On a random day, about two years ago, I was scrolling through the vast wasteland of social media and I stumbled up this image:

I am not sure why, but I immediately felt - let's say, mildly annoyed. It came across as obnoxious. And as it turns out, it is a twist on the original below...

I have no way of knowing for sure which image came first, but that is not the point. What both images seem to be saying is this: The more you read books, the more you realize how bad things really are - BUT, if you read a LOT of books, then you will see brilliance and wisdom (and hope?) beyond that.

This got my wheels turning. This really stuck with me and for some reason I have come back to this image several times. Three insights came to mind since the first time I saw this, so I wanted to share them here.

Knowledge does not equate to wisdom.

True wisdom can only be gained through experience, and perhaps some reflection. In fact, one would hard pressed to define the word "wisdom" (Spoiler Alert: Online dictionaries do not do this word any service). How many of us know a very intelligent, well read, highly educated person who holds ludicrous beliefs?

One could argue that the average Liberal Arts and Social "Science" professor is devoid of wisdom almost by definition. This is because Wisdom implies a certain degree of critical thinking. Anyone able to think critically at even a basic level would be able to observe that there is nothing scientific about sociology or the social studies. According to some Anthropology 101 and Sociology 101 textbooks (Yes, I have read and skimmed through a few), humans, tribes, and cultures do not conform to neatly defined boxes and conventions. So if we cannot classify humans in any way that would be considered "scientific" in terms of classification, in part because to do so would equate to stereotyping, then we can simply not call it science. One could debate this all day long, but that does not change the fact the the social sciences have hobbled themselves by this conundrum - to put cultures and peoples into categories and boxes is akin to enabling racism (according to them, not me), yet failing to do so mitigates any value they offer in terms of deeper understanding of the ways in which cultures differ and correspond.

Much like any well-read social scientist, or engineer, or doctor, or academic of any sort, every moment spent reading a book is a moment of experience lost. It is an unfortunate tradeoff, but a tradeoff nonetheless. And such is one of life's great paradoxes - the ignorant run about enjoying the fruits of life, flailing, clawing, and stumbling in search of the visceral. Only some will come to understand their context, and the greater context in which we all live. But at least they lived! Likewise, the learned spend their lives buries in books, searching for knowledge; and many do indeed find that. However, what is knowledge without experience? At this point the reader should call me out for pointing out the two polar ends of this, but that is also part of the point. It is the great mass of people in the middle that experience more or less of both. One might imagine it looking like a standard normal distribution curve - with the outliers being the self-righteous nerdy virgins locked in a room buried in books on one end, and hedonistic degenerates on the other.

It is clear to me from the image which is implied to be which.

Either way, it is a cute concept, albeit inspiring and perhaps well executed; however deeply flawed.

Inaction is the problem

Whatever might have been intended, this image paints itself into a corner; one can only achieve (enlightenment?) by reading more and more. Yet it fails to acknowledge the passivity of all three actors. The ignorant man staring at the wall, foolishly believing what he sees before him (news, social media, etc,) is looked down on by the two seemingly intelligent actors. But they are standing on the same street, on the same block, doing the same thing - nothing.

My youngest son saw this image when I first started jotting notes about it, and asked me what it meant. I asked him "Well, what do YOU think it means?" He said "When you get smarter you see more things?" I nodded my head in pride and said "Well said, son." (And no, I did not launch into a rant about the meaning of life, depicted through cartoon memes. That's what this blog is for!)

Then he asked me an odd question (he is THAT kid): "Dad, which one are you?" No joke, hand on my heart, my kid asked me that. My first thought was, dang - he thinks I could be any one of them! I replied: "I am none of those guys. If you zoom waaaaayy in there, you will see a small spot of green. About the size of a car's shadow on the ground. I am there sweeping and cleaning. I have not read as many books as the really high up guy, and I know too much to believe that life is all rosy like the guy on the left. And the guy in the middle is just staring at that mess and doing nothing about. So a long time ago I climbed over that wall and got busy cleaning up. No one told me where to start, and no one even asked me to do it. Maybe when you get older, you can hop over that fence and help me do some cleaning.

He smiled and then asked "When is dinner - can we have pizza?" Followed by a big grin. It worked - I ordered pizza right there. But a part of me hopes that my message sunk in.

And upon thinking about that moment, it occurred to me that I run the risk of coming across as more arrogant than any of those characters. That somehow my taking action is morally superior to learning. I also run the risk of exhibiting that working class defensiveness thing - "who cares about college, those guys probably don't even know how to tie their shoelaces" Neither of these was intended. In fact, in my head anyway, my sense was that perhaps we need all four types of man - and a few other types. After all, who writes the books? Who built that fence, who designed those factories; and who caused that destruction? My obvious choice was to hop off that hamster wheel and figuratively (and often literally) pick up a broom and get busy doing something useful instead of bloviating about it (this article notwithstanding!)

Introduction

American women have been fighting for rights and privileges since the founding of the country. Men too have had to fight for rights; after all, the Revolution was a war over our Constitutional Rights. Likewise, non-land-owning white males gained the right to vote in 1828 – half a century after the Declaration of Independence.

With each right and privilege came new challenges and issues. This piece is an attempt to follow this timeline and hopefully present the conventional wisdom or zeitgeist that resulted.

Women’s Rights: A Timeline and Analysis

• In July of 1848 during the first women’s rights convention. Elizabeth Stanton and Lucretia Mott were the organizers, and this convention marked the beginning of the feminist and women’s rights movement. There were a number of grievances made in the resultant Declaration of Sentiments, but primarily it was enfranchisement, the right to vote, and the right to work that got the most attention.

Result: Women gained a voice and were given due consideration by the Government.

• Despite the claims made in that Declaration, hardly 6 months later, on January 23, 1849 Elizabeth Blackwell became the first woman to graduate from medical school in the US. It is unclear how these glaringly contradictory statements and facts were justified at the time, but the result:

Result: Women gained the right to attend college and become Medical Doctors.

• In 1869, a mere forty years after white males earned the right to vote, the legislature of the territory of Wyoming passed America’s first woman suffrage law, granting women the right to vote and hold office. The 19^th Amendment was to be ratified in 1920, so it took time for it to roll out to other states. But few people realize that by the time the 19^th Amendment was passed, many women in the US were already voting.

Result: Women gained the right to vote

• In 1916, Margaret Sanger opens the first birth control clinic in the United States. An organization that would later become planned parenthood. In 1960 the FDA approved the first birth control pill. Roe v Wade, in 1973 protected a woman’s right to abortion.

Result: Women gained total and absolute control over human reproduction

• On June 10, 1963 President John F. Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act, prohibiting sex-based wage discrimination between men and women performing the same job in the same workplace.

Result: Equal pay for women.

• On June 23, 1972, President Nixon signed off on Title IX of the Education Amendments. This law stated that “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."

Result: Women were given full and complete access to higher education – including sports.

• In 1994 then President Clinton signed “the Violence Against Women Act”. Among other things, this law provided funding for programs that help victims of domestic violence, rape, sexual assault, stalking and other gender-related violence.

Result: Women were given gender specific protection against several forms of violence.

• In January 2013, the U.S. military removes a ban against women serving in combat positions.

Result: Women can now serve in “combat roles”

Analysis

Now, let’s look a bit deeper into the longer term consequences of these short term results.

Women gained a voice and were given due consideration by the Government.

Despite the myriad laws that specifically protect women, numerous articles have been written about women who still feel ignored. And despite the fact that their enfranchisement was voted on by 100% males, women also still feel that systemic sexism persists.

Women gained the right to attend college and become Medical Doctors

One needs no citation to acknowledge that women vastly outnumber men in Higher Education. Women also garner 92% of all gender specific scholarships. What was asked for was equality. What was gained was nearly total dominance – often irrespective of competence or merit.

Women gained the right to vote

Women now claim that women, who are denied the right to vote due to felony convictions, are victims of sexism. They claim that this is evidence of sexist AND racist disenfranchisement. No equal mention of men who are convicted of felonies.

Women gained total and absolute control over human reproduction

Single motherhood has become the norm in the US. And it has been well established that children raised in single parent households perform poorly by almost every important metric of health and well-being.

Furthermore, boys raised by single mothers fare worse than almost any single demographic. In one study, it was shown that 72% of juvenile murderers, and 60% of rapists came from single mother homes.

Equal pay for women.

Women’s rights activists still claim that the wage gap still exists due to systemic misogyny; despite the fact that this claim has been resoundingly debunked, and can be explained by women’s career and job choices.

Women were given full and complete access to higher education – including sports.

Women who fought for parity and equality for well over two centuries, are now acting with as much bigotry as those whom they decried along the way. Transgendered athletes are being discriminated against by more than just TERFS. Apparently men are horrible – even when they become women. Whether one agrees on this point or not, transgendered people are making the very same case that early women used to change laws. If the logic is wrong now, it was wrong then.

Women were given gender specific protection against several forms of violence.

The Duluth model is used as a weapon against all men, regardless of merit or evidence. According to the Wikipedia page: “The feminist theory underlying the Duluth Model is that men use violence within relationships to exercise power and control.” All because one woman had a theory. Key word: Theory

Women can now serve in “combat roles”

The selective service is mandatory for men. Not only is conscription optional for women, but the combat roles are optional for women as well. This serves as a backdoor way to promote women to higher ranks in the military, without the same level of overall risk to life and limb.

Conclusion

The more equality women have gained, the more loudly the cries of sexism and oppression have become. No matter how much progress has been made, the average American woman unironically seems to believe that things are worse than ever for women.

Every single major milestone in the women’s rights movement was explicitly based on demands for equality, but every single one of these milestones has resulted, not only in Inequality, but unacceptable negative consequences men. These consequences range from fewer opportunities, to unjust incarceration, to out right death.

On moral grounds alone, these results are unacceptable.

Let's see someone print that.

Source: