Sacks' Newest: "Valentine's Day & the Gender Wars"

	posted by Adam on Thursday February 13, @09:30AM from the News dept.
	Anon User writes "On Valentine's Day 2003...American men and women often remain bitterly divided...Part of the division...is due to women's legitimate grievances. But much of it is also caused by men's resentment that the very real problems and disadvantages they face as husbands, partners and fathers have been ignored by the media, our lawmakers and by society as a whole. To achieve reconciliation between the genders, it is necessary to address men's grievances." Read the article at http://www.glennsacks.com/valentines_day_and.htm --Newsday (2/12/03)

<  V-Day Parody Song Winner Announced | Cyberman Books Chat  >

  

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

What Grievances? (Score:1) by shawn on Friday February 14, @03:05AM EST (#1) (User #53 Info) Part of the division...is due to women's legitimate grievances. I almost always see a statement like this in articles about men. I call it the apologetic statement. But really. Do women in the United States or the Western World have any legitimate grievances in this day and age? Is there any significant aspect of life where women are at a disadvantage because of their sex? Pay equity? Nope. Education? Nope. Health Care? Nope. Victims of violence? Nope. I can't think of anything. On the other hand, there are plenty aspects of life where men are disadvantaged. This is a serious question. Do women have any legitimate grievances? About the best I can come up with is that in some religious organizations women cannot hold leadership positions.

Grievances? What Grievances? (Score:2) by frank h on Friday February 14, @12:50PM EST (#2) (User #141 Info) "About the best I can come up with is that in some religious organizations women cannot hold leadership positions." And even that is not legitimate. After all, there is nothing compelling them to associate themselves with that organization.

Male Magna Charta (Score:1) by cshaw on Saturday February 15, @11:35AM EST (#3) (User #19 Info) http://home.swbell.net/misters/index.html When the English Barons confronted King John at Runnemede in England in 1215 demanding certain rights for themselves and Constitutional rights and liberties for all Englishmen they did so in a very confrontational manner within a history of civil war with regard to the same. American and Western males must realize that a confrontational attitude has often been necessary to secure personal and collective rights and liberties. Although I, pesonally, believe that this confrontational course is the only realistic means for North American males to secure their rights and liberties, I believe that emigration outside of North America is the best course of action for North American males. Why? Because the individual sacrifice necessary to acheive these just ends for males is disproportionate to liberty and rights which males individually and collectively may obtain. At once upon emigration, the male is free from the oppression and discrimination he faces. At once, those who oppress males individually and collectively are closer to tyranny and collective oppression. C.V. Compton Shaw

[an error occurred while processing this directive]