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.
Topics - stands2p
When I was just a little kid, I found out some people were coming to see us. I was a little scared because no one had ever come to visit us before and the concept was too alien; why didn't they just stay home? It didn't make any sense at that age that grown-ups could have brothers, just like I did.
I found out gradually that I had a whole 'nother family that we got to see twice a year. I remember a Christmas when my uncle played Santa and helped us set up the electric trains. I had cousins that were just like brothers and sisters you didn't have to fight with.
When I was a teenager, I went hunting with my uncle and learned that he had been a championship marksman when he had been a teenager. I remember him hitting birds that all of us had missed. And I remember his way of knowing where the birds would be. We never hunted with dogs, we didn't need to.
I remember playing chess with him as a young man fresh out of college. I was scratching my chin and he told me to play more aggressively, that I had already beaten him and just needed to finish it. He was proud of me in a way that didn't need to be said.
I remember hearing stories about my own dad and understanding him better; resenting him less. My dad had once been a cocky young pup who drove too fast and made actual mistakes. Who knew?
And it wasn't until I was much, much older that I found out not everybody has such a wonderful thing.
My cousin called a couple of hours ago to let me know he had passed. He was a Viet Nam vet and had been exposed to Agent Orange. He had worked in industrial environments for years before it occurred to anybody that certain kinds of dust could kill you. And he was a smoker. The last few months of his life were spent gasping for air. I will never understand why they didn't get him on oxygen sooner; there was no need for him to suffer that much. When they finally got him on oxygen, he developed pneumonia almost immediately, his lungs just wouldn't function anymore.
He was a man in world full of "guys" and "dudes." He worked hard all his life and would have cut off his own arm before he broke a promise or his word. He had more patience in the tip of his little finger than anyone else I've ever known. He went from bouncing me on his knee as a baby to accepting me as a grown man without a moment's awkwardness.
We have all lost a brother.
All of you be well, and take a moment to appreciate your uncles today.
I saw an internet video ad for Cadillac and I was truly impressed. The ad begins with a fifty-ish guy walking through an office with a cardboard box. There is no audio save for the soundtrack throughout. The man stops to shake a few hands and leaves the building. He parks his car at the beach and stares out over the waves and then goes home. Clearly, he has retired and is contemplating the final chapter of his life. But wait. The next morning we see him kiss his wife goodbye at the breakfast table and leave the house wearing a tie. He shows up at a much less stodgy office building where we quickly see he has signed on to lead these modern young mavericks in a whole new enterprise. He conducts a business meeting from a couch with his shiny Cadillac parked outside.
My checking account admits to no immediate plans for a $70k ride but the ad was nice.
Then I saw another ad in the same series. A 29-ish woman walks through an office. Each time she encounters a man, he quickly tries to look busy. She steps onto an elevator with a man and the shot zooms in to the man's shirt pocket where his pen begins to leak, staining his shirt. The image clearly alludes to a man wetting his pants from fear. The ad closes with the woman behind the wheel of her shiny Cadillac, laughing gleefully.
Obviously, she is meant to be the boss and someone who enjoys her authority and prestige but there is no further development, no hint as to what she does or how she got there. The first ad is expertly crafted to tell a story about a man who has earned this shiny Cadillac through his courage and ingenuity (striking out on a new career track, later in life.) The second is just some person who has and enjoys great privilege and authority over others.
These ads illustrate perfectly the asymmetry in expectations for men and women. Obviously there are men who are members of the lucky sperm club and women who have been pioneers but this ad campaign wastes no time worrying about them. Their male customers want to believe they have earned a Cadillac, their female customers want to believe they deserve a Cadillac.
Every Wednesday I grow more smitten with this sly temptress. I say we sweep the beer cans off the couch and invite her over for cocktails.
Diddle He Or Didn't He?
Because I value trusting one's instincts, I'm prompted to write about your advice to "Uneasy," the woman whose boyfriend would go into another room to talk on the phone to his stepdaughters from a previous relationship. I feel the woman was expressing suspicion that he still had some interest in their mom out of an unwillingness to believe that he may be behaving inappropriately toward his stepdaughters. One in four women reports having been raped or molested in childhood, and stepfathers play a prominent role in those statistics. He may not be a "molester," but maybe he's asking the girls about their bodies in ways that make them uncomfortable. You should have encouraged "Uneasy" to call a truce with her boyfriend: He takes calls openly, and she drops the nagging if there isn't anything unseemly going on.
Oh, the dark world of people who prefer to take their phone calls in private. Yes, this guy could be a molester, and could be asking these girls inappropriate questions about their bodies. And when I walk away from my boyfriend to take a call, I could be planning the violent overthrow of our government, and arranging to trade my neighbors' twins for a suitcase nuke -- or maybe I simply see no need for corroborating witnesses when I try to reschedule my cleaning lady.
The woman in question admitted that she had no reason to believe her boyfriend had any interest in an ex-wife he'd divorced over five years earlier, or was anything but a stand-up guy trying to remain a father figure to his very young stepdaughters. Yet, according to you, merely because he preferred to talk to the girls without his jealous girlfriend standing over him, I should have encouraged her to say something along the lines of "Hey, honey, I'll calm down if only you let me listen to your calls so I can be sure you aren't raping babies."
Warped thinking like yours makes me realize how lucky I am to be a woman and white as typing paper. Although I recently got stopped by a cop for going the wrong way on a one-way street (he rolled his eyes and let me go when he realized I wasn't drunk, just ditzy), I'm generally safe from automatic presumptions of criminality like Driving While Black or Living And Breathing While Male.
Here you are, parroting this outrageous man-bashing propaganda -- "one in four women reports having been raped or molested during childhood" -- maybe because you heard it repeated so often you assumed it was fact. This figure is a common misquote of a survey by radical feminist sociology professor Diana Russell. Although Russell presents herself as a truth-seeking social scientist, her work reflects a substantial bias against men, as evidenced by her claim, based on one of her studies, that "a considerable amount of marital sex is probably closer to the rape end of the continuum."
The actual figure from Russell's survey was an unbelievable one in 2.6 women sexually abused before the age of 18 -- a figure she arrived at with substandard sampling techniques and what UC Berkeley professor Neil Gilbert, in his book Welfare Justice, calls "research that lumps together relatively harmless behavior such as attempted petting with the traumatic experience of child rape." For example, one of Russell's questions asked, "Did anyone ever try or succeed in touching your breasts or genitals against your wishes before you turned 14?" Well, if you put it that way, even I was a victim of child sexual abuse: It was sixth grade, we were playing spin the bottle in somebody's basement, and the boy who kissed me tried to feel me up.
Should we really count a quick boob grab I got from some sixth-grader the same as the experience of some other 12-year-old girl who was repeatedly forced to have sex with her uncle? We should if we're looking to criminalize being male -- and never mind if that poisons relations between women and men, dilutes funding and attention to real victims, and leads to prejudicial policies like British Airways' that no unaccompanied minor can sit next to a man. (Which -- horrors! -- means some unaccompanied brat is more likely to be seated next to me!)
Women best protect themselves by appraising men as individuals, based on evidence, not by leaping to the assumption that "stepdad" equals sex predator. In other words, my advice to "Uneasy" stands. My advice to you? Pick up Christina Hoff Sommers' Who Stole Feminism? to get a better idea of the damage done by radical feminist activism tarted up as serious science. Contrary to what the likes of Diana Russell would have you believe, you should come to the conclusion that the answer to "Hey, Dad, how'd you meet Mom?" probably isn't "While raping her at knifepoint."
Posted by aalkon at May 9, 2007 10:10 AM
One of my big issues with feminism is the idea that there are no fundamental differences between men and women beyond plumbing. I think one of the fundamental differences between men and women is in their different needs for emotional support and the role of feelings in making decisions.
Within an existing relationship, when women expect husbands and boyfriends to take on the role of girlfriend and confidante or demands that a man "share" or "vent" there is conflict.
When a man expects a woman to "cowboy up" and do what needs to be done or is too emotionally guarded about his own feelings, there is conflict.
When women or men try to convince themselves that they are acting from reason when they are actually seized by emotion, there is conflict.
When relationships are in trouble, many people try counseling. As a man, I think of a counselor as someone who is emotionally detached from my situation who can give me impartial advice. I think some women see a counselor as someone who will become emotionally invested in her situation and tell her she is a good person and help her feel better about her situation rather than advising her on how to improve the situation.
Men, especially younger men who are caught in the C.S. system, need good advice on how to avoid being destroyed by a system that is biased against them. Young men who haven't been caught by the system need to be aware of the dangers of the system and how they can avoid being trapped in it. The few counseling services that are currently available to men are not geared towards men's needs and may do more harm than good.
The kinds of people who are drawn to counseling work tend to be people who want to listen to people emote and help them work through their feelings. This is an important part of helping someone but I think there is a 80/20 rule that is opposite for men and women. Women want and need to spend 80% of the counseling time talking about how they feel about the situation and 20% of the time talking about how to fix it. Men want to spend minimal time talking about how they feel and more time looking for solutions.
On those rare occasions where social services will provide counseling to a man, the counselor is probably going to be a woman and she is probably going to expect to spend most of the session talking about feelings. Some men will take an invitation to emote at face value and begin talking about their feelings of anger and betrayal and frustration. The counselor will become frightened and refer the fellow to anger management classes. Some men will get the message from all the talk about feelings that he has no options and should just accept the situation as it is.
What would be more helpful to a man in conflict with the C.S. system would be to talk with someone, preferably a man, who can tell him that his feelings are understandable but also tell him about the range of constructive options available.
There is a video on CNN just now in the U.S. news section of a Navy Ensign coming home from service overseas and surprising his six-year old son in his classroom. This reunion is what it's all about; I'm sitting here blubbering like an idiot. Thanks to everyone who has ever served.
(Can someone smarter than me add a link to the video itself?)
I was looking at Warren Farrell's books on Amazon.com today and skimmed some of his one-star reviews. (These are sometimes more helpful than the 5-star reviews.) One of Farrell's least adoring fans is G**mar (piss be upon her.) No surprise by itself but I was stunned to see that she has over a thousand helpful votes for her various reviews. Could there really be thousands of people who found her advice about an onion slicer helpful? I'm guessing she had some of her fellow banshees take a look at her reviews list.
I just happen to be a reviewer on Amazon myself and I think the average SYG'er might be interested to see what I've read and what I had to say about it. You can see my profile at:http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/A10250WFWWKGWV/ref=cm_pdp_search_profile/002-2748772-7272069
Feel free to comment on my reviews and toss a helpful vote my way, (you have to be registered at Amazon.)
Add a link to your own profile to this thread and we can boost the influence of MRA's in the on-line book review arena.
Doh! Thomas already kicked of a thread for this one, I will move my 2 cents over there.
A guy told a woman he was sorry for something that happened between them years ago when he was drunk. The woman is now pressing charges for rape.
12 step programs have shown some success in helping people with addictions to drugs and alcohol. The steps are pretty straighforward:
1. We admitted we were powerless over alcohol--that our lives had become unmanageable.
2. Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.
3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.
4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.
5. Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.
6. Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.
7. Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.
8. Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.
9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.
10. Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it.
11. Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.
12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.
Notice step nine, making amends to people you've harmed. The fellow in this storyhttp://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/03/15/12step.apology.ap/index.html
tried to make amends and is on his way to jail as a result. I have no idea what happened between this man and woman but you'd think this guy would have realized that he was sticking his head in a cannon. You'd think his sponsor (AA person assigned to help a newbie through early recovery) would have told him to find a way to approach this transgression in a way that wouldn't destroy his life.
Many if not most people with serious addiction problems have committed crimes that could land them in jail. If they are not out mugging old ladies and breaking into houses it is only because they are keeping up appearances in a 9-5 job as they rob the till. I like justice as much as the next guy but I know there is a difference between justice and law. I would think AA would have dealt with at least one lawyer who refused to send himself to jail in order to get sobered up.
I thought I would play Cupid and spread the word about a young lady that is sure to make some lucky fellow very happy. Here is an excerpt from an http://www.startribune.com/462/story/979361.html
article in the Minneapolis StarTribune, a newspaper with an inferiority complex probably shared by many papers serving similar communities. As such, anything that pops up in the NYT will be echoed within days as if to say: "See, we're not a two-bit cow town in the middle of fly-over country!" The recent "study" that showed 15 year-old girls are not getting married and therefore the institution of marriage is over is no exception.
Do you deserve me?
Regardless of socioeconomic status, women seem to agree on one thing: They aren't settling.
Leila Croy, 26, of Minneapolis works 25 hours a week as a waitress at Champps in Richfield, studies nursing at Minneapolis Community and Technical College, and is the single parent of a 6-year-old son. She was in a relationship with her son's father for four years but, she said, they met too young and "just grew into different people."
Croy would love to get married, but very few men, she said, "meet my standards. Educated, career-focused, that's what I want. I'm a good catch."
Now I'm sure she's a nice enough person but a good catch? A cocktail waitress who couldn't be bothered with her son's father, studying "nursing" (read: "I'm hoping to marry a Doctor!") Did it ever occur to anybody that maybe some women aren't getting married because nobody can stand to be around them?
She was nice enough to use her real name for the article. Maybe I'll look her up on Zabasearch and send her my credit report.
I am considering an education plan for my son that some might find shocking. I don't think I will encourage him to go to college. My daughter is going, period. But as I look at the current state of affairs and the direction I see things going, I don't see college being a reasonable investment for my son. I consider his experiences so far in elementary school and I see that he is not being educated, he is being indoctrinated. He is being taught to be ashamed of things that have nothing to do with him. He is being taught how to be an insignificant cog in a bland world of beige carpeting and fluorescent lighting.
I have plenty of doubt about sending my daughter into this world as well. But I think she will have options my son will never know. She will be able to pursue her dreams down many paths and change paths as often as she likes with no penalty. She is bright and confident and I will let the people who get in her way worry about her. College will be an excellent investment for her.
I don't think it will benefit my son to spend four years of his life and six figures of borrowed money for a diploma that says he is just as good as several million other young men his age. Unless he has distinguished himself by being number one in his class, president of the student body or a star athlete, his diploma will say nothing about who he is. Corporate recruiters and graduate and professional school admissions boards will only see his gender and another obstacle to their "equal opportunity" quotas. Even if he were to achieve great success in one of the professions, he would always be at the mercy of the political whims of the gender police.
Then there is the experience of college itself. The skills and habits that are being taught in today's colleges are a disaster for young men. Young women are relishing the independence and discovering "who they are." Young men on college campuses are living in a fool's paradise; a world of unbounded social opportunity and no consequences. They are emulating the college experience of the young emperors of several generations ago when college was the privilege of the very wealthy. They are learning none of the integrity and stoicism that the world, feminist or not, will expect of them the day after graduation. Most of them are being set up for a cruel fall.
I think what I will do instead is to invest in a fund that my son can use to start a business once he finishes both high school and some carefully selected business courses. It will be entirely up to him what kind of business to start but I will make sure he understands that this will be his livelihood. I think he will realize quickly that with a few years of hard work, he will be able to afford all the college he wants and that he will value the experience more for having earned it.
As hard as it is for any parent to admit, neither of my children is a prodigy. They are both smart but they will have to work hard to make their way in this world and enjoy the kind of life they have come to expect. I want to give them the tools they need to make their way and I don't think college will be the right tool for my son.
My wife's best friend's sister lives a few hours from us. The sister is divorced. There are three kids from the marriage and the ex-husband lives nearby and has a regular visitation. My wife's friend calls up, distraught. Her sister is afraid her ex-husband is planning to violate the terms of visitation. I am only slightly acquainted with the divorced couple.
Normally, I don't do drama. If my wife's girlfriends call with a crisis, the most I will do is tell my wife they called. I've even asked people to call back and leave all the gory details on the answering machine so I don't have to be the messenger.
But I see a chance to make a difference here. My wife's friend is also my friend and this story has all the classic signs of a father being unfairly accused. I tell my wife's friend (truthfully) that my wife is not around but can I help? She is happy to begin spilling all the details. The three boys spent most of the summer with their father and are now back home with their mother for the school year. The youngest of the boys (9) is sad at the idea of going back to just seeing his dad every other weekend and is asking to stay with him more than that.
At this point, my wife's friend feels it is necessary to advise me of her ex-brother-in-law's failings as a father. When the boys were first born, he moved to his mother's house and left his wife alone to keep the house and care for the children. It doesn't sound like there was any infidelity involved. It sounds more like an all too common, ill-suited couple who found out quickly they didn't have what it takes to face the challenges of marriage and parenthood. In other words, neither of these people gets any awards but neither can either of them be held fully to blame for the mess they have made of things. All the traditional accusations are being flung. The ex-wife is afraid her ex-husband is planning to kidnap the boy. We all know such an accusation can only lead to bad things for the father and no repercussions for the mother.
My wife's friend is planning to travel the several hours to be at her sister's side and wants my wife to come along for moral support. (My wife's friend is a recovering alcoholic with only a few days of sobriety under her belt. Not everyone will see it this way but my wife and I do like this person and don't want to tell her "not my problem." Anyway, if she weren't in such a fragile condition, I would never have heard of this whole soap opera.)
I think I am in a unique and possibly advantageous situation. My wife is potentially part of a gang of banshees descending on an unsuspecting fellow who had the audacity to bond with his son over summer vacation. I have one tiny fingertip of influence in the situation and I plan use it shrewdly with the hope that this shitstorm doesn't have to end with the misery the current circumstances seem to dictate.
My wife and I are on the same page: she is going along to stand by her friend, not to get involved in another family's issues. To the extent that my wife's presence involves us in the situation, my wife's friend seems to be at least partially receptive to my perspective on the conflict. My own expectations are not lofty. If I can get my wife's friend to sit down with her sister's ex and get his side of the conflict, I will call that a small victory in a thick forest of injustice. She will have to put aside her natural desire to show solidarity with her sister but I think she loves her nephews enough to look for a peaceful resolution.
I will post more as it develops but it might be next week before I have more to add. Any insights are appreciated.
Policies about Men's Rights and other things should be decided through deliberation and discourse but, at the end of the day, they are made by those with the power to make them; political winners.
The machinery we have available to us to reverse policies like automatic assignment of child custody to mothers in divorce cases is Government. Government office is won through ideological, party politics.
Part of the noise of modern life is idle, social conversation about actual political discourse. Most of these social conversations have no meaningful impact on policy but they do play a role in social interactions. Within social structures, fashionable sentiments arise as people's movements within their social groups begin to reflect the prevailing sentiments and vice versa. People will admire a person for the views they hold and also adopt certain views because of the people who hold them. Both tendencies reflect those human frailties that originally lead to the establishment of governments. It is tempting to think that appealing to people's fashionable sentiments is a good place to start in gaining influence over policy. This is why the term "moderate" is widely used as a compliment in politics and as a pejorative in any other human endeavor (moderate success = failure.) In a popular democracy, broad appeal might deliver transient success but never enduring progress toward fundamental goals.
So anytime you are taking part in a discussion that you think is important and meaningful and just might have some impact on policies that affect you, remember this:
Anyone who asks you to check your politics at the door in the interest of good manners is TRYING TO SHUT YOU UP. Hoist your banner, whatever it is, high and don't let anyone pull it down without a fight. Your views may cost you your position within a social structure but if you are willing to surrender your beliefs in order to maintain a position within a clique, you might just as well adopt the beliefs of the clique (at least until the fashions change.)
For the purposes of this essay:
Politics is the never-ending discourse and struggle between people for what they think is right. People everywhere say they hate politics. Politics is a lot of work and people are frail, selfish, lazy and remarkably clever at figuring ways out of things they don't like.
Ideological labels are tools people use to identify those with whom they agree or disagree most of the time in political discussions.
Political parties are organizations that allow people to form alliances and share resources with people they agree with most of the time with the purpose of defeating the people they disagree with most of the time.
Government is the machinery people have constructed and agreed (or have been forced) to submit to in order to do other things besides discourse and struggle (e.g. find food, watch T.V.)
Government has the power of life and death over people; that is its defining characteristic.
Smart people want the government machine to be operated by those people with whom they agree most of the time.
Policies are the formally established measures that are to be taken in specific circumstances by an organization or institution.
Police: Mom Left Kids In Car, Danced Nude On Bar Table
POSTED: 10:21 am PDT June 7, 2006
OKLAHOMA CITY -- Police said they busted Christie Swing for giving an impromptu show at an Oklahoma City bar.
According to authorities, Swing was dancing nude on a table while her two kids waited in a car in a nearby parking lot.
Police Officer Taylor Shaw reported that he saw the children outside Charlie's Last Stand at almost 1 a.m. The children told the officer their parents were inside the bar.
Shaw said when he went into the bar on May 28, he saw Swing dancing nude on a table and arrested her and bar manager David Jones.
Swing's charged with engaging in an act of lewdness. Jones was busted for allegedly allowing nudity.
The children were released to the custody of their father at the scene.
There is a lot to shake your head at in this story; signs of society in decline; a mother locks her kids in the car at 1 a.m. while she dances nude in a bar. Who knows what the rest of the story is. What this lady's problem is isn't the point.
The closing line offers a slight glimmer of hope for civilization: The children were released to the custody of their father at the scene.
My wife took our daughter to the doctor the other day with a sore throat. My daughter had a throat culture to check for strep throat and then my wife met me at home so I could look after our daughter while she went off to work. I called the Dr.'s office at the time the results were to be available and...They wouldn't tell me! The parade of functionaries I yelled at all insisted their hands were tied; since it was my wife who had brought my daughter in, they could only release the results to her.
There is absolutely nothing in our dealings with the Dr.'s office to suggest any kind of reason to withhold information from either of us. Since my wife and I share these kinds of parental duties, the next time I take one of our kids in for a test I will have my wife call in for the results while I listen in on the call. I am certain they will release the results to her without question.
The presumption that fathers are to be considered suspect until proven otherwise further permeates society everyday. I guess they haven't gotten the word yet in OKC, OK.
I have a nephew who is about 22, I'll call him "Jeff." He is a "baller" in his own words; a star football player with a scholarship at a Midwestern university. At least he did have a scholarship, and a bright future. What changed this young man's prospects was poor sperm management. He impregnated a young woman he had "hooked up" with. She was a "friend with privileges" as they say nowadays, let's call her "Linda."
The same young woman who took a "no strings attached" approach to sex is now demanding to know Jeff's intentions for the future. (DNA results are in, it's his.)
If Linda's family has it in mind to entrap my nephew in order to cash in on a lot of professional sports paychecks, they have terrible timing. Jeff has not yet arrived as an NFL prospect and could easily be one of the many, MANY also-rans. Linda's demands revolve around my nephew's emotional "obligations." Her parents would be happy if he dropped out of school and took a minimum wage job today.
I want to corral all the young men I know and hammer some advice into their hormone addled brains but I also want to play out a scenario that can be traced to the old T.V. show "Dallas." The Ewings of the classic nighttime soap had three strapping sons, the youngest of which knocked up his low-rent girlfriend. Rather than allow their high-born but low-achieving son to be held ransom for the rest of his life, the powerful and wealthy Ewings took charge of the situation. They kidnapped the newborn granddaughter and handed the girlfriend a one-way bus ticket to Dontcomeback, USA. The granddaughter grew up to be the fetching Lucy of my teenaged fantasies.
What would happen if my nephew's family approached Linda's family and said "Your financial worries are over. We will take full physical and legal custody of the baby. You will have no role in this child's life so get on with your own."
This is the near mirror image of what happens to men with a couple of differences. First, the woman spends nine months gestating the child which is not a small detail. Second, there is always the assumption that women are entitled by sperm to have access to a man's wallet. For myself, I can't think of a better bargain than to forego whatever money a woman might contribute in exchange for being DONE with her. The child would go to a loving family and Linda's parents could pretend the whole thing never happened.
Why don't we see this kind of arrangement happening at least SOME of the time?
Yesterday's thread (now locked) from a brand new member seemed to offer a link to a porn site. The user name was aescetemotoholic. That name seems to me to be a play on words meaning roughly "fossil fuel addict" or "motor oil junkie" (aescete=oil.)
I think someone in the environmentalist movement was hoping to discredit SYG. They were hoping dozens of members would follow the link so they could say we are all a bunch of porn junkies or something. The response to the post was swift and deadly thanks to TMOTS, RockyMountainMan, Sir Percy and Dr. E.
Personally, I think the feminists and environmentalists are just bands of dupes working to advance socialism. Both groups (fems and greens) see men as the enemy and government control of every aspect of life as the one true faith.
I am about half convinced that our grammatically challenged friend is an undergrad in the thrall of a venomously anti-male assistant prof somewhere. Her writing and thinking are too sloppy to be a seasoned student but she stays in the mix longer than you'd expect for some kid out for a thrill. I think she is trying to collect damaging statements that will be used out of context in a book or journal article about "male hostility" or something. Her efforts may be in exchange for her profs continued patronage (hee hee I mean matronage.)
I am more impressed with this forum everyday. I think everyone here can be proud that the moonbats are giving us their attention.
Two wealthy families in a remote mountain town decide to write to their agent in the city to send two suitable young men to be husbands to their respective daughters. The agent locates two young men of appropriate breeding and arrangements are made for their journey. Along the way, the young men's coach is attacked by bandits and one of the men is killed. The other completes the journey but upon his arrival in the remote town, the mothers of the two debutantes are incensed . Each demands that the surviving man must marry her daughter and they take the matter to the local magistrate.
Since the two families shared expenses in the entire matter of arranging for the young men's selection and travel, the magistrate can find no grounds to give preference to either family.
He finally assembles the parties to offer his verdict: "Since there is only one young man and two brides, the young man is to be cut in half and the pieces given to the families to do as they see fit."
The first prospective mother-in-law is appalled. "There is no need for such barbarism, we relinquish our claim."
But the second prospective mother-in-law is thrilled with the proposed arrangement. "Agreed! Let us send for the surgeon."
"That" says the magistrate, "is the young man's true mother-in-law."
I first posted here four months ago. I offered some tripe about "whining" and I want to take it back and say that I've learned a lot here.
Here is a story:
When I was in college, I met a woman and we got to be friends. We started spending more and more time together and soon enough, hormones grabbed the reins and we started screwing. We didn't really "date" because we were both students of modest means. I wasn't really thinking about where things were going until one day, out of the blue, she mentions she has a child. I was stunned. It helps to understand that I was something of a hippie back then. I thought this was a perfect time to show how "modern" and "enlightened" I was so I said this was cool. The fact that she was also married came to light soon afterwards. Of course their marriage was failing and their divorce would be final any day. I wanted to believe it was true and she wanted me to believe that she believed it was true so we got along just fine. Usually this story is told with the genders reversed but it works both ways I can tell you. I was thinking with my groin but even now, in my forties, with my waning libido, I still think she was the hottest piece of ass there ever was and I cut my younger self some slack.
The next few elements of this story come in pretty rapid succession. It is easy to look back on it and see the point where I should have walked away and not looked back but when it was happening, that point was not at all obvious.
I thought it was kind of cool dating a married chick. I thought I was "sticking it to the establishment" in my own way. I pictured her husband as a lout who deserved what was happening to him. I was young and I was an idiot. I decided I didn't care about her being married and I didn't mind living at her convenience so as not to complicate the ongoing dissolution of her marriage. I decided it worked in my favor to go along with her game.
The next thing was that I met the woman's little girl. I found out that you get attached to little kids and they get attached to you, very quickly. That little toddler would bring me the diaper bag when she was ready for a change. She would snuggle up to me as she slept and wake me up in the morning bouncing playfully on my chest. This was another place where I thought I was being Mr. Sensitive, New-Age Guy. I wanted to impress the woman with my "co-parenting" skills and I wound up getting very attached to a kid that wasn't mine. Any ideas of this being a "no expectations, nobody gets hurt" kind of relationship were long gone. I thought this was the real deal.
The next thing that happened was that I began to see different sides to this woman's personality. We had always been very respectful and considerate of each other until one morning she called me and told me the trip we were planning was off (non-refundable tickets already paid for etc.) She wasn't angry. She wasn't even upset. In fact she was laughing, like it was a big joke to her that I ever thought we were really going. After our first real argument, the trip was back on but she had established that any relationship we had would be on her terms. I found out later that she gotten together with some of her girlfriends and they had convinced her to "take charge." It was a lesson that has stuck with me ever since: a woman's girlfriends are her sacred council. Women exchange intimate details of each other's lives at every opportunity. If a woman does something completely out of character, chances are she's been to see the coven. These might be people you have never met but they know all about you and they have opinions about you.
The trip went ahead but things were never the same with us after that first argument. It was on this trip that she told me she was "late." You know, "late." We had been going at it like bunnies and using birth control in that haphazard way of young idiots. Yes, she was pregnant. Things start happening even faster here. If I could open a window in time and yell back to myself at this point, I honestly wouldn't know what to say. It would be like yelling advice to someone as they speed past in a burning car toward a cliff. I think I would just watch in grim fascination to see what the poor bastard (me) was going to do.
In those progressive public schools of the early 80's, I had been taught that pregnancy is a venereal disease that will destroy your future. I did not react with joy at the news of my impending fatherhood. I moped and sulked and wondered what we were going to do. She was insulted by this. She compared me to her husband who had swung her around in a joyous hug and bought her flowers when she told him of their child (before they were married.) I found that annoying and so we spiraled down in our dealings with each other. She called me one afternoon and said she had been to the doctor. I knew this was to be her first prenatal visit and I was excited to hear the news. She said she was not pregnant.
I was confused. I had gotten past the denial phase. She had been barfing for several days, her abdomen was beginning to swell, her period was 40 days late. She went on talking about what a relief it was and how we should get together to celebrate but there was something in her voice that didn't sound right. I asked her flat out and she told me she had had an abortion.
The conversation took a nasty turn here as she informed me that she had only had the abortion because of the way I was acting. I can remember sitting alone that night with a bottle of tequila, wondering how I had gotten so old so suddenly. I was 24 and I knew that I would never be able to smile or laugh again without thinking that a tiny, innocent child was dead because of me.
We drifted apart after that but it was not a clean break. She could still use her child to get to me. She'd show up with her little girl and ask did I want to take a walk in the park and we would have fun together. She would call me up late at night and say her daughter was with a babysitter and could she come over and show me her new purchase from Victoria's Secret and yes, we'd screw our brains out. I tried to focus on other things and get her out of my life but my life was miserable then. I was trying to finish school. I had no social life at all and I felt like a failure and a bad person most of the time. She called me up after one of our "reconciliations" and said she thought she was pregnant. I sat with a gun to my head for a long, long time and only the most primitive instinct for self-preservation kept me from leaving a mess for my landlord. She called me a week later and said she was not pregnant. I knew better than to breathe a sigh of relief. She called a few days later and said she felt guilty for not telling me she had had another abortion.
I dropped out of school for a while. I spent my days walking around because it kept me from thinking constantly about ending my life. I would walk across bridges, wondering if they were high enough to ensure a quick and relatively painless death so I started walking my neighbor's dog because I knew I wouldn't commit suicide and leave the dog. I held on to life by a fingernail and gradually began to heal.
I eventually went back to school and eventually let my brother set me up with one of his co-workers. She was nice enough and little by little, life became more normal.
Today, I am in a crappy marriage with that woman who saved my life without even knowing it. I will be staying with it until I am dead because leaving my wife, or letting her run me out, would leave my kids without a father. A random string of men would parade through the home I helped build and they would treat my kids just like what they would be: someone else's. My life would spiral into the gutter because I would no longer give a shit about anything; everything I do I do for my kids, they are my whole world and I don't give a rat's ass what anybody thinks of that.
I don't have the slightest idea what I will do once the kids are grown and off on their own. I really don't
The Minneapolis Sunday paper is 5lbs. of liberal, politically correct, feminist tripe wrapped around the Sunday comics and the T.V. listings. I usually pull out what I need and drop the rest straight into the bin. Yesterday however, a cute drawing caught my eye. Accompanying a group of "lifestyle" columns about the color and flavor of life in the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota, USA was a cartoon of a smiling woman hitting a man in the face with a club
(this was to illustrate the concept of "passive-aggression," a character trait held by many Minnesotans.)
The on-line edition of the paper does not carry the cartoon so I have scanned it, you can see it here. http://hadleya1504.blogspot.com/
(Is it possible to post small images here?how?)
The credit reads: Illustrations by JOE ROCCO- Special to the Star Tribune
I wonder if Joe Rocco submitted sketches of other gender pairings for this concept; a woman hitting another woman, a man hitting another man. But of course not a man hitting a woman because anyone could tell you that would just be wrong.
is the email address of the editor of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. Please feel free to drop these folks a line to let them know just how much you appreciate their perpetuation of double-standards regarding gender violence.
(Here are the sappy ramblings which accompanied the cartoon: http://www.startribune.com/389/story/434045.html)
Rosa Brooks writes regular articles on foreign policy and international relations and how Bush is a big meanie. Today's entry is a hoot.http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-brooks19may19,0,1191549.column?coll=la-news-comment-opinions
It's a shame Foreign Affairs
requires a fairly spendy membership to read their archives because Fukuyama's original article is the shit. He argues eloquently that one POSSIBLE outcome in international relations is that touchy-feely places like Sweden where farm animals and household pets can be sued for sexual harassment are going to be in no position to resist tanks and artillery from places where they still eat meat and belch in public.
She takes a well reasoned piece out of context (how can I get a job reviewing 8 year old journal articles) and buys into the fantasy that women will eventually make war and conflict obsolete. She assumes Western men will become economically marginalized and no longer suitable for premeditated divorce (oops, I mean marriage) and excretes this gem:
Maybe we'll find some creative solutions: a boom in global match-making, perhaps, pairing high-achieving "surplus" Asian men with Western women.
Riiiight, Asian men will be lining up, especially the high-achieving "surplus" ones, to open joint checking accounts with Maureen Dowd and her deeply conflicted sisters. And never you mind that feminists are currently trying to legally complicate international marriages because they can't handle the idea of Western men finding happiness with...well, women. Those laws can be re-written just as soon as the competition has been dealt with.
And wait just a minute, isn't she concerned that Western women will be marrying men from a culture that systematically exterminated women? Maybe she reasons that since non-Western women aren't feminists, it was okay to exterminate them.
She paints a rosy future doesn't she?
original article (intro only, fee required for entire article)http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19980901faessay1415/francis-fukuyama/women-and-the-evolution-of-world-politics.html