$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', '
')" I don't know if we can be friends. You just refuse to look back on your life through the lens of male domination and oppression and it's getting in the way."
Brings to mind the old adage about becoming that which you hate. If we are going to ever get over wrongs that were done to us, men or women, it has to be by growing into something better, calmly and wisely. Obsessing about it and 
PeakOil is You
Gender Issues- A Slightly Different Perspective
by PenultimateManStanding » Thu 17 Mar 2005, 00:30:01
-
PenultimateManStanding - Expert
- Posts: 11363
- Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
- Location: Neither Here Nor There
by lotrfan55345 » Thu 17 Mar 2005, 17:41:47
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'L')otrfan everybody has role models of some sort. If you had grown in another environment you would be different than you are. You know about the old Nature vs. Nuture debate. Its a debate because both sides have some truth. The biggest influences are the adults who looked after you when you were an infant, toddler, then little kid. If you are like most of us, you'll be taking a closer look at who you are in the coming years and know that at lot of stuff is there in you because 'they' put it there.
Oh, yeah, I totally agree, but I ment a single role model, like Arnold or something.
- lotrfan55345
- Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1091
- Joined: Tue 20 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Minneapolis / Pittsburgh
by RIPSmithianEconomics » Thu 17 Mar 2005, 18:31:27
One of the most under-reported and non-addressed issues is domestic violence on males. It's a taboo subject- a scientific paper published by a woman in 1978 received death threats both to the woman and her children. I'd be amazed if there are more than 50 shelters WORLD-WIDE for male victims of domestic violence.
There'll be war, there'll be peace
But one day all things shall cease
All the iron turned to rust
All the proud men turned to dust
So all things time will mend
So this song will end
But one day all things shall cease
All the iron turned to rust
All the proud men turned to dust
So all things time will mend
So this song will end
- RIPSmithianEconomics
- Lignite
- Posts: 260
- Joined: Sun 11 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Scotland
by ubercynicmeister » Thu 17 Mar 2005, 19:35:15
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RIPSmithianEconomics', 'O')ne of the most under-reported and non-addressed issues is domestic violence on males. It's a taboo subject- a scientific paper published by a woman in 1978 received death threats both to the woman and her children.
EXACTLY.
Warren Farrell's book has an awful lot on males-as-victims of domestic violence.
Some quotes:
"Most people still assume domestic violence is more likely to be perpertated by men, despite overwhelming evidence that it [domestic violence] is perpetrated...more by women.
The misconceptions are so fundamental that mandatory arrest laws [for domestic violence] were created with the assumption they would lead to the arrest of almost all men.
But the Police saw the evidence and [then] didn't have the option of ignoring the [actions] of women, the mandatory arrest laws [for domestic violence] resulted in the marked increase in the number and percentage of women arrested [for domestic violence] .
" (Page 4, 'The Myth Of Male Power' Warren Farrell)
He (Warren Farrell) goes on to say:
"There a few messages of the women's [right's ] movement that demonstrate a deeper misunderstanding of what masculinity is about than the belief that domestic violence eminates from males learning that they have a right to beat up females. Boys who beat up girls [at school] are called sissies, and are beaten up by other boys.
Treatment programs based on [the women's right's point of view] unwittingly encourage domestic violence." (Page 4, 'The Myth Of male power').
Let me recommend the book to ALL of the guys here, especially the younger ones, who have been force-fed the diet of Political Correctness (which Warrren Farrel gives a good kicking to) .
Warren Farrel's web-page
(Edited to correct spelling)
Last edited by ubercynicmeister on Thu 17 Mar 2005, 21:53:16, edited 1 time in total.
-
ubercynicmeister - Tar Sands
- Posts: 640
- Joined: Sun 25 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Hunter Valley, New South Wales, Australia
by ubercynicmeister » Thu 17 Mar 2005, 21:43:26
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'U')bercynicmeister, Good quotes, though the dude who's now voting republican---I don't know. Voting against one form of weirdness in support of another?
Hi threadbear.
Yeah, think about it in the following way - what the Neocons (now THERE is an accurate description - cons!) are doing to Iraq, the Politically Crrect wants to do to one's own country.
What do I mean?
Take the following examples from Australia, the greatest Politically Correct country on the planet:
Yesterday, a man who has been getting bilked by his crummy ex-missus for child support for two children who weren't his own (DNA evidence proved it) was NOT allowed to stop paying the Child Support payments, as a court ruled the woman 'didn't know' at the time of the divorce settlement that she'd had sex with someone other than her then hubby to have the two children.
From Warren Farrell's book:
"...in Australia....domestic violence is now defined to include a a man raising his voice to his wife - 'the domestic decibel rule'. However, the opposite, a woman raising her voice to her husband, is considered an understandable defence to male dominace.
[These laws] apply to marriage [and] also to couples living together.
These double standards have made men in Australia very fearful of getting married." Page 254, The Myth Of Male Power
(A statement I can heartily concurr with, as an Australian man)
"ITEM: A husband and wife in Australia are making love (or so he thought) and she asked him to stop. The following morning she called the Police and reported him as a rapist, claiming it took him 30 seconds to stop. He claims he stopped right away. He recieved four (4) years in Prison." page 303, "The Myth Of Male Power"
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'R')adical feminists's political view, that the patriarchy was oppressive, had merit
I disagree entirely and Warren Farrell's book takes that point of view apart. Merit?
The oft-derided Patriarchy had division of labour - women did one thing (generally the safe-but-boring stuff) while the men went down the dangerous coal-mines and literally died by the millions in war in a male-only draft (one of the reasons that women are now starting to feel a little less than happy about feminism is the prospect of a female draft, hee hee, what HYPOCRITES they are for wanting to 'duck out of it' too.) .
But hang on, let's examine the traditional MATRIARCHIES that exist in Indonesia, just to Australia's north - there is a MASSIVE division of labour - the women are in charge, absolutely - a male cannot own ANYTHING without his wife's express permission and she can withdraw that permission at any time - but it's the women who stay home and do the cooking and cleaning and looking after the children.
A woman in these societies can order a male to do anything - for example she can order her hubby to give up all of his property if she tells him to do so. And he must comply. Immediately.
The older females choose which girl the guy will get married to, guys have NO CHOICE about whom their partners will be. The girls can reject the guy in that case, but the guys cannot say no to the older female's choosing who will be their partner.
So why is it we see the men going out and building the houses the women order them to make? And building and repair of the boats and the other "heavy outdoor jobs"?
Why is it we see the women staying in the houses the men construct (and get badly injured in constructing, may I add) - cooking and cleaning and looking after the children?
It's a MATRIARCHY fer cryin' out loud!
A matriarchy!
If the "division of labour" (which is what the idiot Politically Correct object to) is so terrible, and "women would never have invented it", then why do we see it even MORE formalised in a matriarchy?
OK, let's look at the most peacable socity I know about - the Tarahumara indians on North Eastern Mexico - they are a traditional PATRIARCHY.
Ther's never been a murder, there's never been a rape...or has there?
Y'see the guys are so shy around their own wives they will not even KISS them. (that last part sounds like a feminist paradise).
Indeed, in order to have children, the Tarahumara Indian women have to get the ir own partners drunk in order for the guys to have sex.
BUT hang on, isn't getting your partner drunk in order to have sex with them...isn't that RAPE?
So, under that definition, every Tarahumara Indian Woman is a rapist.
The Tarahumara Indians are VERY Patriarchal - and incredibly peacable. Give me a peaceful patriarchy ANY time over any other form of government - it seems to be the fairest we humans have come up with...
No rapes?
I think that's fair.
No murders?
I think THATS' fair.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'I')n the last 40 years, using guilt as leverage, an equally oppressive matriarchy has almost replaced it. This is what feminists have to look at. I'm extremely suspicious of feminist deconstructionists who are able to deconstruct every ideology and mind-set but their own. I've lost women friends over this. My favorite quote from someone who had been a pretty good friend:
" I don't know if we can be friends. You just refuse to look back on your life through the lens of male domination and oppression and it's getting in the way."
My brother says it best--"Men are the new women"
No, Warren Farrell says it best:
Man as 'nigger'?
Blacks were forced, via slavery, to risk their lives in cotton feilds...blacks died premarurely. Men were forced, via the draft, to risk their lives on the battlefield, so that everyone might benefit...men died prematurely.
Both slaves and men died prematurely to make the world safe for freedom - someone ELSE's.
Slaves had their own children involuntarily taken away from them; men have their own children involuntarily taken away from them. We tell women they have a right to children and we tell men they have to fight for children.
[Slaves] were forced...into society's most dangerous jobs; men are forced , via socialistation, into society's most hazardous jobs.
Both slaves and men constituted almost 100% of the 'death professions'. Men still do. [we freed the slaves, but not the men - ubercynic]
When slaves gave up their seats on buses for whites, we call it subservience. When men give up their seats on buses for women, we call it politeness.
[W]e called it a symbol of subservience when a slave stood up as their master entered the room.; but [we] call it a symbol of politeness when men stand up as a woman enters the room.
These symbols of deference and subservience are common to with slaves to masters and with men to women.
Blacks are more likely than whites to be homeless; men are more likely than women to be homeless. Blacks are more likely than whites to be in proison; men are 20 times (2000%) more likely than women to be in prison. Blacks die earlier than whites; men die earlier than women.
Apartheid forced blacks to mine diamonds [in EXTREMELY dangerous conditions - ubercynic] for whites; socialistaion expects men to work in different mines [coal mines, uranium mines - and the 'salt mine' that is a common name for one's place of employ - ubercynic] to pay for diamonds for women.
Nowhere in history has there been a ruling class working to afford diamonds they could give to the oppressed in hopes the oppressed would love them more.
Women are the only 'oppressed' group to systematically grow up having their own member of an 'oppressor' class (called fathers) 'in the field', working for them.
Traditionally, the ruling class had people 'in the field' working for them - called slaves.
" From the Myth Of Male Power, pages 27 and 28
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'C')ynic, Keep holding your head high, and try not to hold individuals accountable for the new systemic social insanity,
But we have to - where the blue blazes d'you think "feminism" would have been without, say, Germaine Greer?
Or that most unacknowledged of feminist thinkers, who united the two modern strands of truly Machiavellian thinking - Political Correctness and Economic Rationalism - Ayn Rand, in her work 'The Virtue Of Selfishness"?
Neither 'philosophy' would have taken a foothold without her, though she remains largely unknown.
We have to hold accountable those who did the wrong thing - like the rottenly corrupt executives of Worldcom, whom I understand have been sent to jail, if so deservedly.
If we throw out accountability - if we leave it to someone ELSE, then we are as bad as those executives are.
In that sense, apathy ("leave it to someone else, don't get involved; Peak Oil isn't happening, the free-market will take care of everything") is worse than hostility.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', ' ')It's going to change and hopefully for the better.
