"MCP"  wrote in message 
news:lyc_d.80392$Bk7.46376{at}fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> "Philip Lewis"  wrote in message
> news:39t13jF66qj3oU1{at}individual.net...
>> http://www.angryharry.com/
>>
>> Comments by AH
>>
>> Swedish Feministas "We want to take back the official space.
We want the
>> same rights and have the same respect as men do in this society. If laws
> are
>> necessary, well, then we demand them," they continued. [
>> http://www.thelocal.se/article.php?ID=1066&date=20050308 ]
>>
>> Do you know what?
>>
>> AH really, really, really hates feminists.
>>
>> They are bad enough when it comes to creating hatred and disharmony in
>> relatively wealthy countries, but can you just imagine how much more
>> horrible will be the outcomes in poorer countries who might come under
> their
>> malicious influences?
>>
>> And in the following article we see, yet again, the permanent economic
>> turmoil and hopelessness brought about by feminism.
>>
>> + Ninety percent of Swedish women would be better off if they were on 
>> sick
>> benefits, a new report has shown. The study, by academics at Stockholm's
>> Karolinska Institute, showed that non-professional women are effectively
>> being deprived of incentives to return to work. [
>>
>
http://www.thelocal.se/article.php?ID=962&date=20050212&PHPSESSID=aa558ed66effa0ba3fade0d997f9e642
]
>>
>> Basically, women get paid handsomely for staying at home, so they do not
> go
>> out to work. And because they do not go out to work, the feminists blame
>> their allegedly lower pay packets, so-called employment discrimination,
> and,
>> of course, men.
>>
>> But, the larger is the incentive for women to stay at home, the more that
>> must be done for them to get them out to work!
>>
>> In other words, a never-ending cycle of goodies must be handed out to
> women
>> no matter what they choose to do - all paid for by men, of course.
>>
>> Indeed, if women who stayed at home were paid via government handouts
>> exactly the same amount of money as men who went out to work, then women
>> would not go out to work.
>>
>> Unsurprisingly.
>>
>> And the feminists would then argue that the men were holding them back!
>>
>> And this, of course, was pretty much the situation that prevailed some 60
>> years ago. The men went out to work and the women stayed at home. The
> women
>> did not receive government handouts because the men were financially
>> responsible for their families - and take it from AH, they were forced to
> be
>> financially responsible for their families.
>>
>> There were no-opt out clauses!
>>
>> And what did the feminists do?
>>
>> They moaned about it.
>>
>> And they claimed that the women who stayed at home were the victims of
> male
>> oppression and that the men were holding them back.
>>
>> But now the feminists keep demanding that their governments give money to
>> women so that they can stay at home!
>>
>> It does not matter what men do, western governments and feminists will
>> continue to heap hatred upon them and to blame them for what women
>> themselves decide to do.
>>
>> Goodness me. Even when women actually kill their partners they are deemed
>> mostly to have been their victims - in one way or another!
>>
>> For example, ...
>>
>> Domestically Violent Women They [women] struck out in reaction unlike 
>> men,
>> who typically strike out to show power and control. Women interpreted
> their
>> violence as self-defense or a way to show a man his aggressive behavior
> has
>> to stop. Most learned the power of violence from their parents, 
>> boyfriends
>> and spouses. [ http://www.innovations.harvard.edu/news/2392.html ] 
>> Cynthia
>> Taggart - suggesting that domestically-violent women are 'victims' 
>> whereas
>> domestically-violent men are not.
>
> AH!! Angry Harry a MAN after my own heart.

I have the utmost respect for the guy - he has single handedly kept his 
website going for years with major updates sometimes TWICE weekly.

Phil


>
> MCP
>
>
>
> 




--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/18/05 4:59:39 PM ---