|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday August 12, @05:25PM EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
I emailed them and asked members of mens' studies group to email them complaints. Hopefully, Progressive with face a strong reaction.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spamming sounds good. Maybe something worse even. I'm not even going to write the acronym for it in this post because of respect for this place, but it's 3 letters.:-)
Disclaimer: Everything I post is of course my own opinion. If it seems harsh, Feminazis just piss me off!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday August 13, @01:24AM EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
I think it doesn't help the cause of men's equality for men to become just as humourless and uptight as feminists. Sure, the double standard needs to be addressed, but instead of setting the standard to the feminist "low", why not instead insist that the feminist low be rejected, and a non-uptight "high" standard be adopted for all? Instead of whining about "misandrist" ads which are just humorous and harmless, why not simply stand up and say that such ads would be just as harmless and humorous if the "target" was a woman?
I, for one, do not want to be part of any "men's movement" which sinks to the level of prudish, uptight, victimhood feminism.
nutboy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday August 13, @08:46AM EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
I disagree about misandric ads being humorous and harmless and I disagree that it would be considered funny if Progressive showed a woman having pain inflicted on her genitals.
Show me one ad that jokes about a man inflicting pain on a woman and then come back repeat your statements.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday August 17, @02:31AM EST (#28)
|
|
|
|
|
You completely missed my point. I didn't say that it would be considered funny if Progressive showed a woman having pain inflicted on her genitals, and I stated very clearly that there IS a double standard. But I don't think we should eliminate the double standard by having the standard set by uptight, humourless feminists.
I've seen the ad. It's playful and harmless. Anyone who thinks such a mild depiction of "violence" is a terrible thing would, in order to be consistent, have to censor almost every television show, book, movie, etc, routinely.
If men's activists are FOR massive censorship then I, reluctantly, will have to be AGAINST men's activists.
nutboy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday August 18, @04:40AM EST (#39)
|
|
|
|
|
NutBoy....
You're probably a feminazi or a Troll.
I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, at first. But after EVERYTHING that's been laid out for you, on this matter, You still either can't, or (possibly) won't see what is obvious.
No one here said ANYTHING about CENSORSHIP.
Can you show gratuitous sex on television?
NO, Of course not. Is that CENSORSHIP or protecting certain people (children) from "harmful" images?
Can you show explicit images of a woman actually being raped on television?
No, of course you can't. Is THAT CENSORSHIP?
Come on, use your head, Okay?
Also, You keep saying, over and over again that you don't want to be a part of a Men's movement that;...'fill in the blank.'
FINE, I think I speak for alot of us here when I say; Go away, then. There is NOBODY careing.
I think, actually You are not "NutBoy" but "NutGIRL."
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday August 19, @02:57AM EST (#47)
|
|
|
|
|
Nutboy.
In my previous post I think I was, frankly, Un-fair to you.
I appologize for it.
Just because you don't agree with Me and some of the others on this subject, did not give Me the right to attack you in that way.
Again, I am sorry.
I still stand by my oppinion on the "PROGRESSIVE" ad, as I'm sure you will stand by yours.
We'll just have to agree to disagree, as they say.
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday August 13, @02:57PM EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
So, tell me..., Do you think if a commercial depicted a man plunging a CHAINSAW into a womans' vagina, because he 'just felt like it', it would be considered "harmless"?
What about a white man beating up a black man, simply because he felt justified in doing so.
The above examples would NEVER, EVER be used as a way to sell ANY product to ANYONE!
Why? PRECISELY BECAUSE of the HARMFUL effects such imagery has on ANY society.
Are you familiar with the propaganda films of the NAZIS? Were those HARMLESS? I dare say they had just a slight effect on molding the attitudes twards jewish people. By your logic if Jews complained about this they were "prudish" and\or "uptight".
As an American Indian, I can PERSONALY tell you how negitive stereotypes can do GREAT damage.
And it is the media (Movies,television, Etc.) that put these stereotypes forward. This is a historical FACT.
MILLIONS of Indian people were SLAUGHTERED, or died during "removal" from homelands (includeing people from my own respective nation.) while ALL the time media, in this case newspapers, screamed from their headlines; "SAVAGES", "BARBARIANS", "WARRIORS". despite the FACT that MOST Native tribes were PEACEFULL!! Again includeing mine.
Those stereotypes are still VERY much alive and well, and with us to this day.
Not a DAY goes by, when I am in public, that SOMEONE doesn't look at me and say "HOW". or some other derogitory stereotipical comment. (Would you ever go "OOGAH-BOOGAH" to a black person?)
So, don't TRY to tell ME that negative stereotypeing or propaganda, no matter WHOM it's directed at is HARMLESS! There are litaraly thousands of years of history that prove that belief FALSE.
HATE is NEVER "HARMLESS". ...EVER... And that INCLUDES when it is directed at MEN!
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday August 13, @06:00PM EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
Women get off sexually to depictions of sexual violence against men.
THAT's why it SELLS to them so well.
Yeah, MEN are evil.
Notice no one tries to "sell" to men with sexual violence toward women. (not openly any way.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Radical feminists would have us believe that any man who complains such abuse is simply "afraid of strong women."
(Naturally, this is as ludicrous as claiming that women who protest male abuse and harassment are simply afraid of strong MEN.
Unfortunately, too many women buy into this feminist myth, and become sadistic and degrading toward men in attempt to believe they're "strong," when in reality such behavior portrays the epitome of weakness and insecurity, and TRULY strong people don't need to put others down to make themselves feel adequate or superior.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday August 17, @02:52AM EST (#31)
|
|
|
|
|
I agree completely, but I still don't see this ad as significantly "abusive" towards men, except in the sense that the feminist double standard means that equally light-hearted ads in which *women* are depicted as the victim of fantasy violence would not be accepted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday August 18, @05:13AM EST (#42)
|
|
|
|
|
Then you REALLY need to open your eyes, my friend.
I don't say that to be snide.
just REALLY LOOK at it for what it truely is. Hate-speech, plain and simple'
Plain and simple...,
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday August 17, @02:49AM EST (#30)
|
|
|
|
|
Jesus, I hope you don't mean all women, or even a majority of women. If you do, then you really are full of delusions, and are as misogynist as Dworkin is misandrist.
nutboy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday August 17, @02:46AM EST (#29)
|
|
|
|
|
Can you seriously compare "plunging a chainsaw into a woman's vagina" with a woman poking a *voodoo doll*, and having the man react in pain, which is clearly something that ABSOLUTELY NEVER HAPPENS? (unless you believe in voodoo).
False analogy. The woman in the ad is not beating up a man out of hatred of all men (which presumably be the case in the white-black scenario you describe) but because they were lovers who broke up. Do you believe that any time a white man dislikes a black man, simply because they had a personal relationship, not at all to do with their races, that he is a "racist"? If so, then you are as narrow in your thinking as the feminists who cry "sexism" everytime I criticize their narrow views, or anytime anyone criticizes a woman for any reason.
YOu are right - but the examples you are describing are NOT comparable to those in the ad.
Are you seriously comparing the NAZIS with some company trying to sell insurance or whatever it is?
So what is your solution? Completely abandon all free speech? Have an army of government censors going through every single ad, movie, tv show, newspaper article, book, essay, etc, looking for evidence of "offensive stereotype"? Your solution, it seems, is as totalitarian as anything the most uptight feminist would dream up.
If the men's movement is the enemy of free speech, then it will never succeed. Moderate, sensible people can take a little joke, and uderstand that free speech is VITAL to freedom, and if it offends people, so be it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Anonymous:
You write,
"If the men's movement is the enemy of free speech, then it will never succeed. Moderate, sensible people can take a little joke, and uderstand that free speech is VITAL to freedom, and if it offends people, so be it."
Ans. I hope you will forgive what you perceive as overreaction on the part of some men toward this commercial, but you must understand that when the hit's have been coming in as long and as hard against men as they have we are all a little shell shocked. Therefore, it is indeed cruel and unusual punishment to be so subjected to this kind of hateful drivel (insult to injury)as Progressive insurance sets forth in its advertisement. Humor is very subjective (in the eye of the beholder) and to this viewer I find it heinous. That being said, let me remind you that someone told me a sick joke a few years back to which I never laughed at(probably why I don't remember it entirely). It started out, "Do you know the difference between a Jew and Pizza?" Why would anyone ever think that something so horrible painful to so many could be funny to anyone? Maybe its just me, but I don't get it.
You write:
"Can you seriously compare "plunging a chainsaw into a woman's vagina" with a woman poking a *voodoo doll*, and having the man react in pain, which is clearly something that ABSOLUTELY NEVER HAPPENS? (unless you believe in voodoo)."
and,
"...- but the examples you are describing are NOT comparable to those in the ad."
and,
"Are you seriously comparing the NAZIS with some company trying to sell insurance or whatever it is?"
Ans. Yes and yes to both your questions. All steps at dehumanizing a class or group of people are extremely dangerous. That's how all this hate begins, or have you not yet been subjected to the state sponsored, politically correct indoctrination to the extent that I have? It is hypocritical for a government to prosecute and persecute men to the extent that they have and then allow this kind of hate to be broadcast into their living rooms. Men are right to be upset, outraged at this insidious evil cloaking itself in a vehicle, a mask, of socially acceptable advertising. I know not what course others may take, but as for me there will be no more "Krystal Nachts," that escalate the demonization and violence toward any group of people. They were not shoving Jews in the oven when Krystal Nacht happened, but it was not too long after that. There is no excuse for domestic violence. NONE, Zero Tolerance! If as the feminists purport, and the laws of the land support, it is so dangerous that we must quash it at every minor occurrence then let this be the case here also, or is this just another example of equal justice meaning nothing when it comes to injustices against battered men.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday August 18, @04:56AM EST (#40)
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, Ray.
Listen, I've got a hunch, that some of these "Anon"s and "Nutboy" are actually Trolls or (militant feminist) Women.
After EVERYTHING that's been "shown" to them, they STILL don't get it???
They either have to be very stupid, or feminists\trolls to NOT get it. And they seem to be trying PRETTY HARD not to see the obvious.
I could be wrong, but I don't think so.
Any more effort on our part to show them the light is likely to be for-not.
An old saying in my family...; "It is POINTLESS to show light to the blind."
Just thought I'd give ya a heads up on what I suspect are "baiting trolls".
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday August 19, @01:51AM EST (#46)
|
|
|
|
|
Allright, maybe "Nutboy" is for real.
I don't want to be hard on him (Her?) JUST because we don't see eye to eye on this ad.
I may owe "Nutboy" an apology.
If so, I will.
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday August 18, @06:05AM EST (#43)
|
|
|
|
|
((("If the men's movement is the enemy of free speech then it will never succseed, sensible people can take a little joke, and understand that free speech is VITAL to freedom, and if it offends people, so be it.")))
First off, The millitant feminist movement IS the enemy of free speech, (Ever hear of "political correctness"?) and it has "succseeded" quite well.
The point is this, And I will ask this question just ONE more time. If a WOMAN instead of a man were haveing their genitals mutilated with a pair of pliars, Would you think it (a)funny, (b)harmless, (c)just a little joke,?
Do you think it would EVER be put on the air?
If you say "yes" to any of these questions I must presume you are lying. (sorry.)
And as to you're accusation that the men's movement is against free speech, Why is it that because we oppose a very sexist, mean-spirited ad, you believe we are for an "opposite extreame"?
(IE) censorship.
Don't tell me that if this commercial depicted a WOMAN in this sort of situation, that women wouldn't be outraged! and that women AND feminists would'nt be doing the EXACT same thing we in the men's movement are doing now. (And they would have EVERY right to do so.)
And, Yes, What this commercial and others like it, as well as COUNTLESS TV shows and movies are doing IS comparable to Nazi propaganda films.
They take ONE segment of the population, and set it aside for ridicule, humiliation, violence, degradation and de-huminization.
If it WERE just this ONE commercial, Yeah, I'd probably grimmace with disgust then not worry about it so much.
But it is the PREPONERANCE of such imaegry that we are takeing issue with.
And yes, before you ask, If this was happening to WOMEN in our society, you're DAMNED right I'd be protesting THAT as well! Alot of us would be.
Frankly, I'm amazed that I even HAVE to EXPLAIN this sort of thing.
Also, as I mentioned I am American Indian.
Don't you even try to tell me I don't know bigotry when I see it. to this day, I still see stereotypical images of Indians in the media, running around, going "Woo Woo Woo", Saying things like "Ugh, We smokem peace pipe.", "Me getum keemosabe." and on and on. We do not now, nor have we EVER spoken like that. It makes my blood boil. And you know what? I get the EXACT SAME feeling, as a Man when I see things like this "PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE" ad. I KNOW that
feeling ALL too WELL.
If you don't "Get it" by now,
My guess is you're trying VERY hard NOT too. you'd HAVE to be, not to see what should be obvious.
And you have the unmitigated GULL to say I am "narrow minded".
Thundercloud.
PS. A mind is like a parachute..., It only WORKS when it's OPEN...,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"I, for one, do not want to be part of any "men's movement" which sinks to the level of prudish, uptight, victimhood feminism."
Well, I have a sense of humor, too and I would have a hard time imprisoning all advertisers in the dungeon of humorless copy, devoid of all personality.
But the issue here isn't one or two isolated cases of male-bashing in advertising. It is the undeniable trend of advertisers to treat men as losers, punching bags, worthless nincompoops, or worse, as bloodthirsty killers without an ounce of compassion. Nutboy, I challenge you do do this: watch network television for one week, especially during prime time, and evaluate every commercial you see as to whether it is anti-male, anti-female, or neutral. Consider how the characters are juxtaposed against one another and how they are situated versus the product or service being offered. Consider especially the cases where both genders are included and one is made to look more evil or foolish or inadequate than the other. At the end of the week, if you actually look objectively at every commercial, you will surely find the trend to be grossly anti-male. In the cases where the male is treated worse, note how much worse the male is treated than the female in the opposite role. Typically, the woman will just do something foolish and the viewer will have a laugh at her expense. But the male will typically get kicked in the balls or punched or otherwise assaulted in a manner that, in ordinary life would be very painful, or he will be depicted as a pervert, a criminal, someone who carries gross evil with no redeeming social value or no justification (such as abuse) for his sins.
And how do we stop this? by making an issue of it everytime it happens. Sometimes we're gonna blow the whistle on the one commercial that a company broadcasts. Other times we're gonna catch a company in a trend. And one day, we're gonna hurt someone's bottom line with our ire. Hopefully soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I watched the TV show "Law and Order" for a VERY short time, since the air of anti-male sentiments, and male-bashing in general, was so strong that I really don't know what sick bastards could have written it, or how the audience could avoid noticing such bias; my guess is that most television audiences just submit to such messages, and are thereby conditioned to believe them, and hence men become passive and apologetic while women becom abusive towards them.
Likewise, one need only watch "Lifetime" network to see that all men are made to look guilty, while Oprah Winfrey didn't rise to her level of success without realizing that misandry SELLS.
I really never understood how it's considered "brilliant" or "funny" to portray women as "hip" etc. for abusing men, whom likewise are portrayed as inferior, evil, stupid etc.
Likewise, writers must not realize that there is NEVER a good reason for such portrayals, unless they either a) get off on misandry, or b) believe, like Oprah, that misandry SELLS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"b) believe, like Oprah, that misandry SELLS. "
In fact, it does sell. We have to understand (but we do not have to accept) that television and radio are driven by advertising revenue. Since women supposedly make 85% of all consumer spending decisions, then the audience that TV and radio play to is almost exclusively female. They really don't care if men watch because men don't count in their marketing plans.
In order to counter this, we need to make it clear (and we need to ACT on this, not just talk about it) that their bottom line WILL be hurt if they continue. If your wife is in charge of deciding who to buy car insurance from in your house, then tell her (I said 'tell' not 'ask') that you will NOT be buying from Progressive. If you don't like the way Southwest Airlines advertises, but your wife is making the vacation plans TELL her, don't ask, that YOU will not be flying on Southwest. If your wife makes the decisions on which cell phone service to buy, TELL her that you will not be using or paying for Voicestream. You don't have to tell her why, but if she asks and you think you have the balls to do so, tell her the truth and tell her you're not backing down. If you don't have the balls for this confrontation, then make something up. It really doesn't matter which, as long as the product or service is not in your buying plans.
Progressive probably went out and did a little research and found out that not very many policies got cancelled, so they feel licensed to continue with this crap. Obviously, we been ineffectual. We need to find a way to make a difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday August 17, @08:01AM EST (#37)
|
|
|
|
|
"Progressive probably went out and did a little research and found out that not very many policies got cancelled, so they feel licensed to continue with this crap. Obviously, we been ineffectual. We need to find a way to make a difference"
Dear Men's Movement Compatriots:
Continued documentation by all of corresponcence with Progressive would be good, in as much as it shows their ongoing pattern of exploitation and abuse. Should it ever go to court this evidence could be very useful.
Continued dialog with Progressive stating, firmly but fairly, our opposition to their commercial(s) and the reason(s) for it is useful in drawing out their socially irresponsible and damaging behavior. Documenting their stand on this critical social issue is vital to any possible future legal action we may deem necessary.
Be prepared at all times and in all places. We have not yet begun to fight (on the scale I would like to see), but with each passing second we draw closer.
A Friend
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday August 18, @05:01AM EST (#41)
|
|
|
|
|
I may be going out on a limb here, But I'm pretty sure the F.C.C. is supposed to "frown" on this kind of advertising, Is it not?
Anyone Think we should contact them?
(I think some one else MAY have mentioned this, allready.)
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday August 17, @03:02AM EST (#33)
|
|
|
|
|
I love the show Law and Order and if the male bashing was really that strong I sure didn't notice it. Now, it's true that I have been unsuccessful in completely purging myself of the female-priviligeing attitudes that we are all socialized with, so maybe the misandry really is there and I just missed it, but I suspect not. On that show they have, it seems to me, a lot of very good scripts that deal with complex issues without taking sides. I do recall specific criticism of feminism by some of the characters, and plots in which rape cases are shown to be phoney, etc. Characters of both sexes are shown as flawed and even evil.
I'm curious - can you name a specific example of " male bashing" on that show?
nutboy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday August 17, @02:57AM EST (#32)
|
|
|
|
|
ok, fair comment. I think it is fair, and desirable to comment on the anti-male trend in the media, but not to censor it per se, and not to make a big deal out of any one individual ad.
The general hypocrisy should be pointed out, but that's as far as I'd go. After all, advertisers don't normally have an agenda beyond selling stuff, so it's unfair to assume that the advertiser in this case is deliberately misandrist - it's more a matter of them being creative and doing what they can get away with to sell their stuff. If joking about violence against women was considered acceptable, they would probably do that to see their product.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday August 18, @06:12AM EST (#44)
|
|
|
|
|
You are right, Anon.
If they could get away with demeaning women, they would.
However one must ask themselves, What is it in this society that says this sort of de-huminization of MEN is exceptable...?
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[i]"I think it doesn't help the cause of men's equality for men to become just as humourless and uptight as feminists. Sure, the double standard needs to be addressed, but instead of setting the standard to the feminist "low", why not instead insist that the feminist low be rejected, and a non-uptight "high" standard be adopted for all? Instead of whining about "misandrist" ads which are just humorous and harmless, why not simply stand up and say that such ads would be just as harmless and humorous if the "target" was a woman?
I, for one, do not want to be part of any "men's movement" which sinks to the level of prudish, uptight, victimhood feminism.
nutboy[/i]
Nutboy, you are indeed very well named. It's not "humorless" to refuse to stand for abuse disguised as humor, nor is it "whiny, prudish, uptight," or "victimhood" to demand an equal standard of treatment. Rather, this is just what the radical feminists want us to believe since a foe will seek to bind with words where force will not avail; abusers always accuse their targets of being "weak" for standing up to them, when in reality weak people DON'T stand up for themselves, and strong people don't stand for abuse.
Likewise one isn't "humorless" because they refuse to tolerate abuse disguised as humor; harassers often tell their targets they're "just kidding" and have no sense of humor etc.
These are just common tactics used to silence their targets, and only a deluded weak person such as yourself would buy into the feminist propaganda that there's anything acceptable with such blatant hate-messages, or anything wrong with doing whatever it takes to get rid of such misanrist filth.
As for rejecting the feminist "low" standard, how can we do that without rejecting these blatant hate-messages?
Likewise, the notion that ANY women would tolerate such ads if the gender-roles were reversed, is an outright insult to the intellect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"I emailed them and asked members of mens' studies group to email them complaints. Hopefully, Progressive with face a strong reaction. "
Slightly off topic but of men's activism concern. How many 'men's study' programs are there? How many students a year do you figure?
.
http://www.fathersforlife.org/fv/Dan_Lynch_on_EP.h tm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Probably the same number of men's self-defense courses offered at the school's expense of the type which compare with the high-priced classes offered to women ONLY free of charge, despite that men are more often victims of violence and with more severe injuries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like the martial arts, I teach and have studied and practised for about 21 years. I teach freely to anyone. Its funny because when I was getting into teaching stuff for women I started talking about the same bullshit stats , such as 1 in 4 women are sexually assaulted, that was because I thought it was true. After more research and some personal experiences I found out, it was all shit. And I now view that stuff as another form of comercialized male bigotry and hatred.
I mean the stuff is formulated to get women to hate men and the product is "services" which women don't really need. But its marketed like insurance with fear mongering propaganda. Im going to Post Amber Pawlik's article again for those who missed it. But just like she said "feminism appeals to the worst in women" just like these websites and comercials its all related.
This was written by Amber Pawlik and I would like to see it posted on men's daily. Maybe I can get her to submit it.
Take Back Your Sanity
All evil movements have appealed not to the best, but to the worst in people. They have all appealed to hatred. We are currently engaged in a war on terrorism. The terrorists who have waged a war against us have appealed to human hatred at its most bottom level in order to rally their people against America. They tell their people of horrendous things America has (not) done and tell them that America is the reason that they are not doing well in life. All evil movements have used this tactic. Feminists are no different.
Feminists are some of the foulest creatures on this earth. Their activism is done by appealing not to the best in women, but to the worst. As such, feminists have managed to hold many women down, allowing those women to dwell in psychological terror -- in order to continue their activism. These women are contemptible and should be severely punished.
In order to keep their "cause" going and their numbers high, feminists need to keep women angry. They have a heavy amount invested in angry women. Not just their cause, but certain feminist's careers, tenure, and livelihood are invested in ensuring that women are being oppressed -- and that they stay upset over it.
As such, feminists encourage women to dwell on whatever misfortune that has happened to them - to keep the pot of anger brimming. The most critical issue that they focus on is rape. Feminists encourage rape victims to re-live their tragedy in their head over and over again.
One example of this is "Take Back the Night." Take Back the Night is an event in which feminists unite on college campuses and women get up in front of a mass crowd of people and describe abuse of all kinds: incestuous abuse, sexual assault by a friend, being raped or knowing someone who was raped. They dwell on the actual tragedies that happened to them and keep bringing up the feelings of anger and hatred from the incident over and over again.
Slight common sense can tell you that this is psychologically destructive. The only thing that encouraging women who have been raped to re-live their moment again can do is re-send thoughts of terror and horror through that women's mind and soul. These women are severely strained in their ability to put the tragedy in the past and move on with their lives. It's like picking at a scab, if you keep prodding it -- it never heals.
By encouraging this sort of behavior, feminists keep the anger flowing, the hatred brewed -- the 'cause' going. Feminists politicize the issue of rape to advance their agendas. They use rape victims as political pawns, allowing these women to live in psychological hell -- in order for them to enhance their agendas and careers.
In fact, I am proud to say, my observation of this feminist behavior is supported by statements straight from the horse's mouth. In Tammy Bruce's book, The New Thought Police: Inside the Left's Assault on Free Speech and Free Minds, while she, a former Los Ang. NOW president, was within the feminist establishment, they encouraged their organization to "rub salt in the wound." Tammy elaborates:
"'Rubbing salt into the wound' means maintaining the pains of your constituency. It can take many forms, but primarily the strategy involves twisting any and every event under the rubric of human relations into an assault on women, blacks, gays, or whatever groups is your bread and butter. If the events of the day provide a real example of bias, they must be exploited -- and if they don't, then an appropriate incident must be invented to remind your constituents of their victimhood.
Need I say more?
I've seen other places in which feminist encourage anger and victimology. Catherine MacKinnon, a contemporary feminist icon encourages girls to "Try thinking without apology with what you know from being victimized." Don't think clearly -- try thinking when you were angry. Gawwwwwwd, these women are evil!
By doing this, they keep their numbers high of women who support whatever cause they are crusading. The angry mob is always there for them, ready to sick whatever person they deem evil. This type of conditioning by feminists is what causes them to be such unruly monsters. Feminists are known for the mob-like tactics when confronting people who disagree with them. They shout down speakers; they cuss at people; they scream their heads off at all dissent. They are, as Tammy says, thought police. And they do it for the most self-righteous of reason: they think that they are crusading for rape victims, for the poor, for all the poor baby bunnies of the world. Don't ever let them fool you. No matter what they were -- rape victim or not -- their mob-rule style tactics are not acceptable and these untamed beasts should be quickly reprimanded for their behavior.
The reason why they need a mob is because feminists are, above all things -- the biggest rationalizers on earth. Instead of studying the evidence first and coming to the conclusion; they have the conclusion first and seek out the evidence afterwards. And the conclusions about the world are based upon their emotions. Feminist don't want to go to the world, they want the world to come to them. Feminists want the whole world to cater to their emotions. Given they know they don't have objectivity on their side, they seek popularity. The collective replaces the objective. Observe this quote by a feminist. It was a post by a user named 'phebe' on a MS Magazine forum.
"John Harrison saying, "All I ask is that people try and address the discussion with logic and facts rather than with emotional statements."
Why should I have to give you what you ask? What makes your "logic and facts" BETTER in some sense than my emotional statements? That is not at all obvious to me. You said you loaded a gun and took off the safety and left it on a table and asked how long it would take for it to kill someone. I said it would take just as long as it takes for a three-year-old to find it. That's a woman's answer, and what's more, it's true. It is what happens. It is what is *important* in the situation you describe. Your "logic and facts" approach is empty, useless, idle and dangerous relative to the point that I am making, which is that this happens all the time and tiny children shoot themselves and others all the time, and everybody knows this! (Bold mine)
This young feminist has identified clearly the feminist line. "Why should *she* have to give *you* what you ask?" "Why can't the world see that *her* emotions are the ultimate arbiter of truth?" "Everybody knows this is true - *she* doesn't have to stoop to the level of providing facts and logic!"
Indeed, this is the groundwork of an authoritarian regime. People without any objective fact supporting their opinions must necessarily resort to force. Whether they be whim-worshipping religious zealots or crazy feminists, the rejection of objectivity leads to wars and violence. They resort to hushing out opinions of dissent. They have to scare the tribe into subservience -- it is the only way their faulty opinion can remain alive.
Events like 'Take Back the Night' and other feminist tactics are contemptible. It should be clear to anyone who is honest in evaluating feminist behaviors that they do not seek to improve women's lives. Feminists are crueler to their own women than they are to men! It surprises me that more people don't come out and criticize this event (TBTN) that exploits rape victims. What they really need is not to Take Back the Night -- but to Take Back Their Sanity.
written by:
Amber Pawlik
July 10, 2002
.
http://www.fathersforlife.org/fv/Dan_Lynch_on_EP.h tm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday August 17, @03:15AM EST (#34)
|
|
|
|
|
GREAT post! As I like to say, if rape didn't exist, feminists would invent it, such is it's usefulness to them in spreading hatred and social division.
And if rape ever did become extinct, they would just redefine it, to an even broader definition than it is at now, to keep it going. If necessary, they can fall back on teh Dworkinesque notion that all heterosexual sex is rape, by definition.
nutboy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 8-16-2002 I received this reply from webmaster@progressive.com
"Dear Mr. ______
Thank you for contacting Progressive directly about our advertising. We take feedback like yours seriously as we develop our advertising plans. Your feedback will be forwarded directly to our advertising department.
We are proud of our award winning Web Site, progressive.com, and created this advertisement to promote its superiority in a humorous, entertaining manner. We apologize if our advertising offended you in any way.
Sincerely,
AnnMarie Rodgers
Progressive Internet Service Specialist
webmaster@progressive.com
http://www.progressive.com"
-----------------------
Citizens:
They apologize that what I perceived offended me, but are they sorry? Do they perceive the offensiveness of this advertising too? Is this just an attempt at a patronizing placation? Here's the real question, are they going to keep on airing this INCITEMENT TO COMMIT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, this offensive commercial, and ones like it in the future? I have emailed them these questions and await there reply.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is my email reply:
"AnnMarie Rodgers/Progressive Insurance:
You apologize that what I perceived, "offended me," but are you sorry? Do you perceive the offensiveness of this advertising too? Is your reply to me just an attempt at a patronizing placation? Here's the real question, are you going to keep on airing this INCITEMENT TO COMMIT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, this offensive commercial, and ones like it in the future? Please reply.
Additionally, does Progressive insurance offer insurance for domestic violence? Does Progressive insurance sanction domestic violence against men and women? Or, does Progressive insurance only look at domestic violence as a source of humor? Please reply to these specific questions too.
Very Truly Yours,
Ray"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, it's all about money. If some company thinks that dissing men will increase its profits, and if dissing men isn't seen as socially unacceptable, they'll dis men! But when it comes to buying insurance, people want to know they're getting a good deal. Given the advertising tactics being employed by Progressive (there's a misnomer if ever there was one) I'm guessing that they're neither the biggest nor the best. Aren't there companies that offer better deals or better service? It would be great if there was a website somewhere that listed companies that promoted bad feelings towards men in their ads, and listed alternative companies that not only didn't promote such bad feeling but also offered better products. It could also have a CEO Hall of Shame, with names and pictures of the big cheeses of these companies (all of whom will be vain idiots). I'm sure all the men-friendly sites wouldn't mind linking to it, and it'd only be doing what other consumer-oriented publications do, but from a pro-male perspective.
Of course we shouldn't be humourless, instead we should be impish and set in motion things that our detractors never wanted to happen - we have to invent things to further our cause. How about an annual Manhating Wankhead of the year award? Rubbish these people, rubbish their products, make what you do seem cool to the Jackass generation. Feminists have the feelings of hatred and resentment sewn up, so we in the men's movement will have to use the ones they've rejected, such as humour, love, respect and intense, unrestrained ridicule.
*********************************
Disclaimer: my views are the truth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday August 13, @03:03PM EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
(("Disclaimer: my views are truth."))
Uberganger, I LOVE it!
(and it's true too.)
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Thundercloud. I don't mean to sound arrogant, but I think the things I say are the truth. I think a lot of truth gets talked on this site, and people should be proud to declare it as the truth. It's all the liars out there that need to start worrying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hardly; "for he who sews lies shall not want of a harvest, and shall lie in leisure while others reap the bounty in his stead." --Tolkien
The price of freedom is, indeed, eternal vigilance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday August 15, @07:35AM EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, great, that's all we need. first we have TROLLS on this site, now HOBBITS. (^-^)
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Like Robin Williams stated in the movie "Popeye,"
"I have a sense of humor, but I also have a sense of humiliation, and I'm asking you for an apology."
And I DON'T mean the "sorry 'bout that" form e-mails we get while the commercials roll on, but a REAL apology.
Until then we have EVERY right to compare them with Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan, who ran sick propaganda ads similar to this one about Jews and Blacks; if they BEHAVE like Nazis and KKK'ers, they can expect to be identified with such.
One way to make it expensive for them REAL fast is by likening them to such infamous hate-groups; another is with a big fat LAWSUIT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday August 13, @11:12AM EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance Companies charge men 1,000,000% more for coverage of car accidents.
Having male clients is much more profitable for them because they can rob them and discriminate against them all they want and no one cares.
But now, they show ads where their expressing their hatred of men. Isn't that weird?
Either, they don't get it and don't see how they're shooting themselves in the foot with that ad OR they hate men so much that they can do both, meaning insult them on tv and torture them and at the same time discriminate against them and stealing all their money and all this with no guilty consience or sense of wrong-doing that normal human beings get in those situations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I sent a letter to Linda Danna, Vice-president and general manager of WKBD-50 in Detroit, telling her that the ad is a violation of men's rights and sanctity, since it would never have been approved for viewing if the gender-roles had been reversed to show a vindictive boyfriend joyfully crushing a woman's ovaries and genitals with a pair of pliers.
I then stated that no responsible station would air such a commercial, and asked her if the viewers of her station can be led to believe that the station harbors this type of anti-male sentiments.
I finally demanded that the ad be pulled, the person responsible for approving it be fired, and that the station issue an official apology and state its official stand on gender rights.
I also think it's time we filed a lawsuit against Progressive.com, since there is ample precedent under civil case law against broadcasts which project hate against select targeted; I've warned them already to either pull the ad or face legal action, and their conduct was clearly wilful and malicious which leaves them open for punitive damages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I complained the very first time I saw the ad. They responded that they thought the ad was funny and in no way offensive. I've noticed more and more ads using sexual violence against males lately. Things are getting steadily worse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"A man, riding in on the back of feminism, assails Progressive Insurance wielding reverse psychology." In other words, with the email included below, I tried to present to them the fact that they were contributing both to the criminality of women and the victimization of men:
A report now out from the California Attorney General's office documents that there is a 392% increase in the number of arrests of women for domestic violence in the ten year period from 1988 to 1998. Whether or not your TV commercial depicting a woman squeezing the genitals of a man on a cardboard cut out is humor is arguable. There is no disputing that you are contributing to the social conditioning of females to commit domestic violence by condoning it as humorous in your commercial. You are sending a powerful message to women everywhere that it is O.K. to batter men, that it is humorous. The consequences of your actions will be that untold numbers of females will incur additional arrests for domestic violence thanks to the conditioning of their behavior towards domestic violence in your commercial.
For Progressive insurance company to promote this criminality of women and battery of men is morally and socially reprehensible. I have found the aforementioned to be a consensus view among my colleagues in the women’s and men’s movement lobbies in California. I adamantly demand that you immediately cease and desist from airing this commercial, and that you never engage in this type of socially menacing behavior again. Today the only motto that is appropriate for your company is, "Progressive is Regressive (Socially and Morally).
It appears to me that your commercial is doing nothing less then promoting hate between the male and female gender, and in the State of California that is considered to be a crime. I look forward to the compliance of your company with the content of this letter.
Very Truly Yours, Ray Blumhorst
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday August 15, @06:48AM EST (#24)
|
|
|
|
|
You use the hard won victories of the feminists to further the causes of men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yea, ain't it sweet? I prefer to use a different term instead of oportunist, which could more accurately be applied to your radical feminists. I tend to think of this as equal justice (my constitutional right). Get used to it.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday August 15, @07:29AM EST (#26)
|
|
|
|
|
((("You use the hard won victories of the feminists to further the causes of men.")))
Yeah, just like the feminists used the hard won victories of men to further the causes of millitant feminism.
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday August 19, @01:45AM EST (#45)
|
|
|
|
|
Just to let everyone know that, (So far) While this ad is INDEED being run again, It doesn't seem to be running as FREQUENTLY as it was before. (at least not where I live.)
That's the "Good news".
The "Bad news" is That it's running AT ALL.
....I have enough aggrevation...
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
