comment of the day

Been a wild several days out there in blog-land. Somehow, somewhere back there, a whole fury of debate erupted over feminism and how to deal with it. And, in typically naive fashion, I attempted to put some of the fire out and instead ended up dumping several gallons of gasoline on the flames I think. Maybe I'll write a post about that sometime. But not now. More pressing matters are at hand, as you're about to see...

Over yonder at this thread, MarkyMark crafted one of the best summations I can remember reading about how men--especially young men--approach feminism, and indirectly, women in general, these days. So for your reading pleasure, I present MarkyMark in top form:

You asked why men need to act under the assumption that women are automatically bad. I'll give you an analogy from riding a motorcycle that I think will clear this up for you...

When I'm out there riding, I act under the assumption that EACH & EVERY CAR DRIVER IS TRYING HIS BEST TO KILL ME! I act under the assumption that, until I know otherwise, that the cager is my enemy, and that this enemy is trying to destroy me, the motorcyclist. After all, all cars look alike from a distance; they don't do anything to distinguish themselves, do they? Intellectually, I know that this is not true; intellectually, I know that not all cagers are trying to kill me. However, until I know differently, I have to operate under that assumption. Having said that, there are a couple of important caveats that must be considered now...

Number one is simple physics; no matter how small a car is, it still has MORE MASS than the biggest bike out there. Even one of those diminutive Smart Cars is bigger than the biggest bike, say a Honda Goldwing. Furthermore, a car has protection in the form of a body, windows, and doors; a bike has none of that, save perhaps a front windshield. To put it another way, the biggest bike will lose in a collision with even the smallest car. So, simple physics dictates that I assume, as a motorcyclist, that every car is out to get me, because being wrong can be deadly.

Now, the second caveat to consider is this: between my time in the saddle and my time as a former, professional driver, I've seen all SORTS of insanity out there on the roads; it's as if cagers' stupidity and foolishness know no limits. For example, a couple of years ago, I was riding my motorcycle down I-287 when some cell phone yapping bitch in her Range Rover cut me off, missing my front wheel by only a few feet! Now, are all drivers like this? No, but considering the immense cost I'll pay for being wrong, I'll assume that all cagers are dopes until I can discern otherwise.

In short, when a cager first enters my field of view, I automatically assume that they're my enemy, and that they're trying to kill me. Upon further observation, if their conduct gives me reason to, I won't necessarily KEEP them in the 'enemy' category, but until I'm sure, I have to assume that they are. IOW, until they distinguish themselves, they remain in the 'enemy' category. Again, the laws of physics put me at a distinct disadvantage, due to smaller mass and no protection. If I'm wrong and some idiot cager hits me, best case scenario has be going off to the hospital with serious injuries; I can't afford to guess wrong, so until I know otherwise, I'll assume that all drivers are out to get me.

Now, what does this have to do with anything? Well, until I know otherwise, I assume that a woman will hate, fear, suspect, and disrespect me for being a man. I'll assume that, because of her hatred & fear, she too will be out to get me. Furthermore, because the laws and government are on her side, just as in the saddle, I'm operating a a distinct disadvantage WRT women. All it takes is one woman to point the finger in my direction, and I am destroyed-end of story. Oh, and it only takes ONE woman to do this...

Ergo, until I know otherwise, I assume that a woman is out to destroy me, because she hates me as a man. If she's college educated, then that is doubly true. After all, she's had at least four more years of feminist indoctrination, time in which her fears and hatred of men have been stoked to an even higher intensity. Add to that the collective SILENCE of women when it comes to man bashing, unjust divorce laws, and so on, what are we to assume, other than the fact that she agrees & supports these things?

Let me give you a great example... Lorena 'Slice & Dice' Bobbitt. When women across America CHEERED this, what, as a man, was I supposed to think?! When we didn't see other women crying out against this, what were we supposed to think? I'll tell you what we thought: that women hate us; they do not care about us as human beings; and that they indeed do not view us as such! From where I sat as a man back in the early 1990s when this happened, I found it, and still find it, hard to view women as anything other than the enemy. Sorry, but that's how it is.

