Women love a man who takes control. Then there’s the relentlessly considerate man who sees no need to control her at all. Every woman deeply appreciates how rare and special of a find this enlightened new age is, a who man places such a high importance on pleasing her that he makes sure never to impose himself by assuming he understands her needs without first asking what she actually wants. Every woman hears how this male sensitivity is highly treasured by other women, which is why she’ll be so conflicted when she realizes she absolutely detests a man for exactly the same quality. Because it doesn’t take long before every one of those questions he asks her becomes in her mind an excruciating reminder that he doesn’t already know the answer. After that his constant questioning, seeming more and more like seeking her approval, begins to grate on her skin until she’s surprised to discover she feels utter contempt for him and she begins to wonder if the reason is exactly because he’s so considerate. Rather than fill her with warmth his attentive questions at best fill her with indifference. She finds herself losing her train of thought while answering, occasionally catching herself disturbed by day dreams of being taken roughly from behind by his asshat friend.
Women will openly admit they don’t always want to be asked what they’d like before a man acts because it quickly gets old and makes a man appear to be a child seeking permission. But at the same time women get very angry or hurt when they feel men haven’t asked about and listened to their needs. No wonder women are accused of wanting men to read their minds. It’s the only reasonable conclusion to arrive at about someone who by their own admission makes a habit of arguing for you to do something that they don’t actually want, because they won’t tell you what it is they do want you to do.
However strangely enough women may be exactly right in asking men to solve this riddle. Rather than an obedience trial it’s actually a test of charisma and confidence. She’s not asking you to read her mind, she’s asking you for the charm and swagger to put an idea in her head, and once you’ve left it there – to convince her to want it.
For many woman the idea of giving up control and letting a man “into her head” in this way inspires dreams of steamy romance. Men find the idea of letting someone into our heads terrifying. There’s an element of manipulation that’s eerily reminiscent of evil aliens who’ve shown us in countless sci-fi plots that they’ll only use mind control to enslave humanity, possibly followed by eating us. For us it’s easy to see how this natural dynamic between the sexes exposes women to the control of charismatic and thoroughly ill-intentioned men.
Yet women aren’t without their defenses. One way women have always combated such motherless bastards is by banding together to scold the scoundrel back in line. Communal female shaming is in fact a powerful and highly evolved social mechanism to do exactly that. Initiated by the wronged woman’s tearful pleadings, a group of women come together for the purposes of passing judgment on the man who brought her to that state. He won’t be allowed entry at his own trial to defend himself before this all female court of opinion, but it wouldn’t matter if he was. No evidence he could bring would have any meaning, nothing he could say would explain. To the women his words and seductively clear logic are only hateful “tricks” that make him more guilty. Even him daring to open his mouth on his own behalf is poison to the more evolved sense of right and decency they all agree they alone as women have. He WILL be found guilty, and once summary judgment is pronounced there can be no trial or appeal. There is only surrender and appeasement.
Women realize the importance of this shaming as a social safety net. While it can be said that women want a man who doesn’t listen to them, they definitely don’t want any man to be immune to communal female shaming. The danger of men developing immunity is such a fearful scenario that the failure of any man to respond to shaming raises the entire female community’s shaming defenses to high weapons readiness extremely quickly. The comrade hens initiate aggression, striking with low level hits before most men even know they are under attack, small verbal pecks that quickly begin raining on the man from all quarters. The aggression of their engagement rises with his threat level, and if he continues to refuse to listen and to insist he’s right, his threat level will rise quickly.
Their clucking attacks are no laughing matter. Soon they’ll call other men (known in the manosphere as white knights) to their defense and when that happens there’s deep trouble on the horizon for our anti-hero. The fearsome vengeance of white knights is the real reason few sensible men are either willing or in a strong enough position to brave becoming truly detestable to a group of women. To us in the manosphere such a person is legendarily lawless, a man worthy of admiration and praise. To feminist women he’s a contemptuous devil who infantilizes them by playfully ridiculing their scorn, who abusively confronts them with the hard truth of their errors, and who narcissistically refuses to back down or repent when he’s not wrong. They see no redeeming qualities in him, and in their hysterics this more than justifies inciting other men to do real violence against him. Soon when the woman start to carelessly let fly with false accusations of rape, abuse, paternity, inadequate alimony or child support, workplace sexism or other serious offenses, they will show exactly how hard the heart of a wronged woman is. They will not spare him from any cruel public punishment they can muster. It’s a rare man who can live in this minefield immune from harm.
Every generation has had such extraordinary scoundrels as our anti-hero just as every generation has had far greater numbers of more ordinary scoundrels with the sense to try to learn from their betters by emulating him. But where he eluded the consequences of his actions his followers may not escape as freely. Female shaming is a growing organism that adapts to answer every challenge. It has evolved from being conjured up by the few wives in our ancestral villages or tribes to now being the product of a vast number of women in a bewilderingly greater variety of roles. Today’s shaming circle includes the psychologists who’re constantly refining their labels to describe more misbehaving men, the self help groups encouraging women to share their stories of victimhood, the women’s centers demonizing husbands and fathers, the feminists railing against the patriarchy in the popular media, the heavily feminist family courts, the victim entitlement based government, and the pro-single mom social welfare system. All of these are an extension of the ancestral female shaming which teaches us that when an upset woman appeals to the shaming circle on any issue that holds the communal sympathies, the man who upset her or any man who opposes her is wrong regardless of any explanation.
To some it would seem that our ancestral habit of women communally inflicting shame on men is completely out of place in the modern feminist world where women aim to be equal. However I’m someone who’s always believed that natural selection is smarter than all of us. Human ideals (like feminism) that may be in vogue during one generation may be completely reviled in the next. But natural selection works over a longer period and reveals the real truth in our history. I believe feminism may breed itself out, but on the other hand society may become more feminist. Natural selection will eventually give us the answer as to whether it confers some advantage and is therefore “right”. However I believe that society’s need to shame men actually conflicts with feminism, and that because society’s need to shame men comes from a deep and longstanding truth that has lasted for many more generations than the current feminism, this is another indication that feminism can’t last. I say shaming conflicts with feminism because the shaming circle acknowledges that men have responsibility to protect and care for their women. Shaming men who mis-“lead” women is implicitly an acknowledgment that in some fundamental ways men do “lead” women. Discouraging men from mis-“leading” women is an encouragement for men to “lead” women well, and it’s an acceptance of women’s need to find men who will lead them.
In acknowledging the need for some degree of male leadership in male-female relationships, the female shaming circle is actually an indictment of today’s feminism, as women are deprived of men’s leadership and commitment when feminism removes any incentive for men to commit to the leading male role. Particularly so since in the last few generations feminism has been a powerful force entitling women to their husband’s labor while absolving all their responsibilities to him, encouraging women not to have any loyalty or allegiance to the husbands they have given responsibility for leading them. That feminism disincentivizes men from taking the male role while the shaming circle encourages it pits feminism directly against the shaming circle given to us through the natural selection of human behaviors that proved beneficial to societies over countless eons. Since feminism is working against deep forces that have been in existence for much longer that it has, feminism may only be a temporary blip in human history. Still we’re at a point where men very sensibly see the male role as a losing proposition, and that realization has brought us to a strange crossroads.
Female communal shaming becomes powerless when men withdraw themselves from the possibility of being harmed through any connection to society. Young men only take on roles in which they can be coerced or harmed when they marry, become fathers, are beholden to the society for employment, or partake in one of the many other resources at their shaming community’s disposal. However becoming a man today doesn’t mean getting a serious job, getting married, or even moving out of your parent’s basement. Increasingly men are withdrawing from exposure to any harm.
Instead of society harboring just a few legendarily detestable scoundrels among legions of modest hardworking family men, more men than ever are now are heavily fortified against the shaming circle and so are at liberty to be as lawless among women and as devoted to their own self interests as the worst in history have ever been. Rather than “lead” women honorably they have raised to a religion the GAME of manipulating women’s emotions for their own pleasure. Rather than dedicating themselves to working slavish hours to support a woman who feels no responsibility to cook, clean or be faithful, and who feels entitled to neglect his sexual needs, now that the rewards of relationships are even smaller men are free to instead invest their time pursuing their most far-flung dreams or indulging their most frivolous diversions. Today’s men are more free to bang their way across Europe than at any time since the second world war. Today’s men are more free to go their own way or to become ghosts … all with less public censure than ever.
Young men struggling along difficult soulless career paths so one day they might be a good provider have long fantasized about such an escape. Married men stuck in traffic on the long commute back to ungrateful wives have dreamed forever about a more narcissistic existence free of all that crushing responsibility. But in the past the costs of escape for men were always too high. It’s a strange twist that feminism may be exactly what’s allowing men to set the worst of themselves free and embrace their inner narcissist. Though it’s the only patch of light in the middle of an anti-male dystopia, nevertheless it’s feminism that’s brought this one small gift for men.