21 February 2012

Societal Fitness Test

This post as been a long time in the making, but something Elusive Wapiti wrote has served as the inspiration needed to finish putting my thoughts together:
In short, this movie offers much of the same as Fireproof, only with a slightly different twist. It was steeply exhortative of men, while speaking little to women's needs for behavioral reform. Moreover, the movie's stance on paternal abandonment is simply not consistent with the facts, and unfortunately repeats some of the same incorrect pap we've had to endure for two generations now.
I view feminism as a macro-level fitness test.  Women, on a society-wide scale, tested the resolve of men and found them wanting.  Women demanded to be treated equally (in a positive-rights sense), they demanded to be given power, and they demanded to be taken seriously.  And now, the results speak for themselves.

Women should have been put in their place, they should have been told—by men—that they were not going to be given power, treated as equals (again, in a positive-rights sense), or be taken seriously.  Men, in general, failed this test was it was presented to them.  From the suffragette movement to the temperance movement to the sexual revolution, and many times in between, women have made demands of men that should have simply been denied.  They were not, and the results speak for themselves.

As has been well-established by the Dark Lord of the Crimson Arts, women want strong dominant men.  The evidence, whether it be personal experience or a scientific study, proves time and again that women want men that won’t capitulate to their solipsistic whims.  This is certainly generally true on an individual level, and I suspect it’s true on a macro level as well.  And so, when society’s men were tested by women, they failed, and failed miserably.  The men caved to the women’s demands, and now the results speak for themselves.

Who, then, can blame women for engaging in their current behavior?  Many men are simply too unmasculine to merit feminine women.  It has been said by many that men and women always deserve the other.  And since leadership always starts with men, it would stand to reason that many modern social ills are a result of men abdicating their God-given authority to women.  Again, the results speak for themselves.

So what does this have to do with Elusive Wapiti’s review of Courageous?  Well, EW laments that it is always men—never women—who are told to improve, to fix society, to fix the problem.  Here’s the thing, though:  men are the natural fixers, the natural problem-solvers.  What is that women always complain* about:  men never listen to their problems, instead men always try to fix their problems.

This time is no different.  Men will have to step up and fix the problems wrought by feminism.  Men, in failing to stand up to the societal fitness test thrown at them by women through the political movement known as feminism, allowed to mess to be made.  To be sure, men did not initially make the mess, but they allowed it to happen when they could have easily prevented it.

Men’s natural role is that of leader and women’s natural role is that of follower.  Women will comply to men’s frames as long as men stick to their frames.  If men want women to improve, they will have to expect women to improve, and they will also have to demand that women improve.  And expecting women to take the lead on this matter is ludicrous because women are simply not designed to lead.  They are, after all, the helpmeet.  Thus, men need to be men in order for women to be women.

Some women have even recognized this fact, calling for men to man up, the ill-received Kay Hymowitz op-ed being but one example.  And though women might recognize the problem (as I believe Ms. Hymowitz has), they are generally ill-equipped to solve the problem. For one, as the aforementioned op-ed by Ms. Hymowitz readily indicates, women are not good at providing solutions that strike at the root of the problem.  For two, it is utterly absurd and counter-productive for women to tell men to take the lead.

Ultimately, the problem with men is that, by and large, most of them simply are not ready to lead.  Many young men, as Ms. Hymowitz suggested, lack direction in their lives.  They are content to work dead end jobs and play video games, foregoing real, meaningful accomplishments.  Incidentally, it’s not hard to see why the younger generation would do this; they grew up watching their dads being emasculated by their moms (and society), and have rationally concluded that marriage—maybe even relationships with women in general—is a terrible, costly idea (and not only that, they have been constantly told that men are worthless, and that men are crap).  And while there is a certain rationality to their actions, what’s undeniable is that these sort of actions are not the hallmarks of leaders; they are the hallmarks of quitters.**

Thus, solving the problems brought upon society by earlier men’s failures will require that men take the lead and refuse to yield to solipsistic desires and protests of women.  Men need to give up the quitter’s mindset and once again take their rightful place.  This means that men need to act, to be confident, to do, to have a plan, to have a sense of direction.  This means saying goodbye to dead-end jobs, to hours wasted on pointless video games, to living in virtual worlds, to accumulating massive amounts of anime.  This means taking on the responsibilities of leadership.

Fixing the problems caused by the long-ago failures of men is not going to be accomplished by a handful of men; it requires everyone.  Hopefully the current generation is up to it.  But if it is not, the problem will eventually resolve itself.  Thanks to the sexual revolution, women are now in a better position to have sex with attractive men.  Attractive men are usually those that refuse to put up with a woman’s nonsense. The sons of these men will likely inherit this same ability, which means that, over time, truly masculine men will once again be in abundance, and will thus effectively pass women’s fitness tests, both on an individual and social level.  And so, even if the current generation decides that it’s better to surrender than fight, all is not lost, for these problems have a way of fixing themselves.  And, ultimately, it is men who will fix this problem.

* As always, what women say they want and what women actually want can be two different things.  There is no reason to believe that it is different when it comes to men listening to their problems.

** To be clear:  quitting, in this context, is not irrational.  However, the implicit surrender to women is not going to make the current problems brought about by feminism go away.


  1. I haven't seen the fireproof movie. From what I have read about it, the central premise seams self-defeating. The idea that rewarding a woman for her bad behavior will result in her good behavior just doesn't seem like a reasonable solution.

  2. @Prof. Hale- I haven't either. Dalrock has a pretty biting review of it on his blog. It sounds terrible, so I'm not at all inclined to see it. And yes, the premise that rewarding a woman for bad behavior will cause her to behave properly seems unreasonable (and almost naively mystical).