The psychology of Patriarchate: why strong, heterosexual men are the enemy

[vulcanlogician]

Good favorite. But can you explain why you loved Tolstoy?

 

[Stevicus]

Good favorite. But can you explain why you loved Tolstoy?

It's been a long time. I'd probably have to think about it for a bit.

 

[vulcanlogician]

I have time.

 

[wellwisher]

I will quote myself since this applies to this topic and was already done. earlier.

Men and women are naturally designed to be complementary, like two gears in a machine, that mesh and can amplify torque; marriage. It is similar to two opposite spin electrons, in an electron orbital, that adds stability to the atom and allows atoms to build by stabilizing the nucleus.

By opposite spin, I means men and women approach the same shared problems from two opposite but complementary ways. Men may look at the problem from the POV of cost; money, personal and social, while women look from the POV of emotional needs; compulsion to fear. Both are valid concerns, with the male and female having their own angle or spin, from which compromise comes, so the team can move forward and build with leverage.

The natural female POV comes from female pregnancy and child raising, with the concerns and needs of the baby and small child, immediate, and based on the ebb and flow of their child's emotional ambiance. The male is the classic provider, so he has to think longer term, since he hopes his family's needs can be met beyond himself; inheritance for the grandchildren. He has to weigh the long term costs both individual and social. This contrast of spin is actually between short and long term needs, with both angles valid. Spare the rod and spoil the child is a good example, of trying to find a compromise for settling emotions; quickly, versus the long term implication of over indulgence; criminal. The compromise may be a time out. The gears mesh and the family is stronger.

The Patriarchy is about long term needs. Why do you think patriarchal religions last thousands of years and are not fads? These were men of long term vision. Feminism is more about short term needs, such as fads and fake news buzz; gossip. Neither of these will last or will be helpful, in the long term. Who remembers the gossip a week ago or the fad of last year? The US national debt is due to short term thinking. It does not have the balance of long term thinking. The "evil" males are not allowed to balance the needs of the now and the future. Borrowing can be good for the future, but only if there long term investment like a house. Going into debt for a party is not wise.

College debt, for example, became a problem in the US, due to short term thinking without balancing long term thinking. The students were happy living in the here and now of fun college life, not considering the future, if their major could not provide job prospect, lucrative enough to meet their future debt. This is the pitfall of feminism without male input.

The short term thinking Democrat goal was to add this to the National Debt and then pretend all we need is short term thinking, but with a bail out. But since the bail out path was sealed by those who fear the debt future; males, now their long term thinking has to come back in sight. Those with debt have to tighten their belts and sacrifice the short term pleasures.

It is not the evil males that led to this problem, but short term feminism, without a patriarch to balance her off, for the future needs of the young people. The children played and now they pay. This could have been avoided, but men are called evil and the short term gaming of the system for emotional buzzes and stealing is called good. The colleges stole their money and did not attempt to teach them the long term problems this stealing would bring the students. Con artist depend on short term thinking, with long term thinking the enemy of the crooks. This is the proper perspective.

Culture needs to take off the debt prosthesis that create the illusion short term is all you need; hidden within future debt. Once that prosthetic is gone; the future will be for those who can see the future, and adjust their short term, so both needs are met. It takes a committed man and woman to find that balance for their family and culture. Don't open the doors to lopsided the short term con artists selling smoke.

 

[Sand Dancer]

It was sufficient to see how Clinton was crucified for having an affair with an intern.

He was treated like the worst of criminals.

That's the result of a serious problem of psychological nature. Which sees heterosexual sex as something a priori sinful.
There is a victimization of the heterosexual man and Clinton showed his frailties as heterosexual man. And was condemned.

But Trump is not crucified for doing worse.

 

[Estro Felino]

But Trump is not crucified for doing worse.

I just meant that it's not a political tactic.
Both leftists and rightists are victims of that game.

 

[Wu Wei]

It was sufficient to see how Clinton was crucified for having an affair with an intern.

He was treated like the worst of criminals.

That's the result of a serious problem of psychological nature. Which sees heterosexual sex as something a priori sinful.
There is a victimization of the heterosexual man and Clinton showed his frailties as heterosexual man. And was condemned.

You really appear to have no idea of the reality in the USA... this happened about 30 years ago and is not even thought about much, if at all, in the USA today

Clinton's problem was he was president, she worked for him, he was married, and this allegedly occurred in the oval office. It was not any sort of attack on heterosexual male it had to do with the Office of the President of the United States and apropropriate behavior of thst office

Kid Rock was asked about this at the time it came to light and his response (I will not use his exact words due to vulgarity) but he even said then it was because of the image of the US President. If he (Kid Rock) was not caught with his pants around his ankles and a woman in his lap with a bottle of Jack (Jack Danielles) in his hand, people would think something was wrong

 

[Estro Felino]

You really appear to have no idea of the reality in the USA... this happened about 30 years ago and is not even thought about much, if at all, in the USA today

Clinton's problem was he was president, she worked for him, he was married, and this allegedly occurred in the oval office. It was not any sort of attack on heterosexual male it had to do with the Office of the President of the United States and apropropriate behavior of thst office

Kid Rock was asked about this at the time it came to light and his response (I will not use his exact words due to vulgarity) but he even said then it was because of the image of the US President. If he (Kid Rock) was not caught with his pants around his ankles and a woman in his lap with a bottle of Jack (Jack Danielles) in his hand, people would think something was wrong

I believe he was the victim of a conspiracy, honestly.

 

[Wu Wei]

I believe he was the victim of a conspiracy, honestly.

alrighy then.... you should realize you are seriously in the minority on that one.... The Lewinsky/Clinton affair went on for 2 years.... it was not a 1 time thing..... and if you really look into the facts of the case as told by Lewinsky and other investigators, there is no conspiracy... but you hve fun storming the castle

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Premise: this is a very serious thread, so serious replies only, merci beaucoup.

Honestly I think in the United States, there is a serious psychological issue.
What I mean is that this conviction that women are all victims, because there is still a strong form of Patriarchate.
And the emblem of Patriarchate is the heterosexual man who adores women.

There is also a veiled phallocentrism that is unconscious that has been transforming into an obsession with men's sex drives.
This obsession has led feminists and women to believe that all straight men are potential rapists, because they own the phallus.

And this undermines and belittles women and their sex drives. Women have a vagina, and so they have sex drives, they do desire men.
They are not victims. They choose the men they like and they even fight for the men they like.

There is no Patriarchy.

How are you defining a strong man? To me, a strong man is one who is mature an responsible, who works hard and helps to take care of his family along with his partner wife. Far from victimizing women, such a strong man supports his wife to pursue her potential.

The problem lies in that too many men are not strong men. They are insecure and childish, and feel the need to subjugate women.

Furthermore, despite laws against it, women are routinely discriminated against in their careers, where employers still pay them only 83.7% of what a man in the same job gets.

Working women still have more than their share of the housework and childcare, and in fact are far far more likely to carry the emotional labor of a relationship (planning holidays, keeping track of doctor appointments, etc.)

Rape remains a very serious problem that is seldom prosecuted. Only a minority of men rape, but they almost always repeat offend, and cause an enormous amount of damage.

 

[Estro Felino]

How are you defining a strong man? To me, a strong man is one who is mature an responsible, who works hard and helps to take care of his family along with his partner wife. Far from victimizing women, such a strong man supports his wife to pursue her potential.

I agree,

The problem lies in that too many men are not strong men. They are insecure and childish, and feel the need to subjugate women.

Where are they? They don't exist.
On the basis of my experience, men are nice for the first six months. Romance and passion, then they become more and more interested in soccer games and their pals.
Women and wives become invisible for their own husbands. The exact opposite of subjugation.

Furthermore, despite laws against it, women are routinely discriminated against in their careers, where employers still pay them only 83.7% of what a man in the same job gets.

