To read about the disintegration of American life into narcissism and self-absorption is just appalling. The immaturity and disregard for others are just psychopathic: “The patriarchy has conditioned us to feel incomplete without permanent partnership, coercing us into presumed stability, even when it proves unreliable, insecure. And when a woman refuses to conform to this expected ideology, she is often deemed broken or fickle, a commitment-phobe or a whore.” These people are just using others and playing the victim. It’s only through the generosity of the patriarchy that a single woman could even afford to raise multiple children. Women don’t produce cars, houses, buildings, sewer systems, electric grids, roads, lumber, oil, food, etc. They are given office and service jobs and many times paid multiples of actually productive jobs. Women like this are not suddenly “queer” but narcissistic. They desire other women because they can only really love themselves. A prominent trait of a narcissist is their preference for non-binding commitments. Lasch, in his book The Culture of Narcissism:
Plagued by anxiety, depression, vague discontents, a sense of inner emptiness, the “psychological man” of the twentieth century seeks neither individual self-aggrandizement nor spiritual transcendence but peace of mind, under conditions that increasingly militate against it. Therapists, not priests or popular preachers of self-help or models of success like the captains of industry, become his principal allies in the struggle for composure; he turns to them in the hope of achieving the modern equivalent of salvation, “mental health.” Therapy has established itself as the successor both to rugged individualism and to religion; but this does not mean that the “triumph of the therapeutic” has become a new religion in its own right. Therapy constitutes an antireligion, not always to be sure because it adhreres to rational explanation or scientific methods of healing, as its practitioners would have us believe, but because modern society “has no future” and therefore gives no thought to anything beyond its immediate needs. Even when therapists speak of the need for “meaning” and “love,” they define love and meaning simply as the fulfillment of the patient’s emotional requirements. It hardly occurs to them—nor is there any reason why it should, given the nature of the therapeutic enterprise—to encourage the subject to subordinate his needs and interests to those of others, to someone or some cause or tradition outside himself. “Love” as self-sacrifice or self-abasement, “meaning” as submission to a higher loyalty—these sublimations strike the therapeutic sensibility as intolerably oppressive, offensive to common sense and injurious to personal health and well-being. To liberate humanity from such outmoded ideas of love and duty has become the mission of the post-Freudian therapies and particularly of their converts and popularizes, for whom mental health means the overthrow of inhibitions and the immediate gratification of every impulse.
These people are just idiots.