Breaking the Cycle

This month, I want to shed some light on a huge issue dividing conservatives and radical liberals: race. Many liberals accuse us of not wanting to and avoiding frank discussions about race. I say “challenge accepted! ” I’m going to try to write some articles on different issues involving race this month as an overarching theme…

*Trigger Warning*: Radical Liberals, you will get offended! A Lady of Reason takes no responsibility for the mind altering effects from your exposure to an actual opposing viewpoint after you read this article. 😉 Proceed at your own risk…

An issue that has been in the radical liberal agenda is the idea that since white people oppressed minorities, then they literally “owe” them reparations for the damage done. They argue minorities are held back by white oppression still, due to numerous past injustices that in my own metaphor, dug them into a pit that they now must dig out of to be on the same playing field as white people. This is one of the arguments mentioned for affirmative action is it’s a form of that reparation. But now, minorities have also demanded reparations such as welfare, food stamps, and other handouts due to white people forcing them into poverty.

Now, many conservatives and moderates pushed against this, as even though injustices happened in the past, in the present, much of the discrimination has been abolished formally, and there are plenty of resources to help break the cycles of poverty and crime. Why aren’t many minorities on the same playing field and achieve the same things as whites and a few exceptional minorities do? Some pro-reparation liberal arguments come in the form of white oppression forced them into the cycle of poverty, ghettoization and crime seen today, or white families have had centuries to build up wealth and privilege the minorities didn’t have the chance to get. Even some along the lines of we owe some minorities for stolen labor, like slavery, prison, and other exploitation from history. The issue is, what about today?

Let’s not deny it: history is full of past injustices we rightfully denounce now and have abolished, like slavery, segregation and all sorts of discrimination in housing and the job market. While no law can change all bigoted attitudes in society, it is illegal to formally discriminate against minorities or have slaves for that matter! I can understand in the immediate aftermath, people ought to have been proactive in giving minorities a leg up to catch up to where the majority was in life, but once on their feet, why haven’t they gone and ran with it?

One can try to drudge up the past ad-nauseum, but the past is past now. Yes, history affects our present, but it doesn’t have to define our future. Our present is shaped by what happened previously, but we can let the past go, and define our future on our terms the way we want it to be. Just because slavery existed for millennia through history, and much of this country’s, doesn’t mean it couldn’t be changed, and in 1865 it did for America. We had the power to say that’s no longer who we are, even if it was in our past. Our future from then on was slavery-free. The black community still cries victim over slavery and demands reparations for it today though! It’s been over a century, and yet, black people several generations removed who have never been a slave feel “victimized” by white people. They claim the legacy of slavery is still with them in poverty, crime and ghettos, but really? Why couldn’t they start to redefine their future too? They who were born free, never robbed of their labor or forced to be someone’s property have created mental chains and blame it all on white people! Why do they still need a “leg up” from slavery over a century ago? No black person currently alive today was ever a slave!

Now of course, I can hear the comeback now: “But there were much more recent forms of oppression!” The civil rights movement has been in the lifetimes of many alive today. The Jim Crow era of segregation and lynchings still is painfully, in the memories of many. But my argument applies here as well. We outlawed segregation. Lynching is called murder now. Black people can have the same jobs and housing as white people. Even a more recent painful past can be remedied by a redefined future. One can acknowledge and remember our painful past, but also look toward a brighter future now justice is being served. I am NOT denying inequalities exist to this day, but those are social biases, not legal mandates. Should those biases be addressed too? Of course! But the point is there are no laws keeping people back. Even so, the civil rights movement and the hey day of Jim Crow are fading into the memories of the elderly. In a few decades, that too, will be in the memories of those long gone. No millennial black person today can claim to be a victim of Jim Crow, or even many of their parents for that matter! Crying victim for something you never personally experienced is dishonest! “Trans-generational trauma”?(Yes, I’ve heard that term coined by the liberals!) Come on! Why can’t we acknowledge the wrongs of history, without being chained to them? Why not build the future we want to see, regardless of the past we didn’t?

Which leads me to the next argument: because of the past, the black community, for example, cannot get out of the cycle of poverty and crime, and it’s unfair to blame them as white people caused their misfortunes. However, going back to my previous argument, why not? It is one thing to say, for the sake of argument, they’re right, white people put the black community into poverty and disadvantage, but why now with help from many groups to break the cycle and anti-discrimination laws and affirmative action, can’t they help dig themselves out? It is one thing to be put at a disadvantage, forced down a deep hole of inequality one must climb out of to have a fair chance, but to passively lay there only to weep at your misfortune and demand others fix it all? Especially with the many hands to grab or ropes thrown down to you to climb out by people dedicated to help break the cycle, anti-discrimination laws, equal housing, scholarships for school, mentorship programs, or even affirmative action for starters!

The thing is, and this is pretty inflammatory to say out loud but here goes: They don’t seem to want to climb out. It’s easier to just take handouts like welfare and food stamps, never work an honest job then cry victim and have a pity party for past injustices you’ve never even come close to personally facing or being affected by. Yes, bias and discrimination exist, but I wonder honestly how much of it was influenced by a grain of truth to the hurtful stereotypes of the ghetto culture, crime, poverty, lack of respect for education or lazy welfare handouts. Playing victim you see, is the easy way out. Logic doesn’t play into any of this, just laziness and greed.

Many black people are in low income, dangerous ghettos. Gang activity is rife, people pop out kids they can’t feed, are addicted to hard drugs, drinking, on welfare from cradle to grave, for generations at a time, and don’t seem to care. Now certainly not all of them are like this, amazingly, there are black conservatives like Walter Williams who acknowledge this flaw! He even said it’s gotten worse now that welfare is so prominent. In his day, he said he knew far more respectable professional working class black people like you or I. He, like many wonder, what happened to those black people? The ones who did want to redefine their futures, not be chained to their past. Many black kids today bully fellow black kids who want to learn and go on to be professionals. They view them as a race traitor or “Uncle Tom”. Many black communities are complicit in gangs running their economy and “jobs” in town. They don’t care about having a high rate of fatherless kids who they can’t feed or clothe, and push on struggling school systems to raise. They don’t care to work even though they’re able bodied and minded to learn and earn a good salary for their families. Have you seen some low income neighborhoods? It’s a literal trashy ghetto with vandalism and filth!

Poverty is no excuse for that! Yes, you may be poor, but to trash your own home? Your own community? Plenty of white people are struggling to make ends meet, yet they keep decent tidy homes, don’t tolerate crime, work jobs to make their income, and raise their own kids! My paternal grandparents were poor blue collar folks for instance, who didn’t have much at all financially, yet they were able to keep a nice little house, raise two kids, one being my father, and valued education and sacrificed so both kids could go to college. They never once looked to crime for easy money, or took handouts when both could work. Just because you don’t have money, doesn’t mean you can’t afford some morals! Don’t say crime is for “survival” either! Plenty of people of all colors are very poor, yet only take what is absolutely necessary, and try to earn the rest. Plenty of people would rather be dirt poor, than commit crimes and lose their integrity and respectability as people.

Also, white people cannot be responsible for all of it! No white person is forcing another to trash their communities, pop out kids they can’t feed or provide for, take welfare instead of working, tolerate gangs and even welcome them, and drain the country’s resources. Believe me, that’s the opposite of what many white people, and others want! Now, the black community isn’t the only one freeloading and crying victim, but they have an extensive history of legitimate past wrongdoings they seem to not want to let go of in the present, thus making them example #1 for this article. Many look at black people with bias and stereotypes, for some who are none of what was described, unfairly, but I’d wager it’s because of the many who do drain our resources and invite crime. Black people who are decent human beings are hurt by this too. Being painted with the brush of the dysfunctional ones must hurt immensely and is a constant source of baggage they must fight against.

Let’s not forget too, other minorities were oppressed as well, yet are assets to this country, not leeches! The Asian and Indian communities are leading the way in the hard sciences and technology for instance. Why not the black (or Hispanic for that matter) community too? If we’re all equal in potential regardless of race, why can’t they? Other minorities overcame their challenges, why not them as well?

People in the black community who want a future, want to redefine their future in a positive light, must work hard to fight the stereotypes cast down by their fellows in the ghetto and in gangs just as much, and labeled as a race traitor and “Uncle Tom” for choosing success and a future over crime and poverty, just as much if not more than any white person’s bias. Many have tried to open their arms and lend those hands to help them get out of the pit of past oppression, poverty and crime, but as they say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink it! One must meet them halfway in actually wanting to change for the better! We need more black leaders too, to encourage people to break the cycle, not just subsidize welfare for an easy vote or to be “cool”! I apologize to those in the black community who do not stand with this bottom of the barrel lifestyle, and are taking their futures in their own hands. We need more people like Walter Williams in this world, not the next generation of welfare recipients and gang members. We don’t “owe” people like that one cent! They owe us a community who builds up, not tears down our society! Black and white together, we need to stand against this!

Related image
I guess we haven’t changed much from the past after all 😉

Inspiration in Conservative Dress: Inspiration or Appropriation?

Inspiration in Conservative Dress is a reoccurring series of posts of various modest and feminine outfits to inspire other women to dress modestly and resist society’s pressure to dress provocatively and subscribe to “hook up” culture. Through conservative dress, A Lady of Reason sends a message of resistance to the “sexual revolution” and radical liberal feminism, and the upholding of feminine virtue. Arguably, this could also extend to the support for social conservatism in general. How we dress signals who we are in society. I also want to state that this idea is not mine originally, but done on another religious blog called The Catholic Lady. I was inspired by hers to make a secular version for A Lady of Reason. 

For many of us, it is cool to be inspired by other peoples and cultures in our fashion. From what was once an innocuous Halloween costume, to cornrows, hoop earrings, tribal prints and more, are now deemed politically incorrect by the radical liberals. While many see it as innocuous fun, they feel it has a more sinister undertone. To them, it’s “cultural appropriation”. The idea is in essence, white people are “appropriating” or “stealing” another culture’s or country’s material culture and treating it condescendingly as “exotic” and “foreign”. Also they feel it sends the wrong message of “we’re entitled to use and enjoy your cultural assets, but not face the hardships and struggles of your people. We can just take off the costume when we feel like it…” whereas real people of that marginalized group cannot and have no choice in facing discrimination. For example, it’s “cool” for white people to act hipster and have cornrows, but when black people do it, they’re thugs. Or, you can pretend to be from the Orient, all reinforcing Orientalism and Western supremacy by treating their objects as exotic, as some examples.

Image result for cultural appropriation

Now, it’s true we shouldn’t be mocking or condescending another culture and what is important to them, but the question is, is that the intent of many who use other cultures’ styles today? The issue I have with it is, first of all, cultures have been borrowing from other cultures for centuries. In the ancient world, places like Ancient Rome, for example, were very cosmopolitan and they borrowed plenty of ideas and items, especially from the Greeks. Now, one could argue, then, as they argue for today’s cultural borrowing, or “cultural diffusion” in scholarly terms, that it’s a power imbalance for us, as the dominant group, or even Ancient Rome as the conquerors. They argue, minorities have to mimic us to be seen as valid and taken seriously, whereas we can simply choose what parts of their culture seem “cool” and imitate it without acknowledging the cultural context of it. That’s also why the liberals don’t see it as a double standard that many have adopted our way of life.

