What the Kavanaugh Hearings Can Tell Women About Themselves

Earlier this week (I think it was Monday), someone called into the Detroit, AM 760, Guy Gordon afternoon talk show with the following comment (paraphrased and elaborated by myself):

Some women take the side of a female accuser and somehow just KNOW that a man accused of sexual abuse / assault must be guilty. Other women stand up for due process and talk about all the honorable men whom they actually KNOW as fathers, husbands, and sons and want to extend the presumption of innocence under the law to the many “trials” by public opinion which the media routinely offer us. The caller stated that perhaps it isn’t just party politics like we saw in the recent Kavanaugh circus; rather, that each group of women is correct inasmuch as they are describing the men in their social circles: Democrats in contrast to Republicans; progressives in contrast to conservatives, etc. Hmm what about that?

Let’s face it, all men have a common nature which is base and prone to desire sex and violence for selfish, self-gratifying purposes. It’s a miracle we have civilization at all, and many hold the opinion (including myself) that women are in large part responsible for civilizing men. But men also have a daily choice: give in to their base desires or seek God’s help in actually loving the women and children they encounter. Now, I ask you, which is the party of respect for women and family life, virtue and self-control, sacrifice, faith and godliness? Yes, in general, this type of man is a Republican or conservative. It’s not like Democrats necessarily embody the opposite, it’s just that they do such a good job at it they are easily associated with the opposite. I think this caller’s theory is a good rule of thumb because conservative men and women have a preference for each other’s company and progressive men and women have a preference for each other’s company. Is “preference” too strong a word? If you think so, just accept that each seems to travel within certain social circles that closely match their own appreciation for prudence as well as sentiment. I think, in general, the caller’s theory explains well the observed evidence of contrasting female testimony / assumptions about men as abusers.

I’m sure there are exceptions, crude hypocrites hidden among the ranks of conservatives or sainted fools lost among the ranks of progressives. (In fact I know some of each.) But it does come down to competing ethical models. On the question of what is right and wrong, one has to ask “why” is something right or wrong. The admirable men I have described above know that it is not okay to go against a person’s best interest just because either the woman herself gives consent or because society gives approval and overlooks bad behavior from men. Such men know there is a higher good at stake and literally a higher Power (God) who has a say in such things. But the craven man will not be satisfied with failure to obtain consent from the woman / approval from others. He will continue to scheme and manipulate and distort relationships by hook or by crook–in this case abuse and assault–until he gets his way.

So, if this is the case with men–and I, a man, am affirming that it is–why are all of you Democratic / progressive women WASTING YOUR TIME on Democrat and progressive men? If you don’t like how they treat you, get a clue from your sisters on the other side! Consider what ethics really means (you have the same choice as just stated for men in the things you are responsible to God for). Evaluate where you are and how you got there. Determine that you made a mistake in trusting the wrong ethical system–and the men who also chose it. Then transition to the other political party. CONVERT (it is truly a conversion) to the other side where you are far more likely to be cherished and respected as God intended.

Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *