view
that --everything is basically the same as everything else,-- that
distinctions should not/do not and do not/should not exist anywhere,
that --discrimination-- is solely a pejorative (as Frank Miller adroitly
pointed out at one time, when he orders steak instead of hamburger in a
restaurant he is committing an act of discrimination) also finds
expression in their belief/feeling that children are (more or less)
interchangeable with adults and that they should be treated as such:
that the imposition of any kind of discipline on a child by its father
is simply patriarchal tyranny, an abuse of power which can lead only to
the child experiencing lifelong voodoo profession trauma. Children, like
adults, have inalienable human rights (goes the screw-loose
approximation of female --reasoning--) and must, therefore, be allowed
full license to pursue -- with the imposition of as few external
limitations as possible -- what children perceive to be their own best
interests.
The end product of this --reasoning-- is on display in the food court of
any shopping mall in the soon-to-be-completely-uncivilized world on any
given Saturday afternoon.
New Impossible Thing to Believe Before Breakfast:
15. Children must be allowed to raise themselves and determine for
themselves what does and does not constitute ethical, responsible
behaviour.
What is at issue, it seems to me, is the dichotomy which exists between
the masculine and feminine interpretations of --out of the mouths of
babes . . . --
To a man, this aphorism implies that --although children are unshaped
and incomplete beings until they reach the age of their majority, it is
an interesting naturally-occurring phenomenon that -- apropos nothing and
even in the earliest stage
.
|
