|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm glad Bettina wrote this.
She puts the blame on the mother's who raise their sons to be such assholes. She points out how society isn't fair to men in dozens of ways especially violence.
Bettina also points out how it is now men who have to "tip toe" around the world or house in fear of the woman. Basically she is saying we went from one extreme to the other. So so much for fairness.
It is a great article and I'm seeing more and more people doing this type of writing (or I'm just becoming aware of it). Hardcore feminists are labling themselves anti-feminists to insert feminist dogma by putting on a facade of care for boys etc... I also watched a movie called 100 Girls, where the writer slips in a number of anti-feminist calls, but still uses some feminist lingo to appeal to the people. I believe the writer was ultimately christian. If anyone has seen this movie he has a long tirade about "ists". He nails the femi-nazis in a women's course down pat and calls them on their bullshit.
I forget the rest of what I was going to say, but I can assure you that Bettina did not switch to the otherside.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First and foremost, she's acknowledging what men's advocates have been saying all along - that men are now on a leash, and that we have to watch what we do, especially where women are concerned, because the culture is now hypersensitive and hypervigilant to male disorderly conduct.
Where she seems to run "afoul" with the party line that's typical of men's advocates is in her apparently whole-hearted agreement that the new status quo is justified by what men did in the past. She seems to whole-heartedly agree with the feminist line that men have been privileged and frequently abusive of that privilege in the past.
I don't know exactly how much I agree with that - but honestly, I do hope a lot of men read this article, especially younger men. I've been cautious of saying so before, but I do see a lot of young guys who live up to the stereotypes we commonly blame on feminism. They aren't the majority, but there are enough of them around to fuel the fire. Honestly, I tend to get more pissed off at them than I do at the feminists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know exactly how much I agree with that - but honestly, I do hope a lot of men read this article, especially younger men.
I agree, as long as there's someone around to put it in context. The actual content is similar to Fred Reed's articles cautioning against marriage.
I've been cautious of saying so before, but I do see a lot of young guys who live up to the stereotypes we commonly blame on feminism.
Obnoxious adolescents. This is a surprise?
"For, our infancy proves with what ignorance of the truth man enters upon life, and adolescence makes clear to all the world how full we are of folly and concupiscence."
-Augustine, City of God
Yeah, there are plenty of assholes in the world, especially young ones. Always have been. Augustine wrote that in 426 A.D. Somehow society managed to deal with them in stride until feminism woke us up to the fact that there is no crime greater than a man being inconsiderate to a woman.
One thing Bettina left out as she was tut-tutting about the rude, young footballer was the probability that he was getting laid that night. Handsome, cocky jocks tend to have that effect on adolescent girls. Perhaps he will be selfish and only concerned with his own pleasure and not talk to the girl after that. Big deal.
Honestly, I tend to get more pissed off at them than I do at the feminists.
Honestly, why?
Larry
Proud member of the Sperm Cartel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...Honestly, I tend to get more pissed off at them than I do at the feminists.
Honestly, why?
Because they blur the line between offensive and defensive feminism. And in today's cultural climate, one obnoxious, male chauvanist pig makes a bigger impression on people than 20 men who are getting browbeaten by their wives or girlfriends.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday September 20, @05:33PM EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
"What do you folks make of this?"
I think DV laws are the most unconstitutional hate laws ever conceived, as criminal law is able to cover real abuse issues and safeguard due process. What DV advocates have done is throw out due process and this is what results:
My ex cheats and decides to get rid of me quick for someone else - My ex used the system to annihilate me with false abuse allegations. All she had to do was make one call, that simple, and I was arrested, my name put in the paper, the judge actually said "despite conflict in testimony (she gave three different accounts) and lack of any real evidence, something must have happened" and he denied me bail which took me a week to get out of lockup. I could not return to my property, nor contact some people that mutually knew us so that she could put a negative "spin" on things to denigrate me while I was caught up in the system.
She (my ex) is a sick liar that knows the system will do her dirty work for her. I suspect more and more women will be doing the same as everyone is beginning to know how one sided courts/police have become in these issues. The basis for guilt -her words alone.
The local DV advocates are pushing "Stop the silence" - translation - give us more male meat to chop up...
I will not shut up about how things really are...
I am a victim of my own government. Safeguards against lies have been removed, and bad women lie. The new DV standard is: good luck proving your innocence…asshole.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @12:43PM EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
Every thinking man must by now realize that this society, here in the so-called Land O' the Free, has become, by virtue of the feminists' successful corruption of our legal system, an utterly toxic environment for men.
Men are now for all practical purposes merely plucked ducks in a barrel... the feminists' capture of the legal system means that all men have become potential prey, and all women have become potential predators.
The DV Industry is the primary mechanism of social control by the feminazis, who have made it clear that male "misconduct" = criminality and the consequences will be severe.
BTW, misconduct = not providing HER with anything she wants; and/or having failed to meet HER expectations based upon her subjective feelings about your efforts.
According to the prevailing DV "treatment" curriculum for male batterers, "ignoring her needs" has become a criminal act.
In the Bizzaro World men have allowed to happen, all it takes is three digits and four words - and everything a man has worked for will be taken away by the state-sanctioned DV gestapo!
Dial 911 --- "I'm afraid of him."
No due process. No 14th Amendment rights. No "innocence until proven guilty." Nada.
It's impossible to escape the realization that MEN have done this to themselves. It could never have happened if men had paid attention to the lethal transformation of the legal system, managed so superbly by the rad fems.
If women want to understand why there's a growing endorsement by men of the "marriage strike," why traditional romantic dating has devolved into mere "hooking up," why more and more men are intentionally avoiding cohabitation with females and all the legal exposure it entails ....
Consider, how would YOU behave if you woke up and realized that you were being HUNTED, that you had a target on your hide 24 x 7, simply because of your gender?
So, guys, how does it feel to be afraid? Truly afraid? All the time?
"It's a terrible thing... living in fear."
- Roy: Hunted Replicant - "Blade Runner"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @02:48PM EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
I've been there too. You are right in the bullseye with everything you are saying. Welcome to Feminazi America. I will only surve on a jury panel under duress, and I have no confidence in any aspect of a legal system that embraces principles of Nazism. Calling it what it is, "Nazifornia is a sexist hostile environment against men." Domestic violence law is the flagship of the Feminazi America.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The article says that many women threaten the idea of leaving their marriage becuase women are independent now?
Well men can leave also. But why dont men choose to leave?
Because the sytems of government and courts around the provide women with the resources necessary to leave a marriage whenever convienient to them.
Some one is still holding their hands when it comes to this so called independency.
But men dont have many choices in marriage but to side with women. Why? They are often threatened of losing their family and most of all their children. So as long as the courts allow women to have this "big stick" . Marriage and families will be bad for children and men.
Women due rule in families, but itrs not good for children or fathers.
And I have yet to see any clear evidence of men who ruled over women in any society in the past. So the backlash due coming to women may ultimately set them far back.
Also men have less say so in family becuase the
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think also that they don't want to leave because they really love thier wives and really hope that they can make thier marriage work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"These are tough lessons. No male entitlement, no cock crows or strutting. Now it is the male who faces a lifetime of carefully tiptoeing, perhaps even grovelling, with radar finely tuned to women's whims."
As if being treated with respect were an "entitlement" and not a courtesy extended to one's fellow human beings. Oh yeah, that's right, men are not human anymore!
Yep. The law and fembots will back this up. Men and boys can't even defend themselves vs. attack by a female without being persecuted-- it was like that back when there was slavery. A slave couldn't strike back at the master or his appointed overseer even if he was unjustly struck first. It's what happens when you are stripped of rights, either legally or socially or both.
I have said it before and will keep saying it: Avoid marriage and avoid paternity. They are as a slave's ball and chain around the neck/ankle. And, avoid cohabitation as well, and may I also suggest you keep relationships with females short and limited in nature and duration. Either be a friend, or a sex partner (but not for long, and for chrissakes don't get her pregnant!), but not both if at all possible-- and enter into "romantic relationships" only with the intention of finding a graceful exit soon enough. The longer you are involved romantically with a woman, the greater the risk she 1) gets pregnant or 2) gets annoyed with you and accuses of some imagined slight which will get you into trouble.
Just 'cause I'm paranoid don't mean I'm wrong! :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @11:13AM EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
"Men and boys can't even defend themselves vs. attack by a female without being persecuted-- it was like that back when there was slavery. A slave couldn't strike back at the master or his appointed overseer even if he was unjustly struck first."
The analogy is perfect. I do not believe that an assault(verbal/physical/sexual) should be regarded as less serious if the victim is male and/or if the perpetrator is female. In to-day's feminist society, women have cast away all the disadvantages associated with being weak, helpless and defenseless. They have no right to retain all the advantages associated with being weak, helpless and defenseless.
The core problem is the willingness of men to allow women to retain the privileges of the pre-feminist woman. Women have lost all the obligations and constraints of the pre-feminist woman. It is time for them to lose the privileges as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @02:13AM EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm passing articles like this one to as many men
as I can. I would hope everyone who reads this would do the same. We need to take it upon ourselves to educate other men about the man hating in society right now. Anyone who reads this sight knows the mainstream press ignores us.
If we wish to create awareness its up to us. Please, whoever reads this pass it on! Think of what we can accomplish if all of us would pass the articles on this site to five other people each. Its our responsibility! Noone will do it if we don't. It's time to go to work. All of us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @12:38PM EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
“After almost tripping over him as I excitedly followed my son's run with the ball, I couldn't stand it any longer and suggested he sit up and stop blocking the path.”
My reply: Nobody likes a bully whether he is male or female. On the other hand, what’s wrong with celebrating one’s masculinity at a football game? Where is tolerance for the masculine man?. Certainly this author appears to be imposing her female views of chivalry and female entitlement on this young man.
Still, no one likes a person or a movement who thinks they are entitled to territory meant to be shared. This young man reminds me of the behavior of the gender and radical feminist movement, where only women are empowered to be bullies. This woman is making it crystal clear that today only the all perfect female is entitled, empowered, and privileged enough to speak up freely without fear of getting a butt woopin’ or being put down for bullying.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @12:48PM EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
“As a male, he couldn't afford to hit a woman - never, ever. It's something good men have always known, but now the stakes are far higher.”
My reply: Yes, the feminist movement certainly has "raised the stakes" for being a man. This woman certainly is concerned about the difficulty her own son may have, but does she love her son and want him to succeed, or is she just concerned that his oppression may become baggage in her own preciously privileged female life.
Things have definitely changed, but has this woman shed her expectations of chivalry too? I don’t think so. By her comments, she seems to be intimating to the reclining young man, "Clear the path you hulking brut there's a superior woman in your presence!"
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @12:50PM EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
“As a male, he couldn't afford to hit a woman - never, ever. It's something good men have always known, but now the stakes are far higher.” “These are tough lessons. No male entitlement, no cock crows or strutting. Now it is the male who faces a lifetime of carefully tiptoeing, perhaps even groveling, with radar finely tuned to women's whims.”
My reply: Yes, we have empowered women to be batterers, as this points out, and men can’t even say, “Walk around if you don’t like it.” for fear of being labeled a “primary aggressor.” I assume the young man she is referring to is physically bigger, although I doubt he could have a bigger ego.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @01:29PM EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
...what number comes after 3?
...feminist influence all around me.
...I must be losing it.
...Oh no, my math skills are sliding. The negative expectations of the feminist educators are working.
Just kidding, I screwed up and lost track for a second, doing all this "cut and pasting" from my word processor document. I apologize for so many submissions, but short to the point sound bites are clearer and cleaner than a long harangue. Obviously, this story raised a lot of gender equality issues with me.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @12:56PM EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
"In good relationships both partners accommodate the other and to much the same degree.
But the problem is that men's gender-training makes them more likely to be resistant to influence; it's the man's willingness to accommodate that shows up in their research as more important," says Burgess.
My reply: If it is men’s gender training that makes them more likely to resist influence, then why does this article go on to accurately note that, "If you want your marriage to last for a long time, just do what your wife says. Go ahead, give in to her . . . The marriages that did work all had one thing in common - the husband was willing to give in to the wife."
Continuation of my reply: It is accurately noted here that it is women who are the ones who are completely resistant to their partners influence in marriage.
The truth is that women are a selfish bunch of privileged abusers who make no effort to allow any men to have influence into their lives, and if a man doesn’t comply to their expectation of slavery, they divorce him and take everything he has in the sexist, man hating courts.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @12:58PM EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
“There is a very good reason that domestic violence is now taken very seriously, given the long history of men using physical force to intimidate women.”
My reply: A mega analysis of all studies on domestic violence show that d.v. is about 50/50 and that indeed it is women who tend to initiate it more. Women often prove in d.v. that size is irrelevant by using weapons to make up for smaller size. Are “cars” now women’s favorite weapon of choice or is it guns or knives? “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned,” or just in a bad mood, or just an empowered feminist. Using a man’s physical size to tag him as the primary aggressor, when a woman has brutally committed domestic violence is just one more glaring example of how female cunning and cruelty are used to disempower and batter innocent men.
Men are not only free to be abused by females, they now have no rights to defend themselves and no shelters to seek when they are battered. Women are very resistant to recognize men as victims of d.v. and give them the shelters they deserve. Studies show this would greatly reduce the instances of d.v., by giving men that escape outlet, but feminists want men in jails so they can get their precious statistics and get more money. THEY NEED BATTERED WOMEN TO STAY IN BUSINESS. IT’S NOT ABOUT ENDING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. IT’S ABOUT THE STATISTICS NEEDED TO GET THE MONEY TO KEEP THE D.V. INDUSTRY GOING.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @01:08PM EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
“It isn't easy teaching boys the new rules, which aren't always very fair. Recently I had to adjudicate a children's quarrel that had ended in some fisticuffs . "She hit me first," wailed my son. (And she's two years older, he could have added.) But the message I had to give him was that that didn't matter. As a male, he couldn't afford to hit a woman - never, ever. It's something good men have always known,
My reply: Now this woman is saying that if a man defends himself from a battering woman he is not a “good man,” and this is something that “good men have always known.” It bears repeating that using a man’s physical size to tag him as the primary aggressor, when a woman has brutally committed domestic violence is just one more glaring example of how female cunning and cruelty are used to disempower and batter innocent men.
This is a little digression, but is still in the ballpark: On the City Attorney's web page in Los Angeles they talk about "Battered Woman Syndrome" in detail, but make no mention of "Battered Man Syndrome." This has been the case for years, and it underscores the glaring sexist, man hating discrimination in their domestic violence enforcement. By their own rules they discriminate based on gender and are fully, fully hate criminals of the lowest order, by their own definition. IN AMERICAN, ALL YEAR IS OPEN SEASON TO BATTER MEN!
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a male, he couldn't afford to hit a woman - never, ever. It's something good men have always known,
One incontestable fact that governs relations between men and women is this: most men are bigger and stronger than most women. Face it guys: if men made a general decision to dominate and enslave women, we could make it happen. It might be a little tougher in this age of technology, but we're mostly better with guns and other stuff like that than they are, anyway. From day to day, the vast majority of women have to deal with the fact that they are, compared to the human race as a whole, in the bottom percentiles as far as physical size and strength, and the feelings of vulnerability that must produce can't be comfortable.
Given the fact that using physical force to make a woman do whatever he wants is an option open to most men vis a vis most women, and since it seems pretty clear to me that no society that enslaves half its population is likely to be stable for very long, I'm can't say I'm against having fairly strict social standards against men hitting women. If we allowed that to be something common and acceptable, it would take the human race down a short road to chaos.
