Quote of the day
"Tim goes away, so who looks like Tim? It's usually not a Sarah"
At the top of Europe's banks, it's still a man's world
- Reuters dutifully toeing the anti-male line on international women's day
_______________________________________________
Navalny aide urges Russian women to protest against Ukraine war
_______________________________________________
Several years ago while channel-surfing I landed on what seemed to be a discussion of art, in this case a sort of table I think. It turned out instead to be a feminist rant against the "objectification" of women, as the furniture in question had sides/legs carved in some semblance of caryatids. Naturally, it was not in the speaker's interest to address the obvious question of why, if this was an attempt to diminish women, were they included at all and not replaced with male models. As usual the feminist spin hinges on willful ignorance. Ignore the blatantly obvious observation that our one-step recipe for beautification, our requirement for appreciating anything, has always read "just add woman" where male figures would be ridiculed for standing around doing nothing.
We would have no trouble seeing the issue clearly if we imposed parity on our points of comparison. If I told Bob he's a looker and Ben to put a bag over his head, I would obviously be favoring Bob and mistreating Ben. Only when called upon to reaffirm our instinctive devotion to female safety, prosperity and happiness do we immediately accept such insane propositions that it is somehow worse to be considered beautiful than ugly by default, worse to be provided for than saddled with providing for others, worse to be protected than thrown to the wolves, that all this somehow oppresses those being praised, provided for and protected. And we will self-flagellate over such doublethink even as we praise, provide for and protect one sex as more worthy of beneficence than the other.
So it's no surprise that Putin's feeble political opposition has a photogenic female calling on women to protest the invasion of Ukraine. It would work. If you get the women on board, men too will rush to champion women's newest cause as they always do in their desperation to curry favor. But Yarmysh's quoted comment "I’m sure that in Russia there is not a single woman who will welcome
this dishonest, meaningless war" sounds just as willfully ignorant as that PBS feminist's rant against her own favored status. Russian women did welcome the war. For over twenty years. And if they do finally turn on their darling Tsar it's not in view of sending their men out to die grabbing resources from neighbouring tribes (after all, that's what men are for) but the growing fear of tightening the belt back home in response to the economic crunch of becoming a rogue state. The Tsar can murder as many men as he wants (in fact it only reinforces his image as winner of dominance contests and therefore the ideal mate) but he is judged on his ability to protect and provide for the females of his tribe.
On a completely unrelated (and more comical) issue, let's talk about Donald Trump. He was often accused of being a dictator, but his labile, attention-seeking ineptitude quickly revealed him as something far more pathetic: a dictator's fanboy, aping the perennial winning strategies of autocrats while lacking the basic understanding of where or how to deploy them. Take one of his most infamous speeches against South American migrants and refugees. As a mere droplet of his constant deluge of oral diarrhea it's almost impressively garbled but nonetheless reveals the effect he sought.
"I don’t want them in our country. And women don’t want them in our
country. Women want security. Men don’t want them in our country. But
the women do not want them. Women want security. You look at what the
women are looking for. They want to have security. They don’t want to
have these people in our country. And they’re not going to be in our
country. It’s a very big thing."
Trump is incompetent enough a politician to state such uncomfortable
matters bluntly and thus ran afoul of women's insistence on maintaining
their deniability, but Putin (like true autocrats in general) merely plays the part and lets our primal social ape
undertow pull in his favor. As just one proof, look for the endless publicity shots he's taken as a barrel-chested he-man, the sort any cavewoman can really trust to spear a boar for dinner, brain some other man with a rock to take over his cave and finally die defending her from bear maulings. You think the infamously anti-gay dictator took shirtless photo-ops every year to appeal to his male constituency? Get real. He did it because nothing wrings a pair of ovaries quite like the image of a high-class strongman. That's what women want: the best murderer. Prince Charming.
Which brings us back to Tim. You remember Tim, from that quote above decrying male preponderance in top economic/financier positions? Yeah, there's a reason so many more Tims than Sarahs desperately claw their way to such ranks: women's never admitted but consistently reinforced message that if you're not that Tim (or that Vlad) then
You.
Are.
Nothing.
The aforementioned deniability also explains why far fewer Sarahs bother occupying such positions. Putin's invasion of Ukraine has the potential to finally see him deposed, and he runs the knowing risk of winding up a war criminal. But whatever his losses (if any) you can be sure they will not spill over to his ex-wife who saw him through his rise to power then bragged about him still supporting her after their divorce or the myriad likely mistresses, prostitutes and groupies for whom he bought a house or a car over the years.
Sarah can climb halfway up the ladder, just high enough to catch Tim's eye, then take him for half of everything while never risking the fall which comes with condemnation of Prince Charming's crimes.
Deniability is a wonderful invention.
Meanwhile, the fact that three billion women can't wait to jump on a sadistic tyrant's dick is precisely why other men have no choice but to either emulate such behavior in some small way or be erased from the gene pool. Even if the majority would suddenly refuse collusion, the uterine status quo would reassert our gender dynamic by the next generation. You will be grudgingly permitted to reproduce... so long as you work yourself to death bettering your mate's social standing, wheedle steal and capture whatever she demands and finally rot in the trenches in a grab for another tribe's tea to send back home to your own tribe's females.
You want real objectification? Try disposability.
Happy Women's Day.
Especially to the Ukrainian men dying in hopes the half of their tribe born more worthy of life might have homes to return to, and being spat on by feminists as patriarchal oppressors.
Fucking Happy Women's Day.
No comments:
Post a Comment