are women to blame for tyranny?
Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2019 4:41 pm
women elect men who embody their will - and only such men - that is one half of the human population at any given era, to be their group's 'government'.
yes, other men have a 'vote' but who raises boys in at least the first few years of life in almost every society? who shapes their will through 'love'? even the father's love is usually just the will of the mother's in most societies. and how many boys subsequently escape this grasp/blindfold to see clearly and have a will/love-to-give of their own? not many, and they are readily labelled deviants and usually thrown in jail or ostracized as women see them as threatening.
and they are easy to spot moreover, if they carry themselves honestly, as they have no instinctive 'respect' for women, as 'socialized' (women's will embodied) men do.
so the government at all times has at least half of the population supporting it, since the government, regardless of era, is most responsive to the will of women, not men. and the men that are present, the vast majority have been infused with women's 'love' (will), so they won't really challenge said government, no matter how tyrannical, will more readily support and accept it as women do, and even invent clever rationalizations like 'human nature' to defend it, since they love women so much, and you know don't want to be thrown in jail.
i cannot say for sure whether this is universal - across time and space - i know in some societies boys are raised by their fathers much more, they are taught to hunt early, etc. and the daughters are likewise raised by their mothers to housekeeping and the like, but how do we untangle the will of the mother from the will of the father, extending back to our earliest predecessors as a species?
does a father even have a desire to extend his own unique masculine will into a child, or better yet guide a child to discover a will of their own? and perhaps this discovery is what it means to have a man's will? a will of their own? a will entirely self-discovered, with no blinding or lies by anyone.
while this does sound a touch misogynistic, and i sympathize with women's condition as far as life strategies and desires of their unique own, i cannot say that women or mothers desire the same for their children. they are more 'practical' - they want the child to survive and succeed in the world, and teach them accordingly, because that is their mode to extending their own sense of self into the future, through the child, that is their instinctive power at work, but insodoing, in adopting the mother's will and desire to symbolically live on, the boy and subsequent man never discovers a will of his own, and can only pass on to his own children his mother's will, and if this happens en mass, from generation to generation, across time and space, it is no wonder we have tyranny, and a lack of clarity about the world and human condition and our real choices in life.
as far as how the daughter's will is affected by the mother, i haven't cared enough to think about this so i won't bother speculating, and it's partially remote to tyrannts, although it's obvious daughter's quickly get the memo and basically support the whole thing, acting like their mother's and such. how it all unfolds might be slightly different to how it happens for boys, how the 'love' is internalized and will meted out - or maybe just a practical recognition that this is what they have to do to survive as females in the world, or perhaps even out of resentment/revenge toward boys. after all they will be the next generation of mothers.
but i can say with more certainty it is not in men's nature to elect any sort of government. moreover they cannot cooperate enough amongst themselves - because they don't want to, and don't need to to survive or be happy even as a group - to even support such a thing, i imagine guys acting according to their own unique self-discovered will function like little nations, each one of them, because that is what preserves their autonomy and independence of will, which is their happy place, assuming no infusion of mother's will.
yes, other men have a 'vote' but who raises boys in at least the first few years of life in almost every society? who shapes their will through 'love'? even the father's love is usually just the will of the mother's in most societies. and how many boys subsequently escape this grasp/blindfold to see clearly and have a will/love-to-give of their own? not many, and they are readily labelled deviants and usually thrown in jail or ostracized as women see them as threatening.
and they are easy to spot moreover, if they carry themselves honestly, as they have no instinctive 'respect' for women, as 'socialized' (women's will embodied) men do.
so the government at all times has at least half of the population supporting it, since the government, regardless of era, is most responsive to the will of women, not men. and the men that are present, the vast majority have been infused with women's 'love' (will), so they won't really challenge said government, no matter how tyrannical, will more readily support and accept it as women do, and even invent clever rationalizations like 'human nature' to defend it, since they love women so much, and you know don't want to be thrown in jail.
i cannot say for sure whether this is universal - across time and space - i know in some societies boys are raised by their fathers much more, they are taught to hunt early, etc. and the daughters are likewise raised by their mothers to housekeeping and the like, but how do we untangle the will of the mother from the will of the father, extending back to our earliest predecessors as a species?
does a father even have a desire to extend his own unique masculine will into a child, or better yet guide a child to discover a will of their own? and perhaps this discovery is what it means to have a man's will? a will of their own? a will entirely self-discovered, with no blinding or lies by anyone.
while this does sound a touch misogynistic, and i sympathize with women's condition as far as life strategies and desires of their unique own, i cannot say that women or mothers desire the same for their children. they are more 'practical' - they want the child to survive and succeed in the world, and teach them accordingly, because that is their mode to extending their own sense of self into the future, through the child, that is their instinctive power at work, but insodoing, in adopting the mother's will and desire to symbolically live on, the boy and subsequent man never discovers a will of his own, and can only pass on to his own children his mother's will, and if this happens en mass, from generation to generation, across time and space, it is no wonder we have tyranny, and a lack of clarity about the world and human condition and our real choices in life.
as far as how the daughter's will is affected by the mother, i haven't cared enough to think about this so i won't bother speculating, and it's partially remote to tyrannts, although it's obvious daughter's quickly get the memo and basically support the whole thing, acting like their mother's and such. how it all unfolds might be slightly different to how it happens for boys, how the 'love' is internalized and will meted out - or maybe just a practical recognition that this is what they have to do to survive as females in the world, or perhaps even out of resentment/revenge toward boys. after all they will be the next generation of mothers.
but i can say with more certainty it is not in men's nature to elect any sort of government. moreover they cannot cooperate enough amongst themselves - because they don't want to, and don't need to to survive or be happy even as a group - to even support such a thing, i imagine guys acting according to their own unique self-discovered will function like little nations, each one of them, because that is what preserves their autonomy and independence of will, which is their happy place, assuming no infusion of mother's will.