[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Wall Street Journal Prints Supportive Letters Re Men's Commission
posted by Matt on 05:46 PM December 27th, 2005
National Coalition of Free Men Marc A. writes "Today the Wall Street Journal printed two supportive letters responding to Professor Lionel Tiger's op ed on neglected issues affecting men and on the findings of the New Hampshire Commission on the Status of Men."

Restraining Order vs. Letterman Quashed | CNN wants to Hear from Male DV Victims  >

  
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Tear drops on a blazing fire! (Score:1)
by Davidadelong on 08:30 PM December 27th, 2005 EST (#1)
It is very good that professionals are speaking out against the system. But, all we have to do is study the history of Female oppression to see how long the system plans on drawing this out. I for one do not want to wait 100 years. I do not believe that I will be here then, and if things keep on going the way they are, niether will my Grandsons. The time for CHANGE is now! I do laud the letters that were written though, it took guts.
Re:Tear drops on a blazing fire! (Score:1)
by Thundercloud on 11:12 AM December 28th, 2005 EST (#2)
Excellent letters.
They were reasoned in tone and full of facts.
All the more reason the feminists will cry "sexism!!!"

  Thundercloud.
  "Hoka hey!"
Now it makes sense (Score:1)
by RandomMan on 11:38 AM December 28th, 2005 EST (#3)
As the psychology professor points on in the first letter, if Title IX and other supposed "anti-disctrimination" regulations were applied equally and we created Commissions on the Status of Men, or up here "Status of Men Canada" and men's studies programs to counter the volumes of feminist, androphobic ideology polluting our governments, universities and schools, the appalling treatment of men and boys in this culture of misandry would become instantly identifiable, and would demand immediate attention. Naturally the feminists and their "chivalrous" dupes in govenrment are going to drag their feet on any such initiatives. After all, they might result in, oh, I don't know, equality. Rather than adopting the hate-driven attitude of feminists, I don't want fewer rights for women, or rights for men at the cost of women: I want to see genuine legal equality, where both genders have the same legal rights and the same responsibilities and accountabilities, not special "privileges" and "perks" granted for nonsensical, ideological reasons.

Please tell me there isn't a human being left who thinks feminism and equality have the slightest thing to do with one another.
Let them eat cake... (Score:1)
by Thundercloud on 02:39 PM December 28th, 2005 EST (#4)
One of the main problems is that feminists want their cake and eat ours, too.

  Thundercloud.
  "Hoka hey!"
Re:Now it makes sense (Score:1)
by Gregory on 10:01 PM December 28th, 2005 EST (#5)
"please tell me there isn't a human being left who thinks feminism and equality have the slightest thing to do with one another."--RandomMan

Good point. I've come to notice that feminism is about building female privilege, not equal rights and responsibilities among the sexes. Protecting women (especially from responsibility) and expanding female options (while reducing their obligations) seems to be the priority
of feminism in modern times. Male vulnerability and hardship don't seem to matter much unless women start to complain about their effect on women and children.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]