Here’s another thing I’ve noticed

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Here’s another thing I’ve noticed

Here’s another thing I’ve noticed
Regular Contributor

This is just general information – an opinion I’ve formed from observation. Whenever men get into discussing this feminist mess (which is actually too seldom) the fems do everything possible to muddy AND poison the waters. A common result is that after the bimbos are put in their places, or leave, or whatever can happen to get the air clear so the men can talk together, the atmosphere is so sullen and depressive that the talk is over. The fems know this.

You must make it your business to understand that fems are better than men at using emotions, interpersonal dynamics, and all the other linguistic-psychological tools to control others. Whether or not they choose to do this – for good or ill – is a SEPARATE ISSUE from the fact that social and legal conditions enable them to do it. It’s a logic trap. If you believe in equality, then you must want men and women to have equal rights, equal employment, etc. If that turns out to be a disaster you don’t need to throw out democratic and liberal values – you need to modify your application of those values. So, if women have different goals and values, in marriage for example, then it might not be reasonable to have them subject to the same rights and restrictions. It’s not the simplistic answer to the problem, but it might be the right one. I wonder. See, this is the semantic problem again: All men are equal. Women are the same as men. All people are equal. Well, we know that people are not all ‘equal,’ so to straighten out the confusion we just need to remember that the real meaning of that phrase is that ‘all people are equal before the law.’ If that is a good choice, then we have to force (really) the powers that rule us to actually enforce the spirit of the law. And, as far as female sexual criminals, that might mean different rules.

Thurs. Sept. 21. Diogetrix added:
On re reading that post I realize how sloppy the writing and thinking is. I take it as a sign of my rising disenchantment with this board. Here is an insight that I want to share with you men before I disappear completely:
Over the past several years – thanks to the Bush Bunch – we’ve seen the rabid reicht wax extreme in (among other places) our media, and especially AM radio talk shows. I think everyone here is familiar with Rush, Savage, Lurch or Crotch … or, Drudge .. whatever he calls his gay self. There seems to be an endless market for the bad taste, extreme rhetoric, and paranoid politics of the reight wing. The liberal response is found at Pacifica Radio, Air America Radio, and a few smaller outlets – never mind that these are dominated by the ‘feminism equals liberalism’ pedants of both sexes. While it is probably true that both political sides are preaching to the choir, and the listenership of both reicht and left wing stations is almost entirely partisans of the station viewpoint, there is a difference, and I think the difference is significant. The difference is that reicht wingers enjoy the game; left wingers do not. I know that is not an easy phenomenon to see because the ‘left’ as we know it now generally includes feminists and some radical leftist zealots who never tire of their own ranting. But, the difference is to be found in the facts of the American political spectrum as it exists today. Currently, the voices of the two sides that can be heard publicly are not equal in the vehemency of belief. The ‘conservative’ side is actually much further to the right than the ‘liberal’ side is to the left. We have, that is to say, ‘liberals’ arguing with ‘reactionaries,’ or in other words, ‘extreme right wingers’ arguing with ‘moderate liberals.’ And, (this is my point) the extreme right wingers enjoy the fight for its own sake (just as do the extreme left wingers like feminists and communists.) Moderate leftists/liberals don’t want to fight about it and talk about it 24/7. Super ‘war on teror’  dupes, anti-abortionists, religious nuts, racists, fundamentalists, Zionists, and the like – don’t have much of a life outside of constant paranoid obsession with their politics. Those are the kinds of people we are facing when we try to advocate a moderate solution to the mess that feminism has made of things. The feminists are the same. The game they are playing (feminism = liberalism, thus feminism is democratic, progressive, humanist, etc.) is a Big Lie, and my belief is that we have to deal with that false claim as the first step in untangling the rhetorical tangle of ideas and thoughts that keep men tounge-tied and going around in circles. The idea that ‘all men are equal’ includes the imperative that women must have equal political power at all levels of society is based on the idea that women and men have the same goals and will equally benefit society if allowed to act in accord with their values and desires. I don’t believe it is true of the majority of women. I believe that women, if allowed to have equal political and social power with men, will destroy our society and nation. It could be that they are doing this only because they are being led and touted by political power mongers who are using them – that the fems are foolish and easily manipulated into partisan sex hate against men. This would be analogous with the Southern Strategy that has effectively used race hate to neutralize the moderates in the American South. It works. Or, it could be that women are generally just hateful of men, and will always choose separation, domination, and sacrifice the common good to avoid a complacent family oriented society. I don’t know, but I know the world is being controlled by people who are playing the men and women off against each other now with enormous effect.

Message Edited by Diogetrix on 09-21-2006 09:20 AM

Message Edited by Diogetrix on 09-21-2006 09:23 AM

09-20-2006 07:52 PM

Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

%d bloggers like this: