From State to State

      Finally, I'm home. A few hours ago I flew from Texas, one of the greatest states in our Union, and came out in one of the states I've called home. I was greeted with news that made me jump higher than a little boy on Christmas morning or shout louder than a man watching the super bowl. Three years ago the Republican Party made an ultimatum and today they delivered their promise.

      For those who do not remember, three years ago the Republicans and Libertarians pledged that if the Democrats passed a bill through the budget, they would destroy it through the budget. Under reconciliation the Democratic party passed the Affordable Care Act with a strict party-line 51% vote – ramrodding it passed our traditional, super-majority threshold. In the upcoming elections the Democratic party lost the control of the House and gave up several seats in the senate. But the rally to repeal the most destructive bill under the Obama Administration did not end with our elections nor our Tea Party and Libertarian movements. Large Corporations, Big Unions, and our representative government opted out of Obama's healthcare. They pleaded with our president and lobbied our congress to pass exemptions to free them from their economic demise. The fruition of our labors, three years later, is a bi-partisan attempt to defund Obamacare.

     There are some who will read this as adoration and excitement for a government shutdown. Nothing could be farther from the truth; Nothing could cause more grief than to watch our Senate fight so fervently to destroy our nation. I have prayed that the American government would listen to the American people. I have prayed that Americans will understand that Liberty is non-partisan. I have prayed that America will look beyond satisfying our president and seek what is right for our people. And today Congress has stood toe-to-toe fighting for this cause. Today our government placed us before their reputation. Today Liberty became non-partisan. Today Americans and America came together to tell our president that America is worth more than his reputation. If our government is unwilling to hear our voices then our government is undeserving of our funds.


Whether or not the fight against Obamacare is long-lived, a statement was clearly made. The American people are becoming more aware that there are too many politicians too far away from home.

A Candid Response: What Women Talk

        My previous post was written quiet some time ago but my belief that someone, somewhere would take it the wrong way prevented an earlier publication. Now I'm sharing a record of how that conversation went. I'm not here to wave my hand to self-fulfilled prophecy or to usher in an example of hostilities found in debate - I'm simply recording an exchange and hope that anyone who has found offense under the same contentions will have foreknowledge of my position.

The original post may be found here.

The name of the my friend will be left unknown for the privacy's sake.

Sealhy Nendyek -
"Um. Wow. I really have no words. Has it ever occurred to you that gender is secondary to humanity? And that these neatly packaged ideas of how to relate to this absurd creature called 'woman' is possibly irrelevant because we really aren't so different than men? I suppose gender roles, and stereotypes, and adopting an 'us vs. them' mentality, looking at us like we're some sort of novelty behind a glass is just so much easier than approaching us like we are merely another human being just like yourself. If you are having a hard time understanding someone, or are not sure how to relate to them, I always suggest a little open, honest communication, accompanied by an open mind. Funnily enough, this applies regardless of gender, or age, or position, etc. But don't mind me. I'm female. I'm sure I need you to pander to me, and anything more I just wouldn't understand."



Me -

I think you misunderstood the whole point of me writing this. It wasn't a thesis on "womanhood" and why manhood is different or, God forbid, better, if anything, notice that I only poked fun at males. And that perspective (to make fun of your own gender) is typical of these sorts of articles. For example most of these types of articles are written by women, and they poke fun at women. This one was written by a man (or a boy if you prefer) and was designed to poke fun at men.

True, we can diverge into the realm of stereotypes (which I do believe on a macro scale holds some form of truth), but I believe where we seriously diverge from the same path is the notion that humanity is preferable before gender. It's like saying automobiles are more preferable to corvettes or that insects are more noble than the ant. To me it seems that the negation of particularity is the negation of personality - you can't throw one out and hope to keep the other.

But perhaps, since I have gone this far, I must continue to the root of the gender wars: Feminism. The problem with feminism is that it isn't feminine. The problem with feminism is that it is entirely unconcerned with feminism and entirely concerned with masculinity. In one fell swoop and perhaps with a wave of a much more dully colored flag, they usher in Protagoras as their god and cry out, "Man is the measure of all things: of things which are, that they are, and of things which are not, that they are not." Feminism, with all their secular philosophy, assumes that the fulfillment of womanhood is simply completed by doing what men do, and along the way they drop the divine notion that they were created by God for a much greater, and wholly different, purpose.



