Showing posts with label Feminism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Feminism. Show all posts

Thursday, December 24, 2015

WHY HILLARY CLINTON DOESN'T REPRESENT WOMEN WELL

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

WHY HILLARY CLINTON DOESN'T REPRESENT WOMEN WELL
.

Can a woman become a great president? Anyone who can't answer the above question in the affirmative couldn't have been raised in the Black community. As ashamed as I am to have to admit it, it should be clear to anyone with eyeballs that the African American culture is matriarchal by it's very nature. That said, now I'm supposed to start explaining all of the conditions beyond the Black man's control that led to this state of affairs, but the fact is, I'm not predisposed to lying, so I refer you to Black Entertainment Television (BET) and you can be the judge.
.
Okay, had enough?
.
Now that you've viewed the misogynistic subculture that has all but seized the soul of the young Black male, it has to be clear that any woman who can manage to raise well rounded, productive, and stable children - by herself - in such an environment can do anything.

.
So, of course a woman can be a good, and even great, president, but I don't count Hillary Clinton among those women. Hillary, and many other so-called "feminists" of her generation suffer from seriously misguided views on what it truly means to be a strong and independent woman. They actually diminish the meaning of womanhood by embracing the position that the only way a woman can truly be strong and independent is by being more like a man, and Hillary has spent her entire life doing just that - trying to show America how much like a man she can be - and to the point where all vestiges of femininity are now nonexistent. 
.
That doesn't promote the competence, intelligence, and insight of  the female character; it suggests that women should abandon the "inferior" qualities that make them innately special, and take on the "superior" qualities of men. That's backward thinking.  That's like a Black man thinking that the only way he can be equal to a White man is to become Archie Bunker. But Barack Obama has clearly shown that a Black man can be equal to a White man, and more, while remaining true to his nature; and Michelle Obama has demonstrated the very same point with respect to female competence. Let us not forget, Michelle used to be Barack's boss and mentor, but she has no problem with being highly feminine, and highly home oriented. Michelle doesn't feel the need to prove that she's as competent as a man, because she's comfortable in her womanhood, so she knows she is.
.
But Hillary is an ideologue, and all ideologues (regardless of stripe) are dangerous, because they tend to give ideology priority over truth, and intrinsic to every zealot's passion for justice lies the seeds of tyranny. So with a feminist ideologue like Hillary Clinton as president, I'd be afraid that she might send thousands of young Americans to a needless death just to prove that she can be "just as strong as a man" with respect to wreaking havoc and destruction all over the world. 
.
WOMEN TRYING TO BE MEN IS
ANTI-WOMAN
Hillary Clinton, and many other modern women, seem to have dedicated their entire lives to the proposition that the traditional role that women have played in society is something less than what a modern woman should aspire to. I firmly disagree with that position. While I think that a woman should be free to compete with a man in any and every area in this society, I also think the role of the traditional "housewife" has been severely undervalued in this society. What our society looks upon as a "mere housewife" is actually a mother, a psychologist, a nurse, a chef, an economist, an interior designer, and in many cases, a sex therapist for a philandering husband--and society has been going downhill every since these women were convinced that what they did wasn't worthwhile. 
.
Remember Donna Reed? Women of Hillary's ilk tend to look down their nose at women like that, but consider this - there was no such thing as drive-bys on Donna's watch. She created a stable home environment that served to stabilize society as a whole. She did more for society from her family's house, than a Hillary clone could ever do as president from the White House. The problem with the Hillary kind of women is that they fail to recognize that fact. They see women like Donna as "quaint," and out of touch with the new feminist reality:
.

"One of the things that made me drop the feminist label was how cruel they were to women who said they weren't feminists, I had no problem with women who supported equality even if they didn't use the same label as me and I didn't understand WHY they [feminists] had to act like they [non-feminists] just said 'No, I hate my rights and I wish it was the 1900's again'. They just said they didn't labeled themselves as feminists, big f..king deal, it's like asking someone if they believe in God and then saying 'If you believe in God you MUST be a Catholic' when that person says they're an Orthodox Christian.

"They believe feminism is the truth and if someone is against it they're obviously wrong and deserve to be shunned until they convert, almost like religion. They're like the religious nuts that say that atheists have no morals or worship the devil, the only difference apart from politics and the like is that feminists are taken waaay more seriously than those guys. I used to laugh at the people who said it was a cult and now I think that yes, It's kinda cult-ish, If you say 'wrong stuff' they shun you and treat you like shit, they just lack a 'Feminist Overlord' or any kind of leader and initiation rituals."
https://www.reddit.com/r/TiADiscussion/comments/3k1j4g/why_are_modern_feminists_outright_hostile_against/

.
Many feminists completely fail to realize that women like Donna are directly responsible for who, and where they are today. So it's not Hillary that I dislike, or her chosen path in life; it's the condescending attitude of Hillary-type women towards homemakers - and I don't think I'm alone. Hillary hasn't personally done a thing to deserve the hostility that she engenders in many Americans. But while much of that hostility is directed at her, it's not about her, it's about what she represents - the degradation of America.

.
The American people don't have a problem with women seizing the opportunity to express their creativity and potential as human beings, but what they do resent is a handful of ambitious women attempting to further their personal goals by convincing a generation of housewives that they're being less than productive by not entering the workforce to take up arms against men. Prior to these women entering the workforce, one income was sufficient to comfortably support a family. Now, a woman must work, whether she wants to or not, just for most families to survive. The reason for that is, once women went to work and put more money into circulation, the business community simply doubled the cost of living. So what we're left with as a result of this mass exodus of housewives into the workforce is a rise in the of the cost of living, women being forced to juggle family and a full-time jobs, latchkey children, a hoard of incorrigible teenagers, a rise in workplace indiscretions, failed marriages, and skyrocketing crime - a net loss anyway you look at it.  This is the culture that women like Hillary Clinton represents - the very mindset that's destroying America.
.
But of course, now I'm going to be accused of wanting women to remain barefoot and pregnant, but that's not at all the case. Women should be free to go into whatever profession they choose, but if they choose homemaker as their chosen profession, they shouldn't be denigrated as "barefoot and pregnant," because as our current situation clearly demonstrates, they are actually the backbone of this society.
.
This country is falling apart because we allowed the "feminists" of the sixties to sell us a bill of goods. When these women chose to pursue professions and then ran into sexism in the workplace, instead of addressing the problem within the workplace itself, they decided to hitch their wagon to the civil rights movement in order to sop up some of the gravy that the eloquence of Martin Luther King had stirred. But in order for these White, middle and upper class women to make an effective case - many of whom, living comfortably, and supported by husbands - they had to convince all of the housewives across America that they, as a class, were just as victimized as Black civil rights activists, who were not allowed to vote, couldn't find jobs, and were being attacked by police dogs.
.
So while these women did have a just cause, they addressed that cause in a fraudulent manner for no other reason than to promote their own ambition - and in the process, convinced women across this land that raising a family and laying the foundation that everything else in our society is built upon was something less than a desirable pursuit. They also convinced many women that the only things that are of value in this world are those things that men do - in fact, focusing on being a lady, in itself, was a frivolous pursuit. The message was, the only way to compete with men was on a man's terms - a message that places women at a gross disadvantage.
.
I have a good friend who happens to be an Asian. She's so beautiful she doesn't look real -  she looks like someone drew her. In addition, she's brilliant, and one of the sexiest women I've ever laid eyes on - and she knows it. Her only shortcoming is she's bought into the nonsense that it's against the rules to use her femininity to help her get ahead. She told me one day that her boss wouldn't allow her to move up any farther in management. When I asked why, she said, her boss always tries to flirt with her and she doesn't want to play that game. So I asked her, doesn't your boss use his deep voice and intimidating personality to get what he wants? And she told me that he did. I then asked, so why shouldn't you use your beauty and feminine wiles to get what you want? You don't have to give in to your boss, just make him think you might - right after the next promotion, then the next, and the next. You don't have to give up a thing. Just keep hope alive. There's nothing immoral about that. You're simply manipulating him with your feminine beauty in the same way that he manipulates you with his masculine ability to intimidate.  That was a few years back.  Today she's his boss.
.
So, absolutely a woman can become a great president--and quite possibly, one of the greatest presidents we've ever had. But I don't want one who thinks she has to act like a man to be successful. I want to vote for a female who's intelligent, charismatic, and well educated, yet, not afraid to stick her hands in dishwater. Yes, I want her to be professional and dignified, yet, also know the value of a short skirt and silk shiny stockings. I don't want any president who's going to try to be effective with one hand tied behind his or her back. A president should be prepared to bring every resource to bear. So if the president happens to be a woman, sure I want her to know how to be firm when she needs to be, but she should also know how to work it like it's hot.
If a man's strong suit is intimidation, the illusion of power, and brute force, a woman's is insight, subtlety, and finesse. Once a woman loses sight of that fact, she's tying one hand behind her back.
.

Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.





Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, November 12, 2014

LIFE WITH VAL: THE PARTY

Beneath the Spin * Eric L. Wattree

LIFE WITH VAL: THE PARTY
.
I was recently in what can only be described as a verbal altercation with a couple of feminists today. They took exception to a picture that accompanied an article that I wrote showing a man holding up the world, Atlas-style, to keep it from crushing his family. It showed his wife, son, and daughter, obviously in fear, and on their knees praying. The feminists took the position that it portrayed the woman as weak, and needing a man to protect her.
.
I was really taken aback by their position and lost all patience with them. I mean, what kind of rabid ideologue does it take to take offense at a picture of a man protecting his family!!!?  One even said, "It is not a distraction to say we need to stop teaching boys to be saviors and start teach them to be partners,"  to which I replied, "Men NEED to feel like saviors. That's what makes them men..
When my wife died and my son and daughter were grown, many of my female friends stepped in to make sure that I didn't have to prowl the streets looking for sex, but I was still depressed. I thought my life was over as a man, because no one NEEDED me to be a man and to protect them. But fortunately, I was a musician, and met a lady - who did need me - and it made me feel like a man again, and it gave me a reason for living."  So it's a part of a REAL man's nature to be a protector. Again, that's why nature made him bigger and stronger, and emotionally, that's what makes him a man.  I didn't realize that myself, until I was left with an empty nest. I began to feel like I no longer had a reason for being.
.
I went on to tell them the following:
.
What some of you are doing here is buying into a philosophy that is destroying the poor and middle class. We are currently knee-deep in a CLASS WAR, and race, sex, and religion are the most potent weapons of the people who are waging this war. We’ve got to keep in mind that what the corporate/GOP alliance thrives on is anger, division, and frustration. They’re agenda - to lower the standard of living of the American middle class to conform to the new global economy, which pays people of many countries less per week than many middle class Americans spend on lunch per day - is so toxic to the American way of life that they MUST keep Americans divided to promote it.
.
The picture in question is not about religion, it is not about the denigration of women, and it is not about anything other than Black men stepping up to the plate and being Black men. Thus, those people who see something else in it that is offensive to their narrow ideology, must understand that their vision is CONTRIVED, DIVISIVE, AND LACKS AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE BIG PICTURE. How do I know that? Because I posted the picture, and what they’re complaining about never once occurred to me when I posted it. So they are digging up, and looking under rocks to see what they want to see.
.
Now, I can fully understand women wanting to be recognized as equals and peers in every sense of the word. But this photograph does not either say nor does it imply that women or not equal. It simply acknowledges the fact that men and women are DIFFERENT, just as nature did when it made men bigger and stronger than women. 

.
Equal doesn’t mean that men and women have equal assets. Equal means that men have certain strong suits that they need to bring to the table to combine with the assets that women provide to the family unit. And to even suggest that being feminine, and not being as physically strong as a man is less than equal, is being bigoted and condescending toward what it means to be a woman. Being physically strong is not everything. My late wife literally MADE me. The mere fact that I can write this is a tribute to the strength of that woman, and even though she’s gone now, I’m STILL trying to live up to the man I saw reflected in her eyes. And by the way, when she died she made $37,000 a year more than I did. One of our biggest arguments was I refused to let her hire ME.
.
So if you’re a feminist, instead of nitpicking about what YOU THINK is being portrayed in a picture, your efforts would be better served in fighting to see that ALL women received equal pay for what they do. Because if that were the case, Val would have made $57,000 a year more than I did. And even though she's gone, I still get a check from her on the 28th of every month. So grow up, and see the big picture.
 

.
That started me thinking about Val, and just how special she was. So I'd like to relate the following episode in our lives:

The Party
.
My late wife Val and I met when she was 14 and I was 16 years old. Her aunt worked at the 55th Street Medical Clinic in Los Angeles processing insurance documents, and my mother was head nurse and physician’s assistant. That year my mother hired Val to send Christmas cards to the patients. I met Val while I was on one of my routine missions to the clinic to bum money from either my mother or Dr. Atkins. It didn’t matter to me - whichever one I ran into first was cool.
.
It was my routine to go to the front desk and have whoever was there buzz me into the inner sanctum. Once there I would lay in wait in the lunchroom for whoever came out of one of examining rooms first. I always hoped it was Dr. Atkins, because he was an easier touch. He didn’t have time to listen to my sad scenarios, so he’d just pull out his bankroll and start peeling off paper without even listening to me, with maybe a caustic remark like, "Eric, you need to get you a job." It was kinda embarrassing, because my younger brother, Fred (12 years old), used to work around the office to EARN his money. But, being the consummate little deadbeat that I was, a little embarrassment didn’t phase me a bit.
.
But what I didn’t know was, on that particular day, when I walked through those doors it would change my life forever. When I walked up to the counter, Val was turned facing the files. I waited before I said anything, because even then she had the body of a full grown woman, so I just stood there and took in the view. But when she turned around, I was shocked to see that she was a young girl. I also saw that it was my lucky day, because when she looked at me I saw for the very first time that look in her eyes that made me feel special until the night she died.
.
We were married on Christmas morning when she was 19 and I was 21, and she’s been an ongoing gift in my life every since - even today, now that she’s gone. When I originally wrote this, several years before her death, I pointed out that we have two kids - a daughter, Kai, who was 23 at the time, and a 21 year old son, Eric, Jr. They’d both graduated from college the previous month (Eric, on my birthday).
.
I also pointed out . . . that I'm sort of a laid-back, ‘cerebral’ kind of guy who refuses to make a move without thinking it through. You know the type - the kind of guy who people aren't really sure about until they get to know him. Val, on the other hand, is a totally spontaneous, what-you-see-is-what-you-get kind of person that everyone loves on first sight. But she's *so* spontaneous that the kids and I have to keep an eye on her to keep her out of trouble.
.
In both high school and college my son was the school basketball star, and before each game countless kids would congregate at my house waiting for Val. Others would go to the gym early to save seats in the bleachers, waiting for her to show up - and when she did, the party was on.
.
The kids used to call the section where Val sat "The Dog Pound." More than once a player on the other team would miss free throws or plays because they were laughing so hard at something Val might have said about one of the referees or opposing players - and the funny thing was, in spite of that, the referees, and the kids on the other teams, loved her, and they all call her by her first name - some of the kids called her "Nani."
.
Kids who were scheduled to play our team would come by the house and say, "Now Val, this is just a game. Don't be doggin' me on the court next week." And she'd say, "I ain’t gon have to, my son's gonna do it for me - and get out of my refrigerator. Don't Ruth feed you?" Sometimes after a game my son would say, "Moma, you know you were a bad girl at the game today, don't you?" And she'd say, "What? His topee was on crooked!" Sometimes I seriously wonder was the Whoopie Goldberg movie, "Eddie," loosely based on Val's Antics.
.
She is so out there. She lives in her very own universe. I tell her sometimes, "Val, if WWIII broke-out, you wouldn't even know it until you heard the blast. And it's true. Val is so oblivious to the things that the rest of us worry about that it verges on dangerous. In spite of the fact that she is well known as one of the top Property Administrators at Hughes Aircraft in El Segundo, Ca., she manages to leave all of her business acumen in her desk at work. One day, for example, she saw a very expensive household item that she wanted to buy. So she came to me and asked if it was alright for us to purchase it. At the time, we were sort of strapped, so I told her that we didn't have the money. She looked at me with deep disappointment, and said with total sincerity, "What do you mean we don't have the money? You have a box full of checks in your desk drawer." So, needless to say, I handle the money in the family.
.
But her disarming personality has also helped us out of a number of uncomfortable situations. About ten years ago when we moved from Los Angeles to Covina, California, we were one of just a few Black families in the area. Not being use to that sort of situation, we - make that I -was more than just a little uncomfortable. And to make things worse, one of the neighbors had a huge Confederate flag spread across one entire inside wall of his garage - and the garage door was always open, so whenever we drove down the street his blazing Dixie flag hit us right in the face. I felt uncomfortable with it, but hey, that flag was draped across that wall long before we moved into the neighborhood, and besides, the man has every right to love Dixie. The only thing I hate more than a racist is a person who comes into a situation and thinks everyone else should rearrange their lives to accommodate them. So I just learned to ignore it, as I THOUGHT Val had.
.
About a month or so after we moved in, however, the lady from across the street invited us to a party that she was having. Again, being the laid-back kind of guy I am, I felt uncomfortable about the prospect. I don't like parties as a matter of course. You have to stand around laughing and smiling when you really don't feel it, and discussing issues that you really don't care about (How about those Dodgers?). It's not my thing - it makes me feel phony. I had the feeling that this party would be all that multiplied by a thousand - especially, not knowing anyone, and being the only Black couple there. "Hey, Bubba! Guess who’s comin’ to dinner?"
.
But Val immediately lit-up. The lady had said the magic word--PAAAAAR-TAY! Before I could say a word, Val took the ball and ran with it. "I'd love to! Hey, can I be the bartender? I make the best...." The lady ended up at our house all afternoon laughing and talking with Val. By the time she floated back across the street, under the influence of a quart of Val's "sample" Margaritas, Val was up on all the neighborhood gossip, and the two women had forged an unshakable, Most Favorite Neighbor Treaty.
.
The lady's name was Rose, and watching her and Val together was very enlightening. By watching the way that she and Val bonded I began to recognize that people don't naturally bond by race.  In a multiracial society, grouping according to race is a contrivance of man. Let to their on preference, and the absence of artificial societal rules, people would bond according to type. Watching Val and the blond, blue-eye Rose together made that perfectly clear.  These two women were clearly sisters.  They had just met a few hours ago, but if some who didn't know them walked into the room they'd think they grew up together. And later, my son and daughter validated my new recognition beyond refute. When they went to school and began to blend into the neighborhood, their crew looked like a United Nations assembly.  The only thing missing was an Eskimo, and they didn't even seem to realize that there were any differences between themselves. 
.
That taught me a lot, and it caused me to drastically revise the way I viewed the world.  It's a lesson that I should have learned years earlier, because when I was in the Marine Corps, my closest friend was a White Hillbilly from Kentucky name Stan.  We hated one another upon first sight, due to our preconceived notions. Stan saw me as a radical Black militant, which I was, and I saw him as a racist Hillbilly, which he was.  But he was also a world-class Black belt in the marshal arts (he later made a career as a Navy Seal close combat instructor (the Marine Corps is a part of the Department of the Navy).
.
But anyway, I was in Oceanside one night in a phone trying to call home.  I dropped my dime and I was bent over trying to pick it up.  This damn BLACK MP thought I was drunk and grabbed me and caused me to bump my head on the little counter that they used to have under the phone, and it hurt like hell.  So I came out swinging, and MPs (on Black and one White) started beating me with their clubs. Stan happen to be there at the Greyhound bus station and came and jumped in on my side. It took four Oceanside policeman to peel us off their asses. But fortunately, after we were subdued, one of the MPs (the Black one, of course) decided to spray me with mace, after I was handcuffed.
.
Our 1st Sergeant (also from Kentucky like Stan) came and got us out the brig the next morning. Then when he got us back to his office he said, "You know, I'm completely cluster fucked about you two.  Everybody in the unit knows that you can't stand each other. So how in the hell did you two end up in the brig for givin' two MPs a good ole Marine Corps ass kickin' (congratulations, by the way, I here you did the unit proud)?  Sgt. Delorge, aren't you the one that said that Cpl. Wattree was an asshole?  Then Stan said something that I'll never forget - "But he's our asshole, Top."  Thereafter, Top just smiled and called the Provost Marshal and said, I hear your people sprayed one of my Marines after he was handcuffed.  That's an unprovoked assault. The old man is pissed, and he order me to follow up on that. Yeah, I know, but ain't that what we train 'em to do?  Well, I'll tell you what, why don't you just let me handle these two on my end and we call it a wash. Okay, I owe you one."  Then he look up and told us, "Get the hell out of office."  Thereafter, me and Stan were inseparable.
.
Many years later I went to visit the colonel I used to work for (I used to do all of the writing for the battalion when he was our battalion commander), who by that time was a Maj. General and the commanding general of Camp Pendleton, and he told me that they still used me and Stan's story for morale training - and often used Stan who had become a training officer with the Navy Seals, to tell it.  So I should have known how the racial dynamic works on an individual level, but the instant connection between Val and Rose served to bring that reality back home.  
.
But when it came to this party, that was a different situation. Relationships forged between individuals, and  the group dynamic works much differently, as the current situation in our society readily attests. So I began to think that this was going to be more complicated than I thought - it had become serious. We had just moved to the area, and already, life as we were just coming to know it was about to come to a screechin' halt. I could just picture this nice, quiet neighborhood under the influence of Val and her notorious mixed drinks. Once the neighbors came down from their hangovers they'd never forgive us. I could just see the headline of the next day’s San Gabriel Tribune now - "BLACK CHICK CORRUPTS COVINA!" - and knowing my woman, there was no doubt in my mind that’s exactly what was about to happen.
.
Val has a real knack for mixing drinks in a way that masked the liquor. She can blend various juices, fruits and crushed ice with more artistic flare than a Renaissance master. If she could pull-off the same thing with paint and canvas we'd be instant millionaires. She can mix these drinks so well, and make them so pleasing to the taste, that people generally forget about the gallon of liquor that's in them. We'd have parties where I'd here non-drinkers saying, "Ah Val, can I have another 'slush,' please?" I'd think, "slush, indeed. The only thing that's going to be slushed is you, in about five minutes." Val got a real kick out of it - and now she was about to do it to our new, unsuspecting, neighbors.
.
The night of the party I wasn't as uneasy about it as I had been previously, because by then I'd had a week to get to know both Rose, who seemed to have made Val her closest friend on the block, and her husband, Al, who was really a nice guy. But I still wasn't passionate about the prospect of being paraded about as the new Black guy on the block to a lot of people that I didn't know. So I begged off with a cold that I had made it a point to cultivate three days prior to the event.
.
The night of the party I kissed Val on the cheek and told her to have a good time. But as she was leaving I held on to her hand and reminded her, "but not too good of a time." She promised to be good, and she was off.
.
I then got comfortable and settled into the bedroom to watch television for the night, but I kept the windows open and the blinds open so I could keep an eye - and ear - on the house.
.
By 12:30 a.m. the party was going full blast. I could hear the laughter and the faint sound of music playing in the house, but by 2:00 a.m. I began to hear the sounds of Val working her magic. A couple of guys who I recognized as two of my more conservative neighbors were in front of the house arm-wrestling on the hood of a brand new Chrysler, and another guy was calling out to a woman who was struggling down the street barefoot in an evening gown. So I decided I'd better drop in on the party.
.
When I walked in it was clear that Val was in full control of the festivities. It was also clear that I didn't have to worry about uneasy small-talk - everybody in the house was about as loose as you can get. Val walked up and hugged me, saying, "Hi, honey! Hey everybody! This is my Nu-nu, Eric." I heard various drunken responses:
.
"Hi, Eric"!
.
"Hey, Nu-Nu!" 
.
"What's his name?" "Nu-NU?" 
.
"Big, ugly rascal, ain't he? Just kiddin', don't beat me up, brother!"
.
Then this one guy walked up and said, "Hi, I'm Stewart. I live down the street. This is quite a lady you got here."
.
"Yeah, I know," I said. "I hope she's been behaving herself?"
.
"Naw, I can't say that she has," the man said. "First, she done got everybody drunk - but I can't fault her for that, that's what I came here for - but then, she called me a Commie."
.
I said, "what?"
.
Then Stewart's wife chimed in. Between the booze and her laughter, she could barely get her words out. She introduced herself as Sue, and said, "No, she asked my husband, 'Are you a communist or something? And my husband said, 'No, I ain't no damned Commie. What made you say that?' Then Val said, 'Well, why you got that Communist flag in your garage?'" Sue went on, trying to talk through her laughter. "Then Stewart said, 'That ain't no damned communist flag! That's Old Dixie. We from Georgia.'"
.
With that, someone else took up the story. "Then Val said, 'Same thing.'" Then everyone fell out laughing all over again (even me, because I knew Val was serious) as Stewart stood there pretending to be incensed. But everyone knew inside that while the joke was suppose to be on Stewart, we were actually laughing at the childlike way in which Val viewed what was suppose to be an uncomfortable subject.
.
It seems that Stewart had been receiving a lot of ribbing over the flag for quite sometime, and Val's remark just put the icing on the cake. It turns out that he and Sue are both really nice people. Stewart is quite an intellectual, and - believe it or not - has turned out to be my closest friend in the neighborhood. We spend hours together debating everything. He says, "I admit, I’m a Southern bigot - I think we should lynch anyone who roots against Georgia Tech." 
.
Stewart and I agreed on one thing, however - since the essence of our being is what we think, and physical attributes are purely superficial, it makes more sense to define ourselves according to the way we think, rather than the way we look - and if that is true, then our preoccupation with race is an exercise in stupidity. 
.
LOOK AT WHAT OUR BABIES
BROUGHT HOME
I really like that guy, and if it weren’t for Val we probably never would have met. And she’s brought so many other things into my life. I discovered my love for writing as a direct result of finding that I didn’t write well enough to answer the love letters she used to send me while I was in the Marine Corps; she encouraged me to go to college, and she also talked me into buying my first Commodore 64 Computer when personal computers first hit the market. So, while living with Val can indeed be challenging, I can’t imagine life without her.
.
I could go on and on about this woman, but I’ve got to go now - it’s time for me to mount a campaign for dinner.
.
"Oh, Sugar Lips!"
.
"Sugar Lips my ass. Hit the microwave, Buddy!"




Eric L. Wattree
http://wattree.blogspot.com/
Ewattree@Gmail.com
Citizens Against Reckless Middle-Class Abuse (CARMA)
.
Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does. 

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, January 31, 2014

I Write to Seek Truth, Not to Reinforce What Readers Want to Believe

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

I Write to Seek Truth, Not to Reinforce What Readers Want to Believe
.

A WRITER'S JOB IS TO TELL READERS
WHAT THEY DON'T WANT TO HEAR
I don’t profess to be either the owner, or arbiter, of truth. I’m a seeker of truth, as oppose to a seeker of validation. And I don’t see the internet as a social club. I view it as an educational tool, a place to educate, and to be educated. So writing is not a competitive event for me, nor is it a social activity where I feel obliged to either stroke egos, or tell people what makes them feel warm and fuzzy inside. I avoid such places and activities both online and in the real world, because they’re a gross waste of time. They’re only good for reinforcing the often erroneous beliefs of the people who congregate there. I call them FOXholes.
.
So I’m not going to waste my time writing just to tell people what they WANT to hear. If I’m going to write, I’m going to write about what I think people NEED to hear, and if they're mature adults, they should understand and appreciate that. If they’re not, I simply dismiss them as not the kind of people I’m interested in communicating with in the first place. Why try to have a discussion with people whose minds are closed to ideas that differ from their own? Such people have already made up their minds about what they want to believe, so truth, new facts, and even reality, are meaningless to them. So what’s the point of a discussion? There isn’t one.
.
I’ve found over the years that you can pick and choose who you want to associate with in the real world, but on the internet that’s not always so easy. So I’ve found an easy solution for that, and maybe others might want to adopt it. When I find that a person online has nothing of value to offer, or doesn’t fit the profile of the kind of person that I’m trying to get through to, I simply ignore that person. The minute I see the person’s name I simply skip over it and move on. That way, it’s like the person’s not even there. And if the person tries to force themselves upon me, as many such people tend to do, I simply block them. If everyone did that, trolls would eventually find themselves with only one another to troll. They’d be relegated to a troll’s Heaven.
.
I received a comment from one lady (at least, I’m assuming it was a female) that said something to the effect that every since I betrayed a thought that she didn’t agree with that she’d lost all respect for anything I had to say. It later became obvious that my opinion was offensive to her more liberated feminist views. I had written an article that was intended to give women insight into how most men think. I considered it a very innocuous article, since it was based on what we men have routinely discussed among ourselves since the time we were little boys. It described my observation of how most men categorize women. I pointed out that in my opinion most men place women in one of three categories: 1). Easy - convenient and nice to have around when there’s no one else to have sex with, but we have very little respect for. 2). Friends with benefits - women who we like and respect, but whether or not we'd marry them is a question mark. Or 3). Women who are generally low-key and very protective of their sexuality - or, the kind of women that most men are looking for in a wife, hence, the phrase, "my lady."
.
Women don't like hearing that - especially feminists - because they have a vested interest in believing that men are taking them seriously, and that their newfound sexual liberation isn't being used against them. But the fact is, due to the fact that men have been innately wired to be morally corrupt, and all's-fair-in-love-and-war predators by nature (probably to ensure the perpetuation of the species), we are indeed undeniably manipulative of the newfound sexual liberation of women. It plays right into our lustful hands. But that said, it's grossly illogical to lash out at a writer for brazenly reporting the blatant truth. He didn't create the situation, nor is he promoting it, he's merely doing his job, reporting the facts. So that clearly demonstrates that craving the comfort of an ideological echo chamber is a human characteristic, and not merely a conservative affliction. That's why it is incumbent upon writers to never cater to this tendency in human nature.
.
But again, the lady was highly offended, and said that as a result, she had lost respect for anything I had to say. I pointed out to her that while I was sorry that she felt that way, I could certainly understand it. So I simply won’t expect to see her name commenting on any of the blogs that I submitted in the future. I let her know that while I was sure I’d miss her input, I wasn’t there to win friends and fans, and I was certainly not there just to reinforce what she wanted to believe. I was there to engage in serious discussions with serious-minded and objective people who are capable of intellectual detachment. Thus, for my purpose, people who are emotional and allow their egos to get all caught up in a discussion are a distraction.  
.
So if a person doesn’t like what I have to say, it’s not necessary for them to throw tantrums and spitballs - that’s the way children behave. Such people need to realize that they don’t live in this world alone, and the rest of the world don’t have an obligation to cater to views that make them feel good. There are others who may also disagree with me, but may want to challenge my views in a more detached and intellectual fashion. I welcome such people, because they are the ones who give the internet the potential for being the most powerful educational tool that man has ever known, and more than once, individuals of this caliber have caused me to reexamine my views, and even reverse them.
.
But my opinion is my opinion, so if it’s such an intolerable assault on what an individual wants to believe, they should simply vote with their feet, and I’ll get the point. And what’s most ironic about it is, more often than not, these tend to be the very people running around with their hair on fire, wanting to know what’s wrong with the world, and why people are so dumb.
.
Well, here’s another "why." Why distract others who are online to discuss issues, explore ideas, and who are genuinely seeking mutual growth, with inane side issues and false assumptions regarding the motivations of the writer. If you feel that the writer has a hidden agenda, do something constructive. Write an article of your own with an opposing view, laying out the issues that you feel are relevant - some of my best articles have started out that way. That way you’re ADDING to the body of knowledge, instead of simply being a distraction. 
.
Life is simple. Why make it complicated?
.
Eric L. Wattree
Http://wattree.blogspot.com
Ewattree@Gmail.com
Citizens Against Reckless Middle-Class Abuse (CARMA)
.
Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, May 07, 2009

Carrie Prejean: Are Progressives Becoming as Intolerant as Conservatives?


BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

Carrie Prejean: Are Progressives Becoming as Intolerant as Conservatives?

I've always been proud to consider myself a progressive, because being a progressive meant that I was open-minded, willing to assess every issue on its own merit, and I'm tolerant of varying points of view. But it seems that many of today's "progressives" have corrupted the term. Though many of these people call themselves progressives, they are not progressive thinkers–they are progressive in name only. Over the years they seem to have somehow lost their way, and as a result, have managed to redefined the term "progressive" to simply mean, not conservative.

A case in point is the unconscionable way in which the so-called progressive community has demonized Carrie Prejean after she indicated, almost apologetically during the Miss America Pageant, that she thought marriage should be between a man and a woman. Why in the world did she say that?!! Thereafter, she was called a bitch, seminude photos of her have been posted on the Internet, and she's been generally, dragged through the mud. It is unbelievable that people who call themselves progressive could do that to that young woman.

While I 'm in total disagreement with her views on same-sex marriage, those are her views, and she has every right to them. She didn't try to shove her point of view down America's throat; she was specifically asked whether SHE thought same-sex marriage should be legalized. And she and she responded– quite honestly, diplomatically, and in my opinion, quite courageously, that she didn't. Then the judge, Perez, I think his name was, taped a video on Youtube calling her "a dumb bitch." So I ask you, what kind of progressive thinker can take the position that a person doesn't have a right to their own views? Perez even went so far as to dictate how Ms. Prejean SHOULD have answered the question. Who the Hell is he to tell a person what they should think?

People like, Perez, is more damaging to their cause than they are helpful, because in many cases, it's not the issue that people are against, they just don't like the people who represent the issue. I agree with Perez on this issue, but I don't like him. So if I was on the fence regarding same-sex marriage, I'd vote against it–not against the issue, but against him, and I'm certain that many progressive issues are being voted down for that very reason.

The American Heritage Dictionary defines a progressive as "A person who actively favors or strives for progress toward better conditions, as in society or government." Granted, Ms. Prejean's attitude toward same-sex marriage is far less than progressive, but she never claimed to be a progressive. She said she was a Christian, so there's nothing unusual for her to adhere to a belief system that she's been taught all of her life. On the other hand, however, for so-called progressives to denigrate this young lady as though she doesn't have a right to her private opinion, nor religious beliefs, is far more destructive to society and backward thinking, than anything that she's ever publicly uttered, at least to my knowledge--and such a position is certainly not a progressive point of view.

Many of the people who call themselves progressives today seem to have been infected by what old-school progressives considered their most ardent foe and the most pernicious bane on society--intolerance. It's no longer good enough to say that gays and lesbians should be afforded equal rights and be allowed to marry like anyone else in our society, now it is required that everyone must enthusiastically embrace that position–in spite of their religious beliefs, and even in their private thoughts. And it's no longer good enough to say that women deserve equal rights in the workplace, now, any woman who chooses to be a full-time mother and homemaker is considered a turncoat to the feminist movement, and "unenlightened."

And please don't let a woman use her femininity in the workplace to get ahead–just as men use their masculinity on a daily basis–she's immediately demonized. In fact, I'm virtually certain that Ms. Prejean's feminine beauty is playing a large part in her demonization. And the irony is, such demonization is often led by other women. Due to our leftist indoctrination, they fail to realize that's the very worst kind of sexual discrimination. They've allowed themselves to be convinced that the only way a woman can truly validate herself as being a worthy individual is to prove that she can be just like a man. A similar mindset is reflected in the Black community. Many Blacks feel like the only way that they can validate themselves is by proving how "White" they can be. Both assumptions are silly, premised on backward thinking, and are highly derogatory to what it means to be a woman, and/or, a Black person. Both President and First Lady Obama are excellent examples of the fact that you have to abandon neither your heritage nor your femininity to embrace excellence.

Thus, in this progressive's opinion, such thinking is the very height of ignorance. In fact, it's laying the groundwork for a new kind of latter-day conservatism. After all, it is not so much what Rush Limbaugh and the GOP leadership think that is so insidious, it's their belief that no one should be allowed to disagree with them. And any so-called progressives who share that mindset not only validate Limbaugh's point of view, but are in fact, conservatives themselves. The only difference between them and Limbaugh is that they're conservative regarding a different set of issues. They even share the conservative trait of hypocrisy.

A true progressive recognizes that the most important characteristic of any free and viable society is tolerance. They clearly understand that the only difference between the old U.S.S.R. and Nazi Germany was one was led by lift-wing radicals and the other by right-wing reactionaries. But in spite of that, they had more in common than they had that set them apart–they were both dictatorships, they were both oppressive, and like every dictatorship, they were both intolerant of individual beliefs.

The very same dynamic is at work, though to a much lesser degree, in this country. Thus, progressives must always remain cognizant of the fact that we corner the market on neither wisdom, intellect, nor morality. Therefore, once we begin to give priority to dogma over independent thought, we cease being progressives, and become just another group of fanatical wingnuts--like Perez Hilton.



 Eric L. Wattree

wattree.blogspot.com

A moderate is one who embraces truth over ideology, and reason over conflict.

Sphere: Related Content