Leo's blog regarding feminism

[trenton]

https://actualized.org/insights/where-i-agree-and-disagree-with-feminism

I have some positions around feminism that might add nuance to the bullet points Leo listed. I believe there are some complications that are commonly overlooked.

In terms of agreement, all of it looks like common sense. However, there is one point "Women should be paid equally well for doing equal work. (But only if they truly do equal work.) This comes after "Women should not be discriminated against in the workplace." These two go hand in hand. One complication is that using methods to measure gender inequality such as wages is that if you account for the exact positions, then the pay gap largely disappears. The problem is that workplace discrimination also places men in positions that women should be able to reach, thus causing unequal pay due to position access. It can be a qualification problem or discrimination preventing a woman from gaining the opportunity to do equal work to a man and therefore remain in a lower pay range with both men and women, thereby seemingly erasing the gender pay gap. This is a problem with measuring the phenomenon through broad standards as it misses these scenarios.

All other points of agreement seem straight forward with my main concern being the tension between equal work, equal pay, and ongoing discrimination preventing equal work and therefore creating a wage gap or not depending on the frame of reference in terms of measurement. Leo mentions later on that inequality cannot simplistically be measured, which ties into what I am describing as measurements can obscure inequality or make it appear more prevalent than it actually is.

In terms of disagreement, I see more tension. Firstly, "men's objectification of women and men's psychology is merely bad patriarchal social conditioning." In this case, I partially agree but at the same time conditioning is a huge and possibly the main factor when it comes to objectification. For example, there is a long history of relational status being used to confer consent. This gives historical precedent to the entitlement worldview in which women were systematically treated like objects with no right to say no. Marital rape wasn't fully criminalized in the U.S. until 1993, meaning that many men alive in America today are still operating from a worldview in which it is not rape if you use force to make a woman in a relationship have sex with you. This is a strong sign that conditioning plays a huge role in objectification and may be the main factor in this male behavior.

The part that gets more subtle is that although conditioning is important for describing male behavior, there is still an internal sexual attraction that has elements of objectification. This may be what Leo refers to with "merely bad patriarchal social conditioning." It is definitely a factor, but not the only factor. It can be greatly reduced, but likely not eliminated entirely.

In terms of Women needing to be responsible for being attracted to abusive and corrupt men, this could be deeply problematic. When dealing with someone like a psychopath or a serial rapist who puts on a convincing persona with many layers of lies that are difficult to uncover while tailoring his psychological strategies to target a woman's vulnerabilities, it is hard to blame women for being attracted to corrupt and abusive men. In some cases women go on a date with a man who seems completely normal. They then go to his place where a gang then pulls a gun on her, kidnaps her, rapes her, and possibly kills her. I know women who have been in situations like these and it is hard to blame them for being tricked by organized criminals of sex traffickers who threaten to stick a coat hanger inside of you if you don't let them gang rape you. Sadistic offenders are the rarest typology in sex offenders, but it is also genuinely difficult to distinguish a seemingly normal man or woman from gang members involved in organized criminal activities planning to set you up and jump you. In terms of women being partially responsible, many organized criminals use women for specific roles such as targeting caregiving roles or making people feel at ease or lower their guard while they are kidnapping children to sell them to rapists while posing as relatives. There are documented cases and I have witnessed this behavior.

Leo's frame of reference for women being attracted to abusers is probably that there are women who like "bad boys" but then end up getting treated badly. Given that frame of reference, it sounds like we might be screwed in terms of preventing abuse. There are bad boys and women who like bad boys, so I don't see what can be done to stop this dynamic from creating abusive situations. Maybe the only realistic way to stop this dynamic would be to generally raise the consciousness of mankind such as through education in relationships, boundaries, empathy, self-reflection, and other areas. Otherwise if there are bad boys and women who like bad boys, I don't see how else to stop abuse. Is it the case that telling women to take responsibility is about as helpful as telling men to take responsibility? Most low conscious actors tend to just deflect responsibility anyway even if it were true that they are not being responsible. What system could we create that would make men and women more likely to take responsibility rather than taking the path of least resistance which is typically to blame someone else?

A point that jumps out at me is in regard to feminizing men. This has been a big problem in my life. Feminization partially happens when a son is fatherless. In my case, my father was a criminal and I grew up as an only boy with a mother and sisters. On top of that, my maleness was seen as threatening and the people around me were trying to mold me into being gender non-conforming. They made it seem that gayness was almost desirable. This was combined with perpetrator projection linked to assumptions about my nature as a male. I have now become deeply traumatized and conflicted about my sexuality while my father was a heterosexual male who engaged in actual predatory behavior. his gang also did have a woman in it though and she would participate in drug deals and sometimes blackmail people with rape accusations as a means of coercing them for money. Female criminals seem to commonly have male partners in crime as they like to place more distance between themselves and the direct act while manufacturing social situations more indirectly to set people up and manipulate them into vulnerable positions.

There is a point about gender roles and whether or not they should be changed or equalized. I think gender roles probably should be changed such that men do some childcare as well. The logic is simply that it is no longer possible under the current economy for a man to provide for the household like the nuclear family model. A woman must work and often times the economy is such that couples are required to be financially codependent as housing is otherwise too expensive. If women must also work, then it seems unfair to say women should do equal work to men in the workplace, and then women should do more childcare than men. In this case, it seems like it makes sense for men and women to split childcare more equally if women are overburdened due to being expected to maintain traditional gender roles which are simply impossible depending on how the economic situation changes. If traditional gender roles were such that women were restricted from working outside the home, then it seems that society has already drifted very far from traditional gender roles anyway. It seems to me that gender roles are not merely a social construct, but rather they are largely an economic construct as well, beyond our individual attitudes which then adapt to the environment. As economic incentives change, they seem to change gender roles by necessity as women can't stay at home and be only caregivers in many cases now.

Overall, I think the points seem mostly solid. I thought it would be worth adding my perspective to try to stress test some of these points and see what you think.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

I made a comment here that overlaps with some of what you speak of (just to contribute to discussion):

 

 

[Jannes]

9 hours ago, trenton said:

In terms of Women needing to be responsible for being attracted to abusive and corrupt men, this could be deeply problematic. When dealing with someone like a psychopath or a serial rapist who puts on a convincing persona with many layers of lies that are difficult to uncover while tailoring his psychological strategies to target a woman's vulnerabilities, it is hard to blame women for being attracted to corrupt and abusive men. In some cases women go on a date with a man who seems completely normal. They then go to his place where a gang then pulls a gun on her, kidnaps her, rapes her, and possibly kills her. I know women who have been in situations like these and it is hard to blame them for being tricked by organized criminals of sex traffickers who threaten to stick a coat hanger inside of you if you don't let them gang rape you. Sadistic offenders are the rarest typology in sex offenders, but it is also genuinely difficult to distinguish a seemingly normal man or woman from gang members involved in organized criminal activities planning to set you up and jump you. In terms of women being partially responsible, many organized criminals use women for specific roles such as targeting caregiving roles or making people feel at ease or lower their guard while they are kidnapping children to sell them to rapists while posing as relatives. There are documented cases and I have witnessed this behavior.

Leo's frame of reference for women being attracted to abusers is probably that there are women who like "bad boys" but then end up getting treated badly. Given that frame of reference, it sounds like we might be screwed in terms of preventing abuse. There are bad boys and women who like bad boys, so I don't see what can be done to stop this dynamic from creating abusive situations. Maybe the only realistic way to stop this dynamic would be to generally raise the consciousness of mankind such as through education in relationships, boundaries, empathy, self-reflection, and other areas. Otherwise if there are bad boys and women who like bad boys, I don't see how else to stop abuse. Is it the case that telling women to take responsibility is about as helpful as telling men to take responsibility? Most low conscious actors tend to just deflect responsibility anyway even if it were true that they are not being responsible. What system could we create that would make men and women more likely to take responsibility rather than taking the path of least resistance which is typically to blame someone else?

It clearly sticked out to me as well as probably the most polarizing one. If I said this openly in public in front of feminist women I think I would get lynched. 

I agree with what was said though, but the phrasing was possibly not careful enough. Obviously people, including women can be victims of crime as there is realistically only so much precaution you can do in life.

The story of the beauty and the beast is deeply rooted in unconscious survival though. Women get attracted to strength and dark triad men have exactly that. A women has the responsibility to go against her unconscious survival instincts and not reward these toxic men. As long as women reward inappropriate behaviour they play a big part in the spreading of toxic men. If a toxic men gets massive amount of pussy should the other men be like "Oh he is such a douche, I wouldnt want to be him even if it would get me laid massively."