How The Left is Driving A Wedge…

The Left’s derisive rhetoric and ideology has driven a wedge in much of society. From race wars, to gender wars. Gay versus straight, cis versus transgender. Black versus white. Christian versus Non-Christian. Etc…etc… Seeing the worst of intentions in innocuous comments. “Microaggressions” so microscopic yet so massive to the “victim”. Scapegoating, blaming, finger pointing, you name it! The Left fosters it. And what does all this un-nuanced black and white division do to society? You guessed it! Divided society at every level and among every group! Families are literally feuding over how one voted in 2016. Ostracism, insults, ultimatums are becoming more and more prominent in friendships, relationships, and families all over politics and social issues. An opposing opinion is no longer grounds for “disagreeing to disagree” then changing the subject. No! now it has to mean the other person is evil, bigoted, immoral, and even perverted in some cases!

Take this scenario, based off this article. A mom whose daughters are 13 and 15 wrote in to a columnist that she is upset that her husband and her father in law are telling jokes that all dads with daughters know about, such as “Dad better buy a shotgun for when they start dating!” Or “lock your doors!”. She claims it made her daughters uncomfortable as well as herself. The columnist wrote back in agreement saying that such jokes rob daughters of their agency, and make light of gun violence. Now, I agree with one thing: If the daughters don’t like it, they should stop out of respect for their daughters’ and granddaughters’ wishes.

However, lets dive deeper into what I argue this portrayal of this common family scenario has been seen through a lens of extreme projection and misguided conclusions. Jokes like those told by men one, are NOT taken literally (just like 99.9% of jokes!) and really meant to reflect a man’s sense of duty and honor towards his daughters, and more widely, protecting the women in his life. Quite frankly, a woman such as a mother, does not have the full sense of the dynamic between man-to-man interactions and how men express sentiments is not the same often as how a woman might express it. The “protect your daughters” jokes are an example of that. Grandpa was simply giving dad a man-to-man pat on the back so to speak, for the challenges of raising daughters and making sure their best interests are respected by any suitor.

The jokes are hyperbolic: Barring out and out abuse, a sane and reasonable man would not literally pull out a gun and terrorize a suitor! The point is that the jokes are meant to show how far a man would go to protect his daughter from mistreatment, exploitation, coercion or abuse if it were to occur, not that he’ll go out like a maniac waving a gun at every teenage boy in town! While of course, mothers also are deeply invested in protecting their daughters from predatory or toxic men, the special role of an honorable man has always been to guard his daughters until he knows her chosen one is worthy of her, beyond what a woman is expected to do.

Grandpa, who’s “guilty” of said jokes, is not being a perv, or a chauvinist who believes that his granddaughters should literally be locked up like in some 3rd world culture, but a man who in his wisdom, is supporting the dad in his role as protector. As to the other argument about agency and autonomy, one, what other areas of major life choices would you argue a young teenager should have complete and total autonomy over? And two, why not complain more about cultures who literally KILL their daughters over an unapproved suitor and force her into marriage at the age these girls are? Where’s the feminist outrage over that??? You can argue all you want you don’t want men to occupy that traditional role guarding his daughter’s hearts, but what would you say of a man who’s just like, “Whatever… What do I care about my daughter’s dating habits…” As for the daughters themselves, perhaps they were conditioned from day one to look at men as potential perverts and misogynists and were primed to read disgusting undertones in grandpa’s well meaning comments.  Just look at the Girl Scouts of America telling parents young girls hugging grandpa leads to sexual coercion at work 20 years later! Just because mom, not socialized to have the honor code of a man, doesn’t quite understand the subtle nuances of the dynamic between Dad and Grandpa, doesn’t mean they have nefarious intentions or sexist attitudes! My case rests… 😉

The next scenario, related to family matters, is the case of a mother on an online forum freaking out over her 7 year old daughter’s kitten heels she bought for some special event, like a daddy daughter dance, let’s say. I’ve also covered this topic before too, but what shocked me was the mothers reaction to what Dad said: She said she was fearful and troubled because Dad said, guess what? “Wow! You look so grown up!” to his daughter when he saw her in those shoes. Mom believes that Dad’s comment was perverted in the worst possible way, and that yes, implied it meant Dad was lusting over his little girl comparing her to a grown woman! Even more shockingly, multiple women agreed with her!

