What Society Needs From Men and Women

A question I was asked earlier today has me thinking about the difference between men and women working. It’s a discussion I’ve engaged in a lot of the last few years, even before I was a full-fledged male chauvinist and was merely an antifeminist who thought that full-time homemakers deserved respect.

One point I kept making even then was this: civilization got along just fine for hundreds, nay thousands of years of women not being doctors, engineers, lawyers, or politicians. Civilization has barely survived 40 years of women not being mothers.

The thing that we keep forgetting, safe and comfortable as we Westerners are compared to most humans for most of history, is that society is absolutely dependent on men doing men’s work. Some women might like being in the military or the police, a few might even be useful, but without men willing to put on a soldier’s or policeman’s uniform and pick up a gun and put their lives on the line, no society will survive for long. We don’t need women to do this. We do need men to do this.

Let me repeat that: we NEED men to do this. Whether women do it or not is immaterial.

And this is something I’ve seen mentioned often in the MRA blogosphere, and have tried to alert my run-of-the-mill conservative friends to. A lot of MRA’s state flatly that they will never serve in the military, not to defend a government that let their wives steal their children and their money from them, that gives women special privileges at the expense of men who have earned those same privileges, that allows women to make false rape or abuse allegations without consequences, etc. This means that our society has abused men enough that they are not willing to defend it. No society can survive that way. If Muslims do not invade and conquer us, it will be someone else. The granddaughters of the women who burned their bras may well end up forced to wear burquas, and they will have their bra-burning grandmothers to thank.

The workplace also depends on male labor. Let me repeat that too: the workplace DEPENDS on MALE labor. Female labor is useful sometimes, but the hospitals and the universities and the factories and the laboratories can get along just fine without it. They cannot – CANNOT – get along without male labor.

Why? Because men are competitive by nature, in a way which few women are. (Yes, I am one of the exceptions. Since I was a small child, it’s gotten me odd looks from adults and children alike when my behavior clashed with their unconscious expectations. You take the most feminist person on the planet, their “monkey brain” – the innate evolutionary programming we are all born with – is going to be more sexist than my conscious mind is on my crankiest days.) The competitive male nature makes them strive and work and improve in a way that few women are driven to.

In addition, men produce statistically far more geniuses. (And far more retards; it’s called the Bell Curve, and it really pisses off the PC.) And it isn’t only that men are, generally speaking, smarter than women. It’s also that the male brain works somewhat differently. The female brain was mostly designed to handle interpersonal relationships, as that was what made it possible for cavewomen and their young to survive, which is why even the few geniuses women produce seldom go into the physical sciences. The male brain was more designed for the outer world, for figuring out better ways to bring down a woolly mammoth. Men think more strategically, with more of a problem-solving approach. It’s this that made it possible for men to invent the spear and the wheel and eventually the airplane and the Internet.

There are more women who are able to pass the exams to get through medical school than there are women temperamentally suited to spending years working hard at such a demanding profession. A lot of women will go through medical or law school and never work at the profession, or work at it only for a couple of years before finding a man to pay their bills. I once had a blind date with a phlebotomist. She went through the training to do the job, then one day she had a bad day at work, quit and went on welfare. She was the unwed mother of an unwed mother, and since she was young enough to be on a date with me, that means her daughter had to be barely of legal age, and she herself had to have given birth pretty young. She was really pretty and had a sexy voice that would have been musical in the throes of passion. I didn’t call her.

In addition, while there are plenty of women who have the intellect necessary to get through medical school, Camille Paglia was right: if advancing civilization had been up to women, we would still be living in grass huts. Women are capable of practicing, say, engineering, but not of inventing it. It was men who figured out how to build cathedrals and skyscrapers.

Women might like doing a job, but it’s men who we NEED in the workplace. Women are dispensable outside the home.

In short, the idea behind women in the military, police and workplace is that they benefit from being there. They think it’s fun. It flatters their egos, deservedly or not. The idea behind men in the military, police and workplace is that we all depend upon their being there and doing their jobs. All of society benefits from their work. And yet here we are, giving the dispensable privileges for the purpose of feeding their egos at the expense of the people we need who get by solely on their own merit.

Do you think I like this? I don’t. I hate that our species is designed in such a way that if we deviate even slightly from these rules, most of which are totally “unfair” (nature not being fair), the civilization which took so much to build and which gives us so many benefits will collapse. But that is the reality, and ignoring it will only lead us to further catastrophe.

Advertisements

81 Responses to “What Society Needs From Men and Women”

  1. Hawaiian Libertarian Says:

    …civilization got along just fine for hundreds, nay thousands of years of women not being doctors, engineers, lawyers, or politicians. Civilization has barely survived 40 years of women not being mothers.

    Excellent observation!

  2. Hawaiian Libertarian Says:

    …civilization got along just fine for hundreds, nay thousands of years of women not being doctors, engineers, lawyers, or politicians. Civilization has barely survived 40 years of women not being mothers.

    Excellent observation!

  3. Hawaiian Libertarian Says:

    …civilization got along just fine for hundreds, nay thousands of years of women not being doctors, engineers, lawyers, or politicians. Civilization has barely survived 40 years of women not being mothers.

    Excellent observation!

  4. Querus Abuttu Says:

    “In short, the idea behind women in the military, police and workplace is that they benefit from being there. They think it’s fun. It flatters their egos, deservedly or not. “

    Ouch, M, that’s a really broad statement.

    Benefit, maybe, but I never felt like the military flattered my ego. If anything I had to work to keep what little I had. Every bit of my time there was hard work, and sometimes double to prove I could do the work. Many men think the military is fun also, and many benefit from being there depending on their choices. Often they come and the do 3 to 4 years, and leave and do something else. The government tends to recruit from the poorest areas in the nation in order to get the numbers they need.

    Granted, I work in the medical part of the military now, and provide health care to women (sometimes men by treating STD’s), but I spent my first 5 years enlisted, parking aircraft, gassing up airplanes, loading sea bags, etc. My gender was often to my detriment. I chose the work, though, because I wanted to have the opportunity to go to school in the long run (like many of the rural/urban and poor men and women that were there with me, and the GI bill was available). I wanted to be a hospital corpsman when I came in, but ‘my recruiter said’ there were no spaces available…and told me I could choose a job once I got there. (If I had a dollar for everytime I heard someone say ‘my recruiter said’…)

    I later chose to be a nurse, and then a nurse-practitioner/midwife when I was honorably discharged from enlisted active duty, because I knew that was where the jobs were, and I liked educating people about health care. Never easy work, nursing. I came back into the military health care system because it paid more, offered job security,flexibility in job roles, upward mobility and better benefits. By then, I had 2 kids and a husband to provide for, and I needed to be sure they were cared for.

  5. Querus Abuttu Says:

    “In short, the idea behind women in the military, police and workplace is that they benefit from being there. They think it’s fun. It flatters their egos, deservedly or not. “

    Ouch, M, that’s a really broad statement.

    Benefit, maybe, but I never felt like the military flattered my ego. If anything I had to work to keep what little I had. Every bit of my time there was hard work, and sometimes double to prove I could do the work. Many men think the military is fun also, and many benefit from being there depending on their choices. Often they come and the do 3 to 4 years, and leave and do something else. The government tends to recruit from the poorest areas in the nation in order to get the numbers they need.

    Granted, I work in the medical part of the military now, and provide health care to women (sometimes men by treating STD’s), but I spent my first 5 years enlisted, parking aircraft, gassing up airplanes, loading sea bags, etc. My gender was often to my detriment. I chose the work, though, because I wanted to have the opportunity to go to school in the long run (like many of the rural/urban and poor men and women that were there with me, and the GI bill was available). I wanted to be a hospital corpsman when I came in, but ‘my recruiter said’ there were no spaces available…and told me I could choose a job once I got there. (If I had a dollar for everytime I heard someone say ‘my recruiter said’…)

    I later chose to be a nurse, and then a nurse-practitioner/midwife when I was honorably discharged from enlisted active duty, because I knew that was where the jobs were, and I liked educating people about health care. Never easy work, nursing. I came back into the military health care system because it paid more, offered job security,flexibility in job roles, upward mobility and better benefits. By then, I had 2 kids and a husband to provide for, and I needed to be sure they were cared for.

  6. Querus Abuttu Says:

    “In short, the idea behind women in the military, police and workplace is that they benefit from being there. They think it’s fun. It flatters their egos, deservedly or not. “

    Ouch, M, that’s a really broad statement.

    Benefit, maybe, but I never felt like the military flattered my ego. If anything I had to work to keep what little I had. Every bit of my time there was hard work, and sometimes double to prove I could do the work. Many men think the military is fun also, and many benefit from being there depending on their choices. Often they come and the do 3 to 4 years, and leave and do something else. The government tends to recruit from the poorest areas in the nation in order to get the numbers they need.

    Granted, I work in the medical part of the military now, and provide health care to women (sometimes men by treating STD’s), but I spent my first 5 years enlisted, parking aircraft, gassing up airplanes, loading sea bags, etc. My gender was often to my detriment. I chose the work, though, because I wanted to have the opportunity to go to school in the long run (like many of the rural/urban and poor men and women that were there with me, and the GI bill was available). I wanted to be a hospital corpsman when I came in, but ‘my recruiter said’ there were no spaces available…and told me I could choose a job once I got there. (If I had a dollar for everytime I heard someone say ‘my recruiter said’…)

    I later chose to be a nurse, and then a nurse-practitioner/midwife when I was honorably discharged from enlisted active duty, because I knew that was where the jobs were, and I liked educating people about health care. Never easy work, nursing. I came back into the military health care system because it paid more, offered job security,flexibility in job roles, upward mobility and better benefits. By then, I had 2 kids and a husband to provide for, and I needed to be sure they were cared for.

  7. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Q,

    Yes, it is a broad statement. I know there are women like you out there who actually do your jobs and have sane motives, but frankly, I don’t encounter a whole lot of them. What I encounter is women who have a career because Cosmo told them to get one, who can’t or won’t actually do the work if they can get around it. I have a lot to be angry about.

  8. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Q,

    Yes, it is a broad statement. I know there are women like you out there who actually do your jobs and have sane motives, but frankly, I don’t encounter a whole lot of them. What I encounter is women who have a career because Cosmo told them to get one, who can’t or won’t actually do the work if they can get around it. I have a lot to be angry about.

  9. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Q,

    Yes, it is a broad statement. I know there are women like you out there who actually do your jobs and have sane motives, but frankly, I don’t encounter a whole lot of them. What I encounter is women who have a career because Cosmo told them to get one, who can’t or won’t actually do the work if they can get around it. I have a lot to be angry about.

  10. Artfldgr Says:

    mcw

    thought you might want to gander at this one.

    its a pip…

    however, for Q, who knows math, she should be able to see the extremely dishonest way that this is presented and manipulated.

    Exactly how much housework does a husband create?
    http://blogwonks.com/2008/04/04/exactly-how-much-extra-housework-does-a-husband-create/

    i didnt have time, so i didnt do the job that needed to be done on it. however, since blogwonks comes and fades within 24 hours, putting oo much into them seems to be a waste.

    sigh.

  11. Artfldgr Says:

    mcw

    thought you might want to gander at this one.

    its a pip…

    however, for Q, who knows math, she should be able to see the extremely dishonest way that this is presented and manipulated.

    Exactly how much housework does a husband create?
    http://blogwonks.com/2008/04/04/exactly-how-much-extra-housework-does-a-husband-create/

    i didnt have time, so i didnt do the job that needed to be done on it. however, since blogwonks comes and fades within 24 hours, putting oo much into them seems to be a waste.

    sigh.

  12. Artfldgr Says:

    mcw

    thought you might want to gander at this one.

    its a pip…

    however, for Q, who knows math, she should be able to see the extremely dishonest way that this is presented and manipulated.

    Exactly how much housework does a husband create?
    http://blogwonks.com/2008/04/04/exactly-how-much-extra-housework-does-a-husband-create/

    i didnt have time, so i didnt do the job that needed to be done on it. however, since blogwonks comes and fades within 24 hours, putting oo much into them seems to be a waste.

    sigh.

  13. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Art,

    You’re right, that is appallingly slanted. Because I live in a corrupt feminist era, I have an exaggerated reaction to these things. Had I lived before the 1960’s, I would have been much more in favor of men helping their wives with the housework. Since I don’t, articles like that make me want to scream, “Get back in the kitchen, bitch!” An excessive reaction, yes, but I think one that’s needed in response to feminism.

    Querus,

    This reminds me of something I wanted to say to you, that my reaction is a little on the extreme side because it’s needed as an antidote. A lot of my friends, most of whom don’t know I’m a male chauvinist, have opinions similar to yours, that the laws about stuff like custody and alimony and discrimination suits just ought to be more “fair”.

    For instance, one of my friends, after hearing my explanation of why I am in favor of default father custody, suggested instead that instead, custody should be awarded on a case-by-case basis according to the best interests of the child, instead of either parent getting default custody.

    I would have said something similar a few years ago. But as I learned more and pondered more, I came to the conclusion that “fair” or “gender-blind” isn’t going to do the job, largely because men and women are so inherently different. To continue with this example: until the 1860’s in the U.S., and later in Europe, fathers could leave mothers and take the children; divorce was of course much more difficult then, but fathers had default custody. And yet, they almost never did it. Nowadays, women have default custody; they can leave their husbands and take the children. And a lot of them do exactly that.

    I’ve stated elsewhere on this blog that had I lived in a saner era, I would still have been a male chauvinist – that is, someone who considers men superior to women, an opinion with overwhelming evidence supporting it – but I wouldn’t have been a misogynist. I might even have been fiercely upholding the right of those women who were capable to do more than most women did, much as these days I promote the right of children and teenagers to do what they are able to do rather than what the straightjacket concept of their age designates them for.

    I’ve suffered a lot personally, as well as watching civilization collapse, because of women attempting to do things almost none of them are qualified to do. I can hardly help being a misogynist.

    Given the female chauvinism rampant in government and culture today, I really believe we need some grouchy male chauvinist misogynists like me to balance it, not that we have anything approaching balance these days.

  14. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Art,

    You’re right, that is appallingly slanted. Because I live in a corrupt feminist era, I have an exaggerated reaction to these things. Had I lived before the 1960’s, I would have been much more in favor of men helping their wives with the housework. Since I don’t, articles like that make me want to scream, “Get back in the kitchen, bitch!” An excessive reaction, yes, but I think one that’s needed in response to feminism.

    Querus,

    This reminds me of something I wanted to say to you, that my reaction is a little on the extreme side because it’s needed as an antidote. A lot of my friends, most of whom don’t know I’m a male chauvinist, have opinions similar to yours, that the laws about stuff like custody and alimony and discrimination suits just ought to be more “fair”.

    For instance, one of my friends, after hearing my explanation of why I am in favor of default father custody, suggested instead that instead, custody should be awarded on a case-by-case basis according to the best interests of the child, instead of either parent getting default custody.

    I would have said something similar a few years ago. But as I learned more and pondered more, I came to the conclusion that “fair” or “gender-blind” isn’t going to do the job, largely because men and women are so inherently different. To continue with this example: until the 1860’s in the U.S., and later in Europe, fathers could leave mothers and take the children; divorce was of course much more difficult then, but fathers had default custody. And yet, they almost never did it. Nowadays, women have default custody; they can leave their husbands and take the children. And a lot of them do exactly that.

    I’ve stated elsewhere on this blog that had I lived in a saner era, I would still have been a male chauvinist – that is, someone who considers men superior to women, an opinion with overwhelming evidence supporting it – but I wouldn’t have been a misogynist. I might even have been fiercely upholding the right of those women who were capable to do more than most women did, much as these days I promote the right of children and teenagers to do what they are able to do rather than what the straightjacket concept of their age designates them for.

    I’ve suffered a lot personally, as well as watching civilization collapse, because of women attempting to do things almost none of them are qualified to do. I can hardly help being a misogynist.

    Given the female chauvinism rampant in government and culture today, I really believe we need some grouchy male chauvinist misogynists like me to balance it, not that we have anything approaching balance these days.

  15. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Art,

    You’re right, that is appallingly slanted. Because I live in a corrupt feminist era, I have an exaggerated reaction to these things. Had I lived before the 1960’s, I would have been much more in favor of men helping their wives with the housework. Since I don’t, articles like that make me want to scream, “Get back in the kitchen, bitch!” An excessive reaction, yes, but I think one that’s needed in response to feminism.

    Querus,

    This reminds me of something I wanted to say to you, that my reaction is a little on the extreme side because it’s needed as an antidote. A lot of my friends, most of whom don’t know I’m a male chauvinist, have opinions similar to yours, that the laws about stuff like custody and alimony and discrimination suits just ought to be more “fair”.

    For instance, one of my friends, after hearing my explanation of why I am in favor of default father custody, suggested instead that instead, custody should be awarded on a case-by-case basis according to the best interests of the child, instead of either parent getting default custody.

    I would have said something similar a few years ago. But as I learned more and pondered more, I came to the conclusion that “fair” or “gender-blind” isn’t going to do the job, largely because men and women are so inherently different. To continue with this example: until the 1860’s in the U.S., and later in Europe, fathers could leave mothers and take the children; divorce was of course much more difficult then, but fathers had default custody. And yet, they almost never did it. Nowadays, women have default custody; they can leave their husbands and take the children. And a lot of them do exactly that.

    I’ve stated elsewhere on this blog that had I lived in a saner era, I would still have been a male chauvinist – that is, someone who considers men superior to women, an opinion with overwhelming evidence supporting it – but I wouldn’t have been a misogynist. I might even have been fiercely upholding the right of those women who were capable to do more than most women did, much as these days I promote the right of children and teenagers to do what they are able to do rather than what the straightjacket concept of their age designates them for.

    I’ve suffered a lot personally, as well as watching civilization collapse, because of women attempting to do things almost none of them are qualified to do. I can hardly help being a misogynist.

    Given the female chauvinism rampant in government and culture today, I really believe we need some grouchy male chauvinist misogynists like me to balance it, not that we have anything approaching balance these days.

  16. Querus Abuttu Says:

    “What I encounter is women who have a career because Cosmo told them to get one, who can’t or won’t actually do the work if they can get around it.”

    I do understand that, M., I do. I encounter it, personally, more in the civilian world, when I go out to go grocery shopping, which I hate…, or to a Home Depot when I need someone to assist me with cutting a large chunk of wood for garden borders. I seldom see a woman heave the heavy stuff, in a job that was meant to heave the heavy stuff. On the military side, when women are staffed as mechanics, or Boatswain’s Mates…some pull their weight and some do not. My personal experience is about 50/50. (I seldom see a guy that doesn’t pull his weight in a job, because if he slacks, the other men let him know it.) That’s something I have issues with. Not the fact that a woman is doing the job, but the fact that there are women employed who are doing jobs that they aren’t qualified for, or not motivated to do right. Companies are mandated, according to Affirmative Action, to have a quota of hiring females, regardless of their ability. This is supposed to insure an equal chance that a woman who IS qualified gets the job…but what does a company do when there are no qualified women? They have to hire an unqualified one to keep up their numbers. This is the same with minorities, and white men, which are also becoming a minority in some work places…but who aren’t yet…so there’s no quota for them. You’ll have 50 people lining up for a job, but because they aren’t the right race, the right gender, the right age group (lets not forget age group), the right ‘class’, they won’t get hired because of a required quota. However, lets not forget that American discriminatory processes helped to bring this about, to be fair. If some people hadn’t deliberately been cruel or unfairly discriminatory of individuals in the past, the cases would have never gone to court, and there would probably not have been laws to enforce quotas. I know it’s a little more complicated than that…but that is the basics from what I’ve read so far.

    For fun, here’s a website dedicated to political quotas around the world. See if you can find the US.
    http://www.quotaproject.org/displayCountry.cfm?CountryCode=ES

    You won’t find the US or New Zealand there. But go to this part of the website, and they describe why, and the “pros” and “cons” of having quotas: http://www.quotaproject.org/faq.cfm

    Look at this call for gender quotas in our political system:
    http://www.iknowpolitics.org/en/node/4250

    This is an article on the Argentine process discussing the benefit of gender quotas. Library access is needed to pull it up…another “control” that the primary public doesn’t have. http://cps.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/31/1/3

    Control over who has library, professional paper resources is a huge issue with me. Why should valid, recent research be beyond the access of those who are too poor to get it? The information may make a very big difference in the lives of people that go to the library to learn. (Art, did you previously have access to scientific papers from all major databases? Does the library there allow access to anyone?)

    Here’s another article on the political party gender quotas in Germany. I find it sad that people just can’t be honest, and if a woman, or a man, doesn’t make the grade/cut for a job that concessions are made for them anyway. THIS weakens our system, and supports hiring a number and not the best and brightest. It’s a twofold problem. Yes…unqualified women, or other unqualified applicants apply…but companies/organizations HIRE them based on the quota laws, and quota laws supposedly originated because people either felt they weren’t being given a fair shake, and/or the legal system was hit by lobbyists from organizations that felt that ‘diversity’ was important regardless of the job qualifiers, and they wanted to insure that immigrants and women were treated fairly in the job market.

    There is so much information on this, that I can’t sift through it all right now to get to the origins of the people/organizations that started this. MCW or Art…do you have any background info on this?

    Here’s an article I haven’t had the chance to pull up yet at the library: http://www.jstor.org/pss/2691813

    This one is a European Weekly online article:

    http://www.neurope.eu/articles/84189.php

    In terms of American Affirmative action, I came across this essay, which specifically states in a 1995 poll that Americans felt that quotas were no longer useful: http://www.123helpme.com/view.asp?id=16916

    “Since the early 1960s, minority participation “goals” have also been integral to
    Executive Branch enforcement of minority hiring and employment standards on federally
    financed construction projects and in connection with other large federal contracts.
    Executive Order 11246, as presently administered by the Office of Federal Contract
    Compliance Programs, requires that all employers with 50 or more employees, and federal
    contracts in excess of $50,000, file written affirmative action plans with the government.
    These must include minority and female hiring goals and timetables to which the
    contractor must commit its “good faith” efforts. Race and gender considerations – which
    may include numerical goals – are also a fundamental aspect of affirmative action.
    planning by federal departments and agencies to eliminate minority and female
    “underrepresentation” at various levels of agency employment.8
    Federal contract “set-asides” and minority subcontracting goals evolved from Small
    Business Administration programs to foster participation by “socially and economically
    disadvantaged” entrepreneurs (SDBs) in the federal procurement process.9 Minority
    group members and women are presumed to be socially and economically disadvantaged
    under the Small Business Act, while non-minority contractors must present evidence to
    prove their eligibility.”

    fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/53577.pdf

    I know Art will give up some history on the American Civil Liberties Union… which was linked who? My fingertip trivia from Wiki says the Popular Front Movement, which was originally engendered by Stalin to strengthen the Communist Party Movement , but I have no depth on the info right now.

  17. Querus Abuttu Says:

    “What I encounter is women who have a career because Cosmo told them to get one, who can’t or won’t actually do the work if they can get around it.”

    I do understand that, M., I do. I encounter it, personally, more in the civilian world, when I go out to go grocery shopping, which I hate…, or to a Home Depot when I need someone to assist me with cutting a large chunk of wood for garden borders. I seldom see a woman heave the heavy stuff, in a job that was meant to heave the heavy stuff. On the military side, when women are staffed as mechanics, or Boatswain’s Mates…some pull their weight and some do not. My personal experience is about 50/50. (I seldom see a guy that doesn’t pull his weight in a job, because if he slacks, the other men let him know it.) That’s something I have issues with. Not the fact that a woman is doing the job, but the fact that there are women employed who are doing jobs that they aren’t qualified for, or not motivated to do right. Companies are mandated, according to Affirmative Action, to have a quota of hiring females, regardless of their ability. This is supposed to insure an equal chance that a woman who IS qualified gets the job…but what does a company do when there are no qualified women? They have to hire an unqualified one to keep up their numbers. This is the same with minorities, and white men, which are also becoming a minority in some work places…but who aren’t yet…so there’s no quota for them. You’ll have 50 people lining up for a job, but because they aren’t the right race, the right gender, the right age group (lets not forget age group), the right ‘class’, they won’t get hired because of a required quota. However, lets not forget that American discriminatory processes helped to bring this about, to be fair. If some people hadn’t deliberately been cruel or unfairly discriminatory of individuals in the past, the cases would have never gone to court, and there would probably not have been laws to enforce quotas. I know it’s a little more complicated than that…but that is the basics from what I’ve read so far.

    For fun, here’s a website dedicated to political quotas around the world. See if you can find the US.
    http://www.quotaproject.org/displayCountry.cfm?CountryCode=ES

    You won’t find the US or New Zealand there. But go to this part of the website, and they describe why, and the “pros” and “cons” of having quotas: http://www.quotaproject.org/faq.cfm

    Look at this call for gender quotas in our political system:
    http://www.iknowpolitics.org/en/node/4250

    This is an article on the Argentine process discussing the benefit of gender quotas. Library access is needed to pull it up…another “control” that the primary public doesn’t have. http://cps.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/31/1/3

    Control over who has library, professional paper resources is a huge issue with me. Why should valid, recent research be beyond the access of those who are too poor to get it? The information may make a very big difference in the lives of people that go to the library to learn. (Art, did you previously have access to scientific papers from all major databases? Does the library there allow access to anyone?)

    Here’s another article on the political party gender quotas in Germany. I find it sad that people just can’t be honest, and if a woman, or a man, doesn’t make the grade/cut for a job that concessions are made for them anyway. THIS weakens our system, and supports hiring a number and not the best and brightest. It’s a twofold problem. Yes…unqualified women, or other unqualified applicants apply…but companies/organizations HIRE them based on the quota laws, and quota laws supposedly originated because people either felt they weren’t being given a fair shake, and/or the legal system was hit by lobbyists from organizations that felt that ‘diversity’ was important regardless of the job qualifiers, and they wanted to insure that immigrants and women were treated fairly in the job market.

    There is so much information on this, that I can’t sift through it all right now to get to the origins of the people/organizations that started this. MCW or Art…do you have any background info on this?

    Here’s an article I haven’t had the chance to pull up yet at the library: http://www.jstor.org/pss/2691813

    This one is a European Weekly online article:

    http://www.neurope.eu/articles/84189.php

    In terms of American Affirmative action, I came across this essay, which specifically states in a 1995 poll that Americans felt that quotas were no longer useful: http://www.123helpme.com/view.asp?id=16916

    “Since the early 1960s, minority participation “goals” have also been integral to
    Executive Branch enforcement of minority hiring and employment standards on federally
    financed construction projects and in connection with other large federal contracts.
    Executive Order 11246, as presently administered by the Office of Federal Contract
    Compliance Programs, requires that all employers with 50 or more employees, and federal
    contracts in excess of $50,000, file written affirmative action plans with the government.
    These must include minority and female hiring goals and timetables to which the
    contractor must commit its “good faith” efforts. Race and gender considerations – which
    may include numerical goals – are also a fundamental aspect of affirmative action.
    planning by federal departments and agencies to eliminate minority and female
    “underrepresentation” at various levels of agency employment.8
    Federal contract “set-asides” and minority subcontracting goals evolved from Small
    Business Administration programs to foster participation by “socially and economically
    disadvantaged” entrepreneurs (SDBs) in the federal procurement process.9 Minority
    group members and women are presumed to be socially and economically disadvantaged
    under the Small Business Act, while non-minority contractors must present evidence to
    prove their eligibility.”

    fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/53577.pdf

    I know Art will give up some history on the American Civil Liberties Union… which was linked who? My fingertip trivia from Wiki says the Popular Front Movement, which was originally engendered by Stalin to strengthen the Communist Party Movement , but I have no depth on the info right now.

  18. Querus Abuttu Says:

    “What I encounter is women who have a career because Cosmo told them to get one, who can’t or won’t actually do the work if they can get around it.”

    I do understand that, M., I do. I encounter it, personally, more in the civilian world, when I go out to go grocery shopping, which I hate…, or to a Home Depot when I need someone to assist me with cutting a large chunk of wood for garden borders. I seldom see a woman heave the heavy stuff, in a job that was meant to heave the heavy stuff. On the military side, when women are staffed as mechanics, or Boatswain’s Mates…some pull their weight and some do not. My personal experience is about 50/50. (I seldom see a guy that doesn’t pull his weight in a job, because if he slacks, the other men let him know it.) That’s something I have issues with. Not the fact that a woman is doing the job, but the fact that there are women employed who are doing jobs that they aren’t qualified for, or not motivated to do right. Companies are mandated, according to Affirmative Action, to have a quota of hiring females, regardless of their ability. This is supposed to insure an equal chance that a woman who IS qualified gets the job…but what does a company do when there are no qualified women? They have to hire an unqualified one to keep up their numbers. This is the same with minorities, and white men, which are also becoming a minority in some work places…but who aren’t yet…so there’s no quota for them. You’ll have 50 people lining up for a job, but because they aren’t the right race, the right gender, the right age group (lets not forget age group), the right ‘class’, they won’t get hired because of a required quota. However, lets not forget that American discriminatory processes helped to bring this about, to be fair. If some people hadn’t deliberately been cruel or unfairly discriminatory of individuals in the past, the cases would have never gone to court, and there would probably not have been laws to enforce quotas. I know it’s a little more complicated than that…but that is the basics from what I’ve read so far.

    For fun, here’s a website dedicated to political quotas around the world. See if you can find the US.
    http://www.quotaproject.org/displayCountry.cfm?CountryCode=ES

    You won’t find the US or New Zealand there. But go to this part of the website, and they describe why, and the “pros” and “cons” of having quotas: http://www.quotaproject.org/faq.cfm

    Look at this call for gender quotas in our political system:
    http://www.iknowpolitics.org/en/node/4250

    This is an article on the Argentine process discussing the benefit of gender quotas. Library access is needed to pull it up…another “control” that the primary public doesn’t have. http://cps.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/31/1/3

    Control over who has library, professional paper resources is a huge issue with me. Why should valid, recent research be beyond the access of those who are too poor to get it? The information may make a very big difference in the lives of people that go to the library to learn. (Art, did you previously have access to scientific papers from all major databases? Does the library there allow access to anyone?)

    Here’s another article on the political party gender quotas in Germany. I find it sad that people just can’t be honest, and if a woman, or a man, doesn’t make the grade/cut for a job that concessions are made for them anyway. THIS weakens our system, and supports hiring a number and not the best and brightest. It’s a twofold problem. Yes…unqualified women, or other unqualified applicants apply…but companies/organizations HIRE them based on the quota laws, and quota laws supposedly originated because people either felt they weren’t being given a fair shake, and/or the legal system was hit by lobbyists from organizations that felt that ‘diversity’ was important regardless of the job qualifiers, and they wanted to insure that immigrants and women were treated fairly in the job market.

    There is so much information on this, that I can’t sift through it all right now to get to the origins of the people/organizations that started this. MCW or Art…do you have any background info on this?

    Here’s an article I haven’t had the chance to pull up yet at the library: http://www.jstor.org/pss/2691813

    This one is a European Weekly online article:

    http://www.neurope.eu/articles/84189.php

    In terms of American Affirmative action, I came across this essay, which specifically states in a 1995 poll that Americans felt that quotas were no longer useful: http://www.123helpme.com/view.asp?id=16916

    “Since the early 1960s, minority participation “goals” have also been integral to
    Executive Branch enforcement of minority hiring and employment standards on federally
    financed construction projects and in connection with other large federal contracts.
    Executive Order 11246, as presently administered by the Office of Federal Contract
    Compliance Programs, requires that all employers with 50 or more employees, and federal
    contracts in excess of $50,000, file written affirmative action plans with the government.
    These must include minority and female hiring goals and timetables to which the
    contractor must commit its “good faith” efforts. Race and gender considerations – which
    may include numerical goals – are also a fundamental aspect of affirmative action.
    planning by federal departments and agencies to eliminate minority and female
    “underrepresentation” at various levels of agency employment.8
    Federal contract “set-asides” and minority subcontracting goals evolved from Small
    Business Administration programs to foster participation by “socially and economically
    disadvantaged” entrepreneurs (SDBs) in the federal procurement process.9 Minority
    group members and women are presumed to be socially and economically disadvantaged
    under the Small Business Act, while non-minority contractors must present evidence to
    prove their eligibility.”

    fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/53577.pdf

    I know Art will give up some history on the American Civil Liberties Union… which was linked who? My fingertip trivia from Wiki says the Popular Front Movement, which was originally engendered by Stalin to strengthen the Communist Party Movement , but I have no depth on the info right now.

  19. Querus Abuttu Says:

    Art,

    Interesting info. Looks like its a lot easier just being a single man. 😉 But then, the stats say that married men live longer…I wonder if they are accounting for the lifestyle changes?

    The article states that “women control the purse strings of the home”, which is an incorrect assumption/broad statement. I’ve seen some men dominate the finances at home, not allowing the wife to spend money on anything without his say so. I’ve seen some women squander the family money away without caring what they spent it on. There’s both sides.

    Here’s a website with some eye opening stats that you are both probably well aware of.
    http://www.divorcemag.com/statistics/statsUS.shtml

    The State of Our Unions 2005, a report issued by the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University. The same study said that only 63% of American children grow up with both biological parents — the lowest figure in the Western world.

    As of 2003, 43.7% of custodial mothers and 56.2% of custodial fathers were either separated or divorced. And in 2002, 7.8 million Americans paid about $40 billion in child and/or spousal support (84% of the payers were male). (It would be very interesting to see the break-down on that finance equation).

  20. Querus Abuttu Says:

    Art,

    Interesting info. Looks like its a lot easier just being a single man. 😉 But then, the stats say that married men live longer…I wonder if they are accounting for the lifestyle changes?

    The article states that “women control the purse strings of the home”, which is an incorrect assumption/broad statement. I’ve seen some men dominate the finances at home, not allowing the wife to spend money on anything without his say so. I’ve seen some women squander the family money away without caring what they spent it on. There’s both sides.

    Here’s a website with some eye opening stats that you are both probably well aware of.
    http://www.divorcemag.com/statistics/statsUS.shtml

    The State of Our Unions 2005, a report issued by the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University. The same study said that only 63% of American children grow up with both biological parents — the lowest figure in the Western world.

    As of 2003, 43.7% of custodial mothers and 56.2% of custodial fathers were either separated or divorced. And in 2002, 7.8 million Americans paid about $40 billion in child and/or spousal support (84% of the payers were male). (It would be very interesting to see the break-down on that finance equation).

  21. Querus Abuttu Says:

    Art,

    Interesting info. Looks like its a lot easier just being a single man. 😉 But then, the stats say that married men live longer…I wonder if they are accounting for the lifestyle changes?

    The article states that “women control the purse strings of the home”, which is an incorrect assumption/broad statement. I’ve seen some men dominate the finances at home, not allowing the wife to spend money on anything without his say so. I’ve seen some women squander the family money away without caring what they spent it on. There’s both sides.

    Here’s a website with some eye opening stats that you are both probably well aware of.
    http://www.divorcemag.com/statistics/statsUS.shtml

    The State of Our Unions 2005, a report issued by the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University. The same study said that only 63% of American children grow up with both biological parents — the lowest figure in the Western world.

    As of 2003, 43.7% of custodial mothers and 56.2% of custodial fathers were either separated or divorced. And in 2002, 7.8 million Americans paid about $40 billion in child and/or spousal support (84% of the payers were male). (It would be very interesting to see the break-down on that finance equation).

  22. Artfldgr Says:

    Men ultimately serve women, or there is no species. so techically, they are better at being the leader on someone elses behalf. its frustrating beacuse the other often thinks like a teenager and doesnt believe that they should be allowed to play with dynamite, but also, they no longer see that they are ultimately more valuable than men.

    men are, and have been called, the disposable sex.

    anyway, here is a bit from the

    British Medical Journal

    from sweden, to the UK, and even poland, feminists are finally being taken apart. (i think i noted the swedish economic paper that urges them to give up communism, since in capatalist america women make more than men. of course here in america, the femNITS still claim the same number as when i was a kid)

    here is the BMJ short.

    Basically its starting to suddenly be very fasionable to finally expose the harm and all the bad that feminism is and has been doing. its dead, and good riddance.

    when you hear the things that they list that feminism did for women, ever notice that the majority of everything on that list was obtained BEFORE 1965? the socialists took it over and thought to get all the credit.

    [mcw: did you read about the lesbian christine quinn in ny. created 30 front organizations and got them funded so she could then have her own unaccountable slush fund. she was the first to get into that office (though they are not crowing these thigns now), and she gutted the department. then this happens, and now they are trying to say she didnt know, and that this is just a more polished version of common thing. the fun part is in the names for the orgs… 30 false fronts and we still cant call them communists and eject them]

    Are there too many female medical graduates?

    More women now graduate from medical school than men, and soon male doctors will be in the minority. But are we risking future staffing problems, or is there still some way to go before we reach true equality? Two experts debate the issue in this week’s BMJ.

    Increasing numbers of female graduates will create a major shortfall in primary care provision and may also affect education, research, and development, argues Brian McKinstry, senior research fellow at the University of Edinburgh.

    Evidence is growing, he says, to demonstrate the negative consequences of the feminism of primary care in the UK and elsewhere. For example, fewer women than men choose to work out of hours, and the increase in women doctors may have partly influenced the recent abandonment of out of hours work by general practitioners in the UK, he claims.

    But according to McKinstry we are yet to feel the full effects of this feminisation. For instance, above the age of 45 years men, mostly working full time, are in the majority, whereas general practitioners younger than 45 years are mostly female and working part time. As older, mainly fully time doctors retire, unless employment behaviour changes, there will be a major shortfall in primary care provision, he argues.

    This demographic change may also affect education, research, and development, he adds. An American study of women in internal medicine found that women with children had fewer publications than men with children, while Scottish data indicates that women contribute about 60% of the activity of men in development aspects of general practice such as training, teaching, research, and committee work.

    He concludes that in the absence of any profound change in societal views on responsibility for child care, a balanced approach to recruitment in the interests of equity and the future delivery of services is vital.

    But Jane Dacre from University College London, argues that rather than worrying about having too many women in medicine we should be focusing on ensuring equality of opportunity.

    Although women outnumber men in most medical schools by about 3:2, they are under-represented in some areas, especially in clinical academia and in specialties requiring more acute and on call responsibilities and more technical skills.

    Dacre believes that medicine needs and wants to attract the best and brightest people whatever their sex. But in order to welcome more women into senior positions, she says, institutional barriers that prevent their progression such as a lack of rota flexibility, low acceptance of career breaks and part-time working, and the need for greater availability of child care and easily accessible and funded part time training options needs to be addressed.

    The feminisation of medicine should be welcomed as an opportunity to be creative with workforce planning and to recognise that a more flexible way of working is essential to delivering good quality patient care at all times of the day and night, she says.

    In an accompanying editorial, Jenny Firth-Cozens from The London Deanery, acknowledges that the implications of the proportional rise in female doctors must be taken into account. But she warns that any financial estimation that compares the cost of employing male or female doctors must take into account sex differences in the costs of poor performance, litigation, re-education, and rehabilitation that are consistently higher for male doctors.

    Source: British Medical Journal

  23. Artfldgr Says:

    Men ultimately serve women, or there is no species. so techically, they are better at being the leader on someone elses behalf. its frustrating beacuse the other often thinks like a teenager and doesnt believe that they should be allowed to play with dynamite, but also, they no longer see that they are ultimately more valuable than men.

    men are, and have been called, the disposable sex.

    anyway, here is a bit from the

    British Medical Journal

    from sweden, to the UK, and even poland, feminists are finally being taken apart. (i think i noted the swedish economic paper that urges them to give up communism, since in capatalist america women make more than men. of course here in america, the femNITS still claim the same number as when i was a kid)

    here is the BMJ short.

    Basically its starting to suddenly be very fasionable to finally expose the harm and all the bad that feminism is and has been doing. its dead, and good riddance.

    when you hear the things that they list that feminism did for women, ever notice that the majority of everything on that list was obtained BEFORE 1965? the socialists took it over and thought to get all the credit.

    [mcw: did you read about the lesbian christine quinn in ny. created 30 front organizations and got them funded so she could then have her own unaccountable slush fund. she was the first to get into that office (though they are not crowing these thigns now), and she gutted the department. then this happens, and now they are trying to say she didnt know, and that this is just a more polished version of common thing. the fun part is in the names for the orgs… 30 false fronts and we still cant call them communists and eject them]

    Are there too many female medical graduates?

    More women now graduate from medical school than men, and soon male doctors will be in the minority. But are we risking future staffing problems, or is there still some way to go before we reach true equality? Two experts debate the issue in this week’s BMJ.

    Increasing numbers of female graduates will create a major shortfall in primary care provision and may also affect education, research, and development, argues Brian McKinstry, senior research fellow at the University of Edinburgh.

    Evidence is growing, he says, to demonstrate the negative consequences of the feminism of primary care in the UK and elsewhere. For example, fewer women than men choose to work out of hours, and the increase in women doctors may have partly influenced the recent abandonment of out of hours work by general practitioners in the UK, he claims.

    But according to McKinstry we are yet to feel the full effects of this feminisation. For instance, above the age of 45 years men, mostly working full time, are in the majority, whereas general practitioners younger than 45 years are mostly female and working part time. As older, mainly fully time doctors retire, unless employment behaviour changes, there will be a major shortfall in primary care provision, he argues.

    This demographic change may also affect education, research, and development, he adds. An American study of women in internal medicine found that women with children had fewer publications than men with children, while Scottish data indicates that women contribute about 60% of the activity of men in development aspects of general practice such as training, teaching, research, and committee work.

    He concludes that in the absence of any profound change in societal views on responsibility for child care, a balanced approach to recruitment in the interests of equity and the future delivery of services is vital.

    But Jane Dacre from University College London, argues that rather than worrying about having too many women in medicine we should be focusing on ensuring equality of opportunity.

    Although women outnumber men in most medical schools by about 3:2, they are under-represented in some areas, especially in clinical academia and in specialties requiring more acute and on call responsibilities and more technical skills.

    Dacre believes that medicine needs and wants to attract the best and brightest people whatever their sex. But in order to welcome more women into senior positions, she says, institutional barriers that prevent their progression such as a lack of rota flexibility, low acceptance of career breaks and part-time working, and the need for greater availability of child care and easily accessible and funded part time training options needs to be addressed.

    The feminisation of medicine should be welcomed as an opportunity to be creative with workforce planning and to recognise that a more flexible way of working is essential to delivering good quality patient care at all times of the day and night, she says.

    In an accompanying editorial, Jenny Firth-Cozens from The London Deanery, acknowledges that the implications of the proportional rise in female doctors must be taken into account. But she warns that any financial estimation that compares the cost of employing male or female doctors must take into account sex differences in the costs of poor performance, litigation, re-education, and rehabilitation that are consistently higher for male doctors.

    Source: British Medical Journal

  24. Artfldgr Says:

    Men ultimately serve women, or there is no species. so techically, they are better at being the leader on someone elses behalf. its frustrating beacuse the other often thinks like a teenager and doesnt believe that they should be allowed to play with dynamite, but also, they no longer see that they are ultimately more valuable than men.

    men are, and have been called, the disposable sex.

    anyway, here is a bit from the

    British Medical Journal

    from sweden, to the UK, and even poland, feminists are finally being taken apart. (i think i noted the swedish economic paper that urges them to give up communism, since in capatalist america women make more than men. of course here in america, the femNITS still claim the same number as when i was a kid)

    here is the BMJ short.

    Basically its starting to suddenly be very fasionable to finally expose the harm and all the bad that feminism is and has been doing. its dead, and good riddance.

    when you hear the things that they list that feminism did for women, ever notice that the majority of everything on that list was obtained BEFORE 1965? the socialists took it over and thought to get all the credit.

    [mcw: did you read about the lesbian christine quinn in ny. created 30 front organizations and got them funded so she could then have her own unaccountable slush fund. she was the first to get into that office (though they are not crowing these thigns now), and she gutted the department. then this happens, and now they are trying to say she didnt know, and that this is just a more polished version of common thing. the fun part is in the names for the orgs… 30 false fronts and we still cant call them communists and eject them]

    Are there too many female medical graduates?

    More women now graduate from medical school than men, and soon male doctors will be in the minority. But are we risking future staffing problems, or is there still some way to go before we reach true equality? Two experts debate the issue in this week’s BMJ.

    Increasing numbers of female graduates will create a major shortfall in primary care provision and may also affect education, research, and development, argues Brian McKinstry, senior research fellow at the University of Edinburgh.

    Evidence is growing, he says, to demonstrate the negative consequences of the feminism of primary care in the UK and elsewhere. For example, fewer women than men choose to work out of hours, and the increase in women doctors may have partly influenced the recent abandonment of out of hours work by general practitioners in the UK, he claims.

    But according to McKinstry we are yet to feel the full effects of this feminisation. For instance, above the age of 45 years men, mostly working full time, are in the majority, whereas general practitioners younger than 45 years are mostly female and working part time. As older, mainly fully time doctors retire, unless employment behaviour changes, there will be a major shortfall in primary care provision, he argues.

    This demographic change may also affect education, research, and development, he adds. An American study of women in internal medicine found that women with children had fewer publications than men with children, while Scottish data indicates that women contribute about 60% of the activity of men in development aspects of general practice such as training, teaching, research, and committee work.

    He concludes that in the absence of any profound change in societal views on responsibility for child care, a balanced approach to recruitment in the interests of equity and the future delivery of services is vital.

    But Jane Dacre from University College London, argues that rather than worrying about having too many women in medicine we should be focusing on ensuring equality of opportunity.

    Although women outnumber men in most medical schools by about 3:2, they are under-represented in some areas, especially in clinical academia and in specialties requiring more acute and on call responsibilities and more technical skills.

    Dacre believes that medicine needs and wants to attract the best and brightest people whatever their sex. But in order to welcome more women into senior positions, she says, institutional barriers that prevent their progression such as a lack of rota flexibility, low acceptance of career breaks and part-time working, and the need for greater availability of child care and easily accessible and funded part time training options needs to be addressed.

    The feminisation of medicine should be welcomed as an opportunity to be creative with workforce planning and to recognise that a more flexible way of working is essential to delivering good quality patient care at all times of the day and night, she says.

    In an accompanying editorial, Jenny Firth-Cozens from The London Deanery, acknowledges that the implications of the proportional rise in female doctors must be taken into account. But she warns that any financial estimation that compares the cost of employing male or female doctors must take into account sex differences in the costs of poor performance, litigation, re-education, and rehabilitation that are consistently higher for male doctors.

    Source: British Medical Journal

  25. Artfldgr Says:

    M,

    custody should be awarded on a case-by-case basis according to the best interests of the child, instead of either parent getting default custody.

    The best interest of the parent is the child. Want to know where all this do it for the children came from? Its Volkish.

    “The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.”

    Adolf Hitler

    It did a good job on the germans, and they copied them. hitler and stalin, fascism, and communism, two brothers like romulus and remus.

    as i said, its nice to know where ideas actually come from… have you noticed how many things are repeating under different labels?

    too bad your friends are calling the wrong people fascists, they should look in the mirror.

  26. Artfldgr Says:

    M,

    custody should be awarded on a case-by-case basis according to the best interests of the child, instead of either parent getting default custody.

    The best interest of the parent is the child. Want to know where all this do it for the children came from? Its Volkish.

    “The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.”

    Adolf Hitler

    It did a good job on the germans, and they copied them. hitler and stalin, fascism, and communism, two brothers like romulus and remus.

    as i said, its nice to know where ideas actually come from… have you noticed how many things are repeating under different labels?

    too bad your friends are calling the wrong people fascists, they should look in the mirror.

  27. Artfldgr Says:

    M,

    custody should be awarded on a case-by-case basis according to the best interests of the child, instead of either parent getting default custody.

    The best interest of the parent is the child. Want to know where all this do it for the children came from? Its Volkish.

    “The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.”

    Adolf Hitler

    It did a good job on the germans, and they copied them. hitler and stalin, fascism, and communism, two brothers like romulus and remus.

    as i said, its nice to know where ideas actually come from… have you noticed how many things are repeating under different labels?

    too bad your friends are calling the wrong people fascists, they should look in the mirror.

  28. Artfldgr Says:

    and white men, which are also becoming a minority in some work places…but who aren’t yet…so there’s no quota for them.

    Q,
    There will never be a quota for them. They are to be exterminated by process, or something else. The oppressor class can never become oppressed, nor can they switch sides by being nice. They are forever the oppressor class and anything the oppressed class does to harm them, remove them, destroy them, is considered class justice.

    Most people don’t have a single idea what class dialectics are and how the thought process works behind them. However if you get what I just said, then you can see how an Islamic radical has more rights than a Christian. Christians are the oppressor class because of the people they killed during the inquisition (the Vatican opened their archives, it was only 3000 people, and not mostly women), and they visited the crusades on those poor people. of course the real history was that on SEPT 11/12 1683 the battle of Vienna, Islamics invaded and proceeded to commit genocide of Europe.

    The reason the lords and their sons went on crusade was that the pope offered them a way out of being noble. Bet you don’t know why they are noble either. There was no contractual way around the tenets of God, especially around mortal sins. So murder, lying, cheating, and such were mortal sins and those who did them went to hell. So technically a person who takes up the point to lead politically, also takes up the understanding that in exchange for that, they will go to hell. The noble sacrifice was their eternal soul in exchange for their countryman’s safety. That was true of EVERY soldier.

    The pope said, if you do this, god will forgive you and you can enter into the gates of heaven. Well, every lord, and son, and such, thought that was a no brainer. Either sits around waiting for Islam to finish the job, or bring the battle to them, and get absolution.

  29. Artfldgr Says:

    and white men, which are also becoming a minority in some work places…but who aren’t yet…so there’s no quota for them.

    Q,
    There will never be a quota for them. They are to be exterminated by process, or something else. The oppressor class can never become oppressed, nor can they switch sides by being nice. They are forever the oppressor class and anything the oppressed class does to harm them, remove them, destroy them, is considered class justice.

    Most people don’t have a single idea what class dialectics are and how the thought process works behind them. However if you get what I just said, then you can see how an Islamic radical has more rights than a Christian. Christians are the oppressor class because of the people they killed during the inquisition (the Vatican opened their archives, it was only 3000 people, and not mostly women), and they visited the crusades on those poor people. of course the real history was that on SEPT 11/12 1683 the battle of Vienna, Islamics invaded and proceeded to commit genocide of Europe.

    The reason the lords and their sons went on crusade was that the pope offered them a way out of being noble. Bet you don’t know why they are noble either. There was no contractual way around the tenets of God, especially around mortal sins. So murder, lying, cheating, and such were mortal sins and those who did them went to hell. So technically a person who takes up the point to lead politically, also takes up the understanding that in exchange for that, they will go to hell. The noble sacrifice was their eternal soul in exchange for their countryman’s safety. That was true of EVERY soldier.

    The pope said, if you do this, god will forgive you and you can enter into the gates of heaven. Well, every lord, and son, and such, thought that was a no brainer. Either sits around waiting for Islam to finish the job, or bring the battle to them, and get absolution.

  30. Artfldgr Says:

    and white men, which are also becoming a minority in some work places…but who aren’t yet…so there’s no quota for them.

    Q,
    There will never be a quota for them. They are to be exterminated by process, or something else. The oppressor class can never become oppressed, nor can they switch sides by being nice. They are forever the oppressor class and anything the oppressed class does to harm them, remove them, destroy them, is considered class justice.

    Most people don’t have a single idea what class dialectics are and how the thought process works behind them. However if you get what I just said, then you can see how an Islamic radical has more rights than a Christian. Christians are the oppressor class because of the people they killed during the inquisition (the Vatican opened their archives, it was only 3000 people, and not mostly women), and they visited the crusades on those poor people. of course the real history was that on SEPT 11/12 1683 the battle of Vienna, Islamics invaded and proceeded to commit genocide of Europe.

    The reason the lords and their sons went on crusade was that the pope offered them a way out of being noble. Bet you don’t know why they are noble either. There was no contractual way around the tenets of God, especially around mortal sins. So murder, lying, cheating, and such were mortal sins and those who did them went to hell. So technically a person who takes up the point to lead politically, also takes up the understanding that in exchange for that, they will go to hell. The noble sacrifice was their eternal soul in exchange for their countryman’s safety. That was true of EVERY soldier.

    The pope said, if you do this, god will forgive you and you can enter into the gates of heaven. Well, every lord, and son, and such, thought that was a no brainer. Either sits around waiting for Islam to finish the job, or bring the battle to them, and get absolution.

  31. Artfldgr Says:

    If some people hadn’t deliberately been cruel or unfairly discriminatory of individuals in the past, the cases would have never gone to court, and there would probably not have been laws to enforce quotas. I know it’s a little more complicated than that…but that is the basics from what I’ve read so far.

    you didnt ‘get’ what i taiught you about morals and understanding in men vs women

    your are confusing justification of an end, end justifies the means, as a moral argument.

    your stating that two wrongs will make a right.

    meanwhile, how does that play out. i am a white male, of latvian descent who is the first male born here in america.

    and the discrimination of peoples was less in the past! how else would blacks be able to open businesses in the south right after the war?

    did you know that the first self made female millionaire was a minority? madam cj walker in harlem.

    it wasnt till the communists decided to have class warfare that all that stuff really started.

    i linked you to the school that was a communist front that martin luthor went to for his training, and rosa parks.

    the leaders of the school went to prison because they took the money from the same communist organization that funded the tuskegee incident, and they bought a house in the white south, they then moved a black family into it. they were arrested, the school disbanded and a lot mroe because they then bombed the family blaming it on the southern whites. i gave you the link to the fbi files, at the fbi website!

    you still havent figured out that most of what you know is lies and wash.

    your next lesson is to research the wkkk. yes W… thats the women of the kkk, they became the modern feminists after labour was a dead end.

    Margaret Sanger wrote about her Ku Klux Klan speech in her autobiography, “I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses…I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak…In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.” (Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366)

    ever notice that the people in government helping blacks on the left are all religious ministers?

    “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

    Margaret Sanger’s December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon’s Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.

    “Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying … demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism … [Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant … We are paying for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all.”

    Margaret Sanger. The Pivot of Civilization, 1922. Chapter on “The Cruelty of Charity,” pages 116, 122, and 189. Swarthmore College Library edition.

    he most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”

    Margaret Sanger (editor). The Woman Rebel, Volume I, Number 1. Reprinted in Woman and the New Race. New York: Brentanos Publishers, 1922.

    “Eugenics is … the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems.Margaret Sanger. “

    The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.” Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5.

    care to go to the planned parenthood website and read what they say?

    http://www.plannedparenthood.org/issues-action/other/sanger-1916-9974.htm

    In 1916, the year that Margaret Sanger opened America’s first birth control clinic in Brooklyn, NY, and founded Planned Parenthood, Woodrow Wilson was president. It was a leap year. World War I and the Mexican Revolution were raging.

    see the lie?

    planned parenthood was not called planned parenthood till way later. It was first called the negro project.

    http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/margaret-sanger-14115.htm

    Margaret Sanger gained worldwide renown, respect, and admiration for founding the American birth control movement and, later, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, as well as for developing and encouraging family planning efforts throughout the international community.

    on this page they contradit their other page!

    Harlem — 1930
    In 1930, Sanger opened a family planning clinic in Harlem that sought to enlist support for contraceptive use and to bring the benefits of family planning to women who were denied access to their city’s health and social services. Staffed by a black physician and black social worker, the clinic was endorsed by The Amsterdam News (the powerful local newspaper), the Abyssinian Baptist Church, the Urban League, and the black community’s elder statesman, W.E.B. DuBois (Chesler, 1992).

    in case you didnt know web was a communist.

    THEN they mention the negro project… because they cant escape it, but here is what THEY say…

    Negro Project — 1939-1942
    Beginning in 1939, DuBois served on the advisory council for Sanger’s “Negro Project,” which was designed to serve African Americans in the rural South. The advisory council called it a “unique experiment in race-building and humanitarian service to a race subjected to discrimination, hardship, and segregation (Chesler, 1992).”

    socialists lie… its all a lie… you cant figure out where the lies start and end… one big mash up of lies and truth and sociopathically saying anything for the moment that gets them their desire for that moment. after they get it, they will hold on and then keep playing till your tired out.

    i love this line

    The Negro Project was also endorsed by prominent white Americans who were involved in social justice efforts at this time, including Eleanor Roosevelt, the most visible and compassionate supporter of racial equality in her era; and the medical philanthropists, Albert and Mary Lasker, whose financial support made the project possible (Chesler, 1992).

    care to research those names… its like they are saying… all those with a hidden agenda loved it.

    arrrgggghhhhhhhhh

  32. Artfldgr Says:

    If some people hadn’t deliberately been cruel or unfairly discriminatory of individuals in the past, the cases would have never gone to court, and there would probably not have been laws to enforce quotas. I know it’s a little more complicated than that…but that is the basics from what I’ve read so far.

    you didnt ‘get’ what i taiught you about morals and understanding in men vs women

    your are confusing justification of an end, end justifies the means, as a moral argument.

    your stating that two wrongs will make a right.

    meanwhile, how does that play out. i am a white male, of latvian descent who is the first male born here in america.

    and the discrimination of peoples was less in the past! how else would blacks be able to open businesses in the south right after the war?

    did you know that the first self made female millionaire was a minority? madam cj walker in harlem.

    it wasnt till the communists decided to have class warfare that all that stuff really started.

    i linked you to the school that was a communist front that martin luthor went to for his training, and rosa parks.

    the leaders of the school went to prison because they took the money from the same communist organization that funded the tuskegee incident, and they bought a house in the white south, they then moved a black family into it. they were arrested, the school disbanded and a lot mroe because they then bombed the family blaming it on the southern whites. i gave you the link to the fbi files, at the fbi website!

    you still havent figured out that most of what you know is lies and wash.

    your next lesson is to research the wkkk. yes W… thats the women of the kkk, they became the modern feminists after labour was a dead end.

    Margaret Sanger wrote about her Ku Klux Klan speech in her autobiography, “I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses…I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak…In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.” (Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366)

    ever notice that the people in government helping blacks on the left are all religious ministers?

    “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

    Margaret Sanger’s December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon’s Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.

    “Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying … demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism … [Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant … We are paying for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all.”

    Margaret Sanger. The Pivot of Civilization, 1922. Chapter on “The Cruelty of Charity,” pages 116, 122, and 189. Swarthmore College Library edition.

    he most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”

    Margaret Sanger (editor). The Woman Rebel, Volume I, Number 1. Reprinted in Woman and the New Race. New York: Brentanos Publishers, 1922.

    “Eugenics is … the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems.Margaret Sanger. “

    The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.” Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5.

    care to go to the planned parenthood website and read what they say?

    http://www.plannedparenthood.org/issues-action/other/sanger-1916-9974.htm

    In 1916, the year that Margaret Sanger opened America’s first birth control clinic in Brooklyn, NY, and founded Planned Parenthood, Woodrow Wilson was president. It was a leap year. World War I and the Mexican Revolution were raging.

    see the lie?

    planned parenthood was not called planned parenthood till way later. It was first called the negro project.

    http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/margaret-sanger-14115.htm

    Margaret Sanger gained worldwide renown, respect, and admiration for founding the American birth control movement and, later, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, as well as for developing and encouraging family planning efforts throughout the international community.

    on this page they contradit their other page!

    Harlem — 1930
    In 1930, Sanger opened a family planning clinic in Harlem that sought to enlist support for contraceptive use and to bring the benefits of family planning to women who were denied access to their city’s health and social services. Staffed by a black physician and black social worker, the clinic was endorsed by The Amsterdam News (the powerful local newspaper), the Abyssinian Baptist Church, the Urban League, and the black community’s elder statesman, W.E.B. DuBois (Chesler, 1992).

    in case you didnt know web was a communist.

    THEN they mention the negro project… because they cant escape it, but here is what THEY say…

    Negro Project — 1939-1942
    Beginning in 1939, DuBois served on the advisory council for Sanger’s “Negro Project,” which was designed to serve African Americans in the rural South. The advisory council called it a “unique experiment in race-building and humanitarian service to a race subjected to discrimination, hardship, and segregation (Chesler, 1992).”

    socialists lie… its all a lie… you cant figure out where the lies start and end… one big mash up of lies and truth and sociopathically saying anything for the moment that gets them their desire for that moment. after they get it, they will hold on and then keep playing till your tired out.

    i love this line

    The Negro Project was also endorsed by prominent white Americans who were involved in social justice efforts at this time, including Eleanor Roosevelt, the most visible and compassionate supporter of racial equality in her era; and the medical philanthropists, Albert and Mary Lasker, whose financial support made the project possible (Chesler, 1992).

    care to research those names… its like they are saying… all those with a hidden agenda loved it.

    arrrgggghhhhhhhhh

  33. Artfldgr Says:

    If some people hadn’t deliberately been cruel or unfairly discriminatory of individuals in the past, the cases would have never gone to court, and there would probably not have been laws to enforce quotas. I know it’s a little more complicated than that…but that is the basics from what I’ve read so far.

    you didnt ‘get’ what i taiught you about morals and understanding in men vs women

    your are confusing justification of an end, end justifies the means, as a moral argument.

    your stating that two wrongs will make a right.

    meanwhile, how does that play out. i am a white male, of latvian descent who is the first male born here in america.

    and the discrimination of peoples was less in the past! how else would blacks be able to open businesses in the south right after the war?

    did you know that the first self made female millionaire was a minority? madam cj walker in harlem.

    it wasnt till the communists decided to have class warfare that all that stuff really started.

    i linked you to the school that was a communist front that martin luthor went to for his training, and rosa parks.

    the leaders of the school went to prison because they took the money from the same communist organization that funded the tuskegee incident, and they bought a house in the white south, they then moved a black family into it. they were arrested, the school disbanded and a lot mroe because they then bombed the family blaming it on the southern whites. i gave you the link to the fbi files, at the fbi website!

    you still havent figured out that most of what you know is lies and wash.

    your next lesson is to research the wkkk. yes W… thats the women of the kkk, they became the modern feminists after labour was a dead end.

    Margaret Sanger wrote about her Ku Klux Klan speech in her autobiography, “I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses…I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak…In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.” (Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366)

    ever notice that the people in government helping blacks on the left are all religious ministers?

    “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

    Margaret Sanger’s December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon’s Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.

    “Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying … demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism … [Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant … We are paying for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all.”

