When I’m not on the road doing things I should have stopped doing twenty years ago, I can usually be found at home up in the mountains paying bills, tidying up, working on “home improvement” projects that never seem to get finished and don’t really do much to improve my home anyway. Since I live alone most of the time, it can get incredibly quiet, which, after a while, is just too much quiet. So, especially during the winter, I usually turn on the TV to function as a kind of humanoid background noise.
This is rather a challenge during mid-day, when the TV is full of those talk and “news” shows designed by and for women. Those programs haven’t changed for fifty years. They still involve women talking endlessly about their problems, discussing what’s best for raising daughters, vilifying men, praising themselves, selling “self-help” book number 17,682,463, etc.. These women are all about wallowing in self-pity, blame-shifting, eternal victimhood, hopelessness, all while glorifying themselves and their innate superiority – just like back in the 1960s. (No, I never could discern the logic of pitying superiority.) Worse, these women simply do not tolerate dissent, so any token male guest is absolutely guaranteed to follow the party line, tell them what they want to hear, or run the very real risk of losing any masculinity he may have left – right in front of millions of women all across the country. (See Footnote #1.) It’s a mind-set that has been able to remain so incredibly constant for so long simply because it has never been challenged, not by other women and certainly not by any sane man. It’s another of those absurdities of our society that have become permanently institutionalized. A frequent theme on these shows is which candidate for national elective office, or which such serving official, is most beneficial for “women’s issues”, which are still pretty much what they were a half century ago.
I guess all this wouldn’t be so unsettling if it didn’t involve a huge majority of the population of the United States. The whole thing is a construct built on premises that haven’t been valid for decades – running on mindless auto-pilot. There’s now a big industry built around this nation-wide hand-holding ritual, with hundreds of similar shows at the local level all over the country providing training for apprentice hostesses hoping to make it up to the national level, and its fame and fortune, via that women’s “newstainment” route. Anyone walking back in the door from a visit to Jupiter would assume that absolutely nothing has changed in America since 1960. There is, however, one exception: the privileged “hostesses” now usually include a token black woman, as long as she parrots the prevailing women’s dogma – which also hasn’t changed since the 1960s. (There is and never has been any male equivalent anywhere to this self-serving fifty year old ritual, but men still remain “the enemy”, that long cowed and deeply conflicted minority always oppressing this huge, powerful and obnoxious majority.)
About three minutes of this stuff is usually enough to get me hunting for news, sports or history channels.
Fox News has a mid-day show hosted by a young woman named Megyn Kelly. It’s nearly impossible to imagine a human with more gifts than this women. Stunningly beautiful, she has a terrific personality, solidly grounded values, great common sense and humor, and a very quick mind. She speaks in perfect diction with a vocabulary and a rapid certainty that reveals a very well trained and disciplined mind. Formerly a practicing attorney, and apparently happily married, she also recently had her second child. Watching this self-assured woman’s many amazing gifts operating so effortlessly at once can be just mesmerizing (at least to me). Her two hour daily show is usually full of all sorts of different things going on in the world, and includes a whole range of regular guests who appear on camera to offer expert views or argue pros and cons of various issues – with lawyer Kelly doggedly keeping them on topic. But her show also includes an obligatory brief segment every day where other women experts are invited in to expound with her on various issues of concern to women. (Just as in 1960, men are not allowed to have “issues”, so any notion of the existence of such “issues” is simply preposterous.)
Recently, while I was doing some sheetrock remodeling work downstairs, this segment involved the women complaining about the fact that only two woman have so far won selection for her party’s nomination to run for either President or Vice President – as if this was some self-evident reward that is “owed” to women. It’s never articulated just why women are owed such things. Apparently that “debt” is based solely on an accident of birth, not on anything this majority of our society has ever actually done. Election to national office, even as President, apparently is no longer due to anything one has accomplished on behalf of all of us, but rather as just another birthright entitlement of our “special” women for happening to exist in today’s world. Since no woman has yet held that highest office, it’s now apparently just another quota system position for our majority women to decide among themselves which of them will ascend to the throne. As best as I can deduce, it’s all based on what women of the Greatest Generation did for society long ago, especially in having and raising enough very healthy and well educated kids to keep the country going and moving forward with relative ease. In recognition of such critical, and absolutely essential, contributions, society rewarded such women with many deferences and financial subsidies and rewards. But only a small percentage of women still fill such roles. Most such functions are now met by a “vast village” of employed others who are paid by everyone to achieve results far less than half of what women used to accomplish on their own – while women of today pursue other roles of greater interest to themselves. Well over 55% of women today have never been married or had children, and together our native women have a birth rate that is less than half what is needed just to maintain society’s status quo, much less to meet society’s ever burgeoning “birthright entitlement” needs. Not only do all of our women still receive all of those deferences and rewards, and much more, their ever lengthening life spans place huge additional burdens on society even as the nation is required to import tens of millions of Third World women who will have and raise children – which also adds to society’s burdens. So women are owed things because they (1) set themselves up with the best educations and (2) lowered their contributions to society while (3) adding to society’s burdens? Brilliant “reasoning”.
I’d heard the same emotion-based nonsense at least a thousand times over the previous thirty or forty years, and since I knew the segment would soon be over, I let it run. I also knew that the piece was aimed at satisfying women viewers’ daily mid-day “victim fix”, but I just couldn’t get it out of my mind for the rest of the day as I continued with my plaster work. By the time I called it quits for the day, I had a whole little speech (or perhaps rant) I would like to have delivered at the end of that brief show segment. (I do my ranting in solitude. I call it “baying at the moon”. In solitude no one is going to label it “aggression”, have me drugged up and committed.) Anyway, it went something like this:
It’s really really irritating for a guy like me to have to listen to American women talk about their “right” to any elective office in the land, including that of President – without ever over the past century having demonstrated a positive accomplishment for any group other than their own. From where did this nonsense that “leadership” is a “right” spring? Are we talking here about a simple celebrity popularity contest for the person most likely to give “me” what I want for “me” – with trainloads of money taken from “someone else”?
All I ever hear from women is: “It’s my right to be boss!” wherein being “boss” is equated to being a “leader” solely by virtue of being “most popular”. Who teaches such absurdity? Is it just that one’s perpetual “victim” status absolves them of any responsibility for anyone else, that it grants them all sorts of rights that don’t also involve responsibility beyond themselves? Is being the nation’s President a matter of it simply being “my turn” to “ascend to the throne”? Just what has any woman “leader” ever done for my minority group? They won’t even stand up and scream on behalf of their own sons.
Here’s just one example: American boys, just about the last group in this country without a lobby and thus the easiest target there is, have been suffering enormously on many fronts for over thirty years, and still no woman “leader” has ever stood up and screamed about it. No woman has ever attempted to champion their cause, much less walk into a courtroom and bring a civil rights case against public schools which every year, decade after decade, send twice as many girls to college as boys. Instead, all those women do is hide the truth, speak only in terms of some absurd fictional uni-sex entity, pretend that there’s no problem, insist that all those screwed-up under-educated “men” simply created themselves. Just which lobby, which elected woman representative, screams for boys? It’s just another case of, “if it’s not a problem for “me”, then it’s not a problem.”
Because of the choices American women make, only one in four American boys can count on a stable father through age eighteen. Do you have any idea how it feels for a thinking man to watch a women prosecutor and a women judge sanctimoniously condemn yet another young man to prison without ever acknowledging their own role in creating the “man” he became? Do you understand what it is to watch so many men, only a tiny fraction of similar men, finally winning freedom from unjust convictions based solely on a woman’s testimony – and never see a prosecutor or a women witness held accountable? How can “suicide by cop” be justified as “unavoidable” when no armed woman has ever been able to similarly “end their own life”? Do you have any idea just how incensed it makes me feel when watching a truly arrogant women – a mother or a teacher, say – totally secure in her unquestioned authority and twisted self-anointed “expertise”, aggressively impose her will on boys in a very concerted effort to alter even his own gender and turn him into some entity “just like me”? How would a woman feel when seeing the autistic daughter, rather than the usual autistic son, of a professional parent, knowing full well that the infant essentially had been placed on a comfortable trophy shelf and neglected during its most critical first two years of life? Do you know how it feels watching highly paid women “psychologists” subject military men to the most extreme methods possible in order to find their “breaking points”, knowing full well that anyone trying such experiments and “training” with women would find themselves condemned to a heavily padded prison cell?
How long would it take women to blow a gasket reading social study after social study, paid for by taxpayers and conducted by men, that all make the totally absurd assumption that gender is irrelevant and thus it is only necessary to focus on males in determining the “best” approach? How would women feel if they knew that all US public schools and their legions of education “journalists” had been for over a decade purposefully burying the very poor performances of girls under the very good performance of boys and hiding it all from the public behind the exclusive use of gender-neutral terms? I doubt that a single women in the country would accept that despicable practice – which is a perfectly acceptable deception with boys. In America you can do anything you want to boys, and no one will ever say anything.
The Greatest Generation brought the nation through 45 long years of ever-present threat of immediate superpower nuclear Armageddon, including nuclear weapons secretly inserted and dispersed inside the country, with no mass hysteria and zero impact to our freedoms. Now that the threat to a country run by Baby Boomer women is from a handful of crazies with home-made bombs, in the interest of “our safety and security”, we fan fear for profit, cower in the corner like little girls, give up our freedoms right and left, and still sing “America, land of the free, home of the brave”. (See Footnote #2.) The same arrogant women social science “experts” who have so thoroughly screwed up most of our boys with their self-serving dogma are now flooding in like swarms of piranha to apply their same uni-sex expertise to men who so far managed to escape it – combat veterans. With male workers constituting over 85% of those thrown for years out of work by the Great Recession, women fill the the media and congressional offices with emotional stories demanding help for the 15% who are women even as the military is forced to fire hundreds of thousands of soldiers and dump them into a market with over 16,000,000 others already looking for jobs. What is wrong with this picture?
Has anyone ever seen these special princesses demanding their “fair share” 50-50 quota of ditch digging, coal mining, timber logging jobs? How about fire-fighters, inner city beat cops, combat infantry soldiers? No demands here that “it’s my turn now” or “we are owed it!” It’s far easier to demand your right to cherry pick only the comfy stuff serving “me”, and then sit in charge and judgment of those “dumb Neanderthals” who do the hard stuff serving “all of us”.
These things seem to reflect a prevailing mind-set out there – among a group that hasn’t been challenged for a half century, among a group that actually believes it is above reproach and completely unaccountable for what it does to the other half of us solely to satisfy its own wants. Do women think men are too stupid to see how women even manipulate news stories with their own self-serving propaganda techniques? (It’s ALWAYS, “He or she was accused of sexually assaulting children.” It is NEVER, factually, “He or she was accused of raping boys.” Etc. “Is the full truth too uncomfortable? Doesn’t fit neatly into your dogma? Why just hide it behind a smokescreen of broad terms cleverly allowing the reader to make false assumptions based on their own established belief structure? (It’s self-serving propaganda, pure and simple.) Is this the way women and their many lobbies prepare their path to the throne – by ensuring that any female candidate will still be able to play the “eternal victim” role, never be asked very tough questions, never be required to assume any responsibility? I can easily pose such questions for another ten pages. Am I the only person left who still thinks with simple logic? (Perhaps I almost am; the only person seeking nomination for President in any party over the past thirty ears who has a spine and speaks with logic and not mushy and ever-shifting emotionalism is the one literally everyone else labels a “whacko” – Ron Paul.) This is the kind of “group think” sickness that happens when all the money and attention has gone to only one group of “special” people for such an unbelievably long period.
For women it’s always been some silly eternal “battle” against men, against the other half of us. If you are a perpetual victim, then you are a perpetual victim of me, so why would I follow your lead anywhere, including right off a cliff? It’s just totally illogical, emotional mush. Leadership is NOT a “right”. It is solely the acceptance of responsibility for others, a demonstrated ability to get others to follow your example, from the front, for the greater good of others, for ALL of us. But if your example is totally self-centered, what would following you ever get anyone else? Nothing. It would just be forcing me to provide you even more of whatever you want for yourself, damned whatever I want, whatever anyone else needs, damned what’s best for the country as a whole, best for the future of ALL our children, including our sons. Electing a US Commander-in-Chief is not a TV reality show, a celebrity popularity contest, of no consequence.
