Friday, December 1, 2017

Sex Scandals Expose Feminist Connection to...Warlock Hunts, Religious Fundamentalism, Etc.

While outrage over the various high profile sex scandals rightly pervades the culture, Christina Hoff Sommers writes "that there is also panic in the air, which could ruin this #metoo moment."  Citing the "frenzied reactions" of various feminists prompted by these scandals, such as an NYU professor's call to "resocialize little boys" she writes: 
Before we consider all men guilty of harassment or abuse until proven innocent, a reality check is in order. Most of the sensational harassment cases in the media involved high-profile men working in unusual environments with little or no accountability. That suggests they are atypical.
While Sommers, along with most reasonable people, consider these scandals a way to create "a new resolve to make the workplace more respectful and equitable for women - for everyone," she, as well as other commentators like Robert Tracinski, are right to warn about a large segment of the feminist movement that does not seek simple fairness and equitable treatment, but rather regards males or masculinity as inherently toxic.  Recently, this view prompted feminist Emily Lindin to tweet that she doesn't even care if some men are falsely accused in the "process of undoing the patriarchy." In this segment, unhinged feminist Cathy Areu defends Lindin while advocating replacing witch-hunts, not with due process based on individual rights but with "warlock hunts."       

Such a view of masculinity gives rise to a number of reasonable questions.  Obviously, physical assault and stalking, forms of force, are reprehensible and criminal, but, under the view of toxic masculinity, can men ever interact with women, in or out of the workplace, without an inherent violation occurring?  For example, some feminists treat a man's tendency to gaze at a beautiful woman, so-called ogling, as a sexual harassment violation.  Given the inherent nature of men and women - you know, like in the real physical world - what exactly would be an ideal, or even permissible, interaction to these feminists?      

This got me thinking, somewhat humorously, of a post I wrote several years ago about a "beauty pageant" that took place in Saudi Arabia and its possible connection to western feminist's "ideal," as well as, perhaps, an explanation of the feminist's puzzling whitewash of Islam's barbaric treatment of women (see their enthusiastic support of Linda Sarsour).  The article reported:
Sukaina al-Zayer is an unlikely beauty queen hopeful. She covers her face and body in black robes and an Islamic veil, so no one can tell what she looks like. She also admits she's a little on the plump side. 
But at Saudi Arabia's only beauty pageant, the judges don't care about a perfect figure or face. What they're looking for in the quest for "Miss Beautiful Morals" is the contestant who shows the most devotion and respect for her parents. 
"The idea of the pageant is to measure the contestants' commitment to Islamic morals... It's an alternative to the calls for decadence in the other beauty contests that only take into account a woman's body and looks," said pageant founder Khadra al-Mubarak. 
"The winner won't necessarily be pretty," she added. "We care about the beauty of the soul and the morals."
Got that?  Inner beauty is all.  Physical beauty is unimportant at best - dangerous at worst.  To me, this pageant represents a concretization not just of religion, but the more fundamental philosophy upon which modern religion (and perhaps modern feminism) is based: Platonism.  Just to bore you a bit, let's analyze Plato, who believed actual things are just imperfect reflections of ideal forms that can only be accessed by the enlightened.
According to Socrates [Plato's representative], physical objects and physical events are "shadows" of their ideal or perfect forms, and exist only to the extent that they instantiate the perfect versions of themselves. Just as shadows are temporary, inconsequential epiphenomena produced by physical objects, physical objects are themselves fleeting phenomena caused by more substantial causes, the ideals of which they are mere instances. 
And, c'mon, you've all heard of Plato's cave, right?: 
The allegory of the cave (often said by scholars to represent Plato's own epistemology and metaphysics) is intimately connected to his political ideology (often said to also be Plato's own), that only people who have climbed out of the cave and cast their eyes on a vision of goodness are fit to rule. Socrates claims that the enlightened men of society must be forced from their divine contemplations and compelled to run the city according to their lofty insights. Thus is born the idea of the "philosopher-king", the wise person who accepts the power thrust upon him by the people who are wise enough to choose a good master. This is the main thesis of Socrates in the Republic, that the most wisdom the masses can muster is the wise choice of a ruler.
More to the point, Plato's philosophy leads to a rejection of this world, i.e., reality, in favor of an idealized or perfect world as conveyed to the masses by enlightened Philosopher Kings (like the Pope, the Ayatollah, Obama, or maybe modern feminist college professors). It is obvious that such a philosophy is the essence of religion. In fact, Platonism was hugely influential on early Christian theologians. For a detailed accounting of the early Christian church and the influence of Greek philosophy I highly recommend, The Closing of the Western Mind, by Charles Freeman. For example, Freeman discusses Clement of Alexandria [c.150-c.215]:
Clement was in effect drawing on Middle Platonism, which stressed the power of "the Good" or "the One" to act in the world through the Platonic Forms. Platonism was ideally suited to providing the intellectual backbone of Christianity in that Platonists, particularly Middle Platonists, were dealing with the concept of an unseen, immaterial world in which "the Good," or God, could be described as absolute while at the same time being able to have a creative and loving role. Middle Platonists had developed the idea of the human soul from earlier Greek philosophy. They saw the soul as distinct from the human body and able to exist independently of it and to make its own relationship with a providential God, who, in his turn, might reach out to it living and creatively through the Forms, or "thoughts of God," as they were now described by Christian theologians.
To Plato, everything in the world is an imperfect reflection of the ideal, so logically, this doctrine leads to a disdainful, contemptuous view of reality and of man's nature. Consider the Christian doctrine of Original Sin which regards man as inherently sinful by virtue of having obtained knowledge and the capacity to be human in the Garden of Eden. Note that the essence of religion is faith or belief in the absence of evidence, which is considered a virtue. Note that religion urges the rejection of this world in favor of a heavenly after life; it promotes the worship of an unknowable God; it demands the rejection of sexual pleasure, and in the case of the beauty pageant (and in Islam generally) the literal cover up of physical feminine beauty.

Another important feature of Platonism mentioned in the Freeman quote is the separation of the body from the soul. Note the explicit recognition of this dichotomy by the pageant founder: "The winner won't necessarily be pretty," she added. "We care about the beauty of the soul and the morals." Again quoting Freeman (p. 146):

In contrast to Aristotle, who had talked of the soul as the essence of a human body, using the analogy that a body without a soul would be like an axe that cannot cut, Plato had stressed the independence of the soul from the body and its continuing existence from one body to another.
This doctrine was hugely influential on early Christian theologians such as Origen who argued:
that the soul was preexistent to the body in which it came to live and could move on to others after the death of a body (transmigration), but gradually the belief was consolidated that each body had its individual soul given to it at conception and that soul continued to exist eternally after the death of the body, something Aristotle could never have imagined. It could enjoy the happiness of heaven or the suffering of punishment in hell for eternity.
Origen stressed that the process of learning "true reality" requires devotion and commitment, an attribute of paramount importance to the pageant contestants:
Origen drew on the Platonic idea of a long, disciplined period of training before it was possible to achieve knowledge of the true reality - in their case God. The first step, the desire to commit oneself to the long path ahead, was the most important. This created the possibility of being "transformed, " a key concept for Origen. Those who selected themselves for "transformation" were the equivalents of Plato's Guardians, and like the Guardians their selection distinguished them from the those less committed to recovery.
Note how this philosophy naturally leads to the false alternative between "morals" and "physical beauty". Under this doctrine, in contrast to the Forms or God, physical beauty is regarded as fleeting and imperfect. Accordingly, to the Platonist, it is much more important to devote or commit one's life to the soul which is eternal. Therefore, the choice offered by this false alternative is "morals", i.e., sacrifice and the dictates of dogmatic authority or "beauty", i.e., the physical realm detached from morality.

Today, we see this all around us. It is implied in the false alternative between "religion", represented by the fundamentalist Muslim fanatics in the Middle East, and subjectivism, represented by modern cultures' glorification of physical power and brute materialism detached from the concept of morality. It is implied by Cass Sunstein's distinction between the "consumer" who imbibes "infotainment" and the "citizen" who aspires to higher ideals. It is implied by the pageant founder when she declares:

The idea of the pageant is to measure the contestants' commitment to Islamic morals... It's an alternative to the calls for decadence in the other beauty contests that only take into account a woman's body and looks."
In reality, if morality is derived objectively, i.e., through reason, using man's life as the standard of good and evil, then it becomes obvious that one can and ought to be moral and beautiful. In other words, there is no necessary dichotomy between the achievement of rational egoistic values and physical beauty, nor is there any shame in recognizing and admiring it. The idea of morals without beauty, or beauty without morals, or a beauty pageant where the contestants cover their bodies, should be seen as the ridiculous and disastrous false alternative that it is.

Wishing for a world that isn't appears to be the hallmark not just of Plato and religion, but perhaps modern feminism as well.

No comments: