Make That a Few Things

This group is called "I'm going to say something controversial." I'm not going to say something controversial. I'm going to say a few things that are controversial.

First, let me start in a spot that's not so close to the heart: The economy. (Okay, this is hurting some right now, but it's not quite as personal as some other things I'm going to address.) Right now, America (and a lot of the world) is in an economic recession, and everyone seems to be screaming the same thing: Bring the government in! If the government would only assist failing banks, or failing homeowners, or something like that, all will be well again. These same people overlook the fact that a major cause for our recession is the housing bubble, which was created by the government! Alan Greenspan, the chair of the Federal Reserve, encouraged lenders to lend more money to prospective home buyers who couldn't make ends meet. Presidents Clinton and G.W. Bush cheered him on. During his 2004 re-election campaign, President Bush frequently took the stand and praised the rise in home buying, leading a chorus of politicians who made it sound like it was patriotic to own your own residence.

These people created the economic mess we're in, and our response to ask them to fix it? When interviewed on ABC's 20/20, Walter Williams, one of America's foremost economists, compared it to witnessing a house fire: "Would you ask the arsonist who created the fire to help put it out?" Baffles him; bewilders me, as well.

On that same note, why have all this government? Right now, in the United States, government costs $10,000 for every citizen–––male and female, child and adult, every race and every background. That's where it was last time I checked. And it's failed! Yes, we need government to protect our rights and liberties as outlined in the Constitution; yes, we need police and fire departments. But do we need the Bureau of Indian Affairs (an organization which, in my mind, is responsible for the impoverishment of an entire minority group)? The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau? The Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage Corridor Commission? The International Broadcasting Bureau? And what about all the duplicates: We have an International Trade Commission and an International Trade Administration. We should keep one and eliminate the other, if we keep either at all. This is just at the Federal level. My home state of Washington has a total of 194 state agencies listed on their website, also with those same duplications. What particular catches my eye is that there is an Asparagus Commission, Red Raspberry Commission, Fruit Commission, Blueberry Commission, Apple Commission, Wheat Commission, Wine Commission, Cherry Commission (nicknamed Northwest Cherries), Seed Potato Commission, Fryer(?!) Commission (apparently something to do with chicken), Dairy Products Commission, Barley Commission, and Beef Commission. All of this doesn't count what we have at more local levels.

Of course, when anyone proposes shrinking government, the reaction is "NOOO!" But why? It's not like we're safer with any of this crap.

Lastly, I'll get to that aforementioned heart: Gender politics. I won't deny the fact that women were cruelly suppressed, and had to fight hard to win the right to work, vote, and such. I can appreciate that. But d*** it! You shouldn't blame me for the fact that your gender was suppressed by my ancestors!

I used to think I wouldn't get married because I'm unlucky. Now I'm convinced the reason why I'll never get married is because I demand respect in my relationships. I tell women, "You will not win every argument. You cannot use sex to get your way. If you cross me, I'll throw YOU on the couch for the night." Wives do this to their husbands all the time, and it's considered no big deal–––or, worse, a laughing matter. But when the roles are reversed and a husband does it: CHAUVINISM! MISOGYNY! DIVORCE HIM! I'm willing to weather those remarks for the sake of getting the treatment I deserve as a human being. Husbands don't want to–––either they're afraid of the labels, or they're afraid of being denied sex. That's not a joke: Some fellows have actually told me something along the lines of, "I don't want to p*** my wife off, because then I'll get punished in bed."

In fact, I think women have an unfair advantage in this world. The media is totally on their side, willing to feed their victimhood by an "endlessly misogynistic society." Politicians are on their side. Any politician or medium who deviates from that line and sympathizes with men is considered evil. As such, the long list of issues facing men–––the lack of fair hearing in child custody cases, the unfairness of the draft, the educational disparity between boys and girls in K-12 schools–––goes unreported, because it's either made-up or politically incorrect.

I realize I've gone on a long while. But if you give me a soapbox, I'm going to stand up on it and raise my voice to whoever will listen.


rustyguy rustyguy
18-21, M
7 Responses Mar 20, 2009

Sexism does go both ways, but I'm pretty sure you exaggerated it. A lot of women DON'T abuse their husbands and get away with it. Not ALL feminists are radicals that call everything sexist and hate men.

my ex husband nearly beat me to death for disagreeing with him or even looking at him the wrong way. considering you are a young man in your 20s i believe you should pull your head in about judging all women by what your young married friends are telling you. you can't tell a severely abused woman that she haz power in her marriage or that gender politics haz been won by females. <br />
<br />
you are a male which puts you in a point of opposition to women's freedoms anyway, especially when your claim to issue is over sex politics and childish role-reversals. gender roles should be abolished in my not-so-humble opinion. it only serves to create stupid bickering about the sexes like you are doing and increases violence towards women behind closed doors when people are too afraid for their lives to speak out, knowing that the man-loving system will not help them or even worse, force them to provide evidence that they aren't lying while he gets name suppression and rights to privacy. <br />
<br />
as you get older you will learn eventually how narrow your view of the world is now. or not. but you seem like an intelligent man... don't waste your intelligence on gender wars, women do not have equal rights or pay, nor do some of us have any rights in our romantic relationships to be free from violence, domination, rape and control by force. modern day feminists are not blaming your ancestors for hurting women in the past, we are still fighting for freedom from getting raped, beaten and killed just for being females IN THIS PRESENT DAY. don't believe me? ask middle-eastern women why they aren't allowed to drive themselves anywhere or go anywhere without their male *owner*. do not make judgment on women's issues if all you can do is offer narrow opinion about western gender politics. it's not a well-rounded argument and yes you are going to annoy women who have experience in the social harms against them.

Exactly my point, women are still suppressed and although the court system favors women in things like custody it practically ignores them when it comes to violence.

You are definitely thinking, jp5040. But here are some counterpoints.<br />
<br />
Highways: I suggest you look up "91 Express Lanes" on Wikipedia. It talks about a highway in California that was privately-owned and worked much better than the alternative government routes.<br />
<br />
Healthcare: Yes, it costs less. How long are the waiting times, though?<br />
<br />
Forestry: In the western U.S., the worst forest fires occurred on government land. This is because government allowed underbrush to collect and act like kindling. However, on private lands, management takes better care of things.

No doubt about it, our govt. is currently set up not to uphold justice for its citizens but to curtail justice and take advantage of our citizens. We don't need "bigger" govt. we need to downsize our govt. and make changes so the powerful do not pray on the weak. <br />
<br />
Such organizations such as The Federal Reserve.... has nothing to do with "federal" but is comprised of Chairman from Banks sitting on a committee that governs their own industry. This is also true for the AMA -American Medical Association and the BAR Association. These are all corrupt organizations that protect their own at the expense of our people and our rights. <br />
<br />
Most of corporate America believe in "laissez faire" capitalism. Wonderful to get the govt. out of the way? Well, the problem is our govt. is already out of the way.....way, way, out of the way of protecting our people and are protecting big business interest in the expense of the people. This is where this recession/depression was able to take root. It's one thing to give opp. to those less fortunate but another to take advantage of those uneducated or to allow a system that does not enforce simple checks and balances. Big business is corrupt and they have our politicians in their pocket. The biggest scam businesses use is the "hurry up, now" scheme. Every salesperson uses it and it was used by Big Business with our Congress. "Hurry up, and sign b/c the sky is falling....." In other words, we need your billions now, b/c I want my bonus before the company closes...." How could anyone ok a stimulus pkg. of 165 billion without contingencies is beyond belief. Every congress person who signed that first bill needs to leave their seat.<br />
The second bill is not much better....more pork.<br />
Obama, himself rec'd $100,000. from AIG for his campaign and now wants us to believe Timothy G. is the intelligence we need. Ok. so far not impressed.<br />
Nancy Pelosi....give me a break. How two-faced can you get? Pelosi and crew so outraged with the car execs. dare they show up in private jets? Well, about 10 members of our congress took a private jet to Italy a few weeks later. No not across a couple of states....TO ITALY IN A PRIVATE JET. LETS KICK ALL 10 OF THEM OUT!<br />
<br />
Yes, I agree there are still some differences between the sexes..... Although I have never kicked a boyfriend to the couch ...I see your point. I think this is more about working towards compromise and conflict resolution within the relationship itself than society roles.<br />
I do think the court system does favor women in many circumstances - especially in short term marriages whereas the wife (with no children) walks away with half of everything the man has worked for - significant settlements that defy logic. A nice example is the McCartney Divorce. I am sure he offered Linda a generous severance package but ......of course, it just wasn't enough.....she was looking for say....50million. Some changes are in the system but more changes are needed......hopefully society will work the kinks out for a more justified system.

Let me re-iterate something I wrote: "I won't deny the fact that women were cruelly suppressed, and had to fight hard to win the right to work, vote, and such. I can appreciate that." Yes, it is a twisted country in that regard, but we need to look at both sides of the coin.

hippyheart, I'm sorry you feel I "slammed women across the board." But what I said is the way it looks.<br />
<br />
lagenomal, I don't know what to say to you. Well, okay, I will say I love Canada dearly.

jp5040, first, thanks for the positive pat on the shoulder. Second, it's not a mix of "pop culture"---it's real life. Men have really told me they don't discuss touchy issues with their wives, because they're afraid they'll get punished in one way or another.<br />
<br />
hippyheart, if I come across as negative on women, sorry. But it bothers me because people ask me why I don't want to/never will get married, and they ask it incessantly. Hate to say it, but there is a double-standard: Husbands/boyfriends are to be punished, wives/girlfriends are to be royally revered. And you don't have to duck and run... I respect your right to free speech.