I Skyped with my son last night. The conversation went something like this:
Johnny: Dad, your blog is so lame. If you weren't my father I probably wouldn't read it. You try too hard not to offend people.
Me: Are you kidding? I say plenty of stuff that a lot of people would find offensive. What about that series on black names? Or this series on gender differences? A lot of people just try to ignore or deny that stuff. And most people would certainly never say it.
Johnny: Okay, sure, it's politically incorrect, but you still need to be more controversial. You know, say stuff that will shock people.
Me: Johnny, my goal isn't to shock people. It's to get them to say, "Hmm, that's true." I just try to tell the truth, no matter what the subject. And a lot of times what the other side says is partly true too, so I'll point that out as well. Name one thing I've said that isn't true.
Johnny: Okay, well maybe. But there's a lot of stuff you don't say that you should.
Me: I've covered most of the politically incorrect stuff. But how many times can I talk about race and IQ? Or about race and crime? I lose interest in those things myself. I just try to talk about stuff I find interesting, and that I think other people will find either interesting or amusing.
Johnny: But you're not nearly hard-hitting enough. In your series on gender differences, why don't you talk about how woman's suffrage should be repealed?
Me: What?!
Johnny: Oh come on, you know how destructive it's been. Look how this country has gone downhill and become so ridiculously liberal since 1920. [The year women got the vote.]
Me: Johnny, you have got to be the oldest member of the We Hate Girls Club.
Johnny: Dad, don't be stupid. You know it's true as well as I do. Or why don't you talk about women never invent anything? Tell me, how many Nobel Prizes have there been in the hard sciences which have been awarded to women? Or why don't you talk about the fact that women can't make decisions? They just want to do everything by committee. Come on Dad, you know it's true.
Me: I know what I'll do. I'll write a post about how you say these things.
Johnny: Dad, don't be such a goddamn pussy. I know you know all these things are true.
Me: Well....
Johnny: Well just don't forget to put in the part about how women's suffrage should be repealed.
It's good to have a son who will give voice to things that even I won't say. Thanks to Johnny, I can give such views airtime without putting my name to them, and pass them off as an amusing father-son conversation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
But under employment law men and women are identical..... Since men and women are in fact different in many ways, its not crazy to think that a man might do better in one type of employment and a woman might do better in another. But if any employer openly stated a gender preference for a job position they'd likely be subject to a big law suit.
Along those lines we're now seeing the push for US women in combat. After all men and women are the same and must have equal opportunity at all employment. Imagine injecting a few female infantry into Blackhawk Down.
Going back a few posts I think your description of male / female drivers was accurate, but didn't address one type of female driver. The aggressive yet inept female driver - and there are quite a few of them out there. These are the women who tailgate excessively and make sudden lane changes which might require a quick evasive maneuver by the unfortunate vehicle in the adjacent lane. The motivations for aggressive driving by men and women are likely quite different - think estrogen vs. testosterone.
I think the differences we see in in male / female driving habits and skills are likely rooted in the proven gender differences in spatial relationships, where men are better.
- Ed
Ed --
From what I understand, the idea of having women in combat positions in the Army is regarded as a joke by actual combat troops. What are they going to do about he basic training requirements? When my son was in basic training last summer they had to take a 7 mile trek carrying 85 pounds of equipment, and also a 12 mile hike carrying 75 pounds. How will they adjust these requirements for women?
I seem to have been outvoted on the women drivers issue. My experience is that they are much less aggressive, but others seemed to feel that that is no longer the case.
When strength is an employment issue the standards are lowered to accommodate women - as has been done with police and fire. I assume they would do the same for women in combat.
- Ed
Ed --
I remember around twenty years or so ago when there was a big issue made of the fact that there weren't enough women being in the New York City Fire Departments, so they changed the part of the physical test where you had to hoist a 160 pound bag over your shoulder and carry it across the room. For women, the new test consisted of having to drag an 80 pound bag across a room.
Really made me feel safe.
Post a Comment