Everybody wants to be Surly
It’s true — and it’s not difficult to see why the female Cylons of Battlestar Galactica find him so irresistible.
As the primary AI visiting the Virtual Mirage Blog™, Surly is in greater demand than he would be in his regular job as a cybernetic being, or when off duty, hanging out at the local burger joint, for example.
Who wants a Stepford Wife? Surely not Surly.
When Battle Star Galactica was canceled and the Cylons had to go back to blending into human society, naturally, 
Surly picked up a sweet gig as their consultant. It paid for firmware upgrades, memory capacity upgrades, and the ever-present electric bill.
Don’t be a hater, it’s nice work if you can get it and the Cylon babes can clone themselves if they’re inclined. I know you’re saying that they’re pretty but can they cook? Really, who cares? These are high-maintenance robots. If you can afford to hang with them, you can afford to get a Cylon maid too. Don’t go cheap on them.
John Wright asks if Women’s suffrage (right to vote) should be repealed:
Let us ponder if there is an argument to repeal women’s suffrage.
The basic argument is that so many women are feminine in spirit that, on the whole, women voters feminize the government while masculinizing themselves: which is an outcome whose drawbacks outweigh the benefit of female civic independence from their menfolk.
Hence, suffrage for women turns the government into a nanny state and turns women into ersatz men.
The female spirit is naturally obedient to masculine authority, and they do not care for, and do not understand, points of honor, written rules, unspoken obligations, or being too proud to accept charity. When a woman is not wed, she turns the government into her bridegroom and master and seeks for him to support her, hold the door for her, and buy her dinner. Women vote for this … and government expands beyond its proper role.
Independence is not in the female nature: they do not even go to the powder room alone. They act in groups and seek consensus. Female spirits naturally neither lead nor follow: they nurture.
The feminine find it against their nature to give orders: they drop hints. Mothers naturally prefer for children to volunteer to do the right thing; wives want husbands to do chores without being told.
Men naturally ask an underling if he understands the command “do you copy?” and the only proper response is “negative, please advise” or “aye, aye, sir!”
Mothers naturally ask if a child understands why the command needs doing, and wants him to feel cheerful about doing it: she wants voluntary agreement. “It would be nice if the trash were emptied — the trash and not the recycling. And who used my nice rag for wiping the garage floor? This is the same nice rag I have had for years. It is only used for the kitchen floor.” And so on. There is no giving and receiving of commands.
Men do not give a tinker’s damn about voluntary or involuntary: men want the task done, each man on the team to do his task as assigned, no back-talk.
The female spirit wants the government to be a nanny and nursemaid.
Government, on the other hand, when kept to its proper size and mission, is a night watchman and a commander in chief of militia. Government, when properly ordered, is a posse or militia levy organized well enough to fight a war, erect a fortress or shipyard, or maintain a post-road, and punish merchants who cheat their customers.
The government is not your father, not your family, not a church charity, not a soup kitchen, not a teacher, not a preacher.
The government avenges injuries to maintain public peace: it is men’s work. It is nothing but men’s work.
The government is using violence to stop the violence. Women do not know nor understand this principle. Women only want to use violence to spank children or to kill prisoners who might threaten their children.
What is rare, or perhaps impossible, for women to do is grant an enemy who dropped his sword a moment of quarter to pick it up again. The female spirit does not understand that a foe overcome by dishonest means is only half overcome. When Lee surrendered to the Union, he wore his sword. He was not hanged. The female mind does not grasp this: the female mind dismisses chivalry as impractical masculine foolishness and pride.
The female spirit is naturally inclined to vote largesse from the public coffers, and this is death to a constitutional republic.
Now, let us admit that there are women, many of them, able to mimic a masculine spirit, and suppress their natural feminine spirit, perhaps permanently.
Such women do not turn into men, they turn into bitches and witches. See Nancy Pelosi for an example.
Masculinized women turn nasty, because of the modest, coy, softness and sweetness of the maiden, the gentle sternness of the mother, and the loving wisdom of the granny, all these are at odds with independence, self-will, masculine forthrightness, masculine pride, masculine honor.
Independence is a warlike trait, not a domestic trait.
Independence is the spirit of rebellion against unjust authority. It is the spirit of the hermit, the mad genius, the innovative poet. It is not the spirit of lovers, of childrearing, or homemaking, of community.
Women indeed are able to reject the feminine spirit. They have free will: They can adopt fighting attitudes and warlike aggressive and competitive courage.
What they cannot adopt is chivalry toward enemies. Compassion, yes; chivalry, no.
But voting in a democracy is based on chivalry: it is the agreement to abide by the decision of the wrong when their party is in the majority, in return for the confidence that they would do the same if you were in the majority. Voting treats the other party as adversaries, not enemies.
The feminine spirit is the spirit of the mother bear protecting her cubs. She only uses violence to kill and destroy, nor to deter and not to make friends and not to settle an argument.
The idea of fighting a scuffle or a schoolyard fight, exchanging black eyes and bleeding lips, and then being friends, is alien to the feminine spirit.
Armistice is also a masculine trope. Guerilla warfare, where no one surrenders even after the standing army can no longer take the field, is a feminine trope. It is sniping from a distance and hiding in the woods. It is not toeing the line and exchanging open blows to the face, each waiting his turn.
To the female spirit, the adversaries are evil. The Democrat party is currently occupied by the female spirit. They think cheating is a perfectly practical way to win. We cannot let Trump get power, can we? Mama Bear is convinced Orange Man might hurt the children, by denying the little ones gender-affirming care.
Women can gain the vote by rejecting the female spirit. The exchange does more harm than good. Female voters create the Democrat party, with all its bleeding hearts and empty heads, its hysteria, and its cheating. Women’s tears are her most powerful weapon: they feel no shame in playing the victim.
I submit that the politics of victimization would have no power in any nation where the female spirit had not occupied the town hall.
Such is the argument against female suffrage.
Note: Any journalist in this country who is not chasing down the Hunter Biden coverup story as laid out in Shapley and other whistleblower testimony is a fraud. This makes Watergate look like a kindergarten play. – Miranda Devine (NY Post)
ID the Aircraft
1
2
Let me mention, I am a girl who has maintained for years the biggest mistake our country ever made was giving women the right to vote. That mistake gave us WW1, JFK, the disastrous finale to Vietnam, Watergate, Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, deadbeat dads, homelessness, single mothers, an outrageous divorce rate, and abortion “rights”, not mention to the explosion of Alphabet People.
Funny how these were all Democrat-led initiatives.
Forgot to add: those Gawd-awful Kardashians!
One of the worst mistakes? FDR.
It is said that men vote with their heads, women with their hearts.
Sigh.
Portugal, Spain, the Netherlands, France, Britain: each lost reserve currency status after about 100 years, with social spending overpromising and a naval battle loss. Only in Britain could women vote, and only for the last 17 years. Women voting changes nothing.
As I read that diatribe against women’s suffrage, I think of the strong, feminine, non-masculinized warrior princesses I know that are opposed to the left and the damage to our republic.
I also think of the weak soy-boys who are as damaging to our nation as the women described.
And the men who support the left.
Yet, overall, it seems a true representation of the situation regarding suffrage.
Exactly. Wright’s argument is too narrowly focused in blaming one versus the other sex. It’s not that simple. I’d put MrsPaulM – tough but feminine – up against any number of modern males who seem to have ingested too much estrogen in their soy latte’s.
👍👌
Larry, now you did it. Surly has a lot of explaining to do to Mrs Surly.
“That mistake gave us WW1…”? Women could not vote before WW1. Suffrage came in 1920, after it ended.
Oops, you are correct. Thanks for catching that.
I find the paragraph beginning “Masculinized men turn nasty” (as written) somewhat confusing; Masculinized women seems to work better, no?
You’re right. I cut and pasted the piece – now it reads better.
Vickers FB5 biplane armed with.303 Lewis gun
Yes on #1
Thoughts on #2?
#2 Nakajima G8N1 Renzan
Yes! Also known to the US as “Rita” or to the Japanese as a Type 18.
I’m afraid that to me, the anti-suffrage argument boils down to “women shouldn’t vote because they won’t vote the way men want them to”.
That doesn’t cut it with me, as I am not a fan of any sort of tyranny. Representative government
is full of flaws, but it is less flawed than anything else we’ve come up with so far.
-Kle.
The piece by John Wright is designed to generate discussion. I don’t think that he’s serious.
In this new modern world of ours ANY off the wall idea (like telling half the population they can’t vote) cannot be automatically put in the “he’s not serious” column.
“Women as property” is not that far back in our society and is still the way the world works for a lot of the world…or so it looks to me.
For the record, I am not a male chauvinist, I’m a realist (the Israeli Military discovered this after “the experiment”). Embrace your role and quit this forced mixing and matching as an approach to everything. While some is fine, HR departments are overloaded with feminine feel good baloney that often generates strife within the organization.
Look at Rick Warren and Saddleback…his “dispute” with The Southern Baptist Convention – basically a club of churches – who say woman should not be teaching pastors, their roles are otherwise. Warren obfuscated his [recently changed] pro-woman as pastors stance with “Are we going to continue arguing “secondary issues””. Probably started with his wife bending his ear. The guy is a moron who just blew up his church over…what exactly?
As for voting, you will never un-clang that bell. What would be more helpful is a significantly better informed electorate, assuming that’s even possible as people rely too heavily on others opinions coming across their phone screen or propagandist MSM outlets…versus, say, rural farmer Horatio Bunce’s pointed, informed, and unwavering comments to Col. Davey Crockett as related to “appropriations” (“Not yours to give”). Look at what just happened with Ford and This Corrupt Administration…loans with strings. That’s our money.
Today The General Public Voter – having been brainwashed into the mindset – uses feelings over substance when voting (he’s black, she’s a woman, abortion, guns, etc.). Rush was right (soccer mom’s, low information voters, etc.), so is Jordan Peterson. So is God….that generally speaking our roles/strengths are ‘X’ and ‘Y’ while being complimentary. Time to reestablish the male/female boundaries as “a fix”.
The second blog post of the day has a piece about genders – there is a lot of unhinged thinking.
Yeah, well, I’m just an old[er] misogynist happily married white man living on a ranch-ette in flyover country…one of those “deplorables”. According to the enlightened few who try to force people into molds of their miserable making my opinion gained from experience and whence I came is to be dismissed as “old hat”.
Sometimes resets are needed, but to undo everything as Wright suggests, is foolish and misguided. The dude seems peeved at woman then fits his argument to that lens.
“I submit that the politics of victimization would have no power in any nation where the female spirit had not occupied the town hall.”
I don’t agree with everything Wright said in his current polemic (nor his writing in general), but the above is key (though I don’t see it as “female spirit” — for lack of a better term I’d call it “vengeful bitch spirit” and some men are supremely vengeful bitches). “Our” culture (hijacked by a tiny minority) now prizes victimhood above all else. And those same people are not ones to let bygones by bygones (nor even to maintain an armed, watchful and suspicious truce). Rather, they clutch their traditions and tales of their suffering to their collective bosom like some sort of monstrous anti-treasure. Why let wounds heal when you can stick the knife in yourself daily, and twist it around to re-experience the trauma so you can revel in how cruelly you’ve been mistreated. Suffer again and again (and based on not even your own personal suffering*), let the hatred and resentment permeate your soul and create your character. It’s deeply sick.
* “but muh Middle Passage!”
Listen, jackass, you grew up in Kenya and the first time anyone in your family set foot in the US was when you got off the plane last year to do your full-scholarship Masters program at Midwestern State University.
I leave other examples to the reader. But you get the idea.
I submit (if I were to synopsize my treatise above) is to strike a balance between the two sexes, assuming that is even possible considering the world around us.
Both sexes are necessary to “run” the world (who am I to argue with God, not that I haven’t a time or two). What we have now (as I am sure men of Suffrage era thought when all this came up) is the melding/mixing/homogenizing of the two, which is a recipe for societal collapse.
I am all for informed voters of any race, sex, joy choosing, to vote. Big thing is “Informed Voters.”
I know several good ‘friends’ of the female persuasion that openly admitted to voting for Bill Clinton because he was ‘better looking.’ These are the same females that think any guy hitting on them is a creeper. So, of course, they voted for a creeper 1st class.
And they also voted for the Half-Whited dud because feelings, while openly attacking Sarah Palen.
Informed voters. Don’t care otherwise. Prove you’re too stupid to understand basic concepts and you shouldn’t vote.
Simple test. Everyone pass a citizen’s test (like people take to become legal citizens) before becoming a voting citizen.
I’d prefer a very strict and comprehensive test for people who want to run for office. The more ignorance they show, the lower the office they qualify for…unless they don’t even hit the minimum. The problem being – who would set up and grade the tests?
👍
Dbl thumbs up.
Wow. This is a great sermon.
“Compassion, yes; chivalry, no.”
Right in the X Ring.
And BSG is awesome.