In case you didn't know, November 19 is International Men's Day (which also happens to be World Toilet Day, interestingly enough). As if we really needed a day to celebrate ourselves. What International Men's Day should really be is a day of atonement, a sort of Yom Kippur for men. And for those guys who arrogantly claim that they have literally nothing to atone for, prepare to eat some humble pie, and apologize to the Divine Feminine. The following is food for thought:
So what has our gender collectively done for the past 7000 years or so?
We paved paradise and put up a parking lot, we created a desert and called it "peace". We devoured and suffocated our own empire, the world is on fire, and now we are all paying a heavy price for it. It's 14:59 of our proverbial 15 minutes of fame, and the clock is ticking.
All because we foolishly decided one day to depose Women from power because we thought we could somehow do better. Well, we were wrong, dead wrong in fact. We are sorry, but clearly we can stuff our "sorrys" in a sack at this point. The agony of regret indeed.
Yes, I know, "not all men". But the fact remains that the "good guys" among us have clearly and consistently failed to prevent the truly bad guys from subjugating, tyrannizing, raping, abusing, and degrading the better half of humanity (while also doing the very same thing to Mother Earth as well), and overall turning heaven on Earth into hell on Earth.
So how could heaven turn to hell? You guessed it, it was us all along. But one day the shadows will surround us, and the days will come to end. And now we see clearly...
We both knew, it would always end this way...
(Bonus points for anyone who can find the hidden and not-so-hidden pop-culture references and lyrics to various songs contained throughout this apology to the Divine Feminine)
And just like you should never wish someone a "Happy Yom Kippur", as there is really nothing happy about atonement, we should probably avoid doing the same with International Men's Day as well.
Monday, November 4, 2019
Wednesday, October 30, 2019
Why Sex Has To Be Expensive And Hard To Get (For Men, From Women) Under Patriarchy
(And how this ultimately serves and maintains the patriarchy)
One thing that not everybody fully appreciates is just how many levels and layers the patriarchy really has. Like peeling an onion, when you dig in you just keep finding more and more layers. And nothing about patriarchy has more levels and layers related to it than the topic of sexuality, which under patriarchy is quite a complex topic to say the least.
Patriarchy has had a very long history of repressing Women's sexuality. And such sexual repression has been proven to do more harm than good, and essentially all of patriarchy's archaic and repressive rules about sex were designed to control Women. That was originally done so men could be at least somewhat certain of paternity, as descent was reckoned (and inheritances were passed) through the male bloodline, though with the advent of modern birth control and paternity testing such a reason has basically become obsolete. Note the double standard of patriarchy in which Women are far more likely to be punished for sexual transgressions, and how men who sleep around are considered "studs" and "legends" while women who do so are considered "sluts" and "whores". In contrast, Matriarchal societies have historically been far more sexually free in general, since knowledge of paternity was basically a non-issue as descent was reckoned through the female bloodline.
Additionally, patriarchy's rules against masturbation, homosexuality, and birth control are really a result of the fact that patriarchy is one big Ponzi scheme (and protection racket) that requires very high birth rates to keep it afloat. Thus, anything that frustrates that goal is deemed sinful. Patriarchy considers Women to be the brood mares, while men are the work horses. And in today's overpopulated world, such rules are also obsolete as well. In Matriarchal societies, on the other hand, overpopulation would never even have occurred in the first place as Women would have complete sexual and reproductive freedom, and thus not have pregnancies forced upon them by men.
But wait, that is only the very first layer of this massive onion. Read on for more.
Of course, less often appreciated is how such outmoded rules also have the purpose and effect of indirectly controlling (non-alpha and non-elite) males as well, by keeping the "cost" of sex artificially and arbitrarily high as well. But on balance, the effects are far worse for Women, making patriarchy a negative-sum game overall even if a few come out ahead. This is basically the "commodity model" of sexuality, in which sex is something that men "take" from Women, as opposed to being a mutually beneficial and pleasurable act in itself. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how this model inevitably leads to rape culture.
