Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, July 25, 2008
W. Thomas Smith, Jr :: Townhall.com Columnist
Kathleen Parker's Quest To Save The Males
by W. Thomas Smith, Jr
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Years ago, my then-girlfriend urged me to read John Gray’s Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus. So I did. It was an interesting read. But it was really nothing I and any other red-blooded American male didn’t already know about the differences between men and women, and how the two – very differently-wired human sexual creatures – might better interact with one another. But it was in a neat little one-volume package that we males could refer to whenever we screwed up, which – according to our female counterparts – was and is often.

There have been a number of related-books written since – most of which are categorized in the self-help section of the local bookstore – but very few addressing the recent social and cultural degradation of all that used to be good and noble about being a man.

Fact is, for the past three-plus decades there has been a deliberate effort in some circles to make sure the proverbial wind has been taken out of the sails of manliness – I suppose in an attempt to create a more balanced playing field for women – but it has been done at the expense of manhood: Hence, strong, level-headed fatherly figures like Andy Griffith and Ward Cleaver, and far too many of our hard-riding cowboy heroes have been replaced with the likes of Homer Simpson, Al Bundy, and that bunch of milquetoast unmanly men on Friends (There are exceptions like 24’s Jack Bauer, but not without his multitudinous masculine flaws).

Enter author Kathleen Parker, a syndicated columnist who frequently champions both men and women, but never one-over-the-other because of gender. Parker appreciates the differences – subtle, obvious, and complimentary – between men and women; and her new book, Save the Males, explains “why men matter, and why women [and men] should care.”

As expected Parker has taken some heat from PC watchdogs whose backs have been bowed by Parker’s courage, cleverness, and the book’s ruthless honesty. After all, “Most men don’t know they need saving,” Parker writes. “Most women consider the idea absurd.”

According to Parker, men have been “screwed – and not in the way they prefer. For the past thirty years or so, males have been under siege by a culture that too often embraces the notion that men are to blame for all of life’s ills.” So in an attempt to create a more “female-friendly world,” a culture has emerged that is not only “hostile toward males,” she writes. But “contemptuous of masculinity, and cynical about the delightful differences that make men irresistible, especially when something goes bump in the night.”

The basic nut-graph of Save the Males is Parker’s on-point, commonsensical argument: Manliness and the unique characteristics of men really do matter.

Of course, this argument essentially skewers political correctness, angering the extreme Left, and forcing moderates to consider revisiting the approaches taken by unwavering old-school feminists, who would argue that in combat – for instance – a woman can push a button as well as a man.

Problem is, it’s not that simple.

Which brings me to what I – and surely others like me who have served in-and-with ground combat units in peace and in war – have found most interesting in Parker’s book: That is, there is a crystal-clear reason why – for instance – the U.S. Marine Corps continues to train men and women separately during boot camp, and why infantry and the other ground-combat-arms fields (including ground-based special operations teams) remain all male.

Of course, Hollywood's portrayal of females in action – Demi Moore basically whipping-up on a Navy SEAL in G.I. Jane or some 120-pound female martial-artist kicking a trained male-assassin nearly to death in an episode of Walker Texas Ranger – would lead those who scoff at maleness and who don't understand the actual dynamics of the battlefield, the football field, or the lockerroom for that matter to cheer; even believing the utter nonsense they see in movies and on TV, which according to Parker, helped spawn the myth of the heroism of real-life U.S. Army private Jessica Lynch.

Save the Males covers everything from how we got to this point culturally, the unfortunately related “porning of America,” why boys need men, to the increasingly popular notion that men and masculinity are simply irrelevant.

What is however relevant – particularly to active and former military guys like myself who clearly understand how the continued track of gender-norming in the armed forces could ultimately erode national defense – is that, as Parker writes, "As a rule, most women are physically weaker than most men" and “There’s a reason there are no women in the NFL.”

I know: We're not supposed to actually say those things. But it's critical when one considers the fact that in the infantry – even the modern infantry – physical strength (along with high-tech equipment and great leadership) is key to dominance on the battlefield. But don't take Parker's or my word for it: Ask any rifleman who had to slug it out tooth-to-eyeball with the enemy during the Battle of Fallujah – thus far the Super Bowl of the Iraq War – which by the way, Parker examines in Chapter 7.

As I previously said, the truth hurts: and this book is going to sting some, especially those who do not want to let men off the hook. For the rest of us – men and women – willing to take a good hard look at why men matter – looking at the issue as objectively as Parker has – it is a very important read.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
W. Thomas Smith Jr. is a former U.S. Marine rifle-squad leader and counterterrorism instructor. He is the author of six books, and he has covered war and conflict in the Balkans, on the West Bank, in Iraq, and Lebanon. Visit him online at http://www.uswriter.com.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read W. Thomas Smith's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Either with you or against you
The difficulty I have had in dealing with men is that they are so two-dimensional. They wish me to be either the old fashioned subservient woman who is content with kinder, kirche, kuche and purrs with pleasure because she's got that little Cape Cod in the suburbs and all the toys she needs to keep it shining fresh and clean ... or they declare that I am an emasculating lesbian b***h who wants to steal the bread out of the mouths of families by having a career and (gasp) a happy life without a man to lead me, guide me and look after me. The sad thing is that men insist on being boss, and if they can't be boss, it's because some woman "cheated".

I have heard there are other kinds of men in the world. In 60 years of life I have yet to meet one.

In my own life I find men to be much like profanity; useful when nothing else will do, but by and large not a day to day necessity.

Yes Wendy
all of these posters were wrong, and you were the only one that was right. Shouldn't that tell you something?

Destroying Males
Parker is acutely perceptive re the plight of males and possesed of the strength to stand up and point out the obvious pathological consequences of feminism gone wild (see Wendy (sp, Windy?) Liberal Psycobabble above) How sad is it that after three to four decades of brutalizing males from birth to grave that the topic is getting some serious play, albeit only in the conservative alternative media? More evidence that we've lost our collective national mind and intellect. To the average US citizen, one can only ask, "What the hell is wrong with you?"

Charles F Schanie, PhD

Women in leadership roles...
...generally do very poorly. One of the very best bosses I ever had was a woman, and she was superb in every possible way. Having said that, every other female supervisor I have had was either a chrome-plated feminist or wore her authority like a fur coat. Several were infantilizing "professional mommies" who treated the men under her like ten year olds, and the women like sisters in the Yadda-Yadda sorority.

I will NEVER work for a woman again. Too much drama, too many insecurities, and too much EGO!

One day, when our daughters are brought up to learn leadership skills the same way little boys learn them while building tree houses, you might see more women perform successfully in positions of authority. But for now, most (not all) act like they got their positions from the state lottery and have no accountability for their behavior.

PS: Another reason many women are bad in leadership roles is...and you're going to HATE this...the lack of physical violence in their lives. I know: This sounds utterly appalling. Hear me out and think about it. Men begin their lives as boys, and when boys interact, there are quickly learned "codes" of behavior. One says that if you really p*ss me off, you just might eat a knuckle sandwich. Men learn from a very early age that there are lines you never cross, or else you invoke the Rules of the Schoolyard. I've had women coworkers treat me in a manner that, had they been men, I would have asked them if they'd like to step into the parking lot so that the ambulance crew doesn't have to negotiate the gurnery through a hallway. This is a big reason men work better together and for each other: there must be a foundation of MUTUAL RESPECT. Women, in all their backstabbing cattiness, have little or no mutual respect. For every male coworker that has acted like a child, I'll show you 30 women who never graduated beyond Barbie's Magic Playhouse.

Rant over. You may now move freely about the cabin.

Mother of 4 dead on!
This Alaska woman can also shoot better than her man and so could my mother. In fact, her first husband made quite a living challenging men in bar bets that his wife could take out five dimes in free fall in five shots with a 22. Living in a big military town, I got to shoot an Army sniper rifle a while back. I impressed the soldier who was overseeing the demonstration with my accuracy at a distance. He pointed out that there's only a few dozen Army riflemen who can shoot what I did and they require practice. I pointed out to him that whie I could dead lift his rifle, I couldn't hump it very far, and I made him laugh when I pointed out that I am, after all, a woman.

The fact is that men and women have different strengths. I, a woman, wince when I see women play the "girl" card when they don't have to. Alaskan women win the Iditarod, for heaven's sake. We're not weak and we have stamina and pain tolerance far beyond that of men, but we are NOT men. We remain women.

Most women never grow past that early elementary phase of not liking or 'getting' boys. They want them to think like women in order to be included in the "club". Admittedly, most men didn't (and many still don't) want to "get" women. There is something alien about the way the other gender thinks. Those of us who cross the gender divide often find ourselves accused of -- homosexuality (not), trying to steal other's mates (not), or being a traitor to our gender (okay, I'm okay with that). I am known among my friends for my sarcastic humor, but I am also known for my husband being off bounds. It's not that he couldn't be a source of my wry observations (he's got flaws), but that he doesn't deserve to be the source of them and I figure I'll leave it up to prime-time television to denigrate him and his entire gender for not being women. I personally like (most of the time) that his is not a female mind. So he's aggressive; at least he's not catty.

BillCC
BillCC

Your comment “The single, most important masculine trait that has allowed our civilization to prosper is RISK.” Right on!

We are now fighting a PC war with sissified generals who apologize and grovel and kiss the Koran, hunkering down on bases second-guessing those on the front lines, and interested only in self-perpetuation, not in our national defense.

The nation that apologies in this manner is not interested in winning.

youtube.com/watch?v=aSq8Z4qWQco

youtube.com/watch?v=aSq8Z4qWQco>

and the latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-convoy24-2008may24,0,5302838.story

These Marines were falsely accused by their leadership. After 10 months of ruthless, brutal investigation, they have been vindicated in a very wimpy fashion.

fight back
I fought back this weekend! On Saturday I married a wonderful woman (but not an American woman).

Ten years ago I decided that marrying an American woman would be a really stupid thing to do. I decided to take my kindness, love, gentleness, and skills, and dedicate them to a woman who will TRY to make me happy.

In 2000, I went to visit Margarita, a sweet thirty year old Mexican woman who lived in central Mexico. Margarita has a college education and a gentle disposition. Over the past eight years we have corresponded and visited (on and off). She was very reluctant to come to the US because she had a good life in Mexico. Well, last year we finally decided to get married… and we tied the knot on Saturday.

In eight years time, Margarita never once said anything demeaning to me. She never once insulted me. She has always been feminine, kind and gentle. Don’t even think that Margarita is submissive (avoiding biitchiness does not require submissiveness – it requires kindness and decency).

I dated a dozen or so American women before deciding to focus on Margarita. And each of the American women I dated was not able to make it more than two months before being insulting or demining to me.

Wish us luck!

Guys… you have options… look abroad… there are women in the world who have not yet been poisoned. The feminists tried to shut down relationships between American men and foreign women, but they lost, and the laws they got passed were watered way down.

We've seen women in control
We've never before in the annals of history, with the exception of a couple of post-war periods, had the female so prominently displayed at the head of families--never so prominantly as in the black community. We all see the effects; we all deplore the effects; and we all long to see a change, which never will happen with absent men and fathers continuing to be absent.

You want a look into the future of men-less homes and families, we have our case study available in the black community: greater poverty, greater crime, greater everything dysfunctional. Is that racist? No; because it will happen to every single population group to which it happens...it just so happens that it's the black population right now that actually has the problem.

Response
I will only say that the vast majority of people criticizing my post are complete idiots, cannot follow a line of thought, and haven't said a sensical thing in their entire posts. Particularly amusing are the commenters who accuse me of putting words in the author's mouth, then put some type of Marxist-liberal-feminist viewpoint in mine. I am also amused by those who think Smith does not think de-masculinization isn't occuring, only its cultural precedents; yet, he finds it important enough to write about. I stand by everything I wrote, and I will here respond only to the honest critics.

BrianR, if you read my post again, you will see that I am not unsympathetic to limiting eligibility for combat arms to males. I know full well what physical strength it takes to do an infantryman's job. My (legitimate) concern is that Smith is trying to smuggle this point into another agenda: The beating down of women psychologically. If you need evidence of my point, read jaybird's post. Those people are out there, and I can smell their weakness.

I am, for the record, very much in favor of "masculinity" in men, the nature of which I gave clues to in my original post. I have read some of Parker's commentary regarding masculinity, and it was a disaster. She presented an image of masculinity as drinking beer and burping while putting their hand down their pants while grunting cheers while watching sports. Those are almost her exact words.

Is that supposed to be a defense of masculinity? How many people in our culture do you expect that kind of mess will convince? Who will be for masculinity in men when masculinity is portrayed not as a matter of exercising free will to achieve the highest available to him, but as some innate tendency to mindlessly groan and grunt and lift things?

It really is no wonder that the left is having success in its agenda. The right virtually handed them victory.

I'll Regret This
Women have always been more liberated in western civilizations, as opposed to the rest of the world. However, even western nations were mostly built by men. There were a few genuine exceptions, of course, such as Madame Currie.

The tipping point in a nation's decline is when the men become more feminine than masculine. In the last century of so, beginning with women voting, the men in western nations have become more feminine than masculine.

A never before phenomenon has also occurred during this period. The status of women has been equalized with men. This equality has resulted in women becoming more masculine. There is a greatly reduced need for men.

The result of these masculized women is social disintergration in every western nation. High rates of divorce, substance abuse, and family abandonment. Also, fewer people are getting legally married. Masculinized women has also resulted in a much lower birthrate.

We are all responsible for a very weak, rapidly declining West.

There are so many successful
Marriages to see how it works best.
What I do not get is why these examples are so despised by feminists.

Nothing about them is female, or womanly as they all seem to want toact like men.

When I hear "you've come a long way baby"
I think yes you have, a long ways from being a feminine creature of beauty a man would die for.
Instead have come to being a nit picking, fault finding, nagger and critic of all things male.

There is nothing any man can do that is good enough for them.
So why try?
Most men do not try, why should he.


Am I the only one
Who noticed the (doubtless intentional) double entendre in Ms. Parker's prose about "the delightful differences that make men irresistible, especially when something goes bump in the night.”? I laughed.

REAL WOMANHOOD'S GREATEST CHALLENGE Pt.2

Today and Tommorrow will have to depend on Real Womanhood to pick up the pieces of once was the Real Man like Humpty Dumpty....and to restore him to his proper role as husband, father and head of household. The Real Woman will be like a great artist who will take the pieces of what was a Real Man and to restore them to their proper place...she will create her masterpiece and once again reclaim man from all of the confusion about gender identity and once again restore him to his proper place as her Prince and her King and when she accomplishes this...her Man will in turn reciprocate and restore her to her proper place as princess and queen and she will sit on the throne beside him and once again reign over God's Kingdom.

REAL WOMANHOOD'S GREATEST CHALLENGE

Throughout the American Landscape you will find remnants of Masculine men who have been neutered
or castrated by Liberal Man Haters who wish to pervert God's natural design and creation. One of the best ways to try and accomplish this is to deny there is such a God and replace him with some perverted likeness. Sometimes that likeness becomes Government itself. This is when it really becomes dangerous. This is one reason why Humanism is so attractive to the Man-Haters...they feel it gives them the Power they have always sought and continue to seek.

Throughout Hollywood with Brokeback Mountain and the Celebration of Ellen and Rosie's coming out society has given into the forces that seek to unleash the Demons of Satan. All around us they fly to and fro and try to sneak into our everyday lives. Now they don't want..but rather
demand that we recognize Marriage between such perverted alliances and Unions. Effeminine men are celebrated and the Real Women wonder where have all the Real Men gone? From CNN to Fox news its the Charlies Angels who dominate the news industry...from Corporations to Politics..its about the FIRST WOMAN THIS OR THE FIRST WOMAN THAT... however, real men and women have never placed limits on where a woman can go or what she can achieve because we all know that if she can be a good mom or wife there is nothing that a woman cannot do or accomplish. Its the age of the Masculine Woman and the Effeminate Man....perversions alike in their own ways.

