It appears "children" was too specific a choice of word. Perhaps a better fit would have been "simpleton." The point being that when we engage those of opposi

It appears "children" was too specific a choice of word. Perhaps a better fit would have been "simpleton." The point being that when we engage those of opposite views by dismissing their views out of hand, we usually make ourselves feel righteous in doing so by rationalizing that they are simpletons. They are beneath our level of understanding and any attempt we make to sway them is hopeless. I don't mean to imply that the author was trying to persuade the opposition's point of view. Rather merely that the introductory paragraph exhibits the hallmarks of a closed mind, and unfortunately one that disingenuously feigns being open. I find that particularly disappointing. These labels we assign to political points of view are so broad that I find it distracting to dwell too much on historical associations of each word. Historical perspective cannot be dismissed, but if the present and past differ, I'd rather consider the present. On this subject, what do conservatives think now about women in leadership and management positions? I honestly cannot say with a straight face that modern conservatives think women are incapable of management. In fact I feel perpetuating that myth only serves to diminish whatever progress they have made toward our point of view, as if we're moving the goal posts and sneering at them for even trying. It seems like petty politics and not genuine effort to improve matters.