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

[–] BlackCirce 🔮🐖🐖🐖 3 points

There’s two parts to power one is being willing and able to do what is necessary and the other part is from other people. Women have problems with both, not being willing/able to do what is necessary and other people especially men reacting badly when we do. Yes women train girls in this cycle because it’s a cause effect relationship: if you behave passively you will not be punished as harshly, but if you risk self respect you will be raped, killed, outcast, shamed (etc) by men almost exclusively, to maintain male power. A mother is not ordinarily going to teach her child to risk her life or bring shame and deprivation on herself or the family. It’s not women who deliver the ultimate punishments, but women have not successfully ended them either, which is the only path to power. This is what powerlessness looks like. Oppression is a vicious cycle that reinforces dependence and passivity in exchange for survival. It’s not like women who tell the truth, work hard, build new things, break into independence or behave heroically are thanked and celebrated the way men who are barely adequate are. When the rewards are slim to none so is the behavior. We are fighting an uphill battle.

Yes, I can see that. You are rewarded by the system if you conform to gender expectations, if you do not there's only opposition. It does get tiring sometimes.

Some men do realize that the system molds women, that we fight an uphill battle, but only to poke at the wound and kick us while we are down. They delude themselves thinking they can protect us from patriarchy, that they know what is real freedom. But I while I want women to stand up for ourselves and have more agency, I do no want to look after men for examples. Rather the opposite. If they build such a unfair system then there's nothing to gain by playing their rules.