Gender Feminists' Anti-Testosterone Bias

[Atomica]

In the beginning the feminist movement was about equality, about equal opportunity between the sexes. The equity feminists simply wanted to be on an equal footing with the men.
But in the early 1970s there arose a new form of feminist, and this feminist was unlike her equity-minded sisters: She demanded that men be sacrificed for the sake of advancing women.
And so it began with the elimination of men's athletic programmes in universities for the sake of implementing women's programmes in the name of "equality".
And with the advent of so-called affirmative action the term "equality" became horribly corrupted. Then the same gender feminists, not content with forcing more qualified men out of promotions by judicial and media fiat, decided to corrupt our school systems by forcing our boys to become more feminine, by drugging little boys who tended to be active and rambunctious like little boys normally are.
We have watched society collapse around us as we have watched the feminisation of America, by eliminating recess and building public schools without playgrounds and forcing children to be medicated, causing enough concern for we the people to demand a federal law banning forced medication (which has passed the House).
Now the gender feminists are on the verge of demanding the forced sterilisation of little boys who are "too aggressive". And what are the determining factors to warrant such actions? Who will decide which boys are to be sterilised? Or do they just get to sterilise ALL little boys, fearing they might produce too much testosterone, leaving only female hermaphrodites able to produce testosterone, in what could be a false hope of producing only women? Why not just allow only cloning (which has been proven to be an utter failure if we remember the lessons of the late Dolly the cloned sheep) and thus endanger the human race's survival?
The problem with gender feminism is that it is wrecking America and its traditions. Now is the time to stop the militant gender feminists' assault upon our society and realise that we are all human and that's the point. The plain and simple is gender feminists have given the movement a very bad name indeed. It's no wonder books from Christina Hoff Sommers (Who Stole Feminism and The War Against Boys) have been so popular, along with Michael Savage blasting the "she-ocracy" in his bestseller The Savage Nation and Rush Limbaugh who blasted feminazis in his two books during the 1990s and Cal Thomas' 1993 bestseller The Things That Matter Most. And we must continue to fight the good fight and flush this radical fringe minority, no doubt supporters of Communism, out onto the streets...

[syracusa]

Naahhh....In good faith, I think you exaggerate.
See...the problem with accusing a certain part of "bias" is that it is never clear where the real 'CENTER' is.

Moreover, the part that has managed to implant its skewness/bias in society's consciousness for a very, very long time is the one that comes out sounding "truthful", even if "the truth" is not exactly with it.
Anything that deviates from that - sounds "biased".

The only quick and delightfully easy to observe facts that come to mind when reading your post are:

1. Men still rule the world big time (in a very unsuccesful manner, for that manner - as it can very well be observed); so mind you, I see no male disadvantage here and no feminization of society whatsoever.

2. Many boys (socialized by sociopathic parents, most probably fathers obssessed with testosterone) continue to think it is OK to bully, hit, shove, ridicule...or even shoot - somebody/something that appears weak(er).

3. Society continues to be ruled by mass hysteria when it comes to male-oriented sporting events. I do not know of anything similar targeting women.

3. Prisons are still filled with males (the majority of criminals, rapists and thieves (including Enron-type) continue to be males). I know...old arguments...but very telling.

4. The majority of resources and property (which are very good for keeping others in check) continue to be had by men.

5. Any society on the face of this Earth can benefit from less AGRESSIVITY(traditionally associated with the male...not that the female would be incapable of displaying that) and from more COOPERATION AND EMPATHY (traditionally associated with the female...not that a male would be incapable of that either).

Hardly any significant "feminization" of society out there.
Everything else is fluff.
Do I agree with forced medication of children? No.
Would I like to see exactly what kind of "normally testosteronish behavior" you were talking about when you mentioned "poor innocent little boys" being "medicated"? Yes.

Chill. The feminization of society is a myth used by power-hungry men and their brainwashed women to maintain the enormous imbalance of power that has existed between sexes for ages.
Something that is just purely and essentially WRONG.

[Man Against Time]

1. Men still rule the world big time (in a very unsuccesful manner, for that manner - as it can very well be observed); so mind you, I see no male disadvantage here and no feminization of society whatsoever.

Men are in power, but in order to remain there, because of universal suffrage, they have to apologize for manliness. Though there will indeed always be a set of balls and a schlong in the high seat in the Oval Office, that does not whatsoever imply that manly values rule civilization at all anymore. In order to stay in power, men have to sell out to the whims and fancy of woman.

2. Many boys (socialized by sociopathic parents, most probably fathers obssessed with testosterone) continue to think it is OK to bully, hit, shove, ridicule...or even shoot - somebody/something that appears weak(er).

That is by no means a Masculine characteristic, so that is rubbish. Women are equally, probably, more aggressive and psycho to each other, especially when they percieve weakness.

3. Society continues to be ruled by mass hysteria when it comes to male-oriented sporting events. I do not know of anything similar targeting women.

Clearly youve never been down the highway and seen a billboard. Or heard of Britney Spears, Jessica Simpson, Beyonce whatever her last name is, etc etc.
And what about the female oriented mass-hysteria that accompanies vomit like boy bands and Sex and the City? There is plenty of that as well.

3. Prisons are still filled with males (the majority of criminals, rapists and thieves (including Enron-type) continue to be males). I know...old arguments...but very telling.

What the hell does this prove that relates to the feminization of society? Are you saying manhood is not in danger because men are still reliably committing crimes?

4. The majority of resources and property (which are very good for keeping others in check) continue to be had by men.

That is misleading and stupid; a majority of property and resources are probably controlled by about 7% of the population. I know as a Man I have zero stake in this majority of property. Do you as a man share in this bounty? Does anyone you know? I have never met, and probably never will meet, anyone who monopolizes a significant amount of resources and property. The regular guys that make up 9 men in 10 in the country have no manly privileged claim to be the sole property holder under really any circumstances.

5. Any society on the face of this Earth can benefit from less AGRESSIVITY(traditionally associated with the male...not that the female would be incapable of displaying that)

Why didnt you just say "aggression?" What the hell is Agressivity?
And this is more Hollywood hogwash. Women are just as aggressive, they are just not physicall confrontational. They are not as likely as a man to charge up to you in a bar and hit you with something, but they are just as likely to attack without provocation. Just in their own way, which is usually some kind of demeaning little backbiting manipulation, because that is their power. Men have fists and use them. Women would be crushed so they use subtler power. That says nothing of their tendency for aggression.

and from more COOPERATION AND EMPATHY (traditionally associated with the female...not that a male would be incapable of that either).

Cooperation is associated with the female? Do you think the Spartan and Roman armies considered their discipline and cooperation girly? Do you think the British Empire took its fighting formation cues from women? Think the Marine Corps' attitude about the Corps is a woman's stance? What about when tribal men go out on a hunt and work together? Womanliness?
Youre idea of men and women is too influenced by a watered down and desecrated Hollywood seal of approval.

[james?]

Whoa, great post Man.

[castille]

Yeah yeah, "lets all be passive and kind to each other". Why not castrate men while at it?

I'm sure the feminists find it funny to say "if everyone is non-competitive then we would have a wonderful society".

Well, "aggressive men" defended Russia from slavery during World War 2. "Aggressive men" fought with broken bottles for every block, every building, and every room in the ruins of Stalingrad. In fact, even the Russian women who fought the war, were just as aggressive as the men.

Compare this with the passive attitude of the French leaders when the Germans conquered them in weeks.


Also, women can be just as cruel and vicious. They don't do it with fists. They do it with "psychology"; taunts, isolation, etc etc. Didn't Elizabeth the first have her own cousin executed? Didn't Isabella of Spain order for the execution of thousands of Jews and muslims?

