Wow. Please read my work. I have certainly never been accused of being soft on women. I've been a severe critic of toxic feminism. Kiran's point was to emphasize, I think, the traditional feminine qualities, which are admittedly in short supply today. Yes, all the female leaders love war as much as their male peers do. My point was to hy…
Wow. Please read my work. I have certainly never been accused of being soft on women. I've been a severe critic of toxic feminism. Kiran's point was to emphasize, I think, the traditional feminine qualities, which are admittedly in short supply today. Yes, all the female leaders love war as much as their male peers do. My point was to hypothetically agree that traditional females would be less likely to want to go to war. At this point, that is certainly a pipedream, given the state of men and women (and "transgenders") in America 2.0.
Sorry, my response was to her, but I replied to you to keep the thread from splitting, my mistake.
I just re-read her comment, and I still don't agree with your interpretation, at all.
"I blame men, yes," and "We women don't like to go to war". Huh? Those are cut and dried statements and they're tripe, otherwise there is no need for "I'm sorry if men feel offended". Is there?
As an aside, most of the women on my list are childless. Does that matter? There's no proof that having children makes a difference in a war-mongering woman's attitude. Women give birth to boys, who raise them to then go to war to get killed. Women are just as culpable as men. If a woman wants to make a difference in attitudes, she had best start with her offspring, and then other women, and see how far she gets. Berating men as a whole, using worn out non-facts as basis for one's argument, gets us nowhere. But it makes the woman feel powerful in her weakness by "virtue" of being oppressed. It doesn't make any sense.
This whole Ukraine fiasco is being, to a very large degree, organized, financed and run by women. As long as women like Kiran can't or won't see it, and as long as TPTB are able to set men against women and women against men, no man or group of men will be able to change anything. Some of those men are rotting in solitary, right now, just for peacefully assembling. If you can't peacefully assemble, according to your legal right, then spare me the nonsense.
Maybe if we appeal to billionaire women, like Kim K, and Oprah, and Bezos' latest squeeze, and Beyonce', we can get something done? haha Have at it, women.
As you know Donald, we need a draft. That would stop this BS overnight. Instead, we don't vote on war, and most of it is contracted out, paid for by taxes we also have no say over, just like in the waning days of the Roman Empire.
The difference now is that women have much more power than they ever did back then...and yet...not a damn thing has changed. I guess women need even more power, to make up for the millennia of oppression. Once we cross that magic threshold, whatever it is, we'll have peace in our lifetime. In the meantime, history shows nothing will change because women get drunk on the power of being able to force others to do what they say, the same as any human. I see no difference between men or women in that regard, and the "if only women were in charge" fantasy is just that, a fantasy, and a grotesque one at that.
Wow. Please read my work. I have certainly never been accused of being soft on women. I've been a severe critic of toxic feminism. Kiran's point was to emphasize, I think, the traditional feminine qualities, which are admittedly in short supply today. Yes, all the female leaders love war as much as their male peers do. My point was to hypothetically agree that traditional females would be less likely to want to go to war. At this point, that is certainly a pipedream, given the state of men and women (and "transgenders") in America 2.0.
Sorry, my response was to her, but I replied to you to keep the thread from splitting, my mistake.
I just re-read her comment, and I still don't agree with your interpretation, at all.
"I blame men, yes," and "We women don't like to go to war". Huh? Those are cut and dried statements and they're tripe, otherwise there is no need for "I'm sorry if men feel offended". Is there?
As an aside, most of the women on my list are childless. Does that matter? There's no proof that having children makes a difference in a war-mongering woman's attitude. Women give birth to boys, who raise them to then go to war to get killed. Women are just as culpable as men. If a woman wants to make a difference in attitudes, she had best start with her offspring, and then other women, and see how far she gets. Berating men as a whole, using worn out non-facts as basis for one's argument, gets us nowhere. But it makes the woman feel powerful in her weakness by "virtue" of being oppressed. It doesn't make any sense.
This whole Ukraine fiasco is being, to a very large degree, organized, financed and run by women. As long as women like Kiran can't or won't see it, and as long as TPTB are able to set men against women and women against men, no man or group of men will be able to change anything. Some of those men are rotting in solitary, right now, just for peacefully assembling. If you can't peacefully assemble, according to your legal right, then spare me the nonsense.
Maybe if we appeal to billionaire women, like Kim K, and Oprah, and Bezos' latest squeeze, and Beyonce', we can get something done? haha Have at it, women.
As you know Donald, we need a draft. That would stop this BS overnight. Instead, we don't vote on war, and most of it is contracted out, paid for by taxes we also have no say over, just like in the waning days of the Roman Empire.
The difference now is that women have much more power than they ever did back then...and yet...not a damn thing has changed. I guess women need even more power, to make up for the millennia of oppression. Once we cross that magic threshold, whatever it is, we'll have peace in our lifetime. In the meantime, history shows nothing will change because women get drunk on the power of being able to force others to do what they say, the same as any human. I see no difference between men or women in that regard, and the "if only women were in charge" fantasy is just that, a fantasy, and a grotesque one at that.