Can’t Find A Husband?
| February 26, 2007 at 06:24:47Can’t Find a Husband? |
I have bad news for the ladies out there looking for a husband. Today’s men are afraid of marriage and having kids. This is most likely because their male friends and relatives have told them what usually happens in the event of a divorce with children. In fact, some men are calling for a marriage strike.
I’m a liberal female father’s advocate, activist, writer and blogger. I’ve been studying the effect our current family law has on families, and why the laws are written the way they are. Unfortunately I have more bad news.We women have allowed radical feminists to take over the feminist movement, the one that used to stand for equality, and they’ve been negatively influencing family law. Now it’s all about domination; in the case of divorce it’s having complete control over the kids, house, money and dad’s visitation time.
Many fathers want equal physical custody of their children after a relationship break-up. If women deserve equality, men do too, right? Then why are feminists, who claim to be about equality, opposing us whenever we introduce equal-parenting laws? I’ve even seen them lying during their testimony to a legislative committee. They’re also changing domestic violence laws to make them even more anti-male, though the facts show males and females batter each other equally and mothers abuse children more than fathers.
Our country is in a fatherless crisis, yet men who are natural hands-on daddies are scoffed at. These men who embrace fatherhood are shown their time and influence isn’t important. Our government does this by enforcing child support orders while not enforcing visitation orders. Whether the father had due process in court or not, whether blatant errors were made, when the DNA test shows he’s not the father, and even when there is no child, our government punishes fathers, including throwing them in jail, for getting behind in child support.
The number one fear of children whose parents are divorcing is losing one parent. Yet millions of fathers, and some mothers are prevented from having natural, fully functioning, dedicated and loving relationships with their children after divorce. Unmarried fathers face the same problem. There are many men across the country, single and divorced, who want equal physical custody of their children, who want to help with home work, meet with teachers, take the kids to the dentist, all the normal things parents do.
Mothers and fathers tell me they don’t believe 4 days and 4 evenings a month is adequate time to develop the kind of relationship necessary for the healthy development of their children. In many cases the sole custodial parent even interferes with that limited time, and in some cases cuts the noncustodial parent completely off from their child even if they’ve done nothing wrong.
A vindictive parent can essentially steal the child by moving the child far away, encouraging negative feelings and thoughts the child has about the noncustodial parent, or filing a false domestic violence report. The way the laws are written today, a divorcing woman can report that her husband was throwing things, say she’s in fear, and with just her word she can get a temporary restraining order and emergency child custody order. One study showed half the temporary restraining orders granted were for cases where no physical harm was even claimed. Another showed the abuse claimed could not be verified fifty-nine percent of the time.
The father in a case like this doesn’t get a chance to face a judge or jury; he’s automatically considered guilty of abuse or potential abuse. This happens without proof of any wrongdoing, and can happen without his knowledge. Once she has the emergency custody order, he has very little, or in most cases no chance of getting equal custody. Every day innocent fathers visit their children in jail-like supervised visitation centers and take anger management classes, sometimes for years. Worse yet, some of these men not only are innocent of domestic violence, they’re the victims. Some children of these innocent men never see Daddy again.
The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) has encouraged programs that promote the idea that batterers are male, victims are female, and every child should be in the sole physical custody of it’s mother. In other words, our government supports programs that vilify men. The Violence Against Women Act needs to be reformed or eliminated, and I-VAWA, the international version, needs to be rejected.
If we want men to embrace the idea of family life, we need to ensure they have equality in family law. Equal parenting laws, favored by 85% of people polled, need to be passed nationwide and a Federal Family Rights Act needs to be established immediately to protect families dealing with Child Protective Services and parents in divorce and child custody cases. The time has come to restore human and civil rights to all fit parents.
Now, back to looking for your husband. I’ve been working with fathers in the equal parenting movement for a few years now. These guys are some of the smartest and kindest friends I’ve had, and some of the most loving and dedicated daddies I’ve ever met. They’ve experienced pain and injustice at the hands of women. When they meet women who respect them, who understand that most men make great parents, they return a special kind of respect and appreciation. Come join us; you can make new friends, and have the satisfaction of helping a very honorable cause. And who knows, maybe you’ll be at a rally one day and meet your future husband.
Take action — click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Reform Family Law So Fit Parents Of Both Genders Have Equal Rights
I'm a sun and nature loving, 50-something, laid back, forward thinking, liberal anti-feminist egalitarian, san francisco bay area native, single mom of 4 and yia yia to 2. I've been active in the equal parenting movement since 2002. Known as the purple Queen of Equality, I once blogged as the Feminist4Fathers. Find me now on sharedparentingworks.org and jugsforjustice.org. | More from Teri Stoddard
Stumble It!
February 27th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
Jeez, all this argument over a pro-male article. I’m sorry, I can’t be bothered to read it all, but it does seem to me that many of these issues can be resolved by recognizing that
1) divorce is a conflict, a war of sorts,
2) when at war, it is a characteristic of the human animal, male or female, to use whatever advantage they might have and
3) women have the advantage in the family courts.
Result: women preferentially beat up on men in family courts.
There is no need to condemn women, only to recognize that they have an overriding advantage and some/many (but not all) will know no restraint when it comes to using it. There is nothing in the female psyche which makes them any more dangerous in this sense than there is in the male. (Cue the arguments about men being more honorable than women. Rot. Good behavior is a matter of education. Women can be educated into it just as well as men can.)
February 27th, 2007 at 1:14 pm
we men are victimized by looking for a good woman in the woman’s movement.
As tasmaw takes exception to the use of the term “marriage strike”, I’m going to take exception to the use of the word “victimized.” I believe there is a subtle , but critical, distinction to be made here.
I have been “burned” many times, but I am not a “victim” because I refuse to accept that role and make that part of my identity. When something bad happens to me, the first thing I do is start looking for causes and seek power and control over my own life so that I can prevent it from happening again. Cause and effect – I cannot dictate the effects, but I can affect the causes.
I believe that no one can “make you a victim” – that taking on that belief about oneself requires a person’s own complicity in it.
If someone punches me in the face, or knocks me down, I am only a “victim” if I lie there and don’t get up. If I come up swinging and break that person’s nose, then I am not a “victim”, I am “pissed off.”
Let me illustrate what I mean with an example from my personal experience.
Years ago, I was having dinner with a good buddy of mine and his ex-wife with whom he had started having an affair about 7 years into her 2nd marriage and about 10 years after their divorce. (follow all that?) He wanted to “win her back” and she was stringing him along hinting that might be possible, while she used him as a “Captain Free-Therapist” to listen to her constant whining about how her current husband didn’t want her sexually. (still with me?) I found it very annoying that she would focus so much on the man who didn’t want her in the presence of a man who so obviously did (not me, fergawd’s sake, my buddy), but I have generally found that few people are very appreciative of someone else’s efforts to prevent them from screwing up their own lives.
The topic turned to certain “political differences” this woman had with her current husband. I asked her for an example and she responded with “If a woman goes into a bar, wearing sexy clothes and no panties, and later gets raped – did she ask for it?” It was truly enjoyable to be in a position where I could not care less what this woman thought of me, so I decided to have some fun and force her to admit that her position was idiotic.
I started out with “Are you really going to sit there and take the position that the woman’s choice of behavior and where she chose to behave that way had absolutely nothing to do with the consequences she later encountered? If a man would go into a poor section of town, and make a big display of waving around a wad of $100 bills, simply to lord over people the fact that he had something they wanted and didn’t have, and someone decided to take them from him, are you really going to claim that his actions had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with what happened to him afterward? Would you at least agree that she engaged in behavior that a person of average intelligence would regard as ‘high risk’ and if she had not taken that risk, her experiences would likely have been different?”
Evetually, I was able to force her to admit that yes, if the woman had chosen to act differently, then she most likely would have gotten different results.
However, she finished up lamely by saying “I still believe that a woman SHOULD be able to go anywhere she wants, wear anything she wants, do anything she wants, and not have anything bad happen to her!!” My buddy, of course, was sitting on the other side of the table agreeing with every word out of her mouth like a complete bobblehead. (and yes, I agree that most men are dumber than a sack full of hammers when it comes to dealing with women.)
Yes, this woman was a complete “victim” because she had the victim mentality which makes someone else responsible for every bad thing which happens to a woman. And, was actually offended by the non-PC suggestion that those who do not engage in high-risk behavior on a regular basis, on the average have fewer bad things happen to them than those who do.
