|
Home > Archive > General Discussion > November 2003 > A First Lesson Plan
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
A First Lesson Plan
|
|
| Jesus Christ 2003-11-25, 1:46 pm |
| I am very pleased to report that I have just filled the last and remaining vacancy that existed on my faculty. I hired him this morning, and he starts Monday.
The gentleman I hired will be teaching the very subject I used to teach myself.
American History.
Since our school year already started two weeks ago, this was an emergency hire. He has not yet completed all of his certification requirements.
However, he has pledged to do so within a reasonable timetable. What impressed me about this candidate was his background. He used to play professional football for the New York Jets before a knee injury ended his
career.
I can use a man like him as one of our assistant coaches, an extra duty which
he has gladly accepted. As an administrator, I like to keep my priorities straight.
About a half hour after I told him he was my man, he asked for my advice on a good lesson plan to use when he starts Monday. After giving this some thought, I finally decided to give him a copy of one of my own historical essays and let him design his own lesson from this source.
I found a spare copy in my filing cabinet and handed it to him. As he read through this essay, his face lit up. "Right on!" he said. "I can really get into a lesson plan like this. I can't wait to try it."
I knew I hired the right man. The one thing I look for when I interview candidates for a teaching position is that twinkle in their eye. This guy definitely had it, as well as a great attitude to boot.
Without further ado, I herewith submit a copy of the essay which will be the
basis for my new's teacher's first lesson this coming Monday:
ON WOMEN AND LEADERSHIP
Like most men, I love women.
I love them just as much as the next man and probably more than most. Not only more, but probably a lot better than most, if I don't say so myself.
And also according to most of the women I date. However, it is my considered opinion that the feminine psyche is not suited for
most positions of serious leadership. Elementary school teachers and school
librarians are about as high up as most of them should go.
My opinion enjoys the backing of some of the greatest thinkers in history. For example, let us ponder the following quote from Alexis de Tocqueville, the first political theorist from postmodern America, which appeared in his Democracy In America (1835).
"There are people from Europe, who, confounding together the different
characteristics from the sexes, would make man and women into beings not only equal but alike. They would give to both the same functions, impose on both the same duties, and grant to both the same rights; they would mix them in all things--their occupations, their pleasures, their business."
"It may be readily conceived that by thus attempting to make one sex equal to
the other, both are degraded, and from so preposterous a medley of the works of
nature, nothing could ever result but weak men and disorderly women."
His vision was most prophetic, indeed. The fiasco of feminism has created an unholy eradication of traditional gender role boundaries. Many men have forgotten how to conduct themselves as men and have become sissies instead.
Many women have rejected the feminine roles that our Creator gave them. For a clear example of the "disorderly women" that de Tocqueville spoke of, one has to look no further than some their rantings on many of our internet newsgroups and message boards.
It was only a decade later when de Tocqueville's vision began to materialize
into the nightmare that it has become today. In July of 1848, the Women's Rights Convention was held in Seneca Falls, New York.
It was here that the suffrage movement was born. Elizabeth Cady Stanton put forth her Declaration Of Sentiments, which officially expressed the goal of seeking the voting enfranchisement of women.
It is also significant that also in 1848, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels published The Communist Manifeso in Europe. Both of these works spoke out vehemently in support of abolishing the tradition of our patriarchal family structures. Both works advocated the use of government force and power to
achieve their ends.
Fast forward to about 70 years later. In 1917, we saw the Bolshevik takeover in Russia.
In 1920, the 19th Ammendment was passed, giving voting rights to all women in
America.
It is crystal clear that these two events were governed by parallel and
synchronistic forces.
Those who doubt this are encouraged to study the life of Aleksandra Kollantai,
a Russian revolutionary, who visited New York City in 1916 to edit the communist publication, Now Mir.
Indeed, in the fateful year of 1917, she returned to Russia to participate in
the Bolshevik revolution. Kollantai was known as an advocate of free and
promiscuous sexual behavior, serving as one of the earliest embodiments of the
correlation that exists between feminism and sexual immorality.
Contrary to popular opinion, there were a number of women who did speak out and
fought against the suffrage movement. A notable example is cited by the thoughtful words of Ella Winston in her enlightening article: Foibles Of The New Woman (1896). Following is an excerpt from her article:
"When a woman revolts against her normal functions and sphere of action, desiring instead to upsurp man's prerogatives, she entails upon herself the inevitable penalty of such irregular conduct, and while losing the womanliness for which she apparently scorns, fails to attain the manliness for which she strives."
Elihu Root was one of the most famous men in America at the turn of the century. He held such positions as Secretary of State, Secretary of War, and U.S. Senator from New York. His clarity and manliness stands in sharp contrast to many of our modern military leaders today, who shamefully advocate that women be allowed to serve as fighter pilots.
In 1915, he wrote the following to Alice Chittendon, president of the New York
State Anti-Suffrage Association:
"Suffrage, if it means anything, means entering upon the field of political
life, and politics is modified war. In politics, there is struggle, strife,
contention, bitterness, heart-burning, excitement, agitation, and everything
else which is adverse to the true character of women. A woman in strife becomes hard, harsh, unlovable, and repulsive."
Prophetic words, indeed. He must have had a vision of a future U.S. Senator from New York. Hillary Rodham Clinton. America started going downhill fast when women got the vote. A lot of men allowed themselves to become emasculated and started listening to women instead of leading them.
The creation of our modern welfare state followed shortly thereafter. Men became weak and women became disorderly, just as de Tocqueville had predicted.
America became weak militarily because it had become feminized.
For a clear example, take a look at Jeanette Rankin. She was the first woman to serve in the U.S. Congress and the only member to vote against our entry into both World War I and World War II.
Her anti-war stand actually got her defeated in 1919. However, she was later reelected in 1941, but only served one term, once again for her anti-war views.
Rankin was the only person in Congress to vote against the United States entering World War II after Pearl Harbor. Even JFK said of Miss Rankin: "She was a blind isolationist and an impractical pacifist who refused to recognize the harsh realities of world conflict and national security."
Admiral Bradley Fiske was a prominent leader and writer in America. In a speech in 1925, he charged that the effeminization of the United States was responsible for the state of unpreparedness with which we entered World War I.
He described Germany, Russia, and Japan as strong and virile nations, and England, France, and the United States as effeminized. When asked how our country can return to its former state of virility, he replied:
"Nothing can be done, or if it can, I don't know what it is. No man respects and admires woman more than I do, but many women have faults and the fault most commonly found is a seemingly insatiable desire to interfere in matters they do not understand."
This is a theme which is constantly reaffirmed throughout our history. For a
modern example, one only needs to be reminded that the attorney who lost the
O.J. Simpson case was a woman.
It is no coincidence that we were asleep at
Pearl Harbor. Years later, we lost half of Korea. As feminism continued to infect our society like the insidious cancer that it is, we wound up losing Vietnam entirely.
For a most recent example of the harm that suffrage has wrought, we can look at
the presidential election of 1996. For the first time in our nation's history, the exit polls showed that men alone would have elected a different candidate than women alone.
Men chose Dole 44% to 43%. Women chose Clinton 54% to 37%. As a result, we
had to endure another four years under the "leadership" of the very man who let
Osama Bin Laden get away.
Then two years ago, Bin Laden inflicted the
most horrendous terrorist attack in our nation's history, right on our home soil.
Indeed, it is tragic that many feminists are in denial when acknowledging the proper role of subervience for their gender. It is not a curse. Instead, it is both their birthright and their blessing.
The old adage that "a woman's place is in the home" does not diminish her significance. To the contrary, it is a divine confirmation and exhaltation of
her highest calling.
It is an unfortunate exercise of gender role misalignment when a woman chooses to competiively pursue a traditionally male oriented career. Men and women were not meant to compete against each other. Instead, they were meant to complement each other.
Indeed, the shameful comingling of both sexes in the rightful male domains of
war and politics has only led to the debasement of the God given gender purity
to which women were divinely annointed.
In closing this essay, I shall end with another quotation; this one from
President Theodore Roosevelt during his address to the Mothers' Meeting in
Washington D.C., in 1905:
"The call to women to leave her duty to take up man's duties is an impossible call. The call on man to impose on women his duty, in addition to hers, is an unjust call. Fathers, hustands, brothers, speaking for the silent women, I claim for them the right to be exempt in the future from the burden from which they have been exempt in the past."
"Mothers, wives, sisters, I urge you not to allow yourselves to be enticed into
functions for which you have no inclination, by appeals to your spirit of self-sacrifice. A woman's instinct is the star that guides her to the divinely appointed life, and it guides her to the manger where an infant is laid." | |
| Papiya 2003-11-25, 2:09 pm |
| Have you ever considered relocating to Saudi Arabia? | |
| mindmesh 2003-11-25, 3:03 pm |
| quote:
Originally posted by Papiya
Have you ever considered relocating to Saudi Arabia?
Or migrating to the year 2003? And if 2003 is a stretch at least get out of the 1800's. | |
| ClintonN 2003-11-25, 3:09 pm |
| How did you find this site anyway? | |
| Papiya 2003-11-25, 3:12 pm |
| quote:
Originally posted by ClintonN
How did you find this site anyway?
A google search for "sinners" perhaps. | |
| ClintonN 2003-11-25, 3:13 pm |
| Amen | |
| mindmesh 2003-11-25, 3:15 pm |
| quote:
Originally posted by Papiya
A google search for "sinners" perhaps.
Just glad it didn't give him my home number! | |
| Jesus Christ 2003-11-25, 4:34 pm |
| quote:
Originally posted by ClintonN
How did you find this site anyway?
Naturally, being an educator, I am always on the lookout fo educational sites. | |
| HOOLIGAN 2003-11-26, 1:25 am |
| Teaching American history cant be too difficult, can it? I mean what, like only 200 hundred or so years worth? and even then it wasnt like much happened before the Civil war.
American history teacher ( easy life ). | |
| curiousgeorge 2003-11-26, 1:32 am |
| Nothing like politics to bring a group together!
I must have ADD, because I lost interest in the post after three paragraphs.
Keep the satire a little shorter next time. | |
| peterd 2003-11-26, 3:53 am |
| Hi Guys,
I think that JC is really von Daniken in disguise...
Regards
Peter | |
| Papiya 2003-11-26, 7:50 am |
| Why do I get the feeling that Jesus is actually a liberal posing as a conservative to make them look stupider than they actually are?
By the way, this idot posts on usenet as Arthur Claude Munyan, Sr. Do a search and you'll fing a lot of similarly insipid ideas from the distinguished principal. | |
| freak 2003-11-26, 11:41 pm |
| he must have been visiting THIS SITE before he posted that crap!  |
|
|
|
|