A long time ago, a feminist by the name of Lisa Kansas and I got into it a little bit on a board called Stand Your Ground. The issue at hand was 'what is enough? When has the movement achieved it's goals?' If I recall correctly, my response was along the lines of 'When Mens Issues are given equal weight and consideration to women's.'
At the time there was this thing we referred to as the 'Lace Curtain', which essentially referred to the tendency to filter everything through a female-oriented belief system - ie. "Women hurt moar!". This belief system usually resulted in the complete censoring of a male-sympathetic view of anything, and overblown exaggeration of female victimhood.
As has been pointed out many times in Manosphere blogs, this tendency to view women as helpless victims and men as aggressive protectors is as old as Civilization. And as has also been pointed out, this has evolved into mistrust, even hatred of male sexuality - and by extension 'toxic' aspects of masculinity, almost all of which are related to male sexuality.
This view of male sexuality is also expressed in the 'He wanted it' view society takes toward male sexuality, from male victims of sexual abuse, to the advertising campaigns portraying men as insatiable monsters hardly able to contain their urges. Men as a sex are viewed in the most hostile terms when it comes to their sexuality, on nearly all fronts.
Conversely, the sexuality of women is celebrated in every conceivable way - as empowering, as a means to success, as a lever for control, for simple pleasure, or as part of a pair bond (with a partner of either sex)...sex is routinely portrayed in a positive (and victimey) light in social discourse.
This is known as the "Women are Wonderful" effect, known in MRA circles as Gynocentrism, and it is every bit as destructive as the Misandry we note regularly. It should be noted that the people most likely to subscribe to this sort of notion are the men with limited experience with women.
This permissiveness on one hand, and demonization on the other, is essentially a reversal of the harshest understanding of Victorian sexual mores. It is literally the result of portraying men as beasts, knuckle dragging simpletons...basically, subhuman. At the same time, the permissiveness afforded female sexuality encourages women to completely ignore male emotion as the fiction they must be. And, because there is so little in the way of 'depth' to men, the ONLY way to get their attention is through sex...in this narrative.
Little wonder then, that women seem to be bent on devaluing themselves to being little more than a life support for a vaginas, even in the face of male protest. According to the narrative, it's the only way to get a man. The curious thing, though, is why women allow this to happen.
That feminist I referred to earlier? One other thing I said to her was "Someday, people are goingto look back on Feminism, and what we are doing to men and society today, with abject horror." She thought I was being hyperbolic.
Myself, frankly I'm not so sure.
At the time there was this thing we referred to as the 'Lace Curtain', which essentially referred to the tendency to filter everything through a female-oriented belief system - ie. "Women hurt moar!". This belief system usually resulted in the complete censoring of a male-sympathetic view of anything, and overblown exaggeration of female victimhood.
As has been pointed out many times in Manosphere blogs, this tendency to view women as helpless victims and men as aggressive protectors is as old as Civilization. And as has also been pointed out, this has evolved into mistrust, even hatred of male sexuality - and by extension 'toxic' aspects of masculinity, almost all of which are related to male sexuality.
This view of male sexuality is also expressed in the 'He wanted it' view society takes toward male sexuality, from male victims of sexual abuse, to the advertising campaigns portraying men as insatiable monsters hardly able to contain their urges. Men as a sex are viewed in the most hostile terms when it comes to their sexuality, on nearly all fronts.
Conversely, the sexuality of women is celebrated in every conceivable way - as empowering, as a means to success, as a lever for control, for simple pleasure, or as part of a pair bond (with a partner of either sex)...sex is routinely portrayed in a positive (and victimey) light in social discourse.
This is known as the "Women are Wonderful" effect, known in MRA circles as Gynocentrism, and it is every bit as destructive as the Misandry we note regularly. It should be noted that the people most likely to subscribe to this sort of notion are the men with limited experience with women.
This permissiveness on one hand, and demonization on the other, is essentially a reversal of the harshest understanding of Victorian sexual mores. It is literally the result of portraying men as beasts, knuckle dragging simpletons...basically, subhuman. At the same time, the permissiveness afforded female sexuality encourages women to completely ignore male emotion as the fiction they must be. And, because there is so little in the way of 'depth' to men, the ONLY way to get their attention is through sex...in this narrative.
Little wonder then, that women seem to be bent on devaluing themselves to being little more than a life support for a vaginas, even in the face of male protest. According to the narrative, it's the only way to get a man. The curious thing, though, is why women allow this to happen.
That feminist I referred to earlier? One other thing I said to her was "Someday, people are goingto look back on Feminism, and what we are doing to men and society today, with abject horror." She thought I was being hyperbolic.
Myself, frankly I'm not so sure.
No comments:
Post a Comment