According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan it is estimated
that a woman is raped every two hours and a gang rape occurs every
eight hours and about 1,000 women die annually in honor killings.
According to a report by Human Rights Watch, more than 70 percent of women in
police custody experience physical or sexual abuse at the hands of
their jailers. Reported abuses include beating and slapping;
suspension in mid-air by hands tied behind the victim s back;
the insertion of foreign objects, including police batons and chilli
peppers, into the vagina and rectum; and gang rape. Yet despite these
alarming reports, to our knowledge not a single officer has suffered
criminal penalties for such abuse, even in cases in which
incontrovertible evidence of custodial rape exists
Women comprise of 30% of the total labor
force, but 65.7% of this female labour force is officially accounted
for in the informal sector An estimated 100,000 women work in brick kilns, but they
are not "officially" employed because whole families work in a form
of bonded labour, in which only the male head of the family is
registered.
Every year some 500,000 women die from complications arising from
pregnancy and perhaps a further 200,000 die from unprofessional and
clandestine abortions.
For more info visit the Asian Human Rights Commission at: http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2008statements/1412/

As a tear roles from my eyes, I can only hope death meets me before I see anymore.

And when women get into high office in Pakistan, they do nothing about the situation.e.g. the late-lamented Ms Bhutto-she was PM, twice.

No, Henry, when A woman got into power she did nothing about it.

And this proves what, exactly? That all women therefore condone this sort of behaviour? That they really enjoy it? That its justified? That they deserve this treatment? That every other woman is therefore responsible for it? That the efforts of those who are working for change are unimportant? That men are incapable of recognising or rectifying the situation? That the rest of the world should should shrug their shoulders and say they brought it upon themselves?

Mugabe is a man. He is a man in power. He has done nothing about human suffering but increase it. Do you feel that is worth posting about?

*High fives Romany*

Dear evolution,
You have a nice name and very sensitive soul but this is not enough. We must fight for women rights, for human rights, for a better future for all people on our planet. Today's BAD NEWS, Bush vetoes interrogation limits.
About the women world wide In 2001 in European Union 33% of women worked part time , while only 6% of men. Part time work means low pay, no opportunities for training or to improve their position, it means women always are on the top for redundancy.
Women and trade unions we know that more and more women become member of the unions World wide, that In Australia from 2002 exists equal number of men and women in the top level but there are not enough women organizers.
We know that students in European universities 37% are men and 63% women!
We know last years in Australia the gap between men's and women's wages increased.
WOMEN HAVE HUGE PROBLEMS MAINLY IN UNDEVELOPED COUNTRIES AND IT IS OUR DUTY TO SUPPORT THEM
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Dear HenryVIII,
Until our days the political parties have controlled from men, that means any woman in top position has had to follow men's decisions. I hope soon the number of women members and officers in political parties to increased. I believe when women have enough power in political parties they will follow more responsible and fair policies. On major issues as democracy, environment, race discrimination etc women are better (more sensitive and responsible) than the men. Women are more progressive than men.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Can I give you a little tip on where to start the fight. It all starts when the man is a little boy. What actions he views from his father, is what the man will become. If the father believes that the woman has little to no value other than a child maker and house maid, more of that poison will keep going and your cries will be in vein.

My wife and I both believe in 50\50, I guess that's why we have been in love for 17 years. We work together and share all in the world we have made for ourselves and that's what I saw from my father when I was a little boy, and I know, that's the man I have become today.

I hope this as helped.

Evolution.

Another great example of what i was talking about in the sexism thread.

Perhaps we need a hermaphrodite as prime minister so each gender is equally represented.

I know Steel. You never hear about men are victims, only about how women are victims.

Just imagine, if this were a free forum, where any poster could suggest a topic for anyone else to comment on, men could actually stop whinging, and start discussions about the various ways in which men are disadvantaged.

If only...

Please visit my other thread about the millions of women around the world, are being denied effective representation because of the low numbers of female politicians, judges and employers. Also I created few minutes before an other thread about the 'National crisis' for Iraqi women
Thank you all,
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

"where any poster could suggest a topic for anyone else to comment on, men could actually stop whinging"

Care to check the title of this and the other topic? Hint: Both are pretty much, "Women... Are Victims"

So what were you saying about whinging?

"So what were you saying about whinging?"

I was saying it irritates me. It's nothing to do with gender - I don't like when women whinge any more than I like it when men whinge. (And the author of this post is a male, by the way, aren't you Antonios?)

You're free to whinge as much as you like, of course, but if you feel annoyed that too many posts on the general forum are about women and not enough about men, then why don't you start one about men? No one is stopping you. Or if you'd just prefer that no one created posts about women, then why not join a men's forum?

They say the single male has the highest insecurities. lol

Vanilla: "..if you feel annoyed that too many posts on the general forum are about women and not enough about men, then why don't you start one about men? "

Indeed. I've often wondered why none of these sad and embittered men, who bleat on incessantly about their apparent gender problems, seems able or willing to initiate their own discussions - or actually submit the odd article - that articulate clearly and rationally their position.

Instead, whenever an article is published that addresses issues that primarily concern women, or somebody starts a similar general discussion, it attracts a litany of misogynist whining from the usual suspects. I agree with Vanilla - whingeing is not only annoying, but I'd add that it's mind numbingly boring.

Little wonder these guys seem so sad, angry and lonely. If their real life conversations in any way resemble their online efforts, they must inevitably end up talking to themselves. Normal, well-adjusted people would either leave or fall asleep in such company.

"these sad and embittered men, who bleat on incessantly about their apparent gender problems"

Problems so tragic, we might add, that they really put a chili pepper up the rectum followed by a pack rape that will never be prosecuted into perspective. Lord, the women of Pakistan are such *wingers*, aren't they?

Vanilla,CJ Morgan,evolution.
1. The title is not mine but from the Asian Human Rights Commission but I agree with it because there are so many evidence about women's victimization, because we have heard it from so many sides and corners from our planet. Some truths hurt but I will not hide them to seem nice. I write the truth and I promote the justice. Women's international day was an opportunity to promote their interests, to support them.
There are some women, a small number of them who do not accept men's support or involvement in their fight for their rights. I am sure most women understand that their problems are our problems, our society's problems. I know that there are many progressive women, that there are many women member of the ALP or Green Party, and I think most voters of the green party are women. I know that women are less racists than the men and more sensitive on Human Rights. ONLY IF I WAS IDIOT ONLY THEN I COULD NOT SUPPORT AND PROMOTE WOMEN'S INTERESTS. I ignore what any one think about it.
My goal is not to seem nice but to promote the ideas and interests I want.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Yeah, good on you Antonios.

CJ and Vanilla: silly billies! Of course the Usual Suspects aren't free to start their own threads! Don't you remember: evil women will stream from the bunkers and wreak their horrible revenge. Or Graham (actually a pseudonym for "Germaine")will alert the gestapofems who will monitor the thread and then use it to charge everyone for anti-femspeak. While the female judge, acting on secret orders from the real leader of the country in the Office of Women, will sentence them to hard labour for life:- cleaning out the sewers of all the horrid detritus of perfume, lipstick and sanitary napkins.

Vanilla > "Problems so tragic, we might add, that they really put a chili pepper up the rectum followed by a pack rape that will never be prosecuted into perspective. Lord, the women of Pakistan are such *wingers*, aren't they?"

No doubt you are joking, but even these flippant remarks reveal why my comments in BOAZ' thread on "Sexism... or culture" are quite accurate. These are two core feminist lines:
- Mens problems are laughable
- playing the Rape card (in this case, it is "pack rapes are never prosecuted")

Despite letting slip this feminist propaganda, two concepts in the one sentence ain't bad either, you make a comment previously in the "Sexism... or culture" article that you do not know of these feminazis/misandrists/extreme feminists....yet here you are casually using their language...in that article, i explicitly described this level of engineering or ignorance of it amongst society (CJMorgan's scornful comments are a great example as well, i will get to those later).

Vanilla > "You're free to whinge as much as you like, of course, but ..... why don't you start one about men?"

Because I subscribe to a different ideology than CJMorgan, Symeonakis and most feminists: I am not a sexist.

Vanilla > "Or if you'd just prefer that no one created posts about women, then why not join a men's forum?"

I'd prefer submitters showed some balance and not push such an agenda, that was most obvious in the "internet a dark age for women" article. It's manipulative, deceitful and redundant. I can throw this one back at you too: Why doesn't the submitter join a women's forum?

Vanilla page 2> "men could actually stop whinging"

in reviewing your comments, i found a little gem of potential irony. Here you are willing to make absolute statements about men without qualification, but got your panties in a knot over me writing such a statement (note with a rock solid basis unlike the one i quoted...) in the internet is a dark age article...hypocrisy or did you take my advice?

CJMorgan > "Indeed. I've often wondered why none of these sad and embittered men, who bleat on incessantly about their apparent gender problems, seems able or willing to initiate their own discussions - or actually submit the odd article - that articulate clearly and rationally their position."

1. There are 3 recent topics about women in this section. There is 1 in the other section. And at least 1 nasty little example in the articles section.

So, in your own words, "Who is incessantly bleating on about their apparent gender problems?" Well as you can see according to the facts, it is women who are bleating incessantly. My lone comments amongst the crowd are simply observations. Comments do not equate to actual topics, otherwise you will have to count yours (in addition to many others) against my few.

So, in your own words, "the sad and embittered men", must really be sad and embittered women *and* men like yourself as you are an advocate for these "bleating" women.

2. The reason why there are not additional topics is because the comment sections suffice. Why create two separate topics on the one subject? This is really gets at the root of current problems. Men and women's issues must necessarily be separated according to feminists, when they need not and should not, be so.

CJMorgan > "Instead, whenever an article is published that addresses issues that primarily concern women, or somebody starts a similar general discussion, it attracts a litany of misogynist whining from the usual suspects."

So you expect them to make separate topics to express their opinion on the current topic? Sounds stupid...and read again my last paragraph on separation of gender issues.

It's not of primary concern to women and some links I provided in another post proves this. Feminists have successfully introduced laws attacking men. And "incessant bleating" comes in the form of litany after litany of articles that are simply disgraceful such as the "internet is a dark age for women" one.
<continued>

The writer of that article is trying to acquire a PhD. I hate to think of what influences that poison will have on future law, politicians, and gullible idiots.

On that last by CJMorgan, my comments in "Sexism...or Culture" submitted by BOAZ, are also insightful. Here we see the feminist's Misogyny card played very casually. Using such a ploy is old and irresponsible. It's also vindictive and truly disgusting behaviour. The type of individual who uses such terms in such a manner are equivalent to women shown in this video, who falsely accuse innocent men and police officers of rape. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgxwPU0W-Wg People like CjMorgan are the enablers of this type of behaviour. They throw around the misogyny and rapist cards like candy, despite the potential serious threat and harm to those who are affected.

CJMorgan > "I agree with Vanilla - whingeing is not only annoying, but I'd add that it's mind numbingly boring."

Then stop whinging about men expressing their opinion! You're obviously one to find the whinging of women intriguing (count the ACTUAL TOPICS, not mere comments, on one hand if you can), so I think your position here is arguably an highly sexist one. Symeonakis for example has SPAMMED the forum THREE times with similar rubbish. Get it?

CJMorgan > "Little wonder these guys seem so sad, angry and lonely. If their real life conversations in any way resemble their online efforts, they must inevitably end up talking to themselves. Normal, well-adjusted people would either leave or fall asleep in such company."

Your thinking is institutionalised and your attempts to explain away these opinions by attacking individuals is pathetic. "well-adjusted" is a great substitute (in your case), for "domesticated and cowardly". Am I angry at all the crap and nonsense I read, that is responsible for changing laws and ruining the lives of many men? Why yes. I could not be unless i was either ignorant or indoctrinated like yourself and Symenokis.

Steel
I can not understand you because one day you wrote << Wow. What a great example of what i was talking about in the other thread>> and next day you wrote <<Symeonakis for example has SPAMMED the forum THREE times with similar rubbish>>
Steel be honest what do you mean <<a great example>> or <<rubbish>>. Do not worry I respect your right to change mind.
About the 500.000 Iraqi children who die of cause the sanctions YOU HAVE RIGHT but as you know president Bush kept USA out of the International Criminal Court, Let's press USA to recognize and respect the ICC.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Steel: "..my comments...are also insightful"

They may well be, but since they're all over the shop it's difficult for anybody else to access any insights you may have.

All the more reason to write your own article, where you could synthesize your ideas into a coherent argument. Personally, I tend not to bother reading many of the comments about "women's" issues, for the reasons outlined above.

Poor old Steel. You are the very definition of "knickers in a twist".

You attribute two opinions to me.
1. "Mens problems are laughable"
2. "pack rapes are never prosecuted"

For the record, I neither believe nor said either of these things.

You are right about one thing. You are one angry man.

perhaps you should read your own quote..

Steel,

Can you direct me to what you mean? I don't know why you think I said, "Mens problems are laughable." It's true I think some of *your* arguments are laughable, but I think men's problems are very serious. I partly work toward improving the status of men in my job.

As for "pack rapes are never prosecuted", I did suggest comparing your feeling of suffering with those women in Pakistan who've suffered "a chili pepper up the rectum followed by a pack rape that will never be prosecuted". Here I'm referencing the same Human Rights Watch story that Antonius referenced, which found that, in Pakistan, pack rapes had been documented but not prosecuted.

It would be a logical fallacy to suggest that from this one example I'm suggesting that no pack rape in the world has ever been prosecuted. They frequently are, including many high profile cases in Australia. Equally, when I referred to "a chilli pepper up the rectum", I didn't mean that all women have suffered a chilli pepper up the rectum, nor that no one has ever been prosecuted for inserting a chilli pepper up someone's rectum.

I happy to stand up for what I believe, and I'll back what I say. But as I've just pointed out, I neither believe nor said either of the things you suggested I said.

For what it's worth, I was referring to the beginning of your comment about, "Problems so tragic...." I interpreted sarcasm there...and i did say that i knew your comment was kind of joking. my style of commenting is perhaps more overstated and harder than it need be but i guess i'm a little paranoid people will miss a point otherwise ...sounds like i'm confusing people though.

With no intention of being patronising, I really appreciated Steel's last comment which gave me, at least, a better insight into the personality behind the posts.

However, it still seems to me that the question of why the men who are concerned with the fact that too many articles are written about women's affairs don't retaliate in kind?

Steel says that commenting on womens threads is enough: but if those comments are incited because there are too many subjects posted about women, it seem that the only logical way to redress this is to post more subjects about men or gender-free subjects, surely?

Steel: "Men and women's issues must necessarily be separated according to feminists, when they need not and should not, be so."

Which feminist manifesto demands men's and women's issues must always be separated? They forgot to send me my copy. If they had, I would have argued that such a distinction and artificial and useless.

Steel: [I won't start a thread about men] "Because I subscribe to a different ideology than CJMorgan, Symeonakis and most feminists: I am not a sexist."

To say that we cannot separate men and women's issues is sexist is - and thought I hate this phrase, it's the most apt description I can think of - political correctness gone mental. Steel, are you really saying we're *not allowed* to separate men's and women's issues on a public forum? Or that it's just too sexist? Are we allowed to admit there are such beasts as men and women?

So if I wanted to raise the issue of, say, prostate cancer being neglected by society, or female on male domestic violence being ignored by it, or shouldn't maternity pay be parental pay, then I should have to twist these issues around to make them "gender free issues" (for example, "For balance, I should also point out that women are currently contracting prostate cancer at a rate of 0%.")?

You then change tack a bit by suggesting submitters should "show some balance," but you yourself refuse to provide balance by bringing up more men's issues.

It does seem that you prefer to complain rather than do something proactive to improve the situation

cont...

Steel, you say that your posts are "insightful," but I honestly believe you need analyse things more critically and be more alive to all the subtleties of argument. Not everyone who is a victim is playing a victim. Sometimes, bad things actually happen to people. Not every feminist hates men. In fact, I don't know *any* feminist who hates me, and there are none on this board. (Or if there are, speak now!) When feminists critique culture, they are not blaming men. They are critiquing culture. These are different things.

It doesn't help your argument to just make things up and say "This is what you feminists believe." I simply don't care what you think I or feminists believe when any reasonable person can see it's incorrect.

I don't know quite what you're talking about on the "digital age" thread, but I did think it was odd that you didn't care at all which posters agreed with your general view about internet pornography (as I did and do). You just got angry if anyone raised any subtle point of difference.

You have not presented one argument that I can see to suggest that the situation of women in Pakistan is not dire, or that we should ignore it, other than you think there are too many threads about women.

Can you think of any solutions to the problem that you believe you've identified (to be honest, I'm still not sure what that is - that you think some people are being "sexist" by posting gender-specific threads? That posters need to provide more balance in their threads?) that isn't just criticism? How can we improve the situation?

Vanilla,

'When feminists critique culture, they are not blaming men'
They are when they opine men create society or culture. Which has been said by Yvonne, and Bronwyn and Danielle. The supposed 'man's world' of the workplace for example on the 'fair go for women' blog.

I say it's not the law makers or even necessarily voters who create society. I think the plebs actually form most of societies values, and the priveledged and politicians use these values to manipulate them. Men and women create culture and society, so women are 50% to blame for all this supposed inequality they highlight at every oportunity.

For every woman who thinks the world would be wonderful, and have no war, if only women held all the positions of legislative and political power, they just don't truely understand the nature of power, leadership, forced compromise and politics.

It's pretty easy for these women standing on the sidelines (through lack of oportunity or not) to be untainted by humankinds path thus far, while reaping the rewards in standard of living. The fact is they have been just as complicit as men in creating 'society', but still hold this superiority complex for this supposed compassionate and fair world say they WOULD have created.

