Schwarzenegger's propaganda

Chris wrote:


Apparently, I must have overlooked where he claimed that his children
had a male role model. Perhaps you might quote just what he said that
leads you to believe so.

He said .. "(raised by their mother who restriced my involvement)" Look
up restricted if you are still confused.

And showed his continued involvement with this "I've voiced my
displeasure with their actions"

If you've read his other posts you can see how he and his kids have a
decent relationship despite the efforts of his ex.


A CAREFUL review of my statements and yours will reveal that there is
absolutely NO relationship between the two.


Thats because you can't follow anything that doesn't agree with your
agenda. You've already made that obvious.

"Dusty" wrote in message
...
"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...

[snip]

And it's not limited to government. For an example, Coca-Cola is
promoting women's heart health with their diet Coke as if men didn't have
heart disease or die from it. (Like breast and prostate cancer, the
numbers are similar)
Just about everywhere one looks, there are incentives, promotions and
events slated for women, women's health and the like, at best only a very
few for men.
The only way I know to fight sexism from corporations is to boycott their
products and write an occasional letter of disapproval of their actions
to them. I don't have a problem with coke funding research for heart
health, I just think promoting women's health is sexist since it touches
men as well and in nearly equal numbers. (I suppose the fact that more
women are obese has something to do with Coca Cola choosing diet coke as
their product to promote it, it is, after all, just a grab for money).
Nearly every accidental work-place injury and death is to men yet no one
notices. Can you imagine the uproar if 90-some percent of those killed in
workplace accidents were women?

Phil #3


Here's a thought.. sue the *******s.

Class action suits are great for this and can even garner considerable
media coverage. OK, so early on a lot of pinheads may laugh and make
jokes, so what. After men start winning these suits, the laughter will
stop and people will sit up and take notice that men are sick and tired of
being the brunt of all ills of women.

Whenever a company, or the government, moves to promote anything that
(real or imagined) appears to benefit only women and excludes men, in any
way, shape or form - sue them.

After a while they'll get the idea that men are no longer going to take it
in the shorts, nor stand for being told to "Man up" when they have
been/are being disadvantaged.

Private entities can give whatever they what to whomever they choose. That
is part of free enterprise but I don't have to participate in their bigotry
and can refuse to purchase their product/service. The government, however is
a different case in that we are forced to contribute; but one can hardly
expect fairness from an entity that is part of the system of the entity one
is suing. It would have been like Jews suing Hitler in the late 1930's and
'40's.
Phil #3

"Chris" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:


"Phil #3" wrote in message
...


"Chris" wrote in message
...


"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Dusty" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Kenneth s." wrote in message
...

On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:04:16 +0200, "Dusty"
wrote:

"Bob W" wrote in message
m...


"Chris" wrote in message
...



[snip]


[snip]

The whole thing is too little, too late. The FIRST necessity is to
consider and treat BOTH parents as equals, which would solve the
whole problem but that isn't gonna happen until men, as a group,
get radical and vocal.


That's all well and good Phil, but there's a major flaw in that
idea.. (1) men are being picked off one-by-one wither they are vocal
about it or not and (2) try as we might, there is no central figure
for men to rally around.

I hate to say it, but most people are sheep and will only follow
those in front of them, even if it's over a cliff. The lack of a
central, organized hub, if you will, to grease the wheels and keep
them turning in the right direction is what is required for the MRM
to take flight.

Part of the problem is that there are many, many splinter groups
that, much like the Red Queen, are after someone's head. This in
turn is what feeds the media to portray everyone in the MRM as a
nut-job. Which leads us to another part of the problem, lack of
media support or good, pro-father stories in the media. A good deal
of that can be laid at the feet of the Hollywood elite by their
constant portrayals of men as complete dopes and utter fools. After
being fed a steady diet of "Dad is a Buffoon" for nearly 30 years
the public buys into it, hook, line and sinker without ever raising
an eyebrow.

Reverse this and people will demand heads on platters. An unlikely
example of this is David Letterman and his so-called joke about
former Governor Palin's daughter. People who heard it wanted
Letterman's head in a pike for insulting a young girl and
insinuating that rape would be good for her. But whereas people
went into an uproar over this happening to a female, not a peep was
heard about a demand for Letterman to apologize to the MAN he
slighted as her would-be rapist!

There's a lot of work yet to be done before we can even think of
getting into the ring with the girls.


That was the "radical" part I mentioned: getting politically active
and unified, which would be a radical change in the way men act and
react. This whole anti-male mindset of which you speak has come about
since the 1960's when women became intensively politically active.
Of course men, who have historically been forced to work to support
women, are at a disadvantage but it is not insurmountable.
How exactly did we wind up with three liberals at the head positions
of governement (Obama, Reid, Pelosi)? By a majority of women and
minorities who are most likely to benefit from liberal politcs,
taking and active part of the process while the majority of men
ignored it at their own peril. Approximately 63% of voters were from
urban areas and 66% under the age of 30 voted for Obama. Nearly 100%
of black voters cast ballots for Obama then flatly state that anyone
who opposed his policies do so because of racism... and no one bats
an eye.

Nearly every commerical is based in a stupid, childish, lazy and/or
incompetent father/husband with a wise, competent, hard-working and
mature mother/wife as are many of the TV shows (Roseanne, Home
Improvement, etc.), and for many this becomes real-life; almost a
documentary. And men ignore it, even buy into it.

Phil #3


Well stated. I personally know a handful of middle-aged white men who
have applied for (and received, believe it or not) government welfare.
They figure if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em. Slowly, but surely, the
U.S. is becomong the U.K.

[By the way, food stamps come in the form of a credit card, better
known as a "dignity" card. WHY? Are the government people saying that
collecting welfare is a shameful act to be concealed?]


Two of my sons (raised by their mother who restriced my involvement)
currently get food stamps and have for several years. They are both
healthy and capable but lazy, a lifestyle they didn't get from me.
Neither hold a job longer than it takes for unemployment benefits to
kick in then they stay unemployed until benefits end only to repeat the
cycle with a low-paying job that won't end their eligibility. I've
voiced my displeasure with their actions but decades of indoctrination
is firmly planted.
Yet they both recognize the anti-male actions of government yet enlist
voluntarily. I just don't get it. Perhaps they are just getting what
they can, while they are able.
Phil #3


Simple. Children are a product of their mother. How their mother raises
them determines their general behavior as adults.

Wow, you guys are really pro- failure. You adopted the attitude that if I
am unhappy everyone in the world should be too. You are 100% wrong, boys
almost always behave the way they are taught by their male role models,
leaving a child without a male role model means he will have to find his
own role models, in most cases that role model will be a coach, teacher,
older brother etc. But in the worst cases the role model will be a person
who preys on young men without role models. When you read about a teenage
drug dealer or shooter how often is his mother in jail for dealing drugs
or shooting someone? Almost never. The male role model is almost always
the example.

I was making reference to principles, NOT role models.


Are there exceptions
to the rule? Of course! But overall, they respond to their mother's
example. Since many, if not most, children are taught by their mothers
that men pay money and don't raise children, and women get free money
and determine what to teach their children, it doesn't surprise me that
the "child support" system perpetuates.


Try to be realistic for 10 seconds, this is completely wrong and
ridiculous.

Then perhaps YOU can explain why the beat goes on.

If you want to talk about these things forget about your beefs with child
support learn a little about child psychology.

Welcome back!

Chris, I guess you enjoy the repartee with XXX but it scares me to realize
that there are many people who are just as warped as s/he.
For instance, s/he still wants to blame men as in the case of teenage drug
dealers who are most likely to come from a mother-headed home where there is
no male "role model" at all. The case of over 70% of all inmates in jail are
from a 'father-ess' home means nothing to bigots such as XXX, they simply
blame men, even though they are prevented from being part of the
problem/solution.
You can educate the ignorant but stupid is forever . However, you do allow
her/him to stick both feet into her/his ample mouth just by keeping them
stoked.

Phil #3

" wrote in message
...
Phil #3 wrote:


"Chris" wrote in message
...


"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Dusty" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Kenneth s." wrote in message
...

On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:04:16 +0200, "Dusty" wrote:

"Bob W" wrote in message
m...


"Chris" wrote in message
...



[snip]


[snip]

The whole thing is too little, too late. The FIRST necessity is to
consider and treat BOTH parents as equals, which would solve the
whole problem but that isn't gonna happen until men, as a group, get
radical and vocal.


That's all well and good Phil, but there's a major flaw in that idea..
(1) men are being picked off one-by-one wither they are vocal about it
or not and (2) try as we might, there is no central figure for men to
rally around.

I hate to say it, but most people are sheep and will only follow those
in front of them, even if it's over a cliff. The lack of a central,
organized hub, if you will, to grease the wheels and keep them turning
in the right direction is what is required for the MRM to take flight.

Part of the problem is that there are many, many splinter groups that,
much like the Red Queen, are after someone's head. This in turn is
what feeds the media to portray everyone in the MRM as a nut-job.
Which leads us to another part of the problem, lack of media support
or good, pro-father stories in the media. A good deal of that can be
laid at the feet of the Hollywood elite by their constant portrayals
of men as complete dopes and utter fools. After being fed a steady
diet of "Dad is a Buffoon" for nearly 30 years the public buys into
it, hook, line and sinker without ever raising an eyebrow.

Reverse this and people will demand heads on platters. An unlikely
example of this is David Letterman and his so-called joke about former
Governor Palin's daughter. People who heard it wanted Letterman's
head in a pike for insulting a young girl and insinuating that rape
would be good for her. But whereas people went into an uproar over
this happening to a female, not a peep was heard about a demand for
Letterman to apologize to the MAN he slighted as her would-be rapist!

There's a lot of work yet to be done before we can even think of
getting into the ring with the girls.


