If I vomit, will you catch me?
NYT Jodi Kantor has an article today titled: Gender Issue Lives On as Clinton’s Hopes Dim
If I scream this, will you all understand? If I yell it loud enough, will the NYT hear? Or is it like the trees; if an angry Texan posts something on a blog, and no one reads it, does it mean anything?
Senator Clinton did not lose this nomination because she's a woman. She lost because she's not what people want. She does not represent this "change" idea that everyone is embracing. She is guilty of having a name people associate with scandal and old politics. That's it. She did not lose this nomination because she is a woman, just as Obama did not win this nomination because he is black.
Why do we ruin the accomplishments of our fellow man by placing these ridiculous boxes around them?
A quote in the article says women felt like this was their time.
Let me do a quick status check -- yup. Still a woman. And nope, I didn't think this was Hillary's time. I can assure you, my mother, my sister, and probably lots and lots of women I met over the weekend, did not think this was Hillary's time.
Feminism and environmentalism are going to destroy the nation as we know it. Don't believe me? Look at high school graduation rates. Boys are being left behind. 72% of women graduate, and only 65% of men do.
There are more women in college than men and they graduate college at a faster rate. They are also having an easier time finding jobs and making more money right out of school then their male counterparts. And these trends are just continuing.
I am not about the promotion of any sex or race to the determent of another. And I could go all day about how I think feminism has ruined the roles of men for all time. If your date or your husband doesn't open your door for you, doesn't stand up for you, doesn't have any ambition to support a family ... blame a feminist. Because she said a woman could do it all without a man.
If a man and a woman divorce, and he has the better job and all other things are equal - she will get the kids and he'll see them twice a month. Even if he wants them. And he has to pay her child support, and there is no safe guard to ensure that money goes to the child and not to the ex-wife's new car.
Military pensions (most pensions) - if husband and wife separate, the wife is entitled to half of said pension, even if she remarries another.
There are no safe guards in our system to protect men. The Lacrosse case. Their reputations and lives ruined. Presumed guilty. A DA who was intent to prosecute no matter what the evidence suggested.
We have to stand up for the father's and son's in this country. We have thrown the baby out with the bathwater in regards to a lot of our laws and protections. We've reduced the role of father's to babysitter on the weekends. And we've told them that their input in child rearing, their impact on a child's life, is unimportant.
I got off track. But the feminists would have you believe that Hillary lost because she is a woman. That's just not true. Hillary lost because she's Hillary. I know it's hard to believe. But there are a lot of people out there that just don't like her. As a person. As herself. Not because she's a woman.
Now, instead of focusing on how women are getting the raw end of the stick, maybe go talk to your son and make sure he's going to graduate high school.
If I scream this, will you all understand? If I yell it loud enough, will the NYT hear? Or is it like the trees; if an angry Texan posts something on a blog, and no one reads it, does it mean anything?
Senator Clinton did not lose this nomination because she's a woman. She lost because she's not what people want. She does not represent this "change" idea that everyone is embracing. She is guilty of having a name people associate with scandal and old politics. That's it. She did not lose this nomination because she is a woman, just as Obama did not win this nomination because he is black.
Why do we ruin the accomplishments of our fellow man by placing these ridiculous boxes around them?
A quote in the article says women felt like this was their time.
Let me do a quick status check -- yup. Still a woman. And nope, I didn't think this was Hillary's time. I can assure you, my mother, my sister, and probably lots and lots of women I met over the weekend, did not think this was Hillary's time.
Feminism and environmentalism are going to destroy the nation as we know it. Don't believe me? Look at high school graduation rates. Boys are being left behind. 72% of women graduate, and only 65% of men do.
There are more women in college than men and they graduate college at a faster rate. They are also having an easier time finding jobs and making more money right out of school then their male counterparts. And these trends are just continuing.
I am not about the promotion of any sex or race to the determent of another. And I could go all day about how I think feminism has ruined the roles of men for all time. If your date or your husband doesn't open your door for you, doesn't stand up for you, doesn't have any ambition to support a family ... blame a feminist. Because she said a woman could do it all without a man.
If a man and a woman divorce, and he has the better job and all other things are equal - she will get the kids and he'll see them twice a month. Even if he wants them. And he has to pay her child support, and there is no safe guard to ensure that money goes to the child and not to the ex-wife's new car.
Military pensions (most pensions) - if husband and wife separate, the wife is entitled to half of said pension, even if she remarries another.
There are no safe guards in our system to protect men. The Lacrosse case. Their reputations and lives ruined. Presumed guilty. A DA who was intent to prosecute no matter what the evidence suggested.
We have to stand up for the father's and son's in this country. We have thrown the baby out with the bathwater in regards to a lot of our laws and protections. We've reduced the role of father's to babysitter on the weekends. And we've told them that their input in child rearing, their impact on a child's life, is unimportant.
I got off track. But the feminists would have you believe that Hillary lost because she is a woman. That's just not true. Hillary lost because she's Hillary. I know it's hard to believe. But there are a lot of people out there that just don't like her. As a person. As herself. Not because she's a woman.
Now, instead of focusing on how women are getting the raw end of the stick, maybe go talk to your son and make sure he's going to graduate high school.
Comments
I disagree. I think extremism is going to destroy the nation as we know it. I think the failure to appreciate distinctions within groups is going to destroy the nation as we know it.
To address the two examples you cite....
Feminism--equal pay for equal work, equal rights under the law, the ability to perform work that suits your skills and desires rather than being conscripted into pre-defined gender roles--a very good thing. Taken to extremes--men's rights being infringed in favor of womens--not good. I would argue that there are more people practicing the moderate version than the extreme one.
(And as an aside, giving children to their mother just because she's their mother is illegal and has been for sometime. What's not uncommon, however, is for men to negotiate that their ex-wives can have primary custody of the kids in exchange for waiving rights to pensions, alimony, etc.)
Environmentalism--everyone does their part to make the Earth cleaner making the choices that best suit their situation be it carpooling, recycling, eating less meat, or whatever--a very good thing. Taken to extremes--people who don't take showers or act like you're murdering kittens if you use one plastic bag--not good. Again, I would argue that there are more people practicing the moderate version than the extreme one.
Love you to death dearest, but I think you lose credibility when you make such sweeping, broad statements.
Enviornmentalism in it's form today, is singlehandedly trying to push the US into previous centuries. We can not build new power plants of any kind, and yet we wonder why California can't meet it's energy demands. We decide that burning our food is a good idea, and the world has a food shortage. Polar bears, an animal that is healthy numbers today and who has survived through hundreds of years, is now a threatened species, given credence to a global warming theory that is now taken as fact. They think the answer to an enviornmental crisis that we have not heard a dissenting opinion on for at least 5 years, is going to be cured if we all drive mini-coopers and bring green bags to the grocery store and sign a treaty that will slow the US economy down to nothing.
It's not about being good stewards of the earth. It is about money and global power.
It's not about women and men being equal, it's about women being better.
We'll see how it all works out, because those that believe and follow the dictates of the enviornmental movement as it exists today, are going to be in control of our government. So we'll see what happens. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe we'll all sing kumbaya and France will like us and everyone will have jobs.
Or maybe the dream of freedom that was the United States over 200 years ago will cease to exist, and we'll have sensors on our thermostats that are government controlled, and we'll pay carbon taxes that mean 55% of our income goes to the state.
But maybe your right and I'm wrong. We can hope for that.
For which you can thank feminists.
Again, I'm not saying that I agree with extremists on either issue, and I'm not saying that it's not about money and global power to some extent. Money makes the world go 'round. But just because money and global power are concerns, doesn't mean the environment is not also a concern. It can be all of the above.
Bottom line with the environmental issue--there are a finite amount of resources on this planet, and if we don't start living within our means the bills are eventually going to come due. I don't think discussing and agreeing to the allocation of those resources with other countries is a bad thing. The alternative is we're all going to fight over them, and we can see how well that's worked so far....
Anyway - I don't like feminists in their modern definition. In the 1920s I'm pretty sure I'd have walked around singing "Votes for women!" with the lady of the house while a nurse watched my kids (it's a Mary Poppins reference).
But feminism in my adult life has never been a friend to me. And it's continuation - or it's extremism, take your pick - has led to some yucky side effects.
And no one is fighting over resources. The market is doing what a market does. China and India are booming, booming, booming and they have more demand for oil. So we're not so much fighting over it, as we are bidding over it. And they are willing to pay more. So we're having to pay more.
And what's so finite about them? Yes they will go away someday. But are they going away tomorrow? No. What's happening is the world saw that demand was sky rocketing, and those in control decided to control the supply. People invested in oil, knowing it was going to go up, and OPEC lowers production so they can make as much money as they can. Coal and gas are still the cheapest, safest way to power our homes and cars. Nuclear power is great ... but what do you do with the waste?
We have to decide which is more important, staving off a theory that has yet to be proven, or allowing Americans to heat their homes through the winter.
If we want lower gas prices - we have to increase supply. Asking oil executives why they aren't researching alternative fuels is just stupid. It's because they are OIL EXECUTIVES. Duh. If you want alternative fuels, go talk to a chemist.
I am all for being a good steward of my environment. I water my yard sparingly, I don't run the shower when I'm not in it, and I don't take baths because they are wasteful. I try only to buy what we will eat (doing better at that) and we recycle and I keep us to one bag of trash a week. We didn't even have a full bag of trash from the last two weeks (mostly because we were out of town for 5 days, but still!).
Being a good steward of the enviornment that God gave us is essential. And understanding our impact on the world is very, very important. But I won't have laws made on junk science and big brother watching my thermostat while my Congressman sits on his air conditioned private jet and lands in Tahiti and gets into an SUV. I don't care if it is a hybrd. Because those things have terrible impact on the enviornment in other ways. You can not dispose of the batteries and they are toxic.
I have green bags for my groceries, I recycle, I have a small home with a time elapsed thermostat and energy efficient appliances. I am one of the people that is doing the "small things" to save the enviornment. But it won't be enough because they aren't getting my money. They want to charge me a carbon tax, they want me to bow to a foreign entity and give up my soveriengty in the name of enviornmentalism.
And there is not one ounce of proven theory behind it.