Radio-Update1122

AVfM Radio: If you’re sick of the princess, kill the prince

Do you throw up a little in your mouth whenever you hear a woman say she expects her man to “treat her like a princess?” Are you tired of the Princess Mentality exhibited by so many women today? Then it’s time to stop playing page, serf and vassal to her self-appointed highness.

With the exception of the few remaining royal houses, princesses aren’t born, they’re made. Well-meaning parents buy Disney princess costumes for their little girls and refer to their daughters as their “little princesses.”

Here’s the problem: Many little princesses grow up to become adult princesses with out of control entitlement issues, believe it’s all about them, all the time and that their wants and feelings trump all else. Self-appointed princesses typically don’t see their partners as equals, but rather as subjects who live to serve them. Reciprocity? Pfft.

For the men out there who haven’t figured out that a woman who refers to herself as princess is best avoided (huge red flag), this show is for you. It’s time to stop playing vassal to Her Monstrosity (i.e., her monstrous, over-inflated ego) and time to learn that healthy love relationships are about treating one another with MUTUAL respect, dignity, integrity, love, affection, consideration, getting back what you give and not treating one partner like royalty.

Please join your co-hosts, Dr Tara Palmatier of Shrink4Men and “Dr Paul” Elam of AVfM on Monday, March 26, 2012 at 9pm EST, when they’ll discuss a big part of the Princess Problem: Men who buy into these royal pains in the arse.

Phone lines will be open +1 310 388 9709.

SHOW PAGE


About Dr. Paul & Dr. T

Dr. Paul and Dr. T have joined forces to bring the red pill truth to the brain washed world of blue pill men. They bring reality - to comfort the disturbed, and disturb the comfortable.

View All Posts
  • AVFM seeks app writer volunteer

    Are you an MHRA? Can you write apps for iPhone and Android? Are you willing to do that for AVFM on a special project? Please contact us.

    A Voice for Men seeks a volunteer with solid app writing experience to help us develop an app that will be linked to the AVFM brand. If you have the qualifications and are serious about following through, we would love to hear from you. Your efforts could be of great assistance to this website and to our cause. Please contact Paul Elam at paul@avoiceformen.com for more details...

  • Wikimasters, Editors, Translators, and Writers Wanted *Apply Now*

    Fight Wikipedia censorship! A Voice for Men and WikiMANNia are working to increase knowledge of men's issues through two wikis: the AVfM Reference Wiki for scholarly references, and WikiMANNia for general-interest men's issues. Volunteers needed for writing, proofreading, and organizing. Some knowledge of the German language will be helpful but *not* required.

    Please write to editorial_team@wikimannia.org...

  • Tawil

    Do you throw up a little in your mouth whenever you hear a woman say she expects her man to “treat her like a princess?”

    ROFLMAO

    The princess cult first became widespread in Europe in the 12th century (ish). Thats when “romance literature” and the term “romance” first got coined, and we’ve had a Mills-n-Boon culture ever since.

    Romance literature was basically the written form of women’s fantasies regarding how society should work- chivilrous knights doing great deeds for ladies – slaying dragons, guarding bridges, writing poetry, giving gifts and flowers (“Troubadours”)….. before the 12 century arranged marriages were the dominant social construct – none of this fluffy romance stuff which, if it was indulged at all, was done so as isolated social events, or otherwise quietly and underground. Romance was never the dominant theme.

    The age of Romance however changed all of that and for the first time societies got structured around romantic love – women could now barter their love for male deeds- the more the man did, the more he was paid in love. And of course most deeds revolved around making the woman feel like a proverbial princess. So society became filled – for the first time in human history- with Romeos willing to demean themselves in every possible way for a little pussy-barter.

    This is where Gynocentrism started… although there were individual examples of gynocentric behaviour within individuals and in societies before this European revolution, there had been no societies structured primarily around the concept courtly love. So the Frenchies gave us more than fries, believe me…. and without that gift there would not have arisen AvFM, feminism, MRAs and the like.

    • ghebert

      If we don’t indulge their unreasonable romance-novel fantasies then we’re awful, inconsiderate and they’ll like likely cheat on you because they’re romantically “unfulfilled”. If we even think of asking them to indulge any of our sexual fantasies, we’re disgusting, sexist pigs and should be ashamed.

      Well…excuuuuuuuse me princess.

  • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

    A romantic poem:

    Caterpillars bloom to butterflies,
    As red flags shrink to red pills.

    The End.

    P.S.
    Ah ha! That’s why you’re a shrink for men Dr. T.

    • Otter

      They call us beasts and offer the leash
      It’s how we raise our daughters
      Because every girl’s a princess
      And a white knight needs a monster

  • http://theredsphere.wordpress.com/ Zerbu

    Typical response from an entitlement princess: “BUT I LIKE IT!!!!”

  • Zarathos022

    Healthy love relationships? You mean there’s STILL such things as those?

    • Kimski

      “Healthy love relationships? You mean there’s STILL such things as those?”

      Yep. You’ll find them under canned goods at the local grocery store. They don’t sell very well, so they had to make them long lasting.

      • Zarathos022

        Well they don’t seem to carry them at the grocery store I’m going to then. LOL :)

        • Kimski

          Well, that should tell you something about the demand in your area.
          :D

      • Paul Elam

        Healthy love relationship = you don’t end up in jail or dead.

      • BeijaFlor

        I don’t know, Kimski. All I’ve found around the canned goods at my grocery store were past-their-prime princesses with healthy love handles.

        Are things different in Scandinavia?

        • Kimski

          Oh, yes. Our cans over here comes with pieces of feminist barbed wire in them. So we got lots of cans, but noone’s buying.

          The divorce rate is approaching 45%, but the stats forget to mention that not many people are getting married in the first place. Also the stats for single parent households are approaching 25%, and you need to keep in mind that we’re dealing with a population of approximately 5,5M. I don’t know how the state can keep 25% of the grown female population on welfare, but taxes at 52% would be a good guess. We also pay almost $3 for a quarter of a gallon gas. As in all other feminized countries in the west, someone else is paying for the party, namely the evil menz.
          ‘-Oh, the Patriarchal oppression is unbearable..’

          The following is a typical empowered woman answering the question: “Why is the divorce rate so high in Denmark?” You’re going to love the way she skips over the consequences for men and children, and how much weight she places on the sex issues:

          “Actually there are several factors why divorce in Denmark is so high:
          1.They have that freedom(they are liberated)
          2.Its so easy to get divorce it almost costs nothing imagine only 500kroner you can divorce your partner…unlike in Philippines a couple should spend more than 15,000kroner just to annul their partners.
          And It take many years to get annulled.
          While in Denmark it only takes a day to get divorce….Gosh!!!
          3.Danish have one word…if they said no…its reallly no!if they said yes its really yes!!! as in they are following the saying,,,”One word is enough for a wise man”
          4.Both couples have a stable job and money so no problem if they will be separated.
          5.The children below 18 yrs have a monthly financial support from the government plus the schools are free and hospitals as well.Therefore they dont worry about the future of their children.
          6.The Danish women are not contented to only one man.Thats what I observed.(Me either lol!!!just kidding!)
          7.Its very common to everybody so its not a big deal for them…
          8.Maybe their hearts is hard as a rock……
          9.Fornication or premarital sex is common to the teenagers….
          10.They can have sex whenever they want even outside marriage so why keeping themselves to bind in the married life?
          11.Most Danish are Atheist they dont believe in God nor Evil…
          Therefore theyre afraid of nothing!”

          *Coughs* -Bullshit!
          -We all know why the rates are so high..

  • amido

    I notice AVFM radio shows are no longer being archived? There are the same 8 old ones in the webplayer. :(

    • http://aleknovy.com/ Alek Novy

      Nah, they’re archived here:
      http://www.blogtalkradio.com/avoiceformen

      The list in the sidebar is only for the convenience of new visitors, and sometimes it’s not updated instantly.

    • BeijaFlor

      It appears to me that your reminder helped, Amido.

      The fresh list showed up in the refresh after my last post.

  • Steersman

    While I think that argument – many women as spoiled brats, as princesses – can, of course, be taken too far, I think there’s more than some justification for it, that there are more than a few flies in the ointment of feminism – even if there’s also been more than some justification for that as well. For instance, though you may already be aware of this book, it argues that:

    … the attempt to make Women’s Studies serve a political agenda has led to deeply problematic results: dubious scholarship, pedagogical practices that resemble indoctrination more than education, and the alienation of countless potential supporters.

    In addition, Philip Wylie in his Generation of Vipers coined the term “Momism” to describe the process, and the reasons for it and for which we are all to blame, by which Cinderella, the princess, is frequently transmogrified into something that is hell on wheels:

    We must understand mom before we lose touch with understanding itself.

    I showed her as she is–ridiculous, vain, vicious, a little mad. She is her own fault first of all and she is dangerous. But she is also everybody’s fault. When we and our culture and our religions agreed to hold woman the inferior sex, cursed, unclean and sinful–we made her mom. And when we agreed upon the American Ideal Woman, the Dream Girl of National Adolescence, the Queen of Bedpan Week, the Pin-up, the Glamour Puss–we insulted women and disenfranchised millions from love. We thus made mom. The hen-harpy is but the Cinderella chick come home to roost: the taloned, cackling residue of burnt-out puberty in a land that has no use for mature men or women.

    Mom is a human calamity. She is also, like every calamity, a cause for sorrow, a reproach, a warning siren and a terrible appeal for amends.

    While she exists, she will exploit the little “sacredness” we have given motherhood as a cheap-holy compensation for our degradation of woman: she will remain irresponsible and unreasoning–for what we have believed of her is reckless and untrue. She will act the tyrant–because she is a slave. God pity her–and us all!

    However, Wylie also took pains in his Jeremiad to roundly and soundly criticize if not condemn a great many other segments of society – from Churches to the military to the educational system – in supporting his argument that “we have cancer – cancer of the soul”. Or as Pogo said, “We have seen the enemy and he is us.” But, relative to the related “battle between the sexes” with the well-entrenched, not to say dogmatic, Man Boobz and A Voice for Men leading their respective cohorts on opposite sides of No-Man’s Land, one might argue that, as in any war, the first casualty is the truth.

    And, more specifically, it seems to me that, for all of the somewhat credible examples provided by A Voice for Men of women who are bigots and “fem-Nazis”, there is a disconcerting and problematic unwillingness to recognize that there are, apparently, more than a few men who are, in fact, decidedly misogynist if not outright assholes in their dealing with women. And, on the other side of the coin, it likewise seems that, for all the also somewhat credible examples provided by Man Boobz, and company, of men who are misogynist assholes, there is a decidedly problematic unwillingness to recognize that some putative feminists are egregious misandrists if not outright assholes.

    Seems to me that it would help a great deal if both camps were to recognize that “my sex, right or wrong” is highly problematic, that the more dogmatic members of one’s own sex or camp are more of a problem than the less dogmatic ones on the other side. Maybe Man Boobz and A Voice for Men might even each create a “Featured Offenders” docket of women and men, respectively, who really aren’t contributing much to “feminist humanism” [in John the Other’s phrasing] or to “manist humanism” – except possibly giving those movements a bad name. Might even do something about the “failure to communicate” that seems to be at the heart of the problem.

    • Just1X

      Funny how when men talk about their issues, then some mangina peeps up with ‘women have issues too’…what happens?

      Suddenly we’re not talking about FRA / divorce theft / child alienation as outrages, they’re ‘balanced’ by there not being 50% of women on boards, teh patriarchy etc.

      Well fuck that shit.

      I’m not interested in false equivalency arguments, I’m not interested in wimminz issues at all.

      Start with the male issues and solve them, THEN I might be interested in whatever real issues women might have (not bullshit like the wage gap) – but don’t count on it.

      • Steersman

        Funny how when men talk about their issues, then some mangina peeps up with ‘women have issues too’…what happens?

        Considering that Paul Elam (in the video, which could use some editing, on the Futrelle & Barca post) pointedly and emphatically and commendably rejected justifications for “corporal punishment of women” – presumably in the context of adult relationships, would you call him a “mangina” too? Or how about John the Other who provided some support for “feminist humanism”?

        I’m not interested in false equivalency arguments, I’m not interested in wimminz issues at all.

        How about true equivalency arguments? Or have you made up your mind that there aren’t any? And the evidence you have for that is what?

        Start with the male issues and solve them, THEN I might be interested in whatever real issues women might have …

        Maybe some of those male issues are connected to some female issues. Won’t ever find out – or resolve either – if you close your mind to the possibilities. Although maybe you just prefer drawing up sides and fighting it out – mano a mano – rather than solving the problems.

        • Just1X

          Please list the female issues that I ‘should’ care about.

          Please show me where manboobies criticises feminism. He has no common ground with me because he’s a feminist, not interested in men at all. Where does he address the facts linked to in the masthead above? He even banned you as being unacceptable (he has a point), and yet we are to suck up to him and his ilk?

          Dr F has you nailed.

          You are a total and utter disingenuous wanker.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            I’m still waiting for the flocking idiot to back up this gem of his:

            “I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men. ”

            He won’t because he can’t and he’s reading right now and he’s most cross about it. Most cross.

            (“Flocking idiot”, there, I did tell you I’d stolen it.)

          • Just1X

            @Dr F.

            Yeah, “it’s a reasonable conclusion” LMFAO

            I wonder in what circles this passes as reality?

            Deeply feminised ones, I suspect. Ones where disagreement is seldom expressed within the flock, womens studies perhaps?

            ‘He’ certainly isn’t used to be called on his bullshit. He has no counter other than deflection and lies. No balls to back his arguments.

            re. ‘flocking idiot’ de nada, mate, my pleasure

          • Steersman

            @ Just1X,

            Please list the female issues that I ‘should’ care about.

            Presumably you have a mother and might even have a sister, both of whom you might care about. One would think their rights and treatment in society might be of some concern to you. As for specifics, I think reproductive rights and equality in the legal system would probably top the list.

            Please show me where manboobies criticises feminism.

            Can’t say that there are many, but I was pleased to note in an earlier post where he castigated a reader of his site, presumably a feminist, who apparently threatened a moderator on a Men’s Rights Reddit.

            He has no common ground with me because he’s a feminist, not interested in men at all.

            Only if you have a narrow-minded and dogmatic definition of feminism and masculinism:

            The consensus today in feminist and masculinity theories is that both genders can and should cooperate to achieve the larger goals of feminism.

            Some feminists are actively involved in promoting men’s rights, especially father’s rights and social equality, arguing that this position is necessary for feminism and women’s equality.

            You might want to do a little reading on the indicated topics; for one thing, it could flesh out that list somewhat.

            Where does he address the facts linked to in the masthead above?

            Maybe you could ask him. But you could also ask yourself where you have addressed the facts on his side of the ledger.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            @ Steersman,

            It’s interesting how you continue to avoid my repeated post which says…
            ————————-

            Please support your assertion:

            “I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men. ”

            We are waiting.

          • Steersman

            @Just1X:

            @Dr F. Yeah, “it’s a reasonable conclusion” LMFAO I wonder in what circles this passes as reality? Deeply feminized ones, I suspect. Ones where disagreement is seldom expressed within the flock, women studies perhaps?

            Or maybe on AVfM where disagreement is also seldom expressed? Who knew that it is also “deeply feminized”?

            You really should learn to not let your spleen get the better of your brain: “Put mind in gear before putting mouth in motion.”

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            @ Steersman,

            It’s not looking good Slick.

            You still duck my request to answer your assertion,

            ““I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men. ”

            Note:
            Request has been repeatedly submitted to you and you weave and duck every single time.

            Submitted on 2012/03/27 at 11:26 PM
            Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 4:41 AM
            Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 8:56 AM
            Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 11:42 PM
            Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 11:44 PM
            Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 11:56 PM

          • Just1X

            @shithead

            there’s no spleen involved at all when I call you a cunt

          • Steersman

            @shithead2 (aka Just1X),

            And I’ll see your cunt and raise you an asshole and a prick – although I figure your parents – if you had any – must have had some responsibility for that.

    • andybob

      This is a well-written piece that would seem reasonable if not for the unfortunate omission of one all important detail. Men who make misogynistic comments about women get fired, blacklisted and marginalised – or worse. Women who make misandric comments about men get tenure, comedy Emmys and positions as Secretary of State.

      See the difference?

      Men who behave like arseholes towards women are called out for it by every establishment organization in existence – as well the massive army of blue pill men who have been well-trained to defend and serve women to the death. In short, Princesses have Prince Charmings coming out of their arses. Who stands up to defend men when we are victimised by our misandric societies? We can depend on Dr Palmatier, Izzey, GWW, Bev, 100%Cotton, and…um….

      Still not seeing the difference?

      I’ve read your comments before. Some of your points are valid, but your understanding of the MRM seems mired in simplistic notions that prevent you from comprehending our predicament. Misogyny is not the same as misandry. Feminism is not the reverse side of the MRM.

      Do you know how many feminists have accused me of misogyny when I have attempted to discuss any MRA issue? All of them. When feminists speak of misogyny, they are referring to anything we say that challenges their narrative. When we speak of misandry, we are talking about issues that are ruining men’s lives in cruel and destructive ways. Parental alienation, FRAs, VAWA – the list is innumerable.

      You still can’t see any difference, can you?

      Last night, me and my partner watched a lame reality show. One woman after another kept mumbling crap about “stupid men” and “typical bloody men” and “what do you expect, he’s only a man”. As we are both men (yes dear, there are gay MRAs) this pissed us off a lot. This is called misandry, and men are attacked by it everywhere in our culture. It’s hip, it’s cool, it’s OK.
      Misogyny? Well if you sit up until midnight you might catch a documentary about psychotic serial killers – not the female ones of course because, apparently, they don’t exist.

      Still don’t see a difference?

      Is it at all possible that you are so used to living in a Princess Bubble, where women never get criticised, that when you finally do confront some honest home truths at a place like AVFM, you cannot perceive it as anything other than misogyny? Do you not realise that it is this diva brittleness that will be your undoing?

      Feminism will wilt like a dainty princess at the first sign of a challenge. Men, on the other hand, negotiate one insult-laden day after another and still have the strength and pride to fight back. Men, and women (we have women MRAs who make radfems look as clueless as Kardashians in a kitchen) from all walks of life have had enough. If a bit of name-calling already has you hiding behind Manboobz, then your demise will be as swift as it is inevitable. Manboobz is a toady, while Dr Paul Elam is an activist and a leader.

      See the difference?

      As for Momism, that was already old hat when I was a kid. It must have seemed like totally far-out pass-the-bong man lava lamp profound in the sixties – Freud on mushrooms – but it all seems a bit twee these days. Mom’s decision to don hotpants and disgrace herself was nobody’s fault but her own, so stop blaming men.

      • Steersman

        This is a well-written piece …

        Thanks.

        … that would seem reasonable if not for the unfortunate omission of one all important detail. Men who make misogynistic comments about women get fired, blacklisted and marginalized – or worse. Women who make misandric comments about men get tenure, comedy Emmys and positions as Secretary of State.

        Yes, I’ll agree – and said so in my previous post – that many women, many feminists, have a blind spot in not calling out or criticizing the more egregious attacks and positions of some radical feminists. And I even argued that position over on Man Boobz, although some feminists there, I presume, counterpunched by pointing to some T-shirt place that argued, in effect, that “No means yes; yes means anal”. But the point is that if Dr. Elam is going to argue that Katherine Heigel is a bigot and misandrist – the substance of my post – then it seems he is obliged to condemn the T-shirt place as misogynist. Otherwise Elam only opens himself up to that charge from Futrelle and company – at least condemning it would take some of the wind out of his sails.

        Well if you sit up until midnight you might catch a documentary about psychotic serial killers – not the female ones of course because, apparently, they don’t exist.

        Sure they do as described in the true-to-life (?) film Monster about a former prostitute who killed six men. But against that there is Jack the Ripper and the Green River Killer and Robert Pickton who killed some 50 prostitutes.

        Seems to me, as CS5150 suggested in the “Slut by any other name” thread, that both camps are working from rather incomplete and erroneous stereotypes that doesn’t do anyone any good: there are good and bad characters on both sides. Failing to acknowledge that just keeps the pot boiling without delivering any meal; not particularly productive – unless that’s what you really want: “East is east and west is west and never the twain shall meet ….”

        As for Momism, that was already old hat when I was a kid.

        Maybe it was in your neck of the woods since the term was coined in 1942. But the problem is that a great many feminists and women, not all of them fortunately, are completely unaware of it. Or refuse to consider it when they are made aware of it as I tried to do – and which got me banned over on Pharyngula. Although that was more for a general criticism of feminism and for defense of using the word “c*nt”. Curious that many women, though not all, take that insult of one woman as an insult of all women yet fail to see that most men are, in an analogous situation, not insulted if another man is called a “pr*ck” – maybe there’s some biochemical reason for that although some women might be offended by that suggestion.

        Mom’s decision to don hotpants and disgrace herself was nobody’s fault but her own, so stop blaming men.

        Dr. Elam argued that “princesses aren’t born, they’re made”. Who do you think is responsible for that? Just the women? You should try reading – or re-reading Generation of Vipers – for plausible explanations of how we’re all to blame.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

      You may well work a word as a blacksmith hammers a glowing shoe, but when all is burnt away there is nothing left that speaks as harrowingly as men who are right now being flayed alive by the edict you wheel out for defense.

      Your suggestion of a ‘great search’ whereby AVfM and Manboobz may find overlap is no different as a Venn diagram expressing the commonalty of Polar bears and penguins bonking at a barbecue.

      Mr Andybob and Just1X have been very patient with you and polite by their well carved posts, and if I was a better person I’d fall in cadence with them with their virtues that way but I’m not so I won’t as I can’t.

      To recap my brothers here:

      * [Just1X] “Start with the male issues and solve them,..”
      * [Andybob] “…your understanding of the MRM seems mired in simplistic notions that prevent you from comprehending our predicament.”

      …as for me… Yawn.

      You’re exposing yourself as a placard, or flashy display of someone with a ‘truly discerning mind’ only. You seem not to have any demonstration of a single mote of compassion for those in real pain about you anywhere while everywhere.

      Read the facts sheet on the masthead if you will and stick it next to your words and watch the candle of your cretinous glimmerings snuff out in disgrace.

      Yuk.

      • Turbo

        “Your suggestion of a ‘great search’ whereby AVfM and Manboobz may find overlap is no different as a Venn diagram expressing the commonalty of Polar bears and penguins bonking at a barbecue.”

        ROFLMAO

        Good one Doc, though I have to admit rushing to Google to remember what a Venn Diagram is.
        Bin a while since school.

      • Steersman

        Your suggestion of a ‘great search’ whereby AVfM and Manboobz may find overlap …

        Just trying to do my part to find some common ground; you know, if you’re not part of the solution ….

        And as a matter of fact I happen to notice that Futrelle actually castigated at least a reader of his posts who apparently went off the deep end and harassed someone over on a Men’s Rights Reddit. First an Arab spring – maybe there’s one in the cards for Men’s Rights and Women’s Rights ….

        You seem not to have any demonstration of a single mote of compassion for those in real pain about you anywhere while everywhere.

        That seems a bit of stretch, particularly since you know diddly about my personal circumstances. You maybe expect me to be emoting all over the place? I’ve acknowledged that there are many men who are apparently between the proverbial rock and a hard place in part because of feminism. But I’m not blind to the fact that many women are, and have been, in similar situations for similar reasons. Failing to acknowledge the latter doesn’t do your credibility or that of the Men’s Rights movement any good at all.

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

          Pardon for this long post.

          Steersman I have read every single one of your posts just now and I stand by my comments, all of them.

          I’ve seen your M.O. before and your display of it truly reeks, especially when going into admin mode and seeing your posts all stacked up together like a great teetering lasagna made with slices of pressed monkey shit.

          Your M.O. is this exactly:
          You have a feminist agenda absolutely and I believe your method to ply it is to intersperse your sentences with “MRA-ish” observations. You know like this, “Feminism has it’s good side and we shouldn’t forget about blah blah blah. Oh yeah…and blokes get a raw deal because blah blah etc.”

          You skip under the “radar” as such because if you were to edit out all of the “caring” words you give and only leave remaining your feminist leanings (“leanings” ? Fuck that mate, you’re quite horizontal) you’d stick out like sunburnt dog nuts.

          I maintain it’s not a stretch for me to call to question the size of the mote of your humanity or compassion for those that are in pain.

          Don’t trust my word for it, I’ll let your very own crap cakes speak to you again without your “kind words”.

          Sit back folks, grab a beer or something and listen to this red faced dick-brain chitter and chatter away while his grubby paw is wedged in the biscuit jar.

          ———————————-
          Submitted on 2012/03/11 at 10:13 PM

          Great site with lots of pertinent information. While I don’t agree with everything here and I generally think that women have gotten it in the neck for far too long, I think that the pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction, at least in more than a few specific cases.

          For example the Wikipedia article on women’s suffrage in the US indicates that while the 19th Amendment granting that was passed in 1919, Georgia didn’t ratify it until 1970 and it wasn’t until 1984 that Mississippi had the dubious honour of becoming the last to do so. Looks to me like a rather odious and systemic bias against women.

          In addition, I notice that the Wikipedia article on rape indicates some 200,000 victims of “rape or sexual assault” in 2005. And even assuming the higher number of 10% for false accusations plus the fact that only “about 5% of rapists will ever spend a day in jail” it seems that one might be forgiven for suggesting that women have some cause for being bent out of shape.

          ———————————-
          Submitted on 2012/03/11 at 11:59 PM | In reply to Kimski.

          (Kimski said this)
          “Besides these questions, please inform me as to what feminism has done that helps men in any way, that doesn’t come with an equal amount of costs, both economically and emotionally.”

          (Steersman said this)
          “As one example, I would say that the role they played on the “home front” during World Wars I & II was substantial and that it was probably a consequence of the feminism that paved the way,”

          ———————————-
          Submitted on 2012/03/12 at 1:04 AM | In reply to Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist.

          (Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist said this)
          “A man that does not register for conscription is not allowed to vote. We men have the *privilege* of voting if, and only if we are laying our lives on the lines.”

          (Steersman said this)
          “While I’ll agree that there is some disparity there, it also seems that many feminists are fighting for the right to contribute in that area as well. And, if I’m not mistaken, there were a great many Russian women who served on the front lines during WW II.”

          “….More specifically, although one might argue that more men than women died in combat, that is probably balanced out to some degree by maternal death rates, at least historically.”

          ———————————-
          Submitted on 2012/03/12 at 2:38 AM | In reply to ThoughtCriminal.

          (Steersman said this)
          “I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men. ”

          ———————————-
          Submitted on 2012/03/12 at 2:49 AM | In reply to Kimski.

          (Kimski said this)
          “Women didn’t have to go down in mines, and die from destroyed lungs at an early age, or perform any other hard labour that could kill them.

          (Steersman said this)
          “True enough. But, speaking of hard labour, not too many men died as a consequence of making babies either.”

          “…the abortion of more than 30 million unborn children. How can the destruction of the very fabric of modern society and civilisation in any way be justified with the ‘liberation’ of anyone?”

          (Later in the very same post Steersman says the following)

          …I’m not particularly happy either to see that many fetuses aborted, but I sort of look on it as a regrettable case of triage.

          ———————————-

          Busted.

          • Sting Chameleon

            It seems like you’ve caught a nasty concern troll. Good job Dr. F.

          • Steersman

            Busted?

            That’s a joke, a real thigh slapper. You’ve quoted me, probably accurately, but you haven’t really rebutted any of my arguments. I’ll stand by my comments too, particularly this one since your eyes must have glazed over – if they were ever open – before reading it:

            I’ve acknowledged that there are many men who are apparently between the proverbial rock and a hard place in part because of feminism. But I’m not blind to the fact that many women are, and have been, in similar situations for similar reasons.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            Your argument 1/
            Women had to fight for the vote. It took a long time for all states here in America to give them the vote.

            Rebuttal
            Pointing to one example of lackluster behaviour does not a summer make as it were. Australia, New Zealand Europe and the majority of everywhere else welcomed the change and there were both men and women protesting for it. Like all changes everywhere there will not be absolute parity of change. Not all “cross the finish line at the same time. Are you suggesting that all must change at exactly the same time and if not then you’re onto something ?
            Some were slower than others of course, and there was no blood shed and you know this. You Cherry Picked and this is dishonest. Busted.

            Your argument 2/
            Women get raped a lot. They are right to be pissed off.

            Rebuttal
            Men get raped much much more to the point where even inflated figures pale and you know it.
            Busted.

            Your argument 3/
            Feminism has helped men and as an example look the role they played on the “home front” during World Wars I & II. It was substantial.

            Rebuttal
            The white feather campaign was a role played in WWI and the other roles you speak of like munitions workers tram drivers and so on was a natural consequence of depleted male numbers on the very same home front. Feminism had absolutely nothing to do with helping men then or now and you know it.
            Busted.

            Your argument 4/
            Many feminists are fighting for the chance to go to contribute to war efforts. I mean look at the great numbers of Russian women who served during the lines during WWII.

            Rebuttal
            You avoid female casualty numbers compared to male casualty numbers because you know that those numbers would expose the flaw in your argument. So with no mentioning of numbers you use words that make it “sound” like women are pulling their weight with the military. You are being dishonest here.
            Busted.

            Your argument 5/
            Hang on, women die in childbirth. There, that balances it out somewhat don’t you think ?

            Rebuttal
            To draw upon the tragic deaths of women who die in childbirth is dishonest. You are implying that because women have died/suffered because of childbirth then the sheer numbers of men who die in battle is lessened ?
            Men have gone nuts trying to find safer ways for women to give birth with the advance of science through pharmaceuticals and better work practices with better equipment. As a result the deaths of women in childbirth has plunged.
            You are using the measure of something that has been placed upon us by nature, and men have done amazing things to make things better in spite of it. To pick an unfortunate thing in the past that is nobody’s fault and place it next to a correctable injustice is remarkably untruthful.
            Busted.

            Your argument 6/
            Not many men have died making babies.

            Rebuttal
            You are using past tense and for the most part you are right using the past tense.
            Bad things that have happened to women in the past regarding childbirth has no leverage this way or that way with anything what so ever. It’s tragic, but to suggest that since there have been deaths of women in the past then women have some “brownie points” or “credits” is repugnant and dishonest and you know it.
            Busted.

            There. Now your turn.
            Back up this statement of yours:

            ——————————
            Submitted on 2012/03/12 at 2:38 AM | In reply to ThoughtCriminal.

            (Steersman said this)
            “I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men. ”
            ——————————

            You said it thigh slapper but you didn’t back it up.

            Go on, do it.

            P.S.
            When you say “I’ve acknowledged that there are many men who are apparently between the proverbial rock and a hard place in part because of feminism. But I’m not blind to the fact that many women are, and have been, in similar situations for similar reasons.” you’re right in that they are sympathetic words.

            Your kind words means bugger all because it’s your pro-feminist words that give me relevant and truer information about the motivation of your presence here. It’s your feminist sympathetic attitude that has my attention, not your phoney ” agreeable MRA observations” that are made up so you can slip in your truer thoughts.

            No, you are one dishonest M.F. every way you slice it and the noises around you of others indicate others see it too.

          • DruidV

            This agitator wont quit Doc. I’m pretty sure you know that and I think you are just having fun with it now.

            Get a few licks in for me will ya?

            Oh yeah and what would your poor gray haired old mother, your helpless hothouse flower sisters, aunts and daughters think of you, if they knew how you felt about your better half, you misogynistic womyn hater?

            Unless this troll is right and you never even had a mother…

            EGAD!!!

            *rethinking my opinion of you sir, and if this last is true then it has definitely improved!

        • ThoughtCriminal

          Oh here we go with this shit again. Listen, andybob already told you what it is. Why the fuck does feminism need us to denounce misogyny? EVERYBODY denounces misogyny. Everybody.

          • Steersman

            @ ThoughtCriminal,

            Why the fuck does feminism need us to denounce misogyny?

            Maybe because coming from your part of the bleachers it would probably carry more weight. Everybody expects it from the feminist section so it doesn’t carry as much.

            EVERYBODY denounces misogyny. Everybody.

            Horse crap. Even misogynists?

            Although that does raise an interesting question or issue as it seems that it is a somewhat nebulous concept. Or at least a word for which different people have different definitions or different criteria to justify the accusation.

            For instance, the well known atheist blogger and feminist – of one stripe anyway, Greta Christina, argued that some accusations of that are entirely bogus. And more than a few think that gendered insults – c*nt in particular – insult all women and are therefore misogynist. I think that is some very specious “reasoning” – and I use the term loosely – and have been banned in several locations for my troubles.

            In addition, I said earlier I thought that Paul Elam’s, “You see, I find you, as a feminist, to be a loathsome, vile piece of human garbage” was shading into misogyny. I mean, if you were to ask all women whether they supported equal civil rights for men and women then I very much doubt that you would find any that said no. And consequently hating one woman simply because she supported rights for women that all women do seems tantamount to hating all women – ergo misogynism.

            Although, to be fair, I have to admit that there is some parallel with the gendered insults. However, it seems to me that, logically speaking anyway, it is more sensible to self-identify as a person with a particular set of civil rights than one with a particular piece of anatomy. But identity politics – and psychology – seems a little tricky at best, although an interesting field.

    • Turbo

      You seem to be arguing as though this is just two different ideologies butting heads. Two academics sitting around a table with a cup of tea unable to find common ground in their respective ideals.

      IT IS NOT !!

      This is ONE ideology, a tyrannical one, which has infected governments the world over and is destroying the lives of men, children, and yes, women as well.
      Can you guess what it is called, hint: It starts with “F”

      The MRM is simply a backlash to this tyranny. It has no other ideology other than freedom from oppression.
      We are talking about Real life and Real lives. This is not an academic think tank.

      • Steersman

        You seem to be arguing as though this is just two different ideologies butting heads.

        It is, at least in part: feminism and, for want of a better word, patriarchalism. Although I’ll agree with you that the issues are hardly academic and that they have real effects on real people.

        This is ONE ideology, a tyrannical one, which has infected governments the world over and is destroying the lives of men, children, and yes, women as well.

        Right. Just like the evil Red Menace of McCarthyism. While I’ll agree that just about any “ism”, including both feminism and “manism”, has its problems, that is largely a consequence of people buying the Party line and not thinking for themselves. Hysteria doesn’t do anyone any good – except maybe the munitions makers.

        • Turbo

          No it isn’t, there is ONE ideology here, and a reaction to it. You tried to describe the MRM as an “ism” twice, and you failed twice.

          Let me do it for you, humanism. The right to freedom and equality under the law for everyone, regardless of gender.

          As for

          “Hysteria doesn’t do anyone any good – except maybe the munitions makers”

          No hysteria here my friend, and that statement is just offensive.

          • Steersman

            No it isn’t, there is ONE ideology here, and a reaction to it. You tried to describe the MRM as an “ism” twice, and you failed twice.

            No, I would say and have said there are two ideologies in play, maybe not necessarily here on AVfM, but still influencing everything that you have to deal with.

            Let me do it for you, humanism. The right to freedom and equality under the law for everyone, regardless of gender.

            Totally agree. However, as indicated, the history of the status of women clearly shows, I would say, that women have generally had the short end of the stick for most of that time, although it hasn’t been particularly easy for anyone. That there have been excesses in redressing the balance is certainly deplorable and cause for concern by everyone – the same way there were excesses in the development of unions and rights for workers. But that doesn’t seriously detract from the justification for that redressing.

          • Turbo

            @ Steersman

            Ok, explanation noted and accepted.

            As you refuse to accept the there is one ideology at work here and one reaction to it, I see no further point continuing this dialog with you.

            Hopefully you have read a lot on this site, and continue to read a lot. Maybe then some of it will sink in.

            It seems clear to me that you have not been effected as yet by any of the draconian laws that the western world has instituted, as most of the people here have.

            Sometimes that is what it takes for some people to get it.

            But if, or when this happens to you, and a humungous great Red Pill drops on your head, then and only then will you wake up to the real world, and understand what we are on about.

            Then we will be able to say “Told you so!”. But, of course we won’t say that, we will help, cause that’s what we do here.

            We are here to help everyone, even those that don’t get it.

            By the way, I sincerely hope this never happens to you, I would not wish that pain on anyone.

          • Steersman

            @ Turbo,

            Thanks; I’ll those points in mind.

        • blueface

          Well done, Steersman! You keep finding the flaw. Even if you have to put it there yourself.

          “Manism” or “patriarchalism”. Very clever. Clearly faulty isms. You should patent them, seeing as you’ve just invented them.

          Another ism that has its problems is “middle-of-the-road” ism. Neville Chamberlain tried that.

          He thought he was very statesmanlike with his “Peace in our time”.

          Unfortunately for him, Hitler had “didn’t give a fuck” ism about agreements, keeping his word and telling the truth.

          For the first few years of the second world war the British wished they had given as much to the munitions makers as Germany had. Hysteria, anyone?

          Analogies are great, aren’t they.

          The real problem with feminism, when you stop trying to avoid its scrutiny by deflection, is that you can’t polish a turd.

          It is based on false premises and dishonest statistics. It is a grab for power.

          If you seriously want to be a part of the solution, do some real digging. Check out the sources, the statistics, the reports. Check who funded them. Check the logic behind them.

          Have a good hard look and let us know how you go.

          • Turbo

            @ Steersman

            “No, I would say and have said there are two ideologies in play, maybe not necessarily here on AVfM, but still influencing everything that you have to deal with.”

            Well, you would say that, and you would be dead wrong. There is one ideology, and one reaction to it. Cause and effect. Trying to link the MRM with the “Patriarchalism” or “Manism”, whatever the hell they are, is proof positive that you cannot describe the MRM as the mirror image of Feminism, try as you may.

            By the way, you ARE here at AVfM, not elsewhere, so don’t tell us what what you think is happening elsewhere.

            “I would say, that women have generally had the short end of the stick for most of that time”

            This statement is highly debatable at best, and a massive revision of history at worst. If you think not being able to vote for a few more years after the other gender is worse than being conscripted to fight and die on foreign shores, well then, yes that is the short end of the stick. I know which end I would have wanted.

            “That there have been excesses in redressing the balance is certainly deplorable and cause for concern by everyone – the same way there were excesses in the development of unions and rights for workers. But that doesn’t seriously detract from the justification for that redressing”

            You’re seriously suggesting here that 40 years of stripping Fathers and their children of their rights to a loving relationship, financially and emotionally crippling them, and leaving children mourning the loss of a father that they loved causing untold emotional damage to said children, is just some sort of collateral damage for the greater good.
            Justify that ifyou will

            By the way, you did not address your inflammatory comment

            “Hysteria doesn’t do anyone any good – except maybe the munitions makers”

            Please do so, violence is not tolerated around here and your insinuation will not be tolerated.

          • Steersman

            “Manism” or “patriarchalism”. Very clever. Clearly faulty isms. You should patent them, seeing as you’ve just invented them.

            Thanks. Although I did put them in quotes to suggest they weren’t entirely accurate. But “manism” seemed like a reasonable complement of or opposite to feminism. And while “patriarchalism” is a real word, it is not an entirely accurate description of “patriarchy” – which is what I had in mind, but it seems close enough or at least suggestive:

            Patriarchalism is a political theory that was arising in England in the seventeenth century that defended the concept of absolute power for the monarchy, through language that emphasized the “paternal” power of the king over the state and his subjects.

            Analogies are great, aren’t they?

            Yes, they certainly are. And I’m most impressed with yours that equates feminism with Nazism no doubt right down to its “final solution”, although that will obviously be the extermination of men instead of Jews. But Hitler was obviously a piker in comparison with feminists, 6 million being hardly a patch on 3500.

            But while I’ll agree that there are probably more than a few false premises and some dishonesty in feminism, I would say it is more than a stretch to argue that it is some monolithic organization out to take over the world. Although since you seem to think that is the case you must have all of the data you think I should be looking for, so maybe you could do the whole world a favour and post it all on this site.

          • Steersman

            @ Turbo,

            As for “Hysteria doesn’t do anyone any good – except maybe the munitions makers” No hysteria here my friend, and that statement is just offensive.

            Apart from what I might consider some offensive statements from you and others, and as you seem rather insistent about an answer to that I’ll start there as a separate post. Not quite sure what you think I meant by that or why you think it might be offensive, but what I meant by that, consistent with my earlier analogies about battle lines and no-man’s land, was that in any war it is frequently only the munitions makers who really come out ahead.

            And in this case that might include those on both sides who manage to make a living out of an ongoing war and who therefore have less incentive to see it resolved. Pretty much the way communists talked of the Party fading away once the consciousness of the Proletariat had been raised sufficiently – and of course it never was.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            @ Steersman,

            Please support your assertion:

            “I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men. ”

            We are waiting.

          • Steersman

            @Turbo:

            Well, you would say that, and you would be dead wrong. There is one ideology, and one reaction to it. Cause and effect.

            Others would apparently disagree with you and agree with me.

            Ideology: An ideology is a set of ideas that constitute one’s goals, expectations, and actions.

            Patriarchy: Patriarchy is a social system in which the male gender role acts as the primary authority figure central to social organization, and where fathers hold authority over women, children, and property. It implies the institutions of male rule and privilege, and entails female subordination.

            Feminism: is a collection of movements aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights for women. …. Most forms of feminism characterize patriarchy as an unjust social system that is oppressive to women.

            Looks to me like “patriarchy” and “feminism” are both ideologies and that the latter is, in substantial part anyway, a reaction to the former. Or maybe you think that the latter developed only because the ladies had nothing better to do between afternoon tea and evening bridge.

            Trying to link the MRM with the “Patriarchalism” or “Manism”, whatever the hell they are, is proof positive that you cannot describe the MRM as the mirror image of Feminism, try as you may.

            Depends on what you and I mean by those terms and the degree to which AVfM adheres to or supports one in particular. But virtually all I said was that all “isms” are problematic and that:

            But “manism” seemed like a reasonable complement of or opposite to feminism.

            However, it seems that there is actually a better term than “MRM” or “manism” and provides some justification for arguing that it is, in fact, somewhat of a mirror image of feminism, at least in the sense of being an ideology that supports and promotes men’s rights as opposed to women’s rights, that is:

            Masculinism: Masculism (or masculinism) may refer to political, cultural, and economic movements aimed at establishing and defending political, economic, and social rights and participation in society for men and boys. These rights include legal issues, such as those of conscription, child custody, alimony, and equal pay for equal work.

            But it seems to me that, as I’ve suggested several times before, those “isms” only become problematic when they become dogmatic and authoritarian, and in the process of championing their own rights deny them to other members of the society.

            By the way, you did not address your inflammatory comment.

            I did in an earlier comment today.

            Please do so, violence is not tolerated around here and your insinuation will not be tolerated.

            Huffy, huffy. The insinuation is only in your own mind and interpretation, not in what I said.

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

          Please support your assertion:

          “I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men. ”

          We are waiting.

          • Turbo

            @ Steersman

            Ok, my last post was to be my last post to you, but I had not read your last response, so this will be my last.

            “Others would apparently disagree with you and agree with me.”

            Yes, and we all know who they are. You continued efforts to try to link the MRM with some sort of Patriarchy is clumsy, has failed and is disingenuous. If you want to attack us for what we are, fine, but don’t try to attack us for what we are not.

            We are here not for Patriarchy, or Matriarchy but for equality in law. For all people, regardless of Gender.

            By the way, I read your last response to Dr F. If you come to a site like this, where most men have been totally emotionally crippled and financially destroyed by the family law system, and start sprouting women’s rights in divorce, you have just declared that you are a clown. You will be given no credibility, because you have none.

            I stand by my last response however, we will stand by anyone who has been brutalized by these draconian laws.

            Please ponder all that has been said to you, or not, whatever.

          • Steersman

            @ Turbo,

            You continued efforts to try to link the MRM with some sort of Patriarchy is clumsy, has failed and is disingenuous. If you want to attack us for what we are, fine, but don’t try to attack us for what we are not. We are here not for Patriarchy, or Matriarchy but for equality in law.

            As I have indicated several times, although you seem to want to ignore that, I quite agree with the principle of equality in law. And likewise that many feminists are of the same opinion. Looks like some common ground to me.

    • Paul Elam

      “And, more specifically, it seems to me that, for all of the somewhat credible examples provided by A Voice for Men of women who are bigots and “fem-Nazis”, there is a disconcerting and problematic unwillingness to recognize that there are, apparently, more than a few men who are, in fact, decidedly misogynist if not outright assholes in their dealing with women.”

      I am trying to think of a considerate response, but the only thing that comes to mind when I read this is “Fucking DUH.”

      Of course there are men that are assholes and jerks. Hell, most of us here are a lot more familiar with men being seen that way than your average blue piller.

      Our society has been engaged in a pervasive and relentless campaign against men for 50 years and a large part of that is reminding us incessantly about the worst among us, and even sent us the message that this model represents the core of all men.

      Surely you have better things to do than to come into a place like this, where we wax algebraic about this stuff with a lecture on simple addition.

      We don’t need to be reminded of this shit, man. We need to remind you that when we explore the dark side of some women we are not creating an imbalance, but correcting one.

      Whatever “seems” to you about both camps is a product of not really understanding either.

      Get off your white horse, even if you have to shut up for a little while so that you can learn how to dismount.

      • Steersman

        Of course there are men that are assholes and jerks. Hell, most of us here are a lot more familiar with men being seen that way than your average blue piller.

        As I indicated in a previous post, I’m glad to see that you acknowledged that and stood up against it. Just trying to suggest that more of it might take some of the wind out of Futrelle’s sails and / or lead to some sort of rapprochement. I sort of suggested that on his site and got banned for my efforts – no sense of humor or low boredom threshold, I guess – so that avenue is closed off.

        Our society has been engaged in a pervasive and relentless campaign against men for 50 years and a large part of that is reminding us incessantly about the worst among us, and even sent us the message that this model represents the core of all men.

        Considering the status of women in most societies just over the last couple of millennia – you might want to read Ibn Warraq’s Why I Am Not a Muslim [copy online] and Does God Hate Women? by Ophelia Benson & Jeremy Stangroom for details, I would say that there might be some justification for that campaign. Although I’ll concede that, as is typical in such cases, there is some justification for arguing that the pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction (as I indicated in my first post) – not at all easy to reach an equitable balance point.

        Surely you have better things to do than to come into a place like this, where we wax algebraic about this stuff, with a lecture on simple addition.

        I do as a matter of fact, but I figure that many people – on both sides of the equation – aren’t really cognizant of all of the unknowns. And on which I might be able to shed a little light.

        We need to remind you that when we explore the dark side of some women we are not creating an imbalance, but correcting one.

        Yes, as indicated above I realize there is a dark side in feminism and that there is some necessity for correcting an imbalance in some areas. But it still seems to me there are many other imbalances in favour of men that contribute to the overall problem. Needs a bit of a top-down approach to resolve it.

        Whatever “seems” to you about both camps is a product of not really understanding either.

        Maybe. But there are a great many factions in each that makes it somewhat questionable whether anybody really has a good handle on either. And stereotypes and hysteria tends to produce responses that are frequently very counterproductive. As I would say is the case where John the Other recently “misspoke” ….

        • Paul Elam

          Sorry bro, but you are rolling in steer-shit. And I really don’t have time for it. You won’t be the first or last guy to come in with grand ideas about having us focus on how a nobody like Futrelle might react, all using feminist sensitive vernacular and living the delusion that we are dealing with rational, moral opponents.

          But that is where I quit reading.

          You are free to debate this stuff here with anyone who wants to waste their time, but don’t troll.

          Better yet, read every article in the suggested reading catalog and THEN come back with whatever it is you are selling.

          • Steersman

            … living the delusion that we are dealing with rational, moral opponents.

            Yes, I’ll certainly agree, from firsthand experience, that there is some justification for questioning whether some feminists are at all “rational and moral”. In particular, it seems that the perspectives of both Man Boobz and the Southern Poverty Law Center on the The False Rape Society, at least, were badly out to lunch – it would be interesting to know whether there were any retractions from the first two. Although, if I’m not mistaken, Futrelle raised similar questions – justifiably or not – about some of those on the AVfM side of the fence.

            You are free to debate this stuff here with anyone who wants to waste their time, but don’t troll.

            Thanks, although I don’t see that I was doing any trolling as I spoke directly to the original post and to the responses of other commenters. However, my impression is that many sites throw down the trolling accusation when it looks more like just a case of reasonable questions about the prevailing “conventional wisdom” – aka dogma.

            Better yet, read every article in the suggested reading catalog and THEN come back with whatever it is you are selling.

            Generally a pretty good site with some credible arguments, more than a few of which I have read. Though I also think there is some substantial bias and stereotyping that justifies taking some of it with more than a grain or two of salt.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            @ Steersman

            “Generally a pretty good site with some credible arguments, more than a few of which I have read. Though I also think there is some substantial bias and stereotyping that justifies taking some of it with more than a grain or two of salt.”

            What are you… a bloody wine critic or something ?

          • Just1X

            @Dr F.

            don’t you go all mushy on us now just because he damns us with faint praise, stay strong & true to the cause brother

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            @ Just1X,

            I think you are right, and I would do all of us due respect had I steered Steersman faster to the “Exit or stay honest but unpopular” sign.

            So, in the spirit of MRA clarity and disdain for crappy postings which have the nip of snake venom I’ll repost my softer reply.

            @ Steersman,

            When you say…… ““Generally a pretty good site with some credible arguments, more than a few of which I have read. Though I also think there is some substantial bias and stereotyping that justifies taking some of it with more than a grain or two of salt.”……… you tell more than just these words.

            You have now exposed yet another side of your nastiness by plonking yourself in a crows nest and delivering unto us your final “carved in marble” review of our assembling here.

            By doing this you are being dishonest once more, and here’s why:

            You are presenting as an authority as to what site has or has not credence or verifiable information for others to read. While you do this you do not back up why or how you came to this conclusion.

            In the meantime your silence about that means you have become tolerant by default of the possibility for any naive and uneducated passerby to read your words as the truth.

            You don’t suggest any opinions of a single person, only as scholarly soul with wisdom shaped by many years. You know some may fall for it while most will not and I believe you are playing homage to a numbers game with this mask, another lie.

            You tried to duck and weave the good replies here to your flimsy assertions and as a fellow animal I get that on a Precambrian mid-brain sort of thing, I do.

            However, the time for hiding has come and gone and now the spotlight has lifted upwards and is lighting you up to show you as a deranged mixture of a shriveled John Wayne with a monocle bearing a whiskey balloon while straddling a horse way up on high.

            Steersman, again, as others have said before, if you wish to be here with others in healthy debate you must first use that long ladder attached to your unusually long legged horse and climb down.

            Meet us here around the table and if you lie again we’ll call you out and big deal. Take it on the chin and let’s press on – honestly this time.

            There is too much at stake for us to concentrate on who votes for this party or who believes in god or not. We are getting the hang of unity in a way that floats well above any words from you or anyone else that tries to divide us.

            We are getting really bloody smart and so the deal stands.

            Keep it honest and see if you have the nuts to see if you can teach us a thing or two, or quite simply tuck those Coco-pops away and let us do our thing.

        • OneHundredPercentCotton

          Dear Steerman,

          Thank you for speaking up on behalf of women. Truly much appreciated.

          I appreciate it so much in fact I’m wondering if you’ll speak up for MY issues as a woman.

          Do you realize how much women hurt other women?

          I pissed off a sister in law, who in turn retaliated against me by falsely accusing my teen son of rape. I could only sit by helplessly as he was railroaded in a court system sympathetic to accusers and designed to convict at all costs. My “always the victim because I’m a woman” status was changed to “mother in denial”, because it seems only women making accusations are honest and incapable of lying.

          Women get child custody the majority of time, which means if you are the paternal grandmother you enjoy the same “man status” as your son. If your son is barred from his child’s life, you are also barred from your grandchild’s life.

          My daughter just found out her children are worth $75.00 each in child custody formulas, while the First Wife’s child is worth $800.00. A First Wife can get pregnant during her husband’s deployment by another man, divorce him and move his child across country and freely enjoy her life.

          Child support formulas are determined on the higher pay rates during temporary deployment rather than the regular rate of pay when Daddy isn’t putting his life on the line in a war zone.

          “You should have known the First Wife could have done this before marrying him or having children” she was told, while learning she and her babies will now be living below poverty wages yet ineligible for food stamps because the money goes to child support while First Wife gets a new house and car out of the deal.

          As a woman watching my son and daughter both suffer at the hands of an unjust system, I gotta tell you I’ve come to support the MRAs because as a woman, I sure as hell don’t get any support from feminists.

          So, hey! Thanks for all your concern about us women getting the shitty end of the stick.

          Sincerely.

          • Steersman

            No problemo. My pleasure, although I’m not sure whether I should be offering much further assistance or even sympathy given the rather low esteem in which white knights – and women – are generally held in this neck of the woods.

            But I’m sorry to hear that you and your family are getting it in the neck from what certainly seems to be an inequitable system.

            Do you realize how much women hurt other women? …. . My “always the victim because I’m a woman” status was changed to “mother in denial”, because it seems only women making accusations are honest and incapable of lying.

            I tend to forget about it as I’m not exposed to it a lot partly because of Generation of Vipers. And which is a large part of the reason I was banned at Pharyngula as I was skeptical about the motives of one woman which put the local cohort of feminists on the warpath after me – seems to me that many of them are rather naive about their own sex. Or opposite sex as the case may be. Or rather dishonest.

            … I gotta tell you I’ve come to support the MRAs because as a woman, I sure as hell don’t get any support from feminists.

            I can see how the MRAs could potentially help out with your son since the false rape society seems to have a credible case. Really unfortunate that the court system seems to have degenerated in many cases to the point where hearsay and pretty tenuous circumstantial evidence carries the day. Although the other extreme in Muslim societies where four male witnesses to a rape are required for conviction seems quite a bit worse. But if the situation progresses any further in that direction men and women won’t be able to be in the same room together without there being cameras rolling and affidavits signed as to the precise nature of all interactions.

            Although I don’t know what to say about your daughter except that it seems rather complicated for one thing. It appears that the issue is less a case that either feminism or MRAs have any influence on and more being one in which the formulas weren’t really designed to handle a relatively unique or uncommon set of circumstances. I hope she will find other legal avenues to obtain additional support.

            So, hey! Thanks for all your concern about us women getting the shitty end of the stick.

            Unfortunately it seems that any given change in policy or law doesn’t always solve every problem or to the same degree for everyone; bit of a continuing battle for incremental improvements which isn’t always that much consolation for those on the tail end.

          • OneHundredPercentCotton

            Well there you go. “in Muslim countries men blah blah blah blah blah to women”, so therefore MY sons have to suffer for it?

            The SAME sons who are deploying repeatedly to put their lives and body parts on the line in those Muslim countries, coming home to divorce papers and wives pregnant by some other guy only to find out they have NO RIGHTS in family court because they are insignifigant to their children’s lives?

            Yeah. The guys forced to-I mean having the exclusive priviledge to- sign up for selective service because if they don’t THEY will not be allowed a driver’s license, professional licenses or rarified Government jobs allowed males.

            Shame on my son for what transpires in Muslim countries!

            I should have reminded him of that everytime he came home upset and disappointed he was ineligible for scholarships given freely to women and minorities with less qualifications than he had. He asserts his male priviledge by getting up at 3:00 A.M. to shovel snow for the university he attends since it’s UNFAIR TO WOMEN to expect THEM to shovel snow in exchange for tuition.

            Hate to be a whining female, but look…here my husband is once again facing hernia surgery(almost 10 years since the last double hernia surgery) because at over 60 years of age all the young guys that USED to do the heavy lifting have all been quota replaced by young women, and heaven knows THEY can’t be expected to be lifting heavy equiptment! Now *I* have to be stuck waiting on him hand and foot! This is NOT FAIR to me, because God knows my husband won’t complain about it!

            As for my daughter, it’s not complicated at all. She thought family court would be fair, reasonable, and concerned about her and her children as well as the other.

            I tried to tell her. She wouldn’t listen. “Whatever can be done to stick it to your husband, screw him over in any way possible will happen. Be prepared”.

            She didn’t believe me because all her life she has enjoyed “fair” treatment – more than fair, in fact, getting off lightly for youthful infractions while her brothers got SLAMMED for minor ones.

            Of course I was right when I told her to expect the worst. As long as she assumes a traditional loving supportive wife role she will be punished alongside her husband.

            At least she has options. She can pick up the phone and make a false DV complaint and file a restraining order if the whim suits her. She can have “choice” and she can avoid responsibility.

