by Paul Craig Roberts, Paul Craig Roberts:
The backbone and principal resource of every country is the male heterosexual population. Without them there is no country, no births to take the place of deaths. Men have the temperament and strength to fight and to lead. They protect women and children, property, borders. They lead families, communities, businesses, and governments. That has always been their role throughout history. When men become effete, the society collapses. In America this indispensable resource is being destroyed.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
It begins with boys, which means they never become men. I remember when boys were trained for leadership. They received more discipline and were given more independence than girls, who were trained for nurture and motherhood. The roles of the sexes were as distinct as the sexes. There was no such thing as a girl who wanted to be a boy or a boy who wanted to be a girl. Transgenderism is an invention of a sick and dying society.
Everything related to becoming a man has been banned. School playground fights, today an excuse to call police and arrest children, were part of growing up. Sports were where you developed confidence as you learned to catch a high fly, field a grounder, throw a strike, hit a single or a home run. Boys were encouraged. They had their own space, sandlot teams, Little League, Boy Scouts. They had after school jobs–newspaper routes, bagging groceries, cutting lawns, washing cars. Girls developed cooking skills, sewing skills, artistic skills, chaste demeanor. None of this meant that women were barred from professional lives. They were authors, Registered Nurses, accountants, para-legals, teachers, scientists, scholars.
The destruction of the male began with feminism. The feminists were the first transgender advocates. They insisted on no difference in the role of men and women. It was the feminists’ insistence that the male role was better than the female’s and that women assume male roles and male sexual promiscuity, combined with their attacks on men as misogynists, that destroyed the role of men in society. All of a sudden it was not alright for boys to have their spaces. Boy Scouts had to have girls. Little league teams had to have girls. Think about this for a minute. Parents felt they had to support the girl players. Effusive praise would follow a girl catching a high fly, fielding a grounder, getting a hit. But as these are things the boys were expected to successfully do, they didn’t get the praise, and it went on from there. As “diversity” and “multiculturalism” progressed in America, it was less safe for girls to be as independent from home as boys. The equality on which feminists insisted meant that the independence of boys had to be curtailed. Today American parents who allow their male children the independence my generation had are arrested for child endangerment.
The feminist desire to turn women into men meant a diminution of male leadership roles in society as women entered politics and corporations were pressured to create “gender balance” in executive roles and in academia. Just as white people are sidelined by the accusation that they hold back blacks, men are sidelined by the assertion that they held back women.
Years ago Christina Hoff Sommers addressed the destruction of the male role in family and society. But nothing came of her warning. No lesson was learned. Today behavioral problems of boys, declining academic performance, depression and suicides arising from the loss of their role is falsely explained as girls having better self-control, as boys’ slower development, and attributed to alleged hormonal and neurological causes. No one notices that these blamed causes are new as are the conditions. Neither cause nor conditions were present when boys had leadership roles.
The facts are bald-faced. Normal young white heterosexual males grow up in a non-merit-based society. They witness preferences for females, preferences for blacks, preferences for sexual perverts. What do the normal white men get out of it? The theft of their leadership role and blame for holding back others.
Recently I heard men of the passing generation comparing women of their time with those of today. The adoption of young women of the stripper’s G-string as beach attire, the female use of four-letter words, and so on. They all agreed that the emotional support a wife gave a husband is a thing of the past. They wondered what this means for the marriages of the younger generations. Divorce which once implied failure now has no negative connotation. Are marriages becoming commitment-free? Has marriage become a temporary sexual and economic contract that once a better one is found becomes void?
Read More @ PaulCraigRoberts.org
