Now this is an awesome end to this week’s story arc.
Sam is spot on about a sammich being more than a sandwich.
My wife and I tell young couples asking for marriage advice that men and women are complimentary not competitive. That’s what Sam understands and why she has a good man and Skye doesn’t.
Women are now sadly reaping 30 years of man hating feminism. Hopefully Skye can stay on the road to finding a good man.
Sam has much she can teach here.
Stay tuned.
May 28, 2017 at 1:39 am
WayneM
More than 30 years, actually… If you dig into the origins of the feminist movement, you’ll find it’s closer to 100 years and Marxism was there from the onset.
May 28, 2017 at 8:18 am
MasterDiver
More like 50 years. I saw this coming back in the late 60’s when the Libbers were first burning their bras and invading Men’s Health Clubs. On campus, men were in a no-win situation. Hold a door for them, you were a Male Chauvinist Pig, treat them as equals (what they supposedly wanted) you were uncouth and ill-mannered. Gloria Steinem and her ilk did women no favors with their propaganda. Thank God I found a good woman who was independent, but appreciated the courtesies a gentleman offered a Lady. We just celebrated our 35th anniversary, and are going strong.
May 28, 2017 at 12:47 pm
WayneM
Women’s suffrage is the symbol identified with first wave feminism. Indeed, the idea of women’s suffrage predates the works of Engels and Marx by more than a century… but the idea didn’t really gain legs until Marxism was introduced. Women were demanding the vote but what they wanted was power.
If you follow the history of feminism and compare it to the history of Marxism, the timelines of their influence are virtually identical. We see the parallels now as the screeching harpies demand Marxism with them in charge but that parallel goes all the way back.
Type “Marxism Feminism” into your fav search engine.
May 27, 2017 at 8:14 pm
formwiz
Sam is not done yet. That red hair is no lie.
She knows Skye is talking through her hat about winning, Trump’s election proves it, as does the fact Skye only knows polite Western civilization where Lefties can weasel their way, but she was treated badly and that sandwich is a symbol of the beating.
So, men have subjugated, enslaved,and hurt women for milennia… and you wonder why some women hurt you back, and why most won’t trust you?
Read the beginning of you own link again. It’s obvious why most women would distust men, and why some, like me, keep a hand on their gun.
May 27, 2017 at 9:55 pm
Chris Muir
Jeps, by your reasoning here, every German is a Nazi. Even new, baby Germans. People-and couples- are amalgams of emotion and reason.
You should try the latter someday-and lose the gun.
May 27, 2017 at 10:44 pm
Grunt GI
So, here’s the question..if civilization fell, do you think men would give a rat’s ass about feminism, or wymyn’s studies?
Nope, just like he article says, women would be falling all over themselves to please men for their protection from other predatory men. Thus it was ever so.
Push comes to shove, the average man can kill the average woman in less than 5 minutes…Col Colt notwithstanding. Wymyn have tried to avoid that basic biological fact, but they never will.
Funny thing is, if you ask my wife, she would say that women had a surprising amount of influence back in the day? WHY? Just like now, who does a man confide the most in? His wife.
If you read the letters and biographies of our Founding Fathers, they spilled everything to their wives, who used their domestic influence to great effect.
Abigail Adams wrote to her husband in 1776:
“I long to hear that you have declared an independency. And, by the way, in the new code of laws which I suppose it will be necessary for you to make, I desire you would remember the ladies and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the husbands. Remember, all men would be tyrants if they could. If particular care and attention is not paid to the ladies, we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice or representation.”
Again, men and women were meant to be equal in dignity, but not in power. If we were to science the sh*t outta this, I would say that biology is unavoidable, and males will always be the dominant of the species.
Unless of course, they are whipped, humiliated, and shamed into giving up their power. Which, is, of course the goal of modern 3rd wave feminism.
AND yet, more women than ever are unhappy?
Hmmmm.
The reckoning here is, and it’s going to be vicious and sad to watch as the old, harpy shrewish feminists die off in a sea of empty cat food cans and copies of Betty Friedan saying “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.”
May 28, 2017 at 12:56 am
Polly Cy
Well, yes and no. De Tocqueville wrote that the success of the American experiment could be attributed in no small part to “the superiority of their women.” And it was men who invented, or at least enabled, all these women’s studies programs. My cynical side considered it a way to herd all the women into a nice, attractively decorated, academic ghetto where they didn’t have to deal with us. When I headed off to grad school, everyone wanted to know what aspect of women in Soviet society I specialized in, as if a women could only study “women’s issues.” When I politely explained that I didn’t give a rat’s ass about women in Soviet society, but rather did mathematical modeling and leadership studies, I managed to annoy both the feminists and the guys. Good practice for developing the thick skin you need to be a conservative in a political science department.
May 28, 2017 at 6:40 am
Jeps
Grunt
You reasoning simply boils down to «might makes right». Men dominate women bc they can, and women should just be grateful for whatever scraps of power fall on them.
Given the same reasoning, the left would be fully justified in breaking and subduing the American male. If they can do it, they have the right to – and men should just be happy with what scraps are thrown them.
Again, this is by YOUR reasoning.
I do not support this, but I *do* support women being *equal* in power, not just «dignity».
May 28, 2017 at 8:49 am
Grunt GI
Well, basically that is EXACTLY what I am saying. Men have always been physically stronger and aggressive and women have survived in the tribe by pleasing the men.
This whole women’s rights things is basically an exercise in men giving their political power away…and like I said, if the sh*t every really hit the fan, who do you think would be in charge of helping the tribe survive? The ex-Marine or the women’s studies major?
IF, of course, you would like a real life example of might makes right, simply look at the Muslim world and the effects of mass immigration into Western society.
Western women are so stupid they think the Muslim men will consider them more than whores and breeders. Good luck with that.
If you want to know how good Western women have it, read Tom Kratman’s book Caliphate.
If that book doesn’t make every Western woman grateful for what she has, well…then nothing will.
May 28, 2017 at 8:52 am
Grunt GI
Poly Cy:
An excellent point. At one point women had an extremely large influence in American society, unwritten perhaps, but very real.
I wonder exactly what women have given up in the name of sexual freedom and women’s liberation.
As I mentioned, survey after survey shows women incredibly unhappy in spite of getting more college degrees than men, having a lower unemployment rate through the Great Recession, and generally rising up the economic ladder more than men the last 25 years or so.
May 28, 2017 at 6:53 am
Jeps
Chris
I would never *blame* men today for atrocities done in the past. I would, however, still *remember* the past. What has happened before can happen again, after all. It would be foolish to forget.
And with that said, I believe «Si vis pacem, para bellum» is a reasonable stance. For me and women in general.
May 28, 2017 at 9:19 am
PaulS
“For me and women in general.”
What about men? You a sexist or something?
I taught my wife to shoot and other training because she wanted to learn and I care about her well being. I would love to be there to protect her when needed but that simply can’t be 100% assured. Neither of us is a threat to the other, and frankly I think mama bear would be less tolerant of a threat that was presenting itself toward us.
May 28, 2017 at 7:59 am
GWB
I wouldn’t ever call on her to lose the gun, Chris. But losing the defensive attitude would make her life better.
Thank you, Jeps, for making me aware that I can, in good conscience and very happily, decline to ever lift so much as a finger on your behalf….
May 27, 2017 at 9:49 pm
Grunt GI
This times 1000%.
This is why Sam is so hawt. She is no wilting violet, yet she desires to please her man. And she is happily married. Even Jan is sliding into this realization. And Naomi as well. All totally hawt.
Fortunately, I do see there are still women out there who would love to find a good man to please. My wife and I try to encourage them.
There is still some hope that these women will see and evade the train wreck that their mothers and older sisters created.
May 28, 2017 at 2:03 am
RHT447
Women have always had power. The face that launched a thousand ships (or just one) and all that. The power of a smile can inspire a man to move mountains and slay dragons. Feminism is the lie that convinced women to give up that power so they can do things like join the infantry. Can women fight? Of course. Just ask Molly Pitcher. But who would convince a young women to give up the very best of what it is to be a young woman, in exchange for the very worst of what it is to be a young man?
May 28, 2017 at 8:15 am
GWB
This is the key. (Well, one of them.)
Women have a different sort of power than men. The problem for some of them is they desire the more raw power that men demonstrate. But, with very few exceptions, women cannot do so. And when they try, they often end up exhibiting the behavior men label as “harpy”, “shrew”, and “feminazi”.
Part of the problem with Jeps’ view seems to me to be a category error – men do these things, instead of people. The main difference, in reality, is the type of power they use to do their sinning. All people are susceptible.
A good chunk of history has been spent in a power struggle between people, and often between men and women on a micro level. It’s why the “your desire will be for your husband” was a curse, when God delivered it in the Garden*. Feminists seem to think they can break that curse by their willpower and the power of gov’t. It just isn’t so. (I’m not going to accuse Jeps of being a feminist, unless I read more of her comments.)
(*Folk like Grunt GI and his wife have evidently taken the curse and made the best of it through their love for each other. That’s how it’s supposed to work. Good on y’all for that.)
May 28, 2017 at 10:34 am
Grunt GI
Actually, the verse we like to use on young couples is Ephesians 5:22-28. Feminists have so twisted this verse that we have to dig into its fundamental meaning for these youngsters. To be “submissive” is not to be a doormat or to be abused. It is to submit to a husband’s role as the head of a family.
What feminizes skip is the FOLLOW ON verse where men are admonished to love their wives as Christ loved the church, i.e., to lay down your life, sometimes literally.
This of course makes both the young people sit up as they realize that marriage is indeed a partnership, but like any good partnership, someone has to lead.
Our experience is that when men do that, in Christian love, those marriages tend to last. Where the women are always trying to wear the pants, it does not.
But hey, what do we know? We’ve only been married 29 years and watched many of our friends and shipmates over the years on marriage number 2 or 3….the school of hard knocks is a tough school.
May 27, 2017 at 11:05 pm
Kafiroon
Hey Jeps! If you live in an area where Rama-lama-dig-dong is celebrated, you may get your chance to blow away an assaulting male. Of course, it will probably be a number of them. AND, if they get their way, you WILL get to discover male dominance. Get good at ducking rocks.
May 28, 2017 at 8:25 am
NotYetInACamp
Recommendation: weapons with large capacity magazines and many spare loaded magazines.
avoid countries with areas already conquered by Labaladingdong celebrators. Be quick to use so as not to lose the equalizer. Be able to relocate quickly to western Civilized Men protected space. Safe space. though these areas have massively diminished as of late. Keep equalizers handy as all western males are not civilized.
May 28, 2017 at 6:38 am
noncom
Thanks, Chris….good read…
May 28, 2017 at 8:26 am
NotYetInACamp
Nice informational and analytical post on current and long term issues and facts.
May 28, 2017 at 8:34 am
NotYetInACamp
Been there. Lived through too much of that.
At a certain points, you just walk (Or RUN!!! ROCKET!!) away.
I’ve come close to what should be. Too many people in this world have stupid agendas.
May 28, 2017 at 2:00 pm
Pamela
Too many people are trying to be something they are not.
May 28, 2017 at 2:52 pm
RegT
Yes, a great article.
May 27, 2017 at 9:17 pm
cz93x62
THAT was a hell of a good read, Mr. Muir.
May 27, 2017 at 10:03 pm
KenH
Winning, SKYPE??
WE HAVEN’T EVEN STARTED WITH YOU YET
*H/T to Londo Mollari. Just before he tortured Morden to death, and beheaded him…
May 28, 2017 at 12:26 am
Deplorable B Woodman
Nice B5 reference. My most fave sci fi series of all time.
May 28, 2017 at 12:55 am
Swansonic
Where is Zathrus when you need him…..
May 28, 2017 at 1:25 am
Mogrith
Zathrus not sure where Zathrus is but Zathrus is with Zathrus and Zathrus and …
May 28, 2017 at 8:46 am
MasterDiver
How you pronounce third “Zathrus”? He may be Zathrus’ cousin.
The world is out of balance when Good Men are not allowed to live by their God given rights. The world is out of balance when Good Men are now consigned to be comic book characters in an action movie.
Or a daily cartoon that is drawn with great care, and causes its readers to look, question and discuss.
Thank you Good Sir.
May 27, 2017 at 11:31 pm
Chris Muir
Powered by vanilla rum®.
May 27, 2017 at 11:32 pm
Pamela
Let me know when you need some more
May 28, 2017 at 1:04 am
Polly Cy
Speaking of drawing with care, the proximity of “CHOP” and fingers, coupled with the “ow” had me worried for a moment that Sam had lost a finger or two.
May 28, 2017 at 9:29 am
PaulS
Actually Sam cooking is somewhat disturbing, she doesn’t have the best record of providing that sort of nourishment.
May 28, 2017 at 1:58 pm
WayneM
How ironic to reach for the Avengers as examples of heros… at a time when Marvel is spinning out of financial control in an effort to appease the SJWs…
I never read comics as a kid. They were unacceptable as reading material.
The fact that Marvel has strayed from the original intent of the characters to feed a limited narrative of what is “inclusive” causes me to wonder how many head meds are being ingested by the decision makers of the company.
The problem with “movements” is that they are really just theoretical constructs of some agenda, usually desire for control.
There is no “feminism”, no LGBTXYZ “community”, no BLM, etc. etc. etc.
Conersely, there’s no return of Neanderthal man process, not really even a Trump movement or a cohesive block of deplorables. And notwithstanding the knucklehead in comments yesterday who spoke of the magical power of “manly men”, there’s no klan of kavorka dudes for whom every female within sight or smell drops and spreads ’em.
There’re just individuals. Minorities of one who may by choice or coercion align themselves, or try to align themselves, with some ephemeral group or another. But more importantly and dangerously, those who try to assign or categorize every other individual with a label or into some convenient group.
That’s where Skye is right now; she doesn’t need “all the good men”. She only needs one, who will choose her and she him to make what they want from life, not what her protestor flocks tell her what she should want.
Even Sam is questioning herself as to whether her gender as a force has kept the opposite gender from its intended role, when in fact she Sam and he Zed individually and independently have and/or create their own roles as just the two of them make their choices and live their lives.
God, we have become so used to being told what to think and feel and do…mostly by those with an agenda who care not a whit about what we actually need as individuals, or by self-important and frustrated gurus who assuage their own frailties by trying to tell others how to deal with theirs.
There is power in numbers as what is sane and normal and natural makes a comeback against the overwhelming and unsustainable breakdown of it, but we have to be careful not to replace one group mentality or flavor of Kool-Ade with another. Make the right choices for ourselves as individuals, and the “movement” will take care of itself.
Good one DAB, and accurate…just as those targeted movements are.
Until the “movements” hit the fan. Sooner rather than later I think.
May 28, 2017 at 12:38 am
Deplorable B Woodman
“Where are all the good men?”
“They’re not gone…..”
Right. The good men aren’t gone. You, Skye, chased them away. And then chose not to see them when they stand directly in front of you, because they don’t fit your world view. Good men are there, but you need to retune your mentality to get on their same wavelength.
And this is KC7JDS, out.
May 28, 2017 at 7:36 am
Redleg
Actually, she had ar least a couple: Anatoly and Tucker; but she ditched them.
May 28, 2017 at 8:25 am
GWB
She’s recognized at times that Zed is one of those “good men”. If she gives it enough thought, she might figure out that a lot of the “good men” moved on to less toxic women while she was having her Stupid Phase.
(BTW, if you haven’t read Sarah Hoyt’s Darkship series, do. Those who would rule the earth are called “Good Men” in order to give them legitimacy to be autocrats.)
May 28, 2017 at 6:17 pm
John
No doubt in the same context that Saberhagen’s Berzerkers labeled those who cooperated with them as “Goodlife”.
Chris, you bring deep thought to current events. Would that more would read you.
May 28, 2017 at 12:54 am
Swansonic
Got that in 1.
May 28, 2017 at 2:02 am
Alaska Paul
Where can one have such a remarkable comic strip, exploring such themes and issues, still be thoroughly entertaining, and have 140+ comments?!
Thank you, Chris, for providing a wonderful site and forum for all of us.
May 28, 2017 at 2:42 am
Noelegy
All those veggies, and yet they eat Wonder Bread?
May 28, 2017 at 6:19 pm
John
Carbs are carbs.
And yes, it is official: High Fructose Corn Syrup is only sugar, nothing more and nothing less.
May 28, 2017 at 7:46 am
Bill
Sorry I’m not buying the conversion. This just sounds like more self pity for something that she doesn’t have. Having a relationship with a good man or woman takes more than just wanting one.
May 28, 2017 at 8:25 am
Shooter 2.5
The good men are ignoring the R3V women because they can spot trouble a mile away. Unfortunately it took experience to know this. Secondly, I know a decent women who can’t find a guy but her confused antigun attitude sends out the stay away signals. Why would being antigun matter to any good guy? Because it’s a screaming siren and flashing lights to any person who believes in basic rights and property. She might as well say “I love you, cherish you but if there’s an slight disagreement, I’m taking everything away from you”.
May 28, 2017 at 8:28 am
GWB
Chris, what sort of sandwich is she making where there’s a lot of chopping involved? Slicing a tomato or onion, maybe. But, chopping?!?
It’s either weird or something I want to try.
May 28, 2017 at 6:22 pm
John
In my experience some lettuce is very unruly. It’s best to subdue it into fine pieces to get it to behave under the bread.
May 28, 2017 at 8:49 am
Unca Walt
The honest and sincere mistake Jeps is stuck so deeply into causes an old Alpha like Unca to feel truly compassionate.
Like the famous fairy tale of the beautiful woman cursed to be ugly for 12 of every 24 hours… unless and until she receives what every woman wants.
She asks her husband-the-Prince:
“Do you want me to be beautiful in the daytime as your Princess to help you rule the Kingdom, or do you want me to be beautiful at night for love in privacy? I must be one or the other because of the curse.”
Her loving Prince answers:
“I cannot choose. You must choose for yourself… It is not my right.”
The Princess smiles with joy. “Now I do not have to choose. You have given me what every woman wants. Sovereignty. The curse is removed.”
Jeps cannot be happy (it shows) without this incredibly important right being comfortably in force. Women and men are NOT equal.
Men are pathetic compared to women in so very many areas. This does not make men inferior… it just defines “difference”.
My redhead is my exquisite life companion. Each of us has the respect of the other, and each of us believes in the sovereignty of the other.
Sadly, this simple truth is often so completely erased and buried under slogans du jour in our wrongly-drifting society.
To hold hands, cuddle, smile, and deeply love does not depend upon pudenda at 76. The answer is sovereignty.
UW, I honestly don’t know what is meant by “sovereignty”, either in the parable or in your emphasis of it?
By its literal definition of unilateral supreme authority, it does not seem to lend itself to a marital union, unless it is a joint sovereignty which is plausible to me in my definition of that union melding into a single entity. But then it doesn’t really fit the Webster definition, or what you and the Princess seem to mean.
Many here indicate that only the man be be *the* sovereign authority in any union, personal or governmental, and history bears that out, though to me it limits their sovereignty to raw power without factoring the changes in how control is wielded in modern times, with less emphasis on brawn and more on brains which would equalize power between the sexes in theory if not in genetic reality. I would be interest to see you expound?
Jeps. The issue with this person has to do with gender only in her mind. She, as an individual, has a very dangerous mindset as to how deadly force is the great equalizer. It is in fact a last and final defense against death or injury (with an expanded definition of “injury”) and from government despots, but to her it is a tool of control over any perceived slight or inequality.
And Chris is right to imply that she should not be armed; she with her warped attitude is a danger to the immediate society around her and the greater society that fights to retain the defensive ability that the Second Amendment is intended to protect. If you saw her first spew, it was to say that any man who slapped her ass would face 2A…that indicates that she has no idea what 2A actually is or intends. She is a menace, and yes as her subsequent comments prove, she is a “feminist” and/or “progressive”, in the mold of calls for a new “movement” (there’s that word again), of armed, aggressive, and militant leftists to distort and corrupt our cherished rights to enforce their will and agenda. There is no compassion from me for the likes of her.
May 28, 2017 at 6:33 pm
John
The “unilateral supreme authority” is the premise of any free man or woman.
It is what is required to enter into a binding contract, be that a business deal or a marriage.
The sovereign individual is free. The consent he or she exercises to live in a free society makes that society free.
Without that consent there is no liberty and we are slaves.
This is the horror of Socialism, where each of us is merely a slave to the State.
And where there are Slaves there are Masters.
It’s just that some Slaves are more equal than others.
May 28, 2017 at 8:23 pm
Unca Walt
There It Is.
For JTC, “sovereignty” — it is the dignity of any individual to choose their own way. It does not AT ALL mean that if a woman decides to become a partner to a man she must become a chattel to that man.
It means the woman (AND the man) have honor, ideals, all the things that make the melding of two intellects so pleasurable and wonderful.
Yes, JTC, this means in the majority of cases, there will be an Alpha male who — and read this carefully — in certain cases will take command to deal with things with which he is by nature, more competent than his precious female mate.
Combat. Carrying bricks. That sort of thing.
But women are so superior in so many ways, their sovereignty unquestionably gives them the final word in those areas of superiority.
Works great. Trust yer Unca. Especially you, Jeps.
I am a combat veteran Alpha. I am damned good at it. You would be pathetic in combat. That is NOT a derogation. If anything, it is a hat tip to the super important superiority you would be able to demonstrate regarding the forming/guiding of young minds.
Except for the “Daddy” thing, we suck at it.
But if you grab your silly ass gun because your husband short-sheeted the bed, that just makes you a failure. In all categories.
So joint “sovereignty” as I speculated, a melding of strengths and weaknesses complementing one another, a good and solid union and partnership.
It’s the term itself that had me wondering, as sovereign is literally defined as a single, unilateral and unquestioned authority. Glad your relationship is not one of those; I don’t think that’s at all what God wants from men as the head of the household (a term that also chafes Jeps).
I guess anybody can be sovereign in a group of one, but the partnership approach has also been the structure that has worked for my family for 46 years; I may be the final arbiter for the most serious issues we face, but not without discussion, I provide for my family to the best of my ability and I will protect it with my life. But in many things I would be absolutely lost without the power of love and strength and nurturing and intuition that the love of my life quite literally embodies.
Nurse and nurture. Protect and provide. That is the essential division of strengths and responsibilities that has worked for us and many successful unions. It is one that Jeps rejects. I wish success for her, but I don’t expect it.
May 28, 2017 at 9:55 am
PaulS
Delilahcatessen,
While I have no doubt you can make a fine sammach (I was just goofing with you as someone else laid out later in the thread).
My wife and I actually share the sammach making based on our strengths, she makes wonderful hot sammaches and I take care of the Deli and Sub styles, also the grilling falls to me, hot stuff that goes in a bun, yum. 🙂
May 28, 2017 at 10:28 am
NotYetInACamp
How and why a sammich is requested and made and given (either person) is the (path is the) message (and the journey is the destination).
May 28, 2017 at 10:30 am
Henry
Extraordinary, Chris. You’re delving ever deeper into history, biology, geopolitics, sexuality…the whole Magilla. And it’s a *cartoon*. Hat’s off to ya, guy.
May 28, 2017 at 1:30 pm
Pamela
Sam you need to put the knife down. Chopping bell peppers without removing the top and seeds is not a good idea.
May 28, 2017 at 2:08 pm
Jeps
Grunt
GWB
JTC
RHT
…
I don’t want to flood the comments with my replies, so putting it into one post here.
a) if Might makes Right is the rule, then it *is* the rule. Debating the morality or «rightness» of someone getting the upper hand on you is then a moot point. I.e. with that mindset, anything the left does to men is right because they *can* do it. I don’t agree with this, but that goes both ways – it also means that I don’t agree men should be dominant to women just bc physically stronger.
b) As for «other kinds of power» – these are largely illusory, dependent on good will. Women have traded an illusion of power, for a lesser, but growing, amount of real power (and freedom). At least how I see it.
c) JTC – this is the last time I will adress this with you. Yes, a gun is a way to equalize capacity for violence – but one I will only employ if a someone uses physical force against me *first*. Having prepared for this mentally is simply part of effective self-defence.
And again, I suspect your problems with this is rooted in the fact that I have effectively negated the male strength advantage in how I relate to men… I will never let a man in my life tell me what to do, let him have the last say, just because of his greater capacity for violence is supposed to grant him some kind of authority (i may still *decide* to agree)…
…which is an issue for those who want men to be the dominant «head of household» and justify it with «bc stronger». Which some here seem to do.
I think I have clogged up the comments enough for now, so if anyone want the last word; enjoy 😀
Have you ever stepped up to protect or defend any person that is weaker or defenseless against someone of any strength willingly to do harm to that person?
God I hope not. This type of person is the last who you’d want sheepdogging, even worse than the dude who will snatch out his LCP and spray some shots when a thug walks in and holds up the donut shop more often than not popping a few innocents in the effort to play hero. In her case, the conflation of male/female societal roles and mores has exactly nothing to do with the employment of deadly defense but is the entirety of her attempt at justification:
“…I have effectively negated the male strength advantage in how I relate to men… I will never let a man in my life tell me what to do, let him have the last say, just because of his greater capacity for violence…”
One of the most extreme cases of dick envy I’ve ever seen. Her equalizer is her gun, not for protection from physical attack, but just because he’s bigger and stronger she’s ready to shoot his ass at the slightest perceived provocation. I’m a big guy, but there’s lots of bigger, stronger, younger dudes than me. Doesn’t mean I’m ready to shoot them if they look at me cross-eyed. This is the exact same mentality that causes road rage, a need to grossly over-compensate with deadly aggression for perceived inadequacy; it has nothing to do with gender.
She, and anyone for that matter, would do well to read, digest, and comprehend a little essay written by Maj. L. Caudill, USMC (ret):
Well actually the good colonel is a myth, kind of a case of reverse stolen valor. The real author is German immigrant sci-fic writer Marko Kloos who has as good a handle on the right to bear arms as any I’ve seen. On first read it may seem to confirm Jeps’ reasoning, but read deeper to see that the justifications in the essay, and hers, are not at all the same and have nothing to do with the great battle for “equality” of the sexes.
May 28, 2017 at 4:08 pm
Pamela
Women can be equally as violent as men and will hold a grudge and the need to get even longer than men. Fear can play into the need of being hyper-vigilante against a potential attacker. Constantly on-point is wearying and can bring about fatal results.
“I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.” Frank Herbert
Great quote, in the vein of Patton’s about those living in fear dying a thousand deaths rather than one.
Won’t argue about womens’ capacity for violence or processing and dealing with the threat and/or aftermath of violence differently, just one of many physiological and psychological differences thank God, as others have mentioned here.
That’s not the basis of Jeps’ promise to be quick on the draw, though she uses it as an excuse for it; a gun is just as deadly in the hands of someone who is 4’6″ as someone who is 6’4″. The problem is a lack of proper training or worse, a pre-conceived mindset of anyone of any size (or gender) to respond with deadly force as first rather than last resort, and to openly eschew what will de-escalate a conflict way before it gets to that point…situational awareness, what you call being hyper-vigilant and on-point, avoiding or retreating from those situations…a response that she sees as weakness or acquiescence to male physical superiority.
Her attitude is a recipe for disaster.
May 28, 2017 at 3:15 pm
Oliver Heaviside
What one might call “first-wave” feminism – the right to vote, hold property, etc, is a natural outgrowth of human rights, as so brilliantly expressed in the Declaration of Independence (and other places). Of course women are the legal equals of men.
That does NOT mean they are the same as men. There are many inherent differences in biology, some of which influence behavior. As western society evolved technologically, we were slow to recognize the need to shift much of women’s labor from inside the house to outside of it. Two hundred years ago, “keeping house” was a full-time, skilled trade, of great economic value. It is still of value but it is no longer full time, and many parts of it can be outsourced, so to speak. In the US, we have made huge gains in this area; more than is generally recognized, but this does not change the underlying biology and its influence on women’s preferences in men.
