Uechi-Ryu.com

Discussion Area
It is currently Sat Dec 20, 2014 3:02 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2006 3:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 6:01 am
Posts: 798
Location: Tallahassee, FL
GRAVITY HOLDS WOMEN DOWN!

It's time to discuss the extra burden that gravity places on women, says Colleen Hyphenated-Lastname, president of the Propaganda Organization for Women.

"Feminist scientists on an archaeological dig in Mesopotamia have discovered illustrations of women who seem to be floating in the air," Hyphenated-Lastname says. "This cutting-edge research indicates that there once was a time when gravity did not exist. In fact, these artifacts indicate that society was once gender equal, and women held most high offices of power and controlled the television remote."

"But all this changed with the onset of western patriarchal societies that wanted to keep women down. If there were no distinctions between men and women, patriarchal oppressors had to invent them. And if there was no gravity, the patriarchy had to invent that, too."

"Gravity is designed to benefit men, who have thicker bones and greater upper-body strength. Today, we see the results everywhere of the patriarchy's efforts to keep women down. Gravity causes women to fall to their deaths out of windows or down stairs. It makes buildings collapse, killing women and children. It damages women's cars when some inconsiderate construction worker topples from the tenth floor and bounces off the hood. Gravity makes the complete, leather-bound editions of Carrie Chapman Catt fall off my bookshelf and give me such a smack I can hardly see straight."

"Navy pilot Kara Hultgreen would not have crashed her jet except for gravity. Clearly, she was set up to fail."

"Women seek treatment for depression at far higher rates. Obviously, more women are feeling 'down.' Gravity is just another way in which women's health is being shortchanged."

"This oppression is historical, the product of white, western men who wanted to hold onto power. The laws of physics were written long before women had the right to vote. If women had had more input, the laws of physics would have been kinder, and gravity would have been supportive. Instead, we are shackled with the competitive, conflict-oriented mode of men. Isaac Newton, a typical dead white European male, was obsessed with 'opposing' reactions, even if he hypocritically admitted that some of them were equal. When he declared that for every action there is opposed an equal reaction, he was doing nothing less than defining the backlash. If women had had a chance to shape these laws, their conflict-free style of interaction would have made sure that there were no opposed reactions. All reactions simply would have been equal.

"We can undo the oppressive, patriarchal mindset that would have us believe that gravity really represents the 'natural' order of things," says Hyphenated-Lastname. "It will require spending money on programs to elevate girls' self esteem so that they are not held down by artificial concepts of patriarchy."

"This will cost a lot of money," says Hyphenated-Lastname.

"But I'm up for that."

- posted by Sir Jessy of Anti @ 11:22 AM

http://antimisandry.com/vbdr/forum/show ... 270&page=1

(Its on page 2, but you have to be registered to view page 2......)

_________________
Seek knowledge from cradle to grave


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2006 7:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:16 am
Posts: 2758
Location: Boston
Says as much about the male author than the fringe women it lampoons, doncha think?

The first thing I saw on the site was this:

"What I'd like to achieve with this thread is to expose this misguided mentality as much as possible; and the best way to do that seems to be to start with collection of quotes from articles, where blatant ignorance of men's suffering (or a much greater toll a given problem takes on men) is evident - and the suffering/toll of minority of victims (usually women) is heavily highlighted.

So, what I'm asking you to do, is merely that when the next time you'll read some article stating that "1000 people died, including 10 women", you quote it here. Don't forget to cite the source, and provide the link, if possible."

Do you think they'll call it ageism if such examples also contain comments like "including 3 children"? Neither do I. I was watching a "Seconds from Disaster" review of the titanic tragedy and thought to myself how stupid the call for women and children first was. I'm not worth less than a woman. I would buy the kids first concept tho. They've got more life to live, and certainly, if I was 90 I'd refuse to use scarce lifeboat seats. Maybe--parents? Kids? People that can help in some way with the ongoing disaster? Beyond a few things like that we're all equal--except the captain and crew, they're last :) Anyway--when you hear griping like this, its usually about the misandry and they might skip over the ageism and heck, the class issues, 3rd class was toast on Titanic. Somehow I suspect that'd be glossed over or overlooked.

So it comes down to guys missing out on all the fun of being a ranting feminist and having things to complain about all the time. If you miss it so freaking much, go have a sex change and join em. If you'll excuse me, I go have to have a relaxing lunch with my multiracial, multinational, gender equivalent, polylingual, multigenerational, progressively LGB accepting, friendly peer group...

_________________
--Ian


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 4:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 6:01 am
Posts: 798
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Quote:
you miss it so freaking much, go have a sex change


a little projection going on here Ian? I knew I could always count on you Ian to sympathize with hetero men ..... And yeah, Ian, heterophobia is on the rise.....happy?!?!?!?!?

_________________
Seek knowledge from cradle to grave


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Stop Harassing Me!
PostPosted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 4:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 6:01 am
Posts: 798
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Every so often I’ll deign to give expert advice to the subhuman oppressor-pigs who call themselves “men”. According to feminist ideology, somehow these idiots managed to effectively oppress us wymyn seamlessly for thousands and thousands of years because of their motiveless evil. But a few decades ago, quite suddenly, these ultra-competent, ultra-clever oppressors became too stupid and inept to do anything right. Isn’t that an astonishing turn of events? And that’s why those bungling yet masterfully-oppressive men need the sublime gift of female advice… although they clearly don’t deserve it.

Yes, you men are all a bunch of drooling, low-IQ losers who nonetheless manage to oppress us females using diabolically invisible methods of mind control that only us feminists can discern. But I’m optimistic that not even you are so dim-witted and vile that you can’t comprehend a bit of simple-worded advice from your intellectual betters. (See? I’m not a man-hater. Perish the thought!)

We womyn are your equals, but we’re also your moral superiors because we believe in equality. And we womyn stopped evolving the instant we hit perfection back in the mid-70s, but you swine still have a long way to go before you can reach our dizzying heights of flawlessness. So the advice I’m going to give today is how you clueless ##### can avoid being the sexual-harassers that you usually are. (Go get a dictionary because I’m going to use words longer than 8 letters. I know you guys have trouble with those. *smirk*)

To be a vigorous and carefree male today is dirty and wrong!

You are always enjoying improper thoughts and you might occasionally be doing bad things when our backs are turned. Frankly this pisses us righteous womyn off to no end. That’s why we do everything we can to make sure your happiness and ease of mind in the workplace can never come to fruition. So a team of wonderfully prickly, heterophobic and censorious feminist jurists cooked-up a very convenient entrapment-scheme called “sexual harassment”. There were two assumptions on which sexual harassment is based:

First, Male heterosexuality is based on domination and violence but female heterosexuality is based on rainbows and happy thoughts. Therefore females are horribly oppressed by your speech but you are not harmed or bothered by the same speech when it comes from a female. This assumption is necessary to guarantee equal treatment for both sexes.

Second, There are increasing numbers of hard-edged, savvy and self-confident career-womyn entering the workplace and the possibility of you having any heterosexuality at all is absolutely terrifying and beastial to them. It turns out that the hard-edged, savvy and self-confident career-womyn around you are also fragile, easily-hurt orchids who could spontaneously combust from overhearing a risqué pun.

And because we love to politicize personal conflicts (especially conflicts which are not easily solved by intrusive political means), it is your behavior that needs to be reigned-in. For the sake of equality. The fact that feminist lawyers and feminist harassment counselors profit mightily from the resulting suspicion and dischord is a total coincidence.

Are You A Sexual Harasser?

Of course you are, nitwit!

Have you ever made an off-color remark in mixed company? Have you ever stood close to a female in an elevator? Have you ever gestured with your hands in ways that might be interpreted as obscene by a paranoid onlooker across the room? Have you ever dated a co-worker or unsuccessfully asked a co-worker on a date? Did you ever say something that was offensive to an eavesdropping prude? Well I’ve got news for you, buster: THAT MAKES YOU A FILTHY HARASSER FOR WHOM HANGING IS TOO KIND! You are required to change your speech, habits and behavior immediately.

(Special note: if you ever expect me to ever “tone down” my potty mouth or change how I dress or act, then it means you’re a misogynist who is forcing me to wear a burkha. Self-control is for YOU, never for me. Expecting me to adjust my behavior is absolutely outrageous.)

Sexual harassment is not about sex, it’s actually about power. (Special note: SEX is not about sex either, it’s actually about power.) And sexual harassment is not only the making of unwanted sexual advances, but it’s also the failure to make advances when they are wanted by me. Similarly, if you and I were to have a short fling in the workplace (unlikely, but bear with me) and you decide to end the relationship without my consent, then it proves that you were just using me and THAT is a form of sexual harassment. In fact, any behavior I don’t like is harassment. Got it, jerk?

I have the right to go to work without ever getting uncomfortable in any way and everyone else has got to make accomodations to suit my ever-changing emotional hang-ups. Thems the rules, boys. Deal with it. For the sake of equality.

And even though us womyn are equally rough and tough as men, we’re also frail and delicate enough to collapse into quivering heaps of fainting Victorian jelly if you make saucy double-entendres or ribald witticisms. We’re equally strong and aggressive as men but we’re also weak and helpless and need protection from men. Yes, perhaps sexual harassment rules create many opportunities for cynical abuse by unscrupulous and vindictive females due to office politics or personal grudges, but unscrupulous and vindictive females simply DO NOT exist!

Honest, they don’t.

Trust us.

In any sexual-harassment situation, it’ll be my word against your word, and my word ought to carry more weight. Because you, as my equal, lack the sense of fair play and human decency that come so naturally to me.

Always keep these simple rules in mind:

1. Your behavior may create a HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT for female co-workers. A “hostile environment” is defined however the most hypersensitive, Puritanical and erotophobic ice-queen in the office chooses to define it at that particular instant. The burden is on you to figure-out when that is. The victim might not decide she was harassed until several weeks after the fact.

