Posted on 03/03/2012 7:05:40 PM PST by Borges
“No, really? Is war not due in part to higher levels of aggression in men?”
So, Elizabeth I, Indira Ghandi, and Golda Meir were men? Women leaders engage in war too.
Everyone should just read The Myth of Male Power by Warren Farrell. Farrell, by the way, is a male feminist (try not to laugh!) and once served on the board of N.O.W. The book is DEVASTATING to feminist myths. The book’s info about false reports of rape was shocking to me.
I found it interesting that you summed up in a few words what was never touched upon in the avalanche of sociological concepts and links produced here. These results are political as well as sociological. Well done.
Sorry if I got too defensive. I’m just sick and tired of the “blame game” that goes on in our society, ya know?
I think the point though, is not that men’s lives were so much harder than womens, but just to show that the flawed arguments of the feminists can be turned around and used to paint the exact opposite picture. The argument may still be flawed, no matter which perspective you argue from, but it doesn’t even work consistently in favor of the feminists.
“No, suffrage wasn’t absolutely universal for men ...”
Yes, that’s my whole point. Suffrage wasn’t denied only on the basic of sex, which is the simplistic argument that feminists like to paint. I’m not tryng to “obscure basic facts” by pointing out the complexity of the situation, the feminists are trying to do that by reducing a complicated history to a single sentence.
When you look at the actual history, it paints a different picture than “men oppressed women”. The truth is more like “some men oppressed women and other men, and at times, they oppressed women more than some men, and at other times, they oppressed some men more than some women.”
“Rush’s stupid comment has sent misogynist FReepers into a tizzy of idiocy.”
Why are you engaging in the typical feminist (and liberal) shaming tactic of calling others hateful names because they disagree with your position? Do you think that is a valid method of argument?
Well, that’s a whole different argument since there were both civillian men and civillian women, though of course they suffered in different ways if the military failed to protect them. Still, women getting raped, or forced into servitude during wars, isn’t a result of men being sexist bastards, it’s a result of humans being evil. The same men that were out raping the enemy’s women were trying to stop the enemy from raping their women. It was a tactic of war, based on practicality getting the better of everyones’ morality.
I agree wholeheartedly that men are s*** on constantly by the media and academia and that has to stop. I only took issue with one strand of the author’s article and certainly don’t hold men responsible for deaths in childbirth.
I agree wholeheartedly that men are s*** on constantly by the media and academia and that has to stop. I only took issue with one strand of the author’s article and certainly don’t hold men responsible for deaths in childbirth.
I have no doubt that male civilians suffer terribly as well. I’m only saying that for female civilians, having one’s male family members killed off or missing, and then potentially being raped or forced into concubinage by the enemy seems like a fate worse than death to me. If ever I faced that circumstance, I think I’d rather die fighting.
I find that in studying philosophy and psychology, that there are many lies posited in the school systems——BK Eakman outlines them in her Cloning of the American Mind as does John Taylor Gatto and Allan Bloom in Closing of the American Mind.
This is all to destroy Natural Law Theory and concept of God and Objective Truth. It is a movement that picked up its power with Nietzsche and Marx and the postmodernists who emigrated to the Universities in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and took over public school curricula.
The basic truths and the idea of Virtue is being intentionally destroyed so that the Marxists can redesign Right and Wrong without God and Objective Truth. (CS Lewis wrote about this in England in the 30’s—same thing).
With lies as foundational learning-—children have no trouble with illogical concepts such as the bizarre idea of “homosexual” marriage and the word “Slut” is good and “sodomy is good”. 50 years ago this would have beeen unbelievable-—because we believed in Objective Truth (God) and in Natural Law Theory which is Common Sense. The irrationality of the leftists leaves any arbitrary thing a “Right” including forced abortion.
Have the lefties declared Natural Law a “hate crime” yet?
Thanks Borges.
Not a crime quite yet, although it is out of fashion since socialists/Marxists took over in the US and mock it. It was good for over 2500 years—made Western Civilization the greatest cultures in the history of man. It is the basis of logic.
Ayn Rand hated the Postmodernists because they threw out Natural Law Theory—and she told Donahue in one of her interviews that the Postmodernists were “irrational”. (which they are-—just listen to their “logic”.
Now, the NEW “virtue” of sodomy and slutty behavior (promiscuity) is good. It is being promoted 24/7 in all MSM and Jerry Brown’s schools-—to 5 year olds and forcing a paradigm shift in reality to destroy Judeo/Christian Ethics—which are in line with Natural Law Theory and is the basis of Free Republics-—the need for Virtue for freedom was understood as far back as Aristotle and in the US until the Marxists established Separation of Church and State as a sentence in our Constitution and removed our freedom of Religion in the 50’s with 50lc3 etc.
It was all planned. Curricula removed Moral Absolutes and lied about our history to make people hate all the heroes of the USA. It is how the Marxists operate to destroy cultures from within.
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.