2: undue partiality or attachment to a group or place to which one belongs or has belonged3: an attitude of superiority toward members of the opposite sex; also :behavior expressive of such an attitude. Compare male chauvinism.
I had an interesting conversation over the long weekend about my Shallow post with a few red pill friends. The topic of NLP (neurolinguistic programing) and how select terms are ‘owned’ by the feminine imperative was discussed. It’s interesting to dissect how the terminologies of certain feminine social conventions have entered our contemporary lexicon as the ‘official’ definitions we simply take for granted in our blue-pill ignorance.
The subjective nature of terms like “Shallow” and “Superficial” are easy examples of this feminine repurposing, but then you get to “Misogynist”, “Sexist” and of course “Chauvinist” and you can see how these ‘official’ terms evolved into what they are today. In fact, “Sexism” was so universally defined as male-specific, Websters needed a new word to describe a female form of sexism, “reverse-sexism.” And of course “Misandrist” still gets the red underscore of a misspelled word in my WordPress spellchecker.
The problem I see is in defining ‘Chauvinism’, particularly as opposed to ‘Misogyny’ – they’re practically synonyms in the lexicon of the feminine imperative. The biggest fallacy I think most AFC guys and all women I’ve read write on Chauvinism subscribe to is that women own this term. It is absolutely possible to describe a woman as a Chauvinist, but in a modern context it has been uniquely defined in the masculine. In fact, to get down to the roots of the term when it was defined as a masculine attribute, the original terminology was “male chauvinist pig” courtesy of Gloria Steinem and the militant feminist movement of the 1970s.
However, more important is how the term has become synonymous with masculinity. For the past 40 years it’s been developed in westernized society that masculine = chauvinism and that any uniquely masculine trait, behavior or characteristic is at the very least suspect, if not outrightly so, chauvinism.
Why is this? Why should a man be labeled ‘chauvinistic’ for expressing his masculinity? Masculinity and the behaviors that are derived from it are no more negative than those expressed in the Feminine depending upon individual conditions. But it’s the masculine that is vilified by both sexes (at least in the last 60 years).
Why can’t the masculine be a positive? The underlying theme for Rational Male is an effort to get back to a positive definition of masculinity. Thatt’s not advocating a wife-beating, caveman ideology, rather it’s a move back to defining the masculine in terms that don’t equate it with chauvinism. The difficulty occurs in attempting to relate to both men and women a need to unlearn this pre-described terminology, that even our own parents helped brow-beat into cultural consciousness. Chauvinism as masculinity has been parroted constantly for so long now that a new generation of AFC sons from AFC fathers now resort to internalizing this doctrine and ego-investing themselves in avoiding anything even remotely construed as masculinity in a desperate attempt to identify with what other women repeating the same ideology (masculine equals domineering opression) have been socially conditioned to accept as what a man should be to achieve the ‘gift’ of their intimacy.
Then men are ridiculed (even by their own) for even prompting the thought that something might not be entirely equitable in gender relations when behaviors consistently don’t match ideology. The man to even subtly point out inconsistencies in women’s behaviors is automatically a Chauvinist for exposing a feminine weakness in their argument. And now we come full circle and hear a constant bemoaning from feminized pop-culture, “Where are all the REAL men these days?” Why can’t we have Superman again? All in complete, blissful ignorance of the history and circumstance that have lead to the decline of positive masculine males.
The only reason men outside the sphere have any impression that the manosphere is based in Chauvinism is because they have no grasp of the true definition of the terem, nor do they understand the engineering which evolved the term to what it is now. It’s far easier to engage in misguided attempts to identify with the feminine; to spit back the rhetoric women say they approve of as a condition for their intimacy while simultaneously contradicting themselves with their own behaviors.
For far too long young men have bought the basic Carl Jung psycho-babble women have repeated since the 60’s – “Men need to get in touch with their feminine side” as if this were the ultimate in female identification and an avenue to their intimacy. In fact the opposite is true – men need to rediscover their masculine sides and be unafraid of the consequences. In my experience the manosphere makes the single best attempt to do this in modern culture, without resorting to actual misogyny.
It’s time to stop buying the lie that masculinity is laughable, ridiculous or definitively negative. The world desperately needs Men. Men with strength of will to pass the meta-shit test of a feminized popular culture when it tells him he’s pitiable because he’s been poisoned with testosterone and the traits that make him masculine are to be controlled as character flaws.
“men need to rediscover their masculine sides and be unafraid of the consequences.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauvinism “A contemporary use of the term in English is in the phrase male chauvinism.”
I’m in my mid 40’s and I remember being in grade school, probably 4-6 grade (we’re talking late ’70s), when the term “male chauvinist pig” became a popular taunt among the girls. Course, with women becoming so testosterone-infused, the feminine is becoming masculine, so all things will come in a circle.
Maybe it’s just me but if any other guys are noticing the same thing please chime in. I feel like since American men as a whole have become so feminized/beta that the way to peacock is to do the opposite and embrace the positive masculinity. Being politically correct and appealing to the femcentric way has become so ingrained that even slight doses of chauvinism seem to work pretty well. I’ve had more noticeable success and garnered more attraction by embracing the ethos embraced here at RM compared when I used to say what I thought women wanted to hear. For… Read more »
For the past 40 years it’s been developed in westernized society that masculine = chauvinism and that any uniquely masculine trait, behavior or characteristic is at the very least suspect, if not outrightly so, chauvinism. Sure, because if women cannot do it or have great difficulty doing it, then men are wrong for doing it so easily and well. Why can’t the masculine be a positive? It IS positive and that is the problem. Feminist are gone the minute men realize this. These words you describe; misogynist, chauvinist, shallow, etc are simply weapons. You take away these weapons and you… Read more »
Also, I have this routine where talk about how I lament the fact how my two good friends have moved in with their gfs and how it totally emasculates them (They can’t sneak around, no more guys night out, always watching rom coms, etc). How one friend is getting married and it’s the worst mistake he can make. I go anti-marriage a bit too and decry how my buddies have given themselves 100% to the idea of love. It’s worked well in convos on first dates for some reason. Maybe the girls I’m going on dates with get the “Get… Read more »
Beta-Game is really anti-game, but then anti-anti-Game is the contingency.
It’s like running a boyfriend destroyer routine, only you get to define the character of the boyfriend and DHV against the character you create. Brilliant.
Straw Man Game FTW!
Rollo: “The world desperately needs Men.”
Not complete. The world desperately needs men if it is to be a certain way which requires ‘Men.’ The new kind of world emerging before our very eyes seems not to require ‘Men’ so much, and it’s muddling through nonetheless. The world which Men have built is analogous to the political system set up by Augustus; so well-designed that it can withstand bad leaders (in our case, women and feminized men) for centuries before it finally collapses.
OlioOx, shut up.
I’m a bit drunk at the moment, and I consider what I just posted to be really quite brilliant. But like the ancient Persians, according to Herodotus, I will try to consider things twice: once when drunk and once when sober (or vice versa). If I still consider it brilliant tomorrow morning, perhaps I’ll celebrate by having a drink.
Cheers bro. Your comment is “right” from a pure logical point of view, but its factually wrong. “The world which Men have built is analogous to the political system set up by Augustus; so well-designed that it can withstand bad leaders” And how long did that last? You can automate a house to run so perfectly it can hold your kids without adult supervision – until an accident happens, until the kid does something stupid, until something breaks, until… The world is set up in a way it doesnt require “men” but agendered slaves – but making everything worse for… Read more »
Be very careful of drinking the “x is real masculinity, y is not” kool-aid.
Society will define masculinity in a way that benefits society first, the individual second (if you are lucky).
Actually its better to just let go of the whole idea of trying to “find masculinity” to minimize manipulation. Do whatever works. When it stops working, try something else.
If you’re happy, you’re the man.
Strangely enough, “chauvinism” originated as a word having nothing to do with sex relations but with extreme and blind patriotism. It comes from the name of one of Napoleon’s soldiers, Nicolas Chauvin. Interesting how words evolve, and just how many of them have been hijacked by feminists.
“It’s like running a boyfriend destroyer routine, only you get to define the character of the boyfriend and DHV against the character you create. Brilliant.” Rollo thank you for defining that dude. I think that’s exactly what occurs when I do it. Easy to speak about it convincingly when your friends are actually going through it. I think it also sets the frame (at least for something longer term) that the girl I run this routine on sees me as damaged(?) and wants to turn me around to fit the “ideal” pursuit of love that my friends are going for.… Read more »
One of the best lessons in taking the red pill…
Stop apologizing for being a man. Stop apologizing for your desires.
Yes, that shit works. Big time.
Great if that kind of thing works for you, but I wouldn’t. With a new prospect, I still subscribe to the be mysterious about your intentions school of thought. The less you signal in the early stages about whether you’re up for LTR or marriage or just keep it casual, the better. Before I got into my current LTR I had only one main answer when asked the where is this going question: Wherever/whatever comes natural for us. When pressed on what that is: I don’t know yet. I regard it as a sh*t test because she’s trying to ask… Read more »
as always well written and educational. modern western ideology touts this nonsense. people are indoctrinated en masse as if it is a basic fact of life. as if we are just now understanding the gender relation ideal and all of mans past was tainted with a flawed social dynamic. but look now, the men are unhappy with the women and their prospects and the women are unhappy with the men. and the reason, as most of you know: gender is not a social construct. take your pants off and tell me gender is a contrived notion designed to keep one… Read more »
1. Hit the Iron
2. Join a Jiu-Jitsu Academy
3. Grow a Beard
4. Hunt or Fish
5. Spend a couple nights in a forest, alone, without any gear or link to the outside world
Do all that, and you’ll be well on your way.
In re. gender and courage/strength/integrity/character, google Maria Santos Gorrostieta (RIP).
It’s funny that being masculine isn’t really rediscovering anything…it’s just finally saying no to the lie. Once you realize that woman have no power over man other than big daddy government and mommy court system…there is nothing to fear. If those two institutions fail (and with Obama let’s hope they do), feminism will die a quick painful death.
And if a woman puts you down for being a man…let her enjoy her retirement in a cat shelter.
Rollo, your last sentence rang so true for me.
“…he’s pitiable because he’s been poisoned with testosterone and the traits that make him masculine are to be controlled as character flaws.”
I’ve often thought this but could not have expressed it so succinctly.
I think it sums up the whole double-standard.
Masculine traits = character flaws
Whatever a woman does, says, writes, thinks. = ‘You go grrrrl!®’ empowerment.
[This is the essence of the Feminine Imperative]
@taterearl – “…finally saying no to the lie.”
Yes, just internalizing that concept makes a huge difference.
In re. gender and courage/strength/integrity/character, google Maria Santos Gorrostieta (RIP).
A good example of society programing individuals to sacrifice themselves for society. Soldiers also come to mind.
It’s funny that being masculine isn’t really rediscovering anything…it’s just finally saying no to the lie.
Agree. Reaching masculinity for a man is about removing stuff, not adding. When you have removed all lies, what’s left is “pure you” which is the most potent man you will ever be. “The man” is within.
A good example of society programing individuals to sacrifice themselves for society. Soldiers also come to mind. I disagree. Santos Gorrostieta acted from her own free will, not from social programming. If people were programmed to do this, there would be hundreds if not thousands more Santos Gorrostieta standing up against the drug cartels and the horror they have wrought. What Santos Gorrostieta represents is a rare person of unspeakable moral courage, physical courage, and selflessness, who defied the apathy of the society around her–which programs its citizens for consumerism, individualism, and self-indulgence–in order to do what she felt was… Read more »
Great post and comments again, but I have two questions that have nothing to do with anything.
First, I’m finding that as the Pill sinks in that “nice guys” are causing me to feel a vsiceral sense of disgust. There’s a guy behind me at work who laughs like an Herb all the time, and it’s taking huge amounts of strength to not turn around and pound him. Is this normal?
Also, can anyone point me to a good place for guidance on approaching in the gym?
Most mexicans are neither standing up against the cartels nor joining them because they are not dumb. Thank god. Social programmng is not supposed to work on all or even the majority. Just enough to serve its purpose. Get a few to take the bullet for the others. In return society then calls them heros and praises them for having courage, selflessness etc yet will never follow their footsteps. Getting killed and endangering your kids for “society’s benefit” is foolishness of the highest order. Apathy is good, it can save your life. Letting society sleep in the bed it made… Read more »
I think a comment got swallowed. Anyhow, I’m curious if Rollo agrees with either of these articles:
Good read. Also I’d like to point out that it’s written by a woman. Like your one post mentioned (can’t think of title right now), if a man did this, it would be a shit storm.
Some of the comments in the “feminist boys” article are out of this world. We’re not alone.
“For far too long young men have bought the basic Carl Jung psycho-babble women have repeated since the 60′s – “Men need to get in touch with their feminine side” as if this were the ultimate in female identification and an avenue to their intimacy. In fact the opposite is true – men need to rediscover their masculine sides and be unafraid of the consequences.”
“First, I’m finding that as the Pill sinks in that “nice guys” are causing me to feel a vsiceral sense of disgust.”
Me too. That’s probably me getting in touch with my feminine side.
I got voted down when I made some comment under an article where I pointed out that society as we know it would not exist if it weren’t for men: everything you see and touch was conceived, built, and delivered by a man. Since this was considered “chauvinist” we need to conclude that merely point out reality to women is offensive. And from there, we need to conclude that Franklin, Jefferson, the Victorians, Freud, etc. we correct when they claimed women were irrational children, not fully-formed adults. If you view them from this perspective it’s easier to deal with them.… Read more »
Me too. That’s probably me getting in touch with my feminine side.
When I saw the picture of Jessica Wakeman, I was just dumbfounded in that Frisky article. Why is it that the ugliest women that should doubling down on being ultra supportive and super sweet in order to snag some type of decent guy the worst angry femicunts the world has ever seen? If I looked like her, I would be rah rah dudes. At the first chance a decent beta provider I would be on that like flies on shit all the time being sweet hoping that he overlooks my sub par looks. I mean she’s the female omega of… Read more »
i remember on my first day at school, the first thing our teacher (mrs. tinker..) told us were the class rules, the one that stuck in my mind and can still hear her telling us is ‘keep hands and feet to yourselves’ obviously just talking just to the boys- and that formed the base for many of them to ‘keep your masculinity to yourselves’ ever since. it is inconvenient to deal with boys who like to throw sand at each other and smash their building blocks against each others’, but that is a small price to pay for raising a… Read more »
Rollo. As always thanks for the article. @Team-Red. Long been on 1&3, I 2nd rec them for everyone. 2,4&5…i’ll do those. Esp like the idea of 5. @taterearl. Just my opinion but though rumors abound, I don’t think the feared and talked about collapse will happen any time soon. MUCH is wrong with this system, but hose predicting near term let alone imminent collapse generally seem to suffer from the cognitive condition where their own lack of understanding is replaced with fear. A lot of assets and strategies will have to burn out before this system turns in on itself.… Read more »
Case, yep, but you still need men to create the automatized colonies, to build the machines, to get the stuff done, etc. Women aint gonna do it.
You need men to create a society that can run without men, even without men maintaining it. But there’s no incentive (pussy) for men to build such society. The less incentive (pussy) there is, the more men fail, the more men are pushed low and outside of society and the more those men are unwanted – therefore the more society wants these men to build a society where themselves are not needed… but there’s no incentive. You can push that model for so long but eventually the dog bites it’s tail. The promise for women was to have it all… Read more »
Lol got called “chauvinist pig” for even questioning the entitlement culture of women. It started with my q “Why should they get preferential treatment”…oh boy, I was just amazed at the fervor that it induced.
“When I saw the picture of Jessica Wakeman, I was just dumbfounded in that Frisky article. Why is it that the ugliest women that should doubling down on being ultra supportive and super sweet in order to snag some type of decent guy the worst angry femicunts the world has ever seen?” Because women like this are invisible to men and they’ve come to hate and resent men for ignoring them. Women like attention and this is the only way the nasty-looking ones can get it. I’m not going to even Google her pic, but from your description I’m gonna… Read more »
Jesus fucking Christ that picture, suddenly I need to go punch something or someone.
How to Piss off a Feminist twice? Fuck her in the ass and wipe your dick on the drapes.
“In fact, to get down to the roots of the term when it was defined as a masculine attribute, the original terminology was “male chauvinist pig” courtesy of Gloria Steinem and the militant feminist movement of the 1970s.”
Mary Inman was an ardent feminist and Communist in the late 1930s and early 1940s. During that era, the Communist Party of the USA often used the phrase “white chauvinism” to refer to racial prejudice. It was Inman who reworked that phrase to coin the term, “male chauvinism.”
“”First, I’m finding that as the Pill sinks in that “nice guys” are causing me to feel a vsiceral sense of disgust. There’s a guy behind me at work who laughs like an Herb all the time, and it’s taking huge amounts of strength to not turn around and pound him. Is this normal?”” Perfectly normal, I’ve imagined strangling thousands of herby herbs over the years. Listening to this half man banter literally causes my head to feel tension, seems to be the side effects from long term red pill dosage. I find myself just walking away from many conversations… Read more »
Women may not be able to run an advanced society without any male help, but they could do it with the assistance of a large number of ‘nice guys.’
Hmm, doesn’t that pretty much describe current conditions?
Biological role of the man is to be the tool for women. He is here for her to enable her to procreate and work his ass off for her offspring. He is here to proctect and provide and if necessary, to sacrifice his life for her. His very body AND BRAIN is made that way. It is up to him to realize it and master his body and emotions so that HE CAN control women, not the other way around. Men have forgotten this, they are no longer taught that they have to RULE women. Majority of them are slaving… Read more »
@yohami: your 8:15 comment is total gold. I may frame it. Vital, powerful stuff that is.
Slightly OT, and forgive me for asking the obvious, but how does one avoid being misogynous(not in the shaming sense of the word)?
How does one strike the middle path between pedestalising women and being misogynous?
This is how Swedish society acts to prevent embracing the masculine. Not just in the U.S but situation is critical in many countries in Europe too
Yohami also describes why polygamous societies can be so destructive. Alpha males get 22 wives, and thousands of omegas get none. Therefore you’ve got thousands of men with no incentives to create or advance. They become violent, turn on each other, and nothing but a giant drain. The only potential benefit for such a society is to become massively militaristic so as to kill off the excess males. Although it’s not polygamous, China’s one-child policy has resulted in tons of excess, unmarraigeable males. Not only does this accentuate the virgin/whore dynamic among females (their either prized at birth and used… Read more »
Conquest is also a great way to pick up chicks (literally, in the back of a cattle car).
‘How does one strike the middle path between pedestalising women and being misogynous?’ Being true misogynst is hard my hard. I very much doubt many men in the middle class plus are misogynsts. Misogyny is the hatred of women along with abusing them. Like if you trip a woman and cause her to fall to the floor simply because she is a woman and has done nothing else. You take glee in making their lifes miserable simply because they have a pussy. Misogyny is NOT having control over women. Misogyny is NOT having casual sex with women Misogyny is NOT… Read more »
Pure gold as usual!
Kudos, Ferret. Actual misogynists never ask themselves, “Am I a misogynist?”
There are plenty of misogynists I’m sure in the Crips and Latin Kings, but I doubt many in forums like this one. We’re here because our natural tendency was too much pedestalization. It’s really hard to go from that to genuine hatred of women.
