The radical US feminists want these women blocked because they are competition. IMBRA very effectively blocks them completely and totally as I explained (if IMBRA had not required that women sign approval of contact in writing, I would have probably never bothered to fight it).

I Love Latins is now a completely free dating site, but the loss of the $4000 per month income will eventually mean that the site does not expand and less resources will come to bear to help men and women meet each other.

IMBRA is a Marxist law bent on destruction of all business in introducing Americans and foreigners. Without the profit motive, activity will basically die.

As to why you think a “men’s community” would band together to help each other for free: We are having a murderous enough time finding a pro-bono lawyer to do a challenge against IMBRA. No viable male candidates are popping up to say they want to do Pro Se challenges (without a lawyer). We will probably not get the $25,000 we need to do a lawyered challeng until after we find a female American citizen plaintiff, who is not forthcoming.

But it is stupid to put all one’s eggs into one challenge when that challenge can meet up with an idiot judge. Better to have the lawyered challenge correspond with a few Pro Se challenges in other districts where resources can be reallocated to the district which has a judge who shows promise.

It would be easier to do a direct challenge and overturn this law than to spend any effort working around the law for a non-profit dating site.

How about you Tony? Can you walk into a federal courthouse and challenge this on your lunchhour?

That is precisely what I would do if I were living in the US and had a little bit more time and financial freedom than I now have.

The ideal candidate for challenging IMBRA would have $10,000 in the bank and not be “under the gun” job-wise (heavy corporate pressure and travel).

http://www.guernicamag.com/blog/248/the_office_on_violence_against/

So we American males and veterans have to stand around and get trampled underfoot while leviathan feminists duke it out over us?

Hillary Clinton would appoint a feminist who is much more left wing to this position in January 2009?

Here is an interesting article on Mary Beth Buchanan here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/28/us/28obscene.html

It says the new Attorney General, Michael Mukasey, is fairly level-headed on pornography. He will be the defendant in the lawsuit against IMBRA.

We are going to hit him with the fact that Adultfriendfinder and other hookup dating sites are exempt from IMBRA, despite their advertising to Americans in other countries with big web ads saying “10,000 women in Brussels want you tonight” depending on where the American’s IP address says he or she is located overseas. We will show that the Republican Attorney General is defending the right of international hookup sites that should also fall under IMBRA (but won’t because huge corporations own them). It is really mentally sick that huge corporations have invested in porn dating sites but there is a “stigma” that stopped them from investing in marriage-oriented dating sites.

The court documents would be labeled “Plaintiff vs Mukasey”

And this is bizarre…Newsweek didn’t pick up on our press release on the 9th of October while a female staffer was writing the following garbage about how the feminist moving is apparently going nowhere?

http://www.newsweek.com/id/43419/output/print

Apparently, nowhere means complete control of the House and Senate and Executive branches isn’t good enough.