Even by Mr. Wright's standards, though, this screed is batshit crazy. I'll just post some choice quotes from it and try to figure out what the logical structure of his argument is.
I had recently come to realize that the feminist movement is not feminist at all. It is masculinist.That's how he starts out. Yes. The feminist movement is not feminist. It's actually pro-male! But then wouldn't that be a good thing for the ASMOTT (Antisocial Males on the Internet) community? Not so! For this masculinist feminism is VERY SINISTER INDEED.
By this I mean, the purpose of Fourth Wave feminism (if you wish to judge not by what they say, but by what they do, and to know the fruits, so to speak, by their fruits)I hate it when women speak with their fruits. Don't you hate it when women do that?
is not to make women legally and culturally equal to men, but to make them be men: that is, to abolish the female from life and thought altogether.
So…like the twist ending to Sleepaway Camp?
No clearer homage could be paid to the concept that males are superior to females than the tacit acknowledgement that the only path to equality was imitation. What the feminists are doing is about as insulting and degrading to women as if the Civil Rights movement of Martin Luther King, rather than abolishing Jim Crow laws, kept those laws in place, and instead urged all Negros to have their skin dyed white.
I cannot think of a deadlier insult, or a more outrageous.You couldn't have thought of a stupider one, either.
For many a year my admittedly limited brain refused to accept that this was what the feminists were actually seeking, because, of course, as we all know, women are the superior sex. (They are not the superior gender. Gender is a part of speech. Only people who hate sex and hate women would demean them by referring to them as a “gender”. A “gender” is something artificial you put on. To call a woman’s sex her gender would be like referring to the Black Man’s race not as a race but as a “costume”.
I decided to bold a particular part of that paragraph because I think he's subconsciously realizing how stupid he sounds right now.
What are the distinctive marks of womanhood, the thing that makes women women instead of dickless men with breasts? Even the man from Mars can tell that: women bear children rather than father children. This has immediate and inescapable social and political implications: by nature, women must be more careful in the choice of mate than the man, for she will carry the child nine months. Hence, sexual purity is and must be more important to and for woman than men.
I think you deserve an award for making that many non-sequiturs in one paragraph.
…do I even have to make fun of this?
So, in an effort to break the evil hypnotic spell the feminists have cast over the human race, let us here and now announce a Fifth Wave of feminism, a true feminism, which glorifies womankind and reduces we mere males back into our deservedly lowly position as breadwinners and heads of households, whose mission in life is to cough up money enough to support a wife and kids, and have the wife at home so that hired daycare strangers are not raising them.I have a term for this movement as well. It's called, "suburbia."
Wait, I'm confused now. What point is trying to make here?
Fifth Wave feminism demands that men return to their ancient and servile status as suitors, chaste lovers, bridegrooms. With one voice, the sisterhood of all true feminists everywhere cries out: “WE WILL BE COURTED, DAMN IT! No more of this casual sex that exploits the woman and leaves the man looking smug. No more hook ups. No more cheap dates.
A reminder. This guy is not a satirist. He is being completely serious here.
Fifth Wave feminism holds that gay marriage is impermissible, on the grounds that marrying males is a privilege too rarefied for males. You are not good enough to be women, so stop acting like it. (Of course, since no-fault divorce laws gutted the meaning of marriage long ago, this issue is moot.)Then why are you bringing it up!?
Fifth Wave feminism likewise holds that unnatural sexual acts, hereafter to be known by the euphemism, “The Sin of Clinton,” are degrading and insulting to women, on the grounds that the female womb is desecrated and insulted if a male thrusts his male member into any other orifice aside from the life-giving womb: to equate the sacred mystery of femininity with the mere physical sensation of penis gratification is the same as to demean women to the status of sexual toys: it is a mortal insult.Okay, there is no way he isn't at least slightly self-aware about how ridiculous this sounds? The "Sin of Clinton?" Really?
But more importantly than any real world implication of Fifth Wave Feminism, we ask, nay, we demand that the English language be changed to pay special homage and adoration of womanhood, so that certain words be set aside to refer to women. Any use of sneaky so-called gender-neutral terms we denounce as an insult to womanhood and as a covert or overt attempt to rob womankind of her most glorious triumph and highest honor: namely, that all woman shall proudly say, “We are not males!”Isn't this similar to what a lot of second-wave feminists tried to do?
Especially note that when using Latinate words, such as “aviator” to refer to an aviatrix, or “alums” to refer to an alumni, you will sound stupid if you try to neuter women of their sex and rob feminine words of their gender.
And you are not robbing the English language of words like “heroine” and “enchantress” except you take the pen from my cold, dead hands, you harpy freaks. Fie on you, and a curse on your breed!
Tragically, his genius goes unnoticed.