When women cry: is it a sign of weakness?

Yes

1 of 1

by G E Barr

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

The Reality Of Showing Emotion

There are those who consider a woman who cries, weak, and they like to be involved in "projects" which cause a woman to cry. I know from experience.

For those of you who read this, do you want the truth? Or do you want another fallacy?

In some ways of thinking, a woman who cries is disgusting. A woman who loves and cares about her children, is "sick". People who did not have a mother who loved them, sometimes don't want to see that kind of thing. They read in certain aspects that are not there.

There are few things which make me cry. One of them is Africa. I grieve for what the people of Africa go through. It is inhumane and horrendously lacking in human rights, Africa. Were I to spend an afternoon watching videos on Africa and reading many of the websites which contain the accounts of random genocides, starvation and crudity in general and then I went to the grocery store to pick up some milk, I run the risk of being seen as "weak".

The reason for my red eyes will not be taken into account and I run the risk of being attacked in various ways.

Yes, when women cry, it is a sign of weakness. It is a sign that she is emotional, frail and capable of caring. Caring causes problems for some people.

This is not a diatribe to skewer the emotions of sensitive women, it is more of a warning. A reminder that all is not as it seems.

By the rules of psychology, anyone can be made to be seen as mentally ill. People are often times driven to insanity. This is the reason why so many women are staying with men who sexually abuse their children and their are many women who aid and abed this social phenomenom.

There appears to be, in reality, two kinds of insanity. The more obvious and the less obvious. Trends decide what is less obvious. If everybody is doing it, then it must not be crazy. Right?

I just explained to you why feminism is a necessary component in a free world and why, though I have empathy and compassion, I've no choice but to distance myself from weeping.

Here is the wikipedia definition of Radical Feminism that focuses on the theory of patriarchy as a system of power that organizes society into a complex of relationships producing what radical feminists claim is a "male supremacy"[1] that oppresses women. Radical feminism aims to challenge and to overthrow patriarchy by opposing standard gender roles and what they see as male oppression of women, and calls for a radical reordering of society. Early radical feminism, arising within second-wave feminism in the 1960s,[2] typically viewed patriarchy as a "transhistorical phenomenon"[3] prior to or deeper than other sources of oppression, "not only the oldest and most universal form of domination but the primary form" and the model for all others.[4] Later politics derived from radical feminism ranged from cultural feminism to more syncretic politics that placed issues of class, economics, etc. on a par with patriarchy as sources of oppression.

But what happens when the inverse of this occurs? When matriarchal supremacy occurs? The same effects defended by women.

I'm not crying over this, I am merely distinguishing in a rational manner, the difference between myself and the trendy.

Learn more about this author, G E Barr.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.