When the President of the United States, in his re-election campaign, states, “Voting’s the best revenge,” it makes one wonder. We could downplay, ignore or dismiss such a statement as insignificant or realize that it reflects a significant, deep-seated attitude that is quite unsettling. Having concerns about the basic ideological and practical approach that President Obama has demonstrated, I can only conclude that this is a statement worth taking seriously, one of which to be concerned. I can easily see five groups upon which he, and those of similar mindset, would like to get “revenge.” The five groups are Capitalism, America, Christianity, Men and Caucasians.
Revenge on Men
The “revenge” attitude is unreasonable. It will manifest itself, on many levels, in unreasonable and ultimately destructive ways. Even as I explain this particular target of revenge, along with the others in this series, it should become clear that such a “root of bitterness” springing up defiles many and creates very twisted scenarios. Certain approaches toward promoting change rely heavily upon conflict. Within this revenge drama, conflict abounds. Using terminology such as “war on women” is a case in point. Consider how foolish it is to declare that there is a “war on women” because a business or institution, that has no duty to do so, does not provide female contraceptives. It is stated that they are preventing (might need to check the definition of the word) women from having access to contraceptives. What nasty monster would do such a thing? MEN, of course! Much of the women’s liberation movement is generated by resentment toward male “dominance.” The bold, often belligerent, declaration and insistence that a woman has a “right” to do with her body as she chooses (meaning, according to our unique social language, she has a “right” to abort the baby who is developing within her) is also an item one will find in the twisted wreckage of our revenge collision.
I am in favor of healthy male / female (or female / male if you prefer) relations. I am in favor of human rights. I am in favor of women’s rights and men’s rights and children’s rights. How we define such rights is a matter of ideological presuppositions.
Emphasizing women’s rights, aside from its general connection with a healthy approach toward human rights (often the case with special-interest groups), produces unhealthy, unproductive distortions. Of course, in this scenario, men are the oppressors. Instead of focusing upon the nature of healthy male / female relationships, revenge thinking only encourages a form of role obliteration or reversal labeled as equality. Revenge only produces a different type of inequality. There is a difference between providing solutions and “getting even.”
This attack on men extends to the realm of the aggressive push toward giving homosexuality social credence. To encourage the emasculation of men is somehow a demented step toward victory.
The outcome of “revenge” toward oppressive men will produce the oppression of men. The oppression will result as role distinctions are denied and women, due to pride and power seeking, take on roles they are not designed to play. I know of a young woman driven by “equal rights” who took a position with a crew of road workers. One day when a rock became wedged between the dual, rear wheels of a dump truck in muddy terrain, she was told to climb beneath the truck and remove it. At this, she demanded to know why they asked her to do it!
I end with an obscure quote from Agenda 21, a ploy for controlling private property that states, “Particular interest should be paid to the needs of women and indigenous people for economic and cultural reasons.” What a strange age it is in which we live.
 Consider the writings of Alinsky and Marx for example.
 As consistently stated in these articles, true oppression and abuse must be corrected. Using actual or supposed oppression or abuse as a ploy for the advancement of one’s ideological agenda is simply further abuse.