Image result for cultural diffusion ancient rome

I argue, however, that imitation can be a form of flattery too, or simply innocuous. In the historical example, Rome conquered the Greeks, and did in modern terms, “appropriate” much of their culture and ideologies, like philosophy. However, the Romans admired Greek culture, and thought much of it would help enhance Rome and make Rome better. Ancient Greek, like Latin is today, for them was the language of scholars and the well-educated. Greek slaves were prized as teachers and scholars. While there was a definite power imbalance, that did not mean the Romans looked condescendingly when they imitated the Greeks, quite the contrary, they wanted to emulate them. Now, we may not be trying to model our culture after others we borrowed stuff from time to time, but borrowing certainly does not mean condescension! I think much of the hoopla over it hearkens back to resentment over past colonialism when we were imposing our culture on theirs. Nowadays, many have a knee-jerk response to anything Western crossing their “turf” so to speak as they feel they have to be guarded and territorial over what they feel is “theirs”, like a dog guarding its food as it’s been taken away in the past. Emotion, not logic rules much of this debate. The stewing resentment of past colonialism.

Most people don’t think much of when they dress up in a cultural costume for Halloween, or decide to wear a cultural thing as a fashion piece. Condescension and Related imagedisrespect never even cross the minds of many at all, and would be horrified to think they did something disrespectful.  Sometimes, the idea to borrow something from another culture is because it looks interesting or they admire the craftsmanship, or the look. It’s something new and different, which aren’t bad things, like the snowflakes say. “Exotic” does not have to mean foreign in a bad way, or in a condescending way. It can simply mean something different, unique to what you’re used to. After all, what’s exotic is relative. Hamburgers and fries are quite “exotic” to the Bedouin nomads of Africa and the Middle East, wouldn’t you agree? 😉 Sometimes a little difference adds some flavor to life. As they say, if we were all the same, it would be pretty boring! Why not incorporate and be inspired another culture’s style sometimes? Cultures have exchanged looks, materials, technologies and ideas throughout history, why not us too?

A last point to make is also, who says certain items only “belong” to a certain group? what makes a group have the right to claim ownership of an item, such as hoop earrings for example? They’re not religious items, or some sort of medal, or even tied to one group! It’s not like a bindi dot for Hindus, or some native country’s traditional dress. Even then, there’s the hypocrisy of anyone can appropriate native European stuff, like Lederhosen, even if you’re not Germanic for example. You can dress up like a French person, or Italian, or English! It’s only for non-white peoples you can’t appropriate, but plenty of European groups faced ethnic prejudice in this country and towards each other in Europe! Why can we celebrate St. Patrick’s day if we’re not Irish when the Irish were caricatured as brutish apes by Americans only a century ago? African Americans haven’t been slaves in over a century, yet we’re not allowed hoop earrings? Or cornrows for that matter? Who said they own the concept of braided hair? A sombrero on Cinco de Mayo does not mean you’re bigoted and wish to subjugate Mexicans! It’s simply having fun sharing another culture’s tradition. I can see how some items may be best left alone if you’re not an insider, like religious-wear, ceremonies of deep significance, and such, but many things, like a fun Halloween costume, or hoop earrings, or braided hair, can “belong” to everyone. I think the key is intent: are you trying to mock another or be disrespectful? If the answer is no, I’d say it’s probably innocuous. Whatever happened to being able to laugh at yourself and letting others join in the fun? History has shown cultures can be inspired by everyone, why can’t we?

Image result for cultural appropriation political cartoon

“Whites Need Not Apply”: Affirmative Action

This month, I want to shed some light on a huge issue dividing conservatives and radical liberals: race. Many liberals accuse us of not wanting to and avoiding frank discussions about race. I say “challenge accepted! ” I’m going to try to write some articles on different issues involving race this month as an overarching theme…

Affirmative Action is a heated topic for many people. Proponents say it is necessary to give a leg up for disadvantaged group, such as women and people of color. They argue in addition to righting some of the past wrongs, like the racial or sexist discrimination of the past in the workforce and academia, it also brings fresh innovative perspectives to the table. In addition, arguments are also made to the effect of we “owe” certain groups this, due to historical injustice as well. Proponents of affirmative action present these three succinct arguments in favor of the practice:

The first one being that since minorities are disadvantaged by systematic racism, sexism, etc…, it is literally harder for them to achieve as much as white people, especially white men even if they have equal merit and qualifications. They claim the bigotry of the past has put minorities in a “hole” in the present, that they must dig out of to overcome the challenges set up by a system of racism and sexism. On its face it sound plausible, as bias can exist and people can make assumptions that are unnoticed. Stereotypes can sip in sneakily and create bias against potential candidates, such as ethnic names that don’t sound “professional”, for example, or a cultural look in an interview that doesn’t go with “professional attire”. The issue is in that case, how much should we be flexible about what looks “professional”? While some flexibility is a good thing in many cases, does that mean we must turn traditional conventions of professional attire and personal presentation on its head to accommodate someone’s “native” outfits?

The other issue with it is I think it places too much emphasis on past wrongs. Yes, the past has put others at a disadvantage, like women and minorities, but now there are many laws trying to prevent that from repeating itself. Everyone has something that puts them at a disadvantage that they didn’t earn and was never asked for. The key thing is, in the case of racial and gender discrimination in the workforce and academia, things are being done in the present to remedy that. The whole point of the anti discrimination laws based on “sex, race, religion etc…”  was to prevent special treatment, not enforce it! The idea should have been to take those factors off the table when judging who’s qualified for the job or the school, and judge their merits, not their outside appearance or things they can’t control based on stereotypes and prejudice. Affirmative action does the opposite, instead using these things as playing cards to get “a leg up” over white people now. Candidates through affirmative action, are not being hired or accepted based on past experience, training, credentials, GPAs, SATs and such, but by their race or gender. The past is past now: we can’t change what happened to minorities in the past who were unfairly denied earned opportunities, but we can, and have taken steps to level the playing field and judge merit, not skin color or gender. We ought to focus on now, not then, for judging just how “disadvantaged” these groups are today. What opportunities do minorities have now to succeed through hard work and merit? Focusing too much on past injustice distracts from an honest assessment of their equality now in society. Just because your ancestors had it bad, doesn’t mean you do just because they did!

Of course, a counterargument to that is that minorities have had less opportunity to build their skills and get the same level of education as whites. They say minorities live mostly in poorer neighborhoods with poorer families and few resources. They say they have had challenges to overcome, like juggling work and school, taking care of siblings, crime etc… that middle class whites didn’t have. Only there, you can easily see, this is more about class privilege than racial disadvantage. The blame for their misfortunes is often put upon white people though, as they blame white society for keeping them in poverty and disadvantage. Perhaps in the Jim Crow South, yes, but now? Not so much. There are plenty of organizations and legislation to try to break the cycle of poverty and crime in minority communities, but there’s the old adage, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink it.”

The past may have influenced disadvantage of the present, but that is not an excuse for passive acceptance of it. Why aren’t more minorities going for higher education and jobs, bringing more wealth to the community? Why isn’t there more vigilance and less tolerance of crime such as drug deals, gun violence, prostitution, gang activity, exploitation etc.? The excuse of it’s all they can do to survive is nonsense! Would you excuse white crime as being “survival”, when people in extreme disadvantage have been able to work honest jobs and make honest lives for themselves? Thing is, crime is the easy way out for survival for many, getting an honest job and education to make more money takes actual hard work, which many don’t want to do it seems. Harsh to say, yes, but it’s true. It’s inflammatory to admit, but at least 50% or more of the ghettoized crime culture and welfare state and disintegration of the family in many minority communities are on them, not “the white man” and past historical injustices. As said, the past is past, it’s time to focus on the present. What can we do now, to make our communities better, regardless of then?

The second argument is basically tied into the first. We “owe” them affirmative action due to things like slavery, for instance. Again, the past has past. Their present problems aren’t all the “white man’s burden”. Having a culture entrenched in crime for economy, persecuting anyone wanting to “act white” by breaking out of poverty and crime, and pursuing education and career, depending on welfare and handouts from the government, not having intact families with supportive parents to help their kids succeed etc… and making it all look “cool” is at the very very least 50% of their problem. Yes, slavery put the black community at a disadvantage, for example, but slavery also ended over a century ago, and the civil rights movement passed much legislation to help give black people the same opportunities as whites. Instead of dwelling on history as one’s own pity party, why not change the present, even if the past was bad? But then again, that takes hard work, not something glorified in ghetto culture. There are even black conservatives now, like Walter Williams, who decry this “victimhood” status of his race, as it reflects badly on any minority who does indeed want to further themselves the honest way. Not all minorities are “lazy”, but the lazy ones seem to have the loudest mouth, making everyone else look bad.

Lastly, a third argument is about the fresh perspectives others can give outside of the life experience of white middle class America. It is true, different life experiences and perspectives are good for a business, or school looking to expand the minds of its students. This is probably their strongest argument. Diversity can be a good thing for broadening everyone’s minds, not just white people’s. Knowing people from all walks of life, and different cultures can enrich your own outlook on the world. After all, historically, new ideas and innovations happened due to cultural diffusion and encountering different people. The world would be dull with just a homogeneous group 24/7. The issue here, is not with the idea of being around different people than yourself, but with why they’re there in the first place. It’s an issue of merit outside race or culture. Are your coworkers or employees here because of their many talents and achievements, or their race? Do they bring new innovative ideas to the table that stand on their own merit, or were they just selected to fill arbitrary diversity quotas to gain “enlightenment points”? There is absolutely no problem at all with having a diverse workforce, the issue rests with them being there on their own merits, instead of their race or gender alone. But people will say, “It’s not just their race! They have to be qualified too! It’s to give a minority a leg up if they’re equal to a white candidate since they were disadvantaged.” Of course, the flaw in that is many places have actually lowered their standards to admit more minorities in schools and the workforce. Minorities need lower test scores, GPAs, and SATs now to get into college than white people, or even Asians! There is a double standard in qualifications now, all to admit more minorities simply because they’re minorities!

Overall, I’m against affirmative action simply because it is what it claims to prevent: discrimination. Discriminating against whites and men is no different from discriminating against minorities and women. Being judged on stereotypes and factors beyond your control instead of honest merit is unjust no matter who you are. The “equality” it presumes to enhance actually is just reverse discrimination. I feel though, the liberals are actually afraid to stop it, because it would unearth some very uncomfortable realizations about why more minorities aren’t in higher up positions, (Hint: it’s not “the white man”, it starts with a “c” ends with ‘ultre”…) not to mention votes 😉 Unlike the snowflakes would have you believe, reverse discrimination is discrimination, period. Turing the tables on the majority group and limiting them based on skin color or gender is no different from the majority oppressing the minority. The outcome is the same, only the roles are switched. “Two wrongs do not make a right”, as my parents would say. Indeed, many minorities feel insulted to think they were chosen as the “affirmative action hire” and be held in contempt by their coworkers and fellow classmates, instead of their workplace or school seeing them as bright, capable individuals regardless of what they look like. Affirmative action is a stain on minorities too who do want to live the honest way, and not be lumped in with the freeloaders. Whatever happened to honest work and merit, rather than playing the “minority card” to get ahead in life?

See the source image

The White Man’s Burden: White Privilege

This month, I want to shed some light on a huge issue dividing conservatives and radical liberals: race. Many liberals accuse us of not wanting to and avoiding frank discussions about race. I say “challenge accepted! ” I’m going to try to write some articles on different issues involving race this month as an overarching theme…

Many liberal snowflakes accuse conservatives of trying to avoid the topic of race, as it is highly charged and emotional, and skirt around it for their own comfort instead of just talking about racial issues frankly. However, I find the opposite to be true: many are indeed willing to discuss race and inequality, but feel intimidated to out of fear of saying the “wrong thing” or are being silenced and shot down for any honest critique. What most white conservatives are most afraid of, is not talking about race, but being branded a “racist”. There’s no denying that actual racism and prejudice existed and still exists. Yes, there are people who most reasonable people could call close minded bigots and bias still exists. The problem is, in trying to right the wrongs of the past, many have swung the pendulum too far in the other direction! You see, the “dialogue” the liberals supposedly want of discussing race in a frank and honest manner has been turned into a “monologue” by the snowflakes and SJWs.

White privilege is perhaps one of the most inflammatory terms on both sides of the debate! The basic idea is that white people are privileged by their skin color and don’t face the same obstacles such as being keenly aware of their race or feel constantly dehumanized or vilified. They claim white people enjoy far better housing, neighborhoods, schools, jobs, etc… due to their skin color alone. However, they seem to forget that white people weren’t always so prosperous throughout history, and there are plenty of disadvantaged white people in America today. Many white Americans came from impoverished immigrants who came with nothing. They faced prejudice from the people already here, and had to build themselves up from the ground. No handouts, no welfare, no leg up in society to achieve. However, many did through their own determination and grit, not crying victim and demanding to be accommodated. The “privileges” their descendants have were earned through honest hard work and sweat. Not to mention also, poverty devastates white families the same as any other family. One could argue many of the inequalities are less to do with skin color, but more to do with economic privilege. One could argue more minorities are poor due to lack of racial privilege, but I raise the question how much of their straights is truly out of their control, a topic I want to explore later…

The liberals, once faced with this backlash as many were offended and perceived the concept as belittling of their hardships and as a personal attack, decided to change the story a bit. Now, they try to make the nuance that it isn’t so much that white people have never faced any hardship or had obstacles to overcome in life, but simply that their skin color wasn’t one of them. They may have been poor, or unable to find decent work, for example, but skin color wasn’t a factor unlike people of color’s is. On its face, that idea of the concept of white privilege sounds more sensible, it’s not a lack of hardship, but the idea skin color doesn’t contribute to it directly for white people. However, I find a flaw in that line of reasoning involving the definition of “privilege”. To me, and most people, a privilege is something that is added to give one a leg up, not simply the absence of something weighing you down or the absence of explicit disadvantage.

Their definition of white privilege is based on the simple absence of whiteness being a disadvantage to white people, as opposed to darker skin being a disadvantage to minorities. This I feel, is too passive a definition for an explicit “privilege”, especially one to accuse someone of being unfair because of it! It’s like, “you may be poor and grew up in a lousy neighborhood with few opportunities to break the cycle, but your whiteness wasn’t one of them, ergo, you’re privileged!” The thing is, we all do have “privilege” in our lives that we haven’t earned, such as a good family, a stable home, your family’s means to give you a leg up such as higher education, job connections, social connections etc… But these things emphasize their presence in our lives, not simply the observation they’re not weighing you down and holding you back. They are additions, “bonus perks” if you will, whereas white skin not begin a factor in why you didn’t get the job isn’t a privilege. It may not have been a disadvantage, but it’s not like you would get the job simply because you’re white. With this logic of the absence of something weighing you down automatically being a “privilege”, does that mean I have “health privilege” over other people by the simple absence of a disease or illness? Does this make me somehow unfairly “extra special”? That’s what they’re really trying to say after all. One can acknowledge their race being one less burden to carry in life, but also not feel guilty or ashamed of the mere absence of a burden.

Which brings me to another point: no one can control the race they were born as. Even if there are racial inequalities that benefit white people, can you actually place blame for “white privilege” on white people due to a thing they had no control over? It’s not like white people said “please, make me white, I want special treatment!” anymore than a person of color asked to be a race that is disadvantaged. Snowflakes decry the idea of discriminating against people of color for a thing they cannot control; their race, yet are all too keen to do it to white people albeit being unable to choose to be white. Placing the onus on white people to dismantle a “privilege” they had zero control over inheriting is unfair and hypocritical in itself! Even if this “white privilege” does in fact exist, by definition, white people have no control over it since it’s simply what they were born with. Demanding people take blame and fix what they never chose to have in the first place is extremely unfair. I mean, what realistically are white people expected to do? They can try their hardest to treat all people equally, and create opportunities for others to succeed and achieve too, not just white people, but by definition, that will not erase their “white privilege” as it simply exists by them being white. Even the most strident white SJW has as much white privilege as the bigoted racist. The only way to stop white privilege is to not be white, which is an impossible task! Now, someone will say, “but they can use that privilege for good”, but that begs the question too, is there actually privilege now for white people?

I would argue, not much anymore! In an effort to right the wrongs of the past, we have swung too far into reverse discrimination! Policies like affirmative action bar white people from positions not based on talent or merit or qualifications, but on skin color: their whiteness. White people are now forbidden to dress up as people from other countries, ethnicities and cultures for Halloween, forbidden from using words other races can, like slurs such as the “N” word, even trying out different fashions, hairstyles and material culture from other cultures or else they’re accused of “appropriation”. Being white means you can’t tell certain jokes, say certain things, do certain things, wear certain things etc… You can only have the “right” opinions, or else you’re labeled a bigot and a racist, or even white supremacist. Your culture is viewed in a more negative light now, to “deconstruct” its former glory based on the subjugation of other peoples (of course). White people nowadays have to walk on eggshells not to “offend” anyone basically! White people are supposed to ignore race in judging people, yet are racist for saying “I don’t see color”. Yet truth is, white people are judged all the time by the radical liberal snowflakes for just that! All in all, “white privilege” is having the “privilege” of being the only acceptable group to be racist toward!

Image result for white privilege

“Who’s Your Daddy?”: The War on Fatherhood

I have mentioned before in A Lady of Reason about the disintegration of the nuclear family to make way for politically correct “any family is a real family” propaganda, and mentioned the importance of a strong father figure in the lives of girls, but I wanted to devote more into elaborating on some specific issues regarding fatherhood.

The traditional two parent family, married mom and dad is unfortunately a rarity these days. Barely a quarter of people I knew in school had a stable two parent household with an active father figure. Perhaps many of the PC liberals grew up in the divorce generation, spanning from the baby boomers up to now. Since the sexual revolution, the traditional two parent home, and the value of marriage gave way to hook ups, flings and an attitude of non-commitment and disregard for the fallout. In many households, the fathers were absentee and walked out, or were simply “baby-daddies” and sperm donors. I theorize many of the liberals grew up jaded and cynical since they had no real father figure or strong man in their lives. Those kids then went on to have more kids and perpetuate the same cycle, with the same non-committal attitudes. They have told themselves and their children lies about how you don’t need a father, and a woman can raise kids all by her lonesome and be equal to a two parent household. The radical feminists keep telling women and girls that they shouldn’t depend on a man and that having a man around signals oppression. This all lead to cynical attitudes about men and fatherhood. Even in families with dads still around, the radical feminists prefer them to be weak and subordinate to the female members of the family, rather than take the lead in the household. Paradoxically, the liberals whine that too many men don’t step up and take care of their families, and just walk out, they attack any societal expression of the fathers who are in the picture. This I feel, is a “war on fatherhood”.

Examples of this war are everywhere! A major example is simply the downplaying of the father figure in children’s lives. The liberals want us to believe that fathers are inconsequential, and single mothers can do both jobs just as well. However, this is a politically correct lie, simply to soothe some whiny, bitter single mom’s hurt feelings. For all the things a mother can give to her children, she cannot give the perspective a man can for their children. Children needs both parents in the picture to get a more well rounded upbringing. An issue plaguing our society today due to lack of father figures are boys growing up to be weak and hyper feminized, instead of learning how to be strong men. Single mothers paranoid to simply let “boys be boys” are raising a generation of emotionally fragile, weak young men who cannot take charge like their grandfathers did and be the rock in the family. Men were once raised to honor, protect and respect the women close to them, but now chivalry is labeled sexism, and “respecting” women means being a mindless lapdog for a “Nasty Woman”! Men who would have gone off to fight and protect their women are now in need of safe spaces, trigger warnings, and flinch at the thought of a bruise! A father knows what is was like to once be a rambunctious spirited boy, and would raise his son to become a strong and capable man from a man to man perspective. As mothers relate better to daughters, sons relate more to their fathers, being the same gender, one day filling that role themselves. A single mom can devote her entire life to a son, but she can never give what a man can give in terms of becoming a man one day.

Daughters too, need a strong father figure. The PC liberals hate this point even more, as it reinforces notions they have decried as “sexist”, but the point still stands. Daughters raised with involved fathers are far less likely to become at risk, and promiscuous, have body image issues and of course “daddy issues” later in life! Many young women I know without dads have become victim of the PC radical feminist “Nasty Woman” and hook up culture, distrusting of men and committed relationships. The traditional role of the father as his daughter’s protector, guarding her from unwanted advances by manipulative boys and seeing who is worthy of her in relationships, and marriage, is decried by the PC liberals. While it was true fathers had ownership over daughters, to marry them off historically, fathers today covet the role of protector and guardian over their daughters. A father knows what men are like, being one, and what sort of man is good for his daughter. A good father helps his daughter choose wisely in relationships, and models what a man should be like in her life in how he treats her, her mother and other women. Also, he models what men should expect of her in return. Fathers that expect their daughters to have standards and conduct themselves as ladies raise girls to attract gentlemen who want well bred ladies, not vulgar “Nasty Women” of the radical feminist era. He also models what a strong man is for the family, and not some hyper feminized boy like single mothers raise all too often. A single mother can teach her daughter about womanhood, but she cannot teach her about men like a man can. Anyone who cries “sexism”! is mistaken, as it is not about anyone being inferior, but a question of insider perspective. As the PC liberals hate it when outsiders talk for minority groups, because they’re not insiders, they ought to realize a man’s and a woman’s perspective on the world are going to be different, and a child needs both to grow up well rounded. A man cannot have the same deep experiences of a woman, and vice versa. Mothers cannot do it alone, fathers have to be there too in a balanced family.

This is why it incenses me when the PC liberals try to stifle the role of a father in an attempt to be “inclusive” to the “any family is a real family” lie. Many schools have banned the father-daughter dance becuase it might hurt someone’s feelings that they don’t have a dad and can’t go, or reinforces the value of the traditional family. Butt-hurt whiny single mothers complained, and ruined it for everyone! Who says the girl can’t go with another male family friend or relative? Why ruin it for everyone who does have an involved father in the picture? A believe an involved father, standing up for the traditional family is a rarity now, and should be celebrated! I wish more schools had the backbone to send the message that a father figure is important, not just for individual families, but society as a whole. The father-daughter dance is an expression of the value fathers should have. It’s still amazing in the hostile PC climate, women are still letting their fathers walk them down the aisle, and give them away during their weddings! I fear in another generation or so, that will be gone too…

More slights against the father figure are embroiled in controversies surrounding the funny prom photo of dad between the girl and her date, holding a shotgun! What was once all in good humor, and not serious, is now an atrocity! “How dare a man have a gun in the presence of children!” “How dare he not let his daughter have sexual agency!” etc… What was once a joke in a nod towards the father’s role as his daughter’s protector is now construed as a violent patriarchal threat! I mean though, who should let their sixteen year old sleep with whoever she wants and get knocked up on prom night? Is it wrong for dad to forbid her to fling herself on any guy she wants and get pregnant as a teenager? The radical feminists envision weak dads who have no say in their daughter’s lives, while they go out in their pussy hats and feel vulgarity is empowerment, sleep with any guy to be “liberated” from the patriarchy and want weak men! Any dad who wants to raise a lady of standards is now demonized and called sexist and patriarchal!

Lastly, but certainly not least, another war on fathers is an attack on Father’s Day. Single mothers want two Mother’s Days, one on Father’s Day for their extra hard work, but why not just celebrate it all on Mother’s Day? Fathers deserve their own special day, just for their hard work. Mothers already have a day too, and single moms replacing Father’s Day is only a way to feel better about the gaping hole not having a father in their children’s lives is. Why not let dad have his day? The father is downplayed now so much in society, Father’s Day is a way to stand up for fatherhood and the nuclear family. Erasing fatherhood from our cultural memory and acknowledgement is a politically correct tyranny to soothe many bitter single moms and fatherless children. The truth hurts sometimes though, and it is a truth that fathers matter in the family unit and in our society! We need to fight back the PC notions of ” any family is a real family” garbage! If you stand for the intact stable family, of mom and dad, thank your father 🙂

Related image
Back in the day, this is how the ideal family was once portrayed, not just “any family is a real family” PC propaganda!

“Mind The (Age) Gap” Part II: A Trip Down Memory Lane!

I made this point in part I of this series: it’s not just millennials who are radical snowflakes, and they didn’t get these ideas out of thin air! Nor, did a lot of these PC liberal ideas start with the millennial generation either! The “elders” of today came mostly now from generations of the post WWII era, starting with the boomers from 1946 to 1955, going through Gen X from the 1960-1980’s before the millennials. While many remember a simpler time in their youth, than the media crazed era of the digital age of today, and the radical snowflake agendas, it only takes a history book or some memories to realize the world from 1946 to 1980 or so was just as tumultuous in its own way as today’s issues!

The dowdy old “fuddie-duddies” of today seem to forget, they were in the generations that had the hippie movement, the sexual revolution, draft dodging, the new era of divorce and the broken home, racial tension in the civil rights movement and more! The baby boomer generation from the post WWII years, were in their teens and 20’s around the late 1950’s to 1960’s. During this time, were the civil rights movement and the hippie movement! Issues of racial tension are not new to the BLM movement of today. Race riots were being fought, protests were being done, marches for racial equality and desegregation were afoot. The hippie movement was very controversial with the older generations of the era, and many saw it as the disintegration of the old family and community values, and an “anything goes” movement of promiscuity and drug use. Sound familiar? The elders decrying millennials in their late 60’s and 70’s were peers of those at Woodstock! The promiscuous hook up culture of today for example, is not a millennial movement! The hook up culture of today had its roots back in the sexual revolution in guess when? The 1960’s to 1980’s! The advent of the broken divorced homes started with the boomers and Gen Xers. The Gay LGBT movement had its beginnings in the 60’s with things like the Stonewall riots in 1969 and overlapped in time period with the civil rights movements and second wave feminism. These are only some broad examples of how these “elders” decrying millennials today were the generation in the middle of multiple counter cultural revolutions themselves!

Now, I’m not saying everything about those movements were bad. Prejudice and segregation, or inequality for women were bad then as now. I’m not saying let’s go back to when people of color, women and gays had zero rights. However, many aspects of these movements did have detrimental messages, like the militant black power ideologies, the advent of promiscuity, disintegration of the traditional family and militant feminism, as well as a more militant LGBT community. The culture of the “proper” traditional 1950’s, while having it’s flaws that did need to be challenged and changed for the better, had elements the more counter cultural 1960’s ought to have kept, like traditional family values for example. The counter cultural movements of the 1960’s sowed many of the seeds for the contemporary radical liberal agendas of today. The radical boomer snowflakes probably grew up involved in and around those movements and only embraced it as it got more radical in the 1990’s to present. Third wave radical feminism was founded on the second wave radical feminism of our elders’ youth. Also important to note, much of the liberal movement apparently led by millennials, like the Parkland movement, are actually being supported, funded and goaded behind the scenes by adults with their own agenda to play, using and exploiting the young people for their own ends. Teens and young adults generally don’t have much say, so much of their power is probably being funded and promoted by older adults! The Women’s March, as another example was being funded by other groups, like Muslim groups and BLM.

Now is a tumultuous very counter cultural time, but so was the days of many older adult’s youth too. Even before the boomers, think of the revolution post WWI. The prim Victorian traditions gave way to more relaxed standards of the 1920’s. Think of your great or great-great grandparents being of the “flapper” era, one of jazz, promiscuity, radical vulgar dance moves and too short dresses! Point is, counter cultural tendencies among youth are timeless! The issues may have changed, but the attitudes have not.

Which brings me to an important point though. Just because stuff was going on “back then”, doesn’t automatically mean it defined you! Not everyone who was in their 20’s and teens in the 60’s were at Woodstock or promiscuous drug addled hippies! Not every young woman in the 60’s was a bra burning feminist who advocated for promiscuity! Not every person who was young in the 20’s was a flapper! Yes, many movements were iconic of their respective eras, but plenty of people were not defined by those movements, nor a part of them. There were plenty of mainstream, regular Joes who lived conservative lives like their parents. The same realization should be applied to millennials today. Not every millennial is defined by the new snowflake era of today. Many are simply living modest lives and not preaching on a soapbox in a pussy hat with a picket sign! Not all are kneeling for the BLM movement, or doing inconsequential protests against gun ownership or Trump. Many indeed, are quietly more moderate or conservative like myself, and simply stay out of such heated topics day to day with others. I am very critical of the radical liberal snowflake youth, as much as many elders, but I ask you to please not forget the tumultuous times of your youth before you automatically judge all young people as the nutty revolutionaries of today! Many are simply trying to survive in this time of upheaval and tumult in our society just as it was before. While many movements have become much more extreme now than back then thanks to millennials, the seeds were sown in the youth of our elders, not the millennials! Before you judge an entire generation, please take a trip down memory lane yourself 😉

“Mind The (Age) Gap” Part I: Not all Snowflakes are Millennials, and Not all Millennials are Snowflakes…

Millenials: also known as the narcissistic, entitled, disrespectful generation. Always on their phones, tuned out of the world, feel entitled to “participation trophies” for just going through life. The generation that refuses to acknowledge the dedication of their elders, or the values that kept society together such as family, work ethic, even simple kindness, and then has the audacity to say the world is flawed and do inconsequential protesting. I don’t blame any older people who do have a negative image of millennials, it is true many are on their militant soapbox, preaching for causes they know little of, and doing inconsequential protests or disrespectful things such as interrupt opposing speakers and laying siege to college campuses and schools! Many millennials are more superficial, and more into their phones or celebrities than real world issues, or building a solid future. I’ve personally known those types too. Many millennials do show ageism, and belittle the older generations as useless, past their prime, and inept and unworthy to be heard. The “triggered” snowflake generation is a real thing out there!

However, many forget their own youth, and the issues of their generation. Ageism goes both ways, and as many millennials are guilty of being belittling towards the elders, many elders are guilty of stereotyping all millennials. The millennial generation spans roughly from the 1980’s to 2000’s. I was born within those years, and personally know many millennials, including myself, who are not in fact, rabid liberal snowflakes. Related imageConservative millennials are rarer, or at least, not “out of the closet” due to the vitriol of their fellow snowflake peers, and even teachers, and employers, but they are out there, as a more moderate majority. People like us are not the stereotype of the entitled, shallow, narcissistic millennial who only cares for themselves and takes everyone else for granted, and high on dope! We are the ones trying to grow into adulthood, one of stability, security and a functional place in the world. We are the ones trying to take the values our parents gave us to heart, the ones who want to wait for the right person instead of a hook-up, the ones who instead of taking booze and dope, are studying towards good schools and fruitful careers. Many of us are bright, driven, determined and want to earn their place in the world the honest way. Millenials, like myself do not appreciate the vocal loudmouth snowflakes who want to represent what my generation is all about. There is a silent majority of young people who uphold traditional values and conservative viewpoints.

I find it a shame many seem not to remember their younger years, or idolize their youth as a utopia where there was no wrong. I’m not making excuses for the militant radical snowflakes by any means, but for millennials in general, we aren’t that different from you when you were young. Yes, plenty of millennials focus on inconsequential issues, like peer groups and celebrities instead of real word issues, but what were you focused on at 15? Did you have all your priorities in order in your teens? Can you honestly say you are the same person at 50 as you were at 20? Maybe young people are more idealistic and naive to the world, but who has the knowledge of an elder who’s had decades of experience in their 20’s? The point is, there are some traits all youth have regardless of the era. Young people naturally want to make changes in their world, right the wrongs of their parents, clash over cultural interests and differing ideologies from their parents and elders. Young people can also be very naive and too unrealistic, or more radical in their opinions, but often simmer down by the time they get a taste of the world! What you care about is what affects your life. It may be peer groups today, but politics tomorrow as you become the one paying the bills or raising a family 😉 Think of an issue you changed your perspective on as you aged…

Another important point to make too in all this millennial bashing, is that we weren’t the only generation that ruffled a few feathers! These radial snowflake ideas, while many are more recent, didn’t come out of thin air! Where do you think these millennials have gotten such radial snowflake views from? It’s not just my generation whose been espousing these ideas, like political correctness, sexual anarchy, “any family is a real family”, trigger warnings, safe spaces, just do what makes you feel good etc… Think of it: these ideas are being taught in schools across the country, to the next generation of snowflakes. The mainstream media is full of news organizations with a blatant liberal bias, even major social media platforms and search engines like Google are blatant liberal, and will even censor conservatives! Now, one may argue many of these people behind this could have been some of the earliest “millennials”, but a lot of these new radical ideas like the transgender thing or safe spaces are more recent, and the bulk of the criticism towards millennials is directed towards teens and college aged kids. Adults control these major companies like Google, or CNN, not teenagers still in high school! Millennials are getting much of their liberal propaganda through the adults in their lives in school, and in the media such as news, TV shows and movies.

And it’s not just 40 and under people feeding the liberal agenda to our youth today! I know personally several people past their 50’s and 60’s who are radical snowflake all the way, including several friend’s parents, teachers, even older college professors! These people are no better than any militant millennial, one mother in her 60’s I know went to the Women’s March in DC when Trump was elected, and wore a pussy hat and had a sign with the middle finger that said “Now you p*ssed off Grandma!” There was another example in the recent news about a retired English teacher, who rudely “corrected” a letter President Trump himself sent to her personally addressing her concerns, and resent it back with the corrections in red pen! I don’t know about you, but that is just as petty and insolent as any teenager could be! With examples from “elders” like these, how would they not turn out to be radical snowflakes? These “elders” don’t seem worthy of any respect by any one, much less impressionable youth on how to act!

Related image

Millennials are certainly not the first generation to clash with their elders or hold extreme views! While many young people are indeed all the detrimental qualities people think of, there are many others who are the opposite, and are morally upright people who just want a future for themselves and a better world and are willing to work honestly to make that happen. Plenty, like me, do not identify with their snowflake peers who are entitled and militant and intolerant of any dissent. Nor, are all adults, especially older adults representative of a more virtuous bygone era. Many have embraced the radical liberal side too, and are teaching our youth to become snowflakes like them. It’s not just radical peers parents must watch for now, but the conservative parent now must also be weary of their child’s school, academia, the mainstream media, and even respected organizations in the community and country! Stereotypes often have truth in them, but there are always exceptions to the rule! Belittling and stereotyping millennials and youth in general as negative, only alienates allies in the fight for common sense, virtue and reason like myself and other millennials, and may even drive young people on the fence on these issues over to the radical liberal side due to them thinking that all adults are “anti-them” but the liberals hear their voice and embrace them. Please “mind the (age) gap”, and be a bridge, not a wall between you and young people in your life.

Image result for generation gap