|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The feminists must be going batshit seeing their lies and hatred failing so fast today. Articles like this are appearing more and more. We have a long way to go, but we have made great strides over the last few years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree Thomas. I can hear the "beep beep beep" of their ideological trucks backing up....
I am bracing myself for a chorus of "We never said that women weren't violent or men weren't victims." And then the inevitable "You need to build your own from the bottom up just like we did."
We need to continue to attack their misandry and the system they have built (legislative and actual) that vilifies men and turns away from female violence. Was it Patton who when asked the three most important things a warrior does responded by saying "That's simple, attack, attack and attack."
Stand Your Ground Forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am bracing myself for a chorus of "We never said that women weren't violent or men weren't victims." And then the inevitable "You need to build your own from the bottom up just like we did." ---------
You nailed that. I've heard that a few times. Not only that, the kid from his school newspaper took a hammer at victim feminist propaganda. Its not leaps and bounds but it is step by step.
Honestly, this whole victimology has absolutely nothing to do with domestic violence or solving the problem.
Rather it was a brilliant way to use victimology as a strategy to advance agendas. What better way then to gain federal money to perpetrate their projects. Erin Pizzey is almost responsible for this mishap. Of course it wasn't her intention to have things turn out like this.
Playing victim has become a weapon and a weapon women are learning all to well.
One major reason feminists will not debate or even look at men as victims is that will lead to a large scale 'reconciliation' between men and women. Forgiveness is a victimfem's worst enemy.
If society realizes the full complexities of domestic violence forgiveness and reconciliation is the inevitable.
In my opinion the falsehoods of Domestic Violence is the biggest issue for feminists. Once they are taken down everything else about feminism starts to break down. When that happens men can regain their lives so to speak.
Don't even get me started on how feminists are trying to convince women not to have chilren.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dan said: "In my opinion the falsehoods of Domestic Violence is the biggest issue for feminists. Once they are taken down everything else about feminism starts to break down"
I see it exactly the same. DV is a "winnable" fight for us considering the outright lies that they have told and had our government (U.S.) put into print in booklets and flyers. Once we change enough minds that they are in fact lies there will be a collapse of their power base. People will start trusting them less and see them for what they are: at best, a special interest group for women.
I have been working on an agency in Maryland that has printed booklets for public consumption about DV with our tax money using the feminist lies. So far they are refusing to retract and edit the propaganda but I am not finished yet! :>)
Stand Your Ground Forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In my opinion the falsehoods of Domestic Violence is the biggest issue for feminists. Once they are taken down everything else about feminism starts to break down
I think the other really big lie, whose debunking will help to destroy the hatred of feminism, is the claim that for a given background, ability, and amount of work women are paid less than men.
People will start trusting them less and see them for what they are: at best, a special interest group for women.
The Independent Women's Forum is doing a tremendous amount to bring forth the truth. One of their target audiences is college students. The people at the IWF deserve our respect and support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IMO the key to all this is that moderates don't like radicals... so the more the feminists appear as radicals the less the majority of Americans (men and women) will want anything to do with them.
Right now they're appearing pretty radical... and as more people become aware of the deceitful tactics they've used to push their agenda, the better it will be for those of us looking for true equality.
I'm encouraged by the fact that even as the feminists try to stick their fingers in the dyke (the fluid retaining sort in this analogy :)) holding back the truth, more and more cracks are spreading and allowing it to escape.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Erin Pizzey is almost responsible for this mishap. Of course it wasn't her intention to have things turn out like this."
I have to disagree most strongly with this, even considering the weak caveat.
After everything Erin's done and been through while opposing the hatemongering, femelitist bigots who stole her legacy -- the strong integrity she's shown in the face of their threats and attacks -- there is simply no way a reasonable person can assign her responsibility for the theft of her originally charitable and meritorious work and her ideological betrayal and attempted destruction at the hands of these anti-male, female-elitist, self-serving propagandists.
Erin deserves nothing less than our finest respect, admiration, and support for her own consistent loyalty to the truth and to all domestic violence victims, female and male alike.
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Erin deserves nothing less than our finest respect, admiration, and support for her own consistent loyalty to the truth and to all domestic violence victims, female and male alike."
Yeah. I should have expanded on my point further. Basically I am paraphrasing Erin herself really. The point is that she fought so hard for federal money she finally got it and opened the door for funding the hate groups.
Even Erin herself points out she did nothing to stop what was happening in the beginning because she feared it would stiffle the good aspects of what she fought so hard for.
