Friday, April 16, 2010

Female Hegemony .... Male Cultural Expressions

It is my belief and I've heard it to be that of others that women side with who ever is winning, it is their nature and understandably their adapted nature over the last 7 million years or more. In essence females are more group oriented and are swayed by the herd i.e. communal mentality to reach their own individual prerogative and thus the resulting mutual consensus.

Politicians know and it is the case that the female vote is the most swayable but in general women will side with who provides for them the most. Historically, shortly after women began voting they have voted almost entirely Democratic. Women survive by eliciting resource provision and protection from others both privately, by ensnaring a male in the now one sided exchange of marriage and communally through government husbandry or outside marriage with forced male resource provision of an "Isolated Resource Producing Male"

I believe that NO OTHER CLASS OF HUMAN BEING BESIDES CHILDREN could ever be provided such unequal representation under law in so many realms and facets of day to day society and under the guise of equality. None other than woman could have managed to divert the Stimulus Package to themselves during one of the most dire Recessions this country has seen since the Great Depression..Not to mention one in which 80+ percent of all jobs lost are to men in this Mancession. None other than woman could do this, I assure you of that!

Anyway, they don’t break from the herd to distinguish their status or by pushing the limits of their external utility and capability, they don't seem as driven to take risks and distinguish themselves from the group, they simply don’t have to, females, as it is, are inherently valuable, why expend effort, energy and risk where one does not have to i.e. where there is no pressure sexually selectively speaking or not. Females are in fact the constant XX while the male XY is the variable subject to selection and change. As we know, males are represented at the top and bottom of the bell curve, which goes to illustrate the heavy selective pressure upon the male.



MORE:Helena Cronin: Philosopher, London School of Economics; director and founder Darwin@LSE; author, The Ant and the Peacock explains the gender dimorphisms above and those mentioned that caused the President of Harvard University to lose his job and subsequent social execution by Women's Feminists

You will notice that a primary element of feminism involves attacking and legislating against men at both the top and bottom of the dimorphic curve. Essentially women have a deep disgust toward and revile the beta males below the "Glass Floor" and seek to legislate heavily against them while simultaneously looking above the "Glass Ceiling" in contempt of the men at the top of the curve, the alphas as well, again seeking to heavily legislate against them.

Remember, when feminist women or the Women's Party speak of men, they are usually referring to some aspect of the top or bottom of the curve. When you hear about feminist legislation or hear their conjecture in the future, think of and identify which side of the dimorphic curve it is referring to or targeted against.

Note* This may be different from who is actually affected by it. Usually however it is the males within the curve, the vast majority of men, your average Joe that is affected most adversely.
------
cont....

There is not nearly as much sexually selective pressure upon the female. Heavy selective pressure is placed upon the male and carried through the Y chromosome. Again, the Y is the variable. XX Female is the base blueprint. The female has cross redundant backup mechanisms that repair damage to this. So pop Women's Feminists can stop SAYING MEN ARE GOING EXTINCT...This has shown your true character.

Likewise she is clustered around the center, the mean average and this is representative in her nature. She remains in the center of gender dimorphic differences from the standard deviation of variance i.e. the bell curve, is agreeable, socially attuned, communal, intuitively perceptive of her relational state to others and the acute emotional and relational disposition of those around her, this is how the female survives, it is her nature.

She is not likely to take risks of social rejection by distinguishing herself as much as males. The assertion of new and great ideas and concepts, as history has shown, are often times very risky endeavors socially speaking. Contrastingly to males it seems that it is the female hegemonic representation in the clustered center, her communal nature, her socialist tendencies, that gives her social influence and power. A tendency however which leads to the lack of female representation as comedians and in other such "stand alone" social status activities. She is homogeneous in nature, she, in general, is less likely to risk great failure or great success (something that just prior to predicating decided action, usually corresponds to the "size" or proportion of the risk the person themselves quantifies in their head.

Men by nature have a different threshold of quantification of sizable risk. Male risk taking is representative at the extremes, we are driven to magnificent display behavior, strive for feats and cultural expressions that make us of better "external utility" than the next man or otherwise displays our intelligence or utility, we are in fact the purveyors of and actors of romance and romantic expression, song, poetry, stand up comedy and magicians. We are indeed represented at the extremes of variance from which to choose.

Male are much more likely to be represented at the extremes of specific abilities as well, we are more likely to be specialists or abnormally good at a specific trait. We are also represented at the other end of the spectrum, we are, also the majority of the mentally retarded, physically deformed, least intelligent portion of the population as well. I believe that males are represented at the extremes of cultural expression for this very reason i.e. because of the unique place the male holds of being the primary or "more selected for variable" XY. We males sure are characters : ) Human male display behavior is really a treat to see and is a vital element of culture and construct of any great civilization.

I do think that with rescinding and dwindling prospects of male production incentive and general enfranchisement as part of the family and in society, male display behavior i.e. an intrinsic element of culture dies along with it. To me it is certainly an indicator of civilizational decline.


The differences between the two sexes goes to illustrate the importance of male “external utility” (as our value as a mate is heavily weighted in such) and the NECESSITY of having a strong critical mass of well enfranchised males, particularly in terms of incentive prospects to produce for his enfranchisement and the associated opportunity for mating and paternal investment..

Males, in order to thrive require a competitive, and often if not entirely hierarchical competitive echelon, males need to be enfranchised in an environment with equal opportunity for competitive advantage. I would like to mention that just such a construct has been removed from our schools and education system. Competitive and resource reward based learning models have been mostly and entirely replaced with cooperative learning models. By legislative and sanctioned handicapping, male disempowerment from this competitive advantage echelon is increasingly becoming the case in the public sphere of general society and in business. Increasingly the only place males will find that we can compete fairly is in sports and video games.

Males are increasingly marginalized in Western Society and thus this is another aspect of what can only be described as the Male Eunuch or termed the feminization and ostracization of the modern man from a place in the family, society, politically, judicially, educationally and even in his personal health.

I find it particularly interesting that two words have entered the American Lexicon in the last several years that I can say with utter certainty did not exist prior, "mangina" and "metrosexual". I believe that these additions to, what is at the moment, the growing list of emasculating lexicon is reflective of the disenfranchisement of males in society, the family and culture.

As male value is heavily weighted in "external utility" and precisely because of this fact, words of feminization and emasculation are not intended to belittle or make less of the female, rather, they are in a very real sense, intended to be the very antithetical definition of essential masculinity, what is and what will increasingly become, "THE MALE EUNUCH"

59 comments:

Anonymous said...

The more I think about things the less sure I become. It could be that women join with the winning side. I am not sure I would just limit this to women. It is,however,noticeable to me that there are a disproportionately small number of women libertarians.

Personally I am not sure if competition was necessary to me. I can not be sure but as far as I can recollect competition with other men played only a minor part in my life and the decisions I made. It could be that I am un-typical.

One of the thoughts that goes through my head is that may be I have an understanding of maleness which is no longer applicable to most men. It could be that fundamental male nature has changed and become something quite different to what it was before.

Men are not absent form most spheres of public activity. What I do feel is that these men are totally alien to me. But as I said I probably am un-typical.

Bwec said...

