Tag Archives: Women

Why Are Conservatives Anti-Society?

13 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by in Aging, All Rights Reserved, Business, Conservatives, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Economy, Education, Ethics, Gender Issues, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Higher Education, History, Housing, labor, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, racism, Religion, Reno, Respect, Second Amendment, Taxes, United States, US History, Voting, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The conservative agenda is not society friendly. It is designed to benefit few and ignore the rest. The ideology of conservatism is based on an idea of keeping what is perceived to be good and avoiding risk-taking in the future. It assumes that there will be winners and losers so life is about making sure they are the winners.

Fear and Hate are the Entrees for Conservatives

Religions As Safe Harbor For Conservatives

Religions are typically conservative because most religions are built on a paradigm of preserving past traditions. Even the Christian religion is filled with rules and rituals that preserve the thinking of the past and are resistant to change. This is why so many Christians identify themselves with conservative thinking.

The idea that everyone is worthy and equal is usually rhetoric in religions mixed with a condescending effort to help those less fortunate. Often religions and conservatives blame the less fortunate for their own problems. They are the losers and a conservative often consoles hu’s* conscience by making offerings or volunteering to help the less fortunate.

A Liberal Perspective is in Direct Conflict with a Conservative

A conservative, by definition, is focused on preserving what they believe with the assumption that any other belief is irrelevant. It is easy to understand why anyone who has a liberal perspective is worthy of ridicule to a conservative because liberals tend to have a less cynical view of humanity.

Conservatives are driven by fear and self-preservation, while liberals are driven by hope. Conservatives need to believe that they are under threat. Examples of conservative thought consumed by selfishness and fear are:

Taxes

All efforts in a society should be of direct benefit to the person paying taxes. Any money spent for the welfare of others is a target to conservatives and considered a waste of money. Conservatives often use rare examples of waste to ridicule spending for the benefit of less fortunate.

Gun Ownership

Conservatives use their fear of humanity to base a belief that a system of laws and impartial judgment are not effective. Conservatives believe that they should have the right to judge the actions of another person and execute them without trial. To the conservative, the term ‘defense’ justifies the instant execution of an unarmed person based on hu’s fear of that person.

Immigrants

Conservatives typically interchange hu’s racists beliefs with issues that target a particular race. Even though there is no significant immigration problem in the United States, conservatives manufacture a fear that immigrants are a threat. Immigration enforcement targets non-Caucasian races and typically ignore Caucasians.

Women

Historically women have endured a subservient role in society. Conservatives want to preserve that subservient role and consciously and unconsciously act as if women are a lesser gender. In religion, a fear of women has pushed them into a role of service to men and the church.

Conservatives Anti-Society

The problem with conservative ideology is that the fear and hate of non-conservatives places them as the adversary of society. It divides the population, often along the lines of race and power. In their mind, everything is an ‘us-versus-them’ battle regardless of a lack of evidence.

This attitude impacts the effectiveness of our society as the concept of a few winners is at the expense of the rest of the population. 

(*’Hu’s’ is a pronoun meaning ‘his’ and/or ‘hers.’)

Why the Stock Market is Like a Strip Club

24 Wednesday Jan 2018

Posted by in About Reno, Aging, Business, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Economy, Ethics, Generational, Government, Honor, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

People and Donald Trump use the stock market as proof that the economy is great. The problem is that the stock market is to our economy as a strip club is to love relationships.

Nothing To Do With Money or Love

A strip club is a place where white men give money to the girl that pleases them the most. It has nothing to do with love. Similarly, the stock market is where hardcore investors give money to the investment that pleases them the most. It has nothing to do with the economy.

In both a strip club and the stock market, customers are looking for the girl (investment) will put out more for them. The man or investor doesn’t care about the larger picture. He is after a short-term gain. In fact, like the guy who goes after the ‘bad’ girl, the investor can bet against an investment and still get what he wants.

Stock Market and Strip Club Feel the Pain

It’s not rocket science to understand that a booming stock market has no connection to the economy…unless….unless the economy crashes. When the economy goes south the wealthy investor discovers that investments are fickle. This is similar to the man who’s real relationship crashes and he discovers that even the girl in the strip club is not going to replace the one he loved.

When you hear a man or Donald Trump talk about how great the stock market is doing, remember he is like the guy talking about how great the girls at the strip club are, and understand he is talking about what’s in his pants, not what is real to the rest of us.

The lesson? Stock markets and strip clubs are for jerks with too much money.

The video below applies somehow…not to strip clubs, but to pompous men who like to tell us how great they are…you know…stable geniuses…

Popes That Damned Women, Choice, and Humanity

21 Sunday Jan 2018

Posted by in 1968, Aging, Ethics, Generational, History, Politics, Privacy, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Religion, Respect, Technology, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Pope Pius XI in 1930 and Pope Paul VI in 1968 had opportunities to extract the Catholic Church from the debate on birth control options for women. Both Popes had religious councils that suggested women using contraception should be allowed under some circumstances. Both Popes rejected those opinions and strictly forbade women having medical options in preventing pregnancy. 

Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini, ordained 1920

Pope Paul VI as a new Catholic priest

By Brescia Photo – Instituto Paolo VI, Public Domain, Link

1930 – The Church Takes A Stand

In 1930, the Anglican Communion (the alliance of Churches associated with the Church of England) held their seventh conference known as the Lambeth Conference. This Conference, held once each decade, brought together representatives of the Anglican Churches around the world to discuss religious issues.

At the 7th Lambeth Conference the representatives, by a 193 to 67 (47 abstentions,) passed Resolution 15 that would allow certain methods of contraception provided it was, “…done in the light of the same Christian principles.”

The Catholic Church was not affected by this Resolution; however, Pope Pius XI felt he had to respond to the Conference’s Resolution with his own proclamation on New Year’s Eve the same year. For the first time in Church history, the Pope insisted that the only justifiable reason for sexual relations was for procreation. He said that anytime, “…the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature..” 

Pope Pius XI reaction to the Lambeth Conference was obviously his belief of the moral superiority of the Catholic Church, but 38 years later Pope Paul VI was not attempting to respond to actions of other churches. Instead, he was squelching his own committee that had been called to review the teachings of the Church.

Birth Control Guided Away From Vatican II

The Second Vatican Council (Vatican II) was convened in October 1962 and ended in December 1966. It was established to assess the role of the Church in modern life. The decisions of the Council resulted in many changes to the Church doctrine, but women’s use of contraceptives was not one of the issues discussed. 

Some in the Church wanted to bring the issue of contraception methods into the discussions during Vatican II, but instead, Pope John XXIII established a commission in 1963, that reported directly to him. The task of the commission was to study questions of birth control and population. Pope John XXIII died later that year and Pope Paul VI continued the commission to its completion in 1966.

The commission, by a 64 to 5 vote determined that the use of medical contraceptives was an extension of the method of monitoring a woman’s fertility cycle and was not inherently evil. Information about the report was leaked to the media prior to publication and Catholics around the world began to believe the Church was about to liberalize the teachings regarding the use of birth control.

A Handful of Men Kill Women’s Choice

Despite the findings of the study, a minority report by four priests vehemently opposed the decision. They stated that if the Church’s position was reversed, it would mean the declarations of Pope Pius XI and other church leaders of the past would be seen as false teachings.

Pope Paul VI chose to follow the minority report and rejected the commission’s findings. He reaffirmed the Church’s position that women should not be able to prevent a pregnancy with contraceptives.

Why Did Pope Paul VI Reject the Findings?

The four most likely factors contributing to Pope Paul VI’s rejection are as follows:

  1. The Catholic Church has been consistent in discouraging the idea that worshipers have a personal relationship with God. The Church has preferred that personal choices should be made using the Church to guide them.
  2. A historical perspective in the Church that women are subservient to men and not worthy of positions of religious leadership; therefore, a woman’s choice to want to avoid pregnancy is irrelevant.
  3. Pregnancy is an act of God, not of humans.
  4. Pope Paul VI was not a woman, never married, and rumored to be gay.

It is unlikely that any Pope will ever reconsider the issue of birth control. Note that when Pope Paul VI made his declaration in 1968, the population of the world was 3.5 billion people. The world population is now 7.6 billion. 

This is NOT an Excuse: Why Older White Men Sexually Harass Women

22 Wednesday Nov 2017

Posted by in Aging, Business, Communication, Crime, Crisis Management, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, History, Honor, Human Resources, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, parenting, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect, The Tipping Point, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I need to be clear. Sexual harassment is and always has been wrong.

However, as an older white man, I can say that I am not surprised by the revelations coming out about women who have been sexually harassed by powerful older white men, I have to admit that I have been guilty of the same attitudes and behaviors.

Nothing that I have to say should be construed as an excuse for the behavior. No one should read this and feel any sympathy for men who have engaged in sexual harassment. This is simply an explanation of why I am not surprised by the recent revelations, and why I think almost all men of my age or older have a propensity to sexually harass women.

“Nothing that I have to say should be construed as an excuse for the behavior. No one should read this and feel any sympathy for men who have engaged in sexual harassment.”

I was born in 1957. My parents that raised me were married in 1939. My Dad was twenty years old, and my mother was fifteen…on the day she married. That was not typical; however, older men marrying younger women, even girls, was not uncommon, and during my childhood years, almost every Mom was a housewife.

As a child of the 1960’s, the idea that the man was dominant over a woman was not even questioned. Women were created to please men. The mindset was, women should not be overtly sexual and modest; therefore, it was the man’s place to initiate sexual actions. There was no formal instruction about initiating sexual intention with women, it was just expected that boys would learn as they go.

It was blatantly obvious to me, and probably most men my age, that power and wealth made men sexually attractive, and that women craved men who boldly took the initiative, so they didn’t have to pretend that they didn’t want sex. One way to win over a woman was to be in a position of power, and create a situation where the woman could submit to them.

“…that power and wealth made men sexually attractive, and that women craved men who boldly took the initiative, so they didn’t have to pretend that they didn’t want sex.”

The problem was, it worked. In hindsight, it didn’t work because the myth of women secretly wanting sex was true, it worked because the intimidation of a powerful man, and because most fell into the belief that it was a societal norm. Until I was in my late 20’s, the concept of sexual harassment was not even recognized as a problem in the workplace. A man marrying a subordinate was commonplace.

During my adult years, the development of workplace training began to take hold, and one of the primary topics became sexual harassment training. I, and most other men, were told that we had to be careful how we handled ourselves in the workplace, but that seemed to be focused on the workers, not so much on the executives.

When an issue of sexual harassment did come up with someone in management, companies hushed it up “to protect the woman,” and often the woman was given some type of compensation and moved out of the situation. In the business world, the human resources department enabled men to sexual harass women by treating it as an embarrassment for the company that needed to be dealt with internally, without law enforcement involvement.

There is no excuse for my behavior, nor the behavior of white men my age. In part, the problem is born of myths that are created in the absence of discussion and awareness of sex. Young boys will believe what other young boys will tell them when reliable information isn’t available.

We have to stop pretending that sex is only for married adults, and prior to marriage sex isn’t supposed to happen. Abstinence is an abomination to human interaction, and people who promote that idea don’t realize the damage they are doing to our society. Sex is not taboo or should it be embarrassing to discuss. It is a natural function of life.

We also have to stop letting companies deal with sexual harassment issues. Profit, public relations, and efficient operation of the business have no place in how a workplace sexual harassment issue is resolved.

“Profit, public relations, and efficient operation of the business have no place in how a workplace sexual harassment issue is resolved.”

Finally, I apologize to any woman who feels I have offended and/or been sexually inappropriate with. There is no excuse.

Management Study for God

19 Wednesday Mar 2014

Posted by in Business, Consulting, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Fiction, Generational, Government, History, Human Resources, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Religion, Sports, Tom Peters, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

WORLD MANAGEMENT STUDY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On March 1, 2014, Kiser and Co. was retained by God to perform a study of the world management. After a thorough review of the processes and effectiveness of the current management practices on Earth we submit the following analysis and make the following recommendations.

ANALYSIS

FINDING ONE:  Ineffective World Leadership
Our researchers found the world leadership to be largely ineffective, self-promoting, and in some cases cruel and corrupt. In most advanced civilizations we would expect to see leadership to evolve into higher quality leaders as lessons learned from poor leadership would be applied to avoid repeating past failures. In fact, we have seen the reverse is true in many situations.

Key examples are Russia and North Korea. In both cases, the eventual failures of past leaders who used military force, prisons, politically controlled media, covert police enforcement, and corrupt practices have not deterred the current leadership of these countries to return to, or continue those practices. In addition, religious-based organizations seem to be among the worst offenders in promoting policies and practices that marginalize people and encourage hate and violence.

Immediate changes in world leadership will be required if management of the planet is to move forward.

FINDING TWO:  Lack of Vision
There seems to be a lack of concern for the future of the world. Consistently we saw an attitude that can best be described as “What’s in it for me?” Companies focus on next quarter’s profit, not long-term viability. Governments tend to lack any sensitivity toward the underprivileged, tending to blame them for their problems while passing laws that benefit the privileged at the expense of those who cannot afford the basic necessities to survive and prosper.

Again, immediate changes in world leadership will be required if management of the planet is to move forward.

FINDING THREE:  Obstruction of Progress
Many in leadership positions use propaganda and destructive techniques to prevent effective management. By focusing on meaningless, but highly controversial issues, some leaders have been able to keep discussions away from relevant issues and waste time through generating anger on topics among key population groups. The result is wild, pointless discussions on issues that cannot be resolved unless everyone works together. The key element in the obstructive leadership’s tactics is to announce that any compromise is a failure. In this way they create an “all or nothing” situation that effectively stops progress.  

Again, immediate changes in world leadership will be required if management of the planet is to move forward.

FINDING FOUR:  Inequality
We were shocked to discover the issues of inequality. The gap between the “haves” and “have-nots” is vast and continues to grow. People are grouped and identified with certain expectations that determine their treatment by the world’s leadership. Slavery has become replaced with subtle tactics of discrimination that tend to become more bold over time. In many cases, the discriminatory practices have become accepted as normal.

Again, immediate changes in world leadership will be required if management of the planet is to move forward.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Despite the scope of the problem, the solution is surprisingly simple.

PROPOSAL 1:  Downsize the Male Gender
Among the four major findings, men were found to be the principal source of the problem. The current ineffective leadership group (Finding One) is overwhelmingly male dominated and they tend to be the people who demonstrate a lack of vision (Finding Two,) an inability to compromise (Finding Three,) and promote inequality (Finding Four.) Without men almost every current issue disappears without any further action.

Eliminating all males will also result in many benefits. The world population will be dramatically reduced, sexual harassment will virtually end, most, if not all, wars will end, and most pay equality issues will cease. Issue after issue becomes smaller, or disappears completely without men on the planet.

COUNTER FINDINGS
It is difficult to find negatives to this solution; however, here are some of the areas that may feel the impact of downsizing the male gender:

Reproduction — A lack of males would seem to create an issue in the propagation of the human species; however, there is believed to be enough frozen sperm available to continue reproduction on a smaller scale and the new males will be raised in a female-dominated environment, which may weed out the personality and behavior issues of the current male gender.

Male-dominated jobs — There are few jobs that truly require a male worker. Just because females have been excluded from many jobs doesn’t mean they can’t be trained to perform the work effectively.

Sports — Without males, most competitive sports will end. We cannot find a downside to this issue.

IMPLEMENTATION

It is believed that a 100% downsizing of the male gender may not be necessary for an effective change in world management. It might be more advisable to put all males on a 30-day Improvement Required Action. At the end of the 30-days those who have not demonstrated a clear reversal of  the findings of this study should be downsized. The remaining males could then be re-evaluated at 60 and 90 days to determine if the initial downsize resolved the problem or not. It is suggested that the changes required should be permanent as a condition of continued existence.

We do have recommendations about downsizing certain females; however, those may be handled on a case by case basis in a closed meeting with Human Resources.

Social Media 2020: Did Women Legitimize the Social Media?

14 Wednesday Apr 2010

Posted by in Information Technology, Lessons of Life, Random, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Women

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Here’s a question for you to ponder.

Would Social Interactive Media (SIM) be where it is today if women hadn’t put their stamp of approval by becoming active users?

Did Women make Social Media acceptable to the World?

I’m not talking about numbers, because 60% of Facebook users are women, so it’s obvious that they have had an important impact in the volume of users, but I’m talking about legitimizing it for everyone else. I don’t want to get into stereotyping, but as George Clooney’s character in Up In the Air said, “It’s faster.”

Consider that, with the exception of having sex, most men need a reason for becoming involved in an activity.  Men don’t shopping; they go to a store to purchase.  A man may say that he plays golf just for the enjoyment of the game, but don’t let anyone kid you, a man’s golf score can make or break his day.

Women, by contrast, don’t need to have a reason to go to the store or play golf.  They can find pleasure in just doing the activity.  For a woman, life doesn’t need justification to be enjoyed.

Now look at the Social Media arena.  I often find that men are the most phobic when it comes to participating in Social Media.  They mistrust and fear it.  Often the comment is, “I just don’t understand what the purpose is!”  And there lies the stereotyped gender difference.  Men need a reason (and they tend to leave their participles dangling.)

Women don’t need a reason.  The format of sharing information and ideas is in their comfort zone and that’s all they need.  Women are accustomed to be judged by others, so they don’t fear being judged online.  Women are also better self-monitors, so they know how to control their emotions when they post and tweet.

I believe that it was the acceptance of Social Media by women that pushed it into the mainstream.  Now, men are just trying to keep up…and trying to find a justification, a ‘reason’, to explain why participation in Social Media is important….hmmm…how’s that working out for us, guys?

Other Blogs on Social Media and Public Relations

Social Media 2020:  Public Relations 2001 vs Social Media Relations 2010

Social Media 2020: Who Moved My Public Relations?

Publishing Industry to End 2012

Who uses Facebook, Twitter, MySpace & LinkedIn?

Fear of Public Relations

Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn…Oh My!

Does Anybody Really Understand PR?