“I know this is becoming a habit, but there’s something I’d like to bring up before I continue on with what I predict will be a controversial topic/post. In a broad stroke, Irrational Health is meant to be an objective analysis of modern day irrational social norms, habits, customs, and pathologies. The fact remains though that with anything it is partially based on personal experience so there is a sort of line that I try to be very cognizant of just because of the fact that it is easy to fall into bias. Nonetheless, I have thought a great deal about the series of topics that make up the major irrationalities of modern day human behavior. This has required the development of very refined analytical skills. The fact is that it is a difficult thing to do, to detach oneself from a personal situation in order to analyze it objectively. Someone who is good at this has the ability to take a scene, detach yourself as a separate person from the situation, and view it as if you were a third party. This is difficult. It’s not easy, but it’s process and one that is a part of a set of key guidelines I’ve set up for myself in writing this objective psychological book. I just wanted to bring that up and to use it as almost a disclaimer as these posts are much more informal and less finalized than what will eventually make its way to the final project. So here is the fourth official post for Irrational Health, which is one that has been finished for a while, but just not published.”
It’s been a while, but this can be considered my fourth official post for Irrational Health. The previous posts where reblogs from my principal blog at Raymond A. Guzman which touched upon topics that are in the works for Irrational Health. My hope is to write a book based on Irrational Health, while I keep up the blog. Juggling the two has proven to be a bit of a task, but hopefully I have the formula down now, but back to the topic.
In my Critical Methods course, one of the books I read which stuck with me was Mythologies by Roland Barthes. It’s one of his crowning works, a collection of essays, that sought to take these sort of values that were taken for granted and try to get at the historical background that’s lead to that manufactured value. In the preface, he writes, “The starting point of these reflections was usually a feeling of impatience at the sight of the ‘naturalness’ with which newspapers, art and common sense constantly dress up a reality which, even though it is the one we live in, is undoubtedly determined by history.” That’s how he starts and he goes on to say that a myth is likely the best terminology to be used to express these phenomenon if you will. The takeaway is that things aren’t always what them seem and that sometimes the value we attach to something is derived from something negative or just simply from a different source altogether. For example, his first essay is about the topic of wrestling and how wrestling is meant to portray the value of justice. Wrestling is more a performance than a sport or martial art because the intent isn’t to obtain victory or to disable your opponent. While the audience is clearly in tune with the physical aspect of wrestling, a match wouldn’t be very entertaining if eventually the value of justice didn’t manifest itself. I start out with this because it’s Barthes’ idea of the myth that really makes up the Irrational Health aspect of feminism.
Feminism is essentially a myth. The attempt to celebrate womanhood and to strive for equality inevitably leads to the exact opposite goal. Not only this, but the the goal it does achieve leaves us all worse off on the whole. I realize that those statements alone might be enough to deter certain readers from wanting to continue reading, but, as always, if you take the time to realize that what’s true, is true, and what isn’t, isn’t, then you realize that to believe otherwise is to deceive yourself. First off, something needs to be understood at the start. If one of the goals of feminism is equality with men, then it holds that equality entails both the adoption of good and bad qualities, good and bad rights. It can’t be had one way or another. As women intend to make themselves equal with men, they end up adopting most if not all of the stigmas associated with the masculine gender. It’s hard to deny this. Don’t women do certain things just because of the notion that if men can, so can they? Yes. What are some of those things? To name one big one, to treat sex as an act of conquest. Women adopt that stigma. The question I raise is why stand by feminism then if you have to take the bad with the good? It’s one of those things that simple, but isn’t really something that is of a concern up front. It’s one of those things that gets buried in the grandness of it all. In this way, we’re all worse. Doesn’t it follow? Is it not possible to admit that perhaps the rising divorce rate in our country can be attributed to women’s attempt to even the score? The answer is, yes, but, of course, many might attempt to refute that. So we already see that what seems so positive on the outside, arises from glaring flaws at the start.
There is one other major point to make though and that’s regarding the fact that the end goal of feminism doesn’t hold true. If anything, the inequality between men and women has increased because women don’t really want equality. They want to be right. They want to have the advantage. Whether they realize it or not, even if it’s just subconsciously, women will drop the notion of equality in a second if it proves to be to their benefit. Women have historically had the submissive role in the human partnership while men have had the dominant role. Feminism in a way can be seen as the belief that women should embrace an equal dominant role with men. This just does not follow through though, because what the reality is is that women will take on the role that will be to their highest benefit in any situation. Is that equality? If it barks like a dog, looks like a dog, and smells like a dog, it’s probably a dog. You may laugh, but it’s one of those things when I almost feel like kids are coming up with some idea that adults have adopted and decided to run with. Feminism hasn’t panned out. It’s a myth. It’s a myth that is perpetuating the disintegration of our meaningful relationships. It’s an irrationality that manifests itself as a pathology on a daily basis. It’s a crime that is going unpunished all of the time. It’s like a child doing something inappropriate over and over again and falling back on the idea that he’s a child and he doesn’t know better. Women have become severely proficient at being dominant when it’s to their benefit and playing a role of a victim when it’s not. Feminism is myth, but you could even say it’s a conspiracy. All of these false conspiracy theories out there regarding historical tragedies and yet, no one takes the time to point out a conspiracy with several irrational qualities that’s prevalent in everyday life? Feminism has done some good, sure, but if you’re not intending on taking the safety off of the gun, you probably shouldn’t pick it up.