Saturday, December 25, 2010

Some Women are Not All Women

For some reason, be it the singular minded view of television anchors or the monomania perpetrated by N.O.W., but people need to start announcing to the world and to themselves that we are all very different. Men and women both have mutually exclusive programming that goes back to hunter-gatherer times, but let's face it, while many men may seem to be the same and many women seem to be the same, some men aren't all men. Some women aren't all women. Every guy isn't Tiger Woods. Every woman is not Anna Nicole Smith. We are all shaped by our experiences and we are all born different people. From our very inception in the womb, every time an embryo is formed, even from the same parents, the formation of that embryo is EVERY TIME RADICALLY DIFFERENT! Ever meet a brother and sister who are total opposites? A Father and son who can't get along and you wonder how one could come from the other?

And I'm sure you've met a man who is as gentle as a kitten and a woman is seems to be as hard and icey as the most distant man. Now men and women are inherently made differently, one from an x and a y chromosome, the other from two x chromosomes, but as they grow older, the differences begin to melt. Men and women mature at different rates, generally speaking. Girls are born 6 months more mature than boys. At 2 years old - just 2 years being alive - they are A YEAR more mature than boys. That said, some boys certainly mature a bit faster than others. I know I did.

Now to the meat of the article, dear reader. You will hear such things in the press... MEN do this... WOMEN do that.... its usually spoken in a derogatory way. When you hear this, you should hear SOME men... SOME women... etc.

Further, know that many of the "men" and "women" who make the news or make the spotlight to be judged are Hollywood starlits. These are not normal people. They are often liquid to the tune of millions and some have a net worth of well into the hundreds of millions. Super athletes, the famous... these people have access to resources that the normal people do not. This allows them to behave in a wanton and selfish manner and AVOID EVER HAVING TO COMPROMISE. Marriage is compromise and any therapist or even priest worth his or her salt will tell you that. So be sure to laugh hysterically should ANYONE ever suggest "going back to" a single male breadwinner would result in chaos and female subjugation. [My family had a female breadwinner and they managed to stay married for going on 4 decades. My father did more than his fair share in other ways... in fact he very well qualified for the so called title of "stay-at-home-mom" who liberal think-tank studies state are worth 100 grand plus given their contributions. More in his case and he worked a full time job as well as did the cooking and cleaning. But I digress].

In fact, be sure to note that American Indian tribes had the ultimate "patriarchal" society and "subjugated" women but somehow instituted marriage unions and THRIVED as a people for hundreds of years or longer. In fact in many tribes, women had the right to leave their husband at any time for any reason or no reason (she simply wasn't allowed to seize his property or income - I guess those crazy savages just never realized women should be able to leave men as penniless, dependent and unable to provide for anyone else). But of course the fact that women had ENORMOUS influences on their husbands in tribal culture gets lost on modern society. Hell, even president's wives in the 18 and early 1900's bent their husband's ear about everything from support for the poor to women's suffrage to war and clearly had an impact. Hillary Clinton didn't bother with informality, despite not being an employee of the government she sought to fix the healthcare crisis nearly single-handedly when Bill was in office. (Now the Health Care industry owns her as it does every other politician).

But always bear in mind that men and women live together. They always have, they always will. Period. Its in their best interest. They cooperate. They enjoy the financial, time and energy savings of living under one roof. They build intimacy and trust. They take care of one another. Its not the alpha-male way to live, but its clearly in our best interest; in society's best interests as well. Once children come along, you MUST cooperate and work hard if your children are to be successful, healthy adults.

Now, onto women. Sorry, but this post will be about women. Comment about men if you'd like. Women are designed and behave as societal creatures... that is, group animals. Women are designed to cooperate, they are MUCH more intuitive than men and are famous for being able to communicate with eachother without speaking. This has its roots in hunter-gatherer society as most things do, and like all instincts, it is not to be ignored. Women simply care about what others think more than men do. It is in their nature, it is part of who they are and how they were made. In this case, the design and the behavior was to ward off predators, and help take care of their young, which they were left alone to do while men hunted. Like a sponge, or a mirror, women detect and sense almost CONSTANTLY. For that reason it was the poet Byron who said that women are a reflection of all that is wrong with society. What he meant of course, is that women sense and detect ALL things around them, not just some things. And much of what society seems to preach in media, news and "society" is pretty ugly: greed, lust, sloth, materialism, sensationalism, rumor, innuendo, judgement, hate, cruelty, violence, etc..

Men are taught from a young age that women are delicate, fragile and sensitive. For better or worse most men extend that to the way women think. THIS is a terrible mistake. But its done. Like thinking a panda bear is sweet and lovable just because it looks that way and moves slowly. And many men, myself included, recoil in a mixture of horror and disgust when many women reveal that they can be very shrewd; they can assess, judge and punish with the toughest of any man. They can hate, spy, cheat, lie, steal, cajole, threaten, kill, maim, poison, stab, fantasize, abuse and exploit. Are all women evil? No. But don't think they do not have the capacity for evil. Just as men do. Mary Wollstencraft hinted at this years ago, quite brilliantly. The way many men discover this is when a woman casually looks at another and coldly sums up her appearance or fertility potential: "her butt is big and her legs are chunky." Or something like "she needs to get a bikini wax and supportive bra." Or sometimes much worse. The horror author Stephen King was an odd child, of course and was teased in high school and when asked about it often recalls that what he endured was gentle compared to what unfavored girls endured. One female classmate of his was teased so mercilessly by other girls she developed severe depression and despite growing up to eventually get married and have children, she one day blew her head off with a shotgun.

Are all women this evil? Are they wicked and disgusting? Are they shrill harpies who are lusty and conniving? No. In fact many women are very giving, loving, and charming people who love to help others, give themselves selflessly and are devoted to their families. Unfortunately, these women are not ALL women. And I have to openly wonder, cruel as it may be, how many of these women there are with a 50% divorce rate and 50% of children being born out of wedlock. Now these numbers are not a result of more women being evil or anything like it. They are a result, in large part, of women being led astray. Remember reader, that children raised in broken families - divorced, abused, etc. - are more likely to have broken families of their own. Does the evidence not strongly suggest this problem is accelerating? 60% of divorces, studies report, are requested by wives. Not husbands. Wives. While men certainly bear blame in many instances of divorce, the statistics show women are the larger driving force. This is highly unnatural. Women are inherently designed to 'nest'. They seek out stability in romance, work and friendships. They start families, they stay close to their parents - these are all well proven facts. Why are they breaking up their own families? What could be causing this?

It is assumed, in the media, of course, that men are to blame for families breaking up. "Tiger Woods!" they say (as if all men were philandering, billionaire playboys). But I'm afraid that simply isn't what is happening across the broader spectrum. Stepping into anecdotal evidence for a moment... I am appalled to personally know friends or family friends that had occurrences of wives quite literally coming home one day and ambushing their husbands with "I don't feel like being married anymore." That is literally the statement of two different women with no relation to eachother! Now there may have been underlying reasons for these women leaving their husbands, but in both cases I can confidently say that infidelity, poverty, joblessness, drugs, alcohol, and abuse were not factors. Simply, their husbands were simple, hardworking family men whose trespass was known only to their wives. Further their wives suspiciously gave NO reason for wanting out! This would've been HIGHLY suspicious and irregular 30 years ago but is today considered appallingly common. I can't help but suspect that fickle and capriciousness nature of Hollywood movie stars and the public's obsession with them is at least partly responsible. To make the situation even more absurd, these women are entitled, under the law, to alimony, which is still comically contained in all state law books. I say "comically" because more women than men receive college degrees these days and women's earnings have been skyrocketing for the past 10+ years. The fastest growing market segment is women in the 18-25 age range. Yet in Mississippi, Massachusetts and Tennessee, alimony is usually awarded for life. Give me a break, for chrissake. Life? So the women I see divorcing for no reason have literally hit some kind of lottery, whereby they receive a portion of the earnings of someone who is their earning equal, thereby reducing them to being a kind of running debt slave to her, yet the divorce was her decision and she must not give any reason or cause for it!

The marriage of today is not the marriage of yesteryear. Marriage is being entered into lightly by many and being equally discarded by many. Many women simply don't 'need' marriage for financial reasons. Women truly are men's equal, for better or worse. The statistics reveal it, simple observation reveals it. And with divorce rates at obscene levels, its obvious that people have neither the moral nor the practical reasons to shun divorce that they once did. Yet in light of effortless divorce, a completely self-sustaining female population, and equality between the sexes, women are being handed a portion of her ex-husband's earnings for the rest of her life? A husband who might've been her husband for all of 3 or 4 years? This no-fault-divorce-between-equals system of ours has nothing to do with commitment, love or marriage. Its become a ticket to rent-a-slave. A small proportion of the time, men are actually being awarded a portion of their ex-wife's earnings for life. This is equally obscene. A completely healthy man with a good education just being GIVEN (stealing, in essence) a portion of his wife's income that she works hard for every day in exchange for.... nothing? This isn't justice or equality or any of that nonsense. This is a mafia-style shakedown with the divorce lawyers laughing all the way to the bank. How long before a man and a woman get together and soon think that being the higher earner is the WORST thing for him or her? After a divorce, despite being a higher earner who most likely has more education and works harder at a difficult job, you could find yourself POORER than your ex, who you may have been married to for only a matter of months and who you most likely have not associated with for years. You are now legally obligated to enrich a stranger. They don't sleep with you, rub your shoulders, cook for you or sacrifice for you in any way, nor do you for them yet this transfer of wealth takes place regardless, FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIFE. Think about what that means if you divorce in your 20s or 30s!

Welcome to the pinnacle of stupidity. The United States of Blow-'em-out. While Barry Ritholtz's book "Bailout Nation" was an apt description of the financial farce that is our banking sector, a book about our family and social structure ought to be entitled Blow-Out Nation.

Hang 'em High and Dry

No comments:

Post a Comment