Jul 18, 2009

By | 13 Comments | Print Print

Feminism and the Destruction of the West

The Woman Racket: The New Science Explaining How the Sexes Relate at Work, at Play and in Society
by Steve Moxon
Charlottesville, Va.: Imprint Academic, 2008

moxonMost of my readers would agree that the West’s modern political correctness regarding race and gender is an insult to the intelligence of anyone who has given any thought to human nature and its evolutionary source.  So the triumph of the PC ideology needs an explanation.  With regards to feminism, Steve Moxon thinks he has an answer.  In The Woman Racket, he looks to evolutionary psychology to shed light on our prejudices and documents how they lead to misperceptions about the sexes and how that in turn leads to failed policy.

The Hatred of the Beta Male

First, there was asexual reproduction.  One day, mother nature brought two proto-gametes together, and they (how?) ended up mixing.  This process gave an advantage to the offspring by diluting replication errors (the majority of mutations are harmful).  The two gametes were not exactly the same size and by natural selection eventually became polarized.  The larger ones, being less numerous and harder to produce, became the “limiting factor” in reproduction.  The proto-sperms, on the other hand, became numerous, competitive with one another for proto-eggs and “cheaper.”

This far-fetched story of the origins of sex explains gender differences.  Little boys, like little sperm in abiogenesis, wrestle and compete in sports.  As adults, mating with a female that has unfit genes costs less (or did, before the government or at least culture stepped in) than the equivalent mistake would for a female so they are less picky sexually.  Eggs are expensive, sperm is cheap.  That’s why we’re most horrified when women and children, the most genetically valuable, are killed in war.

The story gets even more interesting than that.  For the species to survive, nature still wants those with the best genes to reproduce.  Since the male world is where competition is, males have a wider distribution of talents.  In numerous traits, the male bell curve has wider tails while females are clustered near the middle.  People want the males who are at the bottom, or even the vast majority that aren’t alpha, out of the gene pool, and we have a subconscious contempt for them.  Cultural norms enforce this hierarchy.  There’s a Saturday Night Live skit where the difference between a man who gets a date and one who gets charged with sexual harassment is looks and charm.  The male hierarchy is rigorously enforced by both sexes.  This “good of the species (or at least race)” explanation goes further than Dawkins’s more simplistic selfish gene model in explaining why for example humans are so ready to submit to hierarchies even against their interests.  The result is that while just about any woman can be sure to find male attention somewhere, there is no such consolation for low-ranking males.

Moxon challenges conventional wisdom that says it is women that are and have been historically disadvantaged.  He wonders why men being the only ones allowed to engage in work, which for most of history was much more hellacious than the worst jobs today, is seen as an advantage.  And even if being able to work is an advantage, up until the present era it was necessary for one person to stay home to manage the household.  This is nature’s division of labor and the basis of primate life.  In pre-historic times things were even worse for men.  In some groups of hunter-gatherers 50% or more would be killed in violent combat while all women who were healthy enough could expect to survive to adulthood.

To ask whether men or women are “advantaged” is as meaningless as wondering if infants are advantaged relative to their grandparents.  The sexes live in different worlds, and each is happier living a life more congruent with its respective nature.  Trying to bridge them has been a disaster.  In Britain the percentage of women engaged in full-time permanent work is no greater than it was 150 years ago. Moxon provides evidence that this is due to women’s choices rather than discrimination.  In fact, in 1996 Riach and Rich sent out similar résumés to employers with only the sex of the applicant being different.  ‘Emma’ got four times as many job offers as ‘Phillip.’  Women being less inclined to work is predicted from an evolutionary perspective.  Since a woman’s mate value is based on her youth and beauty rather than status, working for any reason beyond getting the bare essentials for life is pointless.

Perception and Reality: Rape and Domestic Violence

There are two chapters in this book at the start of which the author makes extraordinary claims.  The reader is eventually shocked to find that the evidence is there.  First, false claims of rape are at least as common as the real thing.  The Home Office in England investigated rape claims in 1999 and found that 45% were false charges; the woman retracted completely.  This is only a low end number of rape charges that are false, since one would have to think that not every woman who lied eventually admitted it.  Investigations in the UK, New Zealand, and the US show that police officers with experiences in rape cases believe that 50-80% of claims are false. Compare the media attention given to women who are raped compared to men who are wrongly convicted.

Studies show that the number of rapes in US male prisons dwarfs all cases on the outside.  Yet, it’s a joke in our society, and some even see it as criminals getting their just desserts.  It’s really a grotesque thing to laugh at, considering the AIDS epidemic in US prisons making a stint of any duration in jail a possible death sentence.  Evolutionary psychology tells us why male rape is funny while a person making a joke about female rape is banished from respectable society.  A man who rapes a woman is violating the rules of the male hierarchy by gaining a mate that his genes don’t merit, and our nature makes this objectionable to us.

The second shocking claim is that the majority of instances of domestic violence, even the serious stuff, is female on male.  Men who aren’t psychopaths have a natural aversion to hitting women, while women have no aversion to hitting men.  They can do so knowing that the man won’t hit back and that when the cops come they’ll be the ones believed no matter what.  The cultural Marxists and feminists use our natural favoritism towards women to make men into an oppressor class.  Reality says that so-called violence towards women isn’t part of some “patriarchy,” but largely a myth.

The War on the Family

Feminist demand “equality” only when it’s convenient for women.  They complain about the lack of women CEOs and political leaders but never about the lack of female mechanics or plumbers.  Women demand equal pay but after divorce should get 50% of what the man earns.  All that aside, the government’s intrusion into family life in the name of feminism has been the greatest disaster of all.  Moxon focuses on his native England but the same story could be told of any Western country.

In 2007, former Labor minister for welfare reform Frank Field calculated that a woman with two children working 16 hours a week for minimum wage receives after tax credit as much as she would if she was living with a man and they worked 116 hours a week between them.  With these kinds of incentives for reckless and irresponsible behavior it’s not a wonder why the number of out-of-wedlock births in Western societies has multiplied in the last few decades but why most white children still end up in two parent households.  Moxon says that human nature can’t be changed, but he’s too optimistic.  Harpending and Cochran’s Ten Thousand Year Explosion shows us that evolution in civilized societies can happen very quickly.  Each generation of Westerners is going to be less intelligent, less responsible, and less moral the longer the welfare state and feminism survive.

Family courts show the same bias against men that the rest of modern political life does.  Women initiate 80-90% of divorces (with the financial incentives no doubt playing a part in the decision), but men are assumed to be the guilty party.  The latter are responsible for paying child support but have no guarantee of seeing their own children.  All of a sudden, equality goes out the window, and men are required to be providers for women who no longer want them.  Judges have even ruled that men may be forced to pay for children that aren’t even theirs.  In the US a man can at least get a prenuptial agreement, but in England they aren’t even enforceable in court.  It bears repeating: after reading The Woman Racket and investigating feminism’s influence on the law and culture the reader won’t wonder why the modern family has been breaking apart but how it even survives at all.

Another White Man’s Disease

Moxon’s theory of women being favored, like many things, makes sense in the Western world but not universally.  He says about Middle Eastern culture

The very different experience of Muslim and Hebraic cultures–where social practices are derived primarily from canonical text rather than the codification of biological imperatives–is the exception that proves the rule.  Indeed a plausible argument could be made that the ‘patriarchal’ moral and legal codes deriving from the ‘religions of the book’ are an attempt to redress the imbalance revealed by the practice of ‘natural’ societies.

But doesn’t that seem backwards?  Wouldn’t we expect that culture and religion would work with a group’s nature instead of “fixing imbalances?”  Kevin MacDonald makes the case in his paper What Makes Western Culture Unique? that inherent racial differences are reflected in and reinforced by religious and cultural practices.  Like with the question of race and IQ, it is more reasonable to assume differences than similarity in the kinds of societies we expect different groups to create.  I wonder if Moxon really believes that Afghans or Saudis are inherently just as likely to fall for “The Woman Racket” and adopt society destroying feminism as Swedes are.

Racial differences can also help explain why no group of whites has reacted to incentives for irresponsibility the way black Americans have.  In 2007 the black out-of-wedlock birth rate hit an all-time high of 72%. Africans are not only looser sexually but have different ideas about the obligations of men and women.  Steve Sailer writes that in the West “feminists complain that men lock women out of the world of work.  But in Africa, men have always ceded most of the world of work to women.” We see the same thing with regards to out-of-wedlock birth rate to a lesser extent with America’s growing Latino population.  East Asians may have birth rates as low as the West, but you still don’t see Western style feminism or rampant anti-men discrimination.  We all share certain qualities going back to the primordial ooze, but different environments have had plenty of time to tweak our differences since then.  While there are pluses and minuses to each system, feminism seems to be like racial masochism: a curse that only affects whites.

