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.