Tuesday, 8 March 2011

Morally Stronger?

Poppets, no long post today because I have been in court, seeing justice being done. At first I was in the wrong courtroom, and that was very dull. But then I found the right courtroom, and life became a lot more interesting.

Now, I don't really want to get into a "Women are better and purer than men" kind of an argument. I certainly don't want to let men off any kind of hook by stating that they are (in general) morally weaker than women. And I am also reluctant to think up examples of how women are morally weaker than men, or explain that women are, indeed, capable of sexual assault--usually of other women and of children. (It's rare, but it happens and of course it is disgusting.)

But I will say this. I was in court for hours. Court was very busy. And all but one of those addressed as "the Accused" were men. Most of them were young men. The only woman who shuffled into the dock was pregnant. She sought to have her ultimate court date transferred to after her baby was born.

The men in the dock--and their male supporters--wore casual clothes, clothes that were almost insolent in their slovenliness. In general, their womenfolk dressed respectfully.

I'm just throwing it out there. I do believe science will bear me out that women are less likely to break the law then men, or commit violent crimes. And for whatever reason, this suggests to me that women, in general, do keep to a higher standard of civil behaviour.

It is my belief that women are a force for civilisation, and that when women give up the more usual standard of female behaviour, we are letting civilisation down. The biggest difference between the binge drinking culture of Britain now and of Britain 50 years ago, is now even the women get smashed out of their minds, fall about in the streets and get involved in violent disputes. This is not an improvement.


Ginger said...

If anything, I think the fact that there are more male criminals than women could almost be attributed more easily to women being morally smarter rather than morally stronger.

Perhaps we're better moral economists. We put more weight in the consequences of our actions (as I said about pregnancy and reputation).

In the end, humans are humans. We all have a strong inclination to sin. Why would God make one sex more inherently able to endure temptation than the other? Remember it was Eve who first bit the apple.

Seraphic said...

And as Miss Cordelia of the "Anne" books immediately retorted, "'Twas a he-creature that tempted her."

Possibly men are more tempted by men to break laws and hurt people to prove their manhood. Women are generally not encouraged to prove what "women" they are by breaking laws and hurting people, although sometimes they are convinced that "real women" do this or that sexual thing. And, yes, the A-word has occured to me, although heaven only knows how many women co-operate with the A-word because of terrible pressure from boyfriends and family.

I have no interest in beating up on men. My family is full of good men. I have men friends and mentors. I like many men very much.

I just notice that men are more likely to commit violent crimes and, in general, to shun responsibility for (living) children, and are more readily willing to commit sexual sins.

That is is why it is particularly noticeable when women do bad things men (in general) are more likely to do.

And I think, therefore, that women are behaving in a more unnatural way when they attempt to close the criminiality gap or to "have sex like men." (Not that good men really "have sex like men.")

I appreciate, Ginger, your defense of men. I haven't the slightest idea why men are more attuned to violence and promiscuity than women, although it seems to have been that way since Cain slew Abel.

"Testosterone" said B.A. just now. "Hel-lo!"

Then he added, "The Fall, innit?"

Seraphic said...

Sorry--by (living) I mean BORN. Of course unborn children are living.

Irenaeus G. Saintonge said...

Could we not interpret this in a more complementary way? Would we say, for instance, that (working from the assumption that men and women are equally weak morally) that the sins of men are more likely to be public, as opposed to the more private sins of women?
Were that the case, I'd attribute it to the natures of men and women being different, with men in a sense being more publicly aggressive or assertive, and women tending towards private passive-aggression.
I'm just kind of uncomfortable with saying that either sex is morally less inclined to sin than another. I'd rather attribute the perceived disparity to different (complementary) natures.

Ginger said...

Hey, Irenaeus G. Saintonge! I think I like you!


Not that I don't like Seraphic, of course. hehe But I just very much agree with the sentiments you express. If we're being honest with ourselves, woman are all about appearances. And that's great in some respects. Appearances are important and maybe they, in addition to other things, keep us from committing certain sin for fear of humiliation and . But men, I think, are much less concerned with how they are perceived.

Seraphic mentioned that the men dressed slovenly, while the women dressed respectfully. Yet, a woman will dress up for a trip to the grocery store while men will go in, well, whatever. Stains on the torn tshirt or no.

On a moral level, we'll smile sweetly at other women who we loathe and then nip at them behind their backs. Men hash out disagreements with their fists.

Women have impure thoughts and desires, but we don't discuss them with each other the way men do.

I'm defending men because God created them as much as He created us, as equals. To say we are morally stronger is to say we are morally better. We're morally different.

Ginger said...

"...fear of humiliation and public censure" is what I meant to say in a sentence up there that I left incomplete after being distracted by some other point I wanted to touch upon, lol.

Irenaeus G. Saintonge said...

Yeah, I'm going to have to agree with you, Ginger. Morally different, based on our temperaments. Same way we can account for differences among individuals. I, a guy, still won't go out to the grocery store in sweatpants and a stained shirt, but maybe I'm just a bit more vain than someone who will, and on the flip side, maybe that guy who will has a bit less self respect.
That's just one example, of course, but I think this theory is easily applicable on a broad range.

Alisha said...

BTW, Happy International Women's Day...just came across this video! :) Ah, Judy Dench - the voice of authority!


Kimmy said...

I think I subscribe to Dennis Prager's way of looking at the differences between men and women's moral strengths and short comings. Neither sex has a more moral nature than the other, only a different set of moral weaknesses. Men tend towards outward physical and sexual aggression (which society definitely expects them to control), while women tend towards passive-aggression (as Irenaeus was saying), and emotional thinking (which society sanctions). And I can definitely say, as a woman, that emotional thinking is a real problem for any human being looking to do the right thing - as opposed to the right feeling thing.

Women's moral shortcomings aren't as obvious as men's, but they are every bit as damaging to society's moral fabric. The moment we women stopped disciplining our natures (when feminism became sexual revolution) is when we began to have this exponential proliferation of abortion on demand, uneducated and troubled kids, and unwed mothers. Just think, here in the states, one of the most determinative factors of male imprisonment is if the boy had a father in the home. Now, since women no longer go looking for husbands, but rather hookups, who deserves more blame?