nolonger
enthusiast
Reged: 09/15/08
Posts: 305
|
|
With my divorce final in less than a month, I'm seeing there has been an increase in interest in me from the opposite sex. Normally, I'd be flattered (maybe I am anyway) but I feel like I'm being invaded by the goonies. There is a guy I told I wasn't interested in but he still emails and texts me. Then there's the guy who I met last night (I was friends with his ex 2 years ago) that just found out I am getting divorced and he's contacted me three times in 12 hours. Not interested. There's a few others as well.
Anyone have that experience where you're the "new meat" in the divorce market?
How do you let them down gently but still get your point across not to bug you any more?
I guess I'll just NEVER answer the phone, text or email even tho that is rude, IMO.
Boy, isn't this fun....NOT!
|
AUDad
newbie
Reged: 10/11/08
Posts: 46
|
|
Cute how you discredit without proving a person wrong.
In fact, we have read your posts. You don't even know the difference between a hole in the ground and what you represent…axxhole.
You and your ilk (fellow femin azis) would rather disrupt posts from real posters that need help than give real advice.
There are no other posters on this site, period, that know more than us jovial guys from Fathers' Integrity & Rights Movement.
You can only parrot the filth of your fellow femin azis and have no real thoughts of your own, piglet. You know. We know. Anybody that reads what you have to state can see it.
Ask anyone that is not a femin azi PIG as you are.
Beware:
This is a known liar and disrupter of posts.
This is a known bully.
This is a known femin azi.
This is a known troll poster.
Therefore, whatever she states should be regarded with caution and suspect due to her repeated lies, misinformation and posts in multiple names/genders along with just being an "icky" type subhuman.
|
nolonger
enthusiast
Reged: 09/15/08
Posts: 305
|
|
Nevermind. I don't really care for any replies on this. I can't find how to delete a thread.
|
Batman
member
Reged: 11/02/07
Posts: 131
|
|
For those that don’t know, you have landed on a known, militant feminist site. We call them femin azis.
They will attempt to chase off anyone that disagrees with them (and their lies).
They will denigrate those that refuse to leave.
They will gang up on you and if that does not work, they will collude (yes , this is illegal), lie about you and try to get Divorce Source to ban you. Unless you know how to counter this, Divorce Source takes the easy way out and accepts their lies instead of investigating the truth.
They hate the members of Fathers’ Integrity & Rights Movement (F IRM) because they have tried for over 10 years to rid this board of us.
For over 10 years, they have NEVER proved us wrong on ANY post except once. And, that was because of a new law that passed in the state of GA that we were not aware of, but do thank them for pointing it out.
Many times you will see the following message or similar to it because we have found that it does not matter what is stated, they will lie, twist it and do their best to denigrate the poster.
Some say to just ignore them. We have. We have for over 6 months at a time and they never relent.
What you will find is that the most ardent femin azis are also Canadian. They are part of the Status of Women, Canada (SOWs) . The SOW are financed by Canada to monitor and to report back any hate speech for them to counter. Of course, if you disagree with them, then, that is considered hate speech.
If you will TAKE CAREFUL NOTICE, they only attack our character and their lies about our character have escalated over the years to even now (no pun intended), they accuse SuperEric of being a child molester. But, if you look at what they post, they NEVER disagree with the posts. They cannot. They cannot because we back what we say with facts and figures including law and quantitative analysis.
There are two main femin azis of this site:
Gecko (Cheryle Bammel)
Runs With Scissors (Caroline Rogers)
Oh, they have their many drones, but most of them are just a different screen name for both of these “leaders” as they post as males and females to “sway” their points and to prove that “men” also believe their aberrant and sick ways…
They have another group that has “special members” to audit this site and they discuss how to control and “correct the thinking” of others. How do we know this? They were infiltrated! We were sent the postings and know EXACTLY what they are up to.
We try to start everyday fresh. We don’t attack unless attacked. Enevitably, they will attack. So, we just have a simple statement that we attach after they have posted whether or not, in the forum or the thread that they are posting in once they have attacked us within the previous 24 hours.
You will see many posts like this after they have attacked us:
"Beware:
This is a known liar and disrupter of posts.
This is a known bully.
This is a known femin azi.
This is a known troll poster.
Therefore, whatever she states should be regarded with caution and suspect due to her repeated lies, misinformation and posts in multiple names/genders along with just being an "icky" type subhuman."
Again, we have NEVER BEEN PROVED WRONG, BUT WE MOST ASSUREDLY HAVE PROVEN THEM WRONG ABOUT A GAZILLION TIMES.
We hope that this explains what is going on and, if you think we are attacking you, just look at who is responded to in the gray areas of the responses because it will show the name of the person that we are defending our integrity from…
You as a newbie, may think that there may be another approach. Feel free to comment. However, we can attest that we have tried eveything that we know how to try to no avail.
One thing we can say for sure about the Nazis is that their lies worked, for awhile...with this motto:
Hitler said in "Mein Kampf" that if you tell a lie for the purpose of propaganda, tell a big one! Because the bigger the lie is, the more people are apt to believe it, because they can't believe you would dare to tell such a big lie unless it was the truth!
It seems that some have a difficulty with the term, "femin azi." So much so, that they can only reflect upon the members of F_IRM (Fathers Integrity & Rights Movement-named by a woman, btw...).
Well, this misconception is totally wrong yet continues to be propagated by...guess who...the femin azi PIGS.
In fact, the term femin azi is so colloquial, all mainstream dictionaries have a definition of what a femin azi is:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/femin azi
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/femin azi
Hell, even the encyclopedias have their say too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Femin azi
This is certainly not a new term and is certainly MAINSTREAM.
But, natch, the person that really describes the term for what it really means is SuperEric:
"Femin azi is a term to describe a select group of women. Not all women. Not feminists. It describes militant type feminists that use the doctrines and dogmas of Marxism/communism, believes in the eradication of the family unit and more specifically, men, to believe a female over a male when encountering law enforcement & courts and to put women in a group that is "more equal." They use the techniques culled from the N azi ideology to accomplish their goals."
Others broach the subject:
by Carey Roberts
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When persons call for the decimation of half the world's population, that grabs my attention. This is what I'm talking about:
"The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race." -- Sally Miller Gearhart, in The Future - If There Is One - Is Female.
"If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males." --Mary Daly, former Professor at Boston College, 2001.
These proposals are disturbing in their own right. What is even more troubling is that no feminist has ever repudiated them.
When feminists call for global "decontamination" by phasing-out men, I can't help but think of the lies and accusations leveled against the Jews in [censored] Germany, and the similarities to contemporary gender feminism:
1. Biological superiority: The National Socialists preached the genetic superiority of the Aryan race. Now, a feminist-oriented World Health Organization website claims that women enjoy an "inherent biological advantage."
2. Sub-human: In the 1930s, the Jews were called vermin and "Judensau" (Jew-pig). Thirty years later, feminists referred to men as "male chauvinist pigs."
3. Conspiracy theory: The Jews were often accused of "working together" to pollute German culture. Now, feminists refer to the so-called conspiracy against women as "the patriarchy."
4. Excessive influence: Seventy years ago, Jews were accused of controlling the German economy. Now, men are accused of "having all the power."
5. Threat to the greater welfare: The Jews were blacklisted as toxic to German culture. In the present era, Gloria Steinem writes, "The most dangerous situation for a woman is....a husband or lover in the isolation of their own home."
6. Faulty science: Just as Hitler's propagandists once dismissed Albert Einstein's discoveries as "Jewish physics," feminist scholars now ridicule male scientific breakthroughs as the product of "linear" and "hierarchical" thinking.
7. Spread of a dread disease: In [censored] Germany, Jews were falsely accused of spreading of untreatable syphilis. Now, UNICEF director Carol Belamy unfairly blames men for the spread of AIDS in Africa.
8. Sexual contact: Hitler was obsessed with keeping Jewish men from "defiling" the racial purity of Aryan women. Now, according to Catherine McKinnon, "In a patriarchal society all heterosexual intercourse is rape."
But the most fascinating parallel between Germany in the 1930s and the current era lies in the conscious use of deception to sway public opinion.
In her brilliant exposé, Who Stole Feminism?, Christina Hoff Sommers documents the many fabrications of gender feminism. Indeed, the entire ideological foundation of feminism rests on what columnist Wendy McElroy calls the "Great Lie" -- the wrong-headed notion that women are the eternal victims of male-dominated culture.
The feminist Great Lie echoes the infamous passage from Mein Kampf that says, "The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed....The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one."
The effect of the [censored] accusations was to convince the German public and the world at large that Jews were not part of humanity, and thus not deserving of fundamental human rights.
Once the dehumanization and demoralization of the Jews was complete, the stage was set for the horrors that were to commence in 1939.
So what does the future hold for the male species?
Carey Roberts
Carey Roberts is a researcher and consultant who tracks gender bias in the mainstream media.
Still, others try to make it more specific:
by Angry Harry <mailto:admin@angryharry.com>
30 Reasons Why Feminists Really Are 'Feminazis'
Nope. AH has not yet written Part III of his explanation of how it is that multi-cellular organisms and multi-peopled organisations are so amazingly similar.
He has been far too busy!
And he keeps being distracted from writing it.
And one major recent distraction was caused by an email from T who wanted to know why anti-feminists keep insisting that feminism and N azism are very similar.
Well. The reason is this.
The N azis were around well before the heavy-duty violence and the gas chambers. And for quite some time they operated in a manner that paralleled in many ways the more recent activities of feminists.
Furthermore, feminist and N azi ideology have a lot in common.
AH very occasionally receives an email saying that it is outrageous to compare feminism with Nazism - because it somehow trivialises the terrible experiences of the Jews in the Germany of the 1930s.
But making the comparison does not do this at all.
It does the opposite.
It brings to the attention of people the kind of forces that gave rise to Nazism and, as far as men are concerned - particularly the white ones - it makes them understand a little better the horribleness of discrimination and demonisation.
Furthermore, most Jewish groups do not actually highlight the holocaust in order to gain everybody's sympathy.
They do it so that people can LEARN!
They do it so that people can see if something heinous is creeping up on us.
Anyway.
Here are 30 similarities between feminism and 'early' N azism.
Feminism and N azism have both ...
discriminated against individuals on the basis of their genetic code.
promoted the view that the targeted group was inferior genetically and behaviourally, e.g. see AH's Men Bear a Striking Resemblance to Slugs. <esmenbearastrikingresemblancetoslugs.htm>
promoted propaganda that led to the targeted group being labeled as 'parasites', e.g. see AH's Steven Jones - A Parasite? <esstevenjones.htm>
promoted propaganda that led to the targeted group being constantly ridiculed e.g. see Incredible Shrinking Y <http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FB0F1EFD39590C7A8CDDAE0894DB404482> by Maureen Dowd
promoted propaganda that led to the targeted group being laughed at even when mutilated e.g. Bobbit jokes.
demonised the target group by labeling them as perverts and sexual criminals, e.g. see Put Up or Shut Up <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,57209,00.html> by Wendy McElroy
sought to break the target group away from their families e.g. see The Federal Bureau of Marriage? <http://www.fathersforlife.org/articles/Baskerville/marriage-expose_1.htm> by Professor Stephen Baskerville.
promoted the view that the targeted group was responsible for most of the major ills in society.
disseminated lies and disinformation about the targeted group in order to further promote their own ideology, e.g. see Msinformation <tgMsinformation.htm> by Professor Christina Hoff Sommers.
disseminated lies and disinformation about historical matters, e.g. see AH's Did Women Really Want To Go Out To Work? <esDidWomenReallyWantToGoOutToWork.htm>
used intimidation, threats and coercion to prevent their opponents from speaking out e.g. see AH's Feminists are nasty things <esFeministsarenastythings.htm>.
promoted the lie that the privileged group consisted of innocent 'victims' of the targeted group e.g. "women have been oppressed throughout history."
demanded special privileges in the workplace for members of the privileged group e.g. preferential job placements for women.
discriminated against the targeted group in educational matters and in the workplace e.g. see AH's Well Done the Girls? <esWellDonetheGirls.htm>
perverted the justice system so that members of the targeted group were easily discriminated against in the law e.g. in family courts.
arranged matters so that accusers from the privileged group could be shielded by anonymity in the courtroom e.g. in sex-assault cases.
arranged matters so that defendants from the targeted group had to 'prove' their innocence e.g. in sex-assault and domestic violence cases.
arranged matters so that members of the privileged group could capriciously define what, legally, was to be deemed 'a crime', e.g. where nowadays the 'feelings' of women rather than the behaviours of men are the determinants of what constitutes 'a crime' e.g. see The Real Goal Of Feminism <tgTheRealGoalOfFeminism.htm> by Antonia Feitz - 18 min.
arranged matters so that members of the privileged group could capriciously define how the law was to view certain matters e.g. a fetus inside a woman can now be deemed by her - at her whim - to be a worthless piece of tissue or a prospective baby - with all the ramifications of this - regardless of how the father might feel about it all e.g. see AH's Rant Against the Child Support Agency <esRantAgainsttheCSA.htm>. (Also sexual harassment etc.)
arranged matters so that the law punished members of the targeted group more severely than members of the privileged group for the very same crime e.g. in domestic violence and murder cases.
arranged matters so that members of the targeted group were made responsible for the choices and behaviours of members of the privileged group e.g. in paternity fraud cases where duped fathers still have to pay child support.
arranged matters so that members of the privileged group who harmed, or even murdered, members of the targeted group were shown undue leniency - and were often actually applauded for their actions, e.g. see Killer given domestic violence award <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1651234.stm> and AH's Loose Women <meLooseWomen.htm>.
arranged matters so that the law punished members of the targeted group severely for even trivial offences - e.g. domestic violence, sexual harassment.
arranged matters so that members of the privileged group earned a right to the property of members of the targeted group for no other reason than that they were members of the privileged group e.g. alimony, child custody.
arranged matters so that certain speech or attitudes directed against the privileged group were criminalised e.g. biased 'hate speech' laws.
demanded subservience to the prevailing ideology and to the government.
effectively controlled the mainstream media and the academic institutions and arranged for them to present a dishonest and dishonourable point of view in support of their ideology.
consistently highlighted and exaggerated the achievements and the suffering of the privileged group while downplaying the achievements and the suffering of the targeted group e.g. see Human Rights are not for Men <tgHumanRightsarenotforMen.htm> by Melanie Phillips.
ran government-funded educational courses in universities (e.g. Women's Studies, Title IX) and in schools to promote the privileged group at the expense of the targeted group.
persisted in a long term campaign of hatred toward the targeted group, e.g. "Women need men like a fish needs a bicycle." "Men think about sex every 15 seconds." etc. Also see AH's Permanent Menstrual Tension <esPermanentMenstrualTension.htm>.
Bar the heavy violence and the gas chambers - which came towards the end of the Nazis hold on power - feminism and early Nazism are surely very similar indeed!
But, SuperEric (as normal) hits the proverbial femin azi PIG on the head:
Femin azi is a term to describe a select group of women. Not all women. Not feminists. It describes militant type feminists that use the doctrines and dogmas of Marxism/communism, believes in the eradication of the family unit and more specifically, men, to believe a female over a male when encountering law enforcement & courts and to put women in a group that is "more equal." They use the techniques culled from the [censored] ideology to accomplish their goals.
Another thing that is not often mentioned is:
Hitler said in "Mein Kampf" that if you tell a lie for the purpose of propaganda, tell a big one! Because the bigger the lie is, the more people are apt to believe it, because they can't believe you would dare to tell such a big lie unless it was the truth! STICKY
For those that don’t know, you have landed on a known, militant feminist site. We call them femin azis.
They will attempt to chase off anyone that disagrees with them (and their lies).
They will denigrate those that refuse to leave.
They will gang up on you and if that does not work, they will collude (yes , this is illegal) , lie about you and try to get Divorce Source to ban you. Unless you know how to counter this, Divorce Source takes the easy way out and accepts their lies instead of investigating the truth.
They hate the members of Fathers’ Integrity & Rights Movement (F IRM) because they have tried for over 10 years to rid this board of us.
For over 10 years, they have NEVER proved us wrong on ANY post except once. And, that was because of a new law that passed in the state of GA that we were not aware of, but do thank them for pointing it out.
Many times you will see the following message or or similar to it because we have found that it does not matter what is stated, they will lie, twist it and do their best to denigrate the poster.
Some say to just ignore them. We have. We have for over 6 months at a time and they never relent.
What you will find is that the most ardent femin azis are also Canadian. They are part of the Status of Women, Canada (SOWs) . The SOW are financed by Canada to monitor and to report back any hate speech for them to counter . Of course, if you disagree with them, then, that is considered hate speech.
If you will TAKE CAREFUL NOTICE, they only attack our character and their lies about our character have escalated over the years to even now (no pun intended), they accuse SuperEric of being a child molester. But, if you look at what they post, they NEVER disagree with the posts. They cannot. They cannot because we back what we say with facts and figures including law and quantitative analysis.
There are two main femin azis of this site:
Gecko (Cheryle Bammel)
Runs With Scissors (Caroline Rogers)
They have another group that has “special members” to audit this site and they discuss how to control and “correct the thinking” others. How do we know this? They were infiltrated! We were sent the postings and know EXACTLY what they are up to.
We try to start everyday fresh. We don’t attack unless attacked. Enevitably, they will attack. So, we just have a simple statement that we attach after they have posted whether or not, in the forum or the thread that they are posting in.
You will see many posts like this after they have attacked us:
Beware:
This is a known liar and disrupter of posts.
This is a known bully.
This is a known femin azi.
This is a known troll poster.
Therefore, whatever she states should be regarded with caution and suspect due to her repeated lies, misinformation and posts in multiple names/genders along with just being an "icky" type subhuman.
Again, we have NEVER BEEN PROVED WRONG, BUT WE MOST ASSUREDLY HAVE PROVEN THEM WRONG ABOUT A GAZILLION TIMES.
We hope that this explains what is going on and, if you think we are attacking you, just look at who is responded to in the gray areas of the responses because it will show the name of the person that we are defending our integrity from…
You as a newbie, may think that there may be another approach. Feel free to comment. However, we can attest that we have tried eveything that we know how to try to no avail.
One thing we can say for sure about the Nazis is that their lies worked, for awhile...with this motto:
Hitler said in "Mein Kampf" that if you tell a lie for the purpose of propaganda, tell a big one! Because the bigger the lie is, the more people are apt to believe it, because they can't believe you would dare to tell such a big lie unless it was the truth!
It seems that some have a difficulty with the term, "femin azi." So much so, that they can only reflect upon the members of F_IRM (Fathers Integrity & Rights Movement-named by a woman, btw...).
Well, this misconception is totally wrong yet continues to be propagated by...guess who...the femin azi PIGS.
In fact, the term femin azi is so colloquial, all mainstream dictionaries have a definition of what a [censored] is:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/femin azi
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/femin azi
Hell, even the encyclopedias have their say too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Femin azi
This is certainly not a new term and is certainly MAINSTREAM.
But, natch, the person that really describes the term for what it really means is SuperEric:
"Femin azi is a term to describe a select group of women. Not all women. Not feminists. It describes militant type feminists that use the doctrines and dogmas of Marxism/communism, believes in the eradication of the family unit and more specifically, men, to believe a female over a male when encountering law enforcement & courts and to put women in a group that is "more equal." They use the techniques culled from the [censored] ideology to accomplish their goals."
Others broach the subject:
by Carey Roberts
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When persons call for the decimation of half the world's population, that grabs my attention. This is what I'm talking about:
"The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race." -- Sally Miller Gearhart, in The Future - If There Is One - Is Female.
"If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males." --Mary Daly, former Professor at Boston College, 2001.
These proposals are disturbing in their own right. What is even more troubling is that no feminist has ever repudiated them.
When feminists call for global "decontamination" by phasing-out men, I can't help but think of the lies and accusations leveled against the Jews in [censored] Germany, and the similarities to contemporary gender feminism:
1. Biological superiority: The National Socialists preached the genetic superiority of the Aryan race. Now, a feminist-oriented World Health Organization website claims that women enjoy an "inherent biological advantage."
2. Sub-human: In the 1930s, the Jews were called vermin and "Judensau" (Jew-pig). Thirty years later, feminists referred to men as "male chauvinist pigs."
3. Conspiracy theory: The Jews were often accused of "working together" to pollute German culture. Now, feminists refer to the so-called conspiracy against women as "the patriarchy."
4. Excessive influence: Seventy years ago, Jews were accused of controlling the German economy. Now, men are accused of "having all the power."
5. Threat to the greater welfare: The Jews were blacklisted as toxic to German culture. In the present era, Gloria Steinem writes, "The most dangerous situation for a woman is....a husband or lover in the isolation of their own home."
6. Faulty science: Just as Hitler's propagandists once dismissed Albert Einstein's discoveries as "Jewish physics," feminist scholars now ridicule male scientific breakthroughs as the product of "linear" and "hierarchical" thinking.
7. Spread of a dread disease: In [censored] Germany, Jews were falsely accused of spreading of untreatable syphilis. Now, UNICEF director Carol Belamy unfairly blames men for the spread of AIDS in Africa.
8. Sexual contact: Hitler was obsessed with keeping Jewish men from "defiling" the racial purity of Aryan women. Now, according to Catherine McKinnon, "In a patriarchal society all heterosexual intercourse is rape."
But the most fascinating parallel between Germany in the 1930s and the current era lies in the conscious use of deception to sway public opinion.
In her brilliant exposé, Who Stole Feminism?, Christina Hoff Sommers documents the many fabrications of gender feminism. Indeed, the entire ideological foundation of feminism rests on what columnist Wendy McElroy calls the "Great Lie" -- the wrong-headed notion that women are the eternal victims of male-dominated culture.
The feminist Great Lie echoes the infamous passage from Mein Kampf that says, "The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed....The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one."
The effect of the [censored] accusations was to convince the German public and the world at large that Jews were not part of humanity, and thus not deserving of fundamental human rights.
Once the dehumanization and demoralization of the Jews was complete, the stage was set for the horrors that were to commence in 1939.
So what does the future hold for the male species?
Carey Roberts
Carey Roberts is a researcher and consultant who tracks gender bias in the mainstream media.
Still, others try to make it more specific:
by Angry Harry <mailto:admin@angryharry.com>
30 Reasons Why Feminists Really Are 'Feminazis'
Nope. AH has not yet written Part III of his explanation of how it is that multi-cellular organisms and multi-peopled organisations are so amazingly similar.
He has been far too busy!
And he keeps being distracted from writing it.
And one major recent distraction was caused by an email from T who wanted to know why anti-feminists keep insisting that feminism and Nazism are very similar.
Well. The reason is this.
The N azis were around well before the heavy-duty violence and the gas chambers. And for quite some time they operated in a manner that paralleled in many ways the more recent activities of feminists.
Furthermore, feminist and [censored] ideology have a lot in common.
AH very occasionally receives an email saying that it is outrageous to compare feminism with Nazism - because it somehow trivialises the terrible experiences of the Jews in the Germany of the 1930s.
But making the comparison does not do this at all.
It does the opposite.
It brings to the attention of people the kind of forces that gave rise to Nazism and, as far as men are concerned - particularly the white ones - it makes them understand a little better the horribleness of discrimination and demonisation.
Furthermore, most Jewish groups do not actually highlight the holocaust in order to gain everybody's sympathy
.
They do it so that people can LEARN!
They do it so that people can see if something heinous is creeping up on us.
Anyway.
Here are 30 similarities between feminism and 'early' N azism.
Feminism and N azism have both ...
discriminated against individuals on the basis of their genetic code.
promoted the view that the targeted group was inferior genetically and behaviourally, e.g. see AH's Men Bear a Striking Resemblance to Slugs. <esmenbearastrikingresemblancetoslugs.htm>
promoted propaganda that led to the targeted group being labeled as 'parasites', e.g. see AH's Steven Jones - A Parasite? <esstevenjones.htm>
promoted propaganda that led to the targeted group being constantly ridiculed e.g. see Incredible Shrinking Y <http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FB0F1EFD39590C7A8CDDAE0894DB404482> by Maureen Dowd
promoted propaganda that led to the targeted group being laughed at even when mutilated e.g. Bobbit jokes.
demonised the target group by labeling them as perverts and sexual criminals, e.g. see Put Up or Shut Up <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,57209,00.html> by Wendy McElroy
sought to break the target group away from their families e.g. see The Federal Bureau of Marriage? <http://www.fathersforlife.org/articles/Baskerville/marriage-expose_1.htm> by Professor Stephen Baskerville.
promoted the view that the targeted group was responsible for most of the major ills in society.
disseminated lies and disinformation about the targeted group in order to further promote their own ideology, e.g. see Msinformation <tgMsinformation.htm> by Professor Christina Hoff Sommers.
disseminated lies and disinformation about historical matters, e.g. see AH's Did Women Really Want To Go Out To Work? <esDidWomenReallyWantToGoOutToWork.htm>
used intimidation, threats and coercion to prevent their opponents from speaking out e.g. see AH's Feminists are nasty things <esFeministsarenastythings.htm>.
promoted the lie that the privileged group consisted of innocent 'victims' of the targeted group e.g. "women have been oppressed throughout history."
demanded special privileges in the workplace for members of the privileged group e.g. preferential job placements for women.
discriminated against the targeted group in educational matters and in the workplace e.g. see AH's Well Done the Girls? <esWellDonetheGirls.htm>
perverted the justice system so that members of the targeted group were easily discriminated against in the law e.g. in family courts.
arranged matters so that accusers from the privileged group could be shielded by anonymity in the courtroom e.g. in sex-assault cases.
arranged matters so that defendants from the targeted group had to 'prove' their innocence e.g. in sex-assault and domestic violence cases.
arranged matters so that members of the privileged group could capriciously define what, legally, was to be deemed 'a crime', e.g. where nowadays the 'feelings' of women rather than the behaviours of men are the determinants of what constitutes 'a crime' e.g. see The Real Goal Of Feminism <tgTheRealGoalOfFeminism.htm> by Antonia Feitz - 18 min.
arranged matters so that members of the privileged group could capriciously define how the law was to view certain matters e.g. a fetus inside a woman can now be deemed by her - at her whim - to be a worthless piece of tissue or a prospective baby - with all the ramifications of this - regardless of how the father might feel about it all e.g. see AH's Rant Against the Child Support Agency <esRantAgainsttheCSA.htm>. (Also sexual harassment etc.)
arranged matters so that the law punished members of the targeted group more severely than members of the privileged group for the very same crime e.g. in domestic violence and murder cases.
arranged matters so that members of the targeted group were made responsible for the choices and behaviours of members of the privileged group e.g. in paternity fraud cases where duped fathers still have to pay child support.
arranged matters so that members of the privileged group who harmed, or even murdered, members of the targeted group were shown undue leniency - and were often actually applauded for their actions, e.g. see Killer given domestic violence award <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1651234.stm> and AH's Loose Women <meLooseWomen.htm>.
arranged matters so that the law punished members of the targeted group severely for even trivial offences - e.g. domestic violence, sexual harassment.
arranged matters so that members of the privileged group earned a right to the property of members of the targeted group for no other reason than that they were members of the privileged group e.g. alimony, child custody.
arranged matters so that certain speech or attitudes directed against the privileged group were criminalised e.g. biased 'hate speech' laws.
demanded subservience to the prevailing ideology and to the government.
effectively controlled the mainstream media and the academic institutions and arranged for them to present a dishonest and dishonourable point of view in support of their ideology.
consistently highlighted and exaggerated the achievements and the suffering of the privileged group while downplaying the achievements and the suffering of the targeted group e.g. see Human Rights are not for Men <tgHumanRightsarenotforMen.htm> by Melanie Phillips.
ran government-funded educational courses in universities (e.g. Women's Studies, Title IX) and in schools to promote the privileged group at the expense of the targeted group.
persisted in a long term campaign of hatred toward the targeted group, e.g. "Women need men like a fish needs a bicycle." "Men think about sex every 15 seconds." etc. Also see AH's Permanent Menstrual Tension <esPermanentMenstrualTension.htm>.
Bar the heavy violence and the gas chambers - which came towards the end of the Nazis hold on power - feminism and early Nazism are surely very similar indeed!
But, SuperEric (as normal) hits the proverbial femin azi PIG on the head:
Femin azi is a term to describe a select group of women. Not all women. Not feminists. It describes militant type feminists that use the doctrines and dogmas of Marxism/communism, believes in the eradication of the family unit and more specifically, men, to believe a female over a male when encountering law enforcement & courts and to put women in a group that is "more equal." They use the techniques culled from the [censored] ideology to accomplish their goals.
Another thing that is not often mentioned is:
Hitler said in "Mein Kampf" that if you tell a lie for the purpose of propaganda, tell a big one! Because the bigger the lie is, the more people are apt to believe it, because they can't believe you would dare to tell such a big lie unless it was the truth!
|
nolonger
enthusiast
Reged: 09/15/08
Posts: 305
|
|
[quote]Nevermind. I don't really care for any replies on this. I can't find how to delete a thread. [/quote]
==========================================================
On 2nd thought, I think I could use some advice. The guy who I told just last week to "cool it", that I'm not ready for committment, that I needed to <blah, blah, blah, You all know the rest>...kept calling, texting, emailing. Fine, I guess. We knew each other in high school so it's not like we can't be friends.
Or is it?
I live 6 hours away from him in good driving weather. We got a ton of snow and more in the forcast. That drive could easily be 8 hours and definitely is dangerous.
He is insisting he come visit me on Christmas and thru the weekend.
!??!!
First, I told him no. Then, I told him, no...really, NO. Then, after a text from him that said, "Say yes!" I called him and told him I had job training all day that day. <I really only have job training for an hour> and he STILL insisted saying that he can find something to do for 5 hours and wait for me.
!??!!
That's when I said, "It's not about the job training. I was trying to be gentle, but, I just don't want you to visit."
He got silent. He told me he was one of the good guys. He hung up the phone without saying goodbye.
I'm thinking, never answer his call/text/email again! The truth is, I know he's a good guy and I don't want to burn that bridge. I just don't want what he wants right now.
I see warning signs, tho. Do you?
|
shortmarriage
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 12/07/08
Posts: 1773
|
|
He does seem a bit "pushy". He should respect that you're not up to it right now. "It" being a commitment, a relationship, or a visit over Christmas and thru the weekend. You said that you know this guy from school. How did you get back in touch with him?
"It's not about the job training. I was trying to be gentle, but, I just don't want you to visit."
It may be that when you were honest with him, he didn't like your answer. You shouldn't have to say anything more than "it's just not a good time" or "I'm really not up for that".
It does seem that he's trying pretty hard to make you give in. He may be a nice guy, but don't they all seem that way in the beginning?
You are not burning a bridge- the timing just may not be right. He'll still be around if/when you change your mind. And if it's meant to be, it's meant to be. Trust your gut. If I had paid more attention to the red flags I saw early on, I wouldn't be getting divorced right now.
Have you had other dates with this guy? Because 4 days at Christmas is a pretty long date.
|
nolonger
enthusiast
Reged: 09/15/08
Posts: 305
|
|
Thx, SM. I'm with you. Had I looked into the warning signs during dating, I wouldn't be in my sitch at all, either. I learned a lot. Don't wanna make the same mistake.
This guy was actually my prom date. He was my best guy friend who I always had a secret crush on. He, at the time, was off limits because twice during the 4 years of school, I was dating his close friends.
I remet him at the 20 year reunion this fall. He told me he regretted never acting on his feelings for me in h.s. and just wanted to tell me that. That was before he knew I was getting divorced. Once I informed him that I was going to be available, he was in 7th heaven. We spoke on the phone and it was just like old times. He's the easiest guy to talk to. I really value that right now. There is absolutely nothing "wrong" with him. We click.
So we went on a lunch date with my sister and my kids (at this point, just as friends). He got little stuff for my kids as gifts. Sweet.
Then we went on a group date with other h.s. friends. Got drunk. Went dancing. Had a blast.
I'm a [censored] believer in chemistry. I already knew I liked his personality, but wasn't sure about being closed to middle age and if we "had it" in that department. So I kissed him after that date. Well, and during that date, too. Each time, I was seeing if I felt anything more.
At first, I thought I did but then, not so much. I don't know what it was. I'm sure I was sending him the wrong signal by this simple act (hind sight is 20/20) but I was just experimenting.
When I got back I had time to ponder. Plus, I was dating another guy, nothing serious. When I went out with the other guy, I immediately realized that he and I had the chemistry that h.s. guy and I lacked. It was quite clear to me that I was trying to push a square peg into a round hole.
Then what happened was that guy I had chemistry with (who was never even close to being anything near a long-term possibility. He was simply the first guy I went out with since splitting w/ my H.) called me to tell me he had found someone that he thought may be the one he'd remarry some day. I was thrilled for him, but of course, it still hurt a bit.
Then I applied that experience to what I was entering into with the h.s. guy.
YIKES! I realized that in NO way did I want to put h.s. guy into a position of being hurt, nor did I want to put myself in a position of falling for a man who lived so friggin far away.
Never mind the fact that my divorce isn't final til the 20th of Jan.
I'm so not wanting to deal with any of this crap! I just want to casually date, find out who I am, what I want, and just be ME. Alone. No strings. No pressure.
It seems the pressure I felt from h.s. guy is the reason for the lack of chemistry. I just don't want what he wants right now.
Back to the warning signs...he's never been married and is 38. He has a college degree and manages a popular big-city restaurant but doesn't have his stuff together as much as I think he should be now. Then there's all this pressure and insistance in spite of my total disclosure of my true feelings about not wanting to be involved with anyone in spite of my saying that I don't need any pressure right now as I'm already in the pressure cooker! Add to it, the wierd guilt-trip thing with the hang up with no good bye.
I'm thinking it may be OK to burn that bridge. Am I being too guarded?
|
nolonger
enthusiast
Reged: 09/15/08
Posts: 305
|
|
Um, just forget all of this again. I got the BIGGEST warning sign and I'm done with this guy.
He's telling people he's my boyfriend and those people are asking my family members if this is true and when they said no, the response of the person this guy talked to was, "Oh! That's not the impression I got AT ALL!"
I think I dodge an obsessive-dilusional person.
I'm 2 old 4 this.
|
shortmarriage
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 12/07/08
Posts: 1773
|
|
Hey nolonger,
How have things been with this guy lately? I really think you should trust your gut instinct. You should be guarded, whether it's because of him or the marriage your currently in the process of ending, there's a reason you're having doubts.
|
nolonger
enthusiast
Reged: 09/15/08
Posts: 305
|
|
SM, hey! Thanks for your interest. To answer your Q, this guy has continued to contact me and I have not contacted him back until today.
His last message included "I don't know what is going on between us" and "this silent treatment is a bitter pill". If spoken to someone in a committed relationship, totally healthy. We went on 3 dates. I last spoke to him and told him that we weren't an item. Seems unhealthy.
Because I spoke with him last, I decided to respond in writing today hoping he 'd have written word about my lack of interest and therefore I can have no uncertainty that my communication was clear.
That will be my last contact. I'm thankful he lives 370 miles away.
Meanwhile, I have found something healthier for now.
|
shortmarriage
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 12/07/08
Posts: 1773
|
|
Hey nolonger,
It's best to let this one go...
Glad to hear that something/someone else is panning out better! I hope that 2009 is a great year for you!
|
nolonger
enthusiast
Reged: 09/15/08
Posts: 305
|
|
Sm, he has not contacted me since. All is well. Hope you have a great '09 as well!
|
timbuktu
journeyman
Reged: 09/26/09
Posts: 77
|
|
No longer..I hear ya completely!! I'm too old for this myself!!
My divorce will be final in March and I am telling ya...once they smell the fresh meat on the market...I seem to attract all the morons!!
First guy I dated seemed like a good enough guy..dated him once..and he told me that he was still hung up on his last relationship...but was it okay if we had sex?
HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA!!
Second guy I dated for 2 months told me he loved me on the first date..wanted me to move in with him...and asked me if I'd marry him down the road three dates later. Shortly after that he was telling me how to dress(I should dress more like a woman..heels..low cut dresses, he hated my choice or purses, etc) when the only place he ever took me was to blue collar bars (I was probably the best dressed IN the place) and the only thing HE ever wore was the same three shirts and the same two pair of jeans and tennis shoes, that he didn't want me to take my new job (he knew a lot of RICH people and he himself had a lot of money...haha yeah right!)
It's been downhill from there (not that the second guy was any better than the rest of them but he did make me feel good about myself..when he was sober and not lecturing me and trying to change/control me).
Went out with my friends one night and a guy I knew as an acquaintance all of a sudden finds out that I'm going through a divorce and spends all night yapping with me..buying me drinks, asks for my number..(you know the shpeel), and then asks if I wanna get lucky when I was getting up to leave.
LOL!! God, I haven't heard that word since the 80's and just laughed and said, "Why..ya wanna buy me a lottery ticket??!"
Well, coming from a guy that's still wearing a Steve Perry hairdo..I guess I should have expected it. He just laughed and said, "Sure..I'll buy you a lottery ticket..let's go back to your place or mine and plan how we'll spend the money if we win the 'motherload'.."
Oh my lord!!
And I thought my ex was bad!!
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
