Question Everything!Everything!!

Question Everything!

Question Everything!

This blog does not promote

This blog does not promote, support, condone, encourage, advocate, nor in any way endorse any racist (or "racialist") ideologies, nor any armed and/or violent revolutionary, seditionist and/or terrorist activities. Any racial separatist or militant groups listed here are solely for reference and Opinions of multiple authors including Freedom or Anarchy Campaign of conscience.

MEN OF PEACE

MEN OF PEACE
"I don't know how to save the world. I don't have the answers or The Answer. I hold no secret knowledge as to how to fix the mistakes of generations past and present. I only know that without compassion and respect for all Earth's inhabitants, none of us will survive - nor will we deserve to." Leonard Peltier

Wednesday, April 25, 2018

What if Women Had Voted on Women's Suffrage?

What if Women Had Voted on Women's Suffrage?


G.K. Chesterton thought that the matter of the vote for women should be left to a vote of women.

G.K. Chesterton’s What’s Wrong with the World contains a section of feminism.  By way of providing an accurate preview of what’s to come, he titled it “Feminism, Or the Mistake about Woman.”  Yes, G. K. Chesterton had his differences with the feminist movement, then in its infancy.  Chief among his differences was the mistaken view (in his view) that there were no differences between the sexes.

Were the differences that he saw a matter of nature or nurture?  Chesterton does not wade, much less charge, into that thicket.  He simply assumes that differences exist.  He also assumes that those differences are important, vital to a good society, and well worth preserving.

His take on those differences also led Chesterton to have his differences with the suffragist movement in England.  One of those differences was to use the less preferred term, suffragette, in reference to them.  Preferred or less preferred term aside, the key difference was his opposition to the vote for women.

Are you still reading?  I hope so, because his thoughts on the twin subjects of feminism and the male-female difference (or the lack thereof) are worth exploring, whether one agrees or disagrees.  But first let’s put a Chesterton counter-proposal on the table.

Chesterton found it more than curious that male politicians wanted women to be able to vote on everything, except for the question of granting women the right to vote!  Maybe those same politicians had the same suspicion that Chesterton did.  And just what was that?  Chesterton suspected that if women alone could vote on the issue of granting the suffrage to women that it would be defeated.

Why?  Because he presumed that women understood that the vote was not something of great importance.  Most men (but not Chesterton) thought differently.  Most men, thought Chesterton, regarded the vote as something of “frightful importance.”  But they didn’t think that women would ever believe them.  Did they?

There might have been an answer to that question if women had had the opportunity to vote on the subject.  But Chesterton’s proposal was never adopted.  Instead, men eventually voted to give women the vote.  Chesterton drew the following conclusion from the result: Having told women that the vote was of frightful importance, men extended the franchise to women.  As a result, a “terrible thing happened to men: we won.”

Of course, suffragists in England had been putting increasing pressure on men to grant women the vote.  Sometimes that pressure resulted in public protests.  After newspapers reported on one of these public protests, Chesterton could not resist a few comments of his own.  It seems that some suffragists had taken to punching policemen.  In an essay in the Illustrated London News, Chesterton turned his commentary on the scene into a commentary on one of the differences between the sexes.

Punching policemen struck him as a “bad tactic” because it was “not at all a female tactic.”  While the newspaper reports didn’t say so, Chesterton suspected that at least some of the policemen must have been amused, perhaps even laughing: “After all, when a woman puts up her fists at a man, she is putting herself in the one and only position (where) she does not frighten him.”

Chesterton was far from finished.  After all, by his reckoning there were many female attitudes and gestures that could be thoroughly frightening to a man.  “Every turn of a woman’s head or hand is quite capable of shaking a man, any man, like a dynamite explosion.”  Just warming up, Chesterton continued: “Every man who is a real man is afraid of a woman’s tongue—and still more of her silence.  He is afraid of a woman’s endurance, and still more of her collapse.  He is afraid of her sanity—and her insanity.  He is afraid of her laughter—and her tears.”

At that point Chesterton was finished.  Or was he?  Not quite.  Here is his conclusion:  “But her fists?  When one really thinks about this, one realizes that the only part of a woman which a man does not fear is her deltoid muscle.”

At this point Chesterton had finished making this particular point.  But he was far from finished with the larger subject of male-female differences, whether his thoughts are to be found in What’s Wrong with the World or in Illustrated London News essays.  For the time being, however, let’s be content with letting his politically incorrect approach to the subject sink in a bit before taking the question of differences between the sexes beyond matters of deltoid muscles and punching policemen.






Become a partner in helping others rediscover past wisdoms and traditions.

“The greatest evil is not now done … in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried, and minuted) in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern.” ― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters

Joseph F Barber,is a freelance writer and editor of the blog FREEDOM OR ANARCHY,Campaign of Conscience.it is my message to we the people and the citizens of our world to stand free and your ground feed another if you can ,I tell you this as it come from with in my soul There comes a point when a man must refuse to answer to his leader if he is also to answer to his own conscience.


Pro Deo et Constitutione –
Libertas aut Mors Semper Vigilans Fortis
Paratus et Fidelis

Joseph F Barber



http://snip.ly/fw8ip

http://snip.ly/di5p0

http://snip.ly/rnz26#https://the-family-assistants-campaign.blogspot.com/



No comments:

Post a Comment

Anyone is welcome to use their voice here at FREEDOM OR ANARCHY,Campaign of Conscience.THERE IS NO JUSTICE IN AMERICA FOR THOSE WITH OUT MONEY if you seek real change and the truth the first best way is to use the power of the human voice and unite the world in a common cause our own survival I believe that to meet the challenges of our times, human beings will have to develop a greater sense of universal responsibility. Each of us must learn to work not just for oneself, ones own family or ones nation, but for the benefit of all humankind. Universal responsibility is the key to human survival. It is the best foundation for world peace,“Never be afraid to raise your voice for honesty and truth and compassion against injustice and lying and greed. If people all over the world...would do this, it would change the earth.” Love and Peace to you all stand free and your ground feed another if you can let us the free call it LAWFUL REBELLION standing for what is right


FREEDOM OR ANARCHY CAMPAIGN OF CONSCIENCE