The White Male Oppressor Speaks

Good day my friends. I am sure that you are all familiar with the old biblical adage “The meek shall inherit the earth”. This phrase seems be a more and more common battle-cry of Liberalism in America and entitlement protests throughout the world like in Greece and France just to name a couple. But would the meek really inherit anything if they had to pull themselves up and work for it? I think not. Indulge me while I explain my reasoning behind this in a little more detail. To do so first we must understand what the word meek means. Meek is defined as “overly submissive or compliant; spiritless; tame.”

I am sure that most if not all of you reading this know at least one person that fits the above description. I want you to think about that person for a moment. If it were not for the generosity of others whether freely given or forced through taxation, would that person inherit anything? Or would they die begging for what they are not willing to obtain through their own means? If suddenly one day the government said “that is it, no more”. Would they start busting their ass to support themselves and families? Or would they come to you palms outstretched looking for a handout? Remember these are the same people that beg for larger government involvement and taxation. They gladly surrender their rights not even for a piece of bread but for the mere promise of a crumb of that bread. They then pick up signs and chant slogans and riot to try to convince the rest of us to agree that their handouts are a valid necessity. These are the same people that scream for socialism or communism in the spirit of fairness. Fairness being you work hard and have accumulated too much and need to give that which you worked for away to those that would not. And anyone who has picked up a history book or does not blindly accept” bumper sticker” propaganda slogans knows socialism and communism do not work. Don’t believe me Google up a little bit of Ukrainian history during Soviet communism.

Before you right me off as a “far right winger”, I must say I strongly believe in helping the helpless. On the other side of that coin I also strongly believe that the clueless are not in that number and are not deserving of help from those that work hard, and I sure as hell don’t believe that the government has either the capacity nor ability to help the helpless in any meaningful way. Let private charities do this work, that is what they are good at. Whether or not you are of a more “left” or “right” leaning of the political and social persuasion, or whether or not you agree or disagree with social programs. Do you like the idea that large numbers of  the so called meek get a free pass on laziness paid for by you without your consent? Ultimately and completely the meek shall inherit nothing. That is unless that which they inherit you consent to have taken from you by force or legislation. But I fear that our society has grown to apathetic to hard work and personal responsibility to stand up and say enough is enough. The other option, the one that seems to be easier and more politically and socially correct is that you can just sit back and accept an ever growing entitlement complex or take a firmer grip on our society.

Until Next Time: Courage

Share The Oppression

So I have been noticing a trend with this whole “Occupy Wall Street” campaign. That trend is self important entitlement junkie whiners coming out of the woodwork using at best poor penmanship and even worse spelling on sheets of paper declaring how hard they have it and then proclaiming that they are the 99%.

Before I start getting hate mail, as much as I do enjoy the vile, vulgar, insulting and just downright rude liberal tolerance from the entitlement junkie crowd  I must say that I agree with the premise that they are putting forth about the corruption of the financial industry and blatant disregard of the people by our pathetic conservative and liberal washing machine of bullshit that is our government needing a desperate change. I can’t, however, agree with whining college students and the angry “not my fault crowd” trying to convince me to believe that these institutions forced them to make poor decisions in life and that it is somehow their fault, for example a 25 year old girl with a $20,000 fine arts degree  is having trouble finding work.

While some of these “my life sucks” papers are actually unfortunate and are actually deserving of empathy, the vast majority are nothing more than  complaints that the world somehow owes these people something. As much as I hate to piss on your pity parade no one owes you a thing that you are not willing to work for. If you are not happy with the way things are going for you quit blaming everyone else because you made poor choices and are either too lazy, apathetic, or have a massively ingrained victim complex to find solutions to your “what about me” problems.

For example this harrowing tale for you from one of these poor me sign holders. “I am a college graduate – $30,000 in debt from a degree which makes me “un-hireable.” (Really? you went to college to get a degree that makes you un-hireable?) I work part-time for $7.25 per hour. (how many applications are you filling out per week to find full time employment?) My bills are accruing interest and more debt by the minute. (really why don’t you apply for a financial hardship deferment, you would qualify?) Meanwhile, millionaires sip champagne and look down on me from their penthouses with the same human eyes I have. (No their eyes see problems and then find solutions they didn’t become millionaires by complaining and blaming others.) I am fed up with their greed and arrogance. I am ready to revolt. (REVOLT!!! Yeah that’s a good idea kill people and destroy property because you are feeling butt hurt.) I am the ninety-nine percent.” You sir are not the 99% I would say maybe the 5% maybe as high as 7% but definitely not the 99%

Since the whiners are by now probably really pissed that I am daring to challenge their idiocy and refusal to take responsibility for their own lives here is my % story.

I carry almost $30,000 dollars in student loan debt for a computer science degree. I am currently making less per year than I owe in those loans. I work 50 to 60 hrs a week to support a family of 4. I do not have health insurance and the idea of a retirement account is yet just a dream. I have a land line phone and standard DSL. I am the whatever %.