You asked why men feel the need to categorize all women as skanks. Well, the ones who are not skanks do not do enough to DISTINGUISH THEMSELVES from those who are skanks. Just like when I'm in the saddle riding my motorcycle, until I see tangible evidence to the contrary, I'm assuming that a woman is a skank; that she's a feminist; that she hates me as a man; and that she'll try to destroy me because of that. To view women in any other way is to court disaster, because IT ONLY TAKES ONE to point the finger, an wreck my life-only one! It doesn't matter if every other woman out there is good; if I run into the evil one at the wrong time, then I'm toast. The only prudent course of action is to assume that all women are indeed 'like that'.

You want men to judge you as an individual, ma'am? Then ACT like it! Don't go along with every single trend like most other women do; don't be a herd creature like your typical woman! Do something to distinguish yourself in a good way, and guys just might be inclined to cut you some slack; they just might be inclined to judge you as an individual. Until I see that from a woman, I have to assume the worst, simply because being wrong is so costly for me as a man. I hope that THIS answers your question...

Wow. To add anything to that would be to take away from the beauty of it. Perhaps he comes off as a bit jaded or pessimistic about the whole bit. Not ALL women are so bad. Women aren't THE enemy. But as the comment effectively demonstrates, that doesn't make his take incompatible with a well-grounded worldview.

No American guy who regularly interacts with the society he's in needs to be told that's the reality we presently have to work with. The world around us is a very dangerous place in regards to dealings with the opposite sex, and this demands a defensive approach to many areas of interaction with society at large. Like it or not, I'm just calling it as it is. Many men have found this out first-hand at the hands of the "justice" system or false accusations and I don't intend to join their number.

Now that doesn't mean we should hate and scorn all women* or even most, or even any for that matter. For Christians, a basic understanding of the faith should get us that far. We are commanded--for our own good--to see others around us as God sees them, not as we might otherwise see them. In other words, all people are deserving of basic love and respect since we're all created in God's image. So should I hate women, men, both's, none's, or otherwise? Of course not.** But do I still view women with some amount of suspicion until proven otherwise and guard my moves accordingly? Absolutely! And I'd even argue that this isn't entirely by choice; men have been taught during their time spent in society to automatically take such an approach, to the extent that caution is practically instinctual for many of us. And this is more or less a prerequisite for not getting burned in some nasty way and even having your life altered for the worse because of it. Hey, you deal with reality as it is, right?

I'll even add that there are surely a considerable number of really good women out there, the types who abhor what society has become and speak out ardently against it, to the point of engaging others in defense of the truth--as opposed to just paying lip service to the opposition sometimes but otherwise going right along with societal trends. Examples are out there; we've all known them and probably know some today. But they aren't exactly common. To borrow from something I recently put in a thread comment, we humans will always stereotype the world into something more easily comprehended and much more easily dealt with and acted upon. In this case, that stereotype protects men while not actually being as far off from reality itself as we'd like.

I had more to say here, but once again my short memory and shorter attention span are haunting me. Oh well, as I said, the Markster's comments stand on their own anyway.

So, is all this good? No. Particularly pleasant for anyone in society? No. The preferred MO? No. Reality? YES. And reality, not perception or blind hope, is what ought to dictate how we act. Don't like it? Then do something to change it!

____________________

* If you take me to perhaps be the sort of fellow who returns hate with hate when dealing with folks, go read some of the threads in that chain of links and then wander back. Hopefully you'll think differently...or if not, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

** It's worth adding here that the vast majority of bloggers I read tend to appreciate femininity and wish it were displayed more in society, so I'm not trying to insinuate that there's some huge groundswell of fem-hate being perpetuated by bloggers themselves that I'm aware of. As for commenters? Well...enough to cause alarm for anyone who hopes our society somehow pulls through and recovers from its current malaise.

_____