I’ve also seen more misogyny among some of the Men’s Rights types who’ve dropped out of society.
“Misogyny is the hatred of women along with abusing them. Like if you trip a woman and cause her to fall to the floor simply because she is a woman and has done nothing else. You take glee in making their lifes miserable simply because they have a pussy.” Feminists are the true misogynists. Just replace woman with man and you see what I mean. When I correct or disagree with women…it has nothing to do with hatred of them. If anything, it’s to prevent them from doing something stupid. If I hated them I’d beta up and tell them… Read more »
I think it’s also a question of results. Feminists say they want to get women what they want and it makes women miserable. We want what we as men want, and we make women happy (after some annoyed grunts and squeals, of course).
the only appropriate response to a girl calling you a chauvinist pig is ‘oink oink’.
You think it’s bad here? Here’s the latest news from Sweden- http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/gender-neutral-toys-swedish-kids-article-1.1208711?localLinksEnabled=false
You think it’s only THAT bad in Sweden? Here’s the latest from the good ole’ USA- http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/27/time-nominates-sandra-fluke-for-person-of-the-year/
One thing I do find interesting is that the comments sections of most of these articles (even the one from thefrisky linked to earlier in these comments) show that there are a LOT of people out there who are buying this BS. Even women.
Oops….comment in moderation might sound a little odd. Didn’t go back and re-edit what I edited…..
Itsme: wrong. Loud snorts are even more dismissive.
Reblogged this on arussthebus and commented:
A real opener, this post.
I always rebuke any woman that calls me a misogynist. I am not misogynist. Misogyny is a pejorative label that feminists peg to a man or institution that would resist the aims and goals of feminism in any way that women might deem functional and useful to peg that man or institution with that label. I am not a misogynist. I am a Woman Hater and there is world of difference in being a Woman Hater and a Misogynist. I hate them as they are and what they do, how they act, their arrogance, their conceit. To insist that a… Read more »
@Yohami on 815 above …
sorry been away didn’t see reply.
I agree with the fellow earlier who said that’s kind of happening. Betas giving it up for free, so to speak. Also, to get really mad max on things, numbers could be culled.
When driving by a strip mall with the same garden variety set of corp stores, think “replicant emergent colony”. When driving by a closed down strip mall with the same think “failed emergent colony”.
It would be a different humanity and not one many would want, but I can see it.
Case, yep, it’s happening, it’s heading there, but it’s failing
Boys will be boys, but a lot of em need some help so they don’t hurt themselves, the people around them (like their future wife) or unknowingly supporting something incorrect e.g politicians ruling with beta motives, or the fool paying for sex not knowing he’s fueling the sex trade. C’mon Rollo write a post that looks at this stuff on a global scale and at the darker side of the beta mind set, for instance, a post on how scarcity (or believing what you want is out of your reach) leads to desperation, this leads to irrational acts e.g paying… Read more »
Misogyny is NOT having control over women.
Misogyny is NOT having casual sex with women
Misogyny is NOT having restrictions on what women can do in a society.
Misogyny is NOT not supplication and putting up with women bullshit.
thebloggerssililoquy, “C’mon Rollo write a post that looks at this stuff on a global scale and at the darker side of the beta mind set, for instance, a post on how scarcity (or believing what you want is out of your reach) leads to desperation, this leads to irrational acts e.g paying for sex, this leads to there being a market for it e.g prostitution, this leads to some really fucked up shit e.g sex slaves and trafficking. There’s a world outside America and all the posts I’m seeing focus on that area.” You must be new to the Manosphere.… Read more »
If the guy in the photo doesn’t want to carry the woman’s bags he can just put them down, turn around, and walk away. He carries them because he wants to eat her pussy later on.
Suck it up, boys!
Well, we do have one use. LOL.
@Hopeless Romantic American MRAs are totally jealous that Dutch guys in Holland, oh excuse me, “The Netherlands”
What’s American MRAs? Is that male rights activists? Being jealous about that contradicts the whole point of learning game, so you don’t have to be sick enough to pay for sex. In my eyes anyway. They can’t honestly want to sleep with a ten year old girl, or a woman that’s been hooked on heroin and forced into it (which some women around the are btw)
Quite frankly, Rollo, you often enable the female imperative by just addressing it. Sunshine Mary, for example, just banned me from her blog for suggesting that her flaunting of her panties is not just “innocent.” Yet, you show up at her blog sticking your tongue in her unmentionables simply to “justify” your position in the sexual dynamic. Surely you, of all people, Rollo, understand why SSM’s blog has become so instantly more popular than your own blog. It is because there is a woman behind the voice, and men find this acceptable, because the female imperative has given its approval.… Read more »
Ferdz, I’ve been blogging in the manosphere for just over a year now, but most of what I offer here is the culmination of more than a decade of interaction and discussion on various forums and doing peer counseling with men who seek my advice. Prior to launching the blog I had no idea who Susan Walsh was and in fact I only discovered her because she took personal issue with my Wait For It? post on HUS and linked back to. This then began an exchange over other posts and my evaluating her propositions and advice as little more… Read more »
Can’t we just acknowledge the only reason we’re all fighting so much is because we all want each other so much? New Year’s resolution: less fighting, more kissing 🙂
Rollo, the few times Susie has ventured out of her own echo chamber, such as to Badger’s or Dalrock’s, she’s found the experience not to her liking. Some mean man or other dares to challenge her emotional impressions with facts, and demands she support her claims with evidence. This leads to behavior rather like a squid or cuttlefish – spray of ink to cloud the waters, that covers a hasty retreat to safety. SSM at least can stand up to debate. But let’s bear in mind, as Rollo noted, the inherent limitations in women’s thinking, when the topic is “women’s… Read more »
For most people in our “civilized” society, the slaughter of a young lamb would be shocking, unpleasant to watch and maybe even offensive. To witness the slaughter or execution of a human being would, of course, be even more disturbing. Other than those who have served in the military, and except for the occasional news videos or photographs of executions or assassinations, most of us have not seen real, violent human death firsthand. To some, the simulated violence and death in a television program or movie is so troubling that they want it banned or extensively curtailed. It is certainly… Read more »
[…] Chauvinism […]
This opinion falls short by mistaking the terms “masculine” and “chauvinist” for synonyms. Chauvinism requires the presence of superiority whereas. masculinity is a neutral quality. By neglecting that difference, the author is displaying male chauvinism. Masculinity is not superior to feminity, but the belief that it is is, by definition, chauvinist.
“For far too long young men have bought the basic Carl Jung psycho-babble women have repeated since the 60’s”
That’s not really what Carl Jung says. While he says that there is a feminine side in men, it’s more about using this mental construct to access the collective unconscious than actually turning into an emotional man or something along these lines.
Jung had nothing remotely as accessible to the biological, archeological and evolutionary information we possess today. Most of his theories were the result of an attempt to identify better with the feminine so as to facilitate his banging his female subjects (with his wife’s blessing no less). Game recognizes Game. Jung was just the Hugo Schwyzer of his time, and a man that 2nd and 3rd wave feminism embraced because his universality of genders and them being social constructs gelled with the egalitarian equalism narrative. “Women are a magical force. They surround themselves with an emotional tension stronger than the… Read more »
I don’t that’s too much about game, Rollo. Jung was a trying to understand esotericism from a psychoanalytic perspective, did you ever seen his comments on the I Ching? It has nothing to do with game whatsoever. Now, about his relationship with women, his “Man-Eater dream” tells alot about it. He was sexually repressed, no doubt, but his idea of union with the anima/animus is more about the unification of the duality in one’s mind. You can see more about this unification in alchemical and gnostic texts. It’s not about sex, but it can be understood through sex. It’s more… Read more »
Damn your good!!! thank you for this read.