Feminists have made the claim that men are now obsolete. A lot more underlies this statement than the average person realizes. What a discounted existence men must have that they can be referred to as obsolete. How can this term, or matching status, ever be applied to the sex of a species? Here’s why.

Robbed of an exclusive biologically-derived male value (converted to government currencency) by Equal Employment Opportunity, men are no longer the exclusive bread-winners, although women still possess their enate sexual value on uncompromising terms. However, the traditional male identity is still applied, which in and of it’s own still lacks personal value attached to men (e.g. “He was a good provider”–a utility).

You are only as good as you think you are, and this applies to conditions that support the way you have been programmed (raised) per an acquired identity instilled from boyhood. This grooming process from boyhood is where the problem lies.

Many men lack self-worth, and the kind some do possess is unhealthy, merely based on servitude rather than on an individual, let alone equal, basis to women that is attached to men in their own right. However, women have a self-worth attributed to their personal/individual value defined in their own right, not as some utility or entity to be disposed of when no longer needed. As men are groomed and sculpted by their mothers from boyhood, and by their fathers who have had the same done to them, with an acquired identity to serve women as pawns and beasts of burden, per their defined ‘manhood’ identity, it’s not surprising to hear the modern feminists claim that men are ‘obsolete’.

The identity assigned to men by women (per their female-defined masculinity) is discarded when men are no longer needed, just like any other beast of burden–e.g. an old plow horse that heads to the glue factory or an old bull that is to be slaughtered for hamburger, since they no longer serve any ‘useful’ purpose. There is no personal value or exclusive identity attached to a man’s existence other than that which benefits others–specifically women. [A man’s existence by a defined identity, attached to him early, is devoid of any rights or equal status to others–just as a slave who serves his master, so he’s not due any rights of his own.] He often even thinks that his defined role assigned by others is his as an individual, in which case men are often preceived (designed at a certain level) as all being the same, much as all slaves serve a common purpose are seen as the same.

This assessment of men being obsolete (although maddening at first) makes sense since men, per their sculpted existence, are to abide by a common character of being ‘a man’. This is why you won’t find the same collective assessment of worth applied to women in which case a shaming tactic holds them to a confined and restricted existence–e.g “Act like a woman.” When realized, this mental cross-roads must be visited by a keen sense of self in which case such self-awareness will involve a development of the male as an individual equal in status to a woman.

Alan Millard’s most recent book, A Flaw From Within: How Women’s Higher Status Defies Equal Justice, Violates Men, and Destroys Society, is available through Amazon.