|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is my favorite topic. Women's studies, very often confused with 'lesbians who hate men studies'.
As what is the end result in half of these programs? Well it dosnt take a rocket scientist much fuel to get to where these fembots are going. The biggest arguement they are making is based on 'ideology'rather then scholar ship. Here is a linc to my favorite girl Christine Stolba, despite those bedroom brown eyes, does not use her 'womanhood to her advantage'. http://www.iwf.org/pdf/roomononesown.pdf this should get you there, you will need an acrobat reader 5.0 , to open the pdf file. If not there is a 1-800 number that you can call for a free copy. I cannot say enough good things about the I.W.f. they are a man's best friend in this sexually hostile environment. Never be afraid to promote them. Chritine disproves a great deal of their(women's studies) books, and puts then in their place. Here is another linc you might like- http://shethinks.org/articles/an00098.cfm a nice little story by an ex NOW intern. Do I have a problem with 'women's studies'? No! I have a problem with 'Hate Studies' and thats exactly what these people are pusing forward. They are "Predators posing as Housepets" be forwarned. Take the time to read Christine Stolba's work she is going to be an important girl someday and is an important woman of our time and not just because I want to see her naked but because she's a women of heart. She's consertive yes, but she has a heart of gold that is revealed in her work(you will have to read more), that see's her dissent in areas such as affirmative action (in short she is a people person). There is also an article by Cathy Young I think, about when she tried to inteject her beileifs at a lecture but was thrown off stage, or booed or something, it was on the men's daily news recently. I believe that these women' studies have been some of the biggest impact to men's rights in the last little while. It is an unoppose "hate studies" program for the most part. And the biggest problem is it is being taken for fact over fiction. This is causing a ripple effect my friends, it attacks our universities and eventually our homes, kill it on route. Point out to everyone what exactly goes on there and sue them for creating a hostile environment. There lies have become truth. They are predators preying on young naive girls who dont know any better. They have a one sided lens of whats going on, and this is the problem.
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is an artcle I found on Chritine's work. "Lying in a Room of One's Own"
What I refer to as "Developing Skills of Hate", truly hits the mark.
May 19, 2002 -- IN the days of pre-modern medicine, the adage was: Whatever else hospitals do, they should not spread disease. In these days of postmodern higher education, the adage is: Whatever else schools do, they should not subtract from understanding. Which brings us to the subject of women's studies.
Christine Stolba, a history Ph.D. and senior fellow at the indispensable Independent Women's Forum, recently steeled herself for the ordeal of reading a lot of meretricious rubbish.
The result is her report, "Lying in a Room of One's Own: How Women's Studies Textbooks Miseducate Students." It is published by the IWF, a voice for women unlike those who have hijacked feminism.
The hijackers include the authors of five widely used women's studies textbooks. Because these represent the mainstream of women's studies, they illustrate the extent to which political screeds, the cultivation of grievances and anti-intellectualism have gained academic respectability.
The textbook's factual errors serve the transformative mission of women's studies - the political mission of agitation and mobilization, aka "consciousness raising."
However, the postmodern premise (explicitly endorsed in one of the texts) is that no purely factual studies exist. That is, "truth" is "socially constructed," and in "patriarchal," "phallocentric" societies' "factual" - scare quotes are obligatory among postmodernists - assertions merely reflect power relations of male domination.
So textbooks' assertions about the "wage gap" between men and women do not mention the fact that many women chose to sacrifice compensation in exchange for flexible work arrangements.
Certain feminists, radiating contempt to all women - the vast majority - who differ with them, disparage this choice as a "mommy track." They say it is not a real choice, it is mindless adherence to imposed sexual stereotypes.
The textbooks' attempts to cling to the myth of education bias against women founders on facts such as: Today women receive most bachelor's and master's degrees, and soon will earn most Ph.D.s.
So stuck are these books in a time warp, one text, while rejecting the traditional literary canon (too many dead white males), recommends "I, Rigoberta Menchu: An Indian Woman in Guatemala," a book which helped the author win the 1992 Nobel Peace Prize - before it was demonstrated to be fraudulent.
What Stolba calls the "women under siege" theme - what one of the textbooks calls the "matrix of domination" - is impervious to evidence. As one book insists: "The overall effect of the 20th century on women was neither liberation nor gender equality as much as it was change in the nature and meaning of their fragmentation."
The fact that women think they are better off is, the texts say, proof of how subtle and sinister their oppressors have become. The "internalization of society's views" - "internalized oppression" - causes women to have such low self-esteem that they are "absorbed into the male worldview."
That view, says one text, is apparent in the degrading stereotype of the kneeling Native American woman on the label of Land O' Lakes butter. Really.
On sexuality, the theme of many textbooks is, Stolba says, "How do I love thee, let me count the heterosexist, patriarchal ways." The "culture of romance"? Not good. It "entails male privilege." The marriage myth? Don't ask.
Fatherhood? Well, the textbooks say it is not all incest and child abuse. One textbook even finds a bright side: "At present, it appears that domineering fathers may provoke reactions in their daughters that release our feminist impulses and creative potential."
The title of Stolba's report echoes that of Virginia Woolf's splendid 1929 essay "A Room of One's Own," in which Woolf deftly suggested how many deprivations - including having no "room of her own" - could explain why a sister of Shakespeare would have been handicapped compared to her brother.
Today, a widely used women's studies textbook fulminates against supposedly phallic words and phrases such as - no kidding - "input," "plugs into," "thrust" and "penetrate." How feminism has fallen.
Home
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dan - I loved the article by Stolba on the women studies textbooks. Excellent work. I became acquainted with the IWF last year around their work at debunking the 10 feminist myths and joined their organization immediately. I think they are doing important work. I was however, shocked to see an article that seemed to be bashing males. It's called "Menopause Envy: Not all guys were changed by September 11." and seems to make fun of Jed Diamonds book and men who are seeking greater understanding of their health. The author also takes stabs at men who cry, calling them "weeping warriors" and pokes fun at Bly and Moore in the process.
The title itself is a put-down "Menopause Envy
Not all guys were changed by September 11."
Seems to imply that 9-11 changed men. That's a crock. 9-11 changed people's perceptions of men but the men had always been men....and then it implies that those wheo weren't changed by 9-11 are the sensitive ones who cry and worry about male menopause.
I wrote them a note to let them know how much I appreciated all they do but that this particular article was indeed an example of misandy and this was a sad shock that they would allow it. You can send them a note here info@iwf.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Great insite , Tom.
Im a kind of guy who takes the good with the bad.
I think Christine Stolba is an important woman of our time.
With all this hatred towards men, its some times hard to realize when women are just being women.
I for one have been deeply disturbed by 911, the images of the tragedy are overwhelming. But men are conditioned to not respond to this, its typical warrior stuff that my SENSI ingrained in my thought process. 911 has also opened my eyes up to a great deal of other horrendous acts around the world, and to say I have no feelings on this is just wrong. Jesus tried to instill compassion in the hearts of men, but as men, we know we have to balance these things out because it is detrimental to the survival of our wives, children and ourselves. Historically this may be the reason women often choose big strong men as mates. Men are loosing in the government because they dont bitch, its thats simple, we've been out bitched. The squaky whell gets the grease, but unfortunately in this battle of the sexes, to many victims of domestic violence are the ones controlling the stories. Its not actually a mass conspiracy, its just hurt individuals looking for revenge and have simply generalized their approach. They are not very well educated and objective and the one's now that are rely on this one sided approach for money. Its sad really. Forgivness is the answer in the long run.
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tom: The author also takes stabs at men who cry, calling them "weeping warriors" and pokes fun at Bly and Moore in the process.
Just another example of a female who is insecure in her femininity. A real woman wouldn't feel threatened by vulnerability in a man. :-)
Larry
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly Larry. Agree completely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree that they can be rightfully called "hate studies," or perhaps "lies and deceipt and misandry" studies. But I don't agree that they're "lesbians who hate men studies".
Although there are lesbians in the courses, there are more straight women in them than lesbians. I don't know why we have to bring people's sexual orientations into the picture. It's amazing how alot of u only do this with gays but not straights. If Bill Clinton were gay, we would not only attack him for giving all that money to feminists but we'd tie his sexual orientation into it. Since he's straight, we don't say "oh that heterosexual man-hater who gave money to NOW." Why is it that when we attack straight feminists we don't mention their heterosexuality but when they're gay we mention that they are lesbians?
It's not even true that all, or even most, lesbians hate men. Some of the lesbians that I know feel strongly that they *are* men, and some of them are far, FAR more supportive of men's rights than a hell of a lot of straight men and women are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry , Marc. I didnt mean to go over board, and I have really though havent I.
But, I will say this, that a great deal of the teaching is geared to a lifestyle in lesbienism. Which I ultimately dont mind, but its the big swindle isnt it. Sure there are a great deal of individuals lesbiens who dont mind men at all. The point is these bad apples, have designed women's studies to encourage the lifestyle and probably are marketed to women who dont realize that thats what they are getting into. This is disscussed by many comentators of these course outlines.
But this is so much like the indoctrination at many women's shelters, they watch films they read pamplets and healing books, many of which are so misandric I cant begin. These women are in extreme vulnerable posistions and are very open to influence. What is being created is a dogma of hatred to ingrained the healing will never begin and the hatred will always be fueled. These people are Predators posing as Housepets, warn your children of these people.
I admire your ideals marc, and I encourage further critisims. I am not a 'right winger'
or a 'left winger' Im trying to balance whats best for right now I think. Frankly all this right wing left wing stuff is confusing to me, so much propaganda I dont know who to believe, I think it was wise to try and not polarize the two sides on men's rights issues.
But at the same time I will use what ever works. And the iwf girls are making some good cases.
Keep up the good work, Marc!
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jezz Dan! You're a cool guy but use paragraphs for gawds sake! :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"You're a cool guy but use paragraphs for gawds sake! :)"
I failed grade 10 english 5 times, does it show?
Im really trying with my grammer, I am struggling with it, I dont know why I cant pick it up as fast as I would like.
I wanted to be a writter too. irony
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh I wasn't complaining about grammer. People who nitpick on grammer suck. What I meant was that big posts are much, much easier to read if they're split up into smaller chunks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Dan, if you'd been a professional writer from day one you'd probably be writing for some misandrist rag instead of MANN.
Nice to see everyone back so promptly after our little holiday, except the Anonymous trolls of course.
Although I was finding troll slappin' quite the sport.
I must say that I feel for Bill Clinton, blamed as he often is for financing fema-fascism.
I wonder if you or I or Marc were the victims in a domestic violent relationship what would we do to placate our abuser.
"it is easier to support a popular cause than a just one"~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"I must say that I feel for Bill Clinton, blamed as he often is for financing fema-fascism."
You're right. I'm not attacking Bill, just making a point about sexual orientation. I even voted for Bill once, but I stopped supporting him when I saw how much power he handed over to the feminists. He gave new meaning to my luv bird's tongue twister, "feminists femi-fib the femi-feds who femi-fund the femi-falsehoods that femi-feed the femi-fury that femi-fuels the federally funded feminist femi-fable factory." But no attack on Bill intended.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
""Hey Dan, if you'd been a professional writer from day one you'd probably be writing for some misandrist rag instead of MANN. ""
Not really sure how to take this.
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was rather taking it as a given that all mainstream publications today are 'misandrist rags', and not suggesting that you would select one.
"it is easier to support a popular cause than a just one"~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thats what I thought.
Your probably right, I used to support a lot of feminists causes.
But silly me, I was out to try and solve the problem, accidently found out the truth.
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Me too Dan. That's what brought me here. I fell for the, "we’re here to liberate men as well as women."
It was kind of a shock when I first saw legislated discrimination.
You see, a decade or two ago, we made a mistake. We ('liberal minded people') supported people who, we thought would get the job done, who would have the energy and commitment to break down the barriers. We knew they were bigots of course but we figured that they were on a tight leash and nothing could get out of hand. We thought that we would ‘use’ them in the vanguard and then drop them when a point of equity was reached.
Usual result of course. I'll be damned if I'll make that mistake again which is why I appreciate a lot of what you write; it seems to be pretty gender equitable. Of course without bringing into the fold, the extremists we may have less support in the short term but our end will be justified BY our means.
"it is easier to support a popular cause than a just one"~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Of course without bringing into the fold, the extremists we may have less support in the short term but our end will be justified BY our means."
Well, I dont know if we need extremist persay, what we do need is dedicated individuals who are strong willed, persistant and capable. But after all that is said, it will have to be an independant choice for each person.
In the end we need to constantly think about "Cause and Effect", which means when fighting for your "cause, dont forget about the effect of that cause"
With that logic in mind we will not need radicals, we will need men and women to understand these concepts.
I dont think women generally want to destroy men, but with the constant indoctrination of hate towards men it may become more apparent that they do. This is much like a religeous endevour of anti-semitism or anti-christianity . And this may sound harsh but there is logic in this aswell, if the Christians became anit-whatever for not other just basis than to have a superior advantage in life, I would have to turn on them myself.
I hope my statements are clear. I consider myself to be a christian, and as far as I know, christ was about loving everybody, regardless of their mistakes.
These people that have set into motion this wheel of hatred dont realise that 'hate has no friends' or 'allies' that this will turn against them as quickly as it feels safe to do so.
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dan. You have a great deal to say and we are interested. So, I suggest that you start by limiting your paragraphs to 5-6 sentences that express and support a single thought or idea. The first sentence is the topic of the paragraph, and the subsequent sentences explain the idea of the first sentence. This will be hard at first, but it will get easier as you practice.
Worry about the grammar later. Just focus on your paragraphs and making smooth transitions. This is simple and will help you in a big way. Then you can worry about all of the confusing grammar rules later.
Cheers!
Warble
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Warble,
I still think my browser is doing some of this on its own.
I must have checked off a funtion or something.
I will look into to it.
Until then I will try and write as clearly as I can. Thank you for the encouragement.
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think the web settings are set to something too, that is condensing my words.
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I cannot imagine any self respecting autonomous human (let alone a feminist) agreeing to being told what to say and what not to say .... in a university setting or any other.
This is just mind-boggling. I think back to my college days and try to imagine anyone trying to tell me not to speak my mind. I just can't fathom it.
Maybe I scare peopel half to death or something .... but I can't imagine someone daring to tell me not to voice my opinion, much less in a university setting. I just can't imagine that happening! Ever!
The only way it can happen is if a person allows someone to shut them up. I can't imagine any self-respecting feminist being that docile and subservient ... to anyone! Something does not compute.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My mediation coach has feminist leanings, theres no doubt. She is also some sort of minister, able to perform marriages etc.. Now, Im thinking there are different levels of feminism. One being the average girl who thinks, well "I care about feminism and Im concerned about women's rights and all, you know" , I get this statement a lot. Next, is one learning about stats and reciting them, then theres the ones in counceling positions, reading up on all the "books", some have degrees but for the most part, maybe grade 12 sometimes less, but some good some bad, unfortuanately all to many of them ex-victims bent on revenge. Then there's the university prof. who just loves to recite indocrination and speak political tidbits almost anonymously raising eyebrows of some of his/her students. Then there's the ones truley making a living off this type of "politic" these people depend on these 'Myths' they are the ones who taint the paint in the bigger picture. They can range from Profesional opinion makers, people who work for the police in 'Domestic Violence' who tell the police, "yea or nea" if someone posesses a threat to society or the ex. People who sell "masterbation" mags such as Cosmo or MsPrint magazine. They know things like "RAPE" are attention getters, insert advertisement here. They are much like the ones working at the top of Crises Centers that need your money and funding to perpetuate old stats, or make up new ones. These people are very well networked, and only to happy to hear more Misery .
A person like my prof. When the subject comes up, are skilled at deffering the remark and changing the subject when dissent arises. Women's suffering has turned into such big business that it could be labeled "hazarderous" (as she gets many referals from women's councelers) to allow for dissent. Be for warned of these people, if we are ever to accomplish something we have to stick to things like 'cause and effect' things like 'objectivety'. We have to be sure not to become dependant on the very same thing we are fighting.
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I cannot imagine any self respecting autonomous human (let alone a feminist) agreeing to being told what to say and what not to say .... in a university setting or any other.
I suspect there wouldn't be codes of censorship if the instructor were not having students challenge the materials. People just do not normally swallow outright lies without making objections. So the solution, have the students sign a gag order.
There has been many times where I've disagreed with a professor. Their solution was to move on to the more concrete theories and qualify the questionable materials. If they were wrong, the professionals corrected the error and moved on. I believe USC should have this professor do the same without a code of silence. Otherwise, feminist studies becomes feminist lies 101, 201, 301, and etc.
Warble.
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh I agree there are definitely codes. This, however goes on in all kinds of college environments.
I once took a weaving class in college (as an elective I was not an art major). I mistakedly thought a weaving class would be a place where you could learn how to use a loom and create some piece of fabric. Once in the class I learned that weaving is "art" and that "art" was supposed to make a political statementn.
I sincerly wish they had made me sign something saying I understood this beforehand because I would not have taken the class if they had. I wove a piece of cloth that I made into shawl and almost failed the class because making something utilitarian was uber-taboo .... apparently everyone in the class knew this in advance except me. (Nothing in the course syllabus would let you in on this little secret).
It wasn't until I made up some total BS about the layers and colors in the shawl representing various things (I think about the mistreatment of Indians or some lame BS I cooked up overnight) and stuck some branches throught it that I got a passing grade.
College can be a bunch of hoo-ey sometimes. IMO much of what goes on there is subjective to the Nth degree. A BA should really be a BS and meant literally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"IMO"
You know I keep meaning to ask someone what this means.
can someone explain?
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IMO="In my opinion"
A variant:
IMHO="In my humble opinion"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A female friend of mine who is a member of SAFE is enrolled at a women's college and she signed up to speak at a domestic violence program sponsored by the college. When she told them she was going to tell the stats on how women initiate the violence as often as men, the woman overseeing it said, "I don't that that would be appropriate at a women's event," and when my friend insisted that was the right thing to do, they kicked her out of the program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is to much marc.
Hey is it possible for her to write up an editorial, story, whatever on this???
I like to pass things like that around.
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would tell her to complain at the school's equal rights board (or a similar type office) on campus. The fact that they allowed her in then silenced her due to her opinion is very discrimitory. (but not at all surprising)
One of the things that has encouraged me in my school carrer is that the majority of women I talk to who have taken "women studies" classes recognize them as bias and male bashing. I have had more than one woman tell me they were shocked that men didn't speak up and often felt soory for the oppression they felt in the classes. As a result they are often very interested in a rational and informed opinion about men. I have found that challenging the big falsehoods of gender feminists is better left for later but opening the door with men's issues that "gender studies" do not address such as paternity rights, male health issues (physical and mental )and education. Challenging the wage gap myth is better left until they have a more open mind.
Finally the best thing to do is listen to the arguement and only address the argument not the person. By staying calm and quietly but firmly questioning the "facts" it places doubt in the minds of the students who only hear one side of the gender dynamic.
(note: I refuse to subject myself to additional emotional battery by taking any more Women studies classes)
Tony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would tend to agree that the average college-aged girl has very little interest in learning how to minimize their chances of any meaningful contact with the opposite sex, which is essentially the endgame of most WS classes. Many, but not all, young women have come to recognize patronizing pro-woman propaganda when they see it. My wife's class (the one that sparked this whole controversy) is not all that unusual, unfortunately. But with FIRE's help, I aim to see that course either altered or stricken. Wish me luck...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My wife's class (the one that sparked this whole controversy) is not all that unusual, unfortunately. But with FIRE's help, I aim to see that course either altered or stricken. Wish me luck...
I'm sure it's not unusual. Good luck, and keep us posted on anything you're able to accomplish.
BTW, as for the statement, Many, but not all, young women have come to recognize patronizing pro-woman propaganda when they see it, the rate of seeing through the propaganda seems to be increasing -- an indication of the growing influence of the men's movement? I would just change the word "patronizing" to "matronizing."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wrote FIRE and email and told them the LA Chapter of NCFM would be interested in knowing if there's anything we can do to help with this issue at USC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Someone recomended to me today, Marc. That your friend, should have gone up there under false pretences, then gave the real story out.
I feel it has come to this, I really do.
Thats why I give credit to women like Christine Stolba, who could have easily written something else and fed into the market. Courageous, in my mind, as a writer. Going against market trends is bad business, but I think Christine's not into that self identifying masterbation ideology of 'Its not your fault'.
Christine Stolba is a doer and a fixer. And does a great deal of good for her sex, which is why she's there at the iwf, which is for women primarily, its just that they are aware of balance and they realize that if you upset the balance, you put yourself at an even greater risk. They have many lessons we can learn from.
What I got from Christine, was her sence of objectivety, and just because it suits my cause I should really think about this. Christine is a born leader man or woman. There are many other women like her, search them out and tell me about them.
Its good to remember that its not women who are the enemy, but rather the ideology of what Feminism has become.
Women are a rightful birth group, just like we are a rightful birthgroup.
Feminism like Nazizim is not a birth group.
We have to learn how (if we havent already) to seperate Feminism from women.
Which means because we are attacking feminists, it deoesnt mean we are attacking women.
One major unfortunate thing, is that women will want to hold on to this 'feminist' sticker. And even when you confront them on the lies with actual proof, you have to remember they are people who have been lied to, and they really believed they were doing the right thing. Nobody likes to feel like they were a "dupe".
This will require tact and understanding compassion on our part.
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, Dan. And quite clearly, YOU are in love.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Are you making fun of me Marc? :)
Well, yes, my own objectivety is skewd by Christine's pretty brown eyes. You figured me out. My heart was in the right place.
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“I cannot imagine any self respecting autonomous human (let alone a feminist) agreeing to being told what to say and what not to say .... in a university setting or any other. “
What do you think the motivation behind this site is Lorianne. Somewhere to spend a cold wet evening?
