Friday, December 22, 2017

Yes, Why Are We Having This Harassment Panic?

Writer Christopher DeGroot is pissed off that the centrist ladies at Quillette dumped him when they found out that he linked to American Greatness and that he "distinguish[ed] between white supremacists and nationalists who happen to be white." They are all cowards, he complains.

He then links to a piece by Claire Berlinski on the current sexual harassment panic in which she writes about her amusement at the Oxford don that grabbed her butt at a party when she was 20. Then she wonders aloud why we are having this sexual harassment panic. Is it because, per uber-liberal Hanna Rosin, men are becoming expendable in the post-industrial economy? Is it because, per Freud, women are castrating men en masse? But here's a plausible reason: "The President of the United States is Donald J. Trump."

I admit, she does have a point. Suppose you are an average college-educated woman that has been taught lefty lies K thru grad. school and believed them. Suppose you believed that the bad old days of the patriarchy were behind us and that America was finally Ready to Elect a Woman President. Supposed you believed the lefty reactionary faith that political power was the royal road to emancipation and liberation. Suppose you believed the lefty Big Lie about women as helpless victims of the patriarchy since the dawn of time.

Well yeah. Then I expect you'd be terrified by the election of Donald Trump. You'd suddenly worry, deep in your collective unconscious, that the world view you had been carefully taught was all wrong. You'd marinate in your Culture of Complaint and tell all your friends that "I can't believe we elected a man like Trump." You'd be all ginned up to destroy any and every man that overplayed his hand in the dance of the sexes. Because if you can't trust the voters to elect the First Woman President who can you trust?

But your real problem would be that you have been taught and believed in a lie. Because everything taught by the left is a lie, including "and" and "the." It is not true that women can be an "independent woman," per Simone de Beauvoir in The Second Sex. Women need protection, for a bunch of reasons. It is not true that women can be like men where sex is concerned, per the sexual revolution. It is not true that women can blithely destroy their in-utero babies without the guilt pursuing them for the rest of their lives, and above all it is not true that beneficial legislation can do anything for women except make them the subordinate slaves of the state.

What feminists call the patriarchy is merely the bald fact that women need protection from sexual predation, and I dare say that down the ages well-born women have been better protected than lower-class women. What feminists call the patriarchy is merely the eternal fact that women need support when they are bearing and raising children, and they always will. What feminists call the patriarchy is simply that men are more programmed for taking risks than women, so women in the current work-force tend to choose jobs in well-established companies, and singularly avoid tech startups.

But the worst thing of all is that the feminist Good Little Girls have adopted the leftist faith in politics, the faith that life is a dog-eat-dog battle and that without political power you go to the back of the line.

Wrong! In the first place, humans are called social animals for a reason. We make our way in the world by suspending the war of all against all within our communities. No really!

Then there is the modern miracle. The last two hundred years has seen an astonishing transformation in life, and foremost among the changes is that instead of a strictly hierarchical society where you nestled up as a helpless victim to some powerful patron for protection from rapists, looters, and plunderers, today you can go forth into the world of the market economy, and in the market economy force does not rule. Instead trust rules.

By the way. Back in the bad old days when people needed powerful patrons, they had this cozy cultural thing called the droit de seigneur. If you don't already know what that means you better not ask.

Do you see how important trust is for a woman in the public square? It means that Claire Berlinski can laugh off the Oxford don that grabbed her butt at a party, because she trusts that she can make him behave. It means that a starlet that gets the Weinstein treatment heads out and never comes back, because to submit to the Harvey treatment after the first time means to accept the role of subordinate slave to his slavering revoltingness.

Oh yes, you can have your laws to punish harassers, and sometimes it comes to that: the heavy-handed application of the criminal law in order to keep lawless men in check.

But the real secret of our present prosperity and our present freedom is the simple application of the TIT FOR TAT rule from the Prisoner's Dilemma. You trust people that establish a track record of trustworthiness with you and you continue to transact with them; you dump the untrustworthy right now and forever. Otherwise you are a subordinate slave.

No comments:

Post a Comment