Today and Tommorrow will have to depend on Real Womanhood to pick up the pieces of once was the Real Man like Humpty Dumpty....and to restore him to his proper role as husband, father and head of household.

Wendy's attempts at logic
From one woman to another, if you're going to accuse someone of fallacious arguments, go back first and review your logic primer. You're indulging in the straw-man fallacy to belittle the author of this fine column. He didn't say what you said he did, so your conclusion has no foundation.

Parker's book would help you. Neither she nor Smith have any interest in beating either sex down. Unfortunately, like so many of our sex, your emotions are blocking your ability to receive and consider ideas that you deem threatening.

THE COMPLIMENTS OF DESTINY

Forever as God has intended, it has been the Destiny of Man to be the head of the family, the clan, the tribe. However, it is only a recent occurrence that this destiny reverted to the titular head of the family instead.

Although the Liberal Man Haters wish to overturn the natural order of things...they have failed to completely disrupt the back bone of the Nuclear Family and thereby destroy the culture that not only gives life but reaffirms the future of Western Civilization and its Judeo/Christian values. Man is a fighter, a producer, a warrior, leader and soldier. He is also a father, a husband, a teacher and a farmer. Man's life and destiny is overt..his destiny turns outward to the hunt, to the kill, or to the next skyscrapper or mountain and yes..even to the Moon, the Stars and the Universe. Man's destiny is the opposite of a Womans for obvious reasons and mostly because man does not create life within his own body like a woman. Therefore, his creativity turns outward.

A Woman's Destiny is the opposite from that of a man for obvious reasons...her life turns inward to the womb...to the child because this is her ultimae Destiny and her most valued purpose in the Natural order of things...to bear children and thus carry on the species, the race, the tribe and the civilization. Hers is perhaps the most important role or Destiny because she creates within her own body...the masterpiece that becomes another living, breathing person. Even if she chooses not to have children...her profession or her husband or mate becomes her child and we all know that a woman has the reputation to fight for her husband her children and her home. Even in the animal kingdom it sometimes happens that the female is the most vicious of all when protecting their young. Even if a woman decides not to have children her profession often becomes like her child and is nurtured in the same way.


BrianR
I don't have the address, but he is on the Medved thread and you can click the name.

Cheers

Kindel #45
Well said.

The current generation of boys don't even know how to open doors or help a lady because they have had no male role models. The entire system is working Against the family and definitely toward the Marxist goal of Government knows best.

Scary part is people are buying it. The school system does not like it when you won't send your kid to a psychiatrist and get him on Ritalin. But many parents love the diagnosis and the drug.

THE DESTINY OF A MAN AND A WOMAN !!

"The first question anyone or anything should ask is this: "What am I in my essential nature and being?" Once he has found this, he has found what his freedom may be, for he will know what his life's truth is. If in his essential nature and being he is a blind appetite, an amorphous lust, a grab-bag of nothing, he can never be free. Nothing he can do will make him free, though he toss choices left and right like an antic harlequin of possibilities! ... Being nothing, what can he be but nothing? Having no nature to become, he will have no freedom; and in his sick despairing misery, he will seek to destroy his freedom with his license and his whims and his perversions.

But if he is a true artist, of language or of life, he will seek his destiny and grow toward his meaning. He will find the truth, and the truth shall make him free."

It should be obvious to most people that both men and women have a different destiny that is opposite from one another but that reciprocates each other by complimenting and validating Masculinity for a Man and Femininity for a Woman...a man's destiny is fulfilled by trials and errors as he grows and becomes forever more the MAN that GOD intended he should become. This is also true for woman as she goes through her own trials and errors to become forever more the WOMAN that GOD intended she become.


Woman's Senseless Pride
Men know that the real sex with pride is the fairer sex. A man can never relate to a woman full of herself. It was the same sin of Satan - PRIDE! There are legions of single woman today who cannot understand, nor will they ever understand how to get a man because they need to take a good hard look in the mirror and the BIBLE to solve their problems, but they are being spoonfed their steady diet of lunacy from anywhere but the Bible. God made MEN to be the spiritual leader of the family; it is His Divine Order. If modern, man-hating woman can't deal with that, maybe she needs to take the issue up with GOD. We MEN have long since gotten fed up with it. That we even have a viable Democratic Party still in existence today is a testament to the power of Satan in the Women's Movement to utterly destroy families and murder and destroy an entire nation and future generations in the name of WOMAN'S STUCK-UP PRIDE.

Modern-Day Feminist Jezebels
I really feel sorry for beautiful women these days; they are tragic characters. Often their beauty makes men immediately pull out the stuck-up meter to see when it will go off inevitably. Today's modern beautiful women are often so stuck up on themselves in the current culture that they feel entitled to dog their men, if they even have a wuss at all in their lives willing to emasculate himself long enough to put up with her eternal games. Most men see good-looking women as anything-but marriage material; she's just nice window dressing or someone for a one-night stand. We all know that good-looking stuck-up woman added with today's anti-male culture equals a guaranteed divorce. She's often just damaged goods from the get-go. It's not surprising that so many good-looking women sooner or later become either gay or jaded themselves. Their own male-bashing, rebellious behavior often drives them to it. Often, a beautiful woman will sit around crying and wondering why no man will ask her out. It's quite simple. She's unapproachable and full of herself; we men see right through these types. They're ubiquitous, and we avoid them like the plague. If a woman cannot be down-to-Earth, she's a dead-ringer for just another future divorce waiting to happen. Most of us men sooner or later just give up on the lookers and settle for a woman we can actually relate with, having grown weary of trying to resolve a futile situation with the hopelessly brainwashed opposite sex who often have no clue how to RELATE with men.


...Cont'd - 48% Single Adults in US
Many men have just become cynical and jaded and choose to live out their lives in perpetual bachelorhood especially after having been divorced by "liberated" women. They just don't believe any US women of the marrying kind even exist anymore. So few women have any respect for men. They have been brainwashed by their feminazi mothers and grandmothers to despise "real" men and pursue their almighty careers and dollars and put men and love on the backburner, and always, always, always make sure he's a white collar worker with gobs of money. What has this reduced modern day women and marriage to: Whores & legalized Prostitution! If today's modern women do respect men at all, they're usually just ugly and desperate. That's why so many of us men, who do, if at all, elect to get married and roll the dice, playing the 50% odds on financial ruin with the likely imminent divorce, sooner or later just prefer to settle on a woman who is a safer bet, the one who may not be the hottest, but sure knows how to treat her man with respect,who cherishes our masculinity - the MEN we are.

48% of US Adult Population is Single
This has to be the biggest cost of the anti-male culture that has persisted since the dawn of the Women's Movement which opened the Pandora's Box on Divorce and Abortion. Divorce hit unprecedented rates in the US around 1978, right at the height of the Women's Movement right up to the 50% level where it remains today. Abortion has killed 54 million baby boys and girls - 16.67% of the current overall US population have been murdered since 1973 -all in the name of giving woman a "right" to murder. Since when does one sex in this nation have a preferential "right" to commit murder??? Demographically speaking, we have destroyed and continue to destroy our ability to perpetuate our population and all the while that vacuum of population has been supplanted with illegal aliens by the Corporate whores in DC in both parties who have completely abandoned the American People to pursue a PC agenda.

BrianR
If you happen to catch this...since the demise of Wirs. The WBABT team will be meeting at Medveds.

Check out Normans Blog.


Cheers!


Our Young Boys are Being Drugged for PC
When one sees a cute 2-year-old boy full of testosterone coursing through his veins, running around getting in trouble, aggravating his sisters or brothers, fighting, and making the family laugh, it's all cute and fun while he's young. Fastforward to that same little boy full of life now going to grade school. Chances are highly likely he'll be diagnosed with ADHD or ADD or some other Liberal horseshit, anti-male, PC poppycock and drugged into oblivion for the remainder of his time in grade school. This horribly, egregiously anti-male PC behavior is absolutely inexcusable. This little boy is immediately confronted with personality assessment and an examination of his entire sexual nature, his masculinity, his own personality, the very being that GOD created him to be. This is how young boys become neutered and a society, indeed, an entire generation becomes Politically Correct and brainwashed into becoming sissified, Liberal, environmental whacko wusses.

Equality

My answer to equality concept is to treat all women equally to men - except my wife, she's still treated as a woman. I have no problem with equality, but I do have a problem with wanting to have a cake and eat it too. I did get couple of nasty glances for not helping women (other than my wife) getting over sized luggage from airport carousel - too bad, I wouldn't help healthy and relatively young men, either. If we *really* started treating women (other then our significant others) as men, that would be very quick wake-up call. Especially to those like Wendy of the first comment.

Unfortunately, it takes a lot of restraint to overcome DNA-wired impulse to use our physical strength to help and protect even unrelated females. But for all our sakes (male and female alike), we men should try harder to look the other way.

Different, but related: since there are so many laws protecting children today - in fact, so many that to me known 70 year old man admitted he's afraid to approach children in public places to joke with them which he normally did since his first kids 40 years ago - I guess they don't need Citizens to help other people's children. As hard as this might be, if we just once let child get hurt and answer we did it because nobody needs us anymore since there are laws protecting them ... maybe we will have normal adult-oriented society back. Doing otherwise is installing a certainty that to have a cake and it it too is not only possible, but can be obtained if you scream loud enough.

Homeschool Mon
AMEN!!

I NEVER did more than take my kids for their annual dental. Only if the need arose would we go to the doc's, as I could see no point in paying good $$ for someone to tell me what I could plainly see for myself-that they were (and still are)perfectly healthy. Vaccines were handled at the county health dept. as needed. They were allowed to get dirty and scrape their knees-and get over it. We survived Little League, a brick hearth and open stairs with no more than the expected injuries. Antibiotics were rarely needed-and only one of our 4 kids has ever had strep throat. Which at the time I promptly got too for the first time in my life! :)

I'll admit to insisting they wear a helmet while at least learning to ride the bike, though. After that you couldn't pay them to wear those stupid things.

Now I see the TV commercials for purse-size antibiotic spray or gel just in case Jimmy gets a cut on the playground (which I think have lost a lot in both character and fun due to the safety nannies' intervening) and it just makes me roll my eyes.

*Sigh* No wonder we have such a nation of whiners.

Well, Sky, if you'll look again

at my post, you'll see that I didn't say that women are equal to men.

Read it again; you'll see we're actually on the same side of this issue.


Mother of 4
per your post #4.

Our oldest son is a Marine sharpshooter but his mum (me) can shoot nearly as well-and with nowhere near the practice required. The look on his face was priceless when he saw where I'd hit that target one day while out shooting-and yes, he was proud. :)

Anyway, I love men-the real kind. And don't mind the division of labor one bit.

Andy Griffith was the first comedy we introduced our kids to and we still enjoy the DVD sets we have. Sometimes the show is corny but always there's a positive lesson.

And just in case Wendy reads these posts, Helen Crump, Ellie Walker and the lady sharpshooter he also dated were anything but doormats.

Brian You Are Wrong
Women are not equal to Men and God intended that way....: ) Women gave Men the desire to come home to warmth, to love, to procreate, to look at life instead of death, to think before talking, to choose between violence and forgiveness. To choose between dying inside and living for your children. Fact is a Man will do what his heart, guided by his wife, and his concience allows....;providing it's enough....if not, a Man does tend to take over to protect his family in any way he can.....meant to be that way....and by devine providence will always be that way.....

Sky

Exactly, Anna!

In many respects women are MORE equal than men.

As a man, I feel it's my duty and pleasure to open doors for Her, light Her cigarette (if she's a smoker), let Her precede me into any room, let Her walk on the inside (safe) side of the sidewalk, let Her stand and wait under shelter while I go get the car when it's raining, etcetera, ad infinitum.

I don't do that stuff for guys. They can take care of themselves, just like I do.


Up with Men!

Man, does this country ever need more Godly testosterone...which IS a beautiful thing.

I think the women's movement ripped off women. How should "equality" be defined? (That's where Wendy gets it wrong IMO) I prefer that equality be in having equal power. To say that women deserve "equality" because they are the same as men or can do the same things as men is a rip off, and absurd.

