From Feminism to Sanity

in #politics7 years ago

domestic bliss.jpg

I’m a recovered Social Justice Warrior (SJW). I think that makes me very well placed to take on the SJW mindset; few of the vocal SJW opponents strike me as having fallen into that particular blind spot, and often demonstrate lack insight into the condition by their polarised responses to it. I suggest that if you were not ever trapped in SJW immaturity you should not automatically assume some kind of superiority; plenty of bigoted, narrow-minded individuals never consider matters of social justice at all, and without historically applied ‘social justice’ many lives in the world now would be significantly impoverished, particularly here in the West.

But I see the contemporary SJW as a shallow, anachronistic, regressive reflection of this positive influence, demonstrating a narrow-minded self-righteous superiority that has nothing to do with improving the world at large, and everything to do with self-soothing, projection of personal issues, and scapegoating. We obviously all start from immaturity, and hopefully we get the chance to grow up. If you think yourself an SJW, and your instinct is to stop reading this now – pause, consider what you have to lose if you are right, and I am just a reactionary (probably misogynist) gasbag with no insight to offer? If your attitude and position is secure you have nothing to lose and potentially much to gain by reading me – you can see where I went wrong and lost the plot, and avoid making the same mistake I did when I thought I was ‘growing up’. You may even be able to help me recover. The SJW mindset embodies a range of attitudes – on race, identity, culture, gender, etc. For focus I will examine gender here – my journey from feminism to sanity. I think I can start my story at primary school:

“Hands up who thinks boys are better than girls?”

This is the question my teacher asked our class when I was 8-years-old. My instinct was immediate – ‘stupid question, of course not, we’re the same’. Then I noticed that all the other boys had put their hands in the air, along with 3 girls – half the girls in the class! I put my hand up, not wanting to stand out or be teased. The resistant girls were sullen and defiant.

“Who thinks boys and girls are the same?”

No hands in the air… My hand should have been... I felt ashamed, and cowardly.

I think I spent many years with that bubbling away in the back of my awareness, and the effect of it was to radicalise me somewhat. I grew up sharply aware of the feminist critique of patriarchal society, and fully endorsing it. I remember an argument I had with someone at Sixth Form College, where I bluntly stated that I thought that all repeat rape offenders should be castrated... I didn’t really understand his horror. To be fair on myself, I was being somewhat utilitarian about it back then, and rather disregarding the question of physically mutilating people as a solution or punishment, as well as the deeper (and surely actually pertinent) question of how rooted in sexual function rape actually is anyway.

As a teenager, women represented to me the idealised ‘other’ – they were compassionate where men were emotionally absent. They were considerate, where men were selfish. They were sociable, where men were unreliable. I witnessed a world driven to a precarious edge with masculine destructive values of war, aggression, profiteering, brutality, oppression, cruelty and exploitation. Women represented to me the soft, gentle, quiet and beautiful victims, whilst men were the harsh, violent, noisy and ugly perpetrators. As I now understand it, all I saw was the dark shadow of masculinity, and the creative light of the feminine. I consciously recognised little of the dark shadow of femininity, or the creative light of the masculine. This may have at least as much to do with my identity then as a heterosexual teenager as it reflected my personal environment and experiences. Hindsight and life experience now also informs me that all of these ideas were being framed and buttressed by how the world was being presented to me publicly – in media, books, and general culture.

At some point in my early twenties my understanding began to shift. I remember a discussion I had with a girlfriend at the time, in which I was complaining about Margaret Thatcher, and arguing that Thatcher was basically a woman dressed up in a whole range of stupid male ideas, attitudes and postures, and that she didn’t represent a breakthrough for women in politics at all… To my great surprise my girlfriend completely disagreed with me. She argued that Thatcher was indeed a woman in every sense, and that she actually embodied a whole range of stupid female ideas, attitudes and postures that needed little reference to men. I began to get the uncomfortable feeling that a subtle sexism in me was being uncovered – that my ‘protection’ of women was generic and impersonal, and ironically somewhat patronising; at the expense of grasping a deeper, more complex reality. My girlfriend persuaded me (thanks Anna)... and my opinions began to subtly shift.