I do love many things about women and I don’t hate them BUT……

Females by nature are gynocentric, they don’t look after the well-being of males like males do for them. They are masters at manipulation, it is how they survive.

They have managed to convince men that we are in power because we do the work for them… Her ability to make us believe the opposite of reality exemplifies her tremendous abilities of manipulation, power and control..

Women know this about other women and many don’t get along with women because of it.. Women can only deceive males this way. I get the impression (as if TV, media and popular culture isn’t enough example) that women have really lost respect for men, fathers and our place in society..

Female authority is not so kind, not so protective and provisional, women look down on men because we have given them all of our power….

I honestly think the only thing keeping this whole charade going is the ability of females to convince us that they are hard done by and oppressed.

The reality of the male health and well-being is stark.

–When you look at why men as a whole of the population earn more than women you find that it is not oppression of women but quite the opposite that drives males and often forces them by law to produce or face a jail sentence. The sacrifice of the male body and the fruits of its labor to women is mandatory.

–When you look at his life expectancy as compared to women in 1920 and then now you realize there is a problem.

–When you look at male workforce participation, male voting participation, male suicide rates, male incarceration rates, male college attendance, male disenfranchisement from a place in the family and as a father to our children you realize that men hold very little power at all. Increasingly I feel the only place men have to work in fairness with each other is in sports and video games.

The truth is that women in fact own their own bodies and the fruits of it’s labor, they own the body of children and they own the body of men and the fruits of its labor outside of marriage after divorce.

May I mention that although the Stimulus Package was diverted to create jobs for women (See article No Country For Burly Men by Christina Hoff Sommers) it is men like my brother who have to produce for women or face high interest payments and jail time if they do not produce. My brother’s unemployment is currently being garnished to provide for a woman that left him in no-fault and the child she took from him.

The position and status of men as compared to women is clearly one of servitude and powerlessness.

–Competitive and resource reward based learning models have been mostly if not entirely replaced with cooperative learning models in our schools.

–Equal opportunity for competitive advantage and a fair playing field for men in the public sphere and in business is being removed from men day by day in favor of Title IX, Affirmative Action and other “women first” policies such as hiring and promotion freezes for males so as to fill “equality quotas” for females. Males are being handicapped, discriminated against and suffer from unequal protection under law.

I’m hoping for a great male awakening! The new initiative to create Male Studies programs (OnStep.org) & (MaleStudies.org) gives me hope for change in the male condition, our health, well-being and the prospect of restoring and enfranchising males to have and seek an honorable place in society and in the family.

Lindsey said...

"women own their own bodies" excuse me? Oh ok, that's why 1 in 3 women will be raped or sexually assaulted in their lifetime, and why I get groped and sexually harassed every time I leave my house. Got it.

Anonymous said...

Brilliant article.

Lindsey-

Your rape statistic is a lie, and anyone with commonsense knows it. Your other claim of constantly being groped and harassed is another lie, and simply beyond belief. Feminazi propaganda fail. The only reason you are a victim is because you want to be one. Grow up, and stop pretending to be a princess trapped in a tower by and evil king. No one is coming to save you. You will grow old and alone in your tower of irrationality with only your cats to keep you company.

Anonymous said...

Telling someone 'you're lying, you're lying, nah nah nah cat lady' is not a winning argument.

I'm pretty sure she doesn't want to be groped and harassed at all, any time. Stop telling her 'you want to be a victim' like some sort of internet psychoanalyst, hm?

Bwec said...

Lindsey You Say: "women own their own bodies" excuse me? Oh ok, that's why 1 in 3 women will be raped or sexually assaulted in their lifetime.

There is a difference between your body and the ownership and protection under law you have for the fruits of its labor. You not only own the fruits of its labor but your body is protected by law where as the body of men and the fruits of our labor are not.

You, under law have full agency and control of your body and even the bodies of children themselves. Men have no such protection from women, men have no such ownership of children, men have no such ownership of the fruits produced by our labor.

Your statistics that 1 in 3 women will be brutally raped in a pathologically violent fashion is an outright lie. It is now the duty of men to expose the truth of inequality and the disparate control each gender has over our bodies.

Bwec said...

I assure you that men will free ourselves from you as you have from us. Though it will not be done by forceful transference of your bodily sovereignty as you have done to him, men will liberate ourselves from you in entirety.

We no longer have the obligation to produce, protect or provide anything to you as you have no reciprocal obligations, no honor or integrity. Woman you have no valor and no obligations to men by law.... Men will complete the future you seek, I assure you of this...we already are..

Lindsey said...

Okay, my own experiences and the experiences of every woman I know are a lie? Really?

I also enjoy that the best insult you can come up with is you liar liar liar you will grow old alone with 50 cats, you feminazi bitch, blah blah blah. Yeah, I totally haven't heard that before.

I do not want to be groped, cat called, hit on, but men full on REFUSE my right to be left alone. In their minds, my body is theirs to gawk at and touch, ie. it is not mine.

I also never said "brutally raped in a pathologically violent fashion", I said raped or sexually assaulted.

Feminism and gender studies are about breaking down traditional gender roles (you know, the ones that tell us that only women are fit to raise children, and men must be the breadwinners), not about trying to make the world into a matriarchy. Wake up.

Why don't you get along with the Men's Studies set? Why is it necessary to have 2 different 'disciplines', especially since Men's Studies does such great things? All you are is Men's Studies frat boy cousin.

Bwec said...

YOU SAY: "I also never said "brutally raped in a pathologically violent fashion", I said raped or sexually assaulted."

Ok so we are making progress, you admit that these are not violent pathological rapes. Do you by chance mean that both parties were drinking or using drugs, are in the home, know each other and the intercourse was non violent.. Is this the rape of which you speak?

How is it that men do not have the right to take what they want from your body while you have the right to take what you will from his???

How is it that you believe men should be forced into labor to produce money for you? How is it that men should not take what they want from you in as much or greater proportions? How is it that you believe you deserve more respect than you give men?


YOU SAY: I do not want to be groped, cat called, hit on, but men full on REFUSE my right to be left alone.

You poor thing, how horrible it must be to carry inherent value for the simple fact that you exist. You poor thing, how horrible it must be for men to "hit on" you. How horrible it must be for men to "cat call".

Perhaps they shall get on their knees and offer you gold and diamonds... What you are telling me is that you do not deserve to be a woman and you are correct, you are not worthy to be so graced.

Bwec said...

Also you must understand Lindsey that your problems are not the problem or responsibility of men...

Why should men care for your problems when you have never cared for, listened and addressed male problems for which your gender is responsible for?

If your body is yours then men should have equal rights to our bodies. Men should not exist to enable the "choices" of women.

Bwec said...

Furthermore you can keep your grievances to yourself.

It may come as a surprise to you but Male Studies is not about women, it is about men.

Your problems are of no concern to men as you have made it clear that the problems of men are no concern to you. Unlike Women's Studies, Male Studies will not seek to define the female experience or speak on behalf of women..

Male Studies gives men a voice we do not have and furthermore has arisen because YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO DEFINE THE MALE EXPERIENCE. You have no right to tell men when we can and can not feel. You have no right to define our gender and it's associated roles.

Anonymous said...

Awww. Somebody's parents didn't hug him enough when he was a kid. Also, somebody's schools never taught him reading comprehension.

Lindsey said...

"Ok so we are making progress, you admit that these are not violent pathological rapes."

Yeah, except I never said that to begin with. Glad we got that cleared up!

I love you how dance around my questions/you don't even read what I'm saying. That really gives a lot of credit to your 'discipline'. Not once did I mention Women's Studies; I asked what the difference is between Male Studies and Men's Studies.

I'm pretty sure that women getting raped is men's problem...maybe if men would stop raping women, we would stop accusing you of doing it. Pretty simple! YOU have no right to tell me what my experience is like as a woman, which is exactly what you're doing.

Bwec said...

I'm pretty sure that men's bodies and the fruits of our labor getting raped is women's problem...maybe if women would stop raping men, we would stop accusing you of doing it.

I'm really not concerned about female rape and in answer to your question I believe that "Men's Studies" is concerned with women and what they think and this is a problem.

Men's Studies was not founded by men but in fact it's leaders are feminists and transexuals.

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2010/04/22/mens-studies-foremost-authority-opts-for-castration-literally/

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEN'S STUDIES AND THE NEW MALE STUDIES IS THAT THE LATER IS NOT CONCERNED WITH WOMEN'S ISSUES....IS THAT SO HARD FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND..

You see, men are not responsible for your problems and as much as women deny any responsibility and culpability in anything, as much as you claim to be the victims men are going to step back, heal ourselves from the damage you've done and let you be independent for once.


Men have enough of our own problems, many of which your gender is responsible for creating. Men will discuss these matters among ourselves and for once women are not welcome. You are not welcome to define the male experience, Men and Male Studies is.....

Bwec said...

Besides, it is just like a woman\feminist to come to my blog and insist on focusing on women and their issues... This blog is for men and male issues and so is male studies.

I've told you already, I do not care for female issues such as rape, men have our own problems to articulate express and deal with... We will get to solving your problems when we have solved our own....

It is kind of like being on an airplane and the cabin loses pressure and the oxygen masks come down, men must put on our own mask first, we must solve our own problems that women cause us and formulate a response much as women have done to men.

Men must understand the situation that women have caused us and formulate a response. Then and only then will we be able to solve the problems of those who purport themselves to be weak and helpless, those who are unable to solve their own problems i.e. women.

Lindsey said...

Please outline the ways in which I rape men and the 'fruits of their labour'.

Bwec said...

Please outline the ways in which I rape men and the 'fruits of their labour'.

sure....

http://rebukingfeminism.blogspot.com/2010/04/my-body-her-choiceher-body-her-choicea.html

Bwec said...

Here is another way in which you are responsible for the male condition for which you may not admit to. It is related to his body and the fruits of its labor paradigm.

What you call oppression can and is at the same time servitude.


http://rebukingfeminism.blogspot.com/2010/04/men-its-all-your-faultall-of-it.html

Bwec said...

I know I speak with a confrontative tone at times. The vary nature of our disparate views brings forth emotion and heated debate.... This is ultimately a good thing...

At times I do think my feelings come forth in my writing and I apologize that if it is of detriment to my female audience in terms of holding a discussion of the topic at hand...

I really do care about these issues and as much as you may believe I value the role of husband and father and seek to restore the prospect of being such by protection under law and by the understanding of the changes which have taken place since "Women's Liberation" from men.

Again, I believe the role of Male Studies will serve to understand the male condition and current state in society and in the family.

Thank you so much for coming here to share....

RealityForever said...

Hey Bwec- Reality here- I was the one who commented on your comment on Spearhead about the church and how women have destroyed it.

Nice blog- a little different from what I do- you're far more academic and sophisticated. I take a more direct in your face approach that's not quite so er, sophisticated you might say- here's one of blogs
http://problemwithwomentoday.blogspot.com/

And a new collection of my posters I've been doing since 2004
http://americanfemaleposters.blogspot.com/2010/04/american-female-posters.html

I'm heavily into imagery and not quite as polite as you are. I used to be- quietly writing well considered articles.. but no one was reading them! So out of sheer frustration and taking in the overall dumbed down attention span of most today - I just went full blown visual with the one-two punch to get my message out thereand I'm not 'nice'at all.

Here's also a funny video I made in Xtra Normal
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl1KZHrR7AI

Bwec said...

Thank you sir, I do realize that many men understand that something is terribly wrong but are unable to articulate, express or even understand what is happening. Such feelings are inevitably expressed by men in a myriad of ways.. I'm sure your contributions are resonating with many men and at very least serve as a sign that men are becoming aware of the male condition and are trying to express it in any way they know how...

It has been my contention for a long time now that Feminism actually creates much of the male behavior it purports occurred in historically significant proportions. On all accounts that I have referenced it actually seems such male behavior in the past was much less evident. In fact adverse behavior between the sexes has been on the increase.

I can tell you that adverse male behavior has actually come about in higher proportion because of the impact of feminism itself.. It has been a type of negatively compounding force that has served to create the very environment of strife and gender conflict.

I believe instinctually males tend to avoid competition and conflict with females and are actually quite responsive to female demands, screams and otherwise female demands for more protection and provision. Males will actually turn on other males to accommodate the needs of females. In terms of mate selection males are a class divided. When these forces are acted upon and introduced systemically the results can be and have been disastrous for males. Call it chivalry turned against itself, the best aspects of males used against us.

It is my hope that the new academic discipline of Male Studies will be able to put into words what so many men have been feeling and experiencing. It is my hope that for the first time men will feel free to speak of the male experience without fear of losing our jobs which has been the case in academia for some time now..

Lindsey said...

Okay, I have learned the following things:

Single mothers are unacceptable, because they exclude fathers from children's lives. So completely independent women who do not need a man's help to raise children are the scum of the earth.

ALSO:

Women who stay home and take care of their children and let the man be the breadwinner are scum, because they are a parasite, 'feeding' off of the resources that the man has earned.

-----

You resent women for becoming 'competition'. For 'competing' for jobs and resources, for no longer being stuck in the home, cooking and cleaning.

ALSO

Again, women who are 'lazy' and stay at home, are feeding off of men and the 'fruits of their labour'. And in your eyes, are not doing shit for the advancement of society.

So, are you going to make up your minds at some point? Or are you going to keep writing long winded hypocritical, contradictory rants using fake statistics and anecdotes and LOTS OF CAPITALIZATION, and call it an 'academic discipline'?

It boggles the mind how you expect women to contribute to society in the same way men have, and at the same time be in the home, assuming their 'natural' role.

The patriarchy we live in is RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT YOU ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT. Traditional gender roles say that only women are capable of being a good parent (HINT: THIS IS WHY WOMEN ALWAYS GET CUSTODY OF CHILDREN). Traditional gender roles also say that men need to be the ones making the money, and need to be supporting the women and children (HINT: THIS IS WHY YOU HAVE TO PAY CHILD SUPPORT AND SPOUSAL SUPPORT).

Either let women compete with you for jobs and resources, or shut up and pay the fucking spousal support. PICK ONE.

Bwec said...

A longer answer later Lindsey but a quick answer to this one....

You Say: "Either let women compete with you for jobs and resources, or shut up and pay the fucking spousal support. PICK ONE"

My sentiments exactly Lindsey, at the moment men do BOTH for you. We are selected by you by your hypergamous mating preference while at the same time in unfairly legislated competition with you in the public sphere AND pay spousal support to you and "YOUR" children.

You are independent, and self supporting are you not?

Bwec said...

You say that I think: "Single mothers are unacceptable, because they exclude fathers from children's lives. So completely independent women who do not need a man's help to raise children are the scum of the earth."

I believe that men should be allowed to and expected to be involved in the lives of their children. A woman who becomes a single mother on purpose is a very selfish individual indeed.

Fatherlessness has been PROVEN to be detrimental to the healthy development of children.

"More than 79% of Americans feel the most significant family or social problem facing America is the physical absence of the father from the home. Research shows that the lack of a father in the home correlates closely with crime, educational and emotional problems, teenage pregnancy, and drug and alcohol abuse"

-Ad Council United States

"Children living with single mothers are five times more likely to be poor than children in two-parent households. Children in single-parent homes are also more likely to drop out of school and become teen parents, even when income is factored out. And the evidence suggests that on average, children who live with their biological mother and father do better than those who live in stepfamilies or with cohabiting partners"

-Barack Obama from his book The Audacity of Hope

"Every society requires a critical mass of families that fit the traditional ideal, both to meet the needs of most children and to serve as a model for other adults who are raising children in difficult settings. We are at risk of losing that critical mass in America today"

-Hilary R. Clinton, It Takes A Village pg. 50


So in answer to your question I do not think becoming a single mother by choice is a respectable or morally correct decision. You are correct I don't think it is "acceptable"

I'll answer all your questions but it will take time.. I'll be back to answer the others...Thank You for sharing.

Bwec said...

Lindsey You say: "Women who stay home and take care of their children and let the man be the breadwinner are scum, because they are a parasite, 'feeding' off of the resources that the man has earned."


No actually this is what feminism told women. But I must say with globalization, anti performance and anti competition based wage laws implemented by women, Affirmative Action, Title IX and other "women first" laws it makes it quite hard to fill this role even if a man wanted to...

When you add in the fact that anyone who takes on this role immediately becomes the "provider" after divorce and loses their children as well....NO THANK YOU!

The feminist plan was to make any type of arrangement you speak of completely untenable. YOU MUST TURN OVER THE CHILD TO A CHILD CARE FACILITY or put what has now become undue and unjust pressure upon a man to provide to you.

Remember, men and women as now separate socio-economic and socio-political classes are now in competition with each other.

So yes, you are effectively correct, through the changes women lobbied for and made to family, many state and now Federal law any woman who expects a man to support her while she is weaning an infant or raising and nurturing pre school aged children is by feminist doctrine "a parasite".
Through legislation and social policy feminists wanted to make you "a parasite".

And now a quote from one of your famous feminist leaders and author of the Second Sex...

“No woman should be authorised to stay at home and raise her children. ... Women should not have the choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one”

(Simone de Beauvior)

You've got what you wanted Lindsey. Women have got what they asked for but men have been taking undue burdens to support women's "choices".

I believe a male awakening to the male condition is beginning to take place. Soon all the "choices" women have afforded themselves will no longer be financed by male liabilities....

Bwec said...

Lindsey You Say: "You resent women for becoming 'competition'. For 'competing' for jobs and resources, for no longer being stuck in the home, cooking and cleaning."

Absolutely not, I resent women who think they still have that choice. Do you think for a moment that I am going to be the "provider" for a woman when it means I have to support her when she leaves me and allows her to take my children..

Let's make my position clear..men will no longer be your "provider" when it is convenient for you. We will no longer be cast out of the family and the lives of our children and forced to be your provider on top of your no-fault divorce laws which women lobbied for...

Men will no longer provide to you or enable your "choices" PERIOD.

You made your bed, now sleep in it. Turn the child over to another woman or child care facility shortly after birth as you and "your" child will not be my liability and furthermore I refuse to let you be such after you divorce through no-fault.

Jilly said...

Lindsey - good comment. I can't see what many of these men want. I have never been dependent on a man financially since I wss 20. I have always worked and for the last 21 years have supported my male partner because he has serious health problems and cannot work.

In the UK increasing numbers of women are earning more than their husbands and the men are staying at home and caring for the children. Men are gaining custody of their children when they divorce and women are paying child support as any parent has to. The numbers of women paying out for their children after divorce are increasing every year. Too many men lose contact with their children after divorce and things do need to change - but they are gradually doing so.

Our justice system is still white male dominated so it is their own kind who are disadvantaging men - not women.

So do men want us to be a drain on their finances or do they want us to work and earn money so that both men and women can support the children they have together?

Bwec said...

Jilly YOU SAY: "So do men want us to be a drain on their finances or do they want us to work and earn money so that both men and women can support the children they have together?"

LOL, I ask you this question maam. Which is it??? Are you saying females have no hypergamous mating preference for the "successful" males? Are you saying women are willing to pay for our meals on dates? Are you saying they will take care of men and our child financially, even if we take the child from her and leave her in no-fault divorce?

Because this is the position men are in now so that you may have your "choices".


So I ask you the very same question maam..I think women like things just they way they are, resting responsibility for your choices on our shoulders is quite comfortable yes..

So I ask you the very same question...WHICH IS IT???! You either share the children, and support yourself (especially after you leave a man in no fault and take his children) or go back to looking after the family and child.

YOU SAID: "So do men want us to be a drain on their finances or do they want us to work and earn money so that both men and women can support the children they have together?"

Again....I ASK WOMEN, WHICH IS IT!! Men will no longer provide you both.

Lindsey said...

“I believe that men should be allowed to and expected to be involved in the lives of their children. A woman who becomes a single mother on purpose is a very selfish individual indeed.”

Yeah, this sounds nice, but isn’t realistic in real life. How are you going to force men to be a part of their children’s lives? Has it ever occurred to you that some of them don’t want to be? What about a woman who becomes a single mother because the father walks out? He gets to just do what he wants, he’s allowed to be selfish?

“Fatherlessness has been PROVEN to be detrimental to the healthy development of children.
"More than 79% of Americans feel the most significant family or social problem facing America is the physical absence of the father from the home. Research shows that the lack of a father in the home correlates closely with crime, educational and emotional problems, teenage pregnancy, and drug and alcohol abuse"

-Ad Council United States”

Lack of father = lack of income because women on average make less money (because they do ‘women’s’ jobs like daycare, teaching, etc etc) = more likely to be living in poverty (do not even TRY to dispute this, because there is NO WAY you can disagree that there are more single mothers living in poverty) = more crime, teenage pregnancy, drug and alcohol abuse. This is simple sociology. If a woman makes enough money to support the child, these outcomes won’t happen. It has nothing to do with ‘fatherlessness’ and everything to do with income.

And what about lesbian mothers? Two moms? Is that a ‘lack of a father’? Because I’m pretty sure two mothers have raised children successfully before in history. I can’t wait to see your homophobia come out; there is a dark undertone of it in everything you write.

Also, taking a poll on the opinion of Americans isn’t exactly reliable to the real situation. That statistic means…..what exactly? Just because lots of people see things one way doesn’t mean it’s right. I can’t help but laugh at the idea of someone taking the ‘opinion of Americans’ seriously.

AND AGAIN: what do you plan on doing to FORCE men to take responsibility for their children? Let’s hear it.

"Children living with single mothers are five times more likely to be poor than children in two-parent households.”

Hmm it’s interesting that you admit this, after you: 1) dispute that women make less money than men, and 2) that women rob men of EVERYTHING THEY HAVE when they divorce or have children out of wedlock. If those 2 things were truly how you claim them to be, wouldn’t women have no problem bringing up kids on their own?

Lindsey said...

“Children in single-parent homes are also more likely to drop out of school and become teen parents, even when income is factored out. And the evidence suggests that on average, children who live with their biological mother and father do better than those who live in stepfamilies or with cohabiting partners"

-Barack Obama from his book The Audacity of Hope

What are you arguing for here? Less divorce? What does “do better” mean? Do you really think that children brought up in homes of abuse and arguing are better off than children brought up in safe, quiet single parent families? I think not. Its not the 50’s anymore, women and men are allowed to divorce their miserable and abusive partners. This is a good thing. Marriage means absolutely nothing anymore. And this means that an adoptive mother and father are incapable of bringing up kids? Please.

"Every society requires a critical mass of families that fit the traditional ideal, both to meet the needs of most children and to serve as a model for other adults who are raising children in difficult settings. We are at risk of losing that critical mass in America today"

-Hilary R. Clinton, It Takes A Village

No, society does not require this. Perhaps if society had less of a stick up it’s ass about what the definition of ‘family’ is, we could ACTUALLY live up to the idea that it takes a village to raise a child. A village means many people in a close-knit community, not a mom and a dad.

“So in answer to your question I do not think becoming a single mother by choice is a respectable or morally correct decision. You are correct I don't think it is "acceptable.”

Again, this means that a woman cannot make the choice to have a child by herself, yet a man can make that choice for her with little to no repercussions. That’s nice! I do not want to hear about “laws in women’s favour blah blah blah” because you COMPLETELY ignore the fact that most women in this situation CANNOT AFFORD to take the negligent, deadbeat fathers to court.

Lindsey said...

"Men will no longer provide you both."

Our point is that you do not want to do either for us. We as women can't please you, we can't win because YOU don't even know what you want. Every statement you make contradicts one that you said earlier.

Bwec said...

Lindsey: YOU SAY:

"Our point is that you do not want to do either for us."

I urge you to recognize Lindsey that it is women who were persuaded to begin this process that has caused such strife.

Men have always been and were willing to "provide" to you. You mistakenly label male servitude to women as oppression.

Due to the stagnant and downward pressure upon wages and the resulting separation from productivity, "providing" for women, (assuming they should still have a choice to be provided for) has become economically untenable for much of the American working class.

I would like to present two graphs to you to illustrate some of the factors that are putting pressure upon the American family and gender relations..

Wages separate from productivity which is exacerbated by female saturation of the labor pool and globalization trade and production practices.

Graph:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_IU3iQnIt6Nc/S15PXKK_MEI/AAAAAAAAATw/cDoaXXiFSwc/s1600-h/l_000c07bd4b8745c4946c2cca721ef026.jpg

The second is the distribution of wealth in the hands of the few which has surpassed the level it was during the first Great Depression.

Graph:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_IU3iQnIt6Nc/S15PWr48dbI/AAAAAAAAATo/jRcEL1iXrdM/s1600-h/Copy+(2)+of+ScreenShot001.bmp

Bwec said...

Essentially Lindsey, we are reaching a breaking point between two VERY DIFFERENT SYSTEMS...

I can tell you that such duality of male obligations to provide for women is reaching a breaking point. At this point women have their cake and can eat it to....

Something is starting to give and men are becoming aware of our disproportionate servitude and obligation to enable women's choices and the associated pseudo independence from men these changes in law have provided to women.

Bwec said...

Lindsey YOU SAY: AND AGAIN: "what do you plan on doing to FORCE men to take responsibility for their children? Let’s hear it."

I'm not sure what you mean, women initiate 70+% of all divorce. Men vary rarely divorce and abandon their families and their children.
Men only initiate 30% of divorces and most do not involve children.

According to Los Angeles divorce consultant Jayne Major:

"It's a little known fact that in the United States men initiate only a small number of the divorces involving children."

Bwec said...

Lindsey YOU SAY: "you: 1) dispute that women make less money than men"

No I do not, I dispute that women make less money due to oppression by men or some sort of patriarchy.

"2) that women rob men of EVERYTHING THEY HAVE when they divorce or have children out of wedlock."

No women enable "choices" for themselves and "her" children by establishing lawful control over a man's body and the fruits of it's labor. I do not believe that women should have default custody or ownership of children.

I do not believe that men should be responsible to pay woman support alimony to women that are not a part of their family and to children that are not a part of their lives.

Women's choices especially out of wedlock should not become the liability of men. Men deserve the right to be independent from women and to have control over our own bodies and the fruits of it's labor while the child is shared.

Lindsey said...

Oh my god...I'm not talking about divorce I'm talking about men who just SPLIT after an unplanned pregnancy. READ WHAT I WRITE.

"I do not believe that women should have default custody or ownership of children."

GREAT. NEITHER DO FEMINISTS. HOLY SHIT. You are not helping in the least, you're making things way worse than they already are.

This is incredibly frustrating, you're not even reading what I'm saying. I'm out.

Bwec said...

"I do not believe that women should have default custody or ownership of children."

YOU SAY: "GREAT. NEITHER DO FEMINISTS. HOLY SHIT. You are not helping in the least, you're making things way worse than they already are."

Good, then I expect you to sign the shared parenting petition at ACFC.org as it is currently the case that N.O.W., The Feminist Majority, Emily's List and federal funding under V.A.W.A. are used to lobby against shared parenting.

Bwec said...

Lindsey YOU SAY: "Oh my god...I'm not talking about divorce I'm talking about men who just SPLIT after an unplanned pregnancy."

Hello Lindsey, do you have the data on how many men "just split" after an unplanned pregnancy?

Being that you support the right of women to be single mothers by choice and that you see the role of father as unnecessary to our common felicity and cultural well-being do you believe that men should have the right to abort responsibility for the ramifications of conception as women are able to do?

If your body is your choice and the growing life within it is your property and your choice, do you believe that men should have equal choice over our own bodies and the fruits of its labor as well and that women should have the choice to abort or not abort accordingly?

Or do you believe that men's bodies and the fruits of our labor should be the property and right of women so as to eliminate the role of "coercion" a man's equal right might play in a woman's "choice"?

Should men not have such a right in order to enable the choice of a woman to abort responsibility?

Is sex, making love and conception itself something you see that a man "does to a woman" or is it a mutual act requiring mutual accountability and responsibility and as such equal rights to abort or not abort to reach these ends?

Do you believe that both men and women should have the right to absolve ourselves equally from the ramifications of pregnancy or is conception something a man does to a woman and as such, something he has no right to absolve himself from as women now have?

Bwec said...

Dear Lindsey, please take another close look at this graph

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_IU3iQnIt6Nc/S9KUZA0bukI/AAAAAAAAAbA/GIi5TjovN8M/s1600/fertility.jpg

For the longest time the breakdown in family have been blamed on men who are failing to live up to their responsibility or are "afraid of commitment"

I ask you, do you not think that something has changed from the time the divorce rate and single mother birth rate skyrocketed that men and women are not EQUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR....

One goal of Men's and Father's Rights is to help women understand that this is not something that can be blamed on men but rather something that women must take responsibility for solving.

You do realize that much of the issue revolves around women and their change of divorce and family law correct? You do realize that it is your insistence to redefine the family that is involved here correct?

You do realize that a central part of "women's liberation" and feminism involves the liberation from the necessity of family correct?

I urge you to study closely the ideology of feminism....

On Women in the Workforce:

"Nowadays the working woman hastens out of the house early in the morning when the factory whistle blows. When evening comes and the whistle sounds again, she hurries home to scramble through the most pressing of her domestic tasks. Then it’s off to work again the next morning, and she is tired from lack of sleep. For the married working woman, life is as hard as the workhouse. It is not surprising therefore that family ties should loosen and the family begin to fall apart. The circumstances that held the family together no longer exist. The family is ceasing to be necessary either to its members or to the nation as a whole. The old family structure is now merely a hindrance." "Communism liberates women from her domestic slavery and makes her life richer and happier."

-Alexandra Kollontai -Komunistka, No. 2, 1920, and in English in The Worker, 1920

Further Reading:

“Feminism, Socialism, and Communism are one in the same, and Socialist/Communist government is the goal of feminism.” – Catharine A. MacKinnon, Toward a Feminist Theory of the State (First Harvard University Press, 1989), p.10

“A world where men and women would be equal is easy to visualize, for that precisely is what the Soviet Revolution promised.” – Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex (New York, Random House, 1952), p.806

“The Women’s Caucus [endorses] Marxist-Leninist thought.” — Robin Morgan, Sisterhood is Powerful, p. 597

See works of Alexandra Kollontai:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/kollonta/

The Bolsheviks opened a Council On Women and Girls just like Obama did. It was called the Zhenotdel

Jilly said...

BWEC - in case you hadn't noticed I AM SUPPORTING my MALE partner - how does that mean I am expecting everything from him? If we go out for a meal - I PAY - not him.

I have ALWAYS paid my share - always.

I have no children myself - and at nearly 60 I shan't be having any. But I know many men and women in the UK who have split up and who share custody of their children and share expenses because they earn similar amounts. You can't get fairer than that.

In fact most women I know well do not expect men to support them financially in any way and share the expenses of keeping a home - what is inequal or detrimental to men about that?

Jilly said...

What Lindsey and I are both saying is you seem unable to decide what you want from women. You want us to stay at home and look after you but then you moan if you then have to pay for your ex spouse and children in the event of a divorce. You don't like women who know their own minds and who argue with you. You don't like women who want to share child care with you and share paying for children with you.


I have never looked for a so-called alpha malme - as I can earn enough money myself I do not look for wealth in a man. I've always been interested in men who I enjoy being with and who I respect for being the people they are.

I like my life how it is and I want to retain the rights I have - to vote, receive the same pay for doing the same job as men do and not to be harrassed by men who are unable to exercise self control. I do not want to be a stay at home housewife.

I am sorry if you don't like it but I will fight tooth and nail to keep the rights I have - but then I'm in the UK so that doesn't concern you really does it?

Bwec said...

JILLY, YOU SAY: "What Lindsey and I are both saying is you seem unable to decide what you want from women. You want us to stay at home and look after you but then you moan if you then have to pay for your ex spouse and children in the event of a divorce. You don't like women who know their own minds and who argue with you. You don't like women who want to share child care with you and share paying for children with you."


Where are you inferring all this from?

YOU SAY: "You want us to stay at home and look after you but then you moan if you then have to pay for your ex spouse and children in the event of a divorce."

I would love for my prospectful infant child to be breast fed and weaned by its own mother, is that to much to ask for?

However, I do not feel that women should have the choice to stay home and be supported by a husband as current economic factors and legislated liabilities that women formed into law preclude this as an option that men should have to support on their own lest they bear the consequences.

Some of these economic pressures upon men stem from the choices that women made, namely the choice to have a choice to do both and furthermore the ramifications and consequences a man takes on when he takes on the now oppressive burden of the provider role and enabler of women's choices.

When a man does this it now makes him responsible for supporting a woman after she leaves him and also forfeits his right to have meaningful contact with his child..

Only a fool supports his wife and child while she stays home. Only a fool takes on the role of provider with the changes that women have made to divorce law.

YOU SAY: "You don't like women who know their own minds and who argue with you."

No, I'm actually quite delighted that women such as yourselves are speaking here on my blog.


YOU SAY: "You don't like women who want to share child care with you and share paying for children with you."

No, I do like women who do this because it is the only option that will give me a fighting chance of having control over my own body and the fruits of its labors and a chance to have meaningful contact with my child.

It is important that if a woman does stay home that she contribute half the money it takes for her to do so or else I will end up her provider which is something that is now penalized by law.

It is important that the agreement is carefully documented so that in the event of divorce I will not lose my child and be forced to support a woman who is not my wife and a child that is not a part of my life.

I've seen to many men become devastated and forced to support women who where using their money to go on vacations and spa treatments when these men themselves could barely feed themselves. I've seen what women can do to men and how little rights men have. I've seen it happen to my brother and my own father..

Maam, I will not be humiliated like my father was. I will not be humiliated like my brother. I will not be humiliated like my friends.

I will not drive hours each way to "sneak" up to see my own children....

Do you realize how humiliating it is to support a woman that is not your wife and a child that has been taken from you..?????

NO WAY WOULD I EVER...EVER TAKE ON THE "PROVIDER" ROLE... NEVER WOULD I FORFEIT MY RIGHTS AS A FATHER AND TO MY OWN BODY IN ORDER TO SUPPORT A WOMAN AND CHILD, THE LAW FORBIDS SUCH A FOOLISH DECISION....

Bwec said...

JILLY, understand that women are now in direct competition with men for resources in the economic sphere.

Understand that you have "women first" laws such as Affirmative Action and Title IX and gender based quotas that mandate that men give up their seats to women in government and in business.

Understand that the Stimulus Package was diverted to women though it is men who are responsible to support women by law. (Read Article: No Country For Burly Men by Christina Hoff Sommers)

Understand that these men who need work such as my brother are having their unemployment money garnished to support women who are now in direct competition with them in the economic sphere and furthermore this competition is unequal due to "women first" laws. Women have no right to be doing this to men...

Understand that men who successfully gain joint equal custody of their children are STILL REQUIRED TO PAY CHILD SUPPORT.

I want you to understand full well what is happening here and that only a fool supports a woman by taking on the provider role. To be quite honest I don't think it really matters, men lose custody and are forced to support women either way.

Lindsey said...

"Understand that you have "women first" laws such as Affirmative Action and Title IX and gender based quotas that mandate that men give up their seats to women in government and in business. "

No we don't. Jilly lives in the UK, and I live in Canada. We don't have those here...so you really have no leg to stand on. All your American shit doesn't apply to us, and there is no use bashing our whole gender for something that happens in your stupid country. How typically American of you, assuming that everyone else in the world cares about issues that ONLY apply to you. We have bigger problems on this planet.

You are aware that only 6% of executives are women? I went to a AGM today for an oil company, and guess who was on the board of directors and in the executive group? CEO; white male. CFO; white male. Chairman? White male. Every single VP? White man. Every single person in the company making over 250 k a year? WHITE MEN. You CANNOT seriously tell me that there is nothing wrong with that. This set up in oppressive for men; it is oppressive for women. Men hold ALL the power in this society, men could change the world if they wanted to, they could make the world a better place. But they don't.

Lindsey said...

Also, enough about the stupid stimulus package. We aren't American, and I have no interest in being American, so stop it.

Bwec said...

YOU SAY: "We aren't American, and I have no interest in being American"

With all due respect maam this blog concerns my country, its people and our laws. In this respect we have very little in common.

In regard to your dissent against "White Males" you are behaving as a racist, a sexist and misandrist and I do not appreciate nor respect such bigotry.

If you would like to speak about why it is men that are predominately in leadership positions I am open to this type of conjecture.

To simplify the matter in the way you have is inexcusable in my book.

Would you like to elaborate upon your reference to "white males" and the reasons they predominate in such places?...If so I would be more than happy to discuss it.

Bwec said...

YOU SAY: "All your American shit doesn't apply to us, and there is no use bashing our whole gender for something that happens in your stupid country. How typically American of you"

Again, with all due respect (which is dwindling at the moment) I've stated clearly in the header and premise of my blog that the focus here on my blog will pertain to my country.

If you don't respect that and insist on insulting my country and its people I respectfully ask you to leave.

Lindsey said...

Yeah, the focus is on your country. However, Jilly told you REPEATEDLY that she lives in the UK, so any reasonable person would leave out the crap you said about affirmative action, etc, or at least research if that particular company has a similar policy in place. I'm sorry about the other stuff i said, but you REALLY have to remember that America isn't the center of the universe and that other countries have completely different cultures, politics, policies and ideas than yours.

Frankly I find it really insulting that you ASSUME that I have just been GIVEN things in this society because of affirmative action, etc, when I actually don't even LIVE in a country that has that as a policy. I have also never said that I agree with that policy. I have never been given a job when I didn't deserve it just because I am female, so I'd appreciate it if you'd stop accusing me of that.

And how is what I said racist? or sexist? It's a fact that white males disproportionately made up the upper echelons of this company. And you would like to know why this is? Because only men with white skin are deemed 'competent' enough for high, powerful positions in our society. Women are too 'emotional' 'weepy' and 'weak'...women aren't smart enough, with their tiny lady brains. People of colour have 'hidden agendas' and are a 'special interest group', so they are deemed unfit to make important decisions.

The reality is that YOU are the racist and sexist one. Your true colours are really coming out here! All you want to do is further the white male agenda, and leave all coloured people, homosexuals and women in the dust.

I'm going to guess that you're also one of those people that wrings their hands over the prospect of interracial marriage and the end of the 'white race'.

Lindsey said...

in the first paragraph I mean country, not company.

Bwec said...

YOU SAY: "All you want to do is further the white male agenda, and leave all coloured people, homosexuals and women in the dust."


I do? How would I be wanting to enact this agenda? What sort of white male conspiracy theory are you talking about?

You should know that there are actually discriminatory, racist and sexist policies against white males in my country.

So I ask you....Who is legislating against and oppressing opportunities for who???

Lindsey said...

Because you for some reason find it offensive that I pointed out white men hold the most important positions in this society. And you clearly want it to stay that way. Right?

You should know that there are actually discriminatory, racist, sexist, HOMOPHOBIC policies against women, people of colour and gay people in your country.

On the climb for equality, you have WAY less distance to climb than others. It's time for you to start owning up to the privilege you hold as a straight white man.

People like you have ALWAYS held the most power, have NEVER had to fight for the right to vote, have never had to fight to be able to get an education, have never been denied access to university, have OWNED SLAVES, have never been thought of as baby-making property to be passed from your mothers to your wives as women have (up until 50 years ago, no less!!!!), you have never been scared to be out at night by yourself, you have never been groped on public transit in the way women have. You get ALL the credit for making everything in this world. You have all the opportunities in the world, and as a straight white male, you reserve NO RIGHT to define other people's experiences as "not oppressive".

There is no doubt in my mind that you have experienced some things that are oppressive. No doubt at all. The thing is, you aren't the only one, but you sure act like it. There is systematic oppression at work here, which oppresses everyone involved.

Also, I find it funny that you reply to some of my comments and not to others. I've asked you 3 times if you're homophobic, yet you won't give me an answer.

Bwec said...

YOU SAY: "I pointed out white men hold the most important

positions in this society.

What do you mean by most important positions? I'll have to

pull aside the next white male I see and as him what important

position he holds.

"And you clearly want it to stay that way. Right?"

Don't you? Everyone should have the equal opportunity to

acquire resources on an equal playing field. How would you plan

on changing this Lindsey?

"You should know that there are actually discriminatory, racist,

sexist, HOMOPHOBIC policies against women, people of colour and

gay people in your country."

REALLY??? That's quite a substantial accusation. What

legislation are you referring to?

"On the climb for equality, you have WAY less distance to climb

than others."

Distance to what equality? What is this equality of which you

speak and who is the system set up to make things unequal?


"It's time for you to start owning up to the privilege you hold

as a straight white man."

What privilege would this be? They said the same things to the

Jews in Nazi Germany..

"I've asked you 3 times if you're homophobic, yet you won't give

me an answer."

I have absolutely no concern for gay issues what so ever.

You're asking if I'm afraid of gay people? No, I am not afraid

of gay people.


"People like you have ALWAYS held the most power"

So the majority ethnicity has always held the most numerical representation. hmmm
statistically speaking I would be quite surprised if this was
not the case.

Bwec said...

"have NEVER had to fight for the right to vote"

The average non land owning man in my country won the right to

vote shortly before women did.

Before this men were not allowed to vote at all or have a

representative government of the people so men decided to

sacrifice in order to make this happen...

Men have fought and died to have the right to vote.. I don't

understand what you are talking about Lindsey? Men have endured

more hardship and sacrifice than you have to have this right.


"have never had to fight to be able to get an education, have

never been denied access to university"

Again Lindsey, your understanding of history and culture is very

limited.

"have OWNED SLAVES"
Families owned slaves, not men. My white ancestors were slaves

to the pharaoh of egypt. We were also rounded up and executed in

nazi Germany. Women loved and swooned for Hitler.


"have never been thought of as baby-making property to be passed

from your mothers to your wives as women have."

You are gravely mistaken. Men's bodies are the property of

women and so are the fruits of the labor produced by it.. Male

bodily sovereignty is transferable to women outside of marriage

as well.

You should be so lucky that women did not have more

responsibilities than to be the owner of the bodies of men who

produced for her and still do for that matter. When will women

free men from our oppressive role to work for and produce for

women?


"you have never been scared to be out at night by yourself"

Yes I have, 95% of all violent crime is committed against men.

Statistically I am much more likely to be harmed by the criminal

element than a woman is.

I am concerned about my safety at times but I go anyway and

sometimes carry a gun.


"you have never been groped on public transit in the way women

have."

I am not as valuable as women are in this respect. You should

be so lucky as to have laws protecting your body and the fruits

of its labor as well. Men have no such rights to our bodies.

THey are for the service of women and for country.


"You get ALL the credit for making everything in this world."

Male value is heavily weighted in external utility. If men don't

produce or become something we really have no value and are left

to rot under a bridge and in the streets to die.

Jilly said...

BWEC - all the laws you mention - affirmative action etc are in force in the USA - I live in the UK and what we have are anti-discrimination laws - women, men, race, religion, sexual orientation, age etc. These do not favour men or women since either gender can bring a legal case under the legislation.

In the UK I agree men are disadvantaged when it comes to divorce but as judges are still more than 80% male they appear to have not progressed from when women were chattels. This means that men are still expected - in some cases - to pay for their ex wives etc. I am all in favour of sharing custody of children and sharing the expenses after divorce. These days you do not find too many cases in which men are asked to pay maintenance (I think you call it spousal support) for their ex-wives because ex-wives are expected to work and support themselves - which I agree with.

In the UK I would say this is probably the only major area were the situation really needs to be reviewed.

Jilly said...

As Lindsey correctly says - not all countries are like America. But from what I read about America the far right seem to want to oppress women and send them back to the home.

Lindsey's comments on an AGM in Canada could equally apply to here in the UK there are less than 10% of company directors who are women in the UK and this situation is not improving. I do not believe this is because there are no capable women in these companies.

Because we have anti-discrimination laws in the UK it has driben all sorts of discrimination underground - where it is more difficult to spot - and fight.

Bwec said...

YOU SAY: "here in the UK there are less than 10% of company directors who are women in the UK and this situation is not improving."

You should make laws against men so that women may advance. You should also make laws in your colleges so that women are given preference over men. Many countries are already doing these things..... Equal opportunity is not enough for women to outcompete men for access to resources, you must discriminate against males. A

YOU SAY: "Because we have anti-discrimination laws in the UK it has driben all sorts of discrimination underground"

Good, I'm glad to see the free market is hard at work to maintain itself. We are starting to pass a Fair Pay Act here which will allow any woman to sue, even after the fact if she finds out that someone else made more than she did.

Talking to a businessman the other day he told me that his business could not survive such an attack by women and thus he will keep women working from contract and temp companies rather than actual hire. Women are just to much a liability. He told me that he can't afford to pay everyone the same but relies on wage negotiation and the free market to make his profit margin.

He told me that just maintaining records for liability reasons would increase his costs alone.

He said that he must keep open the option of raises for employees that deserve it but this will only open up lawsuits from women. Again, he believes he will simply only use women workers through a temp and contract company.

Ultimately the effect "fair pay" laws will have is to drive wages down as it is to much a liability not to communize and equally distribute wages.

As this man put it, in order to maintain the free market he will be forced to keep women out.

Though I do believe the law applies to men but clearly he saw women as the threat in all this and for good reason.

The real situation is that the workforce will become stratified between contingent workers and actual hires. There is no choice now... In order to allow for women to acquire as much and more territory and resources as males do males must literally be shut out. To many businesses this is unacceptable as their male labor force is their bread and butter.

This guy told me that the majority of his hardest workers are males and that males make up the majority of workaholics in general. Men are very driven to acquire territory and resources and in general are very hard workers.

Bwec said...

To Lindsey:

You ask about classlessness and equality for all, specifically homosexuals. Your focus on political correct speech and diversity in unrelated subject matter is striking. It reminds me of something I am reading in Time magazine at the moment.

Listen carefully to how this woman perceives and interpret a statement by Dr.Oz, a physician.

"Dr. Oz's patronizing insistence that women are best suited to the role of primary care giver because they know "instinctively" what to do leaves out in the cold women who, whether by choice or circumstance don't fit that description as well as nontraditional families, including ones with gay parents."


So you can see how the Dr. made a statement about his perception regarding abilities he sees as unique to women and then sees it as having a connotation and connection to gays (a vast minority who can't reproduce) and what the woman herself sees as the possibility that his statement also does not pertain to a small minority of women either.

You see, when someone speaks of something (a person, place or thing) they are usually speaking about the common element, circumstance and definition of the word being used.

Thinking like yours and the feminist above is called a non sequitur argument, a logical fallacy.

You see, when one refers to "women" they mean the lexical definition of "women" which means the majority of women. It has nothing to do with gays and the minority of women. It is meant to be a general statement relative to a common element.

It seems everything is passed through a Cultural Marxist filter in your mind. You demonstrate a strong indoctrination in your thinking.

In order for someone to think in non sequiturs it takes quite a bit of indoctrination. The systematic breakdown takes some time.

As Yuri Bezmenov said "the idea is to make your enemy believe the snow is grey"

From here the subject lacks a central point of reference and is susceptible to reprogramming and brainwashing..

I know you mean well but you have been heavily influenced by feminist and Cultural Marxist ideology... I'd like to know your experience with this and from where you were so heavily influenced...

Lindsey said...

Huh? I just believe that all people matter and all people should be included, not just the "majority". Social stigma and societal expectations result in a "minority" of gay people and women who don't want children. In reality these people are much more common, its just not acceptable for them to be themselves.

If you would like to talk about majorities and minorities, we should talk about the fact that men like YOU are in the TINY minority of people, if you look at the world and even America.

Also, gay people reproduce and raise children all the time. Apparently you've never heard of sperm donors or surrogate mothers. Or adoption.

I am definitely not brainwashed, nor am I a communist (??????). I just care about the people who are at a systemic disadvantage.

Bwec said...

YOU SAY: "I just care about the people who are at a systemic disadvantage."

Hmmm is that so? Do you believe in equal representation and protection under law? Feminists don't. Nor do they support such representation in social culture.

If you noticed, the feminist indoctrinated woman above mentioned all but the VAST MAJORITY of people who would find themselves in a situation where they must contest a "gender normative" construct....MEN..

You see, the last thing feminists care about is anything heterosexual and they despise the word "normative" to describe anything good.

You see, the VAST MAJORITY i.e. the norm is what feminists seek to destroy. Perhaps feminists could start to challenge female hypergamy. Perhaps feminists could consider shaming women for not supporting a man financially while he stays home. This is because women don't want equality, they want choices.

Rights=Responsibility

Show me a right that women have that men do not (and there are many) and I will show you how it is men who bear the responsibility to enable her right.

Furthermore, using the word rights to describe female choices is a misnomer. Feminists label privileges given to women by the responsibility of men as rights...
This is to detract from the truth that female choices are privileges and not rights.


Again, true rights=responsibility for the individual who has that right. Women don't bear responsibility for their choices...men do.

In regard to helping what you see as the "disadvantaged" I think it would be best to abstain from going beyond equal rights, representation, protection and monied advocacy for these people lest the fact that they are equal show it's face by the results such discrimination has upon persons with skin that is white and gender that is male..

"Equal laws protecting equal rights the best guarantee of loyalty and love of country."

President James Madison