MLK, in your conviction to remain an apologist for feminism you have mis-characterised outrage as rage and appear not to know or at least acknowledge the acute difference by definition. Outlining the elements and irresponsibility of a politicalised, sexist ideology and the social atrophy it has brought about is social conscience. I would be no less outspoken if it was being done by masculinist.

http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/l/l-misc/larukirkland052103.htm

"The emancipation of women is primarily dependent on the reintroduction of the whole female sex into the public industries, to accomplish this, the monogamous Family must cease to be the industrial unit of society." - Friedrick Engels (in this regard feminism has been victorious. They have, for the most part destroyed the family unit).

http://fact.on.ca/news/news0211/dt021102.htm

http://www.fathersforlife.org/pizzey/hatemen.htm

“There is no scenario that anyone could come up with that would bring about 'equality' between 'men' and 'women' unless no distinction between 'men' and 'women' was actually being made!“ Feminism depends on a acknowledged sexual distinction as the source of their power. Woman power.
Much better to have practices, rules and laws that make no such distinction.
The politicalisation of the sexes is a destructive social element and has at the heart of child rearing, motherhood/fatherhood, PARENTING, caused the most god awful disconnect between and within the family unit. Anorexia, bulimia, child suicide, child pregnancies, anxieties, and with few exceptions every psychological breakdown suffered today by children is a result of the parentless family and the expectation put upon children to be adult before their time while suffering the absents of their mother. I say mother because it is her constant attention that developing boys and girls require above all else. Do I minimise the role of fatherhood by this statement? No! Fathers are very necessary but mothers, consistently, more so. The role of motherhood has been devalued by the feminist, and our children suffer the consequences. So too the woman for her acceptance of such nonsense as being empowering. We have children having and raising children in hopes of recreating a sense of that physical and emotional compleat family they grew up with out.

Aqva, what a load of codswallop!

40 years ago my mother was absent for 12 months because she had to sit beside her dying mother. Other friends mothers were away from the family home for long periods in the 1950s caring for their aged relatives.

100 years ago children grew up in motherless households because mama had died in childbirth.

STOP BLAMING WOMEN. I am inclined to blame you for the pain your dysfunctional family life brings to your posts.

Thank you billie, your singular post refutes every argument feminist and divorcing women have put forward for child custody. Who knew that it would be a woman to voice the fact that mothers are of no value and that they have no impact on the outcome of their children. Your a diamond in the rough. Lets not blame women for their failure to protect their children from their own stupidity cuz 40 years ago your mother went to nurse her mother. Or because a 100 years ago mothers died in child birth at a rather alarming rate do to the lack of medical institutes, knowledge, and practitioners. Or include the fact that midwifery wasn't even regulated until 1902 and that before midwives were being actually trained, they practiced such methods of dealing with a breach birth by rubbing honey and cream on the belly. Your a beaut billie. Let's not hold women/mothers accountable for not being around to properly raise their children. Their children would commit suicide, take drugs, have learning difficulties, have psychological issues of abandonment, get pregnant, have image conflicts, etc, at the same rate whether the mother was there or not. Much safer to blame some poor poster for being at fault than actually take note of the effects of parentless children raising themselves.
Try reading a little more than fembot quarterly comrade.

I don't think there's anyone denying the effect (re anorexia) of media and advertising. The real question is - what is to be done about it.

We could start I think, by having a stronger regulator for advertising. That's something that should be easy to get agreement on, and which affects what children see.

As best as I understand it - the advertisers currently police themselves.

Just where in the article were men blamed for this? I'm always keen to take on authors who try and turn issues into gender wars but after having read the comments first I went and searched the article for the part that has caused the gender component in the discussion and could not see anything to justify it.

Please point to the parts of the article which suggest that men are somehow to blame for this. I've seen the claim in other places but it's not in this article.

It's a piece about the impacts of some of the images that some hold up as ideals. Most of us don't consider the ultra stick thin an ideal.

I agree with those who have pointed out that these images are not driven by men but the article does not seem to claim that so why the fuss.

I saw something in MX the other day about beauty and mens views on it. I don't have the article with me and I don't know what the source was but what I read rang true with me. The points I recall were
- Most men prefered some bottom on women
- Victoria Beckum was out for most, to skinny.
- Most would be self conscious enough about their own bodies not to choose to get naked with women commonly held up as super beautiful. (Other considerations aside).

R0bert

Avqvarivs

You may not be able to tell the difference between rage and outrage.

I can.

The blind rage toward feminism which you inject into every gender OLO commentary is not only irrational, it is blazenly deceitful. You make up one ‘evil-feminist’ scenario after another to fit your distorted fears then venomously react to the very scenario you have invented.

I have met enough anti-feminist attitudes like yours from both men and women to know that they are not driven by anything as simple as misogyny. They are driven by the need to control others and to vindictively smash anything that looks like organised dissent - which is all feminism really is.