My current position on these issues began to crystallise by my early thirties. At 31 I was studying for a Degree on Human Rights, and during one particular seminar this gender issue arose once more. This was a class that was dominated by women, and on this particular day the subject of our session was some aspect of Women’s Rights. I asked the group (in honesty, I was initially cautiously indirect, but what follows is accurate :) Why it was that we were having yet another session on Women’s issues, when looking through the syllabus it was clear that we had no time set aside for Men? Similarly, the UN declaration on Human Rights, and many of the subsidiary documents, had sections devoted to Women, amongst other identities, but nothing on Men. I pointed out that we were studying Human Rights – not Men’s Rights, Women’s Rights, Children’s Rights – but Human – and Human covers us all. If we’re going to look at subsets of this, it surely should be balanced, not discriminatory? …

These views were not 100% popular… There followed a somewhat heated exchange. I was ‘reminded’ by several of my colleagues that ‘we live in a patriarchal society where women suffer discrimination all the time precisely because they are women’. Sound familiar? Replace ‘women’ with your favourite victim identity… This is of course a very common and familiar theme repeated ad nauseum by feminists in our contemporary ‘culture wars’. I countered that so-called patriarchal society actually affects everyone in it, men and women alike, and that both genders have difficult consequences that are specific to them. I asked the group;

“In all the wars of this twentieth century, how many men have been killed, and how many women…?”

A female colleague riposted – “How many men have been raped, and how many women…?”

At that point the Professor facilitating the group – a Man I should point out – said,

“I don’t want to get into a debate about whether rape is worse than murder; I think we should move on...”

I sat there, incredulous, resisting the temptation to rudely laugh out loud. Perhaps it is because I am male, but I have to say that though I have no desire to be either raped or murdered, I know which one I would resign myself to if forced, and I wouldn’t take too much time working it out either... The point, of course, is that social imbalance impacts everyone in that society, and cherry-picking ‘issues’ and ignoring problems suffered by the now labelled ‘perpetrators’ is unfair, inaccurate, and fundamentally dishonest.

Now, anyone interested enough to have read this far will be beginning to get a flavour of where my development was going. Here is the gist of the issue as I assessed it seven years ago (in a formal presentation to a group - again, mostly women), and I think this largely still holds:

‘It has seemed to me, for the past 15 years or so, that what has been described as patriarchal society is not a system of social organisation that specifically favours one gender at the expense of the other – rather – it is a system of fairly rigid social roles, which favours one gender over the other depending on the role in question, largely dictated by environmental context. For example, patriarchy largely emphasises that men have more power and influence in social leadership roles –instances being head of the family, head of the tribe, and head of local/national/international government. However patriarchy consequently emphasises that women have more power and influence in internal family roles – specifically, in the quality and nature of child rearing and education. Women also often have emphasised network roles between families and wider groups. To put this bluntly, men may well control current social policy, but those same men’s attitudes, opinions and personalities have been largely determined through their upbringing by women. In temporal terms; patriarchy has men controlling the present, and women controlling the future, and seen from either perspective, the other may seem to hold all the advantages. As Marie Maguire describes it:

‘In our society each sex has access to different forms of power and control which arouse intense envy in those who lack them.’

My perspective on this is largely the same argument as that adopted by Warren Farrell in ‘The Myth of Male Power’. On the subject of power and influence Farrell notes that the first few years of life are acknowledged to be of critical psychological importance in developing personalities. The traditional role of women gives them an overwhelming influence in this sense on the next generation. Farrell writes:

“Almost every woman had a primary role in the “female-dominated” family structure; only a small percentage of men had a primary role in the “male-dominated” governmental and religious structures.”
So by any measure, this leaves the overwhelming majority of men without power or influence…’

Where I live feminism has achieved wonderful things in the past century. Sanity must recognise that the real battle – the intellectual war that has resulted in full equality of opportunity in principle and law in our society – was won many decades ago. Attitudes in the wider community take longer, in some instances generations – and attitudes in the individual are a matter of personal growth, and cannot (and should not) be legislated – or hammered in by blame, or shrieking shame. But the consensus views enshrined in legal and social arrangements were settled a long time ago. In other parts of the world this does not hold of course – my critique is directed at the SJW feminists, both male and female, who are screaming their divisive and accusatory identity politics here in the West. Power and opportunity Imbalance between groups, and genders, and especially individuals - hurts everyone, especially individuals – only superficiality and immaturity reads into these issues ‘group winner/loser dichotomies’, and we are all superficial and immature in many, many areas, at some time, by default. By even considering themselves an SJW, the immature (in this way at least) individual is demonstrating the same error – a fixed identity created in the mind, rather than the reality of a fluid process of being which, when unshackled from crude belief traps, can begin to grow, expand, and perhaps grow up.

So I travelled, in a couple of decades, from an idealisation and fragmented comprehension of ‘women’, which I consider fundamental to the contemporary SJW stance, to considering the possibility that men, in many important instances, may actually be significantly disempowered and disadvantaged in modern society. I do not pretend that this ‘gender’ issue covers the breadth of SJW posturing, but I do argue that a similar trajectory of thought development applies. If SJW theorising and justification rests in anything, it rests on the notion that certain ‘identities’ – women, minorities, etc. – are victims of certain other ‘identities’ – men, whites, the rich, etc. Some opponents of SJW’s simply invert this ‘identitarian’ model, and accuse other ‘identities’ of being the real problem – SJW’s themselves as a ‘group’ are the problem for instance, or liberals, or socialists, or Marxists, or Zionists, or Jews, or psychopaths, or the rich, or… … ! I reject all of this utterly, for the same reasons. It is crude. Each human being is unique, and our complexity far outstrips our capacity to create descriptive stories, beliefs and theories about each other, however much those stories comfort us as knowing who we are, and are not. This immature position drastically overestimates the human capacity to accurately mentally model the reality we find ourselves living in – it is fundamentally arrogant and brimming with hubris and the injection of a little humility, maturity and inclusive perspective is suggested.

So identifying ‘groups’ as though any individual, unique, experiential human being can be simply pegged into such a slot, and then all becomes clear about them… is crude, immature, and leads to dramatic errors of judgement, regardless of the ever present good intentions. There are uncountable tensions and unanswered questions raised by this summary of course, but that is inevitable, and this is not the space to address them. If anyone reads this, and actually wants me to develop one or more of these strands I will consider doing that. But for now, I hope this has been of some value, and prompted some useful thought. Love to SJW’s and feminists alike. Db

bally.jpg

Sort:  

IMG_20180627_211437.jpg

well-written post.
Are you a blogger/author? If yes, can you please mention this on your profile? Then you will get more attention from the community.

sorry, my reply to you somehow got fitted into my response to misterakpan below - I'm a total noob, will attempt to learn fast :)

No problem.
I suggest to write something about yourself so people can feel some sort of connection. For example, you can say that you love blogging, travel, cooking etc.

One more thing, please always remember to reference the sources of your images that aren't original. It helps with the credibility of your posts.

the images were created by me from freely available online elements to illustrate this piece - I will indeed reference if ever relevant, I agree it is important. Db

I thought so. Love the images btw :)

hi, not a blogger or author, but who knows... thanks for the vote and compliment.

This is about one of the best critiques of our current social climate I have ever seen.

I disagree in places with some terminology, the idea of even labelling a group as SJW for instance, but that doesnt change the truth of certain facts that you bring up e.g. that there really are people out there who describe themselves as SJW or Feminist yet actively shut down any dissenting point of view by an ad-hominem attack with buzzwords like: racist, bigot, sexist, Nazi etc.

In the end my view on these words and terms kinda comes down to language and how we use it and I urge people to be very careful before using terms like SJW or Feminist. All too often its simply used as a form of attack, as if believing in real social justice or equality is somehow bad!

I have had arguments with my mum on some of these issues and sometimes it feels like when I offer a critique of a feminist viewpoint, that I am attacking all women and shitting on years of feminist work. When the shoe is on the other foot the exact same point is used. This is apparent in the Margaret Thatcher argument which I have had a near mirror image situation. Margaret Thatcher is a perfect example of how woman can be just as bad, warlike and hard nosed as any man on earth which was illogically countered that its because she is in a patriarchal society that she was like that, which I feel is admonishing her of responsibility and laying the blame, again, on mens shoulders, as if women have no part to play in society or that no woman on earth wants war.

There are still many women in the western world who are being victimised unfairly but this is sometimes accompanied with the assumption that men cannot be victimised in a sexist way, much like saying only white people can be racist.

Anyway, I applaud your writing here as an opening of a more honest debate which feels so very missing in todays social critique.

thank you for your kind words. I agree with all your points here - the problem with language and terminology is the issue of consensus it seems to me. If I carefully define everything I mean, what I write becomes unreadable, so some assumption of commonality is essential. The inverse problem becomes the echo chambers so prevalent today. A tricky balancing act, constantly adjusted. Db

I know what you mean, there is a point where defining stops meaningful interaction because you would have to interrupt yourself to explain the full context of every sentence. That way leads to crazy land :)

I guess the main reason I bring the point up is because Im all to aware of the current social climate surrounding some words but at the same time I dont think we should be afraid to use words like SJW or Feminist for the intended purpose. Generalisations can be very helpful to the flow of a conversation. On reading your post I could clearly see you were aware of these issues.

I admit when I saw the header I instantly assumed many things based on previous experience, mainly from interacting with, debating with and/or from reading peoples opinions online. However, as I read thru your post I was pleasantly proven wrong in my assumptions and that felt good.

Also, I worry that I too hold some crazy opinions that I simply cannot see the folly of, although I suspect thats practically inevitable and changes depending on when and where we are brought up and depends on our personal experiences.

Whew, sorry, Im a posting windbag today!

All in all, again, thanks for the post :)

A thoroughly pragmatic & considered piece. Some of your thoughts enlivened a better distillation I have when taking issue with this, I find, morose movement (SJW) is the recursion of it all. How does one keep up with the taxonomy? The classifications of victimhood are paralyzing to know from an academic perspective, leave alone the application to it. Attempting to validate any point historically is too apoplectic. There's so much a Marxian attitude to it (the same fella who jibed in the CM that new industry would take down the patriarchy and fashion a willy-nilly fetish for all things innovative, aka technology); with how much Margaret Sanger railed against welfare, immigration, and charity, you'd think you were reading Ayn Rand, you know, the Russian-Jew Immigrant who made her mark in Hollywood, Philosophy, and Economics //you know, a 'man's domain'//and yet they can't stand her. Just in those two instances: a Jew who was borderline Luddite and by our modern standards, a misogynist, and another Jew who broke through 'glass ceilings' of male-dominated circles, but she's a scumbag because $$$. So from that logic, as long as one is a Marxist, you can hate women, and both of them being Jews cancel themselves out, although, certainly don't make noise about your pro-Jew stance, cuz #Palestine, but quietly we'll say Wonder Woman is the greatest super-hero movie ever cuz #girlpower and damn those internet troll-men for mansplaining theaters have lady's only showings (but never mind an entire country, Lebonon, not show the film period, cuz of that Israeli girl)...the mathematics are perilous and grotesque. Thank you for your insite and meditation on this topic. Cheers!

I am completely out of my mind. You understand to describe this change of your mind in such details, that everybody can follow. It is amazing. Why I am so delighted with your article. Last year I organised the first online.mencongress. And I got so much hatred and misunderstanding that I was completely bewildered. So many men that try to protect women for every price.
Anyway the best article that I ever read to this topic. Can you translate it in German?

Thanks for the kind words. I'm glad you liked it. A very interesting synchronicity (which tells me to pay attention closely) - I have been studying German for about a year now, listening to about 45 minutes of it most days (when I walk our dog). I have no sense of my own ability with the language, I suspect it is dreadful and I am several years away from even writing this reply in German, never mind an article with complexities, but I will certainly work towards it. Perhaps I can get a German friend to translate sometime. Db

If you allow, I would try to translate it into german and send it to you. I dont want to steal your work. I meant every word that I said. It is real hit, which explains the complexity to the problem.

You are most welcome to do this. I would not consider it stealing because I did not write it for money, but because I thought it needed saying. To be honest, I have no interest in writing for any other reason. If you translate this it will also be useful for my German learning! Thank you friend, I look forward to seeing if and how you accomplish this. Db

Thank you very much. It is really an extraordinary text, which has the power to open someones mind.

