"Diversity is not our strength": Cincy's own Ramaswamy 2024!

[GMDino]

Oh.  

.@VivekGRamaswamy thinks the only help a single mom needs is to get married and have a man in the house.

Not higher wages, child care, or affordable housing. A man. pic.twitter.com/1gKslMTbLx

— American Bridge 21st Century (@American_Bridge) September 10, 2023

 

They really do want it to be the 1950's.  Well, at least the television version.

[LSUfaninTN]

(09-10-2023, 08:47 PM)GMDino Wrote: Oh.  

.@VivekGRamaswamy thinks the only help a single mom needs is to get married and have a man in the house.

Not higher wages, child care, or affordable housing. A man. pic.twitter.com/1gKslMTbLx

— American Bridge 21st Century (@American_Bridge) September 10, 2023

 

They really do want it to be the 1950's.  Well, at least the television version.

Being raised in a single mother household is an undeniable obstacle. It’s certainly not insurmountable, but an obstacle nonetheless. The left has made it “bigoted and sexist” to point this out. 70% of kids in juvenile detention centers are from single mother households. 60% of rapists come from single mother homes. 60% of teen suicides, 70% of drug abusers and alcoholics, 80% of all prison inmates, and 90% of the homeless are from single mother households. I’ve been to rehab twice (85 days sober, hell yeah!). I kid you not, al most everyone came from a single mother household. I was in a cabin of 12 people. 10 of them from single mother households. Almost all of them had been in trouble with the law at some point, some even a decade plus in prison. Hell, I watched a guy get arrested by 10 ATF cars when I was there. That’s an anecdote but still pretty crazy. The fact that the left especially ignores all of this is mindblowing but pretty par for the course for them. Let’s just pay them more than men, that would solve everything. 

The gender pay gap is also highly exaggerated and not just due to gender. Not saying it doesn’t exist in some capacity, but this notion that you would solve all problems by raising their hourly wage by a few dollars… it’s just stupid. Really stupid. Not to mention, pay is almost identical up until around age 27. Career choices also play a factor. Even in Scandinavia, arguably the most “gender progressive” place on earth, women tend to gravitate toward jobs that involve working with people, men working with things. Hours per week (women average 35, men average 40) also do. Again, the left is just incapable of conducting a multi variable analysis. 

When he says diversity is not our strength — I take that to mean, stop insisting that every group of people in schools, businesses, movies… etc, HAVE to have different color skin (unless it’s all black, then diversity ceases to matter). The ones who make diversity such a big deal are almost ALWAYS talking about skin color. That’s not a strength in and of itself. Diversity of ideas, backgrounds, perspective… THAT’S a strength, but no one gives a shit about that these days. China is kicking our asses right now, they have no diversity. On the other hand, you can even argue that the way the left prioritizes diversity is actually a weakness, because over time, if you separate people into groups (notice how 90% of black Americans feel compelled to vote democratic), they eventually form tribes (you will not change 250,000 years of human evolution which has always done this) and get pissed off at each other. Diversity of skin color and naturally forming factions in this country, is currently leading to a lack of unity, in which case it becomes a weakness. What do you think the culture war is about now? 

[Dill]

(09-10-2023, 08:47 PM)GMDino Wrote: Oh.  

They really do want it to be the 1950's.  Well, at least the television version.

At least we are back to actual conservatism. 

This version of "family values" was one of the themes of George Gilder's Wealth and Poverty (1981). 

That was back when divorce was still a negative for politicians (though Reagan overcame the stigma). 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-11-2023, 01:26 AM)LSUfaninTN Wrote: Being raised in a single mother household is an undeniable obstacle. It’s certainly not insurmountable, but an obstacle nonetheless. The left has made it “bigoted and sexist” to point this out. 70% of kids in juvenile detention centers are from single mother households. 60% of rapists come from single mother homes. 60% of teen suicides, 70% of drug abusers and alcoholics, 80% of all prison inmates, and 90% of the homeless are from single mother households. I’ve been to rehab twice (85 days sober, hell yeah!). I kid you not, al most everyone came from a single mother household. I was in a cabin of 12 people. 10 of them from single mother households. Almost all of them had been in trouble with the law at some point, some even a decade plus in prison. Hell, I watched a guy get arrested by 10 ATF cars when I was there. That’s an anecdote but still pretty crazy. The fact that the left especially ignores all of this is mindblowing but pretty par for the course for them. Let’s just pay them more than men, that would solve everything. 

