|
From the author of Surviving the Feminization of America. |
|
February 2002
Are folks getting wise to feminist lies?
"We make a quarter what men make."Were that true, it would be cause for concern, indeed. But even the National Organization for Women doesn't go that far. Instead of telling such an outlandish lie, they use a statistical fact to mislead: "Women earn 74¢ for evey (SIC) $1.00 earned by men." - NOW, Equal Pay Day Shows Women Still BehindThere are many well-documented reasons why even NOW's statistics are misleading, but they would certainly agree with Judd's next complaint: "We couldn't vote until 1920."What's this "we" stuff? Judd wasn't alive in 1920. In fact, white women like her had the right to vote before my people did. American Indians did not gain the right to vote until 1924. These facts alone have little if anything to do with present oppression. It ain't what they done to our ancestors that counts so much as what's done to us today. And these days, in the name of equality, more and more its feminists doing to men. Lame as her complaint about the vote was, however, the worst was yet to come: "You know, I have a show on daytime TV, women's entertainment network, so I'm on for these women during the daytime. ... and the other day, I said that feminism is the radical notion that women are created equal."This is a total rip off on the slogan coined by Cheris Kramarae and Paula Treichler: "Feminism is the radical notion that women are people." Moreover, as Ann Coulter, who also appeared, noted, it's just the opposite: "They run around saying, 'We're not equal.'"There was a time when, lame and misleading as they were, the quality of feminist propaganda was much better. That was back when they were still willing to appear on radio and TV to debate the issues with the men's and fathers' rights leaders. But by around 1996 they began to retreat from public debate because it was too embarrassing. In 1999, for example, feminist author Susan Faludi refused to appear on TV with equalitarian author Warren Farrell, perhaps because she had lied about him so blatantly in her first book. The result of this retreat has been that, while the press and politicians still cater for the most part to the feminist anti-male agenda, comments like Judd's are becoming increasingly common. The lies are getting bigger and louder. The question we need to ask is, are regular folks buying the feminist bull, or are the feminist voices growing shrill because folks are getting wise to their lies?
Anti-male Bias in Education?
Researchers at the University of Ulster at Coleraine, in Northern Ireland, have found that men consistently outperform women in general knowledge tests, even in categories typically thought to favour women, such as fashion. - Battle of the brains, Anne Marie Owens, Natonal Post, February 22, 2002How can this be when women are outperforming men in so many other ways? As Dr. Paul Irwing, a psychology professor at the University of Ulster, and a lead researcher in the two studies, notes: "In the real world, women are increasingly outperforming men. They definitely outperform men at university ... What one has to say then, is that if women are doing better in the real world, why then aren't they doing better on these tests?" - Battle of the brains, Anne Marie Owens, Natonal Post, February 22, 2002The old explanation was that the tests were biased. Not so in this case, however: The results of the present study indicate that the higher average scores obtained by males are not due to bias in the questions, but reflect a genuine phenomenon of a tendency of males to possess more general knowledge than females. - Battle of the brains, Anne Marie Owens, Natonal Post, February 22, 2002Does this indicate men really are smarter than women? The Irish researchers have ruled out an explanation of male advantage in terms of fluid intelligence, or innate intelligence, and have also eliminated the idea of a male advantage in verbal ability, since there is no evidence of such an advantage. - Battle of the brains, Anne Marie Owens, Natonal Post, February 22, 2002Whatever the explanation, it does call into question why women are outperforming men academically. Researchers do not appear to be considering an anti-male bias as an explanation for that, but maybe they should.
Miracle or Monster?
We've had the ability to clone a human for a few years, but until very recently it still took a woman with a womb to make a baby. Not anymore, according to scientists at Cornell University's Center for Reproductive Medicine and Infertility: Scientists have created prototypes made out of cells extracted from women's bodies. Embryos successfully attached themselves to the walls of these laboratory wombs and began to grow. - Men redundant? Now we don't need women either, Robin McKie, The Guardian, February 10, 2002In modern war, we have seen technology put us in the place where we must choose between mutually assured destruction, or mutual survival. In the war between the sexes, that time is at hand: "'There are going to be real problems,' said organiser Dr Scott Gelfand, of Oklahoma State University. 'Some feminists even say artificial wombs mean men could eliminate women from the planet and still perpetuate our species." - Men redundant? Now we don't need women either, Robin McKie, The Guardian, February 10, 2002Some feminists undoubtedly do. What they're not saying is that cloning means women could eliminate men "from the planet and still perpetuate our species." It's a biological bomb both sexes can use against the other. Which is why we should know why, after reproduction, the sexes still need one another. And then, as we noted in 1996, there's the abortion issue: It also has serious ethical implications, as Gelfand pointed out. "For a start, there is the issue of abortion. A woman is usually allowed to have one on the grounds she wants to get rid of something alien inside her own body. ... At present, this means killing the foetus. But if artificial wombs are developed, the foetus could be placed in one, and the woman told she has to look after it once it has developed into a child." - Men redundant? Now we don't need women either, Robin McKie, The Guardian, February 10, 2002That's one option. Assuming the genetic father does not want the child, either, another would be for abortion clinics to merge with adoption agencies. A woman comes in, has the fetus removed ("evicted"), then leaves. The clinic places the fetus into an artificial womb while the adoption agency finds suitable parents. Together, cloning and artificial wombs can be either a curse or blessing to humankind. The choice is ours to make. We can act of fear and, in a panic, impose severe limits on their use or even ban them altogether. We can act out of hate, cease these technologies and, like the Nazis, who rained rocket-driven terror down upon the British, use them in an attempt to dominate the opposite sex. Or we can use them for the health and happiness of all humankind.
Will new rape law protect the innocent?
Abstinence bites. Being (formerly) fat, old and single, I know. But, until recently, even celibacy was no guarantee against a false accusation. Now, a new law may help to both protect the innocent and nab the bad guys: "Now, a new Texas law--the first of its kind in the United States--will permit prosecutors to collect DNA from an accused sexual offender at indictment in the hope that the test will permit police to quickly determine whether to pursue the case. Police also hope the measure will allow them to tag repeat offenders, leading to possible revocations of their parole or probation." - New Rape Law Permits Speedy DNA Tests of Accused, Suzanne Batchelor, Women's e-News, February 8, 2002Some organizations feel this would be an invasion of privacy. Maybe it is. Many laws do. But most of those laws work both ways, helping to convict the guilty while also protecting the innocent. The same will hold true with this law: "At the same time, the new law helps investigators eliminate those likely to be innocent well before taking them to trial." - New Rape Law Permits Speedy DNA Tests of Accused, Suzanne Batchelor, Women's e-News, February 8, 2002The innocent have nothing to fear from the truth. |
|
regret might transform into a charge of rape. At present, the only real protection men have against that is to just say no.
