Join the Discussion

Reply
Report this post

What makes Gregory assume misogyny or "fear of women" on Prager's part? I see no evidence of either. On the contrary, his argument is a stinging indictment of what feminism has done to women (as well as for them) over the last 40-odd years by improperly raising their expectations. A person doesn't need a doctorate degree to give his opinion, make observations, or draw conclusions, and that is all Prager has done. Prager does not pretend to offer a clinical diagnosis of depression nor prescribe a cure. He simply points out to women that society has done something cruel to them over the last couple of generations. Gregory seems to be assuming that a person needs an ASE mechanic's certification to credibly assert that a car won't run properly because it has a flat tire. Do you really need years of schooling to understand that? By the way, this fellow needs to dial down his diction a notch or two. His snotty-sounding word choice is impressing no one but himself.

Reply
Report this post

Mr Prager, your critic represents the academic view that common sense can not be a guide in drawing conclusions. Your observations meet the test of common sense and thus anathema to your critics. Most men and woman will not have careers, they will have heavy lifting jobs that grind them down over a lifetime. In that a lot of jobs held by men involve more than a 40 hr week thus the prospect of 50-50 home chores sharing is unrealistic . Your critic cannot accept the truth anymore than many of the feminists cannot accept the biological thus mental differences between the sexes. Add political correctness and you have a nation headed for disfunctionalism.

Reply
Report this post

Well, I will begin by stating that among credible sources, including the American Psychiatric Association (APA), the National Institute for Mental Health (NIMH), and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV(DSMIV)...or any other source that I could find within the realm of mental health research cites "feminism" as the cause for higher numbers of women experiencing depression than men. Really, the whole debate should end there. But to be fair, let's examine just what it is that Mr. Prager is saying here and why he feels as though he qualifies to draw such conclusions about women and why so many of them are depressed. While Dennis Prager is a well educated man having studied at fine universities and institutions both within the U.S. and abroad, he holds no doctorate, certificate, license or any other credential that suggests he can make any sort of practical diagnosis of depression and why and how it affects women. So it can be reasonably deduced that the above analysis by Mr. Prager holds about as much water as me stating, "hmmm, I think that children suffer from depression because of religion". While it is perfectly within my rights to make such a statement, and there are indeed personal and experiential events in my life that for me support that statement (as well as quite a few other experts with far more credibility than I possess that feel the same way), I would expect no one, least of all any audience I might be driving my point home to take what I am saying for anything other than what it is: Laymen drivel based on absolutely nothing empirical or credible. That is unless, of course, my argument comes from empirical, credible evidence. Mr. Prager brandishes no evidence to support what he is saying here, and that is important because he is discussing an issue that fundamentally demands that conclusions be drawn based upon important medical study and research. Once this laborious but necessary task has been exacted, appropriate opinions may then be drawn. The only statement that Mr. Prager provides his audience that even attempts to lend a spine to his already feeble assertion is that he is "one who regularly talks to women, and about men and women, on my radio show" and to be someone who has "informally counseled women of all ages". Well, I regularly talk to women to. I may not have a radio show, but many women have sought out my advice despite this apparent handicap in "expertise". I am not about to tell anyone, man or woman, that the status of their clinical mental health is due to feminism or the Civil Rights movement or the Minute Men or any other social/cultural movement in which its connotations may or may not advance my selfish political agenda. This appears to be precisely what Mr. Prager is doing here, however. What I may indeed say to them, at any rate when it comes to this sort of subject, is "perhaps you should consider seeing a psychiatrist". We all have opinions, and to be fair once again Mr. Prager is making his statements in an opinion column, after all. The thing about it is that it is an erroneous and unsubstantiated opinion steeped in nothing other than Mr. Prager's own misogyny and fear of women. Add to that the not-so-coincidental current event in which a very empowered woman may very well be the next president of the United States. If Mr. Prager thinks that this column is anything other than a thinly veiled jab at that potential outcome, he is underestimating at least one member of his audience.

Reply
Report this post

Re: Matt Matt said:"A person doesn't need a doctorate degree to give his opinion, make observations, or draw conclusions, and that is all Prager has done." ...after I had already said: "We all have opinions, and to be fair once again Mr. Prager is making his statements in an opinion column, after all." Matt, did you read my comment in its entirety? Because that line specifically addresses your criticism, and did so before you even made it. The point of my comments was to challenge Mr. Prager's assertion based on the idea that he is drawing conclusions about a subject, a specific subject, that demands research and is informed. I took issue with his opinion because no one in the medical community, that I could find, is citing "feminism" as a cause for higher rates of depression in women. I think that it's fair to challenge what Mr. Prager is saying, as well as to assert that there exists a hostile agenda behind drawing such conclusions. My opinion of the column is that Mr. Prager is attempting to undermine a valueable movement that has done a lot of good for millions of people, as well as insert seeds of doubt in the minds of voters in the current political climate. I could absolutely be wrong, of course, but considering the writer's MO, I think that perhaps I am not. As for my "diction", I am quite happy with it, so I concur with your critique. -GA