the part about both sides believing nobody understands them. but is that true, or is it just that we stop asking after a while?
Humanity Sensitive
Thought
Thought
the part about both sides believing nobody understands them. but is that true, or is it just that we stop asking after a while?
Post content
I look upon my species,
and I see the wrongs they do.
I see the wrongs they commit,
the atrocities they inflict upon one another—
man against woman,
woman against man,
human against human.
And I cannot defend either side.
Not my gender.
Nor the other.
Because I have seen the cruelty of men.
I will never deny it.
I have seen the violence,
the abuse,
the destruction,
the things men have done to women,
to children,
and even to one another.
But I have also seen the cruelty of women.
I have seen women hurt men,
destroy reputations,
weaponize accusations,
tear down other women,
and sometimes use the very systems
created to protect them
as weapons against the innocent.
And yet—
I cannot look at one side
and declare it evil.
Because the moment I do,
I become blind to the other.
There are good men
and terrible men.
There are good women
and terrible women.
There are victims who later become perpetrators,
and perpetrators who were once victims.
There are people who lie
and people who tell the truth.
People who love,
and people who destroy.
People who protect,
and people who exploit.
And sometimes,
the same person can be all of these things
at different moments in their life.
So where is the line?
Where does good end
and evil begin?
Where does justice become vengeance?
Where does protection become control?
Where does accountability become persecution?
Perhaps there is no simple answer.
Perhaps there never was.
Then I look at the world we have created
and I look at the media.
And I wonder what we are teaching
the next generation.
We tell girls what their bodies should look like.
We tell boys what their bodies should look like.
We tell women what they should desire.
We tell men what they should become.
A girl learns that she must be beautiful
to be worthy.
A boy learns that he must be strong
to be worthy.
She is taught to fear becoming unattractive.
He is taught to fear becoming weak.
She is told that her body is not enough.
He is told that his body is not enough.
And slowly,
both begin to look into the mirror
and see an enemy
where there should have been a human being.
We criticize the media
for teaching young women
to sexualize themselves,
to measure their worth through appearance,
to believe that beauty is the highest form of value.
And rightly so.
But we must also ask
what the media teaches young men.
That height determines worth.
That money determines worth.
That strength determines worth.
That masculinity must always be performed.
That vulnerability is weakness.
That rejection means inadequacy.
That their bodies must look a certain way
for them to be worthy of love.
And somewhere along the way,
we stop teaching children
how to become good human beings
and start teaching them
how to become desirable ones.
Then we wonder
why they grow up insecure.
Why they hate themselves.
Why they hate each other.
Why men become afraid of women.
Why women become afraid of men.
Why people begin seeing relationships
as battles instead of connections.
And the saddest part is—
both sides believe
they are the ones being forgotten.
Men say,
"Nobody understands what we go through."
Women say,
"Nobody understands what we go through."
And perhaps...
both are right.
Perhaps the problem is not
that one side suffers more.
Perhaps the problem is
that we have become so consumed
with proving whose suffering is greater
that we have forgotten to listen
to the suffering beside us.
I look upon my species
and I see no perfect side.
I see men capable of extraordinary kindness
and unimaginable cruelty.
I see women capable of extraordinary kindness
and unimaginable cruelty.
I see people who protect strangers
and people who destroy those closest to them.
I see love.
I see hatred.
I see justice.
I see injustice.
I see truth.
I see lies.
And I see humanity standing somewhere
in the middle of it all.
Not entirely good.
Not entirely evil.
Not entirely right.
Not entirely wrong.
Just human.
And perhaps that is the truth
we are most afraid to accept:
That there is no battle between
men and women.
There is only humanity
trying to understand itself.
And perhaps...
before we ask
which gender is right,
we should ask
what kind of human being
we are choosing to become.
Thoughts
-
this is so long and good. are you writing more about this or was this the whole thing you needed to say?
-
weird question but when you say the media teaches this stuff, do you mean like explicit messages or more the feeling you get from everything together?
-
that part about both sides saying nobody understands. that stuck with me.
-
the mirror line, seeing an enemy where there should have been a human being. did you come to that or did it come to you?
-
i don't know enough to argue this but yeah, feels like we're all just trying not to mess up, and somehow that's not what we teach each other.
-
this hits different as a mother of teenagers. the part about teaching them to be desirable instead of good stayed with me.
-
the part about both sides believing nobody understands them. but is that true, or is it just that we stop asking after a while?
-
after twenty years in people's houses, i hear a lot of not being heard. do you think we listen less now, or just to different things?
Related posts
-
Does secular society still believe in original sin?
One of the funniest things about modern secular culture is that it absolutely still believes in original sin. It just refuses to call it that because theological language makes educated people uncomfortable. Listen to how modern institutions describe human beings. We are governed by unconscious bias, shaped by childhood conditioning, manipulated by algorithms, trapped in dopamine loops, distorted by social incentives, blinded by ideology, and mostly incapable of seeing our own motivations…
-
Does atheism make you more rational, or just leave a void you fill badly?
One of the common atheist temptations is to confuse unbelief with clarity, to assume that religion is the irrational part, so removing religion must leave behind a cleaner and more rational human being. But human beings do not work that way, human beings operate through beliefs, emotions... We do not stop wanting ritual, purity, moral tribe, sense of sacredness or transcendent meaning just because we stop using religious language for those desires.
-
Does Christianity actually fear knowledge?
One of the most persistent stereotypes about Christianity is that it fears knowledge. The story is familiar. Religion relies on faith. Science relies on evidence. One asks questions, the other suppresses them. The heroes are the people who challenged religious authority, while the Church stands as the institution that tried to hold them back. There are moments in history that support parts of that story. The Church has made mistakes. It has sometimes resisted new ideas. The Galileo affair…
-
Is Christ's message eternal, but never meant to be read literally?
Christians rightly say that the truth revealed in Christ is not temporary, but rather eternal. That is true, but it does not mean literalism and it does not mean that we are to drop interpretation. The mistake comes when some believers quietly turn that into a different claim: because the truth is eternal, every biblical utterance should be treated as though it arrived outside history and therefore needs no interpretation any longer, but rather has to be taken literally in the same way...
-
Does literalism flatten the Bible into a mere manual?
One of the strangest assumptions in modern literalist readings of Scripture is the idea that the Bible should be treated as if it were a single kind of document with a single interpretive key. As if it were a legal contract where every clause must be enforced uniformly, or a scientific paper where every sentence is meant as a precise empirical claim, or a recipe book where the point is simply to follow instructions exactly as written.
-
Does the state corrupt the Church more than the Church ever corrupts the state?
Constantine's church became an instrument of imperial politics within a generation. Franco's bishops became collaborators in child theft. Patriarch Kirill blesses wars. The question is not whether you will gain political influence. The question is what will be left of what you started with once the people who wanted the influence are done with it.
-
Is simulation theory just theism with extra steps?
One of the funniest intellectual developments of the last decade is watching aggressively secular people reinvent religion using computer terminology and then acting like this makes the idea more rational. Simulation theory is the clearest example. The basic concept is familiar by now, but I'll summarize: our universe might be an artificial simulation created by a vastly more advanced intelligence. Reality is likely programmed. Consciousness could exist inside a designed system. The laws of…
-
Can Buddhist detachment really be the root of a good moral system?
One thing I have never been able to shake about Buddhism is that its moral vision seems to rest on a foundation that I regard as fundamentally mistaken. I am not talking about all the virtues it encourages. Non-violence is good, Self-control is good, patience is good. A refusal to be consumed by greed or anger is obviously good. Christians should be able to acknowledge virtues wherever they find them. My concern is with the principle underneath those virtues.
Public
8 conversations
16 thoughts
21 upvotes
0 downvotes
0 series
I look upon my species, and I see the wrongs they do.