|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Very good piece - and very truthful in showing an example of an annoying social phenomena (women conveniently blaming men for everything bad).
For a slightly more encyclopedic and "direct" response to this phenomena, here's an article I found a long time ago at The Liberator website. It's slightly crude but, I have to say, cathartic for any man who's tired of the pointed finger.
Happy Veteran's Day!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Discovery channel had something about the Indianapolis on sunday. It went down during WWII, when a japanese sub sanked it. The survivers only had life jackets (no food or water). They were out in the deep sea for 4 days. And they also had sharks attacking them for the whole time. A lot of the men were hit pretty hard, mentally, by the 3rd day. I think discovery is reboard casting it on wednesday.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not a bad piece ! You just forgot in your list
of women leader Indira Ghandi and how she ended
democracy in 1975 in India.
Or how Pauline Nyiramasuhuko and Rose Karusharain in Rwanda led the genocide against the Tutsi and killed hundreds of men and women themselves.
Must be because of men.
Zerostress
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems interesting to me how some feminists speak so ardently about how men and women are substantially the same. Yet, in the same breath, they will state how they are so much more peace loving, and caring, than men.
They often speak of a "spirit of reconciliation", while holding a grudge until the end of time. If women are so peaceful and loving towards transgressors, why do they feel the need to hang a bunch of plaster likeneses of male anatomy on a string to try to make battered women feel empowered? This "artwork," certainly does not conjure up images of compassion, forgiveness and reconciliation. Just ask anyone who went to Catholic school under the reign of an angry, ruler toting, nun. Don't get me wrong, I love those cranky old nuns, and I wish we had more discipline in our classrooms today, but this shows that women do have a violent streak, and when in power they will excersize it against anyone who oposses them. Another example is PETA, and other radical animal or environmental groups, They often resort to destructive behavior to further their cause, and many of their members are women.
It would seem that women and men ARE very much alike. We all have causes that we are willing to die for, and likewise kill for. It is true that we are all willing to give up a certain amount of freedom for safety, but this can only be taken so far. When a system becomes abusive instead of protective, people will rise up and fight. I believe this tendency is shared by both men and women. Our causes may vary slightly, but the tendency to fight for what is right is the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When a system becomes abusive instead of protective, people will rise up and fight. I believe this tendency is shared by both men and women.
Right. The survival (or fight-or-flight) instinct that all creatures need to react to threats is not something that I think females are exempt from having and needing, simply because they've often had males to act as buffers. In fact, a lot of feminists talk like women go through life feeling more physically endangered than men - which would engender an even stronger and more ruthless fight-or-flight instinct. Of course, feminists, in the same breath, profess that the very reason women are so endangered is because they are such passive creatures. Kind of a contradiction there.
The issue I take with common conclusions we draw from evolutionary theories is the idea that simply because one gender might make use of a particular instinct or skill more, that Nature then sees fit to deprive the other gender of having this instinct or skill. But, just because our primitive male ancestors probably did most of the hunting and killing was no reason for our female ancestors not to be equally endowed with the instinct to fight and kill, if they should need it. The same applies to nurturing instincts. Just because women have done most of the direct nurturing is no reason to wire males to be completely dispassionate. In fact, it would seem to me that if men have so much physical power to harm women and children, that would make it even more important for males to be compassionate (which is not to imply that I think we are more compassionate, but I don't see why we should be less, either).
They often speak of a "spirit of reconciliation", while holding a grudge until the end of time.
Warren Farrell, in interviews, has referred to women having "victim power", which I think is very real and very important. My theory is that victim power is something that women have almost as a birthright, because we perceive them as being weaker, more innocent, and more besotted with biological intrusions. It's kind of the flip-side of capability power, which is what men have traditionally had. Capability power means that you are first in line for rights and privileges that require you to be capable. Victim power means that the world is perpetually indebted to apologize and reparate you for your weaknesses and for the indignities that you have suffered, in a variety of ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
legal codifications – what we call modern “justice” – developed over millenia from roots in the law of talion – the jungle law of revenge
talion is based in the ancient uncodified assumptions of “mother right,” which is shorthand for the long period of the numerous stages and variants of matriarchy, in which any “offense” made to any member of the feminine was the most serious, inexpiable crime
america is a recapitulation of mother right – this is part of a necessary “rebirthing” process involving the opposites that has now gone on too long, and requires reform
the urge to vengeance runs far deeper in the female of the species, for it is the base psychological strata of her collective shadow side, the occulted counterpart to her nurturing aspect (which is equally as real)
at the moment, the collective feminine in the west refuses to make conscious its own blood-lust, thirst for retribution, and self-service, preferring instead to assume that female motivations and behaviors invariably are correct, righteous, and beyond criticism – exactly replicating conditions during the vast bulk of human development
because culpability is currently impossible for the feminine, all liability – including the assignation of evil – must be projected onto males, individually or en masse
this is why male heroism, in the modern period, is defined by the rejection of revenge (christ, gandhi, et al.), for vengeance constitutes regression to talion and mother right
mens’ activists need to become much better informed about the roots of gender in socio-political organization – the info is available, it simply takes the commitment to work through it – j.j. bachofen and robert briffault are the places to start, but it is the great depth psychologists, c.g. jung and erich neumann, who reconnect incipient social organization under maternal domination with the modern world
a grounding in history, anthropology, iconography, and the leading voices of classical greece and rome is also very helpful
we cannot pass through this neo-matriarchal phase in human development unless we understand the history and pre-history of our current psycho-social assumptions concerning gender
else, the masculine will simply remain scapegoated and bound until it is left with no options except mass destruction – personally, there are some elements of modern civilization that i think are worth preserving
we will lose them if we fail
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
