Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Women’s Suffrage–Historical Background’ Category

The Importance of Feelings

Posted in Women's Suffrage--Historical Background, tagged , , , , , , , on April 14, 2013| Leave a Comment »

With the rise of Women’s Suffrage and the ongoing march of Women’s Liberation, we have lost sight of some very basic values. The importance of feelings. Does this statement sound to you like an oxymoron? It’s not. I will explain.

Emotional fulfillment is the most important aspect of our lives as sentient beings. It is not sexual fulfillment, it is not financial “success,” it is not the acquiring of a higher educational degree. The need for refined, emotional fulfillment is what separates us from the other animals whose needs are much more rudimentary and essentially physical in nature. Emotional fulfillment is supplied by others who care about you as a person, people who are genuinely interested in the highs and lows of your life everyday, both the small and the large. The process of fulfillment is completed by your returning of these interests to those who supply them to you. As of this date, the 14th of April in the year 2013 Current Era, America has more college graduates and less emotionally fulfilled citizens than any other country in the history of this planet.  Let us now trace the cause of this phenomenon. It comes in two installments.

Part one. The Wife and Mother or — Displaced Homemakers.

Women are the emotional heart of the family. Our ability to empathize makes us invaluable as emotional supporters wherever needed. Being a wife and mother is a bona-fide career. To excel at anything, one must pursue it as a life focus. You do not hear of an eminent neurosurgeon who is also a world-renowned astrophysicist. The reason that men have never wished for their wives to also have a career is that she will be the emotional center of their home. He provides the money to support the home and she provides the emotional fulfillment. If she has to work outside the home, all of that emotional fulfillment will be missing. And nowadays, it is. It is only within the last forty years that our society has deliberately turned it’s face away from the vital importance of the role of wife and mother. This desertion has been engineered by other women. Men really had nothing to do with it.

Women’s Suffrage and Liberation have insisted that all female children born in this country be groomed for high-powered careers outside the home.(whether they want it or not) This notion is not powered by a wish for the girls well-being or personal fulfillment. It is based on the feminist teaching that as husbands and providers, men are not to be trusted so every female must be financially independent of all men. This is what we are currently teaching our girls in our educational process.  Being a wife and mother is a minimum-wage type of thing to a Feminist chiefly because it involves a healthy and trusting relationship with a man and Feminists are afraid of, and hate, men. If they want to live their lives based on fear and hate that is their prerogative but why are we letting them teach their personal poisons to our daughters via the schools?

Part two. The Husband and Father or — Displaced Husbands.

Back in the sixties when women’s lib was getting under way one of their battle cries was– “men have a career and a marriage so why can’t women? It’s not fair!” I addressed this issue in the above paragraphs. I know whereof I speak here because I had a front row seat for this bout. This  is the year 2013 CE and the decision is in. The American family unit lost on points. The sixties generation of females got what they thought they wanted–careers. The husband is now an after thought. It has been especially informative to follow the husbands that have been ‘supportive’ of her ‘career.’ I have listened to so many brag about that. Until they found he was having an affair with his co-worker because ‘she made him feel special.’  That really was the wife’s job you know, but she was so busy being liberated and supported and career oriented that she paid no attention to his emotional needs. And you know what? It was all his fault for being unfaithful.

This post is about the importance of feelings and I am stating here that men have feelings too. They need to feel needed. Anyone does. Being the provider for the family is really the only way a decent man has of showing his love in a practical hands-on manner. It is especially important to him in his feelings as a husband. We have allowed our daughters to be taught to despise their husbands feelings and needs as being only ‘male ego’ and unworthy of notice. Since the onset of women’s liberation it has become a point of honor with many females to totally ignore the emotional needs of the men in their lives. It really has. Is this humane? Is this an appropriate response to perceived gender issues? Is this what ‘liberation’ has done for females as a whole? So, now we have lots of divorced female wage earners with a career who are really struggling to provide for their fatherless children all alone and about ninety percent of the time this situation has been engineered by the women themselves. This is the financial independence that their schooling taught them to seek. The women are unhappy, their children are unhappy, and the men who have been driven out of their position as husband, provider and father by the totally unrealistic expectations of the women they married are more unhappy than the rest. Yes, most of these men are unhappy with being divorced from their homes and children.

So what’s the bottom line here? The young women of America, our future wives and mothers are being emotional brutalized themselves by our educational system and it’s expectations of them. The Feminist agenda thought to change the world by changing the way our daughters are educated. They thought that by teaching young girls to be assertive, competitive, emotionally hard-boiled, and financially self-centered they would really “show” the evil man’s world what was what and be better off themselves. And just look at the mess they have made.

If a young girl really is motivated towards a career instead of marriage, by all means support her choice. But we need to stop selling our girls the notion that they have to do both. We need to re-instill in our girls the sense of respect for marriage and motherhood that is natural to them and allow room for it to develop. The last forty years have been artificially induced by a small set of unbalanced feminine minds and we are quite capable of seeing that this stops so that our future husbands, wives, and children have a stable home where the importance of everybody’s feelings are given the right attention.

Alieff Farwell

Read Full Post »

Minding Your Own Business

Posted in Women's Suffrage--Historical Background, tagged , , , , , , , on March 25, 2013| Leave a Comment »

There are only three legitimate functions of government for free people.

1.) National defense.

2.) A postal service.

3.) Maintenance of roadways

There is nothing else that requires a collective input on a national level. There is nothing else that requires funding from a national treasury. Readers please note that life choices are not included among the three.

We are having so much civil and legislative trouble in America today because we have raised up a legislative mentality that believes itself endowed by the Creator with the unalienable right to mind everyone else’s business for them. How these cretins have arrived at that conclusion is fairly murky but the general cause is apparent enough. A Petticoat government that feels is has to make everyone “safe” – according to it’s own effeminate agenda. Most of this insanity got it’s start under the Kennedy administration.

It is not the business of government, on either the state or federal level, to do most of the things now required of it. Everyone has to wear seat belts, everyone has to have child seats, everyone has to fund Medicare, everyone has to pay for health insurance, everyone has to agree with homosexual activity, no one can smoke a cigarette, the federal government takes a full third of your paycheck and most states take more, everything has to have a “warning” label just in case some idiot leaves a dry-cleaning bag in the babies crib, the list is virtually endless. None of this is legitimate government. The income tax is not legitimate, never was. Allowing this particular scam to go unpunished has brought us all to our present deficit scam which has been hugely aggravated by the cost of this mommyism legislation.

All of this has been caused directly by allowing women into places of public authority. They can’t take the heat. They pass legislation to soothe their emotions. Sometimes people make personal choices that are not particularly wise. In certain types of accidents, like head-on collisions, the wearing of a seatbelt may save your life. If you choose not to wear one, on your own head be it. This is what any mature adult male will tell you and it is the truth. Adult women cannot do this. They have the mistaken notion that if they see the results of someone else’s bad decision, they are responsible for it. They want to make everyone else’s decisions for them, just in case someone doesn’t make the “right” one. That is, one that the women agree with and that makes them feel comfortable. Accidents happen. They are tragic and emotionally upsetting. Our female oriented policy makers are always going to pass legislation to “make sure it doesn’t happen again!” I am truly sorry to be so blunt but this is just plain stupid. Of course they will happen again, they are accidents. Suck it up Sisters and stop spending our tax dollars creating useless legislation and wasting it on “investigations” as to who is to blame. If it’s an accident, no one is to blame.

Petticoat government.

No one can manufacture leaded paint anymore because some child might put a piece in it’s mouth and get lead poisoning. It is mommy’s job to see that this doesn’t happen, not the federal governments. Taking the lead out of paint has severely retarded it’s useful life as a preservative of homes. I can remember when a homeowner had to paint their house just once every twenty years or so. Now you have to repaint every four or five. Would anyone care to work up some figures as to how much this is costing homeowners in this country? I wonder if the National Organization of Women got kickbacks from Sherwin Williams?

In the book “1984” Big Brother was depicted as the ultimate government evil. He should have been portrayed as Big Momma instead because this is where all this over seeing, all seeing, intrusive, insulting, government regulation is coming from. We are all adults, we are capable of making our own decisions. Life choices are not a governmental department. Women, collectively are incapable of dealing with that fact on a public level, which is why our great-great grandfathers didn’t want them in the public arena. They were right.

I have an idea! Let’s stop electing them! We have had over eighty years of women in politics and it should be obvious by now that they do not know how to mind their own business. Running the country is not the same thing as managing your own home or family. It requires a much more elevated view of things and entirely different people skills. The feminine mentality is just not making the grade here. I will paraphrase the battle cry of the Suffragettes of 160 years ago–

If men were allowed to run the country, things would sure change, I can tell you that!

A. Farwell

Read Full Post »

Some Thoughts On Coincidence.

Posted in Women's Suffrage--Historical Background, tagged , , , , , , , on February 24, 2013| Leave a Comment »

I would like to point out a few “coincidences” in this post. Readers will please dot their own I’s and cross their own t’s.

We need to remind ourselves that what is happening in America today is not some untraceable evil perpetrated by some secret evil cult that controls us against our collective will. The evil is very traceable and the people who have foisted it on the rest of us are a matter of public record.

During the Civil War era two major initiatives were in the public eye that were to shape American society and politics for the next hundred and fifty years.

#1. During this era, the first attempts were made to institute an income tax. In the time leading up to and during the first World War, these attempts found their fruition in the  alleged passing of a federal income tax. Appearances have in this case really proved to be deceiving. I refer readers to the book, “The Law That Never Was” by a fellow named Benson.

#2. Women’s Suffrage used the upheaval of the war between the states to market it’s own agenda.

Please note a couple of major things here–

#1. The income tax initiatives were calculated to be pressed at those times when most of the men were involved in, and away at, a major military conflict.

#2. Women’s Suffrage was also pressed it’s hardest during times of major military conflict, and was allegedly passed in 1919—during the first World War. In fact, suffrage and the income tax in America went along hand in hand in our country’s development. Coincidence?

With the alleged passing of the federal income tax, Washington D. C. became the de facto, autocratic ruler of a supposedly free republic of free citizenry, moving government away from the states. At the same time, women moved into the public arena in the telecommunications industry, banking jobs and politics, federally entitled welfare programs were introduced and private businesses were steadily crowded out in favor of multinational corporations. Coincidence? Between the Civil War era and the second World War, women moved into the military in America. First as nurses, then as regular commissioned officers. The Liberal Movement that began to over take our major colleges and universities after WWI kept pace with the entrance of women into the public arena and formed the basis of the Gay Liberation movement which is predominantly championed by females. Most of our major news agencies now have a liberal gay spin to all their stories and we now have increasing accusations of the rape of female military personnel published by these agencies. Coincidence?

The biggest names in Women’s Suffrage were also to be found among the leading families of the state of Maine. Bigelow, Warren and Clark to name just a few. I find that a most curious coincidence. Maine is strategically important to the defense of North America. The Rumsfeld/Cheney duo led military policy into abandoning the Northeast as a station for fighting units–they did however, leave control of military money in Limestone, Maine, in an office run by women. Coincidence? Cheney is an open supporter of the homosexual lifestyle. Maine is now leading the fight for homosexuality in America, against the stated will of it’s voters. There has been the same kind of political skullduggery in the state about this issue that Knox (also an old Maine name) used on the income tax question. Coincidence?

I have to quote Jethro Gibbs here— “I don’t believe in coincidence.”

Read Full Post »

The Social History of The Women’s Suffrage Movement

Posted in Women's Suffrage--Historical Background, tagged , , , , , , , , on February 16, 2013| Leave a Comment »

I have had a lot to say about petticoat government lately. I have expressed my dissatisfaction with the methods, aims, leadership, and so-called “accomplishments” of both the Women’s Suffrage Movement and it’s granddaughter, Women’s Liberation. I think that for clarity’s sake, I need to develop this theme just a little more.

Back in the day, before the suffrage movement was just getting under way, there was a genuine need for reform on several levels. The women in most upper class western societies  had no effective legal redress against abusive fathers or husbands. If they left them, the man in question could just hunt them down and bring them back. That was the law, very like that which governed runaway slaves. Women had no real property rights in many instances and as they were barred from pursuing a lucrative profession their only option was to try and get a job as a chambermaid, governess, or some other minimum wage job where they would be exposed to the predations of any male in their sphere. This really amounted to no choice at all and then it only worked if they were not pursued by the law. Middle and upper class females were raised to be dependent on their men and if these men happened to be drunken a-holes, well, the poor things were basically stuck. A well bred lady didn’t make a public scene about family troubles.

Notice that I specified upper class here. The females who were born into less affluent families did not have the same problems. The accepted standard of behavior was far different in the working class. If dad or hubby got drunk and tried to be abusive, young Nell or Daisy was as apt to brain him with the fry pan as not and let the chips fall where they would, and dad and hubby knew that. The working class families lived their lives in the kitchen where fry pans were close at hand. The ladies of the upper class lived in the drawing room and had no such domestic weaponry at their disposal. I suppose they could have brained their domestic brute with a Dresden china shepardess but somehow that would not have been the same.

It was also understood by the men of the working class that women sometimes needed to defend themselves at home and a man that brought such retribution down on himself was perceived as getting his just desserts, by the other men. In the working class, there were no servants to hide behind, no public perceptions of lady like behavior that hindered the women from doing what they needed to do if self defense became a survival issue in the home.  Everyone understood that domestic relationships were sometimes violent and ugly and this class of people were prepared to acknowledge and deal with it. This was by no means the case in the upper classes. And here you come to the real crux of the matter. The unwritten but highly effective codes of behavior that really govern our society, laws and legislation not withstanding.

Again we are back in the day. Upper class men were expected to conduct themselves as gentlemen in public. They were expected to be honest and competent in their business, to refrain from public drunkenness at social events and to pay their gambling debts, if any. This last was as big item. Social gambling was a very popular pastime in the upper reaches of society. Games of whist and other card games were a regular feature at balls, gatherings, and gentlemen’s clubs. This was socially acceptable. Men were expected not to gamble more than they could afford to lose. If a ‘gentleman’ lost more than he could afford he was black listed by his club(s) and ostracized from society. This was as low as a ‘gentleman’ could fall and once there, he was not allowed back. This was a very severe thing back then and the thought of it was a deterrent to many.

There were also places called ‘gaming hells’ that were run by professional gamblers where any ‘gentleman’ was free to gamble away the family estates and fortunes upon which his dependents counted for their support as well. No social pressures were brought to bear in such cases. The rest of ‘Society’ thought it a great shame of course, and gossiped freely about the recreants but– a ‘gentleman’ had a god given right to mind his own business and if he did not do so very well, that was just too bad. It was not an unusual story back then for ladies of means, raised to be ornaments to society, to find themselves on the street with small children to support and no means whatever of doing that. I will again point out here that this situation was inherently upper class. Women from working class families had saleable job skills, they were expected to have them, they did use them, so if a domestic problem arose, they were not nearly as bad off as their upper class sisters.

I have created this post here to point out two things:

#1.) Social pressure from a peer group is very effective in moderating excessive or selfish behaviors and the men of that day were well aware of it’s finer points and practiced in it’s applications so they had absolutely no excuse for not applying the same methods to those ‘gentlemen’ among them who were well known to be compulsive gamblers or abusive drunks at home. Those men did not do this.

#2.) Women’s Suffrage and it’s granddaughter, Women’s Liberation were not conceived for the empowerment of all women. They were generated by a miniscule group of nobly born ladies to correct the misbehavior of an equally miniscule group of nobly born “Gentlemen.” There were no “Universal Wrongs” against women at issue.

These social issues, domestic violence, drunkenness, and gambling, were three of the major motivations behind the Suffrage movement and it was a black shame to the upper class men of the western world that some of their women were forced to resort to such measures as public protests in order to defend themselves—from their own.

Our present governmental problems have arisen from this social background, this tiny percentage of upper class male misbehaviors and the lack of effective deterrents to it that were available to the rest of the upper class males and— were not used.

I hope I have kept this simple enough for my friends and followers. Since this issue is still causing such public outcry’s today. I will develop this theme by degrees, in a few more of my posts.

In conclusion, I will emphasize my sympathy for the issues of domestic violence and financial dependency that gave birth to the Suffrage Movement. I will also explain why I have no sympathy with the methods that were adopted to combat them. It should be obvious by now that they are not only ineffective but they are causing even more trouble, and these issues are too important to the survival of our society as a whole to be left in legislative and social limbo.

A. Farwell

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: