[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Penetration Kills
posted by Hombre on Monday December 08, @03:20PM
from the Groups-which-only-claim-to-care-about-men dept.
Masculinity P George writes " Here is a short article on AIDS. The arctile summary says "Latest AIDS statistics point to sexual and syringe intromission as the vectors of contamination of a disease that disproportionately cuts down women, gays and racially-despised minorities. Created in Quebec by Montreal men against sexism, this logo attempts to raise the issue of penetration as cultural icon."

Now if you go to the bottom of the page it gives a link to the National Institue of Health. Near the top of the page it says "Approximately 50 percent of adults living with HIV/AIDS worldwide are women.", which means the other 50% are men! Then further down the page under the heading " HIV/AIDS in the US" and exactly right above the statistics that these "men against sexism" cut and pasted it says "Approximately 40,000 new HIV infections occur each year in the United States, about 70 percent among men and 30 percent among women." Whose being the sexist here? Then click on their attached file. It's a picture of a red no smoking sign with a syringe turning into a penis. On the sides it says "Penetration Kills" followed by the inside saying "Montreal men against sexism"! I can't articulate on how this sign is misandry but I can't imagine a similar sign with a vagina that says "cavern of chlamydia" or something. This seems like purely Hate propaganda to demonize men. Why would they do this? What do you guys think?"


I agree with you that the sign is misandrous, and the reason I would call it that is it clearly focuses on the penis as an object of hate and fear, while implying everyone with a penis, (and only those with a penis), is responsible for the spreading of STDs. As to the question of why they would do that, well some people may not be aware of this but in addition to ourselves and groups like the NCFM, ACFC, etc. there is also a fake men's movement. A movement which purports to oppose sexism and care about the issues which effect men but is really just composed of self-hating male feminists. Men Against Sexism is a group which fits this category, and I would bet that the Montreal Men Against Sexism is just a division of that group. A brief perusal of their homepage should tell you what they're about, and why they would actively try to demonize men.

Police cripple teen over offroad permit | Let's get together  >

  
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Feminist Boys - (Fem Boys)! (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Monday December 08, @04:08PM EST (#1)
"This seems like purely Hate propaganda to demonize men. Why would they do this?"

I have seen this before in the domestic violence arena also. We went to a domestic violence conference last year, where the main thrust was, "WHAT CAN MEN DO TO STOP THEIR VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN."

We showed up with signs of our own, one of which said, WHAT CAN WOMEN DO TO STOP THEIR VIOLENCE AGAINST MEN, and another which said, "BATTERED MEN, THE UNREPORTED EPIDEMIC." There were other signs too.

It seems to be a strategy of the women's industry these days to enlist servile men (fem boys) to spout their agenda. These toadies are eager to win the acclaim and a part of the fat dollars that these man hating batterers have.

There have been so many lies told by the feminist movement that it still amazes me that there are still spineless, chivalrous fools and Feminist ideologues who will rush to the support of these vile despicable destroyers of innocent men's lives.

Let the whole truth be told. We have nothing to fear but the lies of the feminist movement and the fools who believe them.

Sincerely, Ray

whatever (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Monday December 08, @07:38PM EST (#2)
Interesting how that NOMAS site doesn't say anything about how 'women' put pressures on men to 'deny their feelings' to appear strong to women which gives men a 'lack of close relationships', to be 'aggressive' so as to be better protecters of women, and the social pressure that a lot of women put on men to be 'preoccupied with work and success', which they say "have all served to limit our wholeness as men".

They don't discuss how specifically 'women' put social pressures on men which causes them to behave the way they do. No it's all mens' fault for the way men are socialized. It's only the "patriarchy" which does all this. This denies the social and cultural influence women have on society. Which is sexist, but since it makes women innocent and men guilty it's ok.

    Now I'm not saying women are soley responsible for mens behaviour, but they do put a certain amount of social pressure on men. And women do have considerable influence on our society and culture.

NOMAS---"We believe that the new opportunities becoming available to women through the feminist movement will be beneficial to both women and men. Men can live happier, more fulfilled lives, by challenging the old-fashioned rules of masculinity including the assumption of male superiority. NOMAS is deeply supportive of men who struggle with the issues of traditional masculinity. As an organization committed to changing men, we care about men and are concerned with the difficult issues in most men's lives."

Funny, feminists have not made me a more "whole" person. Nor have they confronted female privilege--chivalry. In fact they seem to keep on using us as their protectors.

From my point of view as a low status, lower class male I can tell you that it's women who want and put pressure on men to be chivalerous, to achieve, to make money so as to buy them things, to not show so much of their feelings, to have status and power and to be their protectors because they IGNORE if you don't have these things.

Convenient that they just blame the patriarchy without any mention on the pressure women put on men! And I'm not sticking up for the patriarchal men in power either. I'd be happier without a patriarchy or a matriarchy.

p george

[an error occurred while processing this directive]