Obama Honors Women in Weekly Address (Murkowski gives repsonse!)

Voice of America ^ | March 12 | Staff

[PghBaldy]

U.S. President Barack Obama has chosen Women's History Month to honor their achievements, and showcase legislation aimed at giving women equal pay.

During his weekly address Saturday, Obama said a new White House report on the status of women shows their earnings still lag behind men.

The president says the findings have inspired his resolve to get pay reforms legislation passed. Obama says in the current economy, fair pay is not just a women's issue, but a family issue.

The president noted that women are more likely than men to attend and graduate from college, yet women are more likely to live in poverty.

In the Republican address, Senator Lisa Murkowski said the rising gas prices are a by-product of the Obama administration's regulations on oil permits and drilling.

Senator Murkowski says her party supports new oil production in the U.S., and alternatives to raising taxes to reduce consumption.

[PghBaldy]

Videos of the two idiots at the link.

[screaminsunshine]

Moosecowski. What a disgusting Donk.

[FroggyTheGremlim]

Well, I’m no Murkowski fan, but what she’s saying is the truth.

[EGPWS]

That's a woman?

[DoughtyOne]

Well, if you can’t be assured that the union skanks will always be there to back your treachery, you’re gonna have to find another group to game. HELLO my best friends the women of our nation. Have I told you how much I love you lately?

While these people try to game women by asking questions about equal pay, they somehow forget these questions.

How much sick time will the average woman vs the average man use during their first ten years of employment?
How long does the average man stay here, vs the average woman?
How many times will a man request time off to take care of the family? How many times will a woman do this?

It seems to me that there are gender specific roles here, that affect an employers willingness to pay women on the same level.

Now I know some people think, it shouldn’t matter, that one hour’s service from a woman should be worth the same hour from a man, but that leaves certain things out of the equation.

If you’re moving around from job to job every three to five years, you’re absent for three times for four months when you give birth, if you’re not there as steadily as a man is on a regular basis, are you honestly going to say the employer should see you no differently than the guy that will be?

It takes time to train new employees, for them to learn the industry and become their most productive. If one person is going to gain that experience and leave, should you pay them the same scale as a person that is by statistics more likely to remain and use that experience to your organizations benefit?

Salary, is the tool the Democrats use to prove they are the woman’s best friend. IMO, real friends are brutally honest with their friends.

The Democrats are no friend of the U. S. family, and women had better be fully aware of that.

[freespirited]

U.S. President Barack Obama has chosen Women's History Month to honor their achievements, and showcase legislation aimed at giving women equal pay.

Women already have equal pay--for equal work. (Not to mention hiring preferences.) They might earn a few percent less than equally qualified men, but discrimination is an unlikely explanation. More likely it's because women dont push for raises as much as men do.

[TwelveOfTwenty]

While these people try to game women by asking questions about equal pay, they somehow forget these questions.

They don't forget, they over look them for two reasons.

1. Men, in their penis dictated servitude, will never openly support a politician who would ask these questions, so it does no politician any good to ask them.

2. No politician will risk infuriating female voters by asking these questions, especially since they would gain no male voters to replace the female voters they would be afraid of losing.

[DoughtyOne]

While these people try to game women by asking questions about equal pay, they somehow forget these questions.

They don't forget, they over look them for two reasons.

1. Men, in their penis dictated servitude, will never openly support a politician who would ask these questions, so it does no politician any good to ask them.

    The problem with writing those types of comments, is that sooner or later the reader will begin to understand that the writer is writing about his life-experience rather than about all men's life-experience.  This was how the writer viewed men.  It's not how I view men.  Why did the writer see men this way, and I don't?  Because the writer was describing himself.
    A number of the reactions were one way of looking at things.  Unfortunately for the writer, there are other ways to look at things.  Men's actions don't have to be spun negatively at every turn.
    A person can assume that all men are lazy, wimp inclined slaves to their sexual desires.  On the other hand, they could just as easily understand that men value the family unit, don't react at every negative incident, becasue it's better to support the family unit than look for excuses to put it at risk.
    Most men put their foot down when they need to.  Most men don't find it necessary to take action every time it may be warranted.  They are self-asured, not insecure.
    I don't derive self-esteme from joining groups.  I don't particularly find it impressive to see someone go out driving half the nation bat-s--t by constantly talking about the problems they may run into with their anatomical features.  I particilarly don't find it admirable that these groups are exclusivley self-absorbed, and not designed to help out even their own chilren of the opposite sex, their fathers, or their husbands, whose incidents of cancer are roughly comparable to their own.  And this is never more pronounced, than when I see some young boy being dragged by the hand while mommy helps her fellow girls raise funds to extend their lives, so the life expectency gap can be enlarged between her son and herself.
    Men work hard, play hard, and die too young.  At the same time they don't get a charge out of complaining every two seconds about life's inequitable moments.  They don't feel the need to obsess about cancer, or other things that may happen to them decades away.  They live life.  They enjoy life.  One day they die.
    Sure men get a raw deal out life (in some ways), out of divorce in some ways, and yet you hear perhaps 1% of the complaining out of them that you do out of the fairer sex.  And now men get trashed for that too.  Just damn.
    Are you saying you wouldn't openly support a guy who was frank enough to raise these issues?  Really?

2. No politician will risk infuriating female voters by asking these questions, especially since they would gain no male voters to replace the female voters they would be afraid of losing.

    You'd be surprised how many mothers out there would.  They love their husbands, their sons, and their fathers.  The informed ones know of the inequities they face.  They don't like it.

[MasterGunner01]

Lisa Murkowski is a woman? Who knew that?

[GBA]

Freak show.

[TwelveOfTwenty]

The problem with writing those types of comments, is that sooner or later the reader will begin to understand that the writer is writing about his life-experience rather than about all men's life-experience. This was how the writer viewed men. It's not how I view men. Why did the writer see men this way, and I don't? Because the writer was describing himself. A number of the reactions were one way of looking at things. Unfortunately for the writer, there are other ways to look at things. Men's actions don't have to be spun negatively at every turn.

The writer is an MRA. What he writes is based upon what he has seen.

A person can assume that all men are lazy, wimp inclined slaves to their sexual desires. On the other hand, they could just as easily understand that men value the family unit, don't react at every negative incident, becasue it's better to support the family unit than look for excuses to put it at risk.

Later in your post, you say that women love their husbands and sons, and would want the best for them. Given this, how would demanding equal treatment put the family unit at risk?

Most men put their foot down when they need to. Most men don't find it necessary to take action every time it may be warranted. They are self-asured, not insecure.

That's part of the problem. They put their foot down when THEY need to, which for them is when THEY face injustice. The time to put your foot down is when others encounter it, so it can be eliminated BEFORE you encounter it.

I don't derive self-esteme from joining groups. I don't particularly find it impressive to see someone go out driving half the nation bat-s--t by constantly talking about the problems they may run into with their anatomical features. I particilarly don't find it admirable that these groups are exclusivley self-absorbed, and not designed to help out even their own chilren of the opposite sex, their fathers, or their husbands, whose incidents of cancer are roughly comparable to their own. And this is never more pronounced, than when I see some young boy being dragged by the hand while mommy helps her fellow girls raise funds to extend their lives, so the life expectency gap can be enlarged between her son and herself.

You have indirectly substantiated the author's point with those comments. I'll leave it to you to figure out how.

Men work hard, play hard, and die too young. At the same time they don't get a charge out of complaining every two seconds about life's inequitable moments. They don't feel the need to obsess about cancer, or other things that may happen to them decades away. They live life. They enjoy life. One day they die.

Play hard? You mean like gunning each other down in the streets? Shooting themselves up with drugs? Flying airplanes into buildings?

Sure men get a raw deal out life (in some ways), out of divorce in some ways, and yet you hear perhaps 1% of the complaining out of them that you do out of the fairer sex. And now men get trashed for that too. Just damn.

Again, you substantiate the author's point. When women fight injustice against them, let's just call it "complaining". Then, men can feel good about refusing to "complain" when their sons are jailed over false assault charges.

Are you saying you wouldn't openly support a guy who was frank enough to raise these issues? Really?

No. I said a lot of men won't, at least not openly.

You'd be surprised how many mothers out there would. They love their husbands, their sons, and their fathers. The informed ones know of the inequities they face. They don't like it.

I wouldn't be surprised, because there are a lot of women who have supported men's rights. Please reread my comments. I didn't say women wouldn't support such politicians, but only that many politicians are afraid they wouldn't. It's men who just might be surprised how many women would support them if they would just make a stand.

[DoughtyOne]

LOL, hey...

[DoughtyOne]

The problem with writing those types of comments, is that sooner or later the reader will begin to understand that the writer is writing about his life-experience rather than about all men's life-experience. This was how the writer viewed men. It's not how I view men. Why did the writer see men this way, and I don't? Because the writer was describing himself. A number of the reactions were one way of looking at things. Unfortunately for the writer, there are other ways to look at things. Men's actions don't have to be spun negatively at every turn.

The writer is an MRA. What he writes is based upon what he has seen.

What he writes is his interpretation of what he has seen.  It's HIS conclusion.  Sometimes conclusions are valid, and sometimes they are not.  Conclusions more often than not, are based upon what a person sees as normal.  And here this guy has judged with a very wide brush, what all men are like.

Besides, it doesn't take an MRA to see everything that men do in a negative light.  That comes naturally to some people.  This guy has it down pat.

A person can assume that all men are lazy, wimp inclined slaves to their sexual desires. On the other hand, they could just as easily understand that men value the family unit, don't react at every negative incident, becasue it's better to support the family unit than look for excuses to put it at risk.

Later in your post, you say that women love their husbands and sons, and would want the best for them. Given this, how would demanding equal treatment put the family unit at risk?

Later in my post I stated that many women love their sons, husbands, and fathers, and would want what is best for them.  That doesn't mean all women would.  As for demanding equal treatment, you have misinterpreted my comments to mean that I would never speak up to defend myself.  In my marriage I have done so when necessary.  I don't think it's productive to go looking for trouble, measuring each comment or action by your spouse to be negative, or to take them in the worst possible light.  Being overly defensive is not the route to merital success, or personal success.

Most men put their foot down when they need to. Most men don't find it necessary to take action every time it may be warranted. They are self-asured, not insecure.

That's part of the problem. They put their foot down when THEY need to, which for them is when THEY face injustice. The time to put your foot down is when others encounter it, so it can be eliminated BEFORE you encounter it.

You're assuming that I don't speak out about injustice when I see it.  What gave you that idea?  I address issues with my wife openly and frankly.  If we see something wrong, we talk about it.

Good grief!

I don't derive self-esteme from joining groups. I don't particularly find it impressive to see someone go out driving half the nation bat-s--t by constantly talking about the problems they may run into with their anatomical features. I particilarly don't find it admirable that these groups are exclusivley self-absorbed, and not designed to help out even their own chilren of the opposite sex, their fathers, or their husbands, whose incidents of cancer are roughly comparable to their own. And this is never more pronounced, than when I see some young boy being dragged by the hand while mommy helps her fellow girls raise funds to extend their lives, so the life expectency gap can be enlarged between her son and herself.

You have indirectly substantiated the author's point with those comments. I'll leave it to you to figure out how.

How magnanamous of you.  Cough, cough.  Some people have the need to do the things mentioned in that paragarph, and others don't.  Does every woman find the need to participate in the activities mentioned in that paragraph?  No.  So are you and the author going to cast them as lazy people who deserve what they get in life?  Are you going to cast them as being in vaginal dictated servitude?

The fact that I pegged the boy being dragged around by his hand for precisely what it was, rips your and the author's premise to shreds, not the other way around.

Men work hard, play hard, and die too young. At the same time they don't get a charge out of complaining every two seconds about life's inequitable moments. They don't feel the need to obsess about cancer, or other things that may happen to them decades away. They live life. They enjoy life. One day they die.

Play hard? You mean like gunning each other down in the streets? Shooting themselves up with drugs? Flying airplanes into buildings?

Well, maybe the men you know wind up like that.  Not a single person I know has.  Strangely I'm 59 years old, and I've gone through life not knowing a single person who has gunned somone down, been the victim of being shot, has shot themselves up with drugs, or has flown airplanes into buildings.  Don't you realize that by bringing these issues into this discussion, you are including these in the litany of bad things normal men do?  Wow, this is pretty strange stuff here.  I'll bet you still don't understand what I was talking about, when I referenced the negative spin on men's actions, and here you come up with a list of things only a very small percentage of men engage in.

Sure men get a raw deal out life (in some ways), out of divorce in some ways, and yet you hear perhaps 1% of the complaining out of them that you do out of the fairer sex. And now men get trashed for that too. Just damn.

Again, you substantiate the author's point. When women fight injustice against them, let's just call it "complaining". Then, men can feel good about refusing to "complain" when their sons are jailed over false assault charges.

Where did I state that men should feel good about injustice, or stand by while injustice of this sort takes place?  The author raises the premise that men are sex adicted droids, you seem to agree, and I laugh at the assumption and all of a sudden it is postulated that I think it's okay for men to be jailed over false assault charges.

Where the hell did you come up with that?

As for women being called complainers, I referenced it in the context of going over the top, not in the persuit of seeking reasoned fairness or justice.

Are you saying you wouldn't openly support a guy who was frank enough to raise these issues? Really?

No. I said a lot of men won't, at least not openly.

You really need to start hanging out with a better class of guys.  Once again, I don't know a single guy that would refuse to openly support a person like this.

You'd be surprised how many mothers out there would. They love their husbands, their sons, and their fathers. The informed ones know of the inequities they face. They don't like it.

I wouldn't be surprised, because there are a lot of women who have supported men's rights. Please reread my comments. I didn't say women wouldn't support such politicians, but only that many politicians are afraid they wouldn't. It's men who just might be surprised how many women would support them if they would just make a stand.

I haven't advocated men not take part in supporting men's rights.  I took offense to the idea that men were living in a penis dictated servitude.  I took offense that men were being cast as social rejects because they weren't out there advocating for themselves to the extent women are.  This writer is carrying more baggage than most intenational flights, including carry-ons.  Who needs NOW to put down men, when there are guys around like this one out there?  Negative, negative, negative, and he wants me to believe he's my bud and the champion of men?  Seriously?

This guy may not be the ignoramus he's coming off like here, but his bed-side manor is atrocious.

Nowhere have I said that men should simply allow women to walk all over them.  I have not advocated them allow women to screw them over in divorce.  I have not advocated men allow women to make false charges against them and do nothing.

If a politician is too afraid to address important issues of the day, based on getting votes or not, that is what will cost them my vote, not the other way around.

[TwelveOfTwenty]

OK, you seem to have strong opinions about this, but so far you haven't backed your wordy posts with anything. Here's my challenge.

Present for me any class action lawsuit organized by men, on behalf of men, and supported by men until won, against any institution that has historically discriminated against men, where male politicians expressed support, and that wasn't shot down by a male judge.

I'll give you a head start. Orr v. Orr - 1979.

[DoughtyOne]

OK, you seem to have strong opinions about this, but so far you haven't backed your wordy posts with anything.

I always find it a real hoot when folks pop up here to convince us of stuff, and when we express a difference of opinion, we're supposed to be somehow too intense, too wordy.  If we respond to precisely what they said, we're somehow dodging the 'real' issue.  You made comments.  I responded to those comments.  This post I'm responding to here, is your avoidence of responding to my comments in turn.

Here's my challenge.

Tell you what, when you have responded to what I said in the post you're responding to here, I'll give some thought to your challenge.  Let's pretend this a discussion and not a lecture with you at the podium.  If you want me to take your comments serious, I suggest you start responding to my points.  If you can't handle that, then I guess it's evident your thoughts aren't sound enough to defend.

Present for me any class action lawsuit organized by men, on behalf of men, and supported by men until won, against any institution that has historically discriminated against men, where male politicians expressed support, and that wasn't shot down by a male judge.

I'll give you a head start. Orr v. Orr - 1979.

[TwelveOfTwenty]

I took offense to the idea that men were living in a penis dictated servitude. I took offense that men were being cast as social rejects because they weren't out there advocating for themselves to the extent women are. This writer is carrying more baggage than most intenational flights, including carry-ons. Who needs NOW to put down men, when there are guys around like this one out there?

Then PROVE him wrong by answering my challenge.

I always find it a real hoot when folks pop up here to convince us of stuff, and when we express a difference of opinion, we're supposed to be somehow too intense, too wordy. If we respond to precisely what they said, we're somehow dodging the 'real' issue. You made comments. I responded to those comments. This post I'm responding to here, is your avoidence of responding to my comments in turn.

When you have answered my challenge, you will have proved your points. Your failure to do so will prove mine.

[trisham]

Let's pretend this a discussion and not a lecture with you at the podium.

***************************

I doubt that will happen.

[DoughtyOne]

My failure to play your game proves nothing, other than that you and the writer are fools if you think you can get away with this sort of behavior.

Evidently, you're not going to get it until I address every word of this commentary, are you.  Here goes...

Time for Some Male Bashing of Our Own

Frankly, I've seen enough male bashing for one lifetime.  Women do it.  The Courts do it.  The media does it.  Now people claiming to be an advocate for mens rights do it.  Let me ask you something.  If I don't back women when they do it, I don't back the courts when they do it, I don't back the media when it does it, why in the sam hell would I back some dumb ass who uses their catch phrases trying to goad me into supporting his vision?

If you want my support for something, don't come to me acting like a man in drag, then try to get me to support your favorite project.  It won't work.

Sure men could use some advocacy, but if this guy thinks I'm going to run right over and support groups after reading this diatribe, he's just mistaken.  And when someone comes to me trying to enlighten me, and links me to this nonsense, I'm done with them.

Try to imagine a woman getting up front of a room full of women, and calling them all c--ts, because they haven't bought into her plans to start litigation or legislation to better their plight.

After she'd called them penis adoring bitches, slovenly sex adicts, lazy cows, a bunch of knitting assholes, a buch of boisterous loud mouths who sit around watching talk shows all day along, and a number of other things, just how many women would be left in the room by the time this idiot was ready to talk policy?

2010-01-04
By Paul Elam

I’ve been an MRA (Men’s Rights Activist) promoting gender equalitarianism for over twenty years. (And yet after after all this time he's still trashing men on a par with the worst feminists ever. Where was he supporting men from, the Cleveland offices of NOW?) Recently I have been downright giddy over the emerging voices of men and women who have had enough of feminists, and are throwing the lies promulgated by them right back in their faces.

Back in THEIR faces?  LOL< in this commentary you've thrown it smack dab into men's faces, AGAIN!

This is especially true on the internet.  These days, if it gets loud enough on the internet, even the sycophants in the mainstream media start paying attention.

Unfortunately, in this instance the mainstream media would see a buffoon repeating many of the negative stereotypes concerning men, that certain women and their advocates have used for the last fifty years.  That would sure be a plus.  /s  I can see it now, "Advocate for men confirms everything feminists have said about them for the last fifty years."  This didn't occur to you?

But I have to say it is time to stop, at least for a moment.

The real problem we have now isn’t feminists, it’s men.  I am not talking about MRA’s, at least not most of them, but about Joe Average next door.

I might be talking about you.

Okay, I can't wait to hear what he has to say about me.  For the sake of understanding here, I would urge everyone to take this guy at his word.  If you're a guy and you haven't sent in money to a men's issues cause, he's taking about you.  If you haven't joined a pro-men's group, he's talking about you.  Let's see what he has to say about you, me, and our male friends and family members.

And so I am here to do some male bashing of my own.  And men now have that coming to them far more than feminists.

Say what?  No..., they don't.

I am not going to reinforce the stupid ideas about men that feminists have spread for so long, (this guy actually thinks he's not reinforcing the stupid ideas..., read on) but to point out the stupid actions of men that have enabled feminists to keep grabbing more power without much of a challenge.  (LMAO, so those stereotypes are okay, if they're used to promote your cause.  OIC)

This isn't looking very good.

We have had a gender war, guys.  The problem is that you didn‘t show up.

No, I didn't show up.  I was doing some very stupid things.  I'll cop to it.  Here.  Here's a list of them.

I was earning a living to support my family.
I was spending overtime hours at work to make ends meet.
I was busy writing programs that allowed me to function more efficiently at work, save my employer a lot of money.
I was taking classes to improve myself.
I was doing odd jobs around the home.
I was doing work on our vehicles to save money.
I was building cabinets and other things we needed for our home.
I was helping my kids with their studies.
I was playing with my kids and the neighbor kids in the evenings.
I was inviting the neighbor kids in for movie nights.
I was going on family outings with my wife and children.
I was participating in family events that included some or most of our relatives.
I was making sure we made it to church.
I was making sure the kids made it to and from the parochial school safely and on time each day.
I was taking in my wife's family members in to help out after her mother died.
I was watching the kids in the evening so my wife could take classes at the local junior college.
I was busy trying to manage the small business that was my family.
I played and managed organized softball or baseball once or twice a week for 25 years.
I spent time going out with my wife, to keep our relationship on track.
I did the food shopping for the family.
I did housework around the home, cooked, did dishes, vacuumed, waxed the floors.
I helped produce rallies for state and federal level political figures campaigns.
Yes, I chipped in around home.  I'm sure that's damning in your eyes too.

There were literally thousands of other things I did.  Can't tell you how sorry I am now that I look back on it.  This guy is really making sense here.  I'm guilty.  /s  The hell I am.

While men, and by that I mean you, your brothers, fathers, sons and friends get bent over and raped in openly rigged family courts, you look the other way.

I, my brothers, my father, my son, my grandfathers, and my male friends had a life.  That life was full of things that come under the title of adult duties, associated with marriage, children, family, friends and community.

How dare this guy (?) talk down to any of us in this manner.

He's got some issues that I could support, and yet he has completely destroyed his and by association their credibility with me.  (That's what I've been trying to tell you nimrod.)

While your sons get marginalized and fall behind in ever more female centered schools systems (they now only represent 42% of college students), you have pretty much reacted by making sure the TIVO is set to get the next ball game.

God, I have seldom seen a woman go this stereotypical about men.  I have never watched ball games to any degree.  I did play about once a week for a few months each year, but that was it.

Mixed in with the insults, we get to some substance.  Our sons are marginalized and falling behind in ever more female centered school systems.

Look how far we are into this article, before this dumb ass starts to cover something that does need to be addressed.

While the media has portrayed you as one dimensional idiots, bumbling fools who couldn’t buy an analgesic without instructions and supervision from your wife, you have validated that idiotic treatment by tolerating it, and have indeed begun to emulate it.

The writer of this s--t, really needs to come to terms with reailty.  Men have lives.  They have duties to take care of.  They ARE NOT emulating anything, unless being husbands and providers is something to be ashamed of, unless doing what men do, is something to be ashamed of, unless doing anything other than what this fool wants them to, is something to be ashamed of.

And why mention the fact that media has portray us as one dimensional idiots, bumbling fools who couldn't buy an anaglesic without instructions and supervision from our wife, when the writer of this article does the very same thing?  The media is bad when it does it.  The writer wants us to think he's gifted when he does it.

While your sons are used as cannon fodder in illicit wars and are simultaneously excoriated by society for having too much power, your response has largely been:

“Man, look at the caboose on her!”

Once again, we're back to another worn out female oriented stereotype about men.  At this point I'm rather unclear.  Is this person trying to motivate men by slandering them non-stop, or is he preparing for a sex change?  I consider the men who serve in our armed services to be honorable.  This guy (?) even tries to destroy the honorable fact that they volunteered to fight.  No, they're just cannon fodder fighting in illicit wars.  Whew, nothing men do is honorable to this guy (?).

You have taken to reading magazines like Men’s Health, the COSMO for the new age male, so you can learn how to get those six pack abs and make princess take a second look at you.

In 2009 Men's Health had a circulation of 1.8 million copies in the U.S.  I guess we can stipulate that ALL MEN (roughly 155 mllion of them in the U.S.) have taken to reading Men's Health can't we.  /s   This writer is an absolute idiot.  LINK

And five years from now, when princess robs you of your children, your income, your property and your dignity, your best friend will console you with something really profound and helpful, like  “Dude, that really sucks.  Want a beer?”

Yes, if we're lucky we'll have a friend to do just that.  Or perhaps if we truly want to see justice done, we'll get an attorney and fight for equal rights in court, and our friend will toast us for doing that.  It happens every day.  Men are getting joint custody out there.  I don't happen to think we've reached equity by a long shot, and yes the courts are biased against men.  I firmly believe that.  Still, this commentary is not a good tool to get men to support anything.  It will alienate them if they have a lick of sense.

Is there still a major problem in this area?  I believe so.  And if some guy wants to go out and sell an effort to help men become involved, I support the idea.  If that guy is going to use this approach, I'm not going to wish him luck, becuase he'll destroy any I grant him, any luck others will grant him, and every bit of his own in that effort.

Insulting men as if you were a (stereotypical) menopausal woman whose hormones are at an all time high one minute and an all time low the next, is not the key to success in an effort like this.

Simply explaining what the problems have been, to your way of thinking, is the way to go.  Imagine that.  Simply explaining the inequities might work, educating the male populace might influence them to support a cause to change things.  Who could have guessed that might be productive?  Instead this person is intent on slandering them into action.  FAIL²¹⁹

It will happen to more than half of you that get married, but somewhere along your way in life, you hung a vacancy sign on your common sense, and you are likely helping your sons hang that same sign on theirs.

The writer of this vanilla wrap, is now trying to make points about our common sense?  However, painting with a broad brush reagrding men from a female's (stereotypical) perspective is evidently the common sense that makes..., welll, the most common sense to the writer.  Perhaps it's best if we don't seem to have common sense, to this..., er guy (?).

It is enough to make someone say, “Wake the hell up!”

No, this commentary is enough to make someone say, "Writer, wake the hell up!"

You know, that may be the wrong thing to say.  Most of you aren’t asleep, you’re in a coma; anesthetized by a thoughtless existence, you’re crippled by one of the few things feminists have said about you that happens to be true.

You think with your penis.

Look ace, your grand-dad, your dad, your uncles, brothers, your boys, your nephews may all think with their penis for all I know.  I can't imagine a guy writing this commentary thinking with anything else but a vagina, but the men in my family are too busy being men to write something that seems this much like someone wrote it while suffereing a severe case of the cramps.  The next time this writer is moved to write about men, I hope someone gifts him(?) with some Midol.  I'm thinking men would appreciate that very much.

And you know, though you likely won’t admit it,  when you think with your penis, the first thing it does is take your spine out of the picture.  With that goes your values and credibility.

Well, nope, that didn't convince me to support this person either.  Next insult please...

What occurs to me about now, is that thinking with your vagina (like this person was) turnes men's spines invisible to your world view.  With that went his rationality and credibility...

And that is how most of you live, in a penis dictated servitude; as trained seals fearful of saying or doing anything that might cause princess to get upset with you, or, God forbid, that might keep you from getting laid.

Desperation is evidently settling in.  This person must not be getting the support they think men should be breaking down walls to provide.  And if men are not, it must be their shortcomings, because this writer or the person he supports can't be wrong when they trash men using the same tactics as spreach-writers for the National Organization for Women.

Just speaking of my wife, she happens to think that men do get a raw deal in a number of instances.  The writer of this garbage aside, I'm thinking most men's wives do want what is best for them.  That's probably why between 55 and 59% of first marriages survive.  I'm sorry this writer doesn't seem to have been one of the lucky ones, or perhaps didn't select the best wife and she thinks he's lucky to be getting any at all, but that's not my problem.  What is my problem, is that some person found this insult laden garbage to be to intellectual, that they had to link others to it, and give them grief if they dared call it for what it is.

Personally, I have seen enough of this garbage from men to last me a lifetime.  And I'm sure men out there are just sick that they have let you down so. /s There are men and women out here right now, fighting an uphill battle you can’t imagine (And who could argue with this, men thinking with their penis and all?  Hell no I tell ya!  Just ask the guy thinking with his vagina.  He'll tell ya.) just to give you a fair shot at justice when the wife calls in the lawyers and the state to dissolve your marriage and your assets; to dissolve your life.  Well, I guess they hadn't heard of high-powered devorce attornies either.

You don’t owe them or me anything, but you might, if you can pull your head out for five minutes, think about what you owe your sons.

I owed my son a father.  He got one.  I didn't have to pull anything out of my ass, and I sincerely wish you hadn't pulled this B.S. out of your own.

Many of you who have already been destroyed by family courts are still raising your daughters to be replicas the princess that handed you your head, and your sons to be the pack animals that will carry the weight for them through life, only to be discarded when they are used up. Just like you were.

The empathy just drips off this paragraph, and as I clear my eyes for a moment, I am astonished to note that this guy (?) concedes that fathers still raise daughters and sons after divorce.  Wait a minute!  I thought...

Wow, was I used up?  Hmmm, I didn't know that.  Wonder what he means by that?  Sounds rather painful.  Sure makes me kinda sorry for the guy (?).  Maybe he lost the family jewels.  That could account for the stereotypical menopausal/like insults I suppose.

And you are still more interested in big screens than the big picture.  It’s completely pathetic.

Big screens vs big picture?  I'm so confused.  /s  I'm sure lucky to have someone like this writer clear it all up for me, so "IT" isn't completely pathetic any longer.

This chosen ignorance is fatal.  Men die more frequently of all the top killer diseases than women, though women get the lions share of gender specific medical research money.  Women outlive men by seven years, and though they have had a national office for women’s health for decades, we are just now hearing the first inklings that we might have one for men.  It hasn’t happened yet, and wise men aren’t holding their breath.

Okay sparky, then why didn't you advocate for this way way way way up this diatribe?  If you had done so without the insults, I might have been influenced to support your effort.  As it is now, I'm going to finish this and move on.  I would never support you.  Most people will read about a quarter of this and move on.  Some self-loathing individuals may join you based on this, when the aren't under medical care.

Maybe you don’t care if you die of heart disease or prostate cancer before you are sixty.  But if you have a son, at least give him the honesty to turn to him and tell him you don’t care if he does either.

I'm 59.  Nice to know I'll be dead in less than six weeks, in your estimation.  My father is 85.  I guess he's another person who is living in dilusion having actually died (by your account) in 1985.

What I will tell my son the next time I see him, is not to ever argue like an insulting old burnt out woman.  I'll have the honesty to turn to him and tell him, it will gain you nothing, except people who think you're an idot.

That’s not shame, it’s blame.  And if you are the “average” man in western culture, you deserve a boatload of it.

Wow, you came close to getting my support with that logic.  Very good.  I'm almost surprised myself that this didn't persuide me completely to support your cause.  NOT!

Hmmm, blaming men in Western Culture, why even Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, and the Taliban could agree with that concept.  Thank heaven you have been sent to us as an advocate.  /s

I imagine that more than a few of you won’t much like what I have to say. (Do... ya... think?) You’ll have to just imagine my concern about that.  But if it upsets you, it won’t last.  All you need is fifteen minutes of acting like a lap dog for the nearest feminist, or hiding your cowardice behind words like traditionalism, manliness and chivalry. Say all three like you actually believe yourself and you’ll be right as rain.

Insulting, belittling, trying to act as if you understand men when you clearly don't, it all winds up gaining you the same contempt.  You clearly don't understand this do you?

But if you are so upset that you want to do something about it, then I have a suggestion.  Instead of buying those tickets to the ball game, or that next 12 pack, send the money to a fathers rights organization that is doing work for which you do not have the sense or the nerve.

I wouldn't send any organization that made sense to you a single penny.  They may be wonderful organizations, but if it's logical to you to support them, I'll have to swear off.

Your expressions here have completely destroyed any respect I could have for you and organizations you support.

The sad thing is, you really don't understand this.

Or how about this?  The next time you hear someone take a stupid, bigoted stab at men, say something about it.

Oh..., my..., God!  I'm speechless.  You have just written a diatribe doing nothing but taking a stupid bigoted stab at men throughout.  Say something about it?  What do you think I've been doing Sparky?

And if it happens to be a woman, don’t say something agreeable so you can score points.  Don’t lie now, you know you have done it.  After all, what is self respect compared to some tail?  Your sons can live on their knees, too, though it is an ironic life for a species distinguished by it’s ability to stand upright.

I have seldom seen a person that had a lower opinion of men.  In fact, I'm not sure I ever have.  This whole diatribe is riddled with disrespect for them.  It's shocking to me that you could possibly think this was going to be viewed favorably, and gain your fave groups monetary or physical support.

You are the nightmare that most fundraisers have.  Some wingnut gloms on to the cause, and offends everyone in sight that would be inclined to donate, if only they had not run into this pecker-head.  This offering is so bad, that if I hadn't had a negative view of NOW my whole life, I might actually take time to donate to them right now.

I can only imagine what people will do who share your contempt for men.

But if you can’t manage a single moment of real backbone, please just keep your mouth shut.  You are quite skilled at that one, anyway.

We have never met, and yet you offer up this opinion of me and every other man, sight unseen and sound unheard.  Bigotry?  Yes, the word does come to mind.

There are men our here trying to do for you and your sons what you won’t.  There are already enough obstacles in the way.  The last thing we need is foolish beneficiaries to shoot us down.  Just let us do what we do. Let us be the advocates for your sons that you fail to be.

Please don't advocate on my or my son's behalf.  Men already have enough problems as it is.  If you really want to help, please use this exact attitude and try to garner support for NOW.  Thanks very much in advance.  And yes, it's okay with me if you think I'm a foolish beneficiary, as if spreading this manure was going to favorably impact the public view of men.

Like I said, feminists are not the real problem any more.  Men are. You are. They launched a gender war and, rather than fight back, men just blindly followed, out of fear, out of biological programming and out of abject weakness. What else can we call it but weak when men and their sons get flogged with rampant injustice  and they react, in a thunderous collective voice, saying:

“How ‘bout them cowboys?”

Men have lives.  They don't sit around pissing and moaning like you do.  When they need legal representation, they get it.

If someone wants to go out and start legislation to help men out, I'm all for it.  If someone wants to mention it and try to get men to support it, I think that's a valid objective.

I will never support someone like you.  Watching you trash men leaves no doubt you are either too stupid to understand what you have done here, or you clearly don't have men's best interests at heart.

I know, this is a rant, and after I have unleashed all my hostilities I am supposed heave a sigh of relief and say something conciliatory, like “Sorry if I offended.”  But the truth is that if this stuff applies to you, then you need to be offended.

What could you possibly mean by, "...if this applies to you, then you need to be offended."  You have just laid out a litany of things that men are, and yet here you act as if you had left any room at all for this not applying to a single man.  You are an absolute fool.

You need, I dare say, whatever it takes to get you to spine up and learn to think past the next ball game or round of the horizontal bop.

Do you realize you haven't spoken in a positive manner about sexual intercourse between two loving people in this diatribe?  No, if anything, men are supposed to be ashamed of having gotten laid.  Sounds to me like someone isn't getting any.  With this bedside manor, I can't imagine why.  /s  Or is that what is going on here?  Did some burnt out old feminist promise to give you some if you wrote so many words trashing men for her.

If that is as far as you can reach, then you don’t deserve to be heard at all.

You don't even know yourself, and yet you are trying to act as if you have all men pegged.  That's just sad.

Authors note:  John Dias has supplied the following descriptions and links to organizations that deserve some of your hard earned bucks for the cause.  Thanks to Mr. Dias.

These causes may be decent.  After this diatribe they won't get one cent from me.

This guy has more issues than Gloria Steinem.  In fact, one could be forgiven for thinking she was the ghost writer promising someone sex here.  What better way to tarnish otherwise decent organizations.



The constant use of stereotypes, the clear attempt to belittle, insult, and berate men leaves no doubt in my mind how flawed this person is.

This commentary actually made sense to you didn't it.  Well, taking the author's advice I'll skip the sorry I can't agree with you and tell you that if you can buy into the methods of this guy, you share at least some his (?) serious personal deficiencies.

[DoughtyOne]

You might want to check out post 18 here.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2687779/posts?page=18#18

It’s long, but I think it puts the article linked earlier on this thread into perspective.

That article is what caused me to object to a poster’s seeming support for it here.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2687779/posts?page=7#7

[TwelveOfTwenty]

So I challenge you to offer facts, and you offer opinions. No problem, I can respect your opinions even if I don't agree with them. But opinions aren't always facts, so I'll lay it out for you one more time.

Present for me any class action lawsuit organized by men, on behalf of men, and supported by men until won, against any institution that has historically discriminated against men, where male politicians expressed support, and that wasn't shot down by a male judge.

If your next post doesn't answer this directly, then I will rightly conclude you can't.