If someone goes into a store leaving their car running and the keys in the ignition, and it gets stolen, they are not “a victim”, they are an idiot. I have never had that happen to me because I recogized that as “unwise, high-risk behavior” and have always taken reasonable measures to minimize my risks wherever possible.
I believe that the reason women tend to show more empathy toward men who are “victimized” is because the victim mentality is more ingrained in them. I often feel very sorry for guys who have been burned by family courts, but my empathy is tempered by the fact that they lived in the same culture I did, had the chance to see the same things I have seen, and still chose to engage in behavior which I consider “high risk” – ie. marriage and fatherhood in today’s culture.
I’m going to leave it up to god, and those who have eaten of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil to deal with how things “should” be, but aren’t. I live in a world where those who do the best job of assessing how things ARE and who take reasonable measures to protect themselves and do not choose to engage in unwise high-risk behavior generally have fewer bad things happen to them than those who don’t.
I have a pretty simple choice – I can do whatever I want to do, and wait around for the entire culture (and in fact, the entire nature of reality) to change so that I can do that and never have anything bad happen to me, and in the meantime be “victimized” by the fact that bad things do happen to me, or I can analyze my environment as objectively as possible, and take whatever measures are in my power to minimize my risks.
I know which one I choose, and that is why I have never been “victimized.” “Burned”, yes, but “victimized”, never!
February 27th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
So now I’m a woman hating abuser? Or I am representative of a woman hating abuser? I cannot own my anger Teri without also carrying that? Heck, I thought my post was mild in tone. Everything I said in my first post is true. Women have gone on a selfish binge of self-indulgence for privilege at the expense of men for decades and some of you are only now, after all this time, starting to wake up. If you are offended that I doubt the intelligence the mass of American women for doing this then you are not looking at my reasons for saying what I said. I want to keep those facts alive in the minds of the men viewing here. You are simply offended that I call American women stupid. Does calling the mass of American women selfish fit better for you? Would that not be “degrading to women” if that sounds closer to the truth for you? Or is that also offensive? If all you ever see in my posts is emotion then you are missing something. I do repeat certain themes but that is intentional. Older posts or older ideas are useful to new people showing up. My tone is done intentionally. My posts are not about me; my audience is the men. Posting on MND is largely not about my own journey, it is about keeping certain facts and ways of seeing things alive. I’m grateful for your own volunteer efforts and am surprised that one guy (me) can cause you to re-think why you are here.
February 27th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
Teri, no Woamn hating abusers here. They are out on the prowl somewhere else looking for the next victim.
We are here trying to save ourselves, other men, and maybe society. It does not mean that it is gong to happen, or even be by our means of understanding. We are trying.
You can agree, that what is the American Female Culture sold to all is not the solution here.
Teach your lady victims about Values and Character. They obviously bought the wrong product just like us.
February 27th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
Teri Stoddard wrote, “Not so fast Thurston. ; )
You wrote: “Women become selfish, destructive, and monetarily motivated when the divorce lawyer starts…†I’d agree with that, if you used the word ‘most,’ or ’some.’ ”
Ok, I see your point about using all inclusive terms. I do believe it is ’some’ or ‘most’ women when it comes to some of the many points listed above. BUT, it is ALL females in America that are bombarded with anti-male b.s. throughout their lives. That is of course unless they’ve been living under a rock.
“Most” (read: all)of the women with whom I have been in a relationship have a sense of entitlement, with a man as the giver. “Most” women with whom I have become aquainted think it’s okay that men are marginalized in “all” aspect of life these days. In education, the military, career opportunities, medine, etc., men are second class citizens and that is okey dokey with them.
Men and women are NOT equal. Men do some things better than women and women do some things better than men. But, I’ve yet to see an all-women firehouse or an all-female deck crew working on a flat-top (aircraft carrier). Why is that? You and I both know why but we’re not allowed to say it out loud.
The bottom line as far as a woman finding a suitable husband these days is this: Until the anti-male family court laws, DV laws, hiring and promotional practices, title IX, and all the other discriminatory practices, rules, laws, and quotas are abolished and the playing field made level, men are better off on their own.
“Most” women had nothing to do with the current policies that discriminate against “all” men, but what man (in the know) would take a chance at fatherhood or marriage?
February 27th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Why should it matter who we are as individuals or what we say? Surely the women you speak with can recognize that there is something wrong with a culture that so obviously favors women to the detriment of men and children?
Statistically, we know that women are more likely to abuse, neglect, and murder children, yet women can be virtually assured of child custody in a divorce/separation. Statistically, we know that female violence approximates male violence in domestic relationships yet billions are spent “protecting” women and next to nothing is spent protecting men. Statistically, we know that men die younger, die more often at work, kill themselves more often, die more often in wars, and on and on.
As you know, most men do not lead patriarchal lives of privilege, and I would hope that your efforts to convince other women that things need to change are not dependent on the rantings of a few angry men? Surely the preponderance of evidence should be enough to make the case that feminism has been and is harmful to men, women and children?
If any “eyes” are reading this…look at the facts and see the results of feminism. If that is not enough for you, then you’re hopeless. Go put on Oprah.
February 27th, 2007 at 11:49 am
Denis, you described SOME American women, not all American women. I’m an American woman. You’re sure as h*ll not describing me.
You guys are missing my point, or maybe (some of) you simply don’t care.
If you want or need MND to be your place to vent, fine, but it seems like you keep saying the same thing over and over. Some of you just degrade women. How is that helpful?
I have single moms in my Yahoo group who’ve really been scr*wed over by men. Some have been abandoned, others raped, and at least one has a child by rape. Some of those women are now men’s advocates. They got past the anger and rage. Is it too much to wish you could too?
Okay, now I’m going to pull a “chick thing;” I’m going to make this all about me. : )
I volunteer my time and skills almost every day to this cause. I’ve put much effort into getting the truth out there to counter what the rads say about you. It frustrates me to no end when I see you do something that makes my efforts less effective.
Please, always be aware of the eyes on your words. If I tell people that you guys are average guys who just happened to get scr*wed over, that you’re not woman-hating abusers, people believe me. If they then come to MND and see the things written here about women, they’ll think I lied and the rads were telling the truth.
Okay, it’s not really about me. It’s still all about you guys.
I give up.
February 27th, 2007 at 11:27 am
Thank you Teri.
It is our duty here to keep our experiences alive for the sake of younger men who are just beginning their lives. Our Sons and little borthers.
To help them evade the traps of pedestalism, materialism (trophy wives and Playboy), and the lies of Feminism which have protracted the plight of families in this nation, not repaired nor solved them.
My Lady friend has raised 3 children, 2 alone with her family, one with the childs father who rejected the child through his gestation, all without seeing a single judge.
Her values? Work. Hard work and sacrifice.
Problem is I had to find a Black Woman to first ever see such attributes because of the materialistic society I grew up in. I had to turn off some of my programing to understand the solution that I needed. (And he problem was a woman I met in a “Spirit Filled” church)
Values and Character are the message. (Thank you Elder George)
Zed’s post sent my mind wanderng down the road that we men are victimized by looking for a good woman in the woman’s movement.
We have found here a great education on the fact that we were looking in the wrong place, because of the extreme that it actually is.
Since they have chewed a great portion of us up and spit us out, there are fewer men willing to take our place. The immediate market is beginning to dry up.
So the obvious solution will be women will find a good man in the men’s movement.
But they would first have to value Men, and believe in the horror of actual equality, whiuch will in reality be to the Right of the Center that will form in the next couple of years.
Then they will have to be understanding that the Man will not sign the Marriage License again. For that is surrendering of himself, his manhood, his control of his life to the State, the Courts, and the lawyers who plundered him easily in the past.
What woman with that power to destroy a man will not fall prey to the rule the “familiarity breeds contempt”?
My lady friend and I are hitting this hurdle now. The Female preacher (something that is a Biblical abomination which I will be springing on her shortly) telling her a man and a woman to be together MUST be Married. So, now we have to define marriage, and it will never have anything to do with the State in my life ever again.
Can she get over it? Perhaps she has seen enough of my pain to get over it, or get away from me. It would be insanity to go back under that system again.
Hell, it is insanity for any woman red, yellow, black, or white to love me with the swords of destruction over my head, not to mention that I can provide nothing materially.
The values obviously have to shift for there to be marriage. Love has to be a spiritual thing transcendent of things, character.
Marriage as an institution of State has failed. The State has been coopted to destroy it for the parties who sought its destruction. They have been well remunerated, some Judges in Off Shore Trusts.
The Liberal ideal of Separation of Church and State is about to become a reality.
All despite the great strides Feminism has made, women, any woman at all, persist in the antithetical desire to be one with a man!
That alone states that the ultimate and true purpose of the leadership of Feminism, which is the extreme, has failed, and thus the whole convoluted notion has failed.
It was a distraction, a folly, and millions have suffered for it.
Marriage will not cease to exist as the Right worries. It will just not be in a legal statist form.
As the MRM develops further we will be the party of control, who care the least (for the sake of our souls and lives), and we will redefne the patriarchy, and teach ourselves how to identify feminist thought and ideas, and root them out of our value system.
Women who seek the antural fulfillment of nurturing (not merely wanting) children will come to US, for our approval and protection, because we will offer sanity over the present system. (The reason White Females are flocking to islam in Europe.)
Meanwhile, these women looking for men to marry will have to redefine what marriage is to them.
If they are looking for a prisoner, as so many of us here have and continue to be even though divorced, we will be holding the line at this extreme end to warn the young men that THIS, US, OUR experience, can happen to any of them too.
On one extrme: Women looking for a whipping boy and prisoner deserve to not find one. Nor more than a man looking for property should find one of our daughters.
On the other extreme: Women looking for a real man and a real marriage are not going to find one from the decades of mangina crops raised by this infected society. Anymore than our Sons will find a real woman out of the narsicitic, materialistic, feminist culture our Daughters have been programed into.
It is wrong to send innocent people into known circumstances without proper skills and equipment. They will fail and lose heart, or at the worst die (4/1 sucide ratio divorced Men/Women). These are our Sons and little brothers.
We must hold the extreme on this side so that the center leans back to something actually closer to reality.
Women who want a real Man will in great numbers abandon feminism as I have already seen, and go to the center, as at least a modicum os self-interest will be maintained in them as individuals.
We will either shift this center more to our side and reality, or what was American Culture will be replaced by the illegal immigrants who do not fall prey to the Family Court System, for fear of deportation, and the Ranks of Islam which will soon be pressing for power and domination over this sick society.
February 27th, 2007 at 11:18 am
“…every woman on Earth is responsible for feminism and all the destruction it’s caused!†Give me a freaking break.”
Give me a freaking break. I did not say “every woman on Earth”….I said AMERICAN women.
If this bothers you too bad. Every freaking day I see misandry and double standards all around me. It’s all “men bad-women good”. And your offended by my generalization? I’m one guy that you don’t have to listen too. I HAVE to listen to the misandry and double standards because it’s everywhere AND put up with it while living my life in many institutionalized ways. You don’t. I agree that the men in power who helped bring this about are much to blame as well. Many are politicians. But they are doing what all politicians do: they respond to the most vocal and demanding. And women have been yelling and demanding non-stop for 40 years. And you’re offended on behalf of American women because of what I say? I’m one guy who is doing some yelling and demanding versus millions of women going back decades. Evertime a guy does that a woman has to come along and preach. After 40 years of this bs you expect me to play nice just because you or any other woman is “offended”? Get real.
February 27th, 2007 at 10:41 am
From my experience it is the “average, generic” person whom does not care about the injustices heaped upon men. Men seem to be as disinterested as women when it comes to the destruction of the Father/child relationship; domestic violence, work place discrimination, etc. I wonder why so many here seem to hold women responsible for this mess, but not men?
Who knows for sure, but when I was divorcing if someone came up to me and offered me full custody and control of my children; a weekly unearned paycheck; and most of the marital assets, I probably would have taken the deal without blinking an eye. Perhaps I would have been better than that, but at such an emotionally charged time, I may have disregarded what I know to be the right decision and gone with the easy decision?
I think it is misguided to focus so much attention on the role of women in the current state of affairs. Yes, women have been complicit in the advancement of feminist doctrine, but who really has had the power and opened the doors? I believe that men are at least equally to blame and turning things around will require acknowledgement that men have acted and continue to act just as badly as women.
When I discuss the problems of a feminist dominated system, generally I get more empathy from women than men (when the cause gets empathy at all). I don’t understand why we are holding women to a higher degree of responsibility for this horror show than we hold men? Steveno is an extreme example, but I think his blase attitude about the pain and suffering of men is not so rare and is as likely to be held by men as it is by women.
February 27th, 2007 at 9:33 am
“Frankly, I don’t really understand why you keep saying your liberal without expressing in what way your arguments represent liberal values.”
Define “liberal values” femikook…Or do you mean YOUR liberal values…. uhuh, I thought so.
Isn’t it time for you to take your estrogen shots or something? You do realise that you can’t miss them less your transformation not work….
TMOTS
February 27th, 2007 at 9:24 am
Teri: I don’t mind anything written here, except the attacks on women in general.
You guys have very strong feelings about feminists and your exes. Sometimes the things you write sound like you’re describing them, not the average woman.
amfortas: Most women are average women.
It is the average woman who has lost the trust of men.
The average woman who has done nothing to aid men but every small, additive, scornful, demeaning, disrespectful, gratuitously nasty thing to gleefully undermine them.
On the one hand, there really is no such thing as “the average woman”, any more than there is such a thing as “the average man.” The “average American couple” of the 1960s or so had 2.2 children. Anyone ever met anyone who had exactly 2.2 children? Every individual person we deal with is just that – an individual.
But, every person also has characteristics which allow them to be grouped with other individuals with similar characteristics and certain generalizations made about them which have some degree of predictive value. For example, I could make the statement “People with red hair sunburn more easily than people with dark hair.” Now of course someone who wished to refute that statement could find a redhead with lots of melanin in their skin and someone with black hair and very white skin and throw that in my face as though it completely invalidates my previous statement. It does not, and in fact all it does is give the impression that the person is actively resisting the point I’m trying to make with the original statement. If I put 100 redheads chosen at random from the population as whole and 100 brunettes chosen at random from the population as whole in the sun for 8 hours, there are going to be more cases of severe sunburn among the redheads, due to the overall coloration pattern which goes with red hair, than there will be among the brunettes.
MOSTmen form their impressions about the “average” (generic) woman from the “average” of their interactions with women. A man whose interactions, on the average, are positive, will hold a generally positive view of women. A man whose interactions are, on the average, negative, will end up with a generally negative view toward women.
More and more men are forming increasingly negative opinions of women, because their interactions with them have been, on the average, more negative than positive.
There, is that “qualified” enough to suit everyone?
I have observed exactly the same thing which amfortas has – “The “average” (generic) woman who has done nothing to aid men but every small, additive, scornful, demeaning, disrespectful, gratuitously nasty thing to gleefully undermine them.”
When I take the “average” of all my interactions over the years with “average” (generic) women, they have a very shallow, contemptous, view of men; dismiss men’s needs and feelings as being totally insignificant; and are quite focussed on their own needs and feelings of the moment. And, when called on that by a man, the “average” (generic) woman has a ready excuse or rationalization.
Now, women (insert obligatory “on the average”) seem to have no problem with anyone who makes generalizations about their sex which are positive – “women are nurturers”, “women are better communicators”, “a woman would never lie about a thing like rape” and I have never seen a woman stepping up to challenge that. It is only when a man makes a statement to challenge that particular generalization that women (insert obligatory “on the average”) immediately rise up to defend generic womanhood and inform the man that “not all women are like that.” So their objections when men “genralize” come across as self-serving hypocrisy – “it’s great to make positive generalizations about women which benefit us (me) but it is an awful thing when you icky men do it! (so there!)”
And, it is that characteristic by itself which gives the impression that ALLwomen are in collusion to make sure his point does not get heard.
As more and more men have this experience, the “average” man begins to get the impression that the “average” (generic) woman cares only about herself and how things affect her. The more times he gets silenced trying to make his point, the stronger that impression gets.
The entire structure of this article, from the title onward, reinforces that impression – “Can’t find a husband, start having a little concern and care for men. Go to a convention of divorced dads and the pickings might be very good for you.” Whether it is conscious or unconcious, even this “average” (generic) woman author is appealing purely to women’s selfish interests – finding a husband – in order to get her point across.
Like I said, I have no problem with that. If “average” (generic) women were going to wake up to the severity and magnitude of the problems, they would have done it years ago and it would not take two years to “drill it into their heads.”
The “average” (generic) woman will wake up to how bad things have gotten when they start to directly affect her – when she can no longer get what she wants. Then and only then will the “average” (generic) woman see the situation as a problem which needs to be addressed.
Unfortunately for the “average” (generic) woman, the very conditons which will bring about her deprivation are a generalized alienation of men from her (the “average” generic woman). Few men who have reached this point of alienation are likely to be motivated to spend two years drilling into these women’s heads an understanding of how and why things have gotten so bad, and the “average” (generic) woman’s role in all this.
It will no doubt surprise the “average” (generic) woman that her recent (and labor intensive on the part of men) enlightenment or epiphany does not immediate produce a red carpet being rolled out on her behalf, and trophies and kudos passed out for finally wising up and becoming slightly less self-centered and toxic (as a result) than the rest of the “average” (generic) women out there.
There is a definite divergence among men who identify themselves as “MRAs” – between those who hold to the belief that they need “average” (generic) women to help them achieve their goals, and those who are tired of waiting for women to wake up and don’t have the patience to spend two more years drilling it into their heads.
The total disregard which “average” (generic) women have shown for men, their feelings, and their needs for past 30-40 years has destroyed a huge reserve of generalized goodwill toward the “average” (generic) woman which the “average” (generic) man used to have. Just as the “average” (generic) woman has tended to overspend her income and borrow on her (monetary) credit cards, the “average” (generic) woman has also emptied out her “emotional” bank account and maxed out her credit line. For a lot of “average” (generic) men, it has become a “pay as you go” situation.
Sorry, grrls, no you don’t get your credit line extended for suddenly waking up to the fact that 40% of the children in the culture are now fatherless. If you only figured out that your house was on fire when 40% of it had already burned down, all that indicates is that you were not very smart and weren’t paying attention.
So, as I said before “Can’t find a husband?” – good. When the number of “average” (generic) women who can’t reaches a certain critical mass, then perhaps the “average” (generic) woman will be motivated by self interest to try to figure out why that is the case, and actually start doing something about it – like speaking up against other “average” (generic) women when they bash men or act stupidly or selfishly in everday interactions and conversations.
February 27th, 2007 at 6:44 am
Looking for a date, Stephonie?
February 27th, 2007 at 4:48 am
Teri – I’m really curious in what way you consider yourself liberal? Do you, for example, support gay marriage? That’s an equality issue.
The reason I ask is because while you SAY you are liberal, you certainly do not act like one. I do not know of a single prominant liberal, or even a not-so-prominant liberal (except perhaps for you), who devotes their time and energy to defeating modern feminism. I mean, most liberals don’t consider feminism to be the root cause of problems in this world. Liberals tend to be far more concerned with the war in Iraq, with poverty, with intolerance, and with civil liberties, than they do “child custody battle madness.” In general, it’s conservatives who cite the perennial “decline in moral values” mantra everytime somebody sneazes. Liberals view the past, generally, as far more immoral than the present.
I’m concerned about our children too, but being married is not the solution to all the world’s problems. In India they have really low divorce rates, but their standard of living is quite low and children are far more likely to die of malnutrition than they are of doing poor in baseball cause daddy wasn’t around.
Frankly, I don’t really understand why you keep saying your liberal without expressing in what way your arguments represent liberal values. Perhaps that’s an idea for your next article.
February 27th, 2007 at 3:13 am
Teri, my ex WAS an average woman. She was only extraordinary in my eyes. Most women are average women.
It is the average woman who has lost the trust of men.
The average woman who has done nothing to aid men but every small, additive, scornful, demeaning, disrespectful, gratuitously nasty thing to gleefully undermine them.
February 27th, 2007 at 2:55 am
Thurston, I don’t have a problem with your comments.
I don’t mind anything written here, except the attacks on women in general.
You guys have very strong feelings about feminists and your exes. Sometimes the things you write sound like you’re describing them, not the average woman.
So far on the site where the article was first published, there haven’t been any negative comments. The people commenting are probably liberals, agreeing with my article. And I’ve been told for four years that liberals don’t care about fathers.
February 27th, 2007 at 2:50 am
I have to add. I agree with Teri about the lack of qulaifiers. It is ’some’,'many’, most’ rather than the all-inclusive ‘women’. I won’t hubristically intellectualise it with ‘man’s conceptualisation skill’ as some, many, men couldn’t conceptualise their way out of a paper bag. But, Teri, I have had to put up with women – every woman I have ever met – using all-inclusives about men, most of the time, ignoring the reality of me, personally, as an individual. Yes, it hurts.
However that small pain is minor compared to when I lost my children, my home, my wealth and the woman I loved. These are real, not simply words.
It is also a wasted effort pointing out to ‘most’ women that their all-inclusiveness is hurtful, unfair and innacurate. They simply say ‘men deserve it’. (not even qualified with ’some’)
This too hurts. So when a man here says the same, in effect, that women deserve it, maybe it is unfair but the same sauce that we gooses have had spread on us for decades. Its the gander’s turn.
The betrayal by the woman you love, the one for whom all your efforts were directed, is the greatest hurt of all. The hurtful words of other women, in their eagerness to be part of the great sisterhood, may be individually less severe but the effect is so widespread and have sank into the pores of society.
The pain that men feel as they see their societies falter and fail is horrifying. It is excusable for men, in my opinion, to be sometimes forgetful to use the qualifyer when talking of women. It is a small matter.
If women who trawl their way onto MND see words they don’t like, all I can say is ‘tough’. ‘Most’ women hold the view that men do not express their emotions enough. Here we are, expressing away, and ’some’ women still complain. Tough. If they are put off that easily but such small points then they are hardly going to respond favourably to the harder ones.
You, Teri, as I have said, have my respect and that of many here. But even I don’t push my luck too far when I have a monk on.
February 27th, 2007 at 2:23 am
Terri,
After serious thought and consideration of my words and that of my brothers, I must remain resolute in my position and my words.
I cannot retract in any manner that which you object to me describing even in justifiably general terms.
I have heard such things and worse against men for decades now and see it on the TV I rarely watch.
Woman’s primary need is security.
This cannot be disputed.
Lawyer holds the promise of money, woman sees money as equaling security and then does everything he says because the lawyer said it is OK.
This is the evidence of a twisted character and Value System.
Materialistic society is playing out this to the maximum extent, just as it is the Masculine motivation to reproduce (i.e. the pleasure experienced in the act).
As I have learned from Elder George, even us men here are having to shift out of the feminist value system we were educated and born into. I know I have had to. And part of that is an understanding of not only where I was wrong, but the wrong motivations of the American Feminine Mind.
This means that both groups are going to have to change in order for family to thrive again.
Men are going to have to be men, lead, and exclude feminist ideals from the deliberative process. That means not excluding women from decisions, but feminist/materialistic ideas, to reach to the truly spiritual and righteous conclusion, avoiding the satiation of the temporal.
The only place where I could have been wrong in my prior message was in blaming the Divorce Attorneys for exploiting the woman’s primary need for security.
I was wrong.
For in order for a woman to be so exploited she must first have a character flaw of materialistic selfishness, a corrupt value system that makes her leave a man who she made vows to, because of poorer, or hard times.
That is a corrupt value system of the woman that is looking for the bigger better deal (materialism).
That is what my brothers, who are not as appreciative as you would like, are talking about.
I know Teri that you agree with me that there is no sense bringing the two major parties in this mess together until there is an alteration of the Value System of Both Parties.
The only woman I found who never went down the road of being seduced by the lawyers and the system was the one woman I met who did not go to any court regarding her child, to become its tool.
This is also the woman who said to me upon my report of my son telling me he does not want to talk to me responded, “No son of mine would ever be allowed to talk to his father that way, not in my presence, not in my house, not ever.†(Holy Value System at Work Batman!)
After writing and reading this message in prior forms I see the error of my way. The fact is that the system is not the cause of anything but the revelation of the TRUE character and nature of the women in this country and how they view and value men (or not).
The tragedy here is that as much as any of us tries to bring women to our cause by marketing us as “OK”, that reason is insufficient.
It will not work because we are not OK, we are in pain agony, incarcerated, driven from the most profound experience of belonging that we can have on earth, we are devastated.
