Feminism's slide since Sept. 11

Men's News Daily ^ | September 17, 2002 | Cathy Young

[RogerFGay]

bump

[goldstategop]

If it weren't for the character and humanity of American men, women in this country and elsewhere in the world would still be men's chattels. Something for the feminazis here to contemplate as they keep denouncing America and the men who make her great.

[gridlock]

Similarly, if it had not been for Britan and, to a lesser extent, America, human slavery would still be the rule, rather than the exception.

[RogerFGay]

It has just amazed me how American feminists have made fools of themselves and their country every year at the Annual UN Women's Day conference. Of course, Americans know that they make fools of themselves every day in the US, and aren't surprised when they make fools of themselves on the world stage.

[sneakers]

As a woman I must admit that you are right. God bless those men.

[Kermit]

Yesterday there was an article posted on American women working with the Special Forces in Afghanistan. They're used to search Afghan women, who've been smuggling weapons. One Afghan women didn't believe the soldier was a women until she took her Kevlar helmet off. Talk about culture shock.

[Tired of Taxes]

Some conservative commentators have also argued that the attack on America and the war on terrorism have ushered in a restoration of traditional gender roles, and in particular an era of "manly men"

I'm surprised that you posted this article, Roger, considering some of the other articles you've posted about fathers' rights. As a woman, I have absolutely no trouble with the idea of "manly men", but, remember, in addition to firemen and rescue workers and other heroes, fathers who work and support their families also fall under that heading.

the plight of women under the Taliban made many American women realize what real oppression looked like and made some preoccupations of the American women's movement (such as policing sex jokes at work) seem rather trivial.

The idea that American feminists didn't know or didn't sympathize with the plight of women under the Taliban is (excuse me, but) a load of crap. I first heard about the Taliban and its treatment of women (not to mention its horrendous treatment of men, too!) years ago on a feminist website. But, back then, Americans outside of the feminist arena didn't care. Let's face it: It didn't become an issue of concern for most Americans until we were fighting Afghanistan in a war. But, Western feminists were screaming about it for years beforehand.

[RogerFGay]

The author, Cathy young, is an extremely well known "individualist feminist" (i.e. western political orientation as opposed to Marxist-Socialist) who has made a career out of knowing what's going on with feminism and arguing against the feminazis. Among other things, she's remarking on the left-wing anti-Bush anti-Republican phenomenon of critisizing the war against the Taliban and al Quaeda. Your left-wing feminazi sisters are like that. In case you haven't noticed, they work with and for the Democratic Party and don't really care which side of what they end up on. Hating men, all men, is mostly just about getting recruits and donations.

As for your other thing -- being surprised that I posted and reminding me that fathers who support their families are men -- shame on you.

[Tired of Taxes]

Your left-wing feminazi sisters are like that.

I'm not "left-wing". I'm more traditionalist in the roles of men and women. What I'm pointing out is that it's contradictory for men to support the idea of "manly men" in one way (rescue workers, etc.) but not in another (i.e. supporting their families and allowing mothers to raise the children). But, perhaps I'm confusing you, Roger, with a few of the respondants on your threads... ?

[RogerFGay]

You're not confusing me. You've confused yourself. You're insinuating that I'm among a group of people who are on some other side of a fence from men who care about and take care of their children. As I said before -- shame on you.

[Tired of Taxes]

No, I'm not saying that you personally don't take care of your responsibilities. However, you have posted articles sympathetic to men who don't take care of their responsibilities.

[BIOMAN]

I stand BEHIND the women's movement 100%.

[RogerFGay]

No, I'm not saying that you personally don't take care of your responsibilities. However, you have posted articles sympathetic to men who don't take care of their responsibilities.

You mean like men who are unemployed, so the government creates an arbitrary debt for them to pay, revokes their drivers licenses, and throws them in jail? Are those the men you're accusing me of showing sympathy for?

[RogerFGay]

How about those men the government orders to support children of women they've never met? Is opposing that sympathizing with men who don't take care of their obligations?

[Tired of Taxes]

Again, Roger, if you're going to support traditional "manly" roles, then you should support ALL the traditional roles. "Manly men" work to support their families.

[taxcontrol]

I stand BEHIND the women's movement 100%.

Me too, the view is great! [sorry, couldn't resist]

[VOA]

yeah, look at all the women liberated in Afghanistan by Mavis Leno (Jay's wife) and
her feminist friends...oops, no that was Dubya and a few good men (and women) who did that.

Bet that is not talked about over at the National Organization of Women much...

[RogerFGay]

Again, Roger, if you're going to support traditional "manly" roles, then you should support ALL the traditional roles. "Manly men" work to support their families.

That's not the subject of my articles. I'm sure Cathy Young wasn't referring to my articles when she made the comment in her article, because that's never been the subject of any of my artiles.

[Tired of Taxes]

How about those men the government orders to support children of women they've never met?

Again, I agree with many father's rights issues. I don't think men who aren't the bio-fathers of children should be forced to pay child support, and I'm sure most people would agree.

But, here you've posted an article applauding "manly men", and I'm just pointing out the contradiction between two positions:

(1) Women should appreciate men who are "manly", and feminists should realize there's a natural difference between men and women

VERSUS

(2) Men shouldn't be penalized for not supporting their families.