Gender bias remains alive and strong

Gender bias remains alive and strong

By Jaime O'Neill

Created Mar 22 2008 - 10:55am

This column for Karen, on her birthday

My 82-year-old mother is bereft. Mom was born just six years after women got

the right to vote in this country, and she thought for awhile there that she

might live long enough to see a woman become president. Now it looks as

though that won't happen.

And, though I personally will be happy to see Barack Obama follow the

catastrophic George Bush into the highest office in the land, I, too, am

disappointed that Hillary's bid for the presidency is floundering and likely

to fail. As the father of two daughters, I know a Hillary Clinton victory

would have had enormous symbolic and psychological significance for younger

women. It would have been "empowering," in the true sense of that

perniciously overused word.

Years ago, I taught at a college up in Washington State, an institution that

prided itself on its pre-med and dental-assisting departments. I routinely

faced classes with large numbers of young women who were seeking

certification to become dental assistants or LVNs. Once in awhile, when one

or another of these students would turn up during office hours, I would ask

why they hadn't considered becoming doctors or dentists. Their answers made

it clear that such an idea was virtually unthinkable because of images of

women they'd inherited from popular culture. If you'd talked to them about

"a woman's place," they would have bridled at the thought, but they'd been

trained to keep their place, nonetheless, and the training was encoded with

such subtlety that it was virtually invisible. They were groomed to be

dental assistants, not dentists.

Like those young women whose horizons were artificially narrowed by

culturally-instilled sexism, our entire nation continues to incubate

attitudes toward women that severely handicapped Hillary Clinton's bid to

lead us. In fact, sexism may prove to be even more intractable than racism.

For starters, let's not forget that black males were afforded the right to

vote some 50 years before the wives and mothers of the white males who held

the power over who would vote, and who wouldn't.

Political punditry surely has been driven by culturally-encoded sexism, from

the rantings of Chris Mathews to the steadily negative commentary from just

about everyone that made Hillary unlikeable if she was forceful ("too

shrill," "too aggressive," "too pushy"), and equally unsuited to be the

commander-in-chief if she was not forceful enough ("weak," "unable to hold

her own against other world leaders," "unsure of her own positions").

It was a classic Catch-22 situation, a catch that seems to apply exclusively

to women, a catch that ensures they will be damned if they do, and damned if

they don't. They are harridans if they act as men are thought to act, and

they are weak if they don't. That catch virtually defines the glass ceiling.

There was just no possible response to the endemic sexism still festering in

the nation's psyche. No tough foreign policy posturing would do the trick,

and neither would a department store full of pantsuits.

Subtract her gender from the equation and the intensity of hatred for

Hillary Clinton becomes inexplicable. Listen to right-wing talk radio or

read any of the right wing blogs and you'll soon discover a vile and

venomous river of filth and fury directed at this former First Lady. Rush

Limbaugh has been at the sport of Hillary bashing longer than most, and his

hate speech even slopped over to young Chelsea when she was a mere

13-year-old girl. Rush, the bully boy of the right, described that teen-age

girl as "the White House dog."

Limbaugh, you'll recall, invented the term "femi-nazi" to describe women who

sought equal rights with men. How deep must male insecurity go to find a

comparison between the least powerful people among us and Hitler's legions

of oppression? But the insecurities of threatened and underachieving males

is surely one source of Hillary hate, the fear far too many men have of

intelligent women. Bertrand Russell once observed that most people would

rather die than think, and in Bush's America, that observation has been

borne out.

If you don't think we have a cultural bias against brains, then you probably

didn't go to high school in this country, where showing signs of functioning

gray matter was nearly always cause for derision. Intelligence isn't

particularly popular for either gender, but to be a bright girl where I went

to school was cause for scorn. If you were a poor kid, it was even more

unacceptable to show signs of smarts because to do so suggested you were

putting on airs, or that you were trying to "rise above your raisin'. For

women, the social pressures to hide or suppress intelligence are powerful.

It takes character to persist against such pressures.

Over a long career as a teacher, I saw this dynamic at work just about every

day I entered a classroom. Any overt display of interest in learning or a

willingness to ask questions was viewed with suspicion by most students, and

the snide whispers were often directed at young women intent on doing well.

Intelligence and a desire to learn were paths to unpopularity.

In one of their final debates, Barack Obama rang in on the subject of his

opponent's likeability," by saying "you're likeable enough, Hillary." But

she wasn't likeable enough, when all was said and done. She had committed

three sins that remain unpardonable in the minds of far too many Americans.

Hillary Clinton was born female, she was born bright, and she had ambitions

beyond those that are culturally-sanctioned for people of her gender. In a

word, she was "uppity."

Those qualities made her hard to like for far too many people, male and

female. For that reason, as much as any other, my mother will probably not

witness the triumph of women that began when she was six years old.

_______

--

NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not

always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material

available to advance understanding of

political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. I

believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as

provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright

Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107

"A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their

spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore their

government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are

suffering deeply in spirit,

and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public

debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have

patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning

back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at

stake."

-Thomas Jefferson

"Gandalf Grey" <valinor20@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:47e7c6b1$0$2620$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...

> Gender bias remains alive and strong

>

> By Jaime O'Neill

>

> Created Mar 22 2008 - 10:55am

>

>

> This column for Karen, on her birthday

>

> My 82-year-old mother is bereft. Mom was born just six years after women

> got

> the right to vote in this country, and she thought for awhile there that

> she

> might live long enough to see a woman become president. Now it looks as

> though that won't happen.

>

> And, though I personally will be happy to see Barack Obama follow the

> catastrophic George Bush into the highest office in the land, I, too, am

> disappointed that Hillary's bid for the presidency is floundering and

> likely

> to fail. As the father of two daughters, I know a Hillary Clinton victory

> would have had enormous symbolic and psychological significance for

> younger

> women. It would have been "empowering," in the true sense of that

> perniciously overused word.

>

> Years ago, I taught at a college up in Washington State, an institution

> that

> prided itself on its pre-med and dental-assisting departments. I routinely

> faced classes with large numbers of young women who were seeking

> certification to become dental assistants or LVNs. Once in awhile, when

> one

> or another of these students would turn up during office hours, I would

> ask

> why they hadn't considered becoming doctors or dentists. Their answers

> made

> it clear that such an idea was virtually unthinkable because of images of

> women they'd inherited from popular culture. If you'd talked to them about

> "a woman's place," they would have bridled at the thought, but they'd been

> trained to keep their place, nonetheless, and the training was encoded

> with

> such subtlety that it was virtually invisible. They were groomed to be

> dental assistants, not dentists.

>

> Like those young women whose horizons were artificially narrowed by

> culturally-instilled sexism, our entire nation continues to incubate

> attitudes toward women that severely handicapped Hillary Clinton's bid to

> lead us. In fact, sexism may prove to be even more intractable than

> racism.

> For starters, let's not forget that black males were afforded the right to

> vote some 50 years before the wives and mothers of the white males who

> held

> the power over who would vote, and who wouldn't.

>

> Political punditry surely has been driven by culturally-encoded sexism,

> from

> the rantings of Chris Mathews to the steadily negative commentary from

> just

> about everyone that made Hillary unlikeable if she was forceful ("too

> shrill," "too aggressive," "too pushy"), and equally unsuited to be the

> commander-in-chief if she was not forceful enough ("weak," "unable to hold

> her own against other world leaders," "unsure of her own positions").

>

> It was a classic Catch-22 situation, a catch that seems to apply

> exclusively

> to women, a catch that ensures they will be damned if they do, and damned

> if

> they don't. They are harridans if they act as men are thought to act, and

> they are weak if they don't. That catch virtually defines the glass

> ceiling.

> There was just no possible response to the endemic sexism still festering

> in

> the nation's psyche. No tough foreign policy posturing would do the trick,

> and neither would a department store full of pantsuits.

>

> Subtract her gender from the equation and the intensity of hatred for

> Hillary Clinton becomes inexplicable. Listen to right-wing talk radio or

> read any of the right wing blogs and you'll soon discover a vile and

> venomous river of filth and fury directed at this former First Lady. Rush

> Limbaugh has been at the sport of Hillary bashing longer than most, and

> his

> hate speech even slopped over to young Chelsea when she was a mere

> 13-year-old girl. Rush, the bully boy of the right, described that

> teen-age

> girl as "the White House dog."

>

> Limbaugh, you'll recall, invented the term "femi-nazi" to describe women

> who

> sought equal rights with men. How deep must male insecurity go to find a

> comparison between the least powerful people among us and Hitler's legions

> of oppression? But the insecurities of threatened and underachieving males

> is surely one source of Hillary hate, the fear far too many men have of

> intelligent women. Bertrand Russell once observed that most people would

> rather die than think, and in Bush's America, that observation has been

> borne out.

>

> If you don't think we have a cultural bias against brains, then you

> probably

> didn't go to high school in this country, where showing signs of

> functioning

> gray matter was nearly always cause for derision. Intelligence isn't

> particularly popular for either gender, but to be a bright girl where I

> went

> to school was cause for scorn. If you were a poor kid, it was even more

> unacceptable to show signs of smarts because to do so suggested you were

> putting on airs, or that you were trying to "rise above your raisin'. For

> women, the social pressures to hide or suppress intelligence are powerful.

> It takes character to persist against such pressures.

>

> Over a long career as a teacher, I saw this dynamic at work just about

> every

> day I entered a classroom. Any overt display of interest in learning or a

> willingness to ask questions was viewed with suspicion by most students,

> and

> the snide whispers were often directed at young women intent on doing

> well.

> Intelligence and a desire to learn were paths to unpopularity.

>

> In one of their final debates, Barack Obama rang in on the subject of his

> opponent's likeability," by saying "you're likeable enough, Hillary." But

> she wasn't likeable enough, when all was said and done. She had committed

> three sins that remain unpardonable in the minds of far too many

> Americans.

> Hillary Clinton was born female, she was born bright, and she had

> ambitions

> beyond those that are culturally-sanctioned for people of her gender. In a

> word, she was "uppity."

>

> Those qualities made her hard to like for far too many people, male and

> female. For that reason, as much as any other, my mother will probably not

> witness the triumph of women that began when she was six years old.

> _______

>

>

>

> --

> NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not

> always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material

> available to advance understanding of

> political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues.

> I

> believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as

> provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright

> Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107

>

> "A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their

> spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore their

> government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are

> suffering deeply in spirit,

> and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public

> debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have

> patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning

> back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are

> at

> stake."

> -Thomas Jefferson

>

>

>

Um, maybe if her claim to fame wasn't that she was married to the president.

Or maybe if she didn't cry when things got tough.

Her grab for unaccountable power was why conservatives didn't like her as

first lady. Her socialist policies are why they don't like her now. Sexism

has nothing to do with it.

The leftists who rule America are for having a unisex country and

for fighting "sexism". This should be replaced by a nation that is for

manhood and womenhood. Not only are the sexes different, but the

reason we are attracted to the opposite sex is precisely because they

are different.

In 1852 Emma Snodgrass was arrested in Boston for wearing pants.

Today women are allowed to be policemen and soldiers. Men don't need

to be protected by female policemen.

We don't have to have the kind of society we have now. The

government, and the media, and the schools, may all be leftist

enemies, but their ways are so contrary to human nature that it can be

changed.

The two main forces that reject the unisex society are religion

and nationalism. There certainly

wasn't much feminism going on in a Muslim country like Afghanistan.

And it is no coincidence that the USA bombed Afghanistan. The USA and

its masters the Jews are the enemy and that is the first thing we need

to be clear about if we are going to change things. There were also

Nationalist countries that were also bombed by the USA and the other

leftists. The media will tell us how terrible they say these countries

were. We must always remember that the media is the enemy and they are

the ones pushing unisex culture on us.

Feminism is something we must always fight against. But a normal

man who considers women his enemy must eventually go mad. Feminism may

be a major symptom of what is wrong with this country but it is only a

symptom. The Jewish control of the media and society is the disease.

And feminism is Jewish:

Gloria Steinem was a Jew. Bella Abzug was a Jew. Betty Friedan was

a Jew.

"THE JEWISH 100: A Ranking Of the Most Influential Jews Of All Time"

By Michael Shaprio

# 56 Betty Friedan (b. 1921)

Born Betty Naomi Goldstein to Harry and Miriam (Horowitz) Goldstein in

Peoria, Illinois, educated at Smith College, married in 1947 to Carl

Friedan, the mother of three children, divorced in 1969, activist,

best-selling author, professor, a founder of the National Organization

for Women (NOW), the National Women's Political Caucus, and the First

Women's Bank, researcher, journalist, Democrat, clinical psychologist,

and grandmother, Betty Friedan was the most influential feminist of

the postwar era. Deemed by Marilyn French and others as an "initiator

of the 'second wave' of feminism, " Friedan's writings and lectures,

including the highly influential books THE FEMININE MYSTIQUE and THE

SECOND STAGE, synthesized women's views on what equality meant and how

to live and work... When the war against fascism ended two decades

later, four million women lost their jobs to returning GIs. Women were

again told that their place was in the home. The freedom to work to

build up and defend their nation was over. Men would earn the family's

bread. What the boys needed was a warm place to come home to every

night. Ironically, American soldiers had accepted some of the values

toward women (Kinder, Kuche, Kirche - children, kitchen, church) as

the Nazis they thought they had defeated...

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com

http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/

http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html

"Topaz" <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:jesiu3hqjifflgqsba1g318jmucufalss8@4ax.com...

>

> The leftists who rule America are for having a unisex country and

> for fighting "sexism". This should be replaced by a nation that is for

> manhood and womenhood. Not only are the sexes different, but the

> reason we are attracted to the opposite sex is precisely because they

> are different.

But equal under a country that recognizes human equality. That's not

something I would expect someone as bigoted as a neonazi to understand, but

it's the principle of our government, Herr Topaz, a more perfect union

toward which we must always strive.

<lorad474@cs.com> wrote in message

news:a964392b-f53d-4ca0-a3fc-c0f2ecaf7dc8@13g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...

On Mar 25, 2:12 pm, "Gandalf Grey" <valino...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Topaz" <mars1...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

>

> news:jesiu3hqjifflgqsba1g318jmucufalss8@4ax.com...

>

> > The leftists who rule America are for having a unisex country and

> > for fighting "sexism". This should be replaced by a nation that is for

> > manhood and womenhood. Not only are the sexes different, but the

> > reason we are attracted to the opposite sex is precisely because they

> > are different.

>

> But equal under a country that recognizes human equality. That's not

> something I would expect someone as bigoted as a neonazi to understand,

> but

> it's the principle of our government, Herr Topaz, a more perfect union

> toward which we must always strive.

Well... we done arrived..a long time ago.. (haven't you heard of

federal minority placement programs?)..and then went on to smash the

terminal.

These days being male, white, and non-mexican now constitute three

strikes against career advancement.

(if you work in corporate neocon america)

Name for me - which you will be unable to do - any lack of equality

that you might perceive to exist in US Law.

Then re-assess your biases.

____________________________________________________

Tell me - which you'll be unable to do - how U.S. Law accurately reflects

the bigotry of types like you.

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:12:54 -0700, "Gandalf Grey"

<valinor20@gmail.com> wrote:

>But equal under a country that recognizes human equality.

That is false.

"I was listening to a speech that he gave in Sweden. You can listen at

the

Url below if ya want. http://www.davidduke.com/

Anyway, the guy made an analogy that sums it all up.

He said, lets look at Iceland. They have one of the worlds lowest

crime rates, and have some of the worlds highest test scores.

He then went on to say: Haiti is rich in natural resources, they have

great weather, beaches etc.. Yet its a murder, rape capital of the

world. etc, etc.

He went on to say: If we were to take all of the people from Haiti &

Move them to Iceland, Well, they would soon die.

Take those from Iceland and move them to Haiti and within one

generation Haiti would be paradise on earth.

He explained it better than I did. But you should get the gist of the

Iceland / Haiti analogy. Better yet, listen to the Stockholm speech

and hear it for yourself.."

Tommy

> That's not

>something I would expect someone as bigoted as a neonazi to understand, but

>it's the principle of our government, Herr Topaz, a more perfect union

>toward which we must always strive.

>

Your government is based on lies.

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com

http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/

http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html

"Topaz" <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:7fglu39nn9ht0ghjqa4gqc90ufukohjc25@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:12:54 -0700, "Gandalf Grey"

> <valinor20@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>

>>But equal under a country that recognizes human equality.

>

> That is false.

What's false about it, Herr Topaz?

On Mar 24, 8:42 am, "Gandalf Grey" <valino...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Gender bias remains alive and strong

>

> By Jaime O'Neill

>

> Created Mar 22 2008 - 10:55am

>

> This column for Karen, on her birthday

>

> My 82-year-old mother is bereft. Mom was born just six years after women got

> the right to vote in this country, and she thought for awhile there that she

> might live long enough to see a woman become president. Now it looks as

> though that won't happen.

>

<snip>

Your mother has gender bias. There is a tendency for people with

gender bias to be racists. They should be more concerned with black

people becoming President.

Prove that tendency right where.

(snicker)

"znuybv" <thowilson@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:b330e394-47e5-462a-9fbe-0c7d18ba24af@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

> On Mar 24, 8:42 am, "Gandalf Grey" <valino...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Gender bias remains alive and strong

> >

> > By Jaime O'Neill

> >

> > Created Mar 22 2008 - 10:55am

> >

> > This column for Karen, on her birthday

> >

> > My 82-year-old mother is bereft. Mom was born just six years after women

got

> > the right to vote in this country, and she thought for awhile there that

she

> > might live long enough to see a woman become president. Now it looks as

> > though that won't happen.

> >

> <snip>

> Your mother has gender bias. There is a tendency for people with

> gender bias to be racists. They should be more concerned with black

> people becoming President.

Gandalf Grey wrote:

> Gender bias remains alive and strong

>

> By Jaime O'Neill

>

> Created Mar 22 2008 - 10:55am

>

>

> This column for Karen, on her birthday

>

> My 82-year-old mother is bereft. Mom was born just six years after women got

> the right to vote in this country, and she thought for awhile there that she

> might live long enough to see a woman become president. Now it looks as

> though that won't happen.

>

> And, though I personally will be happy to see Barack Obama follow the

> catastrophic George Bush into the highest office in the land, I, too, am

> disappointed that Hillary's bid for the presidency is floundering and likely

> to fail. As the father of two daughters, I know a Hillary Clinton victory

> would have had enormous symbolic and psychological significance for younger

> women. It would have been "empowering," in the true sense of that

> perniciously overused word.

It certainly would.

I'm fairly certain that as President, President Hillary will declare

anti-abortion protesters to be "terrorists" (for allegedly "terrorizing"

abortion clinics). That will enable her to invoke the PATRIOT Act

against them, and have all the anti-abortion protest leaders arrested

and sent to Gitmo.

I'm not kidding. I think that is a very real possibility with a Hillary

Administration.

--

Steven L.

Email: sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net

Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.

"Steven L." <sdlitvin@earthlink.net> wrote in

news:13um2gl518bs193@corp.supernews.com:

> Gandalf Grey wrote:

>> Gender bias remains alive and strong

>>

>> By Jaime O'Neill

>>

>> Created Mar 22 2008 - 10:55am

>>

>>

>> This column for Karen, on her birthday

>>

>> My 82-year-old mother is bereft. Mom was born just six years after

>> women got the right to vote in this country, and she thought for awhile

>> there that she might live long enough to see a woman become president.

>> Now it looks as though that won't happen.

>>

>> And, though I personally will be happy to see Barack Obama follow the

>> catastrophic George Bush into the highest office in the land, I, too,

>> am disappointed that Hillary's bid for the presidency is floundering

>> and likely to fail. As the father of two daughters, I know a Hillary

>> Clinton victory would have had enormous symbolic and psychological

>> significance for younger women. It would have been "empowering," in the

>> true sense of that perniciously overused word.

>

> It certainly would.

>

> I'm fairly certain that as President, President Hillary will declare

> anti-abortion protesters to be "terrorists" (for allegedly "terrorizing"

> abortion clinics). That will enable her to invoke the PATRIOT Act

> against them, and have all the anti-abortion protest leaders arrested

> and sent to Gitmo.

>

> I'm not kidding. I think that is a very real possibility with a Hillary

> Administration.

>

There is no possibility of a Hillary administration.

lorad474@cs.com wrote in news:0c873329-9932-47b0-9d26-d771d39ff0d9

@p73g2000hsd.googlegroups.com:

> On Mar 26, 6:49

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 07:38:57 -0500, Mitchell Holman

<Noemail@comcast.com> wrote:

>lorad474@cs.com wrote in news:0c873329-9932-47b0-9d26-d771d39ff0d9

>@p73g2000hsd.googlegroups.com:

>

>> On Mar 26, 6:49

lorad474@cs.com wrote in news:36fdb2fb-26f8-4bac-9556-f8d255e10dc7

@u72g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:

> On Mar 27, 4:38

On Mar 26, 7:44 pm, "Steven L." <sdlit...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Gandalf Grey wrote:

> > Gender bias remains alive and strong

>

> > By Jaime O'Neill

>

> > Created Mar 22 2008 - 10:55am

>

> > This column for Karen, on her birthday

>

> > My 82-year-old mother is bereft. Mom was born just six years after women got

> > the right to vote in this country, and she thought for awhile there that she

> > might live long enough to see a woman become president. Now it looks as

> > though that won't happen.

>

> > And, though I personally will be happy to see Barack Obama follow the

> > catastrophic George Bush into the highest office in the land, I, too, am

> > disappointed that Hillary's bid for the presidency is floundering and likely

> > to fail. As the father of two daughters, I know a Hillary Clinton victory

> > would have had enormous symbolic and psychological significance for younger

> > women. It would have been "empowering," in the true sense of that

> > perniciously overused word.

>

> It certainly would.

>

> I'm fairly certain that as President, President Hillary will declare

> anti-abortion protesters to be "terrorists" (for allegedly "terrorizing"

> abortion clinics). That will enable her to invoke the PATRIOT Act

> against them, and have all the anti-abortion protest leaders arrested

> and sent to Gitmo.

>

> I'm not kidding. I think that is a very real possibility with a Hillary

> Administration.

>

> --

> Steven L.

> Email: sdlit...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net

> Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.

Hello,

The fact that you're "fairly certain" that Hillary would do such

things, lacking any evidence whatsoever, again shows why nothing you

assert should be taken seriously. Your assertions and predictions are

based on nothing by your partisan blindness.

Carlos

<lorad474@cs.com> wrote in message

news:e8995076-9513-497d-bcb3-2ddb340b0faf@13g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...

On Mar 25, 3:08 pm, "Gandalf Grey" <valino...@gmail.com> wrote:

> <lorad...@cs.com> wrote in message

>

> news:a964392b-f53d-4ca0-a3fc-c0f2ecaf7dc8@13g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...

> On Mar 25, 2:12 pm, "Gandalf Grey" <valino...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

> > "Topaz" <mars1...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

>

> >news:jesiu3hqjifflgqsba1g318jmucufalss8@4ax.com...

>

> > > The leftists who rule America are for having a unisex country and

> > > for fighting "sexism". This should be replaced by a nation that is for

> > > manhood and womenhood. Not only are the sexes different, but the

> > > reason we are attracted to the opposite sex is precisely because they

> > > are different.

>

> > But equal under a country that recognizes human equality. That's not

> > something I would expect someone as bigoted as a neonazi to understand,

> > but

> > it's the principle of our government, Herr Topaz, a more perfect union

> > toward which we must always strive.

>

> Well... we done arrived..a long time ago.. (haven't you heard of

> federal minority placement programs?)..and then went on to smash the

> terminal.

>

> These days being male, white, and non-mexican now constitute three

> strikes against career advancement.

> (if you work in corporate neocon america)

>

> Name for me - which you will be unable to do - any lack of equality

> that you might perceive to exist in US Law.

> Then re-assess your biases.

> ____________________________________________________

>

> Tell me - which you'll be unable to do - how U.S. Law accurately reflects

> the bigotry of types like you.

It looks like you wanted to respond..

It looks like you can't answer the question.

On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:26:21 -0700, "Gandalf Grey"

<valinor20@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>"Topaz" <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote in message

>news:7fglu39nn9ht0ghjqa4gqc90ufukohjc25@4ax.com...

>> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:12:54 -0700, "Gandalf Grey"

>> <valinor20@gmail.com> wrote:

>>

>>

>>>But equal under a country that recognizes human equality.

>>

>> That is false.

>

>What's false about it, Herr Topaz?

>

The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black

nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second

world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.

It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than

the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the

people in India.

All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more

intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything

important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on

the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses

are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:

"One of the most powerful direct studies of race and environment

was conducted by psychologists Sandra Scarr, Richard Weinberg and I.

D. Waldman. All three were quite well-known for their environmental

opinions. The study analyzed White, Black, and Mixed-race adopted

children in more than 100 White families in Minnesota. The study was

an egalitarian's dream, because the children's adoptive parents had

prestigious levels of income and education and were anti-racist enough

to adopt a Black child into their own family. Scarr is a strong

defender of racial equality and maintained that environment played an

almost exclusive role in IQ differences between the races. Scarr

supports the importance of heredity in causing individual differences

within a race, but she has argued that between-race differences are

mostly environmental.

The children in the study included Whites, Blacks, and Mulattos as

well as the biological children of the White adoptive couples. At the

age of 7, the children were tested for IQ, and all of the groups

including the Blacks and Mulattos, scored above average in IQ. Scarr

and Weinberg published a paper claiming to have proven the almost

exclusive power of environment over race in IQ, even though they had

to admit that the White children, whether adopted or not, scored well

above the Black and Mulatto children and that the Mulatto children

scored above the Blacks. (88)

A decade later, when the children reached the age of 17, a

follow-up study was conducted that that again included IQ

measurements. As they matured, Black children had dropped back to an

average of 89 in IQ, which is the average IQ for Blacks in the region

of the United States where the study was done. The White adopted

children scored an average of 106 in IQ, 17 points higher than the

Black children, which is consistant with traditional studies of Black

and White IQ differences. In line with genetic theory the half-White,

half-Black Mulatto adopted children scored almost exactly between the

adopted Whites and Blacks. (89)

RESULTS OF MINNESOTA TRANSRACIAL ADOPTION STUDY

IQ

Parental IQ 115.35

Biological Children 109.4

White Adopted children 105.6

Mulatto parents adopted children 98.5

Black parents adopted children 89.4

Scarr and Wienberg reluctantly published their data from the

follow up survey, but they waited close to four years to do so, almost

as if they were embarrassed by what they had found. Through a tortured

reasoning process, they still argued that environment played a

dominant role in IQ. But in their follow-up survey, unlike their first

paper, they also admitted that genes had an important impact as well.

Both Richard Lynn and Michael Levin effectively showed in their

re-analysis of Scarr's own data, that genes clearly comprise the

dominant role in intelligence levels of those adopted children. (90)

(91)"

(88) Scarr, S, & Weinberg R. A. (1976). IQ Test Perfomance of Black

Children Adopted By White Families. American Psychologist. Vol. 31.

p.26-739

(89) Weinberg, R. A. , Scarr, S., & Waldman, I. D. (1992). The

Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. A Follow-Up of IQ Test

Performance at Adolescence, Intelligence. Vol 16.

p.17-135

(90) Lynn, R. (1994). Reinterpretations Of The Minnesota Transracial

Adoption Study. Intelligence. Vol. 19. p.1-27

(91) Levin, M. (1994). Comment on The Minnesota Transracial Adoption

Study. Intelligence Vol. 19. p.3-20

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com

http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/

http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html

"Topaz" <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:2ebou35fbjho4ha4cgcsg5ob9l2dg42kd2@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:26:21 -0700, "Gandalf Grey"

> <valinor20@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>>

>>"Topaz" <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote in message

>>news:7fglu39nn9ht0ghjqa4gqc90ufukohjc25@4ax.com...

>>> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:12:54 -0700, "Gandalf Grey"

>>> <valinor20@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>But equal under a country that recognizes human equality.

>>>

>>> That is false.

>>

>>What's false about it, Herr Topaz?

>>

>

> The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black

> nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second

> world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.

And that would be an idiotic prediction without evidence to back it up.

> It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than

> the Black race.

Not true at all.

> All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more

> intelligent than Blacks.

No they haven't.

On Mar 27, 6:08 am, Mitchell Holman <Noem...@comcast.com> wrote:

> lorad...@cs.com wrote in news:36fdb2fb-26f8-4bac-9556-f8d255e10dc7

> @u72g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:

>

>

>

>

>

> > On Mar 27, 4:38 am, Mitchell Holman <Noem...@comcast.com> wrote:

> >> lorad...@cs.com wrote in news:0c873329-9932-47b0-9d26-d771d39ff0d9

> >> @p73g2000hsd.googlegroups.com:

>

> >> > On Mar 26, 6:49 pm, Mitchell Holman <Noem...@comcast.com> wrote:

> >> >> "Steven L." <sdlit...@earthlink.net> wrote innews:13um2gl518bs193

> >> @corp.sup

> >> > ernews.com:

>

> >> >> > Gandalf Grey wrote:

> >> >> >> Gender bias remains alive and strong

>

> >> >> >> By Jaime O'Neill

>

> >> >> >> Created Mar 22 2008 - 10:55am

>

> >> >> >> This column for Karen, on her birthday

>

> >> >> >> My 82-year-old mother is bereft. Mom was born just six years after

> >> >> >> women got the right to vote in this country, and she thought for

> >> awhile

>

> >> >> >> there that she might live long enough to see a woman become

> >> president.

> >> >> >> Now it looks as though that won't happen.

>

> >> >> >> And, though I personally will be happy to see Barack Obama follow

> th

> > e

> >> >> >> catastrophic George Bush into the highest office in the land, I,

> too

> > ,

> >> >> >> am disappointed that Hillary's bid for the presidency is

> floundering

>

> >> >> >> and likely to fail. As the father of two daughters, I know a

> Hillary

>

> >> >> >> Clinton victory would have had enormous symbolic and psychological

> >> >> >> significance for younger women. It would have been "empowering,"

> in

> >> the

>

> >> >> >> true sense of that perniciously overused word.

>

> >> >> > It certainly would.

>

> >> >> > I'm fairly certain that as President, President Hillary will

> declare

> >> >> > anti-abortion protesters to be "terrorists" (for allegedly

> >> "terrorizing"

>

> >> >> > abortion clinics). That will enable her to invoke the PATRIOT Act

> >> >> > against them, and have all the anti-abortion protest leaders

> arrested

>

> >> >> > and sent to Gitmo.

>

> >> >> > I'm not kidding. I think that is a very real possibility with a Hi

> > lla

> >> > ry

> >> >> > Administration.

>

> >> >> There is no possibility of a Hillary administration.

>

> >> > If so... then there is no possibilty of an Obama administration

> either.

>

> >> Sure there is. Do you think the public really wants to follow

> >> up Bush jr with Bush version 3.0? McCain is Bob Dole without the

> >> charm, and we saw how far his campaign got.

>

> >> The democrats could run Barney the purple dinosaur in the fall

> >> and still win.

>

> > With a predicted 30% democrat defection against Obama...

> > And with all the negatives that the neocons will expand once they have

> > finished setting him up..?

>

> > It most definitely is not a sure thing.

>

> > The guy is unqualified.

>

> Obama is a US citizen, over 35, and has lived in the

> US for the last 14 years. The Constitution says he is

> qualified enough..........

The voters will judge whether he is qualified. He is the most liberal

Senator. He is claiming that he isn't but the people are not buying

it.

znuybv <thowilson@gmail.com> wrote in

news:71be3e84-1b14-40c7-a534-c4ddbf8e5cac@c19g2000prf.googlegroups.com:

> On Mar 27, 6:08 am, Mitchell Holman <Noem...@comcast.com> wrote:

>> lorad...@cs.com wrote in news:36fdb2fb-26f8-4bac-9556-f8d255e10dc7

>> @u72g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> > On Mar 27, 4:38 am, Mitchell Holman <Noem...@comcast.com> wrote:

>> >> lorad...@cs.com wrote in news:0c873329-9932-47b0-9d26-d771d39ff0d9

>> >> @p73g2000hsd.googlegroups.com:

>>

>> >> > On Mar 26, 6:49 pm, Mitchell Holman <Noem...@comcast.com> wrote:

>> >> >> "Steven L." <sdlit...@earthlink.net> wrote innews:13um2gl518bs193

>> >> @corp.sup

>> >> > ernews.com:

>>

>> >> >> > Gandalf Grey wrote:

>> >> >> >> Gender bias remains alive and strong

>>

>> >> >> >> By Jaime O'Neill

>>

>> >> >> >> Created Mar 22 2008 - 10:55am

>>

>> >> >> >> This column for Karen, on her birthday

>>

>> >> >> >> My 82-year-old mother is bereft. Mom was born just six years

>> >> >> >> after women got the right to vote in this country, and she

>> >> >> >> thought for

>> >> awhile

>>

>> >> >> >> there that she might live long enough to see a woman become

>> >> president.

>> >> >> >> Now it looks as though that won't happen.

>>

>> >> >> >> And, though I personally will be happy to see Barack Obama

>> >> >> >> follow

>> th

>> > e

>> >> >> >> catastrophic George Bush into the highest office in the land,

>> >> >> >> I,

>> too

>> > ,

>> >> >> >> am disappointed that Hillary's bid for the presidency is

>> floundering

>>

>> >> >> >> and likely to fail. As the father of two daughters, I know a

>> Hillary

>>

>> >> >> >> Clinton victory would have had enormous symbolic and

>> >> >> >> psychological significance for younger women. It would have

>> >> >> >> been "empowering,"

>> in

>> >> the

>>

>> >> >> >> true sense of that perniciously overused word.

>>

>> >> >> > It certainly would.

>>

>> >> >> > I'm fairly certain that as President, President Hillary will

>> declare

>> >> >> > anti-abortion protesters to be "terrorists" (for allegedly

>> >> "terrorizing"

>>

>> >> >> > abortion clinics). That will enable her to invoke the PATRIOT

>> >> >> > Act against them, and have all the anti-abortion protest

>> >> >> > leaders

>> arrested

>>

>> >> >> > and sent to Gitmo.

>>

>> >> >> > I'm not kidding. I think that is a very real possibility with

>> >> >> > a Hi

>> > lla

>> >> > ry

>> >> >> > Administration.

>>

>> >> >> There is no possibility of a Hillary administration.

>>

>> >> > If so... then there is no possibilty of an Obama administration

>> either.

>>

>> >> Sure there is. Do you think the public really wants to follow

>> >> up Bush jr with Bush version 3.0? McCain is Bob Dole without the

>> >> charm, and we saw how far his campaign got.

>>

>> >> The democrats could run Barney the purple dinosaur in the fall

>> >> and still win.

>>

>> > With a predicted 30% democrat defection against Obama...

>> > And with all the negatives that the neocons will expand once they

>> > have finished setting him up..?

>>

>> > It most definitely is not a sure thing.

>>

>> > The guy is unqualified.

>>

>> Obama is a US citizen, over 35, and has lived in the

>> US for the last 14 years. The Constitution says he is

>> qualified enough..........

>

> The voters will judge whether he is qualified. He is the most liberal

> Senator. He is claiming that he isn't but the people are not buying

> it.

>

Weren't you just claiming that Hillary was the

most liberal senator?