I don't hold Erin responsible for what has been done. It is more like Erin opened the door to let good in and bad found its oppurtunity. The very reason it happened was because Erin has such an honest heart. Ironic.
Anyways I am a very strong supporter of Erin and her work. I believe her methods are the ones we as a society should be following. Eventually I believe it will.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is an article written by a college student who was this year allowed to write a contraversial submission. Word is slowly getting out.
V-Day ignores men-as-abusers stereotype
By: Steve Krakauer
02/13/03
--------------------------
Feb. 14 means love, courtship, flowers and chocolates — but don't get used to it. Enter V-Day, and not the Hallmark holiday.
V-Day "is a global movement to end violence against women and girls," said V-Day Executive Director Jerri Lynn Fields. The "V" stands for vagina, victory and, somewhat overshadowed, valentine.
But the "V" ignores vindication of the men-as-abusers stereotype.
At Syracuse University and more than 600 universities in the United States, V-Day contaminates the February romance-holiday with a vengeance against males, fighting viciously with weapons of misconception and propaganda.
Cruelty toward women warrants attention on an international level, as women around the world face hardships not seen since the U.S. women's rights movement in the mid-1800s.
Today, women cannot vote in Kuwait. They cannot drive cars in Saudi Arabia. Our world may be assimilating to Americana but not without abandoning its chauvinistic culture.
The discrepancy comes when looking at the harm toward women within our national borders. Women, of course, fall victim to violent crimes at an alarming rate. But through female empowerment, which is the ultimate goal of V-Day, truth is compromised.
A favorite piece of V-Day artillery is the use of statistics — publicizing misleading data easily available through malleable reports.
For example, a popular V-Day figure is "every 15 seconds in America a woman is being battered, usually by an intimate partner." The statistic originates from a National Family Violence Survey conducted by Richard Gelles, Murray Straus and Susan Steinmetz.
Straus himself admits, "Family conflict studies, without exception, show about equal rates of assault by men and women." Thus, every 15 seconds in America a woman — and a man — is being battered.
Glenn Sacks, a former feminist who has appeared on CNN, Fox News and in major newspapers, often defends males, especially in instances of misleading statistics.
"College males have to deal with defamation and can't defend themselves," said Sacks. "They don't know it's false and have no outlet to speak out against it."
Some might say the "15-second" stat is truthful, although not entirely reflective of reality. But consider if an event were held to combat carjacking in America.
To demonstrate carjacking as an epidemic, organizers post facts like "58 percent of all carjackers are black."
This fact is true and backed by the U.S. Department of Justice. But it doesn't take into account where carjackings occur, such as in a predominantly black neighborhood. It disregards vehicle type and the criminal's age and ignores the societal fact that police target blacks.
Is the statistic saying a black man is more likely to hijack your car than a white man? Should we be more cautious of blacks eyeing our vehicle in the grocery store parking lot?
Obviously not, and the implication is ludicrous — just like the statistics furthering the stereotype of female victimization and male dominance.
Rape is an immensely serious issue. Victims should have every forum to express anger and violators should be prosecuted. But the fact remains: Most men are not abusers. V-Day's propaganda incriminates all men.
Kate Kennedy, campus projects director for the alternative-feminist Independent Women's Forum, agrees.
"We want to prevent the portrayal of a white male patriarchal society," Kennedy said. "What V-Day does is put on a pedestal women victimization."
Kennedy's organization runs SheThinks.org, which developed an advertisement exposing the other major problem with V-Day: its essential theft of the value of Valentine's Day.
The evolution from viewing Feb. 14 as a day of positivity in relationships to their destructive aspects furthers the fabrication of male-supremacy in America. Valentine's Day becomes soiled with negativity as if Cupid's arrow provides more harm than good.
Sacks does not see how holding V-Day on any other date solves the problem either. "Campus feminists lie about men 365 days a year, so the fact that it's on Valentine's Day doesn't bother me," he said.
Dan Lynch, a board administrator for the Men's Activism News Network, opposes V-Day as well.
"The fear mongering propaganda leaves women vulnerable and divided from men," he said. "It serves one purpose and that is to indoctrinate women for political purposes."
At SU, V-Day events do not alienate men as much as Lynch notes in the national arena. "Vagina decorating" and literature tables in Schine Student Center have no ill-meaning. The performance of "The Vagina Monologues," a staple of V-Day nationwide, is artistic expression.
Still, many other areas further the men-as-abusers stereotype. A flier put out by the SU R.A.P.E. Center lists criteria a man can conform to in order to combat dating violence.
The flier makes such asinine suggestions as "If you are emotionally ... or sexually abusive to women ... seek professional help NOW" and "Mentor and teach boys about how to be men in ways that don't involve degrading or abusing girls and women."
V-Day organizers also asked fraternities to sign "Rape-Free Zone Declarations," naming the greek houses as vagina-friendly and posting their avowal, as if signing a piece of paper somehow ended their previously untamed aggression towards women.
The biggest disappointment with V-Day is that, for now, it's the most popular outlet for revealing injustices needing exposure.
Globally, bias against women runs rampant and worthy of uproar. Nationally, education about rape and dating violence is necessary to solving the problem holistically.
But V-Day is an ultimately misguided attempt at remedying those issues. A sign in Schine reads, "When violence stops, women and girls will be ... running the world."
For V-Day ever to succeed, the sign should instead read, "When violence stops, women and girls will live in complete equality with men and boys."
Steve Krakauer is a freshman in the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications. E-mail him at sakrakau@syr.edu.
--------------------------
Story Source: The Daily Orange
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let us know of the aftermath of this article.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let us know of the aftermath of this article.--------
I think it will be posted pretty soon. Im interested as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I forgot to mention, if you follow the link to the story there is also a link to enable you to watch the programme.
And the BBC conducted a survey,which found
"More than a quarter of the women who were questioned - 27% - said they had been physically abused. The corresponding figure for men was 21%."
More results from the survey and other opinions can be found at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2752567.stm
Before the survey results, on the Breakfast Show during the week, Sandra Horley (from the charity refuge) said "The overwhelming majority of victims are women".
A Woman 'relationship the rapist' on the show said "It's to do with the power dynamic of men over women. It's predominantly men tyrannising women." (A pity this view still predominates.)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/breakfast/27 52399.stm
Perhaps both women would like to come back and comment on the results from the survey.
Finally and unfortunately the BBC let themselves down badly with the very much gender biased 'help' offered here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/hh/
It sometimes feels like you take one step forward and two steps back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oops
(A pity this view still predominates.)
This is my commentary not part of what she said.
The whole emphasis would have been completely different had she made *that* comment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well they have to keep their agenda alive somehow. Notice they do this as a soundbite and not as a debatable feature.
This is where men's activists should be pushing. Writing the networks or having people like Sacks spreading the word on how feminists do not "debate" the issues or prove their assertions. I know its been done, just not enough in my perception.
Constantly relying on "Hate Statistics" , soundbites and one sided information structures.
Maybe the reason women are the majority of victims is because men have been stiffled from speaking out.
Interesting how women like Erin Pizzey could percieve how things were going right from the get go.
Im certain there is more to this.
Lately I have been in contact with a group who is studying subliminal messaging on television. One of their research developments revolves around how certain television shows are sublminally encouraging domestic violence.
I know sounds fishy, but anymore nothing surprises me. Subliminal messaging is nothing new.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Don't let a few minor programmes on the BBC fool you. This week our 'wonderful' British Broadcasting Corporation - funded by a license fee that you have to pay just for owning a TV receiver - is showing a number of programmes about domestic violence. Called 'Hitting Home', it claims to reveal the horrific truth about DV. The entire series of programmes is done from the perspective that DV is overwhelmingly done by horrible, nasty, evil men against lovely, nice, good women. None of the programmes they're showing are about the origins of the DV industry, or the ways in which statistics are routinely exaggerated or just made up. It's going to be a week of anti-male propaganda - overt propaganda for once, seeing as most of the time the BBC's anti-male propaganda is fairly covert.
For an interesting article on the subject, take a look at 'The BBC and gender fascism' on Melanie Phillips website. It's an article that appeared in one of our national newspapers a few days ago. Melanie Phillips has written many excellent articles on the subject of manhating feminism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday February 17, @11:46AM EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
I can vouch for this. I saw Kilroy's (male daytime chat show host) programme this morning and the male only perpetrator stereotype was wheeled out again. He also used the "1 in 4" stat as fact. A couple of other trailers for forthcoming programmes reinforced this view.
I thought Melanie Philips' article in the Daily Mail was excellent. The Mail is a fairly misnadric paper with a host of anti-male writers and editorial themes. In fact, until recently, the www.dailymail.co.uk web address resolved to www.femail.co.uk (the paper's "female" section). In fact, even today, if you want to browse the UK news from this site, you can only do it through the "Femail" sub-site - a shocking state of affairs as the Mail (like it or not) is one of the big UK sellers.
Rob
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the link to Melanie's article - Excellent.
I was hoping that the BBC would be presenting a more balanced view, though that hope was a bit forlorn.
Still, the survey they conducted probably shocked them and can at least be quoted back.
This a.m. Ester Rantzen (of Childline) looked very awkward talking of all the help and advice available to victims of DV and was doing her best to stay gender neutral until she said 'Mothers and children may want a place of refuge'.
All the while I thought the interviewer might at least ask the question - and for men and their children? But no.
How do you change attitudes like this?
Presenting contrary evidence does not seem to make any difference as the debate gets shifted, even if they do acknowledge that It's Violent Men *and* Violent Women, to Women suffer the majority of injuries.
Which is a bit galling since 'the children' suffer regardless.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All the while I thought the interviewer might at least ask the question - and for men and their children? But no.
How do you change attitudes like this?
Presenting contrary evidence does not seem to make any difference as the debate gets shifted, even if they do acknowledge that It's Violent Men *and* Violent Women, to Women suffer the majority of injuries.
I agree that this is a very difficult problem. The class-based analysis of gender employed by feminism taps into some very deep-rooted ideas about the perception of groups of people. Ultimately all forms of bigotry are founded on these same ideas of class distinction, and in practical terms there is very little difference between, say, racism and feminism. Both derive their authority from at least one of the three great 'higher powers' - God, Nature and History - and locate evil in the 'other' and goodness in their own preferred group. The emotional advantages alone outweigh all considerations of 'fairness' and 'rightness'.
One of the problems the men's movement hasn't yet addressed is that of creative interpretation - putting a spin on things, in other words. The men's movement is too bogged down by ideas of reason and rightness, as if there is some kind of bedrock reality which one has a duty to honour. The feminist movement is entirly unencumbered by such concerns. They begin with the conclusion they want to reach, then creatively interpret all information so that it connects to that conclusion. Reality, in the sense of something that has physically happened, is a meaningless and boring technicality to them. Consequently it wouldn't matter how much evidence you presented them with; if it contradicts the conclusion they have already decided on it will simply be ignored. It doesn't fit the emotional template of the conclusion, so it is wrong.
The logic of domestic violence, as it is conceived by the feminist mind, is that it is something men use to control and dominate women. All studies of domestic violence must have this conclusion built into them at the start, irrespective of whether it is violence by men or violence by women that is being examined. One unusual consequence of this is that violence against children is virtually ignored. In physical reality, women batter more children than men, batter them more violently than men, and murder more children than men. It is a lot harder to translate this into the terms of female oppression by men than it is to say that female violence against men is in self-defense. Even when the issue is discussed, the emphasis is on excusing the women who batter children, either by covertly blaming men, or by inventing 'illnesses' that allow women to deny responsibility for what they do with their own fists.
There is no 'clever' solution to this. Creative intepretation of the facts will always allow feminists to reassert their version of events, no matter what the men's movement comes up with. The men's movement needs to seriously sharpen up its cohesion, organisation and out-there activity - a lot of people don't even know there is a men's movement! Furthermore, it needs to have its own creative thinkers taking the lead; people who can not only deal with feminist spin but also redefine feminist ideas in a way that criminalises them. However, the men's movement has yet to find it's Germaine Greer or its Gloria Steinem.
One last thing. On the subject of who gets injured most often in domestic violence, the figure of 7 women to 1 man is often quoted. This figure is seriously out of date. A more modern analysis by John Archer of the University of Central Lancashire suggests that men make up about two fifths of those injured. You can check out the abstract of his work here, together with those of other related articles which also make for interesting reading.
The issue of domestic violence is the battlefield on which the men's movement can win its greatest victory. Unfortunately the men's army has yet to turn up for the fight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good comments and information.
'One of the problems the men's movement hasn't yet addressed is that of creative interpretation - putting a spin on things'
The attempts at rebuttal of John Archer's work are very interesting. One basically says, We can't help them because it would disrupt us helping our group, so your analysis is flawed.
I agree that there is a need for creative thinkers. So where are they?
Reactive thinking, using logical analysis seems to have allowed Feminists to shift ground, become more extreme, yet still appear reasonable. The small steps and slippery slope approach.
Maybe, we stop thinking in that way and use the rules of PC and Feminism by selectively breaking them. How do we shift the emphasis from us to them?
Maybe we just say 'Oh that's old hat (feminism et al), we're over here now busy forging a new and better path. We have our own brand of universal unity plus that's all inclusive, good and fair.'
We need some marketing people.
regards and thanks again for the links
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
