America's enemy

Our Enemy
 
We are told who are enemy is and that we should be against them.  Why should anyone who has never met a person of the declared enemy country view them as an enemy? 
I have met people who were deemed our enemy and they were just like me.  They wanted a life of happiness.  They wanted a family and a home to raise their children.  They were friendly.  Could I conceivably take a weapon and kill them because my government said they were the enemy?  Would they choose to kill me because my country was deemed the enemy by their country?  Should I kill someone because their ideology is different from mine?  I don’t buy it and wouldn’t participate in any fight unless it was in defense of my life and my family. 
Who is America’s enemy today and why are they designated as such?

There has been progress. In 1707, Scotland became part of the United Kingdom and the boundary between the two countries became an imaginary line (this line between the two countries had moved up and down over the centuries as territory was lost and gained). Since Scottish devolution in 1999, there has been a push towards an independent Scotland. The Irish War of Independence was a geurrilla conflict that began almost a century ago. Scotland's fate will be decided by the ballot box.

England is and always has been regarded as the "Auld Enemy" by the Scots. If a small group of islands the size of the UK cannot live together as one united community, what hope is there for the rest of the world?

Agree, Shelagh.  Politics are the culprit.  Give people a chance to get to know one another, and things change.

9/14/2013

                     Politics is the corruption of all mankind..

                                  Cheers..Joe..

Discussions of war always bring two original Star Trek episodes to mind.  In one, the war was between two races.  One race had the left side of the body dark and the right light and the other race the opposite, which proved to each that they were the superior race because of the side of the light or dark coloring.

Another was a war fought by computer where the side losing, say, 100 people by bombs on the computer screen, had to actually round up a 100 volunteers to agree to death.  It was considered a humane way to end senseless killing .  Only those who agreed to die felt the ravages of war.

And in the second episode you mentioned, Captain Kirk persuaded the enemies to stop by saying that we are all animals who must kill to survive,  We wouldn't be able to adhere to a rule that decreed no killing ever, but we could, as individuas, say, "I will not kill - today."

There was a lot of female body exploitation in those old Star Treks; but women had responsible jobs and made decisions in spite of their clothes.  They were also treated with respect unless the script was otherwise.

The social issues, however, were right on and a great lesson in cultural dilemmas.

And it was rumored that the "T" in James T Kirk stood for Tomcat.

For the 1960's, I think it was very progressive, overall, but, yes, the prevailing attitude of that decade towards women in independent roles was basically demeaning, still.

I actually think it was way ahead of its time.  The set was clumsy, but the ideas in the gadgets were quite modern. 

They very thoroughly explored the idea of enemy and friend, etc. with all its ramifications.

I think Star Trek was progressive, futuristic and not sexist.  To depict reality in any situation is what we want.  Fortunately, we can still see a difference between the sexes.  Take that away and there is an unrealistic void.  Women in Star Trek played an important role. They were not men, yet performed their duties in a superior manner.  Romance still plays a role in books and movies.  Star Trek was no different.  Without some romance, movies would be dull as would be life itself.  Unisex if BS.  We are different and I say, "Viva la Difference"

And how many women were on the bridge in the original TV series?  And how was she dressed?  Was she ever given a "romantic" role?Why was her uniform a mini-skirt instead of a jumpsuit?

I'm afraid your sexism is showing through in your argument, Abe  Especially when you pull out that old "vive la difference" ploy, as if an intelligent woman who expects to be treated with respect is somehow less feminine and "unromantic" because of it.  Competence is not attractive?  A woman is not"romantic" if if she is in a leadership role?  Should she not wear professional attire as she practices her profession?

Women with careers are not trying to be men.It isn't even about having the means to be independent, although that is a part of it.  Being in control of one's own life and having a sense of personal power are parts of it.  Mostly it is about making a valid contribution to the world at large  and having a sense of personal identity based on that contribution.  Modern men are not turned off or threatened by an independent woman's power.  They are turned on by it, actually, and modern women are turned on by modern men.

Today's world is a different world than the one of the early 1960's and masculinity and femininity are no longer defined by such narrow roles.  Today, a woman can be both powerful and feminine at the same time.  It's no longer an either/or situation.  

Power is indeed a potent aphrodisiac.  Vive la difference!

Ann, having read what you posted and have written on other posts when it comes to the sexes, you have created an image in my mind about you as a person.  I have never met you and my impression would most likely change if we met. 
Yes, I am of the old school.  I like women who are feminine.  I am repulsed by men who act feminine.  The same is true of women who try to act masculine.  In business, what is important is intelligence.  How women interact with their male colleagues requires intelligence of a different sort and to get the job done successfully requires compromise.  
We have lived in a male dominated society, especially in business.  Women want to compete in that society and feel they must conform to the role of the male.  That thinking is wrong, in my view.  In the international arena, culture plays a role in business success.  Going against accepted business practices may be a noble undertaking, but result in failure.  Being accepted and trusted is key to a good business relationship.  Women who retain their femininity have an advantage when dealing with men.  Men are polite to women often giving the woman the advantage assuming she is intelligent enough to use it.  The opposite is true when a woman tries to act like a man.

Abe, I sometimes think that you and I are writing in different languages.  In a sense, we clearly are.  I am amazed that what you seem to have read is so opposite to what I wrote.  It is said that our beliefs act as a filter to the "real world."  We may not be speaking different languages, but we obviously do live in different worlds.

Perhaps, if we were to continue the discussion, it might be a good thing to come to common definitions of words like femininity, masculinity, and "romance."

Where did I say that modern men come on as feminine or modern women as masculine?  Where did I say that intelligent businesswomen want to compete or that, even if that was their motive, that they had to act like men in order to do so?

I said that women - feminine women -want to have the means to control their own lives.  Does that make them "masculine"?  I said that women want to have their own identity.  Does that make them "masculine"?  Is a woman's purpose, if she is to remain feminine in your eyes, to submit to a man's authority?

I cannot tell whether you approve of women even being in the "workplace."  Perhaps as secretaries and receptionists?  (which was basically Uhura's job on that Enterprise bridge, BTW)  Are leadership qualities exclusive to makes?  Is being direct a masculine attribute?  Is taking charge of a situation and coming up with a workable solution a masculine trait?

For that matter, should sexuality be brought into the workplace by either men or women?  To dress or behave seductively to me seems unprofessional, and for a man to come on to a female co-worker is legally called harassment.  "Romance" has mo place in the office.  The women and men who work in that office together should be focused on the work rather than on each other.

 What I am hearing you say is that intelligence and leadership capabilities are strictly masculine traits, that women who wish to have independent means are acting like men, and that a man who finds these attributes attractive in a woman lacks masculinity.

I have two daughters and a daughter-in-law, all of whom are highly successful in their careers and all of them have very masculine husbands who are proud of their successes and see them as being quite femininely attractive, in part, because they have their own lives and means, and are not dependent on their husbands.  They come to the relationships as equals, and that makes them even more desirable, not less.  Their "romance" is enhanced by that equality. 

" In business, "  you wrote,  "what is important is intelligence.  How women interact with their male colleagues requires intelligence of a different sort and to get the job done successfully requires compromise."


Intelligence of a different sort?  Different how?  Compromise?  or  deference?     

In the movie, "Cool Hand Luke" the jailer says to Paul Newmann, "What we have here is a failure to communicate" and I think that is the situation here with our posts.
I have obviously failed to communicate if you have failed to comprehend what I meant by what I wrote.
Women of intelligence know what is required to gain respect in business or in any leadership role with male and female subordinates.  If you feel insulted by how you are treated by your associates, the problem is yours if you dwell on it.  Unless one is hired to change a business culture, trying to make that change as the lone ranger leads to failure.  We can only change ourselves and our thinking.  Intelligence of a different sort meant not just intelligence about the technicalities of the job, but human interaction.  Some people are socially inept and just don't fit in.  Being interviewed for higher management, one is normally asked questions, i.e., "Are you a team player?"  What does being a team player mean to you?"  These are just a few of the questions asked.  Others might also include, "Do you go it alone or do you seek help with problems?" How one answers these questions can determine if they get the job.  Asking questions is seen by some as lack of intelligence.  The opposite is true.  Asking questions can mean you are open to suggestions and that you don’t have all the answers. 
As for romance in the workplace, many have found their lifelong partner in the workplace.  You can’t shut off the sex drive or turn off an attraction.  Sexual harassment is not the same thing, in my view. 
I don’t have all the answers either.  I’ve learned much during my lifetime, but still have much to learn.  I accept advice/suggestions from those I respect.  Book learning does not mean a person has all the answers or insight.  A person whose advice comes with experience has more weight in my view.
Ann, we can continue to disagree.  Perhaps we can both learn.

Perhaps, but you are still misreading what I wrote, apparently, because you are addressing a situation that is very different from the one I was referring to, and making assumptions that must reflect your experience and attitude since they have little do do with mine.  I don't see a point in continuing to disagree.  We live in different realities.

Interesting example you started your post with since in "Cool Hand Luke," that jailer was demanding submissive behavior from his prisoner, and, as I remember the film, was willing to beat that submission into him.

Nuff said.

I love this topic because it is such an emotional one, but I think it runs a bit amok from the original thread and it's my fault for bringing in star trek.  I still hold that despite its technical errors and obvious exploitation of the female form and sexuality, it did address social issues that are still relevant today.

We could have a whole new thread on the changing understanding of male and female roles in the western culture - and it would be fun if we could keep our emotions and personal bias in check.

Thinking about the title of this thread and it's original topic, I am reminded ofone of my favorite comic strips, Pogo, and of that now famous line first elucidated by the wise little possum:  "We have met the enemy and they is us."

And, yes, I agree with you completely about the impact of Star Trek.

What is a sexist? Is that a word that means, "Women want men to think like women," or does it mean "Women want to be treated like a man?"
And yes, I know women will reply..."We just want to be treated equal to men." Since male, and female are very different in body, and thinking...how do you do that?

9/26/2013

                 I always found it interesting when women were yelling equal rights years ago,
                when you look back at say women in film, who became famous stars had to do
                it by themselves , yes men ruled the studio system but many female stars tried
               to fight that systemBette Davis didbut she lost, Olivia De Havilland did and she
               won her fight and Marilyn Monroe walked out on Fox for a year till they found out
               she made millions for them and they had to give in...So many women have had the
               balls to stand up tp me for what they wanted..

                                                       Cheers..Joe..

We are our own  worst  enemy.

alice wrote:

We are our own  worst  enemy.

Lol, women have it easy Alice. Women don't have to deal with the scorn of a man...a man has to run, and hide from the scorn of a women. Some times we even have to sleep with one eye open...women should try that some time, it's hard.

10/15/2013

                And yes sex is used as a weapon by women, ask any man and they'll tell you.


                                               Cheers......Joe.........

You should get to know women from Europe Joe, very different from American women.

I also believe American men come out second best to men of Europe when it comes to treatment of women.

(As I wave my Italian Passport.)

I agree that equality is a hot button.  However, the simple statement:  treat others as you wish to be treated is useful here to help with the difficulties.

All humans wish to be treated with respect, have the same opportunities for self-expression through a career and through their choices for life partners, have their pay determined by the nature of the work rather than their gender, and a long list of similar things that are not so esoteric when one looks at ones own choices for a quality life and then understand that both genders want similar opportunities.

I think before American women get what they ask for, they should start helping women in other parts of the world who are forced to live a life lower than a dog. Rather than trying to climb up the ladder to be equal, reach down, and help other women below you.