How sexual equality turns men and women into enemies
Here is another Roissy-esque analysis that I find very interesting, posted at Mangan’s:
The concept of the equality of the sexes plays havoc with this arrangement. While men are no longer publicly acknowledged as superior to women, women still have to view them as superior in some way if they are to be sexually attracted to them. In the early days of sexual equality, when women had not yet become financially independent, there was still the man’s earning power to establish the requisite perception of virility. But nowadays even that’s gone, so the only kind of male power that remains to attract women is of the base, animal kind—on the physical side, brute strength, or on the non-physical side, selfishness, arrogance and social domination.What Expatriot is saying is that women’s practical equality of function with men in today’s society eliminates or renders irrelevant the traditionally protective, virtuous, admirable, and efficacious qualities of men that women used to find attractive, with the result that, as Expatriot puts it, “the only kind of male power that remains to attract women is of the base, animal kind—on the physical side, brute strength, or on the non-physical side, selfishness, arrogance and social domination.”
That is extremely insightful and well stated, and it fits interestingly with a traditionalist analysis of liberalism. When you eliminate distinctions between different and complementary parts of the whole, such as men and women, each respective part no longer needs the other for its own completion as it formerly did. Previously, the parts related to each other as parts of the same whole, and so each part saw its opposite as partaking of the transcendent, the transcendent being defined here the quality of a whole that is more than the sum of its parts. But once the distinctions between the parts have been eliminated, the whole to which they belonged and which drew them together is also eliminated, with the result that the former respective parts, the male and female, have no transcendent meaning to each other any longer. All that’s left to attract them to each other is their body, their bare utility, or their power, with the further result that negative and perverse aspects of each sex are drawn to the fore, and the love, sympathy, and friendship that used to prevail between men and women is changed to jungle combat.
All of this is the direct result of feminism and sexual liberation.
A. Zarkov writes:
Expatriot is on to something. I have long wondered why so many women seem attracted to convicts. Charles Manson gets marriage proposals. Even convicted wife murderer Scott Peterson gets marriage proposals. Peterson is a handsome guy, but Manson is grotesque in all ways. Why are so many women attracted to evil thugs when so many nice guys are available? Years ago a San Francisco woman complained to me that she can’t meet men. So I introduced her to some friends and she rejected them all, instantly. The one guy she carries a torch for is gay!
Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 20, 2009 08:54 PM | Send