The Deconstruction of Men, Review of the year 2014 in France

Here is a review of the year 2014 but from a French perspective.

What I'm offering here is a perspective of how the Misandry Bubble is acting out in France and more importantly what it affects and what it is being affected by. A very important point here is that the Misandry Bubble is intertwined with multiple events and is influenced by multiple ideologies.

A crucial event that happened in France in 2014 was the release of "Le Suicide Francais" (The French Suicide) by Eric Zemmour, a popular political analyst, writer, and TV host. He was at a time the equivalent of what Jon Stewart is, sporting in what was (and somewhat still is) the most popular talk show on French television, but a loooot more on the conservative side. And then he left TV to write books, and the book he released this year literally shattered the media and public scene. He is now the equivalent of the Dreyfus Affair (go ahead, google it!) by himself, you are either pro or anti-Zemmour, no in-between. And why is that? Why so much division and conflict?

Because the guy put into words what many were struggling to even realize in France. And one of those things was the Misandry Bubble, so you can imagine how easily people polarized themselves around that issue.

But not only that, he also exposed the “Deconstructors”. He analyzed how since the 60s appeared what he called the “Deconstructors”, people who set out to unravel, deconstruct all the social norms because by virtue of being social those were thus artificial and thus free to be remodeled, changed, altered at will through psychologist theories. Using Psychology and Goodwill as their weapon, through the decades they destroyed social constructs after social constructs and that continue to this day.

And of course one of those social constructs that was to be remodeled among many was, you guessed it, the role of Men in society. The good ol’ formula was applied to it, “men being in charge is an [oppressive] psychologically enforced social construct and thus we should get rid of it to make for a better society”.

The catch now is that the Deconstructors tackled another social norm, Heterosexuality. And this is where things get messy and reflect the situation in the US.

Most homosexuals fight to be accepted by society, but what Eric Zemmour denounced is one branch of the LGBT movement, exported from the US, that instead fought to unravel Heterosexuality as a social norm and “make a society where homosexuality is the norm” (his words).

Those efforts culminated in the Taubira’s Law, dubbed the “Marriage pour Tous” (Marriage for All) adopted this year 2014, and easily the most divisive event in French’s politics in the last 5 years. The law was to give access to Marriage to homosexual couples, so of course all the progressist forces in France did their best to back the law. What they did not plan was that this would also cause a radical movement that would also do its best to oppose the law. And where this went wrong is that a lot of the forces opposing the law were religiously-motivated.

To explain, the movement opposing the law had one point to them, they feared what would happen if the right to have children as an homosexual couple would imply the right to use “Meres Porteuses”, people that would get pregnant for you for a price. France forbid this practice, for fear of a commercialization of babies. In the US I believe those are less of an issue, I presume thanks to the mercantile nature of the country, but France is a more traditionalist country especially when it comes to what money can do. To put it simply the rational forces opposing the law where worried that it would profoundly alter French society.

Now the problem was that the less rational part of the movement were full of extremist religious movements that stained the movement as being a good old fight of Religion against Progressives. And thus automatically aligned all the atheist, secular, and republican forces of the country against those opposing the law.

The Taubira’s Law was adopted in the end, but everyone noted the deep division that appeared through this confrontation, and that manifested itself further when elements of the rising far-right political movement gained points from the side opposing the law by saying “see they don’t listen to you when it comes to society, why would they listen when it comes to money and your jobs?”, more importantly they also salvaged the problem with the commercialization of babies as a political leverage that is now starting to be a central debate in French politics. The law never cared what would happen with this, the law was an act of Goodwill and thus could do no harm.

Still the fight for the right of homosexual couple to marry painted the Deconstructors as fighting the good fight, as being the good guys, and it was a victory for them. This also then painted everyone who were opposing those Deconstructors as religiously-minded extremists, and thus Eric Zemmour was crucified for his book, as you can guess.

But this also gave words to those who were noticing this trend in the French political and media scene. It was easy to tell now who was among the Deconstructors in those scenes. Canal+, a channel that Eric Zemmour shown had a Deconstructing agenda, spent the year trying to paint Eric Zemmour as a racist, misogynistic, anti-jew, white pig (the usual weapon when you want to silence someone), which further proved his point.

This also made some other journalists and politics able to fight against what they discerned as systemic silencing through accusation of the usual -ist (racist, misogynistic, homophobic, ect..). The far-right is rising in France not only because of the economic situation, but because they allow people who are being silenced by people with Goodwill (“we do it so that this group of people won’t feel sad, oppressed, ect…, even if it is at the expense of society as a whole”) to finally have a voice.

This is why Eric Zemmour's book has been so polarizing. Those fighting for secularism feel that they have to support the Deconstructors, but at the same time the Deconstructors are acting on a purely emotional “logic” which contradict the secular, scientific-method minded people, and then the people opposing the Deconstructors are finally starting to side around a mutual understanding of what they are fighting.

I’m sure you can see the parallels now with many some of the events that happened in the US this year. For example that incident that revealed to gamers something they couldn't quite grasp or realize, how Psychologists and Deconstructors have tried to paint their media as misogynistic and how they have promoted systemic silencing of everyone who dissent from their opinions.

The role of Psychology in all this is central. Whenever you see claims of misogyny or gender oppression in the West, a psychologist is likely behind. The roots of that movement that is trying to alter the role of Men has its roots in Psychology, and women are using it for the advantage of their gender in ways men have yet to. Examples like the case of the man who was raised by a feminist mother to hate man and exemplify feminist values ended up growing up hating himself: http://mgtow1.blogspot.ca/2014/10/what-happens-when-boy-is-raised-by.html show what happen when Psychology ignores our nature, or this example of how psychologists try to paint what is normal male kids behavior as something that is systematically dangerous: https://lejournal.cnrs.fr/billets/en-finir-avec-la-fabrique-des-garcons ("to end the making of boys") (in french)

2014 has been the year where not only the Misandry Bubble, but also the phenomenons around it have been revealed to a lot of people, many who thought themselves isolated from all those issues.

To finish, it is also to show that the Misandry Bubble is not just an isolated phenomenon, it is linked to many movements and many events. 2015 is going to be the year where the Reconstructors will start asking for legitimacy, the problem is that it will likely be through far-right movements. The crux of the fight in 2015 will be to make that demand for legitimacy something that is above left and right or in the worst case that has arguments that appeal to left movements.