Perusing the “manosphere” in greater breadth and depth again lately (part 2)

Yesterday I read an article on AVFM main-site titled “Marital Rape: why it is a thing” by David King:

Actually do appreciate that article and David King’s arguments used to further illuminate his position in the comment section. Written pieces like that could go a long way in improving public relations for the men’s rights movement, I do believe.

Wandering on…

“Low IQ Cop Slams Woman On The Floor & Knocks Her Unconscious”:

The video in question linked therein:

Now, let me stop there to say that Paul Elam actually managed to be a voice of reason in the comment section of that article. Surprises me to see so much of his humane side coming out in various articles and videos in recent months. Glad to see it. Because, as he pointed out and I totally concur with, this isn’t the way cops should be treating anybody, regardless of whether it’s a male or female. Because cops have a history of being most violent and oppressive toward men doesn’t make it justifiable to also become as violent and oppressive toward women. This is not some zero-sum game where men win because women lose. No. We’re all losing ground under a system that permits (nay, encourages) this sort of rough-handling of its citizens by cops without concern for protocols or human dignity or even life itself. So much for being “civil servants” — those days have long come and gone apparently, assuming they ever occurred to begin with. Might be another fiction our society likes to wax poetically about in reminiscing on the good ol’ days.  straight_face

The other comments on that article as well as on the YT video’s page are a mixed lot. Some seem to find it really funny, but then those same people would be up in arms if that sort of shit happened to them and others just stood around laughing or if those people present in that parking lot hadn’t spoken back to power. We ultimately hurt ourselves when we treat life as little more than a spectator sport, not to mention the damage we wind up inflicting on our communities and society-at-large by demonstrating such cowardly detachment while finding amusement in the mistreatment of others.

And people wonder why we are where we are at this point in history. Largely because we’ve opted to behave like a bunch of sissy cowards. It’s true of women and men, and I’ll go ahead and lump myself in there as well for not doing more of what I know I ought to be doing.

Getting so frickin’ tired of people and our bullshit…

Let me just stop there for now. I’ll undoubtedly return to this blog post later on to share more of what I’ve been reading and viewing, but for now I’m going to start another post pertaining to police misconduct and excessive force because that seems like a more worthwhile use of my time this evening.

Returning the next day…  Read Paul Elam’s article:

And wrote a good bit on here in response to it, and then, naturally, Firefox crashed and WordPress for whatever reason saved no new drafts, so all is lost. Damn.

The short, short version is:

1.) It seems a bit ironic that guys who complain about women aiming to “train” them are also promoting ways for guys to essentially “train” women to behave as they’d prefer or GTFO. Guess humans are just prone toward trying to train and bend one another according our standards and expectations. It should come as no surprise then when some of us wind up locking horns with one another in a battle of the wills.

2.) So much of what’s being discussed appears to boil down to compatibility issues. Different conflict resolution strategies employed that prove not to be complementary winds up with issues remaining unresolved, and that all unto itself can prove extremely frustrating and can taint the relationship over time. That is not automatically a gendered matter so much as a question of temperaments and compatibility. Each sex, when speaking to others of their sex, likes to frame it in a biased manner.

3.) Crazy is as crazy does, and I’ve yet to see any tango all alone. Members of each sex can point to irritations with the other, but I’d argue that passive aggression can prove every bit as crazy-making as does blatant and loud ass-riding, and neither sex has a full-blown monopoly on either of those tendencies. Because one appears calmer on the surface does not automatically mean it’s truly any less destructive in relationship settings. Retreating and routinely hiding out so as not to deal with life and relationship challenges appears to be no less of an indicator of a lack of maturity, common as it is. And conflict resolution is something we often learn through observation during our upbringing, at least until one becomes conscious of how faulty those examples were and strives to seek elsewhere for information so as to override our ingrained, habitual tendencies, which, of course, is typically easier said than done.

4.) One issue that I think gets left out of these types of talks is how those who are prone to retreat from conflict sometimes do so with no intention of ever resuming the conversation. They simply bow out and head to the bar and hide away, hoping that all will blow over in due time with no additional effort on their part. THAT is an irritating issue as well, and it probably points to a lack of maturity just as much. So, again, we’re redirected to a conundrum between conflict resolution strategies, which are a HUGE consideration when it comes to compatibility in enduring relationships.

5.) The maturation process is ongoing and anyone who thought we humans would have it all ironed out by our mid-20s is fooling him/herself. It’s just not that simple, regardless of what we might wish. Some may wish to blame modern life and whatever else for “coddling” people, but the reality is what it is by this point, and it extends to members of both sexes. A genuine desire to continue growing and learning is about the best sign we can hope for these days.

That’s enough to say on that.

Though, I would like to include something someone who goes by the handle “artiefischel” posted in the comment section of that article:

Struck me as cute and funny. Might as well post it here for levity’s sake since we’re all so prone to take our own opinions on these matters uber-seriously.

A random find from Diana at Feminism LOL channel titled “Roosh V: The Pussy Whipped ‘Terrorist'”:

Still not a fan of that woman regardless. And seriously, she thinks Roosh places women on a pedestal?? Ha! That’s one minuscule pedestal if that’s the case.

Been reading much this week on AVFM’s forum, as I’m prone to do from time to time. Can’t claim I haven’t been giving men’s rights groups a fair listening considering I’m still taking in plenty of what they have to say, now 4 years on. And some of what I read on there is useful food for thought. Some. Plenty also reminds me why I’ve grown to despise gender politics in general. Keep wondering how much longer I’m going to continue taking up time with observing that political battle of the sexes. Perhaps I feel guilted into doing so to some degree, considering I am not an activist anymore but had past affiliation with feminism to where it only seems fair to hear out these guys’ side of it. Can I get behind the strategy of blaming Feminism for damn-near all modern social problems? No, I cannot.

Not because I remain all that sympathetic to feminism as a whole, but mostly because there are so many factors to why we’ve arrived where we have as societies in the most-modern age. Feminism isn’t responsible for the rise of global economies and it wasn’t what initially set in motion the advent of Communistic systems (nor Capitalistic ones either, for that matter). It isn’t what’s behind the expansion of the military or any of its campaigns in the last century or prior. Not even so-called “gynocentrism” can be claimed to be responsible there. It wasn’t the originator of our consumerism culture, nor single-handedly can claim to have corrupt our laws and police forces. And yet, it seems if MRAs could somehow have responsibility foisted upon Feminism (or “gynocentrism”) for those game-changers as well, it would happen in a minute.

As I see it, Feminism has been co-opted as an arm of a wider political trend that I unabashedly refer to as Totalitarianism (whether historically fascist and communistic versions or “inverted” via Corporatism). And it’s that trend I take most issue with.

Yet, I can also see how so many other movements and groups play into it as well. Anything that’s aims, intentionally by design or otherwise, promise to usher in more government involvement in citizens’ lives plays into that scheme. My observations of the men’s rights movement give me the distinct impression that they too will over time go that way also, in an effort to attempt to “level” the political and legal domestic playground. While I can grasp why they feel driven that way, I cannot go along with it any more than I could go along with Feminism or Political Leftism or Rightism or pretty much any other “ism” that will wind up calling for increasing government oversight of the citizenship. That’s just me, though. Don’t have kids or big dreams to join the middle class or a big stake in what the future may hold. All I know for certain is I cannot, in good conscience, go for that. My conscience troubles me enough without yielding any more than I must to what I consider the most unpardonable sin of our times.

That may sound dramatic to some, but the whole human melodrama looks dramatic as hell from where I sit. As it always has been and always will be. People seem driven toward instituting some sort of ultimate fairness, level ground and equal opportunities for all. But I don’t see how that differs all that much from the socialistic and communistic dreams that came before. While so many gnash their teeth at “cultural marxism” and the notion of social constructs, they unwittingly play right into it themselves. It’s definitely ironic, and I cannot seem to express these views articulately enough to give them pause. Wouldn’t even know what to tell them if they did pause and wanted to seek other avenues and answers. We’re hesitant to advocate the strategy of every person for him/herself, but at the end of the day, what other formulation makes any greater sense? Ceaselessly fight one another in political battles with the goal to win out and force changes on those you deem “the enemy”? Won’t turn out like people wish it would, that much I am doggone certain about. About the best we can hope for seems to be to group up with those one’s capable of working with and working on our own selves, according to what principles we value most. And that can’t help but differ across the masses of individuals. We’re not all on the same team, regardless of our sex/gender, race, nationality, creed, political persuasion, etc. And the more of us there are, the more complicated everything is destined to become.

I have no answers. Only a bunch of reservations. Won’t claim to be much of an ally to any “cause.” But routinely I am reminded after sitting with these opinions and ideas tossed about that I’d probably be better off walking away so far as I’m able. Because all the gnashing of teeth and denouncements of this group and that group gets to looking like the same shit, over and over, just dressed up to look a little different year after year. Is that an apathetic stance? Well, perhaps. I care about what I care about, and that actually encompasses quite a lot, but the methods popularly advocated cause me to feel guarded. Wary and weary. Watchful and wondering what may come to pass. Unwilling to take part in the ways they all seem to want. My heart says no. My mind says it’s all absurd at bottom. My soul says there are more fruitful ways than succumbing to this.

It’s a conundrum because we like to believe that we citizens determine political outcomes based on who and what we vote for and how loudly we advocate for change, but at this point the lunatics indeed appear to be running the asylum. Beat ’em or join ’em? Eh…  Nah. Fuck ’em and their Law.

Reasoning apparently can only take us so far when our biases will only let so much in. This is the age of people popularly proclaiming we must choose “the lesser of two evils.” But who said there were only two?

Tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.