Science, social stability and feminism

So, what does science have to say about men and women? Let’s ask two very rare women who are steeped in a perfect trifecta of feminism, a classic liberal education and science. First video, below. Here are a few of their comments in the first video:

Camille Paglia: “The biggest gaffe in women’s studies, is the failure to have a requirement about biology….You’ve had now 40 years of women’s studies, with a social constructionist view of gender. Without the slightest reference to hormones or endocrinology”.

Comment: Can you imagine such a thing? You can get a degree in the study of women, without having to take a science course in basic biology? Absurd…it’s like trying to be an engineer but refusing to teach mathematics.

Christina Hoff Sommers: “Forty years of women’s studies and I think we know less about gender, than when we started, for this very reason, this <feminist> dogma, that men and women are the same, that we’re cognitively inter-changeable.”

Comment: Cognitively inter-changeable? Here is barely the tip of the iceberg:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2015/10/02/sorry-girls-but-the-smartest-people-in-the-world-are-all-men/

Camille Paglia: “For heaven’s sakes, I’m someone who wrote a dissertation on androgyny. I have not for one moment of my life questioned that the sexes are actually different. There are very powerful hormonal compulsions, that drives the sexes together for procreation.”

Christina Hoff Sommers: “There is so little push-back in the Academy” <against feminist ignorance>

Camille Paglia: “That’s because there’s no knowledge. People are just settled, and sluggish, in their little cells, their ideological cells, and there really are very few inquiring minds left, no true intellectuals <in feminism>”

Feminists deny nature. With that denial comes a denial of human biology. They deny that human females, like all other female mammals, have a special bond with their offspring. That is simply not in the feminist equation, that is not part of the feminist political agenda. If humans had in the past actually followed this current feminist equation, we would no doubt have gone extinct, long ago.  In the current inter-sectionalist feminist worldview, unlike in the rest of the natural mammalian world, in the human world there is no femininity, there is no masculinity, there is only androgyny. This is nonsense, masquerading as an education. The very central mechanism in nature and evolution, the division of life into sexes, for the purpose of procreation and survival of the species, does not exist in current feminist ideology. I suppose they think Charles Darwin was wrong, if any of them actually heard of him. Feminists are all about denying traditional femininity and masculinity, and disapproving of any male who enjoys being conventionally masculine, disapproving of any female who enjoys being conventionally feminine.

Milo was right. Feminism is social cancer.

How do we fix this mess?

Feminism needs to be brought into the modern age. Currently it seems more like a religion, though many have accurately described it as an ideology. The thing is, I am quite religious myself, but I know the difference between science and religion. I know both of their limitations. Things should be first and foremost tested, when you can in fact test them. And yes, many feminist beliefs can be tested…..falsified or verified. The beliefs of feminism are mostly subject to the laws and insights of biology, as a starting point. Just making up beliefs, when you can test them with science and real scientific rigor, just leads to ignorance, which is the current state of feminism.

For instance biologist Bret Weinstein said that he does not believe in the theory of Patriarchy, of men supposedly organizing to oppress women, for obvious biological reasons: most of the same genes in males, spend half of their evolutionary life in females. So why would males of the species conspire against their own genetics, essentially? It makes no sense.

Remember the so-called “Wage gap”? For decades, most people believed that nonsense. Why? It went unchallenged till research started to come in, soundly disproving it’s theory. Now? No one who has looked into it, believes it any more. Why is that? Because all the evidence shredded that central tenet of feminism, in no time, once the evidence was looked at, one the ignorance was exposed.

Ignorance is not the answer. If feminist beliefs are actually valid, they will hold up to the scrutiny of science, reason, logic and evidence. If not, they will disappear or evolve. This scientific ignorance must end, in feminism.  Feminists need to render unto the Scientific Caesar, what is Caesar’s, render unto God, what is God’s….

One thing I agree with the feminists on, is helping women. All decent men, which is the vast majority of men, agree on that, regardless of their political affiliation or race or economic position. However, you can’t help women, if you use many of the beliefs of feminism as the basis of your perception of gender reality, as many are mired in ignorance….such as the malicious fairy tale about “The Patriarchy” as a vast conspiracy of men, colluding with each other against women. That’s just feminist paranoia. There are two sides to every story….and often more than that…To any good idea the feminist have, I say welcome. To the bad ideas, I say trash them. Jordan Peterson and Camille Paglia have a lot to say on that,  in the video below.

A couple of reading suggestions for anyone who made the mistake of getting a Woman’s Studies degree, which avoided educating you on biology. You are a victim of educational malpractice, you need to escape your programming. Here are some remedies:

1-Neil Shubin’s classic book: “Your Inner Fish”

https://www.amazon.com/Your-Inner-Fish-Journey-3-5-Billion-Year/dp/0307277453

2-Bruce Lipton’s “Biology of Belief”

https://www.amazon.com/Biology-Belief-10th-Anniversary-Consciousness/dp/140195247X/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1550082554&sr=1-1-spons&keywords=the+biology+of+belief+by+bruce+lipton&psc=1

The best way to help feminism evolve is to set up a new and vigorous program that incorporates science, and which includes a classical liberal education including deep history, which was around before the humanities got polluted by post-modernism and feminism. Also, there is a tremendous amount of mental energy online, from the migtow community and Men’s Rights communities, both of whom heavily criticize feminism, constantly pointing out it’s many glaring deficiencies, weaknesses and defects. This is a perfect situation to include men into the conversation. Right now the mainstream media, which is sometimes closed minded, ignores and marginalizes critics of feminism. Make no mistake: feminists pose as victims, even while controlling the mainstream media agenda by which most people have their perceptions on gender, shaped…..as Cassie Jaye found out, when she tried to challenge feminist assumptions about gender…..There is a great bit on her, on the online movie “Hoaxed”….a Mike Cernovich film. Obviously no self-respecting man would participate in the current ideological feminist garbage, which is mostly about man hating and a distorted view of history and current reality….so we need a paradigm shift.

One of the curious things I remember Milo Yianopoulis saying was that “Men’s Rights Activists who criticize feminism are not the sort of  people you would invite to parties, but they are almost always right about women.” For Milo, a gay man with no dog in that fight, that’s a remarkable statement, as well as being obviously true. So why is that? Why are mgtow and MRAs so often right about feminism? It’s because we post our opinions online and are then subject to a peer review of sorts, from other men. This is a ruthless process, as it should be. We don’t allow hate speech against women, unlike feminists who often post it against men. Men have no intellectual mercy for other men, which is a good thing.

Come to think of it, that’s exactly how science works. The scientific method mostly evolved out of a male perspective. Men like facts, men like competition, men like challenging each other for social and intellectual dominance, men like logic, reason and evidence. When someone posts something online, that person is subject to the brutal inspection of other people. Jordan Peterson has stated that 80% of people on you-tube are men….which has something to do with, why so many of his fans are men. The reason for so many men on you-tube is, I think, that even at 1 day old, male humans and male primates in general, tend to spend more time looking at things, than time looking at faces. Female human babies, female primates of all sorts, display the same tendencies….they like to look at faces more than things. Likely there are strong evolutionary reasons for this.

That’s why  there are more men that women, who play video games, more men than women on you-tube. So it seems to me that constructing a new gender studies program to include both men and women, it needs to be put online and be highly interactive. In fact, I think that all current gender studies programs and women’s studies programs, need to be put online, made interactive….for the general public. You should be able to view them live, you should be able to view them on you-tube and make your comments. It seems to me that the best way forward, for understanding gender, for men and women to getting to a more agreeable place in the gender war, is based on combining science in the classroom, with public access to what is being taught at our universities.

Then, men being men, they will ruthlessly tear apart all comments, ruthlessly tear apart any presentation or set of ideas on gender. Good ideas will survive, bad ideas will die. This will be an essentially Darwinian process to weed out bad ideas. Stating scientific hypothesis, collecting data and rigorous review would be central to this new discipline. Given the nature of men and women and the current state of technology, this seems a quick way forward, to get rid of bad ideas in feminism and to project ourselves into a better future, for both genders.

It seems to me, that men and women aught to get along. It seems to me that gender relations are currently at a low point, no one knows why, we aught to get together and talk about it, think about it. It seems to me that part of the problem is that feminism arose out of very debauched roots: from post-modernism, which is now negatively affecting the very thinking process of people who attend university. Remember that the twin of feminism is post-modernism, both have similar views of reality, both heavily relying on clever word games, obscurantist specialized knowledge and very academic language jargon designed to make the purveyors of that arcane language sound profound, to mask their ignorance, both relying on emotion, over reason and evidence. I blogged about it, before. Link:

https://linkyou.blog/answering-sir-roger-scruton-part-1/

Summing up post-modernism, which gave rise to feminism. From my Roger Scruton blog:

So, summing up, thus far, a very clever French intellectual, who supported pedophilia, who hated white men, was a Communist,  he died of AIDS and believed in torturing people in sick sexual fetishes, while contemplating suicide.  (I wish I was exaggerating for comedic effect, but I’m not…those are the facts)…..But before he died, this clever but sick and hateful man, by the name of Foucault, was very influential in creating a thought system….post-modernism…he was one of it’s top philosophers….post-modernism, which did away with the idea of truth….including scientific truth. He replaced it with a thought system which relied more on argument and emotion, of a theory of competing power groups being the basic way to understand our history,  based primarily on competing narratives and emotion, rather than evidence and reason and logic….similar to feminism. And the aim of that thought system was to destroy white men, they clearly stated that as their aim, and the feminists and post-modernists hope to destroy white men, by also destroying science.

To any feminist reading this: You’ve been duped, by a sick pedophile by the name of Foucault.

What are the worst of the feminists, up to? Jordan Peterson: “The real radicals on the left, who are opposed to the Patriarchy, the Patriarchy is Western Civilization, make no mistake about it. The Patriarchy is just a code word, for that. And governed by their Neo-Marxist dogma, and their post-modern dogma, they believe that it needs to be re-tooled, right from the bottom up. And that’s exactly what they are doing. And that makes them natural allies with other systems that are opposed to our system” <that’s why radical feminists are allied with Islamist’s, both want to destroy Western Civilization and capitalism.>

So there you have it, if you support radical feminism, you wish to bring down Western Civilization. As a man who pays taxes, and since universities are publicly funded by my tax dollars, I have to ask, why my tax money is being used, to indoctrinate young women in hate, to hate me as a white male, into an ideology that is ignorant of the basic facts of history, is ignorant of science and wishes to destroy me and everything I love….such as Western Civilization and free speech, which I think are good ideas. It’s like telling someone you wish to shoot them, and by the way, would you mind buying them the gun? To which I say, No thanks…Starting at 5 minutes, 40 seconds:

How do we change this insanity?

We need to inject logic, reason, evidence and the scientific process into feminism. Men and women are biologically inter-dependent. Most academic men have ignored “women’s studies” as something to keep their wives happy. That’s a mistake as it has bred a large political class of programmed radical left wing political drones who wish to destroy or disrupt society, based on largely nonsensical theories which are similar to communism.

We need social stability. Men and women need to get along. Time to follow Cassie Jaye’s lead and go talk to the so-called enemy. We may find we have a lot in common. Science will help this.

If we build such a MWS program, and it’s online, all the best teachers don’t even have to live in the same cities, so then it becomes possible to draw in the best teaching staff from around the planet, to participate. My personal favorite would be Gad Saad:

One thought on “Science, social stability and feminism

  1. Reblogged this on larrysmusings and commented:
    Here is an incisive and insightful post from another blogger (reblogged here by a Scandinavian blogger). This is quite worth the several minutes to read and ponder. Please refer others to it. The content of the post speaks for itself, therefore there is no need for any introductory words from me.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s