- Warning: May contain satire
- If this essay offends you or makes you question my sanity, please know that I don’t actually believe this and am merely making a point of how ridiculous certain conservative publications are by using their writing style to support a caricature of radical feminism.
- Anyone tempted to seriously argue with this is missing the point.
“God gave men both a penis and a brain, but unfortunately not enough blood supply to run both at the same time.”
Radical meninists believe women should submit to men because, the average man would win a one-on-one fight with the average woman. No civilized country, however, settles the question of leadership in the UFC octagon or by any other type of athletic contest. In fact, most modern world leaders are well past their physical prime, and few people of any political affiliation complain about this. Clearly the custom of making the strongest member of the tribe the default chief has gone the way of hunting the neighbors for food.
The question then is: How do we determine authority if not by strength? Choosing the most rational and moral individuals to lead seems logical. If this is our standard then we must choose women who are naturally more rational and moral than men.
The quote from Robin Williams has already alluded to the tendency of men to become irrationally sexually distracted. Sometimes the consequences of this are no worse than men degrading themselves to flirt with obviously disinterested women. Some men, however, evidently turn into lust-driven rape beasts at the mere sight of an attractive young woman in a miniskirt. Anyone this easily driven to bestial behavior should not be placed in a position of authority. Furthermore, male irrationality does not extend only to sex. Think of how many men have broken their hands while punching walls in fits of rage and how few women have made this same foolish error.
Women are also evolutionarily programmed to be more moral than men. While men seek violence and chaos women seek order and peace. The reason for this is linked to human reproductive biology. A woman must endure nine months of pregnancy to produce a child, while at least some men make their only contribution in less than a minute. To successfully pass on her genes to many descendants a woman must live a very long life, something that is more easily accomplished in a peaceful orderly society than a violent and chaotic one. Men, however, can benefit from chaos by taking the opportunity to impregnate as many women as possible, with or without their consent, over a short time scale. Men who practice this strategy to may leave behind many descendants, but create a Hobbesian nightmare where the lives of most people are “nasty, brutish, and short”.
The superior morality and rationality of women makes “the fairer sex” naturally better suited for authority, but what complementary role should be given to men? Men seem uniquely suited to the role of domestic helpmates. Their superior strength is much more constructively used for helping bring their wives plans to fruition than for starting wars and punching walls. To this end men should be encouraged to marry young before both their physical strength and sperm motility start declining. While some misguided washed-up overweight meninists may complain that this interferes with men’s ‘fulfilling’, but frivolous education, career, or travel plans real men are notably happier when married than when single. The shorter life span and self-destructive habits or divorcés also shows what happens when a man is left without female guidance and supervision.
It is in the interest of a peaceful and rational society as well as male and female well-being for male to accept their roles as helpmates to their “queens of the castle”. Anything else risks returning to the social chaos of the stone age.