Now, to a sane person, it sounds just like a dad amazed, as any parent is, of how fast is child is growing up. Seeing his daughter, in her fancy dress, her hair done up, some light makeup, and in those cute little shoes for her special dance with daddy, it is not out of the question that as a parent, he could see in her in that moment, some of the woman she will grow into very soon. A beautiful woman he will one day dance with again at her wedding. Or send off to her prom. What only the sickest most vile pervert would see in a little girl in kitten heels is a sex object to lust over!!! In the fight to stop oversexualizing girls, the  women’s rights movement has ironically, sexualized them to the extreme by seeing everything that was once innocent, as now sexual, sick and perverted! I can only think of two scenarios. Number one, mom is wildly and wrongly projecting the most vile thoughts on her husband for being a sentimental dad, or she married a complete monster and doesn’t deserve to raise a child if she allows him to be near her daughter. I strongly suspect the former case is more probable…

Lastly but certainly not least of all, another example of how a family can be utterly divided by Leftist ideology is the common case of that relative who says something un-PC at the family gathering. Now, instead of just chalking it up to an older generation who were raised with different norms, or an innocuous comment that just came off as “insensitive” as opposed to a targeted insult, many Left learning parents are struggling with whether or not to let the kids see Grandma, or Aunt Sally, or Uncle Joe over “sexist” or “racist” sentiments that most reasonable people outside of the radical Left wouldn’t interpret as openly racist or sexist for instance. apparently, it’s not enough to say to your kids, “I disagree with what Grandma says sometimes, and here’s why, but we still love her even though we differ on certain subjects…”

Now, it’s all or nothing. If Grandma’s not “woke” enough, she doesn’t make the cut! Or maybe just be open and honest and tell Grandma, or Uncle Joe or Aunt Susie not to bring those topics up in front of your kids when they come to visit. Many, even if they differ from your perspective will honor your request. After all, 5 year olds care more about Grandma’s cookies than Grandma’s political ideologies! 😉 However, why can’t we just be brave enough to expose our kids to differing views then let them know they can make up their own mind in their own time without pressure from either side? We can’t grow as people without thinking deeply and thinking for oneself after all.

In all three examples, we see families utterly divided by the Left. Granddaughters that see grandpa and their own father as sexist creeps for wanting to protect them. A wife who sees her husband and father in law as misogynistic and not having their children’s and grandchildren’s best interests at heart. A mother who implicitly views her own husband as a sick pedophile lusting over his daughter on the grounds of saying as every parent says, “You look so grown up!”. Parents across the nation alienating their kids from their grandparents, aunts and uncles over politics, ideas the children don’t even know about or care about yet. Teaching the kids that an opposing opinion is immoral, and the person holding it is bad and to be written off without hearing why they have that “offending” opinion. If that isn’t division, then what is??? I have liberals and conservatives in my family, and among my friends. If I alienated everyone who doesn’t think exactly like me, I’d be one lonely person! 😉

Image result for divided over politics cartoon

55 thoughts on “How The Left is Driving A Wedge…

  1. This is a good post LOR and really gets to the heart of the divisiveness that’s going on. One might even say it’s all a purposeful designed by those that stand to benefit politically from people being pitted against one another. Hmmm, now which political party would that be?

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Unless I’m missing something, the examples presented indicate a breakdown in civil discourse and interpersonal relationships rather than symptoms of a partisan divide.

    But either way, why not apply the golden rule? I submit that honoring someone’s request to stop commenting on their appearance or making them uncomfortable leads to less friction than arguing for your right to continue doing so.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. I don’t understand how hugging while you are ung will cause sexual problems later in life.

    Yet the propaganda of the left of teaching young children all about sex and how wonderful and natural it is and to just do it anytime you want as long as you have protection. And don’t worry about being alone in potentially escalated environments.

    Far more people are sexually abused by left ideology than through a few hugs.

    You can argue against making kids hug and I really don’t care if you do as hugs weren’t a thing I liked either as a kid. But to suggest it creates some weird sexual issues later is beyond idiotic. It is almost up thwt with asking a baby’s permission to change a diaper to teach consent.

    Many ideas of people on the left require a lot of educational indoctrination by useless classes to make you drink the cult Kool-Aid

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Very interesting post. A lot of my friends are dads and I can attest that the gun jokes are common. They reflect the universal fear that fathers have for the welfare of their daughters when they start dating because the girls are growing up and going out where they can’t be there to protect them. Country/western singer Rodney Atkins even has a pretty good song about it titled “Cleaning This Gun.” Some years ago, I remember a co-worker telling me that, when his daughter started dating, he said to the boy: “Tonight, you will have the two most important things in the world in your hands, my daughter and your life.” Although I doubt Vito was joking when he said that. Another friend of mine came up with a novel solution to the problem. When his daughters became teenagers he got each of them their own shotgun so that they could handle any issues themselves. That’s what I call female empowerment.

    I read the article that you linked and I agree with you that the writer’s hysteria over firearms caused him to miss the point. I doubt that the daughters of the women who wrote in for advice were that concerned about the gun issue but instead felt the usual teenage girl’s embarrassment about references to their physical maturity and irritation at their parents interference with their budding social lives. I agree with you, that when dads and grandfathers notice that their daughters are maturing, it triggers a reaction that is protective rather than salacious. Commenting that one’s child is growing up isn’t a sign that a parent is a predator. After all, what mother hasn’t told her teenage son that he is handsome (especially after she got him to put on a suit.)

    As is common with the left, the “Ask a Dad” columnist found it “beyond (his) level of understanding” that one could joke about using a gun. I find it curious given that the left, so easily offended by jokes, readily accepted leftist congressman Eric Swalwell’s excuse that his comment about domestic use of nuclear weapons was just a joke. Horror of horrors that a dad should joke about protecting his daughter with a gun but a jest about nuking Omaha is fine. I suggest that is another example of what you point out is the selective outrage of the left that is so tolerant of honor killings and forced marriages etc.

    I pity the poor fellow who marries and has children with an anti-male feminist who thinks fathers are inherently sexual threats to their daughters just as I pity the woman who expects a soy boy to be much of a dad.

    Liked by 4 people

  5. As always, you’ve packed a lot into your post!

    Divisions will always exist; that’s just life. However, for the most part, people had learned to deal with it in a more mature manner. I saw the divisions start to increase during the Bush Sr. years, but it still wasn’t too bad. It really skyrocketed under the Obama regime. His rule validated the divisions, brought them to the surface, and justified them. How? By exactly what timefoolery42 says; textbook case of projection. They see all the racism, sexism, microaggressions, etc. everywhere, because that is their internal reality, which they project on the “enemy”. While projection can happen on both sides, it is leftism that has made it into practically an art form. Some had agendas to push. Others, because that is what they were indoctrinated to believe.

    The hyper-sexualization of EVERYTHING is a major problem. It prevents people – especially men – from forming close, loving relationships with each other. When every touch, glance or smile gets interpreted sexually, people become physically and emotionally isolated. We humans NEED physical touch. Lots of it. We NEED close bonds formed with other people; especially those of the same sex. But since we are now being taught that a simple hug or even a complement is sexual in nature, we have a generation of love (philia, storge and agape) starved people who try to fill that emptiness the only way they know how; through sexual “love” (eros). It is causing all sorts of psychological damage, which in turn is causing physical damage.

    Your example of the child in heels; I’m not a fan of what passes for girls clothes, especially shoes. More because even ordinary shoes for girls are designed for appearance, not play. Even runners had heels! I had to by my daughters shoes and clothes in the boys department, so they could run and play without injuring themselves, and without destroying their clothes the first time they tried to climb a tree. But there are times when dressing up is appropriate, and boys and girls both should learn how to dress and behave for the occasion. What that is, changes with the times of fashion. Children learn by imitating adults, and those daddy-daughter dances are an excellent way for men to model to their daughters, how they should be treated! How grown up that little girl must have felt, and how wonderful for her father to compliment her! The mother, on the other hand, has problems!

    The crazy thing is, the same people who flip out over heels sexualizing children (there are real problems with that; we don’t need to invent fake ones!) are the same people who would praise and defend infants in hijab. Even within Islam, the hijab, or other covering, was for post-pubescent girls. There is only one reason a female is to be “modest” and cover herself in Islam, and that is to protect men from lustful thoughts and thereby leading them to sin. In Islam, if a woman is not covered, a man can rape her, and it’s her fault, because she made him doing it by showing the shape of her body and not covering her hair. So when I see a baby in her stroller, or toddling next to mom, wearing a hijab, it is a major warning sign, because it is blatantly showing that this little girl is viewed as a sexual being. It is disgusting and horrifying. Yet this actual sexualization of girls gets a pass, because Islam gets a pass on everything. Meanwhile, I’ve had anti-Christians, who have gone on and on about how terrible Christianity is towards women and non-whites (which displays amazing ignorance of Christianity) flip out when I pointed out this reality of Islam, denying what the koran and hadith say, and defending the indefensible.

    The cognitive dissonance must to so painful.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Divisions will always exist; that’s just life”. No, not really. Divisions come from belief systems. Name one that doesn’t divide, whether political or religious? Belief is the problem. Both sides and all denominations are wrong, and living proof belief is the seedbed of tribalism and is a cancer on humanity.


      • That’s a cute little misdirection. Belief systems also always exist. It is impossible for humans to all believe the same things, so you’re basically proving my point.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Is it? You are then a part of the bigger problem. Why is it so important for you to believe something? Everyone wants a belief and they’re all different, even within your own religion. People argue over what to believe, but I say belief itself is the problem. And I’m right. Nothing compares to the decisiveness of it, and no Christian objective has ever been met it proven. How long would you give any other idea to show results it promises? Certainly not 2000 years. It’s a hoax that never has produced the promised outcomes. Ever since it’s inception it has divided from the bottom all the way to the top. Political beliefs as well. Why is it what you believe politically piss off half the population, while what they believe pisses off your half? By design, that’s how.


      • Now, see, here you are, proving Lady of Reason’s point for her, not just in this post, but others, as well! You seem to have your own definition of “belief” and, the more you talk, the more it comes out that what you really are talking about is Christianity, and that you are anti-Christian.

        Which is, in itself, a belief.

        Also, you’re pulling out all the stops when it comes to argumentation failures and logical fallacies, too. Just all over the place.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Go ahead, pull the apologetics 101 card. I believe nothing. And then criticize writing style and ignore content. You actually have defined yourself here, not me. Neither party nor your religion has any truth at all. Just word salad. I am equal when it comes to parties or religions. All a lot of talk and no results. Weird how one could embrace either.


      • LOL Oh, you are too funny – and not the least bit original. By the way “word salad” is not about writing style, but content; namely, the lack of content, hidden by the jumbled overuse of words.

        You know nothing about my “party” or my “religion”. The funny thing is, your “you actually defined yourself here, not me” is very much like a comment my mother often makes. She’s paranoid schizophrenic. What’s your excuse?

        Liked by 3 people

      • Nice. See how politics exudes kindness? Point proven. Heaven forbid a disagreement. Any group that will embrace you over belief, will betray you over unbelief.


      • It’s funny that you are projecting this onto me, when you were the one who couldn’t handle having someone disagree with you! Yes, I know you said you “don’t project”. It made me think of a parent holding an empty cooking jar saying “you ate all the cookies!”, while the kid sits there, cheeks stuffed full of cookie and chewing furiously, answering “no I didn’t!”

        Also, for your assistance:

        “unbelief in American
        (ˌʌnbəˈlif )
        a withholding or lack of belief, esp. in religion or in certain religious doctrines
        SYNONYMY NOTE: unbelief implies merely a lack of belief, as because of insufficient evidence, esp. in matters of religion or faith; , disbelief suggests a positive refusal to believe an assertion, theory, etc. because one is convinced of its falseness or unreliability; , incredulity implies a general skepticism or disinclination to believe.”
        Collins Dictionary.

        As an example, your comments and insistence that Christianity (something which you brought into the conversation, btw) is false is a position of disbelief, not unbelief. Unbelief would be an agnostic, not an atheist, position.

        Also, your other statement of “I believe nothing” is self refusing, since it is a belief statement.

        And from what I could see, this conversation left politics behind, long ago. Also, you might want to do some study into argumentation and debate. It’s difficult to have a valid conversation when the only thing you’ve been doing is throwing out argumentation failures and logical fallacies.

        Liked by 2 people

      • After reading some of your posts I think you are quite the delight even though we may disagree on many levels. I usually try to get to know some background but with my long travel day and tiredness I broke the code. My apologies if I came over a little strong. You have a nice evening. All the best!

        Liked by 3 people

      • You certainly are smug about what I don’t believe. I might actually surprise you if you could possibly see how narrow and offensive you are.


      • It not truly offending me, but it is bizarre how one could be so adamant about belief with the historically negative results, then go to finger pointing. I’m just as perturbed with Democrats as well. What has happened is people get sucked into taking sides and think it’s there way or nothing. How can someone as smart as farmer get sucked in to two choices amongst 300million people. It a shame


      • Again it’s just typical declaring to me my belief. Not believing something no one has ever seen or heard is not belief. Disbelief, un belief, are not really ideologies. Not being political doesn’t mean I have an ideology worked out that I believe in although Ive been working on it. I know the two parties we have here are corrupt, and I am not alone in that, nor can I align with either. Does that make me a different type of believer of some kind? Of course not.

        Liked by 2 people

      • LOL!! Oh, that is too funny! Projection, here it is! You’ve been smug and offensive from your very first post, but since I point out your logical fallacies, you’ve projected *your* smugness, offensiveness – and yes, narrowness – onto me.

        We’re in a limited text format. We can only draw conclusions based on what we read from each other. I don’t know what you are like in the real world, and I don’t care, since we’ll probably never meet in person.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Dear Jim,

        If you don’t like America, maybe move to China, the biggest atheist nation on earth. When you criticize the government, and they beat you half to death, you can then appreciate our Christian heritage. Unfortunately, the media and schools have intentionally dumbed down our population, because without a historical reference point, there is nothing to compare their nonsense with, and we are easy to brainwash.

        Also, the sex drive was to lead to marriage and children, period! Contraception, abortion, pornography, and homosexuality are all illegal, since the Supreme Court never had a Constitutional right to legalize them. Our Declaration of Independence states our rights come from nature and nature’s God.

        ‘An unjust law is no law at all’

        Liked by 1 person

      • I like it here but think we can do better. I have a place in Panama as well, and ya know, it’s just friendlier and more open. Not hung up on sex like Christians here. Just because China hasProblems doesn’t mean that we can’t do better than China. America has flaws that would be easily fixed if religion didn’t divide end of politics didn’t divide all based on beliefs.


  6. “Quite frankly, a woman such as a mother, does not have the full sense of the dynamic between man-to-man interactions and how men express sentiments is not the same often as how a woman might express it. The “protect your daughters” jokes are an example of that. ”

    Well said. We all have inter-gender language that only we understand. To try and cross that boundary is often a massive fail.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. I think you underestimate how your party set a fork in the road many years ago. If you think this is mainly a left problem you are missing a contextual picture. Why are there laws to protect minorities? Because with the right (mainly religions forcing their moralities on non believers) we drag gays and blacks behind pickup trucks and form lynch mobs and burn people over the importance of this right-wing morality. Islam is no different. Too many of your politics have religious underpinnings that are intolerant of others over a mere set of beliefs. The left didn’t bring the wedge to the party.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Just to reiterate what I thought you said – So because some people (who are no longer alive) were bad to people (who are no longer alive), and what ever they did is no longer done and routinely condemned on all sides,

      so now a father can’t say that his daughter looks all “grown up” without being considered a perv?

      Ok. Got it.

      Liked by 3 people

      • I didn’t say that at all. I never even addressed that topic because I actually agree with that part of it. Why don’t you address my comment instead of typical avoidance like religions are famous for


    • You do realize that the Dems created the KKK to fight the Reps, after the Reps were created basically to abolish slavery? All those laws against discrimination were brought forward by the Reps, passed by the Reps and voted against by the Dems. The Dems brought in Jim Crow laws. Good Lord. I’m Canadian, and even I know that.

      Liked by 3 people

      • But who now is closest to those groups? Good lord, I’m an American and can see that right wing people are against gays and women’s rights. Let’s talk current events. Btw, nicely evaded points


      • Not evaded; you were the one who brought up the past.

        As for today, no, “right wing” people are not “against” gays or women’s rights. That’s ludicrous, but it is exactly the propaganda leftism is instilling. Even the “alt-right” – a very small, self-identified group – is actually leftist in their social ideology, but you won’t know that since the political and social left, particularly in the media, will label anyone who isn’t a leftist, “alt-right”, “far right” or “extreme right”. All of which is pure BS.

        Liked by 2 people

  8. Isn’t it ironic how the left is more concerned with old school thought and micro-aggressions than it is with overt misogyny and aggressions of their “pet” groups they’re claiming to protect?
    And how is it believing in a Christian God is bad, but believing in a God that declares Jihad on everyone who is not muslim a-ok? But no, they would rather pick on grandma and grandpa and the man-God Jesus who just so happened to pay the price on our behalf for the sins of the world. Our bad.
    However, we ALL do need to be aware and sensitive on BOTH sides of our interactions with others before we judge and impose our beliefs and opinions on others without the lack of respect and understanding of where they’re coming from.

    Liked by 4 people

      • This is interesting I came across this while looking for something
        Luke 12:49-53
        Christ Divides Men
        49 “I [y]have come to cast fire upon the earth; and [z]how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to [aa]undergo, and how distressed I am until it is accomplished! 51 Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division; 52 for from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”

        Liked by 1 person

  9. The Left has been pushing for these divides for a long, long time. They pushed for women to join the workforce and shove their kids into daycare so the child learns not to rely on their parent and instead look to the state to take care of them. And are we really surprised that this has led to grownups who continue to look to the state to take care of them?? I’m extremely disgusted with the very idea that hugging grandpa as a little girl might lead to them giving in to coercion later! Getting love from your family at all age levels actually does the exact opposite – it reinforces the idea that they are loved and supported by their family, and the confidence that comes with knowing that your family has your back. And to suggest that a father, who has shown no sexual interest in his little girl, might suddenly see her that way simply because she put on her first pair of heels is DISGUSTING. It says far more about the mother who would think such a horrible thing and then air it in public. And the irony of this is all the pedos within the Democratic Party like Jeffrey Epstein and others who literally prey on underage children!!! The DNC is no arbiter of Family Values by any means and all their ploys are meant purely to divide, especially when they put forth the idea that people should unfriend anyone who doesn’t think and vote exactly like you. They do exactly what they accuse Conservatives of doing, which is, of course, textbook projection. Everything they truly think and feel, they must accuse someone else of before anyone can point out the mote in their own eye. Indeed, the Left has done their level best to create a situation in which Socialism can be more easily implemented on individuals who have been divided from their support system of relations and friends.

    Liked by 4 people

    • I agree for the most part with what you say, however, I was thrust by default from a left-leaning society; to a far-right society. They’re pretty bad too. They criticize the morals of the women in the family but the men to and extent get a no-holds barred in the expectations in their moral conduct and blaming Eve is rampant. The baby-boomers in the family lean into grandma’s perspective of female subservience and helplessness without her man. God forbid one of us are sick, or flawed, etc..oh those poor guys. It’s a no win situation with these far-righties either. They utilize the progressive ideas of the left when it suits them, and throw equality and value under a train when it suits them. True conservatives respect an individual’s boundaries and don’t cross the lines to exploit their agenda either. I think that’s where Trump has some authentic balance. We want to preach and teach righteousness and do our best to live by those ideals without interfering with others nor having others interfere with us WITHOUT compromising morals, ethics, and standards.

      Liked by 3 people

      • I don’t care either how people choose to live as long as no one is being negatively impacted. It’s when an agenda is pushed that hurts people do I care, such as “any family is a real family” divorce propaganda, or hook up culture, pretending gender doesn’t exist with far reaching consequences, or an attitude of entitlement paid for by our taxes and policies that drain our resources for some examples do I care about what others choose to do/support.

        Liked by 2 people

    • ”The Left has been pushing for these divides for a long, long time. They pushed for women to join the workforce and shove their kids into daycare” This is very misleading. No one has forced this upon anyone but a system that required two parents to work, therefore equal pay and accommodations were necessary since the economy you are so proud of forced women into the workforce. Btw, it should be their choice, but capitalism means you have to join the struggle or be on the street. How in any way is this the left pushing women into the workforce? Your entire comment is bias to your party.


      • Women weren’t forced into the workforce by the “economy.” They were forced into the workforce by a war that took all the men away.

        Capitalism is the free exchange of goods and services. If it isn’t free (meaning, voluntary), it isn’t capitalism.

        Liked by 2 people

      • But we are voluntold to participate. Your timing is off. My grandmother worked during the war then went back home to raise kids after it was over. My mother was home until around 1980 when they were no longer making ends meet. Inflation has outpaced wages. Play the game whether you want to or not, or be destitute. This is a problem with a system that demands growth for investors. Where will it lead? When will enough be enough?


      • No, my timing is not off. I was responding to your specific claim about women being “forced” into the workforce (meaning; jobs outside the home). The return of increased women in the workforce is much more complex than that, and is more directly related to the rise of “feminism” – particularly those agenda driven feminists that convinced women that being a homemaker, raising children, was a form of slavery and that they could only be “equal” to men if the left their children to others to raise. The need for two incomes to support a home and children is also more complex, but also connected to this, as well as increased government intervention in the economy and our lives, taking more and more of our incomes as taxes, both up front and hidden.

        Most economic problems are related to government intervention in a free economy. Capitalism itself is self-correcting. People just take their money, or the the services they provide in exchange for money, elsewhere if they are not satisfied with what they are getting in return.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Free economy? Where you either perform constantly at a high level or get left behind? That one? Where the economic divisions keep kids at home now into their 30s? We should all be ashamed of where this is going. Both sides are wrong and guilty as hell.


      • You seem to have some very odd interpretations of both capitalism and our economy.

        Also, historically, it is very rare for adult children to leave the home; usually, households were make up of at least 3 generations. Just like the idea of having homes big enough for every child to have their own bedroom, this is a very modern notion. But that’s another conversation.

        Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s