sathor: (Default)
[personal profile] sathor
All causes, social and natural, combine to make it unlikely that women should be collectively rebellious to the power of men. They are so far in a position different from all other subject classes, that their masters require something more from them than actual service. Men do not want solely the obedience of women, they want their sentiments. All men, except the most brutish, desire to have, in the woman most nearly connected with them, not a forced slave but a willing one, not a slave merely, but a favourite. They have therefore put everything in practice to enslave their minds. The masters of all other slaves rely, for maintaining obedience, on fear; either fear of themselves, or religious fears. The masters of women wanted more than simple obedience, and they turned the whole force of education to effect their purpose. All women are brought up from the very earliest years in the belief that their ideal of character is the very opposite to that of men; not self will, and government by self-control, but submission, and yielding to the control of other. All the moralities tell them that it is the duty of women, and all the current sentimentalities that it is their nature, to live for others; to make complete abnegation of themselves, and to have no life but in their affections. And by their affections are meant the only ones they are allowed to have - - those to the men with whom they are connected, or to the children who constitute an additional and indefeasible tie between them and a man. When we put together three things -- first, the natural attraction between opposite sexes; secondly, the wife's entire dependence on the husband, every privilege or pleasure she has being either his gift, or depending entirely on his will; and lastly, that the principal object of human pursuit, consideration, and all objects of social ambition, can in general be sought or obtained by her only through him, it would be a miracle if the object of being attractive to men had not become the polar star of feminine education and formation of character. And, this great means of influence over the minds of women having been acquired, an instinct of selfishness made men avail themselves of it to the utmost as a means of holding women in subjection, by representing to them meekness, submissiveness, and resignation of all individual will into the hands of a man, as an essential part of sexual attractiveness. Can it be doubted that any of the other yokes which mankind have succeeded in breaking, would have subsisted till now if the same means had existed, and had been so sedulously used, to bow down their minds to it? If it had been made the object of the life of every young plebeian to find personal favour in the eyes of some patrician, of every young serf with some seigneur; if domestication with him, and a share of his personal affections, had been held out as the prize which they all should look out for, the most gifted and aspiring being able to reckon on the most desirable prizes; and if, when this prize had been obtained, they had been shut out by a wall of brass from all interests not centring in him, all feelings and desires but those which he shared or inculcated; would not serfs and seigneurs, plebeians and patricians, have been as broadly distinguished at this day as men and women are? and would not all but a thinker here and there, have believed the distinction to be a fundamental and unalterable fact in human nature?

Date: 2016-11-18 10:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile]
Yeah, he sure nailed it there.

Date: 2016-11-19 03:52 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile]
It's funny for me to see a man who wrote this so long ago, and yet, here I am in the 21st century, still surrounded predominantly by men who believe the very things he describes about the place of women in society.

Date: 2016-11-20 07:11 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile]
The really sad thing is that here we are in the 21st century, still surrounded predominantly by women who believe the same thing too.

That's what so-called 'post-feminism' is all about - basically, "Boys don't like feminists"; speaking up for one's own rights is Unattractive.

John Stuart Mill nailed it, and so did John Norman, who wrote the ever-popular Gor books: in a society where women are subjugated to men, naturally "it would be a miracle if the object of being attractive to men had not become the polar star of feminine education and formation of character." The girls who succeed best are the ones who are most pleasing to the most powerful man - the costliest slaves, the Favorites.

Y'know, the Mens Rights Activists aren't wrong about the fact that they're 'beta males' with little chance (outside of rape) of obtaining any of those fine costly slaves. The Gor books are totally written for that kind of male: fantasy wish-fulfillment, a world ruled by Mighty Men who keep women in chains and don't allow no back-talk. (What those dudes don't want to admit is that if Gor was real, they'd be even more 'beta' there, and end up chained to an oar or down in a mine before a week had passed.)

Both John Norman and the MRA assume that they can't get the hot babes because Feminism. It's the same kind of fucked-up thinking as the guys who assume they can't get a good job because Immigrants: they don't question the power-structure that sets the dogs to fighting over the scraps from their feasts, because if they did, they'd have to realize that they ARE only 'dogs' in the eyes of their Masters, who don't make any distinction between white dogs, brown dogs or black dogs.

If women were equal to men, there'd be no need for Feminism. But by the same token, there'd be no need for femininity either: all the artificial enhancement of female traits for the purpose of competing for the attention of high-status males. The MRAs don't want equal partners; nor do they value women for their intelligence or character, regardless of appearance; nor do they believe in a woman's rights over her own body. They want gorgeous, pleasing, obedient slave-girls who'll vie for their favor and let them do anything.

They're shit-outta-luck there, because they can't afford that kind of slave-girls, and never will be able to. But it's not the girls' fault that they're slaves in the first place, and that as slaves, their best chance of success is to be the most expensive slave, the Favorite of the richest master they can attract.

As Trump demonstrates, intelligence or character doesn't matter there, either. He's not an 'Alpha male' - sheesh, I get SO tired of hearing him called that! - he's just a big old blow-hard. If he hadn't inherited a fortune too big to fail, no one would even listen to him, let alone follow him into battle. Alexander the Great, now there's an Alpha Male - he out-Alpha'd Trump before his testicles even descended - and his respect for women was legendary in its own time.

The MRAs don't have either intelligence or character anyway; they don't respect women at all; and in a society that prizes achievement, wealth, looks and style, they've got nothing to offer. They attack women because they're too nithing to challenge the social structure that makes them slaves every bit as much as women are, but much more expendable.
Edited Date: 2016-11-20 07:12 pm (UTC)

Date: 2016-11-20 09:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile]
Enlightening as always, although a little depressing. I feel like I fit into that beta category quite well - to a point where I more or less have given up. There's no point in struggling against a system I despise, or trying to abuse it to my advantage when the gains would be just as deplorable as the system itself.



sathor: (Default)

December 2016

45678 910
2526272829 30 31

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 21st, 2017 09:25 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios