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".

[MKx2]

Well, ya know damn good and well they'll cry foul if any male gets even CLOSE enough to leer and drool.

Brent, this whole gender equality thing really bothers me no end.  I have NO problem with mandatory registration for the draft.  In fact I honestly believe that all kids out of high school should serve their country for a year or so before embarking on a college education.  It would do a great big bunch toward maturing them, and as well might give them a bit of insight as to what career path they DON'T want to pursue.  It would probably also lessen the numbers of kids in college for onely a year or two before dropping out - they tend to waste the time of many educators who would be far better off devoting time to those students who are seriously interested in an education.

But all that aside (and I still believe in mandatory service without all this equal rights crap) ... in a perfect world we would be far more satisfied with the roles that our bodies were made for - and I'm speaking more on the female side.  For God's sake!  What is SO wrong with having children and staying home with them?  Why is it such a crime for men to be the providers?  If we get down to primal basics, men are hunters and providers, while women are gatherers and nurturers.  I realize I'm talking in terms of "the perfect world" however, somewhere along the line society has just gotten totally turned around.  Certainly I don't think what happens in the Middle East or other areas with the abuse of women is right, but then, neither is it the right thing in my mind for children to be shuffled off to daycare in the wee hours of the morning, coming home late and perhaps getting an hour of parenting time a day.

The bottom line in my mind is that our great society and those of some other countries have put the almighty dollar ahead of everything else, inflation has forced many women into the workplace, who otherwise would have been far more content with being the SAHM, all because we believe that the great American Dream of owning a home, having 2 cars and taking lovely 2 week vacations every year is what should be the norm.

I guess I'm just a dinosauer when it comes to these issues ... having gone through ERA, bra burning, having a child, working full-time and looking back, I would have gladly given up that damned Isuzu Rodeo, the Volvo Station Wagon, the expensive furniture my ex wanted, the skiing vacations every winter, and his every other year pilgrimage to the South Pacific with "the guys" in order to be able to stay home with my DS when he was little.  It is in retrospect with DS as a young adult now I realize how short that time was with him, and how as a parent my time would have been far better spent with him and caring for family and home.

What an old fuddy duddy I have become in the Golden Years.

[Peanutsdad]

LOL, as far as women going topless,,


My pb sports a pair of 38DD,, which she would rpoudly display to one and all. She has been known to gripe about the "inequality" of men being able to go shirtless, and she cant.

Unfortunately, she forgets, shes gained and lost weight so much, most men aint a-gonna oogle that pair. Lets just say, her skin didnt quite "snap" back into shape.

As far as the "perfect world" roles for men and women,, as far as I can remember, men didnt ask for the change, they merely provided the vehicle for which the modern liberated females drove the changes thru with.

It doesnt matter what we wish the perfect world would be, we have the world we have, with all its follies and blessings. Personally, I dont see it changing anytime soon. Perhaps in my grandchildrens time........

[MKx2]

PD - if you or anyone else took from what I wrote that men may have asked for the "change" in society that has taken place, I'm sorry.  I certainly didn't mean that at ALL!

Yeah ... I know we don't live in a perfect world.  We gotta live in the one we have, and I think for the most part, most of us do a decent job of it.

My whole point is that we, as a society, have allowed things to evolve the way they have, and for me, I think it is terribly sad.  The family unit has broken down and we are all much poorer, in many ways, for that.

Ya know, there's something about aging and gravity that seem to go hand in hand.  Now if there's one thing that isn't fair about being a female, I think I'll vote for that one - LOL

[Peanutsdad]

MK, that is EXACTLY my point. Society is MUCH the poorer for the changes.

[kiddosmom]

-----------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!!!! --------

The female chest may be sex toys, but guess what so are mens in one form or another. What female will ignore a well built males chest glistning with sweat or water from a beach???? What woman doesn't like to run her hands over her mans chest??? Some men have just as sensitive chests as females. Women stare at the male body just the same.

[1angrystepmom]

 >
>The female chest may be sex toys, but guess what so are mens
>in one form or another. What female will ignore a well built
>males chest glistning with sweat or water from a beach????
>What woman doesn't like to run her hands over her mans
>chest??? Some men have just as sensitive chests as females.
>Women stare at the male body just the same.

Ummm thanks for that mental picture ;)  

(I think I am on my way to take a cold shower, LOL)

Amber