Whoever said that men weren’t creative beings? Well, they are. In a way. They’re creative in much the same way that they are capable of love. It is very different from how women love. Men love beer, or cars, or evolutionary biology, or vindictive deities, or women in pretty much the same way – without nuance. The ‘love’ is shallow, but intense, and is both self-oriented and self-serving. Men don’t love as a selfless act or in a way that helps someone (or something) other than themselves. Men love beer because it dulls existential pain, might be pleasurable on the tongue, and gives them a way of shirking rape charges in the rare case that a woman is stupid enough to speak truth about her violation in public. In the same way, when men love people, it is because the object of love serves them in some way. He isn’t selflessly giving himself to the person, he is telling us that he has use for her. “I love you” means: “Currently, I am getting some use and pleasure from you. And that may change tomorrow if you fail to please me in some way.” The object is always replaceable, and if not replaced, the man in question usually falters in some significant way. Men who lose a long-term wife-slave seldom live very long after her death. The same is not true of women as male love is not about taking care of women in the ways that matter. Women usually find their freedom after spousal death. But that is male love. It is self-serving and highly conditional upon the love-object delivering what is expected and making no demands in return. And often, in men, love lies on the knife blade’s edge with their hatred, and sometimes, they are completely indistinguishable. Love often resembles hate just as male-defined sex is practically indistinguishable from rape. And so, a man can emotionally abuse, rape and beat a woman and call it love. And an emotional apology to her afterwards coupled with the word ‘love’ will always win a woman over because she understands emotion and tears and apologies and gifts. For her that is love – the giving. For a man though, he is afraid of losing his object, and will do and say anything to avoid losing his power.
The creative drive in men is similar. Men create for several reasons – all of them self-serving. Men create to consume. They create to gain power and money. They create to gain envy and admiration. They create to satisfy various fantasies (all of which are destructive to the object being used). Underlying much of this is a fundamental truth: they create objects to hate and to direct their rage at.
And so we have Woman.
Now I’ve written in the past that we have never known what a natural woman is. I’ve discussed the interaction of nature and nurture and how they affect males and females differently (here) and how we can tell what is natural and unnatural behaviour (here). I believe that not only are men solely allowed to be natural creatures, but that females – or Woman – is a completely constructed being. She is the crowning glory of men’s creative output. She changes over time and across cultures to reflect what men believe their rights (also what they call their ‘needs’) to be. But, the common theme across time and place has always been that Woman is a fuckhole (or series of fuckholes) and a baby-factory. She is forced to be dependent on men for survival, while at the same time is threatened by these very same men. She lives in a continuous, boner-producing loop of fear of and love for her oppressor (aka Stockholm Syndrome). She is his biggest fan and greatest defender, even as she cowers from him and fears the constant threat his existence signifies to her. Woman exhibits a highly unnatural set of behaviours all designed to suit male purposes (domination, quelling feelings of inadequacy, sado-sexual pleasure, material for comedy, etc).
But all artists tend to have a current of self-loathing running through them. It fuels them by producing angst – and the creative drive. And Woman, as a male creation, serves another important purpose for him. She is the ultimate object of his hate. He has created something to use, something that is the exact opposite of what he feels he himself is, and in doing so, he creates something to loathe. He loves what he has created in the way that he is capable of love as I described above, but the angst-ridden artist can never achieve perfection – actual women can never meet his expectation of perfection – so he ends up hating his creation. He creates something to ‘love’ (use), but it is also something to hate and continually mock and try to destroy. She allows him to avoid directly destroying himself, although by destroying Woman, is actually is destroying everything, including himself.
I talk about female slurs more in depth in another post, but I’ll briefly mention them here as they are also the main archetypes that males love to hate. I’m referring to the Bitch and the Whore.
The Bitch was initially a dehumanizing reference to Woman’s forced role as a breeding dog. Men denied her entrance to almost every other possible role in society. It’s what he wanted and needed to assert his dominance, and he also hated her for it. Imagine putting a bird in a cage, denying it access to the sky, and then commenting that not only do birds never ever fly, but they don’t even want to or like to fly. They may perhaps not even be designed for flying despite the fact that they have wings. And the satisfying conclusion, “Stupid, useless, fucking birds. At least they make the cage look good!” This has been woman’s story since time began. Men forced Woman into a breeding dog role, prevented her from doing anything else with her life, and erroneously saw this as proof that she neither wanted to do nor was capable of doing anything else. All this despite a highly evolved brain and the same (or greater) capacity for skill mastery as men. “Stupid, useless, fucking bitches. At least, they make ME look good.”
The Bitch, more recently, has become a replacement term for Woman. Before this, as some women started to openly question their caged existence and the male creative drive, it used to be used most often to refer to a woman who pointed out or interfered with men’s privilege and brutality. But these days, if you pay attention to media, entertainment, daily conversations, output from gay and black culture, etc., you’ll see that in many ways, Bitch is now equal to Woman. And, strangely enough, the trannies – men in dresses – are taking over the word ‘woman’ for themselves. How did we get here…? The intensity and normalization of woman-hate in Western countries is reflected by how little attention hate speech such as this and other woman-slurs receive. I mean really, television will bleep out ‘fuck’, but not ‘bitch’. And all racial and ethnic slurs produce a cringe-factor in all people these days and are NEVER heard on television. Opposing a woman-slur gets you laughed at or an admonishment for not having your priorities straight (e.g., focusing instead on racism). Nope, woman hate is at an all-time high, and is completely brushed under the carpet. Men’s creative juices are still flowing, and Woman is becoming more and more unnatural with every iteration.
We also have the Whore. Since the beginning of time, men have creatively allowed a second role for Woman because it served an extremely important purpose for them. She is the Whore – a rejected woman; an unlucky woman; a confused, abused, misguided woman; and in essence, a woman who serves male sexual ‘needs’ in all ways. In the past, women were disallowed into the economy, and completely dependent on men for survival. One wrong move or a piece of bad luck, and she was forced into selling her body in order to live. In reality, if women were free from men and living naturally, they would never have even conceived of selling their bodies. But as per creative male design, putting Woman into a situation where she must service cock to survive allowed men an outlet for their sexual depravity as well as a very convenient object for their hate and rage. The Bitch was/is hated, but the Whore is hated more. Another love/hate object. Men tell us they are entitled to the use of whores, while at the same time castigating them and denying them humanity. They are hated and wanted and used by religious and atheist, conservative and liberal men alike. In the present day, capitalist men tell us that selling your cunt is a legitimate business, just like flipping burgers. But, unlike the burger-flipper, men hate and abuse whores. Truly, though, men see all women as whores. Some are public (prostitutes, strippers, etc.) and some are private (girlfriends, wives, etc.) The Whore is also a convenient construction used to divide women. Private whores are threatened by public whores and vice versa. Pitting these women against once another is part of the male plan of hate and control, and it works well. But underneath it all, public Whore, private Whore, and Bitch are really all one and the same… Woman.
One thing to know is that these archetypes, and the slurs themselves, will NEVER go away. They are a crucial part of the male system of violence and hate and creation and ‘love’ that was designed by men long ago. It is impossible to imagine a world where men exist and creative hate doesn’t. Men talk about the feminization/pussification of society, and this is exactly what they are getting at. They can’t exist without violence and woman-hate. They are threatened by the idea of dismantling their system by the introduction of natural female qualities of fairness, empathy, knowledge- and truth-seeking, love, etc. They fear the removal of hate and violence, the very things that give men meaning and purpose and that currently underlie every single society in existence. They fear the eradication of their greatest creation – the Whore/Bitch. They don’t have to worry though, no one is fighting them. Quite the opposite, actually.
[This post is part of the Love = Hate series.]
As someone with an advanced degree in psychometrics, I often think about the ways in which we go about assessing things. It was how assessment is misused and abused that got me into the field in the first place, although its applications are many and are used formally and informally by one and all every day.
Some people of the more intellectual or academic sort use formal assessment methods, but are so burdened with bias (especially that derived from privilege), that even applying rigourously developed quantitative methods go horribly wrong once it comes to interpretation of analyses.
Most laypeople rely upon subjective ways of determining something’s value (on whatever scale is relevant), and in many cases, this is problematic. For example, I’ll never give a male friend’s assessment of another dude any credence whatsoever because of his guaranteed blindness due to male privilege. I speak from way too much unfortunate experience. Guys often respect each other, but most dudes hate women on some level. So a male friend’s dude-friend may be ‘cool’ among dudes, but a complete fucking rapist or rape apologist when among women.
Honestly, I like the idea of parsimony. If I can find a simple and quick way to figure out if something or someone is worth my increasingly precious time (ladies, you likely won’t come to start valuing your time until you get older and will waste almost uncountable hours on the bombastic sex), I cherish and hone it.
Given that I’m in between teaching semesters, and I have hours upon hours to devote to entertainment of one sort or another and to copious reading and writing, I’ve been putting some thinking into how not to waste my time. Essentially, how do I assess whether what I’m viewing, reading or listening to is worth my time?
As my commitment to radical feminism develops and deepens, I find there is little to view, read or listen to that has much value. There are very few women – never mind radical feminists – that produce entertainment or ‘art’. The male viewpoint predominates, and attempts by women to break into entertainment are often thwarted, especially if they aren’t willing to destroy the existence of women, and ultimately themselves, in the process. As a result, it is impossible to watch a film or television program that isn’t peppered with misogynistic slurs and insults, increasingly horrifying and glorified sexual violence, empornulated female characters, and really damaging, backwards, and confusing ‘moral lessons’. Truly good books that don’t trigger my ‘sausage alert’ with sexist language (he/mankind/man) and misogynistic stereotypes are few and far between. And even documentaries are heavily dickish. Most art isn’t really that inspiring. And is output from the past much better or worse than that of the present? Same shit, different seasoning, different era.
Sooooo, I have come up with a basic, little formula/criterion that I want to test out. And it’ll work with material produced during any era.
If you have to rely upon denigrating or exploiting women as the sex/subhuman class in some way in order to achieve success in your work, you don’t really have talent.
I’d argue that 99.9% of the work men have produced throughout time and including that of today lacks talent based on this criterion. And honestly, much of the shit that is produced today is so unoriginal, that the only thing that makes it any money is the Tits and Ass it exploits. So if you’re an artiste or a createur in some way (including you fun feminist types), put your s̶h̶i̶t̶e̶ work-of-art to the test. Have you relied upon sexual stereotypes, anti-woman slurs, sexay sexual violence or outright sexual exploitation in order to get it some attention? If you can say ‘no’ and it isn’t a defensive, knee-jerk sort of ‘no’, then I’ll take a look with a skeptical and critical eye.
And be honest with yourself, for fuck’s sake. Exploiting women is fucking shameful. And fucking unoriginal. And fucking boring. And sadly, too fucking easy these days.
Art is supposed to teach us something. Make us better as a society. If what is being produced today is any indication of the social/intellectual/creative/ethical direction our world is going in, it is certainly not forward motion.