|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The history of feminism is a history of injuries and usurpations on the part of women towards man, having direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
on the part of women
And no I'm not saying all women. Though most women today believe the lies invented and propagated by feminism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @05:29PM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
"most women today believe the lies invented and propagated by feminism."
Your source for that please?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your source for that please?
I generally avoid responding to anonymous users. Get a handle and I'll consider answering your question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Don't forget that feminism has done a great deal to harm women.
I was wondering if you could file a 'hostile' environment charge or complaint since it is on school property.
If not that then an equal day or month for men is in order.
Otherwise I'd get a picket sign and stand out front of the place and tell them about the descrimination and hate mongering. Tell them about the lies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @06:13PM EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
"Get a handle and I'll consider answering your question."
IOW you don't have an answer. I am as pissed off at feminists as anybody but saying "most" without the numbers to back it up shoots yourself in the foot when it comes time to attack them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IOW you don't have an answer.
Wrong. Get a handle and I'll consider answering you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @06:24PM EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
"Wrong. Get a handle and I'll consider answering you."
You already have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm afraid I have to agree that you should get a handle. I've made the mistake of debating anonymous users in another forum, and three different anonymous users ganged up on me. It got to where I was spending hours per day responding to them because I couldn't tell who was saying what. It takes all of about a minute to set up an account so why not do it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous User wrote:
"most women today believe the lies invented and propagated by feminism."
Your source for that please?
Thomas replied:
Your source for that please?
I generally avoid responding to anonymous users. Get a handle and I'll consider answering your question.
I wouldn't have thought of this response, but support the idea. Consider, for instance, just a little further down:
Anonymous User writes:
Well said Ray.
Which "Anonymous User" is which? Is the first one Ray? Who's the second? The third? Maybe they're all "Ray," in which case "Ray" is applauding himself, which is a little crass.
Certainly, anyone who wants to be taken seriously here can take the few minutes to establish an identity.
In any case, the demand for a "source" is a stupid question, whose obvious intent is not to elucidate the subject but to put a stop to conversation. Does anyone not agree that feminism has taken over our society and culture? If that is the case, then it's obvious on the face of it that "most women today believe the lies invented and propagated by feminism"; otherwise feminism wouldn't be dominant.
If you disagree on this fundamental point, "Anonymous" or anyone else, then say so, and we can argue about that. If anyone cares to. Which I doubt; anyone who does"believe the lies invented and propagated by feminism," including the myth of eternal female innocent victimhood exemplified by the subject quote, is wasting their time here. Awakening is a one-way street.
As for the "Seneca Falls Convention," I knew that the genesis of modern feminism is dated from this event, but I'd never before seen the actual wording. Pretty bald, and apparently nothing has changed in 150 years. See the whole document here: it's a kind of pastiche of the Declaration of Independence. Reading about the event, interesting to see that a number of men took part: the very same kinds of men that we now see promoting feminism.
A Google search brought some interesting information, including that the major figure at that convention, Elizabeth Cady Stanton (memorialized by a special postage stamp a few years ago) "met temperance worker Susan B. Anthony, and shortly the two would be joined in the long struggle to secure the vote for women." I was amused a few years ago to hear in a PBS special celebrating the 75th anniversary of the 19th (female suffrage) Amendment, that one of the arguments against it at the time was that if women were given the vote, they'd vote in Prohibition (aka "temperance"). Which in fact they did, with disastrous consequences, including the creation of both a national criminal underworld and the FBI.
Like the Infant Male Circumcision Program, which I consider the first great success of feminism, Prohibition is a perfect example of how the female mind works: a simple-minded, hasty, fascistic "solution" which, rather than considering possible causes of the "problem," merely applies force and violence to men. Since, of course, in the female mind men are the cause of the problem.
To which I respond, as always: If so, then what's the cause of men? The truth is, women are not powerless; they actually have all the power; no man has any power but what he has been given or lent by women. Which is exactly why feminism is such a success: because its "first principle" is a lie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @07:50PM EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
"some" is the magic word that I use. It is vague enough that even when "most" is true but hard to verify you can still make your point about a certain unknown number. Very few people will argue with the "some" quantifier. I would say that "some" is a quantity greater than zero and less than infinity that can be supported with very little effort. Don't worry if I can't give you one example of "some" thing I'm talking about I just won't say anything.
Now let’s try it again. Some women believe the lies of feminism wholly and without question, while others acquiesce to feminism rather than swim against the current. Lastly, some women take a stand against the blatant misinformation and policies supported by the feminists.
Inasmuch as the feminist philosophy has become accepted into law in many areas of California society, it is difficult to know for sure how many women are in each group, but there is no question that all are asked to submit unquestionably to the assertions put forth in institutionalized feminist propaganda.
Big Sister is some kind of a monster and if most people in CA don't recognize that yet, then most of these unenlightened people will some day have a rude awakening. I would guess some day sooner rather than later, the way things have been going the last four years under the leadership of Gov. Grey Davis. Sorry I can't give you exact numbers to the nearest ten thousandth, but these are all just my opinions based on my experiences, observations and intuitions anyway.
Respectfully, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @11:15PM EST (#26)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am as pissed off at feminists as anybody but saying "most" without the numbers to back it up shoots yourself in the foot when it comes time to attack them
Nice assertation. Want to prove it?
Oh, that's right. It would require getting a handle so you'd have to stand by what you say instead of racking the numbers, and claiming "Unh-uh! Warn't me! Not every anonynut who posts here is me!"
Convenient excuse. Thanks for playing, pheminut troll!
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @09:56PM EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
Anon, it is terribly confusing to debate with someone without a handle, so please get a one or sign a name at the end of your posts.
To everyone else: A call for substantiation of a claim in no conceivable way equates to being a troll. Anon's request for a citation is perfectly acceptable. If you can't substantiate your claim, concede it and move on.
-hobbes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you can't substantiate your claim, concede it and move on.
Just so you know, hobbes, I can substantiate it. Like I say though, I generally avoid responding to AUs. It's far too often a complete waste of time. If a person won't even bother to get a handle, then the person hasn't earned a response.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday March 06, @03:38AM EST (#31)
|
|
|
|
|
"Just so you know, hobbes, I can substantiate it."
Then I stand corrected in assuming otherwise - albeit tentatively, because I haven't seen the source yet :) just kidding...
"Like I say though, I generally avoid responding to AUs."
And with good reason. I agree that it is a waste of time. I was just a little surprised to see the response that ANON got in requesting a citation (accusations of "troll" and such).
Nontheless, your position in not debating ANON's is a smart one.
-hobbes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday March 06, @03:40AM EST (#32)
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas,
To clarify, I know that you didn't call ANON a troll...
-hobbes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A call for substantiation of a claim in no conceivable way equates to being a troll. Anon's request for a citation is perfectly acceptable. If you can't substantiate your claim, concede it and move on.
It's very typical of certain debating styles to demand citations and external sources for each and ever niggling point that is made. This, especially when combined with an AU handle, is most certainly troll behavior.
The whole end of this style of debate is not to actually have debate, but to bog it down, and ultimately stifle discourse.
And it is extremely disingenuous for someone who is hiding behind an AU handle to demand such things, at the very least.
One thing I have often wished for one many boards, and not just here, is the ability to filter out anonymous postings. Far, far, too many AU's post willy nilly, rack things with multiple posts, claim to be different people, play the gadfly, argue both sides of an issue, and so on, and so forth. So far as I am concerned, having "Anonymous User" as your tagline is two outs, two strikes, no balls, and bottom of the ninth, with your side behind.
It takes less than a minute, even with dial up. There's no excuse.
AU's don't have the right to demand diddley until they get the hair to sign a monniker and stand by what they have to say.
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's not like getting a handle is painful, costly, dangerous, time consuming, or anything else negative.
It's a no-brainer, and gives the poster immedately a base level of credibility (where you at least won't get dissmissed out of hand). Anon posters are guilty, and can't prove themselves innocent because they can't establish a track record. Handled posters are innocent until they prove otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IOW you don't have an answer.
AU. Thomas is right. Get a handle and we may consider answering your question. There are too many AU's that waste our time.
I can assure you that we have all kinds of physical evidence that the majority of the public has bought into the lies of feminism.
Warble
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can assure you that we have all kinds of physical evidence that the majority of the public has bought into the lies of feminism.
As you are probably aware, warble, there've been plenty of polls, too, not to mention extensive personal experience. Unfortunately, in many cases most men are not far behind most women in being duped, and in some cases may take the lead. The big lies that are overwhelmingly accepted are the claim that almost all domestic violence is by men against women , and that for a given background, ability, and amount of work women are paid less than men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three books address this contention by feminists. They are: "Who Stole Feminism" by Christine Hoff Sommers; "Sexual Personae" by Camille Paglia; and "The Myth of Male Power" by Warren Farrel. "On the other hand, most contemporary feminism, and almost the entirety of academic and political feminism, as Farrel discovered at NOW, is what
Sommers has called "gender feminism," which is essentially based on a form of Marxist theory that substitutes "gender" for Marx's category of
"class," or simply adds the two together, usually with "race" thrown in. This sort of "race, class, and gender" theory is typically a dangerous
form of political moralism, with the same totalitarian characteristics as other verisons of Marxism have proven to display. One consequence of
this is that the substantive content of criticism is rarely addressed but that it is considered sufficient to vilify critics as, in effect,
"class enemies," i.e. directing ad hominem arguments against them that their status, in terms of race, class, or gender, or simply in terms of
their critical attitude, is sufficient to refute their arguments.
C.V. Compton Shaw
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before protesting, you might want to hang out near the poster and see if any men or women read it and look disgusted. If so, you can approach them and see if they think it creates a hostile environment for men or that it's discriminatory. By doing this, you might be able to assemble a group of like-minded people who will join you in protesting the hate-mongering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @07:24PM EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
"Before protesting, you might want to hang out near the poster..."
Better yet if you can get a picture standing beside this poster it might be valuable in the future to prove the hostile environment you work in. Do this only if you think it is o.k., because you never know what kind of things people like this will say about you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would try contacting Joe Manthey on this. Since he is in California maybe he can do something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Get rid of it and replace it with an equally big poster that says that both genders need each other and have a lot of work to do and that dwelling on the past is a good way to keep things from getting better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Get rid of it and replace it with an equally big poster that says that both genders need each other and have a lot of work to do and that dwelling on the past is a good way to keep things from getting better.------------
This is a good idea. Play the victim like those rad fems who tore down the penis. Then when it comes right down to it, the evidence of hate is right on the poster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @11:04PM EST (#25)
|
|
|
|
|
Better than tearing it down might be to put up a banner sighting the number of men who have sacraficed their lives in combat so that all Americans could have things better, including, if not especialy WOMEN!
And you might point out that the majority of American women have things better than ANY people on the face of the planet.
For crying out loud, Women in this country are practically worshiped as deities...!
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alternately, leave the poster up and post Amendement 19, with the date. Maybe post some factual data, such as ratio of male to female victims of violence, # of males buried at Arlington, something like that. Match the hate posters with fact posters where possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @07:20PM EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
I too work for a community college in CA and you'd have to be dead or blind not to see the virulent hatred and abuse that is heaped on all males by these bigots. There is absolutely no doubt at all in mind that to work in a school in the great hate state of California as a man is to work in a hostile environment. It's all so politically correct and acceptable you almost expect them to come goosestepping up to your door and give you the schedule for your classes in the reeducation camps. Oh, wait a minute, they've already done that. What's next?
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I too work for a community college in CA and you'd have to be dead or blind not to see the virulent hatred and abuse that is heaped on all males by these bigots.
We should keep track of who the perpetrators are. Any adult, who takes part in anti-male hate activities around males under the age of 18, may be guilty of child abuse. Also, given the nature of, for instance, the sexual harassment industry, federal racketeering laws may apply. If we ever install a just system, it would be good to hold these monsters accountable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @08:27PM EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
The political climate is so liberal in California to begin with, and then it gets more liberal on the college campuses. Even though they espouse a liberal viewpoint, they are some of the most closed minded bigots I have ever seen. They are not the least interested in tolerating a viewpoint that is not fully in step with their own.
There is no environment for free and open thought in West coast liberalism. As we have seen in the news lately, while the (red areas) of the country have been inundated on the TV with the liberal war views of the coastal dwellers (blue areas) we have not seen a reciprocally reporting on the sentiments of the people from the red areas.
Lately this has been changing somewhat. Let us hope it continues. I for one am sick of the arrogant bigotry of the heavily feminist minded blue areas. Sorry if I stepped on anyone’s politics. Go ahead and yell at me. I voted for Clinton twice and nobody is yelling at me louder about that than myself.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @11:28PM EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
I voted for him once, Ray.
That was because he went to the Lakota reservation, saw the deplorable conditions there, proclaimed it (correctly) to be the worst state of poverty and death in the Nation, Said he was proud to be "part Cherokee", and said he would do something to help ALL Amer-Indians.
But first we 'poor, dumb, Indians, would have to play Martyrs for the Democratic party.
We didn't. and so he left the Lakota Men, Women and children to die in un-forgiving poverty. No medicines, No dropping of biggoted "blood-quantum" standards, No federal aid, No NOTHIN'!
THEN the Dems went and elected Nancy (the palooka) Palosi.
Needless to say, I have not, nor will I ever again vote Democrat.
Not unless some SIRIOUS changes take place.
The republicans aren't much better, I.M.O.
So don't feel bad, Ray. And forgive yourself. You'll feel better.
You have enough aggravation where you live.
Thundercloud.
PS.
To Bill Clinton.
NEVER say you're "part Cherokee", unless you IDENIFY as Cherokee and live as closely as possible the "traditional" Cherokee ways.
Otherwise You are a "Twinkie" a "wannabe" or a "Pretendian."
As Bugs Bunny would say: "What an ultra-Maroon!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I voted for him once, Ray.
needless to say, I have not, nor will I ever again vote Democrat.
So, you're going to harbor a grudge against a whole group of people becuase of the (in)actions of *one* person? How is that any better than misandrists who, at some time were done wrong by some man, hate men as a group?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday March 06, @08:16PM EST (#47)
|
|
|
|
|
"So, you're going to harbor a grudge against a whole group of people becuase of the (in)actions of *one* person? How is that any better than misandrists who, at some time were done wrong by some man, hate men as a group?"
Scudsucker:
I guess I tend to go off on the liberals based on the abuses I've witnessed in California, but I should be more objective. After all the bumper sticker on the back of my car says, VOTE MEN'S RIGHTS. I'm not about to restrict men's rights to any particular party. Both of the main ones have plenty of room to improve in that area. In all fairness, conservatives do a huge amount of damage to males when promoting their biased policies embracing chivalry. I tend to see liberals more directly in bed with the feminists, however. After all, don't all feminists belong to that party?
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Its true that the two main parties whore themsevles out to various causes. The GOP uses one had to deep throat the religious right, and uses the other to pass out tax breaks for all ills. Economy good? Cut taxes to give people their hard earned money back. Economy bad? More tax breaks to stimulate it. Massive deficits? Uh, lets pass some more tax breaks.
On the other hand the Democrats don't realize that they've accomplished all of their major goals over the last 50 years or so, and haven't moved on. Womens rights, civil rights, social services, blah blah blah. Sure you will always find some racism and sexism, but that will always be the case because a certain percentage of the population is, and always has been, assholes.
I just think you'll have more luck trying to pursuade liberals to reverse course and support mens rights than in getting conservatives to do so. I think it would be easier to reverse 40 or so years of white-men-are-privlidged-and-the-source-of-all-evi l attitudes in liberals than centuries of chivalry from conservatives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have been a liberal leaning for quite some time and have been offended by feminazi propoganda as long as I can remember. Why can't people be concerned about *human* rights, not just *womens* rights, why can't you be against violence against *people*, etc. I was rather pissed at Time for having for a cover about ten years ago, with a picture of a hog in a suit on the cover, asking the question "Are men pigs?"
And as for liberals being "close minded", you should check out a couple of articles about David Horowitz, an esteemed nutball conservative. He made an ad attacking (rightfully so) the idea of paying reparations to the decendants of slaves. He then tried to get it published in the newspapers of a bunch of liberal colleges, and was mighty full of himself when a few refused to do so. Look at the close minded liberals, they wont print my ad, blah blah blah.
A different journalist thought that was pretty cool, so he decided to do a similar experiment. He made a God is an abortionist ad and tried to print it in conservative newspapers at conservative schools. Which ad do you suppose got printed more?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @08:11PM EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
There are a number of feminst myths that have contributed to bad policies and laws being passed such as the Violence Against Women Act. Christina Hoff Sommers does a good job of exposing the Super Bowl Myth that contributed to the passage of the VAWA in one of her books. Either WHO STOLE FEMINISM or THE WAR AGAINST BOYS.
If you type "feminist myths" in a good search engine like "google" you should be able to pull up some others from various sites that are out there. batteredmen.com or .org has a list of feminist myths and so does DVMEN.org. In a court of law if you can prove a witness has lied then you have strongly discredited him/her to the point that all other testimony is highly suspect. It never ceases to amaze me that with all the lies that have been shown to come from the feminist movement, that they still have the nerve to opening their deceptive mouths about anything. Believe it or not I carry a list of feminst myths with me when I picket and tell people to prove me wrong. They can't.
Feminists are big liars, and I wouldn't believe most of what comes out of their mouths. I wouldn't believe some of what comes out of their mouths. I wouldn't believe any words that come out of the mouths of feminists.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @08:37PM EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
"The history of feminism is a history of barbaric injuries and usurpations perpetrated by feminsts against men. Most notably, over the past 30 years, great injury has been suffered by decent men at the hands of these tyranical Nazi bigots."
These are my sentitments about feminist sentiments towards men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have been reading this forum for a month now. I have three Sons and two daughters. I am the divorced Father of five children and Grandfather of three boys. I am greatly alarmed at the misandry in America and the growing war against Men and Boys. The only exclusive all male club the feminists have no interest in joining is Arlington National Cemetary. They truly hate Men and children. They see us as breeding stock, Cannon Fodder, Human ATM Machines to provide for their entertainment and amusement. They hate us then whine that we no longer want them. If these dumb asses had their way they would dismantle the very institutions protecting our lives and freedom they are a fifth column for our enemies. They are frustrated Lesbians, Socialists, and Communists who have to hide their true agenda. I see them as the enemy of America and refuse to treat them with respect. I am sick of the 35 years + of war against us. They are socially remaking America and the West and systematically destroying family life and relations between the genders. Advocating our sterilization, or elemination and considering it funny. Time for war. I intend on taking no prisoners.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I see them as the enemy of America and refuse to treat them with respect. I am sick of the 35 years + of war against us. They are socially remaking America and the West and systematically destroying family life and relations between the genders.
This is unfortunately true. We are at war against the feminist and they are well funded with $4 billion from the VAWA. We can all expect that the war will intensify and become more vile in the next 3-4 years.
The enemy has nothing less than the destruction of the family at heart. For example, I'm attending committee meetings in Sacramento, CA on drafting a set of recommendations for paternity fraud laws.
I can assure you that the lesbians, child advocacy groups, feminists, ALI, and Judicial council has no other object but to weaken the family and incrementally eliminate biology as the primary basis for establishing a father child relationship.
We have already seen in 1917 what happened when the Soviet Union dramatically weakens the marriage contract and eliminates the importance of biology in enforcing father-child relations. The result was a major disaster with over 7 million homeless children committing routine criminal acts.
The Soviet Union's justification for dramatically weakening family ties was that it was seen as a patriarchal institution that is evil. We see those exact same arguments today from the feminists, child advocacy groups, ALI, Judicial Council, and more that the Soviet Union used in 1917.
We are literally at war for the well being of our children in California and America. On the one hand we have overwhelming opposition that wants to do away with or significantly weaken the principle of biology as a basis for establishing parent-child relationships and assigning moral responsibility.
On the other side are a few rag tad victims of paternity fraud who are fighting with everything they are worth to preserve the family. America damn well better hope that we win this battle.
Warble
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We can all expect that the war will intensify and become more vile in the next 3-4 years.
I don't think there's any doubt about this. And over the next 10-15 years, we may well see most male-female relations degenerate to a level of outright hostility that has been previously unimagined. I don't look forward to this. In fact I've been involved in the men's movement, to the extent that it has existed, for nearly three decades, but I'm thinking of dropping out of the entire scene. I'm beginning to suspect that the only way to defeat the fascist evil, feminism, may prove to be extreme actions. I want no part of those extreme actions. In fact, I've been trying to warn women for decades that a radical response might result if they didn't back off.
What will those radical responses be? Probably little overt violence, though there's no being sure of that. Extreme civil disobedience, to be sure. A marriage strike and a fathering strike that leads to a catastrophic collapse in the population? That's already begun, accompanied by a decreasing desire by women to have children. (Watch that population collapse. It may lead to the greatest social disruption of all.) Also note the hook up scene on college campuses, and throughout much of the rest of society. Men and women will get together for sex and then get the hell away from each other. Why would a man want to have children only to have them taken away because his relationship with his wife changed over time? Roll in the hay, then ramble on. We've already seen a dramatic decrease in committed relationships on campuses.
Read bulletin boards online and see how men are shying away from marriage. Talk with young men, and see how they are shying away from marriage. Will men refuse to pay for child care, which will allow women to have their children raised partly at men's expense, after men have been eliminated from the family? Expect to see increasing opposition. How about maternal leave? Again, expect to see increasing opposition, as men more and more are eliminated from the family.
There's some serious shit comin' down the pike, and anyone, who doesn't see it, is a blind fool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday March 05, @11:37PM EST (#28)
|
|
|
|
|
Has anyone else heard about this...?
It is my understanding that the schools in America are to stop teaching about George Washington.
I heard that on some news program. But I don't remember where, off hand.
Something about it being because he had kept slaves.
Okay, fine he kept slaves.
And, frankly he was no friend to my people either. But he played an important part in this country's history.
Let's see, what was it...?
Oh, yeah..., He was only THIS COUNTRY'S FIRST PRESIDENT!!!!!
*sheesh*
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday March 06, @11:30PM EST (#48)
|
|
|
|
|
TC
Jefferson and I'm sure other founding fathers kept slaves as well, and no it wasn't right. However, if we're going to throw Washington out of the history books for being someone who keep slaves (a common evil in that day) just think of the hole we'll have in the history books of our times, when in the future the evils of feminism are recognized fully for what they are.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"The dogma of woman's complete historic subjection to man must be rated as one of the most fantastic myths ever created by the human mind."
- Mary R. Beard, feminist historian, in "Woman as Force in History" (1946. p144)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I suggest you take quotes like the great one above and create a poster to place next to the bigotry you quote above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please, men, let's not go overboard here. This is a quote taken entirely out of context. There are two documents which you need to read in order to have an informed, intelligent opinion about this document:
First, read the Declaration of Independence, available here: Declaration of Independence
Then, go read the Declaration of Sentiments, from the Seneca Falls Convention: Seneca Falls Convention. The Convention was held in Seneca Falls, New York, in 1848. Proto-feminists Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony were reportedly in attendance. This event, the issuance of the Declaration of Sentiments, is considered to be the seminal event in the history of Women's Suffrage.
Quoting it out of context, and 155 years after its issuance, is a bit cheeky of the women who were responsible for posting that bit. It'd be a bit like posting this, and only this, from the Declaration of Independence:"The history of the present [Monarch] of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States." Obviously Queen Elizabeth II does not have a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. I mean, if you could convince people that this statement is as valid today as it was then, you'd be making a strong case for military action against our greatest ally, the United Kingdom.
This, indeed, is the intellectual bankruptcy with which these modern-day feminists are approaching the Declaration of Sentiments. The Declaration makes statements which are no longer accurate in this context, mainly because of those statements having been made. For instance:"He has never permitted her to exercise her inalienable right to the elective franchise." This is no longer true. Amendment XIX to the United States Constitution provides that:"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex." Obviously anyone taking the afore-mentioned quotation from out of its original historical and political context is ignorant, intellectually bankrupt, or deliberately attempting to cause a ruckus.
I recommend educating oneself about these matters before deciding on an appropriate rejoinder.
Tying in a response to the Lysistrata protest would be interesting (supposed feminists' advocation of the position that the only means by which women may act politically is from withholding sexual favors from men, hardly an empowering or enlightened view), given that it is these feminists who are enforcing sexual stereotypes blown up by the Declaration of Sentiments.
Another interesting response would be to post the corresponding passage in the Declaration of Independence, as I mentioned above. Post the out-of-context quote of the Declaration of Independence (replacing King with Queen) right underneath the out-of-context quote from Seneca Falls, so maybe the intelligent will find something amusing, and those less blessed will start ranting against Britain, and thus expose themselves for the intelligent to avoid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone ever been there? It's all but a ghost town. It's run into serious econominic troubles since its businesses all closed up and moved overseas or elsewhere, out of New York State and away from its taxes. It can't seem to make much tourist money off being the "Birthplace of Women's Rights" (or anything else)-- possibly because it really wasn't the "Birthplace of Women's Rights". New York City is more aptly titled this since the real Suffragette Movement began there. But one may look back even further in history to find "The Birthplace...". Some think ancient Egypt was. Well, it's all debatable.
But no matter, the idiocy reflected in taking the Decl. of Sentiments so totally out of context speaks for itself. It is par for the course on college campuses these days, many of which have become veritable *madrassas* of the Great Feminazi Conspiracy.
We had a few feminazis on campus when I went to school here and there, but nothing like what kids (of both sexes) have to deal with today.
I am so glad I am not going to college these days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am so glad I am not going to college these days.
There are some subjects that I would like to study in a classroom environment, but I've decided to educate myself, because I refuse to put up with the evil spewed out by feminist teachers and administrators and their spineless femboy dupes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How about including this in your letter of protest:
"Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practise to deceive!"
------Marmion. Canto vi. Stanza 17. by Sir Walter Scott
Feminism is founded on lies you know and what a tangled web it has weaved!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The analogy between feminist activities and web weaving is a compelling one, considering the fact that the female black widow usually kills and eats the male after mating.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
