"Women’s rights rhetoric is used to manipulate and disguise war making in the name of democracy. No one’s rights - especially not women’s - are ever recognised in war."

Author Warren Farrell in the Myth of Male Power describes men as the disposable sex or the invisible gender.

Zillah demonstrates this rather admirably, but then it is not surprising in the eyes of feminists that men do not have the right to have human rights. Lets consider the fact that having the misfortune of being born male in these war torn areas, means that your life expectancy can be very short, but then no one seems to be keeping a tally.

Christine Hoff Sommers recently wrote a valid criticism of American feminists she forgot to include Australian feminists.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/points/stories/DN-sommers_17edi.ART.State.Edition1.43ee30f.html

Zillah uses similar techiques in trying to combine the problems experienced in the middle east with the problems experienced by western women.

Zillah confuses sexual decoys with unbridled capitalism. Without getting into American bashing, America has a history of trying to destroy the opposition.

Her article has more in common with the fire and brimestone sermons from the evalangical priests.

To Pericles,

no time, will attck you more fully later, but in the mean time, about
"[White Warlock? Imperial Wizard? Coincidence? You decide]",

my point is precisely this:

in the dark middle ages people who were "different" or went against the established metaphysical claims of the "herd", then they were branded "witch" or, in the case of the male, "warlock".

So, in light of today's political climate where anyone who dares to speak against the established clergy (the so-called "left") and to challenge their metaphysical claims, gets irrationally attacked by the mindless herd that throw hollow slogans at them and use fear tactics to silence them, just like the way that the "herd" used to treat "witches" and "warlocks" in the dark ages, which we seem to be in again, at least when it comes to reason and rationality.

These claims mostly take the form that the "other" is a separate entity, almost another species who exists in a cultural bubble that can't be penetrated, thus one can't abstract out of all these "cultural bubbles" commonalities that can be used as a foundation to build moral and political systems on. This is precisely why we apparently cannot criticize other cultures, and this is what cultural relativism is.

give hilary a break! after all, how many blokes are in parliament/congress because their father, grandfather, stepfather, uncle, brother etc etc etc (and so it goes - fraser, anthony, katter, gore, bush, kennedy the list just doesn't end ...) was there before them. dynasties are more of the making of men than of women. and even those without a relative to assist didn't get there on their own. *everyone* but everyone in parliament or congress gets there or got there with support, help, mentoring, $$$$, etc from someone else and generally from lots of someone elses ...

CJ Morgan,

I'm actually a Law student if you must know, with a background in Philosophy and Politics.

Yes, from where I've come from, it IS an immense achievement.

Most people I knew ended up in prison.

And just to throw in more confusion about me (after all you do think I'm a right wing nutter) I am totally with the Greens regarding drug policy. That is another post though...but that is a far leftist position is it not?

I went back to University last year after a few years of doing the silly things people do in their mid-twenties, although to answer your query about Anthropology, I think I do have enough field experience to make a 'judgment'.

Think about it.

Here's this young boy growing up in the experiment that is multiculturalism in the 1980's, without any preconcieved notions - my parents didn't indoctrinate me or my brothers.

This is in my experience unique, especially considering how much the 'ethnic other' is indocrtinated.

They literally have preconceived notions of everything, right down to which cousin they must marry, or if they are allowed infidel friends.

Can you believe this topic is a major discussion thread over at Sydney Muslim Village - a mainstream Muslim chat site. I recently was kicked off by the moderators for commenting that they were all racist, that it shouldn't be an issue.

Why would one not be friends with one just because they're an infidel?

Do you see what we're dealing with yet? A mainstream site?

NEWSFLASH: I just seen something on the news about intellectually disabled Iraqi kids in an orphanage who were severely abused. The aid donated by the west (who else?) was being sold while the kids starved.

I'm sorry, but that couldn't happen in the west as our ethics don't allow it.

To mention how sick that is isn't being racist, it is simply dealing with the reality that non-western ethics are vile.

Now back to my post...

I noticed that while my parents were friendly to my friends (all of which were ethnic - I'm serious, there were NO whites in my street) I was never invited inside at most of their houses.

I thought it may be the language (see how tolerant I am! I even tried to excuse it!) but I've realised one doesn't have to know the language to smile, or invite someone in.

So, you condemn me all you want.

I have lived it, your experience is either in a restaurant on Friday night or mabye a really 'assimilated' one lives next door - as the areas you type usually live in one needs money.

Are you so naive you think the white flight phenomenon is racism? Haven't you considered it may have something to do with the behaviour of third world cultures?

Do you hate statiticians who tell us the most violent areas are those where they live?

Your only argument about me being wrong is if you said I was unlucky enough to meet the worst of them.

Still though, it manifested itself in other ways.

The shopkeepers, for example, would stand on stools looking around the isles in their little shops - because many of their customers were theives - a cultural value.

Old ways imported here.

Vietnam is notorious for piracy, 99% of market is pirated, from CD's to linen.

There is NO good will in such cultures.

This is why the largest Medicare fraud in our history was in the Cabramatta/Fairfield area in 1993, in which 2/3 of the health professionals were in on it - all Asians (going to university doesn't change ones ethics).

I'm not saying they are all bad, I say their cultural values are what cause this.

If they were all to become westerners there is no way a community could develop where 10yr old kids sell heroin on the street.

There are westerners who are corrupt, of course, but a whole community? Not possible.

Why would you want to not believe me anyway? This says a lot about YOUR preconceived notions.

Politicisation of gender is the decoy. Author buys right into it and has clearly been hooked. Cant seem to see it tho.

Governments have no regard whatsoever for the rights of people, any group of people. They pay lip service to that idea and as history clearly shows the electorate generally buys the facade.

Women have been conned regarding gender rights. Its a huge hoax. What you are getting is far removed from the utopian rhetoric. Its like a consumer shopping fix. You get the feel good rush but a day after the goods are outta the box you are left feeling flat, cheated.

l think most people sort of feel cheated as a matter of course.

There's a lot of crap in a mans world, most of it goes unsaid, thats just how it is and we are expected to take it, which we mostly do. Most men live a life of quiet desperation. No point complaining, no one wants to hear it, especially not from a man. Men have been sold many a pup thru the ages... religion, democracy, unionism, free markets, socialism/society, matrimony, consumerism, all empty rot.

We are all in the same boat. l think it may be a bit harder for women to see the con as they have been sold a wicked lemon which panders to some pretty deep seated delusions (like people are equal).

In the end, everyone is 'equal', some are just more 'equal'.

The essence of government is to LIMIT YOUR RIGHTS.

That is the point of governanace, regulation, rules, laws, courts, enforcement, incarceration, punishment, etc. All in the name of the opposite. Orwell smiles from the grave no doubt.

The fact that people like the author take the twisted bait proves the point.