|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Being female trumps all other 'disadvantages' because women are not a minority, nor were they oppressed in the way that actual minorities were. Most whites did not spend the bulk of their adult lives working to support non-whites and their children, but most men did work to support women and children. The black race in America seems to have been the testing ground for radical feminist social policies. Give it another twenty or thirty years and maybe the rest of male society will be in the same boat. How convenient that the issue of race can be used to divide men, while the issue of gender unites women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
women are not a minority, nor were they oppressed in the way that actual minorities were. Most whites did not spend the bulk of their adult lives working to support non-whites and their children, but most men did work to support women and children.
Thank you for pointing out these great lies of feminism. Were women an oppressed minority in the past? Not in this country. In this country, in the past, men and women were oppressed in different ways. Today, however, there is great oppression of men and no oppression whatsoever of women.
We need to keep up our attack on feminism. Yes, there are different extremes in the feminist movement, but it is all by its very nature anti-male. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The allegedly "good" forms of feminism are a smoke screen that serves to enable radical/mainstream feminism to keep oppressing men. There may have been Nazis in Germany, who supported the party because they believed in full-employment, wanted to have the trains run on time, wanted the injustices of the Treaty of Versailles abrogated, and believed Jews should have equal rights. But by supporting Nazism, by perhaps speaking of good Nazism and bad Nazism, they supported monstrous evil.
Let's stop enabling hatred and lies.
The black race in America seems to have been the testing ground for radical feminist social policies. Give it another twenty or thirty years and maybe the rest of male society will be in the same boat. How convenient that the issue of race can be used to divide men, while the issue of gender unites women.
We need to use this race-gender issue as a bridge between black men and white men. We all benefit by removing the hateful, preferential treatment of women in the nation's academy and throughout society. We need to strive to help black men and boys in school, because they are the most downtrodden, but we need to attach the interests of all men and boys to that effort. Through this we can advance not only the just interests of men, we can also advance racial harmony.
The Million Dads March will be a perfect opportunity for men of all color to work together on this, since all dads should be terribly concerned over the welfare of their downtrodden and despised sons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"and believed Jews should have equal rights."
That should be "but believed Jews should have equal rights."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> We need to use this race-gender issue as a bridge between black men and white men.
It's also high time straight men and gay men got united.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's also high time straight men and gay men got united.....
I could not agree more. All men and boys are being crushed by anti-male hatred.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And what is really a pity, is the fact that gay men and feminists are usually supposed to be allies.....against the white and machist heterosexual male....what a joke, feminists love gay men when they are effeminate, but are so scared of them when they act like "normal" guys...because they can't control them by using sex, unlike what they do with heterosexuals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My impression of the political gay movement is that it's anti-male, anti-father and anti-family. I'm not saying that's how most homosexuals are, but that's the impression I get. A lot of feminists seem to group 'sexism' with 'racism' and 'homophobia', and blame them on the 'patriarchal male' and the 'nuclear family'. It then becomes vitally important to undermine the heterosexual male and the 'patriarchal' family (by which I mean the family structure in which the biological father of the children is seen as an essential component). I honestly don't think gays - or at least the politicised ones - could give a damn about men or men's rights. If anything, they really don't seem to like men very much at all. They lionise women and denigrate men. They seem almost to be suffering from a bizarre kind of sado-masochistic sexual impotence - unable to get it on with women, but deriving some form of pleasure from the idea of female domination. Gore Vidal's 'Myra Breckinridge' seems to embody that basic attitude, with its bondage, its sexual violence, and its depiction of the 'strong woman' (actually a sex-changed man) as a violator of heterosexual masculinity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A lot of feminists seem to group 'sexism' with 'racism' and 'homophobia', and blame them on the 'patriarchal male' and the 'nuclear family'.
I agree. We need to point out the fact that "feminism" is linked with "racism" (as shown in the article starting this thread) and "misandry" and point out that this is the fault of the feminists, many of them lesbians. (Just look at the leadership of the N.O.W.)
We need to build bridges. I suspect there is as high a percentage of straight men who despise gay men as there is of gay men who despise straight men. We're seriously undermining ourselves by staying divided. We have many critical interests in common. If an existing movement doesn't work as an ally, we do an end run around it. I suspect there are may gay and bisexual men who are sick of anti-male hatred. Just consider the postings of rage on this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @03:18PM EST (#36)
|
|
|
|
|
Something else I just thought of.
Alot of Black leaders are very fond of saying that "White men enslaved us." The feminists like to use that as a bridge between them and Black people as an "excuse" to hate men.
What the feminists fail to mention(intentionaly, of course), is that white WOMEN also kept slaves.
Particularly rich white women. And what are most feminist organizations comprised of, mostly? WHITE WOMEN!!! Not to mention that some people in Africa SOLD their OWN countrymen into slavery, to begin with!
And, to be fair, just for the record, some of my cherokee ancestors ALSO kept Blacks as slaves. AND Black members of the U.S. Calvary were just as guilty as any White member for slaughtering Indians, as well.
So, there, fine. Every ethnicity and gender is guilty of SOMETING!
So can we all just acknowledge that and get on with our lives?!?
Not if you're a feminist, apparantly...,
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The allegedly "good" forms of feminism are a smoke screen that serves to enable radical/mainstream feminism to keep oppressing men.
This is an excellent point. All groups and ideologies have their positive and negatives sides. There is good and bad in nearly everything. However, when a group or ideology becomes so evil that they are almost completely focused around hatred, one must question any association with that group. I used to accept terms like "equity feminism." Now, however, I believe people who identify themselves as equity feminists may be doing themselves a disservice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We need Men's Studies course designed by men who really look at the issues of men.
We need Men's Commisions everywhere there can be one.
We need to stop giving money to finance feminist propaganda.
We need to become a mainstream media issue.
We need to neutralize feminist indoctrination tactics at the source. Not to divide us further from women who are also being told the same lies.
We need to stress the importance of fairness and extinguish prejuduces.
We need to tie up the courts with excessive amounts of costs if they continue to deny our rights and we need to make these things as public knowledge as we can.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday February 27, @07:39PM EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday February 27, @10:10PM EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
I agree.
Another similar analogy I use when talking to people:
Just because you are anti-nazi doesn't mean you are anti-German white people. Similarly we aren't anti-women.
We don't feel threatened or intimidated by succesful women, but we are outraged at the unfair and sometimes shockingly cruel treatment of men and boys in this country.
The enemy we are fighting is hatred and bigotry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday February 27, @09:35PM EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
...*sigh*...,
Once again I see the dicussion of "race" and "gender" as Whites and Blacks, Blacks and Whites.
Sorry, folks. I know I push my luck sometimes, here, But WHY are there never any equivalent studys on any other ethnic group when it comes to things like feminism?
I think I speak for alot of other Indians, as well as Asians, Hindus, Hispanics and other minorities when I say that, There are other people in this country besides Whites, Blacks, "Men", "women" and Homosexuals. Yet these are the ONLY people one hears about.
Feminism has wreaked havok on Indians, in America, I can assure you! It's not as bad as with some other "groups" but it's taken it's toll. I imagine it is the same with other "minorities" as well. Yes Feminism HAS damaged Black men, TERRIBLY. as well as White men, But if you want to remove a cancer, it CAN NOT be done by only removeing a little piece of the tumour. By ignoreing all other groups besides Whites and Blacks, rest assured feminism can and is easily spreading, just like cancer through the body of America.
I guess what I'm trying to say, is that the rest of us feel, well, a bit 'left out', as if we don't even matter. Like we aren't even Americans.
When we (Indians and other minorities) are over-looked in study, after study, after study, alot of us are starting to say, "Oh, What the hell's the use of even TRYING??"
And in today's climate of feminism, That can and does set a dangerous precedence.
Something I beleive the millitant feminist element is counting on.
As I said..., It's ALL the cancer, or none of it...,
Sorry.
I'll be good, now.
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry.
I'll be good, now.
You have been good. Thanks for reminding us, Thundercloud. All good men and women must unite to overthrow feminism for the just treatment of all men and women -- straight, gay, black, white, Indian, short, tall, whatever.
Thanks again for reminding us and helping to keep us on our toes, Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You have been good. Thanks for reminding us, Thundercloud. All good men and women must unite to overthrow feminism for the just treatment of all men and women -- straight, gay, black, white, Indian, short, tall, whatever.-------
I certainly did not mean to leave you out, Thundercloud. However I strongly suggest you keep speaking to us and to keep reminding us that you aswell 'because' of your ethnicity feel destroyed because of it.
However our greatest commonality is that we are men. I feel it should be the main focus but not the only one. The reason I feel it should be the main focus is it is our greatest bonding source.
I always felt gays were in with feminists because feminism is highly a homosexual outlet. that gender feminism promoted lesbianism in impressionable girls minds.
As for natives, it seems that our backgrounds are skewed by land rights and with blacks its slavery.
Feminists like to keep that flame alive to keep us divided. With the money and the promise of a 'better life' feminists can move in on native girls and turn them against the white man easily then slowly against their own native men. Its a very seductive process.
This type of tribalism will continue on for a very long time if we don't expose their tactics of hate mongering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> I always felt gays were in with feminists because feminism is highly a homosexual outlet. that gender feminism promoted lesbianism in impressionable girls minds.
That used to be the case in the seventies. It has changed since then. I'm bisexual myself, I like men, I like women, I'm very masculine, and I hate hateful feminists. Their hatred towards men has created hatred towards them in me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @03:01PM EST (#34)
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas, Dan and Rage.
Thanks for understanding.
I get conserned sometimes that I am ramming Native issues down people's throats, here, sometimes. But as I've stated before, I'm a double-activist.
BTW, I do bring up men's issues on NATIVE websites as well as bringing up Native issues on MEN's websites.
I don't bother doing either on FEMINIST websites.
...Take a guess why...,
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
" I'm bisexual myself, I like men, I like women, I'm very masculine,"
Do you think that you would feel the same about feminists if you were just totally gay?
I have a friend that is bi has a child with a woman and he sees the stuff I am talking about because he himself has gone threw it. Now his partner for example is totally gay and he almost but applauds what the feminists are doing as it creates a bigger fault between men and women and encourages homosexuality.
When I tell him of the bullshit laws he just nods and sais 'men and women shouldn't be together'. But for my own viewing pleasure I point out how homosexuals are going through it too. He has a sour puss then.
My opinion is that the government is trying to invade our lives so much ever little move we make will be under legislation.
If you have time read this link of how Canadian governments have been favoring feminists to promote thier hate agenda against men. http://fathersforlife.org/articles/report/charter_ coup.htm
They are basically paying feminists to lobby their agenda. Gender feminism needs seriously to be exposed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @04:30PM EST (#41)
|
|
|
|
|
"BTW, I do bring up men's issues on NATIVE websites as well as bringing up Native issues on MEN's websites."
TC, that is really cool. Personally, I don't mind at all that you remind myself and others that race isn't always a black/white issue. I think it is great that you strive to raise awareness in this regard.
Also, I think the direction of the present thread is quite positive for our purposes here. I am thrilled that the constituents of this board break from the terrible stereotype of "men's movement" members propogated by NOW and other feminist organizations. They ceaselessly assert that father's rights activist are all white, all male, all heterosexual, all racist, and all homophobes.
Think about how much it would strengthed the men's movement if gay and minority men knew that they were welcome and wanted within it! That the men's movement stands for the rights of all men, and not only white, heterosexual men.
And to Rage and any other bi/homosexual contributors: I respect your sexual preferences, and apprieciate your contributions to the board and to the men's movement at large.
-hobbes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks.
But please also consider the fact that I'm not gay, I'm bisexual, so I guess it is easier for me to feel cool within the men's movement. Perhaps 100% gay men will have more trouble committing themselves to the cause, as the men's movement has suffered from the prejudices you mentioned for a long time.
But it is obvious that the men's movement could be only strenghtened if it welcomed gay and minorities men, and would gain sympathy in the media much more easily.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Think about how much it would strengthed the men's movement if gay and minority men knew that they were welcome and wanted within it!
And that, despite any illusions they may harbor to the contrary, they don't stand an ice cube's chance in hell without it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @10:09PM EST (#54)
|
|
|
|
|
It's weird, isn't it? that feminist organizations, like the N.O.W. accuse men's activists of being "racist" when (as I mentioned elsewhere on this thread) they themselves are comprised mainly of WHITE women!
I have almost always been welcomed amoungst men's activists. But I seem to remember hearing some where 'minorities' are not particularly welcome amoung millitant feminists. That includes FEMALE minorities. I could be wrong but I don't think ANY feminist group has even ONE minority female leader...!
I guess this is yet another example of: if men do it it's always wrong, but if women do the exact same thing, there's ALWAYS an excuse for
it. And in this case men aren't even DOING it.
...But the fems are...!
Hypocricy, plain and simple, the feminist way.
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There may have been Nazis in Germany, who supported the party because they believed in full-employment, wanted to have the trains run on time, wanted the injustices of the Treaty of Versailles abrogated...
This makes me think of the famous statement of a German anti-Nazi (I'm blanking on who exactly it was; maybe Martin Niemoller?) "They came for the Jews, and I didn't say anything because I wasn't a Jew..." (He runs through a list of several other groups the Nazis rounded up) "...and when they came for me there was no one left to say anything."
Well, in this context, I have to confess: they came for the African American men, and I didn't say anything, because I wasn't an African American man. And, as Thundercloud has pointed out, Native Americans and a whole lot of other groups could be included on that list. I don't have any magic ideas for making it happen, but we have to find some way to get beyond these divisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sinbad the comedian was on a talk show. He started to talk about his recent divorce. He became very agitated and upset. He made the comment that he thought that being black was bad in this country, but being a male going through the family court system was worse. They cut to a commercial, and when they returned the conversation was not continued. I guess my point is that as long as you are male, regardless of your race, you are oppressed. I don't believe that the gay movement has the same agenda as the mens' movement. I will have to admit that I have limited exposure to the gay movement, just what I read, and what I hear. Most of the gay men that I have spoken to have distain for what they call breeders, and align themselves with women as their sisters. Go figure!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't believe that the gay movement has the same agenda as the mens' movement.
I also don't think that the gay movement has the same agenda as the men's movement. In addition, I don't think that the black civil rights movement has the same agenda as the men's movement. Jesse Jackson sure as hell doesn't. You can add a lot of other movements to that, including the Indian rights movement.
I'm not saying that the men's movement should ally itself with the gay movement and the black civil rights movement. I'm saying that straight and gay and black, for that matter all good men, need to work together to fight anti-male oppression. We need to build a new movement.
In the words attributed to Benjamin Franklin, according to Bartleby.com, when signing the Declaration of Independence, "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @02:52PM EST (#32)
|
|
|
|
|
Saddly, Thomas is right about the 'Indian rights movement'.
Even Russell Means, once a leader of A.I.M. (American Indian Movement) and a man I have admired for years, is on record as saying, 'We live in a patriarchal society', and 'America is "anti-female"'. Where Means and other leaders (includeing Black leaders) get that impression, is beyond me!
It just goes to show, that although progress has been made, we still have a ways to go. And that entails convinceing guys like Russell Means and Jessie Jackson, Etc. that they need to wake up and see what is REALLY happening.
While I agree with Russell Means on alot of issues, Gender is not one of them.
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The reason that the "leaders" say what they say, is that sadly they have been corrupted. Power corrupts, and absolute power corruptes absolutely. If a person in power doesn't go along with the current agenda, they are ostracized by the the regime, which makes it difficult to get anything done. Instead of holding to integrity, they opt for expediency, hence the downfall of real decomracy. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday March 02, @03:40AM EST (#72)
|
|
|
|
|
Dave.
For the most part you are right, about leaders being ostracized by the regime.
But keep in mind; American indian leaders, activists and Indians in general are already ostracized by the regime.
Which, frankly, makes Russell Means' statements on gender all the more puzzling to me.
Perhaps he and people like him who WANT to be accepted into the regime say what they think the regime wants to hear. I don't know, but it wouldn't suprise me if that were indeed the case.
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never understand why when someone is doing well and coming up in the world, people have to make it into a negative. It just reeks of sour grapes.
Also, what would make people happy, quotas on success, everybody improves at the same % and at the same rate/year? I mean really, what are the expectations? Is everything one giant quota/parity game?
Geez, you'd think we could applaud the fact that black women are doing better than previously instead of blame them for beating out black men. The same arguments were tossed out about white women "taking OUR jobs" etc etc way back the. The displacement theory is bankrupt. There is enough success to go around for everyone. Black women doing well doesn't mean someone else is getting screwed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @12:11AM EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
>Geez, you'd think we could applaud the fact that black women are doing better than previously instead of blame them for beating out black men.
It is great that black women are doing well. The problem is that black men and boys are doing so much worse. I am not blaming black women for doing well. I am blaming radical feminists, a gender-biased school system, and a culture of misandry for destroying the self esteem of boys, labeling black boys as criminals and rapists from childhood, and then claiming that males are the privileged gender.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @12:38AM EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
Can she thrive if her brother does not, if the black man succumbs, as hundreds of thousands already have, to the hopelessness of prison and the streets?
The problem isn't black women's success, it's women treating men as tools for women's personal fulfillment. The implication here is that concern about black men follows from black women's concern about themselves. That's gross. That's the typical feminist view of men.
Imagine, if you can, a world in which men -- black, white, Indian, Mexican, gay, or whoever they see themselves to be -- are treated like fully human beings. Not means for women to get stuff, but valued as real live flesh-and-blood persons.
If that doesn't appeal to you, go back to your vagina monologues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't read it that way. The article didn't make it out to me to be about women wanting black men to succeed so that they would be worthy to marry. Instead it seemed to me to be saying that black women want black men to succeed so that all blacks (and by implication the next generation, thier children) will be better off than every before.
It seems to me that a common thread in all people who started out lower on the econmic/social scale is a desire to do better than the previous generation. To do that virtually everyone in the group has to improve themselves and garner all the opportunities they can. This is hard to orchestrate en masse. That's why if a portion of the group does well, they all theoretically are inching upward.
In real life, some individuals are going to do better than others at first, take the lead or whatever. Then the rest (usually the next generation) does better. It would be hard to imagine that the next generation of black children born to successful black women, whether or not their fathers went to college etc, wouldn't do better. After all no one complained when women didn't scale the education/career ladder as fast as men, but nevertheless their unions of better educated successful men and women produced the next generation with more opportunity than their parents. This was the whole idea behind the GI bill after all. Get more men better educated and inch up the prospects for everyone ... not overnight ... but long term. It worked. The generation after WWII had were more educated than their parents overall and had expanded opportunities compared to their parents' generation.
Look, we should invest in everyone, I agree. But if one segment is moving out front (as more men did after WWII), everyone will benefit. I see no reason to rain on that parade just becaue in this particular case it is women who seem to be doing the inching upward.
Ditto the Vietnamese when they started emmigrating here in the 70's. The men ventured out first and worked at menial jobs. They then pooled their resources and bought small family businesses like shops and restaurants which the women largely ran. Neither was very educatied but the men were better educated and assimilated first (by necessity learing the language and getting in on the bottom rung of the economic ladder) before the entire group could move up. The next genertaion did very well. There is no logical reason why this same model cannot happen in the black community only with the women out in front. We never heard a gender parity argument among immigrant groups as they inched up the social/economic ladder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lorianne, there seems to be an underlying theme to your responses. One that seems to be trying to either justify, or excuse the oppression of the male for the betterment of the female. If in fact women were so much more enlightened than men why is the oppressive nature of the system so insidious? Why are women such as yourself trying to preserve the protected status of the female, while at the same time trying to demonize men? Why has the American family been decimated in this country under the reign of women? Why are there so many single parent families headed by women that have led our nations youth astray? Seems to me that the only thing that could fix this mess is equality, with equal responsibility. If that frightens women that they will lose their protected status, and that they will be held accountable for their actions, then it is time to mature. Can't have it both ways! Why, because there is no responsibility!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why are women such as yourself trying to preserve the protected status of the female... If that frightens women that they will lose their protected status, and that they will be held accountable for their actions, then it is time to mature.
This hits the nail on the head. Comfortable, white, female feminists look at everything they've had handed to them on a silver platter and they say "Our jobs," "Our children," "Our rights." They're afraid that if black and other men truly rise up, they'll take away "Our jobs," demand access to "Our children," and expect to receive "Our rights." Acting like things are developing well in the black community is a sign of feminist psychopathology.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's feminine privilege, Dave, palin and simple.
Nothing is relevant except how it impacts women. We could have a virus decimating the population, and targeting only those with a "Y" chromosome, and the discussion would center about how adversely this impacts women.
Women don't get it. And I'm past figuring out whether they refuse to get it or can't get it.
All I needed to learn from life I learned from a guy we called "Bill the Cat" when I was working construction. We were setting in a foundation, and we were fixing to pour the main slab.
We had a couple of college boys hired in as casual labor, and they were just talking it to death. Arguing over who was going to pour, who was going to rake, whether they were going to start at the back and move forward, or forward then back, and so on.
Then up come old Bill. We called him Bill the Cat because he had one pop-eye, and a mess of wild ass curly red hair. He lokked at them till they shut up, spit on the grpound, and then said, "De two of yas soun' like a coupla goddam wimmin! I don' give a fuck how ya do it, but th' only way this slab is gonna git poured is t'pour the fuckin slab! Now shut th' fuck up, and pour th' fuckin' slab."
That's wisdom. Less talk, and more action. No meetings. No consensus. No who's doing what, who's working harder than who, who's to blame or anything. Just shut the fuck up, and pour the fucking slab. Just do it.
This is why you don't hear men bitching about how their wife doesn't do enough housepainting, or yard work, or gutter cleaning, or pumping out the cellar, or fixing the machinery, or building the garage back up, or fixing the roof, or replacing the shingles on the side of the house, or hauling the old furniture out to the dump, or chopping the firewood, or ...
... and so on and so on. It needs to be done. The only way to get it done is to do it.
Shut the fuck up, and pour the fucking slab.
I heard a woman bitching because her husband didn't help out enough around the house. He came home and got in the shower, then plopped down, ate, red the paper, watched the news, and went to bed. He only did jack on Saturday mornings.
And it was true. But we didn't ever hear the other side of the story.
Her husband worked 10 hour shifts at a factory. This was where they made sintered components. That's when you take powdered metal, added some stuff to it, and compressed and heated it until it fused. He had metal dust in his hair and face constantly, dust that was heated. The factory averaged 95 degrees in the winter. In the summer it was easily a hundred and ten. He ran a machine where he was lifting racks of these parts into and out of polishers. 300 pound racks. For ten hours. Five days a week.
This wasn't some white collar executive who kept his own hours. This was a guy who shut the fuck up and poured the fucking slab. She didn't work. He supported her, and the kids, fifty hours a week in hundred degree conditions chucking about 300 pounds, day in, and day out.
This is our greatest strength, guys, and is what gives us, as men, property rights over much of the world. Because whatever the people have that are out pouring the fucking slab, you can bet dollars to donuts they ain't sporting a pair of tits.
You know what else? We've done it for so long because it's so damn obvious. Shit doesn't get done by having fucking meetings. Bitching never solved a goddamn problem. Blaming someone is wasted effort. Arguing about who does what or works more is mindless. Someone has to operate the truck. Someone has to guide the chute. Someone has to shovel, someone has to rake. Someone has to finish. Someone has to set the molds, and so on and so on. In short, someone has to do their part so the fucking slab gets poured. Because the motherfucker ain't going to pour itself.
It's what should have been said fifty years ago, and what it isn't to late to say now: Girls, you want your piece of this man's world? Then shut the fuck up, and pour the fucking slab.
Or go into the kitchen and make my fucking lunch.
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Nothing is relevant except how it impacts women. We could have a virus decimating the population, and targeting only those with a "Y" chromosome, and the discussion would center about how adversely this impacts women. "
This should be on billboards across the country. In every english speaking country in the world that is.
I read a quote from a french actress and she said the reason men like french women better is "because we're[women] not trying to be men".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's what should have been said fifty years ago, and what it isn't to late to say now: Girls, you want your piece of this man's world? Then shut the fuck up, and pour the fucking slab.
Or go into the kitchen and make my fucking lunch.
You're a genius, because you say what is obvious to all of us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
White feminism is the mortal enemy of black men.
White feminism is the mortal enemy of the black community.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
White feminism is the mortal enemy of black men.
White feminism is the mortal enemy of the black community.
Remember who they are.
Remember.
Justice will come.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why not? We already have quotas in the form of affirmative action - so why not quotas somewhere else?
Quotas - affirmative action - are "success at someone's expense." The minute you start giving someone something unearned on the basis of their race or gender, you cheapen any success that members of that group might have. It's one of the reasons that Asians, Jews, and American Indians have resisted (thus far) becoming part of the victim culture.
Sad thing is, there's damn few women or blacks running around to day that someone can't look at their success and legitmately ask "Are they successful because they're good? Or because they're black/women (or Black women)?"
Look at the queen of token AA programs - the WNBA. People are staying away in droves. Why? Because they're no good. Because they play like girls. Because the cellar dwelling team in the NBA would take their champions and make them into their butt-monkeys.
Do you seriously think that the recipient of an affirmative action freebie can honestly look themselves in the eyes and say, "I earned this," and feel good about it? Do you actually believe it doesn't reinforce the idea of "Poor things - couldn't get anywhere without some set-asides for them." with all the condescending attitude that implies?
I know my white, male doctor had to be good - damn good - to be admitted to college, med school, and to graduate. Did that woman, black man, or black woman have the same obstacles? Did they skate through a class because the tests were "race or gender normed?"
That's success? Okay, whatever.
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's ridiculous and racists.
Even IF someone got a chance to go to school through AA (and most minorities don't get in by this route) it doesn't necessarily mean they are less capable to perform once they get there. By my estimation about half of ALL college students of any race are not really college material anyway. Standards are so low at most colleges that whether someone is "qualified" to be admitted is largely a bogus point.
In the meantime, many students once they get to college atually get serious about education and learn. A certain percent of students "unqualified" initially are going to outperform the a certain percentage of the "qualified" ones who blow off education once admitted or were never serious about it to begin with and are only there because their family expects them to put in the 4 years.
You're dreaming if you think all white students in college are qualified to be there. As it stands colleges are eager to admit anyone with a pulse (and a checkbook). That's the reality these days. The number of colleges has increased and the number admitted has increased in the last 15 years which means MORE college places available, making AA arguments largely invalid. Colleges want students period. The more the better.
The real question is: What is the value these days of a college degree? Colleges love AA arguments because it deflects attention from this question and keeps the "value" of their product inflated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's ridiculous and racists.
How so?
That's a scurrilous charge, especially from someone who really doesn't know diddley about *MY* race - which, FYI, is a good portion American Indian. That's right, Indian, dammit, not "Native American." Lenni Lenape, (Delaware, for those of you in the cheap seats.)
And that means - so what?
I was raised "white" (whatever the hell that means.) I look white, and I pass as white.
And I've encountered racism too, at the hands of both Whites and Indians. In the end, so what?
It's racist because it's the truth.
Even IF someone got a chance to go to school through AA (and most minorities don't get in by this route) it doesn't necessarily mean they are less capable to perform once they get there.
Don't mean squat. It begs the question: Could they have got in on their own merits? Or do that just have an AA pass, IOW, someone who *is* qualified is out because they had the right plumbing or color of skin?
By my estimation about half of ALL college students of any race are not really college material anyway. Standards are so low at most colleges that whether someone is "qualified" to be admitted is largely a bogus point.
Most will drop out. It's about equality of opportunity, not equality of results. Again, so what? This is relevant why?
In the meantime, many students once they get to college atually get serious about education and learn. A certain percent of students "unqualified" initially are going to outperform the a certain percentage of the "qualified" ones who blow off education once admitted or were never serious about it to begin with and are only there because their family expects them to put in the 4 years.
And many NHS students from high school fail miserably, many get married, pregnant, and on and on and on ... Again, relevance? Some fail, some succeed; so far your grasp of the obvious is stunning, but I fail to see a point.
You're dreaming if you think all white students in college are qualified to be there.
Never said they were. Many are in on legacies (as are other races) and a variety of reasons. And? They didn't get in *because* they were white, so it's an apples and oranges thing.
As it stands colleges are eager to admit anyone with a pulse (and a checkbook). That's the reality these days. The number of colleges has increased and the number admitted has increased in the last 15 years which means MORE college places available, making AA arguments largely invalid. Colleges want students period. The more the better.
In that case, doing away with Affirmative action is thus nbo problemo. If the arguments are "invalid" it means that there is more than enough to go around for anyone who wants in a college.
The real question is: What is the value these days of a college degree? Colleges love AA arguments because it deflects attention from this question and keeps the "value" of their product inflated.
Well, you try to get a job somewhere where the honcho "paid his dues" getting his degree, and is going to make damn sure everyone else does too. I do hiring, and I won't hire someone without a degree for certain positions - you can certainly load the truck and sweep the floor, though, or answer the phones and fetch my coffee. If you have a degree it's reasonable of me to hold you to certain expectations. If you don't, well, then I don't have that reasonable expectation anymore.
My degrees have opened many doors for me. They're my credentials. They give me credibility. And they have been required for many positions. So, the value is high.
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You're the one argueing apples to oranges. The article is about the progress of black women compared to black men. Then you toss in AA suggesting most blacks can't get admitted any other way. Even if that were true, that would make black men look even worse, since all they have to do is apply (according to you) and play their victim card.
Well, if blacks are being admitted into colleges based on their race (your contention not mine), why aren't equal numbers or more black MEN enrolled? After all if they're giving handouts, it still takes a bit of vim and vigor to roll out of bed and get in the handout line. Under YOUR scenario, black men don't come out looking too swift if they can't even figure out how to manipulate the AA system to their advantage like their sisters.
Therefore, not only is your argument racist, it's insultling to men as well. Double whammy from you for black men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @06:29PM EST (#48)
|
|
|
|
|
"why aren't equal numbers or more black MEN enrolled?"
Black men get one victim card. Black women get two. Plus black men have to deal with all the prejucide against men in school. Black women get all of the preferential treatment for women.
Plus, there IS prejudice against blacks and men. There is only preference for white women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You're the one argueing apples to oranges. The article is about the progress of black women compared to black men. Then you toss in AA suggesting most blacks can't get admitted any other way. Even if that were true, that would make black men look even worse, since all they have to do is apply (according to you) and play their victim card.
Did you actually read the whole article, and not just the blurb at the front? About two thirds of the way down, it goes into how "lonely" black women are.
And you, as usual, are putting words into people's mouths. What I said, suggested, insinuated, AND implied was that affirmativbe action cheapens any accomplishment that might be made by any minority who benefits from it, because every minority gets asked, "Did you earn it? Or did you get a pass?"
Live in the real world for a day or two. Watch them say it on the factory lines. Hear it said in break rooms. Here it said in open in meetings.
You may not like it. My friends Roger, Kevin, Maurice, Roger, and Juan sure don't like it. I don't like it. But like most politically correct shitheels, you take offense and play the racism card when someone observes things in action and reports on them.
Well, if blacks are being admitted into colleges based on their race (your contention not mine),
Shaming language, flag on the play, 15 yards and loss of down! Words in the mouth, flag on the play, 10 yards from the line of scrimmage!
The whole thing is what is coming out of your mouth is your own guilt at your own racism. I believe that blacks, and hispanics, and American Indians, and so on CAN perform as well as whites. I'd support the implementation of policies which allow such people to be all they can be.
Such policies don't include patronizing and demaning things as affirmative action, which are designed to keep them on the plantation, and in vassalage to some political party or agenda.
Affirmative action is a racist program. It says, "Poor things, they couldn't get anywhere on their own merits if we didn't let some things slide." It creates and fosters division; it does nothing to bridge any racial divide, it just gives the crackers ammunition to say "That niggah would't be nuthin if he dint git a free ride." It's a policy of "get evenism." It perpetuates the culture of victimhood. And when a black man does succeed, his accomplishments are tainted, because somewhere either some redneck is going to accuse him of skating through life on an affirmative action pass, or some east coast liberal closet redneck is going to call him an "Uncle Tom" if he thinks for himself and goes outside the party line. Ask Clarence Thomas about that.
Methinks the womyn is a little sensitive because her gender falls under the penumbra of affirmative action. Why? Are you one of those cops, firefighters, or soldiers who doesn't have the same PT requirements as a man does to qualify for the job - IOW, you got the job on a pass even though you don't meet the objective requirements?
As bad as AA is, that's far worse. But I bet you support it. Double whammy from you on black women. No wonder they feel insecure in their achievements - they wonder if they have earned them of have been given them as a pity prize.
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All I can say is I hope black men aren't banking on support from this crowd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"All I can say is I hope black men aren't banking on support from this crowd. "
------------------------------
Considering that it is mostly rich white girls that have benifitted the most from affirmative action, I can hardly think they are worried.
Beware of a government giving away free stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gonzo, in regards to Ms. Loriannes diatribe a line from as good as it gets delivered by Jack Nicholson comes to mind when his character was asked how he wrote women so well, " I think of a man, and I take away all reason and accountability" when in doubt make things up, speak for other people by putting words in their mouths, and disregard the reason of the other argument. When an individuals foundation starts to crumble they invariably will resort to underhanded techniques when their foundation was built on lies to begin with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funny, you quote Melvin from "As Good as It Gets" also a racist (and sexist and homophobe) socially atrophied misanthrope with an unREASONABLE OC disorder
Good save Dave.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I quoted a line that reminded me of of you, whether or not you agree with the author is erelevant, but I will say that it has been my personal experience that the line is true! Most women, those with education, spew prose without any real commitment to execution. Do you want to play word games?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Racist, Sexist, Homophobe!" The trio of Political Correctness. We have the Trifecta!
Well, Lorrianne, we've long suspected you of being a pheminist shill, and member of the PC Police, but it's always fun to have your deepest suspicions borne out.
Jeez, like straight out of the marching orders. It's almost creepy.
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never understand why when someone is doing well and coming up in the world, people have to make it into a negative. It just reeks of sour grapes.
Yes, like the so-called 'Wage Gap' and the 'Glass Ceiling', and girls turning into 'Ophelias', and all the other excuses that are routinely used to criminalise male achievement. You may smell sour grapes, Lorianne, but I smell a rat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here's the killer, Uber - *WE* didn't write the article.
The damn article talks about how Black Women have succeeded, and now are finding themselves alone - it of course, tries the usual canard about how men don't want or find attractive "successful, strong, independent women" but it doesn't ask the questions that need to be asked.
It's time women realized some things.
First, if you act like a man, you'll probably be assumed to be a dyke. Some men may ask you out, but it will usually be freaks.
Walk around with the ol' "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle" chip on your shoulder, and most men will - wonder of wonders - assume you have a dislike and/or a contempt for men. Only a sicko wants to be around someone who dislikes them and holds them in contempt.
Men like peace and tranquility. Men don't like high drama. While there are freakish exceptions to this rule, the quickest way to give a man itchy feet is to harp on him the minute he walks in the door, and make life a bad soap opera. First he'll find excuses not to be home until you're asleep. Then he will stay away.
Having our children held hostage against our paychecks is extortion. Period. It's evil, and there's no excuses that justify something this monstrous. No "buts." No debate. This is why men are more and more not wanting kids. They've seen their fathers old before their time.
Ditto with marriage. All a young man has to do is watch his elders get dragged through a family court system where he is presumed an evil predator, and stripped of everything he's worked for, and it produces two reactions: A) Why bother trying to achieve anything? B) I'm no dummy, every one of these men were robbed by women. Hmmmmmmm.....
We've all seen men hit with false accusations of DV, p[edophelia, rape, harassment and such time and time again. Despite the fact that it rocks someone's world to admit that such stories are not "merely ancedotal" they are becoming more and more common. Again, these accusations 999 falls out of a thousand originate with a woman, usually one of these strident and doctrinaire "successful, strong, independent women". Thus, young men say, if I avoid such women..... Again, hmmmmmmmmmmmm....
But hey, who am I trying to kid. I mean, what, am I actually suggesting that these women bear responsibility for the way they act, for the choices they make in how they live their lives and deal with people? I mean, jeez, Gonzo, where's your head? Did I suddenly forget that all women are paragons of virtue and rightness, and it's mean, selfish, and immature men who are fucking up the lives of these feminine living saints?
I ... I ... I don't know what came over me. Bad toad! (SLAP!) Bad, BAD!!!!
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @01:30PM EST (#28)
|
|
|
|
|
What you actually have is women who don't know how to deal with, or are afraid of dealing with successful, strong, and independent men who refuse to be manipulated by sex.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @08:05PM EST (#50)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who are you, and why are you afraid to let us know who you are? I for one agree with you. It has been almost two years since I have had sex, and I tell you what, it has been enlightening. They are trained to use our sex drive against us, and we are but sheep led by the taint of the smell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday February 27, @11:31PM EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
|
One small plus side to the article is that they mention a respectable woman say that teachers and the educational system in general are biased against men.
One of the memories I have of my fourth grade teacher is that she said that women have achieved much more since their emancipation than African-Americans. This statement was so disgusting to me then, that I still remember it.
When I realized sexism and misandry was not limited to just my school, I had no idea what to do. I don't like to think of women and girls as enemies or tyrants. Thinking of myself as a victim of women is very unnatural and depressing.
But, I realized I am not a victim of women, but a victim of an idealogy of hatred. By taking a stand, we are not fighting the female gender - we are fighting unfariness and injustice.
Men need to realize that by being silent they are not being open-minded or kind to women, they are instead allowing more children to be denied the education they deserve.
We are fair, rational, and reasonable. Always remember that we are against cruelty, bigotry and hatred - not women.
Never give up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe the black man has it figured out.
Look, what else can be said? He's on strike.
Look, I've seen black women in action. The term harpy is pale to describe it. In your face, talking faster, and louder, spittin' and slappin ... Christ, what man would want any part of that?
So the black man has gone on strike.
He's not worried about pleasing women who refuse to be pleased.
He's not worried about justifying his manhood to a female who can't even comprehend it.
He's defining masculinity for himself.
THIS - this "attitude" is what is pissing black women off. He's measuring his success by his standards. If he's locked out of his kid's lives, if he can't be a father in the most meaningful of ways, he's not doing it at all. Fuck 'em. Don't need a man means don't need one at all. And really -why establish an emotional investment with a chilkd if it's likely to be used as a weapon against you?
He wants sex? Plenty of whores willing to have sex, and then the transaction is done; you don't have to worry about being nice to some temperamental bitch who thinks you owe her forever once she's spread the golden gash for you once.
I think we should consider the wisdom of the black man. I think we all need to go on strike.
Screw this bullcrap about working ourselves into an early grave in a high stress job? For what? To turn control of all we have gained over to some woman?
Stop trying to impress high priced whores who want some exclusive lifetime contract. Cheap whores, by the date, are much more economically efficient.
Until the male pill comes out - condoms, men. Let the sperm cartel live. Pull out in time. Oral sex. Preghnancy and children on our terms and our terms alone. Not a negotiation. It's an ultimatum. Their clock stpops ticking around forty. Ours may go slow but keeps running. Just ask Jack Nicholson, or Tony Randall.
They want a date, let them ask. Fuck this business of setting yourself up for rejection. Let HER bear that burden for a while. Afraid we don't find you attractive? It might be that you're thin enough, have big enough boobs, and the ass is great; pouty lips and smokey eyes, but jeez! The garbage out of your mouth - and that shirt - "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle" - ever consider we don't think you're pretty INSIDE?
Learn the law, guys - shelter yourselves so what is your stays yours.
Don't bne alone with women, especially at work. Door open, no private chats where a "she says - he says" situation might come up. Yeah, this will serve to isolate women from the halls of power. Sux to be them.
Our masculinity, or sexuality has been pronounced criminal, and repulsive. Fine and dandy. Back in the closet it goes. Stop opening cans, changing tires, getting the heavy things down from the top shelf. Stop opening doors, giving rides to the poor wench standing by the busted car in the rain. You might be a serial rapist, remember? Or you might be accused of it - and only the woman's words matter now.
Live a spartan life - you know, when not preening money to impress women, we guys live very well on a small amount of cash, because we don't need new decor every season, countless sitabouts, geejaws, and doodads. Be honest - when you're not prowling for the pussy, you drive the bondomobile, don't you? And don't tell me you're all GQ unless you are looking for action - well, when you stop constantly patrolling for it, those expenditures won't be necessary.
And better yet - it won't attract gold-digging whores!
Yep.
Time to go on strike.
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ya know, TGK, I'd LOVE to see this published as a letter to the editor in Newsweek. Set some mouths to chatterin', I'll tell ya. Oh, they wouldn't have the balls to publish it, but it'd be sure as hell funny if they did.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In fact, let me suggest this: that we (men) all go on strike for one day, the day after Father's Day.
Any takers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @03:41PM EST (#37)
|
|
|
|
|
((("In fact, let me suggest this: that we (men) all go on strike for one day, the day after father's day.
Any takers?")))
Frank, yeah, I suggested something similar last year. I thought it was a good idea then and I think it is a good idea now!
So Yeah, brother, I am definatly a 'taker'! I'd love to see the media try and cover THIS up.
...although, knowing them they'd probably find a way. Or if they DID cover it, they'd say it was a "misogynist war against women" They'd miss the whole point entirly, and likely on purpose.
But, still, I say let's DO it!!
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't post much anymore because of time constraints, but I wonder if anyone remembers the National (or International if it grew fast) National Mens Walkaway site. I had also been suggesting that far back, with a website, to be brushed aside over and over as unrealistic. Fine, let it get worse I said to myself. Then the idea will come along again, as a "guess what I just thought of!?", or even a remembrance of previous conversations. And I'm sure the idea has come up even YEARS before, but I will still participate in one actively if I hear about it, and if all the reasons correspond to what we talk about here, but some of the main reasons it hasn't happened, in my opinion, is that men still lack the "brotherhood" element (hmmm, reminds me of that "left out" feeling Thundercloud brought up.) THAT is such a major part of feminist rhetoric with "sisterhood". No matter what a woman does wrong, or illegal, or even monstrously cruel, she will always have "sisters" to run to her defense and help financially, legaly, etc., because after all, she is a sister....a sister of the "cause".
Maybe I should re-allocate some server space to test the waters with the idea again. It wouldn't be worthwhile if it didn't bring a majority of corporate america to a standstill though, because most folks don't listen until their own pocket book is hurt, or a likelyhood of that happening seems very probable. And then there's the possible fear of worse repercussions of the legal kind.
Anyway, I actually am on strike in a personal kind of way, in that I refuse to participate in converstaions when womens issues are brought up (unless I QUIKLY find an opprtunity to inject our side of it and turn it around), and even leave the conversation and even the room or premises if it makes a bigger statement. I really don't even care what women want anymore, at least in the American and European socialist countries. Oh, yeah, can't forget about Japan and Australia. Did I forget a country? Sorry if I did, just know I would have included them. I know there are good ones out there, but I don't bother to look anymore. As long as I have my computer, my music, and know that God gave us hands for a reason, I'll be fulfilled enough until we win.
Adam
Disclaimer: Everything I post is of course my own opinion. If it seems harsh, Feminazis just piss me off!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ya know, women have been having the "International Women's Strike Day" (Or some shit like that) for years. Thus far it's been a real yawner. Women don't work. And nobody notices.
In a larger sense, we really couldn't have a "Men's Strike Day." Civilization would collapse.
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @10:15PM EST (#56)
|
|
|
|
|
You've got a point there, Gonzo.
Civilization MAY very well collapse.
Then guess who would have to re-build it.
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, Gonzo. That's EXACTLY what I mean. Once the very thought of it sank in by the 11th hour, we could set our price.:-)
Disclaimer: Everything I post is of course my own opinion. If it seems harsh, Feminazis just piss me off!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"In fact, let me suggest this: that we (men) all go on strike for one day, the day after Father's Day.
Any takers?"
Count me in. In fact, I already am on strike in a way. Have been for a while. I have many female friends, and I'm getting close with one, but - no shock here - all from foreign countries. It is refreshing talking to feminine, sweet-natured women; something American women for the most part aren't anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @02:10PM EST (#30)
|
|
|
|
|
This article is already behind the times.
Black men are beginning to make it. I just had dinner last night with a 35 year old black attorney.
My alma mater, the University of Illinois, features on its basketball team one Roger Powell, a National Merit Scholar and Dee Brown, an honors student.
It's taken black men a while to catch on, but they are doing it. I knew that they would.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 28, @04:38PM EST (#42)
|
|
|
|
|
I like your point of view! In fact, I live it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You're right about that except for one thing: American men have traded proficiency in money-making for proficiency in seduction; as a result, American women have become gold-digging whores instead of romantic lovers.
Therefore, instead of busting your butt to earn more money to impress some freeloader, I say spend a little time stuyding the art of seduction, and you can take your pick while keeping the upper hand- being monetarily challenged, I've done it the "traditional way" (i.e. hard work, marriage and waiting) and my own way-- trust me I've learned my lesson, and taught a few women theirs as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stop opening doors, giving rides to the poor wench standing by the busted car in the rain.
This reminds me of a time I was in high school, when I was riding shotgun in a car with my younger brother driving, and his buddy in the back seat, when we passed a couple of teenage girls hitch-hiking.
Being a "man on strike," as it were, I responded with an appropriate gesture to let them know what I thought about them, since they would never stop for me if the situation was reversed.
After this, my brother and his friend saw the girls, said said "hey, let's stop for them!"
Then his buddy in the back seat said "no, they don't want us to; they're giving us 'the finger!'
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...gave out false ATM receipts recently at a Valentine's Day Event. The receipts showed incredible amounts of money. Men went, picked up the receipts, and then left them laying around when they took women home. Sure enough, gold diggers showed their true colors! Golden Gash indeed!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's really sad how far Tuskeegee has sunk, from the alma mater of some of the best fighter-pilots in WWII, to limiting their alumnae a bunch of dumb jocks while educating women instead. I think we all know who to blame for this-- and it's not Eleanor Roosevelt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I guess Newsweak is to small-minded, liberal and politically-correct to look at the real issues, these being that these jobs aren't as "glamorous" or rewarding as they were once hyped up to be, while black men, having long ago learned this, have opted for lower-paying but more fulfilling work; that these women's head have often swollen far beyond their merit, sometimes in compensation for this general late-learned dissatisfaction, taking on an attitude of abusive, arrogant entitlement beyond excuse or tolerability;
and, perhaps most of all, they presumptuously tend to demand equality while at the same time demanding that a man earn more than they do.
Finally, they don't even have the brains to realize that their "success" often comes from unofficial "affirmative action" as corporations strive to allay the Jesse Jackson's and other liberal accusations of discrimination in hiring.
Liberal writers should refrain from showing off their intelligence until they obtain some of the actual vs. self-deluded variety; however they can't face up to the fact that their conceited misandry, which bashes men for demanding simple respect and courtesy v. embittered hostility and abuse, will only have themselves to blame when they end up sleeping with only their spite and a pair of D-cells, learning the hard way that men just won't find it worth their while any longer to put up with their crap, when there are plenty of women who don't bitterly destroy themselves with terminal penis envy. Having just ended relationships with an overly-ambitious female doctor and engineer (at the same time) to resume a prior romance with a sweet woman who shows love v. pressure and ridicule, I think I speak for most men when I tell women that the worm has turned, and the shoe's on the other foot.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