That was the "radical" part I mentioned: getting politically active and
unified, which would be a radical change in the way men act and react.
This whole anti-male mindset of which you speak has come about since
the 1960's when women became intensively politically active.
Of course men, who have historically been forced to work to support
women, are at a disadvantage but it is not insurmountable.
How exactly did we wind up with three liberals at the head positions of
governement (Obama, Reid, Pelosi)? By a majority of women and
minorities who are most likely to benefit from liberal politcs, taking
and active part of the process while the majority of men ignored it at
their own peril. Approximately 63% of voters were from urban areas and
66% under the age of 30 voted for Obama. Nearly 100% of black voters
cast ballots for Obama then flatly state that anyone who opposed his
policies do so because of racism... and no one bats an eye.

Nearly every commerical is based in a stupid, childish, lazy and/or
incompetent father/husband with a wise, competent, hard-working and
mature mother/wife as are many of the TV shows (Roseanne, Home
Improvement, etc.), and for many this becomes real-life; almost a
documentary. And men ignore it, even buy into it.

Phil #3


Well stated. I personally know a handful of middle-aged white men who
have applied for (and received, believe it or not) government welfare.
They figure if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em. Slowly, but surely, the U.S.
is becomong the U.K.

[By the way, food stamps come in the form of a credit card, better known
as a "dignity" card. WHY? Are the government people saying that
collecting welfare is a shameful act to be concealed?]


Two of my sons (raised by their mother who restriced my involvement)
currently get food stamps and have for several years. They are both
healthy and capable but lazy, a lifestyle they didn't get from me.
Neither hold a job longer than it takes for unemployment benefits to kick
in then they stay unemployed until benefits end only to repeat the cycle
with a low-paying job that won't end their eligibility. I've voiced my
displeasure with their actions but decades of indoctrination is firmly
planted.
Yet they both recognize the anti-male actions of government yet enlist
voluntarily. I just don't get it. Perhaps they are just getting what they
can, while they are able.
Phil #3



Wow, this really is a window into your denial. Boys emulate their fathers
(or a father figure) close to 100% of the time. If they were
indoctrinated, it was the example of victim hood, impotence and weakness
from their male role model(s) that indoctrinated them into this sort of
lifestyle. The whole "get into a union, volunteer for the first round of
layoffs, collect benefits and live cheaply" lifestyle is fairly common and
pretty rewarding for a guy with hobbies and no ambition. That's why
fathers (father figures) are the key to this, boys enjoy ANYTHING as long
as they are getting some positive reinforcement and instruction. City kids
will love fishing and hunting if they are taught to do those things,
redneck kids will love tennis if they are encouraged to do that.

You're a liar or stupid. Only you know which. but whichever, you are
definitely a sexual bigot.
Phil #3

"Chris" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
...
Phil #3 wrote:


"Chris" wrote in message
...


"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Dusty" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Kenneth s." wrote in message
...

On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:04:16 +0200, "Dusty" wrote:

"Bob W" wrote in message
m...


"Chris" wrote in message
...



[snip]


[snip]

The whole thing is too little, too late. The FIRST necessity is to
consider and treat BOTH parents as equals, which would solve the
whole problem but that isn't gonna happen until men, as a group, get
radical and vocal.


That's all well and good Phil, but there's a major flaw in that
idea.. (1) men are being picked off one-by-one wither they are vocal
about it or not and (2) try as we might, there is no central figure
for men to rally around.

I hate to say it, but most people are sheep and will only follow
those in front of them, even if it's over a cliff. The lack of a
central, organized hub, if you will, to grease the wheels and keep
them turning in the right direction is what is required for the MRM
to take flight.

Part of the problem is that there are many, many splinter groups
that, much like the Red Queen, are after someone's head. This in
turn is what feeds the media to portray everyone in the MRM as a
nut-job. Which leads us to another part of the problem, lack of media
support or good, pro-father stories in the media. A good deal of
that can be laid at the feet of the Hollywood elite by their constant
portrayals of men as complete dopes and utter fools. After being fed
a steady diet of "Dad is a Buffoon" for nearly 30 years the public
buys into it, hook, line and sinker without ever raising an eyebrow.

Reverse this and people will demand heads on platters. An unlikely
example of this is David Letterman and his so-called joke about
former Governor Palin's daughter. People who heard it wanted
Letterman's head in a pike for insulting a young girl and insinuating
that rape would be good for her. But whereas people went into an
uproar over this happening to a female, not a peep was heard about a
demand for Letterman to apologize to the MAN he slighted as her
would-be rapist!

There's a lot of work yet to be done before we can even think of
getting into the ring with the girls.


That was the "radical" part I mentioned: getting politically active
and unified, which would be a radical change in the way men act and
react. This whole anti-male mindset of which you speak has come about
since the 1960's when women became intensively politically active.
Of course men, who have historically been forced to work to support
women, are at a disadvantage but it is not insurmountable.
How exactly did we wind up with three liberals at the head positions
of governement (Obama, Reid, Pelosi)? By a majority of women and
minorities who are most likely to benefit from liberal politcs, taking
and active part of the process while the majority of men ignored it at
their own peril. Approximately 63% of voters were from urban areas and
66% under the age of 30 voted for Obama. Nearly 100% of black voters
cast ballots for Obama then flatly state that anyone who opposed his
policies do so because of racism... and no one bats an eye.

Nearly every commerical is based in a stupid, childish, lazy and/or
incompetent father/husband with a wise, competent, hard-working and
mature mother/wife as are many of the TV shows (Roseanne, Home
Improvement, etc.), and for many this becomes real-life; almost a
documentary. And men ignore it, even buy into it.

Phil #3


Well stated. I personally know a handful of middle-aged white men who
have applied for (and received, believe it or not) government welfare.
They figure if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em. Slowly, but surely, the
U.S. is becomong the U.K.

[By the way, food stamps come in the form of a credit card, better
known as a "dignity" card. WHY? Are the government people saying that
collecting welfare is a shameful act to be concealed?]


Two of my sons (raised by their mother who restriced my involvement)
currently get food stamps and have for several years. They are both
healthy and capable but lazy, a lifestyle they didn't get from me.
Neither hold a job longer than it takes for unemployment benefits to
kick in then they stay unemployed until benefits end only to repeat the
cycle with a low-paying job that won't end their eligibility. I've
voiced my displeasure with their actions but decades of indoctrination
is firmly planted.
Yet they both recognize the anti-male actions of government yet enlist
voluntarily. I just don't get it. Perhaps they are just getting what
they can, while they are able.
Phil #3



Wow, this really is a window into your denial. Boys emulate their fathers
(or a father figure) close to 100% of the time. If they were
indoctrinated, it was the example of victim hood, impotence and weakness
from their male role model(s) that indoctrinated them into this sort of
lifestyle.

And you know they had a male role model how?

The whole "get into a union, volunteer for the first round of layoffs,
collect benefits and live cheaply" lifestyle is fairly common and pretty
rewarding for a guy with hobbies and no ambition. That's why fathers
(father figures) are the key to this, boys enjoy ANYTHING as long as they
are getting some positive reinforcement and instruction.

With all due respect, whatever are you talking about?

City kids will love fishing and hunting if they are taught to do those
things, redneck kids will love tennis if they are encouraged to do that.

Some perhaps, but not necessarily all.

I wonder what it's like to think one knows everything about any subject like
XXX does.
The truly amazing part is even s/he simply cannot be so stupid as to
actually believe any of the sexist garbage s/he spews and still be able to
feed and dress themselves.
I suppose it is a case of making **** up as one goes. (You'll notice s/he
never offers any sort of proof, evidence or anything else except personal
bigotry).
S/he seems to think that her/his imagination is more relivant than our
experience.
Phil #3

" wrote in message
...
Dusty wrote:

" wrote in message
...

[snip]

Oh bloody hell. Who let you out of your cage again?

You keep posting the ridiculous bull**** and I'll stop in from time to
time and make fun of you. I know how much you hate to hear the truth when
it contradicts your whining, but someone has to do it.

Yup, with astounding regularity, you somehow manage to wedge both feet into
your mouth more often then anyone I've ever had the pleasure of not meeting.
Your ability to post some of the most inane, ridiculous, incomprehensible
crap anyone has ever put forth is truly incredible.

Though, I still can't help but wonder if you'll ever, through whatever fluke
of fate, somehow publish the truth AND back it up with factual, verifiable
data. But I'm not going to hold my breath, it may be a very long wait
before you get round to it.

"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:


"Phil #3" wrote in message
...


"Chris" wrote in message
...


"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Dusty" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Kenneth s." wrote in message
...

On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:04:16 +0200, "Dusty"
wrote:

"Bob W" wrote in message
m...


"Chris" wrote in message
...



[snip]


[snip]

The whole thing is too little, too late. The FIRST necessity is to
consider and treat BOTH parents as equals, which would solve the
whole problem but that isn't gonna happen until men, as a group,
get radical and vocal.


That's all well and good Phil, but there's a major flaw in that
idea.. (1) men are being picked off one-by-one wither they are
vocal about it or not and (2) try as we might, there is no central
figure for men to rally around.

I hate to say it, but most people are sheep and will only follow
those in front of them, even if it's over a cliff. The lack of a
central, organized hub, if you will, to grease the wheels and keep
them turning in the right direction is what is required for the MRM
to take flight.

Part of the problem is that there are many, many splinter groups
that, much like the Red Queen, are after someone's head. This in
turn is what feeds the media to portray everyone in the MRM as a
nut-job. Which leads us to another part of the problem, lack of
media support or good, pro-father stories in the media. A good
deal of that can be laid at the feet of the Hollywood elite by
their constant portrayals of men as complete dopes and utter fools.
After being fed a steady diet of "Dad is a Buffoon" for nearly 30
years the public buys into it, hook, line and sinker without ever
raising an eyebrow.

Reverse this and people will demand heads on platters. An unlikely
example of this is David Letterman and his so-called joke about
former Governor Palin's daughter. People who heard it wanted
Letterman's head in a pike for insulting a young girl and
insinuating that rape would be good for her. But whereas people
went into an uproar over this happening to a female, not a peep was
heard about a demand for Letterman to apologize to the MAN he
slighted as her would-be rapist!

There's a lot of work yet to be done before we can even think of
getting into the ring with the girls.


That was the "radical" part I mentioned: getting politically active
and unified, which would be a radical change in the way men act and
react. This whole anti-male mindset of which you speak has come
about since the 1960's when women became intensively politically
active.
Of course men, who have historically been forced to work to support
women, are at a disadvantage but it is not insurmountable.
How exactly did we wind up with three liberals at the head positions
of governement (Obama, Reid, Pelosi)? By a majority of women and
minorities who are most likely to benefit from liberal politcs,
taking and active part of the process while the majority of men
ignored it at their own peril. Approximately 63% of voters were from
urban areas and 66% under the age of 30 voted for Obama. Nearly 100%
of black voters cast ballots for Obama then flatly state that anyone
who opposed his policies do so because of racism... and no one bats
an eye.

Nearly every commerical is based in a stupid, childish, lazy and/or
incompetent father/husband with a wise, competent, hard-working and
mature mother/wife as are many of the TV shows (Roseanne, Home
Improvement, etc.), and for many this becomes real-life; almost a
documentary. And men ignore it, even buy into it.

Phil #3


Well stated. I personally know a handful of middle-aged white men who
have applied for (and received, believe it or not) government
welfare. They figure if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em. Slowly, but
surely, the U.S. is becomong the U.K.

[By the way, food stamps come in the form of a credit card, better
known as a "dignity" card. WHY? Are the government people saying that
collecting welfare is a shameful act to be concealed?]


Two of my sons (raised by their mother who restriced my involvement)
currently get food stamps and have for several years. They are both
healthy and capable but lazy, a lifestyle they didn't get from me.
Neither hold a job longer than it takes for unemployment benefits to
kick in then they stay unemployed until benefits end only to repeat
the cycle with a low-paying job that won't end their eligibility. I've
voiced my displeasure with their actions but decades of indoctrination
is firmly planted.
Yet they both recognize the anti-male actions of government yet enlist
voluntarily. I just don't get it. Perhaps they are just getting what
they can, while they are able.
Phil #3


Simple. Children are a product of their mother. How their mother raises
them determines their general behavior as adults.

Wow, you guys are really pro- failure. You adopted the attitude that if
I am unhappy everyone in the world should be too. You are 100% wrong,
boys almost always behave the way they are taught by their male role
models, leaving a child without a male role model means he will have to
find his own role models, in most cases that role model will be a coach,
teacher, older brother etc. But in the worst cases the role model will
be a person who preys on young men without role models. When you read
about a teenage drug dealer or shooter how often is his mother in jail
for dealing drugs or shooting someone? Almost never. The male role model
is almost always the example.

I was making reference to principles, NOT role models.


Are there exceptions
to the rule? Of course! But overall, they respond to their mother's
example. Since many, if not most, children are taught by their mothers
that men pay money and don't raise children, and women get free money
and determine what to teach their children, it doesn't surprise me that
the "child support" system perpetuates.


Try to be realistic for 10 seconds, this is completely wrong and
ridiculous.

Then perhaps YOU can explain why the beat goes on.

If you want to talk about these things forget about your beefs with
child support learn a little about child psychology.

Welcome back!

Chris, I guess you enjoy the repartee with XXX but it scares me to realize
that there are many people who are just as warped as s/he.
For instance, s/he still wants to blame men as in the case of teenage drug
dealers who are most likely to come from a mother-headed home where there
is no male "role model" at all. The case of over 70% of all inmates in
jail are from a 'father-ess' home means nothing to bigots such as XXX,
they simply blame men, even though they are prevented from being part of
the problem/solution.
You can educate the ignorant but stupid is forever . However, you do allow
her/him to stick both feet into her/his ample mouth just by keeping them
stoked.

Phil #3

What I am trying to understand is why such role model MUST be male.
Apparently, everything that I learned from women was just a figment of my
imagination. The teacher was really a man. In drag ya suppose?

Phil #3 wrote:


"Chris" wrote in message
...


" wrote in message
...

Chris wrote:


"Phil #3" wrote in message
...


"Chris" wrote in message
...


"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Dusty" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Kenneth s." wrote in message
...

On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:04:16 +0200, "Dusty"
wrote:

"Bob W" wrote in message
m...


"Chris" wrote in message
...



[snip]



[snip]

The whole thing is too little, too late. The FIRST necessity is
to consider and treat BOTH parents as equals, which would solve
the whole problem but that isn't gonna happen until men, as a
group, get radical and vocal.



That's all well and good Phil, but there's a major flaw in that
idea.. (1) men are being picked off one-by-one wither they are
vocal about it or not and (2) try as we might, there is no
central figure for men to rally around.

I hate to say it, but most people are sheep and will only follow
those in front of them, even if it's over a cliff. The lack of
a central, organized hub, if you will, to grease the wheels and
keep them turning in the right direction is what is required for
the MRM to take flight.

Part of the problem is that there are many, many splinter groups
that, much like the Red Queen, are after someone's head. This
in turn is what feeds the media to portray everyone in the MRM
as a nut-job. Which leads us to another part of the problem,
lack of media support or good, pro-father stories in the media.
A good deal of that can be laid at the feet of the Hollywood
elite by their constant portrayals of men as complete dopes and
utter fools. After being fed a steady diet of "Dad is a
Buffoon" for nearly 30 years the public buys into it, hook, line
and sinker without ever raising an eyebrow.

Reverse this and people will demand heads on platters. An
unlikely example of this is David Letterman and his so-called
joke about former Governor Palin's daughter. People who heard
it wanted Letterman's head in a pike for insulting a young girl
and insinuating that rape would be good for her. But whereas
people went into an uproar over this happening to a female, not
a peep was heard about a demand for Letterman to apologize to
the MAN he slighted as her would-be rapist!

There's a lot of work yet to be done before we can even think of
getting into the ring with the girls.



That was the "radical" part I mentioned: getting politically
active and unified, which would be a radical change in the way
men act and react. This whole anti-male mindset of which you
speak has come about since the 1960's when women became
intensively politically active.
Of course men, who have historically been forced to work to
support women, are at a disadvantage but it is not insurmountable.
How exactly did we wind up with three liberals at the head
positions of governement (Obama, Reid, Pelosi)? By a majority of
women and minorities who are most likely to benefit from liberal
politcs, taking and active part of the process while the majority
of men ignored it at their own peril. Approximately 63% of voters
were from urban areas and 66% under the age of 30 voted for
Obama. Nearly 100% of black voters cast ballots for Obama then
flatly state that anyone who opposed his policies do so because
of racism... and no one bats an eye.

Nearly every commerical is based in a stupid, childish, lazy
and/or incompetent father/husband with a wise, competent,
hard-working and mature mother/wife as are many of the TV shows
(Roseanne, Home Improvement, etc.), and for many this becomes
real-life; almost a documentary. And men ignore it, even buy into
it.

Phil #3



Well stated. I personally know a handful of middle-aged white men
who have applied for (and received, believe it or not) government
welfare. They figure if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em. Slowly, but
surely, the U.S. is becomong the U.K.

[By the way, food stamps come in the form of a credit card, better
known as a "dignity" card. WHY? Are the government people saying
that collecting welfare is a shameful act to be concealed?]


Two of my sons (raised by their mother who restriced my
involvement) currently get food stamps and have for several years.
They are both healthy and capable but lazy, a lifestyle they didn't
get from me. Neither hold a job longer than it takes for
unemployment benefits to kick in then they stay unemployed until
benefits end only to repeat the cycle with a low-paying job that
won't end their eligibility. I've voiced my displeasure with their
actions but decades of indoctrination is firmly planted.
Yet they both recognize the anti-male actions of government yet
enlist voluntarily. I just don't get it. Perhaps they are just
getting what they can, while they are able.
Phil #3



Simple. Children are a product of their mother. How their mother
raises them determines their general behavior as adults.


Wow, you guys are really pro- failure. You adopted the attitude that
if I am unhappy everyone in the world should be too. You are 100%
wrong, boys almost always behave the way they are taught by their
male role models, leaving a child without a male role model means he
will have to find his own role models, in most cases that role model
will be a coach, teacher, older brother etc. But in the worst cases
the role model will be a person who preys on young men without role
models. When you read about a teenage drug dealer or shooter how
often is his mother in jail for dealing drugs or shooting someone?
Almost never. The male role model is almost always the example.


I was making reference to principles, NOT role models.


Are there exceptions

to the rule? Of course! But overall, they respond to their mother's
example. Since many, if not most, children are taught by their
mothers that men pay money and don't raise children, and women get
free money and determine what to teach their children, it doesn't
surprise me that the "child support" system perpetuates.


Try to be realistic for 10 seconds, this is completely wrong and
ridiculous.


Then perhaps YOU can explain why the beat goes on.

If you want to talk about these things forget about your beefs with
child support learn a little about child psychology.


Welcome back!


Chris, I guess you enjoy the repartee with XXX but it scares me to
realize that there are many people who are just as warped as s/he.
For instance, s/he still wants to blame men as in the case of teenage
drug dealers who are most likely to come from a mother-headed home where
there is no male "role model" at all. The case of over 70% of all
inmates in jail are from a 'father-ess' home means nothing to bigots
such as XXX, they simply blame men, even though they are prevented from
being part of the problem/solution.
You can educate the ignorant but stupid is forever . However, you do
allow her/him to stick both feet into her/his ample mouth just by
keeping them stoked.

Phil #3


Wow, you couldn't have read more incorrect crap into what I said if you
weren't stupid. Nothing you said there refutes my statement, in
fatherless households boys will seek out and emulate a male role model,
is many cases these male role models are men who prey on fatherless
boys. The welfare mom who sits around and lets her kid come home with
new sneakers and a pocket full of cash is no help, but she is not the
role model. You are purposely ignorant because admitting the simple
truth puts a lot of responsibility on you, and that just won't do among
you guys, this is a responsibility free zone, everything is someone
else's fault.

Chris wrote:

"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Chris" wrote in message
...


" wrote in message
...

Chris wrote:


"Phil #3" wrote in message
...


"Chris" wrote in message
...


"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Dusty" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Kenneth s." wrote in message
...

On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:04:16 +0200, "Dusty"
wrote:

"Bob W" wrote in message
m...


"Chris" wrote in message
...



[snip]



[snip]

The whole thing is too little, too late. The FIRST necessity
is to consider and treat BOTH parents as equals, which would
solve the whole problem but that isn't gonna happen until men,
as a group, get radical and vocal.



That's all well and good Phil, but there's a major flaw in that
idea.. (1) men are being picked off one-by-one wither they are
vocal about it or not and (2) try as we might, there is no
central figure for men to rally around.

I hate to say it, but most people are sheep and will only
follow those in front of them, even if it's over a cliff. The
lack of a central, organized hub, if you will, to grease the
wheels and keep them turning in the right direction is what is
required for the MRM to take flight.

Part of the problem is that there are many, many splinter
groups that, much like the Red Queen, are after someone's
head. This in turn is what feeds the media to portray everyone
in the MRM as a nut-job. Which leads us to another part of the
problem, lack of media support or good, pro-father stories in
the media. A good deal of that can be laid at the feet of the
Hollywood elite by their constant portrayals of men as complete
dopes and utter fools. After being fed a steady diet of "Dad is
a Buffoon" for nearly 30 years the public buys into it, hook,
line and sinker without ever raising an eyebrow.

Reverse this and people will demand heads on platters. An
unlikely example of this is David Letterman and his so-called
joke about former Governor Palin's daughter. People who heard
it wanted Letterman's head in a pike for insulting a young girl
and insinuating that rape would be good for her. But whereas
people went into an uproar over this happening to a female, not
a peep was heard about a demand for Letterman to apologize to
the MAN he slighted as her would-be rapist!

There's a lot of work yet to be done before we can even think
of getting into the ring with the girls.



That was the "radical" part I mentioned: getting politically
active and unified, which would be a radical change in the way
men act and react. This whole anti-male mindset of which you
speak has come about since the 1960's when women became
intensively politically active.
Of course men, who have historically been forced to work to
support women, are at a disadvantage but it is not insurmountable.
How exactly did we wind up with three liberals at the head
positions of governement (Obama, Reid, Pelosi)? By a majority of
women and minorities who are most likely to benefit from liberal
politcs, taking and active part of the process while the
majority of men ignored it at their own peril. Approximately 63%
of voters were from urban areas and 66% under the age of 30
voted for Obama. Nearly 100% of black voters cast ballots for
Obama then flatly state that anyone who opposed his policies do
so because of racism... and no one bats an eye.

Nearly every commerical is based in a stupid, childish, lazy
and/or incompetent father/husband with a wise, competent,
hard-working and mature mother/wife as are many of the TV shows
(Roseanne, Home Improvement, etc.), and for many this becomes
real-life; almost a documentary. And men ignore it, even buy
into it.

Phil #3



Well stated. I personally know a handful of middle-aged white men
who have applied for (and received, believe it or not) government
welfare. They figure if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em. Slowly, but
surely, the U.S. is becomong the U.K.

[By the way, food stamps come in the form of a credit card,
better known as a "dignity" card. WHY? Are the government people
saying that collecting welfare is a shameful act to be concealed?]


Two of my sons (raised by their mother who restriced my
involvement) currently get food stamps and have for several years.
They are both healthy and capable but lazy, a lifestyle they
didn't get from me. Neither hold a job longer than it takes for
unemployment benefits to kick in then they stay unemployed until
benefits end only to repeat the cycle with a low-paying job that
won't end their eligibility. I've voiced my displeasure with their
actions but decades of indoctrination is firmly planted.
Yet they both recognize the anti-male actions of government yet
enlist voluntarily. I just don't get it. Perhaps they are just
getting what they can, while they are able.
Phil #3



Simple. Children are a product of their mother. How their mother
raises them determines their general behavior as adults.


Wow, you guys are really pro- failure. You adopted the attitude that
if I am unhappy everyone in the world should be too. You are 100%
wrong, boys almost always behave the way they are taught by their
male role models, leaving a child without a male role model means he
will have to find his own role models, in most cases that role model
will be a coach, teacher, older brother etc. But in the worst cases
the role model will be a person who preys on young men without role
models. When you read about a teenage drug dealer or shooter how
often is his mother in jail for dealing drugs or shooting someone?
Almost never. The male role model is almost always the example.


I was making reference to principles, NOT role models.


Are there exceptions

to the rule? Of course! But overall, they respond to their mother's
example. Since many, if not most, children are taught by their
mothers that men pay money and don't raise children, and women get
free money and determine what to teach their children, it doesn't
surprise me that the "child support" system perpetuates.


Try to be realistic for 10 seconds, this is completely wrong and
ridiculous.


Then perhaps YOU can explain why the beat goes on.

If you want to talk about these things forget about your beefs with
child support learn a little about child psychology.


Welcome back!


Chris, I guess you enjoy the repartee with XXX but it scares me to
realize that there are many people who are just as warped as s/he.
For instance, s/he still wants to blame men as in the case of teenage
drug dealers who are most likely to come from a mother-headed home
where there is no male "role model" at all. The case of over 70% of
all inmates in jail are from a 'father-ess' home means nothing to
bigots such as XXX, they simply blame men, even though they are
prevented from being part of the problem/solution.
You can educate the ignorant but stupid is forever . However, you do
allow her/him to stick both feet into her/his ample mouth just by
keeping them stoked.

Phil #3


What I am trying to understand is why such role model MUST be male.
Apparently, everything that I learned from women was just a figment of
my imagination. The teacher was really a man. In drag ya suppose?




"Such" role model has to be a man in order to be a male role model.

Phil #3 wrote:


" wrote in message
...

Phil #3 wrote:


"Chris" wrote in message
...


"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Dusty" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
m...


"Kenneth s." wrote in message
...

On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:04:16 +0200, "Dusty" wrote:

"Bob W" wrote in message
m...


"Chris" wrote in message
...



[snip]



[snip]

The whole thing is too little, too late. The FIRST necessity is
to consider and treat BOTH parents as equals, which would solve
the whole problem but that isn't gonna happen until men, as a
group, get radical and vocal.



That's all well and good Phil, but there's a major flaw in that
idea.. (1) men are being picked off one-by-one wither they are
vocal about it or not and (2) try as we might, there is no central
figure for men to rally around.

I hate to say it, but most people are sheep and will only follow
those in front of them, even if it's over a cliff. The lack of a
central, organized hub, if you will, to grease the wheels and keep
them turning in the right direction is what is required for the
MRM to take flight.

Part of the problem is that there are many, many splinter groups
that, much like the Red Queen, are after someone's head. This in
turn is what feeds the media to portray everyone in the MRM as a
nut-job. Which leads us to another part of the problem, lack of
media support or good, pro-father stories in the media. A good
deal of that can be laid at the feet of the Hollywood elite by
their constant portrayals of men as complete dopes and utter
fools. After being fed a steady diet of "Dad is a Buffoon" for
nearly 30 years the public buys into it, hook, line and sinker
without ever raising an eyebrow.

Reverse this and people will demand heads on platters. An
unlikely example of this is David Letterman and his so-called joke
about former Governor Palin's daughter. People who heard it
wanted Letterman's head in a pike for insulting a young girl and
insinuating that rape would be good for her. But whereas people
went into an uproar over this happening to a female, not a peep
was heard about a demand for Letterman to apologize to the MAN he
slighted as her would-be rapist!

There's a lot of work yet to be done before we can even think of
getting into the ring with the girls.



That was the "radical" part I mentioned: getting politically active
and unified, which would be a radical change in the way men act and
react. This whole anti-male mindset of which you speak has come
about since the 1960's when women became intensively politically
active.
Of course men, who have historically been forced to work to support
women, are at a disadvantage but it is not insurmountable.
How exactly did we wind up with three liberals at the head
positions of governement (Obama, Reid, Pelosi)? By a majority of
women and minorities who are most likely to benefit from liberal
politcs, taking and active part of the process while the majority
of men ignored it at their own peril. Approximately 63% of voters
were from urban areas and 66% under the age of 30 voted for Obama.
Nearly 100% of black voters cast ballots for Obama then flatly
state that anyone who opposed his policies do so because of
racism... and no one bats an eye.

Nearly every commerical is based in a stupid, childish, lazy and/or
incompetent father/husband with a wise, competent, hard-working and
mature mother/wife as are many of the TV shows (Roseanne, Home
Improvement, etc.), and for many this becomes real-life; almost a
documentary. And men ignore it, even buy into it.

Phil #3



Well stated. I personally know a handful of middle-aged white men
who have applied for (and received, believe it or not) government
welfare. They figure if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em. Slowly, but
surely, the U.S. is becomong the U.K.

[By the way, food stamps come in the form of a credit card, better
known as a "dignity" card. WHY? Are the government people saying
that collecting welfare is a shameful act to be concealed?]


Two of my sons (raised by their mother who restriced my involvement)
currently get food stamps and have for several years. They are both
healthy and capable but lazy, a lifestyle they didn't get from me.
Neither hold a job longer than it takes for unemployment benefits to
kick in then they stay unemployed until benefits end only to repeat
the cycle with a low-paying job that won't end their eligibility.
I've voiced my displeasure with their actions but decades of
indoctrination is firmly planted.
Yet they both recognize the anti-male actions of government yet
enlist voluntarily. I just don't get it. Perhaps they are just
getting what they can, while they are able.
Phil #3



Wow, this really is a window into your denial. Boys emulate their
fathers (or a father figure) close to 100% of the time. If they were
indoctrinated, it was the example of victim hood, impotence and
weakness from their male role model(s) that indoctrinated them into
this sort of lifestyle. The whole "get into a union, volunteer for the
first round of layoffs, collect benefits and live cheaply" lifestyle
is fairly common and pretty rewarding for a guy with hobbies and no
ambition. That's why fathers (father figures) are the key to this,
boys enjoy ANYTHING as long as they are getting some positive
reinforcement and instruction. City kids will love fishing and hunting
if they are taught to do those things, redneck kids will love tennis
if they are encouraged to do that.


You're a liar or stupid. Only you know which. but whichever, you are
definitely a sexual bigot.
Phil #3



and you are just a whiny loser, doesn't change the facts though.