I've had numerous debates with traditional conservatives in the past ten years. These individuals always devolve into trolls, in my final analysis.
They honestly believe that women are irrational and that we only respond to them for illogical reasons. I have also found, over the years, that many who argue for essential gender differences are just as happy, if not more so, to talk with the imaginary woman inside their head. They don't really need an actual woman interlocutor. A real woman would be like a redundant third wheel on a bicycle (nonetheless, stabilizing a mistaken ideological notion through the tacit approval she lends by her presence). Rather than supply this extra justification or support for their ideas, it is better to allow right wing men to continue to relate to themselves intra-personally.
The drama of the debate and the roles are already scripted, whereby the woman is supposed to present her irrational views about reality and then recoil into a hurt mode when hard-headed male 'rationality' will not bend to her totally crazy, womanly ideas.
Amusingly enough, it is the "hard-headed" male himself who knows inside and out the emotional movements and proclivities of the crazy woman role. He can be left alone to perform his role as masculine aggressor, as well as the role of his imaginary interlocutor: the outraged and overly sensitive generic woman-as-such.
These roles of hard-headed male and soft-headed woman are TOGETHER intoxicating for conservative. They never seem to tire of playing both imaginary roles!
**********************
No comments:
Post a Comment