Or maybe it now is. Finland has had a lesbian president for two successive six-year terms, and she remains very popular among Finns. But no one can name a single thing in those twelve years that she has accomplished for her nation – a country with a proud history of great leaders like Mannerheim, Paasikivi, Kekkonen, men who made a great difference in Finland’s history. With loyal support of her country’s powerful establishment leftist media, she goes around the world speaking a lot of old emotion-based platitudes about “human rights” and “women’s issues” while wagging a sanctimonious finger at others, all first class royal pomp and circumstance as “head of state” on her people’s dime. She really relishes being Finland’s commander-in-chief, ruling over so many conscripted men sworn to defend the nation, and she likes to elbow herself into international meetings intended to be led solely by the country’s male prime minister. Apparently her only accomplishment has been to be a lesbian president who so far hasn’t screwed things up. It’s widely rumored that she insults and bullies her servants, but the notion that she actually leads anyone is absurd. The woman is a freeloader, and has been a freeloader her whole life, just another schmuck in the arena, but one very privileged and “special” schmuck who is now filling a quota. Finland should just switch to a monarchy; with birthright entitlement, you don’t have to actually do anything, except hyper-inflate your own ego.
But the US doesn’t have the advantage of having both a president and a prime minister – a very important fact often overlooked by those tending to view all presidents as equally important. In almost all other countries, “president” is actually a meaningless and very expensive ceremonial position of little or no consequence, similar to a contemporary “queen”, and suitable for superficial popularity contests. In the US the President is it; there is no one else to whom the buck can be passed. The single most important factor that led to the creation of the USA was the universal rejection by its people of birthright entitlement, of the power of dictatorial monarchies. Americans prefer full accountability in their temporary leaders, and they demand that those people both earn the position and actually accomplish important stuff while filling it. At least Americans have always demanded that of men filling the position.
American women, including those in “retirement”, have had the super-majority voter numbers to elect any women they want as President since 1980 – for the past thirty years. The difference in numbers is now so great that the votes of men have become irrelevant to the outcome. All politicians in this country know full well that they cannot get elected to office, or remain in office, unless they promise women whatever women want, unless they “win the woman’s vote”. Maybe some of those women still know about logic, can recognize the fallacy of their “thinking” on this matter. If a privileged American woman does ascend to the throne, and then doesn’t, or doesn’t know how to, accept responsibility for the other half, then she has set up herself, and all American women, not to mention the nation itself, for catastrophe.
And if you DO ascend to the throne, DO become President, what does that say about the continued viability of your own enormously beneficial “victim” status? Your power has always derived from the ability of your mythical eternal “victim” status to demand that “someone else” fix everything. Just who will be that “someone else” after you become “The Man”? Just who are you going to blame then? We have become a nation of children taught by incessant interest group propaganda to do little more than sit around waiting for “someone else” to DO something. What happens when you are suddenly that “someone else”? Will you hold yourself as accountable for our society’s many gross inequities as you have always held men? American women have never been challenged, never been held accountable; do you really believe in the infallibility of your own self-serving “thinking”? Are you even able to grant the possibility that someone else might have a differing view that could have some validity? How would you deal with the shock of someone else actually suddenly challenging your views, your carefully constructed belief structure? It’s a half century overdue, so I wouldn’t expect that challenge, when it comes, to be timid.
For American women it’s all about “rights”. The responsibility part is STILL for “someone else”. Does THAT make a “leader”? What kind of logic is being applied here? Is being a “leader” all about ordering around a bunch of morons, from the very safe rear? Who is creating all of those morons? If you are still lecturing me about your “sensitivities”, then you are simply a case of very alarming “arrested development”, at least thirty years behind where you should be. Male leaders are not permitted “sensitivities, so why should female leaders have them? As much as this may shock you, there are, in fact, others besides yourself who just might possess “sensitivities” of their own and are simply tired of your obnoxious self-serving dictate running on mindless auto-pilot.
Even “your” token children have become just another “asset”, a commodity, a way to “earn your stripes” and qualify as “parent” for all sorts of society’s benefits. Acquire a child, place it on the shelf, invoke that “vast village”, and, voila! .. instant “self-worth”. “Fulfillment” on the cheap. Doesn’t even require an actual marriage! Is it even possible to get more phony, and worthless, than THAT? We are rapidly becoming absurd caricatures of humans, cardboard cut-outs of empty shells, signifying absolutely nothing, except infantile self-involvement. And I am supposed to “owe” you something?
