It’s Hard to Be a Man: Since When?

Article here. Excerpt:

'The #MeToo and #Time’s Up campaigns have shone a light on the alleged sexual misconduct of several major Hollywood personalities and if the past few months offer any indicator, further revelations appear inevitable – and more reputations will tumble.

But the idea that it’s suddenly become hard to be a man appears a tad misplaced, and if the worst thing most men have to contend with in a changing climate is some awkward conversations, then so be it.
Misogyny has been infinitely more prevalent for, well, let’s face it, all of recorded history than misandry.

Are there men haters out there? On the law of probability, yes, but history clearly shows that it’s the misogynists who have inflicted wholly greater punishments and miseries, some of which remain institutionally and culturally agreeable in men-dominated states/regimes across the world.'

up
44 users have voted.
I like this

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Patriarchy, etc.

Recently responded to a friend who said something about patriarchy, etc. Seems like a good place to cc it:

Patriarchy as characterized by feminists isn't an accurate rendering.  Patriarchy is a product of hyper-specialization of the sexes among humans.  Most higher animals vary little in relation to one another in terms of sex.  Male and female cats for example don't vary much physiologically, yet female cats still produce kittens and males don't.  Re humans, much of human females' internal systems are oriented toward reproduction.  Arguably to create 1 new human it requires roughly 70% of her bodily resources.  Even then, a lot can go wrong.  And in a state of nature, women are all but helpless in the last stage of pregnancy.  Humans produce utterly helpless offspring and they stay that way for literally years.

Man needed to develop a very social brain and systems of inter-relating to support successful reproduction.  Because for over 99% of human history our infant death rate was 7 or 8 in 10, and our life expectancy was maybe 30 or 40, human women needed to focus much of their time and energy on making babies.  Men evolved in such a way to maintain and defend the interests of human females and children.  Without this specialization of men, humanity would have died out because it could not provide for and defend its young successfully.  This remained true through ancient history.  Civilization as we know it further required huge amts of physical labor to maintain.  Practically speaking only men could provide it.  And the high infant mortality rate remained unchanged.  Humanity may have gotten more civilized but its fundamental problems remained: high infant death rate, low life-span.  Patriarchy was the inevitable outcome of all these factors as a sheer matter of cause and effect.

Then a few key inventions and modern medical science came along.  Suddenly the infant death rate plummeted.  Human life-spans expanded greatly.  And physical labor was replaced by machine labor.  In a very short time, some ppl realized that patriarchy was no longer a required matter because the forces that brought it into being were no longer extant.  Hence the suffragette movement in the 19th C and the first women's rights convention.  Demands for expanding women's roles in society predictably increased as time went on.  The end of patriarchy is an inevitable consequence of modernity and its advances.

That Americans would create this movement is no surprise. Americans are eminently pragmatic.  When they see something that isn't necessary, they move to eliminate it or replace it w/ something more useful.  Eliminating patriarchy with a more equitable system makes sense.  But while this is a good and noble goal, the leaders of modern feminism are not in fact about equity.  The movement was once about equality of opportunity between the sexes.  Today it isn't.  Feminism has morphed into a Female Supremacy movement.  #MeToo started as a justifiable effort to stop men in high places from abusing their positions sexually with women.  Alas it quickly morphed into a weaponized branch of modern feminism, now used as a way to attack men a woman or women don't for whatever reason like (eg: Garrison Keillor) or to get him replaced with a woman simply bc someone wants to see a woman hold his position regardless of qualification.

This is closely related to Marxist class struggle ideology wherein the notion of justice for the individual is vacated in the name of "class justice". This sort of thinking led to millions of deaths at the hands of Communists in the USSR as innocent ppl were sent to gulags just for being successful farmers or merchants.  This kind of class-oriented thinking is at the root of the modern Social Justice movement.  It represents a real threat to western liberal civilization.

Don't allow ideologues to conflate the desire to see equal opportunities for women, which is an all but realized goal in the US, with the goals of modern SJWs and feminists.  They are not the same.  Not even close.

up
8 users have voted.
I like this

This guy is a few pancakes short of a full stack

I don't believe in the myth of misogyny--that men everywhere actually hate women. Gender roles developed primarily for survival, as Matt explains. Men did their part, women their did part, and together we survived and thrived.

These roles were not based on men exploiting women. They were based on men and women helping each other. There were advantages to the male role, but there were also advantages to the female role. A woman might not get to explore the new world on the first ship but neither did she die alone in a humid jungle because the native inhabitants didn't take kindly to the newcomers.

I learned how hard the world could be for men by watching the body bags flown back from Vietnam on the nightly news. The body counts were posted daily. In the meantime, women complained about wearing bras. Poor dears. A lot of the men did survive, with missing limbs or suffering from PTSD. You can still find some of these men in the local homeless shelter. My brother went and wouldn't talk about his experiences there for more than 40 years. Even today, with women in "combat," most of the dead are male.

The truth is the same as always: men do the dirty jobs of life so women can enjoy the comforts of life. And enjoy them longer than men. If there's a sewer pipe that needs cleaning or a ditch that needs digging or a war that needs fighting--it's more than likely the man who will do it.

But Hillary explained how women are the primary victims of war--because they lose their husbands and brothers and sons. How is being the one who survived worst than being the one who died?

up
8 users have voted.
I like this

Interesting take but she's missing the point

http://thefederalist.com/2018/01/31/feminism-takes-away-womens-power-say-no-predators/

Interesting. But the feminists know EXACTLY what they're doing. Anne hasn't realized that modern feminists have deliberately and willfully cast women as victims categorically so that Marxist class warfare tactics can be used on men. This is a perfect mechanism for the misandrists now leading feminism and who quite literally want to see men hunted down and killed off (not hyperbole).

Still, it's nice to see someone standing up for common sense and the original exhortations of feminism as it used to be.

up
9 users have voted.
I like this