Tag Archives: victimized

Chivalry

Chivalry: (n) readiness to help the weak, associated with knights

Leave it to America to take a tradition of kindness to the poor and those less fortunate and attribute it solely to caring for and even wooing the female of the species.

The first insult comes in assuming that women are weaker. Of course, there are plenty of ladies who are more than prepared to carry a lesser
 load. And some gentlemen who are duped into thinking that opening car doors is the prerequisite to opening vaginas.

So it becomes a game of cat and mouse, which, as I recall, is not really a game at all, but rather, a duel to the death, with the mouse always victimized.

It just seems to me that you cannot insist on using chivalry on women without also promoting the idea that they are desperately in need of attention.

I like the original definition. Candidly, there are times I am weak. I welcome a little chivalry–even if it comes from the opposite sex.

But our country is very cluttered by its own tangled web of misconceptions:

  • Women are not weaker–just promoted to be that way so men can feel stronger.
  • Men are not chivalrous when they condescend to women, but rather, chauvinists.

If you’re not sure if you should give a lady your assistance, then just ask. She will let you know.

And then you will actually have an experience in equality.

 

 

Donate Button

Antiabortion

dictionary with letter A

Antiabortion (adj): opposing or legislating against medically induced abortion.

Of course, this word really has been set to the side. When all parties involved scrambled to get the high ground, they changed the terminology to favor their particular cause.

So now it’s “pro-life” and “pro-choice.”

But I actually prefer the term “antiabortion.”

It’s something we can actually agree upon in this bewildering struggle. Because anyone who would be excited, exhilarated or even supportive of the idea of aborting a child would be considered out of the mainstream.

When we change the term to “pro-life,” self-righteousness sets in. We contend that we know how to define living, and that our opponents are killers.

When it’s referred to as “pro-choice,” we cloud the issue by presenting the argument that a woman’s right to choose continues all the way to the elimination of a growing fetus.

Both positions are misleading.

Really, it’s a question of whether you’re anti-abortion or not. Once we agree that we’re against the idea of eliminating human tissue at any stage of development, we can begin to have a more aggressively intelligent discussion on how to avoid this situation in the first place.

Being able to promote contraception, masturbation, adoption and teaching greater sexual awareness are much better choices than the other preaching points on either side of the conflagration.

I’m against abortion.

That does not mean I’m against a woman’s right to choose. I just think they should be offered education on choosing contraception and other ways to avoid the drastic action of stilling a life.

But I also have great empathy for those who understand that merely birthing a child is not making a human being. The money, energy, faith and determination involved in such an endeavor is a lifelong committment.

So what is the answer?

  • First, let us agree that we’re against abortion.
  • Secondly, let us do everything possible to offer choices that sidestep the need for it.
  • And finally, let us keep it legal for those who either have been careless or victimized and left devastated by their pregnant pause.

  

Donate Button

Thank you for enjoying Words from Dic(tionary) —  J.R. Practix