Uncategorized

Crazy Males

 

The traditional male psyche found meaning in the face of personal extinction by being a father who protected a woman and her children from other males and providing sustenance.  However contraception means women do not need to have children when they are unable to protect them, and the automation of physical labor has meant women can provide for children using their own labor.  This challenge to the traditional male psychic structure creates anxiety which in turn creates neurotic, anti-social behavior.

Males should be prevented from exercising political power until they have readjusted their psyches to deal with the new economic and technological realities without causing undue harm.  I propose a ten year moratorium on males holding political power.

Advertisements
Standard

14 thoughts on “Crazy Males

  1. Of course, similar considerations apply to females. They are just as much in unknown territory as males, and they have equally serious problems in dealing with it. Perhaps we should have a 10-year moratorium on anyone holding political power.

  2. Male clergy are really important, not least to provide counseling to other males But the positions of ecclessiastic power (bishops, mullahs, chief rabbis)– disciplining clergy, deciding who gets to be clergy, speaking on behalf of the religion — should all be held by women.

      • Did. It gets called anti social behavior.

        But to speculate, what if that’s a thing – what if there’s this little sandbox inside of social norms for men to be in, but they aren’t needed for it anymore – the sandbox is to do with protecting da wimmins and providing da foods and da manual labours. But what if, when you’re not needed for that, there’s no other sandbox for you and anything you do becomes an anti social behaviour? What if societal norms just aren’t keeping up with the times, rather than another ‘blame men’ situation? That folding arms and avoiding creating a new sandbox in favour of the much easier ‘blame men’ is to be more part of the anti social problem?

        But speculation is never all that interesting if it lands oneself in the cooking pot, of course!

      • Which is?

        Whistling on a Tuesday was anti-social at one point, women wearing pants was anti social at one point, the idea of women getting the vote was anti social, at one point – all sorts of things, people get a big old bee in their bonnet about – simply because it’s not been given a sandbox by society.

        So what sandbox is given to men now?

        Telling anyone to go find a space for themselves when one hasn’t been made for them is really quite cruel.

        That or instead of society deciding a space for men, men will decide society (perhaps even Trumpish men, sadly) and will dictate that their behavior, whatever it is, is the norm rather than anti social. No one stands being continually scolded for their behavior when no right behavior has been supplied. That sort of thing is largely why feminism came about – women being continually scolded for certain behaviors. Does it work out? In my estimate it doesn’t.

        But the obsoletes, face either perpetual scolding (as they try and guess how much of their masculine intuitions they can actually express without a verbal slap down) or they can join some ‘Alpha, Beta’ Trumpish mobs and gain some kind of place and acceptance (whilst becoming extremists in the process)

        This is part of the man talk we all need to have.

  3. Pingback: Matriarchy and the Intelligence Paradox | Ashes of Our Fathers

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s