Thank you d, it's funny that it's impossible to judge the impact of your own work, I genuinely thought this piece would be ignored, I'm rather used to that. If you do translate it please publish it here yourself, obviously just link to me. If it makes any money it would be deservedly yours, translating is hard work, and this wouldn't be happening now without you. If you want the link to the original pictures just ask and I'll post them here. Db

here is the link and I hope you are satisfied with the outcome. I took me quiet a lot of time because I am not a professional translator but I had to do it. I think your text has a lot of power to heal the gender issues.

https://steemit.com/deutsch/@doityourway/vom-feminismus-zur-vernunft

And I would recommend to translate it into all important languages. But I am out;-)

Nice greetings
Chris

Hi Chris, I'm very impressed indeed, that was quick work - I'm under no illusions how hard translating is. Hehe - I am also out regarding more on this - I'll leave it to the universe... thanks again, I'm sure I'll learn plenty going through your text, and perhaps I'll drop you a note in German when I have more confidence. Be well and happy, Db

Congratulations @dharmapee! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

Award for the number of comments

Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here

If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

By upvoting this notification, you can help all Steemit users. Learn how here!

Congratulations @dharmapee! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

Award for the number of upvotes received

Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here

If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

By upvoting this notification, you can help all Steemit users. Learn how here!

Congratulations @dharmapee!
Your post was mentioned in the hit parade in the following category:

  • Pending payout - Ranked 6 with $ 84,39

Congratulations on your transition! Nothing feels better than opening one's eyes. Also very mature stance of you not to oscillate into the other extreme. The problem with the SJWs and their cultural and medial prominence is that they are currently successfully working on the demise of their own "privileged" societies.
Thanks for the read!

Hehe, they do seem to be - such wasted energy, and so much to really do. Thanks for the reply! Db

Internationally the position of women is still highly oppressed, and so the SJW movement still has an important place. It is just that it also a tendency to be blinkered and dogmatic, but in any case is certainly better than rabid ultra-conservatism.
Like anything I think it's just a matter of taking the good and leaving the bad.

Hi bigmantings, I wanted to give you a proper response to your comment because in many ways your opinion here was the target of my article. Here’s why: I almost completely agree with everything you write, bar one critical part – and that part, I believe, changes everything. Yes, around the world women find themselves in various states of oppression, and this absolutely must be tackled. I’m not sure I can draw a distinction between ‘blinkered and dogmatic’ and ‘rabid ultra-conservative’ as they seem the same to me, but I think I know what you’re getting at, perhaps kind of ‘their heart’s in the right place’, compared to ‘they are heartless in principle’ – but I don’t want to put words in your mouth.
However, here’s my point: the SJW is explicitly a ‘warrior’ mentality – fighting the good fight perhaps is the intention. A warrior needs an enemy. In this case, the enemy should be bad ideas which support and excuse oppression – but how do you defeat bad ideas? Surely with better ones… Is closing down conversations – censorship – ever going to defeat bad ideas? Is name calling, shaming, getting people fired, ridicule – all the all-too-usual SJW tactics – going to achieve this? And what about the violence of Antifa – how is that directed against bad ideas, how is that putting forward better arguments?

Here’s what I think has happened, and it is kind of tragic: instead of focusing on bad ideas, SJW’s focus on what they consider ‘bad people’, in the naïve belief that destroying the people will destroy the ideas they think they represent. At the same time, SJW’s pride themselves on their inclusivity – so ‘attacking’ the ideas of people in other countries, other parts of the world, is racism, cultural imperialism, etc, etc. And of course physically attacking or ridiculing those same ‘foreigners’ in the same manner they do to the ‘enemy’ in their own societies is similarly unthinkable. Yet, as my article argues, here in the ‘liberal’ (classical sense) West, these arguments are won, and SJW’s are chasing shadows, looking for ‘permitted’ targets, basically anyone with the temerity to disagree with them. So here is where I have to disagree with you – there is no important place for SJW thinking and activity, either here, or elsewhere in the world, because they are doing absolutely nothing to tackle the oppression they claim to despise – they are actually pushing their own insidious version of it, and utterly ignoring the all too real and appalling abuses happening around the world right now. I’m sure the Kingdom of Saud is all too happy to encourage Antifa and SJW’s in the West, they are no threat to such genuine medieval abominations whatsoever. The sooner SJW’s grow up, the sooner our real full energies can focus on the real solutions to the oppressions and evils of this world, but as of now, sadly, they are part of the problem, not a solution. Thank you so much for reading and responding to my article. Db