The Social Pathologist starts off on good footing in Marx and the Feminine Imperative when he writes:

Now, I do think that the Feminine imperative holds true, especially for the avowed feminists, but for the average woman, I don’t think she wakes up in the morning desiring to consciously or unconsciously screw men over. But….. Rollo and Dalrock’s highlighting of the subject did get me thinking and I think something else is happening. I do think that the effects of the feminine imperative are real but what is enabling this is not some underlying power conflict but something more complex and therefore harder to understand and tackle.

But later he stumbles by suggesting it is simply about women getting the benefit of the doubt for immoral actions:

I really don’t think there is such a thing as the feminine imperative, what I do think though, is that Western Women are privileged to enjoy moral indulgence–it’s their get out of jail free card, and currently, Western Women are exploiting this phenomenon en mass to avoid moral responsibility. When a woman does something consciously dumb, rude or evil, there are many resources in Western Culture she can draw on. Sure, men can access some of these resources, and criminals frequently do, but women have far deeper pool of cultural “treasure” to get out of jail.

The problem is the feminine imperative is much more insidious than simple moral indulgence. The feminine imperative has warped our very ability to think morally. For example, a recent commenter at Dr Helen’s blog offered the following helpful dating advice for men looking for good women:

…I have found that when men “go there too soon,” a woman feels regretful or in some cases objectified… Whether or not they were they said “no.” So, if you are looking for “the one,” patience is the best. “Getting women in bed quickl” is the fastest way to get a woman out of your life, if you ask me. A good woman wants to wait, and you want a good woman for the long haul, I would think… I guess I can only offer the “good-girl, looking for life-long partner” perspective. They are out there, maybe fewere and fewer?

How many even inside of the manosphere can spot this for what it really is? Most will mistake it for Christian sexual morality or at least something along those lines, instead of what it really is, the cuckoo chick which pushed Christian sexual morality out of the nest when no one was looking. Modern Christians can’t spot this for what it is so they nourish it as if it were their own. It takes a vigilant eye to spot this parasitic imposter as the feminine imperative masquerading as sexual morality. The beauty of it is even the woman writing this likely has no idea of what she is actually doing.

Where I think many are getting hung up is in the explanation of the mechanics of how all of this happens. This is certainly a valid and interesting discussion, but whether or not you agree with Rollo on the mechanism doesn’t invalidate the phenomenon. Something very real is happening, and it follows what is generally a distinct and recognizable pattern once you understand what a feral woman’s mating script actually looks like. In essence, what Rollo has done for us is both point out the pattern and offer an explanation at the same time. He may or may not be right about the explanation, but the pattern is as undeniable as iron shavings surrounding a magnet. We don’t have to know the mechanics of electromagnetic fields to see that there is a pattern there, and those who are objecting to the concept of the feminine imperative should take the same approach. While the mechanics may be in question, the result is undeniable.

Warbler tricked into feeding Cuckoo chick image licensed as creative commons by Per Harald Olsen.