The main difference between the men's and women's movement.

Started by D, Mar 21, 2004, 03:13 PM

previous topic - next topic
Print
Go Down
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6

D

Mar 21, 2004, 03:13 PM
Feminism was/is artificially induced, where as the men's movement is a true grassroots campaign.

The truth of the matter is that 'men' don't need to organize like women do, they merely have to be woken up to see what's happening.

Sh0t

#1
Mar 21, 2004, 05:53 PM
Lack of communism too :)

Johnny

#2
Mar 21, 2004, 06:08 PM
The only reason feminism has any legal weight whatsoever is because they have captured the governmental institutions.

Unplug the government, and you unplug feminism.
Openly Straight.

NealGold

#3
Mar 21, 2004, 08:17 PM
Another description of the difference between men's and women's movements could be summarized by the quote of Adm. Yamamoto immediately following Japan's successful bombing of Pearl Harbor (and which is to me akin to the FemBorg attack on all things masculine):  "I fear all we have done is to waken a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve."

However, there are no thoughtful people the likes of Admiral Yamamoto on the payroll of The FemBorg Kube, Inc.
A man conscious of his strength, observes Nietzsche, need have no fear of women. It is only the man who finds himself utterly helpless in the face of feminine cajolery that must cry, "Get thee behind me, Satan!" and flee. The normal, healthy man...still keeps a level head. He is strong enough to weather the sexual storm. But the man who cannot do this, who experiences no normal reaction in the direction of guardedness and caution and reason, must either abandon himself utterly as a helpless slave to woman's instinct of race-preservation, and so become a bestial voluptuary, or avoid temptation altogether and so become a celibate." -- H.L. Mencken on Nietzsche's philosophy of women

Johnny

#4
Mar 22, 2004, 12:07 AM
Hey Neal, I saw Tora Tora Tora today. My Father served at age 17 on the USS Greyson DDG. What a dude!

Dude was in Coral Sea, Iowa Jima, Midway, and many others. Dude is an absolute hero.

I never got stale to his WW II stories. What an absolute MAN.
Openly Straight.

NealGold

#5
Mar 22, 2004, 05:48 AM
Johnny,

I've imagined a contemporary conversation regarding what we've discussed here:

Johnny:  My dad was a MAN at 17.  He fought against all odds in WW2 against the Japanese.

Woman:  Boys will be boys.

I wish I had the nuts to slap everyone who ever utters that GD dismissive phrase.  It's clear to me that men stand on principle; women stand on their graves, at once wailing over their loss (of income), then bleating in unison about their superiority over men.
A man conscious of his strength, observes Nietzsche, need have no fear of women. It is only the man who finds himself utterly helpless in the face of feminine cajolery that must cry, "Get thee behind me, Satan!" and flee. The normal, healthy man...still keeps a level head. He is strong enough to weather the sexual storm. But the man who cannot do this, who experiences no normal reaction in the direction of guardedness and caution and reason, must either abandon himself utterly as a helpless slave to woman's instinct of race-preservation, and so become a bestial voluptuary, or avoid temptation altogether and so become a celibate." -- H.L. Mencken on Nietzsche's philosophy of women

dr e

#6
Mar 22, 2004, 06:41 AM
Be careful with generalizations Neal.  My own family has many men who have died in wars over the years.  The men and women both have a deep sense of gratitude and respect for their courage and sacrifice.  Now if you were talking about the fembots that is a different story.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

NealGold

#7
Mar 22, 2004, 08:00 AM
I don't like generalizations, but I calls 'em as I sees 'em.  If the man earns less than the woman in his life, or if he's lost his job, instead of the relationship getting stronger, it gets more contentious.
A man conscious of his strength, observes Nietzsche, need have no fear of women. It is only the man who finds himself utterly helpless in the face of feminine cajolery that must cry, "Get thee behind me, Satan!" and flee. The normal, healthy man...still keeps a level head. He is strong enough to weather the sexual storm. But the man who cannot do this, who experiences no normal reaction in the direction of guardedness and caution and reason, must either abandon himself utterly as a helpless slave to woman's instinct of race-preservation, and so become a bestial voluptuary, or avoid temptation altogether and so become a celibate." -- H.L. Mencken on Nietzsche's philosophy of women

Cain

#8
Mar 23, 2004, 10:56 AM
One of the many pervasive misunderstandings society has inherited from feminism is the current popular definition of "generalizations"  as incorrect in themselves.We have gotten to the point were the only thing neccassary to dismiss a generalization is to describe it as one.It is no longer neccassary to present a counter argument since its not the actual argument thats being dismissed but its structure.The "politically correct" and their word speak minions have managed to convince whole societies to accept their definition of  generalization's as "logically incorrect" and thereby hamstring debate the world over.
To say women behave as women is a generalization,it is also true.The usual approach taken to dismiss statements such as the example,is to point to the existance of a single female or group of females that do not fit the description.This approach simply illustrates that there was no understanding of what a generalization was to begin with,since what is being applied to dismiss the general argument is in fact the defininition of an absolute one.General arguments by definition include the presence of their own contradiction,that is why they are framed "generally" .Absolute statements on the other hand are easily discredited simply because they are inflexible and a single example of a contradiction is enough to challenge it.In order to discredit a general statement it must be shown that the size of the sample is too small to support the conclusion.So the above generalization continues to be true until it can be shown that a larger percentage of women behave as men instead of as women.
The above generalization also continues to remain valuable,as do all generalizations,since they are the root of understanding and the very definition of inductive reason.We move from specific detailed observation to general principals so that we can see how much of an effect the detailed observations have on the specific group.Specific female behavior's are not only seen to be present in the vast majority of the female population but to dominate that population,this move from the specific behavior in an individual to the general behavior in a population helps us as humans to understand the nature of what it means to be female,just as the move from the specific to the general helps us as humans understand the nature of all things.Since all things outside of ourselves exist as a general experience all things outside of ourselves can only be understood and described in general terms,as there are very few absolutes.
The general criticisms directed at women by Neal were made generally because they reflect the general experiance,and they remain true and valuable even though some women through their behavior contradict these statements.These general statements only become untrue when they no longer reflect the general experience,and of course changing that general experience is what the mens movement is trying to do.But how can we do anything to change the general experience when we cant even talk about it in general terms because we have hamstrung ourselves by accepting and enacting definitions supplied by the very movement we seek to change.
I understand there have been quite a few changes since i posted here last and even though i value and respect your efforts at keeping the board civil Doc,i think this new approach to generalizations is a mistake.
All you Fascists Bound To Lose" - Woody Guthrie

What goes around

#9
Mar 23, 2004, 07:07 PM
Of course, as soon as the women develop a back bone,a foot hold in society and a voice of their own (after 1000s of years of being compared to 'non-human') insecure men have to come out crying foul and wah wah wah about facist feminists. And of course, out comes the ol' "boys only club" where men go to beat their chests,grunt like the pigs and justify their sorry lives.

Why don't you all just accept your fate, you as a gender created feminists. Your gender beat women down for thousands of years. Women are rising. You want equality? Accept that the pendulum swings both ways and right now the ball is in your direction. True equality means both sides have to feel the injustice inflicted upon the other. Right now it seems to be your turn.

"Do or don't do. There is no try"
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
Oscar Wilde, Lady Windermere's Fan, 1892, Act III "

zenpriest

#10
Mar 23, 2004, 07:22 PM
Quote from: "What goes around"
Why don't you all just accept your fate, you as a gender created feminists. Your gender beat women down for thousands of years. Women are rising. You want equality? Accept that the pendulum swings both ways and right now the ball is in your direction. True equality means both sides have to feel the injustice inflicted upon the other. Right now it seems to be your turn.


Yup, there you have it, folks - feminism is about "paybacks for thousands of years of beating wimmins down."  

Interesting post to come on the heels of doc's admonitions about generalizations.  

Quote from: "What goes around"
... you as a gender created feminists.

Musta been someone else, I've never been "a gender", just an individual man to whom the male half of the deal doesn't look that much better for most men than the female half of the deal has looked for most women.  

Life has never come with guarantees to always be easy, fun, and entertaining.  It's pretty much been a roll-your-own affair.  If there are enough wimmins like you who think that the time has come to punish us "as a gender" for the urban legends about the conduct of our male ancestors, then when what goes around comes back around on women, and the pendulumn swings back in the other direction, the women of a generation or two from now are going to think you acted pretty stupidly.

Pernicious

#11
Mar 23, 2004, 07:32 PM
Quote
Of course, as soon as the women develop a back bone,a foot hold in society and a voice of their own (after 1000s of years of being compared to 'non-human') insecure men have to come out crying foul and wah wah wah about facist feminists.


Wrong, most men here are here because they see injustices in society which are perpetrated majorily by extreme feminists whose goals no longer include gender equality. People who are looking for Special privilege for women and girl children. People who vilify men (especially white men) because of their gender.

Quote
And of course, out comes the ol' "boys only club" where men go to beat their chests,grunt like the pigs and justify their sorry lives.


Sorry, there are no "boys only clubs", those are against the law, where "womens only clubs" are not only allowed but are promoted and flourish. Take an example Boy Scouts and Girl Guides, Boy scouts are no longer boy scouts, they are scouts, which include both boys and girls, which include both male and female leaders. Girl guides are still exclusively female only, with female only leaders.

Quote
Why don't you all just accept your fate, you as a gender created feminists. Your gender beat women down for thousands of years.


True, some men in the "past" may have beaten down women. No women today are beaten down by these past injustices. Women are not forced to go die in wars. Women are not forced to work in the "glass cellar" jobs. Women are complaining that they make only .76 of a man, but do not take into account the jobs that women take in regards to men. Women are also free to not have to take the jobs which have 98% of the death rates.

Quote
Women are rising. You want equality? Accept that the pendulum swings both ways and right now the ball is in your direction.


Yes, we want equality, we do not want "your" version of equality. Everyone should be treated equally where gender should not be a question.

Quote
True equality means both sides have to feel the injustice inflicted upon the other. Right now it seems to be your turn.


Why should I have to suffer the injustices done to people who no longer are alive, I did not beat you. I did not treat you poorly. Why must I be punished because "You" feel that you are unjustly treated.
 do what I need to do to protect my loved ones, friends, and family. This is what men do.

dr e

#12
Mar 23, 2004, 07:32 PM
I was thinking along the same lines Zen.  Basically, here we have an blatant example of the lack of compassion of feminism.   It's not about equality or the desire to have fewer victims of any truama, it's about paying back for some fantasy that supposedly took place for generations.  This of course spoken in the same breath as the sanctity of diversity.  Honor diversity, except for men.    Feminism is such a joke. :propeller:
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

Assault

#13
Mar 23, 2004, 07:37 PM
Instructions for Care and non-feeding of your troll  ! :roll:

Rule #1: don't feed

Rule #2 See Rule #1. Never engage a troll!

If for some reason you feel compelled to respond to a point they make, address us, not them. You can talk to them directly in their venues if you wish.

Rule # 3  Never mention a troll's name . Even "Anonymous". Every fairy lore worth his salt knows that saying their name conjures them. (Remember Beettlejuice?)

Rule #4  Remember the rule that is not polite to talk about someone present as if they weren't there? The opposite works for trolls: pretend they are not present - especially if you intend to comment on them.

Be considerate to your fellow members who set their filters to avoid the trolls. Do not force on them what they are avoiding. Make your points not as a reply to the troll, but as your own independent opinion.

Rule #6 Address your fellow members, never the troll.  You may start your post with "contrary to popular belief" or any other cute sarcastic opening  that satisfies your anger at the time.

  Just keep in mind at all times:  your fellow members don't read the troll (the troll will read your response, which will be more effective by ignoring their person) . So don't incorporate in your post anymore than you need to make your point.
Feminism is the product of female selfishness, compounded by male chivalry.

- Peter Zohrab -

Renegade

#14
Mar 23, 2004, 07:47 PM
Quote
Your gender beat women down for thousands of years. Women are rising. You want equality? Accept that the pendulum swings both ways and right now the ball is in your direction.



Hahahaha, thats pretty funny! Which is it? Men have done everything for women for thousands of years or "beat them down"? Wimmin keep changing their story as it suits them. Tell me if this sounds familiar?:

"Chivalry."
"Your gender beat women down for thousands of years."

"I remember when men used to know how to treat a lady."
"Men have oppressed women for thousands of years."

"Women and children first."
"Women have been beaten, raped and whipped since the beginning of time."

"Men should pay for dates and buy woman gifts because it is 'traditional'."
"Women have always been opressed slaves to the male 'patriarchy'."

"I remember when we used to have people that stood up for what is right. We used to call them 'men'."
"Men are selfish pigs that only think of themselves."

"True equality means..."
"Women, women, women, women..."

I am confused. Men are gift-giving providers that would give up their lives for women or selfish, women-hating rapists? Which is it?

This is especially funny since we live in a society in which the slightest problems faced by a female are cause for public concern, a single female has more freedom and liberty than a building full of males, while have half the responsibilities and where the terms like "diversity" and "equality" means "what can we do to make things easier for women".

R
"A man chooses. A slave obeys." What if a man 'chooses' to obey, because he is met with scorn, shame and ridicule and rendered a social outcasts if he does not?
Print
Go Up
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6