Replies

Sorry to break it to YOU, but men benefited just as much as women from feminism. Feminism caused women to be more sexually loose and to abort their babies, which was great for men who wanted to sleep around and have no responsibility.

You're not entirely wrong here, but I don't think you're going to like where that line of reasoning takes you. I agree that men screwed up, but they screwed up not when abortion became legal or divorce became common. Nope, they screwed up when they gave women the vote, because once that happened, the other stuff became inevitable.

With regards to the highlighted portion of the quote above: yes, there is a certain class of men who are scumbags. But the great misfortune of humanity is that women are disproportionately attracted to these scumbags and will often sacrifice reason and ethics to be with them. In the past, fathers knew to keep these scumbags away from their daughters, and their daughters away from these scumbags. Now, having been rendered powerless in the increasingly rare case that the father is even allowed to raise his own kids, the degradation of society is unstoppable.

But the great misfortune of humanity is that women are disproportionately attracted to these scumbags and will often sacrifice reason and ethics to be with them.

I don't know if it's still true, but back in the 70s & 80s I had to wonder about this same thing after reading the blurbs on the backs of many dozens of cheap Romance paperbacks. So very many of them described the male love interest as being both handsome but dangerous. One line you saw frequently with only slight variations was, "Should she love him, or fear for her life?"

And yes, in times of boredom I read through a number of these. The love interest was often someone who had a violent side, eg killing other men in duels at the drop of a hat. But on the other hand he was always tenderly passionate with his woman.

Good grief! Couldn't the intended consumers of these paperbacks understand that in real life, a violent streak in one area of his life is going to eventually show up in others?

I had to wonder whether these plots reflected the way young women truly saw men? I mean, why buy the books otherwise? Yeah, sure, dismiss it as merely "escapist fantasy," but is there really such a thing as Escapist Fantasy that readers fully realize does not reflect real life, and have no wish to emulate?

In the fantasy world, the knight slays the bad guys in a blood-soaked orgy of swordplay to rescue the damsel imprisoned in the tower. Yet the moment he reaches her, his mood swiftly changes to infinite tenderness.

In the real world, this violent man of action in the midst of the heat of battle would probably have slapped her across the face and said, "Damn it woman!! How many times have I told you to be careful going out? I'm sick and tired of risking my life to rescue your sorry butt once again!"

At the time I was perusing these, a close friend and his wife had taken into their homes for short periods of time at least two 20ish women as part of a program to hide them in places where violent ex-boyfriends would not think of looking. These were intelligent, good-looking women, and the choices they made seemed to tie in with what I read on the back covers of the paperbacks.

the degradation of society is unstoppable.

We conservatives as a whole made a huge mistake from the late 60s onwards, in believing that the best place to fight liberalism was in the field of politics, or in politics plus education.

We were wrong. The real battle of significance was in Hollywood, and we surrendered that to the liberals without a fight. That loss has made all the gains in the world of politics into moot points. Any battles we win against liberals in politics or education are at best "rear guard actions" - ie victories that temporarily stem our never-ending retreat for only a short time, but don't affect society's long-term slide downwards.