2011 September 13 Tuesday
Jackie Kennedy: Alpha Jack Versus Beta Adlai Stevenson
Interviews of Jacqueline Kennedy from 1964 are just now reaching the public eye. She spoke in an era before political correctness would have made such admissions unlikely even in private. A bit of frankness about sexual attraction from Jackie.
Mrs Kennedy reveals she enjoyed having her husband 'proud of her', saw no reason to have a policy opinion that wasn't the same as his and laughed at the thought of 'violently liberal women' who preferred the more effect Adlai Stevenson to her husband.
She said: 'Jack so obviously demanded from a woman - a relationship between a man and a woman where a man would be the leader and a woman be his wife and look up to him as a man.
'With Adlai you could have another relationship where - you know, he'd sort of be sweet and you could talk, but you wouldn't ever... I always thought women who were scared of sex loved Adlai.'
Nice guys finish last? Well, Jackie was turned on by her demanding husband and turned off by nice guy Adlai Stevenson. Nice guys turn off many women.
Jackie sounds dumb, dumb, dumb. Well, okay, maybe an IQ of about 110. Not bright, though.
I'm not sure Jackie should necessarily be held up as a model for the ideal of womanhood. She did manage to secure three high profile mates, however, so presumably those men knew what they were getting. Perhaps she was just a mirror for their egos. But overall, neither her progeny nor the rest of the Third Generation Kennedys strike me as particularly accomplished or impressive. Mostly they seem to have coasted on their trust funds and the cachet their name provides. In the Kennedy Family you see several early deaths (overdose, plane crash (probably due to drugs) and "ski football"), serious legal problems (including the Palm Beach rape case and Dead Ski Football Guy), and a divorce rate that is probably higher than normal for the upper class.
There is now not a single Kennedy in high elective office. JFK's grandparents were local Boston politicians, and his father was extremely rich, but the myth of a Kennedy poltical dynasty rests on 3 members of a single generation whose careers covered ~60 years (from '47, when JFK was elected to the House, to '09, when Ted died). Maryland's sole Republican governor in the last 40 years won by running against a Kennedy.
There are reasons women like men who are assertive. Assertive men are regarded as leaders and show, through their assertiveness, that they have other options. It also can show a lack of condescension to the woman. A man can be assertive and "bossy" because he has to manage his time and because he has strong opinions on its best use. Such passion is (and should be) sexually attractive. But faking assertiveness by simply being a jerk will get you about as far as a Wonderbra. Once the bra comes off, your mate realizes there's nothing underneath all the show. Women who go for men who are assertive without purpose are just low class dupes.
Well put, WJ, thanks.
It seems remarkably low value of the Kennedy progeny to not even be able to maintain the momentum of their fathers and grandfather. Generating the momentum in the first place is the hard part, and all they would have had to do was do a semi-competent job.
Reminds me of the West's general fall from the 1960s through the current era into effeteness and triviality, squandering the momentum generated by our harder-working ancestors.
Sounds like a very typical woman of her time, before the feminist wave washed over America.
>"It seems remarkably low value of the Kennedy progeny to not even be able to maintain the momentum of their fathers and grandfather."
What other progeny of politicians "maintained the momentum of their fathers and grandfathers"?
JFK's father, Joe Kennedy Sr, expanded his father's momentum by engineering JFK's ascension to the presidency.
George Bush Sr. and Al Gore both expanded on the momentum generated by their fathers, who were senators.
It's too much to expect children of great men to rise to or above the level achieved by their fathers. If your field of endeavor is American politics, how do you rise above the presidency? How many Nobel laureates' children have also won the Nobel? Marie Curie's daughter is the only one who comes to mind (not counting the Braggs, who won their Nobel together). How many giants of industry have children who surpass them? Success - scientific, artistic, business, or political - arises from a unique combination of genetics, environment, and opportunity. It would be interesting to clone a few highly accomplished men and see just how much of their greatness is attributable to their specific combination of genes.
So I would be very shocked to see any in the current generation of Kennedys rise to the level of the last. But to me they don't even seem to be trying. They seem to be hanging out in the non-profit sphere serving as professional Kennedys.
One problem with engineering a next generation as great as the last is that it is mostly men who achieve greatness, but the woman contributes half of a child's DNA (slightly more in men, since the X chromosome is much larger than the Y chromosome), a dramatically greater share of their upbringing, and a better than even share of their intelligence. Genetically, you can never be sure what, in terms of nature or nurture, a woman is bringing to the table. I suspect your best bet is to look at the accomplishments of her father and her brothers, if any.
>"JFK's father, Joe Kennedy Sr, expanded his father's momentum by engineering JFK's ascension to the presidency."
>"George Bush Sr. and Al Gore both expanded on the momentum generated by their fathers, who were senators"
I'm not sure how you expect the next generation of those families to "maintain the momentum" of their forefathers. Since the progression was usually something like Congressman->Senator->President, what comes next? Emperor of Earth? Generalissimo of the Galaxy?
I'm also not sure why we should WANT long-lived political dynasties. Aren't you some sort of libertarian? You shouldn't be pining for an hereditary aristocracy.
Good points, WJ and Solaris.
The world can never get enough talented 21st century workers, though, so if lazy privileged kids seek to become serious people who contribute to science, technology, and the economy, it's more for the rest of us.
Keep in mind that everybody reading this is probably going to die for no reason other than that humankind is too lazy make SENS a priority.
(SENS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategies_for_Engineered_Negligible_Senescence )
Nice guys turn off many women.
Well, (rape aside of course) what woman seriously complains for getting a little hurt after receiving a rather large one for 15 or 20 minutes?
What woman -while on her knees- does seriously complain for being grabbed firmly or have her haired pulled back as if it were reins? A little spanking perhaps?
When a woman admires and desires a man, she silently wants to be moderately violented. It's just a female need that we also see in other mammals, and an arousing trait for males.
Jackie Kennedy was a sexist and is very bad because I always wanted to have women at your disposal. I think now it is important to make clear that everything about his past and his way of being.
Jackie Kennedy only wants her husband is proud of her, but I do not agree that women need to be abused by a man or anyone is silly and the man in a relationship can be the leader but she should not be abused by him and the man need not be the only admired but also the woman.
Ha ha "KiiD Tiago" your "comment" was very funny--in a stupid Latka Gravis way!
Jackie was raised to be a geisha girl. That is not a put down. That's what her mother was, and that's how she was raised. She was very successful at it.