Tag: society

A Rape Culture? Humans ARE Specialists.

Posted on by D. L. Keur

Horror_preC_strip

I’m so tired of “new” feminists and their male proponents. I’m tired of the attempts to culturally castrate men…and other women, for that matter. I’m tired of people mouthing the words ‘rape culture’, when, honestly, they have their heads up their varied anatomical holes about rape.

I was raped–sexually, in fact. I didn’t talk about it for years…decades. I rarely speak of it, now.  Why? I was traumatized. Brutally. Because the rape was brutal, done by a bunch of jocks–yes, gang-raped by those privileged boys, black, brown, and white, whose ‘bad boy’ behavior and aggression society–almost ALL human societies–encourages and celebrates.

Do we live in a ‘rape culture’? Really? You bet we do. And it ain’t just the men.  It ain’t just them who have a penis and testicles. Women rape, too. And I’m NOT limiting this to sexual violation, folks. Rape is an act of domination, of overpowering and subjugating others. And it isn’t limited to males dominating, overpowering, and subjugating women or even men dominating, overpowering, and subjugating other humans, regardless of gender. Women are just as guilty of raping those around them, both women, especially women, as well as men. They may not commit a sexual violation to do it (though some do that, too, and, yes, even to men) but they do, in fact, practice forms just as or even more onerous…because they are HUMAN.

Humans are specialists in domination–dominionism. They are specialists in subjugating others–hierarchy. They are specialists in overpowering anyone and anything they can–oppression. It’s the nature of humans to do so. It’s how primitive humans survived hostile environments to become what they think is the top of the food chain–by subjugating, overpowering, and dominating.  To change that, you’re going to have to change YOU and the entire species. Genetic tampering would do it. Attempting to dominate, subjugate, and overpower your perceived victimizer is only perpetuating more rape, that is you raping–subjugating, overpowering, and dominating–those you blame as YOUR rapists.

Horror_C

Is Politics Your Only Criteria?  Really?

Posted on by D. L. Keur

AristotleEntertainingTht 

Someone I follow on Facebook posted a very cool image of Prez Obama responding in sign language to a deaf person’s sign-speak.  One of his followers/friends spoke out in astonishment that Tom and he were definitely on opposite sides of the fence, politically.  This should matter?  …It shouldn’t.  Not at all.  It was a post showing a wonderful very human moment that sets a great example of what should be.

(And, btw, I’m not an Obama fan. To me, he’s just yet another politician’s politician, unwilling to lay it on the line and stand up for what he believes when push comes to shove.  I don’t like wimps.  Not in my country’s leadership.  Neither do I like the fact that, the day he took office, he simply continued Bush’s policies.  Gone were the campaign pledges.  And then there’s the problem that the only people and lives he really cares about are city-folk, especially Black city folk.  That really galls.  As soon as he took office, wolves got the shaft.  So did the environment, in general.  Instead, what did we get?)

Lately on FB, I’ve been attacked and harassed for posting pro-Bernie stuff, pro All-Life stuff (as in that not just all human lives matter, but animal and plant life, too, along with the living biosphere).  Startlingly and viciously attacked to the point I blocked the worst offenders that started stalking me.  And it amazes me.

A lot of you who know me know that I’ve got a foot in two canoes, one heading right, the other heading left.  I’m not a moderate, by any definition, but rather have strong opinions on Constitutional issues like separation of church and state, the right to bear arms (and, yes, I mean civilians owning guns without being put on somebody’s watch list), capital punishment, anti-Affirmative Action (make everything based on merit, please), and the like.  On the other hand, social Darwinism and unfettered capitalism lead to a meaner, more vicious predatory existence for everyone.  I’m pro-choice, an environmental preservationist, anti-discrimination of any kind, and so on.  So you can’t call me a Lib or a Rightie, either one, because I’m both–legitimately both–with strong, solid rationales behind my positions.

Here’s the thing that bothers me about the U.S. and all the divisiveness going on–all of it sponsored by the power-brokers,with the specific and very effective intent to divide and conquer so they can finalize their enslavement of us:

Politics and differences of opinion, whether religious or social, should never terminate friendships.  Debate is good; differences of opinion and perspective are good;  Listen more; find alternatives that satisfy, as much as possible, everyone’s needs, and, even if you can’t, keep the lines of communication open and hands extended in empathy and good will.  Lose the us versus them attitudes. It will ultimately lead to everyone’s downfall, including yours.

JMO (just my opinion)

Dearth

Posted on by D. L. Keur

I had to laugh this morning.  Today’s Word of the Day from Dictionary.com is “dearth.”  It means scarcity, lack…an inadequate supply.

Dearth: It applies to the economies of the world, including the U.S. and it’s job market.  It applies to U.S. politics and the lack of common ground, common cause, and common sense.  It applies to our species’ levels of tolerance–the lack thereof these days–from Western societies to Middle Eastern societies to Far Eastern societies.  It applies to human-to-human and human-to-other kindness–severely lacking now in this our 21st century.  In short, the word “dearth” applies to us as our socio-political reality.

Prior to 9/11/2001, that infamous day when the skies of New York City darkened with the World Trade Center disaster, and despite the stolen election of the U.S. presidency by the pretender G. W. Bush, there was hope; there was, in fact, a growing sense of peace, prosperity, and, yes, a kinder, gentler America…which would, in turn, one trusted, lead in time to a kinder, gentler, less selfish world.

That all changed in the moment whoever was responsible for the 9/11 attack on America instigated their act (…and I still suspect those who had to most to gain–the strongest motive).  It stirred a sleeping dragon, a nest of hornets. America reacted to 9/11 with vicious determination, its people hurt and angry, the flames of their sorrow-born rage provoked and encouraged by a political agenda that desired nothing more than to feed the lucre of power and resources to itself via its industrial war machine, greasing greedy wheels with human blood.

Gone in that moment were all the gains toward a more peaceful, benevolent world–kindness, tolerance, economic prosperity, the hope of a better future for all of us. Instead, hate, intolerance, and fear dominated our national psyche, the result of which pitched us and the world to the brink of political and economic fascism–the dearth of billions for the enrichment of the few.

No longer do the voices of benevolence and kindness, of civility and tolerance, hold forth within the public ear. Instead, schisms between ideologies, theologies, and cultures, are cultivated and encouraged by gleeful profiteers, collapsing civility, solvency, and plenty, and replacing them with dearth–dearth for the poor and for the middle class, dearth for the general human populations, dearth that leads to further degradation of the world environment.

Hatred, fear and rage has replaced common sense and tolerance, a hatred and fear engineered using the power of influence to seed its seepingly insidious corruption into a vulnerable public mind that fails to grasp the agenda of the elite socio-political masterminds behind it who are bent on owning and controlling everything to the benefit of themselves–the mighty few–to the detriment and dearth of everyone and every thing else.

Dearth, a word to think on.

 

Fairness

Posted on by D. L. Keur

There’s a saying that “life isn’t fair.” Okay, in a Darwinian sense, that’s very true. It’s true because of chance and circumstance. However, humans try very hard to make things fairer…for themselves…and vehemently object to being treated unfairly by others. This objection to unfairness brought those. such as the Calvinites, who were persecuted for their beliefs in Europe and Britain to the “New World” in search of religious freedom for themselves…and went on to institute the very same, and, in some cases, more violent, persecutions against others who did not embrace their religious doctrine. Wanting fairness for themselves, they were willing to deny fairness to others. Don’t you find that hypocritical? I do (though, I don’t find it surprising.)

In Israel, the Jews, victims of genocidal persecution, in turn now persecute the Palestinians, including invidious methods of genocide– denying water, livelihood, and shelter. The Jews wanted fairness, but refuse to, themselves, be fair.

In the U.S. today, I see a great deal of this kind of hypocrisy embraced–the “I’ve got mine, and I’ll deny you yours” mentality. I find this level of unfairness based in intolerance unacceptable, yet the socio-political direction most evident through the media, in the workplace, and in interaction between people online and off demonstrates to me that we, having been purposely factionalized by power brokers playing us for pawns for their own agenda, are evermore embracing unfairness, intolerance, and injustice. I think we really need to pull ourselves up and take a keen look at who we are becoming.

Jobs: Many Articles, One Inevitable Conclusion

Posted on by D. L. Keur

There are and have been a lot of articles about the state of jobs in the U.S.  Reading them, I find only one or two that actually address the real problem: over-population.  That’s because it’s a tabboo subject; it’s unpopular to suggest that people must stop having so many babies.  When I was in high school, then college, though, it kept striking me that population growth along with technological innovation would, in time, prove to be disastrous for our nation and the world. And, unfortunately, that time has come.  I used to argue that in Economics class; I still argue that with colleagues, though, lately, their voices are fewer and weaker because, 1) their jobs have been outsourced overseas, and, 2) computers and automation have taken over their tasks. Even jobs requiring a high degree of mental acumen and skill are being phased out from a “permanent” position to that of a “permanent temporary”, subcontracted status. Mostly gone are the lucrative, lifetime jobs where you could look forward to retirement after, say, thirty years of satisfying, steady employment with the same firm, working your way up the company hierarchy.

DOING MORE FOR LESS
Technological innovation and computer automation are, of course, wonderful. One person can do so much more today than they could even ten years ago…by themselves, without an army of help. So, pound for pound and dollar for dollar, they and the company they work for make more money, right? Maybe, depending on the circumstances and the business. Mostly, it depends on how the business is run and how much competition vies for the same market…because competition for income is more intense with the increasing number of desperate available bodies willing to do it for less.

REPLACING THOSE EXPENSIVE HUMAN WORKERS
Of course, robotics allow companies to get rid of expensive workers who, being human, are, well, human. Emotions, illness, familial responsibilities, and the need for reasonably safe, comfortable working conditions all add a toll to hiring live bodies as opposed to high-tech mechanicals. Robots are expensive, though. Still, when measuring one robot’s productivity against that of a live worker, robots make a lot of sense.  It takes 4.2 human workers to do the same amount of work as one robot if those humans can and will work at the same speed and with the same efficiency as said robot.  And, of course, you need the tech to maintain and fix the robot…or a contract with the company who makes it.  Still, the robot is still cheaper, especially since a robot can be used as a depreciation expense.  So, considering all the variables, buying a robot (or several) is definitely much more appealing than employing human beings.  And robots don’t need health care or retirement benefits, a huge plus in savings.

BURGEONING POPULATION
Then, of course, there’s the sheer volume of people who need or want work. That makes workers very cheap and becoming cheaper still as population increases.

SHORT TERM SOLUTION? I don’t think there is one that’s politically appealing to either of our political parties, nor one that is practical without closing the borders and isolationism, plus some stringent new commerce laws…such as: to sell in the U.S., you must create the product in a U.S.-based factory that employs U.S. citizens, else pay a huge tariff for the privilege of selling to Americans.

LONG TERM SOLUTION? Pretty easy to figure out: reduce the human population by reducing the number of babies born.