The gender pay gap is also highly exaggerated and not just due to gender. Not saying it doesn’t exist in some capacity, but this notion that you would solve all problems by raising their hourly wage by a few dollars… it’s just stupid. Really stupid. Not to mention, pay is almost identical up until around age 27. Career choices also play a factor. Even in Scandinavia, arguably the most “gender progressive” place on earth, women tend to gravitate toward jobs that involve working with people, men working with things. Hours per week (women average 35, men average 40) also do. Again, the left is just incapable of conducting a multi variable analysis. 

When he says diversity is not our strength — I take that to mean, stop insisting that every group of people in schools, businesses, movies… etc, HAVE to have different color skin (unless it’s all black, then diversity ceases to matter). The ones who make diversity such a big deal are almost ALWAYS talking about skin color. That’s not a strength in and of itself. Diversity of ideas, backgrounds, perspective… THAT’S a strength, but no one gives a shit about that these days. China is kicking our asses right now, they have no diversity. On the other hand, you can even argue that the way the left prioritizes diversity is actually a weakness, because over time, if you separate people into groups (notice how 90% of black Americans feel compelled to vote democratic), they eventually form tribes (you will not change 250,000 years of human evolution which has always done this) and get pissed off at each other. Diversity of skin color and naturally forming factions in this country, is currently leading to a lack of unity, in which case it becomes a weakness. What do you think the culture war is about now? 

Interestingly, children from single parent households in which the father is the parent fair much better.

https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/2001/07/09/study-children-fare-better-with-divorced-dads-factors-besides-income-were-of-benefit-to-fathers/62139586007/

Historically, there is only one reason such a claim might be made - a father's higher income. No doubt it's true, single fathers with custody tend to make more money than single mothers. In fact, they tend to make more money than the average father.



But Farrell discovered that even when the father and mother had equal income, the children who were with their father full time - boys and girls - did better than those with their moms full time.



Overall, children living with dads were less likely to have discipline problems. Does this mean that dads were more likely to resort to physical punishment? No. Moms were. And they used physical discipline more frequently. Nevertheless, children living with their moms were more likely to exhibit frequent temper tantrums.


This is from a study by Dr. Warren Farrell, from his book Father and Child Reunion.  I guess the dismissal of the importance of fathers has had some unintended consequences.

[*Nately120*]

(09-10-2023, 08:47 PM)GMDino Wrote: Oh.  

.@VivekGRamaswamy thinks the only help a single mom needs is to get married and have a man in the house.

Not higher wages, child care, or affordable housing. A man. pic.twitter.com/1gKslMTbLx

— American Bridge 21st Century (@American_Bridge) September 10, 2023

 

They really do want it to be the 1950's.  Well, at least the television version.

I've never been strong enough emotionally, spiritually, morally, or financially to take on the responsibility of building a life with a woman who already has kids, but now I have a good excuse not to thanks to the "everyone is a pedophile" culture this country has taken. 

[*pally*]

It always comes back to forcing the woman into situations that Republicans prefer. They live in a fantasy world that didn't exist then and doesn't exist know and won't exist in the future.

why doesn't he require any man who impregnates a woman and doesn't pay child support to get a vasectomy with the first missed check? Let's require that a married man divorce his wife to marry his pregnant girlfriend. Let's let the incarcerated dude out of jail so he can support his family. Let's ignore the effects of the abusive husband because after all single motherhood is worse than watching her get beaten.

In the meantime, let's force the woman who knows she is not ready to be a parent physically, emotionally, or financially to have a child and then fail to offer assistance just because she doesn't have a man in the house

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-11-2023, 06:51 PM)pally Wrote: It always comes back to forcing the woman into situations that Republicans prefer.  They live in a fantasy world that didn't exist then and doesn't exist know and won't exist in the future.

Examples?  We all understand abortion will be here, but what else?

Quote:why doesn't he require any man who impregnates a woman and doesn't pay child support to get a vasectomy with the first missed check?

Probably for the same reason we don't force a woman on welfare with multiple kids to get a tubal ligation after she gets pregnant again.

 

Quote:Let's require that a married man divorce his wife to marry his pregnant girlfriend.

 
Are married women who get pregnant via an affair required to divorce their husband and marry the new father?  Smells like a false equivalency.

Quote:Let's let the incarcerated dude out of jail so he can support his family.

Are imprisoned women who are incarcerated released so they can care for their family?  Another false equivalency.

 

Quote:Let's ignore the effects of the abusive husband because after all single motherhood is worse than watching her get beaten.

Huh?  Who is advocating for that, or anything similar?  False equivalency.

Quote:In the meantime, let's force the woman who knows she is not ready to be a parent physically, emotionally, or financially to have a child and then fail to offer assistance just because she doesn't have a man in the house

If you'd confined your post to the issue of abortion it would have actually made sense.  Instead you engaged in a slew of false equivalencies that did nothing but obscure your point.

[Dill]

(09-11-2023, 06:51 PM)pally Wrote: It always comes back to forcing the woman into situations that Republicans prefer.  They live in a fantasy world that didn't exist then and doesn't exist know and won't exist in the future.

why doesn't he require any man who impregnates a woman and doesn't pay child support to get a vasectomy with the first missed check?  Let's require that a married man divorce his wife to marry his pregnant girlfriend.  Let's let the incarcerated dude out of jail so he can support his family.  Let's ignore the effects of the abusive husband because after all single motherhood is worse than watching her get beaten.

In the meantime, let's force the woman who knows she is not ready to be a parent physically, emotionally, or financially to have a child and then fail to offer assistance just because she doesn't have a man in the house

I think the bolded is kind of an important point. One of the many negatives from shifting the emphasis from education to incarceration back in the '80s, followed by three strikes laws in many states. 

[*pally*]

(09-11-2023, 07:53 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Examples?  We all understand abortion will be here, but what else?



Probably for the same reason we don't force a woman on welfare with multiple kids to get a tubal ligation after she gets pregnant again.

 
 
Are married women who get pregnant via an affair required to divorce their husband and marry the new father?  Smells like a false equivalency.



Are imprisoned women who are incarcerated released so they can care for their family?  Another false equivalency.

 

Huh?  Who is advocating for that, or anything similar?  False equivalency.


If you'd confined your post to the issue of abortion it would have actually made sense.  Instead you engaged in a slew of false equivalencies that did nothing but obscure your point.

you can nitpick all you want, however, the point remains, that the only solution Vivek can come up with is to force the woman into an unwanted marriage.  If she doesn't get married she loses government benefits.  The guy doesn't marry her...nothing happens.  When will politicians look at the other half of the pregnancy equation?  For every single mother on her own, there is a single deadbeat father living it up making more babies.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-11-2023, 08:36 PM)Dill Wrote: I think the bolded is kind of an important point. One of the many negatives from shifting the emphasis from education to incarceration back in the '80s, followed by three strikes laws in many states. 

In order to end up in state prison you have to have committed several felonies.  No one ends up in prison for their first felony, unless it is a very serious one e.g. murder, rape, arson, assault with a firearm etc.  A child is far better off not being raised by a criminal, and their obvious influences, than to not have them around at all.

(09-11-2023, 09:58 PM)pally Wrote: you can nitpick all you want, however, the point remains, that the only solution Vivek can come up with is to force the woman into an unwanted marriage.  If she doesn't get married she loses government benefits.  The guy doesn't marry her...nothing happens.  When will politicians look at the other half of the pregnancy equation?  For every single mother on her own, there is a single deadbeat father living it up making more babies.

A much better argument then your string of false equivalencies.  Being pro-choice I'm not a fan of such ideas, but you do your position no favor when you compare them to the examples you put forth.  Also, your last sentence is patently untrue, given that men are far less likely to be given full or joint custody of children, even when the mother is obviously an unfit parent.

I do have a counter point though.  Would you be in favor of abortion access for women, but men get to decide if they want to have anything to do with the child?  Meaning a woman can get an abortion or not, and a man can decide to have absolutely nothing to do with said child, financially or in any other manner.

[LSUfaninTN]

(09-11-2023, 05:22 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Interestingly, children from single parent households in which the father is the parent fair much better.

https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/2001/07/09/study-children-fare-better-with-divorced-dads-factors-besides-income-were-of-benefit-to-fathers/62139586007/

Historically, there is only one reason such a claim might be made - a father's higher income. No doubt it's true, single fathers with custody tend to make more money than single mothers. In fact, they tend to make more money than the average father.



But Farrell discovered that even when the father and mother had equal income, the children who were with their father full time - boys and girls - did better than those with their moms full time.



Overall, children living with dads were less likely to have discipline problems. Does this mean that dads were more likely to resort to physical punishment? No. Moms were. And they used physical discipline more frequently. Nevertheless, children living with their moms were more likely to exhibit frequent temper tantrums.


This is from a study by Dr. Warren Farrell, from his book Father and Child Reunion.  I guess the dismissal of the importance of fathers has had some unintended consequences.

You raise a good point. I don’t know if I’ve seen statistics, ever, of single father families. Maybe that’s because the courts usually side with the mother. I’ve sadly seen first hand with my girlfriend, whose baby daddy has been almost entirely out of the picture, what a difference a male authority figure in the house makes. As a separate issue, I do worry about her. She hasn’t been taught to deal with or respect male authority figures, which poses a problem with a mostly male police force as well as bosses of companies… etc. 

[Dill]

(09-11-2023, 10:30 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: In order to end up in state prison you have to have committed several felonies.  No one ends up in prison for their first felony, unless it is a very serious one e.g. murder, rape, arson, assault with a firearm etc.  A child is far better off not being raised by a criminal, and their obvious influences, than to not have them around at all.

If "them" refers to the "criminal," I think that is generally how most people who favor increased incarceration look at it. 

So for them, family break up wouldn't really register as a serious consequence of incarceration. 

Nor would they link it to future consequences, I guess on the assumption that children from single-parent homes are less likely to become offenders themselves if they are in a single-parent home because a "criminal" parent is in prison. 

[Dill]

(09-11-2023, 10:31 PM)LSUfaninTN Wrote: You raise a good point. I don’t know if I’ve seen statistics, ever, of single father families. Maybe that’s because the courts usually side with the mother. I’ve sadly seen first hand with my girlfriend, whose baby daddy has been almost entirely out of the picture, what a difference a male authority figure in the house makes. As a separate issue, I do worry about her. She hasn’t been taught to deal with or respect male authority figures, which poses a problem with a mostly male police force as well as bosses of companies… etc. 

What is "male authority"? 

E.g., One city has a female mayor, another has a male. Each has a kind of authority. 

But the male has something extra? He is a "male authority figure" as well as a mayoral one?

[LSUfaninTN]

(09-11-2023, 11:13 PM)Dill Wrote: What is "male authority"? 

E.g., One city has a female major, another has a male. Each has a kind of authority. 

But the male has something extra? Is a "male authority figure" too? 

Male authority. That’s what it is. 

It’s different. She doesn’t know how to respond to male figures because she’s never had one. I do not know why that is hard to understand. Kids respond differently to women vs men. There are numerous studies that show children at a young age trust women more than men typically. Big reason why kindergarten / elementary school teachers are almost entirely women.

[Dill]

(09-11-2023, 11:15 PM)LSUfaninTN Wrote: Male authority. That’s what it is. 

It’s different. She doesn’t know how to respond to male figures because she’s never had one. I do not know why that is hard to understand. Kids respond differently to women vs men. There are numerous studies that show children at a young age trust women more than men typically. Big reason why kindergarten / elementary school teachers are almost entirely women.

So there is something intrinsically different about male or female authority? 

Sorry, this still isn't very clear to me. Do children at a young age trust women because women lack male authority? 

More women teachers in lower grades because . . .? How does that connect to male authority? 

To me it just sounds like you are describing someone who didn't have many important men in her life.
So she doesn't relate easily to them. 

But you seem to imply she should be respecting them for being male, or something. I'm not sure.
 
Or that men have or should have an extra authority that women do not, but should recognize. They'll have "problems" if they don't.

You are not speaking simply of "males in authority," but "male authority," something different, right? 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-11-2023, 11:07 PM)Dill Wrote: If "them" refers to the "criminal," I think that is generally how most people who favor increased incarceration look at it.

You mean people with common sense? 

Quote:So for them, family break up wouldn't really register as a serious consequence of incarceration. 

You know what, you've convinced me.  Keep the murderer or rapist at home to raise their kids.  The consequences will be far less severe.  The modern far left left is amazingly incoherent.

Quote:Nor would they link it to future consequences, I guess on the assumption that children from single-parent homes are less likely to become offenders themselves if they are in a single-parent home because a "criminal" parent is in prison. 

There are certainly consequences to being raised in a single parent household, especially when the parent is the mother as previously demonstrated.  That's not the question.  The question is whether the consequence is outweighed by keeping a major criminal off the street to victimize the community and inflict damage upon their family.  Thus far you've made no attempt to actually make an argument in either direction.  So, typical.

[Dill]

(09-11-2023, 11:29 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You mean people with common sense? 

You know what, you've convinced me.  Keep the murderer or rapist at home to raise their kids.  The consequences will be far less severe.  The modern far left left is amazingly incoherent.

There are certainly consequences to being raised in a single parent household, especially when the parent is the mother as previously demonstrated.  That's not the question.  The question is whether the consequence is outweighed by keeping a major criminal off the street to victimize the community and inflict damage upon their family.  Thus far you've made no attempt to actually make an argument in either direction.  So, typical.

I "typically" don't "make an argument in either direction"? Yet I "convinced" you of something? 

The "modern far left"--whatever that is--is for keeping "the murderer or rapist at home"?  

You didn't get that from my post. You added it from another source? Got a link, maybe? Off topic but I'm curious.

[*pally*]

(09-11-2023, 11:13 PM)Dill Wrote: What is "male authority"? 

E.g., One city has a female mayor, another has a male. Each has a kind of authority. 

But the male has something extra? He is a "male authority figure" as well as a mayoral one?

The whole “male authority” thing reminds me of a famous description of good coaches…they are “leader of men” like it takes a special skill or is some great special accomplishment to lead men as opposed to simply being a leader. It’s a stupid line and so is separating male and female authority.

Children are taught how to respond to authority in general. Teachers, police officers, parents, etc. if they fail to respond appropriately to men it generally means the adult in their life is teaching them that by words or actions.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-12-2023, 01:04 AM)Dill Wrote: I "typically" don't "make an argument in either direction"? Yet I "convinced" you of something? 

The "modern far left"--whatever that is--is for keeping "the murderer or rapist at home"?  

You didn't get that from my post. You added it from another source? Got a link, maybe? Off topic but I'm curious.

Typically nonsensical. Thank you for giving me a quick out.  Sincerely.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-11-2023, 11:15 PM)LSUfaninTN Wrote: Male authority. That’s what it is. 

It’s different. She doesn’t know how to respond to male figures because she’s never had one. I do not know why that is hard to understand. Kids respond differently to women vs men. There are numerous studies that show children at a young age trust women more than men typically. Big reason why kindergarten / elementary school teachers are almost entirely women.

(09-12-2023, 01:35 AM)pally Wrote: The whole “male authority” thing reminds me of a famous description of good coaches…they are “leader of men” like it takes a special skill or is some great special accomplishment to lead men as opposed to simply being a leader.  It’s a stupid line and so is separating male and female authority.  

Children are taught how to respond to authority in general. Teachers, police officers, parents, etc. if they fail to respond appropriately to men it generally means the adult in their life is teaching them that by words or actions.

Pally, I'm sorry but you're completely disconnected from reality on this one.  There is absolutely a difference between male and female authority, especially when we're speaking in relation to child development.  One of the largest obstacles to male development is a lack of male role models.  As we've already discussed single parent families tend to be the mother rather than the father.  What sex are most teachers, especially at the elementary level, female.  By the time a male hits adolescence, and the real challenges begin, he's probably had nothing but a slew of female authority figures.  Not one positive man in his life to model his behavior off of.  Couple that with the natural resentment many single parent children have towards their parent for "driving off the other parent" again usually the father, and you have a perfect recipe for a dysfunctional male who resents, possibly even despises, female authority.