If the main appeal that attracts people to the doctrines of feminism is a desire for more gender equality, there is no denying that a search for more power is also a strong component sought by its advocates. They have pinpointed where the problems for women come from: a poor and unfair distribution of power. With the “patriarchy theory”, they have set and defined a way to view the world: it is a power struggle, a war between those who are at the top, the men, and those at the bottom, the women. The theory dictate that men have all the power, because male power and dominance is a lot more obvious than feminine power. A western lifestyle, mixed with feminist theory, has left women to notice the constrictive nature of their gender role while viewing men to be free of constrictions of any kind.
So women see men going out there into the world, making their marks, building and creating things, getting rich and liked by others. They work toward gaining status within society and create positions of power for themselves and women get envious and jealous. When you consider the feminist ideology of viewing the world through the lens of the patriarchy theory, in which men hold all the power and how they use it to oppress, it isn’t surprising to see them want a piece of that pie. Think of the suffragettes, who were after more political (societal) power for themselves through the obtainment of the right to vote. Fast forward to the Second World War, when women joined the war effort by taking job in factories, performing hard manual labor that were traditionally masculine endeavors. The unintended consequence was women getting accustomed to a new way of life that most were held back from holding due to gendered social conventions that would rather see them at home fulfilling their womanly duties as housewives and mothers. It’s the nature of their biology and the enforcement of gender roles that prevented women from understanding that life outside the home, a life as an individual who transcend limitations was not only possible, but a way to assert more power and control over their own destiny. It took men dying by the millions to create new ventures for women.
Then, in the 60’s, a new product was commercialized which influenced and revolutionized even further the world into taking the shape it has now: the contraceptive pill. The pill gave women a new found freedom and a power they never had before: a reliable and easily accessible way to control their own reproductive abilities. That gave them a tool to compete with men on their own battlefield. Gone were the days of pregnancies acting has a handicap holding women back. Men, not being impeded by pregnancies and the social convention that sees them as the one primarily responsible for child rearing, coupled with their conscientious and industrious nature, allowed them what some could see as a form of freedom that distinguished them (unfairly, feminist would say), and gave them advantages over women. While, certainly, there were always women distinguishing themselves amongst men (gladiator, Viking warriors, to name a few) only a small portion of them possessed the physical and psychological temperament necessary to compete with men successfully. And this is where we can see how the notion of possessing masculine traits as an advantage and a tool that lead to success.
One of the half-truth feminism has put forth for women to believe in is that it is recommended for them to reject motherhood and housewife duties for the sake of a career. They were told, as G. K. Chesterton put it best, that feminists think “that women are free when they serve their employers but slaves when they help their husbands.” It’s propaganda geared toward a social reengineering of gendered social dynamics, aimed at taking down and dismantling the patriarchy. This happened so quickly, only 5 or 6 decades, that men have been left scurrying to adjust. Their positions and their roles in society has been devalued to unprecedented level. Although they have always been the disposable gender, due to the nature of their biology and reproductive capabilities, even when they were shipped off to die in wars, they knew they served some useful purpose: fighting for a just cause. Now, with women competing against them, they are not only very aware that they’ve lost this uniqueness that traditionally separated them from women, but that their disposability serve no purpose anymore. Men are made to become obsolete. Men are made to feel unwanted and purposeless.
Interestingly enough, the consequences for women have also been negative as many women feel dissatisfied with their new freedoms and positions. A strong argument can be made that it’s women rejecting their true nature has life givers, for a more masculine way of life, that lead them to this. They were lead to believe that fulfilment and satisfaction could be achieved through masculine aspirations. By seeing men accomplishing themselves out into the world, they thought that copying those behaviors would grant them the same sense accomplishment. Instead of thinking that their womanhood was an advantage within society, they saw it has an impediment. So many decide to delay reproduction for a career, nowadays. Until they hit their 30’s and realise if they do want a family, it’s now or never. And many who do reject having children live to regret it later, wishing they hadn’t bought the lie of choosing an employer over a relationship. The women who decided to have it all, family and career, are glorified above all in our modern culture. Terms like “super mom” are used to describe them. It is not a secret that these women live incredibly busy lives and it is so common for women to hold such lifestyles that “being busy” has now become an indicator for success and prestige.
