JamesH You sly old dog, you. I have just found out where the content of your posts comes from. Word for word in many instances. You simply rip huge swathes of other peoples opinions from various partisan web-sites and pass them off as your own, don't you, you cunning old monkey? Not even Australian web-sites in the main.

Your rather huffy reply to my fervent plea for you to get a balanced idea of what feminism (uh, especially feminism as it effects people in Australia. Australian men and women)was to provide the names of other anti-fems. like yourself you'd grabbed off the web. Well, of course your views will seem like they were handed down through a burning bush if you only ever read people who agree with you. Hell's teeth, what on earth is the point of that?

Its a rather nasty and unpalatable fact of life that views other than one's own have merit. Debate, discussion and research are supposed to open our minds to the fact that we are neither omnipotent or omniscient. They are supposed to educate us and, yes, at times even humble us: part of the process that turns us into balanced individuals.

I do not have any particular agenda (except honesty?) to push for. I am only ..repeatedly, vainly, tiredly...calling for a balanced view because arguing from a position of biased ignorance with a closed mind is an insult to those once described as "..so noble in being.." (And that quote didn't come off any rabidly partisan web-site.)

Btw. ever heard of plagiarism? It's taking other people's work and passing it off as one's own. If you are going to assemble your posts from bits and bobs of second hand and unfounded quotes brush up on your punctuation. As it stands now a large part of "your" posts (see, the quotation marks denote irony because they are not yours at all) come from others. Better still, don't say anything more, just make your posts a series of web-site addresses we can take seriously or not as we desire. Jeez.

Dear Romany,

I put the persons name first and then quotation marks around what I cut and paste. Plus at times I also paste the link.

I might add for example Erin Pizzey wrote.

As far as I know that is not plagerism.

James - o.k.: - The para commencing: "When Victor Fuchs..." should begin with quotation marks because those are neither your words nor is it your knowledge.

A quote within a quote requires single Qt. marks e.g.: 'Statistical decomposition.. At the end of this quote within a quote finish with another single qt. mark:...poverty'.

Keep your original quotation marks open right until you begin to use your own voice. In this case you are quoting someone else all the way down to the word "non-white". As that also finished the Gimenez quote you close off her speech with a single mark, and then close off the whole piece with end quotes: ...and non-white.' ".

As you have it right now yes, mate, it does indeed constitute plagiarism. The most lenient thing one could say is that it is misleading.

Romany, you sly ol' dog you. The sharpness of your blade is proof of the hours you have laboured over that grinding wheel. No agenda indeed.

James, my son, you are banned from the men's room until you master punctuation. Not using sufficient quotations. Three weeks sitting down to pee ought to open your eyes to the angst you have brought to "Australian feminism". God. The list just keeps getting longer eh.
Material feminism
Equity feminism
Gender feminism
Cyberfeminism
Post-feminism
Hardline feminism
Third-world feminism
Cyborg feminism
Individualist feminism
Socialist feminism
Radical feminism
Black feminism
and last but not least, Womanism.

James have you read any of Warren Farrell's work?

Thanks for the lesson in grammer, I know it's not purfect.

However where are you references, I haven't noticed any.

"Debate, discussion and research are supposed to open our minds to the fact that we are neither omnipotent or omniscient. They are supposed to educate us and, yes, at times even humble us: part of the process that turns us into balanced individuals." Romany.

That is correct. Now apply it!

I find it to be extremely hypocritical when people say 'get a balanced view of feminism' when the view presented of men by feminists is anything but balanced.

It is true that there are many types of feminism. I found that out by reading Daphne Patai and Sommers who are not Australians.

Perhaps the author I got most of the 'click experience' from was Melaine Phillips.

In theory the fems say that they want equality, support human rights and social justice. I have yet to see those principles being applied equally to men.

"Oh yes, women are notorious for tugging on the emotions of their blokes in order to get their way."

"And while doing a bit of probing, I came across some facts that find this theory could indeed have scientific legs. "

"A study published in The Psychiatric Times found that women were more likely to use psychological pressure - such as verbal pleading and arguments, emotional blackmail and deception - than men."

"And don't we know it." Sam and the city, 2007.

I guess the real double standard applies in that women (fems) are allowed to critise men, but men are never allowed to critise feminists and in particular what is often passed off as research.

“Yet what baffles me the most about my newfound insight into the male brain (thanks to this column and the ever expanding number of emails hitting my inbox) is that it's not the men who judge us so profoundly. Instead, it's our own kind: it's our fellow femmes ...” Sam and the city

though made light and with twisted humor, this video piece on 'creating a cult' following on 'be-dumb' rang true in the fundamental sense, and similar to my experience in some church denominations over the years before I gave up looking for spiritual growth there...

http://www.be-dumb.com/
at "mind control made easy" - some crude language there and recommend older than 18's to view this site

At particularly, remove self identity, criticism of cult is criminal, produce mental breakdown while giving it nice names and supporting it as a good thing, all to break the individual and remake to what is wanted by the ones with the 'power and authority' etc

I wonder if women would be able to comment on how much of the inner workings of feminism resemble this, and to us men of how many of us as children have been affected by women.

Sam