It is, if you believe certain quarters, though it will hardly come as a surprise to long-time readers to learn that I don’t happen to buy into this idea. Far from it. This article draws its inspiration from here, an article written by one Larry Kummer. The usual rules apply – quotes will be in pink. The author is largely reposting another article, found here, which is where the majority of quotes will come from. Quotes from the second link will be in red.
Summary: All societies put leashes on the sexuality of both men and women. In America the leashes are tightening on men while women are unleashed. It’s an experiment, conducted blindly and guided only by ideology. Dalrock reports from the front lines about the unexpected results.
I’m not altogether sure if society at large has put the sexual behaviour on much of a leash, either recently or historically. Even today, in many parts of the world, men who leave behind a string of lovers are seen as admirable and described as studs, Cassanovas and so forth – and women are still described as sluts, whores etc. The double-standard, which has existed for decades if not longer, continues.
Two symptoms of our society’s growing dysfunctionality are seldom mentioned. First is our inability to see threats. We are like a ship’s crew frantically dashing about with fire hoses while the vessel sinks. For example, we worry about overpopulation while fertility crashes (disruptive to the economy although good for the ecology). Second, we recklessly tinker with core aspects of our society — without testing, rapidly, guided only by ideology. Such as communism.
The most potentially destructive are those cases where we do both. Such as the revolution in gender roles. We relentlessly tighten the leashes on men’s behavior while unleashing women. It is a gigantic experiment with few precedents in history. We do not understand what is happening because we won’t see what is happening. It is run like allowing monkeys at the controls of a nuclear power plant. They are bold and happy; the results might be unpleasant.
On the first part of the first paragraph, I might be minded to agree to a certain point. Certain quarters of certain parts of the world (such as Republicans and their supporters who blindly follow Trump) do nothing whilst the ship burns. I’m not at all sure if the world at large is still playing around with communism, not after the spectacular failures of that particular ideology, unless the author is falsely equating socialism with communism; even then, there are different degrees of socialism.
As for gender roles, these have long been quite artificial and enforced by various forces as a means of control. They have hurt men as well as women. I’ve used the expression before and I’ll do so again – we have been put into boxes and told to stay in them. These stereotypes continue to manifest themselves in societies all over the world. They do no one any favours, especially when they are the result of a lack of choice.
Moving on, we come to the post of Dalrock.
I was talking with a good friend of mine roughly a year ago about what I had been reading in the manosphere. At the time I hadn’t started blogging yet and was primarily reading Roissy*. At one point in the conversation I asked him what it would look like if women lacked civilizational restraint. What would it look like if women went feral? After a significant pause, I re framed it and asked what it would look like if men weren’t properly civilized; What would they do if they followed only their base instincts? Pretty quickly he came up with a description which was roughly a cross between Animal House and Lord of the Flies, just as I was expecting. Then we went back to the same question for women, and he remained stumped. My guess is most of my readers could easily have the same conversation with the same results with most of your non manosphere involved friends.
Not altogether certain I follow where this is going at this point but I have no trouble admitting that. However, I think were civilisation to collapse and we all had to resort to base instincts and cunning to survive, we’d all – men and women alike – behaviour in a similar way. I don’t think we’re talking about that kind of base instinct.
I thought about this again when getting a haircut the other week. Two mothers with junior high aged daughters were talking about the kinds of clothing their girls were wearing. It fascinated me to hear how confused they were about what was actually going on. They were sure that the girls were only dressing like little hookers because of pressure society was putting on them. What they didn’t understand was the girls were dressing like hookers because society wasn’t putting any pressure on them. Female intra-sexual competition being what it is, this is what young women will devolve to if all restraints are lifted. Today’s crop of young women are perilously close to as Zeets would say* presenting like a red-assed chimp.
Have to disagree. We still have a huge amount of social pressure on young women to be sexy and presentable for male consumption. Glamour magazines continue to present the image of the ideal woman, as considered by men. This continues to drive how women are expected to dress and act and it starts at an early age. It is drilled into women by both other women who are under the same pressure and by men who see women as objects. This is prevalent in movies, TV and other media. There is a lot happening to tackle this, but it’s still a big problem.
Commenter MNL responded to my post Her Parents Must Be Proud with a link to a WSJ article by Jennifer Moses Why Do We Let Them Dress Like That? which addresses the same question and suffers from the same flawed premise.
In the pale-turquoise ladies’ room, they congregate in front of the mirror, re-applying mascara and lip gloss, brushing their hair, straightening panty hose and gossiping: This one is “skanky,” that one is “really cute,” and so forth. Dressed in minidresses, perilously high heels, and glittery, dangling earrings, their eyes heavily shadowed in black-pearl and jade, they look like a flock of tropical birds. A few minutes later, they return to the dance floor, where they shake everything they’ve got under the party lights.
But for the most part, there isn’t all that much to shake. This particular group of party-goers consists of 12- and 13-year-old girls. Along with their male counterparts, they are celebrating the bat mitzvah of a classmate in a cushy East Coast suburb.
It is interesting that she herself makes the colorful bird analogy, but still manages to miss the underlying biology involved here. She also misses another glaring neon sign, which is the significance of the event she was witnessing. The description below the video explains that peer pressure is at the root of the issue:
Today’s teen and preteen girls are bombarded with images and products that tout the benefits of sexual attraction. But must we as parents, give in to their desire to “dress like everyone else?” asks author Jennifer Moses.
The reason that young girls might end up dressing in the manner described is due to pressure from various sources. They are indeed bombarded with all sorts of images and with that also comes pressure of another sort – the desire to fit in. Very few of us are comfortable with being different, which partly because society has long drilled into the idea that different = bad and partly because, as social animals, human beings have a compulsion to be part of a group. This can make people easy to manipulate.
But what if it isn’t the culture driving the young girls this way? What if the young girls are driving the culture? This is extremely important, because parents, schools, pastors, etc. can’t begin to address the challenge while in denial of what the real drivers are. We don’t assume a teenage boy caught with a Playboy was only looking at it to keep up with the other boys. But we can’t bring ourselves to be honest about the sexuality of women in general, and young women in specific. This is especially damaging because young women and men tend not to fully understand the forces they are operating under themselves. Pretending that it is solely the work of some outside force only makes it more confusing and difficult for them to manage while robbing them of a sense of accountability.
The thing is, it is society and culture that drives these behaviours and this has long been the case. Stuff like the aforementioned Playboy material, among others, has formed long-standing expectations for women and reduced them to the status of items of male admiration and desire. Rejecting these ideas leads to accusations of women being prudes/stuck up, but taking ownership of these notions leads to accusations of being whores. The message that is continuously bombarded at women and girls is ‘be sexy and available for men, not on your own terms though, only for the benefit of the men’. When women do try to take ownership/accountability for their sexuality, they are condemned and told to get into their box. They are not to challenge their place.
There is a little bit more here, but I didn’t really find it added anything more to the points being raised, though of course you can check out the link directly.