politicians spoonfeeding women more and more entitlements for their vote is one of the reasons men in 1920 died 1 year earlier than women and now die on average 6 years earlier!!

spoon feeding entitlements to women is condescending to the true equality feminist..

but the new gender feminist isn’t about equality!! she’s about wanting more of everything, and will use her “feminist facts” to create hysteria to get them!!!!

If you guys don’t vote in this debate, the Estrogen Express will carry the day. Every American feminarcissist is voting in this poll!

For some reason I cannot play this video. But the mere statement about dems pandering and therefore etc. etc. is incredibly true! They take dead ideas, toss in the days buzzwords, and try andntry again.

If you cannot play the video, go to http://www.FoxNews.com. Click on ANY video. You will be prompted for your Internet-connection speed. After you submit that, you can watch my debate video.

Pander IS the correct term. If she regurgitates that equal pay bilge one more time, I’m gonna turn off the audi when she is talking!

“Generally speaking, feminists get together with other feminists because it is less expensive than seeing a therapist. ”

“Feminists are usually drawn together by an inability to deal with men. When they get together, whether in a small group or a large one, criticism of males tends to dominate the discourse. ”

“Let me give you an example. A few days after I made an appearance on The O’Reilly Factor – to talk about race and class, not gender – two feminists gathered outside my office to criticize some pro-life bumper stickers that were posted on my door. One feminist stated that it must be difficult to have to come to work every day on the same floor with such a sexist professor. The other said they should keep their voices low because I might overhear them. Since I was actually in my office at the time (with the door shut) I did overhear them. ”

“Despite the fact that the conversation began with one feminist trying to sooth another, they soon worked themselves into a frenzy. The mere repetition of words such as “patriarchal,” phallocentric,” and “male-dominated” has an effect like the one described in George Orwell’s 1984. If you want to see the “two minutes hate” in practice just attend an annual “Take Back the Night” march or “The Vagina Monologues.”

“Regardless of whether it is a gathering of two, two hundred, or two thousand feminists, the dynamics are always the same. And those dynamics make it hard to take feminism seriously.”

“Most feminists don’t really want equality.”

“One good example of this phenomenon comes from a recent argument I had with one of the stars of The Vagina Monologues. She wrote me to complain about a column I published criticizing that infamous feminist play. She told me she was “offended” and “hurt” by my critique. I then asked her whether the flashing “vagina” sign in front of the school was offensive to the Greek Orthodox or Baptist churches located nearby. She responded by saying that she “didn’t give a sh*t” what they thought. It mattered very much that she was offended. It didn’t matter at all that she had offended others. (Take a moment to look up the word “sociopath” in the dictionary). ”

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MikeSAdams/2006/01/23/why_i_don’t_take_feminists_seriously

Other observations
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MikeSAdams/2006/01/25/why_i_dont_take_feminists_seriously,_part_ii

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MikeSAdams/2006/01/26/why_i_don’t_take_feminists_seriously,_part_iii

i voted at 8:55pm and rudov is ahead 52-48. i thought the fill in guy interrupted rudov too much. he also spoke over mark and that makes it difficult to finish a thought or make a cogent point. i don’t believe he did that with malice in mind, but thats how i saw it. perhaps rudov can clarify?

Donnieboy57,

Fortunately, as more people have watched the video and voted, I have rebounded from being behind at 76-24 to moving ahead at 55-45 (at the moment).

David Asman, the substitute host, tends to interrupt more than Neil Cavuto. Regardless, I made all of the points I wanted to make in that short timespan.

No matter the situation, Lis always will believe that women are the downtrodden. That’s why she is the perfect debating partner and why she exemplifies the fallacy and death of feminism.

I wholeheartedly support the equality of women. My problem is, most women don’t like equality because it requires making sacrifices, paying costs, and fulfilling obligations. Somebody forgot to mention THAT part of equality to them. Receiving only the benefits of equality exist only in a dream — or when eunuchs make it so for entitled princesses.

