Posted on by Abe Austin

Faulty Premises- Campaign Slogans

What a Man Can Do)

Today we are looking at an example of a campaign that was built on a faulty premise that led to extreme results beyond its original intentions: feminism. This movement has had a few campaign slogans, but arguably the most prominent were the ones that begin with “What a man can do…”

Interestingly, there have been three variations of this slogan, each going further than the last. In the late 19th century it was, “What a man can do, a woman can try.” Then, at the start of the 20th century, under the suffrage movement, it became, “What a man can do, a woman can do as well.” Then, still later, it became, “What a man can do, a woman can do even better.”

Obviously, the last two versions of the slogan are explicitly untrue. In reality, we understand that biological differences make certain things possible for men and impossible for women and vice versa. Of course, the falseness of the statements was part of the design, making them provocative and controversial. One might say these statements were never meant to be taken literally, just as a rhetorical flourish.

Fair enough, but that raises the question, “what are the long-term effects of founding a movement on a faulty premise?” Even if the faulty premise is tongue-in-cheek, can it really portend good things down the road when that is your foundation? Perhaps it is effective at getting the changes that you want today, but what sort of changes are likely to follow later on?

From Twisted Beginnings)

A movement that accepts a lie at its origin is a movement with a twisted foundation. It is somewhat misaligned with reality at the very beginning, and it is sure to become even more misaligned as more and more structure is built on top of it. This is especially true when we realize that yesterday’s rhetoric becomes tomorrow’s dogma. In my experience, there are many that have taken the provocative, tongue-in-cheek message of “what a man can do, a woman can do as well,” and actually believe it literally. They take it as an undisputed fact that men and women are totally equal in all regards, and that leads to some shocking conclusions.

Most recently, this line of thinking was clearly a main contributor to the transgender movement, which fully embraced the idea that there was little or no difference between a man or a woman, and that one could become the definition of the other at will. I think it’s safe to say that such a notion was far from the mind of old-time suffragettes, but this is simply the long-term consequences of the seeds that they, themselves, planted.

This is an example of a campaign built upon an explicit lie, but what about a campaign built upon implicit lies? We’ll look at an example of that tomorrow.

Posted on by Abe Austin

A Pivotal Moment- The Pendulum Swings Back

In the last post we discussed the deep spiritual sickness that society has progressed in for over a century. We have pushed God further and further from our hearts and never found a core purpose to take His place. We have become technologically and financially superior, but depressed and bitter at the same time.

We also discussed how we never found a unifying force either. Now that we no longer see one another as brothers and sisters, fellow children of God, our fractures have grown deep, dividing us into tribes that compete rather than cooperate.

In the last sixty years there have been dramatic shifts in society, and we have changed who is “winning” at the game, and we call that progress. But that is an extremely shallow and shortsighted perspective. There is no progress in taking turns oppressing one another. There will only be progress when we stop playing the game entirely.

Men vs Women, White vs Black)

Two of the greatest divides in our culture today are on the basis of sex and on the basis of race. Feminism looks to disable the patriarchy, and racial justice seeks to end differences of outcome. In both cases, I believe there were valid concerns at the origins of their movements, but they have also each been corrupted by overreach, tribalism, and faulty assumptions. Let’s look at each in turn.

With feminism, all one needs to do is watch classic movies from the ’40s and ’50s to see that there was a genuine tone of misogyny common to the time, and that’s never alright. Even worse, there was little recourse for victims of abuse, and women have always been more at risk for that then men. These were genuine concerns, and any society seeking to improve itself would need to address them.

At the same time, though, man-hating has been an angle of feminism basically from the very beginning. Also, the movement goes far too far in assuming that every cultural tradition, difference in sex responsibilities, and difference in outcome is necessarily a problem. It lacks the nuance to see that some differences were mutually agreed upon because they were beneficial to both men and women and still would be today.

With racial justice, again there were clearly many legitimate concerns at its roots. Even after the Emancipation Proclamation, Jim Crow laws and segregation prevented all races from enjoying the same freedoms. The Civil Rights movement was necessary to provide systemic equality to every person.

As the years have gone by, however, there has emerged a movement for reverse oppression instead. DEI initiatives have brought back the very same racial discrimination practices that the Civil Rights movement sought to end! There also has been an increasing trend of casual racist sentiment, with mainstream media unabashedly disparaging an entire category of people on the color of their skin. It wasn’t right when that was permitted towards our black brothers and sisters, and it isn’t right when it is permitted towards our white brothers and sisters either.

Lost Progress)

In summary, things have gone from correcting genuine problems to hurting one another in a zero-sum game. What at first looked like barriers being broken and all becoming one, transformed into barriers being re-established, and one group elevated at the expense of the other. Many have noted that gender and racial relations seemed to be improving for a time, up until the turn of the millennium, but that the last two decades has seen a reversal into increasing racism and sexism.

But then, over the last two years, it has appeared as though things are starting to shift again. The revolution seems to be facing a counter-revolution. White men, previously submissive to the public agenda, now are pushing back against it. It took about a generation for this to happen, as challenging the narrative seemed like social suicide, but people will not forever tolerate playing a game that has unfair rules. Thus, the rules are changing.

But is it for the better? We’ll examine that in depth tomorrow.