Matt writes "In the 10/18 Wash Post:

Washingtonpost.

This is a toughie- the challenge here is to call into question the practice without seeming to attack the faith of those doing it. If this can be done, since it is likely to get coverage vs. "routine" circumcision, bringing the issue up in a letter to the editor in this context could serve the cause of getting awareness of male genital integrity issues increased-- but it's a tightrope-walk, no doubt. No objection can be seen to be an attack on the religious context in which it applies, or risk distraction from the issue or worse yet, a further entrenchment of the practice in the name of religious self-defense."

napnip writes "It seems like everyday I see an ad by this or that company stating that it contributes to breast cancer research and awareness, yet I have never seen a company mention prostate cancer, until today! I bought a package of fresh To-Jo mushrooms from my local grocery store, and it has a logo on the package stating that the company is a "Blue Ribbon Partner" in the fight against prostate cancer! I went to their website, and it has some more info: http://www.mushroominfo.com/ If only more companies would do this. Let's write them and thank them!"

donaldcameron1 writes "Nebraska
man ordered to speak English to his daughter or face limited visits

Canadian Press
Tuesday, October 14, 2003


"PAPILLION, Neb. (AP) - A Hispanic man who spoke to his
five-year-old daughter in Spanish has been ordered to use primarily English
around the girl as a condition of his visitation rights.


I wrote a letter to the Governor expressing my concerns and urge readers to contact this governor to express their concerns or outrage over this kind of stupidity.


Email
  the Governor
Go to
Governor's Website
or you can send an e-mail to the newspaper of record The Papillion Times



Thanks for taking the time to read this."

I'm really just posing a question here which I hope you'll read. But ask yourself, is it the "payee" or the "payer" that comes out on top? Check it out here. As always feel free to pass it around for discussion. Enjoy!

amperro writes "On Sunday (10/12)ABC's "The Practice" ran the first of a two-parter concerning a man whose wife was cheating on him. She reveals to him that his children were in fact fathered by another man.
On Tuesday (10/14)CBS's "The Guardian" ran an episode about a couple suing a fertility clinic because the wife's eggs were fertilized with another man's sperm. Later it is revealed she had an affair and the clinic was not at fault.
Why doesn't Congress have the guts that Hollywood seems to be showing when addressing this issue?"

JohnC. writes "Polls should heed Arnie's angry army
/
Daily News editors, The New York Daily News
/
Riding the crest of one of the more astonishing people's insurrections in modern memory - a rebellion of historic proportions and enormous implications - Arnold Schwarzenegger is today the man who will govern California. And Gray Davis is not. There's a bottom line for you.
/
Riding the crest of one of the more astonishing people's insurrections in modern memory - a rebellion of historic proportions...
/

CONTINUED"

Anonymous User writes "

Seriously, what is the media's interest in this topic? Why is it every article on this issue always has to include some little snide comment on what a wonder step forward this will be?

Why is it so hilarious to muse about the genetic withering of half the populace? If I were to welcome the devestation of the world's black population via HIV, what would that say about my character?"

JohnC. writes "If MEN have all the POWER, how come WOMEN make the RULES?

- You keep hearing that “It’s a man’s world”
and “women are oppressed,”
but it sure doesn’t seem that way to you.

- Is “something wrong with you”?
- Do you have “an emotional problem”?

- Are you going crazy?

- Or is maybe something else going on,
something you’re not supposed to think,
and certainly not talk about?

- This book lays it out in plain language
with vivid images and examples
to help you see clearly what’s really going on
between men and women.

-And why you’re right for thinking something
is very, very wrong...

"Download eBook

*Here!"

JohnC. writes "When Your Partner Cheats
By Karen Berney -

Few events cause as much turmoil in a marriage as

infidelity, which can reduce a marriage to rubble,

shattering trust and creating a breeding ground for

insecurity, mistrust and resentment.

Peggy Vaughan, author of The Monogamy Myth, estimates

that 60 percent of husbands and 40 percent of wives

will have an affair at some point in their marriage.

Story Here!"

JohnC. writes "The Top Ten Myths of Marriage
By David Popenoe

The most recent U.S. Census figures confirm what most everyone already knows divorce rates, indeed, are on the rise.

1. Myth: Marriage benefits men much more than women.

Details Here!"

Dominic7 writes "Bob Almighty." AKA Bob Geldof.

Matt writes "... ahh, they pine for the good ol' days, don't they, when women and girls could flirt and lead men on and not be held responsible in any way for it. (Well, they still can.) But now should that noble and lofty paradigm be challenged in the least, they are crying bloody murder and once again blaming boys and men (in this case, boys in particular).

I can tell them why the boys are not interested in dating-- the short version: why bother? It wastes the boys'/men's time and money for the most part and leads eventually to a lot of whining about commitment (which isn't really commitment when half of marriages end in divorce, these being largely intitiated by the female). What, do they think we're so stupid as to keep walking into this trap again and again? Maybe today's adolescent boys, after seeing what has happened to their fathers and uncles, are wisely saying no to the relationship/marriage trap.

The boycott will continue until men get their rights back!"

Member2k3 writes "Good article. I definitely agree that it's about the needs of the children - rather than the rights of the father." Oh man, I'm gonna keep a distance from this one....

Marc writes "There is currently a 4-day conference at UCLA on women and pay inequities. So the UCLA Daily Bruin on Monday printed the usual myths about pay gaps by citing weekly earnings without giving details about other important factors (hours worked, experience, spending power, etc.). Thankfully they did print our letter refuting their distortions. And it's good timing - right while the conference is still taking place. I thank Joe Manthey of Kid Culture in the Schools for sending us the original Daily Bruin article."

Marc writes "This article by NBC4.TV briefly covers the court's recent dismissal of Ray Blumhorst's lawsuit against 10 state funded domestic violence shelters for discriminating against males, which we are immediately appealing. As the article states, the court dismissed the case based on Government Code section 11139, which exempts "programs benefiting women" from the ban on discrimination in state funded programs. But the article fails to mention that we made a constitutional challenge to section 11139 based on Connerly v. State Personnel Board, which makes gender classifications in the law presumed unconstitutional, and that the judge refused to respond to our constitutional challenge and only said, "I'm not going to declare it unconstitutional." We are appealing this immediately."