Driving Down Unknown Roads: The Feminization Of America

Fred On Everything ^ | 032904 | Fred Reed

[cajungirl]

Hon, I don't think women want to dominate or at least the women I know don't want that. I think Hillary is an oddity. Laura Bush is more the rule. Laura is educated, smart, could earn a living, has opinions, has ideas but she is not into ruling. Nor are most men if you ask me. My personal husband says he likes having someone who is helping with moving the logs around {metaphorically speaking} rather than someone he has to hold up all the time. Partners make good marriages. Ruling, I just don't cotton to that. Altho as far as I am concerned, yall can rule the world and run the government as long as I get to decide what kind of mortgage we get, what kind of car I drive, where we bank and who pays the bills.

[Freedom_Is_Not_Free]

I don't know about Fred, but I am sure longing for the "good ole days" when you could walk down any street in America at night without expectation of being accosted and you could carry any reasonable weapon on your person for your defense in the event you were attacked.

I miss the good ole days when we were considered to have among the finest elementary and secondary schools on the planet.

I miss the good ole days when the government didn't take half your paycheck for taxes. Many of the "nanny state" costs are responsible for this draconian abortion.

I miss the good ole days when home closing costs covered actual minor processing fees and were not a means for profit in and of themselves.

I miss the good ole days when a driver did not get cut off by jerks at least a dozen times during a commute. And when you let someone into your lane, they waved back at you in a gesture of "thanks". When was the last time THAT happened to you? I can't even remember the last time I saw courteous driving on the road.

I miss the good ole days when you didn't need 2 incomes just to make ends meet.

I miss the good ole days when families stayed together and women actually raised their own children.

I miss the good ole days when criminals got punished and victims were protected.

I miss the good ole days when a school coach could pray with his team without being fired.

I miss the good ole days when parents slapped their kids silly if they even mentioned they planned to have sex, rather than say, "they are going to do it anyway so let's make sure they do it right".

I could spend all night telling you why I miss the good ole days. Modern life holds innumerable comforts and conveniences. It is not insufferable. But the modern family, neighborhood and church have never been so fractured and damaged in the history of this republic. I grieve for future generations if we keep on this path and extrapolate to the inevitable result. No good can come of it.

Are women completely responsible for these deprivations? No, men are well capable of ruining a society on their own. But when you look at the polls and what women flock to -- somone who will promise free medical care, free secondary education, free child care, subsidised transportation, gun control, abortion on demand, open borders, cuts in defense, abolition of nuclear power, eliminating grades in school and eliminating keeping score at sporting events.

I've pinted with a broad brush here and I know I have exaggerated, but the point still stands none-the-less: society works best when men run it with the strong influence of women to counterbalance their extremes. When women run things you get a touchy-feely world that is not strong enough to withstand attack from without or decay from within.

Call me sexist, but this is my humble opinion.

[KellyAdmirer]

Men use it to conquer their neighbors whether in business or war, women to impose security and pleasantness.

Not a bad rant, but having been in situations where women had real power and exercised it, I can tell you that there is nothing "pleasant" about a matriarchy. Nothing whatsoever. Imagine a police state where the biggest crimes, carrying the equivalent of death sentences, are being presumed to have an "attitude," an inability to "play with others" or an unwillingness to go along with whatever the females want (which is in their own selfish interest) and you come close to the reality.

[justanotherday]

"Partners make good marriages. Ruling, I just don't cotton to that. Altho as far as I am concerned, yall can rule the world and run the government as long as I get to decide what kind of mortgage we get, what kind of car I drive, where we bank and who pays the bills."

Thanks for the response. But if my wife did all the things you did, she'd be wearing my balls. Decisions like these are made jointly. As it should be. FYI: 32 years of marriage.

[cajungirl]

I miss a great deal of what you miss. But the welfare state was created by men for the most part. Maybe women influenced them but men did it. I think either sex running the country is not good. Men and women equally can run this country. Blaming women for a group of looney toons who are mostly driven by socialists and revolutionaries does not bring people to your opinion. I do believe we all miss what you miss, I do, but the women who have radicalized education all have men involved too.

