Radio & TV Interviews         - Canada AM - 1993    - King 5 News - 1993    - Compton Report - 1993 Men's Links              - Abuse in Canada    - ACFC    - Alliance for Marriage    - Angry Harry    - AskMen.com    - Bitter Films    - Child Abuse - Perps    - Child Homicides - Perps    - Choice for Men    - Circumcision Info/Resource Pages    - DADs    - DNA Testing (commercial site)    - DADs Australia    - Domain of Patriarchy    - Equal Justice Foundatino    - DV Against Men    - Fathering Magazine    - Fathers' Day Protest    - Fathers' Rights to Custody    - Feminazi.com    - Fiebert - Female Abusers    - Male Genital Mutilation    - Men & Fathers' Resource Center    - Men's Defense Assoc    - Men's Net TV    - Men's News Daily    - Men Surviving    - NCFM    - PaternityFraud.com    - Pay Back    - Pill for Men    - Revenge Unlimited    - Stop Paternity Fraud    - Stop Prisoner Rape    - Suffering Patriarchy    - Taping Phone Calls    - Tom Leykis    - Transitions Cover Art    - Rape of Males    - Women Suck    - Zero Tolerance Sucks Women's Links              - 4k Years - Women in Science    - About Rape    - Bat Shalom    - Boys Are Icky Brigade    - DigitalEve    - EquityFeminism.com    - Female.co.uk    - Feminist Factions    - Feminist Majority    - Heartless Bitches    - ifeminists.com    - Independent Women's Forum    - Ms. Magazine    - NOW    - NWPC    - nrrd-e-grrlz    - Oxygen    - RightGrrls    - SexMD - Real Doctors    - Third Wave    - WINGS    - Women Only Links    - Women's eNews Issues    - Archives    - Hmmm    - Business    - Disabilities    - Gender    - News    - Politics    - Quotes    - Race    - Reader email    - Soapbox    - Special    - Teens    - Unions Resources    - Definitions    - Directory    - My 1992 book    - Links

What Men Know That Women Don't: How to Love Women Without Losing Your Soul From the author of Surviving the Feminization of America. January 2002 International women's strike demands return to Patriarchy! According to the pop feminists behind the 3rd Global Women's Strike scheduled for International Women's day on 8 March 2002, men don't care: "It is a disaster that only half the human race is trained to care and the other half told it has 'more important things to do'." Not only do they arrogantly dismiss how deeply men care, and all the ways we express how much we care, but they ignore that the majority of violent deaths, not only in civilian life but in war, are men: "Women and children are most of those killed & wounded, and 80% of refugees." - 3rd Global Women's Strike Maybe they learned some new kind of feminist math, an arithmetic which doesn't recognize that if "80% of refugees" are women and children, it's because most of the dead are men. Okay, either they're propagandists or stupid. Or maybe they're just plain ignorant. How else could we explain why they seem to think war is the sole domain of capitalism and corporations? "As corporate power and its wars threaten every corner of all our lives, people everywhere have formed massive movements - to reclaim our land and our planet, and to stop the theft (via privatisation) of water, seeds, genes . . . " - 3rd Global Women's Strike As if the majority of collectivist tribes throughout history, and socialist nations in recent times, have been anything but bloody. Or that most wars were somehow motivated entirely by male greed and that the complaints of wives and mothers nagging husbands and sons with their wants and needs had nothing to do with it. Despite their selective eyesight, which sees only good in women and bad in men, some of their demands are worthy: "Invest in life and welfare, not military budgets and prisons." - 3rd Global Women's Strike That's a good goal. Ironically, however, their demands stand in stark contradiction to one of the most strongly held tenets of feminism. Referring to themselves, they ask: "What is more valuable than raising children and caring for others?" - 3rd Global Women's Strike Then they answer: "Accessible clean water, healthcare, housing, transport, literacy. ... Non-polluting energy & technology which shortens the hours we work. We all need cookers, fridges, washing machines, computers, & time off!" - 3rd Global Women's Strike In other words, they're demanding a return to Patriarchy! They want to go back to the days when the women stayed at home taking care of the household, and men (at least in the west) went off to work on the farms, work in the factories, work in construction, and do all the other traditionally male occupations. Equalitarian that I am, I'd like to think that, at least in the west, we have progressed to the point where women and men are free to choose their own way. That if a woman is mentally and/or physically capable, and if she is so inclined, then she should be free to work producing and providing "cookers, fridges, washing machines, computers," etc. And if a man is best suited for staying at home taking care of kids and kin, then he shouldn't be forced into a more traditional arrangement. But I know of hundreds of men's and fathers' organizations who would fully support this return-to-patriarchy agenda. Somehow, I think a resounding "that's not what we meant!" will not be long in coming. Maybe that's not what they mean, but it's exactly what they're saying. What they're not saying - and this puzzles me - is why they think men (at least here in the west) will take a "global women's strike" seriously. Consider how they plan to put on the pressure: they intend to stop working. "Begin to organise an event in your community, workplace, place of worship or trade union. You can suggest that on 8 March women and girls: stop work for an hour, 10 minutes . . . however long you can manage." - 3rd Global Women's Strike Last year, I pointed out that a lot of men (at least here in the west) would welcome this, and would even encourage women to go on strike permanently. Why? Consider the flip side: what would happen if western men went on strike? Millions of underpaid western women would see this as an extraordinary career opportunity because all those jobs would have to be filled, and employers would be forced to pay higher wages to get (women) workers to fill them. Same holds true for us guys: if all western women went on strike, millions of underpaid western men would suddenly find themselves able to earn enough to support a family, just like their fathers and grandfathers did. Now wait, hold on there just an apoplectic minute, bub, the global strikers are talking about housework, too! Yea, so what's your point? The divorce rate is higher among women because more and more men, here in the west, are going on strike against marriage. (But doesn't the divorce rate have to be equal? No, because divorced men are more likely than divorced women to remarry.) Why are men striking against marriage? Because our courts are virtually blind to domestic violence committed by women, women have all the reproductive rights, men have all the reproductive responsibilities, child custody and child support are awarded almost exclusively to women, only women can change their mind about sex, and, except for boys (and that's only a recent change), any man who claims rape is subject to ridicule. So, an ever growing segment of the western male population would never know if women stopped doing housework because we're doing it for ourselves. Being an equalitarian, I'd rather see the global strikers push for more equalitarian goals. Their patriarchal agenda dressed up as a feminist revolution is a step backward, in my opinion. But many men's and fathers organizations, once they realize what the strike really means, will disagree. Make room for Daddy? For decades, feminists have asserted fathers have all the power. Now, the truth is coming out: The advocates of equal rights for fathers say they have been fighting an uphill battle in Massachusetts. They say that liberal, feminist politicians have long held the power in the legislature and any movement toward equality has been slow and incremental. - Fathers Push for Shared Parenting, Curt Lovelace, February 2002 As a growing number of men know, women hold most of the cards in Family Court, this has been the case for many years, and every man who gets screwed in family court is another recruit for men's rights: The plight of fathers in the hands of unsympathetic courts gained national attention recently when a former Massachusetts man committed suicide on the steps of a courthouse in California. - Fathers Push for Shared Parenting, Curt Lovelace, February 2002 The better half? Men make war, women make pieces: "An Oregon woman who dismembered the body of her elderly roommate in California has admitted to shooting her daughter four years earlier, cutting up her corpse and dumping some of the pieces into the ocean, a prosecutor said yesterday." - Woman admits shooting and cutting up daughter, January 8, 2002 Men murder, women nurture: "Karen Lee Huster ... is charged with murdering her 9-year-old daughter in 1996." - Woman admits shooting and cutting up daughter, January 8, 2002 More sad irony to come: The predatory half? Men are predators, women are their prey: "A married woman has pleaded guilty to having sex with a 12-year-old boy." - Woman pleads guilty to having sex with 12-year-old boy, January 8, 2002 Men pervert relationships into sex, women elevate sex into relationships: "Karyn Denise Jensen, 37, of Bend, pleaded guilty Monday. She faces more than six years in prison on charges of rape and sex abuse. Sentencing is scheduled for Feb. 14 in Deschutes County Circuit Court." - Woman pleads guilty to having sex with 12-year-old boy, January 8, 2002 Men are monsters? John Waters - Men are monsters? January 7, 2002 - Men perpetrate domestic violence and women are the victims. We know this because, despite that for the past several years we have cited numerous experts whose studies prove otherwise, pop feminists and Bill O'Reilly (January 8, 2002) say so. But now Ireland is taking the lead toward an equalitarian view, and solution, to domestic violence:           "(A 2002 report entitled Men and Domestic Violence: What Research Tells Us, by Kieran McKeown and Philippa Kidd ) ... comes down on the side of 'gender symmetry' ... indicating that the results of representative studies are consistent in showing that, in half of intimate relationships where domestic violence occurs, both partners use violence, with the remainder divided equally between male-only violence and female-only violence."           As we have noted here many times, until domestic violence policies address both male and female perpetrators, it will continue to grow worse. This report takes a necessary step toward a solution. - Irish Times. Posted January 7, 2002 William B. Kaliher - Equal rights for men? October 1, 1999 - Androphobes take as gospel truth the assertion men have more rights than women. As recently as 30 years ago, their assertion had merit. Today, there are still a few ways in which men have slightly more rights than women, but in the arena of reproductive rights, women reign supreme:           "Under current law, a pregnant woman can terminate a pregnancy or deliver and force the father to pay child support."           To some, this seems very fine. If a woman gets pregnant but does not get an abortion, she carries the child for 9 months. Forcing the father (biological or otherwise) to pay with 18 years or more of his life is only a woman's due. The Constitution, however, disagrees:           "These two contradictory rights remove all control of the fetus from the male, thereby excluding him from the basic American ideal of equal rights and/or treatment."           This raises a significant question: If the courts will not grant men equal reproductive rights, why should men grant women equal rights in anything else?           "To correct this inequality, we should codify that males bear no responsibility for any woman's children."           Or the courts can do the right, reasonable thing and grant to men equal reproductive rights. It would, after all, be not only fair, but the Constitutional thing to do. - EtherZone. Posted January 5, 2002 Black widow murders: January 5, 2002 - Women aren't violent. We keep hearing that. Except when it's in response to the evil white male hegemony. We know this is so because the gentle, eco-nurturing, child caring, world loving, put all men into prison and make them slaves to the good upper class white female hegemonists say it is so. Except, sometimes it isn't:           "Josephine Gray enlisted the help of each successive husband and boyfriend to commit murder on her behalf, first in 1974, then in 1990, then in 1996, authorities said in court documents."           One of the common forms of female violence is to employ a male third party to do their dirty work:           "Female black widow spiders kill their mates, and that is what Josephine Gray has done three times."           Why would she do such a thing?           "Gray ... allegedly collected thousands of dollars in life insurance payments after the deaths."           Ah, so you see, it is the fault of the evil white male hegemony after all. But for them, women wouldn't need money because, as all good new rage women know, the world is a gentle place made mean by men, and in its most natural, female nurturing condition, there is no need for work or money, because, absent male influence, Mother Nature provides everything a woman could need. Or so pop feminists seem to believe. - Boston Globe. Sharon Lerner - Only words: October 31 - November 6, 2001 - A year ago Hibaaq Osman said we needed to make war against the Taliban on behalf of Afghani women. Now that war is a reality, what does she have to say?           "We have seen our worst nightmare-women being dehumanized and shot in public-and it makes us more radical. It makes us angry enough to entertain the idea of war. But do I support war? No. No. No. War is not OK under any circumstances."           Ignoring how pop feminists make war against men and boys in ways that don't involve guns and missiles, Osman demonstrates one of the many flaws of pop feminism: they're all squawk and no walk when it comes to dealing with real bad guys. Were it left up to these wimps and whiners, women would still be living in the dark ages instead of having an audience of enlightened women and men who will listen to their hypocritical complaints:           "Still, many women are unwilling to translate their opposition to the Taliban into support for war. The U.S. air strikes against the country and the recent addition of ground troops-which, depending on the estimate, have together resulted in anywhere from a few dozen to almost a thousand civilian casualties-clash with long-held feminist sensibilities."           They're content to use bloodless political policies to destroy millions of American families, consigning tens of millions of American men to lives of solitude and servitude, and millions more children to life without father, but let the blood spatter in real time and they retreat into the myth of female nonviolence:           "We will not support the bombing or U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, for it would only punish suffering people and increase the hatred on which terrorists feed."           The War on Terrorism is a complex issue, but sometimes war is necessary. So, ladies, if you can't take the heat, go back to the kitchen and leave the battle to those women and men who are ready, willing and able to lead in the real world where hard choices sometimes have to be made. - Village Voice.

Join The Backlash! discussion list