Camille Paglia is the manosphere's godmother

Seth_Rose

Pelican
Gold Member
While Camille Paglia is definitely a breath of fresh air compared to modern feminists, I wouldn't call her the 'Manosphere's Godmother'. She is still a feminist-- although one who stands for the early tenets of feminism--and is also a lesbian. Definitely not conducive to Manosphere values.

If there were a Godmother of the Manosphere, which is somewhat oxymoronic in promoting a matriarchal figure in a men's movement, it would have to be a prominent women who advocates for traditional gender roles, being feminine, no false rape bullshit etc. At the end of the day though, I'm suspect of giving too much power to women in men's movements, as eventually they will accumulate more power and start to push their objectives first and foremost.
 

Onto

Ostrich
Gold Member
I would say the Manosphere's God-Mother would be the major figures of the feminist movement throughout the last 100+ years.

If it weren't for feminism, the Manosphere wouldn't have a need to exist.
 

Saga

Woodpecker
Though there are certainly nuances and places where I disagree with her, the first 50 or so pages of Paglia's excellent Sexual Personae is a merciless demolition of modern feminism, including that timeless quote: "If civilization had been left in female hands, we would still be living in grass huts." Great stuff. Her writings, along with those of Hoff Sommers (and girlwriteswhat on youtube, now that I think of it), were deeply important for me to break out of blue pill oblivion and I doubt I'm alone in that. Unfortunately, men stuck in the tyranny of conventional feminist thinking instinctively reject manosphere concepts through that fool's refrain "they're meanie sexists who hate women, and I love women so I can't agree with them!", but when men hear many of the same truths (or facts that lead to those truths) from feminist women, that objection falls apart and some oxygen can finally get through. It's ridiculous that that's what it takes for many men to see reason, but it is what it is.

Another gem:

We could make an epic catalog of male achievements, from paved roads, indoor plumbing, and washing machine to eyeglasses, antibiotics and disposable diapers. We enjoy safe, fresh milk and meat, and vegetables and tropical fruits heaped in snowbound cities. When I cross the George Washington Bridge or any of America’s great bridges, I think: men have done this. Construction is a sublime male poetry. When I see a see a giant crane passing on a flatbed truck, I pause in awe and reverence as would for a church processions.
 

ColSpanker

Pelican
Gold Member
I've been reading Doc Paglia since she first published SEXUAL PERSONAE in the early 90's. I still can't figure out if that old butch is a fucking genius or just plane insane.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member

debeguiled

Peacock
Gold Member
Icarus said:
An excellent 1h43m-long conversation between Camille Paglia and Jordan B. Peterson:


Subject matter was good, but she is a human disaster. Did you notice that in that discussion, she might as well have been alone?

She didn't seem to speak to Peterson as a person at any time whatsoever, and just used anything he said as a jumping off point for a motor mouthed rant.

Honestly, he tried to get a little rapport with her every now and then but then gave up; she was like a wind up disembodied brain.

She showed no curiosity or interest in anything personal he said, about his travails against the SJW legal system of Canada, it was all just grist for the fast lane mill of her mouth.

I found it to be extremely off putting, no matter how much I agreed with the substance of what she said.

At the very end she said, "See! I knew we'd agree on everything!" with a triumphant note in her voice, like she was saying "See, I knew you'd agree with everything I think."

Even that was jarring to hear because it had the slightest personal note to it, and I was thinking, oh, so now you are recognizing that you are talking to another human being.

She might have been threatened by his sudden high status among public intellectuals, I don't know.

Just seemed oddly robotic.
 
debeguiled said:
Subject matter was good, but she is a human disaster. Did you notice that in that discussion, she might as well have been alone?

At least that was to be expected.

Peterson, on the other hand, seems to be on some sort of "ally" search and is trawling for any semi-famous people who agree with him on anything. Admitting that there are differences between the sexes is enough to be promoted by Peterson? That's disappointing.

Notice Paige still denigrates the nuclear family and even blames homos on it, while literally claiming post-modernists are historically illiterate. Were homos in antiquity prior to the nuclear family non-existent?

Notice she still claims something called the "authentic 1960's revolution" and Peterson says nothing.

Notice she claims her fellow revolutionaries of 2nd wave feminism "emancipated" women from the "jail cell" of the family and Peterson says nothing.

IIRC, that was the first video on JP's page that was worthless, other than as a recording of the thoughts of an old feminist who increasingly senses her growing irrelevance.
 

Thomas More

Hummingbird
John Michael Kane said:
Dr. Hellen Smith could be considered a worthy contender for godmother in favor of standing up for the modern downtrodden man:

https://pjmedia.com/drhelen/

She writes insightful articles all the time. I suggest you read up on her if you haven't already.

Helen Smith (or actually her husband Instapundit who linked her) is the one who introduced me to a lot of manosphere concepts.

However, she is more of an MRA/MGTOW type. She started having a lot of material in 2007 or so about divorce rape, and about the way men are disrespected and ridiculed in commercials and sitcoms.

She didn't directly lead me to the red pill, but she definitely laid some of the groundwork that made me ready to accept it a few years later.
 

Icarus

Ostrich
Different T said:
Notice Paige [sic] still denigrates the nuclear family and even blames homos on it

Paglia does indeed denigrate the nuclear family, but she also defends 3 generations living under the same roof. She is not glorifying living alone, is she? What if she's right? The nuclear family is a very recent invention. One of the ills of our age is that the grandparents' wisdom is not being transmitted to the grandchildren, mostly because the grandparents have been shipped to a retirement home.
 
Icarus said:
Paglia does indeed denigrate the nuclear family, but she also defends 3 generations living under the same roof. She is not glorifying living alone, is she? What if she's right? The nuclear family is a very recent invention. One of the ills of our age is that the grandparents' wisdom is not being transmitted to the grandchildren, mostly because the grandparents have been shipped to a retirement home.

Do you think that the reason we no longer have three generations under one roof is simply because we "choose" to?

I understand your point, but when you listen to that interview in context, she quite clearly has the "middle class housewives were sequestered prisoners" view of the nuclear family. To use her language, her perspective is thoroughly "bourgeoisie." And then she specifically states her generation "emancipated" these women? Into what? And then she bitches some more about charlatans and the "authentic 1960's revolution."

Additionally, how many of you or your friends don't grow up regularly meeting your grandparents or cousins? Is that really common?
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
Paglia is a purple piller, she's got a sharp mind when it comes to breaking down trans culture and other "current year" absurdities, but she's also got some glaring blind spots and other limitations due to her background. She's about as sane as a lesbo-feminist can get. In order to really get to the bottom, she has to step out from her fundamental identity, which would be too big a step for her.
 

Icarus

Ostrich
Different T said:
Do you think that the reason we no longer have three generations under one roof is simply because we "choose" to?

To some extent, yes.

Most fathers have become such cucks that they are happy to send their daughters to college where they will get fucked by alphas. These weak fathers are the worst pimps in the world, for their daughters are not merely unpaid whores, their price is actually negative! Pay tuition, get your daughter alpha-widowed for life. Such a great deal!

As I have defended many times before on RVF, women should be married by 18-20 years old. There would be no young adult women in colleges. Young men would have to focus on their studies and on their careers. By the time men were 28 and minimally established in their careers, they could marry 18 year old virgins. Quality, rather than quantity.

There is the obvious problem of jobs. One may have to move to find a decent job. That is a serious difficulty.

One eventually concludes that one needs a new religion to create the incentives and penalties necessary for the vision above to materialize. However, for a new religion to arise, the selfish religion of the Baby Boomer generation must be burned to the ground. No mercy! Burn it all.


Different T said:
I understand your point, but when you listen to that interview in context, she quite clearly has the "middle class housewives were sequestered prisoners" view of the nuclear family.

Paglia defends segregation by gender, which I also do. She puts it in terms of "world of men" and "world of women". I could call it matriarchy for women and patriarchy for all. Men and women are too different. Suppose 3 generations live under the same roof. There's a pyramidal hierarchy:

  • The grandfather rules over the fathers and the grandsons. Fathers rule over their sons and nephews.
  • The grandmother rules over the mothers and the granddaughters. Mothers rule over their daughters and nieces. Lastly, the grandmother reports to the grandfather.

Hence, men are not forced to deal with female insanity. Wifey is PMS-ing and acting insane? Inform grandfather. Grandfather then orders the grandmother to discipline insane wifey. She does so. Problem solved. Men should not be forced to descend into the utter inanity of female emotion.

Paglia attacks with great vigor the nuclear family with only 1 or 2 kids. She is all for large families, however. I agree with her. If you only have one sibling, your socialization will be limited. Socializing with a bunch of siblings is a much richer life.
 
Icarus said:
To some extent, yes.

Do you think a 30 year old man living in his low-to-middle income parents house is going to be attractive? Or is this a "change the whole culture so all incentive structures are rearranged and then what I am saying will make sense" sort of deal?

Icarus said:
One eventually concludes that one needs a new religion to create the incentives and penalties necessary for the vision above to materialize. However, for a new religion to arise, the selfish religion of the Baby Boomer generation must be burned to the ground. No mercy! Burn it all.

Am I interpreting this correctly that you think you're able to simply "create" a new religion? What is a religion, just some bullshit you manipulate other people into believing?


Icarus said:
Paglia defends segregation by gender, which I also do. She puts it in terms of "world of men" and "world of women". I could call it matriarchy for women and patriarchy for all. Men and women are too different.

It seems you heard what you agreed with. The main thing Paglia seemed to be defending was something called an "authentic 1960's revolution" that had something to do with a "universal consciousness," etc. that is so abstract it's unlikely even two "authentic revolutionaries" would have the same conception.

Icarus said:
Suppose 3 generations live under the same roof. There's a pyramidal hierarchy:

  • The grandfather rules over the fathers and the grandsons. Fathers rule over their sons and nephews.
  • The grandmother rules over the mothers and the granddaughters. Mothers rule over their daughters and nieces. Lastly, the grandmother reports to the grandfather.

Hence, men are not forced to deal with female insanity. Wifey is PMS-ing and acting insane? Inform grandfather. Grandfather then orders the grandmother to discipline insane wifey. She does so. Problem solved. Men should not be forced to descend into the utter inanity of female emotion.

Ah, it's all that easy, huh.

Icarus said:
She is all for large families, however. I agree with her. If you only have one sibling, your socialization will be limited. Socializing with a bunch of siblings is a much richer life.

Again, IIRC, JP was the person that brought that up and she agreed. In fact, she emphasized the role of the elder women having tons of control over social life, not "grandfather" as per your example.

Though it does make a lot of sense for a person claiming "No mercy! Burn it all," to not understand the term "Playing with fire."
 
911 said:
In order to really get to the bottom, she has to step out from her fundamental identity, which would be too big a step for her.

LOL. Per the interview, she "identifies" as a gay "transgender" lesbian feminist. So maybe this thread could be re-titled "Camille Paglia is the manosphere's godmother/godfather/gay-uncle/lesbian-aunt/...."
 
Top