But here is the main difference – I work that 50 to 60 hours a week and bust my ass to better my financial situation in the long term. I am always looking to supplement my income and find more lucrative opportunities. I am happy that those low interest student loans were available to me so I could get an education which I would not have been able to otherwise.  I, unlike some I have seen, do not complain because I can only pay part of one bill this month and catch up in a couple months. I make it work because I have to for now. I will become a millionaire because I am willing to do what is necessary and make sacrifices to achieve my goals. I see these people complain that they are broke but a large number especially the brain dead college crowd through late twenty somethings who have a $300 I-phone with an $70+ dollar a month cell and data plan. which by the way you have to have if you buy an I-phone or other smart phone. Complaining about their financial situations while carrying their $5+ dollar coffee every morning going out to clubs where as anyone knows you can drop $50 bucks a night easily they run out and buy over priced under powered computers and toys that they could get for a fraction of the cost for the simple reason that it has a picture of a piece of fruit on it for $1400. Side note I bought a PC that is half again as powerful as the latest iteration of the Macbook and paid 1/3rd the cost, brand new. Some of them sitting in apartments that their parents are paying for complaining how hard they have it.

In conclusion, if you can look down and see an I-phone, Android, or Blackberry and pay 5+ dollars for a cup for coffee still having money to party with and eat out on and complain about being broke, shoosh! Perhaps its not an income problem you have but a priority problem. While getting a college degree is important, if you decide to pay 10’s of thousands of dollars for a degree that does not have a really high return on investment for the largest percentage of graduates, shoosh! You made a poor decision and it is your fault not the banks and corporations. I hate to break it to you but a Liberal Arts and Fine Arts degree is not lucrative and you should not be surprised that you can’t find a high paying job in the lucrative fields of being a victim or painting pretty pictures. It is time to quit whining and make some changes in your life so you can improve it. Because whining and protesting instead of looking for a better job will just make you poor and pissed.

Until next Time: Courage

Share The Oppression

Well my friends, yesterday in lovely downtown Spokane, Washington, People for The Ethical Treatment of Animals decided to protest a local Sushi restaurant. They splayed themselves out on the cold spit and gum covered sidewalk in front of Sushi.com. Which has good sushi I might add. PETA in their usual protest style of “Look at us we’re crazy”, two males and a female, painted themselves the color of algae put on fake flippers and laid stretched out on a net in front of the establishment. But here is the kicker this time your humble narrator was there to enjoy the crazy.

I was told by a good friend that this was going to go down so I looked up the news report for the upcoming protest and being as I was in the area I couldn’t resist a look-see. In that article I was promised topless people dressed like fish. Who can pass up the opportunity to see half naked people dressed like fish? I sure can’t. I have seen them do this before at some of their other what I have dubbed “Tits for Tuna” protests. But alas while the two guys followed through and were topless the one female of the group put star shaped stickers over her nipples before painting herself to look like algae with flippers and while laying there she laid one arm over herself to further cover them up. I am thinking about suing PETA for false advertising. I was promised a crazy PETA peep show.

I must say that their protest was a little lack luster compared to some of their other “pornography for animal rights” stunts. Maybe the actual pornography web site they are going to launch to promote a Vegan lifestyle will be more revealing. But their protest was a success. They had, I would guesstimate around 50 people gawk at and mock them for the better part of the hour they were laying there. I would also like to mention that one of Spokane”s local newspaper columnists, Doug Clark from the Spokesman Review, was kind enough to bring lunch for us stating at the beginning of the protest “get a free Filet o’ fish. Because you can’t enjoy the protest on an empty stomach.” Thank you Mr. Clark. Another sign of their success was the news outlets and blogs that are mocking them today. I would say they successfully proved once again that PETA is nothing more than a bunch of enviro-wackos that do little more than put on a mediocre show on par with most other street performances.  I was surprised though that the local looney bin did not make a showing to drive them back home.

Share The Oppression

Here is to the NAACP LA Chapter for adding one to the “I hear what I want to file”. Members of the Las Angeles NAACP chapter are raising a ruckus towards Hallmark because they, of course, hear racial epithets where none exist. Here is the situation, Hallmark releases a new graduation card featuring Boots and Yoyo with a solar system theme that has a micro speaker that says the following “Hey world we are officially putting you on notice! You black holes you’re so ominous and you planets watch your back.”

But of course the race baiters at the LA chapter of the NAACP, as usual hear what they want to hear rather than what is actually being said. The President of the LA chapter Leon Jenkins who apparently was not getting enough attention claims that the card actually says “You black whores you’re so ominous“.  Now not having experience with black whores or any whores for that matter I could not attest to how ominous they can be but one thing is for sure this guy needs to get a hearing test. What is worse is that he has all kinds of black people who, I would assume, are otherwise intelligent people believing that the dastardly denizens of hate “HALLMARK” are intentionally putting a slight against the black race in their otherwise fun graduation cards.

I can just see that meeting at Hallmark, cant you? All of those evil Hallmark execs sitting around in white sheets scheming on ways to insult black people through their series of playful and well known greeting cards and let us not forget they have to come up with a fake script to release to the press. Anyone who actually buys into this is a sheep and will do and believe anything they are told. Unfortunately stores have bowed to this race card playing buffoon and are pulling the card from their shelves because someone got their feelings hurt by a non-existent insult.

I have listened to this card over and over trying my hardest to hear either the word Whore or Ho as some have said but for the life of me all I can hear is black hole. I guess I am just either to racist or to blind to the eminent threat that Hallmark poses to the black culture to hear it.

The point is crap like this has gone too far. For crap sake quit trying to read an insult into everything you come across. It makes you (and I am looking at you LA chapter of the NAACP) look foolish. I know that the only way you make money is to make people think that they are much bigger victims than they actually are but this is just ridiculous.

Until Next Time: Courage

Share The Oppression

I have been noticing a rather interesting if not wildly amusing trend on various message boards and blogs. It appears as though after almost 50 years of the second wave feminist movement women are still not happy with the result. For the last half century from the time of the first bra burning to the latest penile dismemberment the feminist idea and rhetoric of  “We can do whatever a man can”  has been propagated throughout our society and brow beat into every school girl and women’s studies major. Now it appears all that hard work and misandry is now making some of them unhappy. I say that because I see over and over in article after article and blogs aplenty the same women who scream from the roof tops about equality and gender neutrality complaining that Chivalry is dead and that men do not know how to treat a lady anymore.

Well princess guess who is really to blame for chivalries demise. That would be you. Chivalry is not dead it is just in its death throws. Not because of some secret meeting and memo that went out to all men in the united states, the postage alone on that would be a killer. Chivalries death rattle is because women keep stabbing it in the heart repeatedly by taking offense at the very things they claim men do not do enough of.

A prime example of a perceived crime against femininity is holding the door open for a women. While this practice was universally accepted as a courtesy before the current wave of misandristic feminism, it is now an offence worthy of public humiliation. For example I myself the loveable White Male Oppressor has stopped holding the door open for any woman who is below the age of social security because there have been several times where I would be walking and a woman would be behind me so I would do as I was taught growing up and hold the door open for her and receive a sometimes banshee level scolding of “I do not need a damn man to hold the door for me” or “Jesus when are we ever going to be treated like equals.” So congratulations you have succeeded. You have successfully trained one more man that to be courteous is to be a misogynist.

The current generation is being taught by the children of the feminist hay day of hippie bra burnings and male degradation. These mothers never taught their sons chivalrous courtesies and gave their daughters a victim complex masked as a superiority complex. This has been done to the point that if a man tries to be nice he should be kicked in the balls. Why because women have been indoctrinated to believe that the only possible reason a man would be polite is because he wants to have sex with you. So now the current generation of boys and girls are being taught not to trust each other because of the mindset that they just want to use you. The last 50 years of this crap has just been leading to a gender war the likes of which Valerie Solanas could not have imagined. One where parents no longer teach their children respect for the other gender fostering mistrust and outright hostility.

Some of the biggest perpetrators and purveyors of this are groups like the National Organization of Women who do a excellent job of portraying women as absolute victims of a perceived phallocracy and pump millions of dollars a year into getting destructive misandristic legislation passed. Is there anyone left that is so naive to think that these groups do this out of the kindness of their hearts or a love of women? Sadly yes but the truth is these groups have millions of reasons in the bank why they need to push this idea and lead the sheepets in to victim hood.

The only way that these groups can keep the coffers overflowing is to teach women that they are victims of men. They need to push the idea that men do nothing as a courtesy and that there is always an ulterior motive laying just below the zipper. The point is if you want to be treated like a lady then act like one. Stop believing the rhetoric from these activist groups. Stop berating a man for holding the door open for you and above all else if you want men to be chivalrous it is incumbent on you to teach your children to be so. You have already destroyed chivalry in your children and if you truly want that changed you will have to teach your adult children how to be chivalrous and ensure your grand children are taught the same. Until you are willing to do that you better get a nose guard because that door is going to hit you in the face more and more often.

Until Next Time: Courage

Share The Oppression

I had originally posted this some time ago but almost lost it in a database fry. This is still relevent and I feel strongly about looking deeper into people that I am told I have to look up to before I give them the benefit of the doubt. Because more often than not these individuals do not deserve the adulation that is heaped upon them by the masses. So without further ado. Here’s Gandhi.

A lot of people out there are going to probably be upset by this, but Mahatma Gandhi was not the master of peace and pacifistic ideology that we have been mislead to believe. The truth as often is the case, is in great contrast to the myth. So I think that I will examine the truth that you are not told about this supposed man of the people and of peace.

First a little background on this man that so many look up to. From his biography on mkgahndi.com here is his humble beginnings. “MOHANDAS KARAMCHAND GANDHI was born on October 2, 1869, at Porbandar, a small town on the western coast of India, which was then one of the many tiny states in Kathiawar. He was born in middle class family of Vaishya caste. His grandfather had risen to be the Dewan or Prime Minister of Porbandar and was succeeded by his son Karamchand who was the father of Mohandas. Putlibai, Mohandas’s mother, was a saintly character, gentle and devout, and left a deep impress on her son’s mind.

