|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
absolutely, positively, undeniably great letter/essay/deconstruction, Steve! My hand is extended, warmly.
Gotta love being a guy.
Mitchell A. Smith
"An ambiguous perspective is all you can hope for when initially confronted by that which you do not know."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday June 05, @12:28AM EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a Canadan man and all I can say is "thank you".
I wish i could express myself like you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You don't have to be eloquent or expressive to make a point. Just believe in yourself and write what you feel. Your point of view is just as valid as anyone elses !!!!
Keep smilin'
Thunderchild
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Thunderchild,
You are so right! His point of view is as valid as anyone else's and we need his point of view! We need him to express it. This is a team efforts.
It's too easy to get caught in the trap of calling ourselves not "expressive" or "eloquent." Hell, Shakespeare himself said, "Brevity is the soul of wit."
I wrote a very long letter for a few reasons. First, I wanted to let the gender feminists know without a doubt that we are on to them and have their number. Second, I didn't think all the men's activists would have time to read all 150 pages of that drivel. Therefore, I wanted to spell out the most important points so others could use them when criticizing the alleged "research." Third, I used several examples to point out the hypocrisy of the feminist authors of the report. Finally, once I began writing, the document just flowed, so I decided to include most of what I had written.
Keep up the good work, guys! Let's use this opportunity to build a cohesive team and expose the gen-fems for what they are.
Steve
--I rejoice at the destruction of gender feminism, and I laugh at its shattered ruins.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yo Steve ! Good to hear from you !
I had a bash at "Commissar" Augustine today (and tried to get a copy to you - something went woring somewhere, so I published it on this site)
Firstly, the sheer unfairness of this Canadian Feminazi BS really gets my goat.
Secondly, I wanted to show support for my Trans-Atlantic cousins, and yes, you're right; it is a team effort. So, if you have any other similar causes let me know - I'll happily mix it with any Feminazi (any side of the Atlantic !)
Thirdly, I need the practice for when our own home grown Feminazis decide to pull a similar stunt in the UK.
Keep us all informed of what happens with this Canadian nonsense.
ThunderChild
ps On the day that the Feminazi Beast expires I shall drink a toast with you in fine Scottish Malt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much for the excellent letter!
C.V. Compton Shaw
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I will be sending this letter, along with one I write to my MP Monte Solberg. Thanks alot for your help!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday June 06, @05:21AM EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
Here is my 'tuppence worth' on this blatantly unfair subject:
The Honourable Jean Augustine, P.C., M.P.
Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of Women)
Etobicoke-Lakeshore, Ontario
Canada
By electronic mail only: augustinej@swc-cfc.gc.ca
June 7, 2003
Dear Secretary Augustine,
Re: Report; “School Success by Gender: A Catalyst for the Masculinist Discourse”, available on: http://www.swc-cfc.gc.ca/pubs/0662882857/index_e.h tml
I am writing to you to express my extreme displeasure at the publication of the above mentioned “report” and to lodge my own personal protest. That such a piece of, what I can only describe as, anti-male ‘hate propaganda’ should be funded by the Canadian taxpayer borders on obscenity. Having read all 150 pages of the “report” I find that the fundamental basis of the work is a double standard of monstrous proportions.
The authors argue that women should continue to strive, and be supported in their quest, for “equality” (which I would recognise as a politically-motivated utopian search to achieve “equal outcomes” i.e. both sexes represented equally throughout Society) yet are resistant to and dismissive of the ethos and actions required to achieve the same for boys and young men within education, hence potentially disadvantaging them later life.
Where the “report” fails dreadfully is in the fact that it does not set out a clear and unambiguous definition of ‘masculinism’ ! Not only is this criminally negligent in terms of Social Science methodology, it leaves any statements made wide open to the interpretation and prejudices of the reader. In effect this failure renders the entire piece of work nothing more than a worthless and unsubstantiated anti-male attack.
In short the ‘report’ has neither face or construct validity ! It would appear that the Canadian taxpayer got a very poor, slipshod and worthless piece of “research” for their $75,000 ! Questions should really be asked at the highest level on this waste of the Canadian People’s money.
The actual content of the report was no more than a re-hash of many tired and well-worn extreme feminist stereotypes used extensively to stifle criticism over the last three and a half decades. In summation of the content the authors tried to systematically attack the activities of the subject groups with criticisms that conveniently forget that the extreme form of feminism has utilised far worse activities, and misinformation, in far more radical, extreme and intimidatory formats. The concept of ‘backlash’ seemed to take on almost hysterical proportions, and a particularly offensive section attempted to link these undefined, yet later listed, masculinist groups to ‘Pornographers’ and ‘paedophile groups’ – for which the authors produced not a shred of evidence. If the authors have such evidence I would urge them to forward the details to the relevant law enforcement agencies – or print a full formal apology and retraction to these listed groups.
The most controversial recommendation of the “report” namely to spend yet more of the Canadian People’s money to monitor these websites and to produce similar websites to promote the feminist ideology beggars belief. If the authors’ wish to invoke section 319 of the criminal code then there are far worse examples of ‘hate speech’ emanating from websites and organisations such as S.C.U.M. (Society for Cutting Up Men), which advocates extreme violence, castration and murder for all males - except the men’s auxiliary section of their own organisation. It may have escaped the authors’ notice that the gendercide espoused in such websites actually contravene Human Rights Law. Yet, we have no government-funded reports into the ‘hate speech’ and activities of these extreme feminist organisations. Perhaps the authors would like to produce the name of a website that advocates similar extreme violence, sterilisation and murder for all women ?!
I would urge the Canadian Government to reject this report and its recommendations in that to monitor or curtail freedom of speech for one group whilst condoning the views of another group with far more extreme and, humanitarianly, illegal views would make the country little more than a totalitarian Police State.
Yours most respectfully
John Thunderchild
I may be from the other side of the Atlantic, but I recognise unfairness when I see it.
Thunderchild
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is a great letter!
Another thing we can do is give a heads-up on this issue to our congressmen, since it has become an issue of Canadian foreign policy. I hope the French and the Australians will do the same.
Anybody else think it's odd they completely missed the UK sites?
T______
"A woman needs a man like a fish needs the river."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The likelihood is that the Canadian Feminazis don't see UK Men's Rights Groups as a threat.
There is not such a great tradition of 'rebellion' in the UK - and Men's Rights groups have not been around for as long as U.S., Canadian, Australian, French etc....however, that is changing.
Read the 'Angryharry' website.
Thunderchild
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
