The Problem of Patriarchy Finally SOLVED
Is feminism a Catch 22? Can you win if you do what feminists ask?
There is eerie logic in the reasoning below. And I think I have seen the process being described in my own life. I am a naturally dominant personality and for 60 years I have found that to go down well with women. It may be some evidence of that that I have been married 4 times and have a chic chick in my life right now in my 80th year. I live a life that incels only dream of.
And I have never been good-looking. Recent pic below
So what the feminists idealize is NOT what most women want. Feminists are screwed-up personalities who are shooting themselves in the feet. Most women in fact LIKE patriarchy in moderation. So I find the reasoning below confirmed in my own life
I finally have it figured out for all of us, fellas. I have finally figured out the problem of patriarchy and toxic masculinity. And the solution is remarkable simple. Read below to find out.
Women have greater sexual value than men, which gives women sexual power over men, and thus more bargaining power in the game of dating, mating, and procreating. This greater bargaining power creates a sexual selection pressure that women then exert on men. In response to this sexual selection pressure, men seek to embody what women want men to be in order to earn sexual access to them. So, to put it quite simply: women created patriarchy.
Patriarchy is the peacock’s tail, the lion’s roar, and the stag’s antlers. Women used their great sexual selection pressure to compel men to make themselves, or become, more dominant, ambitious, confident, independent, self-reliant, and wealthy relative to women. Modern feminists call this biological reality of intersexual dynamics “patriarchy” and “male privilege”. Feminists claim that we have categorized these personality traits as “masculine” or “manly” because the patriarchy rewards men, and not women, for embodying those traits. This argument is actually correct because only women have the social-sexual power to compel men to meet these expectations.
However, as our modern feminist society clearly demonstrates, these “masculine”, “manly”, or “patriarchal” traits are actually gender neutral to a degree given how many modern women seem to currently embody them. In reality, for the most part, these traits are just the traits of adulthood. If men had the social-sexual power to command that women embody these traits then women would have come to embody them in far more significant numbers long before the advent of the modern, postindustrial age. Modern women do not embody these traits in our modern society because men commanded it from them. Modern women have come to embody these traits because they demanded the option to do so, and more importantly because women no longer need to rely on an individual man, or even a group of male relatives, to provide for them and protect them. These roles and services have been outsourced to governments and corporations. Modern women have come to embody these traits because they have been set free to pursue them for their own benefit in a world explicitly designed to advantage them.
The modern, post-industrial economy is the first economic system in human history to produce a plethora of jobs and professions that pay reasonably well and are within the average woman’s capacity to perform that work without enormous personal sacrifice to her life, mind, and body. Prior to the middle of the 20th Century, most jobs that paid a living wage were hard, uncomfortable, dirty, disgusting, dangerous, and/or back breaking work. Women were not mentally, emotionally, and/or physically equipped to do those jobs. Primarily because their biology often made it virtually impossible, but more importantly, women lacked a social system incentivizing and conditioning them to toughen up, in order to cope with being expected to perform that work without complaint, as was the case with boys and men.
Incredibly, despite living within a social and economic system designed deliberately to advantage them, feminists claim that we still live in a patriarchy where women experience discrimination on a regular basis. A common example of this “patriarchal oppression” or “male privilege” is the wage gap. Feminist’s cite the fact that the average income of all American men is slightly higher than the average income of all American women because of discriminatory employment practices. Let us ignore the fundamental issue with how they frame this conversation around a meaningless comparison of average income based on gender; a fact that is no different than, and just as meaningless as, the reality that tall people have a higher income on average than short people. I don’t think our society is deliberately discriminating against short people. There are clearly other factors at play. Ignoring that, there is a very obvious, logical, and meaningful explanation for why men on average make more money than women on average: women want it that way.
The wage gap, better understood as an achievement gap (or even an earnings gap), is the direct result of the sexual selection pressure that women exert on men. If women are capable of using their greater sexual value to compel men to pick up the slack in the personality traits I just explained as being essentially the traits of adulthood, then women have no incentive to be more dominant, ambitious, confident, independent, self-reliant, and/or wealthy relative to men when they can just get men to do all that work for them. This intersexual dynamic makes an achievement gap inevitable.
How ironic that this “male privilege” maps exactly to what women already expect from men! How is a man supposed to demonstrate dominance, ambition, confidence, independence and self-reliance without a hierarchy? How is a man supposed to be dominant and ambitious without aggression? How is a man supposed to create wealth without capitalism? Without equivalent sexual value and equivalent sexual selection pressure on women, how are men supposed to command the same level of dominance, ambition, confidence, independence, self-reliance, and wealth in women as women are capable of commanding from men? They cannot. If men are the ones responding to women’s sexual selection pressure then men cannot command particular personality traits of any kind from women. That is why we have the dating, mating, and procreating marketplace that we have today.
Men do not have the power to fulfill the expectations of the modern feminists. Men do not have the power to liberate women from the already MORE POWERFUL POSITION that women occupy. Patriarchy did not create women’s sexual selection pressure. It has always existed. It has existed since the day the first male hominid gave the first female hominid a handful of berries. Male hominids started giving female hominids food to provision for them during the process of gestation, lactation, and childrearing. In return, female hominids developed emotional attachments to the male hominids that provisioned for them and protected them. From this development human pair bonding emerged. Pair bonding could not have emerged if no emotional attachment developed between the two. This evolution in intersexual dynamics made it possible for hominid children to have an extended period of socialization in which multiple adult members of the community raised them; primarily and most importantly, their fathers. This development enabled the evolution of increasingly complex thoughts, concepts, languages, societies, and eventually civilizations. All the accomplishments of the human species, rooted most fundamentally in the male instinct to protect and provide for females, not only at the level of the individual man, but also in cooperative competition with other men.
Feminists argue that patriarchy hurts men too. Women may be the primary victims, but men do not escape unscathed from these rigid gender role expectations. Feminists argue that patriarchy hurts men by claiming that it refuses to respect or acknowledge the legitimacy of men’s emotions; it robs them of their families; makes their sexuality less valuable than women’s; and reduces their value down to their ability to provide for others. I wonder. Why would patriarchy do all of those horrible things to men? Could it be because there is a direct causal connection between all those expectations of men and how those expectations happen to benefit women when they are met?
It is pretty incredible when you consider it. Feminists observe the consequences of women exerting their greater sexual selection pressure on men, in order for women to get what women want from men, and then turn to blaming and shaming men for conforming to what women want from men in the first place. Not only that, feminists then make the case that this blaming and shaming of men is actually some kind of disturbing, dehumanizing “feminist love” whereby men will one day be liberated from their traditional gender role just so long as they continue giving women even more power. Apparently, if men ever want to be equally valued by women than men must give up all their “male privilege”. Which is the same as saying that in order for men to be valued by women men must abandon everything that makes men valuable to women. If men want women to value them equally then men must discard everything that men must become in order for women to even consider them remotely attractive. To be honest, this sounds like an abusive relationship in which the man is prohibited from burdening anyone with any acknowledgement of any aspect of his internal life or humanity. All for the sake of meeting the expectations of women. That is the “solution” that feminists recommend to the “problem” of “patriarchy”.
We have solved it, gents! How do we eliminate patriarchy once and for all: men need to stop meeting women’s expectations.