Originally Posted by stereoman
My beloved partner, like our good colleague Mellow Julia, is very sensitive to sexist stereotyping. Is she "overly" sensitive? I wouldn't say so. Bu then, I'm prejudiced.

Speaking of prejudice. I return to a question posed by the writer, based upon a partial quote from one Lord Chesterfield:
Originally Posted by Charlotte Allen
Women "are only children of a larger growth," wrote the 18th-century Earl of Chesterfield. Could he have been right?
What the writer is asking us here is whether it is possible that this highbrow member of the British Gentlemancy of almost THREE HUNDRED years ago might have made an accurate assessment of "the fairer sex". It might be helpful, in making that judgement, to know where this particular quote has been popularized: in a 1954 book entitled The Nature of Prejudice. That's revealing.

It might also be helpful to have the context of the Chesterfield quote, from a letter he wrote to his son in 1748:
Originally Posted by 18th Century British highbrow aristocrat
I will, therefore, upon this subject [women], let you into a certain arcana, that will be very useful for you to know, but which you must with the utmost care conceal, and never seem to know. Women, then, are only children of a larger growth; they have an entertaining tattle and sometimes wit, but for solid, reasoning good sense, I never in my life knew one that had it, or acted consequentially for four-and twenty hours together. Some little passion or humor always breaks in upon their best resolutions. Their beauty neglected or controverted, their age increased, or their supposed understandings depreciated, instantly kindles their little passions, and overturns any system of consequential conduct that in their most reasonable moments they might have been capable of forming.A man of sense only trifles with them, plays with them, humors and flatters them, as he does with a sprightly, forward child; but he neither consults them about, nor trusts them with, serious matters, though he often makes them believe that he does both - which is the thing in the world that they are proud of; for they love mightily to be dabbling in business (which, by the way, they always spoil), and being justly distrustful that men in general look upon them in a trifling light, they almost adore that man who talks more seriously to them, and who seems to consult and trust them - I say who seems, for weak men really do, but wise ones only seem to do it . . .
Could there be a more cogent description of what we think of as "male chuavinism"? I turn again to the essay in question, for there I find almost every element that this ancient British heir has suggested that all members of "the weaker sex" hold in common, expressed with equal or greater disdain.

My beloved has latched on to the aphorism "B!tch is the new Black". I return to Julia's observation in the opening post that if this article had been written about any other racial group, it would not have been published. Let's look again at Lord Chesterfield's observations, with some simple substitutions:
Originally Posted by hypothetical Peer with a different prejudice
Africans, then, are only children of a larger growth; they have entertaining music and sport, but for solid, reasoning good sense, I never in my life knew one that had it, or acted consequentially for four-and twenty hours together . . . A man of sense only trifles with them, plays with them, humors and flatters them, as he does with a sprightly, forward child; but he neither consults them about, nor trusts them with, serious matters, though he often makes them believe that he does both - which is the thing in the world that they are proud of; for they love mightily to be dabbling in business (which, by the way, they always spoil) . . .

I con cur with you, Steve! ThumbsUp

milk and Girl Scout cookies ;-)

Save your breath-You may need it to blow up your date.