I got into a Twitter discussion with a feminist. Actually, two at once. One was… well, she left a lot to be desired. The other was a lot more reasonable and I enjoyed our conversation. The latter expressed concern over Forney, his stance on domestic violence, why he isn’t being called out on it, etc. So we talked that out a bit before she asked me my take on his How to Crush A Girl’s Self-Esteem piece. I gave a rather clunky critique of it that didn’t even come close to showing my thoughts. She said I scared her, gave a few reasons why (mostly “you’re okay with hurting women”, etc) and left. I respect that she doesn’t want to talk to me anymore but now I have all these thoughts on his post and no one to talk to about them. Lucky you, dear reader!
First off, I am never sure if Forney is being completely serious. I suspect he is not, which is probably why I can stomach him more than most. I suspect he is serious wrapped in satire which is exactly how I read it.
Second, I should probably point out that I didn’t entirely disagree with his previous article The Case Against Female Self-Esteem. I have a tendency to inject my own views into what other people are saying so maybe I completely missed the point of this but, in all honesty, the cult of self-esteem pushed on women these days is on my last nerve. I agree with him here:
From the moment they’re old enough to speak, girls in America are bombarded with propaganda that artificially boosts their self-esteem. They’re told that they’re shpecial and you-nique because they have an extra X chromosome. They’re told that they’re smart, that they can do anything, that they deserve respect merely for existing. They’re encouraged to derive self-worth not from their inherent feminine nature but from their college degree, their job or the other illusory trappings of achievement in a man’s world.
Combine this with the white-knighting tendencies of fathers and the sexual attention that attractive girls already get from puberty forward and you have a complete social meltdown in the making.
Yeah, I’m going to have to say he is spot on here as are his first two points: 1) Most girls have done nothing to deserve self-esteem and 2) Insecurity (or, ya know, humility) is integral to femininity.
I can completely see where this among some more colorful things he said in the post makes women and feminists everywhere rage. As he said, we’re told from minute one we are special princesses deserving of everything under the sun. This guy thinks we aren’t? Hulksmash!
Now onto the more recent post. This is how I broke down my thoughts for the Twitter feminist:
It is this I would like to expound on:
1. Constantly make her feel inadequate.
I said I was 50/50 on it. This is what I meant:
You should rarely give her unqualified praise.
I feel that.
Every time she does something for you, find out what she did wrong and remind her of it. If you can’t find any problems, make some up.
Not so much.
I think he is on to something here ie: not letting a woman get away with her inadequacies, expecting more, etc. Remember, we are talking about women here that have grown up in a society where they can do no wrong. Showing us we can is actually pretty important, IMO. Life changing stuff. But making stuff up? Going on the hunt for it? Reeks of desperation. A little too heavy-handed, a little too much.
2. Dominate her physically and sexually.
I said I more or less agreed with it, this is what I meant:
I was going to quote him but as he gets a bit graphic I’ll spare you, delicate flowers that we are (she says in jest). “Push her boundaries” is the gist of it. I do think this is important in a relationship that deals with an unequal balance of power. He pushes a little, she gives in a little more. Note, we’re talking pushing here not steamrolling. “I’m willing to submit to you in as far as I control all aspects of it” isn’t submission. Well, it’s BDSM submission but not the real life everyday kind (BTW, for those that don’t get how this is different than kink, there’s your answer).
3. Isolate her from her friends and family.
This is the big one, the one I really wanted to address. I said that he had a great point that I could go on about but couldn’t on Twitter because of space, this is what I meant:
You need to be the primary emotional influence in her life, and you can’t do that if she’s leaning on anyone else for support.
He’s not wrong. Isolation is a strong word, a bit extreme, I do agree with that much. But the underlying point is that you can’t ever underestimate, male or female, how many people want to drive a wedge. I don’t even mean purposefully, just with their ideas about themselves, you, life, your partner, etc. Cleave to your husband. That’s what this comes down to. What other people are saying and doing shouldn’t matter as much as what he is. Yet the way things are now the reverse is suppose to be true. In fact, anything but is considered abusive on one level or another. We need to remember and respect that we are our husband’s wives not everyone else’s. The idea that their opinions should matter is a false one. You revolve around him, not family or friends. This is advice I give even to my non Red Pill/traditional friends. Respecting your partner is about respecting him above everyone else. Now, this isn’t to say you can never be with, talk to, etc anyone but him. This is to say you lean on him more than anyone else.
4. Reward her at random intervals.
This one I was wrong about in lumping it in with all the agrees. Rewarding is important, yes. Rewarding at random intervals is an interesting concept, I’ll give him that much, one I am still mulling over.
5. Give her an emotional release.
I know that this one is controversial, even among TRP, but I can say it can be beneficial for many women. This deserves it’s own post, though.
6. F*** her like it’s your last day on Earth.
I just like this one because sex. And, yes, orgasm control is a win-win scenario. You’re just going to have to trust me on this one.
I get that the joke could really be on me in this in either reading too much or too little into what he says. It is what it is. I find at least some of what he says to be beneficial and humorously put which is why I read him. Reading his stuff objectively is not the same thing as cosigning on every last one of his ideas, contrary to popular belief. Just thought I would throw that out there because apparently these days it needs to be said.