Charlotte Allen, the low-rent Phyllis Schlafly at the NRO (the most intellectually dishonest rest-stop on the Information Super Highway), says that the lack of men at the Sandy Hook Elementary School was really the problem. Damn feminists, it’s their fault:
“There was not a single adult male on the school premises when the shooting occurred. In this school of 450 students, a sizeable [sic] number of whom were undoubtedly 11- and 12-year-old boys (it was a K–6 school) [K–4 -- TG], all the personnel — the teachers, the principal, the assistant principal, the school psychologist, the “reading specialist” — were female. There didn’t even seem to be a male janitor [not true --TG] to heave his bucket at Adam Lanza’s knees.”
Aside from throwing a bucket at the knees of a gunman armed with high-powered guns with enormous bullet clips, what else have ya got for us, Charlotte?
“Women and small children are sitting ducks for mass-murderers. The principal, Dawn Hochsprung, seemed to have performed bravely. According to reports, she activated the school’s public-address system and also lunged at Lanza, before he shot her to death. Some of the teachers managed to save all or some of their charges by rushing them into closets or bathrooms. But in general, a feminized setting is a setting in which helpless passivity is the norm.”
Dawn Hochsprung seemed to have performed bravely? Most men I know would not have had the presence of mind, let alone the (lady) balls of Hochsprung. Rushing the kids into locations like closets and bathrooms seems to have helped all but 20 of the kids, which in itself is as close to a miracle as we seem to get most days.
“Male aggression can be a good thing, as in protecting the weak — but it has been forced out of the culture of elementary schools and the education schools that train their personnel. Think of what Sandy Hook might have been like if a couple of male teachers who had played high-school football, or even some of the huskier 12-year-old boys, had converged on Lanza.”
Protecting the weak. Jeebus, are you really saying that ladies should be ladies and let a man do the protecting? Also/too: aside from there not being any husky 12-year old boys (K–4, remember), don’t boys count as children to be protected, too? Isn’t this some sort of Megan McCardle twattle?
But then, our pal Charlotte moves onto her next topic in her thesis: the coddling of men. I guess it is not enough to want menfolk to protect the wimmins, but you need to keep those boys rugged or something. Anyway, take it away Charlotte:
“Parents of sick children need to be realistic about them. I know at least two sets of fine and devoted parents who have had the misfortune to raise sons who were troubled for genetic reasons beyond anyone’s control. Either of those boys could have been an Adam Lanza.“
But they aren’t, Charlotte, but they aren’t. I’m not sure what Charlotte means that they were troubled for genetic reasons; is that a dog whistle for something else? I can interpret that as schizophrenia, being gay, being mixed race? What does it mean, Charlotte, what does it mean?
“You simply can’t give a non-working, non-school-enrolled 20-year-old man free range of your home, much less your cache of weapons. You have to set boundaries. You have to say, “You can’t live here anymore — you’re an adult, and it’s time for you to be a man. We’ll give you all the support you need, but we won’t be enablers.”
Oh, so what she’s saying is, tough love, and now you are society’s problem? “You genetically troubled kid, out of the house with you! I’m done! And keep away from my Uzi, too.”
Unfortunately, the idea of being an “adult” and a “man” once one has reached physical maturity seems to have faded out of our coddling culture.
OK, so in short, from Charlotte’s confused mind: Women are weak (except for unarmed Dawn Hochsprung, who sprang like a coiled tiger on the armed gunman), men are coddled, but women need them anyway to take down killers. Everyone know your gender-role behavior now? Good.
It doesn’t surprise me that some wingnut wrote this, what does surprise me is that anyone would publish it, but then again, it is on the NRO (the most intellectually dishonest rest-stop on the Information Super Highway).