These days we hear a lot about the concept of the "male power fantasy," usually about the feminist accusation of "toxic masculinity." In other words, feminists argue that the male power fantasy is a social construct that makes men aggressive, and aggression is supposedly the cause of most of society's ills.
However, if one studies the archetypal ideas of heroism (a hallmark of the male power fantasy), what we almost always find are stories of self-sacrifice. Power, for most men, is meant to be used in service to others; to protect and to provide for those who cannot protect themselves. This symbolism is found in literature, television and movies centered on powerful male figures time and time again. Rather than being "toxic," men are compelled by their relationship to power to achieve something greater for all the people around them.
This is not to say that there are no men with twisted motives. History is splattered with male rulers who have abused their authority and committed a host of atrocities. These men, however, are the exception to the rule. The majority of men fantasize about being heroes with a moral code, not villains.
The hero's journey usually requires a struggle to attain the power that will eventually be used by the man. It is at least subconsciously understood that power attained without experience and wisdom leads to corruption. In other words, for men, great power comes with great responsibility.
The female power fantasy, unfortunately, is very different. For feminists, great power means never having to take responsibility for anything ever.
When women with power are written by women (specifically feminists) or woke activists, you will see a considerable juxtaposition when it comes to how that power is attained and used. A female power fantasy does not require a woman to be a hero. In fact, they often act like villains; they tend to be selfish and narcissistic, and they lack depth and the redeeming qualities often associated with principled women. When women fantasize about power, they are more likely to reflect dark masculine qualities instead of nurturing feminine qualities.
There is no archetypal hero's journey for modern women. In popular culture, female icons usually gain power automatically without any struggle. They are born with magical abilities, magical or God-given talents, or they "manifest" power by sheer psychological will (the fantasy of witchcraft). They imagine what they want, and what they want is supposed to come to them magnetically.
In the past, such stories of female fantasies involved women using sexuality to influence men to do what they want (sexuality being the magical power). That said, this dynamic has long perturbed feminists who like the idea of sexual manipulation but don't like the idea of women still relying on men to project their "agency." So, in modern times, feminists have shifted female power more into the realm of men, with women acting like men, using force like men and asserting psychological dominance like men.
Furthermore, the real source of magic for feminists is in controlling centers of society, the government being their holy grail.
But here's where things go awry. Women are not men and will never be capable of what men are capable of. That is to say, men can survive without women, but women will never be able to survive without men. It's a cold hard reality that feminists simply do not understand.
 |
Woke activists like to claim with a certain tinge of glee that "the world is changing" and conservative men are angry because "the patriarchy is losing power." I find this argument fascinating because it is so self-contradictory: If the patriarchy exists and men really are a monolithic power structure, then frankly, there is nothing stopping us from crushing feminists under our boots like bugs and taking all that power back.
Women, by virtue of their biology, have no power. At least not in the way that men do. Any power they think they have taken was actually given to them by men. Men allow women to have the freedoms they enjoy in the Western world, there is no power struggle. I'm sure some feminists will accuse me of chauvinism here, but this is a fact. Women have equal rights and opportunities to men in the West because men want them to. If there was a patriarchy, those rights would not exist.
Just look at any Muslim fundamentalist nation, where you will find real patriarchy. Feminists have no influence because the men in those societies do not allow them any. It just takes a flip of a switch, and all the power feminists think they have gained can be confiscated in an instant. So please ladies, don't delude yourselves and be thankful Western men are so inclined to appreciate and support the women around them.
The next most common argument from feminists is that women don't actually "need men." I think for first-wave feminists this was limited to the idea that women don't need men for personal happiness or personal success. That's debatable but I'm not really interested in whether or not feminists feel affirmed in their daily lives. The problem arises with third-wave feminism and the fantasy that women don't need men for anything, including the stability of society.
Let’s make this clear right up front: Men built almost everything in civilization. Men maintain almost everything in civilization. Everything you see around you, from the buildings to the roads to the utilities to the factories to national security, it's all built and kept running by men. All those ugly but necessary jobs that women don't want to do or are incapable of doing are done by men.
Feminists like to assert that women only need men for protection from other men. If men did not exist, they would be safe. This is a hilariously naive assumption, and it is only spoken by women in first-world societies where they have never been forced to experience true survival.
If men were to disappear tomorrow, civilization would collapse. Women might not have to worry about men, but they would have to worry about functioning in an environment without any amenities or modern comforts. They would not last more than a couple of weeks.
We know this for a fact because there have been multiple survival experiments in recent years with all-women groups that ended in disaster. They are either forced to rely on male groups to survive, or, they have to tap out and leave the experiment completely. A famous example is the old Bear Grylls battle of the sexes experiment, but it's not the only one and the results are generally the same across the board.
Feminists talk big, but they fold like wet paper when they're placed in a situation where they must legitimately struggle to live.
The world is an inhospitable place, especially without men. The feminist power fantasy relies on the notion that they are capable of doing whatever men can do. It's just not true, and the requirements are not limited to the physical. There is a dangerous lack of organizational ability among women, at least where completing concrete tasks is concerned.
In another famous example of an all-female experiment, in 2005 a female TV producer decided to build a media-based business from the ground up with only female employees. No men were allowed because she believed men had an easy ride. The company quickly imploded two years later due to lack of work ethic, lack of direction and infighting. The CEO admitted openly that an all-female staff was a terrible idea. She noted:
"While I stand by my initial reason for excluding male employees — because they have an easy ride in TV — if I were to do it again, I'd definitely employ men. In fact, I'd probably employ only men..."
My point is the feminist power fantasy can only exist in a first-world society where men have already built the majority of necessary amenities needed for survival. It is within these comfort-focused environments where feminists thrive, if only because women have so much time on their hands to ponder the little things rather than being concerned about what they will eat, where they live and who will keep them safe.
In a survival scenario, feminists cease to exist. They die, or they give up on feminism and seek the aid of men. It might be prudent for modern women in the West to keep this reality in mind because in the past, first-world countries have been known to fall into third-world status with shocking regularity.
To truth and knowledge,
Brandon Smith
Bob Livingston's Personal Liberty Media Group
