"... Although feminists still claimed to be working for gender equality, their actions would soon reveal a very different agenda..."

                                                                                      - Carey Roberts, Feminist utopia, social nightmare

"Almost everything I ever did, even as a scientist, was in the hope of meeting a pretty girl."

                               - James D. Watson, Nobel Laureate, author of The Double Helix

"Women have always been the primary victims of war: Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat." - Hillary Clinton, U.S. Secretary of State

The following text is quoted from MenAreGood.com:

Let's try an exercise to evaluate your way of thinking. Has it ever bothered you that only males are expected to sign up for the selective service? That it is only males expected to go and die in case of a national emergency? Does that bug you? Okay, now imagine that congress in all its wisdom has changed the law and decided that we need to draft only girls and women until an equal number of women and girls have died in combat to the numbers of men and boys who have died. Would that upset you? Why? Do you value women and girls more than boys and men? How about if we decided to draft only Black people? Maybe only Jews? Would either of those groups being sacrificed upset you? Would you protest for any of those to not be the only group drafted? Can you feel in your bones how upsetting that would be? If you answered yes to any of those questions, how was your response different from thinking it is okay to draft only men? If you had a different reaction then you are likely holding some of that tendency to consider men and boys to be more disposable.

You can see this tendency in many places. Boys and men comprise almost 80% of suicides and yet we have no outcry or services specifically for this. Men and boys are over 90% of the workplace deaths in the Unted States but no one seems to notice. Over 97% if the deaths of U.S. servicemen in Iraq are men and boys and yet we hear no protest in support of men and boys or calls for equality. Men are the victims of domestic violence in considerable numbers and yet we have no services directed towards their needs. All we need to do is open our eyes to see the extent that men and boys are seen as expendable. It is all around us. Ever heard of the wife telling the husband she will go investigate the loud noise that awoke them from a deep sleep?

"Virtually all sociological data shows women initiate domestic violence as often as men, that women use weapons more than men, and that 38% of injured victims are men." (Link to bibliography examining 271 scholarly investigations: 211 empirical studies and 60 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 365,000.)

"The story of Abusegate is as much about the attempt by feminists to obscure their real intentions as it is about feminist attempts to conceal the reality of partner abuse, in order to claim the issue as their own, and possibly the only issue available at the time to keep this essentially destructive philosophy alive." (Trudy W. Schuett: Abusegate: a generation deceived)

"According to the logic of IDPOL (identity politics and ideological policing), one must always act in one's own group's interest as long as that group is oppressed. Oppressors are assumed to be doing the same for their side, but they should be castigated for doing so. Thus, a man who does not support a feminist cause is automatically a sexist; a white person who disagrees with a black person's position is a racist. The reverse, however, is not the case. Consequently, those defined as oppressed place a high premium on keeping that identity." (Feminist and former Director of Women's Studies at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, Daphne Patai & Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Education and Indoctrination in Women's Studies, 2003)

Follow this link to learn why there is no such thing as a "moderate" form of feminism

Feminism's stated goal of real equality between the sexes will begin to be credible when females are required to register for the draft at 18, as males are, when 50% of combat units must be women -- in short, when women are paying 50% of the real price, not only in war but also in society's other sacrificial exercises.

Why -- aside from the fact that they are jerks -- do men get angry? Does it have something to do with the fact that they die seven years earlier than women do, with rates of heart disease, ulcers, suicide, alcoholism and other stress diseases considerably higher than those of women? Are they angry because something in their conditioned or instinctive social roles as men revs them up in order to expose them to the worst dangers, like dying in war, like being killed in the line of duty as policemen and fire fighters, or otherwise doing the dirty, dangerous work; 93% of people killed on the job are men. The more dangerous the job, the greater the percentage of men who are doing it. Federal, state and local governments spend hundreds of millions of dollars protecting women workers from sexual harassment, while millions of men are still left substantially unprotected from premature death by industrial hazard.

Actually, the real reason men get angry is not the danger or premature death. It is mostly because they feel unappreciated. Men are fairly simple creatures.

Warren Farrell has made men's case admirably in a book called The Myth of Male Power. Farrell for some years was the country's leading male feminist advocate. But he came gradually to the conviction that the feminist take on men left out an important part of the story: the real powerlessness of most men. In any case: "Feminism suggested that God might be a 'she,' but not that the devil might also be a 'she.' Feminism articulated the shadow side of men and the light side of women. It neglected the shadow side of women and the light side of men."

The quarrel lies not with feminism per se, but with feminism incompletely or dishonestly or opportunistically pursued. Women must do their share, not just take the share they find attractive. Equality must be equality in all things, not just in the professional opportunities that white middle- and upper- middle-class women wish to exploit. Equality is a matter of real responsibility and risk, of accepting the liabilities as well as claiming the assets.

Women now control the vast majority of consumer dollars in America -- especially the discretionary dollars. If that is not power, and privilege, what is? An extraplanetary visitor, scouting a report for The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy perhaps, might look at the evidence of their lives (the myriad labor-saving devices, the opulent food and shelter, the sheer abundance of choices that most of the rest of the world desperately envies) and come to the conclusion that white middle- and upper-middle-class American women -- from whose ranks the majority of militant feminists arise, the ones who call themselves "womyn" to keep the hated syllable "men" out of their identity -- are the most privileged people in the history of the planet. The alien would be stoned to death for saying it, however.

When will women take full responsibility, fifty-fifty with men, for initiating sexual contacts, thereby assuming the occasionally painful risks of rejection? That risk of rejection makes men, who usually must take the active part, not only look foolish many times, but also appear to be sexual harassers, when in fact they may be merely inept. A successful approach to a woman is called romance and courtship. An unsuccessful approach is called sexual harassment and may be a crime.

Feminist politics goes against the animal behaviorist's insight that females organize their lives around the getting of resources (food, shelter, nice things) while males organize themselves around the getting of females.

The collision produces a dishonest configuration. Women elaborately manipulate and exploit men's natural sexual attraction to the female body, and then deny the manipulation and prosecute men for the attraction -- if the attraction draws in the wrong man. Women cannot for long combine fiery indignation and continuing passivity (attempting to have the best of both those worlds)."

Above text quoted from Time Magazine, Men Are They Really That Bad? by LANCE MORROW;John F. Dickerson/New York, Jon D. Hull/Chicago and Martha Smilgis/Los Angeles

Wikipedia: "Antifeminism is opposition to feminism in some or all of its forms. In the narrow sense, the term antifeminism connotates individuals, organizations, or ideologies that criticise or reject feminism of the modern industrial countries of the West, claiming that the use of the feminist ideology in its praxis did more damage than good. These critics primarily refer to radical feminism, which antifeminists accuse of encouraging misandry and female sexism. For these reasons, the term antifeminism has started to signify feminists, of feminism for straying into extremism. In which ultimately, Antifeminist view Feminism as a Hate group... Many antifeminist proponents say the feminist movement has achieved its aims and now seeks higher status for women than for men."

"Life in this society being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of society being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation, and destroy the male sex." - Valerie Solana, SCUM Manifesto (Society for Cutting Up Men.)

"If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males." --Mary Daly, former Professor at Boston College, 2001.

"The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men." -- Sharon Stone; Actress

"If the classroom situation is very heteropatriarchal--a large beginning class of 50 to 60 students, say, with few feminist students--I am likely to define my task as largely one of recruitment...of persuading students that women are oppressed" - Professor Joyce Trebilcot of Washington University, as quoted in Who Stole Feminism: How Women Have Betrayed Women

"Politically, I call it rape whenever a woman has sex and feels violated." and "All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman." -- Catherine MacKinnon, feminism founder and leading feminist policy-maker

“I’d like to burn you at the stake!” -- Betty Friedan, author of The Feminine Mystique and founder of the so-called "women's liberation" movement, to Phyllis Schlafly in Bloomington, Illinois (source: The New Yorker)

"Women have always been the primary victims of war: Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat." - Hillary Clinton, U.S. Secretary of State

Please carefully consider the above quote for a moment. Is this not like an early 1800's Southern American slave owner claiming to be victimized because his slave died? Does it not suggest that the slave owner's comfort was more important than the life of the slave? Suppose Hillary had said "Whites have always been the primary victims of war: Whites lose their blacks in combat." Why is a member of a hate group appointed to the high office of Secretary of State? In World War II alone, more than sixteen million American men served in the military and more than one million American men were killed or wounded (source: Congressional Research Service). Romantic notions of chivalry, knowledge and preparedness that we as boys and men may one day be required to die for all the women back in our home country (all males, but not females, are required to register for Selective Service within 30 days of their 18th birthday), and the rejection and shame we are made to feel about our natural biological (yet simultaneously being artificially stimulated by cosmetically-enhanced women everywhere) urges: these are but a few things that combine to make males feel disposable beginning the day we are born.  Despite women comprising more than half of U.S. voters (source: America.gov), voters reversed the movement toward ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment when it became known that it could subject women to the draft, thus risk making females just as disposable as males. (source: The New Yorker)

"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." -- Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor

"Man-hating is everywhere, but everywhere it is twisted and transformed, disguised, tranquilized, and qualified. It coexists, never peacefully, with the love,desire, respect, and need women also feel for men. Always man-hating is shadowed by its milder, more diplomatic and doubtful twin, ambivalence." - Judith Levine, author, journalist, co-founder of the National Writers Union and No More Nice Girls, board member of the National Center for Reason and Justice and the Vermont chapter of the ACLU'

"Don't Cook Dinner, Starve a Rat Today!"

More feminist quotes

"How come many women still believe feminism is about equality when its practice is not?"

Feminist Hate Speech

The Insults Feminists Throw at Anti-Misandrist Women

Feminist myths and tricks frequently used to disrupt discussion

Is Feminism a Hate Movement?

"Indeed, the evidence is that feminism is little more than an ideology of hatred. Hatred towards men."

"Feminism purports to concern itself only with equality - but in reality propagates mistrust, tension and hatred between the sexes."

"Most people agree that men and women are of equal worth and should be treated with dignity. If you support gender equality the assumption is that you should support feminism. However an increasing number of feminists, including Erin Pizzey, Christina Hoff Sommers and Camille Paglia, are expressing alarm at the direction that modern feminism is taking... "

"Saving the males is an unlikely vocation for a 21st-century woman. Most men don’t know they need saving; most women consider the idea absurd. When I tell my women friends that I want to save the males, they look at me as if noticing for the first time that I am insane. Then they say something like: 'Are you out of your mind? This is still a male-dominated world. It’s women who need saving. Screw the men!' Actually, that’s a direct quote. The reality is that men already have been screwed – and not in the way they prefer. For the past 30 years or so, males have been under siege by a culture that too often embraces the notion that men are to blame for all of life’s ills. Males as a group – not random men – are bad by virtue of their DNA. ” -- Kathleen Parker, The Sunday Times

"Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women's movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom for women cannot be won without the abolition of marriage." -Sheila Cronin, leader of the feminist organization NOW

"The nuclear family must be destroyed... Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process." -- Linda Gordon

"We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage." - Robin Morgan

"As one of the world's most gender-equal countries - a land where 80 percent of the women have jobs, where about half of the members of Parliament are female - does Sweden need a feminist party? Many people thought so this spring, when a number of high-profile Swedish women began Feministiskt Initiativ, or Feminist Initiative... At its recent founding congress, for example, instead of tackling a mainstream platform as planned, the party presented proposals to abolish marriage and create 'gender-neutral' names." (Source: New York Times)

"As for the issue of whether or not to continue to reproduce males, it doesn't follow that because the male, like disease, has always existed among us that he should continue to exist. When genetic control is possible — and soon it will be — it goes without saying that we should produce only whole, complete beings, not physical defects of deficiencies, including emotional deficiencies, such as maleness. Just as the deliberate production of blind people would be highly immoral, so would be the deliberate production of emotional cripples." - Valerie Solanas, SCUM Manifesto (Society for Cutting Up Men)

"Men haven't turned away from smart, successful women because they're smart and successful. More likely they've turned away because the feminist movement that encouraged women to be smart and successful also encouraged them to be hostile and demeaning to men." - Kathleen Parker, "Feminism's devolution from hoaxers to whores"

".. advocates for no-fault divorce argued that the law should be changed to provide a straightforward procedure for ending a marriage ... The most prominent advocate of this position was feminist law professor Herma Hill Kay (a former dean of UC Berkeley School of Law)." (Source: Wikipedia citing Bishop, Katherine, "Sweet Victory for Feminist Pioneer at Law School." New York Times, 3 April 1992, sec. A, p. 19)

“Two-thirds or more of all divorces involving couples with children are initiated by mothers, not fathers.” and the main reason "cited by women as a cause of divorce" is not cruel or abusive husbands, not adultery, but "a lack of closeness or of 'not feeling loved and appreciated.'" (Source: Glenn Sacks Source Page)

"Three out of four teenage suicides occur in households where a parent has been absent." (Source: Jean Beth Eshtain, "Family Matters: The Plight of America's Children.", The Christian Century (July 1993): 14-21.)

"Feminism comes from a French term -- feminisme -- that is essentially the idea that gender is culturally, rather than biologically created. This is the root of feminism as a concept." (Source: Yanna Krupnikov, "Feminism is still alive and kicking")

The idea that gender is culturally, rather than biologically created, completely ignores the legitimacy and importance of the male sex drive, without which none of us would even be here today. This is not to say that men are more important than women, only that both, biologically distinct as they are, are indispensible to human procreation. To say that sex and gender are distinct and that they are created by two different things, biology and culture respectively, is to say that when babies are born their differences are only skin deep. To deny the legitimate existence of the male sex drive is not only denying the obvious, it is the pinnacle of dishonesty. As the root of feminism, denial of something so obvious could cause any honest person to question the credibility of feminists, and everything they have ever done or said. Aside from the fact that science and all available evidence have concusively disproved this idea, the denial of innate masculinity is misandry at its core.  Boys of our generation, brought up by divorced mothers in broken families, daycare centers and female-dominated school systems all proceeding on the basis that gender is culturally, rather than biologically created, that all aspects of masculinity are learned therefore can be forgotten, are brought up to be ashamed of the very gender differences that make us who we are. This great failed experiment we call Feminism has caused an entire generation of boys to be brought up to be ashamed of who we are.

