You Want To Do What?

With the Federal budget especially, but also state and local, if Citizens could pick and choose which social programs they want to pay for and how much they want to contribute to each one, it would at least give us some semblance of a democracy. 

Look, there is no one greater than I that fears the voting majority because they are not being educated and there is no reason for the ruling class to educate them, and actually just the opposite. The stupider the voters are the more they can be taken advantage of.   

With politicians making the decisions, knowing darn well they are serving the wealthy special interests instead of the majority, the benefits of our democratic republic are negated. We’re simply an oligarchy, controlled by wealthy special interests pretending to be a democratic Republic like the Roman Empire and ALL other nation-states before us.

Can you imagine politicians having to actually prove to the voters that a war is needed with the citizens getting to decide if the truth is really being told to us? Would we have engaged in Desert Storm or Syria?

We have the technology to do this, it’s the political will I am worried about. These putzes can’t even get a simple 1 man 1 vote election correct. That’s because sadly we have the inmates running the asylum; oh right, we’re calling it a swamp now. Elon Musk and SpaceX can send rockets into space and land them safely, and we can get a friggin computer system to count the votes correctly?   


23 thoughts on “You Want To Do What?

  1. Sadly true. I have a complaint about our voting booths here where I live. After you make your ballot selection, you are suppose to answer the questions posed on the ballot. When you answer them and cast your vote you hear a sound that confirms your vote has been cast. If you don’t answer the questions and try and cast your vote no confirmation sound is heard. I’m not sure if some of my votes were successfully cast and counted because I failed to answer the questions on the ballot and heard no confirmation sound. I wonder if a buzzer sound, as in you”ve cast incorrectly, could be arranged for absent minded people like me who forget to answer the questions. I don’t claim perfection, and embrace the knowledge that humans are flawed. But you have a good idea. War should always be a last resort and a true democracy should extend the privilege. That would be nice.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Because I deleted my Google+ account this site is the only way I can reach you for future commentary regarding my writing “How Social Darwinism Led To The Discovery Of Mental Illness” and which you called it “utter non-sense.” In defensive posture to your argument that this writing is in fact philosophically invalid one could, and one in fact has, argued that Social Darwinism, that psychotic text of Western culture, influenced the notion of male supremacy of masculine privilege. That the position of masculine privilege has been refuted as psychotic script by female philosophers and female Psychoanalysts, thinkers in the fields of academia. The position of masculine privilege of the little boy who identifies with his father’s omnipotent phallus, the text that explains the Freud’s castration complex is not, in fact, “utter non-sense” as analysis of the Western philosophical texts has proven. It supports the very real hegemonic structure that continues to perpetuate female silence in their muted interiority.


    • Because of your will and positive nature I will look forward to more of your comments and arguments. Perhaps it is that I just need to better understand what you are saying. I admit I am much more knowledgeable in socio-economics than sociology and psychology and therefore I am always thankful when someone can provide me with greater insights.

      Would you guide me to where I can read your essay it again? It would also help me if you can explain some of the terms and phrases you are using, so we can be on the same page.

      Really like your avatar. Very cool.

      As an Example, could you provide more detail as to what you meant by this sentence: “It supports the very real hegemonic structure that continues to perpetuate female silence in their muted interiority.

      Liked by 1 person

      • As an Example, could you provide more detail as to what you meant by this sentence: “It supports the very real hegemonic structure that continues to perpetuate female silence in their muted interiority.”

        Social Darwinism was the belief that man evolved from the apes and has thus relinquished his animal like nature and in fact he must be superior. This belief led to theories and ideologies of supremacy, namely white supremacy. This notion of white supremacy then went on to influence, or at least represented a continuation in support of this archaic brain embryo, the Nazi genocide of Word War II. At the time Social Darwinism was raging in the philosophical minds of men, men also believed the female to be “backwards” and “inside out,” males lacking a phallus or at least possessing an “inside out” phallus and, therefore, this anatomical fact rendered her “inferior.” This sets the stage for misogyny and the oppression of the female voice. The denial of equality for woman as speaking subject.
        However, this suppression of woman’s voice didn’t just mysteriously reveal itself. It has been discovered in the ancient writings of Plato in his 7th book The Republic. In this book he writes what readers have called Plato’s Cave. Plato opens up this parable with:

        “imagine men to be living in an underground cave-like dwelling place, which has a way up to the light along its whole width, but the entrance is a long way up. The men have been there from childhood, with their neck and legs in fetters, so that they remain in the same place and can only see ahead of them, as their bonds prevent them turning their heads.”

        Feminist writers, philosophers, and psychoanalysts believe Plato’s cave parable operates as a figure, metaphor, and displacement of the fecund womb of woman. This is significant to woman’s studies because it has gone on to influence, I believe, writings by Karen Horney regarding the masculine fear of woman in her critique of Schiller’s The Diver poem. In this poem, the dark grotto of the female cavity is rendered as a metaphor as well. Only it is represented by the oceanic abyss. But back to Plato’s cave parable:

        “Already the prisoner was no longer in a womb but in a cave – an attempt to provide a figure, a system of metaphor for the uterine cavity. He was held in place that was, that meant to express, that had the sense of being like a womb. We must suppose that the womb is reproduce, reproducible, and reproductive by means of projections.” (Luce Irigaray)

        Psychoanalytically Plato’s cave parable is believed to be an all-consuming phantasy – phantasy of woman reduced to mother/receptacle. We hear this fear of imprisonment too in Schiller’s poem. It is also believed to be one of his greatest contributions when it comes to “reading silence” in that Plato, and Shiller too, renders woman mute by metaphor and also disfigures her by representing her as a cave dwelling or the all consuming fear of the oceanic abyss. Hence, my comment as woman as enclosed space/ interiority.

        Similar themes can be found in Sigmund Freud’s contributions with regard to traditional sex-gendered roles. The masculine remains the active outside force and the feminine remains the passive inside force (muted interiority of domestic servitude and masculine oppression). Thus one can now see how “It supports the very real hegemonic structure that continues to perpetuate female silence in their muted interiority.”

        Masculine unconscious fears have gone on to render some of the most outrages symbols of phantasy regarding feminine evil; female witches, blood sucking vampires, virgin whores of Babylon (prostitutes).

        Thus, Social Darwinism uncovers masculine mental illness when it is read as a form of denial and silencing of not just woman’s rights, but ethnic rights, religious rights, etc. Narcissistic oppression through the absolute law of Western patriarchy; the law of father, phallic law, and Freud’s castration complex, which as it turns out, is considered psychotic text and helps us to understand various forms of mental illness.


        • You’ve said a lot and I think you could be right to some extent, meaning with some unspecified number of men, but as a generality, I think it would be hard to prove. I have some thoughts. White male supremacy is in my opinion not as important, prevalent or destructive as say Religious supremacy or governmental supremacy, those that think they are God’s chosen people of which their are actually as many religious women as there are men, and in some countries, like England, there are more women that go to churches than men and in Judaism, heredity is passed through the female. I also think it is interesting that their are those who suggest they are skilled at ruling over others.

          I think both the middle and lower classes of the world, both men and women are suppressed through social and political means. As a low to middle class white male, seeking to improve one’s life through hard work and being proud of yourself for what you have or haven’t obtained is not white privilege. In the U.S. I have seen educated white males pushed aside by such laws as the affirmative action of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972.

          It just like now in So. Africa where the blacks now control the government, whites are being ostracised by those in control of the system.

          The point is many cultures are (Supremacists) to some degree both culturally and religiously, not just white males. White males have given the world some pretty cools stuff. Just because some have done some bad stuff, you shouldn’t generalize.

          As far a men and women. We are so different in our desires and motivations, it is very difficult to compare the two.

          It always floors me as to how and why women will subject themselves to religious dogma but it’s mostly survival. Men and women cling to one another because it works. We need women and women need us, at least for most of us.

          I’m also floored by men and women who don’t like the other sex, purely because we are so different. We’re different, so get over it and learn to love one another for what positive attributes, each other do bring to the table.

          I like to make fun of women because they think they are so smart and great, even though their math and science skills go down once the reach puberty. Not hard to figure that’s when the hormones kick in and they start looking for what they envision they want their mate to be. People are much more interesting to women than electromagnetics and most educated men would rather talk about electromagnetics then people. Once again I’m generalizing.

          As to one’s wealth and power, it appears to me both sexes seek it, but operate in different ways to obtain it. Women of course bear children and thus cannot be as productive as men during those periods, unless their the wealthy or have other advantages. Many couples prefer the woman not work at all outside the home in at least the first several years of a child’s life. We’re just different and have different roles in life.

          Then you have the socio-economics influences such as child welfare laws which induce out of wedlock births and the current baby-daddy generation of multiple fathers of one woman.

          What some people do to one another is horrible and what some people do to open another is beautiful.

          I wrote an article called Complicity Within An Institution; why atrocities happen;!topic/harrietrobbins/TdY6cgWMmY4.

          Liked by 1 person

          • First let me say it becomes very easy to confound and conflate the various issues this topic converges on, pulling in to the argument various aspects of what I am more specifically studying, “masculine priviledge” and reading denial and reading silence in terms of how woman’s voice has been silenced historically. However, there are many forms of masculine priviledge. There is white masculine priviledge, black masculine priviledge, Asian masculine, each priviledge possessing its own cultural characteristics unique to its ethnicity. And perceptions about another’s ethnic masculine priviledge can, be distorted by each individual class, like how black masculine priviledge perceives white masculine priviledge.

            My argument in my rewrite wasn’t as linear as I had hoped for in terms of the historical record and manifestation of, and yes I dare say it, the psychosis of modern civilization. Reading silence and reading denial in terms of a criminal investigation can be easily understood, but what about reading silence and denial from a historical perspective of Western patriarchal literature? Philosophical and psychoanalytical.

            The reason feminist philosophers haven’t gotten over their sexual difference is because they are looking and engaged in an academic pursuit of discovery. Uncovering “a universal genre of discourse” in terms of the heterogenous which include the masculine genre (voice) as well as the feminine genre of discourse (voice). Thereby unifying two separate genres. This might help those engaged in philosophical endeavors, such as psychoanalysis, address the different issues of masculine repression and denial.

            So masculine priviledge (absolute law of the father and desire to possess a phallus) can manifest in the psyche of women as well. On this point you and I agree as both men and women seek the acquisition of finances which is a form of power and dominance. However, when masculine male dominance is manifested in women, it has historically been perceived as a type of female perversion and mental illness but in recent years this opinion has changed and forms of perversion have even been declassified. For example, homosexuality and sex and bondage in sex games both of which are forms of perversion that incorporate Freud’s castration complex.
            And yes I agree with you that male’s dominate in the arena of science, discovering new advanced tools for the rest of civilization to use. Males also dominate in terms of violence and aggression. Typically, males are the ones responsible for murderous aggression. Both, male-on-male violence, and male-on-female violence. But there still exists a small sub-grouping of females who commit violent aggression against men and women. The “deadly women” who commit serial murder.

            In today’s modern day world, avenues have opened widely in terms of opportunities for women. Fifty or sixty years ago this simply was not so. So women can work in professional careers today and earn almost, if not just as much, as men. I think we agreed on this topic in a past discussion.
            I must say I was surprised to hear you say “white male supremacy is in my opinion not as important, prevalent or destructive as say Religious supremacy or governmental supremacy.” I think it is in terms of domestic violence, men who beat their wives, in terms of the statistics of rape and other forms of violent crime against women. What my entire argument regarding Social Darwinism was aimed at was the long standing, ingrained psychosis of any and all forms of “supremacy,” white, black, Asian or otherwise.

            Thanks for the link. I’ll make a point to read it and comment on it.


            • Don’t sweat the grammar Nazi Syndrome as many call it. They’re just another bunch of rules people made up, allegedly to make us communicate better. I think this perfection syndrome makes some people not practice and write enough for fear of being criticized.

              First, I’d like to say in my life, as an older white male, I do not feel that I’m privileged. I think men believe dealing with women is harder than dealing with men and I would guess some women feel the same about dealing with women being easier. I know female realtors do very well in residential real estate where men do better in commercial real estate. The highest grossing residential office in the U.S. is all women, in southern California, near Hollywood.

              The Dentist my wife works for hires a female office manager so he doesn’t have to deal with all the women he employs. He says he doesn’t want to hear it. He doesn’t want to deal with all their issues and this is not uncommon in business. I’ve never worked in government so I don’t know how they deal with this issue.

              I’ve started to write a humor piece on the differences between men and women. Like men preferring to read Playboy or a car magazine vs women reading fashion and gossip. I like to golf and watch it a lot on TV. I know most of the professional golfers. My wife on the other hand, knows who is married to these guys, at least the more famous golfers. I have no idea even where she gets the info.

              Approximately 600,000 men died in the Civil war. Is that a male privilege. Another 500,000 in the Vietnam War. Mostly the poor and middle-class kids who can’t get a job. As one civil war soldier stated, “it’s a rich man’s war, fought by the poor. Did you know that both in the north and south, the rich were allowed to pay poor people to fight on their behalf, since the draft was in effect on both sides? This is also when Rockefella started his first company, a transportation company transporting supplies for both sides in the war.

              Yea, there is male privilege but there are also wives and daughters who have female privileges. It more a wealth and power thing.

              It’s good to be King or Queen.

              And yes, those in power are some of the greatest abusers of women as the Jeffery Epstein and his Lolita Express is showing.

              I’ll bet you find that most rapes are committed by poorer men who women deen unsuitable as mates. Wealthy men just buy prostitutes. I think 51% of women are now marrying for the monetary privilege and not love.

              The reason for me saying the male privilege is not as important as others such as religious and political privilege is because I believe that women’s rights were quelled specifically by the church and state, and it has greatly influenced the various cultures. If you were an outspoken female who did not go along with the various churches bullcrap, the burned you at the stake for being a witch. I recently read that the last witch murdered by the British was as early as 1840.

              This doesn’t show that but it looks like 1810 here:

              I don’t want to simply believe that mankind and womankind by nature are as violent as the church and state has forced them to be throughout history. The Church and State in collusion have committed some of the greatest atrocities in history.

              You want to silence a bunch of outspoken women real quick, burn a couple at the stake.

              Liked by 1 person

              • When I refer to male privilege, I am referring to entitlements, men doing as they please without considering the other party’s position, feelings, or needs as a consistent way of being. Not all men possess this anti-social personality trait which is more commonly recognized as personality disorder. But some men do and its not a black or white thing, nor a rich or poor thing. It is quite simply a human thing and as such manifests in the rich ruling classes as well as the poor disadvantaged classes.

                War is at the heart of what feminists call masculine male privilege, as it was the predominantly white masculine ruling patriarchy that has historically initiated the major wars in our post-modern history. The fact that innocent men, and women too, have died in line of or as a result of war demonstrates the mass hysteria / group psychoneuroses of man.

                Hysteria had predominantly been categorized as a mental illness that solely inflicts women (the disadvantaged and inferiorized) but it has been shown that hysteria effects men as well as at the same or even a similar rate of occurrence.

                Hysteria is characterized by fear and craving and is demonstrated by the repetition of a behavior.

                In fact, Juliet Mitchell a predominant feminist and psychoanalyst, has said that once you look at the lateral relationships found with in a family nucleus (ie: sibling relationships), instead of the vertical relationships (mother/father), hysteria emerges. That is to suggest that the difficulty in navigating the lateral difference of no longer being #1 baby. The following is a quote:

                “When a sibling is in the offing, the danger is that the hero – ‘His Majesty the Baby’ – will be annihilated, for this is someone who stands in the same position of the parents (and their substitutes) as himself. This possible displacement triggers the wish to kill in the interest of survival. The drive to inertia released by the shock becomes violence. ”

                We see the manifestation of hysteria in many different illness; anorexia, male batterers, some borderline illness, M-S (mass murder – suicide) and militarized warfar.

                Thanks for the interesting bits regarding our war history. I don’t know any of the statistics when it comes to the casualties of the different wars, so I’m going to have to take your word on it. I guess when it comes to money, any one with a lot of it can pay any one to do something they want, even when it comes to perverse paraphilias and I guess that’s is why we combat sex trafficking, child pornography, and the drug cartels.

                The weather is probably fair and pleasant where you are located which should play out well with regard to your golf games.

                Hope the new year brings you greener fairways. Happy New Year!


                • I think you are right with the borderline personality disorder as I think it is also called or is it a separate illness you are detailing. I understand it is prevalent in both men and women. Women speak out in anger and hatred to the ones they love, while men revert to violence. Sociopathy I think is also right there in the mix. A study in England suggests CEOs are on par with those in prison. The amount of historic leadership with mental illness is also quite interesting.

                  I have a different take on the war issue. War has always been about profits to the contractors building the arms, equipment and supplies and it is perhaps the largest industry in the world. In return, the contractors then payback the politicians through campaign contributions and other lobbying methods. Government is first and foremost a pay to play system, secondly, a confiscatory cartel so it has the money to buy the weapons, equipment and supplies and thirdly, a protection racket to protect the confiscators from retaliation by the taxpayers.

                  There is a group of very old families going back many centuries that have been using the power to tax and the nation-states to maintain this system. From there standpoint, without wars there is no need for the system. So they create reasons and false flag events if none exists so they can keep building the weapons and selling them to the taxpayers/government. These families are actually very small but have $Trillions like the Rothschilds who have been known to be behind every war since the Battle of Waterloo. Organizations like the Bank of International Settlement that they are a part of funded many war projects of both the allied and axis powers during both WWI and WWII. They lend the money to the companies and get paid back (indirectly) by the taxpayers. This is all well-documented facts. Senator Prescot Bush, George H.W. Bush’s father, was caught giving his banks money to a German company, during the war and the bank was seized.

                  I don’t know what to call them except evil. When you are willing to get people killed for money that’s evil.

                  So when they say the power to tax is the power to destroy. Yep.

                  Happy new year to you too. I’ve enjoyed reading your stuff.

                  Liked by 1 person

                  • No, it’s Borderline Personality Disorder. Borderline Personality Disorder, as due personality disorders like Narcissistic Personality Disorder. But Borderline cases hold the potential for intimate partner violence as seen in the prolific sensationalized cases of Jodi Arias and Andrew Cunnanan. Both of whom comitted murder against their intimate love interest/s. Although I do not know if Arias was in fact a Borderline case, she displayed classic text book symptoms, in my opinion. However, that is not to say all Borderline cases murder, but rather to say the proclivity toward acts of blood lust rooted in fears of abandoment are sometimes prevelant. Remember I was talking about hysteria being characterized by fear and craving and repeated acts of acquiring what one desires. For me, this is a critical understanding in understanding human relations historically and in understanding the manifestation of many different mental illness. I use to love reading Shakespeare’s comedies, until I was told if I really wanted to understand man I’d have to start reading Shakespeare’s tragedies! That is to say, man’s mental illness.
                    Yes, I agree with you. There are cetain fields of occupation that are more attracted to the sociopath / psychopath. Policing is one career, business and poltical leadership another, and too, for profit sale positions that receive commission as well as career sports (channeled aggressive personalities performing sport for achievement). This goes to prove that only a small portion of America’s sociopaths/psychopaths/criminals are locked up in our prisons and jails. It’s quite possible to have a personality disorder and fit right in with the rest of normal America.
                    The fact that government is a “pay to play” system supports how “gaming” is a critical aspect of social success and some of those political games are in direct service to the major political parties playing them. I’m not say that “gaming” as a social sport is wrong. I just question the ethicacy of the game and one’s ability to recognize when the game crosses the line from ethical to unethical disregard for people’s rights and interests as a nation or global leader. I’m sorry to say that some times the behavior of political leadership is dispicable and offensive and America must weather the diffence or impeach.
                    I’m at a loss for words in light of the recent facts you’ve just reiterated to me regarding “old” money and its legacy for promoting war. Except to say, feminist have touted that the reason for technological advancements was due, in part, by the fact man lacked a vagina of his own with which to bring forth life, and so, lacking a vagina the masculine species has ceasely gone on to create and establish modern civilization, as we now know it, through the endeavor of creating advnaced tools, buildings, and weaponary. War a by-product of those technological advances.
                    I’m glad you enjoy reading my writings. I assume you mean my replies and blog posts? I don’t know what to say except that most of the material has been directed toward my rallying cry for the social injustice against minorities groups. Namely, my own personal experience with “invisible violations” of electromagnetic frequency and what I believe to be a form of mind control and oppression. Michael Foucault was an excellent writer on social power with insights to how power is weilded.
                    You had said previously stated, “I have some thoughts. White male supremacy is in my opinion not as important, prevalent or destructive as say Religious supremacy or governmental supremacy, those that think they are God’s chosen people of which their are actually as many religious women as there are men, and in some countries, like England, there are more women that go to churches than men and in Judaism, heredity is passed through the female. I also think it is interesting that their are those who suggest they are skilled at ruling over others.”
                    I personally think religion eschews the major point of what terrorism is all about. When white male supremacy has historically represented some form of either violent/ethnic/gendered/sexual/cultured terrorism. Terrorism is at the heart of the paranoid schizoid personality position. The position held by many, regardless of religion or political affiliation, that expresses the fear of individual difference/s and acts of violence against those who posses those very difference/s that are feared. It is found in cases of violent rape, violent murder, wife batterers, lynchings, armed robbery, to genocide and ethnic cleansings just to name a few.
                    Funny that religous dogma should act as a vehicle for implanting a conscience state of awareness in those lacking one. And too, that historically religion was used as the main focus away from previous forms of physical brutality held in regard to penal corrections in prisons. Physical brutalities like burnings, whippings, and public executions.


                    • You don’t know how many times I’ve have thought on this very subject. I want to think that mankind can adapt to say the Bonobo vs the Chimp mentality. Not all men are violent. I haven’t been in a fight since I was 21 in Texas and they both attacked me. I obviously think part of the unhappiness is socio-economic or environmental and not just mental illness. Surely both are to blame but how much influence does one have on the other is a great question.

                      I remember a couple of guys egging my best friend and I to fight in 7th or 8th the grade. We ended up not fighting but I always wondered what type of personality would want to incite violence like that. Every time I looked at those kids, I thought there is a little something wrong there. I think they were doing it as a means to prove their intellectual prowess. If I can get others to do something which is stupid, I’m obviously smarter than they are. Is there a name for the Napoleonic Complex when associated with one’s intellect? I remember reading something on criminal behavior being caused not by lack of self-esteem but too much of it. Arrogance is an interesting topic. A fine line between self-confidence and arrogance.

                      The sexual desire of males toward females is ruthlessly strong, especially when young. So much so that I often found it aggravating and even depressing. One cannot always find a willing ready and able female as often as my sexual desires arose and the hormonal effects have a huge influence on ones daily life. The desire for female attention, affection and sex is very strong. I’m pretty sure some weaker or less attractive men turn to rape because they just get so frustrated that women will not oblige their desires. We need more Bonobo type women. Lol. I think it is also one of the reasons for so much male homosexuality. You take a guy with a lower IQ and physically unattractive, he is going to turn to something. They say there’s a woman for every man and vice versa, but that just what Mon’s tell their children, as the look disparately for a mate at age 35. After a while surely some men get bitter and even angry at women for not likely them.

                      These are just some of my observations and thoughts on the initial subject and what might be some of the influences.

                      The problem with religious dogma is that many people take it to be true. Muslins, Christians and Jews all claim to be God’s chosen people. Thus only one or none of them are correct. I truly think that this ultimate self-righteous thought complex is why you find so much deviousness in say the Catholic Church, but similar stories abound in many of the religious hierarchies. They know the hypocrisy. I think their conscience has a tough time dealing the fact that they are most likely wrong and perhaps why so many have twisted ethical lives. Now, are the less ethical attracted to these hierarchies by power or by the need to find a solution to their unethical thoughts and desires, hoping God can help them? Let’s do some polygraph and psychological testing on those in the hierarchies of the three major religions noted above.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    • Let me address some information you previously gave to me in a former response about the real estate business. Men being better in commercial real estate and Women being better with regard to residential real estate. That information is very intersting and quite striking with regard to gender identity and personality (male personality versus female personality).
                      The information you previously gave about incarcerating men until the age of 27 as an answer to violent, criminal, antisocial behavior is additionally interesting as I have read research that stated symptoms of sociopathy/antisocial mental illness can diminish with age. Not sure it’s age related or learned related. Learned related as in the person realizes that his/her actions he/she is performing are obviously not beneficial to his betterment and so, something must change. But still we need to be careful about the silent, insidious, often swift perspectives that can quietly pervade our thinking resulting in prejudice; that cloud of perception about people that holds us back. Fear is at the heart of these blinding fogs and often prevent us from make the most of fuller relationships with others.
                      I believe Harvard University has been performing a longitudinal study regarding happiness. It has been performing it for over 80 years. Scientists began tracking the health of 268 Harvard sophomores in 1938 during the Great Depression, they hoped the longitudinal study would reveal clues to leading healthy and happy lives. The single greatest factor connected to human happiness has been found to be the quality of their human connections with family, friends, etc. That is the amount of joy they experienced from their intimate relationships.
                      “The surprising finding is that our relationships and how happy we are in our relationships has a powerful influence on our health,” said Robert Waldinger, director of the study, a psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital and a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. “Taking care of your body is important, but tending to your relationships is a form of self-care too. That, I think, is the revelation.” ~Liz Mineo, Harvard Staff Writer
                      I think the Harvard Gazette’s headlines stated something like “Good genes are nice, but joy is better.”
                      Regarding the Napoleonic Complex you were speaking of and the 7th or 8th grade fight you recounted to me, there is a name for this and it is called sadomasochism. Every individual possess it. And it was something I researched to find answers to my questions. Questions regarding behaviors I had observed in others. In order to come to a fuller understanding of when our sadomasochim crosses the line and when it is considered a by-product of healthy human action, I read some journal articles in the International Journal of Psychoanalysis. For example, if I had been on your playground when you were a 7th or 8th grader, as an adult, I might have suggested the two warring groups of boys “take it to the court.” Perhaps, a game of baseball, basketball, or some other structered aggressive sport that is socially acceptable. Channeling aggression in various different sports or activities is considered socially acceptable, like aggressive salesmen ship. I found that it is not wrong to enjoy the demise of an opponent, as long as your opponent lost fair and square! I have had issues in the past with what some psychologists might have called “extreme states of consciousness” feeling guilty for savoring the win because you felt bad the other guy lost. I guess I feel everyone should win even though this is only practiced with the very young entering structured sport settings. There is the flip side to extreme states of consciousness; violent aggression where you don’t care who gets hurt. It’s all about the win no matter what the causalities are. This has been called war! So it is a very human proclivity to feel joy at watching your opponent fail, simply because you worked hard for the win. This isn’t wrong. It’s a question of boundaries and socially acceptable actions and whether or not the other got hurt or if their is any unfair collateral damage. History has shown, the human species sometimes enjoys making public displays of those individuals who empitomize our difference; Witch Trials, The Holocaust, Black Lynchings (public executions). The Eagles vs The Redskins, their last game was a public execution! (1st part of post; reply continued below)


                    • (2nd Part of Reply)
                      Regarding criminal behavior, self-esteem, self-confidence, and arrogance. The answer to correct behavior lies in empathy. Empathy for the other individual. The topic of criminality with regard to individual personality is a very large color pallet. There are many varying shades of colors and hues and so it’s not just one aspect or character trait that defines the question of, “Is it wrong? ” For example, there are many men who are vainly arrogant and carry on myriad affairs with women. Is this wrong? Well, it’s not criminally wrong to be sexually promiscious especially when its done consentually. It might be considered socially unacceptable in some cultures as it doesn’t promote the idea of selecting a mate for family growth and producing offspring which is what many species, including the humans species, value most. But then there is the aspect of serial rape and prostitution. These acts have been deemed a form of sexual deviant criminality because they violate boundaries and certain social standards. They also violate certain laws that are put in place to protect women. The question to ask is, “What kind of danger or threat does the personality pose to the the community?”
                      With regard to strong sexual proclivities found in the human species, young men and women learn to self-regulate. They learn to supress desire or find other outlets that help them manage stress. This is part of the training process called parenting, although some parents aren’t as diligent in their duties as others. There are social skills to consider, like mutual understanding and respect, that are found in happy marriages, healthy relationship ties, and good mate selection. Considering the other person’s feelings, mood, or even health is important when it comes to human interaction and sexual request. Expecting a woman to be “on demand” is similar in tone and script as paying a prostitute to perform sex. No disrespect intended. But this is simply not how happy marriages work. I always felt happy marriages would be fluid in movement, script, and tone with a great deal of mutual understanding and work done by both individuals in an attempt to foster the other’s happiness. For the most part, I mean every marriage or union has some degree of conflict in it.
                      I feel the reason for so much male homosexulaity is that fact that our govenrment has decided to de-regulate and de-classify homosexual behavior. Where before it remained hidden out of fear of persecution, it has now been opened to social acceptance. I feel that any perception of “increased homosexuality” is only an illusion bought about by positive government regluations. I also feel the reason for homosexuality itself may have more to do with genetic factors combined with environmental influences. I watched a Ted talk given by a physician who was a father. His son had recently “come out” to him and his wife. It was really interesting talk that set a hopeful prospect in terms of social treatment towards those being “different” with homosexuality.
                      I think everyone has some experience with rejection. I have certainly been rejected by male interests, and it hurts at first because all anyone ever wants is to be accepted and loved. I have found that genuine character attributes like honesty, respect, love, mercy, temperance, and self-reliance are just some of the positive qualities successful people possess. So when you reduce love to terms of beauty vs. ugly, I don’t think you give those individuals who possess these postivie qualities a fair shake. These are qualities that make individuals truly love and value one another. In terms of the battle of the sexes, and male and female love interest, delusions of feminine/masculine fantasies of evil touch on very perceptions of asthetic beauty. Just because something looks beautiful doesn’t mean they are beautiful. And thus, the grand delusions of women by men and vice versa.
                      All religions are a pathway to the same place. I would venture to say that all the major religions place emphasis on the development of character and positive leadership skills. Again, those positive character attributes like honesty, respect, love, mercy, temperance, self-reliance, and self-discipline which religious parables and literature promote. These readings promote positive intimate relationships. Relationships that would be successful and producitve to any society. And, sadly, as with any institutional political structure, where there is a power heirarchy, you always will find those who, wanting power, money, and control will take it at any cost. This is a human proclivity found in the human mind. However, your focus solely on the evils that sporatically populate religious power structures isn’t really fair to the institutions. It isn’t fair because religion is a cultural universal to human populations and it has been shown that the development of spirituality fosters a person’s health and contributes to healthy lifestyles. Positive lifestyles that promote group adhesion. I guess one might say that about any political structures or formal law code. However, increased population growth, with limited resources (access to those resources) might be another factor in the increase of criminal, violent, and antisocial behaviors. In addition to the demand that are placed on poorer households to provide even the basic minimal care may be another. Historically, smaller cultural groups, I would venture to say, didn’t experience the amount of deviance and crime we see today as they were most homogenous with a large amount of group cohesion.


                  • I am having problems with my laptop and it seems like someone is enjoying remote access to all the privileges of my various accounts, including this one. I posted my reply twice. Sorry for the redundancy.


    • I’ve been very busy with my job so I am picking up where we left off. I still need to reread your last two or three comments. Our discussion is making me think of the old cliche, “all is fair in love and war”. I was thinking last night while in bed about the differences between men and women. I don’t know how many parents have commented on especially their teenage daughters, being 15 going on 25 or something to that effect. I remember a long time ago one of the Government agencies doing a study, I would think the DOE but I remember it being the CDC, on post-pubescent girls having lower math and science test scores but only after puberty. Whereas, before puberty, they tested the same. As you are probably aware of, a major push has been made to try to rectify this differential and find out why such differentials, of the “perception” of them, even appear in the high levels of academics with men dominating the higher teaching levels, with even women choosing men over women for these positions.

      Is it the nurture vs nature phenomenon? As an example, most men are stronger than most women and we see this in nature, as well as the opposite, to increase the ability to foster offspring. Men protect women in many ways in addition to harming them.

      We wouldn’t joke about our 14 year old daughters thinking they are 25 yrs old unless there was some truth to it. Why? Then there is the old joke that “Encyclopedia’s for sale, got married and my wife knows everything”.
      My wife has a plaque her mother gave her. It says “Man wants but little and is easy to please, woman bless their heart, wants everything she sees”.
      My point and questions are, are we trying to reprogram nature and do you and other females think it can be done?

      FYI: I’ve started writing an article “Why So Many Women are Attracted to Socialism”. For me, this just falls in line with the nature/nurture phenomenon. Of course, most women are going to be more attracted to socialism then men are. Women are both more self-preservationists and nurturers. As an example, most women do not appear willing to take the same physical risks men, as do men in both work and recreation. Women are must less likely to expose themselves to chemicals in the line of work, except for cleaning their own environment. They are less like to do really dirty jobs, etc.

      To me, this is fascinating stuff. I have come to love women for what they are and able to recognize their desires and needs as well as their weaknesses. Not excepting our weaknesses is arrogance yet we view those acknowledge their weaknesses as lacking confidence a weakness. So, to be honest with others is a weakness. Would that not be a deductive conclusion?

      As an example, I didn’t know my wife had a fear of driving at night, always giving the excuse of having floaters in her eyes, as an excuse not to drive. It wasn’t an issue until we moved 6 months ago to an area with a long highway with no lights on it and her having to leave late from her office as darkness was falling. For two days she was beside herself trying to figure out how she was going to manage. She wined to her boss about having to stary late and her boss said, I guess I will have to find a replacement. She was, of course, fuming when she got home that night. I talked about how I handle it such as turning my high beams on, driving a little slower and just focusing on your lane and not worrying about the oncoming traffic and their often simi- blinding lights. Long story short, she is my age and she just got over this fear. I always wondered why she always pushed me to drive at night? Lol

      Liked by 1 person

      • “Alls fair in love and war.” Well, that is a rather complicated pharse that would indicate that there is nothing fair in love and war. I’m borrowing a comment I found on-line regarding it’s analysis:

        “The concept behind the phrase is that some areas of life are so important and overwhelming that you cannot blame someone for acting in their own best interest. For war, this implies that spies, torture, lying, backstabbing, making deals with enemies, selling out allies, bombing civilians, [and] killing, and so on are [all] “fair game” [and too that] in the sense that by taking these…… [actions]…… you are only hurting yourself: Your opponent has no reason to comply to your moral standards……….Countries have actually declared certain things taboo with regards to war — with mixed success.”(1)

        What is brought into the analysis of this phrase is “social context” and “culture”. For example, would this phrase even hold any logical value in the social culture of the Dharmapada? Or any other peaceful society or person that look to alternate answers to the violence of war?

        Regarding the science aptitude of post pubescent girls, was it a one-time study or did they study various groups of girls to replicate the results? The study only shines an interesting light on IQ and science aptitude in girls in relations to the on-set of puberty. For it to be authenticated it needs to be replicated. Personally, I think there may be many factors involved. One of them being the profound effect of having your body change and mutate right before your eyes. It was Jacques Lacan who said, “The images of man’s body [and here we can assume woman’s too!] is the principle of every unity he perceives in objects……all the objects of his world are always structured around the wondering shadows of his own ego.” He is a psychoanalytic author I have yet to explore but his contributions, from what I understand, are very noteworthy in the field of psychology. Being a woman I don’t know what the pubescent experience of being a male is like. I do know, that as a woman, myself-confidence plummeted. Our bodies change into those of our adult care giving love Objects. Me and my mother had a terrible and tumultuous relationship. This has to have personal profound repercussions on individual psyches and so I have to suspect that these finds might suggest something about a specific population of girls. This decline is probably directly linked to the child’s perceptions about their same-sexed care giving love Objects. I was 10 when I went through puberty. So perhaps age might also be a relevant factor as to the maturity of dealing with it, but counseling probably will help profoundly in assisting the child to circumvent the psychic trouble surrounding puberty. But that is just my opinion. With self-confidence plummeting, test scores can’t be far behind.

        Historically speaking, when you look to the technological advances of modern man, it was male patriarchy that contributed to these achievements as women were not allowed entrance in to the workforce, or any “Thinking” field of endeavor. So I have to believe, that just like long ingrained prejudices regarding people of race, color, and ethnicity, so too, there are long ingrained prejudices involving the aspects of female gender and the abilities they possess like science and math scores. I suspect, too, that if all things being equal we would see a very small differential between the two. That is, a very small difference, with both genders fluctuating back and forth from time to time. But that is only if all things were equal. The problem with equality is, equality is elusive in our culture. Even though our constitution insisted “All men are created equal”, in the historical period of which the constitution was written, this legal instrument was in conflict with man’s actions and it still is today.

        As far as your gender politics and the “nature” vs “nurture” phenomenon, the world is changing. We use to think homosexuality wasn’t as prevalent as it is today, but in fact is was just as prevalent and, too, given consideration to the historical time period, only well hidden. The social culture in which we are socialized in, holds aspects to influence. So what I see in today’s world is a world filled with the symbolic phallus being transferred to breast, and the inner passive space of woman’s breasts and vagina being transferred to the male’s penis and his psychic interior. Thus, the penis becomes the breast and the breast becomes the phallus. Should there be anything wrong with this? I don’t think so, but I’m liberal thinking. I guess perhaps this gender conundrum will only change when science figures out a way to allow men to reproduce by giving live birth to offspring and breastfeed them from engorged glands, and too, to allow women to actually inseminate their love Objects. Till then, we might be doomed to envy what the other person has possession of.

        “Reprogramming?” I think that again, with the concept of “programming of nature” it is a very socialized concept that involves “culture” and “family” and “what and what isn’t” perceived as culturally acceptable. I’m okay with Drag Queen Story Hour most libraries are undertaking. I’m okay with men wanting to dress like women and women wanting to dress like men. I’m for diversity and in that diversity there should be included that people have the freedom and the right to choose what they want in life. Perhaps the most profound influence here is that of ignorance. Ignorance in knowing what shapes women into wanting to be men and what shapes men in to wanting to be women. I think that once our culture fully realizes equality and equal rights, that maybe then, we might make strides toward greater tolerance and acceptance of difference. Even tolerating Donald Trump and his “rhetoric” that so many have issues with. I don’t think it’s an issue of “reprogramming” as much as it an outcome to adverse social and environmental influences combined with individual genetics that doesn’t necessarily pose a “cultural evil.”

        As far as your “FYI” paragraph, statistically what you say is true, but there are smaller percentages of women who defy these statistics. This statistics probably revolve around issues which predominantly place the male at the head of the household with bread winning and protection, and female at the head of the household as nurturer and care provider. But I believe we are living in a world that is changing. It is influx and adapting and evolving to evolutionary needs.

        I think that to recognize anyone in the light they present themselves in, is an accomplishment of character development. To recognize them as a unique and different personality, in spite of their flaws and to see them in the light of their strengths and what they have to offer, is another strength of personal identity possessed by some of the strongest leaders our country has to offer. To be honest, honesty is something children are taught at a very early age, or at least it should be. To be honest with others, and oneself, is an act of courage. Our honesty can undo us. So really, honesty should be executed with strategic afore thought. So yes, that would be a deductive conclusion. Honesty can be a weakness. It’s important to stay safe too.

        Congratulations to your wife in over coming her fear of driving at night. What do they say, “There is nothing to fear but fear itself.”



        • Yes, that is what I meant by all is fair in love and war. It is also alluded to as the battle of the sexes. Understand that I am not really arguing against you in so much as just putting force observations and I surely understand that I’m likely to be biased by my masculinity but that doesn’t mean I’m necessarily wrong or right. You appear to be a highly sincere and well-educated individual, as I think I am, so I’m really enjoying the feminine perspective.

          We surely know that sociological, environmental and psychological factors influence all of our psyches. What I have been researching and trying to evaluate are the effects that law and economics have on our society on both groups and individuals.

          As an example, the idea that prostitution is illegal in most cultures but legal in others, makes one scratch their heads. I have often considered it was wealthy men making sure that the women they paid did not hang around their proverbial stomping grounds. The wealthy are the greatest solicitors of prostitutes and as such have a good reason to make sure they do not remain in the environments in which they live, work and play. Calling the cops on them and having them arrested is surely a simple means to accomplish such a goal but it requires the prohibition. Of course if the wealthy are busted as solicitors they simply pay their way out.

          The idea that women and men are equal in various ways, if the playing field was truly level is really interesting too me and obviously to you. I’m trying to level the playing field myself but what does that really mean. How do you level the playing field, so the majority of men and women prosper intellectually and materially? Even that is at issue in our society more than ever today with such two strong opposing sides. I’m in an extremely small minority politically alleged less than 4%, yet those that agree with me like Ron Paul are highly demonized by both parties. It makes me think we are right and the wealthy want to make sure we have no followers.

          Gary Johnson ran again for President in 2016,[12] once again winning the Libertarian nomination and naming former Republican Governor of Massachusetts Bill Weld as his running mate.[13] Johnson received nearly 4.5 million votes (3.27% of the total vote), which is the most for a third party presidential candidate since 1996 and the highest national vote share for a Libertarian candidate in history.

          Liked by 1 person

          • I have a pretty good educational background. I was educated in Catholic elementary school and then went on to Catholic high school prep. But I think the fact that I’ve now turned 50, and have accumulated years of experience, puts me at level of maturity which is greater than some. I think, thanks to my curious nature and interest in uncovering answers to questions I keep posing to myself, combined with my religious spiritual experience, has helped guide me for the most part. My driving force to understand man’s nature was first uncovered in reading religious texts and some classic literature and then in pursuing independent study of religion, psychoanalysis, feminism, gender studies, and philosophy.

            What I meant by “all things being equal”, I meant that if all children were endowed with an adequate level of intelligence, receiving the proper nurturance with the adequate “real” love and attention, with adequate nutrition, with adequate needs being meet like clothing, shelter, and safety, with adequate early education of one-on-one (taught by the caregivers in a type of early education that focuses on letter and numbers in a early pre-school), and taught the proper values as self-discipline and self-reliance when it comes to the study of education, and taught the values that make good leaders within a community, then maybe we MIGHT see similar test scores. I don’t know. But what I do know is that it is possible to teach a 1st grader a basic algebraic problem as they are beginning to learn subtraction. Then, when they go on to learn multiplication, have them memorize square and cube roots. But of course, things are seldom ever equal and things are sometimes often unfair. With the right early educational program I think its possible to raise test scores, but America’s schools are lacking and parents have become over burdened with financial stress. It’s critical that parents have a more “hands-on” approach when endowing knowledge instead of leaving it up to the school systems but this just isn’t possible for every household with an elementary school aged child in it. So perhaps proper family planning and career planning is a solution combined with proper fiscal management of income. I don’t know. That’s my personal opinion.

            “How do you level the playing field, so the majority of men and women prosper intellectually and materially?” Well, that’s just it. One really can’t level the playing field in such a vast society as America. If we were talking about small homogenized groups found in indigenous villages, we might be at a better advantage at controlling the prosperity of all individuals in the group. However, in small homogenized groups of indigenous people there is “shared value” in things. For example, the entire village suffers if their live stock is struck down with disease. We see less, and less of this “shared loss” in American society where things are massed produced and have become “disposable”. It is impossible to feel another person’s loss when we don’t really know or may not even understand what that loss means. We might know what it feels like to loss something but still there is a disconnect as people are focused more on themselves and their own households with less and less “shared value” within the community.
            One may ask, why does the constitution state that “all men are created equal” when we know that isn’t true. At least it can never hold true in an American culture with over 327.16 million people. I don’t think it is possible to “level the playing field” nationally with out imposing some type of cultural absolute monarchy. In families, or in extended families with relatives who help “share” the responsibility of rearing new offspring, we might be able to “level the playing field”. But for the most part, it takes a willingness of extended family member to not only want to help but be sincerely interested in helping the next generation of offspring excel. I think, historically speaking, this is why socialism found its way in to politics. Creating social programs that are geared at helping the financially impoverished, disadvantaged, and those without extended family networks.

            I had lost a 19 year old nephew tragically in car accident that was due to the negligence of the other driver. My brother and his wife were awarded a very hefty cash settlement of which increments of $$$ are being doled out over the years. His first born daughter is benefiting greatly from this new found resource, and I believe it has gone to help raise her children, the next generation of offspring. So money, education level of the parents, social culture are all very important issue when it comes to adequate resources provided to children and the raising of test scores. Perhaps we should start playing the lottery more often. 😉

            In a system as vast as America. How can a system outlaw behaviors like prostitution, even outlawing the use of certain drugs like marijuana oil and psilocybin? These drugs do not lead to violent criminal activity. In a system where the welfare of every child is not guaranteed nor a child’s civil rights protected adequately, it only becomes fair to de-regulated and de-classify and that is exactly what we are privileged to watch, as we have seen the decriminalization and acceptance of homosexuality and gay marriage and the decriminalization of marijuana which is geared to prison reform. I actually believe forms of these drugs (marijuana oil) should be sold over the grocery store counter and used as food additives for consumption to help assuage stress, anxiety, and to help relieve depression . Used properly, they have very beneficial effects and no one overdoes on them. Psilocybins are a mild anti-psychotic and as such can help people manage periods of depression that are transient, like the sudden death of a loved one, or the loss and separation experienced following a divorce. Basically it’s a mild anti-depressant.

            Perhaps one should ask the question, how do you eradicate the inherent flaws of men? Is this even possible?! I don’t believe you can without violating some ethical boundaries. You can only provide helpful assistance in the form of social programs and/or be an advocate by helping others in a positive way. That is by being active, spreading knowledge, and by being a proper role model. But even proper role models are culturally influenced.


            • The idea of promoting equality is surely one of the great challenges we have as a society. I want to suggest that historically knowing how to do it has so far alluded us except in only a couple of instances and even then, it was just better than it is now.

              “All men are created equal”? Let’s try to understand what Jefferson really meant by this. By continuing to read the Declaration he tells us what it meant to him. That all people have equal “rights” under the law, not equal in talents or wealth, the later is not possible to accomplish or I should say has never been accomplished so far. What I ask people is, “how would you do it” and what specific Constitution and Bill of Rights would they have if they think a government can implement it. That usually leaves them scratching their heads and I never hear back from them.

              The reason I think no one has yet been able to write a bill of rights and constitution is that it can’t be ethically or legally done. So the idea or concept that we can all have guaranteed “equal” access to our basic needs; food, clothing, shelter, education and healthcare are impossible even though we all think it would be great to have. I’m all for it but how do we do it?

              Now, I believe I can write a Constitution and Bill of Rights that gives us “equal” rights and the protection of those rights under the law but nothing more. Our founding fathers actually did a pretty good job under the circumstances, but it has been severely subverted over the years, unlawfully I might add. It only took us less than 75 years to abolish slavery which had been going on for thousands of years.

              Is it simply men’s fault? I don’t think so. Yes, we have both ethical and inherent flaws but so do women and they are as much today a party in our progression or digression, as men.

              Liked by 1 person

              • “All men are created equal” was penned during a time of slavery. “All men are created equal?” I would like to pose a suggestion, after a slaying of a black minority post the question “How many white people want to be treated like a black person in today’s society?” I venture to say no white person will raise their hand. I understand the issues on both sides. I understand that sometimes black men DO NOT ACT in their own best interests, and so too, that racial profiling, prejudice, still does exist. And so too, does the silencing of the female voice.

                Even with the equal rights movement and women’s suffrage, the level of awareness raised against discrimination of both African Americans, people of ethnicity, women, and LGBTQ, hate still exists in our country. We live in a culture of violence and intolerance and it was founded in acts of white supremacy.#NativeAmericanIndians

                There is still a symptom of silencing in the academic field of philosophy and psychoanalysis when it comes to the maternal body and its influence on the developing mind of the child. The maternal body serves as the silent and the unacknowledged emblem of a divided self in the realms of philosophical science, Christian theology and Freudian psychoanalysis, serving merely mother and receptacle to the paternal function. A depository for the supreme seed of male supremacy. Does not one find it comical that we should find within the language of Christian theology, the subject of maternity becoming enshrined as the sacred vessel of divinity associated with the cult of the Virgin? A woman who was divinely impregnated and did not consort with a man sounds a little suspicious to me? Does it not? Does not this very ego-ideal find its way out of the roots of Klein’s “good breast” / “bad breast” theory, fantasies of feminine evil and those aspects connected to the “perfect ego-ideal” of the “perfect woman”? What are Virgins after all, but the silent, chaste, and obedient daughters of their fathers/husbands?

                In reading the silence of female philosophers regarding the maternal body and its represented voice in theory of psychoanalysis where Melanie Klein often remains an unheard voice in the male-dominated institution of Freudian psychoanalysis, a feminist philosopher asks “What might this silence be symptomatic of?”

                From the perspective of spiritual theoretical language, this “divine maternity” of the cult of the Virgin culminates in it the virtues of love, self-effacement, and self-sacrifice. Not bad things, but they do represent an ego-ideal that may not actually exist. When women can be defiant, sexually provocative, and boastful. However, it seems that the daughter’s repressed desire to bear her own father’s child dooms her body to be used as instrument only in the field of Freudian psychoanalysis. The mother’s desire exists solely in so far as it is related to the father of the Oedipal text. Once again, the maternal body is robbed of its ambiguity and defined solely in its socially conservative reproductive sense. Power is, thus, robbed from the maternal realm, doomed forever to remain with the phallus and the reproductive rights of existing patriarchal culture of Western psychoanalytic thought. In short, Freudian, unless of course these daughters of Klein can come together and entwine more philosophical threads and posit more theories to support the power of maternal influence.

                It could just be that men suffer more from the psychosis due to the Oedipal phase of detachment, with the taboo placed on desiring mother than do the daughters at this developmental phase. There are more men incarcerated for violent crime than there are women. So excuse me, but yes, socially speaking, society could, technically blame you more.

                As far as the Constitution and Bill of Rights go, I feel our founding forefathers did do a pretty good job. There are inherent mechanisms that help the instrument self-correct and for the most part my faith is placed in the jurisprudence of the supreme court justices.


                • Yes, that is true. As its author, during his administration, Thomas Jefferson in 1801 was the first individual to sponsor a Bill for its abolition and it was very narrowly defeated. This indicates that many people were abolitionist and we know this to be true from other historical records. Sadly it is a fact that the government has always been controlled by wealthy special interests and the majority have yet to be unable to escape their oppressive controls.

                  I try to teach people many of the social policies we live under today are causing many of the social problems you are indicating in your writings. The best example is licensing laws. They have created a professional class in this country similar to the aristocracy under the monarchs and the surely have “not” protected the general public. They are contributing to the wage and wealth disparity we are seeing. A single dental implant can cost as much as $5,000 in the U.S. and you can get the same quality work done in many other countries for 10% of that cost or $500. Professions such as doctors, lawyers and dentist are making 10 to 20 times that of highly trained craftsmen and even other licensed people because of both licensing laws and college accreditation. Abe Lincoln was never licensed or schooled yet he became one of the prominent lawyers of his day, representing some of the major railroad interests in the country. Over 100,000 people die each year from medical malpractice. We had no licencing in the country. Here is a little excerpt from one study: The condition of the American medical profession at the close of the Civil War was, in almost every particular, significantly different from that which obtains today. The profession was, throughout the country, unlicensed and anyone who had the inclination to set himself up as a physician could do so, the exigencies of the market alone determining who would prove successful in the field and who not. Medical schools abounded, the great bulk of which were privately owned and operated and the prospective student could gain admission to even the best of them without great difficulty. With free entry into the profession possible and education in medicine cheap and readily available, large numbers of men entered practice. Indeed in 1860 the census data indicate that the country possessed over 55,000 physicians, or 175 per 100,000 population, almost certainly the highest number of doctors per capita of any nation in the world.

                  Additionally, Jefferson was in France during the Constitutional Conventions, nor was a proponent of the Constitution, preferring the Articles of The Confederation instead. He is said to have been unwilling to determine if a person should be considered as a percentage of a person. He inherited his slaves from his parents and if you freed your slaves and they were caught, they would often be hung. He let several of his slaves free believing they that would be able to escape to freedom in other places.

                  What the said is pretty cool
                  “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.