The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

‘They Were Lonely and Depressed; Their Symptoms Were Psychosomatic’

Posted on | August 13, 2013 | 62 Comments

In 2006, an Australian physician related his experiences encountering a certain type of female patient: Attractive, successful, mid-20s, complaining of rather vague symptoms. The patient had previously been diagnosed with and treated for a variety of ailments, but was still suffering from anxiety, cramps, etc. A pattern became evident, and the doctor described the typical reaction:

When questioning them about their unhappiness, a litany of loathing and tears, more sincere than any self penitent would erupt. They were fat, they were unintelligent and they couldn’t find a partner. They were ugly.
They were unlovable.
At first I was quite shocked at this complete disconnect between reality and self perception. As a young man, I would not have hesitated at once to try to make an acquaintance with any of these women. Indeed, they usually did not have a problem with meeting men at all. What they did have was a problem of meeting men who would treat them like a person instead of a means of sexual satisfaction. They were lonely and depressed; their symptoms were psychosomatic.
The pattern of their personal lives seemed to be the same. They usually had a string of liaisons more than relationships. The male leaving them after he became sexually bored, lured away by a more attractive mate or when “demands” were placed on the man. These “demands” usually usually took the form of a promise of commitment or exclusivity. It was interesting to observe that the many a woman would delay making “demands” on her partner for as long as possible as she was fearful of losing her mate. The imperative however was the biological clock, demanding that a stable relationship be entered for the good of the offspring. It was at this point that the relationship broke down. Time to start again: all men are Bastards.
Indeed their inability to “keep” a man was interpreted by themselves as a failure of attraction or, in a psychologically negative sense, proof of their ugliness. As the cycle repeated, the ideation was verified. A course of anti-depressant medication usually improved their symptoms if not their mental state. They were sad, not mad. They were suffering from a reactive depression with the consequential psychosomatic symptoms. Their existential situation was the cause of their problems. . . .

Please read the whole thing, because it is important to understanding the fundamental grievance that underlies most of modern feminism. Women are unhappy, and feminist ideology offers them a systematic explanation — a political analysis — for their unhappiness.

Having an explanation is not the same as having a solution, however, and the persistent unhappiness lends itself to a sense of rage: If the “patriarchy” is causing their unhappiness (as feminism tells them), then the more unhappy they become, the more vehemently they lash out at the personified scapegoat. This is really politics as psychotherapy, an acting-out of emotional problems.

It is not that I am unsympathetic to the plight of women, but I refuse to accept the rigid quasi-Marxist ideology by which feminists delude women into believing “the personal is political,” i.e., they can solve their individual unhappiness through collective action.

Dana Pico at First Street Journal has relevant thoughts on “SlutWalk” and the attendant feminist rage.



62 Responses to “‘They Were Lonely and Depressed; Their Symptoms Were Psychosomatic’”

  1. Dianna Deeley
    August 14th, 2013 @ 2:20 pm

    Marriage was not – except rarely – just a few years after puberty. That was a remarkable thing in the American Colonies (and the age at marriage suddenly rose just before the Revolution), and in the first half of the 20th Century, that young people could, indeed, marry in their early twenties.

  2. Dianna Deeley
    August 14th, 2013 @ 2:21 pm

    That’s a ghost story, right? Or am I the only one who thinks so?

  3. Dana
    August 14th, 2013 @ 2:27 pm

    your link has so far tripled my traffic for the day! You are the man!

    Oh, wait, is that a celebration of Teh Patriarchy or something?

  4. Dana
    August 14th, 2013 @ 2:32 pm

    She has indeed not been shortchanged in the mammarial department, and she does look good, but she needs to wear clothes that actually fit.

  5. La Pucelle
    August 14th, 2013 @ 4:36 pm

    I personally think it’s the “God-shaped” hole that Lewis references. Instead of Christ, they fill it with ideology instead. And it’s destroying them. The “sexual liberation” and “equality” feels great for a while, but like any other idol, eventually there’s nothing but emptiness left.

  6. Steve Skubinna
    August 14th, 2013 @ 4:52 pm

    From what I have read, the producers decided to leave it ambiguous. They supposedly filmed a scene but then cut it, in which it turned out Clint’s character was the murdered Marshal’s brother enacting vengeance upon the town.

    So you aren’t the only one who thinks so, but the question deliberately does not have an obvious resolution.

  7. Steve Skubinna
    August 14th, 2013 @ 4:55 pm

    For that matter, MADD has accomplished their stated mission. Drunk driving is no longer a joke, and receives draconian penalties everywhere in the nation.

    Has MADD thrown a party, struck the tent, and declared their job finished? Not on your life. They got money, they got exposure, they got access to power, damn if they give it up just because of some silly old “mission accomplished” thing.

  8. Steve Skubinna
    August 14th, 2013 @ 4:59 pm

    Perhaps your self image is not focused on your genitalia? Seriously, who could actually be proud of that? Don’t you think that such people have a deeply secret nagging sense of shame that their entire identity is based upon their private parts?

    Of all the things I’m proud of, where I place my penis is not even on the list.

  9. Dianna Deeley
    August 14th, 2013 @ 5:16 pm

    Game theory, though, will point out that abstention works best if the majority do it, not the minority. It’s sad, but true.

  10. La Pucelle
    August 14th, 2013 @ 5:21 pm

    That’s certainly part of it. Feminists have been brainwashed into thinking that being “equal” means becoming a “female equivalent” of the straw macho man they’ve constructed, and this straw macho man thinks entirely in terms of his penis.

    But even if the strawman were true, it’s still defining themselves as “not-men” rather than as women. Rather than pushing to make classic femininity culturally equal, they try to become what they think is “masculine”.

    But I think ultimately my happiness is the reason I don’t think with my lady parts. They’re great and I enjoy them at times, but I’m more than the sum of my parts. That’s what self-respect is.

  11. Dana
    August 14th, 2013 @ 8:12 pm

    Well, Captain Janeway supposedly had a boyfriend back in the Alpha Quadrant. I guess that Seven of Nine became the sex object, after Kes left the series; it helped that the Doctor left in a couple of her Borg implants.

  12. DaveO
    August 15th, 2013 @ 11:26 am

    Get a Rule 5 room… or better, send your links to the Wombat and we’ll see who the better weatherlady. Heh!