A question came up regarding whether or not what might be seen as toxic male behavior could exist in a utopian society. To define utopian society for this essay, we are simply talking about a 100% sustainable, generally agrarian in nature, community of a specific number of people. They find their symbiotic relationship with the surrounding world, they are extremely fair and generous in their land use in terms of fertilization and of course they practice nonviolence. The question of the dominant male has to do with the break in civility when all things are truly not equal. The premise being that if a truly dominant male entered the room, every other male would react and there would be an issue.
It seems that common thinking according to the media would lead to exactly the sort of reactions we’re getting with the elections. Literally, the males would fight to the death to hold on to whatever drugs were available, their own masculinity being the number one drug they own. The good old family jewels and the desire to make use of them is pretty much all of their usefulness as a male. If you are the biggest guy in the room or if you just one of the guys in the room, every guy in the room understands what’s going on every single day. That’s what it means to be a male. It’s just there. Or in other words, they will speak of anything that will not feminize them and allow them their masculinity.
And this is a fair argument even despite that it must be delivered amidst the hysteria of a pro female regime. Harris lost because nobody wanted this particular phony baloney version of whatever it is she used to be selling. And it’s fair enough. Or, it was just that we reached the threshold where selfish stupidity had larger numbers then people trying to be decent to their habitat. Literally, to enjoy modern life and all modern conveniences means generating so much garbage and so much pollution that it seems criminal to notice this. Literally, everybody loves partying like a criminal everyday while agreeing that they are still good people and especially good Christians.
But I think people misinterpret the existence of males fighting for the right to mate. If you are to accept the human animal to be what it is, this would be a part of life including the immediate hierarchy that appears when one asks who exactly is the cock of the walk. But that doesn’t have to automatically make it into violent altercation. It’s the existence of violence in this moment of life that is containable or simply removed. This doesn’t mean that you don’t have boxing matches or any kind of sport where men can fight against each other for their dominance and the entertainment of an audience. There’s no reason we can’t do this in a civilized fashion. The thing is that at the end of these little parties, we all go back to work in the morning. Everybody does basic chores no matter how big you are and no matter how many girls think you’re hot.
I think the Utopian fiction world of Arthur and joy and creating the baseball league in the Utopian community was an extremely reasonable assessment of a way where all sexuality, male or female, has its right to be in its time and all human beings have the right to be who they are. In this case, I think Sam and Olga both represented pretty much the apex of the species in terms of size and speed. But it was also about generosity and public interaction. They weren’t celebrities in that they were untouchable. They were just kind of celebrities because they were worthy of celebration. Just the best of the best was in the room and therefore the team was better because they were there. And that is a beautiful way to think about things. If you yourself are not the alpha male, it seems that nobody feels bad about agreeing that Sam is number one because he’s just too nice to hate.
In the end, the ability to raise children at some level of consciousness where they understand their responsibilities to help with the community carry on. Children are not very far away from communication although we are much slower than other species by far. But it is not hard to tell a baby that it is one of us. It’s probably the easiest concept to impart. This is your mom and this is your dad and you came from us and we are all people. We are big people and you are a little person. And this is the life of a person. And indeed, if we are talking about a Utopian society, it’s not cradle to grave security and a pension that would make people happy, it is cradle to grave knowledge of nonviolence and wanted participation for a genuine purpose. We all want to live, we all want to have a nice time and we clean up our messes immaculately.
I hope this clears up any issues of automatic feminization. I don’t think anybody wants a gun in Utopian society. I really think there are plenty of games of skill and accuracy that one can play with their own body that does not cost any money, waste resources or have the potential for awesome sadness and pain. We don’t need these things nor do we need weapons of war. But yeah, how accurate can you hit a target. I like baseball. Can you throw strikes while someone is taking swings at your balls? I think what this means is that we really don’t need to build a phony society because it has more economic potential than a natural one. I think we should forget about economic potentials and just feed each other and help each other to live. I would think this would be a satisfying enough life for everybody no matter what the cocaine heads at the top think.
