|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hello Marc, et. al.
I went to the guestbook and saw that it has a place for email but doesn't guarantee privacy. You might want to add that. I never give my email to a site without trusting the site, at least somewhat, and receiving reassurance that my email won't be used in any way that I haven't agreed to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just viewed the guests and saw that email isn't a required field. Nevertheless, people should be warned that, if they give their email address, it will be published for all and sundry to see.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You might want to add that. I never give my email to a site without trusting the site, at least somewhat, and receiving reassurance that my email won't be used in any way that I haven't agreed to.
Thomas,
Thanks for the input. I'll look into putting in an option that will make the email address private and non-displayable. I'll also look into adding a notice that we do not redistribute email addresses or send out spam. These should be pretty simple features to add that will guarantee privacy. The default will be set to guarantee privacy.
Finally, we do make all of the fields optional. However, if there is no comment the entry will be deleted or just not posted.
Other suggestions are of course welcome!
Warble
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'll look into putting in an option that will make the email address private and non-displayable.
Good idea. Thanks to you and your friend for building the site, and thanks to Ray for designing the flyer.
One additional suggestion. You might want to contact the people, whose email addresses are displayed, and double check to see if they mind having them published. They might not have realized that they would be.
Thanks again for all your work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday November 12, @05:58PM EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the tip Thomas. We'll talk some more about this. We appreciate it.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In other areas of this site I spoke about a strategy that men's activists might adopt, which was to support Roe v. Wade (if they are in favor of it) only if Feminits support say, at least one of the reforms mentioned on the NCFMLA site; i.e., the reform of institutionalized dicrimination against men. In formulating strategies, I suggest the use of techniques of game theory where applicable; I offer the following analysis of the strategy I proposed elsewhere as a small example of what could be done; one should bear in mind that more players should be considered, and that the analysis presented here could be taken much further.
We can think of this strategy as a 2x2 game, as in the matrix below. Several analyses are possible; I
prefer the Theory of Moves, as explained in the monograph of Brams of that
title; the players begin their game in some historical context and they are
allowed to look ahead any number of moves. There are two players: Feminists, and
Men's Activists. The Feminists are assumed to want abortion to remain legal as a
primary goal; their secondary goal is to appear fair, since this will gain them
political points if they appear willing to compromise and abortion is
criminalized, than if they appear uncompromising and abortion is criminalized;
if their compromise doesn't gain them anything, they can be tougher in the
future. The various issues of concern to the Men's Activists are such
things as child support reform, family court reform, the establishment of a
department of men's health and the criminalization of
paternity fraud. The Men's Activists want compromise on at least one issue
of concern to them as a primary goal; as a secondary goal, they do not want
women to have exclusive control over every aspect of reproduction and its
consequences (i.e., whoever has control of children has an advantage in
divorce). If Feminists are unwilling to support at least one issue of concern to
men's activists, then Men's Activists will support the appointment of an
ultra-conservative legal activist judiciary who will move to criminalize
abortion; this way, no one will have exclusive control over every aspect of
reproduction and its consequences, even if no outcome favorable to men's
activists occurs. The relative value of each position in the matrix below is given by a pair (f,
m), where f is the value of the position to the Feminists, and
m is the value of the position to the Men's Activists.
Feminists uncompromising on all men's issues
Feminists compromise on at least one men's issue
Roe v. Wade overturned; Abortion criminalized
(1,2)
(2,3)
Roe v. Wade upheld; Abortion remains legal
(3,1)*
(4,4)
The starting position of the game is the one closest to the
current historical situation, given by the lower left hand corner of the matrix
(indicated by an asterisk).
Here, Feminists have the advantage, since their primary goal is met; Men's
Activists are starting from their worst position, since Feminists have defeated
virtually every of their attempts to obtain legal reform. The analysis depends
on how much power Men's Activists have to influence the criminalization of
abortion one way or the other, depending on cooperation from the Feminists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eghads! My 2x2 matrix html code didn't come out! Here it is again.
We can think of this strategy as a 2x2 game, as in the matrix below. Several analyses are possible; I prefer the Theory of Moves, as explained in the monograph of Brams of that title; the players begin their game in some historical context and they are allowed to look ahead any number of moves. There are two players: Feminists, and Men's Activists. The Feminists are assumed to want abortion to remain legal as a primary goal; their secondary goal is to appear fair, since this will gain them political points if they appear willing to compromise and abortion is criminalized, than if they appear uncompromising and abortion is criminalized; if their compromise doesn't gain them anything, they can be tougher in the future. The various issues of concern to the Men's Activists are such things as child support reform, family court reform, the establishment of a department of men's health and the criminalization of paternity fraud. The Men's Activists want compromise on at least one issue of concern to them as a primary goal; as a secondary goal, they do not want women to have exclusive control over every aspect of reproduction and its consequences (i.e., whoever has control of children has an advantage in divorce). If Feminists are unwilling to support at least one issue of concern to men's activists, then Men's Activists will support the appointment of an ultra-conservative legal activist judiciary who will move to criminalize abortion; this way, no one will have exclusive control over every aspect of reproduction and its consequences, even if no outcome favorable to men's activists occurs. The relative value of each position in the matrix below is given by a pair (f,m), where f is the value of the position to the Feminists, and m is the value of the position to the Men's Activists.
...................|.Feminists don't..|.Feminists
...................|.compromise......|.compromise
============================================
Abortion......|.....(1,2)............|...(2,3)
criminalized..|.........................|
============================================
Abortion still.|.....(3,1)*...........|...(4,4)
legal..............|.........................|
The starting position of the game is the one closest to the current historical situation, given by the lower left hand corner of the matrix
(indicated by an asterisk). Here, Feminists have the advantage, since their primary goal is met; Men's Activists are starting from their worst position, since Feminists have defeated virtually every of their attempts to obtain legal reform. The analysis depends on how much power Men's Activists have to influence the criminalization of abortion one way or the other, depending on cooperation from the Feminists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The analysis depends on how much power Men's Activists have to influence the criminalization of abortion one way or the other, depending on cooperation from the Feminists.
I was going to make this exact point. However, you already made the point. I've also heard this called by other names like the prisoners dilemma.
There are other strategies that can be revealed by studying this exercise. For example, there is a strategy where neither participant has coercive power, or only one participant has coercive power. Another strategy can involve a third party that is working between the participants of the matrix, and the third party has the coercive power. In that case it is assumed that one of the participants is in the wrong, or it may be the third party in the wrong and neither participant is wrong.
The combinations can get quite complex but they are limited. I prefer a three-dimensional model of this matrix. Usually there can be generalizations made to simplify the model to that level. In all cases there are predictable outcomes if the assumptions are correct. I appreciate your reminding us of this matrix.
Warble
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The combinations can get quite complex but they are limited. I prefer a three-dimensional model of this matrix. Usually there can be generalizations made to simplify the model to that level. In all cases there are predictable outcomes if the assumptions are correct.
Sure--the example was intended as the barest indication of the kind of analysis that can be done. I suspect that the techniques of game theory will be politically useful to men's activists, so I offered an example small enough to fit in a slash-dot style web post. This kind of math has already proved itself in political-economic and strategic situations. It's also fun to attempt to frame the analysis as neutrally as possible, without ideological bias.
The analysis depends on how much power Men's Activists have to influence the criminalization of abortion one way or the other, depending on cooperation from the Feminists.
I was going to make this exact point...
Assuming the simple example has some merit, it suggests the obvious conclusion that until Men's Activists have some influence, Men's Activists are entirely dependent the good will of the Feminists to achieve any of their proposed reforms. On the other hand, if Men's Activists have the power to cause abortion to be criminalized if Feminists don't compromise, then not compromising leads to disaster. Of course there should be more players for the game to be more realistic; as Smoking Drive says, "those who like this sort of thing will find this the sort of thing they like."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday November 13, @10:31PM EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, I love it. Game theory being utilized by the men's movement!
Thanks for spelling this out and THANKS for the kind words on our guestbook, Mars!
Or should I call you Professor Nash?
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent job. I like the site, looks good. My favorite part is the flyer. Good idea to summarize the six issues. I told my wife about it and she asked me to send her the url. She can get a overall sense of things by reading the summaries. Nicely written also.
One technical bit I wanted to mention is that you have your tables set for width=1000. This is fine as long as your monitor is 1000 x whatever. But if you have a screen that is less or greater than 1000 (most do) then it will be either too small or too large which will demand horizontal scrolling. You can fix this by simply setting the tables to 100% width and they will automatically adjust to the size of anyones screen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can fix this by simply setting the tables to 100% width and they will automatically adjust to the size of anyones screen.
Good point! Naturally we all have the high resolutions screens....don't we?
Thanks,
Warble
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Warble - The resolution of the screen is not an issue here. The issue is width of the screen. The way you have it set your page will always be 1000 pixels whether the end users screen display is 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, or 1280x1024. If it is 640x480 your page will be too large, and if it is 1280x1024 your page will be too small. In the 640x480 example the end user will need to scroll horizonatally in order to view the entire page. He will have a screen that is 640 pixels wide but your page will be 1000 pixels wide.
If you use the width=100% tag your tables will adjust to the end users screen size. If the end user has a 640x480 display the table will be 640 pixels wide. If he has a 1280x1024 then your table will be 1280 pixels wide. This is usually a much better tag to use since it adjusts to the size of screen being used by the end user.
You can also change the % on the tag to whatever you want i.e. width=50%. In this case the table would automatically take 50% of the screen width available. Since it appears that you use only one table the best width would likely be 100%.
You might want to change only that tag on the source and save the new file under a new name. (that has the 100% tag) Put it on the web and try them both and see if you can see the difference.
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aha! Glad to see that someone changed it to width=100%. Looks much better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's a great site. I put in my 2 cents in the guestbook.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A thoughtful conversation on the ins and outs of the women’s movement led to the following conclusion, as provided by my soon to be wife:
“As men have controlled the equilibrium of justice for most of this century, and long before that, how is it that the women’s movement managed to gain so much momentum, legislatively, in our lifetime?”
Sensible woman, is she.
And of course I said "Smoke and mirrors, with a little lie here, and a little lie there, etc."
But her point is well taken with me, as it should be with everyone that reads this.
Mitchell A. Smith
"An ambiguous perspective is all you can hope for when initially confronted by that which you do not know."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The point that the presupposition that "men have controlled the equilibrium of justice for most of this century, and long before that" may in fact be FALSE?
Remember, the idea that 'men have all the power and make all the rules primarily for the benefit of their own gender' is an inherently sexist presupposition which assumes the still-unproven contention that women's influence on men and their decisions is negligible and irrelevant, and that men are inherently unstable gender-fascists.
Or were you thinking of some other point?
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The point that men didn't see all of this coming, and didn't take the time to think much of the legislation through, and didn't seek more common ground, and that politicians (which have been, and continue to be, the majority male) are more worried about being re-elected than doing what’s inherently right and fair, and so on and so on…
In addition, at no time did she state (nor is it even remotely implied) that a woman's influence on her husband/son/father/brother/etc is negligible or irrelevant. Yet, your supposition of the possibility of covert influence is entirely without merit as well, and it needlessly burdens the uncharted background with a murky elitism. If your potential interference mode is correct, and women do have great influence over the men in their lives, then publicly elected chaps are absolutely feeble minded drones. Is this what you believe? Probably not. Given the state of actuality in relationships, the truth is likely somewhere in the middle.
As for the unstable gender facists bit, I don't know where you came up with that. Maybe a quick look in the mirror will do you some good?
I'm not going to discount her comment just because she's a woman. On the contrary, I'll give it even more thought, and attempt to see it from her point of view. (Why did you say the comment about men running everything? How do you really feel about the extreme left feminist view point? Where are my damn car keys?)
Yes, as I stated before: I'll heed her point to the extreme.
Mitchell A. Smith
"An ambiguous perspective is all you can hope for when initially confronted by that which you do not know."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Respond to these type of arguments this way: "Probably the same way boys managed to gain so many advantages, privileges and attention over girls in the classroom, as feminists say, even though classrooms have long been controlled by female educators."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the advice, but I'm not really interested in putting up an argument as to 'how' or 'why' it happened to us. I'm much more interested in knowing how she feels about the process, and what it would take to make her feel that men are being 'wronged'.
Mitchell A. Smith
"An ambiguous perspective is all you can hope for when initially confronted by that which you do not know."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm much more interested in knowing how she feels about the process, and what it would take to make her feel that men are being 'wronged'.
Could I ask what her response has been to such a question? It seems to be an important question to ask. Perhaps if we knew what sorts of things would convince women of men's powerlessness in some contexts, it might give us a better idea as to what kinds of actions we can take. That way, we could apply our energies to targetting more effective activism. Of course, she's only one woman, with her own ideas, but if we all ask women we knew similar questions, we could pool our resources. For my wife, it took doing a little reading, like Farrell, for her to see the complex nature of male privilege/obligation and power/powerlessness.
Sean
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I promise to get back with that answer once I have a more complete understanding of her position.
In addition, I may ask her to respond to some questions directly, if anyone cares to inquire. All I request is that everyone treat her like a lady, as I assure you she is one, and not like the enemy. I know most of us here understand that, but it is clear to me that some 'rogue' members may be inclined to attack, and I just don't want her to feel 'chastised' for something of which she isn't really to blame.
Mitchell A. Smith
"An ambiguous perspective is all you can hope for when initially confronted by that which you do not know."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By the way, does anyone know of good resources other than Warren Farrell for questioning ideas about patriarchy or male privilege? I'd like to cite some good sources for a book review.
Sean
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“As men have controlled the equilibrium of justice for most of this century, and long before that, how is it that the women’s movement managed to gain so much momentum, legislatively, in our lifetime?”
Ummmm... the inherent righteousness of their cause?
But her point is well taken with me, as it should be with everyone that reads this.
I think something is being lost in the telling, Mitchell. Perhaps in the context of your conversation this is a conclusion which makes a telling point, but here it just strikes me as an honest, important question. One which requires insight and much thought to find a satisfactory answer to (and which evidently stumped you at the time.:-)
Kudos to your partner for being willing to talk about this stuff without getting all defensive and congratulations on finding such a woman. However, I'm having trouble seeing the question in itself as making a point or providing an important insight.
Maybe you had to be there?
Larry
Proud member of the Sperm Cartel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday November 13, @02:27PM EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
Ray,
I went to the NCFM-LA website, and saw your photo there.
...Funny, I always pictured you as older.(^_^)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Funny, I always pictured you as older."
Warb rolls on the floor laughing!
Ya the buger is a cut little toddler isn't he?
No wonder why women just luv the wee boy.
He’s so….so….CUUUTE!
Warb
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thundercould/Warble:
Will no one spare a bowl of porridge for poor little Oliver Twist, the hapless waif?
Sorry I have to go now and practice my cute look so I can find a free ride in life. Since I'm all grown up/growing old cute doesn't seem to be working so good for me anymore.
Perhaps I could find a sympathetic feminist who would gently squeeze a kindly old man's cheek and give him a little hug, perhaps not.
As a guy, cute and 50 cents will only get you a cup of coffee, a very small cup of coffee.
Still, all things considered, I'm very grateful to have had a wonderful childhood with both my parents and my brother always there on that 300 acre farm where I grew up (not to mention my 30 aunts and uncles). We weren't rich, but I wouldn't trade that childhood for one in Beverly Hills if I could. It's true what they say about you don't know what you've got until its gone.
Things were really good and wholesome for me when that picture was taken. There were always lots of genuinely caring people in my life in those days.
It was the kind of setting that radical feminists are targeting today and doing everything in their power to destroy. I am confident they won't suceed, because every molecule of human existence longs for a truer, purer healthier life source than the perversion of life that they embrace.
Regards,
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps I could find a sympathetic feminist who would gently squeeze a kindly old man's cheek and give him a little hug, perhaps not.
Oh Dianna! Wendy! Hey....Over here! Cute little old Ray needs a hug and a squeeze on the cheek at the protest next Tuesday.
Warb
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday November 14, @11:22PM EST (#31)
|
|
|
|
|
You guys don't WANNA see MY baby picture.
I was an ugly baby. ...who grew up to be an ugly adult.
I am really ugly.
"How ugly are you?"
I'm so ugly that I even scare blind women!
I'm so ugly that when I was born the doctor slapped my mother instead of me!
I'm so ugly my neck was arrested for carrying a lethal weapon! (My face)
I'm so ugly I turned MEDUSA to stone!
Thank you ladies and gentlemen, I'm here all week!
(^_^)
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