Like the woman in Brisbane who murdered her partner because he wouldn’t let her play a Bruce Springsteen CD and “who the hell doesn’t like Bruce Springsteen?” I’ve had a brain snap. I'm now officially sick of being told — fallaciously — what I believe, and hearing tortured versions of what others have said (particularly Romany and Danielle, whose posts seem to bear absolutely no relation to the contorted summaries they inspire), and hearing mindless twaddle about “feminists”, and hearing reductio ad absurdum arguments or simple half-arsed analyses of culture which carry no ambition to solve problems, or improve society, or even to be particularly perspicacious or witty or interesting, but seek only to “win” a competition about whose life is more tragic which your opponents are not interetsed in playing.

It just seem impossible to have any meaningful conversation about gender without someone — and yes, on this boards, mostly blokes — getting oversensitve and feeling victimised and blamed and saying, “you’re being sexist.” I rarely use the word “sexist” — I doubt I ever have on OLO — but if I did, it would be about something real, something genuinely discrimatory against either women or men. Not because the other gender made *three* posts this week and we didn’t make any. And yet, week after week, none of the people who claim that the feminist material on OLO is “sexist,” and feel the material “blames” them and they’re “victims” of it, manage to write just one article, or start just one thread, to advance their own concerns.

Whitty, I’ve never seen any evidence to suggest you: “truely [sic] understand the nature of power, leadership, forced compromise and politics.” If you do, why not share it? And if so, you need to market yourself better, because you give off an aura of someone who feels hard done by but doesn't want to actually do anything about it.

Meanwhile, I don’t sit on the sidelines. And I don’t know one woman who does.

Vanilla > "and hearing reductio ad absurdum arguments or simple half-arsed analyses of culture which carry no ambition to solve problems, or improve society.."

On the contrary, how does wanting to eliminate this sexism and expose this divide (with some exception) is not attempting to solve anything? That very divide is creating problems. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1555&page=0#29554 That happens because of deliberate attempts to change laws.

> "..but seek only to “win” a competition about whose life is more tragic which your opponents are not interested in playing."

Wrong. Men comment on this subject and are participating by doing so. Since feminists are so pervasive in our society, it's a little hard to be taken seriously when their indoctrination causes people to label them misogynists and "whingers". As i said before i do not engage in sexism otherwise i would be a hypocrite (except of course where the goal is to unwind the damage).

No one is trying to win a "competition: They are saying that feminism has gone too far and should stop. It's pointless and divisive and it's manipulating society into something that isn't equal. Again, the "digital age is a dark age for women" is a shining example of this corrosion.

> "So if I wanted to raise the issue of, say, prostate cancer being neglected by society, or female on male domestic violence being ignored by it, or shouldn't maternity pay be parental pay, then I should have to twist these issues around to make them "gender free issues"?"

Too literal. There was a thread a while ago on female circumcision. In it, feminists were uninformed and actively fought to separate the issue of male circumcision. They even defend the practice. I found their position abhorrent. Such forceful genital mutilation OF EITHER SEX is EQUALLY wrong. PERIOD. You can't cry about one (like these feminists) and not the other, or you are both a sexist and hypocrite.

> "Can you think of any solutions... How can we improve the situation?"

It's so pervasive it's up to individuals to not support it when they see it and inform others.

that last sentence probably comes off poorly. what i mean is, if you understand the effects (read the links etc i presented) and see the media awash with this kind of crap, then you should realise what you're seeing is feminism overstepping it's bounds.

Vanilla,

I must have really hit a nerve somewhere. I used to think you were pretty reasonable, and I'm not sure how to react to that post. I think it's best I ignore it. Regardless of my 'aura' I don't feel hard done by, and to refute an assertion of women as victims is very different to portraying men as victims.

Whitty,
In every society there are various types of social values, which was created from various human groups. But the main values of a society are the values of the leading human group. While until now human societies passed from various stages, took various forms, all these societies in all their stages or forms have had something common, they was created MAINLY, (not absolutely) by men. Only last century women have started to involve with politics, noticeable. I believe (I DO NOT ASK ANY ONE TO AGREE WITH ME) I believe women's involvement with politics will be A BIG PLUS for future generations. I believe that at least 30 percent seats of a parliament, government or any important organization should given to women. But most of all I like Chile, Spain and Sweden which have complete gender parity in government.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide
Very sorry for my poor english!

ASymeonakis,

' I believe women's involvement with politics will be A BIG PLUS for future generations.'

Surely womens involvement in politics will bring as many positives as negatives. Or do you believe women to be superior to men?

I don't think anything should be ' given to women'. Why cant they earn things themselves, and convince people to vote for them through their ideas?