In order to avoid any misconceptions, allow me to first identify the terms feminism and intimacy. Feminists usually define feminism as a movement toward male and female equality, or equal rights for women. The assumption is that the law has in the past, and still does favor men over women.
I have written elsewhere regarding the fact that this assumption is false on its face, and that the opposite is actually true. As a matter of fact, the feminist movement effectuates legislation that empowers women with legislated entitlement, while at the same time, oppressing men.
This can be seen in the fact that women are entitled to any club, organization, social structure, occupation, or other arena occupied by men, while keeping men from violating their women-only clubs, organizations, seminars, and social structures. It can be seen in the fact that women can join men in the military, as police, and as firefighters with equal pay, while enjoying a lower standard of physical requirement and risk-taking.
We also witness female entitlement in family courts where men routinely lose all, while retaining all financial liability, and we witness it in the public arena, where novels, movies and television portray men as bumbling fools who couldn’t do anything without the wisdom and guidance of a very patient woman. Men are routinely portrayed as being virtually worthless in a family setting, unable to even help their children without the wise women telling them to leave the kids alone. On the other hand, if a man has the audacity to insult the female gender, he invites ridicule as a male chauvinistic pig, a bigot, and a misogynist (a hater of women).
Since it is the assessment of feminists that men who insult the female gender are misogynists, we can also view women who insult the male gender as they routinely do, then, as misandrists (haters of men). Combine this with the fact that feminists aggressively pursue more and more legislation for the oppression of men while calling it equality, and we can reach no other conclusion than the fact that feminism actually constitutes hatred against men.
Before examining the prevailing attitude among feminists, let’s briefly define and discuss intimacy. Most people view this in terms of an amorously familiar act, such as a soft touch, a kiss, or holding hands, for instance. It can also be viewed in terms of sexual intercourse, but we should never exclude the all-important concept of a close, familiar, and usually affectionate or loving personal relationship with another person or group.
I don’t think anyone would argue with the point that intimacy is important in the maintenance of a healthy relationship between two people, and that such a relationship cannot be based on sex. If intimacy is viewed only in terms of sexual intercourse, then the relationship will not be a healthy one. Therefore, we must consider intimacy in terms of affection expressed through amorously familiar acts. In other words, if a couple expresses intimacy only when they come together for sex, then there is something wrong in the intimacy department of their relationship.
Now let’s examine the three levels of relationships. At the lowest level, we have codependency. In this type of relationship each partner lacks something, and needs the other to fulfill or complete him or her. If one or the other’s needs are not fulfilled, then there is fear, resentment and anger.
At the next level, we have the independent relationship. Here, the two come together, but each one is really into him or herself. They are not really cooperating with one another in the making of a life, a home, or a family unit. They tend toward selfishness, which keeps them split apart in the intimacy department.
The highest level that a relationship can attain involves interdependence. Here, each partner is fulfilled within him or herself, they are happy within themselves, and they come together to form a non-needy love bond, where neither one is used as an emotional crutch. I have heard this type of relationship described in terms of a choreographed ballet, where the relationship becomes something greater than the sum of its parts, and where the couple stay in sync with one another. In philosophical terms, this is the formation of a gestalt.
The question now, is this: “How can anyone who hates, disrespects, or is otherwise critical of the nature of a person’s gender, expect to find synergy with that person?” This concept is applicable to men and women equally; but a particular problem has arisen in the world through feminism, where women in mass are developing narcissism through social and legal systems that provide them with an entitlement mentality. In fact, the feminist movement is rife with narcissism.
Narcissists depend in life, on the perceptions of other people. They seek compliments while pretending otherwise, and may even feign embarrassment when complimented. Compliments allow them to feel good about themselves, while any criticism at all causes them to feel that their person is unacceptable. Therefore, criticism is not taken as an attack on their behavior, but rather as an attack on their very person. This will cause them to push away and even punish the perceived attacker. Among feminists, any criticism of women at all, is seen as sexism.
So what about feminism and intimacy, then? Allow me to begin my answer to this question by stating the fact that regardless of what any particular woman might say about what she wants in a man, they all want deep, emotional intimacy. Furthermore, a woman who is strongly feminine is emotional and nurturing.
Narcissistic people, and thus feminists, lack empathy. This can be seen in their ability to destroy men financially, socially and through public ridicule; and to do so without mercy. With this understanding, the concept of intimacy as it pertains to a feminist or any other narcissist for that matter, is a very interesting study.
Narcissistic people are codependent in the fact that they require a partner to fulfill their need to feel good about themselves. Since they are hypersensitive to criticism, they need someone in a relationship to adore them, and not to question them. Of course this involves a codependent relationship, so it is not likely to last for any significant period of time.
As long as the feminist’s/narcissist’s codependent needs are being met, then intimacy in the form of sex will be forthcoming, as well as the amorously familiar acts that we discussed above. Due to the narcissist’s lack of empathy, however, an affectionate or loving personal relationship is not possible. Under
these circumstances, a woman’s natural desire for deep, emotional intimacy will manifest in her seeking it through sexual intercourse. Of course, such a woman as this will live out her entire life without fulfillment.
Feminists often try to minimize their lack of empathy by demonstrating their affection for children. This, however, only serves to demonstrate their codependency with children who are responsive to a soft touch and kind words, responding in kind with complimentary admiration that is almost totally void of criticism.
Since feminists have a codependency, they are not capable of being happy by themselves. Therefore, the level of the interdependent relationship is way beyond their grasp, and they can never enjoy the synergy of a choreographed ballet with a significant other. They are forever doomed to dysfunctional relationships. The best that such a one can hope for, is an independent relationship where separation is the key word, and only sex is shared on occasion.
A healthy relationship is built on truth and honesty. This means that neither partner can keep skeletons in his or her closet. If everything is laid on the table in the beginning, then each one has the freedom to accept or reject the other for who he or she is.
Such skeletons cannot remain hidden forever in a relationship, and they constitute a set of lies that when discovered, cause turmoil and distrust. This in turn, rots the foundation of the relationship. Trust and synergy in a relationship is created through giving, and not through receiving. When both parties receive pleasure from giving to one another, then and only then, can they begin their choreographed ballet. Only then, can they experience the deep, emotional intimacy that accompanies an affectionate or loving personal relationship.
Unfortunately for feminists, their tendency toward pathological lying (which is a trait associated with all narcissists) causes them to misrepresent that which they want in a man. They claim to want men who will support them in their social, legal and political conquests, which means that they claim to want manginas. In reality, however, the they detest such men because of the weakness that they perceive in them.
The men that all women respect, are those that are strong and independent, possessing a will of their own, but who are not playing the role of “White Knight”. The problem for feminists, however, is that such men are not codependent, and therefore, only serve to infuriate them by refusing to be sensitive to their needs regarding male approval.
For this reason, most feminists tend to marry men for whom they have little respect. They need to be validated; and the classical mangina serves this need all too well. In support of his feminist wife, such a man will readily accept her offer to enter the professional world, while he stays home and raises the children. What he doesn’t realize, however, is that under these circumstances, women are known to lose sexual interest in their house husbands, within a year’s time. Having more respect for men in the professional world, these women also engage in adultery, and almost always leave their husbands behind.
Feminists will not only be threatened by this discourse, but most of them will experience rage, due to the fact that my criticism of their philosophy and behavior will be viewed as an attack on their persons. Such exposure causes them immense fear and insecurity; so in retaliation, they will attempt to punish me in any way they can.
The material for this discourse came from several sources, but its writing must be attributed to: