|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ads, a while ago, MANN reported on a 17 year old girl who had filed a lawsuit trying to change the male-only selective services registration requirement. Do you guys have any news as to how that's progressed?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Last I heard it was still being considered, if we get any more news about it, we'll let you know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Last I heard it was still being considered, if we get any more news about it, we'll let you know.
And, if you find out first, please let us know, so we can tell everyone else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why are politicians (mostly male!)on the leash of gender feminists nutjobs? Why is their influence so great in the political arena when their actual numbers are so small?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why are politicians (mostly male!) on the leash of gender feminists nutjobs?
I think it's basically that they don't know our issues exist. I remember a debate I had a while back with some guys on another board over this, it turned into a right flame-fest with insults like "dickless wonder" and "chivalous puke" thrown around. Sure was a laugh through.
Why is their influence so great in the political arena when their actual numbers are so small?
2 reasons:
1: General voter ignorance.
2: Not challenged often enough.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Because they are convincing, mostly. They name their causes with names like "Violence Against Women Act" which implies voting against such a bill, you're pro-violence against women. They scream about giving an inch gives 'em a mile = default join custody means men will quickly be able to have default sole custody. It's nonsense, but it scares the crap out of women - so they immediately support any male politicians who grovel to the vocal minority of gender fems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some very good answers to this mystery.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good question. To begin with it's worth noting that most women aren't career gender-feminists, but will side with their principles anyway. So whatever the GFs follow up on, will influence what their sheep do, or how they vote, or whatever. So while there might only be a certain number of problematic feminists, they wield power disproportionate to their numbers, simply because they act as proxies of their followers (non-politically active career-feminists, idle girl-power-is-cool types, and everything between).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday June 29, @10:20AM EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
Firstly, I think it is because the "feminist nutjobs" control the media . Secondly, because of the existence of the womens voting block i.e. if a male politician is labelled "anti-woman" , he loses the votes of women and, therefore, his political career. For some reason, as yet, men do not vote on gender issues; thus, a poitician who is labelled "anti-man" will not suffer the same electoral backlash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday June 29, @10:54AM EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Kudos to all the hard working guys who are making a difference. The following points are not intended for them:
A big part of gender feminists' successes has been their activism in face of UNDERwhelming male activism. It speaks volumes to the apathetic, uninspired, depressive nature of males who don't write letters, or pick up picket signs, or protest in public, etc. They (gender feminists) have not been getting challenged in much of any way. As Warren Farrell said, "The Gender Wars are a conflict in which only one side showed up." We have seen a little increase in male activism lately, but there are still a large number of guys who can't put the remote control down, or get time off from work, or can't get the little ladies permission. You can bet none of those G-fems ever had to ask for permission from a man.
Secondly, during the past 5-10 years that we have been getting more active, we have been trying to play catch-up against a bigoted, closed minded governmental system that is heavily entrenched with the vilest forms of G-Fem laws and discrimination. It has been like trying to climb up a mountain of snot, for lack of a viler more accurate metaphor.
It really helps to have a great activist group like NCFM to be a part of, but there is nothing like showing some individual initiative. I am off today to a Paternity Fraud picnic with a new T-shirt design. I walked into my City Council Woman's Office in L.A. the other day and chatted (all politics is local). I talked to an aide. It went well until near the end when the subject of primary aggressor in domestic violence came up. She was not receptive to any challenge of that. I pointed out that size should not be a factor in determining who to arrest in d.v. disputes and said, "I'll close by saying, Remember gender profiling is just as much hate crime as racial profiling." At least I planted a seed that there are people/constituents (even if they are men) that have an opinion different from the feminist model.
I highly recommend everyone read the book by Chris Matthews called HARDBALL to better be able to understand the political beasts. Surprisingly, I find it interesting and easy reading. It's not the heavy verbose monster I was expecting. No matter how little effort you make, it all adds up so most of all - JUST DO SOMETHING. We are in a critical time when we are really starting to get on the scoreboard. If everyone who has done nothing did something, and everyone who has done a little would do a little more, we could finally start to turn the G-fems atrocious policies and laws around. Hang in there guys and gals (non G-fems) our presence is certainly being felt.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"We have seen a little increase in male activism lately, but there are still a large number of guys who can't put the remote control down, or get time off from work, or can't get the little ladies permission."
Or just don't believe there's a need. Like my boyfriend, I once explained that this was one of the few causes I'd dedicate myself to. his response was:
"Men are always going to be treated unfairly somehow. Women are always going to be treated unfairly somehow. Why bother trying to fight for one side?"
"Because I believe one side is getting the short end more than it deserves?"
"I don't see it that way."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All the points that have been made are good ones. But I’ll add some thoughts as well.
To me it mostly comes down to chivalry – the age-old gender role game of males as providers/protectors and women as nurturers/protectees. For the overwhelming majority of voters the choice is in whether you buy into the old or the new-age version.
Generally speaking, women are more than willing to vote to advance the health, safety, and well being of themselves and other women. It’s consistent with millennia of making males disposable to provide greater protection for females. “Equality for women” (as feminists euphemistically refer to new-age chivalry) means choices, options, and freedoms for women where men have none. No woman has to make a choice as to what the rules should be. She can just vote to eliminate any rules that restrict her. That freedom would be hard to pass up for anyone that votes based on his or her own self-interest.
At the same time, most men see themselves as being in competition with other men and seek to be more chivalrous. A typical man is proud to do his part to protect women (often at his own expense) and will accept policies that highlight all those other guys as less chivalrous than him, thereby improving his own relative position with women by letting the government trash other men for him. Despite what happens to so many men, at a very fundamental level most men don’t recognize public policy that favors women as a threat to their own well being. Or they don’t care (Can you say low self esteem? Can you say lack of self respect? Sure you can).
So if you’re trying to win or hold onto public office it’s a no-brainer – just think chivalry. Women represent a majority of voters and are generally willing to vote in their own self-interest. Most men compete so intensely to be more chivalrous than the other guy that they go along even if it may result in disaster for them personally.
Only a handful of people even question this pattern. Many of them visit this website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I for one believe that we can use 'chivilry' to an advantage. Im a firm believer in what works against you can work for you in many areas of push and pull thinkings.
In fact I think there are a number of things we can use against these gender feminists that they themselves have initiated against us to destroy us. These ideas will unfold as we go along. They key to remember here is that sometimes we don't have to do away with an item but rather learn how to manipulate it to our advantage and their disadvantage.
I would also like to point out that many Gender Feminists are Male Professors. I have encountered a few of them along my schooling careers. At the time I had no idea what they were advocating and why, but, these extremely educated and manipulative men can curb hundreds perhaps thousands every year just on their own. Constantly grinding out "political thugs" with fascist intentions.
This happens because the students are not being told both sides of the story.
When people realize how much money is involved in discriminating against one group or another, they begin to see how many organizations will purposely upset the balance of things. They will withold information and distrubute information that favours their goals.
In the divorce industry there are almost two dozen groups who make money off the divorce industry. They have a vested interested in demonizing men and blaming males for all the wrongs of the earth.
I believe this is both a men and women's movement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I for one believe that we can use 'chivilry' to an advantage. Im a firm believer in what works against you can work for you in many areas of push and pull thinkings.
It's actually a good idea; I myself favor redefining it as conditional, i.e., you want chivalry? Earn it.
It needs to stop being a birthright of women with a XX chromosome.
I'm serious, guys. If you find a truly enlightened woman, and feel you can trust her (Crescentluna seems to good to be true sometimes - no slight, but she's just a name here) roll those dice. Personally, if it's just for sex - pay for it. It's cheaper in the long run and there's always people willing to sell out "their side" for short term gain.
(Besides - for good sex, go to a professional, not an amateur.)
No sex - male birth control - all this means no babies. No babies, no mommies. No mommies, and that clock starts going from tick, tick, tick to TICK, TICK, TICK. Also, once that power is removed, there's no further meaningful power that can be used against you. It's called leverage. The sperm cartel, remember?
With that, we don't need laws; the strong, successful, independant woman will breed herself out of existance, and the rest will remember the carnage that such bullshit wrought on humanity.
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's a laudable solution, and am waiting with bated breath for the male birth control to hit the market. It will certainly be interesting.
And I wanted to add, my boyfriend doesn't want to marry me and we don't even live together. He's fanatical about birth control. Basically, I landed an enlightened guy without being aware of it, which worked out well, in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"""No sex - male birth control - all this means no babies. No babies, no mommies. No mommies, and that clock starts going from tick, tick, tick to TICK, TICK, TICK. Also, once that power is removed, there's no further meaningful power that can be used against you. It's called leverage. The sperm cartel, remember? """
Good idea. But what about sperm banks? Women can get preggers by this means and they don't have to be married. However, there is the drawback of not having a financial slave for the next 18 years to keep you in beer and cigarette money. You can't sue the damned sperm bank for child support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday June 30, @02:41PM EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent post. Rather than react to the injustices suffered by men, this post seeks to outline the fundamental cause of these injustices. Frankly, many of the contributors to this website do not understand that MALE CHIVALRY is the root cause of all the injustices suffered by men.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
