Paradigm Shift (2) : The Relativistic Speed of Light

Paradigm Shift (2) : The Relativistic Speed of Light.

The Universe and the Relationship between Dimensions

In the beginning, there was ONE dimension, mass, m. It is called the 'singularity' from whence our universe began its expansion from the process called the 'big bang'. Mass is one of the few constants which one could accept as likely to be constant.

At the point of the 'big bang', another dimension was added to the first, the SECOND dimension being called velocity, c. The second dimension contained both m and c, which when combined, make the quantity we call momentum, M = mc. Momentum is the primeval mathematical integral relating mass and velocity, represented by ∫ m c⁰ .dc = mc.

The THIRD dimension, beginning just after the 'big bang', added to the second dimension by introducing a change of velocity, or third dimension called acceleration, c/t, containing the second dimension. Similarly, acceleration is a mathematical integral of velocity, represented by

∫ m c¹ .dc = mc² (ignoring mathematical constants for the moment), which is what, in the third dimension we call energy. (Einstein's famous E = mc² ). Time is about to start with acceleration, but at this point is still zero, represented mathematically by t⁰ . So in the third dimension mathematically, E₃ = mc²/t⁰. Anything to the power of 0 equals 1, so E₃ = mc² /1 which is Einstein's equation E = mc² .

The FOURTH dimension, has the addition of time,t, and it contains m, c, c/t and t, that is it contains the first, second and third dimensions as outlined above. The fourth dimension is the mathematical integral of the third dimension, represented as ∫ mc² / t⁰ .dc = mc³ / t¹ , and E₄ = mc³ / t, (again ignoring constants).

Following the same reasoning, the FIFTH dimension is more difficult to visualize (because we live in the fourth dimension), but it is an integral of the fourth dimension, ∫ mc³ /t¹ .dc = mc⁴ / t² . It is “t^2” because the fifth dimension has its own time and spatial directions in addition to those of the fourth dimension, which it contains, and therefore has a total of six spatial and two time directions. So the energy is E₅ = mc⁴ / t² .

Similarly, again ignoring constants, it can be shown that in the SIXTH dimension E₆ = mc⁵ / t³ , and so forth.

The general equation for the energy of a given time dependent dimension (n), that is fourth dimension and above, can be written as E_n = m c^(n-1) / t^(n-3).

What becomes clear on examining the mathematics between time dependent dimensions is that the multiple which is the difference between them is c/t. For example, E₆ /E₅ = mc⁵ t^-3 / mc⁴ t^-2 = c/t. This is a constant between any consecutive time dependent dimensions. C/t is a velocity divided by a time, which is an acceleration. It then follows that, physically, the separation between dimensions is an acceleration.

As far as we know, the universe is still accelerating away from the point of the 'big bang'. If we accept Max Planck's calculation from the properties of free space, that time equals (in round figures) 10^-44 seconds while the speed of light from the same viewpoint is deemed to equal 1, then the value of the acceleration, c/t, is 1/ 10^-44 which equals an acceleration of 10⁴⁴ m/s².

When energy/mass has an acceleration of that magnitude, it is clear that the velocity, c, will soon be exceeded. Einstein's theories are very probably correct in their conclusion that c cannot be exceeded in the fourth dimension. He did not look into the fifth dimension.

If time can vary, as Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity calculates, then given the above calculated constancy of c/t, it follows that c can vary in another dimension when viewed from this dimension. Therefore both c and t are different in, say, the fifth dimension when viewed from the fourth dimension.

The Speed of Light is relativistic also, it varies with Time between Dimensions.

Paradigm Shift

PARADIGM SHIFT

The Theory of Dimensional Relativity

Michael J. Bull 2013

Introduction

        The Theory of Dimensional Relativity (TDR) is an extension of Einstein's Relativity Theories in that it moves those same principles into higher (and more energetic) dimensions. The effect is to allow a more complete overview and explanation of the phenomena we observe in the cosmos, much of which currently lacks any plausible explanation.

Some conclusions from TDR include calculation of the mass-energy of other dimensions; the quantification of inertia and its relationship to acceleration and time; the identification of the source of the gravitational field; the calculation of relative light speed and time in higher dimensions as seen from the 4^th dimension; theory of the relativistic speed of light where c is not a constant as now believed, but the ratio c/t is; theory of the mathematical relationship of gravito-inertia to electro-magnetism; some insight into the cause of 'black holes', and other cosmological phenomena.

All of these conclusions have significant consequences, which constitute a study in their own right, and the purpose of this article, which is not intended as a scientific paper but as a thought provoking medium based on the startling conclusions from the original Paper, which is a more rigorous scientific document as far as is possible when considering a new reality, much of which is not possible to physically corroborate at our present level of technology. This means that mathematics is the only indicator of the reality at present, as was the case with Einstein's theories for nearly a century.

A summary could be that the Theory of Dimensional Relativity is an extension of Einstein's Special and General Relativity Theories. It does not contradict them, however it does look beyond their scope into the higher dimensions, and in so doing, relates the gravitational field to the other forces of electro-magnetism, the weak nuclear force and the strong nuclear force. This connection has defied science to date and was not found by Einstein, who spent the latter half of his life in pursuit of it. Nikola Tesla made the connection in part, but could not justify his intuition without a dimensional relativity theory.

What are Dimensions?

       Much study is aimed at ascertaining the beginning and the end of the universe and there are a raft of views on the subjects. It is generally accepted that the beginning was an explosion, 'the big bang' from a 'singularity' or concentration of mass-energy at a point. The Theory of Dimensional Relativity (TDR) has as this point the 1^st dimension where there is only mass. The 2^nd dimension is at the point of explosion where there is no time or space and only mass (m) and velocity ( c). The 3^rd dimension is soon after the 'big bang' at the beginning of time and space. There are three co-ordinates of space (like length, width and depth) and one of time, as well as mass and energy (as acceleration). The 4^th dimension, which is where we live, is a view of the 3^rd dimension as time elapses, the spatial co-ordinates increase at an accelerating rate (the universe increases in volume) and there is mass (solid matter) and energy as ever increasing velocity. At a point where velocity reaches a certain limit, (the speed of light, c), the acceleration of mass and energy continues, but in a new dimension which is not detectable from the 4^th dimension because it exceeds the speed of light in the 4^th dimension. The 5^th dimension has an additional three spatial co-ordinates and one time co-ordinate and contains the first four dimensions within it. The speed of light in the 5^th dimension (c₅) as seen from our 4^th dimension is much faster than our speed of light, (c₄). Additionally, time in the 5^th dimension, (t₅) is much slower than in our 4^th dimension (t₄).

In 5^th dimension time, one second equals about 10 years in the 4^th dimension. This can be calculated from TDR inter-dimensional mathematical equations. The speed of light is, as Einstein predicted, constant within any dimension, but not between dimensions. The constant between dimensions is the ratio of light speed to time, or c/t, and it is constant regardless of which dimensions we are looking at. The 6^th dimension has the same relationship to the 5^th, there being a constant ratio between consecutive dimensions of c/t, which is in fact an acceleration of 10⁴⁴ metres/sec/sec.

The question is asked 'What was before the singularity leading to the 'big bang' ?' There was no 'before' because there was no time. It is not a meaningful question. We have minds wedded to time or 'cause and effect' which is why we struggle with the reality of quantum physics. Time is not part of the consideration, it is only an inter-dimensional variable. Time in the 6^th dimension as seen from the 4^th is 3 x 10⁵² sec or one 6^th dimension second equals ten thousand billion billion billion years in 4^th dimension time. To all intents the 6^th is timeless as we see it. So it may be with the singularity.

What is the future of the universe? This is a valid question because we have a point of reference – the beginning of acceleration – the 'big bang'. The universe continues to accelerate as it has since the 'big bang'. As the acceleration continues, we will acquire more higher dimensions to contain the increasing energy from the relentless acceleration, as it surpasses the light speed limit for each dimension. The gravitational field will not overtake the acceleration and cause a contraction. The gravitational field is a consequence of the interaction of mass with the acceleration of the next higher dimension, as discussed in the next section. The foreseeable future is more of the same.

Where does Gravity come from?

