Maryland Task Force for Men's Health is defeated

Started by dr e, Apr 17, 2005, 07:24 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

dr e

There had been a move by a Maryland legislator to create a task force to study men's health.  Sadly it was defeated in a Maryland Senate committee last week.  It never made it out of the committee to see the light of day and to be voted on by the Maryland Senate.  Sad as this is I think we learned something from our efforts.

Who do you think killed this bill?  Many of the female Senators have feminist leanings as you can imagine.  In order to be elected you better be pro-women.  So one might assume that it was the female Senators who put this one out to pasture right?  Wrong.  80% of the votes for were from women.  And guess what?  80% of the votes against were from men. One of the nays was actually an M.D. :twisted: That's right.  It was the men who killed this bill.  The other side of chivalry raising its ugly head and saying, "Men don't need anything" "Just toughen up and don't complain."  We are only here to serve women and children.  

The lesson is that it is the men that we need to target and push.  Most of the women are already on our side on this issue.  The chivalrous males are killing us.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.


That is so sad...

It is men we need to work on.  Look at the court are a few facts.

"For the same crime, being male increased the chance of incarceration by 165 percent. Being black, in comparison, increased the chance of incarceration by 19 percent."
(Justice Quarterly in a 1986 study of 181,197 felonies in California)

"gender differences, favoring women, are more often found than race differences, favoring whites."
(Daly, Kathleen. Crime & Delinquency, Jan1989, Vol. 35 Issue 1, p136)

"A greater proportion of female judges on the bench is associated with a lower gender disparity for serious crimes. This result is most easily reconciled with the idea that female offenders benefit from the paternalistic biases of male judges"
(American Law & Economics Association Annual Meeting. 2004.  Paper 4. Racial and Gender Disparities in Prison Sentences: The Effect of District-Level Judicial  Demographics. Max M. Schanzenbach)

In other words, male judges treat women better then men.  Female judges treat the genders in a much more fair manner.


Quote from: "Dr Evil"
80% of the votes against were from men.

Quote from: "Dr Evil"
The lesson is that it is the men that we need to target and push.  Most of the women are already on our side on this issue.  The chivalrous males are killing us.

Yes... This reminds me of something I heard on G. Sacks' show a week or so back and which is another nice example of the situation you describe, DR Evil:

Glenn Sacks: The person who in my mind really made the gutsy decision here was Judge Arlene Goldberg, the judge in the first case, who transferred custody from Marks to Aylsworth after finding that Marks had coached the girls to make these accusations. Would a male judge do that? When I first heard of Goldberg's ruling my first thought was 'it must be a woman judge.'

This is it, for me the most iomportant part of a one hour show.

So, I agree with you, Dr E, though I simply cannot call these "good deeds" from these "chivalrous males" chivalrous anymore. No, no, this is BEYOND chivalry, this is mere STUPIDITY, plain and simple!!!
ou've read it... And now you can never un-read it!

Go Up