IS THE WOMAN ALWAYS SCORNED?

The story of a man and woman parting and the man quickly moving on to the next available person is not unique.  It is also not unique that the man can easily start a relationship – in whichever way –  with the woman’s best friend, sister, boss, cousin, church sister, mother, perfect stranger or his “friend”.  In fact, in more cases than not, the way in which the “move-on” occurs is done to inflict pain.  These things happen.  There are some men who simply operate like this without thought or consideration, and there are many women who will not see anything wrong with this and will encourage the “interactions” as well as the instructions given. 

Generally speaking and within the context of a “new scenario”, we tend to romanticize our decisions and our position, because we feel like we have come to save the day.  We are often of the opinion that it is our duty to take our new interest out of the horrors that he/she has had to endure with this other person (based on hearsay).  More specific, the stories that the woman is sold is so bad that she feels inclined to join him in his quest to denigrate the other woman whom she is sure has treated this “wonderful man” in a horrendous way, considering all the good he has done for her and how honest and kind he is to her, in the beginning.  In fact, in this new position the “newly elevated” woman is more inclined to believe that this “scorned” woman is pining after him and wants him back.  How desperate can she really be?

But that is the romantic version that many women opt to believe, until her lived experiences (with him) becomes all too familiar.

The story of a woman belittling another woman when she has received what she deems to be the prize is an age old one.  Women have been taught this somewhere, and men know this; some use it to their advantage.  

Why can’t the new woman just date him without helping him to “fight” a woman she knows NOTHING about? 

I do not have enough hands to count the amount of times I have heard (directly or indirectly) a woman speak horribly against another woman because of what she has been told by the man.  What makes it even stranger is that the disparager would have, herself, gone through turmoil with another man – something that lets her identify with the other woman; yet, she would still accept the disparaging story she has been told without even referencing her own experiences for guidance.  It is as common as it is strange.

But what does it profit a man (and his new woman)?

The “woman scorned” mythology has been used to benefit the narrative of many relationships that have ended.  Most are not honest enough to say that the other person was the one who walked away and would therefore not indicate their own efforts made to rekindle.  Plus, humans operate with the mindset that men are the superior being – that patriarchy rules – that to be masculine means to NEVER be “left.”  Thus, if a “relationship” ends, then it is more likely that the woman was “left” – that she was scorned.  This accepted mindset is to the man’s benefit, because he is able to create the narrative to suit his ego retention.

Furthermore, to accept the “woman scorned” narrative is more salacious and entertaining, as well as a more plausible reality that keeps the man at the helm of society.  In this way, his masculinity is never questioned. 

What “weak” man would allow any woman, especially if society deems her to be “below” him, to leave him?

The fallacy of it all.

Some may not agree, but only a few who understand the alternative may accept the truth:  she was the one to have walked away for very sinister reasons that he would NEVER admit, openly.  So, rather than entertain the possibility of an alternate reality, the “better” woman believes herself elevated and must, therefore, perform the “hate” that she has been sold.  Plus, in order to prove that he is done with the “other” woman, (even as he entertains other thoughts), he must perform his disdain, very loudly.  This performance is necessary to him because:

• It helps to repair a bruised ego
• His masculinity is maintained
• It proves the “woman scorned” narrative.
• It keeps the “better” woman in his grasp.
• It sends the message to the audience that the “other” woman was “no good”.
• In his mind, he is inflicting unto the “other” woman the level of pain that he has secretly felt.
• The new woman feels chosen and special and will therefore treat him special and possibly revere him in the way that he requires.

So what if the reverse is true?

Let us just say, for argument’s sake, that the woman is, in fact, scorned.  How important is this information to the newly-established or newly-public interaction?  Is the performance of hate a necessary binding agent?  Does he have to perform his hate for her to prove his love to the “better woman”?  Why is this even a standard that women seemingly require anyway?

Relationships end all the time for reasons that the parties involved do not always reveal.

Understandably, the new couple (of friends/lovers, etc.) must operate in unison to prove to her, the public and to anyone who cares that “he no longer wants her”.  Whatever the case, he benefits from a society that is more inclined to accept that she is the “woman scorned” than to believe that he is!