Katanji Brown is a Supreme Court Justice. The law is black and white and shouldn't be a game.
If Ms. Brown had said, "A woman is a being that is composed of XX chromosomes, can bear live young." She should have had the guts to say, "Men can not be women. Men are not women."
I'm with you in spirit, but I disagree on fact. The law is not black and white. It is mostly gray. We have prosecutors and judges pretty much making it up as they go along. First, they decide if they want you to be guilty, then they find a way to make you guilty.
I heard a woman complaining the other day that women didn't feel safe going to their car at night. She simultaneously complained about the issue, somehow indicating that government should be so all powerful as to make all walking at night safe (and what a nightmare government that would be!) and complained about men offering to walk her there.
This whole thing depends upon certain facts. Those facts don't change according to your desire to choose.
I don’t think the scenarios are quite accurate because the options are not presented as do you want to depend on a man or the government, the options being presented are do you want to be controlled by a man or do you want to control your own life. That’s the framing in culture and politics today. It’s not clear to many women that we have been essentially replacing men with government. They really do think they don’t need men, that they are and can be fully independent. Women aren’t told it’s an aggressive world they need protection from, they are told girl power is unstoppable and they don’t need no protection because they can handle themselves. If women were particularly concerned about their survival in an aggressive world and wanted the government to protect them large numbers of women wouldn’t have supported defunding the police (including VP Harris). If women were concerned about their inability to care for themselves in an aggressive world and wanted government to do it they would be in favor of harsh prison sentences and strong border controls. If women were concerned about protecting themselves in an aggressive world they would be against gun control given that most women need some sort of tool to act as an equalizer if confronted by a man. If women were concerned about protecting themselves in an aggressive world they would want the government to protect them against men in their locker rooms, bathrooms, and sports.
Instead women have been convinced that the world isn’t aggressive and dangerous but that the greatest danger they face is men wanting to control them. They vote to defund the police out of compassion for those adversely impacted by police, and because they don’t appreciate their own need for protection. They vote against strict immigration controls out of compassion for migrants and because they don’t appreciate the dangers on multiple fronts they represent. They vote for gun control out of compassion for those killed by guns and because they don’t see that a gun is the only feasible way most women have to protect themselves. They vote to be able to kill their own babies because they don’t want men to be able to tell them what to do.
In reality we absolutely are outsourcing not only the roles of men but the roles of extended family and community to the government, but that’s not the choice that’s being presented to women.
The issues that you mention here did not arise organically from women generally; they were created and foisted upon us by political charlatans. We are all being played, all the time.
The problem with this article is that it assumes women as a whole are capable of independence, or even want such a thing. Observed reality is that they (minus a handful of outliers) are not and do not, whatever they might say. Women clearly want to be ruled (see: every single policy women as a block support), so the only choice is whether they will serve their fathers/husbands, or the state.
Anyone who says 'bUt I kNoW a wOmAn WhO iSn'T lIkE tHaT' has had their brain rotted by liberalism.
I really don't think you understand what I 'm getting at. I'm suggesting that women should think for themselves and be self-reliant, not totally dependent on men, and definitely not reliant on government.
That doesn't mean women shouldn't get married or have children and a family. I'm only saying they should do it on their own terms, and not be dependent on others deciding for them.
I'd say this of anyone. I've made it a point for most of my adult life to be self-sufficient to an extent that no one is in a position to manipulate me by withholding income, or coercing me into much of anything. I have disciplined myself to not go along with the crowd, unless I personally choose to. My choice, not the crowd's choice. I see the crowd from my own perspective, while others see themselves from the crowd's perspective.
It is that she knows how to play the game.
Katanji Brown is a Supreme Court Justice. The law is black and white and shouldn't be a game.
If Ms. Brown had said, "A woman is a being that is composed of XX chromosomes, can bear live young." She should have had the guts to say, "Men can not be women. Men are not women."
I'm with you in spirit, but I disagree on fact. The law is not black and white. It is mostly gray. We have prosecutors and judges pretty much making it up as they go along. First, they decide if they want you to be guilty, then they find a way to make you guilty.
I heard a woman complaining the other day that women didn't feel safe going to their car at night. She simultaneously complained about the issue, somehow indicating that government should be so all powerful as to make all walking at night safe (and what a nightmare government that would be!) and complained about men offering to walk her there.
This whole thing depends upon certain facts. Those facts don't change according to your desire to choose.
I don’t think the scenarios are quite accurate because the options are not presented as do you want to depend on a man or the government, the options being presented are do you want to be controlled by a man or do you want to control your own life. That’s the framing in culture and politics today. It’s not clear to many women that we have been essentially replacing men with government. They really do think they don’t need men, that they are and can be fully independent. Women aren’t told it’s an aggressive world they need protection from, they are told girl power is unstoppable and they don’t need no protection because they can handle themselves. If women were particularly concerned about their survival in an aggressive world and wanted the government to protect them large numbers of women wouldn’t have supported defunding the police (including VP Harris). If women were concerned about their inability to care for themselves in an aggressive world and wanted government to do it they would be in favor of harsh prison sentences and strong border controls. If women were concerned about protecting themselves in an aggressive world they would be against gun control given that most women need some sort of tool to act as an equalizer if confronted by a man. If women were concerned about protecting themselves in an aggressive world they would want the government to protect them against men in their locker rooms, bathrooms, and sports.
Instead women have been convinced that the world isn’t aggressive and dangerous but that the greatest danger they face is men wanting to control them. They vote to defund the police out of compassion for those adversely impacted by police, and because they don’t appreciate their own need for protection. They vote against strict immigration controls out of compassion for migrants and because they don’t appreciate the dangers on multiple fronts they represent. They vote for gun control out of compassion for those killed by guns and because they don’t see that a gun is the only feasible way most women have to protect themselves. They vote to be able to kill their own babies because they don’t want men to be able to tell them what to do.
In reality we absolutely are outsourcing not only the roles of men but the roles of extended family and community to the government, but that’s not the choice that’s being presented to women.
The issues that you mention here did not arise organically from women generally; they were created and foisted upon us by political charlatans. We are all being played, all the time.
The problem with this article is that it assumes women as a whole are capable of independence, or even want such a thing. Observed reality is that they (minus a handful of outliers) are not and do not, whatever they might say. Women clearly want to be ruled (see: every single policy women as a block support), so the only choice is whether they will serve their fathers/husbands, or the state.
Anyone who says 'bUt I kNoW a wOmAn WhO iSn'T lIkE tHaT' has had their brain rotted by liberalism.
All human beings must serve something.
The whole article sounds so leftist. Conservative people care that the sexes cooperate and have a good life together.
I assure you, I am no leftist. Consider my pseudonym....
I don’t consider your pseudonym. I consider your words.
This is the same crap we’ve been hearing for the last 50 years. “StRongh wOmaN I don’t need no stinking man.”🤮
I really don't think you understand what I 'm getting at. I'm suggesting that women should think for themselves and be self-reliant, not totally dependent on men, and definitely not reliant on government.
That doesn't mean women shouldn't get married or have children and a family. I'm only saying they should do it on their own terms, and not be dependent on others deciding for them.
I'd say this of anyone. I've made it a point for most of my adult life to be self-sufficient to an extent that no one is in a position to manipulate me by withholding income, or coercing me into much of anything. I have disciplined myself to not go along with the crowd, unless I personally choose to. My choice, not the crowd's choice. I see the crowd from my own perspective, while others see themselves from the crowd's perspective.
Yes, it does. But I think some of that comes from modern thinking in toto, not particuarly leftist.
A read of GK Chesterton's 'What's Wrong with the World' would clear up some of this, I think :)
This article sucks.