Ladies, Be Empowered!

This is addressed to my fellow women out there. I’ve covered much of the flaws of feminist thinking, especially along #MeToo lines in sexual assault prevention, which is basically zero. I’ve also covered in several articles my argument for more personal accountability to lessen one’s risks of assault as well as holding the perpetrator accountable too. Look, I know this topic isn’t all that pleasant, and very serious, but it must be addressed head on. I agree with the Left that misconceptions are a roadblock to empowering women to fight back against sexual assault, but I argue that it is in fact their side, that is fostering dangerous misconceptions about sexual assault.

Their basic premise is that too often, we shift the blame on the victim rather than the perpetrator and even go so far as to say we created a “rape culture” where rape is not only tolerated, but thought of as a man’s “right”. They say that the only thing that causes rape is the rapist, and nothing else. Therefore, one cannot talk about how alcohol or drugs play a role. Nor other poor risky choices such as becoming isolated or suggestive behavior/dress. Now, I will say that they are correct that one does indeed, need a rapist, to commit rape. Alcohol, sexy clothes, drugs, partying, does not literally cause a rape to happen, just as gun violence can only happen if someone pulls the trigger. However, the above factors do indeed create an increased risk of victimization, and are correlated with incidents of sexual assault.

Rapists are going to rape no matter what, because if you are at the point where you feel entitled to rape someone, you don’t care one bit about how it will impact your victim. You may not even care what they are wearing either, as many argue rape is more about power than sexuality. However, barring any empathy for your victim, you still have to choose one! So, which girl, if you would put yourself in the mindset of a callous rapist, but doesn’t want to get caught, would you choose? The girl who’s sober, more modestly dressed surrounded by 5 other girlfriends, (a.k.a. witnesses) at the party, or the one who’s almost blackout drunk, isolated, and in suggestive clothing that can be used as an excuse later in court in your favor? Who do you think would be noticed more if missing? Who do you think would put up less of a fight?

Now, does either girl deserve to get raped? Absolutely not! No one ever “deserves” rape, and nothing ever “justifies” rape. However, the cold, hard ugly truth of the matter is, one girl is more at risk than the other to be chosen as the next victim. Rapists will indeed rape no matter what whenever they find the chance, but it’s on us, ladies, to make sure he has the least amount of chances possible to target us. Causation for increasing your risk is not justification for the crime! Is it fair that we must go out of our way to look out for creeps? NO! But that’s reality. We shouldn’t need to watch out for each other at parties, or a girls’ night out. We shouldn’t have to worry about trusting the guy to take us home safely. Or buy us that drink and worry if he drugged it. We should be able to dress as sexy as we want without any unwanted advances. However, what we should be able to do and what we are able to do without putting ourselves more at risk aren’t identical.

And yes, sometimes, rape will happen when we do everything right to lessen our chances. Rapists will rape, we get it… But isn’t that true for any crime? A burglar can still smash in your window even when you lock your door every night, but does that mean you shouldn’t bother to lock your doors? We talk about more emphasis on teaching boys not to rape and assault women, instead of teaching girls how to empower themselves and lessen their risks in the logic that the solution is solely on telling men not to rape.

However, look at it this way: We teach our children not to steal, yet there are still thieves. Should the solution for burglary be simply to teach people to not steal and call any attempt at advising people to lock their doors or hide their valuables victim blaming? After all, no one has the right to steal your stuff no matter where you leave it! Similarly, there are still rapists despite teaching boys not to rape. The crime is not going away in both cases sadly. So what are we to do? Just sit around on our hands and complain about the obvious injustice, or do something to protect ourselves from becoming a victim, even if it means making inconvenient and yes, unfair, lifestyle adjustments?

Ladies, we need to live in the world as it is, not live in the world that we want it to be. Even if that world demands a “sexist” or un-PC answer to lessening our risk. We ARE judged by how we dress, whether we like it or not. Wearing sexy, provocative clothing, while never justifying any unwanted advances, sends off the signal that you want a consensual interaction and if the wrong guy who’s a complete callous jerk feels you “led him on”, yes, some will cross that line into assault. It’s ugly and unfair, wildly unfair and unjust, but ladies, this is the reality we live in. It’s not about simple morality, or saying that the girl in the sexy dress is morally “lesser” or “bad” and deserves assault, but it is about the fact that as unfair as it is, you ARE judged by how you choose to present yourself, and a real rapist can use it as an excuse in his sick twisted mind to justify harming you.

Drinking until you’re black out drunk, going off alone with a strange guy at the party, taking a drink that could be roofied easily etc… increases your chances of victimization and puts you in a vulnerable position. No, alcohol doesn’t cause rape to happen, but it does increase your risk the rapist will target you because you can’t physically resist or even say “no”. Going off alone with no witnesses and no one to step in to protect you is the perfect way to be victimized. Is this fair? Is it fair that women need to be careful instead of just being carefree when out for the night? Of course not! But as said before, this is the cold hard reality of the world we live in.

Saying all this is bound to draw the ire of many screaming “victim blaming!”, but this is no more victim blaming than suggesting one lock their doors or hide valuables to lessen chances of a burglary. Rapes can happen even after every base is covered. But so can burglaries. So can any crime. NO set of precautions has a 100% guarantee or covers every situation. That however, doesn’t mean we don’t take those precautions. Yes, the rapist could be someone you know and trust. Yes it can happen elsewhere than parties. Yes, more subtle coercion could be involved. Yes, I know all those things! That however does not belittle the merits of precautions against rapes that do happen with strangers, or in parties for instance. You may not be able to avoid one scenario, but does that mean “Why bother learning how to avoid the other”? Sure, the burglar can just smash in my window, but he sure won’t come through my door if I can help it! 😉

Ladies, it’s also not black and white. I’m not saying you can never party, you can never go out, you can never wear that “cute little number” to the club on girls’ night, you can never have a drink or hang out with a guy. We don’t have to dress like nuns and never leave our homes! All I’m proposing is to be aware. Awareness is half the battle, and with a good dose of awareness and common sense, you can have that night out of fun and be as safe as you can. Empowerment is liberating, not constraining. The awareness to know what the risk factors are, and how to avoid them is liberating, as you can live your life, just be aware and vigilant. When we drive, we learn the rules of the road. When we choose where to live, we look into crime rates. We have fire drills. We have emergency drills. We look over our shoulder in that sketchy area. We hide our valuables. We do all these things AND live a normal life full of excitement and fun. Can we do everything we want, (drink to excess, dress like we’re turning tricks, go off with every guy in the bar etc… etc..)? No. But in moderation, and with awareness of the risks, we can weigh our chances and act accordingly.

Related image

Advertisements

Speaking of Microaggressions…

In my previous post, I talked about how the Left just loves to see maleficent intent in innocent mistakes and misunderstandings. How they see bigotry where only curiosity lies, or prejudice where there is merely ignorance and mistaken assumptions. How what was once formerly innocuous, or something that no one else would think to see or use in an offensive hurtful manner is now assumed to be a targeted attack. Nowadays, one cannot say nearly anything in fear of offending someone!

Also typical of the Left, however, is their ability to set the most hypocritical of double standards! While they claim legitimacy over the idea of a microaggression being harmful and far from trivial, they I argue now, create their own microaggressions against anyone they don’t like as well! See, two can play at the “microaggression” game 😉 The definition of a microaggression according to Psychology Today:

Microaggressions are the everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership.

And guess what? I can list multiple examples from my own experiences, my family’s and also what is heard in the increasingly Leftist society that would fall under that definition in being hurtful, stereotyping, discriminatory, and marginalizing of conservatives and other quote “majority” identities that are said without anyone batting an eye! (And yes, all examples I cite were either personally witnessed, told to me by family and friends or seen in the media…) Now you tell me whether or not if the races and genders in my examples were reversed, they would be acceptable:

A professor in class apologizes to the class for all the white male scientists that existed throughout history versus more scientists of color and women… (To put this in perspective, imagine if it was an apology for all the Jewish scientists that existed!)

A close family member being told that he’s a man from quote, “that generation” (A.k.a, a baby boomer) in a contemptuous way and that he watched “too many John Wayne movies” to dismiss his opinions as an educator on protecting schools from shootings by arming security and teachers…

Numerous Lefties on social media assuming that I’m some Bible thumping fundie solely because I’m a conservative then trying to play the Jesus card on me, or their utter derision of anyone who is conservative out of genuine faith…

Similarly, Lefties assuming I must be anti-science because I’m a conservative who sees many Liberal agendas pushed as science, and their belief that Republicans are impervious to empirical data…

A professor tells the class that most people voted for Trump because they’re racist then spends the next 15 minutes, of every class period (in a class entirely unrelated to politics) berating Trump and his supporters…

A family friend who grew up in a broken home in poverty and worked hard to put all of his children through college and raise them in a middle class home with a stable family, only to be thanked by being told he’s unduly “privileged” due to nothing but his skin color by his own children…

A professor tells the class that white Republican men are the most dangerous terrorist group in the country…

Another family member of mine berating me over creating this blog and strongly implying that my opinions make me an inherently immoral person…

The numerous SNL and other skits played for laughs  such as this one, that don’t simply lampoon Trump as a political figure as any other has been throughout history, but make targeted personal attacks on the morality and character of everyone who decided to vote for him accusing them of the vilest forms of hatred…

Being told that being proud of your heritage and culture means you’re a white supremacist and bigoted against other cultures…

A male student in a class being told by the professor, that he is “part of the problem” and that he “threw all his female classmates under the bus” for standing up for due process for men who are accused, and challenging radical feminism…

A student in a US history class ranting about how the South has “always hindered progress” and promotes oppression and never embraces more egalitarian values to this day while several students in the class were known to be from Southern states…

Every “safe space” created to get away from white people, men, and conservatives and every literal white, male, conservative free zone…

A white professor asking a student of color, who is a first generation immigrant proud to have the opportunities this country offered, “What challenges living in America do you experience?” in a pointed and leading way (without asking about any benefits also) to in essence, ask “So, how have you been oppressed being a person of color in America?” Then have the student fumble around looking for a decent answer…

Now, on principle I reject the notion that microaggressions are something to be taken seriously, and believe treating them as such only leads to derisiveness and fragility. However, it is worth pointing out all the “little” slights and insults that marginalize us too are hurled by the Left in the most hypocritical fashion, as they decry exactly what they are doing to us, when applied to their own protected groups! So I spelled out some examples out of the many hundreds that are actually meant to sting and alienate that many don’t bat an eye at when hurled our way. Two can play at the Let Me Cry Microagression!© game after all 😉

So fellow patriots, did you have an experience of a “microaggression” similar to the ones I listed or a different one you want to share that happened to you? Please leave a comment! 🙂

Image result for microaggressions conservative cartoon

A PSA to The PC Crowd: Ignorance is Not Malevolence!

This observation came up for a while now in noting the various absurdities of the pro-political correctness crowd that in many cases, they seem to judge everything in a “one size fits all” sort of way. This is probably no surprise to many of my fellow conservatives, but I do want to expand on this particular aspect of it. Imagine a few scenarios if you will which I will proceed to describe:

A few students are gathered in the cafeteria for dinner at some college somewhere, and meet up with a few friends and acquaintances. Some of these friends also brought over their friend groups unknown to your group. To break the ice, one white student asks a student of color “Uh, so, where are you from?” The student of color answers “Oh, I’m from Upstate NY…”. The white student then prods further, “But, where are you from originally? Where are you really from?”

A guy goes out to a party on a Friday night with his buddies. They see a group of what looks to be girls wanting to look for a date to dance with and hang out with. One guy is nervous, and really doesn’t know what to say to start the conversation and absentmindedly blurts out “Hey, you’d look nice if you smile” to one girl staring off more absentmindedly. She gets angry and retorts “It’s not my job to smile for you!”

In a discussion about race, a participant says “I don’t see color, I treat everyone equally…” when asked how they would view a solution to stopping racism and racial bias.

A co-worker recently has come out that they are transitioning to be transgender. They tell everyone what pronoun to use and the new name they want to be called, but many at the office find it hard to remember either, and out of habit, refer to and accidentally address the person by their old name/pronouns. 

A white person called up on stage during a concert (This is based off a real event) to sing a rap song written and sung by a black performer included the “N”-word as it was in the lyrics of the song.

At the neighborhood picnic, a neighbor reveals he has Native American ancestry and someone asks “So, how Indian are you?”. 

All of the above examples are considered offensive and demeaning within the politically correct edicts. Reasons given for each scenario are asking where someone is from “others” that person and makes them feel like you don’t think they’re a legitimate American and like an exotic other. Asking a girl to smile is now considered sexist and a form of harassment, a sexist entitlement to make a woman conform to your needs vs. her own autonomy. The idea of being “colorblind”, the Left says, does not help not being racist, and in fact, now is racist as they believe it marginalizes the influence race plays in inequality. Not using the correct names and pronouns for a transgendered person de-legitimizes their choice to be transgender and live as their preferred gender. Non-black people are not allowed to use racial slurs, but black people are exempt as they are said to be “reclaiming” the slurs once used to oppress them. And in the last but certainly not the last example of what constitutes a PC faux pas, asking “How Indian are you?” is said to be ignorant and offensive as it implies they’re not a “real” Native American.

On the surface, these seem to be at least semi-believable explanations. They have been said over and over to the latest generation, including myself many times throughout school, media and society. However, looking deeper into each reveals the issues may not be so black and white in of themselves, but also the key factor: The intentions of the people who made such an “Un-PC” mistake.

Saying “Where are you from?” because someone looks a little different is not always, and in fact is most likely not a pointed slight to make someone feel like an outsider. The question in any other context is simply used as an ice breaker to start a conversation and get to know a person more. It’s really context dependent and also in your tone of voice. Saying it in a suspicious and accusatory way does indeed hint to a less friendly intention, however a neutral question said in curiosity is most likely meant that way. In the scenario, however, it is pushed further when the answer wasn’t what the person was going for. Even then, I argue, it doesn’t have to be a display of bigotry. Is it always prejudice if the person genuinely had curiosity as to what part of the world someone’s heritage came from, especially if they do look different than most others around? Yes, in that case the person being asked is sort of “the other”, but the point in asking what part of the world they are from ethnically is to make them less of an outsider, and to become more familiar with them. Racism and prejudice can stem from ignorance, but the key to combating ignorance is asking questions to gain knowledge! Most who ask such questions, while can appear insensitive, are merely just curious, not prejudicial and suspicious. Curiosity is NOT bigotry!

Asking a girl to smile I will say, is probably awkward in most cases depending how you phrase it and  if you’re talking to a stranger. However, labeling it as depriving women of their bodily autonomy and being male entitlement is going way off the deep end! Think of it: A young guy who is shy and awkward around girls might blurt out something that’s a bit awkward and not quite the ideal pick up line, but is that an expression of oppressing women? I’d argue the last thing any nervous guy approaching a girl to ask her out feels is “entitled”! Asking a girl to smile is nowhere near REAL harassment of women…

Saying “I don’t see color” while not the catch all solution to end all forms of racism and bias, had its heart in the right place. While not solving racism, it fosters the attitude to help combat it as it is said in the spirit of treating every person as equal in human worth and dignity, regardless of skin color. The idea skin color isn’t even a factor in how we should treat others. The world would indeed be a much kinder place if we didn’t obsess over each other’s phenotypes…

I have other reasons to sympathize with those who don’t want to legitimize just “choosing” to be another gender and calling it reality, but in the common scenario that the pronoun and name conflict comes up, the issue of common habit, not a pointed rejection is a valid explanation. See, if you knew “Bob” your coworker as Bob and referred to him as a “he/him” for the 20 years you worked at the company, it may be a harder transition to consistently remember to call him “Susie” and “she/her” overnight! Even if you’re perfectly okay with his/her choice, just the sheer habit of knowing him by one name and identity takes a lot of getting used to, and slip ups happen… If the pronouns are different such as the made up gender neutral ones, it’s like learning a new language!

If you get invited to sing a song at a concert, that contains a swear word, and you say said taboo word, is it your fault as if you chose to say it spontaneously? If it’s not your own word, you’re just quoting someone else’s choice to use it, and if it’s in the song the artist invites you to sing, then why omit it? The person in that scenario that said the racial slur was NOT saying it to disparage anyone, nor was her own choice of words, but the lyrics to a popular rap sing she was INVITED to sing! Racism never even entered the picture other than she was white and singing along to a song written by a black artist. In this case, context means everything…

And in my last example, it’s related to the first one: Curiosity. No one is prodding to do detective work into if someone is a “real” Indian, or anyone else (Unless you’re running for political office capitalizing on that status 😉 )! People can be genuinely and innocently curious about things, and it means no more than that. Asking how Indian someone is is simply about curiosity, and many wouldn’t even think it would be offensive to ask any more than asking how much German or Italian ancestry someone had. Does anyone of mixed ethnic European ancestry feel invalidated and feel less German or less French or English for instance if someone asks how much ancestry they have of those respective countries?

And tying all these various examples of some “microaggressions” as the Left calls them together, the common theme is the “perpetrators” are either merely curious, or ignorant that it is coming off as offensive or insensitive. No one in all scenarios presented had deliberate intent to oppress, marginalize, invalidate and belittle anyone! Yes, pointed and snide comments can happen, and are meant to be offensive, and I advocate for everyone to stand their ground if insulted so. However, before making that comeback to shut them up, think first on the intention of that off color remark or seemingly insensitive comment or question. Did they mean to hurt or belittle you, or were they simply curious or ignorant of how it came off to your ears? Most, if told they offended would feel mortified and apologize right away! Let me emphasize this again: Curiosity is not bigotry. Ignorance is not prejudice. The vast majority of microaggressions are merely mistakes and misunderstandings, not targeted insults. The elder who uses that outdated word is just saying what was acceptable in their generation without malice. The kids dressed up as Indians aren’t thinking “Hey, isn’t it fun to marginalize Native Americans?” The nervous guy just blurted something awkward out and is embarrassed, not entitled! Ignorantly assuming something off a common stereotype betrays lack of knowledge and familiarity, not lack of acceptance and kindness.

Yes, I also realize damage can be done even with good intentions. However, intentions do matter. Breaking the prized vase does damage regardless if you pushed it on purpose or by being knowingly reckless, or simply bumped into it and it fell. However, one is judged to be an accident, and one a deliberate act or one you are culpable for neglecting to be careful of such an event. How is that done? By the intention of the person who did it! Why isn’t it the same for all these PC grievances too? A person may feel “othered” by a comment or question regardless of original intent, but in terms of judging the one who said it, one should consider did they mean any harm and did they know it would offend? Unfortunately, the politically correct crowd only sees everything as a one size fits all issue of perpetual offense and demonizing those who unwittingly commit the dreaded microaggression… Well, all I have to say to them is just wait until it’s YOU on the other end of the accusation… How will YOU want to be judged? 😉

Image result for microaggressions cartoon

The Social Justice Glossary ;)

The radical liberals have come up with quite the glossary of SJW jargon, and for those who haven’t been immersed in the environment of their newspeak, some terms may be unclear or confusing! Therefore, I compiled this handy glossary to further decode their ever changing, inconsistent and hypocritical agenda! Of course, if you have more items I missed, please comment them below for all to see! 😉

A

Ad-Hominem (ad-ˈhä-mə-ˌnem) noun 1. A strategy to shut up the opposition by attacking their character, 2. What conservatives deserve anyways, 3. When you have no other arguments backed up with facts or evidence…

Affirmative Action (ə-ˈfər-mə-tiv ˈak-shən) noun 1. A way to virtue signal how enlightened we are by imposing artificial diversity for race, gender, etc… over merit based acceptance into jobs and schools and higher positions in either.

B

Bigot (ˈbiɡət) noun 1. A person who disagrees with the Left, 2. Someone who is intolerant of the Left’s agenda.

Bias (ˈbī-əs ) noun 1. Pointing out facts that do not suit the Left’s given narrative, 2. What Conservatives always have according to the Left…

C

Censorship (ˈsen(t)-sər-ˌship) noun 1. A strategy to shut up and silence the opponent and their ideas from getting out, especially before an election 😉

Christianity (kris-chē-ˈa-nə-tē) noun 1. The religion of Bible thumping fundies who are racist, sexist, homophobic etc.. etc…

Conservative (kən-ˈsər-və-tiv) noun 1. A racist, fascist, homophobe, bigot, Nazi etc…etc… 2. Someone to be shouted down, harassed and ostracized

(The) Constitution (kän(t)-stə-ˈtü-shən) noun 1. The document spelling out the “law of the land” for the United States, 2. The document the Left likes to disregard in favor of social justice agendas…

Cultural Appropriation (ˈkəlch-rəl  ə-ˌprō-prē-ˈā-shən) noun  1. Anything White people borrow from other cultures because of their imperialist, fascist, racist etc… nature by virtue of being white and being blamed for colonialism from generations past…

D

Deplorable (di-ˈplȯr-ə-bəl) noun 1. A Trump Supporter, 2. Any Conservative because they’re a bigot!!!

Discrimination (dis-ˌkri-mə-ˈnā-shən) noun 1. Treating a person or group unfairly and in a biased manner; can only be applied to whom the Left chooses…

Diversity (də-ˈvər-sə-tē) noun 1. What must be artificially imposed to gain enlightenment points and virtue signal how “woke” one is…

Due Process (ˈdü ˈprä-ˌses) noun 1. See “evidence“…

E

Entitlements (in-ˈtī-tᵊl-mənts) noun 1. Special treatment the Left demands for its members or else go into a righteous meltdown…

Evidence (ˈe-və-dən(t)s) noun 1. A foreign concept to the Left…

Evil (ˈē-vəl) noun 1. Anything at all the Left opposes…

F

Fact (ˈfakt) noun 1. A true statement; inconsequential when it doesn’t fit the Leftist narrative…

Fascist (ˈfa-​shist) noun 1. A person who supports Conservatism, 2. An insult to shut up your opponent

Feelings (ˈfē-liŋs) noun 1. Goes in place of evidence during any debate or policy change, 2. Held sacred above all else and cannot be hurt under pain of microaggression and triggering…

Feminism (ˈfe-mə-ˌni-zəm) noun 1. A movement to crush the “patriarchy”, 2. Women rule, men drool…

G

Gender (ˈjen-dər) noun 1. A social construct that oppresses women and non-binary/gender nonconforming people, 2. A product of the patriarchy!!!

Guilt Trip (ˈgilt ˈtrip) noun 1. A tactic to make the opponent feel guilty over wrongs they have not actually done; used often to demand reparations….

Gun (ˈgən) noun 1. A weapon that can kill and cause mass casualties, so therefore must be banned for all the good guys so criminals can still steal and use them to commit crimes and shooting sprees unimpeded, 2. The shape of which anything completely unrelated to guns causes panic and suspensions, expulsions, and psychological evaluations in public schools…

H

Hatred (ˈhā-trəd) noun 1. Supporting or believing in anything the Left disapproves of…

Hillary Clinton noun 1. A big Leftist idol, 2. Triggered a meltdown when she did not get in office in 2016…

Homophobe (ˈhō-mə-ˌfōb) noun 1. Anyone who criticizes the Gay community or LGBTQ communities contrary to what the Left pushes, 2. Religious conservatives by default…

Hypocrisy (hi-ˈpä-krə-sē) noun 1. What the Left accuses everyone else of but themselves despite having the most double standards…

I

Impeach (im-ˈpēch) verb 1. To get rid of the president (aka. Donald Trump) from the office of the presidency 2. What needs to be done to Trump…

Inconsequential (in-ˌkän(t)-sə-ˈkwen(t)-shəl) adjective 1. Whatever is deemed contradictory to “The Narrative”…

Islam (is-ˈläm) noun 1. The “religion of peace” 2. Who helps fund the Left’s agenda and gains votes for the Left…

Islamophobe (is-​ˈlä-​mə-​ˌfōb) noun 1. Anyone who dares criticize or scrutinize Islam…

Innocence (ˈi-nə-sən(t)s ) noun 1. Not being guilty; to be determined by popular opinion by the Left…

J

Justice Kavanaugh noun 1. A high school gang rapist and sexist misogynist, anti woman hating patriarchal MAN!  2. “We do not consent!!!”….

K

Kneel (ˈnēl) verb 1. To get on one knee to protest for the Black Lives Matter movement especially at sporting events during the National Anthem by slighting the military and first responders who served the country…

L

 (The) Left, (‘left) noun 1. The political ideology of everything on this list… 2. The party of “righteousness” and “tolerance”

LGBTQ noun or adjective 1. The lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or queer movements lumped into one umbrella term which will NOT be questioned or criticized in any way lest you be called a “homophobe”, “transphobe” etc… 2. A modifier describing the agendas of said groups…

Logic (ˈlä-jik) noun 1. See “evidence“….

M

Man (ˈman) noun 1. The supreme oppressor of women; especially if old and white, 2. A sexist term used to describe both men and women together, but omits “women” triggering radical feminists…

Mansplain (ˈmanˈsplān) verb 1. To express one’s opinion as a man; specifically on women’s issues that radical feminists deem off limits for men to have an opinion about…

MeToo (ˈmē ˈtü) noun 1. A movement meant to enable women to accuse men without evidence or due process in matters of sexual assault allegations to virtue signal how un-sexist one is and to encourage men to take the blame for acts they never actually did…

Microaggression (mī-krō-ə-ˈgre-shən) noun 1. Anything that offends based on the Left’s protected groups, 2. A devastating insult that originally was meant to be harmless

Minority (mə-ˈnȯr-ə-tē) noun 1. Any group the Left deems to be marginalized and victimized by straight, white men….

Multiculturalism (məl-tē-ˈkəlch-rəli-​zəm) noun 1. The agenda to accept any culture’s values, regardless if they clash, undermine, or seek to overthrow our own culture and its values…

N

National Rifle Association noun 1. “Baby killers” and child murderers according to the Left due to their gun rights and 2nd amendment advocacy…

Nazi (‘nät-sē) noun 1. What to call a Conservative to get them to shut up when you have no sound arguments…

Non-Binary (ˈnən ˈbī-nə-rē) adjective 1. Describing the feeling of not belonging to either gender, but switching between them or not having any at will…

N-Word noun 1. A highly offensive derogatory word towards black people, but used by black people constantly in vernacular speech and rap music however is forbidden to any other group to use it by the Left…

O

Obama noun 1. The best president ever according to the Left, 2. The Left’s supreme idol…

Open Borders (ō-pən ˈbȯr-dərs) noun 1. Everyone can come unto America no matter how many or any history of criminal behavior, violence or ability to earn a living, 2. Abolish ICE!!!

P

Patriarchy (ˈpā-trē-ˌär-kē) noun 1. The society made by men, especially old white men oppressing women…

Participation Trophy (pär-ˌti-sə-ˈpā-shən ˈtrō-fē) noun 1. A prize or reward given out to all despite differing levels of merit to earn such an award due to potential hurt feelings instead of actual merit deserving of the honor itself…

Political correctness (pə-ˈli-ti-kəl kə-​ˈrek(t)-​nəs) noun 1. Any phrase, word, or idea the Left approves of…

Protest (ˈprō-ˌtest) verb 1. Whine, scream, make silly slogans and signs, impede others from getting where they need to go, climb monuments, make vagina costumes, etc… until you get your way, 2. Make threats if that doesn’t work…

Public School (ˈpə-blik ˈskül) noun 1. Leftist indoctrination factory for the next generation…

Pussy Hat (ˈpu̇-sēˈhat) noun 1. A pink knitted hat use to show resistance to “the patriarchy”…

Q

Question (ˈkwes-chən) noun 1. A thought that must not be thought of, 2. Something that will not be answered in a logical and rational manner, 3. Invites ad-hominem attacks if asked…

R

Racist (ˈrā-​sist) noun or adjective 1. someone who dares to criticize the Left’s special interest minority groups, 2. Anything that is against the Left’s narrative about minority racial groups

Refugee (ˌre-fyu̇-ˈjē) noun 1. Any person coming into the US that the Left takes pity on and disregards any safety concerns or impact on US citizens over, 2. A term often used to evoke emotions of pity by the Left to describe legitimate threats entering the US but will further the Left’s agenda…

Reparations (re-pə-ˈrā-shəns) noun 1. Rewards, often money given by the Left to groups they deem worthy of victimhood for injustices years, often decades or even centuries in the past; often by the descendants or wider group that had no connection to any historical injustice…

Resist (ri-ˈzist) verb 1. To fight against Trump, Conservative values and sound reasoning that doesn’t support “The Narrative”

Reverse-Discrimination (ri-ˈvərs dis-ˌkri-mə-ˈnā-shən) noun 1. The Left’s version of racism and sexism towards white people and men to atone for traditional racism and sexism to “even the score”…

S

Snowflake (ˈsnō-ˌflāk) noun 1. A person who seeks entitlements, gets offended over every minor thing, and breaks down at the slightest challenge and demands participation trophies; often on the Left….

Socialism (ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm) noun 1. The Left’s ideal society and government 2.The only way forward from Trump’s fascism…

Social Justice Warrior (ˈsō-shəl ˈjə-stəs ˈwȯr-yər) noun 1. A righteous virtue signaler and a TRUE veteran (unlike those who have actually seen real combat)…

Soros noun 1. The Left’s “sugar daddy” behind many Leftist movements…

T

Tolerance (ˈtä-lə-rən(t)s) noun 1. To promote the agendas of your special interest groups, but ignore others, 2. A buzzword to throw out whenever anyone offers a critique of any of your chosen groups, 3. To turn a blind eye to issues within those groups affecting others.

Toxic Masculinity (ˈtäk-sik mas-​kyə-​ˈli-​nə-​tē) noun 1. The Left’s distortion of normal masculine qualities as being detrimental and sexist…

Transgender (tran(t)s-ˈjen-dər) adjective 1. A person who decided to identify as the opposite of their biological sex, 2. Anyone who says they are 😉

Transphobia, Transphobic (tran(t)s-ˈfō-bē-ə) noun or adjective  1. What to call valid concerns over transgender policies affection others, 2. What to say if anyone questions the transgender narrative or brings up biological evidence…

Trigger, Triggered (ˈtri-gər) verb 1. To offend and make one paralyzed with trauma mentally, emotionally etc…

Trigger Warning (ˈtri-gər ˈwȯr-niŋ) noun 1. A heads up that ideas you don’t like or will offend you will be discussed so you can A. avoid it or B. censor it for everyone else…

Trump noun 1. IMPEACH!!! IMPEACH!!!….

U

Uncle Tom noun 1. Any person in the black community who doesn’t subscribe to the welfare state and wants a better future through education and hard work according to the Leftist black community…

Understanding (ən-dər-ˈstan-diŋ) noun 1. What the Left demands of everyone else towards their special interest groups and their ideology without extending it towards their opponents’ positions and reasoning…

V

Victimhood (ˈvik-təmˈhu̇d) noun 1. The ideal state of a group to gain reparations, compensation and the right to complain and whine for past or imagined injustices by the Left to certain groups they deem worthy…

Virtue Signal (ˈvər-(ˌ)chü ˈsig-nᵊl) verb 1. To convey how much of a loyal Lefty you are and how “woke” you are through insincere and superficial platitudes, actions and slogans.

W

Welfare State (ˈwel-ˌfer ˈstāt) noun 1. A social system where a select group gets to live off of others’ earnings and never find a job for themselves from cradle to grave and through multiple generations, 2. What the Left does to gain more of a voting base from certain communities…

Western Culture (ˈwe-stərn ˈkəl-chər) noun 1. The imperialist oppressor of our select minority groups, 2. A culture who is built on white supremacy, heteronormative standards and the patriarchy!!!

White Fragility (ˈhwīt frə-​ˈji-​lə-​tē) noun 1. White people having the audacity to be offended by being constantly shamed and blamed for historical injustices in the present they took no part in whatsoever…

White Supremacy (ˈwīt sə-ˈpre-mə-sē) noun 1. The idea of racial pride for those of European decent, “White” or “Caucasian”, 2. Whatever the Left deems to be prejudicial against their protected groups by people in such categories…

Woke (ˈwōk) adjective or verb 1. Describing a person who subscribes to the Left’s agendas and virtue signals them faithfully, 2. To actively take part in such an agenda, 3. To be in the state of being “woke”…

X

Xenophobe (ˈze-nə-ˌfōb) noun 1. A person who criticizes the Left’s immigration narrative, also used frequently with “racist”, and “Nazi”.

Y

Ye (formerly Kayne West) noun 1. A rap singer who became conservative, greatly angering the Left, 2. An “Uncle Tom” for resisting the Left’s foot hold on the black community

Z

I got too triggered making this list to go any further 😉 😉 😉 ….

Image result for sjw political cartoon

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! 

Image result for transgender political cartoons but i say I'm a woman

Equally Treated : Equally Criticized

Criticism: Everyone gives it, everyone gets it! This has been known to all who have ever had an opinion about anything! Even more benign topics than politics or morality, such as pineapple on pizza, is it gross or tasty? Chocolate or vanilla? Dog lover or cat lover? The list goes on and on in our everyday lives we don’t even think of, nor truly care about if someone happens to have a different idea of what they like. Of course though, when the stakes are a little higher than “what’s for lunch?” disagreements get more heated! From gay rights, to religion, to racial issues, gender issues, foreign policy, etc…etc… issues that will affect countless people other than yourself, disputes on how to handle them provoke far more conflict.

Issues that both sides of the aisle can agree needed change, such as blatant racism, segregation, the oppression of women, intolerance for different lifestyles, religions, etc… that led to violence, threats and out and out bigotry, have been addressed and still are. I think we can all agree it was a good thing to stop segregation, lynch mobs, slavery etc… or stop treating wives and children as property, or letting women reap the rights and duties as citizens of this country too. Or to be more open minded to a changing society and learning about those who are different from ourselves. We’ve come along way from a century ago and many things I’ll admit I’m glad we can leave behind in the history books.

However, there comes a new issue with this newfound freedom many groups now enjoy alongside us: The pendulum swinging too far the other way! See, I don’t mean that in the sense they are too equal and should be put back in a state of disadvantage and inequality again, but in their right and just equality with the traditional “majority”, they feel in order to be our equal, they must become our superior! How is this?

Well, take the issue of criticism. It is true many minority groups feel that if a member of the majority group criticizes any aspect about them, this must mean that the criticizer wants to revoke their equality in this country and set them back a century! Now, in a way, I can get an understanding of why some may feel this way. If you genuinely feel that the group who gave you your equality is bitter and resentful and wants any excuse to find a way to revoke it, then yeah, I can understand that. Or if historically, that group had a voice and you didn’t, you might feel that when today, your former “oppressors” speak up and critique something, it can bring flash backs of that earlier time where you didn’t have a voice to respond.

Trouble is of course, just because you feel a certain way, doesn’t make it true! Just because something “feels” like past oppression, doesn’t mean it is. For one example, a brutally honest critique of a minority group doesn’t always mean that the person making the criticism does it out of hatred or bigotry for that race. It may sound very harsh and uncharitable to hear, but that person may have a valid point. If one says that for example, the Black community is disproportionately affected by crime and has a 75% illegitimacy rate, and this should change to build better communities and families, unless these assertions came out of thin air and are false, it is a valid criticism that needs to be addressed. Just because, say, the person noting this was White, doesn’t mean they say this out of ill will, bigotry and hatred for the black community, anymore than when fellow Black leaders such as Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell say it. No more “racist” than when someone in the Black community wishes to offer a criticism of White people and ask them to address something that they feel needs fixing, such as racial bias…

Or look at Native Americans. Reservations often have similar issues with crime and gangs. Child abuse and alcoholism are rife. So is poverty, and no, it’s not solely “the white man’s fault!”. Does bringing this up beyond blaming white people mean that person hates Indians? Not necessarily! You don’t need to be Native American to see the devastation alcoholism and poverty had affected many of their communities! Perhaps maybe, just maybe, the outsider who raised the issue genuinely wants to help and to do so, must bring it out into the open?

Every society has things that are good, and things that need to be looked at with a critical eye and addressed. Hiding one’s need for change behind labels such as “racist” and making excuses that only your group can ever critique your society when the issues at hand are plain for all to see, lets a blind eye be turned to pressing issues as of course no one likes being criticized and told they need change! If the only people who can criticize you are you, then how honest will you really be with yourself??? Outside 3rd parties help eliminate some internal bias or even just shortsightedness for things an insider may take for granted. An obvious fabrication and lie told about a group is not the same as a proven fact that happens to be unflattering being called out in the open by others. A criticism is not the same as slander!

A slightly different circumstance but related to the idea of being immune from any outside criticism is happening to the gay community. It’s now the law of the land gays have the same civil rights, including a legal marriage here in the United States. In fact, being gay is becoming more and more accepted and less stigmatized. I know plenty of gay people, who are just like you and me, have jobs, go to school, like the same things, and are probably among your friends, classmates, coworkers, your favorite celebrity, etc…  From even a few decades ago, the LGBT community has made immense strides in being socially accepted and are being represented exponentially in the media and in society.

However, this apparently is not enough. Despite all the acceptance as well as gaining the clear legal right they wanted to see happen nationwide, they now demand that no one can ever criticize or disagree with their lifestyle. Look, some people have religious objections to the gay lifestyle. Some find it distasteful in their personal opinion. There is still opposition to gay marriage. And yes, instances of threats and violence and bullying have affected the gay community. Thing is though, there is a vast difference between those who do actual violence and threats towards gay people, and those who in their private opinion, don’t embrace the idea of being gay for religious reasons or otherwise. Many of these people would never threaten a gay family, or do violence against them. Those that do are a very small minority who we can all agree are in the wrong regardless of their opinions!

No one is entitled to force people to like and embrace your choices in life. You have the right under federal law to be gay and to be free from threats and violence as much as any other citizen in this country. What you don’t have the right to however, is to make everyone embrace your choices or else be labeled a “bigot!” and demonized. I personally don’t mind gay people and nor does my family who would love me just as much if I were gay myself. What I do mind though, is the idea that any valid criticism of the gay community, or someone’s personal distaste for the gay lifestyle must be stamped out and compelled to agree with it in the name of “acceptance”. No, not everyone has to “accept” your choices in their personal opinions!

Still don’t understand? Take my own personal example. I’m an atheist, and a “minority” within the conservative community. Some of my fellow religious conservative peers say things about atheism and non-believers I can find too harsh and un-nuanced, such as the idea that my non-belief means I don’t have any real moral code based in anything real. Or that my life is unfulfilled and I must be angry and bitter. Now, I will argue against these assertions about my non-belief, but I will never demand religious people stop criticizing atheists to spare my “delicate feelings”! They have just as much right to their own opinion and criticisms about my lifestyle choice to be an atheist as a fellow atheist. Many religious people may find atheism distasteful, and that’s okay. The beauty of this country is we can all have our own opinions! Now, it crosses a line if they were to threaten me or openly discriminate against me, but again, criticism alone does NOT equal discrimination! I can be a non-believer in this country just as you can be gay, and we both have the legal right to be what we are. What more should we demand??? Anything beyond that to me smacks of entitlement!

To sum all this up in general for everyone, no one is immune from criticism, nor is entitled to be! As a conservative as well, don’t I and many of my fellow patriots know it! 😉 We don’t demand the Left never criticize us. Just don’t threaten us and our families, bar us from jobs, and ostracize us from society. Nor do we seek to stifle the voices of minorities, women, gays, etc… as in the past. We just want to still let our voices be heard alongside yours now. We do want equality for all in this country. But equality means we all can be equally criticized as well as equally heard! And don’t forget of course, of you want to be free from criticism, then don’t feel entitled to hurl it at others, like straight, white cisgendered males for instance! 🙂

Image result for left party of tolerance cartoon

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 😉

Image result for ben garrison trump slaying dragon