    Margaret Sanger. The Pivot of Civilization, 1922. Chapter on “The Cruelty of Charity,” pages 116, 122, and 189. Swarthmore College Library edition.

    he most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”

    Margaret Sanger (editor). The Woman Rebel, Volume I, Number 1. Reprinted in Woman and the New Race. New York: Brentanos Publishers, 1922.

    “Eugenics is … the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems.Margaret Sanger. “

    The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.” Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5.

    care to go to the planned parenthood website and read what they say?

    http://www.plannedparenthood.org/issues-action/other/sanger-1916-9974.htm

    In 1916, the year that Margaret Sanger opened America’s first birth control clinic in Brooklyn, NY, and founded Planned Parenthood, Woodrow Wilson was president. It was a leap year. World War I and the Mexican Revolution were raging.

    see the lie?

    planned parenthood was not called planned parenthood till way later. It was first called the negro project.

    http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/margaret-sanger-14115.htm

    Margaret Sanger gained worldwide renown, respect, and admiration for founding the American birth control movement and, later, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, as well as for developing and encouraging family planning efforts throughout the international community.

    on this page they contradit their other page!

    Harlem — 1930
    In 1930, Sanger opened a family planning clinic in Harlem that sought to enlist support for contraceptive use and to bring the benefits of family planning to women who were denied access to their city’s health and social services. Staffed by a black physician and black social worker, the clinic was endorsed by The Amsterdam News (the powerful local newspaper), the Abyssinian Baptist Church, the Urban League, and the black community’s elder statesman, W.E.B. DuBois (Chesler, 1992).

    in case you didnt know web was a communist.

    THEN they mention the negro project… because they cant escape it, but here is what THEY say…

    Negro Project — 1939-1942
    Beginning in 1939, DuBois served on the advisory council for Sanger’s “Negro Project,” which was designed to serve African Americans in the rural South. The advisory council called it a “unique experiment in race-building and humanitarian service to a race subjected to discrimination, hardship, and segregation (Chesler, 1992).”

    socialists lie… its all a lie… you cant figure out where the lies start and end… one big mash up of lies and truth and sociopathically saying anything for the moment that gets them their desire for that moment. after they get it, they will hold on and then keep playing till your tired out.

    i love this line

    The Negro Project was also endorsed by prominent white Americans who were involved in social justice efforts at this time, including Eleanor Roosevelt, the most visible and compassionate supporter of racial equality in her era; and the medical philanthropists, Albert and Mary Lasker, whose financial support made the project possible (Chesler, 1992).

    care to research those names… its like they are saying… all those with a hidden agenda loved it.

    arrrgggghhhhhhhhh

  34. Artfldgr Says:

    by the way, later they say that the quotes that are used like mine are “taken out of context”

    with the net things can be checked better… but they know the game of the big lie and that more will believe the ‘organization’ then everyone else…and they are basically supplying the fellow travelers and useful idiots with the correct lie so that all those are coordinated intheir answers.

    that seems more powerful and correct and thats goebbles big lie.

  35. Artfldgr Says:

    by the way, later they say that the quotes that are used like mine are “taken out of context”

    with the net things can be checked better… but they know the game of the big lie and that more will believe the ‘organization’ then everyone else…and they are basically supplying the fellow travelers and useful idiots with the correct lie so that all those are coordinated intheir answers.

    that seems more powerful and correct and thats goebbles big lie.

  36. Artfldgr Says:

    by the way, later they say that the quotes that are used like mine are “taken out of context”

    with the net things can be checked better… but they know the game of the big lie and that more will believe the ‘organization’ then everyone else…and they are basically supplying the fellow travelers and useful idiots with the correct lie so that all those are coordinated intheir answers.

    that seems more powerful and correct and thats goebbles big lie.

  37. Artfldgr Says:

    we forget the movie with gregory hines and latvian dancer…

    remember how hines said he lived. they were telling the blacks something but everyone was too focused on the story.

    in no socialist place do they do well at all… but here in america we have several that have tried to run as president, one that runs american express, the first female millionaire, and the list goes on.

    but we are oppressive… right?

    see how you swalloed the lie and ignored the ecvidence all around you. including the lesson from the poverty stricken black man who earned his own brokerage firm and made a movie “in persuit of happyness”

  38. Artfldgr Says:

    we forget the movie with gregory hines and latvian dancer…

    remember how hines said he lived. they were telling the blacks something but everyone was too focused on the story.

    in no socialist place do they do well at all… but here in america we have several that have tried to run as president, one that runs american express, the first female millionaire, and the list goes on.

    but we are oppressive… right?

    see how you swalloed the lie and ignored the ecvidence all around you. including the lesson from the poverty stricken black man who earned his own brokerage firm and made a movie “in persuit of happyness”

  39. Artfldgr Says:

    we forget the movie with gregory hines and latvian dancer…

    remember how hines said he lived. they were telling the blacks something but everyone was too focused on the story.

    in no socialist place do they do well at all… but here in america we have several that have tried to run as president, one that runs american express, the first female millionaire, and the list goes on.

    but we are oppressive… right?

    see how you swalloed the lie and ignored the ecvidence all around you. including the lesson from the poverty stricken black man who earned his own brokerage firm and made a movie “in persuit of happyness”

  40. Querus Abuttu Says:

    Some great info, Art. Thanks. I’ll keep reading…

  41. Querus Abuttu Says:

    Some great info, Art. Thanks. I’ll keep reading…

  42. Querus Abuttu Says:

    Some great info, Art. Thanks. I’ll keep reading…

  43. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Art, go easy on Querus! We’re telling her that pretty much everything she’s ever believed is wrong. Give her time to process it and determine what seems true to her!

    Q,

    However, lets not forget that American discriminatory processes helped to bring this about, to be fair.

    Right, but for one thing, in the case of sex discrimination, there were good reasons. Women used to quit to get married – and they were right to do so. I know this isn’t going to be popular, but I think more employers should discriminate against women, and should be legally free to do so; it shouldn’t be made too easily profitable for women to avoid marriage.

    Racial discrimination is a completely different thing and very wrong, but affirmative action and quotas are definitely a bad answer. Thomas Sowell, a black man and probably the most brilliant conservative philosopher currently living, has remarked that he is very lucky: he started his career right after segregation ended but before affirmative action, which he says has many of his black acquaintances wondering if they truly made their own achievements or not.

    (Slightly off topic, but one of his essays on segregation is I think of interest: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell102705.asp)

    Quotas are pretty much always used for nefarious purposes. When they’re used to promote black people, they undermine everyone’s respect for black professionals: “How do I know he didn’t get the job to make the quota? I’m going somewhere else!” Before they were used to “promote” black people, they were used to limit the number of Jewish people in universities and professions, because Gentiles figured they were so smart and studious they would “take over”. Affirmative action, quotas, attempts to make the assortment of people in a given profession conform to some preconceived ideal – it all does nothing but mischief.

  44. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Art, go easy on Querus! We’re telling her that pretty much everything she’s ever believed is wrong. Give her time to process it and determine what seems true to her!

    Q,

    However, lets not forget that American discriminatory processes helped to bring this about, to be fair.

    Right, but for one thing, in the case of sex discrimination, there were good reasons. Women used to quit to get married – and they were right to do so. I know this isn’t going to be popular, but I think more employers should discriminate against women, and should be legally free to do so; it shouldn’t be made too easily profitable for women to avoid marriage.

    Racial discrimination is a completely different thing and very wrong, but affirmative action and quotas are definitely a bad answer. Thomas Sowell, a black man and probably the most brilliant conservative philosopher currently living, has remarked that he is very lucky: he started his career right after segregation ended but before affirmative action, which he says has many of his black acquaintances wondering if they truly made their own achievements or not.

    (Slightly off topic, but one of his essays on segregation is I think of interest: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell102705.asp)

    Quotas are pretty much always used for nefarious purposes. When they’re used to promote black people, they undermine everyone’s respect for black professionals: “How do I know he didn’t get the job to make the quota? I’m going somewhere else!” Before they were used to “promote” black people, they were used to limit the number of Jewish people in universities and professions, because Gentiles figured they were so smart and studious they would “take over”. Affirmative action, quotas, attempts to make the assortment of people in a given profession conform to some preconceived ideal – it all does nothing but mischief.

  45. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Art, go easy on Querus! We’re telling her that pretty much everything she’s ever believed is wrong. Give her time to process it and determine what seems true to her!

    Q,

    However, lets not forget that American discriminatory processes helped to bring this about, to be fair.

    Right, but for one thing, in the case of sex discrimination, there were good reasons. Women used to quit to get married – and they were right to do so. I know this isn’t going to be popular, but I think more employers should discriminate against women, and should be legally free to do so; it shouldn’t be made too easily profitable for women to avoid marriage.

    Racial discrimination is a completely different thing and very wrong, but affirmative action and quotas are definitely a bad answer. Thomas Sowell, a black man and probably the most brilliant conservative philosopher currently living, has remarked that he is very lucky: he started his career right after segregation ended but before affirmative action, which he says has many of his black acquaintances wondering if they truly made their own achievements or not.

    (Slightly off topic, but one of his essays on segregation is I think of interest: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell102705.asp)

    Quotas are pretty much always used for nefarious purposes. When they’re used to promote black people, they undermine everyone’s respect for black professionals: “How do I know he didn’t get the job to make the quota? I’m going somewhere else!” Before they were used to “promote” black people, they were used to limit the number of Jewish people in universities and professions, because Gentiles figured they were so smart and studious they would “take over”. Affirmative action, quotas, attempts to make the assortment of people in a given profession conform to some preconceived ideal – it all does nothing but mischief.

  46. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Querus,

    I’m reading the MRA blogroll and it occurred to me that you might be interested to read it. It has feeds from many MRA blogs, mine included, many of which are focused mostly on unfair custody and alimony arrangements. Also, many are less misogynist or male chauvinist than I am. You can find the blogroll here.

  47. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Querus,

    I’m reading the MRA blogroll and it occurred to me that you might be interested to read it. It has feeds from many MRA blogs, mine included, many of which are focused mostly on unfair custody and alimony arrangements. Also, many are less misogynist or male chauvinist than I am. You can find the blogroll here.

  48. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Querus,

    I’m reading the MRA blogroll and it occurred to me that you might be interested to read it. It has feeds from many MRA blogs, mine included, many of which are focused mostly on unfair custody and alimony arrangements. Also, many are less misogynist or male chauvinist than I am. You can find the blogroll here.

  49. Querus Abuttu Says:

    Thanks MCW and ART,

    No worries… I’m not taking anything personal, even if I was meant to. Life is too short. 🙂

    I’ll keep reading/looking and certainly be objective along the way. I’m not sure when I’ll be back. I’ve got some major papers due in the next few months, with some heavy research. My focus is on violence against men, fairness in the prosecution system, and global issues concerning violence against men and how it affects our world when we ignore it. But you both have given me a lot to consider, and I’ve got a whole “new view” book/literature list. I just received in the mail: “The Kinder, Gentler Military” to compare with “Women in the Line of Fire”, and Susan Pinker’s book arrived today along with “The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism is Harming Our Young Men” by Christina Hoff Sommers.

    ART, I still can’t believe in the level of coordination of power that you allude to. Perhaps I’m gnawing on the red pill, but I don’t think so. Interestingly, many of us who are Buddhist love the Movie “The Matrix”, because it describes the level of “sleepers” that we ALL are in this world. Truth be told, we create our own suffering, and it is us who must chose when to wake up and stop playing the Samsaric game.

    “You take the blue pill and the story ends. You wake in your bed and you believe whatever you want to believe.
    You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.” (Morpheus)

    The truth is, the days from the past will never come again. All things change, and will continue to change. Change is a constant we can count on. The only way to stop the suffering is to “wake up” and find realization that exists beyond what we physically ‘see’. When we do, we can be happy, and help others along the way. If you think you’ve woken up, the true test for you is “are you happy”? Are you selfless? Are you compassionate towards others?

    I imagine that you don’t believe this, but I know that reincarnation of our spirits is real, and I’ll tell you why. It’s because of a memory…a memory so clear, so strong, I’ll never get it out of my mind. I remember being a baby….in my crib…maybe 9 months old. My mother was getting ready to change my diaper, and I remember thinking (this is real now) “I hate this part”….Now…You might think I meant the diaper, but I didn’t. I meant that I hated being a baby AGAIN. I hated being helpless, dependent on others, and not able to do what I wanted to do. I KNEW I had come back. It’s such a small thing, but it is as true as any crystal clear memory I’ve ever had.

    When I started meditating, it was not mumbo-jumbo or mysticism. The freedom, the elation, the stretching of the mind is very real. When I was working for the military as a midwife full time and seeing over 30 patients a day…one pregnant woman after another ….I felt depressed because I felt like they were not getting the care they deserved because they needed more time to have their problems addressed, to talk about their families, their nutritional needs etc. I was started on medication by a (male) physician. I felt so dead inside on that drug, so devoid of emotion, I had to quit. I started meditating, and it has saved my life. I’ve never felt depressed since. Actually, I’m very, very happy most of the time. Ah well. I know you’ll both think I’m hokey…but I don’t care. It’s the truth.

    Ever see the movie “What the Bleep do we Know?”. I highly recommend it.

    MCW and ART, your spirits are generous and kind. Personally, I think that you both could turn some of your frustration and anger at the system, and at some women, into something beneficial and constructive by researching and writing what you know in a logical, persuasive manner. When you do that, you have more of a variety of people listen and consider the facts/arguments/ideas. You have more of a chance that people will listen. Why preach to the choir? I know ‘venting’ feelings might feel good sometimes, particularly when you can do it in ‘cyber’ public and barely suffer any consequences, but it only fuels a fire of anger, and anger is destructive to your purposes overall. I would challenge you both to use your incredible intelligence , and the kindness inside you that you have demonstrated on this website, to share your information with different people, and to point out the social inconsistencies. I am sure that along the way, your minds will remain open too, and accept facts that might deviate from your current thinking, that make logical scientific sense.

    Personally, I think the truth is somewhere in between what you both believe/understand and what I believe/understand, but if we all worked together to figure it out, it would make more of a difference in the long run. What was it Ghandi said? An eye for an eye just makes the whole world blind? If we let each other keep our eyes, and help each other along the way, we might ALL just see.
    (My luck, ART will tell me Ghandi was communist……just kidding ART).

    I imagine that this website might have been created to ‘stir the pot’ per se, and to get people thinking about the issues and discussing them. Discussion is a good thing. But, in my opinion, there are a number of groups of people that probably get indignant that you print what they consider inflammatory words…and then I’m sure they go out and start their own site in order to “counteract” yours, and start bashing anti-feminists, and misogynists and male chauvinists. The result is that no one takes time to listen to eachother (except the choir)….they are all so buried in their self-righteousness and indignation. (Just because you have facts you know and can back up doesn’t mean those facts should be used to taunt those that don’t understand what you do.) Then more websites pop up, more people read, more people get angry, indignant and then people start preying on eachother with cyber hate crimes, or worse.

    Truth? Hate is the real deceiver. It is a drug that we all get addicted to if we allow it. It feels good to hate. It fills us with power and inflates our egos, but the truth is it is the destroyer, and when we give into it we fail ourselves and everyone we love. Maybe I’m naive. Maybe my vision is skewed, but on this issue, I don’t think so.

    Blessings to you both. I think you both are amazing people with some wonderful gifts. Use them well. I’ll be reading, and following up on ART’s and your leads M., doing some reading and maybe in a few months pull some thoughts together.

  50. Querus Abuttu Says:

    Thanks MCW and ART,

    No worries… I’m not taking anything personal, even if I was meant to. Life is too short. 🙂

    I’ll keep reading/looking and certainly be objective along the way. I’m not sure when I’ll be back. I’ve got some major papers due in the next few months, with some heavy research. My focus is on violence against men, fairness in the prosecution system, and global issues concerning violence against men and how it affects our world when we ignore it. But you both have given me a lot to consider, and I’ve got a whole “new view” book/literature list. I just received in the mail: “The Kinder, Gentler Military” to compare with “Women in the Line of Fire”, and Susan Pinker’s book arrived today along with “The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism is Harming Our Young Men” by Christina Hoff Sommers.

    ART, I still can’t believe in the level of coordination of power that you allude to. Perhaps I’m gnawing on the red pill, but I don’t think so. Interestingly, many of us who are Buddhist love the Movie “The Matrix”, because it describes the level of “sleepers” that we ALL are in this world. Truth be told, we create our own suffering, and it is us who must chose when to wake up and stop playing the Samsaric game.

    “You take the blue pill and the story ends. You wake in your bed and you believe whatever you want to believe.
    You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.” (Morpheus)

    The truth is, the days from the past will never come again. All things change, and will continue to change. Change is a constant we can count on. The only way to stop the suffering is to “wake up” and find realization that exists beyond what we physically ‘see’. When we do, we can be happy, and help others along the way. If you think you’ve woken up, the true test for you is “are you happy”? Are you selfless? Are you compassionate towards others?

    I imagine that you don’t believe this, but I know that reincarnation of our spirits is real, and I’ll tell you why. It’s because of a memory…a memory so clear, so strong, I’ll never get it out of my mind. I remember being a baby….in my crib…maybe 9 months old. My mother was getting ready to change my diaper, and I remember thinking (this is real now) “I hate this part”….Now…You might think I meant the diaper, but I didn’t. I meant that I hated being a baby AGAIN. I hated being helpless, dependent on others, and not able to do what I wanted to do. I KNEW I had come back. It’s such a small thing, but it is as true as any crystal clear memory I’ve ever had.

    When I started meditating, it was not mumbo-jumbo or mysticism. The freedom, the elation, the stretching of the mind is very real. When I was working for the military as a midwife full time and seeing over 30 patients a day…one pregnant woman after another ….I felt depressed because I felt like they were not getting the care they deserved because they needed more time to have their problems addressed, to talk about their families, their nutritional needs etc. I was started on medication by a (male) physician. I felt so dead inside on that drug, so devoid of emotion, I had to quit. I started meditating, and it has saved my life. I’ve never felt depressed since. Actually, I’m very, very happy most of the time. Ah well. I know you’ll both think I’m hokey…but I don’t care. It’s the truth.

    Ever see the movie “What the Bleep do we Know?”. I highly recommend it.

    MCW and ART, your spirits are generous and kind. Personally, I think that you both could turn some of your frustration and anger at the system, and at some women, into something beneficial and constructive by researching and writing what you know in a logical, persuasive manner. When you do that, you have more of a variety of people listen and consider the facts/arguments/ideas. You have more of a chance that people will listen. Why preach to the choir? I know ‘venting’ feelings might feel good sometimes, particularly when you can do it in ‘cyber’ public and barely suffer any consequences, but it only fuels a fire of anger, and anger is destructive to your purposes overall. I would challenge you both to use your incredible intelligence , and the kindness inside you that you have demonstrated on this website, to share your information with different people, and to point out the social inconsistencies. I am sure that along the way, your minds will remain open too, and accept facts that might deviate from your current thinking, that make logical scientific sense.

    Personally, I think the truth is somewhere in between what you both believe/understand and what I believe/understand, but if we all worked together to figure it out, it would make more of a difference in the long run. What was it Ghandi said? An eye for an eye just makes the whole world blind? If we let each other keep our eyes, and help each other along the way, we might ALL just see.
    (My luck, ART will tell me Ghandi was communist……just kidding ART).

    I imagine that this website might have been created to ‘stir the pot’ per se, and to get people thinking about the issues and discussing them. Discussion is a good thing. But, in my opinion, there are a number of groups of people that probably get indignant that you print what they consider inflammatory words…and then I’m sure they go out and start their own site in order to “counteract” yours, and start bashing anti-feminists, and misogynists and male chauvinists. The result is that no one takes time to listen to eachother (except the choir)….they are all so buried in their self-righteousness and indignation. (Just because you have facts you know and can back up doesn’t mean those facts should be used to taunt those that don’t understand what you do.) Then more websites pop up, more people read, more people get angry, indignant and then people start preying on eachother with cyber hate crimes, or worse.

    Truth? Hate is the real deceiver. It is a drug that we all get addicted to if we allow it. It feels good to hate. It fills us with power and inflates our egos, but the truth is it is the destroyer, and when we give into it we fail ourselves and everyone we love. Maybe I’m naive. Maybe my vision is skewed, but on this issue, I don’t think so.

    Blessings to you both. I think you both are amazing people with some wonderful gifts. Use them well. I’ll be reading, and following up on ART’s and your leads M., doing some reading and maybe in a few months pull some thoughts together.

  51. Querus Abuttu Says:

    Thanks MCW and ART,

    No worries… I’m not taking anything personal, even if I was meant to. Life is too short. 🙂

    I’ll keep reading/looking and certainly be objective along the way. I’m not sure when I’ll be back. I’ve got some major papers due in the next few months, with some heavy research. My focus is on violence against men, fairness in the prosecution system, and global issues concerning violence against men and how it affects our world when we ignore it. But you both have given me a lot to consider, and I’ve got a whole “new view” book/literature list. I just received in the mail: “The Kinder, Gentler Military” to compare with “Women in the Line of Fire”, and Susan Pinker’s book arrived today along with “The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism is Harming Our Young Men” by Christina Hoff Sommers.

    ART, I still can’t believe in the level of coordination of power that you allude to. Perhaps I’m gnawing on the red pill, but I don’t think so. Interestingly, many of us who are Buddhist love the Movie “The Matrix”, because it describes the level of “sleepers” that we ALL are in this world. Truth be told, we create our own suffering, and it is us who must chose when to wake up and stop playing the Samsaric game.

    “You take the blue pill and the story ends. You wake in your bed and you believe whatever you want to believe.
    You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.” (Morpheus)

    The truth is, the days from the past will never come again. All things change, and will continue to change. Change is a constant we can count on. The only way to stop the suffering is to “wake up” and find realization that exists beyond what we physically ‘see’. When we do, we can be happy, and help others along the way. If you think you’ve woken up, the true test for you is “are you happy”? Are you selfless? Are you compassionate towards others?

    I imagine that you don’t believe this, but I know that reincarnation of our spirits is real, and I’ll tell you why. It’s because of a memory…a memory so clear, so strong, I’ll never get it out of my mind. I remember being a baby….in my crib…maybe 9 months old. My mother was getting ready to change my diaper, and I remember thinking (this is real now) “I hate this part”….Now…You might think I meant the diaper, but I didn’t. I meant that I hated being a baby AGAIN. I hated being helpless, dependent on others, and not able to do what I wanted to do. I KNEW I had come back. It’s such a small thing, but it is as true as any crystal clear memory I’ve ever had.

    When I started meditating, it was not mumbo-jumbo or mysticism. The freedom, the elation, the stretching of the mind is very real. When I was working for the military as a midwife full time and seeing over 30 patients a day…one pregnant woman after another ….I felt depressed because I felt like they were not getting the care they deserved because they needed more time to have their problems addressed, to talk about their families, their nutritional needs etc. I was started on medication by a (male) physician. I felt so dead inside on that drug, so devoid of emotion, I had to quit. I started meditating, and it has saved my life. I’ve never felt depressed since. Actually, I’m very, very happy most of the time. Ah well. I know you’ll both think I’m hokey…but I don’t care. It’s the truth.

    Ever see the movie “What the Bleep do we Know?”. I highly recommend it.

    MCW and ART, your spirits are generous and kind. Personally, I think that you both could turn some of your frustration and anger at the system, and at some women, into something beneficial and constructive by researching and writing what you know in a logical, persuasive manner. When you do that, you have more of a variety of people listen and consider the facts/arguments/ideas. You have more of a chance that people will listen. Why preach to the choir? I know ‘venting’ feelings might feel good sometimes, particularly when you can do it in ‘cyber’ public and barely suffer any consequences, but it only fuels a fire of anger, and anger is destructive to your purposes overall. I would challenge you both to use your incredible intelligence , and the kindness inside you that you have demonstrated on this website, to share your information with different people, and to point out the social inconsistencies. I am sure that along the way, your minds will remain open too, and accept facts that might deviate from your current thinking, that make logical scientific sense.

    Personally, I think the truth is somewhere in between what you both believe/understand and what I believe/understand, but if we all worked together to figure it out, it would make more of a difference in the long run. What was it Ghandi said? An eye for an eye just makes the whole world blind? If we let each other keep our eyes, and help each other along the way, we might ALL just see.
    (My luck, ART will tell me Ghandi was communist……just kidding ART).

    I imagine that this website might have been created to ‘stir the pot’ per se, and to get people thinking about the issues and discussing them. Discussion is a good thing. But, in my opinion, there are a number of groups of people that probably get indignant that you print what they consider inflammatory words…and then I’m sure they go out and start their own site in order to “counteract” yours, and start bashing anti-feminists, and misogynists and male chauvinists. The result is that no one takes time to listen to eachother (except the choir)….they are all so buried in their self-righteousness and indignation. (Just because you have facts you know and can back up doesn’t mean those facts should be used to taunt those that don’t understand what you do.) Then more websites pop up, more people read, more people get angry, indignant and then people start preying on eachother with cyber hate crimes, or worse.

    Truth? Hate is the real deceiver. It is a drug that we all get addicted to if we allow it. It feels good to hate. It fills us with power and inflates our egos, but the truth is it is the destroyer, and when we give into it we fail ourselves and everyone we love. Maybe I’m naive. Maybe my vision is skewed, but on this issue, I don’t think so.

    Blessings to you both. I think you both are amazing people with some wonderful gifts. Use them well. I’ll be reading, and following up on ART’s and your leads M., doing some reading and maybe in a few months pull some thoughts together.

  52. Querus Abuttu Says:

    Ooops, perhaps it was a Freudian slip…but I meant to say “perhaps I’m gnawing on the BLUE pill, but I don’t think so”.

    And what would have happened if Neo had just refused to take EITHER pill?
    🙂

  53. Querus Abuttu Says:

    Ooops, perhaps it was a Freudian slip…but I meant to say “perhaps I’m gnawing on the BLUE pill, but I don’t think so”.

    And what would have happened if Neo had just refused to take EITHER pill?
    🙂

  54. Querus Abuttu Says:

    Ooops, perhaps it was a Freudian slip…but I meant to say “perhaps I’m gnawing on the BLUE pill, but I don’t think so”.

    And what would have happened if Neo had just refused to take EITHER pill?
    🙂

  55. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Querus,

    Thank you for your comment. I’m really pleased to have met you, and to have had the opportunity of sharing some of my views with someone who doesn’t agree in a civilized fashion.

    It so happens that I also believe in reincarnation. There have been Christian sects over the centuries who believed in it, such as the Cathars, with whom I have considerable sympathy. (Though if they had had Buddhism available to them, they probably would have taken it up.)

    As a matter of fact, eventually I do intend to write a book. I don’t know how many people will read it, but I’ll do what I can.

    While this blog is primarily intended to preach to the choir – and to work out my ideas for my eventual book – there is one thing I’m doing to try to make my ideas a little more widely known. Namely, I review male chauvinist books on Amazon.com – you can find a link to the reviews on my sidebar. In many cases, my review is the only one of that book! Some truly insightful books have been ignored or forgotten. I have always been a bookworm and an intellectual, and yet the ideas in these books were new to me when I sought them out. I wrote the reviews, summarizing the theories, in hopes of educating people a little, because these ideas just aren’t out there.

    Naturally, my reviews got some really harsh comments from feminists, not very well thought out. They aren’t there now because I started a separate Amazon.com account for my male chauvinist reviews. I didn’t want some casual acquaintance searching for my email address and finding these, ah, controversial reviews. I could see a friend going, “I wonder if she has a Wish List so I can get her a birthday present… THE HELL?” So I deleted the reviews and put them on the new account, and thus far new comments haven’t been made.

    Anyway. I do wish you all luck, and you are very welcome on my blog!

  56. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Querus,

    Thank you for your comment. I’m really pleased to have met you, and to have had the opportunity of sharing some of my views with someone who doesn’t agree in a civilized fashion.

    It so happens that I also believe in reincarnation. There have been Christian sects over the centuries who believed in it, such as the Cathars, with whom I have considerable sympathy. (Though if they had had Buddhism available to them, they probably would have taken it up.)

    As a matter of fact, eventually I do intend to write a book. I don’t know how many people will read it, but I’ll do what I can.

    While this blog is primarily intended to preach to the choir – and to work out my ideas for my eventual book – there is one thing I’m doing to try to make my ideas a little more widely known. Namely, I review male chauvinist books on Amazon.com – you can find a link to the reviews on my sidebar. In many cases, my review is the only one of that book! Some truly insightful books have been ignored or forgotten. I have always been a bookworm and an intellectual, and yet the ideas in these books were new to me when I sought them out. I wrote the reviews, summarizing the theories, in hopes of educating people a little, because these ideas just aren’t out there.

    Naturally, my reviews got some really harsh comments from feminists, not very well thought out. They aren’t there now because I started a separate Amazon.com account for my male chauvinist reviews. I didn’t want some casual acquaintance searching for my email address and finding these, ah, controversial reviews. I could see a friend going, “I wonder if she has a Wish List so I can get her a birthday present… THE HELL?” So I deleted the reviews and put them on the new account, and thus far new comments haven’t been made.

    Anyway. I do wish you all luck, and you are very welcome on my blog!

  57. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Querus,

    Thank you for your comment. I’m really pleased to have met you, and to have had the opportunity of sharing some of my views with someone who doesn’t agree in a civilized fashion.

    It so happens that I also believe in reincarnation. There have been Christian sects over the centuries who believed in it, such as the Cathars, with whom I have considerable sympathy. (Though if they had had Buddhism available to them, they probably would have taken it up.)

    As a matter of fact, eventually I do intend to write a book. I don’t know how many people will read it, but I’ll do what I can.

    While this blog is primarily intended to preach to the choir – and to work out my ideas for my eventual book – there is one thing I’m doing to try to make my ideas a little more widely known. Namely, I review male chauvinist books on Amazon.com – you can find a link to the reviews on my sidebar. In many cases, my review is the only one of that book! Some truly insightful books have been ignored or forgotten. I have always been a bookworm and an intellectual, and yet the ideas in these books were new to me when I sought them out. I wrote the reviews, summarizing the theories, in hopes of educating people a little, because these ideas just aren’t out there.

    Naturally, my reviews got some really harsh comments from feminists, not very well thought out. They aren’t there now because I started a separate Amazon.com account for my male chauvinist reviews. I didn’t want some casual acquaintance searching for my email address and finding these, ah, controversial reviews. I could see a friend going, “I wonder if she has a Wish List so I can get her a birthday present… THE HELL?” So I deleted the reviews and put them on the new account, and thus far new comments haven’t been made.

    Anyway. I do wish you all luck, and you are very welcome on my blog!

  58. Artfldgr Says:

    I still can’t believe in the level of coordination of power that you allude to. Perhaps I’m gnawing on the red pill, but I don’t think so.

    thats the same reason people dont believe capitalism works, and works much better.

    lets move the idea to a basic principal. ever watch large flocks of birds? you can find, if you look hard enough other animals, like schools of fish, that do the same thing. even insect masses of literally hundreds of thousands can do the same thing.

    thats the kind of coordination, nothing really planned, just a constant bias.

    say you were to do random numbers and you add a -.0000005 bias to the random series, what is the outcom if you run that long enough?

    I am not claiming this moriarty coordinated thing, i am claiming termites who look to a select few for the direction to move in.

    from gods mind, to fellow travelers, to useful idiots, to fans/students/media, etc.

    in fact call up a paper on the math of flocking and you get.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/math.ST/0502342

    This paper considers a group of mobile autonomous agents moving in Euclidean space with point mass dynamics. We introduce a set of coordination control laws that enable the group to generate the desired stable flocking motion. The control laws are a combination of attractive/repulsive and alignment forces. By using the control laws, all agent velocities asymptotically approach the desired velocity, collisions can be avoided between agents, and the final tight formation minimizes all agent potentials. Moreover, we prove that the velocity of the center of mass is always equal to the desired velocity or exponentially converges to the desired value. Furthermore, we study the motion of the group when the velocity damping is taken into account. In this case, we can properly modify the control laws to generate the same stable flocking motion. Finally, for the case that not all agents know the desired final velocity, we show that the desired flocking motion can still be obtained. Numerical simulations are worked out to illustrate our theoretical results.

    i highlighted the key parts…

    they only have to look at the same source.. the mass will then follow and will converge on the optimum…

    the last part highlighted says stragglers and those not quite getting it will follow along.

    its a very simple process that leads to complex behavior.

    “movements”, fads, etc are flocking in humans… think of it as ‘thought flocking’.

    [and if you use this stuff in a paper, give creds]

    the people look to a select few elites, the leaders of the flocks. the closer ones look to the right ones, the farther ones have their own local flock leader to follow (in this way the formuleas should really be almost fractal)

    eventually it sorts out to be a heirarchy in appearance. the leaders of each area of the lefts movement groups follow one singular ideological basis. each ‘netted’ groups next stage leaders look to them and follow them without question (or else the strength and force of ‘flock’, ‘movement’ will stall and break up. (you know a follower when they promote an inane point. so you know to draw them nearer. this sorts the flock letting disruptive stragglers to move to the outside).

    over time if there is energy put into it, the flock builds on itself as the children of flocers are more likely to be flockers in the absence of historical knowlege, or in the inability to defy the group to ask questions about things that are logically nonsense. in this way the ‘code’ really does sort away people who are smart enough to think for themselves, but not smart enough to hold their mouths and wish to find answers. (which type would be potentially harmful to a state depending on stagnation to eventually get it right? as new things are what they now believe ruin things. so the progressives are now a kind of stagnation or regression wanters, and as always war is a favored thing for them. (remember small government of the right is only capable of defensive existence as its minimal).

    war for them breaks up the people, redistributes wealth, gets people to accept control of their lives. maybe now you know why so many who are supposedly ideologically against war want war. they want war, they ideologically lie to the bottome level. (this is what class war is all about. and the other side is the divide and conquer nature of movement methodologies. a black movement, feminist movement, green movement are all divide and conquor armies. as long as they focus on, and remind us, and create if needed examples of things, the two halves they are working on can never comw together. a nation cant defend itself and keep safe if every group is agaisnt every other group. they ahve turned the idea of free protest, the people to the state, to a perversion of that. a group of people lobbying advantage, forcing division by leveragine the desire of the state to make people happy so appeasing them instead of telling them to go home (because the rest of the people are more interested in their right to do what they do than the reason they do it), they get an entitlement and so the other side now wants theirs, or the false advantage removed. we bicker on this stuff, then give the state more money, they get more intrusive, and we keep doing it over and over. go to nazi.org and you will find out that the greem party is the nazi party. they call themselves the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party.

    as always i digress too much… sigh.

  59. Artfldgr Says:

    I still can’t believe in the level of coordination of power that you allude to. Perhaps I’m gnawing on the red pill, but I don’t think so.

    thats the same reason people dont believe capitalism works, and works much better.

    lets move the idea to a basic principal. ever watch large flocks of birds? you can find, if you look hard enough other animals, like schools of fish, that do the same thing. even insect masses of literally hundreds of thousands can do the same thing.

    thats the kind of coordination, nothing really planned, just a constant bias.

    say you were to do random numbers and you add a -.0000005 bias to the random series, what is the outcom if you run that long enough?

    I am not claiming this moriarty coordinated thing, i am claiming termites who look to a select few for the direction to move in.

    from gods mind, to fellow travelers, to useful idiots, to fans/students/media, etc.

    in fact call up a paper on the math of flocking and you get.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/math.ST/0502342

    This paper considers a group of mobile autonomous agents moving in Euclidean space with point mass dynamics. We introduce a set of coordination control laws that enable the group to generate the desired stable flocking motion. The control laws are a combination of attractive/repulsive and alignment forces. By using the control laws, all agent velocities asymptotically approach the desired velocity, collisions can be avoided between agents, and the final tight formation minimizes all agent potentials. Moreover, we prove that the velocity of the center of mass is always equal to the desired velocity or exponentially converges to the desired value. Furthermore, we study the motion of the group when the velocity damping is taken into account. In this case, we can properly modify the control laws to generate the same stable flocking motion. Finally, for the case that not all agents know the desired final velocity, we show that the desired flocking motion can still be obtained. Numerical simulations are worked out to illustrate our theoretical results.

    i highlighted the key parts…

    they only have to look at the same source.. the mass will then follow and will converge on the optimum…

    the last part highlighted says stragglers and those not quite getting it will follow along.

    its a very simple process that leads to complex behavior.

    “movements”, fads, etc are flocking in humans… think of it as ‘thought flocking’.

    [and if you use this stuff in a paper, give creds]

    the people look to a select few elites, the leaders of the flocks. the closer ones look to the right ones, the farther ones have their own local flock leader to follow (in this way the formuleas should really be almost fractal)

    eventually it sorts out to be a heirarchy in appearance. the leaders of each area of the lefts movement groups follow one singular ideological basis. each ‘netted’ groups next stage leaders look to them and follow them without question (or else the strength and force of ‘flock’, ‘movement’ will stall and break up. (you know a follower when they promote an inane point. so you know to draw them nearer. this sorts the flock letting disruptive stragglers to move to the outside).

    over time if there is energy put into it, the flock builds on itself as the children of flocers are more likely to be flockers in the absence of historical knowlege, or in the inability to defy the group to ask questions about things that are logically nonsense. in this way the ‘code’ really does sort away people who are smart enough to think for themselves, but not smart enough to hold their mouths and wish to find answers. (which type would be potentially harmful to a state depending on stagnation to eventually get it right? as new things are what they now believe ruin things. so the progressives are now a kind of stagnation or regression wanters, and as always war is a favored thing for them. (remember small government of the right is only capable of defensive existence as its minimal).

    war for them breaks up the people, redistributes wealth, gets people to accept control of their lives. maybe now you know why so many who are supposedly ideologically against war want war. they want war, they ideologically lie to the bottome level. (this is what class war is all about. and the other side is the divide and conquer nature of movement methodologies. a black movement, feminist movement, green movement are all divide and conquor armies. as long as they focus on, and remind us, and create if needed examples of things, the two halves they are working on can never comw together. a nation cant defend itself and keep safe if every group is agaisnt every other group. they ahve turned the idea of free protest, the people to the state, to a perversion of that. a group of people lobbying advantage, forcing division by leveragine the desire of the state to make people happy so appeasing them instead of telling them to go home (because the rest of the people are more interested in their right to do what they do than the reason they do it), they get an entitlement and so the other side now wants theirs, or the false advantage removed. we bicker on this stuff, then give the state more money, they get more intrusive, and we keep doing it over and over. go to nazi.org and you will find out that the greem party is the nazi party. they call themselves the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party.

    as always i digress too much… sigh.

  60. Artfldgr Says:

    I still can’t believe in the level of coordination of power that you allude to. Perhaps I’m gnawing on the red pill, but I don’t think so.

    thats the same reason people dont believe capitalism works, and works much better.

    lets move the idea to a basic principal. ever watch large flocks of birds? you can find, if you look hard enough other animals, like schools of fish, that do the same thing. even insect masses of literally hundreds of thousands can do the same thing.

    thats the kind of coordination, nothing really planned, just a constant bias.

    say you were to do random numbers and you add a -.0000005 bias to the random series, what is the outcom if you run that long enough?

    I am not claiming this moriarty coordinated thing, i am claiming termites who look to a select few for the direction to move in.

    from gods mind, to fellow travelers, to useful idiots, to fans/students/media, etc.

    in fact call up a paper on the math of flocking and you get.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/math.ST/0502342

    This paper considers a group of mobile autonomous agents moving in Euclidean space with point mass dynamics. We introduce a set of coordination control laws that enable the group to generate the desired stable flocking motion. The control laws are a combination of attractive/repulsive and alignment forces. By using the control laws, all agent velocities asymptotically approach the desired velocity, collisions can be avoided between agents, and the final tight formation minimizes all agent potentials. Moreover, we prove that the velocity of the center of mass is always equal to the desired velocity or exponentially converges to the desired value. Furthermore, we study the motion of the group when the velocity damping is taken into account. In this case, we can properly modify the control laws to generate the same stable flocking motion. Finally, for the case that not all agents know the desired final velocity, we show that the desired flocking motion can still be obtained. Numerical simulations are worked out to illustrate our theoretical results.

    i highlighted the key parts…

    they only have to look at the same source.. the mass will then follow and will converge on the optimum…

    the last part highlighted says stragglers and those not quite getting it will follow along.

    its a very simple process that leads to complex behavior.

    “movements”, fads, etc are flocking in humans… think of it as ‘thought flocking’.

    [and if you use this stuff in a paper, give creds]

    the people look to a select few elites, the leaders of the flocks. the closer ones look to the right ones, the farther ones have their own local flock leader to follow (in this way the formuleas should really be almost fractal)

    eventually it sorts out to be a heirarchy in appearance. the leaders of each area of the lefts movement groups follow one singular ideological basis. each ‘netted’ groups next stage leaders look to them and follow them without question (or else the strength and force of ‘flock’, ‘movement’ will stall and break up. (you know a follower when they promote an inane point. so you know to draw them nearer. this sorts the flock letting disruptive stragglers to move to the outside).

    over time if there is energy put into it, the flock builds on itself as the children of flocers are more likely to be flockers in the absence of historical knowlege, or in the inability to defy the group to ask questions about things that are logically nonsense. in this way the ‘code’ really does sort away people who are smart enough to think for themselves, but not smart enough to hold their mouths and wish to find answers. (which type would be potentially harmful to a state depending on stagnation to eventually get it right? as new things are what they now believe ruin things. so the progressives are now a kind of stagnation or regression wanters, and as always war is a favored thing for them. (remember small government of the right is only capable of defensive existence as its minimal).

    war for them breaks up the people, redistributes wealth, gets people to accept control of their lives. maybe now you know why so many who are supposedly ideologically against war want war. they want war, they ideologically lie to the bottome level. (this is what class war is all about. and the other side is the divide and conquer nature of movement methodologies. a black movement, feminist movement, green movement are all divide and conquor armies. as long as they focus on, and remind us, and create if needed examples of things, the two halves they are working on can never comw together. a nation cant defend itself and keep safe if every group is agaisnt every other group. they ahve turned the idea of free protest, the people to the state, to a perversion of that. a group of people lobbying advantage, forcing division by leveragine the desire of the state to make people happy so appeasing them instead of telling them to go home (because the rest of the people are more interested in their right to do what they do than the reason they do it), they get an entitlement and so the other side now wants theirs, or the false advantage removed. we bicker on this stuff, then give the state more money, they get more intrusive, and we keep doing it over and over. go to nazi.org and you will find out that the greem party is the nazi party. they call themselves the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party.

    as always i digress too much… sigh.

  61. Artfldgr Says:

    The truth is, the days from the past will never come again. All things change, and will continue to change. Change is a constant we can count on.

    who taught you that? did they inform you that this only applies in the micro material sense, and not neceassarily at all levels?

    the amish are pretty stagnated, arent they? oh there in constant change too, but thats at the level of their lives, not in the level of what controls their lives. their cooperation from that level stagnates them by imposing on them a inner desire to maintain that through their inner ability to keep moving in the one direction.

    if everything is changing, that means they are remaining stagnated by working towards it.

    so you can get stagnation if you can get the people to work towards it.

    The only way to stop the suffering is to “wake up” and find realization that exists beyond what we physically ‘see’. When we do, we can be happy, and help others along the way. If you think you’ve woken up, the true test for you is “are you happy”? Are you selfless? Are you compassionate towards others?

    half truth. sorry. but thats MY opinion. its why the judeo christians did more in the world than the buddists. techically budism is happy with stagnation, its being so close to confucianism has its similar goals. given that the majority of buddists do not live the full way, makes the machine move foward at all. but slower…

    and lack of change makes people happier, because they clearly know what to respect. however, lack of change confounds the few who are different who in effect want to act in ways that oppose this harmony. so they become the vanguard of movements. each of them is actually promising a utopia through a certain desire to limit progress. meanwhile, their lipservice is the opposite!!!

    however, this is not to say that all of these things are bad. for the individual a certain amount of stagnation and appreciation does lead to more peace and happiness in many people as they find that good engouh is often great and that most things we want we dont get what we want out of.

    so what is at core stagnation, does not result in that in practice for MOST people. which is why its system works for large populations that use it, while still leaving them adaptable. they adapt to survive, and strive towards the goal to live. this keeps them anchored while at the same time not stagnated.

    however, buddism, and others dont result in the stame kind of poor imatative ideological stagnation. they are punitive, so they desire to be all anchor. so in practice they not only stagnate as a wheel hub stagnates and allows the wheel to function, but they lock the wheel too.

    charity vs socialism.

    freedom to give vs obligation to give insured by removing freedom to choose and be personally responsible.

    judeo christianities key difference is that by having a deity, they seek revelatoin. bhuddists seek revelation but not from a deity. that difference leads to two different lines of thoughts. one line says “it just is, so there is no reason to know more”, the other says “someone helped make IS, so if we study IS, then we will know them”.

    both are positive anchor points that cause personal goodness and low need for external power (allowing for minimal government etc).

    they are not perfect, and that is why theif faulted and attacked. its the false argument of the imperfect method. they say they are no good because they are not perfect… christians do this, bhuddists still get caugth doing that. they are silent in noticing the large ‘other’ in the room that all such comparisons must be made to in order to sound right. so they create the creature through negative space. by defining whats around it, not defining it in itself. never mentioning it, itself. so christianity is not perfect, but the state will be. bhuddism will not solve the worlds problem, but the state will. they dont have the power to be perfect, but the state will.

    the area surrounding the object is infinite, and so creates a never ending supply of areas to work on describing the thing through everything else in negation.

  62. Artfldgr Says:

    The truth is, the days from the past will never come again. All things change, and will continue to change. Change is a constant we can count on.

    who taught you that? did they inform you that this only applies in the micro material sense, and not neceassarily at all levels?

    the amish are pretty stagnated, arent they? oh there in constant change too, but thats at the level of their lives, not in the level of what controls their lives. their cooperation from that level stagnates them by imposing on them a inner desire to maintain that through their inner ability to keep moving in the one direction.

    if everything is changing, that means they are remaining stagnated by working towards it.

    so you can get stagnation if you can get the people to work towards it.

    The only way to stop the suffering is to “wake up” and find realization that exists beyond what we physically ‘see’. When we do, we can be happy, and help others along the way. If you think you’ve woken up, the true test for you is “are you happy”? Are you selfless? Are you compassionate towards others?

    half truth. sorry. but thats MY opinion. its why the judeo christians did more in the world than the buddists. techically budism is happy with stagnation, its being so close to confucianism has its similar goals. given that the majority of buddists do not live the full way, makes the machine move foward at all. but slower…

    and lack of change makes people happier, because they clearly know what to respect. however, lack of change confounds the few who are different who in effect want to act in ways that oppose this harmony. so they become the vanguard of movements. each of them is actually promising a utopia through a certain desire to limit progress. meanwhile, their lipservice is the opposite!!!

    however, this is not to say that all of these things are bad. for the individual a certain amount of stagnation and appreciation does lead to more peace and happiness in many people as they find that good engouh is often great and that most things we want we dont get what we want out of.

    so what is at core stagnation, does not result in that in practice for MOST people. which is why its system works for large populations that use it, while still leaving them adaptable. they adapt to survive, and strive towards the goal to live. this keeps them anchored while at the same time not stagnated.

    however, buddism, and others dont result in the stame kind of poor imatative ideological stagnation. they are punitive, so they desire to be all anchor. so in practice they not only stagnate as a wheel hub stagnates and allows the wheel to function, but they lock the wheel too.

    charity vs socialism.

    freedom to give vs obligation to give insured by removing freedom to choose and be personally responsible.

    judeo christianities key difference is that by having a deity, they seek revelatoin. bhuddists seek revelation but not from a deity. that difference leads to two different lines of thoughts. one line says “it just is, so there is no reason to know more”, the other says “someone helped make IS, so if we study IS, then we will know them”.

    both are positive anchor points that cause personal goodness and low need for external power (allowing for minimal government etc).

    they are not perfect, and that is why theif faulted and attacked. its the false argument of the imperfect method. they say they are no good because they are not perfect… christians do this, bhuddists still get caugth doing that. they are silent in noticing the large ‘other’ in the room that all such comparisons must be made to in order to sound right. so they create the creature through negative space. by defining whats around it, not defining it in itself. never mentioning it, itself. so christianity is not perfect, but the state will be. bhuddism will not solve the worlds problem, but the state will. they dont have the power to be perfect, but the state will.

    the area surrounding the object is infinite, and so creates a never ending supply of areas to work on describing the thing through everything else in negation.

  63. Artfldgr Says:

    The truth is, the days from the past will never come again. All things change, and will continue to change. Change is a constant we can count on.

    who taught you that? did they inform you that this only applies in the micro material sense, and not neceassarily at all levels?

    the amish are pretty stagnated, arent they? oh there in constant change too, but thats at the level of their lives, not in the level of what controls their lives. their cooperation from that level stagnates them by imposing on them a inner desire to maintain that through their inner ability to keep moving in the one direction.

    if everything is changing, that means they are remaining stagnated by working towards it.

    so you can get stagnation if you can get the people to work towards it.

    The only way to stop the suffering is to “wake up” and find realization that exists beyond what we physically ‘see’. When we do, we can be happy, and help others along the way. If you think you’ve woken up, the true test for you is “are you happy”? Are you selfless? Are you compassionate towards others?

    half truth. sorry. but thats MY opinion. its why the judeo christians did more in the world than the buddists. techically budism is happy with stagnation, its being so close to confucianism has its similar goals. given that the majority of buddists do not live the full way, makes the machine move foward at all. but slower…

    and lack of change makes people happier, because they clearly know what to respect. however, lack of change confounds the few who are different who in effect want to act in ways that oppose this harmony. so they become the vanguard of movements. each of them is actually promising a utopia through a certain desire to limit progress. meanwhile, their lipservice is the opposite!!!

    however, this is not to say that all of these things are bad. for the individual a certain amount of stagnation and appreciation does lead to more peace and happiness in many people as they find that good engouh is often great and that most things we want we dont get what we want out of.

    so what is at core stagnation, does not result in that in practice for MOST people. which is why its system works for large populations that use it, while still leaving them adaptable. they adapt to survive, and strive towards the goal to live. this keeps them anchored while at the same time not stagnated.

    however, buddism, and others dont result in the stame kind of poor imatative ideological stagnation. they are punitive, so they desire to be all anchor. so in practice they not only stagnate as a wheel hub stagnates and allows the wheel to function, but they lock the wheel too.

    charity vs socialism.

    freedom to give vs obligation to give insured by removing freedom to choose and be personally responsible.

    judeo christianities key difference is that by having a deity, they seek revelatoin. bhuddists seek revelation but not from a deity. that difference leads to two different lines of thoughts. one line says “it just is, so there is no reason to know more”, the other says “someone helped make IS, so if we study IS, then we will know them”.

    both are positive anchor points that cause personal goodness and low need for external power (allowing for minimal government etc).

    they are not perfect, and that is why theif faulted and attacked. its the false argument of the imperfect method. they say they are no good because they are not perfect… christians do this, bhuddists still get caugth doing that. they are silent in noticing the large ‘other’ in the room that all such comparisons must be made to in order to sound right. so they create the creature through negative space. by defining whats around it, not defining it in itself. never mentioning it, itself. so christianity is not perfect, but the state will be. bhuddism will not solve the worlds problem, but the state will. they dont have the power to be perfect, but the state will.

    the area surrounding the object is infinite, and so creates a never ending supply of areas to work on describing the thing through everything else in negation.

  64. Artfldgr Says:

    I have always been a bookworm and an intellectual

    you have never been a real intellectual.. i am not an intellectual.

    your a smart person, not a person posing to be smart by having the ‘right’ knowlege.

    🙂

    and for you Q, thanks too… i am more of a social blockhead so i tend to focus on the ‘problem’ and the systems… its more a guy thing… the desire to solve the problem rather than discuss the problem and accept it.

  65. Artfldgr Says:

    I have always been a bookworm and an intellectual

    you have never been a real intellectual.. i am not an intellectual.

    your a smart person, not a person posing to be smart by having the ‘right’ knowlege.

    🙂

    and for you Q, thanks too… i am more of a social blockhead so i tend to focus on the ‘problem’ and the systems… its more a guy thing… the desire to solve the problem rather than discuss the problem and accept it.

  66. Artfldgr Says:

    I have always been a bookworm and an intellectual

    you have never been a real intellectual.. i am not an intellectual.

    your a smart person, not a person posing to be smart by having the ‘right’ knowlege.

    🙂

    and for you Q, thanks too… i am more of a social blockhead so i tend to focus on the ‘problem’ and the systems… its more a guy thing… the desire to solve the problem rather than discuss the problem and accept it.

  67. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    I still can’t believe in the level of coordination of power that you allude to. Perhaps I’m gnawing on the red pill, but I don’t think so.

    See, I was the opposite. I have always been – still am – skeptical about conspiracy theories. But as I continued to read and study the way western culture collapsed, I couldn’t help thinking it looked like a conspiracy. So many different, disparate elements, all working together to bring our civilization down.

    But I kept telling myself that it wasn’t a conspiracy, of course it wasn’t, until the first time I stumbled upon an article about the Frankfort School. Their deeds are well documented – by themselves! At last it finally made sense why such a historically unprecedented societal corruption should occur.

  68. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    I still can’t believe in the level of coordination of power that you allude to. Perhaps I’m gnawing on the red pill, but I don’t think so.

    See, I was the opposite. I have always been – still am – skeptical about conspiracy theories. But as I continued to read and study the way western culture collapsed, I couldn’t help thinking it looked like a conspiracy. So many different, disparate elements, all working together to bring our civilization down.

    But I kept telling myself that it wasn’t a conspiracy, of course it wasn’t, until the first time I stumbled upon an article about the Frankfort School. Their deeds are well documented – by themselves! At last it finally made sense why such a historically unprecedented societal corruption should occur.

  69. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    I still can’t believe in the level of coordination of power that you allude to. Perhaps I’m gnawing on the red pill, but I don’t think so.

    See, I was the opposite. I have always been – still am – skeptical about conspiracy theories. But as I continued to read and study the way western culture collapsed, I couldn’t help thinking it looked like a conspiracy. So many different, disparate elements, all working together to bring our civilization down.

    But I kept telling myself that it wasn’t a conspiracy, of course it wasn’t, until the first time I stumbled upon an article about the Frankfort School. Their deeds are well documented – by themselves! At last it finally made sense why such a historically unprecedented societal corruption should occur.

  70. Artfldgr Says:

    it finally made sense why such a historically unprecedented societal corruption should occur.

    they figured out how to instigate and keep movements happening. they get people like musicians to sign on by having them do something dumb and then the world copied them.

    so people wear underwear outside their clothes… the africans copy h rap brown and follow frankfurt school teachings that being polite is a falseness and so the only honesty is literal brutal honesty… because people can be nice for false reasons, people are not brutal for fals reasons… so they are keeping it real.

    you can look at the 60s, 70, etc..

    and now we have no culture… so we can only copy and recut togeter past cultures…

    but its not a conspiracy in the sense of how most thing… they just thought to steer a natuaral process that others left alone because it was important.

    when asking who will press hte nuclear button, they all line up.

  71. Artfldgr Says:

    it finally made sense why such a historically unprecedented societal corruption should occur.

    they figured out how to instigate and keep movements happening. they get people like musicians to sign on by having them do something dumb and then the world copied them.

    so people wear underwear outside their clothes… the africans copy h rap brown and follow frankfurt school teachings that being polite is a falseness and so the only honesty is literal brutal honesty… because people can be nice for false reasons, people are not brutal for fals reasons… so they are keeping it real.

    you can look at the 60s, 70, etc..

    and now we have no culture… so we can only copy and recut togeter past cultures…

    but its not a conspiracy in the sense of how most thing… they just thought to steer a natuaral process that others left alone because it was important.

    when asking who will press hte nuclear button, they all line up.

  72. Artfldgr Says:

    it finally made sense why such a historically unprecedented societal corruption should occur.

    they figured out how to instigate and keep movements happening. they get people like musicians to sign on by having them do something dumb and then the world copied them.

    so people wear underwear outside their clothes… the africans copy h rap brown and follow frankfurt school teachings that being polite is a falseness and so the only honesty is literal brutal honesty… because people can be nice for false reasons, people are not brutal for fals reasons… so they are keeping it real.

    you can look at the 60s, 70, etc..

    and now we have no culture… so we can only copy and recut togeter past cultures…

    but its not a conspiracy in the sense of how most thing… they just thought to steer a natuaral process that others left alone because it was important.

    when asking who will press hte nuclear button, they all line up.

  73. Carl Says:

    I was gonna make this a longer post but I realised that what I was typing barely made sense since it’s more of a web that I can’t explain in words. But basically, what Art calls “flocking” is very easy to see on the net. Hell, it happens with everything on the net.

    The most basic form is:
    MSM site > big blogs > smaller personal blogs > individual people in forums etc > people in real life

    You’ll also notice that the people in real life will accept the idea as if it is an absolute fact that everyone “just knows” even though you yourself might remember the exact article that started off the whole chain. It doesn’t even matter if the original article was completely destroyed in the comments or follow ups; people won’t scroll that far down the page.

    However, what makes it more interesting is when it starts something like:
    Commentaries > MSM > …
    or even:
    Big blogs > MSM > …

    Notice the plurals, “commentaries” and “blogs”. It’s very strange that two or more independent people suddenly have the same idea and write about it within days of each other. While these people may try and sell it as their own idea, it’s blatantly obvious that it came from higher up, most likely a press release from a think tank of charity or whatever.

    If a bunch of independent reviews fluffing up Apple’s new product suddenly all appeared at once we’d know exactly what it is and who’s behind it. So why is it that we can spot product advertising from a mile away but not idea advertising?

    Personally, I don’t think it’s a conspiracy or that there’s anything wrong with the actual process. The problem is that the average person on the street doesn’t watch the log flow down the river and since everyone around them seems to have heard the same idea then they can only catalogue it as general knowledge and as a fact (it’s much easier to disregard something when it’s just a single article at a news site or a silly blog post, but most people succumb to peer pressure if the street is the first place they hear it).

    This is also compounded over the generations since it’s impossible for someone to watch an idea go down the river before they were born. Even I’m too lazy to put in the amount of effort Art does to trace things before my time back up the river.

  74. Carl Says:

    I was gonna make this a longer post but I realised that what I was typing barely made sense since it’s more of a web that I can’t explain in words. But basically, what Art calls “flocking” is very easy to see on the net. Hell, it happens with everything on the net.

    The most basic form is:
    MSM site > big blogs > smaller personal blogs > individual people in forums etc > people in real life

    You’ll also notice that the people in real life will accept the idea as if it is an absolute fact that everyone “just knows” even though you yourself might remember the exact article that started off the whole chain. It doesn’t even matter if the original article was completely destroyed in the comments or follow ups; people won’t scroll that far down the page.

    However, what makes it more interesting is when it starts something like:
    Commentaries > MSM > …
    or even:
    Big blogs > MSM > …

    Notice the plurals, “commentaries” and “blogs”. It’s very strange that two or more independent people suddenly have the same idea and write about it within days of each other. While these people may try and sell it as their own idea, it’s blatantly obvious that it came from higher up, most likely a press release from a think tank of charity or whatever.

    If a bunch of independent reviews fluffing up Apple’s new product suddenly all appeared at once we’d know exactly what it is and who’s behind it. So why is it that we can spot product advertising from a mile away but not idea advertising?

    Personally, I don’t think it’s a conspiracy or that there’s anything wrong with the actual process. The problem is that the average person on the street doesn’t watch the log flow down the river and since everyone around them seems to have heard the same idea then they can only catalogue it as general knowledge and as a fact (it’s much easier to disregard something when it’s just a single article at a news site or a silly blog post, but most people succumb to peer pressure if the street is the first place they hear it).

    This is also compounded over the generations since it’s impossible for someone to watch an idea go down the river before they were born. Even I’m too lazy to put in the amount of effort Art does to trace things before my time back up the river.

  75. Carl Says:

    I was gonna make this a longer post but I realised that what I was typing barely made sense since it’s more of a web that I can’t explain in words. But basically, what Art calls “flocking” is very easy to see on the net. Hell, it happens with everything on the net.

    The most basic form is:
    MSM site > big blogs > smaller personal blogs > individual people in forums etc > people in real life

    You’ll also notice that the people in real life will accept the idea as if it is an absolute fact that everyone “just knows” even though you yourself might remember the exact article that started off the whole chain. It doesn’t even matter if the original article was completely destroyed in the comments or follow ups; people won’t scroll that far down the page.

    However, what makes it more interesting is when it starts something like:
    Commentaries > MSM > …
    or even:
    Big blogs > MSM > …

    Notice the plurals, “commentaries” and “blogs”. It’s very strange that two or more independent people suddenly have the same idea and write about it within days of each other. While these people may try and sell it as their own idea, it’s blatantly obvious that it came from higher up, most likely a press release from a think tank of charity or whatever.

    If a bunch of independent reviews fluffing up Apple’s new product suddenly all appeared at once we’d know exactly what it is and who’s behind it. So why is it that we can spot product advertising from a mile away but not idea advertising?

    Personally, I don’t think it’s a conspiracy or that there’s anything wrong with the actual process. The problem is that the average person on the street doesn’t watch the log flow down the river and since everyone around them seems to have heard the same idea then they can only catalogue it as general knowledge and as a fact (it’s much easier to disregard something when it’s just a single article at a news site or a silly blog post, but most people succumb to peer pressure if the street is the first place they hear it).

    This is also compounded over the generations since it’s impossible for someone to watch an idea go down the river before they were born. Even I’m too lazy to put in the amount of effort Art does to trace things before my time back up the river.

  76. Mr Zopo Says:

    Excelent

  77. Mr Zopo Says:

    Excelent

  78. Mr Zopo Says:

    Excelent

  79. Phoenix Says:

    Brilliant! Well it's common sense but I still have to praise the author as brilliant. This writer's words are pure gold.

  80. Phoenix Says:

    If I were a catholic (I'm not, I'm protestant) and if the author was a catholic, I would demand that she be sainted by the pope (while still alive). The patron Saint of Misogynists!

  81. Billy Says:

    ~quote~ "Given the female chauvinism rampant in government and culture today, I really believe we need some grouchy male chauvinist misogynists like me to balance it"I must be a "grouchy male chauvinist misogynist" because I'm really getting off on what you write!There is more truth on this blog than in any major newspaper.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: