areyoustillthere
New Member
http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/strategy.html
Men!
Ever wondered why your buddy got fired and prosecuted because of the female glamour photo on his office wall, though the woman who complained has even more male glamour photos that are seen as 'cute', 'liberated' and 'progressive'?
Wonder what all this has to do with feminism?
Have you ever been publicly eviscerated for referring to a certain woman as "attractive", by a roomful of savage women, each of whom reads four novels a week, that have fabulously wealthy, ruggedly handsome heroes who are 6 foot 3, with massive muscles and a name like 'Fabio' or 'Baron Kalashnikov'?
Have you given up expressing opinions on any female because you are attacked for every view, whether you call her beautiful or plain, dumb or smart, gentle or rough, rich or poor, fat or thin, sweet or sour? Have you noticed that you are now 'not permitted' to have views on women in general because you are male? Do you sense you're in a censored, never-win situation?
Have you noticed that women are 'permitted' to say what they like about men, whether in private or in the media?
Ever tried to get equal rights in a court of law over a family matter?
It's no accident ... it's ... (drum roll) ....
Strategic disempowerment
"'It's sexy and eye-catching", says Janet Hogan, 42,
co-creative director of the advertising agency Streamline,
who created the campaign for her client Kolotex.
"Women love the ballsiness of it."
Sydney Morning Herald, April 13, 2002
Click to read how Australia's Advertising Standards Board
explained to Pip Wilson that this billboard is only "a satirical comment"
Good news for men about gender relations
If you are a man, the subtitle of this article might raise a laugh. What good news could there possibly be about male-female relations, right? Feminists have ruined them for all time, correct?
I have to tell you that for a while I felt like that, too. When I became fully aware of how men are disadvantaged in gender relations by what I have named 'strategic disempowerment' (SD), I was sure that there was no way out and I felt ... well, disempowered.
Before I go on to tell you some ways that I have found to not feel helpless in the face of the onslaught of feminist's belief in the superiority of women, I'd like to describe some of the phenomena associated with SD.
Double standards to disempower
SD is used by some (not all) women in order to boost their self esteem, and probably to gain power over men, or a man. It is sometimes used consciously, and sometimes unconsciously, but at all times it is backed by the woman's belief system. At the root of SD are beliefs that women are superior to men, that men owe women, and that women are oppressed by men (see my article Twelve Great Myths of Feminism, which addresses these false beliefs). The women who are most likely to engage in SD tend to be those who have accepted the persuasive, convincing myths of feminism.
The basic method of SD is the use of double standards. Many of these involve the most deep-seated of all human feelings, sex, because it is there that all human beings are often most sensitive and vulnerable. It's in the area of sex that the most leverage can be attained for increasing one's dominance, whether the woman is trying consciously or unconsciously to disempower. However, not all of the tactics used by practitioners of SD involve sex or sexuality, so we mustn't be too quick to overlook other areas of engagement by these women.
Let's take a look at some of the disempowering tactics these women use. It should be noted at this point that many of the tactics have gained wide enough currency for them to have been enshrined in legislation in many Western nations, where a concerted effort has been made over many years by feminist activists. In fact, much legislation is clearly disadvantageous to men, and it is possibly because many men also have accepted the myths of radical feminism as outlined in my aforementioned article.
Oppressed minorities syndrome
The double standards that are the engine of SD are many, and may be schematised in terms of what feminists label unacceptable, and what they label acceptable. These examples always involve permission for women to do one thing, and the denial of permission of men to do the same.
The effect that occurs when a man is subjected to an SD tactic is identical to that suffered by any disempowered person. Wherever one class, caste or section of society enjoys privileges denied to another, the latter group suffers feelings of powerlessness, shame, guilt, hurt and confusion. The results are well documented in the study of disenfranchised and oppressed minorities around the world, and include suicide, drug abuse, alcoholism, ill health and a host of other factors. These factors, by the way, are exhibited by males far more than females. (Unfortunately, men's health, despite being in a more parlous state than women's, is drastically less funded than women's, so research is thin on the ground. Nonetheless, enough exists for us to know that men are experiencing symptoms akin to those associated with underprivileged groups.)
More research should be done in academia to explore my hypothesis that men share with indigenous and other disenfranchised groups a common set of underlying causes leading to congruent syndromes. While anecdotally it is clear that there is a female hegemony in many fields, such as health funding, family law, anti-discrimination legislation, and so on, what is not so clear is what can be done about it, nor what role men play in allowing and even facilitating it. Again, it is a field ripe for research, but one suspects that funding bodies and academic institutions would be loath to risk persecution under the very tactics that we are discussing.
It should be noted at this point that the effectiveness of the following tactics of SD lies in the following methods: discriminatory interpretation of legislation; withholding of affection; withholding of compassion; shaming and other emotional abuse; verbal abuse; private vilification; and public vilification. At all times, however, the most effective element in the table below is the frustration experienced by the person or group who is forbidden to do what the other person or group self-encourages.
The psychology involved here is simple: SD sets up a paradigm of 'to the victor the spoils'. The selfish child who has an ice cream gains further victory by flaunting the victory of eating ice cream in front of the child denied permission to eat. Similarly, ruling castes who have expropriated material wealth from oppressed minorities maintain their high status not only by owning wealth, but by making their wealth conspicuous.
In both cases, and in the case of SD, the frustration engendered in the oppressed actually disempowers them further, and often leads to self-harm rather than militant action against the oppressor. The child slips into depression and feelings of being 'less than'; the oppressed minority accepts an inferior status, and disintegrates with drink and drugs; the frustrated man thinks it serves him right for being a 'mere male' and slowly self-destructs with self-hatred and unhealthy behaviours.
Men!
Ever wondered why your buddy got fired and prosecuted because of the female glamour photo on his office wall, though the woman who complained has even more male glamour photos that are seen as 'cute', 'liberated' and 'progressive'?
Wonder what all this has to do with feminism?
Have you ever been publicly eviscerated for referring to a certain woman as "attractive", by a roomful of savage women, each of whom reads four novels a week, that have fabulously wealthy, ruggedly handsome heroes who are 6 foot 3, with massive muscles and a name like 'Fabio' or 'Baron Kalashnikov'?
Have you given up expressing opinions on any female because you are attacked for every view, whether you call her beautiful or plain, dumb or smart, gentle or rough, rich or poor, fat or thin, sweet or sour? Have you noticed that you are now 'not permitted' to have views on women in general because you are male? Do you sense you're in a censored, never-win situation?
Have you noticed that women are 'permitted' to say what they like about men, whether in private or in the media?
Ever tried to get equal rights in a court of law over a family matter?
It's no accident ... it's ... (drum roll) ....
Strategic disempowerment
"'It's sexy and eye-catching", says Janet Hogan, 42,
co-creative director of the advertising agency Streamline,
who created the campaign for her client Kolotex.
"Women love the ballsiness of it."
Sydney Morning Herald, April 13, 2002
Click to read how Australia's Advertising Standards Board
explained to Pip Wilson that this billboard is only "a satirical comment"
Good news for men about gender relations
If you are a man, the subtitle of this article might raise a laugh. What good news could there possibly be about male-female relations, right? Feminists have ruined them for all time, correct?
I have to tell you that for a while I felt like that, too. When I became fully aware of how men are disadvantaged in gender relations by what I have named 'strategic disempowerment' (SD), I was sure that there was no way out and I felt ... well, disempowered.
Before I go on to tell you some ways that I have found to not feel helpless in the face of the onslaught of feminist's belief in the superiority of women, I'd like to describe some of the phenomena associated with SD.
Double standards to disempower
SD is used by some (not all) women in order to boost their self esteem, and probably to gain power over men, or a man. It is sometimes used consciously, and sometimes unconsciously, but at all times it is backed by the woman's belief system. At the root of SD are beliefs that women are superior to men, that men owe women, and that women are oppressed by men (see my article Twelve Great Myths of Feminism, which addresses these false beliefs). The women who are most likely to engage in SD tend to be those who have accepted the persuasive, convincing myths of feminism.
The basic method of SD is the use of double standards. Many of these involve the most deep-seated of all human feelings, sex, because it is there that all human beings are often most sensitive and vulnerable. It's in the area of sex that the most leverage can be attained for increasing one's dominance, whether the woman is trying consciously or unconsciously to disempower. However, not all of the tactics used by practitioners of SD involve sex or sexuality, so we mustn't be too quick to overlook other areas of engagement by these women.
Let's take a look at some of the disempowering tactics these women use. It should be noted at this point that many of the tactics have gained wide enough currency for them to have been enshrined in legislation in many Western nations, where a concerted effort has been made over many years by feminist activists. In fact, much legislation is clearly disadvantageous to men, and it is possibly because many men also have accepted the myths of radical feminism as outlined in my aforementioned article.
Oppressed minorities syndrome
The double standards that are the engine of SD are many, and may be schematised in terms of what feminists label unacceptable, and what they label acceptable. These examples always involve permission for women to do one thing, and the denial of permission of men to do the same.
The effect that occurs when a man is subjected to an SD tactic is identical to that suffered by any disempowered person. Wherever one class, caste or section of society enjoys privileges denied to another, the latter group suffers feelings of powerlessness, shame, guilt, hurt and confusion. The results are well documented in the study of disenfranchised and oppressed minorities around the world, and include suicide, drug abuse, alcoholism, ill health and a host of other factors. These factors, by the way, are exhibited by males far more than females. (Unfortunately, men's health, despite being in a more parlous state than women's, is drastically less funded than women's, so research is thin on the ground. Nonetheless, enough exists for us to know that men are experiencing symptoms akin to those associated with underprivileged groups.)
More research should be done in academia to explore my hypothesis that men share with indigenous and other disenfranchised groups a common set of underlying causes leading to congruent syndromes. While anecdotally it is clear that there is a female hegemony in many fields, such as health funding, family law, anti-discrimination legislation, and so on, what is not so clear is what can be done about it, nor what role men play in allowing and even facilitating it. Again, it is a field ripe for research, but one suspects that funding bodies and academic institutions would be loath to risk persecution under the very tactics that we are discussing.
It should be noted at this point that the effectiveness of the following tactics of SD lies in the following methods: discriminatory interpretation of legislation; withholding of affection; withholding of compassion; shaming and other emotional abuse; verbal abuse; private vilification; and public vilification. At all times, however, the most effective element in the table below is the frustration experienced by the person or group who is forbidden to do what the other person or group self-encourages.
The psychology involved here is simple: SD sets up a paradigm of 'to the victor the spoils'. The selfish child who has an ice cream gains further victory by flaunting the victory of eating ice cream in front of the child denied permission to eat. Similarly, ruling castes who have expropriated material wealth from oppressed minorities maintain their high status not only by owning wealth, but by making their wealth conspicuous.
In both cases, and in the case of SD, the frustration engendered in the oppressed actually disempowers them further, and often leads to self-harm rather than militant action against the oppressor. The child slips into depression and feelings of being 'less than'; the oppressed minority accepts an inferior status, and disintegrates with drink and drugs; the frustrated man thinks it serves him right for being a 'mere male' and slowly self-destructs with self-hatred and unhealthy behaviours.
