Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


You don't seem to know the "role" I envision as evidenced by your false assumptions like this one....


I've never opposed anyone taking on any job they qualify for!
I oppose lowering standards for women as has already been done in the U.S. military. The following link explains what happens when that occurs...

econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/articles/95/costly-affirmative-action.htm

There has been too much such social engineering which is related to 'affirmative action' when attempting to jet stream (pun intended) women into positions they didn't quality for. As to the relatively few women who do it on their own without the social political correctness, I say "congratulations" and welcome aboard.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


Not in practice. In the U.S. and in most western countries women receive lesser penalties for the same crime. For example, in spousal murders, men have averaged 17 year sentences while women have averaged only 7 years. It's part of societies 'women-protected' status which I'll expound on later.


It's noticeable that pro feminists here are silent on this important area.


It's too bad that those supporting the feminist agenda cannot get through these videos because the logic seems to make their heads explode. I particularly like the ones where recovering feminists are narrating.


Some men have been mandated by the courts to do just that. It's part of our culture to continue to protect women who ironically cry "discrimination" at the drop of a hat.


That's a very fundamental point, one that is intentionally ignored by feminists and their fellow travelers.


In western cultures women are favored over men by being catered to in law and custom.


""I feel that 'man-hating' is an honourable and viable political act......." Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor
That's only one of thousands of feminist anti male comments and in this case uttered by the editor of Ms Magazine which was the house organ of feminism. Amazing.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]

So its come to this, lol. My time is very limited now but I'll be delighted to extrapolate about many issues presented here sometime in the future.

As to "Psychology Today" I've noticed that in the past few years very few issues have a picture of a man on the cover, indeed, I've only seen one in the past year and he had to share the cover photo with a woman. This magazine knows who to cater to and its readership is about 80 percent female. It's also very liberal in most of its presentations, in other words, it's "politically correct". Even "Time" magazine attempted to tweak intelligence numbers to show how smart women are. They compared university women who are now 60 percent of all students with the general population of men. That's how far our "PC" culture has come to raise women whiie downgrading men.

Now, on to intelligence: I only have time for a quick Cliff Notes general analysis Here is what Professor Camille Benbow of Vanderbilt University found in a peer-review research,

*At the 98% IQ level (mensa level), the ratio of men to women is 3:2. (This is also the ratio in Mensa groups, worldwide,)
*At the 99% IQ level, the ratio is 4:1
*At the 99.5% level, 7:1.
*At the 99.9% level, 11:1
(I can feel the blood pressure rising in some of our posters)

As a poster already pointed out, men have the highest IQ's and also the lowest. Women tend to hug the middle grounds and I suppose that is part of nature's plan. Of course most people are not in the extremes be they male or female.


Academics have been 'adjusting' like this so that articles like the one in "Time" and "Psychology Today" and many others normalize differences unless they favor women. At any rate, gotta go so I'll leave you with this: en.wikinews.org/wiki/UK_study_claims_men_have_higher_average_I.Q._than_women

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


Not to the pliable name-calling feminist apologists. To them simply pointing out the immense mountains of feminist hypocrisy is "hateful".


They prefer to charge someone with misogyny because its so much easier than attempting to debate logically.


True, and somehow they don't see it. I'm still waiting for some people to have honest discourse through point-by-point reasoning and evidence. Take apart those links I've provided, especially the ones narrated by reformed feminists who have seen the light. Instead, feminists hide when sunlight appears.

I noted a couple of giants, ndeed the biggest feminists of the 60's, 70's and 80's who have admitted their Marxist inclinations and how those roots helped fuel their feminism. Yes indeed, feminist icons Gloria Steinem and Betty Friedan became official feminist spokeswomen

Given Poland's slavery during communism, I would find it surprising if the Polish womens organization meetings would advocate such militant feminism but as evidenced by history, one never knows.

.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


Too bad you are incapable of retorting any of the facts I've stated. The 7 women I've referenced also logically destroy feminist dogma. These women must also have a "women-hating view as well, eh?

Instead you succumb to calling someone hateful because that's all you've got which only embarrasses you. You add nothing to the discussion.

Gloria Steinem said, "When I was in college, it was the McCarthy era, and that made me a Marxist.." Fem-socialists, hell-bent on achieving a genderless society, are now scheming to repeat the same disastrous experiment in Western society as that tried by Lenin who noted, "in Soviet Russia, no trace is left of any inequality between men and women under the law."

Betty Friedan was another giant in the feminist movement . She wrote "The Feminist Mystique" and she was a long-time participant in the American Communist movement. Low information feminist fellow-travelers which include pliable male 'white knights' are easily duped by "equality". rhetoric. Freiderich Engels who is the father of Marxist theory predicted that equality of the sexes would only happen when women abandoned their homes and become worker-drones. Of course the tactic was to sell feminism in a socially vanilla way. Who would oppose "equality"?


You left out Foreigner along with others who don't post here. By the way, the "hordes of evil left" now run Universities and colleges and attempt to influence the mushy minds of the young. That was done in the Soviet system.

It's ironic that Sobieski mentions Orwell. With all the bogus talk about "equality", he authored the famous line, "all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others." With all the preferences given women in our social, cultural and now even in law, it would seem that feminists believe they are the more equal ones. His books "Animal Farm" and "1984" were precursors to what is happening in the west today. Feminisms love of an authoritarian state will fail because it is unnatural. Even now, more and more 'recovering feminists' which I've quoted and linked are seeing the light.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


You mimic false debate points straight out of fem-speak 101. Nothing you said is true. You also, typically, failed to give specific replies to real facts. No surprise there.


They know it too.


Owners should decide how to run their businesses and not have some BigSister government tell them how to do it. Problem is, while feminists have demanded special women's hours, etc they conversely have opposed men having the same 'equal' benefits. The mountains of feminist hypocrisy rise above Mt. Everest.


You haven't read much feminist orthodoxy have you?


Who's going to pay? I'll leave alone the fact that having food, a roof over ones head, tv's. etc, etc, is a payment in itself and shared by the main bread winner with the main household manager.


Don't forget watching Oprah, the multitude of soap operas and daytime movies, all dominated by female viewership during day time tv. lol

Now goofy (I like your name), would you rather work as a miner for 10 hrs a day or as a housekeeper with the tv on in the background and taking breaks whenever you feel like it? Same goes for many other jobs like being an oil rig worker during a sea storm, etc.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


....therefore she can comment on any objections she has in specific manner, right? After all she is as you say, "independently-minded".


It is one of several ideologies and/or beliefs which I combat because I'm aware of how harmful it is to society. Like most people you are probably unaware of the close early relationship of feminism with Marxism even though many feminist leaders have openly admitted to it.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


That is an issue within the individual woman (herself). After all, feminists constantly remind us that women are "empowered". You've learned the feminist language well. Yes indeed, "objectified" no doubt by the "patriarchy". Poor dears don't know what to do without extra help......


I'm recommending the gym at my club to post signs that state: "No leering and no secret laughing allowed". Of course this would only apply to men.


You "let" her? Did she need permission?


Did your wife specifically counter any of the arguments and examples I noted or as usual was it just another general statement of disagreement?
There has been a dearth of specificity by those who lamely support the feminist anti male agenda


No, there is more; they also have to pay a cover charge when entering my lakeshore condo...............
Ask your wife to sit through this video (doubtful if she can) and ask her what specifically she disagrees with and why. It's common sense so you and she might have a problem with it.

youtube.com/watch?v=vp8tToFv-bA

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


lol, it is so insulting that no feminists are protesting it, eh? Evidently, they don't believe in true "equality". Feminism is about me 'ism as constantly evidenced by what feminists do or don't do. If something favors women, no matter how sexist they go along with it, indeed, often push it.

By the way Englishman, I understand that the female race-car driver who sped you around crashed her car when she was parallel parking.:)

Well, let's see, how about this? We know there are women-only gyms and no male-only ones but even some 'equal' access gyms give preference to females. This female writer 'feels' that the man suing is wrong.

jezebel.com/jackass-suing-his-gym-for-their-442-women-only-hours-pe-476604412

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]

I'm going boating today and tomorrow; just wanted to post one out of many dozens of odd ball ways women are protected in society even though they are "equal". lol I really do have dozens of such examples which add up to general societal preferences for women which they accept as 'natural'.

telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/9393451/Easy-parking-spots-for-women-introduced-by-German-mayor.html

News / Poland will have a queen again [75]

Some people actually honor unelected kings and queens who live luxuriously off the state? Why?

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


I've given you and others half-a-dozen examples of how feminism (as practiced) is anti-male and therefore harmful to society. You were incapable like some others here to refute in specific manner any of the cases presented. You merely generalize.


I'll respond to this although I am not the one who talked about nuclear families. Since prehistory the common, obviously 'natural' units were those of a man and a woman often with children. In modern times this unit is much more successful than single parent families as evidenced by Dept. of Labor figures.

marriagedebate.com/pdf/imapp.crimefamstructure.pdf
From the link: "90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes - 32 times the average.
70% of youths in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes - 9 times the average. (U.S. Dept. of Justice,
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
"Recent research strongly suggests that family structure is an important predictor of crime and delinquency. Teens and adults raised in single-parent families are at increased risk of committing crimes"


Your premise assumes that's true. Feminists actions speak louder than their words, which often enough are hateful in themselves.


Funny how that "system" only favors women instead of it being random in its mistakes, eh? So something else is obviously going on and (hint) it's related to feminist "political correctness" and privilege.


I've already explained what the dominant view is and how it is presented in books, articles, tv, special womens programs and even in advertising. For example, pro life feminists are a mere thimble to the ocean of pro choice feminists who dominate this narrative.

News / Poland will have a queen again [75]

Monarchies should have been abolished long ago. I wouldn't kiss a royals ring but they can kiss my _ss.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


Seems like many feminist supporters don't accept that. They certainly don't own up to it as demonstrated here. Their silence is very loud. that's because they like the courts to continue to favor them and don't really believe in "equality".


You decided not to look at the linked evidence eh?


You mean aside from demanding funding for women only in a variety of venues ? For example, feminists appeared before Congress to oppose people who wanted funding for mens shelters under the pretext that "it would harm womens needs." Another example is how Title 9 has affected mens sports. Pushed and lauded by feminists, the effect has been a disaster for mens sports in colleges as hundreds have been eliminated so that womens athletics were proportional.

The list of how feminism damages society is extensive but one of the more culturally insidious ways is how feminism has changed language thus affecting how men are now perceived (note how advertisers tip-toe when showing women in advertising). A short list follows:

*Discrimination against men = "equal opportunity"
*Discrimination against women = "discrimination"

*A woman with grievances = "victim"
*A man with grievances = "angry"

*A woman talking about hating men = "empowerment"
*A man talking about hating women = "hate speech"

*A man assaulting a women = "(domestic) violence"
* A woman assaulting a man = "humor"

*Women standing up for themselves = "empowerment"
*Men standing up for themselves = "chauvinism"

.......it's a lengthy list and we've all heard this from the feminist language police. I have to give credit for this small sampling from a much more extensive list to "A Voice For Men".


You are really thick, sorry to say that but you seem to have missed the fact that I've referenced several women who are what I call rebel feminists. They are in the minority but they at least have the virtue of honesty when it comes to their criticisms of feminism. (I met Ms Paglia at a book signing).

I'm still waiting for you to express your thinking on unequal health care funding and why you defend it by your silence.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


Plenty. I prefer to hold my fire until the already stated examples are explained away; such as fathers made to pay child support for kids that aren't theirs or judges ruling that adult women who have sex with 14-year olds are eligible to collect child support from their young victims. That's how upside-down the world has become. Hopefully, it won't be like that after Polish feminists organize. .

Female defenders offeminism as it really ishave fled because they cannot defend the many specific cases of discrimination against men.No mention of health care funding that favors women; no acknowledgment of women committing domestic violence; no talk of all the special women-only programs that benefit women; etc, etc. The record is clear and history will judge this 'mad phase' of feminism harshly.

I've posted the following quote before but its been some time so here it is again. This woman nails it!
"Men in teams subordinated self-sacrificing, disposable got the human species from caves to palaces. When we watch mens teams at work, we pay homage to 10,000 years of male achievements - a record of vision, ingenuity and Herculean labor that feminism has been too mean spirited to acknowledge."........ Camille Paglia (author , speaker and professor)

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


That's how it should be but that's not how it is. townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2013/03/25/jailed-for-nonpayment-of-child-support--but-its-not-his-child-n1548325/page/full
From the link: "Judges and prosecutors are fully aware of the DNA tests exonerating these men, but still rule against them. They hold men to super high technical standards that are not equally applied against women."

Today, 40 states can still order a man to pay child support even if the children are not his. No woman has (yet) been charged with fraud for lying about who the father is.

people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20138571,00.html

Feminists who demand "equality" somehow are not demanding it when it comes to these sorts of cases. How surprising, eh? As you noted......

