If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.
We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.
Our YouTube channel is here.
Today’s video is here (3:31).
Over a period of almost six months we’re posting links to one video daily from the comedy channel of our associated award-winning website, Laughing at Feminists. Remember, it’s more than important to laugh at feminists, it’s a civic duty.
You might also be interested in the 700+ videos on our YouTube channel, which includes our media appearances since 2012, 300+ videos of talks and other materials from the International Conferences on Men’s Issues (2014 – ), from the other men’s issues conferences we’ve been involved with, and so much more. The individual conference playlists are here.
—————————-
If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.
We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.
Today’s video is here (10:41).
Over a period of almost six months we’re posting links to one video daily from the comedy channel of our associated award-winning website, Laughing at Feminists. Remember, it’s more than important to laugh at feminists, it’s a civic duty.
You might also be interested in the 700+ videos on our YouTube channel, which includes our media appearances since 2012, 300+ videos of talks and other materials from the International Conferences on Men’s Issues (2014 – ), from the other men’s issues conferences we’ve been involved with, and so much more. The individual conference playlists are here.
—————————-
If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.
We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.
The start of the Executive Summary of an interesting report (2009) from the Cato Institute:
“On July 1, 2001, a nationwide law in Portugal took effect that decriminalized all drugs, including cocaine and heroin. Under the new legal framework, all drugs were “decriminalized,” not “legalized.” Thus, drug possession for personal use and drug usage itself are still legally prohibited, but violations of those prohibitions are deemed to be exclusively administrative violations and are removed completely from the criminal realm. Drug trafficking continues to be prosecuted as a criminal offense.”
The report:
If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.
We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.
Our YouTube channel is here.
There are, to the best of my knowledge, no fields of human endeavour – physical or intellectual, and where performance can be measured objectively – in which women compete at the top level in significant numbers (if any). In many fields (chess comes to mind) there are (and always have been) none, which explains the continued sex segregation in chess as well as in sports.
So why, one might reasonably ask, are women so convinced of their superiority over men? I’ll offer one explanation after introducing an experminent carried out in an American schoolroom by a schoolmistress, Jane Elliott, on April 5, 1968, [J4MB: a Friday] the day after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. A section of her Wikipedia page:
“Steven Armstrong was the first child to arrive in Elliott’s classroom. Referring to Martin Luther King Jr., he asked, “Why’d they shoot that King?” After the rest of the class arrived, Elliott asked them how they think it feels to be a black boy or girl. She suggested to the class it would be hard for them to understand discrimination without experiencing it themselves and then asked the children if they would like to find out. The children agreed with a chorus of “yeah”. She decided to base the exercise on eye color rather than skin color to show the children what racial segregation would be like.
At first, there was resistance among the students in the minority group to the idea that brown-eyed children were better than blue-eyed children. To counter this, Elliott lied to the children by stating melanin was linked to their higher intelligence and learning ability. Shortly thereafter, this initial resistance fell away. Those who were deemed “superior” became arrogant, bossy, and otherwise unpleasant to their “inferior” classmates. Their grades on simple tests were better, and they completed mathematical and reading tasks that had seemed outside their ability before. The “inferior” classmates also transformed – into timid and subservient children who scored more poorly on tests, and even during recess isolated themselves, including those who had previously been dominant in the class. These children’s academic performance suffered, even with tasks that had been simple before.
[J4MB: I very much doubt that the necessary work to establish these conclusions could have been carried out on all the children on the same day. The woman, now 91, was a leftie and therefore prone to unashamedly inventing things for ideological purposes.]
The next Monday, Elliott reversed the exercise, making the blue-eyed children superior. While the blue-eyed children did taunt the brown-eyed children in ways similar to what had occurred the previous day, Elliott reports it was much less intense. To reflect on the experience, she asked the children to write down what they had learned.”
Also from Elliott’s Wiki page:
“Elliott is considered to be the forerunner of diversity training, with the “Blue Eyes/Brown Eyes” exercise [J4MB: The reported results of which might have been 100% invention] as the basis of much of what is now called diversity training. She has done such training for corporations such as General Electric, Exxon, AT&T, and IBM, as well as lectured to the FBI, IRS, US Navy, US Department of Education, and US Postal Service.”
I’ll finish on brown eyes / blue eyes by linking to a piece from 2022 by Stephen G Bloom, Professor of Journalism at the University of Ohio, A second look at the blue-eyes, brown-eyes experiment that taught third-graders about racism. Elliot was a nasty piece of work, I expect she still is. An extract from the piece:
“Elliott turned into America’s mother of diversity training.
The anti-racism sessions Elliott led were intense. To get her points across, Elliott hurled insults at workshop participants, particularly those who were white and had blue eyes. For many, the experiment went horribly awry.
In doing the research for my book with scores of peoples who were participants in the experiment, I reached out to Elliott. At first, she cooperated with me. But when she discovered that I was asking pointed questions of scores of her former students, as well as others subjected to the experiment, she made an about-face and said she no longer would cooperate with me. She has since refused to answer any of my inquiries.
Scores of others did participate. I interviewed Julie Pasicznyk, who had been working for US West, a giant telecommunications company in Minneapolis. She was hesitant to enroll in Elliott’s workshop but was told that if she wanted to succeed as a manager, she’d have to attend. Pasicznyk joined 75 other employees for a training session in the company’s suburban Denver headquarters in the late 1980s.
“Right off the bat, she picked me out of the room and called me ‘Barbie,’” Pasicznyk told me. “That’s how it started, and that’s how it went all day long. She had never met me, and she accused me in front of everyone of using my sexuality to get ahead.”
“Barbie” had to have a Ken, so Elliott picked from the audience a tall, handsome man and accused him of doing the same things with his female subordinates, Pasicznyk said. Elliott went after “Ken” and “Barbie” all day long, drilling, accusing, ridiculing them, to make the point that whites make baseless judgments about Blacks all the time, Pasicznyk said.
Elliott championed the experiment as an “inoculation against racism.”
[J4MB: End of extract]
I suggest to you that the impact of decades of women and girls being told how amazing they are, and men and boys being told how defective they are, has parallels with the brown eyes / blue eyes experminent. This is combined with women’s and girls’ narcissistic propensity to believe flattering things said about them (and/or their sex) regardless of how out of kilter they are with observable reality.
A personal anecdote should illustrate the point. 30+ years ago I was in a nightclub with a few friends including a lady (her boyfriend was also in the party) who returned to our table in a state of some excitement, saying, “That man over there” – she pointed to a man on the dance floor – “just told me I was the most beautiful woman he’d ever seen!!!” I’d never seen her look so happy. An hour ot two later she returned again to the table, looking very morose, saying, “I just heard the man tell another women she was the most beautiful woman he’d ever seen!” She was genuinely crestfallen.
If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.
We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.
Our YouTube channel is here.
Interesting. “Sanatan-disrespecting” means “Hindu(ism)-disrespecting”.
If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.
We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.
Our YouTube channel is here.