Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Female hurricanes not taken seriously because of implicit sexism

According to high level research by some really stupid progressives, hurricanes are sexist. That’s right, female hurricanes are not taken seriously because of the inherent sexism that 1960-PSYCHO-001resides in society. Even natural disasters are not immune from sexism. Do the female hurricanes themselves know that they are suffering from society’s injustices? People do not take female hurricanes seriously even though they are “deadlier” than male hurricanes. The war on women just got weirder, but nothing is too out of bounds for feminist nut jobs to sink their collective fangs into. Should this be a new pet issue to propagate? Surely, and hopefully, while female hurricanes are beating the hell out of coastal cities, they can stop at Planned Parenthood for an abortion or get some free condoms as a complimentary gift for stopping by. Happy storm surging girls.

Really, one would think feminists would be happy about this development. Their female counterpart hurricanes kill more men than male hurricanes, older people, and babies. They kill everyone and everything. Win win. They don’t even have to use guns to do it. Oh no, not so fast. This is sexism. A natural disaster, something allowed by God to take place, is an entity for misogyny. Funny thing too, hurricanes don’t have sex organs. But it’s all in a name. As explained by the brilliant folks at The Wire, here is one conclusion:

The study, Female hurricanes are deadlier than male hurricanes,’ attempts to figure out why (slightly) more people die in storms with female names than in storms with male ones. In order to test the theory that this is because people are pretty fundamentally sexist (‘warm fuzzy, Tabitha won’t hurt us as much as mean old Harry, so we won’t take precautions’) the researchers asked six groups of volunteers a number of hypothetical, storm-related questions that hinged on each storm’s names.

Do the people who conducted this study remember Hurricane Katrina or Superstorm Sandy (female hurricane hybrid)? The meteorologists were screaming at the television sets telling people to get the heck out of New Orleans and in the areas the Sandy would hit. Male meteorologists were not telling people to “calm down” because it was just a chick hurricane, or to stop being so emotional and hormonal. Hurricane Katrina topped $108 billion dollars in damage. But if it had just been given a male name, it would have “inspired” people to leave the city. As a wise man once said, “The secret to winning an argument with a woman: They have to be dead.”

Maybe. just maybe, could it also be that people don’t heed the warnings of hurricanes and other natural disasters because they’re stubborn, lazy, or just think forecasters overreact? Most people also think they’re invincible and that the worst won’t happen to them, which is surely another instinct rooted in misogyny. Not to be outdone, the foaming at the mouth feminists at Policymic have a similar take on the issue:

But the study is one of the first of its kind to statistically analyze the relationship between socially assigned gender roles and behavior. And it’s a good step toward beginning to look at the real-world implications of living in a society that still can’t be honest about how it really thinks of women.

We’re still talking about hurricanes. But if this kind of stupidity will keep the feminists busy, have at it. At least they’re not worried about something important. That’s when everyone really needs to worry. But it’s likely time to move to gender-neutral hurricane names, just so there won’t be any hint of implied sexism. The war on women will be waged during hurricane season.


About Janna Brock

Janna Brock is a staunch Christian conservative with a passion for writing about all topics that have to do with civil liberties, the gay agenda, Islam, and the the atrocities of the Obama Administration.

Leave a comment ...

Trending Now on

Send this to a friend