|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:44 PM December 3rd, 2004 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Thomas. It appears that feminism is indeed, by definition, a crime against humanity.
Just today I walked into the multicultural center at my university at Oregon State University, (my first mistake of the day) and noticed that they have converted the men's restrooms to unisex restrooms. THe women's restrooms have remained for women only, but now there are officially no "men's" restrooms in the building. Fucking pig dogs. I guess I should be happy that they give us a place to piss at all.
One day, we won't have to liken feminism to Nazism. Feminism will be understood as a crime against humanity in its own right. One day, people will liken things to feminism the way we liken feminism to Nazism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"...they have converted the men's restrooms to unisex restrooms."
What, they think that if males are left alone for too long they'll rise up and stand together against feminism? This is very similar to the rules back in the day of American Slavery. The slaves weren't allowed to socialize in groups out of fear that they may band together and rise up against their masters. I sense some feminist paranoia...gasp, are they starting to catch on that men are starting to *NOT* take their shit anymore and are forming a revolution against their misandric tyranny?!
Oh poor them! The poor little feminazis are starting to loose their 'guilt-trip' power over men and boys. Sucks to be them, but I don't feel sorry for their impending demise because it's been LONG OVER DO!!! People are waking up to feminist lies more than ever before. And they are, rightfully so, equating Feminism with Nazism, because Feminism *IS* Nazism. It's misandric gender fascism! It's a no brainer. They're just a hate movement. Like the Nazis, they needed a scapegoat for their own self-inflicted and self-induced misery; the Human Male Species. People are starting to realize that and it's about damn time.
*Ms.Thea the Pre-Law Major, Pro-Gender Egalitarian, and Pro-Reproductive Rights Activist*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
they have converted the men's restrooms to unisex restrooms. THe women's restrooms have remained for women only, but now there are officially no "men's" restrooms in the building.
A few months ago, I went to the Gugenheim Museum in New York. I had a cup of tea in the cafeteria before heading for the exhibits. On the way I passed two, side by side, restrooms. Having to take a leak, I stopped and waited in line. One of the restrooms was for women only. The other was unisex. When someone left the unisex room, the next person in line, male or female, went in. When someone left the women's room, the next female in line went in, even if that allowed her to pass one or more males. Needless to say, the females were waiting in line for significantly less time than the males.
So, I did a bit of peaceful guerilla warfare. After I was done, I lowered the seat. I washed my hands, and then I splashed a lot of water from the faucet onto the toilet seat. The person who went in after me was a woman.
Chuckle.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:16 PM December 3rd, 2004 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
What a gentleman. I would have been so angry that I would have pissed all over the toilet seat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:20 PM December 3rd, 2004 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
that's what i thought too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is one thing that could be tried. Someone has to sit at the front of the bus. This would be going to the women's bathroom. This is consistent with non-violent direct action (It has to be non-violent or it will give feminists the excuse to shout about violent men) and would probably court arrest, probably on some feeble grounds about "indecent behaviour" or the US equivalent. I am not clear that I would be brave enough to do that, although I have come close in one F4J protest. Until someone does something like that nothing is going to change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:06 PM December 5th, 2004 EST (#44)
|
|
|
|
|
I just hope it never comes to that. Rioting on the part of us guys, I mean.
However if the time DOES, indeed, come, I will be there. Hopefuly I will make the warrior clan of my ancestors proud.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am pretty sure we are far away from a true sex war. To get some kind of rebellion or uprising you have to have a group of people who feel that violence is the only answer. We do not have that at the present time. I hope we never have a sex war. A sex war would be more devastating than any previous civil war or rebellion as it is a far more fundamental division than most civil wars.
Martin Luther King advocated non-violent direct action as an alternative to violence. I am suggesting non-violent direct action as an alternative to doing nothing. One reason is the success of feminist propaganda that paints woman as the victim. For most practical purposes the Men's Movement is invisible. Websites and campaigns are starting to get to through but only in small ways so far. This success of F4J as opposed to most other groups has due to the use of non-violent direct action to draw attention to father's issues. If the campaign is set at the right level then it gets publicity but not hostility. It is partly dependent on a feeling among some men, not generally voiced, that things aren't quite right between the sexes. Our problem is to break through the lace curtain. I believe non-violent direct action is the only possible course at this time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am pretty sure we are far away from a true sex war.
To a large extent, I'm not talking about a sex war. When there are enough impoverished men seeing far more women than men dressing in classy clothes and eating at the best restaurants, yes, there will be more attacks on women, most by individual men. But when masses of impoverished men riot (wait until we have two generations of horribly undereducated men and then add on a severe economic downturn), the men will to a large extent attack buildings. They will attack the system. I would expect to see rioters streaming toward the financial district.
I'm not saying I want this; I'm saying this is where we're heading. F4J has had a few successes and will have more. But in the US, for example, there have been more women than men in the colleges and universities for nearly two and a half decades. And the percentage of men continues to plummet. Even if an honest effort were made to start turning this around today, we would still have a generation of undereducated males. In all likelihood, the feminists will successfully stonewall reform for many years to come.
Yes, with enough organizing, perhaps at some school a group of young men will stage a sit in at a women's restroom. In three or four or five years, administrators at a school or two might decide that all restrooms should be unisex.
A sex war would be more devastating than any previous civil war or rebellion as it is a far more fundamental division than most civil wars.
We already have a sex war. It's called feminism and the body count is clear in the rising tide of male suicides. Perhaps it would be clearer if more females were committing suicide.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Men are coming to understand that in this feminist Gulag, they are merely prey.
Every faithful wife/girlfriend is only one 911 call away from seizing your assets and destroying your personal liberty.
Men are chattel in this feminist legal Twilight Zone.
Like the plantation slaves in pre-Civil War times, men are developing their own subversive channels of communication, and our own invisible language codes, and systems of insurrection.
It will not take decades to win over the majority of men, many of whom today (via the marriage strike) are passively resisting feminist tyranny, and will soon take up more activist measures.
The young dudes on all the MRA boards display a wisdom beyond their years.
They'll not repeat their father's mistakes...
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Thomas,
I wasn't saying you were talking about a sex war. I was talking about violence up to and including a sex war. I was saying that it was unfeasible and would be detrimental to the human race, both sexes, in the long run.
I would suggest to you that we are not currently in a sex war. We are under attack but it is a propaganda war or a Cold War, not a formally declared war. We are for the most part not fighting back. Most men do not realise that feminist pretensions about equality are anything other than correcting a bad situation. Any out and out war is a long way off. In the meantime, we need to combat the propaganda war.
F4J represents a typical example of the position we were in. Prior to F4J almost no one outside a small number of father's groups knew or acknowledged that there was anything wrong when the family court system. Any attempt to bring it up a in a feminist controlled media produced bland dismissals with the usual assurances that everything was alright. After F4J highlighted the problem, there is still an attempt to dismiss this problem, but now serious questions are being asked.
I am committed to the idea that non-violent direct action will get attention and raise questions, and is the only feasible way forward at the moment . Although feminists and the media feminists and the media will try to depict it as male violence, they will not be successful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hello Raymond,
I wasn't saying you were talking about a sex war. I was talking about violence up to and including a sex war... We are under attack but it is a propaganda war or a Cold War, not a formally declared war.
I'm afraid I'm not clear on what you are saying. We certainly have a great deal of violence against males through feminism. The plague of false accusations which leads to the placing of innocent men into prison, where violence is often rampant, is part of this. So is the domestic violence committed against men and boys, which is generally excused when committed by women. In addition, I have read of one case and heard of another in which men, who had lost their children as a result of divorce, have shot their ex-wives' attorneys. And, of course, there are the cases of men who commit suicide after losing their children as a result of divorce. If we're talking about "violence up to and including a sex war," we have that the moment there is any violence at all. As for a formally declared war between men and women, I don't expect that, and I'm not sure how war between men and women could be formally declared.
I do expect men to become more violent as a large percentage of them are cast into poverty, they see far more women than men living oh-so-well, and they realize that they are poor and the women are wealthy as a direct result of endless preferential treatment for women and hatred and discrimination against men. I'd bet that few of the classy, well-dressed, professional black women that I saw in DC live in the ghettos with far too many black men. White women and white men will soon follow this pattern. And when the severe, prolonged economic downturn arrives, men's lot in life will collapse. There will still be jobs, but far fewer, and almost all of the jobs that pay well will be held by women -- again, note the black community. (BTW: The economic downturn to which I refer is the one that Japan is now in and that will get worse as the rest of the developed world follows suit as a result of population collapse. To anyone who doesn't believe it's coming, I suggest you send your data and analyses to the growing number of respected economists who are now warning us about our impending prolonged and severe economic malaise.)
Anyway, I'm glad you believe in non-violent action. I'm a non-violent man myself, but I do expect a rising tide of violence as society, and especially men, fall into the pit into which feminism is inexorably driving us.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:07 PM December 6th, 2004 EST (#61)
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't it interesting that feminists are literaly PUSHING men into the rolls they claim to so hate?
When un-able to find employment alot of men WILL turn to crime. Some may have no other recourse to survive. Robbing establishments to get money to buy food or drugs and alcohol, to numb their miserable existance.
It reminds me of what happened to my people. We were (still are) reffered to as "Thievin' Indians". When our livelyhood I.E. the buffalo were slaughtered to near extinction by the federal government, we Indians had no alternitive but to steal food for our families in order to simply survive. And yes, we did kill some pioneers who came, shot up our villages and stole our land. But it was OUR land. So we were called "violent savages". These were behaviors that the government claimed to detest in Indians, but we were literaly driven to it BY the government! ANYONE in the same position would do the same or similar things.
Just as the federal government drove Indians to behavior that they claimed immoaral, wrong and savage, so too does feminism, the government, the "legal system" and other factors begin to drive men (of all races) to do the same.
In the past we had Indian up-risings. Now it is time for a MEN'S up-riseing.
And I agree we shouldn't use violence (for now). When I say I hope to make my warrior ancestors proud, I don't mean necissarily through violent means. Some of our greatest warriors used non-violence. He wasn't from my particular tribe but I think Cheif Joseph is a hell of an example of a warrior who caused change for Indian people by NOT fighting. And we "Indian warriors" of today tend to use the legal system rather than rifels and war-axes to do our fighting.
But the time for change is NOW. And we must do what we can to achieve it.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:06 AM December 4th, 2004 EST (#25)
|
|
|
|
|
Better yet, up until very recently the Oregon State University shuttle van would only pick up women. Men were not allowed on the van. The idea of the shuttle service was that women could call and have the van pick them up and take them anywhere they needed to go free of charge. It would purportedly make it safer for women who were taking night classes to get to their cars, or anywhere else they needed to go. Men could not use this same shuttle (being funded, of course, by their student fees.)
So, it reminds me too of blacks having to sit at the back of the bus. Except, at least black people were able to get ON the bus.
-CH3CH2OH
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:19 PM December 4th, 2004 EST (#30)
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it IS the same thing as blacks having to ride at the back of the bus. And it IS the same thing as the taverns in my old neighborhood, back in the 60's, that had signs on the doors that read; "NO DOGS OR INDIANS ALLOWED".
Yes, it is the same thing.
That is why I became a men's activist as well as an Indian activist.
In the 60's I was restricted for my ethnicity. Now it is because of my gender. I have to endure the same exact thing I did as an Indian , again as a MAN!
Nothing ever seems to change in this country. The hate is still here and it is still flourishing, feeding and growing.
It just changes targets every now and then, but it's still here all the same.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:17 PM December 4th, 2004 EST (#32)
|
|
|
|
|
If we REALLY wanted to get peoples under-pants in a wad, we might hang signs on the uni-sex bathrooms that say; "No dogs or WOMEN allowed".
Let's see how long that would be tolerated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you really want to get the point to people perhaps you need to use words like ni**er in addition to male on the sign.
"No ni**ers of males alowed!"
Just censored the bad part, I dont like the word, so...
They (feminists) will never understand it anyway so dont bother being polite.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The author wants it both ways... he/she says that changes have not hurt boys but have rather helped girls, then goes on to detail all the ways that the changes HAVE hurt boys... contradicting the prior statement.
Must be a guy wrote the article :rollseyes:
Dave K - A Radical Moderate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feminism is a crime against humanity. Its perpetrators should be dealt with accordingly.
I certainly can't disagree with this.
My own take, however, is that feminism is a religion. I'm reluctant to say this because I'm a religious person and have no desire to give religion a bad name. Regardless, feminism is a philosophy that has no basis in fact or reality. It's a mythology. As such, it has no place in public education.
It's the Christmas season. I find it both ironic and sad when some groups express concern with fairly insignificant public displays of religion such as Christmas carols that carry religious overtones, yet are oblivious to the forced indoctrination and acceptance of that vile and hate-filled religion known as feminism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Although I had, on the level of personal one on one debate, always, even as early as 1971, tried to keep feminism an itellectually honest enterprise ( and brothers please forgive me, I have worked actively at eliminating things like a lower minimum wage for women, supervisors exercising a modern form of jus prima nocta and other obvious abuses of women) I very quickly came to see that the movement was attracting people with "schizoid personality disorder" ( a form of psycopathy that has disappeared in the name of political correctness).
The University I attended was Mount Saint Vincent, a former Catholic girls finishing school which was sold out to feminists and given a University Charter. My experience as a student there was pure Hell. but that is another story and not really what I wanted to talk about in this thread.
Nearly 10 years after I graduated from the Mount, a collegue of mine, a certain renagade philosophy professor who's name I will refrain from divulging so that I may post this thread other places, came to me because he found himself alone in trying to prevent a travesty and a tragedy for boys who would be attending public schools in the futrure. He knew he could count on me to fight fervently.
The feminists at the Mount were riding on an arrogant wave of success. They had just confered an honourary degree on Hillary Clinton. (this was before Monica). In the scramble to downsize post secondary institutons the minister of education had selected MSVU as the one place to retain a program confering degrees in education...the one place where aspiring teachers could attend. Knowing what I did about the Mount I was indeed willing to fight this decision.
Every news media that I approached would not publish what I said...if you purchase eight square inches of ad space in a newspaper, you have purchased silence when you need it...I had learned THAT lesson years before. But there was one exception, FRANK magazine was started in part by funds that one of the initial partners had received as an out of court settlement for unjust dismissal...so FRANK owed MSVU no favours. I also got a sympathetic ear from a reporter at the student newspaper "the Picaro" but the issue my interview was in was confiscated and censored by the university administration. The folowing was what I managed to get published in FRANK.
Carry A Torch for the Mount (letter to the editor, FRANK magazine issue#213, Feb 13, 1996)
Dear Frank,
Here's a one liner for you. Did you hear the one about the guy who decided to celebrate Valentine's Day by going out to the Mount and burning his degree?
To paraphrase what Horace Greeley said: When a dog bites a man that is not news. When a man bites Cujo that aught to be news.
Problem is, you are just not allowed to say anything bad about Mount Saint Vincent.It's just not politically correct. Any questioning or criticism of what is done there in the name of feminism is usually responded to with something like: Feminists don't hate men. Some of my best friends are men. I just wouldn't like to see my sister going out with one.
And of course there is the great excuse of all at the Mount, which is that the university's mission is the education of womyn (this is not a typo; "man" and "men" are dirty words at the Mount).
What the real mission is (let's face it women can be educated any number of other places; most of the women who teach at the Mount were), is the political indoctrination of women, and that indoctrination has a distinctly anti-male flavour.
So why the protest now? Because, in the rush to downsize post secondary institutions in Nova Scotia, the education minister saw fit to leave the Mount as the only place in the province where you can get a teaching degree.
What made the minister pick the Mount, God only knows. But if he had spent four years there as a male student as I did, he wouldn't dream of doing such a thing. You must be out of your mind Mr. MacEachern.
The Mount is one big practical exercise in hatred and willful ignorance. It is a travesty to dress such things in the cap and gown of scholarship. Owning one of their degrees is an embarrassment to me. But not for much longer. On February 14 I plan to burn it in the parking lot of the Seton Academic Centre.
Call CHNS or CKDU ( don't bother with CJCH, they're too politically correct) and dedicate Smoke Gets In Your Eyes or I Don't Want To Set The World On Fire to the Mount for Valentine's Day.
__________________________________________________ ________________
When this issue of FRANK hit the news stands, members of the Mount's Alumnae office and Public Relations Office went around franticly buying up as many copies as possible as damage control.
They invited me, by way of their chief of security (who happened to be my next door neighbour in the neighbourhood where I grew up and one of my oldest aquaintences) to attend asession with their "sexual harrassment advisor" in order to express my concerns. Prior to this, a tantrum I had thrown when the Alumnae association had asked me for contributions had led to the enactment of a new sexual harrassment policy (carefully crafted to not have sufficient retro-activity for me to sue). Initially this fembot lawyer thought she could intimidate me with her referent authority and some butch body language....you guys know me...what do you think happened?
Anyway, when I finished venting she seemed genuinely appalled at some of the things I reported...but gave me the lawyer kiss off.
I made it clear that the public were going to be warned and that had nothing to do with my grievances...it was for the sake of the little boys who would be attending school in the future.
Just befor Valentine's Day, I was shovelling snow in my drive way when a process server came to me with two documents which I will now post. He was a decent fellow, big and burley as he was, when I explained to him what it was about he said:
"You know, they sent this in a sealed envelope and that is grounds to have it thrown out in court. If you decide to defy this injunction I will appear and testify that they blew it on procedure"
I thanked him, but I was not going to put my friend the security chief in the position of having to arrest me. Besides, I think the administration of the Mount might have been a little concerned that some of their more militant students might have had an altercation with me and I was a karate instructor after all.
first the letter from the Mount administration:
February 6, 1996 (on Mount Saint Vincent University letter head from the office of the vice-president administration)
Dear Mr. XXXXXXX:
We have received communications from you indicatingthat you propose to engage in a protest against Mount Saint Vincent University by attending our premises on or about February 14, 1996 to burn your degree from the University.
The degree which you earned from Mount Saint Vincent University is your property. However, it would be highly inappropriate and unacceptable to us for you to enter upon our premises and burn your degree. We will not permit your attendance on campus for that purpose. Attached is a Notice under the Protection of Property Act to that effect.
I understand that you have concerns about the quality of the educational experience received by men attending Mount Saint Vincent University. There are appropriate ways in which to deal with legitimate concerns regarding the University. As you know, the University has created the Office of the Sexual Harassment Advisor. This Office provides an avenue to any student, be they male or female, to address concerns of sexual discrimination or harassment. I understand that, at the University's suggestion, you have met with our Sexual Harrassment Advisor to review and discuss your concerns. You may not be aware that the Mount also regularly surveys the members of it's community on a variety of issues, including, periodically, concerns relating to sexual discrimination/harassment.
Yours truly
M. Lois Dyer Mann
Vice-President (Administration)
NOW THE INJUNCTION:
Dear Mr. XXXXXXX
TAKE NOTICE that on or after the 6th day of February, 1996, pursuant to the Protection of Property Act of Nova Scotia, yo are hereby notified that you are not to enter, or be on the property of Mount Saint Vincent University, Halifax, Nova Scotia.
The Protection of Property Act, Section 3(1), provides that:
Every person who, without legal justification, whether conferred by an enactment or otherwise,or without the permission of the occupier or a person authorized by the occupier, the proof of which rests upon the person asserting justification or permission,
e) enters on premises where entry is prohibited by notice; or
f) engages in an activity which is prohibited on the premises by notice,
is guilty of an offence and on summary conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $500.00
Your attendance on Campus for any purpose, including your proposed action of burning your degree, is strictly prohibited.
THIS NOTICE will remain in effect until such time as you are given written permission by the Vice-President, Administration, of the University to re-enter the said property.
Signed on behalf of Mount Saint Vincent University this 6th day of February, 1996.
MOUNT SAINT VINCENT UNIVERSITY
Per: Lois Dyer Mann
Vice-President (Administration)
-------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------
Anyway, as it turns out this was more of an embarasment to them than if they had simply let me do the protest and ignored me as a crank. The following article then appeared in FRANK:
Lois' Looney Valentine Kiss-Off ( from Frank Magazine issue 215, 1996-03-12) by "Cass A Nova"
I thought my Frank 213 correspondent, XXXXXXXXX's,"threat" to celebrate Valentine's Day by going out to Mount Sait Vincent U. and burning his biz admin degree was all a bit of a hoot.
XXXXX, a (federal government bureaucrat), who graduated in 1987, contends his alma mater is in the iron grip of terminally politically correct feminists who discriminate against men students-and sent the university a copy of his Feb 14 missive.
Gauleiteress Lois Dyer Mann (Personn?) didn't quite call out the fire department. But the nutty admin v.p. sent Dartmouth resident, XXXXXX, an official notice telling him he could be fined $500.00 under the Protection of Property Act, if he showed up and set things alight!
"It would be highly inappropriate and unacceptable to us for you to eenter our premises and burn your degree, " declared Lois.
Responded XXXXXXX: "Like I said, you are just not allowed to say anything bad about the Mount. Yet, Harvard and Yale were streaked by naked feminists protesting pornography this year."
XXXXXXX, stayed away from the campus, but wrote Gauleiteress Lois a Valentine: "Everyone I have shown your edict to thinks it is hilarious. As for Mount Saint Vincent breaking our hot date, well once again I feel rejected.
"But I leave you with this Valentine's sentiment. When the devil enters a coven of witches, a peculiar protocol is observed.
"And the feminists at the Mount who treated me like the devil owe me a kiss."
As some of you know (the Canadian contingent at least) the SOW fiasco calling for all MRAs to be hatewatched was an attachment to a report on boys performance in school. The accused got to investigate themselves,,,found themselves not guilty and charged their accusors with hate crime.
By the way...there are now five male teachers remaining in the Nova Scotia school system all near retirement age and not one...nope nary a one..male education graduate to replace them.
To all of the folks who dismissed me as a crank
I TOLD YOU SO!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERY nice of you to share a story like that.
Sharing of stories such as these allows us to all have a better understanding of what we face.
Steven
Guerilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:54 PM December 3rd, 2004 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Despite all the facts being against them, feminists still found a way to manipulate the media into reporting that girls were discriminated against in education. The American Association of University Women published "research" on how girls have self-esteem issues from the way teachers taught. It even claimed that the (female majority) teachers weren't calling on girls to answer questions in class. It was amazing how much was made of this while the real gap in education wasn't being addressed at all.
How can you address a gender gap when feminists attack anyone who even calls attention to the facts?
http://www.now.org/issues/media/alerts/102502-60mi nutes.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feminist are effectively using the same techniques that Hitler used. In Mein Campf, Hitler proposed the big: lie. It has to be as simple as possible. Whether you're talking about Jews or men you blame all of them. You do not get bogged down in arguments about particular Jews or men, and you simply repeat the big lie as much as possible. No matter how ridiculous it is, it is eventually believed. Reasonable people who do not make sweeping generalisations about a particular group have a lot of trouble dealing with this argument because they are concentrating on the minute details,: whereas the big lie is easy to understand. It is much easier to understand "All Jews are rotten" or "All men are rapists" than some argument like a "Some men are rapists but not all men are rapists". The latter can sound like prevarication and evading the issue. Of course it helps if there is an inherent desire by some of to believe the outrageous lie in the first place. Somehow the big lie has to be confronted which in difficult when the liars control the media, but it has to be done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:19 PM December 3rd, 2004 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
the problem runs much deeper. It surely won't be fixed until educators first come to see that it exists.
The problem comes from pervasive misandry. Time to do something about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not especially fond of certain brands of feminism which have exacerbated this situation.
But I can't help but wonder - why aren't more men stepping up to the plate and taking an active role with boys' education? The overwhelming majority of teachers in K-12 are female. I work at a university and I don't see males swelling the ranks of teacher education programs so they can get out there and make a difference in the classroom. That's where boys need help and male role models and there just aren't enough men to go around to fill the classrooms. Men who are in college shun these programs for business and engineering (yes, these fields pay more but they don't necessarily make a difference in boys' lives on a day-to-day basis). It also seems to me that too many men are blissfully ignorant of this problem or are more concerned that their sons play football than read a book. Unfortunately men have assisted in creating a culture that's anti-intellectual where academics just aren't cool (I call this the MTV culture). And too many boys have bought into this culture. They need men to help wean them off the music videos and video games and focus on their school work instead.
I'm retiring very soon. One of my highest priorites for retirement is to work with boys to help them improve their academic skills. Public libraries around the U.S. run reading and literacy programs and that's where I plan to start. I have been blaming feminism for too long and not doing anything more proactive and I intend to change that. I know many dedicated men work with their sons but all too many boys are without an adult man's influence and that extends to the classroom where this problem begins. Articles such as this one help bring the issue to wider public attention but articles alone cannot change the situation. I hope many more men will take an active role in helping to change the educational system that is failing boys in a major way. Feminists made girls their priority. It's time for men to make boys their priority and to take whatever steps we can to change this horrendous situation that is worsening each year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell me if I'm incorrect, but feminism staked its credibility on the premise that if girls and women were "enabled" to excel, if the Evil Patriarchal barriers blocking the fairer gender's potential were dismantled, then we would have a society that advantaged all PEOPLE equally.
Today, American girls and women are the most free human beings on the planet. They enjoy an abundance of life choices, an endless tax-payer funded entitlement system, a "You Go Girrrrllls" media culture that celebrates their every whim.
Men foolishly assumed that liberated, educated women would actually "walk the talk" about equality, fairness, and creating a better society.
Now that boys are suffering, and failing, in schools that have been "reconstructed" to benefit girls, do we see any evidence at all that women care?
Women dominate a boy's daily experience from birth through high school, as mothers, day-care providers, and teachers.
Women are failing men.
Intentionally, and with malice.
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When asked, the majority of the feminists, even a few males, would say that men have most of the priviledges as granted to them by the Patriarchy.
When asked what problems females faced, they could spout off a whole littiny, yet when asked about men, they say they either have few if no problems and then clam up and say that really only female problems matter to them.
If I saw a female bathroom next to a unisex bathroom that used to be a male bathroom I'd ask them where's the male bathroom. If they say I can use the unisex bathroom, then I'd tell them if there is a female bathroom then there must be a male bathroom. If they say there is no need, or some other B.S., then I'd tell them they are being racist/sexist.
It's a funny thing calling Feminists racists/sexists. They don't like being called that, yet they have no problem calling others who don't agree with them racists/sexists!
Just goes to show how messed up society has become, huh?
-Bro
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You're correct Roy. Feminism deceived men into believing that women would help lift the burden off of men from being the soul bread winners within the family and in return men would be able to enjoy being with their children more often. But as we see today that was simply a big lie. A lie such as the classic, "Feminism is about equality between both sexs and feminism benefits men and boys too." Well where are those fucking benefits because I and the rest of us who didn't buy into feminism's idiot-ology don't see them?!
Mothers still unfairly monopolize (and tyrannize)over children's lives and refuse to allow fathers enjoy these so called beneficial promises of feminism that would allow fathers to be with their children more often, and free men from the burden of being the soul bread winner. These women don't want equality, they MORE PRIVELEGES, MORE SPECIAL TREATMENT, MORE STUPIDLY CHIVALROUS MALES, AND MORE POWER OVER SOCIETY!!!
But these new stay-at-home mommies aren't like the "Leave It To Beaver" housewives/mothers. They're the "Desperate Housewives" mothers. Women who lounge around the house and leave all of the house work and childcare to their nannies and maids, so that they can watch Oprah, Dr Phil, Sex And The City dvds, read Cosmo Magazine, fool aroudn with the UPS guy, have children that aren't their husbands' children, and then spend all of his hard earn money on material luxury shit that Oprah and Cosmo Magazine tell them to buy. Stay-at-home mothers aren't what they used to be, but they're riding the Feminist bandwagon and milking it for all it's worth in order to satisfy their greed.
Women who have been poisoned by Feminism, Matriarchal Supremacist Dogma, and Chivalry then give birth to boys and dominate the class rooms and the boys' daily lives are the tyrannical dictators fulfilling feminism's dream; the complete erosion of the Male Psyche and freewill. Mothers and Female teachers condition boys into being chivalrous, profeminist, submissive, and docile pawns who blindly follow and obey the Feminazi Reich. Domineering mothers and biased Female teachers (trained by Feminism) who tyrannize their sons are Maternalistic Feminine Hitlers and Stalins. So Hitler and Stalin are still alive and well, just in a new incarnation--maternal and feminine but every bit cruel and abusive.
*Ms.Thea the Pre-Law Major, Pro-Gender Egalitarian, and Pro-Reproductive Rights Activist*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know whether or not it's true for the United States, but in the UK the educational system is effectively openly hostile to men. (1) There was a report about a male student teacher who went to one school that made it clear that no man was welcome in the school. (2) There was a African-American educational psychologist who came to England to advise on helping Afro-Caribbean (African British if you like) boys in British schools, but when he suggested a Afro Caribbean male role models in schools, this was rejected by Afro Caribbean feminists on the grounds that female role models were just as good. (3) Male teachers continue to be vulnerable to any accusation of abuse, and regardless of who makes it and what their motives are. They can be suspended at a moment's notice and inquiries into the allegations seem to take forever, even when the motives of the complainant to a quite possibly to get out of a punishment for some misdeed. There is even a possibility or being sued or jailed based on an allegation which is quite possibly motivated by spite against the teacher. No attempt is a made a to correct any of this, therefore men continue to avoid teaching as a career
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:27 PM December 5th, 2004 EST (#47)
|
|
|
|
|
"(3) Male teachers continue to be vulnerable to any accusation of abuse, and regardless of who makes it and what their motives are."
I taught school for many years (part time), but after seeing story after story on TV about guys accused of sexual impropriety, it became clear it was way too risky of a job for the salary they paid.
Kids in school are notorious for making things up, and any man today would be a fool to be a teacher in the man-hating educational system that we have today. The radical/gender feminists have worked hard to make the system that way, and their indoctrination is everywhere throughout the educational system from Kindergarten to Doctoral programs, from College Libraries to custodial closets.
I do not foresee that I will ever go back in the classroom, and I suspect there are many males who have crossed "Instructor" off their list of potential jobs, for good reasons.
I still have my teaching credentials, but they are as worthless as confederate money right after the American Civil War.
I was thinking just the other day, that going after all these misandrist advertisers was a good thing, but when is the men's movement going after all those man hating women's studies programs on college campuses that spew their evil filth and lies about men? Man hating all begins in taxpayer funded women's studies programs on college campuses. The radical/gender feminist movement recruits and enlists their minions on college campuses. They train them on college campuses. Then they send those college trained hate monger bigots out into your community to spread their evil, vile, man hating filth and lies through the legal system, the church, the media, the movies, the TV shows and all the other politically correct areas of society - until all of society is corrupted by their evil. It would be bad enough if these hate movements existed exclusively on college campuses, but they don't. They don't exist in a vacuum on college campuses. They spawn there, then spread like the plague into our communities. Just the other day I saw a sign (made to hang on a door knob) hanging on the door knob of the women's studies center of the campus where I work. It was from a well know off campus radical/gender feminist group, and it said (among other things) "Do Not Disturb," and "Feminists at work," and "Working for Women's Equity." It all sounds equitable and nice, but we have already seen the effects of their work in our courts, schools, churches, newspapers, etc., and the completed work flowing from their goals is still femi-supremacy and male slavery and persecution.
You only have to go on the main feminist organization web sites to see the "work internship for college credit" and other programs and services they offer students in taxpayer funded women's studies programs to know the insidious links to the evil persecution men live under. Women's studies programs encourage their students to train to be professional victims through these various employment opportunities in the "Women's Industries." It's the biggest racket in America today, and it is heavily supported with taxpayer dollars, and should be broken up and prosecuted under "RICO in my opinion."
Women's Studies Swindles Taxpayers
Women's Studies Teaches Uncritical Thinking
Women's Studies Is Abhorrent Pseudo-Science
Women's Studies Teaches Heterophobia
Women's Studies Incites Manhating
Women's Studies Sabotages Traditional Families
Shame on Women's Studies For Its Misandry
Women's Studies Teaches Lies!
Women's Studies Lies About Domestic Violence (this one is not yet finished - work in progress)
Sincerely, Ray
Please do not scroll up the page of the linked item(s). All the info I'm trying to convey is as the page initially comes up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Considering how long "The War Against Boys" by Christina Hoff Sommers has been available - please explain why we see articles such as this.
Perhaps the matter is worse than I thought, can it be that the professional journalists in America cannot read ? ? ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:54 PM December 4th, 2004 EST (#35)
|
|
|
|
|
"Considering how long "The War Against Boys" by Christina Hoff Sommers has been available - please explain why we see articles such as this."
Yea, the author of that article says no one has noticed the problem, but as you point out, Hoff Sommers has know about it for years, and wrote a book on it.
I guess the feminist dominated media just doesn't have the time to read books that don't have the approved radical/gender feminist slant. No wonder there are so many ignorant newspaper articles like this.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:14 AM December 4th, 2004 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
check this out...
i can't get myself to read too much since i can tell some are mysandric...'privileged boy' shit i think...a couple posts i read were ok.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboa rd.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2784968&mes g_id=2784968
[you may have to connect the gaps in the link for it to work]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:24 AM December 4th, 2004 EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
someone named teach1st wrote this on that thread....the the thread is called
'Why is this?
A shift in this thread away from the article's focus (which is that boys are having problems in school) to complaints about pay disparities and something about macho stuff not working anymore. That's changing the subject.
Looking at the problems boys have in school - and they are having problems - doesn't detract from problems that females have, but on every board I see this subject brought up, the problem is minimalized.'
Boys are struggling academically (Why?)
at democraticunderground
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:35 AM December 4th, 2004 EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
someone named maple wrote
'Girls are now doing well
in every subject. They used to do badly in maths and sciences, and well in English. Boys did well in maths and science, and poorly in English. It was thought to be because girls were 'verbal' and boys were 'spatial' in their thinking.
Simply prejudice...so people decided to push girls, and give them an equal chance. Meanwhile, they forgot the boys.
Same game, different team.'
a response to that quote
'Other way around. Girls are working harder....
because they know they have to do three times better than a boy to get a position that pays half what the boy does.... '
other random comments below
--------------------------------------
'So, where are their fathers?'
-----------------
'Now that gender roles are reaching parity...
...guys just can't count on macho bullshit and the like to get by, anymore.
---------------------
' they do better academically, but still earn less than men.
that's a bigger question.'
---------------------
' I notice this all the time.Edited on Fri Dec-03-04 10:57 PM by distantearlywarning
Among other things, I teach undergraduates to write. After 4 semesters, I can now tell without looking at the name whether a term paper was written by a male or female student. How? Male students, far more often than female students, turn in papers that are ungrammatical, have punctuation errors, and verge on total incomprehensibility.
My male students are also significantly more likely to be the students that come late to class or miss it entirely, sit in the back and fool around, plagiarize, do work incorrectly or not at all and then provide excuses for themselves, and demand things from me in an "entitled" kind of way (all you teachers out there probably know what I mean by that).
95% of my best students in 2 years have been girls. I have had very few men even make As in my classes. The vast majority of the students I have failed have been male.
I assure you that I am not just some crazy feminist who hates men and interprets every male behavior as bad or stupid. I make every attempt to grade students fairly. And if I had any biases at all when I started teaching, it was probably against girls, because I tend to like men better than women interpersonally. I certainly do not hate men or male undergraduates.
But I must confess that I am starting to develop a prejudice against male students now, after my experiences of the past two years. Many of the male undergraduates I have taught, IMO, do not belong at college. They have neither the work ethic nor the temperament to succeed in the academic setting.
Edited for clarity.
---------------------------------
Why? Because it doesn't matter how well they do!
They can do 40 percent worse than me in colllege and STILL make an extra $20K a year starting out... and double their income in a few years, and then again in a few years.
Because there is NO PRESSURE for men (white men) to be smarter, more efficient, more clever than the average woman.
Flame away, I will be sitting here under the glass ceiling...'
---------------------------------
There is a deep vein...
of anti-intellectualism running through the young males these days. Some of that is the influence of the hiphop culture, as I see it. Some of that is engendered by the schools pigeon-holing the kids and teaching them to be stupid, in the name of standardization. Some of that...sheesh...who knows?
It's cool to be a badass. It's cool to be cool. it's cool to get laid a lot. It ain't cool to be smart.
------------------------------
actually, I think boys still get more attention...
---------------------------------
my comment-----
some people are retarded
p. george
[i've been forgetting to sign my name in the last couple posts]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:43 AM December 4th, 2004 EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
about hip-hop from the above quote....hip-hop can be quite intellectual and political... discussing race and also class [including white working class people] and encourages knowledge, just not what we're told to believe by teachers...
but only the shallow ignorant crap is what gets on mtv....i can asure you though, that this is not what causes boys to hate school...
more boys have learning disabilities. i myself have mild dyslexia.
p george
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:46 AM December 4th, 2004 EST (#24)
|
|
|
|
|
'So it's possible this new data is about girls believing they have more options and feeling confident about going after them. What is interesting is the article doesn't cite evidence that boys are now doing worse than boys did in the past on standard measurements; they are only falling behind in comparison with girls. Maybe it's just that social changes are revealing a natural superiority among girls'
this is amazing....it is fine to say females are inherenty superior to males...fascists
p. george
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:15 PM December 5th, 2004 EST (#45)
|
|
|
|
|
I believe that this is being done either intentionaly or is an over looked fluke, that favors females. (which is why it is over looked)
Think about it. If girls are better educated than boys WHOM between them will have the qualifications for ALL major jobs, both buisness and political?
Un-educated, boys will have NO qualigfications for any thing other than janitors, which is EXACTLY the type of world feminists and their croneies are trying to create. They WANT boys to fail acedemicaly. Then and only then will their feminist, COMPLETELY female dominated paradise be acheived.
To do so BOYS MUST FAIL!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:12 PM December 6th, 2004 EST (#62)
|
|
|
|
|
Therefore, any claims that feminists make about wanting "equality" is utter bullshit!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted from the article: "And when fewer men earn college degrees there are fewer partners whom educated women find desirable to marry."
-------------------------------------------
Did anybody notice this line in the article? Here in the Netherlands the lack of educated men is also an issue and recently there was an article about the same issue from London UK. They can't find men who earn enough money to pamper them. I guess this is what's really concerning them.
Bert
--------------------
From now on, men's rights first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I imagine that the justification they're using for that bathroom thing is that women take longer to get their toilet business done. Fair enough; do what my company did. The bathrooms are separated by a wall, and instead of having 8 stalls in each bathroom, they just removed the wall and shifted it by one stall (does that make sense?), leaving 10 stalls in the ladies' room and 6 stalls in the men's.
Maybe some male Oregon athletes can use a similar argument (their practives are longer; they're bigger and have more equipment, etc.) to set things up so that there's one men's locker room, and one unisex!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kyo,
Yes, that sort of thing is one possible solution, though you don't mention the number of urinals. I've tested how long it takes to go into the bathroom, get ready to take a leak while standing, wash my hands and leave. I've compared this to the same, but getting my pants down and sitting. It takes a total of about 10% more time to drop the pants and get them back up and secured, everything else being the same. If the time required to take a leak were added, the difference would be even less.
So, to be fair: women should have at most 11 stalls for every 10 stalls and urinals combined that men have.
Another fair solution would be to make all the stalls unisex, and, when there's a line, the next person is the one who goes in. The reason this solution isn't used is because it would be equitable, and equitable is the last thing that our feminist rulers want. Women don't take far longer than men in a restroom for any physical reason. They take far longer because men attend to business and leave. Men don't hang out at a mirror checking their makeup and men don't use restrooms as social centers where they hang out to badmouth members of the other sex.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:26 PM December 4th, 2004 EST (#33)
|
|
|
|
|
Gentlemen and Ladies too of course: Something has been on my mind. Boys are fairing poorly academically, not a good thing indeed. Now we are going to saddle them with a male only draft? The prime draft age will be 20, seems to me that will discourage a lot of them from going on to higher education knowing they will be pulled out of college. It's my opinion that a male only draft is only going to make this problem worse. Perhaps many will loose the motivation or if they do go on to college will not pickup where they left off once their military time is up. I know the draft is not in place yet but I believe it will be sometime in 2005. Does anyone else see this issue as I do?
Pete in Nebraska
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pete in Nebraska asked:
I know the draft is not in place yet but I believe it will be sometime in 2005. Does anyone else see this issue as I do?
If the draft is reinstated soon, I think males and females will be drafted. Well over 95% of casualties among the draftees will be suffered by men. Women will be given positions in which they will learn skills that they can later use to earn money so they can live in comfort. They will also be put into positions in which they will decide where to send men to suffer and die. The media will, of course, trumpet the male and female draft as evidence that women are carrying their share of the burden.
By about 20 years from now, a draft might not be necessary because many men, being extremely undereducated, will have no option for getting their next meal other than joining the military. In that case, the enlisted men will struggle, suffer horridly, and die. American women can then carry on about how violent men are while they, the women, eat their bon bons.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:03 PM December 4th, 2004 EST (#34)
|
|
|
|
|
I was in my local bookstore this week when I came across a copy of Gwendolyn Gray’s book, “Girls Who Grew Up Great: A Book of Encouragement for Girls About Amazing Women Who Dared to Dream.” However I was shocked that the storeowner did not know of a similar book had been published for boys.
I looked on “Amazon” for a book that encourage boys and could not find any. I think in this time when boys seem to be unmotivated and subjected to a mass media that is full of negative male role models a book of encouragement, if done the right way, could be a bestseller.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:08 PM December 4th, 2004 EST (#36)
|
|
|
|
|
An encouraging book for boys would have a tough time getting published, because the publishing industry is feminazi dominated. And if it did, it would face tough sales prospects, because anti-male-brainwashed women buy most books.
But men have never been afraid to fight against great odds. Go for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pete, I'm not worried about a draft. GWB has said that he's 100% against it, and I can't imagine him doing anything to get people even angrier at him than they already are.
Thomas, that's a good point you make about women often heading for the bathroom just to socialize. I hadn't considered that. To answer your question, in my own office there are six urinals in the men's room. Probably this space is filled by more stalls in the women's room, but never having gone in, I of course can't be sure. Don't women have the courtesy to do their business and exit the bathroom right away when there's a line of people waiting? Or do they figure, "I waited for so long; I'm going to take my sweet time now that I'm here"?
It depresses me that there are no encouraging books for boys, or general motivating slogans like "you go girl" and "girl power" and the like. Whatever the situation may have been in the past, ten-year-old kids haven't experienced it, and boys are growing up feeling inferior. Easy for adults, who saw whatever injustice existed a generation or two ago and believe themselves to be rectifying it, to forget that kids have no sense of paying for the sins of their parents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I lived in Washington, DC, during the late-60s and early-70s. At that time, pretty much all of the blacks were poor. The women didn't dress for work (cleaning whity's toilets and sweeping whity's floors) in slick, professional outfits. The men didn't dress in three piece wool suits to clean the streets or pick up the garbage. Last June on the subway in DC, I saw countless, classy, black women. Many of them beautiful. They were dressed as rising or established professionals. As for black men, many were dressed as laborers. A few were dressed as professionals, but they were overwhelmed in number by the black women who were dressed as professionals.
Whity is headed in the same direction. Someone above asked where the men are, when it comes to education. Well, to paraphrase one of the great monsters of the 20th century, give me the children for their first five years, and you give me the future. Feminism has planned from the start to remove fathers from the family and, thereby, from their children. They have removed men from teaching positions with the young by the threat and application of false accusations. Years ago, I considered becoming a high school teacher. I spoke about this with other young men my age, who were considering the same career, and several of us expressed concern about having our careers destroyed and even being imprisoned as a result of false accusations made by women in the schools and children who have been coached by the feminists in the schools. (We'd already seen it happening.) As far as I know, every one of us decided against the career, in large part because of this consideration. And that's not to mention that there are far more men who have children and women to support than there are women who have children and men to support. On the whole, men need higher paying jobs, so they can't take a relatively easy way out. And, yes, it takes more to become an electrical engineer than it takes to become a grade school teacher.
The way things are going, and I see no reason to expect otherwise, in another couple of decades, women will have pretty much all of the high paying jobs. Revisionist feminists, who claim that women will then take gooooood care of men are liars or fools. Men will be treated more like dirt by women than they are today. By that point, the teaching that females are by nature superior to men will probably be part of the curriculum of every publicly funded institution.
About my only regret is that this horror won't be perpetrated fully against the men of today. They are the ones who, with precious few exceptions, have earned it through their cowardice and complicity in the face of blatent anti-male evil. (I've gotten pretty fed up with the inaction or active groveling on the part of the overwhelming majority of men today.)
Well, it's the boys of today who will live in abject misery, while they women use them to do their dirty work and play with them as sex toys before throwing them out or having them imprisoned.
So it goes.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:03 PM December 5th, 2004 EST (#50)
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas
My God what a horrible outlook. Sometimes I tell myself to stay away from this site because it does upset me. But I keep coming back because I know there is a lot of truth here and I can look all around me and see it.
Pete in Nebraska
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's funny to me that back in the 70s, when I'd say where society was headed because of feminism, people thought I was being ridiculous (we're pretty much exactly where I said we'd be), but at least they didn't think that I wanted us to end up there. Now, when I say where we're probably headed, I get the feeling that many MRAs think I want us to end up there. The removal of fathers from the family has caused a terrible amount of heartache for the men who have suffered the loss of their children as well as their homes and savings. But the systematic destruction of male-education may well prove to be far more devastating to society as a whole.
As part of activism, it's important to stay aware of where society is headed. Fathers, who have lost their children, may disagree, but I think that on the one hand the destruction of male-education and on the other hand population ageing and collapse, in large part as a result of widescale practicing of the feminist religion's highest sacrament -- abortion, are the two greatest threats facing the developed world.
Because of population ageing and collapse the intertwined world economy faces a grave and extended downturn. Because of the destruction of male-education, the youths growing up today, especially the males who have been and will be driven from the academy, face, to say the least, a grim future.
Awareness, of where we're headed, can help guide our activism. For example, it might become clear that we would do best by putting less effort into redirecting big government, such as the federal government, and more effort into developing strong, well-defended communities.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
About my only regret is that this horror won't be perpetrated fully against the men of today. They are the ones who, with precious few exceptions, have earned it through their cowardice and complicity in the face of blatent anti-male evil. (I've gotten pretty fed up with the inaction or active groveling on the part of the overwhelming majority of men today.)
Well, it's the boys of today who will live in abject misery, while they women use them to do their dirty work and play with them as sex toys before throwing them out or having them imprisoned.
So it goes.
You and I don't always agree on everything, Thomas, but I absolutely do agree with your first point. Like you, I have been screaming about this since the 70s, and the reaction I have gotten from most men is denial and blank stares. In some respects I can forgive women for supporting feminism - it was to their short-term benefit - but I have a harder time forgiving the stupid passivity of many men while this poisonous ideology was taking root and growing out of control.
Where I depart from your projection about the future is that I think it is too early in the match to count men out. If you look at the state of the other failed socialist experiment on a cultural scale - the former Soviet Union - you will see that organized crime actually has more power than the government. I think men will develop and inhabit alternative structures to the "mainstream", in the same way they have adapted to every environmental challenge for the past 60,000 years or so.
I think this is worse news for the "mainstream" than for the marginalized males. Even under the worst conditions, life is relatively easier for anyone in most western democracies than it was for most people during say the 1930s. So what if they don''t make enough money to participate in the culture of constant consumption, no one I know of has ever died from x-box deprivation or from being unable to completely furnish their abode from "Martha Stewart Living."
The way I see things, the culture has committed voluntary suicide by refusing to educate the group which has been the traditional producers and sustainers. We all know that most women can't make it in the business world without massive federal intervention and support, and that every female employee is a sexual harassment lawsuit waiting to happen.
Somewhere in all this the point is getting lost that businesses generally reward those who produce, not just those who show up at the door with the proper credentials. Bush just nominated a guy for a cabinet post who started out as a truck driver and ended up as CEO of Kellogs. The more useless women become, particularly the highly educated ones, the more valuable that focussed male energy will become.
While it would be nice to think that people are generally decent enough to want to be "fair" to boys as well as girls, my experience has been more that most people are selfish and mostly out to get all they can. In the short-term rush to elevate women at the expense of men, the culture has thrown away its chance to educate, and indoctrinate in cultural values, two entire generations of men. A lot of these men will have a great deal more interest in seeing "the system" destroyed than in seeing it survive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hello zenpriest,
I enjoyed reading your post, even if we don't agree on everything.
I think it is too early in the match to count men out.
Actually, I'm not counting men out, though I think men will fall far lower before they organize enough to start building the world up out of the catastrophe into which feminism is casting us. And I expect many men to lash out before men as a whole hit bottom. Men may fare better than women in the coming downturn as a result of creating an effective illegal underground. I think that many men may come to believe that such a move is necessary for survival with a modicum of comfort. But criminal undergrounds tend to be very violent, with much of the violence being between members of different groups in that underground.
One reason for my not being sanguine, due to the fact that men have been fixing messes for tens of thousands of years, is because feminism is a type of hate movement that hasn't been attempted before. In the past, the members of groups that were targeted by society-wide hatred at least to a large extent raised their own children. Black slaves could tell their children that they were being exploited and that they really weren't by nature inferior to their owners. With feminism, we have the victims of the hate-movement being raised by the participants of the hate movement. Mothers may have an instinctual attachment to their sons, but, if they buy into the feminist lies, they will probably poison their sons with a fair amount of self-loathing, even if unintentionally, by expressing their (the mothers') beliefs in the innate superiority of females. And when boys are sent to day care, the "caregivers" have no such instinctual attachment. The feminist "caregivers" and administrators seek to deconstruct the little boys' masculinity starting as early as a few weeks into the boys lives. I have little doubt that this causes long term and in some cases permanent deep emotional scarring.
So, will men, who have been raised from birth to despise themselves and men and masculinity, be able to respond to a crisis in the same way as men who were raised from birth to be proud of themselves and their masculinity? I'm not too confident.
Also, the experience in the black community leaves me little reason for optimism. From what I've read, more black men do time in prison than go to college. The life expectancy of black men is around 65. (The next group is white men, then black women, then -- riding high over all -- white women.) I'm not sure of the numbers, but black men seem to spend more time killing each other in the ghetto than they spend building an effective underground. Many black women, however, are going to live in middle class and, to a lesser extent, wealthy neighborhoods and leaving the men behind to rot in the ghettos. We can learn a lot from what's happening there as women receive the lion's share of education. At least that experience puts the lie to the absurd claims by revisionist feminists that women, once they have the great majority of fine jobs, will take care of men. We've already seen that the women to a large extent (there may be a few programs run by women, but they are not making great strides) simply leave the men.
We are, of course, attempting to predict the future. When it comes right down to it we'll have to wait and see. I'm just glad that I'm not a little boy growing up today. And I'm not sure I'd want to be a little girl growing up today either. Feminism will hurt most if not all of today's children horribly.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:58 PM December 6th, 2004 EST (#67)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm just glad that I'm not a little boy growing up today. And I'm not sure I'd want to be a little girl growing up today either. Feminism will hurt most if not all of today's children horribly.
Hi Thomas,
I agree with most of what you say, particularly this last part. In the article you posted on the population collapse in Russia, it points out that things aren't particularly looking up there for women, either. The wording is a little poor, but it seems to say that violent deaths of women are at a higher rate than for men in western Europe, a rather amazing stat given the fact that men always have higher rates of violent death than women.
I've remarked many times on the similarities between cultural practices today and the ancient medical practice of bleeding patients - the supposed cure is actually the primary cause of the illness. Yes, lots of boys will grow up loathing their sex, but this hatred will not be turned only on themselves - there will be a lot of what military people call "collateral damage." The more that women and the culture attacks boys and tries to destroy their core being, the more boys will end up hating the culture and women. One prediction for the future which I have is that levels of violence will raise in the US just like they have in the USSR.
I am less sanguine than I am detached and pessimistic. I think our window of opportunity to ward off this cultural black plague called "feminism" closed in the 90s. While there are still guys out there saying it is feminism and not women who are the enemy, feminist mentality has so seeped into the culture that most women and a lot of men mindlessly repeat and believe feminist lies. There is going to be a fundamental alteration of world view for a boy who at age 6 is branded a sexual harasser. You and I both lived through the 60s which were called "turbulent" by the standards of the 50s. Do you remember all the movies which came out with the theme of putting people in concentration camps or euthanizing them when they hit 30? Logan's Run and Wild in the Streets were just the most famous ones.
The difference between what has happened to black (and Indian, Thundercloud) males and what is coming in the future is that we are no longer talking about a minority. The culture has turned against half its future citizens, which is a huge amount of social mass. If the proportion of criminal behavior among the white population reaches the same levels as among the black population, maintaining enough prisons to warehouse them all may eventually cost as much as the military.
Already there is a growing backlash against the farce that the public education system has become. Homeschooling is just the leading edge - as home schooled students encounter the hollow shells which most universities have become, they will either see it through and learn how to game the system, or they will blow it off the same way they did the public schools. A college or university depends heavily on the contributions of successful alumni, and women on the average contribute a far smaller percentage of their income than do men. I quit contributing to my school when they established a wimmins's studdees department, and in response to their last begging letter told them I might consider contributing again when they got the percentage of male students up to 50%.
With terms such as "the Harvard A" entering common usage, the value of what these females are supposedly "excelling" at comes into question. So what if Miss Priss gets a 4.0 average in her "queer studies" major?
I saw an article out of Australia in the past few months which pointed out that boys are only "failing" by the standards of contemporary education. Take them out of the feminized classroom, and they are still inquisitive, energetic, bold individuals who can kick ass on your basic x-box. Most of them are still excellent problem solvers, and the only standard by which they are "falling behind" is the artificial one of feminized education systems.
The first fundamental lie of feminidiocy is being exposed as false every day - that the only reason women had not achieved and excelled the same way men do was because men had held them down. Women have received the majority of college degrees for nearly 25 years, and I am still waiting for the great contributions they were supposedly going to make when that happened. The more power and influence women get, the louder they scream that they have none at all.
When you think about the vast resources which have gone into educating those who do not produce or contribute at the expense of those who do, I think you can begin to appreciate what a cultural poison pill feminism has served everyone. The US already has a shortage of nearly a quarter million physicians, there are such shortages in the IT sectors that it is necessary to import foreign workers, and even in manufacturing they are forecasting a shortage of as many as 15 million workers.
But, we do have plenty of "queer theory" majors with 4.0 averages from Hah-vahd.
Yes, there will be lots of individual tragic stories of males, but aside from contemporary expectations of western culture I don't see them as being exceptionally more tragic than most of human history.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A number of interesting points, zenpriest.
The more that women and the culture attacks boys and tries to destroy their core being, the more boys will end up hating the culture and women.
Yep.
One prediction for the future which I have is that levels of violence will raise in the US just like they have in the USSR.
Yep.
I am less sanguine than I am detached and pessimistic.
There are benefits to growing older. You and I will probably miss the worst of the maelstrom into which we are careening. Besides, in a way what society is doing is utterly wild comedy of the absurd. You couldn't pay for such entertainment. As the economy collapses and groups of men start to lash out, I might start carrying a copy of the letter that I wrote to an editor of a major newspaper in the late-70s protesting male-bashing. In a few years, angry young men may start lashing out at men of our generation partly because the retirees are an unaffordable expense and partly because with few exceptions the men of our generation failed to oppose the destructive evil called feminism. I don't suppose it would hurt to show that I was one of the few who opposed it. (I'm being facetious, but only partly.) A great irony just struck me. Back in the 60s and 70s, when feminists would spew out hateful generalizations about men, I would often say, "I'm not like that." Their standard answer was, "You're an exception." At the time, I resented being called an exception. In a few years I may be quite happy to show that I was, indeed, an exception.
I think our window of opportunity to ward off this cultural black plague called "feminism" closed in the 90s.
To a large extent this is true, and I've been trying to make a point of this for a while. Though I'm not sure exactly what actions men should undertake at this point, I grow more certain by the day that trying to correct the system is a waste of time. Our last chance may have passed, and the ideal time, for the actions that men's groups are carrying out today, was probably in the 70s at the latest. At this point we might be best off learning self-defense, and I don't mean just hand to hand combat. Fist fighting is worthless for a man in his 60s or 70s. (For emphasis I will repeat that I am talking about self-defense. It would be wrong to read some hidden statement into what I'm writing.)
what is coming in the future is that we are no longer talking about a minority. The culture has turned against half its future citizens, which is a huge amount of social mass. If the proportion of criminal behavior among the white population reaches the same levels as among the black population, maintaining enough prisons to warehouse them all may eventually cost as much as the military.
This would be a huge burden for the members of society who have money, but the Nazis were, for a while at least, able to oppress entire populations. They did this, of course, through the use of the Kapos, Judenrat, and collaborateurs. Women and the government would probably have no trouble getting a number of men to help organize and manage the camps. Hell, we already have that situation with the US having the world's highest percentage of its population in prison, with a huge percentage of undereducated black men behind bars.
I quit contributing to my school when they established a wimmins's studdees department, and in response to their last begging letter told them I might consider contributing again when they got the percentage of male students up to 50%.
The last time I was contacted by my alma mater I told the young woman who called that I wouldn't contribute to any school that I know of in this country. She asked me why, and I told her "because the nation's schools have become a bastion of anti-male hatred and lies." She was suprised to put it mildly. I told her to take my name off their list; they haven't called me since.
With terms such as "the Harvard A" entering common usage, the value of what these females are supposedly "excelling" at comes into question. So what if Miss Priss gets a 4.0 average in her "queer studies" major?
If the overwhelming surfeit of female students were almost all majoring in Wimmyn's Studies, I'd hardly be concerned. What does concern me is the fact that women now outnumber men in business school, law school, medical school, and as far as I know journalism school, as well as other professional schools. And the gap continues to grow. In addition, from what I've read, girls now match boys in high school in the sciences. They may well match and then surpass males in the sciences in college in the next few years.
I'm aware of the fact that women on the whole now thrive on endless preferential treatment. I also know that many women work very hard, many more will work very hard if they have to, and that they can manage business pretty well without men if they have to, especially if they have men as virtual slaves doing all of society's dirty work for them.
I know I'm for the most part preaching to the choir here, but: We are already guaranteed a social catastrophe as a result of feminism. The sooner the hate movement is overthrown, the better off we'll be. We can no longer avoid severe social upheaval and hardship. And I see no getting around the fact that men's ultimate response will probably result in a temporary increase in chaos as the superstructure of hatred is destroyed before being replaced.
Yes, I do agree that our window of opportunity for a nice resolution has passed. The destruction of the family, through the systematic removal of fathers, will prove to be devastating in itself. But with the destruction of male-education and population ageing and collapse added on, we're in for a world of hurt.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:40 PM December 5th, 2004 EST (#56)
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know how you guys will take this site, but an australian website called www.boysfoward.com tries to adress the issue you guys are talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Careful here, people!
The BoysForward site referenced in the previous post seems to be all about building a new and better breed of boys and men, not about embracing the way boys and men are.
Social constructionists are everywhere!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see anything wrong with that site, I think it's a great initiative.
Bert
--------------------
From now on, men's rights first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notice the wording:
"Things can and will change drastically in the next 20 years. There is evidence that the 'boy code', which has been passed down from generation to generation, is now being linked with the problems that our boys are now facing. The "boys will be boys" myth - where parents lament their wrecked houses and furniture and teachers say, "well my class is just a zoo that's because it is 70 percent boys" is no longer acceptable. By confronting the boy code we can actually change things for boys."
Notice how they use the words: "boy code" and "boys will be boys myth."
"Please debrief them and let them know that most people around the world are kind, generous and loving and that a minority of people who do the wrong thing get all the media publicity. Try to make it a ritual that at least once a week the television is turned off, that the family has dinner together and that negative issues over the last week are discussed and our children debriefed on the negativity they have witnessed. Give them hope for the future!"
Also notice how they use the word debrief.
This site rings of feminism and their view points on masculinity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:25 AM December 7th, 2004 EST (#71)
|
|
|
|
|
"rings of feminism"? How 'bout reeks of feminism?
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
