music of the week
music of the week
In modern culture, the story we are given is a disingenous one. It tells us that men always had the vote, while women were denied it. This is not only untrue, many important historical perspectives have been airbrushed from of our collective memory. For example, the simple fact was that at the start of the 20th century, most men did not have the right to a parliamentary vote. But this is rarely mentioned.
I will say that again in case you missed it — most men did not have the vote. Nevertheless, they were expected to fight and die in the trenches of the Great War.
Furthermore, Emmaline Pankhurt urged her suffragettes to hand white feathers to any male not in uniform to shame them to enlist in a war that killed millions, including teenage boys under 16.
Men on Strike
Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood and the American Dream — and Why It Matters
by Helen Smith
How did society reach the point where, a lawsuit filed this week alleged, a man working at the desk of Planet Fitness on Bay Shore, Long Island was too afraid of repercussions to enter the ladies’ room to administer CPR to a dying woman? “He said he didn’t know what to do and that he wasn’t allowed to go into the ladies’ bathroom,” a witness said in an affidavit.
A poll conducted on behalf of a British children’s charity reports that many men refuse to join because they fear being labeled pedophiles. A British Airways passenger sued the airline because he was forced to change seats in accordance with the carrier’s policy that no man be allowed to sit next to a child, even one accompanied by his parents. (Don’t worry, there’s a perfectly great middle seat for you in the last row, guys. Next time, take the bus.)
In Illinois, 28-year-old Fitzroy Barnaby was convicted of “unlawful restraint of a minor,” a sex crime, and placed on a sex-offender registry after he grabbed the arm of an 14-year-old girl to lecture her on not dashing into the street in front of a moving car, as she had just done. On a blog called Parent Dish, a reader said he stopped coaching girls soccer after an 8-year-old player told him, “I don’t have to listen to you. I can get you in trouble just by telling people you touched me.” In England, a man passing by 2-year-old Abigail Rae, who later drowned, declined to help guide her to safety because he feared being labeled a pervert.
Everywhere you look, men are AWOL. Have they declined to show up or have they been kicked out?
Both, says Helen Smith in a new book citing these alarming examples and others. “Men on Strike” notes that men have disappeared from campus (where nearly 60% of undergrads are female), from the workplace (the percentage of men employed hit an all-time low last fall, down from 87% to 70% in the past 65 years) and from the family (the American birth rate is just above an all-time low, and more than half of women under 30 giving birth are unmarried). Tired of being labeled defective women, wary of the financial traps of marriage and fatherhood, hammered by the disappearance of construction and manufacturing jobs, disgusted by the presumption that their sexuality is a scary disease, men are shrugging and turning away.
The rules of the game have tilted against men in every field this side of coal mining (black lung being one of the few male privileges the ladies are happy to cede). Family courts hold men financially liable even for children conceived by women who falsely claimed to be using birth control, while at colleges the presumption of innocence has been withdrawn from men accused of sexual misbehavior.
“Uncle Tims” — male feminist lapdogs eager to curry favor with their female and feminized masters — are everywhere, Smith notes. Yet one man quoted in the book reports dropping out of college after being accused of “maladjustment” and subjected to horrified looks when he said he might buy a gun someday. A video-gaming blogger notes of fellow enthusiasts, “It’s bizarre how some of them are in their 20s, have graduated from good schools, and have simply zero interest in women.”
Needless to say, there is not a renowned and powerful National Organization for Men to lobby against these grim and worsening realities, and if there were it would be treated by a joke by those who didn’t dedicate themselves to eliminating or feminizing it the way they destroyed so many traditional all-male associations.
Helen Smith was once a feminist, when that stood for equality and fairness. “Now it means female privilege,” she writes, “and I believe discrimination against men is every bad as discrimination against women.”
She concludes by urging men to speak up more, to get their point of view across in public forums, to stand up for their rights in courts and on campus. But as a psychologist she has intimate knowledge of fractured relationships from people she has counseled, and she advises women that they also have much to gain by keeping men from fading out of the picture. It’s a myth that men won’t talk about their feelings, she says: If they’re silent, it’s because they think they won’t get a fair hearing. Listening without judgment, focusing on his positive aspects, and resisting the temptation to complain about him (especially to third parties) can be useful in keeping a man around.
Polls show that women’s happiness has steadily declined over the last five decades, even as women enjoy unprecedented success in educational and career terms.
But if men catch a cold, society sneezes. We tell “men they are worthless perverts who reek of male privilege while simultaneously castrating them should they act in a manly manner, and now women are upset that men are becoming more feminized?” Smith writes. “You reap what you sow.”
Let’s begin by explaining something that should be obvious, but which is seldom stated explicitly. Feminism is a movement of women, by women, for women. Men may support feminism, but they cannot participate in feminism. It’s an exclusive all-girls club.
as feminists want male “allies,” they want male allies who will shut their mouths and nod their heads in mute acquiescence while women get paid to proclaim to the world what wretched and despicable creatures men are.
Here’s a hint, guys: Women who like men are not feminists.
Oh, sure, there are heterosexual women who for one reason or another describe themselves as “feminist,” but the more she studies feminist theory and embraces feminist ideology, the more she is compelled to the belief that all men are violent predatory oppressors. Feminism is a journey to lesbianism and any woman who tries to reconcile this ideology with a normal female life — men, marriage and motherhood — is condemning herself to disappointment, while creating needless misery for those around her.
It would be better for such a woman simply to avoid this exercise in futility; the minute she decides to major in Women’s Studies, a young woman could adopt radical lesbian separatism as her creed and avoid all the harms she would otherwise inevitably suffer herself or inflict on others in pursuit of an ideologically consistent “heterosexual feminism.” But some people are so profoundly unhappy that their only source of satisfaction in life is to make other people unhappy, and some heterosexual women embrace feminism as an excuse for taking out their resentments on the men in their lives, an ideological rationalization for their weird sadistic love/hate relationships with men.
Why do you think Hillary Clinton refuses to divorce Bill?
Feminism’s war against human nature means that, insofar as any man internalizes feminism’s critique of masculinity — abjuring those qualities of assertive confidence which feminists condemn as “male domination” — he thereby becomes less attractive to women, even those feminists who routinely complain that men are oppressing them.
No matter how hard you try to be a latter-day Ashley Wilkes, any woman worth having will always prefer Rhett Butler.
So please, guys, don’t embarrass yourselves by atttempting to appease feminists, becoming a Vichy collaborator with the feminist regime. Whatever you might hope to gain by being a “male feminist” can never compensate for your loss of dignity and self-respect.
The Toronto-Based Arabic newspaper “Meshwar” published (Issue 109, July 25, 2014, P. 21) a photo montage featuring Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, as a bloodthirsty vampire who kills and consumes Palestinian children.
With a blue Star of David, a symbol of Judaism, adorning his forefront, and an injured Palestinian toddler in front of him, Netanyahu’s look seems vicious, his eyes are searching for a prey, his mouth is wide open and blood is dripping from his canine teeth. The photo montage is crowned with the following sentences: “Can’t get enough. Save Palestinian Kids.”
Meshwar newspaper addresses the Arab community in Canada and distributed for free in the Greater Toronto area. The editor of the Arabic newspaper is Dr. Nazih Khatatba, a board member of the ‘Palestine House’ in Mississauga, and its offices are located at 3195 Erindale Station Rd., Mississauga, Ontario, the same address of the Palestine House.
When I posted the video of anti-Israel protesters chanting “Heil Hitler” at pro-Israel supporters during Ezra Levant’s rally in Calgary Thursday (see here) you absolutely knew there was no way that attending media didn’t witness it and stayed silent – now we have proof that at least one did exactlt that.
While reading this piece “Silent vigil Palestinian solidarity” I noticed Calgary Herald reporter Erika Stark omitted the fact that Israel supporters were attacked even after referencing the event where it happened:
Friday’s rally was markedly different from the past protests, where chants filled the air, tensions were high between Palestinian and Israel supporters and angry words were exchanged between the two groups. (see here)
I confronted Stark on Twitter about this obvious omission and then noticed this tweet by her:
A professional reporter admitting she self-censored in order to shield vile racists wishing for the death of Jews and, she still has a job.