It tells a woman that her gifts are of less value than supposedly "masculine" characteristics. Knock out the men and break down the family and look at what we have today in America....a very sick country.


```````
I agree with Mother of 4!

Men and women are designed to complement each other -- compensating for each others' weaknesses and reinforcing each other's strengths.

equal when it's convenient
I grew up on a farm in what was then rural AZ and I noticed none of the females were screaming for quality when it came to doing the manual labor assigned to the males in each household. Especially during the summer.

Not that there weren't manual labor jobs for us, but there was simply no way we could keep up with the men in strength and endurance when it came to big jobs. In situations where we had to do a man's job when a man wasn't available it took longer and was harder for us. We simply could not have run it smoothly without them for very long.

I've spent 40 hours giving birth with absolutely no medication with my oldest, so I think can say I'm not some little weenie princess type, but I will readily admit the physical strength unique to women is customized for lower demand physical chores and childbirth. Which by the way, I find incredibly few women volunteering for. They scream for an epidural at 4cm but they think they can handle a tour in Iraq on the front lines?

Then there are the bubble wrap mommies that are flooding society. Heaven for bid their children climb-they might fall. Don't let them run-they might trip. Don't let them try-they might fail. Wear a helmet or we're all going to die. Don't be barefoot-you might step on something. Oh my goodness they scarped their knee-better get a tetanus shot. What!? A runny nose? Better take some antibiotics.

Good men aren't the only ones on the decline. Good, solid, no nonsense women are becoming more rare.

Kathleen Parker's Book
Ms. Parker's approach to saving the "male" is very similar to Christine Hoff Sommers' books of recent years. It's also interesting that Elaine Donnelly (mentioned in Robert Knight's article), in a sense is also trying to save "males"!

women's unique role devalued
There are innate and measurable differences in the sexes programmed and maintained through tens of thousands of years of human development. They are not going to disappear because fifty years ago Betty Friedan started the myth that all women are unfulfilled in "merely" raising a family. A man and woman pair bond with their complementary skills is the best possible problem solving entity for protecting their young, the future of any society.

Like all leftist ideas, radical feminism was aimed at destroying the roots of western capitalist classical liberal democracies that were 100% successful and replacing them with marxist utopias that have had a 100% failure rate.

The main difference between classical liberalism and its stunted evil modern version that has basically stolen the name is individual rights vs collective rights.

Marxism's strategy of getting into power is to induce class warfare. They made all women i.e. half the population a pretend "oppressed" class.

So-called women's liberation has brought women the anxiety of promiscuity, abortion, STD's, single parenthood and the "right" to work at what is for most a soul deadening mc-job outside the home so a minority can "actualize" themselves through careers. Society was remade in such a way that most second incomes now pay taxes to support the big government required to take up the slack in child and elder care. Immigration to replace the 50 million aborted American citizens now includes people who actually despise the host society and are bringing us a world of trouble.

Women are now doing work that men can do, narcissistic women who prefer it to the altruism required to raise solid citizens, and less educated women forced into crappy jobs to pay their taxes and/or support their kids alone. Simultaneously, too few are doing the work only they can do which is bearing and raising children.

A society so stupidly set up cannot last long.

PT Test Standards

One thing not mentioned -- and something that the women never admit -- is that there are TWO sets of physical fitness standards for the military and for all civilian jobs of a similar nature.

Women in the military are graded on being about a third less strong then men. A 20 year old woman is only expected to be as physically fit as a 45 year old man. A 45 year old woman thus is expected to be as fit as the average guy in a wheelchair....

If women want to scream equality, if they want to be held to the same standard as men, the first thing they ought to be screaming about is the fact that they AREN'T held to the same standard....

Yes, some women could meet (or exceed) the male standard. And the reason why they aren't complaining is???

PT Test Standards

One thing not mentioned -- and something that the women never admit -- is that there are TWO sets of physical fitness standards for the military and for all civilian jobs of a similar nature.

Women in the military are graded on being about a third less strong then men. A 20 year old woman is only expected to be as physically fit as a 45 year old man. A 45 year old woman thus is expected to be as fit as the average guy in a wheelchair....

If women want to scream equality, if they want to be held to the same standard as men, the first thing they ought to be screaming about is the fact that they AREN'T held to the same standard....

Yes, some women could meet (or exceed) the male standard. And the reason why they aren't complaining is???

I want a MALE supervisor....

> I have worked for women (having had three
> women supervisors over me in different work
> environments). Believe me, having had men
> superviors as well I have come to the
> conclusion that, by nature (generally
> speaking), women are not out there trying
> to prove something.

I will never work for a woman again. The difference is simple, a man tells you to do something and you either do it or have problems. If the man forgets he told you to do what you did, he may or may not admit it but that is the end of it.

A woman, on the other hand, has so many nuanced levels of meaning that it is almost impossible to figure out what she wants you to do. And everything is a conversation, nothing is hard and fast along the lines of "do this in the following manner."

And I have thus decided never again to work for a woman.

Boys
100% correct. The schools and society are making it difficult to raise "boys". We have "mediation" and pulling your kid out of class to go to little lessons with the social worker for incidences that happened outside of school. My Dad used to tell my brothers, "I don't want you starting the fight, but I want you to finish it." A lot of things got settled early with letting the mouthy kid get punched a few times. Far better than Mommy and Daddy and lawyer getting involved in kid fights. And you didn't have charges of "sexual harrassment" when your 10 year old tells his friend that the dog is humping his leg (and the kid doesn't even know about sex).


Women Who Don't Like Men
I think that a large part of the confusion comes from the fact that few women actually like men. Not like as in romantically attracted to. But actually LIKE men as in enjoying their company and enjoying spending time around them and talking with them.

The Group-Identity part of our culture emphasizes the need of people to be similar to each other in order to get along. Men and women are NOT alike. That’s biology, hard-wired into our bodies and brains.

The Sexual-Liberation part of our culture makes all male-female interactions all about sex. It has become nearly impossible for men and women to be simply co-workers, people sharing a common interest, or friends without an expectation that some form of bumping body parts is required. Then, since our nature is to form lasting pair-bonds while our culture encourages short-term hook-ups many women end up taking out their frustration at their inability to form a lasting relationship on men in general rather than on a culture of emotionless sex.

And the pervasiveness of father-absence and the decreasing size of modern families makes it not only possible but likely that any given woman has never in her life known a man who wasn't a potential romantic-sexual partner.

Given those factors few women ever learn to like men for who and what they are and many women end up with a chip on their shoulder against all men. Its not a healthy way to build the future.

CharlieEcho,
In re: post #27,

Very well said.

My sister's place in the military is as an AGE mechanic. I'm proud of her and I'm proud that her ability to do this job, repairwork often associated with men, frees a combat-capable man to do a job she cannot.

Men and women are designed to complement each other -- compensating for each others' weaknesses and reinforcing each other's strengths.

People might find Elizabeth Wayland Barber's book, "Women's Work: the First 20,000 Years" revealing. She explored why a combination of biology and culture channeled women into the traditionally female fields and how some of the same biological FACTS may affect the demographics of career choice in the future.

jaybird,
In re: post#3
Don't mistake the foolishness of the over-sized boys (not men at all but boys who never matured), who trick new shooters by starting them with high-powered loads in large calibers without regard for the ergonomics of the gun's fit -- and generally without correct eye and ear protection too.

Every handgun instructor I've had has said that women who shoot generally end up shooting better than men. We don't suffer from testosterone deafness when receiving instruction and our fine motor skills assist in aiming.

Personally, I shot a 2-inch group dead center on the plate the first time I ever shot a .45 (from a compact Kimber and if you actually know anything about shooting you'll know what that means in terms of difficulty).

However, the general high quality of female marksmanship has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with women's combat capability. The practical matters of the battlefield far outweigh women's ability to handle firearms and make it a place for our larger, stronger, more aggressive, more team-oriented brothers, fathers, husband's and sons.

Put a woman in the position of defending her children and her home and you get people like Lidiya Gudovantseva, a Soviet sniper who killed 76 German invaders. But outside such extraordinary situations, battle is for men.

J Corson,
eh, most of the women I know don't like working for other women, usually citing vindictiveness, cattiness, and a need to prove that they are the boss as the main problems in their female superiors. But, come, our individual experiences do not accurate generalizations make.

Moonbat Exterminator
Agreed! I'm a liberal, and that annoys me to no end. I'm perfectly capable of cooking dinner, taking care of kids, dressing myself, etc., despite what commercials and sitcoms may think.

I Like Women...I Can Trust Them Too.
Wendy Writes:

"Or is your agenda really to beat women down, because if someone is beneath you, you are superior? I get that impression. If you are the last defenders of men's masculinity, we are all in trouble."

I have worked for women (having had three women supervisors over me in different work environments). Believe me, having had men superviors as well I have come to the conclusion that, by nature (generally speaking), women are not out there trying to prove something.

