Comments
|
I Read One |
by J. via ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 1
24 May 2002
|
This was posted by J. as a comment to this same piece of spam on the global IMC site. I think it sums up just the beginning of why the posting above is BS.
J. says:
It seems like male chauvinist nonsense to me.
And I say this as a male. For instance, the story talking about the << myth >> of the rape culture.
It's a myth, the article says, because rape has always existed. So rape has always been common therefore we do not live a rape culture?
Strange logic.
The <> of rape culture is also a <> because rape is really violence, and violence has always against existed. Same logical flaw.
The article goes on to say that most of the violence in society is not directed against women, but against men.
This may be true, but most of the violence is perpetrated BY MEN. This is for historical reasons, not simply for biological reasons, as the author insists. The author says, women are the victims of violence because they are weaker. This directly contradicts the previous assertion that most violence is directed against men.
The article is filled with all sorts of fallacies and false assertions. Any anthropologist can tell you that there are matriarchal societies in which men are treated as inferiors, and suffer more from discrimination than women (For example, the Na-shi tribes, in Western China, near Tibet.)
Violence is a matter of culture and history, not simply a matter of biology. Violent Crimes are five times less likely in Western Europe than in the US. Violence is greater, even on a per capita basis, in cities, than in rural areas. Urban culture is different from pastoral culture.
This new <> movement is ill-conceived and sexist. There may come a time when women constitute 97 per cent of the CEO's of large corporations. There may come a time when women are the majority in Congress, and there may come a time when the President, half the cabinet, and half heads of government departments, and two thirds of the Supreme Court Justices are women. But until that day, I think <> is simply code for anti-feminism, or reasserting patriarchy. |
|
Thanks, ML |
by Roxy
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
|
|
The same thing was posted on the Chicago IMC with a title of something like, "Too HOT for the Newswire!!" and the summary intentionally insulted readers. It looks like it's been hidden or something. |
|
Flamebait |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
|
Hi Roxy,
They may have a editorial policy against flamebait at Chicago IMC. I'm beginning to think that we need such a provision here with all the right-wing trolls we have picked up since the changes in the global IMC Newswire. We'll see. |
|
Typical of the left. |
by catswold
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
|
|
We see once again in the reactions below, that liberals are unable to argue with the facts and resort to personal attack. "Right-wing trolls," I believe is the term used. How sad it all seems that there cannot be a rational debate on issues without it getting personal. It is, however, inevitable that anyone who takes a shot at one of the sacred cows of the left will be assailed by the left in a personal, emotional, reaction bereft of logic or reason. If there is any "rape culture" in America, it is do to the general cultural decline in and those bastions of left-wing thought, our universities, which tell our youth "do what you like," " there is no absolute right or wrong," and "you don't need to take responsibility for your actions," unless of course you are a white male...then it's all your fault. |
|
Chickenshit Rightwingers |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
Modified: 03:00:50 PM |
Have you noticed, catswold, that you are having this interchange on a left-wing website?
There simply isn't any right-wing equivalent. People like you fear a challenge to your prevailing orthodoxy too much to allow such a thing on your websites as the open Newswires that exist at IMCs.
Let us know if such a thing as open publishing ever comes to pass on a right-wing website. We'll all want to post there. But I'm not holding my breath for such a thing to happen. Until it does, I am not going to take your complaints of how you are being stifled and insulted here seriously. It simply goes with the territory. If you don't like it, then leave, instead of whining about it. |
|
Gee |
by Aleph Null
AlephNull_42 (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
|
I'm a liberal, and I've voted as a democrat in every election I ever could have possibly voted for.
I'm a supporter of the men's movement.
Kinda blows a hole in your theory, doesn't it? |
|
What's the big problem? |
by ...
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
Modified: 09:06:19 PM |
As someone who's had his sons ripped from him and simultaneously been robbed by laws stacked in favor of the opposite sex, I find the men's rights movement both timely and relevant. Of course, it's also filled with hooie, but so is the newswire.
Don't diss a movement just because of its nutcases. Sift out the chaff, already. Real evil is done to men by other men, women, and the law. Deal.
p.s. quoting - "The author says, women are the victims of violence because they are weaker. This
directly contradicts the previous assertion that most violence is directed against men. "
How's that again? Forget about other men, did we? |
|
More Unsubstantive Gibberish |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
Modified: 25 May 2002 |
Aleph,
So you voted for Clinton? Now there's a fine example of how men should treat women.
Not that I'm saying that that whole sad side of the last President (yes, HE was actually ELECTED to office, unlike the current resident of the Whitehouse) justified the circus that the Republicans turned it into, but the claim that somehow voting for Democrats makes you somehow OK on gender issues is ridiculous. You're just confused about your principles.
Besides, Clinton was actually a conservative dressed up as a pseudeo-liberal. Voting for him doesn't actually mean you support a liberal agenda. In addition, most of the readers and authors on this website consider themselves radical, so loving liberalism alone won't win you many friends here, let alone support for your non-argument about the relevance of the men's "rights" movement.
And "...",
I would like you to cite specific examples of the laws you claim are "stacked against" men. True, there are some laws that level the playing field as a remedy for a power structure still heavily weghed against women, but I would hardly call that a stacked deck... unless you were used to having the deck stacked in your favor. Maybe that had something to do with your present family situation.
As for the quote you cite, you aren't reading closely enough. It was referring to info in an article on one of the websites that composes the original "article" above. It wasn't J. who missed that point about violence, rather it was one of the websites that you think are so full of "timely and relevant" information.
And neither of you has offered much in the way of "facts" to defend your argument, as "catswold" demands. But I don't take him seriously, so neither should you, especially self-avowed liberal Aleph Null. |
|
Men's Rights is neight right nor left |
by Marc Angelucci
angelucci2000 (nospam) alumni.law.ucla.edu (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
|
I am a member of the Green Party and I support gay rights, environmental and many other "liberal" causes. But I'm also an ardent men's rights activist and I don't agree with anyone who makes men's rights into a left/right matter. There are both leftists and rightists in the men's rights movement. In California, it took a liberal black democrat to finally write a bill (AB 2240) that will protect men from paternity fraud. That same assemblyman write a strong letter of support for a Commission for Men in Los Angeles County to address all the rampant discrimination against men.
You speak of a "rape culture." Whether there is one or not, our society and our government totally ignore male victims and do very little to address false accusations. Males are raped all the time in prison, and regardless of the sex of the rapist they deserve attention, yet 99% of rape prosecutions are when women are victims. Men are also frequently victims of sexual coercion from women as well, according to 40 studies published in the Summer 2000 issue of Sexuality and Culture, a peer-reviewed academic journal. But instead our government uses "rape culture" issues to bash men. They go to universities and only interview women and they define rape to include "unwanted sex", which happens to men too all the time. People have "unwanted sex" every time they have sex with a partner they don't feel like having but agree to consensually to please a partner. That isn't rape. Every month we read of another male found innocent by DNA evidence after years of imprisonment for a false accusation. The Air Force found that of 300 or so rape accusations, 28% recanted either before taking a lie detector test or after failing one, and they cited reasons such as "spite or revenge," "to cover an affair," mental illness, etc. Yet our government still only protects the names of the accuser and not he accused, and they rarely ever prosecute for false accusations.
We also give men higher sentences for the same crime even when all other factors (no. of priors, family situation, etc.) are accounted for. (http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/stories/angelucci042902.htm)
We ignore male victims of domestic violence even though men are victimized as often as women are and have no shelter or outreach but instead receive ridicule and disbelief. (www.batteredmen.com).
Men are the only ones forced to register for the draft (and it was the two most liberal Supreme Court Justices, Marshall and Brennan, who agreed with the men that this discriminated against them and dissented), even though women support or oppose wars at nearly the same rate that women do.
Men get their penises chopped at birth for no medical reason at all, with all the nerve endings entact, and nobody cares.
Men make the majority of homeless, job casualties, incarcerations, and die six years younger and die more often for each of the 10 leading causes of death. Yet we spend 4 times more on breast cancer than prostate cancer research and we have several offices of women's health with no office of men's health, and we are told the lie that women were excluded from medical coverage, which has been disproven over and over by researchers such as Dr. Sally Satel of Yale University.
Men are bashed for "earning more," yet that 76% figure comes from a snapshot of yearly incomes that doesn't account for overtime, type of work, etc. Men work 90% of overtime and work far more dangerous jobs that pay slightly more than desk jobs at the working class level. When these other things are factored, the wage gap narrows to almost nothing.
Men are routinely discriminated against in family court, having their children robbed from them and then told to pay up and driven to suicide, homelessness or despair, and then called 'deadbeat dads' even though men have a better record of paying their support than women do and most 'deadbeat dads' are poor or homeless and denied access to their kids.
This has nothing to do with right or left. Any form of government, left or right, should give equal rights to the sexes. But few of them give men equal rights. We've been liberating women without liberating men.
You can find out much more about men's right issues at www.mensactivism.org and see how gender feminists have lied and misled the public over and over, and because men are expected to be tough and not complain, the feminists have continued doing so without being accountable for their lies. |
|
State Force |
by Dan Lynch
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
|
So far I have seen a lot of crap that shows that men are evil thus should be corrected, women are weak need protection, blah blah blah, load of shit blah.
To say that women are incapable of decete, or violence etc... ironcly does a disservice to women. It shows them as inept, incapable, and with no backbone. Ya thats why they should be leaders, nice utopic vision idiots. When I vote I vote for who I think is CAPABLE, sorry no favortism for sex. Am I harsher on women in judgement NO! But I will tell you morons something about domestic violence, just because you get someone else to do your dirty work i.e. the Police and District Attornies it doesnt mean that its not a severe form or act of violence because IT IS! Here's a clue D.A.s are Lawyers essentially, what do lawyers do, they try to make work for themselves. If they can't win cases by conventional methods they just change the fuking rules. So buy a clue or a vowel or something you dumb ass motherfuckers, because before you know it all of us won't have one single right to stand on. |
|
RAPE Fraud Culture spun by Misandrist Maniacs |
by Bill
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
|
"Feminism is built on believing women's accounts of sexual use and abuse by men." -- Catharine MacKinnon
"All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman." Catherine MacKinnon
"All men are rapists and that's all they are" -- Marilyn French Author, "The Women's Room" (quoted again in People Magazine) "All men are rapists and that's all they are ..." --Feminist Marilyn French, People Magazine (Percent of reported rape or near-rape incidents = .07% [The FBI's Uniform Crime Report lists for the year 1996])
"[Rape] is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which ALL MEN KEEP ALL WOMEN IN A STATE OF FEAR" [emphasis added] -- Susan Brownmiller (Against Our Will p. 6)
"Marriage as an institution developed from rape as a practice. Rape, originally defined as abduction, became marriage by capture. Marriage meant the taking was to extend in time, to be not only use of but possession of, or ownership." -- Andrea Dworkin.
"Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women's bodies." -- Andrea Dworkin
"Romance is rape embellished with meaningful looks." Andrea Dworkin in the Philadelphia Inquirer, May 21, 1995..
"Under patriarchy, no woman is safe to live her life, or to love, or to mother children. Under patriarchy, every woman is a victim, past, present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's daughter is a victim, past, present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman," Andrea Dworkin, Liberty, p.58..
"One can know everything and still be unable to accept the fact that sex and murder are fused in the male consciousness, so that the one without the imminent possibly of the other is unthinkable and impossible." Andrea Dworkin, Letters from a War Zone, p. 21..
"In every century, there are a handful of writers who help the human race to evolve. Andrea is one of them."--Gloria Steinem
"And if the professional rapist is to be separated from the average dominant heterosexual [male], it may be mainly a quantitative difference." -- Susan Griffin "Rape: The All-American Crime" |
|
INSANE MISANDRIST PROPAGANDA!! |
by Bill
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
|
Let EVERY legislator, judge, and lawyer KNOW that they are NOTHING BUT RAPISTS according to the feminist lunatics they pander to;
"The institution of sexual intercourse is anti-feminist" -- Ti-Grace Atkinson "Amazon Odyssey" (p. 86)
"When a woman reaches orgasm with a man she is only collaborating with the patriarchal system, eroticizing her own oppression..." -- Sheila Jeffrys
"I claim that rape exists any time sexual intercourse occurs when it has not been initiated by the woman, out of her own genuine affection and desire." -- Robin Morgan, "Theory and Practice: Pornography and Rape" in "Going to Far," 1974.
"Who cares how men feel or what they do or whether they suffer? They have had over 2000 years to dominate and made a complete hash of it. Now it is our turn. My only comment to men is, if you don't like it, bad luck - and if you get in my way I'll run you down." -- Letter to the Editor: "Women's Turn to Dominate" -- Signed: Liberated Women, Boronia -- Herald-Sun, Melbourne, Australia - 9 February 1996
Toward a Feminist Theory of the State. Catharine A. MacKinnon, 1989, First Harvard University Press (paperback in 1991) [a legal treatise comparing and contrasting feminism with COMMUNISM AND SOCIALISM]
"It is not only men convicted of rape who believe that the only thing they did that was different from what men do all the time is get caught."
"If sexuality is central to women's definition and forced sex is central to sexuality, rape is indigenous, not exceptional, to women's social condition."
"Under law, rape is a sex crime that is not regarded as a crime when it looks like sex. The law, speaking generally, defines rape as intercourse with force or coercion and without consent., Like sexuality under male supremacy, this definition assumes the sadomasochistic definition of sex: intercourse with force or coercion can be or become consensual."
"Compare victims' reports of rape with women's reports of sex. They look a lot alike....[T]he major distinction between intercourse (normal) and rape (abnormal) is that the normal happens so often that one cannot get anyone to see anything wrong with it." Catherine MacKinnon, quoted in Christina Hoff Sommers, "Hard-Line Feminists Guilty of Ms.-Representation," Wall Street Journal, November 7, 1991.
"In a patriarchal society all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent." Catherine MacKinnon in Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women's Studies, p. 129..
"[Acquaintance rape] is more common than left-handedness, alcoholism and heart attacks." Naomi Wolf, The Beauty Myth (in the feminist attempt to build a case that "one in four" women have been raped in America.)
“Rape is a violent expression of a pattern of male supremacy, an outgrowth of age-old economic, political and cultural exploitation of women by men.” From a pamphlet entitled “Woman Against Myth,” by Betty Millard published in 1948 by CPUSA (the Communist Party of USA.)
"[R]ape represents an extreme behavior, but one that is on a continuum with normal male behavior within the culture." Prof. Mary Koss of Kent State University (1982)
"Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience." Catherine Comins, Vassar College Assistant Dean of Student Life in Time, June 3, 1991, p. 52..
As cited in Andrea Dworkin's "Right-Wing Women" "...I submit that any sexual intercourse between a free man and a human being he owns or controls is rape." -- Alice Walker in "Embracing the Dark and the Light," Essence, July 1982. (Feminists believe that marriage = ownership). |
|
Still MORE of the HIDEOUS EVIL that is feminist dribble |
by Bill
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
|
It's time that people started showing EVERYONE what these Insane Maniacs think. Start using some of the quotes against politicians.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Compare victims' reports of rape with women's reports of sex. They look a lot alike....[T]he major distinction between intercourse (normal) and rape (abnormal) is that the normal happens so often that one cannot get anyone to see anything wrong with it." Catherine MacKinnon, quoted in Christina Hoff Sommers, "Hard-Line Feminists Guilty of Ms.-Representation," Wall Street Journal, November 7, 1991.
"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." -- Robin Morgan, (editor of MS magazine)
A young woman at the University of Pennsylvania who wore a short skirt complained of a "mini-rape" because a young man walked past her and said, "Nice legs." (Camille Paglia and Christine Hoff Sommers, "Has Feminism Gone Too Far?" Think Tank with Ben Wattenberg, Produced by New River Media, Washington, DC, November 4, 1994.) At the University of Maryland, some female students posted the names of male students selected at random, young men about whom they knew nothing, under the heading "Potential Rapists." The message was that all men are potential rapists, though the men actually named probably did not find much comfort in that...
Far more serious are the accusations of actual rape when nothing of the sort occurred. A female student came to a male student's quarters with her toothbrush, planning to stay the night. The next morning she was seen having a peaceable breakfast with the man. Later she charged him with rape and he was briefly held in jail. (John Leo, "De-escalating the gender war" U.S. News and World Report, April 18,1994, p.24.) Accusations of date rape are flung freely by women who consented and later changed their minds about what they did.
-- From: Robert H. Bork (1996): Slouching Towards Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism and American Decline, Regan Books/HarperCollins, NY (pp.193-225)
"Female heterosexuality is not a biological drive or an individual women's erotic attraction or attachment to another human animal which happens to be male. Female heterosexuality is a set of social institutions and practices... Those definitions... are about the oppression and exploitation of women [by men]." Marilyn Frye, Willful Virgin: Essays in Feminism, 1976-1992 ( Freedom: Crossing Press,1992) p.132 |
|
FEMINISM – HATE GROUPS PROMOTING TERRORISM |
by Bill
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
|
When the evidence and the logic are both against you, it is necessary to claim that evidence and logic are counterrevolutionary props of the status quo ... facts and rationality, when inconvenient, as they usually are, may be dismissed as "patriarchal constructions of knowledge" ... Emotion must be allowed to trump intellect if the whole enterprise is not to be revealed as the hoax it is. -- From: Robert H. Bork (1996): Slouching Towards Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism and American Decline, Regan Books/HarperCollins, NY (pp.193-225)
Feminism Defined (by Bruce Eden of Divorce Reform in New Jersey) - Feminism is no longer about equal opportunity for women. It is a thuggish, devious synthesis of Marxism and lesbianism used by ruling elites to undermine individuals and weaken society. It is to society what AIDS is to the body.
Why is there "an explosion of angry demand on the part of women who as a group were the freest, healthiest, wealthiest, longest-lived, and most comfortably situated people the world had yet laid eyes on." -- Midge Decter, "You're On Your Own, Baby," The Women's Quarterly, Winter 1996, p.4
"I am most anxious to enlist everyone who can speak or write to join in checking this mad, wicked folly of 'Women's Rights,' with all its attendant horrors, on which her poor feeble sex is bent, forgetting every sense of womanly feelings and propriety. Feminists ought to get a good whipping. Were woman to 'unsex' themselves by claiming equality with men, they would become the most hateful, heathen and disgusting of beings and would surely perish without male protection." ~ Queen Victoria, March, 1870.
"Sexual harassment legislation is an instrument by which the micromanagement of everyday life is being undertaken. The real aim is to change the relations between men and women in a fundamental way. Why? Who benefits from this? The only people are those radical extremists who want to disrupt male and female interactions, and they have done just that in the workplace, the colleges, the high schools, the grade schools, and even the kindergartens. Everybody is now on notice." Daphne Patai, Ph.D. Author of Heterophobia: Sexual Harassment and the Future of Feminism.
"...[W]omen and men are distinct species or races ... men are biologically inferior to women; male violence is a biological inevitability; to eliminate it, one must eliminate the species/race itself ... in eliminating the biologically inferior species/race Man, the new Ubermensch Womon (prophetically foreshadowed by the lesbian separatist * herself) will have the earthly dominion that is her true biological destiny. (from a panel on "Lesbianism as a Personal Politic" that took place in New York City, Lesbian Pride Week 1977) -- Andrea Dworkin. LETTERS FROM A WAR ZONE. Part III, TAKE BACK THE DAY. Biological Superiority: The World's Most Dangerous and Deadly Idea. 1977
Karen DeCrow, former president of the National Organization for Women, writes:
"If a woman makes a unilateral decision to bring a pregnancy to term, and the biological father does not, and cannot, share in this decision, he should not be liable for 21 years of support ... autonomous women making independent decisions about their lives should not expect men to finance their choice."
"The idea of woman’s emancipation is based upon a profound enmity between the sexes, upon envy and imitation. Woman becomes a mere caricature, a pseudo-being." ~ Russian philosopher Berdyaev, quoted in Elliot's Let Me Be a Woman, page 158
Domestic Violence, Butchering Children Feminist Style, and destroying women
“Believing what [feminists] say about family violence is like believing what the tobacco companies say about cancer... [M]isleading statistics are a deliberate fund raising tactic for women's shelters. The shelter movement almost never mentions scientific studies." -- Sam and Bunny Sewell, Family Resources & Research.
There is a great deal of reckless disregard for the truth in radical feminism. Some of it is so blatant that it certainly deserves to be called lying, but some of it appears to reflect the delusions of paranoia. What is worrisome is that so much serious misrepresentation passes into the realm of "truth." One might think that misrepresentations about checkable facts could not survive long in an open society, but they can and do, probably because the press and the academy are very pro-feminist. When a sensational report about the amount of domestic violence against women appears, newspapers, magazines, and even textbooks relay the news, and it quickly becomes established folklore. The attitudes formed as a result are embedded in the culture. Yet the facts, for those who care about them, indicate that these reports are wild exaggerations or flat misrepresentations... For some people, there can be no surer evidence of a conspiracy than the fact that no conspiracy is apparent. After all, a really effective conspiracy would be invisible. Feminists' ideology is a fantasy of persecution. -- From: Robert H. Bork (1996): Slouching Towards Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism and American Decline, Regan Books/HarperCollins, NY (pp.193-225)
NOW apparently ENDORSES Domestic Violence against children. And just in case you think it is just HOUSTON NOW, think again. This little excerpt from the article tells the tale of the NATIONAL SUPPORT by NOW.
NOW Rallies to Mother's Defense. Group Says Woman Needs Help, Not Prison, in Drowning of 5 Children. By Paul Duggan, Washington Post Staff Writer, Monday, September 3, 2001; Page A03. excerpts below…
"From what we know right now, [Yates's] psychosis is so obvious and her mental illness is so heart-wrenching that clearly she's entitled to treatment and not punishment," declared Terry O'Neill, a NOW vice president in Washington. She said the group's national leadership ‘completely supports’ [NOW's Texas state president, Deborah Bell’s] efforts, which have been denounced by victims' rights advocates, media pundits and others.”
Dianne Clements, a Rosenthal supporter and head of Justice for All, Texas's biggest victims' rights organization, reacted angrily to NOW's criticism. "I don't believe they should be using their political power and prestige to help a woman who has acknowledged killing five children," Clements said. She accused NOW of "prejudging" Yates based on liberal ideals before a word of testimony has been heard.
"They've decided to seek absolution for Andrea Yates," Clements said. "They've absolutely accepted that she's not responsible for what she did before they've heard any facts in court. . . . None of us can say why she killed those children, whether it was because she was psychotic or she was just plain evil."
"Such a [post-partum depression] defense, however, is not novel," wrote Dallas lawyer Brenda Barton Neuwirt in the Southern Methodist University Law Review. In a 1998 article, she recounted successful postpartum psychosis defenses by a California mother who intentionally ran over her infant with a car and a New York woman who smothered two of her babies and tried to smother a third.
She also cited the highly publicized D.C. Superior Court case of LaTrena Pixley, who pleaded guilty to second-degree murder in 1993 in the suffocation of her infant daughter. At her sentencing, after a defense lawyer submitted a psychiatrist's report attributing the crime partly to postpartum depression, the judge stunned the court by ordering Pixley, then 20, to spend weekends in jail for three years.
Yates's sympathizers tend to lose sight of an important element of the tragedy.
"You know what I think [Rosenthal, the D.A.] saw when he looked at this case?" Clements said. "I think he saw the same thing I saw: five beautiful children, dead."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NOW Throwing Lifebelt to Mom who Drowned Five Kids. Phil Brennan. Thursday August 30, 2001. NewsMax.com. Excerpts below…
The National Organization for Women (NOW), which couldn't bring itself to lend aid and comfort to rape victim Juanita Broaddrick, is going all out to help a woman who drowned her five children.
According to the ultra-liberal feminist organization, NOW is helping to raise money for Andrea Yates on the grounds that their involvement might help raise people's consciousness about post-partum depression.
Now opposes the death penalty except for the victims of the abortion industry which they vigorously support.
Yates admitted to police that she drowned her children one-by-one in a bathtub. She revealed that when it came the turn of her oldest child he fled and she had to chase him down and drag him back to the tub.
Not surprisingly, NOW has been joined by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), several other women's and health groups and anti-death penalty organizations in the Andrea Pia Yates Support Coalition.
One reason for their support, observers say, could be that the pro-abortion NOW may view such child killing as merely retroactive abortion, and therefore worthy of their support of the killer.
“The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it" Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, in "Women and the New Rage," p.67.
In response to a question concerning China's policy of compulsory abortion after the first child, Molly Yard responded, "I consider the Chinese government's policy among the most intelligent in the world" Gary Bauer, "Abetting Coercion in China," The Washington Times", October 10, 1989.
"No woman should be authorized to stay at home and raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one." -- Interview with Simone de Beauvoir, "Sex, Society, and the Female Dilemma" Saturday Review, June 14, 1975, p.18
[W]omen, like men, should not have to bear children.... The destruction of the biological family, never envisioned by Freud, will allow the emergence of new women and men, different from any people who have previously existed. — Alison Jagger - Political Philosophies of Women's Liberation: Feminism and Philosophy (Totowa, NJ: Littlefield, Adams & Co. 1977)
FEMINIST "RELIGIOUS" DOGMA AND CREEDS - "[L]ove without marriage is holy, and that marriage without love is illegitimate... Advocates a free contract in marriage, and that separation may occur at the will of either "mate”… [D]ivorce shall be made easy… "[M]otherhood" is a mere animal function, and that even a cat may have kittens; that motherhood has been made too much of in the past. [She] Advocates with the Socialists that the State has a superior right to the parents over the nurture, conduct and education of the children… advocates the "control of births" by artificial measures. Suggests that any woman may reject motherhood, and any woman with "mother love" may accept motherhood whether she is married or single… The Feminist is a man hater, except as she may be able to use him for her purposes… She claims that man has subjected her to "sex slavery" and "economical servitude," from which she demands "liberation," so she may be made a "free woman”... —Benjamin V. Hubbard (Socialism, Feminism, and Suffragism,1915, pp. 142-144)
"In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them" Dr. Mary Jo Bane, feminist and assistant professor of education at Wellesley College and associate director of the school's Center for Research on Woman -- Do I hear YFS and DSS here??
"The care of children ..is infinitely better left to the best trained practitioners of both sexes who have chosen it as a vocation...[This] would further undermine family structure while contributing to the freedom of women." Kate Millet, Sexual Politics 178-179
“[I]f even 10 percent of American women remain full-time homemakers, this will reinforce traditional views of what women ought to do and encourage other women to become full-time homemakers at least while their children are young.... This means that no matter how any individual feminist might feel about child care and housework, the movement as a whole [has] reasons to discourage full-time homemaking.” ~ Jane J. Mansbridge, Why We Lost the ERA, p. 100 (and you wonder WHY feminism ATTACKS home-making?)
"[F]eminists who ceaselessly inveigh against their own oppression by men (often hardly specifying its exact nature) would ignore how they themselves have oppressed … feminine women. It oppresses a woman who could delight in domesticity to tell her that her domesticity makes her a parasitic inferior to men. It oppresses a woman who yearns to stay home with her children to tell her she is worthy only insofar as she achieves in the workplace." ~ F. Carolyn Graglia, A Brief Against Feminism, page 349
So long as we insist upon defining our identities only in terms of our work, so long as we try to blind ourselves to the needs of our children and harden our hearts against them, we will continue to feel torn, dissatisfied, and exhausted…. The guilt we feel for neglecting our children is a byproduct of our love for them. It keeps us from straying too far from them, for too long. Their cry should be more compelling than the call from the office." ~ Danielle Crittenden, What Our Mothers Didn't Tell Us, page 143.
"Women are told today they can have it all-career, marriage, children. You need a total commitment to make it work. Take a close look at your child. He doesn’t want you to be bright, talented, chic, or smart-any of those things. He just wants you to love him. He will be the one who pays the price for your wanting to have it all. Think carefully about having that baby. Not to have it would be a great loss. To have it too late greatly increases the health hazards for you and the child. To have it without a commitment to it would be a great tragedy." ~ Beverly Sills, addressing a graduating class of Barnard College in New York.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Forty-two amicus curiae, or "friend of the court," briefs were filed on behalf of "Roe." A "woman's brief" argued, as author Marian Faux summarizes it, "that even if a fetus were found to be a legal person, a woman still could not be compelled to nurture it in her body against her will." Prominent women such as theologian Mary Daly, Barnard College president Millicent McIntosh, anthropologist Margaret Mead, and former U.S. senator Maurine B. Neuberger (D-Oregon), all signed it.
"that even if a fetus were found to be a legal person, a woman still could not be compelled to nurture it in her body against her will."
Consider this statement a moment, put another way, even if a fetus were a legal person, a woman could not be compelled TO LET IT LIVE (i.e. COMMIT FIRST DEGREE MURDER). And we wonder why Child Abuse is so high among those same women that buy into the Feminist party line and do not value marriage, OR LIFE!!! Was infanticide (child murder) the feminist goal all along??
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“[The unborn victims of violence act] would establish penalties for those who harm a fetus, either knowingly or unknowingly, while committing a federal crime-such as bank robbery, kidnapping or terrorism. This bill is yet another attempt to limit and restrict a woman’s right to choose.” N.O.W. September 15, 1999 Legislative update. (Apparently, NOW’s version of “choice” also includes FORCED ABORTIONS during the commission of a crime. The “choice” is no longer a woman’s. According to NOW, If she WANTS the child, TOO BAD IF IT IS MURDERED DURING A CRIME!)
"My feelings about men are the result of my experience. I have little sympathy for them. Like a Jew just released from Dachau, I watch the handsome young Nazi soldier fall writhing to the ground with a bullet in his stomach and I look briefly and walk on. I don't even need to shrug. I simply don't care. What he was, as a person, I mean, what his shames and yearnings were, simply don't matter." -- Marilyn French, in "The Women's Room"
"All men are good for is f&%$ing, and running over with a truck". Statement made by A University of Maine Feminist Administrator, quoted by Richard Dinsmore, who brought a successful civil suit against the University in the amount of $600,000. Richard had protested the quote; was dismissed thereafter on the grounds of harassment; and responded by bringing suit against the University. 1995 settlement.
"I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig." Andrea Dworkin, Ice And Fire.
“…[I]n every realm of male expression and action, violence is experienced and articulated as love and freedom." Andrea Dworkin, Pornography: Men Possessing Women.
Women's Liberation … in the short run it's going to cost men a lot of privilege... Sexism is NOT the fault of women -- kill your fathers, not your mothers". Robin Morgan, Editor of Ms. Magazine
“…[I]f you don't like it, bad luck -- and if you get in my way I'll run you down." Signed: Liberated Women, Boronia Herald-Sun, Melbourne, Australia. 9 Feb., 1996.
Even the language of the [feminist] movement mirrors the mood of fascism. The apocalyptic and hate-filled rhetoric of radical feminists expresses their eagerness to inflict harm. -- From: Robert H. Bork (1996): Slouching Towards Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism and American Decline, Regan Books/HarperCollins, NY (pp.193-225)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“The [Domestic Violence] law was originally drafted to protect women from violence in the home. In its present form, it not only runs roughshod over any due process protections for the men accused, it is also used to prosecute people, mainly men, for actions which 1) are perceived as threatening by the alleged (female) victim, and 2) have not yet happened, but may happen” and “Radical feminists have constructed elaborate 'dangerousness assessment' tests that reduce to gender profiling: Men are always dangerous, while female malfeasance is rationalized and excused.”
“[W]e've done one better than [George Orwell’s] "1984." We don't just prosecute for "thought" crimes. We prosecute based on the thoughts of someone else.”
“[W]omen intent on "giving him a lesson he'll never forget," can use this law to throw a man out of his own home, take away his legal rights to even see his children, and set the stage for the financial rape that will follow by virtue of being in possession of the marital home, kids, and property. All of this is based on her statement that she has "fear" of him. No claim of actual violence is required.” -- The Massachusetts News, Do Restraining Orders Cause Domestic Violence? by Mark Charalambous. September 1, 2000.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Feminist research has an UNETHICAL AND POLITICAL agenda. "The implications of linking our research agenda with our political agenda and with intentionality are profound for feminist research. Perhaps the most awkward rite of passage for all researchers is the ethics approval requirement of each discipline and/or institution. In order to carry out a research agenda linked with a political agenda we must examine the institutional barriers to our enterprise." Sandra Kirby "What do Feminist Methods Have to do with Ethics?" in Women Changing Academe, (Winnipeg, 1991) p.168. Kirby is now Chair of Sociology at UW.
Perjury has become the coin of the realm in [Domestic Violence Court]. People’s homes are invaded because of lies. People are arrested because of lies. People go to prison because of lies. People stay in prison because of lies, and sometimes, bad guys go free because of lies. Lying has become a significant problem in [Domestic Violence] court cases because the rewards to [the Lying party] can be so great and the consequences so minimal. Perjurers are seldom punished; neither are the law enforcement officers who ignore or accept their lies. -- The damage of lies. By Bill Moushey, Post-Gazette Staff Writer. November 29, 1998
"If there is one area of the entire [legal] process [Judge Jones] openly questions, it is the matter of … restraining orders." … "It's a necessary law, but it's an abused one. I've seen it used too many times as leverage in divorce cases, not for women in imminent fear of physical danger. One third of them are not legitimate, merely used as an 'I'll fix you.' Don't forget, once a [restraining] order is in place, if a defendant violates it, he's now got a criminal case he's looking at." Retiring Judge Reveals that Restraining Orders Are Huge Problem. April 2, 2001. The Massachusetts News
When it comes to the murder of intimates, as criminologist Coramae Richey Mann documented in her 1996 study of female killers, When Women Kill, murderesses are seldom helpless angels: 78% of the women in Mann's study had prior arrest records and 55% a history of violence. Only 59% claimed self-defense.
"[W]omen report using violence in their relationships more often than men" and "wives hit their husbands at least as often as husbands hit their wives." -- Hitting the Wall, (After 20 years of domestic violence research, scientists can't avoid hard facts), Mother Jones Magazine, Nancy Updike, May/June 1999 (Mother Jones is a radical feminist / Socialist publication. Certainly NOT pro-male by any stretch of the imagination)
Isaac Newton's Principia Mathematica is a "rape manual" because "science is a male rape of female nature"; Beethoven's Ninth Symphony expresses the "throttling murderous rage of a rapist incapable of attaining release." (Quotes by Sandra Harding of University of Delaware and Susan McClary, "who applies feminist theories to music," respectively. Quoted in John Leo, "PC: Almost dead. Still funny," US. News & World Report, December 5, 1994, p. 24.) -- From: Robert H. Bork (1996): Slouching Towards Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism and American Decline, Regan Books/HarperCollins NY (pp.193-225)
Lenore Walker, speaking at a Laguna Beach conference, as reported in the SF Chronicle "Our research and most other studies show that wife-battering occurs in 50 percent of families throughout the nation." The SF Chronicle comments, "Only the most crazed man-hater could believe that."
Lenore Walker, after visiting one of the early shelters for battered women, wrote "I was struck by what a beneficial alternative to the nuclear family this arrangement [communal housing and child raising] was for these women and children." (p.195) The Battered Woman
"The Violence Against Women Act slipped into law in 1994 without most members of Congress quite knowing what they were passing. We have Andrea Dworkin's word on this. Dworkin is surely a contender for the North American title of most overwrought, man-hating feminist. She told the New Republic at the time that the only possible explanation for the bill's popularity in the Senate was the 'senators don't understand the meaning of the legislation that they pass.' In plain English, she seemed to mean that Congress was naively institutionalizing the radical view of domestic violence as antifemale terrorism by a relentless oppressor class — men. -- U. S. News, page 12, John Leo. January 24, 2000
N.O.W. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE - June 12, 2000; NOW claims that VAWA is Gender Neutral and that it provides protection for men and children when a simple reading of VAWA shows that it CLEARLY EXCLUDES help for children and men.
NOW's LDEF (Legal Defense Education Fund) sponsors and helped to WRITE the VAWA legislation and therefore NOW is AWARE that the language of the bill **specifically** excludes children and is gender biased. Yet NOW is KNOWINGLY LYING to the Congress of the United States of America and elicits help from Congress and the Judiciary to destroy more families and children.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
N.O.W. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE - June 12, 2000
HATCH PROMISES TO BRING VAWA REAUTHORIZATION TO SENATE FLOOR VOTE
http://www.now.org/issues/legislat/06-12-2000.html#hatch_vawa "...it is important to stress that the Violence Against **WOMEN** Act [emphasis added] is gender neutral. Funds are available to support programs which assist men as well as women; if the language in the act were not gender neutral, it could not meet a Constitutionality challenge." [Obvious "talking point" propaganda]
"And, any statistics that our opponents may cite that suggest that as many women as men are batterers are simply inaccurate and cannot be substantiated by sound scientific research."
A NOW Legislative Alert dated June 12, 2000 FRAUDULENTLY states: ". . . the Violence Against Women Act is gender neutral. Funds are available to support programs which assist men as well as women. . . ." and then says ". . .if the language in the act were not gender neutral, it could not meet a constitutionality challenge."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NOW LDEF to Rep. Nancy L. Johnson, October 4, 1999, gender based language is unconstitutional when it ". . . tie[s] the federal benefits available under the act to gender . . . violate[s] the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment. . . ."
"Further, to the extent that Act targets certain grants to state programs offering gender-specific benefits, it would operate to encourage states to violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. As recently set out by the U.S. Supreme Court in Saenz v. Roe, 119 S. Ct. 1518 (1999), Congress cannot authorize states to accomplish indirectly what Congress itself is constitutionally prohibited from doing."
The VAWAII act specifically states in part "Ineligible activities" include "projects that focus on "children or men."
|
|
Andrea Yates? It ain't just postpartum, bud |
by Mink
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2002
|
|
What's with all the blathering about Andrea Yates and postpartum? The woman was schizophrenic, period.
Perhaps, PERHAPS, the hormonal changes with pregnancy triggered some episodes (it had apparently
happened before) but her issues were far larger, and not anything restricted to the female half of the population.
Hell, if anything the illness is more common in men.
Now, why on earth she was discharged from the hospital and put back with her kids on the evidence that she "was showering and dressing
herself with minimal prompting" when even her (fellow inmate!) roommate still thought she was insane is anyone's guess
(personally I'd be suspecting funding problems) but it's hardly an issue restricted to a single gender. Perhaps
we should start a new thread about treatment and potential execution of the mentally ill in general.
At any rate, she's back on her meds now, and gets to sit in prison for the rest of her life missing her kids
and knowing she killed them. It's not quite a free ride.
|
|
laws biased against men |
by Mangesh
cobra999in (nospam) yahoo.co.in (unverified) |
Current rating: 3
25 May 2002
|
|
Here's an example (from India). Under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, `cruelty to women by husband or his relatives' is an offense (cognizable and non-bailable) punishable with imprisonment upto 3 years and fine. India also has a law on prevention of cruelty to animals. Cruelty to men is perfectly legal. |
|
Oh really |
by Julian A
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
25 May 2002
|
REF :- This new <> movement is ill-conceived and sexist. There may come a time when women constitute 97 per cent of the CEO's of large corporations. There may come a time when women are the majority in Congress, and there may come a time when the President, half the cabinet, and half heads of government departments, and two thirds of the Supreme Court Justices are women. But until that day, I think <> is simply code for anti-feminism, or reasserting patriarchy.
Over my dead body !! We are already seeing the fruits of women being giving more power and reposibility, they in general use it to blame others. All the females that ran their country for a while ended up in one conflict or another. It's a shamble and you know it and it's as a direct result of feminism. |
|
Just Curious |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
25 May 2002
|
Come on, GUYS. Tell us which right-wing e-mail list is agitating for the this tiny handful of mis-guided masculinity to show up here to spread this silliness about how "oppressed' you all are as men. The only other time a discussion here has degenerated to this level was the time we had a discussion about the "Chief" when we were targeted by a Rush list. As far as can be known, none of you are regular readers or users of IMC. As far as I know, you all are just pissing in the wind of social change that cannot be turned back, no matter how hard you whine about it.
I guess you all need to let off a little steam though, because it's rather obvious that the only loving you've probably had lately is from Ma Thumb and her four daughters...
Which is probably the way it'll stay, given your medieval view of the opposite sex. |
|
I'm a Moderate Liberal |
by warble
activistwarble (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
25 May 2002
|
I am a moderate liberal, and it is clear to me that women have won rights without the consequences unlike men. I believe it is time for women to have responsibility and consequences associated with their rights.
I also vote democrat in almost every election. I vote for the person that I believe will be the best representative. I don't care if they are male or female.
Many times I find it is the women that support men's rights while the conservatives are will to grant women a special class status.
I believe the worst feminist is a male feminist that fails to recognize that feminist should be advocating equal responsibility in issues like the draft and paternity fraud.
Finally, I believe the rape culture is an artificial construct brought about by feminists that have encouraged the destruction of the family and the removal of the father from children’s lives. The evidence is out and it is against the feminist. Children that turn into rapist have no father. The men's movement is for real and we are not going away. |
|
To ML |
by Aleph Null
AlephNull_42 (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
26 May 2002
|
ML,
Yes, I did vote for Clinton. Honestly, I hated him at first ("slick Willie"), but after a while I grew to appreciate his particular brand of politics. I think it started with that wonderful quote "I smoked but I didn't inhale,"
Translation: Maybe I did; maybe I didn't. That's my private life; you have no business asking; so I'm going to lie to you and you can't do a damn thing about it.
Why, did you vote for Ralph Nader? *laugh* And *look* who we have in office now!
The difference between Clinton, Nader, and Gore (though I don't think Gore is totally bad either), is that Clinton knows how to deal with political realities, whereas these other guys don't - they're like 5-year old kids expounding about how they want to grow up to be firemen.
Yes. Clinton was a moderate. Unfortunately for you, the US is a government of a pleurality. Which means that by its very nature, extremist ideas will not (and should not) dictate our national policy. Anyone who can't put their head around that is living in a closed box.
Sure , he sleeps around on his wife. That's not nice, but that's his business. Would you be railing on a female president for sleeping around on her husband? No. You'd be railing on the press for invading your precious woman's powder room.
If you want to hear details about various men's issues, then why not read some of my previous posts:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=alephnull_42&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&scoring=d
The format of an unthreaded news board is not conducive to meaningful discussion.
Too much chatter... |
|
