KS informs us that she possesses a 130+ IQ and reading comprehension problems:
I am rather disappointed that you would mandate a woman of my age, 18, to start looking for a mate immediately for the sole purpose of producing children, whereas you issue a caveat to young men to stay single. You tell us women on World Net Daily, ” Remember, your choices narrow as you get older, while men’s choices broaden,” because, apparently, once we are no longer young and fertile, we are no longer of any value to the opposite sex. I suppose when your wife hits menopause, you will immediately begin hunting for a younger mate.
Yes, once a woman is no longer young and fertile, she is completely useless for having children, except in a professional capacity as a doctor, midwife or fertility technician. If having children was my foremost priority, I would certainly replace a post-menopausal or barren wife for one capable of bearing children. But what does any of that have to do with Monday’s column or the subsequent discussion?
KS reveals a haphazard manner of thinking all too typical of today’s youth, conflating narrowing choices with a complete lack of value and failing to note the obvious caveats applying to the two columns in question. Furthermore, she either reveals the female tendency towards totalitarianism in confusing individual observations with an order by an authority figure or she does not understand the word “mandate”.
You instruct us not to flirt, or bait-and-switch. ” Unlike their female counterparts, men who say they don’t want to get married or have kids usually mean it.” You seem to think it is fine for men to not want children or marriage, but not for women. If it is our biological purpose as women to bear children, shouldn’t all men also fulfill their biological purpose in providing the other 23 chromosomes and, oh dear, a feminist thought, perhaps share in the responsibilities of raising children?
First, I never mentioned anything about flirting, second, does KS seriously wish to argue that it is ethical or effective for women to engage in bait-and-switch tactics? And while it would be demographically desirable for young men to harbor more interest in marriage and children, the evidence suggests that the lack of such interest is primarily a symptom caused by the construction of the Equalitarian Society, its quasi-legal courts and masculinized women. One cannot cure the disease by treating the symptoms and ignoring the cause. There’s more sloppy thinking here, as it is not possible for men to share in the responsibilities of bearing children, which is the subject at hand. Men have always shared in the responsibilities of raising children, unless one redefines the activity as excluding the provision of food, shelter and protection.
According to you, we should “settle earlier rather than later.” I resent the fact that you even use the term “settle.” It gives me the impression that you do not think we have a right to search for a decent human being beyond our peak reproductive age, so long as he provides viable sperm, he will do.
A resentful woman, imagine that! Again, KS confuses individual opinion and biological realities with the force of law. You have the right to do whatever you want. If you want to collect cats, go for it. But you will settle, sooner or later, because The Perfect Man does not exist. There is always an opportunity cost, even if you make the best of all possible choices.
Indeed, in my opinion, the job of mother is the most difficult on the face of this earth, and many women are not equipped to fulfill it, especially if they follow your advice and bear children before 25, before they have had time to experience the world beyond their parents’ homes. This is why I am uncertain as to whether I want children. I would love to have them, but I am not sure if I would do as amazing a job that my mother did with me and my siblings. And may I point out that the tradition of marriage used to be a father selling his daughters in order to improve his connections, wealth, and status. As if his female children were livestock, ommodities to bring him material gain.
Here KS makes a remarkably stupid statement. The job of mother is one of the easiest jobs on the face of this earth and trillions of women have successfully performed it. About the only easier job is that of father. The fact that they are uniquely necessary jobs does not make them complex, dangerous or hard to do.
As for the tradition of women being regarded as commodities, if KS and other young women elect to continue following the equalitarian precepts of the Sisterhood, I think we can just about guarantee that the West will see a revival of the practice within 100 years.