|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:46 AM May 24th, 2004 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
From commercials to work to recreation to volunteering men are treated as criminals, or outright criminalized by the political correctness of radical/gender feminism run amok.
Ray
(click) Hate Crime Target
(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 01:12 PM May 24th, 2004 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Yep.
If you are a (straight) man you are indeed GUILTY untill proven GUILTY.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This sounds like the restrictions that would be replaced on a convicted sex-offender.
Although this is one organization, I wonder if this is a trend to try and blur the line between criminal men and decent men. It seems they assume all men are potential sex-offenders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Likely, it is because abusers are usually men (or are usually thought to be men) that these restrictions exist.
And what better way to promote and legitimize prejudice? And what better way to teach people that they should distrust men? Bigots almost always promote discrimination as a practical way to deal with a problem, after defining the problem based on their own bigotry.
I’ve got an idea! How about tattooing an ID number on the male volunteers’ forearms!
Actually it’s hard to tell whether these restrictions come from the organization’s prejudice or whether they’re taking practical measure to legally protect themselves. Either way it says much about our anti-male world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
>>>And what better way to promote and legitimize prejudice? And what better way to teach people that they should distrust men?
Yup. What if the rules read that "Black volunteers may not pick up or hold caucasian children" or "There must alwasy be a caucasian volunteer alongside an asian volunteer when a client must be met with behind closed doors."
This is absurd.
R
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the letter I e-mailed to them:
----------
Dear Rescue Mission,
I was reading over your volunteer information packet at:
http://www.rescuemission.org/volunteer/images/volu nteer_packet.pdf
I am curious about something: why do you not have a provision which prohibits female volunteers from picking up male children? You forbid male volunteers from picking up female children, but you don't seem to have a problem with the reverse scenerio. Also, you insist that a female volunteer be present when a male volunteer meets with a client behind closed doors. Does this mean that you also insist that a male volunteer be present when a female volunteer meets with a client behind closed doors?
Or do you just naturally go out of the way to treat your male volunteers like criminals? If that is the case, then please explain to me why any males should bother volunteering to give their time and money to your misandrist organization, since you seem to treat them like subhuman chattel.
Sincerely,
XXXXXXX XXXX
----------
BTW, I e-mailed it to the following addys:
wsarinana@rescuemission.org
rtorres@rescuemission.org
cwinter@rescuemission.org
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please post the response to this letter, if any!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here they are:
----------
My apologies to any inconvenience to you but our policies are designed to protect our volunteers, our clients and our organization from those that would take advantage. Often our lives and services are inconvenienced as well but we deal with it and remain flexible as the spirit leads. I pray that your attitude will reflect better after understanding our needs better.
Chris Winter
Warehouse Coordinator
Orange County Rescue Mission
714-247-4330
----------
Dear Mr. XXXX,
Thank you for contacting the Orange County Rescue Mission I am Rose Torres the Volunteer Coordinator. I was looking over the policies that you have brought to my attention. Thank you for informing me of the issue in the policies, I will discuss with my supervisor if there needs to be any change of the policies and what that change would be. To answer the following question, "Also, you insist that a female volunteer be present when a male volunteer meets with a client behind closed doors. Does this mean that you also insist that a male volunteer be present when a female volunteer meets with a client behind closed doors?" Our policy states,
(8) Volunteers (there is no gender classification made)shall not be alone with children or their parents behind locked doors at any time. There must always be a female Staff member or Volunteer alongside a male Staff member or Volunteer whenever a client needs to be met with behind closed doors. * The only exception being licensed counselors at the House of Hope, in which case the Staff can monitor counseling sessions through windows.
We insist on there be two volunteers or staff members (female and male) if a clients needs to meet behind closed doors. Again thank you Mr. Bost for contacting the Orange County Rescue Mission. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns.
Thank you,
Rose L. Torres
Volunteer Coordinator
Orange County Rescue Mission
rose.torres@rescuemission.org
----------
I replied to the first one. This is my reply:
Well that's all well and good. I can understand that you make policies to protect yourselves.
That being said, it's rather one-sided to prohibit male volunteers from picking up female children, while not prohibiting female volunteers from picking up male children. You don't actually believe that men are evil predators while women are pure, virtuous angels, do you?
Again, I would ask that you explain to me why any man out there should freely give his time and money to your organization, when your policies would suggest that he is some type of potential predator.
I look forward to your thoughtful and speedy reply.
Sincerely,
XXXXXXX XXXX
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:52 PM May 24th, 2004 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
I have been involved for decades with this type of work situation.
Although there were no direct instructions given to me "fron on high" regarding this, it was common practice to "go in twos" and I always advised any of my people - be they male or female - never to be alone with a client for no other reason than to avoid possible litigation, accusations etc. It is useful to have a witness to whatever goes/went on. I advised any male to have a female present when interviewing a female.
Simple survival.
It reflects more on the unreliablility and the treacherous nature of the females than on any possible sexual predatory actions of the interviewing men. Indeed, it was presumed that it was the men who needed protection.
Perhaps it would be wise if we men did not go the feminist way and see evil where none exists.
Neil
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I could almost agree with you if it weren't for the other part of the equation: They forbid male volunteers from picking up female children. Yet they do not forbid female volunteers from picking up male children.
One might say that they are trying to protect children from predators. Fine. The only problem is that men aren't the only predators out there.
The next response is usually "True, but men make up the majority." What they fail to address is that if they are truly trying to protect children from predators (and they think men are the vast majority of predators), then the only logical rule for them to adopt is that men pick up absolutely no children.
But that isn't what they've done. They forbid men from picking up female children only.
Which tells me that if they honestly think that men are the majority of predators, then they (the "charitable" organization) doesn't care much for male children since they will allow potential predators to pick up male children.
No, this is simply a matter of them playing politics and demonizing men in the name of "love" and "compassion".
To hell with them. I don't have to support their bullshit, nor will I.
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:45 PM May 26th, 2004 EST (#43)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:44 PM May 24th, 2004 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
"It reflects more on the unreliablility and the treacherous nature of the females than on any possible sexual predatory actions of the interviewing men. Indeed, it was presumed that it was the men who needed protection."
Clearly you have identified the evil. A very significant number of women are notorious liars and false accusers if it is too their advantage to lie.
"Perhaps it would be wise if we men did not go the feminist way and see evil where none exists.
I don't think we're doing that, just identifying the evil that you so clearly pointed out just one sentence before. Men clearly do need to be protected from the treacherous exploitive nature of a significant number of women. No one here will deny that.
R.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:56 PM May 24th, 2004 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
I apologize for perhaps not having been clear enough. The evil I referred to was the evil of "male-bashing", "demonzing" etc, or whatever we want to call it.
In this ludicrous and litigious climate everyone has to protect himself against the possibility of attack. men are extremely vulnarbale, more so now than perhaps every before, although historically this could be debatable. Perhaps you Americans are focussing on the wrong terrorism!(I'm not an American)The real evil is feminism and the evils that it spreads.
My adivice to my personnel was at all time that no body should at any time be alone with a client - and I did not only deal with children - adults and adolescents were part of it all, too. But, with young children being coached into making all sorts of allegations, men would be foolish if not downright irresponsible to insist on equal treament here! Let's leave this one to the Ladies!
I therefor whole-heartedly agree with the proscription against men picking up female children. I had the same proscription for both men and females - whether the client was male or female, my workers were not to visit them, touch them or in any other way compromise the well-being of the program or, indeed, their own well-being. These were employment instructions - they had to be followed. Those who broke these rules were dismissed. If they didn't like the conditions of employment, they didn't have to work in the program, it was a simple as that. At no time was the employee permitted to dictate conditions.
Neither does it concern me that some - other - people donot follow that simple and equal instruction - one day they will live to regret it, at least I hope so. Cops follow it, Nuns follow it, even nurses follow it - and I think the do-gooding females should follow it, too. If they don't - it's going to be their funeral in the end. I'm not my sister's keeper.
Nor should any other men be.
If that sounds harsh and cruel - well, so be it. We operate in the real world and life wasn't meant to be easy.
Neil
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:21 PM May 24th, 2004 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
Here's another reply I got from Chris Winter:
----------
Again being flexible allows us to work within our system as many others do, and enjoy volunteering with us. If you do not feel lead to volunteer for us based upon our policies that you are intimidated by then I suggest you look elsewhere.
Chris Winter
Warehouse Coordinator
Orange County Rescue Mission
714-247-4330
----------
To which I responded thusly:
It's not a matter of me being intimidated by your policies.
It's a matter of you being intimidated by men, and forming your policies around your own intimidation. I would ask you yet again: Can you explain to me why any man out there should volunteer his time and/or money when you treat him like he is a potential predator?
I look forward to your thoughtful and speedy reply.
Sincerely,
XXXXXXX XXXX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Again, from Chris Winter:
----------
XXXXX-
Once again, being flexible allows us to work within our system as many others do, and enjoy volunteering with us. If you do not feel lead to volunteer for us based upon our policies that you are intimidated by then I suggest you look elsewhere.
CW
----------
To which I responded:
Chris,
And once again, you need to demonstrate some of the flexibility that you expect of others. You need to look at your policies and stop defending blatant sexism. Let's see you be a little flexible and change your misandrist policies, eh?
You're absolutely right. I do not feel lead to volunteer my time and/or money for an organization whose discriminatory policies deliberately paint all males as evil predators. No self-respecting male would give your group a dime's worth of his time. I would be an utter fool to give you a minute's worth of my time when you obviously don't hesitate to paint me and all other males as vicious predators.
Considering how you treat your male volunteers, one can only imagine how you must treat the homeless men who come to you for help. I imagine if I were out on the street, I'd rather take my chances with the street than with an organization that looks down on me with contempt.
Incidentally, do you happen to receive public funding? (i.e. taxpayer funding) If so, it just may be that your discriminatory policies are against the law.
Sincerely,
XXXXXXX XXXX
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:55 PM May 25th, 2004 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Rescue Mission;
I must say that I'm please to learn of your organization though the men's issues network. The men's issues network consist of a loose coalition of groups and individuals that are fighting back against the evil we have come to know as feminism (aka Marxist-Feminism). Your organization is to be commended on the level of charitable work it has accomplished. I myself have been greatly blessed by organizations such as this when I had serious problems and issues that lead to homelessness.
Today I am a committed Christian that is blessed to prosper, contribute to my community, and raise a wonderful family. Twenty years ago I would have never thought this possible, yet because of organizations such as yours I was influenced and became a changed man in Christ.
So, it is with reluctance that I support the criticism of the men's issues groups and individuals. As Christians we are constrained to acknowledge that evil seeks to destroy that which is good. Here is a list of goals of the enemy that seeks the destruction of The Rescue Mission:
1) The enemy is feminists that have openly declared that the traditional family is to be destroyed. Proof of this declaration is readily available.
2) The enemy seeks to teach the hatred of good and honorable men so that marriages are more easily destroyed. Indeed, this campaign is so successful that women initiate almost 80% of all divorces in America. This is just like the Soviet Union in the early 1900’s
3) The enemy seeks to bias the church against men so that they are seen as wife beaters, child abusers, alcoholics, and etc.
4) By creating extreme bias the enemy seeks to enact laws that will criminalize the male gender.
5) Feminist have a long history of forming an alliance with the evil we call Communism. To determine how families have been destroyed in the past one only need examine the family history of the Soviet Union. That same history is being repeated today.
6) Feminist doctrines have been intentionally interjected into ALL CHRISTIAN churches and denominations. This is done for the intent of weakening the sheep.
7) Feminist seek to exploit the ignorance of ALL conservative organizations, by making appeals to chivalry and charity, to enact harsh laws that will ultimately destroy the traditional families that remain.
8) Feminist groups have widely manufactured false studies and statistics to support their lies that teach male hate. The professors and feminist that manufacture these studies know that they are inflating the figures so that they can demonize all males.
8) Feminists advocate paternity fraud both within the constraints of a marriage (free love) and outside of the marriage. They seek to oppose any new laws that would require correctly identifying a natural father of a child at an early age. This is done so that a single welfare mother can collect money from the wealthiest candidate instead of a father that makes less money, or in the case of a married mother it is done so that she can collect child support from the duped husband instead of the criminal who may be in jail.
9) Finally, feminists have worked tirelessly for over 30 years to change and corrupt our family laws. They are currently funded with over 4.2 BILLION dollars. The source of that funding is the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which was passed only after many-many-many feminist lies were told and the legislature could no longer distinguish between them. There is no men's issues group that comes close to collecting as little as $100K per year.
In conclusion, it is clear that the Rescue Mission is suffering from the affect of feminist propaganda. This is reflected in its policies and membership.
For example, there is a policy that no male is to touch a female child in any way, yet if the intent is to protect children then why are the little boys devalued and left unprotected at the hands of men that are presumed to be child molesters? The answer is anti-male hate.
Why is it assumed that women should be permitted to touch children of either sex? I ask this as a father who knows the suffering of having a child molested by a female baby sitter. It is a feminist lie to suppose that females do not frequently molest little boys. It is propaganda.
The answer is that feminism has corrupted the thinking and reasoning of this organization. There can be no other conclusion. In the Rescue Mission, boys are devalued and left unprotected while both the female and male genders are given free access to molest and brutalize any child they choose.
In the Rescue Mission, the female gender is exalted and glorified as holy while men are hated and seen as vile creatures that molest female children at every opportunity. This is in line with the feminist agenda of male hate. The feminists are no doubt proud of The Rescue Mission’s policies of male hate.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:24 PM May 25th, 2004 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
ear Mr. Kent,
I take personal offense when you attack the character and mission goals of OCRM. While not perfect but with Godly intentions in mind the Rescue mission has established guidelines so as to protect our volunteers, clients and staff from any improprieties and potential claims of abuse. You have taken issue with one rule that we have "#5. Male volunteers will not pick up or hold female children."
I would be open to any suggestion as to how you would improve this rule so as to continue to protect our volunteers, staff and clients. With today's litigious society, especially in California, we have to take extreme precautions so often that it creates conflict itself. We try and remain as flexible as the Spirit of God allows, and yet still work within our system. However we can only bend so far and this still causes some to not want to be involved within our organization and that is when we refer them to look elsewhere.
If you have any other questions just ask.
Chris Winter
Warehouse Coordinator
Orange County Rescue Mission
714-247-4330
*******************************************
My Reply:
Dear Chris;
You are mistaken to assume that I'm attacking the character and mission goals of OCRM. Nevertheless, others and I have demonstrated that evil feminist's ideologies have successfully permeated your organization. The problem is in fact more intense than you realize.
Further, OCRM is not the only Christian organization to befall this fate. I believe that I find this form of evil in EVERY CHRISTIAN organization today. OCRM is not being singled out.
This problem is as the feminists have designed and intended. The problem is that your organization now feels legally compelled to assume that all males are potential sex offenders, that they are to be presumed guilty, and that they should not enjoy an American value of innocent until proven guilty. The strategies employed by feminists are complex and have proven highly successful. Remember, they have literally billions in government funding at their fingertips with which to seek the corruption of your organization.
Just the fact that your organization must consider such a rule as policy number 5 is a testament to the power of feminist’s organizations in law, government, our culture, neighborhoods, and churches. In my opinion, the result is that it is influencing your policies such that OCRM is now, as a matter of policy, treating ALL MALES as sex offenders in the name of avoiding legal liability. That is what the feminist want. It is by design and OCRM has yielded to their evil power. This means that OCRM has in effect appeased the enemy. It is there for all to plainly see.
On a good note, I have found that the other policies are gender neutral. I would simply suggest that policy number 5 be made gender inclusive (neutral) as well, and I have given you a personal accounting of why this policy should be gender inclusive.
In conclusion, if you ignore the fact that my child was molested by females and refuse to make policy number 5 gender neutral than you risk bringing condemnation upon your heads from God. That is because females can and do molest children and in my opinion you are in affect encouraging such evil behavior from the female gender by denying that reality. It is evil to treat all males as criminals while treating females to be the unquestioned angels from God.
Best Regards,
XXXXXX XXXXXXXX
P.S. These are my personal opinions and beliefs. They are subject to change without notice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have to say that you were kinder and gentler than I was. (Which is probably a good thing, I suppose.)
It's bad enough when feminists demonize all men in the name of "equality", but when professed Christians do it in the name of God, that's pretty much rock bottom.
I would remind Chris Winter that Scripture says that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
The way Chris Winter seems to reads it, all except women have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Did you notice how Chris Winter stated "I take personal offense when you attack the character and mission goals of OCRM." (BTW, is Chris Winter a male or female? Chris is a gender-neutral name.)
Apparently Mr./Miss/Mrs./Ms. Winter feels it's OK to attack the character of all men, simply on account of their gender, but when someone points out his/her misandry, then suddenly (s)he gets uppity and "takes offense" at our objections.
What it boils down to is "I can insult you and insinuate that you are a pedophile predator, but don't you dare deny my insinuations and challenge me, because it might offend me!"
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:43 PM May 25th, 2004 EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
Did you notice how Chris Winter stated "I take personal offense when you attack the character and mission goals of OCRM."
My experience is that usually it's the wolves in the Christian organizations that take offense at an attack against feminist bigotry.
This Chris is most certainly taking big time offense. The fact of the matter is that I never made a personal attack against Chris.
********************************************
Also, I got other emails. One of them follows:
Dear Mr. XXXXXX,
Thank you for contacting the Orange County Rescue Mission. I am Rose Torres the volunteer coordinator and am responsible for the policies and procedures by which all volunteers must follow. As I told a gentleman yesterday that emailed me about the issue you have also brought up. I will make yours and his views known to my supervisor and we will than decide if there needs to be made any changes in our policy. I would appreciate Mr. Kent if you would direct your correspondence with myself. I am the volunteer coordinator as I stated and am the one that would make any changes if there need be. I am out of the office today but will return tomorrow. Please at that time call me at 714-247-4390 to discuss the issue at hand and I will explain our procedures and policies at length with you.
Thank you,
Rose L. Torres
Volunteer Coordinator
Orange County Rescue Mission
rose.torres@rescuemission.org
*******************************************
My reply;
Rose,
Thanks for your reply. The only request that I'm making is that policy number 5 be made gender neutral (like the others) instead of singling out the male gender. In my opinion, by singling out the male gender, policy number five sends out the feminist male hate message that ALL MALES are presumed to be sexual predators. It is that simple. In my opinion, if OCRM continues to maintain gender specific language then it will be out of bias and due to feminist influence that is designed to generate male hatred and distrust.
Finally, it is forseeable from a legal standpoint that a female can molest a child just the same as a male. If such were to happen or god forbid such an accusation were to be made against OCRM then OCRM would not be able to claim that such an event was not forseeable. Nor would OCRM be able to claim that it took preventive measures and applied them equally to both genders.
Best Regards,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:17 PM May 25th, 2004 EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
Keep a record of your emails with them. If such a case arises, they might prove to be evidence.
Yup. My thought exactly. I'll be watching the news for an OCRM female on child molestation suit. I would just luv to take down this male-hating family destruction unit.
Warble
P.S. This is simply personal opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P.S. This is simply personal opinion.
Opinion? I'm more inclined to say that everything you pointed out is cold, hard fact.
The really revealing thing is that after I asked Mr./Ms./Miss/Mrs. Winter about the rescue mission's funding, I never got a reply. He/she/it replied to all my e-mails up to that point. Once I brought up the money, then he/she/it got silent.
Which just goes to prove a very important point: When it comes it feminists, it isn't really about "equality" or "justice" or "women's rights".
It's about $$$.
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:46 AM May 26th, 2004 EST (#36)
|
|
|
|
|
The really revealing thing is that after I asked Mr./Ms./Miss/Mrs. Winter about the rescue mission's funding, I never got a reply. He/she/it replied to all my e-mails up to that point. Once I brought up the money, then he/she/it got silent.
If they are a 503(c) corporation then they are legally required to respond in detail to a written request. I would strongly suggest that somebody help us out by going after the funding information. Then we can publish the details. Clearly, they have something to hide.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:14 PM May 25th, 2004 EST (#26)
|
|
|
|
|
Another response from OCRM:
Mr. XXXXX,
we are happy for your transformation in Christ. Let me assure you, feminism has not “corrupted the thinking and reasoning of this organization”. The fact of the matter is that we run an abused women’s shelter and there is a lot of history with abuse on the women and we do everything that we can to create a safe environment for them. Whatever group you are with, I would suggest that instead of focusing on this topic and spending your time nitpicking our policies, that you actually go out and make a difference with your God given talents and the new life you have found in Christ.
God Bless…John Luker, EVP
*******************************************
My response:
Nitpicking? Absurd. He has no idea of the letter that I prepared and then chose not to send. I'm being very polite.
What the heck is wrong with using my God given talents to request that policy number five be changed?
It isn't nitpicking to respectfully request that policy number five be changed to be gender inclusive.
How else will the so-called abused women learn that there are good men in the world? Not at OCRM.
The hell feminism hasn't corrupted this woman's shelter. I have a long list of how such socialist operations have been corrupted. There is little question that he is probably working at yet another family destruction unit. Erin Pizzy would be horrified.
Warble
P.S. What is expressed is my personal opinions and beliefs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aha! They run an "abused woman's shelter." But disclaim any links to feminism? Something sounds more than a little fishy! I think they have been outed. Maybe a good question for them is whether they have facilities for abused males and let them know that men comprise a sizable % of the vicitms yet have no services available. I wonder how their Christian values would respond to that? I bet they would simply deny that men are victimized and that would be that.
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If they indeed run a shelter for abused women, then I'd be willing to bet that they receive VAWA money.
It's pretty revealing that after I brought up the funding question, I never received any more replies from Chris Winter.
Just follow the money trail. It'll probably lead right into their good ol' God-fearin' wallets.
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:56 AM May 26th, 2004 EST (#37)
|
|
|
|
|
While I believe that we are right to point out the male-hate embodied in policy number five, I also believe that we should be supportive of this group because of their Men's Shelter. We only rarely see a group that supports a women's shelter also supporting a men's shelter.
I suggest that we be polite and civil while being firm in our expression of disapproval because of the feminist ideology that has overtaken this Christian organization.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with Warble here. These folks are not your typical radfem male hating sorts. Give them the benifit of the doubt.
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:38 PM May 25th, 2004 EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
"Further, OCRM is not the only Christian organization to befall this fate. I believe that I find this form of evil in EVERY CHRISTIAN organization today. OCRM is not being singled out.
This problem is as the feminists have designed and intended."
All you have to do to prove this is go to some prominent feminist web site and type Promise Keepers, Christ, Christian, or Jesus in their search engine and you will find out how they actively oppose all of the preceding as being patriarchal and anti-female.
Feminist groups actively target and infiltrate the church to the point that it is not very Christian today. A number of churches have been infiltrated by the man-hating dogma of domestic violence programs, and offer a number of organized venues for that man-hating.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nice letter Warble ....
Reasoned, factual, and without apology.
SLAM!!!
Steven
Guerilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:22 AM May 25th, 2004 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
This reminds me of the "man-free zones" that were established in many hospitals and college campuses several years ago.
Anyway, this and other forms of overt discrimination are often illegal, because violative of civil rights laws. The problem is, most men are too focused on defending other people's rights to give much thought to their own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:08 PM May 25th, 2004 EST (#25)
|
|
|
|
|
Can you be more specific about these "man-free zones"? I'm interested in which universities participated in such events.
-hobbes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:20 PM May 25th, 2004 EST (#28)
|
|
|
|
|
Man-free zones existed in prior to the early 80's. For example, they were in hospitals where children were being born. Even then male doctors were the exception. Prior to the invention of anesthia (by a male of course), males were not permitted by women to witness a child birth or anything female.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:05 PM May 25th, 2004 EST (#30)
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Warble. I was afraid such things were happening presently on college campuses. I was about ready to break out my protest sign. Given that university campuses are the spawning ground for feminist hate, it wouldn't have surprised me a bit. I get into large arguments with shit-head profs over this crap almost every term. So far, it hasn't seemed to affect my grades too much. And I'm proud to say that I think I've embarrassed a few of them in front of their class, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Thanks, Warble. I was afraid such things were happening presently on college campuses. I was about ready to break out my protest sign. Given that university campuses are the spawning ground for feminist hate, it wouldn't have surprised me a bit. I get into large arguments with shit-head profs over this crap almost every term. So far, it hasn't seemed to affect my grades too much. And I'm proud to say that I think I've embarrassed a few of them in front of their class, too."
Describe. Expound. Vent.
bg
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anon said: "And I'm proud to say that I think I've embarrassed a few of them in front of their class, too."
Excellent. This is precisely what they fear. Anyone standing up and speaking the truth. They rely on creating an environ with fear that disallows true discussion. Just look at any feminist message board on the net. Control, control, control.
Hey Anon, I hope you come to the Men's Rights Congress. Click the link below. You would find yourself with other men and women who are passionate about these issues.
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:55 AM May 26th, 2004 EST (#38)
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Tom,
I've posted my intent to join the congress over at the Congress forum. Right now it is just a matter of funds (I'm a college student who would have to fly out from Oregon), but I will do my best to get there. It would be a dream come true to attend this event. Best of luck to you in making it a success.
BTW, Thomas - if it turns out that I can make it, I would still be honored to join you and luna for a pint.
-hobbes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hobbes - If you can get here we may be able to find a scholarship for you. Email me at info@mensrights2004.com and we can discuss ways to help you get here.
If you do make it you will be having a pint with more than just Thomas, luna and myself. We are going to have a fascinating group including people you know via the net but have probably never met. It is going to be excellent.
Thanks for your enthusiasm!
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:31 PM May 26th, 2004 EST (#47)
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas,
Thanks. I will let you know as soon as I find out myself. I really want to make it out there.
-hobbes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:35 PM May 26th, 2004 EST (#48)
|
|
|
|
|
Tom,
I'll be sure to get in touch with you shortly. Thanks.
-hobbes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
>>>The problem is, most men are too focused on defending other people's rights to give much thought to their own.
That is the first part of the problem: Men focusing on problems of others that they cannot see that their own gender is being victimized and exploited.
Also, that first point combined with this: Society condemns men and trains its people TO condemn men who seek justice for their own problems. If a man is trying to save/help others he is a-okay. If he wants to point out injustices against men, society is trained to squash and ridicule him.
Put those two points together and its no wonder that men have become "second-class citizens".
R
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:59 AM May 25th, 2004 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
Many of you might be wondering about the following restriction on males: "Male Volunteers wii not pick up or hold female children."
This is a reflection on the Orange County, California culture. Here it is believed that only women should change diapers and that men have no business doing such. Case-n-point, a male was changing a diaper of his daughter in a park. The result was that a feminist reported him to the social services hotline.
Naturally, the department seized the child and he was forced from his home. Only the wife was permitted to remain if the child were to be returned. After that the child was returned Orange County social services was assured that the wife wasn't participating in enabling the husband to fondle the daughter via the diaper changing procedure. Fondling in this case is using a wet wipe to clean poop off the buttocks and vagina of the female child.
So, now a male in Orange County would ever in his right mind touch a female (for any reason) even if it were his daughter. Notice that there is no permission for the male to perform life saving procedures for the female child. Mouth-to-mouth is forbidden and they would prefer the death of the child. Another example is that if a male/father grabs a young girl by the buttocks to pick her up it is seen as inappropriate touching (you will see this all over in grocery stores – I should start reporting these abusive mothers). Worse yet. if the tip of the finger of the male holding his daughter by her skinny leg were to accidentally come into contact with the vagina then that is a criminal offence worthy of jail time. I’ve seen this happen with mothers holding their children by the leg.
I should point out that this attitude is spreading throughout California, and it is no longer restricted to Orange County. What is ironic is that it started with the conservatives, and the policy is being embraced by the socialist.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:53 PM May 25th, 2004 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
"What is ironic is that it started with the conservatives, and the policy is being embraced by the socialist."
Well Orange County has been a bastion of conservatives for decades, but Loretta Sanchez beat Bob Doran, and I believe other who are supportive of radical/gender feminists have worked their way in as well. I think the roots of what you are describing are still in the gender/feminist agenda, but they have gained such power in the state that conservatives toady up to the radical/gender feminist agenda in order to survive. They have certainly targeted Orange County over the years, because of its conservative base.
Any man is a target of that agenda, and that agenda thinks nothing of villifying an innocent man who has been an advocate of women's rights, just as long as they can put another man in the evil patriarch category. California is one of the greatest bastions of governmental biogtry and hate ever to have existed on the face of the earth since the begining of time, and that's putting it mildly if you're a man.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:47 PM May 26th, 2004 EST (#44)
|
|
|
|
|
Frosty cake. Rots your teeth but who cares?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:49 PM May 26th, 2004 EST (#45)
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe they should change the name from "ORANGE county" to "RED county".
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:26 AM May 27th, 2004 EST (#49)
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe they should change the name from "ORANGE county" to "RED county".
Actually, it is known as the OC Iron Curtain.
Warb.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