So how does the commodity model ultimately benefit the patriarchy? It keeps non-alpha, non-elite males subject to the oligarchs at the top by working harder and harder to get sex, basically. And under patriarchy, that work is generally of the sort that serves to make the rich even richer, in the hopes of "earning" the "prize" of sex at the end of the rainbow. And it also makes men that much more aggressive, which patriarchy loves. But again, it is a massive Ponzi and pyramid scheme. Meanwhile, Women end up enforcing their own oppression by slut-shaming each other to artificially prop up the "cost" of sex in the "sexual marketplace", which undermines any attempt at a sisterhood which would be the greatest bulwark against the patriarchy. Divide and conquer, basically--both men against Women, and Women against Women. And the oligarchs just sit back and laugh.
(See a pattern here? This is the same sort of "artificial scarcity" that the patriarchy and oligarchy create with money, goods, and services in general. To them, sex is just another commodity or currency with which to control the masses.)
Too many layers yet? Well, we're still just barely scratching the surface here. Additionally, Women in general can gain power and psychological influence over men via their sexuality, and patriarchy would logically do everything they can to keep this from happening. Thus, Women's sexuality needs to be repressed even further. This is particularly true when older Women date or hook up with younger men, which is of course extremely taboo under patriarchy for primarily that very reason. A young man with an older Woman as a sort of "mentor with benefits" would seriously undermine the patriarchal agenda in so many ways.
The next layer is sexuality between Women themselves, i.e. lesbianism and bisexuality. A majority of Women, if not nearly all of them, have some sort of capacity in this regard to one degree or another. And as we see with the bonobos, what better way to encourage a strong sisterhood than through bonding sexually with one another? Of course, patriarchy would HATE that!
Still another layer, and probably the most complex and puzzling at first glance, is patriarchy's perennial love-hate relationship with sex work (i.e. prostitution, pornography, stripping, and stuff like that). On the one hand, patriarchs absolutely love to objectify and exploit Women sexually, both directly and in terms of profiting from it all, while on the other hand, they also fear the potential for Women gaining any sort of power through this avenue. So they tolerate it, but only insofar as men can totally control the trade, not Women. And they use the law as a cudgel in one way or another to do so. For porn specifically, those who control the propaganda essentially control the agenda. Additionally, this is also related to the patriarchy's love-hate relationship (you can see a pattern of ambivalence here) with nudity as well. They make it naughty and illicit, and hypersexualize it, because otherwise people would be desensitized to it, and would probably be a lot saner too. Can't have that, of course!
And still another layer to all of this is the fact that male-defined sexuality is the only kind of sexuality that patriarchy promotes, prioritizing male pleasure and conquest and rendering Female pleasure and well-being irrelevant. It is essentially men using Women as masturbation machines, and plays right into the hands of the patriarchy. Female-defined sexuality, the sort that prioritizes Female pleasure and perspective, of course, is what really throws a monkey wrench in the works of the patriarchy. And patriarchy will be damned if they ever let men learn about that.
Thus, we see how keeping the "cost" of sex artificially high ultimately serves and maintains the patriarchy, regardless of whether some individual Women may benefit from it. It's a Faustian bargain, and one that can never lead to a real Matriarchy in practice. (If it could, it would have already.)
And when Women finally reclaim their rightful position as the new leaders of the free world, I believe that our society will become truly sexually free once again, albeit with some concessions to modern times of course. In the meantime, we all need to stop slut-shaming Women yesterday. A "sexual cartel" is no substitute for a genuine sisterhood.
Let the planetary healing begin!
One thing that not everybody fully appreciates is just how many levels and layers the patriarchy really has. Like peeling an onion, when you dig in you just keep finding more and more layers. And nothing about patriarchy has more levels and layers related to it than the topic of sexuality, which under patriarchy is quite a complex topic to say the least.
Patriarchy has had a very long history of repressing Women's sexuality. And such sexual repression has been proven to do more harm than good, and essentially all of patriarchy's archaic and repressive rules about sex were designed to control Women. That was originally done so men could be at least somewhat certain of paternity, as descent was reckoned (and inheritances were passed) through the male bloodline, though with the advent of modern birth control and paternity testing such a reason has basically become obsolete. Note the double standard of patriarchy in which Women are far more likely to be punished for sexual transgressions, and how men who sleep around are considered "studs" and "legends" while women who do so are considered "sluts" and "whores". In contrast, Matriarchal societies have historically been far more sexually free in general, since knowledge of paternity was basically a non-issue as descent was reckoned through the female bloodline.
Additionally, patriarchy's rules against masturbation, homosexuality, and birth control are really a result of the fact that patriarchy is one big Ponzi scheme (and protection racket) that requires very high birth rates to keep it afloat. Thus, anything that frustrates that goal is deemed sinful. Patriarchy considers Women to be the brood mares, while men are the work horses. And in today's overpopulated world, such rules are also obsolete as well. In Matriarchal societies, on the other hand, overpopulation would never even have occurred in the first place as Women would have complete sexual and reproductive freedom, and thus not have pregnancies forced upon them by men.
But wait, that is only the very first layer of this massive onion. Read on for more.
Of course, less often appreciated is how such outmoded rules also have the purpose and effect of indirectly controlling (non-alpha and non-elite) males as well, by keeping the "cost" of sex artificially and arbitrarily high as well. But on balance, the effects are far worse for Women, making patriarchy a negative-sum game overall even if a few come out ahead. This is basically the "commodity model" of sexuality, in which sex is something that men "take" from Women, as opposed to being a mutually beneficial and pleasurable act in itself. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how this model inevitably leads to rape culture.
So how does the commodity model ultimately benefit the patriarchy? It keeps non-alpha, non-elite males subject to the oligarchs at the top by working harder and harder to get sex, basically. And under patriarchy, that work is generally of the sort that serves to make the rich even richer, in the hopes of "earning" the "prize" of sex at the end of the rainbow. And it also makes men that much more aggressive, which patriarchy loves. But again, it is a massive Ponzi and pyramid scheme. Meanwhile, Women end up enforcing their own oppression by slut-shaming each other to artificially prop up the "cost" of sex in the "sexual marketplace", which undermines any attempt at a sisterhood which would be the greatest bulwark against the patriarchy. Divide and conquer, basically--both men against Women, and Women against Women. And the oligarchs just sit back and laugh.
(See a pattern here? This is the same sort of "artificial scarcity" that the patriarchy and oligarchy create with money, goods, and services in general. To them, sex is just another commodity or currency with which to control the masses.)
Too many layers yet? Well, we're still just barely scratching the surface here. Additionally, Women in general can gain power and psychological influence over men via their sexuality, and patriarchy would logically do everything they can to keep this from happening. Thus, Women's sexuality needs to be repressed even further. This is particularly true when older Women date or hook up with younger men, which is of course extremely taboo under patriarchy for primarily that very reason. A young man with an older Woman as a sort of "mentor with benefits" would seriously undermine the patriarchal agenda in so many ways.
The next layer is sexuality between Women themselves, i.e. lesbianism and bisexuality. A majority of Women, if not nearly all of them, have some sort of capacity in this regard to one degree or another. And as we see with the bonobos, what better way to encourage a strong sisterhood than through bonding sexually with one another? Of course, patriarchy would HATE that!
Still another layer, and probably the most complex and puzzling at first glance, is patriarchy's perennial love-hate relationship with sex work (i.e. prostitution, pornography, stripping, and stuff like that). On the one hand, patriarchs absolutely love to objectify and exploit Women sexually, both directly and in terms of profiting from it all, while on the other hand, they also fear the potential for Women gaining any sort of power through this avenue. So they tolerate it, but only insofar as men can totally control the trade, not Women. And they use the law as a cudgel in one way or another to do so. For porn specifically, those who control the propaganda essentially control the agenda. Additionally, this is also related to the patriarchy's love-hate relationship (you can see a pattern of ambivalence here) with nudity as well. They make it naughty and illicit, and hypersexualize it, because otherwise people would be desensitized to it, and would probably be a lot saner too. Can't have that, of course!
And still another layer to all of this is the fact that male-defined sexuality is the only kind of sexuality that patriarchy promotes, prioritizing male pleasure and conquest and rendering Female pleasure and well-being irrelevant. It is essentially men using Women as masturbation machines, and plays right into the hands of the patriarchy. Female-defined sexuality, the sort that prioritizes Female pleasure and perspective, of course, is what really throws a monkey wrench in the works of the patriarchy. And patriarchy will be damned if they ever let men learn about that.
Thus, we see how keeping the "cost" of sex artificially high ultimately serves and maintains the patriarchy, regardless of whether some individual Women may benefit from it. It's a Faustian bargain, and one that can never lead to a real Matriarchy in practice. (If it could, it would have already.)
And when Women finally reclaim their rightful position as the new leaders of the free world, I believe that our society will become truly sexually free once again, albeit with some concessions to modern times of course. In the meantime, we all need to stop slut-shaming Women yesterday. A "sexual cartel" is no substitute for a genuine sisterhood.
Let the planetary healing begin!
Saturday, October 19, 2019
There Is No "Back Door" To Matriarchy
Those who are familiar with The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood would recall that it depicts the fictional Republic of Gilead as a misogynistic and theocratic dystopia, not a utopia. And in it, Women were often their own worst enemies in that they enforced such repression and oppresion on other Women. That was primarily the role of the group of Women known as the Aunts, led by Serena Joy (who was loosely based on Phyllis Schlafly, Mary Pride, and most likely a bit of Tammy Faye Bakker thrown in for good measure). They apparently wanted to create a Matriarchal society through a sort of back door, by controlling Women in order to indirectly control men (by keeping the "cost" of sex artificially and arbitrarily high), and that of course backfired mightily on Women collectively as a class (even if a few individuals like Serena initially benefited at their expense).
The Handmaid's Tale is a work of fiction, of course, but the real-life wannabe Serena Joys do exist nonetheless, in that awkward space between the far left and far right, between fascism and communism, between extreme radical feminism and the Religious Right, and thus between extreme patriarchy and reverse patriarchy that is the hallmark of Horseshoe Theory (where ideological extremes are fat more alike than they are different). Phyllis Schlafly and Mary Pride were infamous historical examples, but there are plenty of others as well such as Beverly LaHaye and her followers.
So what does this strategy supposedly look like? It is NOT limited to just banning porn and prostitution, as that is just the start. It also involves banning or severely restricting birth control, abortion, homosexuality, and Women's sexuality in general, particularly that of younger Women (but ultimately all Women). The control of Women's sexuality and reproduction is crucial to their agenda, and they basically seek to restore rigid, "traditional" gender roles in which Women are mere brood mares and men are the work horses, but of course only when it's convenient for the powers that be. In other words, it is basically the same old-school patriarchy with some Women taking the place of the men in charge, albeit behind the scenes. No one is really free when others are oppressed. Thus, is it really any wonder that this strategy has NEVER brought about any sort of actual Matriarchy in practice?
Clearly the back door does NOT work. Thus, Women need to charge through the front door instead. Yesterday.
So let this be a warning, NOT a newspaper! The master's tools will NOT dismantle the master's house, and you really can't stop coercion by coercing. Liberty is NOT a zero-sum game at all. In fact, liberty is like love: the more you give, the more you get. So what are we waiting for?
Let the planetary healing begin!
The Handmaid's Tale is a work of fiction, of course, but the real-life wannabe Serena Joys do exist nonetheless, in that awkward space between the far left and far right, between fascism and communism, between extreme radical feminism and the Religious Right, and thus between extreme patriarchy and reverse patriarchy that is the hallmark of Horseshoe Theory (where ideological extremes are fat more alike than they are different). Phyllis Schlafly and Mary Pride were infamous historical examples, but there are plenty of others as well such as Beverly LaHaye and her followers.
So what does this strategy supposedly look like? It is NOT limited to just banning porn and prostitution, as that is just the start. It also involves banning or severely restricting birth control, abortion, homosexuality, and Women's sexuality in general, particularly that of younger Women (but ultimately all Women). The control of Women's sexuality and reproduction is crucial to their agenda, and they basically seek to restore rigid, "traditional" gender roles in which Women are mere brood mares and men are the work horses, but of course only when it's convenient for the powers that be. In other words, it is basically the same old-school patriarchy with some Women taking the place of the men in charge, albeit behind the scenes. No one is really free when others are oppressed. Thus, is it really any wonder that this strategy has NEVER brought about any sort of actual Matriarchy in practice?
Clearly the back door does NOT work. Thus, Women need to charge through the front door instead. Yesterday.
So let this be a warning, NOT a newspaper! The master's tools will NOT dismantle the master's house, and you really can't stop coercion by coercing. Liberty is NOT a zero-sum game at all. In fact, liberty is like love: the more you give, the more you get. So what are we waiting for?
Let the planetary healing begin!