Maine: Feminists Stage Topless Protest, "Enraged" When Men Turn Out in Droves to Ogle Them

Why Gender Feminism is a Fraud…

Just the facts and more facts

"All through my career, as a journalist, a writer and a social reformer, I have been hounded and bullied by feminist women and their coat-trailing 'new men.'" (Source: Erin Pizzey, founder of the Refuge Centres for Battered Women)

"...it saddens me that we even have to have a women's movement and a men's movement but really there was no choice. I couldn't stop the feminist movement from hi-jacking my work in London at my refuge in Chiswick. They wanted funding and my work, twenty-five years ago - as the first refuge in the world seemed heaven sent for them. No matter that I told them that out of the first hundred women that came into Chiswick sixty-two were as violent as the men they left. I couldn't get any coverage for the truth. 'All men are bastards and rapists' is the only truth that the women's movement were prepared to hear....Now, with the help of this evil movement father's role in family life seems to be irrelevant....." (Source: Erin Pitzey, founder of the world's first women refuge)

• "For example, a wife who never works and never pays taxes is entitled to a retirement benefit equal to 50 percent of her husband's benefits. After he dies, she is entitled to 100 percent of his benefits." (Source: NCPA)
• "Full Retirement Age = 65" (Source: socialsecurity.gov)
• "In the U.S., average life expectancy at birth is about 79 years for women and about 72 years for men." (Source)
• "During 2006, even in the poorest countries, women can expect to outlive men" (Life expectancy: women now on top everywhere)

• Men lack equal rights in the following areas: Health Circumcision Suicide Domestic Violence Local Council Public libraries Radio Newspapers Advertising Marriage Lifestyle Opportunities Family Courts Parental Alienation Mother-headed households EducationPoliticians Passports Taxes Pensions and benefits Safety Defence Employment Criminal Law Wealth Men
  

• "Women comprise more than half of the U.S. electorate and have influenced electoral outcomes for more than 40 years." (Source: America.gov)

• "The unemployment rate for women was 5.4 percent and for men it was 6.1 percent in 2008." (Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Women's Bureau)
• 901,000 females, vs. 875,000 males, enrolled in college in the U.S. in 2006. The number of females enrolled in college has exceeded the number of college enrolled males every year since 1974. (Source: U.S. Department of Education)
• "the raw wage gap continues to be used in misleading ways to advance public policy agendas without fully explaining the reasons behind the gap." (Source: U.S. Department of Labor) (Read about how the U.S.Government tried to cover up its own report)

• In 2003, 17% of U.S. women received welfare, vs. 13.7% of men. (Source: U.S. Census Bureau report)
• Not including those caring for children or others, in 2004, 11.3% of non-working U.S. women, vs. 2.4% of men, chose not to work simply because they were not interested in doing so. (Source: U.S. Census Bureau)
• In 2003, 48.0% of individuals in U.S. families maintained solely by women received welfare, vs. 25.7% of families maintained solely by men. (Source: U.S. Census Bureau)
• In 2004, 27,088,000 U.S. women between 15 and 44 had no children and 3,645,000 of these childless women (13.5%) received welfare. (Source: U.S. Census Bureau)
• "Interestingly, at all ages, the net tax payments are smaller for women; relative to men, women pay fewer taxes and receive more benefits." (Source: Jonathan Gruber, Public Finance and Public Policy (2005): 100)

"Even the liberal American Association of University Women concluded that three-quarters of the wage gap is due to factors such as education, occupational choice and hours worked."

From Professing Feminism: Education and Indoctrination in Women's Studies by Noretta Koertge and Daphne Patai, feminist and former Director of the Women's Studies Program at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, 2003, pages 214 and 215:

"Because Women's Studies programs have in so many instances repudiated liberal values and fallen prey to the dangerous amalgamation of political, pop-theraputic, and education objectives, they cannot, at this moment, be considered successful. Too many are in crisis, and the causes of the crisis, as we have argued, lie within feminism itself, which should never have been embraced in its ideologically inflamed form by institutions of learning. Those students who seek the single correct path--true believers already or young people demanding the security of ultimate enlightnement--will have to go elsewhere. They can join political groups. Nothing prevents them from becoming activists, even extremists. If feminist seminaries or cadre training camps are to be set up, however, they should be clearly identified as such. It is not the function of a university to sponsor them.

   When it becomes impossible to decide whose truth, whose politics, whose identity shall prevail in the academy, what will we then do? Resort to censorship? To arms? Drive people from their jobs? What will we then have? Models abound: the Aryan university of Nazi Germany; Stalinism and Maoism; lily-white institutions in the pre-1960s U.S. South; the purges provoked by McCarthyism; East German universities whose faculties first had to embody Marxist-Leninist truths and were then removed wholesale when that ideology folded; ethnically pure enclaves in the former Yugoslavia. Think about these, and a chamber of horrors opens. We must back away from the particular ideologies to see what they all have in common, and that is the tyranny of politicized education by means of indoctrination, and the even more pernicious faith that someone holds the key, knows the truth, has the answers, and is empowered (whether by our will or against it) to impose them on the rest of us.

    How can such an arrogation coexist with a genuine call for multiculturalism and diversity? It cannot. Only that weary adjective liberal--much maligned and battered but still bravely insisting on tolerance, mutual respect, and an open mind--can lend to education the power to overcome ignorance, prejudice, and hypocrisy.

    As long as Women's Studies offers an academic home to the latter traits while distrusting or openly repudiating the former, it will continue to produce students who, like fundamentalists of every stripe, use their small store of fixed ideas to build walls around the tiny enclaves, not realizing that within these walls they themselves must live as prisoners.  Women--and men--deserve better."

"Why Not A Feminist Overhaul of Higher Education?" by Daphne Patai, former director of the Women's Studies Program at the University of Massachusetts, January 1998, describing abuse of power and the conflict of interest between Women's Studies programs and their own dictation of sexual harassment policy on the campuses that house them:

"It begins by invoking the purportedly sorry state of women in higher education. Few reasonable observers would accept this claim today, given increases in female graduation rates, and women's entry into professional schools and faculty ranks, but relentless feminist propaganda has confused the evidence. At the University of Massachusetts, for example, female students interviewed in December by a local newspaper readily asserted that they had not personally encountered bias in the classroom; nonetheless, they assumed that it exists... it is the distance between the actual and the putative condition of women, and between the positive-sounding goals and the sanctions threatened against resisters and nonconformists, that exposes the power game being played... it is a plan for policing the struggle for gender equity, based on the anachronistic insistence that inequality characterizes women's status in every aspect of university life... Women's studies got its first foothold in academe by invoking the liberal values of tolerance and intellectual openness. Once entrenched, however, and in defiance of both the historical record and common sense, women's studies has turned on those very values, rejecting them as helping to sustain the hated status quo... Will it be any comfort that Big Brother will have turned into Big Sister?"

Massnews.com: "Extreme Feminists at UMass Have 'Hate Men' Rally to Keep Money Flowing to Rape Crisis Centers"

Also by Daphne Patai, "The Great Tattling Scare on Campuses":

"...in the face of successful legal challenges to speech codes, for some years now universities have been putting into effect harassment policies that restrict speech and can actually cost professors their jobs for saying something in class that someone considered sexist or racist. A score of universities have even shamefully revealed, by designating special 'speech zones' on their campuses, that the college as a whole is, as the civil-liberties attorney Harvey A. Silverglate has called it, a 'censorship zone.'"

"But, like harassment policies (which invariably include 'verbal acts' of certain types among proscribed conduct), such restrictions have not aroused vigorous protest, least of all from feminists and other campus activists who have seen the codes and policies as a means of enforcing their own agenda. Again, where were the newfound defenders of free speech when politically incorrect speakers were shouted down at universities around the country? When campus papers of a conservative cast were seized or stolen, with no protest from campus administrators? (Check The Shadow University, by Alan Charles Kors and Silverglate, for details.) Evidently, some ideas deserve not only a chill but the deep freeze."

"What, precisely, does 'chilling'  of free speech mean? According to Greg C. Lukianoff -- the director of legal and public advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, an organization formed for the defense of the civil rights of professors and students, of all political persuasions -- the concept of 'chilling effect' generally refers to the likelihood that vaguely defined and overly broad rules governing acceptable speech will cause people to censor themselves, since they cannot be sure whether their speech is illegal or not. But the term is often invoked to 'chill' other people's use of free speech."

"The Death of Manliness at the University of Wyoming":

"'Manly' is a lonely word on college campuses today. Although recovering the lost art of manliness is gaining interest in the nation at large, colleges and universities do their best to stifle it. Most institutions offer degrees in women’s studies but not men’s studies, and they have women’s centers but not men’s centers... Last year, women comprised 46.5% of the workforce and 57.2% of higher education enrollment in the United States... Colleges seem to want to keep women back, to make them retain victim and minority status when they are no longer a minority. Ironically, in doing so, they victimize and invite discrimination against men."

"Let me begin by stating what I believe indoctrination to be and what it is not. Indoctrination is presenting opinion to students as though it were scientific fact or as though no rational, decent, and moral person could have any other view. It is the equivalent of presenting students with ready-made conclusions which they cannot realistically feel free to challenge. There are entire fields of study that are in fact programs of indoctrination. For example, all Women’s Studies programs with which I am familiar are programs to train students to be radical feminists and specifically to instill in them the doctrine that gender differences are “socially constructed” – that they are artificially created by male elites to subordinate and oppress women."

"The social construction of gender is not a theory that students in Women’s Studies courses are free to adopt or reject. It is taught in the same way university courses in physics teach Newton’s laws of motion. When, at a recent academic conference, I confronted the president of the American Association of University Professors over this very issue, he replied that he did indeed teach the social construction of gender as a scientific fact but because he allowed students to take the opposite point of view it wasn’t indoctrination. But what does it mean to let a student who is seeking a good grade argue against a scientific fact, except that you are allowing him to make a fool of himself?"

"Hoff Sommers said that modern feminist theorists have bolstered their views with urban myths and “egregiously false information.” She said she had found that many commonly cited statistics, such as that violence against women increases 80 percent on Super Bowl Sunday, did not have any basis.

"'Over and over again, you could count on theorists to overstate,' Hoff Sommers said. 'The truth is so much more complicated. If you want to help women, help them by using the truth.'

"According to Hoff Sommers, the feminist movement has also become increasingly hostile towards men, 'implicating an entire gender.' It does so by focusing on the bad behavior associated with 'aberrational masculinity' rather than what most men are like. 'We get the worst-case male standing for masculinity,' she said."

"The percentage of "deadbeat" moms is actually higher than that of dads who won't pay, even though mothers are more consistently awarded custody of children by the courts.

"Census figures show only 57 percent of moms required to pay child support -- 385,000 women out of a total of 674,000 -- give up some or all of the money they owe. That leaves some 289,000 "deadbeat" mothers out there, a fact that has barely been reported in the media."

Warren Farrell:

"The political genius of the feminist movement was its intuitive sense that it could appeal ... by emphasizing expansion of rights and avoiding expansion of responsibilities.  Had the National Organization for Women (NOW) fought to register 18-year-old girls for the draft, it might have lost a few members.  Had feminism emphasized women's responsibilities for risking sexual rejection, or paying for men's dinners, or choosing careers they like less to support the family more, or marrying down, its impact would have been more egalitarian but less politically successful."

"Equal Rights":

"22 states – Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming – provide in their constitutions either inclusive or partial guarantees of equal rights on the basis of sex."

"Since the 14th Amendment guarantees all citizens equal protection of the laws, why do we still need the ERA?"

"Aren’t there adequate legal protections against sex discrimination in the Equal Pay Act, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Titles VII and IX of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, court decisions based on the 14th Amendment, and more?"

"Federal Affirmative Action Laws":

"Executive Order 11246 Requires federal contractors to develop affirmative action programs to employ and advance women ... Requires the establishment of hiring goals for ... women."

• In 2008, "Women accounted for 51 percent of all workers in the high-paying management, professional, and related occupations." (Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Women's Bureau)

"Reverse discrimination goes hand-in-hand with affirmative action. Affirmative action, defined through Dictionary.com is the encouragement of increased representation of women and minority-group members, esp. in employment.

"In 1965, Lyndon B. Johnson signed into law an Executive Order regarding race neutral Affirmative Action. Throughout the order the following '...without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin' is used. You can view this Executive Order here. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is similarly worded stressing non-discrimination and is neutral towards race.

Both the Executive Order signed by LBJ and the Civil Rights Act, signed by JFK are essentially, for what it's worth, worthless, in regards to affirmative action, a.k.a. reverse discrimination. Beginning in 1966, the 'Equal' Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Civil Service Commission began implementing their own rules regarding hiring. Because of their variations, they joined forces and issued the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP).

The Executive Order and the Civil Rights Act are simple reading in comparison to the UGESP. There are now rules in effect that govern employers and which job applicants they choose, NOT based on their experience and ability, but on whether they fall within the 'minority' class."

"The most common belief is that feminism is 'not needed' in Ukraine, that Ukrainian women have all the rights they need... Women’s organizations are terrified of the word 'feminism'... The media, however, is very careful to differentiate between 'gender equality' and 'feminism' because feminists are hellish, castrating creatures... There is a popular belief that if you come to America, and happen to open a door for a woman, she’ll sue you for everything you’ve got."

"Because of their commitment to radical egalitarianism, most early radical feminist groups operated initially without any formal internal structure. When informal leadership developed, it was often resented. Many groups ended up expending more effort debating their own internal operations than dealing with external matters, seeking to 'perfect a perfect society in microcosm' rather than focus on the larger world. Resentment of leadership was compounded by the view that all 'class striving' was 'male-identified'. In the extreme, exemplified by The Feminists, the upshot, according to Ellen Willis, was 'unworkable, mechanistic demands for an absolutely random division of labor, taking no account of differences in skill, experience, or even inclination'. 'The result,' writes Willis, 'was not democracy but paralysis.' When The Feminists began to select randomly who could talk to the press, Ti-Grace Atkinson quit the organization she had founded."

"Has feminism gone too far? Have women reached equality with men, or is there still lot of work ahead to achieve that goal?" (Read the debate and decide for yourself.)

"Do men sacrifice themselves too much for women?" from Amazon.com's Women Community:

"I would say in this day and age, yes.

In an era of post women's lib and 3rd (some will say 4th) wave feminism I think more men should insist on women fending for themselves. I think men are more prone to sacrifice themselves too much for women without stopping to consider if women would do the same for them.

Unfortunately what we see are far too many women wanting to have their cake and eat it too; and men allowing them to get away with this behaviour. As result western women will perhaps be the most spoilt group of women you'll ever come across in the world. That's just my humble opinion.

To be fair, men also have to carry a lot of the blame for this. You have some men who insists on coddling women and encouraging their entitlement syndromes merely to satisfy their own urges to feel like Mr. Invincible. Esther Vilar in her groundbreaking novel The Manipulated Man addressed this very issue quite eloquently. This is a book all men and any self-respecting equity feminist should read.

What a lot of these "mr. invincible" guys don't realise is that by disregarding their own interests -- in a world which completely caters to women and where women overall care mainly about themselves and children -- will only hurt them in the long run. In contemporary times we see how this has manifested itself through divorce court, jobs, equal protection under the law, the draft and various other areas.

Many modern feminist groups and individual feminist women aren't seeking equality, because men and women in the west are pretty darn equal -- what they want is female supremacy. And the only way to balance the scales is for men to join the conversation. Insist that women give as much as they demand.

Please note that I'm not talking about the social climate for men and women prior to 2nd wave feminism. I'm talking about contemporary times in nations of a 'western' ideological persuasion.

And by the way, before anyone start blasting me that I'm a woman hater and what not just know that I'm female and very well educated in women's studies. I'm also married with 2 college aged sons -- which makes this topic all the more important and relevant to me."

Feminist author Teresa Riordan:

"When it comes to the opposite sex, males from many species are easily deceived. Male fireflies flirt with penlights. Male turkeys become randy at the mere sight of a fake, female turkey head. Male humans find feminine decoys equally beguiling. Women recognise this. And they have shrewdly, cannily and knowingly deployed artifice in their ceaseless battle to captivate the inherently roving eye of the male ... As much as it initially galled the feminist inside me to admit this, women have been the driving innovative force behind many of these inventions."

Perspective Needed -- Feminism's Lie: Denying Reality About Sexual Power And Rape by Camille Paglia:

"Feminism, coveting social power, is blind to woman's cosmic sexual power."

In Defense of Male Sexuality by Hestia:

"All healthy male sexual expression is criminalized in our culture today. Look around and the examples are scattered about everywhere. The leftist feminists consider all men to be potential rapists while their right wing sisters believe all men are potential adulterers...

"Men were made to appreciate female beauty and to respond to it. Such responses are noble and help us make new life and move forward as humanity. A man admiring a beautiful woman is as natural as admiring the beautiful view of a mountain or a flower filled valley, even a spiritual experience at times, and a positive part of human life...

"Considering this normal, natural response to be a negative one, as is done today, has criminalized male sexuality and left it open for abuse. Women dress and behave in ways that allow them to use their beauty power over men, men whom they have no intention of sharing themselves with, all to earn favors or manipulate men into performing for them. This is a terrible abuse of something good, a perversion, and is causing a great rift in gender relations, one that is already breeding hatred and upset and will continue to until it is stopped."

Anakin Niceguy:

"Like it or not, men react on a very basic biological level to sexual stimuli, even when they are virtuous enough to not want to follow through on anything illicit. Do we, as men, stop to think about what the constant barrage of female sexuality does to our mental and emotional health, if not our spiritual health? Think, for instance, about the unwanted sexual tension and the mental and emotional stress, anger, and depression that all too often follows. Think about all the compromises that men make with regard to their dignity and self-worth in order to fulfill a strong drive that has been overstimulated...

What is particularly galling about discussing this matter is that it will be greeted in three very unhelpful ways:

1) Mockery: A man will be accused of being a 'frustrated loser.'

2) Apathy: You will be regarded as a prude. After all, it is supposed that men want non-stop titillation by women.

3) Chivalrous male-bashing: There may be some acknowledgment that wanton displays of female sexuality are a problem, but men will be held solely responsible. Men will be regarded as lecherous beasts, while fashion models, porn stars, and other immodest women will be regarded as precious, unfortunate victims who have been exploited."

Brandon Sergent:

"'I've always depended on the kindness of strangers.' uttered Blanche DuBois, in 'A Streetcar Named Desire'. A line once so antiquated and indicative of a long dead era -and irresponsibility- is slowly and insidiously making a comeback, that is, if it ever really left. It seems to me that the women’s liberation movement is making a tremendous backslide in American culture as a result of two major factors. The first being movies and television making it a male’s duty to cater to a woman’s needs if she is attractive, or should I say, sexually alluring, enough. And the second being women who are eager to exploit this opportunity to sell their bodies, and their dignity, for an easy ride without being honest about the nature of the sale. In fact, these days, shaking your ass for preferential treatment isn’t so much an attack on dignity, as it is accepted commerce. Strippers make more money than many socially vital positions. Which is fine because they are honest about it, my problem is with those who are every bit as much sex dealers, but without the sand to be honest about it.

"I say we repeal sexual harassment laws entirely. If women don’t want to be called toots they shouldn’t wear jeans 2 sizes too small and spend more money annually on makeup than they do on healthcare."

Pat Lunsford:

"The urge for sex stems from the human instinct to procreate, which at times can be stronger than the urge to survive. It is a completely natural human instinct." (Penalties for rape are second only to penalties for murder because the human instinct to procreate is second only to the human instinct to survive.)

Women torturing men en masse: Physiology of the Male Sex Drive

Michelle Goodman, CNN:

"Throughout history, humans have used their bodies to get what they want -- from ancient Egyptian ruler Cleopatra, who cemented her power through liaisons with Roman rulers Julius Caesar and Mark Antony, to the man and woman who were arrested at a Fort Wright, Kentucky, motel in late June for allegedly swapping sex for gasoline. Regardless of our motivation, scientists say we're hardwired to use our bodies as a bargaining chip.

A recent study of 475 University of Michigan undergraduates ages 17 to 26 found that 27 percent of the men and 14 percent of the women who weren't in a committed relationship had offered someone favors or gifts -- help prepping for a test, laundry washing, tickets to a college football game -- in exchange for sex. On the flip side, 5 percent of the men surveyed and 9 percent of the women said they'd attempted to trade sex for such freebies.

And although they weren't hard up for resources, the students surveyed 'recognized the value of this socioeconomic currency system,' says Daniel Kruger, research scientist at the University of Michigan School of Public Health, who published his findings in the April issue of 'Evolutionary Psychology.'

'It's more about getting what you want than getting what you need,' he says. 'Unless you think everyone needs a $200 Louis Vuitton bag.'"

Slavery, the Epitome of Male-bashing - Traditional Female Power - Now More Than Ever

Jessica Bennett, Newsweek: "Yes, women have sex to get what they want—and they're not always timid about it."

"Women are certainly not above telling 'white lies,' or even bald-faced ones, if it serves their purposes ('size doesn't matter,' 'we can still be friends,'), while at the same time demanding total honesty from men...A man will be constrained to submerge his true personality and adjust his opinions in the hope of getting a little sex. And instead of allowing men to express themselves openly and honestly, most women force men to be "politically correct," sometimes even at the threat of losing their jobs. This isn't honesty -- it's catering to an extremely sexist society, biased toward women. Of course, she'll wear makeup, dye her hair, and put on a padded bra, and it won't even occur to her that she's deceiving anyone (including herself)." -- Matthew Fitzgerald, Why Men Have To Lie To Women

Kate Devlin, Telegraph U.K.: "Buying a woman presents could help men get them into bed, a new study which shows that chimpanzees have sex for gifts suggests."

"Men’s biologically determined sexual eagerness and women’s resultant ability to choose have led to a universal expectation in women, and in men, that men who desire sex will offer women gifts." (Malinowski 319; Buss, The Evolution 99-101)

According to nationally acclaimed clinical psychologist Willard F. Harley, Jr., sex is a man's number one need. "Need" is clearly distinguished from "want". A "want" is optional, a "need" is not optional. We are using "need" in the sense of "something required to live or make living worthwhile" as in "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

Sex is a universally-recognized (except in feminism) need. Maslow's hierarchy of needs includes both sex and sexual intimacy. In general, men require more sexual activity than women. It is taboo in most societies to openly acknowledge sex as a need because societies would then be forced to recognize an obligation to meet that need. Women have always maintained power by controlling access to sex just as certain social hierarchies maintain power by controlling access to food and water. How would you feel if the leaders of our society maintained control by preventing you from having food and water?

• Feminists deny that women have ever had power by denying that sex is a real need.  America's unique blend of puritanical and highly sexualized society means it is taboo to speak of men's need for sex while men's need for sex is amplified by constant exposure to sexual imagery; yet men are offered no support.  Many other nations acknowledge and support the need for sex by decriminalizing sex.  Feminists' denial of sex as a real need is the key to feminists' claim that women have always been more oppressed by virtue of not being able to get their needs met.  Feminists deny that women have ever exploited men's need for sex.  Read "What is a life without sex like?"  Feminists' claim to oppression simply could not stand if sex were ever acknowledged as a genuine need. Women control men by regulating sex. Were sex not a genuine male need, and women not exploiting that need, then none of the following would be true:
  
  
• Nearly $7 billion is spent on cosmetics annually
  
  
• "Nearly 11.7 million cosmetic surgical and nonsurgical procedures were performed in the United States in 2007... Women had 91 percent of cosmetic procedures. "

• Women's sexual power over men is so well known, it's universal knowledge: “For a man to walk into a bar and have his choice of any woman he wants, he would have to be the ruler of the world. For a woman to have the same power over men, she’d have to do her hair.” (Bill Maher)  “My success has allowed me to strike out with a higher class of women.” (Woody Allen)  "Man comes from the womb and spends the rest of his life trying to get back there." (George Bernard
  Shaw) The power of sexual suggestion is so strong that sex is a cornerstone of modern marketing and advertising. Laws giving women "veto power" over sex have carried the same weight as murder laws since the beginning of recorded history. How can you say that women could not own property when women, in effect, owned men? How can feminists seriously claim women never had power? Society has always maintained female power by discouraging women from approaching men and encouraging women to force men to come to them as the only way to get their needs met. It's a double-standard and a one way street. It's the elephant in the room that everyone refuses to talk about. So much for any hope of equality.

• "men do everything they do in order to get laid. This is mostly unconscious on the part of the men; they don’t necessarily know that they do everything they do in order to get laid... they are evolutionarily designed to compete and achieve, and, when they do, women seek them out as sexual partners." (evolutionary psychologist Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa: Psychology Today)

• "But in most marriages, one spouse, usually the husband, has a much greater need for sex than the other." (Marriage Builders)

• Maslow's hierarchy of needs: "Physiological needs include: Breathing, Food, Homeostasis, Sex"

• Juli Slattery, Focus on the Family: "One of the biggest differences between you and your husband is the fact that he experiences sex as a legitimate physical need."

• "A heterosexual community can be analyzed as a marketplace in which men seek to acquire sex from women by offering other resources in exchange... The social exchange analysis emphasizes that sex is a female resource, so that men must offer women other resources in exchange for it. But how much? The price of sex (so to speak) may vary widely. To commence a sexual relationship with a particular woman, a man may have to offer her a fancy dinner, or a long series of compliments, or a month of respectful attention, or a lifetime promise to share all his wealth and earnings with her exclusively. This price is negotiated between the two individuals in the context of the prices that other, similar couples set." (Sexual Economics: Sex as Female Resource for Social Exchange in Heterosexual Interactions, Roy F. Baumeister, Department of Psychology Florida State University; Kathleen D. Vohs, Faculty of Commerce, Marketing Division, University of British Columbia; Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2004, Vol. 8, No. 4, 339–363)

• Every woman is aware of the sexual market system and most women have participated in it.  Read one woman's description of the sexual market system.

• Sexy girls have it easy See traditional female power in action: "...donning a sexy exterior earned her £20.50 (approximately $41) of free goods more than her dowdy duds did."

• Sex-For-Tickets Fan Found Guilty of Attempted Prostitution  But implying sex in exchange for resources somehow isn't prostitution?

• Ashley Dupré: Let me say this - most girls, to varying degrees of course, want to be pampered and have nice shoes, designer handbags and gorgeous clothes. I know many women who target guys with money and use them to get these things. They toy with them, flirt, go on dates, have sex and then drop hints about that new dress at the store down the street or being short on rent money – and the guys deliver it. This is a dishonest relationship.

• Every single adult female human is 100% aware that men can be easily manipulated; almost every woman who abuses her traditional female power by underdressing in public, the workplace, etc. to manipulate men for her personal gain rationalizes her behavior by claiming that men have the choice to control themselves.  Mens' behavior is unconsciously biased by female sexual power, therefore, under the influence of such female sexual power, men do not have the choice to fully control themselves.  This is why every nation on Earth has common sense laws against obscenity, etc.  Manipulating a person against his will and for personal gain (even just for an "ego rush") is exploitative, dishonest and wrong.  Sexually manipulating a man against his will is sexual harassment and sexual abuse.

• The male urge to procreate is so strong that it influences men's behavior both consciously and unconsciously.  Evolution has seen to it that men's bias toward attractive women is beyond men's conscious control.  Women know this so well that they gauge their power in terms of their sexual attractiveness, and artificially increase their sexual attractiveness by way of cosmetics to gain even more power to exploit men. Psychology Today: Men do everything they do in order to get laid, Why women will always have more power than men  BBC News: Sex cues ruin men's decisiveness "Dr George Fieldman, principal lecturer in psychology at Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College, told the BBC News website: 'The fact men are distracted by sexual cues fits in to evolutionary experience. It's what they are expected to do. They are looking for opportunities to pass on their genes.' He said the study confirmed what had been suspected by many."
  

• This causes men very real, genuine physical pain, moreso than waterboarding.  Physiology of the Male Sex Drive, Vasocongestion  Society conditions men to ignore pain and/or not complain about it.  Torture is cruel!

• "Although women account for slightly more than half (52 percent) of the U.S. population, they write 80 percent of all checks and are responsible for 85 percent of all consumer spending. In fact, for years women have been the ones primarily responsible for purchasing household goods and services in our country. From Kellogg's Corn Flakes to Calvin Klein jeans to Ethan Allen furniture, women control the purse strings." (LIMRA's Market Facts)

Let's connect some dots. Feminists consider all heterosexual sex to be inherently violent, and complain about a pay gap that causes men to earn more money because women choose to work fewer hours and in easier jobs.  Women are responsible for 85% of consumer spending in the U.S. If women earn <50% of total national income but spend 85% of total national income then where does the >35% difference come from?  Prostitution is prohibited in the United States. It seems that men with female partners are coming home from work, handing over their paychecks, and getting something that they would otherwise not be getting in exchange.  But what are single, lonely, taxpaying men getting in exchange for their tax dollars that make it possible for 17% of U.S. women to live off of government welfare?  How many hard working, taxpaying men are single, lonely and living in pain because 17% of U.S. women are married to the government instead?

The facts speak for themselves.  In the USA, the ratio of males to females in a state predicts the suicide rate in that state.  In general, the more males a state has for every female, the greater the suicide rate in that state.  In the USA, seven of the top nine "suicide states" are also among the top nine "male states".  The only state that bans "no-fault" divorce is also the state with the lowest suicide rate. 

Emily Hopper, Married to the government:

"Perhaps they are concerned about appearing 'sexist,' but I found it disappointing that the article on the 'marriage gap' failed to state the (somewhat obvious) main reason married women vote Republican and single women vote Democrat. Well, I'm a woman, so I'll say it ...

Women, no matter how independent they may believe themselves to be, are always subconsciously looking for someone to take care of them, and having children makes that need all the more powerful. Married women have their husbands, so they want the government to back off and stay out of their husband's pockets. Single women have no one, so they look to the government to take the place of a husband and provide for them.

You can't fight nature."

Melanie Saiz Cordero:

"Like the little boy in the old fable, 'The Emperor’s New Clothes,' I vow to stand up and scream... 'The Feminists are Naked!'"

Elizabeth Austin, Lipstick Feminists:

"Sexual power is a pistol loaded with only one bullet

I feel kind of sorry for Monica Lewinsky. It's not that I consider her a victim, by any stretch; when a young woman heads to Washington with the expressed intention of earning her presidential kneepads, she forfeits any future right to claims of sexual exploitation. But neither do I see Lewinsky as a post-feminist power girl, wielding her feminine wiles in a brazen bid for an easy G-15 rating. To me, she's just a painfully sentimental, pathologically vulnerable, sexually available young woman who honestly believed her expensive haircut and starry gaze were enough to bring the Leader of the Free World to his knees. If I weren't a feminist, I guess I'd call her a pathetic little slut.

That's a hard thing for me to admit, and a difficult word for me to use. But over the last few months, I've been horrified to hear a soprano chorus of 'lipstick feminists' crow over the exploits of Monica the Power Babe. In one recent New York Times op-ed, headlined 'Monica Lewinsky, Career Woman,' Katie Roiphe complained that we lack a term for 'the opposite of sexual harassment, when a person of less power uses her sexual attractiveness or a personal relationship with a person of greater power to get ahead.' Frustrated by her stalled career, Roiphe reports, Lewinsky 'used her personal power over the President to get results,' threatening him with public exposure if he didn't land her a new job, pronto.

'There is nothing inherently wrong with Ms. Lewinsky's way of thinking, or with her attempt to translate her personal relationship with the President into professional advancement,' comments Roiphe, who is apparently unfamiliar with the legal concept of blackmail. 'It is a time-honored female tradition to use sexual power as a way to try to improve one's position in the world....'"

"The way we need to understand what the heck happened in the last 40 years is that it was all incremental for women."

"In other words, when women talked about 'equality' -- that never really happened. In order for equality to happen (and it never would be perfect anyway because perfect equality is a utopian ideal), women would have had to have given up their very real privileges -- privileges around children, sexual power, military service, courtship rituals, things like Systems is mentioning and so on.

"Feminism talked a bit about getting rid of these things, but of course nothing much happened to them, because apart from the radical Marxist bitches in the academy, most women had no interest in giving up their power bases (sex and children) or the privileges they had accreted over the ages relating to these, even as they eagerly embraced the new powers and freedoms given to women by feminism: sexual freedom, economic opportunity and so on.

"So at the end of the day it was all incremental power and freedom for women. They surrendered pretty much none of their traditional power and privilege, yet colonized the male power base and eroded areas of male privilege in the name of 'equality'...

"Basically it's fair to say that women defended their own power bases and actually increased their power over them substantially such that they have a near totalitarian power over their own traditional bases of children and sex (abortion rights, VAWA, rape and harassment laws, c/s regimes, family law) while aggressively colonizing the male space. When women speak of equality, therefore, I think what they really mean is (1) equality between men and women in what was previously the male space coupled with (2) absolute power of women in the female space.

"Some equality, huh?"

Marc Rudov:

"Most men and women still believe that, in the mating ritual, the man should unilaterally pursue the woman:

'The man calls the woman. The man arranges the date. The man picks up the woman to drive her to the date. The man pays for the date. The man initiates the goodnight kiss. The man returns the woman to her home. The man calls the next day to thank her for allowing him the privilege of spending his money on her. Then, the man calls a few days hence to determine whether this woman is available again for another opportunity to entertain her.'

Yes, in 2004, when women are doctors, lawyers, CEOs, mayors, and governors, the majority of romancers still play this obsolete, disempowering game...  So, when you make a man buy you — by forcing him to pursue, court, wine, dine, and vacation you — he will feel ownership of you and act accordingly. He may smile and pretend that nothing is wrong, assuming he will close the deal on his new possession at the night’s end, while secretly resenting the whole charade. Quite simply: If you don’t want to be a possession, don’t act like one."

As far as courtship and dating are concerned, the vast majority of women are still "pay for play".

"How Feminists Have Destabilized Marriage in Massachusetts" at MassNews.com:

"They’re Still Working Against Marriage with Our Tax Dollars.

This story about the 25th anniversary of a women’s center in Greenfield explains how feminists have intentionally destabilized marriage throughout Massachusetts. They believe that women will not be 'free' until marriage has been eliminated."

"Georgia’s female-supremacist family courts" by Stephanie Ramage:

"I am struck by the idea that even in our criminal courts, a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, but in our family courts, a father is usually presumed to be guilty of not being as good a parent as a mother, of not being worthy of equal time with his children. It is strange to me that women are treated only as if they have divorced their spouses, but men are treated as if they have divorced their children as well. Women, by virtue of their gender, something as arbitrary as the color of their skin, are assumed to be the rightful custodial parents."

"I used to think feminism stood for equality. I've seen for myself it does not. Someone with a 'loud voice' needs to take a look at the facts, someone who doesn't benefit financially by the outcome. Then they need to use that loud voice to talk louder than the father-haters."

"In the spring of 2006, an estimated 13.6 million parents had custody of 21.2 million children under 21 years of age while the other parent lived somewhere else. The number of custodial parents has remained statistically unchanged since 1994 (Table 1). The 21.2 million children living with their custodial parent represented 26.0 percent of all 81.6 million children under 21 years old living in families... In 2006, 5 of every 6 custodial parents were mothers"

"Some fathering advocates would say that almost every social ill faced by America's children is related to fatherlessness. Six are noted here. As supported by the data below, children from fatherless homes are more likely to be poor, become involved in drug and alcohol abuse, drop out of school, and suffer from health and emotional problems. Boys are more likely to become involved in crime, and girls are more likely to become pregnant as teens."

Effects on children of removing a father from the life of a child

Henry Makow writes about men giving up on American women in The Male Fallout From Feminism:

"Martha Kirkland is a 'happy but poor' 30-something NYC artist who laments that she is dateless despite being 'bright, thin, attractive, funny' and traditional."

Daughter of famous feminist rejects its 'me first' philosophy:

"Alice Walker, author of The Color Purple, touched the lives of a generation of women. A champion of women’s rights, she has always argued that motherhood is a form of servitude. But one woman didn’t buy in to Alice's beliefs--her daughter, Rebecca, 38. Here the writer describes what it was like to grow up as the daughter of a cultural icon, and why she feels so blessed to be the sort of woman 64-year-old Alice despises--a mother. ... ‘I very nearly missed out on becoming a mother--thanks to being brought up by a rabid feminist who thought motherhood was about the worst thing that could happen to a woman. ... In fact, having a child has been the most rewarding experience of my life. Far from enslaving me, three-and-a-half-year-old Tenzin has opened my world. My only regret is that I discovered the joys of motherhood so late. ... As the child of divorced parents, I know only too well the painful consequences of being brought up in those circumstances. Feminism has much to answer for denigrating men and encouraging women to seek independence whatever the cost to their families. ... Yes, feminism has undoubtedly given women opportunities. It’s helped open the doors for us at schools, universities and in the workplace. But what about the problems it’s caused for my contemporaries? What about the children? The ease with which people can get divorced these days doesn’t take into account the toll on children. That’s all part of the unfinished business of feminism. ... Feminism has betrayed an entire generation of women into childlessness. It is devastating. But far from taking responsibility for any of this, the leaders of the women’s movement close ranks against anyone who dares to question them--as I have learned to my cost. I don’t want to hurt my mother, but I cannot stay silent. I believe feminism is an experiment, and all experiments need to be assessed on their results. Then, when you see huge mistakes have been paid, you need to make alterations. "

Birth Rate:

"For a number of decades the birthrate has been falling steadily throughout the western world. In most developed countries it is now well below the replacement level of 2.1 – in Spain, Italy, South Korea, and Japan, it has fallen to around 1.3 or even less... feminism has a huge role to play in the infertility of Japan’s females."

"And I wonder, if civilization continues for another 40 years (no guarantee on that one, imho) how these lonely women, their fatherless children, and our society will function consequent to what can only be termed our Feminist Holocaust."

Feminists exploit rape by hugely inflating rape statistics for political gain, however False Rape Accusations May Be More Common Than Thought by Wendy McElroy:

"Is it the new 1-in-4 statistic? I don't mean the widely-circulated '1-in-4 women will be raped in their lifetime' but a statistic that suggests '1-in-4 accusations of rape are false.'"

Boys are constantly promised that being a hero is a sure way to find love and acceptance. Life for most men is not worth living without love and acceptance, which is the reason why most men are all too willing to die for love. If only it were that easy. Is the promise that being a hero is a sure way to find love and acceptance the biggest lie of all?

Plane Crashes Into Hudson: Hero Pilot Saves Everyone

Lonely Pilot Commits Suicide

The Misandry Bubble

BBC News: New York passers-by leave good Samaritan to die "A homeless man (who had recently lost his job and home) in New York City who was stabbed after coming to a woman's aid was left to die while passers-by ignored him, CCTV footage has shown."

"A reluctant hero of the Oklahoma City bombing who took his own life was wracked with guilt because an injury kept him from rescuing more victims, his closest friend said." Do males deserve our sympathy too, or are they just disposable?

Where did all the heroes go?  Elizabeth Austin, Lipstick Feminists: "Sexual power is a pistol loaded with only one bullet."  Have you ever wondered where all the heroes went? Half a million American men were sent to their deaths in World War II alone.  Suicide.org: There are about 4 male deaths by suicide for each female death by suicide, and more than 742,000 Americans committed suicide from 1977 through 2001.  Perhaps the heroes saved the bullet for themselves.

"The female-supremacist hate movement called 'feminism' must be opened to the disinfecting sunlight of the world's gaze and held to a stern accounting for its grievous transgressions."

"These feminists are children in adult bodies who believe the way forward is to empower themselves out of a relationship with a man - or not start one at all - but in so doing need collective support from the nanny state due to this alleged oppression by men. This is a form of Marxism using the collectivity of females to overturn the traditional family. It is working well with marrieds now a minority in Canada and 75% of all divorces initiated by women and 90% of all physical child custody orders given to females.

The chief purveyors of this doctrine are tax supported public servants who are Professional Feminists with no other skill sets ... This is the source of taxpayer funding to so called community groups (including DV shelters) and Academics both male and female who earn their living by promoting feminist propaganda and discrediting masculinity. Many of the most virulent propagandists are female law professors who have no problem with mendacity in text books they author to be used by students."

U.S. taxpayers are now forced to spend tens of billions of dollars funding well over six hundred Women's Studies departments at public universities nationwide, over 270 women's commissions, domestic violence shelters that refuse to help male victims, lawmakers, lawyers and courts that create and enforce "family" and Affirmative Action laws that openly discriminate against men, and the bureaucracy that perpetuates all of this.

Please ask yourself: Has not feminism accomplished its objective... and then some? Is it not time to end the hate and recognize laws that make our hard-earned tax dollars pay professional feminists, hurt men and children under the guise of "equality" for what they truly are? Will your next vote perpetuate the hate or help to end it?