lumigan tramadol tadalafil

From 1903: Another Example of How Our Society Never Valued Women or Saw Them as Fully Human

2007-12-27
By

Background: Feminists often portray the pre-feminist (pre-1970) era as one in which women were not valued or seen as being fully human. To cite one example of thousands, recently the National Organization for Women wrote on their website: “Are women human? Do women deserve full human rights? The U.S. Senate isn’t sure.”

My belief is that while 1960s/1970s feminists had plenty of legitimate grievances, their insistence that society never valued women is false. In reality, men made enormous sacrifices to provide for and protect their wives and children–a testament to the average man’s respect for women.

While reading one of Bill James’ baseball books recently, I stumbled upon a couple examples of how society viewed women 100 years ago. In one, George Davis, a turn-of-the century star baseball player, and his teammates rushed into a devastating apartment fire to save the lives of its female inhabitants. To learn more, see my blog post From 1900: Another Example of How Our Society Never Valued Women or Saw Them as Human.

From Bill James, describing an incident involving Tommy Corcoran (pictured) and Orville Woodruff, major league baseball players over 100 years ago:

“In St. Louis in 1903 Corcoran was walking around the town sight-seeing with a teammate, Orville Woodruff, when a horse, frightened by an automobile, reared up, creating panic. According to Lee Allen in The Cincinnati Reds, ‘pedestrians scattered in all directions, Corcoran was pinned against a building and badly hurt, but Woodruff emerged from the affair a hero, picking up a woman who was lying right in the path of the horse and carrying her away from the danger in the nick of time.’”

Erectile Dysfunction? Hair Loss? Call the Men's Renaissance Health Centers

MRHCs are specialty medical facilities dedicated to helping men. Call (866) 398-6086. Mention Glenn Sacks to receive special rates.

8 views
Didn't make Oprah's Book Club. And Ronnie doesn't care. Man up. Buy the book now on Amazon.com. Or listen to Ronnie tell a story at escaping-from-reality.com.


  • PolishKnight

    A Monster’s Grievance

    My belief is that while 1960s/1970s feminists had plenty of legitimate grievances, their insistence that society never valued women is false

    One could say the same about Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, Idi Amin, and Joseph Stalin. Didn’t all these guys have “plenty of legitimate grievances” and didn’t they constantly point them out? If there’s one thing monsters are good at is nursing is a grudge. If you step on their toes, they’ll remember and bitch about it for a million years.

    On the other hand, a nice guy milquetoast will feel GUILTY about bumping into a stranger and even apologize even if he’s running into the street to rescue a bundle of orphans and kittens at the time. That’s just the nature of jerks versus nice guys: The jerks are great at looking to see what they can get, while the nice guys are constantly looking at a way to meet someone halfway.

    Let’s put this in bold and caps you so you get:
    MEN HAVE NOTHING TO APOLOGIZE ABOUT TOWARDS WOMEN. MEN HAVE BEEN THE PROVIDERS AND PROTECTORS OF WOMEN *AND* CONTINUE TO BE. UNTIL WOMEN WALK IN MEN’S VERY LARGE SHOES, EQUALITY IS MEANINGLESS!!!

    “Walk a mile in my shoes
    you’ll stumble in my footsteps…” — Depeche Mode

  • lieweary

    They aren’t branded as such often enough.

  • http://whatmenthinkofwomen.blogspot.com/ christianj

    “Feminists often portray the pre-feminist era as one in which women were not valued or seen as being fully human.”

    Well stated Amf.

    But as usual, female victimhood is worth a lot more dollars than actually telling the truth..

    No wonder feminists are branded as wilful and dubious liars.

  • amfortas

    While women were marching in the streets of London, demanding ‘equality’, threatening to assassinate the Prime Minister, fire-bombing buildings, and handing out white feathers to men, 140,000 men were killed or wounded in the mud and machine-gun horror of the of the battle of the Somme. The women, relatively safe on the streets demanded the right to vote while the majority of those men fighting to protect them didn’t have a right to vote. Most of the dead didn’t vote. Men came home legless, blinded, armless, to not be able to vote. Men who didn’t want to go to war were called cowards – by the women who didn’t want to go either.

    So, which gender did society value?

    I agree that those women were NOT fully human. Their lack of empathy was astounding. Tree-trunks have more empathy than they.

    I also note the phrasing in the opening: “Feminists often portray the pre-feminist era as one in which women were not valued or seen as being fully human.”

    Not valued, by whom? Not seen as fully human, by whom? I see this sort of statement all the time. No one mentions just who it was that was or wasn’t ‘seeing’ women in this or that way. There is an unspoken assumption that all the negativity came from men, but society has both men and women.

    The raffia-mafia of women in their drawing rooms were the true oppressors of women, not the men. It was these upper-crust and middle-class women, living comfortably off the wealth of hard working, entrepreneurial men, who had the women servants and chamber-maids, the lady’s-maids, the cooks, the cleaners. It was women who made and enforced the social mores. It was women who owned and ran the brothels stacked with lower-class women – kept low by these other more fortunate women.

    But we mustn’t ever mention women devaluing other women or treating them as less than human, must we.

  • http://mensnewsdaily.com/author/the-gonzman/ The Gonzman

    Feminists aren’t ignorant. They are liars.

  • KRS

    If anything, 100 years it was MEN who were seen as less than human, not women.

    Remember the movie “Titanic”? When the ship was sinking the women and children were the first to be saved, and the men were last. If you recall, the villain in the movie grabbed an infant who was not his own and boarded the lifeboat, claiming that he was the only living relative of this baby. That was the only way that the ship’s crew and the other lifeboat passenger’s would have allowed him on the lifeboat.

    This example is typical of how the entire society treated men a hundred years ago — as second-class life forms whose role was to sacrifice their very lives for women (and children), who by definition were more worthy of being saved.

    Not much has changed in the last 100 years, either.

  • lieweary

    But men today are disposable property, not property that must be taken good care of.

  • wtexas

    Well of course all attempts were made to save the women, they’re valuable property after all and their owners would hate to replace them, lol.

  • lieweary

    Feminists are ignorant of history, which is a long tale of serfdom and misery for both men and women, not a tale of men profiting from the misfortunes of women.

    But the more women get, the deeper the victim myth will run, which is a pity since a little appreciation would allow them to enjoy their gains.







Right.

Man up.

Buy the book now on Amazon.com. Or listen to Ronnie tell a story at escaping-from-reality.com.

Search