|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:23 PM May 19th, 2004 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Can someone explain to me what that is all about?
Sources? Links?
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No problem, now I'm signed in.
Could you explain what it's all about and give me a few sources?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, SaneMan.
I'm referring to the radical feminist belief that heterosexuality, like gender, is a social construct, that heterosexuality has been imposed by a heterosexist patriarchy. People can free themselves from heterosexuality through its deconstruction. (The funny thing is that, while heterosexuality is often portrayed as a social construct, I've seen in the same context homosexuality portrayed as due to nature rather than nurture.)
A quick search with key words and phrases will turn up a wealth of information on this. Try Googling "heterosexuality 'social construct' feminism" for instance, and you'll find an interesting essay on the subject. (I've only taken a quick look at it, but you may find it worthwhile.) Here's an excerpt: "According to Sra Llama man/woman, masculine/feminine are merely cultural constructions, and thinking that heterosexuality is the 'natural' sexuality is only another 'example of a "biological" social construction'."
This essay contains "Heterosexuality is seen as culturally constructed and a form of domination necessary to maintain patriarchy. They advocate lesbianism as the only way to fully develop female sexuality without power relations.
"Politically, this view leads to a separatist position. That is, women must fight together separate to men and against men to overcome oppression. This philosophy is evident in writers such as Andrea Dworkin and Catherine McKinnon and in campaigns such as Greenham Common."
In a nutshell, many radical feminists believe that heterosexuality was created to oppress women. If you search with various key words, you'll find a lot on this. Daphne Patai, in her excellent book "Heterophobia," spends a bit of space debunking this nonsense.
Enjoy the search. I think you'll find it enlightening.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:09 PM May 19th, 2004 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
What suprises me is that so many people swallow the feminist tripe in the first place.
Even seemingly "intelegent" people.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the info. I just wanted to know whether it was based on serious reasearch or if was just extreme feminist claims that can't be taken seriously.
Seems it was the latter.
BTW, a lot of the pornographic "lesbian culture" that dominates the mainstream media (for instance Madonna kissing Britney etc.) is just another way to get that kind of "women don't need men, heterosexuality is made to discriminate women"- message across.
Even the word 'lesbian' has in our culture reached some kind of hyped status as being edgy and cool and experimentational. It's in to be lesbian, it's cool and fashionable in our culture.
That's why I think we should stop calling homosexual women 'lesbian'. The word itself has a glamourous pornographic connotation to it. I doubt the 'pornographic lesbian fad' that's all over US media today would have the same commercial power if it was called what it actually is; gay, homosexual etc. I don't think it would be very hip for Britney to be promoted as a 'homosexual', while the word 'lesbian' is ok to promote her by because of the glamorous pornographic connotations the word has in our society. In fact, the kind of pornographic culture that rules US media today is designed to take away any potency and attractive male qualities and worship everything that has to do with female sexuality. The kind of disguised manhate that lies in the 'lesbian' fad makes young men feel more insecure about themselves as attractive objects for women, which is what men should be for heterosexual women. Of course, the idea of a man having sexual power - or any power for that matter - over a woman, is not accepted in the mainstream media today. On the other hand, the sexual power of women is being worshiped constantly. The same thing goes for other types of words used to describe men and women; an attractive man is at the most described as handsome (he's lucky to get that word, the alternative is 'cute'!), while ANY mildly attractive woman will get the word beautiful. For proof of this last statement about use of words, just look at some of the late shows and you'll se what I mean. Practically any women will be called beutiful, seemingly just because she's a woman. It's just as obligatory for the host to call a female guest beautiful as it is for the host to ask whether or not the guest is dating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Even the word 'lesbian' has in our culture reached some kind of hyped status as being edgy and cool and experimentational. It's in to be lesbian, it's cool and fashionable in our culture.
That's why I think we should stop calling homosexual women 'lesbian'. The word itself has a glamourous pornographic connotation to it. I doubt the 'pornographic lesbian fad' that's all over US media today would have the same commercial power if it was called what it actually is; gay, homosexual etc. I don't think it would be very hip for Britney to be promoted as a 'homosexual', while the word 'lesbian' is ok to promote her by because of the glamorous pornographic connotations the word has in our society. "
This is exactly what I have determined thoughout my lifetime. While homosexual males are considered disgusting and perverse, homosexual women are regarded as a "higher form" of sexuality. I know some friends of mine that dont even like "heterosexual" pornography. If the material has a male in it (i.e. does not contain just a woman or multiple women only), they they get "disgusted" by it.
Whenever I refer to "lesbians" I *dont* use that term, I say "homosexual". If someone asks if I had seen a particular scene in a movie because it had two women making out, I reply, "Sorry, I am not into homosexual porn." That usually makes them stop and think for a few seconds.
It's really sad when a man no longer fantasized about being with a woman he is attracted to and instead fantasizes what it would be like to see that woman with another woman!! Even TV shows or movies have scenes where a man will try and encourage his wife/girlfriend to have a "lesbian" encounter. What the heck??!! It's like is okay (and even desirable) for a mans wife to cheat on him, as long as it is with another woman?!
R
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:35 PM May 19th, 2004 EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
I am in toatal agreement that ANY woman is called "Beautiful".
Case in point; (the beautiful)Sarah Jessica Parker.
Uhhm, no...,
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you want some 190 proof insanity, check out Orgasm Politics by Shiela Jeffreys.
"There is no such thing as a "natural" sexual pleasure that can be liberated. What gives men or women sexual sensations is socially constructed out of the power relationship between men and women, and it can be changed. In "sex" the very difference between men and women, supposedly so "natural," is in fact created. In "sex" the very categories "men," persons with political power, and "women," persons of the subordinate class, are made flesh."
Yup, you heard it right - male and female bodies do not really exist but magically coalesce at the moment of sex out of power relationships. At one point in history, such obviously insane people would be locked up. Now, they are given tenured professorships from which to spread their mental illness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:39 PM May 19th, 2004 EST (#28)
|
|
|
|
|
Sheila Jeffreys and company need to quit doing drugs.
...Or do MORE of them, I don't know...!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:28 PM May 19th, 2004 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
Wendy notes, "I still squirm at the thought of how many successful women now seem to view a large percentage of decent single men. Namely, as lesser and lower. "
What can I say? The feminist agenda of male hate continues to advance and accelerate at alarming rates. That is because of one thing and thing only. It is because the female gender has generally chosen to permit this hatred of men to advance.
It is a hatred that originated with the female gender, and it is a hatred that is ripening in the female gender. She only has her own gender to blame for the hate. By that I mean that if the millions of women who claim to disapprove of the feminist agenda wanted to stop the hate then it would stop. Immediately. Note that it continues. That is because MOST women like to hate males. It helps them feel superior.
This fact is reflected in Wendy's quote when she observes, "....the concern of the colloquium participants was a growing trend of women marrying men who were less educated and earned less money than they did. Minority women expressed the greatest concern … "
Conclusion. Women generally want female superiority and dominance so that they can have a reason to hate men. The easiest way to earn the right to hate men is by getting a college education. Note that they especially hate men that work in the death occupations like mining, construction, iron works, etc. Hummm. I wonder if that is because they are incapable of performing these tasks?
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:55 PM May 19th, 2004 EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
"...death occupations like mining, construction, iron works, etc."
Dirty hands/clean money, no problem. Isn't it just the most horrible thing in the world, when something breaks down and these poor gifted females have to go to a mechanically skilled man to get something fixed. They're too ignorant, or too good to fix it themselves so they just have to get one of those 2nd class citizens (a man) to do it.
Using feminine wiles will get you charged double my little femi-supremacist, or triple.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:30 PM May 19th, 2004 EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
Using feminine wiles will get you charged double my little femi-supremacist, or triple.
For sure! If they are feminist, educated, and male-haters then create a few more problems that they must pay the second class citizen to resolve.
Uh. Shoot mam. The gas line has a leak and it'll cost an additional 50 bucks to replace. Dang! That iron fence require a special chemical treatment to soften the iron so it can be welded. That'll cost 100 bucks. Crap. I'm sorry mam! The furnace has a hazard enabled pilot light. It'll cost 70 bucks to light the flame and keep the furnace from exploding.
You got a collage education! Here. Pay for this!
:)
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The pornographic "lesbian culture" that dominates the mainstream media (for instance Madonna kissing Britney etc.) is just another way to get that kind of "women don't need men, heterosexuality is made to discriminate women"- message across.
Even the word 'lesbian' has in our culture reached some kind of hyped status as being edgy and cool and experimentational. It's in to be lesbian, it's cool and fashionable in our culture.
That's why I think we should stop calling homosexual women 'lesbian'. The word itself has a glamourous pornographic connotation to it. I doubt the 'pornographic lesbian fad' that's all over US media today would have the same commercial power if it was called what it actually is; gay, homosexual etc. I don't think it would be very hip for Britney to be promoted as a 'homosexual', while the word 'lesbian' is ok to promote her by because of the glamorous pornographic connotations the word has in our society. In fact, the kind of pornographic culture that rules US media today is designed to take away any potency and attractive male qualities and worship everything that has to do with female sexuality. The kind of disguised manhate that lies in the 'lesbian' fad makes young men feel more insecure about themselves as attractive objects for women, which is what men should be for heterosexual women. Of course, the idea of a man having sexual power - or any power for that matter - over a woman, is not accepted in the mainstream media today. On the other hand, the sexual power of women is being worshiped constantly. The same thing goes for other types of words used to describe men and women; an attractive man is at the most described as handsome (he's lucky to get that word, the alternative is 'cute'!), while ANY mildly attractive woman will get the word beautiful. For proof of this last statement about use of words, just look at some of the late shows and you'll se what I mean. Practically any woman will be called beautiful, seemingly just because she's a woman. It's just as obligatory for the host to call a female guest beautiful as it is for the host to ask whether or not the guest is dating.
It's sad to witness so many men being stuck in the idea that men should be 'gentlemen', when the society has changed so much. This old culture should have vanished when the feminazis took over. Sadly it didn't vanish for many men out there, who still support the idea of women given special treatment. The fact is, women don't deserve it and should have to earn special treatment like everyone else. You can't have it both ways. Still, many women complain that there aren't enough gentlemen around, without realizing that if they want equal rights, gentlemen can no longer exist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ever wonder how any of the Male inhabitants of the Greek Island of Lesbos feel about being Lesbians themselves?
Maybe they could start a class action suit...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
" Practically any woman will be called beautiful, seemingly just because she's a woman"
I noticed this as well. It seems that as long as a woman has a) a slender (i.e. not fat) body and b) a non-ugly face, she is considered "hot" and desirable. To me, they usually like "nice", but there are SOOOO many women in this range of "beauty" that its difficult to get enthusiastic when you see *another* one.
For me, anyway, it all comes down to a woman's personality and attitude. That is what sets them apart from the others.
Another side of this gynocentric (read: focusing on women only) attitude in society is that a lot of guys I know will go see a movie just because a certain actress is in it, or because the movie has a sex scene with a certain actress.
I just see all this pro-female and gynocentric attitude from SO many people in society, that my jaw drops to the floor whenever I read about or hear about people complaining on how it is a "mans world" or how men *hate* women and want to keep them down. Zuh??!!!
R
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"I still squirm at the thought of how many successful women now seem to view a large percentage of decent single men. Namely, as lesser and lower."
The thing which annoys me the most about this sort of "blonde" journalism is that even when the evidence smacks them in the face, that they still cannot see the obvious.
Women have always valued men based on how successful they are, and men have competed with other men for success in order to have the best possible range of choices of potential female mates. Most cultures developed along lines which would maximize both tendencies so that as many men as possible would "qualify" as potential mates for as many women as possible.
By elevating so many women's financial status, the net result is to shrink the pool of men that these women consider "eligible" and increase competition among women for those prize males. I read a factoid last year that the number of breast implants had increased from about 30,000/yr in the late 1960s to over a quarter million per year today.
The cultural stress which comes from the fact that the actual behavior of most women is absolutely nothing like the ideology pushed by feminism is breaking out all over the culture right now. The attitudes of women that McElroy is just now waking up to and make her squirm, are the foundation of the frustration and animosity a great many men feel toward women which has been mis-characterized as "misogyny." It is simply not possible to deal with creatures who act so consistently self-obsessed and not end up hating them for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wendy for once was direct and unambiguous ---
"Marrying down is called a social crisis only when women’s choices appear to be limited. This reflects both hypocrisy and elitism."
And Zenpriest's note --
"The cultural stress which comes from the fact that the actual behavior of most women is absolutely nothing like the ideology pushed by feminism is breaking out all over the culture right now."
Maybe feminism was never really about equality?
(Yuh think? Hmmmmm....)
Perhaps it's always been (in their neo-Marxist mindset) a contest of gender advantages and disadvantages? (A zero-sum game?)
It would be such a travesty to have to witness Dr. WomynzStudies, Ph.D. contemplating a lifetime of embarassing "slumming" wed to Mr. Plumber.
(Never mind that the plumber makes twice her income doing honest work instead of "deconstructing gender relations" in the academic sandbox...)
And, just imagine the therapy their children would need!
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Maybe feminism was never really about equality?
(Yuh think? Hmmmmm....)"
y'think? After all the drivel about "gender bias in language" from the early feminidiots, selling a movement with a gendered name as a movement for "e-kwal-i-tee" ranks right up there with selling someone his own feet on the list of all-time great con jobs.
As old PT said - "Never give a sucker an even break."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, Barnum also said...
"Bring on the suckers!"
(This is a gender-neutral comment.) ;-)
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"There's a sucker born every minute",
but swallowers are hard to find. ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:48 PM May 19th, 2004 EST (#29)
|
|
|
|
|
L.O.L!!!!
Zen, that was a TERRIBLE pun!!
(Funny, though!)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:13 PM May 19th, 2004 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
The cultural stress which comes from the fact that the actual behavior of most women is absolutely nothing like the ideology pushed by feminism is breaking out all over the culture right now.
Yet by tacit consent women generally approve and support the ideology pushed by feminism. That makes them responsible for the consequences of feminist hate.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warble --- You don't really think that this... or any other action, principle, or ethic ... will result in an admission by women en masse of any actual "responsibility?"
That would be an epiphany for our society!
I admire your optimism.
And remain a skeptic...
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You don't really think that this... or any other action, principle, or ethic ... will result in an admission by women en masse of any actual "responsibility?"
"It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle..." than to get a woman to take responsibility for ANYTHING.
However, taking responsibility will end up having nothing at all to do with suffering the consequences. Have you ever read The Cold Equations"? - great story!!!
It really doesn't matter whether women take responsibility for the social and cultural changes they have created - they are going to have to live in that world that they created because blaming it on men the way they have isn't going to make the consequences go away. And, the more they blame and bash men, the more that men pull away from them and lose any willingness to rescue them from those consequences, even if we could.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:55 PM May 19th, 2004 EST (#31)
|
|
|
|
|
Leave it to a whole lot of American women and feminists to do everything they can to put men down, destroy their self esteem and literaly turn them into 2nd class citezens only to complain and blame MEN for the whole shabang, when not enough "Mr. rights" are available.
Ladies, there's an old saying that you are gonna have to deal with, and that of course is; You made your bed, now lie in it...!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ladies, there's an old saying that you are gonna have to deal with, and that of course is; You made your bed, now lie in it...!
alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:40 AM May 20th, 2004 EST (#40)
|
|
|
|
|
Warble --- You don't really think that this... or any other action, principle, or ethic ... will result in an admission by women en masse of any actual "responsibility?"
Just the thought of women in general admitting "responsibility" .... for ANYTHING makes me roll on the floor with laughter!
Case and point. I go to a Harley dealer to buy some parts for my bike. There is a female at the counter. After asking a couple of questions I determine that the phrase dumb blond perfectly describes this woman. Like she believes that just looking beautiful behind a parts counter is sufficient, and she doesn’t believe that she actually needs to know something about Harley’s.
So, there is another female and I go to her the next time I visit the Harley dealer. In five minutes its clear she's quite blond also. I ask for a simple “c” clip and get a fist full of parts she is trying to sell. Crap man! I only need 98 cents in parts!
But then I talk to a couple of guys. The difference is astounding. The first guy, while he isn't well informed, it able to make a professional judgment and come up with good answers to my questions. How does he do this? He reads the manuals. Astonishingly, this male High School grad is able to read, and here I thought all males were supposed to be illiterate because they didn’t go to college. I go to the next guy, he is nothing short of amazing, and he can make suggestions for part substitutions like nobody I've ever seen.
Well it turns out I want some special fab work done. I go to the service department and what do I find? There is a retard woman working as the highly paid contract writer, and she is unable to fill out the most-simple aspects of my special fab order. Worse yet, she is the lead at the head of several more qualified and knowledgeable men. For her, if the parts don’t simply fit together like a well made puzzle then the job is impossible. She has no clue of how to use a grinder, welder, saw, or brackets.
After giving up on yet another retarded woman working at a Harley dealership, I go down the road and ask about my simple fab job. They are all apologetic and falling over each other because the other dealership is so incompetent, thanks to the women, and assure me that the job is doable and simple. But then of course I was dealing with ..... horrors of horrors .... men!
So, you are asking if I believe that women can be responsible? HELL NO! There may be a few. But the rest belong at home on welfare with their fatherless kids that are the result of their initiating a divorce because some man looked at them funny.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The multiple comments above about women's incapacity to take responsibility for their choices and behaviors clearly demonstrate the ultimate consequence of forty-plus years of radical feminism...
Which is simply that women have become the equivalent of psychological infants.
Once a woman has bought into feminism, her primary identity becomes that of a "Victim of Patriarchy."
Once that quantum shift in her consciousness has been made, her media reinforced identity-as-victim means that she will be forever protected from such adult functionings as ... self-reflection, accountability, guilt, remorse, critical thinking, ethical reasoning, learning from failures, etc. etc. etc.
Feminism's great "gift" to women is that they now get to wake up every morning and try to navigate in their lives and society as cognitively disabled and psychologically underdeveloped human beings.
"You go girlzzzzzz..."
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm just wondering (and here I'm being completely serious, I truly wonder about this a lot and I've discussed it with my wife, who has reluctantly become convinced that I'm right) how to invest my savings in Islam, Chinese culture, and Indian culture. They are the future. Feminism has guaranteed it.
If they're the future, we're looking at a third world planet. As such, might as well blow your money in the present.
Anyone got any investment tips?
Well, I hear carbon nanotubes are about to be hotstuff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:53 PM May 19th, 2004 EST (#30)
|
|
|
|
|
"Just tryin' to figure out how to ride my kayak on top of the coming tsunami."
That is the story of my life. HAHA, thanks for a good laugh.
I've given up on the grandiose dream of saving the world from the clutches of the femborgs. I'm now more interested only in shining a little light on their murky little Nietzschean workshops; watching them squirm under the "oppression" of accountability will suffice for me just fine.
-hobbes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:52 AM May 20th, 2004 EST (#33)
|
|
|
|
|
"I'm now more interested only in shining a little light on their murky little Nietzschean workshops; watching them squirm under the "oppression" of accountability will suffice for me just fine."
That's the spirit!
Years from now when the human species has the added benefit of 20/20 hindsight, the collected writings of radical/gender feminism will be remembered for being the biggest pile of crap in the recorded history of the human species.
People will look at the catalog of amassed feminist contradictions and wonder how anyone could have been so stupid as to have allowed feminists spouting such drivel to amass so much power.
Still, there will be others, those 2nd class male citizens (Plumbers and such), who the feminists have deprived of an education. They will look at those writings, those pillars of today's women's studies programs, that big pile of feminist crap. While others will try to deconstruct the illogic of feminist writers, they will say in the common sense style that men have men have used to advance humanity for centuries, "JUST FLUSH IT!" Somethings are so worthless they just aren't worth wasting another second of time on.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone got any investment tips?
You're not alone. A few convenient ones:
Ticker: Description
GCHAX: Alliance Greater China 97 Fund Inc
CHUSX: China US Growth Fund
LNGZX: Columbia Funds Trust II Newport Greater China Fund
DPCAX: Dreyfus Premier International Funds Inc Greater China Fund
EVCGX: Eaton Vance Greater China Growth Fund
ECCGX: Eaton Vance Growth Trust Greater China Growth Portfolio
FHKCX: Fidelity Investment China Region
ICHKX: Guinness Atkinson China & Hong Kong Fund
MCHFX: Matthews International Funds China Fund
TACWX: Templeton China World Fund Inc
USCOX: US Global Investors Funds China Region Opportunities Fund
EMGIX: Eaton Vance Greater India Fund
IMAMX: Allied Asset Advisors Funds Dow Jones Islamic Index Fund
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:35 PM May 20th, 2004 EST (#47)
|
|
|
|
|
Thae blacks say there will be a race war.
I am wondering if we will have a literal GENDER war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Many people believe that America's Achilles heel is our currency. Anyone that follows the actions of the Federal Reserve and watches the figures on the amount of currency they create out of thin air can’t help but wonder about the long-term viability of the dollar.
Some oil producing countries are already threatening to sell oil in terms of euros rather than dollars (e.g. Russia). I’ve also read claims that there is pressure in some Islamic countries to trade oil in terms of gold rather than dollars in an attempt to overthrow the dollar as the preeminent world currency (apparently they aren’t crazy about just replacing the dollar with the euro).
Gold will be real money long after the dollar and euro become footnotes in history books.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:12 PM May 19th, 2004 EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm opting out of the privileged patriarchy. It's just too danged dangerous, and doesn't pay enough.
Why be successful when radical/gender feminists constantly attack you for every success.
More dangerous than that is getting involved with the opposite sex in any way. Better to be moderately successful, but stay arms length away from any involvement with the man-hating, college educated, gender feminists who are created by america's feminist run educational system.
I do feel really sorry for these poor over educated females however. They had the best of all possible worlds. Complaining about privileged patriarchs, making men's lives hell, and yet screwing their way into men's bank accounts. Now they have ruined so many men and lowered them to such a level, that it's just impossible to keep working the same old double standard on men. Life is just so unfair for women. Why can't there just be an unlimited number of rich men for women to abuse for being successful, and to then rob after getting intimately involved.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:02 PM May 19th, 2004 EST (#32)
|
|
|
|
|
I have to agree with the folks at nomarriage.com when they say; "if you HAVE to marry, marry OUTSIDE of the U.S. or europe. Try Asian or South American women, instead."
Even THEN I'd proceed with caution...!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The only real danger to marrying outside our borders is the fact that you would have to remain there, rather than bring your wife back to the States. Like any virus, hatred of men and the comcommitant lying done about them spread very quickly. It won't be long before someone gets to her, and then you can kiss your euphoric life goodbye. Once the virus takes hold, it's over and done with. A thousand loving gestures made on her behalf will do nothing to dissuade her from indoctrination, nor will any past decencies put forth by you stem the red tide of feminist dogma.
Even if you choose ex-patriation, the virus will creep across oceans and borders, and then no male will be safe.
Hate to sound so gloomy, but I would rather be depressed than oppressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:41 PM May 20th, 2004 EST (#48)
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed.
Even though I would LOVE to be a Dad, Marriage is just to dangerous, here in the states.
However I am too fond of my country, despite all the problems, to ever want to leave it just to find a suitable mate.
I guess I'm saying I'd rather be an American than a husband...,
That doesn't make me weird or something, does it?
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:37 PM May 20th, 2004 EST (#55)
|
|
|
|
|
I guess I'm saying I'd rather be an American than a husband...,
NOPE! Its no stranger than a man desiring a Harley rather than a feminist woman. I'll take the fully loaded Road King any day.
Warb
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:27 AM May 21st, 2004 EST (#70)
|
|
|
|
|
Are you saying you'd choose a HOG over a SOW, Warb? (^_^)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:44 AM May 21st, 2004 EST (#73)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:13 AM May 20th, 2004 EST (#34)
|
|
|
|
|
"First, the same women who argued for minority rights, a more balanced equality, and advancement of the underprivileged seemed to be genuinely horrified at the prospect of dealing with “lesser” and “lower” men as equals in their personal lives."
Excellent comparison showing these hypocrites caught in another contradiction. Just another example showing that these radical/gender feminists, these femi-supremacists, where never about equality between men and women. IMO their lie about wanting equality between men and women is their ultimate hypocrisy now come to light.
"First, I suspect that a social problem is in the process of being manufactured. At every juncture in women’s lives today, sociologists and hype-hungry media seem eager to discover a social crisis. We’re too thin; we’re too fat. We’re career obsessed; we’re quitting work to become housewives. Now, after decades of urging girls to become Ph.D.s, women are suddenly discovered to be too educated for their own good."
Great point Wendy. I've seen parrots with a one word vocabulary that showed a wider comprehension of existence, than these narcissistic, femi-centric, automatons spouting their famous one word mantra over and over for all the world to hear, "It's all about ME! ...ME, ME, ME, ME, ME, ME, ME!
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:58 AM May 20th, 2004 EST (#35)
|
|
|
|
|
"...genuinely horrified at the prospect of dealing with “lesser” and “lower” men as equals in their personal lives."
Oh where, oh where will these women find more rich men to rip off after having reached a superior educational and economic status in society?
Only a complete and total fool would have an iota of sympathy for such completly self-centered nonsense as what these "intellectual women" are trying to put forth as valid concerns. These women show not the least concern for the equally valid rights and feelings of others, but focus only on themselves to the exclusion of all others. In their own minds they are the center of the universe, and all else revolves around them, and only as a consequence of their own existence.
Their concerns strike me as nothing more than the ravings of inanely self obsessed greedy pigs who are caught in a delusional world born of their own petty desperation to have everything men have, then more.
How truly tragic, that now having reached educational and economic parity with men, these women no longer have an abundant supply of "rich men" to exploit financially.
Alert the divorce attornies, and set loose the dogs of litigation. I smell money! That's right my little femi-supremacist, it's always the people with money who pay, and pay, and pay. That's just the way law works, and remember, as you hear that sucking sound coming from the area of your bank account, you're equal now.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Women wanted churches to get married in and schools to educate their children. They wanted more shops and fewer saloons. They did not approve of lawlessness, public drunkenness, open prostitution and cattle drives through the middle of town."
Um, were the prostitutes male too? I guess they didn't count as woman? Weren't the houses of prostitution usually run by women? And where were the women sheriffs? And the women carpenters, and the women cattle drivers?
I can't stand revisionist history. Yes women played a part, they were the reason MEN tamed the west. But to say women did the job is like saying housewives caught Sadam. No, our troops caught Sadam. Their wives were their inspiration.
The Biscuit Queen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't stand revisionist history.
And Mapes is definitely into it. I love how she attributes the hook up scene to the prevalence of women in colleges. The fact is, this hook up scene has nothing to do with relative numbers of men and women in a setting. (Mapes needs to visit a non-campus bar, where men outnumber women, to see ample evidence of this.) The current state of relationships between men and women, including the hook up scene, are a result of decades of feminism.
Man meets woman. Woman quickly decides to have sex with him, as she has with many other men and women. If woman gets pregnant, she can destroy the fetus/embryo on as little as a whim. If she prefers, she can have the child, keep the man away from the child, and have him forced to pay household support (support of the child and her) for decades, under threat of imprisonment. If she decides she didn't like his performance, or she thinks she can get a lot of money from him, or she's just in a nasty mood, she can falsely accuse him of rape. His life will be ruined, and, even if it becomes clear that her accusation was a complete fabrication, she will suffer no consequences, other than being hailed by women's centers as a hero and survivor.
Men see this. Men know this, even if they won't openly admit it. They are being choosy, and being choosy means rejecting women who are instilled with feminism and who may well abuse this horrid situation. A quickie? Maybe. A long term relationship? Yeah, riiiiight.
Mapes claims that the hook up scene is a result of the preponderance of women in college, but it is, rather, a direct result of feminist social values and the sexual abandon of women, which began a decade before women superceded men in college.
But then if something, like the hook up scene, is considered bad, it can't be women's fault, now can it?
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:32 PM May 20th, 2004 EST (#46)
|
|
|
|
|
If she decides she didn't like his performance, or she thinks she can get a lot of money from him, or she's just in a nasty mood, she can falsely accuse him of rape. His life will be ruined, and, even if it becomes clear that her accusation was a complete fabrication, she will suffer no consequences, other than being hailed by women's centers as a hero and survivor.
Men see this. Men know this, even if they won't openly admit it.
Well...I agree that men see this, but they are in denial or they don't know any different. So, they ignore the facts and write them off as the ravings of a few white males.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well...I agree that men see this, but they are in denial or they don't know any different. So, they ignore the facts and write them off as the ravings of a few white males.
Here we run into the problem in language of using a term like "men" to mean some men or many men rather than all men. Certainly most men, who are elected to office or are allowed to become news reporters, ignore the facts or write them off as the ravings of a few white males. I've found that many others, however, while believing this superficially, have a deeper realization of what's going on.
A growing revulsion toward and rejection of feminism-infected women is already pervasive and deep in this society. I'm actually surprised how often these days I hear men make derogatory remarks not necessarily about women but about marriage and having children. I just got back from the grocery store, where a woman with three kids preceeded me at the checkout. As he rang me up, the cashier tipped his head at the departing woman and said, "Another good reason for staying single." I swear, this happened about 20 minutes ago. And at the rec center, where I work out, I have heard men dissing marriage and the idea of parenthood on a number of occasions. Most of these men are healthy, intelligent, and have good jobs. While it's not true of men who are allowed to be reporters, professors in many fields, and politicians, there are many men (and their numbers are growing at an increasing rate) who see and know what's happening. And they want no part of it.
Granted, there's just a small number of people who post to this board and others like it, but the facts that we present are becoming widely known. The marriage strike is almost certain to expand. Population collapse is almost certain to accelerate. Unfortunately, a lot of good people and society as a whole will suffer terribly as the hate movement called feminism comes down.
We are in for a hell of a ride.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:04 PM May 20th, 2004 EST (#58)
|
|
|
|
|
And at the rec center, where I work out, I have heard men dissing marriage and the idea of parenthood on a number of occasions. Most of these men are healthy, intelligent, and have good jobs.
I agree that there is a growing consensus among men that it's a pretty stupid idea to get married, and that this group finds feminism to be distasteful. However, I find that this group of men is basically following a populist movement where it is fashionable to avoid marriage.
They have no real idea of how feminism has been carrying out an attack against the institution of marriage, how feminist have corrupted our laws, the extent of the corruption of American laws, they fail to realize that the male gender is under an all out assault from our government as directed by feminists, they fail to recognize the Marxist ties of feminism to communism, they fail to realize that our current family law closely resembles what the Soviet Union had in the early 1900's, and they don't even know why they have such a distaste for feminism. To them the word feminism just sounds anti-male because those of us that are activists have spent so long speaking out against feminism.
These same people will go to church and denounce feminism while spreading feminist inspired doctrines without knowing that feminist are the source of the corrupt doctrines.
Yes. I am of the opinion that men know “something” is really wrong. However, they have no clue of the all out war that is being waged against the male gender. They know that feminism is problematic, but they don't know why. At best they are confused and refuse to take action to correct the problem. For example, men in general refuse to learn of how feminist bills are going to criminalize them and fight against those bills. When they are told they refuse to listen. When they are asked to help fight back they refuse to fight.
Instead they are in the gyms working out, whining about feminism, whining that it isn't advantageous to get married, and they whine when the find themselves in jail because of false accusations.
When they are told of how easy it is to become a victim of false accusations they look at you is disbelief, they think you are nuts, and they deny the evidence. Nope. Men may be starting to wake up, but there is a long way for them to go.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:54 PM May 20th, 2004 EST (#62)
|
|
|
|
|
I think we're pretty much in agreement.... It's just as much the fault of men for not daring to get the facts and then forthrightly stand up for what's right.
Yes we do pretty much agree. And yes men should take some of the heat for their apathy. Especially the feminized males.....the whimps!
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I too am in agreement, Thomas. But remember that to voice dissent is CrimeThink (to borrow from George Orwell). It means tarnished reputation, and possibly prison. I can't even imagine a politician getting up and saying words to the effect of "You know, we've gone too far in the direction we chose. Men shouldn't be second-class citizens, nor held responsible for the sins of former generations". That would spell the end of political careers left and right. I think that the pulling away from women on an individual basis is just that; a personal choice to make. I remember a quote that goes something like "To live well is to live unseen"...DesCartes, I believe. Finally, let's remember that men are virtually hard-wired to regard each other as potential adversaries and not as potential friends and allies. Men simply don't want to help other men unless they can make a buck or two off of the effort. This is the one reat weapon that feminists, and women in general have; they are able to work as a unit without regard to personal gain a lot easier than guys. if we men are to acheive that same ability and willingness, it will probably mean having to personally detach from women, if only to be able to observe their stategies and tactics with an uncritical and unbiased eye.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm getting this sneaking, horrible suspicion that my boyfriend is a male feminist - been going out for a few months, so haven't quite had that "Honey, I have something to tell you, I'm a men's rights activist" conversation that. . . maybe someone else is familiar with.
Two conflicting items of evidence:
1. I had mentioned a rumor going around at my work that this one girl is in an abusive relationship. He says something to the effect of
"Though I think it's basically wrong to hit anyone without prevocation, if a woman hits you first, the guy should respond with decking her. Not a slap, 'cause that would be demeaning to women, but an honest punch to the face."
ah, warms of the ol' heart.
However, he's reading my "Those Who Hunt Elves" manga, which is basically about a group of japanese who find themselves in elf land and, unfortunately, the spell they need to get back is on the bodies of a couple of female elves - so they go around randomly ripping the clothes off of female elves to try and find the spell. Anyway, he looks at and is like "so this book promotes rape?"
me: "huh?"
him: "taking someone's clothes off without their permission is rape."
Me: "What??? That is NOT the same thing!"
Hmmm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:40 AM May 21st, 2004 EST (#71)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:47 AM May 21st, 2004 EST (#74)
|
|
|
|
|
But remember that to voice dissent is CrimeThink (to borrow from George Orwell). It means tarnished reputation, and possibly prison.
Yea. No shit. The feminist whould have luv'ed to have my ass (plus a few other men's activists) in jail up in Sacramento as we moved paternity fraud bills forward. They did everything they could to manufacture an arrest. They really hate us.
Warb.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:50 AM May 21st, 2004 EST (#75)
|
|
|
|
|
Men simply don't want to help other men unless they can make a buck or two off of the effort. This is the one reat weapon that feminists, and women in general have; they are able to work as a unit without regard to personal gain a lot easier than guys.
Actually, most feminism is composed of lazy female gold-diggers that have too much time on their hands. So, they go to lobby the legislature so that they can get more special priviledge.
Meanwhile, men are simply too busy providing for the needs of the gold-diggers and their children. That is why they cannot organize.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:54 AM May 21st, 2004 EST (#76)
|
|
|
|
|
him: "taking someone's clothes off without their permission is rape."
Me: "What??? That is NOT the same thing!"
Actually, with todays corrupt laws this would be seen as sexual assault, which is considered to be the same as rape. Why? Well that is a pretty long explaination. The answer has to do with the "withdrawal of consent" standard vs. the "use of force" standard to determine if a sexual assault has taken place.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warning: Long post ahead.
You make some excellent points, NoLoveLost. They are the reason that I have been saying for years, including on this board, that the battle against feminism will largely be fought and won one man at a time. The hookup scene, with its disappearance of romance and dating, and the marriage strike are signs of this.
men are virtually hard-wired to regard each other as potential adversaries and not as potential friends and allies. Men simply don't want to help other men unless they can make a buck or two off of the effort. This is the one reat weapon that feminists, and women in general have; they are able to work as a unit without regard to personal gain a lot easier than guys.
I agree. Fortunately, however, men are starting to work together, as evidenced by the fathers' rights movement, especially in the UK. Also, as the truth dawns, more men will start to collaborate as another instinct — self-preservation — kicks in. As you make clear, though, this will require some internal (intellectual and/or spiritual) work. Your point also brings out why women are so valuable in the truth and justice movement. In some ways, it's more in women's nature to work with men than it is in men's nature to work with men. Also, women can help to draw men together, though there'll be a catch. (More on such catches below.) If I were young and on the partner-market, I'd be very drawn to any intelligent woman, who was sympathetic to or, better yet, active in the truth and justice movement. As the movement grows, we'll start to see serious competition for such fine women. (An important note to women in college, who are competing for college educated men! You might find that actively supporting men regarding these matters is like being dealt a royal flush.)
As feminist societies collapse from the drop in fertility to far below replacement rate, societies in which men hold some true power, as opposed to the trappings of power, will replace the dying cultures.
During my studies of physics, I came across a fascinating tidbit called le Chatelier's Principle. It is a result of the laws of thermodynamics, and it states that the more a perturbation tends to move a system, that is in steady state, out of its current state, the more that system will respond in such a way as to minimize the influence of the perturbation. I've found that this applies to human systems as much as purely physical systems (to the extent that purely physical systems exist, but that's another matter).
We see this at work with global warming. As we heat the planet, more water evaporates, forming clouds, which reflect more sunlight. Also, melting of the Arctic ice cap may well lead to a flood of surface fresh water in the north Atlantic sufficient to sink the saltier and, therefore, more dense Gulf Stream. As a result, northern zones, especially western Europe, would see a serious drop in temperatures.
As for humans, I don't believe that in western societies women have been more oppressed than men. Men and women have had different roles as a result of the fact that women bear and nurse the young. Both roles had severe restrictions and associated pain. It was not one-sided oppression.
It wasn't until the development of birth control for women and the advent of safe, efficient, relatively inexpensive abortion that women were freed (primarily by male scientists) from their biology and thereby able to fully enter the workforce. So, whereas in the past men and women had different but balancing roles, many women are now, through feminism, trying to take total or near total power. And what are we seeing as a result? There are three primary possibilities:
- Western societies will self-destruct as a result of population collapse.
- Women will be forced to return to the role of gestator and possibly child nurse.
- We will develop, refine, and deploy artificial wombs on a massive scale.
In any case, either a balance will be restored by us or societies, in which men retain some true power, will simply replace us.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:14 PM May 21st, 2004 EST (#80)
|
|
|
|
|
1) Western societies will self-destruct as a result of population collapse.
2) Women will be forced to return to the role of gestator and possibly child nurse.
I agree with this assessment though for slightly different reasons. Basically, it is clear that there has been a massive killing of Western children by feminist women for the last 30 years.
In addition, feminists have successfully instituted massive social programs that can only be paid for with a new taxpayer base. Clearly, that will not come from the children of our Western culture. It will come from the children of or immigrants.
That is why the government is currently encouraging a massive immigration of new taxpayers to close the fiscal gap so that our socialist programs can be paid for.
There can only be one outcome, and that is that we will no longer have an America that represents Western values and individuals. This means that whatever tax paying base results will end up in power. It also means that we will see pain in the form of massive tax increases. Those tax increases will of course include the massive tax increases that will be levied on our 401K savings.
There is no question but that immigrants will determine the future of America, and the result will be that we will find that Western Americans will be the minority. We already see this playing out in California. The result is socialism and communism on a massive scale that will permeate the entire country.
So, if we end up with Chinese immigrants then we will end up with Chinese values and a country with a one-child policy. By contrast, if we end up with primarily Mexican immigrants then we will end up with a new culture that values children. I personally see a mixture developing that excludes Western white males because our women have killed our children.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NoLoveLost wrote: "let's remember that men are virtually hard-wired to regard each other as potential adversaries and not as potential friends and allies. Men simply don't want to help other men unless they can make a buck or two off of the effort."
Wow, what can I say except that I feel for you if that has been your experience. It certainly is not *my* experience.
I find men, in general, to be more compassionale, polite, thoughtful, and willing to help than women. I know I have gone out of my way to help other men, strangers sometimes as well as friends, and they have certainly done the same for me.
Men, being generally more independant and individualistic, may not operate collectively as well as women (herd mentality?), but my experience is that they're often very willing to render aid on an individual basis.
Ragtime
The Uppity Wallet
The opinions expressed above are my own,
but you're welcome to adopt them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"As the movement grows, we'll start to see serious competition for such fine women. (An important note to women in college, who are competing for college educated men! You might find that actively supporting men regarding these matters is like being dealt a royal flush.) "
Crystal clear!!, who can love someone that regards you as third class, someone that considers your life less valuable than her´s, someone that think she can make you have unwanted children, that can deny you the right to rise your children, that say is entitled to force you to performe slave labor and profit from it?.
It does´t matter how attractive or how intelligent is, that person is scum, and should be treated in concordance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:52 AM May 22nd, 2004 EST (#83)
|
|
|
|
|
That's I noted the two items were conflicting, the first I agree with, the second - no, I'll easy go along with harassment or misconduct, or something, but rape is different from that. Anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, but it still bothers me that in common usage of the word, the two are interchangable. It really isn't the same act, just as verbal abuse isn't the same as physical - yeah, it isn't a good idea to bitch someone out all the time, but it isn't the same thing as beating them into a pulp.
But, it is a common women's studies / feministy ideal that all "unwanted" sexual activity is rape. Even if she says yes it might be no, even if all that happened was some nudity, so therefore it is rape with a 20+ year sentence. which is insane.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Men, being generally more independant and individualistic, may not operate collectively as well as women (herd mentality?), but my experience is that they're often very willing to render aid on an individual basis.
Just like a bunch of sheep. Anyone ever watch sheep in the field, as a kid on the farm or ranch.
All they do is spend thier time looking for the greener grass, or the bigger trough of sweet tena( sweet tena is a horse feed suppliment, basicly its granola), or sleeping.
All we really need to do, is figure out a way to kill the green grass, or a way to stop the flow of sweet tena to the sheep. Once that is done the sheep will starve.
I do believe we are hard wired for competiveness. Always be the better athelete, always get the better girl( which out of the countless girls i dated and the one bit** i married, i have only found one that i would fight for, and thats my current girlfriend), or who owns the better faster sports car.
I believe that we as men can pull together and still be hard wired. What we are trying to do should not be seen as a compitition, but as a common goal that we are trying to reach. If we can reach that goal and cut off the supply of feed, then the feminist ideas and theries will slowly dwindle and then cease to exist.
But thats just my two cents
OMS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it is a common women's studies / feministy ideal that all "unwanted" sexual activity is rape. Even if she says yes it might be no, even if all that happened was some nudity, so therefore it is rape with a 20+ year sentence. which is insane.
Completely insane. The net effect has been to criminalize men's desire for women. This is the most devastating strategy possible, because that desire is the fundamental mechanism which draws couples together. Make it something crimninal and suddenly every man has already committed a crime and the only question that remains is when he will get arrested for it.
In the long run, it also hurts women because the majority of women really do want to feel desired and desirable. But, we have a "war on male desire" which is actually far better funded and more zealously pursued than the "war on drugs", and is turning out to be more effective.
To paraphrase one of the gun lobby's slogans - "When wanting women is outlawed, only outlaws will want women."
I have no sympathy at all for women who complain about meeting nothing but "jerks". Their actions over the past 40 years have just about guaranteed that no other kind of man will continue to approach them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:10 PM May 22nd, 2004 EST (#87)
|
|
|
|
|
Dump this male feminist guy. He's a loser. You can find much better.
"Though I think it's basically wrong to hit anyone without prevocation, if a woman hits you first, the guy should respond with decking her. Not a slap, 'cause that would be demeaning to women, but an honest punch to the face."
How sick and childish. Please stay away from these kind of demented men. You are a total babe, and there's no reason to stay with this kind of creep.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
****I'm getting this sneaking, horrible suspicion that my boyfriend is a male feminist - been going out for a few months, so haven't quite had that "Honey, I have something to tell you, I'm a men's rights activist" conversation that. . . maybe someone else is familiar with.****
That would be interesting. A women's rights man dating a men's rights woman.
****Two conflicting items of evidence:
1. I had mentioned a rumor going around at my work that this one girl is in an abusive relationship. He says something to the effect of
"Though I think it's basically wrong to hit anyone without prevocation, if a woman hits you first, the guy should respond with decking her. Not a slap, 'cause that would be demeaning to women, but an honest punch to the face."
ah, warms of the ol' heart.****
I don't know where to start with this. Better to punch someone than to slap him/her? Well, at least he didn't argue that "it's just different" when a woman hits a man from the reverse. THAT would be a definite red flag. Too many people condemnt the men but excuse the women in that area.
****However, he's reading my "Those Who Hunt Elves" manga, which is basically about a group of japanese who find themselves in elf land and, unfortunately, the spell they need to get back is on the bodies of a couple of female elves - so they go around randomly ripping the clothes off of female elves to try and find the spell. Anyway, he looks at and is like "so this book promotes rape?"
me: "huh?"
him: "taking someone's clothes off without their permission is rape."
Me: "What??? That is NOT the same thing!"****
Not quite rape, but it IS sexual assault. I have no problem with that label, so long as it's also applied to the WOMEN BEHAVING BADLY ladies who thought it would be funny to pull down men's pants in public, not even to mention the women implicated in the Iraqi abuse scandal.
bg
Hmmm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:53 PM May 20th, 2004 EST (#63)
|
|
|
|
|
"Women wanted churches to get married in and schools to educate their children. They wanted more shops and fewer saloons. They did not approve of lawlessness, public drunkenness, open prostitution and cattle drives through the middle of town. Yes women played a part, they were the reason MEN tamed the west. "
Women have historically enjoyed a protected status at the hands of the patriarchy, and as such were elevated to the pedestal of moral compass for all of society. Men were content with the arrangement, but gender feminists have not been. The later viewed women's historical position as subordinate and oppressed.
The death statistics throughout history and unto this day verify the protected status women have enjoyed, and their moral compass status has been more a factor of men's success at protecting women from invading armies, famine, starvation, and other threats. Still, many women died in child birth playing the role of mother, and all have suffered to some extent as a result of wars. Sure it's been rough for women, but it has been devastating for men being on the front lines as official protector of the species.
Wendy makes a good point when she mentions that the character of a man is not necessarily measured by his education, but more by how he manages to care for himself and the ones he loves.
As women have exposed themselves more to the world of men as a result of their liberation, and feminist empowerment, their protection has become less of a concern of men, and more their own responsibility. Some women no longer have a man in their life to protect them. It is now government as daddy or husband that is now the protector of the female. As far a moral compass, any fool can tell you that the ethics of a radical/gender feminist makes a Mafiosi look like a choir boy.
Let us hope that men continue to allow women to gravitate to the front lines of the patriarchy. It will be satisfying to hear the gender feminists babble about the patriarchy as they are having their backs broken by the misery men have carried for millennia. The only question I have is, "Who will gender feminists blame and complain about when they discover all the discontent that men have routinely just absorbed as their lot in life for all these millennia?” Could it be they will find some new way to blame men as Wendy's article indicates they already have.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree in principle, Ray. But we both know, as does every dis-enfranchised man does, that our gender will bear the brunt and blame for their misery. The message will probably transmorgrify into something like "Waaaah! we women are miserable and unhealthy! Waaah! why didn't you men help us? So typical of you to ignore the plight of us women...whatever happened to the 'real men' who looked after and cared for their women-folk?"
Oops...I forgot that this sentiment is already being expressed.
It's always going to be our fault, guys. We really need to learn how to ignore the whines and moans, and be able to say without fear of prosecution "Welcome to our world. Not much fun, is it? Enjoy your diminished well-being. You are now equals"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tsk, tsk Jen! You're forgetting there was one lone female temp. stand-in sheriff who really did all the work! Thank god [oop! I guess I gotta say goddess now-a-days] there will be five pages in any traditionaly "patriarchial" history book about her!
And those poor prostitutes were oppressed by the patriarchy indirectly! If the patriarchy only had enough well paying jobs with daycare services for all women, they wouldn't be prostitutes, now would they? ;)
And, yeah, all of the this has been in sarcasm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Howdy folks. Since I have opted out of relationships with females, while remaining heterosexual (yes, it can be done easier than you may believe), the chaos in my life has lessened, and I have more time and peace of mind. I'm not going to say, "I told you so", but imho, our response wasn't collectively strong enough and is still not strong enough to do much about it. Like I said, it is an opinion based on my own observations, and one I sadly note. I let this article serve as a pretty accurate indicator of where chicks heads are, which is where I place damaged goods. Maybe after another century of hell things will change, but may the marriage strike grow quickly, and lets just walk away from all of this. Let the fembots have each other.
Disclaimer: Everything I post is of course my own opinion. If it seems harsh, Feminazis just piss me off!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:57 PM May 20th, 2004 EST (#44)
|
|
|
|
|
Since I have opted out of relationships with females, while remaining heterosexual (yes, it can be done easier than you may believe), the chaos in my life has lessened, and I have more time and peace of mind.
Starzabuv,
Have you noticed how opting out of the hetero arena just makes women go crazy? That cannot stand the idea that men don't approve of them. What is odd is that you don't have to tell them or mention this fact in any way. Yet they still smell it!
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, they can still smell it. If I could bottle it as a mens cologne, I would name it "Indifference". LOL! It could become a new marketing strategy for the cologne industry in mens products. "Care less whether she exists or not? Just want her to go away?
Try 'Indifference', and watch them dissapear....or not."
Disclaimer: Everything I post is of course my own opinion. If it seems harsh, Feminazis just piss me off!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:35 AM May 21st, 2004 EST (#68)
|
|
|
|
|
"Since I have opted out of relationships with females, while remaining heterosexual"
I believe that this is the reason why prostitution is outlawed, to make 'normal' women necessary to men for sex. It gives men a reason to have to keep women around. Perhaps we should try to legalize prostitution to counteract this.
Comments or suggestions?
(P.S. I am new here, but everything I read here is very profound, I am very glad this website exists)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:28 AM May 21st, 2004 EST (#69)
|
|
|
|
|
Correct. Feminists are ruthlessly opposed to prostitution for the reasons you have outlined, and NOT for any pretended concern for the plight of prostitutes.
Hotspur
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One might observe that for the past forty-plus years of modern radical feminism, men have let an awful lot "just slide..."
That's a man's basic response to a lot of the crap he has to deal with as a lifetime indentured wage-slave, domestic servant, corporate cog, and "success object."
Men don't get easily flustered; they assume logic and reason (and individual effort and persistence) will ultimately prevail.
That was a reasonable assumption up until feminists successfully hijacked the legal system, assaulted the family, criminalized male sexuality, and generally turned the gender rules into the equivalent of social silly putty.
Now, things are different. Very, very different.
Kinda like going from the main floor to the inner sanctums of the Vegas casinos.
The stakes now are much, much higher.
And, wonder of wonder, men finally noticed!
If you apply a negative force (feminism) long enough against a positive force (patriarchy) you can be sure that a REACTION will eventually occur.
Now all the disturbed girlies are wondering what went wrong?
Why didn't my aggression result in what I wanted?
It's just "not fair!"
They forgot to consider the Second Law of Thermodynamics...
Energy is not won or lost ... merely displaced.
And now, with men's resistance to further feminist tyranny, it's pretty clear who has the energy...
Alas, the fems don't do well at billiards either.
Physics... gone. Geometry... incomprehensible.
You GO GIRRRLLLZZZZ!!!
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For all of their caterwalling about having to marry down to a lower level, they forgot to mention that these women, even though college educated are not necessarily on a higher social OR economical level.
Many of these "college educated" females have degrees in the "social sciences" and work as low level pencil pushers.
I know a girl with a degree in social services that works as a probation officer.
She makes about $22,000/yr.
Any decent mechanic around here makes twice that.
But in her mind, (despite her trailer-park upbringing) she is on a higher level than any mechanic and "deserves" her doctor/lawyer/knight-on-the-white horse that will anyday now, ride into the probation office and whisk her off to the castle she has "earned" by partying for four years at a "place of higher learning".
My brother's "soon to be" has attended college for the last 9 years and now has a PHD in some kind of child physcology.
She's currently looking for a job with the state.
Last I heard, she is over $100,000 dollars in debt. (Credit cards and student loans.)
After she gets her "high status" $25,000/year job with the state social services division, who do you think will be paying off that loan, her or my brother?
It is the "Princess" mentality that is really hurting America.
Not the fact that fewer men are attending colleges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:41 PM May 20th, 2004 EST (#49)
|
|
|
|
|
She's currently looking for a job with the state.
Last I heard, she is over $100,000 dollars in debt. (Credit cards and student loans.)
After she gets her "high status" $25,000/year job with the state social services division, who do you think will be paying off that loan, her or my brother?
I know! I know! I know! Pick me!
Okay.
Warble...would you please answer the question.
Your brother will pay off the loan!
BZZZZZZZT! WRONG ANSWER!
The correct answer is that our princess will marry the bro who will start the process of making the payments, then she'll commit paternity fraud, divorse him, collect vagina-mony and fraudulent child support, she'll go on welfare (to increase her income) while divorsed and making false allegations of DV against your bro, then she will re-marry and have two+ males paying off the loan. When she becomes more gready she will repeat the pattern to get 3+ males paying off her loans. This of course will involve more paternity fraud and collection of more vagina-mony
Warb.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:49 PM May 20th, 2004 EST (#50)
|
|
|
|
|
Women are also refering to themselves as DIVAS or even GODESSES, these days.
...Self worship...? Now that's SICK!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:34 PM May 20th, 2004 EST (#54)
|
|
|
|
|
Just what we need....DIVAS that think they are GODESSES who worship their vagina.
Warb
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:36 PM May 20th, 2004 EST (#61)
|
|
|
|
|
...sounds like the beginings of a really long rock song, "Vagina Goddess Da Diva"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heheh, I was talking to this fellow that was a doctor who was incredulous that I'm dating my boyfriend, a liquor store attendant, over "a guy like him" with the exact words "don't women care about a guy that has a nice car anymore??" :P Hee, I know those women, had a coworker who had a kid and the guy's name tatooed on her - only dated guys that would take her to the most expensive restaurant in town and had nice cars - didn't matter if the guy could afford that stuff or not, as long as they gave her princess treatment. Guys didn't date her for very long.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What do you think?
"Meanwhile, college women are complaining that dating has all but disappeared on campus. Male and female students still "hook up" casually and often engage in sex, but much of the romance is gone. Men tend to be more interested in casual sex than women are, while women tend to be more interested in romance. So are these two trends -- the growing percentage of college women and the decline of college dating -- related? It seems likely."
I don't think you should adhere to those generalizations. When a male and a female have sex or make out with each other, I think it's because both want to.
When I was in college, I didn't want to have sex or make out, even within the confines of a romantic relationship, and much less OUT of one. This seemed to put me at odds with the climate there, where the thing to do was to get wasted at a party and make your "move" on somebody of the opposite gender. Now, from what I'm hearing, the situation is even worse.
This means I've never really dated anyone in my life, but if I WERE to do so, it would be very old-fashioned with regard to the affection we'd show for each other (hand-holding, cheek-kissing), while very modern with regard to equality. One of the most frustrating things I've seen is the phenomenon of girls and women who demand to be treated like princesses (wanting to be asked out, to have the door held for them, to be showered with gifts and praise) while not being willing to do any of these things for the guys they want do go out with. They've seen too many romantic movies, which are created for women who want sit back and be rescued by their White Knights. Love (even from my inexperienced view) ought to be equal and mutual.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:56 PM May 26th, 2004 EST (#91)
|
|
|
|
|
"Men, besides dying of natural causes at a younger age, kill each other in both war and peace and engage in more dangerous occupations and recreations than women do. Thus they tend to be outnumbered, possibly to their advantage."
Yes, just think of the wonderful advantages of being dead!! Wow, no more taxes! Gosh I love the fact the my life expectancy is shorter than a woman's -- what an advantage for me!! Yipee!!
Mark Sutton
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