Unless you had and are raising at least two very healthy children, both mentally and physically and in full recognition of their different genders, and without farming out 90% of your responsibility to some vast “village”, Lady, this American man doesn’t owe you anything, but I do expect of you everything that I expect of men. There is no “special” in “equal”. If you find that statement shocking, or “sexist”, then it’s long past time to grow up and get over it. Our society can no longer afford your self-indulgence. Know this: Given the gross inequities that have long existed in this country between boys and girls which women and their lobbies keep fostering and hiding behind self-serving propaganda, I would never trust, much less even consider voting for, any women who speaks only of “students” and “children”, who deceptively plays slick propaganda games to hide the truth. All you tell me is that you know the truth and are standing there lying to my face, arrogantly trying to play me for a fool. The only thing you “lead” is your own myopic self-interests. You have now extended your countless “birthright entitlements” to dictatorial rule over, and deliberate destruction of, my group – all while declaring yourself totally free of any responsibility for anything beyond yourself. I do not owe you or your self-indulgence anything. On the contrary, I now throw back to you the same accusation you threw at me a half century ago: “If you know it’s wrong and do nothing to fix it, then YOU are part of the problem!” Today, I would even change that old accusation to “You are the problem! And what’s more, you know it!”
At least black American men have long, ever since the Civil War, proven their responsibility for others in a very wide range of fully accountable arenas, including on the battlefield. The nation very easily could have elected General Colin Powell as President by a wide majority many years before Mr. Obama. The same applies to American men from all other racial or ethnic backgrounds. Just what responsibility for others have American women ever demonstrated? Just what have they been doing to American boys for the past forty years? The condition of those boys has only grown progressively worse under women’s “expertise”, and all that those women do now is hide the truth. According to voter polls, American women seem to care far more about their own “right” to have abortions than they do about the rights of their own sons. (See Footnote #3.) It is NOT all about “me”. I know of no American women who has ever really filled the role of “leader”. Boss, yes. Leader, no. Leadership is like respect and trust; it has to be earned. Any twit off the street can scream orders to cowed idiots from the rear.
We now have twice as many women in American colleges and universities as men, and that gap, blatantly illegal under US civil rights law mandating “balance” and “equity” in every aspect of American education, has widened every year for the past twenty-five years. And yet American women laugh at the few “dumb” men who show up on campus and complain loudly about the high cost of college – while spending twice as much on their own clothes as all of us together spend on higher education. And that doesn’t include what American women also spend on their own shoes, on their cosmetics, on “accessories”, on hair and nail treatment, on “beauty aids”, on “optional medical procedures”, etc.. Added up, those self-indulgent expenses exceed what all public education in America costs! Just what kind of priorities, responsibilities, are we talking about here?
I know it’s against the law for men to criticize women, and I, of course, profusely apologize, but don’t women ever take a hard look at themselves? You can’t tell ME that a woman as smart and gifted as Megyn Kelly has never thought about such things.
To a thinking man, it all seems like really enormous capability being wasted solely on “me”. And THIS justifies a “right” to ascend to the throne? Did someone turn us into a monarchy when no one was looking?
The American women in this country who impress me most are all junior commissioned and non-commissioned officers in the professional US Regular Army and US Marine Corps; I keep hoping against great odds that, after all American women have been granted their demand to register for the Draft and to serve in the Infantry, one of these great women will one day rise to actually lead us all as the first American woman President – one who fully earned that esteemed position.
P.S. There’s a good reason why I prefer to be on the road and working hard at tough things well past my prime. Even war isn’t as scary as this stuff. I do recognize that there are a lot of people out there who think the solution to everything is to turn boys into girls, to make women out of men, and then label the twisted mess some conflicted limp-wristed “uni-sex” entity. I, on the other hand, believe that there are few things I could consider more offensively arrogant, just another part of one-sided dogma based on emotion, not on sound thinking. This is every bit the same level of psychological violence that so many, like I, reasonably object to as physical violence, with probably even worse consequences. Anyone who can accept one while condemning the other is simply delusional. I long ago came to the conclusion that it’s far better to do away with “women as eternal victim” and equitably raise girls to be girls and boys to be boys – while ensuring that each has an equal share of the responsibility for becoming independently productive adults mutually respective of each other – under the exact same high standards. This was actually once the objective of social science and education back in the 1950s and 1960s, before the Baby Boomers decided they knew a better way, that it was just easier to forcibly impose the views of one side on the other, in the simplistic interest of “me” and “now”. Besides, there are now far too many psychopaths and pedophiles out there, and they definitely did NOT create themselves.
Footnote #1: Have you ever noticed how everyone in academia, and many bureaucrats, these days always begins their response to a question with the word “So”? To the listener it implies, “Hush. I’m on my own superior wave length here, and your question is irrelevant to my thought process. Be patient, peon, and my enlightened words should help even you see the light.” It’s very disconcerting, and incredibly irritating. Remember when members of the brainless teen set were beginning every utterance with the word “Like”? It’s the exact same thing – a stupid habit. “See how cool I am? I talk just like that esteemed Valley Girl, Denise Dimwit!” It’s similar to grown white guys actually calling each other “Bro.” Or nitwits trying to impress others with their vast vocabulary by incessantly saying “Absolutely”, when a concise and proper “Yes” will suffice entirely for people with actually functioning brains. How do such idiotic habits form? They are introduced, promulgated and reinforced through that insidious tool of mass hysteria known as “social media”. It is “social media” creating massive herds of brainless bobble-heads, all parroting each other, like a plague. Now even “experts” are its victims! In academia! Like, wow.
“That test was narly, dude! I’ll be lucky to pass!” Yes, you will, dude. Yes, you will. But you might have a slightly better chance if you used grammar and words already in the English language, especially words that have only one or two universally understood definitions. You don’t really place yourself in a firm position by using made-up words that can mean almost anything you want them to mean because your lack of command of English quite simply requires you to make up such words. A lot of other twits use the words “you know” to break up every clause. It gives their limited brains extra time needed to think about what to say next. No, I don’t know! If I did know, I wouldn’t have to waste time listening to you! Oh, and it’s “The student who…” It is NOT “The student that…” The word “student” in the English language is a personal noun; it requires a personal pronoun.
Social media. Teaching itself. To be stupid. Who needs schools?
Many Americans have become so brain-dead lazy that they can’t even be bothered to pronounce the word “to” properly. In the age of short-cuts, quick fixes and easy answers, when actual effort is unnecessary, even a simple two-letter word comes out as a half-assed “ta”. “I have sumpin’ ta say.” No, you don’t. Go back to sleep.
Footnote #2: These are the same mushy emotion-based people who never ask how it’s possible for the most advanced and potent military force in world history after ten years of war to still be sacrificing dead soldiers to an enemy that doesn’t own a single ship, plane, tank, missile or drone and whose citizens are now, once again, eager to fire as many of those soldiers as possible while keeping all the toys; how it’s possible to hold US ground soldiers accountable for innocent deaths while granting immunity to desk jockeys 8,000 miles away for their “acceptable levels of collateral damage” by girly remote control; how it’s possible to hold US soldiers accountable while requiring them to wear clearly distinguishable uniforms making them easy targets for an enemy that hides among civilians; how it’s possible for Americans to prefer that their soldiers kill people rather than deal with the “messiness” of taking them prisoner; how it’s possible to allow privileged women psychologists and women social “scientists” with absolutely nothing in common with, and zero understanding of, ground soldiers to “treat” them when they return from war – all “according to me and my dogma”; are we going to kill off, in the name of “my” self-worth, yet another 6,500 American soldiers before “we” all stop wallowing in the victimhood offered by an awful event that happened over ten years ago? Etc., etc..
There is little left in American society that actually makes sound sense to a thinking man; it’s all girly emotion based on randomly inculcated snippets of self-serving propaganda. It’s all about “me” and what makes “me” feel good about “myself”. It’s all about where self-serving lobbies push other peoples’ money for “me”. It’s why our nation has gone nowhere for forty years, hasn’t solved a single major problem since around 1970 – all in the interest of lowering standards to artificially pump up unearned self-esteem. A million rights, and almost no one left with the responsibility. “It doesn’t HAVE to make sense!”
“We may very well end up as a footnote in history, but we WILL be happy about it! ….. Well, at least “I” will be happy about “me”.”
Footnote #3: For an excellent example of how self-serving propaganda becomes a part of the overall belief structure, see the work of three guys at IBM (Viejas, Wattenberg and Dave). These men analyzed the Wikipedia entry for “Abortion” and displayed their results graphically, showing how the original entry (as a straight-forward medical procedure) was repeatedly edited after its submission in December 2001. (Visual graphs developed with computers apparently are easier to grasp than are printed words, but they also sometimes reveal, through the study of networks, unexpected linkages and insights.) By June 2003, after really numerous entries, the original submission had been almost completely rewritten – mainly to conform to the stand of the women’s lobby on this “issue”. This is now an important way that “truth”, perverted by self-interests, enters into the popularly accepted culture. It’s now easier than ever to re-write history, even truth and fact, to suit yourself. “Whatever, man.” For all its great advantages, one thing the “digital age” does NOT offer is permanence. This is indeed a very fluid and ever-shifting “truth”, very malleable to “my” wishes, including those of government. The Rosetta Stone it definitely is not. All that data, and no way to judge its validity, and not enough brain tools to really know how to understand it, much less to use it properly. These days you can do anything you want with “information”. Every day it is ever more important to develop minds that can handle it properly, minds that can really think. But we don’t.
