|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodness, that was fast! Normally these sensationalist cases seem to drag on for eons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and here is the reaction on the MS. Boards:
http://64.29.220.68/cgi-local/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?u bb=get_topic;f=5;t=002543
Brought to you by the sham mirrors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks John, I still don't know how to make those links.
Brought to you by the sham mirrors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday March 12, @08:22PM EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
"She was indicted in only three of the children's deaths"
How exactly did they indict her of only three of the five murders?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My boyfriend thinks it's probably so that if they found her innocent of these three they could come back and get a new jury for the murders of the last two.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is exactly why. If they didn't get a conviction, they could retry it knowning what tactics they'd used to try and overturn it.
Sneeky tactics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Searched the NOW site. One reference to Andrea Yates.
Houston NOW is "Down." *ahem*
Yep, it looks like the fix is in there, doesn't it? I distinctly recall last fall I did a search at now.org and there were a couple pages with Andrea the Butcher on there.
Mutability of the past, and Houston, you have a problem.
Oh, how thick the hypocrisy is. They really got their boobies caught in the meat grinder on this one, didn't they? Hehehehehehehehe.
Oh, before I forget....
Yes! Yes! YES! Yesyesyesyesyesyesyes! OH, HELL YES!!!!!!!!!!!!
Excuse me. I need a cigarette. How sweet it is...
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday March 12, @11:31PM EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
You're the one who seems to have a problem Gonzo.
I really hope women learn from this not to be a stay-at-home mother, not to have a large family and home-school your kids because hubby wants it, not to look after your ill father, let alone spoon feed him and most of all not to trust that your husband is going to look after you should you become insane.
Burn baby burn yourself creep
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
keep crying there radfem. You're on the wrong message board.
Brought to you by the sham mirrors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I think you're a nitwit. But moreso, this kind of thinking drove me far away from feminism - women are not smart enough to make their own choices about their families and obviously are all dominated by their meany old patriarch husbands to make choices that aren't "popular" with the "I'll be a strong career woman!" feminists would like to think every single woman aspires to be. Sorry, I give women a lot more credit than those types of feminists, which I strongly suspect you are, ever will.
Unfortunately, that also means those women will have to pay the consequences when they committ crimes - especially brutal ones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday March 12, @11:52PM EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
How do you expect a woman who has been brought up on this crap and who is a stay-at-home mother to come into contact with anyone who may be able to help her with the brainwashing she's been subjected to?
No hon, I'm not a nitwit, you're the nitwit. You surround yourself here with a group of cocks and look on as they trash your own gender endlessly. You're the nitwit and it's very sad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So now it's her parents' fault for killing her children? She was a nurse, she did not stay in her parent's home until she was married and then was chained in her house. Didn't happen like that. She went to school, she went to college, she had a job and she CHOSE to become a stay-at-home mother. She CHOSE to have that last kid that sent her over the edge. Even if she was "brainwashed," there are plenty of other women in that exact same situation who did not drown their children - I know one lady who has had 9 pregnancies and 7 children, didn't systematically drown them because of being 'brainwashed' into her lifestyle as a Christian homeschooling stay-at-home mother.
I'd rather be here than amongst feminists who can't possibly imagine women experience more than about 3 emotions: "I'm a victim!" "I'm an angry victim!" "I'm an angry victim who hates all men!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"If any lack of trust should exist, it's the blind trust men have in allowing women to care for the children. Given the fact most abuse is dished out by women against children."
And yet all we hear about is men's violence against children. That really gets me going. Despite the fact that WOMEN are the ones who commit the most child abuse and murders, the radfems have done a great job in getting everyone to believe that men are to blame. How many times have you read "help us stop violence against women and children"?
Brought to you by the sham mirrors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @12:04AM EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
She may have chosen to stay at home with the kids but she most certainly didn't choose her upbringing which was the cause of her thinking she could home-school five children suffering post-partum depression and still be alright.
Precious of you to say men should be more careful of who they choose to look after their kids.
Me thinks you're all going to end up with very little choice of women that are willing to sleep with you let alone have kids with you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"She may have chosen to stay at home with the kids but she most certainly didn't choose her upbringing which was the cause of her thinking she could home-school five children suffering post-partum depression and still be alright.?"
Of course, she's only a woman, she can't think for herself, right?
Brought to you by the sham mirrors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @12:27AM EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
Excuse me, but men are never brought up to think of themselves as slaves are they? They don't have to "deprogram" themselves because they're not taught this garbage about their role in life to begin with. I wonder how easily thinking for yourself would have come to you had you been taught your whole life that your job is to stay at home with kids, give birth to them without painkillers and home-school them on top of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ha Ha Ha, the "I'm a victim" bs again. I don't know what planet you live on, but here on Earth, girls have had choices since before Andrea Yates was born.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Excuse me, but men are never brought up to think of themselves as slaves are they? They don't have to "deprogram" themselves because they're not taught this garbage about their role in life to begin with. I wonder how easily thinking for yourself would have come to you had you been taught your whole life that your job is to stay at home with kids, give birth to them without painkillers and home-school them on top of it."
No, not at all. Men were not told that if they didn't function as breadwinners they would not make good fathers. They were not told to be protective of women at all costs.
But you know what? I realize that men can screw up. I understand that men can "think for themselves" and transcend such roles ascribed to them. I even realize that in many cases, men do bad things to other men, women and children.
Are you familiar with the concept of "an adult"? When men do bad things, I, unlike you, am not so quick to look at what circumstances in which they were brought up. Yes, in some cases, previous circumstances may explain bad behaviour, but that still does not excuse men from their crimes. So why shouldn't the same apply to women?
Let us accept your mode of thinking for a moment. Let us assume that Andrea Yates had no ability to think for herself and choose not to stay at home with her kids. Perhaps, as you say, she had been taught all her life that it was her duty to be a housewife, no matter the costs.
Well, what about the man who has been raised in an abusive household. Day in and day out he had witnessed his father beating his mother and came to believe that hitting was the only way to deal with any female. How would you respond to this?
All of a sudden there is no excuse for violence, right? Heck, feminists have been saying that for years.
So what is it going to be? Either you accept the fact that Andrea could think for herself and commited some very serious crimes. Or you stick with your view that she could not think for herself and was somehow a victim of the patriarchy. The problem is that if you maintain the latter, you run into some problems. Just as Andrea should be excused for being the victim of circumstances, so should abusive men (and women). So what is it going to be?
Brought to you by the sham mirrors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ok I will attempt to educate you about the men's movement issues since it is so obvious you have never studied anything other than school distilled feminist rhetoric. (NOTE: i have a degree is psychology and am working on one is sociology and have a couceling theory background so if you want theory here it goes.)
Your first comment: "Excuse me, but men are never brought up to think of themselves as slaves are they?"
ACTUALLY they do, it is a well known and extensively studied fact that one of the main roles that men feel obligated (ie slaves to) is fulfilling the role of breadwinner by working. ANYONE that takes a moment to look at the theory on this area can easily see that men are slaves to their work. The social pressure to fulfill the breadwinner role is so enormous that many men commit suicide after losing thier jobs not to mention commiting suicide soon after retiring due to the loss of identity. So men are slaves.
Your second comment was:"They don't have to "deprogram" themselves because they're not taught this garbage about their role in life to begin with."
ACTUALLY men have to deprogram themselves much more than women do currently. Women have a well known and public forum for the discussion of restictions on gender roles that limit them. Men do not. Infact many gender studies theorist (surprisingly feminist theorists) recognize that the male gender role is currently much more limiting and restrictive than the female one. A simple look at the acceptable options allowed for women in dress, work, and speech and the limits that men have in the same areas will show this to anyone that is not blind.
Your last comment was:"I wonder how easily thinking for yourself would have come to you had you been taught your whole life that your job is to stay at home with kids, give birth to them without painkillers and home-school them on top of it."
My reply to this is I wonder how easily you would feel careing for someone after working a 12 hour day, degrading yourself by asking your family to help you with your children and wife, having your five children murdered by the wife you love and trusted to care for them.
I honestly do not expect to have an open and academic dialogue with you but I always give people the benefit of doubt. One of the key problems I see with the majjority of feminists is that they refuse to recognize that feminist theory has a built in excuse for ANY wrong doing by women. All the problems in society are simply placed in a simplistic pyramidical structure that assumes men have all the power in society. By extension all womens problems are a result of mens attempts to retain power or subjugate women. There is absolutely no way to see women having any fault for any of their actions since they are assumed to be in reaction to the oppression of patriarchy (ie. men).
Once again I will offer you the opportunity to take part in a serious discussion of gender and step back from the assumptions of feminist theory for a moment and look at the issues with a clear lens. it's your choice.
Tony H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @12:35AM EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
How many children have you given birth to without the aid of painkillers jerk?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So child birth is an excuse for murder now?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My mother gave birth to three without painkillers and didn't kill any of us. She stayed at home for 13 years and homeschooled us as well and didn't kill us. She was near bedridden for a three years during that time and STILL didn't kill any of us. And amazingly, she remained an active member of the feminist community. If giving birth without pain killers turn women psychotic the human race would've died out long ago - somehow it managed to keep going.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
None, of course.
Now. How much of your genitalia was cut off without the aid of painkillers?
And to how many baby boys in the USA does it CONTINUE to happen, daily?
Well. At a no-anesthesia rate of approximately 50% (slightly increased from the 45% rate cited in Stang & Snellman's 1998 Pediatrics-published survey)[1], and one infant male sexual mutilation every 30 seconds (slightly decreased from HCIA, Inc.'s 1998 statistical report)[2], that would be ONE PER MINUTE.
ONE NON-ANESTHETIZED MALE SEXUAL MUTILATION PER MINUTE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
ALL DAY LONG
ALL WEEK LONG
ALL MONTH LONG
ALL YEAR LONG.
Despite the infant right to intact genitals being guaranteed by federal legislation.
. . .um, oh wait -- IF you're a FEMALE minor, that is.
Shove THAT in your 'childbirth without painkillers' crackpipe and smoke it, dearie.
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
[1] http://www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/101/6/e 5
[2] http://www.hcia.com/findings/990513_circum.htm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How many children have you given birth to without the aid of painkillers jerk?
Anonymous, you ignorant slut.
You have no idea what men go through in their lives.
You don't want a baby? Get your tubes tied. Or abort it.
Even Andrea Yates' brother said Russell Yates "did his best ... He trusted the doctors and he did everything they said to do. He made sure she took her medication."
Her SHRINK had Russell Yates have his wife taper off Haldol. Russell Yates took her back to him on June 18. The doctor said he saw "no sign of psychosis" and sent her home. Then, two days later, she killed their five children.
The doctor said Andrea Yates was getting better.
So he does - WHAT? Quit his job to care for the kids? And who puts food on the table?
The religion was both of theirs - not just his. So what's he say, "Gee, sweetie, I just don't trust you, you're a nut!"
So he brings his mother up to watch the kids every day. Leave for work at 9 a.m., his mother arrives at 10 a.m., and he thought he had the situation under control. Soounds like a responsible thing to do. But he wasn't omniscient! Let's just crucify him!
So he tries to keep home stable, be cheerful and brave and strong (Like men get brainwashed to do)And hope to hell the medicine and treatment works like the doctors say.
Like the doctors say "mood swings" and depression, not "Homocidal Urges."
And he probably had denial. I work with a lot of mentally ill people and their families, chicky, and facing it in someone you love is easy for you to say. Her father had died - AND SHE SAID SHE WAS OKAY!!!!
The decisions on more kids, contrary to pheminist propaganda and claptrap were also mutual. In fact, SHE wanted to try again for a girl.
Oh yeah, her best friend says "HE" didn't help out much around the house. I didn't notice her ass out supporting 5 kids, a wife, and her medical bills. I'll change places with her there ANY day - and I have done it with 7 kids for two years in a halfway house/orphanage setup. And they all had behavior issues. So I do speak from experience, chicky-poo.
So you take your narcissitic, self absorbed, cult of victimology, rich white "oppressed" suburbanite pheminist bullcrap, and stick it in your ear. SUCK IT UP! Be a man, instead of whining, you pissy-assed little two year old. You and your kind dismiss Russ Yates and all he did, and you couldn't walk a hundred feet in his moccasins let alone a mile, you worthless gas-bag.
She was Convicted. She's a murderess. Guess what? Women have faults, and it means you might too; yea, oh yea, the beans are spilled. Kiss your genetic moral superiority of women goodbye, sissy, because the cover is blown!
SUX 2 B U!
LOL!!!
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"How many children have you given birth to without the aid of painkillers jerk?"
How many excessive overtime hours, long commutes, and dangerous/stressful jobs have you worked where you risk your life and limb every day and destroy your own health (all the while being blamed for "earning more" or for "patriarchy") so that your partner can give birth and can, by choice, stay home and raise kids, and jump from career to homemaker and back without being locked into the breadwinner role?
Maybe you should re-think who is the jerk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @02:00AM EST (#29)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually I don't think any male child should be mutilated just as I don't think any female child should be but I can see that you have no idea about the pains and complications of childbirth.
It's quite a bit different from getting your foreskin removed I can tell you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @02:17AM EST (#30)
|
|
|
|
|
PREACH!! Brother
Rub their faces in the blood!!
PREEAACH Ack!
Bill the Cat would be so proud!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ACTUALLY!
it is the women in the feminist movement that have pushed for natural childbirth. It has been the feminist movement that has pushed for the reduction of drug use during the child birth process. As a new father and someone that was there at EVERY doctors appointment, and every minute from the moment my wife stepped in the car, the birth and the next 4 days I and offended by your accusation about not knowing the pains and complications of childbirth. (I actually counted the hours I was gone in those four days and it was less than 3 since someone had to go home and get clothes, mail, phone messages etc.)
ALso your trying to use the female biology as some claim to a greater understanding of pain. if you want to really get into this I can discuss the facts about female biology that allows her body to deal with childbirth without drugs. (BTW my wife was all for drugs and our MALE doctor's exact quote when discussing the topic was, "I do not give out awards for the most pain endured."
But I seriously doubt your mentioning childbirth was to discuss the idea of pain but to deflect attention away from the issue of widely accepted and LEGAL mutilation of men.
Tony H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Women and men who've had a spinal fussion are quite clear in saying it is FAR worse than childbirth. Yet, femanuts seem to think that no male could possibly know anything about pain...
Weird.
the Volksgaren Project: Intelligent Abuse Recovery, http://clix.to/support/, jaxom@amtelecom.net, 519-773-9644
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @09:28AM EST (#40)
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe a trip to the psychiatrist yourself is in order?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDC Reports on Infant Homicides: 1st year, 1st day riskiest - 89% known killers, Mom
From the CDC Reports on Infant Homicides
ATLANTA 3/8/02
The risk of getting killed by someone is greater during the first year of life than at any other time before age 17, the government reported Thursday.
Infant homicide victims were most likely to be killed during their first week, with 82 percent of those slayings committed on the day of birth, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said.
The sixth through the eighth week _ when babies cry more persistently _ was the second peak period for infant homicides, the CDC said.
The agency studied more than 3,300 death certificates from 1989 to 1998. Homicide is the 15th-leading cause of infant deaths in the United States.
Of the babies killed on their first day, 95 percent were not born in a hospital, the CDC said, citing earlier studies. About 89 percent of the known killers was female, typically the mother, researchers said.
Dr. Len Paulozzi, the report's author and a researcher in the CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, said the study demonstrates that prevention measures must be targeted at the earliest stages of a child's life.
"You need to be involved really before the delivery of the child in order to really head off infant homicides," he said.
Dr. Frederick Rivara, a pediatrics professor at the University of Washington, said he believes the findings reflect the many pregnant teen-agers unsure of how to cope with being a parent.
"It's obviously a tragedy given that there are a lot of people in the United States who would love to adopt a baby," said Rivara, former director of the Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center in Seattle.
"We need to have these teen-agers know that there's help out there for them and there's an alternative to concealing the pregnancy and not allowing the baby to live."
Researchers noted the report was subject to faulty homicide counts.
Some deaths were probably not recorded as homicides because of unintentional injuries and deaths attributed to sudden infant death syndrome, the CDC said. Others might have been wrongly classified as homicides when they were stillbirths.
http://www.dadi.org/89homcid.htm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not me. I took those drugs. Sang I'm a little teapot all through labor too. Just 'cause we gotta be the ones to give birth doesn't mean we have to be masochists about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cute. I have to hand it to those women who want to go through that the "natural" way. They've got serious grit. Hell, my wife is one of them, but I wonder if she'll go through with it.
If it were me, I think I would take the same route you did, Wiccid. Can't imagine I would even be a little bit conflicted about that, but I suppose we'll never know... :))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, Nagz, ask yourself this: If you were going to be kicked in the balls every ten minutes or so, and the kicks got more frequent and more intense until they were about 30 seconds apart, and this whole thing was going to last for anywhere from 6 to 36 hours, would you take the drugs?
As for me, I might try to tough it out the first time, but I doubt I would last if I had a choice, and I doubt I would be as courageous the second or third time.
On the other hand, once labor starts, mom has little choice but to see it through. I think it was the villian in Disney's "Aladdin" who said "You'd be surprised what you can live through." Having sat with my wife through all three, and having seen other women nearby on those occasions, I have to say that, while they survived it, the women I saw had little real control over themeselves, especially in the later stages. Childbirth seems not to be so much something you conquer as something you survive.
I will say this: a woman who goes through it a second time without some sort of chemical painkiller is either very well conditioned to deal with the pain, or much braver than I'll ever be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
>Just 'cause we gotta be the ones to give birth >doesn't mean we have to be masochists about it.
Never said you had to be one, babe, just meant not having drugs doesn't mean the mother is going to kill her children.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A woman I vaguely know [over net] has recently quit her job to be a stay-at-home and is living completely on the child support payments. :P imagine if her ex-husband [or ex-boyfriend, I don't know her that well] lost HIS job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I marvel at the power you think men have over women, and the ability you have to understand her situation from the court case and reports. I also marvel at the concept that women sleeping with men is something that will be taken away, as if it is a reward for being a good boy. In fact at times it almost seems like a punishment. But that aside, I wonder if you were following this trial so closely you were not aware of her recieving medical attention for her problems? Also that her husband's mother was coming over after the baby was born to help her.
The issue of home schooling is a religious decision, and one of the problems of fundamental thinking. As is the lack of birth control, and what you are persieving as the patriachal control you feel her husband had over the family. To place the blame of religious thinking on the shoulders of the male population is a tradition of the feminist mindset. Again this is the concept of "active" as oppose to "passive" involvment. The perception of women as passive in decision making relieves them from the responsibility of the actions of a decision.
I believe that this women was mentaly compromised. I think that anyone who commits murder in some way has a psychological condition ranging from a "personality disorder" to psychosis depending on the severity of their condition. It seems to me that if she responded to treatment and medication then it is surely concievable that during her hospitalization she was psychotic.
Of course the question here is was she psychotic during the period she commited the murders or was she just depressed. Though religious posturing is common with psychotics it is of course also common among religious fundalmentalist (which one could assume from the reports her and her husband may have been0. This alone does not make her psychotic.
Are we to assume that any mother who kills her children is psychotic? If so do we assume that every woman who kills is psychotic? Do we afford the same to men?
She killed her children to protect them against satan. Muslim extremists kill to protect their people from satanic influences of western civilization. White supremists believe that their cause is just because they can find validation in the bible. Men in Saudi Arabia were recently beheaded, in Eygypt over 70 men in recents months were jailed and sent to hard labor, and in this country men have been murdered all for being gay and all motivated by hatred from interpretors of religious works. Are all these people who back these actions and participated in them psychotic? Could the real problem be hateful religioius interpretations? The schizophrenic blurring of love and hate in religous text. If it is possible then why is it assumed that only women are oppressed by this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Me thinks you're all going to end up with very little choice of women that are willing to sleep with you let alone have kids with you.
Aha: here is an admission of the kind of power that women often deny they have!
Well, if they're going to deny this is a kind of power, we can help them by acting as if they really don't have the power they deny they have through a simple act of volition: I tell myself that only women at most 5'2" tall are sexually attractive.
Try this gedanken experiment sometimes. It is, if I may say so myself, utterly brilliant in its simplicity and scope; it has the effect of instantly neutralizing the power that the troll wishes a large population of women to have over men.
Even if you don't believe it, try this simple and brutal exercise. My intuition is that you'll be suprised at how liberating it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aha: here is an admission of the kind of power that women often deny they have!
I know what you mean, Mars, and the sad thing is that it is the kind of power men can have if they bother to exercise it.
Ever notice that a great many women chase the most unavailable man around? We have the "fag-hags" who are convinced that they can convert avowed homosexuals if they can only be enticed by their feminine charms, women who pusue married men almlost exclusively, and a score of other examples from just about any man's life.
Years ago, I took stock of this, and adjusted my attitude. I stopped looking for women, in fact resisted any attempts to "hook me up." and began patronizing an escort service. $45 for an hour, hell it was cheaper than dinner and a movie, and no uncomfortable dancing around whether or not sex was going to happen.
It wasn't a year, and I was suddenly irresistable, and the more indifferent I was, the more irresistable I became. I found also, if I gave in, I lost the charm as a "conquest" of their sexuality.
I went almost 5 years like this, relying on my escort service for sexual release when I needed it and otherwise picking and choosing dates and encounters on my term, and I rarely did without.(The downside was the couple of near-stalkers that became irrational) Yeah, I dated, and I'd make it clear that I only believed in a long term relationship on my terms, to wit, I wasn't an emotional tampon, my house was mine and suggestions were unwelcome, I had certain hobbies and outside interests and they weren't open for discussion let alone negotiation, and any long-term commitment would be accompanied by a written agreement. And that a date meant I expected sex after a certain point, failure to enthusiastically and joyfully participate would be the last such date.
Mars, it was astounding. I never disclosed my vasectomy - and I had three women turn up pregnant trying to get a piece of my action. (Two had abortions when they found out ol' Gonz couldn't be stuck with the bill).
I had women sighing in relief that there was a real man left in the world.
Most weeks, I had to arrange a social calender to accomodate the demands on my time.
By making myself unavailable, I made myself irresistable. And I finally found a devoutly anti-feminist woman who is educated, contributes to the household, and recognizes that my 60 plus hour work week is harder than her 30 hour week, and sees keeping a house not as something demeaning and doesn't start nagging the minute I walk in the door. (And since she doesn't nag, I see no problem with getting out the harsh chemicals and doing a Saturday morning cleaning, and moving the heavy stuff so she can vacuum underneath.)
Mars, women outnumber men. We have the commodity. Add in to this equation the number of men who are gay or irredeemably so repulsive they are just hopeless, we have about 9 women buying for 7 men selling. Do your economics, supply and demand. Hold out, and you can eventually name your price.
I'd encourage every man to do this, and that would seize control of this horsecrap away from the pheminazis. All it takes is an act of will.
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I certainly hope that the men's movement isn't going to turn into the feminist movement. I am getting rather tired of the who is more violent than whom arguments. The fact is, human nature can be violent. But the vast majority of parents, both male and female, are not abusing and will not ultimately kill their children.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You're the one wah! who seems to have a problem Gonzo. I really hope women learn from wah! this not to be a stay-at-home mother, not to have a large family wah! wah! and home-school your kids because hubby wants it, not to look after your ill wah! wah! father, let alone spoon feed him and most of all not wah! to trust that your husband is going to look after you should you become insane.
Burn baby burn yourself creep wah!
Awwww.....! Is the poor lil' pheminist troll get ums feelings all hurt by Mean Old Gonzo?
GET A LIFE!
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I understand the political implications, and I guess I feel that justice is being done in the Yates case, but ... five dead children. no. No. NO!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @02:28AM EST (#32)
|
|
|
|
|
innocents in the grave
not a moment for rejoicing
nor marching
leave vengeance to those authorized
that doesn't include the state
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
innocents in the grave
(good point 18 year old men being required to fight in wars if not by choice then by force and with the support of the women and mothers and daughters at home)
not a moment for rejoicing
(I totally agree! How easily we forget to thank all the men that have died and sacrificed thier lives to allow us the freedoms we have today)
nor marching
(Oh this reminds me of how men were not allowed to march in the Oregon Cure for breast cancer march until this year, even if they lost love ones or survived breast cancer themselves.)
leave vengeance to those authorized
(EXCELLENT point the only people morally and legally excused in acts of vengence are women since men have repressed them for so long.)
that doesn't include the state
(ABSOLUTELY! That is one of the purposes of this site and a small portion if the men's movemtn is to not let the state allow women to get away with crimes.)
Tony H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @04:04PM EST (#64)
|
|
|
|
|
we're all relieved, tony, at last to discover that you are god
learn to direct your vitriol
ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
although i recognise the roots of the anger that arise in these discussions we engage in, i believe that name-calling and otherwise hostile statements made are ultimately detrimental to our goals. i assume that we're working towards an understanding of one another through discourse and perhaps a mutually satisfactory perspective, if possible.
tension within these forums rises in the state of conflicting viewpoints and we seem to have the potential to lash out in accusitory and degrading language. i think that this hinders us more than it helps us. those on the receiving end of such statements are far less likely to listen to the concerns and perspectives we hold when we place them on the defense. although this applies to the visiting, anonymous users as well, i believe that the responsibility falls upon us, the regulars of MANN to maintain a certain level of civility as these heated discussions take place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'll address hostility.
You can run far and wide on the internet where men gather to discuss the issues of men, and where you find places that give these trolls voice, and don't call them on their misandry and androphobia, you find places where they are taken over by those same folk.
Yourself, Brad, and Nazgul later, are basing your point of view on a flawed premise. It is not rational debate these phoney egalitarians want. Look at the language. It's shaming language they use. Pity Andrea Yates. She's the real victim. Protect her. Be a man. Be chivalrous. Blame Russell Yates. It's a cadenced drone, designed to appeal to the lizard brain, that says "Protect the female of the species at all costs."
It's an illogical appeal to emotion, and utterly contrary to fact. And the intent of this is two-fold. First to diminish and dismiss the concerns of men, and second to elevate the concerns of women in its place, thereby changing the subject.
This is not a request for a debate, and I wonder what kind of debate it could be. It's a moral gimme here. Five kids, four drowned and laying on the bed, one floating in a vomit and waste filled tub, by a woman who was frantic to do it before her mother in law could get there and stop here - willful, calculated, mass murder. In the space of less than an hour, Andrea Yates brought a little bit of Dachau to Texas.
Russell Yates - who may have followed a different drummer, with the help of his wife - a loving, dedicated, hard working father, deprived of his flesh and blood by a narcissistic self absorbed woman who obviously didn't want help, to take responsibility for her own well being. Who worked to the end to get his wife better, and now consumed with grief and brainwashed into thinking that somehow no matter what he did, it wasn't enough.
Where's the debate? Are the children not murdered? Did not Andrea Yates murder them? Did Russel not try his best given what he had to help her - medicine she didn't want to take, counselling she wouldn't follow through, help she wouldn't accept? Have her committed, or try tpo, only to have her psychiatrist testify, "Hey, she can't be that bad, I took her off the medicine." Then what - out of the house and probably with a restraining order so he can do no good? Or maybe he should have chained her in the basement - effective, but hardly legally supportable.
These trolls are not here to debate, they are here to belittle, demean and dismiss, and the get that hurt pouty look, with their little lips aquiver, and appeal to some "chivalrous" man to defend her and champion her cause. And in so doing, devide, conquer, and deflect the issue to "Be nice to poor widdle powerless, oppressed, lip-quivering pheminists."
In the words of General McAuliffe, "Nuts."
Andrea Yates is not a victim, she's a murderess of the most vile sort. Five children who never got to have a life, and a man who buried his five children - a thing no parent should ever do are the blameless victims of her vicious, brutal and willful act. These points are fact, not open to debate, and the discussion proceeds from there, after they have been acknowledged and embraced.
Awareness of "post partum depression" needs to happen. I agree. It needs to be seen that it is another thing that proves that gender is not a basis on which to assign primary custody and caregiving. It needs to be seen that our doctrine of "tender years" is outdated, outmoded, and dangeous to children. There's your lesson.
Read the driviel put out by pheminists all over the place, and what they want - Andrea Yates in treatment, to be released soon, and Russell Yates on Trial in her place. You can dress it up however you want, but that's the tone of the pheminist editorials and self-righteous preaching from the NOW gang. Of course, except that NOW remoived all evidence of their support from her and placed a gag order on the Houston Chapter.
Empathy? For Russel Yates and his children, I have much. Sympathy for Andrea Yates?
Check in the dictionary between shit and syphilis. You'll find it there.
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @01:46PM EST (#49)
|
|
|
|
|
i am suspisious of u because there was almost no trols on this sight until u showed up
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm suspicious myself of anonymous posters who hide their identity and make cheap shots at people on the board.
Many people here take off the masks and stand behind what we say. "Anonymous Cowards" like yourself are in no position to be making foundationless accusations of anybody who has the courage to place a name and an email behind what the say.
I can vouch for the bona fides of many people on here. Where's yours?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"i am suspisious of u because there was almost no trols on this sight until u showed up"
Actually, there were.
Brought to you by the sham mirrors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Andrea Yates is not a victim, she's a murderess of the most vile sort.
Yes, I agree with that. At least she is being held accountable for what she did. May this set a trend.
Read the driviel put out by pheminists all over the place, and what they want - Andrea Yates in treatment, to be released soon, and Russell Yates on Trial in her place.
I don't think he should be put on trial in her place... after all, *she* drowned the kids, not *he*--but I do to wonder... it seems weird to me that *after* she began manifesting severe psychiatric symptoms (she had postpartum psychosis with the next-to-last child, if not before), they went on to have *more* children.
I'd be skeptical of having more kids with someone who turns out to be so mentally unstable... I have to wonder what the hell they were thinking when they did that.
Even if schizophrenia isn't directly inheritable as a condition, the susceptible brain chemistry is inheritable. I'd be worried about passing that on to offspring.
But hey, that's just me. My father was/is a paranoid, rage-aholic, woman-hating jerk. I have to wonder about not only his sanity but that of my mother, for having married him and then stayed with him through 19 years and four children.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even if schizophrenia isn't directly inheritable as a condition, the susceptible brain chemistry is inheritable. I'd be worried about passing that on to offspring.
By that account, I should have never been born then.
My mom's side of the family seems to have that "susceptible brain chemistry". I'm mentally quite stable.
I don't remember if schizophrenia has associated triggers, but still, it's quite alarming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is very alarming. My ex-husband and his father are bipolar; his father's sister is schizophrenic. I found out his family mental health history when I was 8 months pregnant. (He didn't know either.) My ex wasn't diagnosed until our daughter was almost 3. She's 8 now, and except for a seizure disorder she seems to be mentally stable. But given her family background, I worry a lot about future manifestations of mental illness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have to say, after perusing the exchanges that have been fired on this thread between the men's advocates and "anonymous" feminists, I am a bit disgusted and discouraged.
What I have not seen is any reasoned, dispassionate debate. This has shown me yet again how far we have to go as a people. Name-calling, invective, and narcissistic whinnying has characterized all of it. As ususal.
Personally, I take the side of the men's movement on the Yates case (and most others). Left to my own devices, I would love nothing more than to sink my teeth into the illogical, fact- and substance-free personal attacks and broad ad hominem generalizations that PC feminists visitors have posted. But frankly, it feels like I'm stepping into the middle of a massive shouting match devoid of any gainful content. This is a microcosm of the larger debate going on, and it reminds me a little bit of the aftermath of the Tower of Babel. We are all at each other's throats, speaking different languages.
In theory, it is possible to hash out these arguments in a sane and lucid fashion. But the more I read, the more I study, and the more I am exposed to the issues, the more I am crestfallen at the total lack of empathy exhibited by either side.
I may have to abandon my involvement in these gender-oriented topics, as much as they do mean to me. I fear for any children I might someday have, and lately, I have wondered if we are capable as men and women of passing on a world to them that respects them as individuals. Fighting the battle on a different front, that of academic freedom, might be the only truly rewarding fight I can go for. The hate I see seeping through on all of these partisan discussion boards has become too much.
Christ, people, does anyone really understand the meaning of love anymore? Failing that, does rationality enter into the picture somewhere?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well nazgul
The radical feminist did this to the genders, not men and over the last 50 years. Yes we have responsible feminist, most females are not feminist but NOW and other group’s say they speak for all women. So now some Men have NOW had it with DV, restraining orders, divorce, child custody, child support, paternity, sexual harassment plus others that are all one sided against men and for women without even due process.
Does anyone really understand the meaning of love anymore? NO
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have to stand with Ronn, Gonzo, and others here.
As long as men are demonized, we have a right to be damned angry about it, and telling angry people that they have no right to their anger is only going to add fuel to the fire.
I'm fifty odd years old, and except for my son's wives and a grand-daughter I have no use for women in my life. This is because of what feminism has done to society. Romance is dead, and feminism is its murderess.
Is there love? No. Who needs it? It's just another opportunity for a woman to weasel their way in your life, break your heart, abandon you, rob you blind, and leave you with a stack of bills you never contracted for. I do know the meaning of love, and feminist dogma that places "self-fulfillment" above anything else, sure as hell isn't it.
I've yet to meet the woman that has the loyalty of a good dog. Gonzo used a good word, namely, narcissistic. That describes how feminism has programmed the average woman nowadays to be self absorbed and blind to anything but their own little world. I'd add parochial and self-centered too.
I've no desire to be used, and for sex I'd as soon hire a prostitute. It's more honest that way, with fewer deceptions and games. And at my age, who needs it more than 2 or 3 times a month? It's just not worth the aggravation.
Honestly, I'd as soon have a men only area, because I've grown sick and tired of having to hear the "woman's perspective" all over the place shoved down my throat. I get enough on that with the local news and their token bimbos, and if I cared, I'd read the Woman's section, or if you'll excuse me, I believe the politically correct euphemism is the "Lifestyles" section. Can't we have just one place to ourselves where we don't have the stench of estrogen all over the place?
Whatever is said needs to be said. Anger suppressed only ferments into rage. A while back there was a hubbub about violence, and expressing it, for men, is good. Read your communication books. Men are venters, they blow off steam, and get it out of their system for the most part. Bluntly put, women, coming to a men's place, need to understand, accept, and respect that need in men and kindly keep their mouths shut about it. It's what men do. Deal with it, get over it, or go back to the knitting club where everyone negotiates some "consensus" whatever the hell that means.
So, no, I have to disagree too. The "Trolls" are getting exactly what they deserve, and I for one say it is high time people named them for what they are, troublemakers and verbal bullies who just need to be stood up to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @02:54PM EST (#55)
|
|
|
|
|
then go sumwere els and whine, crybaby. u r fucking up the discushun and debate on this sight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So you are one of those who don't want equality for the sexes, but for men to have their rightful place and women to shut up about it. Got it. But I ain't shutting up.
And Romance isn't dead. Otherwise the greeting card companies and flower shops would have been long out of business. Sure there are men out there who are real jerks, just as there are women out there who are manipulative bee-atches. There are also good, decent men and women out there. If 50% of marriages end in divorce, that still leaves 50% of marriages intact. I know couples that have been together since junior high and are now in their 30s, 40s or 50s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @03:19PM EST (#60)
|
|
|
|
|
"A while back there was a hubbub about violence, and expressing it, for men, is good. Read your communication books. Men are venters, they blow off steam, and get it out of their system for the most part. Bluntly put, women, coming to a men's place, need to understand, accept, and respect that need in men and kindly keep their mouths shut about it. It's what men do. Deal with it, get over it, or go back to the knitting club where everyone negotiates some "consensus" whatever the hell that means."
right on the bulldog's back, proudman
that's how guys do it -- scuffle it out and see what's left standing
ooh, but it sounds so violent!
no, my roadgrader flattening your poodle is violent
these are words in cyberspace
instead of sneaking around, guys hash it out, and it's for the best
bumps and bruises are inevitable
unfortunately trolls like post # 55, and even site regs, often try instead to stifle expression
yah, 55, i recognize your infantilized syntax from prior threads
lemme repeat it, so it makes your dreams tonight
stoke thy oven with breath foul, for you will burn in it
ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @04:02PM EST (#63)
|
|
|
|
|
weh weh weeeehhhhhhh i just a bully who talk loud but do nothing weh weh weeeeehhhhhh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So you are one of those who don't want equality for the sexes, but for men to have their rightful place and women to shut up about it. Got it. But I ain't shutting up.
Au contraire. I'm all for equality. I think you all should have your own private henhouses too. And I for one wouldn't want to come within a mile of the places, so kindly mark them promiently with towering neon signs.
And Romance isn't dead. Otherwise the greeting card companies and flower shops would have been long out of business. Sure there are men out there who are real jerks, just as there are women out there who are manipulative bee-atches. There are also good, decent men and women out there. If 50% of marriages end in divorce, that still leaves 50% of marriages intact. I know couples that have been together since junior high and are now in their 30s, 40s or 50s.
Valentines day gathering. 500 women wanted to go, and only 2 men.
You can argue with me but you can't argue with the figures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, whatever. You go on living your sad, lonely little life and I'll go on living mine - with a husband who among other wonderful qualities is also romantic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It doesn't sound to me like he has a sad and lonely life. Sounds like Mistah Proudman just doesn't choose to share it with women.
Why does that make it sad or lonely? What, a man living a life without a woman. Does that scare you? Maybe because other men will see they don't need to put up with pheminist crap? Because other men might see it's a sellers market, and might decide, hey - surrogate for kids, prostitute for sex, and if you want in on it, on my terms.
Hmmmmmm. Sounds like Proudman struck a nerve there. Hit a little close to home, eh wot?
Struck you right in the old female privilege?
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think paying a prostitute for sex, rather than having sex within a committed, loving relationship, is very sad and lonely. Sorry if you don't agree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday March 14, @04:20PM EST (#76)
|
|
|
|
|
right, gonz
actually, i detest the use of sexuality as a tool of commerce and power
but each man’s conscience must be his guide in these matters, and to pay overtly is far better than the covert tithe with which males are now saddled in “relationships”
the first work each man wishing to be free must accomplish is the personal work gonzo described
western men are deeply addicted and subservient to females
this is the power – even more than their police and “laws” and mancages – that keeps males, even avowed masculists, from being effective against gyneocracy
before any legal or socio-political changes happen, each male must take back his own body and spirit – which means just saying “no” to females, across the board – beginning with our economic and sexual slavery
the second step is teaching boys that they also need not be tools of the feminine – and that’s a toughie, because kids are owned by women, and are conditioned to bow to anything feminine
it can be done, however, boy by boy, sneakily
in midlife i also reached the watershed gonzo describes, and overturned the biological tables
i began expressing – not merely feigning – disinterest in the sexual and emotional “wares” of females
you’d a’ thought i’d undergone “tom cruise” plastic surgery
pretty quick the babes were hounding ME – and i mean hotties too, across the entire spectrum of ages
it comes down to this – like any animal, females can smell fear on a male, and most females, in my experience, take advantage of that fear from that point forward
as soon as i lost the fear of females, and got off my knees before them, presto!! – more babes than i could possibly handle
no, i ain’t shittin you, boys, it really does work – though my route wasn’t quite as calculated and conscious as gonzo’s – i fell into it basically out of disgust
i hear men whining and challenging others, complaining that no-one gives them concrete masculist strategies and activities
amazing – hey, take back YOURSELF first, before worrying about rinsing the courts, academy, and other matriarchal institutions
come on, boys – i’m a broken down old fuck in goodwill clothes – no home, no money, no fame, no come-on lines, goofy looks
the only thing i changed was my subjugated attitude – and as soon as i started respecting myself, and gazing down any female trying to catch my eye – whoa momma, they did come running to me
try it, you’ll like it
ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just hope you and your prostitutes are being checked thoroughly for diseases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think paying a prostitute for sex, rather than having sex within a committed, loving relationship, is very sad and lonely. Sorry if you don't agree.
How dare you? Where and how do you get the nerve, let alone the right to judge me?
Shall I begin to judge you, and tell you how you should run your life, and behave? No, wait, I'm not a feminist. I have too much class for that.
You have not clue one about how my life goes, or how I feel within it, and that attitude of "We know better what is good" is just the one that the vast and overwhelming majority of women have that makes it not worth my time to sort through the chaff to find the few that have escaped that curse.
Next time you even think to take someone to task for speaking about you or judging someone else, look in the mirror.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prostitution is illegal in most states. Among other things, it is a health hazard. I wouldn't want my daughter to be one. I wouldn't want my stepsons to visit them. But that's just me. I have goals for my kids; among them, long lives preferably free of STDs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday March 14, @05:19PM EST (#80)
|
|
|
|
|
bullshit
covert prostitution -- the vampirism of male libido by the feminine and its institutions -- is the very foundation of western civilization
calling it "relationships" and "romance" changes nothing -- it only adds a fetid layer of "respectibility" over the commercialization of touch and sexuality
until males stop paying to be touched and "loved," they will be whipped and stomped into mush
properly so, too
obviously you lack a strong male presence in your home
like purt' near every other household in the west
i fear for your sons and daughters
ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday March 14, @05:22PM EST (#81)
|
|
|
|
|
p.s.
hey, where's my toady?
what, i'm not important anymore?
i want my skulker back!!
wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday March 14, @05:30PM EST (#82)
|
|
|
|
|
weh weh weeeehhhhh i say covert so much because i think all are out to get me weh weh weeeehhhhh i think i know it all so i critic others wif fowl languidge weh weh weeeehhhhh i say i fear wen oll i really want is to flame u weh weh weeehhhhhh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well he is no John Wayne but he is brilliant, helps around the house,is great with the kids, shares my political opinions, can fix anything he puts his hands on and is the only person I know who can beat me at Scrabble. And he is really the head of the family, both ours and his extended family's, though fairly young for the title.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday March 14, @06:15PM EST (#84)
|
|
|
|
|
if he's brilliant, he wouldn't "share" your political opinions
he'd form his own and live by them
something mr. wayne, by the way, was unable to manage
what a fake -- "greatest generation" my ass
sold their own sons down the river
that said, wiccid, i appreciate your presence on this board
REAL diversity is beneficial
and best of all, my slithering friend is back!
fell down on your stalking gig a bit, tho, dincha?
your babytalk is as tired as you are
don't fizzle on me now, wormtongue, i'm just heating up
i feel whole again!!
ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"if he's brilliant, he wouldn't "share" your political opinions"
I guess I should have left that out; but he doesn't hold them because they are mine. That was just dumb luck that we found eachother and are in tune.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday March 14, @06:34PM EST (#86)
|
|
|
|
|
weh weh weeeeehhhhh i so full of hot air i float wen i fart weh weh weeehhhhhh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
>if he's brilliant, he wouldn't "share" your >political opinions he'd form his own and live by >them
But what if they reached the same political conclusions before they met each other?
my boyfriend and I have a couple of differing ones, but for the most part the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just to me, I do not feel anonymous trolls who come in with the express purpose of causing trouble with illogical statements deserve a fair debate. I have seen very logical, sensible debates go on here, but when I feel one person does not want to play fair, when they just want to shout bumper sticker slogans it is their own fault if they are called names or not treated with as much respect as someone who presents an actual argument.
I hope you do not leave this entire movement because I called someone a "nitwit."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wasn't singling you out by any means. But take a quick look at where the thread following my post wound up.
Fittingly, it ended with an anon-fem pointlessly holding down keys and mimicking baby sounds like a gradeschool harpy. And that wasn't even the worst of it. If that is the depth to which these people are willing to go to advertise their self-aggrandizing, sophomoric, ignorant irrationality then we are truly hopeless. Most astonishing, it is people like that who fund groups like NOW and actually have their voices heard.
No, Evil Maiden, I wouldn't single out your "nitwit" remark as the sole source of my dismay. The problem runs much deeper, and there are times when I feel the forces of self-interest are too firmly entrenched into the concept of democracy for things to advance with any sense of fairness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday March 15, @07:44PM EST (#90)
|
|
|
|
|
by no stretch is it proven that my personal troll is a feminist
consider – my posts are monitored daily, whether i post at ten a.m. or midnight, on sunday morning or thursday evening, and the “wah” reply is usually posted within minutes of my comment
even the most obsessed fem would have to monitor this board virtually around-the-clock – and do almost nothing else – in order to respond with such immediacy and consistency
much more likely, it’s an inside job – someone who monitors the board in the course of their regular daily activities
i make lots of enemies with my comments and style, on both ends of the gender continuum
somehow, wah consistently "evades" the moderation system
still, the whole notion tickles me
i had no idea i was so important, and effective
ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @10:01AM EST (#41)
|
|
|
|
|
Where I live, when arguments where put forth about how Yates must be insane (because a woman is never intentionally malicious) it was front page news for months. Now that the verdict is "in" - the story was a second page story.
Local Fox news began their coverage as "It's a sad day for women's health care as Andrea Yates has been found guilty..."
Hypocritical misery merchants, I hope they all choke on this story for a long time... I'm glad that the mostly female jury in Texas could see through all the bullsh*t.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Her defense lawyer said this was throwback to the Salem witch craft trials and that it was a very sad day for the mental health community. [paraphrased] He got the timing wrong, however, it was June 18th that was a sad day where her physician failled to put her back on her medication - could've prevented the deaths of her children.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder if Russell Yates will divorce his wife? If she is not given the death penalty, I mean. Seems he'd have ample grounds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I doubt it, he's said he'll stand by her through all of this - I doubt that just because a jury has decided she's guilty he'll decide that she is too and will change his mind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well we have some fun and games but did you kiss us first. So now I know how I stand in your mind.
This could be fun if I did not already do this with others like yourself. It is useless to argue with a person like yourself (one without a pinis) For you are a victim and need protection and also have boobs. I have to female daughters and it would make me sick for me to see them grow up like you. Do you hate men so bad, do you wish to change places with me. Do you feel so abused and so helpless. Get off your fat ass and work to make this world a better place. You have Just PISSED OFF 1/2 of this planet. And you think you will win in the end. Get a CLUE.
Ronn
Mechanical Design Engineer - Masters Degree / MIS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Many of you have noticed that many feminists have supported Yeats, and a few of her lay-defense attorneys have nearly proclaimed her total innocence.
What is amazing are the number of those on the other perceived-side of the political spectrum who are joining in with near defense of Yeats, but mostly this right-wing, blaming father Yeats for the crime.
I am just now listening to a talk-show program in an extremely conservative city, and attention has now turned on the father.
Most of these people, right & left, claim the father should have foreseen his wife's [incredibly unbelievable & unpredictable] murdering of all their children.
First of all, occurs to me: Do these people now believe that the father is a professional psychologist & therapist?
But assuming that the dad had suspected his wife a little unstable, he is hardly likely to even suspect in his wildest dreams, that she would drown all five in cold blood.
So, assuming his most radical suspicions at the most, assume again, that he had approached outside help. What is he going to tell them? That his wife, a loving mom with five kids, is nuts? He would have probably been the one judged nuts, and maybe put away. Or at the least, more likely, have been removed from his family as a bad influence & instable. (and forced to pay child support to the crazy killer, but assuming not for long, she was probably soon going to kill them all anyway)
Had the father been removed and placed under restraining order, he would have left his children even more vulnerable to his wife.
What could he have even begun to reveal in his case, that even equals the historical revelations of other such cases of suspicion, cases much more than just suspicion. Often the killer mom has had to kill at least two of her children to even get initial attention from authorities.
Look at the Marie Noes case, all ten of her kids dead, none even reached two years old, killed at least eight of them over twenty years.. doctors knew, neighbors suspected to the point of not leaving their own kids around Marie. (after confessing nearly a half-century later after her first killing, Marie's sentence is to walk. Or to drive to see the shrink. She is a sweet old grandma, or would be had any of her kids lived to have kids.)
http://www.phillymag.com/Archives/1998April/noes.h tml
Let's assume that a somewhat suspicious father Yeats had managed to get some minimal outside attention. What would have been most likely? No intervention.
What would have been the second most likely? That all his kids would have been removed by the child-protective squad, and placed in a public home.
The other amazing claim by the father's prosecutors, is that he is a patriarchal demigod who forced his wife to have all these kids.
I suppose if as she claims, God made her do it. Then now, in addition, the father god at home made her do it.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO START SPREADING THE GUILT OF THE MOM ALL AROUND TO OTHERS, THE FATHER AS EQUALLY OR MORE GUILTY.. WHY STOP BLAMING THE GUILT THERE? KEEP GOING, TO THE REAL GUILT WHERE MUCH OF THESE KILLING MOTHER CASES LIE & ARE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN. AND WHERE THE REAL CRAZINESS IS. BLAME THE LEGAL SYSTEM. BLAME THE NATION. AFTER ALL, THIS NATION IS NUTS!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
He knew she had post-partum depression - he got his mother to stay with her all but one hour while he wasn't home. The doctors knew she had post-partum depression. They had her on Haldol - but they took her off it. Russel Yates brought her BACK to her doctor because he thought she needed her meds again. Almost immediately after that she killed her children. I think he did as much as he could, save divorcing and putting a restraining order against her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 13, @09:42PM EST (#71)
|
|
|
|
|
finally, a moment of sanity
thank you, dogfree
bark on
Chuck Wagon
|
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
