This lady exposes the hypocrisy of feminism flawlessly.

[LJ_Reloaded]

http://36.media.tumblr.com/e86a819e35a25c68d8b919f65a82466e/tumblr_nxh5vu1LSZ1th71p8o1_500.jpg

 

[badbabysitter]

Actually that's just an example of how retarded the author is


then again she is a devout Randian


here's a review excerpt from her book you just quoted

This is a potentially persuasive thesis—yet Ms. Smith hasn't done much to advance it with hard evidence. Her book contains surprisingly few references to actual studies. For her assertion that more than one million American men may be currently raising another man's child unwittingly, her source is . . . a 2007 article in Men's Health magazine. A "men's' rights" blogger named Douglas Galbi is her source for a statement that about 50,000 people are behind bars on any given day for failure to pay child support. Indeed, much of Ms. Smith's material comes from the comments section on her own "Dr. Helen" blog. These commenters tend to be men who got burned in a divorce or other relationship. Divorce and discord between the sexes can be a nasty business, bringing out the worst in all concerned, including a tendency on the part of affected men to indulge in a level of victimological self-pity worthy of the most irritating feminist

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324577904578559501706287178

 

[Graf_Severin]

On flaws about "flawlessly"

Ehk, I'm not one to enter political discussions, but I'm frankly tired of flippant attitudes toward feminism as if it's one linear movement or a modern political party.

Political memes, for the most part, are at best cogently expressed witticisms that reinforce a position more than argue anything objectively - or at least within a fair context. That said, I'll take a look at this author's writing, because that's only fair, but I've never read or met any feminist who wants "men to lag behind." I've never read it from Simone de Beauvoir, bell hooks, or Vandana Shiva. Never read it from the Marxist feminists or the postcolonial feminists. Never even read it from the radical feminists.

So what singular feminism is meant here? Give context.

Feminism is as a monolithic a movement as Protestantism. It's an umbrella term for myriad histories and country contexts and ideologies. Blanket statements about a one-and-only, singular feminism points to me people don't even know their history, or cannot qualify what it is they think they are attacking.

And to be clear: as I read from this book and the synopses, the statements address how "American society" (not "feminism") has become "anti-male." Ironically enough, I think that efforts to bring attention to the unfair gender expectations of men in modern American society can pull from the same movements that some people seem inherently opposed to--feminism. Let's work together here.

 

[richard_daily]

http://36.media.tumblr.com/e86a819e35a25c68d8b919f65a82466e/tumblr_nxh5vu1LSZ1th71p8o1_500.jpg

Too bad that's not actually what most feminists think.

 

[badbabysitter]

Too bad that's not actually what most feminists think.

it's not what most rational people think either

 

[Rachel_X]

When will people learn that your race, gender or sexuality doesn't matter?
Because you're all inferior to me! Muwahahahaha!

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

it's not what most rational people think either

You are trying to push the "Not all feminists are like that" argument?

Funny, men have been trying to tell you "not all men are like that" for years and you feminists keep calling that unhelpful.

So in response to you here, I'll respond with something a feminist once said after the Elliot Rodgers rampage...

Imagine a bowl of M&M's. 10% of them are poisoned. Go ahead, eat a handful!

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Ehk, I'm not one to enter political discussions, but I'm frankly tired of flippant attitudes toward feminism as if it's one linear movement or a modern political party.

And in the next breath you'll characterize all men's rights groups as one big misogynist hate movement.

Self awareness, folks, it's such a rare thing.

 

[Aella_]

1. LJ's rhetoric tends to be a bit overboard sometimes imo but he brings up interesting and valid points. There Is a tendency to devalue men in certain social circles nowadays, and it needs to be talked about.

I'm not referring to the older generation of men over 50 who grew up in a time where women were devalued.
It's more about the younger generations (men under 20). I've seen snippets of this phenomenon while living in NZ. (as opposed to Au).

Nevertheless, BadBabysitter is right: the way of talking about these issues is to adopt a neutral stance rather than attack femminism. Because we see both phenomena nowadays, depending on social environment. We see either men being devalued or women being devalued and abused.
We need activists for both sides.


2."Men on Strike" by Helen Smith
I had a quick look at it on ScribD. (preface and conclusion), but I'll read it in more depth later on.
The book serms to focus on the issue of marriage/divorce and child custody. But in general terms, LJ is right: the book does go in the direction that he talks about. Similar to Steve Paikin in his interview series about "The demise of guys".

In my next post I'm attaching some screenshots from the book's Preface and Conclusion.

