PIPISTRO

just something to say

The banality of male

leave a comment »

Fear of God can be defined as the attitude of the faithful who feel subjected to the constant judgment of divinity. It is a way of being introduced, albeit to a different extent, in every religious elaboration, where man has always imagined himself oppressed, subjected or at most – in a vaguely more evolved paternalistic conception – protected by God.

This feeling, this fear, is reflected in the fear of contravening the rule that is meant to be imposed by the divinity and being punished for this and must – in the design of those who made the system – direct the actions of the community to achieve the advantages preordained for the creation of the system itself, such as – historically, by way of example – the conservation of heritage and the aspiration to a relative, as often sterile, social tranquility.

In many cases, but for the same reason, fear is a pure manifestation of the male apparatus that created the system and in this respect it has been associated for millennia with the subjecting of women to men, understood as male, who then made it application in the political system, where the authority of power has finally replaced or has been added to the presumed authority of God, often corrupted by the unnatural and interested conception of physical pleasure as a rewarding situation for the man, undue for the woman and sinful for both.

But if there is no fear, the system – any system, be it religious or social – with the failure of the rule to which fear is preordained, collapses.

Thus, a system inspired by the primitive principle according to which physical strength prevails in the short term and in which a male author has drawn God in his own image also to draw an ephemeral convenience from it, rebels against the dissolution of fear from which his very existence derives. . And it does it in the crudest and most banal way, with violence.

From a different point of view it must then be added that to the maintenance of the system that has seen the undisputed dominion of the male in any situation, has been added until recently (and even today) the willing collaboration, in a subordinate and often parasitic role, of a woman who preferred to uncritically adapt to the system, making it her own, to reap some residual advantages, but making herself for this very reason the worst – unaware or devious – enemy of herself.

This certainly does not mean that an outcast lover or an ignoble father elaborate thoughts deeper than a puddle in order to mistreat and kill – considering themselves abandoned and dishonored – the partner or daughter seen as cheating, but only that their genetic heritage and cultural, as well as that of women who do not oppose it and for this reason support it, struggles to get rid of the pathology of a yoke that has lasted millennia, which, outside their head, is only vulgar and gangrenous alignment with the anachronistic advantages which inspired it.

Written by pipistro

December 11, 2020 at 7:08 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: