Posted on 01/10/2003 11:21:38 AM PST by MikalM
Publication date: 01/09/2003 They are way too aggressive. My proof: 200 million people were murdered in the 20th century because of war and genocide. Since most decision-makers are men, and most soldiers are men, we need to reflect a little on this problem. I know, you want to yell out Indira Gandhi! Margaret Thatcher! Golda Meir! (Everyone gets so excited that they can name three women who fall into this war-mongering category. Can anyone name a fourth woman who belongs here?) If there is a global skirmish, men should learn to say "Let's talk," or "We're sorry," but no one ever says those things. They could also try saying "Let's compromise," but that doesn't happen, either. I feel bad for most men. Their communications skills are so low, they cannot seem to handle discussing things. Our system teaches males to be competitive and aggressive. Boys who don't like football are called sissies. Hierarchical qualities are instilled in all of us, but in men in particular. These feelings serve to keep us separate, rather than interconnected. Separateness fosters violence and brutality. Men in war report a kind of homo-erotic experience, a time men can bond with other men without looking like sissies. Some report that they get erections when killing. There seems to be a strong link between aggressiveness and sexuality that I don't pretend to understand. Perhaps war is exciting and dynamic. War is a global experience, an easy way to travel. It's exciting. And even if you lose and die, you are guaranteed an honorable death. There will be flags and medals for you. All of that pomp and circumstance is a way of feeling. It's just like football. It's something big and it's outside your family and, for many, the feeling for the unit is even more intense than for the family. I wish we could figure out how to stop men and countries and their aggressive tendencies. What can we do to help men? What can men do to help themselves? Men need to bring out their nurturing and compassionate sides, rather than their frightened side. After all, the purpose of life is to understand life and learn its glorious lessons. All life is precious. All opinions and ideas, precious. We need to understand our divine nature. We need to practice being less greedy. Americans have a demanding sense of consumerism; we're taught to step on, and now kill, the "little people." We've become masters at race wars; we're imbued with a fervor to kill people if they get in our way. Women give and give and give, and it's never enough. And men take and take and take, and it's never enough. We all need to help men move along. We need to create awareness, understanding and outlets for men. They need to develop more feelings for humanity. Men need to see themselves as humans. And women need to speak up. We need to stop propping up our men. Instead of saying "it's my turn to control the remote control," we put dinner on the table faster and try to explain away our husband's temper to our shaken children. If you have a penis, perhaps you should be required to take a course in aggression and compassion. And perhaps women need to take courses on co-dependence. We can bear our sadness by educating our public about hate and prejudice and we definitely should be analyzing the ways that we can help the world instead of destroying it. I am personally in a state of despair. I've been a political activist for 34 years, and it all seems to mean nothing these days. We have these nitwits in charge of our country and we are going off (again) to kill more people. We haven't learned anything. Comment: letters@examiner.com Lani Silver is a women's studies teacher and an oral historian.
Why do men like war so much?BY LANI SILVER
Special to The Examiner MEN SEEM TO BE out of control. They like war way too much.
HEDLEY LAMARR: Qualifications?
OUTLAW: Rape, murder, arson and rape.
HEDLEY LAMARR: You said rape twice.
OUTLAW: I like rape.
(Blazing Saddles)
"I am personally in a state of despair."
-AND-
"I'm very depressed."
She sounds like she's a candidate for Zoloft.
LOL!!!!
Men are from Mars.
Wymyn are from that-hot-little-planet-that-orbits-its-star-every-29-hours.
Which is all you really need to know. To professional victims like Lani Silver, feelings trump logic, decency, reason, common sense, and any sort of realistic view of human history or nature. People like this believe the entire human race has to act as their own personal support group.
Because victory makes women open their legs.
Pray for W and the Truth
1) The whimpering, simpering "sensitive New Age guys" you mentioned; or
2) The most brutal, Neanderthalian, d**k-led mouth-breathers imaginable. Which makes sense, as the whole Men=Killers attitude usually is a not-too-well-concealed rape/domination fantasy needing to be acted out in a relationship.
Not only have you not learned anything, you've blown your chance to have a normal family due to your crazy ideas while encouraging others likewise and dragging down our country.
Bet you wish you had been normal.
They do, you idiot. That's why they go to WAR...to beat the living &#&$^(&% out of those who would kill THEM. (And, to protect the weak, like YOU.)
This woman's ignorance surpasses belief. If asked (please don't), I could name a hundred women rulers who enthusiastically went to war. Elizabeth I comes to mind. Then there was Cleopatra, who went to war against her own brother's army, then went to war against Octavian as an ally of Antony. And who can forget Catherine the Great? Apparently, Lani Silver can, assuming she ever even heard of this war-mongering empress.
How about Artemisia, who allied her forces with Xerxes at Salamis simply because she detested the other side, not because she had to embroil herself in this conflict (see Herodotus). Zenobia, the "warrior queen" of the 3rd century AD had a lust for war that is well documented. In the 6th century AD, we have the exceptionally brutal and pugnacious Visigoth queen, Brunhilde, who started a war that dragged on for 40 years. There are soooo many more, and every last century is represented right up to the 20th C. The 16th and 17th centuries are simply littered with warring female rulers!
Now, why am I not surprised that the editors of the SF Examiner have no knowledge of history at all?
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.