While he was still in high school, he was married, at the age of thirteen, to Kasturbai who was also of the same age. For a boy of that age marriage meant only a round of feasts, new clothes to wear and a strange and docile companion to play with. But he soon felt the impact of sex which he has described for us with admirable candour. The infinite tenderness and respect which were so marked a characteristic of his attitude in later life to Indian women may have owed something to his personal experience of “the cruel custom of child marriage”, as he called it.

Now that you have a basic beginning point let us continue. When the Boer war broke out Gandhi formed with the help of Dr. Booth the Indian Ambulance Corps which consisted of 1100 volunteers and offered its services to the Crown. It is said that he encouraged the Indian people in South Africa to do this because they claimed their rights under the British so it was their duty to Britain.

Later on in his life, Gandhi started a newspaper called the Indian Opinion and made different speeches, where we see the true face of Mahatma Gandhi emerged. Gandhi addressed a public meeting in Bombay on 26 September 1896 he states the following: “Ours is one continued struggle against degradation sought to be inflicted upon us by the European, who desire to degrade us to the level of the raw Kaffir, whose occupation is hunting and whose sole ambition is to collect a certain number of cattle to buy a wife with, and then pass his life in indolence and nakedness.” Just to help put his views in perspective the work Kaffir has a word in the English language that means the same thing, That word is Nigger.

Denegrating an entire group of people based soley on their ethnicty may be a little bit understandable because of the time period and could even be potentially overlooked if it were an isolated occurrence from the supposed great master of peace. But it was a running theme with him. Another example of this is an excerpt from his newspaper the Indian Opinion on September 9, 1905 where he is referring to the Black African native as follows: “Now let us turn our attention to another and entirely unrepresented community – the Indian. He is in striking contrast with the native. While the native has been of little benefit to the State, it owes its prosperity largely to the Indians. While native loafers abound on every side, that species of humanity is almost unknown among Indians here.”

Gandhi who was born to the merchant cast had no love for the lower caste Indian. He considered them unclean as can be seen from his comments here: “You say that the magistrate’s decision is unsatisfactory because it would enable a person, however unclean, to travel by a tram, and that even the Kaffirs would be able to do so. But the magistrate’s decision is quite different. The Court declared that the Kaffirs have no legal right to travel by tram. And according to tram regulations, those in an unclean dress or in a drunken state are prohibited from boarding a tram. Thanks to the Court’s decision, only clean Indians or colored people other than Kaffirs, can now travel in the trams.”

In reality the only people that Gandhi wanted to help were the upper caste Indians who he worked to get on the same level as white people in South Africa. He also believed that white British being the predominant race in South Africa was the best choice for that country. Gandhi was also all for segregation against the native black population out of Indian areas as seen by the following quote From the Indian Opinion of February 15, 1905; “Why, of all places in Johannesburg, the Indian location should be chosen for dumping down all Kaffirs of the town, passes my comprehension. Of course, under my suggestion, the Town Council must withdraw the Kaffirs from the Location. About this mixing of the Kaffirs with the Indians I must confess I feel most strongly. I think it is very unfair to the Indian population, and it is an undue tax on even the proverbial patience of my countrymen.”

I could go on and on about this peace maker’s views on racial purity, segregation, and classist attitudes but I feel that my point has been made for now. People need to look into those that they consider great, humble people of peace because the truth often obscured or blatantly ignored by blind sheeple as to the true nature of a persons work can paint an unrealistic picture of those that are adored. Below are some links so you can start to do your own research and make an informed decision if you still feel this imperialist, racist man was actually a man of the people.

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2419

http://www.sikhsundesh.net/gandhi.htm

http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/gandhi.html

http://www.zimbio.com/Ghandi+quotes/articles/20/Gandhi+racism+truth+behind+mask+Behold+Sergeant

Until Next Time: Courage

Share The Oppression

In order for us to set the proper context for this post it is important to give a little background on Mother Teresa the so called saint of Calcutta. Then I will discuss why I say  “so called saint”.  Mother Teresa was born Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu (pronounced Agnes Gongsa Boyoku) in Skopje, Macedonia, on August 26, 1910. At the age of eighteen she left  home  and joined the Sisters of Loreto, which is an Irish community of nuns with missions in India. After training for a few months with a convent  in Dublin, she was sent to work in India. Agnes Bojaxhiu took her vows to be  a nun on May 24, 1931. In 1948 she received permission from her superiors to leave the convent school she had taught at since 1931 and devoted herself to working with the poorest of the poor in the slums of Calcutta.  Mother Teresa received permission from the Vatican on October 7 1950 to start her own order, “The Missionaries of Charity”, whose primary task was to love and care for those people that no one else would. In 1965 the Society became an International Religious Family by a decree of Pope Paul VI.

Some of the awards that Mother Teresa received were: The Pope John XXIII Peace Prize (1971) and the Nehru Prize for her promotion of international peace and understanding (1972). She also received the Balzan Prize (1979), the Nobel Peace Prize (1979) and the Templeton and Magsaysay awards.

What most people know about the Missionaries of Charity came from a documentary about her Order from 1969,  the church, and mainstream media that refused any ideas from critics wasn’t worth following. Now on to the unpleasant truth behind the squalid conditions that these poor people suffered in under the care of this Order. I will be discussing accounts from volunteers of the Missionaries of Charity as well as a former sister of the Order including a documentary film maker/reporter both of  whom had seen first hand what life was actually like in these aptly named “homes for the dying”.

First I would like to bring to you a  man named Donal MacIntyre who is an investigative journalist. He went undercover as a volunteer in her “flagship home” in Kolkata, India.  His description as to what he saw is distressing at best. Here is his account of what he saw in this home for disabled boys and girls. “I worked undercover for a week in Mother Teresa’s flagship home for disabled boys and girls to record Mother Teresa’s Legacy, a special report for Five News broadcast earlier this month. I winced at the rough handling by some of the full-time staff and Missionary sisters. I saw children with their mouths gagged open to be given medicine, their hands flaying in distress, visible testimony to the pain they were in. Tiny babies were bound with cloths at feeding time. Rough hands wrenched heads into position for feeding. Some of the children retched and coughed as rushed staff crammed food into their mouths. Boys and girls were abandoned on open toilets for up to 20 minutes at a time. Slumped, untended, some dribbling, some sleeping, they were a pathetic sight. Their treatment was an affront to their dignity, and dangerously unhygienic.” The first time I read this I was absolutely sickened at the thought of children no matter where they live being treated in such an inhumane condition. Now if it were just this account alone I would hold a more skeptical view of the validity of these claims so I did some more digging and found out some other unfortunate tidbits of knowledge.

The following excerpts are from a story in free inquiry magazine called “Mother Teresa’s House of Illusions” by Susan Shields a former sister in the Missionaries of Charity “As a Missionary of Charity, I was assigned to record donations and write the thank-you letters. The money arrived at a frantic rate. The mail carrier often delivered the letters in sacks. We wrote receipts for checks of $50,000 and more on a regular basis. Sometimes a donor would call up and ask if we had received his check, expecting us to remember it readily because it was so large. How could we say that we could not recall it because we had received so many that were even larger?” In that same article she describes an obvious hypocrisy “Our Constitution forbade us to beg for more than we needed, but, when it came to begging, the millions of dollars accumulating in the bank were treated as if they did not exist.” In another part Ms. Shields describes the horribly unsafe and unsanitary practice in Haiti of the sisters reusing hypodermic needles until they were blunt in order to keep the spirit of poverty. When some of the volunteers offered to go and get more needles the sisters refused.  At one point the Missionaries of Charity had around $50 million in the bank, and yet they refused to offer the people that needed real help anything but dull needles and horrible living conditions.

This is absolutely unconscionable especially for those that purport to follow Christ’s teachings yet Mother Teresa seems to be obsessed with the suffering of others with comments like “We see Christ in the broken body, and we touch him and that touch is comes from that deep faith that Christ cannot deceive“, to me that appears to say she needed the decrepit state and suffering of others for her to be closer to Christ. I have a hard time believing this is what Christ meant in Matthew 19:14 when he said “But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.”

In conclusion I am sure some fundamentalists out there are going to say I am lying and that I just hate Catholics and want to discredit a great woman. This could not be farther from the truth. I had no opinion on Mother Teresa or the Missionaries of Charity other than what I heard from admirers and the news until I started looking into her and her order and read the first hand accounts corresponded with previous volunteers and saw photos of the conditions that these people lived in unnecessarily. Yet the blissfully uninformed seem to hold people like Agnes and others who walk around with undeserved adulation or sainthood as society looks the other way when it comes to the atrocities that they commit. If you find comfort, security or happiness in the memory and works of Mother Teresa and her order I am not out to change your mind or defame Catholicism in anyway but purely to inform people of the reality behind those society holds as caretakers of virtue.

Next on the chopping block of reality. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

Until Next time: Courage.

Share The Oppression

Today I would like to take a look at one of the more humorous arguments I have heard from Feminist organizations and so called “enlightened” men, and that would  be that the Feminist Movement is just misunderstood. This interesting idea has been put pretty heavily on the site – The Good Men Project.

One such argument is made by Male-Feminist Professor Hugo Schwyzer, where, in his article, “How the mens rights activists get feminism wrong”, he asserts that men are the sole cause of the “anger” men’s rights advocates show. Professor Schwyzer starts speaking about a dark time in his life when he was getting sober with the help of a twelve step program and a phrase that really struck a cord with him. The passage from the twelve step book says that “addicts are the architects of their own adversity“. And while this is absolutely true when it comes to Drug and Alcohol addiction, making the leap to men’s rights seems a bit harder to swallow.

He states in his article regarding men’s rights advocates that  “These men feel victimized, they feel exploited, they feel ignored, they feel impotent. And those feelings are powerful. I don’t think these boys and men who turn to the men’s rights movement are lying about their pain. The problem is that they’ve completely misunderstood two things.” In the interest of time and to avoid the “To Long Didn’t Read” Phenomenon of the internet I will only address the first point of the good professor’s article, but I do recommend the article as a good point for my argument. The first thing that he is referencing are as he calls it “the straitjacket of traditional American manhood. Men are suffering because their emotional, psychological, intellectual, and sexual potential is stunted by their own efforts to live up to an impossible masculine ideal.“  He references what are termed here the “Guy Rules” and points to Deborah David and Robert Brannon’s 1976 book on men, The Forty-Nine Percent Majority, which in short says those rules are: Big boys don’t cry. No sissy stuff. Be a “sturdy oak.” “Be a big wheel.” “Give ’em hell.”

I must say this is a very accurate interpretation of these so called “Guy Rules”. We are taught from the cradle to toughen up, be the rock of support and be ambitious. But are these things really bad? Is this really the reason that men’s rights groups feel that men have been disenfranchised and emasculated? I think it is more of a cop-out explanation than a viable reason. I say this because from the time that life diverged from asexual reproduction to a time when two distinct genders came on to the scene the overwhelming majority of all species not just humans have one major trait in common. It is the male that must secure the shelter hunt the food and protect the family or herd. And it is only humans that consider this a bad thing.

We must remember from the beginnings of what has been termed second wave feminism these protective traits in the male gender of our species have been vilified and countless millions of dollars have been pushed into education, advertising, media and legislation to teach and support the false idea that men are nothing more than violent dumb creatures that want to do nothing more than rape, kill and watch sports.

I will not be quoting Valory Solanas or Andrea Dwarken like many would at this point because equating either of those two with a realistic version of Feminism would be like equating Scooby Doo with an accurate description of canine behavior. The question here is do the television shows that we watch and the movies that are produced really show men as women beating, child raping sycophants? If all you watch is Lifetime, Dr. Phil or Law and Order : SVU then you would answer a resounding yes. But if you watch regular television shows on the major networks and cable from ABC to the Disney Channel that argument falls apart.

Men are marginalized as existing in a dim witted near simian states on sitcoms and have been for the last 30+ years. For example Everybody Loves Raymond where an apparently gifted sportswriter is semi-literate and can not for the life of him understand the simplest situations of the family dynamic. Or Home Improvement. The story of Tim Taylor who whilst having absolutely no clue what is going on or for that matter how to change a light bulb without electrocuting himself somehow has a hit home improvement show. In both of these cases their wives are constantly belittling their lack of mental prowess and these along with a whole host of others I could mention portraying men as mental and emotional midgets. My question is how is this emasculation and dumbing down of men and their instincts not a cause for concern?

I find it hard to understand that anybody who even has a rudimentary knowledge of the activities of the second wave feminist movement could possibly think that they are misunderstood, they repeatedly make their intentions and motives very clear that their movement is purely a women centric greatest of equals ideology.  The feminist movement of today has little to nothing to do with the women’s movement of the early 20th century when the complaints were legitimate. In today’s world feminism has nothing to do with the legitimacy of women’s original complaints but the inherent injustice of their proposed solutions. And in all reality the men’s rights movement purely exists as a counter weight to the well funded and extremist elements of the women’s movement. I think it is pretty well understood.

Until Next Time: Courage

Share The Oppression

While Domestic violence is a problem for for women it is by no means a one way street.  Are the Statistics that you see and hear a realistic interpretation of the facts? Domestic abuse towards men has been a problem as long as it has been for women. We can even find instances of domestic abuse towards men in the history books and in well known celebrity relationships.

A prime example of this is Abraham and Mary Todd Lincoln. According to Michael Burlingam a history professor at Connecticut College and author of “The inner world of Abraham Lincoln” said “Mary Todd used to beat the hell out of Lincoln.” Some recorded reports state that at one time President Lincoln did not put enough wood on the fire so Mary Todd beat him with a log. There are a number of other recorded cases where she drew blood on the President for indiscretions as slight as buying the wrong meat for breakfast. By many reports Lincoln hated his marriage and in 1864 he pardoned a Union soldier who abandoned the Army to marry his childhood sweetheart. While signing the pardon, Lincoln said, “I want to punish the young man. Probably in less than a year, he’ll wish I had withheld the pardon.”

And in the celebrity world we have Bobby Brown. The common belief is that he used to beat on Whitney Houston. However the truth comes out in an interview in an April 13, 1999 Associated Press article Ms. Houston admitted “Contrary to belief, I do the hitting, he doesn’t. He has never put his hands on me. We are crazy for one another. I mean crazy in love, love, love, love, love. When we’re fighting, it’s like that’s love for us. We are fighting for love”

The point of those two examples was to show that this is not a new phenomenon but does the rhetoric hold up to the facts? One of the favorite statistics that is commonly thrown about is that 90-95% of the domestic violence is by men against women this number is as erroneous as it gets but like most other false information if you throw enough money into promoting it pretty soon people will believe it.The following information is taken from US Department of Justice National Violence Against Women Survey.

I am sure you noticed as did I that there is a major discrepancy between previous 12 Months and lifetime domestic violence rates of 1.5% female and 0.8% male in that previous year vs. 22.1% female and 7.4% male over the lifetime. Dr. Malcolm George of the St Bartholomew of Royal London Hospital Medical School, author of Aggression in British Heterosexual Relationships suggests that the discrepancy between the number is due to the fact that men do not report assaults that happened a long time ago, further he found that very few male victims considered they had been the victim of a crime. These male victims most of the time explained their assaults as, “Just one of those things that happens.”

Reports also state that the annual physical assault rate is 44.2 out of 1000 women and 31.5 out of 1000 men are assaulted by domestic violence each year. This averaged is 3.5% victimization per female and 3.4% victimization per male. look at that a statistical dead heat as the data below indicates:

Interesting how the real numbers don’t add up to the numbers that we are told huh? But we have more myths to explore so let us continue…

Next we will look at a myth about emergency room and injuries to women due to domestic violence. What if I were to tell you that 20-35% of emergency room visits by women are due to domestic violence. You like most people would immediately think, “Yup that sounds right I have heard that before.” But is that number really a fair representation of the data? Not according to real numbers shown in the table below.

The reality of the data presented as you can see from all forms of violence accounted for a total of 5% of total ER visits of which 37% were due to domestic violence which leaves a grand total of 1.85% of ER visits were actually due to Domestic Violence. Interesting how if you leave out the first part of the facts they can claim that 37% of emergency room visits by women are due to domestic violence but unfortunately for them anyone who looks up those numbers knows that is not true. However; fortunately for them the general population is to lazy to learn the truth and is happy to believe bumper sticker tag lines.

And finally probably one of the most damaging myths that Domestic violence by women against men is not serious assault. As you can see by the Tables below, this is not the case at all. In the table below the highlighted portions are the percentage of each type of assault by gender of which were assaulted by that means.

Type of Assault by an Intimate
as Percentage Surveyed and Percentage Assaulted, by Gender
Re-analysis of data from NVAW Survey, Tjaden & Thoennes (2000), Exhibit 11

As you can see in none of the cases are the numbers that you are told close to the truth of this problem. However you hear about male domestic abuse so rarely it is easy to understand why people do not think it is a real problem. Add in that men more often than not will not report being the victim of domestic violence because of social and legal stigma and you have a perfect storm. Men are taught that being hit by a woman is somehow emasculating from the time we are children. I am sure that the men reading this can remember maybe a time when they were in school or in another social situation when they were assaulted by a girl. What happened? Your buddies or classmates immediately made fun of you with comments like “I can’t believe you got beat up by a girl” or other similar taunts to the point where we learned just to shut up when it happened because either no one would believe us or we would be ridiculed.

It is easy to understand why it goes unreported when even in the legal world domestic violence against men is considered a joke. In some states with what are misnamed Primary Aggressor laws if a man calls the police because he is being threatened or physically abused he will be arrested because he is the larger of the two, therefore he is the primary aggressor even if he has cuts and bruises and she does not have a scratch on her. It is automatically assumed that she did it in self defense. Which in some cases may be true but as you can see by the numbers that would most likely be a small percentage.  Until men start to stand up this will continue.

Until Next Time: Courage

Share The Oppression

Hello my dear reader. Today I would like to talk about a very serious and sensitive issue. Sexual Abuse. Now I realize that at just the name of the post the angry facts don’t matter, feminists are already gearing up to discredit this piece, I have seen it many times before. I will be addressing facts about a very serious issue from a male perspective.

If you just pay attention to the news and the skewed rhetoric of well funded media campaigns by feminist organizations you could easily come to the conclusion that sexual abuse is a one way street as can be seen by these quotes from noted feminists “All men are rapists and that’s all they are” — Marilyn French Author, “The Women’s Room” and “And if the professional rapist is to be separated from the average dominant heterosexual [male], it may be mainly a quantitative difference.” — Susan Griffin “Rape: The All-American Crime” (p. 86). This is a very powerful tool that the feminist organization uses to keep those dollars flowing, but is that really the fact of the matter? You may have been driving down the road and seen billboards like this by groups like StopItNow.org, to be fair to Stop It Now – on their website I could not find any indications (at least where I looked) that they specifically mention one gender over the other but this billboard does seem a little suspect to me.

But why do I find this billboard suspect? Because like all other anti-child sexual abuse advertising that I can remember seeing it only shows men, and when I typed “Child Sexual Abuse Prevention” into Google Images if there was a man in the add it was in the role of the aggressor or abuser. But is that how it really is? the answer to that is an easy – NO. But with that aside the more important question facing us though is not whether it is just men that abuse but the ramification and potential harm that this misconception can cause.

Society has been taught by the movies, television and the media that men are dangerous abusive rapists or batterers. To the point that women who sexually abuse children or adults are more often overlooked than their male counterparts. There are a number of myths surrounding sexual abuse by females and I would like to take a look at a couple of the more common ones that I have heard throughout my life.

The first myth I will address is that Sexual abuse committed by a female has little or no harm. The reality is that sexual abuse by females can be just as damaging as sexual abuse by males. In other words sexual abuse is sexual abuse. There have been a number of studies that have found that sexual abuse by a female could be more damaging for some victims than being sexually abused by a male. There has been research looking at long-term effects that are unique to being sexually abused by a female. For example a 2004 study by Denov found that,

• 93% reported that the sexual abuse was highly damaging and difficult to recover from.
• 100% reported a strong mistrust of women as a result of the sexual abuse experience.
• 29% reported having sexually abused children at some point in their lives. The men were charged and convicted. The sexual abuse by the women was never reported.

Another common myth is that sexually based offenses committed by females is extremely rare. Once again the reality does not match the myth. The truly unfortunate reality is that all sexual abuse is widely under-reported and when it comes to female sex offenders this truth is compounded. There have been a number of studies that show that less than 10% of sexual abuse over all is ever reported and even less than that go to court. Of course as with anything the reporting rates will very from study to study based upon the wording of questions, what the research is designed to find out, what data is used as a baseline and the demographic of the study. But here is an example of an officially reported statistic from The United States Department of Justice which found a rate of 8.3% for “Other sexual offenses” from females.

A study by Bobbie Rosencran in 1997 of female perpetrated sexual abuse found that only 3% of the female victims and 0% of the male victims told anyone about the sexual abuse during their childhood, even though 100% of them reported it was damaging. Another study by Johnson and Shrier’s in 1987 found that even though the male victims experienced the abuse as highly traumatic, none of them reported it to a mental health, social service, or criminal justice agency. It is statistics from studies like that discussed in many sexual abuse seminars and the low numbers of males reporting the assaults due in part to it being such a social taboo and a socially accepted lie that males can not be sexually abused that make it so the false impressions that these female advocacy groups can get away with skewed numbers and downright false statements about this problem.

Other studies have found the following.

• One in six adult men reported being sexually molested as children, and — in a surprise finding — nearly 40 percent of the perpetrators were female, a new study found. (Source Link)
• In cases of daycare molestation, more than 60% of children who were molested, were molested by women. – (Source link)
• Approximately 95% of all youth reporting staff sexual misconduct said they had been victimized by female staff. In 2008, 42% of staff in state juvenile facilities were female. (Bureau of Justice Report)
• In a study of 17,337 survivors of childhood sexual abuse, 23% had a female-only perpetrator and 22% had both male and female perpetrators. ( Dube, Shanta R et al. “Long-Term Consequences of Childhood Sexual Abuse by Gender of Victim.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine. (2005):28(5), p 430 – 438.
• According to a major 2004 study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Education – In studies that ask students about offenders, sex differences are less than in adult reports. The 2000 AAUW data indicate that 57.2 % of all students report a male offender and 42.4 % a female offender with the Cameron et al. study reporting nearly identical proportions as the 2000 AAUW data (57 % male offenders vs. 43 % female offenders).. (Source .PDF Download)

David Finkelhor, Ph.D The following comparison of sexual abuse rates between boys and girls as perpetrated by a female is based on research summarized in . “Current Information on the Scope and Nature of Child Sexual Abuse,” Sexual Abuse of Children (1994), this link shows some percentages of female versus male assailants and victims.

While it is true that more girls than boys are sexually abused the one in one hundred rate is identical for the perpetrator being female. Some people have pointed to the extremely low number of women who are incarcerated for sexual crimes as a indicator of the lack of female sexual assault perpetrators. However this is like pointing to the number of men incarcerated for sexual crimes as an indicator of its prevalence which the same groups of people that use female incarceration rates to prove the low numbers quick to point out. Those in either case are not even close to reliable data sets.

Other things that make it so that these numbers will be lower than reality is for example, In Idaho it is impossible for a woman to be convicted of Rape. Idaho statute title 18 chaper 61 defines rape as the following. 18-6101. Rape defined. Rape is defined as the penetration, however slight, of the oral, anal or vaginal opening with the perpetrator’s penis accomplished with a female. There is no provision for female perpetrated statutory or non statutory rape. The only amendment to the State of Idaho rape definition is to the statutory wording in house bill 169 Which only changes ages and still words the rape definitions to only include females as victims.

It is social stigma and laws like the one above that perpetuate the ignorance of boys and girls being sexually abused by females. Remember young men you did nothing wrong. You were victimized and you need to speak out about this. It is not only possible but more common than you are told for women to be sexual assailants no matter what lies you have heard from women’s groups or society. RAINN: The Rape Abuse and Incest National Network has an Online hot line and they are there to help. If you have been abused talk about it you have nothing to be ashamed of you will not be blown off because you are male. here is the URL for the hot line:

RAINN: National Sexual Assault Online Hotline

Further Reading:

julie brand: the best kept secret mother daughter sexual abuse

Top Ten Myths About Female Sex Offenders

Sameritan Counseling- Female Perpetrated Sexual Abuse of Children: The Best Kept Secret

Until Next Time: Courage.

Share The Oppression