Home » Uncategorized » The female hysteria myth persists, in the guise of egalitarianism

The female hysteria myth persists, in the guise of egalitarianism

I am writing this as a separate post from Ad Hominem: Not Always Relevant because I need to elaborate on the idea of moderation as a virtue. Angry women are told they are too emotional, imbalanced, illogical or irrational in their views when they have storng convictions. We should be fence-sitters. The men and “egalitarians” saying this really mean they want women to tone it down or shut up for their benefit. Abusers deny that other people be able to express their anger. They need to be the center of attention all the time.

Moderation takes other forms. Another is saying,”That would be like yin blaming yang.” Or the “What about X?” tactic commonly manifesting as,”But what about the men?” Saying “That would be like yin blaming yang” strongly implies that the sexes need each other whether they want each other or not (compulsory heterosexuality), that they have a ‘better half’ in the opposite sex and that women are not complete as human beings.

The same white/neoliberal dudes who take pride in being rational and logical and philosophical also take pride in abstract interpretation because they shy away from stating any truths. But not everything is about interpretation, is it? there are plenty of things that are subjective and open to interpretation but there are others which are literal and unequivocally bigoted and I don’t have time for reformism and wishful thinking in the reclaiming of slurs and degrading practices. Including in the guise of religion shared by their more conservative brothers.

This quote summarizes it perfectly:

“It is not possible to be truly balanced in one’s views of an abuser and an abused woman. As Dr. Judith Herman explains eloquently in her masterwork Trauma and Recovery, “neutrality” actually serves the interests of the perpetrator much more than those of the victim and so is not neutral. Although an abuser prefers to have you wholeheartedly on his side, he will settle contentedly for your decision to take a middle stance. To him, that means you see the couple’s problems as partly her fault and partly his fault, which means it isn’t abuse.”
— “Why Does He Do That: Inside The Mind of Angry and Controlling Men” by Lundy Bancroft

“Labeling women as “crazy” is a way of controlling them. It may not be something planned or pre-meditated, but the ease with which men call women “crazy” says a lot about them. Calling a woman “crazy” is a quick and easy shut-down to any discussion. Once the “crazy” card has been pulled out, women are now put on the defensive: the onus is no longer on the man to address her concerns or her issue, it’s on her to justify her behavior, to prove that she is not, in fact, crazy or irrational. Men don’t even have to provide any sort of argument back – it’s a classic catch-22; “the fact that you don’t even see that you’re acting crazy is just proof that it’s crazy.””

Additionally, the myth of female hysteria manifests in the realm of the sexual. The belief that women can be hysterical due to lack of sex comes from Freud and the Victorian age, but that doesn’t stop both men (and the women behind them) from believing it. Its precedence was the Greeks’ belief that women were hypersexual and had a wandering uterus, that the womb was the cause of all female afflictions; the word hysteria comes from the Greek hysterika meaning uterus- cf. When Women Wanted Sex Much More Than Men and Hysteria and the Wandering Womb.

If anyone thinks it is okay to say the Freudian/Victorian quip that women are hysterical from “lack of sex” (and they mean PIV sex) then let is be said that it is because only 1/3 of women orgasm from PIV and THAT is why they are frustrated you fucking morons — most men are terrible at sex:

“Most women do not experience orgasm from intercourse itself. When Shere Hite, in her groundbreaking study, asked women to report their own sexual experiences in detail and depth, she discovered that only three in ten women regularly experience orgasm from intercourse. The women’s self-reports are not ideological. They want men, love, sex, intercourse; they want orgasm; but for most women, seven out of ten, intercourse does not cause orgasm. The women want, even strive for, orgasm from intercourse but are unable to achieve it. Hite, the strongest feminist and most honorable philosopher among sex researchers, emphasizes that women can and must take responsibility for authentic sexual pleasure: “the ability to orgasm when we want, to be in charge of our stimulation, represents owning our own bodies, being strong, free, and autonomous human beings.” ” — Andrea Dworkin, Intercourse, ch. 7: Occupation/Collaboration

Needless to say, every aspect of the female hysteria myth is a form of misogyny. It degrades both women and the expression of emotions and passion as evil and uncontrollable; it encourages men to have a lack of empathy and conscience. Women feel pressured to adhere to an ideal of equality that is fixed on male-centric values and behavior as a standard, the same values and behavior used to condition men into the masculine gender role. Femininity is not loved so much as it is enforced upon women as an obsolete and harmful gender role to ensure passivity and subordination, whereas men who are effeminate are “failed men,” “faggots,” “half-women” or “wanting to be women.” Men who are raped by other men or who take the passive role in gay sex are the only ones seen as gay, for the same reason feminine women are seen as ‘real’ women. Even slurs hurled at men usually do not refer to him directly, but refer to him as a woman or insult his mother (“motherfucker,” “bastard”).

How ironic that men see women are overemotional, when they choose to engage in emotional and physical violence, even towards other men. That they have expression in anger and physical or sexual dominance is a matter of preference and not of self-control. Men who presume themselves to be virtuous in their self-proclaimed logic, rationality, and philosophy, believe ‘might is right’ and argue hypothetical or ideal abstractions over material reality would do well to look at themselves in the mirror.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s