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


There have been a variety of cases with a variety of ways men paid for kids that weren't theirs. They include the man who thought the kids were his while raising them with his unfaithful wife.

How about this? . When young teenage boys have sex with older women, (ages range from 23 to 55). they can still owe child support. Nice link too.

fathersandfamilies.org/2008/08/25/on-courts-ordering-boys-to-pay-child-support-to-women-who-statutorily-raped-them-part-ii

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


It's more than evident that those supporting feminism cannot debate, in specific manner, the issues and facts I've presented. Instead they generalize. I've given Englishman a question on breast funding vs prostate funding but he declined to answer because he can't argue the point made. A couple of women here said they'd have a retort on one of the video's but again, they didn't have an answer; and so it goes. For example:


The comment is meaningless because anyone can say that about anything.

Feminists demand "equality" but not when it suits them. I call that Pick-and-Choose Feminism which seems to dominate in all forms of feminism with the exception of IFeminism which is run by Wendy McElroy. She is as harsh on your standard hypocritical feminist as I am. I spoke with her about 12 years ago and congratulated her on her objectivity which is a virtue lacking in the rest of feminism. One of my links in these threads is hers' where she admonishes feminists who ignore domestic violence against men.

The problem with feminism as I've often reiterated is that its agenda has been advocated and run by misandrists. One of my links quotes a few of their male-bashing comments. It's noticeable that their defenders in this thread try to ignore those quotes. Poor Englishman thought that only 3 female leaders spoke that way (sigh). I've got a couple more for you:

"Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience." ............Catherine Comins, "Vassar College" Dean of Students
Imagine that? It's a positive thing to be falsely accused of rape. Only a feminist can believe that.

"A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle." Gloria Steinem made that a popular refrain. Certainly brings the sexes together doesn't it?

There is a large litany of such anti-male comments from feminist leaders but I've made the point. Those in charge of the feminist agenda, the leaders who are writers, magazine editors, womens community organizers are the engines that drive feminism so attempting to show differences within feminism is moot.


The minority viewpoints have little impact compared to the hard-cord feminist book industry and lecture tours.


I've given stats from organizations not affiliated with feminist research which is junk science. No one dared to take apart the Feibert Studies because they couldn't. Name-calling does not count. Evidently, people like Wendy McElroy, Erin Pizzey, Dr. Helen Smith (I'll name others if you challenge me) that I've quoted don't count either, even though they are women. The objective Feibert Studies are extensive and come from dozens of different sources not affiliated with each other. That's what makes them unchallenged. csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

Studies provided by feminist advocates who first come up with an agenda-driven answer put out their made-up numbers to fit their conclusions.{eg, 1 in 4 women are raped). These are used by those who seem to have a need to feel like victims, um, feminists for instance.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


Ah, there's that word again. Just cry "misogynist" and that answers everything for you. Too bad you are unable to dissect any of the many facts I've presented. Perhaps I've presented too many and it overwhelms you.

I'll try to make this easier for you. Let's take one truth at-a-time: I'll focus on a specific point of contention so that you can address it unequivocally. We all know the incredible amount of attention given to breast cancer and its unfortunate impact on women. Prostate cancer affects men in about the same proportion. Yet, for more than 4 decades, the amount of attention and money given to breast cancer is substantially higher than that given to men, let alone the many 'pink celebrations' that abound for it.

From the link: "According to estimates from the "National Institutes of Health," in the United States in 2010, 207,090 women will get new cases of breast cancer.... while 39,840 women will likely die from the disease. The estimated new cases of prostate cancer this year ...is 217,730, while it is predicted 32,050 will die from the disease."

Of the total amount of money allotted to research both breast and prostate cancer and despite the virtual equality of cancer cases, women receive 69% of breast cancer funding. Men receive 31% of prostate cancer funding. (Society continues to be more protective of women in this and many other areas)

Specifically, do you 'feel' that this is equality and precisely explain the discrepancy in funding.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


You haven't contributed a single specific fact. I've given dozens which you are incapable of refuting.


I've given you proof; actual quotes from top-line feminist leadership. One of my links shows a typical feminist shouting, cursing and name-calling men. She must be your idol.


"Facts are stubborn things"............Ron Reagan


Well, you are certainly closer to the truth. The women I date are independent and don't cower under some victim pretense. A beer is good but an 18 year-old Scotch is even better. She could also light my premium cigars for me as well.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


Amazing!


You are truly brainwashed.


Do you understand that if I quoted all the feminists who bash males I'd still be typing? Besides, if you took the time to look at the link I provided you'd see plenty more quotes by feminist leaders. Try to up your game.


Feminist leaders set the agenda - that's why they are leaders. They are spokeswomen.

LOL, as to shoes, not all women are like Imelda Marcus:
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2207353/Imelda-Marcos-legendary-3-000-plus-shoe-collection-destroyed-termites-floods-neglect.html
....but many women do have some sort of shoe fetish. Count how many pairs you have and how many women in your life own. lol

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


Just being around feminists as they really are proves it. The following link is a small sample of many more quotes by feminist leaders.
fatherhoodcoalition.org/cpf/newreadings/2001/feminist_hate_speech.htm
From the link: ""All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman." ......Catherine MacKinnon. This university professor also said, "You grow up with your father holding you down and covering your mouth so another man can make a horrible searing pain between your legs."

""I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig." .....Andrea Dworkin;

"The institution of sexual intercourse is anti-feminist". .....Ti-Grace Atkinson (national board member of the National Organization for Women)

There have been thousands of feminist speakers who have demonstrated their 'male-hate' by their very words. Often, they've done this at universities in front of audiences but also their behavior at various protests where they swear and curse out men. The list of male-hate in articles, books and audience presentations is almost endless. Most women know this but don't want to own up about it, as evidenced in these threads.


Sight unseen? lol


Englishman can't help it. He is a 'white knight' which is another way saying, 'a slave for women'.
\


In the sense that about 5% are good and 95% are bad you are correct. Note their leadership quoted above.


Bad analogy. Testosterone and estrogen could be compared. (feminists have tried to give testosterone a bad name). Women's menstrual cycles have no equivalency to anything males have. It's 'mother' nature's gift.(smirk)

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]



......instead they just summarize their lack of facts by calling something "crap" or "hateful". They must teach that tactic in women's studies, lol


Tick-tock.....tick-tock......tick...

You seem to be one of the more sensible women here. Don't skirt (pun-intended) the issues in that video or even the video with Dr. Helen Smith. Don't be jaded like f2 is (she's incapable of arguing her indefensible positions).

Her limitred vocabulary consists of words like; "hate", "hateful", "sexist", "misogynist" , "your mother", and "oppressors", I sense you are smarter than that.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


Translation:f2 and feminist apologists cannot refute the videos or the stated facts and figures. If they could - they would.
As to "nobody cares" it would seem that more and more men and good women are finding out for themselves what a hate movement feminism has become. History will not be kind to feminism!


You have stated your position but you have failed to objectively defend it with specific argumentation. You have also failed to comment on the many issues presented here that favor females. Like many women, you are incapable of listening when men talk. Women don't care about men's concerns, they only care about their own..

As to issues involving work productivity, it is true that in general women take more sick days than men. This is true in the U.S. and in all western societies (don't know about 3rd world countries)

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-512312/Women-46-cent-sick-days-men.html


Before going to the following link, not mentioned or factored in the sex category is the fact that women subconsciously (as well as consciously) think about sex when they put on make-up, short skirts, certain blouses, etc. If counted, women think sexually more than men. psychologytoday.com/blog/you-it/201106/do-men-really-think-about-sex-more-women

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]

I dare feminist supporters to listen totally to the following video. Dr. Helen Smith explains why men are turning away from marriage and she explains our current feminized western culture........It's too truthful for some here to dare to listen to it. If you have the courage, explain where you disagree.

youtu.be/3yzUECFwU3U

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


You're absolutely right. Many women now play the "I'm offended" card. When they don't want to hear something or when they want to be "empowered" (sic), they become the deciders of what men can or cannot say. We've all experienced it. When feminists crashed a tech conference, they placed cards on men's laps which warned them to be nice to women and to not offend them. How can any woman or 'white knight' here support this?


No, the "women's liberation" movement has been led by misandrist females for decades. How many thousands of examples of their excesses and male-hate speeches do female 'fellow-travelers' need - to know this? Those women who still want to believe that it's about "equality" are either naive or just plain ignorant.


Yep I've watched some of these movies that show some 115 pound woman beating up 250 pound men. Yet, not one female has qualified for entry into the Navy Seals (yes, some have been given special permission to try).


I had to laugh when I read about a feminist "Estrogen Fest" in Chicago. It featured women in the arts and of course a heavy dose of feminist politics. These women-only events range from the likes of the Chicago Tribune recognizing 75 "Remarkable Women" who received recognition to the nutty "Vagina Monologues" where women on stage spoke fondly of their vaginas. Audiences, about 80 percent or more female applauded wildly. It's a viral craziness which women themselves don't seem to recognize. I can only imagine the complaints if men did something similar.

My point in all of this is that women have become a 'special class' protected more in law than men and also catered to socially and culturally. Yet, it seems that western women complain more now than ever and they seem to by more unhappy now than ever. Here is the latest attempt at female preference; can you believe it involves immigration? Women leaders have no shame;

thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/supporters-of-immigration-bill-offer-amendment-focused-on-women/?_r=1

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


Your horrific experience skewers your thinking. You have difficulty dealing objectively because of it and it shows in your presentations. Men who have had terrible experiences with women like the man who had acid poured on his face when he was sleeping probably have the same sort of view as you do. But these personal tragedies are anecdotal. They are not the norm.


You still don't get it. I don't claim that feminism is the cause of domestic violence committed by women. It should have been clear by now that I don't like what feminist organizations do with their phony numbers. They count every charge made by a woman as being true. They don't count false accusations which are abundant particularly in divorce cases. They still count false rape accusations as well, even when they've been proven false. Their nonsensical numbers that 1 out of 4 women get raped have been so thoroughly dispelled that even the most ardent feminists have started to back away. The DV industry is huge and many womens organizations profit big time and of course it's also an opportunity to bash men. We've all heard their hate speeches.

As to the number of spousal murders, it is true that since the mid 1970's the ratio of men killing their spouses has increased. Before that, the ratio was about 50-50. So what's changed? As you should know by now I don't accept surface information and (I) dig deeper. I call that process "fuller facts".

There are 2 things I've noticed when doing my research. First, Women have more options. Women's shelters and other facilities have given women an alternative. Many shelters for women have been licensed. Without these, the only way to escape an intolerable situation at home was to get rid of the cause. So that's a good thing, right? Problem is, men don't have those new options. . Women also have other alternatives and programs which can help them, many funded by tax dollars. Once again, men are left out.

The second reason is one of how a spousal murder is recorded. When women hire 'hit men' to alleviate their situation (usually it's for the spouses money) it is not counted officially as a spousal murder.. It is called a team murder and not counted as a wife killing her spouse. Sometimes the murderer is a boyfriend who has an interest in the victim's wife. . More women than men do this since men prefer to 'do the job themselves'.

Additionally, men tend to murder by gun, knife or by brute physical force. Women who do the murder themselves often prefer poisons. For instance, arsenic and other compounds are often used and a man dying of a 'heart attack' is noted as the cause of death. Now and then an autopsy catches this but one has to be requested by a suspicious family member. Dr. Warren Farrell writes extensively on this subject. He was head of the New York chapter of the National Organization of Women but quit after being subjected to their usual hypocrisies. In short, like me, he's an ex feminist.

As a quick aside, and sadly, the number of spousal murders by minorities is significantly higher and tends to skew the national U.S. average; but that's a subject for another forum.


You don't like the fact that this man put a ton of information together and got the result that he did so you call him "scum". because it doesn't jive with your personal experience. Is Erin Pizzey scum too? She substantiates what Feibert did and she lived it more than you. She started out protecting women only but learned the 'fuller facts" the hard way when feminists detonated a bomb near her car (among other things). So you say you like the current DV laws. How nice for you. How awful for men.

In the future I might discuss the discriminatory VAWA laws which invalidate men's issues but support womens'. It's another tax subsidized billion dollar anti-male, pro-female government enterprise. It ain't Orwell's "Big Brother" any more. It's 'Big Sister" government we're getting.


I can't wait, I'm going fishing later today and if they're biting tomorrow too.:)


Nah, those who prefer not to see the damage to relationships caused by feminists are already defensive about it or they just don't care. They've already attempted to defend the indefensible. When feminist leaders address college crowds and say, "I hate men and I'm proud of it" it doesn't phase them. It's acceptable. Of course if some male even attempted that he'd be stoned before he finished his sentence, and you know that. [/quote]

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


All that crap includes the computer you are using right now, ; the building you are in, the automobile you drive, the phones you use, the airplanes you fly in, the musical instruments you listen to, film, video, washing machines, the ( you fill in the blanks as the 'civilization list is too long to post here)...........The bottom line is that those educated under feminism hate men reflexively, and will put a negative spin on any male action or attitude no matter what. All you have to do is listen to them "I hate men...." and read what they write; "all men are rapists...." etc. I've previously provided evidence for such comments and I have a library full of them. The norm in feminism is male hate.


Um, many men still work in mines. You oppose women raising kids?


Yes ma'am. I'm going to my room right now.


False premise. Please, no straw man arguments (pun intended).


There can be. In my case there isn't.


Your brain must be protected by some stubborn gene. Do you need to have information repeated frequently before it sinks in? As previously noted, the Feibert Studies incorporated "286 scholarly investigations: 221 empirical studies and 65 reviews and/or analyses, with an aggregate sample size exceeding 371,600..." So much for your misperception that "all the statistics.......lean in favor ow woman being a victim". But then feminists like you only look at the data you prefer instead of overviewing the totality of information. I've already explained how the DV industry does its business and profitably I might add.


I prefer to state it differently. Women are sometimes successful with me. You often seem concerned about my love life. You refer to it now and then even going back a few years . I never refer to yours'. because it isn't part of the argument.

Of course I know where you stand on these issues. You cling to the victim card, the higher moral card, and the 'women should not ever be corrected or criticized card'. otherwise you automatically throw out the misogynist card. End of argument, no need for fuller facts and speaking of that, you once again failed to dissect the video with specific points that refute it. You should also attempt to dispute the Feibert Studies in logical manner.Explain them away okay?

Oh, one more thing, since feminists demand equality and integration into many upscale venues, why aren't they consistent and demand full integration of men and women in sports as well? Is it just 'pick-and-choose' feminism? I'll await your concise responses but I bet my dog a T-bone steak that you won't do it. Instead you continue to generalize. Don't try to join a debate team.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


I 'm not hinting that at all. You are doing what others do, that is you insert how you 'feel' instead of what is factually stated. I'm obviously accusing feminists of distorting the statistical facts for their own agenda. How you could come up with what you just stated is baffling.


That's exactly my point about feminist studies.


Ah yes, there it is. You too have been indoctrinated into using the "patriarchal" generalization for womens complaints. Anything about 'matriarchal fuktards'? I didn't think so.


You're proving that here with your post. But shhhhh, don't let the feminists hear you say that. They still 'feel' that the sexes are merely "social constructs" and that we're all the same except when women are superior.


The Feibert Studies prove you wrong. csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm Can you tell me how "286 scholarly investigations: 221 empirical studies and 65 reviews and/or analyses," with an aggregate sample size exceeding 371,600.can be wrong? The professionals come from disparate places meaning that there is no single agenda. Even Erin Pizzey who has worked her whole life in the domestic violence arena says you are wrong, but as I've often noted, women base their decisions on their personal experiences which are not necessarily the total facts.


Amazing how much you 'feel' you know about me, Do tell me more about myself. Not only are you judging emotionally, but you 'assume' so much without evidence. (feelings are not evidence)


I'm truly sorry to hear that. It obviously skewers your judgment about this. I'm tempted to give you some examples but I won't because individual experiences are just that. They are anecdotal.


Repeating that doesn't make it true. Really, look at the last couple of lines in the Feibert Studies. Pick any 2 dozen and go through it. I won't go into the psychological control women have in their relationships because you are seemingly blind to that.





Thanks for sharing.......


Please find any quote from anyone in these threads that suggests that. You are guilty of wrongly over thinking something which isn't there. That is more typical of feminist apologists here so I'm surprised at you.


Shhhhh, again. Don't you know that feminists claim women don't take such advantages? If I gave that as an example then I'd be called a mysogynist.


I knew you had it in you. You've seen a bit of the world.


I enjoy happy endings.

Life / Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up [631]


It's obvious that if you could comment in specific manner then you would. You can't so you don't. I'll ask again, what precise points in this video do you disagree with and why?

youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VOu_BszChIE
Please be specific. If your silence continues then that speaks for itself, and in ways you probably don't comprehend. It means you are incapable of debating the facts stated.

One more question. Ms Erin Pizzey opened the first womens shelter in England and it's obvious that she cares about women and domestic violence. Because she began to see that men needed services as well, she was boycotted, called names and even had her life threatened by British feminists. She had to flee England for 15 years before returning. This was in the early days of the feminist movement in Britain supposedly by women who wanted "equality". What do you think about that?

Just for laughs; future dating is ruled by "equality"

youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=F_PTxpIjGXE