|
|
Content d'être un gars
|
|
Jeudi, le 6 mars 2008
|
|
.jpg)
Quand on n'a pas commis de faute, madame, on ne peut pas être absolument sûr de soi... tandis que lorsqu'on a bien vu les conséquences d'une bêtise, eh bien! on ne s'expose plus à la recommencer!
Shame on the Post
Misogyny Day At The Washington Post (Part 1)
We Scream, We Swoon. How Dumb Can We Get?
By Charlotte Allen
Sunday, March 2, 2008; B01Here's Agence France-Presse reporting on a rally for Sen. Barack Obama at the University of Maryland on Feb. 11: "He did not flinch when women screamed as he was in mid-sentence, and even broke off once to answer a female's cry of 'I love you, Obama!' with a reassuring 'I love you back.' " Women screamed? What was this, the Beatles tour of 1964? And when they weren't screaming, the fair-sex Obama fans who dominated the rally of 16,000 were saying things like: "Every time I hear him speak, I become more hopeful." Huh?
"Women 'Falling for Obama,' " the story's headline read. Elsewhere around the country, women were falling for the presidential candidate literally. Connecticut radio talk show host Jim Vicevich has counted five separate instances in which women fainted at Obama rallies since last September. And I thought such fainting was supposed to be a relic of the sexist past, when patriarchs forced their wives and daughters to lace themselves into corsets that cut off their oxygen.
I can't help it, but reading about such episodes of screaming, gushing and swooning makes me wonder whether women -- I should say, "we women," of course -- aren't the weaker sex after all. Or even the stupid sex, our brains permanently occluded by random emotions, psychosomatic flailings and distraction by the superficial. Women "are only children of a larger growth," wrote the 18th-century Earl of Chesterfield. Could he have been right?
I'm not the only woman who's dumbfounded (as it were) by our sex, or rather, as we prefer to put it, by other members of our sex besides us. It's a frequent topic of lunch, phone and water-cooler conversations; even some feminists can't believe that there's this thing called "The Oprah Winfrey Show" or that Celine Dion actually sells CDs. A female friend of mine plans to write a horror novel titled "Office of Women," in which nothing ever gets done and everyone spends the day talking about Botox.
We exaggerate, of course. And obviously men do dumb things, too, although my husband has perfectly good explanations for why he eats standing up at the stove (when I'm not around) or pulls down all the blinds so the house looks like a cave (also when I'm not around): It has to do with the aggressive male nature and an instinctive fear of danger from other aggressive men. When men do dumb things, though, they tend to be catastrophically dumb, such as blowing the paycheck on booze or much, much worse (think "postal"). Women's foolishness is usually harmless. But it can be so . . . embarrassing.
Take Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign. By all measures, she has run one of the worst -- and, yes, stupidest -- presidential races in recent history, marred by every stereotypical flaw of the female sex. As far as I'm concerned, she has proved that she can't debate -- viz. her televised one-on-one against Obama last Tuesday, which consisted largely of complaining that she had to answer questions first and putting the audience to sleep with minutiae about her health-coverage mandate. She has whined (via her aides) like the teacher's pet in grade school that the boys are ganging up on her when she's bested by male rivals. She has wept on the campaign trail, even though everyone knows that tears are the last refuge of losers. And she is tellingly dependent on her husband.
Then there's Clinton's nearly all-female staff, chosen for loyalty rather than, say, brains or political savvy. Clinton finally fired her daytime-soap-watching, self-styled "Latina queena" campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle, known for burning through campaign money and for her open contempt for the "white boys" in the Clinton camp. But stupidly, she did it just in time to alienate the Hispanic voters she now desperately needs to win in Texas or Ohio to have any shot at the Democratic nomination.
What is it about us women? Why do we always fall for the hysterical, the superficial and the gooily sentimental? Take a look at the New York Times bestseller list. At the top of the paperback nonfiction chart and pitched to an exclusively female readership is Elizabeth Gilbert's "Eat, Pray, Love." Here's the book's autobiographical plot: Gilbert gets bored with her perfectly okay husband, so she has an affair behind his back. Then, when that doesn't pan out, she goes to Italy and gains 23 pounds forking pasta so she has to buy a whole new wardrobe, goes to India to meditate (that's the snooze part), and finally, at an Indonesian beach, finds fulfillment by -- get this -- picking up a Latin lover!
This is the kind of literature that countless women soak up like biscotti in a latte cup: food, clothes, sex, "relationships" and gummy, feel-good "spirituality." This female taste for first-person romantic nuttiness, spiced with a soup¿on of soft-core porn, has made for centuries of bestsellers -- including Samuel Richardson's 1740 novel "Pamela," in which a handsome young lord tries to seduce a virtuous serving maid for hundreds of pages and then proposes, as well as Erica Jong's 1973 "Fear of Flying."
Then there's the chick doctor television show "Grey's Anatomy" (reportedly one of Hillary Clinton's favorites). Want to be a surgeon? Here's what your life will be like at the hospital, according to "Grey's": sex in the linen-supply room, catfights with your sister in front of the patients, sex in the on-call room, a "prom" in the recovery room so you can wear your strapless evening gown to work, and sex with the married attending physician in an office. Oh, and some surgery. When was the last time you were in a hospital and spotted two doctors going at it in an empty bed?
I swear no man watches "Grey's Anatomy" unless his girlfriend forces him to. No man bakes cookies for his dog. No man feels blue and takes off work to spend the day in bed with a copy of "The Friday Night Knitting Club." No man contracts nebulous diseases whose existence is disputed by many if not all doctors, such as Morgellons (where you feel bugs crawling around under your skin). At least no man I know. Of course, not all women do these things, either -- although enough do to make one wonder whether there isn't some genetic aspect of the female brain, something evolutionarily connected to the fact that we live longer than men or go through childbirth, that turns the pre-frontal cortex into Cream of Wheat.
Depressing as it is, several of the supposed misogynist myths about female inferiority have been proven true. Women really are worse drivers than men, for example. A study published in 1998 by the Johns Hopkins schools of medicine and public health revealed that women clocked 5.7 auto accidents per million miles driven, in contrast to men's 5.1, even though men drive about 74 percent more miles a year than women. The only good news was that women tended to take fewer driving risks than men, so their crashes were only a third as likely to be fatal. Those statistics were reinforced by a study released by the University of London in January showing that women and gay men perform more poorly than heterosexual men at tasks involving navigation and spatial awareness, both crucial to good driving.
The theory that women are the dumber sex -- or at least the sex that gets into more car accidents -- is amply supported by neurological and standardized-testing evidence. Men's and women's brains not only look different, but men's brains are bigger than women's (even adjusting for men's generally bigger body size). The important difference is in the parietal cortex, which is associated with space perception. Visuospatial skills, the capacity to rotate three-dimensional objects in the mind, at which men tend to excel over women, are in turn related to a capacity for abstract thinking and reasoning, the grounding for mathematics, science and philosophy. While the two sexes seem to have the same IQ on average (although even here, at least one recent study gives males a slight edge), there are proportionally more men than women at the extremes of very, very smart and very, very stupid.
I am perfectly willing to admit that I myself am a classic case of female mental deficiencies. I can't add 2 and 2 (well, I can, but then what?). I don't even know how many pairs of shoes I own. I have coasted through life and academia on the basis of an excellent memory and superior verbal skills, two areas where, researchers agree, women consistently outpace men. (An evolutionary just-so story explains this facility of ours: Back in hunter-gatherer days, men were the hunters and needed to calculate spear trajectories, while women were the gatherers and needed to remember where the berries were.) I don't mind recognizing and accepting that the women in history I admire most -- Sappho, Hildegard of Bingen, Elizabeth I, George Eliot, Margaret Thatcher -- were brilliant outliers.
The same goes for female fighter pilots, architects, tax accountants, chemical engineers, Supreme Court justices and brain surgeons. Yes, they can do their jobs and do them well, and I don't think anyone should put obstacles in their paths. I predict that over the long run, however, even with all the special mentoring and role-modeling the 21st century can provide, the number of women in these fields will always lag behind the number of men, for good reason.
