Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Laban is Lazy

Polly Toynbee bemoans the effects of the sexual revolution which she was such an enthusiastic participant in. Laban sticks his four penn'orth in, rehashing his usual themes.
Posted by at
Labels: , ,

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

The feminist revolution is quite an amusing story. During the 70s women convinced themselves that having a career was more important than getting married and having kids. They were convinced by the feminist writers of the time. Those feminist writers had a proper career of course. The rest of us just have jobs, but the ladies thought they were missing out on something. After all, so many of us guys seemed to want a job, they must be worth something right?

The concept of having babies was put on the back burner. Then those girls reach their 30s and biological panic sets in. For many it turns out to be too late. How can a feminist in her thirties compete with a busty 21 year old with procreation on her mind?

Todays generation of mothers have learnt their lesson. They have totally rejected feminism. They are determined to ensure their own duaghters make them grandparents. Consequently I suppose it should be no surprise to me that my neighbours allow their 14 year old daughter to dress up like a tart and go out with 18 year old men. Perhaps they have decided that any pregnancy is better than no pregnancy at all....

9:47 am
Anonymous said...

I don't buy the point that Guardianistas have to breed to pass Guardianistaism onto the next generation - there are enough fools brought up in good households who will fall under the spell without being indoctrinated into it from birth.

However, I do take your point that ethnic trends in Britain will eventually kill it - as you say, when ridiculously high percentages (70%?) of UK Pakistanis marry teenage cousins from backward areas of Pakistan, the prospects for female liberation are going to recede rapidly. The great irony is that the Left will ultimately be responsible!

9:47 am
Anonymous said...

Here's a great feel-good BBC article on Multiculturalism:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7349777.stm

A few points about this rigorous scientific survey:

(1) "The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) canvassed the views of detectives and community officers across the UK."

So, completely unscientific then. "How do you feel?" stuff. Subjective.

(2) "Acpo's head of race and diversity, Peter Fahy, who co-wrote the report"

So, the Race and Diversity Stasi ring you up and ask you if you think crime is committed disproportionately by non-Britons. Given the insane attitude of the Police force towards race issues, it is a no brainer what the average copper would say. No Guv, everything's fine.

(3) "Acpo's head of race and diversity, Peter Fahy, who co-wrote the report, said the nationality of offenders should be recorded to make it easier to monitor crime trends."

BINGO! They don't even record the nationality! How can they say that migrant crime fears are unfounded when THEY DON'T KNOW the nationality of the criminals? Unclear would be honest; unfounded is a politically motivated lie.

This survey is about as legitimate as Saddam's 99% of the vote at his last election.

10:17 am
Anonymous said...

Laban,
I agree with you on most things but I think the fertility issue is more complicated than you make out. Another interesting blog I follow, Demography Matters, points out in a recent post that two countries with the lowest TFR, Italy and Spain, aren't actually that "modern" when it comes the role of women and social attitudes:

Far from having particularly high rates of female labor force participation (FLFP)... both have had unusually low rates, and far from having weak family bonds and weak religious institutions, the countries had some of the strongest family ties and what appeared - on the surface at least - to be among the most influential church institutions in Europe.

Any thoughts?

12:06 pm
Anonymous said...

the copper at coppersblog has an interesting take on the acpo thing

3:27 pm
Anonymous said...

How to dragoon women into the workforce in the 70s? Empower them! Tell them they were getting shafted by being stay-at-home Mums. Drag them in the workforce.

Don't you get the irony. They thought their emancipation was of their own doing, but they were being led by the nose because inflation had made it impossible for a single wage earner ("Dad") to raise a family. Get Women into the workforce and families won't notice their declining standard of living. And make it so that women entering the workforce was of their own free will rather being foisted on them by inflation.

Women weren't empowered they were played.

Not authors of their own destiny but suckers (men and women both). The sex was just part of the bait.

5:25 pm
Ross said...

This post has made me think about sex and Polly Toynbee at the same time, which really is a terrible image to spring on anyone.

Rob, good (albeit off-topic) post.

11:56 pm
Anonymous said...

When vipers like Toynbee start agitating for women to do jobs where their nails might get broken then Ill believe feminists want equality and not privilge.

As for the sexualisation of society I am of the mind that this is driven by the liberated female (liberated by contraceptives that is) There is a limitless supply of women who are happy to use their sexuality to get by in the world. And so nature intended it. The real problem with the Patriarchy is that it suppresses what comes naturally to women. What we see today is female behaviour unrestricted by male demands. Namely being provided for by a series of male partners. The male is viewed as a temporary item to be replaced when a better offer comes along. The female has no real attachment to the nuclear family as such.

(Just like to say in passing LT that you are blogging fantastic just lately. In fact I almost recommended you to the good folk on Stormfront - but I guessed you would nt appreciate that!)

7:01 am
Anonymous said...

What would the 'good folk' on Stormfront know about women?

Last time I looked, the 'Why am I still single?' thread had run to about a hundred pages.

No wonder some of you lot think raping a woman is no different to forcing her to eat chocolate cake.

10:34 am
Anonymous said...

"No wonder some of you lot think raping a woman is no different to forcing her to eat chocolate cake."

That would indeed be a terrible attitude. But no worse than the kind of hypocrisy that allows a person to vilify the BNP whilst simultaneously supporting a government which has killed over a million foreigners.

3:07 pm
Anonymous said...

Anon@10:34. The SFers in their honest-to-goodness no-nonsense way are pretty much united in their call for rapists to be severely punished (hanging seems popular). Nik Erikson found only one person to defend him when the subject came up there. That person was me. The chocolate cake remark was OTT sarcasm. Bad taste nothing more. PC sometimes does that to people.

6:22 am
Anonymous said...

If anyone has conflated rape with the consumption of chocolate cake (forced on them by the patriarchy) it would be a particular branch of loonoid feministas

10:14 am

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)