Did Women Steal the Male Role from Men?
Women didn’t steal the male role in the United States. Men gave it up. Can they get it back? It depends.
To start, women could not take the male role from men. It’s not their fault that men don’t have a role. Men didn’t have to give their role to women. They chose to do that. So, they can also choose to take it back. How could they or would they do that?
Men can take their role back because they have the power to do it. Even if women are in the minority, men have superior strength and resources to women, that if they wanted their role back, they could take it. That is not the first step, but it is a step men can take if they want to have a role anymore.
What Is a Male Role?
If men are going to take their role back, this starts with first answering this question: “What is the male role?” Men won’t get any role until they decide that there is a male role. This is a problem right here at the beginning, because that starts with belief in objective truth. Someone can know what the male role is. Can. This is epistemological, essentially how people know what they know. Truth about the male role exists and men would operate from that truth.
Uncertainty about the male role will result in no movement or progress on retrieving the lost male role for men. The role of the man isn’t nebulous, but men must agree that it isn’t. Can they or will they even do that? I say, “can,” because men in their present state can’t even do that. They won’t because they can’t. The “can’t” relates to an inward weakness proceeding from uncertainty about truth itself. No consensus among men, that could bring back their role, will occur without an objective standard for manhood.
Fear of Women
I believe that most men today are more willing to subjugate themselves to women than take the steps necessary to take their role back. They don’t have the conviction to take it back, arising from a certainty of truth. Instead, they’ll in essence do the equivalent of twiddling their thumbs on this. It’s also easy to see that men are too afraid of women. That alone could merit a whole post — what is fear of women. I’m not saying that it’s fear of losing to a woman in arm wrestling.
Some reading here might think that I’m suggesting that men beat up women to show who is boss. Not at all. That’s not right, and it would not ever work to get their role back, even if men decided to do it. It shouldn’t have to happen that way. However, there is a sort of civil war in the country right now as seen in the gender gap in the country, which nationally was ten percent in the 2024 election. It’s not just that, but 8.7 million more women voted than men in that election. If those percentages were 50-50, Trump still loses by 8.7 million votes.
Gender or Sex Gap
Trump had to win the men by 10-12 percentage points. Here is the math. Women out number the men 53% to 47%. For Trump to get superior numbers with those percentages, he had to win the male vote 55% to 45%, which he did. If voting wasn’t private, I don’t think men could have done that. They wouldn’t have had the courage to do it. Men as a whole do not want to get in trouble with women. They so want their acceptance, that they’ll abdicate their role to have it.
Before the election, Democrats ran an advertisement attempting to persuade women to vote differently than their husbands. They essentially said, “You know you want to do this, so do it.” Many experts said more of the opposite actually happened though. That is, more men didn’t tell their wives they were voting for Trump than women didn’t tell their husbands they were voting for Harris.
My point of talking about the election is not for pro-Trump reasons. Please don’t come on here and say anything about that. I’m talking about the variated view of the world between men and women and what that means in the realm of authority. This is worse in a blue state like California where the sex gap is not 10 points but 14. and then 18 points in the state of New York. By vote, women are in charge in blue states. They already far outnumber the men, but they control what happens by the vast difference in how they vote. Men go their way too by a small margin, indicative of the overall affect on men.
Objective Standards
One recent change in all this came through new standards for the military. Under this new administration, apparently the military leadership will judge women and men by the same standard, meaning that women have to fulfill the physical requirements of the men. Within the variation of different sorts of men, men still had to accomplish the male standard for strength and fitness.
I started talking first about the ability and willingness of men to judge the male role by an objective standard. Men can’t make up their minds about what this is. Maybe you’re a man there and you don’t think so. When I talk to men, they can’t come out and say even in the audience of other men what they think about this subject. Mainly they have no comment.
An Example for a Thought Experiment
When I arrived here in Indiana two years ago, one of my first events was attending a 5th and 6th grade basketball game. The all boy team had a woman coach. That might sound very egalitarian to people reading here. The female coach stomped up and down the sidelines, yelled, and got in the face of the boys. In other words, she acted like a man. I had not been in a setting like this for decades, so it surprised me, when I saw it.
Standing and conversing later to a man and his wife, both professing Christians but not from our church, I mentioned what I’d seen at the game. I was open about my surprise and opposition to the situation I’d witnessed. They both looked at me with a nervous and purposefully blank stare and ready to change the subject. Neither even nodded as to give away an opinion. Almost one hundred percent sure, that husband and wife voted for Trump. Neither of them could even blink out anything about what I saw from that female coach. Either thinking had changed or no one would dare say it for fear of listening devices.
Gender Dysphoria
Is it even wrong for a man to act like a woman or for a woman to act like a man? Does a society just tolerate this kind of behavior? Is anyone anymore even able to state his disapproval, even with, of course, a very calm demeanor? I mean a very masculine calm demeanor, borderline if not completely effeminate.
Maybe you knew that people use the terminology, “gender dysphoria,” today. This is at least an extreme confusion about one’s own gender. This occurs at a pandemic rate. Ironically, statistics show that this dysphoria has decreased in the last year corresponding to the election. Some of this is just the mere willingness to push back against the most awful ideas or concepts on this subject. The upward trajectory toward gender confusion at least took a momentary pause or small downward turn. Almost no one can inform a girl or boy what to think or expect in and for this world.
Conversations about Words
People are talking about the topic of this post. In a strong, confrontational, albeit friendly, discussion between Piers Morgan and Tucker Carlson, Carlson reported to Morgan of a woman arrested in England for calling someone a “faggot.” Piers couldn’t say the word, so he called it the “F-Word.” A “faggot” is essentially a derogatory term for a homosexual male, but many also use it to describe the weakness of any particular man. I don’t think it is the best or even a right approach for pointing out male weakness, but I understand it. What do you say about weakness or softness in men?
Since the conversation, I’ve heard that eleven British police officers showed up to arrest the woman, banging through her door while she was naked in the shower. This crowd of police officers, mainly male, surprised and shook her, sending her to tears, of course all acceptable as treatment of a woman in England who texted that word to another person in a private chat. A man had assaulted the woman and she used the word to describe the weakness of one or ones who would do nothing about it.
Drawing a Line
What is a word for a man who will not show strength? In the consequential discussion, the term the assaulted woman chose to use became to men of greater offense than her physical assault. The term was hate speech that could cause injurious harm to the psyche of a soft male, sending him to suicidal ideation. The police read her charge and said this text was punishable of five to ten years in jail. She as good as killed the man with her words, people said.
The debate that arises about such conversation about words and about what characterizes a man, turns toward a mega-multivariable nature of the meaning of a man. What follows is that the definition of such male sex doesn’t need to be strength. Strength doesn’t need to win the argument as a trait for manhood. Why not weakness? If a man doesn’t want to hear a strong word, because he’s weak, why can’t the weakness also be a justifiable trait of true manhood? Some of you may think I’m kidding, but I’m not. This is where we’re at, and this is why I’m talking about the need and even ability to draw a line on this subject.
A society can punish a woman for saying a word that targets a man for betraying the defining quality of his sex. The physically assaulted woman assaults another woman’s ears about her former husband or boyfriend. She calls the hate speech hotline. Something then happens. Somebody got called a name. British police weren’t there against the grooming gangs in urban England, raping teenaged girls, but they could arrive on time to arrest a female slur against effeminate men. Maybe weakness really did become the newest male trait.
More to Come