“Infantriarchy”, an entirely worthwhile article…

Every once in a while one comes across an article that has the potential to change one’s way of thinking about a topic.
Infantriarchy is one of those for me.

The gist in my words: Man’s biggest fault or weakness is his desire to get female approvement. Woman’s biggest fault or weakness is her inability to handle this responsibly.

The result is that gender relations are like scales or a seesaw: the more one side goes up, the other goes down and vice versa. It is difficult to maintain an equilibrium.

Woman: “I admire strong men” — Man: “I can be strong”
“I admire the strongest/wealthiest/most powerful man” — “Look, I am stronger/wealthier/more powerful than the others”

Women learn that they can get what they want from a man if they “play” him right. “Playing him right” often meant and means to signal in some way: “I can’t do this” or “I need that” or “I’m afraid of those” in connection with “I need you to fix it”, with “I’d be ever so grateful” being implied.

By infantilising themselves they can get men to be more grown up in the sense that men do (or are) the things that women claim to be too powerless to do or be themselves.

Thus by becoming powerful, rich, strong etc. men become the patriarchy. Feminisms fault is to overlook the other side of the seesaw: There would not be a patriarchy if the infantriarchy of women would not reward, even demand it.

By overlooking the female side of the scales, feminism fights one expression of patriarchy, i.e. powerful men, but not the concept and the workings of the patriarchy-infantriarchy seesaw. Only the categories where changed. Now it is:

“I demand a man in touch with his feelings who respects women” — “I am a mangina of a magnitude you would not have thought possible”
“I am a victim of Maleness” — “I am not male but a White Knight and I will lay down my brains to protect you from other males.”

By declaring the Male as enemy and/or insisting on being the Victim, feminism pushes her side of the scales ever further downwards. And men react ever more hysterically. “You want us to forget our Constitution and lose the assumption of innocence in court and the freedom of speech and thought at universities and implement programs that discriminate against males in as many fields as possible? OK, will do…”

The game can only be stopped when or if women start saying “We own our shit. We are grown up and responsible and we don’t need any more provisions as a leg up” and men start saying “I do not need your approvement. Treating you the way you seem to demand is not fair, neither to you nor to anyone else.”

I see now that my words aren’t nearly as well put as Gordon Wadsworth’s. So hop over and read the full article. Well worth your time.