Moxon may have been smart to avoid the racial issue here.  For a mainstream book you have to pick your battles.  It’s easier to get people to accept gender differences than it is to accept ones having to do with race.  After all, many of us don’t have much contact with other races but we all have at least some experience with the opposite sex.  We don’t know what the future holds but what’s certain is that the current system can’t last.  With the IQ and productivity of nations falling due to immigration and differential birthrates and the rapid spread of inferior genes due to relaxation of selection and government subsidies the question isn’t if the collapse is coming but how soon.

Originally published at HBD Books, June 3, 2009

Share

Related Posts

  1. avatar
    A Brito said:

    Good article, interesting, and personally I don’t find much to disagree with.

    A comment however on the following: “We all share certain qualities going back to the primordial ooze, but different environments have had plenty of time to tweak our differences since then. While there are pluses and minuses to each system, feminism seems to be like racial masochism: a curse that only affects whites. “.

    It’s a curse but it’s also mark of distinction. I suppose that whites easily fall for certain feminist ideologies because whites are intellectually highly vulnerable to the values of empathy and altruism. In the short term, these values may be a weakness but in the long term they will do whites just fine — so long however as whites realize that altruism begins at home and not just next door. I have no doubt however that this realization will come about. Altruism is a mark of intelligence, and as an aside I might relate my bemusement at those compatriots who are casting their lot in with the selfish morality of “certain others”. Quite an irony in my opinion.

  2. “Evolutionary psychology tells us why male rape is funny while a person making a joke about female rape is banished from respectable society. A man who rapes a woman is violating the rules of the male hierarchy by gaining a mate that his genes don’t merit, and our nature makes this objectionable to us.”

    I don’t know about this business of using evolutionary psychology to try to explain the pervasive misandry in our society. If you ask me, the double standard has more to do with women, particularly Western women, being sacralized and put on pedestals, than with any kind of an evolutionary “male hierarchy.” Look at how common rape is in other cultures, such as sub-Saharan Africa. Look at how common it was in hunter-gatherer societies.

  3. @ A Brito: Altruism is fine so long as it’s not applied universally. The problem is we’re applying it universally.

    Of interest are Simon Sheppard’s concepts of Malign Encouragement and Vicarious Generosity:
    http://www.heretical.com/sexsci/traits2.html

  4. “Reality says that so-called violence towards women isn’t part of some ‘patriarchy,’ but largely a myth.”

    If anything, patriarchy has been good for women. Contrary to what feminist windbags have claimed over the years, the current porno culture in which women are treated like pieces of meat or disposable commodities is a direct result of the decline of patriarchal society, not of patriarchy itself. No man in his right mind would get married today. Women have been sold a Big Lie by the culture distorters and are going to suffer dearly for it (and already are).

  5. “feminism seems to be like racial masochism: a curse that only affects whites. ”

    Baloney, I work as an accountant in an all-black non-profit firm that sucks off of the federal government, and is also run by women. Trust me, they fit the mold. I do the payroll, and it is… very interesting. The husband of the “President & CEO” drives a Geo Metro, and she (with the hyphenated name) drives a Buick SUV .

    Blacks in America are drowning under a matriarchial system that results in single-parent households for most of their children.

  6. avatar
    Kronprinz Wilhelm said:

    “—Blacks in America are drowning under a matriarchial system that results in single-parent households for most of their children.—”
    __

    “Myth Of The Ghetto Alpha Male”
    ~ The Rawness

    “But even though they are doing their best to be supernigga, they still do things in a feminine way because feminine influences are most of what they know.

    “Most of their role models and involved family members are women, and the few men in their lives were likely raised by only women too.

    “And it shows in how they handle conflict: grudges are held forever, they never know how to let anything slide, they think primarily with emotion and are prone to outbursts, drama and confrontation and most importantly, they don’t know how to choose their battles.

    “True male behavior isn’t being a drama queen, being highly prone to emotional outbursts and holding onto grudges; true male behavior is picking your battles, knowing when to fight and when to let things slide, analyzing things calmly and logically and having discipline over your moods and emotions and exercising emotional restraint.

    These are things that a true alpha male influence teaches you, and such influences have almost disappeared completely from the hood.”

    http://therawness.com/myth-of-the-ghetto-alpha-male/

  7. To back up what I said,
    Try googling for a book called “Sex and Culture” or for any F Roger Devlin articles (starting with “Sexual Utopia in Power”).

  8. avatar
    john thames said:

    ONCE AGAIN, GOD’S CHOSEN SEX

    Everyone these days claims that rape is the crime of crimes. Just to show the utter insanity of registering “sex offenders”, consider the following analogy. The U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service are considering the application of Joseph Stalin to become an American citizen. “I see, Mr. Stalin, that you have murdered twenty million people, 80% of them male, in your gulags. I think we can overlook that in the interests of détente. Welcome to the United States, Mr. Stalin. You are now an American citizen.” Six months later: “O my God, Mr. Stalin. You sexually abused a ten year old girl! You are now a sex offender. You must register with our CIA wherever you go in the world. If you do not, then you will have to repay all those billions in Lend-Lease we gave you in WW2 as forfeited bail.”

    Absurd, you say? Not at all. It is a perfect description of what is actually going on. Were Charles Manson paroled from prison today, he would not have to register. He merely masterminded the knifing to death of five or more people by his female groupies. However, had Mr. Manson raped Sharon Tate, then he would have to register for a “crime worse than death”. (One suspects that the deceased Miss Tate, and Roman Polanski too, would have preferred the rape to the knife.) We are told, over and over again, that rape is the most horrible of crimes. But that obviously does not apply to white males anally sodomized behind prison bars by black animals. They are treated with indifference by the same feminists who consider a woman’s private parts the center of the universe. Murderers and repeat robbers do not have to register for their crimes. There is not, and never will be, a registered “false accuser” list for women who concoct false allegations of rape, domestic violence and child abuse. Females who expose their buttocks in thong bikinis shall not be banned for life from public beaches for creating a “hostile, testicular distress inducing” environment for men.

    Those who claim that rape is a uniquely horrible experience should be asked hard questions. Is it more horrible than having your living heart cut out by a stone knife on an Aztec or Mayan sacrificial altar? Or more horrible than being burned alive like Joan of Arc? Is it more horrible than having your bones broken on the medieval torture rack or having molten lava poured down your throat? Is it even more horrible than having your arms and legs amputated, like an unborn baby in the womb, waiting to have your skull crushed? These apostles of woman’s vagina as the center of the universe do not say. There has been much to-do about Korean pleasure women forced to service Japanese soldiers during World War Two. But these women merely had to put out. They were not blown up by bombs, suffocated in caves or burned alive by 1000 degree gasoline like the Japanese soldiers. At the Tailhook Navy Dinner Party a female cadet received $5.2 million dollars for a little groping and roughing up by the boys. But the boys brutalized by the Japanese on the Bataan Death March did not receive a dime for being bayoneted or trampled beneath the treads of tanks. “Hostile battlefield environment” did not compensate them.

    We have reached the stage in American life where a woman’s “virtue” counts for everything but a man’s life counts for nothing. This is the worship of God’s Chosen Sex encapsulated as one crime as the center of the universe.

  9. The American work place is not conducive for any kind of work anymore. It is nothing but silent torture dealing with women in the work place on a daily basis. It completely drains you out of your life energy until you turn into a lifeless zombie.

    • Tell me about it. I work for a human services agency…talk about feminist hell-on-earth! Its so frustrating to go to work everyday, trying to be a positive male role-model for young men with intellectual disabilities and behavioral challenges, when all of your hard work gets negated by the propagation of the anti-male (especially white male) attitude of our culture. What these poor lost souls need most is to gain access to their long-oppressed masculine instincts, but efforts to help them just get hen-pecked away!

  10. “Evolutionary psychology tells us why male rape is funny while a person making a joke about female rape is banished from respectable society. A man who rapes a woman is violating the rules of the male hierarchy by gaining a mate that his genes don’t merit, and our nature makes this objectionable to us.”

    The reason why rape is taboo is because human societies have evolved through co-operation – and conflict over mate access can undermine that co-operation.

    The reason why rape has achieved special consideration in contemporary, developed world populations, is because females and high-status males have closed political ranks in facilitating female sexual autonomy(which naturally benefits females, and a minority of high status males).

    And since male policy makers are invariably high status(and married), it is likewise personally expedient for them to empower female sexual choice, and break ranks with lower status males.

    Male political consensus, under these conditions of factor sparsity, is impossible given that males are competing for a scarce resource in terms of sexual access to females(where scarcity is a function of females limiting themselves to a select margin of high status males whom they are content to ‘share’).

Back to Top