I’ve come to find that there is a large element of misdirection in the concept of patriarchy and male domination. It’s not masculine imbalance at fault, but rather the Dark Triad, which is a deadly combination of Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and Psychopathy, that is the true core issue; and blaming men is just the convenient scapegoat. Women tend to display the dark triad in a different manner than men with the same traits, just because of gender differences (or at least they used to), but that difference doesn’t imply that men are the problem. However, it seems that the Narcissistic, Machiavellian, and Psychopathic women are now taking the lead in the fight against men, and not just to find balance, but to dominate and beat them down into submission. At the top of the power hierarchy though, you just have the Dark Triad of both genders farming the world’s population to fulfill their own vision and goals.
Narcissists seek praise, psychopaths seek control, and Machiavellian’s seek their ends by any means necessary (the ends justify the means); and the Dark Triad’s combination of the three suggests that they are self-centered and egocentric control freaks who will do whatever it takes to get ahead, including unethical and immoral acts. This gives them an unfair advantage within a peace loving society, where individuals give others the benefit of the doubt, and value empathy, compassion, and good will.
Aline and I do not see it as a masc/fem problem at the root, but rather a child/adult problem, where the parental role is not taking responsibility for setting healthy boundaries and holding the child aspect of people accountable—and the Dark Triad is a result of that. Narcissism is the stage in psychological development of a toddler, but these perpetual toddlers never grew past this point due to poor parenting by their family and society as a whole; and in fact, society currently rewards narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism, which reinforces the behaviors. Again, we feel that the man/woman gender war is a red herring and a false dichotomy. Pitting men vs women is a brilliant way to disguise the actual issue.
If we really want to look at men/women, then we could analyze the Gnostic creation myth and its archetypes, where Sophia chose to create our universe without her masculine principle, and has been enabling and coddling her children/creation ever since (her offspring are called “Archons” in the Gnostic texts). In this scenario, the masculine principle is absent from his parental responsibilities (setting healthy limits and boundaries), which is necessary to raise children into responsible and mature adults.
The feminine principle is best described metaphorically as the non-aggression principle (NAP), while the masculine principle is best described metaphorically as the self-defense principle. An out of balance feminine principle is therefore dominant and coercive in nature, and is played out as either aggression, passivity, or passive aggression, while an out of balance masculine is therefore spineless and submissive, and is the proverbial doormat. A healthy feminine principle does not use coercive force against others, and respects their personal boundaries, while a healthy masculine principle sets and enforces strong personal boundaries and protects against all who would attempt to trespass against their personal space. These two principles, both in their imbalanced and balanced forms, inhabit males and females equally, thus any so-called “toxic masculinity” is really an individual with a spineless masculine principle coupled with an overtly aggressive feminine principle. To reign in the out of balance manifestations in our communities and world, individuals must rediscover their ability to set and enforce healthy boundaries, and at the same time learn how to respect the boundaries of others; this will safeguard liberty, and make the world a better place. ~Nathan & Aline
We must also remember that we use deductive reasoning in our thinking, which takes the available premises we’re fed from our senses and other sources over time, and then logically deduces conclusions from those premises. For example, “if all men are mortal, and Socrates is a man, then Socrates is mortal.” In this statement, “all men are mortal” and “Socrates is a man” are the premises, and “Socrates is mortal” is the logical conclusion we derive from the premises; if the premises are false, we will logically deduce false conclusions. All somebody has to do is feed the premises that people will see throughout their life, and then they can control the deductions/conclusions of the people. In this way, reality is easy to fabricate—in any direction the Elite (who control most of the available premises we’re able to see) chooses.
We come up with and discover the premises we use to formulate our conclusions/deductions through observation. For example, watching television programming feeds us the premises that will shape our attitudes and conclusions, because we’re observing what’s on television, however we need to be aware that television is one of the means that is shaping our beliefs and attitudes as a form of feeding us controlled premises. In order to escape, we need to learn how to observe ourselves, observe what we observe, to observe/challenge the premises we’ve been fed, and to observe/challenge the underlying assumptions we hold about our premises. Challenging our core premises (and assumptions) is a crucial step towards the goal of personal liberation.
We can copy and paste what we’ve learned about deductive reasoning, and observe what we have come to believe as true from second and third wave feminism—we’ve been fed “anti-male” premises for a while now, and because of that, we all think the patriarchy is evil (even though the word patriarchy isn’t even about men, as “patria” is a Greek feminine noun that means “family“, and “archy” denotes “leadership and authority“). In fact, the feeding of false premises to women and men about men has infantilized them to the point where they think they need surrogate parents such as the State and other authority figures to take care of them.
What I am saying throughout my work is that girls who are indoctrinated to see men not as equals but as oppressors and rapists are condemned to remain in a permanently juvenile condition for life. They have surrendered their own personal agency to a poisonous creed that claims to empower women but has ended by infantilizing them. Similarly, boys will have no motivation to mature if their potential romantic partners remain emotionally insecure, fragile, and fearful, forever looking to parental proxies (like campus grievance committees or government regulators) to make the world safe for them. ~Camille Paglia
As a result, we see most of the people believing the propaganda (controlled premises) about men to be true, because it has gone unchallenged by most of society—thus the “men are evil and misogynists” meme has become a forgone, logically deduced conclusion (a form of Hitler’s “Big Lie” / proof by assertion fallacy).
Again, the real issue is the Dark Triad of narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism, and the red herring to keep people distracted and powerless is “men” and the so-called “patriarchy”. All the controlled premises in society now say “men” are our problem, because those with the traits of the Dark Triad have given the people those premises to distract us from their lust for power, and the tightening of the noose around our necks.
Links to sharable memes related to this article:
- Non-Aggression & Self Defense Principles
- Those Who Control the Premises
- Camille Paglia on Infantilizing Women
- The Correct Etymology of Patriarch
- Proof by Assertion Fallacy / Big Lie
THE UNITY PROCESS: I’ve created an integrative methodology called the Unity Process, which combines the philosophy of Natural Law, the Trivium Method, Socratic Questioning, Jungian shadow work, and Meridian Tapping—into an easy to use system that allows people to process their emotional upsets, work through trauma, correct poor thinking, discover meaning, set healthy boundaries, refine their viewpoints, and to achieve a positive focus. You can give it a try by contacting me for a private session.
Did you enjoy the article? Show your appreciation and buy me a coffee:
Bitcoin: 1a5etiEBpor2iDguc8jqGtrJ3BdcpLKM4
Doge: DBLkU7R4fd9VsMKimi7X8EtMnDJPUdnWrZ
XRP: r4pwVyTu2UwpcM7ZXavt98AgFXRLre52aj
Thank you both for tearing down and exposing a most insidious form of social control being perpetrated upon the people of this planet! Having a Jungian background myself, I have witnessed even the top Jungian teachers, writers and trainers fall to the prevailing disease of PC thinking that only the “divine feminine” is healthy and good, when in fact, Carl Jung, Marion Woodman, and others recognized that an imbalance in either feminine or masculine psychological structures creates deep neurosis and is an impediment to individuation and maturity. Thank you also for the etymological roots of the word “patriarchy” which even my colleagues at the university in which I taught could not (or did not) want to acknowledge. I have to say, that at times I have felt alone in my understanding of the human condition, but, you folks give me hope that all is not lost. Keep up the intelligent inquiry and unbiased conclusions; you are doing the work that this world and all of creation needs to restore it to health.
Thank you Robert, we appreciate your warm feedback, and are grateful to attract Jungian leaning readers to our blog. It’s unfortunate that so many people, Jungian types as well, have succumbed to Cultural Marxism and the PC agenda, and all it entails. You’d think that discovering one’s shadow sufficiently enough would lead people away from herd morality, but it’s a pervasive mental virus and few are immune to its effects.
Discovering the etymological roots of patriarch and patriarchy was a revolutionary discovery for us, and we’ve even found older documentation and writings where it was used to denote a female as early as the 1850’s in Massachusetts (although they were referring to the mother State as the patriarch, which was undoubtedly a blow to liberty early on in America’s history). These discoveries opened our eyes to the attack on the family unit, and we’ve doubled down on better understanding what it means to have and maintain a strong family, and how individuals behave responsibly within it.
Again, we appreciate your feedback, and will definitely continue on in our work. Be well.