Miscellaneous: Scott Adams
By now, many of you who keep up with your Internets probably have heard about Dilbert creator Scott Adams's latest controversial blog entry, "Pegs and Holes". I encourage to read the entry, as well as some of Adams' other blog posts, to understand the whole context of the situation.
But to sum up, Adams writes that modern (presumably American, or Western) "society is organized in such a way that the natural instincts of men are shameful and criminal while the natural instincts of women are mostly legal and acceptable"
Adams doesn't really go into much detail about what he means by men's and women's "natural instincts", but we can infer from the blog entry that he sees male "bad behavior", such as cheating and raping, as instinctual to men. He goes on to write that "All I’m saying is that society has evolved to keep males in a state of continuous unfulfilled urges, more commonly known as unhappiness."
Ok, a couple things here. On a very basic level, Adams is correct: society has evolved to keep people under control. People, men and women, have negative impulses all the time. Not everyone has the same negative impulses--some people have an impulse to commit acts of violence while others may have an impulse to steal. But since we live in a society with laws, we are obligated by law and a sense of shame/propriety/whatever to keep our base and destructive impulses under control. Adams, in a very passive-aggressive manner, grudgingly admits that this may be best for society. He goes on to prophesize that one day science will come up with a pill that will chemically castrate men, and that we (again, I assume he is talking about American/Western society here) will become a "society of huggers" and that men would only go off the pill to donate sperm so that civilization can continue.
From this paragraph, we can surmise that Adams is mainly concerned with men's sexual instincts being cut off and controlled by a culture that has evolved in favor of women. He implies that rape is an instinct of many men, and that when they aren't "allowed" to rape, they are unfulfilled and unhappy. Now, I'm not a man, so I cannot speak for men generally--but I'm willing to bet that many, many, many men go through life with no desire to sexually assault women, just as I have no innate desire to torture animals or hit small children. Yes, there are men who rape for various reasons (more likely having to do with power and control than simple lust), but I'm willing to bet that the VAST majority of men (at least in this culture) do not have to go around controlling their natural "rape impulses". I dunno...fellas, can you help me out with this one?
Secondly, I think Adams is incorrect when he states that society treats men's desires and instincts as shameful and allows them no outlet. Sure, RAPE is criminal...because it's...well, a crime. A violent crime. But if Adams sees simple sexual promiscuity as a natural instinct of men, then he's dead wrong. Who and what, exactly, is stopping men from having sex? Plenty of men have plenty of sex with plenty of willing partners (or, the most willing partner of all--themselves!) and "society" barely notices. Ok, sure, when a scandal like Anthony Weiner tweeting pics of his, er, weiner, breaks--then yes, people can get on their self-righteous high horses. People can be very quick to judge others' sex lives--especially if those people, like Weiner, are public figures who are expected to know better and be a little discreet. Yes, people can be judgmental.
But Adams didn't write that people are annoyingly self-righteous and hypocritical when it comes to sex--he wrote that "society" is a "prison" for "men's" "natural instincts". You're painting with a pretty broad brush there Scott. Are you saying that all men have identical natural instincts and that all of society (or just women?) disapproves?
I think Adams is off his rocker here. I think that our society has plenty of outlets for men's naughty, naughty instincts, and I think plenty of ladies have the same damn instincts and are totally willing to help a dude out! Just maybe not Adams after this rant...
Is Adams a misogynist? I don't know. He seems to have a pretty awful view of his own gender. Maybe he's a man-hater! I bet he has hairy legs too...heehee.
But seriously, I can't know what Adams thinks about women as a whole. I can say that I'm pretty sure that he is simply a bitter person. Just read his blog! Scott Adams exemplifies the notion that money and fame do not make you a happy person. Let me hit that home a little more: Adams is rich, he is famous, he is beloved by many fans. He is male and white and American. Yet he writes as if he is oppressed. As if he and his fellow men have no outlet for their manly desires. I don't know Adams, but I can assure you of one thing: he ain't starving to death. He's not a teenage sex slave. He's not a prisoner of a gulag, or a paraplegic, or about to undergo a clitoridectomy without anesthesia in order to be ready for marriage. He may not have a perfect life (who does?), but overall, I bet Adams has it made compared to many other people in the world who have far worse struggles.
Yet he is clearly angry about something. Bitter about something. These blog posts are not written by a contented, grateful soul.
I think the biggest lesson we can learn from Adams' blog entries is not that men's rights activists suck (some do, but others have good points) or that feminists want to dominate and control all men (a few do, but most actually really like men--just not Adams)...but that bitterness and anger eat away at a person. These emotions, which are valid, are also destructive on a individual level and on a societal level.
I am a feminist and I like men. I like men who are happy and who like themselves. I like men who are strong and self-assured and know who they are. I like men who like women--who see women as partners and lovers and equals.
I do not like the company of men who are bitter, angry, and who don't like themselves. I don't like men who see women as things they have to "win" or "conquer" or "persuade". These men don't persuade me, they scare me. It's as simple as that. Maybe this is why Adams feels he has no outlet. Maybe he scares women away with his anger.
I am a feminist and I don't want to live in a society where men (or women) are chemically castrated--a "society of huggers". That doesn't seem like a fulfilling or wonderful society to me. That being said, I wouldn't have sex with--or even be friends with--Scott Adams. Even if he was the last man on earth.
No comments:
Post a Comment