brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

John Knight johnknight at usa.com
Sun Jul 21 00:43:58 EST 2002


"Jen Larson" <straycat at udel.edu> wrote in message
news:3D37FDBA.AB894599 at udel.edu...
>
>
> John Knight wrote:
>
> > Women have never participated as full citizens, and never will.
>
> Wrong, women do, and will.
>
>  As a group,
> > you'll never even pay any taxes, much less your "equal share" of them.
>
> Probaby not as long as men are willing to work to let them "stay home
> and cook and clean and childcare". Of course the most "uneducable" will
> take the easy route, given the choice. Too bad the choice is evaporating
> for plenty of women. I am glad. All adults should work.
>
>   As
> > intellectuals, you've made a mockery of our once fine universities.
>
> Wrong. Show your evidence.
>
>
> As
> > irresponsible and uninformed voters, you've turned all government
employment
> > into the most massive welfare agency in human history.
>
> The old blame it on the women because as soon as women got the vote, men
> quit voting. More stellar logic from John Knight "man".
>
>   Even though three
> > quarters of you KNOW that "gun control laws" are ineffective,
> > unconstitutional, costly, and STUPID, you still demand even more, which
is
> > maybe the absolutely worst kind of citizen we could grow.
>
> Maybe you should start a young girls fire-arms camp.
>
>  The only reason
> > the courts treat you like moral minors who can't uphold simple
contracts, is
> > because you are.
>
> Complete lies and idiocy.
>
>
>   And the biggest failures as wives and mothers in the
> > history of the world is the American mother who,  in a mere half century
> > (thanks to you feminazis), sank from the most admired, respected, and
> > revered woman in the world to the laughing stock of nations, mainly by
> > subjecting tens of millions of the nation's children to the vagaries of
> > single-motherhood.
>
> That's just a shame maybe you should start a celibacy until marriage
> camp for young girls and boys.
>
>
> >
> > You really couldn't have done a better job of destroying the American
wife
> > and mother if you'd tried.
>
> That is just a real shame. Marriage no longer has incentive as it did
> for women because being economically controlled is b-a-d, now the judges
> are making it economically b-a-d for men good I'm not into "marriage" as
> the be-all end all of life, life is for living in full force not being
> restricted, too bad you don't understand what freedom for all is, you
> are a tyranical bastard from hell who is like a pestulant sickness on a
> slow breeze you are seen for miles and precautions have been taken to
> neutralize your infiltration to health.

The biggest losers in this breakdown of the family have been women, not just
because of the two-thirds plunge in American "family" incomes (dropping them
from a solid first place to a shaky 17th place in per worker income in just
the last 3 decades), but because the most financially destitute households
are single women with children, followed immediately by single women with no
children.

In spite of your glowing praise of feminism, American women have gained
nothing, and lost almost everything they ever had.  And the problem is still
accelerating.  At least now we know why this is complete jibberish to
feminazis--ice plant probably understands it better than feminazis could
ever hope to.

This system that you "think" was so bad for American women is precisely the
one that gave them the once-highest standard of living the world had ever
known. Maybe you didn't even know that, it's been so long since it's been
true.  There are now many women in countries which were third world just 3-4
decades ago who now have higher standards of living than American women--and
American women haven't hit bottom yet.

Congratulations for failing to figure this out.  The Japanese love it.
Through patriarchy, Japanese women rose to family incomes twice ours from a
fifth of ours just 4 decades ago.  This 10x swing was mostly because of our
drop in fortunes rather than their dramatic increase.

John Knight

John Knight








More information about the Neur-sci mailing list