And that must end. By forbidding this discrimination.

Rape remains a very serious problem that is seldom prosecuted. Only a minority of men rape, but they almost always repeat offend, and cause an enormous amount of damage.

I agree.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I agree,

Where are they? They don't exist.
=

ROFL that's just too funny. You want to gaslight all the women that have to deal with these jerks. It's not going to work.

It sounds like you have had better luck with men than most women. I'm happy for you.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I will quote myself since this applies to this topic and was already done. earlier.

The Patriarchy is about long term needs. Why do you think patriarchal religions last thousands of years and are not fads? These were men of long term vision. Feminism is more about short term needs, such as fads and fake news buzz; gossip. Neither of these will last or will be helpful, in the long term. Who remembers the gossip a week ago or the fad of last year? The US national debt is due to short term thinking. It does not have the balance of long term thinking. The "evil" males are not allowed to balance the needs of the now and the future. Borrowing can be good for the future, but only if there long term investment like a house. Going into debt for a party is not wise.

LOL Seriously?

College debt, for example, became a problem in the US, due to short term thinking without balancing long term thinking. The students were happy living in the here and now of fun college life, not considering the future, if their major could not provide job prospect, lucrative enough to meet their future debt. This is the pitfall of feminism without male input.

The short term thinking Democrat goal was to add this to the National Debt and then pretend all we need is short term thinking, but with a bail out. But since the bail out path was sealed by those who fear the debt future; males, now their long term thinking has to come back in sight. Those with debt have to tighten their belts and sacrifice the short term pleasures.

It is not the evil males that led to this problem, but short term feminism, without a patriarch to balance her off, for the future needs of the young people. The children played and now they pay. This could have been avoided, but men are called evil and the short term gaming of the system for emotional buzzes and stealing is called good. The colleges stole their money and did not attempt to teach them the long term problems this stealing would bring the students. Con artist depend on short term thinking, with long term thinking the enemy of the crooks. This is the proper perspective.

Culture needs to take off the debt prosthesis that create the illusion short term is all you need; hidden within future debt. Once that prosthetic is gone; the future will be for those who can see the future, and adjust their short term, so both needs are met. It takes a committed man and woman to find that balance for their family and culture. Don't open the doors to lopsided the short term con artists selling smoke.

Shut up women. You're too stupid and emotional to run the world with your gossipy little woman brains.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I will quote myself since this applies to this topic and was already done. earlier.

The Patriarchy is about long term needs. Why do you think patriarchal religions last thousands of years and are not fads? These were men of long term vision. Feminism is more about short term needs, such as fads and fake news buzz; gossip.

Wow the amount of bigotry that still is exists absolutely floors me.

There is nothing about patriarchy that makes it longer lasting. You have matriarchal cultures that do just as well. I would never characterize the Dineh (Navajo) as being concerned only with short term needs, much less gossip. At least, no more so than any patriarchal culture.

The only reason that the Abrahamic faiths are all patriarchal is because the Indo-Europeans pretty much conquered Eurasia, replacing the previous matriarchal cultures with their own patriarchy.

 

[flowerpower]

Maybe I'm just really scattered after today - and maybe this is just a me problem - but this thread really bent my mind.

By the third page, I didn't really know what to think about anything anymore.

Sounds negative but reading through this was a good mental exercise - like going to the gym and then being in so much pain the next day that you can't move a muscle anymore.

I guess I'll just keep my own commentary glib and say that any time you overgeneralize either of the two sexes, it's way out of line and leads to no good. Yes, men and women are fundamentally different from each other; yes, those differences matter.

Cultural differences matter also and these have the tendency to effect the ways in which men and women are perceived and how they interact with each other and themselves. Engaging in sweeping victim-oppressor narratives derived from sexual politics does a lot of unnecessary damage too.

The generalities involved in how men and women are hardwired differently due to evolution makes me very uncomfortable. I think. Right now anyway - I'm not really sure. It almost feels like this thread is absolutely ridden with various conflicting and complimentary conspiracy theories - the entire idea of the patriarchy could even be considered to be a conspiracy theory in and of itself.

