Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…


Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…

Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
LL
Contributor
LL

I still keep my point that I have made earlier.

-This article must have some scientific basis to it. Otherwise, I wouldn’t know why Forbes would even publish it? Forbes is a prominent magazine and it has a reputation to uphold. Why would it release something that had absolutely NO scientific findings?

-It seems that when an article writes anything that deals with introspection when it comes to the “fairer sex”, there is a riot. Forget scientific articles written that criticise men. There is never an objection and neither would I object to something that criticises men that actually uses empirical evidence and scientific findings to back up their claims. However, when anything that is derogatory and hate-filled is written for men with NO scientific fact (which seems to be the norm in this society), no one comes out against it. No one. The same people who openly object to this, sit back and idly watch as misandistic slogans/articles/advertisements/movies are written that target men. WITHOUT any scientific finding and just to make profits.

-I am quite disturbed how the people who criticise this article only personally attack the author who wrote it. It’s a typical response and I guess it is implemented to silence any resistance. Attck the messenger and not the message. Well, if you knew the truth was on your side, then would you have to resort to these tactics? If this article was incorrect, wouldn’t name-calling be totally pointless and a waste of time? It seems that the responses I hear on this article is “Mr. So and So is an insecure, dickless loser, blah blah blah blah blah” I don’t see how that does anything except make that you look bad. But hey, we all know what the policy of political correctness is. Attack men in the most vicious of ways possible and the women are seen as being perfect angels and evade accountability.

-The people who do object to this article want to use censorship to get rid of it. Again, if this article was a total fallacy and highly erroneous ‘piece of garbage’ like some people say it is, then would you have to resort to those tactics? Why not write a counter article that uses scientific facts? Why not scrutinize the statistics that are out there and utilize scientific findings to validate your claims? I’m sorry, but the recent article about ‘Lazy Men’ and the ‘I feel’ notion that is in the article doesn’t cut it. The counter-article is only based on EMOTION. Sorry people, but in the first sentence, you can’t say ‘studies aside’ and be taken seriously.

-I honestly can’t believe the entitlement mentality and victimhood mentality I see. Even on this board. There are people on here who say they ‘demand’ an apology. Never mind that this article has scientific findings. Never mind that this isn’t an article that just attacks women as a gender without any scientific basis or empirical evidence whatsoever. Believe me, if that happened, I would criticise the article as ‘misogynistic’. What pisses me off is the fact that, even when an article has scientific findings, there is an uproar (usually among women) because these women got their feelings hurt. Well, honey, I hate to say it but why don’t you walk a mile in our shoes for once? Why don’t YOU go out in mass rallies and ever criticise the organizations that make profits by selling misandristic products. Why don’t people object when it goes both ways??? There are plenty of men, including myself, that protest when someone unneedlessly criticises the female gender without any scientific facts, but then why are there very little, if any, women who do the same for men???

Where are the shirts that say little girls should have rocks thrown at them? What about a t-shirt that says women should be raped or a t-shirt that openly humiliates women by saying they only have half of a brain? Where are male public speakers saying all women are useless creatures and should be in the kitchen (remember Marily French and her quote “All men are rapists”. Sure, French may be crazy but guess what, she is a prominent writer for the NY Times). The difference is, if you take the male public speaker or the misogynistic t-shirt, EVERYONE would be criticisng it/him (INCLUDING ME) but if the genders are reversed, nothing. Silence. And what about the novel “Are Men Necessary” by another prominent NYTimes writer, Maureen Dowd? This is only the tip of the iceberg that needs to be addressed.

I hear nothing. No, wait. I do hear something, except they are death threats or people who criticise my character, instead of actually looking at the situation at hand.

I’m waiting for my answer in regard to this.

Why don’t I ever hear anything?

And I ask this again, why exactly should Forbes apologize? Why should Forbes apologize, when organizations that bash men WITHOUT any scientific fact never do.

What I am upset against is the level of double standard that has taken hold in our society. Fine, object to this article. No one is going to stop you. But then, don’t sit back when there is the usual male-bashing that takes place in the media (movies, magazines, books, newspapers, internet, advertisements, clothing, etc, etc, etc). And don’t say “Oh, but it’s only very minimal”. I know it isn’t because I see it first-hand and I see how it affects people around me.

That’s all I have to say. Criticise me, argue with me, debate me, whatever. Actually, I would like an answer that ISN’T something that blatantly criticises my character. I would ACTUALLY like a RATIONAL, thought out and articulate response from a person who is openly objecting to this article.

As much as you would like to hide behind it, you can’t escape from the truth.

Just because something is ‘politically correct’ doesn’t mean something is right.

-LL

08-24-2006 05:05 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
vegasmike
Contributor
vegasmike

Brilliant post!

My thought exactly.

Double standards exist, every woman here knows it they just don’t want to accept it.

08-24-2006 05:18 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

I don’t object to this article so much as think that anyone who would write it, follow it, or think it sound are boooooring, and also likely dumb. But that’s my opinion, and Mr. Noer is entitled to his, as his devoted readers are entitled to theirs.

As for all the male bashing that you want me to account for my lack of response to, all I can say is that defending the fairer sex against obnoxiousness is a full time job, what with the existence of sites like http://www.theabsolute.net/misogyny/ and http://www.theabsolute.net/misogyny/sim.html, just to name a couple. Forgive me if I think that “Boys are stupid, we should throw rocks at them” is not quite the threat (to anyone) that this:

Emotion, whatever the Female Void would have you believe, is not a more Exalted State than is Thought. In point of fact, I think Emotion is animalistic, serpent-brain stuff. Animals do not Think, but I am reasonably certain that they have Emotions. ‘Eating this makes me Happy.’ ‘When my fur is all wet and I am cold, it makes me Sad.” “Ooo! Puppies!’ ‘It makes me Excited to Chase the Ball!’ Reason, as any husband can tell you, doesn’t stand a chance in an argument with Emotion… this was the fundamental reason, I believe, that women were denied the vote for so long.

is. In other words, I’ve got bigger battles to fight, and for my own sex, no less. Maybe I’ll help you fight yours when I see you fighting mine. I’ll rub your back if you rub mine, isn’t that the way the world works?

Message Edited by Marta2003 on 08-24-2006 05:21 PM

08-24-2006 05:20 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
shovel
Regular Contributor
shovel
Well put, Martha.

And Vegas, it takes a bigger man to rise above double standards. I wouldn’t take pride in being a follower. If there is a greater entity, I thank it to be blessed with progressive male family and friends.

Honestly, there’s going to be just as much infidelity if you marry a “career man,” so I don’t know what crawled up Mister Noer’s hole to provoke such an attack on women in particular. I also wonder which hand he is wining, dining, and romancing this evening?

08-24-2006 05:32 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
IshWishDish
Regular Contributor
IshWishDish

I would ACTUALLY like a RATIONAL, thought out and articulate response from a person who is openly objecting to this article.

Okay, here:

Why would it release something that had absolutely NO scientific findings?

I think you’re mistaking statistics for science. What this article presents are statistics stating that women with competitive careers have a higher rate of divorce. No one (no one rational, that is) is angry that they’re bringing this up. The anger is stemming from the UNscientific conclusions the author is jumping to for why this correlation exists. And as this article is an editorial, Forbes is not going to hold it to the same standards of fair/accurate journalism an actual news piece would be held to.

-It seems that when an article writes anything that deals with introspection when it comes to the “fairer sex”, there is a riot. Forget scientific articles written that criticise men.

I believe your perception is somewhat colored here. On this very message board, plenty of men are quite aggressively “standing up for men.” Both sides are being quite vocal with their opinions. Both sides believe their side is being censored and are outraged by it. Both sides are furious that the other side dares to speak up. Find me an article in a reputable publication which you feel is unfair and offensive to men. 1) I will join you in speaking out against it. 2) I will eat the tires off my car if the reader response to the article isn’t just as impassioned and furious as this one. Do remember, battalions of angry women are not storming the streets decrying this. The public backlash against this article is currently limited to an internet message board.

-I am quite disturbed how the people who criticise this article only personally attack the author who wrote it.

I agree, LL. Bear in mind, though, that many of the posters are young and angry and don’t realize how much that tactic damages their argument and image. Remember also that both the pro and anti posters here are saying really inappropriate and unworthy things to one another. Try to remember that when someone uses this tactic, it doesn’t mean their argument is wrong; it just means they’re a jerk.

Why don’t people object when it goes both ways??? There are plenty of men, including myself, that protest when someone unneedlessly criticises the female gender without any scientific facts, but then why are there very little, if any, women who do the same for men???

We always see ourselves and our surroundings as “the norm”, but the truth is, very few men are active feminists. Let’s take this board as an example. It’s impossible to be certain about genders on a message board, but making your best guesses, what would you say is the male female ratio among people supporting this article? among people against it?

Where are the shirts that say little girls should have rocks thrown at them? What about a t-shirt that says women should be raped or a t-shirt that openly humiliates women by saying they only have half of a brain?

I’d be happy to supply you with screenshots of any number of t-shirts bearing slogans advocating violence toward or subjugation/objectification of women. I’ve never seen these shirts advocating throwing rocks at or raping men. That’s absolutely horrible. Could you show me this? As the mother of a little boy and the wife of a grown man, I’ll eagerly speak out against it.

I know it isn’t because I see it first-hand and I see how it affects people around me.

Maybe you should tell us how it affects people around you, LL. I and many others would be happy to tell you how sexism against women has personally affected ourselves and the people around us.

Message Edited by IshWishDish on 08-24-2006 04:55 PM

08-24-2006 05:54 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
LL
Contributor
LL

With all due respect Marta2003, but there are plenty of people that would like nothing better than to rip apart a person “just” because they are a man (or even a boy. I won’t name names here…but what they said can be quoted, so I am not making this stuff up).

As far as I amk concerned there are many men out there who would like nothing better than to help women’s cause any way they can. That’s fine. But then very little, if any, women choose to look at the man’s perspective and most men choose to put blindfolds on when it comes to the man’s perspective as well.

What do you want me to do Marta2003? Round up every rapist until there is none left in the country? There are many men who start organizations, PAC’s, non profits and foundations to address many of the issues that women face in our country. There are laws in place that address these things. Actually, now that I thought of it, there are people who believe that, even if a boy or young man is unjustly accused of raping someone at a later date, it would be an ‘educational’ experience for him. I quote this: “Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience”. I believe one of the assistant dean of students of Vasser College stated that quote. How can you honestly state something like that when you are in a prominent position of power??? There is already a witch hunt taking place in regard to things like sexual harassment and the topic of rape that has gotten out of hand. Don’t tell me it hasn’t when a 6 year old boy is suspected of ‘sexually harrassing’ a female child.

Honestly, is this…witch hunt…this…fiasco…this…grotesque monstrosity that people incorrectly label and thinly disguise as ‘equality’ almost at an end already???

If you ask a tremendous amount of men, I guarantee you all of them will think rape is bad and an utterly malevolent act that not only humiliates the victim but makes them psychologically and physically damaged. But, if you ask a woman (or even some man) about how there will soon be only 39 percent male students attending college or how 88.9 percent of the suicide rate is male, then you will get “Oh…well…it’s not THAT bad……..(blank stare)”.

So, once again, let’s reverse the genders. “Did you know that 88.9 percent of females get raped”. “Well…it’s not THAT bad….(blank stare)”.

Or even better. Let me quote one of the Vasser College’s assistant dean of students again and let me change the quote so everyone can see the message quite clearly…

“Women who are unjustly raped can sometimes again from the experience”.

All of this is part of a bigger picture and if you piece ALL of the puzzle pieces (and yes, there will be a lot of puzzle pieces) together, then you have one pervasive problem that people look over.

Honestly, do some people believe in equality or is it more of the term ‘supremacy’ that comes to mind.

Do you believe in equality Marta2003? I know I sure do.

-LL

08-24-2006 05:55 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
IshWishDish
Regular Contributor
IshWishDish

Actually, Vegas, double standards are exactly what we’re so hacked off about.

08-24-2006 05:59 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
LL
Contributor
LL

IshWishDish,

Thank you for your clear, thoughtful, reasonable and articulate response.

Yes, there are plenty of men who are speaking up against this. From what I have seen though in the past, this is rare. Some of the men on this board I know as well. No one stood up to the Harvard persident, however, this was obvious because he said something that was unreasonable and clearly not supported whatsoever by scientific fact. I would never support such a man and neither would most of these men that are agreeing that this article shouldn’t be censored.

However, when a feminist, such as the deceased Andrea Dworkin, would state that

“In everything men make, they hollow out a central place for death, let its rancid smell contaminate every dimension of whatever still survives. Men especially love murder. In art they celebrate it, and in life they commit it. They embrace murder as if life without it would be devoid of passion, meaning, and action, as if murder were solace, still their sobs as they mourn the emptiness and alienation of their lives.” — Andrea Dworkin, Letters From a War Zone, p 214.
then, her supporters say she was simply “mistaken” or “quoted out of context”. No, I don’t think the president of Harvard was quoted out of context. Neither was Dworkin or any of her other crew. What if we excused a KKK member for quoting something out of context in regard to a black person and we replaced Dworkin’s quote with ‘men’ to ‘black’?

IshWishDish, I am 19 years old. Does that surprise you? Never once have I blatantly stated or attacked one’s character when I would make these arguments. Of course, whenever I would bring up a topic of conversation to a feminist, there would either be crude remarks that are totally out of context (since none of them even know me as a person) or even vivid death threats (such as I should have been post-natally aborted). If you are indeed a feminist, IshWishDish, I suggest that you look around you and see that there are a LOT of hardliners in your organization who only want it their way or “the highway”. With an intolerance for other people’s opinions and their support of censorship, it is very hard to come to a rational agreement with these people.

As far as male feminists go, I would have talks with some of them via the internet, to see what their opinions are. It is the same as talking to a female feminist. It seems that you are just talking to a wall. No matter what you say or how eloquently you put your arguments, they refut you and do so with very little facts and findings that strengthen their arguments. It only leads me to believe that these people have a political agenda to uphold and if they lose it, they may very well lose their financial backing and careers. While that may be the case, it doesn’t excuse them for making the overall situation worse.

Anyway, thank you for your reply.

Here is the t-shirt stuff I was talking about. Hey, there’s even one that tells girls to run boys over in the third site. Wow. I missed that one.

http://www.popartuk.com/humour/boys-are-stupid-st3241-poster.asp

http://www.webundies.com/david_goliath_boys_are_stupid.htm

http://www.girlytops.com/trendytops/trendytops.html

There are other things I want to send to you in this message, such as various quotes that you should be aware of. It will take me time to collect all of them, however, but your patience will be much appreciated. I should have most of the quotes here by tomorrow.

-LL

08-24-2006 06:26 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
IshWishDish
Regular Contributor
IshWishDish

I appreciate the links and quotes, and my appreciated patience is at your disposal, LL. I look forward to the info you propose to bring; I think this has the potential to be something very rare on this (or any) message board: a useful, respectful, and enlightening discussion. I can’t promise to be so dilligent with my research, I’m afraid, as I actually get very little computer time (see above reference to little boy), but I’ll do what I can to make with the goods as well.

08-24-2006 06:41 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
LL
Contributor
LL

IshWishDish,

To answer your question on how sexism affects other men and myself, sexism effects women and men equally. The psychological and emotional aspects of it are felt very deep. It really feels like someone is punching you in the stomach. It hurts and it hurts you even more when you have female friends that buy these things and start to believe in them. Media led brainwashing can have a very powerful effect, IshWishDish. Sexism is sexism, regardless of the gender and there are many women that have been colored because of misandry they were exposed to as well. There is the incorrect notion among many young women today that men are simply “punching bags” or beings that are simply incapable of “feelings” or “empathy”.

Personally, my belief is that there is a pendulum in regard to whatever issue you talk about. It could be any issue in the world but when it starts to lean to one side, it is then you feel the reprucussions.

There is no main, all encompassing organization that speaks for men as a gender, IshWishDish. If there is misandry, then there is no powerful, prominent organization similar to feminism that speaks out against it. Therefore, for any person who believes in misandristic products, there is no one to tell him/her that it isn’t true.

There are some people who will say “yeah…but people arent THAT stupid to fall for it…”. Well, don’t be so sure. Here is a question to ask yourself. Why are teenage, white women the most prevalent smokers?”

Give up?

It is because a lot of teenage women would see Sex and the City and in the series, Carrie would occasionally smoke. A lot of women said it made her look cool. It just shows how powerful society can be and how it can encourage certain viewpoints. Also known as, political correctness.

In regard to the female-bashing t-shirts (I need someone who labels themself as a feminist or is actively involved in them. IshWishDish, if this is you, please answer it then) why doesn’t women’s rights organizations speak out against it? I am sure they do and if they do speak out against it in droves, then why don’t they take these things off the market. The “Boys are stupid, throw rocks at them” slogans have been up for years. I really don’t know how many people speak out against it. Glenn Sacks has but he is only one man and one person who looks at men’s issues. He is usually booed and scoffed at regardless of what he says by feminist groups anyway. Women make up the majority of the clothing and accessory market. So, I would assume collective action would have consequences to these stores that sell them.

-LL

08-24-2006 06:44 PM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
LL
Contributor
LL

IshWishDish,

I have posted some quotes in the forum. Once you read some of them, we can talk about it here.

-LL

08-24-2006 07:56 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
IshWishDish
Regular Contributor
IshWishDish

LL,

I do agree that all sexist behavior (as with all forms of bigotry) is wrong and hurtful to its target. Bear in mind, though, that there are two forms of bigotry: personal (individuals or groups of individuals acting out against other individuals or groups) and institutional (a culture, government, religion, legal system, etc. which has bigotry so interwoven into its fabric that it cannot be extricated without massive upheaval). I do currently see examples of personal bigotry and intollerance directed at men and women in proportions close enough to call equal. Institutional bigotry, though, (in this case, sexism) is still directed at women to a vastly greater extent than it is directed at men. A few random examples off the top of my head: If we’re so overrepresented at colleges, why do we still make less money and hold less top positions? Find me a prevalent national restaurant chain where the “theme” is the blatant, over-the-top objectification of men as servants and sexual objects. When will there be a mainstream Hollywood action movie starring Ursula Andress with Hugh Jackman as her fawning love interest? Why don’t Boy Scouts have to go door to door peddling cookies for hours and hours to fund their activities? I could go on, but I’ll spare you. I’m sure you get the idea. The thing is, as hurtful as individual acts of sexism can be, they just don’t do the wide-scale damage that really entrenched attitudes of inequality do. It’s very frustrating, and it makes many feminists behave badly. This is not in any way an excuse for that bad behavior. It’s an explanation for some of it. What is the explanation for the misogynistic behavior that occurs against women (bearing in mind that rape and other forms of violence against women have decreased as the women’s movement has increased, don’t say it’s all or even mostly an angry response to hostile feminists)?

I will address your other points (and your other thread; man you’re speedy) in increments. I’d like to do it all at once, but at the moment I have to go watch my son ride his bike. More later.

08-24-2006 08:17 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
Angelus
Contributor
Angelus

Marta2003 wrote:

I don’t object to this article so much as think that anyone who would write it, follow it, or think it sound are boooooring, and also likely dumb. But that’s my opinion, and Mr. Noer is entitled to his, as his devoted readers are entitled to theirs.

As for all the male bashing that you want me to account for my lack of response to, all I can say is that defending the fairer sex against obnoxiousness is a full time job, what with the existence of sites like http://www.theabsolute.net/misogyny/ and http://www.theabsolute.net/misogyny/sim.html, just to name a couple. Forgive me if I think that “Boys are stupid, we should throw rocks at them” is not quite the threat (to anyone) that this:

Emotion, whatever the Female Void would have you believe, is not a more Exalted State than is Thought. In point of fact, I think Emotion is animalistic, serpent-brain stuff. Animals do not Think, but I am reasonably certain that they have Emotions. ‘Eating this makes me Happy.’ ‘When my fur is all wet and I am cold, it makes me Sad.” “Ooo! Puppies!’ ‘It makes me Excited to Chase the Ball!’ Reason, as any husband can tell you, doesn’t stand a chance in an argument with Emotion… this was the fundamental reason, I believe, that women were denied the vote for so long.

is. In other words, I’ve got bigger battles to fight, and for my own sex, no less. Maybe I’ll help you fight yours when I see you fighting mine. I’ll rub your back if you rub mine, isn’t that the way the world works?

Message Edited by Marta2003 on 08-24-200605:21 PM

Well Martha- I really must thank you for your honesty here when it comes to your mindset. It all comes down to men versus women, your sisters against the patriarchy, doesn’t it? Well, don’t think for a second that I won’t take you for your word. You wanted a war- I’ll try to make sure you get one.

However, you are quite deluded if you haven’t seen how much men have done for your kind – and still do-, and we are just beginning to wake up and realize just how little you care for us. You are nothing but a bunch of spoiled adolescents complaining about parents that give in to your every whim.

Believe it or not, even today RIGHT NOW, most men will agree with the basic beliefs culturally atributted to the feminist movement. I’m here to tell you however, that those days are numbered. You have become way too haughty. Here you are, openly admitting you don’t give half a poop about what happens to little boys because they are NOT your kind. Well, as your hipocrisy becomes public and exposed, and it has been exposed, men will also make that same decision. I made that decision.

You are not my kind, Martha. You hate me as a man, and I have internalized it, and have accepted it. You hate little boys that have done nothing to you- who could very well be me or my seven year old cousin. You can burn in hell and rot and stay there for all I care. This article and the trend it represents scares you? You haven’t seen nothing yet.

Message Edited by Angelus on 08-24-2006 08:20 PM

08-24-2006 08:18 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
warbaby
Regular Contributor
warbaby

Marta, I’m sure everyone would be delighted to help you fight your battle, but you see, the fact is, YOU DON’T HAVE ONE!!!

Contrary to what the leaders you follow in lockstep have told you, you are not being oppressed. I know, it’s convenient to think you are, and have a pity party everytime you don’t want to take your future in your own hands, but you aren’t. Women in the west have every benefit imaginable available to us, and so many of us still aren’t satisfied.

WTF do you want???

08-24-2006 09:04 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
LL
Contributor
LL

IshWishDish,

Thank you for your reply. There are some things that I would like to debate you against.

<<<<Bear in mind, though, that there are two forms of bigotry: personal (individuals or groups of individuals acting out against other individuals or groups) and institutional (a culture, government, religion, legal system, etc. which has bigotry so interwoven into its fabric that it cannot be extricated without massive upheaval). I do currently see examples of personal bigotry and intollerance directed at men and women in proportions close enough to call equal. Institutional bigotry, though, (in this case, sexism) is still directed at women to a vastly greater extent than it is directed at men.>>>>>>>>

Institutional wise, I do have to say that men are discriminated against. Personally, it is more than women, but I will explain to you from my viewpoint why I think that is. You must remember that there are laws that are designed for women. To help them. What about in the matter of divorce law, sexual harrassment law and the criminal justice system? There have been numerous cases where a woman has gotten off or her punishment was reduced because of the pre-concieved stereotype that a woman is weaker than a man or is less incapable of committing a crime. Like you said, I can’t go into anything because if I did that, it would be a book.

Remember the Pastor’s wife who murdered her husband? She confessed to killing him and ran ~450 miles before she was caught. The judge released her on bond. You release someone on bond if:
1)The crime is not a severe
2)The probability of someone running is slim.
3)The person will show up at his/her trial.

This just gives her the excuse of running again! I know, it’s only *one* case, but this is the type of mentality that a tremendous amount of people in our society hold. You have to imagine if a man was in her case.

I know I wouldnt want a man to be free on bond if he murdered his wife. But she shouldn’t have been freed either. it shouldn’t be gender-related at all. It should depend on the type of crime.

<<<<<<<What is the explanation for the misogynistic behavior that occurs against women>>>>>>

There is no excuse for violent misogynistic behavior against women. Personally, if a man in a high position of power wrote about women what the radical feminists write about men, I would scream facism, but that’s another story for another day. But, that is it. If a man commits a violent transgression against a woman, then he will be put in jail. The law is more equipped to handle this sort of behavior. Society is much more ready to believe a woman than they believe a man. If that wasn’t true, men wouldnt be thrown in jail and released twenty years later because they were found they were falsely accused of raping someone. The law and society is not equipped to handle misandristic behavior on the level it handles misogynistic behavior.

<<<<<The thing is, as hurtful as individual acts of sexism can be, they just don’t do the wide-scale damage that really entrenched attitudes of inequality do. It’s very frustrating, and it makes many feminists behave badly. This is not in any way an excuse for that bad behavior. It’s an explanation for some of it.>>>>>>

But there shouldn’t be an excuse or explanation for misandristic behavior. Period. It would be like me becoming aware of the double-standard men face and me writing a book saying that women aren’t necessary anymore or saying a woman should be “actively beaten in a burlac bag”. If you are in a position of power, as many of these feminists are, it is not an excuse. You have to conduct yourself in a professional manner and come across as intelligent and rational-minded. Unfortunately, most of them don’t and the others turn the other way instead of stepping up to their abuses of power. A bully is a bully is a bully is a bully. It would be like saying since Hitler had bad experiences with jews, so he decided to write about a book saying that all jews should be killed off and then actively doing it.
<<<<<A few random examples off the top of my head: If we’re so overrepresented at colleges, why do we still make less money and hold less top positions? Find me a prevalent national restaurant chain where the “theme” is the blatant, over-the-top objectification of men as servants and sexual objects. When will there be a mainstream Hollywood action movie starring Ursula Andress with Hugh Jackman as her fawning love interest? Why don’t Boy Scouts have to go door to door peddling cookies for hours and hours to fund their activities? I could go on, but I’ll spare you. I’m sure you get the idea.>>>>>>>>

Well, as for the restaurants (are you, let’s say, referring to a place like Hooters?), no woman has to work there. They can find another place to work. It’s like in the topic of pornography, the woman does not *have* to be a porn star if she finds it to be degrading to herself, however, that is entirely another topic for another day.

As far as jobs go, I do have a theory in this. Here me out.

First, what is your argument. Which side are you on when I ask you this question. Do you believe that men and women are totally equal or are they equal BUT does biology also play a key role?

I believe in the second one. If a woman had the same resources, got stellar grades in college and devoted all of her time and energy in what she wanted to do (let’s say, be a CEO), then she will become one. A lot of women choose not to pursue the “top” path, as many men choose not to also.

However…

There is one question a woman asks herself, sooner or later down the line, if she does decide to go all the way to the “top”. And I know it is true because my mother asked the same question when she was in her late 20’s.

“If I decide to do this and fully commit my time to this strenuous career, then how will I feel when I look back on my life in my 50’s and I never had children”.

If a woman wants to go all the way to the “top”, then how can she be a responsible mother? Raising children *is* a hard (and rewarding) full time job in the initial years and many women don’t choose to pursue high end careers that would take up at least 60+ hours a week.

There are some women who do say bull**bleep** to this, but alas, I believe it to be true. A woman just can’t have her cake and eat it at the same time. It would be the same situation if a man decided to stay at home and raise his children. He wouldn’t be able to put in all of the hours that would be able to do as a CEO, or any other high titled position.

Take my mother, for instance. She was a Columbia graduate who wanted to pursue a top-notch position, but asked herself the same question when she was in her late 20’s.

She decided to have children and work part-time. Is it impossible that a woman can reach a “top” level position if she wanted to AND have children? No, it isn’t, but it is MUCH harder and it usually isn’t the best overall outcome for the child.

So, the majority of women who want to have children need to make a choice, and I do recognize, it is a hard one. Children do suffer as well if a woman is working full time and that has to be taken into consideration.

However, no where in this does the government or some ‘higher’ hierarchy (also known to you feminist activists) as patriarchy play a role in determining what job a woman can have. It is biology, more than anything else.

What I am about to say goes against the area of “common knowledge”, but if you examine history, it was more of an economic conflict, IshWishDish. Not a gender one. Throughout U.S. history, many people were barred from reaching higher levels because of their economic status. A poor man could not vote, even if he was white. A poor woman could not vote. What most people do not know is that in several states, wealthy women could vote along with the wealthy man. Was there still a double standard. Of course there was, but it was between the halves and the halve-nots. When it came to education, if a woman was wealthy enough, she could still attend a higher education system and in many cases, was home-schooled in her primary years. If you were poor, regardless of gender, you never went to school, until public education came into play. Men and women were both needed on the farm if you were not part of the ‘privileged class’. Conceding the fact that there were roles that each gender did (men worked in the factories, farmed the land, worked as artisans, women were seamstresses and sewed and when times were harsh, helped out on the farm). Women were, and still are, portrayed as valuable (not victims though!) because they were the ones who gave birth. As men, it was their duty to protect and provide. Women were not oppressed in any sense that we think of now. If they were, then no one would even acknowlege that there were (extremely powerful) female monarchs.

And what about tradition? The concepts of chivalry was a concept to treat a woman like a lady (if they had money. Again, your economic class was everything) if she reciprocated her affection to her protector and privoder of her young. Another tradition was ‘Women and children first’ when there was a disaster. I can keep going but it seems I always write a book when I get into this topic. What can you do, I am majoring in history at my college.

All in all, I know I am going on a tangent IshWishDish, but one has to study history and see how things were set up. In modern day, it seems that it has been twisted to serve the power of the few and their political agenda but this is nothing new and this will never change. There is always an ideology that desires to do this to stir up people’s emotions. However, that’s not to say that there was oppression, but it was of a different kind. Racism was indeed something that was relevant in our country on an insitutional level and it was strongly encouraged up until the 60’s and the passage of the Civil Rights Act. On an individual level, it is still prevalent today and would be foolish to think otherwise. The anger that many young women feel today in regard to men that encourage more pro-female legislation should be passed, they were most likely exposed to a certain kind of sexism on an individual level. But, on a collective, insitutionalized level, I have to say that they are picking the wrong enemy. In the criminal justice system, there are 12 female-only defenses a woman is *entitled* to. I say entitled because a man does not have such a thing, nor should he. No gender should. When it comes to this magazine and this article, it is *one* man who wrote this article and not a government entity. But many would like to believe it is a government entity or an agent of the “patriarchy” even, when the truth is different. I do believe that the government is willing to believe anything a feminist organization tells them though, even if the woman is one of the most radical feminists out there who doesn’t believe in the concept of ‘equality’ in the slightest. Why? Collective guilt, more or less and many people simply did not do their homework. However, I will stop there, as I have written more than enough. I also want to hear what you have to say.

How does this have anything to do with the topic at hand? I apologize to everyone else who may have read this, but it doesn’t. This is merely an off-topic that is transpiring in a thread. An interesting debate it will turn out to be.

-LL

Message Edited by LL on 08-24-2006 10:32 PM

08-24-2006 10:21 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
IshWishDish
Regular Contributor
IshWishDish

This will be brief, as I have to go to bed; I’m just going to touch on one thing you mentioned for the moment.

Institutional wise, I do have to say that men are discriminated against. Personally, it is more than women, but I will explain to you from my viewpoint why I think that is. You must remember that there are laws that are designed for women. To help them. What about in the matter of divorce law, sexual harrassment law and the criminal justice system?

How well do you know divorce law? I think you’d be amazed at how little it actually favors women, and there are “father’s rights” groups working very hard to make it “favor” women less and less. Sexual harrassment law favors women because most sexual harrassment targets women. Look to the highest law in the land. There is still nothing in the Constitution granting women the same rights as men, other than the right to vote. There have been, however, many laws (some still not stricken from the books) dictating the circumstances under which a man may legally beat his wife. Laws against rape, though now properly considered a crime of violence and assault, originally dealt with rape as a crime of theft. The victim of the theft was not the woman raped, but rather her husband or father. This (and much more) is what I mean by institutionalized oppression of women. True, rape and abuse are, on paper at least, dealt with properly now, but this is the legacy our culture carries with it, and as a student of history you must know that history always matters.

More tomorrow!

08-24-2006 11:35 PM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

LL wrote:
What do you want me to do Marta2003? Round up every rapist until there is none left in the country?

Do you honestly believe that I’m worried about rapists? That’s not the scratching I was looking for. I’ve always taken being against rape as a given.

08-25-2006 05:37 AM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
LL
Contributor
LL

Marta2003,

And what is your definition of rape? Oh right…now I remember! It is sex with a man and a woman even if there is consent! If the woman changes her mind three days after the fact, I am sure in your book it is considered rape also. Hey, another man gets to go to jail. Why not, right?? How about if a woman decides on her own free will to get totally wasted and then in her condition, willingly has sex with another man? Sorry, that is considered stupidity and sheer lack of judgement.

Yes, I sometimes hear about these stories throughout college campuses and how men should think twice before they do anything. Of course, I never hear anything remotely close on how the woman shouldn’t have gotten completely wasted to begin with. And I think to myself “These women have no accountability or responsibility-EVEN TO THEMSELVES, so how they can show it to other people”? Well, if you are not taught to have accountability for your actions, then that is just it.

Last year, I was a freshman in college. At the beginning of the year, we had an educational assembly thing about rape, that was inacted by several college students. Pretty much, it wasn’t a woman walking home at night and some random person attacks her. It was a female friend and a male friend who start getting intimate. The female says “yes…yes….(5 minutes later)….no wait…no…I mean…yes….yes keep doing it…”

*1 day later*

Hey…wait a minute! Was I raped!?!?!? The **bleep** didn’t call!?!?!
Her feminist friend: Yep. The male scum raped you. You should feel like such a victim.

Was this rape? Guess what…

****AT LEAST 3/4 OF THE STUDENT BODY THERE SAID IT WASN’T RAPE! MANY OF THE *FEMALE* STUDENTS VEHEMENTLY OBJECTED TO IT WHEN THE SCHOOL SAID IT WAS!!!****

MANY FEMALE STUDENTS EVEN WENT SO FAR AS TO SAY THAT THE WOMAN SHOULD HAVE KNEW WHAT SHE WANTED TO DO BEFORE THE EVENT TOOK PLACE AND BEFORE SHE WENT OVER TO HIS HOUSE!!!!

Their intuition told them it wasn’t, but societal indoctrination and political correctness is telling them otherwise. Society is pretty much informing them that making important decisions is really not important for women to do when it comes to personal relationships and that playing the victim card works every time. Another important subliminal message is that sex between a man and a woman is wrong and should be looked down upon.

Yep. The far and left and the far right really have a lot of things in common.

-LL

08-25-2006 10:51 AM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
IshWishDish
Regular Contributor
IshWishDish

How about this one: A girl, 19 attends a party. The host hands her a drink. she takes it. half an hour later, a boy strikes up a conversation with her. They go for a walk, just talking. The girl begins to feel strange: weak, sick, disoriented. Embarrased that she can’t seem to handle one drink, she tries to walk it off as they talk, but when her vision fades to gray and her legs begin to fail her, she gets frightened and tells the boy something’s wrong with her. The last thing she hears is the boy saying “Don’t worry; my place is nearby.” She wakes the next day naked in his bed in an apartment she’s never seen before with no memory of anything after she collapsed against him on the sidewalk. He isn’t there.

Is that rape, LL?

08-25-2006 11:52 AM

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

LL wrote:
Marta2003,

And what is your definition of rape? Oh right…now I remember! It is sex with a man and a woman even if there is consent! If the woman changes her mind three days after the fact, I am sure in your book it is considered rape also. Hey, another man gets to go to jail. Why not, right?? How about if a woman decides on her own free will to get totally wasted and then in her condition, willingly has sex with another man? Sorry, that is considered stupidity and sheer lack of judgement.

