I wanted to know how men think. So, I went to the bookstore and picked out three books from the philosophy section I knew were either popular with men or a famous man’s philosophy. Those books were:
Meditations by Marcus Aurelius;
The Psychology of Love by Sigmund Freud; and
The 48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene.
To be fair, I had already set my heart on the last one, because my ex-boyfriend never shut up about it. He went on and on about Robert Greene – his favourite author (although, he has only read this one book of his) – and quotes it endlessly. He bleeds the ideologies dry, applying them to our real life. I found out it was a bestseller, so naturally, millions of people would’ve read this.
I know what you’re thinking: another article about the patriarchy. It’s not though.
I’m not saying it was all men by default; women picked up this book too – either with intentions adjacent to mine or, most likely, with the ambition to pursue and attain power. Personally, I wanted to follow the weave of the male psyche, so I might better understand the concepts they have intertwined with our lives. Most importantly, I needed to know the systems and laws that govern my life to an extent I may only know of, as I will never be in a position where I am able to control it.
I feel women are, indeed, docile. I generalise, of course. Women are, by stereotype, better at school and university, but then compare that to the workforce statistics and you see a curious gap in things more than pay.
It is not a man’s fault either that power comes inherently to them, or at least the hunger for it. There is a prompt. But it is more of a systemic role in patriarchal society. Males do not experience their boyhood for long, the term ‘man’ is attached to them almost as soon as they grow out of infancy. From a ‘young man’ to a grown man at the mere age of 18, there is no time and no choice, they generate dominant traits immediately. They progress through life like it’s a Roguelike, the easy levels starting them off with initial funds, and every progress faces them with a higher difficulty foe (except a man’s real fight is with a demon called vulnerability). The gift of life has been a natural incremental game, where the purpose is simple – essentially power, which is almost at no cost to themselves yet at the expense of others.
On the other hand, Women are taught love and romance.
It is not that we are docile by nature, but by how we were fostered. It is not a choice nor a characteristic, it is simply a curse we have dealt with elegantly; like a plant creeping up and over the wall that hinders it from flourishing. But that is terrible to the feminist mind (my own), a degrading generalisation (I feel), and so often we strive to be described as the antonym of docility. We adopt less ‘feminine’ traits (what is traditionally considered masculine) purely out of spite (or is that just me?). I say this because I’ve done it, many people I know have. It is not a safe space, this world, to be soft and sweet.
Anyway, I’m five chapters in. While I agree with some of these laws (as in, could consider applying them into my own life), I must say it all reads with such toxic masculinity. Greene’s evidence for all his laws seems to constantly fall back onto historical politics, figures, wars (all induced by men). On the rare occasion there is the metaphor or analogy with some animal or natural object.
He does not offer new case studies, personal anecdotes, nothing. It is just: the past and the primitive.
Which, in a way I suppose, is the bare meaning of a natural law. It is a repetitive and evident pattern over time, visible in the most mundane and primal of things, it is a foundational rule of nature.
However, it is not an unbiased or informative collection of tips and tricks that lead to power or guarantee the art of power. In fact, it is simply a man’s guide to a man’s world, where power in the context of women and femininity is unprecedented.
They are essentially the same manipulation tactic used over and over in different scenarios: don’t let your guard down, don’t say what you mean, and always do what benefits only you in every situation.
If these are the same people that love, no wonder there is more heartbreak than belief in romance found in this generation.
And no, I do not claim that it is a gendered text; if you asked Robert Greene, he would claim it is not at all. I don’t think the average person, unplagued by the constant pangs of patriarchy, would look at somethings that are so mundane, and contemplate powerplay. But it exists, it does, because when I had my male friend read over this article for me, I saw his face twist and then relax because he did not like my bluntness on the matter and then resolved that I was objectively correct in my assessment. Most guys I know are not misogynists, but then, I don’t know most guys. I know quite a lot of women who are misogynists, but again, I don’t know all women.
So, what is my point? I reckon no matter what we do, no matter what we think, docile or dominant – it is all gender performativity, as Judith Butler (1988) calls it.
One can be considered to be born with privilege if he is a man, however one is not born a man, but rather he becomes one. If you disagree with this, consider the fact that the second as a boy you do something that misaligned with the gendered expectations from a boy, you’re hit with every xenophobic slur in the book. At the very least, someone has called you a pussy, a bitchboy, a girl. There was never a reason gender norms should’ve been created or enforced based on genitals and physical capabilities. I’m not even talking about labour work vs nursing, or white-collar vs housewife; I’m talking blue vs pink. The concept of a gender binary in actuality is false, as it was always a social construct. Everybody this statement aggravates is simply a victim of the concept itself. They suffer gender melancholia, and in my opinion, this is heavily expressed through toxic manners of power play.
Disch (1999) explains, “heteronormative masculinity emerges as the traces of an ungrieved” love for a gender they could never experience or act as since they’re preoccupied presenting as another. And in a ‘women’s’’ case, we cling to hyper femininity, or the ‘tomboy’ aesthetic. We coin terms like ‘girls’ girl’ and ‘pick me,’ and we centre our lives around men. Then we criticise ourselves for being weak and centring our lives around men. Then we validate ourselves for centring our lives around men because we are empathetic lover girls in our soft girl era. We hate Nara Smith for living her life and perpetuating house-wife narratives, then we commend her for great marketing and being a businesswoman.
Heteronormativity exists in places where you wouldn’t even think to look, and maybe you think I’m completely off – but it is certainly founded in power, in a way I’m sure Robert Greene didn’t intend.
But that’s just my opinion.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
If you’ve read this far, do you / your friends identify as feminists, and if not, why?