 

[Aella_]

Excerpts from "Preface" (Men on Strike)

 

[Aella_]

Excerpts from "Conclusion" (Men On Strike)

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

1. LJ's rhetoric tends to be a bit overboard sometimes imo but he brings up interesting and valid points. There Is a tendency to devalue men in certain social circles nowadays, and it needs to be talked about.

I'm not referring to the older generation of men over 50 who grew up in a time where women were devalued.
It's more about the younger generations (men under 20). I've seen snippets of this phenomenon while living in NZ. (as opposed to Au).

Nevertheless, BadBabysitter is right: the way of talking about these issues is to adopt a neutral stance rather than attack femminism. Because we see both phenomena nowadays, depending on social environment. We see either men being devalued or women being devalued and abused.
We need activists for both sides.


2."Men on Strike" by Helen Smith
I had a quick look at it on ScribD. (preface and conclusion), but I'll read it in more depth later on.
The book serms to focus on the issue of marriage/divorce and child custody. But in general terms, LJ is right: the book does go in the direction that he talks about. Similar to Steve Paikin in his interview series about "The demise of guys".

In my next post I'm attaching some screenshots from the book's Preface and Conclusion.

If feminists want to stop being broadbrushed, they need to stop broadbrushing the opposition... and men in general.

 

[Aella_]

Edited…

 

[badbabysitter]

If feminists want to stop being broadbrushed, they need to stop broadbrushing the opposition... and men in general.

says the guy that is on record stating castration is a feminist command

maybe you should start with your own broadbrushing before you start throwing stones

 

[badbabysitter]

You are trying to push the "Not all feminists are like that" argument?

I'm actually pushing she's a crackpot that couldnt do basic research which is very self evident

Funny, men have been trying to tell you "not all men are like that" for years and you feminists keep calling that unhelpful.

No, we really don't... look at HeforShe which is a feminist idea that actively encourages co-operation between the sexes.. naturally , you hate that

So in response to you here, I'll respond with something a feminist once said after the Elliot Rodgers rampage...

Imagine a bowl of M&M's. 10% of them are poisoned. Go ahead, eat a handful!

should I respond with a few of Paul Elam's statements... one about getting an erection from thinking of hurting a woman comes to mind


but this is all entirely off point


the point is you have literally shown nothing to support the author's claim... funnily enough.. she hasn't either

 

[badbabysitter]

Interesting…
In her blog, the above author (Helen Smith) recommends this book. Here is an editorial review.
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with what they're saying, because I don't live in so I don't know much about the US. But I thought that the counterpoints to the more publicised femminist viewpoints were interesting.


"The Myth of Male Power"
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/04...mp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0425181448

Editorial Reviews
From Publishers Weekly
"While some feminists may assert that it is an attack on women, the book attempts to show areas in which males operate at a disadvantage without claiming that women are responsible for their plight.

Psychologist Farrell stresses economics, pointing out that the 25 worst types of jobs, involving the highest physical risk, are almost all filled by men. He also considers warfare, in which virtually all of the military casualties are men; the justice system, where sentences for males are customarily heavier; and sexual harassment, which has become a one-way street. He concludes with helpful advice on "resocializing" the male child, adolescent and adult. Clever cartoons enliven the text. "

please dont quote Warren " Daddy fucking his daughter is okay" Farrel

 

[Aella_]

please dont quote Warren " Daddy fucking his daughter is okay" Farrel

You're right. I just googled him and some of his theories seem to be drawn from the psychoanalytic thingy. Those people are craaazy! !
My bad - retracting my quote from the asshole.

On the other hand, I liked Helen Smith and Steve Paikin's pov's. Because they tended to focus on societal/environmental issues as opposed to "Are women or men the better sex?" No, neither are; they're equal and they need to be treated as such.

What do you think of her pov?
Not saying that she's entirely right, but I do believe that there might be some cases where things happen the way she says they do, as much as they do the other way around in other situatoons (women being oppressed).

Her book is available on ScribD. First month is free, after which it's 9$/month.

 

[lovecraft68]

This picture exposes LJ's home life flawlessly

 

[lovecraft68]

Too bad that's not actually what most feminists think.

And too bad most men won't own the fact they feel the exact same way, wen women are under their thumb all is well otherwise....

fact is the only men who care whether women are equal or not are men with no balls, no self esteem and fragile egos because they need everyone to know they should be on top.

LJ for instance.

 

[Aella_]

This picture exposes LJ's home life flawlessly

Is that a castration device? Lmao…

 

[putzpotus]

Bad Shitter n LJTard, 2 fucked up loons

 

[badbabysitter]

You're right. I just googled him and some of his theories seem to be drawn from the psychoanalytic thingy. Those people are craaazy! !
My bad - retracting my quote from the asshole.

On the other hand, I liked Helen Smith and Steve Paikin's pov's. Because they tended to focus on societal/environmental issues as opposed to "Are women or men the better sex?" No, neither are; they're equal and they need to be treated as such.

What do you think of her pov?
Not saying that she's entirely right, but I do believe that there might be some cases where things happen the way she says they do, as much as they do the other way around in other situatoons (women being oppressed).

Her book is available on ScribD. First month is free, after which it's 9$/month.

Yes, there times that things occur just as Helen Smith claims.. unfortunately she tries to pass this as the norm without any sort study or research to back her claims.. it becomes entirely antecdotal

it would be like me trying to cite Camile Paglia who does the same damn thing

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

I'm actually pushing she's a crackpot that couldnt do basic research which is very self evident

Helen Smith is right on target.

Feminists scream all day about the workplace income gap and Ban Bossy (because the word "bossy" hurts your fee-fees) but there is no feminist outcry whatsoever about men falling behind in college enrollment, and no feminist outcry whatsoever about 95% of workplace casualties being men.

Show me where I'm wrong. You can't? Then Helen Smith wins this and you lose.

No, we really don't... look at HeforShe which is a feminist idea that actively encourages co-operation between the sexes.. naturally , you hate that

HeForShe

That is the main problem with feminism. You always want men to be for you, but you never do anything for men. If a man is a victim of domestic violence you make fun of him and write laws that criminalize him even though he is a victim (the Duluth Model and primary aggressor laws, for instance). Feminists defend paternity fraud. You even have KILL ALL MEN as a meme and MALE TEARS and Valerie Solanas.

And yet you feminists come up with HeForShe as if we men owe you more of the same white knight chivalry in which men have been risking their lives to save women from this and that for hundreds of years already (even before the term 'chivalry' was ever coined)?

Men rise up to kill men accused of rape. Women are caught on video cheering and saying "You go girl" when they see a man being abused by a woman. Care to present a counter argument against that? No? Didn't think so.

The problem with HeForShe is nothing but men championing women, but women doing nothing at all to help men who are victims. The problem with HeForShe is men don't owe you shit.

should I respond with a few of Paul Elam's statements... one about getting an erection from thinking of hurting a woman comes to mind

I've condemned that deadbeat dad Paul Elam on here and on my blog.

You've never actually condemned any behavior by feminists. All you've ever come back with is "but they do it, too!"

Allow me to repeat.

You never condemn bad behavior by feminists when someone calls it out. All you do is blame the other side.

but this is all entirely off point


the point is you have literally shown nothing to support the author's claim... funnily enough.. she hasn't either

I'll repeat: Helen Smith is right on target.

Feminists scream all day about the workplace income gap and Ban Bossy (because the word "bossy" hurts your fee-fees) but there is no feminist outcry whatsoever about men falling behind in college enrollment, and no feminist outcry whatsoever about 95% of workplace casualties being men.

Show me where feminists complain about men falling behind in college enrollments. Show me where feminists complain about the majority of workplace deaths happening to men. Show me where feminists complained about the mancession.

And feminists actually celebrate men falling behind.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/07/the-end-of-men/308135/

They even gloat about men being "obsolete":
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/09/opinion/incredible-shrinking-y.html

Feminists talk about reproducing without men:
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=4725121

Reality is actually worse than what Helen Smith said.

Care to refute the non-Men's Rights, non right wing documentation that I've provided? Or is this where you move the goalposts and engage in your infamous spin control again?

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

And too bad most men won't own the fact they feel the exact same way, wen women are under their thumb all is well otherwise....

fact is the only men who care whether women are equal or not are men with no balls, no self esteem and fragile egos because they need everyone to know they should be on top.

LJ for instance.

Your life, in a nutshell:
http://www.ironrealms.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/250-wide/story/images/internet-white-knight.jpg

 

[Aella_]

Ah, I get it.
LJ wants to convince everyone that feminists are bad to the core, and that advocates for some men's minorities are good,
- whereas Badbabysitter wants to show LJ that feminists are the only group that are legitimate. And that there's no such thing as a minority group of men that are oppressed, too.

It's exactly what's going on in those Political threads: parallel talks only 10×.



So I'm done posting for the moment, and I "ll pick up only if anyone else shows interest in discussing Helen Smith's ideas.
Not that anyone cares, I know. But I do, because I find the topic to be extremely interesting.