|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:54 PM June 10th, 2004 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Two other possible topics:
1. Media Bias/Media Stereotyping of Men
The lack of attention to men's issues is astonishing. The lack of balance in reporting on the statements of anti-male hate groups, such as NOW and many other so-called feminist groups, needs to be addressed.
2. Social Security Bias against men
Men die sooner than women. Some of this difference happens before retirement age, but some doesn't (there are a lot more old ladies than old men). Having the same social security benefit schedule for men and women discriminates strongly against men. I haven't seen a calculation of the net transfer from men to women, but I would guess that it is very large. Once again, men are being treated like donkeys force to pull along women in their carts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The male bashing is an excellent point. We will even have one of the breakouts at the saturday conference by Glenn Sacks on the topic of male bashing. We will have to find someone to write one for us. Soc Sec is also a good point anon. Thanks for the feedback.
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:56 PM June 10th, 2004 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
"2. Social Security Bias against men"
If you go to the IWF's web page they have info on how they are trying to get more benefits for women under social security. Because women "opt out" of the work force they often have less entitlement. They are trying to extablish reasons for women to have more of the pot such as housewives being entitled to more of their husbands entitlement. I think there is some merit for intact families that work together to help Dad earn a living by being supportive having a fair share of social security, but the "opt out" women who are just tired of working and want a longer vacation, etc. need to pay their dues like men are required to.
Sexual bias should not be allowed in Social Security for either sex, and the gender feminist agenda should not be determining who gets what. The IWF should also be carefully watched to make sure there is truly fair and equitable distribution of these hard earned benefits.
I've worked since before I got out of high school, and had one brief 2 1/2 year period of unemployment in the past 40 years. Couple that with working part time during that period for 8 years and earning 100 college units while working without the support of family and you can see why I'm not earger to share my social security with big mouthed, lazy a _ _ females who want to cut into what I've had to get by hard work.
As far as being a privilege patriarch some of my early career work invovled shoveling manure, mowing lawns, and painting buildings all for minimum wage. Serving in the combat zone was less than minimum wage. Dad had a 7th grade education and had it rougher than I did so I tend to get really upset when I hear those complete fools talk about the privileged partriarchy.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:12 PM June 10th, 2004 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Education:
Please don't forget colleges in the educational debate. It is our colleges that have over 700 women's studies classes that are the spawning grounds of much of the man-hating that goes on in society. Title IX is destroying athletics programs. Males, by federal law, can't get student loans unless they register for the draft, but females, who are excelling in all catergories, and in getting degrees, are constantly mentioned for not excelling in all categories such as Science & Math. Where is Title IX in that unfair balance? Oh yea, it only wants to address the perceived historical oppression that Women's Studies sputs off about.
Women's Studies centers are propaganda mills on that create a constant sexist & hostile atmosphere for all things male on many of the campuses across America.
Books in the Library follow the gender feminist viewpoint on issues such as domestic violence, male violence, affirmative action, sports, historical oppression of women, male privilege, women's health, etc. They'd have to burn books to be any more biased than they are. The P.C. police just stamp a book "dicard" if it doesn't follow the gender feminist propaganda line. So much for donating books to our lace curtain educational system.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:23 AM June 11th, 2004 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
"Women's Studies centers are propaganda mills on that create a constant sexist & hostile atmosphere for all things male on many of the campuses across America."
That initial list is an excellent start. Another list that might be good would be one showing some of the main places where feminism is out of control, where men face discrimination such as college campuses, courts, media/advertising, work place, military, etc. and have subsections under each explaining the discrimination that takes place under each of those categories.
Where might the men's movement best expend its efforts to bring some relief to the struggles men are facing?
Are there any new ways that we can educate the public about men's issues? Are there any new ways we can bring pressure to bear on egregious male bashers?
Looking at all the facets of the discrimination we face (who, where, how, etc.) helps to clarify the problem in detail, and may help us to see new methods to use in problem solving efforts.
Gender feminist politicians, tear down the wall that separates men and women from eqality with each other. Tear down the wall of favoritism and special entitlement that favors one sex over the other. Tear down the wall that separates all people from equal justice, equal rights, equal privileges, and equal responsibilities.
Ray
(Click) Women's Studies
(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.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
>1. Media Bias/Media Stereotyping of Men
Inside of this, I've yet to read almost ANY vaguely serious book/graphic novel/manga etc. etc. that doesn't somehow feature a raped/abused as a child female by a male. This whole culture of "women are raped or abused at least 15 times in their life!" type of mindset does SERIOUSLY hurt the relationship between men and women, especially between fathers and daughters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:38 PM June 10th, 2004 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Will there be an "open mic" session for attendees to introduce themselves and speak for a few minutes if they wish?
Will there be break-out sessions where attendees can meet with the main speakers in small groups?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The plan for the morning is to have each of 6 speakers take about 15-20 minutes and leave time for questions and interaction with the group. We plan to have a wireless mic to pass around to those in the audience if needed. Lunch will be tasty and will have us all sitting together chowing down and talking up men's rights issues. We are envisioning lunch as being a time when we can all network and relax and get to know one another. The afternoon features 2 sessions of concurrent breakout groups and will be followed by a panel of the speakers taking questions and comments from the floor. You can see the schedule here.
It should be a powerful day of meeting others who are passionate about this work and finding ways we may be able to potentiate our efforts through working together.
Join us!
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anon and Ray have made good points that we omitted title IX and male bashing. Anyone want to write a paragraph for those two that would fit with the ones above? You could post it here or email it to info@mensrights2004.com. Thank you all for the feedback.
Hope to see you at the Congress.
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know where you are going to go with this list after the Congress, so keep that in mind as you consider this comment.
I would caution against making the list too all-encompassing or verbose, or in placing all of he items on it at the same priority level. Don't forget that you're going to have to market the results of the Congress and try to get buy-in from as many men as you can. (I know, I know, there are those who say 'the hell with unity...') You have to consider the short attention span of most people.
Also, I might suggest that the Congress spend some time trying to figure out how to get more men under the tent. This is, like it or not, a political process, and we're going to need votes in order to get anything done.
I'd actually like very much to go to this event, especially since the planners had the good sense to NOT hold the event right on Father's Day. However, I'm running my second annual fundrainsing event for prostate cancer research, in Mercerville NJ (http://www.dtfyf.org/)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank we will miss you. Thanks for the good feedback. Actually the summaries list will be handed out during our demonstration planned for 3:15 in front of the Supreme Court Building on Capitol Hill. We have a separate list of talking points that spell out just how we want our Senators and Congressmen to vote on bills that will be given to each participant.
Also, one of the good things about the booklet of essays on these issues is that each one closes with recomendations for solutions. Not just complaining, we tell them specifically what we want to happen.
Good luck with your fund raiser.
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lemme offer another suggestions:
EVERYONE who goes to this ought to try to go down on Thursday and try to visit their Congressman. They ARE reachable, if only for a few minutes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is now our duty to support this affirmative effort to free our gender and nation from the oppressive radical feminist agenda that has infested and perverted our institutions.
Lend support in spirit, monetarily or if you are one of the privileged, in person.
Best wishes for all success and to all who are directly involved in hosting this conference THANKS!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have a few suggested changes for the synopsis. They're pretty much all stylistic, so I'll just send them to the congress' committee. The original authors may decide to make changes based on them or to stick with their original texts. However, there is one item in the synopsis that bothers me and that I've read and heard on several occasions. Since I've seen it elsewhere, I think it's worth pointing out here.
The synopsis states "for all 10 leading causes of death, (men) have higher death rates than women." This is actually a non-issue. The fact that men have shorter life spans than women is quite important, but the probability of death for each individual, male or female, is precisely one. Yes, men have higher death rates from the leading causes of death, but that just means that women have higher death rates for less common causes. If the point were made that males have a higher death rate than females in every age category (birth to 9, 10 to 19, 80 to 89, whatever), that would be relevant and would reinforce statements about shorter life spans. However, as I said, everyone dies.
If we complain that men have higher death rates from common causes, feminists can simply respond that women have higher death rates from less common causes.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am looking forward to meeting you Thomas. And all the other admins who are coming. Thanks for getting this together. This should be fun!
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not only the negitivity toward males accompanied with the public opinion effects. Show what a lack of media pertaining to men becomes life threatening as in: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,122398,00.html
One I personally had no clue of and has a stunning effect.
steveb
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think the most important issue is to legislate against anti-male content in the media; I'm beyond furious with male-bashing references-- not the least of which include sexual assault and battery, which is portrayed in every manner as a positive thing, from humorously to self-righteously, implied to graphic; this alone should be outlawed on the public airwaves, since it's an outright sexual violation and attack on male sanctity and self-esteem to suggest that women have this type carte-blanche on men's bodies. And we all know about the "stupid TV father."
It's these female-pandering, male-bashing references which lie at the root of erosion of men's rights, since they essentially program the message that men deserve abuse and not respect; once this sentiment becomes accepted, the rest is just a matter of time. And the only thing necessary for the message to be accepted, is for it to be seen without retalliation and consequence.
Similar consequences should likewise be levelled at print-media; these are also not above the law.
There's no doubt that media messages shape public attitudes, and the public which owns these airwaves and (sales-points of print-media) has a right to be protected from such defamation-- and this is just as true with regard to gender as race, color or creed-- particularly since gender runs across all of these and so there is no "minority gender" (but if there were, it would be men by definition).
As Martin Luther King said, "The law may not change the hearts of the mindless, but it will change the minds of the heartless." It's time to put the law to work against those who pimp male sanctity and respect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