Yes, I sometimes hear about these stories throughout college campuses and how men should think twice before they do anything. Of course, I never hear anything remotely close on how the woman shouldn’t have gotten completely wasted to begin with. And I think to myself “These women have no accountability or responsibility-EVEN TO THEMSELVES, so how they can show it to other people”? Well, if you are not taught to have accountability for your actions, then that is just it.

Last year, I was a freshman in college. At the beginning of the year, we had an educational assembly thing about rape, that was inacted by several college students. Pretty much, it wasn’t a woman walking home at night and some random person attacks her. It was a female friend and a male friend who start getting intimate. The female says “yes…yes….(5 minutes later)….no wait…no…I mean…yes….yes keep doing it…”

*1 day later*

Hey…wait a minute! Was I raped!?!?!? The **bleep** didn’t call!?!?!
Her feminist friend: Yep. The male scum raped you. You should feel like such a victim.

Was this rape? Guess what…

****AT LEAST 3/4 OF THE STUDENT BODY THERE SAID IT WASN’T RAPE! MANY OF THE *FEMALE* STUDENTS VEHEMENTLY OBJECTED TO IT WHEN THE SCHOOL SAID IT WAS!!!****

MANY FEMALE STUDENTS EVEN WENT SO FAR AS TO SAY THAT THE WOMAN SHOULD HAVE KNEW WHAT SHE WANTED TO DO BEFORE THE EVENT TOOK PLACE AND BEFORE SHE WENT OVER TO HIS HOUSE!!!!

Their intuition told them it wasn’t, but societal indoctrination and political correctness is telling them otherwise. Society is pretty much informing them that making important decisions is really not important for women to do when it comes to personal relationships and that playing the victim card works every time. Another important subliminal message is that sex between a man and a woman is wrong and should be looked down upon.

Yep. The far and left and the far right really have a lot of things in common.

-LL

Hmmm. Your insanity’s showing again. Please put it away, thanksmuch.

Can you please respond to the conversation that everybody else here is having?

Message Edited by Marta2003 on 08-26-2006 07:04 PM

08-26-2006 07:04 PM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…

Re: Honestly, someone answer this question rationally for once…
Fugu
Newbie
Fugu

Is the roofie example rape?

Of course yes. This also falls under the Federal legal definition of rape, I’ve read the law. Interestingly, the Federal version is gender neutral, and does not acknowledge LL’s example as a legitimate case for rape (or as I interpret it, it does not), and rightly so, becuase his example is not rape.

Unfortunaltey, California State law would tend to disagree on this point. It may not, in an idealized world, agree that LL’s example is rape, but it would do so in practice. This is due specifically to addendums to the Federal definition, which I personally believe that the Feds left out intentionally, seeing the can of worms they would be opening up. Specifically, California Penal Code 261.6:

“In prosecutions under Section 261, 262, 286, 288a, or 289,
in which consent is at issue, “consent” shall be defined to mean
positive cooperation in act or attitude pursuant to an exercise of
free will. The person must act freely and voluntarily and have
knowledge of the nature of the act or transaction involved.”

I have no problem with this assertion in an ideal world. I have no problem with this assertion during the time of intercourse, in fact I would personally consider it rape otherwise, but this is a personal judgement.

I do however have a problem with this in a court of FACT. A court of law must be a court of fact. If it is not so, it is easily abused by the side with the more expensive lawyers, whichever side that may be.

How is this to be proven as fact?

It can’t be. Particularly if one party can change their mind three days later and a court of fact is constrained to take them at their word.

Note that the Federal version deals with provable, or at least potentially verifiable, criteria. Presence of drugs in the victim’s bloodstream, impairment, violence, threat of violence (which can potentially be corroborated). All of these criteria have the potential to have medical evidence or eyewitness testimony to back up the assertion. The concept of consent however, is largely a character judgement should the case come to trial, and thus is open to abuses.

I would of course say that non-consent at the time the act occurs is in fact rape. I do not, however, believe that our legal system is capable of correctly handling any situation that cannot be proven, or is not provable. A legal judgement, far after the fact, by strangers that were not present, with no evidence and no corroborating witnesses, is simply a popularity contest. It is unfortunate that this is the case, but it is a human limitation. Our legal system is not omniscient.

The Federal Code is Title 18, Chapter 109A, Sections 2241-2247. I fully agree with it.

Oh, and as for the old “I don’t object to this article so much as think that anyone who would write it, follow it, or think it sound are boooooring, and also likely dumb.”

From Wikkipedia:
“An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin, literally “argument against the person”) involves replying to an argument or assertion by attacking the person presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself. It is a logical fallacy.

A (fallacious) ad hominem argument has the basic form:

1. A makes claim X.
2. There is something objectionable about A.
3. Therefore claim X is false.

A classic example derives from the Deutsche Physik movement, which argued as follows:

1. Einstein claims relativity is correct.
2. Einstein is Jewish.
3. Hence relativity is false. ”

‘Nuff said on this one.

08-27-2006 04:09 AM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: