|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:59 PM August 23rd, 2004 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Kerry Marsala asks, "Where are the men's rights groups? Where is their version of NOW? Where are their advocates? We women have them, why can't the men?"
1) The men's issues groups are on the front line, under funded, understaffed, and mostly working for free. By contrast, the women's movement was funded on the backs of husbands with lazy wives that sought more special privilege. Men simply don't have that luxury. Most men are working their ass off instead of staying at home whining and complaining about what the lazy homemakers did to screw them over.
2) Why would men want to create a Marxist-Masculist version of the Marxist-Feminist NOW? Kerry is just plain stupid. She has no clue of how women have betrayed men and their trust. It is women that created the problem, and it is women that should fix the problem. Quite blaming men for the evil anti-family communist ideals of NOW and women in general.
3) Why aren't women taking the responsibility to advocate for men? Again, it is women that created the problem by blaming men for... well... EVERYTHING that is wrong in the world. So, let women fix it. They claim they can. Now it is time for women to put up or shut up. Men have no business coming forward.
4) Finally, men shouldn't need to have men's issues groups. If there is a requirement then it is because women have attacked men on a mass scale. Let women stop the attack instead of demanding that men accept blame for a problem they didn't create.
Kerry admits, "We as women have hurt men tremendously by the way we treat them as mere sperm donors..."
Well dough! Women did a great deal more than devaluing men to the status of a clump of a few cells that are expendable. Now Kerry wants to blame men for the horrors that women have created. NOT! This bitch is clearly a male-hating poser.
Kerry writes, "Men, you need to decide for yourselves, because it's only the individuals who can change how others are treating them. Do you continue to let women treat you like you haven't an IQ higher than a six pack of Bud, a bowl full of Nachos and Monday Football with the guys? Do you continue to let women poke fun at you over the fact that you process information differently? No, you don’t need to tolerate it any longer. And women we need to treat our men with the same R-E-S-P-E-C-T we demand of them."
To claim that men determine how women treats them lowers women to the point of being incapable of discretion. Women have the discretion to treat men with respect. It doesn’t matter how much men demand respect. Women must CHOOSE to respect men.
This is simply more blame-the-male crap. Most men that I know of are working on their Harley's and telling women to go straight to hell. These are the real men. They refuse to marry women, refuse to screw them, and they refuse to come out and play. People like Kerry need to get over their bigotry and stop blaming men for the crap women did while they were free loading off their husbands.
Bottom line. I couldn’t care less about some retard feminist sitcom. I’m too busy being a real man and working on my Harley. Of course, once women figure that out they’ll probably call it domestic violence in the form of spousal neglect if I ride my bike instead of spending every waking moment making my wife experience special privilege.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:08 PM August 23rd, 2004 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Warble - 2 thumbs up mate
Brilliant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Regretably, Kerry is right to attempt to shame men into fighting their corner.
Feminism got the world operating their way by fighting for same, and, employing every dirty trick in the book, plus many others they invented. However sad it is, it is other men who have supported them, passed the laws and generally ensured they have been adequately financed. Truly, if men cannot band together and ensure the legislators know things have gone too far, we shall sink even further.
As everyone should know, when we are under threat from some invading force, we cannot leave matters in the hands of a few individuals, we send in an Army and use everything within our 'combined' power to defeat the threat. Please note, often the Army alone is not enough, we need the Navy and Airforce as well. Only together can we triumph !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, don't kill the messenger. Men have neglected to acknowledge the seriousness of the assault that has been waged against us. No, we didn't cause the assault, nor did we deserve it. Even so, we must be willing to confront it. Men in general need to educate themselves as to the scope of the feminist disaster upon both men and women. Men in positions of power are still deluding themselves that the feminazi hate movement can be appeased by giving them the Rhineland and a chunk of Czechoslovakia. I welcome articles like Kerry's. Sound the alarm. Wake up the troops!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can hear the founding fathers of this country right now.....
"It's the British who created this problem. Then the British need to solve it!"
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kerry's questions are not stupid ones. Most people are unaware of men's groups, and so it's no surprise that Kerry doesn't know of any. She rightfully laments on the need for such groups and is puzzled by the apparent lack of them. Her analogy of wishing for "men's version of NOW" is not the same as wishing for an exact, mirror-image of that organization. I see her article as a little uninformed, although perhaps a bit more informed than the general public, but instead of seeing her questions as stupid I see them as surprisingly refreshing concerns from a woman.
The charges of man-hating puzzle me. Ok, she does blame men for *tolerating* women treating them like crap, but to call that man-hating is a pretty big stretch. I happen to agree with her about that, and one of the regs made a similar comment in a thread here the other day. Even if you somehow do think that translates into hating men, the fact that the rest of the article condemns the poor treatment of men in society and even touches on issues like reproduction and father's rights shows that this woman clearly is not writing out of hostility to men and our rights.
Finally, let me address the marxist/communist comments. The only tangetal relationship I see between feminist and communist ideologies is that both involve transfers of wealth that some people might view as unfair. Such things as child support involve a transfer of wealth from men to women under the supposed assumption that she as the custodial parent can be trusted to spend it on the alleged child's need to 25-40% of the man's income more than him, without any real regulations on how she spends it. I think we both agree that this is a ridiculous transfer of wealth. Income tax is another transfer of wealth from the population to the government which many who call it "marxist" feel is unfair because 5% of the people pay 50% of that tax. I think it's unfair the other way, because the 5% who make 90% of the income are only paying 50% of the tax. I'm guessing you'd disagree with me on this, but it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with feminism! It is obviously possible for us to agree in the one case and not the other, child support is not a "marxist" transfer of wealth, it's a feminist one. You also condemn communism as anti-family. Perhaps the old USSR government had anti-family policies, but so does the good old capitalist USA. I haven't researched it, but I highly doubt the USSR's legal system was as anti-family as the current USA's one. Also remember Elian Gonzales? Who was trying to keep him with his father and behaving in a more family-friendly manner? That's right, communist Cuba. The ideology of communism and certainly that of Marx is not anti-family, even if the old USSR was such, any more than capitalism is anti-family because the USA's courts are. This article doesn't discuss marxism or communism or anything related to it, and by injecting it into your reply you're shifting the focus from fighting the unfair treatment of men to fighting whatever you define as Marxists, which probably includes my own economic views as I think FDR's policies were the greatest economic laws ever passed. Instead of being divisive and fighting about marxism, let's keep the focus on men's issues and work together on those since we happen to agree on them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:05 AM August 24th, 2004 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Instead of being divisive and fighting about marxism, let's keep the focus on men's issues and work together on those since we happen to agree on them.
AMEN, Hombre. We waste our precious energies far too often on divisive issues unrelated to justice for men. Our movement is too weak and too young to be doing this. Sidetracking our focus is as fatal to discussions of our issues as the worse trolls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:05 AM August 26th, 2004 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
"We waste our precious energies far too often on divisive issues unrelated to justice for men. Our movement is too weak and too young to be doing this. Sidetracking our focus is as fatal to discussions of our issues as the worse trolls."
I completely disagree and think that the Marxism that the radical/gender feminists embrace is a major part of the problem eroding the rights of all men in America today.
I thought a few quotes from Daphne Patai, a former women's studies professor of 10 years and author of "Professing Feminism" might add some perspective.
"In speaking of women studies Patai says, "Teachers abdicate their authority. Collective teaching and collective governance structures are set in place, often involving students at all levels, office staff, and women from the '"community."' Political agreement is expected: All women are assumed to share the communitarian, antihierarchical, and pro-consultive positions and understandings of good feminist politics. This is a hollow posture, however, since women with dissenting ideas (not socialists, say) are treated with no respect and are outside the supposedly democratically diverse academic body imagined by women's studies."
"...in the 1997 NWSA (National Women's Studies Backlash Report... ...the report summarizes the results of a 1995 survey of 276 women's studies programs, departments, and centers..."
Patai says they talk about "instigators against women's studies" such as the National Association of Scholars and the Center for Individual Rights..." - and that the above feminists - "ludicrously categorize them alongside the Ku Klux Klan, and neo nazi groups as "conservative right organizations" whose goal is "to restore white, Western male hegemony to the curriculum and the academy."
The report goes on to say:
"backlash is not just a personal problem it is a collective problem that requires political action. What women's studies lacks is a collective offensive strategy that is the equivalent of the right wing movement so clearly arrayed against diversity and equality."
I did not leave my old party, but was driven out by the feminist, Marxist, hate monger bigots who control so much of that party these days and bash all men as privileged, but especially white men as privileged patriarchs. You may not know it but you are hated for having been born male by that group (feminists) which nests in the my old political party, and you are considered merely 2nd class citizens.
In my opinion, anyone who can't see the Marxist trigger words in the femi comments above, and cannot see the Marxist ideology dripping from the radical/gender feminist agenda is really ignorant of the reality that surrounds the feminist agenda's attack on all males. IMO, such obfuscated perception is a detriment to the equal rights that men are seeking. In my opinion such imperception has already divided and weakened us, if that is possible considering the fragmented and disempowered status males presently have in American (Western) society.
Sincerely, Ray
Before the Borg collective, there was the radical/gender feminist collective, a far less inclusive or evolved version of the more humane Borg collective. They taught: Resistance is futile, Your gender is a social construction, Males must be assimilated into the radical/gender feminist collective.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:29 PM August 24th, 2004 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
Also remember Elian Gonzales? Who was trying to keep him with his father and behaving in a more family-friendly manner? That's right, communist Cuba. The ideology of communism and certainly that of Marx is not anti-family, even if the old USSR was such, any more than capitalism is anti-family because the USA's courts are. This article doesn't discuss marxism or communism or anything related to it, and by injecting it into your reply you're shifting the focus from fighting the unfair treatment of men to fighting whatever you define as Marxists....
WHAT?!?! Did HombreVIII really say, "The ideology of communism and certainly that of Marx is not anti-family." OH MY GOD! What darkness and ignorance!
The failure of men to see the connections between modern feminism and their roots in Marxism is astonishing. It is alarming!
It is this failure that is literally leading America to repeat the exact point-by-point history of the early Soviet Union. There isn't a single family and societal ill that America experiences today that wasn't started in communism by the Marxist-Feminist in 1917! Period.
Like most ignorant men's activist HombreVIII needs to read the Communist Manifesto (by Carl Marx). Read it very carefully. Memorize it.
IT IS MANDATORY READING FOR EVERY MEN'S ACTIVIST WHO DESIRES TO EFFECTIVELY FIGHT FEMINISM!!!! YOU CANNOT COMPREHEND FEMINIST IDEALS WITHOUT KNOWING THE CONTENTS OF THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO. WITHOUT THIS BACKGROUND YOU WILL NOT UNDERSTAND WHY SOVIET FEMINIST HISTORY IS REPEATING ITSELF POINT-BY-POINT IN AMERICA.
For example, it has mandates like:
"Abolition of the family! Even the most radical flare up at this infamous proposal of the Communists.
On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution.
The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital."
Make no mistake there are consequences when this mandate is followed, and the feminist groups have embraced that mandate for over 100 years.
Some ignorant men's issues activist don't believe that there is a major connection between feminism and Marxism. Well click on this and you will find a long line of influential Marxist-Feminist leaders and their books.
Ooops! Why is that Carl Marx in the list? According to HombreVIII he has no feminist ties. NOT!
Look. Don't give me this crap that Marxism has little to do with modern American feminism. Do your damn homework! There are endless historical parallels. Hell our modern family law reads like Marxist-Feminist family law with few exceptions. It is no longer rooted in English Common Law as the propagandist would have you believe. They only tell us that so American’s don’t panic and demand the laws be brought back in line with American values.
Then there are the men's issues retards that don't think current feminist ideology was spearheaded on communist grounds. Well here is proof that feminists first got their destructive ideology started in 1917.....
http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5001087859
"The October Revolution of 1917 brought to power a radical socialist government that denounced the family as a bourgeois institution, undermined the institution of marriage, and promised the liberation of women. Aleksandra Kollontai, the leading Bolshevik feminist, declared in 1923 that the Soviet state would "lift the burdens of motherhood from women's shoulders and transfer them to the state." She added that 'the family, in its bourgeois sense, will die out...' "
What they don't tell you is that the result was 7 million homeless children that formed gangs. The Marxist-Feminists go to extensive lengths to hide the consequences of their destructive ideology.
Says Timasheff:
"Dissolution of family ties, especially of the parent-child relations, threatened to produce a wholesale dissolution of community ties, with rapidly increasing juvenile delinquency as the main symptom. In 1935, the Soviet papers were full of information and indignation about the rise of hooliganism, i.e., of crimes in which the sadistic joy of inflicting pain on somebody or destroying something of value was paramount. Everywhere, wrote the papers, gangs invaded workingmen's dwellings, ransacked them, and destroyed or spoiled what they did not take away; if somebody dared to resist, he was mercilessly killed. In trains, the hooligans sang obscene songs; to prolong the fun, they did not permit travelers to alight at their destinations if they had not finished singing. Sometimes the schools were beseiged by neglected children; other times gangs beat the teachers and attacked women, or regularly fought against one another.
Finally, the magnificent slogans of the liberation of sex and the emancipation of women proved to have worked in favor of the strong and reckless, and against the weak and shy. Millions of girls saw their lives ruined by Don Juans in Communist garb, and millions of children had never known parental homes.
Is there anybody that sees the current American parallels? Do you see the carjackings? Do we not have gangs raiding businesses, shooting each other, and killing innocent children? Do the gangs not sing their songs as the Russian children did while carrying out their criminal activities? Is this a historical accident? NOT!
Dale O'Leary does and excellent job summarizing the tennats of Marxist-Feminism when he notes the foundations involve:
- The destruction of the family and the institution of marriage.
- Total sexual liberation.
- The elimination of private property.
- Easy divorce.
- Elimination of a bread winner by having the state provide.
- Women in control of the reproduction process.
- All women working outside the home.
- The state to provide 24 hour day care for the children.
- Elimination of religion as an opposing force by law or infiltration.
- Destruction of the family-supporting religions which oppose them.
To understand feminism, it is mandatory that one understand that each of these ideals listed has its foundation in Marxism, and each of these ideals have been implemented in America. The source is without question Marxist-Feminism.
There is no single-family law or feminist ideal that we see today which has not evolved in the Communist soil of Marxist-Feminism. Failure to see that fact demonstrates a profound ignorance.
That is why I attack the conservatives, progressives, and Kerry. They are literally embracing the Marxist-Feminist ideologies that direct the public to "blame the male" for the problems that we experience today. I have no patience for them. They want to criticize males and follow the feminists examples of teaching male hate by blaming us. They can go to hell. They are ignorant and stupid.
HombreVIII complains, "The charges of man-hating puzzle me. "
Well it's like this, if anybody blames men for the crap that feminism has wrought then they are teaching male hate. It really is just that simple. I won’t take that crap from any feminist no matter what their brand of feminism. They need to stop blaming men and blame the source. Period. Get a clue.
Further, I don't care how well intentioned Kerry is. She is teaching male hatred by blaming men for something feminist and the vast majority of American females have embraced. If American females have a problem with THEIR culture of feminism then let them come forward in the millions and fix the problem they created.
HombreVIII notes, "Perhaps the old USSR government had anti-family policies, but so does the good old capitalist USA. I haven't researched it, but I highly doubt the USSR's legal system was as anti-family as the current USA's one."
This is a major problem. By not knowing the disasters that feminism created in communist countries you cannot know how current American feminist ideologies evolved. American Feminists love this level of ignorance because it gives them a free ticket to misinform the public with propaganda and lies. This means that Kerry, a poser, can make out like she’s in favor of men organizing when in fact she helped create the damn problem to begin with. Kerry needs to shut-up and fix the problem she helped create.
There is a mention of Elian Gonzales and how the communist fought for father's rights. Well if you know history then you will know that communist were forced to abandon some elements of their feminism because of the massive destruction wrought in the children and society. The result of the wholesale destruction is that in a very few ways communist embrace family more than Americans. So what? By contrast the conservatives were ready to leave Elian fatherless to prevent him from going back to a communist country. That only demonstrates how the conservatives have embraced Marxist-Feminist ideologies of family destruction. That’s nothing new. Even conservative states like Texas and Utah have family destruction units and policies.
There is only one explanation for why both the conservatives and progressives are embracing and forcing Marxist-Feminist policy/law on the public. It can be explained in a single work. The word is ignorance and outright stupidity. It's just that simple.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:36 PM August 25th, 2004 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
This is an intelligent and open view of the problem and I commend the writer. As a mother of four sons, I am more interested in how we can help each other rather than create more hate and divide.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:28 PM August 26th, 2004 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
"The only tangetal relationship I see between feminist and communist ideologies is that both involve transfers of wealth that some people might view as unfair"
I do believe your overlooking some very overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Fathers for Life had this article by Erin Pizzy called the "THE PLANNED DESTRUCTION OF THE FAMILY." Read especially the 10th paragraph down.
click THE PLANNED DESTRUCTION OF THE FAMILY
It's a good place to start.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Every time a thread like this pops up i jump in and try to get somone, anyone, to join me in starting a group of men whose focus is the media. Well here i am again. The web resources already exist. Its a simple idea but its an idea that can start to have a real affect. All thats required is that a few of you put up your hands. We all spend alot of time reading and responding in forums such as this, which is valuable in itself. But if we just come together and start to focus some of that time and energy, in the form of emails, at the sponsors of networks like CBS, who run "Who loves Raymond," the networks are going to have to start listening. In fact they are already in a position where they are starting to listen. Male viewership has been dropping like a stone, and i suggest we take advantage of that fact to get some of this shit off the air. This is our job not womens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just found a thread over at the Stand your ground forum for a new mens site called mens movie guide. Looks good. Check it out.
http://www.mensmovieguide.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"...they cannot act collectively."
The above Orwell quote applies in today's world, IMHO. In order for women to be effective agents of change, they would have to first acknowledge that a problem exists in the first place. Even amongst women that I know and respect, and even with the one I thought I was in love with, there is a great deal of denial that men face certain problems in the current societal role imposed upon them. I would propose that organizing might be a fine idea; after all, when the feminist movement began gathering steam, most people took it seriously if not precisely being in perfect sympathy to it. The notion of a men's movement seems only to draw bemused tolerance from those that sit in positions of influence and power. This is not helped one bit by the simple fact that there are a lot of men out there who are also in denial of the problems at hand. I truly believe the only step we can take at this moment is to first educate those of our gender. Show them first hand the inequities of the law, of women's attitudes, and the voting policies of our elected officials. Where do we begin? With our sons.
My own sons are being taught very quietly by me to be wary of those that approach with insincere smiles. They are being taught that the world is not necessarily their friend, and that the only way to combat ignorance is to become less ignorant yourself, and conduct your life against "type". That is to say, be the exact opposite of what society says you are. We cannot take for granted that most people do not buy into the stereotypical role of men.
Still another way of fighting our enemy is to not play on their turf; move the playing field. Become physically and emotionally unavailable to women. Find a spiritually fulfilling path and follow it. Find peace in one's soul and mind, and act according to conscience, rather than in militant fashion. And this above all, regard other men as our brothers, the younger ones our sons. We cannot fight corruption and priviledge with militancy. If we can genuinely live within conscience the unfair laws cannot touch us. If we can demonstrate to women, and most of all to ourselves, that we do not need their company nor their supposed
"favors", we shall become immune to all the sexual politicking that steers us men inevitably towards our dissolution of will.
Political systems alway gravitate away from middle or common ground. Corruption exists on either side of the arguement, and always shall. We need to improve ourselves if we want our lives to be improved. We need to detach and make ourselves unavailable to the machinations of those that oppose us.
We need to trust no one but ourselves and our brothers. I notice that the author of this article does not say nor even imply that she will stop watching the show she decries. She merely wanted to chide and admonish us into action. Her words sound hollow, and say nothing that has not been said a thousand times in this and other forums.
BTW...Is there any man here that believes any woman has the qualifications or even the right to define what a "real man" is? My answer is an absolute "No".
Free your spirits and educate your minds, Brothers. Only then can we be free.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...and applauding her, not attacking her as a man-hater. My God! How can that piece be described as anti-male when she says the same things most of us say in here?
Enough of these Marxist/capitalist/socialist tangential debates. We're here because we want men and boys to enjoy the same rights not to be assaulted, abused, discriminated against, and/or treated unfairly.
Men are from EARTH. Women are from EARTH. Deal with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:41 PM August 24th, 2004 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
...and applauding her, not attacking her as a man-hater. My God! How can that piece be described as anti-male when she says the same things most of us say in here?
Enough of these Marxist/capitalist/socialist tangential debates. We're here because we want men and boys to enjoy the same rights not to be assaulted, abused, discriminated against, and/or treated unfairly.
It’s ironic at how males whine and complain at the drudgery involved with the need to learn the root of the problem. Whaaaaa! It involves a study of history!
Too damn bad that it doesn’t make ‘em feel good like little mindless bots.
Any woman that blames men for the conditions created by the Marxist-Feminists is following their agenda of blame the male. Kerry clearly blames the male in more than one breath.
Now if you are so ignorant that you cannot recognize that every problem we are experiencing today has already got a spot in Soviet history then you cannot be apart of the solution. You're gonna have to know the history of Marxist-Feminist if you want to know the solution. Every single male issue that we are experiencing today started with the efforts of Marxist-Feminist in the Soviet Union. NOT ONE SINGLE ISSUE IS NEW.
If you fail to learn from history then like so many stupid men's activist, you'll just propose and support the same old crap that failed in the Soviet Union.
Don’t be a mindless feel-good bot. Learn your history and condemn these damn feminists that blame the male. Kerry is nothing more than a poser that has no real suggestions. She is only looking for an excuse for women, and that means blame the male like a good little Marxist-Feminist.
I'll tell you right now that it'll take men with real balls confronting the various legislators with the historical truth to beat down the Marxist-Feminist. You will not gain an inch without exposing those traitors for who they are and what they actually support. Nor will any male gain ground without being able to explain why America should not implement a Marxist-Feminist ideology.
To do that absolutely requires knowledge of how Marxist-Feminism failed in the Soviet Union, and it requires being able to draw historical parallels. 99% of men's activist cannot do this so they get ignored. I can. So they listen to me, and the feminists hate me because of it. This means they will resort to any dirty trick to keep me from telling the truth about feminism to the legislature.
It is because I can do this that the Marxist-Feminists have manipulated the police to watch me when in Sacramento. Make no mistake, if the feminists know I'm there then the Sacramento police follow me everywhere and watch. If you know Soviet history then you’ll understand why the fact that I get followed is an important fact.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What action do you recommend that men take? How does it differ from the action that this woman has suggested? What she said was that men need to stand up and defend themselves. I can't find much wrong with that. At this point we are minimized by the mute millions that won't stand up and call the cards of the bullshit legislators and feminist haters. I agree with her that we need to take action and I will likely agree with you and what action you reccommend. So be it.
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:15 PM August 25th, 2004 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
What action do you recommend that men take? How does it differ from the action that this woman has suggested? What she said was that men need to stand up and defend themselves. I can't find much wrong with that. At this point we are minimized by the mute millions that won't stand up and call the cards of the bullshit legislators and feminist haters. I agree with her that we need to take action and I will likely agree with you and what action you reccommend. So be it.
Good questions Tom. First I note that Kerry states, "Men have a choice to be more than just sperm donors; they can actually be real dads."
You know, I can remember the civil rights era in the 60's when all these do-gooder's would come out of the woodwork and say all of these good things (like Kerry) in favor of blacks. Then they would demonstrate their racism by blaming blacks for the problems created by racists. Kerry is doing exactly the same thing. In the end, the Kerry's of the world did nothing to help end racism. They simply made it worse.
I find it outrageous that Kerry claims men must rise above being a bit more than a "sperm donor" in her eyes so that we can qualify as being a dad in her eyes.
For Kerry to call us sperm donors demonstrates the an incredible level of male-hate on her part. In Kerry's eyes, men do not have intrinsic rights other than the intrinsic rights of a sperm cell. In Kerry's eyes, men must somehow be more than just themselves to qualify as being "read dads." NOT!
Then Kerry continues her male-hate diatribe when she writes, "Men, you need to decide for yourselves, because it's only the individuals who can change how others are treating them."
That statement is just plain an pure male-hate plain and simple. Men already have the intrinsic right to be treated with respect and dignity. We do not have to do anything to have that right endowed upon us by the pseudo-goddess Kerry.
Again, Kerry is asserting that if men don't do what she has decided then in her eyes we are nothing more than "sperm donors."
This woman is incredibly bigoted, and she is incapable of accepting responsibility for her version of male-hate. Ignore all of the flowery accolades. There are a few sentences that tell us what she is really thinking.
It is no different then some Southern Preacher spending a half hour praising the goodness of blacks then the Preacher calls them the "N" word and asserts they need to fix their problem.
My recommendations:
1) Denounce people like Kerry as incredibly bigoted against men.
2) Do not marry women.
3) Do not have children.
4) When having sex with a woman use a condom.
5) Poor Tabasco sauce into all condoms after use so that she cannot get a hold of the sperm and get pregnant.
6) Learn to realize that women see men as little more than sperm donors and paychecks. Even Kerry admits this in her article.
7) If a woman claims a child is yours then get a DNA test EVERY time.
8) Do nothing to help fix the rising tide of gangs. This phenomena is a repeat of history as played out in the Soviet Union between 1917 and 1940.
9) Do not help women that are the victims of gang assaults. They created the no-fault divorse laws which have led to the gang violence.
10) Be polite to women in the workplace, and do not talk to them otherwise except for professional interaction as the job requires. If the woman is being too nice then you are at risk for a major lawsuit. This is a major red flag. No not provide them with special help in any way. Let women lift their own boxes.
11) Remember that women created the broken family with their feminist lies and laws. Hold them accountable for the devastating consequences on children, society, and families. You can do this by talking to your friends about how women created the no-fault divorce laws, and you can inform your friends that women cause 80% of all divorces. Then you can point out that ~70% of all children in jail had no father because the mothers made poor choices. Stop blaming men.
12) When a child is a bastard call the child a bastard. This is important because we cannot stop Marxist-Feminism so long as women can have children without the involvement of a father. Every child has the right to a loving father. If the woman cannot produce the natural father then the child should be removed from her neglect (with few exceptions).
13) Do not engage in political correctness. This is a Marxist-Feminist tactic to control your thoughts. Feminists currently have an agenda to use PC speak to make all men's groups illegal because they criticize feminists. That means that they are trying to make posting to this discussion board a hate crime.
14) Learn the history of feminism and how it failed in the Soviet Union, and learn to understand why the same failures are being repeated in America.
15) Tell every man that you know, who you do not work with, that men are at war with feminist. It is a war that the feminists have started, and they will use every form of legal trickery to put you in jail.
16) Inform your friends that over 70% of all allegations made by women are false, and the false allegations are a means of gaining leverage over the man. Common false allegations include, rape, incest, child molestation, domestic violence, sexual harrassment, hostile work environment, and more. They do this for money without any fear of prosecution. Period.
17) Educate your friends on the prevalence of paternity fraud. Make certain that they understand that women have made themselves criminally immune to punishment for that crime. Do not agree to be the father of another man’s child. If you do then you are committing paternity fraud and depriving the child of their real father.
18) Agree with all your male friends that women created the problem and that they should fix the problems. Do not organize to fix the problem except in rare cases. For the most part, this has already been tried and failed.
19) Now that the bigots are coming forward and blaming men for the male-hatered that is everywhere, it is clear that the Marxist-Feminist are starting to get hurt. Do not do anything to alleviate that pain that the feminists are experiencing. They deserve to suffer.
20) When a woman claims to be a feminist recognize that she is in fact an evil Marxist. This applies to most all feminist groups.
21) Recognize that children’s rights groups are actually feminist hiding behind children with a political agenda that favors only the women. Do not acknowledge in any way the rights of children. Doing so only places men at a disadvantage while the women get more special priviledge.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it is ironic as well as hilarious, that the article writer herself admits that men have been getting stepped on by women -- and then blames it on the men!!
She puts the onus on men to come forward..and her last sentence in the article is, quite frankly, indecent and disgusting.
An analogy - I can hear the 'liberated man' of the 19th century: "come on bitch, if you feel you need equality than stop complaining about your yeast infection and learn how to write, so we'll know that you can fill out the ballot!"..
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
