Forums

[robustpuppy]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I can't debate with you or TM that women objectively have less of what most people call "power" in our society. I'm using a broader, more expansive definition of "power." Some background's necessary...

When I talk about power, I'm not talking sheer corporate of govt force or hierarchical achievement. I view the "power" allocation in those realms as bifurcated - there are risk takers at the top, controlling decisions, and everybody else. The difference between the two involves sex, partly for the reasons you cite. But there's more to it than that. There's a lot of luck and native ability that factors in. I'd say sex is a part of it, and a not insignificant one, but hardly the largest.

The power I'm talking about (and maybe this is more a confession than a rebuttal) is the subtle interplay I see driving so much of what men do. I never wanted any achievement, career or shit as much as I wanted to meet a hot chick with brains who fell for me. That was always my white whale, and I think it's most men's white whales. We do everything we do to try to get the perfect mate. The odd thing about women is they are technically not holding the levers of "power," but all the levers of power are being pulled by people trying to get a resource they exclusively hold (even if the people pulling those levers don't realize it at the time they're doing it). Which makes women pretty powerful.

Caveat: To accept this, you have to believe that for most people, sex isn't a mere commodity, but at least a very unique one. You also have to believe that people have an innate desire to bond with, rather than merely dominate, one another.

Levers of power. Heh.