Sorry I’ve been away so long, but I’ve been the subject of a cyber attack (I suspect the government of Singapore), and it is taking up much of my time. Please see this link if you are interested:
http://sites.google.com/site/duncanbutl ... ore-affair
If something is urgent, please feel free to phone me and I will respond immediately; otherwise I normally reply to e-mails in a day or two.
====================
Miss Duszek: Concerning criticism, you are merely presenting the female approach, for which I have great respect; but in implying it should always be ‘kind’, you avoid acknowledging the importance of the male approach, which includes sternness, confrontation, threat and punishment. We need both approaches to run a happy society -- contrary to the claims of female sentimentality -- and today’s Western world is suffering from a dearth of the male, disciplinarian approach, not the female, caring, do-good approach. As you step outside your front door, are you more afraid of intrusive authorities ordering you around, or the antisocial behaviour of other people around you? Criminals, terrorists, gangs of youths? I suggest your own list of problems answers that question for you. Too little discipline, not too much, is our problem; and we end up being unable to trust anyone, neither the government nor the neighbours.
The Balance of Power: I guess you are right: one can imagine a society so impoverished that no-one has very much power at all; and it is also possible to have power over things, not just people. I stand corrected, and I am sorry for over-simplifying. But this is really beside the point, for the emancipation, empowerment, and hegemony of women has been about reducing the power men have over them -- making use of the ‘equality’ argument -- setting women free to do as they will. If we restrict our argument to the BALANCE of power between men and women, then my argument still stands: you cannot tilt the scales in favour of women without tilting them against men. When men run to the hills, hunting and fishing to the exclusion of social activities, it means they feel powerless in front of women.
Material versus Social Problems: I know you have ‘received wisdom’ and current political fashion on your side, in suggesting I should worry about the physical rather than the social environment; and it is true that the minority antisocial activities such as crime and terrorism loom large in the public eye. But it really is an absolute nonsense. The number of children damaged by bastardy, divorce, suicide and step-families dwarfs the number affected by the problems you mention -- by several orders of magnitude. We adults wilfully injure our children on a truly massive scale (over 50% in some countries, 70% of blacks in America), merely to indulge our own whim, and to avoid having to control the misbehaviour of women. Add to this the fact that there are countless millions of people worrying about the problems you list, while I am hard pressed to find anyone to support my own campaigns, and perhaps you may be able to understand why I intend to stick to my guns.
Humiliating Others: Again you present the female, “no confrontation, no humiliation, no punishment” approach, which I agree is important; but again you avoid acknowledging that for men these elements are essential. And look how you have to deceive yourself to do this: “I do not humiliate anyone”, you claim, and yet immediately go on to contemplate situations where you actions cause a man to feel humiliated. Are you claiming he has no right to feel what he feels? That his feelings are somehow invalid? Are you saying you are not responsible for the consequences of your own actions? Of course you are not, you know very well you are humiliating him -- you just mouth the words to escape blame.
Punishment: All punishment is temporary, deliberate humiliation, and it is ridiculous to say we should not do it. Do you want to get rid of the law? And women do it just as much as men, though they are reluctant to admit it to themselves, and so they do it in indirect rather than direct ways. Disapproval, breaking agreements, refusal to join in with activities, refusal of sex, no apology for mistakes, exclusion, betrayal ... all these are female ways of humiliating another person. All are forms of withdrawal, intended to weaken and damage the relationship, and all are very effective at humiliating men. The ultimate weapon in the female arsenal is divorce, of which over 80% are now initiated by the wife in the UK, and to claim she does not realise how much she is hurting, shaming, and humiliating her husband is a nonsense. She is destroying him for her own material gain, egged on by the whole of the rest of society.
=====================
Dear Mrs. ArtisticSolution: You are quite wrong about the Larry Summers affair. The lesson everyone has learnt is that women can NEVER be criticised in public -- no matter how carefully and politely -- and you’d better be very careful about it in private, as well. It has taught every man to keep his mouth shut more tightly; and it has taught every woman that she can make false accusations quite carelessly, for there will never be any repercussions. In other words, the next time such a high profile occasion presents itself, the men will be even more wimpish that professor Summers was (remember, he made no suggestion that there might be a difference between the average man and the average woman); and the women will be even more ballsy and lying than they were in 2005.
The women don’t look like idiots -- far from it: they got rid of a leading man with a few well-chosen lies. This is power to be proud of, indeed. It is professor Summers whose was made to look a fool: he had to debase himself on television, forced to eat his words, and beg forgiveness; he spent $70 million of Harvard’s money to contradict what he had just said; and then he was forced to resign anyway -- proving his self-humiliation was insufficient! The fact that he has been lucky enough to salvage his career will mean nothing to those who might follow: they would not dream that they themselves could recover in a like manner.
So, lying women must go to prison: they must be made to suffer and to feel real humiliation, to act as an example for those who would imitate them. I would go as far as to say women SHOULD misbehave in this way, until they are punished enough to deter them. As I’ve said before, we have to rely on others to control us in the extreme, for we are hopeless at controlling ourselves.
That’s how I see it, anyway.
========================
I am very sorry to have delayed so long before replying. I have been battling with Singapore, as I explained above, but I also destroyed my computer by pouring a large cup of tea all over the keyboard. I am back up and running now, however, and hope to be more prompt in the future.