            What are YOUR “choices” Steersman? This NOT being a Muslim country and all. What are YOUR options? How do YOU protect yourself injustice, presuming you aren’t in a Muslim country?

            Lastly, why bring up foreign countries when discussing how “oppressed” women are in THIS country?

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            Wow, now this is one vicarious smack in the chops if ever there was one.

            You submit a very salient question for a poster who quite willy-nilly throws a “hard hitting” issue our way.

            Considering the circumstances with your two offspring it is remarkably clear why you would pose it to Steersman.

            Nice one Cotton, nice one indeed.

            P.S.
            I wouldn’t bother about sitting on the post box waiting for a reply as we all know your question is rhetorical. It will not be met with a reply of honesty in this life or the one after it, and kudos to you for publishing that inquiry.

        • Him There

          “…take some of the wind out of Futrelle’s sails and / or lead to some sort of rapprochement”

          For all your tiresome meandering twaddle about how you think “both sides” fail to fully understand each other, you yourself completely fail to grasp at least one key point: I don’t give a flying f**k what Futrelle or Man Boobz or whatever he calls himself thinks. Or does. Or says. I can’t speak for anyone else here, but I would be surprised if many others don’t feel the same.

          What you need to get your head around is this: Futrelle and his ilk and all their fans aren’t the problem. The laws, the governments that make the laws and the male haters in their focus groups and thinktanks that get their lies codified and enacted are the real enemies. That being so, not only is your fantasy of a “rapprochement” with Futrelle and his like not on the cards, it’s not even relevant.

          “I figure that many people – on both sides of the equation – aren’t really cognizant of all of the unknowns. And on which I might be able to shed a little light”

          So here I am about to get shafted up the arse with a big sharp stick wielded by the legal system and the family court, and you think my pain would be alleviated if I listened to you give me chapter and verse on the unknown trouble the bastard who sharpened the stick went through?

          • Steersman

            @ Him There

            What you need to get your head around is this: Futrelle and his ilk and all their fans aren’t the problem. The laws, the governments that make the laws and the male haters in their focus groups and think-tanks that get their lies codified and enacted are the real enemies.

            And who do you think makes the laws? I would say that all of these various discussion groups and forums – on this topic and a great many others – influence the laws and policies that are implemented. Seems to me that AVfM wouldn’t exist as a website if there wasn’t some thought that it could be used to influence various policy makers, directly or indirectly. Likewise with Man Boobz. Seems to me that if you want to make some changes you should expect to have to get down into the trenches and battle it out where your opponents live and breathe.

            But I find it curious how so many websites are frequently little more than echo chambers rather than any real venue for discussing the issues – “don’t confuse me with facts; my mind is made up” seems to be the principle in play. Why don’t you go over to Man Boobz or Pharyngula and try out some of your handy-dandy “weapons” – aka arguments? Very few people seem to be prepared to do that, although I notice that some have done so here and there both.

            So here I am about to get shafted up the arse with a big sharp stick wielded by the legal system and the family court, and you think my pain would be alleviated if I listened to you give me chapter and verse on the unknown trouble the bastard who sharpened the stick went through?

            Are you telling me that you’re in that situation or is that hearsay? And are you saying that there are no men in similar situations who aren’t culpable or who try to evade their responsibilities? Presumably – and apparently – the laws were designed to ensure that in divorces there is an equitable splitting of assets and responsibilities. According to Wikipedia:

            It is estimated that upwards of 95% of divorces in the U.S. are “uncontested”, because the two parties are able to come to an agreement (either with or without lawyers/mediators/collaborative counsel) about the property, children, and support issues.

            But no system is perfect and, at least in the indicated 5%, some inequities may occur. Sorry to hear that that might be the case for you, but absent some further details I would say you either need to negotiate a better arrangement with your partner, accept you have some responsibilities, or find a better lawyer.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            @ Steersman,

            Please support your assertion:

            “I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men. ”

            We are waiting.

    • Him There

      “But, relative to the related “battle between the sexes” with the well-entrenched, not to say dogmatic, Man Boobz and A Voice for Men leading their respective cohorts on opposite sides of No-Man’s Land, one might argue that, as in any war, the first casualty is the truth.”

      Cobblers. The “truth” died years ago in the drafting and enacting of apartheid anti-male legislation in the US, Canada, Sweden, the UK and Australia among others, along with the setting up and considerable funding of so-called “family” courts and law centres, all of which routinely deny males their rights to family, to just treatment and to respect. Some (the recent Australian DV Plan is most obvious to me) are but a half-step away from breaching a bloke’s constitutional rights to presumption of innocence.

      That the truth was long ago taken out the back and shot before dawn is NOT the result of the chasm between AVfM and sites like Manboobz or any other blue pill addict greasing their way up the feminist hierarchy, and no amount of poncing about with words by you will cover up your shallow, vapid “analysis”.

      “Oh if only you men were just nicer about it all” seems to be your whinge. Well we were “nice” for 40 years or more and look where that got us. More “nice” won’t fix f**k all, and nor will wet, hand-wringing pleas to find “common ground”. If yo really think it does, go tell a bloke who’s been shafted by the legal or family court system simply cos he shouted at the dog and who now has no family, no home and f**k all money he should have been “nicer” and sought to find “common ground” and I’d be surprised if you got away from him in one piece.

      • Steersman

        Cobblers.

        ?? Means what?

        “Oh if only you men were just nicer about it all” seems to be your whinge. Well we were “nice” for 40 years or more and look where that got us.

        More stereotypes. Really easy to cherry-pick a few cases, particularly where there aren’t any details available to see who is really in the right and who in the wrong, and then proceed to condemn a whole class or group.

        Although I’ll agree that there seem to have been more than a few abuses of the various human rights tribunals.

        • Him There

          “??Means what?”

          “Cobblers” = short for rhyming slang ‘cobblers’ awls’.

          You write:
          “More stereotypes. Really easy to cherry-pick a few cases, particularly where there aren’t any details available to see who is really in the right and who in the wrong, and then proceed to condemn a whole class or group.”

          In your original you wrote:
          “But, relative to the related “battle between the sexes” with the well-entrenched, not to say dogmatic, Man Boobz and A Voice for Men leading their respective cohorts on opposite sides of No-Man’s Land, one might argue that, as in any war, the first casualty is the truth.”

          And you think I’m stereotyping, cherry-picking and proceeding to condemn an entire group? Get a load of yourself.

          • Steersman

            And you think I’m stereotyping, cherry-picking and proceeding to condemn an entire group? Get a load of yourself.

            And you don’t think that it’s maybe a little dogmatic for all MRAs to say that all feminists are “evil, wicked, mean and nasty”? And likewise for all feminists to say the same about all MRAs? Because it certainly seems to me that that is what a great many MRAs and a great many feminists are saying.

            But I’m saying something quite a bit different, almost the exact opposite as a matter of fact. What I’ve said in a dozen different ways and a dozen different posts, here and on other sites, is that there is more than a small amount of truth on both sides of the divide. And a fair amount of highly questionable arguments – at best.

            [Time to call it a night]

          • Him There

            @ Steersman (sorry, can’t see a ‘reply’ option to your post)

            And you don’t think that it’s maybe a little dogmatic for all MRAs to say that all feminists are “evil, wicked, mean and nasty”?

            All MRAs? All feminists? For someone who preaches the evils of generalisations and stereotyping, you don’t half do a decent line in them yourself. Give it a flocking rest will ya? Come back when you can string together a decent, consistent and coherent argument.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            Steersman,

            You have not supported your statement where you said:

            “ I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men. ”

            Come clean and admit it cannot be supported, or have a go and try and support it.

            If you simply piss off without a word with regards to this simple request then you are intellectually filthy and are in need of a plunge into a vat with a rotating power spray equipped with synthetic pyrethroids.

            Either that or a jolly good scrub down with a soapy brush followed by a stout buff with a well flocked…. I mean fluffed towel.

          • Turbo

            @ Steersman

            Have a good nights sleep Steersman, and please wake up and address the issues presented to you. So far you given us subjective analysis, feminist theory and plenty of rhetoric. No facts, no logic and lots of spin. Can you do better Steersman, we shall see. Based on what you have presented so far, I doubt it.
            And I am still waiting for you to address the highly inflammatory comment that you made in your post,
            address this if you want any credibility whatsoever.

          • Steersman

            @ Him There:

            Come back when you can string together a decent, consistent and coherent decent argument.

            “… a decent … coherent decent argument”? You should talk, particularly since you seemed to have had some difficulty writing – at least at that time of day; at least I had an excuse.

            But you’re right: I do say there are substantial evils in generalizations and stereotyping – generally ok if one recognizes them as such, not so if one assumes they apply across the board.

            However, apart from the fact that the first part was a rhetorical question, I did subsequently say in the same post that:

            Because it certainly seems to me that that is what a great many MRAs and a great many feminists are saying.

            You might want to try reading all of what I’ve said before trying to respond.

            But, apart from those quibbles, do you, presumably as an MRA, think that all feminists are “evil, wicked, mean and nasty”, at least in the sense of having no redeeming or otherwise valid features to their philosophies, to their “ideology”? Because it sure looks to me like all the MRAs here are going to be answering in the affirmative. And, as a case in point and which seems to be entirely typical of the attitudes here, Dr. Elam said [fembots bent out of shape]:

            I am not going to stop. You see, I find you, as a feminist, to be a loathsome, vile piece of human garbage. I find you so pernicious and repugnant that the idea of fucking your shit up gives me an erection.

            Now, that looks to me to be rather intemperate at best and, at worst, shading off into misogynism and hate speech.

            Although, to be fair and to round out the evidence for my assertion, it seems a great many of the “feminists” over on both Man Boobz and Pharyngula have a similar attitude towards “masculinism”. Rather sad; one is tempted to say, “a pox on both your houses” if it weren’t for the fact that there is some justifications on both sides.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            @ Steersman

            You still duck my request to answer your assertion,

            ““I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men. ”

            [Note]
            Request has been asked repeatedly and has been so far:

            Submitted on 2012/03/27 at 11:26 PM
            Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 4:41 AM
            Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 8:56 AM
            Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 11:42 PM
            Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 11:44 PM
            Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 11:56 PM
            Submitted on 2012/03/29 at 12:07 AM

            The list is being updated every time you refuse to answer it.

          • Him There

            @ Steersman
            @ Him There:
            “… a decent … coherent decent argument”? You should talk, particularly since you seemed to have had some difficulty writing – at least at that time of day; at least I had an excuse.

            I have NFI WTF you’re on about.

            But you’re right: I do say there are substantial evils in generalizations and stereotyping – generally ok if one recognizes them as such, not so if one assumes they apply across the board.
            However, apart from the fact that the first part was a rhetorical question, I did subsequently say in the same post that:
            Because it certainly seems to me that that is what a great many MRAs and a great many feminists are saying.
            You might want to try reading all of what I’ve said before trying to respond.

            Does the word “hypocrite” mean anything to you? Or are you simply incapable of subjecting the standards of argument you require from others to your own words?

            Your “the first part was a rhetorical question” is so transparently the best post-hoc excuse you could think of. If it isn’t why do the points that follow your “all MRAs” claim completely contradict it? Oh, wait, that’s just another rhetorical device, right?

            But, apart from those quibbles, do you, presumably as an MRA, think that all feminists are “evil, wicked, mean and nasty”, at least in the sense of having no redeeming or otherwise valid features to their philosophies, to their “ideology”? Because it sure looks to me like all the MRAs here are going to be answering in the affirmative.

            I haven’t met or talked to ALL feminists, so your question is redundant. Your perceptions of all MRAs here are your problem, and I have no interest or intention of helping you clear up your own myopia. What Paul Elam said is Paul Elam’s business. Predictably, you slap a quote from him into your post while removing all the relevant context surrounding that quote, then you try to paste your meaning onto it – that’s called cherry-picking. If you think he’s been “intemperate” or worse, I strongly suggest you ask yourself whether his interlocutor’s points or language or attitudes might have justified it.

            Not that I give a toss anyway. Your reply seems to me about equal parts flannel, selective quoting, spin and concern/ tone trolling, and you’ve taken up more than enough of my time.

          • Steersman

            @ Him There,

            I have NFI WTF you’re on about.

            You, or someone else, edited out the second “decent”.

            I haven’t met or talked to ALL feminists, so your question is redundant. Your perceptions of all MRAs here are your problem ….

            Looks to me you’re just trying to evade the question. Let me put it a little more clearly for you since you seem to be unable to read between the lines. Do you think that there is no redeeming value whatsoever in all feminist ideology and principles?

            As indicated my impression is that all of the MRAs here are likely to answer in the affirmative – i.e., “yes”. All it takes to prove me “wrong” is for someone to say, “No. I think there are some redeeming values in feminism.” That no one seems prepared to do so only leads me to think my first impression is the correct one – which is then an entirely different problem as it seems then that it is the brand of masculinism espoused by AVfM that is discredited.

          • Him There

            @ Steersman
            You, or someone else, edited out the second “decent”.

            Oh I see. Suddenly a typo (yes I did correct it, within minutes of posting it) becomes an inability to formulate a cogent argument. Well, you’d know all about that, as you’ve happily shown all the way through…

            Looks to me you’re just trying to evade the question. Let me put it a little more clearly for you since you seem to be unable to read between the lines. Do you think that there is no redeeming value whatsoever in all feminist ideology and principles?

            1) I answered your question. I answered it in the form of the letters I typed that I arranged as words to make it more convenient for those who can read to read and thus understand the answer I was giving. I assumed – incorrectly – that this was a concept you were familiar with.
            2) What I “seem” to you –good, bad or indifferent – is your business.
            3) you now pose a question that is different to the first question and expect me to answer as if they were the same. They are not, I can see they’re not, why can’t you?
            4) in answer to your new question (which as I said is not the same as the original question that I gave an answer to and that you seem unable to find or if you can find it you can’t read it or if you can read it you can’t understand it… that answer), define which subset of “feminist ideology and principles” the question refers to.

            Lastly, I couldn’t give a flying fuck what you think of MRAs on this site or any other, or whether you think you’ve been proved right or wrong or neither or in fact turn out to be a previously unknown species of bacterium or a minor deity. Just so we’re clear and all…

            Here’s some homework for you:
            A. given your unrivalled ability at moving goalposts, have you considered a job at a sports ground?
            B. did you do maths at school and were you bullied by your maths teacher? If not whence your unfailing ability to make 1 + 1 = n (where n is not an integer in the range 1 to 3)?
            C. given the only consistent trait all though your posts are your attempts to catch people out (see A & B) and so “prove” the narrow mindset you came here with (“see, I was right all along!”), why are you even here? Surely you’re wasting all that superior insight, grasp of logic and priceless skill at alternative maths with us mere blokes here when you could have short-cut the whole process by just proclaiming “MRA = MISOGYNY!1!1!!” as you charge about the place on the back of a white horse rescuing damsels in distress? After all, that’s all you’re going to do anyway…

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            @ Him There,

            This Steersman git reminds me of a duck landing on a well oiled sheet of plastic.

            I explained in a post near the bottom of this thread in great detail how I am one of them misogynists, about how I am surrounded by nude chicks all day. He won’t respond as my case is watertight.

            Nah mate, this duck is skidding about as a silly feathery ball just as you might see in a Merry Melodies cartoon.

            All beak and quack. Not even a peck really.

          • Him There

            @ Dr F

            Nice imagery with the greasy plastic sheets and ducks. And “duck” made me think of “quackery” (appropriately enough given our friend Steersman), and if I then add in Steersman’s “logic” I arrive at the point where I want to know whether he thinks I weigh the same as a duck

        • Turbo

          @ Dr F
          Jesus you make me laugh DrF
          Most of the time I have no idea what the F## you are saying, ( me bit thick ) and I have to spend some time analyzing your comments. But seriously when you go for the jugular there are no distinctions, it is straight at the heart of the oppressors that your knife thrusts. I applaud yo doc, you are quirky, you are silly, and you are funny, but when the shit hits the fan, you are a dagger for us all. Luv your work

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            Ta for your kind words Mr Turbo,

            I have made it pretty high on my priorities to call out the fibs of the liars that lower themselves down like spiders on silk coming from their bums.

            We all tell lies, I sure do, but never for fun or personal profit. You know the sort of thing I’m talking about. For example, a lie told on the phone saying “so and so” isn’t here to talk with them while watching someone in front of you waving their arms about while mouthing the words, “I’m not here”.

            These lies are necessary in society for smoother social running and we all do them from time to time and that’s ok.

            For another example, appropriate editing of information is by definition a lie. If someone greets you with, “How are you today ?”, you don’t say. “Well I have a sore foot and my tooth is worrying me and I feel glum about the stock market and I need to rush off to the toilet now for a wiss so bye.”

            It’s the other lies that jack me sideways and these are lies I see more and more now. I’m not saying that there are more of them than there used to be. I’m saying I see them more where I didn’t before.

            That ethically stunted Steersman thing that lowered itself down at our dinner table was selling. Now I didn’t see it at first but by Jove mate he was selling as sure as can be.

            I didn’t see it at first as I am not as sharp as I’d like to be, but when I went into the admin bit and saw all of his posts crunched up together they sparkled. It was as though I had grabbed a great big wet rope and when I squeezed it the filth dripped out.

            People like these will always knock on your door and if you close it they will tap on a window around the other side of the house.

            His motivation is to unsteady our resolve here and I’m delighted to say we acted shiningly and called out the guy/thing/bot/whatever it was. We did it honourably and we did it without taking refuge in basal cat calling to make a point. Well ok, we did lower ourselves a bit (I did), but we didn’t rely on anything else to make our points except calling out the process of his method and calling out the dishonest way he was working. Any cat calling we did was of fleeting substance only and not the crux of our responses to him/thing.

            You know mate, sometimes flushing the dunny once is no good so you just have to stand there and flush and flush until it slithers around the S bend.

    • Him There

      Seems to me that it would help a great deal if both camps were to recognize that “my sex, right or wrong” is highly problematic, that the more dogmatic members of one’s own sex or camp are more of a problem than the less dogmatic ones on the other side

      I believe the term I want here is Tone Troll

  • tallwheel

    Kill the prince? That’s victim blaming! Sure, guys who treat women like princesses are misguided, but should the prince take more of the blame than the princess herself? I hope the prince will learn the true way after his first mistake, but I still can’t help feeling a bit sorry for him. He was probably raised to be that way, after all.

    • Paul Elam

      “should the prince take more of the blame than the princess herself?”

      Only if he values fixing the problem more than obsessing on her craziness.

    • tallwheel

      By the way, I’m guessing that at least half of the guys here, like me, were the prince at least once early in their lives. That’s probably a large part of the reason we ended up here in the first place. Most of us were TOLD by our parents and everyone else that we were supposed to treat women like princesses. It’s no surprise then that so many guys fall into the trap of becoming the prince. That’s exactly what society wanted us to do.

      • Sting Chameleon

        Which is why we’re here in the first place. We shouldn’t kill the princes, but rather recruit them in the Thieves’ Guild and teach them to become rogues :)

        • DruidV

          I am not even embarrassed anymore, that I know exactly what that statement means, SC!!!

          We MRA’s all make great progress here!!!

          • Sting Chameleon

            Indeed. Since things aren’t that horrible yet in this neck of the woods (the fembots haven’t taken over the mainstream discourse yet, even though they’ve made some progress on foisting their agenda), we’re still in time to do something. So far, I’ve only managed to get some of my friends and associates to realize the raw deal they’re getting and how to navigate the raging river that is dealing with modern women.

            Do not be her knight in shining armor, don the cloak and dagger and strike from the shadows, then take the loot.

  • Merlin

    Just listening to the recording of the show and needed to pause to post this. I felt it relevant and think you will too.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNKIjLLZMWs&list=FL2gpXKI6CG5ZODZ4ySVZVaA&index=1&feature=plpp_video

    The great Jack Nicholson telling it as it is…

  • victorsvoice

    Prince of the day: http://blogs.bostonmagazine.com/boston_daily/2012/03/26/white-men-rule/

    Man, look at those comments. This guys reputation is going down the drain. And he really made it worse for himself by referring to the angry commenters as people who are in need of professional help.

  • Him There

    If proof were needed that the Princess Syndrome is – well I won’t say “alive and well” cos it obviously is neither – still prevalent, go spend ten minutes reading the profiles of 20-something to 50-something women on any online dating site in any westernised country.

    Remember to take a sick bag…

    • CanMan

      I have a single friend who wants a relationship. At one point we talked about dating sites and he said that the women there were not what he was looking for. So I spent a couple hours on several different dating sites for two separate countries. Gotta say, I’m glad I’m not looking for a wife these days.

      • Kimski

        But they’re really really great for a good laugh, if you need it. We are talking Monty Python-league here.
        I especially enjoy when grossly overweight women describe themselves as ‘petite’, or make a list of at least 50 things they want from a man, with absolutely nothing to offer in return, before they go on to describing themselves as ‘generally not very demanding’.
        If you want to see perfect examples of female coqnitive dissonance, these are the places to go visit once in a while, but I’ll have to agree with ‘Him There':
        -Remember the barf bags.

      • Him There

        If your mate was into the PUA/game gig dating sites would be a good place to start. Except in rare circumstances they’re not the place to find a suitable suitor, but then that’s just my experience.

        Then again my experience is that some months ago some part of me woke up and began reading MRA blogs, and within days took my profile off the internet dating site I was on. I haven’t been back since, except to cheer myself up a bit. All of which is a long-winded way of saying “does your mate really want a relationship that badly, and why?”

  • Paul Elam

    @ Steersman

    Your questions have been answered and it is indeed you skating past objections to your assertions.

    Personally, I don’t give a fuck if you think you’re getting a troll caution because your making points.

    I have been at this for 25 years in one way or another. I have heard and forgotten more objections to the way we express concerns about men’s issues that you will likely ever entertain. You are not saying anything new.

    In fact, your objection, that we weren’t saying an acceptable enough percentage of remarks about nasty men to make latte sipping quasi-academic snots like you feel good, is one of the more dumbed-down, ignorance revealing things you can say.

    That shit does not play here, and it does not in any way reduce the validity of our claims or the worthiness of our cause.

    If you got a problem with the numbers, cough it up an we will deal with it. You got a problem with the delivery, stand in line…we’ll get someone to you that gives a fuck as soon we can, but it may be a while.

    • Him There

      Oh come on Paul, stop pulling your punches and say what you really think.

    • Turbo

      Please press 1 if your a complete dickhead with his head up his ar### ( Go on hold )

      Please press 2 if you are a rampant feminist with an axe to grind ( Go on hold )

      Please press 3 if you are a feminist troll trying to pass yourself off as a concerned citizen ( Go on hold )

      Please press 4 if you are a genuine human being trying to change the misandric laws and system that robs children and adults of their humanity and freedom ( first available operator sir/ madam, but there may be a wait, so many people of the same opinion )

    • Turbo

      OT Paul, I noticed in my, er, discussion with Steersman, that his last comment to me, I was unable to reply to him. There was no reply button, I had to respond to use the reply from blueface, is there a problem? Also, therre was no reply button in his last response to you, is this a glitche maybe.

      • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

        Everything is fine.

        We all see this too. It’s the “tree” of discussion where we all need to scroll up to find the closest button marked “reply”.

        In these situations where your submitted post might be stamped “Turbo in reply to BillyJack” the thing is to highlight your intended reply at the beginning with “@ Another person” to make it clearer.

        Situation normal no glitches.

        • Turbo

          Yeah, I did pick up on that, thanks Doc.

          PS. We may have to do some more flushing today.

    • Steersman

      @ Paul Elam,

      That shit does not play here, and it does not in any way reduce the validity of our claims or the worthiness of our cause.

      Riiight. And all of the posters on all of the other sites listed on Man Boobz – both the “Boob Roll” and the “Antidotes to Boobery” ones – no doubt all feel the same about their “causes”:

      God willing, we will prevail, in peace and freedom from fear, and in true health, through the purity and essence of our natural… fluids.

      Somebody’s got to be wrong, even if only in some areas – nobody’s right if everybody else is wrong, particularly categorically so.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

      @ Steersman,

      It’s interesting how you continue to avoid my repeated post which says…
      ————————-

      Please support your assertion:

      “I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men. ”

      We are waiting.

      • Steersman

        @ Dr. F,

        I’m still waiting for the flocking idiot to back up this gem of his: “I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men.” He won’t because he can’t and he’s reading right now and he’s most cross about it. Most cross.

        Considering the number of times you’ve asked or commented on that issue, it looks to me like you’re the one with their knickers in a twist. But since you seem not very observant, although that’s probably because of the blinders you seem to be wearing, I’ll try and spell it out a little for you.

        For starters, as I’ve mentioned several times here, the Canadian suffragette Nellie McClung argued that no nation rises higher than its women, a thread that more than a few have picked up and run with. For instance a UN report argued that Muslim countries are so backward relative to Western democracies largely because insist on placing their women in largely unproductive roles. Although I can’t find that link at the moment, this one looks somewhat credible and argues that:

        According to Kenneth [David in a World Bank Survey in 1980], there are several factors for the backwardness of the Muslim society. First and foremost is their illiteracy in general and women illiteracy in particular.

        In addition there is this World Bank Report that describes a few of the negative consequences of gender inequality in Muslim countries:

        Oil and religion are often singled out as the culprits responsible for holding women back, yet neither factor fully explains the facts. …. Women in MENA [Middle East & North Africa] also face a unique combination of legal and social pressures that limit where and when they can work, narrowing the field of available jobs and careers. Laws designed to protect women restrict the hours they can work, and in many countries, women require the permission of their male guardian to work. Employers also perceive women to be less productive or more costly to hire.

        While that is of course in Muslim countries, it should be obvious that, in comparison with Western nations, the benefits of gender equality, particularly access to education, pays off substantial dividends. But, more specifically, the very fact that women comprise a significant fraction of the work force in Western nations all across the board should be sufficient to prove the point. For example, there is this set of statistics (Figure 19) about a Canadian Province which is probably representative. Considering that all of the benefits we share as a civilization are largely due to a highly educated workforce, and that that is due, in substantial measure, to the efforts of feminism to promote gender equality, I would say it is entirely justified to argue that feminism has in fact helped men and women both.

      • Steersman

        And I have posted a response some time ago. It’s on the web page but it hasn’t, I think, shown up in my Inbox yet.

        Also, it would be a nice feature to the website if the post times were shown.

        In addition, I have another post I sent earlier this evening addressed to you that hasn’t shown up in either place yet – presumably because of some extra links.

        Finally, it seems to me that links to the AVfM site don’t go through right away either.

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

          @ Steersman

          Not buying it. Repost the relevant bits again.

          And…. please address my reasonable request that you back up your statement when you said:

          “ I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men. ”

          [Note]
          Request has been asked repeatedly and has been so far:

          Submitted on 2012/03/27 at 11:26 PM
          Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 4:41 AM
          Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 8:56 AM
          Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 11:42 PM
          Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 11:44 PM
          Submitted on 2012/03/28 at 11:56 PM
          Submitted on 2012/03/29 at 12:07 AM
          Submitted on 2012/03/29 at 12:20 AM
          and Submitted again with this post right now.

          The list is being updated every time you refuse to answer it.

          • Steersman

            Check your effing queue. I can see the post on my web page.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            @ Steersman,

            I will not. This is not my site and to duck into admin and fish out anything that is not on the public forum would be an act of disgrace.

            The fact that you suggest I circumvent the process of information flow here in order to respond to you is more proof of your scurrilous method of interaction.

            Answer the fucking request you obnoxious cunt or just fuck off.

            Edit- Do what you will. I am done with you as you reek of all types of decay.

      • Steersman

        @ Dr. F,

        [Here you are you stupid prick. You apparently managed to “duck into admin” to post your twaddle, er “rebuttals”, yesterday.]

        I’m still waiting for the flocking idiot to back up this gem of his: “I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men.” He won’t because he can’t and he’s reading right now and he’s most cross about it. Most cross.

        Considering the number of times you’ve asked or commented on that issue, it looks to me like you’re the one with their knickers in a twist. But since you seem not very observant, although that’s probably because of the blinders you seem to be wearing, I’ll try and spell it out a little for you.

        For starters, as I’ve mentioned several times here, the Canadian suffragette Nellie McClung argued that no nation rises higher than its women, a thread that more than a few have picked up and run with. For instance a UN report argued that Muslim countries are so backward relative to Western democracies largely because insist on placing their women in largely unproductive roles. Although I can’t find that link at the moment, this one looks somewhat credible and argues that:

        According to Kenneth [David in a World Bank Survey in 1980], there are several factors for the backwardness of the Muslim society. First and foremost is their illiteracy in general and women illiteracy in particular.

        In addition there is this World Bank Report that describes a few of the negative consequences of gender inequality in Muslim countries:

        Oil and religion are often singled out as the culprits responsible for holding women back, yet neither factor fully explains the facts. …. Women in MENA [Middle East & North Africa] also face a unique combination of legal and social pressures that limit where and when they can work, narrowing the field of available jobs and careers. Laws designed to protect women restrict the hours they can work, and in many countries, women require the permission of their male guardian to work. Employers also perceive women to be less productive or more costly to hire.

        While that is of course in Muslim countries, it should be obvious that, in comparison with Western nations, the benefits of gender equality, particularly access to education, pays off substantial dividends. But, more specifically, the very fact that women comprise a significant fraction of the work force in Western nations all across the board should be sufficient to prove the point. For example, there is this set of statistics (Figure 19) about a Canadian Province which is probably representative. Considering that all of the benefits we share as a civilization are largely due to a highly educated workforce, and that that is due, in substantial measure, to the efforts of feminism to promote gender equality, I would say it is entirely justified to argue that feminism has in fact helped men and women both.

        • Kimski

          “For instance a UN report argued that Muslim countries are so backward relative to Western democracies largely because (they) insist on placing their women in largely unproductive roles.”

          I don’t think raising a family of healthy and productive individuals can be described as an ‘unproductive role’. Far from it, as a matter of fact.

          Having worked in Saudi Arabia for a period of almost two years I can assure you, that should you ever consider suggesting to a muslim woman that she is oppressed, you’d better be a damned good runner because the retaliation will be swift. This has been witnessed and reported on several occasions, where well meaning feminist western women have been attacked on the street for suggesting such a thing to their muslim counterparts.

          You seem hell bend on introducing an ideology to a demographic who takes great pride in their role as sole decisionmakers when it comes to family, and are far more in control in any aspect of family issues than any muslim man ever was. You just see what’s going on on the surface and believe what western media tells you, obviously.

          The women in muslim countries have NO interest in giving up that power, and the only outcome of giving them an equal amount of power outside of the family and the homes, has been efficiently proved to have devastating consequences for western societies as a whole. It. Does. Not. Work. No group of people should be trusted with that amount of power, because we are all humans and we will use it to gain more.And giving that amount of power to one half of a demographic, while telling them them that they have they RIGHT to use it, based on other peoples actions against other people in the past, and without accountability and responsibility, can in no way “benefit” any society.

          In most western countries there has been a substantial rise in unproductive, sociopathic individuals, as well as a significant rise in suicides. Apart from that, we’ve waged wars on just about every population on the planet in more than a 170 different wars since WWII, and it has all been done in the name of the Holy Equality, and to be able to provide for a rising amount of mostly unproductive individuals, who choose to leave the workforce after their first or second child. This have been the results in EVERY western ‘liberated’ country.

          “In addition there is this World Bank Report that describes a few of the negative consequences of gender inequality in Muslim countries:

          Oil and religion are often singled out as the culprits responsible for holding women back, yet neither factor fully explains the facts”

          No., it doesn’t, and I’ll tell you why: It’s because the reports comes from a small group of people who benefits heavily from spreading that kind of information, about another small group of people who are in posession of ressources that the first group want. The second group are heavily relying on religion to keep EVERYBODY down, and thereby themselves at the top, mostly enforced by another group of radical crazies.

          So, to recapitulate, you are being lied to by a group of people, who relies on an ideology that they also finance, in order for them to get their hands on the ressources of another group of people, who then in turn lie to their populations to maintain the same level of control. And in BOTH systems the men is the demographic carrying the bulk of the burden, and paying with their lives.

          “the very fact that women comprise a significant fraction of the work force in Western nations all across the board should be sufficient to prove the point.”

          Again you are greatly mistaken. The only fact it has proved is that women can’t handle the amount of power you now want to give muslim women, by waging wars on their population of men. A substantial amount of men being fired, commiting suicide, being incarcerated and living on the streets in the western world more than adequately proves this fact.

          That being beside the rising amount of dysfunctional single parent offsprings raised by women who are in no kind of control over these kids, and relies on a increasing amount of violence to keep what little control they have. Thereby creating a demographic of sociopaths that will never benefit society, and are spending their lives creating small empires of criminals and drug abusers in every major city in the western hemisphere. That is, if they’re not wasting their lives on gaming their lives away.

          “Considering that all of the benefits we share as a civilization are largely due to a highly educated workforce, and that that is due, in substantial measure, to the efforts of feminism to promote gender equality, I would say it is entirely justified to argue that feminism has in fact helped men and women both.”

          The benefits we share as a civilization is based on a highly educated force of male soldiers, who rob and steal from other nations in the name of equality, while paying for these “benefits” with their lives. And it’s being done to keep a very small amount of people on top, and to feed a demographic of pampered entitlement princesses, so they can buy the next new item on their lists. All the while becoming more and more stupid and selfcentered, as evidenced by everything you see in the media nowadays.

          The demographic who pays the price for this is the man on the street, who have little else to look forward to in his life than getting married, subsequently divorced, probably incarcerated in the process, and having his kids and possesions stolen from him. But mainly litlle more than being a slave and a utility to keep the wheels rolling in a sick society on the brink of dying.
          And you want this for muslim men too? -How can this be described as a “benefit” for half the population on the planet??

          You have proved nothing so far, because you draw on biased information and refuse to see things in any other way than what benefits those who are already ahead in the game.You are a pawn arguing that we all should be pawns.

          Again, how has feminism benefitted anyone but women, and what makes you think that it will ever stop? From where I am sitting, it becomes more and more apparent, that what we are witnessing taking place is a second edition of The Fall of Rome.

          A smart and highly educated civilization learns from the mistakes of the past instead of doing it all over, don’t you think?

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            Kimski. Wowee,

            I believe this may well be your finest post to date. What a beauty.

            You said everything I wanted to say with this:

            “You are a pawn arguing that we all should be pawns.”

            That line and the “Flocking Idiots” one from our Just1X are just so terrific.

            Thanks for giving a truly wonderful and different angled riposte to our newest troll Mr I.B.Slick the Steersman from Femcoat City.

            ,

          • Kimski

            @Dr.F:

            Thank you.
            /Takes a slight bow.

            There’s much to be said about listening and learning from the discussions in here, and I think that Steersman would benefit heavily from doing so.

          • Steersman

            @ Kimski,

            Not a bad analysis in general and on several points of it I can agree to some extent: more than some justification for thinking the world is going to hell in a hand basket for a great many reasons and causes. And which entirely justifies, I think, my earlier quote that “We have seen the enemy and he is us”. Though very few are prepared to acknowledge that we are all both part of the solution and part of the problem.

            But this, while interesting, is highly suspect:

            Having worked in Saudi Arabia for a period of almost two years I can assure you, that should you ever consider suggesting to a Muslim woman that she is oppressed, you’d better be a damned good runner because the retaliation will be swift.

            My first impression was thinking of a dog with a bone with absolutely nothing left on it, but it would still try to rip your throat out if you tried to take the bone away. People very frequently haven’t a clue as to where their best interests lie, largely because of having been indoctrinated and brainwashed.

            My second impression is that you can’t have read very much about the status and position of women within Islam and have a stereotype based on very few facts. I might suggest you take a look at the book Why I Am Not a Muslim by Ibn Warraq – there’s an on-line version at Scribd, particularly Chapter 14 on Women and Islam. In addition there are all sorts of websites by various apostate Muslims who do anything but wax poetic on the great many merits and benefits of being a woman and Muslim.

          • Kimski

            @Steersman:

            You are correct in assuming that I haven’t read much about the status and position of women in Islam. I prefer to see and experience things for myself, instead of relying on someone else’s opinions, impressions or viewpoints. I have visited a lot of different countries in my life so far, and have seen a great many things up close, instead of reading about them.

            And I have to say that I question those viewpoints, when that someone else is living in another country than their own, and might have an agenda where they might want to fit in as much as possible. And trust me when I say that I know what I’m talking about, regarding that specific topic. I’m a Canadian living in Denmark, and I have felt on my own body what it is like to be an outsider in my childhood, in the true sense of the word. I can only imagine what it must be like to live as a muslim in the western world today, in light of events that has taken place over the past decade, but I’m pretty sure there’s no comparison to my experiences on the subject.

            I hope you get my drift when I say that what takes place beneath the surface, is not what you see or read about in western medias. Especially not when those who own the media have a huge economic interest in presenting things in a certain way.

            Remember the woman with the blue bra from Egypt, not so long ago? -How many men do you think were killed or tortured before that event took place, and the west woke up to the fact that something really bad was going on over there?

            Now I’m not trying to belittle the fact that the Islamic systems can be horrible to women, but pardon me for not being overly empathic or sensitive to the hardships of women, when the crimes committed against men are taking place on a far greater scale everywhere.

            For instance, how many men do you think have been killed, had their hands cut off, or has been beaten to death, everytime you read about the stoning of a muslim woman in western media?

            When I arrived in Saudi Arabia there was a muslim man who got caught drinking alcohol on the plane. I saw this man being beaten within an inch of his life the following saturday. Something that happens every saturday at the local market. What made me finally walk away from the scene and throw up, was not only what happened to him, but the obvious pleasure that the women on the front row took in watching this. Their facial expressions were orgastic in nature, and it reminded me of that stoning scene in Life of Brian by Monty Python, except it wasn’t funny in any way, whatsoever. The reason it reminded me of that particular movie, was because of the fact that the vast majority of those watching were women.

            Another good example is the discussion of female mutilation that surfaces every once in a while in the west. The western media tend to present this as something that men initiate or do to muslim women, when the fact is that it’s women doing it to other women. It has always been done by women against other women, because no man on the planet in his right mind, be that muslim, catholic or protestant, wants to have sex with a woman who does not enjoy it.

            And let’s not forget that at the same time male mutilation is considered so normal, that the UN now wants to circumcise 28M african men, under the pretence of fighting aids. It makes absolutely no difference to the spreading of that disease that they are circumcised, but there’s big money in it because foreskins can be used to stem-research, and beauty products for women in the west.

            To end this little rant of mine, because I’m getting tired of discussing these things with someone who apparently does not fully realize, that if we loose this fight, you will loose to:
            -I’d like you to take a look at something you wrote yourself, and pretend for a moment that I said it to you, instead of the other way around:

            “People very frequently haven’t a clue as to where their best interests lie, largely because of having been indoctrinated and brainwashed.”

            -You are absolutely correct, and I couldn’t agree more.
            /Hands Steersman a mirror.

  • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

    @ Steersman,

    “You apparently managed to “duck into admin” to post your twaddle, er “rebuttals”, yesterday.”

    Yes, but you conveniently forget that the posts I ducked into admin for were a l r e a d y published. – Another lie and right from the start this time.

    I agree with you one hundred percent in that women in [Middle East & North Africa] are suffering terribly and I’ll assert that so are the men. Sure, no doubt about it there are places in the world were women truly do get a dreadful time of it compared to men. However, for you to draw upon the worlds lowest common denominator and take a snapshot of it and wave it about as some wet Polaroid of proof is quite what I’d expect of you by now.

    Are you actually saying that because a “house” on somebody’s street is in a shabby condition then it means that all places are in a similar condition ? I mean are you really saying this ?

    Nope, you will have to do better than that and that comparison you made is a dishonest one and is therefore discarded.

    (Also come to think of it, what the hell are you mentioning this for anyway ? Padding, that’s why and it’s because you are desperately trying to fill in the spaces for a response with your assertion that feminism has helped men.)

    Is it also possible that you’re suggesting that if the women of a demographic or country are elevated then that means that the great Titanic can be raised ? The whole absurd mess all hinges on not paying better attention and respect for women and once we attend to it then we are all better off ? The burden of proof is on you for this one. Hell, I can’t wait for that one.

    It’s another great leap for Steerskind and I’m not opening my wallet for you today. You’re a lousy salesman pal, truly rotten and just as slippery as the worst of them.

    So, nothing as yet. Let’s continue with your pitch shall we ? .

    The next bit is truly staggering. You wheel out this whatever the fuck it is:

    “Considering that all of the benefits we share as a civilization are largely due to a highly educated workforce, and that that is due, in substantial measure, to the efforts of feminism to promote gender equality.”

    Holy crap !

    Your entire, I mean every single bit of your argument at this point rests on this new assertion. The assertion that an educated workforce is due to feminism promoting gender equality ?

    That is a new one for me, and for you and you know it’s rubbish. You are clawing here as you had to come up with something and this is the best you could do.

    “Hooray for feminism stepping in. Hell, if it wasn’t for feminism we’d be stuffed by now. Wow, that was a close call and I shudder to think of what might have been if they hadn’t appeared like Han Solo swooping down at the last minute saving the day.”

    “An educated workforce is due to feminism promoting gender equality.”

    It’s an absurd grouping of words that are lonely looking for the company of proof.

    It also sounds kinda right and fluffy and socially advanced. Problem is it’s kinda faery dung. I say that because in the absence of a single note of evidence it just sits vacuously inside flat and bony skulls equipped with mouths of generous diameter. (Yours is the template for the rest it seems.)

    You see, your attempt at leading me to a PDF that cites employment stats for men and women and median distribution of wealth means what ? It’s a Canadian publication that talks about gender numbers in the workforce and…. ?

    Please don’t tell me that you have made the jump from feminism to increased numbers of women in the workplace and how that means men are better off. Please don’t.

    I’ll tell you what this PDF means. It mans precisely what it sets out to mean and none of it means feminism = better deal for men. Not worse in this “PDF case” not better…. not nothing. More padding only and that’s why you proffered it.

    I could tell you lots and lots of ways that feminism has not helped men but that has been covered here in great realms. I am simply responding to your assertion that men have been helped by feminism.

    You have not convinced me one bit, not one bit.

    1/ MENA Women getting a bad deal. – Misleading and irrelevant.
    2/ PDF – Misleading and irrelevant.
    3/ Core statement “An educated workforce is due to feminism promoting gender equality.” – Not backed up thus far and misleading and irrelevant.

    So again I have dismantled your rickety argument/s and exposed more of your dishonesty by pointing out that you are pointing to irrelevant material to confuse or dilute anothers position.

    Busted.

    P.S.
    I am now bored with you because I fear you have now reached the apex of your talents so goodbye this is my last post to you.

    So with that I’m off to flog off to National Geographic images of pendulous boobies that scuff the African dust.

    • Just1X

      @Dr F

      with the greatest respect, you are wasting too much time and effort discussing stuff with this lying cunt.

      • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

        I know, you’re right.

        You can’t discuss anything with an idiot, a clown, a liar or someone that sleepwalks and he’s all four.

        I’m done with him.

      • Kimski

        You’re absolutely right, Just1X, but right now I’ve got nothing better to do…-I’m waitin for the mail to arrive.
        -I actually find his delusions quite ‘fabulous’ and entertaining, and are in no way ‘conflicted’ about it.
        ;)

        • Just1X

          Fair enough.

          As you may have noticed, I have little time for these tard-con / feminists that are incapable of arguing honestly. Not that they have much choice about avoiding the facts, because the facts are against them.

          Their presence is so predictable in its progression:

          1) arive with sweeping statements about what we should do, shaming about everything else.

          2) countering facts are presented to them

          3) the facts are ignored, arguments deflected, strawmen arguments deployed, shaming ramped up

          4) more countering facts are presented

          5) tard-con / feminist starts losing her temper as she realises that her tactics (which work so well with the other flocking idiots, those who basically share their worldview) don’t work in the land of logic (man-world).

          6) tard-con / feminist flounces off

          They have no honour

          (and yes, Dr F, you can have tard-con as well. I saw it as a mistype on pmaft – the guy recognised its genius. I merely share it with the world.)

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            “Tard – con” Guffaw….

            Mate you’re a fruity bat, first the flocking thing and now this tard business.

            What else you got snaffled up your sleeve there Mister ?

          • Just1X

            @Dr F

            yeah, it’s been a good couple of days:

            1) The biggest problem for wimminz; “How to shame men that don’t care”

            2) Flocking Idiots

            3) Tard-con (though I merely pass this on – I didn’t invent it). Does tard-con cover both trad-con and so-con, I wonder? Or do we need su-con as well?

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            @ Just1X,

            Yes, and you have been rather the diligent parry man for us to be sure, thank you.

            Shaming tactics. I urge all MRA’s to read this remarkably powerful and lucid expose regarding feminist shaming techniques.
            —> http://exposingfeminism.wordpress.com/shaming-tactics/

            I have it bookmarked and am in the ongoing process of memorising it.

            Please trust me on this as it’s something you will definitely resonate with with your own experiences online and in social situations in the flesh.

    • Steersman

      Yes, but you conveniently forget that the posts I ducked into admin for were already published.

      No I didn’t forget; it was published on my screen – how was I to know, and I still don’t, that it wasn’t published on any other one? You’re just being a dickhead in demanding a response and are bent out of shape that I’ve provided one.

      I guess you can lead a jackass, particularly a dishonest one, to a syllogism, but you certainly can’t make it think. You must have tightened up those blinders so tight you can’t see straight, much less think so.

      But you apparently think that if women were still “barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen” – something you would apparently prefer – and with diddly squat in the way of civil rights – no protections at all in the event of divorce – then men would have picked up all the slack and covered all those jobs that women are doing now? Effing antediluvian if not Neanderthal.

      • Otter

        Does this guy ever offer any thoughts of his own or does he just come in here to insult people and regurgitating feminist propaganda?

        He just sounds like a 2nd rate Feminist Apologist who resorts to lying and mud-slinging because he knows he’s wrong.

    • Turbo

      Help dr F, or anyone, I posted a reply post and it has ended up above the comment I was responding to, can I move it down

      • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

        Turbo,

        I can’t help you sorry, but it’s ok really. I read your comment and it fits seamlessly in this jumbled thread.

        It stands great on it’s own as it were. :)

        • Turbo

          Ok, no drama Doc, thanks anyway.

          Can you believe, in his last post to you, that he talks about women’s rights in divorce. Wow, This guy is drowning in blue pills

          • Kimski

            He just needs a quick little marriage and subsequent divorce, and he’ll be back with his tail between his leg, asking to be taken serious.

            -That is if he gets out of prison and survives having his children taken from him.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            Yeah I did notice that, and he spiraled down in flames when he scraped the last muck from the barrel using the, “You want women to be oppressed” nonsense.

            He blew it with every single post, and I loved watching this centipede shot himself in the foot and then in the other foot and then in the other foot and so on and on.

          • Turbo

            @ Kimski

            Indeed Kimski, Indeed. And that is the shame of this whole mess.

          • Steersman

            @ Turbo,

            Can you believe, in his last post to you, that he talks about women’s rights in divorce? Wow, this guy is drowning in blue pills.

            So, you’re saying that women have no rights in divorce? If that is the case then I would say you have OD’d on the red ones. Doesn’t look like much of an commitment to “equality in law” to me – or do you just get a boot out of talking out of both sides of your mouth?

          • Steersman

            @ Dr. F,

            Yeah I did notice that, and he spiraled down in flames when he scraped the last muck from the barrel using the, “You want women to be oppressed” nonsense.

            And I noticed that you didn’t actually deny it. Which tends to justify the conjecture that that is in fact what you want.

            Trying to assert that there are no benefits to men from the efforts of women to promote gender equality – apart from contradicting Turbo’s and Elam’s somewhat disingenuous claims to support it – looks virtually the same as saying that there are no benefits to whites from abolishing the slavery of blacks.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

            @ Steersman,

            You’re right. I am a great thundering growl of a man who loves to oppress women, and my utopia is being lived as I type this to you.

            I sit here on my patio lifting beers that sit on the heads on nude chicks strewn all about me as they crouch on fours before me.

            No need for me to unzip my fly and unroll my enormous and oft’ admired pelvic nipple for the draining of bloke juice, because I just wave it at the nearest gal who’ll slather about on it with her gob or accommodating muff.

            I have naked chicks all over my place doing their jobs for me.

            There’s one in the hallway that stands on her head and she “holds” my umbrella. There’s another one in the kitchen standing by ready to squirt breast milk to my coffee and the bitch next to her holds the thermometer and stirs sugar in it until the temperature is just right.

            There are so many nude girlies in my home sometimes I have to weave in and out between them just to get to the bathroom. (Where incidentally three are waiting in readiness depending on the job at hand.)

            One is always coated with Gum of Arabic and her job is to roll about the floor picking up lint and fluff, another is my remote control in case the batteries run out and I even have one who’s sole job is to position herself in such a way I am not bothered by the window’s glaring light when I wish for a quiet read.

            Every Saturday I step outside and call out “Mow Bitches one to six” and then watch as half a dozen sluts crawl across my lawn and nip the tips of the grass.

            With my cocktail in a cocoanut I am lifted up by six other nudies and they take me to the pool where I am placed at the water’s edge. From there I boom out in a deep and mannish way, “Whores seven to twelve clean pool.”

            I think by now you can see by the way I am describing my set up here how there is at that point much splashing and giggling as all leaves and other unpleasantness is scooped up from the bottom of the pool.

            Everything is done for me and I throw back my bulbous and bald head on it’s white, thick sweaty neck and gargle a laugh that escapes my cigar clenched teeth.

            At the end of each day I rest on a large quivering bed made entirely of a dozen women hugging themselves and shivering in the cold.

            The last thing I remember of each lovely day is calling out to the woman with a lampshade on her head and a torch in her mouth, “Lights off slut.”

            Yep Steersmuck, you cracked the case. I just don’t know how you did it and I am pretty well in awe.

            Now, before you get banned from here as well, I just have one question for you.

            “What is your motivation for being here ?”

          • Turbo

            @ Steersman

            You have left two responses to me, so I will deal with them both here.

            Firstly

            You said that I ignored you when you stated that you quite agree with the principle of equality in law. I didn’t ignore you, I just didn’t comment because I have no reason to doubt you. You stated you do, and I take you at your word.

            But you state that some Feminists agree with this also, that is the issue, and that is what we just cannot see. They can shout it from the treetops, frequently do, but their actions defy their words.

            Secondly

            My blue pill comment was simply my response to what I consider to be your failure to understand just what the hell is going on at the coalface.
            You didn’t like that, and so you threw some red pills back in my face. I accept that.You were within your rights, that’s fair enough.

            But really, to take my comment about women’s rights in divorce and skew it the way you did is just wrong, and I believe you know that.
            It was clearly a reference to the fact that as things stand, women hold the whip handle in Family Law, have done so for decades, and men have been feeling that whip for decades.

            If Family Law and the courts were to be turned on their head tomorrow, and the inverse situation were happening. ie: women were having their children stolen and being financially crippled, that would be equally as abhorrent and cruel as what is happening today.

            Children need both their Mother and Father actively involved in their lives, not the State stepping in governing our families.

            Anyway steersman, I will leave you to have the last word if you wish.

            As I said to you before, I sincerely hope you do not have to learn these lessons the hard way. I mean that. It is difficult to survive

    • Kimski

      “Wow, that was a close call and I shudder to think of what might have been if they hadn’t appeared like Han Solo swooping down at the last minute saving the day.”

      ROFL! -Good one..

      “Now let’s blow this thing and we can all go home.”
      -Yeah, right..And the next thing and the next..Ad.Lib.

      • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

        Until the next one yes.

        We must all remain vigilant with an eye open and never sleep in order to kick against the pricks.

  • http://www.avoiceformen.com/activism-page/karma/ KARMA MRA MGTOW

    Steersman in reply to OneHundredPercentCotton
    ….

    “But I’m sorry to hear that you and your family are getting it in the neck from what certainly seems to be an inequitable system.”

    “certainly seems” yes we better destroy some more men just to be sure…feminist troll…

    Ban Hammer!?!

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

      Ban Hammer ?

      What are you nuts or sumthink ?

      I reckon we shouldn’t ban the hammer, no, we should use that very same hammer to ban him.

      Karma you are a fine man with a stellar MRA record that makes me and most of us blush with a lazy shame, but you say things like this and I just have to wonder.

      Ban the hammer indeed ! No… we should ban him, not that very same hammer required for the banning itself. See ?

    • Steersman

      @ Karma MRA MGTOW,

      Steersman in reply to OneHundredPercentCotton …. “But I’m sorry to hear that you and your family are getting it in the neck from what certainly seems to be an inequitable system.” “certainly seems” yes we better destroy some more men just to be sure…feminist troll… Ban Hammer!?!

      What a shithead. If you’re typical of MGTOW then it is no wonder that Man Boobz has that class on his “Boob Roll”.

      But how in the hell do you get from me acknowledging some “inequities in the system” to thinking that I think that is a good thing and that more men should be destroyed? Except maybe as a consequence of a bias if not some outright bigotry. Talk about straw men.

  • DruidV

    How pathetically predictable, the feminazi sympathizer/ supporter/agitator/troll;

    In typical communist agitator style, this steersman troll went right from the front of the pinko play book, the table of contents in fact, by first attacking the Man (Men) and not their arguments, i.e. ad hominem. e.g. “What would your mother think?” and “You must be some kind of poorly raised misogynist!”

    Next, it moved on down the table of contents to deflection, redirection and outright avoidance of any hard, “cover” blowing questions, e.g. Dr. F’s repeated inquiries about one of its more assinine quotes (and no, there really was no competent “cover” going on in this case, btw).

    Finally after having its ass handed to it repeatedly and with rapidity, unable to even finish the table of contents, it closed the book and slunk away, back into the dark under the fridge, with the rest of the cockroaches.

    Watching communist (feminazi) agitators and trolls be eviscerated with and stymied by their own words and stupidity is actually quite enjoyable and very satisfying!

    As their indefensible position dies in the minds of public opinion and they are finally held accountable for fifty plus years worth of their gendercidal attrocities, I will enjoy listening to the pathetic bleatings of the plethora of femitwats like this steersman, as it attempts to convince us still, about the benefits of feminazism while also trying to rationalize its own existence.

    Still, it is kind of pitiful to watch, though.

    The bigger they are…

    edit: I think this troll should be allowed to continue unbanhammered, just because it proves all of our points so beautifully. It is a living example of feminazi stupidity and it should be allowed to continue to shoot itself in the foot, disruptive notwithstanding…

    My $2.00 (two pennies for what anymore?)

    FTSU!!!
    &
    GMOW!!!

    • Just1X

      I wouldn’t mind a ‘troll-challenge ™’ button.

      Get three users or one admin to click it and then the alleged troll has to justify his points made in his first post. Any further comments go into mod until such proof is provided.

      tards like steersman waste too much time before giving up.

      Comments like
      “I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men.”
      should have had him troll-quarantined ™ immediately (IMHO).

      An alternative might be to assign all his/her tard comments as -14 or -15 as soon as they are submitted. Less ego boost for the tards.

      Or they could argue like men (there are women here that do that without effort)

      • DruidV

        The way I see it is simply that if the femitwats can employ useful idiots, then why can’t we re-employ them?

      • Steersman

        @ Just1X,

        Comments like “I think it is a reasonable conclusion to say that feminism has helped men.” should have had him troll-quarantined ™ immediately (IMHO).

        Would it have helped if I had said that “feminism has helped men in some ways and hindered them in others”? Because, considering my acknowledgement of various excesses, that is essentially what I’ve been saying.

        Looks to me like “feminism” – like masculinism – is a very large system or phenomenon and everyone sees different parts of it, but they then leap to the conclusion that those parts are the whole story. Really bad karma. You might want to take a look at the parable about the blind men and the elephant – that is, if you think your logic is up to the task.

  • Just1X

    @DruidV

    Couldn’t they meet us halfway by:
    Getting a new script?
    Some actual facts?
    Join us in the real world (as opposed to whatever delusional realm they appear to inhabit)?
    Demonstrate some honour by honestly debating?

    yeah, yeah, I want the moon on a stick with sex sauce

    • Steersman

      @ Just1X,

      Couldn’t they meet us halfway by: Getting a new script? Some actual facts?

      If I’m not mistaken, it seems, at least by the logic I have at my command, that getting to halfway requires that each side takes a bunch of small steps in alternating sequence. Really not possible for, or reasonable to expect, one side to make the leap in one step – if it has even been decided where halfway really is.

  • Sting Chameleon

    The infiltrators will keep coming bros, the enemy is scared shitless.