Feminist Issue: Prejudice

Prejudice is a form of presentation of men’s integrity that connects the self to society in order to divide aspects of sexism and sexuality into categories of appropriate conduct as to, then, use other categories, such as skin color, to attribute such “appropriateness/lack of appropriateness” to… so that men can stand to always be right in whatever sexual conduct they treat women by given that prejudice allows for men to dictate the conduct of women through that which they expect from other men as to defend themselves by the “belief” they hold as women are held to the “stupidity” and the “ignorance” of those beliefs under the “rights of a person to form his own opinion”. In that, prejudice allows for women to hate men’s conduct without hating men in general as to always have her view of them to be comparative in relation to each other where she feels that “better” can be possible one day as the definition of “better” is given to one group and the definition of “worst” is attributed to prejudice itself. Meaning: Men have organized themselves in a manner that says, “this group is better than that group” only to carry the terms of being in ONE of these groups in a manner that protects the integrity of ALL men in ALL groups as each man is given the same opportunity to say, “my group is the best” no matter which way the men in that group conducts themselves towards women as to have ALL men from ALL groups be respected under the terms of “belonging” to such groups. Within each group, men dictate the conduct that women must adhere to in respect to the fact that “their men” are “different” as for men to take ownership of the “difference” that exists between men and women as women seek to protect the idea of “different needs the will to be respected” where the “will” of the group becomes the thing that women need to respect whereas the difference in conduct between her and the group may become forbidden due to the fact that, again, this “difference” has already been accounted for through the existence of the entire group as ones who are different than other groups.  Now, to be “different” here means that the ideas within any of these groups are not “natural” to the woman as she needs to be taught those ideas where many times those ideas require a form of violence for the woman to uphold them. We do not find those ideas to be in “agreement” with our nature and neither do we find them to be compatible with that which we are “like” as for us to always need to legitimize these “different” aspects (that exist within a group) using an aspect that we kinda sorta “agree” with as to give us the ability to “cope” with the entire belief system.

I understand the traditional meaning of “prejudice” that defines it to be a faulty way of making judgment in regards to others based on “trivial” aspects. Yet, when this “faulty” has been implemented against women to the fullest extent within each group that has taken pride in living by the terms of the “trivial”, we cannot be trivialized in the name of “trivial” in the same manner we were asked to dismiss the “difference” in us being “different” given that “trivial”–when applied to the person–becomes the only word that is “trivial” as it give legitimacy to all words “it (does not) pertain(s) to”. Due to prejudice being based on that which SHOULD have been trivial but was not when it comes to how women were/are treated…and given the fact that women had to live (as they continue to have to live) by the terms of prejudice—- where the black woman must live in regards to how other men have views black men and his status in society today as to make up for that which society has failed  in his regards without forgetting that, for black women, there is an active injustice that she needs to consider on behalf of the entire world as to justify the behavior that black men treat her by… and where the white woman must live in regards to how other men have viewed white men and his status in society today as to make up for that which society has failed in his regards without forgetting that, for white women, there is a claim that society has not failed one bit in regards to white men as to assume that such extends also to the white woman who must act like it too… and where the Arab woman must live in regards to how other men have viewed Arab men and his status in society today as to make up for that which society has failed in his regards without forgetting that, for Arab women, there is a claim that society has failed to see Arab men’s sexual propriety to be righteous enough to allow him to respect his ability to respect her as the woman needs to make up for that by restricting herself from participating in this world… and where the Jewish woman must live in regards to how other men have viewed Jewish men and his status in society today as to have to make up for that which society has failed in his regards without forgetting that, for Jewish women, there is an expectation of her to see her own men as god-like which is very mentally harmful of how she views reality and herself in it—-where we must ask:  where is the trivial in relation to men but that which is already seen as an injustice that they have/are living to “mend”  and “make up for” at the cost of women? Hence, prejudice is not a faulty way of judging others that we are not allowed to make in regards to men… as it is shown that each man should not mind being treated by the terms of prejudice that he is forcing women to live by. Meaning: why should a black woman respect any man at all? And why should a white woman respect any man at all? And why should an Arab woman respect any man at all? And why should a Jewish woman respect any man at all? And why should ANY woman respect ANY man at all? Men will say that prejudice is wrong in relation to those questions because prejudice due to sex is wrong… as the woman—in existing within the terms of prejudice—is not able to live in accordance to that same answer. In that, we see that prejudice connects men’s sense of self to society as it takes his definition of “sexuality” and gives him ownership over the woman through it as she now must own it under the terms of “belonging” to that group.

Again, prejudice upholds a status of selfhood in society for men—proven by slavery and the prejudice against black people as they are seen as “inferior”. What does it mean for a man to have a self is excused by prejudice as to say that a “black man cannot be fully defined yet” and that “a white man cannot be fully defined yet” and that “any man cannot be fully defined yet” under which this “relaxed” aspect of selfhood is something that, “makes up for the entire definition of selfhood” given that if “selfhood can be lived in its fullest extent”, the evidence of that being so is how “relaxed” of a definition it is in being. Yet, we cannot forget that, for example, even in the midst of slavery, the selfhood of black women was seen having the status of being “fully defined and set in stone” as such is the same for all women… where, today, all women have to take a hammer and a nail as to carve a hole in that stone in order to peak our real identity through it only for us to meet the “fully defined and set in stone” selfhood that another man is subjecting “his women” to. This lack of ability for a woman to live by a “relaxed” definition of self only gains a sense of “fluidity” through a sexual conduct that men have find to be suitable enough for her to “enjoy”—a sexual conduct based on that which remains out of societies being prejudice as that prejudice fades away leaving behind “sexual fluidity”. Hence, explaining how today sexual fluidity is an identity of selfhood through the aspect of “relaxation” that allows for it to be considered a “selfhood”. And hence, how prejudice connects the self to society when it comes to women.

Prejudice is a presentation of men’s integrity. And here we cannot see “integrity” as being personal more so than it is a sexist totality that categorizes men as one group and women as another where women are seen as those who must uphold men as ones who have high integrity in following their rules of conduct. And when I say that “Prejudice is a presentation of men’s integrity”, I mean to say that at the end of all of this division and categorization of people, what we would be left with is a protection that men have always maintained as correct for all people to have towards them as women must pay the price whenever it is not upheld towards them as if any wrong that any man faces is merely a lesson for a woman to see how she is not allowed to treat him by.  And where above I have said that what is left after prejudice fades is sexual fluidity, the integrity is the sexual aspect of it as that being defined as “man” gaining integrity through the supposed preservation of this “fluidity” that is only sex-based although it should be more than sex based where that fluidity, again, speaks about “self preservation” and “lack of infringement” against the selves of others as men are painted to be ones who have upheld the value of “selfhood” more so than even women have. For integrity is the respect of selfhood as for it to be a whole unit where men have altered that definition as they united with each other to create its presentation as women must confirm to it in order not to damage it…where women become the only ones divided against each other given that no woman has yet been allowed to live by a value system of her own choosing and neither may society be able to accommodate a value system that brings women justice in relation to the past and how she was treated in it. Not only that, but in relation to women, I assume that each woman wants to hold her own value as one who carries her own integrity which only can happen if men are seen as ones who lack it in totality as the terms of prejudice need to be held against him.   Meaning: unity of women is not an option in relation to establishing a correct identity as such “unity” must come by removing the integrity that men have acquired instead in order for the “unity” that women gain to be just a  “default” aspect of us having more than one woman as to not be purposeful in trying to establish one definition of “women”—hence, preserving the integrity of each. And here I need to clearly add that such manipulation in regards to the terms of “integrity” is a severe crime that men have committed and continue to commit against all people who have existed with the purpose of continuing to commit against all people that may ever exist as well as it is a crime against animals as it is also a crime against god.

Prejudice serves as a form of honesty that is mind altering in relation to the “level of fear” and the “level of trust” that a woman has towards HER VERY OWN SELF. For in men being forthcoming in relation to that which they are willing to accuse another man of, women  are set to be the ones to blame for the accusations given that women are the ones who are receiving the terms of punishment as another man is being mistreated at the same time… where she is being blamed for being punished while having committed no wrongs as for her to look around and see the wrongs that another man is suffering and feel her punishment to be in his regards… where that creates a feeling called, “bad” during a time when she is in need of empathy and sympathy as to establish a connection between her and the man-mistreated…thereby making all women feel a sense of gravitation towards addressing other men first before addressing our own condition as this becomes evidence that subconscious fear is making a woman feel in need of being dismissed out of that situation as to feel safe in not being the cause of it which is something that  gains legitimacy by accusations that blame women to be the origin of all problems.

Ultimately, prejudice allows men to conduct themselves towards women whichever way they want as men have done so throughout the years until this very day under the name of “we are having problems with each other” and under the name of “we will get to women one day” despite the fact that they have gotten to women since the beginning of time as to address their problems through us similar to women being a dumpster of social issues where getting a new “dumpster” has been the way that men have moved forwards in advancing women’s rights as I need to state clearly that spiritually speaking and otherwise–in all aspects of our existence–there comes a time when fearing the same is the same as fearing the harm that comes from asserting our rights to the fullest extent as both equal the value of our life that we need to be willing to put on the line. MEANING: if we remain in this pattern, might as well kill me. Hence, I need to stand up for “the end of this pattern” to the fullest extent even if it kills me. And elements of disgust cannot be fulfilled more so than the way the world has run and is running today as for me to be able to stand and point in every single man’s direction in trying to point it out—disgusting! Over there: disgusting! And there too: Disgusting! As disgust is more than an eww but a thing that says that one have had enough of being imposed upon to a point where looking at those who have done so is involuntarily making one unable to stand life itself as for it to be an expression of foul conduct overboard.

Making judgment based on “group” membership or making a judgment based on preconceived notions should be problematic but not starting with ME. Here, let us start with Liliyan and see if she is making such judgments against people of the universe as she needs to walk a straighter line lest she is deemed problematic to “our values”–“our values” starting with Liliyan being one who needs to follow them and starting with us commanding it upon her life. Yep, making judgment based on “group” membership or making a judgment based on preconceived notions should be problematic as it always should have been so. To keep women in a subservient position and to merely give her a new longer list of men she needs to respect, now that is not the fruit of correct conduct but the fruit to correct conduct as to also be evidence that suggests the roots of prejudice to just be a thing used to impose women to that which she is able to make a sensible judgment in regards all on her own as to force her to live by “inferior” decisions than that which she would have made. Hence, yes, there are inferiors in prejudice that no one needs to be as. And yes, the inferior in prejudice is faith based as being those who lack faith in judgment that upholds human values… for them to impose upon others the terms of the unfaithful as we place all hope in their hands as a form of a secondary imposition over-my-dead-body that it will not resurrect.

Here is wikipedia on prejudice:

” Prejudice or bigotry,[1] is an affective feeling towards a person or group member based solely on that person’s group membership. The word is often used to refer to preconceived, usually unfavorable, feelings towards people or a person because of their sex, gender, beliefs, values, social class,  age,  disability,  religion,  sexuality,  race/ethnicity,  language, nationality,  beauty,  occupation,  education,  criminality,  sport team affiliation or other personal characteristics. In this case, it refers to a positive or negative evaluation of another person based on that person’s perceived group membership.[2]”

How about fingernails? Why is that not up there? Because there is many more valuable things to destroy as nails can grow back. “Because of their sex, gender, beliefs, values, social class,  age,  disability,  religion,  sexuality,  race/ethnicity,  language, nationality,  beauty,  occupation,  education,  criminality,  sport team affiliation or other personal characteristics”—– what am I allowed to do with these things as you want to do something with them in my regards first? And what is a human being but one who does not dare to cross the line in regards to that?  And so, if men treat a man this badly as to judge him by his skin tone or sexuality or religion or class, then we shall march as to call him a bigot in order to stand for that man even if justice is going to be used against us when doing so, right?

Hence, as women are split in regards to “correct conduct” given that, all of the sudden, we have a say so over men as to tell them not to treat that man badly and for him to follow such recommendations where we may feel powerful in uplifting those who would not treat us well no matter what (as if we have enslaved black men in order to see whether they would still treat us badly or not in order for us to come to the “no matter what” conclusion: SEE? EVEN IF YOU SUBJECT THEM TO THE TERMS OF OUR PAIN, THEY STILL HAVE NO EMPATHY!—in a Jewish NY matter of fact correct accent), the question becomes: how to address such feelings in regards to us valuing what is right in regards to our selves and as we see such rights being violated against men while all men are united against us regardless (of how much we have tried to mistreat them into changing their minds)? One cannot support without asking “what is my support going to cost?” where in looking at black men, for example, we need to ask, “what is this going to cost black women and all women in general?” and where in looking at white men, we need ask, “what is this going to cost white women and all women in general?” and where in looking at any woman, we need to ask, “what is this going to cost this particular group of women and all women in general?” for us to support in a fashion that does not extend damage  to any of us.

In being human, terms of prejudice cannot be upheld as to continue to define the relationship women have with each other.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *