|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:12 PM December 23rd, 2004 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:50 PM December 23rd, 2004 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Running this sort of crap three days in a row on the front page is sick. Your husband is going to kill you when you're pregnant! Unbelievable. And the tone of earnestly uncovering "untold stories". What kind of morons do they think Post readers are?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:21 PM December 24th, 2004 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
"Liberals"
- Signed -
A Former Liberal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:54 PM December 24th, 2004 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Liberals and conservatives protecting them from the big bad man..getting tough on crime, law and order, women on a pedestal who must be protected from the inherently lowly immoral men.
The enforcers of the law, thus the lawmakers, are always lean on the conservative side. Which is why feminism is both left and right. They are reactionary when it fits them, and progressive when it fits them.
They try to solve problems with laws that punish behavior which is conservative, (whether someone calls themselves a leftist or rightist), instead of changing the environment thereby changing the behavior of people.
It's all chivalry on both sides. I think both should be called on their shit.
p. george
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by thea on 02:14 PM December 24th, 2004 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
"Which is why feminism is both left and right."
Feminism wants it all. If feminists notice that one side of the political spectrum has some influencial power, they'll take it, and vice-versa. Feminism just wants more and more power. They really don't care where that power and influence comes from. They want to keep female priveleges and gain all of the so-called 'power' and 'rights' that Anglo-Saxon 'Priveleged Patriarchs' supposedly have. If that 'privelege patriarchs' nonsense were true then blue-collar/working class men like my Dad and brothers wouldn't be working on Christmas Eve. The feminists are parasites that feed off of both political and ideological spectrums. Feminist Women and Pro-Chivalry Women want it *ALL*! All the priveleges and all the power, and they need to leech off of male politicians from both sides in order to get it.
*Ms.Thea the Pre-Law Major, Pro-Gender Egalitarian, and Pro-Reproductive Rights Activist*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by thea on 02:28 PM December 24th, 2004 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Oh fuck, you two aren't going to start that 91 posts nonsense again are you guys? You two hate each other, good for you! We all know, we saw the 91 posts. Just agree that you two want to kill each other all because of political/ideological differences and MOVE ON! Those 91 posts were the kind of immature nitpicking, infighting that I see on feminist message boards or women-only message boards. My god, if you two want to rip each other a new asshole *again* then create a 'Liberal Versus Conservative Post' on MANN's homepage, and feel free to slaughter each other again on that post and not ruin another post. Congratu-fucking-lations, you guys hate each other. We know that. Stay on topic and don't answer any kind of goading or temptation from the other guy. This is a forum, NOT Junior High. And here I thought that ALL adults were upstanding examples of maturity and rational thinking.
*Ms.Thea the Pre-Law Major, Pro-Gender Egalitarian, and Pro-Reproductive Rights Activist*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:03 PM December 24th, 2004 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
No, you've got me mixed up with someone else... don't worry, I'm not going to get into a flame war or any online argument.
My comment was *somewhat* tongue-in-cheek (about what kind of morons the *Washington Post* thinks people are)... What I *didn't* say was that liberals are morons... but feminism IS a liberal scourge, only aided and abetted by conservatives, either too stupid or cowardly to stand up and say "No!"...
The conservatives aren't pushing a liberal, feminist agenda ... but believe me, I agree that they've been completely flumoxed by feminst demands, and instead of standing up to the very worst kind of prejudice and bigotry, they have turned tail, folded, and utterly sold out both men and reasonable women.
In short, "a pox on BOTH their houses!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by thea on 04:00 PM December 24th, 2004 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
What's pox? Like chickenpox or smallpox? I hear chickenpox infections in adults can be fatal. The Washington Post is probably made up of a bunch of Ivy Leaguers who view themselves to be superior to we ever so inferior laypeople. They're ultra-radical liberals, like the ones you would find at Berkley University who are psychotically belligerent towards all conservatives. I'm a liberal with limits, lots of limits. I get along just fine with my conservative relatives because I'm not radical or belligerent about my views like those Berkley kids. A person can be conservative or liberal without being an asshole about it. I've met some belligerent asshole [radical]liberals before and I don't associate with them, nor do I support or defend them. Besides if I were a radical liberal, I wouldn't be an avid fan of meat, leather, furs, guns, and pick-up trucks. There's no way in hell, I'm giving up those things. I'm too much of a Hoosier to not enjoy those things. But the point is, feminism has corrupted both sides of the political/ideological spectrum. We just see it more in the Democrats then Republicans, because feminism takes the form of chivalry and maternalism within the Republican agenda. But it's there, oh it is there. Feminism must be purged from BOTH sides no matter what form it takes. Feminism knows what form to take when it wants more power and influence.
*Ms.Thea the Pre-Law Major, Pro-Gender Egalitarian, and Pro-Reproductive Rights Activist*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:09 PM December 24th, 2004 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
"I agree that they've been completely flumoxed by feminst demands, and instead of standing up to the very worst kind of prejudice and bigotry, they have turned tail, folded, and utterly sold out both men and reasonable women."
Hogwash, the big time advocats of feminism are the liberal democrats, and if any of you spent any time at all in the conservative camp you might dispel your ignorance and see that conservatives have drawn a hard line in the sand against radical/gender feminism and its agenda. Get your facts correct and stop lying. Just today I got a complimentary copy of Newsmax (a conservative magazine) and on page 44 was a half page ad for The War Against Men. All you ever see in the liberal democrat rags are The War Against Women. Be sure to post it here the 1st time the democrat party actually opposes radical/gender feminism. I'm waiting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I must say that conservatives are certainly not the friend of men. Don't get me wrong, I voted for Bush and believe he was the better of the two men. But let's not kid ourselves, conservatives are not going to help men out when they're got chivalry oozing from their orifices.
Conservatives aren't trying to outlaw Male Genital Mutilation.
Conservatives aren't trying to help male victims of domestic violence.
Conservatives sure as hell aren't trying to help men being railroaded by the family court system.
Conservatives aren't trying to find a cure for prostate cancer.
In short, conservatism might be a weeeeeeeeeeeee bit better than liberalism, but it sure as hell ain't by much.
That being said, I have a great respect for both conservatives and liberals who are trying to make the world a better place for men. Instead of fighting among ourselves, we need to realize that our real enemy is radical feminism / chivalry, regardless of whether the politician has a "D" or an "R" in front of the name.
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Boy Genteel on 12:08 AM December 25th, 2004 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
"Hogwash, the big time advocats of feminism are the liberal democrats, and if any of you spent any time at all in the conservative camp you might dispel your ignorance and see that conservatives have drawn a hard line in the sand against radical/gender feminism and its agenda."
Yes, but, you see, part of that is the "old-fashioned" camp who hates feminism because it means that men no longer hold the doors for/remove their hats for/give up their seats for/refuse to get into lifeboats for the sake of women, while receiving no similar kindness in return.
Do you remember the piece in the AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE in which five women were kvetching that there were no "real men" anymore and that men just don't stand up when these women enter the room before. Stuff like that. Be careful what alliances you make.
bg
Men are from EARTH. Women are from EARTH. Deal with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:16 PM December 24th, 2004 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
"I must say that conservatives are certainly not the friend of men."
Let's try to put things in perspective as to who the real enemy of men is:
Q. Are radical/gender feminists the "primary aggressors" (to borrow their term from domestic violence) in the "war on men?"
"Conservatives aren't trying to help male victims of domestic violence."
Q. Who is proactively "hurting" the vast majority of male domestic violence victims?
A. Democrats by "authoring" and "lobbying" for anit-male domestic violence law.
A. Yes, overwhelmingly
Q. Are there any radical/gender feminists in the Republican party?
A. No, I've never seen any, and I've spent years in both camps.
Q. Are there any radical/gender feminists in the Democrat party?
A. Yes, all that I've ever seen in political party activities.
Q. Which party do Women's Studies instructors support and vote far - exclusively?
A. Democrat
Q. Which party do members of Women's Commissions vote for - exclusively?
A. Democrat
Q. Who "authors" the vast majority of anti-male legislation?
A. Democrats
Q. Who "authors" the vast majority of anti-traditional family legislation?
A. Democrats
"Conservatives aren't trying to outlaw Male Genital Mutilation"
I haven't seen any real support for this issue form any party. Not even Glenn Sacks made this much of an issue when it was on his show. I believe there are strong religious traditions at work here too. I am not an advocate of MGM, but think MRA's need to define and present this argument with sound Scientific research in support of efforts to outlaw MGM.
"Conservatives sure as hell aren't trying to help men being railroaded by the family court system."
Here is where the double whammy of chivalrous support for traditional family views, and liberal support of empowered women combine to make the perfect storm of destruction on men's lives. I'm glad to see Father's groups like F4J and ACFC working hard to improve the lives of Fathers, and for that matter Mothers (make them accountable) and children. Much more needs to be done and there are many issues like "false accusations," made by women in divorce and child custody proceedings. Let's see what happens with the effort to hold false accusers accountable in CA where most of the lawmakers are Democrats, but there are enough Republicans to see where they stand.
"Conservatives aren't trying to find a cure for prostate cancer."
There's a lot of other bi-partisan neglect of male issues that really frame themselves into a tacit bias against males like the 80% of homeless that are males, and the 93% of the prison population that are males.
For decades it has been the feminist supporting law makers and lobbyists who have been framing the arguments for legislation, then authoring the pro-woman/anti-male legislation that has been negatively impacting men on a major scale.
Men have been late comers on the political scene. "Men have forgotten to liberate themselves after helping to liberate women" as Warren Farrell says. Yes he's a Democrat working within his party for men's rights, but we haven't seen much positive effect on his party from his books or his campaign for Gov. I don't see that as his fault, more "Who Stole the Democrat Party?" I believe the answer to that is, "The Same People Who Stole Feminism."
"In short, conservatism might be a weeeeeeeeeeeee bit better than liberalism, but it sure as hell ain't by much."
To each his own. I'm sure the decision to be a Democrat or Republican is not made solely by most people strictly on the grounds of men's rights. I do make the decision based largely on that, and so I voted Republican, and consider them vastly better on men's rights issues than Democrats.
Having been both a Democrat and a Republican, I'm advocating that if you are a Democrat or a Republican hold your party accountable for any anti-male bias you can make a valid case for.
Here's a current hot button issue I'll through in, "Women in Combat."
Republican women support views of the "traditional family," and "traditional gender roles" and frame any discussion on women's rights to be more of "equal footing" with men than superior to men. Of course they argue for chivalry, which excludes them from war, but still sends men to fight for their rights (chivalry in all it's glowing tradition as we have come to know it). Very hypocritical on their part if you ask me, and curiously enough it appears there are a lot of egocentric John Kassick types who get all puffed up at the idea of defending females. Republicans do not buy into the Democrat idea of radical/gender feminism at all so using the liberated concept of women from the other camps perspective accomplishes nothing. I believe Republicans should be held accountable for their chivalrous exploitation of "primarily" men in war with generous support for the veterans so they have good lives and don't wind up in the "other camps" batterer's re-education camps.
Radical/gender feminists want equality with men in the military, but haven't been strong advocates of women in combat. I have seen that group oppose even the war in Afghanistan from day one, while advocating that we send more troops to help ensure women's rights in remote areas of that country from the early periods of the war. Very hypocritical on their part if you ask me. I’m sure this is not a definitive coverage of the differences in the parties, and I’m sure some will disagree, and others will have their two cents to add, but please, one and all, address the issues and refrain from the ad hominems.
Happy Holidays to One and All, and if you don't celebrate the Holidays have a nice day off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:13 PM December 24th, 2004 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure the decision to be a Democrat or Republican is not made solely by most people strictly on the grounds of men's rights.
I vote primarily on the basis of achieving equal justice under law for men and promoting equal respect for men's human dignity. On that basis, I've been choosing Republicans over Democrats nearly every time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:18 PM December 25th, 2004 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm an independant, but I have to admit, that I have been wary of voteing for Democrats on moral and men's issues. I HAVE voted for Democrats conserning the enviroment, though. (I'm an Indian, it kinda comes with the territory...,)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:20 PM December 25th, 2004 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
Lets not forget that the Democrats are led by a RABID feminist, Nancy Pelosi.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by thea on 02:06 PM December 25th, 2004 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
"Lets not forget that the Democrats are led by a RABID feminist, Nancy Pelosi."
Yeah that woman is a flaming super-bitch. She probably has an extra pair of ovaries because I've never seen such a bad case of estrogen poisoning. And she's a tyrant, not a leader.
*Ms.Thea the Pre-Law Major, Pro-Gender Egalitarian, and Pro-Reproductive Rights Activist*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:45 PM December 26th, 2004 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
>"flaming super-bitch."
LOL!
I love it.
That is what we should start calling Nancy (the palooka) Pelosi.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Luek on 09:59 AM December 26th, 2004 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
but feminism IS a liberal scourge, only aided and abetted by conservatives, either too stupid or cowardly to stand up and say "No!"...
Actually, the toxic strain of negative gender radical feminism that inspires article series like the one in Washington (com)Post and bad law like VAWA is an offshoot of Marxism. All the early 1960's "burn your bra" type feminists, like Betty Friedan,Gloria Stieniem, Germain Greer and other specimens (if the spelling of the names of these cretins is wrong...well, I don't give a shit!)formulated their ideology while working to impose a Marxist anti-family and anti-male political solution to all the socalled social problems facing Western nations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:48 PM December 26th, 2004 EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, it is an urban myth that the feminists "BURNED their bras".
They did throw them in trash cans, but no one burned them.
Phaedra.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:22 PM December 26th, 2004 EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
"Radical Feminism Is Not Liberalism.
...so where are they in your mind on a scale of far right to far left?
We know that radical feminists love to rewrite the English dictionary so that words have altogether new meainings. What rationalizations do radical feminists have to explain away their obvious classification as liberals? They are liberals in everyone's mind except theirs?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by thea on 04:06 PM December 30th, 2004 EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
What the hell is a dittohead?
*Ms.Thea the Pre-Law Major, Pro-Gender Egalitarian, and Pro-Reproductive Rights Activist*
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Predictably, the Washington Post's