Dead men don’t tell tales, you little bugger, but little buggers like you do, and those tales are sad obfuscations of the reality that faces men everywhere. Yes, men get raped, beaten, foxholed, cornholed, pillowed, tented, and any of a zillion other ways of saying fucked and/or over every single day, but it is always the one or the thirty six hypotheticals that get your attention.

Dude, Camille Paglia was right, women should learn to fight, or shut the hell up when it comes to expecting me to do it for them, but there’s always a stripe-minded Jason or two who are more than willing to step in to the battles they CREATE ( think about this creation in terms of a ‘womans right to bear children’ is in direct parallel steop with the ‘right to bear arms’ with the only difference being that the guns, at least, are created in quality controlled environments)and do it for them. You are trained, Jason, and that training is hard to undo.

Jason asks: “Please provide citations for those examples I requested earlier”

You know yourself Jason, and you know you are prone to that pandering. I don’t have the time in life (besides, its a rather busy rater kaber right now) to flatter you by seeking and cross referencing some useless self effacing comment you made to me that gave me my first clue about you and your tendency to pander to the fembotz.

Here are the points I have made: men, women, blacks and whites are so genetically identical as to be nearly indistinguishable with respect to their abilities. Then I stated that none of the “studies” Robert exhibited, sans actual citation of course, accounted for societal constructs that might lead to a lack of interest or suppression of participation in a particular field. Next, I said I was surprised this was still going on. Then I expressed more surprise, that you were going after me suddenly, and tried to state my actual position (which you have warped and outright ignored several times thus far).

Here’s the hypothetical example I was thinking of. Thank goodness I made it up in my head, and this didn’t really happen, much less to up to 36 women! http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/28/8564 Yes, 36 sure does pale in comparison to all those men who died over this ridiculous misadventure, on both sides, but please do give me examples of men that get raped by their fellow soldiers then killed. And you wonder why women don’t flock to the army. Not only is there the gender-construct drilled into them from birth saying that women don’t become soldiers, but there’s also the threat of being raped and killed by your compatriots (not even by your enemies!).

Please provide citations for those examples I requested earlier, and while you’re at it, also cite studies refuting my assertion that gender constructs no longer have any sway in society and that the real problems society faces are resultant from a matriarchal conspiracy (score one for the Barbara Bush allusion on that front!).

Every time you utter the word–and you utter it every time you can, Jason–you give it far more credence as a social force than it deserves–and in acknowledging it as it is stated by white middle class women, you deny the power actual misogyny has over real women elsewhere.

You see, Jason, it isn’t merely that I re-state ‘unpopular positions’ but that you re-state positions that are flawed, both academically, and empirically. In this case, when you assert “men are in fact in positions of power higher than, and more frequently than, women” what you are realy saying is that you have adopted a white middle class paradigm of power, rather than thought the issue through. You accepted the dogma, and the rhetoric as true.

Undeniably, men fill slots (ahem) of power everywhere–but in so doing they have conceded power elsewhere, chiefly, in the home, raising the next generation of the “powerful”. Jason, which is more powerful: a job as a CEO in a factory, or as CEO in a household raisning the minds of ‘tomorrow’? That’s a no-brainer for me, Jas, or anyone who has ever raised a kid that turned out even ‘half-alright’ but the paradigm of power that you assert is not only outdated, but just plain wrong.

Barbara Bush raised two boys who became president ( that’s a joke, Jas, not a factual error); England has put forward more soldiers who conquered more nations in more wars than any recent dynasty, and that nation has been headed, loosely, for the last two hundred years by a woman, a queen bee with lots of drones; a matriarchy in its own right.

Prince Charles…hehehe; Prince Harry-going bald,both impotent before matriarchy, while the Queen, and her working model of power ( and Victorias before her) rules the ‘civilized’ earth, with its little bastard child, America–headed currently by its single-mom raised favorite son, Obama (just this year with Obama? you asj…no, Jas, for the last several hundred before him)

That isn’t a small feat at all, and quite prima facie that the real power wears a skirt ( Du, that’s for you)

And Jas: “I didn’t realize that the Iraq war was waged just because it has been made socially acceptable to spend your men killing other people’s men”
Well I am glad you are now enlightened as to how matrilocal societies attain wealth for the “motherland.” By upholding the paradigm that it is ok to hurt, maim, and kill men. A no-brainer, once you get your brain unclogged from al that rhetoric blaming ‘opportunists’ and ‘international capitalists’ for wars of conquest.

And here is a real straw-fly in the ointment “how many have committed suicide after being mistreated or sexually abused by her comrades-in-arms; or worse, possibly actually murdered? How many times has that scenario played itself out with men in contemporary armies?”

You want top take the example of a hypothetical woman that you create in your own fauxminist world and compare that to all of the males that have died in this century fighting for the matriarchy of the jolly ol Queen ( NO DuWayne, I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT YOU!)and her consorts? You are as I sated earlier–a fauxminist tool, nothing less.

When you employ the hypothetical abused-woman argument at the expense of the “real men are dying/being dep[rived/beaten’imprisoned every day” argument, you lose me altogether, not only because it denies the reality of men who died, men who are imprisoned, and men who work the shittiest of the shitty jobs everywhere–and them without people like you playing a little tiny lil’ pity the po’ hypothetical woman scenario over and over again.

Jason, you don’t want to talk about the reality of the effect of these stereotypes, you want to do what all fauxmenz do: insert, and re-insert your po’ wiminz propaganda scenario into every discussion in the hope that some fembot or dominatrix will save you from your own latently aggressive self, and affirm that you really really are a ‘good’ guy despite being a guy0–and even mopre manly if you fight for your imagined women rather than yourself.

And Jason, ‘French’ is to foreign in Canada as Berber is to Tunisia….

You’re a vile excuse for a human being and not worth it.

but on the other hand, we have the Iraq war as a testament to the other half of that ‘pro-woman’ agenda, which is ‘socially acceptable/tolerable violence’perpetrated against men of other nations.

Gee, I didn’t realize that the Iraq war was waged just because it has been made socially acceptable to spend your men killing other people’s men. Here I thought it was because some assholes took office and saw a way to profit by waging endless war. Again I assert, the gender roles asserted in this book (in the original post — remember it?) actually lead to men being soldiers. Gender roles like that men are aggressive, adventurous, and rugged, while women are cleanly, subservient, and sexually available. That’s why women weren’t allowed in the army for so long, and why they aren’t rushing into the army now — not because the institution is misandrist, because the powers that be consider women too soft to be of any use. And look at what happens when a woman does want to serve her country — how many have committed suicide after being mistreated or sexually abused by her comrades-in-arms; or worse, possibly actually murdered? How many times has that scenario played itself out with men in contemporary armies?

I honestly don’t know why I’m trying. You’re going to make some weird drawn-out analogy then call me names then call me blind for not seeing that women are some kinds of masterminds and criminals. Then you’ll fight with DuWayne some more about transgendered people, and la roue, ça tourne.

(See what I did there? I used a foreign language too. Maybe it’s just French, but hey, it’s bound to impress someone, since you’re trying to score points by speaking in other languages repeatedly yourself.)

– a victim I blamed for anything (you have a free hand with what I blamed them for)

– how and when I indicated I might blame rape victims for their rape

– an instance where I downplayed the violence and harm done to men when someone perpetrates an anti-male stereotype

– an ass I kissed

In the meantime, while you’re looking for such citations, I’d like to again point out that, despite the fact that misogyny exists more prevalently in today’s society*, that I’m well aware that there are man-haters out there who perpetuate stereotypes about or slanders against males in general. Not only am I aware of that fact, but I take umbrage at them with equal ferocity. It only happens that I’m commenting on this particular episode of you tilting at windmills, because you’re making a lot of assumptions about me and DuWayne with absolutely zero evidence of such. It pains me that someone might actually come away from this conversation thinking that you’re right about something you’ve said about me, assuming the evidence is on your side because how could someone possibly say such things about another human being without some kind of proof?

* (you know, because men are in fact in positions of power higher than, and more frequently than, women, in the same way that white men are in positions of power higher than and more frequently than blacks with the notable exception of the ceiling being shattered — but will it stay shattered? — just this year with Obama)

I want you to note, please, that aside from calling you a troll, which you undoubtedly are, I have been more than civil in discussing these issues with you. I respect your right to your opinion. I don’t, however, respect you laying one ad hominem after another across my name.

Speaking of names, could you at least pick one pseudonym? Or are you Legion?

Combine all ingredients in a large bowl with a hole in the bottom of it so that all of the common sense sifts out, and stir. and stir. and stir. and stir…..until ANY ATTEMPT AT CONVERSATION ON TOPICS OTHER THAN dUwAYNES PERPETUAL RAGE have dissipated and there is nothing to talk about any more except dUwAYNES RAGE AT HAVING AN EMPTY BOWL WITH A PERPETUAL HOLE IN IT ( METAPHOR ALERT)

Then, put contents of empty bowl through a constantly self serving filter, make sure you toss out any attempts at making sense! and Voila!. End of conversation about anything except DuWaynes empty bowl–full of denial and more discussions about DuWayne–in a skirt, resenting the inference that he might be sort of tranny( which, for the record, I never said)

Jason T White Wash formula:
one healthy dose of blame the victim, and blame the victim twice if the victim is male. Add a pinch of “you caused your own victimization” ( really, Jason, would you say that to a female rape victim too?) then sidestep with a “perpetrating a form of misandry himself” when one tries to discuss the violence and the harm that comes to men because of stereotypes AND violence perpetuated by women and the men that ‘love’ them–which to Jason would be unthinkable if the discussion were about massagerism or misanthropogynecology, because Jason is routinely an ass kisser when it comes to pandering to and appeasing the fauxminists.
Dan J: Right again. However, even more deeply rooted in the stereotype beyond ” the mother of the children in a custody dispute is not automatically the most fit parent” is the assumption that violence is ‘male’ behavior, when in fact all species of mammals exhibit female initiated violence, including ours.

This primacy of contact with children allows them to perpetuate the myths of motherhood, and the other myths of fatherhood–primarily the ‘absent father’ and the ‘violent man’ etc, through indoctrinating children into such beliefs at the expense of addressing female violence, etc.

The institutionalized mechanisms of socially permissible misandrist discourse and action are endless, but it is children who are taught this rhetoric which keeps the focus off of womens violence against children, and womens coercion

Beyond custody wars, women are quite capable of committing crimes as men do, but are ALWAYS sentenced more leniently; social definitions of crimes are defined by alleged ‘male’ attributes.But female crime has been under-documented,and worse, denied outright by the last generation of scholars-for the direct purpose of creating this idea of ‘liberation’ of women.

In theory, Obama wouldn’t have been possible without a generation of single mom raised kids, and so too in practice, which is a god thing; but on the other hand, we have the Iraq war as a testament to the other half of that ‘pro-woman’ agenda, which is ‘socially acceptable/tolerable violence’perpetrated against men of other nations.So our social policy of misandry really is misanthropy at its core, but only the part of misanthropy that means ” dead men”.