agency [ey-juhn-see]
noun, plural a·gen·cies.
the ability to make your own choices and act independently, free from the influence or pressure of others.
The subject of women's agency is one both feminist circles and the manosphere have debated almost since each movement's inceptions. Although these two movements approach things from different perspectives, and arrive at their conclusions via opposite routes, they both reach the same conclusion: that no, women do not have agency.
From the feminist side of things, here's a "veteran advocate, activist and educator" who pushes for "genuine sexual liberation and self-acceptance for women" (bio) who declares most women have no sexual agency. And here's the World Bank, a global financial institute and progressive spearhead organization (which has "promote gender equality" as one of its signature 'development goals'; it's also focused on, for instance, fighting manmade global warming), claiming that "girls and boys, and later women and men, have unequal capacity to exercise agency."
The consensus among feminists and other progressives is that women are deficient in agency. The reason they're deficient, feminists and progressives tell us, is because oppressive patriarchal systems and brutish, insensitive men sideline women from decision making -- even within their own lives.
The manosphere side arrives at the same conclusion as progressives and feminists -- that women are lacking in agency -- yet deduce this from a different set of clues. In the manosphere, examples of depraved, seemingly immoral behavior by women and the reliance of much of the modern female lifestyle on contraceptives, as well as the dearth of women who aspire to "higher values" as opposed to men, are pointed to when making the case that "[a] woman’s lack of agency is something neither to celebrate, nor despise. It is something to accept."
Contents
The consensus among red pill and manosphere thinkers, just like feminists and progressives, is that women are deficient in agency. The reason they're deficient, red pill and manosphere thinkers tell us, is because they are simply biologically incapable of freeing their decision-making from emotions, from accepting blame for mistakes they've made, or from hewing to any ideals higher than the most base, primitive necessary to run a life in a society.
It would seem that, while feminist, progressive, red pill, and manosphere thinkers might argue about the source, they all agree on the outcome: women lack agency.
So it might appear the debate is settled. Now we're just arguing about who's to blame: Mother Nature, or outdated, patriarchal men.
But I have another perspective on female agency.
Because I've seen all the things these thinkers talk about. I've also seen a lot of other things. And I've spent a lot of time up close with women, digging deep into their thinking and behavior beyond what they are even typically consciously aware of themselves doing, and beyond what most outside analysts believe they are doing too.
It's led me to the conclusion that women do not lack agency at all. Not in the feminist way, and not in the manosphere way, at least.
Instead, women beguile -- something they're exceptionally good at -- as part of how they act with agency in the world.
A woman uses the cloak of lack of agency as part of her real agency. Feminists further the agenda because it furthers theirs; male progressives and manosphere men alike push this female agenda (coming at it from different start points) because they buy it and believe the performance.
But a performance is what it is.
Comments
Why nobody has perfect agency
Why nobody has perfect agency is summed up well in this video.
So as long as you require something of value from another person, you have to offer something of value. I'd think that a similar calculation is made when deciding to conform vs not conform, the benefits and costs of doing so which may also tie into the Red-Black game mentioned by Varoon. Funny thing about life is that in these matters supply and demand tends to balance things out which is why if women really did sufficiently lack agency, then less parents would be willing to raise daughters and thus men would have less potential women to choose from or women trade agency for another valuable aspect in life. China's one-child policy shows this dynamic.
Loved this one
Loved this one, Chase. Great article!
Cheers,
Franco
Sexy
Very sexy article. Thanks Chase!
Question/Idea
Hey Chase, great article!
Can you make an in-depth article on how to pick-up girls as an Uber driver?
Thanks
Pursue
Good read
Thanks for the article Chase. This was fascinating to read and must have took a long time for you to prepare. You have so much patience and focus it's unbelievable. So do you really believe that any women is capable of cheating then and if they do cheat they know what they are doing and want to do it? Some are obviously more prone than others it all depends on factors you have discussed in your website whether they go out a lot to party, how they were raised, partners etc. But can even women who have only had 1 or 2 partners and they're still in their mid or late twenties and were highly devoted to her man have a chance of cheating if they meet the right guy and if they push the right buttons?
Finding an article
What a deep thought out article Chase!
It is interesting how mainstream arguments become a loop of self-reinforcement. Support comes from within the group; the wrong proving the wrong as right.
Btw, I remember reading one of your articles. You and some people were on a road trip? And you and this guy was working on the girl during the trip. She isn't that pretty, but out of the group, she is the best looking. And you gave yourself a challenge to get her before the trip ends.
The message was usually if we don't have a girl at "Hi", it usually wouldn't go anywhere. <-- This message is also mentioned in another article about approaching. I spent an hour looking through the site but can't find it.
Does it ring any bells? The two articles?
Thanks Chase,
Lawliet
Relating article
sorry, one more thing
You talked about relating in an article somewhere or comment?
How a girl shared with you her bf/ex went to the military and cheated on her.
You didn't know how to relate at that time and said "that's horrible". However, now (when you wrote the article), you would have said "yeah. trust them as far as you can throw them"
Ring any bells?
Thanks,
Lawliet
Add new comment