So I don't understand why more women don't relax, enjoy the innate abilities most of us possess (as well as the ones fewer of us possess) and revel in the things most important to life at which nearly all of us excel: tenderness toward children and men and the weak and the ability to make a house a home. (Even I, who inherited my interior-decorating skills from my Bronx Irish paternal grandmother, whose idea of upgrading the living-room sofa was to throw a blanket over it, can make a house a home.) Then we could shriek and swoon and gossip and read chick lit to our hearts' content and not mind the fact that way down deep, we are . . . kind of dim.
charfleur@aol.com
;)
Lundi 3 Mars 2008
De la «stupidité» des femmes…
Take Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign. By all measures, she has run one of the worst — and, yes, stupidest — presidential races in recent history, marred by every stereotypical flaw of the female sex. As far as I’m concerned, she has proved that she can’t debate — viz. her televised one-on-one against Obama last Tuesday, which consisted largely of complaining that she had to answer questions first and putting the audience to sleep with minutiae about her health-coverage mandate. She has whined (via her aides) like the teacher’s pet in grade school that the boys are ganging up on her when she’s bested by male rivals. She has wept on the campaign trail, even though everyone knows that tears are the last refuge of losers. And she is tellingly dependent on her husband.
L’article d’Allen a suscité une avalanche de critiques dans la blogosphère. Voici celle de Laura Rozen et celle de hilzoy.
This is what is happening in the US. Sigh no such luck for us in Canada. Just imagine if we could witness this kind of courage from our own Canadian media-especially Radio media? I don't see it happening. Somewhere between Trudeau driving on to Parliament Hill and the present the very heart and soul and that once well-known courage in the media went missing. I doubt we will ever find it again save but a few brave souls who stand out against the tide of madness. So is there anything like a larger sense of courage, justice, professional interest or plain media integrity left in Canada besides the few we know who venture there in difficult circumstances? I doubt it. But you never know. It may just be that somewhere there is an ounce or two of what is needed lurking in their hearts. All I do know is that the subject matter is explosive and way beyond anything any journalist in Canada has yet come across in their careers. It is as one activist said to me just last night "Its Huge. probably the biggest ever-connecting story about major deception and cover-up any journalist has ever seen". I believe him completely. My letter to the radio host and the radio station follows hereunder:
RADAR ALERT: Courageous Radio Host Challenges New York Domestic Violence Propaganda Campaign
A year ago, it was Rebecca Odor, director of Virginia's Dept. of Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence, who was spending taxpayer dollars on a propaganda campaign to vilify any father who might hold his little girl's hand. (http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/PJ-AK807_pjMOVI_20070822174330.gif)
The more things change, the more they stay the same. This year, it's Amy Barasch, Director of New York State's Domestic Violence Office who's spending taxpayer dollars on a publicity campaign ("Coaching Boys into Men" - http://www.opdv.state.ny.us) that ignores objective research (http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm) and instead promotes the falsehood that all domestic violence is male-on-female, and that men are inherently disposed to abuse women.
In the face of such an overwhelming, government-funded propaganda assault, radio WGY's Al Roney recently did a show on the topic that was a breath of fresh air. In the show, interviewee Deborah Fellows described New York's "Coaching Boys into Men" campaign as "discriminatory, prejudiced, and actually encourages violence against boys and men".
One caller, a retired police officer, said that when they enforced DV laws against abusive women just as they did against abusive men, the domestic violence organizations would send representatives to court to pressure the District Attorneys to dispose of any cases against abusive women. The advocates also pressured the police departments, and as a result he and his fellow officers were instructed by their supervisor that when they encountered a domestic violence situation in which the violent party was a woman, they shouldn't make the arrest.
