Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Monkeyleg on June 27, 2011, 11:16:53 PM
-
I sure hope this isn't coming soon to schools here in the US. A government-funded Swedish school is attempting to break down gender roles through a variety of means, so that kids don't identify with being male or female. I can only imagine how screwed up these kids are going to be in just 12-14 years.
Does it ever occur to these "social engineers" that there are genders for a reason, and that "gender roles" that come naturally do so for a reason?
I love this:
"Society expects girls to be girlie, nice and pretty and boys to be manly, rough and outgoing," says Jenny Johnsson, a 31-year-old teacher. "Egalia gives them a fantastic opportunity to be whoever they want to be."
Yeah, Ms. Johnsson. After you get through with these kids, some may want to be Charles Manson.
The rest of the story is here (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/06/27/swedish-preschool-fights-gender-bias-drops-him-and-her/).
-
I read about this today and bit my tongue. I knew this would appear here, sooner or later.
"It", "that one", "the one that is not this" "not me nor my sex" as opposed to the personal pronouns "he" or "she"? Oh, yeah, that's a great idea. ;/ De-humanizes EVERYONE. Are we all going to start speaking in 3rd person now?
"This one does not like that one. That one attracts me, yet that one rejects my advances." Poor thing. Let's get you into further counseling with "these ones" so you become even more *expletive deleted*ed up and anti-social.
Idiots.
-
When I was a kid, one of my close friends (I still communicate with him) had as a father a teacher, and his mother was a school psychologist. She was always trying the latest technique de jour in child behavior.
I remember my friend hitting his younger brother. As punishment, the mother told my friend to walk down to the end of the hall and back.
Now, I was maybe 12 years old at this time, but I distinctly remember thinking the woman was off her rocker. Later on I also decided that her kids would likely be screwed up.
Well, their kids were/are all screwed up. She should have bent my friend over her knee and whacked his behind a few times. That's what my dad did.
This Swedish school is just a continuation of that sort of social experimentation on children.
-
Well, their kids were/are all screwed up. She should have bent my friend over her knee and whacked his behind a few times. That's what my dad did.
I know at least one upstanding family where children are literally never spanked. And amazingly their children turned out completely okay as adults, becoming professionals/businessmen etc. Plural of anecdote =/= data.
-
"It", "that one", "the one that is not this" "not me nor my sex" as opposed to the personal pronouns "he" or "she"? Oh, yeah, that's a great idea. De-humanizes EVERYONE. Are we all going to start speaking in 3rd person now?
So what? No, you can invent another neutral pronoun for person. Some has been suggested, the one I like is 've', 'ver', 'vis'. No real need for them, as they're no genderless people, but that may change in fifty or sixty years, or if someone invents an AI worthy of vis name. Funny that that one is the best of the ones suggested so far, but's only been used in certain hard-sf books..
Can't say what Egalia is doing has any point. What schools need to figure out is that it makes no sense to group kids according to age.
Should be according to ability, and institute corporal punishments for bullying.
BTW, Finnish language doesn' specify gender in personal pronouns. The only difference I know of is, that Finnish children become aware of their gender later than children whose native language has gender specific pronouns. And that Finns have a fine national tradition of gloominess and boorishness..
-
On the otherhand, I do not care for some of the societally prescribed sex roles. (As a grammar Nazi, I prefer to reserve the word "gender" for grammar.) As my daughters were growing up, I had to continualy reassure them that, yes, girls could persue any activity they chose. Yes, they could play with trucks or dolls as they chose.Yes, girls could be martial artists. Yes, they can be doctors or engineers or LEOs -- or nurses or mommies or teachers. The chioce was theirs, not society's.
As to languages, I do not recall that Swahili has sex/gender specific pronouns, but I do recall hearing that Swahili society is quite sexist none-the-less.
-
More dumbassery from leftists who think human nature can be molded to suit their desires.
-
On the otherhand, I do not care for some of the societally prescribed sex roles. (As a grammar Nazi, I prefer to reserve the word "gender" for grammar.) As my daughters were growing up, I had to continualy reassure them that, yes, girls could persue any activity they chose. Yes, they could play with trucks or dolls as they chose.Yes, girls could be martial artists. Yes, they can be doctors or engineers or LEOs -- or nurses or mommies or teachers. The chioce was theirs, not society's.
With respect, I find a great deal of difference between a woman who wants to be a police officer and a man who wants to be a woman.
-
Gender is physical.
Gender Roles are sociatial creations.
The determination of these people to confuse the issue is just retarded.
A person is a person, a boy is a boy and a girl is a girl.
There is nothing wrong with making most Gender Roles obsolete, but how the hell these people plan on doing away with actual physical gender is beyond me.
-
There is nothing wrong with making most Gender Roles obsolete, but how the hell these people plan on doing away with actual physical gender is beyond me.
Apparently the idiots plan to wish it away.
-
The determination of these people to confuse the issue is just retarded.
I had a pair of profs in college who fit this... In the 'Gender Studies' course, I was barred from using science as a critique. The number of times some absurd 'science' article was used... I might as well have just had a buzzer that said ceteris paribus fallacy.
My favorite/most memorable were a series that attacked the notion of gender roles by examining some islanders whose home was absurdly irradiated by nuclear testing and whose majority of offspring had both male and female genitals... sometimes more than one each. I think I may have lost my composure a bit that day and pointed out the absurdity of the assertions made about our own 'natural dispositions' by comparing us with Nightmare Island.
Id like to give a thumbs up to BReilley: With respect, I find a great deal of difference between a woman who wants to be a police officer and a man who wants to be a woman.
-Really makes me wish we had a like button.
My gf is best friends with a homosexual fellow who honestly asserts and believes the transgendered are the greatest american heroes of our day.... We don't get along very well. Great cook tho.
-
Id like to give a thumbs up to BReilley: With respect, I find a great deal of difference between a woman who wants to be a police officer and a man who wants to be a woman.
I find a great deal of difference too. Unless we have to lower standards for police (firemen, soldiers, etc...) such that the woman is capable of passing the requisite physical demands.
-
I find a great deal of difference too. Unless we have to lower standards for police (firemen, soldiers, etc...) such that the woman is capable of passing the requisite physical demands.
[cough] US military [/cough]
-
...a homosexual fellow who honestly asserts and believes the transgendered are the greatest american heroes of our day...
Do any of the soldiers serving in Iraq or Afghanistan even enter into his thinking?
-
this is an interesting article along the same lines.
http://www.christianaction.org.za/firearmnews/2003-3_Boyswillbeboys.htm
Basically, human nature determined that boys/men needed to hunt/protect & girls/women needed to gather/nurture. (imo)
Minimizing genetic coding and being in denial about evolution can cause great harm to the psyche of developing boys and girls.
Boys are told playing with toy guns/knives is wrong and violent yet as soon as the pc adults back is turned they go right back to doing it...Because that's how we learn that its ok and moral to fight back against threats from everything like bullies to saber tooth lions
These folks are not much different than the obscene pseudo science eugenics folks that gave us National Socialism/genocide.
Girls are forced to accept pc dogma when they really do want to play with a doll and serve tea and boys are punished for being imaginary heroes and slaying the evil enemy & this makes them feel as if their natural inclinations are wrong and they grow up thinking they are bad people.
Why cant radlibs just let kids be kids? I think the answer is they were mistreated as kids & instead of examining the roots of their own unfortunate rearing they inflict even worse on others because its an easier way of dealing with it.
They would rather drag everyone else down rather then lift themselves up.
-
Gunsmith, I think you have a rather absurd version of what little girls can, will, and want to do.
I'm starting to feel that this gender war is really just attempting to force little boys to behave like what little girls are supposed too.
The problem is no one (not even the girls) want to behave like that.
-
Gunsmith, I think you have a rather absurd version of what little girls can, will, and want to do.
I'm starting to feel that this gender war is really just attempting to force little boys to behave like what little girls are supposed too.
The problem is no one (not even the girls) want to behave like that.
You've never met a little girl who wanted to serve tea and play with dolls? I do agree with your point that the war on gender is an assault on masculinity.
-
My mother used to do "tea parties" with my neices when they were little. She has a big set of little miniature porcelain tea cups and such. I don't know if they wanted to "serve tea", but they all seemed to enjoy playing the "Proper Lady" role for a few hours. My mother had 3 boys so no daughters to do that stuff with. My brothers and I certainly didn't want to.
When I was in high school, it seemed to me the main ones telling girls what they could and couldn't do were the female teachers. Talking with the "popular" girls about how hard math was (English teacher) and stuff like that.
-
It seems to me that best way to accomplish the goals these liberals want to accomplish would be to separate the girls and boys in separate classes and teach them in the way that best suits their natures. None of them ever want to do that though.
-
As an adder, the idea of being told I couldn't accomplish something when I was a kid was the quickest way to get me to try it. Maybe that was just my male competitiveness. I don't know. Growing up, my parents were always pushing us to do whatever we wanted (as long as it was better than what my Dad did).
