[an error occurred while processing this directive]
LA Times Exploits Men Again, Practices Bias in DV
posted by Scott on Thursday June 28, @09:57AM
from the domestic-violence dept.
Domestic Violence Marc Angelucci writes "The LA Times spit out yet another anti-male piece on DV from a purely male=perpetrator perspective. You can read it here. The title says it all: "Helping Boys Be Boys, Not Abusers: A group called Mothers and Adolescent Sons aims to break the cycle of violence that often stems from fathers." They just can't seem to get off their gender-profiling kick. If you can, please write them a few lines at letters@latimes.com with a name, address & phone no, even if out of state."

Source: The L.A. Times [newspaper]

Title: Helping Boys Be Boys, Not Abusers

Author: Elizabeth Mehren

Date: June 26, 2001

DLJ No. 6 | Man Falsely Imprisoned Sued for CS he Owed While in Prison  >

  
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
"All Men are Rapists" (Score:1)
by Andrew on Friday June 29, @10:53AM EST (#1)
(User #186 Info)
”Helping Boys be Boys, not Abusers”: Note that there is no third category, e.g. Men. In these women's minds, a male is either a boy, or an "abuser." This explains a lot.

What I'd like to know is, how many of these Mothers with Adolescent Sons have circumcised their little Peter Pans? Although the Hispanic boy who is the immediate subject of this story may have escaped the knife, it's an excellent bet that the perpetually Angry White Women who run this show have seen to it that their own sons were cut down to size.

American women want their men weak, frightened, unformed, uncertain: easy to dominate, control, manipulate. Thus every girl can grow up to be Lara Croft and kick male butt! What they fail to consider is that a weak man who is not in control of himself will, when he feels threatened, likely resort to violence: it's the only tool he has. (Or maybe they don’t fail to consider this; see below.)

Here's the dilemma: To have men who are not violent, you must have men who are whole, developed, in control of themselves. Such men, however, will not be easily controlled by women. They are likely to be aware enough not to fall for so many of the various tricks and cons that women use to manipulate them. Furthermore, when men are strong, women must be strong and developed also, so each sex can give the other a good workout. American women are lazy; they don't want to do this work.

The truth is, when a woman can provoke a man into violence, she knows she's got a handle on him. He's not his own man. This is why, for all the endless female complaint we hear about "male violence," nothing effective ever really gets done about it. The payoff in the status quo is still worth the pain (especially, for feminist fanatics, if it's another woman's pain). So long as men are by definition violent, women can be victims and not responsible. A real solution would upset the feminist applecart.

What I find increasingly difficult to believe is that these women really don't know this. Really, it has to be obvious, if you just apply a little thought to the situation. We all know how incredibly intelligent and wise women are; after all, we know that when the Patriarchy is finally eradicated and women are truly In Charge, a thousand years of peace will immediately ensue. Pretending that they don't really know what's going on must be their little joke. You bet, girls, it's a real send-up!
[an error occurred while processing this directive]