Men have traditionally promoted themselves as the keepers of true reality.
We all know that women in general are not thought of (by too many — still) as capable of balanced and realistic thought. Women are too flighty... too emotional... susceptible to hormone based irrational behavior unsuitable for the business world, the political world — you know... chicks are responsible for temptation and manipulation of men... duplicitous and untruthful behavior... all sorts of bullshit.
Yet, I can't help wonder what is responsible for the male love of pornography, the male drive to create artificial women, the male love of vicariously experienced sports, the male obsession with "progress" and "new."
As a woman, I've been the victim of the male tendency to comfortably warp another's reality. Any woman who has had a guy try to weasel you into having an affair with them, or had a guy warp your world by acting like they love you while carrying on a completely different life behind your back, you are the victim of an abusive tendency that is made possible by the lack of relationship that many men have with reality.
I think that testosterone is a fantasy oriented hormone. Estrogen as a hormone MUST compel a more complete connection to reality. Women, to nurture as they are compelled to do by estrogen, MUST have a better connection to reality. Men, who are compelled by testosterone to fuck as many women as possible, generally have to be more fantasy oriented — because fantasy is nature's way of driving men to fuck more women than they really have to.
I'm not saying that women don't fantasize, but is seems quite clear to me that men are far more comfortable warping another's reality. Affairs are not just about fucking someone else... they are in a very real way a warping of a woman's concept of the reality of the relationship that they are in. Noone likes having their reality warped... men will actually kill women based only on their distorted fantasies of what a woman is doing. I've been in relationships where men totally think I am having an affair, talking behind their back... and men don't just pester with their irrational fantasies, they involve violence and actual destruction — far more than women. You think Elin would still be alive if Tiger Woods had had babies for her and found out later that she'd had affairs with tons of porn stars? Get real. She'd be dead.
The huge amount of domestic violence is really about male lack of relationship to reality than anything else. I am not blaming men for this — I blame testosterone. I truly do think more and more that testosterone as a hormonal influence is not conducive to a good relationship to reality. That is why men have historically projected their own bullshit onto women, and why abusive men project their own bullshit onto women. I have far too often had to listen to a man who lies like a carpet accuse me of lying, I've experienced incredibly manipulative men define me as a master of manipulation... it just defies reality sometimes. Hello?
The recent election involving Carl Paladino in New York State is a good example of the sort of unbalance I am writing about here. He consistently accused Andrew Cuomo of things that only he himself was guilty of. Across the board, Carl would just ignore his own reality and see it in Andrew Cuomo.
Not only that — but when the actual results of this particular election became public, it was revealed than only the male voters were evenly split in their voting between these two candidates. Black, female, and other minority voters seemed more able to judge the bullshit for what it was in this election. Yes, they were offended more personally by Paladino's bizarre rants, but I think there is more to the voting patterns than that. I believe men in general are less likely to spot such outrageous behavior (as Paladino showed us) for what it is. Why did male voters have such a hard time discerning crazy behavior?
In most men, it is easier to get to know them by how they talk of others... women are guilty of this behavior as well, but not as comfortably, or invisibly, and they just aren't as dangerous.
Women fantasize, but, historically, women's fantasies are not generally those that are involved with the illusion of progress or that actually DRIVE culture as male fantasies and desires do. If they DID, there'd be a huge wedding/babies section in newspapers, like the sports pages. The world is driven by male fantasies... in entertainment, in religion, in the space program... just so much of the culture on this planet is driven by male fantasies... for now.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Rape is a hate crime.
Sound funny? Not quite right? Not what most people think?
Why isn't rape thought of as a hate crime? I can think of nothing more hateful to inflict on someone. Maybe rape is not thought of as a hate crime because it is normal and accepted for men to fuck women. But male perpetrated rape, when practiced on women, is I believe a result of the same exact feelings and impulses based on a male need for control and dominance... and a wish to avoid reality... as any other hate crime.
I remember distinctly an event where this idea of mine really seemed to surprise someone. One day a couple of years ago, I was asked about my thoughts on a rape related issue — by a reporter from a news source. I remember the mike in front of my face, and the answer I gave, and the look on the reporter's face when I said I thought that rapes were hate crimes. Dismissal and disbelief... in a sortof "you're alittle crazy" way... was and is the response I get to this idea for the most part.
How the fuck come? I'd like to hear why people don't consider rape a hate crime when it happens to women — really! Do people think that men who rape women don't generally hate women and just situationally find it to be the thing to do? Like men who rape women are really generally okay with women and how they think and what they do, and because a certain situation comes up, well, rape just happens, like it doesn't come from a deep hatred and disdain for women as people? Like a guy who thinks of women as real and genuine can somehow rape a chick? That just doesn't make any sense to me.
Get fucking real. Any man and every man who rapes a woman HATES women. Any man and every man who forcibly shoves his dick violently into a chick against her wishes hates chicks and what chicks are. They hate what women say, they hate what women do, they think women are stupid and worthless, and not deserving of respect — JUST LIKE guys who hate black people and what they do and what they say, or Jews. Any man and every man who rapes a woman hates women in EXACTLY the same way they hate gay men. The hatred that a man who can rape a woman is evidenced in the general behavior of a man in other situations in his life, not just when he is in the act of raping.
Rape is the way that men burn a fucking cross in your yard if you are a chick. Rape is the way that men put chicks in a concentration camp. Rape is the way that men terrorize women, exactly like a terrorist, but men don't seem to see this, and the female reporter who I was responding to who looked at me like I had five heads when I told her "Rape is a hate crime" didn't see that either.
It just seems like people think that statement is too extreme, just too much, like I am just hating men! I have never ever heard rape referred to as a hate crime. Not in newspapers, not on the news, not by feminists... it may be referred to that way somewhere, by someone, but rape is not considered a hate crime by the masses.
Sorry, it is normal for men to fuck women, but there is nothing normal about rape. The social normalizing of rape as a crime that is less offensive than other hate crimes is bullshit. Rape is a fear and hate BASED crime.
Maybe it's because men have really been in charge of what is actually seen as a hate crime... maybe that is why rape isn't seen as a hate crime. Men who hate women don't generally think that there is anything wrong with hating women... and alot of men hide their hateful approach and treatment of women relatively well... but I think the truth is that most men... in a very deep way... just think that rape is a normal crime.
Sorry guys, RAPE IS A HATE CRIME.
Why isn't rape thought of as a hate crime? I can think of nothing more hateful to inflict on someone. Maybe rape is not thought of as a hate crime because it is normal and accepted for men to fuck women. But male perpetrated rape, when practiced on women, is I believe a result of the same exact feelings and impulses based on a male need for control and dominance... and a wish to avoid reality... as any other hate crime.
I remember distinctly an event where this idea of mine really seemed to surprise someone. One day a couple of years ago, I was asked about my thoughts on a rape related issue — by a reporter from a news source. I remember the mike in front of my face, and the answer I gave, and the look on the reporter's face when I said I thought that rapes were hate crimes. Dismissal and disbelief... in a sortof "you're alittle crazy" way... was and is the response I get to this idea for the most part.
How the fuck come? I'd like to hear why people don't consider rape a hate crime when it happens to women — really! Do people think that men who rape women don't generally hate women and just situationally find it to be the thing to do? Like men who rape women are really generally okay with women and how they think and what they do, and because a certain situation comes up, well, rape just happens, like it doesn't come from a deep hatred and disdain for women as people? Like a guy who thinks of women as real and genuine can somehow rape a chick? That just doesn't make any sense to me.
Get fucking real. Any man and every man who rapes a woman HATES women. Any man and every man who forcibly shoves his dick violently into a chick against her wishes hates chicks and what chicks are. They hate what women say, they hate what women do, they think women are stupid and worthless, and not deserving of respect — JUST LIKE guys who hate black people and what they do and what they say, or Jews. Any man and every man who rapes a woman hates women in EXACTLY the same way they hate gay men. The hatred that a man who can rape a woman is evidenced in the general behavior of a man in other situations in his life, not just when he is in the act of raping.
Rape is the way that men burn a fucking cross in your yard if you are a chick. Rape is the way that men put chicks in a concentration camp. Rape is the way that men terrorize women, exactly like a terrorist, but men don't seem to see this, and the female reporter who I was responding to who looked at me like I had five heads when I told her "Rape is a hate crime" didn't see that either.
It just seems like people think that statement is too extreme, just too much, like I am just hating men! I have never ever heard rape referred to as a hate crime. Not in newspapers, not on the news, not by feminists... it may be referred to that way somewhere, by someone, but rape is not considered a hate crime by the masses.
Sorry, it is normal for men to fuck women, but there is nothing normal about rape. The social normalizing of rape as a crime that is less offensive than other hate crimes is bullshit. Rape is a fear and hate BASED crime.
Maybe it's because men have really been in charge of what is actually seen as a hate crime... maybe that is why rape isn't seen as a hate crime. Men who hate women don't generally think that there is anything wrong with hating women... and alot of men hide their hateful approach and treatment of women relatively well... but I think the truth is that most men... in a very deep way... just think that rape is a normal crime.
Sorry guys, RAPE IS A HATE CRIME.
Politics = Religion = Sports
We all know how much men feel about team sports, yet how many people see a connection between team sports and religion and politics? A pattern that I have noticed in the world is a phenomenon I call the "team thought pattern." Team thought patterns can be seen in the conflicts that most of us take for granted in the world today.
Muslim vs. Christian/Jewish
Republican vs. Democrat
Male vs. Female
Most just seem to accept these conflicts as the way things are, without looking deeper at what might cause people to have such social divisions. Me, I see these sort of conflicts as a manifestation of testosterone based hormonal qualities, since I don't really see women as the creators of such cultural properties. Historically, I don't see much evidence of women creating political parties, sports teams, and religions. Women have other drives.
I think it is safe to say that most religions are created by men. I think it is safe to say that most partisan political parties are created by men. The walls between men and women — the "us vs. them" way that many men view the relationships between themselves and women, seem to me to also fall under a partisan and competitive view that seems to be more about competition and exclusion than connection.
Let's look at something that might be relevant to understanding such behavior.
I believe that hormones are very similar to "operating systems" — that is, I believe that from the start of human development, hormones programmed us as people to behave in distinct ways.
Testosterone, to me, seems to (realistically) have programmed men to fuck as many women as possible, no matter how undeveloped and primitive they may be at any time in historical time. No matter how stupid or undeveloped the human male is, he is programmed by hormones to try to fuck as many women as he can. To do this, I believe that testosterone also programs men to not connect emotionally with women... or other men, who he must compete with. I mean, if a man connects to females emotionally, he is going to perhaps stop fucking many women, and that is not what reproduction demands from men — to reproduce, men must be so driven to fuck that they HAVE to fuck — alot. Affairs that happen outside a marriage seem to be a part of male behavior that is so common, it probably should be seen as a result of this sort of hormonal programming more than any real choice on the male part.
I think that testosterone based behavior (in general of course) is really very much responsible for the partisan constructions we see in society everywhere. I really don't see that particular kind of thought pattern in women... and I think that is because the hormone estrogen is responsible for insuring that no matter how stupid or primitive a woman is (and I mean DUMB... fucking DUMB), she is compelled to nurture and take care of others, and in both testosterone and estrogen's cases, I truly mean individuals are profoundly COMPELLED.
The problem with testosterone based partisan/team thought processes, is that they become very distracting and more important than actual cultural realities/issues. Sometimes, when I read political stories in the newspaper, it's impossible for me to ignore the way that it sounds so similar to sports commentary. One party gains the advantage, one party loses something, so and so is winning, so and so suffers a defeat. It doesn't HAVE to be that way, that is only the way men have constructed relationships based on their hormonal realities.
Religious commentary seems less like sports talk superficially, but maybe that is only because the terminology veers into more of a spiritual realm, where the similarities may be less evident — and more psychologically powerful for both sexes. Nevertheless, there is a real team like passion and flavor to many religious conflicts... Also, the overwhelming male bias in most religions, and all the major religions where today we see such huge conflicts, is so clear and defined... as defined as that found in the sports player/cheerleader system. Noone can really fail to see the historically evident male bias in political thought and systems either.
I'm tired of this bullshit. Everyone just seems to accept these team thought patterns (like a religion almost) as how everyone thinks and how everyone does things... and how things will always be... and it isn't. It's how men do things, subconsciously perhaps, but it's time to really think about how this kind of pattern holds people back. It's really not about connecting, it's about strategies, about winning... time is spent addressing how to win instead of what to do better for everyone.
This partisan, competitive, exclusionary patterning is not the only alternative — but you wouldn't guess that the way the world is now. It's so pervasive and ingrained in cultures that it's hard for me to see an alternative myself, but I bet there is one, or many.
Muslim vs. Christian/Jewish
Republican vs. Democrat
Male vs. Female
Most just seem to accept these conflicts as the way things are, without looking deeper at what might cause people to have such social divisions. Me, I see these sort of conflicts as a manifestation of testosterone based hormonal qualities, since I don't really see women as the creators of such cultural properties. Historically, I don't see much evidence of women creating political parties, sports teams, and religions. Women have other drives.
I think it is safe to say that most religions are created by men. I think it is safe to say that most partisan political parties are created by men. The walls between men and women — the "us vs. them" way that many men view the relationships between themselves and women, seem to me to also fall under a partisan and competitive view that seems to be more about competition and exclusion than connection.
Let's look at something that might be relevant to understanding such behavior.
I believe that hormones are very similar to "operating systems" — that is, I believe that from the start of human development, hormones programmed us as people to behave in distinct ways.
Testosterone, to me, seems to (realistically) have programmed men to fuck as many women as possible, no matter how undeveloped and primitive they may be at any time in historical time. No matter how stupid or undeveloped the human male is, he is programmed by hormones to try to fuck as many women as he can. To do this, I believe that testosterone also programs men to not connect emotionally with women... or other men, who he must compete with. I mean, if a man connects to females emotionally, he is going to perhaps stop fucking many women, and that is not what reproduction demands from men — to reproduce, men must be so driven to fuck that they HAVE to fuck — alot. Affairs that happen outside a marriage seem to be a part of male behavior that is so common, it probably should be seen as a result of this sort of hormonal programming more than any real choice on the male part.
I think that testosterone based behavior (in general of course) is really very much responsible for the partisan constructions we see in society everywhere. I really don't see that particular kind of thought pattern in women... and I think that is because the hormone estrogen is responsible for insuring that no matter how stupid or primitive a woman is (and I mean DUMB... fucking DUMB), she is compelled to nurture and take care of others, and in both testosterone and estrogen's cases, I truly mean individuals are profoundly COMPELLED.
The problem with testosterone based partisan/team thought processes, is that they become very distracting and more important than actual cultural realities/issues. Sometimes, when I read political stories in the newspaper, it's impossible for me to ignore the way that it sounds so similar to sports commentary. One party gains the advantage, one party loses something, so and so is winning, so and so suffers a defeat. It doesn't HAVE to be that way, that is only the way men have constructed relationships based on their hormonal realities.
Religious commentary seems less like sports talk superficially, but maybe that is only because the terminology veers into more of a spiritual realm, where the similarities may be less evident — and more psychologically powerful for both sexes. Nevertheless, there is a real team like passion and flavor to many religious conflicts... Also, the overwhelming male bias in most religions, and all the major religions where today we see such huge conflicts, is so clear and defined... as defined as that found in the sports player/cheerleader system. Noone can really fail to see the historically evident male bias in political thought and systems either.
I'm tired of this bullshit. Everyone just seems to accept these team thought patterns (like a religion almost) as how everyone thinks and how everyone does things... and how things will always be... and it isn't. It's how men do things, subconsciously perhaps, but it's time to really think about how this kind of pattern holds people back. It's really not about connecting, it's about strategies, about winning... time is spent addressing how to win instead of what to do better for everyone.
This partisan, competitive, exclusionary patterning is not the only alternative — but you wouldn't guess that the way the world is now. It's so pervasive and ingrained in cultures that it's hard for me to see an alternative myself, but I bet there is one, or many.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)