|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes I do not know the motive of this sick woman, but this strory is surely disgusting. Women on this world are getting mader and mader, we men has to be vigilent. Cioa!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:50 AM June 6th, 2004 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure what this has to do with men's rights. Can someone enlighten me?
pas
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:04 PM June 6th, 2004 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
This story shows that females can do bad things; crimes by females do not always get that much attention. Also, sometime ago there was a story on MANN that involved a female criminal who killed a pregnant female to take her unborn child. There was a comment (the second one down) comparing the incident to what happened with Scott Peterson in terms of the amount of attention received.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"I'm not sure what this has to do with men's rights. Can someone enlighten me?"
Our society holds to a religious extent the view that women are as innocent as possible in any given situation. If a woman hits a man, he must have done something to deserve it. When Bessie Reese, (a woman who had previously gone to trial for poisoning her first husband), signed a second affidavit admitting to murdering her children, (who had been poisoned), she was assumed to be trying to take the blame for her second husband, who had been convicted of the murders. Since a woman covering for her husband's crime is more innocent than a woman who murders her children that's what the authorities believed, even though the second husband was in another state at a job interview when the murders occurred. When lawmakers created the child support laws they put no restrictions on how the money was spent, nor did they do anything to keep a potentially greedy woman from collecting more in child support than was fair, since that would have required recognition that women are not innocent of the corrupting influence of power. Many people still believe men have a virtual monopoly on the evils of the world.
In order for men to have equal rights, respect, or even to get a fair trial, it is very important that we combat the innocent woman view which so many people believe so deeply. This is why we circulate stories showing examples of women who commit evil deeds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:47 AM June 7th, 2004 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
"In order for men to have equal rights, respect, or even to get a fair trial, it is very important that we combat the innocent woman view which so many people believe so deeply. This is why we circulate stories showing examples of women who commit evil deeds."
So your aim is to lower society's views of women? Is that a goal of the men's movement? To me this seems no different than domestic violence groups pointing to every example (and there are plenty) of men being violent to women and children.
I noticed this gem on the MANN "Philosophy" page:
"We believe that one of the misperceptions that is currently harming equality and men's rights is the myth that women are less violent than men. Although pointing readers to examples of women's violence is one way to help break down this myth, we do not wish to attack women merely for the sake of "exposing women's faults" - after all, the media is currently too eager to portray men as abusers, murderers and rapists. Therefore, unless the news story is related to an issue which is more closely tied with men's issues (ie, an example of domestic violence against men, or inequality in sentencing female criminals), we will generally not post stories that are simply about women being violent."
which is closely followed by:
"The Men's Activism News Network also welcomes the contributions of women to this movement, and receives a significant number of female visitors. Although we believe that male-only groups are of great benefit to men and society, we ultimately believe that it is only when men and women work together with trust and respect for each other that justice for everyone will be achieved."
I'm going to take a wild guess that these are only Scott's views and the other authors don't feel obliged to follow it.
You know how women's groups allow men's "participation" only if men continually reinforce the idea that they, as men, are responsible for male violence? I'm worried that the men's movement is going to do the same for women. Is that really necessary?
pas
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To some degree, yes, it is necessary. The fundamental premise that the feminists use to justify their anti-male hatred is that men are barbarians and that women are peaceful, docile creatures, always and in every way victims of the male. This is a fallacy that needs to be exposed for what it is: a lie.
You may believe that we go to extremes here to do that, but the truth of the matter is that we do exercise a level of moderation here.
"This is a revolution, dammitall! We're going to HAVE to offend somebady!" (John Adams, 1776)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"So your aim is to lower society's views of women? Is that a goal of the men's movement?"
I can't speak for the entire movement, but I feel that working towards a more realistic view of women could end up benefitting men a lot, as well as women. I don't agree with you that subscribing to the "innocent woman" view is having a higher opinion of them than acknowledging their capacity for evil, because when I meet women who aren't corrupt I can acknowledge and appreciate that fact about them, while those who project an illusion of purity on every woman they see can only appreciate the illusion's goodness, and not the actual woman's.
"I'm going to take a wild guess that these are only Scott's views and the other authors don't feel obliged to follow it."
Well you're entitled to your opinion, but I happen to know that we generally do not post submissions we recieve which are only about women's violence, and if you search our history you'll see that women's positive contributions have been welcomed.
"You know how women's groups allow men's "participation" only if men continually reinforce the idea that they, as men, are responsible for male violence? I'm worried that the men's movement is going to do the same for women. Is that really necessary? "
I appreciate your concern and think it's a valid one. I consider it to be a priveledge to be involved in a movement with so many people I've talked to expressing concerns that the movement adhere to the highest moral standard and I think it's important that this continues. I certainly don't feel that all women "share guilt" for any evils that individual women have committed, and I wouldn't want any good women to feel responsible for things she didn't do. It is exactly because we don't want to do this that we don't post most of the "woman done evil" articles we recieve. However, I think the importance of combatting the "women as goddesses" illusion is enough to justify posting them occassionally, while trying to avoid ones that imply widespread guilt with phrases like "typical woman".
It's a subjective issue, like many ethical questions I've seen in the movement, and all we can do is make the best judgement calls we can. I hope you'll give us a little leeway when your judgement on whether to post an article would have been different from our own. We can't please everyone, and sometimes it seems we get questioned about every article we do and don't choose to post. Although I find this to be more telling of the importance people place on this site than any kind of disrespect of it, I hope our readers understand that no 2 people would post the exact same set of articles from the queu we get every month. It's easy to get bogged down in the differences which naturally arise from everyone's individual approach to the movement, and our movement seems especially susceptible to it.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
