University of Life - Part 3

Follow-up to previous post where young University Men and Women were asked to explain preferences and  expectations of existing boy/girl-friends and potential mates revel sharply divergent views.

I believe that difference is based on different needs/wants that boils down to sex.  This article reprises book "Female Sexual Power" that suggests that this difference is "Men want sex more than women".   From an economic viewpoint there is more Demand for Female Sexuality than Male Sexuality.

They go on to explain Baumiesters theory's on this topic.  Interestingly, Feminists are well opposed to this assumption because - wait for it - it is indicates Inequality!

Here was the main conclusions:

Gender structures in the society

The third important dimension of female sexual power lies in its structural effects. Have you ever wondered why…

1. …female romantic sexuality is an acceptable form of sexuality, while men’s sexuality is sick and perverted? 
2. …women’s magazines dominate the official politically correct sexuality, but PUA guides are morally questionable?
3. …men are the more disposable sex?
4. …men must usually make the first move in the relationships and risk the rejection?
5. …men must pay on dates?
6. …laws are against men’s behavior and not against women’s behavior?

The answer to all those gender structures lies in female sexual power. Women’s sexual resource (Erotic capital) manifests itself in gender structures that are beneficial for women.

Neo-Eugenics?

A study from the Canadian Medical Association Journal on the use of Abortion for Sex-Selection and has condemned the practice.  This was ironically "good news" as it legitimized conclusions put forth by a number of smaller, less resource endowed, pro-life special-interest groups (Institute for Marriage and the Family Canada).

Then this investigative news-team report from the UK Guardian newspaper that finds it is happening in the UK.

The issue was addressed by noted Canadian Ethicist - Dr. Margaret Somerville.


To me, this seems to have placed Feminists in a terrible conundrum - most are virulently Pro-Choice, yet to endorse this practice leads boy-preference - sort of self-defeating for the movement don't you think?  Also I have felt for some time that feminists - especially feminists who have children - can not continue with their ideology if they have sons.   Most realize that 1) gender is not a social construct and 2) boys/men are actually not the smoldering violent men that have stereotyped all their lives.   Of course it can take awhile for them to find this all our - sometime more than one generation - but it is our only hope.

University of Life - Part 1 + 2

Part I - Can you just be friends with member of the opposite sex?



Interesting that all Women said "yes and all Men said "no".
This reflect some basic attributes about each our attitudes to the opposite sex.
1) Gals like to surround themselves with men and control access by choice.
2) Men prefer not be bothered with women's company except as a potential mate/date. (being polite here)  Otherwise why bother?

Part II - If you were in a relationship - do think it is ok to have a friend of the opposite sex?



Even though they never got a straight answer - I like that they were seeking to ask gays.

Feel like a lab rat yet?

HGOG

Patriarchy?

Recently I enjoyed this article at Men's Rights blog "A Voice for Men".

Wikipedia defines Patriarchy as:

"Patriarchy is a social system in which the male gender role as the primary authority figure is central to social organization, and where fathers hold authority over women, children, and property. It implies the institutions of male rule and privilege, and entails female subordination.”

Is this what we experience in daily life?
No,  not at all - and anyone who claims this is - as Phil_in_Utah says "is living a very sheltered existence or has an agenda (usually the latter)."  He then goes on to demolish the standard Feminist arguments and ends up with this observation:

Fathers... are one of the biggest crime-stoppers* out there.

He then cites this remarkable story from the Animal Kingdom.

A rather interesting study was conducted by zoologists in Hluhluwe-Umofolozi Park in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.  They had been discovering disturbing numbers of rhinoceros carcasses all over the park, bearing injuries that were inconsistent with any type of weapon used by human poachers.  After investigation, they discovered that the rhinos were being killed by juvenile elephants whose fathers had been killed by poachers.  One of the scientists decided that they should remedy the problem by bringing in a group of six elder elephants.  The adult elephants arrived, and the moment one of the juveniles tried to brutalize a rhino, his step father picked him up and slammed him onto the ground.  Before too long, the rhino killings stopped altogether.

The lesson that can be gleaned from this, and which shows this feminist theory (like pretty much all others) to be a house of cards, is that Patriarchy, at least in the traditional meaning of the word, isn’t the cause of violence.  It is the solution to violence. Feminist theory, when put to work on modern societies, makes them nothing short of unlivable.  Who knew?

Babar taught those same lessons.

PDF1
PDF2

*The "Crime-Stopper" programs sprung from a robbery in Alberquerque NM in 1976.

First, Tiger Mom - now Eagle Dad

First Tiger Mom - a Chinese Mom who runs a strict home in order to prepare her daughters for the outside world.  Amy Chua's book, "Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother" - sparked serious debate about tough child-rearing techniques.

Now we have - Eagle Dad.  A Chinese Dad from Nanjing while visiting New York forces his 4yr-old sone to run in snow while wearing shoes and underpants.    It is part of his tough training regime to harden his son.  He says he doesn't care about criticism because Chinese parents "always spoil their children".  Many in China are outrages and have criticized him for child abuse.   He had trouble initially convincing his wife - but now she says "she is past caring".

Real "Lifeboat Feminism" at work.

The controversy over the "Costa Concordia" cruise-ship catastrophe seemed over done to me.

I have never really warmed to the idea of living on a floating hotel as a vacation although if it provides a way to get somewhere - that is different.  I guess is meshes with a "half the fun is getting" there kind of attitude.

However when it happened, I was reminded of the March 2006 sinking of BC Ferry "Queen of the North" off Prince Rupert BC while innuendo the 2 officers on watch were engaged in sexual antics for the 14 minutes the ship proceeded on the wrong heading at full speed until ploughing into an island.  That was a real catastrophe as it was a regular commuter run in a remote part of the country upon which many communities depend.  Plus it was run by the Government so it has all the best procedures and highly paid people to operate.  In other words -  "No Excuses".  How could they have been so derelict in duty to allow the ship to crash?

After the Costa Concordia was rescued, the criticism swirled around the vessel's skipper.
Was he a coward for his behaviour?
It seemed that the mainstream feminists were saying exactly that.
And I wondered "what happened to equality" - wasn't he justified in saving his life?

But then I read this article by Canadian Blogger "Elusive Wapiti" that reveals the true nature of "Lifeboat Feminism".

Au Revoir ‘Mademoiselle’

Sadly, French Feminists have been successful in eliminating the (perhaps anachronistic) title "Madmoiselle" from the french language as "sexist".  Another coarsening of society in general.

Edmonton Hatefest Week - March 1-7, 2012

Incredible that this group exists - but they have such good company!
It is being held together with Israeli Apartheid Week - that loathing group who condemns Israel for defending itself against attacks by vehement Arab nations all around it who and who are bent on it's destruction.

Hmm - naive broad, questionable guy, result poor.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Isn't this part of a bigger problem?
Personal restrain over pre-marital sex is zero.
"Marital contracts" are devalued to point of meaninglessness (72 day marriage between celebrity Kim Kardashian and basketball star Kris Humphries being one odd example).