A typical teaching among women is how to raise men. No, not children. I'm talking grown, adult males. Of course, the flip side of this teaching is the fact that women can't and are not to attempt to raise male children. A male child's formative years should only be lightly grazed by a woman. She should never be found as the primary caretaker of a boy child because it likens his chances of growing up to develop a desire for penis, hairy chests and asses, women's clothing, gossip, Tyler Perry Movies and all things that apparently black women love to do. You know, because it doesn't really have to make sense as long as you can get a bunch of ignorant and uneducated people who suffer from mass cognitive dissonance to agree with it. Mass stupidity has a tendency to spread like wildfire.
So with all of the above mentioned, how is it that many of these same beings are teaching that women are to better adult males? You mean to tell me that I am incapable of raising a child into a functioning man, but can somehow manage to turn a box maker into an English Furniture Carver? Of course a layman would try to convince a woman that she could somehow morph him into a the CEO of the next Fortune 500 Company. It's all apart of the game. You teach women to settle so that you're capable of getting one. Even women are and have been teaching this madness and based on their own desperate experiences. Many of them are with the same box builders they started out with and do you know why? Because you can't raise a grown man. You can't do the job that some absent minded mother and/or absentee father may have failed to. Furthermore, you can't reconstruct his will nor his DNA. Successful men are oft times "Self Made." I'm not saying that they are built sans external input. No man or woman is an island and there's not a living organism on the planet that's independent. What I'm saying is, these men have a degree of ambition that with or without you, they're going to be something because they want to be. The way many of you speak, you would think that a single man was incapable of making something of himself.
What good is it to teach that men are to be heads of the household while in the next breath, teaching that men are to depend on women for their development? When a man is found behaving poorly, you look to his mother and this is the case even if the father is involved. They deem women the first teacher, but hold us responsible as if we're to be the ONLY teacher. If you find women who are acting as the first teachers, it's because the men have fallen off tremendously. Even while in the womb, the father can familiarize himself with his unborn child to where that child will recognize his voice once here. Once that child is birthed, it is the responsibility of all who agreed to be responsible to teach that child and at the same damn time. Some of you use this "woman is the first teacher" and "75% of the work is with the woman" mantra as cop outs and and scapegoats to relieve yourselves from daddy duty. If 75% of the work is with women, leaving men with a lagging 25%, then that means it takes more than one of you to make half a man. We haven't even scratched the surface of the whole.
When a man is found cheating, you blame women who made themselves available. You say things like, "A man will only do what a woman allows." I would think that a man's duty was to measure, to calculate and see if a thing were worth doing. But what natural head chief of staff of the household just does whatever is available, because it's available? Crack, Heroin, and sheep are available, too. Do you do them simply because they're available? Such a mindset doesn't seem capable of being in charge of self, let along an entire household containing other human beings. But the way many of you speak of men, you would think that they were mindless penises that blow whichever way the wind does. Feminist, such as myself, attempt to hold men to a higher standard because many of us believe that you should be functioning at a much higher standard. We don't believe that a woman's outfit, sexual offerings, or anything of the likes is enough for you to be given a pass to bypass respect, responsibility, manners, and common courtesy. Many of you don't have to really be men because women have been made to be your alpha and omega, your crutch and your cast, but only when you've done something wrong. When it's time to receive rewards, women are expected to be silent and support you in all YOUR endeavors. God gets the first shout out, then your real mama, and then comes you. But when it's time to place blame for the murder rate, infidelity, poverty, the divorce, the gay community, the prison rates and the list goes on, Mama will always be there to carry the blame.
In summation, if a man is to look to women for the sake of his development, then a greater discussion needs to be had. Now, we're pulling up on the talk of submission. A student is to submit to their teacher. If that teacher is me, then I am who you are to submit to. A teacher nurtures and supports their student. Many of you may not know this, but what you're teaching is men in submission to women and I know you don't want that. Once the work is done, you want the teacher (woman) to submit to you, the student (man). So basically, you want us to train you to be our boss. Yeah, because that makes perfect sense...no. No it doesn't. But anyone who wants to be in charge of something has to be prepared to qualify for certain tasks. Those who truly aren't prepared for such tasks will continue to seek scapegoats, be it their mother, their ex girlfriends, or their imaginary girlfriends and mothers. Imaginary girlfriends and mothers are celebrity women that these men sometimes tend to blame for their emasculation. Nonetheless, the Smiling Mammy is loyal to a flaw and countless numbers of men go women who represent that archetype when found in a bind...
then they get on social media and talk shit about those very same women behind their backs.
Just something to ponder.
No comments:
Post a Comment