Just sayin’
May 28, 2017 at 4:27 pm
G. Baker
I have yet to meet a woman that understands a Man won’t fight for what he can’t Have. IMHO their (women) door holding privilege (which is our fault) has removed women from reality.
May 28, 2017 at 7:02 pm
Kafiroon
They may declare they “won”. But, what I am finding from the grand-kids and a few guys hiring young men, is not surrender. Many claim to not want to be “tired down” with single mothers looking for support or what we used to call “easy” and the femi-shrews. They are choosing not to fight and retreating into doing what they want for themselves.
May 28, 2017 at 8:32 pm
Unca Walt
This actually makes me squirm.
“…I have effectively negated the male strength advantage in how I relate to men… I will never let a man in my life tell me what to do, let him have the last say, just because of his greater capacity for violence…”
Because it is so… wounded. So full of internal anger. Unremitting hatred instead of unremitting love.
I worship my Lady. She would swim through blood to save me — to be just as I am.
89 Comments
Now this is an awesome end to this week’s story arc.
Sam is spot on about a sammich being more than a sandwich.
My wife and I tell young couples asking for marriage advice that men and women are complimentary not competitive. That’s what Sam understands and why she has a good man and Skye doesn’t.
Women are now sadly reaping 30 years of man hating feminism. Hopefully Skye can stay on the road to finding a good man.
Sam has much she can teach here.
Stay tuned.
More than 30 years, actually… If you dig into the origins of the feminist movement, you’ll find it’s closer to 100 years and Marxism was there from the onset.
More like 50 years. I saw this coming back in the late 60’s when the Libbers were first burning their bras and invading Men’s Health Clubs. On campus, men were in a no-win situation. Hold a door for them, you were a Male Chauvinist Pig, treat them as equals (what they supposedly wanted) you were uncouth and ill-mannered. Gloria Steinem and her ilk did women no favors with their propaganda. Thank God I found a good woman who was independent, but appreciated the courtesies a gentleman offered a Lady. We just celebrated our 35th anniversary, and are going strong.
Women’s suffrage is the symbol identified with first wave feminism. Indeed, the idea of women’s suffrage predates the works of Engels and Marx by more than a century… but the idea didn’t really gain legs until Marxism was introduced. Women were demanding the vote but what they wanted was power.
If you follow the history of feminism and compare it to the history of Marxism, the timelines of their influence are virtually identical. We see the parallels now as the screeching harpies demand Marxism with them in charge but that parallel goes all the way back.
Type “Marxism Feminism” into your fav search engine.
Sam is not done yet. That red hair is no lie.
She knows Skye is talking through her hat about winning, Trump’s election proves it, as does the fact Skye only knows polite Western civilization where Lefties can weasel their way, but she was treated badly and that sandwich is a symbol of the beating.
If Mama ain’t happy, ain’t NObody happy.
as in https://www.theburningplatform.com/2017/05/25/on-the-pursuit-of-pussy-in-the-age-of-decline-part-1/#more-151072
So, men have subjugated, enslaved,and hurt women for milennia… and you wonder why some women hurt you back, and why most won’t trust you?
Read the beginning of you own link again. It’s obvious why most women would distust men, and why some, like me, keep a hand on their gun.
Jeps, by your reasoning here, every German is a Nazi. Even new, baby Germans. People-and couples- are amalgams of emotion and reason.
You should try the latter someday-and lose the gun.
So, here’s the question..if civilization fell, do you think men would give a rat’s ass about feminism, or wymyn’s studies?
Nope, just like he article says, women would be falling all over themselves to please men for their protection from other predatory men. Thus it was ever so.
Push comes to shove, the average man can kill the average woman in less than 5 minutes…Col Colt notwithstanding. Wymyn have tried to avoid that basic biological fact, but they never will.
Funny thing is, if you ask my wife, she would say that women had a surprising amount of influence back in the day? WHY? Just like now, who does a man confide the most in? His wife.
If you read the letters and biographies of our Founding Fathers, they spilled everything to their wives, who used their domestic influence to great effect.
Abigail Adams wrote to her husband in 1776:
“I long to hear that you have declared an independency. And, by the way, in the new code of laws which I suppose it will be necessary for you to make, I desire you would remember the ladies and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the husbands. Remember, all men would be tyrants if they could. If particular care and attention is not paid to the ladies, we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice or representation.”
Again, men and women were meant to be equal in dignity, but not in power. If we were to science the sh*t outta this, I would say that biology is unavoidable, and males will always be the dominant of the species.
Unless of course, they are whipped, humiliated, and shamed into giving up their power. Which, is, of course the goal of modern 3rd wave feminism.
AND yet, more women than ever are unhappy?
Hmmmm.
The reckoning here is, and it’s going to be vicious and sad to watch as the old, harpy shrewish feminists die off in a sea of empty cat food cans and copies of Betty Friedan saying “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.”
Well, yes and no. De Tocqueville wrote that the success of the American experiment could be attributed in no small part to “the superiority of their women.” And it was men who invented, or at least enabled, all these women’s studies programs. My cynical side considered it a way to herd all the women into a nice, attractively decorated, academic ghetto where they didn’t have to deal with us. When I headed off to grad school, everyone wanted to know what aspect of women in Soviet society I specialized in, as if a women could only study “women’s issues.” When I politely explained that I didn’t give a rat’s ass about women in Soviet society, but rather did mathematical modeling and leadership studies, I managed to annoy both the feminists and the guys. Good practice for developing the thick skin you need to be a conservative in a political science department.
Grunt
You reasoning simply boils down to «might makes right». Men dominate women bc they can, and women should just be grateful for whatever scraps of power fall on them.
Given the same reasoning, the left would be fully justified in breaking and subduing the American male. If they can do it, they have the right to – and men should just be happy with what scraps are thrown them.
Again, this is by YOUR reasoning.
I do not support this, but I *do* support women being *equal* in power, not just «dignity».
Well, basically that is EXACTLY what I am saying. Men have always been physically stronger and aggressive and women have survived in the tribe by pleasing the men.
This whole women’s rights things is basically an exercise in men giving their political power away…and like I said, if the sh*t every really hit the fan, who do you think would be in charge of helping the tribe survive? The ex-Marine or the women’s studies major?
IF, of course, you would like a real life example of might makes right, simply look at the Muslim world and the effects of mass immigration into Western society.
Western women are so stupid they think the Muslim men will consider them more than whores and breeders. Good luck with that.
If you want to know how good Western women have it, read Tom Kratman’s book Caliphate.
If that book doesn’t make every Western woman grateful for what she has, well…then nothing will.
Poly Cy:
An excellent point. At one point women had an extremely large influence in American society, unwritten perhaps, but very real.
I wonder exactly what women have given up in the name of sexual freedom and women’s liberation.
As I mentioned, survey after survey shows women incredibly unhappy in spite of getting more college degrees than men, having a lower unemployment rate through the Great Recession, and generally rising up the economic ladder more than men the last 25 years or so.
Chris
I would never *blame* men today for atrocities done in the past. I would, however, still *remember* the past. What has happened before can happen again, after all. It would be foolish to forget.
