Moving past this silly men vs women war

[zazen]

What caused this? In the past people were too rigid, but now too much freedom, or freedom not being used wisely / responsibly is causing its own issues. People starting relationships young, and getting embittered towards the opposite sex after a few failed attempts/relations. How can one healthily bond to the opposite sex that caused them these past traumas and if they do bond it is traumatic bonding or brings its own issues both parties have to deal with.  I guess the free love, liberation of the 60/70's was a needed shift from the past and marked the turning of the tide, but now society needs to come to some sort of balance as its clearly not working.

 

Marriage has to become viable and not such a bad deal for men. Most men are at heart family men and have the instinct to provide and protect their woman and children. We have to also be able to speak openly about the consequences of casual sex without being labelled far right, prude, judgemental misogynists. 

 

" As the individual bonds with the family, the family bonds with the civilization it inhabits. But individuals deprived the bonds of family by outcome of immutable social factors are often at odds with civilization. Such individuals give up on community, opting for a more parasitic survival strategy. They are the shameless narcissists, the angry barbarians and each and every shade of dysfunction there between. Scarcely do such people care for civilization. And how can we expect them to care for something as grand and abstract as civilization when such individuals were never fully subject to the bonds of family? How does one come to love something as grand as nation when they had not even the love of kin? 

Familial estrangement manufactures apathy. This is how promiscuity and divorce undermine social progress, and in turn, civilizational progress. The effects of such action cause pain, which in turn, promotes excessive individualism and a disdain for collectivism. And so the cosmic recurrence that is a need for balance is tipped too far in one direction. That is, an obsession with the self (individualism, narcissism) and a disregard for the whole (collectivism, abstraction.)

Naturally, this is bad for family. And what is bad for family is in turn bad for civilization. Each family represents a building block in the construction of civilization. Families (in the traditional sense of the word) contribute more value to society than lone individuals. Generally speaking, they have better mental health, a higher sense of civic duty, are more productive, and pay more taxes than broken homes or one person households. And this seems only rational. Family is bound by blood, civilization forms around the desires and needs of such bonds. People work harder and produce more when they care for and are cared for by others.

It is human nature to be infatuated with freedom in spite of considerations pertaining to the stability of such. And so, the minority who manage to stylishly defy society and get away with it are near universally idolised by the masses who are less free. Rock stars, rappers and social butterflies looking to make a name for themselves all encapsulate such attitudes.

In truth, if all enjoyed the near absolute freedom of the few, social order would break down. Civilization would be but a shadow of its former self. And then those left would quickly call for order and more conservative social mores. Indeed, boom and bust, rise and decline, the attitudes and social mores of a civilization’s people appears quite cyclical. It appears that with prosperity, comes the rise of promiscuity. In safe societies the feminine is able to flourish. But people become like children with access to the cookie jar, this leads to excessive freedom, which in turn leads to destruction and general apathy. Then when collapse comes, the masculine takes over – leading to order, conservatism, and ordered individuals in turn  lead to a ordered, creative society once again  "

Edited October 14, 2021 by zazen