Fellow Churchillians:
 
In response to reference to 'manly man' in Finest Hour-
 
 
August 10, 2010        Since the ‘manly man’ issue has been brought up again I 
would like my side of the issue printed—I mistakenly thought it would be the 
gracious option  to  let the Finest Hour have the last word…but it is again 
resurrected and will not go quietly into oblivion so here’s the complete saga.
 
Carol Lea Mueller 
 
 
 
NOT  Churchill Chat’s Finest Hour
 
 
As a participant (cm) in the ‘manly man’ thread on line, I was dismayed to see 
it resurrected in the  Summer 2009 edition of the Finest Hour,  Journal of the 
Churchill Centre, on page 62.  An amazing selection when one considers the 
wealth of worthier material available to highlight.
 
Further, two important entries were edited out—a response to my posting by the 
originator of the thread which is not ‘lighthearted’ as his website 
(www.he-manwomanhaters-club.net) is described in the Finest Hour and my own 
omitted apologia.  To clarify any doubts, I am not a ‘man-hater’ –in fact I am 
the author of The Quotable John Wayne the Grit and Wisdom of an American 
Icon—definitely a ‘manly man’. Further, in my own attempt to be ‘lighthearted’ 
it was misconstrued that I did not think Sir Winston was ‘manly’—nothing could 
be further from the truth.
 
In the interest of being fair and balanced:
 
 
--- On Sun, 4/26/09, James T. Slattery <[email protected]> wrote:
From: James T. Slattery <[email protected]>
Subject: [ChurchillChat] Re: Book Recommendation
To: [email protected]
Date: Sunday, April 26, 2009, 6:54 PM
Dear Ms. Mueller,
 
Thank you for exemplifying why my men's only group exists.  Your response 
is similar to other women who are threatened with the idea that men might 
actually enjoy each others company and want to engage in activities without 
having to ask for permission or support from women and that men would want to 
work towards regaining their status in society.
 
By the way, my group is one of only three men's only groups that I know of 
in San Antonio whereas there are over fifteen women only groups i.e.. Chambers 
of Commerce, Scrape Booking, Bible Study, Retreats, etc. and this was Fiesta 
week in San Antonio where the Battle of the Flowers Parade was held which is 
proudly trumpeted as being lead and organized by a women's only group with 
over 600 members.  (How anyone could get 600 women to do anything is a miracle 
in itself.  I can't even get my daughter to clean up her room.) 
 
But I digress...
 
There is much more I could impart but I suspect you have the same mindset as 
other women I've encountered.  The kind who doesn't want listen to the facts 
because you're mind is set and you derive some benefit from it being so.
 
I will submit that the core founding idea of my group is that I'm, and many 
others, are very concerned about how we are raising our boys.  The newer 
generations of boys think they have less stake in their country because of the 
way they are being treated.  Even though over 64% of college students are women 
they still receive benefits and support as though they are a downtrodden 
minority.  It is also true that there are more men in their 30s living at home 
than any other time in our history.  
 
My concern is that when the next Hitler surfaces, which is likely because 
of the ego-centric way we raise our boys, their won't be another Churchill to 
take up the challenge to defeat him.  My fear is that when the next Churchill, 
if their is one, calls out the Dogs of War they'll all be slouching on their 
parents couch with no intentions of fighting for a society that has lowered 
their status and in some cases such as yours mocked them.  The bottom line is 
that more young men die defending their country than any other group combined.  
If our society continues to raise our boys the way we do and treat them with 
contempt who will protect us, the Women's Chamber of Commerce?
 
I assume your last comment about The Churchill Centre South Texas was an 
attempt to be snide and not an attempt to insult me or the fine folks who are 
members and supporters of our Centre.
 
If you're interested to learn more go to www.northernkingdom.us where you will 
see my books and links to other pages.
 
Sincerely and most respectfully,
 
jim 
James (Jim) T. Slattery
Founder, The Churchill Centre South Texas
2803 Red River Creek
San Antonio, TX  78259
Mobile:  210-601-2143
[email protected]
www.thechurchillcentresouthtexas.com
 
 
This was in response to my posting:
From: Carol Mueller <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:58:39 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Wed, Apr 22 2009 10:58 am 
Subject: Re: [ChurchillChat] Book Recommendation
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original 
| Remove | Report this message | Find messages by this author 
 
Dear Manly Man, 
  
I don't think Churchill is your man!  He went weak-kneed at the sight of a 
beautiful or intelligent woman.  He cried copiously and was terrifically 
sentimental. He married a strong, (not to say 'manly') woman and 'lived happily 
ever-after.'  He was masculine without being hateful of anyone ('except Hitler, 
and that was strictly professional...') and overall is a poor roll-model for 
your group.  His overall positive attitude comes out in all his written works 
and  could deflect your group from its purpose. Although I have not been able 
to offer you a recommendation, I see that many other Churchillians have stepped 
up and provided you with assistance. So, carry on, soldier! 
  
p.s. Are women allowed in your Churchill Centre South Texas?
 
 
My Apologia—
 
Dear Sir,
 
1-I tried to explain in my response why I was offended  and did apologize for 
any offense given on my part in my April 23 post (which I have pasted below) 
hoping to end this sorry thread. I tried to show that Churchill (who I think 
exemplifies manhood and I erred in assuming that anyone would understand that), 
in contrast to your bent, did not need to flaunt his masculinity or subdue his 
'feminine' side or was threatened by women. He was his own man so to say. Your 
message just explains what generates the underlying insecurity I sensed that 
drives your mission.
 
2-I am not a Ms. but a Mrs. I am a senior disabled citizen who respects men 
especially the Winston Churchill kind and have a very open mind. 
 
3- By the way, neo-Hitlers have already arisen. I have raised three sons who 
are willing and able to stand up for themselves and our country as have 
countless other women with and without husbands. That men and women today are 
raising strong patriots is easily verified by acknowledging and appreciating 
our troops on active duty and recent and past veterans.  I venture to say you 
are trapped in some feminazi time-warp.  We ARE raising our sons to have 'the 
right stuff.'
 
4-I am not threatened by your approach, I just don't agree with it or think it 
is necessary and myself have never belonged to a group which excludes anyone 
based on gender, race, creed or color for whatever good intentions or comic 
affect.  Besides, your list of excluding organizations doesn't make it right or 
justify your reaction to do the same. I do not know of any men or boys so 
down-trodden by women as you describe. I see loving men and women sharing 
life's challenges and relying on mutual support. Churchill quoted these lines 
from  Rule, Britannia: 'Blest Isle, with matchless beauty crowned and manly 
hearts to guard the fair...' (Triumph and Tragedy, page 26).  Churchill was a 
romantic in the best sense of the word and so are the strong and brave men I am 
proud to call friends.

5-You scoff at the idea of 600 women acting in unison and mock 'The Women's 
Chamber of Commerce' yet label me snide, mocking and a potential insulter.  You 
complain of your daughter ignoring you among other female based 
frustrations and exude a feeling that you and our current generation of boys 
are being ignored or subjugated by 'She who must be obeyed.'  Bosh!! Stop 
whining! You are, in fact surrounded by an army of manly men and boys who don't 
need you in your ego-centric view to remold them in your image. The Churchill 
Centre's mission of holding up Sir Winston as a role model is good enough for 
me.
 
Carol
---------------------------------------
4-23-09 6:35am
 
Let me make myself perfectly clear: Sir Winston Churchill was a manly, 
masculine man who was a gentleman of great power yet capable of possessing some 
of those 'female' characteristics not appreciated and apparently feared by the 
founder of  www.he-manwomanhaters-club.net  It is the difference between a 
juvenile 'rascal' and a mature man who is a gentleman and respectful of all. I 
tried to be satirical as I hope the website is intended and I understand the 
need for male-bonding and a book club just shouts out manliness; but as Freud 
would say there must be some underlying insecurity.  I intended no one to wear 
lipstick who was not a female pit-bull! Please accept my apology if I was 
offensive also--I tried to be a lady. 

 
 
 
 


 
Carol Lea Mueller
    

--- On Tue, 8/10/10, Editor/Finest Hour <[email protected]> wrote:


From: Editor/Finest Hour <[email protected]>
Subject: [ChurchillChat] Re: Churchill mentioned in an article on "man-caves"
To: "ChurchillChat" <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, August 10, 2010, 1:44 PM


See also "Churchill as Manly Man," Finest Hour 143, Summer 2009, p62.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ChurchillChat" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ChurchillChat" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en.

Reply via email to