On Bachelorhood
Here are two articles taking a stand against the "disease" of bachelorhood:
I think this campaign is meant to be at least somewhat "tongue-in-cheek;" nevertheless, I find it symptomatic of how radically different single men are typically regarded than single women.
Generally, I have found a significant majority of people view single men as "losers" in need of a woman. If a man is single in his 20's like I am, people wonder what is "wrong" with him.
Is this same assessment applied to single women? No. As a matter of fact, they are viewed as being "empowered, liberated juggernauts" who live life on their own terms without the irrelevant input of some "brainless, icky man." No man is good enough for these princesses.
See the difference?
I am not ashamed to be a bachelor; there is nothing "wrong" about this.
I can just hear it now.
- "You must be a loser."
- "Time for you start dating."
- "You are in desperate need of a woman to make you complete."
- "So you are a bachelor? Good. The dating pool is better for your absence, evil white male oppressor."
Such bile has no sway over me.
Be a part of the cure, because, well, you are the cure.
To learn more about how you can join the fight to end bachelorism, go to bachelorism.org.
Let us assume bachelorhood is a disease. Let us assume women are the cure. Has anyone ever heard of situations where the cure is worse than the disease?
Am I open to someday dating and then marrying a woman? Yes, but I am shy and am therefore disinclined to pursue, which the preponderance of women require of men. Besides, I know all too well the risky proposition a relationship with a woman can be.
posted by Lord Feverstone | 9:24 PM
12 Comments:
Generally for men in their 20s or early 30s it's considered perfectly acceptable to be a bachelor.
The comparisons you are making would be for a much older man...
Actually most people if a man told them he was getting married from your age group, he would be told he was too young to tie himself down like that. He would be instructed to 'sow a few more wild oats' before committing to a marriage.
You cannot take what men say on SYG and apply it to yourself as most of them are much older then you, probably old enough to be your father or even grandfather in some cases.
A man who is 40 and never married would be the ones you are referring to and let's face it a 40 year old woman never married would be viewed as 'damaged goods' as well...you are comparing apples and oranges in your statement. 20 year old young men or women, not rushing into marriage and children = good...40 year old of either sex doing the same = odd...
Being a bachelor is a BADGE OF HONOR these days. Only foolish men get married these days. Stay single, have fun overseas and protect your assets.
At least you don't have to worry about the horrors of divorce, child support, spousal support and what it does to men. There is absolutely NO REASON why sane men would get married in westernized societies.
No...there is no good reason to an individual for men to get married and produce families within a marriage. The GOOD comes to society and frequently people who wish their societies to continue will do things a certain way to enable that society to continue...
For instance, it would be much simplier for everyone if they felt the need to go to the bathroom to just pull their pants down and go anywhere they felt like it...why wait to use a toilet when it's so much easier to just go whereever you happen to be when the urge hits?
Obviously most of us don't succumb to that urge as we know it's better for society as a whole for us to discharge waste in a facility that can process it properly such as a toilet and not be urinating all over the streets like dogs.
Or to be having casual sex all over the place with whomever strikes our fancy for five whole minutes either, whether overseas or here.
Remember other societies don't want to have to clean up after you either...and western men will find themselves eventually shunned in other places as well if the people there see you carrying on with women in their societies the way you do here and in Europe.
"Rights are an artificial social construct."
As is civilization and many other things that make life worth living to most people. I mean heck our constitution and democracy itself are artificial constructs if you want to be perfectly honest.
Do you think animals, even those who live in herds or prides, vote before making a decison? It's the rule of the jungle in animal societies...that "war of all against all" that has often been written about...The strong rule and a male's only function is to protect a territory from other males of his own kind, so he can mate/reproduce with whatever females he has living within his turf...
Should man throw out rights of others and just return to that mode of living????
Without those many artificial constructs we have made possible man goes back to living in caves again. Or back to the days when the only history people had was of which wars or invasion one people managed to fight off or begin against another.
Just as many are beginning to suspect your entire mens' movement is not about rights but about chaos...which is what you would like to throw our civilization into...many of you are as bad as al Queda and with far less reason to be mad at the world then they have.
I happen to believe our civilization is unique. As I know eastern civilizations like China and India are far older, but certainly none of them has the commitment to democracy or the rights of every individual that we do.
Clearly it is a recipe for success, as the west still produces the most economically and socially successful societies in the world right now. Even though we are the smallest in actual population. Every other society that exists struggles to copy the western template with the exception of Islam. AND even that might not be the case, as most of the islamic nations still imitiate everything we do from our manner of dress to our technology. So even in their rebellion they become more like, then unlike the west.
"The world has never been without men who toss society into the gutter for something better or to be fair, something different."
Well the problem is that instant communication has allowed what used to be a small group of malcontents, who were easily dealt with, worldwide attention. Thus the Tim McVeighs or Osama bin Ladins get far more press and attract more adherents then these sorts of men normally would have...
The internet, 24 hour news cycles, electricity, aircrafts, all of this technology has allowed the rebels amongst us to influence your average young man far more then good for us as a society.
Unfortunately I think there is always a tendency for men to be rebellious and not conform. Most of society's laws and rules appear to be aimed at constraining men for that reason. Schooling, marriage, divorce laws even, all of these contribute towards that that goal.
Men like you however, willfully undermine society's aims. AND for no other reason frequently but boredom with ordinary existence or dissatisfaction with your own life choices...
I mean even Buddha ignored his own real world responsibilities to his wife and son, abandoned them when he abandoned his 'worldly riches'. Fortunately he was rich enough (through his father's inheritance and hard work) so that his family didn't suffer when he abandoned them but when ordinary men follow his lead and abandon their families, tragedy frequently follows.
So it's a bad example to give young men. That's it's okay to abandon your wife and son to follow a life of mediatation.
Not to mention the social unheavals caused by communities of buddists in China and other parts of Asia. Their monastaries had to eventually be forcibly disbanded by the emperors and they were forbidden to carry any weapons. I believe violence was involved since sending soldiers out to them was mentioned in the text. It's probably how the martial arts started since they were forbidden to carry weapons thereafter; yet I believe these same monks started karate and some other forms of fighting using their body as a weapon to undermine the intent of these orders...
So ideas influence people and I don't think the men in your movement are so responsible to continue spreading the sorts of ideas that they do and that includes you.
Even this spate of spree killers who have been targeting girls I believe is the result of some of this mens rights propaganda. Do you realize that man yesterday shot 13 girls ranging in age from 6 years old to 13 years old...
So you have to think of what your message overall saids to young men and if it's responsible. You can say what you want about feminism but it hasn't led to any women doing things like that.
"...the men's movement as a whole is new..."
No. I don't think it is new at all. It's quite old, this is just it's lastest variant.
Buddha was from India. But his teachings spread to China and were so popular there that the monks eventually became a rival power base (similar to the Pope in Rome in the middle ages) and eventually a threat to the governing elites in China.
Their monastaries were ordered to be disbanned and the men and women in them were instructed to return to their villages of birth and just become ordinary citizens again.
I believe some of them had to be disbanned by force, but I'm not sure.
Anyway Buddism is not the main religion in China or India. It actually never was allowed to become so powerful again after the monastaries were broken up. It is mostly relegated to the fringes of their society, like in places like Tibet, it's practiced.
I think you missed my point however since whether it originated in India or China really wasn't relevant. The point was the message Buddha sent which was for people (mostly men, but some women) to abandon their social responsibilites to their communities and just live lives of quiet contemplation...nice but can be interpretated as selfish...unlike Christianity which pushed people in the opposite direction.
A good Christian is actually a leader in the community or helping out the poor, teaching, leading a congregation, etc., not isolating themselves away from everyone to pray and meditate all the time. Actually a buddhist would be considered a poor Christian for that reason AND vice versa...
Anyway, I was comparing Buddha's message to yours (or the MRA one) and trying to show you the long-term implications of what you are telling young men to do...
"This guy is a male incarnation of Andrea Yates."
No. I don't think so. Actually I think people who kill strangers are more of a threat to society and I think other people feel the same way.
It's probably why men, who kill more strangers, are deemed more dangerous to society overall then women who kill their children. I mean I wouldn't want Andrey Yates as my babysitter but otherwise I don't see where she would be a menance to me if she were released tomorrow.
Whereas Gacey out and about in the world would be a threat to every single person he came in contact with.
"Afterall I have been celibate for ten years..."
Which is not that big a deal...
I know many women who have been celibate far longer. Actually since my divorce I have been, and guess what, that was over 20 years ago. Ten years is nothing for a human being to be celibate.
Actually past a certain age I find most people do fall into celibacy by choice. They simply don't want to be bothered with something that is vastly over rated...
Most of my adult relatives growing up had twin beds actually...after a few kids neither really wanted to be bothered with sex anymore and slept better alone...
I think we need to have more celibacy these days anyway...so on that I'll agree with you...
"The Buddist/Christian comparison is a non-starter."
That's not true if you examine early Christianity. Again, you cannot just take the few extreme examples of the 12 apostles to prove this...
Christianity, even today, celebrates the family...even the banning of priests' marrying only came about later. AND Christ was always surrounded by children...clearly he was demonstrating to his followers that most should be having families.
Buddha representation has always been solitary...
There is a fundamental difference in the two world views.
"Many men ponder what kind of legacy they leave behind..."
Well IF that is what you are trying to do then fine. I just don't see in reflected in your writings to men...there seems to be an undercurrent of bitterness...helping men understand they can leave a legacy w/o marrying is one thing...turning them against humanity, especially women, trying to make them feel they are victimized is another.
"...Actually celibacy is a big deal. It's a really tough sale..."
Well obviously we travel in different circles then. A lot of the married couples I know even are celibate now. Growing up I knew many female teachers who never married and even priests and guess what: none ever had sex (that I know of) or molested me or anyone else I knew of...
I think people are too focused on sex today anyway...it's one element of living...and the older you get the more boring it does...
Different generation I guess...in my 50s I'm older then most bloggers so I guess I just view this differently...
"It's kind of silly to characterize the apostles as 'extreme'...they built the faith from the ground up."
Well when you are building something from the ground up you have to be focused, dedicated and extreme. It doesn't mean that the people following after you have to be the same way.
Most depictions of God, from paintings to stained glass windows, depicted him surrounded by Mary his mother and Christ as a child...it was a very popular medieval image actually...the holy family...
Buddha, on the other hand, I don't ever remember seeing him depicted with other human beings, never mind women and children.
I think this shows two different world views contained within these two religions but that's my personal opinion, it's not a big deal to disagree about...
I don't presume to know everything so that I can tell others how to live.
I consider my blog to just be informational in order to point out changes in laws and public policies so mothers can be informed. Then how they chose to use that knowledge is their own business.
I guess that's why I get so annoyed when I see others putting out false and misleading information: like women get such big divorce settlements and always get custody of children...since it's not true and is the sort of disinformation that leads to people ruining their lives by believing and then acting upon it...
If you have a satisfying and decent life off of cyberspace more power to you...
"Just trying to point the way to others..."
Then may I ask: why don't you allow comments on your blog????
Dammit is this SERIOUS?
I thought it was a JOKE?
Post a Comment
<< Home