For those who associate women with instinctively protecting children or with being supportive of a traditionally religious life, this era in American history has provided something of a shock.
By Dennis Prager, AM GREATNESS 30.8.22
When I was in college, I read a book by George Gilder, one of the wisest thinkers of the last half-century, titled Naked Nomads, which had a deep impact on me. It was about single men and all the pathologies associated with them. For example, Gilder drove home the point that the biggest factor concerning violent crime was that it is overwhelmingly committed by single men.
While there was no danger—I would say no chance—that I would commit a violent crime (though I was, at the time, single), this fact along with others in the book made me a lifelong advocate of marriage.
I also came to realize that raising good men was the most important thing society could do. If it doesn’t, the male propensity to physical aggression and predatory sexual behavior will wreak havoc. Therefore, raising boys to control their natures is fundamental to society avoiding chaos.
Over the course of a lifetime, however, I have come to realize that while society was right about males, it was wrong about females. Whether spoken or unspoken, most people thought that girls just didn’t need to be raised to control their natures nearly as much as boys did.
But they do.
It’s true that females are not inclined to violence or predatory sexual behavior as men are. But this hardly means that girls and women don’t have to learn to control their natures. On the contrary, as I have been telling parents for many years now, they need to teach their daughters to control their natures just as much as they teach their sons to do so.
Specifically, girls have to learn to control their emotions.
Just as the male sexual drive and violent impulses can overwhelm their conscience and their ability to think and act rationally, emotions can do the same thing in girls and women: overwhelm their conscience and their ability to think and act rationally.
However, it should be obvious that at least two generations of parents—especially among the well-educated—did not teach many of their daughters to control their emotions and think rationally.
The result is that women are disproportionately active in doing damage to our society.
The most obvious example is education. American schools teach less and indoctrinate more than ever before. Big-city public (and most private) schools are damaging young Americans to an extent and in ways no one imagined just a few years ago. Young children are prematurely sexualized—they are, for example, exposed to “Drag Queen Story Hour” in class and in local libraries from the age of 5. These feature a man dressed as a woman reading and dancing for them.
And who is facilitating all of this? In virtually every case, a woman. Ninety-two percent of kindergarten teachers are women, 75 percent of all teachers are women and 85 percent of librarians are women.
And they are teaching young people to despise their country (the creator of the poisonous “1619 Project” is a woman), to feel guilty about their “white privilege” or to think of themselves as victims if they are black. Even worse, they are indoctrinating them in “nonbinary” thinking regarding sex and gender.
As City Journal reports, “Los Angeles Unified School District has adopted a radical gender-theory curriculum encouraging teachers to work toward the ‘breakdown of the gender binary,’ to experiment with gender pronouns such as ‘they,’ ‘ze,’ and ‘tree,’ and to adopt ‘trans-affirming’ programming to make their classrooms ‘queer all school year.’”
The same is happening in school districts around the country.
These ideas originated in university gender studies and women’s studies departments, nearly all of whose professors are female.
Teachers and their unions did great damage to young people during COVID-19. They demanded—because of their hypochondria and an apparent inability to apply reason to COVID-19 risk—that schools be closed for nearly two years. Teachers unions in big cities threatened to go on strike if schools opened. In general, teachers unions are just radical arms of the Democratic Party and the progressive movement. They are overwhelmingly composed of women members and women leaders. The head of the National Education Association is a woman, as are the heads of the Los Angeles, Chicago and New York City teachers unions.
Women physicians and health care workers are at the vanguard of ruining young people’s lives at children’s hospitals that push giving young people puberty-blocking hormones and opposite-gender hormones, performing hysterectomies and mastectomies on healthy girls who say they are boys, and chemically or physically castrating healthy boys who say they are girls.
Women are at the vanguard of perverting the medical profession by advocating the teaching of woke ideologies in medical schools, placing these ideologies on an equal footing with medical education.
Last week an organization called Physicians for Reproductive Health published an open letter to the nation’s reporters and news editors, demanding they censor anti-abortion activists: “We are asking for a commitment from the community of media outlets reporting on abortion to keep in mind the true danger that you present when interviewing anti-abortion extremists. You are giving the opportunity for dangerous lies to spread.”
As regards the demand that news outlets censor pro-life individuals and groups, the open letter was signed by more than 600 medical doctors and other health care professionals. Nearly every signatory was a woman. And all four of the listed leaders of Physicians for Reproductive Health are women.
Women clergy have been at the vanguard of pushing Christianity and Judaism to the left, leaving mainstream churches and synagogues increasingly empty. Of course, the increasingly feminized male clergy go along with their female colleagues.
And women are disproportionately supportive of cancel culture, the greatest threat to free speech in American history.
It should go without saying, but it’s undoubtedly necessary to note that there are many women doing great, even heroic, things for our society, and that many men are working to wreck it. But for those who associate women with instinctively protecting children or with being supportive of a traditionally religious life, this era in American history has provided something of a shock.
vivarto. really you can live without female supervision.
ketzel2 I think they will make us wear pink badges.
Sebastien !!!!!!!! You remind me of my student Pete, who stole the clapper from my recesse bell. He thought I could not call him and his classmates into class. A Rancher friend prepared it and to this day it remains in tack. Pete to clever for his own good. He too professed his innocence with ” it wasn’t me”. Or in Spanish, ” no me “.
@Mirib 😀 At least I know how many angels can dance on the head of a pin!
@Honeybee 😀
@Honeybee ?
@Sebastian Zorn. I don’t. Look it up on m-w.com, you hair splitting, contentious old thing. Lets not bowdlerize things. Why are you doing that?
Some progressive women have taken Femminsm “over the hill”. I wince when I see women with prayer shawls and kippas. I also wince when I see men with high heels and earrings. I have seen little improvement in life from all this nonsense. So very superficial,
Sebastien Back in the “bad chair” until you admit IT WAS YOU.
https://youtu.be/u_f6qFBQD9U
ed. by Theodore Sarwtsky, PhD
Workman Pub. 1985
https://books.google.com/books/about/Sex_as_a_Sublimation_for_Tennis.html?id=iqME63EHCTgC
@Michael 😀
Hi, Ketzel
Sebastien doesn’t know — he’s not a biologist.
The main problem I’ve seen in society, is not men and not women; it’s people getting along with one another, regardless of sex. I’m sure you can see evidence of that problem, right here on Israpundit.
I dunno. Ask Michael.
@mirib cc Vivarto You should say, “Sodomist” rather than “Sodomite.” “Sodomite suggests you don’t like them as in “Trotskyite” versus “Trotskyist.” 😀
@Ketzel That’s because everybody was flat baroque. You need to look at root causes.
Also, about all those single mothers, how did they get pregnant? Aliens from UFOs? Did men father those children? If we discuss single mothers, we have to discuss the absent single fathers. At least the single mothers are, you know, raising the children. This double standard has already been discussed in The Scarlet Letter, which we read in school while society was still healthy, in other words, Hawthorne called out misogyny even before feminism. Can anyone think of a reason? Maybe there were some things wrong about society’s treatment of women even before feminism, which gave rise to feminism?
Raphael: I know Prager is basically a good guy who has written good things, but this isn’t one of his better efforts. A misandrist, which I am not, could write an article with all the links, graphs and proofs about how men are hurting America. And it would be true, but not the whole truth. These half truths, aka scapegoating and misdirection are only protecting the truly guilty. I don’t like to drag out the old trope of, Why can’t Jews see this, with their history, but, yeah. We of all people should know about being blamed for pornography, usury, illegal immigration, communism, capitalism, bad art, and I’ve left out so much. But it’s not the Jews, it’s women! The people who are really causing the problems, global elites, set us against each other, men against women, black against white, straight against gay. Who wins? Tyrants. Also, did Rome fall because of women? How about ancient Israel, did women cause that? Too many historical examples. So Prager wrote a silly article off the top of his head, but anyone can say the same things about men, gays, blacks, Jews, etc.
When I read the title, I frankly thought that the subject matter would be a little different. While I believe that Prager is correct on all the points, I think that he totally missed the #1 way that women are hurting our country — out of wedlock births.
Some quick stats for the US: 1964 – 7%; 1990 – 28%; 2018 – 40%
This is a huge increase. There are multiple reasons for this, but at the end of the day (perhaps literally), it is the decision of a young woman to allow herself to be impregnated by a man who is probably neither willing nor able to remain with her to establish a viable family unit that is the problem. In the end, it’s single moms raising fatherless children, funded by the government.
Feminism sees no problem with that. “A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle,” was a phrase coined by Australian activist Irina Dunn in 1970.
Here’s the problem. Women cannot raise healthy, well adjusted children, alone. “Across numerous studies, children raised in single-mother families are at heightened risk for substance abuse, depression, anxiety, and externalizing behaviors and disorders.” That’s not me, that’s a statement from the NIH.gov, so let’s believe the science. I would even be a little more specific. Single mom’s raise a disproportionate number of boys who become problems to society. Prison rates bear this out. As a boy becomes an adult male, women cannot control their actions. (Yes, I know, there are always exceptions.) That’s one essential role that a father plays in a family.
Without the nuclear family, (a father, a mother, and children), being the predominate institution of society, we are doomed to a future of dystopian misery.
@ketzel2
When I read this Prager article, I cringed. It does sound misogynistic. None of us wants to believe what he says is true. But…
First, I know what kind of man Prager is. He is totally honorable, fair, and rational. He is not a misogynist.
Second, he does not say that it’s all women’s fault, just disproportionately so. He backs it up with numbers.
Third, if we are intellectually honest, we must go where the facts lead us. If Prager is wrong, (and if you feel strongly enough about this), you are free to offer a rebuttal.
Does anyone remember music history? In Baroque times, young boys were castrated so they could continue to sing soprano. These boys were apprenticed (sold) to famous composers, music teachers and impresarios. It wasn’t just for music, but also for sex. In other words, all of this societal decay has happened before, in plain sight, and in the 18th century, women were not in charge. Scapegoating is usually intellectually lazy and provides cover for the people who are doing the real work of wrecking society. But you do you.
@vivarto- Don’t joke…you mean like Yuval Noah Harari? Let’s not say “gay” – say sodomite.
@Vivarto 😀
We should all become gay and get rid of women!
Scapegoat the lowest level of functionaries, ignore the people making the actual plans. And how are women to be controlled? Why not burn us at the stake or make us wear yellow badges? What did Mrs. Prager do to him, burn his toast?
At last someone dares say the truth openly!