Archive for the ‘Women’ Category

Okay, no, not really. Actually, MOST men are actually pretty decent individuals. They are honorable, and committed, and strong, and gentle, and ultimately, kind.

But…

…there are just enough assholes out there to skew the equation.

Men, guys, dudes….we have GOT to do better. To BE better.

This is not a feminist anti-man rant. This is not some gloating, self-righteous screed about male privilege or the patriarchy. This is not some self-abasing capitulation by a hemp-wearing beta proto-male seeking affirmation from the modernistic apologentsia.

It’s straight up, man-to-man talk.

I come to talk to you about women. Yes, those enigmatic creatures who populate our life from birth. Our mothers, our sisters, our co-workers, our lovers, our friends. They are different, (yes, shocking, I know); and yet…they’re not. Not really. Not where it counts.

I’ve had an awakening of sorts in recent weeks. I’ve discovered that I am a naïve waif, a veritable simpleton when it comes to the struggles women face, every day, in every walk of life, simply to be accepted as an equal. I have learned, I have come to understand, that women face struggles, often silent battles of which many men are simply unaware.

What I have learned, much to my dismay, is that…Every. Woman. Has. A. Story.

This should break your heart, and if it doesn’t, you might just be part of the problem.

Every woman has a story about that time. That boss. That supervisor. That co-worker. That colleague, that fellow student, that man in a position of authority who at some point decided in his mind that it was okay to grab her. To leer at her, to make a comment, to let his eyes wander. To assume that he had some right.

That maybe she’d be flattered if he pinned her up against the wall and stuck his tongue down her throat. In his office. At work.

The stories are all different, and yet, they are all the same. Maybe it doesn’t happen all the time, maybe it only happened that once.

But it happened.

And in case you were curious…she wasn’t flattered. She wasn’t pleased. She wasn’t aroused.

She felt trapped. And betrayed. And a little dirty. And helpless. And confused. And angry.

Angry that you abused her trust. Angry that she couldn’t feel safe, not even here. Angry that she couldn’t JUST BE A PERSON.

You took that away from her.

Not all men. But enough. Enough have done it. Enough have broken that trust and abused their position of authority and treated a women under their command as nothing more than an object to satisfy his lust.

You should be ashamed. But you probably aren’t. Maybe you thought it was your due. Maybe you thought, “that’s just the way things are done.” Maybe you thought it was, “no big deal.”

You were wrong.

In the story of The Garden, and Adam and Eve, God created the earth, and the Garden of Eden as a paradise, and He said,

“Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

Not over each other.

Every day women struggle to be accepted on an equal footing. They fight an often invisible battler for their opinions to be given the same credibility as a man with equal, or even lesser experience.

Every day, women struggle to not have to struggle. To not have to fight just that much harder for the same pay, the same consideration, the same respect as their male counterparts. In ways I simply could not comprehend.

Until they told me. Until they shared their stories of just how appallingly common this kind of utter bullshit really is. How often it happens, and how terribly hard it is to seek justice in an environment where the whistleblower gets fired and the offender goes free.

About how you learn to be silent if you want to keep your job. About how you learn to accept being victimized, rather than accept being unemployed and homeless.

Men…we have to do better. We have to step up and fight alongside these women. We must speak out when they cannot. We have to police ourselves, and punch these ignorant, mouth-breathing assholes in the throat when they take such liberties with the women we respect and hold dear.

We. Must. Not. Be. Silent. Not anymore.

If we have power, we must help the powerless. If we have strength, we must help the weak. If we have authority, we must use it to correct injustice.

We just, simply, have to do better. To BE better. To be the kind of men that God calls us to be.

Strong, yet gentle. Powerful, yet forgiving. Confident, yet compassionate.

Or…we, quite simply, are not men at all.

So, I have determined that it is only appropriate to focus on a person’s race or gender if you are “heralding” it.  Judge Sonomayor is being “heralded” as the first hispanic Supreme Court Justice.  Barack Obama is “heralded” as the first black president.  Every month is some sort of minority appreciation month where we “herald” the contributions of blacks, pacific islanders, native americans, women, children, those with a cleft palate, the tone deaf and wiccan transgendered performance artists.  Okay, I might have made up those last few.

So, lemme get this straight.  Basing your decision on whether or not to pull someone over for a traffic stop or to give them “extra screening” at the airport based on their race or gender is BAD, profiling, ptooie, but basing your decision on whether or not someone should sit on the Supreme Court of the United States in large measure because of their race and gender is GOOD?  Hoookayyyy….

If you believe that, by nature  of her gender or her ethnicity, Judge Sonia Sonomayor has some unique and/or unmatchable ability to perform her job as Supreme court justice, you are a racialist.  She certainly seems to think so, as per her much quoted sentiment:

I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.

Did she mean in general, or merely with respect to women’s issues, or Latino issues?  Which, of course, then begs the question, why do we need a special set of rules or a unique viewpoint to properly and impartially apply the law to women and/or Latinos?  How is suggesting that a latino woman is somehow inherently more capable of making the correct decision than a white man at its core any different from barring blacks from military service because they aren’t “smart enough?”

Answer:  No difference whatsoever.

There is of course that touchy-feely, squishy-guishy idea that a minority woman should be cherished and protected because of her unique perspective based on her upbringing and challenges.  Bollocks.  That’s called “coddling,” and it promotes all sorts of enabling behaviors that cause us to overlook clear and present concerns with the performance and methods of an individual or group out of some misguided sense that we should not “quell their voice.”  

Sure, let ’em talk.  Just don’t let them make “policy” from the bench!

So, lemme ask.  Whyizzit that a white South African man who emigrated to the US last week is on his own, has to compete in the marketplace just like everybody else, and is lucky if he can avoid paying out-of-state tuition at a college, but a black man whose ancestors came to this country 185 years ago is an “African-American minority” who deserves special consideration in hiring, academic scholarships, and other  quota-based entitlements?   How long until “minorities” are required to just be “Americans,” and compete on an equal and impartial basis with the rest of us genetic misfits, especially when a lot of them would be hard-pressed to find Africa on a map?!

There is NO EQUALITY where there is PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT.

If all men (and women) are created equal with respect to the law, then they MUST be treated equally.   NOT given undue priviledge based on a real or perceived injustice now divorced from their present situation by several generations.

One would hope that the selection for a Supreme Court justice would be completely blind to race, skin color, gender or taste in music.  One would HOPE that we would simply chose the most qualified individual for the job, REGARDLESS of the nature of the adjectives one might ascribe to their appearance!

But no, it would appear that we still have a LONG way to go in the area of equal rights in this country. 

If Sonia Sonomayor is qualified for that seat on the Supreme Court, good on ‘er.   BUT.  She must be qualified because of her experience as a judge, her demonstrated performance as a jurist, and her proven and demonstrable committment to upholding the principles of established Constitutional law.

Not because she’s a latina chic.

If the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, then abortions would be illegal.

True or False?

UPDATE:

Too good not to post.  From one of those “Might Be Related” links below, comes this cogent, erudite, well-reasoned defense of Roe V. Wade:

Roe v Wade is a Surpreme Court of US case on abortion rights. Roe (not her real identity, though you could wiki her and discover she’s now a pro-life lady. The idiot)

Yeah. Nice.  Go prof-life.  Want to preserve unborn children.  It means you’re an idiot.  Pot meet kettle.

was raped (ed. – no she wasn’t – that part was completely fabricated, as in a big fat stinkin’ LIE.

and wanted to get an abortion but the state she lived in (I can’t remember what and I’m to lazy to wiki it) forbid abortion. They brought the case in the Supreme Court and the Court decided that there should be a right to choose or something along that line,

No, you ignorant douche.  They mythicalled up a never-before-seen-or-heard-of, “Right to Privacy” inherent in the 4th Amendment, which essentially meant that under the protections of the Fourth Amendment, the government was specifically prohibited from preventing what was essentially a “private” action, at least without a search warrant.  Come on, chica.  I don’t even SUPPORT abortion, and I know that much.

and if a State makes a law contrary to that, it would be unconstitutional. To be honest, I can’t remember the judgment, really; we were studying the 14th Amendment more than the right to privacy (even though all the cases were on right to privacy; a right that is not guaranteed in the US Constitution)

Uh, mkay.  Soooo then, uhm, tell me again how the decision in Roe V. Wade IS Constitutional, if the foundational premise supporting it IS NOT?!

 14th Amendment is how the Supreme Court make up their own bunch of Bill of Rights that weren’t guaranteed by the people of the 1700s (since the US Constitution is really the will of the people of the 1700s; it is not at all the will of the people who are currently living in the US. The last amendment was in 1992. It’s horrible; though not as bad as Australian’s, I suppose…).

Ah yes.  The “living document” defense.  Yes, yes.  Standard Lefty talking point:  Our Constitution is an archaic throwback reminiscent of the besotted musings of a bunch of old elitist white guys in wigs.  No application to our modern life whatsover.  Except, you know, for that whole right-to-privacy thing, which of course is so, like TODAY, you know?  And needs to be defended to the last breath. Provided you ever get a chance to TAKE a breath, that is.

One would suppose that for this individual to open her ignorant suck and expound on the virtues of a certain piece of legislation (ed.- No, that wasn’t a typo), one would hope she would at least know what the bloody freakin’ hell she is talking about!  But it’s more along the lines of, “Yeah, there was this case, by these guys, about this stuff, for this one girl, from this place.  And, uh, ABORTION ROCKS, DUDE!  GO OBAMA!”

The only plus is apparently, this abortion survivor can’t vote.  So, yeah, we got that going for us.

After reading about the big hullabaloo down Tejas way with regards to a certain polygamist cult, I began to find myself a wondering…

Whyizzit that when a black man has multiple children with multiple women, it’s just a sad statement about our culture, perhaps a failure of the system to properly educate on birth control and benefits of monogamy, etc, etc, etc,

But when a white Mormon does it, it rates a raid by the ATF and HHS?  Isn’t this dude really just one really prolific BabyDaddy?

Mah brutha from anutha mutha and all that?

Seriously.  Why, when its some poor minority dude knocking up multiple women without marrying them, we shake our collective heads and cluck our tongues ever so dispiritedly, but we send in SWAT to get a white guy with a big compound?

I’m not saying either one is right, I’m just a tad perplexed about the seeming disparity in treatment.

 

I think that: 

  • Enforcing immigration laws isn’t racist.
  • Abortion does not “liberate” women.
  • If you want to be treated equally, don’t claim special privilege because you’re a minority.
  • I’d be interested to see what percentage of gun-related crimes are committed with a legally-purchased gun, by the owner of said gun?  I’m sure it’s out there somewhere.
  • On average, Christians treat women better than feminists do.
  • Of all the Blogs I read, if I had to list my top-10 favorites, I’d put myself about 6th.
  • The government shouldn’t be able to force me to buy Health Insurance.
  • The country has far more to fear from radical atheists than radical Christians.
  • Conservatives love their women because they are strong and independent.  Progressives love their women if they are obedient and conformist.
  • Children are a precious inheritance, not to be lightly squandered.
  • If you want to change the Constitution, amend it.  Don’t “reinterpret” it.
  • If I had a report about a possible terrorist attack in San Francisco, I’d be hard pressed to want to do anything about it.
  • I personally don’t feel the need to put a hyphen in front of my “American.”  Just being an American is enough for me.

Women Voters

Posted: February 5, 2008 in Celebrating Diversity, Politics, Rants, Women

Honestly, help me out here.  What with all the babble going on betwixt and between the media circles and Dem talking heads about the “womens’ vote,” I have to ask:  If you’re a woman, is HILLARY FREAKIN’ CLINTON really who you want speaking for you?! 

Here’s a thought:  Don’t vote for someone because she is a woman.  It’s the same as voting for someone because he isn’t.  It’s sexist.

Don’t vote for someone because they are black.  It’s the same as voting for someone just because he’s white.  It’s racist.

Why not try voting for the most qualified candidate to lead the country, regardless of race or gender?  Isn’t that what they call equality?  How are we supposed to be “color blind” if every time you turn around someone is talking about the black candidate or the black vote or who can best appeal to black America?  Black America?  I forget, is that the North, or the South, suh?  I thought that war was over!

Maybe, just maybe, what’s the best for the Country as a whole, ends up being pretty darn good for Women, and Blacks, and Jews, and Asians and any other manner of hyphenated special interest groups, right?  If you vote for the best “womens” candidate, or the best “black” candidate, what about the rest of the country?  Maybe the woman or the black candidate really IS the best choice, but make that determination based on WHO they are and WHAT they’ve done, not the color of their skin or the how many of which chromosomes they’ve got.

Damn, you’d think stuff like this would be self-evident.

UPDATE: 
Wow.  Great minds think alike.  I should really just delete this post because Jim Byrd over at “A Skewed View” says is so much more betterer. (And welcome to the blogroll, btw).