17

Found this blog in the medicine subreddit. Unfortunately the guy talks waaay more about his sociological insights, plenty of them about women, than psychiatry.

I think this might be worthy to discuss so we can break down his points. Some of his quotes:

"if some field keeps the trappings of power but loses actual power, women enter it in droves and men abandon it like the Roanoke Colony."

"I know, I know, women get paid less then men. Sigh. There are a million reasons for this, but the most important is the simplest: some people want to get more money from the job, and some other people want the job to offer them more money, and they are not the same people"

"We need more women in power." Wrong preposition, dummy, but anyway you have them. You have judges and prosecutors and twenty female senators, what has it gotten you? Your own ground floor women don't protect each other, you know who had to come to this teen's aid? Anonymous. Men."

"And if the girls did nothing, it means they were taught to do nothing, and the people most responsible for that lesson was other women."

I found this is the prototype of misogyny by intellectual men that do have some grasp on how capitalism works and how liberal feminism is a product, that knows of socialization and recognizes that men dominate the world/women and still have nothing positive to say about feminism or women because it is threatening to him, as a man.

So of course, he blames women. Women are the ones teaching women how to behave, how to be a victim, how to be less then men. This is truth at some extend, because patriarchy is also supported by women, but we in no shape or form benefiting from it. He compares women to black slaves and asks why they do not rise up, knows it is because of the "system", but I think he missed the obvious threat of violence common to both.

It all comes down to men beating us into submission, from centuries, both physically and mentally. He has no idea what is the psychological terror of being raped or even the threat of being physically weaker than 50% of the population. The problem he presents isn't why men are violent, but "why women don't fight back." The problem of rape isn't a men's problem of being violent, but a women problem of not cooperating to stop it.

Of course he picked a specific example of women being potentially able to help another woman, but choose not to. Most rapes however do not happen in such setting, but inside homes, with a relative/familiar adult to a girl. He also conveniently ignores how much women have done for women, to fight against rape, to ask for better salaries, etc

Everything women conquer to this type of men has no merit. Not because the system is so powerful as he seems to imply, but because he hates women. He refuse to see anything good that we may have accomplished, presenting everything we conquer as given to us by men to further manipulate us, or empty victories..

I find this kind of thinking is the norm in the intellectual misogyny bubble.

Thoughts?

- https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2013/01/no_self-respecting_woman_would.html Found this blog in the medicine subreddit. Unfortunately the guy talks waaay more about his sociological insights, plenty of them about women, than psychiatry. I think this might be worthy to discuss so we can break down his points. Some of his quotes: > "if some field keeps the trappings of power but loses actual power, women enter it in droves and men abandon it like the Roanoke Colony." > "I know, I know, women get paid less then men. Sigh. There are a million reasons for this, but the most important is the simplest: some people want to get more money from the job, and some other people want the job to offer them more money, and they are not the same people" > "We need more women in power." Wrong preposition, dummy, but anyway you have them. You have judges and prosecutors and twenty female senators, what has it gotten you? Your own ground floor women don't protect each other, you know who had to come to this teen's aid? Anonymous. Men." > "And if the girls did nothing, it means they were taught to do nothing, and the people most responsible for that lesson was other women." I found this is the prototype of misogyny by intellectual men that do have some grasp on how capitalism works and how liberal feminism is a product, that knows of socialization and recognizes that men dominate the world/women and still have nothing positive to say about feminism or women because it is threatening to him, as a man. So of course, he blames women. Women are the ones teaching women how to behave, how to be a victim, how to be less then men. This is truth at some extend, because patriarchy is also supported by women, but we in no shape or form benefiting from it. He compares women to black slaves and asks why they do not rise up, knows it is because of the "system", but I think he missed the obvious threat of violence common to both. It all comes down to men beating us into submission, from centuries, both physically and mentally. He has no idea what is the psychological terror of being raped or even the threat of being physically weaker than 50% of the population. The problem he presents isn't why men are violent, but "why women don't fight back." The problem of rape isn't a men's problem of being violent, but a women problem of not cooperating to stop it. Of course he picked a specific example of women being potentially able to help another woman, but choose not to. Most rapes however do not happen in such setting, but inside homes, with a relative/familiar adult to a girl. He also conveniently ignores how much women have done for women, to fight against rape, to ask for better salaries, etc Everything women conquer to this type of men has no merit. Not because the system is so powerful as he seems to imply, but because he hates women. He refuse to see anything good that we may have accomplished, presenting everything we conquer as given to us by men to further manipulate us, or empty victories.. I find this kind of thinking is the norm in the intellectual misogyny bubble. Thoughts?

14 comments

[–] furyosa no, thank you 7 points

I'm not familiar with The Last Psychiatrist but seems to be a male psychiatrist from what I could find?

"And if the girls did nothing [about the girl being raped by high school football players at a party], it means they were taught to do nothing, and the people most responsible for that lesson was other women."

"Which means that [the girls at the party] were taught [to be passive onlookers while the high school football players raped another girl] from somewhere, and the only place that it could have come was older women."

Every stupid parent teaches their girls not to get raped, duh, but have any mothers spent any time indoctrinating their daughters what to do if another woman is being raped?

This is just more of the same old victim blaming that contributes to paralyzing women from acting in the first place. Why exactly are other/older women "most responsible" for high school girls being paralyzed when faced by the horror of witnessing a rape? Why are male influencers in the girls' lives exempt from the author's reproach? Sure, you can train someone out of the freeze response when facing a traumatic event, but that requires precedent and a culture of having others back you up when you take action. This is why feminism is fighting against rape culture which is very much held up and perpetuated by men/boys.

What’s weird is that it’s almost like he’s admitting men don’t know how to not be rapists. Otherwise, why shouldn’t a father also be able to teach his daughter the same thing as a mother? And, more importantly, what about teaching boys not to rape?