2a. Do not make sexual jokes around me. If another man tells a sexual joke, do not laugh and tell him to stop immediately. However, you must be a good sport whenever I choose to crack a sexual joke or a penis-based insult. Especially the jokes and insults that I make at your expense. Those are hilarious.

2b. Special note: If you’re a gay man, every sexually-charged thing you say is automatically cute and witty. [/IAN]

3. Do not tell me about your love life, I am not interested. If another man tells you about his love life, stick your fingers in your ears and tell him to stop immediately. But my love life is always extremely interesting and it deserves to be heard by everyone within earshot of my booming, throaty voice. Disallowing me to do so would deny me my freedom of expression, so it’s imperative that you let me tell you in graphic detail about the one night I propped my ankles on the couch and had my cat lick Tender Vittles from the folds of my coochie.

4. Do not send me mixed messages. Only I may decide when you are sending them. And I may send-out as many mixed messages as I like. Only I may decide when I am sending them. I can flirt as much as I like, as often as I like. I can squoosh my boobies into your back, rub my hands over your chest, nibble your ear, come-on to you like Madonna in heat. But I also reserve the right to suddenly turn cold and be deathly offended if you respond in a fashion that I don’t care for.

5. Do not wear pants that are ill-fitting lest I see the outlines of your disgusting rape-tool. I may dress however I please. This hot bod of mine is far too gorgeous to keep covered-up, but you mustn’t look at it. Just avert your gaze or gouge your eyes-out or something, I don’t know.

6. Your behavior can and will be placed under a microscope. Almost anything can offend me at any instant, and you have to figure out what I find offensive before I know it myself. My behavior will never be placed under a microscope, for that would be blaming the innocent victim. Anything I do that offends you is proof that you’re a spineless wimp with no sense of humor. Learn to “take a joke”, numb-nuts. I should never have to “take a joke” if I don’t want to.

7. Do not try to date co-workers. Do not ask me out for coffee after work. I have no interest in your putrid loins and the poisonous rape-yogurt contained within. I, however, may date whoever I choose. NO ONE tells this grrrl what to do. That would be sexist.

8. If we ever have an office romance that goes badly, I can seek as much vengeance as I want. You, however, would be an uncouth bastard to do the same.

9. Womyn ought to be allowed to be just as sexually aggressive and lusty as you are– but YOU shouldn’t be allowed to be as sexually aggressive and lusty as you are.

10. Do not put sexually-titillating pictures on or around your desk. (”Titillating” pictures may include head-shots of your wife.) An image of an attractive model in a short skirt is exactly as offensive as a swastika but my Jude Law calendar has got to stay– what a hunk!

What else do you need to remember? Plenty: Watch your mouth. Watch your hands. Watch your filthy mind. Stand-up straight. Clean your fingernails. Tuck-in that shirt. Don’t wear your hair in an offensive way. Don’t breathe so loud. Those socks don’t match that tie. Don’t eat garlic. Wipe that grin off your face, mister. Only YOU can stop sexual harassment. Us womyn can’t be bothered so don’t ask. The snows of suspicion and censure around you will never melt.

And as for the ladies…

No rules for you! Isn’t equality great?

For you, working at the office should be as relaxing and fun as a day at the beach. But how can you protect yourself from harassment? Well my dears, your angelic behavior is always de facto perfect and divine and you don’t have to adjust your habits at all. Not one smidgen. You are the hottest, sexiest most erotic creature in town and everyone ought to know it. Sway those hips after making your PowerPoint show, honey! Be the filthy-talking office-clown who gets lots of laughs. Why not “casually” push your breasts together when asking for a raise? You deserve it all, you goddess-diva you. And us feminists will always deny that you ever act this way.

Hell, why not go to work wearing something like this?
Image
Us feminists will always turn a blind eye to your shenanigans and defend you, no matter what you do. You’re a victim!

Yes, being a flirty little sexpot is a great way to rise to the top without having to work too hard. Although you love being hot, you hate getting burned. So if the wrong fellow stares at you, sue the company for gobs of cash. And if someone suggests that your clothing and behavior might’ve “sent signals”, then that’s blaming the victim– which makes you a double-victim.

You can be a sexy-talking, sultry femme fatale when it helps you get that big promotion. You can be a weeping, wounded naif when you want an annoying rival to get fired. And ideally, you should sobbingly make charges that are impossible for the man to disprove. Let’s practice right now:

“He- (Weep!) called me ‘BABE’ when no one else was around! Boo hoo! My virginal ears are bleeding! I’m SO humiliated! I’ll NEVER recover!”

See? It’s easy!

Yup, equality lets you have your cake and eat it too. You can’t lose in this racket, girlfriend.


http://feministing.org/?cat=8

_________________
Seek knowledge from cradle to grave


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 6:01 am
Posts: 798
Location: Tallahassee, FL
http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

SUMMARY: This bibliography examines 195 scholarly investigations: 152 empirical studies and 43 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 175,700.

Men are More Likely Than Women to Be Victims in Dating Violence
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/520686/

A 32-nation study of violence against dating partners by university partners found that about a third had been violent, and most incidents of partner violence involve violence by both the man and woman. The second largest category was couples where the female partner was the only one to carry about physical attacks, not the male partner.

“In the 35 years since I began research on partner violence, I have seen my assumptions about prevalence and etiology contradicted by a mass of empirical evidence from my own research and from research by many others,” Straus said. “My view on partner violence now recognizes the overwhelming evidence that women assault their partners at about the same rate as men. However, when women are violent, the injury rate is lower.”

_________________
Seek knowledge from cradle to grave


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 6:01 am
Posts: 798
Location: Tallahassee, FL
http://feministing.org/?cat=6

Quote:
Lately there has been increased media attention regarding womyn who have… ahem… supposedly committed acts of violence.

(Snicker…)

What a bunch of Backlash! News items like that are intended to retard womyn’s progress.

Everyone knows that wimmin are never violent and in fact can never be violent. Because even though we are equally-capable of doing anything a man can do, only men can do violent things.

It is true that we feminists claim that womyn are equally strong as men. Why, some of us even like to quip that we will kick any man’s ass if he gets too mouthy. But we could never inflict pain. Though we are quite strong, we are also conveniently weak. And men are impervious to injury. Bullets just bounce-off ‘em.

There is absolutely no way a womyn could ever inflict damage on a man who is larger than she is. Well, maybe if she used a knife or a hammer, that might help. Or if she threw a sharp object or boiling water at him. Or maybe if she waited until he was asleep and attacked him… nahh, none of that could happen. It’s all too difficult to imagine.

Anyway, to show how impossible it is for womyn to be violent, take a look at
this CNN article from last week:

The executive director at [Domestic Abuse Shelter Homes], Donna LeClerc, said her group is dealing with more and more cases of women abusing their mates, though Department of Justice statistics show spousal abuse arrests nationwide have dropped significantly during the past decade.

“Men have gotten the point that it’s not OK to do those things, but somehow it’s turned around, and it’s OK for women to do those things,” LeClerc said.

Well lah-dee-dah! Look at the brainless Stepford Wife: “Blah blah blah, it’s OK for women, blah blah! I ****** Patriarchy-cocks blah blah! I hate myself, blah blah!”

#####’ traitor.

Okay, maybe that article was a bad example of how wimmin are never violent. We certainly wouldn’t use violence against young children who couldn’t fight back like in these two cases right here: A Brooklyn mother will be imprisoned for killing her toddler son and a Boston woman pleaded guilty to slitting the throat of a friend’s baby.

When analyzing these events, it’s important to realize a very simple truth: The Patriarchy was to blame in both cases because men made them do it!

When judging the behavior of these two womyn, we must try to compassionately understand them and the pain that drove them to such acts– every bit of it caused by some man behind the curtain.

Perhaps they were abused some years before? Yeah, that’s always a good one.

Perhaps they were just acting-out their frustration at being paid 73 cents for every dollar a man makes?

Or perhaps their boyfriends simply told them to kill the children? Yes, and these poor wimyn were only following the orders of their all-powerful male masters. And in the latter case, maybe the boyfriend deliberately planted the baby in the path of her swinging knife?

So many questions, so few answers…

But anyway, this much should be crystal-clear once and for all: women are never violent.

If you doubt that, I’ll kick your teeth in.


http://feministing.org/?cat=3
Quote:
It is quite true that I live every day of my life being gorgeously oppressed. But today I was slightly more gorgeously oppressed than normal. I am now using a university library computer to type this entry; it will soon become clear as to why.

Earlier this afternoon, I was sitting in my apartment. Of course I was being a feisty feminist hellcat as I always am. Suddenly… the lights went out. As did every appliance. Had I been electro-raped?

“Damn you, Patriarchy!” I screamed at the ceiling. “If it weren’t for men, there wouldn’t be any darkness!”

Snatching-up the phone, I dialed the customer service number for the electric utility. After pushing some buttons to summon the service rep, I was unpleasantly surprised by the voice of a vile manpig.

I instantly demanded to know why the lights had gone off. The moronic penis-lugger mumbled some crap about me “not paying” some so-called “bill” blah blah blah. Bullshit, all.

MEN! Always with the cold-blooded “explanations”.

“Enough!” I shot-back. “This is another Patriarchal conspiracy to oppress my tits and make my pussy feel bad about itself! But I see through your plan and refuse to tremble before the destructive forces of your cock!”

So devestating was my wit, the voice went silent. Perhaps he was stunned by my exposure of his dastardly little plot. It was at that point that I hung-up without further ado. And the creepy rapist-wannabe was probably jacking-off to my voice anyway.

I have no need for Patriarchal electricity. How many womyn have been victimized by MEN’S high voltage lines? Too many!

Without missing a beat, I dug-out my scented candles and lit them. They were hand-dipped at a lesbian wicca commune, making them full of that lesbiany wiccany goodness that we all need so badly to counteract our penis-dominated lives.

But this tale has a happy ending: I had become a survivor!

So I invite you all to post in this thread about how YOU, a white middle-class college womyn, has been ever-so gorgeously oppressed recently. Did you recover from it? Or do you need a support group to offer succor and sympathy about all the grievances which you’ve suffered at the hands of men in the last 30 minutes?


Quote:
The vile Patriarchy– that sadistic social force which oppresses all womyn– has done it again: they’ve approved a vaccine which could prevent nearly all instances of cervical cancer.

As every feminist knows, our society does not value female life and wimmin’s needs are always ignored. Therefore a medical advance like this one could not have come into existence.

Injecting us with this vaccine requires us to be jabbed with needles several times; this amounts to violence against our precious bodies. And if that wasn’t bad enough, Merck’s senior director of clinical vaccine research who oversaw the product development is named Dr. Eliav Barr– which makes him a ##### MAN!

(Initiate the righteous ridicule!)

Why didn’t he help to invent a vaccine to stop rape?? Does he think this advance in womyn’s health gets him off the hook? He’s got a long way to go before he works-off the debt he owes us because he’s part of the problem!

How can this precious vaccine– and almost every other vaccine and lifesaving technology out there– have sprung from the mind of a testosterone-addled, womyn-killing oppressor?

The only reasonable explanation is that Dr. Barr stole this liquid from a selfless wommyn inventor who was denied her moment of public glory. After all, it is womyn who are superior at life-giving and healing while men create only death, destruction and misery. Grr! When I find this Dr. Barr, I’ll tape bloody tampons to his face.

Anyway, we feminists believe that the biological sciences are highly suspect. All of that talk about viral “invasions” and “defenses” underscores the warlike white male prism through which the human body is viewed. And consider all of the time they waste on testing, testing, testing. All of those rules of empiricism and the mathematically-based analysis which follows. In a laboratory there is scarcely any talk about feelings, consciousness-raising or paradigm-shifting. No wonder there are so few feminist vaccinologists!

The heavily gendered distortions of modern biology, in conjunction with its methodological fetishism, often passes unnoticed or ignored. Biology needs to be exposed for what it really is: a male chauvinist pig of a discipline, suffering from severe monomania and small-dick insecurity issues. A proper feminist perspective on biology would be more inclusive and stem from our unique social experiences because our oppression gives us a special insight into the nature of reality.

Indeed, I would have to say that we feminists are far more gifted at finding male bias within a given discipline than actually coming-up with alternative ways of dealing with the subject. And that’s okay because creating a feminist “critique” of a branch of scientific study is intellectually equivalent to re-inventing the branch from scratch. And it is fair to say that a feminist is a person who wants to see more female careers in the hard sciences– but they must be the careers of other females and never herself.

So as part of our never-ending Stoic Opposition To Dominant Sexual Zeitgeists, I’m recommending that we gyrrlcott this vaccine and every other medical advance that has been developed by useless men during their 10,000 years of oppression.

This includes sterilization, antibiotics, anaesthetics, ambulances, defibrillators, public sanitation, x-rays, vitamin supplements, syringes, MRI scanners, blood-banks, heart & lung machines, Pap-smears, birth control and almost every other medical idea dating back to Hippocrates.

If we ever fall ill, we will use radium. Lots and lots of radium. Whatever that is.

That ought to teach the Patriarchy a lesson!


_________________
Seek knowledge from cradle to grave


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 6:01 am
Posts: 798
Location: Tallahassee, FL
This isnt mere satire and/or dripping sarcasm, but there are references to articles by the BBC and many media outlets that trigger such sarcasm......

Like for example.....in this case....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4225470.stm

http://feministing.org/?cat=2

Quote:
This article in the BBC is a few days old, but it’s a fabulous analysis of why there aren’t more wimmin working in high-tech fields. And, as usual, guess who’s to blame for it?

You guessed it. Men are to blame. Much in the same way that they always are. Because if there’s one thing that heterosexual male techies absolutely loathe, it’s having females around.

And it’s true that for decades male techies were fringe-dwelling nerds who played around in their labs with geeky boy-toys and us wimmin laughed at them for being icky and gross. And now that the field has become hip, trendy and lucrative it’s an absolute crime that there aren’t more womin Linux-coders and database administrators.

Sure, I don’t really understand what goes-on in this industry exactly. And sure, my knowledge of workplace dynamics in general is only so-so. And maybe I don’t particularly care how companies work either. But I do know instinctively that womyn are gorgeously stoic victims of oppression wherever they go and that the singular source of all evil has a penis.

I absolutely agree with every single point in this poignant and succinct article. In fact, I’d like to add some of my expert commentary:

Women are ‘put off’ hi-tech jobs.

Women still feel there is an exclusionary “old boys” network.

It’s very good that this article focuses so much on how womyn “feel”. I’ve long thought that womin’s feelings should be the standard of measurement for everything. “Empiricism” is just a fancy way of saying “patriarchal wankery”.

It concluded there should be more equality and support in the workplace.

And this can be achieved mainly through non-stop adulation of everything that every female employee does. In the background of every office, there ought to be an infinite-loop tape which plays: “You’re super-cool, grrlfriend! You’re awesome! You’re, like, a super-riffic goddess-diva who is equally good at Perl scripting! For sure!” Over and over, every day. Because the patriarchy broadcasts the exact same message to men via telepathy.

The report said women left the industry because of long hours, few networking opportunities and a perceived male-domination of hi-tech industry culture.

Wymin left the industry because they didn’t want to work long hours, they disliked the impersonal nature of the field and men are to blame for it.

Those male fiends!

Is there any form of wickedness that they won’t stoop to?

The research also pointed to the lack of opportunities for part-time workers, particularly for women seeking more senior positions.

Why aren’t there more part-time senior management positions, huh? Why can’t a womyn work her way up to be a Chief Operations Officer while working under 20 hours a week, huh? It ain’t fair!

Damn you, patriarchy!

Part-time work was also identified as having a poor image within the industry. Those who work part-time said they were not given the same responsibilities or opportunities as full-time colleagues.

It’s motiveless discrimination! Diabolical!

Many women questioned reported that they would be more inclined to stay if there was less pressure to work long hours in a full-time role.

I am outraged that a womyn should have to work as many hours as a man in order to get the same kind of ranking as a man! What is this world coming to?

Us wimmin demand the money and the status that comes with working full-time, but how dare we be expected to actually work full-time for it!

For the all-important sake of statistically-equal outcomes, wimmin ought to enter high-tech jobs in larger numbers. And if any of them don’t care for that kind of work, then they must be forced into it whether they like it or not. Whether they have ability or not. Whether an employer has any need for them or not. Good thing I won’t be among them; my talent and wisdom is desperately needed elsewhere.

Folks, I am simply too overwhelmed by rage to comment on the rest of this article. Needless to say, we wymun deserve equal treatment which is why we deserve special treatment. In fact, we need lots and lots of special treatment in order to get a minimal level of equal treatment!

Why is that so hard to understand?





I wonder why there aren't more senior management positions that are part time?!?!?!?!? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO

_________________
Seek knowledge from cradle to grave


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 4:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2000 6:01 am
Posts: 1348
Location: Somerville, ma.
Reading these things causes me to feel more sympathetic to feminism, not less. This level of hateful rhetoric really does nothing to persuade me that the targets of the vitriol are the ones I should be disgusted with. Instead, it just makes me think that the ones who really need to change their behavior are the pathetic, embittered men with no more strength of character than to use women as scapegoats to excuse their failures in life.

_________________
- Justin Powell


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 27, 2006 5:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:16 am
Posts: 2758
Location: Boston
“In the 35 years since I began research on partner violence, I have seen my assumptions about prevalence and etiology contradicted by a mass of empirical evidence from my own research and from research by many others,” Straus said. “My view on partner violence now recognizes the overwhelming evidence that women assault their partners at about the same rate as men. However, when women are violent, the injury rate is lower.”

Thanks for posting this, ATH. I made EXACTLY this same claim in response to material from a link on your other thread, and its always nice for you to make my case for me.

A caveat for people who actually read and think about posts rather than just copying huge rants from embittered likeminded bloggers: one has to be careful about the definitions used in the studies. Alot of studies will include emotional violence as abuse, and that is a very subjective matter. One I read back in 2000 or so included a husband telling a wife she was overweight as verbal abuse. That can be done abusively, nonchalantly, or supportively, as in, we have weight to lose, let's you and I go to the gym and eat better, or, can I help you lose weight because I want you to be healthy. So its best to read summations of these studies from a person who isn't super ideological, whether feminazi or harvenazi.

Otherwise, ATH: your ongoing postings are less arguments or evidence of some sociological problem than they are a display of your bitterness. I hope you get over all this someday. Goodbye.

_________________
--Ian


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 4:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 6:01 am
Posts: 798
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Valkanar, Feminism is the dominant meme, thus i wouldnt expect much other than more sympathy for feminism, feminists and male feminists galore.......have a feminist day.......just be warned of the possible existence of hypocrisy, misandry (note how you MAY now know what that means even if you disagree about its existence or deny its severity)....

Why do we have to embrace matriarchy in order to eliminate patriarchy........if equality be a good thing and if it be achievable, then is there not a balance that allows both patriarchy and matriarchy to exist without one demonizing the other.......

there has been a lot of criticism of the patriarchy (some of it certainly is valid although it may not have been welcome) coming out of women's studies departments.....that is ok, and any criticism of the matriarchy seems just as unwelcome even if some of it is certainly on the mark.......

in fact, the extent to which my advocacy has any merit is the extent to which the population of us as a whole determines that we have had enough of the pendulum swinging too far in the wrong direction......

I was a feminist supporter for well over two decades and i still see some merit in its ideals. On the other hand, having been a supporter for over two decades, I am well aware of its shortcomings and its hypocrisies......as well as its successes and admirable ideals.........


Please Note, Ian, that Injury rate is lower is different from Injury rate from women is nill or zero.......many police dv procedures seem based upon an assumption that violence caused by women is nil......

cuz when the police show up at your house, they generally arrest the man......even though the often is the offender......skewing statistics such that men are seen as the majority of offenders.....

the man could have the blood and the bruises and they might just arrest him anyway since there is more prevalence of male abuse and greater harm......thus, the crime stats clearly show men get arrested more (due to assumptions and social science stats that are easy to manipulate and discard evidence that doesnt support your all males are bad hypothesis)

the beauty of social science research is that when we ASSUME that women are not violent, we tend to count fewer violent women.......

thus, women who KILL their husbands are often counted among folks who employ self defense (and get off) while men who defend themselves are as likely or far more likely to be prosecuted......

abused spouse syndrome is used to excuse female violence (and thus NOT count it) while male prediliction for violence which is assumed (is used against men who might otherwise be seen as defending themselves)......

I have gotten to know a number of men who were abused by their significant others (some of whom were arrested or very nearly arrested even when they were abused)



I wonder why there aren't more senior management positions that are part time?



Image

_________________
Seek knowledge from cradle to grave


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:16 am
Posts: 2758
Location: Boston
Nice ad. Who's the most chronically offended person on these forums, ATH, if not you?

"Please Note, Ian, that Injury rate is lower is different from Injury rate from women is nill or zero.......many police dv procedures seem based upon an assumption that violence caused by women is nil...... "

Thanks. I was having trouble distinguishing less and zero. Any relevant facts?

_________________
--Ian


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 2:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 6:01 am
Posts: 798
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Sorry to be gone for so long, but my internet connection in all its broadband beauty is more likely to be down than up......

http://www.nfvlrc.org/

NATIONAL FAMILY VIOLENCE
LEGISLATIVE RESOURCE CENTER

"Advocating for non-discriminatory and evidence-based policies"



http://www.nfvlrc.org/latestResearch.htm
BECOME EDUCATED WITH THE LATEST RESEARCH


http://www.nfvlrc.org/LatestResearch/La ... ponses.htm
Law Enforcement Responses

http://www.nfvlrc.org/LatestResearch/Ge ... rviews.htm
General/Overviews

http://www.nfvlrc.org/LatestResearch/Interventions.htm
Interventions

http://www.nfvlrc.org/LatestResearch/VictimServices.htm
Victim Services

http://www.nfvlrc.org/LatestResearch/Fa ... olence.htm
Family Law and Family Violence

http://www.nfvlrc.org/LatestResearch/Pr ... treach.htm
Prevention, Education and Outreach

http://www.nfvlrc.org/LatestResearch/Re ... ticles.htm
Recommended Articles



Ian aint the only one asking for the use of evidence..........

it probably wont rate as FACT for Ian, but it is my rebuttal nonetheless.....

the domestic violence establishment is not telling us the full truth about domestic violence, and many destructive family law policies have been based on misleading information. Research clearly establishes that women are frequently the aggressors in domestic combat, often employing the element of surprise and weapons to compensate for men's strength.

http://www.glennsacks.com/octobers_dome ... olence.htm

October’s Domestic Violence Awareness Month
Ignores Many Victims




"Current DV policies are so at odds with research and reality that many domestic violence researchers and treatment providers are rebelling against the DV establishment. Earlier this year over 50 of these authorities signed a letter urging the California legislature to stop the state's policy of excluding male victims and their children from DV services.

"'Men account for half of all DV victims and incur a third of DV-related injuries. There is an overwhelming, irrefutable body of research indicating that children are adversely affected by witnessing interparental violence, regardless of the perpetrator's gender. Ignoring female-on-male violence inhibits our efforts to combat domestic violence.'"

Ignoring female-on-male violence inhibits our efforts to combat domestic violence.

Ignoring female-on-male violence inhibits our efforts to combat domestic violence.

Ignoring female-on-male violence inhibits our efforts to combat domestic violence.

"The founding members of NFVLRC have recognized for some time that current polices are politically driven rather being based on scientifically sound information, and are seeking to change them. As a result of flawed policies, many children are being denied the same range of services simply because of their victimized parent's gender. Current policies have in many instances also resulted in a loss of civil liberties, and research indicates that they have sometimes resulted in increased danger to victims...NFVLRC believes that unless domestic and family violence policies are reformed, victims, children and future generations will continue to suffer from this social problem."




Founding members of the NFVLRC include: author and psychologist Don Dutton, who served as a domestic violence expert on the prosecution team in the OJ Simpson trial; Carol Ensign, LCSW, former executive director of the Antelope Valley Domestic Violence Council and Los Angeles County "Woman of the Year" in 2000; author and psychologist Kathleen Malley-Morrison; clinical psychologist Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling of the University of South Alabama; forensic psychologist Dr. Tonia Nicholls; Philip Cook, Executive Director for Stop Abuse for Everyone and the author of Abused Men: The Hidden Side of Domestic Violence; Patricia Jones, MS, of the Antelope Valley Domestic Violence Council/Valley Oasis Shelter; batterer intervention specialist Lonnie Hazlewood, M.S.H.P., L.C.D.C., C.C.C.J.S., co-author of The Violent Couple; retired police lieutenant Richard L. Davis, author of Domestic Violence: Facts and Fallacies; Marlene Moretti, PhD, coauthor of the book, Girls and Aggression: Contributing Factors and Intervention Principles; John Hamel; and others.

_________________
Seek knowledge from cradle to grave


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 2:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 6:01 am
Posts: 798
Location: Tallahassee, FL
of course, lesbain batterers dont exist and shouldnt be a concern since women are gentle and caring and men are brutes, right Ian???????

gay men can bash each other all day long and all it does it prove that men are bad and real men are real bad, but these lesbians beatin each other must prove to be some discomforting info since it flies in the face of all the evidence that men are bad and real men are real bad.....



Coleman, V. (2002). Treating the lesbian batterer. In D. Dutton & D. Sonkin (Eds.), Intimate violence: Contemporary treatment innovations (pp. 159-206). New York: Haworth Maltreatment & Trauma Press.







Carney, M., Buttell, F., & Dutton, D. (2006). Women who perpetrate intimate partner violence: A review of the literature with recommendations for treatment. Aggression and Violent Behavior, in press.


Faigman, D. (1986). The battered woman syndrome and self-defense: A legal and empirical dissent. Virginia Law Review, 72, 619-647.


Moffitt, T., Robins, R., & Caspi, A. (2001). A couples analysis of partner abuse with implications for abuse prevention policy. Criminology & Public Policy, 1 (1), 5-36.


Simonelli, C., & Ingram, K. (1998). Psychological distress among men experiencing physical and emotional abuse in heterosexual dating relationships. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13 (6), 667-681.


Recommended Books
http://www.nfvlrc.org/LatestResearch/Re ... dBooks.htm


Cook, P. (1997). Abused men: The hidden side of domestic violence. Westport, CT: Praeger.


Dutton, D. (2006). Rethinking domestic violence. Vancouver, B.C.: UBC Press.


Felson, R. (2002). Violence & gender reexamined. Washington , DC : American Psychological Association.


Hamel, J. (2005). Gender-inclusive treatment of intimate partner abuse: A comprehensive approach. New York: Springer.


Mills, L. (2003). Insult to injury: Rethinking our responses to intimate abuse. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.


a partial list.....now we can go back to being a place where domestic violence shelters ignore the plight of men (most of them are called battered women's shelters and turn men away) and i am just a cry baby for daring to be concerend about batered men or other issues of import to men

_________________
Seek knowledge from cradle to grave


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 2:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 6:01 am
Posts: 798
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Dutton, D. (2005). Domestic abuse assessment in child custody disputes: Beware the domestic violence research paradigm. (click here for article)


Quote:
Abstract
http://www.nfvlrc.org/docs/Dutton.custodyDV.pdf
In some states custody assessors are now required to become familiar with the dynamics of prevalence of domestic abuse since the presence of one or more abusive parents in the house has impact on the “best interests of the child”. The domestic abuse literature is misleading in setting a framework for abuse incidence and threat source for children. Males are represented as primary perpetrators of physical abuse although data from meta-analytic studies show otherwise. Indirect aggression is scarcely mentioned in the literature, although prevalent in research on aggression. Physical violence directed towards children is actually more likely to be mother – perpetrated. Child safety may be compromised if attention is focused solely on the possibility of abuse from a male perpetrator.



I guess, Ian, you still want the attention focused solely on the possibility of a male perpetrator since that is the view of the male that you have either learned or the discriminatory practices you have picked up from the culturally accepted memes that presently dominate........now you have some of my info.......feel free to cherry pick and ignore the vast number of resources that dont support your arguments (those sexist ones that allow you to presume the males worthy of prison while the females are worthy of shelters).........I meet men who are victims of domestic violence too regularly and i have yet to have a place where i can recomen they go since the vast majority of doemstic violence shelters EXCLUDE MEN.......

but i must be a pussy if i dare to even mention a case where men are discriminated against............what happens to a woman who fights off her abusive boyfriend? they pin a medal on her chest and make a movie about her and put her on oprah for a while.........what happens to a man who fights off his abusive domestic partner? they throw his butt in jail and give him anger management classes and label him the violent thug we know all men to be (except the nice gay ones who dont batter....we all know gay guys are too nice to hit each other....LOL...as if.....).....

and when lesbians batter each other (with about the same frequency as men and women), which man can we blame?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

it really ***** when you dont have men to blame, cuz otherwise, most of us could agree on who the perp was......

_________________
Seek knowledge from cradle to grave


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2006 3:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 17, 2000 6:01 am
Posts: 2813
Location: Massachusetts
I must also apologize for not being here very often recently. I just started a new postion as a Research Engineer working on a major international project and between coming up to speed here locally and the international travel, my personal internet time has, by necessity, been less lately. However, I do still check in to make sure things are nice here...

On that note, PLEASE keep things cordial. We really don't need any personal attacks and they simply won't be tolerated. Any of the moderators here at the Uechi Ryu Forums have the right and capability to jump in on this forum and take actions when they deem it necessary. Other moderators have always contacted me with their thoughts and concerns instead of taking direct action, however, please realize that all moderators have permission to take action when the rules of this forum have been breached. Upto and including banning individuals.

Therefore, please play nice and debate/discuss issues not people.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group