-
Pandora’s Problems
June 14, 2013 | 19 comments
-
Story Ideas for a Press Turning Against Obama
May 28, 2013 | 28 comments
-
Is Kleiner Perkins Sorry It Ever Met Al Gore?
May 13, 2013 | 32 comments
-
America’s Oil Revival
February 8, 2013 | 146 comments
-
Want to Stop Violence? Start in Hollywood
January 21, 2013 | 26 comments
Special Report
The End of Men, The Beginning of What?
Hanna Rosin has written the hottest story of this hot summer — how much of it is hot air?
(Page 2 of 2)
This whole trend is now finding its way into the economy. Seventy-five percent of jobs lost in the recession belonged to men. As of a few months ago, for the first time in history, women outnumber men in the work force. Writes Rosin:
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, women now hold 51.4 percent of managerial and professional jobs — up from 26.1 percent in 1980. They make up 54 percent of accountants and hold about half of all banking and insurance jobs. About a third of America’s physicians are now women, as are 45 percent of associates in law firms….A white-collar economy… increasingly requires formal educational credentials, which women are more prone to acquire…. Just about the only professions in which women still make up a relatively small minority of newly minted workers are engineering and those calling on a hard-science background…. Men dominate just two of the 15 job categories projected to grow the most over the next decade: janitor and computer engineer. Women have everything else — nursing, home health assistance, child care, food preparation.
So what to make of this? That young women perform better in school is hardly an original observation. Mark Twain made it when he wrote “On Girls” in English as She Is Taught:
Girls are very stuck up and dignefied in their maner and be have your. They think more of dress than anything and like to play with dowls and rags. They cry if they see a cow in a far distance and are afraid of guns. They stay at home all the time and go to church on Sunday. They are al-ways sick. They are al-ways funy and making fun of boy’s hands and they say how dirty. They cant play marbels. I pity them poor things. They make fun of boys and then turn round and love them. I dont beleave they ever kiled a cat or anything. They look out every nite and say oh ant the moon lovely. Thir is one thing I have not told and that is they al-ways now their lessons bettern boys.
The seeds of the current situation can be found in How Schools Shortchange Girls, a study put out by the American Association of University Women in 1992. Christina Hoff Sommers eviscerated the study, pointing out in The War Against Boys that girls actually do better in school, that boys have much higher drop-out rates, and that the standard by which the AAUW study measured girls’ shortchanging was self-esteem — a purely subjective standard. Adolescent girls may have most self-doubts but who has the least? Young black males, as it turns out. Obviously, self-esteem has little to do with academic performance.
What threw in a curve — and apparently galled the university women to no end — was a population of “star boys” at the very top. On the whole, girls did better than boys but the best boys outperformed the best girls. Moreover the teachers seemed to favor these star boys, letting them call out answers and praising their achievements. You can just see those university women sitting there years before with their perfect homework assignments written in perfect penmanship grinding their teeth at these obnoxious loudmouths who were always asking a question or calling out the answer.
In the great meritocracy of contemporary American society, this classroom situation has now been duplicated in society at large. Young men who once congregated at the back of the classroom perusing motorcycle magazines and writing their girlfriends’ names on their arms in indelible ink are now sinking lower and lower in the work force. Meanwhile, those young women who turned in all their assignments and made the honor roll are rising through the ranks. True, the “star boys” still dominate most professions but that can be explained as well. With perfect heads-I-win, tails-you-lose logic, Rosin attributes this to “discrimination.”
So if good grades and graduate degrees are becoming the yardstick for performance in the economy, what kind of economy are we creating? The first thing to notice about those Department of Labor statistics is that nearly all the next decade’s expected job growth is in professions dependent on the government. The so-called “white-collar economy” we are entering is really an expanding government bureaucracy. Nursing, home health care, child care, maintaining medical records — all involve taking care of people or keeping track of other people taking care of people while taxpayers foot the bill. (Obamacare will supersize this effort.) Who’s going to create the wealth to pay for all this? Rosin doesn’t venture an answer.
More and more we are becoming an economy dominated by educated and credentialed people doing government-dependent jobs. This kind of economy specializes in “can’t do.” How else would you explain the current fiasco in the Gulf, where the federal government’s principal contribution has been to tell skimming boats they can’t go out without sufficient life jackets, to require federal permits for people trying to rescue damaged birds, to forbid the use of dispersants without environmental impact statements, to keep 80 percent of the nation’s skimming boats bottled up in their home ports in case there’s another oil spill somewhere, and to tell the world’s abundant supply of skimmers (including one Taiwanese boat that can skim as much as our entire fleet) that they can’t help because it would violate federal labor laws?
Women will do well in this can’t-do economy. In fact, anyone who excels at writing term papers and accumulating degrees is more likely to end up writing environmental impact statements than inventing new technologies or starting new businesses. Men’s skills are different. They are adventurous. They like to build and operate machines. They like to take risks and push the envelope. They prefer doing things in the real world rather than on paper. In the can’t-do economy, these skills are becoming more and more marginalized.
Yet economies only advance on the frontiers of science and technology. People who do well at school don’t always do well on frontiers. The ratio of men to women on the American frontier was probably 10-to-1. Always there were a few tough women who thrived in the pioneer life but most arrived only later as a “civilizing” influence. It is men who break new ground, brave the odds, and clear a path for women to follow. Feminists will insist that this is all social conditioning and that “women can be taught these skills as well,” but that’s the point. Men don’t have to be taught. They are that way naturally.
If we have an economy based on writing environmental impact statements, responding to lawsuits, and pushing each other around in wheelchairs, it is likely women will continue to dominate the work force. But that doesn’t bode well for the country. If we are to start making and doing things again — like building the 100 new nuclear reactors we need to clean the air and provide ourselves with enough energy — then men will have to make a comeback. The real question is not about the “end of men” but about the future of America. From the perspective of 2010, it doesn’t look very encouraging.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (163) | Leave a comment
More Articles by William Tucker
More Articles From Special Report
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/07/the-end-of-men-the-beginning-o
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
drudge ette obama| 7.7.10 @ 6:41AM
As I watched my husband rip bushes out of the ground this weekend, using a pick ax and his bare hands to clear old brush, then head up to the roof to work on the chimney, then into the garage to do something with woodworking tools, then change the oil in my car, then pick up a bug using only one kleenex, then declog the drain in the kitchen, carry trees using one hand from the truck to the yard........I felt like a useless idiot, so I helped where I could.
This was just in one day.
Then I go to work and spend the day with soft, young men who wear Ipods and love to talk about women's make-up, Southpark and hairstyles. They don't know how to do things around the house, deal with gas lines, blowtorches or shoot a deer. They voted for Obama and think that conflict and anger should not touch life. They sport tattoos but have never serve in the Navy. They eat too many carbs and then moan about eating too many carbs. Their stomachs are plump at an early age and their hair is sprayed. Even their clothing is mauve or soft tan.
Masculinity does not exist without hair on the chest, dirt under the fingernails, and other behaviors which should not be mentioned on polite blogspace.
I think that we all need a little less in the things department and more basic struggle. It is coming soon - it may be here already.
Struggle will bring back the beautiful men of our country who cleared fields, built buildings and sent people to the moon. Women helped, too, but America should not throw out its tradition of fine, masculine men in the quest of sexual equality.
Kathy L.| 7.7.10 @ 9:13AM
Spot on! And I totally agree. I'm doing everything I can as a woman to encourage real men, masculine men to simply be what God intended them to be. At the same time, I laugh and point at the metrosexuals.... Maybe they'll get the hint.
Heavy Metal Superfreak| 7.7.10 @ 10:25AM
Kathy, you my kind of gal! That is if you got big boobs.
I'm a hard, fist-swinging honcho who listens to heavy metal--the louder the better--and I got me a boombox in my car that can rattle your windows.
I'm a hell-raisin', testosterone-fueled football addict. And I like my porn nasty . . . real nasty! I like to watch three-hole sluts. Know what I mean?
I don't take no sh*t from nobody, and I fart whereever and whenever.
You and me ought to hook up. Whatcha think?
Sylvia| 7.7.10 @ 10:33AM
Thrilling!
Heavy Metal, you turn me on. You're the kind of man that makes me drool. Virile masculinity with no holes barred. That's for me, man! Stick it in me!
PJ| 7.7.10 @ 11:33AM
You're not the man I want my daughters to hang out with; you lack discipline. I want my daughters to associate w/ gentlemen who are or were Marines, Navy Seals, Special Ops,... enlisted or officers.
They can also include men who led an adventurous life struggling w/nature & surviving & using those acquired skills to lead an honorable life.
Anastasia Mather| 7.7.10 @ 12:02PM
Exactly.
William Wallace| 7.7.10 @ 12:04PM
HM Superfreak,
Your sarcasm is showing. One does not have to embody every negative male stereotype nor find the lowest common denominator to be a masculine man. One can be masculine and polite and well mannered all at the same time. Put another way, there is a time and a place for most things. I alter my behavior to fit the context.
By the way, I do think you're on the right track vis a vis big knockers.
Tammy R.| 7.7.10 @ 1:58PM
And, William, I suppose you're one of those right-wing religious fundamentalists who have ravenous appetites for hard core porn-- like that disgusting conservative Superfreak.
The red states, the most politically and religiously conservatives, are the highest consumers of porn by far. Look it up and you'll see.
big one| 7.7.10 @ 8:13PM
I be your big blue northern ghetto bunky baby.
old white guy| 7.8.10 @ 10:03AM
i don't think anyof that crap makes you a man.
Anna K. from Emory U.| 7.8.10 @ 2:25PM
I personally prefer men who are both masculine and feminine, and, therefore, sexually ambiguous.
They are sexually more imaginative, and they know how to please a woman (or, in some cases, a man).
You can take old-fashioned masculinity and feed it to the hogs. And speaking of hogs, there seem to be more than enough old, masculine hogs commenting on this piece.
With every word I read, I hear "oink, oink."
RAMII| 7.8.10 @ 10:12AM
Masculinity = No Self-Control?
I don't think so. Didn't you read drudge ette's post? She mentioned HUSBAND and hard work; not an immature, out of control narcissist and voyeurist who only lives to please himself.
Michael Kirkby| 7.9.10 @ 6:33PM
Spot on. I'm sixty, single by choice and quite white. I've lived here and there and I'm coming to the conclusion that unless humanity grows up pretty soon, there may not be much hope left.
PolishKnight| 7.7.10 @ 11:24AM
Trying to have sexual equality withuot throwing out fine, masculine men is similar to trying to open up beauty pageants to both sexes without having the evening gown contest look weird.
Sorry, but the fundamental paradox is obvious and inescapable (which, of course, doesn't prevent people from often refusing to believe it when it's in the fom of mass denial)
Women cannot have "equality" with men while still expecting and NEEDING men to be their providers and protectors. You can't get rid of all the pesky coal and oil fired power plants and still get electrical power in California, for example. You can't legislate PI to equal exactly 3. But that doesn't people from thinking they can try.
I love the author's point that women's equality has only given us a strong "can't do" economy of government paper pushers but it goes beyond that. Even when these women bring the funny money home, and buy illegal immigrant childcare and cheap chinese made appliances... they still can't make ends meet. All the King's horses, men, and federal rescue programs such as VAWA and "Child" support enforcement hasn't stopped women from still being helpless damsels in distress. Heck, even well-to-do conservative career women who are "traditional" when the dinner check comes but insist that they get paid a much as a man often stuggle to make ends meet. Yet, in the old days, a man with a high school education could support a family of 5 and pay off his family's home in 10 years.
As the Depeche Mode put it: "Walk a mile in my shoes, you'll stumble in my footsteps...."
Factory | 7.8.10 @ 4:00PM
Yeah, it's kinda funny how all this 'equality' and 'independance' comes off the backs of men . Sure, it's not ALL taxes (sometimes, we just do things like buy dinner), but women could not survive without men.
It would be funny to watch them claim otherwise, if the consequences of their extreme narcissism weren't so dire...
By the way PK, you should click through to my blog and get in touch. I have a job for you.
PolishKnight| 7.9.10 @ 10:25AM
Us men love more work!
There's an old Polish saying: Women don't know the meaning of life, but they're certain men have hidden it in the workplace.
drudge ette obama| 7.9.10 @ 6:17AM
I admit your point and clarify mine. I disgard the term sexual equality to replace with something a little less equalizing. Men and women can't be equal just as women can't be equal to eachother. The concept has no measurable points. As a woman, I want to vote, be free to own property, to share the rights given by God and the constitution with men, to live with limited intrusiveness by others and especially those I don't know. I want to be able to pick my profession and study without any limits other than my god-given limits. And if I do a good job, I would like to be paid a competitive wage. I don't expect a job because I am a woman or becuse of my race. But don't deny me one for those reasons, either.
Yes, I agree with you that there is no sexual equality. Out of habit, I used that term to mean something different. Let's make up a new term.
PolishKnight| 7.9.10 @ 10:33AM
The fundamental problem with that reasonable paradigm, Drudge, is that, to paraphrase Garfield from "Other People's Money", even if the yen did this, and the dollar did that, or women just had the same basic rights as men, it wouldn't work.
Here's why: Rights are one thing but, for men, they come with Responsibilities. For example, not just picking up the check once or twice and winning a nobel prize for doing so, but on a regular basis. Earning an income is to pay to support one's family, not just "mad money" to split expenses with a man when times are going well and divorcing him the second he's laid off of work.
Even when things do go well in the new "equal" economy, it's simply impossible for women to marry up on average. The women who are able to do so double-dip and then deal with wage deflation and housing inflation simultaneously while the poorer men become criminals (and cost society indirectly) and poorer women become welfare wives of the state (and cost the state directly.)
And ALL OF THIS for what?!?! For women who pretend to be equal and earn as much as a man but still try to avoid responsibility at nearly every turn? For absolutely NO GAIN to society when it's all added up? For women who call themselves ladies who seeth with anger at men and even each other as they gripe that men are "jerks" who aren't traditional anymore and holding their doors and buying them things while they act like cheap, drunken sailors?
Let me know when I have all those rights but can still expect the opposite sex and society to pick up after me, then we'll talk.
Chalkdust| 7.8.10 @ 1:38AM
Drudge ette:
Great post! Your husband hit the jackpot when he found you. I hope you and he have a passell of kids to past your common sense values on to.
drudge ette obama| 7.8.10 @ 6:06AM
Thank you, sweet Chalkdust.
Professor Terry J. Lovell| 7.8.10 @ 1:25PM
I have spent the better part of the last three decades at the front of a college classroom explaining the social science of economics, business statistics, research methods and their applications to business strategies. In that time I have witnessed the dramatic end-results of the ongoing and systematic “war against boys” (please read the excellent and prophetic book: The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men, by the brilliant Christina Hoff Sommers). Most (75-85%) of my young male students are, in the main, no longer men, either culturally, socially or in terms of their personal cosmic placement. They are adrift in a world of metro-sexual angst and are completely unable to articulate even a minimal understanding of why the world now despises them for doing everything their female primary school teachers told them to do.
Back in the days when giants roamed the Earth, the men I respected the most, my Scoutmaster (Bob Farmer, USMC, fought on Iwo Jima at age 17), my 8th grade English Teacher Mr. Rossell (toughest, strongest, best read man I had know in my young life-rode motorcycles and made his own parts from metal he cut with a plasma torch and welded with an Arc-welding rod), later Dr. Dave Emmons Professor of History at the University of Montana, (expert downhill skier, champion handball player and at age 45 he was still bench pressing twice his weight and was of course a man of letters and published extensively in his two areas of expertise the History of the U.S. Antebellum South and the History of the Irish in America [his great book “The Butte Irish: Class and Ethnicity in an American Mining Town, 1875-1925” is required reading if you want to understand the immigrant mind in the Rocky Mountain West]. These men were capable of raising young men and teaching them to be men. MEN->Not a bully or a lout or an uncouth clod-but a man, who exercised his mind, body and spirit toward the betterment of his world by being first and foremost a good citizen, a good husband, a good father and a good man! My Scoutmaster pulled me aside one day and told me: “It is not for the calf to bellar (colloquialism) like the bull!” This was code for stop buying beer and partying on the weekends after playing high school football games. I was a good 40 years younger, five inches taller and 50 pounds heavier then Bob was at the time. I stared at him, acting tough and said some stupid thing like “What are you going to do to make me stop?” Without missing a beat Bob took me out in his backyard and made me so sorry for challenging his authority to instruct me and his right to demand my obedience. Suffice to say there was no more beer on the weekends aft I played high school football games. Bob did that because I was and am an Eagle Scout and he by-God, was not going to have me act in a way that brought shame to that rank. Thank God he loved me enough and in the appropriate way to “educate” me to my responsibilities. Thank God the United States back then would let a Man act like a Man and settle things in this fashion. To this day it remains one of the greatest lessons I ever learned. Nobles Oblige-the noble obligation of my position as Captain of the Football team, Eagle Scout and one of his boys-required to act like a man-not some horse’s ass jock weekend drunk. God Bless Bob Farmer!
Mr. Rossell taught me to read and memorize poetry and great plays. I learned not just the heart of great men who were trying to share what manhood was to them, but the classics of European and American literature. Mr. Rossell was the first person to teach me that Men had obligation to protect the Arts and Literature from the bullies and the book burners. He taught that if just a few men would have stood up at the right moment in the 1930’s Hitler would have been stopped, not by political ideology, but by simply doing the right thing under the manhood code. When a man loses his job-he sucks it up and finds a new-even if he must vote with his feet-a man never scapegoats the weakest and quickest target-the just isn’t manly. The real Men stand up to say “You will not use that language in front of me.” The language of racism, sexism, anti-Semites and other assorted moron haters is never the path of the MAN. The real Man knows that he is the Captain of his Fate and Master of His Ship and his job is always to protect and defend the social order and the weak. Real men would rather die on their feet than live on their knees (Bolivar). Real Men know that all that need happen for evil to triumph is that they do nothing (Burke)! Real men quote Robert Service or Rudyard Kipling to describe tough times and laugh at the hardships that are merely tests of your manhood. “Talk of your cold, through the parka’s fold it would stab like the driven nail” “If you can meet with, triumph and disaster, and treat those two imposters the same”. Real Men would forever hold their manhood cheaply, if they were asleep in Britain, rather than there at Agincourt with the Henry V and his Band of Brothers.
Real Men like my Assistant Scoutmaster Art Packard who taught me Robert Service poems a line at a time while we walked “drag” with Troop 5 through the Bob Marshall Wilderness every summer. 120 miles covered in 10 to 11 days, earning both the 50 Miler and the Historic Trails Patch every summer for every boy in the Troop. Hiking those trails, with Art doing the poems one line at a time, “A bunch of the boys were whoopin’ it up in the Malamute Saloon” and I’d repeat it-until I had it perfect and then the next line and then both and then the verse and eventually the entire poem. Walking drag was an important job and a noble job. If one of the boys was sick or just discouraged you took some of his weight and let him catch his stride again. Then quietly and without calling attention to it, you’d later give that weight back. Sometimes you just had to encourage the smaller, weaker boys to “man-up” and carry their weight-like a MAN would do. Always this was done in private and with the intent of making them stronger and better-you never did this in front of others-that wasn’t manly. Men didn’t who got the credit-they cared if the goal was met. Anything was possible when real men agreed on a goal. There was no “I” in team work! Those all sound like clichés, but they became clichés because they are absolutely true and filled with virtue-mostly now (sadly) forgotten.
My young men today in my classes (that 15-25% who have been taught and stay true to the Man’s code) tend to be the product of two parent families. A growing number are the children of two-parent Hispanic Evangelicals-born again Christians, entrepreneurs, small business people, who are in ROTC and voluntarily go serve their country in the toughest wars we have ever fought. I have one former student in Afghanistan who is an Army Ranger, a sniper. Sometimes on a weekly basis, sometimes on a monthly basis I get a postcard, with exotic postmarks, on the front side is a picture of a “Montana Double Date” [two cowboys in the front of an F-150 Ford Pick-up truck with two blue tick heelers sitting in between them] and on the back side is either a yellow stick-um of a smiley face or a frowney face. The smiley face means that my former student dropped a bad guy, usually from a 1,000 yards or more away-usually saving the lives of some of his fellow soldiers. A frowney face means he didn’t get the orders to engage. This young man has more understanding of and about honor, duty and manhood, in his little finger, than most of the U.S. Congress has in their entire bodies. He makes me proud to be a man and his former teacher. When he comes home on leave, he says that the U.S. mainstream media are more of an enemy to him than the terrorists in-country (ask that former General if Rolling Stone of Hamas is a bigger threat to our freedom) and I have to agree with him.
Another of my former students is a Chief Warrant Officer in the Army. He loves to fly helicopters and even having earned his Bachelor’s (with high honors) he won’t take the promotion to a desk job-because he was born to fly the choppers. He has done three tours in the sandbox and was just called up again to go back. THANK GOD! He was flying guys out to the doomed BP rig and was scheduled to be there the day it blew up-but he was in Fort Sill instead preparing to go back to Iraq. Who knew flying oil rig duty for the Obama administration would be deadlier than Iraq? When you look up the phrase “grace-under pressure” you see Mikey’s picture in the Manhood dictionary, thank God he is there to protect us all. Just as his Dad was during the War in Southeast Asia->manhood can be passed down through family values and the culture of service and duty that REAL MEN teach. Simple rules, like “Always leave the campground cleaner than you found it!” are at the root of all manly behavior.
So you are correct to say that REAL MEN are good for women and someday I truly hope my 13 year=old daughter can snag a real man to be her husband and the father of my grandchildren.
The real victim of the war against boys is both the modern women and our society that will be populated by the Eric Cartman’s, instead of the Bob Farmers; the Barney Frank’s instead of the Charely Rossels; the A-Rods, instead of the Art Packards. To the warnings of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, defining manhood down will create a race of creatures that look men-but lack the culture and therefore the essence of manhood. That is where we are 75% of the way top today. Please stop the war against boys. One final thought, if the Women rule and men are castrated and made irrelevant who will these new power women find companionship with and build families around and spend their golden years growing in love and friendship?
Love is a verb and if you systematically remove the male-muscles that make that verb work…what is left? Just because there are no bears to be killed in the caves today, does not mean it will always be that way. It is later than you think and the wages of the war against boys is the death of manhood. Is that really what is best for women, society and God-forbid-the boys?
Save MANHOOD NOW!
Ret. Marine| 7.9.10 @ 6:49AM
Thanks for the post, I sent it to my 14 yr. old grandson. I think he will find it interesting that I'm not the only man in this world who thinks the same.
ZZMike| 7.9.10 @ 2:42AM
Like the End of the World (currently set in 2012 (but may be rescheduled as necessary), the End of Men is a bit premature.
"... where the curriculum has been totally revised to fit girls' tastes. "
That is one of the causes, not a result. Our educational system has been doing this for more than a few years now - a deliberate long-term plan by leftist school administrators.
"... the elimination of walk-ons ..."
That leads to the thought that the sexes will have achieved equality when the first female fullbacks appear in the NFL.
Kudos to drudge ette obama!! You put it perfectly. I would add only one more item:
"... cleared fields, built buildings and sent people to the moon.
And defended the country in two world wars.
I was at a talk by a physics professor, who told of a time when he gave one of the standard, age-old problems:
"A man falls out of a 1oth story window. How long does it take for him to hit the ground?"
A male student objected. The problem was too disturbing.
Stephanie| 7.7.10 @ 7:05AM
I'll never forget the firemen who raised the flag on the rubble of the Twin Towers. My heart filled with pride looking at these MEN. Real men, not the metro sexual girly men, like the one that inhabits the White House. I kept that picture of those wonderful firemen and have it framed in my office.
One other thing, I always wondered what would happen to all those men in China when the 1 child only policy caught up with them.
Ed| 7.7.10 @ 8:08AM
If men become extinct, who is going to kill the mice and spiders?
Seriously though, high school girls often go through more rebellion than high school boys. As several mothers have told me: "teenage girls are more complicated than teenage boys".
john| 7.7.10 @ 8:19AM
Let's not forget quotas----oh, affirmative action---where white males in particular are systematically discriminated against.
Bob K.| 7.7.10 @ 8:20AM
It is still a man's world! It will always be a man's world!
Ask any Muslim. In fact, they are now in the process of ensuring that it remains that way where they live and becomes that way wherever they emigrate. Don't expect their beliefs to change when they start to inter marry with western women either. These women will become 3rd and 4th wives and take on the veil!
And who is the USA sending all over the world to fight this philosophy? Why, it is our men, of course! Personally, I'm getting tired of it!
Where are all our liberated big-mouthed women when it comes to liberating their oppressed muslim sisters? Where will they be when the daughters they prefer to have rather than sons start to marry muslim men?
David F.| 7.7.10 @ 10:13AM
Amen! When the feminist in the West get everything they want, they should be prepared for Muslim men to take it all away.
Charles Romer| 7.7.10 @ 7:42PM
Amen indeed! Thanks for saving me the trouble to compose something similar. Well done!
Louis Jenkins| 7.7.10 @ 8:22AM
The 'Man Card' if quickly becoming extinct. It's strange that my youngest daughter is always buttering up to my wife, yet when the going gets tough she relies on me. Yes, a man does work that a woman cannot or will not do. Dirt under the fingernails, cuts and bruises, and other such badges of manhood are fast becoming a thing of the past. That's what is wrong with our society (among other things). Education, the newsmedia, medical practice, are all chick-ified. As Ed has stated, "Who will kill the mice and spiders?"
Melvin| 7.7.10 @ 8:29AM
Can someone tell me what in the hell is actual sexual equality? Equal to what. At least it used to be, that is the reason God made us different, not equal.
I'm sorry girls men were born with penis's and women with vagina's, and there isn't no amount of legislation or public opinion that is going to change that.
I apologize of I go on a bit of rant here but I've gotten sick and damn tired of these metro-uber males that parade around like preening Peacocks that drudge ette obama, and Stephanie have alluded to.
My son as a teenager was going out one evening during high school and I watched him spray something into the air and with arms outstretched walk into the mist. I asked him, "What in the hell are you doing." He replied, "This is how we apply cologne now."
My wife heard my irate voice and stuck her head around the corner as a casual observer and heard me further say, "Junior you smell like French whore, I don't know whether I should shake your hand or have sex with you!"
My wife sighed a sigh of relief for me teaching my son a masculine moment, but needless to say, he never did that again and now as I do he just splashes it on the old mug.
During husband wifey time she said, "You were a little blunt with your son today." I muttered, "Hell, dear I wasn't blunt enough."
For a long time now I and many fathers realized that we were indeed in a fight for the hearts and minds of our sons.
This didn't stop with my two boys either, I'm just as blunt with my grandsons (4) the oldest came whining up during some soccer game with a minor boo boo, and I told him right in front of my daughter-in-law and son, "Stop whining and acting like a girl and get back in the game." The kid looked at his mother and father and all three then looked at me and I would like to think that this was no a good time to cross swords with Granddad because junior got back into the game and three seconds later he forgot all about his boo boo.
"Well you have to be in touch with their feminine side." So says the experts. Shit, I can count the times that I got in touch with my feminine side on one hand. I cried when my mother and father died, I cried when each of my children were born, I cried when my wife had two heart attacks and I asked God, not to take her. I guess he listened because momma's still beside me.
There are exceptions of being a man out there and there are bad men, bad fathers, and bad husbands. But there a millions of us out here who are good men, good husbands, and good fathers that far outweigh this crap that the naysayers are pushing down everyones throats.
As a man, husband, and father I don't consider myself perfect, I'm imperfect and have faults, but that is the way God made us, to be imperfect, but to improve upon these imperfections as we go through life.
And these basic tenets of what I think a good man should be I passed to my sons and they to theirs.
What bothers me deeply is, young men through legislation of equality are being denied the chance to go to college because the government run schools favor young women over young men and put more resources into women to prepare them for college.
Just go to a college campus nowadays. the faces are striking because it is mostly female.
Single mothers are the single greatest threat to young boys into men that exist today.
These single mothers are being brainwashed by the government that, "You don't need a man to help raise and support your children, we'll do it for you."
I think it was Rosie O'Donnell who said this, "If I want a man in my child's life, I'll go rent one."
"We're an endangered species fellas, I think it is high time that we start fighting back for equal time don't ya think, because no one is going to protect us but ourselves."
Geoff Chapman| 7.7.10 @ 9:03AM
Good on yer, Melvin! As long as we have a few men who are not afraid to speak their minds and get their hands dirty, I am not apprehensive that the country is going to hell in a hand basket.
Kathy L.| 7.7.10 @ 9:14AM
Fight on, man! You have my support and admiration.
Bo Darville| 7.7.10 @ 11:03AM
Sir, you have admitted to several hate crimes in your comment. I have reported you to O'Bama.
Melvin| 7.7.10 @ 11:56AM
Heeee, heeee, heeee
PJ| 7.7.10 @ 11:46AM
"Single mothers are the single greatest threat to young boys into men that exist today."
I totally agree. Boys need mentally healthy men in their lives. Part of growing up process for boys is emulating men. A lack of normal men in their lives equals very dysfunctional adult males in the next generation which we are seeing alot of now.
So you old normal geezers----------- become active in the local boy activities like sports or the Boy Scouts!
Stephanie| 7.7.10 @ 12:18PM
PJ, girls need mentally healthy men in their lives as well. Our daddys are our first love and a healthy relationship with them prepares us for good and stable relationships with our husbands.
PJ| 7.7.10 @ 3:04PM
"girls need mentally healthy men in their lives as well." I totally agree but young girls emulate their moms. If the single moms are reasonably moral & try to teach their daughters the benefits of having normal relationships w/men, there's a good chance the daughters will gravitate towards good men. The damage done in not having a good dad is more acute in boys than in girls.
drudge ette obama| 7.8.10 @ 6:08AM
Perhaps, but I can attest that despite whether you are fortunate enough to have a loving father that a woman can overcome the lack thereof and find happiness. It just takes a little longer. Definitely gives an advantage, though, to have a strong and loving father.
the permanent newbie| 7.7.10 @ 12:39PM
Your wife's a lucky lady, Melvin. May you be happy together 'til 120.
Melvin| 7.7.10 @ 3:23PM
Why thank you. The Misses and I have had our share of marital speed bumps, like any other marriage.
But the one fact is, we never ever lost believing in each other, and much as I care to admit this, sometimes I was too stubborn, and should have admitted a bunch of times that I was wrong.
This what we relayed together to our two boys and daughter.
My oldest son who is getting married next month was at odds with himself when he was arguing with his finance. He always felt that he needed to win. Seeing myself earlier on in my marriage, in which my father had died, I didn't have the luxury of going to dad and asking him the meaning of life, I made life and marriage hard on myself through trial and error, believe me there was allot of errors.
But I eventually took stock in myself and told my son, "Good then don't win, just shut-up and listen to her, then compromise if need be."
I guess after that he listened and a girlfriend became a finance.
The point being and going a long way around to, is, a son needs a father, so when he does meet that person he wants to spend the rest of his life with, dad can be there with a gentle reminder, "Think about what your doing, you may not want to go there."
Its from a male prospective. Moms bless their hearts just cannot give the perspective as a husband, they can't because their wives.
To my daughter I cannot give as good as advice as her mother because I'm not a wife.
I by no means is the ideal male, but allot of feminists, and those females that think that they don't need men, are completely off track because there is more to being a male than having an appendage, and I tend to think many times that is what they base their opinion on and not necessarily the man connected to it.
Due to my rambling here I have forgotten to give kudos where it is due. My wife wasn't all fluff and being meek.
While I was running around the world being a Marine, she was at home laying the groundwork for my boys to become self reliant men. She was sometime way much more tougher on the boys than I was, and for her toughness, the family could not have survived. I owe her a great deal and I am forever in her debt.
Bill A | 7.7.10 @ 4:48PM
Melvin, thankyou for your honest insights. You and your family have been truly blessed. Probably like you I was surprised to find out how strong women could be. My naivete cost us early in our marraige. I had brothers and no sisters. Who knew! Unfortunately JoAnn died young when our daughters were six years old and nine months old. I did the best I could but I always felt like a three legged stool, not quite right.
Fortunately my ladies are now 25 and 19 and handle themselves well but I always wonder what cost to them for not having a Mom. I don't know about you Melvin but I do not know how to French Braid hair, and I don't want to know.
I'm just a Dad doing the best I can. I figure God has one heck of a sense of humor.
Be Well
drudge ette obama| 7.8.10 @ 6:10AM
Melvin, again you win the brass ring.
Flee| 7.7.10 @ 4:27PM
A priceless description of the reaction of your child, their spouse and child to your remark. As a basketball ref I frequently see a player hit the floor and lay there waiting for all the attention and their mothers wailing to help their baby. A few minutes or more later the kid gets up no worse for wear. Could have got up in a second except all the crowd was there for the attention. A scraped knee now requires immediate attention from the attending physician rather than a quick wipe on the shorts and move along. It is a bit depressing sometimes but I insist I won't baby my boy and hope my wife continues to go along with it.
jomo2009| 7.7.10 @ 4:43PM
Here! Here! Melvin I would be honored if I could have a drink with you someday.
Melvin| 7.7.10 @ 7:39PM
Thank you for all of your thoughtful posts. As the world swirls around us in uncertainty, its very reassuring to know that there are fellow human being out there that are thoughtful and considerate.
Jomo2009 if your ever find yourself in NC and we will solve all of the worlds woes in a span of an hour, please look me up in American Spectator which is my little spot of sanctuary.
Brandon| 7.7.10 @ 7:43PM
Melvin, you're one hell of a granddad.
If I were your son, I would stay away from you and I would make sure you never saw your grandson.
You're a malicious old fart who subscribes to an outdated concept of masculinity, and you relish humiliating young men who do not measure up to your shithead masculine expectations.
Perhaps a diagnosis of prostate cancer will humble you a bit. In my opinion, you deserve it! You're an old warthog from hell. Go back where you came from!
Sixtnpenny| 7.8.10 @ 1:27AM
Brandon:
The human equation, with male and female counterparts, has been the same since we began writing history. Melvin has a better idea of it than the response you posted to his commentary. Wishing prostate cancer upon him? Denying him his grandson? His words are not "shithead masculine expectations" but a good illustration of what life was like for a lot of people where I grew up. My old man, except for the military service, was a parallel to Melvin and he was and always will be a hero for me.
Brandon's alter ego| 7.8.10 @ 3:42AM
Brandon,
you're a mangina fag. Being a lap dog for feminism will not get you more girls. Just the opposite as a matter of fact. The feminists will keep you around to humor themselves and kick around to take out their frustration over their lack of manhood until they find an alpha male who excites them then they will turn on you and tear you limb from limb for being weak and accomodating them. The best you can hope for with your strategy is some grudging duty sex and maybe the opportunity to raise some thug's kid that you think is your own. Go ahead, be a chump. You're the anachronism. No one ever got far screwing around with nature as you insist we do. BTW, those satchel things you manginas carry look stupid and might as well say kick me, I'm a weenie and a chump.
drudge ette obama| 7.8.10 @ 6:13AM
Brandon, I am sorry that you lost your father to cancer, but it is unkind to project your anger against real men who you wish were your father. You rolled the dice and got nothing. Melvin's family won it all. Turn your envy into love, Brandon. Go feed your fish.
Lord Karth| 7.8.10 @ 3:06PM
Nice post, hotshot. Do you eat with that mouth ?
YOU are an ill-mannered young male (NOT a man) who subscribes to an outdated concept of shock value, and you relish sassing off men whose shoes you are not fit to pick up.
Perhaps a serious thrashing by an actual grown-up, adult man would clue you in to the real nature of what it means to be mature. You're an impudent little boy.
Go home to your mama.
Lord Karth
Tyrone| 7.7.10 @ 8:39AM
http://www.singularity2050.com.....ubble.html
This article came out on the web several weeks ago and the comments about it run 10 to 1 against Rosin's assertions. Mens Rights Advocates (MRA) have eviscerated it already on several other blogs. Rosin is another angry and bitter feminist who seeks to make the world conform to her misandryst fantasies because she couldn't get the alpha male she really wanted. She doesn't see the big picture or relate cause and effect very well, she just gloats over women's victories brought on by judicial and political fiat versus actual skill and effort. Her gloating is premature. The state of affairs she describes is the central reason we feel our society is in decay.
Feminism will die an inglorious death one day because it is a cult of death. Death by abortion, its favorite "right" and death from lack of an adequate birth rate to sustain the population and finally death by driving men from the home, family, and work place. Women are generally less productive and are kept in the jobs over men out of fear of law suits, but needed to make up for women's lower productivity. Misandry will die because nations can't afford to alienate its most creative and productive people and expect to survive, let alone thrive. Patriarchy is a prerequisiste for an advanced society. Ghetto culture is what a matriarchal society creates and it must be sustained by the government through wealth transfer because it can't support itself. One day, they will run out of other people's money, most notably men, because it is they who create the surplus wealth needed to support this socialist tripe. This recession will be difficult, but it will also correct the ship of state from the decadence that feminism has wrought. Feminism is evil, plain and simple.
The web site link above is a fantastic discussion of feminism and how it is sustained artificially and how it will destroy itself. I encourage everyone to read it in response to Rosin's gloating screed.
Dave| 7.7.10 @ 5:58PM
Thanks, Tyrone, for the awesome link. Everyone should spread that article far and wide.
I like how he framed it as the 'issue of the decade' and launched the article on Jan 1, 2010.
Macarthur Of The MRM| 7.8.10 @ 12:14PM
This is a great site. I'm happy to see so many "mainstream" people who are knowledgeable about the MRM and the devastating effects of feminism. Following is a list of the cream of anti-feminism blogs:
www.the-spearhead.com
www.thenononsenseman.com
Robert Hahn| 7.7.10 @ 8:58AM
Men have more sense than to compete for resources with females of their own species. The question for the West is whether our females will acquire this wisdom before or after their culture falls to Islam, or the East. Evolution is ultimately a breeding contest. Western women are too busy competing with their men to even replace themselves.
It is an interesting failure mode.
Anastasia Mather| 7.7.10 @ 9:03AM
Makes me proud of the men in our church, who responded to a sermon series called Manmade issuing a call to biblical Manhood - not the abusive, chest beating stereotype, but the warrior who builds, defends and fights for his family and community.
They then spent two days on July 4th weekend renovating a battered women's shelter, trying to show that strong men need not be abusive men, and that true men will create something wonderful for women.
Needless to say, us church ladies were swooning with pride and standing on the sidelines cheering this evidence of real Manhood.
Let me again make it clear - this was not about men dominating, but using their God-given strength and abilities FOR women. None of us is a fainting rose. We have our own strengths and callings. But it's lovely when we both complement and serve each other in love.
Stephanie| 7.7.10 @ 12:23PM
BINGO Anastasia!!!!! I love you!
Timothy| 7.7.10 @ 7:48PM
The Bible plainly says that women are subordinate to me. Don't you be getting any modern ideas about equality.
You stand behind your man . . . way, far away, behind him.
It's God's law. Puhraise the Lord!
Factory | 7.8.10 @ 4:29PM
Chivalry, and the blind devotion of men to women without DEMANDING equivalent respect back from them, is the exact reason why these policies, and these people, could 'accomplish' what they did.
It may indeed make you 'swell with Pride' at all the strong men that are breaking their backs to prove they're not the abusive monsters they are characterized as daily. Personally, I think you women should have been looking at your hardworking men and feeling abject shame that you and your friends allowed these selfless, hardworking men to be so denigrated in society. That you and your friends GLADLY accept the 'benefits' of Feminism while simultaneously demanding the benefits of 'Tradition' as well.
Frankly, your kind of woman is the absolute LEAST desireable, and Chivalry alone is what allows this.
Thus, the eradication of Chivalry is under way. And women in general and en masse, moreover, do not deserve any more consideration than a man would get. Remember, this was of YOUR (collective) making, these issues benefited YOU (not Society, or Men...only Women), and YOU (again, meaning women in general) have ardently ignored any calls for fairness or even rationality, preferring instead the 'victim narrative'.
I think it's HIGHLY naive of women to think men will have anything other than disdain, or rank hostility, toward women on the other side of this thing.
We've been watching what you've been doing. Taking more for you, 'justifying' it with Feminism or Tradition (as the individual case warrants), and COMPLETELY ignoring the pain caused to the men and boys you 'love'.
Actions speak a LOT louder than words.
Ladies, almost NONE of you are 'friends' of men. It seems you just argue over the best way to extract what you need...Government, or Marriage.
But men are catching on, and you'll have to begin to produce real 'value' in relationships rather than simply exist.
Here's a thought for you:
Given the current state of relations between the sexes, the current state of Family Law and Government policy....if they legalized Prostitution, would the average guy see ANY benefit to interaction with women outside of that?
It's an honest question, I'm not making a position either way...
But if you find it a bit tough to list the reasons why "yes" is the answer....you might want to think about what that says about what women have been doing to themselves...
cyberdog| 7.7.10 @ 9:10AM
I work for a corporation of 5000 employees. We are an energy company so naturally we are also heavily numbered with engineers, male engineers to be specific. Now, due to affirmative action, we are inventing non essential management positions for the sole purpose of positioning women into management, basically to keep the feds off our backs. The unintended consequence of this activity is discrimination against white men, lower standards of performance for management and unnecessary emotional verbal abuse from these "new" managers against men in general. There's a real good reason why the word B I T C H applies to one gender predominantly and all the diversity and affirmative action in the world will not change this fact. At one time my goal was to retire at age 58. Now I can't wait for age 55 to turn in my two week notice of KMA in exchange for my 25 years of respected service to a system that has failed me and every other well intentioned male.
Jack| 7.7.10 @ 9:27AM
Anyone noticed, the more women and minorities elected to goverment and positions of power in the private sector and the more anti-male advertisments run on tv and in ads, the worse things have gotten in the last 50 years? This is just a learning curve humans have to go thru every several thousand years, cause they forget.
Believer| 7.7.10 @ 1:12PM
Jack- Great comment, unfortunately western cultures dont seem to be learning anything. Every year the number of illegidimate kids of every race goes up , and films, TV, and rock n roll all encourage it. The females are living life like bitch's in heat and modern Christianity teachs that we are to love and forgive them unconditionaly. I hope the "curve " will happen soon as the end seems to be near for the " Girls you want to take home " are about all gone.
Nate Washburn| 7.7.10 @ 9:51AM
This is the best thing I've read on AmSpec.com. William Tucker isn't wasting time with the usual silly stuff that predominates this website.
This has the makings of a book Mr. Tucker.
Matt Morehouse| 7.7.10 @ 10:07AM
Kathleen Parker has an excellent book on point: Save the Males. I am surprised it wasn't mentioned.
Nature Tells| 7.7.10 @ 10:10AM
Author Hanna Rosin, meet boy with poop on stick.
End of female domination.
Checkmate. . .
scott| 7.7.10 @ 10:17AM
"Victim status is the highest status the regular citizen can have"...therefore, some/most(?) women may, in cowardly fashion, flatter themselves by saying, "Oh, I'm against affirmative action"...knowing they'd never really vote against it,and it'll never come up for a vote anyway.
I await the Victorian-like, unthinking, snobby reply, "you hate women" in response to what I'm writing here. Minorities and victim groups are like modern-day Pharisees, chomping at the bit to point and yell "BLASPHEMY!!!". Cowards, they are, who attack only when it's safe, simply to make themselves feel brave. Alas, such cowardice passes for bravery in an inverted PC world.
One would think the end of a civilization would include the characteristic of making up its own distorted rules, and certain groups stubbornly clinging to them in order to maintain their power.
In Europe, the vacuum of the absent alpha male is being filled by the uncompromising, oh-so-alpha Muslim male. It must really be something to see the typical "strong woman" in Paris strutting around, and these days, not feeling so strong in the face of the glaring Muslim youth, who await the fulfillment of their own victim narrative.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.7.10 @ 10:36AM
This is the end game of all collectivism, the subjugation of reason which is replaced by policies of division.
The disciples of the policies of division then become the high priest/priestesses of the new order.
The ongoing failures of a society of this type are ignored. Many of the jobs that have fled America fled in the face of non-winnable lawsuits. Even when corporations did win the facile government will strike back with more regulations to make sure those evil corporations have no chance. Think Lily Ledbetter. By the way, since the Lily Ledbetter law passed over 2 million executive jobs have evaporated.
The female gender has yet to understand their guarantees of freedom are simply adherence to the fascist state. They have rights and obligations, but only as serfs serve the masters, they are simply fodder for the practices of collectivism. Their achievements are nothing but guarantees of a government. They should realize that whatever the government gives it can also take away.
To view these false practices in all their glory, here is a caption from today's Washington Post:
http://voices.washingtonpost.c.....s-col-blog
• Question of the Week: How diverse is your staff, including its management team — not only in race and ethnicity, but gender, age, religion and general backgrounds? What ways might help your staff improve its diversity or take better advantage of its diversity? E-mail your answer to federaleye@washingtonpost.com, and include your full name, home town and the agency for which you work. We might include your response in Friday’s Washington Post.
Look at that posting carefully. It's riddled with the illogical thoughts of diversity which in reality is just another bit of the collectivist apple.
Here's some more from Ayn Rand, a female who nailed it:
Collectivism holds that the individual has no rights, that his life and work belong to the group . . . and that the group may sacrifice him at its own whim to its own interests. The only way to implement a doctrine of that kind is by means of brute force—and statism has always been the political corollary of collectivism.
Lucius Cornelius Sulla| 7.7.10 @ 12:38PM
"In truth, men (women) do not desire freedom, but rather prefer a just master." King Mithradates of Pontus.
I would submit that women seek a just master even more than men and giving them the vote sealed the fate of our noble experiment in individual freedom. Single mothers are the foundation and life blood of the Leviathan.
Otis my man!| 7.7.10 @ 10:55AM
What will liberal women do when men finally say, "Damn it, that's enough!"
As Tucker points out, the end of something is usually the beginning of something else.
Lavrenty Beria| 7.7.10 @ 12:42PM
It already has started happening. There is a men's movement now and no more masks to hide behind for feminism. Everyone knows that lefties are not liberals, they are Marxists, AKA commies. Men have started a marriage strike, men have stopped deferring to women, men have started to speak out. This statement would have been impossible in the 90s. Now its become commonplace.
Macarthur Of The MRM| 7.8.10 @ 12:29PM
I've been a part of the MRM for close to 3 years. Here are a couple of good websites:
www.outcastsuperstar.blogspot.com
www.angelfire.com/realm3/jtest.....inism.html
MacArthur Of The MRM| 7.8.10 @ 12:33PM
One link doesn't work so here are two more:
www.manhood101.com
www.mirrorofthesoul.blogspot.com
LS| 7.8.10 @ 2:14PM
Also:
http://artofmanliness.com/
Factory | 7.8.10 @ 4:35PM
Indeed. There's even a magazine (OK, 6 issues, then a name change in the works).
avoiceformen.com/mrm/mrm.php
PolishKnight| 7.9.10 @ 10:47AM
About 20 years ago, during the Anita Hill era, I predicted what we would at least see whether or not women could live up to "equality" by accepting responsibilities along with rights. The Anita Hill case illustrated that it was a liability for men to ask women out if the woman wasn't perfectly happy or content. So conservative men who continued to ask out "traditional" women at the workplace and pay their way would eventually be hauled to divorce court or even fired when such women were in a bad mood. The ultimate "affirmative action."
Would women then start out asking men, paying their way, and accepting financial responsibility for their lives?
Hahahaha! We all KNOW the answer to that don't we? They either wind up dying childless, buying SPERM at a sperm bank (that's like buying your own DIAMONDS ladies!)
So now ladies are puzzled: Why can't they get all the goodies men have without the responsibilities? Er, because that's LIFE. People shouldn't be allowed to VOTE if that can't figure that.
Phil| 7.7.10 @ 10:58AM
Words without wisdom.
ds80| 7.7.10 @ 4:57PM
See directly above.
Caped Crusader| 7.7.10 @ 10:58AM
NOT TO WORRY. We only have to refuse to repair their cars and other mechanical things and they will be rendered useless in a few days.
Petronius| 7.7.10 @ 11:07AM
Is it just the pushy feministas who turned emasculation into a social pathology? Look at the other side of this marshmallow mountain of oversensitivity and self pity emanating from the weak males in our midst; single motherhood households not withstanding.
The whole of our polity now assaults our nature; not just as men and women, but as civilized human beings. Does having a child cramp your style? Planned Parenthood fixes that. Are you a homicidal maniac? Serial killers get lionized on film. Drown a kitten and ask Mr Vick what our modern society did to him over his choice of amusements. Rush may expound on the chicafication of everything, but it happened because of the weakness of our male populace.
Beginning with the boomers, too many boys never became men because there was demand for unskilled labor and they didn't have to compete.
The weenies did not join the Service. The tough guys who did rarely married and had sons. The social misfits went to Chicago in '68. And today Chicago '68 rules the Capitol. And with 3 lost generations of government dependents behind us we will be consumed by a macrophage amoeba of ignorant, indolent, incompetent, supplicant mass of sub-humanity.
PolishKnight| 7.7.10 @ 11:39AM
Petronius, I believe it's useful to point out stuff nobody has said before. Conservatives often blame the weak, wussy men for the collapse of society but the reality is that feminism is just a form of hyper-chivalry: The notion that women are perfect, innocent beings to be protected from everything, including logic. This was perpetuated not by weak men, but but CONSERVATIVE tough guys who overindulged and spoiled their daughters.
I remember one particularly amusing one in college whose conservative father paid for her housing, car, tuition, etc. and griped the "lazy" men who paid their own way weren't buying her things. "Why can't men be MEN and more traditional?!?!" she moaned. Then the campus feminists got a hold of her and that was that.
Republican Daddy paid the bills the whole time.
Grzmlyk| 7.7.10 @ 12:10PM
Polish Knight, I see your point, but I would disagree that feminism is hyper chivalry: In those days of yore, there was a division of labor: Women were put on a pedestal and considered the "weaker" sex while simultaneously acknowledged as the givers of life and the nurturers. At the same time, the traditionally macho role of men was reinforced both as the suppliers of brute force and a homestead's providers.
Now we have a situation where testosterone is considered the root of all evil in toto and men are to be expunged by the feministas.
Balance is not the goal; obliterating the male is.
And like all liberal ideas, this one ends in nihilism.
PolishKnight| 7.7.10 @ 12:30PM
Grzmylk, here's the thing: Women _aren't_ the givers of life. The moment a conservative demands collecting "child support" from deadbeat dads, it's _his_ child that HE made when he had sex wih her. (Life does begin at conception after all.) Indeed, if women "give" life via birth, then does that mean that abortion isn't murder by definition?
When women were put on a pedestal and worshipped as noble, then they ultimately didn't have to accept responsibility for their own irresponsibility. They could demand that society (namely men) be responsible for the consequences of protecting them.
Regarding nurturing. Howz matriarchal unwed mothers raising young boys turning out? Are these boys as gentle as lambs?
Grzmlyk| 7.7.10 @ 1:06PM
Hey, Polish Knight, on balance I agree with you. But I think the traditional view of women was that they were the givers of life - I'm not saying that's my view, but I don't think you can argue with history. Look at the Sir Lancelot legend, or Shakespeare or Victorian England.
And yes, women do physically give birth, which is obviously how that thinking arose - in terms of the mechanics of procreating alone, the man's role is over in a couple of seconds; the woman carries the child to term and, in ancient times, had to suckle the child for months afterward (while the man provided subsistence).
Believe me, I share your frustration with the ironies that abound - if a woman seeks child support, suddenly it's the man's responsibility.
Ditto, the claptrap about unwed mothers.
All I'm saying is that I don't think feminism is an extension of the chivalrous tradition - the chivalrous tradition arose from the division of labor that eventuated out of nature and the differences between men and women. As societies evolved - pre-industrial revolution - those roles became entrenched and somewhat exaggerated.
The industrial revolution, and the homoginization of culture that occurred with increased mobility amd communication technology - began to change those roles such that, by the 1950s, we were putting women on pedestals in a last ditch effort to maintain the old clarity.
As a result, by the post-war boom of the Eisenhower era, the view of the housewife as helpless ditz a la Laura Petrie or Samantha Stevens (or even more insidiously, in some of the movies of the era) was cartoonish.
It's interesting that if one looks closer, one sees some subversive messaging there - Laura Petrie was often wiser and more level-headed than Rob, her husband, and of course Samantha Stevens could turn her husband into a newt if she so desired - in fact she was the one with the real power in that relationship; it was social convention that convinced her to be voluntarily subservient to her husband. So even our pop culture acknowledged, to some extent, the untenable nature of the "woman on pesdestal" philosphy.
As post-war culture gelled, technology (including, very significantly, birth control) continued to completely obliterate the roles that, for about 99% of mankind's existence on this planet, were dictated by nature.
With that technology came ever-increasing prosperity and the blurring of the lines between men and women. Does it really make a difference if your doctor is male or female? I don't think so. Does so many women in the workforce have severe implications for the nuclear family? Of course - the collapse of the nuclear family is perhaps the most significant reason our values have eroded so completely since those supposedly halcyon 1950s.
But feminism per se is something far more sinister than just having more women in the workforce (even if it is tangentially related) because feminism DENIES nature entirely and is ultimately nihilistic and very destructive. It is also wholly political and totalitarian at its core.
Chivalry wasn't innately destructive, nor was it intended to subjugate an entire sex or reorganize society.
PolishKnight| 7.7.10 @ 1:57PM
Grzmlyk, I'm not denying that chivalrous idealism of women was strong in England the USA. On the contrary, I'm arguing that's why feminism was strongest in these cultures!
Regarding giving of life. Indeed, you mention that men provide "subsistence" as an afterthought to the notion that women provide "life" but that's like saying that doctors do "medical work" while praising front desk clerks at the hospital for "saving lives." It's rather amusing how hyperchivalrists imply that scientists, doctors, and taxpayers pop out of women's wombs after 9 months when counting their "children's" accomplishments when there's a 20+ year period where the breadwinner needs to keep those children from starving to death.
Hence, this is why society is struggling with yet another paradox whereby men are regarded as disposable and unimportant and "just breadwinners" and then, when discarded, freak out that the "deadbeats" aren't paying "child" support and the children are starving to death in the "lifegiver's" care. (Don't forget to set your car alarm tonight!)
I disagree with your theory about the industrial revolution's impact on chivalry. In fact, women were required to go to work even more often than before. Who do you think made those nice shirts in Leeds? Regarding birth control. Nonsense. Since B/C, supposed "accidental" pregnancies are more common than ever. If B/C worked, then abortion rights would be moot. Yes? Actually, it's just the opposite as the supply of traditional, breadwinning, sexist men that women crave are drying up that unwed mothers are "lifegiving" children into poverty or even abandoning them in dumpsters.
What's up with that, BTW? Isn't it amazing that with all the options available to modern women: Earning a high income living via affirmative action, birth control, welfare, "child" support, etc. that so many women are MURDERING babies that a law had to be passed to give them a right to abandon their children??!? And you fail to see the connection between chivalry and feminism?
As the saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, right? Chivalry didn't intend to make women into a privileged class to the point of monstrosity, but it couldn't have done the job better than if it was designed with that in mind. A baseball bat is, BTW, also a great way to fight off burlgars.
The post feminist collapse of western chivalrous society will require the destruction of chivalry as we know it. Do you think, for example, that chivalry in Islamic nations is ANYTHING like in the west? That women are on a pedestal in these nations? Equality is obviously not the answer either since it's very attainment requires treating women as victims for failing to achieve it.
All that said... imagine if universities were dedicated to, say, delivering practical fusion power rather than meeting gender (female) quotas. Or if roads were designed to efficiently get you to work without congestion rather than utilizing "women owned" businesses. Or if rather than men sitting in jails or unemployed consuming taxpayer dollars, were productive and women rather than spending money on attorneys for every possible grievance, were instead productive.
Feminism, as a product of chivalry, has been a plague in the west on the same scale of socialism which is why they were the perfect match for each other.
Grzmlyk| 7.7.10 @ 2:21PM
PK, you make some good points, and while I think feminism might have exploited a sense of chivalry, I do not believe it is an extension of it. I think it is fundamentally political and chivlary was not.
I don't think we're going to convince each other, but I see your point and respect your point of view.
Actually, birth control is the reason there are so many abortions; people place too much confidence in birth control.
But approx. 45 million abortions have taken place since Roe v. Wade, and let's say 350 million children have been born in the US since then.
I'm guessing that there have been trillions of instances of sexual intercourse since then. The vast majority of sexual relations do not result in abortions or even children- they are stopped by natural failure to conceive, but also by condoms, the pill, spermacides, etc.
Also, the concept of chivalry evolved in France, from the knights' traditions (chivlary being a form of the French word for "horse.") - it is a uniquely Western concept, so to say "Islamic chivalry" would be like saying "dry water."
And yes, women worked in sweat shops, but things like vacuum cleaners and washers and driers and stoves allowed women to enter the workforce - they were no longer bound to the home.
And please, I'm not saying men aren't indispensible - believe me, I'm a conservative. But there is irreduceable biology when it comes to the time it takes, BIOLOGICALLY SPEAKING ONLY, to sire a child vs. bringing one to term.
After all, traditionally - before the advent of birth control - men were expected to "sow their wild oats" in their youth; look at JFK, perhaps the apotheosis of that kind of idealized tomcatting. Women were not expected to be similarly promiscuous in part because of the consequences, which men did not have to deal with. A one night stand and, pre DNA testing, he could be gone.
Anyway - I cannot delve further.
I wish you the best. As I say, I think you make good points.
Just don't be late with those child support payments! :-)
PolishKnight| 7.7.10 @ 2:59PM
I respect your respectfully disagreeing with me.
I will only get a last word on the matter by observing that feminism is an extension of chivalry precisely because they exploited it. Feminism regards women as incapable of being equal unless men provide them with special protections to do so. That's messed up but also hilarious at so many levels.
I am fully aware of the origins of chivalry and have heard the argument before. I am, of course, referring to the modern (relatively) use of chivalry in regards to protection and idealization of women.
My observation about the chivalrous idealization of bringing children to term is that it is just a small portion of a child's life. It is as small a portion of a child's overall life as siring is when compared to the 20+ years of support and proper upbringing a child requires to become a useful member of society. Only via the welfare state, like chivalrous patronage to make women "equal", can gestation be viewed as the "moment" of a child popping into existance and the world.
Regarding "child" support payments. No problem. I was careful who I bedded down and used a condom AND spermicide every time. And then sent in a hazmat crew afterwards (ok, kidding there.) It's ironic that the gender roles have reversed somewhat as it's now responsible men who need to be careful in relationships since society punishes responsible men for having children out of wedlock. However... this is increasingly becoming moot in that as the supply of responsible men who have irresponsible sex, but still pay support, dry up then that leaves the true deadbeats.
Which leads us to the observation that millions of children being raised by unwed mothers, either via welfare, child-support, or in poverty are net social liabilities rather than assets. China drowned many baby girls. Even as that society now is having more baby girls, China is still facing the reality that it has fewer resources than it does people.
PolishKnight| 7.7.10 @ 3:10PM
One more thing (just one) that needs to be added: Western, and especially English speaking society's, chivalry's obsession with idealizing women as innocent life givers probably is derived not from logical biological imperatives but rather from the Virgin Mary and a sexual pruditry backlash especially common in this culture. (In cultures which are less feminist, it's clear that they are more tolerant of prostitution, for instance.)
Even with B/C, sex is still frowned upon by our society even by far left figures such as Madonna who regard sex not as something someone such as her enjoys, but rather making a "statement." Male sexuality is regarded as dirty and women's sexuality is pure (seems like the Virgin Mary, right?)
Conservatives really need to get over their sexual pruditry and idealization of women before they go the way of the shakers.
Grzmlyk| 7.7.10 @ 3:11PM
Well, believe me, I will think about what you've said about chivalry. Perhaps our opinions aren't that far apart - and I have been known to revise my generally opinionated world view from time to time.
Yes, I too, was careful - and quite the tomcatter myself in my youth. Thank GOD I never got a woman pregnant back then.
But I'm totally with you on how upside-down the world has become with respect to the roles of the sexes - both social and legal - and their relationships to each other.
I believe feminism - whatever its origins - is one of the most insidious things the left has come up with. Then again, I believe it's just the same as "environmentalism" or "social justice" or any of the other causes the libs take up - all roads lead to a totalitarian, coercive regime where THEY get their rocks off by controlling us.
These things are never what they purport to be about - they're always really about one thing: POWER OVER US.
PolishKnight| 7.7.10 @ 3:31PM
Regarding the left getting their rocks off controlling us. It's amusing to me that most leftist men I know who believe in the True Cause are very unimportant, meaningless people. If a leftist is a powerful politician like Blagojovich or even Clinton, they are usually pragmaticists who really know that the end goal is milking the system and oppressing the masses for personal gain and that of their relatives getting jobs as high paid lobbyists and lawyers as kickback.
I'm amused at how there are still leftist men around who like to think they're important and talk about how "stupid" conservatives are and how the world will be so great when their political leaders take over. As if that will really make their lives better or personally more important. It's like they're groupies who spend their whole paychecks to get a glimpse of some rock star.
The same thing with feminists: Lessee. What have they gained? Today, if they're lucky, they might marry a man who earns at least as much as they do and put their money into an overpriced condo and after 30 years, get to vacation once in a while.
On the other hand, a WORKING CLASS woman of 50 years ago commonly married a man, got to stay at home much of the time, got their own HOUSE paid off in 10 years, and vacationed AND had kids before they were 25.
In other words, women took a step back due to feminism, not forward. The JOKE IS ON THEM!
Grzmlyk| 7.7.10 @ 4:12PM
I totally agree with you there. Feminism - and every other "ism" - is ultimately destructive. Liberalism's endgame is self-destruction.
Which, thanks to Obama - and the faceless, feckless men you mention above putting him in office - we are about to learn first hand.
The roller coaster is about to go into free fall.
Grzmlyk| 7.7.10 @ 2:51PM
One other quickie:
I think that feminism's roots MAY be (I'm not an expert) found in the vast numbers of women who entered the workforce during WWII - the "Rosie the Riveters."
I recall that very iconic 1940's-era poster of a woman in a factory uniform flexing her biceps with the tagline "We Can Do It" - a poster that is de rigeur in the one-room apartments of feministas and metrosexuals alike.
When the men came back from the war and supplanted the women - shoehorning them back into the 1950s suburban idea of woman-on-a-pedestal - that was one impetus for a reactionary movement that became feminism.
It remains my opinon that technology is at the root of most of our social upheaval throughout civilization, birth control being, pun intended, seminal in this instance.
But let me reiterate: I think a two-parent, man/woman family is the ideal construct, and men are absolutely essential to the healthy rearing of children. Children need BOTH the male and the female influence in their lives.
Life. Am I right? :-)
PolishKnight| 7.7.10 @ 3:23PM
The RosieTheRiveter poster is also common the NOW website which is a running joke that feminism's direction is ultimately towards butch lesbianism.
Here's my theory about why feminism took off in the late 40's and beyond: They figured out they could promise women that they could get high paying jobs to buy more consumer goods that were coming out but conveniently (on purpose) didn't mention that this would make it more difficult for them to marry up and get men to pay their bills. They also used the boogyman of the divorced, abandoned woman as a scare tactic to get women to agree to women's workplace equality. Kind of like the way Obamacare was sold. Want healthcare? Give goverment absolute power! Freedom IS slavery!
Women jumped into bed with feminism in more ways than one and before they knew it, they had more problems. Fewer traditional men they craves meant more wound up as single mothers needing more special programs. The promise to date any guy they liked even if he was a "bad boy" meant more bodies for those women's shelters. You get the idea.
It's really not that complicated: Chivalry advocates protecting women even from it's own protection. It's not FAIR (or nice) or "sweet" to women to tell them they can't all be firewomen if they want to BUT they shouldn't get burned. (literally in that case.) So women are in a constant state of rage that they can't do everything but at the same time be protected.
It's ironic, I'm well aware, that my holding women responsible for the consequences of their chivalrous benefits is treating them with more equality and honesty, and protection, than feminists and traditional chivalrists alike.
Petronius| 7.7.10 @ 5:27PM
The answer PK, is that most of those boys aren't housebroken yet.
Seek| 7.7.10 @ 11:47AM
I've got news for you: The demonstrators in Chicago were pre-Baby Boomers if they were over age 22 -- as many were. Some were thugs, but others were victims of thugs in uniforms. There's a reason why we libertarians are at least a bit suspicious of cops.
Grzmlyk| 7.7.10 @ 11:26AM
Let's not forget some of the sublter insidiousness of the apotheosis of the female gender:
I am talking about how feminism has permeated our writing styles.
The obnoxious practice of referring to God as a "she" is like fingernails on a blackboard.
Similarly, whenever writing about an unspecified person, many "post-modern" writers reflexively reach for the feminine pronoun.
So we have a proliferation of sentences like this:
"If a doctor is late paying her malpractice insurance premium, she had better be very careful with her scalpel."
I write professionally, and whenever I come across such construction in my research, my attention is yanked from the relevant content and suddenly I'm in a political arena, subjected to the ostentatious foppery of some politically correct hack (or, more often, the ad hoc committee who approved HER writing) trying to make a point other than the point at hand.
Annoys the kapok out of me.
Margie| 7.7.10 @ 4:47PM
Yep. And if the water man came to your house to deliver your 5 gall. bottle of water for your cooler, you mustn't refer to him any longer as a water man, but as a water person. As in "Honey, don't forget the water person will be coming by today."
Kapok. A fibrous stuffing. Taken from the tree known as Ceiba pentandra.
Brian Mc| 7.7.10 @ 12:02PM
To win this argument is simple.
What would happen to all the femeninity of this culture if electricity stopped flowing tomorrow? Or the ability to harness it-was suddenly lost...?
It would not be pretty, and it sure would NOT be a female-dominated society long afterwards. The survival instinct is a powerful thing when actually required. How the sexes deal with that one aspect of existence is telling, though unrequired in the present technological age. The post-electricity era: I often wonder why it has never become the basis for a Hollywood film? I suppose those in power there don't like to consider the results that would surely occur in the aftermath of my far-fetched, mental ramblings...or, might be they can't comprehend the results.
duck| 7.8.10 @ 3:04PM
A great deal of this feminist thinking may depend on where one lives or lived although the national conscience has peculated into these somewhat protect areas as of late.
The area that I speak of is where I grew up into early manhood. This was in in the back woods where we didn't have running water or electricity in many of our homes until the late 50s. The closest restroom was usually some 20 yards behind the closest house. Most of you in mistaking education for knowledge would have called us hicks or hillbillies and been condescending towards we heathens in one way or the other, but, the subject at hand is females and feminism, so I will try and keep zeroed in on that subject..
The women that I was surrounded by were strong, mentally and physically. They stood shoulder to shoulder with the men, not in competition, but as partners because it was a matter of survival for both sexes. This led to an attitude of cooperation and very few would even think of belittling another because of their sex.
The old saying of "where men are men and women are women" had a completely different meaning for us. Chivalry to us was nothing more than being polite and respectful. A woman would except the help of a man for certain task but very few would let the man do her task for her. Most of the women I knew, if they didn't know how to do something, would seek out someone, male or female, to teach them how to accomplish what they wanted to do. I went with a woman for a while that could tear down a auto engine, repair it, put it back together just as well as any male. She also added a room and porch to her house, dug her own well, and cleared the her land. Did she have help, yes, when it was offered but she never sat and let anyone else do the work for her.
Before anyone mentally visualizes these women as homely backwoods frumps, I would state now that many of them could pass as the proverbial pin-up girl on most any calender. This same physically beautiful lady, when treated wrong, could get up on her hind legs and take care of herself as many citified males had found out when they visited us backwards hicks.
We used to laugh at Hollywood and the cartoonists. Their depiction of backwoods society with things like Dawgpatch, Lil' Abner, and Ma and Pa Kettle were hilarious contortions of what was true, yet, even those put down the male of the species.
I guess my point is that if respect for one's self and all others is practiced, this and most other problems would fade away..
William Wallace| 7.7.10 @ 12:16PM
As the father of 2 young boys, I highly recommend Dr. James Dobson's "Bringing Up Boys." It does away with most of the silly, feminized myths and silly ideas society seeks to foist upon us regarding sons. Get it. Read it. Pass it along to someone else.
Stephanie| 7.7.10 @ 12:36PM
Well Bill, I hope your two sons have dolls to play with, just to make things well rounded and fair :-) ( sarcasm)
I have heard that book is helpful. God speed in bringing your sons up into decent human beings. It is the hardest but most gratifying job of all.
Believer| 7.7.10 @ 12:36PM
It's written in the bible, " As for my People children are their oppressors and women rule over them."
FakeEagle| 7.7.10 @ 1:17PM
The young men of today are the product of endless hours of programming by the television. For over 30 years, television shows and commercials have portrayed men as imbecilic, chest-thumping, incompetent fools. If they show any kind of contest between a male and a female, the female always wins. If any wisdom is imparted to a child by a parent, it will come from the mother. Most of the wives portrayed spend much of their time trying to restrain the idiocy of their husbands/boyfriends. Our young males are simply emulating the ridiculous behavior they've been programmed to believe constitutes "maleness" by the idiotic media.
duck| 7.8.10 @ 3:37PM
@FakeEagle
Actually, commercials go farther than just negatively portraying men.
If you watch carefully, most of the commercials have a pecking order.
Minority female trumps all.
Next in pecking order is minority male which trumps
white female.
White male is at the bottom of the majority of commercials no matter what is being sold...
Pat| 7.7.10 @ 1:36PM
In past decades, middle aged American females raised orchids or Siamese cats, today they, along with the occasional academic male, analyze our society, gender relationships, courtship patterns, marriage patterns and child rearing practices. And a hot topic of late is the underachieving, slow to mature, without ambition, young American male. Kay Hymowitz’s “Child Man in the Promised Land” is probably the most widely referenced analysis on the subject, but there are plenty of other essays penned by aging female dragons and they all express alarm over the future of the American male, ages 18 through 35.
But lurking under the surface of these “what’s going on here?” analysis, the real problem, not explicitly defined by the guardians of our society, is the decline in the number of premium level, marriageable males – premium level in the sense the male has a better education, a better paying job and a demonstrated desire to settle down to the long term project of raising a family. In many of our universities and colleges, women are easily outnumbering men by a ratio of 55 to 45, with the ratio continuing to swing in the wrong direction.
According to interested observers like Hymowitz, young males marry later if at all, are content with mediocre jobs, have their pick of young women without the social commitment of earlier eras or danger from the father with a loaded shotgun asking what their intentions toward their daughters are. And most upsetting is the males’ devil may care attitude – they’re happy with their lot and not anxious to change their lives any time soon – female biological clocks non-withstanding. And this lack of ambition and dearth of social responsibility seems to bother the middle aged females far more than it bothers the young males.
John| 7.7.10 @ 5:05PM
Pat the Androgyne,
What nonsense. You completely absolve women of any responsibility for their own actions. Men, to this day, stick to their duties far more than women.
You don't seem to think women are capable of adult-level responsibilities. This makes you a misogynist, due to the soft bigotry of low expectations.
Pat| 7.7.10 @ 5:43PM
Whoa, John, whoa – take deep breaths, you’ll feel calmer. Kay Hymowitz is a respected sociologist and studies these things. Her concerns, shared by many of her female colleagues, is the future of the American family given the state of young American males. And she’s a little more honest than most in her analysis – she readily admits young women look for the superior male - the strong but mythical bread winner - as marriage partners and the father of her children. But societies change if history is any guide, so young, college educated woman may be forced to settle for the uneducated, but noble, blue collar guy or the white collar male in the dead end job. It could be due to evolutionary factors or perhaps due to MS. Magazine, but young women seek out the superior male as the ideal partner – the growing scarcity of same is what concerns the sociologists at this moment.
And more than likely a host of factors have contributed to the decline in male enrollment within institutions of higher education – perhaps a male “affirmative action” program is needed – lower the standards, increase the participation. Or perhaps simple economics have forced males to expect less from their careers, women can do the white collar and easier blue collar jobs now, they’re bringing a college degree to the table and supplanting the less educated males for the better jobs.
If you’re still living in your parent’s basement at 32 and have trouble getting dates, there is no reason to become defensive. The societal roles of males and females are simply changing, it’s happened before, it’ll happen again.
Aristotle| 7.8.10 @ 1:38AM
Young men have figured out the marriage game is rigged in favor of women and against them. Why become a wage slave to some demanding, shrill, spoiled, and entitled harpie who stops giving you sex after a year or two, but keeps the bills coming at an ever increasing rate, especially after she divorces you and takes 75% of everything you've worked for until then and has his children stolen from him. Its even more galling when the women brought 200 pairs of shoes and $10000 in credit card debt that the young man gets to pay off too. Where do I sign up for that bargain?
Aristotle| 7.8.10 @ 1:34AM
Women aren't capable of adult level responsibility as with only a few exceptions, they remain hopelessly somewhere between adult men and children in their thinking and behavior. Apparently they think so as well. Most of feminist jurisprudence is about absolving them of any responsibility for their actions and placing the blame squarely on men.
GENE HAUBER| 7.7.10 @ 1:47PM
IF THIS INFO IS TRUE, THEN WE CAN PROBABLY SURMISE THAT THE "MEN" INVOLVED IN REARING CHILDREN HAVE SUCCUMBED TO THE WIFE'S DESIRE TO JUST HAVE GIRLS, PROBABLY JUST ONE ALSO, MY STARS, HOW COULD SHE (THEY) COPE OTHERWISE?
THIS ARTIFICIAL WEEDING OUT OF BOY CHILDREN IS UN-NATURAL AND I WOULD SAY, VERY DANGEROUS TO ANY SOCIETY.
WE ARE STILL BETTER THAT EUROPE WHERE THEY HAVE A NEGATIVE BIRTH RATE FOR THE INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS.
ABOUT CHINA.....A LONG TIME AGO I READ THAT THE WORLD'S POPULATION WOULD ULTIMATELY BE BROWN SKINNED AND HAVE SLANTED EYES. MAYBE IT'S THE BEGINNING OF THAT....................AS LONG AS WE ARE NOT MUSLIM.
Lancer| 7.7.10 @ 1:58PM
What happens in times of war? Who will fight the war? Women? I think not.
Women believe or have been told they are the superior sex. Tell that to the 2 million German women who were raped by the Russians soldiers near the end of WWII. If they are the stronger sex, how could that have happened.
I don't mean to be evil or bitter toward women, but I do believe they have been seduced by the claim they are the superior sex.
Men and women exist for a reason. Yes, procreation is the major reason, but they also have distinct roles and functions. When you blur the distinctions you get chaos and societal breakdown.
Men in America have contributed to this affliction and now must step up to the plate and reassert their manhood......for the sake of this nation!
C. D. Rossini, Jr.| 7.7.10 @ 2:26PM
Do we really want to eliminate men? Who will charge up the stairs of a burning building? Who will dig miles underground, or keep drilling miles offshore? Who will make the ultimate sacrifice while protecting the rest of us? Who will jump into smoking hell? We need to be very careful when we disdain the natural drive of men to dominate their environment -- the death of the chromosome may be the death of us all.
Seek| 7.7.10 @ 2:29PM
Read the web site of a dominant women's group, the Demale Society (www.demalesociety.com), if you want to see the desire for the elimination of men taken to its logical extreme. Crazy, sick...and real.
Of course, the men just love it.
Tums| 7.7.10 @ 2:39PM
Roissy has eviscerated Hanna Rosin's Mein Kampf with great hilarity :
http://roissy.wordpress.com/20.....providers/
John| 7.7.10 @ 2:41PM
Always remember that in terms of moral character and ethical values :
Men > Children > Animals > Women
This is true.
Aristotle| 7.8.10 @ 1:40AM
I said that.
John| 7.8.10 @ 5:49AM
Say it often! It is both funny and true.
Anthony| 7.7.10 @ 2:49PM
To paraphrase the old college saying:
When men become extinct, ugly women will have extincted them!!
Petronius| 7.7.10 @ 5:41PM
A
And such a state would be called a skankocracy...
jack| 7.7.10 @ 3:15PM
The first act of feminism: Eve. The first I know better. I am woman hear me roar. Its all about me. me. me . me.....Its my body... Do as I say. Everything is for me, me, me.........Things have gotten worse since then.
John| 7.7.10 @ 4:34PM
Always remember that unless female sexuality is controlled, women will exhibit a preference for serial killers over engineers.
Thus, men will adapt to the incentive structure women create, and civilization ends.
Uncontrolled female sexuality is not compatible with civilization. Men are the only humans who ever left the animal kingdom.
a.m| 7.7.10 @ 4:57PM
Great article, interesting comments all! This is one woman who isn't buying into the feminist BS and loves being married to a REAL man--and a soldier at that! And I am so happy that we have a boy (and hope we will have many more boys) who will have a real man to teach and train them.
A few comments have alluded to this, but as an Army wife I'd be interested to hear Miss Rosin's answer to what will happen to our armed forces. Please note that I say "her answer", because I'm smart enough to know exactly where the feminist intelligentsia, given the chance, would like to send our soldiers and America's military strength in general. It's one place hotter than Afghanistan.
Margie| 7.7.10 @ 5:01PM
It does go all the way back to Adam & Eve. The Serpent tempted Eve, who gave in and she tempted Adam. God warned them not to eat of the fruit of that one and only tree but they couldn't listen. The rest is history.
Here it is:
"To the woman he said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you."And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life; thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; you are dust, and to dust you shall return." Gen. 3:16-19.
So there you have it. They failed God and each other. See what happens when you listen to your wife?
BA Cyclone| 7.7.10 @ 5:20PM
Eve did not tempt Adam, that is a common distortion and belies the actual choices made.
Read the passage carefully. The snake tempted Eve. Adam was right there the whole time and saw it happen. His choice was to follow Eve into sin rather than follow God without her. You could say Adam and Even made the choice serially, but in reality they made it together.
"When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it." Genesis 2:6
BA Cyclone| 7.7.10 @ 5:23PM
Actually that is Genesis 3:6, typo.
Margie| 7.7.10 @ 7:52PM
Can't argue with that.
OK~ the word isn't tempt, but it does say~
"And to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life;" Gen. 3:17.
He Listened to her voice.. and shouldn't have.
Notice, too, how when God questioned them, the woman blamed the Serpent, the man blamed his wife, and God punished them all. Just goes to show~ the blame games doesn't work!
viktor| 7.7.10 @ 5:04PM
"If civilization had been left in female hands we would still be living in grass huts."
Camille Paglia
John| 7.7.10 @ 5:07PM
Correction : Who would build the grass huts? Women? HA!!!
We would still be living in CAVES.
Aristotle| 7.8.10 @ 1:43AM
We can't go in there. Caves are dark and scary and might have spiders, mice, and bugs. Men will have to find them first.
John| 7.7.10 @ 5:06PM
Feminism is the new Jim Crow. It really is. Future historians will recognize it as such.
orpone| 7.7.10 @ 5:08PM
Superfreak and Sylvia you both sound like angry lesbians trying to mock the author of the article.
person| 7.7.10 @ 8:16PM
I don't believe I need some d___ c___ to tell me anything about being a man.
She wishes she were one.
Tough s___ b____.
Tim*| 7.7.10 @ 9:15PM
Real Men don't allow an over-opinionated Agenda Broad " Define " them.
Rosalee| 7.7.10 @ 10:03PM
Interesting. When I was attending classes for my MBA, I was usually the only female, or one of two females in the classes. Granted it was in 1980, but it still amazed me.
As a former Navy officer, I am used to being surrounded by men, but what she describes are NOT men, they are 'wuss' types who seriously need a backbone.
JimE| 7.7.10 @ 11:30PM
I met a very hot looking young asian woman one time, she said she need a man. I told her look around, plenty of good looking guys here, you could have anyone you wanted. She told me she didn't give a damn about looks, she had a son who needed a real man in his life to teach him guy stuff as she put it. She said the guys in the office were all weak. She asked me what I did, I told her I retired from the service and was now a gunsmith,
she married me.
Margie| 7.8.10 @ 12:53PM
Ha ha, JimE. I love it!
PolishKnight| 7.8.10 @ 4:28PM
I love the "real man" shaming ploy. If she was looking for a "real man", what was she doing working in an office like one?
In the old days, there was nothing unmanly about office work. JimE probably was also doing it (since he was there.) "Office work" includes, but not limited to: engineering, architecture, management, computer programming, and sales (to name a few).
What's happened in recent times is that the job of SECRETARY, which used to be a job held by men on a management track, was taken over by women and then when quotas required hiring more of them reclassied as "project managers." So now there are 10 managers for every engineer, computer programmer, analyst, etc. asking "Have you finished that task yet?" and getting paid mucho bucks to spend at the mall and gripe: "Why aren't there real men around?"
JimE| 7.7.10 @ 11:31PM
Hey, notice no liberal comments today, Brooks, purple asswipe, where are you?
Osamas Pajamas| 7.8.10 @ 2:25AM
Funny, the Democrat party consists of pussified, prissy boys, and hard and arguably female women, moth-like, dewey-eyed wabbit girls, and some rotten thugs of the commie-fascist-union-mafia type. The Democrats believe in diversity.
Carnivore| 7.8.10 @ 11:40AM
Good article, although "The End of Men" was already torn to shreds here:
http://www.the-spearhead.com
Derek Leaberry| 7.8.10 @ 12:09PM
If we didn't have men, who would be mowing the lawn in 100 degree weather? Or building the homes and offices? Or doing the lumberjacking? Or the plumbing? If we didn't have men, who would do the carpentry? Or the engineering? Or the policing and soldiering so as to protect the women and children? Or the butchering of animals to eat. If not for men, who would do the farming? Who would play the professional sports? Who would carry heavy objects about? Who would do the mining? If not for men, who would be leaving the toilet seat up(as it is supposed to be), allowing women a delightful opportunity to complain?
Margie| 7.8.10 @ 1:04PM
And most importantly, ladies remember this~ that without men there would never have been woman!
"Then the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him." So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said, "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man." Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh." Gen. 2:18 &21;-24.
There we have it. God's plan and creation of mankind and Marriage, all rolled into one!
KyMouse| 7.8.10 @ 4:26PM
Speaking of substituting "feel" for "think," I'd like five minutes alone with the person who started people saying "issue" instead of "problem."
There is nothing shameful about having a problem; everybody has them, and they are to be faced head-on and solved. We don't need to call them "issues" so that we won't be afraid of them.
An issue is, for example, the July 2010 TAS.
REMI| 7.9.10 @ 4:51AM
Beautiful article.
Banderman| 7.11.10 @ 11:28AM
Women are raving, sexist, gender biased hypocrites. End this. They 'demand' respect and support, yet never reciprocate as their pathetic self absorption will not allow it.
PolishKnight| 7.12.10 @ 10:05AM
Banderman, women in the states, Canada, and England (notice a trend there) were born into a culture of hyper chivalry and feminism which regards women as saints and victims to be lavished with "equality" and princess privileges simply for being women.
We buy into the shaming ploy "Be a man!" used by these women which means accepting personal responsibility, earning a living, and not whining. But that begs the opposite question: What do these women think "be a woman!" means? How many men here are willing to ask that?
WAKE UP| 7.11.10 @ 6:58PM
This whole debate reminds me of the old saying: she only discovered that she'd been raped when the cheque bounced.
John| 7.12.10 @ 5:09PM
A society where a hatemonger like Hanna Rosin can actually make money biting the hand that feeds her and keeps her expanding ass safe, is a society that is not going to last much longer (nor does it deserve to).