This Page

has been moved to new address

Fun With Maureen Dowd

Sorry for inconvenience...

Redirection provided by Blogger to WordPress Migration Service
Bloviating Zeppelin: Fun With Maureen Dowd

Bloviating Zeppelin

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

Saturday, March 18, 2006

Fun With Maureen Dowd


Some people think Maureen Dowd needs to be muzzled, a la Hannibal Lecter (see Left). I mirror Lecter's words when he once said: "I myself do not." She manages to step on her throat, seemingly unprodded, with sufficient pressure -- and no additional assistance necessary -- just like the Dems and the DEM themselves.

From the current March 17th issue of The Week:

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd asked an Australian newspaper last week to help her find romance. Dowd was in Australia to promote her feminist manifesto, Are Men Necessary?, when she confessed that she always had a thing for Australian guys. "If they can take a strong, sassy woman, Australian men should please apply," she told the Sydney Australian. The paper got dozens of replies.

"If she can answer this question, I'll let her have me," wrote one man. "How many blokes does it take to open a beer can? None. Maureen should have had it opened when she brought it to me."

'Nuff said, mate.

IN THAT SAME ISSUE, AND IN A SIMILAR VEIN:

Charlotte Allen wrote recently in the Los Angeles Times: "Betty Friedan, it seems, died just in time to roll over in her grave." Why is that, you might wonder? It would seem that a new University of Virginia study has disproved feminism's principal tenet -- that traditional marriage leaves women unfulfilled and miserable.

In a survey of more than 5,000 couples, sociologists found that 52% of "stay-at-home" wives rates themselves as "very happy." That was contrasted with 41% of working wives who likewise described themselves as "very happy."

The survey also managed to challenge the so-called "utopian" notion that housework and child care should be split evenly. The survey, in a clear non-PC fashion, revealed that women are happiest when their husbands are committed to the marriage, appreciative of their wives' contributions, and emotionally open. "It doesn't much matter whether they dust and do the dishes," The Week noted.

John Tierney of The New York Times responded by writing that "the happiest wives, regardless of the family's overall income, were the ones whose husbands brought in at least 2/3rds of the money." Even feminists who said they believed in "a partnership of equals" were far happier with men who provided most of the family's income.

Further, Jenice Armstrong of the Philadelphia Daily News observed: Women may be hard-wired to prefer men who are good providers, but the findings clearly indicate women are happiest with "a loving partner" who is "romantic, affectionate, and understanding."

"In the end," she says, "the answer to the age-old question of what women want is no surprise. It's simply love."

BUT WAIT: THE FEMINISTS WEIGH IN

Meghan O'Rourke from Slate.com said that women still aren't sure what they want. She writes that "the more you scrutinize a relationship, the more likely you are to find fault with it. That's why," she continues, "feminists are less likely to be happy than traditional, religious women. The latter, on the other hand, are free to think (italics are from the article itself -- BZ) of themselves as traditionalists, even though many of them work outside the home (strictly for finanacial reasons, of course), and expect their husbands to share in the housework and the child-rearing."

Traditional women, in other words, are generally happier because "they're free riders on the women's movement (though they'd deny it), whereas feminists have descended into a tangle of second guesses."

Or, I might add, if you're a so-called "traditionalist" (read: a woman possessing any hint of a religious embrace): you're simply too stupid to know what you are missing.

7 Comments:

Blogger bigwhitehat said...

I'm convinced that all feminist were girls that didn't have dates for the prom.

MODO wouldn't have to have feminism. She could be a shrew without it.

I have little respect for anyone who doesn't respect the opposite sex. Women who hate men and men who hate women scare me.

Lonely people are dangerous.

Sun Mar 19, 12:07:00 AM PST  
Blogger Little Miss Chatterbox said...

Extreme feminism doesn't equal happiness.

I think the women suffragists in the 1920's had some good points but once we got equality they swung too far to the other extreme. Just like the civil rights movement. They both started out good but then became extreme leftist movements.

Sun Mar 19, 08:12:00 AM PST  
Blogger echotig said...

Maybe some of those femenists had dates...but the dates were really, really bad. I'm convinced they didn't have good fathers.

Extreme anything doesn't equal happiness does it?

Sun Mar 19, 09:46:00 AM PST  
Blogger echotig said...

I keep spelling Femenist wrong! Ugh!

Sun Mar 19, 09:47:00 AM PST  
Blogger Bloviating Zeppelin said...

It would appear that, time and again, Feminists (capital F) are unhappy people. As it appears, oddly enough, are many Dems and many in the DEM. Recent studies have proven precisely that -- including one study released last week as a fatter of mact.

BWH: Precisely; those who hate the opposite camp have inherent problems on a fundamental level.

LMC: Like many of our foundations, suffragettes and unions for example, came from a base need and did Good Works. They are concepts that, now, require evaluation.

Echotig: Extreme anything isn't productive -- quite true!

Sun Mar 19, 03:36:00 PM PST  
Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

03 20 06

Good discussion guys. Well you all said what I believe too. I am married to a man and aside from daily ups and downs am quite pleased. Had I listened to the feminazis who weren't getting none, I would still be single. My husband loves physics and technology and has always encouraged me to realize my potential. I think that is what marriage is about too; two people who LOVE each other who work together to accomplish something. Sometimes kids, other times businesses, altruism, you name it. And what pisses me off the most is that age old assertion that if you don't agree with the "Men are bad" mantra, then you really must be too uneducated to have an informed opinion. Speaking of prom dates, some of the biggest feminazis I ever met were like: "What me? I didn't go to my prom, that is just a stupid tradition." Well to each his or her own, but BWH and Echotig are right!

LMC I agree with you in entirety. I think now is the time to admit that some things were rooted in great concepts, but now it is time to throw them out and move on...

Mon Mar 20, 01:58:00 AM PST  
Blogger Assorted Babble by Suzie said...

I'm with LMC....(on her response)

However need to add two more cents.

Myself I don't mind being submissive, just as long as I get my way. (LOL) Oh yeah, I don't mind him making more money either...(LOL)

Signed,
Happy go Lucky.....

Mon Mar 20, 04:29:00 PM PST  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home