They’d Rather Have Their Kids as Secure Slaves Than Free Men and Women
Bill Quick

Classical Values » “No good deed goes unpunished.” (Not satire.)

She got a notice of a 10-day suspension and threat of expulsion after telling the administration last Friday what happened — and it’s apparently due to the school’s zero-tolerance policy regarding weapons on campus, WAVY-TV in Hampton Roads, Va. reported.

“I took the razor blade, and then I threw it away immediately…I didn’t carry it around the school…I didn’t use it against anyone…I threw it away,” she told WAVY.

Rachael Harris, Adrionna’s mother, told WAVY she was “shocked and surprised…that a student would get suspended for saving another child.”

“The school system overreached absolutely.”

I consider this too insane for words. Yet it does not surprise me in light of the well established track record the schools have for enforcing so-called “zero tolerance” to the point of ABSOLUTE INSANITY.

What I would like to know is why parents and taxpayers put up with this crap. Perhaps they figure there is nothing they can do. Voting changes nothing, as these things are systematized.

It’s because the primary and secondary eduction arena has become almost exclusively the province of women – and women approve of “safety” for their children over all else.

This policy was created, I would bet, and bet even more that it is implemented almost entirely by women.  Note that it was Adrionna’s mother who called this travesty “overreach.”  She supports the notion of zero tolerance in principle, and only (mildly) deviates from that support when it appears to personally threaten her own child.

Until we bring men back into the education of our children, we will continue to have a system at the mercy of hysterical, frightened woman willing to sacrifice any liberty on the altar of security for their kids.

Bill Quick

About Bill Quick

I am a small-l libertarian. My primary concern is to increase individual liberty as much as possible in the face of statist efforts to restrict it from both the right and the left. If I had to sum up my beliefs as concisely as possible, I would say, "Stay out of my wallet and my bedroom," "your liberty stops at my nose," and "don't tread on me." I will believe that things are taking a turn for the better in America when married gays are able to, and do, maintain large arsenals of automatic weapons, and tax collectors are, and do, not.


They’d Rather Have Their Kids as Secure Slaves Than Free Men and Women — 4 Comments

  1. I’m glad you posted on this. I wrote a post yesterday, then struggled with it for much of an hour before giving up because I just couldn’t spare the time. The problem was in making the point I wanted and providing examples without revealing too much of my not-necessarily-within-the-bounds-of-the-law past.

    Your take on this is interestingly different. Aside from speculating that the story as reported might not have all the facts, mine focused on the lessons the kid was learning: the intent of the law/rules doesn’t matter, only the letter of the law; don’t trust authority figures; don’t help people on your own.

    My own learning experiences along these lines may have started in the (overwhelmingly female dominated) public schools, but were continued in interactions with the police (overwhelmingly male dominated) and, really, almost any public or private organization which has bureaucracy.

    It’s possible that something about the female mind (overgeneralizing here) draws them to bureaucracy more than men are drawn. It’s possible that women in positions of authority almost inevitably change the bureaucracies in ways that men tend not to like. I think it’s most likely that it has to do with power uncoupled with being held responsible for abusing the power. Any of these three could explain the public schools, but only the last explains the police. And some combination, or something else could explain other bureaucracies; I’d not old enough to have seen government agencies or large corporations where many of the managers were not women.

    • Well, in order:

      The difference between “legal intent” and “letter of the law” is fairly difficult for even some intelligent and learned people to grasp. Oh, sure, I get that the intent of the rules in this matter is to protect our kids, and that letter of the law enforcement can have precisely the opposite effect in individual cases, but that’s a tough case to make to the average observer.

      As for your observations about the cops – cops are, in general, thugs who work for the “good side.” It used to be almost a commonplace in crime movies of the thirties and forties – the crook with the cop brother – they both crack skulls, but one took the right path, and the other the wrong path.

      Anyway, the law is designed to channel the force of the state. The cops are designed to enforce the letter of the law as the physical expression of domestic state force. And the laws, ever since Female Suffrage, have tilted more and more in the direction of safety and security over liberty and self-reliance. In other words, while the cops may be primarily male (because men are better at naked force than women are) they are doing the bidding of the legalistic, female Nanny State.

  2. I agree with this somewhat, IF you can find some actual manly men to take on the problem.

    Fact is, these days there’s a helluvalot of men that are as or maybe even more pussified than the women.