Houellebecq: Why do you never get it? Could you put your personal confabulations and stereotypes aside for a moment and just reflect on these matters.

Despite some men on here posting about having experienced acrimonious divorces, had AVOs taken out against them etc etc. you never scrutinize their claims about 'the system' treating them unjustly. Their emotional expressions of distress that have lingered years after the event, never seem to draw comment about a lack of objectivity and whether they might be expressing a biased opinion when they denigrate ALL women.

I don't denigrate all men at all; and if you can't distinguish between yourself and other males then that's a male problem. If you don't like the way men are portrayed - then portray yourself as the sort of man that isn't like those that are full of bitter complaining.

Not all women share my views or are feminists. Do you see me worrying about it?

Yet the history of every social institution right up until now (and ongoing) bears testimony to the restrictions that have held back half the population with less social power than the dominant sex.

You say that men have HAD to go out and earn. Well women have too - but usually at menial and non-paying (devalued) work. Women have always worked. Anyway, back to working men - how do you think that oppressed men obtained the vote or increased wages, or the right to own property or engage in commerce ? - long before women did.
Was it by sitting and twiddling their thumbs; dependent on the beneficence of the upper and wealthier classes ? No, it was by resistance, agitation and revolution - sometimes violent. Feminists have achieved a lot for women (and children; and men) and without using violence, but are never given credit where it's due.

Of course women and poor men too have been both happy sad with their lot. That doesn't mean it is right and ok to surmise that all of them are happy enough and that they shouldn't have the opportunity to improve their lot.

cont'd

cont/d

H: I recall once that you posted about women doing housework and said something like, "Well rather than whinge about it; they should just not do it." That's fair enough (I agree - I do next to no housework myself. I have a homemaker who is terrific at it). However, what do you do when your two year old spills a bowl of stew and the missus isn't around to mop it up ? Just decide you don't want to do house work ? Or do you get on with the responsibility of sorting out the mess even though it's not an enjoyable task and not something you would choose to do ?

I quite understand why you wouldn't question your world - it works for you. Just try a modicum of adult compassion in considering that there are lots of people who don't have the choices that they should have; and which could be so easily obtained. Instead of standing in the way in any little way that you can, why not applaud their efforts and be supportive of positive change ? The men who are held back from understanding because they adhere to carictures of feminists, or they are frightened that if women get something they will lose their importance - or whatever - are missing a great opportunity.

I came became a feminist not by worrying about myself - though I recognized constraints (as mentioned), but because when I was marrying, everyone was asking my to-be-spouse how he intended to support us and whether he owned a block of land or had the deposit for a house. I remember thinking, "Wtf - aren't I earning too?" I wasn't at all 'nesting' but I did amuse myself with the idea that if I had a son I would ask his to-be-in-laws how their daughter intended to support my son.

Who knows; if you let the feminists have a fair run, some blokes might even get to stay at home and mind the kids on a year of parental leave :) Anyway, enough for now.

Pynchme

You took the words out of my mouth...one of the points you made, that Houellie accepts without question the claims made by Anti et al, yet remains completely cynical about anything a female poster has to say, hit a nerve with me.

And all this vitriol on a thread about the achievements about two women. I think you hit the nail on the head by saying some men "are frightened that if women get something they will lose their importance". Like Stev, when he stated that praising women should not be at the expense of men. WTF? If I praise the ambo who rushed me to hospital a few months ago, is that at the expense of all other medicos? Of course not. And the discovery (for me and probably other women) of two outstanding women succerding despite the mores of their time is praiseworthy for both men and women. Women take pride in male success, conversely I am sure there are many men who admire the athleticism of Cathy Freeman or the brilliance of Dr Elizabeth Blackburn, Nobel Prize laureate.

Sad world when an article like Brian Holden's brings out such hatred - or is it envy?

Pynchme:"Despite some men on here posting about having experienced acrimonious divorces, had AVOs taken out against them etc etc. you never scrutinize their claims about 'the system' treating them unjustly"

In my own case, i have been as complete as i can be in describing what occurred and i have answered trite and banal questions with patience and forebearing. I have never tried to run away from events by hiding behind S 121 of the FLA, as some (such as yourself and the laughable cotter) have done to avoid actually presenting cases.

You went out of your way to look back over my posting history to try to find something i have said that discredits ny story and the best you could come up with was when my ex abused my son.

Frankly, you're a fraud and an incompetent. You wouldn't know a fact if it hit you on your ample arse. It was deeply stupid people like you who were at least partly responsible for my ex thinking she could exclude our children's father from their lives and that the State would back her up.

She would have managed it too, if I had followed the advice of my own lawyers before I sacked them.

The reason you don't like my story is because you know it is true and it makes a mockery of your own fantasies. Tough.

ask yourself this: if I was a woman and had come here saying how I had managed to beat the bastard ex in court, what would be your response, all other aspects of my posting being the same? do try to be honest, with yourself at least.

Severin:"baaa baaa baaaaa anti baaa"

"Better watch out, there may be DOGS about".

pynchme,

'you never scrutinise their claims about 'the system' treating them unjustly. Their emotional expressions of distress that have lingered years after the event, never seem to draw comment about a lack of objectivity and whether they might be expressing a biased opinion when they denigrate ALL women. '

Firstly, I'm never interested in the my stats vs your stats game.

I think they target All women as a desperate plea to turn around the all prevalent women victim/male abuser dichotomy. You do the same apart from the odd disclaimer that you love your husband.

Anyway, you never scrutinise people like chazp and mog.

I've been in an abusive relationship where I barely protected myself as I was taught never to hit a woman, yet I still felt guilty especially after THOSE adverts. I don't think you can grasp the damage a lot of the absolutist feminist campaigns unfairly paint all men with the same brush. I'm not going to argue stats, but a lot of DV both partners are violent, but the propaganda remains men are the problem. Always.

There are some things I wish you would admit, given that I conceive you to have a brain.

1. Society looks to punish men and help women
2. There is still a presumption that children are better off with their mother. You cant tell me this doesn't colour Family Court stuff.
3. Some men really do experience legitimate turmoil in being kicked out of the home they have built/renovated/enjoyed with their family and not seeing their kids every day. Some end up committing suicide. You honestly don't give the impression you have any empathy for them at all.

The way I see it, everybody has poured over the plight of women for eons, and feminists are somehow terrified to admit that men have any problems of their own.

'Instead of standing in the way in any little way that you can'

That's exactly what you're doing to the 'menz'. Because you don't want to let go and accept life isn't as simple as man=abuser woman=victim.

Severin said:

"Like Stev, when he stated that praising women should not be at the expense of men. WTF? If I praise the ambo who rushed me to hospital a few months ago, is that at the expense of all other medicos?"

No, Severin, praise is not a zero sum game. You can praise someone WITHOUT denigrating others. If you praised your ambo by disparaging all the other ambos then you ARE doing it at their expense. Do you get the subtle difference?

I don't want to engage in personal attacks so I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't see the difference. What is interesting to me is that I have seen (on more than one occasion) those of the feminist persuasion creating these "straw man" arguments (i.e. attacking something that wasn't said). But, then again, perhaps I'm just paranoid. :-)