The fact is that women in this country are too selfish to ever care. Like the Bible describing the wicked woman, in that she tears down her own house or the woman asking Solomon to slice the Baby in dispute in half, American women have done precisely that, and this is speaking for the men who loved and gave all only to be defeated by materialism and feminism being the value system of the women they fathered children with. (The others, the small percentage, the abusers and philanderers, they are not part of us here.)
What Feminist American women do not understand is that they destroyed the marital home, which was no consequence to them, and think they get a new home that is all their own.
Not so, because there are the children. And they know they cannot raise the children alone.
Even the research is coming out over and over again, and shouted down by the people who tout the value of scientific research.
Elder George is right. It is a complete shift of a Value System, away from materialism, and towards the sacrifices that real life requires that will bring thriving families back to the norm in America.
I challenge the Feminazi’s/Feministas, to show us truly how they value men if the media, and the results and stats from Family courts all over the country, do not represent the market value of a man in this society.
I do not think that they can show value to men while they espouse their rhetoric, not until as one poster here says, THEY HAVE EVERYTHING. Only then will they take the time to define what a man is and his value.
There is one way to women right now, and it is their children.
Continually press the stats on DV, Women killing their children, and the effects of fatherlessness has on children, because women are convinced that they do not need men. At least that is what their leadership has them saying all the time, yet buying magazines on how to get one.
See the dichotomy here?
The hypocrisy?
The denial?
The delusion?
And people wonder why men rail against the sociopathic women of this nation?
When will they decide that men are of value, to have one you have to be honest, and you have to keep your word?
Women in the Feminist movement cannot, even be honset, because the above points show they cannot even be honest with themselves.
In the face of such denial and sociopathy women cannot see that they should be coming to our side because the pendulum of justice has swung so far to one side that people are victimized not for anything that they have done, but because of what they are. In fact, why would we want such insane people on our side.
Women are going to have two ways to on this problem:
1. Change the Value System rejecting the Family Courts, Lawyers, alimony, child support, not driving their children’s father away, Value Men and give headship and control; or;
2. Go for the terrorism of the courts in exchange for empty promises of support and accept the higher risks of raising a criminal and burying their babies or visiting them in prison.
Women should be rushing to this side with these men here because they want their children to not become more susceptible to crime and diseased bodies and minds because of the loss of fathers.
That statistic alone points out something about Father knowing best, how he helps a child integrate into her environment, nurturing Ability in the face of Challenge that is real life.
Only when Men are Valued for something beyond sex and money (something that is now impossible because we are facing the creation of the second generation of divorce in America who does not value fathers because so many do not know what one is), will there be any motivation for women to reject the stereotype that THEY are ALREADY and PRESENTLY projecting through the Family Court System at Fathers, an action that you condemn me for throwing back at women.
You are a Grandmother Teri, you know it takes two. And remember, we have only gotten to this conversation because of the growing Men’s Marriage Strike (as you penned). So, after over 30 years of war on Men, what does logic dictate will be found at a place such as this?
Elder George has me stuck on Values and Character, and the fact that the system which is on its second generation of training has hatched this mess. We men must lead, we must change BACK to what we were meant to be.
Strangely…chicks dig it!
February 27th, 2007 at 2:02 am
If it is any consolation Teri, I was as clueless as you for over 3 decades. Not until my divorce did I realize the full implications of modern day feminism.
You couldn’t tell it from many posters here, but in my dealings with newly divorced Fathers reeling from what has happened to them and their children, the overwhelming sentiment is they can’t believe the system functions as it does. I certainly do not hold women to a higher standard of awareness than I hold myself and others.
Even with some awareness, the destruction wrought by feminism still can’t be fully grasped by those without personal experience. I was discussing paternity fraud with my brother a few weeks ago. During our conversation he said to me that if he didn’t know me better, he would think I was a radical nutcase. He simply couldn’t believe what I was telling him. In some ways, I think he couldn’t bear to hear the truth.
Naah, I don’t blame you or any other person who was at one time ignorant. I was a member of that club. I save my animus for those that are fully aware of the damage done to men and children and support the system anyway. Steveno comes to mind right about now.
February 27th, 2007 at 1:04 am
I’ve seen this problem with missing qualifiers such as ’some’ or ‘many’ come up frequently in discussions of this sort. It’s a sex difference thing.
Men are much more prone to abstract thinking, and when you do it all the time, the qualifiers are simply a given and therefore not needed because they’re implied and assumed that it’s known they’re there, since one is typically dealing with other men in the abstraction biz. In other words, leaving them out is an efficiency measure because men know full well there’s a sense in which all generalizations are lies. (Ok, most men.) Only if one is writing a legal brief would one be careful to put in all the needed qualifiers which could prevent any possible misinterpretation.
On the other hand, I have noticed that when one uses the word ‘women’, any within earshot will think you’re talking about her, not distinguishing between the general and the particular. So if I say “well, women don’t do yardwork or clean leaves out of the gutters”, there’s always one who will read an implied ‘all’ and make a big deal about how she spends so much time at Home Despot, yada, yada, so I’m obviously wrong, all the while she’s totally missing the larger general (and rather obvious) truth. This is what MRA’s mean when they say women are self-centered. And it’s nothing new. I recently read a hundred year-old anti-suffrage book which went on at some length about women’s limited sphere of awareness (it was written by a man).
One especially sees this myopia in the (female) explanations for the man shortage. Whether it’s being commitment-phobic, a Peter Pan who ‘refuses to grow up’, being intimidated by yada yada, being a momma’s boy, or just being socially inept, all the explanations boil down to some individual male pathology. There is virtually no awareness of the abstraction known as the social fabric, which includes laws, ‘the system’, and all the rest of the things that men (especially around here) are acutely aware of.
Which is why it doesn’t matter that any one woman may not divorce a guy, steal his kids, hold them hostage for extortionary payments, etc. but that she could do so. The state will not enforce the marriage contract, but will assist her in unilaterally breaking its terms. The divorce rate for women who first marry at age 24 or above is about 25%, so the odds for disaster are worse than Russian Roulette with the standard six-shooter. As others have said, one would have to be a stupid fool to even show up at the game, much less get involved in any play. So it’s not just marriage and kids, because a guy can ‘get lucky’ on the first date and still end up paying out $100k over eighteen years because marriage is now legally little more than notorized dating, so dating is not much different than marriage.
All the disincentives work against the men who would otherwise be most attractive to women, i.e., men who have something to lose, and therefore something to offer were the circumstances different. Be sure to point that out. The poorly named ‘marriage strike’ — it’s not like we have marriages to go to and are refusing to do so — is irrelevant so far as the men women don’t want is concerned.
Good luck on getting the word out. I’m not sure women have the ears to hear correctly, even though the modern double standard has it that they’re the better listeners.
February 26th, 2007 at 11:33 pm
Great article, Teri, though as I post above, it’s been going on a long time.
And given some of the posts here, you have a very thick skin! As amfortas points out, some of the posters here are very disrespectful. We all have mothers and aunts, and some of us have sisters and daughters. “American women” are not all cut from the same cloth!
February 26th, 2007 at 9:32 pm
Guys, it does no good to shove friends away. You (and I) may well have removed ourselves from the grip of ‘relationship’ but there is still a battle to be fought, so our sons and daughters can have a future, and we need the Women’s Battalion out there in front. Teri is a battalion commander and has my respect. She is trying to get the numers up. Teri fights for truth. We do not ask Teri to ‘pimp’ for us and I find that a very disrespectful thing to say to a friend.
February 26th, 2007 at 9:21 pm
Not so fast Thurston. ; )
You wrote: “Women become selfish, destructive, and monetarily motivated when the divorce lawyer starts…” I’d agree with that, if you used the word ‘most,’ or ’some.’
You wrote that the other posters were correct about women. The problem I have, is the overuse of the word ‘women’ to describe bad women and radical feminists.
How would you guys like it if I was still bitter towards my exes and wrote things about all men like you write about all women?
An earlier poster made a valuable observation. People come to MND to see what the Men’s Movement is all about. They’ve already been told by radical feminists that you guys are woman-hating abusers. Do ya think they’ll agree with the rads when they read this thread?
February 26th, 2007 at 9:10 pm
When I found myself in the fathers’ movement I saw lots of anti-feminism posts online and I didn’t understand. I didn’t believe them; I thought it couldn’t be true. In fact it took 1-2 years before I could believe what my mentors had been trying to drill into my head the entire time.
I really don’t mind you bashing my article today because men weren’t my target audience; I wrote it for the ladies. My goal was to educate women on the facts. I used the title as a hook and the ending to portray you guys as stellar men.
Now, please be nice so I won’t have to be a liar.
: )
Thanks, Teri, but we really don’t need you to pimp for us; at least some of us don’t.
Tasmaw hit the nail squarely on the head. The term “marriage strike” is nothing more than a catchy sound bite. There really has been a sea change in men’s attitudes toward women. One which will persist for decades to come.
What the men here have been trying to tell you is just how deeply, bitterly, and completely the public and private behavior of women toward men has alienated men from women in general. How many times have you been in a group and had some woman announce how “men think with their little heads, not their big ones” with smug looks of superiority on their faces? Men have been saying for years that all the man-bashing had to stop. Marc Rudov has written extensively about all the man-bashing in commercials.
Who is the target audience for this? Certainly not men. Within the past week I have gotten yet another of a constant stream of supposedly “joking” emails portraying men as stupid – “Collge courses for men – Filling ice trays 101.” Not long ago, I got one with such gems as “What do you call a man with half a brain? Answer “gifted.”
Oh, and of course there was the disclaimer to only forward it to men who could “stand a little heat.” When men have complained about this in the past, they are invariable either directly attacked with the intention of harassing them into silence, or told to “suck it up and take it like A MAN!”
It’s unfortunate for everyone that it took 2 years to “drill” (some would say “beat”) into your head what would seem to be obvious to anyone with even rudimentary social awareness. But, what you are seeing now is evidence of men getting completely fed up with women’s “It’s all about ME” attitude (and don’t feign innocence here, if you have not seen one of those T-shirts, posters, or coffee mugs, you have been living under a rock. One of the more popular magazines for women is simply titled “Self”)
A huge number of western men, or men in the “Anglosphere” as some are beginning to call it, are simply getting so sick of women that they are turning their backs on them completely. I’m sure this is great news to all those “strong, independent women who don’t NEEEYEEED no man”, but there also seem to be at least a few of them who are asking “where have all the good men gone” or “why are there no good men left?”
If you want a good reading on how an ever increasing number of men view women, you might take a look at “Diary of a Tired Black Man.” http://www.castlestudio.net/tbm/
The tag line pretty much says it all –
“Now It’s Black Men’s Turn to Exhale.”
Every day, fewer and fewer men are willing to expend the time and energy to try to “drill” into women’s heads what they can’t, or won’t, or whatever the reason, don’t believe. They are just saying “fine, now go away.” More and more men are seeking wives outside the Anglosphere, and no it isn’t because they are all “abusers” looking for some “submissive doormat” that they can “keep chained to the stove, barefoot and pregnant.” They are simply looking for women who have not forgotten what it is like to actually be feminine, and not compete with their supposed mates 24 hours per day. And, of course, American women, like American cars, do not stand up well under comparison to the other models, so they arrange to get IMBRA passed on the premise that all men are abusers and the only reason they could possibly not want a Western Entitlement “Princess” is because they just want to “abuse” her freely and have someone they can control.
It isn’t men who have been griping for the past 30 years that women were “afraid of committment.”
You don’t have to pimp for me, Teri. I really am not a nice man any more. The last time I dated an American woman was in 1995 and it turned out to be one of the most obnoxious experiences of my life. I’m quite happy to let all the single women of my generation go the way of Maureen Dowd, and reflect into their martini glasses “Are Men Necessary?”
Obviously, I’m not, and neither are they. I’m perfectly happy to them repeat their most fervent prayer “Give us this day our daily Oprah, and forgive us our gossip magazines, as we forgive Andrea Yates.”
February 26th, 2007 at 8:59 pm
Nice Try Teri, but the men have a point.
Women become selfish, destructive, and monetarily motivated when the divorce lawyer starts feeding them a story line to bring to the judge.
The men are right. The lawyers treat the women as children and the court caters because, well ntob ecause they are women, but because there is a monetary interest in plundering the man.
He is good for both support on the outside and prison labor on the inside. Either way the Judge gets paid and lawyers bring a case load and the Court gets matching federal grant money.
Women are occasionally plundered, but only when the monetary motivation is absolutely irresistible!
The point? The Problem is the System, the leeching Attorneys that form the women to their case structure that the judge has to know that there is no possiblity that they are all cookie cut like they are being presented, to lawyers who sell men the bill of goods that there is hope that they can get justice by spending money on the a lawyer.
Women are too maliable to being sold victimhood by monetarily motivated attorneys. As the process goes along they find that they have said such harsh things in their motions and briefs that they cannot withdraw them, so they become sociopaths believing the lies scripted for them, because they cannot face the truth of the monsters that they have become.
I am sorry Terri, the message to the ladies is A. Do not feed the Sharks; B. Do not listen to the victimhood peddlers sell you victimhood like they used to sell children hidden abuse stories; and C. Be busy building your home, not tearing it down…what you do to one man any man knows you can do to him, unless he is a fool and such a man has it coming.
February 26th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
Thank you to those who left kind words. They’re appreciated.
Again I’m saddened by seeing, “women do this” “women do that” “every woman on Earth is responsible for feminism and all the destruction it’s caused!” Give me a freaking break.
: )
I first heard about feminism when I was 18-years-old. To me it meant equality. I didn’t give it another thought for decades.
When I found myself in the fathers’ movement I saw lots of anti-feminism posts online and I didn’t understand. I didn’t believe them; I thought it couldn’t be true. In fact it took 1-2 years before I could believe what my mentors had been trying to drill into my head the entire time.
If it took someone smack dab in the middle of the fathers’ movement over a year to believe feminism was hijacked by radicals, how can you expect the average woman, to not only know about it, but to stop it?
More than one of you wrote something like, “I knew women wouldn’t care until it started affecting them.” Guys… What women? It’s an article.
I really don’t mind you bashing my article today because men weren’t my target audience; I wrote it for the ladies. My goal was to educate women on the facts. I used the title as a hook and the ending to portray you guys as stellar men.
Now, please be nice so I won’t have to be a liar.
: )
February 26th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
I have to support the statement made by amfortas: Feminists made the bed where western womens are sleeping now. It is a single bed without much company.
Once upon a time, marriage was a goal for the man. Now, it is as alien than licking the poles of a 9-volt battery. We have learned that marriage was a finantial trap so we stay away from it.
February 26th, 2007 at 7:52 pm
Teri, you said,
“Today’s men are afraid of marriage and having kids.”
Let’s set the record straight on this little misconception. Men are not afraid of marriage, men are not afraid of children, men are not afraid of hard work and men will die to protect their family. What men are afraid of is this monster called the American woman and the system that supports her. That is what scares the hell out of men these days.
N.
February 26th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
I have to take issue with the term ‘marriage strike’. Ladies, there isn’t any patriarchy, there isn’t any union, most men don’t get time to talk to each other because they’re too busy trying to feed you and yours. (And it is you and yours according to the courts. We have lots of dogs in the fight, but no rights any more.)
What you’re looking at is a genuine sea change, a tide that once started, isn’t going to be stopped any decade soon. You and your lawyers have turned the law and policy against people who loved you. How long did it take until they didn’t love you any more? So you think it will ever change again in your lifetime?
Anyone foolish enough to become associated with women deserves the punishment they get.
February 26th, 2007 at 6:35 pm
amfortas, you are one eloquent sonofagun!
February 26th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
Men have been royally screwed all right and women in general are now feeling the pain as it spreads across society.
Teri does a service to all by telling the truth of the issue, just as many men do, in words which women will possibly listen to. There is no need or call to vent anger against Teri.
Feminism is not simply anti-male. It is anti humane. It is anti-life. It is a wicked, deliberate mind-heart-soul virus, and the responsibility for it is wholly owned by women. All women.
The sooner women wake up to the fact the better. Teri woke up many years ago and has been sounding the alarm loudly. Teri deserves praise, not anger.
It is women who need to get the antiseptic out and scrub out the filth that they have made. Until then, smart, intelligent men will refuse to believe that women have anything but their own self-interest at heart, even when, like Teri, they are good, wholesome and loving. It is the good women, like Teri who feel the pain ahead of the bimbos, the liars, the selfish, the theives.
NO woman can escape the lack of trust of men unfortunately. Women in general have destroyed that trust. They have smirked at every misandric joke, statement, sit-com and news article that villified men. They have inflicted pain on their own men and said ‘take it like a man’. They have added gratuitously to the hurt even when protesting that they love a man. It is a woman’s way to test a man’s resolve but unfortunately they have killed his love and trust.
Maybe some of the women who fight the MRA corner can put their minds to just how women will be able to win that trust back. Without it, even their good, kind words will not help them find a husband or a just society.
Good men have turned away and all that the women have left to play their games with are the blind, deaf and thick ones. Their constant complaint of ‘where are all the good men?’ is answered by ‘avoiding YOU’.
Currently society has all the image of a bombed city. Some, women, will have to do an awful lot of bulldozing just to clear the rubble of wrecked lives away before rebuilding can start. Dead men won’t be able to help.
But first they will have to go house to house with rifles in hand and clear out the femonazi snipers until they find the headquarters of feminism and turn the flamethrowers onto them.
Women will have to win a war against their own before men will trust them again.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
mirwalk said,: “this particular post seems off the mark to me. It kinda comes across that women need to start fixing things since men are not marrying them. Not so much that what they have done is wrong, but that we need to change it now since its starting to have consequences.”
I have maintained all along that women would only step up to the bar and become involved when they began to be affected and suffer the consequences. And, that doesn’t particularly bother me – I long ago accepted the fact that people will usually act purely on their own self-interest much if not most of the time.
My position is this – “Can’t find a husband?”, good, the marriage strike is working. But, any strike is not an end itself, and is not a means to punish the “other side.” All it is, is a means to force the other party to come to the table and bargain in good faith. If a few women become willing to do that, then a few men will benefit from it.
This part is an entirely different issue –
men have gotten royally screwed for a lot of this, and that means a lot of bad blood that needs to be reconciled.
And that bad blood will have to get reconciled and worked out one couple at a time, the same way the gender war has gotten as bloody as it has one divorce at a time. Any woman who takes on the task of trying to make a connection with a man who has been badly burned in a divorce certainly has her work cut out for her. She is going to have to give up her bitching about the position of the toilet seat, and who does how much housework, and probably her right to throw hissy fits if he doesn’t make her VD “speshul enough.”
And, y’know, any woman willing to do that is so far head and shoulders above the rest of American womanhood, who are still arguing about how big an engagement ring they should demand, that I’d be willing to give her a bit of credit for that and cut her a bit of slack. If she’s willing to roll up her sleeves and do a little honest work to clean up the mess she has sat back and watched happen, there is a chance that she might actually be worth having as a wife for some man.
For those guys still willing to marry an American woman, that is not a bad thing.
February 26th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
SD, thank you. The biggest problem on this site, it seems, is that if you don’t agree 100% with the poster, you are attacked and dismissed! The biggest difference in the MRM and the feminists, is that they have simple marching orders and follow them. Theyt don’t haggle over the small stuff, or even big PHILOSOPHICAL differences, but try to focus on OUTCOMES that they agree to.
For instance, I don’t agree with Elder George on some things, but we seem to want the same OUTCOME in many cases. So why argue verociuosly, and anger each other, and lose the things we have in common over some philosophical difference?
I’ve written this before: men need a unified message and talking points. Not continual philosophical debate ad nauseum or bitch sessions.
There are several key ones:
1) Suicide Rates (4 to 1) Why are men killing themselves? It’s an outrage!! (And finally, more importantly) LET’S FIX THE PROBLEM!
2)EQUAL PARENTING RIGHTS
3) Mothers kill more than fathers!!
etc.
I’m leaving work so I can’t go further. But you get my meaning. Until what I see as a continual bickering over details instead of focusing on agreeing and promoting a unified message, nothing will change.
February 26th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
Teri,
Today’s topic – supportive and nonsupportive women from Teri S who supports fathers with logic, passion and care…to the letter to the editor from a woman who thanks actors with her vagina for bashing men. (True story, coming up)
It’s odd to me that with women lining up locally and across the country for many events bashing men, that when a woman speaks up for men, some men take it badly.
I have been protesting one sided gender issues/feminism(s) for decades and it’s not just rare to see a woman sticking up for men in the press, it’s rare to hear a man do so.
So why do people react a little negatively because you didn’t write the piece as they would? (Which is what it seems to me.) There are millions of women angry with men, taught to be so. There are many men who are angry in return. That “bitchiness” that is part of hurt and anger creeps in from both camps. So much defensiveness.
What is for sure is that someone new might be checking out mensnewsdaily – could be someone young, male of female, that is clueless and needs to be pointed in the right direction. Maybe some men think what you are writing is patronizing to men, I see that in a couple of comments, but I am always happy with any woman writing in a supportive way of men in – war, work, sexual issues, marriage, child care. What I contine to see from women is the example here from the last newspaper:
Fort Bragg Advocite News “Bravo for ‘Monologues’ EDITOR – Ronnie Gilbert brought down the house at the Saturday, Feb 10, performance of “The Vagina Monologues” …Women of every description and attitude were perfectly represented by the actors…The atrocities against women, particulary at wartime, were poignantly addressed as were the severe consequences of domestic violence.
‘The Vagina Monologues’ brilliantly addressed the strengths and vulnerabilities of woman all over the world. I can’t stop laughing over the duck lips and “c” word. I think I’ll go out and purchase my own short skirt. That should make someone moan. My vagina and I thank the actors for an exceptionally entertaining and thought provoking evening.”
I read that and thought, show me your talking vagina, that would be “exceptionally entertainning and thought provoking” even if the rest of what she thought was the same old stuff. (I saw Mr Ed the talking horse and I would love to see a talking vagina too … wouldn’t you?)
What I see in towns and cities are women from smart to totally exhibitionistic airheads, who come out in mass for programs for women. But when women come out for men, they are ignored by the media or criticized by women and men. Why would anyone bother to criticize you if they thought what you said was too obvious, or too late… it might be obvoious to us, but not to the new lurkers on mensnews. When feminist messaged get pounded into our heads “Four million women battered, one every 15 seconds” we need to be as repetitive in return, and not gentle about it, as in “You lying bitches are poisoninng our children’s minds, it’s child abuse”
Biden and others ignore the “mens movement” because we are timid, or too small in numbers. We need every man and women we can get to help change laws. I wish, Teri, you lived in my town because there is no one here, man or women, that would protest the male bashing. I would love to see your words in our paper. For most, they would be stunningly new concepts.
We have two women running the paper and feminists guiding our schools when it comes to gender and supporting male bashing programs. We have a woman’s choir and Soroptimists supporting DV propagand, there is not one women here speaking up for men. Many women come out to support male bashing programs. With only one person speaking up, I come across as some sort of redneck that “just doesn’t get it” … and as the only person in town who EVER writes a letter, or op ed piece, protesting, … just once I would like to have a woman writing in, as a “sister” supportive of men, over ANY issue in The Fort Bragg Advocate News
I see the “sisterhood” exclude men and women who don’t agree with them. I can’t see why men would want to marginalize any effort you make to help men, and I am sure many men have said the same (More succinctly too – smile)
SD
February 26th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
For what it’s worth, I think it’s important to restrict blame to those actually responsible. The whole group called “women” is not responsible for the damage. That is, those girls who are growing up today or had nothing to do with the assault on males need not get saddled with any blame. The notion of “group blame” is a bloodthirsty feminist emotional tactic of the worst kind, so a wise person would best avoid it.
When you read or write words like “woman” or “man”, it is a good idea to say which ones you mean! While I fully blame the women who are responsible, which consists of very many, I choose not to go beyond that. I thought the article was excellent and accurate. But maybe instead of *repairing* marriage, it should be promoting *replacement* of “state-based marriage” with private marriage contracts? Why repeat the same mistake by trusting government to stay away from the hate-filled NOW people?
February 26th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
She made poor choices, she believed in her entitlement, her empowerment, her feminism, her strength, her independence….it was all a lie. Feminism has made the majority of American women losers in life. This feminist thinking goes beyond a lack of causal logic, its a lack of thinking about the many consequences that have occurred when rights are bestowed upon them. This is the heart of the myth of social engineering: that you can change gender and responsibility roles in society and expect everything else to remain constant.
Most women have no interest in finding a good man, just a good retirement plan. A classic case of “what women say vs. what women actually do”, She could get knocked up by any thug and have a child. What she’s looking for is someone to foot the bill to raise the child. Oh they do love these men, those untamed BadBoys that only they can tame, but these men usually do not stick around and enjoy raising their bastard offspring.
Women seem to treat any form of responsibility as a burning coal that she must immediately throw to someone else. Thus its impossible in their eyes for them to be responsible for the predicament they find themselves in. This is why so many damn women deserve to be alone. Women do their best to destroy men’s life with constant lies, accusations, false criticisms, refuse to listen to him, divorce for any reason, steal his money and treat him like a resource or an emotional punchbag…
A man’s level of maturity is not based on whether or not he’s taking care of you. A man’s maturity is based on strength, honor, dignity, integrity, and honesty. Men aren’t emotionally immature or afraid of commitment, they are cautious in the face of divorce, and indifferent in the face of modern day skankitude. You ran into Mr. Right decades ago. Instead of being receptive to him, you ignored him and focused on the bad boys. You took every chance to manipulate, hurt and use Mr. Right, he’s now very gun shy after being constantly shot at.
What makes a woman think men want an equal? they want a “woman” – the very thing most women have forgotten how to be. The younger woman that is smart enough to embrace, cherish, become a wife, mother and homemaker are the true winners in this life. Can you imagine what it will feel like for these feminist women to one day realize they’ve wasted their entire life? No amount of Prozac will fix it and all the tears in the world won’t drown the emptiness…..and it will be their own damn fault. She will spend the rest of her life slowly stewing in a harsh reality.
~Niceguys
February 26th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
Enforce the Peonage Law and solve the problem.
Why? Because a free society functions only when there is a Rule of Law. When some laws are ignored, particularly laws that protect freedom by putting the brakes on excess, then what we have is not Rule of Law. Just tyranny made to look like law.
That is what is destroying marriage as an institution, to the detriment of both men and women. Not two people of the same gender wanting to try it.
February 26th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
A smidgen of truth in your blog but the rest !!!
Some MRA’s see the need to give to women what women have been giving to them.
It’s just us being nice,sharing and caring.
As much as women try, they will never help the Men’s Movement as it will mean they have to relinquish half their selfish, women only priviledges.
But nice try.
This comment …by Denis
“The majority of American women lack the intelligence to…†“They are sheeple…†“They are self-centered…†“American women are by nature dishonest and mercenary.â€
If your offended by this statement of fact then I wonder what your motives are.
February 26th, 2007 at 3:13 pm
“On behalf of America’s women, “We’re offended.—
Good. Many things offend me too. People usually hear from me when that happens, and that includes “America’s women”.
“Please refrain from this type of hate-filled ranting on my blog.”
and…
“Until you see that individual women are not more responsible than individual men, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.”
If you consider this hate-filled, then you really don’t know me. Read my post again. The majority of women have blindly gone along with what has seemed like a really really good deal with only upsides for them. They never considered the down sides for men and you are an example of one who took 40 years to get a clue. In my opinion whenever any group follows a script blindly for 40 years and only starts reconsidering the merits of the script when THEY start paying a price then that group shows a lack of intelligence. With any woman in America I simply have to wait long enough for a circumstance for her to show her true nature. If you find that as hatred then I proudly say “guilty”.
February 26th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Teri, like the sentiment and the article a bit. Denis is a little on the harsh side, I will admit, but I think he has a good point. There are a few women like yourself who have started apologizing and trying to change things, for that I am appreciative. However, men have gotten royally screwed for a lot of this, and that means a lot of bad blood that needs to be reconciled.
If some big feminists could actually give a heartfelt apology for what they have screwed up, and fix the junk they have forced down our throats, then you would see some nice change. However, for a lot of guys, its too little too late.
I have read a lot of your articles on MND and you are one of the good women out there. However, this particular post seems off the mark to me. It kinda comes across that women need to start fixing things since men are not marrying them. Not so much that what they have done is wrong, but that we need to change it now since its starting to have consequences.
I know that is not what you probably meant by the article, its just kinda the way it comes across to me.
February 26th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
Denis said: “The majority of American women lack the intelligence to…” “They are sheeple…” “They are self-centered…” “American women are by nature dishonest and mercenary.”
————————————
On behalf of America’s women, “We’re offended.”
Please refrain from this type of hate-filled ranting on my blog.
Until you see that individual women are not more responsible than individual men, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.
February 26th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
To Teri,
The reason radical feminists have taken over is because the nature of the feminine principle is to do things in the extreme. Once outside imits are removed from her a woman will do all things in extreme. To speak of moderate feminism is like believing that you can be mostly a virgin or only a little bit pregnant.
I do believe you mean well, but unlike zed, I did not like the aritcle, I found it to be condescending–be nice to those men, they are really good little boys.
Real men don’t have the government run their homes.
February 26th, 2007 at 2:07 pm
The majority of American women lack the intelligence to make the connection between men’s loss of interest in marriage and women generally, to how men have been treated all these many years. They are sheeple who cannot get beyond their OprahWinfreyization. They are self-centered like they always have been. Such minds are capable of believing they are strong and independent and superior to men yet are also perpetual victims at the same time. Women in America have no understanding of men, never have, and are arrogant to believe they have had all the answers at an early age. Marketing and advertisement agencies know this market, what appeals to them, and how to communicate to them, on a mass scale. Women in America have not woken up to the groundswell of male rage that is building. Neither has the government. Women at men’s right’s rally’s are likely to know their audience and to know what to tell them. American women are by nature dishonest and mercenary. I say let the whole country collapse. Every cell of this country has been infected with the virus. Let the women worry about the aftermath and what is in store for them as a result. To those women who have woken up, you are 40 years too late. You have stood silent for too long to earn my respect. Some women only now stand up because the writing is on the wall and they can see a price to be paid for a huge bill going back decades. Women will swing in whatever direction that benefits them the most. They always want to be on the side of the winning team. It appears for some women that the feminist movement has gone from the Profit Side to the Loss Side of the ledger.
American women are like ill-trained doctors who have misdiagnosed the sexes condition from the beginning and have prescribed the wrong remedies for 40 years. Nothing during these 40 years had caused them to call into question their diagnosis. There were too many advantages. Their diagnosis has set many men and women seething at each other over a wide range of issues. Because of your persistence these “remedies” have been seized upon and promoted by every institution as if gospel. If women expect men to be reasonable afterall of this then you are only showing your lack of intelligence once again.
February 26th, 2007 at 1:58 pm
I agree with Gonzman. Thanks for the nice article, Teri. I’ve ben asked numerous times to remarry, but I chose not to, specifically because the system is too gender biased against men.
February 26th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
Very good article.
Now all you have to do is let these women know, “It ain’t you – it’s the system.”
You give me a system that will look at me after a divorce as a full human being, that will bother to look for the truth, that will undo errors it makes in the process of uncovering the truth, and will actually punish wrongdoings by a woman – I may reconsider my position on marriage.
February 26th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
It’s very good to hear all this coming from a woman, but I wouldn’t marry an American woman no matter what she told me beforehand.
The woman we marry is never the woman we divorce. Even Dr. Phil, a woman kiss-ass says this. Women are real good at politically correct, especially when it serves their purpose.
Anyone who believes that women’s opinions won’t change when it becomes expedient for them to change them (like during a divorce and she has a boyfriend, making the presence of the ex an inconvenience), knowing that the government will stand four-square behind all her choices whether right or wrong, is largely responsible for the royal screwing he is going to get in most cases. This applies not only when women purposely screw their men in a divorce but also where the man’s lawyer rightly advises him that what he wants will be virtually impossible to attain because of the discriminatory attitudes of our family courts.
February 26th, 2007 at 11:46 am
Very nice, but please close the barn door since the horses have already run out.
February 26th, 2007 at 11:19 am
“radical feminists have taken over the movement;” ah, how bout the dykes run the show now just as many did early on. 50 extra pounds and a flannel shirt seems all that is necessary to lead this group.
February 26th, 2007 at 11:09 am
It’s just not worth it until the laws are changed. I stay very friendly with a few females,one with benefits but marriage is out of the question. Been there once already. Financial ruin, women seek men who can support them, harassment from an X who believes she is entitled to ruin anyone, Child support payments into retirement years.
FORGET IT !!! I also educate the young men whom I meet every chance I get.
Do the math. The F#@%ing your getting isn’t worth the F$%&ing your going to get.
February 26th, 2007 at 11:08 am
Great article, Teri!