.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

War of the Genders

A confrontational soapbox for rants and politically incorrect manifestos regarding feminism, chauvinism, dating and gender issues.

Monday, October 04, 2004

You're Cursed

This essay is actually a criticism on myself as well because it corrects a serious logical error I made and even posted about earlier. Let's start from scratch:

Females tend to be submissive by nature whether feminists want to admit it or not. Even some of the women that think they aren't submissive always have traces of it or can be made to feel submissive to a certain extent by the right man. Now before you jump to your feet with a large kitchen knife, this does not mean that all women are passive creatures that want to be dominated, that women are inferior, that all are submissive in the same way, nor does it mean that this fact is an idealism or a complete picture.

My proof is simple but somewhat subjective: I've seen it and experienced it in almost every woman I meet, if only to the extent that they enjoy watching male leaders or prefer certain dating and sex habits that let the man take the lead. Since this is only a strong tendency and not an absolute trait, I cannot prove it more objectively than this unless careful studies and surveys are made (which I haven't found).

It can be strongly argued that several external elements such as upbringing, sociological pressures and traumas may be the only causes of this phenomenon. However, the bottom line is that it depends on your ability to be objective and perceptive, to analyze trends and isolate circumstances. I am willing to bet that if a careful study was made even on women with healthy backgrounds and strong careers, that it would prove me correct.

Even the fact that more and more men like women to control them does not contradict this (men and women don't necessarily distribute traits exclusively between themselves), and in fact, if you notice the majority of women's disgusted reactions to submissive men, it would be proof for the opposite argument. It is rare to find a woman who consistently enjoys being dominant in a male-female relationship for more than a short period of time and this fits in with my contention.

Once you accept this base, what would a natural submissive do in a relationship, especially one where her partner is naturally aggressive? Encourage him to be dominant of course. Again, some may do this subtly and moderately, asking for guidance, encouraging him to take the lead in bed, agreeing or giving in more often, allowing themselves to be seduced, etc. Others may be more extreme and encourage the whips and chains, and even delude themselves into thinking that their overly-aggressive males really love them.

This obviously also works the other way around and the opposite chain of events is probably more common: The aggressive male may easily take advantage of this natural submissive trend and use it to his advantage to the point of extremity. Note that this doesn't make the testosterone-flowing male into a 'natural' and healthy counterpart, it only makes things more dangerous!

The important thing to realize is that it works in both directions.

If you think about it, this also explains why battered women stick around for so long. The near pop-psychology that a woman starts to like it and loses her sense of identity may be true, but isn't enough for me. This natural submission gives the behaviour an existential basis and explains why she let it happen in the first place!

Now as a Jew, the source for this behaviour is obvious to me. Eve gets punished for eating the forbidden fruit when, among other things, God decrees that men will rule over her. Obviously, most people assume this is some kind of age-old chauvinistic excuse for abusing woman and keeping her in the kitchen. But have you ever considered the possibility that this is not a command or an assignment of roles but a karmic/genetic change Eve brought on herself? Eve isn't told to submit; she becomes submissive by nature.

Since she wanted too much independent God-like power as well as abused her power over her husband, she becomes dependent on her husband. Unfair? Utter nonsense? The Bible is just chauvinistic crap written by men? Perhaps, but reality just happens to agree whether you like it or not.

Also note that the Bible says two things: not only is she told that her desires will be for her man, but in addition, the man will rule over her. The commentary says that the curse is double: if woman thinks she can control her desires, man will be able to manipulate and use them anyways.

The way I see it, it's not that she became submissive after she ate from the fruit. She was always submissive at a certain level, but had no sense of material independent identity before she ate. She wanted God-like powers with increased separation and therefore free-will, and she got them. The consequence was that now that she got her new independence, she suddenly finds herself submitting it. You can't submit something that isn't there. However, this needs to be discussed elsewhere with more depth.

But the truth is (and this is where I made the mistake) that it's a curse! It is undesirable and should be avoided as much as possible. The other parts of the curse include labor pain, and the man's curse involves sweating all day with farming work and dealing with thistles. Obviously, we do everything we can to avoid these things, why should submission be any different?

Granted, a curse isn't pointless and it's there to remind us of certain mistakes we made, but that doesn't mean we need to give in to it.

By the way, don't assume this means that leadership roles are or should be equally distributed. There are other issues which affect this which I will not go into here.

Now here is where I get a little mean and address you women:

Firstly, stop giving in to the curse so much. 'Duh!' you say? Well think again. Many of you have accepted it as part of your personality and give it free reign to your own detriment, others aren't even aware of it and how it affects them in subtle ways. And until you admit to it, you will not be able to deal with it properly.

Secondly, stop letting the curse take over your personality so much that it erases it. You neurotic, masochistic submissives have combined your submission with your pointless existence and think it makes you giving and wanted. Sex slaves are boring and about as useful as a hole in the wall. Most are merely empty egocentrics with so-called Dominants at their feet doing all the work.

Thirdly, stop trying to dump the consequences of your curse on men by making men make your decisions and do the work. More and more conservative post-feminist women are encouraging men to lead them, another expression of their submission. Just because you're cursed, that doesn't mean I have to get more responsiblities or that all of your development depends on you getting married.

Fourthly, stop exclusively blaming men for oppressing women. A consequence of letting your tendencies take over is that naturally aggressive men gleefully rise to the task and slowly start treating you as inferior. It takes two to tango in some cases, just like both a prostitute and her client are criticized. Why does it not surprise me that some women make out the prostitute to be the victim of man's oppression? They use the same twisted reasoning there and it is merely finger-pointing instead of accepting some of the responsibility.

You've got your work cut out for you just like we have to work for our livings and control our testosterone. You have a curse to deal with. Get to it.



After giving it much thought, I agree.

October 07, 2004 8:32 pm  

I freely admit my argument is weak. There are many other valid reasons why a woman can act submissive. There are exceptions. There are many women who seem anything but submissive at first. And even my claim says that it is only a tendency, sometimes a subtle one at that. Being submissive doesn't mean it's absolute and applies to all things.

But I stand by my argument nevertheless because I see the trend. I generalize because it is generalized. I don't care that it's taboo. Until I have better proof I cannot argue with you. I can only say that if you're objective and self-aware enough, you will notice it yourself and it is within your best interests to do so.

October 08, 2004 1:43 am  

P.S. Perhaps you're right in the sense that the English word submission is not appropriate. I'd accept any word that describes this behaviour. Perhaps this behaviour is limited to certain things. E.g. it tends to exist in sexual matters more often. Maybe I generalized a bit how it affects women. But it's there.

October 08, 2004 2:25 am  

I'm here mostly because Loreley seems to think so highly of you. Just wanted to let you know I'm reading. I'll comment if I have anything intelligent to say.

October 24, 2004 11:25 pm  

You have set out with a conclusion and have only anecdotal evidence from your life to back up your claims. Clearly, this is not an accurate way to gather information nor is it an appropriate way to base wild claims. You are definitely not a scientist or a philosopher - just a misogynist.

October 11, 2007 12:11 am  

You have set out with the conclusion that I am conducting a scientific experiment and that any statement I make must be based on scientific research. You judged my claims/arguments based on this and have invalidated everything I said based on this assumption rather than on any means of logical refutation. Not only that, but somehow you connected 'unscientific' with 'misogynist', thereby displaying your politically correct prejudice and dogma that says that anyone who attacks women without methodical scientific basis is a woman-hater.

People act, make decisions, talk and interact every minute without backing up their arguments, behaviour and statements with scientific methodoloy. I use common sense and never claimed to be a scientist. Ergo, forcing me to back up my arguments this way is just silly. Methinks you just have a problem with what I'm saying.

October 11, 2007 4:32 am  

Post a Comment

<< Home