In this sense, women have also lost their uniqueness. To the point that any women who decide to become stay at home wives and mothers are reviled in some feminist circles. They are looked at with contempt as an impediment to progress and women’s liberation. Sending women to work is one way feminism is trying to take down the patriarchy, by making sure that the traditionally masculine positions of power, such as political positions within a government, are taken away from men to establish a more equitable distribution of said power. It’s an active seizing of power by taking it from one source to give it to another. This is what feminism has always been about. But this seizing of traditional masculine power comes at the rejection of feminine power. Women only experience limited draw backs from this attempt, as they can always go back to what works for them, what nature as designed them for. It’s a win-win for them, they have nothing to lose, while men are left with nothing to hold on to and nothing to fall back on. So they either fight their way out by attacking feminism, which then in turn breeds more dislikes of men or they check out of social convention altogether (like marriage and fatherhood) since those institutions puts them at a disadvantage anyway.
While the intentions of fighting the patriarchy are good in theory, they are ill designed and misguided due to the fact that the patriarchy is more a theoretical concept than anything else. The concept can only be granted validity through the rejection of some dimensions of gendered relations, such as men’s willingness to help and protect women and by focusing solely on women’s perceived lack of privileges. The feminist stance of equality of outcome is a good example of misguidance made into social policies. Implemented to bring about a more egalitarian and gender neutral world, the real life repercussions are opposite of their intended purposed. Instead of diminishing the differences within the workplace, by making it easier for women to access domains traditionally reserved to men, it reinforced them. This is evident in the Scandinavian countries. The more people are helped and pushed to go outside their preferred gendered choice of careers, the more they went to them. And this happens because of a fundamental flaw in the concept of equality of outcome: a denial of gender imperative within the human body. The binary nature of the human specie has created distinctions between men and women that goes beyond the system of reproduction. They are physical and psychological. Those distinctions are ignored and rejected for the sake of the implementation of an ideology, through social reengineering. And I used the word “reengineering” because we already had a working system, though an imperfect one, that feminism saw fit to reorganise because they believe it to be geared toward advantaging men while disadvantaging women. Which, in some sense, is true but feminists see this structure as being a problem by looking only at the bad experiences they face at the hands of men, while conveniently ignoring their own toxic behaviors. They also ignore their own unique feminine power, having been told they don’t have any and that masculine power is the only true form of power one can possess.
The road to the top of the hierarchy has been facilitated for the sake of creating a more gendered balanced world that is compose of 50/50 man and women in as many jobs and domains has possible. The consequence of this is that men are left behind, not being physically design to compete with women on the feminine battlefield. Men have always had to rely on women to pass on their genes through reproductions and it’s always been within women’s own power to decide which men get chosen to reproduce with her. While yes, men have always used their strength and desire to and for dominance to keep others down by force (not just women), they’ve also understood and been in awe of women’s divine capabilities to give life. This is evident in the celebration of the female form since the arts has come about early in human’s history. Men also used to be celebrated for their unique abilities, which doesn’t really happens anymore since men are labelled the agents of an oppressive regime. Their used to be a collaboration between men and women, but the feminist’s insistence of reorganizing society has put an end to the celebration of men and instead replaced it with distrust, hatred and conflict. . The ironic part is that, in a feminized and gynocentrict world they have created, confident and appealing men, from a female perspective, have become a somewhat dying breed. Which leave women asking “where are all the good men gone?”
For many decades, feminists goals hasn’t been to achieve more good and fairness but to take what they never had, male power and to replace it with the feminine, which men, by their nature, are incapable of competing with. Women need to realise that having it all is a well-constructed illusion made to steer them in directions that might not even work for them and that it has more to do with being recruited into fighting for a misguided ideology than obtaining them rights and freedom, which they already own anyway. Third wave western feminism want to replace masculine power, not share it, because it has deemed men unworthy of wielding it. And this is due to an unfair characterization of all men being judged by the worst examples of their gender. I am not advocating for a return to traditional gender roles but for understanding and compassion for men. We need to work together toward creating solutions that will work for everyone. Compromise is necessary. And it cannot be possible as long as any groups has a lust for power and dominance. We need to restore cooperation and reject a harmful ideology that sees men and women as enemies of each other. Let the focus not be on the differences that divide us but on our common humanity.
The outsider's perspective. 