Male Complaining: Fully Justified -- and (Mostly) Pointless

We can whine, or we can win.

I am becoming distressed by the energy wasted on the internet these days by men complaining about their treatment by women. I know it is fully justified, and I do not for a minute endorse the denial or the barrage of nasty scolding coming from the traditional conservatives, when they dismiss the horrific abuses of government power, especially the divorce courts, urging men to “suck it in”, “man-up,” and other glib clichés. Even more serious than the scolding is demanding that men simply ignore the dangers, go ahead and marry, start a family, and put your head in the noose. They do as much harm to “the family” that they claim to cherish as anyone, and I have criticized this (repeatedly). (The professed Christians among them have some pretty shoddy theology.) Especially hypocritical and cynical is when it comes from men in positions of political authority, who have power to rectify the governmental abuses. Too cowardly to challenge or expose a glaring public evil and abuse of public office, they instead wag their fingers at other men for how they choose to lead their private lives.

It is also encouraging that general awareness is reaching more men, thanks to some excellent writing.

And yet there does come a point where continued complaining comes to substitute for constructive action.¹ Men victimized by the welfare-divorce machine number in the millions, which gives them enormous political leverage with huge potential to change things. Moreover, many have deftly (if unintentionally) augmented their leverage by spontaneously going on “strike” and refusing to associate — date, marry, or procreate — with women. This is hitting where it hurts, for women are seriously distressed by the absence of men to marry, and I think many genuinely do not know the reasons why. It is also this that provokes the scolding from the “tradcons,” so we know it has an impact.

But there is little indication that they are translating this leverage into positive purposes. Many men seem to be indulging in their grievances — just as women have long done — as a pastime in itself. The endless he-said/she-said stories, the tales of victimization, the unfairness of it all. It is all painfully true, and yet in itself it achieves nothing. Men have achieved “gender equality” in one respect: they have become more like women by complaining about the opposite sex.

The fact that some prominent voices are women makes it seem almost as if men are waiting for women to rescue them from the railroad tracks.² At some point we must do more than click “Like” and leave opinions all about.

This is in itself a form of feminization and a victory for women, especially the kind who love to complain about men. (The tradcons are themselves highly feminized.) Women love to talk about “relationships”, and they thrive by indulging in endless he-said/she-said chatter and gossip. Some openly admit that they enjoy talking about problems and simply want someone to “listen”, without necessarily seeking any solutions.

Logically, the talk can lead on to therapy, which is almost entirely talk, but now to a paid professional listener. It is no accident that this profession is dominated by women. When couples seek therapy together, the professional listener becomes a referee, encouraging them to complain about one another. When this happens, the man aways loses. The very presence of the referee validates the talk and the complainting and the female point-of-view, even if she does not explicitly declare a winner.

Indeed, the resort to the referee to sort matters out in the first place in itself demotes the man from his authority as ruler of his own home. But while he no longer has any authority to govern his home, he will still be held responsible for whatever goes wrong in it. Whether morally or legally, from that point on he can never be innocent; he can only be guilty.

At some stage this can lead on to forensic therapy — that is, ordered by a court and law enforcement — for example, when it is connected to a divorce case. Then the complaints become accusations and grounds for legal action, including prosecution, even if the accused has not committed any legally recognized infraction. Once this is permitted, here too, the man can only be culpable for whatever went wrong.

Men should never encourage or permit this. True men get on with the business at hand. They do not talk, they act. They take care of the matter, solve the problem, and then move on.

~~~

I suggest that, at a minimum, no man should offer an opinion about “gender” relations unless he also proposes or endorses some solution. I suggest the following principles:

• No man should complain about women themselves.

• No man should complain about abstractions like “the culture” or anything else that he is powerless to change.

• Every man should be complaining loud-and-clear about the specific, concrete laws and practices of government officials, which lie at the heart of this, and then he should devise or endorse some way to put a stop to it. General awareness has been achieved. All attention now goes to solutions.

~~~

I will start, because I am convinced that one thing alone can cut the Gordian Knot and restore men to the authority without which they are not fully men. I have said it before, and greater minds have said it before me. Our civilization understood and practiced it for centuries, and undeniably it works. I propose that we concentrate singlemindedly on that, and that alone, and settle for nothing less, if we truly hope to restore harmony between the sexes, real marriage, stable families, social order, government integrity, even international peace. We either drop everything and focus on that alone, until we achieve it, or we shut up.

That one thing that will restore male authority and all the rest is father custody of children. “The linchpin in the feminist program is mother custody following divorce,” wrote the great Shakespeare scholar, Daniel Amneus in his classic book, The Case for Father Custody. “Pull that pin…and the feminist structure collapses.” I elaborate on Amneus’ argument in my recent book:

And the rest of the radical sexual agenda, that now forms the cutting edge of the Left generally, collapses with it: homosexualism, transgenderism, and the rest. More than anything, this is what undermines masculinity and turns men into frightened, impotent sissies – at the same time that it turns their children into aggressive nihilists, rebelling against their fathers and everything else. “Until then, men must remain afraid of women, of marriage, of feminism” [writes Amneus.] They must also fear “the divorce court judges” [he adds] and all government officials, who learned from the matriarchy how to create and enforce the other bureaucratic tyrannies of the Deep State and who understand that ordinary men heading families pose the principal impediment to their power.

That and that alone will break the back of feminism and the massive state apparatus that supports it: welfare, divorce courts, public schools, false accusations, affirmative action, prisons, police — all of it.

It is also entirely feasible. I elaborate on the multiple benefits and explain how it can be implemented in the final chapter of my book, but you can get a glimpse of it here.

I invite discussion.

---

If you want to read more analysis that will push you to think “outside the box,” you will find it in my new book, Who Lost America? Why the United States Went "Communist” — and What to Do about It — available from Amazon.

Stephen Baskerville is Professor of Politics at the Collegium Intermarium in Warsaw. His books and recent articles are available at www.StephenBaskerville.com.

1. This, by the way, is an old principle in Christianity, and it was inculcated on the English-speaking populations by, among others, the Puritans. They often expressed the principle in terms of divine judgement, which not only promised that evildoers would receive their just desserts, but also reminded their victims that they too would be judged if they did not get off their own duffs and do whatever was in their power to rectify the evil. "Whatever injuries are brought upon us by man, let us acknowledge them as deserved punishment of our sin in regard to God," one Puritan minister urged. "Though we have given no cause to the one, and so are innocent, yet we have given just cause to the other, and so are nocent." Habituating people to such principles was how the Puritans contributed to shaping modern citizenship, and it helped make the Anglophone countries among history’s most successful.

2. When I served as president of a fathers’ organization, I was repeatedly told that there were certain things that I was not allowed to say, but that a woman should be found to say it instead. Imagine if the Civil Rights Movement had required white people to do all the talking.