Archive for March, 2017
or Equality vs ME-quality
Equality will always come in second to ME-quality.
No matter how pressing the problems of a different social group may objectively become, the problems of your own social group will always matter more to the majority of human beings. This is just a simple fact about humans and how our survival instinct has evolved.
It is statistically true that there has been an imbalance of power in favor of men for far too many years now. This power imbalance applies across many areas of life including politically, domestically, financially, and socially.
I believe the imbalance may be due mostly or in part to the higher average strength and agility levels of the male gender, which are of course due to our higher testosterone levels. The imbalance may have originated in cave-times, when brute strength correlated more closely with power, and then carried over to modern times.
Now the power imbalance is slowly disappearing as our one male advantage of brute strength matters less and less in everyday life. We as a species are focusing more on the other human skill sets in which males and females have more equal abilities: general intelligence, strategizing, creativity, memory, social manipulation, economic productivity, etc.
So when someone complains about the way “men” (or “women”) act, I think it’s silly. The entire premise of feminism is predicated on the intellectual, social, and sexual equality of the genders. The one remaining difference is our programming, whether social, cultural, or parental.
So if a generic man acts a certain way in a certain situation, you can be sure that if you put a generic woman in an identical situation, she will respond in a similar manner.
Rich guys love to show off their wealth; Rich girls love to show off their wealth.
Attractive girls are divas; Attractive guys are divas.
Cool guys act like they don’t give a fuck; Cool girls act like they don’t give a fuck.
(Most of them actually do give a fuck.)
For every entitled male, there is an equally entitled female.
For every offensive male trope about women, there is an equally offensive female trope about men.
For every male gaze, there is an equally penetrating female gaze.
Let’s not kid ourselves.
Whether it’s race, gender, sexual orientation, economic class or whatever, lumping together everyone in a certain group strikes me as unfair.
I didn’t give up my seat on the bus today to the tired, heavyset woman standing beside me.
What exactly is it that offends you about this?
If we are two organisms jostling around on a rock in a vacuum, I would say I think the arc of the moral universe is indifferent towards me keeping my seat. At this long term level of morality, you being offended makes no sense.
If it’s polite for a man to give his seat to a woman, I would say I think you’re a misogynist.
If the stronger should protect and care for the weaker, I would say I think this is the specific level of morality where you have the strongest argument. As the more capable being, I have a moral obligation toward beings less capable than myself, and to keep my seat would be the moral equivalent of a conquistador annihilating a tribe or an extraterrestrial annihilating the human race. If you look at the situation through a morally-nearsighted lens, I have a moral imperative to bequeath the poor soul my seat. At this short term level of morality, the high ground belongs to you.
If sitting is the new smoking, however, I would say I think my moral imperative would be to keep my secondhand smoke to myself. If sedentary lifestyles kill in the medium term, then I am doing this woman a favor by keeping her on her feet. I exercise a lot more than she does and am therefore more capable of assuming on my shoulders the considerable risks involved in sitting. She may or may not even literally tell her friends that she doesn’t need the gym because she gets her exercise standing on the bus every day for an hour.
If diminishing pain and maximizing pleasure is your morality, the minutes of discomfort she may have to endure today will save her from a world of pain in the future.
If by sitting in her stead, I can prolong her life for even a mere hour – by keeping her heart rate up, her muscles flexed, and her blood circulating, which in turn will increase her organs’ lifespan, her physical capability, and her quality of life – do I not owe it to her to snatch that seat away, to remove the danger that lies in her path? Am I not sacrificing my own wellbeing for hers?
Should not we all grab the seats for ourselves, laying down our lives on the altar for humanity? Or is humanity under the perpetual curse of an instinctively narrow purview of morality that prevents us from seeing into even the medium term much less the long term?
The Democrats have just proven that in order to win, you have to appeal to black voters.
White male voters are 50/50 assholes, Latino voters have shown that their vote may swing either way, and white women voters are also notoriously fickle. The only way to guarantee you’ll win a presidency is to have a candidate that gets black voters out to vote.
The last two Democrat landslides were, 1) stylish saxophonist Bill Clinton (with a magical 90% black voter approval rating) and, 2) Barack Obama. The other party will probably always have a white candidate for the near future, so that demographic will always be pretty much wrapped up or at least hotly contested. If black voters have to choose between two white candidates, their vote could go either way, or could stay home. But if they get to choose between a white candidate and a black candidate, which candidate do you think the vast majority of black voters would be more likely to trust?
And any candidate who can win the trust of the majority of black voters, will win the election. A liberal black candidate who automatically gets the liberal white vote, the liberal Latino vote, the gay vote, and the black vote will landslide every time.
If the Democrats figure this out first, then our next few presidents will be Democrat and black, not necessarily in that order.
Until the Republicans catch up and start thinking about being able to stomach putting persons of color on their ticket.
Then it will be anyone’s game again.