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 hell go out like a man man 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! 😉

Advertisements

My Womanhood is NOT Your Costume…

Transgenderism is a hot and contentious topic for the Left, with many angles at play! The part I want to focus on in all this lunacy though, is on the premise the Left has put out in that since gender is a mere social construct, it justifies the legitimacy of recognizing transgender people, especially women, as being entitled to be treated as if they were actual biological women (or men, but I’ll focus on women for the scope of this article)! Their argument is that gender is a social construct, something society raises you to be, rather than an innate quality. They further add the confusion that the undeniable biological aspect is now written off as its own separate thing as one’s “sex”, but “gender” is the purely social aspect, such as wearing certain clothing, or liking certain things over others. In essence, it really comes down to a nature vs. nurture debate, and how fluid these concepts really are.

Now, I will say up front, I don’t think that many people who label themselves transgender are being insincere or that they just want to be say, a woman on a superficial whim. I think many truly do feel they were born in the wrong body, and have sympathy for how much that must hurt and how utterly confusing that must be. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone! However, society deciding that this is normal for a person to feel about themselves is absurd, not just a normal biological variation! I also argue that the idea of “gender as a social construct” brings with it many detrimental and frankly insulting implications that many take for granted and completely overlook!

First off though, what are we really saying when we say that? It’s not just a neutral statement of a proposed fact. No! It’s the logical flaw that by implying it’s not a natural trait, and it’s not innate, it doesn’t matter at all. The real idea behind this is that gender should be obsolete, and because it’s not something we consider natural anymore, it’s completely outdated and irrelevant! What we really mean by “gender is a social construct” is that “gender is something artificially imposed and needs to be gotten rid of”.  That statement is loaded, and carries a very heavy value judgement! If it were natural, in Left’s mind, they couldn’t undermine and de-legitimize it as easily..

But, you know what also is a “social construct”? Race! That’s right, the Left now says race too is not grounded in biology, but in society’s whims! However, can we be trans-racial??? Heck no! Just ask that woman who was ousted for being biologically white, but identified as black! If a white person tries to do so, they are automatically being racist, and appropriating someone’s race! One may argue, “but racial differences are very obvious, so you’d know someone cannot be another race…” but don’t men and women look different? And not just clothes, make up and hair! Men grow beards, women don’t. Men’s bodies are bigger, stockier, stronger, differently shaped. Not to mention what’s down below! 😉 Humans after all, are a sexually dimorphic species! The argument against racial appropriation by the Left, that especially if white, you can’t just wear say, a black person’s styles, appropriate their music, their traditions, their food, their heritage and claim you’re one of them, is based on the idea that you haven’t been through their struggles. You want the “fun” aspects of being them, but you haven’t faced their hardships. Haven’t faced their struggles, their obstacles, and to add insult to injury, you’re part of why they have those struggles. Yet, you want to claim their unique heritage as your own??? The nerve!

Well, guess what? This should apply to gender too! If what the Left says is true, about women being disadvantaged, then what gives a man the right to appropriate what belongs to women? If women are living in fear of being assaulted by men, raped by men, paid less than men, devalued as lesser, then why on Earth should a man get to appropriate their unique heritage, in other words, as women? If it is true, as many Leftists believe, that men have male privilege, just like whites have white privilege, then isn’t it privilege to be able to just pick and choose to express one’s self as the female gender but have the option of going back to being a man when convenient? It’s just like a white person wearing blackface! They can take off the color at the end of the day. A person of color has to live with it, and the stigma it allegedly brings. Well same for gender! A guy can take off the dress, the heels, the make up, shave his head again. A woman, however, cannot just transform into a man and all her troubles will go away! She cannot take off her “costume” so she won’t be assaulted, raped, paid less, devalued. She has to live with the struggles too, not just the perks. The man in the dress can punch the attacker, throw off the rapist, while she is helpless to throw off someone twice her strength! Even if he decides to never live as a man again, he still can get the upper hand with his physically stronger body! Also, in line with the Left’s concept of privilege, isn’t it a form of privilege to be able to just throw away your privilege??? A man choosing to be a woman gives up his “male privilege” and swapping it for vulnerability and scorn. However, as “oppressed” as he then makes himself, he chose to take on that. A real woman didn’t. She was born with the fact she would have far greater chances of being assaulted, raped, devalued. She does not have the luxury to throw away privilege wantonly, nor gain it by becoming a man!

No. It’s NOT a two way street. Transgender men are not just “one of the guys”. They do not have extra “privilege”. However, a transgender woman now must be treated as a full woman by Leftist decree! Even if he genuinely feels like he wants to live his life as a woman and never go back, he can. That’s the thing. And that he had the choice to give up his “privilege” of being a man in the Left’s allegedly “patriarchal” society. Real women never have those luxuries. Just like a white person can impersonate, and maybe even genuinely feel like a black person, but has the choice to go back to being white and on top, to take off the “costume”. If a guy wanting to be a girl wants to wear the pretty dresses, the heels, curl his hair, go to the girl’s nights as one of the girls, hang at the mall, do all the fun things women like to do, he should also have had to face her struggles. To be afraid to walk alone at night. To carry pepper spray. To know the fear of being harassed on the street. To be held back on the job. Underestimated, viewed as weak, a victim. Why should someone get to reap in the rewards, without having to go through the struggles? Do I believe the world is really so bleak for women? Not as much as the Left certainly does! But by the Left’s own logic and views on women being oppressed, this is a logical argument…

Also, and less obvious, is a quite insulting implication inherent in this argument: That womanhood, as a social construct, is merely just a superficial costume that anyone can put on… The idea that all womanhood really is, is putting on a dress and heels and make up, styling your hair, and doing “girly things”. As long as you do those, you’re a woman! However, I and many other women would disagree! There’s so much more than superficial looks or going through the motions involved in the intangible parts of womanhood.  The sisterhood all women share together in their deep experiences, and very natures runs far deeper than our make up, our heels, or dresses and hair. Liking shopping and fashion and traditional womanly things is not all there is to our very essence, our unique humanity as women. See, also like one’s race, one’s sex does indeed affect how you perceive the world, and how the world perceives you. Women do not have the same upbringing, the same experiences as men, not because there’s a mass conspiracy that half of humanity wants to oppress us, but because of the simple fact we are NOT men!

Our trillion or so cells speak the plain and simple truth: we are different in our very core. Study after study shows girls consistently play in a more nurturing way than boys. We evolved to nurture, to be more gentle, to be social. We evolved to be the child bearers, and experience the wonders of motherhood, which no man will ever experience. Even the Left acknowledges this in its anti-man “you can never have an opinion on women’s issues because you aren’t a woman!”. See? Even they know, deep down men and women are innately different! That our experiences differ. Our challenges differ. Our womanhood runs far deeper than any costume, any “social construct”, yet, the Left argues implicitly in the idea that a man can put on a dress, heels, inject some hormones, that he can be a woman through superficial behaviors alone, that womanhood is just an actor’s role to play and our feminine style a mere “costume” that can be taken on and off. Oh, and by the way, doesn’t the use of hormones help point to our biological differences too??? 😉  One can’t say hormones our bodies we’re genetically programmed to release upon puberty that make us different are a “social construct”!

Ladies, we are NOT just a costume that anyone can just put on and pretend to be! Our womanhood, our shared experiences, our challenges, the deep bond rooted in womanhood we share with our mothers from day 1 cannot be replicated in someone who is biologically, and socially, raised as a man! Even those who were raised to be men from infancy, but were biological women always felt “different” and not like just another “guy”… Same for girls who were guys inside… To say that womanhood is something anyone can be on a whim, on a feeling, is gravely belittling and insulting to women everywhere! It’s like a woman saying she can just experience every aspect of manhood, without his struggles, his upbringing, his innate nature.

Yes, I know people literally feel they were born in the wrong body, a woman’s soul/mind in a man’s body, but if you were raised as a man, are biologically a man, then no you can’t truly feel like a true woman, know what it is to be one, anymore than one can truly, intrinsically perceive the world like someone who’s a native speaker of a language can versus someone who happens to speak it fluently but was not raised from day 1, in the culture of the speaker! Yes, you can learn a language quite well, but you can never truly perceive the world and be a native speaker within their cultural matrix and have their exact perception of the world though their native tongue. That’s my analogy for experiencing the opposite sex’s world… You can play the part well, but you cannot truly be the real deal unless you are!

Look, I don’t demonize transgender people for wanting to be the other sex. What I do heavily criticize though, is the idea that they can be the exact same, and be entitled to the exact same treatment as a real woman in this case, because they never truly can be. And they know that themselves! Indeed! No matter how much they “transition”, they know in their heart of hearts they are not a woman in the same way as real biological women! They can come mighty close, even look like a woman, sound like one, like in the case of Jazz Jennings, maybe you can’t even tell just by looking. But do you honestly feel “women” like “her” truly, honestly, and 100% believe they are indeed women in every single sense of the word??? I’m not out to say she needs to switch back, or she’s out to hurt anyone personally. She’s probably just trying to genuinely live out “her” life as a woman.

However, she and the others set a precedent where society devalues our essence, our very humanity as women that only a real, biological woman can ever truly know. The inherent sexism in the idea that men can just be women upon their choice devalues our womanhood into a superficial acting job! If a person’s race is not your costume, a person’s culture is not your costume, why should a person’s gender or sex be someone else’s to appropriate? This is heresy for the Left to say, but I will say it loud and clear guys, : My womanhood is NOT your costume! 

He Had a Dream…

Perhaps one of the most iconic speeches of the past century was the “I Have a Dream” speech by Martin Luther King Jr. A civil rights activist, he truly was on the front line fighting the prejudices of his day. Prejudices that included segregation in schools and businesses, a world where a black person could be refused service, black children denied entrance at attractions, couldn’t even drink from the same water fountain, and yes, even lynched… His activism inspired others after him to mark a day in his honor for people to reflect on what his dream was and where we are today with it.

Now, most think that this topic resides more in Leftist discourse than conservative discourse, but I disagree! Yes, the Left has pushed the narrative of black oppression, and more widely, people of all races but white, and use MLK to prove their points. However, this is flawed. First of all, since when did the Left own the dream MLK gave the black community? Where in his speech does it say “I have a dream for black democrats…” I thought that dream was for everyone… The Left however, seeks to control the narrative of black oppression and of course, blames the white race.

Problem is, and I’ve covered this in far greater detail before in my “Breaking the Cycle” post, not all issues within the black community today are caused directly by white people and past oppression, such as the Jim Crow discrimination MLK did fight against! In a pop culture that embraces music with themes of gangsters, drugs, prostitutes and objectifying women, clothes that signal “I’m a gangster”, rundown neighborhoods condoning crime where promising young people are gunned down in their prime, anyone who wants better labeled uncle Toms and such, is not a society that breeds independence and respect! One honestly can’t blame one other race for injustices long past, for the current poverty and crime in a society that perpetuates it through their clothes, music, language, trashes their neighborhoods, bullies their best and brightest, objectifies women and where 75% or so are without a father figure, and has welfare cradle to grave rather than just to get back on their feet. Yes, you can be poor, and your past can disadvantage you greatly, but the past is gone now. Sounds brutal and cruel to say this so frankly, but change cannot happen until the truth is spelled out. MLK knew that when he called out the issues plaguing his generation!

Now, in the present day, and with a blank slate as a future, why not rewrite your story? Black people, who have been enslaved a century ago have broken the bonds of that servitude and created their own identity in America. Black people who were’t even allowed to be in the presence of white people now are able to go where they please, be friends with, even marry white people, things never dreamed of in the Jim Crow era not so long ago! Do people of color still face prejudice and injustices? Of course they do! But so does everybody else… Prejudice is as old as humanity, and far older than the modern notions of race! It’s how you fight back and overcome that prejudice that determines your strength, not your victimhood status like the Left wants to believe! See, being a victor and not a victim, as another inspiring conservative black leader Candace Owens says, does not mean you were never victimized and treated unjustly. It means you fought back and empowered yourself instead of capitalizing on your helplessness… The black community has risen out of Jim Crow and was once thriving in this country. However now, much of it is sinking back into the “hood”, a life of crime and welfare as a lifestyle…

Now do all black people embrace such a detrimental culture??? Absolutely not!!! Countless people of color are appalled, embarrassed, and saddened they are painted with that awful stereotype! Don’t take my word for it! Black conservatives like Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams say it outright: their community needs a huge change! They, and other rising black leaders, such as Candace Owens who formed the current #Blexit Movement for people of color to leave the Leftist narrative of dependency and victimhood, and CJ Pearson, another rising young black conservative on Twitter, want more for their neighborhoods, their race, and their society. To them, skin color does not define who they are, what their destiny will be and what they have to think.

Race does not define a person’s character, actions do. That is the core message of MLK’s activism. The segregation, discrimination, poverty and such of his time was fueled by this notion that the black race was inherently inferior, subhuman and less deserving due to their skin color, their genetics, and a flawed view that their inherent natures were inferior to the white race. Luckily this attitude is being destroyed more and more in the present day. Black people have achieved greatness. Proven themselves just as much of value as anyone else. One was our president (albeit not a great one!) for two terms. Point is, do you honestly imagine that happening in 1960??? If people of color can achieve the presidency for two terms in a row, then why are so so many disproportionately in prisons and poverty? The Left has an easy answer: racism. However, the truth is far more nuanced, including of course, internal societal attitudes about crime and education…

I admire conservatives of color and think they too, have their own dream. I can’t speak for them with 100% certainty, but I do believe they would likely have these dreams:

A dream where their race is defined by their merit, not their skin color via affirmative action…

A dream where their communities want more than just gangs and poverty…

A dream where a generation graduates high school and goes onto college and beyond in record numbers, not in prisons disproportionately to the rest of the US population!

A dream where all little boys and girls are raised with loving involved fathers and intact families…

A dream where their race represents the top CEO’s, business men and women, professors, academics, doctors, lawyers, in people’s minds, not a welfare or victimhood stereotype!

A dream where every young aspiring student is applauded for getting great grades and scholarships to fine institutions, celebrate as the best and brightest, not derided as an uncle Tom or beaten if caught with a book…

A dream where their leaders challenge them into action, not lull them into complacency with dependence and victimhood to gain more votes…

A dream ultimately, where they’re seen as people, period. Not defined by traits merely skin deep by anyone!

Yes, they too, have their own dream! Dreams of being just like everyone else, who is successful, driven, determined, bright and passionate to make a real and lasting change! That is MLK’s legacy. Not something dated from the 60’s, but the message that change can, and must be made continuously as new challenges arise. He truly was a victor, NOT a victim! To all conservatives of color: I admire your perseverance, your strength, and determination in the face of prejudice of not just those who shun conservatives and the frank truths in our world, but from your own communities, your own people, a party who thinks they own you and your goals, dreams and aspirations! Always remember, YOU define you, NOT your skin color!

Happy MLK day 🙂

Oh, and for those who will cry “racist!” at me and think I’m pulling this all out of my butt, take a look at these:

Black student rejects victimhood status: ‘I am going to break stereotypes’

Civil Suit Filed As Gifted Black Girl Bullied For “Acting White,” Principal Refused To Act

Walter William’s Insights…

Thomas Sowell’s Wisdom

And more and more are walking away!…

Yes, We Need Strong Men!

In light of recent events with Gillette’s anti-traditional man commercial, people are speaking out and speaking up for the traditional man! I wanted to cover this topic before, but now seems like the prime time to do so. See, the idea of the traditional man, like the traditional woman, is under attack. The gender neutral movement of radical feminism is not truly about making things fair for women, but an attempt to eliminate any natural differences between men and women in society! They say gender is a social construct, which implies it is theirs to manipulate, and engineer in whatever Leftist direction they choose.

This has created a monster: One where little boys are now forbidden to play soldier, roughhouse, or pursue a mate later in life. All gender roles are now un PC, and boys must be taught to play with dolls, wear pink, and mothers encourage their sons to “let out their feelings” and be “vulnerable”. A boy’s natural energy is pathologized in schools as a special ed issue or a video game a gateway to being the next shooter. A little boy hugging a teacher is an assault, or pursing a playground crush if she says “eew!”. Boys creating harmless mischief and antics, or a no girls allowed tree house or club is not “sexist”. A man who wants his wife to raise his children, and vows to protect her, or puts women first in his life is now “patronizing”. A father who guards his daughter’s heart is accused of treating her like a slave. A military that wants strong men, not weaker women is now “discriminatory”… And so on and so on.

Now, the Left says gender roles are too restrictive, and enforce a “patriarchy”, but did they ever think why those roles were there in the first place? Like it or not, men are women are different. Different physically, and yes, in aptitude and emotionally as well. Humans are a sexually dimorphic species after all, if you just look down below 😉 Our traditional evolved roles suited our unique traits, thus, men being the protector and provider and doing more physical labor, while women doing the child rearing, and keeping the home, foraging, making materials needed back at camp, while the men went out to hunt and such. Many un-industrialized cultures still do this. However, as the Left points out, we’re in the 21st century, not the stone age! Our roles can become more fluid than man hunt, woman gather! And to an extent, I agree. Women and men can overlap more in today’s society in roles such as work and childcare. However, some things have not changed…

We still need our men to protect and provide for society. The cold hard truth is, women are weaker physically than men. Think of why it’s so appalling for a man to hit a woman. It’s appalling to be violent towards anyone, but the key here, as many would agree, is the woman is at an unfair disadvantage, just like it would be unfair to pair wrestlers of vastly different weight classes together for a match! Women are still more vulnerable to violence and assault, due to their weaker physicality. Men have more ways to fight back than women. Why are more women raped than men? Assaulted? It’s not the “patriarchy”, as men are also raped, but at a far less number. Now, one could argue male temperaments towards sexual aggression are higher, but doesn’t that, Lefties, imply that men and women are innately different??? Part of it, a large part I think is women simply are often too weak to fight a man pinning them down versus another guy. Try that on a guy, and take your life in your hands! Point is, women still need protection.

So does society at large. Think of who made up soldiers and armies throughout history. Only recently were women allowed in combat roles! Another sad state of affairs in gender neutral lunacy… Who defended the campsite from the rival tribe, or the predator? Who is there to defend the country in times of war? Who is strong enough to fight hand to hand with an enemy, or kick in a door or take down a thief? Who will defend a woman’s or a child’s life in times of need? Who was it helping women get out during mass shootings across the country? Who shielded their girlfriends in the movie theater and sacrificed their lives for the women they loved? Do we want all that to go away in the name of gender neutrality? Is this what toxic masculinity is about? Why do you think the marines’ tests of endurance wind the majority of women, and even men?! Do you honestly think that women in intense combat roles is just as good for our defense as the strongest men?

What’s so wrong with men being the leader and provider either? The feminists say women can look after themselves, and have the same providing role as men, but then who’s looking after the next generation? Just as men for eons have been the protectors and providers, women have been the child rearers and nurturers in the home. There is something about a mother’s love and care a father cannot replicate. Nor vice versa. “Mr. mom” will never replace REAL mom as much as the radical feminists wish to delude themselves. Mommy’s work is not more important than being there for the children, who need her at home the most, no matter what is deemed “empowering” to women at the expense of the next generation. Nor will a single mom replace the guidance and leadership a father can give his sons as future men, or his daughter in matters of the heart. As told before, the war on fatherhood is real, with dads being told to step down in their role as their children’s leader, especially in the lives of daughters. Now, it’s “toxic” to screen a daughter’s boyfriends, or tell her to wait and be chaste until the time is right. A man can’t show his daughter the men he chooses to trust her with without accusations of treating her like chattel! A woman can’t entrust her heart to her father anymore, or be given away at the altar without the Left whining about it! A man who is the rock of his family, the leader and provider is not outdated, just deemed “toxic” by the Left.

Toxic masculinity is NOT about saying “boys will be boys”, letting boys roughhouse, young men talking crudely in a private locker room, or a young man pursuing a date. It’s not the husband who will be the rock of his family, provide, honor and protect his wife. It’s not the man who feels women should be treated like ladies, let in first, given a seat, holding a door for them, paying for their date night. Nor is it the father who guards his daughter’s heart until marriage, or encourages her to know her worth and makes sure any suitor knows it too 😉 Or the brother who protects his sister’s honor when the bully called her a slut. Or the good Samaritan who stood up for a woman in need. Or the man who answers the call to defend his country or his community as a solider or policeman.

Boys talking crudely is NOT about justifying raping women! A man who provides for his wife is not controlling her finances. A father who guards the heart of his daughter is not treating her like his personal property, but his personal responsibility. A young man in pursuit of a girl is not forcing himself on her, nor forcing her to date him. A man who believes “women and children first” or that violence against women is a special type of evil is not being patronizing, but honoring the fact his strength was meant to serve the weaker and more vulnerable among us. No! REAL toxic masculinity is the wife beater. The abuser. The drunkard who won’t provide. The cheating husband. The rapist. The pedophile. The criminal. The enemy. The terrorist. The harasser that won’t stop. The bully who calls your sister that vile name.

I’m so grateful I was raised by a strong man. A man who can be sentimental, but never carried away in emotion and hysteria! A man who is the rock in his family, whom his wife and children are his priority. Who always wants to provide and jumps at every opportunity to do so. Who guards my heart until I find the right man to take his place one day once he is gone. Who shows me what a real man is, what he does and what he expects of a lady in return. Who would lay down his life for my mother and I. Who believes that every woman deserves to be protected and honored by men in society. Who can laugh with the guys over a lewd joke or “locker room talk” yet views a real rapist or assaulter of women as more vile than a murderer! And can be tough without being a bully. Who can like guy things like monster trucks, sports cars, guns, etc… yet also appreciate the beauty of art and color, or music. Who can appreciate a good looking woman, without ever one thought of being unfaithful to his wife.

He believes in gender equality, and always treated the women in his life accordingly, yet also recognized that equal does not have to mean identical and that women have strengths where men don’t and men have strengths where women don’t. Nor in guarding my heart, views me as his personal property that he is entitled to do as he sees fit. In fact, he often tells me “It’s your decision” 😉 He wants me to have my own mind, my own path in life, my own career, but also, to open my heart to a man like himself. A protector and provider who will honor, protect, cherish, and lead me. He has real feelings, but is not weak. Is tough but not a bully. Appreciates a good looking woman, but not a slime bag. Can banter with the boys but never once mistreated a woman. Knows the worth of women in his life, but is not afraid to assert his own worth as a traditional masculine man!

Toxic masculinity is NOT the idea of the traditional man as provider, protector and leader of his family and his community! The man who can put up a good wresting match, or holds his emotions back to be there when his family needs him in times of crisis. The man who likes monster trucks and guns instead of soap operas, and knitting sweaters! The man who would rather avoid pink in his wardrobe. The man who tells his wife “I’ll provide for you and our children” or his daughter “he’s not good for you”. The man who answers the call of duty here and abroad. And it’s certainly not men who are man enough to have to shave each morning 😉

No, Actually, The World Doesn’t Owe You…

It’s a common issue for the Left: Whom to give reparations to? Or welfare, or affirmative action etc.. etc… Many groups clamor for their chance at getting their “due justice” from “histories of oppression”, marginalization and even violence! Even on a smaller less dramatic scale, we see this idea of those that have more, are obligated in some fashion to give to those who have less. Now, this all sounds well and good. After all, isn’t it just to give back what was wrongfully stolen, or to give to those more in need than yourself? The simple answer would be yes, of course it is and we should! However, like anything in this world, the answer is not so black and white…

These cases can be broadly broken up into a few basic scenarios. One, is the case of the marginalized group, mostly a minority ethnic or racial group claiming reparations for past historic injustices such as discrimination, conquest, even violence. Closely related is the affirmative action debate as historic discrimination happened in schools and the workplace for some groups, but also branches out to include other categories such as gender/sex and sexual orientation. Another case is the people who are at a socio-economic disadvantage and claim that those with more ought to give some of it to them so the balance is more even and the gap between rich and poor must be shrunken as far as possible. Also, on a much bigger scale, international claims to rights or moral obligations that the United States must or should honor in giving people asylum or citizenship to flee persecution, poverty or other events worldwide.

My stance on this? The world doesn’t owe you, we don’t owe you… Now, how on Earth could anyone think so callously or without empathy? Am I not aware that I could have been in their shoes too just as easily had fate turned out different? Of course I am! I get it, and do in fact, have a sense of altruism like the rest of us. In a perfect world, or close to perfect as it can be while still containing the same issues, the simple answer would be of course, I have more, so there’s enough to give to you, too! Problem is, it’s not a black and white cut and dried world, with easy solutions that work. Nor is everything on the surface the whole truth for the claimants to our help… Let’s break down the examples with a few:

Let’s start with the first scenario: The historically conquered then marginalized group. They say that since we took their lands long ago, subjected them to most inhumane brutalities, stamped out their culture and claim we continue to marginalize them, we owe them big time! On its face it seems a fair claim. After all, there’s no way around the truth that horrible things were done through out history to them. The group I’m thinking of is the many tribes of Native Americans. We have done many inhumane, horrible things that should be addressed in some form or another, mainly, to never do it again! Trouble is, the magnitude of their demands.

Many want their original lands repatriated back to them lost through our conquests of their people. However, this is not so easy to fulfill, for one thing, countless Americans now live on those lands, major cities built, neighborhoods grew… We’re not talking about the vast open wilderness of the 15th to 19th centuries here! And what about the generations of new inhabitants who never hurt one single Indian nor have even their grandparents? It was wrong early settlers took land through genocide and violence, but the current inhabitants of said land are as innocent as the natives who lived on it two centuries earlier! Which brings up another point in this not so clear cut moral dilemma…

They did it, too! Yes the Native Americans were not some “noble savage” stereotype of a peaceful nature-loving hippie! They were human just as much as anyone else and had the bad side of humanity just as much as we did. They burned, plundered, conquered and killed other fellow tribes in their areas. They may have not had the “guns, germs and steel”, but as far as morality goes, which we’re judging here, was just as barbaric as any European.

Had they an edge over another tribe, they would use it in a heartbeat and would have loved to have wiped out their enemies. So the question is then, what do they owe those people? I’m cool with giving over the land we took from them, as soon as they give back every little thing they ever took since they crossed the Bering Strait into North America from their enemies they marginalized, conquered, subjugated and oppressed…  In this case, maybe they could make a solid case we owe them something of some sort, but they can’t hide from the fact by their own logic then, they also owe someone the same things, too! Of course, they are not the only group that falls under similar situations, but this is one major example.

Another major example is more generic and socioeconomic in nature. The Left claims that people with more wealth and social status owe people who have less and they only got it through oppressing the people who have less. For example, if you live in a fancy neighborhood and send your kids to the finest schools, you are also obligated to help lift a kid from the ghetto out of poverty by placing them with your child, or your tax dollars have to go to a welfare system. Or you owe them a job at your company because they were “marginalized”. Or a school has to create scholarships for certain special interest groups. The moral issue here lies in the concept of “privilege” and who has it. The argument is that some people are more privileged and need to combat their privilege and the onus is on them to help fight the inequality of those without it. However things are not so cut and dried here either!

Trouble here is well, how did they get said privilege? Yes, they live in a good neighborhood, have a well paying job and are able to easily provide for their family. But how did they get into such good luck? Yes, some could have had it handed to them, or cheated their way up, but for many, it was hard work like everyone else, through the sweat and tears of their family who aspired for the next generation to have more. Point is, that “privilege” was earned. The rich CEO whose grandpa fled Nazi Germany and built the company from nothing, the high powered mom who worked her way into a middle class life out of a broken home by her work and hers alone and now is giving her kids a chance at a new life to give their kids and so on.

A (white) man like my dad whose grandparents fled the Armenian genocide, and lived a borderline poverty blue collar childhood yet is labeled privileged and the onus put on him to solve racial injustice. Why do these people owe someone with less, but can work their way up, too? And what about those simply born into “privilege” the same way someone else was born into disadvantage? We don’t blame the victim of uncontrolled circumstance, such as a marginalized minority for simply being born a minority! Why is it okay then to put the onus of change on the person born white, or male, and in a middle class family, things he couldn’t control either!

My last but certainly not least example is the “right” to asylum in the US and immigration. I’ve written about it in much detail before, so I’ll get straight to the point: We don’t owe anyone citizenship in this country, or asylum morally that is, simply because we have more resources. We’re not the world’s crash pad, nor babysitter. Nor do we want people who are ungrateful and bring their 3rd world injustices into this country, and demand welfare and resources that we do have the legal and moral obligation to give to our own citizens first! If the roles were reversed, the Left would argue that they don’t have to prioritize us over their people… Also, on an important side note, the asylum law says the first safe country, not the cushiest! 😉

Point is overall, there will always be people with more than you. There will always be those with less than you. Why is it automatically assumed that you owe someone who had less simply because you have more through your own hard work, or your lucky circumstance? The onus for change is not on someone simply because they have more fortunate circumstances. The onus is on YOU to work hard to change your life! You to study harder. Work harder. Grasp at more opportunities instead of waiting for them to be given to you, because for many who made it to the top: it wasn’t either. Conquest and historic injustices did happen, racism and sexism and other prejudices did have effects on the world. However, why is one group more responsible for reparations when the group claiming it also has skeletons in their closet? Or the REAL perpetrators have died generations ago? Or you claim asylum yet continue to perpetuate your injustices here?

Is this to say we should never reach out and lend a helping hand or try to make inequalities go away? Not at all! That’s not my point! Giving out of the kindness of one’s heart, altruism, empathy, charity, all have a place in this world. The problem starts when people think the generosity and giving has to be compulsory and others are entitled to it simply because we have more… We should all have generous hearts, which are open to give to those worthy of it. To lift a promising student out of poverty with a scholarship. To have charities to help the needy and break the cycle and give them the change to work their way to the top. To advocate to make sure minorities are not still marginalized or discriminated against for real. To help internationally without draining our resources we need for our own people. My family opens its doors to less fortunate friends. My dad is big on donating to charities as that’s how he was raised to give and serve others.

The key difference is that is true altruism. Given freely as a choice from the heart. What the Left demands is not altruism or goodwill towards fellow man, but forced social engineering! That Robin Hood socialist mentality that is forced and guilt tripped rather than given freely out of altruism and empathy from within. So in conclusion, no, the world doesn’t owe you anything simply for being disadvantaged in some way, because aren’t we all? No one is obligated to have the onus placed on them for your problems if they weren’t the direct cause of them. No one has everything they need or want. We just make do with what we have and work for what we don’t. Why can’t you?

Serving others does not mean enslaving yourself!

“Baby, It’s Triggering Outside”…

A new holiday tradition around the Christmas season is the Left getting triggered over the most benign things! From “Rudolph The Red Nosed Reindeer” being offensive for sending messages of people only accepting differences for what they can get out of you, to even getting in a huff over making fun winter holiday themed activities in school, even candy canes, the Left has become the Christmas, or more broadly, the Holiday Grinch!

Look, I’ve written before that I take a more moderate, reserved view about the whole “war on Christmas” business, even from a conservative view. As a secular person, I honestly don’t mind “Happy Holidays” over “Merry Christmas” and understand why businesses and employers want to use the broader term to not alienate potential customers or employees, or why government and municipal buildings/public spaces would not allude specifically to one holiday, or one religion in a country of religious freedom. In the grand scheme of culture wars, this particular one is one that takes a backseat in my opinion to far more negatively impactful issues, such as 3rd world values creeping in for instance. Saying “Happy holidays” is not the gateway to Sharia law or the persecution of those who do celebrate Christmas, including myself! That being said upfront, there IS a middle ground between “Christian theocracy”and PC “no-mention of any holiday allowed” dictatorship in its own right!

Having candy canes, red and green decorations, a Christmas tree generically decorated (which I’ll note is NOT a Christian symbol but comes from older Pagan traditions), wreaths, and non-religious songs playing do not cross the line into “Christians only” territory! It is possible to have generic winter themes stuff, and holiday things that don’t exclude anyone, even if they are traditionally associated with Christmas. Having an allergic, knee jerk reaction to an innocent wreath, candy canes, or even the colors red and green in the name of religious pluralism is outlandish, as you’re really stretching the scope of  “religious symbolism” into imaginary extremes! A “holiday party” at work is not the same as a church service! “Jingle Bells” is not the same as “Silent Night” in terms of specific religious content in a school holiday program for instance!

I also want to make it very clear, private businesses, property, citizens and such have just as much right to choose a specific holiday, and openly display overtly religious symbols of their choosing! I will fight for anyone’s right to say “Merry Christmas”, display nativity scenes, choose to openly celebrate Christmas as a religious holy day as these rights come with being a country that has freedom of religion. I support a private business emphasizing Christmas over a generic holiday season if they so choose to. Everyone has the right to display all the nativity scenes they want on their own property! Every citizen has the right to worship in the way they choose, just the government can’t favor or impose one on everyone which is why this opinion does not extend into the government/municipal sphere… Unfortunately, the Left can’t understand this nuance, and out of a knee jerk fear of offending or excluding, seek to ban anything even remotely related to the holidays for everyone…

To the Left nothing is safe, not even fun holiday/winter themed songs! “Baby it’s Cold Outside” is now anathema to the #MeToo hysterics who say it supports rape culture and the woman is being unethically coerced. “Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer”, a classic since 1964 is now told to have detrimental messages such as people only accepting differences if they can use you! A principal banished any Christmas or holiday activities whatsoever, even going so far as to ban candy canes on an urban legend it stands for “J” for Jesus and the red is Christ’s blood that would be proven false with a bit of research on her part! Even winter/holiday themed Starbucks cups that have winter/holiday designs and red and green, but no religious symbols whatsoever are making triggered snowflakes get in a tizzy over them excluding people!

If you follow and read my blog closely, many of these instances of utter hysteria are reminiscent of my earlier Halloween post where the Left also makes the innocent and innocuous into something perverted or offensive! I mean, come on! “Baby it’s cold outside” is nothing more than a fun song about a man and woman flirting playfully together. Its clear she is in no distress whatsoever nor is upset to be with the guy! She wants to stay and is coyly telling him to persuade her to over practical reasons why she should go home. Its more of “I really should go back, but I’m enjoying it so much, I need an excuse to stay”, NOT “I feel coerced and he’s trying to exert power over me to force me to stay with him”… Not to mention the glaringly obvious: What about all the vulgar rap songs and pop music our youth listens to that objectify and degrade women, and have lyrics that if #MeToo were applied fairly, would counts as rape and sexual assault/harassment! Women are called vile names, Sl—t, B—Ch, H—es, etc… etc.. and lyrics speak of smacking their booties, oogling their breasts, speaking of strippers and having unbridled sex and overall treating women as nothing more than a “score” for a player, yet a song like “Baby it’s Cold Outside” with zero of the above is labeled as promoting rape culture??? The hypocrisy is maddening!

Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer is just what it was always interpreted as: Someone who is different who was discriminated against, proves everyone wrong by having his special talent, and being an asset to everyone else, not a detriment! That should be a very Left leaning SJW message, as they argue that many groups who are discriminated against do have that “special talent” to add to the country, or community. Rudolph’s red nose saved the day and proved his worth to everyone who thought he was useless. To argue that it’s a bad message in that it means people only care abut what they can get out of you in a selfish manner is highly pessimistic and the worst possible interpretation! That was not the case in the story, they genuinely accepted him for who he was in the end, his nose became secondary after they were all proven wrong! Our special talents make us assets to our communities, our friends and families. To be able to give something great to the people we care about is a blessing not a curse that can be taken advantage of and leeched off of by others! Rudolph had his special talent, the message to the viewer is then, what is your gift to the world? Telling isn’t it, how the Left just loves to make everyone into an oppressed victim!

People, candy canes are just candy canes. Red and green does not scream “Christian theocracy”. Holiday music is not setting the tune of “If you’re not a Christian, you’re not included”. “Baby it’s Cold Outside” is NOT about coercing a woman to rape her, nor does “I’m Dreaming of a White Christmas” have anything to do with race! Generic (historically pagan) Christmas trees, wreathes, and mistletoe are not shoving Jesus down everyone’s throat. Coffee cups that have holly, green, red, and snowy scenes on them are not denominational whatsoever. A school holiday musical is cute, not discriminatory. Making ornaments, wreathes, snowmen in school are fun memories to look back on, not painful ones to retell in therapy. Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer is about acceptance, not exploitation. The holiday season is a magical time that everyone can make fun and lasting memories of, no matter what you celebrate! The “reason for the season” is yours to decide what is most meaningful to you, religious or otherwise! For me, it’s about the warmth of family and friends, and making more great memories with the ones I love and cherish! Whatever your personal reasons are though, being triggered by every innocent and innocuous thing is NOT a good reason for the season! 😉

(Oh, wait, I said “family”, I hope you’re not too triggered as this is the era of the broken home and divorce 😉 Oh well, Happy whatever-you-celebrate!…)

Even Santa Can’t Escape PC Tyranny: A Guest Post by Time Foolery

The PC tyranny has reached its zenith with all out outlandish fancies! Of course, this extends to the holidays season, where anything remotely “Christmas” is banned and stifled! Even Santa can’t escape these grinches, as Time Foolery writes in to A Lady of Reason:

Recently a New Jersey substitute teacher took it upon herself to inform the children in her classroom that Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and other fancies such as the Tooth Fairy, weren’t real. Now, take yourself back in time to when you were seven years old, in the First Grade. It’s almost Christmas, and the decorations are going up and the stockings are hung. Naturally, your first thoughts are, “What is Santa going to bring me!?” I know this because I usually had dog-eared the heck out of our Sears catalog and written my Santa letter well before Halloween! Most kids I knew did. It was the highlight of our year!! Now, think to being a parent, coming up with other fun things like Advent Calendars and Elf on a Shelf to get your young’uns excited about the holiday.

Now think about someone swooping in and deciding for you that your child, or even you at that age, needed to know that something you’re so excited about, is all a BIG, FAT LIE perpetrated by you and your parents before you! If you are like me, you’d be incredibly upset from both vantage points!! To have your childhood so unceremoniously, and without cause or reason, crushed by someone barely qualified to teach!! And to have the right of when you let your children in on the secret so rudely ripped out of your hands – well, it’s no wonder this sub has lost their job. But I don’t want to harp on all the obvious issues that abound with this happening. I don’t think the majority from any party affiliation would disagree that this person seriously overstepped their bounds or crushed the dreams of little children. That’s an obvious.

No, it is the spirit of this season I wish to look at instead. This year I turned the ripe, old age of 52 and I proudly proclaim, I still believe in Santa Claus! St. Nicholas of Myra was an early Christian bishop who became the Patron Saint of Children. It is through his legendary habit of secret gift-giving that we find the traditional model for Santa Claus aka Good Saint Nick. It is this tradition that parents like to emulate and carry on traditionally with their children, and hopefully their children will grow up to do the same for theirs. But there’s many more reasons I still believe in Santa Claus.

Whenever I, or someone else, help someone out of sheer humanity, there is Santa Claus. Anytime someone donates their time to a charity, there is Santa Claus. Even just holding a door open for someone for no reason except to help, that is Santa Claus. But right now, I think Santa Claus is actor James Woods, who just recently played unofficial Twitter coordinator for helping fire victims find their families in California. A week later, he helped police find a homeless vet who was going to end it all because he thought no one cared. He got so many people involved with both situations who shared their love, concern and help for all. That is truly, truly Santa Claus. Indeed, we need look no further than our fellow man to see that the spirit of giving is what St. Nicholas stood for, and doing things like he would makes us all Santa Claus, and I certainly hope we all believe in ourselves!!!

I agree Time Foolery! While as I am non-religious but still celebrate Christmas, I too have experienced the magic of Santa Claus and I guess he’s been generous, as he still leaves a special gift from time to time under my tree 😉 You make the excellent point that when we stop believing in Santa, we become Santa for others!!! The magic doesn’t stop once childhood ends, it only continues through acts of kindness during the holiday season and all year round! Why ruin the magic though while it lasts??? The world is bleak as it is, and childhood is one of the only times we will ever see the world as mainly good and warm and fuzzy… I always advocate for forewarning and forearming our children of the dangers of the world frankly and openly, not shielding them in naivete to its many dangers, but that doesn’t mean some harmless fun and a little magic shouldn’t be experienced, and no longer believing a milestone in growing up… The magic of Santa Claus is something everyone can cherish even when all grown up!