Why Are American Men So Dumb?

Short Answer:  Because they and their sons don’t have any lobbies to tell them otherwise.  Long answer follows.

Sexist Discrimination In American Education

Women are having a lot of fun these days laughing at the dumb, inarticulate, clumsy men they are finding on college campuses.  The situation has grown more noticeable in recent times as colleges and universities tinker around with “affirmative action” for males in their admission practices.  According to numerous news articles over the past four or five years, college women hate the idea of “affirmative action” programs that admit sub-par males to campus (at the expense of more women on campus), but grant that it is more desirable from their perspective to have a male “dating pool” larger than the current two women for each man, even if many of those young men are marginal at best.  Many college administrators are willing to engage in such stupid practices in order to attract sufficient numbers of much higher caliber women to campus — women who, of course, wanting better dating options, then snicker at the male nitwits around them.  Listening to all that frivolous nonsense, you’d think that our colleges and universities have become nothing more than social resorts for the incredibly superficial, spoiled and privileged.

Does any of this make you just a little hot under the collar?  It seems both men and women have rather strong feelings about affirmative action in the 21st century, for very different reasons.  As is common with all social issues in America, we all will hear, and continue to hear, only the women’s view, even if it’s parroted by their well-trained compliant “men”.  So here’s a rare independent man’s view, a man who has reached an age when he has no vested interest in the subject anymore, other than the future of his society after he’s gone.

I’ve spent my entire life accommodating and adjusting to the consequences of forced affirmative action everywhere – for almost every conceivable group in America, but most especially for women, and always under a “grievance” argument solidly based on quota “rights”.  And still the only group or organization with which I have ever had an affiliation is the group called “American citizen taxpayer”.  (I also happen to be a member of that minority of our society that has never had an interest group lobby to champion its “cause”.)

First, as a guy who has watched with an educated social scientist eye the evolution of this twisted campus situation for the past half century, I have to admit that it makes me livid.  Is everyone in this country so incredibly childish anymore that they can’t see the longer range adverse consequences of the situation behind the affirmative action nonsense?  Is everyone so incredibly shallow they can’t even think to ask why this is?

Sadly, those snickering college women are correct.

Forty years ago America’s young men were the envy of the world.  There was nothing they couldn’t do, nowhere they weren’t sought – due in no small part to the role played by American men throughout the world as World War II soldiers and post-war peacekeepers and nation-builders, at home and abroad.  By 1965, they had it all – health, education, character, pride, intelligence, bravery, vision, responsibility, you name it.  They fought and died on the battlefield while venturing into space and walking on the moon.  They created satellites and personal computers; joined, supported, shaped and led the great social movements of our time; made the “Green Rice Revolution” in Asia; continued building the contemporary American infrastructure; made houses in the suburbs possible for the masses and built roads and cars to connect them to employment, schools and hospitals; filled homes everywhere with every conceivable new device to make life easier; cured diseases; designed and constructed spaceships; took the violent heat from every single group in the nation and much of the rest of the world, made appropriate honorable adjustments, and still somehow kept on tickin’.  Honorable American men, men of the Greatest Generation, were the world’s Gold Standard.  Younger siblings of the Greatest Generation, members of the Silent Generation, stood in awe and tried hard to measure up.

And that was just the beginning.  Their horizons were limitless.  They just KNEW they or their sons would be exploring other planets and other moons before the end of the century and bring untold wonders to humanity in the process.  They felt destined to leave a far better world for everyone, no matter how hard that was, how much sacrifice it required.  In those days, back in the early-1960s, you had to hunt hard to find a young man loser; everywhere around were very bright, healthy and tough independent-minded competitors who just KNEW they could do the impossible.  Working mostly on their own, without any government help at all, their mothers had raised the healthiest and best educated kids – boys AND girls – the world had ever seen, and they all planned on conquering new challenges, even new worlds beyond their own, in their own lifetimes.

Today, sadly, it’s actually difficult to find boys or young men who are not “losers”.  Many of them truly embarrass me.  Of course there are always exceptions to the “norm” in any human group, but, generally speaking, they write on a level many years below what is appropriate and read almost nothing that isn’t on a tiny glowing screen.  They have trouble with basic arithmetic and routinely screw up their own meager finances.  They can’t begin to express themselves adequately, and thus frequently substitute violent aggression for intelligent reasoning.  They ponder in such confined realms, have such small goals, parrot so much popular idiotic nonsense, regurgitate so much revisionist propaganda masquerading as “knowledge” and “history”, seem so uninterested in discovering real truths for themselves, in pursuing actually worthwhile endeavors.  They “think” with girlish emotion rather than with masculine logic.  They can’t see beyond next week and choose paths intended for quick payoffs that will ultimately, inevitably, fail.

The things that hold the interest of boys today border on the inane.  They are just as self-involved as our women.  They learn about “real life” from Hollywood, the internet and video games.  They are far better at destroying than building.  Infatuated by silly toys that occupy most of their waking hours, they are all about quick fixes, short cuts and easy answers.  They use their brains for little more than reciting isolated factoids from the past needed to pass long out-dated tests, but can’t put them all together to build a comprehensive whole, much less craft a new strategy forward based on new conditions.  Their ability to objectively analyze is rudimentary and greatly hindered by all sorts of artificial dogmatic stumbling blocks.  Their world view is just simplistically banal.  When someone well educated tries to engage them in meaningful conversation on just about any topic, they quickly realize there’s almost nothing there, just a lot of blank stares, mumbling and memorized politically correct pablum, or the latest group think.  Only a minority of these guys can even read and comprehend what is written here, and I spent most of my adult life as just a professional ground soldier.

It’s easy to assume these guys are all bunched at the bottom of the pecking order.  But that would give a free pass, for example, to all those male politicians who have greatly embarrassed me as an adult man through their incredibly stupid and juvenile behavior, their proven inability to even think as rational adults.  What could be more asinine than a New York City politician who sends pictures of his little wee-wee to others, and then lies about it like a small child when caught with his pants down?  This is a case of shamefully arrested development, stuck somewhere in the fifth grade, who never had a father to smack him in the face, tan his hide, stand him in the corner.  And he presumes to have talents that qualify him to represent actual adult Americans in the halls of Congress?  Who manufactures these twisted, effeminate, irresponsible, grown-up children stuck on stupid?  Why?  They couldn’t even qualify to serve in the nation’s armed forces they arrogantly presume to direct.  What twisted mentality would ever waste a vote for such people to become even dog catcher?  This is the best “men” we can now find in our girly culture? This pathetic creep is a “leader”?  Where are the standards?

Dumb and Dumber, quite content with their own stupidity, substituting brawn for brain to achieve twisted “machismo”, most of these young males can’t hold a candle to our young women.  I’m a military man, well trained to think with cold hard logic, and I can’t stand such guys any more than smart women can.

What the hell happened?

How did so very many of our boys go from top to bottom in the span of one single generation?  Did someone put something in the drinking water?

And why in the world is the focus now stupidly on college admission practices and not on the school system that is supposed to create well prepared students at the college gates, supposed to feed higher education with honed minds?  Does everyone focus on the college “affirmative action” aspect as just another pathetic effort to divert attention from the elephant in the living room growing stinkier by the minute?

Have Americans REALLY become this easily manipulated?

This country annually imports over 850,000 mostly male foreign-schooled students to attend and conduct research at our universities, and still those campuses have really huge majorities of American women.  (See Footnote #1.)  The number of those foreign students rises annually.  Worse, most of those women are in navel-contemplating liberal arts and social sciences while our higher education system has become ever more dependent on foreign students to maintain high standards in the physical and highly advanced sciences, students who keep us barely competitive in a global economy.  About 45% of such US university students are, in fact, foreign-schooled students.  Even worse than that, those women now overwhelmingly dominant in social sciences establish unchallenged the self-serving dogma that sets our society’s social agenda, including that in “education”.

It is simply not possible to observe a United States of America in 2011 that provides college educations to twice as many women as men and NOT conclude that this represents the nation’s greatest and most shameful social injustice – one fully prohibited by civil rights law enacted by The Greatest Generation in 1972 specifically designed to keep such critically important things in American education in fair, proper and equitable balance.

When a college graduate will earn $1,000,000 MORE over the course of an average career than will a high school drop-out – this imbalance signifies a truly gross denial of equal economic opportunity for many millions of American males.  Why are boys dropping out at a rate eight times higher than for girls?  Why are they committing suicide at such staggering rates?  Why are so many of them ending up on drugs or in jail?  Who cares?

It is no longer possible for American women to avoid their just responsibility for such massive institutional bigotry in the education industry they dominate.  A whole gender does not go from academic global top to global bottom in a single generation – unless it is the consequence of deliberate malicious design.  The imbalances began thirty years ago and have grown wider in every year since.

For you college graduates who have trouble with math:  Those numbers are cumulative!  We are now talking about tens of millions of purposefully disadvantaged men – who will now be supported by our enormously privileged women.  Already, over 40% of married women earn more than their husbands.  Already women employed full time nationwide earn an average of 119% of the earnings of men working full time – a natural consequence of them earning twice as many college degrees every year as men – and still expect men to pay the bills, take the blame and do the hard stuff for special “me”.

We are talking about “role reversal” here on a truly massive and rapid scale – but a role reversal that conveniently leaves out the responsibility part.

We can only hope that the ladies are ready to pick up the tab, and the responsibility – not to mention the full accountability.  Once you become “The Man”, you also become the universally hated free-fire target on the firing line – the person responsible for everything wrong in our society.  It goes with the territory.  It is “The Man” who is that universally hated “someone else” responsible for taking the blame, paying the bills and doing the hard stuff for all the slacker others.  It is “The Man” whose responsibilities for others far overshadow any measly petty rights she might claim for herself.  I surely hope women are ready for that very heavy burden.  If not, we all go belly-up, and fast.  Sadly, all the signs so far are definitely not promising.

A Little History

Maybe it’s time for a little recent history lesson from a guy who actually participated in much of it, not from some politically correct or self-serving revisionist tract.  Relax; I won’t go back further than the 1960s, when I, a young Jack Kennedy disciple, was a “rebel” student activist.  I watched the 1961 birth of both Kennedy’s Peace Corps and the Special Forces and appreciated the great beauty of its ‘carrot and stick’ genius – through really hard work on both ends – the perfect challenge in the world for the “best and brightest” of the “Greatest Nation On Earth”.  The very first vanguard of the Boomers were just 16 years old when Kennedy was assassinated, and most would not reach 18 before the end of the decade, around 1969.  I’ve listened to the Boomers lay claim to virtually everything, as if simply being alive was sufficient, but the truth is less flattering.  For example, the great landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, enacted when the very first of the Boomers were just reaching age 18, primarily addressed race discrimination, although it also addressed gender discrimination in employment (and the resultant very wide-ranging affirmative class actions everywhere).  Boomers played no role in emplacing such civil rights law.  In fact, the Baby Boomers put nothing in place; they just milked what they were handed, or twisted it for purposes never intended.

A LOT happened in America after 1964, in very short order.  Kennedy’s New Frontier folded into Johnson’s Great Society, and very quickly came The Economic Opportunity Act of 1964; The Voting Rights Act of 1965; The Elementary and Secondary Education and the Higher Education acts of 1965 – which opened the floodgates of federal money to America’s schools, established Head Start and the National Teachers Corps.  Then came Medicare; Medicaid; the War On Poverty; the Job Corps; the Civil Rights Act of 1968 banning discrimination in housing; and so much more for the economy, transportation, the environment, arts and consumer protection.

Despite today’s popular myths of everyone sitting around smelling the flowers and smoking pot, every adult – Greatest Generation adult – during the 1960s was incredibly busy, on so many different fronts.  Jack Kennedy kept them going, and even his, Martin’s and Bobby’s tragic deaths, while slowing them down, didn’t stop them.  That explosive decade deeply affected everyone, including women, but the truth is that the great historical events and legislation enacted during that period, which very dramatically changed the way America operated at home and abroad, was the final contribution of our Greatest Generation – our 1901-24-born parents who had grown up during World War I (1914-18), survived the misery of the Dust Bowl and the Great Depression (1929-39), bought us through the great bloody World War II (1940-45) and then went on a building and baby binge (1946-66) that bought lasting peace to Europe and produced the greatest economic boom in the history of humanity.  Feverishly determined that their kids never experience what they had experienced in their own youth, they proceeded to hand those kids literally everything under the Sun – gratis.  Even in their later years they did not rest.  (In their final days in the 1970s, came the very wise Privacy Act and the Freedom Of Information Act.)

While their parents were incredibly busy setting really important things in place, most young Baby Boomers during the ’60s focused on the Vietnam and race wars.  Many young women, however, were busy waging their own war, and it didn’t have anything to do with their bras.  Eight years after the Civil Rights Act, when the earliest Boomer vanguard reached age 26, the Greatest Generation’s Education Amendments (Title IX) in June 1972 added new civil rights law to the original landmark legislation.  It significantly broadened the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include gender discrimination in education.

That law stated flatly: “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination, under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

So, while much of the country was engrossed with very high profile issues of explosive conflict, women became the driving force behind very major changes in employment and education.  It was mostly opportunistic, since the environment especially for employment for everyone had been very dramatically improved by the Greatest Generation over the previous two decades so that now even women could be employed in the workplace with little fear of death or injury as had always been the case in the past in most endeavors.  While the young Boomers’ actions in the streets would soon force their parents to end the war in Vietnam and make significant headway against racial discrimination, other young women began using law to muscle their way into wherever they wanted to go, to do whatever they wanted to do, damned any males, including their own fathers, who got in their way.  By the end of 1970s the exhausted Greatest Generation would gradually step aside and turn the reins of their magical cornucopia over to their kids, the enormously spoiled and self-involved Boomers who had almost no understanding at all of the half century of misery and monumental accomplishment that had gone before them.

It wouldn’t take them long to screw it up.

The things that would come to symbolize the Boomers, best grouped under the heading of “Entitlements”, were somewhat less glorious than those of their parents.  “Ask not what your country can do for you…” became “What’s in it for me?” – the sole relevant question for the rest of the century.  The Boomers bought us political stalemate and intellectual inertia, an incredibly short attention span, a shift from logic-based to emotion-based “thinking”, an inability to embrace and solve big long-range challenges, the rise of the idle “elitist” chattering class and enormously powerful special interest lobbies, an endless list of rights with no responsibility, a steadily decaying infrastructure (including our entire education industry), a fatally low birth rate eventually requiring a massive flood of Third World immigrants just to take up the slack and keep the whole show barely viable, the dominance of appearance over substance, perception over truth, process over results, and a shift from an economy that invented and created and manufactured truly useful, worthwhile and wonderful things desired by the entire world to one characterized best by idle apes sitting around playing with toys and picking fleas off each others’ backs, while getting “someone else” to take the blame, pay the bills and do whatever hard stuff they wanted done.  Propaganda evolved into sophisticated “marketing” and set about crafting a society based on insatiable materialistic consumerism and a “knowledge base” that was mostly thin air.  Truth became irrelevant, perception everything.  And, most of all, self-serving rights trumped social responsibility.

While their parents were truly giant adults, their offspring were incessantly whining children – a truly amazing case of massive reverse evolution.  The Boomers would memorize all the “right” answers for the tests designed by their parents and continue using the answers, and the brilliant thinking behind them, well into the next century – decades after the whole world upon which they had been based was gone – and couldn’t figure out why the old answers no longer worked.

Today, while the best description of most American men is just “dumb” and most American women “self-serving”, our best thinkers in intelligent print are mostly Third World immigrants.  Just check out the very astute work of Indian-American Fareed Zakaria, now Editor-at-Large of Time magazine, including his recent “Are America’s Best Days Behind Us?” (14 March 2011).  He attended schools in Mumbai before admission to Yale and then Harvard.  This very knowledgeable man thinks for himself, and brilliantly.  The best and most effective math and science teacher in America – Salman Khan – is the son of Bangladeshi and Indian parents who never received schooling in “education” and needs nothing but his home computer as “infrastructure”.  Lebanese-born and raised Fouad Ajami is a professor at Johns Hopkins who writes for print media about foreign affairs with a remarkably distinctive flare for English that is easily attributable even without a by-line.  The people who impress me most in America anymore are not native-born Americans.  I do understand Walt Kowalski.

American society today is based on little more than mandated lies, dictated dogma, serving a plethora of many millions of “special” people sitting around doing little more than making incessant demands of everyone else, using powerful lobbies and sophisticated propaganda to force a re-engineering of society to best serve their own childish wants.

Demanding Balance In Schools

During the late-1960s and 1970s young women inexplicably decided they needed to be “liberated” from those men being drafted like lemmings for deadly war.  These Boomer women went to work using powerful new law to forcibly “adjust” standards and practices everywhere they wanted to go.  While employment was one major front (and the one where affirmative action – quotas – was used most extensively), education was the other.  When Title IX became law in 1972 young American males were still living under fifteen excruciatingly long years of the ever-present threat of military Draft for a very deadly and polarizing war – a possible eventuality which was very dramatically affecting the decisions, lives and psychology of all young American men (and probably still affects many of those men today).  While very few of the available male ‘pool’ ever actually served in the military, being in, and remaining in, college was at least a certain temporary deferment from the constant threat of war service. A Draftee for Vietnam faced, in addition to the $2.00 a day pay, if he survived the war intact, at the very least a two to three year forced delay in keeping up with college contemporaries of both genders who did not get drafted, and in those highly competitive times, that delay period was significant indeed.  These were some of the things that women of that period never had to even consider.  (Being welcomed back home from war by screaming mobs, stones, curses, spit and defamation was another.)

Still, it was at that same opportune time, in the late-1960s and early-1970s, that women, adroitly discounting the skewed effect of the Draft, decided to make an issue of slight enrollment imbalances on the nation’s campuses that favored men. But feminists wisely did not attack the colleges and universities for their admission policies, as is the stupid myopic focus today.  They far more appropriately attacked the school system that prepared students for higher education – all the way back to the first years of elementary school.

Since the national gender “imbalance” on American college campuses at that time was only about 48-52 (a four point spread), there wasn’t much of a case to be made via the college admissions route, especially since a significant number of those “extra” males stayed in college primarily to avoid or delay the military Draft.  Exempt from the Draft themselves, women at that time instead wisely focused their attention on America’s top rated elementary and secondary schools, since this was the critical route to higher education, advancement in society and significantly increased income in any endeavor of choice.  As the Greatest Generation knew so well, the first-rate education system they had put in place was the critical key to economic opportunity in America, and they were determined to ensure that route was equitably available to everyone.  When more women did get into college, women activists wanted to be certain that those women could compete with men in any field they wished.  It was difficult for most others to understand the focus on this particular target since there were almost as many women on college campus as men, and they indeed could hold their own with anyone.

But, still, there was also a certain “numerical imbalance”, and, in those days, wherever there was a “numerical imbalance” that was not advantageous to women, that was a target.  Women activists and feminists were very successful in getting major changes instituted throughout our pre-college school system even prior to enactment of Title IX – simply by making very loud noises to our “woman’s world” school systems.

Most Americans, and especially men, think Title IX only concerns college sports programs. This is a gross underestimation of the true wide scope of the law, a misunderstanding that is the intended consequence of incessant women’s lobby propaganda for the last several decades.  First, Title IX is universal civil rights law, applicable to all Americans, not just to any select group or groups.  It is NOT some obscure fine print that enables college women to channel money from men’s to women’s sports programs.  (Sports programs are actually a “bottom of the barrel” thing.)  Title IX is NOT something “for women”; it is for BOTH genders, and, in accordance with our Constitution, it assumes an equal level of responsibility by the other gender.

Title IX of the 1972 Civil Rights Education Amendments to the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender against students and employees of any education programs or activities receiving any federal financial assistance at any level.  Nearly every aspect of all public elementary, secondary and post-secondary institutions in America is covered under this law as a consequence of the Elementary and Secondary Education and the Higher Education acts of 1965 (which addressed financial assistance).

Court cases less well known than recent college sports cases brought and won by women in the quarter of a century after 1972 firmly established that this legislation also prohibits gender discrimination in such areas as:  admissions to vocational, graduate, professional and public undergraduate schools; access to courses and programs; school counseling and guidance; tests, materials and practices; physical education and athletics; vocational education programs; student rules and policies; financial assistance; student housing; extracurricular activities; and employment in educational institutions.

Title IX is thus a comprehensive federal civil rights law that prohibits any discrimination on the basis of gender in any education program or activity receiving federal funds – a condition which is nearly impossible not to find everywhere in any public education entity in the nation today.  Title IX applies to both students and teachers, both employees and administrators, just as much to the first grade as to post-graduate school.  It applies, with a few specific exceptions, to virtually all aspects of education programs or activities in America that receive any federal money, either directly or indirectly.  In addition to traditional educational institutions such as colleges, universities, and elementary and secondary schools, Title IX also applies to any education or training program operated by a recipient of federal financial assistance, including that provided under the G.I. and subsequent similar bills for veterans.  In short, Title IX civil rights law applies to every single aspect of American academic education, bottom to top.

How do you determine “discrimination”?  By numbers, by simple math, by any appreciable deviation from a statistical “norm”.  The thinking was sensible Greatest Generation thinking.  (Individual differences are easily accommodated in very large groups – as represented by a normal bell-shaped curve.  The same applies to large sub-groups.)

The most glaring violation possible of Title IX  is a significant gender imbalance in student enrollment on an American college campus.  Federal law requires the government to bring suit against any such university under threat of withdrawing all federal financial assistance going to that university by any route. The law is intended to protect men as well as women, and ensure both are afforded equal opportunity to advance economically in America via taxpayer-funded education.  The same applies to any educational institution below the university level.  Most applicable state laws copy these federal statutes.  But laws are only as good as the effort that goes into enforcing them, especially by those elected, employed and paid to serve all of us, and not just to serve the “special” people.  In the forty years since its enactment, no Title IX case has ever been bought on behalf of boys – the “other half” of our society.  That’s a really twisted version of “equality“.

Legal Arguments

The two key legal principles firmly established in law by women which led to and then relied on the Title IX legislation were:

(1)  appreciable imbalance beyond the statistical norm (50-50) is prima facie evidence of institutional gender discrimination, and

(2)  it is not possible to blame the victims of such discrimination for their failure to achieve the desired numerical balance, i.e., it is necessary for the institution to change to ensure gender balance is achieved.

Women focused on elementary and secondary

  • drop-out rates,
  • teaching methods,
  • classroom atmosphere,
  • textbook content,
  • gender role models,
  • test questions,
  • special programs,
  • testing methods,
  • test scores,
  • graduation rates,
  • scholarship awards,

etc. – and found them wanting, i.e, unfavorable to girls, imbalances that needed immediate correction no matter what that took.  Even though the numerical imbalances were quite minor compared to today, the schools and the courts agreed.

There was no need to query school girls on what they thought of it all, or even about what they wanted for themselves, because school girls, as “child victims”, were not capable of recognizing the degree to which “numerical imbalance” resulting from “institutional discrimination” was hurting them and their futures.  (“Child victims”, intended in US law to apply to all those below the age of 18, later included college women, regardless of age, seemingly uninterested in competitive sports.)  Since children are not capable of recognizing how their lack of success as children will adversely impact their entire lives ahead, it is the responsibility of accountable adults to do whatever is necessary to ensure they do succeed.  And the first step to that end is to recognize that the two genders do, in fact, learn in different ways and to make maximum use of those differences to the best advantage of each.  But this is not what happened.

Women activists asserted very persuasively that numerical imbalance was sufficient evidence of discrimination and thus just flat-out wrong.  They applied very extensively a legal concept known as “disparate impact“, which focuses not on discriminatory intent, as disparate treatment does, but instead on discriminatory consequences, regardless of the treatment, and it is now firmly established in American civil rights law; it shifts the focus from the process to the results, and demands that the process be altered in any way necessary to achieve the desired results.  Nowhere is the concept more important than with society’s most vulnerable group, the one that literally screams out for equitable attention under full adult accountability – its children, its girls AND boys.  And many millions of American men fully accepted that rationale at the K-12 level on its face value.

This was at least an intelligent approach, far more sensible than attacking college admission policies – and one all well and good as long as the “victims” were female children.  Note, however, that this approach has unintended consequences, not fully recognized at the time.  When applied to those 18 and older, including college women, it effectively shifts responsibility from the individual to others who have an impact on the individual; it allows people to escape responsibility for their own choices, for their own behavior.  “It’s not my fault if I don’t learn; it’s your fault for not teaching me.”  It’s easily possible to extend this argument into very aspect of human endeavor. (Eventually it would divorce all personal responsibility from any discussion of rights, and shift the responsibility parts to “someone else”.  “I have rights; I do not have responsibilities.  It’s your responsibility for ensuring whatever rights I decide to demand for me.”  Those with a functioning brain can see where such madness leads.  The concept of “disparate impact” soon settled into the mindset of huge portions of the American population seeking to shift blame to “someone else”.  Like so many other well-intentioned temporary remedies in our society, it became permanently institutionalized.)

Nevertheless, women activists, aggressively applying the principle of “disparate impact” only to their own group, demanded, and quickly got, very major changes in the nation’s pre-college school system – changes in teaching methods, counseling, very significant extra federal funding, extensive reporting requirements, shifts in core subjects, special programs, even changes in test questions and text book and test content – all of which were ostensibly intended to move girls into ‘parity’ with boys graduating from high school and gaining admission to college as rapidly as possible.  The changes were sold and instituted with the broad understanding that they were temporary measures needed to achieve “balance”.

Significantly, the previous prevalent classroom learning process of relying heavily on carefully orchestrated individual competition among students, which, it was argued, favored boys, gave way to more quiet group cooperative learning, which, it was argued, provided a more conducive (“less threatening”) learning environment for girls.  It was an intuitive argument, based on almost no objective research other than a few small survey-type studies that counted raised hands in class and noted their gender.  (The number of raised hands was deemed an indicator of ‘classroom participation’, and thus an indicator of ‘learning progress’.)  This intuitive argument was indeed supported by previous extensive scientific study by the Greatest Generation that laid out in very considerable detail by 1965 the very real differences in the ways in which boys and girls learn, and well understood by most teachers.

I noticed the same classroom dynamic in conjunction with my own university studies of school children a decade earlier, and then found published studies conducted over the preceding quarter of a century which confirmed my own observations.  But what was really going on?  It turned out that 80,000 years of preceding human evolution had resulted in a few gender differences in the learning process, including that boys are more competitive with each other than are girls.  That hand-raising was a form of mild competitive game among the boys.  Smart and well-trained teachers had been using this natural tendency among boys to hold their interest and to teach them to their own best advantage.  But what about the girls?  It turned out that when the teacher ignored the boys and called on a girl, who may or may not have raised her hand, she almost always knew the correct answer, too.  She just wasn’t all that much into making a ruckus about it.  She was watching the boys go through their ritual, doing her own thinking, and just waiting to bowl them all over.  And she almost always did.  Girls do more private contemplation and discussion among themselves to reach a consensus about the correct answer; they use their own natural tendencies to their best learning advantage.  Like everyone else, girls were also learning from the boys’ wrong answers.  Boys are less reluctant to embrace risk, to fail, to make leaps of faith, to learn from mistakes.  Girls were learning just as well as, if not better than, boys – because teachers were very aware of the quite different ways in which boys and girls learn and were using that knowledge and expertise to the advantage of both genders.  It’s a little more difficult to do this, since it requires simultaneously teaching to two different groups, and since some boys can get a bit too competitive.  But teachers knew that the other boys would quickly put such a boy in his proper place, if she didn’t.

But “feminist” interpretation of their anecdotal classroom observations was not based on science.  The boys’ raised hands were seen as “intimidating” to girls.  Feminists used their superficial observations of this natural human dynamic to demand a change in “classroom atmosphere” via a dramatic change in teaching methods.  A key element in demanding the changes women wanted during the 1970s was to label boys’ natural competitiveness as “aggression” – which immediately became a very bad word in the education industry.  “Male competition” was now “male aggression”, something “evil” that had to be banned from the classroom.  “Male aggression” remains central to feminist “thinking” even today (probably because, whatever you call it, it has very few sanctioned and controlled outlets and thus now often shows up in the wrong places).  Feminists turned natural tendencies of males into a weapon to be used against them.  Result: instant boredom, which accomplished nothing positive, for boys.  So, the first effect of the new “thinking” was to hobble boys so girls could move forward.

With the nation’s attention dramatically diverted by the “anti-war” (-Draft) movement and the Black Rights movement, the length of the rather muted school debate at that time was no more than several years, and by the mid-1970s the dramatic changes were almost universal across the country in all of our women-dominated school systems.  Only minor court-mandated tweaking remained for the rest of that decade. While the newly demanded classroom environment (“atmosphere”) definitely provided a considerably easier working environment for teachers, a very major impetus to this rapid change across the country was also, of course, the 1972 Title IX civil rights legislation.  Feminists used this new law aggressively wherever they found a desired opening that had not already been adequately addressed by previous loud complaints or court cases, most often via very powerful organizations like NOW and AAUW (See Comment #2.).  Often just the threat of litigation was sufficient to achieve the demanded changes – which, since they favored females, were not difficult to achieve among the industry’s predominantly female teachers, now themselves being taught every day by those same powerful organizations that they themselves were “victims” in a “male-dominated” world and that they could all have a plethora of rights that came without responsibility.  The name of the game was numerical balance, or quotas, everywhere, no matter what that required.

(In case no one has noticed, the “cooperative” approach to “classroom environment” is also highly conducive to cheating, which, in the intervening years, became an integral aspect of our entire culture, not limited just to inflated résumés, but including drug-popping professional athletes, women using double standards to advance, political candidates lying for emotional votes, journalists “spinning” stories, perpetual losers constantly “reinventing” themselves, jerks claiming the work of others as their own, “achievement” awards for every “special” person who simply shows up, playing the game under changed rules so as to give the illusion of out-performing predecessors, people altering their appearance through plastic surgery, and even our nation’s nuclear weapons officers routinely sharing answers for proficiency tests on code handling, launch procedures, missile safety, even basic qualification exams.  “Everyone cheats on every test that they can,” said one such woman officer, “and they have for decades.”  Honest guys now finish last?  Just who can you trust?  Boys learn their values between ages 7 and 12 by the examples shown every day by the adults around them.  “It’s the name of the game.”  A cheater is a liar; never ever trust a liar.)

(The articleAmerica’s Greatest Social Shame – Boyscontains discussion of the legal considerations, rationale, arguments and precedents established in court decisions by women’s lobbies pursuing very extensive changes throughout American K-12 public education during the 1970s.  This companion article also takes a closer look at some of the broad “thinking” mentioned here, and its consequences.)

In 1982, ten years after enactment, came the Pivotal Moment for our schools.  Except for an aging Greatest Generation man in the White House who had come out of retirement dedicated to finally ending the “Cold” War, the really huge Baby Boomer wave was now dominant.  Gender ‘parity’ (balance) on the nation’s college campuses was achieved in the early 1980s (five years after the Draft ended), when many of those temporary pre-college programs intended to assist girls came up for scheduled Congressional review.  But, even though “numerical balance” was demonstrated in every key K-12 factor of interest to women, powerful women’s organizations such as NOW and AAUW argued very strongly before Congressional committees, with very questionable “evidence”, that there was still justification for keeping those programs and their huge federal funding in place.

And they were.  The issue was dead, never to rise again.  School systems, eyeing all that money, agreed.  NOW and AAUW were gradually joined by the rapidly rising teachers unions AFT and NEA, now the two largest and most powerful unions in America, in the pro-girl/anti-boy “group think”. (See Footnote #2.)   The number of girls admitted to college began moving ahead of boys in the early-1980s, and that gap has grown wider in every single year since – now for three decades.  Gender imbalances on college campuses are projected to continue widening as far into the future as can reasonably be projected, and those imbalances are now moving strongly into post-graduate schools.  (For example, in December 2013, Duke University announced that its incoming class of doctorial candidates in economics will be two-thirds female.)  By the late 1990s, “numerical imbalances” in K-12 had become so enormously tipped against boys that public schools would no longer reveal gender data in their reporting.  (See “group entitlement” under ‘Bury The Opposition’ at “Marketing And Propaganda – Techniques.)

And all of this is just “normal”, “accidental”, and not the consequence of malicious intent?  Doesn’t any part of this vast industry do something so basic as teach people how to think?

Unfortunately, the programs originally instituted to assist girls have now been running so long that everyone thinks they are “normal”.  They are not.  They have just become permanently institutionalized; our public schools teach to girls and expect boys to adapt. American schools are now overwhelmingly “right-brain” oriented, to the great detriment of “left-brain” talents previously dominant in males.  (According to left-brain/right-brain dominance theory in psychology, the right side of the brain is seen as best at expressive and creative tasks, emotion, facial recognition.  The left-side of the brain is considered to be more adept at tasks that involve logic, language, numbers, analytical thinking.)  It’s all “group think” running on mindless auto-pilot.  Those boys who don’t adapt, fail, and in so many different ways, and in really huge numbers.  There are very good reasons beyond a lack of interest among girls for why our schools do such a dismally poor job of teaching math, which historically has been more acceptable to male minds; it’s a natural consequence of a deliberate intent.  The more you avoid teaching all children math, and all that follows from math, including intelligent reasoning and logic, the easier it is to avoid fact and context and instead use emotion to “make your argument”, i.e., inculcate your own self-serving emotional propaganda in very young, naive and impressionable minds.  Boys exist in school in little boxes deliberately designed to contain, bore and frustrate them, while also programming them with “whatever women want”.  Arrogant women in this enormous critical industry literally scream to boys, “You WILL become me!”

It just so happened that this same period (early 1980s) was also the period when the number of women voters began moving ahead of men voters; this steady widening trend, too, has continued in every election since, so that today it’s absurd to think that any politicians are going to risk alienating that huge majority women’s voting block, or their powerful lobbies, OR the even more powerful teachers unions, on ANY topic.  Women rule education, ruthlessly, and completely without challenge, or even question, on matters of gender.  It’s solely a matter of “whatever women want”, a “tyranny of the majority” which civil rights law is specifically designed to counter.  Gender in education has not been mentioned in Congress for over a quarter of a century, unless it was to vilify ‘boy bullies’ or to discuss drugging them up under all sorts of newly invented “medical” pretexts.  American women, running on mindless auto-pilot, give the impression that they care far more about some endangered animal in Africa than they do about America’s endangered boys, or even about their own sons.

Since boys are now failing at a rate far greater than the very high rate girls are succeeding, our whole public school system is, inescapably, by definition and by law, one gigantic affirmative action program for girls, now moving into its fifth decade.  (See Footnote #1.)

The Emphasis On Girls

From 1972 to the early-1990s it was impossible to read any report anywhere on the state of our public schools throughout the country without the progress of girls being trumpeted way up front and addressed with the same bold-letter gravity as race.  Much of this publicity was due to reporting requirements that accompanied extra federal assistance funding for girls’ education, but a lot of it was also due to the continuing demands of women, including mothers and powerful women’s lobbies, to know exactly how well girls were doing in every aspect of school.  Whenever they saw or heard words like “children” or “students” in education reports, these ever vigilant women were quick to claim, justifiably, that “uni-sex in schools is just a cheap cover for hiding institutional sexist bigotry.”

Then in the late-1990s, the words “gender”, “girls”, “boys”, etc., quietly began disappearing from school status reports.  No public announcement accompanied this mysterious change.  The truth was becoming just too embarrassing, and too illegal.  In recent years, it has become very difficult, if not impossible, to find a public school report from anywhere in the country that provides reliable comparative gender statistics, that does not religiously use gender-neutral terms like “students” and “children” to divert attention away from any gender discrepancies which exist in those schools or school systems.  Such practices are patently and purposefully deceptive, deliberate propaganda.  The same applies to women-dominated governmental agencies at all levels established to oversee American education, including the US Department of Education.  The same also applies to every article written by the 98% of “education journalists” in this country who are women as they disseminate the propaganda churned out by the schools and their government agencies.  Apparently the “cheap cover for hiding institutional sexist bigotry” argument now depends on which gender is benefiting from the bigoted “uni-sex” propaganda.

In America, women and their many lobbies determine the social agenda.  America is ALL about “whatever women want” – for themselves.  After a half century of intense navel contemplation, gender is of concern to women ONLY when such concern is or might be beneficial to women.  The net effect is to screw males over in every endeavor possible so females can “advance” – and society as a whole can suffer.  Now “uni-sex” is simply misandry in its purest form.  American women have rights; they do NOT have responsibilities.  Everyone else has the responsibility — for ensuring whatever rights women decide to claim for themselves at any given moment.  When you have lived your entire life under the concept of “disparate impact”, which was intended as a temporary measure to achieve numerical balance among school children, running on mindless auto-pilot in perpetuity, it’s possible to view it as “normal”, a “natural aspect of life that is intended to enable “me” to avoid responsibility for anything, even for my own choices, my own behavior, as an adult with a million rights.”  We now have a nation of grown-up infants wailing for the nipple.  (When you’ve absolved yourself of responsibility, whom do you blame when things go wrong, don’t work out the way you wanted, don’t realize the craved fame and fortune?  Anyone and anything except “me”.  “It’s a conspiracy!”  Thanks to American “feminism”, this is now the basic underlying premise for almost all political “thinking” in America.  Totally asinine, isn’t it?  Human herds as tree moss.)

These are the most expensive – and worst performing – schools in the developed world, in human history.  Costs of women-dominated public education in the US have risen an astounding 375% since 1970, but school test scores have remained flat or fallen, while concentrating in areas that do little to keep the nation economically competitive.  Except for its free day care function, this is the greatest “black hole” for wasted money in American history.  For these people, forty years of abject failure is ample justification for even more money to keep them employed for forty more years of failure.  (Most of these astronomical increased costs are a direct consequence of “feminism’s” deliberate and systematic destruction of the traditional family unit and its inherent division of labor and sharing of responsibility, which, in turn, has required a truly massive shift in dependence to government and those employed by that government.  It’s just another humongous cost to “all of us” of rampant self-involved “me-ism” devoid of responsibility.)

Today only a fool would trust anything any education official tells them about American public education.  How is it even possible, for example, to research, write and disseminate a major report on schools with incredible 30% to 50% drop-out rates, without mentioning that over 90% of those drop-outs are boys?  It’s done every day, on this and many similar topics, by the schools, by school systems, by their government agencies and by the women “education journalists” who churn out this school-provided boilerplate junk in every publication, TV station and web site in America.  For an average taxpaying schmuck like me trying hard for the past ten years to get reliable gender statistics, it’s so unbelievably frustrating that it’s time for some responsible adult to propose that the Secretary of Education be replaced by an adult male federal judge with full subpoena powers.  Today you practically need a federal court order to pry reliable gender data from this vast women-dominated school industry and its enormously powerful unions.

It’s all reminiscent of the “Cold” War days when US intelligence agencies tried to divine what was going on in Soviet Russia, long after the fact, by meticulously examining published obituaries of deceased key personnel.  The Tightly Closed Secret Society.  It’s impossible not to suspect sinister intent.  But, of course, all you really have to do is note the enormous gender imbalance on our nation’s post-secondary campuses to KNOW that our pre-college school industry is, under the law, just a self-serving criminal enterprise.  American citizen gender imbalances on college campuses is now the obituary of the secret American K-12 school system.  It’s small wonder that a college graduate today is on a knowledge par with a high school graduate of a half century ago, the public at large in 1960.  Based on performance over the past forty years, the results of American “education” move one full year backwards every decade.

To view gender balance on college campus as desirable for dating purposes is simply infantile in the extreme.  And efforts to whine about racial preferences in college admissions is just a cheap tactic to divert public attention from women’s self-serving hegemonic stranglehold on American public K-12.  Such women have no idea what hell is coming to them, fast.  American women as a group now spend twice as much on their own clothing as all of us together spend on higher education, and still whine about the cost of higher education that benefits them twice as much as men.  And that doesn’t include an even greater amount these self-involved princesses spend on their shoes and all those accessories, jewelry, etc., that must accompany those expensive clothes – solely to impress other self-involved American women.  Who teaches them all that revolting “birthright entitlement” nonsense, the disgusting lie that they are somehow “special” in a democracy professing equality, that all those rights they claim for themselves come devoid of corresponding responsibilities?  Who teaches these offensive jerks how to think?  (They teach it to themselves, in a society that outlaws criticism, bans challenge to their self-serving “thinking”, uses phony charges of “misogyny” to “legitimize” their misandry.)

Now we even have these “equality” fanatics using Title IX to broaden the intent of the law far beyond what was ever imagined by those who enacted it, even into such areas as “sexual harassment” on college campuses (if anyone can actually define just what that is), as if there weren’t enough laws, policies, regulations, etc., ad nauseam, already banning such behavior, even requiring men to lie to women, to tell them only the nonsense they want to hear.  It’s just using anything remotely possible to cover up the ugly truth to serve “me”.  Laws using Title IX to govern “sexual harassment” is a way women intend to protect themselves from accountability for the sexist bigotry against boys perpetrated in their K-12 public schools.  “It’s against the law to complain about bigotry perpetrated against males, to hold women accountable for their own sexism.”  It’s just another trick designed to protect all those rights claimed by women, while also absolving them of responsibility, and accountability, for anything.  “I will allow you to enter my privileged campus world provided you keep your mouth tightly shut and comply with all my demands.  I am now “The Man”, but I am also a perpetual “special” victim who cannot be held accountable.  Sure I’ve been screwing you over, but you are not allowed to do anything about it.”

This stuff belongs in a lunatic asylum.  I’ve tried to articulate what it feels like to a man like me to be affronted by the extremely offensive nonsense now spewed by so many women (and their cloned male morons) on college campuses today, but I always fall short.  I guess the best description is utter disgust that my country could actually spawn such self-involved and ignorant tots in adult bodies.  These ugly creeps tar me with shame as a responsible American man, make me feel just squalid.  I don’t think I could even bring myself to shake hands with such twisted children pretending to be women, twits blaming everyone else for their own stupidly infantile narcissism, their own failure as contributive humans, fearing I might become infected with the same cancerous disease that is destroying my society – and all simply because they’ve never been challenged.

When I hear that nonsense, I fervently wish there were cell phones on campus in the ‘60s.  I could have taken videos of all those exceedingly arrogant and offensive and intrusive and abusive young “feminists” screaming in the faces of trapped men, spittle spraying everywhere, “If you know it’s wrong and do nothing about it, then YOU, dickhead, are part of the problem!”  “Sexual harassment” indeed is in the eye of the beholder.  Those guys back then honestly didn’t even know there was a problem worth contemplating.  If the Draft and war and dead soldiers and racial injustice and massive riots wasn’t enough, there was always our totally oblivious and self-centered and privileged Baby Boomer women screaming in their faces.  What would happen today if young men tried the same tactics on young women today?  They’d be arrested for “sexual harassment”.  In 2011 not a day goes by when some extremely offensive woman does not say things, usually in a vulgar manner, about or to men that deeply offends me, that constitutes the exact same sexism that women refuse to be allowed to be directed against them.  I can imagine what kind of “men” these “special” immune bigots, with all their double standards, are creating.  (News flash, Ladies:  Boys, men, do NOT “create themselves”.  Isn’t it telling that every parent proudly claims credit for children who succeed, but none claims credit for the losers?  It’s the extreme “feminist” narcissism now inherent throughout our society, all rights and no responsibilities.  “Blame it on a gene!”)

Pathetically, the US is the only English-speaking country in the world that has not been adult enough to recognize long ago that its boys are in Big Trouble and that the situation fully warrants very strong concerted effort, programs, campaigns and regulations at the national level to get things back into some decent equilibrium.  All of those other countries were quick to copy civil rights laws enacted in the 1960s and ’70s by our Greatest Generation, and they still actually try to live up to those laws.  Just consider that Canada’s schools are far better than ours, yet over 60% of the population of Canada was born in another country!  Almost every country in Europe, starting with Finland at the top, has schools enormously better than ours, even though they are all, just like we are, now heavily dependent on Third World immigration and its future taxpayer children to keep themselves viable, to pay for their own birthright entitlements.

New technology drives economic growth, but this principle only works if education keeps pace with technology.  And education critical to technology definitely does NOT begin at the college gates.  Everyone accepts that college football stars need nurturing for years before college, yet women absurdly think that physics stars can be magically created during their sophomore or junior year of college.  When public education falls behind, many millions of workers don’t have the skills to do the jobs required for new technology.  Throughout our history, American public education at all levels kept pace with technology — until the 1970s.  This is when American women decided to re-engineer K-12 public education to meet their self-interested demands and refused to adjust those self-interests for the next forty years despite ever more glaring and inescapable evidence of gross inequities and failure.  It’s been systematically undermining the nation ever since.

Now we even have the totally absurd situation of American women and their lobbies whining about not having their “fair quota” of jobs in high tech companies that employ people with skills that not enough American women possess.  Women employed by such companies today are less than a third of those employed in 1975 when their rate was around 40%, so, naturally, the reaction is to blame “someone else” – the companies for their “discriminatory” hiring practices.  So what are the companies supposed to do?  Hire women just to get the demanded quotas regardless of whether or not the women are qualified for the jobs?  The whole argument is just asinine.  “I have rights!; I do NOT have responsibilities!”  The United States has been engaged in the stupid quota nonsense for a half century, and the dismal results are everywhere you look (including, shamefully, in our “foreign affairs” cabal).  If you look closely at the work forces of those high tech companies, you’ll discover that most of their male employees were schooled in foreign countries!  You just can’t get the required high tech qualifications by waving a magic wand after 16 years of pampered American schooling leading to a college degree in Women’s Studies or Medieval Art.  Both genders, and society, have suffered just to meet the childish demands of women, beginning all the way back in the first grade.

How many men are complaining about not having their “fair quotas” in industries now overwhelmingly dominated by women – such as the entire “child development” arena of sociology, psychology, education and health – where women dominate with percentages over 85%?  Men, and especially boys, don’t have lobbies, and American women are great at focusing attention on tiny places where they seem to be at some “disadvantage”, but never allow a full discussion of the whole picture, or the reasons why.  The result is a totally twisted perversion of our entire sick society.

In the early 1970s the mutual dependency between technology and education was broken.  The result has been many millions of lower-skilled, lower-educated and low-paid workers and far fewer highly skilled, highly educated and high-paid workers – all creating ever rising income inequities.  (See Footnote #5.)  Worse, the American highly educated people are mostly in liberal arts and government services, which do not contribute substantially to technological or economic growth – a grave imbalance for which the US now desperately tries to compensate with much better-educated foreign immigrants coming in and assuming positions at or near the top in higher education, research and business.  But opportunities in America are steadily becoming less inviting to such people, who now can turn to a number of other more competitive and forward-looking societies to make their contribution, all while American society continues to drift in a self-involved morass with economic “growth” mostly driven by moving around other peoples’ inherited money.  Any worthwhile education system, and most certainly one maintained by taxes on society’s members, MUST maximize learning environments for both genders equitably while also meeting the requirements of society’s survival, no matter how hard that is – for both teachers and students.  The US education system accomplished this very well, up until the 1970s.  Women have been offering arguments, excuses, censorship, rationales, blame-shifting, etc., ad nauseam now for decades about the blatant problems with our schools, while making zero forward motion on improving those schools, on making them live up to their mandate of providing quality educations to ALL of our children, equitably.  As experience has shown, when it’s THEIR group on the line, American women can demand and implement very major changes in very short order to achieve what THEY want, simply by using the law and the courts as their battering ram.  (See Footnote #6.)

Sports

In recent times all the Title IX emphasis has been on sports.  Why?  Because that’s all that’s left in “education” for women’s lobbies to complain about.  (This is, of course, dependent on whether or not their latest whines about “sexual harassment” censorship gains enough legs to survive court challenge, assuming there’s an actual man left out there with enough spine to bring such a challenge.)  And even with sports they have always refused to look in the mirror.  Women’s groups incessantly blame men for any “problems” they perceive in their own group, today and in the past, because that tactic fits much better into their “women as eternal victim” dogma.  But in the US the simple truth is that it’s been mostly a case of overcoming women’s lack of interest in certain, usually competitive, endeavors, from basketball to math.  As in all other endeavors, the chief problem women’s groups have had has not been with men; it’s been with other women.  In the US, men have never “denied” women anything; they have always bowed to whatever women wanted, as soon as enough of them decided just what it was that they wanted.  (Some men did object, unsuccessfully, when women wanted to change the rules to favor themselves at the expense of men.)  So almost all of women’s group “wars” have been waged exclusively for the hearts and minds of other women; it’s just been more self-serving if they can claim that men are their “oppressors” to maintain that “victim” nonsense.  Title IX in recent years has done much in overcoming women’s general lack of interest in competitive sports, and thereby generating more money and attention to meet that steadily growing interest.  But it was never a case of women being “denied” participation in sports.  (My mother was a star basketball player in college – during the 1930s.  She was also so good at math that she became a national level cryptologist and division head for the “male-dominated” Defense Department long before “feminism” ever reared its ugly quota head.)  It was always a case of not enough women being interested in competitive sports to make full blown programs worth the effort, especially since so few women who were not in the programs were even interested in supporting those women who were.  So “feminists” in the early-199os turned to men to take the blame and assume the accountability, a tried and true tactic since the 1960s.  (It was the familiar old “disparate impact” theory, the one that absolves one of personal responsibility, that requires “someone else” to ensure the “special” people get whatever they want, that makes “someone else” responsible for the free choices women make, for their own elective behavior.)

Under a late Title IX-based legal argument, huge amounts of funds were systematically drawn from successful men’s sports programs and invested in fledging women’s programs. (Extra profits generated by successful men’s college sports programs have long gone to their universities – in order to help reduce college costs for everyone.*)  This huge influx of money enabled women’s groups to gradually generate more and more interest among women to participate in those programs – especially when the funds from men’s sports programs were used to pay women’s sports scholarships, all while men’s sports programs were reduced to meet the mandated quota “balance”.  Women thus used money from men’s programs to build their own programs, while also successfully demanding that men’s programs be reduced under a numerical quota system that maintained the mandated Title IX “balance” – even taking away scholarships already won by men, most shamefully even on campuses where women students out-numbered men students by two-to-one.  (How selfish, myopic and self-involved is it possible to get?)  If more women entered women’s sports programs, then an equal number of men could be added to men’s programs; it was a classic case of screwing the other guy in order to cut him down to your level and forcing him to pay for it.  The “evil oppressor” propaganda works much better than the “uninterested women” truth.  (It should be noted here that all of the mechanisms that women’s lobbies used over the past half century to achieve their objectives constitute legal precedents; they are thus firmly established in American civil rights law and readily available for use by any other group seeking similar objectives in any similar arena.  Equal rights, indeed, are a double-edged sword – IF they are equitably enforced.)

All of this was done in athletics, however, only after women’s groups for a quarter of a century had already successfully re-engineered all of American academic education to their desires – all under Title IX’s mandate for gender balance in every aspect of American education, no matter what that required, including, at the end, using funds generated by male athletics to boost female athletics.  Now, of course, there is no mention of “balance” wherever women benefit far more than men, as they now do in all other aspects of American education.  “Title IX is civil rights law just for “me”, and it only applies where “I” want it to apply, in order to favor “special me”.  And I do NOT have responsibility for anything beyond me.”  This, of course, is both totally self-serving and completely absurd.  (Some have described it as “the epitome of self-involved arrogant ugliness.”)  Today I truly love watching the marvelous US women’s Olympic soccer team compete against the world’s best.  (It still pains me that American women could not be bothered enough to support their own world class women’s soccer league with such global stars as Mia Hamm at the turn of this century.  That magical team was America’s best ambassador throughout the Third World since our World War II G.I.s.)  But when I recall the sordid history, the incredibly huge costs paid by men and, even much worse, being paid by American boys today – all because women weren’t interested in sports – I get a little sick, and ashamed of American women.  I don’t blame today’s athletes; I blame their totally self-involved Baby Boomer mothers who keep their extremist hate groups running on mindless auto-pilot.  For them, it’s all rights and no responsibility.  It’s all about “me”.  Can you imagine what’s going to happen when an American father finally finds enough spine to take his son by the hand and walk into an American courtroom with a Title IX class action law suit against every single public school system in the country and the entire Department of “Education”, too?  Tough.  That’s the only thing that will ever make our privileged “special” women realize that with each of all those rights they claim comes a corresponding responsibility – for others.  It is NOT all about “me”.  It’s about equal rights and equal responsibility – for all of us.  There is no “special” in equal.  Empowerment” does NOT authorize the same bigotry you condemn in others, and most especially when your victims are male children.

