Näkymättömät miehet

Rod Van Mechelen:

At work, the men there deal with you(woman) on a friendly but professionally distant basis. If you try to get to know them socially, they laugh, tell you you're funny, or report you for sexual harassment. How would you feel? Sexually invisible? Welcome to the world of men, where only the princes have the power of visibility: "The prince is the only one who can awaken the princess."

Most men feel like sexual-ghosts, able to see the world and one another, but otherwise unseen. Warren Farrell calls this the "invisible curtain." A perceptual barrier both women and men create.

The few virile or successful ghosts sparkle like stars. Women see and recognize them as men. But for most, a singular alienation common among men, because women see few men as sexual beings. Sexual objectification may seem common and therefore vulgar to many women, but because few men are objectified sexually, most hunger for it.

Many women add insult to this injury by complaining to "just-friend" men about their awful relationships with "jerks." Most women may deny they do this, and pop-feminists may scoff, but most men know it's true: treat women nice, live a celibate life. And the more successful a woman is in her career-life, the worse it gets:

Women, whether rich or poor, prefer high-status males. In fact, the more money a woman makes, the more she values the financial and professional status of a potential mate. As women's power and status rise, their "sexual taste become more, rather than less, discriminatory."

Jonah Goldberg: Mikä feminismissä on mennyt vikaan.

Think of Cool Hand Luke in that movie ? I forget the name right now. He ate 50 eggs, even though George Kennedy said, "Nobody can eat 50 eggs." The first 30 were easy. The next ten were hard. And the last one or two were brutal. Some experts actually have a term for the problem for the last one percent ? they call it "the problem of the last one percent."

Anyway, when you think about it, most of us are feminists in the traditional sense. The only places women are barred from working on an equal standing with men ? certain combat-related military gigs, professional football, competitive distance-urinating ? it's either because women cannot pass the physical requirements of the job or because we're reasonably concerned about the effect women will have on male performance. For example, dudes are wired to impress chicks and look out for them in dangerous situations. So having them in frontline combat situations can screw-up unit cohesion.

The problem is that there are still a lot of professional feminists out there. And they have to work much, much harder to accomplish much, much less. And in order to do this, they have to insist, loudly, that little problems are actually monumental.

The earlier feminist accomplishments ? the first 99 percent ? were the easy ones. By easy, I mean the original feminist arguments were intellectually and morally compelling to a very large number of people ? men and women. Not too long ago, normal women, with normal desires, could call themselves "feminists" or advocates for "women's rights" because women's rights had reasonable definitions. That's just not true anymore.

What studies and polls do show is that most young women don't want to be called "feminists." Why? Because the term has become synonymous with "unreasonable ideologue," "chronic complainer," "crypto-lesbian," and perhaps most of all, "humorless toothache of a human being."

When you read feminist junk ? and most of it is, quite simply, junk ? there's a lot of guilt mongering about "continuing the revolution" and "finishing the work of our foremothers." But, the unfinished work invariably involves such picayune and marginal issues as "transgender equality" and homosexual adoption. Insisting these are the same issues as women's suffrage doesn't make it so. This desperation to infuse the cause with new passion is the chief reason feminists are so humorless. Because there are so few specific meaningful issues, all sorts of minor or nonexistent issues get injected with outsized and outlandish meaning.

What feminists ? and similar "civil-rights activists" ? don't understand is that gratitude to successful revolutionaries should not translate into the need for continued revolution.

Diipadaapa ehdottaa kommenttiosastolla seuraavaa:

-Avioliitossa olevien pariskuntien tulot yhdistetään ja heille lasketaan yhteinen veroprosentti.
-Aviorikoksesta määrätään päiväsakkoja tulojen mukaan.
-Aviorikos mitätöi mahdollisen avioehdon.

Arvioidut vaikutukset:
-Pariskunnilla, joilla on suuret tuloerot, nettotulot kasvavat.
-Parantaa puolison mahdollisuuksia jäädä kotiin hoitamaan lapsia.
-Eron ottaminen epätaloudellista, kannustaa yrittämään "vielä kerran".
-Yksineläminen on epätaloudellista (jos nait köyhemmän, veroprosentti laskee. Jos taas rikkaamman, yhteinen käytettävissä oleva rahamäärä kasvaa).
-Rikkaat YTM menevät naimisiin veroprosentin pienentämiseksi.
-Rikkaat sinkkunaiset alentavat korkeaa rimaansa veroprosentin pienentämiseksi.
-Pettämisen kynnys nousee taloudellisten vaarojen vuoksi.
-Iltapäivälehdissä lööppejä tyyliin: Tenu Selänteelle ENNÄTYSSAKOT AVIORIKOKSESTA 20 000e!!

Ehdotuksessa on monia kannatettavia piirteitä. Aviorikossakoilla saataisiin kerättyä korvamerkittyä rahaa vaikkapa ATM:n aseman parantamiseksi ja maksajina olisivat uskottomat sikamiehet ja -naiset, joiden kuuluisikin maksaa törkeyksistään. Kiinnijäämistä voitaisiin tehostaa pienillä ilmiantopalkkioilla.

ATN kirjoittaa:

Kulttuuriset estot määrittelevät, minkä tyyppisiin ihmisiin on hyväksyttävää ihastua." Jos vaikka mies ihastuisikin kauneusnormeista poikkeavaan naiseen, tuskin hän suhdetta naisen kanssa aloittaisi. Miksikö ei? Ympäristön paine. Itsetunnoton mies on mieluummin yksin kuin kuuntelee kavereidensa vinoilua rumasta tyttöystävästä.

Ympäristön paine vaikuttaa kumppanin valinnassa miehiin minimaalisen verran verrattuna siihen, miten se vaikuttaa naisiin. Monille naisille on tärkeää päästä esittelemään menestyvää miesystävää kavereilleen, vaikka miehen luonteessa olisikin toivomisen varaa. Miehet sitävastoin antavat itselleen useammin mahdollisuuden(olosuhteidenkin pakosta) ihastua erilaisia hyviä ominaisuuksia omaaviin naisiin tutustumalla heihin avoimin mielin.

Miksi ihmeessä mies ei aloittaisi suhdetta naisen kanssa, johon hän on ihastunut? Monet miehethän aloittavat epätoivossaan ja seksinhimossaan suhteita naisiin, joista löytyy toivomisen varaa joka saralta, kauneusnormin lisäksi.