|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:25 PM April 9th, 2004 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Good eye, Ray. This looks like a good bill that we need to watch. The bill seems to be just an "intent" bill for now, to be further developed later. If this gets drafted well and provides a good enforcement mechanism it could be effective and could be a model to use nationwide in other states. People I've talked to in the Women's Studies courses especially in the UC System rarely know much about Warren Farrell, or writers like Dr. Sally Satel who have refuted the myth of women being routinely excluded from medical testing, etc. This bill could help bring counterviews to these courses, even if the instructors present them in a biased manner, which they'll surely do. We got a community college history instructor in L.A. to begin introducing Warren Farrell's "The Myth of Male Power" as a counterview to the class when he/she does a session on the feminist movement, and the insructor says that the students, some of whom are women's studies majors, tend to be clueless about Farrell's valuable work or the issues Farrell raises. I hope this bill can begin influencing change.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:15 PM April 9th, 2004 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
This news story from yesterday gives a succinct interpretation of SB 1335. It probably came from a press release prepared by Sen Morrow.
(click) Academic Bill of Rigths
This bill was written by a conservative politician, and it doesn't specifically mentioning women's studies by name. However, it does apply to women's studies, just like any other academic class taught in college.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:22 PM April 9th, 2004 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Senate Bill 1335 would implement several affirmative principles that protect the academic freedom of students and faculty. The legislation would direct the California State University system and California Community Colleges to adopt the safeguards. SB 1335 would recommend voluntary adoption by the Board of Regents of the more autonomous University of California system. The principles include:
### Students shall be graded solely on the basis of their reasoned answers and appropriate knowledge of the areas studied, not on the basis of their political and religious views.
### Curricula and reading lists in the humanities and social sciences shall respect the broad pursuit of truth by providing dissenting sources and viewpoints and welcoming a diversity of approaches.
### Faculty shall expose students to the spectrum of significant scholarly viewpoints on the subjects examined in their courses and not use the courses as platforms for the purpose of ideological, religious or anti-religious indoctrination.
### Selection of visiting speakers, allocation of speaker program funds, and related activities shall observe the principles of academic freedom and intellectual pluralism.
### Faculty shall be hired, fired, promoted and granted tenure on the basis of their competence and appropriate knowledge in their disciplines and not on the basis of their personal political or religious beliefs.
### Faculty shall not be excluded from tenure, search and hiring committees on the basis of their personal political or religious beliefs.
### Academic institutions and professional societies shall maintain a posture of organizational neutrality with respect to the substantive disagreements that divide researchers on questions inside or outside their fields of inquiry.
Morrow added, “We create laws to protect workers from hostile work environments, yet we don’t protect our young college students from hostile learning environments. We protect them from sexual harassment, but not from intellectual harassment. Schools, colleges and universities should be safe houses where students can feel comfortable opening their minds, ears and mouths in pursuit of a full education.”
The senator concluded, “It is inherently anti-democratic and inordinately dangerous to muzzle free speech in a nation that has a representative form of government. We need to honor the timeless principles of the academy and fully respect the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:53 PM April 9th, 2004 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
I really think this bill could be more significant in helping the men's movement in CA, than anything else I've seen since I've been in the movement. This bill has radical potential to affect a major area of misandry in this state (women's studies). Women's studies is, and has been, a spawning ground for radical/gender feminism. If this bill passes we could have a golden opportunity handed to us. "Dissenting views" would take on a whole new meaning on college campuses throughout the state. For one thing students would have much more freedom from the political correct thought police to wear clothing like the T-shirt below, which might now be labled hate speech, because of women's "protected status" Yes, the thought police feel females should be protected (especially from male dissent), because of their "herstorical oppression" by males.
(click) Women's Studies Swindles
Sincerely, Ray
(Please do not scroll up the page of the linked item(s). All the info I am trying to convey is only as the page comes up initially.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:23 PM April 9th, 2004 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
As much as I dislike more federal/state involvement into our lives, this kind of makes sense. The Feminists in Academia often poison scholastic honesty and replace it with a politically correct gender version. Feminists has waged ‘revisionism’ on our collective history, and no one is standing up against their deceit.
I support this measure.
CJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I support the measure too, but we mustn't see it as any kind of academic panacea. Theoretically, Title IX could've been used to create Men's Studies and Men's Centers on campus; it had gender neutral language. Instead, it wound up serving the feminazi agenda and destroying mens athletics. Similarly, without vigilance this bill if passed could lead to inserting herstory into normal history, sociology, and psychology classes. Laws are only as good as the political reality of their interpretation and enforcement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:52 PM April 9th, 2004 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, it would be nice to have "sweet girls" again. There seem to be very few of them left.
But while I would like to see "sweet girls" again, I do not want to see subserviant girls. (nor boys, for that matter.)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
>But while I would like to see "sweet girls" again, I do not want to see subserviant girls.
Girls (women) have never been subservient more than they want to be... at least not in most cases. The few that are, there's nothing wrong with that. Many men are not the "bossy" type and need a softer, "subservient" woman who won't use his softness against him. If you don't like women one way, find the kind you like but don't criticize the others or try to bully them through your posts into possibly changing as the feminists certainly have because they're not to your liking or the way you personally think women should be.
My wife is Japanese (Made in Japan - not Japanese-American) and in the entire time I was living with her and in the military, I never once had to shine my shoes. Does that automatically make her subservient or not independent? Being that she was married once before we married 31 years ago and she sought the divorce from him, I would say that if subservient means weak, I would certainly say no. In fact, when I get really angry at her and even hint at divorce, she gets angry at me for even bringing it up. Once she told me she wouldn't "give" me a divorce when I told her I wanted it. (She's not aware that I don't need her OK to get one).
Does this sound like a "subservient" woman?
What about men? If a man gives in to his wife or says "Yes, Dear" too many times, is he subservient? At what point does being nice to your spouse make you "subservient"?
By your definition of subservient, I wonder what percentage of men these days qualify. I think that one of the biggest problems American men and women have these days in maintaining long term relationships is that women are afraid to be nice to their men for fear of being labelled "subservient". I think that word should be totally banned and anyone who uses it in the same sentence with the word "women" describing how women shouldn't act towards men should be strung up.
Dittohd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:20 AM April 10th, 2004 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
Dittohd,
You're right.
The reason I used the word "subservient" is because the anon poster seems to WANT subservient women.
I agree that with you when you say just because a woman does stuff for you, it doesn't make her subservient. nor if a man does stuff for a woman, it doesn't make HIM subservient.
In fact men and women SHOULD do stuff for each other. that shows LOVE. And there is a vast difference between being loveing and being subservient, right?
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:11 AM April 10th, 2004 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
Subserviant girls are better than belligerent ones, take your pick. Not that good women exist or anything. Why anyone would marry a divorced woman is beyond me. 'Divorce' dosn't end a sacramental marraige, it's "till death do us part"... why anyone wants an allready-been-used woman is also beyond my comprehension.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:12 AM April 10th, 2004 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
Subserviant girls are better than belligerent ones, take your pick. Not that good women exist or anything. Why anyone would marry a divorced woman is beyond me. 'Divorce' dosn't end a sacramental marraige, it's "till death do us part"... why anyone wants an allready-been-used woman is also beyond my comprehension.
--------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:13 AM April 10th, 2004 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
Subserviant girls are better than belligerent ones, take your pick. Not that good women exist or anything. Why anyone would marry a divorced woman is beyond me. 'Divorce' dosn't end a sacramental marraige, it's "till death do us part"... why anyone wants an allready-been-used woman is also beyond my comprehension.
--------------------------------------------------
-----------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:13 AM April 10th, 2004 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
Subserviant girls are better than belligerent ones, take your pick. Not that good women exist or anything. Why anyone would marry a divorced woman is beyond me. 'Divorce' dosn't end a sacramental marraige, it's "till death do us part"... why anyone wants an allready-been-used woman is also beyond my comprehension.
-------------------------------------------------- ---------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:37 AM April 10th, 2004 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
...Here we go again...!
There ARE good women out there, Anon.
Maybe you've been hurt by one or more women. If so, I empathize with you, been there myself. But one can't judge ALL women by the acts of SOME women. If we do that we are no better than the feminists who hate all men because of what a few men may (or may not) have done. To do so is nothing more than pure prejudice. Sorry, I'm not trying to start anything, I'm just trying to be reasonable.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:16 AM April 10th, 2004 EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
TC:
The four posts before your post are an outstanding example of the kind of intolerance and repetitive propaganda you'll find in women's studies classes on college campuses so I have my suspicions about the authoress(es) or author(s).
I think some of the things we have been saying on this site about ways to confront the terrorism of radical/gender feminism may be causing those radical/gender feminists to respond in the only way they know how. It appears, as I have long suspected, that their contentions are so biased, that when they are finally confronted with a fact filled refutation, their only recourse is to attack with epithets, politically incorrect sabotage efforts, and femi-supremacist mantras.
Mensactivism is a great and historical site. It is a major stepping stone on the long road leading to equal rights and justice for oppressed men and women everywhere. It gives free speech to men and women who have been long oppressed by the jack boot hate agenda of radical/gender feminists. Thanks to everyone who posts comments here, even the radical/gender feminist propagandists who post their, diatribes, rants, and underhanded, thinly veiled sabotage attempts. The later posters mentioned are helping us more than they can imagine by proving with their behavior what we have been saying for a long time.
I look forward to the day when true academic freedom will come again to college campuses. Can anyone say, “The radical/gender feminist women's studies empresses will have no clothes?” The students will react with hysterical laughter, if they do not break down in tears first, and blind themselves at the horrible site. I can't wait to see the responses students will have, when they finally find out the ludicrous lies and misinformation these bigots have foisted on them. It will be a glorious day when these radical/gender feminist bigots comprising the women's studies programs are finally confronted with the truth as a counter to all the misandrist propaganda they have been spreading for decades.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:51 AM April 10th, 2004 EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
Ray,
Yes and this legislation may just be the thing to do it.
As far as the trolls go I get the feeling that they expected a bunch of misogynists to be here. They seem to think that by baiting us with anti-female rhetoric that we, here will all jump on board and agree with them, thus proveing them "right". Then they can go around telling anyone who will listen; "See! this is what men's rights activists think and feel about women! All they want is to oppress us!"
I am not only happy to be a part of this movement but damned PROUD to be. I am mostly proud because there are no men on this site that DON'T believe in TRUE equality for both men AND women.
It is the FEMINISTS that do not want true equality. and judgeing from what I've been seeing here lately, the more they try to prove that they are, the more they prove that they aren't...!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Besides attempted disruption of legitimate discussion, the troll attacks are an example of the feminist "anger strategy." They are really used to getting their way by expressing stronger and stronger anger at men until they cave, as if we're going to think, "wow, we've really upset someone by our comments, guess we should stop speaking."
But it ain't gonna work no more!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Besides attempted disruption of legitimate discussion, the troll attacks are an example of the feminist "anger strategy." They are really used to getting their way by expressing stronger and stronger anger at men until they cave, as if we're going to think, "wow, we've really upset someone by our comments, guess we should stop speaking."
But it ain't gonna work no more!"
That's right girls...just stick some menstural pads in my shirt pocket because my heart bleeds for the plight of the powerless female.
Want the night back you say? I can't immagine what for..but if you must ...go ahead and take it..it's out in my garage stuffed down in between the winter tires and the lawnmower...
While you're out there you can take your damned ruby slippers, hop on your broomstick and fly the hell back to Lower West Oz.
Pissing off feminazis is now my favourite hobby.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ouch. Well, I'm not trying to deliberately enflame them either, I just want to state my views about the rights of men and the feminist assault on the male gender. If it enflames someone because my views do not conform to feminist dogma, then whatever. They can call me a loser and whiner and throw all the anger and hate at me they want. After a few hundred times it kinda loses it's effect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ray, something I think is vital to assure academic freedom is to tinstitute a system whereby the person writting exams andpapers is annonamus to the person marking and that the professors do not get to mark their own student's papers.
Also there has to be an independant watchdog. It is all very well for the government to make such legislation but it really is in no position to enforce it unlessa third party makes a complaint. The post secondary institutions thathave the highest degree of academic freedom usually have the professors'staff association or union as the advocate...student unions sold out long ago.
There are sites on the internet which serve as a sort of blacklist to warn prospective students not to take certain courses from certain profs.
In my own experience very few students actually care about the truth. Gennerally they have had that zeal flogged out of them by the time they graduate high school and simply want to conform, shut up, give them what they want and get the damn degree so they can get on with paying back their student loans...place themselves in jepoardy by questioning conventional wisdom??? Hell no!!
I hate to say it but people simply cave in like kelp in the wake of feminist aggression and very few will so much as agree with criticism within earshot of a gauleiter. Anonymous surveys are a good tool for exposing abuse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:26 PM April 10th, 2004 EST (#31)
|
|
|
|
|
"Gennerally they have had that zeal flogged out of them by the time they graduate high school and simply want to conform, shut up, give them what they want and get the damn degree so they can get on with paying back their student loans...place themselves in jepoardy by questioning conventional wisdom??? Hell no!!
I hate to say it but people simply cave in like kelp in the wake of feminist aggression and very few will so much as agree with criticism within earshot of a gauleiter."
Students do tend to be apathetical about anything but their grades and graduation. In between studying, working, and having a little exercise (and fun) there just isn't time for anything else in a students life. School is a rough right of passage many go through in hopes of getting a better job, and having a better life. Many who try, fail.
It is a disservice to all to spend precious time filling minds with fraudulent information as women's studies does. Most students just forget a lot of the valid stuff they learn in time, but remember the process of learning. Women's studies students must labor under a delusional reality while pursuing other life goals. They must live under the curse of the man-hating ideology indoctrinated into them, while they try to be functional in a society they are making dysfunctional by their women’s studies mis-information.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By the way, you only need to hit the submit button one time!
Do you really mean divorced women or just the ones with children? My wife divorced her previous husband after 5 years of marriage and we haven't seen or heard from him or had any contact with him in the 31 years we've been married. The subject of her previous marriage almost never came up and I must admit, I'll bet my 26 year old son doesn't know that his mother was married once before marrying his dad. He never asked and I never brought it up. And I suspect my wife might lie to him if he asked her.
I have a tendency to agree with you about avoiding previously-married women, but what do you suggest for people like me who want to divorce, are in their 50's, and aren't dead yet. Seems impractical to look for women who've never been married or had children. Although I admit, I'm definitely considering that as one of my stipulations. Lucky for us most women don't stipulate their men never having been married before as a dating and marriage condition.
Most people these days look down on mature men dating much younger women. What are your thoughts on that? I must admit, I'm not at all turned on by women my age, but then you never know. I'm not saying finding one around my age that does turn me on would be impossible, but why go looking in a population where I might find one-in-a-million that turns me on when in a much younger population, maybe one in a thousand might fill the bill. The odds are so much better in me finding the woman I'm looking for in the younger group.
And at my age, I don't exactly have a whole lot of time left. I seem to be more attractive to women now at my age than I ever was when I was younger, based on the flirting I get from younger women these days that I never got at my younger ages, but I don't expect that to last a whole lot longer.
Dittohd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm with you on THAT one Ditthold. There are a few young women I know who do for me what Viagra does not. Get going on it though, the feminazis want to make it illegal because in every situation where a man has more "power" than a woman that power is invariably abused sine quo non as every feminazi biggot knows and nobody would dare question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:38 PM April 9th, 2004 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
"It would be nice to have sweet girls again... but even people here at this "pro male" site are against raising girls as girls, most people here worship equality."
I suppose that's better than mindlessly worshipping tradition.
What you don't seem to understand is that there are two sides of the coin here, the myth (and it always was a myth) that girls are innately sweet and nice has a counterpart that boys are not so nice, and in particular have an innate tendancy towards violence and starting wars, etc.
What equality buys us is individual accountability for one's actions - mean girls can be acknowledged as mean girls, and likewise for boys. Let's give up the stereotypes and traditional baises and start with an assumption of equaliy, then let individuals create their own destinies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know Dittold, the phenomina of men and women not getting along is far from new. In other times this was accomodated with contemplative orders that were celebate and sexually segragated. Personally I find St. Paul's mysogyny and libido anorexia to be more disturbing, contra-nature, and indicative of being given over to a reprobate mind than most of the things he ruminated about.
The failure of the household in Western society is a symptom of too much independance. Every military NCO faced with the problem of making a bunch of conscripted teenage boys bunk together and fight together as brothers knows that the best way to do that is for them to have a common enemy...if no other is available, the NCO takes on that role.
Families work better in the poorer parts of the world because people actually need each other. Lots of imported Asian wives learn feminism and the benefits of divorce pretty quick once they are here and have hunger as a low priority.
One of the main reasons so many feminists are SO angry is because years of involuntary celebacy brings out the very worst in some people (my grandfather used to have a saying like that "what she needs is a good..."
Right now, other than sex, what does any member of the opposite sex have to offer that you cannot get from someone else?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"What equality buys us is individual accountability for one's actions - mean girls can be acknowledged as mean girls, and likewise for boys."
Penises are uniquely male....assholes are not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:21 PM April 9th, 2004 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not opposed to women's studies existing, but I do believe that there should be the academic freedom to challenge what it says.
If a premise is false, and the discipline is so corrupt as to not allow questioning of the false premise, then you do not have education. You have indoctrination. If the premises of any discipline can not stand up under rigorous scrutiny and sound questioning, then it should be revised to reflect more accurately what are the facts. If a discipline will not allow rigorous scrutiny and sound questioning, then it should not exist in an educational setting. Such a "false discipline" would only be a religion or a political ideology, or a mixture of both disguised as a discipline. Female victimology is preached from the lecterns (pulpits) of women's studies classrooms (churches) like the impassioned religion that it is, but I eagerly look forward to the day when others can present opposing viewpoints.
Ray
(click) Women's Studies Ideology
(Please do not scroll up the page of the linked item(s). All the info I am trying to convey is only as the page comes up initially.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:06 AM April 10th, 2004 EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
I go to a school that has very few women and therefore a reduced feminist presence. However, a few weeks ago while I was in one class and the door was open, I could hear a feminist clearly ranting to some female students about the view of women in history.
The feminist apparently brought up the whole Adam and Eve affair from the Bible as an example of women being scapegoated. I don't know everyone's religious views on this site, but I gathered from a history class that the garden of Eden was more of an allegory than anything factual. To me, the story seemed to represent the state of humans before civilization formed: low numbers of humans, hunter-gathering society, and fairly easy life. However, the discovery of agriculture changed this life, making it more complicated*.
Chances are that women are the ones that discovered agriculture (although this may be different depending on which group we talk about), so that's probably why Eve gets the blame in the story. If you look at the story that way, it's a lot less about blaming women. But I suppose that might give feminists less ammunition in their hate-filled attacks.
*I heard that some anthropologist studies found that current hunter-gathering societies worked on 15-hours per week versus 40 or more for agricultural/industrial societies. Plus, in the story of Cain and Able, Cain gets cursed by having to work the land forever, but his descendants build technology and a society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:54 AM April 10th, 2004 EST (#24)
|
|
|
|
|
I suppose that's possible.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