There are laws in place that allow the violation of men’s human right and you’re surprised that some university lecturer has managed to silence anyone who opposes feminist rhetoric.
The only way that anyone can get through their college years without finding their ability to voice their views not only restricted but in many cases violently oppressed is if that persons views coincide with the fema-fascist viewpoint.
There is only one allowable view point in so called higher education if you follow that view point you will be supported, encouraged and told that it is you duty to protest at every opportunity.
“I just can't imagine that happening! Ever! “
No problem Lorianne, you wont need to use your imagination, since we are living a nightmare in which this vary scenario is set out in Guidelines for Classroom Discussion of The University of South Carolina.
“The only way it can happen is if a person allows someone to shut them up.”
God damn, it’s the fault of those weak willed liberals for being oppressed right off the course for not agreeing and then stirring up trouble by taking matters further with The foundation for Individual Rights in Education.
"it is easier to support a popular cause than a just one"~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most college students are children who are still at the stage where challenging an adult is shaky ground. There is NO WAY they could silence me or anyone else visiting this page, at least not with the threat of physical violence. But my nineteen year old daughter? Of COURSE they could intimidate her into agreeing.
Look. All these kids want to do is go to college and get their degree and get out. They'll do anything not to make that process longer or more arduous.
And the feminizis that run these programs KNOW this, and they exploit it to the max.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What do you think the motivation behind this site is Lorianne. Somewhere to spend a cold wet evening?
I have no idea what this comment means.
There are laws in place that allow the violation of men’s human right and you’re surprised that some university lecturer has managed to silence anyone who opposes feminist rhetoric.
No, I'm not surprised at all! I went to college I know the score. And this phenomenon is not limited to women's studies I can tell you! In fact I never attended a "women's studies" course because I was an architecture major. But I can tell you if you did not hold the same architectural viewpoint as your studio teacher YOU WOULD FAIL THE CLASS. Period. This #%$@ goes on all over university campuses anywhere there is the least bit of subjectivity involved.
The only way that anyone can get through their college years without finding their ability to voice their views not only restricted but in many cases violently oppressed is if that persons views coincide with the fema-fascist viewpoint.
Perhaps. Probably. But as I stated above, this is the same in virtually ANY class as my example above cited. Want another example (warning I have hundreds)? I took a housing class where a guy was basically booted out of class for expressing his views that poor people do not deserve government subsidized housing and that we should allow slums. Now, I thought his views were stupid, but I don't think he should have been coerced out of the class. PC lives and breeds on college campuses, not just in "women's studies" classes.
There is only one allowable view point in so called higher education if you follow that view point you will be supported, encouraged and told that it is you duty to protest at every opportunity.
I agree with you on this. But it is not just in "women's studies". It is endemic to the entire University setting. I know, I was there, I experienced it first hand in virtually every class it first hand as did every other independently thinking person.
The only way to combat this BS is to speak up forthrightly and often about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
""I agree with you on this. But it is not just in "women's studies". It is endemic to the entire University setting. I know, I was there, I experienced it first hand in virtually every class it first hand as did every other independently thinking person. ""
Just wondering, is it because there are no "men's studies" that the opposition seems leaft out on campuses. I mean there is no opposition to an Archetects views, because unlikely there is another "direct veiwpoint" just differences of opinion. If the Men are evil type stuff has no 'women are evil' stuff, then it appears that the whole university is against them.
Hope Im making sence. Its just that if one ideal is allowed to perpetuate from student to student year to year, we have a ripple effect on the one subject, with no opposing veiw point being as largely periferated.
And good point showing us that the bias is not confined to just 'women's studies'.
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"It is endemic to the entire University setting. I know, I was there,"
In a way this is true. But I will bet that there were other architecture courses at your school where different theories and beliefs held more influence and still other courses had a variety of flavors of different professor's idiosyncratic pet theories. This is starkly different from a global theorhetical framework that blames an entire gender for the ills of the earth. In any women's studies course you will likely find similar rhetoric and sadly from university to university you will also find common threads in the women's studies rhetoric that are based on misandry. This is a much more pernicious monster than your little architecture class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a much more pernicious monster than your little architecture class.
How true, and how sad that some people can't or won't realize this. There is a great difference between insisting on an art style and insisting on hatred of a biologically determined group of people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wrong the Modernist theory was the only one that was taught at my University and every other univeristy for the last 40 years or so. It was/is the prevailing dogma and it has had vast and detrimental repercussions to our built environment.
FYI I was using my experiece in architecture to make a point about bias in university courses because that is all I have. I haven't been in Women's Studies classes. Have you?
In addition the same phenomenon is mentioned by people I know in other discplines, in particular History and Sociology. A free range of expression and dissent in college is the ideal but in practice it is often the opposite. This is unfortunate which was my point.
I addition, my "little architecture class" was a 5 year dual- degree in Architecture/Engineering. Your attempt at slighting my experience at University reflects badly on your debating ability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lorianne - Many have already pointed out to you how it is non-sensical to compare your arch class with the feminist lies. It simply doesn't compute. Are there bias's on campus for certain theories? Sure. One could make the same claim about psyc or astronomy but these all have the commonality of being theories and there is a vast difference in backing one's pet theorhetical position and blaming all members of a gender for the ills of the earth! Please! I think you need a little male sensitivity training. How about a little testosterone im???
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't been in Women's Studies classes? Have you?
In contrast I HAVE BEEN in other classes where bias is present and free expression of ideas is discouraged. In addition I've talked with others who HAVE BEEN in classes where bias is present and free expression of ideas is discouraged.