Here is an interesting note: By primary care physician is a woman. My dentist is a woman. My surgeon (for my gall bladder) was a woman, my gastroenterologist (colonoscopy) is a woman and - Hold on to your hats Men - my urologist (who performed my vasectomy) was a woman. Pardon me being crude ladies, but when I am asked to turn my head and cough I am not "squeezed" green and when checking my prostate I am not made to feel that a tent is being pitched!

By and large I have found that women have an easier time being "professional" and maybe men can learn from them. Men are, by nature, conquerors and we just want to feel that we have won something and can beat something. But in this world where women are winning simply by being willing to be "professional," men are made to feel like losers. Thanks is due to the Secular-progressive male-bashing environment in which we live.

I have no solutions to the dilemma but I can tell you that men don't need to prove they can conquer anything except their self-image.

Reality vs. TV
The one time, in my mind, when reality actually coincided with the fantasy heroines in the movies and TV is when I read about a woman who strangled a burgler to death when he entered her home. Of course, she weighed over two hundred pounds and, I guess, was close to six feet tall. Certainly no Angelina Jolie!

But size is not the critical factor in weighing the value of true men. Audie Murphy, an undersized bantam weight, was the most decorated soldier in World War II, winning the Medal of Honor.

Evolution required men to become the hunters and women to bear and care for children. Remove the veneer of civilization and phony feminist ideology and that fact is still true and will remain true as long as the human race exists.

Subject: Men in short supply
What I find especially inspiring is the reference of real men like Andy Griffith and Ward Cleaver, Jack ''24'' Bauer, though I wish he would have mentioned Robert Young of Father Knows Best.
Mr. Smith by the way has been called the ''Jack Bauer of journalism''. No surprise there, and Ms. Parker is without question one of the best writers in media today.
Isn't it interesting and even charming that these two great scribes are the ones who represent ''real'' reality in an age when reality for those on the left is what they want it to be.
Take Mr Obama for instance. Too many on the left want him to be the ''great leader'' when they deep down have to know better .... ie Rev. Wright, William Ayers, and all the usual Windy City suspects.
Can anyone imagine Andy Griffith, Ward Cleaver, John Wayne, George Patton, Douglas McArthur or any real American man tolerate 20 years with a buffoon like Jerimiah Wright, and then turn his back on him?
Would a real man ever flip on the issues like Obama? Would a real man ever suggest a meeting with Achmadenijad?
I hope that real men are reading this and will buy Ms. Parker's book and will start living up to their nature.
America needs you now more than ever!!!

What hapopened? Part II
Many young women today are afflicted by young men who will not engage in commitment or marriage. What is the root of this?
The National Marriage Project (http://marriage.rutgers.edu/) questioned young adult unmarried men in 2002 in order to identify arguments against marriage in this group. Number three:
3. They want to avoid divorce and its financial risks.
In 2004, they questioned a larger group of young men. Disproportionately, those young men who had concerns about marriage were those who had experienced divorce as children.
Well, of course these young men are going to be conflicted about marriage, having seen their own fathers discarded by the actions of their mothers, and now believing that women are just not interested anymore in committing to a stable family, but rather more interested in doing whatever is necessary to obtain fulfillment, gratification and validation in their lives.
How can the modern young adult male take women seriously, having seen the narcissistic actions of their own mothers?
Men will behave in a responsible manner only when they perceive that their responsible actions will be supported by family law and social ideation.
Good news: some states have begun to reverse the repudiation of fathers by instituting presumptive joint managing conservatorship, protecting at least the relationship of fathers to their children.
But ultimately will this be too little, too late?
Too early to say.


Re: TV ads
Could not agree more.

This is also a "test" post. I just signed up and am trying it out.

You Know It's A Woman's World When...
They are hired for many white collar jobs (with less pay, of course) over men. They are considered more conscientious than men. They are promoted more so in the workplace than men (still being paid less). They are more before the camera as news anchors than men. I guess the list can go on and on.

Seriously, taking a casual look at the media, there are more women in front of the camera than men. In fact, I know a radio station owner who decided to go fire the male announcers and hire an entirely female staff. His station went from seventh to first in one quarter. He paid his staff less because, in his argument, they were less experienced than the men before them, but never mind they performed the same and in sometimes more duties than their counterparts before them.

Women are still not given a fair shake. I am personally acquainted with three couples living near me who when the men (husbands) lost their jobs, their wives were able to secure one several weeks before their spouses.

Have you ever wondered why girls (women) work the counter at your favorite fast food restaurant while the boys (men) cook and stock in the back?

Granted, women are "prettier" on the eyes and soothing to the ears than men. They are more focused (on tasks) by and large than men, but in the last few years, men have fallen behind in the social area and are largely passed over in the workforce.

Yes, it's a woman's world and quite possibly the man's world may be in the home.

trust me
women are STILL sleeping their way up the company ladder. Just happened last week again at a company in town. Everyone knows it--but it would be politically incorrect to point it out. Men. Real men are awesome. And desperately needed in this world of pansies. ALL you "homosexual" men out there--strap some on and do your job. Even "teenage" male elephants run rampant until adult males are brought in to discipline. We shouldn't have to learn from elephants that REAL men are needed for children to grow into healthy adults. Give up your narcissistic ways and start thinking about future generations. Homosexuality is NOT innate--it is conditioned and the American Psychiatric Association was PC'd into taking it out of their abnormal psychology textbooks. Let's get the word out--and take back this great country built on the sweat of real men's backs.

Boys
Unfortunately the effort to "modernize" our boys starts in elementary school. The reading books are more about girls or girly subjects. The library has equal women biographies. That only means they must eliminate many of the boys' heroes to keep the balance.

My adamant feminist daughter was changed from her ways by a gentle but firm man's man. I adore him as does she. What a wonderful addition to our family.

Politics?
I very much enjoy Ms. Parker's writings. She has a level head. I'll get her book.

Women have their place in the military. They always have. Women are what make men. Real women that is and not your male want to be. Men and Women, and all the complexities that come with nature, do not belong in combat together. This means training also.

I have five grandkids, three boys and two girls, 15 to 6. Many things they play at they can play together, some they can't. They each have their preferences, and these can be broken down by gender. The fifteen year old, as might be expected is in that nether world of puberty. A football player that is discovering cheer leaders, and all the difficulties of that age group. As it should be.

Women and men "the same"?
Great posts by al responding to Wendy.

One other thing - I find it really annoying when men are always the weaker and incompetent on US TV.

As a counterpoint - here is the ultra lib Matt Damon playing Jason Bourne - and look at the women in that series. They portray women as they really are - and I think the correct roles is part of the success of the movies. Both Nikki and Marie act they way women would in those situations. Not like the idiotic Mr and Mrs Smith movie. And they are in no way demeaned by HOW they act. In fact they are elevated, as men do to women they love (at least in the West as opposed to islamic countries where they are dirt.) To me, it's an interesting sub point of the movies.

Bottom line - when the towers are burning, it's not women in the fire suits hauling someone on their shoulder down the fire escape. And real men don't expect women to do that kind of thing.

Save the Males
I'm just grateful there are brave men and women like Smith and Parker who speak the truth no matter how unpopular it may be.

BillCC
You are so right!
Having lived in Brazil for the past 20 years and rarely coming back for visits, now that I have recently come home, I can't believe how America has changed, for worse, much worse.
Young boys have been feminized, they are petulant and, for the most part, seem brainwashed to be "sensitive"...in reality it looks more like homosexual to me.
The single, most important, masculine trait that has allowed our civilization to prosper is RISK. The females of our species is notoriously averse to risk and, the current offspring of these women, who raised these boys without fathers and in their image, have produced an appalling generation of selfish, effeminate, petulant, indeed helpless and hapless boys. Maybe Hollywood isn't so far off after all...
Even with all the forced perceptions of "equality", there is no substitute for masculinity of which America is sorely short of.
Men are still endowed by nature to be more productive in every sense of the word, intellectually, emotionally, culturally, physically and biologically.
Let's see some basic examples : in strength men out do women by 20 to 40% - in speed, running, swimming or even car racing or canoe rowing men rule. Creativity, no contest, who are the most prolific and popular composers, painters, fashion designers, cooks, architects, engineers and inventors ?
Biologically, well, women can produce one child, perhaps two in a year...men can produce hundreds of children in the same period by natural means alone... I rest my case.


wendy from california
Wendy, the feminist, unwittingly makes the case for acquired, not genetic, homosexuality in the last sentence of her second paragraph. See it. Now that is rich!

I'm encouraged
I have to say that it does my heart good to see all the men who have posted today to take Wendy to task. I was beginning to fear that there weren't many men left who hadn't given up their God given roles as protector/provider. I sure hope you guys have some sons and are raising them to think as you do because I don't think I could stomach five son-in-laws of the metrosexual variety.

Wendy, better clean your glasses
You missed Smith's point entirely. He didn't say that men had been de-masculinized, but that the corps of PC advocates are TRYING to marginalize men. That's clear to anyone who has just a bit of skepticism about Hollywood and the uber-liberal press establishment.

Maybe you want to try to deny that there are significant differences between men and women, but you are missing the obvious.

TIP- Don't use Windex when you clean your glasses, it removes the coating over time. A small dab of liquid dishwashing solution is best. Oh, and try to put aside your prejudices aside, it also helps in reading op-eds.

What happened?
An excellent discussion of outcome in the way boys are raised in our modern era is available at the Claremont Institute web page:
http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1192/article_d etail.asp
Neither wimps nor barbarians, the products of modern culture, satisfy the social need for productive men.
And how did this outcome occur?
As Blankenhorn described in Fatherless America, we have, by virtue of illegitimacy and divorce, created a society in which increasing numbers of male children are raised in households without fathers.
Moynihan: "There is one unmistakable lesson in American history: A community that allows a large number of young men to grow up in broken families, dominated by women, never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any set of rational expectations about the future — that community asks for and gets chaos... And it is richly deserved."
Even boys raised in homes with fathers are subject to the withering fire of our anti-male culture, as described in the article.
The problem is not in our stars, but in ourselves. We have allowed that which is worthwhile to be subjugated by the zeitgeist of relativism and our irrational demand for equality of outcome.

Men in short supply
I have been on this soapbox for years. The ridiculing of men and masculinity makes my blood boil. I am sick of seeing sitcoms where the dad is a bumbling idiot, and would scarcely be able to speak without slobbering if not for his brilliant wife. I'm a never-married single, and I can hardly stomach most men who have bought into this excuse for permanent adolescence. I'm looking forward to reading Kathleen's book, but the best book I've read that deals with this subject is John Eldrege's "Wild at Heart." Run, don't walk, and go get it.

TV ads
I know that some of you don't watch much TV, but anyone who does watch even a small amount would be hard pressed to answer the following queston: when was the last time in a TV ad you watched that depicted a family scene was the dad character portrayed as anything except a clueless doofus? I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer.

Men and women...different, thank God!
I for one celebrate the differences between men and women! And, I'm glad that there are people out there defending those differences.

The Femiactivists would have us women believe that wanting/needing a (real) man in our lives makes us downtrodden...that wanting to care for a man (and wanting a man to care for us) is a symptom of oppression.

If I were to tell them that I LIKE making my husband's breakfast, and I LIKE the way he steps between me and some obviously whacked out bum we happen to meet on the street, I'm sure they'd write me off as being brainwashed by the evil patriarchal society they're trying to change.

Feminism was a movement that accomplished a few laudable goals. Unfortunately, the feminists, like most "movement" oriented folks, didn't know where to stop, and in their fervor, threw the baby out with the bathwater. It wasn't enough for them to gain "equality" (whatever that means), they had to reverse roles, putting men in the subordinate and worthless position they thought women had been in.

For myself, I'm glad they haven't succeeded as well as they might have wished. (I like men, in case I didn't make that plain) :D

Wendy: Beating down?
Speaking of “beating down” , let’s review “box” you feminists and your duplicitous metro-sexual males (with their misdirected sense of chivalry) have created for the minimally franchised, expendable male? Let’s see: U.S. society is currently focused on its main post-modern domestic policy, i.e., providing for the emotional, physical & financial well-being of its virtuous female electorate: artificially enhanced lifespan, no-fault divorce (i.e., alimony, child custody, etc.), affirmative action/quotas, Female-only technical scholarships, (e.g. Intel), VAWA, welfare state, Title IX, taxpayer-funded abortion on demand in perpetuity. Plus a progressive taxation system (top 50% (majority=MEN) pay 96% of all income taxes) has been put in place by the Democrat party that penalizes men while financing said female-specific welfare state, abortion industry, divorce industry, child custody monopoly, etc. Sounds like a “woman’s world” to me. You ever notice it’s never a man that says it’s a “Man’s World”?

Like “feminist comedian” you give pause to the notion that “feminist intellectual” is by its very nature an oxymoron.

Wendy: Really?
Really? The real flaw is the fact that you apparently advocate the female as neo-Marxist "oppressed group" myth.

You are not the embodiment of the “Goddess” on a micro-scale. Your “Goddess” epiphany WRT realizing that you provide a life-support system for a functional uterus doesn’t grant you some esoteric insight into reality in general & nature in particular inaccessible to knuckle dragging, troglodyte males.

Neolithic cultures were of course matriarchal. Technologies that made “civilization” bloomed after the establishment of so-called Patriarchal cultures. Hence, if women were still in charge, we would all be living in grass huts like our Neolithic ancestors. Men have generated 99.99% of all major inventions in the last 2000 years. There’s a reason why men still dominate the “Science, Technology, Engineering & Mathematics” (STEM) professions, why men still dominate the MENSA, why the average male SAT score is still higher than the average female SAT score & why there has been a dearth of females awarded a Nobel prizes in hard sciences. Additionally, Friedan stole all of her feminist tenets from Marx & Engels.

Innate “masculinity” does exist. Unfortunately, it is only allowed to manifest itself in “matriarchy-approved” applications- e.g., your privileged existence is made possible by the continued sacrifice of “other centered”, yet politically-incorrect men who are currently engaging an anachronistic group of ruthless 7th century thinkers. Your continued institutionalized antipathy toward the minimally franchised male will be your undoing.


THE TEST FOR WOMANHOOD
Wendy writes:

"Or is your agenda really to beat women down, because if someone is beneath you, you are superior? I get that impression. If you are the last defenders of men's masculinity, we are all in trouble."

Aslan writes:

I have never felt inferior being beneath a woman and I have never felt superior on top either. But then again, I have never felt that my masculinity was in any danger especially when I am with my woman.

Its obvious though that the Marxist Liberals have an agenda to have me neutered...there is no doubt in my mind about that. From Charlie's Angels on CNN and Fox News to Charmed and Laura Croft....its the age of the Super Woman...its such a joke too. But its obvious just like Globalism and the NAFTA superhighway. No wonder so many white guys are walking down the sidewalk shaking their booty like a woman. They are the product of societies brainwashing....and women like you help to perpetuate it.

Todays men are like a broken masterpiece that needs to be put back together... Unfortunately, it might be womanhoods biggest challenge to become like a great artist and give man back his manhood so that he might take his rightful place on the throne of humanity again and become once more a King...only then will he be able to reciprocate and make woman a WOMAN again and make her his Queen so she can sit beside him once again and rule over their kingdom.

downfall of man?
Adam gave up his leadership responsibility to Eve when he gave into her requests to take a bite of the forbidden fruit. Sin entered the world. Very simple-Eve (woman) easily deceived/tempted, Adam(man) easily gave up his responsibility in leadership. Fast forward to today.

Men are easily giving up their responsibility (leadership) by being "stay-at-home-moms" thus being absolutely poor role-models for all their children.

Hey, men. Get off your tails and assume your God-given roles as men and take care of wife, your kids and yourself...be a man, get a good job, be a leader...be a man!

This post is from a man who works and wife stays at home...

For Wendy
It's comforting to know that some things are constant. In this case the reliable constant is that some PC half-wit like you will LIE about what the author actually said so you can dispute the veracity of what he really did say.

To the point, the author DOES NOT say that men have been "demasculinized". In fact, I have put the word in quote marks because it is YOUR word, not the author's. I defy you to find this word in the article.

The authors says "...there has been a deliberate effort in some circles to make sure the proverbial wind has been taken out of the sails of manliness..."

The description of this as an "effort" but not necessarily a success implies that it is not possible to "de-masculinize" men. This implication is as much as stated in the subject of the article, which is book on "why men matter".

Finally, it is leftist whackos like you who insist that homosexuallity is inherited, not learned. It is therefore you who are arguing against your own side by claiming masculinity can be taken from a male, or, if you will, unlearned. It must therefore also follow, whether you wish to discuss it psychologically or physically, that homosexuality can also be unlearned. Mind you this is the argument YOU are in fact making by by putting words in the author's mouth that he never wrote.

I would suggest that you try to be factually, logically, and intellectually honest in your discussion from now on but it is obvious you are incapable of it. That's why you're a lib.

The real reason: the dialectics
Discussing how equal men and women really are is losing sight of the actual reason behind the 'equality' drive, the dialectics: http://anagennesis.blogtownhall.com/2008/07/26/the_dialect ics,_the_strategy_against_the_west.thtml

A Strong Voice
Kathleen Parker is a powerful advocate for good sense in public policy. She has been an especially good friend to military people, using her platform to advocate for an honest assessment of the deleterious effects that PC policies have had on our military culture and combat readiness.

I love the way Kathleen writes, and thinks. She's one of the few opinion writers capable of making me re-think my stand on significant issues of the day. She's definitely one of the best columnists at Townhall, and I look forward to reading her new book.

Good article and the truth
For the last 40 years, the basic premise of the far left, that men are irrelevant, bad, dumb,overgrown children and only women are good and will save the world, has been allowed to trickle down in our society. Gender norming has become the norm throughout our society. If a job is done by all men, or mostly men, then it MUST be because of discrimination. So of course something has to be done so that many more women can get that high paying job. Like truck driving, or construction, or hmmmmm, combat. And of course, if there is a good reason why no women wanted that job then they must be incouraged to want it. The job must be made easier, gender normed, so that it will appeal to women. Make the job physically easier. But then, surprise...the wages go down because the job is not so demanding which is why it earned the high wages and why men gravitated to it. Then women complained these jobs werent earning them the high wages, so of course it must be because of discrimination. And on and on and on. And of course, the liberals, and feminists encouraged women to believe the nonsesnse so they could get their vote. And their money.

Wendy - Re: Reply #1 (Part 4 of 4)


Wendy writes: “I think you need to think about what you are saying and advocating.”


Indeed, someone might…


~~~


Wendy writes: “Is your point simply to delimit combat arms elibility and to re-establish a tough, aggressive attitude in the average man? Or is your agenda really to beat women down, because if someone is beneath you, you are superior?”


This is a false “either / or” statement in the form of a question, employed in a one-sided conversation (unless Mr. Smith chooses to reply) where you attempt to frame the debate by establishing the only possible (and manifestly negative) motives of your perceived adversary, to the exclusion of any other possibilities.

However, in so doing, you acknowledged that the masculine trait of “a tough, aggressive attitude in the average man” has been diminished, at least to some extent; if it were not so, there could be no reason for you to suggest any need to “re-establish” it.

The second part of your false “either / or” comment was just a cheap throw-away line. You might think it sounds like tough-guy “playground” talk, but it doesn’t make you sound tough, it just makes you sound like a girl who’s trying to talk the way she thinks a man would talk if he was trying to sound tough.

And that’s just silly.


~~~


Wendy writes: “I get that impression.”


You didn’t really get any such impression, Wendy. But playing at “talking tough” from the safety and anonymity of your computer keyboard can make you feel brave, can’t it?


~~~


Wendy writes: “If you are the last defenders of men's masculinity, we are all in trouble.”


You might want to consider limiting the scope of your pronouncements to speaking simply for yourself, a person about whom you might safely be considered an authority. Speaking for myself, and paraphrasing Samuel Adams in 1776, I ask neither your counsels or arms… ;-)


Wendy - Re: Reply #1 (Part 3)


Wendy writes: “If men have become de-masculinized, then masculinity is not innate.”


I don’t believe anyone is suggesting that men in general have been “de-masculinized”, I think it would be almost impossible to do, short of brain-washing. But a vocal and influential segment of society could embrace a “social and cultural degradation of all that used to be good and noble about being a man”.

This could certainly have a negative or stunting effect on the development of masculine characteristics that are innate to boys, affecting them through their developmental years by demanding suppression of masculine characteristics to an unnatural degree, while encouraging those same masculine characteristics in girls.


~~~


Wendy writes: “If this difference between men and women in the mental realm ("masculinity") is not innate (determinative), then logically, society does not need to consider innate differences in its treatment of men and women.”


You seem to embrace an unusual understanding of the word “logic”, Wendy. First you employ a false “if / then” hypothesis, essentially creating a straw-man argument, and then knocking down your own straw-man. You then resort to a non-sequitur, when your conclusion does not logically follow from the premises, all of which are textbook logical fallacies.

Despite certain feminist mythologies to the contrary, there are real differences between men and women, psychologically and physiologically, and yes, physically and biologically too. These differences are a good thing; it is good that men and women are different.

Instead of valuing or respecting these differences, some women (curiously describing themselves as “feminists”) try to minimize or pretend as though such differences don’t exist on the one hand, all the while de-emphasizing their own femininity and emphasizing their own idea of masculinity, which is often little more than a sad caricature of true masculinity.


Wendy - Re: Reply #1 (Part 2)


Wendy writes: “That brings up the second logical flaw. You state that men have been de-masculinized.”


I didn’t see the word “de-masculinized” in Mr. Smith’s entire article. I did see “social and cultural degradation of all that used to be good and noble about being a man.”

I also saw “Fact is, for the past three-plus decades there has been a deliberate effort in some circles to make sure the proverbial wind has been taken out of the sails of manliness...Hence, strong, level-headed fatherly figures like Andy Griffith and Ward Cleaver, and far too many of our hard-riding cowboy heroes have been replaced with the likes of Homer Simpson, Al Bundy, and that bunch of milquetoast unmanly men on Friends”.

And quoting Ms. Parker, I read: "For the past thirty years or so, males have been under siege by a culture that too often embraces the notion that men are to blame for all of life’s ills." So in an attempt to create a more “female-friendly world,” a culture has emerged that is not only “hostile toward males,” she writes. But “contemptuous of masculinity, and cynical about the delightful differences that make men irresistible, especially when something goes bump in the night.”

That covers the first 8 paragraphs…

If Mr. Smith “state[d] that men have been de-masculinized”, I cannot find it; but since it is central to your entire critique, would you please locate the expression for us, and put it in quotations, including the surrounding sentence for context?


Wendy - Re: Reply #1 (Part 1)


Hi Wendy,


Wendy writes: “You are equivocating between the physical and the mental.”

Do you mean “equating”? Equivocating would be to avoid making an explicit statement, or using intentionally ambiguous or misleading statements. I don’t believe Mr. Smith was doing either.


~~~


Wendy writes: “If masculinity consists of muscular strength, as you imply in the last few paragraphs concerning battlefield performance, then what are you talking about in the first few paragraphs with men losing their masculinity?”


Masculinity clearly consists of more than just simple muscular strength. If it didn’t, we would just use the word “muscular”, because “masculinity” would be redundant and unnecessary.

American Heritage Dictionary:
mas•cu•lin•i•ty

1. The quality or condition of being masculine.
2. Something traditionally considered to be characteristic of a male.


For example, your feeling compelled to be the first person to respond in this Thread, and then to do so in an aggressive and challenging manner, are masculine characteristics, and they have nothing at all to do with the relative development of your musculature (or lack thereof).


~~~


Wendy writes: “You are clearly referring to the psychological in the first few paragraphs.”


I believe he was referring to the male characteristics in general, physical, psychological and physiological, and the efforts of a very visible segment of society to portray these male characteristics in a negative light, unless they are being exemplified by women, in which case these male characteristics are celebrated.

If you don’t understand what the author is talking about, if you can’t even acknowledge the reality, then why are you so quick to attack?

I think you understand exactly what Mr. Smith is talking about… why else would you be so reflexively defensive?


Hey, Brian
good to see you!

The thing that jumped out at me was this: "...Parker’s on-point, commonsensical argument..."

There's the problem. Common sense is an endangered species; would that leftists would protect what little is left of theirs.

Good grief.
Wendy, be a good girl now and be quiet.

Brian, go to YouTube and type in something like "woman shooting gun," and get ready to laugh at all the girls squealing crying because the husband or boyfriend's gun kicked and hurt or scared them. It's hilarious to watch, but that is woman with a gun. Advocates of women in the military take note.

Men (real men, not girly-men, nancy-boys, or "metrosexuals") do masculine things and take care of their women (protect, defend, provide for). Women (real women) chatter(see Wendy) but take care of their men (food, comfort, mother children--see history and human nature).

When a society gets too affluent, and life too easy, these roles get confused. Hard times will clarify things again, but the lesson may be costly in human life (see: women in the military, Jessica Lynch).

Tell you what, Wendy

In Vietnam, we used to spend a week or so in the field, carrying almost 100 pounds of weapons and equipment while we slogged up and down mountains in the jungle, 100+ degrees and 95%+ humidity, sleeping in the mud when we slept at all, fighting terrain, triple-canopy vegetation, bugs the size of small cars, leeches, crossing rivers, crawling through rice paddies, all while in imminent danger of being in a firefight with the enemy, from which we may have to slog back out carrying our buddies, alive or dead.

I'm having a very hard time picturing a woman doing that, in all honesty.

That may not be the way wars have been fought recently in our new high-tech military, but a grunt still needs to have that capability.... just in case.


Two obvious flaws here
You are equivocating between the physical and the mental. If masculinity consists of muscular strength, as you imply in the last few paragraphs concerning battlefield performance, then what are you talking about in the first few paragraphs with men losing their masculinity? You are clearly referring to the psychological in the first few paragraphs.

That brings up the second logical flaw. You state that men have been de-masculinized. If men have become de-masculinized, then masculinity is not innate. If this difference between men and women in the mental realm ("masculinity") is not innate (determinative), then logically, society does not need to consider innate differences in its treatment of men and women.

I think you need to think about what you are saying and advocating. Is your point simply to delimit combat arms elibility and to re-establish a tough, aggressive attitude in the average man? Or is your agenda really to beat women down, because if someone is beneath you, you are superior? I get that impression. If you are the last defenders of men's masculinity, we are all in trouble.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.