[Anniee]

Somebody (the feminist ) needs to read not only some Gatto but also The War Against Boys (as wisely listed in the OP.)

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Man Against Time,)
3. Society continues to be ruled by mass hysteria when it comes to male-oriented sporting events. I do not know of anything similar targeting women.

    Clearly youve never been down the highway and seen a billboard...(etc.)<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Don't forget Take Back the Night Rallies - were I a man I'd be genuinely afraid of one of those, even when they're allowed. C*ntfest anyone? or The Vagina Monologues on campus?
Oh hell yeah there are similar things. I want to know what the hell the word "targeted" was in there for though...it didn't make any sense.

I watched television this morning, a local newstation had a commentary/documentary on a few folks the commentator deemed worthy of high praise. One woman, who was ok, invented airbrush cosmetics. Another woman who was on was a head of the Oxygen channel with Oprah, listening to those women tout about their success and what is means to women, why women are stronger corporate figures blah blah blah....I had to think, why is it so easy to make such statements? I can only imagine Ted Turner going on and being hoisted into high esteem for saying "Men, WHITE men, are the backbone of corporate success, they're smarter, work harder blah blah blah", you won't ever see it. The only man, one man, a man who runs his own advertising business, was black. Yup, not one white man amoung 5 or 6 people this woman wanted to praise. The black man used ALL the right PC names, all starting with M "Mother, Malcom, Martin" you know the rest. After all these years, you still hear them banging the same drum over and over. Who are they kidding? But, in light of all that I have stated here, my spirits are not down, my pride is not shifted, my feeling of self worth not changed, even though I can honestly say I know exactly what it means to be a minority sitting in my living room, watching television, taking in what is "socially acceptable".

[Atomica]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (syracusa,)
Naahhh....In good faith, I think you exaggerate.
See...the problem with accusing a certain part of "bias" is that it is never clear where the real 'CENTER' is.

<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

WRONG. I am NOT! "exaggerating"; I am telling it like it is. This IS the reality. I cannot help that you refuse to accept the reality, just because it doesn't jibe with your beliefs.
The fact of the matter is these gender feminists reflect only a fringe minority of American thought yet they are grossly overrepresented in government especially by a controlled (and liberally biased) media who insist upon imposing their sexist, misandrist agenda upon the masses. These are the types of folks who want to throw a man in jail for simply offering a compliment about a woman's beauty for Chrissakes!

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (syracusa)
Chill. The feminization of society is a myth used by power-hungry men and their brainwashed women to maintain the enormous imbalance of power that has existed between sexes for ages.
Something that is just purely and essentially WRONG.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Syracusa, it is YOUR inane, uneducated rant that is purely and essentially WRONG. The myth about "imbalance" has been disproven and discredited in so many ways. Men and women are not exactly the same and should not be forced to be, yet both truly deserve equal treatment. In recent decades men have gotten the short end of the stick by bureaucracies that have mandated pushing more-qualified men aside for the sake of "equality" and "diversity".
Sorry, Syracusa, but the vast majority of Americans demand the best qualified candidate, no matter what his or her sex is. Yes, American society HAS TOO AD INFINITUM become overly feminised to the point where because of forced "affirmative action" which is sexist in its own right because of its patronisation of women as an excuse to uplift women at the expense of men.
And failure to accept that reality is the sign of a closed mind, Syracusa, and your mind is closed to reality.

[Atomica]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Anniee,)
Somebody (the feminist ) needs to read not only some Gatto but also The War Against Boys (as wisely listed in the OP.)

You got that right Anniee! And don't let's forget Who Stole Feminism: How Women Have Betrayed Women.
In addition I must also suggest The Things That Matter Most by Cal Thomas, The Savage Nation and The Enemy Within by Michael Savage, Let Freedom Ring and Deliver Us From Evil by Sean Hannity, and of course anything by Ann Coulter would also work well.

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Man Against Time,)
3. Society continues to be ruled by mass hysteria when it comes to male-oriented sporting events. I do not know of anything similar targeting women.

    Clearly youve never been down the highway and seen a billboard...(etc.)<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Don't forget Take Back the Night Rallies - were I a man I'd be genuinely afraid of one of those, even when they're allowed. C*ntfest anyone? or The Vagina Monologues on campus?
Oh hell yeah there are similar things. I want to know what the hell the word "targeted" was in there for though...it didn't make any sense.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

More and more women's athletic competitions, from team sport to bodybuilding, are increasingly well promoted; the turnout at the latter continues to rise...

[Atomica]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille,)
Yeah yeah, "lets all be passive and kind to each other". Why not castrate men while at it?

I'm sure the feminists find it funny to say "if everyone is non-competitive then we would have a wonderful society".

Well, "aggressive men" defended Russia from slavery during World War 2. "Aggressive men" fought with broken bottles for every block, every building, and every room in the ruins of Stalingrad. In fact, even the Russian women who fought the war, were just as aggressive as the men.

Compare this with the passive attitude of the French leaders when the Germans conquered them in weeks.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Spot on; and don't let's forget about the generations of American men who have eagerly fought for her freedom!


</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Also, women can be just as cruel and vicious. They don't do it with fists. They do it with "psychology"; taunts, isolation, etc etc. Didn't Elizabeth the first have her own cousin executed? Didn't Isabella of Spain order for the execution of thousands of Jews and muslims?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Yes, and don't let's forget about Janet Hitler for killing all those innocent people in Waco in 1993 and kidnapping and dumping Elian Gonzalez (whose mother became shark food for the sake of his freedom in America) back into Castro's totalitarian hellhole and MadAsHell NotAtAllBright (the State Secretary under the media-selected puppet dictator Bill Clinton) for orchestrating the assault upon innocent Christian Serbs who wanted to preserve their borders and their culture.

In the military, women receive higher scores than men on physical fitness tests even though they perform worse.

The notion of group identity is noxious. I didn't check my stock in Male Inc. this morning. I didn't choose where to buy a meal based on the sex of the workers or owner. Bill Gates has more money than he could spend in this life, but how does that help me? The President is male, but how does this help me to earn a paycheck? Congress is mostly male. Does this keep me from getting gouged on taxes every year?

Male vs. Female is just divide and conquer.

[syracusa]

Granted that you are all very conservative men here, age-old gross biases, untruths and injusticeS ARE absolute TRUTHS and RIGHTEOUSNESS in your minds simply becauSe it has been like this for a long time.

Your replies are perversly biased and sound desperate in the face of crude, empirical, measurable reality. They sound as desperate and bitter as the angry protests of a power-hungry individual about to lose some of that power.
I cannot reply to your replies because we wouldn't get anywhere. What you said is absolute perversion of anything remotely related to reality.

Just two more things:

1. The only time I see women displaying their "agression" towards each other(apologies for the word "agressivity", English is not my native tongue) is when they buy into the ideology that the other women are potential enemies in their constant competition for men. Men don't seem to do that because they don't have to. Remind a woman about her biological clock and how awful it will be if she doesn't find a man, and you have her all ready to fight tooth and nail for it.
This state of mind of SOME women (which is more prevalent in some cultures compared to others) generally fits well with men.
Divide ed impera. It works.
Women are not inherently agressive. Once competition for men is out of the picture and once they understand that their life's most precious goal is NOT necessarily to beat the other women at securing a man for themselves- then their agression towards each other usually goes away.
They like to talk a lot with each other and relate to each other - and this very fact unites them rather than putting them in competition. Guys (American guys) cannot claim that.
"Bonding" over a touch-down or becoming "allies" in a war does little in the way of producing true empathy and understanding between individuals.

2. I said it before and I say it again. If it trully is "testosterone" that makes SOME guys act and think like you presented it here - then I delight in the knowledge that the same testosterone will drive you to jump off a plane some day (or something similarly stupid and insane which passes for "masculinity" in some people's minds) and thus exterminate yourselves earlier.

Survival of the smartest, right?
If testosteron=masculinity and masculinity=agression then masculinity=stupidity.
Thank God for the less "manly" men of the world! They seem to be the ones who survive and survive well; and the ones that get laid H*** of a lot more than the "testosteronish", "apeish" ones do.

[Anniee]

So who gave Andrea Dworkin this link anyway? :rolleyes:

[james?]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (syracusa,)
Your replies are perversly biased and sound desperate in the face of crude, empirical, measurable reality. They sound as desperate and bitter as the angry protests of a power-hungry individual about to lose some of that power.
I cannot reply to your replies because we wouldn't get anywhere. What you said is absolute perversion of anything remotely related to reality.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

You've got a real open mind yourself.

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by

1. The only time I see women displaying their "agression" towards each other(apologies for the word "agressivity", English is not my native tongue) is when they buy into the ideology that the other women are potential enemies in their constant competition for men. Men don't seem to do that because they don't have to. Remind a woman about her biological clock and how awful it will be if she doesn't find a man, and you have her all ready to fight tooth and nail for it.
This state of mind of SOME women (which is more prevalent in some cultures compared to others) generally fits well with men.
Divide ed impera. It works.
Women are not inherently agressive. Once competition for men is out of the picture and once they understand that their life's most precious goal is NOT necessarily to beat the other women at securing a man for themselves- then their agression towards each other usually goes away.
They like to talk a lot with each other and relate to each other - and this very fact unites them rather than putting them in competition. Guys (American guys) cannot claim that.
"Bonding" over a touch-down or becoming "allies" in a war does little in the way of producing true empathy and understanding between individuals.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

We got a regular Freud on our hands.

The sexes are not equal. There's countless amounts of proof--from scientific evidence to common knowledge--that they are in actuality very different. You trying to create a world where every person of any gender is equal is simply the greatest destruction of reality imaginable.

[Anniee]

I don't see anything "equal" in his/her posts. I see "women rule, men drool" man-hating rhetoric. Trite.

[G. Adams]

Ahh moan moan moan. Look, women were oppressed, got sick of it, and did something about it. If you really feel oppressed, get off your arse and build yourself an organisation. If your not prepared to fight against what you percieve as injustice, in a free (ish...) society like the USA at least, then you don't deserve to have that element of justice.

[Anniee]

Every time they do they're told they're "whining" and moaning.

[G. Adams]

Then someones mislabling them, or they ARE just collectively whining and moaning. The Women'sLib movement in GB pre WWI put the windows of anti-feminists through, paraded the streets, one of them threw herself under the kings horse and a major race, getting trampled to death in the process. Thats not whining. Not suggesting to get yourself killed, but if your progressivley increase the fervour of your campaign until they listen it'll get to a point when they see your not just a whining nobody without support and start listening.

[Anniee]

Great suggestion putting out windows. Anyway, if you're suggesting that men are not taking to the streets in protest against discrimination in divorce and custody law, for example you're wrong. They are. They're fighting tooth and nail against the legal discrimination they're facing, and against having their children ripped from them. We don't hear about it very much in the mainstream media, because they think like you do; you have to visit men's news sites to hear about it. Over the past year Glenn Sacks has spearheaded a campaign to protest David and Goliath T-Shirts, made for little girls, which carry violent and hateful messages towards little boys - but no such messages about girls. Stores all over the continent have pulled the shirts from their shelves, from Macy's to Bloomingdales. At Christmas a big group of divorced fathers in England donned Father Christmas suits and demonstrated in the public square against the unfair divorce and custody laws. Activists are trying to get the VAWA (the 5 billion dollar law to help only women who are victims of violence, despite the fact that men suffer far more violent crimes) to distribute the money more equally - to open shelters for abused men (who comprise about 40 percent of DV victims, by the way.)

And every time they talk about what they're doing, talk about the discrimination they are facing, share their stories or discuss the legal discrimination they are facing, they have people telling them they're a bunch of pansy crybabies who should shut up and take it like a man.

Well, nice work.

[syracusa]

Anniee,

I have to agree with you here. I am not sure I remember correctly but you were not very "excited" about what I posted earlier, I think you said that I was just drumming "man-hating" rhetoric. I respectfully disagree.
I have a wonderful husband, I adore my grandfather and no, I wouldn't mind having a little boy (though yes, I have to admit I would prefer a little girl :)

But in this previous post, you are making points that I wanted to make as well.
First, it seems to me that something that always gets "conveniently" unnoticed when my type of arguments are brought up...is that the tone is not "man-hating" but "false masculinity-hating".

It is a stupid and completely unfounded ideology that forces ALL men to behave like insensitive, primal, brute apes if they want to "live up" to the name of "real man". I have noticed this is something very typical of the anglo cultures - you would be surprised how different "masculinity" looks when you check it out in other places.

The reality is that there are more decent, nice, great male human beings out there than there are "apes". And this is good.

HOWEVER, what I do "hate" - if we really are to use this strong word - is this obstinant ideology that often leads to exactly what you mentioned in your post.
A man is very limited in what he can do or what he can report for fear that he will be put down and dismissed as a "pussy".

But you will have to agree that it is not women that do this to decent men, but it is the ideology of the apes that does this to decent men.
It is not feminists that make some bully boys abuse and beat the c*** out of normal little boys at school - but again, it is the "ape" ideology.

As for those t-shirts you mentioned...even though I disagree with the message in itself, I am sure you are getting here as "humorless" as those feminists who are accused of taking themselves too seriously all the time and lacking "a sense of humor". It's funny how the "joke" becomes non-funny when you feel attacked, degraded and put down with it, isn't it?
Just a matter of perspective.

"Girls rule and boys drool" is supposed to be a harmless joke as much as expressions like "look-at-that-hot-piece-of-ass!" is supposed to be "harmless".
It is more like a "funny" reaction to the reality that "boys have always ruled and girls have just "taken it up the A**" - metaphorically speaking.
(Sorry for sounding a little too "colorful" here).

Do I say that girls/women can never be manipulative witches? God, no!
And I have to say that G. Adams did strike a cord when he mentioned the "oppression" thing. "If you don't like it - stand up and fight".

I will confess that I've had moments when I had to ask myself honestly if there is a chance under the sun that females may actually be INFERIOR to males in some respects. Otherwise I cannot explain the extent to which a majority of women in certain cultures (not the US) are willing to take an extraordinary amount of S*** and allow themselves to be degraded by some traditional beliefs and norms that they never EVER question; and if you hint that they may be approaching the whole thing the wrong way, they give you the evil look.

I grew up with ideas such as "if a woman is not married by the age of 23 she is a complete loser and nobody will ever want to marry her after that age".

Or "if a man slaps the S*** out of you it is most probably because you did something wrong".

Or "if a man cheats, the woman who he cheated with must be the witch who needs to be destroyed; the man is not responsible, he just can't help himself".

"If you have a boyfriend - you are completely accomplished as a woman. If you don't, you are pathetic. You are not invited to any party because you don't fit in or simply because you are probably planning to steal somebody's boyfriend/husband over there anyway".

I did have to wonder at some point how STUPID you must be as a species to accept and never challenge such horrific norms that literally exploit the soul out of you. Soemtimes they say that when you are THAT stupid, you deserve your fate (G. Adams hinted to that in his post, I guess).

Very possibly.
But then again, I have seen cultures where women DID wake up.
So...I don't know...I continue to believe that it is the influence of culture...God knows.

Thanks for reading.