How consent of the governed makes everybody gay
January 24, 2014 § 37 Comments
Some of my readers are no doubt finding this tedious, but the beatings must continue until rationality improves.
It has been suggested that modern women are attracted to bad boys (men who make poor fathers) because women themselves just have an inherently disordered nature in that respect. Women are basically all (or almost all) just like homosexuals inasmuch as their sex drives are intrinsically disordered.
It has been further suggested (repeatedly) that to the extent that men defer to bad boys it is because those bad boys get all the chicks. I suspect that this counter-empirical insistence reflects an obsessive focus on women and all things female. If you think that you aren’t considered a bad boy because you don’t get female attention like the bad boys, you are probably obsessed with female attention (or its lack) and you’ve badly misunderstood the situation.
Men generally do to some extent admire/fear/respect/defer to bad boys because the bad boys get female attention — the feedback loop John suggests. But women are not the only reason for male deference to other males, by any stretch of the imagination. Women are not even a primary reason why some men defer to other men. There may be a feedback loop, but it isn’t an isolated self-referential system with no other inputs.
Female attention is one of the spoils of social dominance; it is not a primary cause of social dominance.
Men determine the de-facto deference hierarchy, and women respond to that determination. Women know that in a confrontation, contextual-alpha-dork is going to back down and submit to M Shadows — if M Shadows pays him any attention at all. Women know that in a knife fight Bill Gates is going to run away from Tommy Tats-n-Piercings. You can’t fool them into thinking otherwise.
Men, not women, determine the masculine hierarchy. Modern liberal men – that is, almost all men in the modern West – deny the legitimacy of masculine hierarchy. Even where there is de-jure hierarchy (Bill Gates over his subordinates, say), it is (required to be) fully voluntary: Gates only exercises authority by consent of the governed, over ‘subordinates’ who can up and quit any time. There is no absolutely binding command to it, just mutual self-interest and free choice. De-jure hierarchy under liberalism is not like natural masculine hierarchy: it is a very effeminate cooperation, that is, cooperation backed by no real binding authority with teeth, acknowledged as such.
Because an attempt to deny masculine hierarchy is an attempt to deny nature, liberalism cannot actually prevent masculine hierarchy from emerging. All it can do is categorize masculine hierarchy as sociopathic.
So the masculine hierarchy which emerges under liberalism is sociopathic, and the result is that modern women are attracted to sociopaths.