Major Newspapers Will Fail After Christmas - So Much for Pandering to Women... [FR dissed]

Mens News Daily ^ | Dec 8, 2008 | Jim Peterson

[Jim Robinson]

The Miami Herald and Chicago Tribune have practically announced bankruptcy and are both now valued at less than the value of the real estate they own (prime bay-front property in Miami and a skyscraper in Chicago).

Even better, McClatchy Newspapers itself, a newspaper chain with a documented anti-male bias, is saddled with so much debt that it will probably not last through 2009...

~~snip~~

A vestige of Andrew Marton’s article can be found at FreeRepublic.com where you can see that this once-conservative forum is now dominated by man-hating old women and FReepers discussing the story were no allowed to mention the word feminism in regard to the FReeper nmh’s hate-filled diatribes against men who would date foreign women (I know first-hand that any such comments mentioning feminism were deleted).

Exhibit C: The forum FreeRepublic.com was once a place for conservative men to bash feminism freely and often. It was the favorite topic for years. But, since early 2006, most anti-feminist FReepers have had their accounts deleted so as not to antagonize the aging baby boomer females the crippled owner, Jim Robinson, wants to keep in the Republican Party. Jim Robinson’s attitude seems to be just like that of Rupert Murdoch of Fox News…he seems to think that “strong feminist women” should be the backbone of the Republican Party. This is insane. I do NOT think these men are motivated by the concept that 80% of corporate purchase decisions are made by women.

It is easy to logon as a member of the once-mighty conservative FreeRepublic.com. Try doing so and mentioning feminism in a comment somewhere. See how quickly you can be deleted.

Then watch how the readership of the blog has fallen considerably since they turned feminist.

Where was the monetary advantage for this conservative forum to go feminist?

[BobS]

Read my post that happens to be just below yours:) Women can cause some little problems with each other, but men can create loud noises after they get together and organize. Women can’t naturally organize like that. That won’t change.

[Politicalmom]

You’re an idiot. I was EXAGGERATING.

I suppose I HAVE to use a sarcasm tag for you.

Anyway, just take your excess testosterone somewhere else, and attack somebody else.

[ElkGroveDan]

She said so once.

[Lancey Howard]

I’m new here (/sarc) and I don’t have a clue what this pantload Peterson is talking about. I do know that his use of the description “crippled owner” was childish and unnecessary and had no relevance to anything else he wrote. But then, I have to imagine that a nothing site like ‘Men’s News Daily’ is going to publish whatever crap it can get its hands on for next to nothing.

[Politicalmom]

Oh, and your pop psychology stinks, too. You don’t know ANYTHING about me. I am about as far from being over-protective as it is possible to be.

[GipperGal]

I think women are MORE RUTHLESS than men. Much more ruthless, and hands-down more crude and cruel, as a general rule....What's been more destructive or constructive to human history is entirely irrelevant, in my opinion. It's like asking, has drought or flood been more destructive to earth geology?

In an earlier post you wrote:

That is what disgusts me, and it is a weakness I see indulged more often by women than by men. Being a woman myself, I catch myself tending toward the shrill hysteria, the pure-emotion-based reaction that goes along with being female.

You must be disgusted with yourself right now because you have just engaged in a poorly reasoned argument based on emotion.

You're arguing that women are more destructive than men in their weaknesses and yet you're unconcerned about finding precedence for this novel opinion in human history? Come on. As a crusty old professor of mine used to say, "Think, damn it, think!"

I have no argument with you about "mean girls". Girls can be ruthless. But men can be just as vile. Human nature is inherently bent.

Men have done a pretty good job in Western Civilization of containing "dominance, force, brute strength, and desire to spread their seed as far and wide as possible" to minimize "gang rape, sex trafficking, and honor killings." I give them -- and Judeo-Christianity -- credit for that. When women in America start understanding the negative consequences of over-protectiveness and over-mothering, I will give them credit for that, too.

You seem to give women very little credit for fostering civilization. The Judeo-Christian men you seem to credit with founding western civilization actually thought women were the civilizing force. One of my favorite stories from Plutarch's lives was an anecdote he tells of how the ancient Romans finally settled in Italy. Having fled the fires of Troy, they were sailing the Mediterranean for a place to colonize. The women were tired of constantly moving from place to place, so when they came ashore on the Italian peninsula, the women set fire to the boats while their men slept so that they would be forced to finally settle down. Plutarch wrote of them as heroines because if they hadn't done that, Rome would have never been founded!

And of course the most important image in the rise of Christian civilization was that of a Lady holding her Child.

As for the "over-protectiveness and over-mothering" of women in America today, you may have a point. However, the most famous mother on this national stage this year was a lifetime NRA member who hunts, fishes, and proudly boasts that her first born son is defending our country in uniform in a distant war zone far from her protective care. I'd say that's progress, wouldn't you?

[GipperGal]

I like your analogy about the rocks and the rice. Now I see your point!

[GipperGal]

I agree with you 110% about Palin. But I'm not sure I agree with your general description of how women operate, but as you said yourself, Men figure things out, but still can't figure out women! LOL!

Palin reminded me of my sister-in-law, whom she actually resembles, and I recall thinking, "if anyone can get things done, it's my sister-in-law." A mother of five knows how to organize, prioritize, and budget in a manner befitting our best CEOs.

[afnamvet]

Too bad for the Fresno Bee and one of its ugly sisters, the Sacramento Bee. Chortle.

[bcsco]

Yep, I missed that one for sure. Don’t know what I was doing but it sure wasn’t paying attention.

[GipperGal]

Oops! Just want to clarify that this part was a quote, not mine:

"Men have done a pretty good job in Western Civilization of containing "dominance, force, brute strength, and desire to spread their seed as far and wide as possible" to minimize "gang rape, sex trafficking, and honor killings." I give them -- and Judeo-Christianity -- credit for that. When women in America start understanding the negative consequences of over-protectiveness and over-mothering, I will give them credit for that, too."

I should have used italics with it.

[Kevmo]

Thanks. Now do you see that there’s a problem that needs fixin’?

[bcsco]

Here’s an analogy to work with. Take a small box and fill it with some rocks. Then add some rice, filling it to the top. Now take all the same stuff, but in a different order. Put in the rice first, then add the rocks. What you’ll find is that if you put in the big stuff first, the small stuff will fit around it. But if you put in the small stuff first, the big stuff won’t have room. The republican tent is the box. The Big issues are the socon issues, to be put in first. The little issues are things that can be accommodated around the bigger stuff. A candidate who tries to focus on the smaller issues first and leave out the bigger issues has no way of getting all of us into the tent. He splits the party. The candidate who gets the big stuff right and as much of the little stuff that will fit, he can fit more into the tent. We’re often amazed at how much rice can keep fitting in. Rudy Giuliani flunks some of the big issues, and on some of the little issues it looks to me like anyone else’s rice would do just as well. All that remains for us to agree on is which are the bedrock principles and which are not. Why would there be so much invective aimed at rudy from the right? Because there are some bedrock principles that he is leaving out. Bad move. I see rudybot postings all the time saying that they would vote for Hunter, and I see socon postings that say they would not vote for rudy. That’s a BIG indicator of a few bedrock principles that are being left outside the tent in order to let in some rice.

That's as fine a presentation as I've seen lately (for a long time, actually).

[Kevmo]

Thanks. It was part of my reverse Opus on the Bugzapper thread.

What do you think of an idealogical litmus matrix?

[peggybac]

What a bunch of garbage. Man hating women on FR? I have never read such a post or have seen such a thread.

[GipperGal]

Thanks. Now do you see that there’s a problem that needs fixin’?

Yeah, but it's the method. I see it as an opportunity to draw broad alliances based on principles. For example, we should never remove our pro-life principles from the party platform ever. And yet we can reach out to people who do not agree with us by explaining more clearly that overturning Roe does not outlaw abortion, it returns it to the states where it belongs. If they get all creeped out about that, then ask them why should they be upset by democracy?

We don't want to make some people feel like they are not welcome or marginalized. The social conservative principles are based on freedom and respect for tradition. And they are also tolerant. We should always make clear that there is nothing intolerant about our social conservatism. We need to make it clear because the left wishes to tar us with the label of "intolerance".

[fortunecookie]

LOL, thanks for posting, Jim! I love Exhibit C. It's like he's just making it up as he goes, really pulling it out of his, well, you know. But what do I know, I'm just a girl! A man-hating, glad you banned the misogynists, girl! ;-)

(Just kidding, guys, I don't really hate men - take that, Mr. Peterson.) Still ROFL...

[beandog]

I would truly hate to see the women you hang out with, or maybe you don’t. I personally don’t agree with a single word you have posted. Maybe instead of hanging out with men you should get to know a few good women.

[fortunecookie]

Oh, btw, you’re going to be mighty busy today deleting all the accounts who mention ‘feminism’! (Still laughing...)