|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What evidence is there that this protest had any impact at all?
I program my home computer; beam myself into the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AFG - The most obvious sign that there was an impact was that men are starting to stand up and say NO. This cannot be underestimated. We have spent decades saying yes to feminist demands and now we have a need to put our foot down and say no. That is starting to happen. Hopefully it will be contagious.
Another factor is that we got a bit media coverage from the Atlanta Journal Constitution. The AP was there and interviewed us and took pictures as were the local papers and two TV stations who aired our protest that day on network local newscasts.
Maybe even more importantly, the event showed us that we have grass roots support. When we went out at 7:30 am to put our signs up we were "confronted" by the security of the hotel. He told us that we had to stay within certain areas and we agreed. He then said, "Oh, and off the record, I am for you guys 100%." We all laughed, but it started the day with a kernal of what was to come, that we have support from places unexpected. For instance, probably 20% of the cars that passed by us would smile and wave their approval. Cars would honk and give us the thumbs up, people would roll down their windows and ask for literature. Hell, Madeline Albright, a main speaker at the conference, gave us a smile and a wave on her way out! LOL.
This was not an event that changed the world. More importantly, it was an event that showed us that we have support and that the media can be helpful to us if we can get our story to them. It showed us that with a small effort we can publically register our resounding NO to feminists, that we have some power if we can only use it.
Get busy.
Stand Your Ground Forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The success is that we've taken our first step, we're beginning to speak out, and we were protesting at a conference with a number of high-visibility people, including Madeleine Albright, CNN anchor Paula Zahn, Rear Admiral Susan Blumenthal, and of course, Martha "The Fascist" Burk!
In addition to what Tom described, we got a picture on the front of the Washington Times' sports page (of Tom holding a "Choice for Golfers" sign), and today we got a full front page picture and great article in a local northern Virginia newspaper. The biggest score, however, might simply be that we protested and got noticed at a premier women's event in the DC area. From the newspaper article:
"After 18 years, the Women's Center's annual leadership conference attracted a different kind of attention Saturday when a group of men gathered outside the Hilton McLean to protest the voice that is challenging Augusta National Gold Club's policy of excluding women."
Also, our signs and our name -- The National Coalition of Free Men -- were prominently displayed.
In short: they know we're out here.
It's just a first step. Martha Burk has walked out on the limb of hypocrisy, and we're going to help cut that limb with her on it.
Want to help us saw and score one for the good guys?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"It's just a first step. Martha Burk has walked out on the limb of hypocrisy, and we're going to help cut that limb with her on it.
Want to help us saw and score one for the good guys?"
Ready, willing, and able!
High atop my perch, with saw in hand and evil grin - Freebird
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a small victory, but a victory nonetheless, so it is appropriate that we take a moment and do a little end zone dance. But the score is still 100-1 and if we pause too long from our sawing, the slithery bugger will find her way off the branch and we'll lose her.
I understand that the NCWO is seeking a permit to demonstrate at Augusta during the Master's. Is there anyone with NCFM that can apply for one as well? I also understand that the NCWO has ZERO support from the local women. What would be truly sweet is to have a counter-demonstration with women on the NCFM side of the street!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday March 15, @10:41AM EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
I heard that their permit to protest in front of the main gate was denied and that an alternate site was picked, but they don't like it and are appealing.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It would be interesting to see where they get their money. It would not surprise me if it was coming, circuitously, from public grants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday March 15, @12:23PM EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
I have said repeatedly that the best thing that could ever happen to men's rights would be a full and thorough independent audit of every aspect of feminist endeavors starting with domestic violence shelters and then women's studies programs on college campuses.
There is so much taxpayer money that gets squandered on these unverifiable social engineering projects of the feminist, that it is literally taxation without representation. The time is long overdue for these miscreants to open the books to public scrutiny and indepenent audit by agencies selected by the Justice Dept.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday March 16, @12:45AM EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
Amen, Ray.
Amen.
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday March 15, @11:04AM EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Since this is sports related I'll use a sports analogy, which is something most of us guys can relate to. In many sports played with a ball (basketball, football, volleyball, etc), when you are trying to score or advance your chances of scoring the game is easy, when there is no opposition.
However when you are driving for the basket, or you go up to spike and the opponent times your moves, goes up with you and in a nutshell establishes his presence (eat this ball) it becomes a whole new ball game. Oh yea! It never ceases to amaze me how teams or individuals that look really good somehow are far less effective when even a little bit of effort is exerted against them.
I used to be decent at Volleyball and one of the sweetest remembrances is of a time when I went up against a superior player, timed his spike at the net, hammered him so the ball froze as he spiked it (using all of my male upper body strength), then watched he and the ball come down on his side of the net. We got the point (and he got the point). In the bigger sense this is called "ESTABLISHING PRESENCE" on the playing field. If a few more good people would take a stand (win lose or draw) and "get in the face" of these nasty feminist (out there were it really counts) the abuse of men in Western society would be "A WHOLE NEW BALLGAME."
Way to hammer 'em NCFMDC. You've got the right spirit. I don't expect our efforts to be easy or always fun, but I do hope to be with you in whatever way I can contribute, win, lose, or draw.
We all really need everyone to start saying, "Hey what can I do." We then need to follow up and do it. Even if it seems small and meaningless at the time it counts and it's cumulative, and that's how the big games are won.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like this advice and I certainly do agree with it. The challenge we have, though, is that they are very careful about when and where they make their statements:
1) They do as much as they can in private, private meetings with legislators, business leaders, etc.
2) When they do so in public, they exert whatever force they can to make sure their opposition is weak or non-existent (for example, when have you seen a balanced panel debate gender issues on CNN or anywhere else for that matter? The Donahue show came as close as I've seen, and personally thin both both Donahue and Allred were shocked at how Warren, Marc, and Peter handled them. It has also been said that NOW has threatened the likes of CNN with 'no access' if they present an opposing view on-air)
3) They use the feminist court system, avoiding judges that offer anything remotely like unbiased justice.
In order to establish a presence, we have to go into the private places where these dicussions happen, we have to assert our own opposition in the few unbiased courts in the land, and we have to make the media recognize that there is an audience for gender balance.
I got an email from NCFM-NY just recently where they are looking to be recognized with advisory status as a Non-Governmental Organization by the U.N. THIS would be a particularly good place to establish a presence, because as far as I know, there is ZERO representation of men's interests in the U.N., nothing to balance the "testimony" given by women on issues like CEDAW.
It's also been said that, with twenty people behind you, you can get some face time with state legislators and with your U.S. Congressman. For example, if twenty people signed up for a Trenton-Mercer County (NJ) chapter of NCFM, we could get face time with Rep. Chris Smith, who was an author of CEDAW.
Just passing some wind on establishing our presence...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday March 16, @02:02PM EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
Frank:
You bring a valuable insight to this. A thought ran through my head after I wrote that saying, "Yea, but they'll never compete against you in areas of physical prowess, unless it's an ambush they've planned (The Clara Harris Syndrome)." The feminists only wage war when they have the numerical superiority. Hence, you'd never see them go one on one in any male sports, where they just don't have the physical ability, except on rare occasion, (Billy Jean King vs. Bobby Riggs).
We are wise to know our enemy, and our enemy, the feminists, are all about power and control through feminine wiles, cunning, and deception.
I think it is great what NCFM NY is doing at the U.N. and hope that the support of our "NATIONAL" organizational status can bring added weight to their efforts.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"...we could get face time with Rep. Chris Smith, who was an author of CEDAW."
I mis-spoke. Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) was an author of VAWA and VAWA II, not CEDAW. He does not support CEDAW because of its statements on abortion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday March 16, @03:39PM EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
A key to survival of our species has always been an ability to "think outside the box," an ability to change as needs demand. The classical man has always been a balance of mental and physical skills, but in opposing the feminists he must master a counter strategy to deal with the deceptions and trickery that characterize the feminist stratagem. To males the feminists world is a fantasy land based on perceptions unsupported by hard facts and logic. The key to their success is primarily due to their ability to be mutually supportive and nurturing to fellow females. Through the employment of what is innate natural behavior for females, they are able to show huge numbers of women readily willing to support their sisterhood. Thereby, they easily present a huge constituency to the always, eager for numbers, political machinery.
The natural predisposition of males (to always be competitive) is the Achilles’ heel nature has given to men for females to exploit. Men have no ability to bond in the nurturing supportive (and now most acceptable) ways that females do. Male aggressiveness is seen as a weakness, a destructive force in society, that must not be channeled, but destroyed. Nature’s plan intended male competitiveness and dominance to promote the physical strength of the species by allowing those most worthy to pass on their genes to strengthen the species.
Yes women do want it all. They still want all the strong characteristics of the male, but additional the “modern feminist” wants him to have a female brain so that he will be nurturing and supportive like females. After all, it’s always been females who’ve selected who they will mate with, unless of course they are just raped, and as we all know that’s a definite unacceptable anachronism to all modern social orders of Homo Sapiens.
When you are a hard bodied sexual machine (man) geared to compete physically and be superior it runs counter to your nature to be supporting and sensitive to other males. Females don't respect, accept or recognize this. Guys tend not to think about this (a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do). The male psyche, that nature has given him, is the Achilles’ heel, that is most often targeted by the feminists. Isolate the male from the competitive world of his buddies. Make the competition he thrives on as unacceptable in as many ways as possible (media, policy, laws, etc.), then increase his vulnerability in as many areas as possible(school, work, health care, selective service) to further oppress and disempower him. These are just a few of the venues that begin to show us the basis of the modern feminists’ agenda against men.
To counter this virulent attack and defend our survival we must learn to work together and be supportive of each other as men. The first reaction that other men have to this is, "Oh my God he's gay." "He's not a macho man." Obviously gay men have established a certain brotherhood amongst their group. Promise Keepers, through their connection to religion has made the transition using religion instead of gayness. Many heterosexual men avoid other men for fear of being thought gay. Many men cannot hold to, for whatever reason, a religious view. Many men outside of the traditional family, thereby, do not have a support group. As the premiere men’s group (NCFM) it would be constructive if we could all be more aware of our male Achilles’ heel, put aside our differences and at least come together in the political arena as a group of men united for our common good. Let the POLITICAL be the bonds that unite us for our common good, for our survival.
W.C. Fields once said, “Never give a sucker an even break.” That statement underscores the ruthless, cut throat, unsupportive way men have often dealt with each other. Most likely, we males will always tend to be highly competitive, simply because that’s so much a part of our nature, but we need to recognize that this is the Achilles’ heel that divides us, disempowers us, and allows feminists to hold huge rallies with numbers many times our own. Until we can overcome the innate competitiveness that divides us we will always be 2nd class citizens. We will always be political citizens subject to the dictates of the organized and mutually supportive (to females) feminist groups.
Let us evolve and agree to unite POLITICALLY to address the plethora of men’s issues that are killing us (literally and figuratively). It is in the interest of our survival. The predatory realities that each man faces today are truly a test of his natural abilities to adapt and overcome the forces that are seeking to wipe out his very existence.
One need look no further than the stark reality contained in the shocking numbers that show the male death rates for homicide, suicide, disease, accidents, etc. to know that men’s lives are allowed to be expendable by our governments. Truly our survival is at stake, and the survival of the fittest has never faced a more lethal challenge than the destructive force that is being brought against it now, that destructive force know as feminism. Let us agree to POLITICALLY unite now and establish a powerful voice addressing these major men’s issues, child custody, divorce, domestic violence, paternity fraud, unacceptable death rates, and more. Let us set aside those issues that divide us for the moment (Pro Choice vs. Pro Life). It is not a matter of convenience, it is a matter of survival.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday March 16, @04:52PM EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
The title should have been,
Success at Survival - A Modern Male's Manifesto.
That makes it more to the point.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