You can listen to the show by going to http://www.wgy.com/cc-common/podcast/single_podcast.html?podcast=al_roney.xml and scrolling down to "Domestic Violence Campaign (pts.1 & 2)" (or "Save Target as" from the 'Listen' button and save to hard drive in MP3- JS)
So, this week we'd like to ask you to send a big "thank you" to Al Roney and his producer for helping to publicize the outrageousness of these state-enforced biased policies. You can contact them at: Al Roney <al@wgy.com Al's producer <justin@wgy.com>
From: Jeremy Swanson [mailto:swanson@storm.ca]
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 11:46 AM
To: 'al@wgy.com'; 'justin@wgy.com'
Subject: From Canada-to Al Roney and WGY team
From Canada4th March 2008To Al Roney and team at WGY Radio NYRe: Challenging New York Domestic Violence Propaganda CampaignGentlemen,I have been informed through the Fathers Rights network of the brave challenge by radio show WGY to Amy Barasch and her organization-the New York State based 'Domestic Violence' office and their outrageous "Coaching Boys into Men" publicity campaign.I don't need I think to go into much about that here as I am sure you are well enough versed with that state sponsored tyranny and assault on Fatherhood, manhood and of course the family. I am sure you must also realize it happens here too. In a major way. To many of us Fathers on the front line the situation has got to the point where our very society has been overcome, cowed, intimidated, and to all intents and purposed 'occupied' by the radical feminist culture. It pervades into everything we do and into every aspect of our lives. And the destruction is horrendous to witness.Its quite chilling to see and realize over time that most people don't even realize what is happening to them. They certainly don't believe us when we try and tell the story. And so it is that only the media or at least those in the media who have the courage to tackle the subject head-on and publizing details of this outrage is the only way we can inform the public of what is overwhelming them and causing the break-down of the very fabric of our society which binds and guides us. Or at least as it used to.By all accounts you have done that job for the listening public in NY and done it well. It is surely the right thing for you to have done and on behalf of many Fathers caught in the nightmare of the family law-domestic violence industry I thank you for your courage and resilience in the face of the perpetrators of the great lie. What is facing us today as men and fathers is in my view and that of others, the greatest social disaster of our time. I only wish your Canadian colleagues in the radio media would find it in themselves to do the same.Sadly they seem to be already at the point where the domestic violence industry slime has already 'clogged the works' and ensured no-one has the nerve to stand up for what is right. Not even for themselves.I could say more on this but it only angers me further. It remains for me only to repeat my thanks to you and WGY and all your listeners and supporters for doing the right thing.with eternal thanks and kindest regards,Jeremy SwansonFathers and Men's Rights Activist
« J’ai été l’ami du monstre ! Pire ! Je l’ai fait disjoncter ! »
Has anyone had a bad experience where a child was hurt by or due to being in care of CAS (DPJ)? (especially in the Durham region?) Are you interested in suing them? Someone on the fringes of the movement is gathering information to present to a lawyer who is interested in hearing from you.Contact:
Jeremy Swanson
Fathers and Men's Rights ActivistOttawa, Ontario
Phone: (613) 237-1320 ext 2438“For The Children”
Innocente
Ségrégation
Safe and green: Mexico City offers women-only buses
Woman admits lies after man attends anti-violence course
;){kind=link}
Mother who absconded with children gets conditional sentence
Quote: <<Judge Alder acknowledged the situation is painful for all involved. "I am sympathetic to you," she said. "It is a terrible thing not to have your children when you want (to see) them." >>Now just imagine that. An Ottawa Judge saying to this kidnapping women too. How many Dads has she said that to? Or how many of her colleagues have said that for that matter? In Ottawa Court and any other Canadian court the first thing a separated Father will hear is that from being a 24 hour a day parent he is now suddenly to be a twice-a-month parent. Too bad if he wants to see his children more often than that. Can you imagine any judge anywhere, never mind Ottawa, saying the same thing to a Dad? What an outrage. When have we heard any sympathy from anyone in the Family Court system pertaining to the fact that we Dads don't get to see our children as often as we like?JS
Thou shall not kill
Moses
Israeli troops withdraw from Gaza
Israel says the raids are in self-defence
1991 - May 18 Valley Times, Pleasanton, CA an article entitled “Shevardnadze touts U.N.”, staff writer Jeanie R. Wakeland writes about a speech in San Francisco sponsored by the World Affairs Council: “Shevardnadze said the United nations cannot do anything if its decisions aren’t carried out by all members. nations can be made to feel they ‘lose’ if they go against a U.N. position, Shevardnadze said. ‘If we can rely on the (U.N.) position, we can build on this for a new world order.”