All wars endure. Especially this one.

The second in a very short series of provocative topics

We are animals first.  Our motivations, our fears, our basic instincts are all still very primal. We want our genes in the gene-pool, we want to survive and we all want full stomachs. Eat, sleep and screw is still job 1.

Our modern way of following that destiny is now so complicated and so sophisticated that it requires massive social cooperation.  We now need cities, institutions, corporations, NGOs and governments just to make the simple basics happen.  We need Facebook. We have complicated the simple.

So, we are a social species, one that generally works together when it works.  If it works at all.

And, of course, you know all this.

Social species tend towards specialization and we are no different.  In fact, possibly one of the most vulnerable aspects of our own modern life right now is that we may be too specialized in some ways. Not enough people can do enough general-skill-set things to basically survive on their own for more than even a few days and that makes us all weaker to a large extent.  The species is vulnerable to it.  But, I digress.

The point is that we have bred/evolved/specialized men, in particular, to be more manly and we have done the same to woman to be more womanly.  Sexually, anyway.  In our quest for specialization, we have managed to separate the sexes even further and enhance their differences rather than their commonality.  We have ‘differentiated’ them more than they were already and naturally because of nature’s own natural selection, basic evolution and genetic experimentation.  We have bred sheep, cattle, dogs and fowl to be ‘more’ than they were originally and we did the same to ourselves.  In other words, we have always been inclined to being different in the sexes but society and civilization have exaggerated it.

That differentiation served us well for a long time, actually. The male of the species was bred like a pit bull to be an aggressive fighter for a considerable time.  And we encouraged that for village and town defense.  We, the people, wanted them (our soldiers) bigger, meaner, smarter, more aggressive and vicious than those annoying ‘enemies’ we might have across the way.  We want the really tough guys on our side.  If they are aggressive and greedy, that’s not so bad either.  Especially if they raid the other village and bring back the bacon and goodies for their own village.  Go, tough guys!

We even mentally enhanced our males to be more ‘manly’ by way of propaganda movies starring Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham and Bruce Willis.  These guys are tough and invincible AND funny.  What’s not to like?  Go Bruce!

We have further enhanced them with sophisticated martial arts and physical skills training, drugs, extra-hormones, weaponry and by fear-mongering and ‘dissing’ the ‘enemy’.  We reward them when they get that way.  We then take those testosterone-freaks and train them in real death situations in Afghanistan, Iraq, local police forces, armed forces and various other but always-happening hot spots around the world.  Maybe just the local gym. And, if some of our young men are NOT going to a war, they might be encouraged, at least, to play in the mock wars of hockey, football and martial arts.  And we reward them extra for that!

Make no mistake, we encourage our males to ‘man up’.

Why?  Because much of the time we want them to be able to kill, dominate, take and protect.  We want them to be able to beat others up.  We want them to be brutal and decisive and we want them to win as much gold, bacon, babes, real estate and power as they can.  We like men who ‘take what they want’.  So long as they are doing it for us.

And women then want them to give all that wealth obtained by whatever means to them. Someone has to get it all…for the kids….for the species…right?

We have not left our women short in the field of enhancements, evolution, motivations and agendas, either.  They are good at what they do.  They do not have to kill and fight but they should at least be beautiful, seductive and manipulative.  Add silicon if needed. Always add make-up.  They should NOT work hard if it ruins their figure.  They should be physically powerful but so much more mentally powerful that they can control their men. They need to control and discipline their men to avoid trouble back at home.

The modern successful women has it all, a massive bank account, a monster house, a monster husband who brings home the goodies and then he shuts the hell up and watches sports while she gets a massage and manicure and invests the family estate in getting even more money accumulated.  It’s called ‘progress’.

And people wonder why that formula so often goes off the rails.

We all know that it is not a good, healthy, peaceful or sustainable formula.  But it is what we made it and we are playing it.

“So, what is your point, Dave?”

You can’t breed and encourage an animal to be a pit bull and not expect that he will fight and/or bite someone.  It’s now a built-in part of the beast.  You can’t encourage the male human animal by having the female being attracted to them for being so aggressive and not expect that some of the beast will come along for the ride.  Maybe show up now and then back at the condo? To do so is naive.

One of the reasons women are so angry at aggressive and ‘driven’ men is that they WANT that aggressive man to use that ‘power’ to protect them and fill their larder with goodies.  But they do not want to deal with the fact that, for many men, the women are sometimes seen as the ‘stuff and the goodies’.  Getting the babe is part of the reward system because we have also merchandised sex.

And that profession started a long time ago.

Face it, when you silicon and pout yourself up, you are merchandising yourself as a goody.  You are ‘part’ of the larder.  And, when you package yourself up as ‘marketable stuff’, then primal guy is gonna occasionally bite the wrong leg.

Bottom line: we are sending men and women mixed and ultimately self-destructive messages. It maybe worked in the past.  It does not work now.  Be good.  Be successful. Be primal.  Be polite.  And do as you are told is a fantasy expectation.

For reasons no longer applicable, we are still pushing men and women to being caricatures of real human beings and values.  Beauty and the beast.  And we will likely continue to do that because it is good for that new sociopathic species, it is good for business.   And men and women will continue to disappoint one another in real and human ways.  And that is sad because we do not want to be used by corporate guy and we all really want more than primal relationships with our partners.

In the meantime, sex crimes will continue. Sexual politics will continue.   The war of the sexes will continue.

The truly tragic part of it is that we don’t acknowledge the natural differences between the sexes and deal with them.  We don’t accept the basic animal urges as natural.  We don’t address any of that in a healthy way. We just fight about it.  Like the animals we still are.

Fool me once, shame on Jian. Fool me twice and I am the fool.

Sexual politics is a tar-baby.  Shouldn’t be touched.  I know that.  I have just pulled the pin on a hand grenade…

For the record: I do not like – in any way – Jian Ghomeshi.  Didn’t like his personality, didn’t like the CBC show and I was particularly put off with what he allegedly offered up as seductive foreplay for his groupie-like dates.  Not my kind of guy at all.

Well, it was not just alleged, actually, the weird behaviour was admitted by him as well. Doesn’t make it any better.  The guy is some kind of bully, doing silly, immature power-displays over his surprised and intimidated dates.

I have a tendency to want to punch people like that.  Forgive me.  I carry a bias of chivalry. Or chauvinism, if you prefer.  I think I am coming to the rescue. You know, fair maidens in danger…?  That kinda thing?  Disney-esque?  

It seems I am judged wrong to feel that way these days.  “I can take care of myself!” is the fashionable female response even if the opposite is obviously true.  (I once saw a guy meanly manhandling and yelling viciously at a much smaller woman and so I politely intervened.  No punching!  After the guy left, she told me that she was totally capable of handling it and I should not have interfered.  I apologized and blamed the superhero comic books I read as a kid.  Hard to know what the right thing is sometimes).       

And it is also NOT fashionable to judge sexual practices these days either unless you represent a women’s organization and then it’s OK just so long as the bottom line is that all men are still all bad all of the time!  Seems some men don’t behave as they should. Who knew?  But, regardless, I am inclined to think anything that whacked-out weird is still really NOT OK. So, I judge, too. And I judge JG as a bully.  A punk, really.

Mind you, I have some minor judgments forming about the women who date him, too.  So, I am bad all-around, I guess.  It is really me who is at fault.

Sorry.

I have to keep my mouth shut over most of it, though, on the assumption all the weirdos are simply just different and can’t help it.  And it is all OK.  Apparently all 50 shades of deviation are OK except judging it.  And, oddly, there is nothing wrong with that topsy-turvy way of seeing things.

Nowadays, it is OK for some Dominatrix to whip a willing-someone into submission but for me to judge that behaviour as sick, is not OK.  So, once again, I am bad and it is really me who is at fault.

Sorry.

