The Invserse Peacock Tail: Feminist political tactics exposed.

Power, is nothing more than the ability to perform work. To move something. To influence a chain of cause and effect.

Human relationships are always about power. The ability to cause good things to happen, or bad. All humans having functional muscles and brains have some degree of power, regardless of sex, race or social caste.

As humans, we are all subject to a hierarchy of needs. See Malow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

When we run into other humans, our very first evaluation is a threat assessment. Is this person dangerous to me, or to my interests? Or do they have value that will promote my well-being and support my interests.

This evaluation is complex, and  is continually on-going and subject to change. When, over time, and individual behaves in a manner that we consider neutral or positive to our well-being, we develop trust; we develop a habituated sense of security based on the ability to predict another’s choices in regards to us and our interests. The inverse is simultaneously true. When we can accurately predict that someone can and will bring harm to us or our interests, we develop distrust. Taken to the extreme, we have fear–an emotion designed to help us avoid situations harmful to our survival and well-being.

The constant interchange between people has two levels. The first is physical safety, the second is the safety of one’s interests; direct and indirect threats. Much of our socialization is based on these fundamental instincts. Protect ourselves, protect our young, our homes, our jobs, the tools that permit us to do the job, the relationship with those that can provide us the tools, etc.

People are too-simply and instinct-powerfully labelled “good” by  those who use their power to our benefit or that of our interests, or who at least use it in a manner that is neutral to these. “Bad” people are those that use their power to our detrimental us or our interests. “Evil” is simply an adjective indicating the willingness to do harm to us or our interests.

Once direct relative safety has been secured, we lazy humans, followers of The Path of Least Resistance feel emboldened to, though social interactions and have other reduce the load on us to meet our own needs, or to meet needs that we cannot. A baby has the need for food and security, and makes use of physically built-in triggering mechanisms to evoke an adult to provide for them, for example. We use psycho-social techniques of doling out approval to make a person feel secure, or insults, a technique to lower one’s estimation of one’s social status to threaten abandonment or expulsion to the role of social outcast, which, which instinctively is a precursor to pain and death.

We fawn over celebrities in hopes of gaining acceptance so that we may share their social status (“groupies”). Celebrity is nothing more than The Path of Least Resistance acceptance that an individual has something to offer based on other people’s response. Some people are celebrities for the work they bring, others are simply celebrities for being well-known. This is one of the flaws in the value evaluation mechanism of the human creature.

Generally speaking, we treat those with greater ability to change things than we have with more deference than those of lesser power.

All of these sort of things are built-in. And it is the root of all of our social interactions. It happens on a one-to-one scale as it does on a global scale.

Politics is nothing more than the management of power and resources via relationship and social interaction.

Victim politics, for example, is the tactic of appealing to our sense of empathy (help another, help one’s self) and to our instinct of caring for those with less power. The slow perniciousness of this technique, however, is that it is a form of theft via fraud. The more hyperbolic–that which is exciting to the senses–a claim, the more the instinct of empathy and protection are triggered, the more another is moved to meet the so-called victim’s needs.

Political Feminism relies on the technique of amplifying the perception one group’s power (men, white men, cishet white men) and the obfuscation of another group’s (women, non-white men, non-white cishet men) power. This creates a false sense of imbalance of power, and en mass–or should I say  en classe, reducing the status of the former group and of raising the social status of the latter.  It is literally creating “bad abusive men” and “good girl-children”. It triggers another instinct: our innate sense of justice, that is, the instinctive measure of an exchange of value and/or power. Since it is safer for us to reduce the power of “bad” people and to increase the power of “good” people, this technique is an excellent way of appropriating value and power.

The Political Feminist technique is the mirror of the peacock’s tail. I wonder if I could refer to it as The Wounded Peacock’s Tale.

It is brilliant, manipulative and utterly self-serving; it is pure perfidy. It is, exactly what it claims to combat.

I welcome your thoughtful counter-arguments.

Tagged , , , ,

7 thoughts on “The Invserse Peacock Tail: Feminist political tactics exposed.

  1. Anaala Richardson says:

    This brings the book Quirkology by Richard Wiseman to mind. I believe that I ran through several chapters touching on some of these points earlier today.

    • Francis Roy says:

      Really? Can you expound on that?

      • Anaala Richardson says:

        Sure, sorry about the late reply. I’ve been a bit scatter brained this past week.

        I’m not sure if you’re read the book yet so I don’t know how much detail to go into. Basically he relates descriptions of various studies into human behaviour. For instance; why some of us believe in gods and some don’t (the answer lies in the structure of the brain apparently); why we would be inclined to steal from a company like Walmart if we were given extra change as opposed to a Mom and Pop store (because of the us vs. them mentality, we consider the smaller stores to be closer to us).

        He calls the study of these fringe behaviours Quirkology and upon completion I had to agree. Some of these quirks were leftovers from evolution.

        In a way reading it left a vague sense of disgust in myself and others but I also found that it was extremely interesting. It made me wonder if we would still be inclined to these behaviours if we knew how wide spread it was. Granted, a lot of the behaviour that bothered me in the book stemmed from a sense of superiority over the person being taken advantage of. That is, their feelings simply weren’t important.

  2. Francis Roy says:

    I can relate to your experience. I tend to say that people are lazy, stupid and clumsy. I might add quite a few things, such as greedy and selfish. On one hand it is sort of disgusting, but from another point of view, simply accepting that this is part of our makeup, we can separate our moral outrage and simply acknowledge what is. If we know that this is the canvas that we have to work with, then we can get practical about it, rather than getting pissy about the fact that the canvas isn’t perfect and putting all of our energies into demanding that the canvas be so. If we start from what is, the solid, even if uneven ground of reality, then we can build something solid and adjust for trade-offs, rather than attempting to build a “perfect” house on ideological quicksand.

  3. caprizchka says:

    It’s a circus spectacle for people who are easily mesmerized while meanwhile the pickpocket makes his rounds.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: