Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

new theory about how men are controlling women

72 replies

BeforeEve · 17/02/2014 07:54

Hi,
I’d like to know your opinion about one new theory about how men are controlling women.
I heard about new research of psychologists who discovered how men subdue (control, manipulate) women. These psychologists say that every person controlled by the images. However, men have usurped all areas of production of images, such as politics (image making), religion, painting, film, literature, music, and so on. There are some women in these areas too, but they do not know the secret of how to made artificial images as men. Men keep it a secret. That is why men but not women have power in this society. Men occupy all the key managerial positions in all spheres. They have greater financial opportunities than women do. In addition, men control women, totally. Men knows the secret how to create images and create them to subdue women. Men are rudely using women in many spheres of life. Women for men are a resource of cheap labor and a tool for the reproduction of the human race, nothing more. Men turning them into dumb sows, in prostitutes, in a “food processor” in his kitchen. By these images, women are programmed to be a slave of men.
Men do it unnoticed for women. Moreover, women inspired the idea that they control men.
Men are very cruel to women. They realize that artificial images are very harmful to women, that is why women grow old earlier than men, get sick and feel unhappy, however anyway men are continuing the process of creating of new and new artificial images for women to have a power over them.
What do you think about this? Thank you.

OP posts:
scornedwoman67 · 18/02/2014 22:38

eh ?? Shock I think I need some of what you're on!

jadeddazedandconfused · 18/02/2014 22:50

Brilliant! I love the Amazon description. What japes! I haven't added it to my wishlist...

Paulrn · 19/02/2014 14:51

Oh bugger the secrets out !!!!

dollius · 19/02/2014 15:02

LOL at "the pathway to become a garbage"

Funniest thing I've read all day

kentishgirl · 20/02/2014 16:40

If you do the 'look inside' of that book - it actually says that women trying to have power over men is the reason women become old before their time, degrade intellectually, gain weight, lose their looks, become unstable, get depression, hysteria and feel inadequate.

Sounds like the complete opposite of a feminist position.

GiniCooper · 21/02/2014 22:56

I tried but my brain melted out of my ears.

Probably DH's fault.

chateauferret · 22/02/2014 09:40

Sexist bollocks.

gertrudetrain · 22/02/2014 20:04

I don't think anyone will answer your questions OP. Due to the fact your questions are bollocks and your sentence structure is appalling. Please practice basic literacy before trying to wrap your mind around Feminism.

IHateWinter · 22/02/2014 20:33

Men turning them into dumb sows, in prostitutes, in a “food processor” in his kitchen. By these images, women are programmed to be a slave of men.

I think women have to sometimes take responsibility for their own actions and choices. You have a lot of men bashing statements here.

BeforeEve · 06/03/2014 05:19

Quote: "I think the language barrier is making this thread impossible tbh.

The right words are quite important when discussing a topic like this."
Well, here it is.
Chapter 1.

Regardless of race, ethnicity, profession and so on, every woman considers herself an individual. In vain, as no woman is an individual. Any woman lives as a man programmed her to live, as it is convenient, as he wants her to.

A woman lives by that "software," which she has been filled with since the moment of birth by images, pictures, and portrayals. These are pictures with smell, color, with sensations from touch. In other words, a film, but of better quality, one where a woman by herself can be present in her own self. This place is called imagination, fantasies and dreams. There, a woman thinks that she has freedom: my pictures, my dreams, my personal life, my secrets... Really? Where did she get these pictures? Where did her parents get these pictures?

If all pictures, films of an adult woman got erased, she would turn into a newborn child, a baby in an adult body. So, the presence of a system of images in a woman is the foundation of her life, from beginning to end. The truth is that the whole picture system is created based on artificial images taken from society. In society, women do not create artificial images. They can be considered artificial because they are created by men, on the basis of male fantasies, with their pictures of a woman.

Now, let’s consider this in more detail.

Every person has some inner space. Some call it imagination, fantasy, dreams, memories, thoughts, daydreams, visions; we added to the list by naming it a "virtual room." All people do what they want in this space, from calculations to the most elementary actions ("What to eat for lunch?"), to modeling of complex engineering or architectural structures, to generating ideologies for entire nations, rendering functions of global systems and processes. Besides questions like "What lipstick should I choose?" or "Which tie to wear with this suit?" that "virtual room" is where people create new religions and philosophies, movie scripts, literature, operation plans of huge industrial or business structures.

By analogy, a "virtual room" is a cinema where a person watches movies. Only in addition to visuals and sounds, a movie in a virtual room includes smells, taste, and tactile sensations. The whole range of human perception is present in images of the virtual room. He or she may be there actively, creating movies no worse than any filmmaker, or passively, as a spectator of films that pass in front of the inner eye. The position of a spectator is usually perceived as visions, memories, or dreams. But, in all cases any person sees some images inside him or her self.

Often one’s "virtual room" is regarded as the place where a person thinks, ponders, plans and analyzes. The words "I need to think," mean that the subject is now going to "falls deep within him or her self," into the "virtual room." However, these actions do not relate to the thinking process, and especially not for women (as to why, will be explained later). And, since somehow a woman got used to "thinking" in the space of her own imagination, she immediately begins to see nothing else, but images (despite the fact that some people mistakenly believe that people think with words).

On average, by fifteen years of age any woman becomes a subject who is perceived by her own self and others as an individual with her own character, philosophy, habits, life experiences, and preferences. It is considered that this personality is unique, original and unrepeatable, that no two women are absolutely similar to each other, like clones. Indeed, this is the case.

(??. ???????????)
?????? 2.
Every woman inherits her unique baggage of information about the world, about other people, and her self in particular from parents and/or mentors. Along with this baggage, she gets guidelines on what she needs to be like and how she should live. But, during adolescence any girl rebels against this. Because, like shoes that are too small, this inheritance presses, squeezes, brings immense discomfort and therefore causes a terrible rage. In this sense, love for parents does not play any role because you can greatly respect someone who gave you a pair of shoes that are not your size, but you will not be able to wear them.

Therefore, as a teenager any girl makes an audit of that what she got as vital recipes from parents and/or mentors, and makes adaptations. Adaptations are needed, first of all, in order to accommodate the recipes to her self, to make them possible and convenient for use; secondly—to conform to modernity since parents (mentors) created these life recipes during an entirely different era.

In most cases, a woman forgets or ignores the fact that her personality was constructed from material that was handed over by parents and/or mentors. This happens because the new personality that a woman made of her self (as she believes) differs from the previous one, and often, as she believes, quite significantly. Although from our point of view, it does not, as work on the reformation, accommodations of already established gets confused with creation.

As a result, a so-called "Self-Image" gets created in a woman’s virtual room, and, not just an image, but in fact she herself, from A to Z. It is impossible for her not to engage in this process because a human being, just like a computer, does not work without a program. No wonder a woman perceives this so-called "Self-Image" as the foundation of her life after its creation because in reality she begins to live and function strictly according to this image. In other words, she really becomes that what, among other things, she imagined to her self about her self. Sometimes even her physical appearance changes. She really becomes somewhat different, at least because she stops being a child who lives strictly by her parents’ "Image and Likeness." A woman perceives this as "birth of an Individual;" moreover, an individual who supposedly will grow and evolve.

In practice, however, a so-called “Self-Image” created from fifteen to twenty years of age does not evolve, does not advance. Advancement and progression are changes, and women usually leave their "bright image" unchanged until death. Minor adjustments do not count. The essence, the foundation as personal philosophy, recipes what to be like and how to live as a lifestyle are a base that is extremely carefully guarded by the proprietress. And, it is not subject to any cardinal changes. Instead, a woman is ready to change the whole world and other people to be according to her “Self-Image." To her, it is the cornerstone on which she stands, her roots, her greatest treasure. She is rather willing to die than, as they say, "cheat on her self..."

But, the question is: would that really be cheating on HER SELF?

What is the essence of this notorious "Self-Image?" It is nothing else, but a type of a "film library," an archive with an enormous number of videos. And, behind each one of these "movies" are images. Every woman has a huge number of such "videotapes," as it is a requirement to have an image for each function carried out by a human, this is just how nature arranged it. However, first of all, a woman does not perceive this “film library” as such. Secondly, women do not have a slightest idea about images themselves, do not know anything about the effect that any image has on human psychophysiology. But that is not the worst.

The most terrible thing is that women do not even suspect who and why produces images for their imagination.
????????? 1?? ?????.

Women call their, figuratively speaking, "home theater" by different names: "My soul, My inner world, My individuality, My self, My inner core," and so on. But, more importantly, they associate this "cinema" with their selves. They tell themselves: "This is me—the real me." And, indeed, they fully merge with the images that they themselves, as they think, have come up with in order to be, to live, to function. Any woman fights for this "soul" with incredible fury. (Although this has nothing to do with soul because a "virtual room" is intellect, and intellect is not psyche, but only a part of it. Moreover, it is not the most important part.) Any woman would be willing to die, but not give up that what she considers her own "Self." Not even suspecting that what she thinks her “Self" is—is not her at all...

Of course, after reading all of the above, you will wonder: where is the evidence? We are happy to provide this evidence in the next chapter."

So could I ask my question again - WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT IT? tHANKS

OP posts:
dollius · 06/03/2014 05:32

I think this is a very flowery and exceptionally badly written way of saying that both men and women are conditioned by society to accept certain roles in life.

Not much new or revelationary about any of that really.

CinnabarRed · 06/03/2014 05:54

What dollius said.

I might add that it seems to also argue that all women now are the sum of their past life experiences. Which I disagree with, because I do believe that at some level people (not just women) have to take ownership of their lives to move them forward in a positive direction.

CinnabarRed · 06/03/2014 06:03

It's an extreme interpretation of the "Nature v. Nurture" debate, concluding that Nurture is all-important (and with the added twist that all Nurture experienced by women is being deliberately manipulated in a negative way by men).

To which I reply: Nietzsche! Self-determination. Take responsibility for yourself.

Lweji · 06/03/2014 07:40

I'd offer a different point of view too.
Men have been shaped by women. By their mothers and carers, primarily, to have become more and more gentile, more polite.
Polite society may well be mostly an invention of women who have raised men to be more like them and less like their caveman father.

(Disclaimer, not necessarily my views, just showing that we all influence each other)

CinnabarRed · 06/03/2014 09:15

Oh, interesting point Lweji.

It's easy to forget that in evolutionary terms, the past 6,000 odd years of "civilisation" are an anomalous flash in the pan.

BeforeEve · 07/03/2014 08:21

Hi,
Thanks for your responses but it seems that you understand nothing.
Once again

By studying the history of world culture (literature, pictorial art, architecture, music, science, etc.), it is easy to trace that men (males) usurped everything that had to do with images, as ideas for creation of anything. And, from time immemorial, women were left with a role of stupid consumers, and performers, and it was made sure that women think that they (women) are creators too. But, women did not participate in the birth of any product, which begins with a sketch, and in turn a sketch begins with an idea, and an idea begins with an image. Yes, women weaved, embroidered, painted cloth, and sometimes sewed. But, based on sketches made by whom? Based on sketches and patterns created by men (males). The essence of this process is to forbid women from creating images and under any excuse to never allow women to do it, ever. Excuses used are from rudest and degenerative ("What are you trying to do, you fool? Go make me a sandwich instead," or "Do you not hear your baby crying?”), to the most romantic and poetic ("You are my muse, just be near, inspire me, you are so beautiful!").

Men’s intent is simple: to have total control over the psyche and the physiology of any woman because an image is the basis of functioning of any person. Providing an image to a woman ensures that she will live and function strictly according to this image. Also, an image is the basis for control of any person, as well as the basis of knowledge about her/him.

Men create images. Therefore, they know exactly what image is behind this or that behavior of a woman. In other words, they know how she will think, act, present herself, what she will want, strive for and seek (from men as well). So, a woman does not even suspect that she is like an open book for any man, even if he sees her for the first time.

But, women are sure that images that they use (including for construction of their "Self-Image," that they consider their individuality) are a secret. Borrowing images that were made up by men from cultural sources, and using them to form her personality, her way of life, any woman strongly believes in her unrepeatability, originality, and uncognizability. What do you think, who gave women this assurance, and why?

In other words, men achieved what they wanted: from potential goddesses, women were made into logs, a resource, a consumable material from which a man can make whatever he likes. Men use women for all and any of their needs: for childbirth, and for running countries; as a food processor or as an object for performing complex operations in manufacturing, services, business, and so on; as a toilet cleaner or as a highly paid university professor; as sexual "fast food" or as "homemakers."
Today, women are allowed everything, even to pretend that they create images too. Only women are not aware that they make their creations solely on the basis of those artificial images, which have already been thought up by men, and have been put into women for centuries, from generation to generation, in the process of "domestication." Women are celebrating victory, but none of them wonder why, for example, a couple of centuries ago there were no women filmmakers, litterateurs, painters, scientists or politicians? Or, why in the history of humans their percentage ratio is so low? Or, how many prime ministers there were before Margaret Thatcher and what was their gender? Or, in what century there was the first female president? And so on. Even a quick historical review, readily available statistics make it clear that women are allowed only into already constructed and functioning system built by men (males). And, women are allowed to act only based on and within images that the system dictates.

Women lost the "war between the sexes." Since the time of birth women are being made into logs with legs spread wide, as an indication of their main purpose—to participate in the reproduction of the human race, and be pleasant toys in the hands of men. Most important is to not forget to tell women, who "love through their ears," that they are wonderful, priceless, how much men love them and depend on them. Long ago women were programmed to believe in any nonsense, instead of seeing and analyzing facts (as well as history).

What can you say about this?
Thank you

OP posts:
Lweji · 07/03/2014 08:29

I still don't understand it. Could you explain it once again, preferably using the exact same words you have used before?

IthoughtATMwasacashpoint · 07/03/2014 08:32

Yawn seems appropriate.

Lweji · 07/03/2014 08:36

So, you think men dominate women through images?
And they are all in this world wide conspiracy to dominate women through images?
And we are all unaware slaves to men?

CinnabarRed · 07/03/2014 08:43

I understand just fine, thank you.

I don't agree.

Is that clear enough for you?

ghostinthecanvas · 07/03/2014 08:46

Are you the first op ever to try to put an entire book on a thread? I am not sure. I will need to ask DH. Also, I can't decide if you sharing makes my cells degrade. Which makes me want to know are you the oppressed or the oppressor?
Do I care? Not a jot.

NeoFaust · 07/03/2014 09:11

This is bog standard sociology 101, written poorly (the sentences and structures, not the language itself) with a massive misandric bias.

This is the sort of material one saw out of the feminist second wave and generated a hell of a lot of irrational radicalism both within the movement and it's opponents. It's also archaeologically stupid.

Evidence is clear from pretty much the start of agriculture that women were the creative driving force in many early societies. While at some point the gender roles ossified into the unnecessarily unjust structure that we today term 'patriarchy' this was likely to be a prolonged evolution of traditions and social expectations that were as undeliberate as the retreat of the glaciers. Trying to turn structural injustice into a conspiracy is, in a word, lazy. This is not to say men don't have a duty to identify their unconscious prejudices and try to alter them, nor should they fail to acknowledge anachronistic entitlements. But women can not be absolved of all complicity in the structures that have arisen and must now be torn down, or the necessity of examining their (much fewer but still present) archaic gender privileges.

Your material sets back the date a couple of decades and has much validity as the warped pseudo-theology of the Nation of Islam.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page