Those observations being made, I have to ask, what the H-E-double hockey sticks do these women think they're doing taunting us this way? Dancing around and saying "nyahh nyahh nyahh nyahh nyahh, I can hit you, but you can't hit me" is PRECISELY what will break down the consensus among men that hitting women is a bad thing. Right now, women can get away with it because a lot of men still subscribe to the old values, but that, it appears to me, has already begun to change. If this sort of behavior continures for a few more generations, it may change decisively. What will protect women then? The courts and the police? I don't think so - the courts and the police are products of society, and if society changes, so will the law enforcement organs. Besides which it is simply impossible for a society to outlaw the common practices of half its population; any such civilization would simply run out of jail cells. Men as a group might make exactly the decision I described above, and then women will find out what real slavery to a real patriarchy is like. And, in my opinion, the human race will be up sh*t's creek without a paddle.
Just my observations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @04:00PM EST (#26)
|
|
|
|
|
"One incontestable fact that governs relations between men and women is this: most men are bigger and stronger than most women"
One incontestable fact is that most women are more devious and more cunning than most men. Their capacity to inflict wounds by verbal violence far exceeds that of men and those wounds are deeper and more debilitating than many physical wounds.
"Right now, women can get away with it because a lot of men still subscribe to the old values, but that, it appears to me, has already begun to change. If this sort of behavior continures for a few more generations, it may change decisively. What will protect women then? "
The answer is "Nothing". By choosing to back the lesbian feminazis, women have embarked on a dangerous experiment in social engineering. They have thrown away all the constraints of the traditional female role. They are currently in a Fool's Paradise, liberated from pre-feminist constraints while still enjoying pre-feminist privileges. It won't last. Men will, I believe, eventually react to feminism by abandoning traditional constraints. When that day arrives women will travel from their present Fool's Paradise to Hell on Earth. In Biblcal terms, Eve has bitten the apple. It wont be long before Adam follows her example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @04:41PM EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
I am getting to be an old guy, but I heard a conversation last night in a Hollywood restaurant between an average young man and a female, while in the presence of another male. There was no chivalry involved, no respect and no romance. The feminist agenda has been very successful. The contempt for the female was "zeit geist" (of our time).
Considering the de-evolution of males that feminists are successfully carrying out in our schools, and in society, I would not want to be a woman in that future environment. Did you say "hell on earth?"
It might well be horrible for females, but no doubt worse for males. Yes, it is no stretch to see the "hell on earth" you mention becoming reality under the feminist agenda. The tip of the iceberg is not clearly seen by all, but any one of us can clearly see that the proud ship of America is on a collision course at the hands of the feminist fools and their male toadies.
Let the fools give up there seats in the lifeboats to the "ladies." After many years of having my throat under the boot of women's studies propaganda I could easily say that I thought they were all capable of walking on water. On such a day the rats will fare better than the feminist batterers and their purveyors of misandry.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @08:34PM EST (#29)
|
|
|
|
|
There's no doubt that feminism has created a social pathology that now manifests as the so-called "gender war."
Women and men defining each other as "enemies?"
This perversity being celebrated (by rad fems) as "victory?"
What a sick (and complacent)society we inhabit.
The tragic error of feminism was to misunderstand masculinity solely as power and oppression over women and children instead of recognizing millenia of men's service and protection as the defining characteristics of maleness.
Let's face it, if guys had abdicated their protector role back in the good ol' caveman days, the human race would have been extinguished when the ravenous saber-toothed tiger chowed down on his (unprotected because he elected to exercise his "male privilege" and flee!!!) well-fed wife and kids.
Give me a break, soon... please. This endless feminazi-ism is getting sooooo tedious.
Well guys, if we didn't exactly create this societal monster, we sure as hell did our best impression as complacent bystanders.
Perhaps it's time to pay attention before maleness itself becomes a de facto criminal conviction?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Those observations being made, I have to ask, what the H-E-double hockey sticks do these women think they're doing taunting us this way? Dancing around and saying "nyahh nyahh nyahh nyahh nyahh, I can hit you, but you can't hit me" "
This reminds me of something that I have seen in quite a few movies/TV shows: A man does something a women doesnt like or doesnt do what she wants and she says something like, "...if you do, I'll scream 'rape'!"
R
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @01:10PM EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
“These are tough lessons. No male entitlement, no cock crows or strutting. Now it is the male who faces a lifetime of carefully tiptoeing, perhaps even groveling, with radar finely tuned to women's whims.”
My reply: Or men can rise up against their evil oppressors and take back their rights. It’s not easy being tagged a “primary aggressor” at birth by feminists just because your male, but that is the new reality. Life is much easier in the western world without the encumbrances of the female tyrant.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @01:15PM EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
“But a male raised to assume a privileged position is now headed for trouble.
The task of negotiating relationships with women has become mighty treacherous. There's little tolerance for mistakes, no longer any room for hanky-panky.”
My reply: Yes, “Privileged” to be 99.999% of combat deaths, “Privileged” to be 94% of on the job deaths, with similar amputation stats, “Privileged” to be 76% of homicides, “Privileged” to be 95% of suicides, “Privileged” to be 93% of the prison population (most with no high school education). “Privileged” to die in greatest numbers (statistically by sex) of all 10 of the leading causes of death by disease. Should I go on talking about our “Privileges.”
I am literally sick to death of hearing the lies about the “privileges of being male.
THERE ARE NO PRIVILEGED PATRIARCHS IN COMBAT, JUST MEN!
FEMINISTS LIE, PATRIARCHY IS NO PRIVILEGE!
FEMINISTS LIE SO MORE MEN DIE!
PATRIARCHS EARN THEIR PRIVILEGE! FEMINIST LIE & CHEAT TO GET THEIRS.
can you hear me now??? can you hear me now???
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @01:20PM EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
“Having gained economic independence and the power to walk out of relationships where she isn't happy, the woman is now in control. And woe betide any partner who is insensitive to her needs.”
My reply: so much for the yielding to the husbands influence in a relationship and making it work. Yes, you can’t live with them has never been truer, and you can’t live without them has never been more false.
Men will improve the quality of their lives, because they are logical and adaptable, but it is women who will suffer at the hands of the other tyrant women (feminists), when their are no more men to abuse, batter, and bully.
In closing, and because it’s Sunday, I will throw in a few quotes from a 3000 year old book, by a guy who had over 800 wives. I greatly admire this early PATRIARCH for his wisdom:
“It is better to dwell in the wilderness than with a contentious and angry woman.” Proverbs 21:19
“A foolish son is his father’s ruin, and a quarrelsome wife is like a constant dripping.” Proverbs 19:13
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“It is better to dwell in the wilderness than with a contentious and angry woman.” Proverbs 21:19
Thanks, Ray! I think that's going to be my favorite scripture verse for a while!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday September 21, @08:49PM EST (#30)
|
|
|
|
|
And remember, "wandering in the wilderness," according to scripture, leads ultimately to enlightenment!
Whereas cavorting with "contentious and angry" women leads directly to mental torment!
Pity Eve didn't emerge from Adam's rib with a penchant for designer dresses... all that naked booty started the whole thing off down the tragic road we now pursue.
Voluntary celebacy, anybody?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I accidently deleted a post from an anonymous poster regarding classaction lawsuits.
I apologise as I was trying to bump the mod points
However I think it was a great post and should be as a feature submission. If whoever wrote that feels up to writing a full article on the subject or has a link to NCFM regarding this tactic pleas send it to the mann admin email address and I will gladly post it.
Again, sorry about that. I had good intentions.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday September 22, @02:42PM EST (#33)
|
|
|
|
|
It wasn't me, but it does appear there are an awful lot of men who have grievances of a similar nature against a common harasser/abuser. I further believe a class action lawsuit is certainly desired by an enormous group of men even if one is not feasible.
I for one would welcome and join such a suit if practical. I hope the individual writes back, in detail, about the possibility of such a suit.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have done a bit of study of John Gottman and his views on marriage. It is partly true when she says that Gottman see's a man's willingness to be influenced by his wife as an important variable in marital success. Gottman frames it in terms of the man being willing to SHARE his power. Very good idea. What she doesn't tell you is the other side of the story where Gottman says that women need to curb their criticisms of men and demanding behaviors. Duh. She left that out? HA! She is using a tiny fraction of a complex set of ideas to prove her own bigotry. Her sexism is transparent and juvenile.
Sign this online letter about domestic violence
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
