Thank you for this. When my grandson was very young, he he repeatedly lunged from the supermarket shopping cart trying to grab an Ariel figurine. Which distressed his dad. When he finally got his hands on one - he inspected it thoroughly and then started using it as a gun. Which made me laugh.
I am reading through all of this, not nearly finished, with a question in mind - and this may be something only for me - why do I find some women who rise to high places in politics and business so jarring that I cannot relate to them as women and also find that exhortations to vote for or support them because they are women so absolutely illogical and bizarre? For example, Hillary Clinton and Carly Fiorina. For me personally, they represent mindsets that are certainly not womanly, as described by your article. I worked in a huge corporation for a long time, and once attended a meeting meant to allay concerns about layoffs, and a woman actually explained to us that when times are tough, families buckle down, and that is what was happening. I said that families buckle down and allot resources with that in mind, they do not get rid of some of the children and plan to birth more when things are better. Although maybe that was true a very long time ago. Much food for thought. But again, I never found any shared femininity at all when it came to Hillary and Carly. Much less identified with them. They were more like men with their cutthroat approach towards life. Anomalies, I suppose.
As to Hillary and Carly, I simply couldn't stand them as they represented the most viperous of female tendencies - imperious and condescending and manipulative and lying b------. Seriously annoying and mean spirited to boot. Repugnant. Ick.
I also remember being at home with two little boys and turning on PBS to see Gloria Steinem surrounded by young women who adored her as she told them (LIES!!!) they could 'have it all' - ie have a husband a home children and a big job and work until 10 every night. All this from a person who never married had no children and never held a real job. Horrible person. All at once in my head I realized the whole feminist thing was a psyop.
I saw first hand what Fiorina did to Hewlett/Packard. Ruined a lot of folks' jobs savings, and retirement, not to mention she ruined Hewlett/Packard. Hillary, IMO, just ruined lives on a much more grand scale.
This (I'd suggest) is not 'masculinity' in women, but rather her open GRAB for resources and status, and a desire to 'appear' more valuable to higher status men. Choosing to be an excluded female, and fighting for status, "like" a man amongst men in a not particularly successful style -- with men or women -- might seem to the excluded woman to offer a chance of success.
She (foolishly concludes that she) can't or won't get support and inclusion FROM women, so the hell with them! ( {wryly} Ask me how I know!) Took some years to learn it: I wailed once, to a old-timer Navy Warrant Officer in an officers' club, that "I didn't WANT to be a good WOMAN officer," as he had suggested but that: "I WANTED to be a good NAVAL officer!" That was where I solidified my understanding that AS a woman, my ONLY choice was to be a woman officer, I could never be a NAVAL (i.e. MALE) officer. The two were not ever the same!
It's HARD to realize, and then accommodate oneself to the pretty clear fact that NEITHER the men or women against whom these aggressive women are competing find her to be someone they wish to work with. Politicians selling themselves to ... less-than-brilliant ... women voters (the majority, sorry to say) by attempting to appeal to (i.e., PRETEND to have!) "womanly virtues" very often succeeds. The old (deeply stupid!) saw that "women in power are less likely to get us into another war" is a blind assumption of the part of women and weak men.
Aligning herself with "avoid war and danger" voters, while neither practicing nor believing in it; and/or offering 'free' food and housing and health care (to ALL!) are both predicated on women's innate and often unconscious desires.
When I took our two sons to the toy store when they were very little - say 3 and less than 1 years old - and simply walked up and down the aisles, they persistently reached out to grab trucks and guns but their eyes glazed over in the doll aisle etc. If I tried to keep toy guns out of the house they turned their toast into guns or found sticks in the yard to use as guns or swords etc. At Christmas at their grandmothers they stomped over the dolls their cousins were playing with to get to the trucks under the tree. When our younger son was still in a crib and couldn't get to sleep at his grandmother's at Christmas, my sister in law (who had one son a few years older than our two sons, said to put his new plastic truck in the crib with him and - bingo - he was happy and went right to sleep holding onto it. I could go on but you get my drift.
It changes with time and age. Women have become warriors as necessary. Women are the fastest growing gun carriers according to the NRA. I've carried since 1989. I turned 77 last August. The state of TN was going to let my 16 year old son's murderer out of prison, after just 10 yrs of 20-year sentence
SO sorry about the loss of your son! (And angry at the typical "just-us" system's stupidity! I'm 70, and have been carrying for decades too.)
I think you're misattributing the decision to carry -- most women have NO interest in becoming warriors. They absolutely have an interest in being safer! As 'our' world gets more and more violent, (even with as LITTLE as the "news" reports the true situation and numbers), more and more women discover to their horror that the 'freedoms and requirements' of going out unprotected (or even staying IN unprotected) has expanded beyond ALL measure!
We armed and always on-guard women have no desire to BECOME warriors; we want the safety and community support that USED to exist in a 'community'- (GENETICALLY!!-) based society!
I think too, if you ask newly armed women if they have seriously prepared and thought about their OWN safety. ARE they willing to draw, maybe shoot, maybe KILL? Have they thought about -- and mentally and/or physically PRACTICED -- that? "Just carrying" is not sufficient! When I first began carrying my gun, I chastised myself because I was partly carrying it as a "magic talisman"! "Because" I was carrying, I was safer. NOT true!
My beloved husband always went armed, and I knew he would kill or die for me. As I began to realize I was more often "out" on my own: grocery store, shopping, just for fun... I began to take VERY seriously my own protection.
Let me recommend to everyone that they study-up with the vids posted on YT by Andrew Branca Esq. in his "Law of Self Defense" series. You can get his excellent book with the same name that I reread every couple years to refresh my memory: Andrew suggests getting it at his website, as it only costs shipping there; whereas at AMZ you pay more for the book even with free shipping, than if you buy it from him. I buy them in batches and hand them out to the neighbors and friends I teach to shoot... I've taken probably MOST of Andrew's classes... OH! The stuff we do not know.
Modern civilization is run by male "explorer" logic which goes after details while ignoring the big picture. This includes many women who think and act like men in business and politics.
I'm male and have the traits of exploration but couldn't stand war toys like gi Joe. I preferred playing house with my friend, a cute girl across the street 😉. I liked cooperative play vs competitive play.
My family was not religious. Religion also is a total mind fuck where God is some kind of angry douche and everything points the finger at women for why we "fell" from grace.
The truth is that this was what made us fell from peace and beauty into competition and war bullshit.
Here's a post on how written language changed the way we think.
In a leaked memo to staff, Dr. Vinay Prasad said the agency will make changes to how it approves all vaccines, after an internal analysis revealed that “at least” 10 children died from the COVID-19 vaccine, though that number is “certainly an underestimate due to underreporting,” Prasad said. Reaction to the memo was mixed, with some COVID-19 vaccine critics accusing the FDA of a cover-up.
....
Infant Botulism Outbreak Expands to 37 Cases Across 17 States, CDC Says
A good deal of these assumptions are being challenged. Females were warriors, hunters and more, not always relegated to the "domestic." Time for a deeper dive.
U C Davis researchers found that when putting young monkeys alone with a variety of toys, the males 'played' more with the dolls than females did. Maybe the dolls were Barbies, modelled on the German sex doll for adults called Bild Lilli.
Great explanation
Shows the stupidity of any notion that men and women are interchangeable.
Thank you for this. When my grandson was very young, he he repeatedly lunged from the supermarket shopping cart trying to grab an Ariel figurine. Which distressed his dad. When he finally got his hands on one - he inspected it thoroughly and then started using it as a gun. Which made me laugh.
I am reading through all of this, not nearly finished, with a question in mind - and this may be something only for me - why do I find some women who rise to high places in politics and business so jarring that I cannot relate to them as women and also find that exhortations to vote for or support them because they are women so absolutely illogical and bizarre? For example, Hillary Clinton and Carly Fiorina. For me personally, they represent mindsets that are certainly not womanly, as described by your article. I worked in a huge corporation for a long time, and once attended a meeting meant to allay concerns about layoffs, and a woman actually explained to us that when times are tough, families buckle down, and that is what was happening. I said that families buckle down and allot resources with that in mind, they do not get rid of some of the children and plan to birth more when things are better. Although maybe that was true a very long time ago. Much food for thought. But again, I never found any shared femininity at all when it came to Hillary and Carly. Much less identified with them. They were more like men with their cutthroat approach towards life. Anomalies, I suppose.
As to Hillary and Carly, I simply couldn't stand them as they represented the most viperous of female tendencies - imperious and condescending and manipulative and lying b------. Seriously annoying and mean spirited to boot. Repugnant. Ick.
I also remember being at home with two little boys and turning on PBS to see Gloria Steinem surrounded by young women who adored her as she told them (LIES!!!) they could 'have it all' - ie have a husband a home children and a big job and work until 10 every night. All this from a person who never married had no children and never held a real job. Horrible person. All at once in my head I realized the whole feminist thing was a psyop.
I saw first hand what Fiorina did to Hewlett/Packard. Ruined a lot of folks' jobs savings, and retirement, not to mention she ruined Hewlett/Packard. Hillary, IMO, just ruined lives on a much more grand scale.
This (I'd suggest) is not 'masculinity' in women, but rather her open GRAB for resources and status, and a desire to 'appear' more valuable to higher status men. Choosing to be an excluded female, and fighting for status, "like" a man amongst men in a not particularly successful style -- with men or women -- might seem to the excluded woman to offer a chance of success.
She (foolishly concludes that she) can't or won't get support and inclusion FROM women, so the hell with them! ( {wryly} Ask me how I know!) Took some years to learn it: I wailed once, to a old-timer Navy Warrant Officer in an officers' club, that "I didn't WANT to be a good WOMAN officer," as he had suggested but that: "I WANTED to be a good NAVAL officer!" That was where I solidified my understanding that AS a woman, my ONLY choice was to be a woman officer, I could never be a NAVAL (i.e. MALE) officer. The two were not ever the same!
It's HARD to realize, and then accommodate oneself to the pretty clear fact that NEITHER the men or women against whom these aggressive women are competing find her to be someone they wish to work with. Politicians selling themselves to ... less-than-brilliant ... women voters (the majority, sorry to say) by attempting to appeal to (i.e., PRETEND to have!) "womanly virtues" very often succeeds. The old (deeply stupid!) saw that "women in power are less likely to get us into another war" is a blind assumption of the part of women and weak men.
Aligning herself with "avoid war and danger" voters, while neither practicing nor believing in it; and/or offering 'free' food and housing and health care (to ALL!) are both predicated on women's innate and often unconscious desires.
When I took our two sons to the toy store when they were very little - say 3 and less than 1 years old - and simply walked up and down the aisles, they persistently reached out to grab trucks and guns but their eyes glazed over in the doll aisle etc. If I tried to keep toy guns out of the house they turned their toast into guns or found sticks in the yard to use as guns or swords etc. At Christmas at their grandmothers they stomped over the dolls their cousins were playing with to get to the trucks under the tree. When our younger son was still in a crib and couldn't get to sleep at his grandmother's at Christmas, my sister in law (who had one son a few years older than our two sons, said to put his new plastic truck in the crib with him and - bingo - he was happy and went right to sleep holding onto it. I could go on but you get my drift.
It changes with time and age. Women have become warriors as necessary. Women are the fastest growing gun carriers according to the NRA. I've carried since 1989. I turned 77 last August. The state of TN was going to let my 16 year old son's murderer out of prison, after just 10 yrs of 20-year sentence
SO sorry about the loss of your son! (And angry at the typical "just-us" system's stupidity! I'm 70, and have been carrying for decades too.)
