Ballista74 , The Society of Phineas, took a bit of a hiatus from writing, redesigned the look of his blog, and emerged a couple of weeks ago with one of the best subtle communications I’ve seen in awhile. he explained his absence by saying he had not been writing of his experience while he was away using a pets first person perspective. If anyone missed that, it was a reference to my post Thank You Mimi where I therapeutically vented about the death of my mother this past February. I used my dog to tell the story.
Its good to know no deaths occurred in the family. And a clever way of conveying same.
Ballista74’s posts since resuming have been about Helen Smiths book and then generally about those women who have carved themselves out a piece of the manosphere. His most recent post, Chasing Without Knowing, Acting Without Responsibility is a comprehensive (not exhaustive because it is a summary) piece referencing several female writers and the attendant issues with each, and with female manosphere-ish writers in general.
Because it is not exhaustive, which single blog posts are unable to be anyway, it invites (hopefully with his blessing) other writers to take certain tangents and build on the topic. I know one other blogger said he intended to do, and here I am staking a piece for myself.
As ballista74 said in his piece,
[ ]these messages simply not being acceptable from the pens or mouths of men. Again, there are legions of men that have been and are speaking out, but will never get MSM attention with their ideas. In this sense, a man could never have written this book and have had it as accepted as Dr. Smith’s book. To that point, this book had to be written by a woman for it to see the light of day. The publishers in the MSM would have never accepted this book from a man.
How would we address this problem?
Would we stop reacting to the kernals of truth that come with these women’s writing? Do we scrub them from mention in our world? Do we attack them and try to discredit them, at least among our non-homogeneous group of writers and readers?
I don’t know. At the moment we sort of do the first one. But the danger is that men are mesmerized by women who seem to get our stuff. men like to invite women into our spaces. Consider some of those writer’s (ballista74 describes all of this) insidious motives, the flawed ideological framework, and other specious things swirling around these women to varying degrees. Combine that with the tendency of men, especially the uninitiated, to latch onto these women without a full reckoning of their motives etc. you end up with lots of men down with the cause.
But which cause? Its almost like those ministries that are so close to the truth that Christians get sucked in. Folks deceived or ignorant and apathetic who are bought into something because it has shiny parts are in many ways more difficult to show red pill truth to than men who hold diametrically opposite beliefs. That’s not good. From a high view, AVFM is a prime example of this. Lots of what has happened there is coincident with the primacy of female ideologues on their pages.
I started wondering if there is a male influence in the lives of the more prominent female men’s issue writers? Venker and Smith are married. We know Smiths husband. Stepping away from national prominence, GirlWritesWhat does not have a husband. Let’s consider our own subset of women writers. The most prolific is SSM. She keeps well inside the correct lines and writes consistently solid posts (small disagreements notwithstanding)The husbands of the married ones come from different perspectives. I am positing theory here, i do not know them obviously. The two authors have husbands that fit within the frame Ballista74 describes. They are like the men I described above who are mesmerized by a woman who steps seemingly cooperatively into a male ideological space. They are close but miles from the truth that lies beneath. In the case of SSM, if I believe her, and Ive no reason not to, she recognizes her husband as her head, and “wifes” accordingly. But I do not think he offers much in the way of ongoing ever present ideological mentoring, filtering, or editing. Not a disparagement, just is what it is. I would be remiss to not mention Elspeth. Elspeth avoids the hard core ideological debates, or speaks gently and generally and sparingly into them. She never fails to explain that her husband is the role model she follows for her comments on these issues. She expresses DEEP respect for him, and it shows in her comments. I love the guy and never met him. I suspect he is too busy and not inclined to interrupt his life to think deeply about things that just are in his world anyway. he is an uncommonly well situated man, and will accomplish by example in his own fields. So those like Elspeth are unlikely to proliferate aggressively and widely precisely because they are in such a good place. She will stay with teaching some women, and that’s not a small thing.
So, currently, the presence of men in the lives of these women is not making a difference for the manosphere and our issues other than encouraging the women in her efforts whatever those women say. These are the things I was thinking while reading ballist74’s post. Then I read the comments section
Poster evilwhitemalempire, writing at The Society of Phineas, had the following to say:
It might be a good idea, to start blogs, vid channels, etc. disguised as female.
That was not exactly what I was thinking. Nor was i thinking about a man who writes something and his wife posts it under her name. The writing would most likely be transparently male. That defeats the purpose. But there is another variant.
Consider, if a woman who has her head mostly around red pill thinking, and is acting mostly in accordance with the biblical ordering of marriage, and who has a husband who is already Christian red pill and has been steeped long enough to squeeze out white knight vestiges, if that woman was to, in conjunction with her husband, speak into the manosphere, it would be the best of both worlds. it would not be a true Trojan Horse. But it would be decidedly NOT motivated by all the subtle yet nefarious things ballist74 writes about.
It begs a question. How many men who are that well steeped in Christian manosphere ideas have wives who are also well steeped and near completely in agreement? That wife would have to be somewhat motivated by the issues or she’d have never reached her informed conclusion. She must read things. Its not enough she agree with anecdotes her husband shares in between whatever else she is doing. Sorting further, how many have the drive and the nerve to put themselves out there. How many have the skills? The time? On and on.
I thought of Sarah’s Daughter. She meets the tightening criteria I list above. In many ways, very well. I do not know how to describe it briefly. While she hits home runs often in her comments, there is something a bit off in her’s and her husband’s tag team approach. Its as if she is an alpha man by proxy, like she carries the seal of the king and its delegated authority to and over all others, male or female. That’s a whole new set of problems.
What I realized is the exquisite rarity of this hypothetical woman. I cannot think of a single example. I’d be interested to have one pointed out to me. The variant may be wishful thinking.