Every week on Monday morning , the Council and invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day. This week's question:Is there a war against males in our current culture and society?
The Noisy Room:Well, the short answer is "yes."
A quick survey of advertising over the last few decades shows a clear trend toward a "women are smart, men are dumb" meme, along with a companion "kids are smart, adults are dumb" meme.
There are racial as well as "gender targeted" biases laid in with this, but for now I'll just address the "gender targeting" portion. Oh, and we'll acknowledge that the correct term is actually "sex" not "gender" (since gender refers to parts of speech), but culturally, as part of the social neutering process, "sex" is now a four-letter word and "gender" is proper, even if wrong.
Several years ago, the headshrinkers introduced the concept of a "feminine side" to men, which men were obliged to investigate, inspect and adopt for proper integration with the "new, improved" social order. For example, Sears, long a bastion of manliness with the best tools and best gear, and the most git-'er-done per square store, decided that there would be more money to be had pushing their "softer side." The manlier side of Sears was acknowledged in advertizing as a sort of concession to the obligatory husbands, who were necessary to provide the kids and teens for whom Mom would shop, over on that "softer side" of the store.
Large companies -- even medium companies -- increasingly made efforts via HR to muzzle the men and empower the women, creating an increasingly hostile-but-passive-aggressive environment for men. The HR briefings were rich with admonitions to the men that "thou shalt behave toward women," while such corresponding admonitions to the women were pretty thin on the ground.
Somewhere, in an obscure lab or study group, this notion that manliness was somehow "uncivilized" and very cave-man was derived, along with the observation that rambunctious boys with short attention spans (now called "ADD") had this tendency to grow up into men with unfortunately manly attributes, for which (happily) specific "medication" has now been brought to bear, bringing hope to the world that this unfortunate "manliness" thing that so plagues mankind can be eradicated.
There's plenty of room for speculation on the motives for this set of pet theories that manliness = uncivilized and that feminine = civilized, and it should be noted that in countries and cultures where there is dynamic growth and aggressive spreading of cultural customs and influence, manliness is much more prevalent and even preferred as the manifestation of manhood.
It would be a real shame if our society were overrun by a competing -- and more manly -- culture simply because we bred the men -- the manly men -- out of ours.
Bookworm Room: There is absolutely a war against males in our current culture. One sees it most clearly in schools. Little boys are barred from competition, play fighting, rough playing, and war games -- or, in other words, they are expected to sit around the playground like little girls and talk about their feelings. When they get to college, boys and girls are told that boys are rapists and predators. Boys' wonderful qualities -- bravery, loyalty, inquisitiveness, the willingness to fight, physically if necessary, for a cause -- are all painted as negatives that lead to war.
Outside of school, the Left plays lip service to supporting our troops, but tries very hard to feminize them. The latest effort is to bring women to the front line, something that will irreparably change that front line culture.
JoshuaPundit: American culture was been oriented against traditional male attributes and against men in general since the boomers began to take over the culture in the 1970's.. The ironic part was that the social damage inflicted by progressives in what was sold as a war on male patriarchy was actually a war on women.
I recall a speech President Obama gave during the last presidential campaign with star prevaricator Sandra Fluke as his warm up act, talking about how the Republicans 'want to take women back to the 1950's'. Obviously a number of young single women who weren't around then were willing to buy that horse manure, but the fact is that with some obvious exceptions, most women were happier in the 1950's than they are today. They (and their children) were less likely to be living in poverty, more likely to be married, had a far easier time finding suitable mates, were far less likely to be the victim of a sexual assault and far less likely to be divorced.
All one needs to do is look at what's being held up as male role models in the culture today in Hollywood as opposed to even twenty or thirty years ago.
President Clinton is another good example of how far this has progressed. In the 1950's, someone with his attributes, his past and his record of being a serial sexual predator would not even have been electable.Even as late as the 1970's he would have been impeached and shunned by decent society. Nowadays, he's considered a role model and a superb president.
Well, there you have it.
Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.
It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it.
And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?
No comments:
Post a Comment