Dear Trevor,
Trevor wrote:
> I've read the story dozens of times, but in spite of that, I have
> never understood why there has been so much sympathy towards
> Andrea Yates. Not only did she kill her five children, but this
> was not a spur of the moment, blind rage decision; this was a
> planned, calculated murder. She even admitted as much, so i can't
> believe how so many would simply excuse her actions. It's not just
> feminists; people I know that I've spoken on this subject on have
> told me that they considered the husband "morally guilty". Are you
> kidding me?! She kills her children and he's somehow responsible?
> Being mentally ill doesn't mean that you don't know right from
> wrong.
It's the same reason why ordinary Germans supported the Holocaust.
Generational hatred is so great that it overwhelms reason and
common sense.
Trevor wrote:
> I did some research and realized that in most cases, both partners
> were violent. One story that stands out in particular is Erin
> Pizzey. In the 1970's, she opened one of the first women's
> shelters in Britain, because at the time, while hitting a woman
> was considered despicable socially, in all but the worst of
> circles, it generally wasn't prosecuted criminally. After she
> opened it and began hearing the woman's stories, she realized that
> many of them were just as violent as their partners.
Thanks for this information. I found her book online -- not
surprisingly on a "men's rights" web site, even though she's a women's
advocate:
Prone to Violence by Erin Pizzey
http://www.menweb.org/pronevio.htm
Also, here's her 1999 article where she was viciously targeted by
feminists for saying that women are violent too:
Who’s Failing The Family? - By Erin Pizzey
http://www.fathersforlife.org/pizzey/failfamt.htm
Trevor wrote:
> One personal story I have on this is when I walked towards and
> attempted to comfort a woman I knew. She was obviously upset,
> maybe crying, although I wasn't sure about that part. She was
> having relationship problems and I did my best to reassure her,
> one of the things I said was that she was an attractive
> woman. Afterwards, I left, not thinking anything of it.
> A couple days later, I was confronted by one of the people in
> charge. He informed me that she was accusing me of sexual
> harassment, saying that I was coming on to her. To say I was
> shocked at this would be an understatement; I was floored at this
> revelation. This was somebody I knew. Granted, we weren't real
> close, but I thought she knew me better than that.
> Based on how he was talking, the idea that this might be a
> misunderstanding never once crossed his mind. I was considered
> guilty and not even capable of trying to tell my side of this
> story; he had already made up his mind. Other people I knew and I
> thought were friends came to the same conclusion, all without even
> taking the time to hear me out. There were two things I learned
> that day. One is how easy it is to be accused, especially if you
> appear weird to people, which I do. The second is that trying to
> protest your innocence is utter futility.
When did this incident take place? This sounds like the "crazy woman
stories" that were common during the 1990s, but have been less
prevalent in recent years.
Trevor wrote:
> Over the years I've realized just how common male hatred as
> become. This is not restricted to Boomers; it's in every single
> generation. I was taught in school a statistic that "One out of
> four men will commit rape", that it's normal to abuse women, that
> one of the main reasons is a belief in male superiority and male
> power. The pamphlets that I saw in college... well, the message
> was basically: "Be on your guard with every man."
These are like feminists saying "Jews are dirty crooks" in 1930s
Germany. These things become the "common wisdom" and then they're
widely believed.
Trevor wrote:
> There are times when I can understand why Generation X hates
> boomers. the sexual revolution may seem like fun when you're a
> young woman (or man) or even for the middle-aged silent, but if
> you're a child, it's got to be an absolute nightmare.
This is absolutely right. The sexual revolution was great fun in the
1960s -- with free love, free sex, girls burning their bras, men
streaking. These were all forms of political protest, not to mention
a way of getting laid. But Higgie has already told us how streaking
particularly affected him and caused him to have a very negative
opinion of Boomers.
Most of the stories about fun and freedom in the 1960s were a myth.
Here's something I wrote on the 1967 Summer of Love, which was
supposed to be wonderful, but actually was disastrous for many
of the kids involved:
** Boomers commemorate the 40th anniversary of the Summer of Love.
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... b#e070612b
The pendulum has been swinging back towards greater modesty in
women:
** 'It's going to be the 1950s all over again'
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... 11#e041011
** Victoria's Secret changes from 'too sexy' to 'ultra-feminine'
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... 29#e080229
In the 1960s, it was all about "women's lib" and "men and women are
equal." Those political things are still around, but they've become
very tired and stale. As I recently wrote, I was very impressed by
Newt Gingrich stuck it to Juan Williams over the racist crap, and
stuck it to John King over the feminist crap.
Mainstream journalists have been missing the point (as usual)
on these incidents. The broader point has nothing to do with
Gingrich, who may or may not succeed in these kinds of actions.
When the Tea Party burst upon the scene, mainstream journalists
"blamed" it on CNBC's Rick Santelli, who made a rant one morning that
appeared to catch fire. As I pointed out at the time, what was
special about this situation was not that Santelli ranted about
something -- he rants about something every day -- but that something
had changed in the public to make them accept Santelli's rant.
The same kind of thing was true with Gingrich's remarks. The point is
not that Gingrich was clever (though he was). The point is that the
public is less willing to accept this kind of feminist crap,
indicating that the public is changing, irrespective of what happens
to Gingrich.
In a generational crisis era, gender roles become more conservative
and stereotypical. This is happening in America, but it's worth
pointing out that the same kinds of changes are occurring throughout
the world, because people return to the comforts of religion at times
of great anxiety. Thus, many Muslim women are returning to the
comfort of the hijab, and both Turkey and Egypt have voted to move in
the direction of more conservative Muslim precepts. And I've reported
on the web log recently that ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel are moving
in a similar direction, with women covering themselves from head to toe
with multiple layers of clothing.
John