Watch Donny Deutsch’s The Big Idea on CNBC. It is loaded with female entrepreneurs who have become multimillionaires by creating and marketing great inventions. No complaining. No whining. No blaming. Just hard work and great results. THOSE are the women I admire. THOSE are the REAL feminists. All the others are a bunch of little girls in adult bodies.

Marc, I did not realize you posted here. I have been following your debates and voting, you are doing a phenominal job! I thought this topic muct have been picked specifically to give Lisa a leg up, because on concrete topics you have shredded her. This was a really shaky premise to begin with, which made it easier for her. Thank you for doing this show, and there are many of us who appreciate you bringing the issues out to the public.

I find it insulting as a woman that these feminists seem to think I am not capable of behaving like an adult and seem to think I need special privilages to compete with men or to handle tough situations. Bull. I am tired of feminists treating me like a child. I do not think they realize just how demeaning they are to their own gender.

Biscuit Queen,

Interesting name. Almost every week, the topic you see on Your World with Neil Cavuto is a topic I’ve chosen. I have a knack for knowing what stirs people. I don’t think this week’s topic was fuzzy at all. In fact, if it isn’t black-and-white, FNC won’t let me run with it.

Marc Rudov,
When my video did not work, I followed your instructions and went to Fox and watched O’Reilly talking points. Then I came back and still I would have to choose between various format. since I have Widows XL, what woud be the best format?

Vote? How? Where’s the link?

The Fox website is anything but user friendly.

Mark, I posted your request on a number of sites and forums and it should achieve some positive results….

—> these buttons don’t work, but you get the idea. Click down a full screen on the page ….http://www.foxnews.com/foxfan/ The voting box is in the right hand column.

They’re Back for Another Round

Is feminism dead? Lis Wiehl and Marc Rudov square off in this week’s “Your World” Showdown. Watch the video, then vote below!

VIEWER VOTE

Good job on the debate Marc.

Another victory for Marc, but then, we at MND understand the issues. It strikes me, Marc and all other MRAs would benefit from having a two or three word phrase to counter the ‘glass ceiling’ and ‘pay gap’ phrases, when speaking to lay audiences. Call it something like the pay choice gap, the work/life premium, or the commitment gap.

Can anyone else do any better?

‘The Glass ceiling’ is unusual, but memorable. It doesn’t mean anything in itself, but everyone now knows what the phrase means. It takes me about twenty or thirty words to explain the myths behind ‘the pay gap’ and I’d like to be able to do it in three words, then move on to talk about solutions, etc.

liz kept crying….” wait you guys, youre framing it wrong”..
feminists win when they keep the debate well within their framework!!!
they want to keep the debate well within their women-as-victim framework!!

wait marc. “YOURE FRAMING IT ALL WRONG” that really means the foundation of her hysteria is under attack…And she’s looking to change the direction of the debate, and quick!!

Tom of Covent Garden,

It is quite simple: I say there is no wage gap and no glass ceiling. People make their own limitations. Also, I say that women are so obsessed with glass because mirrors are made of glass.

Lis threw in her usual wage-gap nonsense in the end, when she was supposed to have the last word. When I heard her utter that nonsense, I interrupted her. It is sounding so old and tired — and wrong — after hearing it ad nauseam.

Scottkirk,

Yes, Lis told me and David Asman that we were framing our arguments incorrectly. Of course we were! We weren’t buying the feminist propaganda, and that makes us wrong.

tom of covent garden #17 – good call.

How about: “The Wage Gap Myth”?

(or… pay gap crap?)

Short, memorable phrases are key in soundbite land.

Warren Farrell has one… I think it’s the “lace curtain”.

When Lis and I debated the wage gap, I simply said that it doesn’t exist — an invention of feminists who can’t do math. I told Lis that, if she doesn’t make as much as a man, it’s her fault. Her head exploded.

Go to my Website to watch that debate.

Regarding velvet curtain, I believe Farrell’s term is lace curtain. I would never use a mild term like that because it doesn’t pique emotions.

The name The Biscuit Queen was inspired by LSBeene, an MRA from SYG and Mensactivism.org. We were joking around and he told me to shut up and get in the kitchen and make him some biscuits. So I thought I would get one up on him by claiming that as my handle-it has stuck. Oh, and I do love to cook, so it fit.

I did not realize that you got such a say in picking the topics. That is such an opportunity. How did you land this job, if you don’t mind me asking?

You are right, fuzzy is not the right word. I guess it was a more complicated issue, and it seems to me when you are looking at an audience who has never heard the word ‘misandry’ that to them this topic was much more broad and harder to get a grip on. We certainly can understand it better because we are aware of all the issues and the weaknesses of feminism. When the topic is one advertisement (the Trojan ad for example), it is easier for the average person to realize that there is a huge double standard. In these more complicated issues it is harder to dismiss so many assumptions (taught to us by years of feminism).

At some point you are correct in trying to put forward more comprehensive positions. You obviously have more faith in the intelligence (ie ability to not be a sheep) of the average American!

Oh, and the ‘glass cellar’ is a term for the majority of men working in dangerous and low end jobs such as garbage men and septic cleaners. The ‘lace curtain’ is popular term among MRAs to describe the female power base who seek to keep the truth about women’s power and men’s vulnerability.

‘Misandry’ is a great term which maybe would make a good topic for a debate, Marc. Ask why it is that the dictionary is skewed to women, by having a word for women-hating but not men-hating, and why the term patriarchy is skewed negatively in terms of power and control yet the term matriarchy, which has the same latin roots, is skewed positively in terms of peaceful cultures and simply a way of keeping track of geneology.

It appears that Marc is delivering yet another win vis a vis Lis, as the current results are Marc 68% – Lis 32% … pretty much in line with previous debate tallies.

I continue to disagree that Lis is the ideal debating partner, especially in light of the fact that none of the contests have been close in the voters’ opinions. (Though this could simply indicate that Marc’s supporters are more inclined to vote; or that feminists who would logically support Lis don’t have her on their radar yet…)

It was amusing to see Lis pull the “viagra” shame-and-blame schtick on Marc as a way of illustrating how women do not have equality in birth control! What? Women have over a dozen federally approved choices of birth control, have total control over the legal consequences of pregnancy, and a man has …. a silly rubber jimmy cap that’s far from reliable. (Perfect example of Lis’ femi-logic and femi-ethics.)

Since Marc gets to influence debate topics, this theoretical challenge might be worth a shot – (Biscuit Queen will recall this one from long ago on SYG, a forum from which I was banned for too assertively disputing the moderator’s attempts to impose his version of rhetorical ettiquette on posters, i.e. censorship-in-actual-practice…) –

(The proposed debate question):

NAME ONE SOCIALLY CONDONED (sanctioned, approved) DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICE AGAINST WOMEN IN CONTEMPORARY WESTERN CULTURE?

Note that this question goes straight to the heart of the feminist argument that we live in an institutionalized Patriarchy, where discrimination against women is pervasive, widely approved, and largely unopposed…

All Marc will need to do is cite existing laws, corporate policies, and federal spending via VAWA etc. to contest this question.

One would expect Lis to resort to hysterical anecdotal “proofs,” since she is the most non-theoretical blonde that Fox has yet retained.

Feminism, in the classic sense where women seek equal treatment as men, is truly dead. Those who call themeselves “feminist” today are seeking either more rights for women with no responsibility, or more responsibility for men with no rights. Today, those who seek equal treatment regardless of gender are called “Men’s Rights Activists”.

And BTW Lis,

we all know you are reading this MND thread.

Why don’t you have the integrity to reply?

Finally got it played. There is a disconnect between the concepts of “women’s issues” and feminist entitlements. Lis will never bridge the gap. I don’t care how much a politician talks about women’s issues, I just haven’t heard any of them do it…ever! What I mean is, to my knowledge, there are no women’s issues that need addressing. If they can find one, please, bring it.

If you boys are iPod users, the audio portion of this debate, as with all my other debates, is available now — for FREE — on iTunes.

Simply subscribe to my podcasts at http://www.TheNoNonsenseMan.com

DadWith2Girls,

Try to see past your anger and bitterness towards women. I am on a TV show, whose purpose is to get ratings and sell advertising. This happens when the viewers are delighted with what they see, and they want to see more of the same.

This is not about what YOU want; it’s about what FNC wants. FNC is #1 because it understands is viewers extremely well. CNN, MSNBC, and CNBC are mere nothings.

The “Marc vs. Lis” segments are delighting viewers, who cannot get enough of them. In other words, we are succeeding. You aren’t satisfied that I am the only man on TV who, on a weekly basis, before an international audience, raises issues never vocalized before. But, you just don’t get that. Instead, you complain and complain and complain.

Mike La Salle,
Your istructions worked on Marc Rudov-Lisa Wiehl debazte and vote. Rudov is now 69%. He was cool, calm , collected while Wiehl tried to be old over the map with outdated statistics.
By the way, male-only requirement for military draft registaration and most women-only colleges http://www.womenscolleges.org/ being exempt from Title IX never came up. The “proportionality” in Vietnam War was over 58,00 men and 8 women
dead.

Marc,

“The “Marc vs. Lis” segments are delighting viewers, who cannot get enough of them. In other words, we are succeeding. You aren’t satisfied that I am the only man on TV who, on a weekly basis, before an international audience, raises issues never vocalized before. But, you just don’t get that. Instead, you complain and complain and complain.”

Oh, silly me. (What a cranky loyal viewer with an alternative perspective …. no tee-vee-MRA needs that BS goin’ on when he’s making so much easy bank!)

I DO GET “THAT” NOW!

YOU sir, have defined yourself as a COMMODITY!

Shilling men’s rights! (And men’s integrity?)

Could you at least publish your per-hour rate card on MND?

There must be many profitable opportunities that you have not yet considered…..

Now that you have clarified the nature of your principles, many future transactions become viable.

Have you endorsed any products alleging to cure impotence yet?

(Oh, I forgot. Your book!)

Choose your enemies as carefully as you choose your friends, bro’.

ps – Mr. “Star” Rudov, Look up and contemplate the word “hubris.” If you don’t have a dictionary handy, call Lis — she’ll know what it means. The really interesting dynamic that is developing over the clearly successful Marc vs. Lis schtick at FOX is that it can be interpreted as gender political debates or, merely as info-tainment. I am of the opinion that MRA’s would be foolish to put their real politics on the line for a weekly six-minute charade, even if the featured actors are earnest in their pantomimes. Marc — have you considered that you could franchise your debates with Lis? I would pay to watch two six-year-old versions of Lis and Marc debating gender issues! Even cartoon-versions. This schtick is gonna end up on the Simpsons….

Count on it.

(Spaces intentionally deleted to save Marc billable minutes …. )

Attention All Women:

Someone please take DadWith2Girls to bed to give him — and the rest of us — some relief. Thank you.

DW2G, what handle were you posting under at SYG, may I ask?

While I agree the question is a good one, it does not encourage debate, which was why no one would engage Typhon. It is a question really meant as rhetorical. If there was a way of setting up the debate to allow that as the final statement of proof, that would be a good thing. Maybe a question of defining what ‘rights’ women still do not have?

I do have to laugh that Lis kept referring to health care, contraception and family issues as women’s issues. They seem to me like human issues, since these topics concern men as much as women.

DW2G, is there ever an article here that you do not come at from the same angle?
You sometimes remind of the man who says, “why I oughta….” then goes away.
This situation on Fox is what we have, now, for national exposure. Better that we not have that? Better Marc wallow in poverty than make a buck on his work?
Envy is bad, penis envy causes men to buy Corvettes.

DW2G said: “YOU sir, have defined yourself as a COMMODITY!”

DW2G, IMHO, I think you are being too hard on Marc. I think Marc just realizes that he has to deal with the media, and they are largely interested in ratings, so he is giving them what they want and they are giving him what he wants and what we all should want, and that is a chance to get the man’s side of the story out. What’s the big deal? Give Marc some space.

if not rudov, who? some talk, some step up. he sure is doing as much or more than the average bear…boo boo. i say grab an orr or get out of the boat and i agree with dw2g 95% of the time.

i should be as bold as rudov. hell, we all should. can you imagine the heat from the libs and even on this web site if “she” was hammering him the way he is her?

I do think Lis made a significant and heartfelt point about pregnant women being seen as disabled (from the workforce). Of course, Lis is criticising the lack of paid maternity leave in the US with this point, from a true feminist stance, wishing mothers were granted the flexibility to be more financially active. And remember, when states provide more maternity leave, they can be pressurised into providing more paternity leave, giving fathers some flexibility too (although we MRAs have a long way to go on that front).

I read recently that in the US, the numbers of working mothers peaked six years ago, and is now in decline. As a woman who clearly HAS a work ethic, Lis might be somewhat alarmed by her fellow countrywomens return to whorewifery, and good on LIS for raising concerns about the poor quality conservative administration’s relative failure to provide the necessary incentives to those mothers wishing to stay IN the workforce.

Of course, it is no surprise that Lis frames it as a womens issue, when the ability to take time off from your job, to bond with your baby, paid for by the state, is a men’s and a women’s issue. Scandinavian states provide maternity and paternity pay and leave, and I am sure the rest of us will catch up with their high standards of living one day – but anti-feminist conservatism ain’t going to get us there.

Mike ( or perhaps Marc) censored my initial post #24 –

my actual first sentence was -

“It appears that Marc is delivering yet another facial (not “win”) vis a vis Lis, as the current results are Marc 68% – Lis 32% … pretty much in line with previous debate tallies.”

BTW, the term “facial” derives from pro basketball… when a player gets his rim play dunked right back into his face.

Why is this a word to be necessarily banned?

On an ostensibly major men’s rights’ site?

Could I get a list of all the other words eliciting double-entendres that will result in my posts being covertly edited?

I’d just like to be suitably compliant for the future of “free speech” @ MND.

Why is it so hard to find a truly liberated men’s right’s web site?

Marc –

“Attention All Women:

Someone please take DadWith2Girls to bed to give him … some relief …”

Man, I have resisted calling you an ideological “pimp.”

But now you have to deliver what you have promised!

And, I hope the prostitute you send to me will have read your book.

In hardcover — first edition.

OK?

No second-rate ho’s, please.

Still, we’re all about having fun, and profits?

Right?

“Why is it so hard to find a truly liberated men’s right’s web site?”

DW2G – Personally, I am not at all offended by your sometimes colorful expressions. The purpose here is not to curb your “free speech” – that should be obvious. I am simply looking out for the delicate sensibilities of those gray-suited souls who may take your sporty “double-entendres” as an insult before an analogy.

BTW – a “truly liberated men’s right’s web site” as you describe it would likely suffer the ignominy of disinterest by any but the most hardened MRAs. In that case, I doubt even you would bother showing up here to needle Marc, Lis, myself, or anyone else you have accused of “shilling” for the Cause.

Biscuit Queen,

My handle at SYG was banned. It cannot be spoken, according to Dr. Evil.

Erased from SYG for pretty much the same “rhetorical” non-compliance that Mike LaSalle tolerates at this web site.

If men’s rights activists continue to fool around with banning men’s vocabulary and expressed opinions, then Kim Gandy and her ostensible 500,000 sisters at N.O.W. will be able to sleep soundly with no anxious dreams.

Free speech = freedom of thought.

Censor it at your own peril.

Mike L. —

“a “truly liberated men’s right’s web site” as you describe it would likely suffer the ignominy of disinterest by any but the most hardened MRAs. In that case, I doubt even you would bother showing up here to needle Marc, Lis, myself, or anyone else you have accused of “shilling” for the Cause.”

That is a cute way of saying “nobody would advertise” on my commercial site.

And please, besides life on the web and MND, you can have an interesting conversation about the gender wars in any Third World rum bar on the local island’s carenage ….

Are you suggesting that your “high class” clientele is offended by “bad talk?”

Then perhaps we can conclude that all male speech is eventually suspect?

Feminism has of course instructed us that bad thoughts only spring from the toxic Evil Patriarchy.

I have no idea what the majority men are disinterested in. (Though gender politics would be at the top of the hypothetical list….)

The unanimous vote from Congress for VAWA 2005 – 2010 pretty much defines men’s legislative focus.

Hillary for Prezodent?

No ads for her yet on MND?

I would hope everyone would recognize that this blog is purely for entertainment, and does not cultivate real-world activism or politics. While NOW is something of a facade itself, there’s nothing comparable anywhere adressing men’s or anyone else’s rights.

I actually don’t agree that you won and she lost. To be honest, it actually felt like you were talking about separate things. To me, the way this debate was characterized and the questions the moderator asked were terrible.

Liz was right that bringing up certain issues isn’t pandering. And yet, you are most certainly right that pandering for votes by offering them entitlements which is clearly working for getting women’s votes means Feminism is dead.

I just found the entire debate very annoying rather than your usual clear win Mark.

WLS said: “I would hope everyone would recognize that this blog is purely for entertainment…”

Say what?

BQ,

I would look forward to actually meeting you someday; however, the dogs you have so successfully trained would be enough to dissuade me.

Some girls are just too formidable to approach…

How about these:

The wage gap fable.
The wage gap superstition.
The wage gap delusion.
The wage gap fantasy.
The wage gap illusion.
The wage gap myth (post #21).

I kind of like ‘the wage gap fable’ or ‘the wage gap delusion’ myself.

Then there’s these:

The wage gap deception.
The wage gap fallacy.
The wage gap hallucination.
The wage gap misbelief.
The wage gap trick.
The wage gap lie.

Jeez, you guys,

For the record the long statistical study done by Sanford Braver which was on the web in total clearly showed Weil’s lies for what they are. Women clearly come out ahead financially in al,most all divorce cases, of course then theres the little factor that when a man loses his children, he really loses his life.

All this bobble headed doll does is bobble from right to left while Marc is drilling her with facts. Maybe the disclaimer that this is “entertainment” works for some of the folks above but this is NOT entertainment. This is the problem. Lies that go on and on to become pseudo facts which are then used by fools like that moron Biden to fund the VAWA.

Tahnx to Marc for having the guts to sit there and take the bobbling and the lies from this foolish woman, I know I couldn’t sit there week after week and listen to her lie. Even the shrew voice and squeaky demeanor is enough to make me uncomfortable.

Anyway, I would underscore the point again this is not entertainment. These lies are what brought us to our knees. Infidel in the space above hits on a few of the lies perpetrated by the likes of this Wiel, she and Couric and Clinton are not kidding around, this isn’t funny.

While unfunny issues figure in the background, TV debates are calculated to attract viewers by being amusing to causal observors, and to accordingly please advertisers. Some useful consciousness raising follows, but it’s no substitute for actually engaging law- and policymaking—activities which you will not find discussed or encouraged on this blogsite. Most alarmingly you will sometimes even find them reported on disingenuously disinformingly, in deference to its entertainment and, for some, moneymaking aims.

marc..you should make some T shirts with the question..

ARE THERE ANY BENEFITS FOR MEN IN MARRAIGE ANY MORE????
with a picture of youreself…and underneath that
NO NONSENSEMAN.COM

the purpose of the votes is to track a clear increase of the voting each week which supports the position of increased viewership which increases ad billing which drives profit. thats ok as long we get some kind of message out that helps more than hinders. there is along way to go. india just elected a man hating shrew and hillary is probably next. rpr……are we having fun???

Yes, I just added my vote for another one of Marc’s 70% majorities. Keep the message goning Marc.
I hope the delivered effect upon American women is this:

YOU’RE NOT OPPRESSED!

DW2G,

Marc is writing articles, doing the circuit, appearing on Fox once a week, writing books…

He may not fit onto the neat little box that some would like him to, but he IS out there doing SOMETHING!

Just as this site… Sometimes I see ads that make me wonder “WTF?”. But then I am reminded that high traffic sites COST. And ad rolls like adsense etal sometimes place ads that are not really appropriate for the content… whether it is intentional or not, someone has got to pay the bills. So if allowing the occasional date site ad, or book on how women can get even in divorce is the price to pay for this medium to actually exist.. then so be it.

So, in closing… WTF have you done for the men of this world….

Thought so.

TMOTS

The trouble is the blogsite stifles and suppresses real-world activism, in ways which in are in part related to the advertising carried.

If you like playing a fantasy or role-playing game, it’s OK, otherwise you should be dissatisfied.

WLS has been outed in a previous post by Michael Robinson:

I rarely if ever comment on these blogs but I felt compelled to mostly because of some of the misunderstandings about the Taron James case, the Navarro decision, AB 252 and WLS’s, aka William Spence’s relentless attacks directed towards Glenn Sacks, others and sometimes myself. READ MORE HERE

In fact I have received numerous complaints regarding WLS by many, MANY contributors to MND. I have been asked repeatedly to ban him.

Yet here he is still, venting his rather sad and jaundiced spleen.

That’s “free speech” for you.

Or perhaps you could say I just like to keep him around for “entertainment value.”

WLS is right however, in a way. People depending soley on the internet to be active are missing out on real-life activities. The problem with on-line activity is that people only read if they choose to-thus it becomes in large part preaching to the choir. I have been on message boards for the better part of 5 years, and have gotten next to nowhere. Glenn Sacks has a way of making it work by using the internet to rally people into action by letter writing campaigns, which is great. However outreach to new people, which is the single most important issue we face today, is not going to happen on-line in enough numbers to make a difference. We must get out from behind these computers and start talking to people. Even talking to each other in person makes such a big difference. There is a family rights rally in washington DC http://www.dcrally2007.com/ (turn down your volume there is really loud music.) Here is a chance to get together and be heard.

The monthly server cost to keep MND running is $414.90. Let me help you grasp that: four hundred and fifteen US dollars PER MONTH.

If you are reading this you may indeed ask yourself what YOU have done to raise awareness of these important issues – while I sit in my furnitureless house, waiting for the next bill to come.

Some of thurston861′s most colorful language suddenly springs to mind…

Mike, is there an account we can donate to? I didn’t see it (which means it must be right in front of my face!)

Just wanted to throw in my two cents here, for those concerned that talk accomplishes nothing. I got into the online debate thing on Compuserve many years ago, participating mostly in their Men’s Issues forum that Jack Kammer got started. What I found was that the ratio of lurkers to participants is at least 10:1, and often much more. The influence of what we said there extended well beyond our small cadre of debaters. I heard talk radio hosts repeating some of our arguments, nearly verbatim.

People come in to sites like this having clicked on a link, and once here they will usually read a few of the articles — and with the comments attached at the bottom, they’ll likely read those, too. Do not underestimate the power of the online “pen”; it can wake up some of the most unexpected people, and inform far more than you might otherwise have guessed. What Mark does is wonderful, because he reaches an audience that may not see what we write here, and that’s a crucial part of what MRAs need to accomplish. Just don’t sell short the effect of sites like this one. You’re preaching to far more than just the choir that sings with you.

The Biscuit Queen – the box to donate to my paypal account is indeed right in front of you – at the top of the third column on MND. I just added it this morning, requesting help to pay my August server bill.

You know – just to counter the empty allegation that MND is a “big-profit machine”, I am very tempted to make public all of my accounting books for this site.

Fact: I am deeply in debt owing exclusively to my unwavering commitment (six years and counting) to keep this website on the air at any cost.

Fact: I am almost always late in paying for my monthly server charges simply because I don’t usually have enough in the way of operating capital to pay it on time.

Fact: Last year I paid out over $20,000 to a software engineer to help me get the site onto the wordpress blogging platform. I still owe this engineer over $7000, and at this point I am only paying him a small amount every month against the debt I owe him. (I funded this project out of proceeds from the sale of my house in 2005. That money is now GONE.)

Fact: I am worse than broke, and – if I had any brains at all – I would do myself (and my family) a great favor by dropping this site off a cliff and moving on.

Whenever I hear someone like DW2Gs or WLS piss and moan about what a “shill” I am for running MND, it either makes me laugh or cry – I can’t remember which.

To Mike LaSalle:

I’m sure you have learned by now that people who whine the most contribute the least — mostly because they have the least to contribute.

I hope that, given your public posting of private finances, the trolls and detractors will reassess themselves and think twice about talking for the sake of talking. Time will tell.

Thanx for your invaluable contributions.

Done. Thanks Mike, I didn’t realize you were shouldering this on your own.

Thank you BQ!

Yes, MND is 100% supported by me. But if not for my wonderful wife – who has supported ME (in all ways) while I have built and managed this site over the years – MND would not even be here.

Best to you,

Mike

Mike LaSalle said,

The monthly server cost to keep MND running is $414.90. Let me help you grasp that: four hundred and fifteen US dollars PER MONTH.

If you are reading this you may indeed ask yourself what YOU have done to raise awareness of these important issues – while I sit in my furnitureless house, waiting for the next bill to come.
______________________________

Exactly what I was refering to ML. I hope that my post wasn’t interpreted as calling you out. I KNOW what it takes to run a site. I was trying to make that known to those that have no idea what it takes…

TMOTS

Hi Mike, As you likely know, I mad a contribution as well, but I guess the transfer takes awhile to clear, Nonetheless, I post to let you know someone else cares about this and wants to put their money (however little they have left after a recent visit to FCU – Family Court University) behind your cause.

I’ve mentioned this quite a few times in debates with Elder George – bottom line this whole movement needs money – you can sit around and debate forever, but without cash – forget it. He argues that if you makeit about money then the cause is lost – excuuuuse me – aren’t you (elder george) posting on this site? So where is your donation

Tom

Hi Thomas – yes, I got it. Thank you. It should show up in the chipin widget in a few days after the check has cleared.

Meanwhile, let’s see if the community of readers can step up to the plate and help me out with the server costs in the coming months.

Actually – while MND is technically a “for profit” business – I can think of no fundamental reason to keep this site’s financial books a secret to this community.

Over the years, I have come to understand that a lot of folks in the MRA community are at once thrilled and enraged, congratulatory and envious over the unprecedented success of MND as a social networking tool. And because the site focuses largely on unsung social issues, many folks think the site ought rightly be run by committee as a NON PROFIT ORGANIZATION.

To be honest, I have looked into this prospect. But the fact is, MND is such a high-profile media cherry, I don’t think it could work as a non-profit. There are just too many interested people with an unwholesome — even creepy — desire for power and personal aggrandizement. If MND were to fall into the hands of such men, I am certain it would quickly rot from the inside, and little of substance would be left in the end.

For that reason alone, I would sooner close this site down forever and move on to other topics, rather than see it fall into the wrong hands.

But the idea of treating the site as though it were a non-profit organization is quite intriguing to me.

What do I care – after all – if the financial books on MND are open to the public? I think the community might get a kick out of it, and the real costs of operating this site month-to-month and year-over-year might finally begin to sink in.

The original issue, it may be useful to recall, was not really how the blogsite is financed, but whether it informs and effectuates political action and social change, or is more an introverted, targeted to the choir, spot essentially for amusement. No one’s begrudging any gains, or beguiling anyone to suffer losses, for its own sake.