Parodoc-X-ical Musings

Atamanoyare banner


I question the concept that women are ‘less than’ if they express themselves in ways that do not include placing them on a pedestal.

It would then follow, that those who restrict themselves to behaving, thinking and acting like other suggest they are supposed to do, are ‘more than’.

Why is it that if there are any conditional perceptions directed towards women with even a hint of negative undertones, irregardless of veracity.

Words such as sexist and misogynistic are suddenly propagated like bullets from a M134 Mini-gun. Squarely aimed at any one who has the temerity to offer dissension. irregardless of the truth actually.

I stand firmly behind the idea that women – like men – are capable of feats that restore faith in the human condition. And also, like men, they are capable of feats that are considered taboo for the sake of proper societal etiquette.

Lets take a – Lay – philosophical approach to this.

Existentialists purport that existence precedes essence.

According to Jeffery M. Walkey, Jean – Paul Sartre suggests that:

” [F]irst of all man exists, turns up, appears on the scene , and, only afterwards defines himself” (THE ESSENTIAL STRUCTURE THE EXISTENTIAL CHARACTER OF BLONDELIAN PHENOMENOLOGY 105)

To avoid any confusion ‘Man’ is merely used here as a derivative of ‘Mankind’ by virtue of which means it includes women.

Therefore, to be succinct, the quote above suggests that the condition of being human is a canvas.

The things we do while in this state are the combinations of colours and tones with creates a whole painting. ie identity defining actions.

Existence ‘actions’ precedes essence ‘quality of being human – man or woman. Essentially, this presents the idea that women can define themselves by their actions as do men.

The important part to note, is that not all actions must meet the preconceived notion of society as a whole.

To be more in-depth this would be an essay, not a post. However, my point is this:

A woman can: Wear what she feels like and act the way she wants.

The perception of these – if negative – do not make her ‘less than’ to the perception of actions taken by others which would be interpreted as positive.

The idea then, is this: since we all have the capacity for good or bad, we can either choose to be good or to be bad. By having the ability to be thus.

We sculpt our identity with the chisel of actions and temper with the fire of words.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s