[cajungirl]

Well, I have been married 39 years and believe it or not, my husband hates to pay bills, would rather have surgery than go with me to buy my car, likes that I pick out his cars and tend to investments. He works much longer hours than I do and in his spare time likes to read, play on his computer, ski and dive. I think we evolved to an acceptable division of labor without any rancor. And he doesn't seem to be any less masculine for it nor do I seem any less feminine for it. You married the rightr person as did I it would seem.

[justanotherday]

Well, I have been married 39 years and believe it or not, "my husband hates to pay bills,"

as do I

would rather have surgery than go with me to buy my car,M

As do I

"likes that I pick out his cars and tend to investments. He works much longer hours than I do and in his spare time likes to read, play on his computer, ski and dive."

not so much do I

I think we evolved to an acceptable division of labor without any rancor. And he doesn't seem to be any less masculine for it nor do I seem any less feminine for it. You married the rightr person as did I it would seem.

Perhaps. We do have this division of labor, but here's what we do: we pick up a bottle of cheap Australian wine, jump into our Corvette convertible on a warm Saturday afternoon, and play good music. By this time, we know the tune. And it looks like you do too.

[Freedom_Is_Not_Free]

Without doubt men made most of the changes. But when you look at the overwhelming gender gap of the women who vote to elect and support these men, they never could have been elected if women had never gotten the vote. I don't advocate repealing women's suffrage, but the facts speak for themselves.

Men voting alone would never have elected the men who feminized schools, provided more rights for criminals than victims, fought to abolish the death penalty, scorn performance-based rewards in deference to mere self-esteem or provided huge unearned and unmerited financial giveaways without demanding personal responsibility. I'm trying not to come off as "hating women", but I really feel that women don't have the basic "meanness" to rule on merit alone without offsetting that by helping the weak, stupid and careless, and thereby giving away the farm.

I thought the article bore that out. Women mean well, but rule too soft. That softness, lacking in men, is why men who rule need a women's influence to temper their callousness. God knows men would be brutal tyrants without the softening influence of compassionate women. But when women rule, you get automatic advancement in school and soccer games where no-one keeps score. I don't think those are improvements over the ole days.

[TalBlack]

("Was Patriarchy a Women's Scheme to Control Men?")

On this theme: The feminazis screeched about "womans roll" as a thing that women were locked into but they never pointed out that MEN had roles that they were just as "locked into". Now men have no cultural role to speak of and women do more work and carry more responsability than they ever did.

Matrichal(sp?) societies are based on enforced equality. That is why when women get in control of an industry or disipline or profession they immeadiately banish hirearchy and form a circle. (everyone has an equal voice)Men tend to form a rank in a meritocracy, this FORCES excellence. As Maggie Gallagher observed in the NYPost: when women enter a field the field loses prestiege.

Once society controlled male aggression by defining manhood. Watch any movie or TV show pre 1968. The males role was clearly limned, over and over and over, and any violence indulged in had VERY strict rules governing it.

Now the individual male defines manhood for himself. Not a good plan. Society has LOST control of the male.

[TalBlack]

("Was Patriarchy a Women's Scheme to Control Men?")

On this theme: The feminazis screeched about "womans roll" as a thing that women were locked into but they never pointed out that MEN had roles that they were just as "locked into". Now men have no cultural role to speak of and women do more work and carry more responsability than they ever did.

Matrichal(sp?) societies are based on enforced equality. That is why when women get in control of an industry or disipline or profession they immeadiately banish hirearchy and form a circle. (everyone has an equal voice)Men tend to form a rank in a meritocracy, this FORCES excellence. As Maggie Gallagher observed in the NYPost: when women enter a field the field loses prestiege.

Once society controlled male aggression by defining manhood. Watch any movie or TV show pre 1968. The males role was clearly limned, over and over and over, and any violence indulged in had VERY strict rules governing it.

Now the individual male defines manhood for himself. Not a good plan. Society has LOST control of the male.

[cajungirl]

It is great isn't it. A long marriage. The benefits are inestimatible. We laugh at something funny without having to say what it is because we have been laughing at the same things for forty years. We finish each others sentences and sometimes one word can convey a whole conversation because we have the same history. When I forget something, he remembers. When we both forget, we howl with laughter. We can make decisions alone knowing in our bones what the other person would say. There are no secrets, no pretense, no fights or even spats. Our only abiding difference is clothing and baseball. I love both and he would wear a sweat suit every day happily and wouldn't go to a baseball game unless I insisted. So we compromise and I buy alot of clothes and he goes to a few games.

[DoughtyOne]

To: DoughtyOne

Yep, I agree. My husband for instance would go to war for a reason and die in the process. But he wouldn't do it lightly. And he loves peace, lack of conflict and pleasantness. He likes civility, is gentle and kind and thoughtful of other's opinions, far more than I. He is actually more like what the writer describes as woman like. He is not particularly competitive but is reliable, very smart and absolutely dependable. But to go out and act macho, like to mix it up and compete. No, he would rather be home with a book, a good drink and me.

16 posted on 04/05/2004 6:47:50 PM PDT by cajungirl (<i>swing low, sweet limousine, comin' fer to Kerry me hoooommmee</i>)

Thanks for the comments.  It's reather refreshing to have a woman jump in on a topic like this, that has her head screwed on squarely.  Over the years I've taken some pretty stiff guff with regard to some comments I make about what I think is fair or unfair about issues regarding men and women.  My rule of thumb is this.  Most women simply adore their little boys,m often spoiling them into oblivion.  All too many of those same women are perfectly willing to throw the old man out the door on a whim, with no place to go.  Now I'll admit that's a little over the top and a little thin on substance, but it's basicly true.

As much as these women love their boys, they somehow have this perception that men come from some other place than boyhood.  There's a total disconnect.  If these women had their acts together, they would never treat men the way some of them do, because they'd realize that when their sons are adults, this type of mindset will ultimately devistate their own son's lives.

This isn't to absolve men of their responsiblity at all.  If men don't hold up their end of the bargain, there is a remedy that women should use.  Today that remedy is used far too often on a whim.  Outside of abuse, it should be very difficult for a woman to kick the father out of his/her home, but in today's society all a woman has to do is pick up the phone and dial 911, the guy is demanded to leave the home.  Then, if she doesn't want him there, he is subject to her whim on whether he can return or not.  Some people probably don't believe this, but the woman can manipulate the system in ways a man never could.  If a guy dials 911 to report abuse, it's is himself who will more than likely be directed to leave the home.

You mentioned that your husband isn't the physical type of guy who likes to mix it up.  I've never been inclined to go that route either.  Yes upon occassion that came about, but it's so juvenile and always was.

The guys who like to roughhouse don't generally make a point of settling down and raising a family, and if they do, look out.  Good luck.

I enjoy being at home with my wife, but if something were to threaten our home, the person threatening it better be ready for some serious trouble.

Sounds like you've got a good thing going on.  I'm happy for you.  With your outlook, I'm happy for your kids and your husband as well.

And yes I do agree that the feminization that you have observed is taking place.  Every wonder why Ritalin, a Class II narcotic, is given overwhelmingly to boys, sometimes on the orders of a teacher rather than a physician?

The relegation of male students begins in kindergarten and continues through college.  Of course that's if the guy hasn't been driven out of the system by the time he's college bound.  Studies are beginning to show that the school system is a beastly place for male children these days.  Girls are supported and the boys are drugged.  As depressing as that sounds, it's not that wild a comment.

I believe that women in college are much less likely to question authority than a man would.  Thus leftist professors achive the indoctrination of their agenda to their students that much easier IMO.  Then we have the Hillary Clinton types and their network of 'sisters'.  You've got to give the leftists props for their tenacity and drive.  They simply taken over the education system, the homes and much of what passes for reasoned policy in America.  Sadly it's mostly wrong-headed and unreasoned.

Nice talking with you.

Yep, I agree. My husband for instance would go to war for a reason and die in the process. But he wouldn't do it lightly. And he loves peace, lack of conflict and pleasantness. He likes civility, is gentle and kind and thoughtful of other's opinions, far more than I. He is actually more like what the writer describes as woman like. He is not particularly competitive but is reliable, very smart and absolutely dependable. But to go out and act macho, like to mix it up and compete. No, he would rather be home with a book, a good drink and me.