-
It seems to me that best way to accomplish the goals these liberals want to accomplish would be to separate the girls and boys in separate classes and teach them in the way that best suits their natures. None of them ever want to do that though.
That's UNFAIR! The boys will compete amongst themselves and get a better education as the smarter ones challenge each other. As a result, the girls will miss out on that challenging environment!
Of course, when the boys and girls are together, we need to shut the boys up because they are disruptive and need to learn to just sit quietly and not compete against other students. Competition is bad.
-
That's UNFAIR! The boys will compete amongst themselves and get a better education as the smarter ones challenge each other. As a result, the girls will miss out on that challenging environment!
Of course, when the boys and girls are together, we need to shut the boys up because they are disruptive and need to learn to just sit quietly and not compete against other students. Competition is bad.
Sarcasm understood I think, but girls and boys respond to different teaching styles and structures from what I have heard. I think the girls would benefit from it as much as the boys.
-
Sarcasm understood I think, but girls and boys respond to different teaching styles and structures from what I have heard. I think the girls would benefit from it as much as the boys.
Actually, not sarcasm: satire. But yes, I wasn't serious, and yes, both sexes would benefit from being taught separately.
-
When our girls were little, you could give them a toy dumptruck and they would wrap it in a blanket and cuddle it. =D
-
I think its all bell curves, and that majority and statistics be damned, we should treat people like individuals. Countless times I've seen the preaching to the middle approach, folks on either side don't respond to it, and then the middle doesn't either because they are left out.
-
Gunsmith, I think you have a rather absurd version of what little girls can, will, and want to do.
I'm starting to feel that this gender war is really just attempting to force little boys to behave like what little girls are supposed too.
The problem is no one (not even the girls) want to behave like that.
She speaks truth.....
http://www.amazon.com/War-Against-Boys-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849569 (http://www.amazon.com/War-Against-Boys-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849569)
-
To use the usual dolls versus trucks rubric, I don't care if a boy want to play with dolls, or a girl with trucks.
What I care about is "the system" forcing everyone into neuter roles.
That's what I care about.
-
I'm kind of wondering what made the girl I'm interested in pick her hobbies. Kickboxing, knife fighting and car repair are somewhat male pursuits. From her features and general lack of female secondary sexual characteristics, I guess she has high testosterone levels for a woman. That would account for her aggressivity levels and general intensity..
She does look a bit (http://photos.libimseti.cz/img_orig/090507/9/6N21_5AbIA.jpg)male.. (sligthly NSFW pic she publicly posted on a dating site..)
I suspect she has bigger metaphorical balls than I do.. certainly has more scars.
-
I guess I wrote what I was saying in a confusing manner.
Liberals like to force little kids to confront gender issues.
Its a cruel stupid practice that ends up hurting children.
If kids want to play with toy guns/ trucks/ dolls/ doll houses / doll houses with armament / dolls with toy guns serving bio warfare tea ... its all good.
let kids play and learn without forcing them to figure out bizarre gender crap.
in general girls like different things then boys ... of course exceptions occur.
As far as my understanding girls, my late older sister was two yrs older and my younger sister is two yrs younger. I know more about girls then girls do
-
I'm kind of wondering what made the girl I'm interested in pick her hobbies. Kickboxing, knife fighting and car repair are somewhat male pursuits. From her features and general lack of female secondary sexual characteristics, I guess she has high testosterone levels for a woman. That would account for her aggressivity levels and general intensity..
She does look a bit (http://photos.libimseti.cz/img_orig/090507/9/6N21_5AbIA.jpg)male.. (sligthly NSFW pic she publicly posted on a dating site..)
I suspect she has bigger metaphorical balls than I do.. certainly has more scars.
Looks real butch.
-
I'm kind of wondering what made the girl I'm interested in pick her hobbies. Kickboxing, knife fighting and car repair are somewhat male pursuits. From her features and general lack of female secondary sexual characteristics, I guess she has high testosterone levels for a woman. That would account for her aggressivity levels and general intensity..
She does look a bit (http://photos.libimseti.cz/img_orig/090507/9/6N21_5AbIA.jpg)male.. (sligthly NSFW pic she publicly posted on a dating site..)
I suspect she has bigger metaphorical balls than I do.. certainly has more scars.
Looking at the photo (and, BTW, you're a lucky guy... ;) ), I'm not seeing as many physical masculine characteristics (jawline, hips, breasts, etc.) as I am cosmetic (haircut, makeup, etc.) masculine characteristics. I'd be more likely to say that she had strong masculine influences early in her life than to indicate any biological issues.
Here's someone who she somewhat resembles.... http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/ (http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/) ....no biological issues with her, but a lot of the same interests.....
But then, it's hard to make observations like this based on one photo....maybe if you posted other pics......
-
Heh. she's a ironic snarker too. Not world class like Tamara, but then she's half her age. But apart from that..
She has longer hair these days, but still keeps the sides of her head shaved. Looks weird, that combined with her height means people always gawk. =)
I'll consider myself lucky when she's my official girlfriend. So far, it's just sort of tenative. I see no reason to rush ..
Then, I'll be helping her out with vintage car repair over the summer and who knows... The problem is, my people skills are not that good... and it's possible that while she'll like me as a friend, I won't be manly enough for her. I mean, she has more muscles than I do and two more cars than I have. Then I have more guns, but she says knifes are more honest. It's fairly certain that if we stick together, at one point I'll buy her a modern, properly engineered sword. Better than the machete she has in her car.
Then, I have very good aerobic endurance due to cycling, which she doesn't have. Means that she won't wear me out if we ever make it to a bed.. that'll clinch IMO, as I have some cards up my sleeve I just can't bring myself to fess to having in RL because it'd be crass.. =|
-
Lanis, i'd have to disagree based on my own physical make up.
I was always more of a tomboy then someones little princess even before Dad was around. Sure I loved My Little Ponies and Barbie, but I also rode my bike (purple with streamers and a rainbow on the babana seat) like a bat out of hell, tracked mud through the house and earned my mothers ire by jumping in any body of water at any time, usually fully clothed....
I also devolped early, and have a very VERY feminie form.
I think part of it's the way you are raised and part of its just natural, but its never a straight line, nor do all little girl/little boys do the same things based on gender.
My problems with gender wars, is that they are teaching both sexes to be passive and inhibited. Which are not great traits for anyone.
-
My problems with gender wars, is that they are teaching both sexes to be passive and inhibited.
That's the problem with women. Most of them, due to instincts, put safety above liberty and adventure...
I mean, men are evolution's experimental tools. If half of them fails, no problem. But for the species to survive, most women have to bring up children, meaning, women are less likely to be comfortable with risk-taking and more prone to socialist thinking or needless safety measures.
-
That's the problem with women. Most of them, due to instincts, put safety above liberty and adventure...
I mean, men are evolution's experimental tools. If half of them fails, no problem. But for the species to survive, most women have to bring up children, meaning, women are less likely to be comfortable with risk-taking and more prone to socialist thinking or needless safety measures.
Not true. That would be a result of conditioning. Its not "ladylike" to fight back or explore, and all girls get that BS from a very young age.
Which affects motherhood as well. Our cultures have tought women not to fight back or defend themselves, thus they feel they cannot defend their children. I would say this liberal attitude is increased by the lack of men being involved in their childrens upbringing, thus protection.
Women raised with an acceptance towards personal agression and to be upfront tend to be more defensive minded, but still a force to be reconed with and protective.
Unfortunatly, few make it to that point, because after getting called "bitch" one to many times, they start going back to the societly dictacts to be "ladylike".
-
Not true. That would be a result of conditioning.
Are you really, really sure about that. Most women have rather low testosterone levels and are more R-selector than men.
(from National Review, article by John Derbyshire)
"In the security-versus-risk division of temperament, women pile in on the "security" side. Though there are of course exceptions (it was a female cousin that introduced me to skydiving), women generally have a lower appetite for risk than men have. Female gamblers, female speculators, female practitioners of extreme sports, female explorers, female soldiers are a scattered few. Women in general have a strong preference for security over risk. ...
"Security" is now represented by the welfare state.
There is a sense, in fact, in which women were just waiting for the welfare state. Women are natural socialists."
-
*sigh* everyone of those women was conditioned by society.
If you want the natural approch, look at other species of mammal.
The dominate wolf in the pack is often the alpha BITCH. which is also the only female in the pack to produce young.
Do you have any idea how HARD it is to be a women in a male dominated activity? Women don't do these things bcause the don't want too, they don't do them because a. They are told the can't or b. Because the get treated like an oddball pet and don't get taken seriously.
Lanius, you are being the worst type of sexist. The one who doesn't get it.
-
*sigh* everyone of those women was conditioned by society.
A society already and increasingly dominated by females and feminine tendencies. How many of those "act like a lady!" admonitions came from a mother/aunt/female teacher/etc...?
If you want the natural approch, look at other species of mammal.
The dominate wolf in the pack is often the alpha BITCH. which is also the only female in the pack to produce young.
Cheetah sexes live almost entirely separate lives other than mating and the time during which a female raises her male offspring. Gorillas live in a sort of harem with one dominant male. Killer Whales travel in pods made up of both males and females, all of which assist in raising the young and defending. (Of course, who is going to mess with a Killer Whale, male or female?) Cherry picking one species that follows your preferred path is rather foolish. I prefer to know how humans work.
Do you have any idea how HARD it is to be a women in a male dominated activity?
No, I don't. I do have an idea of what it's like to be a boy in a female dominated area, though. (education)
Women don't do these things bcause the don't want too, they don't do them because a. They are told the can't or b. Because the get treated like an oddball pet and don't get taken seriously.
You are generalizing to all females from your own experiences. There are plenty of activities that both men and women enjoy and enjoy together. It's not a conspiracy nor discrimination that keep women out of most male-dominated activities, it's the interests of those women. You like many of the male dominated activities. That's great. You'll have to deal with the way men generally act when in the company of only men at those times because most other women don't like those activities.
Do you think it's discrimination that keeps most women off of those crab boats in Alaska?
-
Lions also live in a pride with one dominate male. But the females do most of the hunting.
If we are talking about estrogen as being a hormonal reason for women to be passive and submissive, then my examples, and yours prove lanius to be wrong.
In our "female dominated" (which is bullcrap) women often are the worst offenders when it com forcing young girls to be "ladylike".
As for your bit about male/ female activities. You totally ignored what I was saying. I don't have a problem being "one of the guys". I have a problem being "that GIRL that knows about guns, aww, look isn't she so cute."
Although, you actually helped my point with the whole crab fishing thing. Its hard to take male defined risks, if women can't even get on the boat.
-
Lions also live in a pride with one dominate male. But the females do most of the hunting.
If we are talking about estrogen as being a hormonal reason for women to be passive and submissive, then my examples, and yours prove lanius to be wrong.
In our "female dominated" (which is bullcrap) women often are the worst offenders when it com forcing young girls to be "ladylike".
As for your bit about male/ female activities. You totally ignored what I was saying. I don't have a problem being "one of the guys". I have a problem being "that GIRL that knows about guns, aww, look isn't she so cute."
Although, you actually helped my point with the whole crab fishing thing. Its hard to take male defined risks, if women can't even get on the boat.
Ah, I didn't note the hormonal argument. You were talking about mechanisms by which gender roles emerge and I misunderstood. (My argument is that they exist for a reason, not necessarily that hormones are the reason.)
In our "female dominated" (which is bullcrap) women often are the worst offenders when it com forcing young girls to be "ladylike".
This was important enough for me to pull out and highlight. Why might it be that women act like this?
I understand your frustration with being treated like a toy. Many men act like that, and will feel far more free to act like that when in the company of mainly men and the one odd female. Do you think it is much different were a man to show up in a female dominated activity, say scrapbooking or quilting? He'd be treated like an oddity as well, especially if he were generally manly other than this interest.
-
I understand that male in female role/female in male role, will cause some notion of being odd.
But do you agree that being looked upon as a pet and having your knowledge treated like a parlor trick is wrong? If so, then I think we can agree that applying ones selve in a reverse gender role is difficult enough to often discorage one from participating in such activities.
Lanius pulled up some study saying women are not natural risk takers based on women participating in male dominate activties. I say such studies are flawed because the are influanced by social pressures and opinions. Such would be the same as a study based on traditional female roles being less dominated by men saying that men are not naturally caretakers or nurturers.
And as to the bit you pulled out. It seems to me that men can be almost as nasty with each other in the reverse scenario. The boy who listins to show tunes or plays the flute gets beat up by the football team or whatnot, right?
Gender roles are strongly enforced by both sexes weither they are right or wrong.
-
That's the problem with women. Most of them, due to instincts, put safety above liberty and adventure...
I mean, men are evolution's experimental tools. If half of them fails, no problem. But for the species to survive, most women have to bring up children, meaning, women are less likely to be comfortable with risk-taking and more prone to socialist thinking or needless safety measures.
Not true. That would be a result of conditioning. Its not "ladylike" to fight back or explore, and all girls get that BS from a very young age.
Which affects motherhood as well. Our cultures have tought women not to fight back or defend themselves, thus they feel they cannot defend their children. I would say this liberal attitude is increased by the lack of men being involved in their childrens upbringing, thus protection.
Women raised with an acceptance towards personal agression and to be upfront tend to be more defensive minded, but still a force to be reconed with and protective.
Unfortunatly, few make it to that point, because after getting called "bitch" one to many times, they start going back to the societly dictacts to be "ladylike".
Actually, I think Lanius has a point here; what he's observed is generally true throughout the world. And, yes I know there are exceptions. But women are "less likely to be comfortable with risk-taking and more prone to socialist thinking or needless safety measures." I'm not denigrating women here I just think it is usually true.
And I think it has to do with more than just societies enforcing gender roles. I think it's just one reflection of the innate differences between men and women that modern societies try to ignore.
-
I will concede a bit on risk taking, but with the note that it general follows giving birth and that men who have become fathers also often modify risk taking behaviors based on the welfare of they're children as.well.
The other half of that statement is straight up gender role brainwashing. Anyone who is trained from birth to be passive and timid will be "naturally" socialistic and agree to over the top safety precations.
-
.....The whole sheep vs. sheepdog vs. sheeple thing ... yeah.
There was a study done somewhere .... forget where/when, but it basically where women got the vote, which happened in different states at different times (hence the ability to study this) government spending tended to go up afterwards. You know, those "social welfare" programs.
Someone else suggested it was female voters in Germany that put Hitler in office.
Hey, SOMEONE had to Godwin this topic before it got out of hand! >:D [tinfoil] :angel: :-X [popcorn]
-
.....The whole sheep vs. sheepdog vs. sheeple thing ... yeah.
There was a study done somewhere .... forget where/when, but it basically where women got the vote, which happened in different states at different times (hence the ability to study this) government spending tended to go up afterwards. You know, those "social welfare" programs.
Someone else suggested it was female voters in Germany that put Hitler in office.
Hey, SOMEONE had to Godwin this topic before it got out of hand! >:D [tinfoil] :angel: :-X [popcorn]
During a time period where women were raised to be even more passive and helpless then they are now. Basically, a bunch of people who wanted protections and help got the ability to vote for it rather then fight for those same things as induvidials.
-
During a time period where women were raised to be even more passive and helpless then they are now. Basically, a bunch of people who wanted protections and help got the ability to vote for it rather then fight for those same things as induvidials.
For being passive and helpless, they sure did a lot to pass the 18th and 19th Amendments.
-
For being passive and helpless, they sure did a lot to pass the 18th and 19th Amendments.
We both know that its a relitivly few induviduals who lead the pack.
And that policritters get votes bases on what sounds good to anyone that votes. Voting is the easy part and you know it.
-
My point is that your colored view of the past is not correct. Do you think frontier women were passive?
Do you think ANY rural women were passive? (Keep in mind, this was the majority of the country.)
Passive and helpless would not survive the harsh realities of life prior to the (later) 20th century.
-
"Americans constantly display their complete confidence in the understanding of their wives and have a deep respect for their freedom. They esteem that her mind is as capable as a man’s of discovering the plain truth and that her heart is just as resolute in following it."
"Thus Americans do not believe that men and women have the duty or the right to perform the same things but they show the same regard for the role played by both and they consider them as equal in worth although their lot in life is different. They do not give to a woman’s courage the same character or role as a man’s but they never question its strength; and, while they do not think that a man and his partner should always use their intelligence and understanding in the same way, at least they consider that the one has as sound an understanding and as clear a mind as the other."
-
My point is that your colored view of the past is not correct. Do you think frontier women were passive?
Do you think ANY rural women were passive? (Keep in mind, this was the majority of the country.)
Passive and helpless would not survive the harsh realities of life prior to the (later) 20th century.
Passive and helpless were the ideals of the time. Notice that the weastern states that broke through the woemns vote were first. National suffreage did not come about untill well into Victorian times, when freedom for women was a limited thing.
Those "frontier" women (a thing that by that point was already mostly a memory) were still train from infancy to obey the men in their houshold.
Which is easier, especially if you still haven't grasped the idea that you can be the owner of property, sole aurdian of your children, and more, to make your man stop drnking? Confront and devorce him, or vote?
-
An American girl scarcely ever displays that virginal softness in the midst of young desires or that innocent and ingenuous grace which usually attend the European woman in the transition from girlhood to youth. It is rare that an American woman, at any age displays childish timidity or ignorance. Like the young women Europe she seeks to please, but she knows precisely the cost of pleasing. If she does not abandon herself to evil, at least she knows that it exists; and she is remarkable rather for purity of manners than for chastity of mind.
I have been frequently surprised and almost frightened at the singular address and happy boldness with which young women in America contrive to manage their thoughts and their language amid all the difficulties of free conversation; a philosopher would have stumbled at every step along the narrow path which they trod without accident and without effort. It is easy, indeed, to perceive that even amid the independence of early youth an American woman is always mistress of herself; she indulges in all permitted pleasures without yielding herself up to any of them, and her reason never allows the reins of self-guidance to drop, though it often seems to hold them loosely.
-
In France, where traditions of every age are still so strangely mingled in the opinions and tastes of the people, women commonly receive a reserved, retired, and almost conventional education, as they did in aristocratic times; and then they are suddenly abandoned without a guide and without assistance in the midst of all the irregularities inseparable from democratic society. The Americans are more consistent. They have found out that in a democracy the independence of individuals cannot fail to be very great, youth premature, tastes ill-restrained, customs fleeting, public opinion often unsettled and powerless, paternal authority weak, and marital authority contested. Under these circumstances, believing that they had little chance of repressing in woman the most vehement passions of the human heart, they held that the surer way was to teach her the art of combating those passions for herself. As they could not prevent her virtue from being exposed to frequent danger, they determined that she should know how best to defend it, and more reliance was placed on the free vigor of her will than on safeguards which have been shaken or overthrown Instead, then, of inculcating mistrust of herself, they constantly seek to enhance her confidence in her own strength of character. As it is neither possible nor desirable to keep a young woman in perpetual and complete ignorance, they hasten to give her a precocious knowledge on all subjects. Far from hiding the corruptions of the world from her, they prefer that she should see them at once and train herself to shun them, and they hold it of more importance to protect her conduct than to be over-scrupulous of the innocence of her thoughts.
-
Passive and helpless were the ideals of the time. Notice that the weastern states that broke through the woemns vote were first. National suffreage did not come about untill well into Victorian times, when freedom for women was a limited thing.
Those "frontier" women (a thing that by that point was already mostly a memory) were still train from infancy to obey the men in their houshold.
Which is easier, especially if you still haven't grasped the idea that you can be the owner of property, sole (g)aurdian of your children, and more, to make your man stop drnking? Confront and devorce(sic) him, or vote?
I don't think "passive" and "helpless" are necessarily the same thing. Frontier women may have been considered "passive" in comparison to the males of their own culture, or to whom they were married, but they were not "helpless." Many frontier women were alone with their kids while their husbands were out at work, and in an era when Indian attacks were not rare, they were expected to handle Winchesters, Sharps, and other longarms as well as men -- they might easily have to use them.
Also consider some more subtle elements.
While it took men to "conquer" the west, it is said it took women to ''civilize" the west. Left to their own, sans women, men became a bunch of ruffians with maybe their only feminine companionshipt found in the "red light" district, the bordellos. Not exactly "high class." ;/
When women arrived in great numbers, and real families became more common, much, though not all, of the "ruffianism" was ameliorated.
Since it was the women who ..."civilized" the men, I can't say that they were "helpless." Somehow that just doesn't fit. "Those 'frontier' women (a thing that by that point was already mostly a memory) were still train from infancy to obey the men in their houshold."~~ Yes .... and with the conquest of the west no doubt their "place in society" was no doubt, re "explained" to them. :angel:
Women have never been without some power. It may not always have been the kind of power they wanted or needed, but anyone who thinks that they were completly powerless does not know what "feminine wiles" means. [popcorn] Oh, and this :angel: again too, just for good measure.
-
Yeah. It's a myth that Chinese women are submissive, for example. They only submit in order to seem harmless, and will have most men doing their bidding unwittingly in no time at all.
There are more winning strategies than confrontation. There's subversion...
-
"The man may be the head of the family, but the woman is the neck..."
-
And you guys wonder why more women don't post on this board. ;/
Women have gone from sweet little inocents, to "natural socialists" who cannot appreaciae libirty over safety, to the powerful "civilizers" of the west and all the way to subversive.
;/
My only point from the very begining was simple, let children be children and stop gearing education of these children to be "masculine", "feminie" or nuetur.
And, for the love of whatevers holy, stop pidgon holing what little girls and little boys like to do.
-
And you guys wonder why more women don't post on this board. ;/
Women have gone from sweet little inocents, to "natural socialists" who cannot appreaciae libirty over safety, to the powerful "civilizers" of the west and all the way to subversive.
;/
...............
Yeah .... I can see how that might be to confusin'... [popcorn] :angel: :angel: >:D >:D
You know, we really need a "neener" smilie on this forum..........
-
Women, as a species, are pissing me off. Their effing coyness, their cowardice, their lack of guts, their risk avoidance..., their lack of interest in games, their hoplophobiam, their socialist tendencies . I sometimes wish I were gay. Would make things a lot fokking simpler. I hate the dating game, but I have to play it, as there are no women in the circles I move in.
And to boot, I'm told by my psychiatrist(who I'm seeing because that's who you see if you suffer from insomnia), that I'm too intense for most women to handle, that they're scared of me. I have no idea why. I haven't even been convicted of GBH and the last time I hit someone in anger was in the last millenium.
I shower daily, shave, wear clean clothing, am polite in RL, have a sense of humor, am taller than 95% of other men, smarter than 95% of men .. usually am pretty energetic and what do I get out of that? Polite or scared refusals to go out, or outright silence, which really angers me. I far prefer being told I'm a creep to utter silence.
To quote one of my friends, I'm not gonna make a fokking tool out of myself in order to get access to some dank and slimy hole and the chance to keep wondering just what the hell I said that has caused her to look sullen and hurt.
Women.. what are they good for? We really need to fix the male pregnancy issue, I think. That'd majorly Anything women can do, men can do better. Cooking, fighting, conflict mediation, games, shooting guns, engineering, science, even housework. Yeah.. we're not in touch with our inner feelings, but some of us would prefer to strangle our inner feelings and people who keep carping about them, set them on fire, throw them down a fokking dry well and then piss on them.
I mean.. take Chess. A simple, stupid game... and women, have a different league. They don't play chess against men? Why? Are they admitting they're less smart and wouldn't be able to hack it there? I can understand different leagues in physical sports.. but in chess.. that's majorly pathetic. Majorly.
-
Lanius: If that's your view on women in general, you may end up being gay yet....'cause you won't get much in the way of women's attentions.... ;/
Why not treat women with the same respect and courtesy as you treat other men? You'd be surprised at how far that will get you.....
-
In RL, I'm usually treating women far better than men and am more polite around them. I can even willing and able to stoop to gentlemanly behaviour on certain occassions.
But I'm not gonna listen to any of their bull$hit and let it stand. If they say something stupid, I don't remain silent.
-
Women, as a species, are pissing me off. Their effing coyness, their cowardice, their lack of guts, their risk avoidance..., their lack of interest in games, their hoplophobiam, .............................................
:facepalm: OK ..... I am going to go to a different thread now. I wish everyone here the best. Goodbye. :-*
-
I'm just p-offed today, majorly. Like I said, the only woman with guts to date me is 6'4" does martial arts and usually carries a machete, but unfortunately, nothing will come of it due to an unexpected pregnancy that resulted from break-up sex with her previous guy and assurances of doctors that there is no way she can get pregnant with her hormonal makeup.. :facepalm:
She's 24 and the other guy is older, with his own house and car, so I can only wish them good luck. He's a martial artist and supposedly as intense as I am, so I predict the kids are gonna be the kind that tends to bounce off ceilings and are higher and more wired by nature than squirrels on pervitin running over powerlines are by design....
That means, I'll have to play the dreaded dating game again. Conceal my interest in guns. Walk slowly, so the women won't get winded. Restrain my sense of humor...
And right after things were heading in such a promising direction..
-
Women, as a species, are pissing me off. Their effing coyness, their cowardice, their lack of guts, their risk avoidance..., their lack of interest in games, their hoplophobiam, their socialist tendencies . I sometimes wish I were gay. Would make things a lot fokking simpler. I hate the dating game, but I have to play it, as there are no women in the circles I move in.
And to boot, I'm told by my psychiatrist(who I'm seeing because that's who you see if you suffer from insomnia), that I'm too intense for most women to handle, that they're scared of me. I have no idea why. I haven't even been convicted of GBH and the last time I hit someone in anger was in the last millenium.
I shower daily, shave, wear clean clothing, am polite in RL, have a sense of humor, am taller than 95% of other men, smarter than 95% of men .. usually am pretty energetic and what do I get out of that? Polite or scared refusals to go out, or outright silence, which really angers me. I far prefer being told I'm a creep to utter silence.
To quote one of my friends, I'm not gonna make a fokking tool out of myself in order to get access to some dank and slimy hole and the chance to keep wondering just what the hell I said that has caused her to look sullen and hurt.
Women.. what are they good for? We really need to fix the male pregnancy issue, I think. That'd majorly Anything women can do, men can do better. Cooking, fighting, conflict mediation, games, shooting guns, engineering, science, even housework. Yeah.. we're not in touch with our inner feelings, but some of us would prefer to strangle our inner feelings and people who keep carping about them, set them on fire, throw them down a fokking dry well and then piss on them.
I mean.. take Chess. A simple, stupid game... and women, have a different league. They don't play chess against men? Why? Are they admitting they're less smart and wouldn't be able to hack it there? I can understand different leagues in physical sports.. but in chess.. that's majorly pathetic. Majorly.
Oh sweet baby Xenu, enough. Lanius has been banned due to excessive idiocy.