Driving Down Unknown Roads(The Feminization Of America)

www.fredoneverything.net ^ | 3/29/2004 | Fred Reed

[RogerFGay]

Hey Roger, have you seen this yet?

Actually, they don't have control of divorce courts. Divorce courts are controlled by organized crime and mostly manipulated by men who are making billions of dollars stealing money from children and taxpayers. The gender wars and "for the children" was their cover.

Don't you just hate it when someone's will to express an opinion is so much greater than their effort to understand what they're talking about?

But anyway -- the answer to what will women do with power is that they will create and maintain conflict and maximize overhead. That's not a prediction. Contrary to the view of the author of the article, the experiment has been run and the results are already in.

[TheSpottedOwl]

But anyway -- the answer to what will women do with power is that they will create and maintain conflict and maximize overhead. That's not a prediction. Contrary to the view of the author of the article, the experiment has been run and the results are already in.

One word....Hillary. Fred does make a good point about boys being forced to be something that they aren't.

[Way2Serious]

I recently served jury duty at the county level. I swear I did not see one male face among the courthouse administrators, the lawyers, and the judges I came into contact with on that one day of service. It was quite a sobering revelation.

[SauronOfMordor]

Our entire nation is founded on the principle of INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.

Exactly.

This is what Fred wants too. The right to live one's life without the Nanny State telling you that guns are too dangerous for regular people to own, that you shouldn't smoke or drink, that competition is bad and affirmative action should make sure nobody loses (except nasty white males).

So where, exactly and specificly, do you disagree with Fred?

[Lorianne]

I agree with Fred about these items. Many women and some feminists don't want the nanny state either. I just think he is going about getting what he wants in an infantile and intellectually dishonest way.

For one thing there are just as many liberal men who support the "nanny state".

Apparently Fred doesn't realize that there are many women who want "power" just as much as he does. If he is intellectually honest about it, Fred would acknowledge that and fight on the same playing field (instead of retreating to Mexico). Presumably if women today are "gaining power" that means that previously they did not have it. Under our system of government, if you can convince enough people to your POV, then you gain political "power". If you can't, you lose political "power". To whine against them gaining power, when you could be out "gaining power" for your POV, is just ... well whining.

That's why I said "sour grapes". If you find yourself out of power ... cut and run (after whining, citing lies about who is drugging children, and finding a convenient scapegoat). Apparently this is Fred's tactic. Not very manly.

Also, he employs the "victim" ideology he decries in others. (Apparently if men won't sign up to be teachers, it's because they are too afraid of what others may say about them. It's as if the schoolyard has a bunch of scarecrows that men won't brave).

Also, he prioritizes male and female attributes (which he attributes incorrectly to begin with) as being superior and inferior. But he decries it if some women do this same thing! Hypocrisy looks bad on anyone but even worse on a supposedly "manly" man.

He also diminishes people he doesn't agree with by suggesting they have no right to enter the political fray .... that's so lame and undemocratic. To live in a democracy you have to put up with a lot #@&$ that other people believe in ... and hammer out compromises. If you don't have the stomach for that ... I guess you move to Mexico or someplace.

Other than all that, I agree with Fred about the nanny state (as do many conservative women).

[Lorianne]

Also I forgot to mention that many Conservative men shoot themselves in the foot by discrediting Conservative women and jumping on the "male superiority" bandwagon. This just sends more women hovering in the middle (whose numbers are legion) over to the other side.

You've heard plenty from these men here at right here at FR, right here on this very thread. If any one group is more to blame for liberal women "gaining power" it is these Conservative men, who don't support their own.

Fred incites these men, he therefore indirectly butresses liberal conservative values.

[Lorianne]

Correction: Fred incites these men, he therefore indirectly butresses liberal values.

[Scenic Sounds]

Good post!!

There are inherent differences between males and females and those inherent differences cannot be significantly altered over any meaningful period of time. What does change more quickly are the ways in which we try to live with one another. Those changes can influence our behavior for a time, but they don't really change us. I think we just keep experimenting and when certain things don't seem to be working right, we try something new.

None of these experiments are irreversible, though - certainly nothing to leave the country over. ;-)

[RobRoy]

Lorainne, Lorainne, where to start...

Wait a second, the only time I HAVE to stick out the discussion with a woman even though she is not understanding logic is with my wife. It matters there and is a respect issue.

It's just not worth it here. You've worn me down. Carry on, and have fun.

[RobRoy]

I have been in data processing for over 20 years. Usually there were at least as many women as men. Well I am now in data processing, but as a sales engineer. I was at a staff meeting last week and suddenly realized why I actually enjoy the meetings: The entire staff is male.

The freedom to speak and use logic and get to the point is priceless. The amount of REAL communication and work accomplished at these meetings is like nothing I have ever experienced.

Unfortunately, when we get to the client site, I have to go into "positive strokes" mode with all the women we deal with.

Don't get me wrong, as I've said before, men are Hummers and women are Ferrari's. Each has its strengths and are a glory in thier "place."

And no,I don't mean barefoot and pregnant!

And yes, I am generalizing.

To put it bluntly, women live primarily off intuition/emotion and men primarily off logic/reason. And NEITHER is infallible.

[Lorianne]

Carry on, and have fun. Well gee thanks. I will! :) You joining Fred in Mexico? If so, have a Margarita on me.

[RobRoy]

My wife and I are actually thinking about it. We are learning Spanish for just that reason.

Ah freedom. Risky? You bet. Life - real life - is risk.

I'd rather be a Gazzelle in the dangerous open country of Africa than a Gazzelle preserved safely in an american zoo.

'Course, that's just me.

[Lorianne]

You are generalizing. I don't agree with your specific points generalizing men or women ... however, I do agree that men and women are different in many ways. Delightfully so.

And the good thing is, we are under no obligation to be the same! None whatsoever! And we really don't need our separate planets.

This is such happy news I don't know why anyone would complain about men or women ever again. But, alas, there are always some curmudgeons around to whine and wimper about "the differences".

This cormudgeonly attitude has been around at least since Henry Higgins warbled about why women can't be more like men. (Which makes you wonder about ole Henry's true persuasion, if you know what I mean.)

[RobRoy]

I SAID I was generalizing. Just like I am generalizing when I say men are taller than women, or women have bigger breasts than men.

If you get my drift...