Steve Moxon doesn't like political correctness very much, and he's written a new book called The Woman Racket. He talks about this book in an interview which is predictably provocative and grounded in plausible-souding (if not always testable) science and data. The whole thing is worth reading, but what I found most interesting is a few sentences in which he implies that his cause is pretty much hopeless:

Feminism is just business-as-usual elitism. It is not about serving the interests of women as a whole: it is a disservice to most women. Feminism is an intensification of the natural prejudice we all share towards males - that is, towards the majority of necessarily lower status males. High status males and attractive women win out. Plus ca change.

Feminism may well be a disservice to the majority of women, but as Moxon says later, it also lets women be overpaid for easy low-skill jobs, so even unattractive women get something out of it, also. The group at which feminism really strikes at and harms are all men except perhaps the top 10-20% in terms of status. This is an idea which Roissy has also independently mentioned - that feminism benefits "alpha males" at the expense of the rest of men.

Moxon can talk about how we and our governments should be nicer to lower-status guys, but all this talk of fairness and justice crashes hard against the fact that we are biologically hardwired to not care much about helping lower-status guys. The natural prejudice he mentions has been described by Ricky Raw in a very evocative way:

People see weakness in a woman and their natural instinct is to protect from harm and nurture it until it’s strong. People see weakness in a man and feel revolting disgust and their natural instinct is to crush it out of existence and get it out of their sight as soon as possible.

The men who are near the top of our social hierarchy might have the most power to change the current state of sex relations, but they have no incentive to do so because it benefits them tremendously. Lower-status men don't really have the power to do much and complaining about the state of things just makes them look like resentful losers who don't have what it takes. That gets them no sympathy and only has the effect of further crushing their already low status. OK, men who are truly at the bottom of society such as cripples and beggars do get some sympathy, but for the vast majority of us any attempt to do so is self-defeating.

What guys like Steve Moxon need to do is sell their ideas in a way which disgust and annoy low-status men while appealing to high-status men and women (especially attractive women). How can that be done? I don't know, but perhaps Roissy is closer to being on the right track?

HT: 2Blowhards