Masculinity is starting to slowly coming back in vogue, but the fight is only beginning. The fact is, at this point in entertainment history, the Second Wave feminists are the gatekeepers of media. The women who grew up in the 60’s are now in charge, and they quite literally run shit. By itself that is not a problem, but these 50-year-old women who hold so many positions of power in media companies have personal preferences that do not reflect many American attitudes. Fratire exists as a genre because people are hungry for someone to tell it like it actually is instead of how these women (and men to some extent) want it to be. There is a large and untapped segment of the American populace that want men to act like men, but the MSM, which is run by Second Wave feminists, doesn’t get this yet. They aren’t in touch anymore.
So there is a history lesson from the horse’s mouth. You have the liberal feminists of the first wave fighting for basic liberal rights. The early 2nd wave extends this “good” trend into the social sphere, but these radical Jacobins go to far. And so there is the 3rd wave liberal restoration. Catherine McKinnon and Andrea Dworkin meet their Waterloo in the feminist sex wars, and Louis XVIII is put back on the thrown. But he is willing to grant a constitution that grants most of the rights of 1789, but not 1793.
This is the path of Crane Brinton’s Anatomy of Revolution which notes how the revolutions followed a life-cycle from the Old Order to a moderate regime to a radical regime, to Thermidorian reaction.
So the Restoration has already been taken back. We are beyond Thermidor. In this framework Roissy and Co. who want to undo even the early “good” days of 2WF and some even 1WF, are the ultra-monarchists, even more monarchical than the king himself.
So you see the history, written by the victors.
Thesis: 1st wave
Antithesis: 2nd wave
Synthesis: 3rd wave
So now we have the new thesis. Tucker-Max/ Paris Hilton 3rd wave feminism. Stripper pole-dance feminism. Empowering differences. Choice and individualism.
So what will be the next antithesis to our current thesis? Well sexual debauchery as Roissyites hope lead to an alpha cavemen sexual monopoly that leads to a counterrevolution that completely annihilates the last remnants of 2WF? Or will there be a second revolution of the radicals against the Restoration?
We are living in the Menaissance Restoration. History can not be reversed. And so some of 2wf is preserved but in an anti-2wf manner. This is the way in which the 1815 Constitution of France preserved 1789 in an anti-1789 manner.
France finally achieved the goals of 1789 in 1830, with a new liberal monarch. And in 1848, an attempt was made to restore 1793.
The Stuart Restoration in England had a different fate. With the fall of the Cromwellian Puritan Republic, a new era of bowdyness with the Rake as the hero was reigned in. The Glorious Revolution, restored the goals of the early English Revolution, but the Puritan Republic was defeated for good. Or was it?
Third wave stripper feminism is anti-feminism under the banner of feminism.
Do you think the counterreaction against feminism will go all the way and undo ALL the gains of 2WF?
No. In that sense we are at the high tide of Restoration. All aspects of feminism that still can be destroyed have already been destroyed. The formal legal equality can not be reversed. The influx of women into the workplace can not be reversed.
Are things going to get better or worse?
The reaction has left economic gains untouched. If anything that march has gone on in spite of social backlash. In that sense the Third Estate of both England and France continued their economic march to supremacy, in the face of Feudal Restoration.
Feminism is the extension of the capitalist market relations into the field of sexuality. Like the English, American and French revolutions, the feminist revolution is in essence a liberal capitalist revolution. But like those revolutions, a radical social side emerged that took lofty ideas more seriously than the liberals did. And like in those 3, the radicals were ultimately defeated, in an alliance that pushed the early liberals, the conservatives and reactionaries together.
In that sense the alphas are supposedly the best competitors in the sexual free-market opened by feminism, and thus monopolize and drive out all “beta” competitors. Alpha sexual entrepreneurs supposedly provide the best service to consumers which is power dominance. Tucker Max is happy with the status quo, for the most part. While the Roissyites want to abolish the sexual free-market, although it supposedly benefits them as alphas, out of a sense of social responsibility. Of course the Roissyites as libertarians, have no real solution. There only hope is that women will be so humiliated and degraded, by Alphas that they will flee into the kitchen. But supposedly they enjoy the alphas?
In this the Christian Democrats who created a socially conservative welfare state, were the best antidote to feminism. They regulated the sexual market, and created economic incentives for the patriarchal single breadwinner home. But social conservatism in the USA is impotent because it is tied to economic libertarianism. US Libertarianism is second only to Nordic feminist social democracy, in forcing women into the market and thus greater economic independence.
In this the Stripper Restoration is no more a defeat for feminism, than the Stuart and Bourbon Restorations were defeats for capitalism. While many political and social gains have been wiped out, the marketization of sexual life and family continues unstopped.
In a world where women are little miss Ayn Rands, and no one owes anyone anything. Why should they fulfill their reproductive “duties”? Living in this libertarian society, if I were a woman, I would never bother to have kids, and if by some disaster I did, I would dump them off in adoption. There is nothing more anti-altruistic than being altruistic in an individualistic society. Unlike Christian Democratic Europe, libertarian USA will NEVER provide economic incentives for a woman to bother to have a family. And so as self-interested homo economicus they never will. What right does anyone have to complain about the end of the family?
No comments:
Post a Comment