I think you're misattributing the decision to carry -- most women have NO interest in becoming warriors. They absolutely have an interest in being safer! As 'our' world gets more and more violent, (even with as LITTLE as the "news" reports the true situation and numbers), more and more women discover to their horror that the 'freedoms and requirements' of going out unprotected (or even staying IN unprotected) has expanded beyond ALL measure!
We armed and always on-guard women have no desire to BECOME warriors; we want the safety and community support that USED to exist in a 'community'- (GENETICALLY!!-) based society!
I think too, if you ask newly armed women if they have seriously prepared and thought about their OWN safety. ARE they willing to draw, maybe shoot, maybe KILL? Have they thought about -- and mentally and/or physically PRACTICED -- that? "Just carrying" is not sufficient! When I first began carrying my gun, I chastised myself because I was partly carrying it as a "magic talisman"! "Because" I was carrying, I was safer. NOT true!
My beloved husband always went armed, and I knew he would kill or die for me. As I began to realize I was more often "out" on my own: grocery store, shopping, just for fun... I began to take VERY seriously my own protection.
Let me recommend to everyone that they study-up with the vids posted on YT by Andrew Branca Esq. in his "Law of Self Defense" series. You can get his excellent book with the same name that I reread every couple years to refresh my memory: Andrew suggests getting it at his website, as it only costs shipping there; whereas at AMZ you pay more for the book even with free shipping, than if you buy it from him. I buy them in batches and hand them out to the neighbors and friends I teach to shoot... I've taken probably MOST of Andrew's classes... OH! The stuff we do not know.
Well who'd a thunk it? Men and women are different . Not what they have been teaching the kiddies in school.
Modern civilization is run by male "explorer" logic which goes after details while ignoring the big picture. This includes many women who think and act like men in business and politics.
I'm male and have the traits of exploration but couldn't stand war toys like gi Joe. I preferred playing house with my friend, a cute girl across the street 😉. I liked cooperative play vs competitive play.
My family was not religious. Religion also is a total mind fuck where God is some kind of angry douche and everything points the finger at women for why we "fell" from grace.
The truth is that this was what made us fell from peace and beauty into competition and war bullshit.
Here's a post on how written language changed the way we think.
https://robc137.substack.com/p/alphabet-vs-the-goddess
Here's one about how left brained obsession with details and exploration is a poor view of reality.
https://robc137.substack.com/p/left-brain-vs-whole-brain-in-battlestar
Excellent.
And those who don't believe in darwinian evolution?
Leaked Memo: FDA Confirms ‘At Least’ 10 Child Deaths From COVID Vaccine, Promises Sweeping Reforms
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/leaked-memo-fda-confirms-least-10-child-deaths-covid-vaccine-promises-sweeping-reforms/
In a leaked memo to staff, Dr. Vinay Prasad said the agency will make changes to how it approves all vaccines, after an internal analysis revealed that “at least” 10 children died from the COVID-19 vaccine, though that number is “certainly an underestimate due to underreporting,” Prasad said. Reaction to the memo was mixed, with some COVID-19 vaccine critics accusing the FDA of a cover-up.
....
Infant Botulism Outbreak Expands to 37 Cases Across 17 States, CDC Says
https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/infant-botulism-outbreak-expands-to-37-cases-across-17-states-cdc-says-5951950?utm_source=ref_share&src_src=ref_share&utm_campaign=gv-cc&src_cmp=gv-cc
In the other side 💚
A good deal of these assumptions are being challenged. Females were warriors, hunters and more, not always relegated to the "domestic." Time for a deeper dive.
U C Davis researchers found that when putting young monkeys alone with a variety of toys, the males 'played' more with the dolls than females did. Maybe the dolls were Barbies, modelled on the German sex doll for adults called Bild Lilli.
Crazy freak show! Horrible satanic inverted demons posing as humans are everywhere.
Good review. Reminiscent of Deborah Blum (1997) Sex on the Brain (Viking)