The incident of former Florida State University quarterback De’Andre Johnson punching a belligerent woman in a bar highlights the feminist double standard of demanding the perks of equality for women while clinging to the perks of the paternalistic past they claim keeps them in servitude to men.
Most of America has seen the video of De’Andre Johnson making his way through a crowded Tallahassee bar where he brushed against a woman standing at the bar. Disturbed by this invasion of her space obviously compromised by the crowded bar scene, the woman turns toward Johnson displaying a raised clenched right fist and appears to angrily mouth a comment to Johnson. Johnson grabs the woman’s right arm to prevent her from hitting him with her clenched fist as they exchange words, whereupon she then proceeds to punch Johnson in the face with her left hand. In response, Johnson throws a massive right punch to the woman’s jaw, and she staggers before recovering and brushing her hair out of her face.
As if on cue, Americans rushed to condemn Johnson for punching this woman without ever bothering to hear his side of the story. The fact that a man punched a woman was reason enough to condemn the man and rush to the woman’s defense. Such is the thorough conditioning of Victorian Era etiquette which proclaimed that a man never hits a woman under any circumstance since they are the weaker sex and must always be protected from the more dominant man who is expected to always act in deference to her as the protector of her safety and virtue.
Feminists since the birth of the movement have railed against the Victorian Era treatment of women as being paternalistic and designed to keep them in servitude to men. They have denounced these societal rules at every opportunity in their quest for the nebulous concept of equality which, in their eyes, will only exist when they are superior to men. Their protests for societal sympathy have turned the tables on men and created absolutely unwinnable situations in which men find themselves subjected to the most asinine of conditions for simply being men. Even when men mean well, their actions often land them in hot water as they attempt to negotiate these ridiculous conditions thrust upon them by a feminist movement which long ago became hostage to the radical man haters among their ranks.
In postmodern America, a man is completely defenseless against the hostile forces of feminists looking for any opportunity to degrade and humiliate men to serve their purpose of achieving dominance in their war of the sexes. No egregious action by any woman is beyond the pale when it comes to attacking a man. These radical feminists think nothing of destroying a man’s life through falsified accusations they know will be loudly trumpeted by the media. They also know that in the unlikely event they are caught lying by a leftist media not interested in pursuing the truth with much enthusiasm when it conflicts with their preferred narrative, that same media will downplay the story and they will remain heroic to the feminist zealots who refuse to see the truth.
In the wake of this incident, Johnson has revealed that the woman yelled “get off me, you fucking nigger!” before she punched him. Angered by her use of a racial epithet, Johnson naturally reacted to defend himself after she punched him in the face. Threatened with physical violence, such as having someone punch you in the face, it is extremely difficult to control one’s natural reaction to counter that punch with one of your own. Now, add the element of anger into the mix and it becomes nearly impossible to control one’s self in such a situation. Yet, our convoluted postmodern society recoils in horror that Johnson failed to obey the rules of etiquette dictated by the Victorian Era of the Nineteenth Century and simply bow his head in shame while apologizing profusely to this obviously slighted woman.
No weight is given to Johnson’s defense by the facts that this woman was inebriated; that she turned toward him with her fist already clenched indicating her premeditated intent to launch a violent attack; that she hurled a seriously derogatory insult at Johnson; or that she then proceeded to strike him. The only fact of interest to those rushing to condemn Johnson was that he struck a woman.
Johnson’s incident is only the latest example highlighting this double standard. In a previous incident, Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice was caught on tape punching his then fiancée (now wife) in the face as they rode in an elevator. Like Johnson, Rice was immediately condemned by the public resulting in termination of his contract by the Ravens and his indefinite suspension from the NFL. Rice’s wife protested that the incident was a private affair between her and her husband and none of the public’s business. She went on to point out that she never pressed charges and considered the matter in the past. Rice sued for reinstatement to the league and remains a free agent while Mrs. Rice has fallen victim to the feminist movement interested in using her as a martyr with nary a thought of casting her into poverty by disrupting her husband’s lucrative career. The NFL was only too glad to cave in to the specious demands of the feminist movement in their cowardly attempts to emasculate football believing that to be the path towards increased viewership.
The feminists who rail against Victorian paternalism towards women, with its fussy rules of men opening doors for women and pushing them to the back to confront danger as if they are helpless creatures, are quick to demand obsequious adherence to these same rules when men dare to actually treat woman as the equals they so obnoxiously demand. The reality is that men have always possessed the ability to dominate women through their superior physical strength, and have done so for millennia prior to the development of societal rules designed to temper their desire to do so. These rules allowed for a more civil atmosphere between those men who adhered to these rules for fear of risking societal scorn and the women who benefited by not suffering physical abuse as a result of their more outlandish behaviors.
Like every other leftist movement, the feminists seek to have it both ways. They condemn Victorian paternalism as a demeaning device designed to keep them in servitude to men, while rushing to claim the benefits of this paternalistic protection whenever threatened by a man they have unnecessarily antagonized. Society finds itself torn between fealty to the Victorian Era which produced these rules and the postmodern times which dictate that everyone is free to do as they please. Everyone, that is, except De’Andre Johnson who felt the need to defend himself against a drunken woman insulting and attacking him. And everyone except any man wishing to rail against the intolerably bad deal we are forced to live with on a daily basis as the courts rape us with lopsided divorce rules and women ruin our lives accusing us of rape upon waking to regrettable circumstances when they were only too willing the night before.
We men are getting seriously tired of the feminist zeal to have it both ways at our expense. We are abandoning in droves the abominable deal marriage has become. Women are being treated with the utmost contempt by a significant portion of men who thrive on turning the tables and humiliating the opposition for a change. And some of us, like De’Andre Johnson, are fighting back against abusive women who hide behind Victorian paternalism while denouncing the very rules of etiquette keeping them protected. As society plunges ever deeper into decay, expect more of these incidents, and expect them to get increasingly violent, until the feminists achieve their goal of equal treatment, only to discover they were at a biological disadvantage all along.