Re: Those PK's

["Max B. Sawicky" <maxsaw@xxxxxxxxx>]

> On Mon, October 6, 1997 at 15:02:20 (+0000) Max B. Sawicky writes:
> >...
> >The subjugation of women is the easiest argument against
> >the PK's, since they are relatively open about it, but in
> >practice I wonder how important it will turn out to be.
> >Why will men who have heretofore declined to dominate their
> >households now find themselves able and willing to do so?
>
> Just curious, how do you know these men are not attracted to PK
> because it provides legitimization of their treatment of "their"
> women?

I don't.  If it did, though, I think we could
expect to hear a little bit more about it
than we have.  We'd see "Wives of Promise
Keepers show you their black eyes, tomorrow
on Oprah" or something similar.  Instead, what
we've mostly heard thus far is that the wives
reckon some improvement in their mates, while
acknowledging room for more.

By contrast, the dominant theme here and with
the MMM is atonement for one's sins.  I have to
admit I don't understand this impulse too well
because I've never felt it. I've regretted many
things I've done, but I've never felt like I wanted
to file with God for total bankruptcy of the soul.

If these guys didn't have major feelings of guilt
for the way they've been living their lives, I don't
think we'd see them.  We'd have to say the jury
is still out on your hunch.

Cheers,

MBS




===================================================
Max B. Sawicky            Economic Policy Institute
maxsaw@xxxxxxxxx          1660 L Street, NW
202-775-8810 (voice)      Ste. 1200
202-775-0819 (fax)        Washington, DC  20036
http://tap.epn.org/sawicky

Opinions above do not necessarily reflect the views
of anyone associated with the Economic Policy
Institute other than this writer.
===================================================