|
|
General Discussion
Started by NickOtani at 07-29-2006 11:18 AM. Topic has 5 replies.
 
 
|
|
Sort Posts:
|
|
|
|
07-29-2006, 11:18 AM
|
NickOtani
Joined on 04-21-2006
Posts 323
|
|
|
|
I don't think being rational or emotional is gender related, but I see a cultural bias over many centuries, from the time of Antigone and before. Plato was radical in his suggestion that women could be political leaders over men. Aristotle immediately reversed that notion and said it is natural for men to rule over women. Both men and women, even today, tend to agree with Aristotle. Even Rand said she would not vote for a woman for President.
Women are going to college, but it's men who designed and built the buildings, paved the roads, designed and built and maintained the automobiles in the parking lots. Men maintain the grounds and clean the buildings. One has to look around a lot to find something to which women contributed. It was a man who invented and perfected the sewing machine. It was a man who invented and developed the stoves on which they cook. The best cooks in the world are men, and the best tailors in the world are men.
Even Ayn Rand, a rare female philosopher, believes a woman's role is to surrender to a man.
Nietzsche was affected by the women who dominated his life and sissyfied him. His superman philosophy was largely a reaction against that. Hemmingway was also alfa-male to offset the way he was treated when he was young, by a mother who put him in dresses sometimes.
Aristotle went by what he observed and called it natural. He observed that slavery was all around him during his time, so he called it natural. He was wrong. We can't always go by what is a trend, even if it is a long time trend. We have seen women who can be political leaders, and we see many women, although not as many as men, becoming mathematicians and scientists in fields like physics. I think it is possible that women could become more dominant in these fields if given a chance.
Other than childbirth, I don't think there are too many things women can't do if they want to and are given the opportunity and proper nurturing to do. And, I think they should be allowed to do what they want and have the ability to do.
I respect women who are in traditionally male roles and are comfortable. I may have problems seeing women drinking beer from the bottle and spiting and cussing. It's unlady-like, but I guess that's my problem, not theirs. I have worked with women at a casting foundry where I had to train them to work on large grinding machines which were dirty and dangerous. They had to either do this or get laid-off. Well, at first they were very awkward, like girls trying to throw a football, but then they became pretty good, as good as the males and better. However, as soon as they had the chance, they choose to go back to the airconditioned waxroom and office jobs.
I worked with two different female purchasing agents when I drove a truck for the steel foundry. We'd go together to purchase supplies for the company and bring them back in the truck. One helped me load and unload, but the other wore heals and remained in the cab while I did the physical work. She thought conformity to the woman's role was important. I had more respect for the other one.
I accept that some women just want to be receptionists and secretaries or office assistants, but I like women who don't mind working in the warehouse, who don't worry about their makeup so much that they can't do anything but look pretty and maybe answer telephones or shuffle papers while doing something on the computer.
I especially dislike women who tell me how full of it I am but want to avoid me saying I am such an unpleasant person.
I do think there are differences in thinking between women and men because of their different bodies and experiences, but I do still think they are rational and as human as men and deserve the same rights. I believe, for example, women in the military should be allowed in ground combat jobs if they meet the standards.
bis bald,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
07-30-2006, 4:13 PM
|
paine
Joined on 07-30-2006
Posts 9
|
|
|
Confused? Judge by the mind and the actions of the individual, not by the genitalia.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
07-31-2006, 11:58 PM
|
DeeVee
Joined on 08-01-2006
Posts 2
|
|
|
If there is any doubt about what women are capable of doing, review
Celtic History. Celtic women as noted by Roman historians, gave orders
to men in battles, and led insurgencies and wars. Women were true
equals in every way, often fighting along side men in battles. Boddicea
and other Celtic Women could just as easily raise children as wage war.
Celtic Women were never slaves to anyone,
Although somewhat religious, religion did not seem to get in the way of
achievement for Celtic Women. Celtic Women were never proscribed from
serving as priests, performing medical arts, magic, and could be
elevated to high level commanders if they demonstrated skill,
intelligence and bravery. Women priests were always consulted for
advice before a battle.
Today, women are actually serving in combat in Iraq. Women make
excellent fighter pilots and soldiers. According to my sources,
although women may not have as much upper body strength as men, lighter
weapons make it possible for women to carry weapons...and use them
well. The women I know who currently serve this country, send in drones
and spotter planes and order "kills" of terrorists and other
combatants. Women soldiers do not shirk or lose a night's sleep when it
comes to "killing" the enemies of this country and the free world.
Women in war take orders well, don't have male ego problems when it
comes to authority, and learn the craft of war well. They are good
soldiers.
Women have made some of the most intelligent, crafty spies and analysts
ever known in history. Women take their time, analyze, think
objectively, and collaborate. One of the most notorious FBI turncoat
traitors in recent US history was found by three older, past retirement
women who worked in counter intelligence, and took the time and effort
to track his movements, the deaths of US assets, and deposits to his
bank account. These older womens' curious natures, not bound by males
"good ole' boy" networks, found this traitor, after others over looked
his suspicious behaviors because everyone "liked him."
As for world leaders, let us not forget Margaret Thatcher, one of the
bravest, smartest leaders the UK has ever had in its history...that
with the USA, defeated the USSR by pure guile, intelligence, and guts.
Thatcher pulled the UK out of its socialist doldrums for the first time
since the UK masses were seduced by the near-religious belief that
utopian socialism would make everything "good and fair." I do think
that if Ayn Rand has lived long enough to appreciate Margaret Thatcher,
she would have changed her mind about a woman President.
Personally, I have 87 sky diving sport jumps. I've worked as a combat
photographer in the 1980s in the jungles and mountains of Central
America. Although some males would challenged me as a female thinking I
was somehow "weak" and and could be intimidated, I would merely ask
sweetly to see their "big gun." Then, I would *** it and shoot a few
rounds right next to their heads. That usually disolved any irrational
belief system that this American female of Celtic heritage and culture
was "weak."
Lastly, being a smart-tough, no-nonsense, Objectivist-trained woman has
not been easy. But, I can sleep at night, knowing who I am and that I
have not compromised much in my life to fit in a mold of false
femininity that is neither realistic or true to my character, genetics,
or morals.
I was introduced to Ayn Rand when I was 19 years of age. Rand's
philsophy of objective processes has always been in the back of my
conscious, awake mind and thoughts...and has served me well throughout
my lifetime. It pleases me no end to know that Rand's elegant and true
concepts of living objectively and well are blooming like roses after a
rain.The fertile ground for this new realism, was 40 years of the
vagaries of the myth of the "nobility of the poor" and the
politics of pity.
When I was first introduced to Rand, I was one of a very distinct
minority in a world going insane with neomystical socialist altruism,
that degraded not only men, but women...which turned human beings in to
"feeling" blobs, and punished human potential as evil. Achieving a
master's and a doctoral degree was possibly more difficult for me, as I
refused to give into false mainstream" thinking, and enter into
"politically correct" social contracts to make this a "better world" by
promotion of the concept of giving up one's individual rights for the
security of living in a police state idealism..
One of the first books I read was "The Anthem" which freed me to be who
I was. Ergo, I never needed the National Organization for Women (NOW),
or any other such "men-hating" organizations to tell me I was not only
equal, but I needed to extract revenge women for centuries of abuse.
NOW ultimately became just another "utopian" left-wing socialist
neoreligious belief system that promoted women's superiority through
mysticism. Pesonally, I preferred men to women, because of their more
natural and objective approach to problem solving.
The second book I read was Rand's "Return of the Primitive" in
which Rand accurately described the future consequences of
hijacking of this country's values of objective thinking and
creativity, and the promotion of legislation that punished successful
people,and making the "rich" the new persecuted minority. Of course the
"rich" is anyone with a job. The "left" and the Democrat Party have now
institutionalized persecuting the "rich" just as severely as Hitler
persecuted the Jews...as the "final solution" to the world's problems.
In reading these wonderful, and insightful posts, and the writings of
other Randites, I feel assured that after having been forced to live
through 40 years of the left's utopian "religion," the tide is turning.
I am very glad I lived long enough to see the rise of objectivism. Be
brave! Persevere. From my point of view, although there appear to be
wars and rumors of wars against objectivism, we are winning.
Humorously, I predict that in 100 more years, "utopian" left-wing
idealism will be not be only considered archaic, but a sign of mental
instability.
Thank you.....
DeeVee
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
08-02-2006, 3:09 AM
|
NickOtani
Joined on 04-21-2006
Posts 323
|
|
|
|
Great post, Dee Vee!
I hope you stick around and contribute more to this board but also visit some of the other places where these issues are discussed.
Yes, women do partcipate in combat in the air over Iraq, but they are still restricted from ground combat MOS's. I decided to make a seperate post on this subject.
And, I don't mind being included among Objectivists here, but I am technically a Neo-Objectivist. Still, I respect your confidence and sense of independence.
bis bald,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
10-23-2006, 3:49 AM
|
marc
Joined on 10-22-2006
Posts 11
|
|
|
I cannot imagine any particular non-sexual thought I could not have if I was a woman. Women may be different, on average, but I would be curious to know what non-sexual, non-physical, non-reflex type questions you could ask to men and women to get the greatest difference in response. Maybe there is something where 75% of men feel one way and 75% of women feel the other way, but still that leaves a lot of people with common ground. There are differences, on average, which you can use to make initial presumptions of default behaviors, but once you become familiar with a person you think of them mostly as an individual. It is also difficult to disentangle cultural expectations that affect development from genetic differences. I think the greatest value to society is in giving men and women both the freedom and opportunity to prove they can do any particular task, so as to increase overall competition. I do not feel any sense of value in enforcing roles and limits on anyone without testing their abilities. Inhibiting competition with absolute judgements based on generalizations is not good. I have no problem with woman being leaders if they have good ideas. Also, our two choices for leader are often not the two ideal candidates. It is really hard to believe that a woman would never be the preferable candidate.
Also, I dont that democrats are exactly persecuting the rich. Our economic system has an element of corruption which is non-beneficial in general but does benefit some of the rich. Both parties have extensive interests in these corruptions. If we create some tax, we create some contracts, and the few companies who benefit from that contract can sometimes be more organized to support it than the many companies which suffer but to a lesser degree. American, from 1992-2000, was not a terrible place to be rich.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
09-03-2008, 12:27 AM
|
David George DeLancey
Joined on 07-06-2007
Posts 48
|
Re: Celtic Women
|
|
|
|
|
Just Passing Through
12:18 A.M.
Really don't mind if you sit this one out,
And you wise men don't know how it feels
And the sand castle urches are all slept away
As the last wave unconcurse the knew fangled way
And the wise man don't know how it feels
And the cloud that i feel is so far away
And you shake your head and say it's a shame
Spend me down dark ages and sing me a song
Got a feel inside very strange. said can't explain dizzy in the head and feelin blue.
12:22 A.M. E.S.T. 0-2-2008 I'm not aware i know what i know if you know what i mean Philosophy. I'm not aware of too many things I know what i Know If You know what I mean Do Ya Shove me in the shallow water before i get to deep. 12:25 a.m.
Daves not here man
Hyannis Massachusetts 314 Ocean Street 02601
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
The Atlas... » Ayn Rand's Idea... » General Discuss... » Re: Celtic Women
|
|
|
|