          The puzzle of the source of the gravitational field has been on-going. Einstein's idea of a warp in space-time is difficult to grasp and has limited mathematical basis. He struggled to fit gravity into his theories of relativity without much success for all of the second half of his life. He was constrained by his own deductions, which was an absolute speed of light and 4 dimensions. He did not look beyond the 4^th dimension. One of his contemporary physicists, the sometimes controversial but brilliant Nikola Tesla had his own views on this matter, but was unable to substantiate his intuition with a suitable theory. The key to Tesla's intuitive explanation of gravity is supported by the Theory of Dimensional Relativity. Tesla proposed that the gravitational field arose as a consequence of energy accelerating through mass (which can be considered as a three dimensional conductor of energy); the converse of acceleration is inertia, which was mass accelerating through energy. While the latter seemed achievable, the former was a more difficult proposition.

The TDR shows that this is not difficult and it happens constantly. The energy of the 5^th dimension, which exceeds the 4^th dimension speed of light, is not detectable from the 4^th. The 4^th is contained within the 5^th, so that 5^th dimension energy constantly passes through 4^th dimension mass, creating the gravitational field. The gravitational field arises as a consequence of 4^th dimension mass and 5^th dimension acceleration energy (which is not detectable in the 4^th dimension). No wonder that the source of gravity has been so difficult to find. Conversely, when we accelerate a mass, it accelerates through 5^th dimension energy, again not detectable, and we feel the resulting inertia, as for example being pressed into the seat when accelerating in a powerful car, which reduces rapidly as it picks up speed.

What is the Equivalence Principle?

          The Equivalence Principle says that different masses accelerate at the same rate in the same gravity field, and that inertial and gravitational mass are indistinguishable. Einstein was aware of the Equivalence Principle, which is a pillar of his Theory of General Relativity. Part of the derivation of the TDR depended upon quantifying the Equivalence Principle, which has not been done by prior physics, except as mass, which is not an accurate description of inertia. The relationship of gravitational acceleration to inertial resistance is a simple mathematical reciprocal. The mathematical statement of the Equivalence Principle is 

 g x ί = 1 Science has been trying to disprove the Equivalence Principle since the time of Galileo, who is said to have dropped different masses from the Leaning Tower of Pisa and measured their fall times. So far no-one has disproved it, we are now down to 11 decimal places without any difference.

The Equivalence Principle holds for any acceleration not just gravity. The following example simply demonstrates this important relationship:

1. if a mass of 20 kg has an acceleration of a = 10 m/s², (from Newton's F = ma), the force, F, is 200 N. As acceleration a = F/m, then inertia ί = m/F = 20/200 = 0.1      a x ί = 1
2. if a mass of 15 kg has an acceleration of a = 1 m/s², force is 15 N and the 
   inertia ί = m/F = 15/15 = 1    a x ί = 1
3. if a mass of 40 kg has an acceleration of a = 0.1 m/s², the force is 4 N and the inertia, ί = m/F = 40/4 = 10     a x ί = 1

The unit of measure for inertia is kg/Newton, and an alternative unit for acceleration is Newton/kg.

Enough of equations. It can be seen from this example why a small mass accelerates at the same rate as a larger mass in the same gravitational field – the inertia of the masses varies to make the accelerations equal, regardless of the masses, while their product remains the same, equal to 1.

The 4^th dimension equivalent of the gravity-inertia relationship is the electro-magnetic relationship. The magnetic field is caused by the velocity (not acceleration) of energy through a two dimensional conductor (a wire). The electric field is caused by the velocity of the conductor through a magnetic field. In the case of parallel electrical conductors, they attract each other when current flows in the same direction. This is the case with mass, which is a three dimensional energy conductor. Two masses attract each other, suggesting that the flow of energy acceleration is in the same direction, toward the centres of mass. The electro-magnetic relationship is entirely analogous to gravito-inertia and is a mathematical derivative of it. So, the mathematical integral of electro-magnetism is gravito-inertia, just as TDR says that 5^th dimension mass-energy is the mathematical integral of the 4^th dimension mass-energy. The mathematical equations demonstrating the electro-magnetic and gravito-inertia relationship are derived in the original Paper. It is sufficient to say that the different dimensions are the source of the different forces of which we are aware. The more energetic the force, the more energetic (higher) is its source dimension, which energy is interacting with 4^th dimension mass to produce the force.

Time and Inertia

         It is shown in the original Paper that there is a direct equivalent value between inertia and time, when expressed as Planck time, t_p. This says that Planck time equals Planck inertia. So, if Planck time is variable and it decreases, then Planck inertia decreases, and by the Equivalence Principle corollary, Planck acceleration increases. This is the same conclusion as that drawn by Einstein's Special Relativity Theory but arrived at from another direction. Special Relativity sees the acceleration as the cause of time dilation rather than time dilation causing acceleration. TDR has established that the enormous difference in energy (acceleration) between the 4^th and 5^th dimensions for example, represents a very large slowing of time in the 5^th dimension when viewed from the 4^th dimension. Time and Inertia are the same in that they are both reciprocal to acceleration, but are orthogonal to each other. Special Relativity Theory establishes the time to acceleration connection, the Equivalence Principle establishes the acceleration to inertia connection and the Theory of Dimensional Relativity establishes the inertia to time connection. Time decrease causes acceleration and a decrease in inertia, the converse causes deceleration and an increase in inertia.

The Permanent Magnet and Electret Conundrums

           Where does the apparently endless energy from a permanent magnet or an electric dipole come from? The electro-magnetic (E-M) particles of the 5^th dimension travel faster than c of the 4^th dimension (c₄) because time is slower in the 5^th .

The 5^th dimension E-M particles are not observable in the 4^th because they exceed c₄ in the 4^th dimension. They are the 'virtual particles' making 'virtual energy' or 'space energy' as described by Tesla. There is a direct connection between the 4^th and 5^th dimension. E-M particles at a broken symmetry, as are electric (+/-) and magnetic (N/S) dipoles, exhibit seemingly endless energy. It comes from a deceleration of the 5^th dimension E-M particles entering the 4^th dimension light speed – time system, c/t, at one of the poles where they become detectable as 4^th dimension E-M particles, and exiting the 4^th dimension at the other pole back to the 5^th dimension where they are again undetectable. The observable result we call a 'static' field because we cannot extract a net energy to do work, although it is in fact dynamic. We cannot extract energy because that which is observable goes back into the system to accelerate the E-M particles back to 5^th dimension light speed - time system from the opposite pole. Extracting energy from that broken symmetry is the subject of much experimentation, particularly outside of mainstream science, as yet without proven success.

Effects from Higher Dimensions

        TDR predicts that each dimension is contained within the next higher dimension. As our primary interest is in our own 4^th dimension, it seems appropriate to view what might be true here. The acceleration energy of the 6^th dimension would also engulf the 4^th dimension, just as does the acceleration energy of the 5^th. The 6^th dimension acceleration would be c/t = 10⁸⁸ as seen from the 4^th , the 7^th c/t = 10¹³² and the 8^th c/t = 10¹⁷⁶. Each dimension has its own particular light speed and time. The light speed exceeds c₄ and photons from higher dimensions are not detectable in the 4^th dimension, as previously discussed above. The interaction of the super fast photons of the 6^th and higher dimensions with mass in the 4^th dimension may account for the other forces known to us. They are, in addition to electro-magnetism and gravito-inertia, the electric charge on a mass such as a proton, the weak nuclear force and the strong nuclear force. To the best of our knowledge, these forces are that which gives mass its atomic structure. The strong nuclear force field decreases as a function of 1/r⁵, which suggests that its source may be photons from the 8^th dimension. The logic comes from the Hypothesis 4 of TDR, which proposes the mathematical integral relationship between dimensions. Four integrals above the 4^th dimension, moving from 1/r for the 4^th 1/r², 1/r³, 1/r⁴ to 1/r⁵ in the 8^th. If this is so, it implies that the weak nuclear force originates from perhaps the 7^th, and the energy which gives mass its electric charge from the 6^th, or vice versa. The rate of decay of the field may be the clue as to the source dimension of the photons whose interaction with 4^th dimension mass creates the field. Further deduction and research is needed on field decay rates and whether there is a relationship to source dimension.

Emerging Conundrums, Micro and Macro

         Modern science has ascertained that some subatomic particle spin has a rotational velocity up to 1.37 times the speed of light, which does not concur with the scientifically accepted limitation of light speed. Similarly, the fact that our galaxy, which is about 100,000 light years across, has a rotational unity, suggesting that the connection between one side and the other is made by some governing agent which exceeds the speed of light. The solution to those conundrums may be related to dimension and its possible effect on relativistic light speed as observed from the 4^th dimension. TDR offers a logical solution to these conundrums.

Time and Light Speed Independence - Quantum Entanglement

           We have a mindset wedded to cause and effect, and therefore have trouble comprehending the concept of quantum entanglement where there is no cause-effect progression. That with two widely separated particles one can have an effect on the other before it has been caused, such as a transmission being received before it was sent. Experimental evidence indicates that this is indeed the case. The intention to transmit is apparently enough to have an effect on the entangled particle if we must look at it in this cause-effect manner. This might suggest that quantum entanglement is independent of time and therefore of the speed of light. The strangeness of quantum mechanics to our normal perception of reality is underlined by our difficulty in perceiving outside the parameters of time. The Uncertainty Principle, the observation affecting the outcome, reversed cause and effect are all more easily understood if time is not considered as part of the issue. One might conclude that these quantum sized particles are not necessarily part of the same dimension in which we exist and therefore not subject to the same rules of time or light speed. This is even more likely in the case of sub-quarks which disappear and re-appear and are fundamentally the energy to mass connection moving between this dimension and another. TDR makes possible the solution that they could be independent of 4^th dimension time and light speed. From which dimension they appear requires more research and understanding.

Dimensional Independence - Consciousness

        It seems possible that our own 'consciousness' which can move back or forward in time at will, like quantum particles, may operate independently of, or from, another dimension, whereas our physical bodies are confined to the 4^th dimension and are subject to the arrow of time and all that it implies. It seems that our natural sense of 'self ', which almost universally means more to us than just our body, implies we exist in more than the body's dimension. That knowledge, although unproven, seems common to all humanity, and probably underlies most spirituality and religious belief.

It suggests that a change in energy potential from this or another dimension may affect our

ability to comprehend, create, solve and expand the mind, a process which history indicates can

move in both directions, as in ages of 'enlightenment' where knowledge is gained and 'dark ages' where knowledge is lost. Knowledge of the last 'golden age' has been lost and only vaguely perceived through legends such as that of Atlantis and Lemuria found in a number of unrelated cultures, although this is far from certain. Some archeological finds are more convincing evidence of lost knowledge, such as the ruins of Gunung Padang about 120 km south east of Jakarta dated as early as 16,000 years old. The knowledge of civilizations in equatorial regions during the last ice age have been largely lost to us. Those with the ability to cast the mind into other areas may be of assistance in regaining some of that knowledge.

The Mind – Untapped by Science

         A striking example of casting the mind was of two 'psychics' of the Theosophical Society, (which splintered in the late 1890's to become a number of separate societies), named Besant and Leadbeater who described in 1908, in their work 'Occult Chemistry', the three sub-quarks which make a quark, and the three quarks which make a proton before atomic theory had been fully developed, let alone a knowledge of quarks. They even described the + and –

difference in the sub-quarks, as a whorl of energy which spins one way or the opposite way, there being two of one type and one of the other in each quark. The sub-quarks can move in and out of existence ( or, put another way, to and from another dimension ). They were also able to fairly accurately deduce atomic weights. We now know Besant and Leadbeater were largely correct.

This is well documented, and indicates that the mind is, at best, poorly understood. It may well be the tool which can provide us with new paradigms, especially into areas where we physically cannot go. Therein lies a field of research relatively unexplored. Words such as 'occult' have unscientific

connotations and are generally rejected by mainstream scientists without serious scrutiny.

It is possible that 'western civilization' has lost some of the abilities of the mind, such as mental telepathy and second sight (possibly a highly developed intuition as an additional source of knowledge) which has been and still is practiced by less westernized cultures in Africa, the Pacific, South America, and the Indian sub-continent. These abilities have no explanation in current western scientific knowledge and require a new paradigm before research can increase our understanding.

Accessing the 'virtual E-M energy', which is physically undetectable, seems to be a plausible

explanation as to how the mind might work, and brings psychiatry squarely into the realm of quantum physics and the Theory of Dimensional Relativity. If a permanent magnet and electric dipoles can access 'virtual energy' why not the mind ? We know it also has electrical potential between neurons, and magnetic fields in the region of the brain.

Conclusions

        The Theory of Dimensional Relativity (TDR) along with the quantification of the Equivalence Principle are a logical extension of Einstein's spectacular advance in scientific thought. They provide a solution to Einstein's insoluble problem with the gravitational field, on the back of Tesla's intuitive insight.

TDR also provides a different view of the universe and solves many of the problems in cosmology caused by an absolute speed of light by removing it and substituting a constant based on both light speed and time. This allows a variation of both of these quantities but not relative to each other.

Another new concept from the Equivalence Principle and TDR is that both time and inertia are reciprocal to acceleration. These three quantities have been given a known relationship to each other. TDR also predicts that the contraction of the universe under gravity will not happen.

The TDR does not point to a new 'silver bullet' for our electro-magnetic energy generation on Earth from this or another dimension at our current level of technology. It does, however, put into perspective where the sources of high energy are to be found, and their relationship to our dimension. Mass is the common factor in the manifestation of all of the different forces which are known. TDR gives us knowledge of the other part of the puzzle – the acceleration – which with mass, creates force from which our machinery can do work for us. There are other implications from the TDR, such as the causes of 'black holes', for example, which is addressed in mathematically sustainable detail in the original Paper.

Another area where we may be provided with a new paradigm by this theory is that of the physics of the mind, an area often avoided because of the fear of ridicule and a lack of a point at which to form an hypothesis which can then be tested. Acceptance of 'virtual energy' as part of the explanation of the intangible aspect of the mind will enable a start to be made. TDR provides an explanation of 'virtual energy' with the replacement of the constant, c, by the constant c/t and the probability of photons from a higher dimension which exceed the speed of light in the 4^th dimension.

The Paradigm shift is looking beyond the Speed of Light.

          Paradigm shifts invariably cause controversy and often heated opposition. So be it.

Men

Ran across this article recently and thought it expressed quite well some of mens' insecurity in our changing social and working environment.

Men Must Be Needed, Because We Can’t Be Wanted

We believe we have to be the heroes only because we can’t yet see other roles for ourselves.

Running an online magazine about masculinity, I’ve come to observe a curious phenomenon. When we post about male rape victims or the enforcement of masculine gender roles, we get plenty of interesting comments. But when we post about Nice Guy Syndrome and other issues around men who feel sexually unwanted, our comments blow up like they were directed by Michael Bay. This is an issue that touches men deeply and damagingly, and ties in with a lot of pain that, hegemonic masculinity being what it is, usually doesn’t get talked about.
Others, such as Hugo Schwyzer, have written about how straight men don’t feel sexually desired, but that’s the tip of the iceberg. It’s hard to overestimate just how deep this idea goes. It feeds into a phenomenon a lot of guys have experienced, a phenomenon based on weird broken ideas about gender roles, ideas so deeply rooted in the subconscious that most men aren’t even aware that they’ve got them.
The core issue is this: many, many men in our society feel they have to be needed, because they can’t imagine they could ever be wanted.
Being needed can take different forms, all of which resemble traditional male roles. Brave protector against danger. Breadwinning economic provider. Indispensable handyman. Problem-solving leader. We get any more macho stereotypes in here, it’s gonna look like a Village People reunion. This is what being masculine means in our culture: to be necessary.
One of the most common complaints about feminism, all the way back to the First Wave, is that feminism seeks to make men obsolete or unnecessary. “If women can [fill in anything about female agency] what will they need men for?” runs the line, in every decade, in response to every advance. And while nobody is arguing that that’s a legitimate criticism, it’s important to understand that it arises out of a real fear. Look at the key word in that sentence, need. It’s always the same concept, however that objection is phrased. Plan A, for men in our society, is to be necessary, to be needed, to be indispensable. There is no plan B. If plan A doesn’t come off, we are lost, we’re adrift, we have nothing. This is an existential fear, on a very deep level.
There’s a common observation among those who, like myself, have worked in senior citizen care homes. It’s related to why the population of those homes skews heavily female, to why men die younger than women. Over and over, again and again, those who are around senior citizens have to deal with retired men who, no longer working and no longer earning money, don’t know why they’re still alive. They don’t know who they are or why they bother to continue drawing breath, if they’re no longer needed for something important. Some of them find something else to define themselves, some new project or internal source of worth. Others just give up and let the next swell of ill health carry them overboard.
The “crisis of masculinity” that many people are currently wringing their hands over, the “mancession” involving men’s employment dropping slightly faster than women’s, the cultural yearning for an imagined past when men bestrode the world like gray-suited colossi, building and making and innovating Important Things… same problem. We’re at a place, culturally and economically, where many of the traditional sources of necessity for men have evaporated, or at least been drastically downsized. We don’t need to have 25% of the population growing food any more, we can do it with 2%. Women don’t need men to provide for them any more, education and career opportunities have opened up. All this would be fine, if there were any plan B.
It’s a well-worn observation that media is the first place to look for enforcement of societal norms. A quick glance at our culture’s media demonstrates that it endlessly reinforces the notion of male necessity. On a surface level, there’s the fact that with fictional heroes remaining overwhelmingly white males, if a guy doesn’t show up, there’s no story at all. That’s a nice form of necessity. Deeper than that, though, there’s the structure of every “romantic” subplot in every movie that has a character who can be accurately described as The Girl. Every action movie, every sci-fi epic, all the movies that are stereotypically written off as male power fantasies, all have the same way that the hero gets the girl: he proves his necessity, usually by saving her life. If he weren’t there, she’d literally be dead.
Interestingly, the romantic movies often stereotyped as female fantasies do not generally have this dynamic. Oddly, however, even those rarely focus on the male lead as the object of desire; the female gaze is commonly absent from these stories. Instead the heroine tends to be the object, and the hero prevails by demonstrating that his desire for her is the biggest and most special and pure and so on. Not even in the realm of “chick flicks” about the joys of heterosexual pair-bonding are men seen as desired, as wanted.
I’m not speaking in the abstract here; when this wanted/needed dichotomy was first pointed out to me, I felt a deep and embarrassed pang of recognition. I myself like it when I can rescue my girlfriends, when I can save the day or handle the problem or otherwise demonstrate my irrefutable necessity. I like feeling needed because even for me, even with all my ever-so-educated awareness of gender roles and stereotypes, even with all the women who’ve told me I’m sexy and desirable, I still can’t quite convince myself that I’m wanted. Even if I am, being wanted can only be a nebulous and fleeting state. Being needed, now, that’s solid. That’s a reason to keep going.
It is downright incredible how resistant to empirical data the sense of being unwantable is. It took many years and girlfriends before I began to suspect that every women who slept with me might not be humoring me out of pity. Even then, and to this day, I feel more secure in relationships when I can provide a measurable and necessary form of value other than just my own charms, whatever those might be. Girlfriend needs a ride to the airport? I’m on it! Needs a ride to the hospital? Even better! The rare occasions where I can help out with covering bills when she’s short on rent (most of the women I’ve loved make more money than a starving writer, it turns out) are even better, because I am Providing For My Woman, and I feel the warm glow of centuries of hegemonic masculinity validating me.
Let me be clear: I know this is stupid. I know it’s asinine social programming and that these women consider me sexually and emotionally desirable. But there’s a difference between knowing that and believing it. And for guys who haven’t got a girlfriend, who feel the bitter sting of active rejection or the endless cold of passive rejection, who yearn for love and sex and the touch of another hand… what can they possibly believe about being wanted?
The fact is, as I’ve learned during prolonged periods of loneliness myself, when a a lifetime of “Ewwww, gross, naked guy!” jokes combine with stretches of personal rejection, it’s easy to feel neither wanted nor needed. Maybe you’re lucky enough to have a job where your particular abilities are necessary, so that’s a form of being needed, one you can throw yourself into, but it’s not the same as being needed by another person. Being wanted by another person, at that point, has disappeared over the horizon, into an unmarked area of the map labeled HERE BE UNICORNS THAT DISPENSE FREE MONEY.
It’s easy to get bitter when you feel unwanted, and so this unfortunate confluence of forces has left our culture littered with embittered men who get very upset about what they can’t help but perceive as their own failure. It’s easy to dismiss them as angry losers or some other convenient pejorative, but I’ve walked a few too many miles in their shoes to call their pain baseless. I don’t pretend to have a solution, but the least we can do is begin to correctly identify the problem.