And, anyway, I have already judged that Ghomeshi could help it.  Apologies to all the ‘chokers and slappers’ out there just expressing themselves naturally.

But – and here’s my point –  so could the victims have helped it.  SO COULD THE VICTIMS!

Of course, they could have had a much better response than they did at the time of the incident but I fully understand the moment of shock and surprise eliminating immediate rational thought.  I understand that seeing a guy ‘turn’ on you like that would be so shocking as to leave one helpless and traumatized.  Maybe even semi-paralyzed for awhile.  In fact, NOT immediately calling the cops makes a great deal of sense to me. Examining your own role in the matter first makes even more sense to me.  “Geez, what did I do to warrant that?”  Not making accusations is probably healthy. You first have to try to understand the something weird that is determined (eventually) NOT understandable.

I get that. Take your time.  Get your head together.

Hint: first question to consider asking yourself, “What the hell was I doing there, in the first place?”

But I also admit that there are many much bigger questions that arise from such a weird incident and the weirdo should do most of the answering.  That first personal question still counts but the next ten or so should be directed at the weirdo.

However, it makes no sense to me to THEN later go on another date with such a person! Simply by doing that, you have implied forgiveness of the original incident if not acceptance.   ‘You were really, really sick, bad and evil but I forgive you.  Be good from now on, OK, my cuddly-dums?’

That almost makes some kind of sense, too, if you are the naive, forgiving type without a brain in your head.  But even the wooden-headed should know that they can’t THEN later charge the dufus with a crime!  Charging the dufus comes BEFORE the second date!

And there should be NO second date.

You are – Ms Woodenhead – by your actions, at the very least, forgiving him his wayward kinks if you go back for a return engagement.  In fact, one might argue that you were inviting more of the same bad behaviour simply by recreating the opportunity.  Don’t you see that?

Doesn’t matter if you do or don’t. Forgiveness makes it consensual.  Sick but consensual. No charges.  No crime committed.

But the charges were laid anyway.  And, oddly, I don’t really have too much trouble with that, either.  Not really.  It was stupid of the Crown.  But, so what?  The system ain’t perfect or fair and it is the accused who gets smashed all to pieces from the allegation, anyway. Allegations are good enough to ruin someone these days.  OBVIOUSLY not all people charged with a crime are guilty but all men are all-guilty of all-sex crimes, it seems.

And that is another hot topic to address some day….

The point: sexual politics has shifted the basic principles of law.  And perspectives. Women think the law no longer cares about them.  Men think the law no longer cares about the male.  He feels he is simply guilty until proven innocent now.  She feels like a target.  Neither are relying on evidence-based processes anymore.

In fact, any woman can allege her husband hit her and the police – without any evidence present, nor questions asked – will take him to jail.  It is Ministry of the Attorney General policy nowadays.  So, that twisted process has to play out.  I think that is wrong, too, but why not at least let it play out?

Women think it plays out but to the advantage of the male.  Men think otherwise.

So, lay the charges, prove the allegation.  Or not. That’s life. Who cares?  Move on.  But, in this, the Ghomeshi case, at least, the evidence was weak, the accusers were proved to be lying.  Ugly, deviant, bully-man got off.  But there is no doubt in my mind, the legal verdict was just.

The court of public opinion will likely find differently.

End result?  Ghomeshi is largely finished as a conventional personality.  Or should be, anyway. We’ll see if he doesn’t yet work his personal madness into a new form of celebrity and make a deal for a show on the FOX network.  Maybe him and Kim Kardashian?  

And there would be nothing wrong with that!   

The public have also called the judge and the law into question. Fair enough, I guess. Justice is a spectator sport, after all.  By design, too. But how can they cry ‘injustice’ when the accusers were proved to be lying?

Answer from women’s groups: ‘Lying is OK, if the original story, in some form, is true enough for our standards?’

Not only is there something significantly wrong with Mr. Ghomeshi, there is something even more wrong with the perspective of women’s rights and political groups if they are prepared to abandon the legal principles on which our society is based.

Jus’ sayin’….