This post will be about something that has been sticking in my craw for a long time —— the war against men. Maybe I should amend that to the war against white men. For the last thirty years or so there has been a lot of public comment on racial and gender prejudice against women, blacks, Hispanics, and Asians, all directed at the ruling class which in the western world has been composed of caucasian males. The dissidents have had a valid argument in some cases, at least on the surface of things, so I am going to play devil’s advocate as it were and show some support for the other side.
An awareness has been raised on some valid issues and I respect that. On the other hand, some crucial facts about the basis of the “white mans’ burden” mentality have been overlooked in the immediacy of hurt feelings. If you are going to discuss this issue with me you will have had to do at least some superficial reading on western history. If you got through high school you should be all set, none of this stuff is going to be PhD. level.
Two points are particularly salient (that is, they stick out) when studying the last two thousand years of history. I will explain.
First point. The verbal grandstanding about democracy, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States has been ubiquitous(everywhere) in the media, in our jurisprudence, and our legislative bodies. They are traced back to Magna Charta in merry old England. ‘They are the basis for all our freedoms’ is what we were taught in school and what they are still teaching. This is not true. These three world shaking documents are pieces of paper. (or more probably, pieces of parchment, which was more widely used at least in the time of the Magna Charta) Pieces of paper I say, nothing more. We do not owe our modern liberties to pieces of paper. We owe them to the men of both the “ruling” and the yeoman class that went into the field of battle and put their lives on the line in defense or what they thought was right. It is a matter of public record that these men were all of the caucasian race.
Second point. If you study the history of Africa and the Orient during this same time slot you will not find any such collective efforts in the name of freedom for the average joe, male or female. I have found no such notions as justice for the common people in my general reading of the histories involved. The internecine conflicts of both these areas are about one king/chieftain/warlord trying to oust the other. With very few exceptions, both Oriental and African histories show a universal contempt for their women. Because they were not as physically strong as men they were regarded as cattle and field hands and used to provide their master with a useful slave population. In China especially, women were regarded as slaves, even the well-born. Both geographical areas also evinced a casual acceptance of the institution of slavery.
The slave trade from Africa so deplored by the American civil war activists was generated and sustained by individual ruling black men in Africa. The Arabs were famous slave hunters during this time. During the time of the civil war between the states there were a few black men(whose names escape me at the moment–do your own research here) the white activists towed around to their meetings to speak on the subject of slavery and it’s evils. I have not been able to discover that any of these black males covered the historical precedent for slavery established by their own past treatment of their women and prisoners of war in their public addresses. As their black male descendents in the hood say today —– what goes around, comes around. Any one with more precise information, feel free to comment here.
The break up of the African slave trade was not accomplished by the black men in Africa uniting in a common cause of freedom as was the case with the caucasian Magna Charta effort. White men in the western world(women were not allowed the vote at this time) passed legislation that smothered the blacks foreign market. Again, anyone with information that refutes this please leave a comment. Also, I note here that although women in the western societies could not vote, they were instrumental in bringing anti-slavery legislation to the public awareness. Kudos to them all.
All this stuff is a matter of public record which I have not found reason to disbelieve. Always remembering that the winner writes the histories, it is still reasonable of belief. All this modern-day howling by the so-called “minorities” was enabled by the sole efforts of the white men they cavil about so much in their speeches. This is not just. And if you desire justice and equity to be given you, you must first practise some of it.
As regards women’s liberation, there were plenty of women in England during the time of the Magna Charta. There is no record of them congregating in an armed militia to aid their men in the field of battle. They could have. Don’t whine at me that the times did not allow women to do such things, the times did not allow the average yeoman any rights either. The men got sick of it and went anyway. I am not going to tolerate any crap about women in combat today either. They are not as individuals, physically strong enough to defend our country en mass. And our men are tender-hearted where we are concerned. In a combat situation, they will not be able to focus on the enemy for worrying about the girl next to them. This is race memory with white men and it cannot, and should not be changed. I digress a little here but I can’t help it. Combat is hard enough for our soldiers without adding this.
In conclusion, I am proud of my white men. In spite of some behaviors, they are the group that has spear-headed the move for the recognition of the worth of the individual. For this I support them and I respect them. No, they do not have a flawless track record this is true, but I will back it against the record of any other male racial group. Do I despise blacks, Hispanics, and Asians? Don’t be a fool. If someone is worthless it is a private choice not a genetic defect. The question of collective genetic choices must be left for a different blog.
The word of the devil’s advocate —– let’s give the devil his due, in this case. I am just recommending a little quid pro quo.
.
The Longest Journey Begins... 
The War Against Women
Posted in War Stories, tagged christianity, conservative commentary,, gender issues, Holy Mother Church, Muslim faith, Native American culture, Protestants, womens liberation on July 30, 2011| Leave a Comment »
In the interests of my quid pro quo policy, I will now share a few thoughts about the war against women. Here are a few preliminaries—
Everyone will know by now that this war has been spear-headed by the Judeo-Christian tradition for the last two thousand years. This tradition comes to us out of the east with its mystery religions. And now that the JCT is flagging in the west we have the rise of the Muslim faith which is also an eastern mystery religion repressive to women. The war has been very much an East versus West scenario with western Europe being the main theater of operations. The majority of African tribes and the largest of the oriental (China)had no need for such a campaign as their cultural practises were misogynist anyway. Here are a few exceptions of interest—–
The Ashanti people of north Africa, the Burmese, Japanese, and Korean people. For all these I have seen references to female friendly cultural practises in my general reading. This may also be true of the sons of Hind in the earliest cultures of India but my reading over the years has not led me into any general instances I can allude to here.
Many of the native North American tribes regarded their women as partners and assistants in the business of life and their advice was sought in the management of the tribe in many issues. Notably, the Cherokee people, originally living in the southeastern part of the United States, had a matriarchal society, with well established trade routes and diplomatic relations with surrounding peoples.
The cultures of the Germanic peoples of western Europe were not essentially misogynist in theory and practise. Women were not made to hide– neither their forms and faces in public, or within the houses of their fathers or husbands.
It has been of major interest to me to note these correspondences among early cultural groups:
1.) all of the best warrior tribes, the people who were fighters by instinct and training and were the most feared by their neighbors, had no great fear of their women either.
2.) none of these people were monotheistic, they allowed the legitimacy of more than one “god/goddess.”
3.) all of these tribal groups valued the individual and expected both male and female to develop a strong sense of physical courage in order to protect the tribe and aid in its prosperity.
4.) for the past two thousand years, the above groups have been the primary targets of the christian church.
Here is the most interesting note of all in the war against women—-
The christian church has always been viewed as a female entity.
To the catholics it is Holy Mother Church. To the protestants it is the Bride of Christ. In both cases the persona is female. This is something for women’s libbers to take a look at. One of the reasons I have never had any sympathy for the modern women’s “movement.” None of them seem to have even a grammar school education or they would have picked up on this and made more of it in their speeches. Of course, that would have taken a lot of unnecessary heat off of the “evil” men, probably why women’s liberation sort of overlooked this salient theological point. I call this a Freudian Slip.
Men and women do not naturally hate each other and are not natural enemies. Also, social studies have shown that women naturally tend to connect and coöperate with each other and that they tend to foster these two practises in their social environment. Lesbianism, which is not natural, views other women as competitors for social and sexual dominance in their “group” and wherever you find them in a public work force, there you will also find dissension and a poor working environment. Look at our political and corporate climate these days.
So if there is a public pogrom against females in any given population group, look for another female to be causing it. At best, a very select few females. They will hide behind the “evil man” image until they feel safe. Only then will they emerge into the political limelight and attempt to rule openly, standing up, instead of on their backs from behind the evil men they have done their personal best to corrupt. Now is this or is this not what we are seeing today in the political scene?
Your average young woman does not immediately think of one of her best friends as being the enemy just as the american public does not think of females as being sexual predators. In the war against women, both individual and public will have to revise some basic notions.
My final word on the war against women is this—– cherchez la femme, girls and boys. That’s french for “look for the woman.” The females who shriek the loudest about men and their insensitive sexual attitudes are the ones most willing to use sex as a weapon and then blame the evil man. You all know some decent, average women. Do you ever hear them do a lot of man-bashing? This gives all women a bad name and I don’t deserve a bad name. I like and respect men, generally. And generally, I get the same from them. Duh.
I have by no means exhausted this subject so look for future refinements in coming segments in the War Stories category.
Rate this:
Share this:
Like this:
Read Full Post »