We must applaud Dave Hon for his recent article titled Why I’ll Never Date a Feminist.
You already know how this ends before you read the article or see any of the feminist response to it. I will get that in a moment. What I want to point out is the brilliance of Hon’s strategy.
He wrote a click-bait article so obvious in its intent that only a self-absorbed, ideological narcissistic would be stupid enough to respond to it. What makes Hon’s article so magnificent is that the worst part of it is the title. The article itself is so civil, so benign, so vanilla that even if one wants to be offended, one has nothing to work with. Hon wrote:
If you look for a reason to hate men, chances are you’re going to find it.
The truth is, I don’t blame women, (especially in my generation) for hating men. They’ve been told there’s a wage gap (I disagree). That there’s a culture of rape on college campuses (I also disagree). And the patriarchy is keeping them oppressed in almost every facet of their lives (I really, really disagree.)
Political issues have been creeping into the bedroom. Now, they’re in romance. Because of the hateful culture, men are now demanding “consent texts” on campus before engaging in raunchy, post-party one night stands. Men’s Rights Activists have taken flight with a new philosophy called “Red Pill” which aims to point out how derogatory, hypocritical and vindictive third-wave feminists can be.
This is the tamest criticism I have ever seen of feminists. Hon stood up on his digital soapbox and said in an even-toned restaurant voice, “I disagree with feminists”. His position is so reasonable, one almost wants to badger him into making a more forceful statement.
Hon continued his vicious massacre of feminists:
No doubt, there are men who should be buried underneath the prison. There’s plenty of examples of how the justice system has failed victims. But, it also fails men. The Father’s Rights Movement reports that only 14 percent of custodial parents are fathers. Mothers are more likely to be awarded child support. Women are more likely to graduate college, they live longer, are less likely to die in the workplace, less likely to go to prison and extremely less likely to die in war-time combat.
How incredibly rude for Hon to present facts with which no one disagrees. Next he will say the sun rises in the east and water is wet.
Hon does get to his point:
When it comes to dating, I don’t care about any of that. Unless you do.
I used to think dating across the political aisle was not only possible, but practical. Hell, if James Carville and Mary Matalin can get along, I can date someone who thinks my genitals automatically give me privileges that they don’t have, right?
People who are more loyal to their gender and not their significant other don’t make good partners. They will always look at you as inherently more fortunate than them. They’ve bought into the “battle of the sexes” mentality and it often pervades their perceptions of romance. Romance turns into a power struggle rather than a partnership.
This sort of misogyny is completely unacceptable. How dare Hon claim that people in general who stick to their gender are more interested in protecting their narrative than caring about their partners.
Hon’s sexism did not stop there:
There are complex advantages and disadvantages to being a man or a woman in America. No doubt, men enjoy privileges that women don’t but that boat goes both ways.
The truth is, these aren’t political issues, but deeply personal ones. Often times, anti-male or anti-female rhetoric is rooted in a previous bad experience. They’re cultural opinions that reflect our world views, and thusly, affect how we want to raise our families. Now that America is more politically divided than ever, it’s impossible to date someone with staunchly different ideals than you.
It’s a shame, really, that this divide is widening between the sexes. It’s evident that gender politics is hurting our culture. More marriages are failing and women are reporting that they’re unhappier now than ever.
Perhaps in several decades this won’t be the case. Maybe one day, men and women will stop trying to eliminate the lines between us and realize it’s the differences between the sexes that make romance, family and love an enjoyable experience.
In the words of Jim Carrey:
In all seriousness, this is the most generous article I have seen written about the gender divide. Hon gives his reasons for not wanting to dating feminists, yet his article is written in the most neutral way possible. He does not focus on feminists or even women. He instead focuses on people, noting that there is an anti-male and anti-female element to the divide.
Feminists responded by attacking Hon’s looks, masculinity, likeability, and character. They didn’t engage his arguments or even acknowledge that Hon admitted that sometimes feminists have point. They just denied every criticism with the age-old reply of “nuh-uh”.
All they did was prove his point. Feminists are so wrapped up in their narrative that they attack practically by reflex. Any criticism, particularly that which cuts close to the mark, receives a stream of hate that is so personal and sexist that it would be ironic if it were not so pathetic. The comments on the article alone are a thing to behold. The hate that feminists let flow through them on Twitter and Facebook is a perfect demonstration of why no one in their right mind would ever date a feminist.
Who would date someone so defensive, thin-skinned, selfish, hypocritical, brainwashed, narcissistic, and bigoted?
My favorite part about the feminist response, however, is that they immediately took to bashing Hon’s appearance. These are the same people, literally people like Jessica Valenti, who rail against anyone who attacks a female writer for her looks. Yet when a man writes something feminists do not like, his appearance is fair game.
This is the brilliance of the article. Hon merely disagreed with feminists in the most general manner, and managed to get the lot of them to show exactly how depraved and sexist they truly are. It took so little effort that I am inclined to think that this may have been one of the internet’s best examples of trolling. It is certainly the best reaction from feminists I have seen since Milo Yiannopoulos’s “darling” comment.