|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:18 PM September 26th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
This is how the feminists have it planned.
Create a superior learning environment for women and an inferior one for men.
This will automatically create a female upper class while creating a male underclass. Knowledge is power, if it is given only to females who will automatically hold all the power?
As I have said many times before what is happening is NO accident. This is indeed being done in the spirit of (what I have heard feminists saying, all along): "We're takin' over". and that is exactly what we are seeing at work in this and many other cases.
It will not be TOO much longer when we have nothing but female politicians. We have nearly nothing but women in academia and media. It is only going to get worse my friends. And it will continue to do so until we can wake up a significant number of men (and women) to the problem.
To the feminists "total "reversal"" IS equality.
It will be hard enough to wake up women, but i think it'll be even harder to wake up the wussie-poopies who not only enjoy being dominated by women, they also enjoy seeing it occur.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:30 PM September 26th, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
I just love the BS at the bottom of the article: the problem must be male anti-intellectualism or bias. Couldn't possibly be sexism on the part of feminists, government or educators, right?
When are these morons going to wake up and smell what the feminists have been shovelling for 40 years. Now we have two full generations of women who not only expect both sets of gender privileges and no responsibilities, but who also expect to be pandered to at every opportunity - by politicians, the media, men, etc.
We have countries filled with spoiled, useless white women. Women who immigrate here quickly become like them, so it is by no means a racial issue.
Your only defense? Get an education, despite feminism's best efforts, never marry, and for God's sake, don't have children!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:47 PM September 26th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
"And it will continue to do so until we can wake up a significant number of men (and women) to the problem."
Therein is the problem. Men are in total denial over what is happening. If men were saying "We have no rights but who cares", then that is a viewpoint I can understand. However the reality is that 99% of men aren't aware that they have no rights. It's something I dont understand and I have given up trying to understand it.
Hotspur
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:26 PM September 26th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
It is ironic that the feminists continue to wail about the lack of women in Congress, yet there's not a feminist anywhere losing any sleep about the imminent passage of VAWA 2005.
If they were even a little bit honest, the girls at N.O.W. would throw an annual "Wussie-Poopy Banquet" to honor all the intellectually castrated men who are in fact the real tools of feminism.
But, of course the rad-fems want to have it both ways....
Men as symbolic evil oppressors, and the same men as thinly disguised shills for the feminist agenda.
Wouldn't you love to have a tape of what N.O.W. Ms.-Prez Kim Gandy actually told Joe Biden about keeping all MRA testimony out of the VAWA hearings?
Do you think maybe Kim used the term "tiny balls" during their friendly discussion?
(roy)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:17 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
|
"It's something I dont understand and I have given up trying to understand it. "
It's because the shit has never quite hit the average male where he lives -- yet. It has never quite arrived in his "neighborhood" -- yet.
And when it finally does arrive, he doesn't recognize it for what it is because his cultural expectations have been patiently engineered all along.
The shit has been creeping gradually, so that people (men and women both) will have time to "get used to it", and lose all knowledge of how things really were "in grandpa's day." Historical revisionism has played its part here, keeping pace with developments. And so today's pathologies seem "normal", and nobody has the critical tool set to question it.
With every passing generation, the ratchet clicks another notch or three.
At the same time, feminism has bestowed largesse upon the female population in a classic ploy known as "usurpation of gratitude". Women, even if they balk at calling themselves feminist, are loath to bite the hand that feeds them. Feminism forges chains of gratitude the better to bind all womanhood unto itself and call itself "the women's movement".
What they've accomplished is brilliant; it would make Machiavelli beam like a country bumpkin who took first prize at the county fair. And all along, feminists have exploited the naivété and essential good nature of 99% of men who, confronted with feminist caterwauling, sensibly bought themselves earplugs and got on with their lives, never suspecting that "girls" were up to anything unsavory.
Meanwhile, the feminists were stealing the cultural ground from under their feet. And so, rather than face the state of cognitive freefall they'd been thrown into, the bulk of males swallowed the feminist weltanschauung hook, line and sinker. (Most of this occuring quite subconsciously, of course! And gradually...)
Enough analyzing. The question is how to throw a shaft of light into the average male mind, and how to persuade the average female to take Trent Reznor's advice and "bite the hand that feeds "
I am endlessly pondering such questions.
-Fidelbogen-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:13 AM September 27th, 2005 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
"It will not be TOO much longer when we have nothing but female politicians."
Not necessarily. When the Nazis occupied a country, they usually used local "stooges" to govern the country rather than Germans. These stooges (or "Quislings") were often more fanatical in implementing Nazi policies than Germans because they were desperate to please their Nazi overlords. Furthermore, the Nazis could claim that the conquered nation had "self government".
The feminazis are using the same tactics. Male feminist stooges are fanatically feminist in order to please the feminazis and so retain a privileged position. Furthermore feminazis can point to these male stooges as evidence that "men still control society" and as "proof" that the glass ceiling exists.
Hotspur
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:28 AM September 27th, 2005 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
"To the feminists "total "reversal"" IS equality."
I disagree, TC. Total reversal would involve women getting traditional male privileges AND traditional male burdens.
Feminist equality means getting traditional male privileges while retaining traditional female privileges.
Hotspur
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by johnnyp on 10:31 AM September 27th, 2005 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:31 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, but I still say it is all by design.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Hunchback on 09:50 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
It is all by design.
In the 60s the Women Libbers were bold enough to actually state their aims. Some even openly bragged that they could count on two male weaknesses—actually flipsides of the same coin—to achieve their ends: a chivalrous desire to protect women at all costs and a chauvinistic belief that women could do them no harm.
It was only in the 70s that the New Feminists found that it was both strategically and tactically more efficient to dissemble. Hey, it produced the Ford grants for women studies. Whole armies of newly minted, college-educated feminazis produced by the universities. The rest is history.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:57 AM September 28th, 2005 EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
"Some even openly bragged that they could count on two male weaknesses—actually flipsides of the same coin—to achieve their ends: a chivalrous desire to protect women at all costs and a chauvinistic belief that women could do them no harm."
True. Which is why I believe the victory of feminaziism can be blamed on MEN.
And the defeat of feminaziizm will only be acheived by a radical overhaul of traditional male attitudes.
Hotspur
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:16 PM September 28th, 2005 EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
Bill O'Reilly(sp?) was asking, on his show last night, if we (America) are ready for a female president. He went on to say that he believes that women are more Noble than men in every way.
Where the hell does he get that? This is exactly the kind of Chivalrous self-hating male tripe that is a good part of the problem for American men.
I don't know if I'd go as far as to say that O'Reilly is a wussie-poopie, but he's at least dangerously CLOSE to being one.
Personally, I think we are ready for a female president IF she is the right person for the job, and she works for ALL Americans not just women. But the way things are I think we will be hard pressed to find a female candidate who isn't your run of the mill man-hating woman, who will do her dead level best to in act anti-male legislation and further erode the already frayed constitutional and civil rights of both men and boys, while giving still MORE special rights and privileges to women.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by johnnyp on 05:27 PM September 26th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
Also remember that women tend to get less marketable degrees while men tend to get marketable degrees. Do not take these stats too hard, I do not think it is as bad as the numbers seem.
Women degrees - communication, physiology, sociology, English...
Men degrees - engineering, science, math, finance, business...
More women may be getting bachelors degrees, but so what.
Here is a non-scientific sample. I got a degree in accounting and engineering. The accounting classes were 2/3 men. The engineering classes were 7/8 men.
I got a master’s degree from a well-known university and 4/5 of the class was men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by johnnyp on 05:34 PM September 26th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
one other thing - schools' of education are packed with women. schools of education also consitently rank near the bottom on measures like average SAT scores.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Thomas on 06:05 PM September 26th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Women degrees - communication, physiology, sociology, English...
Men degrees - engineering, science, math, finance, business...
More women may be getting bachelors degrees, but so what.
Unfortunately, this is very far from the truth. Across the US, women account for a very large percentage of business majors. Most entering law school students are women. In Canada, there is such a severe shortage, especially in Quebec, of male medical students that a concern is rapidly growing that the demographic imbalance will lead to shortages in a number of medical sub-fields. In England, girls and women now lead men and boys in every academic field.
Women are overwhelming, if they haven't already overwhelmed, men in all of academia throughout the developed world.
Thomas
-- Creating hostile environments for feminazis since the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:15 PM September 26th, 2005 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
Problem is that this gives the feminists fuel for their "if it doesn't favour women, it must be male discrimination" nonsense, so even those of us with doctorates in the sciences can't get work - 20% of students in my field are female, and men consistently win the scholarships and awards for academic achievement, productivity, etc., yet 60% of new faculty hired at the 3 major universities in this region in my area of study are female because women have "traditionally" been under-represented.
"Traditionally"? "Under-represented"?
What about the fact that the vast majority of the successful candidates are white or asian? Why aren't we only hiring and promoting South Americans, African Canadians and Polynesians?
Because most of those groups can't beat governments and men over the head with chivalry, that's why. There's a reason there aren't more women in those fields, same way there are reasons men don't dominate the liberal arts. Women can't compete with their male counterparts in engineering and the physical sciences, where the fight for tenure is as competitive as professional sports. Only the strongest survive to make it to tenure by publishing and working their asses off.
In Canada, NSERC (Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council) - our major funding body for academic research and faculty grants, has taken to only allowing women to apply for so-called UFA scholarships/grants, which are the only way to get a tenure-track position in the sciences up here. It essentially cuts the candidate's cost to the hiring university, making them far more appealing to cash-strapped public institutions. Why hire a man when the women are free?
Link: http://www.safs.ca/sept2000/nserc.html
There is a REASON only 20% of the candidates in the physical sciences are women. It has to do with math and spatial abilities, areas in which men outperform women consistently. There is a reason only 10-15% of the tenured faculty are women, despite their favoured access to scholarships and academia: they prefer not to bust their asses to compete with their male counterparts. It means working more than 4 hours a day, and can seriously interfere with baby time.
Strange, but I don't hear the harpies screeching to attract more men to English faculty positions. Or nursing positions. Oh, that's right, it favours women, so that's OK, right?
Despite the decade and $100K I invested in my education, I no longer have the slightest interest in working as a faculty member in academia. Let the feminists destroy science too. The second the playing field is levelled, qualified men with again dominate the area and some actual science might get done.
There is a REASON that matriarchal societies never progress beyond the Stone Age, people!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:54 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
...There is a REASON that matriarchal societies never progress beyond the Stone Age, people!...
How true, and when women do take over entire fields of science then we find that the quality of the discipline fails. Take a look at the medical institutions in Russia.
Female doctors have chased out almost all of the males, and now nobody in their right mind would have any sort of major medical treatment there. Further their pay is dropping as the discipline goes into decay. That is of course men’s fault.
If women are so damn good then where are all of the new medical breakthroughs from Russia? Where the hell is the cure for breast cancer? Why do they still have the common cold in Russia? Why haven’t the Russian women created world peace? After all that is where the Marxist-Feminist movement started.
Answer: It is because Russia is a society in decline. It is a literal example of a feminist paradise that was sponsored by Marxist-Feminist thought. Now we are witnessing the inevitable disintegration from the matriarchy taking over.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:34 PM September 26th, 2005 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
It just shows that non-degreed jobs pay more.
Heck, I have a degree AND a diploma. But the longshoremen in this area make well into the six figures for half a week's work.
Degreed jobs are being offshored. Can't offshore the plumbers. Those guys make FAT cash.
Sure, it's hard and often dangerous work, but if you want food on the table in these increasingly difficult times ya gotta chase the money - and the money is no longer in the white collar, I have my degree kind of jobs but in the trades, which due to complete neglect for decades is so badly needing people they're paying top dollar.
Heck, if I was starting out now I'd have gone to the local tech college and learned a trade.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by frank h on 02:01 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
Victor Davis Hanson comments on poor acadedemic performance here:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007319
and in his article he decries declining test scores. So, since the proportion of women enrolled is advancing, and test scores and overall performance are declining, does anyone else see a pattern there?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:20 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
Yep! I certainly do! (See a pattern)
Oh, but we can't SAY it, because it's not politically correct. (Sarcasm)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