I personally feel the abortion “issue” is irrelevant, especially for men, since American women are always going to do whatever they want to do, court decision or no court decision, religious teaching or not. (I just object strongly to being forced to pay for the behavior choices of others.) Still, regardless of which deceptive propaganda term you use for the medical procedure (“right to choose”, “right to life”, etc.), the real critical factor is whether or not one has actually read, studied and understood the 1973 Supreme Court decision that established this “right”. That time (mid-1960s to mid-1970s) was a period when the suddenly shell-shocked Greatest Generation, under extreme and often violent assault from every quarter by their own Baby Boomer children, where going overboard to grant those children their every demand – mainly, I think, to quell the violence, shut them up, and keep the nation functioning.
The Supreme Court really out-did itself on this one. It first established a theoretical “right of privacy” (derived incredibly from the 1868 14th Amendment’s “due process” clause*), and, upon that “right”, established an extended “right of abortion” – that was inviolable by the state. Since that Court decision also established a legal precedent, the exact same “reasoning” can now be used by others seeking to use a “right of privacy” to establish a “right” to pedophilia, to incest, to marijuana growing, to drug use, to all sorts of really bad stuff, in the privacy of one’s own home and/or within the privacy of one’s own body. It’s first use after the abortion “right” was settled was to legalize the “right” of sodomy, which led to the matter of “same sex marriage.” So the possibilities are actually quite large. This is why it is so important for the women’s lobby to ensure that enough like-minded people are confirmed to the Court to ensure that very tenuous 1973 decision will not be over-turned. No one has yet tried to establish other rights based on this “right of privacy”, but, sooner or later, someone is bound to give it a try. Solely to appease women, that decision (made by fathers of daughters) was a twisted convoluted emotional mess that opened the can for all sorts of trouble everywhere. It definitely is NOT based on sound Constitutional law, and even if it were, just look at all the “exceptions” to a “right of privacy”, not to mention “due process”, that have already been granted to the Government since the beginning of the “war on terrorism”. Apparently the only “rights” that follow from a “right of privacy” is the right to kill unborn children and for gays to have sex – both activities of very loud and powerful interest groups. I, on the other hand, do not have such a right. Emotion trumps logic. I make no stand on either of these two activities, but I do pose this question: what worthwhile society would ever seek to contribute to, enshrine in its basic law, practices that could only lead to its demise – by dramatically reducing the number of children needed to keep it alive?
(*The main thrust of the 14th Amendment was to stop some of the post-Civil War Reconstruction excesses, which were primarily arbitrary discriminatory measures taken “legally” by government entities against black Americans in the South. It thus was intended to restrict government oppression by bolstering certain individual and private property rights. The 1973 abortion issue, under “due process”, was re-visited in 1992 by Planned Parenthood, and stood mostly as originally decided. In 1996 and 2003 the same clause was used more appropriately in deciding excessive punitive damage cases. However, in 2003 the Court drew on Roe v Wade to use the “due process” clause to invalidate sodomy laws, thereby making same-gender sexual activity legal. In doing so it reversed its own 1986 decision involving a Georgia statute in not finding a constitutional protection of sexual privacy. So precedent is now in place to further advance this concept into other activities conducted in private. I personally hope that someone uses the precedent to take to Court the practice of masked para-military police forces busting down doors and invading private homes in the middle of the night while people are sleeping – all based on some nebulous “tip” in the stupid forty-year-old and never-ending “war on drugs”. But it’s probably more likely that the next case will involve something more in line with some lobby’s “me” objectives. Ever notice how women have no problem at all with themselves, with police, private investigators, the government, and other creepy snoops poking around in the private lives of men, but get all bent out of shape when they are the target of such intrusive invasions of privacy? “Voyeurism is fine for me, but not for you.” Right. Just who makes up these twisted rules of “equality”? “But I am special.” Yes, you are, Sweetie. Yes, you are.)