The world for women?

[Brent]

The world for women? - In Canada, the Legislative Assembly of Alberta yawned and let die Bill 219, which would have created the Alberta Commission on the Status of Men Act (http://www.assembly.ab.ca/pro/bills/ba-bill.asp?SelectBill=219). The purposes of the Commission were to have been:
[ul]
[li]study health problems unique to men or which predominantly affect men and make recommendations on appropriate Government initiatives;

[li]examine and advise on issues of cultural bias and stereotyping affecting men;

[li]review, analyze and advise on challenges confronting men including

[li]educational prospects for boys and young men,

[li]mortality and suicide rates,

[li]family relations, and

[li]the role of fathers;

[li]review and recommend initiatives and programs to enable men to develop career skills including continuing education. [/ul]

          On the surface, you might think this would have been a laudable effort, but no, the truth, according to Canadian feminist columnist Mindelle Jacobs, is that men don't need help. For example, there is no need, she says, for battered men shelters:

"Worldwide, the victims of serious domestic violence are overwhelmingly female. There is no pressing need to set up government-funded sanctuaries for abused men." - Mindelle Jacobs, There's no need to study the status of men, Edmonton Sun, December 9, 2003

          You know, she has a point, worldwide most victims of domestic violence are women. In many Muslim nations, it's got to be pretty horrible to be a woman, and women get short shrift in Africa. It is truly terrible how women are treated throughout the undeveloped parts of the world.

          Funny thing, though, Bill 219 isn't about helping men in places like Syria or Sudan, but Canada, where, as in America, there are thousands of shelters for women, but only one or two for men, and thousands of governmental and institutional organizations to help women, but only a few hundred, if that, for men.

          Yes but, worldwide...No, "worldwide" doesn't matter, oppression of women in Africa does not justify the oppression of men in Alberta.

Abusing the Global Context for a National Agenda

          How women and men in other nations relate is important, but irrelevant to domestic policies affecting how women and men relate right here, wherever "here" happens to be for you. But, beginning in the mid-1980s, feminists discovered that they could promote their national agendas, and counter local attempts to establish equal justice for both women and men, with references to international oppression of women. In short, they use the international oppression of women to justify the national oppression of men.

          Certainly, it's laudable to promote fair and equitable treatment of women throughout the world, but to use this as a ploy to diminish and dismiss inequitable treatment of men back home exposes their hypocrisy, and their hatred of men.

http://backlash.com/content/gender/

[Indigo Mom]

The ol' man came home from work the other day and said he heard a "thing" on the radio about some woman trying to make it a "law" that women can walk around in public without a shirt.  

We discussed this, and came to the conclusion that this has got to be THE most dangerous law for both men and women.

I can't seem to find it on the internet, but would like to know how to stop this insanity.  Have you heard about this woman?  If so, do you have a link?

fanx.....

[Brent]

>heard a "thing" on the radio about some woman trying to make
>it a "law" that women can walk around in public without a
>shirt.  

This is a little too vague for me to do anything with.

[Indigo Mom]

Ya, I thought so.  He has no other "details" other than a woman (more than likely a feminazi) thinking that women should be treated equal in the "no shirt" department.  She doesn't think it's fair that men can go topless, but not women.  HELL-FRICKEN-O!!!!  We have cajoobs!  They are sex toys!!! That's why we don't go topless!!!! Anyway, he said there was a discussion on the radio about how this woman is trying to make it a law to allow women to walk around topless.  I gotta say, Mr. B...this here is some serious insanity!

This is the last thing BOTH sexes need.  If ya hear anything, could you let me know?  I thought about you when he told me this...because you know where to find all the feminist garbage.  

fanx again!

[Brent]

>Anyway, he said there was a discussion on the radio about
>how this woman is trying to make it a law to allow women
>to walk around topless.

I have no problem with this, as long as the women who choose to walk around topless understand they'll be constantly ogled, leered at, and occasionally groped. But since 99.9% of all women have feelings of inadequacy or self-conciousness about their boobs, it's unlikely that more than a select few would ever actually do it. They'll scream about how they want the right to do it, but will never execise that right. Kind of like serving in the military.


>I thought about you when he told me this...because you know
>where to find all the feminist garbage.

Finding feminist garbage is no problem. Just look into any septic tank and you'll find all you could ever want.

I'll give credit to "feminism" when women are required to register for the Selective Service (the draft) the way men are. It's funny, with all the whining gender-feminists do, none of them ever fight for the right to be drafted. Odd, huh?

I guess for feminists it's okay to be equal, as long as it means "equal privileges" but not "equal responsibilities".

[Brent]

The world for women? - In Canada, the Legislative Assembly of Alberta yawned and let die Bill 219, which would have created the Alberta Commission on the Status of Men Act (http://www.assembly.ab.ca/pro/bills/ba-bill.asp?SelectBill=219). The purposes of the Commission were to have been:
[ul]
[li]study health problems unique to men or which predominantly affect men and make recommendations on appropriate Government initiatives;

[li]examine and advise on issues of cultural bias and stereotyping affecting men;

[li]review, analyze and advise on challenges confronting men including

[li]educational prospects for boys and young men,

[li]mortality and suicide rates,

[li]family relations, and

[li]the role of fathers;

[li]review and recommend initiatives and programs to enable men to develop career skills including continuing education. [/ul]

          On the surface, you might think this would have been a laudable effort, but no, the truth, according to Canadian feminist columnist Mindelle Jacobs, is that men don't need help. For example, there is no need, she says, for battered men shelters:

"Worldwide, the victims of serious domestic violence are overwhelmingly female. There is no pressing need to set up government-funded sanctuaries for abused men." - Mindelle Jacobs, There's no need to study the status of men, Edmonton Sun, December 9, 2003

          You know, she has a point, worldwide most victims of domestic violence are women. In many Muslim nations, it's got to be pretty horrible to be a woman, and women get short shrift in Africa. It is truly terrible how women are treated throughout the undeveloped parts of the world.

          Funny thing, though, Bill 219 isn't about helping men in places like Syria or Sudan, but Canada, where, as in America, there are thousands of shelters for women, but only one or two for men, and thousands of governmental and institutional organizations to help women, but only a few hundred, if that, for men.

          Yes but, worldwide...No, "worldwide" doesn't matter, oppression of women in Africa does not justify the oppression of men in Alberta.

Abusing the Global Context for a National Agenda

          How women and men in other nations relate is important, but irrelevant to domestic policies affecting how women and men relate right here, wherever "here" happens to be for you. But, beginning in the mid-1980s, feminists discovered that they could promote their national agendas, and counter local attempts to establish equal justice for both women and men, with references to international oppression of women. In short, they use the international oppression of women to justify the national oppression of men.

          Certainly, it's laudable to promote fair and equitable treatment of women throughout the world, but to use this as a ploy to diminish and dismiss inequitable treatment of men back home exposes their hypocrisy, and their hatred of men.

http://backlash.com/content/gender/

[Indigo Mom]

The ol' man came home from work the other day and said he heard a "thing" on the radio about some woman trying to make it a "law" that women can walk around in public without a shirt.  

We discussed this, and came to the conclusion that this has got to be THE most dangerous law for both men and women.

I can't seem to find it on the internet, but would like to know how to stop this insanity.  Have you heard about this woman?  If so, do you have a link?

fanx.....

[Brent]

>heard a "thing" on the radio about some woman trying to make
>it a "law" that women can walk around in public without a
>shirt.  

This is a little too vague for me to do anything with.

[Indigo Mom]

Ya, I thought so.  He has no other "details" other than a woman (more than likely a feminazi) thinking that women should be treated equal in the "no shirt" department.  She doesn't think it's fair that men can go topless, but not women.  HELL-FRICKEN-O!!!!  We have cajoobs!  They are sex toys!!! That's why we don't go topless!!!! Anyway, he said there was a discussion on the radio about how this woman is trying to make it a law to allow women to walk around topless.  I gotta say, Mr. B...this here is some serious insanity!

This is the last thing BOTH sexes need.  If ya hear anything, could you let me know?  I thought about you when he told me this...because you know where to find all the feminist garbage.  

fanx again!

[Brent]

>Anyway, he said there was a discussion on the radio about
>how this woman is trying to make it a law to allow women
>to walk around topless.

I have no problem with this, as long as the women who choose to walk around topless understand they'll be constantly ogled, leered at, and occasionally groped. But since 99.9% of all women have feelings of inadequacy or self-conciousness about their boobs, it's unlikely that more than a select few would ever actually do it. They'll scream about how they want the right to do it, but will never execise that right. Kind of like serving in the military.


>I thought about you when he told me this...because you know
>where to find all the feminist garbage.

Finding feminist garbage is no problem. Just look into any septic tank and you'll find all you could ever want.

I'll give credit to "feminism" when women are required to register for the Selective Service (the draft) the way men are. It's funny, with all the whining gender-feminists do, none of them ever fight for the right to be drafted. Odd, huh?

I guess for feminists it's okay to be equal, as long as it means "equal privileges" but not "equal responsibilities".