For Valentine’s Day, I offer a semantic olive branch to da bitches. Introducing “anti-primalism.”

I was thinking how I want to get away from a common lexicon motif, because while descriptive, it is also slightly antagonistic and inflammatory and draws out ire that invariably detracts from the point at hand.

Not that I am averse to the practice of inflammatory. In fact, I kinda get off on tension and argument, but sometimes, I really need to make a point without resorting to common tropes.

Now, the motif I speak of, the one I see bandied about the manly-sphere, is that of the “feminization of modern civilization.”

I agree with the theory, in principle. I certainly propound the tenet that society is becoming more attuned to the female psyche, and with it, all the attendant social idiosyncrasies that essentially rid and purge society of the historic virtues of masculinity that have enabled us to reach this point where we have the luxury to humor gender egalitarianism.

Concerted, social movement Feminism could only have arisen in a society where the role of physical might was neutered by machines and technology. It follows that each leap and bound of technological evolution further diffuses masculinity while perpetuating the ascendance of femininity because, in the social, cognitive and emotional exigencies of a modern, technocratic society, women experience an “equality of contribution” that is innate to the nature of said society. Forget that feminism tripe, the implied perception that Feminism was a consciously erected movement of man- and woman-made change. Women would have been granted equality, regardless. Women and men had no real say in that. The silent fuels of social change: the market, the capitalism of the moment, required and mandated it. Feminism’s self-laudatory perversity is an example of collective opportunism in claiming a human social evolution that would have occurred in spite of direct human meddling. Social movements are symbols and manifestations of cultural progression that is unearthed subconsciously across society’s macro demands of the moment.

In this respect, I seek to get away from the “feminization” meme, because the article of change I seek to cement, rather, is what I would term “anti-primalism.”

Technology, machine advancement, especially after the Industrial Revolution, is propelled by greed and laziness. And perhaps gluttony, since as humans, we seem inherently bent on filling our idle moments with sensual input. In fact, across the span of our species, there are pockets of many people who seek such sensory fulfillment to an excessive degree. This is gluttony. This is why obesity is an epidemic. Obesity is a symptom of luxury and too much leisure time, not of high fructose corn syrup or excessive carbs.

Gluttony is the driver of technology, hence, anti-primalism. While anti-primalism certainly enables the Female, it is not an elementally female phenomenon. Women are the beneficiaries, but this is not a reason to call it “feminization.” There is no concerted effort to turn society into one big bitch. The indelible and oblique chain of human progress that spawns beyond our control is what dictates this so-called feminization.

I would like to examine this anti-primalism in depth. But that will be another post. Since I’ve offered it up as the corollary and corrective antithetical term to a commonly used talking point in the manly-sphere, I owe it to anyone who will listen a comprehensive deconstruction and pathology of my alternative.

Just not now. I must run. It’s Saint Valentine’s Day, and I must get laid.