Life / Don't Forget: Tomorrow, March 8 is Women's Day in Poland! [115]

Hi everybody. I came here for recipes a while ago and stuck around to learn more about Poland. This is the first time I've heard that there's a Women's day and month. I celebrated by wearing perfume and shaving my legs. Then I vacuumed and took out the trash. It's been such a blast! I guess women's day was kind of a gip without a man to recognize how nice it is to have me around. I don't think it would be the same to get that recognition from another woman.

Zimmy, I don't think 3 new women's health offices should equate to a war on men. Creating something for women doesn't mean that anyone wants men to suffer or die. There are many health clinics for men in the U.S. and I don't think they're closing or that healthcare for men has been more negatively affected by the changes, has it? That's a genuine question, not rhetorical or sarcastic. As far as birth control goes, I would think that men would like women to have easier access to it since this means less of a chance they will become fathers when they don't want to or that a one-night stand will demand child support. That is an area where I think men are treated unfairly by the legal system. Child support doesn't seem very well-regulated here and I've personally witnessed several cases where the mother was abusing the system. That doesn't mean ALL women are like this, though. I do see some good points about the wage gap and some jobs men tend to do more than women.

I've also noticed the way men are portrayed in commercials, but it seems a moot point because I'm not sure how much that has to do with advertisers capitalizing off radical feminist social attitudes or how much is genuine hatred of men. We can easily call tit for tat as women are marginalized by the entertainment industry as well. I never see commercials for cleaning products aimed at men. I hardly ever see products being advertised with the naked bodies of men draped across billboards, which is really unfortunate. Maybe I wouldn't mind so much being surrounded by T 'n A sometimes if there were ever a counterbalance. I never see beer commercials aimed at women. If I believed car commercials I would think women never purchase cars, let alone drive them. I also don't like those jewelry commercials that make us look like a bunch of gold-digging shallow *&%!@^ (rhymes with boars) around Christmas and Valentine's Day. So . . . maybe commercials aren't the best example to discuss the exclusive misrepresentation of men. Advertisers manipulate human desire for a living which puts them somewhere between lawyers and South American dictators on a moral scale.

Also, maybe you should try first dates that don't involve meals. First dates could be going to a museum, art gallery, or just for tea/coffee. Then you can decide if there'll be a nice meal on another date. You'll also have the chance to say beforehand that you'd rather go Dutch. If you avoid dates that involve discussion of divisive issues over expensive meals with no prior discussion of payment arrangements, your dates might end on better notes and sifting through love interests wouldn't be so expensive or time-consuming.

Many women and men work hard for their loved ones. If you think there should be an official day/month for men to be appreciated then try to make it happen. I'd rather have a Men's Day than get rid of Women's Day. I'm sure there are people who observe it better than I did and I don't want to ruin their fun or pass up a small chance to stimulate the economy.

Life / Don't Forget: Tomorrow, March 8 is Women's Day in Poland! [115]

To rozumiemnic: Thank you very much for the link! I don't know how to do that quote/reply thing, but this saves space anyway.

To Zimmy: Yes, I remember the "war on women" catch phrase phase. Our media latched onto Limbaugh's 4-letter comments, Lisa Brown, VA's ultrasound shenanigans, etc. like a dog with a new bone to manipulate people and support party division. Disparity and hypocrisy serve those purposes. I can recognize it and think it counts but it won't change because it benefits groups/people more powerful than I. When it came to men's health, I remember seeing an interview with the president about healthcare reform in a men's magazine but that's it. To be honest, I don't think any mainstream publication/program is going to openly admit that they ignore men's health or any other important issue before an election. It is hard to be fair and balanced when it's increasingly hard to find fair and balanced sources.

Life / Don't Forget: Tomorrow, March 8 is Women's Day in Poland! [115]

Initially I figured the men's rights movement was only a backlash but after some experiences at school and work I became curious. I definitely notice a fringe in what little I've read. It's one thing to hear men badger another when they think he's acting feminine but to see anti-feminine attitudes associated with men's rights is troubling and makes it hard to take seriously. It's like radical feminists who just hate men.

Yeah Zimmy, universities have many liberals and it can be a tug-of-war, but it makes great classroom discussion when you have a nice mix of locals and out-of-state students. The other day we discussed a study that found some women treated students differently, boys more harshly and girls more kindly. It surprised me when the professor said the only solution was to hire more men as teachers. Besides the benefit for these students to have more men as role models, I don't trust that it'd prevent students from being treated differently. The underlying cause for the personal biases of those women may also have influenced the men. Also, boys and girls develop differently and at different rates and their behaviors aren't always the same in the classroom. Teachers need to adjust responses and this is really subjective. Every study I've seen so far has had different results . . . men are more affectionate, women are more distant, men reinforce feminine-preferred behavior more often, no, women reinforce feminine-preferred behavior more often, men make boys leaders more often, no, women make boys leaders more often, etc. Teachers/students are human and maybe their responses in this context are just too subjective.

Anyway, I haven't meant to antagonize with my comments and I get the impression so far that around here if your posts don't antagonize someone then you're not doing it right. Ha! I agree with Paulina that women and men are different and this never had to mean one group was better or worse than the other.

Random Women's Month bit:
Martha Stewart served her prison sentence in Alderson, WV. We were all "really excited." Oh boy, a real celebrity and so close! Her prison name was M. Diddy and I can't knit worth a crap or I would make a shank cozy . . . for my shank . . . because I have lots of those.

Now I'll go see what "Pajamas Television" is.

Law / The right to own guns: would you support such legislation in Poland? [2237]

The topic is supposed to be gun laws in Poland, but I can't resist. Sic simper tyrannis and romanticizing cowboys aside, I just want the means to defend myself from criminals. There are cases of legal gun-owners saving their lives and others (Charlie Blackmore, Samuel Williams, Donna Jackson, and Sarah McKinley) but U.S. media doesn't report these for days on end like it does the actions of sick people. If it could be guaranteed that firearms would not end up in the wrong hands, then I would not own one. I must be responsible for my own defense because no one else can guarantee it. I'm curious to know what guarantee the pro gun ban people have that our thriving black market, which thrives despite the fact that guns are not even banned, would not be absolutely booming after their proposed ban. How would you keep guns from criminals after they're taken from law-abiding citizens?

Jasondmzk, I think there are other factors that are missing from this debate. Since this thread has compared the homicide rates of the US and UK, I'm curious what did the UK have or not have to yield the results they have? What is the correlation between a ban on guns and the gun-related violent crime/homicide rate in the UK? I've looked and can't find anything. Is it as simple as geography? Was it relatively easy to keep guns out of the UK because it's surrounded by water? Would it be harder to keep guns out of the US because we share borders (most notably with Mexico and its drug lords with unlimited access to weapons)? Was it sociocultural? There's something beneath the numbers that I'm missing. As long we cannot keep guns out of our country, gun-related violence will be a multifaceted problem that can't be solved with one simple solution (i.e., a ban). In the places we've banned guns in this nation mass murderers have made the news or gun-related homicides have increased. Your conviction that a ban will end these tragedies scares me. Where is the proof that this will happen? I can't support a ban unless I can guarantee that it won't result in a black market explosion, criminals and sickos acting with no fear of resistance, and even more deaths.

I understand you don't trust gun owners on their words. I agree you can't do that. Likewise, I don't trust a society that has failed miserably at enforcing current gun laws which prohibit criminals from purchasing guns. I arm myself because my society has armed criminals and sick people. I have to be responsible for my own defense. Proper training keeps people from pulling guns when the situation doesn't warrant it. I had a psychological test, training on the range with an instructor and sheriff's deputy, and classroom instruction before even purchasing a gun. I think ALL gun owners should have this level of training. Also, where I live, if someone uses your gun, even if to kill him/herself, you are held responsible for their access to it (in some cases even the crime itself). I have no problem with this. More rigorous instruction would decrease accidents, theft, and instill a healthier respect so people will be less likely to act like they're in a cowboy movie. Things can be better than they are now, but while criminals and sickies easily acquire weapons, I won't be convinced the answer is to hand over my best means of defense.

Polson, my only concerns would be: A taser requires me to get closer to an armed assailant or other threat than I'd like to be and tasers are not legal in all states. If you mean to combine tasers with a ban on all guns, then I'm back to my question: How would we guarantee that criminals would not still get guns off a black market?

Rysavy, thank you for making the poll.

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

Girls should not be allowed in the Boy Scouts. We have Girl Scouts for girls. I lived in an all-girl dormitory once. After a year it was made co-ed. I didn't think it would make a difference, but it really did. I'm not convinced that all-boy or all-girl organizations should be made co-ed. The videos made very good points. I'm curious what feminists think of men opting out of marriage and how many women are doing the same, because I know some who have.

Could much of the way courts rule on child support be attributed to the 1988 Family Support Act? I remember reading something about it and doesn't it basically mandate that biological fathers pay child support without regard to circumstances? Isn't that why rape victims still pay child support? If so, it's a loophole that needs addressed. Presumed paternity is ridiculous since marriage isn't necessary to reproduce so it should definitely be changed, too. I don't understand why paternity fraud isn't more commonly prosecuted since there must be precedent, but I'm no lawyer. What about County of Los Angeles v. Navarro 1996? Doesn't that case set precedent? nfja.org/newsrelease/2004-07-19.shtml

I think women who lie about paternity aren't often punished for fraud because it's not criminal fraud that violates statutes, but civil fraud. I don't remember exactly. A good start may be to change the law so that neither marriage nor biological fatherhood would be the only criteria, which is happening. And men should never owe back payments for children proven not to be theirs. That's nuts. I would say, if these women can't find the father then let them deal with the consequences on their own, but . . . then the children suffer (unless she has a good job). The ultimate shame is the pain and confusion of children caught between dishonest women and men they see as their dads who don't mean to hurt the children but shouldn't be forced to pay hundreds of dollars a month, even when they're actively involved in the children's lives. It's the principle, but it also involves a lot of emotions. I can't imagine thinking a child is mine for years only to discover otherwise. It's not the kid's fault and it's not the man's fault. But how do we hold the mother accountable in such a way that the child doesn't suffer undue consequences? It's a mess, and I don't mean to be harsh, but women need to be held accountable for paternity fraud. I don't understand why people don't just tell the truth. Of course it'll be bad and you'll probably lose your husband/boyfriend, but children deserve to know who their fathers are. I don't know all the factors that led to this situation so it's hard to think of possible solutions, but there definitely need to be changes.