View Single Post
  #266  
Old October 12th 06, 07:28 AM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
teachrmama
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,905
Default Things to think of before you get married again..

You just want it all your way, don't you, Lady? You married (or didn't
marry and procreated with) the wrong man, now everything with a penis is
wrong, wrong, wrong. Maybe it is time that you took a serious look at
yourself and the reasons behind your diatribes against men. Stop blaming
them for your self-created problems. Call your community mental health
facility and get an appointment soon--before you go postal and really do
some damage!

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Bob Whiteside wrote:

I say you are on the wrong side of this issue, even for a feminist, and

here
is why.
Have you ever looked at the dictionary definition of "feminism"? I was
astounded to find that it means ": the theory of the political,
economic, and social equality of the sexes". That makes a feminist an
advocate of the theory of the political, economic, and social equality
of the sexes.


And that definition makes a feminist a Marxist/Socialist ... Feminists
hate
Capitalism because it allows for inequality to occur as part of the
natural
order of human behavior.


And you, a masculinist, like capitalism precisely *because* it allows for
inequality, and specifically for male superiority and dominance through
control of the money.

It's always about the money with you masculinists. That's the mechanism
you wish to use to enforce your male superiority and dominance upon women.

So, I wondered, if you are not a feminist, which I am sure you would
agree is an accurate characterization, then what are you? That led me to
the following:

"masculinist : an advocate of male superiority or dominance".

So let's see, feminists are for equality of the sexes, masculinists are
for male dominance.

That explains a lot ... (8-)


While you have your dictionary out look up "straw man". This one was a
classic. Set up a different argument. Then attack it. Then claim you
won
the argument.


Not at all. It's very relevant. Goes to motivation.

These laws don't work. Statistically only a couple of babies per year

are
dropped off at safe havens, but dozens are abandoned and left to die by
their birth mothers.
And what is your problem with saving a couple of newborn children from
ending up dead in a dumpster? Get in the way of the masculinist point
of view, maybe?


[So I asked the questions immediately above, and Ken, as he usually does,
conveniently avoided answering them. I claim that he did not answer them
because in order to do so he would have to acknowledge his masculinist
world view, and specifically the desire for male superiority and
dominance, even at the expense of the lives of a few babies.]

But let's return to yet another question that you have studiously
avoided answering:

You have two choices: save the child, or see it die in a dumpster. Which
do you choose?

Let's have an honest answer this time.


Save the baby. BUT ...


BUT nothing, Ken. You can't side with saving the baby while condemning the
program that saved the baby, because without the program that saved the
baby, the baby ends up dead in a dumpster. And I don't care if it only
saves a few babies, that's a few that, in your world, would have ended up
dead in a dumpster.

I really do believe, Ken, that you would be willing to see those babies
dead in a dumpster if it meant that you could once again enforce your
masculinist ideas of male superiority and dominance over women, as those
ideas were enforced in the past.

You claim to want equality. I do not believe you. I believe that you want
inequality, as evidenced by your comments regarding capitalism quoted
above, by your extreme reluctance to answer admittedly difficult questions
lest they reveal your masculinist agenda of dominance and male
superiority, and by the generally masculinist world view that flows
through your many messages.

So I guess that we're going to have to agree to disagree, on a number of
subjects:

I support equality of the sexes. You support male superiority and
dominance.

To me, it's about saving the baby. To you, it's about asserting male
superiority and dominance through control of the money.

To me, it's about taking responsibility. To you, it's about using the
irresponsibility of others to justify your own irresponsibility.

That being said, I can see no constructive purpose in continuing this
conversation.

Enjoy your day, Ken. Try not to hate too much.