And with that said, I believe «Si vis pacem, para bellum» is a reasonable stance. For me and women in general.
“For me and women in general.”
What about men? You a sexist or something?
I taught my wife to shoot and other training because she wanted to learn and I care about her well being. I would love to be there to protect her when needed but that simply can’t be 100% assured. Neither of us is a threat to the other, and frankly I think mama bear would be less tolerant of a threat that was presenting itself toward us.
I wouldn’t ever call on her to lose the gun, Chris. But losing the defensive attitude would make her life better.
Thank you, Jeps, for making me aware that I can, in good conscience and very happily, decline to ever lift so much as a finger on your behalf….
This times 1000%.
This is why Sam is so hawt. She is no wilting violet, yet she desires to please her man. And she is happily married. Even Jan is sliding into this realization. And Naomi as well. All totally hawt.
Fortunately, I do see there are still women out there who would love to find a good man to please. My wife and I try to encourage them.
There is still some hope that these women will see and evade the train wreck that their mothers and older sisters created.
Women have always had power. The face that launched a thousand ships (or just one) and all that. The power of a smile can inspire a man to move mountains and slay dragons. Feminism is the lie that convinced women to give up that power so they can do things like join the infantry. Can women fight? Of course. Just ask Molly Pitcher. But who would convince a young women to give up the very best of what it is to be a young woman, in exchange for the very worst of what it is to be a young man?
This is the key. (Well, one of them.)
Women have a different sort of power than men. The problem for some of them is they desire the more raw power that men demonstrate. But, with very few exceptions, women cannot do so. And when they try, they often end up exhibiting the behavior men label as “harpy”, “shrew”, and “feminazi”.
Part of the problem with Jeps’ view seems to me to be a category error – men do these things, instead of people. The main difference, in reality, is the type of power they use to do their sinning. All people are susceptible.
A good chunk of history has been spent in a power struggle between people, and often between men and women on a micro level. It’s why the “your desire will be for your husband” was a curse, when God delivered it in the Garden*. Feminists seem to think they can break that curse by their willpower and the power of gov’t. It just isn’t so. (I’m not going to accuse Jeps of being a feminist, unless I read more of her comments.)
(*Folk like Grunt GI and his wife have evidently taken the curse and made the best of it through their love for each other. That’s how it’s supposed to work. Good on y’all for that.)
Actually, the verse we like to use on young couples is Ephesians 5:22-28. Feminists have so twisted this verse that we have to dig into its fundamental meaning for these youngsters. To be “submissive” is not to be a doormat or to be abused. It is to submit to a husband’s role as the head of a family.
What feminizes skip is the FOLLOW ON verse where men are admonished to love their wives as Christ loved the church, i.e., to lay down your life, sometimes literally.
This of course makes both the young people sit up as they realize that marriage is indeed a partnership, but like any good partnership, someone has to lead.
Our experience is that when men do that, in Christian love, those marriages tend to last. Where the women are always trying to wear the pants, it does not.
But hey, what do we know? We’ve only been married 29 years and watched many of our friends and shipmates over the years on marriage number 2 or 3….the school of hard knocks is a tough school.
Hey Jeps! If you live in an area where Rama-lama-dig-dong is celebrated, you may get your chance to blow away an assaulting male. Of course, it will probably be a number of them. AND, if they get their way, you WILL get to discover male dominance. Get good at ducking rocks.
Recommendation: weapons with large capacity magazines and many spare loaded magazines.
avoid countries with areas already conquered by Labaladingdong celebrators. Be quick to use so as not to lose the equalizer. Be able to relocate quickly to western Civilized Men protected space. Safe space. though these areas have massively diminished as of late. Keep equalizers handy as all western males are not civilized.
Thanks, Chris….good read…
Nice informational and analytical post on current and long term issues and facts.
Been there. Lived through too much of that.
At a certain points, you just walk (Or RUN!!! ROCKET!!) away.
I’ve come close to what should be. Too many people in this world have stupid agendas.
Too many people are trying to be something they are not.
Yes, a great article.
THAT was a hell of a good read, Mr. Muir.
Winning, SKYPE??
WE HAVEN’T EVEN STARTED WITH YOU YET
*H/T to Londo Mollari. Just before he tortured Morden to death, and beheaded him…
Nice B5 reference. My most fave sci fi series of all time.
Where is Zathrus when you need him…..
Zathrus not sure where Zathrus is but Zathrus is with Zathrus and Zathrus and …
How you pronounce third “Zathrus”? He may be Zathrus’ cousin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1j-76eLz1hc&app=desktop
Zathrus, Zathrus, and my other brother, Zathrus.
Hmmm. On Monday, do you have a Missing Man Table planned? I do.
Out will come my bayonet, my garand, and my steel pot, to be planted in our lawn in front of the flag.
Off topic, file under ‘Inadvertent Fraud’: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/05/27/follow-up-senator-ted-cruz-admits-inadvertent-fraud-from-goldman-sachs-campaign-loans/
The world is out of balance when Good Men are not allowed to live by their God given rights. The world is out of balance when Good Men are now consigned to be comic book characters in an action movie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zofga33W4tI
Or,say,cartoons.
Or a daily cartoon that is drawn with great care, and causes its readers to look, question and discuss.
Thank you Good Sir.
Powered by vanilla rum®.
Let me know when you need some more
Speaking of drawing with care, the proximity of “CHOP” and fingers, coupled with the “ow” had me worried for a moment that Sam had lost a finger or two.
Actually Sam cooking is somewhat disturbing, she doesn’t have the best record of providing that sort of nourishment.
How ironic to reach for the Avengers as examples of heros… at a time when Marvel is spinning out of financial control in an effort to appease the SJWs…
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/07/07/marvel-social-justice-insanity/
I never read comics as a kid. They were unacceptable as reading material.
The fact that Marvel has strayed from the original intent of the characters to feed a limited narrative of what is “inclusive” causes me to wonder how many head meds are being ingested by the decision makers of the company.
The problem with “movements” is that they are really just theoretical constructs of some agenda, usually desire for control.
There is no “feminism”, no LGBTXYZ “community”, no BLM, etc. etc. etc.
Conersely, there’s no return of Neanderthal man process, not really even a Trump movement or a cohesive block of deplorables. And notwithstanding the knucklehead in comments yesterday who spoke of the magical power of “manly men”, there’s no klan of kavorka dudes for whom every female within sight or smell drops and spreads ’em.
There’re just individuals. Minorities of one who may by choice or coercion align themselves, or try to align themselves, with some ephemeral group or another. But more importantly and dangerously, those who try to assign or categorize every other individual with a label or into some convenient group.
That’s where Skye is right now; she doesn’t need “all the good men”. She only needs one, who will choose her and she him to make what they want from life, not what her protestor flocks tell her what she should want.
Even Sam is questioning herself as to whether her gender as a force has kept the opposite gender from its intended role, when in fact she Sam and he Zed individually and independently have and/or create their own roles as just the two of them make their choices and live their lives.
God, we have become so used to being told what to think and feel and do…mostly by those with an agenda who care not a whit about what we actually need as individuals, or by self-important and frustrated gurus who assuage their own frailties by trying to tell others how to deal with theirs.
There is power in numbers as what is sane and normal and natural makes a comeback against the overwhelming and unsustainable breakdown of it, but we have to be careful not to replace one group mentality or flavor of Kool-Ade with another. Make the right choices for ourselves as individuals, and the “movement” will take care of itself.
Well put.
The problem with “movements” is that sooner or later that shit has to land somewhere….
Good one DAB, and accurate…just as those targeted movements are.
Until the “movements” hit the fan. Sooner rather than later I think.
“Where are all the good men?”
“They’re not gone…..”
Right. The good men aren’t gone. You, Skye, chased them away. And then chose not to see them when they stand directly in front of you, because they don’t fit your world view. Good men are there, but you need to retune your mentality to get on their same wavelength.
And this is KC7JDS, out.
Actually, she had ar least a couple: Anatoly and Tucker; but she ditched them.
She’s recognized at times that Zed is one of those “good men”. If she gives it enough thought, she might figure out that a lot of the “good men” moved on to less toxic women while she was having her Stupid Phase.
(BTW, if you haven’t read Sarah Hoyt’s Darkship series, do. Those who would rule the earth are called “Good Men” in order to give them legitimacy to be autocrats.)
No doubt in the same context that Saberhagen’s Berzerkers labeled those who cooperated with them as “Goodlife”.
Chris, you bring deep thought to current events. Would that more would read you.
Got that in 1.
Where can one have such a remarkable comic strip, exploring such themes and issues, still be thoroughly entertaining, and have 140+ comments?!
Thank you, Chris, for providing a wonderful site and forum for all of us.
All those veggies, and yet they eat Wonder Bread?
Carbs are carbs.
And yes, it is official: High Fructose Corn Syrup is only sugar, nothing more and nothing less.
Sorry I’m not buying the conversion. This just sounds like more self pity for something that she doesn’t have. Having a relationship with a good man or woman takes more than just wanting one.
The good men are ignoring the R3V women because they can spot trouble a mile away. Unfortunately it took experience to know this. Secondly, I know a decent women who can’t find a guy but her confused antigun attitude sends out the stay away signals. Why would being antigun matter to any good guy? Because it’s a screaming siren and flashing lights to any person who believes in basic rights and property. She might as well say “I love you, cherish you but if there’s an slight disagreement, I’m taking everything away from you”.
Chris, what sort of sandwich is she making where there’s a lot of chopping involved? Slicing a tomato or onion, maybe. But, chopping?!?
It’s either weird or something I want to try.
In my experience some lettuce is very unruly. It’s best to subdue it into fine pieces to get it to behave under the bread.
The honest and sincere mistake Jeps is stuck so deeply into causes an old Alpha like Unca to feel truly compassionate.
Like the famous fairy tale of the beautiful woman cursed to be ugly for 12 of every 24 hours… unless and until she receives what every woman wants.
She asks her husband-the-Prince:
“Do you want me to be beautiful in the daytime as your Princess to help you rule the Kingdom, or do you want me to be beautiful at night for love in privacy? I must be one or the other because of the curse.”
Her loving Prince answers:
“I cannot choose. You must choose for yourself… It is not my right.”
The Princess smiles with joy. “Now I do not have to choose. You have given me what every woman wants. Sovereignty. The curse is removed.”
Jeps cannot be happy (it shows) without this incredibly important right being comfortably in force. Women and men are NOT equal.
Men are pathetic compared to women in so very many areas. This does not make men inferior… it just defines “difference”.
My redhead is my exquisite life companion. Each of us has the respect of the other, and each of us believes in the sovereignty of the other.
Sadly, this simple truth is often so completely erased and buried under slogans du jour in our wrongly-drifting society.
To hold hands, cuddle, smile, and deeply love does not depend upon pudenda at 76. The answer is sovereignty.
It is ALWAYS sovereignty.
UW, I honestly don’t know what is meant by “sovereignty”, either in the parable or in your emphasis of it?
By its literal definition of unilateral supreme authority, it does not seem to lend itself to a marital union, unless it is a joint sovereignty which is plausible to me in my definition of that union melding into a single entity. But then it doesn’t really fit the Webster definition, or what you and the Princess seem to mean.
Many here indicate that only the man be be *the* sovereign authority in any union, personal or governmental, and history bears that out, though to me it limits their sovereignty to raw power without factoring the changes in how control is wielded in modern times, with less emphasis on brawn and more on brains which would equalize power between the sexes in theory if not in genetic reality. I would be interest to see you expound?
Jeps. The issue with this person has to do with gender only in her mind. She, as an individual, has a very dangerous mindset as to how deadly force is the great equalizer. It is in fact a last and final defense against death or injury (with an expanded definition of “injury”) and from government despots, but to her it is a tool of control over any perceived slight or inequality.
And Chris is right to imply that she should not be armed; she with her warped attitude is a danger to the immediate society around her and the greater society that fights to retain the defensive ability that the Second Amendment is intended to protect. If you saw her first spew, it was to say that any man who slapped her ass would face 2A…that indicates that she has no idea what 2A actually is or intends. She is a menace, and yes as her subsequent comments prove, she is a “feminist” and/or “progressive”, in the mold of calls for a new “movement” (there’s that word again), of armed, aggressive, and militant leftists to distort and corrupt our cherished rights to enforce their will and agenda. There is no compassion from me for the likes of her.
The “unilateral supreme authority” is the premise of any free man or woman.
It is what is required to enter into a binding contract, be that a business deal or a marriage.
The sovereign individual is free. The consent he or she exercises to live in a free society makes that society free.
Without that consent there is no liberty and we are slaves.
This is the horror of Socialism, where each of us is merely a slave to the State.
And where there are Slaves there are Masters.
It’s just that some Slaves are more equal than others.
There It Is.
For JTC, “sovereignty” — it is the dignity of any individual to choose their own way. It does not AT ALL mean that if a woman decides to become a partner to a man she must become a chattel to that man.
It means the woman (AND the man) have honor, ideals, all the things that make the melding of two intellects so pleasurable and wonderful.
Yes, JTC, this means in the majority of cases, there will be an Alpha male who — and read this carefully — in certain cases will take command to deal with things with which he is by nature, more competent than his precious female mate.
Combat. Carrying bricks. That sort of thing.
But women are so superior in so many ways, their sovereignty unquestionably gives them the final word in those areas of superiority.
Works great. Trust yer Unca. Especially you, Jeps.
I am a combat veteran Alpha. I am damned good at it. You would be pathetic in combat. That is NOT a derogation. If anything, it is a hat tip to the super important superiority you would be able to demonstrate regarding the forming/guiding of young minds.
Except for the “Daddy” thing, we suck at it.
But if you grab your silly ass gun because your husband short-sheeted the bed, that just makes you a failure. In all categories.
You are better than me at comforting, teaching.
I am a better hunter.
So joint “sovereignty” as I speculated, a melding of strengths and weaknesses complementing one another, a good and solid union and partnership.
It’s the term itself that had me wondering, as sovereign is literally defined as a single, unilateral and unquestioned authority. Glad your relationship is not one of those; I don’t think that’s at all what God wants from men as the head of the household (a term that also chafes Jeps).
I guess anybody can be sovereign in a group of one, but the partnership approach has also been the structure that has worked for my family for 46 years; I may be the final arbiter for the most serious issues we face, but not without discussion, I provide for my family to the best of my ability and I will protect it with my life. But in many things I would be absolutely lost without the power of love and strength and nurturing and intuition that the love of my life quite literally embodies.
Nurse and nurture. Protect and provide. That is the essential division of strengths and responsibilities that has worked for us and many successful unions. It is one that Jeps rejects. I wish success for her, but I don’t expect it.
Delilahcatessen,
While I have no doubt you can make a fine sammach (I was just goofing with you as someone else laid out later in the thread).
My wife and I actually share the sammach making based on our strengths, she makes wonderful hot sammaches and I take care of the Deli and Sub styles, also the grilling falls to me, hot stuff that goes in a bun, yum. 🙂
How and why a sammich is requested and made and given (either person) is the (path is the) message (and the journey is the destination).
Extraordinary, Chris. You’re delving ever deeper into history, biology, geopolitics, sexuality…the whole Magilla. And it’s a *cartoon*. Hat’s off to ya, guy.
Sam you need to put the knife down. Chopping bell peppers without removing the top and seeds is not a good idea.
Grunt
GWB
JTC
RHT
…
I don’t want to flood the comments with my replies, so putting it into one post here.
a) if Might makes Right is the rule, then it *is* the rule. Debating the morality or «rightness» of someone getting the upper hand on you is then a moot point. I.e. with that mindset, anything the left does to men is right because they *can* do it. I don’t agree with this, but that goes both ways – it also means that I don’t agree men should be dominant to women just bc physically stronger.
b) As for «other kinds of power» – these are largely illusory, dependent on good will. Women have traded an illusion of power, for a lesser, but growing, amount of real power (and freedom). At least how I see it.
c) JTC – this is the last time I will adress this with you. Yes, a gun is a way to equalize capacity for violence – but one I will only employ if a someone uses physical force against me *first*. Having prepared for this mentally is simply part of effective self-defence.
And again, I suspect your problems with this is rooted in the fact that I have effectively negated the male strength advantage in how I relate to men… I will never let a man in my life tell me what to do, let him have the last say, just because of his greater capacity for violence is supposed to grant him some kind of authority (i may still *decide* to agree)…
…which is an issue for those who want men to be the dominant «head of household» and justify it with «bc stronger». Which some here seem to do.
I think I have clogged up the comments enough for now, so if anyone want the last word; enjoy 😀
Word.
Ironic humor. Love it!
Jeps
Have you ever stepped up to protect or defend any person that is weaker or defenseless against someone of any strength willingly to do harm to that person?
God I hope not. This type of person is the last who you’d want sheepdogging, even worse than the dude who will snatch out his LCP and spray some shots when a thug walks in and holds up the donut shop more often than not popping a few innocents in the effort to play hero. In her case, the conflation of male/female societal roles and mores has exactly nothing to do with the employment of deadly defense but is the entirety of her attempt at justification:
“…I have effectively negated the male strength advantage in how I relate to men… I will never let a man in my life tell me what to do, let him have the last say, just because of his greater capacity for violence…”
One of the most extreme cases of dick envy I’ve ever seen. Her equalizer is her gun, not for protection from physical attack, but just because he’s bigger and stronger she’s ready to shoot his ass at the slightest perceived provocation. I’m a big guy, but there’s lots of bigger, stronger, younger dudes than me. Doesn’t mean I’m ready to shoot them if they look at me cross-eyed. This is the exact same mentality that causes road rage, a need to grossly over-compensate with deadly aggression for perceived inadequacy; it has nothing to do with gender.
She, and anyone for that matter, would do well to read, digest, and comprehend a little essay written by Maj. L. Caudill, USMC (ret):
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-gun-civilization-todd-widick
Well actually the good colonel is a myth, kind of a case of reverse stolen valor. The real author is German immigrant sci-fic writer Marko Kloos who has as good a handle on the right to bear arms as any I’ve seen. On first read it may seem to confirm Jeps’ reasoning, but read deeper to see that the justifications in the essay, and hers, are not at all the same and have nothing to do with the great battle for “equality” of the sexes.
Women can be equally as violent as men and will hold a grudge and the need to get even longer than men. Fear can play into the need of being hyper-vigilante against a potential attacker. Constantly on-point is wearying and can bring about fatal results.
“I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.” Frank Herbert
Great quote, in the vein of Patton’s about those living in fear dying a thousand deaths rather than one.
Won’t argue about womens’ capacity for violence or processing and dealing with the threat and/or aftermath of violence differently, just one of many physiological and psychological differences thank God, as others have mentioned here.
That’s not the basis of Jeps’ promise to be quick on the draw, though she uses it as an excuse for it; a gun is just as deadly in the hands of someone who is 4’6″ as someone who is 6’4″. The problem is a lack of proper training or worse, a pre-conceived mindset of anyone of any size (or gender) to respond with deadly force as first rather than last resort, and to openly eschew what will de-escalate a conflict way before it gets to that point…situational awareness, what you call being hyper-vigilant and on-point, avoiding or retreating from those situations…a response that she sees as weakness or acquiescence to male physical superiority.
Her attitude is a recipe for disaster.
What one might call “first-wave” feminism – the right to vote, hold property, etc, is a natural outgrowth of human rights, as so brilliantly expressed in the Declaration of Independence (and other places). Of course women are the legal equals of men.
That does NOT mean they are the same as men. There are many inherent differences in biology, some of which influence behavior. As western society evolved technologically, we were slow to recognize the need to shift much of women’s labor from inside the house to outside of it. Two hundred years ago, “keeping house” was a full-time, skilled trade, of great economic value. It is still of value but it is no longer full time, and many parts of it can be outsourced, so to speak. In the US, we have made huge gains in this area; more than is generally recognized, but this does not change the underlying biology and its influence on women’s preferences in men.
Just sayin’
I have yet to meet a woman that understands a Man won’t fight for what he can’t Have. IMHO their (women) door holding privilege (which is our fault) has removed women from reality.
They may declare they “won”. But, what I am finding from the grand-kids and a few guys hiring young men, is not surrender. Many claim to not want to be “tired down” with single mothers looking for support or what we used to call “easy” and the femi-shrews. They are choosing not to fight and retreating into doing what they want for themselves.
This actually makes me squirm.
“…I have effectively negated the male strength advantage in how I relate to men… I will never let a man in my life tell me what to do, let him have the last say, just because of his greater capacity for violence…”
Because it is so… wounded. So full of internal anger. Unremitting hatred instead of unremitting love.
I worship my Lady. She would swim through blood to save me — to be just as I am.
Yes. As I said above…”I guess anybody can be sovereign in a group of one…”
Careful what you wish for, Jeps.
Sad, isn’t it.
All day, and no one remarked on this…
Give us this day “Our Daily Bread”, and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us.
Fits Sam, Skye, and Zed, don’cha think?
Last (?) word