This picture alone has cause 3 major house fires, a typhoon and a zombie attack.
Tradition teaches us that men are appointed the leaders for their families and society. In Genesis, we see man’s undoing in the fall by going along with Eve in sin. I would assert that a key aspect of the fallen nature of men is the tendency to shirk the responsibilities of leadership.
Appeals to tradition are still not valid forms of argumentation. Man's undoing wasn't going along with Eve, it was exactly Eve's undoing: eating from the apple. I don't know about your mother, but my mother didn't give me any sort of a pass when I claimed "but Susie was doing it first!"
Not all men are leaders. That's it. Not all women are leaders. Some men and some women are natural leaders, and they will lead no matter what happens. Some men and some women are not natural leaders and they will never lead, no matter what happens. That's just the way it is. Hell's Rule of Leadership: If I have to get out of the way for you to lead, you're not a leader.
Men do this for a variety of reasons, sometimes for ready sex. When men abidicate this role, it not only leads to a power vacuum but it unsettles those around them. Women become angry and resentful. They grab the reigns and fill in the vacuum. It’s my opinion that the most destructive temptation for women is to seek control and to be in charge. Women are powerful and have many, many tools to control men; they must learn to suppress their fallen inclinations to take control, except when absolutely necessary.
Look, it does a disservice to everyone involved if you expect followers to lead. That's not some sort of anger and resentment specific to women, that's just natural in the situation. Let me put it to you this way: if I left taking the garbage around front on garbage day to Teh Hubby, my house would be the epicenter of a cholera epidemic right now. He's just not good at maintaining a schedule of any kind. In fact, he finds it very confusing when you expect him to do so. He's just so right-brained that kind of thing is impossible for him. There's nothing wrong with that, and his chosen profession allows for that sort of attitude. It just means that I need to be in charge of things like making sure the garbage gets out on the right day and getting the bills paid on time. In this instance, I lead and he follows. We're happy and the electricity remains on.
Now for the money quote:
Just as the power of female sexuality must be constrained by societal norms and traditions (the fire needs to be confined to the fireplace or the house burns down and the inhabitants harmed) so must their temptation to take over the roles of men be overcome.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Ahem. As complimented as I am by this notion that were it not for the judicious use of slut shaming, the raw power of my horniness might have ended civilization as we know it, wtf are you talking about? I find it hard to believe that anyone has a sexuality more powerful than my own, and trust me, my hometown is still on the map and no innocent woodland creatures have been harmed. Admittedly, if you try anything that doesn't involve some foreplay at the beginning and an orgasm at the end, you will know my wrath, but that's your own damn fault.
Sadly, when the system breaks down and men fall into a pattern of giving in, women become ever more angry, grab for more power and demand emancipation, making all increasingly unhappy. It’s been shown, as we can clearly see with nearly a century of active feminism, that once women are allowed to enter any sector of male endeavor, they crowd out the men.
Here's his definition of "giving in": allowing wimminz to own property and vote and get an education. All of society collapsed the moment the wimminz were allowed to work aside those poor, frail men, who are completely unable to compete with untamed vaginas and their awesome burning power. You poor widdle men, I'll just go home, take off my shoes and get pregnant so that you can have your rightful place . . .
wait a minute.
how can you fervently argue for unrestrained capitalism and argue that women should be kept out of the workplace because men just can't compete with them? my vagina has nothing on cognitive dissonance that nuclear.
*just for you, [redacted II - Electric Bugaloo]!
** you have not.
Bump.
ReplyDelete"I used the phrase 'untamed vagina' in front of a jaeger. Mayhem ensued."
ReplyDeleteI love how the person you linked thinks the Vatican, of all institutions, is just too liberal in its outlook on women and marriage. Also, it appears that this "Fitzgerald" approves of spanking adult women (not in a fun sexual way) as punishment for getting out of line.
ReplyDeleteI always encourage people with those sorts of attitudes to emigrate to Saudi Arabia, where they'll find the religious authorities and the culture much more in line with their worldview.
CN: Fun, fun mayhem.
ReplyDeleteUNRR: I actually did suggest emigrating to KSA to one of these people and they got seriously offended that I could possibly think they are anything like a Muslim.
"It’s been shown, as we can clearly see with nearly a century of active feminism, that once women are allowed to enter any sector of male endeavor, they crowd out the men."
ReplyDeleteWait what?
Last time I checked, traditionally male-dominated fields like Information Technology, Science, Engineering, Politics, Military, etc-etc-etc are still all major sausage-fests. Show me a field, a single field, where women have crowded out men.
Actually, I suppose barbers have been replaced by hairdressers in many area's... well, I'm convinced. PERSECUTION!
Actually, I suppose barbers have been replaced by hairdressers in many area's... well, I'm convinced. PERSECUTION!
ReplyDeleteOh, god, you're right!
Back in Chicago I used to get my hair cut by a man, exactly as god intended. Now down in Dallas I get my hair cut by a woman. They're taking over!
Although it's kind of funny. I had a terribad haircut for a couple years that made it look like I had a fucking bald spot. My barber never mentioned it. First time I got a hair cut in Dallas it was at one of those stupid chain places (because if you're in Dallas doing basically anything you're at a stupid chain place) and I explained my problem. The 20ish year-old hairdresser proceeded to come up with a solution.
I then realized, "Hmmm. Maybe it is better to have a woman cut my hair. It would seem to me that they're more likely to say, 'This will make you attractive,' in a believable way than some random old dude."
And that's my complete non sequitur story of the day.
If you want to have a good laugh, listen to the lecture entitled "Priestesses" by Roman Catolic theologian Dr. Peter Kreeft - free on iTunes.
ReplyDeletecan i just say now - i want your wardrobe? man, you have awesome clothes...!
ReplyDeletefields once "male dominated" - medicine is a big one. nurses, at one point [and by this i mean medically trained nurses, not nuns or something doing things like emptying bedpans] were all/almost all male. doctors were once all male - and now, certain fields are over 50% female [Pediatric, OB\Gyn, General Practicioners - i don't know any other for certain]. dentistry, female dentists are now at almost parity with male - and hygenist and such are still almost exclusively female.
teaching is another - especially college lever. sure, *tenured* professors are still majority male, but the average "part-time" teacher is mostly female... more High School teachers are female [and it used to be, at least at one time, that teaching, for women, was only at "younger" ages - except in frontier areas - and was almost always a sign of "spinsterhood" of one sort or another. a teacher got married, she stopped teaching]
Legal - paralegals are now mostly female, same with court reporters. and, nation-wide, i think the rate of female lawyers is over 40%
sorta-legal but not limited to legal - Secretaries, Receptionists, "Personal Aids" - ALL of these were "male" positions until WWII.
student - women are now technically the majority of college students - it's about 53%/47%
there are LOTS of reasons for this, starting with the fact that there are slightly more women in general [51% of the US pop is female] and continuing with the fact that many high-paying jobs that don't need college [as opposed to technical training] are still male-dominated and often depend, at least in part, on physical capability. i'm thinking things like auto mechanic, plumbing techs, construction, etc. there are SOME women in those fields, but not many...
and THEN those women who go thru school...
take a male and female set of students. they go to the same school, take the exact same classes, get identical grades, identical standings, graduate with identical degrees, and get hired at the same company in identical jobs.
after one year of IDENTICAL performance, the man is making 5-10% *MORE* than the woman.
at 10 years, it can be as much as 30% more.
and that's if she doesn't get married, doesn't get pregnant, etc.
which reminds me - marriage? marriage is BAD for women. in a thousand ways... male workers who are married are almost automatically paid more, given more chances at raises and promotions, "because they have a family to take care of". FEMALE workers? are assumed, at all times, to be on the "verge" of becoming married, are not promoted at the same rates because of it... and of they DO get married, are assumed to be on the "verge" of mommy-hood any second - and if they do THAT, well! all hell breaks loose. they're late 1 minute? "the demands of motherhood conflict with the demands of this job". kid gets sick? who's societally required to take care of the kid? the mom - so the whole office resents her because she might have to take a day to take care of her kid, while the MALE parent is assumed to always be free - and if the male parent does it instead, BOTH parents will be punished by employers - HIS because it's *HER* job to take care of the kids so he won't have to, HERS because it just shows she can't be "trusted" to take care of "important things"... despite the fact that she is AT WORK DOING THEM.
and on and on and on - sigh. yet these assholes scream that women should ONLY be wives - despite all the wrongs that causes - and scream that women "can't have it all" while men *CAN* because they're actively stacking the deck against women in the workforce and then blaming women
sigh - it's a rant. it sucks...
hey, denelian, ranting is what the internet's for. Ranting can be an empowering tool, as long as we keep perspective. Rant on, please.
ReplyDeleteAh, the mystery of the vagina, it's power, the contempt and panic it induces...
ReplyDeleteIt is certainly a more powerful item than most people are comfortable with.
It is a term of contempt and derision, "Cunt...! Pussy...!" are insults which must be rejoined in some way if you are a male, but a goodly number of said males would do just about anything to have access to such an item.
The vagina does, indeed seem to have the power to make males get up to some very amazing tricks. Have we not all seen how people, not just the rich/powerful will complicate their lives, spend money, sacrifice everything they have in hopes of access to a different vagina than that which they have usual access to? Or simply TOO get access to a vagina?
Just how many people have we seen in the last year alone who have sacrificed career, family, money, position, respect, friends... and that's just people we know, not necessarily the ones in the newspapers.
So, I would guess, seeing this power that the vagina DOES in fact radiate, secular and religious heirarchies realise that controlling the vagina and it's owner gives them quite an advantage. Access and authorisation is very profitable, is denial of access and punishment for unauthorised use.
I mean, what were the Magdelene Laundries for?
Unregulated, rampant-running vaginas? Chaos! Power unchecked! Can't be allowed...or uncontrolled by people who wish for power.
hey, thanks Zilch :)
ReplyDelete