I'm not talking about the guy who stalks you all the way home in the heart of a concrete jungle or the guys who make lewd comments to you with no regard for your feelings, etc. etc. I'm talking about the average, run-of-the-mill Joe who just wants to go out with you and still has the courage to ask a woman out these days.
Oftentimes, those women who are the most outspoken about men treating them as community property are talking about a specific kind of guy, not everybody, and there's a double standard at play here. If a guy she finds a suitable candidate gives her attention, she's okay with that, while the guy who she doesn't find suitable is being intrusive on her freedoms as a woman and is regarded as annoying. Thus, there’s often clear-cut hypocrisy going on in many cases when women cry foul.
Second, I'm not sure what she's talking about in terms of feeling shamed and harassed. In my experience, women's feelings tend to get catered to in every way. If a woman isn't happy, somebody is sent out right away to make her happy. Every measure is taken to ensure that a woman's emotional happiness is stable and secure, and many women tend to expect this kind of treatment.
The message women get in their emotional lives is that they’re valuable members of society, not to be treated harshly or abused emotionally or physically, and they have a right to expect their worlds to make sense. I think most women who’ve come to expect this kind of understanding from society would commit suicide at the thought of having to put up with the kind of systematic abuse I’ve endured for over three decades.
Frankly, I think we should all be treated as though our feelings count, as though our emotional lives matter to society. This is a goal that we should have if we want to aspire to have a society where the population is healthy and happy from an emotional standpoint.
It’s not so much that women are being coddled as the fact that that treatment doesn’t get extended to everyone else, and wherever there is unfair treatment you will invariably wind up with a great deal of strife to go along with it. From the vantage point of the abused, taking care of other people’s emotions can be seen as coddling and catering to the needs of some at the expense of others.
Men, on the other hand, tend to be treated as though their feelings don't count. They’re often treated as though they should be able to deal with everything life throws at them with machine-like efficiency. If a guy is unhappy for some perfectly legitimate reason, then, more often than not, the message he gets is that he should just suck it up and deal with it. After all, he's expendable and shouldn't expect to be treated any other way.In regard to money, it's a well-known fact that women, generally, make about three-quarters of what men make for performing the exact same job duties, so I’m wholly sympathetic with women in that regard, and I never agree with the abuse of anyone. I will speak out regardless of the consequences, and I've been outspoken about the fact that this reality is unacceptable and has to change.
"Silence is consent."
In public, I'm typically assailed by agents provocateurs everywhere I go. I live within a simulated environment, so to speak, a bubble, almost like a safe sandbox that U.S. counterintelligence agencies create around me at all times to keep me away from any member of society that might be inclined to treat me fairly or objectively.
I never saw the movie, The Matrix, but my situation kind of sounds like what I've heard about this film, leaving me to wonder if our fine intelligence agencies have been watching too many spy movies, too many action/thrillers, too much Hollywood.
But, then again, I don't go out very often, only a few times each month, so it should be relatively easy for these agencies to mold realities for me. If I were out there all the time, things might be a little bit different. I don't really know.
In the final analysis, I decided a long time ago not to spend much time worrying about what warlike people are going to do to make my life miserable for me. I decided they're going to do what they're going to do and, so, it's best for me just to keep being myself and not prepare for any kind of warfare at all. That probably doesn't seem like the romantic/action-themed approach you might see in movies like Conspiracy Theory, but they don’t apply to the real world in any case.
If they want to kill me, it's their prerogative to do so at any time. I've taken my case to the American people, put my fate in their hands and, for the time being, I'm happy with that.
When you stop to think about it, their technical and numerical superiority is so overwhelming that one person, alone and without help, is really pretty much defenseless, no match for them. I’m not that upset about leaving this world as a martyr, though. I just wish that I had more time to complete my mission in bringing about the political revolution that American needs to get back on track and get her to act responsibly towards her neighbors (to give up Empire peaceably before it brings about our total collapse and the collapse of all of human civilization with it).
So, you just set out to do the best you can and let the chips fall where they may. It makes no sense to worry about what psychopaths are going to do when the entire society is made up of them and they’re implementing a take-down program designed to snuff your life out prematurely.
I’ve made my case to the public and provided the answers necessary for humanity to increase the likelihood of a positive outcome for itself. I can’t force anyone to implement them or to see the value in keeping me around. At some point, you have to just let go. I did all I could, and I'm happy with the effort I put forth.
(Agent Provocateur | Wikipedia)
“You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war.”