Ugh.

I feel like I need to go to sleep for a few days straight now just to properly reset.

 

[flowerpower]

Greed and stupidity are our true enemy. And in the US, anyone can become the face of these, ... but it is mostly men. Males are genetically programmed by a long evolutionary history to respect, honor, and covet the twin traits of greed and (violent) stupidity. Just as women have evolved to be attracted to them for it.

See this post in particular seemed to take it out of me more than any other.

Two VERY broad brushes you're painting with.

And to see something as beautiful and elegant as love and human attraction to be reduced to such a statement is extremely depressing.

Not necessarily saying that you're straight up wrong but this really doesn't sit well with me at all - either it makes me extremely uncomfortable by how true it might be or it's so untrue that I find it obnoxious to the point of it being offensive.

 

[PureX]

See this post in particular seemed to take it out of me more than any other.

Two VERY broad brushes you're painting with.

And to see something as beautiful and elegant as love and human attraction to be reduced to such a statement is extremely depressing.

Not necessarily saying that you're straight up wrong but this really doesn't sit well with me at all - either it makes me extremely uncomfortable by how true it might be or it's so untrue that I find it obnoxious to the point of it being offensive.

It’s both, of course. The programming is there. We can’t help that. But we can overcome it if we are willing. The question is, are we willing? (Both individually and collectively.)

 

[flowerpower]

It’s both, of course. The programming is there. We can’t help that. But we can overcome it if we are willing. The question is, are we willing? (Both individually and collectively.)

I don't know.

Self-compassion is a big deal for me right now and I'm really trying hard to give myself a break for not only the things I've done in the past that I know are pretty wrong and go against my values and possible moral conscience.

But especially I feel like I can't help who I'm attracted to (sexually and otherwise) even if they're horrible people or horrible towards me.

I guess that's why it doesn't sit well. Again, I'm not saying you're wrong - truth hurts sometimes.

I would say that collectively, and to entertain your point - we're definitely not willing. And, individually, I'm probably not willing either - life is too much fun and too precious to critique sometimes.

The attraction thing I kind of dispute though - I'm attracted to all kind of people who hold all kinds of various, conflicting traits and characteristics depending upon what I seem to be arbitrarily interested in at the time.

 

[PureX]

Part of becoming a human (rising above our dumb animal natures) requires us not to eliminate the animal in us, but to become it’s master. And caretaker. This is our destiny, as we will either fulfill it as a species, or we will die unfulfilled.

Mother Nature has for some reason given this one species of hairless ape the power of imagination, and with it the ability to imagine itself to be more than what it is. But do we really want be something more? In the end I don’t think we have a choice. We will evolve or die. And each of us has a role to play in the outcome.

 

[flowerpower]

Part of becoming a human (rising above our dumb animal natures) requires us not to eliminate the animal in us, but to become it’s master. And caretaker. This is our destiny, as we will either fulfill it as a species, or we will die unfulfilled.

Mother Nature has for some reason given this one species of hairless ape the power of imagination, and with it the ability to imagine itself to be more than what it is. But do we really want be something more? In the end I don’t think we have a choice. We will evolve or die. And each of us has a role to play in the outcome.

Okay, I now just had an "ah-huh" moment with respect to what you were saying about "respect, honor, and covet the twin traits of greed and (violent) stupidity" as stifling traits that get in the way of any true evolutionary progress.

Now it sits well with me.

I like to think that I'm primarily a sapiosexual - intelligence is really attractive to me - but sometimes I can't help idolizing some very embarrassing people, especially within specific social situations. The rules of attraction are a complicated animal - a prime example of our mammalian brains overriding our frontal lobes on a regular basis. Personally, I'm far from a master of my biological urges, and they're pretty dysregulated just to complicate things further. I enjoy being kind of emotionally heightened all the time but it comes with some terrible social consequences.