Pynchme:"Your menz sites actively encourage men to avoid paying child support. "

Which "menz" sites do that? I regularly visit the 4 major sites devoted to men's and father's issues in this country and I've not seen anything at all on any of them encouraging the non-payment of CS.
In fact, on Dads on The Air and Dads in Distress, it is a point of pride among many posters to state as part of their signature that they pay CS. Those sites also actively welcome women posters, which contrasts very sharply with some of their many counterpsrts run for the benefit of "grrrls".

Pynchme"Therefore we have many women raising children alone without fathers contributing adequately to the costs."

On the CSA's own figures, the total amount of uncollected CS each year is a trivial $50 million out of a total transferred of $2.6 billion. That is approximately 2% of the total, or approximately $5 per taxpayer per annum. If the poor dears are worried about their children, they might consider getting a job, instead of always relying on men to pay their way.

Pynchme:"http://coolbeanscool.blogspot.com/2003/07/what-to-do-with-those-im-not-feminist.html"

Oh dear, radfem much, hon?

A quote:"If a woman answers no to the question "Are you a feminist?", she should immediately be stripped of her voting rights, her right to institute divorce, her legal protection from domestic violence and marital rape - oh, and her pay should be cut to 19% less than that of her male colleagues."

Nice to see a decent respect for difference in the Sisterhood. What a selfish rant from a self-satisfied fool. I'm not surprised you liked it.

[Random quote from typical MRM guru] "In my view, the noble cause of women's emancipation is being damaged in at least three ways by the contemporary women's movement. First, today's movement takes a very dim view of men; second, it wildly overstates the victim status of American women; and third, it is dogmatically attached to the view that men and women are essentially the same."

[Ctrl C] "In my view, the noble cause of women's emancipation is being damaged in at least three ways by the contemporary women's movement. First, today's movement takes a very dim view of men; second, it wildly overstates the victim status of American women; and third, it is dogmatically attached to the view that men and women are essentially the same."

[Ctrl C] "In my view, the noble cause of women's emancipation is being damaged in at least three ways by the contemporary women's movement. First, today's movement takes a very dim view of men; second, it wildly overstates the victim status of American women; and third, it is dogmatically attached to the view that men and women are essentially the same."

Get the picture?

The nature of such borrowed, endlessly recycled accusations against feminism don't really matter. The point is to keep repeating and linking to them on forums like these. Consistent repetition is the essence of the deceit used by those who are hostile to any reasonable discussion of women's equality with men - post after post, thread after thread. This consistently runs the discussion off the rails by keeping feminist-sympathetic posters continually bogged down in a burden-of-proof mire. The more divorced the accusation is from the topic at hand, the better ... because distraction is the real name of the game.

It saddens me that feminist posters here still take these capricious accusations at face value, believing that the accusers want to engage with them when all they really want to do is argue. Because it's human nature to want to disprove an unjust accusation, I can't see this situation changing any time soon. Also, women want too much to be liked.

SJF:"feminist-sympathetic posters continually bogged down in a burden-of-proof mire."

And naturally, the last thing that pro-feminists want is to face a burden of proof on their unsubstantiatable guff. Nice of you to point that out.

As always, your view is that women must be hapless and helpless and must never, ever be challenged and as always, that is simply contemptibly weak-minded.

SJF:"the deceit used by those who are hostile to any reasonable discussion of women's equality with men "

Which would, of course, be you. It's about time you woke up to yourself.

Well, I can see where you're coming from SJF. But really, I still think when one poster posts an opinion and another poster wants to dispute that opinion, it's pretty silly to ask the original poster to do their research for them. If anyone wants to prove me 'wrong' they can do their own work. As it happens, I'm not the type to be bothered trawling the internet to prove a point in an opinion forum.

With regards to the hijacking of the topics, I agree, but I'm not sure it's a deliberately cynical endeavour by those posters. They just happen to have an axe to grind and who better to grind against than an audience supportive of the ism they have a problem with. They should make their own topic and leave the feminists to their supportive 'haven't women been treated terribly throughout the ages' fests.

I see a lot of arrogance in yourself and Pynchme's posts. You dismiss all 'masculinist' sites in one swoop, decide who is a legitimate or respectable gender author and which authors opinions are allowed to define feminism, and then complain about the posters who dismiss feminism. To me, you have a particular image of what feminism is to you, and fair enough. It's no more or less valid than the image other people have of feminism. These categories of gender, equity, radical, victim feminists are subjective. You seem offended by what people say about feminism, but you needn't be. You're all probably talking apples and oranges.

And the disease to please isn't exclusive to women. I think what these male posters really want is a woman ( a feminist even better) to say 'you're not the evil rapist abuser all-powerful war mongerer objectifier.... Please say I am none of these things'.

I think....

Pelican:” Why some continue to promulgate the image of a worst case example of a feminist and use it as the norm is bemusing and perplexing”

Seeker: Really? Isn’t that precisely what feminism does to men most effectively of late?

Sums up all these debates really.

runner

Christina Hoff Sommers is just one person sharing her opinion and even she refers to the "noble cause of women's emancipation". Have you seen where any of the OLO feminists take a dim view of men. Most of the time they are just defending women when they are being attacked by people who appear to hold a dim view of women.

In years past, ideas promulgated by the Church that women were mentally and biologically inferior to men was accepted as the cultural norm. Anyone holding a different view might at that time have been considered radical or a man-hater.

As far as the "overstating of victimhood" - I can see where that might occur in any struggle whether it be gender, race or political. Equally it could be said of men who are angry and bitter about the child support system. Some may have a valid gripe but if you were to project the image they were overstating their victimhood their would be a huge outcry yet many of the posters understate and minimise the problem of violence towards women without flinching.

Sometimes bitterness, resentment and hatred are the real issues for those who take the extreme view on either side, and until we get past that as a group there is not much hope in these perceived gender wars.

"Pelican: Why some continue to promulgate the image of a worst case example of a feminist and use it as the norm is bemusing and perplexing” Runner: Really? Isn’t that precisely what feminism does to men most effectively of late?"

How does feminism do this of late? If anything feminism is losing its appeal especially to younger women because it has achieved much of what it set out to do.

Feminism does not demean men. In fact truly loving and supportive relationships can only come when each partner views the other in a respectful and equal light. Not one being the head of a household but both working together for the wellbeing of their family.

Apologies

I've just realised I responded to runner when I meant Seeker. I someties get you two mixed up even though you are very different posters - probably something to do with the act of running and seeking. :)