Sealhy Nendyek -

Feminists. Evil bra-burners & man haters. Their 'secular philosophy' is what exactly? Social & economic equality? How horrifying. The freedom to define their own femininity that may or may not conform to someone else's 'ideal woman'? How dare they. It's not about who's stronger, or what roles someone needs to be confined to. It's not about defining someone else's femininity or masculinity for them. I was born female. I identify as female. Therefore I am feminine. There is no set standard that I have to conform to in order to claim that. The exact same thing goes everyone else. You think feminists only have a problem when people try to define women? That we could care less about society's rigid gender roles for men? You're right. That's terrible. We should just let well enough alone. Things like rape culture, gender discrimination, male centric standards of beauty don't exist. After all, if we reduce feminism to a ridiculous caricature, then we can convince hordes of people that it means something that it doesn't. Men and women are different. Just like men are different than other men, and women are different from other women. You reduce everyone's individuality to a simple black and white box.



Me -

I apologize Ashley, but if you received the notion that I thought Feminists were man-haters then I misstated. I meant to say that they obsess over men, they think their grass is much too green. Hence my pun to Protagoras about man being the standard for all things. But before I begin I would like to make one thing clear, I'll be responding to feminism's ideals. In otherwords, I'll argue where they erred, I am not providing the solution.

Let's begin with economic equality because that's the most fascinating. If we go back one-hundred years, we'll see a very different America. An America that viewed a traditional set of ideals: men went to work, women stayed at home, children had to learn. When Feminists came to centre stage it revolted against this tradition. But what's fascinating is how they did it.

First, the home was altered from a house to a prison compound. The perception was deftly one-sided - a woman at home is a woman unused. While a man is away exploring the depths of culture and the far-reaches of civilization, the woman was left at home to fiddler with her fingers. The most horrifying blindness of this one-sided approach is that it reduces children to worthlessness. In a conflagration the workplace became important and the home became the burning stake.

Second, the work place was glorified as the chisel against their chains. Again, notice the one-sidedness: give a woman a job and now she's worthwhile. Take away the women from the family, and now the family is complete. How is that? The lie that was eaten was that the world constituted everything outside the home when the opposite is true. It is the home that has made every civilization, and the job to keep it was given to the woman.

And third, the notion of economic equality is false advertising. It's false advertising because no one talks about the role of a job. People get jobs because people need money - we call this wage slavery. And I think rightly so. For feminism's response to this predicament was to give equal slavery to everyone. Again, notice the one-sidedness. They didn't expect the man to come home and be equal parents for their children, they sent the woman to the grinding stone and attack the family.

Next, I'll move to your definition of femininity. It seems as though you're comfortable in saying your feminine because of a certain organ arrangement. I suppose I must have misspoken when I thought that speaking about women was to address a lofty set of ideals, it appears in your case it was some sort of cosmic accident. Either way, your definition prohibits any freedom of the will.

And your last point. It is true, men and women are different from each other, also men are different from other men, but I do believe we have something going for us when we still call all the men in the room men. The ideals of man is to be a protector and provider, the ideals for a woman is to train up and guide. Do we really wish to argue that the protector is worth more than what is being protected? Is the treasure chest really worth more than the treasure?

What Women Talk

There is nothing worse than an unsophisticated male spending a night reading article upon article on how women should understand men. Women need to understand that men need their space; Women need to understand that men could care less about emotional rollercoasters; Women need to understand that men care even if they don't say so; Women need to understand that men only need six objects in their bathroom (toilet paper being three of them... For those who are guessing a toothbrush, tooth paste, and deodorant complete the six necessary objects.) And the list goes on and on and on. What I propose is to write a male's take upon this nasty subject. What I propose is that a male should try to understand a woman. No, on second thought, I propose something less sophisticated than that. I propose to take a moment of silence, and then read a few topical paraphrases on some common sense male perspective. As the old adage goes, “Let us know thine enemy.”

 

Empty Calorie Talk:

Men, you're going to have to roll with me on this one. The empty calorie talk will seem like the longest, most unfruitful talk of your life – but I promise you it will become the largest bomb ever dropped if you don't recognize it when it happens. Imagine yourself having a graceful moment with death and you want to realize how fortunate you really are to be alive. True, deciding to use your dad's rickety ladder on the first story roof to get to your second story roof wasn't a smart idea. But now you're on the ground. You're happy, satisfied, and need nothing more to complete your moment. However, up walks a woman you know and she begins saying, “You wouldn't believe how horrible this is!!! My Bff's brother's girlfriend who's long lost cousin was at a bookstore who somehow got there by mistake because her aunt didn't respond to her text because she was out town because her husbands sister's bff has an amazing summer house and invited the entire family... blah blah blah.” You've already tuned out everything she's saying because you're simply satisfied with embracing the simple beauty of life. After relating this dreadfully awful story, you know an obvious solution to her uncanny predicament. DON'T SAY IT! If it's an obvious answer, then it's a sign that you've been lead into an Empty Calorie Talk. Your response is simple. You look her in the eyes, pause (for effect), and then say, “I understand, and that's really terrible.” Yes. That's right, then entire hour it took for her to convey her story could be answered in one sentence. She doesn't want a solution, she wants understanding. And that's why it's the empty calorie talk – no answers, no opinions, just understanding... You can even bring up some similar situations from your past to justify your position.

The Tea Time Special:

This is the talk between talks, so it's a bit more special and a bit more devastating if you get it wrong. These are those short phone calls or sporadic text messages. No woman wants a fully committed conversation during these moments. She simply wants to know that you're “there”. No, I didn't say, “alive”. I said, “there”. Where? “There”. No one knows where that is, but it exists and you need to be there... No, not here, but there.

The Hot Cocoa with extra whipped cream sit down:

This is the semi-sweet small talk that every man is afraid of. Buckle yourself up and prepare for me to use the f-word: feelings. Guys have them, and women want to know about them. No, not always in a personal way, but in a feely sort of way. Let me explain. You watch a movie and she asks, “How did you like the movie?” You reply, “It was good.” WRONG! Obviously it had to be somewhat good or else she would be telling you how bad it was and it would become an empty calorie talk and she would only want you to understand and agree. What she is actually asking is, “How did this movie impact your normal thought-pattern in a new, improved, and, perhaps, deeper way? How do you 'feel' about the movie?” Make sense? Of course not, but it's true. Try to emphasize a feeling, an event, and then a past correlated event. Process – every man's dream.
 

The Midnight Snack:

The question of all questions, the question every man will ask, but no man will have an answer (spoiler: I don't have the answer either) is, “Why did you wait until I was asleep to talk about this?” Now guys, I know there are only two popular options: we continue to ask this question over and over again expecting a new answer or we do the infinitely worse thing by rolling over and going back to sleep. This goes for anything (text messages and nap-times are included). The midnight snack talk is exactly as it sounds – it can be quick and painless (if the food is available) or it could ruin the rest of the night (when you find out that your brother ate the last of the ice cream that you bought). And that's the decision you'll have to make. Something will be sacrificed. By the end of snack time you will have either lost fifteen minutes or fifteen hours (oh yes, if you manage to go back to sleep she'll be waiting for you in the morning. And it doesn't matter if you don't remember.). Oh, and this goes for any female in your life: friend, sister, or mother.

Things Not to Do:

1) The Monte Cristo – Being a Monte Cristo is effective only if you wish to execute vengeance on an entire social class and hope to escape unnoticed. As part of being a man is also being known. This may be more difficult for those that are shy and unwilling to entertain the idea of going out and starting a conversation. However, there is hope. When a conversation is started, express likes and dislikes. Maybe you give the one-liner and not the story, backstory, sub-plot, inspiring events, and the day you were born. Those may become important, but not now - Simply be known. The man behind the veil is a great stage performer – not a great life experience.

2) Don't lose an argument – Yes, you read this correctly. I said DON'T lose an argument. Every man knows what I mean, and every woman will understand in a moment (Perhaps you didn't know this ^_^). Ask yourself this question, “When you're in a heated discussion, has throwing up your hands and saying, 'Fine! You're right,' ever help the situation?” Doesn't that always produce the intended result? Doesn't she always reply, “Oh. Thank you for acknowledging my position and conceding your right to being correct. Would you like to forget that this argument ever happened?” Of course not. She then debates you on why you dropped the argument and assumes that you simply want to end the discussion. Or, most infamous of them all, she says, “So that's how it's going to be?” Yeah, every man knows that the discussion is about to get real. By the way, that deep sigh and rolling of the eyes won't help you in the long run.

Here's what you have to do: you have to fight like you're fighting a marlin. To win you have to lose, to lose you have to win. You pull in your big guns, and then let them fail. You pull in more of you big guns, and then let them fail. You pull in more of your big guns, and then let them fail. Do you understand the picture? If you hook a marlin, you can't simply reel it straight out of the water. You have reel her in, then let her swim out, then you have to reel her in, and then let her swim out, then you have to reel here in, and then let her swim out. How long must you do this? Well, there isn't a specific standard, but I can tell you it won't take eight hours. Simply repeat the process until saying, “Fine, you're right,” comes out naturally. She'll be happy, you'll be happy, the world will be happy, and, most importantly, the point you wanted to communicate is communicated.

Things to Do:

1) By-Cause – Men, we are all infamous of this. The original English words for because were By Cause. Later, this useful phrase became a contraction and wrote as By-Cause. And now, by-cause of the words popularity, we use the word Because. But let us go back in history and remember our former friend, By Cause. This is the point that makes all conversations worth having. No one is really interested in the fact that Christ rose from the dead, we are more interested, much more interested, in the reason why, or the by-cause, that lead to His crucifixion and eventual resurrection. We are not merely interested in being fired from our job, but desire to understand by-what-cause got us fired. Or perhaps when we decided to have that second ice cream without asking, we can justify our actions by-cause of our hard work. In any case, this old friend of ours is a cherished relic that won't be leaving us any time soon.

So what does this have to do with us men? We need to begin using this word more often – at least in our heads. When a woman walks in and says, “I've been shopping all day.” A simple, “Oh, that's nice.” isn't the most gratuitous act. If a woman we're infatuated with walks in and says, “I've been shopping all day,” simply replying, albeit much more emphatically, “Oh, that's nice!” still isn't the most gratuitous act. The problem isn't how emphatic, but in wondering why she was shopping. Most women trick us into this by walking into the door and asking, “Guess where I've been all day?” See what happened there? She's inviting you into the exhilarating experience of thinking the by-causes of her day. But why wait for the invitation? When a woman walks in and says, “I've been shopping all day,” think, for a moment, “Do I know all the by-causes in her shopping experience?” Of course not! Simply ask, “Why did you go to the store? Why did you buy spaghetti noodles and popcorn? Oh! Is that chocolate bar for me?” Okay, some questions are best left unasked, but do you understand the point? Because is the infinite reservoir of conversation and interest. As long as there is someone doing something and someone interested in why, the word because will exist. Use it.

The End:

And lastly, but definitely not least, is the truth. If you have read to the end it's because you're a female. If you happen to be a male, either you're in a tough situation (by which you are now desperately scourging google to find the answer and happen to fall upon this article) or you're being forced and you're trying to do the right thing. And that's exactly my point. Men already know this, they already know the right thing to do. But what makes a man a man (and not a woman) is that they know exactly what to do, ponder doing it, and then do the exact opposite. Fathers, I know you've looked at your son and have said this countless times. I know because I'm a son, and my father has given up saying it. He simply laughs and joins in – the true art of manship.

A Simple Truth

      There's no easy way to begin. Do we choose a catching story or a surprising fact; do we talk about the weather or say a few jokes? Those late night decisions seem to be more complex than the cosmos or more fragile than a few precious tea cups. But a choice must be made, a choice is always made. And when we find ourselves squirming our way out of a tight situation or looking over our shoulder to ensure our decision was for the best, we must always remember that in those times only a simply truth will take you the extra mile.

       Tonight I had to defend a point I did not agree. In debate I did this most naturally. If I had to defend wind energy, then God was the author and designer of wind energy and we will use it (God willing). If coal plants were the cobble stones that paved our future, then by God we would use them to build bridges between nations and place their sculptures on the highest of mountain peaks. Through these times I never understood my debate friends who couldn't do it themselves; who would rather bow out of a round instead of practicing their skills for when it mattered most: when they defended their love. But tonight I may have had a glimpse of all those moments. A shadowy image of the spy next door. This spiny and prickly friend that told them the secret I've been told now: It's not ingenuity or good intentions that takes you the extra mile but the simple truth.

       It wasn't how he said it or what he said that kept me awake, it was knowing how to do it. Do I choose a catching story or a surprising fact; do we talk about the weather or say a few jokes? It was a late night decision and it wasn't the most prosaic. It was as sharp as any piece of glass, and as organized as a chattered mirror with its thousand faces looking back. What I found in my defense was more than a point I didn't agree with, it was a point that had to be made. It's about the simple truth.

      Will the truth of this essay become obscured by an unknown event or a shadowed by an encoded message – I'm not sure which to believe. The night is passing on without me so I will end with a last message. I was once told that time allows us a small hallway to hang our portraits. They are not always the prettiest and they are not always the hallways we choose, but these portraits are the snapshots of our lives. They capture our moments and help us remember those times. But what makes our portraits fascinating and holds our attention day-in and day-out is that these were the times that made us someone else. So take a moment, lean back in your chair, and remember that the best portraits are always the ones when you spoke the simple truth – that is the beauty in pain and the love in joy.

A Professor's Advice on Revising Essays

        It's that time of year, the nights are becoming colder and the days becoming shorter. School bells are once more ringing down the street, and children are wondering from gas station to gas station collecting candy bars and soda. It's almost a shame that college students spend so much time inside studying instead of outside enjoying the season turn. As a toast to the new college semester, let me begin my series of writing tips with an essay “cheat” that one of my professors taught me.
         The most common problem with revising a recently written paper – if you don't have a firm understanding of grammar and English logic – is the difficulty in finding errors. Your eyes simply fly past them, your brain automatically corrects them (this is an embarrassing problem and spell check is 'Hades that follows.'). This exercise attempts to by-pass all those problems in a time efficient process.
         Before you begin, you'll need a few things. First, and most importantly, you'll need another human being – doesn't even have to be a friend. The only qualifications you'll be looking for is his reading ability. It needs to be at or above college level. In otherwords, your baby brother will be a bad choice. Second, find a pen, or something to write with. Third, two copies of your essay (have a finished first draft). Fourth, five minutes of time. And that's it.
        The exercise is simple. One copy of your essay is for your partner to read aloud, the other copy is for you to silently follow. As he reads follow him and note how he is reading your essay. Every time he makes an unusual pause or breaks his flow of speaking, circle the sentence. That sentence has a logic flaw. The reason we know this is because the brain has an auto-pattern identifier built right into it. Your reader may not understand this but every pause he makes sends his brain back on a quick journey to ensure what he has read is matching what's currently reading. The brain does this because it senses confusion. And confusion is what you're trying to avoid.

         And there you have it. If you need ten revisions, then have ten people read your essay. You can do it quickly, efficiently, and will improve your essay by leaps and bounds. Plus, your professor will love you for it – and we all know that's what matters most.

English Education 101

As I was sitting in my English Education Class, my professor told me her wonderful experiences with head start, a kindergarten/preschool age tutoring service. She told us the games they played, every day objects they talked about, how to properly form lines, and how they taught social etiquette. Then, she concluded, they spent a special time so a councilor could come to each class and have all the children take turns hugging a teddy bear. Woa, woa, woa! Rewind. We are teaching kindergarten and preschool aged children that love and affection can come from an inanimate object by the hands of a psychologist? Wait, it becomes much, much better.

We followed up with reading standards for first through third grade students. My professor thumbed through books such as 'Brown Bear, Brown Bear' and some other book about letters climbing trees. I apologize, but for those parents who are reading this post, have children in first through third grade, and have seen these books as school assignments should not be content with their child's grades. There should not be an echo of happiness. Your children are failing; Your children are being robbed of an education; and your local district councilor who was just hired sees nothing wrong with this.

G.K. Chesterton once said, "Any responsible man will teach his own child." I'm saying this not because I've been homeschooled, but because parents, by and large, will expect greater things from their children, will push their children farther beyond their perceived capacities, and will dedicate more time, money, and love than any teacher with thirty children or any psychologists who has written the lesson plans that are in my hands. I will use college as a case study.

It is widely known that the highest test scores, on average, come from college graduates with physics or philosophy degrees. Why? How is it that a humanities major, philosophy, competes with one of the most prestigious and most rigorous of the natural sciences? How is it that they often share the same seat at a college table? The reason is because of the material philosophy students are expected to understand. When we learn about Aristotle, we read his books (English Translations, of course). When we learn about Plato, we read his books. When we go over Kant, Descartes, Hume, Hegel, Nietzsche, or any other philosopher we are required to go beyond our mental capacity and learn from some of the greatest minds. We do not read someone's summary or another "professor's feelings" upon the matter. I am yet to take an economics class that requires us to understand "Individualism and Economic Order" (A series of essays) by Friedrich Hayek or John Keynes "The General Theory Of Employment Interest And Money". I am yet to take a political science class that requires us to understand Tocqueville, Rousseau, Locke, Marx (We may have read a paragraph about him somewhere in a remote article), or Hobbes. And I'm yet to take a psychology class that requires us to touch a book by Sigmund Freud. If we don't stretch our minds, they'll simply retract into imbecility.

But some will still ask, "What have we lost?" We have lost everything. We've lost the vigor of Marx when he writes, "The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win." We've lost the curiosity and obligation of Rousseau when he says, "As I was born a citizen of a free State, and a member of the Sovereign, I feel that, however feeble the influence my voice can have on public affairs, the right of voting on them makes it my duty to study them: and I am happy, when I reflect upon governments, to find my inquiries always furnish me with new reasons for loving that of my own country." And we have even forget Kant and his conclusion, "Thus pure reason presents us with the idea of a transcendental doctrine of the soul (psychologia rationalis), of a transcendental science of the world (cosmologia rationalis), and finally of a transcendental doctrine of God (theologia transcendentalis)." As Ray Bradbury once said, there's more than one way to burn a book; and our English education is doing a wonderful job.

In looking over our study programs, from childhood to college, from professor to student, from parent to parent, I have come to a single conclusion: We are no longer required to understand, we are simply required to repeat - and that alone should scare us.