The Female Stalker

The female stalker: she’s become a joke in our current culture. And let me say in advance, I find the below video screamingly funny, in fact I nearly peed myself laughing watching this. I am a huge fan of this girl. You can subscribe to her channel right here. I’ve been a fan of hers since she first hit the scene. Anyway, the funny video:

Now, again, this is funny. I am not attacking it.

However, it’s fascinating, isn’t it, that it would not be funny at all if she were a dude. Now, why? I submit that it’s because culturally, we believe men are violent, predatory, and dangerous and need to be tamed, whereas, we believe women are frail and weak and pretty much by definition are not-dangerous. I think there may even be something biological about it, based on something called “neoteny.” I remember introducing Karen Straughan to the term and she did a long video on it which you may enjoy, but in short, neoteny is the retention of childlike physical traits into adulthood. Human females are more neotenous than human males on average, although it is not purely a sex thing; Asian men tend to be somewhat more neotenous than the average white man, just for example (although of course there’s huge variation, it’s not an ironclad rule by any means). But between humans around the world, females are more neotenous than males: they retain smaller stature, less pronounced brow ridges, higher pitched voices, less musculature, less body hair, softer skin, etc. and if you look hard you start to realize that a lot of women’s “beautification” techniques — not all, but a large portion of them — are methods to increase neotenous appearance: getting rid of body and facial hair, softening skin, softening hair, making their eyes look bigger, and so on.

What this appears to my eye to do is to heighten men’s protective instincts toward women, and it also seems to heighten women’s protective instincts toward women. Although there is arguably a biological component to this, I think we live in a time and culture where that nominally healthy instinct has been kicked into overdrive. Women appear to be encouraged to see themselves as potential victims waiting to happen (even though men are statistically more than twice as likely to be the victims of violent assault than women are, and are statistically far more likely to be the victims of sexual assault by females than most people realize) and men as beastly domineering predators and oppressors. I believe both liberals and conservatives are guilty of this impulse, and it’s not healthy for anyone: it infantalizes women and demonizes men, especially when we allow our subconscious impulses to override our rational thought processes. “Wait, she can’t really be dangerous, she’s just a cute girl!”

(And yes, cute girls get away with more than not-so-cute girls, by the way.)

All of it seems to me to be very well encapsulated in the (in my view sexist) phrase “men’s violence toward women,” which is apparently now an acceptable part of political and civil discourse, as the so-called “Violence Against Women Act” goes up for renewal. Factually speaking, women commit the vast majority of violent child abuse, neonaticides, and murder of small children, yet I am virtually certain there would be an avalanche of protest and rage if anyone started campaigns to “end women’s violence against children,” let alone any campaign to end women’s violence against men (which is, again, far more common than most people realize).

I post this in part as an observation in its own right, and also in continuation of a previous discuss on why male victims of sexual assault by females do not report and how I believe this also contributes to a cultural climate of infantalization of women and demonization of men. Feel free to continue to discuss any such related issues here. I think these things do go together.

  • Pingback: The Female Stalker | The Moderate Voice

  • queenofallevil

    Women appear to be encouraged to see themselves as potential victims waiting to happen (even though men are statistically more than twice as likely to be the victims of violent assault than women are, and are statistically far more likely to be the victims of sexual assault by females than most people realize)

    Women are encouraged to be proactive in self-defense because when matched up against a man – they are not likely to escape or overpower a man with use of a weapon or cunningly quick reflexes. Women are generally physically weaker than men, exceptions exist but are not the norm.

    Women are far more likely to be assaulted by men than they are by women – even though women assault other women too.

    Men are far more likely to be assaulted other men than they are of women, even though women do assault men.

    The rape question is still statistically unprovable but I willing to accept the number you’ve provided. At what rate do men rape other men? Do you have that number available?

    The overall point is that while women are violent, men are more violent and have been historically.

    I understand your reluctance to address these issues in a way that is less like the way feminists do but the Men’s Movement is coming from a disadvantage and one glaring one is that historic oppression of women by men makes people wary of listening to angry men screaming about how nasty and violent women are. The same way that whites can’t seem to convince people that African Americans can also be racist. Oppressed minorities get a larger pass from society and lawmakers on certain things and even get special hate crimes legislation passed because of guilt or whatever. We’ve become a nation of special classes and you are gonna have to change hearts and minds to get people to listen to a new narrative when the old one is still solidly in force.

    It doesn’t help when people in the very movement DENY that women were ever even oppressed by men historically. This was written by Paul Elam: “I’m no historian, but I did attend some history classes before I finished middle school. So, by the time I was 13, I knew what oppression was. And lucky for me I was 13 in a time when people still knew what it wasn’t.

    Oppression has some pretty obvious tell tale signs. Like torture and death; like bullwhips and chains; gas chambers and death camps. Oppression is a roadmap of scars on the back of a field hand that was purchased at an auction. It is the rope that gets strung over a tree branch in broad daylight and used to choke the life out of someone convicted of being the wrong color.

    It is an indelible stain on humanity, void of compassion, dehumanizing to both the oppressed and the oppressor. And the evidence of it is so offensive to modern sensibilities that we preserve proof of it as lessons for the coming generations.

    Now, when we compare those things to the historical world of women, which was largely one of being protected and provided for, we get an entirely different picture. It is a portrait not of the oppressed, but of the privileged.”

    If this is the premise he’s working with he’s got a looong road ahead of him. It’s clear he’s no historian, he’s also not a man well acquainted with a dictionary as he’s chosen to re-write the definition of oppression and with his new definition turn women into these mythical creatures who ruled the world. By his standard, communism wasn’t such a bad deal and I imagine Stalin and Mao were just dudes who were seriously misunderstood.

    Change is difficult for people and if you want people to listen and be swayed, it would help if you understood that acting like the very thing you don’t want to be classified as like : scary, angry, or abusive and hateful men. I would strongly encourage you to remember :

    It’s not what you say but how you say it. How you say it often determines how “we” hear it.

    Just some thoughts I’ve been having. I bother because I have 3 sons and I find what you are doing here very important and I want you and the other Menimists to succeed for the sake of my sons and other sons.

  • http://madisonforum.net/ Sandi

    …even though men are statistically more than twice as likely to be the victims of violent assault than women are

    Your stats are just comparing violence, not female violence on male: that is a misuse of statistics.

    Change is difficult for people and if you want people to listen and be swayed, it would help if you understood that acting like the very thing you don’t want to be classified as like : scary, angry, or abusive and hateful men. I would strongly encourage you to remember :

    It’s not what you say but how you say it. How you say it often determines how “we” hear it.

    I don’t think Dean is usually, or very often angry when he posts. Enthusiastic zeal can come across that way in print though, and it often does on this issue. Perfectly said Queen