Inside-Out's Most Contemporary Proponants

It's nearing that time of the year when the clothes start coming off. It doesn't matter whether you're up town or down town or somewhere in mid-town. The phenomenon is the same. In and around university campuses where I've spent much of my childhood and adult life, the spring days on campus find men playing Frisbee or tight-roping in shorts and shirtless. Gals similarly respond to the warming temperatures sun bathing together on apartment balconies. They're found waiting the lines at Starbucks in shorts and a blouse or a sweater top that's "shrunk" up two sizes from the waistline.

These spring events are generations old. I remember seeing similar scenes in 1940's-50's movies with, for example, Clarke Gable and Lana Turner. No big deal. What is new, however (I'll characterize this from my perspective) is a great confusion around what is "female."

Women are being taught they can and should expect to have the freedoms men have always known. They're expecting this, albeit without the "it's a boy!" way of thinking that comes "umbilically" attached to those so-called "freedoms."

Men and women think about who they are and what they do, respectively, very differently. You can't educate or train or otherwise "environate" maleness out of men any more successfully than you can accomplish that same thing with femaleness for women. Nevertheless, the expectation persists. It is marketed and driven by (perhaps?) good intentioned and wishful thinking "scientists," all of whom are card carrying members from a variety of agendas, with social engineering and politically correct goals.

So, what happens when you keep telling a duck he or she is a chicken? You get a really confused duck. You get a duck that tries to be a chicken but isn't wired to do chicken stuff. It's problematic for ducks...and a huge nuisance to other chickens! (see March 22nd's blog)

Consider a few interesting examples:

1. Women are encouraged to be sexually active; postpone or devalue any feeling they might naturally have for commitment to a sexual partner, i.e., "It's purely recreational."
   
2. Women are encouraged to be sexually active and feel little need for concern about any natural consequences (pregnancies) because there are "tools," i.e., birth control pills, "the morning after pill," and abortion if necessary.
   
3. Women are being encouraged to think their costs for health insurance should be exactly the same as men (an idea that is as statistically curious as the statement "Men and women are equally likely to get pregnant").
   

I can list a lot more of these "women are just like men" messages. They come "wrapped" as implicit (implied) and explicit (clearly stated) media-driven packages. Generally all these messages are exactly what they appear to be, driven by questionably good intentioned and wishful thinking "scientists," and proposed by card carrying members from a variety of agendas, with social engineering and politically correct goals.

What's the bottom line to all of this? It's this: Quite generally women don't work that way (click and then borrow this book and go to the chapter starting on p. 189)! So what does that say for men who are often the abusers taking advantage of the innate sensibilities of women? Am I condoning their behavior--their comparative inclination toward what some have described as serial monogamy? NO!

More next time. Have fun. Be safe. Be smart