The thing that stands out most to me about this quote - fantastically wrong on so many levels - is how clearly it demonstrates something I've been saying for quite some time, and that is this: All women are 'homophobic'.
Yes yes I know the etymology of the word but whether the men being prejudiced against are gay or not is kind of beside the point - all women, to a greater or lesser extent, at the very least display the 'symptoms' we attribute to said condition when manifested in men: overt caution, fear and/or disdain of men.
The woman originally posting this foolishness is quite happy to burble forth the conviction that all men should be treated as potential sex criminals - by both sexes. The only thing that marks this out as even slightly unusual in our present era is that she appears to be excusing or even encouraging distrust of homosexuals in order to make her greater point of distrusting all other men. Apparently the key thing to remember here is just so long as you are hating men (gay or straight), you're good to go.
The woman originally posting this foolishness is quite happy to burble forth the conviction that all men should be treated as potential sex criminals - by both sexes. The only thing that marks this out as even slightly unusual in our present era is that she appears to be excusing or even encouraging distrust of homosexuals in order to make her greater point of distrusting all other men. Apparently the key thing to remember here is just so long as you are hating men (gay or straight), you're good to go.
Female 'homophobia'
is so normalized in our society that treating every man you meet like
'Schrödinger's Rapist' is considered an ordinary, common sense fact of life - just so long as
you are a woman. But if a man feels at all uncomfortable around
another man sexually, he is generally branded an evil bigot for behaving the
way all women do at all times.
Not that behaving that way is a healthy way to be, of course: hating anyone - homosexuals, lesbians, heterosexuals, women or men simply because they are homosexuals, lesbians, heterosexuals, women or men, is a pretty woefully unenlightened way to go about one's life. But even if we were to accept that the reaction being discussed (which often comes down to no more than a heterosexual disinclination to celebrate homosexual acts) is a pathology of some kind, a 'phobia', like arachnophobia, or nomophobia, or ouranophobia even, it must surely be the only medical condition we know of for which the only recommended treatment is to be treated with contempt and ostracization by everyone you meet.
Not that behaving that way is a healthy way to be, of course: hating anyone - homosexuals, lesbians, heterosexuals, women or men simply because they are homosexuals, lesbians, heterosexuals, women or men, is a pretty woefully unenlightened way to go about one's life. But even if we were to accept that the reaction being discussed (which often comes down to no more than a heterosexual disinclination to celebrate homosexual acts) is a pathology of some kind, a 'phobia', like arachnophobia, or nomophobia, or ouranophobia even, it must surely be the only medical condition we know of for which the only recommended treatment is to be treated with contempt and ostracization by everyone you meet.
Still, if it works, I suppose. Maybe it's homeopathic or something.
Homophobia is the one kind of misandry you're presently not supposed to consider worthwhile and deserved. All the others are still fine and dandy, though.
What I find so strange about the times we are living in is how we compartmentalize bigotries, and label them either 'good' or 'evil'. Whereas, before this Maoist theory-derived age of Political Correctness, we used to just tell people 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you', or 'treat people the way you want to be treated yourself'. We used to call this 'The Golden Rule'.
And isn't that better? I mean, if you really take those words seriously, wouldn't that actually make you a better person than one who can be manipulated into hysterical overreactions over the difficulties facing one group of human beings while congratulating themselves for openly expressing contempt for another? Wouldn't that be a better way to have spent one's life, in the long run?
There's a blogger by the name of Chelsea Fagan who wrote something in response to that original quote, but I find it also tidily addresses the perils of the underlying 'rape culture' narrative that feminism has promulgated for at least the past 50 years. In her conclusion she says:
Sho 'nuff.
Homophobia is the one kind of misandry you're presently not supposed to consider worthwhile and deserved. All the others are still fine and dandy, though.
What I find so strange about the times we are living in is how we compartmentalize bigotries, and label them either 'good' or 'evil'. Whereas, before this Maoist theory-derived age of Political Correctness, we used to just tell people 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you', or 'treat people the way you want to be treated yourself'. We used to call this 'The Golden Rule'.
And isn't that better? I mean, if you really take those words seriously, wouldn't that actually make you a better person than one who can be manipulated into hysterical overreactions over the difficulties facing one group of human beings while congratulating themselves for openly expressing contempt for another? Wouldn't that be a better way to have spent one's life, in the long run?
There's a blogger by the name of Chelsea Fagan who wrote something in response to that original quote, but I find it also tidily addresses the perils of the underlying 'rape culture' narrative that feminism has promulgated for at least the past 50 years. In her conclusion she says:
If we lived in a world where to show even a trace
of sexual or romantic interest in another person was somehow a
reproachable or even criminal act, could you imagine the consequences?
How could we fall in love, marry, reproduce? How would we break the
barrier with someone we are interested in? We all start off as
strangers, and to make someone’s innocent flirtation or starting of a
conversation into a justification for homophobia is absolutely
repugnant.
A man — gay or straight — respectfully hitting on another person is
not a cause for bigotry, it’s not a cause to treat all men as potential
predators, and it’s not a cause to reinforce hatred. This quote has
successfully justified a young man in his homophobia, reinforced the
idea that all men should be treated as potential predators until proven
otherwise, and demonized the act of flirting with another person as
something that should be feared and, ultimately, reviled.
Sho 'nuff.
Anyhow, to recap:
If any men behave like all women do all the time, they are to be considered very bad people. That's all your society needs you to remember at this point in time.
And once again I am forced into the philosophical position that it sure is a funny old world.
And once again I am forced into the philosophical position that it sure is a funny old world.
*
No comments:
Post a Comment