Monday, September 30, 2019
Neoliberalism: The Religion Of The World, Flesh, And Devil
Neoliberalism. It is a rather obscure-sounding term with a somewhat nebulous meaning. It's anonymity and vagueness shroud it in mystery. And yet, it is the very ideology at the root of most, if not all, of the modern world's problems.
So what is it, exactly? It is best defined as a dogmatic belief in the inherent superiority and supremacy of unfettered free markets and privatization (and commodification) of nearly every single thing in the universe. Inequality, however extreme, and even greed itself is recast as virtuous. The rich and the poor deserve their lot in life, because reasons. Poverty is in fact a feature, not a bug. People are just objects to be used, as are animals and Mother Nature herself. Citizens are reduced to mere consumers and wage-serfs, if not full-blown slaves. And like the robber barons of old, today's high priests of neoliberalism are totally fine with robbing from the poor, giving to the rich, and torpedoing what's left of the middle class. The only difference is that nowadays they typically do it with a smile and a veneer of pseudo-progressivism, while laughing all the way to the bank.
Neoliberalism's warped and twisted code of pseudo-ethics harbors a massive, gaping void that is essentially a moral black hole, since this ideology lacks a truly moral and spiritual component underneath it all. Its entire foundation is shaky, empty and morally bankrupt, totally rotten to the core. And yet, it has such mass appeal on both the (pseudo-)left and right of the political spectrum that it transcends that very spectrum. And while neoliberalism is clearly the darling brainchild of patriarchy, it is such a wily and devious shapeshifter that it even transcends patriarchy itself as well.
From Reagan to the Clintons, Thatcher to Blair, Milton Friedman to Thomas Friedman, Greenspan to Powell, Facebook to ExxonMobil, Purdue University to Perdue Chicken to Purdue Pharma, Trump to Trudeau, and Boris all the way to Natasha, it seems like no mainstream or pseudo-alternative politician, ideologue, technocrat, maven, or tycoon has been able to avoid being infected by neoliberalism to one degree or another, and sucked into its lifeless, soulless abyss.
(Trump, with the notable exception of opposing some of the "free trade" component of neoliberalism, otherwise supports essentially all of the rest of their evil and demonic agenda in practice, his disingenuous rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding. And ALL neoliberals, Trump included, are largely anti-union in practice, if not also in theory as well.)
Though secular in nature, neoliberalism has all of the zeal of a religion, even a fundamentalist one. And its dogmas have basically become the new orthodoxy from about 1980 onwards. And we can thus conclude that neoliberalism is essentially the religion of the world, the flesh, and the devil, filling the voids left by the implosion of the mainstream patriarchal religions. One can even call it a cult as well.
In Christian theology, the "world, flesh, and devil" have traditionally been considered the three primary enemies of the soul, as a sort of "unholy trinity". Now, I believe that there is some nuance to this in that the world is only evil because of who rules it (i.e. the devil who works through men, particularly the oligarchs and their sycophantic lackeys), and the flesh is only evil when we choose to make it that way, since matter is essentially just a slowed-down form of spirit. Neither of these first two are inherently evil in themselves. But under the current regime of patriarchy, living exclusively for these two is believed to ultimately lead to the third member, the devil. Or wetiko, if you prefer. Whatever it is, it is pure evil energy that cannot ever be redeemed. And neoliberalism, in its sheer vileness, vainglory, and wanton idolatry of money and worldly power above all else, effectively worships all three members of this unholy trinity.
The rise of selected flavors of Christian (and other religious) fundamentalism since the 1980s has not stemmed the tide of neoliberalism, and the two increasingly seem to be joined at the hip nowadays. And while patriarchy is currently in its death throes as we speak, the implosion of patriarchy and patriarchal religion is clearly non-linear, erratic, and chaotic.
So what is it, exactly? It is best defined as a dogmatic belief in the inherent superiority and supremacy of unfettered free markets and privatization (and commodification) of nearly every single thing in the universe. Inequality, however extreme, and even greed itself is recast as virtuous. The rich and the poor deserve their lot in life, because reasons. Poverty is in fact a feature, not a bug. People are just objects to be used, as are animals and Mother Nature herself. Citizens are reduced to mere consumers and wage-serfs, if not full-blown slaves. And like the robber barons of old, today's high priests of neoliberalism are totally fine with robbing from the poor, giving to the rich, and torpedoing what's left of the middle class. The only difference is that nowadays they typically do it with a smile and a veneer of pseudo-progressivism, while laughing all the way to the bank.
Neoliberalism's warped and twisted code of pseudo-ethics harbors a massive, gaping void that is essentially a moral black hole, since this ideology lacks a truly moral and spiritual component underneath it all. Its entire foundation is shaky, empty and morally bankrupt, totally rotten to the core. And yet, it has such mass appeal on both the (pseudo-)left and right of the political spectrum that it transcends that very spectrum. And while neoliberalism is clearly the darling brainchild of patriarchy, it is such a wily and devious shapeshifter that it even transcends patriarchy itself as well.
From Reagan to the Clintons, Thatcher to Blair, Milton Friedman to Thomas Friedman, Greenspan to Powell, Facebook to ExxonMobil, Purdue University to Perdue Chicken to Purdue Pharma, Trump to Trudeau, and Boris all the way to Natasha, it seems like no mainstream or pseudo-alternative politician, ideologue, technocrat, maven, or tycoon has been able to avoid being infected by neoliberalism to one degree or another, and sucked into its lifeless, soulless abyss.
(Trump, with the notable exception of opposing some of the "free trade" component of neoliberalism, otherwise supports essentially all of the rest of their evil and demonic agenda in practice, his disingenuous rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding. And ALL neoliberals, Trump included, are largely anti-union in practice, if not also in theory as well.)
Though secular in nature, neoliberalism has all of the zeal of a religion, even a fundamentalist one. And its dogmas have basically become the new orthodoxy from about 1980 onwards. And we can thus conclude that neoliberalism is essentially the religion of the world, the flesh, and the devil, filling the voids left by the implosion of the mainstream patriarchal religions. One can even call it a cult as well.
In Christian theology, the "world, flesh, and devil" have traditionally been considered the three primary enemies of the soul, as a sort of "unholy trinity". Now, I believe that there is some nuance to this in that the world is only evil because of who rules it (i.e. the devil who works through men, particularly the oligarchs and their sycophantic lackeys), and the flesh is only evil when we choose to make it that way, since matter is essentially just a slowed-down form of spirit. Neither of these first two are inherently evil in themselves. But under the current regime of patriarchy, living exclusively for these two is believed to ultimately lead to the third member, the devil. Or wetiko, if you prefer. Whatever it is, it is pure evil energy that cannot ever be redeemed. And neoliberalism, in its sheer vileness, vainglory, and wanton idolatry of money and worldly power above all else, effectively worships all three members of this unholy trinity.
The rise of selected flavors of Christian (and other religious) fundamentalism since the 1980s has not stemmed the tide of neoliberalism, and the two increasingly seem to be joined at the hip nowadays. And while patriarchy is currently in its death throes as we speak, the implosion of patriarchy and patriarchal religion is clearly non-linear, erratic, and chaotic.
Saturday, September 28, 2019
Rasa Von Werder Is Back With A New, Women-Only Religion
In case you missed it, the legendary Guru Rasa von Werder is back with her website "Embodiment of God" having recently been updated for the first time in a while. The latest updates to this side are essentially the genesis of Rasa’s new religion for Women only. No offense, fellas, but it really has to be this way. And besides, there are plenty of older posts and sections on that very same site designed just for you, that you should check out, and be sure to share far and wide.
Readers, please share it far and wide. Also don't forget to check out Rasa’s (and William's) new/old blog as well, along with William's own new blog. And please share those as well.
NOTE: This blog, The Chalice and the Flame, is NOT written by or directly affiliated with either Rasa or William, and opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily those of mine, or vice-versa. Nor is it affiliated with Riane Eisler, who wrote a book with a similar name to this blog, The Chalice and the Blade. And for all third-party sites, caveat lector.
Readers, please share it far and wide. Also don't forget to check out Rasa’s (and William's) new/old blog as well, along with William's own new blog. And please share those as well.
NOTE: This blog, The Chalice and the Flame, is NOT written by or directly affiliated with either Rasa or William, and opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily those of mine, or vice-versa. Nor is it affiliated with Riane Eisler, who wrote a book with a similar name to this blog, The Chalice and the Blade. And for all third-party sites, caveat lector.
Saturday, September 7, 2019
Against Moral Relativism
One thing I have noticed among various schools of thought, both inside and out of the Matriarchy movement, is the concept of moral relativism (also known as ethical relativism or cultural relativism). That is, the idea that there is no objective truth in morality, period. And while on the surface it may sound enlightened and progressive, please be advised that it is actually a very dangerous slippery slope towards egoism, amorality and moral nihilism. And the logical conclusion to such a dubious moral theory turns out to be anything but enlightened and progressive.
In his famous essay, "The Challenge of Cultural Relativism", the late secular progressive philosopher James Rachels does an excellent job thoroughly debunking the specious arguments that underlie moral relativism. Scratch that, he debones, slices, dices, and juliennes such arguments, and then fully lays waste to their remains. And most notably of all, he does it all from a secular progressive perspective.
In a nutshell, the conclusion that there is no objective truth in morality at all (itself an absolute statement, ironically) does NOT follow logically from the premise that there are differences in moral codes between various cultures and time periods. And if one were to attempt to make a valid argument justifying such a specious conclusion, we would also have to essentially tolerate not only various horrific evils because "culture", but also intolerance itself as well. Nothing at all enlightened or progressive about that. So much for relativism being a philosophy of tolerance and kindness.
In another chapter of his book, The Elements of Moral Philosophy, having already debunked moral relativism, he also then debunks the closely related idea of moral subjectivism in similar fashion. This idea basically says that morality (right vs. wrong, good vs. evil) is merely a matter of opinion, again not objective. And in essentially the same way that relativism fails as a moral theory, so too does subjectivism as well.
This is not to say that moral absolutism (such as the views of Immanuel Kant) is necessarily correct either. We know that numerous gray areas do exist, of course, and both relativism/subjectivism and absolutism can thus be seen as two sides of the same fundamentally flawed coin. Thus objectivism (with a lowercase "o", to distinguish it from the egoistic philosophy of Ayn Rand) is essentially the way to go.
So all progressives, leftists, feminists and/or matriarchists reading this, take note. You really do NOT want to cede the moral high ground to the opposition, lest you fall into quicksand and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
In his famous essay, "The Challenge of Cultural Relativism", the late secular progressive philosopher James Rachels does an excellent job thoroughly debunking the specious arguments that underlie moral relativism. Scratch that, he debones, slices, dices, and juliennes such arguments, and then fully lays waste to their remains. And most notably of all, he does it all from a secular progressive perspective.
In a nutshell, the conclusion that there is no objective truth in morality at all (itself an absolute statement, ironically) does NOT follow logically from the premise that there are differences in moral codes between various cultures and time periods. And if one were to attempt to make a valid argument justifying such a specious conclusion, we would also have to essentially tolerate not only various horrific evils because "culture", but also intolerance itself as well. Nothing at all enlightened or progressive about that. So much for relativism being a philosophy of tolerance and kindness.
In another chapter of his book, The Elements of Moral Philosophy, having already debunked moral relativism, he also then debunks the closely related idea of moral subjectivism in similar fashion. This idea basically says that morality (right vs. wrong, good vs. evil) is merely a matter of opinion, again not objective. And in essentially the same way that relativism fails as a moral theory, so too does subjectivism as well.
This is not to say that moral absolutism (such as the views of Immanuel Kant) is necessarily correct either. We know that numerous gray areas do exist, of course, and both relativism/subjectivism and absolutism can thus be seen as two sides of the same fundamentally flawed coin. Thus objectivism (with a lowercase "o", to distinguish it from the egoistic philosophy of Ayn Rand) is essentially the way to go.
So all progressives, leftists, feminists and/or matriarchists reading this, take note. You really do NOT want to cede the moral high ground to the opposition, lest you fall into quicksand and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Tuesday, September 3, 2019
Rasa Von Werder's Website Is Back
The legendary Guru Rasa von Werder is back with her website "Embodiment of God" having now been updated for the first time in a while. The latest updates to this side are essentially the genesis of Rasa’s new religion for Women only. No offense, fellas, but it really has to be this way. And besides, there are plenty of older posts and sections on that same site designed just for you, that you should check out.
Readers, please share it far and wide. Also don't forget to check out Rasa’s (and William's) new/old blog as well, along with William's own new blog. And please share those as well.
Readers, please share it far and wide. Also don't forget to check out Rasa’s (and William's) new/old blog as well, along with William's own new blog. And please share those as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)