Posted on 01/01/2002 3:03:51 AM PST by Dr. Good Will Hunting
In the hours after American Airlines Flight 63 landed safely thanks to the courage and strength of the flight attendants and passengers, there was a refreshing clarity about the sexes evident in the land.
Let's review: When Richard C. Reid leaned down and began touching lighted matches to his sneakers, it was a flight attendant who first attempted to stop him. She grabbed at his hands and he shoved her so hard that she landed, according to The New York Times account, four rows back. She yelled for help, and another flight attendant attempted to thwart Reid's shoe-lighting. Reid bit her on the hand hard enough to draw blood.
When she screamed, a number of male passengers, including the 6 foot, 8 inch NBA player Kwame James responded. Using anything at hand -- including plastic handcuffs, a dozen belts offered by other passengers and, eventually, sedatives from the plane's on-board kit -- four or five large men were able to subdue the "almost possessed" Reid.
The female flight attendants deserve high marks for their courage. But the episode does reveal that physical size and strength still matter in this world. It took the advent of real danger to reawaken our politically correct society to this truth.
Three years ago, my then-5-year-old son came home from kindergarten and looked at me sympathetically. "Mom, when you were a little girl, people didn't think women could be firefighters, did they?"
I knew immediately that his teacher, a lovely lady of decidedly liberal outlook, was instructing her charges on the wonderful progress of civilization.
"Well," I said, "I'm still not sure I think women firefighters are a good idea." I explained that women had been discouraged in the past from pursuing careers at all -- and this did not make sense. There is no reason that a woman cannot try a case, run a business or heal the sick.
But when it comes to tasks requiring physical strength, well, women are still smaller than men. And while many women have just as much courage, ingenuity and self-possession in emergencies as men, only the most unusual women have the strength to carry the average overweight American out of a burning building.
We've pretended for decades now that physical differences between men and women are insignificant, and where they exist, stand as a rebuke to men. Big dumb jerks. We don't need you to hold open doors for us! I can carry my own bag, bub! Except, it turns out, that when a 6 foot, 4 inch terrorist is swatting women away like mosquitoes, you do need men -- the bigger the better -- to overpower him.
What feminists have never understood, and have actually gone out of their way to distort, is that male strength has always been viewed, in Western culture, as a responsibility, not as a weapon with which to subjugate females. Women and men have traditionally taught their sons (in all but the worst families) that with physical strength must come mental and moral strength. Boys were taught the honorable use of their power -- not to intimidate but to prevent intimidation; not to bully but to protect. Despite reams of disinformation circulated by some feminists, husbands are the last people to beat or abuse women.
Perhaps the new climate of danger -- danger from evil men -- will quiet the anti-male agitation we've endured for so long. For the threat from evil men can only adequately be met by good men. Why not cheer when the manly virtues are called for and demonstrated?
Our admiration for Rudy Giuliani is not based upon his empathy -- though he showed plenty of it -- but rather for older virtues like command, authority, competence and leadership. The businessmen on Flight 93 who whispered their farewells to their wives and families, and then set down their cell phones to take on the terrorists were real men -- the best of masculinity. Were we proud of the female flight attendant who quietly boiled water to throw at the terrorists? You bet. But if it came to a fight, mano a mano, the men would have to take the lead.
As Peggy Noonan observed in Opinion Journal, Sept. 11 has brought old-fashioned virility back into style. God bless our men, who've taken so much undeserved abuse for decades, yet never stopped being men and gentlemen.
One reason women take tradional male jobs is
to deny a man a real job
force families onto the street where
Hitlery's limo is waiting to run them over.
But seriously...
Can we repeal the 19th amendment ?
Women are natural socialist.
God bless Ann Coulter
Now there you go, thinking again.
All the talk about women's rights......... reproductive rights, contraceptive rights, lesbian rights, glass ceilings, step-on-your-neck patriarchs, women must work and put the children in day-care, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.........
It all goes in one ear and out the other, when a man and a woman are truly in love, searching each other's eyes and hearts, and, as if touched by an angel, wanting to fulfill their true destiny, their true roles.
When they see strong men fulfilling their roles, and strong women fulfulling their roles, they know the only way they can stop it from happening is by force, ala socialism. And, if they had their way, it would be brute force. Funny thing is, in order to exert that force, they would need to round up a bunch of guys in order to do it.
Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro......none of them organized vast armies of amazons. There was a reason.
Now, there you go, making me break a New Year's resolution not 10 minutes out of bed. I promised myself I would ignore illogic at FR by considering the source. This is not going to work.
No.
But when it comes to tasks requiring physical strength, well, women are still smaller than men. And while many women have just as much courage, ingenuity and self-possession in emergencies as men, only the most unusual women have the strength to carry the average overweight American out of a burning building.
I'll let my 5' 9" daughter know. She was also a volunteer firefighter for a decade--until her rheumatoid arthritis prevented her from qualifying--and was voted in as chief for four years by a predominately male company because of her qualifications, which included carrying the "average overweight American out of a burning building." And she got no break on her qualifications because she was a woman.
Of course, she had a tough time coordinating her fingernail polish to her turnout gear and the helmet made her hair flat. Other than that, she had no complaints.
Unfortunately, when I talk with women about society and government programs - in most cases it seem they lean towards socialism. Could it be this is a natural outcome of their nurturing tendencies – the very thing that we depend on most and admire in women? It seems, that women’s natural tendency towards “civilization” and “domestication” of men results in dehorning – and who knows what the ultimate results will be. We men have been re-programmed to believe that our daughters should have every opportunity as our sons enjoy – and I could not agree more. However, when it comes to a family and hearth – it seems God gave women the ability to do it better – but there are some natural and different rolls we play.
It may be over simplified, but my take is that one of the prime functions of a man is to create a situation where the woman in his life can go about making the home while unencumbered by the daily struggle to pay the bills. Unfortunately, in our most societies this ideal situation does not exist.
However, I know that it is unhealthy for a man to be constantly under the direct influence of a woman’s natural tendencies. A women's natural tendency seems to run counter to the essential and natural differences between men and women. At some point the male must be weaned and become the provider and protector. Men must be “forever vigilant” and gently resist this tendency of women to overly domesticate everything in their influence, whether the cat, dog, or their men – and whether in the home or in government.
I think it is obvious, that I love, admire, and enjoy women, but thank God for my male pals – and the things we do and the attitudes we share that women just don’t get. However, when we get through playing our “guy” things, where do we go, but back to our homes and the reality of the chores they assign us. I wonder who is winning this “battle”?
God protect us and this nation from the good women's natural tendencies!
Why should I have to respond to #4 before you respond to me? Answer the question.
Congrats for your daughter. Personally, I have no problem with seeing women doing what was considered typical "male" jobs, providing they can do the job. Unfortunately that's not the case where I live. The firefighters were sued, and had to lower the "standards" in order to allow more women to qualify, so that the "average overweight American" is now something like 125 pounds for the tests. That is what I disagree with.
You are absolutely correct.
I also believe leftwing, socialist men have mentally crossed the line and become philosophically effemenate. They become people with the body of a man and the mind and thought processes of a woman. They no longer have the ability to think like real men.
I would like some clarification on this statement, please. Who are the other people who beat or abuse women, if husbands are the last ones?
Also, if the flight attendants on this plane had been armed, there would have been less need to call for help. One - or six, or twelve - shots would have been much more efficient and effective than 6 men fighting one guy. But that might have offended some male egos, though, based on this article. Bad idea. /sarcasm
I'll let Condi Rice know. And Karen Hughes.
BTW, in your ideal world, is the burka optional or mandatory?
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.