Skip to main content

It's all about reputation - 2

Sometimes, even those of us without remarkable minds have similar ideas to those who do. Maybe those ideas aren't quite as well thought out or as extensively supported as we'd like, but we have them. A few days ago I posted on reputation. I said that we (the US and the West) tend to act like prey animals. We act like food for the carnivore.

Today Vodkapundit linked to Neo-neocon, who has a wonderful post about Dr. Wafa Sultan.
Dr. Sultan pulls no punches, to say the least; she sets up a Jacksonian challenge to Western countries to begin defending themselves and their culture with greater vigor, or to face continuing to be perceived by the Islamicist jihadis as weak and therefore relatively easy prey.
It frustrates me that people don't get this. Particularly, it frustrates me that people who claim to be culturally and internationally sophisticated don't get this. Because they despise a military show of strength or even just a macho chest thumping, they figure everyone else in the world will react the same way.

Oh, I just had a terrible thought. Maybe we're acting like girls.

Lord save me from a brain that runs off on random tangents. Yesterday my kids were in a karate tournament for Kojosho karate in Albuquerque. I didn't compete. Two young men who stand next to me in class, brothers, fought in the kumite part of the competition. They are very well matched. The event started and they started to beat the crap out of each other. Granted, the way the competition is scored there's not much time for crap beating and no one actually got hurt, but it was fierce enough I heard our instructor telling them to tone it down a bit and afterward joked if they were going to be friends when they went home.

Well, of course they were. Nevermind they had equal points when the match timed out, but the both of them spit out their mouth guards and were grinning like loons.

I elbowed my husband and said, "It's a man thing, isn't it." He agreed.

On foreign policy, it seems to be a common sentiment that if we throw our weight around that people will hate us, that it's a bad thing overall and having to resort to force means that we've lost already. But maybe it's more of a man thing. One side pushes. If we don't push back, we're weak. The pushing doesn't mean that friendships can't be forged.

(Oh, help me! Now my brain wants to run off on a discussion of Jackie Chan movies I watched this weekend that began with people beating each other up only to quickly become allies... ack!)

Girls, on the other hand, tend toward scorched earth policies. We hold grudges and vendettas.

This girl, however, has to go tuck her kids in bed, sing songs and give hugs. Goodnight. :-)

Correction: Neo-neocon has posted a correction on her blog. Wafa Sultan was not the author of the post she cites. Go read her explanation. It will make more sense than my bungled paraphrase.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...

Don't Look Down by Crusie and Mayer

Not really a review, just wanted to say that I enjoyed this book, _Don't Look Down_ by Jennifer Crusie and Bob Mayer. I went to Amazon to get the link and noticed that it's getting trashed in the reviews by people who have been fans of Crusie's romance novels. I can see why they were upset but I hope she continues to collaborate with Mayer because all I can say is "your loss is my gain." I'm also going to be looking for Mayer's books written as Robert Doherty to check them out. _Don't Look Down_ is a silly novel that had me laughing or trying not to let the kids see I was crying... The laughs weren't belly laughs and the tears weren't heart wrenching sobs... It was just fun. And it *was* a romance. With guns. And knives. And Wonder Woman action figures with matching "wonder wear" underwear. And the items the international terrorist was shipping to the Russian mob boss? Pre-colombian jade penises. At least two people get e...

How "Representation" In Fiction Becomes Toxic

  Some things sound so obviously good that they don't need to be examined.  One of those things is the idea of Representation in fiction; movies, television or books.  Entertainment where some people are conspicuously absent would seem to be an obvious problem, right?  A person doesn't have to be "woke" or any sort of feminist to occasionally watch an old television show and realize (for example) that all the scientists and astronauts in an old movie are men. It's as glaring an anachronism these days as watching a show where everyone is chain smoking cigarettes. Entertainment should reflect the diverse nature of real life and society because, in the end, fiction has to be even more real than real life.  If nothing else, it makes that entertainment more interesting to introduce characters with a variety of backgrounds and challenges. And so we're told that diverse fiction is BETTER fiction. The way that this rather obvious truth is often framed, often discussed...