Gender Inequality in Work Roles
Seldom a day passes without examples of ‘equality’, feminist style. In fact, it’s GENDER INEQUALITY but feminist voices remain silent about it or actively support it, suggesting that equality was never really their goal.
For example, look at inequality in men’s sacrifice in their their work roles and more generally in their roles as providers and protectors. Year after year 100% or almost 100% of workplace deaths are suffered by men, as are the vast majority of serious workplace injuries. Yet year after year we see no analysis of the gender implications of this, not even some mark of respect or gratitude towards the male gender for men’s sacrifices. Instead, we hear endless complaints that men earn, on average, about 12% more than women do in their employed roles. A whole government ministry only for women, with no comparable service for men, is maintained to close the claimed earnings gap even though we know that the 12% figure greatly underestimates wealth acquisition by women. And feminists, when confronted with the much greater gender disparity in workplace deaths and injuries, refuse to acknowledge that such sacrifice may justify slightly more recompense. In a recent conversation with me, one feminist claimed that male:female workplace death ratios only persisted because men kept or forced women out of the dangerous jobs. Yeah right, we can see the queues of women clamouring to risk their lives in mines, sewers, and all the other dirty, body-damaging and dangerous jobs men continue to undertake. Those queues are easily detected if you look for the little fairy pigs flying above them.
Here then we honour the following men who have recently suffered significant injury or ultimate sacrifice in their roles. These examples are all from the last six weeks or so. Should any of the links be broken by the time you read this, I have a copy of the full articles.
1. Man crushed by vehicle in New Plymouth: truck mechanic dies horrible death.
2. Body found near where fisherman disappeared: man dies in a typical male provider role.
3. No need for inquest into exploding shell death: No need to give any more attention than necessary to male deaths in the army.
4. SAS soldier’s death detailed: Unusually, this article acknowledged “The work is always dangerous and they’re brave men who do their best to serve New Zealand.” Note, they’re brave MEN.
5. Powerline victim leaves two children: male worker burns to death; headline emphasizes those he ‘left behind’ and doesn’t think his gender important enough to mention.
6. Police officer injured in knife attack: It’s interesting that male police officers seem to be injured much more often than their gender proportion would predict; why is this? And why isn’t his gender mentioned in the headline as is almost always the case when a woman is subjected to violence or injury, for example: Supermarket woman ‘shaken’ by knife-point robbery
7. Truck driver dies in Hauraki Plains crash: This article goes to considerable effort to avoid mentioning the gender of this victim at all. Even where the article could use the masculine pronoun ‘he’ it avoids doing so.
8. Man rescues neighbour trapped under station wagon: As well as being an example of another man injured in a typical male role, it also shows the heroism of another man who put his own safety at risk in rescuing the injured victim.
9. Crushed driver ‘not belted in’: Instead of discussing the high risk profession in which this truckie died, the article blames him for his death due to not wearing a seat belt even though police are not even certain about that.
10. 22 Chinese miners rescued after 7 days: All over the world including our Pike River Mine men frequently die terrible deaths in mines, but often, as is the case with this article, their gender is not thought worthy of mention. No recognition or concern is given to the fact that it is overwhelmingly men who work and die in the claustrophobic darkness of mines to provide materials for the infrastructure of our privileged lifestyles.
11. Four men in flooded Welsh mine, rescue efforts continue: What, you think I was exaggerating about the frequency of male victims in mines?
12. Logger cuts off toes to free himself: Ah yes, the privileges men enjoy…
13. Health board forced to reveal assault figures: Auckland District Health Board is told to provide better records of the number of mental health staff assaulted on the job, but no mention is made of providing a gender break down of these assaults. The gender ratio is likely to mirror that in police and military forces, with men much more likely to be attacked and injured than are women. Why do you suppose this is the case?
14. Quad bike victim’s family tell of legacy: Department of Labour insists on using only the the term “people” in disclosing the numbers injured and killed on farm quad bikes, even though all or almost all will be males. Why is the sacrifice of men kept hidden like this? If some profession saw a significant proportion of women dying, their gender would be highlighted, their sacrifice as women honoured, demands for change would be deafening and the problem would probably be blamed somehow on women’s underprivileged status.
15. Sydney-based Kiwi killed when tyre explodes: This article describes one workplace death, but the gender of the additional workplace serious injury is not thought worthy of mention; of course not, because he was probably only a man. Our deep condolences to the victims and their loved ones.
16. Second body found at Lake Arapuni: Two men die in their role as providers; One supposes that such provider roles are not even counted in gender comparisons of ‘unpaid domestic contribution’.
17. Worker dies in drain collapse: Imagine what the headline would say if this ‘worker’ had been a female…
18. Auckland staircase collapses, three hurt: No mention whatsoever in the article (or this one, oh or this one) about the gender of the injured workers, so guess what their gender was? Congratulations to those who guessed ‘male’, because we were finally able to find one article that saw fit to mention this, though male gender was not considered important enough to mention in the headline.
19. Person stuck in machinery in Christchurch: ‘Person’? Er, I think it was a MAN, but the article failed to mention this at all thereby ensuring male sacrifice remains largely hidden from the public’s view. Oh, and by the way, the man died from his injuries, though I didn’t see that publicized subequently. Another horrible, painful male death; our gratitude is extended to him for his dangerous work and our deep condolences are offered to his loved ones.
20. Man assaulted during bank robbery: Wow, unbelievable, an article actually mentions that a ‘man’ was assaulted in his role as a security guard delivering money. In every other such case articles have claimed simply that a ‘security van’ was robbed or perhaps that a ‘worker’ was assaulted. But don’t expect this article’s enlightened approach to set any trend.
21. Man injured in Dunedin train accident: Actually, he was working on the train, but at least his gender is headlined in this case.
22. Levin man pinned under his own horse: This man may have been in a work role; does anyone know more about this incident?
23. ‘It’s all right’ – drowning dad’s last words to son: Another man dies in his role as provider
24. Man crushed to death by forklift
25. Second SAS NZ death in Afghanistan: Oh, another soldier dies on duty, and surprise, surprise, it’s a man, though this wasn’t thought important enough to mention in the headline, and no hint of concern by anyone that men are disproportionately the ones to die in active service. But plenty of gender-specific concern when it comes to events in the forces that women object to. Of course, it’s important to take seriously allegations by servicewomen of sexual abuse or harassment, but why is the matter of servicemen’s disproportionate death rate considered so unimportant as to deserve no consideration? Are male deaths trivial compared to claims by females of harassment?
This is SUPERB work you are doing Hans.
Thank you.
Your analysis is spot on and starkly shows up the woman centered elitist indifference to men’s situation that feminists in NZ stand for.
The bizarre rationalization given to you by the feminist who insisted men kept women out of hazardous occupations is breath taking!
I could add dealing with vexatious feminists and mangina white knights as other hazardous occupations too!
Comment by Skeptik — Fri 30th September 2011 @ 12:43 pm
Thanks for your acknowledgement, Skeptik. The news reviews might not look like it but they take many hours to prepare. It’s ironic I think that the truth is out there in our face every day, as my news reviews show, yet so many people remain so ignorant of that truth. Luckily, as soon as a man’s eyes are opened to men’s side of gender issues it is very difficult for him to close them again.
Comment by Hans Laven — Fri 30th September 2011 @ 5:18 pm
Well done Hans and I especially agree with your last comment about being ignorant but once your eyes are opened it is very difficult to close them again. As a Social Worker my educational and workplace trainng (which will be no surprise to many of you) has been very sexist and one sided. That is the female gender issues are seen as the only gender issues that require analysis and effort to overcome, whereas mens issues are sidelined as unimportant and trivial. I had always thought that men were in some ways prejudiced against and since joining this website it has made it even clearer just how deep the prejudice runs. My eyes are wide open. It is incredible the amount of biased gender politics in social services and even more incredible how many social service practitioners seem to be oblivious to this. I have challenged the family violence assumptions of my fellow Social Workers on several occassions through presentations and the sexist wording of the family violence policy of the DHB I work for. I have met with the family violence co-ordinator and I have volunteered to be the call person for men who have suffered family violence and she is trying to get some gender neutral family violence posters to put around the hospital. I am currently working on a pamphlet for male survivors of family violence. I hope this does not sound self congratulatory and it is but a small step but as you say once your eyes are open you just have to do something. After all Social Work is suppose to be about equality.
Comment by Phil267 — Sun 2nd October 2011 @ 1:51 pm
Good on you Phil276 for this:
I’m particularly interested in this subject, and I encourage you to make more Posts here about your experiences. I’m very happy to host your pamphlet for men to download; if you want.
You might want to re-consider the use of the word ‘survivors’ to describe male victims of domestic violence however; I think it’s one of those NewSpeak words that has political connotations outside the traditional meaning.
Comment by JohnPotter — Sun 2nd October 2011 @ 5:52 pm
Hans, reading your article, the figure 12% sticks out like feminist’s balls. Should we be campaigning for much higher pay margins for jobs with significant injury and death risk?
Similarly, what pay margin would be required to compensate men teachers for the greater risk of prosecution for sex offenses? In most cases, accused found not guilty are still severely disadvantaged by the cost of their legal defence and also by lingering stigmatism against them. It has been jokingly suggested that it is cheaper and more economicly efficient to plead guilty. In this sense, obviously our criminal justice system is little more than an uneconomic joke, all care maybe and no responsibility.
I would argue that men teachers should be offered higher pay, until the gender balance in teaching matches that in our society.
You point out how often gender is not given to readers. This always requires the use of clumsy awkward language, as our language has evolved to efficiently include gender information very naturally. Thus we can see that over a long period of time, it has been unquestioned that gender be given.
Whilst I support equal opportunity, I don’t support positive discrimination used to drive a very non-level playing ground
Thanks, MurrayBacon.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Sun 2nd October 2011 @ 7:02 pm
Hey John, you may want to know that Sth Auckland is ripe for male victim/female violence. But you’ll already know that. 🙂
Which reminds me I have to take on one abusive male cop and one male cop who wrote a fake report tomorrow (2 of them). I have had a good talk about this to court criminal lawyers and apparently you’ll be lucky if a judge ever does the right thing and allows dirt on a cop.
Their superior cop has written me an apology for the instance and says they’ll make a workshop for cops, lol…… but I can’t use that in court either. Boo Hoo.
Apparently I am too late to ask for a jury and I haven’t yet meet my barrister who apparently is supposed to be good.
…………
Hopefully we can find a way to work out which men and women are lying when it comes to domestic violence WITHOUT all the court crap, lol.
Comment by julie — Mon 3rd October 2011 @ 1:36 am
On another note, I reckon if men’s groups and women’s groups put their money together…. hmmmm, that would give great opportunity …… they could even offer relationship rehabs for men and women. If they get enough money…. hmmmm, just imagine a bootcamp for separating parents, lol.
Comment by julie — Mon 3rd October 2011 @ 1:47 am
Well done Hans,
I think we have come along way regarding men’s safety….. I lived in Taupo and knew of terrible bush accidents. The compulsory drug testing has eradicated allot of injuries and deaths at work and we have safety hats, fluorescence shirts as well as adverts to drive slow near ‘men at work’ on roads etc.
But as you show, it’s not enough. Hopefully someone will take the issue on with passion. (I realised how important this is after learning how little even the commissions get).
Comment by julie — Mon 3rd October 2011 @ 2:05 am
Good on you Phil276 for this:
I’m particularly interested in this subject, and I encourage you to make more Posts here about your experiences.
Amen to that.
Comment by Skeptik — Mon 3rd October 2011 @ 5:19 pm
Thank you John and I will bear in mind about the political connotations of using the term survivors. I actually prefer the term conqueror but that may not be any better and I used the term survivor without thinking. Thank you also Skeptik for your support. I agree with Julie that men and women should work together on family violence because it is not a gender specific issue. The family violence co-ordinator also agrees it is not a gender issue so hopefully we can get some processes up and running. She is also going to put me in contact with other men in community agencies that are active with mens issues. What I find interesting is that most of Social Work team are getting towards retirement age and it is the younger women coming through either as employees or students who are very receptive to discussing the issue of family violence and acknowledging the social cost of womens violence, not just mens. An older Social Worker said it is because feminism has given them the freedom from discrimination to focus on womens (astrophe button not working on my keyboard) violence but I believe it is due to the social/political change since 1984 where there is more emphasis on self-responsibility rather than adhering to the feminist victimisation of women. Hans mentioned it takes him hours to prepare his posts and to him and others like Skeptik, Allan Harvey, Murray Bacon, Darryl X, John Potter, Julie and many others who contribute by putting in posts,debating the issues and supplying links I would like to say thanks as it has enabled me to articulate a counter arguement to the gender politics I face everyday at work. I must admit it has come as a bit of a shock to many of the Social Workers in my team as they have not really been exposed to a counter arguement, or different gender analysis, and the gender bias has become the norm. Someone remarked that the feminists have also manipulated women and I see it as being very evident in Social Work. I will compile posts in the future to let you all know how things are proceeding.
Comment by Phil267 — Mon 3rd October 2011 @ 7:05 pm
@Phil267 – Thanks for your efforts. As you proceed to educate others about the reality of family violence, please keep in mind the following facts from the US:
During the past forty years, the US has forcibly separated more than fifty-million children from more than thirty-million fathers, mostly in response to divorce initiated by mothers. The fathers are forced under penalty of imprisonment to pay excessive orders for child support with which approximately one-half are or have been unable to comply. The child support orders typically exceed cost of raising a child by a multiple of three or four and what fathers should be paying by a multiple of six or eight, as the mothers should be expected to contribute something but don’t.
Excessive orders are made by courts because states receive approximately one dollar of federal subsidies for every dollar transferred from fathers to mothers (in compliance with laws like TANF and VAWA, etc”¦). Approximately one-half of all children forcibly separated never see their fathers again. Most of the remaining are only allowed to see them a few days a month.
Approximately two-million fathers have been jailed during the past forty years for inability to comply with the orders and approximately 250,000 have killed themselves in response to these developments against which they are helpless. Thomas Ball recently self-immolated on the steps of a courthouse in a small town in New Hampshire in response to the government’s excessive imposition on him, as it denied his children access to him and kept rotating him in and out of jail because he could not pay.
The Bradley Amendment to title IV-D of the Social Security Act (of 1996?) prohibits any legal recourse, as it prevents downward modification of an order for any reason. Fathers are routinely denied access to their children because of false allegations of domestic violence and child abuse encouraged by states and the federal government under the Violence Against Women Act, which allows any woman to make false allegations against any man with impunity and with no burden of proof or due process. Basically, the government breaks fathers and then punishes them for being broken.
Approximately one-million restraining orders (RO’s) are issued annually in the US, most against fathers during divorce. Most studies show RO’s deny women and men in real need access to help, harass fathers, are seldom issued in response to injury or harm, and are often for strategic advantage in divorce and for facilitating adultery. An RO issued against late night talk show host David Letterman in New York during 2006 because a woman in New Mexico complained he was harassing her by television with psychic messages of love is an example of the absurd excuses for most RO’s.
Erin Pizzey opened the first woman’s shelter in England during 1971, but was discouraged because most clientele were more violent than their male partners. Most women at shelters are drug addicts, have been evicted from their homes for adultery and/or child abuse, are con-artists and/or suffer crippling mental illness, and are manipulating others with the public spectacle of their chronic victimhood. Recognizing the psychological disposition of their clientele, feminists have turned shelters into cults for strategic advantage in their political hate campaign against men. When Erin became an outspoken critic of shelters and feminists, they threatened the life of herself and her family, killed her dog, and drove her to exile in Italy and then North America.
Objective data gathered and analyzed in compliance with the Scientific Method concerning frequency of child abuse and domestic violence show that women are responsible for most domestic violence and child abuse (Scientist Daniel Whitaker formerly of the CDC and Murray Strauss from Univ New Hampshire are great references), and number of women’s shelters do nothing to reduce frequency of domestic violence against women. However, these same data show that the lives of many men have been saved because shelters are an alternative for violent women who would otherwise kill their husbands.
For the past forty years, more than 34% of children in the US were born to unwed mothers, almost two-thirds were during 2008, and before 1970 less than 5% were. During the past three years, approximately 15% of children born in the US are to unidentified fathers – either there were too many possibilities for the mother to know or the mother simply didn’t know the name of the one possibility. Based upon DNA and other studies, approximately 10% of children born in the US during the past forty years are victims of paternity fraud (some studies show as low as 6%, which is still ridiculously high, and some as high as 14%). Approximately 25% of children born in the US during the past three years do not know who their fathers are (even if that figure was as low as 19%, using the low percent for paternity fraud, it’s still ridiculously high).
Denial of children access to their fathers is parental alienation, which is child abuse, and is facilitated on a vast scale by governments for profit. An alternative to child support is shared parenting, which is possible in most instances but almost always ignored or dismissed because of the mother’s hostile parent veto. Child support is CHILD TRAFFICKING and CHILD ABUSE and SLAVERY for fathers. It encourages mothers and governments to snatch children and hold them hostage for ransom in violation of the Constitution and civil rights of fathers. That is a fascist and oppressive and tyrannical police state if there ever was one.
Comment by Darryl X — Tue 4th October 2011 @ 12:22 am
Darryl X (#11): A useful summary, thanks. We haven’t moved far since the Inquisition have we? The witches have just changed gender.
Comment by Hans Laven — Tue 4th October 2011 @ 8:20 am
Thx, Hans. This most recent dispatch from the world’s largest post feminist dystopian police state is a letter I wrote to the Ohio State Police in response to this article, http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?p=19659, which reports that approximately 10% of ALL adult males in the state of Ohio have already or soon will lose their driver licenses because they are in arrears for child support. This development is after recent laws extended the time for automatic suspensions from thirty to ninety days and after the minimum required threshold for arrears was increased from zero to half of the child support owed. The number would be much greater than ten percent if not for these recent laws. Of course, I do not need to explain the consequences for the economy when ten percent of ALL adult males lose their driving privileages. And of course, almost all these men live below the threshold for poverty and are not eligible for any public assistance. What good does suspending their driver licenses do? None. As a matter of fact, it prevents them from finding employment that would allow them to continue paying child support. To say that this development illustrates the complete irresponsibility and dysfunctionality and self-destructive nature of our government is an understatement. I wouldn’t be banking on the future of the US anytime soon. Of course, other states report similar developments – this article just happens to be about Ohio.
Comment by Darryl X — Tue 4th October 2011 @ 10:09 am
@12
Actually Hans,
As a generalisation I think your observation will do.
However, my reading of history is that a lot of men got killed during the dark times of the Inquisition too – labeled as ‘wicked’.
here’s a list of those executed at the Salem Witch trials.
Bridget Bishop (June 10, 1692)
Rebecca (Towne) Nurse (July 19, 1692)
Sarah (Solart) Good (July 19, 1692)
Elizabeth (Jackson) Howe (July 19, 1692)
Sarah (Averill) Wildes (July 19, 1692)
Susannah (North) Martin (July 19, 1692)
George Burroughs (August 19, 1692)
Martha (Allen) Carrier (August 19, 1692)
George Jacobs, Sr. (August 19, 1692)
John Proctor (August 19, 1692)
John Willard (August 19, 1692)
Giles Corey (September 19, 1692) – Pressed to death
Martha Corey (September 22, 1692)
Mary (Towne) Eastey (September 22, 1692)
Alice Parker (September 22, 1692)
Mary (Ayer) Parker (September 22, 1692)
Ann Pudeator (September 22, 1692)
Margaret (Stevenson) Scott (September 22, 1692)
Wilmot Redd (September 22, 1692)
Samuel Wardwell Sr. (September 22, 1692)
Comment by Skeptik — Tue 4th October 2011 @ 10:51 am
Thanks for the correction Skeptik (#14). I had forgotten that many men were also killed as witches. So it might be true instead to say that it is no longer women, only men, who are the target of the modern witchhunt.
Comment by Hans Laven — Tue 4th October 2011 @ 5:01 pm
@ Darryl X. Thanks for that (#11). I recently read Is Domestic Violence a Gender Issue, or a Human Issue by McNeely, Cook and Torres and it gives a very good synopsis of the appalling treatment towards Erin Pizzey and researchers who were brave enough to show that domestic violence is not a gender issue. I gave a copy to a Social Work student that I had for the day who was very keen to have a copy and she was surprised to learn that women commit the majority of child murders. I have also read a paper by Donald Dutton (cannot remember the name) which detailed the use of different research methods and how different results were gained, or manipulated. I do not know much about the child support issues but I have been following the posts regularly and it is good to have it in a concise summary. Is it true that if a female who has had sex with an underage male and she becomes pregnant then that male is expected to pay child support when eventually working?
Comment by Phil267 — Tue 4th October 2011 @ 8:35 pm
@Phil276 said…
May interest you to know that Chisholm Institute of Technology in Victoria is teaching future welfare workers to disbelieve any male who claims to be a victim. They are to be suspected as perpetrators if they dare speak out.
Comment by gwallan — Tue 4th October 2011 @ 9:28 pm
@Hans…
What makes you think the witch hunts were about gender? In some parts the majority of victims were male.
Women were the primary accusers and prosecution witnesses in these events. Most instances probably served as solutions – if a false accusation can be called such – to neighbourhood disputes between individual women. The Catholic Church is not responsible for it’s beginnings either. It was dragged into it as the only possible civil adjudicator in places where accusations occurred.
The European Witch-Hunts – Adam Jones.
Comment by gwallan — Tue 4th October 2011 @ 9:56 pm
This obviously shows clearly that men were the main targets of the witch hunts, that’s sarcasm by the way.
And here is more evidence of the gender targeted.
And here is more evidence from contemporary sources of the day.
Seems to me that women were in fact the main targets.
To try and say that men were the main targets of the witch hunts is simply to show a grotesque lack of understanding of history. All these quotes by the way are from the SAME article that gwallan has given the source of above.
.
Unlike today, this was a time in history when women actually WERE persecuted, to deny this quite frankly, simply shows ignorance of history. Study the torture devices of the day (I’ve researched this for a book I was working on, which had detailed and accurate torture scenes in it) and you will discover that many devices were invented SPECIFICALLY for the torture of women. Devices like the vaginal pear (a spiked device designed to be inserted and widened), and the breast ripper (a device designed to tear of the breasts of women) are classic examples of this.
.
I have to agree that the modern “witch hunt” against men is certainly aimed at everything male (and appears to employ similar tactics), but to say that the medieval witch hunts mainly targeted males is a pure fantasy.
Comment by Phoenix — Tue 4th October 2011 @ 10:44 pm
JohnPotter said…
I am alternately “survivor” or “victim” depending on circumstance. Within our victim groups we are survivors. In my outbound advocacy I’ve come to use the word “victim” almost exclusively. Language depends upon audience.
You may or may not favour the term “victim” yourself. Unfortunately the most insidious gender gap of all is the one that disallows it’s use for men. It’s a gap in compassion that must be bridged.
Comment by gwallan — Tue 4th October 2011 @ 11:22 pm
Pheonix…
I said nothing about men being the overall victims apart from referring to “some parts”. Reliable estimates of death tolls for male “witches” are between twenty five and forty percent overall.
I suspect you have jumped upon my reference to the church. I have no interest in defending the church. However at the outset of the witch hunts the Catholic Church did not have any position on witches, scriptural or other. They certainly had it in for heretics, as the Inquistion had demonstrated.
Whilst not perfectly relevant it is is interesting to note that single days in single battles have killed more soldiers than all the victims of the witch hunts collectively yet we were trained to view those as “heroic” rather than tragic.
Comment by gwallan — Tue 4th October 2011 @ 11:45 pm
“I recently read Is Domestic Violence a Gender Issue, or a Human Issue by McNeely, Cook and Torres and it gives a very good synopsis of the appalling treatment towards Erin Pizzey and researchers who were brave enough to show that domestic violence is not a gender issue.” Yup. Scary stuff. I don’t think any of these researchers knew what they were getting into when they began pursuing their research and learned what they did which put them in the targets of a brutal feminist regime. Many of these researchers (and laypersons like Erin) began their work (whether it be research or social work or something else) with preconceived notions about domestic violence but were surprised by its results. Then they couldn’t believe the anger and malice that was directed at them by the feminist regime for revealing and broadcasting the truth. They had no protection from law enforcement of course and, like Erin, have had to do things like leave the country to protect themselves.
“I gave a copy to a Social Work student that I had for the day who was very keen to have a copy and she was surprised to learn that women commit the majority of child murders.” That is why a husband and father are so important in a household – to protect the children from their own mother. The demographic least likely to abuse a child is the biological father. The demographic most likely is the mother. The male demographic most likely to abuse a child is the boyfriend of the mother or the step-father of a child. Usually the mother is complicit in these instances. That is how courts increase the risk of child abuse in most instances of divorce – by awarding custody to the mother. More than that is my understanding that not only do women commit the majority of child murders, the ratio of male to female children murdered by men is 50:50 but the ratio of male to female children murdered by women is greater than 50:50, which means that women for various reasons kill male children more than female children. There are several references for this phenomenon but I don’t have one at my immediate disposal. Says a lot about the population.
“I have also read a paper by Donald Dutton (cannot remember the name) which detailed the use of different research methods and how different results were gained, or manipulated.” If you’re referring to feminists and their propaganda and false flags and lies and their reliance on “advocacy research” (which isn’t real objective scientific research), yes, it is a big problem. As far as I am concerned, what these feminists are doing is fraud and should be punished as such. Unfortunately, their lobby of legislators around the world has helped to create laws that protect them from litigation and allows them to keep defrauding everyone. Throw in an audience that is not terribly objective and is already biased against men and sense and reason, doesn’t ask questions and believes everything it is told, and you have a recipe for disaster.
“I do not know much about the child support issues but I have been following the posts regularly and it is good to have it in a concise summary.” This point is VERY important. Child support is a mechanism of feminists (women and their male enablers) to traffic and abuse children and enslave men for satisfying an addiction to power and control. Nothing more complicated than that. Some have criticized my interpretation as a “conspiracy theory” but it is not a conspiracy. As Doug Casey (a prominent investor and market analyst) once said (in reference to those screwing up our economy and its relationship to the self-immolation of Thomas Ball, and I’m paraphrasing), “These people aren’t conspiring. It’s just that sociopaths all have the same goals (satisfy their addiction to power and control) and sometimes the objectives for achieving those goals align. They see what works and what doesn’t and they all latch onto the same ones that work.” Child support works and is a great method for satisfying addiction to power control by trafficking and abusing children and enslaving men. Can it be any more obvious than the methods used to enforce child support: jailing men, suspending passports and driver licenses, driving fathers from the lives of their children and onto the street or to their deaths, increasing the probability of child abuse, and criminalizing and discouraging educaton and scholar and employment and fatherhood. The entire concept of child support is institutionalized malignant narcissism and psychopathy.
“Is it true that if a female who has had sex with an underage male and she becomes pregnant then that male is expected to pay child support when eventually working?” Yes, I am familiar with many reports in the media of this phenomenon. She will not be punished in most instances for statutory rape or sexual assault but instead will be rewarded with excessive child support which will sustain her for the rest of her life and deny the father any means to survive for the rest of his. Even if she is punished, like in a case locally this past year, she will be suspended or even fired from her job (like here at a local secondary school where this happened – it’s actually very common but you never hear about it – only statutory rape by men is reported generally) but at worst might have to pay a fine ($250) and/or spend some time in counseling or therapy. If the sexes were reversed, the man would be sent to prison for approximately twenty-seven years. He might get less time for murder. Another recent phenomenon is women who go to a sperm bank, get pregnant with that sperm, then go after the doner for child support. There are several instances recently in which men who have donated annonymously have ended up paying child support.
Comment by Darryl X — Wed 5th October 2011 @ 12:39 am
Gosh, I am extremely impressed to see you men come together as professionals and giving each other advice from experience etc. I think y’all sooooo important.
Of course I am nothing to you men – no masters, no degree and my mother couldn’t read or write. She died when I was 20 and I had 5 siblings younger than me plus a 10th month old baby.
Comment by julie — Wed 5th October 2011 @ 2:50 am
Damn, I had more to say in my last comment.
Anyways, just take care y’all.
Comment by julie — Wed 5th October 2011 @ 3:05 am
@ 15
Thanks for the correction Skeptik (#14). I had forgotten that many men were also killed as witches. So it might be true instead to say that it is no longer women, only men, who are the target of the modern witchhunt.
You’re welcome Hans.
I only mention it because I don’t want feminists to grab hold of the idea that only female ‘witches’ got the inquisitorial treatment. Goodness knows they’ve got enough bullshit historical grievance to fuel their vengeful man-hate as it is what with their Alice in Wonderland mythical evil patriarchy!
Comment by Skeptik — Wed 5th October 2011 @ 4:04 am
re withchunts – From reports in this thread above by Skeptik, Phoenix and gwallan, the ratio of men and women executed as witches is about 1:4 and reflects the ratio of men to women in a caste of early human and primate social organizing when approximately 20% of males mated with approximately 80% of females (and the other males and females lived at the margins of the caste or were enslaved).
It seems a small population of men are always conspiring with a larger population of women (manipulating them?) so they both can satisfy their addiction to power and control. I actually think all these people (men and women) were “witches” and likely were doing some very bad things to people. Not necessarily witchcraft but manipulating and enslaving and persecuting everyone else. Power corrupts but absolute power corrupts absolutely.
These people are malignant narcissists, the characteristics of which, among others, include solipsistic and opportunistic, irresponsible and manipulative, parasitic, compulsive pathological liars, lacking analytical skills, short-sighted and unable to plan ahead, and shallow affect. These qualities are all antithetical to civilization.
These qualities are typical of feminism, which is typical of a caste and early social organizing and is antithetical to civilization. Feminists are women AND their male enablers. My interpretation is that both the small number of men and the larger number of women likely were “witches” (malignant narcissists) and they were taxing the civilization too much with their antics and civilized people finally got tired of dealing with them and killed them.
Comment by Darryl X — Wed 5th October 2011 @ 6:46 am
@ gwallen
Thanks for that. I read a thread of a article where a man commented that he was doing a domestic violence course in Colorado and he stated that it is actually illegal to say that women are as violent as men in that state. Good point about the term victim. The term seems to me to be too close to the victimisation culture that feminism has created. However using the term victim with males must help reduce the male as the perpetrator only myth.
@ Darryl X
Thanks for that. I do realise the importance of child support issues even though my knowledge is not great about it. Erin Pizzey talks about it quite a lot and how feminists wanted men taken away from the family but to still be a wallet to provide money but no power in the relationship, and cruelly estranged from their own children. This might interest you there is a clip, under gender equality I think, on you tube where an American woman talks about a woman who has nothing to do with her children, refuses to pay child support and the Police refuse to do anything about it as the Court will not hold her accountable.
In case you are interested the Donald Dutton article was the gender paradigm in research and theory part 1 – the conflict of theory and data. He did explain why the discrepancies exist and how they have been exploited by feminists.
Comment by Phil267 — Wed 5th October 2011 @ 7:44 pm
@Phil267…
Highly recommend Adam Jones’ Effacing the Male. Jones uses analysis of the western media’s coverage of the Kosovo war to demonstrate how that media hides, or effaces, male suffering from our view.
Consider that it has always been men and boys who were sacrificed when the crap hit the fan. To an extent we can’t afford to be too compassionate when we may one day need to send masses of them to their deaths. This was particularly true during the first half of the twentieth century and it remains embedded in the broader conciousness.
Comment by gwallan — Wed 5th October 2011 @ 11:31 pm
Thankyou for posting this link gwallan. It is good to see legitimate, academic level, referenced articles about this subject. It’s very easy to make unsubstantiated claims, pulling on research that is never identified or is insubstantial (eg. not academic), so it is refreshing to see links to articles that we can all read.
Comment by Phoenix — Thu 6th October 2011 @ 12:37 am
@gwallan and Phoenix – I’ve experienced similar misrepresentations of facts in the US like the ones you report in this thread above. In the US, the gov’t constantly identifies the victims of poverty as women and children and use “gov’t statistics” to support its claims. But in reality using real data and real analysis, the overwhelming victims of poverty are men. This great discrepancy exists because usually the gov’t is using gross incomes instead of actual incomes or take-home pay. Or because the gov’t is not including data about men who are homeless or dead from being homeless. Or because the gov’t is only using data concerning those who receive public assistance (almost all women) but not including data concerning men who are in the same or worse circumstances than those women and children but are not eligible for and not receiving public assistance. It’s the difference between making claims like “most of those in poverty are women and children” when really most of those in poverty are men.
Comment by Darryl X — Thu 6th October 2011 @ 3:14 am
Darryl x
Perhaps you would like to back up your claims with some real research. It’s very easy to make claims as you do, back it up with some REAL research, published in academic journals, from legitimate authors, that is well researched and referenced that we can all read and perhaps we will actually listen to what you say and not brush it off as sophisticated ranting. There are hundreds of journal databases around the world with thousands of journals and millions of articles, surely you can direct as to at least one legitimate article?
.
If there is as much “research” as you keep telling us it shouldn’t be that hard to find a large number of academic writings. But I suspect that the real reason that you don’t link to genuine material is because the “research” you claim to have read does not actually exist. Unfortunately I am probably like many readers in that because you can’t seem to provide sources of your information on a regular basis, I certainly question the validity and existence of your “research.” I will add that some of your terminology is many years out of date, which seriously undermines your credibility (psychologists have not been using the term “psychopath” for over ten years!).
.
I’ve started (like I am assuming many readers have) to largely ignore all claims made without evidence (a tactic used by feminists known as black propaganda) as they are simply opinions, no matter how well dressed. Research itself is always biased in some way, but unsubstantiated claims (even if the author tells the audience that research supports them) are as common as armpits. I also ignore all information coming from those who have joined feminists in playing the “whose the biggest victim” game, which seems to be so prevalent in the MRAs around the world.
.
The reality is that if men grew some balls, stopped playing the victim and actually did something in a co-ordinated effort, the current problems would not exist. This puts the responsibility firmly in the hands of men for the current state of society.
.
The problem is not feminism or feminists, it’s gutless whining men, many of which need to take a serious look at themselves before they start blaming others. The lack of responsibility being shown by MRAs and the perpetual victim mentality of many MEN is quite frankly sickening.
.
You can’t beat feminist nonsense by playing the same games and by behaving like a feminist but changing the gender you support.
Comment by Phoenix — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 8:45 am
@Phoenix – I have.
Comment by Darryl X — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 9:55 am
Pheonix,
I see you into code yellow and code blue.
Try the red pill.
Comment by Skeptik — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 11:06 am
@Phoenix – What do you want a reference for? Give me an example please. I don’t care if you ignore my “claims”. The truth is what it is and it will come to bear on us all despite your disbelief.
And sometimes my interpretation of data presented in the scientific literature is different than others and everyone has a different interpretation based upon their backgrounds. Everyone brings different experiences to any discussion.
That being said, I have a good history of working on projects with which many other scientists before me had completely screwed up because they were more concerned about patents and fame and ego and money and getting laid.
By thinking way outside the box and uncorrupted by ego and money, I ended up redirecting those projects in ways that yielded data and revealed important truths about the systems I have studied that more accurately predicted the future (the effects of certain causes or the variables that influence certain outcomes) and description about the world around us could be made.
I think my interpretation of social organizing in the current context of civilization and feminism is accurate. I like the way qualities of malignant narcissism complement feminist ideology and the way they reflect the current disintegration of our economy. Certainly it explains a lot of what we are experiencing and allows us to predict what will happen in response to certain developments.
I concede that some of my claims are not documented specifically in the scientific literature exactly but if you try to understand these bodies of work that many other scholars have invested considerable time and effort studying and synthesize them (that is an important quality of the Scientific Method, synthesis) certain things make sense that didn’t before. That is the way science is, often novel ideas are not all that popular to start with. At one time, everyone thought the world was flat. Good thing we got past that one.
I don’t apologize and I don’t expect you to care but it is the truth as far as I can tell up to this point in time in my life. I’m comfortable with what I’ve accomplished both as an Ecologist and as a Psychologist (although my degree is from a dept of pscychology, my research was much more sociologically oriented and I drew considerable inspiration from my education and experience as an ecologist specializing in sophisiticated communication systems, particularly chemically-mediated ones).
I’ve basically spent my entire life trying to understand the disintegration of our society from my very early years (I was born in the late 60’s and even from an early age, something just didn’t seem right – I was correct and things have been spinning out of control ever since). My interest particularly emphasized the relationships between male and female humans. Face it, women are just bizarre and they fascinated me even before I was interested in sex. And my description is the best I can come up with so far and presents the best frame of reference within which I can understand what is happening and make predictions about what is going to happen.
I’m only sharing my thoughts about it all. If you don’t agree, I’m OK with that and I am always open to other ideas that are more useful. I haven’t heard any though. So, I saw a niche here that maybe I can fill. If my ideas are useful, then they should be used. I think they are. If they are not useful, then they should not be used. I don’t get paid for sharing my thoughts so nothing lost. The worst thing we can do as men is to stop trying to understand what’s happening and stop trying to identify a solution.
You don’t have to agree with my interpretation about the witch trials and stuff, but you have to at least concede that my interpretation is interesting and would explain a lot about it. I didn’t say it was correct. I think it is though. Humans often behave in very predictable ways at the most primitive levels. But if I were you I wouldn’t dismiss my ideas out of hand. For a good book about social organizing that has shaped some of my understanding, I recommend Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors by Carl Sagan and Anne Druyen. That’s not the only book, of course, but one that started me in a certain direction.
I have a long history of being ridiculed the way you are ridiculing me now only to end up right. And I have a published record to document my defiance of the status quo and that defiance has stood the test of time – not something easily done in the scientific community, especially as short-sighted and grant-oriented as it has become in recent years. Basically, I refused to chase money and compromise my integrity and instead chose to pursue the truth. I still do. It keeps me human. It’s not easy given my circumstances to continue pursuing the truth knowing that it makes me unpopular and a social outcast and has exiled me to the margins of existence. But I haven’t gotten to a point where I will compromise myself yet (maybe for lack of a better term my relationship with God) for short-sighted and unfulfilling experiences with people who are hell-bent on their self-destruction when there are so many better alternatives.
Psychopath is a current term as far as I know. “Sociopath” used to be the all-encompassing term and then it was used interchangably with “psychopath”. Then they were separated to account for slight differences in behavior. For instance, sociopath was used to describe someone occupying a place high on a contiunuum of malignant narcissism (with Narcissistic Personality Disorder low on that continumm) who tended to operate in a social environment and manipulate others in more of a social context. They tended to use sex more for satisfying their addiction to power and control. They also tended to be represented more by women. Psychopaths tended to operate independently and not in a social environment and instead of using sex or some other form of social exchange, they relied upon money or other instruments to satisfy their addiction to power and control (to acquire their narcissistic supply).
Of course, there are other differences too. That was maybe twenty or thirty or more years ago. Today, I understand that the term “sociopath” has fallen out of favor and has been substituted exclusively with “psychopath”. I am not aware of it not being used for ten years. I do appreciate that there are great differences in how these terms are applied and used and accepted among different cultures or communities of scholars, particularly between the US and Europe. I tend toward a more European interpretation.
Scientists and scholars will always have disagreement about these terms and understanding of them will always be changing and evolving. But as far as I know and from my studies, which are recent, “psychopath” is a current term for such phenomena, and from my own studies and those of others, which are only beginning to get attention, the concept of psychopathy has been much underrepresented among populations mostly because of its subclinical expression. That gets back to my criticism of psychology as a “soft science” and lack of quantitative work and its reliance more on hard data. With increasing use of tools to collect hard data about phenomena like psychopathy, understanding about its distribution among populations and the role of it in social organizing (it likely has had some adaptive qualities at sometime) is growing.
If you have a different understanding or interpretation, please share. The field of psychology is particularly bad because it is a “soft science” and is not as quantitative as it should be – it’s based too much upon subjective observation and not enough upon good hypthesis testing and hard data (like brain chemistry and neurotansmitters and activity in the brain as measured by MRI or CAT). Also, many in the community of psychologists do not want it to be quantitative because then they won’t be able to pathologize people and make money. The subjective disposition of psychology really has been exploited by many professionals, which has hurt the reputation of the discipline.
There actually is a considerable volume of data out there. Dismissing or suppressing thought about the scientific explanations for feminism and how it came to be and how to deal with it will not help solve the problem. (Consult articles by David Usher for great discussion about feminism and its origins in the KKK or vice versa.)
If you doubt my interpretation of our current economy and its direction (or its relationship to feminism), my predictions about it twenty-six years ago were spot on and no one else was even thinking about these kinds of problems the way I was if they were thinking about them at all and many weren’t. And I fear that my predictions about where we are headed from here are just as accurate (although I confess that I have become a little addle-minded in response to recent personal developments and even I have begun to question some of my own judgment as of late – it’s a lot harder to think about the future and solve big-picture problems the way I used to when I have more short-sighted problems that need attention – they do interfere with my analytical skills). And if I’m correct about the reasons and the role of feminism in shaping the future of our economy, there are only two possible outcomes, as I’ve discussed, and neither are good.
Comment by Darryl X — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 11:24 am
@Phoenix – Concerning term “psychopath”, I really do not like terminology like that at all. It’s why I never went into the field of systematics and/or taxonomy. I don’t like names. I prefer to understand things in terms of concept. Abstractions. When I think about things like psychopathy (or sociology), I like to describe areas on a continuum of malignant narcissim. Some of my colleagues would disagree with me or prefer to use specific terminology but that’s the way they like to do things and that’s the way I like to. I don’t get up their nose about it. They do get up mine, though, but as I’ve said before, that’s OK because I don’t have time to bother with people like that who waste time picking on minutia. Although I do agree that it is good to have a common lexicon, it’s just not my thing because I’m too abstract in my cognitive style. I leave that to others with different interests and I don’t let terminology interfere with how I think about problems.
Comment by Darryl X — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 11:33 am
I apologize re #33.
I’ve realized it should have read code yellow and code maroon.
In any case keep taking the red pill.
Comment by Skeptik — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 11:40 am
Skeptik, keep taking your pills, at least that way we know you are medicated for your pathology. And you can be completely absent in action and still feel like you are actually involved.
.
Quite frankly when I became active on this site I expected progress to be aim of the main players here, but over time I have come to realise that Menz is a haven for the emotionally damaged, if there was a desire for progress, then action would be being organised like it is on other sites and there would be reportable progress. I find it amusing that the two main posters are both from overseas, and neither of them are actually DOING anything, despite all their rhetoric. Quite frankly it’s pathetic.
.
Activism is about being ACTIVE, not poking your nose into the affairs of a country that you don’t even live in and pretending that you actually know what you are talking about.
Comment by Phoenix — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 12:38 pm
Pheonix,
I take the red pill everyday.
It’s an effective treatment which helps me stay immune to such daft claims as writers don’t take action and they’re somehow ‘pathetic’.
Look it up in a dictionary and you’ll find that the word write is a verb meaning to take the ACTION of writing.
Study history and you’ll discover it’s littered with examples of people who changed the world by spreading ideas by writing too (there’s that pesky word ‘writing’ again denoting a form of action!)
Far from feeling pathetic or pathological I’m very proud of having spent literally thousands of hours writing a lot that has advanced understanding of men’s issues, the terrible social impact of feminism, and more recently hypergamy and relations between men and women.
Far from feeling emotionally damaged, I feel very robust.
Admittedly my feeling of robust pride is subjective.
I leave it to readers to decide who is rational.
As for the charge of not living in New Zealand.
What makes you so sure I’m not in New Zealand right now?
That’s the beauty of ghosting.
Besides which, even if I weren’t in New Zealand (a country I’ve lived in for decades by the way) I don’t see how that disqualifies me from making comments about the place.
The fact that I get regular feedback from fellow New Zealanders who agree with the ideas I write about men’s issues in New Zealand put’s the knife to your bizarre idea that I’m somehow pretending to know what I’m talking about.
Also we live in the age of the internet.
It’s not very difficult to stay abreast of what’s happening in New Zealand these days – websites, e-mail, skype, facebook, e-zines, voice and video phone calls, internet TV programmes, torrented movies, music and books, heck even snail mail and paper magazines…….. and it’s not like New Zealand is someplace huge either with a massive amount of news to cover as it has a total population of a smaller International city.
Indeed here’s a list of twenty cities with populations between 2.5 and 8 times the size of New Zealand’s population.
Now getting back to the thread topic – Gender equality in work roles – with all these vast means of connecting New Zealand to the outside world I have to say this.
You can put your head in the sand and play the ignorant paroquialist or you can be more open minded and take on board observations from outside of New Zealand. To me the issue is a no-brainer. I’m proud to regularly get outstanding insights from men and women who write from many different countries which I think have a very real bearing on the situation of men in New Zealand.
Again I leave MENZ readers to decide how rational that is.
Comment by Skeptik — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 1:27 pm
Whoops!
Sorry.
I forgot the link to a list of twenty cities with populations between 2.5 and 8 times the size of New Zealand’s population.
Comment by Skeptik — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 1:29 pm
@Skeptik – I knew there was a pill or two in there somewhere but I forgot which ones – LOL.
@Phoenix – First step in solving any problem (including this one) is defining it, describing it and understanding it. I don’t think many people understand the problem the way they need to for a good solution. I agree that there is no more time for trying to understand the problem and that action is necessary immediately.
I have been unable to identify a peaceful resolve of the global world war between the sexes (and really it’s not so much a world war as it is a total feminist route of men and civilization the past forty years). Maybe the male birth control pill is a step in the right direction but I am apprehensive because I think it represents an escalation in the arms race that has become a global battle of the sexes and I don’t think escalation is a good idea the way the nuclear arms race wasn’t a good idea.
However, I can’t identify a better peaceful alternative so it looks like that is a weapon in our arsenal that we will have to use as much as I may be opposed to it. When I consult news about recent developments in the US (like the Occupy Wall Street protests), I am disappointed but not surprised by the lack of participation.
I think there is lacking participation because many people do not understand the problem we are having with the economy and its foundation in feminism (if they understand there is a problem at all). That being said, I am in New York State (upstate) and I have been down to the protest this past weekend in the City.
Also, I try to communicate my concerns to as many people as I can. Of course, you can imagine the response most of the time. I am inspired on rare occasion by the response of a small number of people. I was reading an article in the Spearhead (I think from April 2011) today that emphasized the importance of communicating this problem and not being afraid to speak out.
I am not but many are. No one wants to touch the third rail that is feminism or child support. The US is very large and trying to get enough people in one place the way they did in Europe or the Arab countries is hard. Plus, Americans are very simple-minded people, most of whom the government (feminists) has bought off. The more simple-minded they are, the easier they are bought off. The most lazy and irresponsible are being bought off with money the gov’t is stealing from the most responsible and productive.
So the gov’t (feminists) is pitting one group against the other and weakening both – divide and conquer. I do not believe this strategy is so much a conspiracy among our leaders so much as it is that sociopaths all have similar goals (satisfying their addiction to power) and that the mechanisms for achieving their goals just happen to align sometimes. Child support and trafficking children is a mechanism that just happens to have been so successful because it has met with such little resistance and accepted among so many women.
There are many elements of the problem and there may be many ways of attacking it to defeat feminism. For now, however, I am like many men and concerned more with immediate problems of survival (which is what the gov’t wants – they have succeeded in getting me out of the fight). Currently I am threatened with prison and have just taken very drastic measures to run (escape) and avoid the inevitable.
But my actions have taxed me considerably and left me vulnerable (like so many other men). The problem with protests in the US is that so many of the people (mostly men) who need to protest and would benefit the most are the ones least likely to be able to participate because the government’s suppression/oppression of them during the past forty years has been so comprehensive and successful.
For this reason, I really believe that the younger generation who has not yet been crippled from the onslaught by feminists will and can do more than someone from my generation (my generation is very small and represents only approximately one-eighth of the population). Because I am so vulnerable, I am more inclined to run, but I will help any of our youth, who are not so vulnerable, fight if they are inclined to do so. Also, another important obstacle is that the US is a geographically large country and getting enough of our disparate population, who have been hurt, together is difficult. As I mentioned, the gov’t is very good at dividing and conquering and it has geography, among other things, on its side.
Comment by Darryl X — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 2:29 pm
@Skeptik – Are there any developments concerning the male birth control pill? I’ve not kept up with it since I first heard from you about it. How far out is it before there is a marketable product? Any side effects that you’ve heard of? Like there have been with the female birth control pill. I think defeat of feminism is more likely with an approach from the back door, so to speak, than a full frontal assault.
Comment by Darryl X — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 2:37 pm
@Skeptik – I consider the male birth control pill the back door approach – LOL. Maybe a little sneaky but then again, look what we’re dealing with. I don’t dismiss any alternatives at this point.
Comment by Darryl X — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 2:42 pm
Hi Daryll,
here’s a link to a site advocating and giving news of more types male contraception.
The non hormonal male contraceptive pill developed in University labs in Israel that many are excited about is reported to be 100% effective in trials to date, only need be taken once a month or even once every 3 months.
It’s also said to have no side effects as unlike some other contraceptives it’s not hormonally based – it simple neutralizes one of the proteins in sperm – sperm reach the egg still but are neutralized so to speak.
I’m trying to keep this on topic, so I’ll add this.
I think the advent of men using the new male birth control pill will have MASSIVE consequences for men’s work participation. I imagine many more men opting out of grinding away year after year to fund families as they won’t be creating families in the first place. In other words many men will be consciously downshifting and given women’s hypergamy will simply go John Galt and ‘ghost’. If women want economic improvement they will in turn have to pick up the slack rather than expect so many men to do it for them either directly as primary breadwinner or indirectly through men paying the greater bulk of taxes to government which then gets doled out the greatest amounts to women.
Comment by Skeptik — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 3:14 pm
Hi Daryll,
here’s a link to a site advocating and giving news of more types male contraception.
The non hormonal male contraceptive pill developed in University labs in Israel that many are excited about is reported to be 100% effective in trials to date, only need be taken once a month or even once every 3 months.
It’s also said to have no side effects as unlike some other contraceptives it’s not hormonally based – it simple neutralizes one of the proteins in sperm – sperm reach the egg still but are neutralized so to speak.
I’m trying to keep this on topic, so I’ll add this.
I think the advent of men using the new male birth control pill will have MASSIVE consequences for men’s work participation. I imagine many more men opting out of grinding away year after year to fund families as they won’t be creating families in the first place. In other words many men will be consciously downshifting and given women’s hypergamy will simply go John Galt and ‘ghost’. If women want economic improvement they will in turn have to pick up the slack rather than expect so many men to do it for them either directly as primary breadwinner or indirectly through men paying the greater bulk of taxes to government which then gets doled out the greatest amounts to women.
Comment by Skeptik — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 3:44 pm
Phoenix (#31):
1. Can you refer to the research supporting your claim that “psychologists have not been using the term “psychopath” for over ten years”?
2. You are welcome to your opinion (though can you provide research evidence for it?), but I disagree that sharing ideas and highlighting the hypocrisy of feminist ideology underlying much of our legal and social policies amount simply to ineffective whining. Discussions and dissemination of information on MENZ help with submissions to select committees and other review processes.
3. It’s easy for you to put others down but what are you doing in the form of ‘action’, and what ‘actions’ would you suggest people take if not contributing to public awareness and democratic processes?
4. Whatever your motivation unless it is purely destructive, no useful outcome is likely from your abusive attacks on people contributing on MENZ. Such attacks are very damaging to any movement. Your need to do so suggests that you, rather than those you attack, suffer emotional damage.
Comment by Hans Laven — Fri 7th October 2011 @ 5:16 pm
Thanks, Skeptik, for the link.
Comment by Darryl X — Sat 8th October 2011 @ 1:49 am
@ Phoenix. For what it is worth I use the debate and sharing of ideas and links from this website in my work as a Social Worker to educate other people on the misinformation and biases present in social services due to feminist ideology having such control over gender issues. Myself and other Social Workers are taught a very one sided and biased view of gender issues and it is tantamount to institutional sexism. There is such ignorance of gender issues facing men and what is worse is that with regards to child custody and family violence by ignoring those concerns those mens children are suffering. Men do at times need to be referred to as victims as it will enable them and their children to access social services otherwise closed to them. This is different from victimisation as anyone can be a victim in one area of their life but not in many others. The purpose of using academic research (see the previous comments I have made, I had inadvertently called them articles) to demonstrate that women are also violent is not to play the victim but to give evidence and data to prove there is a need for more social supports. When I met with the Family Violence Intervention Co-ordinator at work she agreed that unless you are titled a victim you do not get the appropriate social service. I think you are confusing whinging with advocacy. Public awareness is the most important first step and this website certainly assists with that.
Comment by Phil267 — Mon 10th October 2011 @ 11:05 am
Pheonix said @#31 –
There’s a couple or responses I have to that.
Firstly as Phil 267 points out he/she needs to stop confusing whining with advocacy.
Also to understand that I and many other Men’s Rights Advocates don’t see ourselves in competition with feminists or anyone else as to who can be the biggest victim. For the simple fact that we acknowledge that by infantalising and pedestalizing females whilst demonising males feminism VICTIMIZES EVERYONE.
It’s not some gendered zero sum game.
Comment by Skeptik — Mon 10th October 2011 @ 1:29 pm
Very good point Skeptik that feminism victimises everyone. It is not a competition and that services for women and their children with genuine need must not be lessened, it is just that services for men and their children must be established to meet their needs. By doing so society would be a much better place. An example of how feminism victimises women is that intimate partner violence was roughly equal between the genders and with the rise of women’s refuges there are now more women murdered than men. The women’s refuge has saved mens lives and therefore if men had refuges (which Erin Pizzey established in the early 1970s), and since most IPV is consensual, it would undoubtedly save women’s lives. Where do violent women go for help with their violence towards their partner or children. Surely those women deserve a chance at changing and having a good life. With regards to the gender pay equality issue women should be empowered with all the information of the dynamics behind the pay issue (eg men more prepared to work in dangerous jobs, do more shift work, work more in remote locations, women tend to put family first, unmarried women earn more than unmarried men, etc). The gender pay inequality issue treats women like children who are not responsible for the life choices they make. This is condescending and disempowering towards women.
Comment by Phil267 — Mon 10th October 2011 @ 3:46 pm
all women do is whinge to get their way
Comment by Ford — Sun 16th October 2011 @ 10:17 am
Thirty-two male and four female people died in workplace accidents up to the end of November last year (2011). The Department of Labour statistics do not include work-related deaths in the aviation or maritime sectors, or road deaths. In the year till June 2011 there were 85 workplace deaths, 445 serious injuries and 33,800 ACC claims. Depends where you source your figures. Put that another way – there were 530 workplace accidents that caused serious injury and in some cases deaths. Depends on your point of view with regard to workplace safety.
Causes attributed to these accidents are hours worked per day, lack of recovery from fatigue, tight timescales/deadlines, level of casual labour, gender (male workers), exposure to the elements, alcohol and drugs.
Labour department figures for the decade to the end of 2009 show 535 men and 21 women died in workplace accidents. (Note as above that does not include all workplace accidents) Using figures from the same period 57% of those deaths occurred in forestry agriculture and construction.
Male 45 – 64 is the most affected age group.
Comment by Down Under — Sat 7th January 2012 @ 9:49 am
The international study of 7000 men and women over a 10-year period, published online by the medical journal BMJ , challenges previous research that suggests the brain’s cognitive decline begins at 60. The brain begins to decline much earlier than previously thought, with new research showing memory, reasoning and comprehension skills can deteriorate from the age of 45. The findings revealed that over the study period there was a 3.6 per cent decline in mental reasoning in men aged 45-49 and a 9.6 per cent decline in those aged 65-70. The corresponding figures for women were 3.6 per cent and 7.4 per cent. The same lifestyle risk factors that cause abnormal decline in heart health and function – obesity, high blood pressure, high cholesterol levels – affect the cognitive health and rate of decline of the brain in similar ways.
Comment by Down Under — Sat 7th January 2012 @ 11:49 am