“Europe was created by history.  America was created by philosophy.” - Margaret Thatcher, Greatest Generation British Prime Minister (1979-1990).

You don’t exactly have to be a genius to ask the blatantly obvious: The Greatest Generation knew full well that America had been forged directly in violent and intellectual opposition to unearned birthright entitled nobility, to favored dictatorship, as a constitutional democratic meritocracy – wherein educational opportunity is paramount to earned socio-economic advancement.  Why would the Greatest Generation ever bother to enact a civil rights law on education that limited itself to athletics?  The notion is simply ludicrous.  Does anyone think there was a huge groundswell of women’s demands during the 1960s to form their own campus rowing crews?  The Greatest Generation never thought so incredibly small.  The whole foundation of the civil rights movement was equal economic opportunity across the board, in all endeavors, for everyone.  (See Footnote #4.) 

Those who don’t know history, or philosophy, or law, should at least be able to apply a little logic.  The purpose is equal economic opportunity; the vehicle is equal academic education; the process is irrelevant; the proof is in the  r-e-s-u-l-t-s.    Get it?

It’s just incredibly grotesque in America in 2014 having to endure the 58-page ranting of a woman Supreme Court Justice over a policy that seeks to end racial affirmative action admissions to college without her ever recognizing that the real issue is gender affirmative action throughout American K-12 public schools.  How is it even possible for any woman viewing campus enrollment populations tilted enormously in favor of women to not see that something is very seriously wrong with this picture?  How is it even possible to be that oblivious to the blatantly obvious?  Can even a woman on the Supreme Court recognize no responsibility to anyone or anything but her own group?  Just what twisted definition of “equal opportunity” does this women use?  Just which version of the US Constitution is she reading?  To myopically focus on race in a country that ensures twice as many college admissions and degrees to women, year after year, decade after decade, is as “brilliant” as closing the barn door after the horses have fled.  Can anyone even image what would happen if some idiot tried to focus on race if twice as many men were entering college and earning degrees as women?  Every woman in the country would take to the streets in full riot gear, and this woman judge would be at the forefront.  What this woman Supreme Court justice is screaming is that, “In America, women have rights; they do NOT have responsibilities!  It’s ALL about ME!  Everyone else has the responsibility for ensuring whatever rights I demand!”  And that, of course, is just asinine.  The self-serving arrogance that comes with never being challenged literally overwhelms the rational mind.

The proper place to address any racial or gender inequities in American education is in K-12, and the objective must be equitable balance – so that anyone who shows up at the college gates gets in on their own merit, their own ability to meet the very highest standards, regardless of any artificial labels.  And that includes “special” women.

Despite repeated efforts over the last five years, Congress has failed to re-authorize the Elementary and Secondary School Act, the law that governs all public schools that receive federal financing.  The Obama Administration has granted 34 states waivers in meeting the last such law (“No Child Left Behind”), mainly because state school systems don’t want to hold teachers and administrators accountable for the results they don’t achieve.  But naturally both national and state politicians will only discuss that old dodge “children” and refuse to mention gender.  With the entire school industry dominated by and for women, and with women constituting the nation’s largest voting bloc, it’s impossible for politicians to state the blatantly obvious and tackle the real problem head-on.  So the only option left is to use Title IX federal civil rights law in courts – just like women have been doing for the past forty years to get what they wanted for themselves, and fast, too.

The greater the obstacle, the more glory overcoming it.” – Molière

.

Parting Words

So, to all those bright girls on campus, I say, “Keep on snickering.  Relish your bigotry, your blatant misandry.  Wallow in your self-proclaimed “victimhood”.  Enjoy laughing at those “dumb” male losers around you.  It’s all sweet justice.  Since your mothers created those guys, the joke’s on you.  You got the men your mothers thought you deserved – just like you.  And that makes it all a truly great tragedy – one that will surely turn your future to hell.  I’m sure it’s a matter of true delight that you can even get men to pay to support your sexist bigotry against their sons.  Of course, it’s certain that, in all your superiority, you’ve already figured out how you’re going to support those many tens of millions of male losers, because, one way or the other, you surely will (after, of course, you’ve found “someone else” to bail you out of a queen’s ransom in student loans).  It’s time to grow up, Ladies.  You are now “The Man”.  And we’re all eagerly awaiting your dozens of 21st century versions of Ford Motor Company, space ships, highways, Amazon, cell phones, Facebook, computers, UPS, internet, global airlines, product printers and drones.  It’s taxpayers engaged in such productive endeavors that are needed to pay for your luxurious dependence on government.  Since the survival of the nation depends on such ingenious creations NOT following the example achieved through your mothers’ “leadership” of American K-12 public “education” over the past forty years, it will be interesting, to say the least, to discover how you will build success on such colossal failure.  Just consider how incredibly stupid it is to screw boys over in school for forty years just so you can continue to demand your “right” to quota positions in enterprises they create – as if it were still 1960.  In case you haven’t noticed, the only men who are creating those enterprises these days are men who were not crippled by your schools, who left to escape the bigotry (or recent immigrants who received far better schooling elsewhere before arriving).

To the Boomers, I say, “I am deeply ashamed of all of you – women for their self-centered bigotry, men for their spineless cowardice.  Any adult, of either gender, who can’t be bothered to stand up for their own sons in school has zero argument to support their own complaints, about anything.  (And just what is anyone to make of those mental midgets who swear they’ll die defending their right to own machine guns, but who lack enough courage to stand up for the right of their own sons to an equitable education?)  No one today would hesitate to turn their daughters over to American public schools, but any responsible man should leave the country before doing the same with his sons.  It’s just that clear-cut.  (Trust me; I know.  I’ve been around the world a few times.)  And no amount of phony self-serving propaganda or slick diversionary politics is going to change it one bit.  It’s just WRONG.  Our boys are NOT expendable.  They do NOT “create themselves”.  They are not girls.  Soon you can all suffer with the colossal mess you purposefully engineered.”

To today’s boys, all I can offer is my apology:  “I should have known that your parents were far too spoiled and self-involved to ever comprehend something like responsibility.  Affirmative Action in college admissions?  Forget it.  That silly diversionary band-aid won’t begin to cover your gaping wounds.  The best that you and the nation can hope for is that someone brave will use Title IX to demand the creation of all-boys public schools all across the country (and hire military veterans as teachers).  But I doubt that anyone will; apparently no one wants to know a simple truth they can’t handle, that might embarrass them into actually doing something.  Take it from a professional soldier; the hardest thing to find in this country these days is an actual man with enough spine to stand up and put it all on the line for a higher purpose, and the few who do are busy doing other stuff with me. So you young guys might consider this advice:  Sure they’ve been screwing you over while you were still boys.  Don’t get mad.  Get even.  I surely would.  It sure beats resigning yourself to a future playing queen’s court eunuch.  All those “special” privileged women are never going to stop their whining.  It’s what they do.  You are NOT responsible for ANY of the choices they make.  You are NOT responsible for their behavior.  Ignore them and their half-century of self-worshiping “me-ism”.  Just shove them out of the way, and DO something!!  But first, be my guest: Go ahead and destroy their world.  No matter what happens, or doesn’t happen, they are still going to blame you anyway.”

P.S.  The answer to the title’s question should be fairly obvious by now.  (Thanks to what the American women-dominated public school industry has done to boys over the past forty years, I’m convinced that the average IQ of American men today is around 80.  There’s a LOT of Really Dumb Men out there, doing little more than reciting their programmed nonsense.  Most seem to be empty bobble-heads full of blustery noise comically trying to project fake machismo, signifying nothing.  But what’s really stupid are the women who laugh at their own dumb creations.)

No man is worthy of that title who is unwilling to stand up for his sons.

P.S.  Since American women will never pass up the flimsiest opportunity to scream about anything which they perceive places their gender at some perceived disadvantage, I have Soldier’s Rule Number One:   “Anyone in America today speaking only in uni-sex terms about our schools is deliberately hiding ugly truths about males, usually boys, as well as their own bigotry, in a conscious effort to subvert federal civil rights law.”

In the United States, uni-sex is just cheap self-serving propaganda benefiting the “special” people – who think the best way to “advance” is to cripple the competition while they are still boys.

_____________________

.

(See “More On Dumb American Men“, “America’s Greatest Social Shame – Boys” and “Why Finnish Schools Are Better“, posted separately, for more detail on this subject.)

.

(For a discussion of the “thinking” involved in “uni-sex education”, and its consequences to the nation, see “Gymnastics Of The Mind“, posted separately.)

.

.

What To Do?  See my 3 April 2013 reply to a reader’s comment to “A Society With Only One Gender”, posted separately.

.

.

Ignorance, allied with power, is the most ferocious enemy justice can
have
.”  - author James Baldwin (“Notes of a Native Son”).

.

.

P.S.  Think about it a minute:  Just listen to American women complain incessantly about men.  It’s their favorite pastime, for the past half century, an incredibly stupid “war” against men that never ends.  No matter what, there’s ALWAYS something else petty for them to whine about.  Is THIS really who any sane guy wants teaching their boys — anything?  Males are guilty, simply for existing?  And that’s what we want boys to learn?

And all you white people who think this is solely a race problem, get over it.  Race is a tactic women use to shield themselves.  To a guy like me, you have no idea how really ignorant you actually are, how much of what you profess to know is just embarrassing nonsense, propaganda programmed by your teachers.  I do not intend for this to be insulting to you, but to your “teachers”.  Just look over the graffiti this soldier has posted on his site during free moments here and there; it doesn’t even scratch the surface of the books I could write if I thought anyone would read them.  Your schooling was just as deplorable as for almost everyone else in America – which is why this subject so enrages me.  As an American, you should be enraged, too.  Over 60% of what you know is just programmed interest group propaganda.

.

Addendum.  The article above was written in 2011, after a year of publicity about all those dumb men on campus and heavy competition among women students for scarce dating material.  In 2013, however, I’ve noticed that the subject of enrollment and graduation rate gender imbalances on America’s college campuses has totally disappeared from the American public discussion – just like any mention of gender imbalances in K-12.  Since the described trends in college enrollment continue unabated, I attribute this deafening silence to the army of women propagandists who promulgate the “approved” dogma for the many powerful women’s lobbies, teachers and government employees unions, and journalism entities – probably in a concerted effort under her political party’s direction to pave the way for Queen Hillary to ascend to the American throne untouched by “inconvenient” difficult questions.  This, too, is just another women’s birthright entitlement devoid of responsibility.  That suffocating campaign has been underway for years with all the asinine propaganda surrounding her role as a Secretary of State who traveled with her fawning entourage a million miles to accomplish absolutely nothing except disasters like Libya and Egypt.

(For more on this addendum, see the two articles on “Marketing And Propaganda”,  Conversation With A Young Lady” and “Why Benghazi Is Important“.)

.

* The incredibly huge salaries and profits, mostly tax exempt, generated by health and medical enterprises associated with universities dwarfs into insignificance the favored position enjoyed by those of athletics programs, primarily because they employ effective and pervasive propaganda, enjoy an “altruistic” and “cooperative” image, are a principle employer of women, and employ by far the largest and most influential lobbies in Washington.

_______________________________________________________________

Footnote #1.   The United States actually has more students enrolled in post-secondary (college level – 17,500,000) than in secondary (high school – 16,500,000) education, a fact that reflects the huge number of foreign-schooled students attending American colleges and universities – mainly because our own schools don’t measure up.  If 17,500,000 students are in college today, then 11,375,000 (65%) are women, and 6,125,000 (35%) are men.  This is a gender imbalance of 5,250,000 at any one moment – in favor of women.  If you consider only American citizens, the imbalance is even far greater.  This is an imbalance far greater than any that has existed since land grant universities were first established in the original states.  That number translates into university educations in favor of one gender that more than doubles every four years!  This is the greatest civil rights gender imbalance that has existed in the United States for well over a century – IN SPITE of the passage of civil rights law specifically designed to preclude it.   Since a university education, once awarded, cannot be withdrawn, these numbers are cumulative, steadily creating a favored nobility caste in American society.

Foreign Students.  After World War II, in the 1950s and 1960s, student visas (which often came with tuition assistance) were seen as a sort of foreign assistance program. They provided entrée to Third World people with decent preparatory educations to top American educations.  The thinking was that these people would then take their American university educations back home to benefit their home countries.  But by the 1980s it gradually became clear that most of the student visas were going to people who came from their home country’s favored top class (and thus could get the requisite quality preparatory K-12 educations, including instruction in English), and that the vast majority of those on student visas were NOT returning home but were remaining in the US after graduation and taking good jobs, including jobs like rural doctors – which didn’t benefit the home country at all.  So the student visa concept “evolved“.  It now provides an important source of income for American universities while also filling seats with students who arrive with much better prepared educational backgrounds than native Americans.  Today student visas are a way for our universities to maintain their relatively high standards and earn needed tuition income while also filling requirements in advanced research positions at the universities or at top associated research institutions, both private and government. Student visas now help take up the slack not being met by the American K-12 public school system but desperately needed by the nation.  The vast majority of those foreign students are male.

Unfortunately, the authorized number of these visas, as well as visas for already qualified foreigners to conduct advanced research and development at the nation’s globally competitive high tech companies, are far too low.  In addition to placing many advanced university programs in jeopardy, this visa restriction is forcing many of these companies to re-locate their R&D facilities “off-shore” to locations where such foreign scientists can gain access.  This, for example, has resulted in a major high tech economic boom in Vancouver (Canada), where companies like Microsoft now maintain huge research facilities paying premium salaries – all to “protect American jobs” that American education simply cannot fill.  (Just what does it say abut a country of 310,000,000 that can’t even produce enough high quality researchers in advanced fields to fill its own needs, and has to import as many as it can from countries with much better schools?)

Another visa program (H-1B) tries to address critical needs existing in the US for qualified workers in high tech fields that the US “education” system also does not adequately meet.  American companies have been complaining for years that there are not enough highly qualified Americans to meet all the very highly skilled technical jobs they have open, especially those requiring advanced science and math, and that the H-1B program needs to be greatly expanded.  But now in 2013 we have women’s groups making a stink in Congress about the H-1B visa program by claiming that the program discriminates against women.  In the United States, the ratio of male-to-female highly skilled foreign workers getting such visas is around 85%, and “feminists” claim the H-1B program is “shutting women out” of high-tech fields and “hurting families”.  Notice that there is no discussion about actual qualifications for the jobs, no discussion about whether or not as many women as men actually apply for the visas, no discussion about why the imbalance exists, no discussion about why the visas are even needed in the US.  It’s all about an affirmative action quota system deriving solely from birthright entitlement due to the difference of a single chromosome.  The solution:  Lower the standards so far that any woman can get one of these high-paying jobs, just to achieve gender balance (or don’t grant visas if the artificial gender balance is not maintained). (Since “families” is now  political code for “women”, usually of “single mother” variety, this is just another over-used propaganda technique.)

Even more absurd, this asinine argument does not even seek to benefit American women, but rather foreign women imported to take jobs from American men by quota.  For American women affirmative action has become a way of life, now running on brainless auto-pilot in its third generation as the country continues to slip beneath the waves.

The proposal currently under consideration in Congress would raise the total number of H-1B visas to 110,000 a year (from the current 65,000), with a provision for as many as 180,000 during years of high demand.  It also shifts the emphasis in immigration policy from one that prioritized family ties to one that will prioritize professional degrees, making it easier for single people with math and science skills to settle here.  Of course, if the women-dominated K-12 public schools in the US were achieving gender balance, while also meeting their mandate to produce the qualified students the society needs, then there would be no need for the H-1B visa program to begin with.  Just as many qualified women would be filling such positions as qualified men, and the nation would not have to shamefully import far better schooled workers from abroad.  But unfortunately this is logic, and America doesn’t run on logic anymore; it runs on feminine emotion.

Since our women-dominated schools are in gross violation of the law, very heavily discriminate against boys, the women’s “solution” is to totally ignore the causes and address only the symptoms – but ONLY when it’s beneficial to “me” and “my group”, damned any overall adverse effect that has on the whole country, much less on men.  It’s ALL about “me”, sound thinking not required, or even tolerated.  Women get away with this despicable nonsense solely due to entitlement, running on brainless auto-pilot for over a half century, where logic is no longer even a part of the equation.  If you can’t apply logic, why would any employer want you to fill a high tech job?  No wonder such companies are simply leaving the US; it’s just gotten too incredibly stupid here.  Women get all the rights, all the choices, and the responsibility part is for “someone else” – because “I am ‘special’.  I am entitled.”  (You’re also nuts.)

Footnote #2. NOW = National Organization of Women. AAUW = American Association of University Women.  NEA = National Education Association (the largest union in the US).  AFT = American Federation of Teachers (the second largest union in the US).

Footnote #3A recent Cato Institute study showed that it would be almost $16,000 per year CHEAPER for public school parents in Washington DC to send their sons to the best all-boys private high school in the DC metropolitan region – where they would join other boys with over a 95% chance of admission to college, often on a scholarship.  (There are really huge taxpayer costs hidden in fully funding Washington DC public schools, the worst such schools in the country.  The solution to “fix” those schools?  More money.)

Footnote #4.  All Equal Under The Law.  The Founding Fathers were committed to establishing a government that would guarantee equally to all citizens the rule of law and security for liberty under the law.  Their Constitution, in order to win individual state approval, was neutral with regard to race and gender (by leaving voter qualification to states’ rights), thereby leaving the way open to later equal protection under the law for racial minorities (and women).  Shortly after the end of the Civil War, which finally settled the matter of slavery, the 14th Amendment (1868) guaranteed equal rights of citizenship to all Americans, with the special intent of protecting the rights of former slaves.*  That amendment includes the word ‘equality’ in Section 1, which prohibits a state government from denying “to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”  This ‘equal protection clause’ protects individuals from arbitrary discrimination by government officials.  Federal courts have read the equal protection concept into their interpretation of the ‘due process clause’ of the 5th Amendment, thereby applying the equal protection limitations also to the federal government.  Thus, neither federal or state governments may classify people in ways that violate their equal liberties or rights under the US Constitution.  American law is thus blind to artificial categories of race, gender, ethnicity, religion, etc.; for purposes of equality a person is a person, and no person is “special”.  Subsequent legislation based on such principles has been designed to ensure equitable balance of all persons.  If you make a law providing certain protections, those protections have to apply equally to everyone.  The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its 1972 Education Amendments  further defined these principles, primarily in employment, housing, voting and (1972) education.  Court cases based on the 1972 Title IX throughout the 1970s and 1980s established the principles used in determining “gender equality” (“balance”) throughout American education in accordance with both the ‘due process’ and the ‘equal protection’ clauses now established in US constitutional law.

Based on a library of upheld legal precedent, certain affirmative action processes may be followed in order to achieve that balance – at ALL levels and in every endeavor of American public education, bottom to top.  Once balance has been achieved there is no longer any justification under US constitutional law for affirmative action policies or procedures to continue.  On the contrary; since affirmative action is a form of “unearned birthright entitlement”, it is anathema to a democracy that enshrines “equal opportunity” in law, under both the ‘due process’ and ‘equal protection’ clauses, and therefore MUST end as soon as the demanded equitable “balance” has been achieved.  To continue it beyond that point is to move past civil rights to establish and perpetuate “group entitlement” – at the expense of others.  ‘Group entitlement” is the very characteristic of British nobility against which the Americans undertook their ‘treasonous’ revolution.  This US cancer, greatly aggravated by a ‘tyranny of the majority’, is finally beginning to attract the attention of the Supreme Court even as politicians everywhere run from the concept to avoid losing votes of favored citizens, and most especially those of the super-majority self-interested and responsibility-free women voters.  All the Court needs is a case that confronts this despicable practice head-on, and there is no better case to be made than American K-12 public schools – everywhere across the country – for any boy’s father with an actual spine.  Despite misperception among those who never learned how to think, all US laws and civil rights apply equally to all citizens, regardless of race or gender; neither laws or government policies or procedures can be legally and permanently established to favor any group over another – which naturally was the original intention of the Founding Fathers.  It is the function of government – the legislative, executive and the judicial branches equally – to ensure equal opportunity for all is maintained, even if the Fourth Estate (the press, journalism) fails totally in its protected mandate and shifts instead to an activist propaganda role favoring certain select groups.  If other bodies fail, then the Court has no choice but to act – in accordance with constitutional law.  All it needs is a case.

*The 19th Amendment (1920) made the right of women to vote universal among all states.

Footnote #5:  Employment.  You can forget about what the announcement says are minimum qualifications for a particular job; the qualifications are whatever those doing the hiring use to select applicants, and increasingly education is the critical factor for quality jobs, and most especially in an era of high unemployment.  Economists have referred to this phenomenon as “degree inflation,” and it has been steadily infiltrating America’s job market.  Across industries and geographic areas, many jobs that didn’t used to “require” a degree — positions like dental hygienists, cargo agents, clerks and claims adjusters — are increasingly requiring one, according to Burning Glass, a company that analyzes job ads from more than 20,000 online sources, including major job boards and small- to midsize-employer sites.  This up-credentialing is pushing the less educated even further down the food chain, and it helps explain why the unemployment rate for workers with no more than a high school diploma is more than twice that for workers with a bachelor’s degree.  (Those without a high school diploma don’t even figure in the equation.)  Because so many people are going to college now, even for degrees which on their face have little market value, those who do not graduate from college are often assumed to be “unambitious” or “less capable”.  All this has shifted a tremendous advantage to women in the employment arena, almost across the board.  Women are using the women-dominated education industry to “advance” on the crippled minds of boys.  (Another reason for “degree inflation” and “up-credentialing” in job hiring is the simple fact that today a college degree actually provides little more real education than a US high school diploma did a half century ago.)

Question:  What is the largest industry in the US with the highest salaries and the lowest unemployment rate still in 2011, three years after the beginning of the Great Recession?

Answer:  Government.  It’s 22.6 million workers with an average salary of $54,000* (not counting the best health care and pension and other benefits in the US) have an unemployment rate of just 3.9%.  (4% unemployment is considered “full employment”, with a small portion of jobs in normal transition.)  (That salary is $14,000 above the national norm; throw in benefits, and government workers are compensated at twice the national average.  These people enjoy the biggest and most powerful unions in the country, which get to negotiate their contracts with … other government employees.)

Next comes – Health Services (16.7 million, $47,000, 5.7%) and Education – (3.3 million, $49,000, 5.9%).  (The health services industry spends four times as much on lobbying government in Washington than does the military industrial complex, but government, health and education are all women-driven industries, so it’s very difficult separating out true influence.  As “eternal victims” all women habitually consider only what’s best for “me” and “my group”.)

These 42,600,000 privileged Americans, the vast majority of whom are women, owe their comfortable lifestyles primarily to money government confiscates from everyone else – who have an unemployment rate of over 16% (which includes those no longer receiving unemployment insurance and those who have stopped filling out job applications.  It does not include those many millions who have had to shift to part-time work.).

Added to this privileged mix are those 7,600,000 employed in Finance (banking, insurance, etc.), also overwhelmingly women, who have average salaries of $58,000 and an unemployment rate of 6.1% – and owe their comfortable lifestyles mostly to mortgages, loans, government laws and bail-outs.

That’s over 50,000,000 American workers  – a third of the labor force – with far and away the best job security, pay and benefits, and working conditions, in the country, mostly oblivious to the trials and tribulations of everyone else.  (This is why, although the value of your home fell through the floor due to a lack of responsible government oversight, your mortgage, insurance and tax costs haven’t budged, may even have risen.  Those “special” industries have a ravenous appetite that MUST be fed.)

Small wonder that a Nancy Pelosi-led Congress was so eager to enact a massive new government health care system AND bail out the financial industry, on top of a new prescription drug program, all with massive amounts of other peoples’ money.  Women have constituted the majority self-serving voting bloc in America since 1980.

The Defense Department in July 2011 quietly began its first round of personnel reductions – 45,400 people.  All, of course, are military people (93% Army and Marine soldiers, which all the self-anointed “special” people like to call inanimate, brainless “troops”, à la Lord Cardigan) – no pension, no severance, no negotiation.  Military personnel do not have unions, and Army and Marine soldiers today incur over 98% of war casualties, for the “special” people.

Some facts that help explain reality:

A “normal” unemployment rate in a dynamic US economy is around 4% at any given moment (due to people changing jobs or retiring, women making choices, etc.).  Thus, only Government is at full employment, followed closely by Health Services, Education and Finance.   All other industries (or “sectors”), which employ far more men than women, have significantly higher unemployment rates, some even well over 20%.

The labor force in the US is about 158,000,000 people – about 66% of all adults (an increase from about 60% in 1948).  About 60% of women are in this labor force, a figure that has risen from 32% in 1948 and 43% in 1960.  About 73% of men are in the labor force, a figure that has declined from 87% in 1948.

Every 1% of the US labor force is about 1,580,000 people.  An unemployment rate of 16% means there are around 25,000,000 people without jobs in America – a figure that is considerably larger than the entire population of Australia.  About 85% of the unemployed are male.

You’d never suspect any of this, since women’s lobby machines with the help of their male clones, as usual, keep churning out the emotional propaganda about something, however petty, for our ever-persecuted women victims to whine about.  It’s all about keeping alive and well the totally absurd notion of a million rights with no responsibility – that it’s ALL about “me” ad nauseam, that women played no role at all in creating their own condition and that of everyone else, and that it’s the job of government to come running to their rescue.  And in a society that now decides on the basis of girly emotion, it works.

*Average (median) personal income in the US for those 25 and older employed full time is about $40,000.  (“Household” income is around $50,000 – a reflection of the fact that it now requires two workers to provide the family living level previously provided by one.)  A 2012 study of 19 metropolitan areas across America showed that women working full time earn about 119% of the incomes of men working full time.

Well over seven times as many boys as girls drop out and never graduate from high school. But even for those who do graduate, the picture is not nearly as bright as it once was.  Today a high school graduate earns $12,000 less than he did in 1980 (adjusted for inflation), yet only about 30% of Americans get college degrees, and twice as many of those degrees go to women as to men.  An average high school graduate earns about $32,000 full-time.  A average person with an undergraduate college degree earns $24,000 more, a masters $30,000 more, and a doctorate $48,000 more than an average high school grad.

That’s why women’s lobbies and their education industry have now started a new campaign to convince people that “not everyone needs a college degree.”  The insider’s secret, of course, is that the campaign is intended only for boys, that it’s perfectly acceptable for twice as many women as men to earn college degrees in America and then get jobs paying far more than for men.  If the campaign were intended for girls, every women’s lobby in the country would be up in arms.  It’s always been true, of course, that not everyone needs a college degree in America, but you’d have to be a moron not to suspect more sinister intent, especially now when women are routinely garnering twice as many such educations as men. (And if you have a useless degree no other employer wants, you can always get hired by government.)  While everyone is screaming about the high cost of a college education (It is, after all, a business, selling whatever the customer wants to buy), it might be worthwhile to consider this:  In 1980, when the cost of a degree was considerably less than it is today and when just as many men as women were earning them, it took nearly 25 years to earn back the investment cost of that degree.  Today, it takes just 10 years.  (Guys, women and their lobbies know this stuff.)  Are self-interested women, who have never once demonstrated any sense of responsibility for anyone beyond themselves, simply setting up their own group for all the cushy, effortless, very high-paying jobs close to the headquarters flagpole, where they can lord their better educations over all those dumb male ditch diggers, store clerks, toilet uncloggers and all-around go-fors out there?  Based on their well-established record over the past half century, I, for one, certainly wouldn’t put that intent past bigoted American women at all.

There have been several stories in news outlets like the New York Times and Washington Post about women-run companies now requiring college degrees for all hired employees, including for receptionist and file clerk.  This makes it very easy for such companies to hire only women, who then have their very own “comfortable working atmosphere” unpolluted by those disgusting competitive men.  When the criteria is college degrees, it’s very difficult to make a legal case of gender discrimination in hiring.  Apparently, in the employment arena, it’s not what you know or don’t know, about what results you can actually achieve, about any leadership capabilities you have or don’t have, but rather how well you fit in the social group, especially when the group is composed only of women college graduates steeped in liberal arts.  (And just try making civil rights law, concerned with artificial labels like gender (or race), apply to credential inflation in hiring – even in companies that now employ only women.  All the company has to do is point to its education requirement in hiring to overcome any potential liability in gender discrimination.  And it all begins with gross gender discrimination in our women-dominated K-12 public “education” system – and stupid American men, for not taking the legal action on behalf of their sons clearly demanded now for over a quarter of a century.)

Women are still allowed to drop out and back in the labor market with little stigma, and many do so, but there are no acceptable excuses for a man to not be always gainfully employed.  Inability to find employment within a brief period for an American man is still grounds for non-hire as well as fertile grounds for clinical depression and can, and often does, lead to suicide, much more so than for women.  In fact, unemployment is still the leading cause of adult male suicide.  (As the country goes through yet another debate over guns, everyone is hearing about the 30,000 gunshot deaths every year in the US, a number one-third that of the premature deaths that occur every year due to mistakes made in American hospitals.  What one does not hear in that gun debate is that well over half of those gunshot deaths are deliberate male suicides.)

Most income statistics published in the US are now concerned with “household income”, in recognition of the fact that, with labor devalued by so many workers, it now takes two wage earners to support a family at the same level previously achieved by one 1960 wage earner.  Most “families” in America are now those of “single mothers”; only one in four American boys can count on a father through age 18.  And all those women in the labor force now have less than half the children needed to pay for their own birthright entitled benefits in Social Security, Medicare, etc.. – a “future taxpayer-producing job” now mostly farmed out to “someone else” (Third World immigrants) but still falling far short of actual need, all while their premiums are heavily subsidized by those dumb men.  (Women receive far greater benefits from such welfare programs than do men, but still pay the same premiums.)  If women don’t step up to their responsibilities fast, this country has no hope of surviving intact beyond mid-century.  And that is the simplest truth of all; it’s just basic math.  And unemotional logic.

Footnote #6:  Education-Technology Disconnect Is Matter Of National Security.

The greatest danger of this disconnect falls in an area that most Americans never even consider – the US Regular military.  This is the most technologically advanced entity on the planet, with extremely sophisticated capabilities that few today can even comprehend.  To manage, control and operate that technology places ever greater demands on human intelligence, on very well trained minds, not just in its day-to-day operational use, but in the great broad overarching thinking that must of absolutely necessity go into fielding, deploying and exercising that technology.  The more advanced that military becomes, the greater demands it places on the ability of humans in high places to understand and direct it, for the best possible outcomes for everyone involved, beginning with our own nation’s future viability.  Today the default “solution” to problems at or beyond our borders is the US military; that fact alone should provide an indication of the vacuity of our culture, including that portion concerned with foreign affairs and diplomacy.  If the people directing that military fall short, especially in not understanding its limitations, the consequences can easily be catastrophic.  For a long time I personally have become ever more alarmed at the declining ability of average Americans to think rationally, to separate emotion from logic, to decide on a course that measures up to the principles and standards upon which the ideal “America” is based.  Is it better to blow something up, or to send in a few of America’s best men?  What good are 10,000 tanks when it’s possible to simply go around or over them, to achieve objectives that simply ignore their very existence?  What is the possibility that those engaging in remote control “warfare” from a very safe distance will quickly become nothing but mechanical extensions of their machines who never see or experience the death and destruction they render?  How easy will it become for them to start and engage in “warfare” that is never thought through or decided by the American people?  What good is all that capability if those who should don’t know how to use it, don’t begin to understand it, don’t even like it?  What are the consequences to us if we take a certain stupid short-sighted action today that becomes the precedent for others to use against us tomorrow?  The more advanced that military becomes the more important it becomes for those in command to know when and why to exercise restraint, to know when and why less is more.

While many ignorant people continue to deride the “military mentality”, the simple fact is that our military and its best leaders are rapidly moving too far ahead of the American people – in a very wide range of human endeavors requiring uncommon measures of extremely detailed knowledge and intellectual capabilities.  No one knows and understands the real world better than a man who has spent a lifetime dealing directly with it and studying its ugliness at the worst possible moments.  Our schools MUST produce people who can measure up to that extreme level of fully accountable knowledge, bravery and competence.  Critical to military mission success today is very rapid and intelligent adaptability, on-the-fly problem-solving at the lowest levels possible, and in-depth knowledge and understanding of all factors in and around the theater of operations.  Despite popular beliefs, war is not about machines; war is about people, where they live, and it requires an enormous amount of personal responsibility far beyond the self – not just for your own people, but also for those affected by what you do – all of them.  War is NOT about winning battles; war is about winning the war – however best that can be achieved.  Furthermore, people are not static edifices; they constantly react and adapt to what you do, so you must remain ever flexible without losing sight of your objective.  There are no text books, no test questions; there are only concepts which enable you to write your own text books and test questions as you try to stay alive.  It requires a mind that can easily meld social sciences with physical sciences to the unique situation at hand.  Anyone who thinks this is easy is a damned fool.  I know of no entity on Earth that can do this better and faster than the meritocracy that is the US Regular military, and its people can apply their expertise far beyond battlefields.  But, sadly, what they do is not taught in America’s public schools.  And yet those directing that military must of absolute necessity be able to at least engage its leaders intellectually on an equal plane. They must understand the military’s limitations as well as it capabilities, and not screw up its missions with second guessing and changes at mid-stream that become self-defeating (assuming, of course, that they are also wise enough to give it a specific concise mission that has the full support of the American people and an objective way to measure its success).

About invincibleprobity

US Regular Army (ret)..... Career military and professional foreign human intelligence operations officer with half century experience in sociology, psychology, foreign affairs, political-military affairs and geo-politics, plus additional developed interests in culture and history, including civil rights, education and similar human societal forces and influences. .....(That’s enough. The rest would just be irrelevant details looking like the boring index of a history book. I know stuff; any questions, just ask. Or better yet, engage me.)
This entry was posted in Baby Boomers, Boys, Education, Entitlements, Greatest Generation, History, Men, Politics, Public Schools, Social Science, Sociology, Special Interest Lobbies, Title IX, Women and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

58 Responses to Why Are American Men So Dumb?

  1. IntrinsicD says:

    I thoroughly enjoyed this article as well as the numerous replies and rebuttals it has obtained. I was born in 1988, and until now it had never occurred to me why I found all of my classes to be intolerably boring. Well, that is aside from a lack of challenge and a definite feel of worthlessness about most of the course material, even as I changed majors four times. I’ve always had a lack of direction in life that, looking back on seems to have been born from a combination of lack of parental guidance, and restrictive societal regulations that pretty much pigeonholed me into either staying home and reading books / watching TV / staying out of the way, lest I be outside and in trouble, not just with the neighbors but with the law.

    The end result is that at 25 years of age I am working full time for a university (that I do not attend), I still have no personal direction in life, and have decided to try to fill in for what our country sorely needs, not because I enjoy it, but because I am good at it and it gives me a modicum of purpose; Which at this point is to finish up my associate degree in mathematics within this year, which would also net me an associate’s in physics and electrical engineering. At this point, my major concern is to improve myself so that by the time I retire, I will have been able to accomplish something that will either better our world, or lay the groundwork for someone after me to do so.

    • Thank you for your comments, IntrinsicD. I receive a lot of comments similar to yours from young men, and I do sympathize with your condition.

      However, in your case, I’d like to point out two things about yourself that you may not recognize as of much value.

      First, reading those books was not a waste of time. Somewhere along the way you learned to write very good English and to express yourself quite well indeed.

      Second, your interest in math and the physical sciences has taught you to use your mind in a systematic and logical manner, which reveals itself in your writing.

      It’s been my experience that these two talents are not so common among Americans today, many of whom seem to be far more ruled by transitory emotion. It is my firm belief that both of these developed qualities will serve you very well regardless of which course you decide to take in seeking your sense of purpose. I think you will succeed, as your own man, and I do wish you well.

      P.S. I don’t believe in retirement; keep going as long as you are still physically able. (There’s something to be said for experience and knowledge.) Just be sure to have a life-long savings and investment plan that will increase your options the older you get.

      Additional thoughts:

      Quite a number of those young guys who write to me are trying to find careers, and ask me if I have any suggestions. I am certainly no expert in business, but I do have an eye for spotting things in my society. We now have a huge flood of 80,000,000 Baby Boomers who are beginning to enter a quite long retirement, and most in reasonably good financial shape, thanks in no small part to their Greatest Generation parents. Many younger women have already recognized this fact, and are going into various enterprises designed to medically or socially assist and care for these people as they age. Most of their efforts will be subsidized or funded by government, providing another rather risk-free and predictable career for women who pursue it. But there is another aspect of these Boomers that seems to be overlooked so far. Most of them, and their children, have never done much of anything with their hands, never actually fixed or built things themselves.

      If I were a young man starting out today, I would first complete my degree requirements, and then I’d give very serious consideration to setting up my own little business – an “Odd Job” or “Handy-Man” company. Start small, and grow methodically. For initial employees, I’d go to an unemployment office and find good guys with the particular expertise I needed and make them an offer on contingency. I’d try to nail down at least an experienced electrician, plumber, carpenter, and construction man, each of whom must be bondable. Priority would go to men with honorable military service, willing to take a gamble. I’d get them to sign a basic contract that required them to answer my call and deliver the service required with the highest degree of professionalism possible, at standard wages.

      The company management would generate business, guarantee the work, and handle customer billing, employee wages and parts purchasing, as needed. I wouldn’t wait too long to hire a smart articulate “people-person” woman as office manager. Market the small jobs, build a solid reputation, and additional customers plus larger jobs will come. As the business grew, and if each of the tradesman had no customer complaints for a year, he’d be offered full-time employment at good wages and benefits, with an opportunity to buy a piece of the company, either as a shareholder or junior partner. New employees thereafter would be hired as apprentices under the direct supervision of the first-hired and proven tradesmen, at decent starting wages. Again, preference in hiring would go to men with honorable military service, including those with combat injuries; these people have already proven themselves and make first-class employees in such endeavors.

      The company would specialize solely in small jobs, everything from replacing a broken porch step to installing entertainment systems to cleaning the chimney to replacing roofing, and new construction would not exceed building residential garages – all at fair market prices. Keep the company focus on traditionally masculine endeavors, on quality work, and offer those men a respected identity as verifiably honorable professionals. “We don’t do house cleaning; we do professional home maintenance.” You might also seek contracts with companies that manage residential properties for rent or lease. Later I’d add a landscaping division, plus a services division that would part-time-hire high school students in good standing to rake leaves, shovel snow, mow lawns, wash windows, etc., at decent wages. Hiring preference would go to those boys who intend to go on to college. You might eventually decide to also expand into the “home improvement” arena, not selling “do-it-yourself” products, but qualified, reliable and professional man-labor on call, at a premium.

      It would be a future, and a purpose, for the right hard-working man – a one-stop shop for whatever needs done, by the best men around. Build a brand, and then franchise it, with the business model and principles you craft. It’s made-to-order for an independent man who can express himself well and use his brains methodically, for a greater objective. Everything worthwhile is NOT in the digital universe.

  2. Matthew says:

    This was a very interesting read, although I haven’t much to say directly in response to this article, unfortunately. However, I will say that I’ll definitely use this page to make sure I won’t fall prey this misandrist society of ours (Wow, my spell checker doesn’t even recognize the word “misandrist”!) It shouldn’t be too hard, since I’m kind of a lone wolf due to my thin tolerance of the typical Americans who surround me. You’re definitely right that most American men have been reduced to dumb losers. I haven’t met any males at my college that I’d want to hang out with yet. It’s almost depressing to see so many of my male peers coast along, not truly caring about anything. Meanwhile all the girls around them are getting better grades or accomplishing more than smoking pot or playing video games.

    But anyway, I have my novel to write, my short film, art work and music to work on, and of course my studies to focus on (I’m voluntarily taking summer classes just for the hell of it). So, perhaps if I continue to keep to myself and stick with my ambitions I won’t become another brick in the proverbial wall. This doesn’t mean I’m recoiling or hiding, but this lone wolf can stand up to this spiraling society of ours in his own way. Or, perhaps making an effort to not become another American man-child is the best way to stand up to this failing society?

    • I understand, and appreciate, what you are saying, Matthew. But just remember that civil rights law is equally applicable to all American citizens, regardless of any other labels applied to them. However, US civil rights law is only as good as those being screwed use it to stand up for themselves, and, far more importantly, for those, including their sons and daughters, who have to follow them into the mess we leave to them. It is NOT ‘manly’ to champion women at the expense of your sons, especially when, in so doing, you are simply in blind service of the “tyranny of the majority” and its self-interests. That was the same tyranny that allowed slavery to exist and thrive in huge portions of America.

      Those who fail to stand up for what is right are not contributing anything of value to their society. As passionate women used to scream so effectively in the faces of men of conscience during the 1960s, “If you know it’s wrong and do nothing to change it, then you are part of the problem!!” The Catholics have long held to a concept known as the “sin of omission”; unfortunately that concept did not serve them so well during the Holocaust. Lately I’ve seen that concept re-phrased as: “He who has the ability to act on an injustice, but who stands idly by, is just as guilty as he who holds the knife.” Again, I am reminded of the Europeans watching atrocities committed for years during the 1990s in front of their faces in the former Yugoslavia – until the American military waded in to end the genocide. But, not surprisingly, Martin Luther King said it best: “In the end we will not remember the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”

      Just how do you want your sons to remember you? By your silence?

      What do you think will happen to America when its women invoke their right to assume the reigns of power over everything – with no sense of responsibility for anyone or anything beyond themselves? This is simply a colossal train wreck just waiting to happen. American women wallow in their self-anointed “eternal victim” role solely to avoid that responsibility. Until brave men stand up and force women to accept the responsibility for others that accompany each and every one of the rights they claim for themselves, we are consciously building the disintegration of our own society. American women must be held fully accountable, or we are all doomed.

      What good will be your ambitions to avoid becoming “another brick in the proverbial wall” when the wall has been reduced to rubble anyway? You might just as well join the “dumb losers” now.

      • Matthew says:

        You’re right; I don’t want to be remembered for being silent. Although to be honest, I’m not entirely sure how to be more active in standing up for these issues.

        • I get a lot of spam, which WordPress software catches and sets aside. Every so often I’ll go through and delete it. When I do, sometime I’ll catch a comment that is not spam at all. This happened to a brief comment I received from “Joseph Tkach” on 9 August 2012 to the article titled “A Society With Only One Gender“. I posted his comment to that article on 3 April 2013. My reply to his comment on that date provides one good answer to your own comment, Matthew. At your age I presume that you, or one of your friends, is pretty good with social media and how to use it to generate interest in social issues. Here’s a social issue just begging for attention.

  3. Pingback: Rishnix takes a Gender Studies course, the final report

  4. Dizzle says:

    As a 27 year old college grad and current graduate student, I can honestly say the biggest turnaround has been women graduating at a higher rate than men and now earning more degrees than men. There are more men currently in master’s an phd programs but the gap is closing.
    Women have been historically denied so many rights for so long, and have historically earned much less than men, even for the same job, so instead of women being taught to grow up and marry a man to take care of them, they are taught to go to college to be able to take care of themselves. I believe girls are pushed more than boys to do well in school because they have historically been held back from higher education and employment opportunities. For women, education has been one of the biggest solutions to our income disparity. Most of the poor in this country consist of women and children.
    I think men are not as motivated as they used to be. I think more boys are self righteous and entitled than ever before. Most girls are taught to cook and clean, and other basic housekeeping skills that boys are never taught. Go to almost any young man’s apartment and it is filthy. Many of them lack pride and a work ethic. Many boys would rather sit around and not work. Women are more likely to be motivated to go out there and make their own money, because they know no one is likely to sit around and hand it to them. Boys are much more likely to live with their parents after college and stay longer in their parents home. Men now are also very opposed to marriage and commitment, so they don’t have the motivation of providing for the family to get out there and work. An author wrote a book about this phenomena, I think it’s called “boy land”. It’s about young men dropping out of school or going back after school to live with their parents and “coast” along. Men are given the freedom to that by their parents. Most female’s parents encourage them to pursue a career or get married, not come back to the home. Some young men are quite spoiled and have no desire to pay bills and maintain a home. They have an idea they will be taken care of and the rent magically gets paid on its own. I think many men don’t realize what working, maintaining a home, paying bills, and being a responsible adult is all about. I think women are equipped with more tools to balance work, home, and school than men.
    I think women’s rights haven’t impeded the rights of men. I think men shouldn’t attribute their failings to the success of women. They should finish high school and go to college. They should work full time and be responsible citizens. Boys and girls should receive equal treatment in the classroom. It is sad that men feel disenfranchised because of how successful women have become in the last thirty years. However, I feel they should use this feeling as motivation- as women have been doing for decades- to execute their goals and become more accomplished.

    • Thank you, Dizzle. I sure wish you had indicated your area of study, but…

      I usually don’t bother giving space to comments that fail to address the contents of the article, but instead wander far off-topic to make irrelevant points in a lot of different directions that accomplish nothing but smoke and confusion. It’s just too wasteful of my own and my readers’ time. But I’ll make an exception here, since you obviously put some time and thought into your comments, if not into any original thought, and you are also at least articulate in reasonably good English. (I’ll assume that you at least took the time to look over my Home Page to understand a little about the author.) Your comments make an excellent example of the emotional tricks that American women use to “make their point”, as explained throughout many of the other articles posted here. Those who haven’t been properly schooled in logic, rational thinking, independent research, objective analysis, etc., are easy prey for this stuff, both dishing it out and soaking it up. It’s just a bunch of self-serving emotional mush, signifying nothing. (Perhaps this is why our women-dominated public schools do such a dismally poor job in objective math and physical sciences favored by boys and so greatly emphasize subjective social sciences favored by girls. You can very easily twist the latter to your own self-serving purposes, something that isn’t possible with the former.)

      Please note that I am discussing BOYS, not men. So you start off on the wrong foot. No one, including me, can do anything about men; they’re already what they are. But I just might be able to change a few minds about boys before they become men.

      “.. Women have been historically denied so many rights for so long…”

      “.. have historically earned much less than men, even for the same job…”

      “.. girls … have historically been held back from higher education and employment opportunities..”

      None of this, of course, has anything at all to do with the article. And none of it is even true. Your comments are just a regurgitation of “feminist” blame-shifting propaganda that hasn’t changed one bit for the past FIFTY YEARS (See “Propaganda And Marketing – Techniques“) and don’t even touch on the process that has taken place in American “education” using universal civil rights law – civil rights law apparently applicable to only one gender, the “entitled” gender, the one with a million rights and no responsibility. (THIS is the topic of my article. Your very first sentence admits a gross violation of that federal civil rights law, which doesn’t concern you in the least, so intensely focused on “me” you are.)

      “Go to almost any young man’s apartment and it is filthy.”

      “Many of them lack pride and a work ethic.”

      “Many boys would rather sit around and not work.”

      And they all just created themselves, right? They just popped out of the womb and became loser adult men in one magic instant. Amazing. Girls need a “vast village”, but boys just need some weed. Got it. Because of all the choices and rights women have, only one in four boys in this country can count on a father through age 18. (Over half of the children born in the US are born to single women, and over half of the rest go to women’s custody in divorce – all exercising their many rights of choice.) Dizzle, our boys are raised by women, in the home and in the school and in all those social sciences, but women have zero responsibility for what becomes of those many tens of millions of boys. It must be great being able to so easily dodge responsibility simply by claiming eternal victimhood. And then you can just blame your dumb victims. (I wonder how far men would get with such a pathetic self-serving rationalization about girls.) Hint: Your mother created all those loser men, and your sons obviously will be even bigger losers for your daughters. Girls get to blame everyone and everything for not measuring up, but boys must assume all the responsibility themselves, beginning at birth. Nifty trick.

      “I think men are not as motivated as they used to be.”

      Just who, or what, is supposed to motivate them? I’ve been looking in vain for an answer to that question for the past quarter of a century. Why bother? I found my own answer long ago; I married a profession and, once I figured out how not to get sidetracked by American women, I found that profession a million times more rewarding than anything offered by contemporary women. (The only other thing left for energetic competitive men with brains in our society is the accumulation of money, by any means possible – i.e., to beat the system.)

      Comments which you use with such ease, were the genders reversed, would be considered the most despicable of sexist bigotry if voiced by a man. But such double standards make perfect sense in the self-serving world women have created for themselves. Your misandry is almost suffocating, but I would never think of censoring your freedom of speech.

      “Men now are also very opposed to marriage and commitment, so they don’t have the motivation of providing for the family to get out there and work.”

      See my recently posted article, “Marry Me”. I think that article pretty much covers this area. Your views adequately show that you really have nothing worthwhile to offer a man, so why should one offer you anything? (Men think mostly with logic, not emotion. And boys learn most life lessons by example, while girls learn them mostly by instruction. Yes, there ARE major differences in the ways boy and girls learn stuff, and these are only two of many.) If men are a factor in your thinking about the future, you are in for a life of great disappointment, sadly of your own making.

      Women have benefitted from over a half century of concerted effort to ensure girls move forward against what they perceived as societal prejudices – only to arrive at the point where they can’t even see that they are now the purveyors of the exact same prejudices they’ve been complaining about for that half century. It’s all about “Me”.

      “I think men shouldn’t attribute their failings to the success of women.”

      I certainly don’t attribute the failings of men to the success of women. I attribute the failings of men to the failings of women – as adult humans, equitably sharing societal responsibility, while those men are still boys. American women have rights; they do NOT have responsibilities. As a American woman, is it fun being able to complain about a world you created while studying your glorious navel all those decades? I’m just very happy that I won’t have to witness what comes next.

      I could pick apart each phrase you use, but why bother? It’s blatantly obvious that you didn’t even bother to read the article on which you are commenting. But if you’re actually interested in someone’s intelligently considered views that don’t parrot your own delusions, you can actually read this or almost any of the other articles posted here and so engage me. Be my guest.

      P.S. I know you won’t. This particular article is of greater interest to foreign readers, interested in figuring out what happened to such a once-great nation, than it is to Americans. But thanks for stopping by anyway.

      • Ponte Preta says:

        (English isn’t my first language, so I’m sorry for anything that may sound funny or inconsiderate – it’s not my intention to do so)

        Hello,

        I’m sorry, but I just think you are displaying misogyny. In this case, why care about her misandry?
        I don’t think we should generalize anyone. Here, you are also displaying some really ridiculous emotional tricks and generalizing behavior.

        I think you are one that doesn’t think all men should be blamed for a minority (or even majority) of men that commit mistakes, or that the younger men should be blamed for the mistakes the men of the past made. And if you do, what about not doing the same to women?
        I don’t know, maybe you are using the same language the former was using, to turn her own game against her – but even then, I just can’t guess.

        “(…)women have zero responsibility for what becomes of those many tens of millions of boys.”

        “Your mother created all those loser men, and your sons obviously will be even bigger losers for your daughters.”
        WHAT? Her mother created all of the loser men? What about the men who created loser men? What about the mother (and fathers) who created winners?

        “I found that profession a million times more rewarding than anything offered by contemporary women.”
        I don’t care if people think this about the opposite gender. But again, you are generalizing and remember, any misandrist could say the same about men – and not only the contemporary ones.

        “Men think mostly with logic, not emotion. And boys learn most life lessons by example, while girls learn them mostly by instruction.”
        Again, unproved generalizations. No one actually “think with” anything but their brains (no, I don’t mean to be sarcastic here, just can’t communicate any better) – and what kind of subcategory you will hold the most valuable for your rational conclusions is up to you. I see a lot of ignorance in this subject coming from LOTS of Americans. And everyone is conditioned with examples equally (see for how many years women have been held back only by following examples, the same goes for men) for all I’ve been seen.

        “you are in for a life of great disappointment, sadly of your own making.”
        HER making, again? Okay, let’s just say a lot of people are afraid of abuse, sadly of your own making. How doest it sound?

        “I attribute the failings of men to the failings of women”
        Only women, and all of them? What if a lot of women attribute their own (wrong) choices to the failings of men as well (that can be true in some ways, in both circumstances)? That would be a vicious blame game circle. You have gone too far.

        At this point I don’t even have to say anything else than: “Your misogyny is almost suffocating, but I would never think of censoring your freedom of speech.”

        I’m really sorry for all of that. The prejudice, the resentment, the ignorance, the blame game. Really sorry for all of that. And really hope American men (and women) like you could learn one day not to generalize and see how you are hypocritical in a lot of ways (as I pointed out) and flawed yourselves, just like all of us.

        • Dear Ponte Preta,

          Your comments indicate considerable emotion, but you did take the time to express yourself in a thoughtful manner, so you deserve a reply. I am traveling at the moment and cannot give your comments my full attention, so I will try to do so later tonight.

          In the meantime, it would help me to know in which country you live. Can you tell me this (and your native language)? My guess is Brazil and Portuguese, but I might be wrong. Are you a Macaca? :o) (The e-mail address you provided does not seem to be valid.)

          If you have questions about me, you can look over the Invincible Probity “Home” page.

          Thanks.

  5. Notes to “Men’s Rights” fora:

    1. If you have questions, please let me know. I usually don’t have time to hunt around for what others are saying elsewhere about what I write here. But I did go hunting for what was causing so many American readers to visit my little site today (a couple thousand above normal), and found frequent use of Reddit via a Men’s Rights forum. My main style for this blog is uncluttered communication, so I try not to overload my work with references to others, etc., so it ends up looking like some imposing and boring scientific study to the rather young readers I am trying to reach. Most of it is probably already boring enough to many of them. I do know that many Americans today cannot read or write well. (Although not specifically addressed, central to my writings is the matter of ethics, of moral philosophy, something that, with the exception of me-focused Freudian Psychoanalysis and herd-mentality Pavlovian Behaviorism, has nearly disappeared from American society.)

    2. To be honest, I don’t have much sympathy for fully grown men (above, say, 30) with a thousand complaints about their own condition. They have had a lifetime to try to maintain some reasonable balance, in the same way women did – in the court room. They have also always had the option of making adult choices. I personally am satisfied with my own condition, and remain very active and actively contributing. That’s as much as I can handle at the moment, so I have no wants for, or complaints about, myself that I can think of. I try to make the best use of the most capable people I find around me at any given moment, regardless of any artificial factors such as gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, etc.. (In the professional US military, this is not difficult.) I am not concerned with men’s rights; whining is for little girls. My main concern is with their sons and grandsons, with Boy’s and Young Men’s Rights, and their futures.

    About half of my readers are members of other countries trying to figure out what has happened to America and especially to American men. I really can’t stand American adults who sit there and whine; in 2013 all anyone in my country has to do is stand up and make better choices, do something. It would be very helpful if many of those men complaining about their own condition would just grow up and direct their concerns to their own sons and grandsons. That is now the contemporary “great quest” waiting for American men. Don’t condemn those boys to a condition worse than yours. All you have to do is take a stand and use the law – in court. By attacking those public schools, you attack the whole system, and start getting things back into better equilibrium. Now another good opportunity is presented with the discriminatory male-only Draft registration. What America needs most is a major “shock to the system”, to really shake up sclerotic mindset that hasn’t had bases in reality for decades. Most of my articles posted here are dedicated to exploding that mindset; use them.

    It is not possible within our democracy alone to fix the nation’s most major problem, a mindset that is in effect a self-involved “tyranny of the majority”. Equality is not just about claiming a million rights and choices for yourself; it is also about the corresponding and equal assumption of responsibility, and accountability, not only for yourself in all those rights and choices but for others as well, including those in the male minority side of our nation. The only place this can be addressed in a civil manner now is in the courts – to finally drive home to our women the fact that we are all equal under the law, and that includes civil rights law. (Some members of the Supreme Court are beginning to ask questions on their own initiative about “group entitlement” – something that all men and all those professing to be experts on civil rights should have started raising at least twenty years ago. The topic concerns laws and policies running far beyond their original intent to, in effect, create in perpetuity whole classes of “special” privileged people in a society supposedly based on equality. See Propaganda Techniques, Bury The Opposition.) And the solution to that is not an incessant lowering of standards so that anyone can meet them with no real effort, an incessant shifting to “someone else” the job of taking the blame, paying the bills, and doing the hard stuff for “special me”.

    The only men on Earth worth their time on Earth are those willing to fight for other men.” Or their sons.

    3. I can defend what I write here, if asked to do so. For example, the “income imbalance” always cited by women’s lobbies is lazy propaganda based on the totally meaningless comparisons of all women and all men, regardless of the choices women make, male unemployment, etc.. (Motherhood, for example, is now a matter of choice, and many women make that choice.) When you compare the incomes of all fulltime male workers and all fulltime female workers in 19 metropolitan areas across the US, as a recent 2012 study did, it is clear that women now earn about 119%, and rising, of the incomes of men, mainly as a natural consequence of their earning twice as many university degrees as men over the past twenty years. In some localities the differences are less, or more, or about the same, depending mainly on the type of main industries in those areas. Rural areas, construction and mining industries, etc., do have higher incomes for (young) men than women, and also employ more (young) men than women. (Those men do not have long futures in such endeavors.) A current case in point involves the very hard-boiled labor in the Bakkan oil fields of North Dakota and Montana versus the large majority of women now employed in the federal government in the Washington DC, region. (Federal government employees earn the best incomes with the best working conditions, health and retirement benefits and job security in America.) All bigotry has an economic basis somewhere.

    4. Readers would do themselves a favor by checking my Home page and seeing a few things about the author of what is posted here. I am currently overseas sitting in an airport waiting for my next flight, but because I had a very good early education, writing comes easy to me. Those who view me as “an old man chiding kids” are themselves engaging in childishly girly blame-shifting and not understanding what they are reading. See the article on Walt Kowalski, or the one that compares “Greatest versus Boomer” generations. Such people would do us all a favor by taking a good long look in the mirror. If you can top me, please be man enough to do so to my face, but please do so according to the broad guidelines laid out on the Home page.

    5. If you want to understand why you believe the nonsense that you do, I suggest you take a few minutes to check out the two articles on Propaganda, and see what it really is.

    • Tony says:

      Before I saw this comment I mistook you for a regular browser of the men’s rights forum on reddit.since you repeat a lot of the common talking points there.

      > I am not concerned with men’s rights; whining is for little girls. My main concern is with their sons and grandsons, with Boy’s and Young Men’s Rights, and their futures.

      I encourage you to look around on our forum and at least read the FAQ. It’s not like we’re only concerned with “old men’s rights”.

      • I apologize if I gave anyone an incorrect impression. I tried to give readers as much relevant information about me as I think they need on my Home page. I’ll try to provide here a little more information since you seem to be a member of a rather large group and have invited me to look around your forum. I will do so as soon as I finish my current endeavor and get back home; that’s as much as I can promise.

        I’m not much interested in me, but rather in those who have to follow me. My own life is the sum of conscious decisions I have made, and I am satisfied enough with it. I’m a rather busy guy and gave up browsing internet sites years ago because it took too much of my time and didn’t seem to get me where I wanted to go in my mind. The older I get it seems the less time I have for such pursuits, but I guess a part of this is due to the fact that I have spent much of my life studying other cultures, etc.. I don’t know anyone personally who shares my views on these subjects, at least openly, so I don’t discuss them with others. I write just to get various things off my mind, to sort of toss them out there, when I find myself with some down time. Unless there is a specific credit given to another writer (almost always just part of a “mainstream” news article that caught my attention), everything written here is totally extemporaneous, right off the top of my head with zero input from others, including other internet sites. I have no idea if more than a handful of people agree with any of it; the vast majority of visitors don’t leave comments or send e-mail. I actually think that most of my readers are women, but I could be wrong.

        My main career expertise lies in pol-mil affairs, foreign relations, strategic intelligence, intelligence collection, military operations, etc. – subjects which don’t seem to interest most young people. So I try to stick to things that I think might be of interest to normal people, and offer it in plain uncluttered English. I guess the total of my blog over the past couple of years now constitutes several books full of material, but I know that it all could be better organized and more interesting. I write only occasionally and then solely from personal direct education, knowledge and experience, and use the internet only to check some facts, names or figures that have grown foggy in my memory. It’s probably obvious that I’m trying to reach a younger audience, and not well, that my stuff here regrettably remains essentially on an academic, and thus rather boring, plane. (I guess my prose has become rather stilted by too many years of writing for the government/military.)

        Sometimes I get responses from others who engage me in intelligent one-on-one conversation; if they have sites of their own, I will visit their sites as a matter of common courtesy. Many of those who write to me are young men who very rarely invite me to their on-line postings; I think they use me as a sort of sounding board, and I try to live up to that responsibility. Very many others are from other countries with specific questions about America; I do my best to provide them accurate answers, usually within the context of their own countries. (Most of them know more truths about America than Americans know about America.)

        I hope this helps.

  6. Brad says:

    I hate to say it, I am one of the males you describe in your initial paragraphs. I’ve been slogging through an academic career, and have gotten most of the way through my PhD before I’ve had to reflect on my lazy, shortsighted and self-destructive actions. There is a problem with males in education and it does start far before they decide to enter higher education establishments, but I think the problem may be larger than problems with public education. I truly worry about the next generation of men.

    • You are definitely not alone, Brad. I get many e-mails from American men like you who express similar sentiments. I am sorry to admit that I really don’t have much of an answer to this one. What good is all that education if it doesn’t lead to something that is worthwhile to you as a man and to your society so in need? I don’t really know. Perhaps we as a nation need a truly great challenge, perhaps something like Eisenhower’s quest to build the National Defense Highway System (interstates), or Kennedy’s challenge to go to the Moon – in a single decade! And watch everyone not directly involved in that quest also benefit from the excitement, from the huge tangential economic and educational benefit. (I had a faint hope of that with Bush Junior’s plan to build a space station on the Moon as a stepping stone to go far beyond, but the whole idea ended up in the dustbin of history in favor of machines.) Trying to reduce our national debt doesn’t really fill the bill, does it? I happen to believe that men need to be challenged, really challenged, hard, that they are inherently competitive, that they must put those traits to maximum use in order to feel a sense of self-worth, of true achievement, actual accomplishment. Whiling away in some cubicle like a trained Dilbert somehow falls short of that, doesn’t it? General Petraeus was a truly gifted “egghead general” with a background in economics who did great things as a military leader – and then flamed out over a woman in an action that betrayed even his own principles, a great embarrassment before his own son. Why?

      I spend a great deal of time overseas, and it truly amazes me what many formerly “Third World” countries are doing, great things, and fast, too. Soon they will just swamp us, and probably rightly so. Many of them are studying us in great detail in an effort to avoid the mistakes we made, and still make. In many of my articles you will see vague references to this problem, but I have no real answers. How can a nation drowning in debt risk literally everything, its very viability as a nation, for another great quest? I don’t know. (See my “From The North Pole To Moon Rocks – And Back” or my “The American Spirit – Now Belongs To China“.) What kind of zero adult thinking ever got us here, such total disregard for tomorrow? My blog has not to date proven useful for major intellectual and innovative discussions about such things, but it definitely is an area that interests me, greatly. I am primarily a humanity person (large group dynamics, sociology, anthropology, demographics, psychology, etc.), and I tend to view things from a national security perspective. I look at a man like South Africa’s Elon Musk and realize that “impossible” things are still possible in my country. But just where does such imported imagination, vision, energy and brilliance lead us all as a nation? I’m not sure, but he sure does harken back to the Greatest Generation American Man, the type of leadership that used to bring along many thousands of eager participants. No longer, it seems. If you find an answer, any answer, I sure hope you will come back and share it with me and my readers. In the meantime, know that I feel your pain, and that I, too, worry about those who have to follow me into the arena I left them. THIS is The Problem. But it does begin with the way we now “raise” and “educate” our boys.

  7. Neil says:

    In reading your articulate article I have concluded that I was different from my male friends but not wrong as so many had me believe. I pity women now though. I will have a hard time re entering college for a bs in science it is true. However, I will also be stronger for the challenge. Then it is time to leave the country afterwards. I am just to weary of being right but losing the arguements in others eyes because of emotional whit. Kudos.

    • Thank you, Neil. And may your future bring success in all your endeavors. Just by sticking to it despite the imposed challenges, you are halfway there.

      I’ve noticed that this article attracts considerable attention from non-American readers trying to understand the real problems with US K-12 education despite the propaganda they are fed by those representing that system. Obviously many of those readers are trying to avoid making the same mistakes with their own education system before they become too entrenched in the popular mindset to fix.

      The first thing to remember is that, in a democracy where all citizens are equal, civil rights law is intended to apply to everyone and all groups equally, and should NEVER be considered “something just for me and my group”. The second thing is to never stop insisting that such civil rights law be enforced equally for all despite very powerful self-serving lobbies constantly seeking to pervert the system in their favor. This is most difficult in childishly spoiled societies where “me” reigns supreme over “us”.

        • My primary focus on these pages is on bigotry against boys, primarily because adults are free to make their own choices and decisions. See my “home page”. I live in a country with a legal system based on “equal under the law”, and for the past half century women have used that law relentlessly to further their own wants. If men are too stupid and cowardly to use that law to achieve some balance under that same principle, primarily with boys, that is their own fault. It’s primarily because “men” haven’t stood up for their own sons that we have so many losers and jerks all around us today, of both genders. (I avoid them all like the plague.) This article, along with its follow-on piece, “More On Dumb American Men”, addresses the most glaring venue to apply “equal rights” in our society. Why American adults are so ready to use the law for incredibly petty reasons, while avoiding this most important area, how we “raise” and “educate” our boys, totally escapes me. All it would take is one major legal victory over our schools, using existing law with a large library of precedent, to start getting people’s minds back where they belong – that we are all in this game together, for all of us. America is not a caste system.

          A second area is now arising on the horizon. American teenage women have always reached age 18 with incessant campaigns to get them to register to vote (a right), while young men have always been bombarded with campaigns to get them to register for the Draft (a responsibility). The US military recently announced that it is ready to accept women in ground combat roles. See “Women In Combat”. Once women are serving in ground combat roles (i.e., infantry, armor and artillery) there will no longer be a legal justification for a male-only Draft. All it would take is one father with enough spine to walk with his 18-year old son into any federal courtroom in the country and claim illegal discrimination. The government would have no option except to eliminate the Draft, or open it to both genders. Since the Draft is an essential element of our national security, which decision do you think the government will make?

          Under the law, all rights DO come with equal responsibilities, and all responsibilities DO involve accountability.

          Your video clip includes some comments by Christina Hoff Sommers, a philosopher scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Dr. Sommers has been writing about such things quite convincingly for at least the past twenty years, but has never won a male following and sadly has had to weather alone constant attacks from self-interested “feminist” extremist bigots such as those of AAUW. This is inexplicable, since her views are sound, especially those expressed in her book, “The War Against Boys” (2000). She believes in equality, just like I do. But I also happen to believe that the only thing in our society that can overcome the cacophony of the herd mentality is The Law. If there are any actual men still left out there, I would urge them to use it, before it’s too late, and we all go belly up.

  8. reficul says:

    I think the answer may be even simpler – it’s adaptability.
    Only dumb men can stand what has become of modern women -> disgusting vomit inducing creatures.

    • Hmmm. Lot’s of emotional negativity there, reficul. (Do I sense a demonic dark side in your name?) My conclusion is that men and women share equally in what has become of our society, women through their self-involvement, men through their cowardice. Sadly, as a general rule, women today strike me as a lot smarter than the men, are much better schooled, more articulate, etc., so our best hope is that young men begin challenging young women to really defend many of the presumptions handed down to them by their self-involved mothers. American women have never been challenged intellectually in our society, have never been forced to assume responsibility for the other half, have been able to formulate a whole all-encompassing social dogma unchallenged by anyone, especially by cowardly Baby Boomer men and their sons. So hopefully, the latest generation, made up much more of bright immigrants unencumbered by all that baggage and propaganda, will begin demanding some equitable gender balance to the equation.

      American society has been running on mindless auto-pilot with constructs that haven’t been valid for decades. All those male losers out there did not create themselves. There are few things more absurd than vilifying your own creations. In this country you can do anything you want to boys, and no one will ever say anything, simply because boys don’t have a lobby and certainly nothing like the enormously powerful juggernaut that women can throw at any perceived “threat”. It is simply NOT macho to champion women, who don’t need championing, by throwing your sons, who do need championing, under the bus.

      But this won’t be easy; American women have a century of experience of running on their very own wave length solely for their own self-interests. The only civil way to force them to start re-thinking some of that dogma is to use constitutional law – in the courtroom. It is simply not possible for a society to survive when one side ends up with all the advantages, all of the rights, all of the choices – but none of the responsibility. Since women are never going to change things on their own, our youngest generation of men must assume the responsibility for themselves and for future generations of all Americans – and walk into that courtroom. They must use their brains, and leave the childish emotionalism outside – and begin forcing a re-thinking of what makes a vibrant society work, equitably for all. Demons aren’t going to be much help.

  9. Baltica says:

    I am from so-called “Eastern” Europe (actually Northern Europe, the Baltic countries) and I am laughing on the floor watching the so-called “western” people acting so “important”, so “advanced”, so “great looking”, so “smart”, so “intelligent”, so “superior”, so “witty”, so “clever”, so “above all other”, so “much cooler” and putting not only other races down, but also puting so-called “eastern” Europeans down just because (as they claim) they are ugly or uglier than the ‘western” Europeans or than “Americans”. Guys, gals from so-called “west” (west=wets pants) how long has it been since you looked at a mirror? Only people who have some personal issues, some inferiority complex do exactly that, by putting other people down. I bet there will be times, soon, when you the “westerns” will come to our countries seeking jobs. Look at China alone as an example of what’s to come.

    • I certainly have never made such observations in anything posted here. I have spent my life for the past half century serving mankind all over the world as a multi-lingual professional American soldier, including well over twenty years all over Europe, and I have never heard an American make comments such as those you attribute to them. I myself have never taken long to feel comfortable in any location throughout the world where I happened to be, and for many years Berlin was my home.

      America is, after all, made up of people from every country on Earth, including all the countries throughout “eastern” Europe, and the whole world owes many of them a great debt of gratitude. One such immigrant, Nikola Tesla, came to America from Croatia; everything in the modern world that requires electricity to work owes thanks to Tesla’s unparalleled genius. The key to success among all humans is simply a competitive environment that allows and assists them to become all they want to become, unfettered by idiotic dogma that favors one group over another. Maybe it’s just a case that America has been lucky enough to get the bravest of the bunch who were more than willing to compete in a free and tough arena in order to succeed.

      These days, despite my frequent visits to contemporary war zones, I am much more concerned with addressing grave problems that have gradually developed within my own country over the past forty years than I am about solving the problems of other countries. After a whole century of such efforts by America and her citizens, including World War I, World War II, the long “Cold” War and the on-going war with Islamic Extremist Terrorism, plus a century’s worth of America’s treasures and blood, it’s long past time for others to step up to the challenges that exist in the world beyond America. I once had hopes that Europe would do so, but now I think the future will be China’s burden. I wish them well.

      P.S. You might be interested in comparing your views with my own European roots; I have posted three articles here on the Irish before and after they came to America. One of my best friends is a second generation Polish-American with a background similar to mine; he is more familiar with Poland, Lithuania and Latvia. These days in my free time I enjoy the Baltic region in summer and have a special affinity with Finland and Estonia.

  10. Elze says:

    I am american, and I can honestly tell you, this will forever remain a mystery… By the way, do you think people seem more or less intelligent where you live compared to America? Going through most of the comments, It’s seems as if, Near England, has much higher intelligence. I’m left wondering why?

    • I was hoping that a full read of the article would have answered such questions. My article, for example, has absolutely nothing at all to do with intelligence, or with any innate abilities. It has to do with choices and self-involvement. I don’t believe that ANY group or location on Earth can lay claim to “higher intelligence”.

      So, if pressed for a short answer, I’d have to say that American men, like ALL western men (including those in France and “Near England”), are the way they are because women made them that way. Or are you so presumptuous as to think that, while western girls need a vast “village”, western boys simply raise themselves? The situation in America is more severe than in other western countries because unaccountable women control virtually every aspect of “child development”, from before birth to after college, in the US. This includes the incredibly mediocre public K-12 schools that predictably very strongly favor navel contemplating females pursuing cooperative liberal arts and social sciences rather than competitive math, engineering and physical sciences that males generally find more interesting and challenging. Such favoritism is naturally reflected in American colleges and universities where women now outnumber men two to one, and most of those women are studying things that contribute very little to America’s global competitiveness.

      American men are further disadvantaged because they happen to be the most accommodating men on the planet — who have always preferred to give women whatever they want rather than suffer their incessant complaining. (All it ever took in America was for enough women to finally decide just what it was that they actually wanted.) And, more so than other western women, American women have never gotten their heads around the fact that there are actual responsibilities that accompany each and every one of those countless rights – responsibilities beyond themselves, including responsibilities to the nation and its future as well as to all those “dumb” boys, shaped in women’s own image, whom our daughters so love to hate.

      The things that most characterize American society today are effeminate self-deception, delusion and narcissism. We are artificially inflated spoiled adult children, running with our herd, nowhere near as “great” or as “special” as we think we are. To the contrary.

      Hope this helps you solve the mystery.

  11. According to the Bureau Of Economic Analysis (Time, 10 October 2011), the average adult American spends more of their income each month on women’s clothing ($59) than on higher education ($57). Since the male half of the adult population doesn’t buy much women’s clothing, the $59 figure is extremely misleading. In reality, America women spend more than twice as much on their own clothing every month than all of us spend on higher education every month – even though higher education in America now benefits women twice as much as it does men. Since it’s been nearly a century since men dared tried to tell women what to wear (even if they cared about what women wear), women buy all those expensive clothes solely to impress other women. It’s a matter of women’s priorities, values, sense of responsibility, even of their “gaming the system”. Some of the other expenditures of the average adult American every month include these: personal care goods ($35); personal care services ($34); jewelry ($21); shoes ($21); children’s clothing ($5); day care/nursery schools ($4); school lunches ($3). Note that men spend considerably less on the first four than do women, so those figures, too, are misleading, concealing women’s much higher expenditures on such personal luxuries. (And, of course, the whole exercise reveals just how dumb men are.)

    The Greatest Generation in the 1950s wisely kept household debt at or below 34% of disposable income; today it’s an obviously unsustainable 115%.* This is the critical difference between adult “delayed gratification” and the childish “instant gratification” that has characterized our society ever since the rise of the Baby Boomers — whose parents handed them literally everything under the sun to squander away. When it was gone the Boomers turned to massive borrowing to sustain what their parents had built with their blood, sweat and tears – because it had all become an “American birthright”. The traits that best characterize our society today – short cuts, easy answers and quick fixes – would have been justifiably the stuff of derisive ridicule in 1960. In 1960, by dozens of indices, the United States was clearly the “greatest nation of Earth”; today our “greatness” is primarily a product of our huge size (sustained mostly by immigrants), our military forces and our past-based delusions. Even much of our wealth is no longer really our wealth.

    It all began in our K-12 schools. Our colleges and universities now spend most of the first two years trying to teach American students basics they should have mastered, and previously did, by the tenth grade. Worse, in many countries most US colleges and universities are regarded as “where you go if you want to study your navel”. For Indian students with money the very top US universities are even a second-choice fall-back for students who fail to get into the incredibly competitive India university system. While our enormously girl-heavy high school advanced placement programs are usually all that’s needed to get into an American college, often with a liberal arts scholarship, in the summer of 2011 India’s top-rated Delhi University system issued cutoff scores at some of its top colleges barely below a near-impossible 100 percent. The Indian Institutes of Technology, which are spread across the country, have an acceptance rate of less than 2 percent — and that is only from a pool of roughly 500,000 who qualify to take the entrance exam, a feat that requires two years of specialized coaching – after school.

    India’s education minister (who studied law at Harvard): “The problem is clear. There is a demand and supply issue. [Even with India's rapidly expanding university system] You don’t have enough quality institutions, and there are enough quality young people who want to go to only quality institutions.” (See “Squeezed Out in India, Students Turn to U.S.”, New York Times, 31 October 2011.) After rejection by Delhi U., Dartmouth is no problem at all for these extremely well-schooled kids. Indians are now the second-largest foreign student population in America (after the Chinese), with almost 105,000 students in the United States in the 2009-10 academic year. Although a majority of Indian students in the US are graduate students in business, math and physical sciences, undergraduate enrollment has grown by more than 20 percent in the past few years, as the number of male US high school graduates has actually declined. And while wealthy Indian families have been sending their children to the best American schools for years, the idea is beginning to spread to middle-class families, for whom Delhi University has historically been the best option.

    Even those Indian students who pursue liberal arts and social sciences in the US are well ahead of the natives. It really scares me how often I find myself reading material that is actually interesting and worthwhile that was constructed, researched and written by Indian immigrants. These people obviously were not raised in the American cocoon of “victimology” and blame-shifting, are not constrained by the intellectually crippling dichotomy of US left-right politics, and are interested only in getting to the core issues and then plotting the best way forward regardless on self-serving propaganda and other such nonsense. These people view the world as it is, not as how we imagine it is. They didn’t memorize the politically correct answers for the tests; they are writing new tests with new answers, answers that are not the consequence of self-serving lobby dictate. These people enter America near the top and quickly advance on their own merit (thankfully not driven by the same US K-12 values that channel the few American math whizzes into the finance industry where they can easily and quickly make money out of nothing). Indians in the liberal arts and social sciences make excellent objective analysts for our nation’s intelligence agencies and armed forces. There is no way American kids, schooled by our deplorable K-12 system and regardless of their wealth, can begin to compete with such foreign students. They know us far better than we know ourselves, not to mention the rest of the world, too. Large parts of the world beyond America are poised to literally explode past the United States, and in rather short order.

    But this situation has been evident for a very long time. American women’s lobbies, incessantly searching for something else to whine about, have been complaining for years that not enough girls are in math and physical sciences and demanding even more special programs to better balance that ratio in college (apparently, as with competitive sports, regardless of what college women want). But the numbers they are comparing in math and physical sciences are made up mostly of males who are foreign students – not American males. Furthermore, mathematicians and physical scientists, like star athletes, are not born in college; they are shaped for decades before college. This stuff is actually challenging, highly competitive, requires long rigorous training and practice. (“No, ma’am, despite your insufferable arrogance, boys do NOT think and learn just like you.”) There are twice as many women as men in our universities, and a large majority of those men, thanks to our K-12 schools, are studying the same things the women are – liberal arts and social sciences. They are contemplating their navels, studying themselves, glorifying “me”, just like they’ve been doing since the first grade. There are no lobbies championing our bored boys and their futures, their interests, their needs. And the nation’s needs always place a distant second behind what our majority women want for themselves.

    A generation ago in 1970 America had the highest percentage of college graduates in the world. Even with most American degrees meaning far less than they once did, today the US is in 9th place and steadily falling, as our women-dominated K-12 school system ensures college educations for twice as many women as men, and mostly in liberal arts and social science fields that contribute little to our global competitiveness – fields in which most males must struggle to maintain an interest. In 2008-09 there were more psychology majors than engineering majors in America and more fitness studies majors than physical sciences majors. (And to keep them all employed, our self-serving psychology industry, like all social science fields, keeps inventing more personality and social “disorders” among our countless legions of “victims” that need “study” and “treatment”, and, of course, funding from “someone else”.) Along with the rise in emphasis on girl’s education during the 1970s, especially in liberal arts and social sciences, federal funding for physical sciences fell 54% over the 25 years after 1970 and continues to fall, right along with the nation’s competitiveness. But, to listen to all the social science whining, we have a thousand times more screwed up “victim” losers than any society has ever had. (It’s a self-feeding cycle. “Build it, and they will come. Provide a vast army of social scientists, and society’s ills will magically multiply.”)

    The World Economic Forum ranks the US a stunningly shameful 51st in tough physical science and math education. In 2004 only 6% of US degrees were awarded in engineering, and huge numbers of them went to male foreign students studying in the US. Japan awards 20% of its degrees in engineering. In Germany it’s 16%. While this range is appropriate for advanced societies, China and India, having long left the US in their math and physical science dust, are now rushing to match or exceed both Japan and Germany – with enormously greater numbers. The world is the prize.

    In 2001, the year of ‘9/11’, all of American universities together awarded a grand total of three (3) advanced degrees in Islamic studies – even though that part of the world had been central to US economics, diplomacy and military concentration for over a generation. Just who is doing our “thinking” for us? US expertise in the Muslim World now lies in the US military. Just what does that say about us as a society?

    As the “birthright entitlement” Baby Boomers now begin their long exodus into twenty or more years of “retirement”, the federal government is already spending $4 on every adult over 65 compared with $1 on every child under 18. This gap is set to widen exponentially. When the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation measured 44 countries and regions on their efforts to improve their competitiveness over the past decade, the US came in at 43rd place.

    There is something deeply perverted about the United States and all its countless “victims”. The self-involvement of privileged American women is guaranteeing a future that will be hell for all of our kids. Unless American women and their many lobbies step up to the responsibility that has long been theirs, or unless American men re-discover enough of their spines to demand that women be held accountable for the state of our boys, the future of America is indeed bleak – regardless of the power of its military forces. Why would all those brilliant foreign students want to invest their lives in a society in irreversible decline?

    .

    * That practice enabled significant Greatest Generation personal savings which cumulatively provided enormous and very wide-spread private wealth for investing in society and its steady growth – with a resultant wide-spread return to investors, mostly via interest and dividends on personal savings – which added to the savings. Today, with such enormous debt, there are little or no private financing available, and certainly not wide-spread, so most investment in society must come from government that simply confiscates money from “someone else” to meet society’s burgeoning needs of today, the future be damned. This is in stark contrast to, for example, Japan, whose national debt is still overwhelmingly held, not by foreign governments reaping lucrative tax-free returns, but by Japanese citizens, via their own personal savings, which include government bonds. The Japanese still wisely invest in their own society and its future, and reap a decent and very wide-spread return on their investment. The difference in personal savings is absolutely critical, since personal savings is one of the very best indicators of a society’s overall health and stability. It’s also indicative of a responsibly adult citizenry that actually cares about its children and their future.

    The most common trait among Americans, on the other hand, has become “blame-shifting”. For example, everyone blames either the banks or the politicians for the 2008 housing implosion that set off a global recession, while giving a free pass to hundreds of thousands of middle class Americans in the part-time “flipping” business – buying homes on margin solely to resell them for a quick and easy profit, oblivious even to the simple fact that there were not even enough Americans to occupy all those “commodity” houses. For years it was as if $300,000 homes were baseball cards of no consequence to the greater picture. How quickly we forget the proliferation of very popular daytime TV shows pushing this insane game to eager housewives suddenly “expert” in the real estate business. These gambling jerks, along with dining room “day traders” and wealthy people with nothing better to do than play the “development” game, share equal responsibility for the resultant crash of the housing and finance industries, but to blame them would necessitate blaming “me”, which is never going to happen.

    • Sasha says:

      “It really scares me how often I find myself reading material that is actually interesting and worthwhile that was constructed, researched and written by Indian immigrants.”

      Not just immigrants. If you go to the websites of major corporates such as Accenture and IBM, most of the content – and I mean the content, the marketing and ‘thought leadership’ – is produced today in Bangalore and Chennai. They’ve reduced their U.S and European marketing teams dramatically since 2008.

      • I, too, have been impressed with the thinking being done by disciplined and honed minds from India. It’s quite obvious to me that those minds, of both genders, are the product of a highly competitive educational system that demands the highest degree of excellence. It seems to me as a bystander that India places a premium on teaching her students how to think. I applaud India for its efforts in this area, but I hope that they will not overlook the educational needs of those who do not quite come out at the very top, and that India will be able to retain most such well trained minds in its own society – for India’s best interests. All members of an vibrant society need the best educational system possible, with the best teachers possible, to help all of its citizens rise as high as they are capable and willing. It scares me a little as an American while viewing America’s educational system and seeing such things rising elsewhere, including in China. I am also familiar with Finland’s system. The key in both countries is a citizenry that places a very high value on quality education.

        (I do continue to have reservations about Indian caste.)

  12. Nit picky, perhaps, but I notice that you often use the word “anymore” wrongly, when it should be replaced with the word “now.” Here are two examples from your post:

    1. “As is common with all social issues in America anymore, we all will hear, and continue to hear, only the women’s view…”

    2. “Is everyone in this country so incredibly childish anymore that they can’t see the…”

    The word “anymore” denotes negativity or absence, so if something isn’t happening “anymore” then it would be valid to use the word. But if something is still happening “now” then “anymore” isn’t the word to use anymore.

    :) Interesting article, nonetheless.

    • Valid points, sir, which I will watch in the future.

      I think the “anymore” comes from a gradually aging guy who is trying to talk to a smart young audience, so I certainly can use some good pointers there.

      Thank you for stopping by.

      • DaArny says:

        Don’t worry, your posts are riddled with words you’re using just to make you seem smart. Good thing it isn’t working on all of us.

        • Thank you, DaArny, for taking the time to read one of my articles and also for taking the time to comment on-line. (The overwhelming number of responses I receive are via e-mail, not for public posting.) I won’t ask which words regrettably posed challenges to you, but I would refer you to the Home page where there are a few things about me and my little blog. It greatly pleases me that my writings attract a very surprisingly (to me) wide audience, and that about half of my readers are non-Americans who do not claim English as their first language, who live in countries whose citizens have far less closed minds and much better educations than does my own today.

  13. I run across potentially interesting articles about social issues in reputable publications like Time, New York Times, etc., every week. Regardless of the social subject, they all have these universal characteristics: (1) They are all written by women. (2) They all have as their foundation the premise that the women’s view of the issue is both correct and infallible. (3) They all presume that males think just like females about everything. (4) They all speak only of some uni-sex entity known as “children” or “students”. (5) They all use fifty-year-old terms drawn from women’s lobby propaganda tracts that became trite clichés decades ago. (6) They all exclude expert testimony from male scientists – unless the males selected provide “evidence” that supports the writer’s thesis. (The latter is almost always attributable much more to the fact that males are in the extreme minority in all these women-dominated social science fields, and because all the money in “research” is in females, than to any actually objective “science”. This is, in fact, the way that social “science” gets conducted today. It’s all about making women feel better about themselves, damned any consequences to those hated men, or their sons.) All of these conditions, in reverse, were fundamental to incessant very loud women’s lobby complaints, propaganda and law suits from 1965 to 1985 – with enormously less foundation in fact.

    I usually stop reading these articles about half way through due to nausea, but occasionally I suffer through the self-serving garbage all the way to the miserable end. And every once in a while, if I happen to have an extra half hour available, I’ll write a letter to the author of such a piece, just to get a few things off my chest. (I never get a response; don’t bother wasting time presenting an opposing view to an American woman “expert”. I think I do it mainly for idle recreation, like killing time by tossing coins towards the wall.)

    Below is an example of such a letter, written to a woman who incredibly even used Kurt Vonnegut at age 47 in both her introduction and her conclusion, I suppose as some sort of “validation”.

    The Vonnegut words she used were: “ When you get to be our age, you all of a sudden realize that you are being ruled by people you went to high school with … You all of a sudden catch on that life is nothing but high school.” The Time writer did say that Vonnegut (a veteran of World War II’s Battle Of The Bulge and the fire bombing of Dresden and repatriation by the Red Army – all very far from the lady’s high school) was quoting a fellow Indianapolis high school grad (and thus the belief was not necessarily his own). But she failed to mention that Vonnegut wrote that quote in 1968 – 43 years ago, during the early years of the women’s “liberation” movement and, of course, during the male Draft, the anti-war tirades, race and other riots, and all that other messy ‘60s stuff. She thus failed to notice that things have changed over the past half century, that men are no longer ruled by “people”, but by American women who have succeeded in creating their very own version of “reality” and then imposing that myopic view on everyone else.

    Serving outside the US in the “male-dominated” US Army myself, I managed to escape most of that whole 1965-85 “forced re-education” period in American domestic history (you know, all the class action law suits, the mandated “sensitivity” training, the incessant affirmative actions, the forced mass replacement of male workers with female workers, all those rights with no responsibilities, the end of free speech and most meritocracies, etc., all while war raged and other important things were going on), so I know that no actual man with his own mind, and most especially a man like Kurt Vonnegut, would EVER have written such an article about American high school so very packed with feminine emotionalism: “Hard work and the development of capacities like conscientiousness and cooperation also matter for success – not to mention personal satisfaction and fulfillment.” (Defined by whom? For whom? To what end?) “… high school as a formative life experience, as social as it is academic, in which students encounter a jostling bazaar of potential identities …” (Gee. No one in the history of humanity has ever asked, “Who am I?” Or had the shallowness to re-invent themselves whenever they got tired of the “old me”.) “Know that you will eventually meet people who will appreciate you for being you.” (And what? Ask you to marry him? When your income is three times his? That’s your job, and, believe me, just like your mother was, he’s a lot more interested in your bank account.)

    If you have a nice personality and a pleasant demeanor you can be as incompetent as you want to be? It’s not about the results; it’s all about the process?

    All of this mushy self-serving stuff, of course, implies that trillions of dollars of taxpayer money are now used, not so much to educate our children about the world, to enable them to contribute to society in meaningful and productive employment, to provide them solid foundations in subjects to be pursued in greater depth in college, to move society forward in a rational and intelligent way so as to compete with the rest of the world without repeating the colossal mistakes of the past, .. but rather to further the study of “me”, to enable each of our children to contemplate their navels ad nauseum until they decide which non-productive liberal arts field they want to play in – on someone else’s dime – for the rest of their lives.

    No wonder so many boys drop out of school due to mind-numbing boredom. It’s a system engineered to promote cooperative hand-holding, to purposefully stifle genius and innovation, to artificially inflate delusional egos, to dilute high individual potential to the lowest common denominator, to instill conformity and group think, to make marginal performance and productivity both acceptable and hidden in the crowd, to even promote cheating (“cooperation”). Small wonder that Baby Boomers Inside The Beltway are still operating on thinking done by our grandfathers – Kurt Vonnegut’s generation – for an entirely different world. Thank God we still have a few private all-boys schools and a few guys like Steve Jobs out there defiantly marching to their own tunes. Our “education” system quite obviously deliberately enforces mediocrity.

    Of course, in these “expert” fields, where everyone specializes in ever tinier parts of the whole, no one ever steps back and examines the overall consequences of all the petty self-serving mushiness, even if someone somehow mustered the capacity to do so. That’s a responsibility, naturally, for “someone else” (if they dare).

    It also shows that schools have also picked up the responsibilities of raising our children on the taxpayer’s dime that once were the natural functions of two complementary and caring parents, one female and one male, along with their childhood playmates and pets. The thing that scares me most about this pervasive American women mind-set is all those many millions of single mothers out there continuously imposing that self-serving nonsense on their boys from birth onward.

    So here is what I wrote to her:

    +++

    Dear Ms Murphy-Paul,

    Re “Life After High School”, by Annie Murphy-Paul, Time, 20 June 2011

    Every time I read one of these social issue articles masquerading as “news”, now ALWAYS written by women, the only group that is allowed to comment on such things, and naturally with full impunity, I am reminded, not of Kurt Vonnegut, but of the wife in that very perceptive classic, “American Beauty”.

    Here we have an article about high school that never once mentions “girls” or “boys” (except to note that girls who play sports are more likely to penetrate “male-dominated” professions, of which I know none outside of hard labor, the military and pro sports). The article is all about some uni-sex universe with one single frame of reference – “My” reference. Contemporary American women “experts” are loath to mention gender, especially in the context of child development during the 0-20 formative years which they now completely dominate, UNLESS they have found another whine, another complaint, another rule they want imposed on “that other gender”, unless there is some advantage to THEM to do so. It’s all a self-serving mind-set that evolved over a half century in the vacuum of a cocoon surrounded by the constant protection of the world’s most powerful lobbies, a cocoon that ensures a million rights without responsibilities, that ensures that “my” view is the only view that counts.

    The result is an arrogance that is just breathtaking, freely espoused in the very safe knowledge that it will never be challenged. Why? Because the other side, the boys, have no lobby at all. Now isn’t that just so convenient? Everything these women utter, in every applicable field, screams to boys: “To achieve perfection you must become me.” It now permeates the entire child development arena, including sociology, psychology, education, health, and “journalism” – all enormously dominated by women – as would an all-encompassing dogmatic disease, or an extremist religion. A very telling example of this mind-set, this religion, is the use of such terms as “male-dominated”; such terms have been chanted incessantly by all women’s lobbies since 1961, as though nothing has changed in a half century. But no one EVER mentions “female-dominated” – as in such very critical fields as child development, health services, education, government, etc.. As such, the terms are just another form of women’s mindless self-serving religious propaganda running on auto-pilot decades after it all became a pathetic cliché. It’s all emotion, devoid of logic.

    This is why American women can’t stand the jerks, creeps, perverts and assorted other twisted male losers they find all around them when they reach adulthood somewhere between the ages of 35 and 50. This is why our K-12 public schools now routinely ensure college educations for twice as many women as men, and steadily rising. This is why these days our colleges and universities spend most of the first two years trying to teach students things they should have mastered in high school, and previously did – charging the bill-payers twice for the same thing. This is why the country has been dead in the water since the Baby Boomers took over in the 1970s, stuck in an ever-circling morass of self-involvement. This is why it is now perfectly acceptable to kill people and destroy things like effeminate girlymen from the secure comfort of mom’s basement and still pretend that it does not involve “hostilities”, while anointing sissy button-pushing gamers with the title “warrior”. This is why we now have a society that demands EVERYONE conform to the woman’s view of the world, or fail. And those who fail are themselves to blame, of course, because, as we all know, boys and men are completely responsible for creating themselves, while girls and women require a vast “village” of everyone working in lock-step concert under one religion. This totally absurd nonsense is only possible when we have a ruling class of women in the social “sciences” and “journalism” that has never been held accountable for the consequences of their myopic self-involvement, never had to answer for THEIR role in creating all those deformed males now everywhere around their daughters.

    You, Ms Murphy-Paul, and your “elitist” sisters have become that which you have always despised – self-serving sexist bigots, insolently imposing your twisted will on everyone else, not even willing to grant that that other gender even has a voice in the matter, much less a legitimate voice. How does it feel to be able, from your female-dominated universe, to dump all over the only group that has no lobby – boys – and then blame THEM for their failings? In all my many years, I have never experienced such impunity, with anyone, anywhere, in war or in peace, or even in high school.

    If women think that their daughters and grand-daughters will not one day face very virulent accusations of their “advancing” solely by deliberately stunting boys in schools their mothers dominated, they are sadly delusional. Besides, THEY will be footing the bills for all those many tens of millions of under-educated male losers – in every way imaginable. Result: a no-win situation caused by the self-involvement of today’s super-spoiled women boneheads – all to the extreme detriment of our entire society tomorrow.

    Did you select Vonnegut to begin and end your piece because something he wrote about someone else happened to mesh with your own views, or because of the man he was? Just what do you think he would write about YOU? Obviously, you didn’t understand Kurt Vonnegut at all.

    What you imagine is actually a granfalloon.

    P.S. Don’t feel too badly. No public school performance report, and no “news” article, has mentioned “boys” or “girls” in this country since the late-1990s – when the truth about how greatly our female-dominated schools and our female-dominated social sciences are systematically failing our boys became just too shameful, and too illegal, to mention. This is far and away the nation’s greatest social shame, but since women can’t be held accountable, it’s best to just impose a blanket censorship on the whole truth.

    In an adult world, one with actual equal responsibility, American women would be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, but that isn’t going to happen, is it? We all must just bend over and kiss your ring. Right, “Mrs. Burnham”? As we saw in “American Beauty”, it doesn’t make any difference now if you shoot them or not; you killed them already long ago. Those still wandering around lose are just your creations, your clones, in your own image. Wow!

    (Please pull the trigger now, so I know.)

    • Ponte Preta says:

      You won’t be taken seriously with resentful and shaming pieces like that, even if some of what you said could be true.
      I’ve read some other comments of yours. You can do better.

      At least now I’m sure; in fact, you are indeed a bigoted sexist, and a really smart one. I just think it would be so much better for anyone if you would just own it, instead of speaking like you actually is against any sexism, when in fact you only care about sexism against males.
      You think everything (considered in your society) feminine is bad, so let’s just call feminine men “effeminate” or girly/sissy, as a big insult. Females are bad, so anything related to females (in yours and/or your society’s eyes) can only be tainted. The same goes to social science or arts – it’s “feminine” in your point of view (or America’s pov, I don’t know), so it’s lower, less important, leads to mistakes, egocentric and flawed thinking. Right here, you just shows how you are the actual one devoid of logical, deeper notions about social sciences in general.
      Americans could try to understand better what emotions and logic really are, and how they work. The way so many of you put the two as antonym qualities that can’t ever work simultaneously and cooperate to a larger view of matters and/or gendered qualities isn’t based on any actual logical perception, but actually your own prejudiced and sexist (and probably also cultural) opinions. Emotions as a feminine (that you always link to females exclusively or in higher proportions), hence bad attribute. Logic as a masculine (linked to males), hence good or better. That’s not how humans work.

      My Brazilian people aren’t scared of emotions and don’t label them a feminine OR masculine attribute, just like we don’t hold logic as something better than emotions – they are both important and different (but not “enemies”) parts of human beings. I can’t remember hearing that kind of ignorant talk so many Americans throw around coming from my friends or media.

      Please show me an academic work which explains, thus proves, that “emotional thinking” is something factual, and how that works.
      Because in my education, emotions aren’t something that can be labeled or compared to a line of thought. Assumptions aren’t actual emotions either, thought they can be driven by them. in fact, most of our human behavior is driven by our emotions, from anger to sadness, happiness to generosity, and even more by our feelings, from inferiority to hate, feelings of responsibility to love.
      Maybe there’s a big communication deficiency here.

      • You didn’t answer my question (to your comments about the “Marry Me” article), so I’ll presume that you speak Portuguese as a citizen of, and living in, Brazil. Thank you very much for taking the time to stop by and checking out a small part of what I’ve posted here, Ponte Preta.

        (For other readers: Ponte Preta is a famous Sao Paulo football club with a female Macaca as its mascot.) Brazil, of course, is a country with a sterling record of social equality, of rights fully matching responsibilities. The fact that you are visiting the US, write English so well, pontificate with such arrogance to an American in his own country (as if it were your own), etc., all speaks volumes about your own “special” privilege. Is it that it’s so much easier to assert rights in the US than it is in Brazil, especially in all those teeming favelas? Twelve of the world’s top 50 murder-rate cities – one-fourth – are in Brazil; what have you been doing to reduce the conditions leading to such mayhem? One wonders to what, or to whom, exactly, you owe your privilege, and what, exactly, you have contributed to the conditions you find in America, much less to those that exist in Brazil, how many companies you have created and built, how many good jobs you have offered to your favela countrymen, how many years you have served in your nation’s armed forces, her police, fire or rescue services, taught boys in her schools, defended others in war, volunteered in favela medical clinics, organized and coached boy’s football teams, raised happy healthy and well-educated children on your own with a permanent male partner, actually earned your privilege, etc.. Or is it all just due to your unearned birthrights?

        If you took the time to look over my “Home” page, you probably noticed that I am an American, and in this blog I am addressing my own country. You may have also noticed that I have spent a long life working in and evaluating other countries around the world to identify their weaknesses, strengths and vulnerabilities. Such and similar information is needed for American political leaders and military commanders to make informed decisions critical to defending the United States and its many friends and allies around the globe, as well as to respond to any unforeseen contingencies that may arise in that world. As you therefore may surmise, I have filled secret US government libraries with my work about other countries for a very long time, but I have remained silent about my own. I decided a few years ago to use some of my remaining time to address my own country, something I am able to do from the perspective of a quite knowledgeable man who has spent most of his life defending his nation from outside it. Now I am exercising my right as an American to get a few things off my chest, primarily by assisting young American men to better understand things around them that no longer make much sense.

        You seem to have a major problem about emotion versus logic. Please understand that I do not exist or write to ensure that you read only what makes you – or anyone else – feel good about yourself. (Our politicians and other brainless celebrities do more than enough of that phony dictated lying to women than all men taken together.) And with the problems I discuss, I fault men (just as much as women) for being too cowardly to call women to task and measure up long ago. As a social scientist who has spent his life in foreign intelligence, I try very hard to avoid emotion, fantasy and self-serving nonsense while using fact, logic and rational thinking to reach carefully considered and defended conclusions that are clearly articulated for anyone who might be interested to see. (As an American military man, I have spent my life dealing with life or death matters in deadly environments where emotion can very easily get you killed. I thus naturally make a very clear distinction between emotion and logic, in clearly differentiating between the different value of each – and most especially when it concerns the future viability and survival of my nation.) Here I am not forcing anyone to read anything. People who are interested will come; those who aren’t interested, won’t come. There are now over 60 rather lengthy articles posted on my blog. It was recently pointed out to me that a decent editor could separate those articles into four or five groups and publish them as coherent books on four or five cogent subjects. I am not interested in doing this, but if anyone is interested in gaining greater understanding of what is said in one article, there are already posted several other related articles which could broaden one’s understanding. It just depends on how much one is really interested. It is of little concern to me that I be taken seriously, but it is true that with my background most people do take me seriously, and always have. I am not guided by any self-serving propaganda, dogma or herd group think. I seek nothing for myself, wish no harm to anyone, and am quite satisfied with my life. My life thankfully has had purpose.

        As a social scientist I naturally speak in broad generalities, in statistical norms, about large groups of humans that identify themselves with certain labels, realizing full well that any group of humans will have “exceptions to the rule”, deviations from the norm. My country now has about 320,000,000 citizens, and there definitely are significant numbers of them who operate on the fringes. I am not concerned with them – with idiots, perverts, creeps, criminals, zealots, etc. – but rather with the principle characteristics that define the group as a whole – and how those broadly defined groups shape my society. I could double the length of what is posted here by including all sorts of academic references and minutely detailed footnotes, but that would cost me the readers I am trying most to reach – young American men, who would quickly become bored with all that extra stuff. Besides, I am not writing for publication or peer group review, etc., but rather just to help a few people, both American and non-American, who are interested, gain a better understanding of things – while I go about my normal day job.

        One of the things that presents difficulties to American women is not taking personally any criticism that is leveled against their group. It’s perfectly acceptable for women to rant with all sorts of insults and invectives against “men” and still expect individual men not to take it personally, but it just doesn’t work that way in the opposite direction. This is not my problem; it is a problem that American women have. I gather from your comments that you are also afflicted with this strange trait. (You don’t even have problems directly insulting me personally with your labels, based on nothing more than your right to invoke emotion. Since I’ve been subjected to that stuff from literally everyone every day of my life for over a half century just for being born a white heterosexual American male, not to mention a professional soldier, and therefore automatically guilty of everything imaginable, I don’t even notice it anymore. It does, however, negatively impact my sons and grandsons, which I presume is the primary intent anyway – to destroy them when they’re too young to know what’s going on by vilifying their fathers and grandfathers. American mothers and grandmothers have been doing a really stand-up job of that at home and school for the past forty years while creating “men” in their own image. But would you regard my doing the same to you as “sexual harassment”? My society is literally FULL of such stupid double-standards.) Please understand that I am NOT saying anything in my blog that should be taken personally by anyone (unless I identify them by name, which has occurred with one or two women who have elected to assume very public positions on the national stage). When I use the label “women” here, I mean American women, as a group.

        Furthermore, I am proud to say that, after a half century of incessant demands from women that I “get in touch with my feminine side”, I never did find that side of me and seriously doubt that it ever existed. On the contrary, I never observed anything about American Baby Boomer women and their daughters that would entice me to even consider so diminishing what I am, and I deeply regret that American men were not just as demanding all that time that women “get in touch with their masculine side”. (I would much rather strive to rise to the level of my best competitors, rather than strive to bring them down to my level, while they are still children.) Even after all that constant assault on my very identity, I am simply not in the least ashamed of what I am, the identity with which I was born, and have zero “conflicts” about any of it. Sadly, I can not say the same about most younger American men I encounter today, so twisted out of shape, so programmed with idiotic dogma and propaganda, as they have become at the hands of self-loathing women.

        I have the impression that you are quite young (by my standard), probably in your 20s. So it may come as a surprise to you that there is nothing in what you say that I didn’t hear from women in 1960, and almost daily ever since. American women for the past century have been blessed with something that no other group on the planet has enjoyed – the most accommodating men in the world. (Remember: I am speaking in group generalities.) As a group, American women engineered the most significant social revolution in human history simply by finally getting enough women to agree on what they actually wanted and then demanding that men accommodate it. (And women have never stopped complaining about the consequences to them of their own revolution.) As a solid adult American male I have been listening to American women for a very long time, constantly bowing, adjusting, accommodating, providing, etc., to “whatever women want”. So have most of my male contemporaries who have managed to survive this long. When you reach my age you start wondering if it will ever end. The main problem American women have is that no one has ever challenged them, no one has ever demanded that they defend their dogma within the context of ALL of us in a larger world beyond petty “me”, no one has ever demanded that women bow, adjust, accommodate, provide, etc., to whatever men want. It’s all a one-way street, ad nauseam. And, sadly, American women are just no longer worthy of the effort. I don’t really care what they think about what is posted here. It’s my turn.

        American women have long been the most protected, the most promoted, the most pampered, the most privileged and the most powerful group of humans on the planet. Their super-majority of votes has decided every election in the US since 1980. On social and political levels they always get whatever they want, and the only things they ever want is stuff for “me”. They’re still whining, still demanding, still literally wallowing in their victimhood, still stuck on 1960 auto-pilot. It just gets so tiring.

        My society is now full of very major flaws and cancers, but most women don’t see them because they remain so laser-focused only on themselves while expecting “someone else” to take care of everything else. It doesn’t work that way in the real world. With great power comes, inescapably, great responsibility. American women will still be whining, totally clueless, when their society lies in rubble all around them.

        Today in America women set the social agenda. No one is forcing them to do anything. Anything they do or do not do is solely a matter of their own choices. And they do have a seemingly endless list of choices. Neither I or anyone else is responsible for the choices women make. Because of such choices, half the children born in America are born to single women. Because of other choices, half of the rest of America’s children are being “raised” by divorced women. Only one-in-four boys in America can count on a father through age 18. Think about that a moment. Fathers, if they exist at all, have become interchangeable spare parts, passing each other in the night through constantly revolving doors – temporary stand-ins serving the choices women make, every woman’s ready-made excuse for their own failings. Because of choices, and no responsibility, all those boys, of course, simply “create themselves”, they become what they became because “someone else”, certainly not women with all their choices, made them that way. That is total nonsense. Boys, like girls, do NOT create themselves; they are created by those women who rule everything in their early lives, from before conception to after college, and mostly by their own example, in their own image. It’s one of life’s inescapable truths.

        One humongous industry that is totally controlled by American women is the K-12 public education industry. This is the most expensive education industry in human history, and the worst performing among advanced societies. It gets worse and worse every year. Everyone praises all the women who are working so hard and so nicely in that industry, but no one dares say they aren’t really doing their jobs. Their jobs are to ensure those children receive solid educations that will enable all children to compete on a global stage as upstanding citizens. If you think with emotion you focus on the process, on how hard and nicely those women are working; if you think with logic you focus on the results, on how many of those children are NOT getting an education, and especially on the really huge majority of boys who are failing in those schools. When American taxpayers pour trillions of their dollars into an industry, they expect to get their money’s worth out of it – for boys as well as for girls. That is not happening. Today we have twice as many women as men every year ensured college educations in America, and pathetically those college degrees are no better than was a high school education fifty years ago. We are running in reverse!

        And no one is responsible. It’s all about “my” rights. So we have all those women “raising” children and all those women “teaching” children, and still we absurdly do not hold women responsible, accountable, for what those boys become? That’s totally asinine. Women ARE responsible. They ARE equally responsible for the other gender. You can bet your very last Brazilian real that, if men were “raising” and “teaching” all those children, and getting such results, especially for girls, women would never stop screaming about girls not doing as well or better than boys, and demanding the heads of men who were so blatantly failing in their jobs.

        Any charge you level against me, I can level against you. Get it? It’s “equality”. It’s also logic. When you use emotion, you can make up any stupid rules to favor yourself you want, and still call it “equality” – which is a favorite pastime of American women. And, of course, women teach our children in their most formative years with their ever-shifting emotion, now with almost no logical input, so that “truth” becomes whatever you want it to be at any given moment in time – to serve your own self-interests. That’s why it’s “all right”, for example, for young males to sneak up behind unsuspecting innocent people on the street and bash them in the head to knock them out for the video cameras as they fall lifeless face-first to the hard concrete. It’s “fun”! “I like it! It makes me feel good, so it must be all right. It benefits “me” at the expense of “someone else”. And, just as women taught me all my life, it’s ALL about “me”, isn’t it?” And that, of course, is just bullshit, for losers. There is no “special” in equal. Women can NOT avoid the responsibility that is theirs. If women are not willing and able to assume full responsibility, and accountability, for their own choices, they need to make better choices. I as an American man am not responsible for the choices American women make. You’d see a lot more logic and a lot less narcissistic “me” in our society if, when the police finally arrest such sociopaths, they also charged as co-defendants the parents who created them and sent them out to plague the rest of us. But with 3/4ths of them “raised” and “taught” by women exercising their right to make choices free of responsibility, that isn’t going to happen, is it? And with one of every four children in the US now an immigrant child, one has to wonder if privileged American women are teaching those children, too, all that same crap about a million rights with no responsibility that they claim for themselves. That sort of nonsense does NOT come out of the ether.

        Emotion says that women keep working hard and nice at home or in school doing the job and receive praise from everyone for it. Logic dictates that if the expected results are not achieved then you stop doing it, you change what you are doing, you do whatever else is required to achieve the expected results, equitably for everyone, including the other gender. That is exactly what women demanded when they felt girls were on the short end. And, as always, they got what they wanted in very short order. Why can’t men make the same demand when boys are now FAR further on the short end? Why can’t men make any demands of women? “This majority half of our population gets all the rights, and this minority half gets all the responsibility?” For the past 25 years American boys have been falling further and further behind every year in that woman-dominated industry, in our whole society, and all we hear is one huge silence. Everyone is afraid of emotional women. It’s just absurd.

        When you “think” with emotion, you can rationalize literally anything.

        And THIS kind of “thinking” is what is killing my country, in a very wide range of other areas, too. In America it’s “against the law” to criticize women. It’s simply not allowed. “Politically correct” dictate demanded by women has made it impossible. American women can do no wrong. We even have laws and regulations and policies in the US that require men to lie to women, to only tell them what they want to hear, to never utter anything that might upset their feelings. American women have rights; they do NOT have responsibilities. It is the responsibility of men to ensure any rights infantile women decide to claim for themselves. It’s ALL total nonsense. It’s utter insanity. If you can’t stand the heat, then get out of the kitchen! Heat comes with that territory called responsibility. There is no “special” in equal. No nationally known woman in the history of American democracy has ever championed a cause for a group other than her own, and this includes those women elected to represent ALL of us and to champion the best interests of the whole nation going forward. But no man elected to any post can get elected without championing whatever women want. And that’s “equality”? If women want to assume positions of “leadership”, why can’t I ask just what they have ever done for MY group, exactly why my group should follow their “lead” anywhere? If some of this idiotic stuff doesn’t start changing fast, the consequences to all of us will be devastating. Women can’t keep wallowing in their self-proclaimed eternal victimhood forever just to avoid their just share of the responsibility.

        Leadership? Why in the world would anyone with an ounce of brains ever follow their lead anywhere? No one has suggested, much less forced, American women to do anything for at least a century; everything they do, or do not do, is solely a matter of their own free decisions. Yet these perpetual infants, these eternally whining children, can’t even assume responsibility for their own free choices, their own elective behavior, and need Big Daddy Government, on someone else’s dime, to assume accountability even for their sexual activity (contraceptives), their eating habits (obesity), their procreation decisions (abortion), their children (the Vast Village), their criminal activity (drug addiction), even their dress preferences (really stupid shoes that require them to be treated like toddlers), etc., ad infinitum. Any day now their lobbies will be demanding that “someone else” provide them a whole new bureaucracy just to change their diapers. Anyone would have to be insane to put such irresponsible children in charge of anything. Just consider what has happened to our society since women took over the voting booths thirty years ago; America has become one gigantic basket case running in reverse! They have done little more for the past half century than demand that everything and everyone change what they are to accommodate them, even lowering standards in whole institutions so a token few women can participate and provide vicarious self-worth to many millions who do nothing but sit on the sidelines making demands of others. The hardest thing to find in this country is someone who learned in that gigantic female-dominated school industry how to do something as elementary as think!

        Now we even have women who voluntarily decide that they want to be combat soldiers who show up not being able to do a measly three pull-ups. Three! That’s just obscenely pathetic – for any adult American. At my age, I can still do at least fifty. Do they think playing combat soldier is the same as answering telephones? Give me a break. If you can’t pick up my dead weight and my weapon from the ground and carry both of us, plus your own weapon, at least 100 yards at double-time speed (And, yes, some actually fit women can.), then I don’t want you anywhere near me on a battlefield or in my chain of command. You’ll just get both of us killed. But no doubt whining women and their lobbies will, as always, force the institution to change its standards to accommodate a few feeble little girls who want to play with the big boys – just so all women can get a cheap boost of vicarious self-esteem while sitting on their asses. Their knee-jerk “answer” for such things everywhere for the past half century has always been to either lower the standards for all or institute despicable double standards for “me”. And, of course, as long as you can keep doing this, there’s no need to measure up, no need to even try, no need to compete as actual equals. It’s not the institution or its mission or anyone else in the institution; it’s strictly all about “me”, damned the larger consequences. It’s a totally perverted version of “equality” – serving “me” – that does little more than steadily lower the standards for everyone, until little or no effort at all is required, and the institution may as well belong to Haiti. It then isn’t difficult to understand why it is now so easy for privileged immigrants to walk in the door and quickly assume positions at or near the top. (There’s nothing “exceptional” about us at all.) It’s just criminal that no one demands the same of women over what they’ve been doing, for example, to boys in their perverted schools for the past thirty years. At least the military doesn’t pick on children. (P.S. The primary reason why women as a group have such huge health care costs compared to men is because so many of them are overweight and out of shape – both strictly matters of voluntary personal choice, personal behavior for which they insist that “someone else” pick up huge portions of the inevitable cost. And their children usually turn out as copies of themselves.)

        Normally I wouldn’t waste time with a girly coward who slings her assassination bombs from behind the safety of creepy anonymity (a woman’s typically ‘excellent’ teaching example for boys), but I had a few things building up in my mind anyway, and you just provided the excuse to unload. I won’t respond to your individual observations because you wouldn’t have made them if you had read with logic rather than with emotion. And I don’t like to keep repeating what I’ve written elsewhere. (It’s really boring for other readers.) If you want responses to such observations, you might try going back and reading what I actually wrote in this article, and not just what you want to feel about it. Or you might peruse as an adult “Gymnastics Of The Mind” and “Why Finnish Schools Are Better” for closely related matters. I note that you’ve already looked over “Marry Me“. And yesterday I provided two replies to a young man (“Fatally Curious”) at the end of the article on “Intelligence Collection” who asked some questions about the various American civil rights movements which you might also enjoy.

        If not, well, thanks again for stopping by. Have a pleasant life.

  14. Here’s a response to a number of e-mails asking similar questions: Usually just the way the main question is phrased will reveal the author’s inherent prejudices. Here’s an example, stated in the title of a popular book supported by the education industry: “Why Boys Fail”. Even the title of this book reveals the inherent bigotry. Why doesn’t it state, “Why Schools Fail Boys”?

    It isn’t phrased that way because it’s easier for bigots and cowards to blame boys for failing a system intentionally designed since the 1970s to favor girls.

    Any moron would be a fool to blame girls for failing at anything. Thirty years of Title IX legal precedent firmly established that the victims of institutional discrimination cannot be blamed for failing that institution, and most especially if that institution is a taxpayer-funded institution, that by law the institution must change in order to ensure that both genders succeed in equal proportion.

    But since boys don’t have a lobby, and women’s many powerful lobbies have now succeeded in instilling the pervasive “females as eternal victims” myth, no one is going to complain, including our esteemed “press”. So adults responsible for the bigotry against boys get a free pass – AND make money selling self-serving books. (Profit, of course, is the primary objective of all the bigotry in the first place).

    So now we have everyone in the education industry (schools, government AND “journalism”) conspiring to not even grant gender to boys until a few of them show up in college and want to play sports – and find themselves grossly under-educated and enormously out-numbered. Up until then, the degree to which American schools fail boys is hidden from the taxpaying public behind the universal use of propaganda terms like “students”, “children”, “kids”, etc.. They all know that the system is in blatant violation of federal civil rights law.

    Of course, all it would take is one single Title IX class action law suit against the advanced placement programs in any school system in the country to upset this whole self-serving house of cards. All of the legal precedent necessary has already been established – by women. The only thing that’s missing is a boy’s parent with an actual spine.

    • Sasha says:

      I disagree, it’s not just that boys don’t have a lobby. It’s that feminist ideology precludes women and girls from having agency.

      The basic premise of feminism is that, while both men and women experience ‘disadvantage’, men benefit more because we clearly live in a ‘patriarchy’.

      Even language reinforces this. ‘Man’ or ‘mankind’ means ‘humanity’ – ‘woman’ is the abnormal.

      This, of course, is BS. ‘Man’ is not the norm in terms of being superior, men are simply so disposable they don’t get marked out as having a special quality. Woman is to ‘man’ in language as ‘prime’ is to ‘number’ – a number just the same as any other number, but one with a special quality. Language isn’t anti-women, it’s actually marking them out as being special.

      However the result of this ideology is that men are marked with agency whereas women are not. Men die younger? That’s their own damn fault for not going to the doctor. They commit suicide more often? That’s because they need to be more open about their feelings, the stupid fools.

      Women get paid less? That’s not the result of their choices, that’s discrimination by men. Women spend more on clothes and make-up? That’s not their fault, that’s the result of the pressure of the ‘male gaze’ and society’s expectations.

      The ‘patriarchy’ myth is the source of the ‘women as eternal victims’ meme.

  15. roblorinov says:

    Great article!! Good work!!

    The shallowness and failure to consider consequences of the future for our present actions astounds me in this nation. And so many people don’t question anything but just lay down and take it no matter what. That’s even more amazing.

    I agree. The American male of 40 years ago is a far cry from the American male of today. It is like looking at night and day. Of course the fall of the American male has been engineered and is by “deliberate malicious design” as you say. And yes there has been a gross role reversal in this naiton between males and females. And all in the name of “superior….” oh I mean “equal rights,” excuse me :) I think one of the greatest things that have contributed to the fall of the American male and society in general has been the handing for free of too much comfort by the Greatest Generation of WWII. The 18th Century Russian Field Marshal Aleksandr Suvorov said “Too much comfort brings too little courage” and I tend to fully agree with his thinking. We have far too much comfort in this nation and far too little courage. Of course the Greatest Generation wanted to give their children more and better lives than they themselves had but isn’t there such a thing as giving too much? Of course there is.

    I also agree with your idea that our society went from logic based thinking to emotion based thinking. Might that not be what our involvement in Libya is exactly about? We got all emotional over the possibility that Khadafi would slaughter his own people so we stepped in while not knowing who the “rebels” even were or what their endgame is. And we did so even though reporters on Fox News and CNN were telling us they recognized the same faces in Libya they’d seen in Iraq as part of al Qaeda fighting against the US and coalition! Amazing! But we involved ourselves in the Libyan civil war anyhow and it was all an emotional deicision that flies in the face of all logic.

    You wrote, “Propaganda evolved into sophisticated “marketing” and set about crafting a society based on insatiable materialistic consumerism and a “knowledge base” that was mostly thin air. Truth became irrelevant, perception everything. And, most of all, self-serving rights trumped social responsibility.” I think you hit the nail on the head as this explains the poor condition that our nation and our society are in today. Many have become little more than consumer machines with no other purpose in life but to buy, buy, buy. And along the way we have thrown social responsibility out the window replacing it with our own selfish self serving “rights” (ie: wants). You also mention “massive reverse evolution” and I’ve suspected for years we have been DE-evolving not in terms of technology and invention but certainly in terms of intellectualism and critical thinking. One of the things that has most concerned me is the campaign referred to as the “dumbing down of America.” From what I see, know, and what your post now makes very clear I see that that campaign has now been won. The liberal radicals have won and the rest of us have lost, miserably!

    As for the Vietnam War it was horrendous and a big mistake for the US to even be involved in. I cannot help but notice that all of the movies, at least the majority of them, paint the same bad picture of the young American male soldier. That is one who was a drugged out, rapist, murdering, young American “boy.” You seldom see anything about the heroic actions of the young American soldiers in Vietnam fighting the Viet Con who were a merciless and cruel enemy. Hollywood has painted a negative picture of the American male ever since that time and it has been nothing short as brainwashing and painting the American male as some sort of evil monster just waiting to come out and wreck havoc. Any logical thinking person still left among us knows this is ridiculous and is NOT the case for the MAJORITY of American males and never has been the case! And don’t even get me started on how Hollywood now paints the male as Gracey (ie: George Burns and Gracey Allen) making us all think the American male is ditzy, stupid, brainless, clueless, and all that rot. Of course modern day Hollywood would never in their wildest dreams make a movie reflecting the great accomplishments of the American male or the American soldier because such a film would rip apart the FALSE image they have painted to no end.

    I think your idea of creating all boys schools across the nation is an excellent idea! How else are we going to straighten our boys out? Certainly not in the public school system as it exists today which is a complete joke! Males are taught shame. They are taught to be ashamed of themselves and the very gender God made them. When are we going to start teaching our males PRIDE? They need self pride not more shame.

    Again EXCELLENT post!! Very well researched and very well thought out with LOGIC rather than emotional thinking. It is refreshing to read something like this instead of the daily rot we normally get.

    PS–Hope you do not mind but I’m putting a link on my blog to this post and your follow up. This is information people need to know. Good work!!

    • Thank you for taking the time and effort to write your comments. And, yes, even a guy like me is pleased with compliments. Gracias.

      There are now three posts on this subject: (1) “Why Are American Men So Dumb?”, (2) “America’s Greatest Social Shame” and (3) “More On Dumb American Men”.

      I wish to point out that I try really hard in all of my posts to avoid left-right politics, which in my mind is a dead end which does nothing but skirt the central role of personal responsibility. (See “About”.) Besides, anymore it’s difficult distinguishing any real divergences in objectives of the two parties; only the rhetoric is noticeably different.

      “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” – H.L. Mencken (1916). (Subsequently often repeated as, “The people get the government they deserve.”)

      Mr. Mencken, however, also observed that, “The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos.” (1919). Not quite a philosopher, Mencken was indeed brilliant.

      Everything I write here comes from my own knowledge and experience and is not based on the work of anyone else. (If I ever do quote or borrow from someone, I will definitely attribute it to them.) I have been “researching” as an active and reasonably perceptive participant for my entire life, so I think I’ve finally arrived at a point where I can begin to share some of what I learned, unencumbered by others. (Actually quite a few readers have pleasantly surprised me by pointing me to works of intelligent others who reached, via different means, conclusions similar to mine. It’s nice to know that I’m not out there by myself on some remote island.)

      For the record: As an unbroken multi-tour Vietnam Vet myself (and perfectly sane, I might add), I do not believe that it was originally a big mistake to get involved there, given the times and the dedicated objectives of much greater forces. For years the US involvement in Vietnam was mostly limited to US Army Special Forces “green berets” working with indigenous personnel in a “low intensity” effort, largely in the background. I DO believe that it was a mistake much later to continue building up our conventional forces in South Vietnam long after it became obvious that it is not possible to win an unconventional war with conventional strategy and means, by killing as many people as possible, including those America originally went there to help. The Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese, both men and women, were superb and extremely dedicated fighters unequaled in the deadly business of unconventional warfare. The US conventional military was never going to defeat them with bombs in their own back yard, in such forbidding terrain. Also, the US policy was to limit our conventional soldiers to one-year or shorter tours, while their unconventional enemy remained in place, year after year, becoming ever more knowledgeable and ever more capable. In the end, the dismal result of US efforts in Vietnam was due to a flawed strategy, an inflexible mindset, on the part of senior leadership. As General Petraeus knows, under such conditions, unique, measured and disciplined strategies are required. When the US did finally leave, it left behind one colossal mess, and damned the people of three countries to many more years of death and misery.

      Some of those US soldiers who fought in Vietnam, highly qualified men in both the military and civilian worlds, myself included, who remained on duty after the US ended its involvement there were also those who, along with the best of the academic community, painstakingly crafted and wrote the excellent series of 1970s Army manuals on all aspects of unconventional warfare, including psychological operations. They also drew heavily on the extensive experiences of the US Army in the Philippines (1899-1902) and the OSS during World War II. The Vietnam Vets developing the doctrine behind those manuals were determined that America never make the same mistakes again. Vietnam Vets also staffed the world’s foremost institute for the study of unconventional warfare in all its various configurations (including “nation-building”) – the US Army’s “Peacekeeping Institute” at the War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. And they also struggled to keep the US Army’s Special Forces the best and most knowledgeable such organization of fighter-teachers on the planet. (You can pick up from here by looking over the post titled “Smiling Faces And Purple Fingers – And Egypt”.)

      The Greatest Generation, the War in Vietnam or Vietnam soldiers, or all the subsequent stupid propaganda surrounding the latter two, are NOT related to our problems today. On the contrary. The adult over-40 “American Male” is what he is, for better or worse, on his own personal record. I am an “American Male”, and one of the least used words in my vocabulary is the imperial “we”. I think if you read through several of my posts, you will recognize several similar themes in all, a world view that is my own. I try to provide a backdrop context for that view. I have always worked with people – not machines, or books, or theories – and with good, capable, smart people in the human arena all over the world.

      One of my main purposes in life now is not championing anyone or anything other than the American boys who will one day have to follow me into that global arena. The mess that will confront them at home will be monumentally challenging. Quite comfortable in my own skin, in my own place, I am not seeking anything for myself at all.

      • roblorinov says:

        Well you do deserve something in my mind as you are not only a soldier but a scholar. That is SOMETHING!! And not to be downplayed. It is so refreshing to come here and read independent thought and see how you come to your conclusions.

  16. Marvelous Male says:

    Invicible, you might want to rethink your idealization of the “Greatest Generation” after watching this 4 part documentary; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcYBSXgtmKQ

    The ills of society that you are witnessing around you today did not have their origins in the 1960s but rather much, much earlier. And it was deliberately designed that way by the US government, US corporations and US media.

    I also suggest you read “Are Women to Blame for the Decline of Men?” article from Psychology Today.

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sax-sex/201103/are-women-blame-the-decline-men

    Happy reading and viewing!

  17. Lily says:

    This is a really interesting post with some great points.

    I’m from the UK and I’m a great fan of single sex schools, however, as someone already pointed out they have coed schools in Finland and they have a good education system.

    Whilst I don’t know much about the education system in the US hence I found your post fascinating, I don’t think the girls doing better than boys academically is to do with education set up favouring girls.

    Have a look at this link which shows gender breakdown of the top schools in the UK. I specifically picked out a list which is fee paying only i.e. they can teach how they like, they do not have to follow the national curriculum and the style is up to them and they will teach in the way that gets best results.

    http://www.best-schools.co.uk/league-tables/gcse-grades.aspx

    • Thank you, Lily.

      In addition to other periods, I spent a lot of time in Europe during the 1970s and watched many countries there quickly follow the US lead in civil rights legislation like privacy, racial equality, freedom of information, equality in education, women’s rights, etc. Today, thirty years later, I think the main difference is that European countries have honestly tried to live up to those laws and keep enforcement of them reasonably balanced for everyone, while Americans are still running on auto-pilot with all the old original rhetoric. Many European and other English-speaking countries have also been adult enough to bring the unique problems of contemporary boys into the spotlight. (I know that European educators usually fault the quality of American teachers, but I think any American “quality” is secondary to “mind-set”.)

      Americans keep operating on many premises that are no longer valid – mainly because powerful special interest lobbies keep up the old drum-beat. These lobbies seem to have a tendency to focus on minor aspects (like college sports) in order to avoid public focus on truly massive problems elsewhere. It’s almost impossible to overcome such well organized self-interest. Over decades it creates a very rigid mind-set, and this mind-set gets drummed into everyone, and most especially into the most vulnerable group of all – boys, from Day One. (They have no lobby to help balance things, so they start out life KNOWING that they are to blame and never escape that and countless other double-standards all around them.) Americans anymore have a predilection to STUDY everything to death for lifetimes of academic leisure rather than actually DOING something. To an American soldier, that nonsense is just reprehensible.

      It IS clear in the US that boys generally do considerably better in all-boys schools than they do in public schools. But I’m not sure why that is. There are a lot of external factors that come into play with private all-boys schools – including parents who are so interested in their sons’ education that they are willing to pay the significant tuition while also paying taxes to support public schools. Added up, that’s a very major commitment to their boys, and the boys know it. Plus, in some cases there are guys like me who are willing to help out in the background with costs (when possible; you don’t get rich spending your life as a soldier).

      I’ll check out your suggested article. Thanks. Generally, private all-boys schools in the US (with which I am familiar) also follow the national curriculum requirements, but they then test ALL (100%) of their students on national tests. (They don’t just test the best academic performers who want to go to college, as is usually the case with American public schools). These all-boys schools are also free to create learning environments that are maximized for naturally competitive boys.

      • Lily says:

        invincibleprobity, how do those private boys schools in the US do if only compared to private girls schools and private coed schools?

        Our measurements are at 16 for GCSEs and 18 for A levels but not everyone does A levels so I suppose GCSEs are the closest to the US high school diploma. There are also now key stage tests which were brought in by the last government which are like your SATs but the independent schools don’t have to take part.

        Personally, I am baffled that an established top tier school as Westminster (where the teaching is certainly boy focused) is only no 10 after mainly girls schools, but saying that having been to an independent academic girls school myself, they really are very tough going.

        Many of the single sex schools take the opposite sex post GCSE. I have female friends who did go to Westminster at that stage and found it tough in some ways (few girls in comparison so attention from boys not used to girls, being taught by masters, the amount of rigmarole etc), they found it easier in others, less of a hothouse than their previous school.

        Interestingly, Westminster seems to make it up to 8 by A level stage but I have no idea whether that’s linked to the results from the girls in the sixth form or not.

        The sad thing is whilst I picked out that link to have a look at a situation without a bias in education system, most children in the UK don’t get that type of education. The typical Finn, whilst they do have some really not well off people (as reflected in a fantastic film Man without a Past, great if you can rent it or e.g. the F1 driver Kimi Raikonnen, he’s young, he grew up without an indoor lavatory) is still much better educated than the typical British person :-(

        • Lily, you’re asking me legitimate questions about details, and I would like to try to answer them. But I have tried here to limit myself to concepts and principles, recognizing that my real expertise lies elsewhere. So I am just not the authority that is needed to answer your questions. But, really, are such answers necessary? The US has long had a major problem with the schooling of boys, much greater than in Great Britain, and much greater than for girls. The answer is to fix it, and as fast as possible, with whatever works. There are probably a range of options to this end, but I would start with (1) un-doing censorship of US public school gender data, and (2) using existing civil rights law to force some real movement toward a measure of “balance”. That’s the way American women went when they had things they wanted addressed, and in my society they succeeded very rapidly. The best I can offer here is broad thinking and very extensive global experience with a wide range of other cultures in mostly tough environments. (And I certainly don’t want to get embroiled in a debate with another whole country; as an American soldier, I’ve had enough of that, thank you. I need some countries on my side.)

          Perhaps some of my readers (most of whom admittedly are rather shy) would care to entertain your questions. If their comments comply with my overall objective (About), I’d be happy to post them without my comment.

          The American boys schools with which I am familiar report SAT scores for the school in newsletters to guys like me, plus usually its ranking among other public and private schools in the region, while noting that all boys were administered the tests at the same prescribed time. The scores are invariably much higher than for public schools, which is usually supported by independent local news articles.

          My casual observation is that the boys don’t seem as much interested in test scores as about excelling in what really interests them. The school that I mentioned, for example, places a high value on ethics, and does participate in foreign exchanges with small groups coming from other countries, including from Europe, and vice versa, to immerse themselves in the environment. Its varsity basketball teams, in addition to participating in tournaments all over the US, have long traveled overseas providing training and exhibitions in developing countries, especially in South America. These boys, indeed, are getting a very well rounded education.

          I also know that the American and British boys we are both discussing have lived in western societies which have been very heavily, and rightly, concerned with women and minorities for the past half century. Sooner or later such emphasis, which inevitably results in certain “double standards”, however, is going to have unintended consequences. I am trying to awaken bright young American women to their responsibility for the other half.

          Small Finland enjoys one of highest overall standards of living in the world (higher than the US) and tries hard to make that standard equitable for all. The country does have increasing challenges with immigration needed to keep the society viable.

  18. Old SWO says:

    Invincibleprobity,
    National Review has a daily email service.
    Once a week they do a retrospective of, usually three, articles from their archives.
    One of this week’s is at the link.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/nroriginals/?q=MmM4YmJiMGJmNjUwN2MzZTZkMzE3NmM5ZDQ4MDMyYzc=

    http://www.nationalreview.com/nroriginals/print/?q=MmM4YmJiMGJmNjUwN2MzZTZkMzE3NmM5ZDQ4MDMyYzc=

    Title: On Rediscovering the Difference (Between boys and girls)
    By George Gilder
    This article first appeared in the Aug. 3, 1973, issue of NATIONAL REVIEW.
    BLUF Mixing genders in education from K-16 (+) is bad for boys.
    A very good read and sadly accurately predictive of exactly what you write about today.
    FWIW, I did high school at an all male Christian Brothers School and College at a Military Academy in a pre-women class.
    I doubt I’d be where I am today if I hadn’t been in that high school.

    • Thank you, Old SWO, for the comment and for the article tip. I’ll be sure to check it out this evening.

      In 1973, I was living in and working out of West Berlin, confronted by The Wall. Seems like an eternity ago.

      I have an instinctive predilection that all-boys and all-girls schools are preferable to co-ed, but I’m not 100% convinced. Schools in Finland, for example, are co-ed. I do know that mixed-gender is not the only cause of this American tragedy, one that has been steadily growing for over a generation now. We have all heard all the usual excuses, from uninvolved parents to not enough money. But I think the greatest problem we have today is enormously powerful women’s lobbies that incessantly instill an extremely rigid mindset about gender – in everyone. This mind-set seems to be creating a sclerosis in thinking that is holding the whole country back, on so many different fronts. Boys are obviously NOT benefiting from this mind-set.

      The education industry is a Woman’s World. (Actually, these days EVERYTHING about children is a Woman’s World.) Most women have an instinctive reaction that any criticism of them or what they are doing is personal. Most women I’ve met in the American education industry seem quite sincere and dedicated, but they absolutely refuse to accept that their overall thinking, their mind-set, might be responsible. How can any problems be solved when women take it so personally? It’s not about the women. It’s about the boys.

      In this arena, the nation needs a really major shock, one that really shakes up the complacent status quo in EVERYONE’s thinking. The only thing that can do that in the social arena is the law. Back in 1973 women learned very quickly that it was not necessary to swarm into every court in the country. One or two or three key cases were sufficient to send major tremors throughout the industry, and very quickly that entire industry fell into lock-step. Women did that with each sub-area they wanted to attack. Title IX law can affect money, and nothing can shake up an industry like the fear of missing out on Major Money until they get their act together. At that point the main focus shifts from the process to the results of the process, and people are suddenly willing to try anything that works in order to achieve the desired results. (It does NOT require “More Money”.)

      I keep wondering how women can presume a “right” to “lead” everything when the results of a world they control so completely are so shameful.

      The first thing we as American citizens need to do is force the industry to stop despicably hiding the awful numbers behind propaganda tactics such as the exclusive use of gender-neutral terms like “children” and “students”. The public DOES have a right to know – and constantly in its face, too.

  19. I agree wholeheartedly! If I could afford private school, I’d send both of my boys to an all male school. Of course the education power structure can’t have a mere mother like me making substantive decisions for my children, so, unless I make enough money to afford 30,000 a year in private tuition, my kids are stuck at the local public schools.

    21st Century skills and brain based learning seem to be the new education buzz words. It’s the same mindless babble we’ve been hearing for 40 years, recycled with more modern sounding words but no more substance than before.

    And so many parents of boys are more concerned with whether their kid will be the next Joe Theismann, Michael Jordan, or A-Rod than with whether their half decent athlete will be capable of getting a college degree of holding down a job when he graduates. It’s really pathetic.

    • Thank you. And I do sympathize with you about male role models. When I talk (and write) to boys and young men, as you can see from the articles I’ve written for this site, I rarely touch on my own background, my main expertise. It’s disarming enough that a guy like me can talk at length on many things that have nothing to do with killing people and destroying things. The real world is a lot more complicated than most young Americans today think, and that is a very dangerous situation.

      I do apologize for the length of these two articles (including the companion piece on “America’s Greatest Social Shame”). I don’t have an editor, and I could write whole books on some of the things that interest me. And these days nothing interests me more than the state of American boys; it’s too important to our future national security. I don’t know when I’ll be back on the road, so I have a tendency to dump it all as quickly as possible – hopefully in decent English without mixing it up with a half dozen other languages.

      It might interest you to know that one on my friends is a senior teacher in Helsinki with a PhD. Over decades I’ve never heard her to complain about the students – in an environment that grows increasingly more difficult with rapidly rising Third World immigration into a society that has for centuries been homogenous in the extreme. This woman is incessantly seeking ways to improve what she and her other teachers are doing, to get the best results, to find what works, without dogmatic constraints. Finns place a very high value on education, and her school system indisputably is the best in the world. But that system is not nearly as expensive as any of ours. I am very proud of her and feel honored to have her as a friend.

      I also sympathize with you about school costs. But there is a way to use boys’ interest in hero figures such as sports stars to your advantage as both a parent and as a teacher – at less cost. As hard as this might be to understand, boys do like tough environments. The key is how to tightly manage that environment. And that takes real talent.

      The Cato Institute study I mentioned had some interesting figures. It took a look at probably the worst performing school system in the country – Washington DC. Officials there estimated the average price per pupil at $17,572 a year. However, the true cost of education in DC is actually $28,170 per pupil (61% more than what was reported). And keep in mind that this is $28,170 of taxpayer money, and it’s over $11,000 more than taxpayers realized was being taken from them for those schools. The Washington DC area has well over a dozen very highly rated private schools, and indeed many of them do charge tuitions between $20,000 and $30,000 a year.

      But one of them is for boys only – where the tuition is $12,250. That’s $15,920 cheaper than the DC public schools – less than half of public school cost.

      And what do you get for that price?

      This four year school has grown from a student body of 400 to 1,100 over the past half century, even though physically constrained by surrounding apartment buildings and commercial enterprises. It accepts boys of all religions, all races, immigrants from all countries, and mainly from the low- and middle-classes. It places over 98% of its graduates into college, very many on scholarships, in a very wide range of studies from music to physics. One recent graduate went to Carnegie Mellon to study design on a scholarship, was hired by Apple, and was one of the small team of bright young people who designed the iPhone – an instantaneous global hit. In a nation of 310,000,000, stuff like that really impresses me.

      This is a school that emphasizes academics above all else, but it is also one of the country’s very top basketball (fifty years) and football (thirty years) powerhouses. It currently has more graduates in the NFL than any other high school in the country, all with solid degrees from top universities. This school uses sports as a way for graduates to win scholarships to schools that may be a little higher than those available through academic scholarships. Athletics thus offer a wider range of options for boy graduates who could make it anywhere – without the sports. The boys have to maintain high academic standards to remain on the teams. The school also has teams in everything from debating to computer science to ten other competitive sports, where the school also excels at or near the top. I could add more praiseworthy descriptions for another ten pages, but this much is enough to show that THIS is indeed a worthwhile “cause”. There are very good reasons why guys like me try to help support their efforts, year after year, decade after decade, with a wide range of scholarship and assistance programs enabling disadvantaged boys to attend the school.

      This school does not even have an athletic field, instead using a town park a few miles away for practice and renting out public school fields for games. There is no bus service, even though the boys come from as far as forty or fifty miles away every day. As my friend in Helsinki will tell you, it is NOT about the infrastructure; it is ALL in the teaching, the learning environment, the mind-set. It is ALL about the boys.

      This is not an impossible objective.

      It’s about setting very high standards, using carefully managed peer competition, and then helping everyone meet the standards, equitably, with top teachers with only one goal – to educate honorable boys capable of competing and leading anywhere they want to go, including overseas in the US military. One of those boys was a Naval Academy graduate SEAL Intelligence Officer who recently died in Afghanistan; his mother, who also put two younger lacrosse star sons through the school and on to the Naval Academy, has been an employee of the school for many years.

    • A friend has reminded me of something about Finland’s great schools that is indeed worth mention.

      I should point out that Finland has cultural aspects far beyond mere educational pursuits that also do play into the education equation. All countries in Europe are undergoing subtle changes in their cultures that are being encouraged by globalization, Third World immigration, open economies, etc., and this is also true of Finland.

      But heretofore at least, Finland has historically been strongly characterized by traits – personal reserve, mutual respect, introspection, politeness, etc., – that are not so very unlike traditional Japanese culture. Generally, Finns place a high value on mutual respect for each other, and they do not seek to impose themselves on others in any way. On the contrary. And this applies also to matters of gender. To an American, Finns thus seem more open to the other person’s view, not closed in their thinking, are more accommodating of others. Patient Finns listen. Think about that a moment. This is an excellent trait for anyone engaged in teaching. Teachers can learn, too. Many of us in much faster paced societies tend to overlook such very important things. (On the other hand, it’s often difficult to get Finns to talk openly.)

  20. Angela says:

    Very interesting and I agree with you on most points. I discovered a lot of your same arguments in books like “Bringing up Boys” and other books aimed at either raising or challenging unmotivated boys.

    It really is sad, but what can we do? TV, movies, comics, books….are all full of Loser male examples. It’s “okay” to joke about the failures of men and emasculate them. Of course it’s NOT okay to do the same to women. It shouldn’t be okay for either.

    I agree also on the minority of “American tax payers.” I live in a state for only 40% pay ANY income tax (state or federal!). We pay a lot – and obviously MORE than our fair share. Surely I don’t use the roads, schools, or police any more than the 60% who pay nothing in income taxes….yet I pay thousands of dollars each year and they pay zero. Hmmm….

    Anyway, thanks for stopping by my blog and sharing your article. As an educated women, I find it both interesting and important. When I was in college 10+ years ago, I was one of maybe two or three women in the math/science realm. There were still plenty of motivated and educated men on campus. Of course, there were also buffoons, but that’s what happens with the human race I guess.

    Here’s hoping it gets better – one educated or empowered male at a time!

    • Thank you, Angela.

      First, as everyone will surely point out, I am just a professional soldier. I haven’t been near civilian academia for a very long time, and I don’t have a long list of academic titles that work in the civilian world. But, as a soldier, I don’t accept excuses. MY heroes these days are people like SP4 Monica Brown, a Silver Star medic with the 82nd Airborne Infantry Division. It pains me to know that today only the top 20% of the young people in my society can qualify to be a private in the Regular Army.

      I’ve started many, but I have never been able to get though a single book on this subject. It makes me sick that all anyone does is make money off the “boy problem” – from phony special interest groups to pseudo researchers to comfortably tenured ivory tower people with all their “expertise”. All anyone ever does is TALK. Talk is the cheapest thing there is. That’s why ALL of our major problems have only grown worse over the past forty years.

      This country has thousands of special interest groups or lobbies that have been set up to “champion” various “causes”. Over 95% of them are staffed by a few “experts” with impressive resumes, plus a few administrators who answer phones or manage a web site. They are all, first and foremost, tax dodge mechanisms, set up to serve those manning the operation and, usually, its “board of directors”. These groups periodically make an effort to disseminate some information relative to their cause, all intended to generate public “awareness”, which itself is intended to pull in revenue in the form of charity donations. It’s all orchestrated to give the appearance of altruistic intent with a seemingly legitimate social “problem”. However, the very last thing these groups ever want to accomplish is to make significant headway towards correcting or eliminating their “problem” – because that would mean the end of their raison d’être, the end of the revenue, the end of their tax dodge. These groups exist, first and foremost, to serve themselves, while giving the appearance of serving their constituency.

      They exist to “protect” their clients, which, by simple process of elimination, leaves those without such a lobby the only free-fire targets left. After a half century on the firing line, I’m made of steel; you can beat on me all you want, and it wouldn’t bother me a bit. But what does it say to my sons, my grandsons? THAT is what no one ever considers.

      One group that I’ve been following for over a decade is ostensibly concerned with the sorry state of American boys in public schools. The group maintains an impressive web site full of all sorts of information, studies, memberships, viewer comment, etc., etc.. Run by a woman (with two young sons!), it even sends out a periodic newsletter to subscribers. It all looks perfectly legitimate, and probably is, with a good purpose and an approach that is sufficient to draw in enough revenue to support her lifestyle. But over fifteen years this group has never actually undertaken any outside action toward addressing its cause. The woman is an attorney who lives in the high-scale Virginia suburbs of Washington DC. She knows full well that all she has to do is pick any school system in the country and walk into a courtroom with a class action law suit under Title IX on behalf of American boys. That one act would very significantly change the landscape in American schools and bring enormous public awareness to the problem of boys. But she does nothing. Her two sons attend private schools.

      The two main problems with our “system” that sets us apart from other advanced societies is (1) the truly enormous power of special interest lobbies (which also deliver huge blocks of votes), and (2) a system that limits our government to two mutually cancelling political parties. There is nothing in our Constitution that requires either. The original intent was that “special interest lobbies” would form political parties and run openly for election, not lurk in the background cowardly pulling strings.

      Like I said in my article (or maybe in the second one on the same subject – “America’s Greatest Social Shame”), the ONLY people who can fix this mess are women – with a very powerful lobby. Only they can make enough noise to get attention, in a heartbeat. And all such a group has to do is simply use long existing law and a library of legal precedent. But all I ever see is myopic self-interest and long out-dated group think. How hard is it to dump for decades on the only group in the country without a lobby? How shameful?

      The first thing I would do is elect Michelle Rhee as President and strongly encourage her to fill her cabinet with immigrants from Asia.

      P..S. I’m proud of you that you chose to go into math and science. Sometimes it’s not easy bucking the herd. In my youth all my friends went into engineering, physics, etc., so, as a “rebel”, I naturally went into psychology and sociology (specializing in child development and criminology), while tutoring English and philosophy. NONE of that stuff was of much interest to the Army, but it did serve me well as a trained observer during my service in 35 other countries. Today Army brainiacs like General Petraeus have very strong backgrounds in economics and foreign affairs. Economics. Go figure.

      • Totality says:

        The author of this article seems like he is full of fear and hatred. Do better and be better.

        Also just right off you refer to women as self-entitled jerks and you ask who taught them or gave them that sense that they were entitled. Well- men did. And men continue to do so. One of your many issues stems from the behavior of your own ranks. You put women on pedestals. You teach them their vaginas are worth gold and diamonds and myriad trinkets. You have taught women all these things and it wasn’t a problem until women demanded to get off the pedestal and WORK for their own living and be complete human beings- not your living sex dolls. Men feel that women are competitors now and they are upset that women’s abilities now appear to be more useful in our current day and age than bombastic cruelty and wonton violence. Perhaps men should turn off the porn, the x-box, the sports games and be mentally there got each other and advance the education of male youth. Set up programs for educational assistance for these boys. Set up counseling centers for the men who have been sexually and physically abused. Men are problem-focused when they need to be solution-oriented. Instead of being active and helpful, they whine. And blame women. Women who, until recently and probably even now, were considered inferior. How can we be inferior yet control men’s sexuality, their minds, and their ability to succeed?

        I want men to do more and be more. I meet men my age who are mentally 16. Living with their parents and playing children’s games. These young men are allowed to be adult children and they thrive in that infantile role. Some on sex like beasts while their lives slip away. All that some young men want to offer others is their penis, which is part of human interaction but shouldn’t be their main attribute. So many men seem to have given up and no, you can’t blame that on females. You said that women have made men this way- as usual women are in the shadows controlling everyone else, huh? This led me to believe that you are just another man who can barely contain his simmering resentment of people with vaginas- the same problem many male religious leaders, male politicians, and MRA people deal with. I don’t feel sorry for you. I feel frustrated- as frustrated as I felt when I was confronted by a self-professed ‘nice guy’ who believed women needed a strong hand (male hand) to guide them and was angry that I didn’t need/want him.

        This society is suffering from vapid consumerism, false ideology, misplaced anger, disunity, self-centeredness, and general stupidity. I interact with less and less people because chances are their actions will reflect these non-values. Love suffers in this society. There is no reason why it should be this hard for men and women and other groups to get along. And no excuse.

        Well I guess this didn’t come across as bad as I thought it would- at least to my eyes. I try not to dwell on negativity.

        And for the record, I have nothing against you- I think you just sound young and angry. This is something I can relate to, but I’m trying not to be absorbed in this type of self-defeating nonsense that this society is trying to engage everyone in. I can’t be angry if I’m improving myself and living the best life I can live.

        • re “Totality”.

          I get a lot of messages like this one from American women who never bother to read past the first few paragraphs and think they have a handle on the whole article. (Maybe I should just publish the article in reverse text.) Then they go running off on dozens of different tangents that have nothing at all to do with the topic of the article (in this case, America’s women-dominated public schools). As I’ve said elsewhere, I usually don’t approve comments that are not relevant to the topic, but since that’s almost all I ever get from American women, even after I give them a chance to reconsider, the site will end up being far too “male-oriented”, which is definitely not my intention. (As stated on my “Home” page, I try to write for smart senior high school and college students, with deference to, but not only to, the young male side.)

          Central to all of “Totality’s” tangents is the presumption that boys and young men simply create themselves. It’s all a mystical magic where some mythical Merlin snaps their fingers, and poof!, there’s another male loser, who then operates with thought processes they made up themselves right there on the spot. (Having children is 100% a matter of a woman’s choice. Over half the children in this country are born to single women, and over half the rest are raised by women granted custody after filing for divorce. In America less than one-in-four boys can count on a father through age 18, and almost all of those fathers, including rotating and stand-in “fathers”, are required to defer to women on matters of children, to parrot the dogma. Then there’s the simple fact that every single field in the humongous “child development” industry, including in health, education, sociology, psychology and government, that “vast village”, is now overwhelmingly dominated by women, often by majorities over 85% – all busily producing clones of themselves. For the past half century all the money has been in girls and women; none in boys or men. Add to this gigantic bulldozer the dozens of powerful women’s lobbies, unions and special interest groups, coupled with their voter super-majority demanding ever more free stuff for “me”, plus all those women “journalists” churning out their own self-serving propaganda, and you have a juggernaut situation where a guy’s complaint is as weighty as a fart in a typhoon, which it is.)

          “Totality” might do herself a favor by actually reading the article all the way through, and a bigger favor by picking one or two other articles on, say, Marketing And Propaganda or Feminism, to actually read, too.

          Then there’s “Totality’s” usual old stuff about men wringing their hands over competing with women that’s been a central theme of “feminism” since around 1960. (It’s just silly. There’s actually no competition involved when one side has all the rights and the other side has all the responsibility, according to “me”, but women were patenting great inventions, building and running factories, teaching and conducting research in universities, etc., i.e., competing, without fanfare, while also raising families, long before “feminism” came along to re-engineer society, but they were doing it as Americans, not as “special” women. American women have been churning out their propaganda for so long that they actually believe it themselves.)

          But none of this stuff is relevant to the matter of K-12 education that is discussed in the article. The reason for this is that women over the past half century have been all about tearing down “male-dominated” institutions everywhere to suit themselves, while naturally giving themselves a free pass on women-dominated institutions which already suit themselves. “It’s not a problem if it’s not a problem for “me”.” Women excel at nothing more than making demands of men; they tolerate nothing less than the reverse. (Notice “Totality’s” call for “someone else” to “set up” programs and centers.) My hope is that some man with a spine will take on these women on behalf of his sons in court and demand equal treatment and results in the America’s K-12 school industry – and also wake women up to their own responsibility, and accountability. But I seriously doubt that will ever happen. So American women are going to keep on occupying their very own fantasy world.

          All the men I know think women should do whatever they want to do, that they certainly don’t need the help of men to do it. I say let them at it. No one anywhere has ever “threatened my manhood”. “You go, girl.” Any help that American women want they’ll just get from government anyway. Most young guys today are willing to sit back and watch, too. “Women have all the answers, so why bother?” They have created the world they wanted, so why are they now complaining even more than they ever did? (Young women complain much more than young men.) American women just can’t seem to get their minds around the fact that the future of our society, for better or worse, is now in their hands. Let’s all sit back and watch what they do with it. It should be interesting watching them looking everywhere for “someone else” to pay the bills, take the blame and do the hard stuff. Sooner or later (hopefully before we all go belly up), they’ll discover that responsibility, and accountability, do come with each and every one of all those rights. All I want is to be left alone, to not be forced to listen to all that whining and blame-shifting, to not be forced to do crap I don’t want to do just to meet someone else’s self-serving petty demands, while my society goes down the tubes.

          Like most men, I don’t need American women any more than they need me. It’s just that simple. And I sure don’t want to pay for all the rights and choices those women claim for themselves. Let them pay their own costs. They quite obviously don’t care one bit about the other half, so why should the other half care about them? That’s just not logical.

          “It’s your world, lady; YOU deal with it. Just keep me out of it.”

          I get so much of this personal stuff from American women that I finally wrote, for young guys, the article titled “Marry Me“, and included its Footnotes #3 and #4. Thanks to the “advances” women have made over the past half century, I, and all guys, now have far better options than we ever had, and soon, with “same-sex” marriage, we’ll have a whole world more. It all sort of reminds me of the 1920s and ‘30s in Europe, before the abyss. It was a really fascinating period, of pulling out all the stops in the face of totally inevitable calamity.

          I think rationally, with logic, not emotion. Thankfully, guys like me are almost gone. It’s theoretically possible for us to go completely nuts in this nonsensical world of “me”.

          I will grant my full agreement with “Totality’s” paragraph: “This society is suffering from vapid consumerism, false ideology, misplaced anger, disunity, self-centeredness, and general stupidity. I interact with less and less people because chances are their actions will reflect these non-values. Love suffers in this society. There is no reason why it should be this hard for men and women and other groups to get along. And no excuse.” Bravo, “Totality”.

  21. Pingback: Why Are American Men So Dumb? | Invincible Probity | FIND BEST EDUCATION INFORMATION

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s