Aswad
Posts: 6914
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ishtarr
So while you may not be free because an individual man has made that choice, you're still free by the grace of men Lisa.
Sheesh, cap that thing before you cover everything in drivel.
You don't get it. You're not supposed to. You're a slave. The day you do get it, really get it, you may find you aren't one anymore, collar or no. Perhaps it takes maturity or experience, perhaps it takes insight, or perhaps only a few people have it in them. I haven't a clue.
Men get away with it, because we're biologically hardwired to kill and die to preserve all that is worth living for, to struggle and overcome or die trying, to bend our environment to our will lest it break us, and in so doing imperil that which we hold dear. Women, whether biologically or not, are usually more inclined to preserve life, to adapt and persevere, to compromise. They are, in any practical and societal sense, of immeasurable value. One man is enough to carry on a whole people. One woman is not. So we get the risk taking behavior, the aggression, the drive to challenge, conquer and control. Because we're disposable.
That directed aggression, curbed in most modern societies to facilitate domestication of the human species, is why a man used to doing what he feels like is more likely to succeed at preventing someone from using physical force at taking it away from him. It's not that most men are free. It's just that most men have to be led into their cage, rather than pushed, or else they tend to raise the ante beyond what their captivity is worth to whoever, because instinct gives them responses that respect the fact that they're disposable. Women, for whatever reason, are more likely to allow themselves to be pushed into the cage, not risking their intrinsic value until it's too late to get back out of the cage.
Culture is an excellent cage. That's one of the reasons we have Gor in the first place. There's no reason to have a violent oppression of women when they so readily oppress themselves. And no reason to oppress men, either, who also readily oppress themselves. Humans are easy to domesticate, and since the French Revolution, we've made excellent progress at turning both genders into livestock, as well as eradicating freedom. The difference is, nobody holds the collar anymore, so it'll take more than a guillotine to take the head off this beast. This is all also evident in the books, but it's apparently unpleasant for some to consider it.
Hey, sure, we could have men and women fighting each other in a literal sense. That has been extensively explored in radical feminist fiction. It's not plausible, though, and the outcome is by definition not favorable to a majority of the men that participate, if even favorable to any. Still, if you'd like to imagine a maledom fantasy world as a plausible scenario, don't let me stop you. But, really, all it ever takes was for enough women to notice a few of their options, which is kind of the point: confining thought patterns is always a more powerful strategy than violence in the long run. Japan used that whole 'underexposure' strategy successfully for ages, and Ms. Franco penned an understanding of the principle in the European late Renaissance, while Labor used it in the UK to break up the suffrage movement (it still succeeded, but the move was more spot-on than any plan they've had for anything else lately; then again, votes were in the balance).
This genie ain't going back into the bottle, no matter where you rub it.
Hopefully, that didn't clear anything up.
Health,
al-Aswad.
_____________________________
"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.
|
RE: Why? - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread