MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

A worthy comment for discussion

Filed under: General — Julie @ 5:41 pm Thu 22nd January 2009

I deleted my last post because I don’t know enough to comment on communism. And I was way off the mark. Oh well, these things happen, unfortunately. Gender studies is not my chosen field.

But this is interesting. I see a movement like this on websites. So I wondered if others have something to say about it.

The author hasn’t a clue about what is communism and is IGNORANT of what is “left”. Feminism is not a “Leftist” movement. It is a “movement” of upper class women who seek to gain an advantage over men within the confines of CAPITALISM. In fact Feminism is extremely harmful to WORKING CLASS men and women. Working class women are asked to embrace Feminism AGAINST their own working class interest becuase upper class women don’t care one twit about them.

Working class women don’t have much to gain from child support from working class men who don’t make much. In fact working class women would gain more from a society providing free health care, education and housing. This goes against the interest of upper class women who want lower taxes and tax-free government sponsered aggrandized that they can get from upper class men.

Feminism is an UPPER CLASS movement that harms WORKING class men and offers only marginal gains for WORKING class women.

It is this lack of understanding among the so-called men’s movement that prevent the men’s movement from making RADICAL demands. Why the hell would any man who has gotten screwed by the divorce system would want to reform or perserve this system is beyond me. The entire system needs to be OVERTHROWN and that can only happen when men understand that their best interest for themselves and their children comes when you put the FEAR OF GOD into your oppressors by DEMANDING a RADICAL change.

Understand that Feminism is NOT socialism and it is NOT communism. It is all about the AGGRANDIZEMENT for upper class women at the EXPENSE of the ENTIRE working class.



  1. DCS, I am not 100% understanding of what you are saying. But I would like to understand. You are right that the working class is effected little by child support.

    But it seems to me that you are thinking of a radical movement between classes.

    It is almost like you are saying the MRM needs to shift the blame of men to the blame of the upper class.

    Communism and Its Role in Society Today

    Comment by julie — Thu 22nd January 2009 @ 9:48 pm

  2. Much of what DismantleChildSupport wrote is true. Most important is main point that the current child tax system needs to be abolished and replaced with a fundamentally different child support system. I agree with that main point completely.

    With respect to the discussion on whether feminism is “left” or not, that is more complex than DCS suggests but also far less relevant. If you really want to discuss it I’ll post further comments below.

    Comment by Dave — Fri 23rd January 2009 @ 6:39 pm

  3. “Feminism is not a “Leftist” movement. It is a “movement” of upper class women who seek to gain an advantage over men within the confines of CAPITALISM.”

    Well in theory Feminism is neither left or right. Both communism and socialism promote the theory of gender equality it is true. Communist Maoist China actually practiced it whereas socialist USSR didn’t really. However it is also true that in the West feminism is tied into and expressed in capitalist terms. Feminism is certainly in force in the West. In other words Feminism operates within the context of the society it finds itself in.

    “Within the context of modern western society…” could be prefixed to everything written about feminism. This would be far too tedious so it should just be taken as read.

    Comment by Dave — Fri 23rd January 2009 @ 6:58 pm

  4. I do want to discuss this, Dave.

    I can’t help thinking of what young men want. Not all are going to have children let alone marry so I think they have every right to expect good treatment for the taxes they pay. And they are going to have to pay off national debt for many years for yesterdays doing. Plus they are going to pay for the baby boomers retirement when they most likely will have no such scheme when they retire.


    Much of what feminism has done has been through the left. I would like to hear your opinion and any other information you may have.

    Comment by julie — Fri 23rd January 2009 @ 7:00 pm

  5. Gosh Dave, we were writing our comments at the same time.

    Comment by julie — Fri 23rd January 2009 @ 7:02 pm

  6. What commentators tend to overlook is that modern western society is often not capitalist. Let me clarify this. Societies are rarely purely capitalist or purely socialist. There is a continuum between these two extremes where some aspects and laws are capitalist and some are socialist. For example you need money to buy or rent a house. That is capitalist. The government lends you a state house for free. That is socialist. A state or council house would never exist in a capitalist country.

    I can provide a large amount of evidence that New Zealand is actually a very socialist country. An obvious example of this is the DBP. This policy is pure socialism. Prior to the depression of 1880s such a policy would have been unthinkable in New Zealand. Because prior to 1880 New Zealand really was a capitalist country (not to mention pro marriage).

    What we have now is by and large a socialist governance supported by a capitalist economy. That is capitalism pays for socialism. In practice this is socialism that tolerates a certain level of capitalism in order to fund itself. Confused? The point is that although wealth is generated by capitalism in New Zealand, most of the wealth is used to run a socialist system. In other words modern NZ is socialist.

    Comment by Dave — Fri 23rd January 2009 @ 7:22 pm

  7. In NZ feminism is aligned with the left. Again the example of the DPB (misspelled above). The Domestic Purposes Benefit is both pure socialism and pure feminism.

    If you look into how feminism is implemented in NZ (rather than the theory) you discover a pattern of socialism. The child tax and family law are obvious examples but there are more subtle ones as well.

    For example, modern feminism demands equal outcomes of income. Most people want equal opportunities. This is capitalism. I have the same opportunities as you. E.g. (a) If I work hard and have good luck then I can get more income than you. Capitalism. In feminism, if you are a woman you should get the same as a man regardless if you do exactly the same job, take as many risks, work as long hours etc. The outcome should be equal. Socialism.

    Comment by Dave — Fri 23rd January 2009 @ 7:41 pm

  8. I think DCS was trying to make the point that often it is privileged women who are the most vocal feminist lobbyists. Much like the classic Parnell socialist. I get his (?) point. However this is only one section of society. A lazy DPB teen mother may lack the vocabulary to spout feminist ideology but she is none the less chosen to live the feminist life style.

    Likewise a gold digger in the family court is grabbing as much money as she can. That is certainly feminist. However I argue this is fundamentally socialism rather than capitalism. I think DCS’s point is that this is within the confines of capitalism.

    To understand DCS’s point of view, consider the similarity of the gold digger in family law with a civil law suit in a real court. You are already wealthy but you sue someone who did you wrong to get money from them for your own advantage. They might end up poorer than you but the law is on your side and you are greedy. This is capitalism — DCS’s point.

    My point is that in the civil law suit you are suing someone who broke the law which gave them an unfair advantage. You are asserting your right to equal opportunity even though the outcome is not equal. In the family law things are setup to advantage the woman under the theory of feminism on the principle of equal outcome. In practice the gold digger could end up better off than the husband but the rationale behind the law is that the gold digger needs this to get an equal outcome because she doesn’t have the skills/attitude/etc to earn as much future income. This rationale is socialism because the goal is too spread money (outcome) whereas capitalism is about equal opportunity.

    As I say — all rather minor and abstract in the context of agreeing that the child tax system is fundamentally flawed and needs to be completely replaced.

    Comment by Dave — Fri 23rd January 2009 @ 8:14 pm

  9. Dave, the above is all good information. But the right added the Child Tax Act. In this way they kept the individual being responsible for the child/ren instead of the social community. Yes? / No?

    So what is the answer to get away from capital, individual responsibility? Would the answer be: “Socialism” where everyone is given the equal.

    The reason I bring communism into this is because of their manifesto.

    They are using both left and right to create what they want. You can see how we are today compared to their agenda.


    I see what you are saying about feminism and women’s behaviour. Feminists who worked towards the social goals are quite horrified that women call themselves non feminists but use or have used their services. That puts an awful lot of women as feminists.

    Comment by julie — Fri 23rd January 2009 @ 8:58 pm

  10. Feminist are simply a lobby group to garner increasing power for women and some crumbs from the table for their supporters.
    In the process they marginalize and demonize men, destroy families, support the needless killing of millions of unborn children annually and lead to the unraveling of social fabric. They create to unnecessary wariness towards men in general and the concomitant stifling of intimacy and social cohesion.
    Their philosophy and ‘research’ leaves millions of children worldwide fatherless, thus neglected, socially, emotionally and educationally impoverished and at risk.
    Feminism is is a modern day hate movement.
    It also encourages through emotional blackmail and PC rationalizations the failure to recognize these things.

    Comment by Skeptik — Sat 24th January 2009 @ 1:43 pm

  11. Thanks Skeptic for bringing feminism back to it’s simple form.

    Comment by julie — Sun 25th January 2009 @ 1:16 pm

  12. How many feminists does it take to change a light bulb?

    One to change the bulb…
    twelve to form a support group….
    three to write to newspapers demanding sympathy…..
    five to full~time lobby politicians for funding….
    one to go on hunger strike until a ‘female friendly’ light bulb is created….
    two who’ve trained in martial arts to guard the ‘wimmin space’ created for the gyno~action……
    and three to ‘counsel’ all of the above for ‘trauma’…

    – All at the taxpayers expense of course!

    Comment by Skeptik — Sun 25th January 2009 @ 11:25 pm

  13. #12, Hahahaha. That’s funny. (sadly it speaks truth)

    Comment by julie — Mon 26th January 2009 @ 11:32 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar