The Emasculation of America

The Case Against Feminism:

EmasculationOfAmerica.com

FEMINISM’S ALLEGATIONS

 Feminist’s claims about both sexes are not only male-discriminatory sex-stereotyping, but flagrantly false or misleading. They are polarizing, divisive, and psychosocially destructive as well. It also seems doubtful most females want themselves portrayed the way Feminist type-cast women. What are some of Feminism’s major claims? [See: Feminist Quotes for specific examples.]

· Feminists accuse men of being: [1] the predominant perpetrators of abuse and injuries of spouses and children; [2]are sexual predators of females, children of both sexes, and other males; [3] more dominant, controlling, and competitive; and [4] more violent, aggressive, and competitive with intimates than women. Males are also cast as less: [5] altruistic/nurturing, emotional, empathetic, and affectionate; as well as [6] less reliable, committed, parental, and familial. Men have [7] much greater political, legal, social, and economic power as well.

· The latter attributes are often summarized by alleging that a “patriarchy” exists in contemporary America—i.e. during the latter half of the 20th and early 21st centuries. This is a culture: [a] somehow dominated by the male minority, in which females are transformed into an impotent numerical, social, and political minority; [b] where public servants elected by majority vote regulate contrary to the will of the majority of their constituents (women); [c] where men manage to control an economy in which women make the majority of buying decisions; and [d] where husbands and fathers rule-over and routinely abandon their spouse, children, and homes.

· Females are basically portrayed as the mirror-image and/or victims of traits like the above—passive, dependent, oppressed, submissive, subservient, exploited, giving, and affective; as well as economically deprived, socially disadvantaged, and politically disenfranchised.

Feminist make allegations like the above behind the façade of seeking equality between the sexes; as well as of stewardship on behalf of the best interests of all women. In reality, however, Feminists primary concern is for women that have similar backgrounds, perspectives, and ambitions to their own. To them, the concept of equal protection and treatment under the 14th Amendment excludes considering such principles from the perspective of men, children, and the majority. Its activists spend most of their time and energy arguing how different and unequal the sexes are, and how superior females are to males in certain areas.

Male-discriminatory sex-stereotyping like the above have been presented so comprehensively and heard so long and often by college-educated people and the public that, even those who know some of the allegations are blatantly false, find them too overwhelming to resist. Stated another way, when all of the Feminist inputs are combined, they form a interconnected hierarchy of “selective perceived truths and realities” (i.e. mental pyramid) that now pervades the entire American culture. Such ideas are the foundation of the astonishingly male-discriminatory “conventional wisdom” among intellectuals and “politically correct” popular opinions that now effectively “silence” all descent, are impenetrable by logical reasoning, and block-out the actual facts about the sexes. [See: “Selective Perception” at Site Introduction for more.]

Male-denigrating and female-elevating assertions like the above are exactly the same as racially bigoted “facts” from education, employment, and law enforcement to “prove” Blacks are inherently less intelligent, achievement-oriented, or accountable, and more vicious and criminally-inclined than whites. Are they are exactly the same as choosing workplace data to make a case “proving” women have less technical or managerial able, and that men are inherently more logical, self-initiating, goal-seeking, tough-minded, and team-oriented. Making such accusations about Blacks and women would unarguably be harmful—and illegal—to precisely the same extent as the above are damaging and against the law with respect to men.

THE SEX-BALANCED AND GENDER-NEUTRAL FACTS

Feminist’s constant one-sided claims about the way women and men compare to one another are overwhelmingly refuted by objective scientific research on the sexes’ underlying fundamental attributes (or characteristics); by empirical studies of their comparative acquired (or acculturated) gender qualities and traits; as well as by objective observations current and historic cultural realities.

First, the preponderance of dual-sex and other generalizable research consistently finds no significant differences between sexes (i.e. > 4%) in any of humanity’s most fundamental characteristics. In other words, males and females are equally intelligent, analytical, motivated, achievement-oriented, violent, aggressive, dominant, and controlling; equally sexual, emotional, and affectionate, caring, and compassionate; equally committed, passive, peace-loving, and altruistic/nurturing. Of course, the sexes are also equally selfish, lazy, possessive, irresponsible, uncooperative, and competitive as well. In sum, significant differences in the sexes’ innate psychological attributes cannot be detected. The term sex is used to refer to all such innate or underlying fundamental characteristics or attributes.

Verification of these conclusions would require reading hundreds of professional journal articles, studies, and books. A single source of verification, a “meta-analysis” that consolidated the results of 1500 other studies, was conducted in 1974 by two women, Eleanor MacCoby and Carol Jacklin. Their work covered many of the most important characteristics described above, but by no means all of them.

MacCoby’s and Jacklin’s comprehensive work found only four areas of significant (> 4%) differences between the sexes: verbal ability (+F); spatial relations (+M); math ability (+M); and physical aggression (+M). Since they completed their project, differences in verbal and math abilities between the sexes have disappeared; ¹¹ and males and females have been found to be equally physically aggressive. The MacCoby and Jacklin meta-analysis did not include analysis of existing research on non-physical forms of aggression, like psychological abuse, manipulation, and indirect forms of force.

Second, vast differences between the sexes certainly tend to exist in two primary domains. On one hand, the sexes have very different physiological and reproductive characteristics. For example, males are commonly 20-25% larger and stronger; the sexes have unique reproductive organs; only women are able to conceive and gestate children; and the sexes’ biological and chemical make-up differs to some extent. These differences lead the sexes to be powerfully inclined—but not mandated—to develop different expressive or surface-oriented qualities in certain, limited but major realms. On the other hand, there are also huge differences in the way females and males most often learn to express their equally shared core of underlying psychological characteristics. Most of these qualities or traits are acquired, not innate, and derive from the sexes’ differing patterns of socialization or self-learning.

The term gender refers to the combination of surface-oriented traits derived from the sexes’ physiological and reproductive differences, as well as the qualities typically acquired through acculturation. One of social science’s greatest contributions to the study of human nature may be the normal curve. As that theory applies to this discussion, all of the various types of surface qualities and traits found in females and males would inevitably be normally distributed equally between them irrespective of their sex. This means that the sexes’ differing gender traits are essentially complementary to one another, and therefore basically balance-out between the sexes.

For every positive or negative gender quality found in one sex, an equivalent and offsetting trait exists in the other sex. For example: [1] boys tend to most often bully directly and physically, and girls bully indirectly and psychologically just as often and severely—most likely as a product of socialization; and [2]women are prone to be immediate nurturing/gratifiers, and men similarly inclined to serve as longer-term altruistic/providers—probably due to physiology/reproduction distinctions between the sexes. [See: “Item #7 at 2nd StLCC Grievance -p2 for more information.]

The fact that the sexes’ share the same core of fundamental attributes equally and their gender qualities and traits balance-one-another-out means male and females are in fact equal to one-another overall. In sum, objective evidence overwhelmingly indicates that the sexes are equal and different.

Violence/Aggression: Widespread abuse of females and other intimates by males is one of Feminism’s most frequent and impassioned themes. But what are the actual scientific facts when it comes to comparing the sexes in terms of overall violence and aggression? Discussion of this topic must be prefaced with the proposition that it cannot be fully and objectively evaluated unless psychological and indirect forms of aggression as well as physical violence and abuse are included in the analysis.

Objective research overwhelming finds that, in their intimate relations with one another, females perpetrate the same physical violence and aggression as males. In other words, males are victims of abuse by women just as frequently as women by men. In addition, no conclusive gender-neutral evidence exists that either sex is more severely injured in such incidents than the other. The fact that men are larger and stronger than women is thus irrelevant. Research shows that abuse and aggression among mates most often begins while dating, then continues while cohabiting or in marriage, and often becomes even more severe and injurious (even deadly) following separation or divorce. [See: Masters Project.]

Data on sexual assaults and rape, while sparse for males as victims, is sufficient to conclude that three to four females report being victims of such violence for every one to two males, but it also finds boys fail to report such incidents two to three times more than girls and men 5 to10 times more than women. Males probably fail to equally report such abuses and rapes because they have not been socialized to interpret female sexual aggression as assault or rape. Males are, however, roughly twice as physically violent and aggressive is in the area of their non-intimate relationships, especially between the ages of 15 and 25. Men are also the victims of 100% more overall physical violence and crime than women.¹

Americans are acculturated to primarily think of physical forms of aggression when they consider violence and abuse. But psychological violence and abuse is at least as—if not far more—harmful than physical. Severe physical injury can and do sometimes end lives, as well as lead to permanent and perhaps enduringly painful disabilities. But if they do not do so—which is the case in the overwhelming majority of cases—the body soon or eventually heals, perhaps leaving lasting scars, but the pain resulting from the injury is seldom, if ever re-experienced. Mother’s reports of being unable to relive the pain of childbirth illustrate this phenomenon. The pain of severe emotional injuries can lead to accidental death and suicide as well. But unlike physical injury, the suffering from serious psychological damage is routinely “relived” again and again—occasionally for the person’s lifetime. In some cases the “re-experienced pain” even gains intensity over that resulting from the initial event, and can lead to an emotional breakdown.

This concept of the severity of physical versus psychological violence is author’s hypothesis. Thus it is not been considered and is not supported by the social sciences. It is also important to note that a gross comparative deficiency in research conducted with respect to males has developed during the last several decades. Female-only studies have also replaced most dual-gender research. The author’s work on intimate’s violence concluded that only 15% of recent research revealed information about the males.

Physical aggression and psychological abuse are simply different manifestations of the same underlying and equally shared characteristic in each of the sexes—the propensity for violence. The acculturation to only see physical forms of VA as a crime against society almost certainly the primary reason men are prosecuted and incarcerated so much more frequently and longer than women. This in turn established a foundation for the popular image of women as innately nonviolent and nonaggressive, which leads the actual acts of physical violence to be overlooked, explained away, or greeted with surprise as aberrations rather than the norm. Feminism’s activist-experts have exploited this tradition-based gross misunderstanding about the sexes among intellectual and the public in an incredibly destructive manner. 

In sum, objective research overwhelmingly finds that, in their relationships with intimates: (1) the sexes perpetrate equal physical abuse/aggression against one another; (2) women abuse children and elders 50-100% more than men; and (3) females are 50-100% more emotionally and indirectly abusive. In their non-intimate relationships, studies find: (1) males are 100% more physically violent/aggressive; (2) women are 100-200% more emotionally abusive/manipulative; and (3) males are victims of 100% more overall violence and crime. Studies of sexual assault and rape find three to four females report such assaults for every one to two males, but boys fail to report such incidents two to three times, and men 5 to10 times more often than females. Hence, such data clearly indicates males are sexually assaulted and raped by the opposite sex just as often as females.

PATRIARCHY versus MATRIARCHY

Feminists declare that men dominate and control—have the greatest power—over the nation’s culture. Declare that the America is paternalistic and a patriarchy. These allegations also imply men use their power in service of their best interests. Are these allegations justified? How is the comparative power of groups objectively determined? How are the beneficiaries of the exercise of cultural power measured?

It is important to recall exactly what paternalism and patriarchy mean, and what role the former played in America’s early history. Paternalism is a European concept was used as the primary basis for transferring property and wealth from one generation to the next. Control of assets passed from father to eldest son, both of whom had theoretically been reared with the motivation for and specialized knowledge of such matters. This practice was not designed to discriminate against either women or the other children. It functioned to keep estates from being broken up into small pieces for productivity reasons. Assets could have been women, but then the transfer to the next generation would be delayed. Further, first sons were groomed to fulfill the head of household role, while most women were not.

In other words, paternalism is not the purposely female-discriminatory, degrading, and exploitive precursor to the imaginary modern male dominance and control or paternalism Feminist make it out to be. It is not at all clear how much of a role paternalism played in social customs and various state’s legal systems in America’s early history. There are many indicators that paternalism was not a widely practiced (i.e. women did inherit in at least some states, and the Constitution empowered women to run for all elected offices). Regardless of how widespread paternalism may have been, it certainly has had no role in American jurisprudence during modern times—i.e. the middle of the 20th century or thereafter.

Patriarchy refers to a male-dominated society based on paternalism in which men posses power and control over the family and within the community. The allegation that a modern patriarchy exists is also specious at best, in large part because it presupposes paternalism or some alternative form of legal empowerment of men to the exclusion of women. In the obvious absence of paternalism in contemporary America, what combination of legislative enactments and/or social customs provides men with such unilateral power over society? In other words, where is the concrete evidence for modern patriarchy?

America was at first primarily governed though local communities that had the primary duties of protecting the public from harm, enforcing their laws, and maintaining order. As the country grew westward, an increasing proportion of the population lived in remote locations; on farms and ranches far removed from one another and the nearest town or city. Providing centralized protection and controlling the behavior of so many widely dispersed souls was impracticable. As a result, consistent with European traditions, men were held fully accountable for the physical well-being and actions of their family members. Men were also the logical choice because they are physically larger and stronger than women. In other words, it was the man, not the wife, who was expected to defend the family—irrespective of injury or death—as well as pay any debt, suffer any punishment, or serve any imprisonment attributable to his wife’s or children’s actions.

It is simply incredible and obviously one-sided to jump to the conclusion, without further proof, that this historic legal system actually served men’s self-interests. If proof could be found that the majority of men exercised the powers thus derived to the detriment of women and children, doing so would legitimize Feminist’s claims that a patriarchy existed once-upon-a-time in America. No such historic evidence, however, has ever been presented. In modern times, it is obvious to any reasonable objective observer that none of the trappings of the prior “rural” system of providing “law and order” in America exists today.

For analytical purposes, we need to examine cultural power from its psychosocial, economic, and political or legal dimensions. The observable and measurable results of the exercise of power in each of these dimensions provide a useful way to determine its beneficiaries.

Prior to the 1960’s, if people thought about such matters at all, they would probably have concluded that men had greater overall power than women. Feminism managed to convert such nonfactual-based popular opinion into a “Battle between the Sexes.” They have so successful that popular perspectives on virtually every aspect of physical reality and culture have been “genderized”. Thus it is proposed that Feminists have succeeded in convincing most American’s that men are the nation’s dominant and controlling group; that the exercise of their power, to some extent, is in service of self-interests.

Social power, however, is also quantifiable. Since the early 1900’s, surviving females have constituted a 4% population majority compared to males. It is proposed that prior to Modern Feminism, this differential in numerical influence was counter-balanced to some extent by men’s intangible advantages in the economic and political dimensions. Since the 1960’s, women’s greater social power has become a very significant culture-shaping force in domains like parental rights, divorce, family life, and sex-discrimination.

The U.S. economy’s foundation rests primarily on its domestic economy, which is in turn is roughly two-thirds controlled by its consumer market. Marketing experts estimate females effectively control 75% of the decision-making in the consumer market. Economist estimated that, since men die an average of six-years earlier than women, women control ~75-85% of estate wealth as well. Thus, it is feminine views far more than masculine, that directly affects factors like product design, sales strategy, advertising themes, and financial decisions, as well as indirectly dictates the content of programming in the media, publications, and entertainment. In this context it is hard to imagine how men in positions of economic power could operate in ways that are generally inconsistent or incompatible with the will and best-interests of females.

Political power derives from sovereignty. In America’s from of political economy, most sovereignty still resides with the majority of its citizens, and the remaining power is exercised by activists and lobbyists. Elected officials and the U. S. Constitution control the government, and both are determined by the people collectively combined with special interests groups . Thus numerical voting superiority is still the primary determinant of political influence because elected officials gain and retain office by satisfying the majority of their constituents. Activists and lobbyist, in turn, seek to influence both elected officials and public opinion. Voting age women have constituted a political plurality in America by a ~7% since the FDR era, although they did not vote as frequently as men until mid-century. Since the 1980’s, women cast and average of ~15% more votes than men in presidential election years. In addition, women have an aggressive activist and lobbyist special interest group claiming to represent and speak for their interests—men do not.

It is nonsense to imply male officials regulate in favor of their own sex. Our legal history for the last 50-75 years reflects consistent neglect for the best interests of fathers, husbands, and boys, while giving obvious priority to the interests of mothers, wives, and girls. Hence, if one sex receives beneficial conditions or outcomes from legislation, law enforcement, and government investments, it is definitely not males.

The above seems to firmly dispel Feminists notion that America is a patriarchy. It also offers a basis for evaluating whether or not the culture is in the process of rapidly becoming a matriarchy.

 

Last Updated: 7/19/08