Posted on 11/02/2005 8:08:21 AM PST by Fighting Irish
No one vets the culture with a keener eye than Dowd. Her identification of trends - especially the perverse evolution of liberated women from Birkenstock-wearing intellectuals into pole-dancing sluts - is dead on. But while she sees women clearly as they search for identity in a gender-shifting culture, she doesn't seem to know much about men.
Men haven't turned away from smart, successful women because they're smart and successful. More likely they've turned away because the feminist movement that encouraged women to be smart and successful also encouraged them to be hostile and demeaning to men.
Whatever was wrong, men did it. During the past 30 years, they've been variously characterized as male chauvinist pigs, deadbeat dads or knuckle-dragging abusers who beat their wives on Super Bowl Sunday. At the same time women wanted men to be wage earners, they also wanted them to act like girlfriends: to time their contractions, feed and diaper the baby, and go antiquing.
And then, when whatshisname inevitably lapsed into guy-ness, women wanted him to disappear. If children were involved, women got custody and men got an invoice. The eradication of men and fathers from children's lives has been feminism's most despicable accomplishment. Half of all children will sleep tonight in a home where their father does not live.
Did we really think men wouldn't mind?
(Excerpt) Read more at tmsfeatures.com ...
"she doesn't seem to know much about men."
I just find that hysterical! I doubt many men want to know much about her!
Really? I've always found her writing to be rather insipid and uninspired.
Hmmm... something wrong there...
Cultural Marxism's anti-male devolution
There, fixed it, but I coulda called it "Critical Theory."
I find Maureen Dowd to be very entertaining. Most of her writing is little tongue-in-cheek, and you have to read it with a grain of salt. Anyone who took seriously her book comparing Bush Sr. & Jr. to Luke Sywalker & Darth Vader is a little obstinate at best. Anyway, she usually makes a few good points amid her long winded and long winding diatribes.
I think one way to get feminists to come to terms with themselves would be to put them all on a remote desert island, with no men, and come back a month later to see how they're doing.
I can't stand her. But to each his own.
She's such a whiner - and I don't find her airing her lamentable love live and other self-esteem problems in public to be very entertaining.
Kind of odd timing... I'm reading a good book called "No More Christian Nice Guy" right now. A lot of the premise of the book focuses on how a lot of churches have been responsible for demasculating men in the past 30 years or so, and how to get back to where we should be.
I don't know whether it can be blamed on the feminist movement, but many "smart and successful" women do come across as hostile and demeaning toward men.
She definitely does have her moments. Though I do dislike her in general.
By women claiming they have control of their reproductive rights (ie - control of the fetus) they in essence said men are not needed. Thus we have the situation in our family courts where women are granted sole custody (like the liar Bridget Marks) simply because they have the golden uterus.
I am female. I still find it appalling that feminists do not wish to be EQUAL with men, they wish to be ABOVE them.
It takes two to create that life, yet a woman doesn't even have to NOTIFY her husband of an abortion??
Check out the #8 reply, people. I'm telling you exactly what is going on, here. Just read it and see.
Maybe because they're lesbians?
Having grown up and observed the women's lib movement as one of those "unneccesary" men, I also observed the conflicts so many women endured by wanting to have a traditional marriage and family without betraying "the sisterhood".
Feminazis have insisted that men reveal "their female side", weep, knit and shop and, when we do, they abandon us for the kind that treats them like crap. I never understood it and hope I never do. If the man you are with doesn't treat you like the best thing that ever entered his life, perhaps you might want to re-consider your values.
I dated and was ditched by a number of ladies who, in the long-run, were unable to contemplate betraying the sisterhood and settling into a life that God intended as husband and wife.
My wife is grateful for their looniness. I am grateful for my wife.
Kathleen Parker hit this one out of the park.
Maureen Dowd has the life she deserves.
Things have a way of working out the way they're supposed to.
I make no effort to understand it. My wife, who does not want to be treated like crap, also doesn't make any effort to understand it. But then again, she wasn't born here either.
Things have a way of working out the way they're supposed to.
I totally agree with you. However, we must all remember that just because this phrase is true, it doesn't mean that those either directly or indirectly involved in any given situation are to sit back and watch the wind blow, while knowing the mad scientist is destroying whatever they choose. God did not create man for that purpose. The way our constitution provides for us to get involved is by voting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.