It’s a strange manifestation of what Carl Jung called ‘synchronicity’ that Gloria Steinem, a second wave feminist who favored full federal legalization of abortions, died just two days before a mistrial was declared in the Lindsay Clancy case. Both women were willing to break the law to kill their own babies – Steinem had an illegal abortion at age 22 – but one became a feminist icon, and the other one is charged with a triple murder.
Gloria Steinem outlived another second wave feminist, Betty Friedan. Betty Friedan literally wrote the book that initiated the second wave of feminism, entitled ‘The Feminine Mystique’. The concept of the “feminine mystique” is that women are naturally fulfilled by devoting their lives to being housewives and mothers, and Friedan disavowed this idea.
The Clancy case, and even more so the crazy pink shirt protestors outside the courthouse, show that women have totally abandoned the notion that feminists should find any joy in matrimony or motherhood. Ironically, conservative men have clung to this idea much longer than our women, but that is changing.
If men can no longer blithely assume that women will never kill their own children, then the last vestiges of the male perception of ‘the feminine mystique’ may be forcefully purged from America. If the mystery and romance of femininity dissipates completely, much like a bridal veil falling off and revealing an angry and ugly bride, then men will no longer give women any special consideration. This should terrify women, because men with no illusions about the darker side of female nature are men who will view them with suspicion and wariness for the rest of their lives.
Women may have no choice except to become career women if men remove their options to become wives and mothers. This would not be the liberation of women, but rather the liberation of men from any sense of duty towards women.
That would be a very ironic end for ‘the feminine mystique’.
For more details, go to Substack and search for “The End of the Feminine Mystique”. Keep the quotation marks when you search for the article.
You failed to mention Margaret Sanger, founder of the birth control movement. As an adherent of the eugenics movement, she argued that birth control would reduce the number of unfit people and improve the overall health of the human race. I believe that, inconveniently for modern feminists, she considered Blacks as an example of the “unfit.”
I can’t describe everything that’s wrong with feminism without writing several doctoral theses, and nobody reads comments longer than one page or articles longer a few pages.
Reading anything much longer than a tweet limits the potential audience to Boomers and GenX.
Heck, most young women get their news from TikTok these days.
September 5, 2026 at 11:32 am
larryarnold
Sorry. I meant it as an addition, not a criticism.
September 5, 2026 at 11:32 am
Oldarmourer
Just about every idea the left comes up with includes either removing or subjugating anyone who doesn’t look and think like them…just like the islamists they adore so much lately.
Whenever a liebral makes a law or regulation there’s always a stiff penalty for noncompliance…
If Javier figured out “female logic” well enough to program it, he’s a bigger genius than he gets credit for being. Kind of like nuclear physics, he’d have to get it absolutely right the first time because the slightest hint of an error would be catastrophic.
In the animal kingdom, (we are actually
animals) when the population gets too
large, something happens to cull them
out, rabies for instance, or predators
etc.
Regardless of, and maybe because of, our
big beautiful brains, we can now construct
our own demise.
Maybe movies like the “Terminator” and
series like “Star trek” etc, were early
warning systems to alert us as to what
is coming.
The dinosaurs were eliminated, maybe the
next species of earth will be robots who
have become Sentient.
Karl’s three laws must have been modified, perhaps with a form of the “Zeroth Law”. He has harmed humans, direct violation of the first law. But he did so to protect one of the family. So If he has been programmed that the family is ‘humanity’, then he is operating under the Zeroth law.
Great in robots, not so much in humans. The first step in any suppression or genocide of particular groups is to cast them as subhuman.
I suspect that Javier’s implementation of the “Three Laws” is more like the “Pirate’s Code” — “they’re more what you’d call ‘guidelines’ than actual rules.”
Heck, Asimov himself said that the Three Laws couldn’t work in real life if they were implemented as absolute directives. Most of his “robot” stories illustrated that very point, by showing robots going off the rails when presented with situations where the Laws were in conflict with each other, or when a Law was followed too literally. A robot that was unable to make value judgements about whose orders should be followed, or what level of “harm” is acceptable to stop a human whose clear intent is to do harm to other humans, is a robot that would quickly be driven insane trying to cope with day-to-day existence in human society.
Not just Asimov. The “Supercomputer is taking over so derail it by asking a question logic can’t solve” trope has been around as long as SF robots, even before Asimov.
September 5, 2026 at 10:13 am
JTC
Question is not “if” the triggering occurs (it will), but rather “what if” it occurs…what will triggering entail and what happens next?
If that “mother board” if you will, carries its estro foundation into operations?
Some women have logic — the real thing. Others (the vast majority in my opinion) have “feminine logic” which is something else entirely. and involves no real logic. A lot of it is more convenience for what they perceive is good for them and nothing else. Hence the difference between conservative and liberal women. For an extreme example, think Margaret Thatcher versus any random blue-haired, nose-ringed screeching harpy at an anti-ice demonstration.
“what they perceive is good for them and nothing else”
IMHO the most destructive form of “feminine” logic, which BTW is not limited to biological females, is the “What my cause perceives is good for you even if you disagree” variety.
See the “It’s racist to call your sports team Indians even if real Native Americans like it” “logic,” or the “You’re Latinx because it’s gender neutral even if it bastardizes Spanish and you hate it.”
Elon knows that “robots” once we stop thinking of them all as like the “Danger Danger Will Robinson” kind and realize they are all around and in everything we do, we realize they may already be in the billions.
And I gather that his real and justifiable concern is not so much for programmable ‘bots but rather the AI that does the programming; we are on the cusp, for better or worse.
Note carefully that Musk says (multiple times) HUMANOID robots. He’s not even counting assembly line chassis welders, Boston Dynamics dawgs, or Roombas.
As I was saying. But has he specified “humanoid” when what he has said for years is AI is a clear and present threat, human form being only a small part.
21 Comments
It’s a strange manifestation of what Carl Jung called ‘synchronicity’ that Gloria Steinem, a second wave feminist who favored full federal legalization of abortions, died just two days before a mistrial was declared in the Lindsay Clancy case. Both women were willing to break the law to kill their own babies – Steinem had an illegal abortion at age 22 – but one became a feminist icon, and the other one is charged with a triple murder.
Gloria Steinem outlived another second wave feminist, Betty Friedan. Betty Friedan literally wrote the book that initiated the second wave of feminism, entitled ‘The Feminine Mystique’. The concept of the “feminine mystique” is that women are naturally fulfilled by devoting their lives to being housewives and mothers, and Friedan disavowed this idea.
The Clancy case, and even more so the crazy pink shirt protestors outside the courthouse, show that women have totally abandoned the notion that feminists should find any joy in matrimony or motherhood. Ironically, conservative men have clung to this idea much longer than our women, but that is changing.
If men can no longer blithely assume that women will never kill their own children, then the last vestiges of the male perception of ‘the feminine mystique’ may be forcefully purged from America. If the mystery and romance of femininity dissipates completely, much like a bridal veil falling off and revealing an angry and ugly bride, then men will no longer give women any special consideration. This should terrify women, because men with no illusions about the darker side of female nature are men who will view them with suspicion and wariness for the rest of their lives.
Women may have no choice except to become career women if men remove their options to become wives and mothers. This would not be the liberation of women, but rather the liberation of men from any sense of duty towards women.
That would be a very ironic end for ‘the feminine mystique’.
For more details, go to Substack and search for “The End of the Feminine Mystique”. Keep the quotation marks when you search for the article.
You failed to mention Margaret Sanger, founder of the birth control movement. As an adherent of the eugenics movement, she argued that birth control would reduce the number of unfit people and improve the overall health of the human race. I believe that, inconveniently for modern feminists, she considered Blacks as an example of the “unfit.”
I can’t describe everything that’s wrong with feminism without writing several doctoral theses, and nobody reads comments longer than one page or articles longer a few pages.
Reading anything much longer than a tweet limits the potential audience to Boomers and GenX.
Heck, most young women get their news from TikTok these days.
Sorry. I meant it as an addition, not a criticism.
Just about every idea the left comes up with includes either removing or subjugating anyone who doesn’t look and think like them…just like the islamists they adore so much lately.
Whenever a liebral makes a law or regulation there’s always a stiff penalty for noncompliance…
Sibling jabs, for the win
If Javier figured out “female logic” well enough to program it, he’s a bigger genius than he gets credit for being. Kind of like nuclear physics, he’d have to get it absolutely right the first time because the slightest hint of an error would be catastrophic.
Wow, it`s getting heavy duty here.
In the animal kingdom, (we are actually
animals) when the population gets too
large, something happens to cull them
out, rabies for instance, or predators
etc.
Regardless of, and maybe because of, our
big beautiful brains, we can now construct
our own demise.
Maybe movies like the “Terminator” and
series like “Star trek” etc, were early
warning systems to alert us as to what
is coming.
The dinosaurs were eliminated, maybe the
next species of earth will be robots who
have become Sentient.
If dogs and cats develop opposable thumbs like raccoons first, the machines lose.
cheers
eon
‘we can now construct our own demise’ Is that what Elon is saying? https://www.youtube.com/shorts/yhZrMRfKWQM
Karl’s three laws must have been modified, perhaps with a form of the “Zeroth Law”. He has harmed humans, direct violation of the first law. But he did so to protect one of the family. So If he has been programmed that the family is ‘humanity’, then he is operating under the Zeroth law.
Great in robots, not so much in humans. The first step in any suppression or genocide of particular groups is to cast them as subhuman.
I suspect that Javier’s implementation of the “Three Laws” is more like the “Pirate’s Code” — “they’re more what you’d call ‘guidelines’ than actual rules.”
Heck, Asimov himself said that the Three Laws couldn’t work in real life if they were implemented as absolute directives. Most of his “robot” stories illustrated that very point, by showing robots going off the rails when presented with situations where the Laws were in conflict with each other, or when a Law was followed too literally. A robot that was unable to make value judgements about whose orders should be followed, or what level of “harm” is acceptable to stop a human whose clear intent is to do harm to other humans, is a robot that would quickly be driven insane trying to cope with day-to-day existence in human society.
Not just Asimov. The “Supercomputer is taking over so derail it by asking a question logic can’t solve” trope has been around as long as SF robots, even before Asimov.
Question is not “if” the triggering occurs (it will), but rather “what if” it occurs…what will triggering entail and what happens next?
If that “mother board” if you will, carries its estro foundation into operations?
Logic my ass.
Some women have logic — the real thing. Others (the vast majority in my opinion) have “feminine logic” which is something else entirely. and involves no real logic. A lot of it is more convenience for what they perceive is good for them and nothing else. Hence the difference between conservative and liberal women. For an extreme example, think Margaret Thatcher versus any random blue-haired, nose-ringed screeching harpy at an anti-ice demonstration.
“what they perceive is good for them and nothing else”
IMHO the most destructive form of “feminine” logic, which BTW is not limited to biological females, is the “What my cause perceives is good for you even if you disagree” variety.
See the “It’s racist to call your sports team Indians even if real Native Americans like it” “logic,” or the “You’re Latinx because it’s gender neutral even if it bastardizes Spanish and you hate it.”
“Little old ladies from Social Services who are so determined to ‘do you good’ that they don’t care if they kill you in the process.”
–A Plague of Demons, Keith Laumer
clear ether
eon
So, what Elon says (the only African American not
accepted by Blacks in America), that robots will number
in the billions in ten years,
Sounds like as Gutfeld said: we will be controlled
by our robot overlords in the near future, a Para
phrase.
Elon knows that “robots” once we stop thinking of them all as like the “Danger Danger Will Robinson” kind and realize they are all around and in everything we do, we realize they may already be in the billions.
And I gather that his real and justifiable concern is not so much for programmable ‘bots but rather the AI that does the programming; we are on the cusp, for better or worse.
Note carefully that Musk says (multiple times) HUMANOID robots. He’s not even counting assembly line chassis welders, Boston Dynamics dawgs, or Roombas.
As I was saying. But has he specified “humanoid” when what he has said for years is AI is a clear and present threat, human form being only a small part.