This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - bluetrigger
I think the ad is quite honest. A dysfuctional company associating itself with a dysfunctional family situation.
I wonder if Ford won't be the first corporation to win a Darwin Award.
Feminists are, when describing men, usually happy to argue from the exception rather than the rule. And it is almost always the negative exceptions. That includes fathers.
Getting past bitterness is a real accomplishment. Bravo!
Feminism: they break her leg, give her a crutch, then expect that she'll be so grateful.
I wasn't saying that altruism is equal to courage--I was saying they were different. The main point is, that neither is a function of gender, but rather a product of individual conscience. Neither gender has the market on virtue--or any particular virtue, in my experience. But a certain situation might favor one gender--such as a situation that calls for physical strength--but that is not a function virtue, it is a function of situation. Indeed, women have shown physical courage, despite being a bit weaker. I don't offer it as a theory, it has been my experience. I think there are likely as many altruistic women as men. But thank you, I'm glad you think well of us as a sex.
Christane, my experience has been that altruism (and courage, which is perhaps better describes what your talking about) is a function of people's individual conscience, not instinct or gender. I appreciate that your intentions are good, and I'm glad you're predisposed to liking us.
It might be true that men, generally speaking, have more physical courage, because we're bigger and stronger--but women are capable of such courage, too.
I've met many men who aren't altruistic, btw.
I've also met women who seem to think that men were created to just give and make sacifices for them as if it were somehow the natural order of God and nature. (Anybody remember Amber?)
Christiane, you wouldn't help anybody in an emergency? You'd just take care of yourself and forget everyone else? Really, I don't think one gender has cornered the market on altruism.
I'm not accusing you personally of this, I don't know you, but I have noticed that some women like to construct like all kinds of manly virtues and attribute them, if not demand them, to men for self serving reasons.
But really, we don't need to be put on pedestals, thanks.
I think women have an instinct to think that their lives are somehow more valuable than mens.
If we go our own way now, what we learn indivdually will be our strength later. I truly believe, when the time is right, we will come together and be unstoppable. Going our own way is, if you want to make so, preparing for a future opportunity. Might be some years, though.
I was sexually abused by my stepmother just when I was coming into puberty. Because of the chivalrous feminism that is rife in my family, I was disbelieved, punished and marginalized for saying anything about it.
And because of the leftist feminist agendas and propaganda "research" in psychotherapy, I was disbelieved, deflected and subtly punished when I sought therapy as a young adult in the early 1980's (for example, I was once told by a therapist (a male therapist) "You claim to have an issue that is usually thought of as a woman's problem, why do you think it is that you need to identify yourself with women's issues? Could it be you are trying to avoid your responisbilites as a man by blaming women?").
The upside, I was forced to abandon standard therapy and seek healing in alternative venues--which is the say, I had to learn to heal myself--which for me was (and is) more complete, effective and empowering than going to a therapist (whether they have feminist agendas or not). I've met many abused men who've had similiar experiences, and have successfully taken the same tack (some women, too).
In the late '80s I was falsely accused of sexual harrassement. It was an interesting situation, because the woman who made the accusation did so, as far as I can tell, for purely gratituitous reasons--that is to say, not for any career advantage, but simply as an expression of power (the fact that she started into it a week after the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill debacle I don't think is a coincidence). Btw, I think she was the least villanous person in the situation, much less so that the gang of feminist terrorist types who "empowered" and egged her on.
The upside of the situation was--I won the battle.
It took five years of Byzantine maneuvering, but in the end she was fired (or actually, her job title was terminated--along with her). I was lucky, about a year before the false accusations started I'd begun practicing Aikido (one of my alternative self healing resources) and I was able to apply the mental and philosophical aspects of Aikido to prevail in what was a very hostile, frightening, lonely and paranoid situation.
I'm a stronger, better, smarter person for suffering feminist misandry and--in good Aikido fashion--I thank them for providing me the opportuinty for self improvement--of course, their obligation to thank me for offering them an opportuity to gain moral clarity about themselves has gone unfufilled. A stubborness which will be eternally to their disadvantage.
As an aside, I think we should be careful about being too aggressively anti-feminist--because many people who call themselves "feminists" or identify with the term aren't genuine feminists. Really, they are fair minded people who have been bamboozed into thinking that Feminism is about fairness and Civil Rights, and don't realize that genuine Feminist ideology is actually about neither--and quite to the contrary of their own good faith intentions. It is important, imo, to be discerning.
Unfortunately, in my experience, the minute you criticize feminism, in many if not most people's minds, you are percieved as attacking women and women's rights. This is because Feminists have done such a good job of selling themselves as synonymous with Civil Rights.
That said, hammering away at the crimes of Radical Feminism is one way of making the distinction between Feminism and Civil Rights.--"They say they are for Civil Rights, but really they aren't. Here is the evidence."
It is one good approach, but I'm afraid it's going to take more than just that. Most people associate Feminism with Civil Rights--they don't percieve Feminist crimes as crimes. Generally, they percieve Feminist crimes as unfortunate, but necessary unintended consequences of the glorious Women's Rights Movement--because they think that Feminism is about Civil Rights. It is hard to blame them, as it has been hammered away at them on tv, in classrooms, etc. for thirty years that Feminism is a Civil Rights movement.
Of course, Feminism is anything but a Civil Rights movement, but until the distinction is made,imho, the useful idiot parade will march on.
I've always thought that one of the most important strategies for a Mens Movement is to hammer away at making a distinction between 'Feminism' as an ideology, and Civil Rights (which includes Women's Civil Rights) as an ideology. Feminism has done a good job of confusing people into thinking Feminism and Civil Rights for women are one and the same--when they are actually contradictory.
The disentanglement of one from the other is essential, otherwise, when criticising Feminism, we will be forever be accused of attacking women and their rights, and Civil Rights in general. I can't see how the movement can move forward without a rhetorical counter-strategy--some kind of "Civil Rights good, Feminism bad" approach-- and we, and our allies, whoever they may be, are all on the same page about it.
Just a thought.