Thundercloud. writes "I couldn't believe my eyes, when I saw on MSN's homepage an article on MEN'S health. Not women's as is the norm, but MEN'S!
The article is entitled; "Why men die sooner".
They covered all kinds of things that the regular news won't even let see the light of day. Includeing MANY things we have discussed here at MANN.
They compared the life spans of Black and White men, But left out American-Indians, American-Asians and other American men, as usual.
(At least Hispanic men were mentioned, albeit breifly.)
This is a step in the right direction. We should continue to protest MSN when they do their anti-man stuff, But we should also praise them when they do things like this!
If you want to check it out, here's the link;
http://www.msn.com"

Doctor Damage writes "I found this one at Mens News Daily. For sheer, jaw dropping insensitivity to the needs of men and our right to justice, this one stands head and shoulders above the pack. In this story a brazilian judge ordered that a man not only pay child support amounting to 100 pounds a month, but fined him a further 10000 pounds. Why? because a probability greater than 99.9% that he was not the natural father based on DNA evidence was insufficient to counter the testimony of witnesses who claimed that he was the father. Notice also, that the story is listed in "quirkies" as if this example of judicial misandry completely out of control is somehow amusing! "

Napnip writes: I was at my local mall today, and there is a store in it called "Gadzooks". It's a trendy clothing store that has all the latest fasions. Well, when I walked past it, I noticed they had lots of large print signs in the windows. The signs said "SAY NO TO EQUAL RIGHTS" and "PROUD TO BE A SEXIST". The signs all had pictures of beautiful women with the bold letters in front of them.

Another sign said that all the male-related items were on sale and that the company was switching over to a completely female-related product line.

If you go to their website, you'll notice that their homepage says "By this summer Gazooks will become a whole new place. One that celebrates, glorifies, dresses and accessorizes girls only." Notice the words "celebrates" and "glorifies".

It's one thing to switch over to a strictly women's clothing store. It's another thing entirely to blatantly display sexism to the point that their signs declare that they're proud of it!

Do you think we should start a letter writing campaign to this company?

If you look at the lower left corner of Gadzooks' Home Page, you'll see a poster that says "EVERYTHING FOR GUYS MUST GO!" Note that the "EVERYTHING FOR" is much smaller than the rest, so what really catches the eye is "GUYS MUST GO!"

Also, Dan Lynch found this gem. Can you imagine an all-men's store selling T-shirts that say "GIRLS ARE STUPID... THROW ROCKS AT THEM!"?

I will host this week's MANN chat, Wednesday
night (4/30), starting at 9:30 PM Eastern Time, at the href="http://www.mensactivism.org/chat.shtml">usual location. The
topic for this chat will be "What Men's Health Crisis?"  Earlier
this week, a researchers at the University of Michigan published an
article that refers to a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030429/ap_on_he_me/men_s_health_4">"silent
health crisis" in men's health, and suggests the need for href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/hsn/20030430/hl_hsn/the_risky_lives_of_american_men">"a
new definition of masculinity that includes greater responsibility for
oneself."  What do you think about this issue?  Are men
experiencing a "crisis" in their health?  How much of the alleged
"crisis" is due to men's individual behaviors?  How much of the
"crisis" results from the disproportionate attention the government
pays to women's health?  Join us at this week's chat to explore
these questions about the men's health "crisis."  See you there.

CJ writes "Here is just one example of the ever increasing presence of the bludgeoning of male genitalia on TV and in the movies as humor: Oliver, the main character in Fox’s new family sitcom (Oliver Beene) gets scared to dance with a girl in the gym class. So while standing in front of the most attractive girl in his grade, he fakes getting kicked in the groin by someone, with the girl standing above him. The teacher calls the whole class to come and stand over Oliver and observe in a casual way while he asks the boy if his testicles had "retracted into his body" The whole gym class is invited to watch as this boy gets dropped on his behind as a way to fix his condition(?). The students go into an amused panic over this scene, as it was depicted as a fun and interesting event. In the last scene of the show, the teacher gets hit in the groin by a ball and falls to the ground, the students gather around and someone suggests a "testicle drop" and the show ends... This trend is increasingly becoming more popular/common. What can be done about this atrocious double standard, where any perceived violation of a female’s reproductive right is an outrage, and the destruction of a male’s reproductive system is common acceptable humor or a justified act. The episode guide makes no mention of the central theme of this show. http://www.fox.com/oliver/#episodes"

Dan Lynch writes "Now I just wanted to post this while it was still on my mind. But there seems to be a recurring theme in many comercials these days. The ones I am speaking of are ones like a recent Doritoes comercial I just saw. The set up is: two guys are at a party surrounded by pretty girls and some cutey catches their eye. Now they don't talk they more or less 'munch' their communications. The conversation ends up with one guy asking the other 'do you think I have a chance with her?' in subtitles. She walks over takes a chip and munches to the subtitle 'slim to none'. My question is--Why is this theme so prevelant on television with guys striking out with girls? Does this really sell stuff? Any thoughts on this?"

Yep, Yours truly is about to start doing a weekly advice piece coming to you each friday (Or bi-weekly, depending on how it goes) where you can ask me various questions (not strictly on men's issues) the more interesting questions will be more likely to be answered. To begin asking, send me an email with "Ask Ads" in the header to adam@mensactivism.org while I can't answer everyone, I will read 'em all, So we'll see how it goes.

I want to apologize to everyone for a submission that I recently posted. I wanted to do some cleaning out of back submissions from readers, so I posted the link after just glancing at the Webpage. That's a mistake that I WON'T repeat. Sheesh!

Turns out the site is very twisted.

I'd like to thank Tor Ackman for letting me know about this.

Again, my sincere apologies.

Thomas

Tatis writes "This article, co-authored by Philip W. Cook and Glenn Sacks, examines some of the causes for the decline of male college enrollments. Males comprise only 43% of all college students nationwide. It was just published in the book Abuse Your Illusions: The Disinformation Guide to Media Mirages and Establishment Lies (published by The Disinformation Company)."

CJ writes "This article

appeared on the front page of the Boston Sunday Globe with a nice picture of the subject next to it. When one starts to read this article, one would think the story to be about a distinguished person. Instead, the story is about the wonderful and interesting life of a cold-blooded female killer. I have never seen anything remotely similar to this done for a man, where a criminal act is questioned to figure out what went wrong. This woman killed a doctor at Mass General Hospital and then committed suicide. When the story broke, the media took days to point out that a woman had actually done the killing as the police were reluctant to charge her with the murder (even though it must have been obvious), and reporters got positive comments about the woman's life. The feminist hate mongers at the Globe are beyond contempt for this flagrant double standard. Men are viewed as patriarchal monsters, and women get the "what went wrong, she was so wonderful" type of treatment. Please email your disgust to the Globe. Thanks"

Dittohd writes "Have you seen this yet? In Houston, a 27 year old woman teacher at a private school was convicted of having sex with a 13 year old boy over a seven month period and got 30 days in jail, a $500 fine, and 10 years probation. This sentence was given by a woman judge. According to TV accounts, there is an "uproar" over this light sentence.I wonder how much of an uproar there really is and I also wonder how hard it would be to depose a judge who hands out a sentence like this, whether or not she is an elected judge. I know judges are supposed to be "permanent" in many cases, but I wonder how difficult it would be to overcome this obstacle. Anyone here have ideas on such a possibility?" The Gonzo Kid also submitted this story and said "30 days, and a $500 fine for a 27 year old female teacher having sex with a male student. Guys, I'm absolutely speechless for the moment. Especially since I know of someone who got 90 days and a thousand dollar fine for a petty offense."

I came across this feature by Aaron Burr due to one of my fellow admins, And I found it quite interesting, and worth sharing. It's quite a different perspective to what you're used to reading, But I think it will generate some worthy thoughts to be heard. Click "read more/post comments" to read it.

MrDave writes "
Eight-year-old punished with detention for pointing a chicken strip at another student in the cafeteria while saying "pow, pow, pow."

Third grader given five-day suspension for violating substance abuse policy after classmates reported that he took a "purple pill." His offense was taking a multivitamin with his lunch.

16-year-old honor student expelled when security guard found a butter knife in the bed of his pickup truck. The knife apparently fell out of a box of household items he and his father had transported the previous day from his grandmother's home to a local Goodwill store.

Phyllis Schlafly comments, “Almost all zero tolerance rulings punish boys. Boys are also the victims of the current fad to eliminate recess and build new schools without playgrounds. This nonsense may be part of the feminist agenda to try to make little boys behave like little girls.”

Read more here".

MrDave writes "David Yeagley, PhD, is a Comanche Indian. His recent essay, "Why Communism Loves Indians"" could have been titled, "The Enemy of Man". Here are some excerpts. Note the parallels with Feminism: 'Communism is the religion of hate. It says, “You have made me suffer. I will therefore violently take from you whatever you have that I want.” ... Communism redefines words. "Envy" now means "justice". “Justice” means I have a right to have what’s yours. “Equality” means I deserve whatever you have. “Democracy” means the state makes sure I have what you have ... Communism wants to destroy the achievements of the white male, and to subjugate him to all that he has had dominion over ... Feminism envies the strength of the male, and seeks to destroy it. The male represents an inequality which Communism cannot tolerate ... Feminists hate American Indian warrior images, and want them all removed ... In the name of Communist equality, you must devote your life to bringing down the achievers. This is the sinister element of envy, to destroy those who have more than you have, because you hate them for having more."

Tatis writes "Best-selling men's issues author Warren Farrell will discuss anti-male hostility on our college campuses on His Side with Glenn Sacks on KRLA 870 AM in Los Angeles at 11 PM on Sunday, April 27. To listen to the show live via the Internet, go to http://hisside.com/listen_live.htm. Listeners are invited to call the show and join the discussion at 1 866 870-KRLA.

Sacks and Farrell will be joined by members of the National Coalition of Free Men Los Angeles who will discuss their recent demonstration against anti-male campus feminism."