May I “Mansplain” Something for a Minute, Please?

Many men are incredibly competitive, even to the point of sometimes being combative.   Modern society (especially feminists) seek to pathologize this stereotypically male personality trait, but evolution selected for it over millions of years, and so it’s pretty deeply embedded in us and isn’t likely to change in a generation or two to suit some political agenda.   We can get all haughty and pretend that our species is (or should be) beyond “petty” competition and posturing (often described pejoratively as “d*&ck measuring contests”), but reality proves otherwise.   

When males compete in measuring contests, the goal is to psychologically intimidate their opponent into submission without a physical fight (and one can see how this strategy may have had some evolutionary pay-offs by preserving social hierarchy without the damage caused by constant physical contests).  While d*&ck measuring contests often look like escalation or brinksmanship, and sometimes they can be, they just as often (or perhaps even more often) achieve their aim of submission without violence.  Maybe that’s a good thing?

Such battles of psychological intimidation are intentionally quite nasty and cruel.  During these scuffles, men will focus on what they perceive to be their opponent’s most tender and vulnerable spots (psychologically speaking).   Nothing is off limits.  Got an ugly mama and are sensitive about that?  Expect that to be pointed out in stark contrast.  Throw like a girl and are embarrassed of that?  You’ll be taunted.  Part of a minority group?  Yep, you’re gonna hear some racial or cultural slurs.  Are you a short and fat little dictator trying to compensate for a Napoleon Complex by obtaining intercontinental ballistic missiles?  Well, you should expect to be called “Little Rocket Man” and to be insulted about your girth.  

It’s important to understand that these insults are purely strategic.  The insulter doesn’t necessarily believe that ugly mamas, girls (or throwing like them), belonging to a minority group, being fat or being vertically challenged are “bad” or “wrong” or “inferior”.  Rather, the insulter simply believes that these criticisms are most likely to hit his opponent “where it hurts”.  This is why you’ll never hear the taunted (if a male) reply by accusing the taunter of “racism” or “fat shaming”.   The taunted knows that the taunter isn’t really racist or a fat hater but rather that the “insult” was chosen especially for its potential impact on the taunted.  

In the past, these psychological battles were waged mostly “mano a mano”.  But with the advent of feminism in the 20th century and with women entering the work force en masse after WWII, men were increasingly pitted in competition against women.  And these men competed the same way they always had—by “hitting em where it hurts”.  And when it comes to women, “where it hurts” almost invariably involves some sort of sex or gender-based shaming.   For men, that’s the low hanging fruit.  

And, respectfully, this is where most women, especially feminists, mess up:  They play the victim rather than punching back.  Can you imagine Kim Jung Eun responding to Trump’s “Little Rocket Man” insults by labeling Trump a “short shamer”?  Such a response would violate Rule Number 1 of d*&ck measuring contests—“never let them see you sweat”!   To criticize Trump for short shaming would be to implicitly acknowledge a sensitivity about being short.   

Or, can you imagine Kim Jun Eun running to the UN and demanding that it take action to end the “hostile environment” created by Trump’s critical tweets?   “Running to daddy” with an appeal to stop a bullying does nothing but empower the bully further.  It’s proof that the psychological intimidation is working.   

So, when women respond to acts of male psychological intimidation by labeling the man “sexist” or “misogynistic”, or by accusing him of “mansplaining”, or by running to some perceived higher authority for help, they inadvertently validate and empower the bully.   They unknowingly concede defeat.  They’ve lost the measuring contest as it was just getting started.    

So, feminists are right about one thing:  Sexual intimidation is indeed about power.  But they are wrong that it’s about “male power”.  Men don’t use sexual intimidation to “keep women down”.  Rather, they use any intimidation they can to keep their competition, male or female, down.  Their competition just happens to be increasingly female, and females just happen to be more easily intimidated sexually.