|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:56 PM September 24th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Borderline Personality Disorder - Paranoid:
Symptoms & Signs -
People with paranoid personality disorder are highly suspicious of other people. They are usually unable to acknowledge their own negative feelings towards other people.
Other common symptoms include:
•Concern that other people have hidden motives
•Expect to be exploited by others
•Inability to collaborate
•Poor self image
•Social isolation
•Detachment
•Hostility
Treatment -
Treatment is difficult because people with this condition are often extremely suspicious of doctors. If accepted, medications and talk therapy can both be effective.
Prognosis (Expectations)-
Therapy can limit the impact of the paranoia on the person's daily functioning.
Complications -
•Extreme social isolation
•Potential for VIOLENCE!
---------
So, how come VAWA 2005 doesn't have a mental health treatment plan for N.O.W.'s esteemed Prez and her like-minded sisters?
Just a few thousand hours on the shrink's couch, and poof! ---- no more Evil Patriarchy!
(roy)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:13 PM September 24th, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
That's really great - women have an institutionalized and discriminatory educational advantage, the cultural protections afforded them by men, a culture which dehumanizes men from BIRTH (assuming some woman doesn't make a choice to abort him first), an infinite range of "choices" PAID FOR by men who have no access to those same choices for themselves, they have legal protection from words that might hurt feelings in the workplace, to say nothing of draconian laws against "discrimination", so the reason they aren't defeating straight white males MUST be the oppressive actions of those men? Newsflash, Gandy, it's the preferences and "choices" of women, who work fewer hours, choose less stressful occupations, take fewer risks, and put fewer years into the workforce.
Enough of this self-serving, greedy nonsense. Men are simply better at competition in the labour market, particularly when it comes to areas involving mathematics, science and becoming entrepreneurs. This is why women only earn 49% of what men do when they are self-employed, but earn 117% of what a single, childless man does when they make the same "choices" as men (Farrell's figures, not mine). Simple female laziness and institutional bias favoring women explain those troublesome little facts, too.
And then this NOW clown has the nerve to come out and blame men?
Face it girls, if it's a level playing field, men will out-compete you in every field except victimology and self-pity. It's called biology. It's not a plot against you, we don't blame you (most of us think you're just great), and nobody said you couldn't play too. It just happens to be how human beings have been constructed, and that men fare better in competitive, demanding fields or in those where male skill sets are needed.
Deal with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:32 PM September 24th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Somehow whenever I read anything by that fem-twit Kim Gandy, I imagine what life in her cave about 40,000 years ago might have been like...
(Kimmy) "Um, honey, I think I hear a saber-toothed tiger out there in our front yard. I'm so frightened I just can't sleep. Please sweety, my man, my hero, could you just go check it out?"
(Next morning when Kimmy wakes up) - "Shit! Where's my breakfast? That slacker!"
(Tiger growl in the background...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:51 PM September 24th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
But remember, the tiger was only attacking the man because it was an oppressed tiger. A victim of while male heterosexism by the ruling class of cavemen, so it had the absolute *right* to kill the man and suffer no harm itself - after all, it had heard that 300 years ago, someone who looked a bit like the man had killed a tiger someplace... ;)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:47 AM September 25th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, outcompeting is only allowed when it's women.
Boys outperforming girls at school? Obvious bias to boys - change the curriculum and exam methodology.
Girls outperforming boys at school? - Girls are simply more intelligent
More male students in engineering/finance/IT/Computing Science/Maths/etc - simple, bias in teaching and emrolment methods
More female students in law, medicine, dentistry? - Simple, females are more intelligent
More men in the death industries? - garbage, logging, driving, sanitation, sewers etc - well someone's got to do it.
More females in Nursing, secretarial skills, childminding,? - Really, they're female oreinted careers, combining nurturing and multitasking skills. Simultaneously, they're indicative of women being stuck in ow paying, menial jobs and patriarchy is to blame.
You couldn't actually make it up.
Gandy's hypocrisy is sickening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:05 AM September 25th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, in your last statement about nursing, secretaril skills, childminding, etc., you left out the predominance of women in human resources and the fact that as you go up in grade or into colleges and universities, there are fewer women teachers.
It has absolutely nothing to do with being menial or nurturing - it's about control. Women prefer to deal with people as superiors in a position of control, not equals. So they prefer to deal with children (position of control), be the "gateway" to powerful men as their secretaries (position of control) and deal with the infirm (surprise, surprise, a position of control).
Don't buy into chivalry's misguided vision of caring, nurturing women. It's nonsense, and it's what they use to extort our own destruction from us in goverment and society at large! VAWA's a PERFECT example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:45 PM September 25th, 2005 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually two things:
I agree with your perspective - it could be about control as much as anything.
And I meant to put quotes round "nurturing" and "multitasking".
Nothing winds me up more than the arrogance of assumtion that only women can nurture/multitask/whatever.........
Believe me, chivalry is not something I buy into at all. Fairnesss, respect? Surely. Deference to a female in certain societal and political situations because it's "tradition", while they laugh at us and play us like fiddles? Not on your life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:04 AM September 26th, 2005 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
I hear you - sort of figured that was what you meant.
Won't it be interesting when the first generation of young men *not* socialized to defer to women and grant their every wish (coming soon to a country near you) starts to come of age? The remaining feminists are in for a very, very, rough ride. Sort of like feminism, but without all the sharing of feelings and "sensitivity" ;)
Unfortunately, it will impact the average woman as badly as radical feminism has impacted the average man alive today, but if it finally achieves some sort of equilibrium and a level of respect for masculinity and femininity, it's worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by johnnyp on 06:26 AM September 26th, 2005 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
We are already seeing the result of… “Won't it be interesting when the first generation of young men *not* socialized to defer to women”.
Take a look at popular culture i.e. rappers. Young men are relating to women based on the last value they still provide which is sex.
Patriarchy keeps men under control as much as it does women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:13 PM September 24th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Gandy in the U.S. Today? What's next, an opinion column from the Grand Wizard of the KKK? This isn't all that funny. One of Slate's "learned" book discussants linked to the "brilliant, crazy Valerie Solanas' 1967 S.C.U.M. Manifesto". See
http://www.slate.com/id/2126570/entry/2126575/
Expect next a link to the brilliant, crazy Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf.
Yes, the lunatics have taken over the asylum.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Anonymous User writes "That's what we always like to see. Good, healthy, unbiased reporting in USA Today.