On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 23:11:40 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas"
<momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:
I think that it is unhealthy for people, male or female, to see themselvesas victims. The victim mentality is a way for people to avoid personalresponsibilty. It gives people a sense of entitlement. People use it tojustify poor treatment of others because "they started it." We canacknowledge the things that are unjust to men without making them bevictims.
Redirect that to most of soc.men


"The pure and simple truth is rarely pure
and never simple." -- Oscar Wilde

"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:p777ov4606ssrb2ak3m3coaqmeiui3t4i7@4ax.com... On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 23:11:40 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:I think that it is unhealthy for people, male or female, to see
themselvesas victims. The victim mentality is a way for people to avoid personalresponsibilty. It gives people a sense of entitlement. People use it tojustify poor treatment of others because "they started it." We canacknowledge the things that are unjust to men without making them bevictims. Redirect that to most of soc.men

I noticed a book at the library today entitled _All Men Are Jerks Until
Proven Otherwise_. According to the blurb this is a dating guide for women
which, among other things, shows how to identify which male flaws are
fixable and which are cause for termination. I was shocked and disgusted
that this is actually considered a socially acceptable thing to say.
Imagine being a man in a culture where a book like that could be published.

Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about the
situation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to their
complaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you that
there really is a problem here.

Jayne

On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 11:19:00 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas"
<momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:
"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in messagenews:p777ov4606ssrb2ak3m3coaqmeiui3t4i7@4ax .com... On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 23:11:40 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:I think that it is unhealthy for people, male or female, to seethemselvesas victims. The victim mentality is a way for people to avoid personalresponsibilty. It gives people a sense of entitlement. People use it tojustify poor treatment of others because "they started it." We canacknowledge the things that are unjust to men without making them bevictims. Redirect that to most of soc.menI noticed a book at the library today entitled _All Men Are Jerks UntilProven Otherwise_. According to the blurb this is a dating guide for womenwhich, among other things, shows how to identify which male flaws arefixable and which are cause for termination. I was shocked and disgustedthat this is actually considered a socially acceptable thing to say.Imagine being a man in a culture where a book like that could be published.Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about thesituation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to theircomplaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you thatthere really is a problem here.Jayne
I saw that book on the stands when I was dating too. Guess what I
didn't eve pick it up to read it. The title put me off. I was also put
off by the blatant anti man speech at the last Robbie Burns's dinner I
went to and said so. I have posted articles on soc.men about men being
the victims of domestic abuse. Women lie, men lie in custody cases. I
have seen both. People become ugly if they feel entitled. But what I
can't stand is all the whining and abusive name calling that Andre
indulges in if a woman doesn't agree with *everything* he posts.
Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about thesituation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to theircomplaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you thatthere really is a problem here.

Of course things aren't fair. But I'm sorry if I don't agree with
Andre's C4M. If you don't want and unwanted child control your sperm.
Or your egg. It isn't the government's responsibly to support
children. If a couple has a kid because they couldn't be responsible
enough to use birth control or say no then the resulting child is
*their* responsibly.

Nature isn't fair. The sperm didn't fall out of the sky into the woman
uterus.

Funny thing is a agree with a lot of what that soc.men say just not
*all* of it so therefore I get called names. How mature of them!


"It is hard to free fools from chains they revere."-Voltaire

"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:tld8ovk7cnlqresesccl31le094734hb66@4ax.com... On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 11:19:00 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:

[]I noticed a book at the library today entitled _All Men Are Jerks UntilProven Otherwise_. According to the blurb this is a dating guide for
womenwhich, among other things, shows how to identify which male flaws arefixable and which are cause for termination. I was shocked and disgustedthat this is actually considered a socially acceptable thing to say.Imagine being a man in a culture where a book like that could be
published.Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about thesituation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to theircomplaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you thatthere really is a problem here.Jayne I saw that book on the stands when I was dating too. Guess what I didn't eve pick it up to read it. The title put me off. I was also put off by the blatant anti man speech at the last Robbie Burns's dinner I went to and said so. I have posted articles on soc.men about men being the victims of domestic abuse. Women lie, men lie in custody cases. I have seen both. People become ugly if they feel entitled. But what I can't stand is all the whining and abusive name calling that Andre indulges in if a woman doesn't agree with *everything* he posts.

I think your complaint about Andre would carry more weight if you avoided
personal attacks more yourself. Besides Andre is just as "abusive" when men
disagree with him. He seems to have a sort of no-holds-barred style of
arguing. While it is not my preffered style, I don't see it indicating any
great character flaw and certainly not misogyny.
Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about thesituation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to theircomplaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you thatthere really is a problem here. Of course things aren't fair. But I'm sorry if I don't agree with Andre's C4M. If you don't want and unwanted child control your sperm. Or your egg. It isn't the government's responsibly to support children. If a couple has a kid because they couldn't be responsible enough to use birth control or say no then the resulting child is *their* responsibly. Nature isn't fair. The sperm didn't fall out of the sky into the woman uterus.

Nature isn't fair in that a pregnant woman can be abandonned by the child's
father. The laws are unfair that give all the choice to women and none to
the men. We can't help the unfairness of nature, but the unfairness of laws
is something that people deliberately legislate. They are different kinds
of unfairness. One learns to accept or work around the unfairness of
nature. One fights to change the unfairness of laws.
Funny thing is a agree with a lot of what that soc.men say just not *all* of it so therefore I get called names. How mature of them!

Admittedly, some of them seem to be in a place where they don't handle
disagreement or criticism well, but I would not necessarily attribute it to
immaturity. Maybe they've just had enough. If you had been subject to the
kind of male-bashing these guys are getting, you might be a little
over-sensitive too.

Jayne

On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 12:45:27 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas"
<momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:
"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in messagenews:tld8ovk7cnlqresesccl31le094734hb66@4ax .com... On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 11:19:00 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:[]I noticed a book at the library today entitled _All Men Are Jerks UntilProven Otherwise_. According to the blurb this is a dating guide forwomenwhich, among other things, shows how to identify which male flaws arefixable and which are cause for termination. I was shocked and disgustedthat this is actually considered a socially acceptable thing to say.Imagine being a man in a culture where a book like that could bepublished.Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about thesituation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to theircomplaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you thatthere really is a problem here.Jayne I saw that book on the stands when I was dating too. Guess what I didn't eve pick it up to read it. The title put me off. I was also put off by the blatant anti man speech at the last Robbie Burns's dinner I went to and said so. I have posted articles on soc.men about men being the victims of domestic abuse. Women lie, men lie in custody cases. I have seen both. People become ugly if they feel entitled. But what I can't stand is all the whining and abusive name calling that Andre indulges in if a woman doesn't agree with *everything* he posts.I think your complaint about Andre would carry more weight if you avoidedpersonal attacks more yourself. Besides Andre is just as "abusive" when mendisagree with him. He seems to have a sort of no-holds-barred style ofarguing. While it is not my preffered style, I don't see it indicating anygreat character flaw and certainly not misogyny.Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about thesituation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to theircomplaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you thatthere really is a problem here. Of course things aren't fair. But I'm sorry if I don't agree with Andre's C4M. If you don't want and unwanted child control your sperm. Or your egg. It isn't the government's responsibly to support children. If a couple has a kid because they couldn't be responsible enough to use birth control or say no then the resulting child is *their* responsibly. Nature isn't fair. The sperm didn't fall out of the sky into the woman uterus.Nature isn't fair in that a pregnant woman can be abandonned by the child'sfather. The laws are unfair that give all the choice to women and none tothe men. We can't help the unfairness of nature, but the unfairness of lawsis something that people deliberately legislate. They are different kindsof unfairness. One learns to accept or work around the unfairness ofnature. One fights to change the unfairness of laws. Funny thing is a agree with a lot of what that soc.men say just not *all* of it so therefore I get called names. How mature of them!Admittedly, some of them seem to be in a place where they don't handledisagreement or criticism well, but I would not necessarily attribute it toimmaturity. Maybe they've just had enough. If you had been subject to thekind of male-bashing these guys are getting, you might be a littleover-sensitive too.Jayne
Since I am over 50 I do remember the bad old days it wasn't always
easy being a women either.

Rauni (LadyWolf@newsguy.com) writes: On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 11:19:00 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in messagenews:p777ov4606ssrb2ak3m3coaqmeiui3t4i7@4ax .com... On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 23:11:40 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote: >I think that it is unhealthy for people, male or female, to seethemselves >as victims. The victim mentality is a way for people to avoid personal >responsibilty. It gives people a sense of entitlement. People use it to >justify poor treatment of others because "they started it." We can >acknowledge the things that are unjust to men without making them be >victims. Redirect that to most of soc.menI noticed a book at the library today entitled _All Men Are Jerks UntilProven Otherwise_. According to the blurb this is a dating guide for womenwhich, among other things, shows how to identify which male flaws arefixable and which are cause for termination. I was shocked and disgustedthat this is actually considered a socially acceptable thing to say.Imagine being a man in a culture where a book like that could be published.Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about thesituation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to theircomplaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you thatthere really is a problem here.Jayne I saw that book on the stands when I was dating too. Guess what I didn't eve pick it up to read it. The title put me off. I was also put off by the blatant anti man speech at the last Robbie Burns's dinner I went to and said so. I have posted articles on soc.men about men being the victims of domestic abuse. Women lie, men lie in custody cases. I have seen both. People become ugly if they feel entitled. But what I can't stand is all the whining and abusive name calling that Andre indulges in if a woman doesn't agree with *everything* he posts.

Well, thats a lie. Jayne just posted that she didn't fully agree with
me, on one aspect of this, and asked for us to table that part, until
she read up some more on it.

I said " OK ".

So, Rauni lies about me. Often. Got it.
Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about thesituation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to theircomplaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you thatthere really is a problem here. Of course things aren't fair. But I'm sorry if I don't agree with Andre's C4M. If you don't want and unwanted child control your sperm. Or your egg.

OK, so you *oppose* abortion, legal abandon laws, legal unilateral
adopting out laws, etc., etc., that *allow a woman to evade the
*consequences* of her *not having controlled her egg* ?

Riigghhttt. ( Dr. Evil voice )
It isn't the government's responsibly to support children. If a couple has a kid because they couldn't be responsible enough to use birth control or say no then the resulting child is *their* responsibly.

Yet, not one word over the *fact that women, post-coitally, have ALL
of the choices by which to VOID that consequence*...

Uh huh.
Nature isn't fair.

Funny how this was NEVER an acceptable argument, when women wanted
more rights...

Can you spell h y p o c r i t e ?
The sperm didn't fall out of the sky into the woman uterus.

No, it arrived via *the woman's consent to it being there*...

What happened to telling *her* to " just say no " ? Uh huh.
Funny thing is a agree with a lot of what that soc.men say just not *all* of it so therefore I get called names. How mature of them!

No, its because you LIE about what we say... See above.

HTH.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) writes:
Rauni (LadyWolf@newsguy.com) writes: On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 11:19:00 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in messagenews:p777ov4606ssrb2ak3m3coaqmeiui3t4i7@4ax .com...> On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 23:11:40 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas"> <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:>> >I think that it is unhealthy for people, male or female, to seethemselves> >as victims. The victim mentality is a way for people to avoid personal> >responsibilty. It gives people a sense of entitlement. People use it to> >justify poor treatment of others because "they started it." We can> >acknowledge the things that are unjust to men without making them be> >victims.> Redirect that to most of soc.menI noticed a book at the library today entitled _All Men Are Jerks UntilProven Otherwise_. According to the blurb this is a dating guide for womenwhich, among other things, shows how to identify which male flaws arefixable and which are cause for termination. I was shocked and disgustedthat this is actually considered a socially acceptable thing to say.Imagine being a man in a culture where a book like that could be published.Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about thesituation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to theircomplaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you thatthere really is a problem here.Jayne I saw that book on the stands when I was dating too. Guess what I didn't eve pick it up to read it. The title put me off. I was also put off by the blatant anti man speech at the last Robbie Burns's dinner I went to and said so. I have posted articles on soc.men about men being the victims of domestic abuse. Women lie, men lie in custody cases. I have seen both. People become ugly if they feel entitled. But what I can't stand is all the whining and abusive name calling that Andre indulges in if a woman doesn't agree with *everything* he posts. Well, thats a lie. Jayne just posted that she didn't fully agree with me, on one aspect of this, and asked for us to table that part, until she read up some more on it.

Jayne's been giving you a ton of breaks since she knows you in real
life and has preconceptions about you.

The rest of us treat you like any other usenet denizen and aren't so
nice about mixing praise into our disagreemnt.

So how you treat Jayne is really not representative of how you treat
anyone else, and for that matter, how Jayne treats you does not seem
to be representative of how she treats everyone else. (Though she is
noteworthy, although not unique, for treating people with respect and
politeness in general.)

On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 12:45:27 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas"
<momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:
"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in messagenews:tld8ovk7cnlqresesccl31le094734hb66@4ax .com... On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 11:19:00 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:[]I noticed a book at the library today entitled _All Men Are Jerks UntilProven Otherwise_. According to the blurb this is a dating guide forwomenwhich, among other things, shows how to identify which male flaws arefixable and which are cause for termination. I was shocked and disgustedthat this is actually considered a socially acceptable thing to say.Imagine being a man in a culture where a book like that could bepublished.Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about thesituation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to theircomplaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you thatthere really is a problem here.Jayne I saw that book on the stands when I was dating too. Guess what I didn't eve pick it up to read it. The title put me off. I was also put off by the blatant anti man speech at the last Robbie Burns's dinner I went to and said so. I have posted articles on soc.men about men being the victims of domestic abuse. Women lie, men lie in custody cases. I have seen both. People become ugly if they feel entitled. But what I can't stand is all the whining and abusive name calling that Andre indulges in if a woman doesn't agree with *everything* he posts.I think your complaint about Andre would carry more weight if you avoidedpersonal attacks more yourself.

I went back to try to find some personal attacks that I supposedly did
on Andre...nope couldn't find any. I disagreed with him but I didn't
call him names. But I sure found a few name calling from Andre.
Besides Andre is just as "abusive" when mendisagree with him. He seems to have a sort of no-holds-barred style ofarguing. While it is not my preffered style, I don't see it indicating anygreat character flaw and certainly not misogyny.Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about thesituation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to theircomplaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you thatthere really is a problem here. Of course things aren't fair. But I'm sorry if I don't agree with Andre's C4M. If you don't want and unwanted child control your sperm. Or your egg. It isn't the government's responsibly to support children. If a couple has a kid because they couldn't be responsible enough to use birth control or say no then the resulting child is *their* responsibly. Nature isn't fair. The sperm didn't fall out of the sky into the woman uterus.Nature isn't fair in that a pregnant woman can be abandonned by the child'sfather. The laws are unfair that give all the choice to women and none tothe men. We can't help the unfairness of nature, but the unfairness of lawsis something that people deliberately legislate. They are different kindsof unfairness. One learns to accept or work around the unfairness ofnature. One fights to change the unfairness of laws. Funny thing is a agree with a lot of what that soc.men say just not *all* of it so therefore I get called names. How mature of them!Admittedly, some of them seem to be in a place where they don't handledisagreement or criticism well, but I would not necessarily attribute it toimmaturity. Maybe they've just had enough. If you had been subject to thekind of male-bashing these guys are getting, you might be a littleover-sensitive too.Jayne

"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:p2g8ovovr3rc4p11d6b0i4h2uakdp7v6vu@4ax.com... On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 12:45:27 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:

[]Admittedly, some of them seem to be in a place where they don't handledisagreement or criticism well, but I would not necessarily attribute it
toimmaturity. Maybe they've just had enough. If you had been subject to
thekind of male-bashing these guys are getting, you might be a littleover-sensitive too.Jayne Since I am over 50 I do remember the bad old days it wasn't always easy being a women either.

Does that excuse treating men badly? Because it wasn't always easy to be a
woman? This is why I think the whole "victim" thing is so destructive.
People can identify themselves as victims and feel that this releases them
from any obligation to be just to others. Even if every claim about
oppression of women ever made were true, we would not have a right to treat
men without justice.

Jayne

On 08 Oct 2003 10:07:45 -0700, Doug Anderson <ethelthelog@yahoo.com>
wrote:
dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) writes: Rauni (LadyWolf@newsguy.com) writes: On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 11:19:00 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:>>"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message>news:p777ov4606ssrb2ak3m3coaqmeiui3t4i7@4ax.com...>> On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 23:11:40 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas">> <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:>>>> >I think that it is unhealthy for people, male or female, to see>themselves>> >as victims. The victim mentality is a way for people to avoid personal>> >responsibilty. It gives people a sense of entitlement. People use it to>> >justify poor treatment of others because "they started it." We can>> >acknowledge the things that are unjust to men without making them be>> >victims.>> Redirect that to most of soc.men>>I noticed a book at the library today entitled _All Men Are Jerks Until>Proven Otherwise_. According to the blurb this is a dating guide for women>which, among other things, shows how to identify which male flaws are>fixable and which are cause for termination. I was shocked and disgusted>that this is actually considered a socially acceptable thing to say.>Imagine being a man in a culture where a book like that could be published.>>Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about the>situation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to their>complaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you that>there really is a problem here.>>Jayne> I saw that book on the stands when I was dating too. Guess what I didn't eve pick it up to read it. The title put me off. I was also put off by the blatant anti man speech at the last Robbie Burns's dinner I went to and said so. I have posted articles on soc.men about men being the victims of domestic abuse. Women lie, men lie in custody cases. I have seen both. People become ugly if they feel entitled. But what I can't stand is all the whining and abusive name calling that Andre indulges in if a woman doesn't agree with *everything* he posts. Well, thats a lie. Jayne just posted that she didn't fully agree with me, on one aspect of this, and asked for us to table that part, until she read up some more on it.Jayne's been giving you a ton of breaks since she knows you in reallife and has preconceptions about you.The rest of us treat you like any other usenet denizen and aren't sonice about mixing praise into our disagreemnt.So how you treat Jayne is really not representative of how you treatanyone else, and for that matter, how Jayne treats you does not seemto be representative of how she treats everyone else. (Though she isnoteworthy, although not unique, for treating people with respect andpoliteness in general.)

No ****. I bet he would even deny That I posted some factual articles
about men being the victims of DV.

"Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:bm1g28$arl$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... "Jayne Kulikauskas" (momkulio@yahoo.ca) writes:

[] I think I've been surrounded by man hating stuff for so long that it
just seemed normal. Indeed. But, doesn't the status of being an adult, give us all the obligation to be ready to test the society that we live in ?

Yes, I failed in that obligation. I'm not trying to make excuses for it. I
was wrong.
I'm reading Sommers's _The War Against Boys_ now. I'm at the part where she documents how there was a movement to save girls from the way they
were allegedly being shortchanged by the education system at a time when
there were actually more girls entering college and doing better on just about any measure of school success. It's clearly a case of appalling
injustice. Indeed, and thats the point. There are plenty of such created injustices against men, and against children, these days. There just aren't any, of any siginificance, afflicting women, anymore...

I can't think of any in Western countries. There are places where women are
killed for adultery while the men go unpunished.

[] I'm not sure that it is always self-interest though. Most people don't have the critical thinking skills to see through whatever is the status quo. Then, we oughtn't be giving such people driver's licences, the vote, custody of small children, a right to unsupervised money... Where do we draw such lines, of excusing people for not seeing what is alla round them, while trusting them to handle far more complex tasks and issues ?

I'm not saying that we should excuse it, but that we should understand it.

[] Changing one's worldview is not something people do easily, even when they don't profit from it. No one ever said that life is supposed to be " easy "... Those who cavil from the difficult tasks would do well to recall JFK's words, when he explained the plan to go to the Moon... " We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things too, *not because they are easy, but because they are hard*. " Life demands that we challenge ourselves. But, people who recoil from the not " easy " parts of it, cannot then claim to be involved people. Or, even informed. The difference between stupidity and ignorance is that, ignorance *can be cured*. But, if one *refuses to*, then one chooses to be stupid. Thats not a choice that anyone ought to show respect for, ever.

I don't have respect, but compassion.

On 08 Oct 2003 10:07:45 -0700, Doug Anderson <ethelthelog@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Jayne's been giving you a ton of breaks since she knows you in reallife and has preconceptions about you.The rest of us treat you like any other usenet denizen and aren't sonice about mixing praise into our disagreemnt.So how you treat Jayne is really not representative of how you treatanyone else, and for that matter, how Jayne treats you does not seemto be representative of how she treats everyone else. (Though she isnoteworthy, although not unique, for treating people with respect andpoliteness in general.)

Oh Andre has accused me of lying several like when times. I took a
quoted of his and changed woman to men and women from guys


To paraphrase what Andre wrote in Message-ID:
<bhgbdu$c80$1@freenet9.carleton.ca>

Free Clue" If men want good women then....they out not to sleep with,
and marry, non good women.
Duh!


Of course if he just took the time to check the message id he wouldn't
have made himself look so silly.

http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=bib2ut%24o3j%241%40freenet9.carleton.ca&rnum=235
Andre ever the victim

On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:14:45 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas"
<momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:
"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in messagenews:p2g8ovovr3rc4p11d6b0i4h2uakdp7v6vu@4ax .com... On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 12:45:27 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:[]Admittedly, some of them seem to be in a place where they don't handledisagreement or criticism well, but I would not necessarily attribute ittoimmaturity. Maybe they've just had enough. If you had been subject tothekind of male-bashing these guys are getting, you might be a littleover-sensitive too.Jayne Since I am over 50 I do remember the bad old days it wasn't always easy being a women either.Does that excuse treating men badly? Because it wasn't always easy to be awoman? This is why I think the whole "victim" thing is so destructive.People can identify themselves as victims and feel that this releases themfrom any obligation to be just to others. Even if every claim aboutoppression of women ever made were true, we would not have a right to treatmen without justice.Jayne
And of course you know I tread men badly right? Or approve of it!

"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:g7h8ovgcf87lt0hesc3nu15fq2p89k2j5r@4ax.com... On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 12:45:27 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:

[]I think your complaint about Andre would carry more weight if you avoidedpersonal attacks more yourself. I went back to try to find some personal attacks that I supposedly did on Andre...nope couldn't find any. I disagreed with him but I didn't call him names.

Not all personal attacks take the form of calling names. I consider all the
following statements by you to be personal attacks.

"He is so blinded by his hate that he had in fact become stupid"

"And I don't have the time to watch all the TV Andre does."

"That seem to difficult for the soc.men crowd to grasp. sperm control
apparently is too difficult of a topic for them."

" It takes a lot of work to be that angry and to whine that much."

When you portray people as angry, whining, stupid and watching too much TV,
it is attacking them rather than debating the issues.
But I sure found a few name calling from Andre.

Yes, Andre calls people names and makes personal attacks. That is not under
contention. However, if you find it an objectionable practice, it seems to
me the best place to start combatting it is in yourself.

Jayne

"Doug Anderson" <ethelthelog@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:y7k3fpsim.fsf@noether.uoregon.edu...

[] So how you treat Jayne is really not representative of how you treat anyone else, and for that matter, how Jayne treats you does not seem to be representative of how she treats everyone else. (Though she is noteworthy, although not unique, for treating people with respect and politeness in general.)

I expect that I would treat Andre with respect and politeness if I were just
encountering him for the first time on Usenet. However, I doubt that I
would feel the admiration that I do.

Jayne

"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:6vi8ov8v9mfrdtnom7nb1710do3f1o3pjv@4ax.com... On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:14:45 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in messagenews:p2g8ovovr3rc4p11d6b0i4h2uakdp7v6vu@4ax .com... On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 12:45:27 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:[] >Admittedly, some of them seem to be in a place where they don't handle >disagreement or criticism well, but I would not necessarily attribute
itto >immaturity. Maybe they've just had enough. If you had been subject
tothe >kind of male-bashing these guys are getting, you might be a little >over-sensitive too. > >Jayne > Since I am over 50 I do remember the bad old days it wasn't always easy being a women either.Does that excuse treating men badly? Because it wasn't always easy to be
awoman? This is why I think the whole "victim" thing is so destructive.People can identify themselves as victims and feel that this releases
themfrom any obligation to be just to others. Even if every claim aboutoppression of women ever made were true, we would not have a right to
treatmen without justice.Jayne And of course you know I tread men badly right? Or approve of it!

Since you posted your comment about the bad old days for women in response
to my remarks about male-bashing, you seemed to making some sort of
connection. You seemed to me to be implying that women's difficulties of
the past somehow excused treating men badly now. If you meant something
else, then please explain what it was because I cannot see another meaning
to your comment.

Jayne

Doug Anderson (ethelthelog@yahoo.com) writes: dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) writes: Rauni (LadyWolf@newsguy.com) writes: On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 11:19:00 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:>>"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message>news:p777ov4606ssrb2ak3m3coaqmeiui3t4i7@4ax.com...>> On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 23:11:40 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas">> <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:>>>> >I think that it is unhealthy for people, male or female, to see>themselves>> >as victims. The victim mentality is a way for people to avoid personal>> >responsibilty. It gives people a sense of entitlement. People use it to>> >justify poor treatment of others because "they started it." We can>> >acknowledge the things that are unjust to men without making them be>> >victims.>> Redirect that to most of soc.men>>I noticed a book at the library today entitled _All Men Are Jerks Until>Proven Otherwise_. According to the blurb this is a dating guide for women>which, among other things, shows how to identify which male flaws are>fixable and which are cause for termination. I was shocked and disgusted>that this is actually considered a socially acceptable thing to say.>Imagine being a man in a culture where a book like that could be published.>>Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about the>situation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to their>complaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you that>there really is a problem here.>>Jayne> I saw that book on the stands when I was dating too. Guess what I didn't eve pick it up to read it. The title put me off. I was also put off by the blatant anti man speech at the last Robbie Burns's dinner I went to and said so. I have posted articles on soc.men about men being the victims of domestic abuse. Women lie, men lie in custody cases. I have seen both. People become ugly if they feel entitled. But what I can't stand is all the whining and abusive name calling that Andre indulges in if a woman doesn't agree with *everything* he posts. Well, thats a lie. Jayne just posted that she didn't fully agree with me, on one aspect of this, and asked for us to table that part, until she read up some more on it. Jayne's been giving you a ton of breaks since she knows you in real life and has preconceptions about you.

No, shes merely applied that knowledge to the discussions, and explained
how my usenet behavior was not fundamentally different from my Real
Life behavior.
The rest of us treat you like any other usenet denizen and aren't so nice about mixing praise into our disagreemnt.

I don't care if you're " nice " or not. That, to me, is irrelevent.

In fact, its a clever evasive tactic, used mostly by people whose
actual argument has gone to pieces, to *then* argue that their
opponent isn't " nice ".
So how you treat Jayne is really not representative of how you treat anyone else, and for that matter, how Jayne treats you does not seem to be representative of how she treats everyone else. (Though she is noteworthy, although not unique, for treating people with respect and politeness in general.)

I see, so you can rationalise away *evidence*.

Lets hope you're not called to jury duty...

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

"Jayne Kulikauskas" (momkulio@yahoo.ca) writes: "Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:p2g8ovovr3rc4p11d6b0i4h2uakdp7v6vu@4ax.com... On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 12:45:27 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote: []Admittedly, some of them seem to be in a place where they don't handledisagreement or criticism well, but I would not necessarily attribute it toimmaturity. Maybe they've just had enough. If you had been subject tothe kind of male-bashing these guys are getting, you might be a littleover-sensitive too.Jayne Since I am over 50 I do remember the bad old days it wasn't always easy being a women either. Does that excuse treating men badly?

Since Rauni is using that as an *excuse*, then the answer, from her
POV, is " yes ".

That " yes " is amplified, by her *failure/refusal* to engage *any*
of the points about misandry, in the post that she appended her two
line bleat about " woman had it bad "...
Because it wasn't always easy to be a woman?

Exactly. Thats the 'tude, in a nutshell. Because women, somewhere,
somewhen, had/have it " tough ", its OK to do any and all bad
things TO men.
This is why I think the whole "victim" thing is so destructive.

Of course. Its a continued demand for excuses and reparations.
People can identify themselves as victims and feel that this releases them from any obligation to be just to others.

" PMS made me kill then ", " Sugar made me kill them ", " Teevee
made me kill them... ".
Even if every claim about oppression of women ever made were true,

And, they're not even close to true...
we would not have a right to treat men without justice.

Rauni thnks thats OK... She said so...By excusing it all, 'cause at
some time, women " had it tough ".

But... so did *men*... Funny how that part counts for... nothing
with her, eh ?

Andre
--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

"Jayne Kulikauskas" (momkulio@yahoo.ca) writes: "Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message news:bm1g28$arl$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... "Jayne Kulikauskas" (momkulio@yahoo.ca) writes: [] I think I've been surrounded by man hating stuff for so long that it just seemed normal. Indeed. But, doesn't the status of being an adult, give us all the obligation to be ready to test the society that we live in ? Yes, I failed in that obligation.

Well, many of us have failed a few semesters. Yet, by acknowleding that
prior state, we can move on to learn, and this time, not fail in that
obligation to ourselves.
I'm not trying to make excuses for it. I was wrong.

Thats good. The next step, as you are doing, is to then seek out new
data.

Would that more people *could* admit that requirement to themselves.
I'm reading Sommers's _The War Against Boys_ now. I'm at the part where she documents how there was a movement to save girls from the way they were allegedly being shortchanged by the education system at a time when there were actually more girls entering college and doing better on just about any measure of school success. It's clearly a case of appalling injustice. Indeed, and thats the point. There are plenty of such created injustices against men, and against children, these days. There just aren't any, of any siginificance, afflicting women, anymore... I can't think of any in Western countries. There are places where women are killed for adultery while the men go unpunished.

Sure. But, in many of those same countries, similar barbarisms are
meted out to men, as well.

We heard a lot, before the US liberated Afghanistan, about women
being forced to wear burquas. But, did we hear, in the pop media,
about men being *killed* for failing to grow the required of them
beards ?

Which form of injustice would you rather have to deal with ?
Wear crappy clothes, or die ?
[] I'm not sure that it is always self-interest though. Most people don't have the critical thinking skills to see through whatever is the status quo. Then, we oughtn't be giving such people driver's licences, the vote, custody of small children, a right to unsupervised money... Where do we draw such lines, of excusing people for not seeing what is all around them, while trusting them to handle far more complex tasks and issues ? I'm not saying that we should excuse it, but that we should understand it.

Indeed. I do. Its a very simple matter, relaly. Its that such people
have life value systems that *won't let them be honest to themselves*,
because they value their emotional comforts over the facts.

You can't get through to people like that with " niceness ".
[] Changing one's worldview is not something people do easily, even when they don't profit from it. No one ever said that life is supposed to be " easy "... Those who cavil from the difficult tasks would do well to recall JFK's words, when he explained the plan to go to the Moon... " We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things too, *not because they are easy, but because they are hard*. " Life demands that we challenge ourselves. But, people who recoil from the not " easy " parts of it, cannot then claim to be involved people. Or, even informed. The difference between stupidity and ignorance is that, ignorance *can be cured*. But, if one *refuses to*, then one chooses to be stupid. Thats not a choice that anyone ought to show respect for, ever. I don't have respect, but compassion.

Too much compassion can lead to enabling. Poor habits deserve
scorn and criticism.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

"Jayne Kulikauskas" (momkulio@yahoo.ca) writes: "Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:g7h8ovgcf87lt0hesc3nu15fq2p89k2j5r@4ax.com... On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 12:45:27 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote: []I think your complaint about Andre would carry more weight if you avoidedpersonal attacks more yourself. I went back to try to find some personal attacks that I supposedly did on Andre...nope couldn't find any. I disagreed with him but I didn't call him names. Not all personal attacks take the form of calling names. I consider all the following statements by you to be personal attacks. "He is so blinded by his hate that he had in fact become stupid" "And I don't have the time to watch all the TV Andre does." "That seem to difficult for the soc.men crowd to grasp. sperm control apparently is too difficult of a topic for them." " It takes a lot of work to be that angry and to whine that much." When you portray people as angry, whining, stupid and watching too much TV, it is attacking them rather than debating the issues.

Gee, I guess that Rauni.... LIED.

I'm surprised <sarcasm mode off>.

But, I've not lied.
But I sure found a few name calling from Andre. Yes, Andre calls people names and makes personal attacks. That is not under contention.

Indeed. I sure didn't deny it. I just said that I don't *initiate*.

Oh, and calling someone a Feminist *for espousing Feminist views*
*isn't* " name calling ".
However, if you find it an objectionable practice, it seems to me the best place to start combatting it is in yourself.

But, but... Its so much easier for her to call me names, especially
when I raise arguments that she CAN'T refute... <g>

What are you saying, Jayne, and Rauni ought to be as responsible as....
*a man* ?

The horrors !

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) writes:
No, shes merely applied that knowledge to the discussions, and explained how my usenet behavior was not fundamentally different from my Real Life behavior.

Actually, she just said your usenet behavior _is_ different from your
real life behavior.
The rest of us treat you like any other usenet denizen and aren't so nice about mixing praise into our disagreemnt. I don't care if you're " nice " or not. That, to me, is irrelevent.

I care if I'm civil to you. It doesn't matter to me if you care.
In fact, its a clever evasive tactic, used mostly by people whose actual argument has gone to pieces, to *then* argue that their opponent isn't " nice ".

Actually you are the one who has been unable to justify any of the
claims you are making as "established facts."

Providing citations that say something completely different does not
count on proving your claims.
So how you treat Jayne is really not representative of how you treat anyone else, and for that matter, how Jayne treats you does not seem to be representative of how she treats everyone else. (Though she is noteworthy, although not unique, for treating people with respect and politeness in general.) I see, so you can rationalise away *evidence*.

You haven't presented any evidence of the things that _I've_ called
you on.

It is a little sad that you think you have.

"Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:bm1mbh$s11$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... "Jayne Kulikauskas" (momkulio@yahoo.ca) writes:

[] I don't have respect, but compassion. Too much compassion can lead to enabling. Poor habits deserve scorn and criticism.

You are right about enabling and it probably is a danger for me to go too
far with compassion. I can't stand to see anyone suffering. However, I
think we've hit an area of fundamental difference. I see a place for
constructive criticism but not scorn. My value system just doesn't allow
for me to be scornful of people.

Jayne

Doug Anderson (ethelthelog@yahoo.com) writes: dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) writes: No, shes merely applied that knowledge to the discussions, and explained how my usenet behavior was not fundamentally different from my Real Life behavior. Actually, she just said your usenet behavior _is_ different from your real life behavior.

Read for comprehension. She said that my Usenet *style* was different,
not the facts that, in niether, do I lie, and so on.
The rest of us treat you like any other usenet denizen and aren't so nice about mixing praise into our disagreemnt. I don't care if you're " nice " or not. That, to me, is irrelevent. I care if I'm civil to you. It doesn't matter to me if you care.

Free Clue: " civil " and " nice " aren't synonyms.
In fact, its a clever evasive tactic, used mostly by people whose actual argument has gone to pieces, to *then* argue that their opponent isn't " nice ". Actually you are the one who has been unable to justify any of the claims you are making as "established facts."

Non sequitur.
Providing citations that say something completely different does not count on proving your claims.

So you SAY... Yet, *cannot* show or prove.

Uh huh.
So how you treat Jayne is really not representative of how you treat anyone else, and for that matter, how Jayne treats you does not seem to be representative of how she treats everyone else. (Though she is noteworthy, although not unique, for treating people with respect and politeness in general.) I see, so you can rationalise away *evidence*. You haven't presented any evidence of the things that _I've_ called you on.

Ibid.
It is a little sad that you think you have.

I posted a reading list, and I have read the whole of it.
Since you made no comment about that list, or it's contents,
its reasonable to surmise that you are *ignorant* of said contents.

QED.

HTH.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

"Jayne Kulikauskas" (momkulio@yahoo.ca) writes: "Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message news:bm1mbh$s11$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... "Jayne Kulikauskas" (momkulio@yahoo.ca) writes: [] I don't have respect, but compassion. Too much compassion can lead to enabling. Poor habits deserve scorn and criticism. You are right about enabling and it probably is a danger for me to go too far with compassion.

Indeed, and not just for you. I am reminded of the " useful idiots "
( To use Lenin's charming, but accurate phrase ) who claimed that
we should be " nice " to Iraq, in 1991, and to Afghanistan, in 2001...
I can't stand to see anyone suffering.

In the words of Robert Heinlein, " The only sin is hurting others,
*unnecessarily*. Hurting yourself isn't a sin, its just stupid. "
However, I think we've hit an area of fundamental difference.

Indeed. And, thats OK. I can use my values, and you, yours. Thats
not a problem, from my end.
I see a place for constructive criticism but not scorn.

Problem is, we've held back from scorn and the proper judging
of values and behavior, and we got from that, millions of people
who believe that humans never walked on the Moon, that astrology
is useful, and accurate, that single mommies can raise kids as
well as intact families, and a host of other clearly erroneous
fallicies.

Its well time for scorn to make a major return.
My value system just doesn't allow for me to be scornful of people.

As I said, thats OK. Just accept that the only person your values
automatically work for, is yourself.

The same about mine, for me. OK ?

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) writes:
Doug Anderson (ethelthelog@yahoo.com) writes: dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) writes: No, shes merely applied that knowledge to the discussions, and explained how my usenet behavior was not fundamentally different from my Real Life behavior. Actually, she just said your usenet behavior _is_ different from your real life behavior. Read for comprehension. She said that my Usenet *style* was different, not the facts that, in niether, do I lie, and so on.

The difference between style and behavior that is important here is?
snip Andre's evasions of the fact that he is unable to justify any of the claims he made which I've challenged.
I posted a reading list, and I have read the whole of it. Since you made no comment about that list, or it's contents, its reasonable to surmise that you are *ignorant* of said contents.

It happens that I've read some of the books on your long reading
list. I'm not sure what points of your those books were meant to
address. But that has nothing to do with the following:


You posted some very specific citations (not from your reading list)
which you allege proved that NOW and Ms Magazine oppose joint
custody. Those citations proved nothing of the sort.

You posted one very specific citation that you allege proves that
"fatherless-by-choice sprog whelping" is a bad thing. That citation
proves nothing of the sort (in fact it proves nothing of _any_ sort
except that an author can take a few anecdotes and pretend to be doing
social science).

You ought to either withdraw these assertions, or simply admit that
you believe them but are unable to document them. At least these would
be the intelectually honest courses of action.

"Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:bm1uir$gbu$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... "Jayne Kulikauskas" (momkulio@yahoo.ca) writes:

[] However, I think we've hit an area of fundamental difference. Indeed. And, thats OK. I can use my values, and you, yours. Thats not a problem, from my end. I see a place for constructive criticism but not scorn. Problem is, we've held back from scorn and the proper judging of values and behavior, and we got from that, millions of people who believe that humans never walked on the Moon, that astrology is useful, and accurate, that single mommies can raise kids as well as intact families, and a host of other clearly erroneous fallicies. Its well time for scorn to make a major return.

Many people seem not to be very good at thinking clearly. I don't see how
scorn is going to fix that. But it probably won't make things any worse.
My value system just doesn't allow for me to be scornful of people. As I said, thats OK. Just accept that the only person your values automatically work for, is yourself. The same about mine, for me. OK ?

Of course. I can't choose your values for you.

Jayne

"Doug Anderson" <ethelthelog@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ovpth7h1kk.fsf@noether.uoregon.edu... dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) writes: Doug Anderson (ethelthelog@yahoo.com) writes: dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) writes:> No, shes merely applied that knowledge to the discussions, and
explained> how my usenet behavior was not fundamentally different from my Real> Life behavior. Actually, she just said your usenet behavior _is_ different from your real life behavior. Read for comprehension. She said that my Usenet *style* was different, not the facts that, in niether, do I lie, and so on. The difference between style and behavior that is important here is?

I think it is a significant distinction. He is *fundamentally* the same.
The values and characteristics that make Andre Andre are all there. Style
is pretty superficial.

Jayne

"Jayne Kulikauskas" (momkulio@yahoo.ca) writes: "Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message news:bm1uir$gbu$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... "Jayne Kulikauskas" (momkulio@yahoo.ca) writes: [] However, I think we've hit an area of fundamental difference. Indeed. And, thats OK. I can use my values, and you, yours. Thats not a problem, from my end. I see a place for constructive criticism but not scorn. Problem is, we've held back from scorn and the proper judging of values and behavior, and we got from that, millions of people who believe that humans never walked on the Moon, that astrology is useful, and accurate, that single mommies can raise kids as well as intact families, and a host of other clearly erroneous fallicies. Its well time for scorn to make a major return. Many people seem not to be very good at thinking clearly. I don't see how scorn is going to fix that. But it probably won't make things any worse.

It will show people that that sort of sdeliberately ignorant behavior
is not a good role, model, and that one *consequence* of that behavior
starts with a lack or respect from others, for it's commision.
My value system just doesn't allow for me to be scornful of people. As I said, thats OK. Just accept that the only person your values automatically work for, is yourself. The same about mine, for me. OK ? Of course. I can't choose your values for you.

Indeed.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

In alt.support.marriage Andre Lieven <dg411@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote: Indeed, and not just for you. I am reminded of the " useful idiots " ( To use Lenin's charming, but accurate phrase ) who claimed that we should be " nice " to Iraq, in 1991, and to Afghanistan, in 2001...

In the first case, we pushed out a dictator to restore a monarchy. Such a
wonderful use of this democracy's might (and yours, as I think Canada was
involved).

The Iraq war in 1991 was pointless, as the "necessity" of our more recent
invasion would prove if it weren't fictitious. While the causus belli in
this last case seems to have been fiction, at least we're making some effort
to produce lasting peace and democracy there.

Whether the war in Afghanistan will have done any lasting good for the
country remains to be seen.

"Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote in message news:<bm19qd$hh3qp$1@ID-141597.news.uni-berlin.de>... "Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:p777ov4606ssrb2ak3m3coaqmeiui3t4i7@4ax.com... On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 23:11:40 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote:I think that it is unhealthy for people, male or female, to see themselvesas victims. The victim mentality is a way for people to avoid personalresponsibilty. It gives people a sense of entitlement. People use it tojustify poor treatment of others because "they started it." We canacknowledge the things that are unjust to men without making them bevictims. Redirect that to most of soc.men I noticed a book at the library today entitled _All Men Are Jerks Until Proven Otherwise_. According to the blurb this is a dating guide for women which, among other things, shows how to identify which male flaws are fixable and which are cause for termination. I was shocked and disgusted that this is actually considered a socially acceptable thing to say. Imagine being a man in a culture where a book like that could be published. Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about the situation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to their complaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you that there really is a problem here.

Raunchy girl is a 50-year old has been who is upset by the fact that
she can't dinner for free any more..so she cheers on anything that will
make YOUNG women reject the men (with wallets) who she wants.
Jayne

On 12 Oct 2003 03:12:11 -0700, magicnosegob@yahoo.com (Magic Nose
Goblin) wrote:
"Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote in message news:<bm19qd$hh3qp$1@ID-141597.news.uni-berlin.de>... "Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:p777ov4606ssrb2ak3m3coaqmeiui3t4i7@4ax.com... On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 23:11:40 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote: >I think that it is unhealthy for people, male or female, to see themselves >as victims. The victim mentality is a way for people to avoid personal >responsibilty. It gives people a sense of entitlement. People use it to >justify poor treatment of others because "they started it." We can >acknowledge the things that are unjust to men without making them be >victims. Redirect that to most of soc.men I noticed a book at the library today entitled _All Men Are Jerks Until Proven Otherwise_. According to the blurb this is a dating guide for women which, among other things, shows how to identify which male flaws are fixable and which are cause for termination. I was shocked and disgusted that this is actually considered a socially acceptable thing to say. Imagine being a man in a culture where a book like that could be published. Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about the situation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to their complaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you that there really is a problem here.Raunchy girl is a 50-year old has been who is upset by the fact thatshe can't dinner for free any more..so she cheers on anything that willmake YOUNG women reject the men (with wallets) who she wants.
Damn Aaron you have early alzheimer's or something? I'm married and
have been so for over a year. Did you forget you hit on me after
seeing my pic on yahoo?

To be honest some men are jerks and so are some women. And there are
relevant behavioral characteristics that tend so show early on in a
relationship that are usually ignored.

I am all for someone terminating a relationship because of some considered
legitimate concerns rather that pursuing it. That usually results in
persistent efforts to change the other person and chronic fights.

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
No Snarling *****es
nosnarling*****es@comcast.net
Antifeminist Extremist Art Work
http://nosnarling*****es.home.comcast.net
--------------------------------------------------------------------



"Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:bm1esk$hgvh2$1@ID-141597.news.uni-berlin.de... "Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:tld8ovk7cnlqresesccl31le094734hb66@4ax.com... On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 11:19:00 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote: []I noticed a book at the library today entitled _All Men Are Jerks UntilProven Otherwise_. According to the blurb this is a dating guide for womenwhich, among other things, shows how to identify which male flaws arefixable and which are cause for termination. I was shocked and
disgustedthat this is actually considered a socially acceptable thing to say.Imagine being a man in a culture where a book like that could be published.Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about
thesituation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to
theircomplaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you
thatthere really is a problem here.Jayne I saw that book on the stands when I was dating too. Guess what I didn't eve pick it up to read it. The title put me off. I was also put off by the blatant anti man speech at the last Robbie Burns's dinner I went to and said so. I have posted articles on soc.men about men being the victims of domestic abuse. Women lie, men lie in custody cases. I have seen both. People become ugly if they feel entitled. But what I can't stand is all the whining and abusive name calling that Andre indulges in if a woman doesn't agree with *everything* he posts. I think your complaint about Andre would carry more weight if you avoided personal attacks more yourself. Besides Andre is just as "abusive" when
men disagree with him. He seems to have a sort of no-holds-barred style of arguing. While it is not my preffered style, I don't see it indicating
any great character flaw and certainly not misogyny.Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about
thesituation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to
theircomplaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you
thatthere really is a problem here. Of course things aren't fair. But I'm sorry if I don't agree with Andre's C4M. If you don't want and unwanted child control your sperm. Or your egg. It isn't the government's responsibly to support children. If a couple has a kid because they couldn't be responsible enough to use birth control or say no then the resulting child is *their* responsibly. Nature isn't fair. The sperm didn't fall out of the sky into the woman uterus. Nature isn't fair in that a pregnant woman can be abandonned by the
child's father. The laws are unfair that give all the choice to women and none to the men. We can't help the unfairness of nature, but the unfairness of
laws is something that people deliberately legislate. They are different kinds of unfairness. One learns to accept or work around the unfairness of nature. One fights to change the unfairness of laws. Funny thing is a agree with a lot of what that soc.men say just not *all* of it so therefore I get called names. How mature of them! Admittedly, some of them seem to be in a place where they don't handle disagreement or criticism well, but I would not necessarily attribute it
to immaturity. Maybe they've just had enough. If you had been subject to
the kind of male-bashing these guys are getting, you might be a little over-sensitive too. Jayne

It was a 20-year-old, 150 pounds lighter pic, by the by..in keeping with the
tradition of bints who post their pics on their web.....




"Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:j1siov0tpl0ru4bac5hcia10bt74htu9ra@4ax.com... On 12 Oct 2003 03:12:11 -0700, magicnosegob@yahoo.com (Magic Nose Goblin) wrote:"Jayne Kulikauskas" <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:<bm19qd$hh3qp$1@ID-141597.news.uni-berlin.de>... "Rauni" <LadyWolf@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:p777ov4606ssrb2ak3m3coaqmeiui3t4i7@4ax.com... > On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 23:11:40 -0400, "Jayne Kulikauskas" > <momkulio@yahoo.ca> wrote: > > >I think that it is unhealthy for people, male or female, to see themselves > >as victims. The victim mentality is a way for people to avoid
personal > >responsibilty. It gives people a sense of entitlement. People use
it to > >justify poor treatment of others because "they started it." We can > >acknowledge the things that are unjust to men without making them be > >victims. > Redirect that to most of soc.men I noticed a book at the library today entitled _All Men Are Jerks Until Proven Otherwise_. According to the blurb this is a dating guide for
women which, among other things, shows how to identify which male flaws are fixable and which are cause for termination. I was shocked and
disgusted that this is actually considered a socially acceptable thing to say. Imagine being a man in a culture where a book like that could be
published. Is it that hard to understand that some men might not be happy about
the situation? If you could acknowledge that there is some validity to
their complaints, they might not be so insistent in trying to convince you
that there really is a problem here.Raunchy girl is a 50-year old has been who is upset by the fact thatshe can't dinner for free any more..so she cheers on anything that willmake YOUNG women reject the men (with wallets) who she wants. Damn Aaron you have early alzheimer's or something? I'm married and have been so for over a year. Did you forget you hit on me after seeing my pic on yahoo?