|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by khankrumthebulgar on 12:02 AM March 4th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Ms. Williams is typical of the Hate filled Gender Feminists being indoctrinated at college campuses with our tax dollars. As to her assertions that I take up valuable space on the planet because of my gender. She is brain washed,mentally Ill, a hateful Lesbian seeking approval of other Manhaters or is seeking approval of other Femhags & Femnags.
This is why I say boycott American Women. Marry a Foreign Woman and reject this sick misandric culture.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Tumescent on 12:16 AM March 4th, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Really, other than the fact that her institution is funded by tax dollars, who really cares what some crazy crack snacker has to say about anything. She isn't even close to representing what the vast majority of women really think. She's an embarrasement to the University. She ought to get off campus and out in the real world for a few minutes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:36 PM March 7th, 2005 EST (#29)
|
|
|
|
|
Get off campus?
Hell, I think she should get off the PLANET!
(And maybe go back to her own...!)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:22 AM March 4th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
You needed to include the entire quote.
"Tuesday, I attended the Socratic Society's re-visitation of the issue of pornography as violence against women. I felt astounded repeatedly by many men's refusal to acknowledge their complicity in the oppression of women..."
This refers to pornography as "violence towards women, which in my opinion is insane. The same argument is used repeatedly in the media as to why porn shops and stip clubs should be eliminated. They constantly quote crime rates around these businesses as significantly higher than other areas. Hey maybe its because you forced them into the bad neighborhoods in the first place. Sex and the photography of sex (within legal requirements) is generally non violent with the exception of some fettishes. And dont forget these women in the industry are well paid and are free to stop at any time. Sex and its photographic depiction does not equal violence
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by LSBeene on 01:44 PM March 4th, 2005 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
What gets me is when you go to lesbian sites, the ones for dating, sexuality, and even just political commentary you often see stuff about lesbian erotica, lesbian porn, lesbian sex toys, etc etc etc.
That's what pisses me off is that this is ONLY said about heterosexual porn, but never homoerotic porn.
Funny how that never comes up (no pun) with the Whitney Williams type.
Steven
Guerrilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 09:38 AM March 7th, 2005 EST (#26)
|
|
|
|
|
and you were visiting these sits for research?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:55 PM March 7th, 2005 EST (#30)
|
|
|
|
|
My understanding is that whith alot of gay and lesbian sex sites there is alot of bondage, sado-masochism, etc. So if anyone is oppressing women it is possibly OTHER WOMEN.
I had to go to some of those sites (yes for research, wise guys :-)) and I saw many depictions of women whipping other women, useing dildos to rape other women, women dominating other women(???), and lots of depictions of women leading other women around on leashes. These are LESBIAN WEB-PORN SITES, Ms. Williams. LESBIAN!
Any and all "violence" against women is being depicted with and by OTHER WOMEN! CONSENTING WOMEN! Yet she calls it "Male on female violence". (!!!!) and "patriarchy" (!!!!!)
Also ALOT of these web-sites are owned, ran and opperated by..., hold on to your hats..., WOMEN!
So not only is it other women who depict "violence" against females, it is women EXPLOITING other women, PIRIOD.
Williams needs to get her facts straight (no pun intended) and just shut the hell up, and quit lying.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:20 PM March 4th, 2005 EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
Strip clubs aren't exploitive of women,they are exploitive of men. $10-15 at the door, $5-10 a beer, and some expectation because some random stranger comes up and waves their jugglies or commits minor sexual assault by groping your genitals that you are supposed to give them money each time they do this in the form of 1's & 5's?
Yeesh, this is maximum cash extraction for what benefit?
Strippers on the other hand can make 60K or more working part time at the right clubs. That doesn't sound very exploitive of women to me. Only of their clients.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:58 AM March 4th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
This article is prime example of why such individulas should be banned from college campuses. It is mindboogling to see this kind of bigoted hate being used, where "all men"are just lumped together because of the behavior of some. How completely stupid can you get??? Furthermore to target any group of people with such hatred is nothing less than the behavior of a hate group like the Ku Klux Klan. If I lived in New Hampshire I would be picketing the perimeter of this campus on a daily basis. UNH is as evil as it gets.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Furthermore to target any group of people with such hatred is nothing less than the behavior of a hate group like the Ku Klux Klan"
Ray, you should read this
Bert
--------------------
From now on, men's rights first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:36 PM March 4th, 2005 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Bert, that one's a beauty. If someone made a movie 20 years ago, out of all the crap that has gone on in the gender feminist movement, I would have walked out half way through and said, "Ridiculous, that could never happen in America." Well it has happened, but now the lines are almost clearly drawn in the gender feminist hate war against men.
There sure are a lot of guys in our ranks, and more joining in every day. I have a feeling we're going to reach "critical mass" very soon. The gender feminist cultural revolution is going to really start hearing about it. The wrote about "the male backlash," soon they'll be writing about "the male Tsunami."
Ray
"For every force there is an equal and opposite reaction"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was astonished myself when I found this some time ago. I always thought of the klan as an extreme right organization and since feminism is left I couldn't imagine there was a connection between klan and feminism. This article is a real eye-opener.
Bert
--------------------
From now on, men's rights first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:13 PM March 7th, 2005 EST (#31)
|
|
|
|
|
Bert-
As you may already know, I am an American Indian desendant, and an Indian activist as well as a men's rights activist.
I was an Indian activist before I was a men's rights activist. It was as an Indian activist that I was studying 'hate-groups'. The more I studied the Ku Klux Klan the more parrallels I found in the way that the Klan feels about minorities and the way feminists feel about all men. Their agendas were (are) almost IDENTICAL!
They both want the toatal oppression of other human beings for their own benefit. They both use de-humanizing terms for the people they hate. They both feel threatened by the people they hate. They both want superiority over the people they hate, and both work doggedly through political and other means to acheive it.
Both the Klan and feminists see nothing wrong with "neutralizeing" (see extermination) of the people they hate.
Take any Ku Klux Klan speech and change the word "minorities" to "Males" and you will see that the agendas are nearly if not the EXACT SAME between the Klan and Feminists.
It was when I saw these parallels, that I knew I HAD to become a Men's rights activist as well as an Indian activist. Because I realized I'm fighting the same battle against two different enemies. Yes, two different enemies but the same battle. Both these enemies seek to destroy me. One because of my ethnicity, the other because of my gender.
That is why I became a M.R.A..
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thundercloud,
Thanks for your response. I know very well of your people's struggle, but at the and they did survive. And so will men, I am pretty sure of that. No matter how long it takes, but eventually people will see through the lies.
Bert
--------------------
From now on, men's rights first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by robrob on 04:29 AM March 4th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
I am amazed continuously with the amount of forgiveness people are willing to grant men, as if the majority of rapes aren't committed by them, as if the majority of businesses aren't owned by them
For highlighting the utter irrational hatred of all men, this statement is one of the best pieces of juxtaposition from a feminist yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 09:41 AM March 7th, 2005 EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
for the first time i see her point.. thanks to enron i can see how business is much like rape (with remunieration!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by AngryMan
(end_misandryNOSPAM@yahoo.co.uk)
on 09:45 AM March 4th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
The bad news is - as you say - that this article is venomous anti-male hate-speech. The good news - such as it is - is that it is incoherent drivel. The woman can barely write.
"But he is a good guy," is an epidemic phenomena at the very least.
"an epidemic phenomena"? If anyone is thinking of writing the the editor in connection with this, you might like to ask her why she isn't doing her job.
Oh, sorry, am I "excluding women's intellectual contributions in rejecting and dismissing them collectively in an effort to protect (my) own patriarchy-sustaining ideologies"?
It reads half like a Marxist propaganda diatribe from the last century, and half like an angst-ridden teenage diary.
I suppose on one level you have to feel quite sorry for her. I hope she grows up and learns not to be so needy and attention-seeking.
The ones I really have to condemn are the heterosexual women with husbands, but who persist in defending this stuff anyway.
Feminism will continue as long as there is money to be made from hating men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by mens_issues on 10:21 AM March 4th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Here is my response to this piece:
In response to Whitney Williams' statement:
""Good Guys" in the patriarchy are harder to find than the Loch Ness monster in a desert."
This statement actually made me laugh, due to its absurdity (though the underlying misandry is anything but funny). Perhaps Whitney Williams shouldn't be hanging around with "The Patriarchy" in the first place if she's a feminist. In fact, I'd like to know where she found "The Patriarchy" in the first place (aren't they a bunch of elderly men in white robes who meet in clandestine places to scheme how to benefit men by oppressing women?). In reality, the average man has about as little in common with "The Patriarchy" as he has with the Loch Ness monster.
Steve Van Valkenburg
Founder of Men's Issues Online - a voice for men's advocacy
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MensIssuesOnline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Luek on 10:33 AM March 4th, 2005 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
"The Patriarchy" in the first place (aren't they a bunch of elderly men in white robes who meet in clandestine places to scheme how to benefit men by oppressing women?
Actually, they are a bunch of elderly, self-loathing, feminist agenda keeping males in black robes who meet in government judicial buildings and scheme how to benefit women by oppressing men! And it is all legal!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:44 PM March 4th, 2005 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
""Good Guys" in the patriarchy are harder to find than the Loch Ness monster in a desert."
This Loch Ness monster wouldn't give a gender feminist the sweat of his (pick a body part) if she were dying of thirst in the Sahara desert as she looked for clues on why gender feminist are so completely and irredeemably stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:13 AM March 4th, 2005 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
I am a graduate of PSU (UNH- Plymouth) and I would have to state without any reservation that the whole administration has a clear anti-male bias. Most departments seem to be headed by women who treated me like I was another male nuisance that they would rather not have to deal with. Furthermore, I found out through a female friend of mine that when she went through the same process as me she was informed of resource options that I was not informed of unless I discovered them myself. Her administrative process in the school was smooth, mine was rough to say the least.
One day having to go into the admin building after the school newspaper put out yet another article warning the school population of a male stalker on the loose, the admin building had copies from a self defense manual pasted posted on the entry doors. They were drawings that illustrated how to kick a (male) attacker in the groin.
The common areas within the schools had well funded posters crying out feminist party line mantra victimology, sexual harassment; take back the night, rape, resources available to women alone, report abusers… It made me sick.
The library run by a bunch of feminists had women’s studies books and “literature” in high profile areas. The school newspaper gave more than a fair amount of space to events run by the ‘gender studies’ department.
My point is, that New Hampshire schools of “higher education” have been hijacked by radical gender feminists. It was very difficult being a male student in this environment, it was a sink or swim situation as the administration made it extremely difficult for me and many of my male friends.
I imagine UNH- Durham is even worse…
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by scarbo3 on 05:34 PM March 4th, 2005 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
When I went to college, we had a "Dad's Day" every year.
I wonder if UNH has such a day, and if so, how many of the girls at UNH invite their dads to campus for it. I wonder if the dads see all the misandry you report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by LSBeene on 10:39 AM March 4th, 2005 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
This is the samw woman who wrote an article that sounded like she was drunk about how women were going to have a revolution.
Then she claimed to have recieved a death threat, from an anonymous computer no less, and ...
WOW right in time for her and her buddies to protest the ending of a class on "Violence on womyn in society".
And, whadda ya know, the class was reinstated.
The timing of the threat was PERFECT for her and her buddies to get the class saved.
Do ya see what I'm getting at?
And here she is talking about men again. But if WOMEN (esp. lesbian women) like porn: that's "Liberating" ...
Got it.
Steven
Guerrilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Kyo on 11:17 AM March 4th, 2005 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
Steven, thanks very much for the reminder; I had read about that case and never noticed that it was the same woman.
Perhaps 50 years from now we'll look through old newspaper archives and read silliness like this and look at it the same way people now look at medieval thinkers who believed in things like the flat earth and witches. Complete silliness which is now behind us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:18 PM March 7th, 2005 EST (#32)
|
|
|
|
|
But there ARE such things as WITCHES!
...We just call them "Feminists", these days. :-P
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:04 AM March 8th, 2005 EST (#35)
|
|
|
|
|
Just to clear up a few things you have wrong. (Well, most of you have just about everything wrong, but I don't have time to fix it all tonight...)
1) the "revolution" poem to which you are referring is based loosely on the historic poem "The Revolution will not be Televised" by Gil Scott Heron. Whitney Williams was not drunk when writing it. In fact, she was in the library sitting next to me.
2) The class to which you are referring is called: "Violence Against Women and Social Change", and if you check course listings on the UNH website, you would find that it is indeed not listed as an offering for this semester. It has not been reinstated, nor has it been promised as such for the future.
You may be confused, as a committee entitled, "Violence Against Women" WAS reinstated as a response, not to Whitney's death threat, but to the actions of the Feminist Action League for many months.
3) If you had read closesly, you would notice that Whitney Williams does not support pornography in any context, and finds the production and consumption of it by all people equally troubling. As pornography is consumed almost completely by men, Williams finds it to be relevant to a discussion about men's violence against women.
4) Williams has no idea how computer routers work, and although opinionated and persistent, she does not go through the trouble to send herself death threats. Nor does she have to, as the patriarchy has abundantly provided. Further, the incident was reported to police and campus computer services.
To the rest of you:
As Whitney is obviously a radical feminist, I am sure she will be delighted that you all have taken such an enthusiastic interest in her writing. I will be sure to let her know to take a peek at your site.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:26 AM April 26th, 2005 EST (#36)
|
|
|
|
|
1) the "revolution" poem to which you are referring is based loosely on the historic poem "The Revolution will not be Televised" by Gil Scott Heron.
As pornography is consumed almost completely by men, Williams finds it to be relevant to a discussion about men's violence against women.
4) Williams has no idea how computer routers work, and although opinionated and persistent, she does not go through the trouble to send herself death threats.
To the rest of you:
As Whitney is obviously a radical feminist,
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by The_Beedle on 11:40 AM March 4th, 2005 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone else notice the three great crimes of all men summed up in the first paragraph?
Gang rape as morally equivalent to consumption of pornography as morally equivalent to ownership of a business.
Business ownership?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:23 PM March 4th, 2005 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
Good point. The Marxist-Feminists are doing this everywhere that we have hierarchical systems of that assigns a value. If that is pointed out as wrong then we are called judgmental. The result is completely screwed-up and pathological reasoning. They have no capability of discerning right from wrong any more.
Notice how the equation works where there is any hierarchy:
hierarchical = capitalism = patriarchy = evil = men = hell
matriarchy = socialism = equality = good = women = paradise
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:20 PM March 7th, 2005 EST (#33)
|
|
|
|
|
...Wow..., And I thought I was bad at math.
Appearantly feminists are WORSE at it...!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:00 PM March 4th, 2005 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
WE CANNOT TOLERATE HATE LIKE THIS. WE NEED TO SPEAK UP FOR MEN EVERYWHERE AND ESPECIALLY AT UNH, WHO SUFFER AT MS. WILLIAMS' EXPENSE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by khankrumthebulgar on 06:41 PM March 4th, 2005 EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
Would be interested to know where I can sign up to join a "Rape Gang"? And I guess my card carrying membership in the Patriarchy has expired. Any idea where the closest place is to reregister? We had an incident very similar in Texas. Seems our former Mayor of Dallas Ron Kirk, wanted a Hate Crime Bill passed a few years ago. Bingo his Black Church had racial slurs painted on the building. Trouble is a drive by passer saw young Black Men outside with Paint Cans doing the vandalism. And just in time to get the Bill passed! This is aka. The Reichstag Gambit. Hitler burned down the Government Building blaming it on the Communists. This gave him broad powers to enforce justice on his enemies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by mens_issues on 08:39 PM March 4th, 2005 EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
Khankrum,
If you want to renew your membership in "The Patriarchy" you can email:
Tom Fullery
patriarchy_central@yahoo.com
Here's a recent all points bulletin:
Greetings fellow patriarchs,
The new generation of men needs updated means of receiving edicts from The Patriarchy. As a result, Patriarchy Central has gone online in an attempt to improve communications with it's loyal male subjects. Remember, it's all about helping you all maintain your male privilege in society.
Tom Fullery
Chief of Communications
Patriarchy Central
"It's all Tom Fullery"
Disclaimer: This is all, of course, a joke (though the email address is real). Someone over at my group didn't get that the first time I posted this over there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by mens_issues on 08:43 PM March 4th, 2005 EST (#24)
|
|
|
|
|
(though the email address is real).
Meaning that I created the email address in order to post my satirical message at my group. Funny, it hadn't been taken already.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 09:38 AM March 7th, 2005 EST (#25)
|
|
|
|
|
hey all,
I would love to discuss the fine points here, but i have a 10:00 oclock gangbang rape fest to attend and all you men KNOW how embarrasing it is to show up late to one of those!
later on we plan on talking dirty to some nuns so they lose control and it will be our fault.. oh the joys of being a man!
later this week i will be busy starting another 4 companies with all the free money the patriarchy is giving me...
what!?!!
you meant there may be womenz here?
damn damn damn... and i thought i could stop acting dumb and stupid and incapable for a little while! sometimes this whole patriarchy ruse is tiring, but you know how it is, gotta make sure they never guess that despite the outward display of febile incompetence that we are really in control. yes, only a few wiley feminists have discovered our plan of secret world domination, everyone will think they are crazy... like suggesting dogs can talk!!! yes yess fido we know better... have a yummy....
well its on to the fest!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by AngryMan
(end_misandryNOSPAM@yahoo.co.uk)
on 11:30 AM March 7th, 2005 EST (#28)
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Editor,
I am writing to you in connection with an article which appeared recently in your publication. This article, 'Do Take Note: The universal myth of the "good guy"' by one Whitney Williams, was extremely offensive.
Firstly, this article was written by someone who seems to be barely literate, and was full of uncorrected grammatical errors, which leads one to question not only your academic standards, but also your editorial competence. However, it was the content which I found objectionable. The article was in fact tantamount to fascist propaganda. I do not use the term 'fascist' lightly; the author's case bore several of the classic indicators of fascism.
(1) All the problems of society are attributed to a specific social group. In this case that group is the male population.
(2) The author identifies herself as being outside that scapegoat social group - in other words, the problems of society are all the fault of someone else, and she thus presents herself as blameless.
(3) This scapegoat social group is defined biologically rather than, say, economically. This entails that membership or non-membership of the scapegoat group is outside the control of the individual.
Any social theory of this type tends to erode individual moral responsibility; one is either 'born good' or 'born bad' –
The author counts herself as blameless not because of what she does, but because of who she is. This is one of the hallmarks of fascism.
(4) There is thus nothing one can do to improve society, other than to remove the 'bad' people. In fact, the article concludes 'We don't need the men, we don't need the men'. If you doubt the seriousness of this issue then consider reading the article again but this time substituting the word 'Jews' for 'men'. How does it sound now? Would you ever consider publishing an article which concluded 'We don't need the Jews, we don't need the Jews'? You would not, and yet you consider it acceptable to promote this kind of fascistic hate-speech against men.
(5) As well as promoting fascistic social theory, the article also contains another classic indicator of fascism, namely authoritarianism. The author repeatedly expresses disapproval of any kind of political dissent. For example "I felt astounded repeatedly by many men's refusal to acknowledge their complicity in the oppression of women". She insists on the requirement that everyone has to accept her views as self-evident truth, and anyone who disagrees is automatically placed under suspicion. This is not an acceptable way of conducting political discourse, still less academic discourse.
I predict that, if I receive any response from you at all, it will be some lame explanation that the article was intended to be humorous. I will reject any such explanation out of hand. Even if one is being generous, how would one possibly interpret this article as humorous? If we were to substitute the word 'men' for the word 'Jews', and read the article again, let us ask ourselves who could possibly find it amusing? No-one but a committed anti-Semite could possibly find anything to laugh at.
I put it to you that rather than being intended to entertain, this article is clearly intended to promote feelings of hatred, distrust and suspicion towards the male population.
The entire first paragraph of the article is a clear attempt to provoke intolerance towards men, and again, the implication is that anyone who disagrees with this view must be mistaken. "I am amazed continuously with the amount of forgiveness people are willing to grant men". Again let us conduct our experiment - "I am amazed continuously with the amount of forgiveness people are willing to grant Jews". Do you consider this kind of speech to be acceptable in a campus newspaper, or indeed anywheer else? I for one do not.
The author attributes the actions of a small minority of violent men to the entire male population, This is a cheap ploy to denounce and discredit men as an entire group. This is exactly the kind of rhetorical method employed by racist and anti-semitic writers in the last century, designed to deceive gullible readers.
The rest of the article continues in the same vein. Men are constantly referred to as 'them'; the writer is clearly attempting to create political divisions between men and women. I put it to you that this is undesirable on a university campus, or indeed anywhere else.
Can you explain then, why it is that you deem it acceptable to publish this kind of naked hate-speech against men?
The author of this article is a nasty little bigot. I find her views wholly objectionable, and I consider your decision to publish this material in your newspaper grossly irresponsible.
I look forward to reading your response.
Regards,
etc.
Feminism will continue as long as there is money to be made from hating men.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Palladin writes "