Question. If a modern leftist, usually single and often lesbian, feminist, how would you feel about this book and topic?
I think you would generally feel a bit warm and fuzzy inside that this damage is occurring within the male population. And you would be irritated that this book is advocating a victim position for males as, in your view, the crushing of males in the economy and society is justified and long overdue.
And you would see your position as moral, righteous and virtuous. And your would expect the elite institutions of power and influence to support your position. In the US you just got confirmation of this with the unprecedented success of the Democrats in the mid-term election.
I was thinking about this from a historical perspective. First, there are no examples in history of a female controlled and dominated (matriarchal) society. Collectivism is generally more matriarchal, but those systems are even more dominated by males in charge than is, for example, democratic systems that support true equality and individualism. In fact, it is the existence of the democratic system that protects individualism that has allowed western feminists to do their things.
Second... I keep thinking about crime... the increase in rape and other crimes against women that we are seeing today. And the next war.... the coming one that will bring the conflict to the shores and cities of America and Canada.
Meanwhile the postmodernist 3rd wave feminists pushing the critical theory toxicity as part of their political power play strategy is destroying gender definitions that reverse progress in the women's movement as new SCOTUS judges steeped in the campus feminist doctrine refuse to even define "woman" and low-T biological males find a way to their own victim identity as winning trans athletes.
It seems that the best strategy for all of this is that males just shrug. I see it happening. Young men of age are seeing females, not as a potential partner or mate, but as something to ignore and distance themselves from. The old drive of males to protect females is going away as males see that females want to be in charge... in control... and the males are conceding. Male T is declining. Depression is increasing for both genders, but from a male perspective, this is what females want. They have been shamed that they are just rapists, so might as well just turn off the natural interest in sex and sexual relations.
This seems to all be leading to a major gender dystopia... maybe we are already there. But the feminists seem very satisfied.
The question of dependency in relationships must go beyond the ability to be financially independent. It is good that both parents have the opportunities for employment, but being needed is more than financial need. Nurturing, caring, and equal involvement in child rearing and family life are a huge part of the needs for both spouses.
I watch our own two young couples negotiate this balance as they have young children. Both men have excellent jobs, both women have excellent jobs and both women would rather be at home with the babies. Finances dictate that the mothers work, not unfulfilled, in order to help with the bills. Both young boys have adapted to day care and these families are working it out.
Personally, I quit an excellent job to stay at home with my children and don't regret it. As a grandmother now, I admire how our young people readily engage in this conversation of the roles of men, women and the family.
This is from the perspective of well educated upper middle class professionals. The conversation may well be different in disadvantaged strata where the struggle to survive is the driving force.
Question. If a modern leftist, usually single and often lesbian, feminist, how would you feel about this book and topic?
I think you would generally feel a bit warm and fuzzy inside that this damage is occurring within the male population. And you would be irritated that this book is advocating a victim position for males as, in your view, the crushing of males in the economy and society is justified and long overdue.
And you would see your position as moral, righteous and virtuous. And your would expect the elite institutions of power and influence to support your position. In the US you just got confirmation of this with the unprecedented success of the Democrats in the mid-term election.
I was thinking about this from a historical perspective. First, there are no examples in history of a female controlled and dominated (matriarchal) society. Collectivism is generally more matriarchal, but those systems are even more dominated by males in charge than is, for example, democratic systems that support true equality and individualism. In fact, it is the existence of the democratic system that protects individualism that has allowed western feminists to do their things.
Second... I keep thinking about crime... the increase in rape and other crimes against women that we are seeing today. And the next war.... the coming one that will bring the conflict to the shores and cities of America and Canada.
Meanwhile the postmodernist 3rd wave feminists pushing the critical theory toxicity as part of their political power play strategy is destroying gender definitions that reverse progress in the women's movement as new SCOTUS judges steeped in the campus feminist doctrine refuse to even define "woman" and low-T biological males find a way to their own victim identity as winning trans athletes.
It seems that the best strategy for all of this is that males just shrug. I see it happening. Young men of age are seeing females, not as a potential partner or mate, but as something to ignore and distance themselves from. The old drive of males to protect females is going away as males see that females want to be in charge... in control... and the males are conceding. Male T is declining. Depression is increasing for both genders, but from a male perspective, this is what females want. They have been shamed that they are just rapists, so might as well just turn off the natural interest in sex and sexual relations.
This seems to all be leading to a major gender dystopia... maybe we are already there. But the feminists seem very satisfied.
Great conversation. The world needs more of this. Indeed, we have to get away from the zero sum games.
The question of dependency in relationships must go beyond the ability to be financially independent. It is good that both parents have the opportunities for employment, but being needed is more than financial need. Nurturing, caring, and equal involvement in child rearing and family life are a huge part of the needs for both spouses.
I watch our own two young couples negotiate this balance as they have young children. Both men have excellent jobs, both women have excellent jobs and both women would rather be at home with the babies. Finances dictate that the mothers work, not unfulfilled, in order to help with the bills. Both young boys have adapted to day care and these families are working it out.
Personally, I quit an excellent job to stay at home with my children and don't regret it. As a grandmother now, I admire how our young people readily engage in this conversation of the roles of men, women and the family.
This is from the perspective of well educated upper middle class professionals. The conversation may well be different in disadvantaged strata where the struggle to survive is the driving force.