The wiser among you already know I’m not speaking of literal emasculation, but figurative.
There has been a movement in the last few decades to emasculate society, or more precisely, the middle and lower class. I am not merely talking about men, but about suppressing attributes which are classically considered masculine: Belligerence, leadership, decisiveness, rationality and action. Instead, their feminine counterparts have been promoted: Amicability, obedience, compromising, emotionality and passiveness. Even anger has been suppressed, as if it is an unnatural emotion and that feeling it makes you inferior. As if feeling anger towards tyrants, crooks, liars and criminals is inappropriate. (Note: I can’t help but notice the same shift in attitude in the occult and alternative spirituality community, mentioned in much less eloquent terms in my experience with an entity I banished.)
The truth of this statement is self-evident, yet some would likely demand proof of such a state of affairs, as if one would need to analyze thousands of pictures of the sky to determine that it is indeed blue. Yet one does not have to look far to find evidence, especially within western schools where “masculine” traits are almost always considered undesirable and even punished, unless a child is in an expensive private school. Even rationality is only rewarded as far as it allows people to make society function. And I need not mention the ridiculous concept of “toxic masculinity”, which would have merit if it hadn’t been stretched to the point of encompassing all masculinity.
But when did this all begin? And why is it happening?
Quite simply, it all began with feminism. It was not the aim of feminism, yet its cause was hijacked by people with interest in doing so.
Of course, the goal of feminism in the very beginning was not the emasculation of society. Its objective was the empowerment of women, namely promoting the idea that women had a right to vote in a democratic society, that they should have equal rights, that they should be allowed to occupy the same jobs as men, etc. If you know my opinion on democracy, rights and equal opportunity, you’ll understand why I actually see nothing wrong with the original cause of feminism. In a true democracy, there is no justification for depriving half the adult population of the right to vote. Saying otherwise is denying the very reason democracy exists, which is that in a republican government, limiting the numbers of those who can choose their leaders increases the risk of corruption immensely.
What is important however is not what feminism wanted to achieve or whether it was right or not. What matters is the impact it had on society, namely women entering the work force in large numbers and getting into positions of authority. Now, whether “feminine” and “masculine” traits are inborn or learned is irrelevant, and any attempt to take the discussion in that direction is merely an attempt to derail it. What matters is that men exhibit the masculine traits and women exhibit the feminine traits. And now we’re getting to the “why”.
You see, as women entered the workforce, employers (read the upper classes) quickly noticed the difference between the male and the female employee. In case you don’t understand, review the masculine and feminine traits I listed earlier. What I mean is that female employees are more obedient, are less likely to argue with their superiors, are more likely to ask their superiors for directions when they’re unsure of the course to take, are less likely to fight for better conditions and better pay, etc. Likewise, politicians made a similar observations. Female voters tend to be more emotional, they tend to favor security over rights and freedom, they’re less likely to question what their government does, etc.
Note that in both cases, it certainly is “tends” and “more likely”. Not all women are more emotional than rational, not all women are submissive, not all women are indecisive. Likewise, not all men are rational, not all men are belligerent, not all men are decisive. It doesn’t matter however, what matters is that women are more likely to have the feminine traits, which the upper class noticed. And to them, these tarts are desirable in a lower class. It makes their employees, their citizens easier to manipulate, to control, to dominate.
And so, the upper classes, under the guise of taking up the fight of social justice, changed the course of feminism. It was no longer about empowering women. No longer would feminism say “Women are Just as good”; rather, it became “society must accommodate women”. Then it became “Men need to change”. And now its quickly becoming “Masculinity is bad”.
So, what can be done? That is a question I am unable to answer. It would seem obvious to say that masculinity needs to be promoted again, that we must fight back against “equal outcome” and bring back actual “equal opportunity”, that we must denounce what is being done. But how to achieve all of these? A mere sensitization campaign would immediately be shot down. I propose three solutions:
1 Instead of directly saying that masculinity is good, the “masculine” traits should be promoted, in completely neutral way, as in without mentioning feminism or gender politics or anything of the sort. Leadership, decisiveness, action, rationality and even belligerence must be shown as positive traits.
2 Attempts to demonize these traits should be shot down. Force those who do so to explain why they think it’s wrong, and why they think their opposite are good. Meanwhile, promote the negative aspects of the “feminine” traits.
3 Finally, and in my opinion the most devious yet most entertaining solution, would be to teach our daughters to hold the masculine traits. This might seem strange, yet it would turn the emasculation of society on its head. As these girls grow into women and exhibit the “masculine” traits, they will quickly learn how these traits, necessary for anyone who wishes to elevate themselves in society, are constantly suppressed. As women become the victims of this campaign, the idea that opposing it is misogynistic will shatter.
These solutions are certainly not perfect, and I myself see many things wrong with them, yet they’re the best I can come up with. Still, we must either act to preserve our masculinity now or watch as our children and grandchildren am raised into pseudo-slaves who do not question the upper classes and believe that they do not deserve more than what they’re given.
Original screen cap: