By Ajax the Great (Pete Jackson)
(Originally posted on my Vive La Difference! blog)
Let's be brutally honest about something: humanity is basically a "lion's pride writ large". Men have always been the lazier gender (relative to Women at the same time and place), and barring a truly quantum leap in human evolution, most likely always will be. This has consistently been true in all known human societies, whether patriarchal, Matriarchal, filiarchal, tri-une, or anything in between, so it is not entirely a social construct like some would prefer to believe.
The difference is that in an actual lion's pride, which is actually Matriarchal, the hardworking females have practically all of the power, while the lazy males have little to no real power at all, just the illusion of power as "King Nothing", like the famous Metallica song. Whereas in patriarchal human societies, men generally have power without responsibility (which is very dangerous), while Women generally have responsibility without power (which is very harmful to Women and children). And even for the most rudimentary job of all for males, to "guard the perimeter" to protect the females and their young, male lions still do it better than most men, as evidenced in the fact that 55% of American men just voted for, and thus bowed to, a known misogynistic fascist dictator, and when you include those who voted third party or didn't bother to vote at all, now you are looking at well north of 60%, that is, a solid majority of men who utterly failed to protect Women and children.
Honestly, if you can't be a provider, at the very least, be a protector, fellas! (Facepalm)
And, of course, men have long had the absolute GALL to, um, lionize the so-called Protestant Work Ethic (TM) (that is, "work for the sake of work, to justify one's own existence"), all while simultaneously and hypocritically devaluing and exploiting Women's unpaid and underpaid labor.
In contrast, in Matriarchal human societies, both historical and contemporary, Women have more power and more responsibility, while the men have less power and less responsibility (albeit sometimes holding puppet figurehead "chief" roles for show). That is, power (or lack thereof) and responsibility (or lack thereof) go fully hand in hand, and as a result, gender relations are as harmonious as it gets.
So here's a good visual aid, courtesy of Wikipedia:
The Real Natural-Born Leaders
You always hit the nail on the head, Ajax. You talk turkey {happy T Day!} when most men just seem to float around in a mental daze as to who they are - what they should do notwithstanding they are programmed to think they are the superior gender, the 'man' of the house, the leader, the Priest, the President, the King.....It's all smoke & mirrors. What gets me the most is how so few see the whole picture - which is the GENDER WAR where toxic men took over the society bit by bit since maybe 6k years ago, this as a result of TESTOSTERONE gone wild. Once men obeyed women, we had peace. It's when the testosterone got so much increased that the violence & aggression got out of control, & they from thence {a part of them, one third according to the myth} refused to any longer obey women. They became their own God, no more Mother God or priestesses. And the testosterone-driven men created swords which eventually lead to nuclear weapons & biowarfare, threatening to destroy the majority of life on our planet. This is the NATURE of toxic men, those who are consumed & controlled by testosterone. I need to think about the effects of testosterone & all it makes people do. I know a little bit through study of the body building pro women. It gives one a sense of invincibility - which is FALSE, just a delusion. In this delusion men venture out violently, recklessly, to do things that will get them injured or killed. Since women in the past never took testosterone they did not do such things. The women who are pro body builders should be stued more & interviewed more to see the results of these 'roids. They are more violent, quick to react when men harass them, ready to bite their heads off. But this is just a sample of how they get personality wise, it needs study. As far as lazy, the reason women don't become 'big shots' in many fields, like art, music in the past - is because they've been consumed with child care. Child care is an around the clock job, it takes up allone's time & energy. And mn in Patriarchy FORCED women to have serial pregnancies instead of waiting 5-6 years between each chid - which is the normal time it takes a chid to receive all the immunity from Mother's milk. Yes, a child should be on the breast 5-6 years Dr. Bryan Sykes says, weaning is TRAUMATIC & Dr. James W. Prescott says leads to attachment disorders - which lead to multiple serious problems like homicide, suicide, drug & alcohol addiction, depression, etc. And so what I am saying to add to your article is that women are forced into having multiple children almost yearly when they should have no more than one every 5-6 years - Having children, just one at a time, is all-consuming but to have several is beyond what a woman should endure. With animals they can have many as animals are mostly not as dependent as humans, but with humans, it's all consuming as we don't grow up for many years. While the females are taken up with this heavy labor of child care males are goofing off, pretending to be 'working' which some are actually doing, while many are not. And what are they pursuing when not working? Right now young males are taken up with sodomy of women, it's the last pornography has taught them & they are obsessed with it. Whatever porno demons are pushing, they follow. They also shave their crotches because of porno - which is unattractive. So yes, I agree, in general, they are lazy & the women are taking up the hardest work - child care. You have no idea what this entails unless you've tried it, I've done it & it's something males simply CANNOT DO & shuld not be allowed to try. Great article, thanks Ajax.
ReplyDeleteYou're very welcome, Rasa. Very well-said, thanks 😊
DeleteOne minor point I would like to make: from what I have read elsewhere, I think Dr. Sykes may have stretched the truth a wee bit IMHO. For most known contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures, which are about as close to our Paleolithic ancestors as one can get nowadays, it seems to average about 3-4 years rather than 5-6 years. Which of course, is still a major step up from the abysmal status quo and status quo ante under patriarchy, and indeed most of the benefits can be had at 3-4 years. And of course, rightly or wrongly, some concessions will inevitably need to be made to modern times until patriarchy and capitalism/neoliberalism are completely eradicated. That's the nature of protopia as opposed to utopia (aka "no place"), after all. But yes, you are broadly correct overall, Rasa. Thanks again 😊
DeleteDr. James Prescott says the absolute minimum for a child to be with Mom & her milk to avoid attachment disorder is 2.5 years. Sykes says the chemicals {I forgot the official name} the child must have to protect itself from illness can be up to 6 years.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, and as per contemporary indigenous hunter-gatherers, the truth is most likely somewhere in the middle between Prescott and Sykes I think. One can see Prescott's view as the floor, and Sykes' view as the guiding North Star, perhaps.
DeleteHave a very Happy Thanksgiving, Rasa 😊
Delete