Deductive Reasoning: Bias and discouraging free expression of ideas in the university setting is widespread.
Speculation 1: Bias and discouraging free expression of ideas exists in Women's Studies classes.
Things to sort out: Either bias is a good thing on University campuses or it is not. Either free and open exploration and expression of ideas on Univeristy campusesis a good thing or it is not. Either censorship is a good thing or it is not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, Lorianne all bias is a bad thing.
No Lorianne, there is no comparison between the harm done by bias discussing gender relations and bias discussing, for instance, architectural styles.
Should bias be stopped even if it is widespread? Yes.
Where should we start? With that bias which promotes hate and oppression.
"it is easier to support a popular cause than a just one"~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The areas in which I take issue Lorianne revolve around the following quotes:
“I just can't imagine that happening! Ever! “
and
“I cannot imagine any self respecting autonomous human (let alone a feminist) agreeing to being told what to say and what not to say”
Is you stance to argue these issues based on your inability to imagine them. If you have an argument we ought to know. Indeed we want to know, for in the men’s movement we actually value fact and logic.
Yes it is your opinion and as such I’m sure it has some value. However, posting the opinion, that you refuse to believe there is an anti-male issue which needs to be addressed, to a men’s rights forum without substantiation wouldn’t appear to make a great deal of sense. I mean, we know there are many people out there who don’t believe that men’s rights issues need addressing but usually they at the very least attempt to construct some kind of explanation as to why this should be so.
What I was asking you Lorianne, was what is your reason for posting to a men’s rights forum to state that you don’t believe men’s rights should be addressed? (in this particular instance)
It is possible that your point about courses in general being based on a premise was an attempt to support your statement? I don’t think I need to debunk this further as all that needs to be said has been said since your last post.
For all the world you seem to be standing before the juggernaut that is the men’s movement and brazenly telling us we aren’t being discriminated against any more than anyone else.
Look , you point out: when I was doing my architecture course I, as a free thinking new age liberal architect was ‘oppressed’ too, so you men shouldn’t think of Women’s studies courses as being any different.
Interesting line of argument. Funny we don’t hear so much about oppression of architects. ‘Architects not fit to be custodial parent’, isn’t a headline we often come across. Nor is, ‘95% of the victims of domestic violence are NOT architects!’ I dare say that at the very best a national movement against one type of architect may result in less interesting buildings but that’s about it.
There is, as many people have pointed out substantively, quite a difference. Of course this is all elementary stuff. There wasn’t really anyone that thought they were the same. Surely not even you Lorianne.
This is me now refusing to believe something, I refuse to believe you aren’t a discrimination denier for a reason. Hey I can understand, most people have found themselves on the wrong end of the moral position at least some time in their lives. Who has such a perfect value system that they can intuitively say right and wrong when faced with two opposing view points? I seem to remember a quote something like:
“An honest man alters his views to fit the truth a dishonest man attempts to alter the truth to fit his view.”
A bit gender specific but I’m sure an educated person like yourself can access the meaning Lorianne.
This is the problem we in the men’s movement face. The people we are fighting have believed they were, and indeed often have been, on the moral side in equity arguments for so long that they no longer question themselves.
Hard to imagine the effect of developing a value system for years in an environment one was told was ultimately liberal only to find that the environment had been perverted to the extent that they were now oppressing others. Quite a shock I’m sure! Difficult to come to terms with.
So, does one accept a truth which, although demonstrated by the principles of the environment, ultimately devalues the environment in which the principles were developed or does one simply deny the truth and thus preserve ones own value system? Tricky decision, Lorianne, but I wish I was in a position to make such a decision.
"it is easier to support a popular cause than a just one"~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bias is endemic to University and college classes everywhere in every discipline. Naturally it is more prevalent in Liberal Arts areas than in the hard sciences, where there are more objective standards.
This is in stark contrast to what a University is supposed to be about, a free exhange of ideas. However, anyone who went to college knows that to subjectivity is a part of the game, and often to pass the class one must conform to a pre-exisiting forma and as well as the individual idiosyncrises of the professor.
For example, you are not going to get an undergraduate Sociology degree by bunking the prevailing wisdom of what is taught there every step of the way. We all know this so what's up with the pretention that is not true?
History is another area where you may be free to express your views but you may not get your degree. If a person wanted to write all thei undergraduate papers from the point of view of various conspiracy theries that are not sanctioned in history, or let's say from the pespective that the Holocaust in Europe was a hoax.... do you think that person would graduate?
In architecture it was the same. For the last 40 years if you did not adhere to the strict Modernists dogma you WOULD NOT GRADUATE. Periond. End of story. You could stick to your guns as much as you like but you'd leave school with no diploma in hand.
This stuff goes on in virtually every discipline with varying degrees, especially in areas with any kind of subjectivity involved in grading. The more subjectivity, the more it happens. If you wish to argue that it happens more often in Women's Studies than in other academic disciplines, that would be a valid argument and you'd have to make a comparitive analysis somehow. To imply that it ONLY happens in Women's Studies classes is a distortion of the truth on the same order of magnitute as what you are critiqueing women's studies of in the first place!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No one is arguing that bias, "... happens more often in Women's Studies..."
Can someone find me a point in which this issue is being confused. Have I at any point suggested the problem here is one of frequency? Has anyone?
"To imply that it ONLY happens in Women's Studies classes is a distortion of the truth on the same order of magnitude as what you are critiquing women's studies of in the first place!"
The only person suggesting that bias, “…ONLY happens in Women’s Studies classes…”, was you Lorianne. You have dreamt up a flawed argument so that you can counter it. You have singularly refused to address any of the issues mentioned here.
We have said that such bias in a women’s studies course is likely to foster hate and that it is more damaging to society than any bias against architectural styles.
We have said that a women’s studies course needs to have an objective framework and that without one it is meaningless.
You have in return stated, in many and various ways, that lots of courses have bias and so we should stop complaining.
There is always bias in any course you are correct. But bias implies a recognition of multiple view points. Bias justifies diversity of opinion. It may support one possibility over another but it accepts there is an alternative however flawed. The women's studies course does not. A requirement to the course is that this is not a study of women. It is like architecture without foundation. Psychology with out the subconscious.
It is a non-course, it is a monologue of hate and oppression; the course pre-requisites have made it so.
"it is easier to support a popular cause than a just one"~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"You have in return stated, in many and various ways, that lots of courses have bias and so we should stop complaining. "
NO! I think you should complain about bias and suppression of free exhange of ideas a lot! Everywhere you encounter it. Including in free speech you don't agree with.
We must be objective ourselves and realize that bias occurs everywhere, in many of our textbooks and historical accounts. If we are going to talk about bias let's not put the blinders on and make blanket statment about Women's Studies classes that we haven't even been in.
The working assumption here is that women's studies courses shouldn't be allowed to express their point of view either. That is not what free expression is about. In many ways this case makes the case for you, and the people running THIS course (and probably others) are shooting themselves in the foot by advocating a signing of agreement of idiological agreement.
What if a Christianity class made students sign a statement saying they believe in the basic tennants of Christianity? Would we be complaining so loudly? What if a Moslem student wanted to join but was kept out because the professor thought he/she would be disruptive to the discussion of Christianity? Or could a Moslem student discuss Christianity and respectfully disagree with its founding premises?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“We” are not here to discuss the bias in areas other than women’s studies courses. So why do you persist in telling us bias is widespread.
What I, and many here, have consistently argued, and what you consistently choose to ignore, is the point that the bias in this course spreads hate and lies and that without the assumptions made in the pre-requisite to this course hate and lies would be harder to spread.
Your implication that, since we haven’t attended the course, our stance is compromised is laughable since we take issue with a statement which is accessible without attending the course.
No “blanket statement about women’s studies courses” required as I have consistently referred to this particular course. Here’s a blanket statement though: any women’s studies course which has the same pre-requisites is similarly abominable.
The feminist perspective on this discussion is that we are restricting freedom of expression of women.
Our view is that a college course is not the place to distribute pernicious, oppressive lies.
“Would we be complaining so loudly?” Typical feminist hate statement. Can’t think beyond the I don’t benefit so what’s the point. Assumes that everyone else thinks the same.
Without the efforts of selfless men, women wouldn’t have the freedoms they have today. Let’s hope there are enough selfless women to return the favor.
Regarding: “In many ways this case makes the case for you”
I address this comment not to our friend Lorianne but to the readers of the forum in general.
You will see statements like this increasingly frequently. Feminists will tell you not to act, just ignore it. They will tell you that these women’s groups are “shooting themselves in the foot”. They have told us this for a decade, they are afraid that if we do act their hateful actions will come to an end. You have seen and will continue to see claims by feminists that there is no need to protect men. Simple market forces will do the job. Of course they will not accept the removal of the laws that they have woven to protect themselves; that would be unilateral. They simply don’t want to extend the protection of the law to the rest of humanity. So the next time someone tells you to stop fighting for your rights because someone else will do it for you, you’ll know to ignore them.
"it is easier to support a popular cause than a just one"~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I cannot imagine any self respecting autonomous human (let alone a feminist) agreeing to being told what to say and what not to say .... in a university setting or any other.
This is the seedy underbelly of gender feminism that Steinem and the NOW brood don't want you to know about. In an effort to liberate women from the so-called "patriarchy", gender feminism has, in actuality, made them truly subservient by dictating their thoughts and emotions to fulfill their agenda.
Subservience is defined by Webster's Dictionary as: "The quality or state of being subservient; instrumental fitness or use; hence, willingness to serve another's purposes; in a derogatory sense, servility." So, when a professor of women's studies states outright decrees that all students enrolled must "acknowledge that racism, classism, sexism, heterosexism, and other institutional forms of oppression exist", he/she has effectively made those students subservient by forcing them to willingly serve his/her purposes. Forced subservience.
Another example of how feminism is a monster run amok. Perhaps a "Common Sense Studies" course is in order.
"Stereotypes are devices that save a biased person the trouble of learning."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I cannot imagine any self respecting autonomous human (let alone a feminist) agreeing to being told what to say and what not to say .... in a university setting or any other.
Actually, the dissention exemplified by Wendy McElroy, who calls herself an (i)feminist is a relatively recent phenomenon, at least it its scope. Back in the 60s and 70s, to be a "feminist" a person had to be in lock step with the male-hating mob on a number of issues. People who dissented were shouted down and treated as pariahs by the true believers. In a great many cases, men weren't even allowed into the meetings that feminists regularly held. Disagreement was simply not allowed, other than, perhaps, on a few details. Much of what was espoused by feminists then was a package of hateful lies just as much of what is espoused by feminists today is a package of hateful lies.
Aside from the few exceptions like Wendy, who feel a need to rehabilitate the word "feminism" which has represented so much evil, there has never been a greater example of group think than feminism. Feminists who claim otherwise are like the crowd in "Life of Brian" shouting in unison "We are all individuals!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So, when a professor of women's studies states outright decrees that all students enrolled must "acknowledge that racism, classism, sexism, heterosexism, and other institutional forms of oppression exist", he/she has effectively made those students subservient by forcing them to willingly serve his/her purposes.
The next step is for the professor to require that all students enrolled accept her brand of theology and declare all other forms to be false or evil. It is amazing that a university would actually require the students to embrace the professor’s ideologies on condition of passing the course.
I believe this is a form of complete thought control on the part of the professor and the university. It is literal brainwashing. There is no doubt that if the professor were asked if she were using thought control tactics that she'd deny it. This should alarm all men and women everywhere. It should provoke outrage in the presses. Yet they largely remain silent. Go figure. This cannot go unanswered.
Warble
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question, why was 'homosexism' deleted?
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One of the dangers in discussing a subject is treating all people that have a similar characteristic as one group. I do not consider feminists or even feminism anti-male. I do however consider the popular form of feminism currently practiced by the political system and taught in colleges to be anti-male for the most part. My wife is a feminist in the sense that she is worried about certain female issues (specifically eating disorders) but she is very aware of the issues that men deal with and agrees with me on most every issue.
We should be above the gender feminists tradition of lumping all men into the criminal, rapist, deat-beat dad, abuser ect.
On another point in reply to Lorraine's post. There is a MAJOR difference between architecture and social science. While much of architecture is an artistic expression it is relatively easy to determine what style the instructor favors over another. Social science is a SCIENCE so proof in the form of hard statisitcal data and research studies are a core to any discussion. When an instructor fails to allow an open forum for the presentation of all available data they are violating one of the core principles of all science, the search for the truth. All scientists admit that bias in research exists (the formal term is confounds) this is why good research is reviewed by peers who are experts in the field but do not necessarily agree with the authors point of view (this is actually preferred) to allow for an accurate critique of the material and search for inconsistancies and confounds.
The same goes for any college course where the insitution is supposed to be a forum for higher education and thought not an assembly line to produce people with simlar views.
If women's studies wants to consider isself a social science then it MUST follow the basic principles of all science and allow for ALL
ideas to be challenged.
Tony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ah.... But they reject the contemporary notion of science as a construct of the patriarchy. That is how/why they justify their rejection of what otherwise would be accepted as "fact" or at least well-supported theory.
You know, they could come up with another construct as an alternative to "today's science." I might be willing to listen to it, if it could be demonstrated to be valid, sort of like the chaos theory, which is relatively recent. But they are completely hypocritical in that they produce "studies" that attempt to use science as a basis yet don't even carry with them raw data, or they simply make something up.
George Will just wrote about this. I was shocked; it even appeared in the Trenton Times, known around these parts to be VERY-feminist-friendly. The link is here: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35 976-2002May17.html]. Dan, you'll like this one. He mentions Christine Stolba frequently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
" If women's studies wants to consider itself a social science then it MUST follow the basic principles of all science and allow for ALL ideas to be challenged"
I think they have, Tony(and lost everytime), but the problem is, they have mistitled the course.
The babes over at the IWF should be teaching women's studies, not these clowns.
I admire your wife, sounds like she has a good head on her shoulders.
And in the end after the smoke all clears, it's the lies ,hatred,decption and whatever else follows; that I as a person am fighting. Not the gender.
It just so happens that Feminists love to ride that pony so much.
In reality women's studies should be a good thing, a brilliant thing.(you are right)
We can not allow this 'indoctrination' to continue on its current course.
Dan Lynch: Martial Arts for the Modern World.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The really frustrating thing for me is that Women's studies do use "patriarchal" science when it proves their points and then turn around and dismiss all other studies and bias and "patriarchal".
The other problem I have is that classes that examine women are often published in catalogs substituting gender for women giving the impression they are giving equal attention to both genders. (Which is a lie in 99.99% of the cases)
Finally there is a program at our college that allows students to formuate and teach classes to undergrads for college credit. While an instructors support is needed to get the class approved I think I am going to formuate and propose a class that examines men's groups and issues. We shall see,...
Tony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"This is the seedy underbelly of gender feminism that Steinem and the NOW brood don't want you to know about. In an effort to liberate women from the so-called "patriarchy", gender feminism has, in actuality, made them truly subservient by dictating their thoughts and emotions to fulfill their agenda."
I couldn't agree more with this statement. If they don't change it will be their undoing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday May 28, @05:35PM EST (#61)
|
|
|
|
|
I've got an extensive resume'. So do many of my male friends. However, when I've approached various medical and women's foundations to APPLY they have refused to ACCEPT an application.
I only apply for technical positions, such as system administrator, database programming, and so forth.
I've been told to my face that men are not wanted.
I tried to contact lawyers, but NONE of the 25 lawyers I called returned my calls.
The state of Washington failed to reply.
I've even been discriminated against at the Columbia Dental Clinic in Lacey, WA. My complaints to the consumer board were replied to by a female: "no cause for action."
They refused to allow me into the room with my girlfriend, who'd wanted me there because she's afraid of dentists.
Once inside, she later told me that they asked her repeatedly if I was abusing her or if she was 18. She happens to be 27 and has a Masters degree in Japanese Literature. They harrassed her about her sexual lifestyle. All these complaints were listed, but WA state refuses to even investigate.
WHILE the states refuse to move or indict, there are no rights for men.
WA state is an ANTI-MALE state.
We should start listing the states that take anti male action, and the biggest cities who have problems with oppression, such as Los Angeles' and Seattle's anti-male DV laws.
We need to start putting up billboards. Taking out ads.
posted by polynoia.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
