Female Athletics

There is this Extreme Right Wing wesbite called http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/ and it has a REALLY STUPID article that is against females participation in sports

http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/article_1574.shtml

1) Why should girls who like to play sports not play them? Let them enjoy sports!

2) This article, printed by fundamental Christians promotes the same mentality as those Islamic Fascists we're supposed to be fighting. This goes to show that the main difference between Christian Fascists and Islamic Fascists is the languages they speak and the clothes they wear.

3) This is what I wrote to those "ladies against feminism"

Conservatives complain about teenage pregnancy, but female athletes ARE A LOT LESS LIKELY to get pregnant early than other women. Why? THEY HAVE AN INCENTIVE NOT TO GET PREGNANT EARLY! Also, girls who do well in academics are also ARE A LOT LESS LIKELY to get pregnant early than other women. Why? THEY HAVE AN INCENTIVE NOT TO GET PREGNANT EARLY!

INCENTIVES MATTER! You can quote all the holy verses you want, but most teenage minds will just tune out! YOU NEED TO HAVE PRAGMATIC INCENTIVES!

Most of the girls who get pregnant early are the ones who 1) are don't doing good in academics OR 2) not playing any sports. Those who fit both those categories see no real incentive to remain abstinent, because they have no plans for the future. Their mentality is "ANYTHING GOES!"

And that is true, even among girls from extremely conservative families! My grandma grew up in an extremely conservative Catholic family in the World War 2 era, (in other words BEFORE the era of Elvis, the "decadent 1960's", 2 Live Crew, or the Pussycat Dolls) and she still got pregnant at 14. If she was more focused on academics or athletics, she would've stayed abstinent during her teenage years!

Plus, why do some people care so much if someone isn't 100% masculine or 100% feminine! It's supposed to be a non-issue in a place that emphasizes freedom. Let people figure it out for themselves how masculine or feminine they want to be!

But to the Conservative Correctness Crowd, the only freedom that matters is 1) low tax rates and 2) the right to make the most bigoted comments. Nothing else matters!

4) The Radical Feminists are whining because some female athletes are posing nude in magazines.

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0035,cagan,17748,3.html

"There are just a lot of men there, including, I'm sure, in the newsroom, who just kind of resent women's success," says Linda Steiner, associate professor and chair of the department of journalism and media studies at Rutgers University. "And so to sexualize her and sort of treat her as a pinup is a way of cutting women down to size."

The women who've posed, and their supporters, argue that the pictures are part of a revolution in women's sports. They say that the photos aren't mostly about sex, they're mostly about strength and confidence. They parry with the non sequitur, emphasizing the intelligence and independent thought of the bare-naked ladies. And, surprise surprise, some say that critics are a bunch of moralistic, uptight, you guessed it, feminists. "This is not a calendar of bimbos," Acuff has repeatedly said. "These are intelligent, world-class athletes. One of them is a Rhodes scholar." Acuff hasn't since explained the correlation -- hasn't she ever heard of smart women, foolish choices? -- but others have echoed her contention.

In a *Washington Post* column defending Thompson's pose, sportswriter Sally Jenkins argued that Thompson is "a 27-year-old of serious intellect, a Stanford graduate on her way to medical school." She also took critics to task as "sports prudes and creaking, old-school feminists."

Those Radical Feminists need to spend more time fighting against those already-mentioned "Ladies Against Feminism" instead of whining about female athletes posing nude! After all, Dennis Rodman posed nude in his book cover, and the feminists weren't complaining

So why are female athletes posing nude? Females have non-conscious, natural desire to attract males! If it means exposing a few body parts, they'll do it. That's nature. It doesn't matter if the female is an athlete, artist, entertainer, librarian, doctor, etc. They're just doing what females do naturally.

It's just like how guys like boast about how much muscle and strength he has. And it's not just the 6 foot 5in. athletes, even the short guys try to emphasize their muscle strength to make up for their lack of height. Even guys who work in the office (which usually requires NO MUSCLE STRENGTH AT ALL), try to emphasize their toughness and masculinity when their job doesn't require it. But the biological-male-in-them "has to" emphasize their toughness, in order to command respect and (drumroll please) attract the females.

Hyphenated-Americans

Anti-immigration fascists love to quote 26th president Theodore Roosevelt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyphenated_American

The term "hyphenated American" was popularized in the 1910s by President Theodore Roosevelt, responding to the increasing fractionalization within the nation along ethnic lines. In an October 12, 1915 speech to the Knights of Columbus,

Roosevelt said,"There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all. ... The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic. ... There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else."

--------------------

What Roosevelt said was VERY STUPID!

Let's say someone calls themselves "Irish-American", "Mexican-American", "African-American" or "Korean-American", etc.

That person is

1) acknowledging the heritage of their ancestors

AND

2) also acknowledging their participating in American culture.

----

The idea that" someone who is paying respect to their ancestor's culture isn't a real American" is a stupid idea!

The idea of being an American is celebrating freedom and individuality. So that means someone can embrace parts of their ancestor's culture AND parts of mainstream American culture!

---

There's this worry about immigrants settling in communities where everyone is from the same country, and therefore not a real American. LIGHTEN UP!

I spend a lot of time in Kalihi, which is a mostly Filipino community in Honolulu. One can live a whole life there, and only have Filipino friends. But I can tell you with great honesty that a Filipino person who was born in Kalihi is VERY DIFFERENT from a Filipino who just arrived from the Phillipines. You can walk by Farrington High School and be able to tell which of the students is a "local Filipino" and an "immigrant Filipino" Even in Kalihi, you're not isolated from the culture of the rest of Hawaii or the US.

It's just like the time I was visiting my uncle in LA. He lived in a mostly Mexican neighborhood. Still, his kids are able to understand English VERY WELL. I didn't even talk to them in Spanish (which I can't speak fluently). However, the anti-immigration fanatics don't want to think about that!

Editing Films for Content

Some conservatives who are disgusted by movies with lots of violence and sex have re-edited films to delete such scenes without permission!

So ironic, since conservatives (who supposedly hate the entitlement mentality) start claiming that they're entitled to "cleaned-up edited" version of popular films!

1) don't like it? Don't watch it!

2) you can't always escape ideas you don't like anyways! What next, avoiding anyone who thinks differently from you?

3) I make my art the way I want to! If you don't like it, make your own art!

4) Maybe I should edit those conservative films so as to not offend the liberal sensibilities of the Blue States. You know, take out scenes critical of affirmative action, homosexuality, abortion, etc. Take out scenes promoting abstinence and resisting drug use. Then we'll see how conservatives feel about editing (censoring) films.

Maybe we could re-edit "Passion of the Christ" with it's violent scenes.

5) Or just go along with #1 "don't like it? Dont watch it!"

Aborted/Unaborted

Right-wing columnist Julia Gorin wrote one of those columns with a few wise-ass remarks against abortion.


http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008802

Gorin: If Ms. (a feminst magazine) readers hadn't had so many abortions, there might be more Ms. readers. As for the rest of us, here's a petition we could all sign: "I wasn't aborted."

Pablo: Yeah, and if my parents didn't have sex about 9 months before I was born, I wouldn't be here either. I am so glad my parents didn't practice abstinence at that moment.

--------

Gorin: Rather than debate what it is we're killing, we should consider what we may be saving--for our sakes as much as for "its" own. When you choose to abort, you alter the course of history. While the child up for abortion may or may not be the next Einstein, saving his life could one day save yours.

Pablo: And maybe we should just put a stop to abstinence too. So if you and your lover don't have sex tonight, that means that you miss a chance to produce the next Einstein, the next Tiger Woods, the next Bill Gates or some hero who cures cancer, ends all wars, and save the world from global warming!

------

Gorin: The Web site of Ms. Magazine--yes, it still exists--is calling on readers to sign a petition: "I have had an abortion. I publicly join the millions of women in the United States who have had an abortion in demanding a repeal of laws that restrict women's reproductive freedom."Well, so much for the right to privacy.

Pablo: The right to privacy is so that those who had abortions (for whatever reason) can have it without worrying about right-wing bullies like Julia Gorin finding out and persecuting them.

The Ms Magazine is trying to get those who had abortions to become brave enough to stand up to right-wing bullies like Julia Gorin.

Single Gender Schools

Brother Greg O'Donnell, the principal of Damien Memorial School (an all boys school in Honolulu) wrote an article that says that boys and girls ought to be segregated in schools.

http://starbulletin.com/2006/06/25/editorial/special.html

O'Donnell: For starters, the natural thing for boys and girls is to be extremely different, including the ways in which they learn.

Pablo: An average boy might learn and act differently from an average girl. But not everyone is average! Take a group of boys -- you'll find that the boys have different learning styles from each other! Same is true if you take a group of girls!

This isn't being politically correct. This is from observing my fellow students when I was a student, AND observing the students as I was a teacher!

------

O'Donnell :From a classroom management standpoint, girls are easier to teach. There are, of course, other considerations, but the energy level of boys can overwhelm a teacher who's already tired.

Pablo: In the elementary level, boys do tend to be more rascal!

However, my observations in the middle school level shows both the boys and girls to be rascal.

There were even cases, when I was working 2 different middle schools, I could have a class of mostly boys, in which the class environment was laid back. However, in the same day, in the same school, with the same lesson plans, a class of mostly girls was worse. A lot of the girls were rude and sassy!

This doesn't happen all the time, but it happens enough to show a pattern!

---

Some say that one-gender schools are good, in that students don't get distracted by the opposite sex. I say it's better that they learn to deal with those distractions early in life!

However, if the student was homosexual, the student would be distracted no matter what school he/she attends!

Schools and Diversity

The US Supreme Court is going to soon hear 2 cases, one from Seattle, and one from Louisville about public schools that admit only a certain percentage from each racial group for the sake of "diversity".

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/05/washington/05cnd-scotus.html?hp&ex=1149566400&en=a57b596a5d121bdd&ei=5094&partner=homepage


The idea that schools choose the race of it's students, for any reason, is ridiculous. Especially if it's a government school.

Our state of Hawaii is more racially integrated than most of the mainland. This state has the largest rate of inter-racial marriages and multi-racial people.

And we didn't get that way by having government schools choosing the race of it's students.

The real reason people had problems with segregated schools in the South pre-1960's, was because the government schools chose the race of it's students. Now, forcing schools to have a certain percentage of whites. blacks, etc for the sake of "diversity" is just as crazy! Let the people figure out their own way of dealing with diversity. That's what we in Hawaii have done.

Yes, a school like Waipahu High would have a lot of Filipinos, but anyone living in that school's district can go to that school. A school like Waianae High would have mostly Native Hawaiians, but anyone living in the district can go there. Hardly anyone in Hawaii has a problem with Waipahu High being mostly Filipino or Waianae High being mostly Native Hawaiian, because people can choose where they live.

Other schools have very different combinations of people, with Kahuku High having a lot of Polynesians and Caucasians; Roosevelt High having a lot of local Japanese and Native Hawaiians, or McKinley High having a large of number of immigrants from Asia and the Pacific (which, by the way, is where I, a Mexican/PuertoRican/Portuguese//German, graduated from). The people in those district choose to live among such diversity.

Yes, Hawaii has Kamehameha Schools, which admits only Native Hawaiians, but it's a private school. And even that has caused controversy. A person with 99% European/1% Hawaiian ancestry can go to Kamehameha School, but a 100% Samoan or a 100% Tongan can't go there, all because their ancestors landed on the wrong island.

The Change in Priorities

So odd, a few years back, some mistaken me for a conservative because I criticized Haunani-Kay Trask, Al Gore, and the Radical Leftists at UH. For that I got vicious smears from people like Tobin Jones.

However, if you read my blog posts the last few months, it is something that would give me vicious smears from the Radical Right.

Most of my political opinions haven't changed, but my priorities on my top topics did. Since I graduated from UH, and after the Churchill/Horowitz appearances at UH, I have paid less attention to the campus leftists.

Now, the extreme right-wing of the GOP wants to reduce or even ban immigration. And this goes along with idiotic, bullshit editorials from conservative writers like Thomas Sowell, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Pat Buchanan, etc.

I give President Geroge W. Bush and Senator John McCain for being pro-immigration, unlike other members of the GOP

I know A LOT MORE about immigrants than most right-wing conservatives. My family includes immigrants, my school classmates includes immigrants, and a large # of students I currently work with are immigrants. I am not going to be silent when someone writes bullshit editorials about people I love and respect.

Tobin Jones would be tempted to tell me "I told you so, that the Left-Wings are angels and Right-Wing are devils".

I'll tell him

1)Bush is defying the right-wingers on the immigration issue, 

2) I still think Dr. Foltz and the other leftist profs need to stick to the frickin topic of the class instead of making political rants, 

3) I dont care much about the 2000 election controversy anymore, since that's old news, 

4) I was never a right-winger in the first place, 

5) I spent more time criticizing the left-wingers on Ka Leo (www.kaleo.org) because the left-wingers dominated UH

The Dixie Chicks started their war on Bush in London instead of Texas. That's not bravery! I'd rather criticize the Left on their territory (UH) instead of doing it outside (ie, BYU). If I was a student @ BYU or Liberty University, I would've spent more time criticizing the Right Wing since most students there are conservatives.

If you are wondering whether I'm Right or Left on certain issues, just explore this blog. You'd have a very adventurous time doing so.