Dustbin wrote:
> Philip Lewis wrote:
>
> >  wrote in message
> > news:1110941689.941584.289600{at}o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >>Even tho I don't understand half the stuff Connor and co post here
I
> >>think Brits and Australians should be encouraged to post here --
> >>because the weirdness in the rest of the world does eventually make
it
> >>to the USA. And we need to be prepared. The way men have been
> >>disenfranchised in the UK seems to be happening in the US - lack of
men
> >>in colleges etc. So let's hear more from the UK, because we need to
> >>know what the US's problems will be in ten years or so...
> >>
> >
> > *ROFLMAO* Forgive my wry mirth - but your argument is exactly the
one I have
> > been making for YEARS for us 'brits' to pay attention to what is
happening
> > in the USA!! Of course we have kept much closer pace with the US
since 'New
> > Labour' came to power back in 1997. Our government is absolutely
riddled
> > with feminists so that now by the year 2005 we have probably
'caught up'
> > with the degree of feminist infestation that the USA is suffering
from more
> > or less. On the plus side we don't have quite the negative
virulence against
> > so called 'dead beat dads' (usually dead broke more than dead
beat!) that
> > you have in the US but that is probably partly due to a totally
incompetant
> > CSA organisation that we have over here, what we do share (in terms
of
> > parental 'rights' or lack of them in the case of fathers!) is a
similar
> > pattern of laws together with an assortment of due process busting
practices
> > that is so blatantly unfair that a certain group protests called
F4J(Fathers
> > for Justice) has resonated across the western world because their
grievences
> > are 'coincidentally' shared in Canada,USA,Australia,New Zealand as
well as
> > many other countries within europe. Of course F4J concerns itself
ONLY with
> > custodial rights - what is also needed are similar campaigning
groups for
> > all the other areas where men (and women for that matter for lets
not forget
> > that feminism is actually giving many women an extremely bad deal
through
> > it's actual practices - for example employers are being given ever
more
> > incentives NOT to employ women because of the ever increasing
social costs
> > that are being imposed upon them by feminist leaning or appeasing
> > governments) are blatantly shortchanged as a result of femionist
inspired
> > policies.
>
> I'm glad to see the recognition of F4J as
> custodial only and the need for organisation
> that addresses wider issues.
>
> We note, for example, almost all men's groups in
> fact base themselves on child custody issues one
> way or another: DAD (Dads After Divorce) and FNF
> (Families Need Fathers) are similar. The problem
> I have with these orgaisations is that they are
> - like the women - using children to further
> their aims rather than fighting a fair fight on
> the issues. Many of us condemn the women for
> doing this but then these men's groups do the same.
>
> We definitely need a group that addresses the
> issues more broadly.


You got it.

For anyone who is legitimately interested in Men's Issues, it doesn't
take more than a few times of reading the heavily contorted,
soundbite-ridden, rationalizations that you routinely get from the
closet feminists of the Internet, before you come to the unerring
conclusion that they are really just advocating bourgeois special
interests and women's rights.

....The "family and children" angle is an old standby for domesticating
Men into errand boys for lazy housewives, while also keeping them
isolated and divided.




- - -

Always an enlightening moment, with:

Turin


I have such sites to show you...
------------------------
http://members.fortunecity.com/turinturambar/
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/Men_First/
------------------------

"He who changeth, altereth, misconstrueth, argueth with, deleteth, or
maketh a lie about these words or causeth them to not be known shall
burn in hell forever and ever...."

-----



> D.
>
> > Phil
> >
> >






PHILIP LEWIS
------------
Blattella Germanica


Philip Lewis is a psychotic "family" crusader - and a useful idiot for
the women's rights agenda (if not a male feminist) - who spams the hell
out of soc.men, usually on a daily basis, with his unwanted "Forwards".


Dedicated to preserving Life in Hell for men everywhere (because we
just want it so bad), they are actually calculated to bog down dialogue
on the real Men's issues.

He's been told to stop spamming our group, and to post his irrelevant
crap to others, instead, which are legitimately dedicated to his
psychoses about playing with children as they grow, the study of one's
tax deductions, and the submerging of the man's identity to the wife's,
but he (she -?) has refused.


- - - - -

Yes.  We understand the tenuous logic behind posting the spam here:

Momma's boy issues are really "men's" issues.

One dimensional man must hand over paycheck to part-time (or no-time)
working housewife, and spend rest of his time demurring to her, and
ducking his head whenever she yells ...while wearing perpetual chagrin
about his role.

No pride.  No sense of self, or self-respect.  Just a lot of perverted
one-sided morality about "sacrifice" and "doing a job"
which works
completely against him in a historically unprecedented way.  And, which
MOST women take complete, unscrupulous advantage of.


- - - - -

This perverted mentality is one of the main problems that Men's issues
are about correcting, to begin with.

This type of man developed in the early 20th century, due to
mass-production techniques developed by Frederick Winslow Taylor.  On a
mass scale, working class Western men were broken down into
task-managed single-track thinkers and feelers who could no longer
switch gears or relate very well to most people.

They were force-fed a sense of pride and "virility" about this
conditioning so that they would viciously resist efforts to round them
out - except by women, of course; which, is why they're still so easily
spoken for, and controlled, by everyone today.

They had their spirituality (and their ability to think for themselves)
almost totally squashed out of them.  Meanwhile the same
corporate/industrial interests added their voices to the women's
movement, yelling for them to strike out for themselves - as "working
girls", or as housewives.

I'm sorry, but the (albeit, true) "socialism" angle to the women's
movement of back then - and since - just doesn't cut it.  It had it's
role, but that role has always been relatively small.  The welfare
women of today are a drop in the bucket next to the wholesale harsh
conditioning of men and their values, for getting them to shortchange
and cheat themselves by automatically handing over all of their choices
to any woman, without even thinking about it.


- - - - -

Then came the next generations of boys from the sheltered upbringings.
These jerks are the ones responsible for hypocritical, rationalizing
phrases; such as:


"If you're not a liberal by the time you're 20, then you have no heart.


"If you're not a conservative by the time you're 30, then you have no
brain."


This is the Phil type.

Or the "Angry Harry" type.

Or the Glenn Sacks type.

....Or many others who have no real life experience outside of their
upbringings.


These guys are simply acting out a time-delayed conditioning which is
set to take effect later on in their lives.  Spoiling the kids helps
Momma to turn the boys against Daddy in her war against him, and it is
done in a very ideologically-pro
women's-rights-who-gives-a-shit-about-men's, also.  So, all they really
ever do is support women having equal rights, and neglect their own.

The method is that they're taught to pay no attention to actually
changing the world while they're young and busy celebrating the idea,
through materialism.  Except, to stand up for women's rights.  Their
mothers always tell them that's "manly".  (Their big push-button phrase
for controlling their sons).

Once their hair starts to thin, that's when they get hit on to "start
acting their age" and to submerge themselves.  Suddenly they acquire
"wisdom" by doing what's convenient, anyway.


- - - - -

....We could continue with this idea along other perspectives, and
that's the sort of thing that soc.men is supposed to be about.

Unfortunately, cult-middle-classer, Phil, doesn't intend to let any
dialog take place.

Why?  Because the nineties are over, and he's irrelevant.


The problem is that these nasty little neo-right wingers can't get any
meaningful dialogue going in any of their own groups, anymore, because
they don't really have any ideas that they stand for.  Also, no one
wants to listen to any more of their thoroughly-exhausted catch-phrase
sermons.

So, they've backed themselves into a corner.  After having kicked out
everyone who disagreed with them in order to create the illusion of
being seiged, they began using attention getting games, like, spamming
- instead of writing with their own words - and looking down their
noses at everyone - rather than debating.


  ...Picture the cock-teaser, with all of the phony make-up and
clothes, whose game is to dish out rejection before the guys find out
how little she's really worth, and you've got a good idea of their
game, too.....



--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/23/05 12:02:27 PM ---