing that in many of the Western civilized countries, which by the way, favors women in custodian cost, Ghanian custody and things like that. Now saying it shouldn't By the way, I'm just making the point that if it was equality, it wouldn't be like that. If it was actually equality, feminists would be
against this because equality should be everything is the same. The man is actually the father is the same as the mother. According to feminism in Islam, obviously, we know that's not true. Because we believe in a kind of essentialism, we accept a kind of biological determinism. We accept that okay, she she's the one who had in the in the womb for nine months, or her name, and then she gave birth, and she's breastfeeding, she deserves more rights in this regard. But if you're a feminist, you can't say that because actually the feminist you can only say that they should be equal no matter what, as negozi, seven a book, she goes to 15 stages of feminism, number one, is that what
you call no matter what, and so yeah, and even as a mother, you, if didn't give the motive yourself? You've made yourself lower. Why have you done this yourself?
Because you believe in existentialism, you believe in your own subjective morality, which you have invented. You've disregarded the science in this regard to the psychology and is regarded as the sociology and economics. And you now want to superimpose an idealistic understanding of society as per an egalitarian view. And by the way, is a lot of big words, I'm sorry for you to understand.
But the point really, is this.
The point is, has feminism therefore failed to consider men's roles? And my answer is, yes. Now the point is,
the point I want to make to you guys is, these are the questions we're gonna ask, we're gonna be asked lots of questions regarding women's rights. Because we go around, go around, and I will tell you about 70 to 80% of the questions that people ask about Islam. Why is a woman not allowed to only have four husbands? Or why is it the case that, you know, a man can divorce easier than the woman? Why, why? Why? Why?
Because we don't believe in any, we don't believe in an absolute equality, we believe in a general equality.
And that is more tenable. If you say, because the professor in the Chicago region, he said that certainly men are equal to women. He said, This, however, is generally the case we have exceptions in inheritance. We have exceptions in marriage. And if you don't want that, to be exceptions, you will fall, you will have problems in society. You can't say anything about maternity leave, we should abolish it. This is the reality. So what I'm saying here is, this narrative of men are the oppressors, and the slave owners of a woman are the oppressed, and the end and the slaves. This has to be broken before we can discuss anything else. We can't talk about equality, there's no I'm not
gonna accept this. Well, it is completely unfair. What you've done to men, what feminists have done to men is unfair. No man from the men nowadays, they don't really want to talk about this. Because they will have repercussions for their life. Yeah. But we have to have our own seriously, we have to have our own intellectual courage to come out and say, You know what? I don't believe in the history that you've given me. I don't believe in a psychology you give me your your run on these issues, and therefore I don't accept your premise. So when you asked me about divorce, why is it in Islam?
Yeah, that a man can divorce more easily than the woman? You're assuming they shouldn't? Why should you assume that a woman can turn the kids against them and she can do things to him when she can't do to her this power she has that he does not have? How are you going to rectify that? How are you going to equalize that?
How are we going to equalize the fact that a woman would just by virtue by biological virtue of the fact that she gives birth to a child, that that child will inherently psychologically have an affinity to the mother moreso than the father, how can you
if that is the case, if there is a psychological scientific reality that we can assert that we must equalize that we have to equalize the relationship between men and women don't expect that to be the same
Same kind of rules for them. Therefore, there has to be checks and balances in place.
And that's why men can do certain things in Islam that women can't do.
And that's why women can do certain things and Islam that men can do.
And that's why Allah subhanaw taala says we'll let him and Omar Abdullah love Viva, there's a genuine civil matter subordinates
that do not want what the other one has. don't wish to have what lactuca your man don't wish to have a woman has for the man is a portion of what he has earned. And for the woman is a portion of what she has done some things
on each unequal by virtue of reality, and that Islam has the answers to that. So when you ask questions about women's rights, just remember what I've said.