[justanotherday]

It is great isn't it. A long marriage. The benefits are inestimatible. We laugh at something funny without having to say what it is because we have been laughing at the same things for forty years. We finish each others sentences and sometimes one word can convey a whole conversation because we have the same history. When I "forget something, he remembers. When we both forget, we howl with laughter. We can make decisions alone knowing in our bones what the other person would say. There are no secrets, no pretense, no fights or even spats. Our only abiding difference is clothing and baseball. I love both and he would wear a sweat suit every day happily and wouldn't go to a baseball game unless I insisted. So we compromise and I buy alot of clothes and he goes to a few games."

Yours is the stuff of marriage. I tend to forget that: wives don't. While life serves up its share of challenges, I always know I have someone to turn too. As do you.

[cajungirl]

Well, we all agree on marriage. And someone mentioned the schools. They really distress me. My daughters were coddled and taught their "feelings" were of primary importance. That always rankled me, I thought their grades and standing in class was more important. But the boys, the grandsons, I am truly worried about what is going on with them. They are such wonderful boys and I want them to be encouraged to play sports, to win, to beat up guys who try to bully them, to learn to be proud of their ability, to want to be in charge and to learn to curb their natural tendancies to be boys and learn to be men. I don't see that happening at school. The education system has been taken over by mediocre women with a lack of ability to be doing something better and they are mad as hell at the men who do better things so they are crippling the boys. It sickens me. I do believe behind it all is a revolutinary movement to weaken this country, sounds paranoid but that is what I think. The only answer I can see is to have men run all boys schools and try to weed out the pedophiles who will gravitate toward such place. and put the girls in girls schools run by middle age moms who have stayed at home and know what is important to women. Teach them what they need to know but quit telling them men are the enemy.

[SauronOfMordor]

The evidence of the inner cities pretty much proves your case. If it were ever entrusted to women, civilization would collapse in one generation.

Not so much from any fault of women, per-se. It's just that men are either a force for construction, or a force for destruction, depending on which way seems more satisfying at the moment.

[DoughtyOne]

I think you know that I don't begrudge any woman any position, but I am convinced you might not be too far off on that assessment of the women in schools these days. I would differ with regard to it being a master plan, although I'd bet my eye teeth that the NEA definately sees it that way. I just think these women have been told they can do no wrong and that they are smarter than ten guys put together. They are doing this to the boy chidren because they think it will make for a better society.

Despite how terrible our schools are, it still seems only the blacks and hispanics are being destroyed by them. Not being black and hispanic, I find that a terrible tragedy none the less. Our society is being crushed by individuals who do not excel, mainly because these nags haven't the mental tools to understand what they are doing.

Good kids from good families still seem to survive. How they do, actually baffles me with the full court press to make it otherwise.

[Jaysun]

I'll go you one better to disprove your hypothesis...try asking a responsible man raised by a single mom. You haven't even identified the problem, let alone proposed a useful solution.

I'm a responsible man raised by a single mom. What of it? The problem? Men have been shirking their responsibilities. The solution? Men should stop shirking their responsibilities. I thought that my example said that fairly clearly. Maybe it didn't.

[Lady Eileen]

I've pinted with a broad brush here and I know I have exaggerated, but the point still stands none-the-less: society works best when men run it with the strong influence of women to counterbalance their extremes. When women run things you get a touchy-feely world that is not strong enough to withstand attack from without or decay from within.

bttt

[cajungirl]

The schools are disgraceful. Middle class and upper class children from intact homes and single parent homes who care are getting by. the rest are being lost. It is very sad.

[SauronOfMordor]

thereby "wussifying" (trying to be nice here) the general populace, until the point when it was faced by an external competitive and male dominated society, it would get its butt kicked from one end to the other.

Not so much "wussified", as males having no motivation to stand and fight. When you don't have anything that's YOURS, and unpleasant company starts moving in, it's easier to just migrate elsewhere.

A man with property and family will stand and fight -- a male who just is involved in part-time stud service says "see ya" to the women and kids and goes elsewhere