The comments have already made it clear that my entire day will be spent dealing with people whose panties are in a bunch because I implied that Elon Musk is not god-like in his perfection. Before you comment defending the honor of the richest man on earth, who probably wouldn't urinate on you if you were on fire in front of him, just stop. Don't. Musk's wealth and ego will both survive a truthful comment on the fact that government money has aided his success; I promise. And if this keeps up, the comments will be locked because my time is valuable.
I can tell I'm going to repeat this comment all day: I'm NOT criticizing him as an entrepreneur. As a liar, yes. Not as an entrepreneur; I'm just stating a fact: he has relied on government money to aid his success. I didn't want to mention him at all, but I knew if I didn't the first seventeen comments would be "Nuh uh! Musk is a better entrepreneur!"
That I will have to address this multiple times today is, ironically, proof of my thesis. Sigh.
Thank you for proving my point so thoroughly. The Right cannot tolerate even the *mildest* statement of utterly-truthful-not-quite-praise for one of its heroes. You could not make my thesis even more clear. And you're reminding me not to get my hopes up that the right will ever even *imagine* doing anything to change its strategy. You probably saved me from some later depression; I am stupid enough to get my hopes up. Thank you.
You're getting put in timeout now. You are unable to focus on the fact that the ENTIRE NARRATIVE OF THE RIGHT - that there's a "gender gap" is horseshit because you cannot tolerate even a truthful non-criticism of a rich and powerful guy who's on your side. It is so important to you to defend the honor (against a truthful statement) of Elon Musk that you cannot stop yourself from proving my thesis over and over. It would be comical if you were trying to be funny. Instead, it's a stark reminder of why the right is destined to lose and keep losing.
Holly you are right on target with this one. I have noticed something in my personal relationships since childhood. If you are friends with someone and friends with someone who doesn’t like your first friend you get stuck in the middle. Some people will not allow you to be friends with someone they don’t like they will turn away from you because you like someone they don’t. This is something I experienced as a child and it has been true even with adults. I can see it but I have never understood it. I find myself always in the middle because I try to judge people on their merits.
You’re right. But it’s the lowest intellects who are also those with the biggest mouths, who shout the loudest, who take the most extreme and most ridiculous positions on either side. The casual observer would find it easy to believe that there is largely a political binary.
To be honest, I dislike both of them and doubt either is “self-made.” They may have started so, bringing remarkable qualities to their ultimate success, but I very much doubt either is her/his own person anymore.
Anyone who reaches a certain level of success and fame eventually is co-opted by the system - otherwise you probably never would have heard of them. There’s a reason great stars often go into hiding. It’s not just a desire for privacy; they don’t agree to be owned.
It was not always and everywhere this way. When I started reading your essay I thought you were describing Dolly Parton. She may also have been owned, but not her husband.
I have great admiration for both Taylor Swift and Elon Musk because of their massive achievements. But when I look at the negative side of both of them, my stomach turns with a sickening feeling. This may be a good thing for me. I don’t need to be tempted to worship a human being.
Yep. It's really telling that the people who worship Swift to that degree are almost all teenage girls, whereas Musk's acolytes are of both sexes and all ages. Truly pathetic.
I love your idea about Taylor Swift. She also loves cats. I am not married and have no children but I am definitely center right. The Left left me long ago. I live in a neighborhood that is a disaster as a result of failed liberal policy and I teach kids who suffer the downstream effects. Fortunately I just got a job at a school that is doing all the right things to turn the tide and give city kids the real academic education they need in addition to teaching them to be responsible citizens.
This is the most articulate, future forward, rational, honest value presenting green shoots of clear thinking from a Conservative side I’ve seen in a decade.
We also need ideas - real, new ideas - about how we create real, durable prosperity.
One of the things we need to talk about is how outsourcing manufacturing decreases quality, empowers our rivals and is a transfer of wealth from those worse off to those well off. The well off buy more things and therefore benefit more from the low cost of Chinese goods.
The worse off are more likely to work making things, and they lose their jobs.
It's difficult to believe there are earlier risers than I am - published at 0332 EDT??? Or perhaps you hadn't gone to bed yet?
Fair points.
Musk was lionized by the left for a great long while because they viewed him as a middle finger to Exxon, Shell, and BP. The right now lionizes him because he is viewed as a middle finger to Leviathan. I must confess I prefer the latter as well, and hope DOGE has much more success than the Grace Commission. On that note, I view the subsidies for EVs and hybrids as much a part of the waste as anything. It's a welfare payment to high income earners and the wealthy.
As far as music...blech. Give me the 5-part harmony of The Eagles or Bon Scott rocking it with the bagpipes while Angus Young wales away on his axe.
Or lyrics like...
On the breeze
What a gentle little zephir
A little zephir
This evening will sigh
This evening will sigh
Under the pines in the little grove.
Under the pines…
Under the pines in the little grove
And the rest he’ll understand
Certainly, certainly he’ll understand.
Old Red was right on the money. If he'd known what those "two old Italian broads" were singing about, it would certainly have spoiled it for him.
It will *never* happen because it would require a Republican official being willing to hurt the feelings of their base, which would require a commitment to principles that the Republican base can't tolerate. What the base requires of its leaders is making them feel good, which is how a hedonist and serial adulterer became their hero.
The hating of Taylor Swift comes from a belief that she has more power than she actually does to get young women to vote Democrat as I previously wrote about. But like you said, women who aren't getting protection/containment from men in their lives want it from the government. It's not difficult to understand, but most people seem to react by their emotions, not logic.
As for voting at home, you make a very good argument. But I don't think that job should be done from home. And it shouldn't have been done from home during COVID so people didn't become sick either, but there's more to it in this case.
If a woman decides to have a child and is now at home caring for the child, she's basically split between her full-time maternal job and the US gov't job she willingly signed up for. This means she will be bad at one or the other IMHO. She will neglect the child to be able to hear all the discussion on bills and considering the best way to vote, or she will neglect her constituents for her child.
I don't know that there is a way to be there 100% for both, and it seems like a woman should step down if she's going to be distracted from her very important (in both cases) job. I think the woman should be responsible enough to know when she's letting someone (constituents or baby) down and when she needs to focus on one (the baby).
That's different from people working from home in order to not get sick, just because they were not as distracted with other full time jobs, or actually being sick.
Speaking as someone who has done very painstaking work while working from home, I think working from home depends entirely on the person. I also think that the child could be in the next room napping for a big chunk of it which is way better for everyone than being on an airplane in Washington. I really don't think this is a black-and-white situation. But as I said, I'm not arguing that it should be the case. Because I haven't thought about it enough. Just looking at it strategically.
I agree. I understand. It could be the case that the child would be napping peacefully and give plenty of time to do the government work. But it could also turn around quickly if the child got sick as well.
Like I said, you made an excellent point, and if it's only 6 months, maybe that's fine. It would probably very much depend on the person and the baby. But when you start allowing it for the one who makes it work well, you're also allowing it for the ones who would take advantage and let one side (constituents or baby) down.
Yep. It's like everything else -- there is no system that can't be gamed, nothing that some people won't use correctly and others won't use badly. Having been a nanny, I know how much babies sleep. I mostly want to see the fathers (there will always be more fathers than mothers in Congress) more involved, which is the main reason why I'm mildly in favor of it (haven't studied it enough to have a strong take). I just think the Republican take on it -- mockery, sneering, accusations of weakness -- is an unnecessary self-own. We either want to be the party of families or we don't.
Years ago, I once worked closely and remotely with a woman who was far removed from where both I and the client were. She had a young child, and her solution was to hire a nanny to work in her home and look after her child during working hours. That way she could concentrate on work without constant distractions and yet be right there in case of emergency. I thought that was brilliant and a much better solution than daycare that so many working families I knew spent an inordinate amount of their second income on.
Yep. This is *very* common among startups with a remote-first policy. I got to the third interview stage with one, and they let me know this was an option. When I said I didn't have kids, they said that they offered a benefit of paying for cleaning/shopping/cooking help for employees without kids, too. It's the ideal situation since nobody works a focused 8 hours. That way the parent can go spend a few minutes with the kid, give them a few hugs and kisses in the middle of the day, be available for emergencies, etc., but still give work its due.
It's lovely to read a solution-focused article on US politics, except your mature take seems to be too much for those who want to pick a fight about their favourite/least favourite hero/saviour.
As is said in Hebrew - kol hakavod - (much respect/full credit to you/all the strength you need) for response management.
Well, I never thought I would hear a strong defense of Taylor Swift. 😄 I like a couple of songs but have never been a fan. I always just assumed it was an age thing. But I have never understood the barely bridled fury that so many people (both men and women) have managed to sustain for years.
Your observations about The Right are spot on. But I am about out of sympathy for the "we've been left out for so long". We are adults. It really shouldn't matter that much to us. If we were as confident in all our superior values that we previously claimed, we wouldn't be so easily butt hurt by serious debates or critiques of our position.
I also appreciate you indicating that there is a bit of a problem with conservatives and young women. A lot of "conservative" young men give off signals at every turn that they don't want girls and women around. They don't show interest in valuing women as individuals and learning what would appeal to them. They regard them all as the avatars of the worst examples of women. And older conservatives who know better don't address this attitude properly. I think they incorrectly assume that it will auto correct but I'm not convinced. Until older conservatives take seriously the "bro" problem that is growing on the right they are going to lose more women, and long-term, future generations. Women will take their influence over men and children elsewhere.
The left does a bad job of respecting that many women choose family and motherhood as their path. The right offers nothing else for women. It's as if they think that women have no need for intellectual fulfillment other than what they get from being with their kids. I'm not saying that that isn't intellectual fulfillment, just that I've known mothers who said it was and other mothers who said that never talking to adults or reading books written for anyone other than preschoolers made them depressed and drove them insane.
I also think the birth rate going sharply down with the advent of birth control shows that many women weren't happy. That's when you find out if something is actually making people happy – when the opportunity to avoid it is made widely accessible and easy to get.
Additionally, not every woman should have kids. And it is a moral good, something to be applauded and approved of, not regarded as wrong, if you are the sort of woman who shouldn't have kids and you elect not to. Children should be wanted and raised by people who are prepared to be good parents. And too many parents figure out that they're not prepared to be good parents too late or not at all.
I grew up among the worst of the Right, so I came into it knowing that my not wanting kids was always going to make me suspicious and prevent me from ever really being able to be part of the tribe. But a lot of women don't know that. It is no secret to me why the left is more successful with women. The right frequently makes it a choice between a side that infantilizes women and a side that tries to shove all women into a box that only some women fit in. Not a hard choice if forced to choose. I can shout about the stupidity of the infantilization, but only if the tribe I'm shouting to actually gives a damn about hearing what I say. The left does a bad but better job of that than the right.
I agree. I think a lot of people who strongly advocate that women who should be full-time homemakers- regardless of what might be best for the financial or mental health for the woman- forget that women no longer have the community networks of other moms, grandmothers, aunts, etc. around them. I have been home with my kids (a threenager and 1 year old) during the work week at different times and have never seen another mother with small children out in the neighborhood. We even have a little playground and my kids are always the only ones playing there. I have been to a couple of story times at the library and there were only a couple of other grandmothers who brought their children. I'm sorry, but once a week or every 2 weeks "Mom's Morning Out" that some churches offer is not the same as having lots of homemaking moms or older women just around at all times. My husband feels the same way. When he has been home with the kids by himself he will say the same sorts of things. It's not boring, but it feels tremendously isolating and after about 2 hours all you can think about is when you are going to get to talk to another adult. I think the level of isolation that comes with full-time homemaking is a real problem culturally and I don't think it's right for people to just put that off on women to have to figure out how to endure it. I think a lot of people on the right are careless about how hard it is (for moms and dads) and those on the left are like, "Well if you chose this so its all on you. We told you it was oppressive." I think parents, as a group, feel very unheard (and in some cases actually abused) right now by both parties on some level.
I also grew up amongst the worst of the Right. It was abusive and so all-encompassing as to qualify in some ways as a sub-culture. Throw in that I grew up in VERY rural Mississippi, I have seen the sort of people who only vote Republican because they associate the Democrat party with black people. So many have genuinely terrible ideas about women and are very cruel to children behind closed doors. And because I have seen what the Right can be, certain things about the left will always be appealing to me.
All in all, I am fine with being politically homeless. I am fine seeing the right called out when it is appropriate. It means I have not lost the ability to think for myself or recognize when someone else is also trying to think for themselves.
True fact: I saw Taylor Swift in concert when she was the opening act for Brad Paisley. In fact, she was the first opening act; Kellie Pickler was the second act, and Paisley was the headliner. It was pretty obvious even then that she had the sheer charisma to be a superstar.
The thing about Taylor Swift is that she has a wholesomeness about her. I mean, she is obviously quite attractive -- rail thin and nearly six feet tall, and she wears pretty short skirts to show off her legs. She definitely plays up the sex appeal. But she does so in a way that still conveys innocence. Even if she endorses all these people on the left, she still codes as being conservative. My main critique of her music is that there’s an artificiality to it, and that it all kind of sounds the same now. I hope she and Travis get married and have kids so then at least she’ll have something new to sing about. Breakup songs work better at 20 than at 30.
I agree with your basic point. One of the problems with today’s online right -- and I think Trump is a part of the problem -- is that the “angry all the time at everyone” shtick gets very off-putting. What Trump (or Vance) should have said is that “both pop music and football are areas where Americans of all political persuasions can get together. We wish Taylor and Travis well, and we hope they have both found the love of their life.” Ok, maybe Vance on that, given Trump’s record in love.
I’ll add that you are, of course, correct in discussing Musk. It’s insane that he started a new automobile company (or, rather, took a flailing one over) and so far at least has made a go of it. But he definitely leaned into government incentives. Now, that’s what we (as in the United States) wanted when those incentives were implemented. But he definitely took advantage of the mixed economy here. Likewise, the government is the biggest SpaceEx customer. But even so, he’s left Boeing and Lockheed Martin in the dust, which is a real accomplishment.
Exactly! I don’t know why stating a fact about taking government help should be misconstrued as criticism. An astute businessman should take advantage of what’s available to support his business. And for many businesses, government IS the main customer.
Can't argue with you on this, Holly. I do know I have to consciously work at not having an immediate contrary reaction to several things you articulated because I know I have been programmed to "feel" that way. Deep breath - now let logic in; and yep, there it is. You are articulating ideas and concepts that I should dispassionately evaluate to discern where there might be areas of disagreement and why, but, I can't really.
I know my initial response while reading this was an emotional based response. Some topics, or people, are simply triggering - because I have been programmed by the algorithms of social media through exposure to the opinions of others falling into that confirming bias bin. I know this about myself and my existence in this tech heavy world. This is why being able to read and give myself time to process and evaluate is so much better than if I had to engage in "real-time" exchanges.
Thank you for another thought provoking offering. (The RNC needs to hire you to do their messaging - or at least provide input so maybe they'd get off their asses and play to win instead of playing not to lose.)
It may be that “the right” is unable to handle criticism in its new era of success. It’s also likely a factor of our culture of reaction. “Something” happens! Social media has degraded the process of consideration such that reaction will be immediate and fiercely pro or con. This applies equally to the right or the left.
I have a few minor quibbles with Taylor Swift as a role model. It has seemed to me that some of her professional success has come from personal failures about which she has written and performed for something like two decades. As you said, it has gotten old. When I say personal failures, I don’t mean her personal failures alone—it takes two to tango and to disentangle. She has yet to actually form a family. You seem confident that she and Travis will marry and have children. We will see.
I did not realize “the right” disdained her so. It might be a reaction, again—think about how roughly treated celebrities who speak out on behalf of the causes and candidates on the right continue to be treated. Maybe it’s all a continual chain reaction!
You are right—I thought she was 39. Hope she and whoever she chooses settles down soon. (I am still not as confident about Travis as you seem to be, and admit I know verrrry little about them). It will be a definite challenge to combine the high powered career she has with caring for a baby, so major life transition.
The comments have already made it clear that my entire day will be spent dealing with people whose panties are in a bunch because I implied that Elon Musk is not god-like in his perfection. Before you comment defending the honor of the richest man on earth, who probably wouldn't urinate on you if you were on fire in front of him, just stop. Don't. Musk's wealth and ego will both survive a truthful comment on the fact that government money has aided his success; I promise. And if this keeps up, the comments will be locked because my time is valuable.
Thanks for reading.
I can tell I'm going to repeat this comment all day: I'm NOT criticizing him as an entrepreneur. As a liar, yes. Not as an entrepreneur; I'm just stating a fact: he has relied on government money to aid his success. I didn't want to mention him at all, but I knew if I didn't the first seventeen comments would be "Nuh uh! Musk is a better entrepreneur!"
That I will have to address this multiple times today is, ironically, proof of my thesis. Sigh.
Thank you for proving my point so thoroughly. The Right cannot tolerate even the *mildest* statement of utterly-truthful-not-quite-praise for one of its heroes. You could not make my thesis even more clear. And you're reminding me not to get my hopes up that the right will ever even *imagine* doing anything to change its strategy. You probably saved me from some later depression; I am stupid enough to get my hopes up. Thank you.
You're getting put in timeout now. You are unable to focus on the fact that the ENTIRE NARRATIVE OF THE RIGHT - that there's a "gender gap" is horseshit because you cannot tolerate even a truthful non-criticism of a rich and powerful guy who's on your side. It is so important to you to defend the honor (against a truthful statement) of Elon Musk that you cannot stop yourself from proving my thesis over and over. It would be comical if you were trying to be funny. Instead, it's a stark reminder of why the right is destined to lose and keep losing.
Holly you are right on target with this one. I have noticed something in my personal relationships since childhood. If you are friends with someone and friends with someone who doesn’t like your first friend you get stuck in the middle. Some people will not allow you to be friends with someone they don’t like they will turn away from you because you like someone they don’t. This is something I experienced as a child and it has been true even with adults. I can see it but I have never understood it. I find myself always in the middle because I try to judge people on their merits.
Anyone operating as if a political binary is real has no choice but to pwn themselves.
You’re right. But it’s the lowest intellects who are also those with the biggest mouths, who shout the loudest, who take the most extreme and most ridiculous positions on either side. The casual observer would find it easy to believe that there is largely a political binary.
I think the solution is to observe actions rather than words.
To be honest, I dislike both of them and doubt either is “self-made.” They may have started so, bringing remarkable qualities to their ultimate success, but I very much doubt either is her/his own person anymore.
Anyone who reaches a certain level of success and fame eventually is co-opted by the system - otherwise you probably never would have heard of them. There’s a reason great stars often go into hiding. It’s not just a desire for privacy; they don’t agree to be owned.
It was not always and everywhere this way. When I started reading your essay I thought you were describing Dolly Parton. She may also have been owned, but not her husband.
I thought Dolly, too!
I have great admiration for both Taylor Swift and Elon Musk because of their massive achievements. But when I look at the negative side of both of them, my stomach turns with a sickening feeling. This may be a good thing for me. I don’t need to be tempted to worship a human being.
Yep. It's really telling that the people who worship Swift to that degree are almost all teenage girls, whereas Musk's acolytes are of both sexes and all ages. Truly pathetic.
I love your idea about Taylor Swift. She also loves cats. I am not married and have no children but I am definitely center right. The Left left me long ago. I live in a neighborhood that is a disaster as a result of failed liberal policy and I teach kids who suffer the downstream effects. Fortunately I just got a job at a school that is doing all the right things to turn the tide and give city kids the real academic education they need in addition to teaching them to be responsible citizens.
This is the most articulate, future forward, rational, honest value presenting green shoots of clear thinking from a Conservative side I’ve seen in a decade.
We also need ideas - real, new ideas - about how we create real, durable prosperity.
One of the things we need to talk about is how outsourcing manufacturing decreases quality, empowers our rivals and is a transfer of wealth from those worse off to those well off. The well off buy more things and therefore benefit more from the low cost of Chinese goods.
The worse off are more likely to work making things, and they lose their jobs.
It's difficult to believe there are earlier risers than I am - published at 0332 EDT??? Or perhaps you hadn't gone to bed yet?
Fair points.
Musk was lionized by the left for a great long while because they viewed him as a middle finger to Exxon, Shell, and BP. The right now lionizes him because he is viewed as a middle finger to Leviathan. I must confess I prefer the latter as well, and hope DOGE has much more success than the Grace Commission. On that note, I view the subsidies for EVs and hybrids as much a part of the waste as anything. It's a welfare payment to high income earners and the wealthy.
As far as music...blech. Give me the 5-part harmony of The Eagles or Bon Scott rocking it with the bagpipes while Angus Young wales away on his axe.
Or lyrics like...
On the breeze
What a gentle little zephir
A little zephir
This evening will sigh
This evening will sigh
Under the pines in the little grove.
Under the pines…
Under the pines in the little grove
And the rest he’ll understand
Certainly, certainly he’ll understand.
Old Red was right on the money. If he'd known what those "two old Italian broads" were singing about, it would certainly have spoiled it for him.
Holly you should be writing speeches for Vance. Imagine him saying this. It would be such an end-around on the cultural divide. Pure genius.
It will *never* happen because it would require a Republican official being willing to hurt the feelings of their base, which would require a commitment to principles that the Republican base can't tolerate. What the base requires of its leaders is making them feel good, which is how a hedonist and serial adulterer became their hero.
I do appreciate the compliment, though. :)
The hating of Taylor Swift comes from a belief that she has more power than she actually does to get young women to vote Democrat as I previously wrote about. But like you said, women who aren't getting protection/containment from men in their lives want it from the government. It's not difficult to understand, but most people seem to react by their emotions, not logic.
As for voting at home, you make a very good argument. But I don't think that job should be done from home. And it shouldn't have been done from home during COVID so people didn't become sick either, but there's more to it in this case.
If a woman decides to have a child and is now at home caring for the child, she's basically split between her full-time maternal job and the US gov't job she willingly signed up for. This means she will be bad at one or the other IMHO. She will neglect the child to be able to hear all the discussion on bills and considering the best way to vote, or she will neglect her constituents for her child.
I don't know that there is a way to be there 100% for both, and it seems like a woman should step down if she's going to be distracted from her very important (in both cases) job. I think the woman should be responsible enough to know when she's letting someone (constituents or baby) down and when she needs to focus on one (the baby).
That's different from people working from home in order to not get sick, just because they were not as distracted with other full time jobs, or actually being sick.
Speaking as someone who has done very painstaking work while working from home, I think working from home depends entirely on the person. I also think that the child could be in the next room napping for a big chunk of it which is way better for everyone than being on an airplane in Washington. I really don't think this is a black-and-white situation. But as I said, I'm not arguing that it should be the case. Because I haven't thought about it enough. Just looking at it strategically.
I agree. I understand. It could be the case that the child would be napping peacefully and give plenty of time to do the government work. But it could also turn around quickly if the child got sick as well.
Like I said, you made an excellent point, and if it's only 6 months, maybe that's fine. It would probably very much depend on the person and the baby. But when you start allowing it for the one who makes it work well, you're also allowing it for the ones who would take advantage and let one side (constituents or baby) down.
Yep. It's like everything else -- there is no system that can't be gamed, nothing that some people won't use correctly and others won't use badly. Having been a nanny, I know how much babies sleep. I mostly want to see the fathers (there will always be more fathers than mothers in Congress) more involved, which is the main reason why I'm mildly in favor of it (haven't studied it enough to have a strong take). I just think the Republican take on it -- mockery, sneering, accusations of weakness -- is an unnecessary self-own. We either want to be the party of families or we don't.
i don't agree with any of the mockery, sneering, etc. It's all emotional play-acting of emotional children. I do wish the adults would grow up.
Years ago, I once worked closely and remotely with a woman who was far removed from where both I and the client were. She had a young child, and her solution was to hire a nanny to work in her home and look after her child during working hours. That way she could concentrate on work without constant distractions and yet be right there in case of emergency. I thought that was brilliant and a much better solution than daycare that so many working families I knew spent an inordinate amount of their second income on.
Yep. This is *very* common among startups with a remote-first policy. I got to the third interview stage with one, and they let me know this was an option. When I said I didn't have kids, they said that they offered a benefit of paying for cleaning/shopping/cooking help for employees without kids, too. It's the ideal situation since nobody works a focused 8 hours. That way the parent can go spend a few minutes with the kid, give them a few hugs and kisses in the middle of the day, be available for emergencies, etc., but still give work its due.
It's lovely to read a solution-focused article on US politics, except your mature take seems to be too much for those who want to pick a fight about their favourite/least favourite hero/saviour.
As is said in Hebrew - kol hakavod - (much respect/full credit to you/all the strength you need) for response management.
Well, I never thought I would hear a strong defense of Taylor Swift. 😄 I like a couple of songs but have never been a fan. I always just assumed it was an age thing. But I have never understood the barely bridled fury that so many people (both men and women) have managed to sustain for years.
Your observations about The Right are spot on. But I am about out of sympathy for the "we've been left out for so long". We are adults. It really shouldn't matter that much to us. If we were as confident in all our superior values that we previously claimed, we wouldn't be so easily butt hurt by serious debates or critiques of our position.
I also appreciate you indicating that there is a bit of a problem with conservatives and young women. A lot of "conservative" young men give off signals at every turn that they don't want girls and women around. They don't show interest in valuing women as individuals and learning what would appeal to them. They regard them all as the avatars of the worst examples of women. And older conservatives who know better don't address this attitude properly. I think they incorrectly assume that it will auto correct but I'm not convinced. Until older conservatives take seriously the "bro" problem that is growing on the right they are going to lose more women, and long-term, future generations. Women will take their influence over men and children elsewhere.
The left does a bad job of respecting that many women choose family and motherhood as their path. The right offers nothing else for women. It's as if they think that women have no need for intellectual fulfillment other than what they get from being with their kids. I'm not saying that that isn't intellectual fulfillment, just that I've known mothers who said it was and other mothers who said that never talking to adults or reading books written for anyone other than preschoolers made them depressed and drove them insane.
I also think the birth rate going sharply down with the advent of birth control shows that many women weren't happy. That's when you find out if something is actually making people happy – when the opportunity to avoid it is made widely accessible and easy to get.
Additionally, not every woman should have kids. And it is a moral good, something to be applauded and approved of, not regarded as wrong, if you are the sort of woman who shouldn't have kids and you elect not to. Children should be wanted and raised by people who are prepared to be good parents. And too many parents figure out that they're not prepared to be good parents too late or not at all.
I grew up among the worst of the Right, so I came into it knowing that my not wanting kids was always going to make me suspicious and prevent me from ever really being able to be part of the tribe. But a lot of women don't know that. It is no secret to me why the left is more successful with women. The right frequently makes it a choice between a side that infantilizes women and a side that tries to shove all women into a box that only some women fit in. Not a hard choice if forced to choose. I can shout about the stupidity of the infantilization, but only if the tribe I'm shouting to actually gives a damn about hearing what I say. The left does a bad but better job of that than the right.
I agree. I think a lot of people who strongly advocate that women who should be full-time homemakers- regardless of what might be best for the financial or mental health for the woman- forget that women no longer have the community networks of other moms, grandmothers, aunts, etc. around them. I have been home with my kids (a threenager and 1 year old) during the work week at different times and have never seen another mother with small children out in the neighborhood. We even have a little playground and my kids are always the only ones playing there. I have been to a couple of story times at the library and there were only a couple of other grandmothers who brought their children. I'm sorry, but once a week or every 2 weeks "Mom's Morning Out" that some churches offer is not the same as having lots of homemaking moms or older women just around at all times. My husband feels the same way. When he has been home with the kids by himself he will say the same sorts of things. It's not boring, but it feels tremendously isolating and after about 2 hours all you can think about is when you are going to get to talk to another adult. I think the level of isolation that comes with full-time homemaking is a real problem culturally and I don't think it's right for people to just put that off on women to have to figure out how to endure it. I think a lot of people on the right are careless about how hard it is (for moms and dads) and those on the left are like, "Well if you chose this so its all on you. We told you it was oppressive." I think parents, as a group, feel very unheard (and in some cases actually abused) right now by both parties on some level.
I also grew up amongst the worst of the Right. It was abusive and so all-encompassing as to qualify in some ways as a sub-culture. Throw in that I grew up in VERY rural Mississippi, I have seen the sort of people who only vote Republican because they associate the Democrat party with black people. So many have genuinely terrible ideas about women and are very cruel to children behind closed doors. And because I have seen what the Right can be, certain things about the left will always be appealing to me.
All in all, I am fine with being politically homeless. I am fine seeing the right called out when it is appropriate. It means I have not lost the ability to think for myself or recognize when someone else is also trying to think for themselves.
True fact: I saw Taylor Swift in concert when she was the opening act for Brad Paisley. In fact, she was the first opening act; Kellie Pickler was the second act, and Paisley was the headliner. It was pretty obvious even then that she had the sheer charisma to be a superstar.
The thing about Taylor Swift is that she has a wholesomeness about her. I mean, she is obviously quite attractive -- rail thin and nearly six feet tall, and she wears pretty short skirts to show off her legs. She definitely plays up the sex appeal. But she does so in a way that still conveys innocence. Even if she endorses all these people on the left, she still codes as being conservative. My main critique of her music is that there’s an artificiality to it, and that it all kind of sounds the same now. I hope she and Travis get married and have kids so then at least she’ll have something new to sing about. Breakup songs work better at 20 than at 30.
I agree with your basic point. One of the problems with today’s online right -- and I think Trump is a part of the problem -- is that the “angry all the time at everyone” shtick gets very off-putting. What Trump (or Vance) should have said is that “both pop music and football are areas where Americans of all political persuasions can get together. We wish Taylor and Travis well, and we hope they have both found the love of their life.” Ok, maybe Vance on that, given Trump’s record in love.
I’ll add that you are, of course, correct in discussing Musk. It’s insane that he started a new automobile company (or, rather, took a flailing one over) and so far at least has made a go of it. But he definitely leaned into government incentives. Now, that’s what we (as in the United States) wanted when those incentives were implemented. But he definitely took advantage of the mixed economy here. Likewise, the government is the biggest SpaceEx customer. But even so, he’s left Boeing and Lockheed Martin in the dust, which is a real accomplishment.
Exactly! I don’t know why stating a fact about taking government help should be misconstrued as criticism. An astute businessman should take advantage of what’s available to support his business. And for many businesses, government IS the main customer.
Can't argue with you on this, Holly. I do know I have to consciously work at not having an immediate contrary reaction to several things you articulated because I know I have been programmed to "feel" that way. Deep breath - now let logic in; and yep, there it is. You are articulating ideas and concepts that I should dispassionately evaluate to discern where there might be areas of disagreement and why, but, I can't really.
I know my initial response while reading this was an emotional based response. Some topics, or people, are simply triggering - because I have been programmed by the algorithms of social media through exposure to the opinions of others falling into that confirming bias bin. I know this about myself and my existence in this tech heavy world. This is why being able to read and give myself time to process and evaluate is so much better than if I had to engage in "real-time" exchanges.
Thank you for another thought provoking offering. (The RNC needs to hire you to do their messaging - or at least provide input so maybe they'd get off their asses and play to win instead of playing not to lose.)
It may be that “the right” is unable to handle criticism in its new era of success. It’s also likely a factor of our culture of reaction. “Something” happens! Social media has degraded the process of consideration such that reaction will be immediate and fiercely pro or con. This applies equally to the right or the left.
I have a few minor quibbles with Taylor Swift as a role model. It has seemed to me that some of her professional success has come from personal failures about which she has written and performed for something like two decades. As you said, it has gotten old. When I say personal failures, I don’t mean her personal failures alone—it takes two to tango and to disentangle. She has yet to actually form a family. You seem confident that she and Travis will marry and have children. We will see.
I did not realize “the right” disdained her so. It might be a reaction, again—think about how roughly treated celebrities who speak out on behalf of the causes and candidates on the right continue to be treated. Maybe it’s all a continual chain reaction!
She wasn't old enough to drive when she got started, so the idea that she's been failing to get married since she was 14 is kind of ridiculous.
You are right—I thought she was 39. Hope she and whoever she chooses settles down soon. (I am still not as confident about Travis as you seem to be, and admit I know verrrry little about them). It will be a definite challenge to combine the high powered career she has with caring for a baby, so major life transition.
I do adore that song, and also "You Belong to Me" - otherwise Taylor Swift is of no interest to me. You make good points in this essay...as usual.