Perspectives

I've read a lot of history, and I have always wondered why men have universally treated women so poorly.


  • By
  • | 1:03 p.m. September 8, 2010
  • Winter Park - Maitland Observer
  • Opinion
  • Share

I think that if given their druthers, women would rather have less to do with men. Thank you very much.

I know a married woman (with children) who would like to live in a dormitory-like setting with other women and children and simply “date” men. She’d see men when she “felt” like it. She finds men tedious, infantile and needy. Her faithful husband — an incredible, verbally derisive bore.

I know any number of divorced women who are so gun-shy of men that they will have little to do with them. It’s a fear based on a profound disappointment of the male sex. It is hard to refute fact based on personal experience.

History validates their perspective. I’ve read a lot of history, and I have always wondered why men have so consistently and universally treated women so poorly. Seriously. When human consciousness first kicked in and “we” (as a species) started reflecting on the meaning of it all, where did the idea originate that women were little more than breeding stock? Surely, our first attempts at society had to have been more egalitarian, but the moment we organized into anything approaching a “civilization”, we became increasingly uncivil to women.

I can think of just a handful of cultures that were even remotely different. Interestingly, ancient Egypt had a more “open” culture as to women and their place in it as did the Etruscans some 1,500 or so years later. But for thousands of years, women were chattel, and only through centuries of incremental change did we arrive in the 20th century, a time when women were able to insist that law (and custom) reflect their equality with/to men. I am particularly impressed with the 18th century feminist writer Mary Wollstonecraft. A fine mind.

The chemistry of life has the sexes hotly desiring one another but after the “bloom” of lust recedes, we’re each (as in male or female) left with our innate qualities to sustain the relationship.

And this, lads, is where we come up short. Being “good” in the sack may get you to home plate, so to speak. A regular homerun hitter. But, uh, to continue the sports metaphor, it does not a complete game make. And, I, for one, do not even know what a complete game consists of today. It’s obvious, it’s not until death do us part, if divorce (or relationship) statistics are any indication.

A lot of women find men boorish. Mix testosterone into the equation and it’s a volatile recipe for disillusionment. It may be that modernity is ultimately incompatible with the male sex, that the qualities that had us climbing out of trees and “successfully” conquering our world (Mother Earth) are insufficient to building and maintaining the more demanding challenge of intimate relationships with women.

Some women actually do like a bit of the “beast,” a wild abandon in bed, but in all other matters (except when home-invaders are at the door), they want consistent male behavior that considers women their equal. Short of that?

“Well, I’ll just have a side order of man. Definitely, sunny side up, please.” And increasingly, that is the dish of the day.

Men in small doses. Filling but not unfulfilling.

 

Latest News

Sponsored Content