Chauvinist Corner Guest Registration

It is always refreshing to get a visit from a product of the USA's efficient system of brainwashing: the joint venture of the public schools and our Leftist controlled media. They have done such a good job in your case that you don't even think it happened.

1. You are only 18 years old, but you think you have all the answers. And since the other adolescents you hang out with agree with you, you figure your answers are beyond question. When you are 10 years older you will realize how little you knew when you were 18 and I guarantee that you will no longer care whether or not 18-year-old kids agree with your point of view. Why? Because at 18 your brain has only barely reached a nearly mature state, and still has development to go through before it is fully mature. Your life's experiences have been phony, in that they have been controlled and free from the responsibilities you will have to take on as an adult. You go to school, play sports and think that is real life. It give you an egocentric view of the world. All that matters to you is yourself and your wants. Once you have lived on your own and been responsible for taking care of yourself for a few years, and done something productive with your life, you will then realize how little you really understand about the world at 18.

2. You don't tell us what you think of your mother directly, but from your comments you must not think much of her, and how she spent her life. That should tell you something about the influences you have been exposed to. You cast off your mother's role in your life, as being insignificant and something that is not at all worthy of emulation. Either you view her as a very bad mother, or you have been taught to think of all homemakers as useless, and not to be copied in your own life. If it is the latter, you are being quite dishonest in your claim that that you have not been exposed to propaganda that has influenced your thinking on this matter. If it is the former, you have my sympathy.

3. You admit that men are stronger than women, but you are not thinking clearly when you ask, "So what?" Men are stronger physically, and are mentally driven to compete, and to win far more than women. It is the reason that men have dominated all societies that have ever existed, and why they always will. If men all at once decided to make all women slaves, there is nothing that women could do about it. From this simple fact, it follows that it is in all women's best interest to make sure that each generation of boys growing up is taught to respect women and to treat them with honor, never hitting them. It is critical that women have a role in society that gives them status and that utilizes their natural abilities. At the same time it is critical that men have their natural abilities and tendencies directed towards positive activities. Men can best have their natures fulfilled through working to support a family. They will direct their aggression towards competing in the workplace, and they will have their need to lead, supplied by heading up a family. They will be taught from birth by their mothers, that women are not the same as men and must be treated differently. Women, who are naturally more nurturing, best have their natures and abilities served by being the great wives and mothers that they are capable of being. They will manage the house, monitor the children and be the single most important influence in their children's young lives.

4. I saw an article in a magazine a while back where an 85 year old lady ran marathons, running the entire 26 miles. Since you don't run the whole 26 miles, does that mean that she is more powerful than you are? While many women can run, have you noticed that the winner of all mixed marathons is always EASILY a man? Although I am much older than you are, I would be happy to take you out on a racquetball court and show you how it is done, or on a basketball court, in a boxing ring, or in a karate match. I would have no doubt about how it would turn out if I were locked into a room with you, if only one of us could come out of it alive. That is what I am talking about when I speak of men being stronger than women. What makes life good for women, is having men that will let life be good for women. Feminism creates men who don't care about women. Feminism creates an animosity between the sexes that is removing the framework from our society, a society that had made life better for women than it had ever been for the entire history of mankind. More women are being beaten and raped today than ever before in American history, and that is only going to get worse because of feminism and other Leftist causes.

5. It was nice of you to admit the possibility that my page is completely accurate in its assertion that most women can be good homemakers. I never said that ALL women can be good homemakers, any more than I said all men can be good husbands. If you can't do the job, then fine don't do it. If you noticed, nowhere on the page do I suggest that the government should force all women to be homemakers. What I want is for the government to get out of the picture altogether on the issue of working women, and let the society decide for itself what it wants!

6. I am sure that in your mind I am a problem. I do not bend with the times, or go with the latest fad. I do not accept the propaganda that is put out by the media and the controlled school system. Instead I think for myself and that is always a problem for those who are following the crowd. So, if you define "the problem" as something that sticks in your craw and makes you uncomfortable because your belief system is shaken, then I am "the problem" and proud to be so. If, on the other hand, you define "the problem" as the destruction of our families, and therefore our society, then I am certainly not "the problem." Those who thought like me were responsible for creating this society in the first place! They are the ones who made life so easy that it was actually possible for people like you to assume that you have no responsibilities to anyone but yourself. Instead of thanking them for what they did, and trying to emulate what they did, so the next generation can have the same great way of life that you have had, you call them "the problem" and are perfectly happy to destroy this society in order to pursue your own selfish interests. That would sound like you, along with the feminists who brainwashed you, are the real problem, doesn't it?

There is still hope for you. Perhaps one day you will grow and realize how important your mother really was in your life. It is just possible that you will see that there are other things than yourself to be concerned with in life, and you may one day find yourself being a good wife and mother. Stranger things have happened. I at least have that hope for you.

This question has an easy answer: Just look that the way things were before, when America was already turned to "my way of thinking." It is my familiarity with the America of the 1950s that makes me so completely certain of what I am saying.

In the 1950s, we had a crime rate that was well below the crime rate of today. There were no school shootings, and the divorce rate was very low compared with today. The average child grew up in a household where both of his real, biological parents, resided. Illegal drugs were nearly unheard of for children. Even legal drugs (alcohol and tobacco) were far less abused by children. Women and children were safe on the street after dark, and the American schools were the best in the world. I am sure that even you can see the difference between that wonderful situation, when compared with the mess we are in today.

1. There were female homosexuals then just like now. Homosexuality was frowned on by the society and therefore those who decided that they just had to practice it, did it covertly. Since that affects less than 4% of the population it is clear to any clear thinking individual that the whole homosexual subject is merely a side issue that should not concern the mainstream of our population. Take for example, Raymond Burr, the actor that played Perry Mason in the television show of the 1950s. He was a homosexual but kept it to himself and nobody was put out about it. He did not lose his job and he was not abused, he just kept his lifestyle to himself.
   
   
2. As for women who did not have an interest in being married, they existed too. However, their numbers were much smaller then because our society was much saner, and promoted the natural roles for men and women. Girls were taught in school that they were going to become homemakers and they looked forward to being like their mothers, who were for the most part good housewives. When girls are not brainwashed with the lesbian propaganda, and boys are taught to accept their natural role in life, most of the boys and girls grow up to become men and women who will form long lasting marriages, with the men providing "the bacon" and the women caring for the home and children.
   
   Once again, we are talking about a very small and insignificant percentage of the female population that will be dead set against marriage. For those, like in the 1950s they can go out and get work. There were "old maid" women who were college professors, and scientists and many other things. Their numbers were small and for the most part, they were of no real import as far as the society was concerned but that option was always there.
   
   
3. Single moms existed in the 1950s too. They had homes set up for unwed mothers. It was considered to be something for which a girl should be very embarrassed over and I think that was a very good thing! You should be embarrassed for creating a bastard child, that you will not be able to support, and that you will no doubt have to take charity for to raise. You should be embarrassed for creating a child that will be raised without a father, which is a cruel deprivation. You should be embarrassed for having sex with someone you are not married to, and have no intention of marrying. When society promoted a wholesome attitude about sex, expecting kids to wait until marriage before having sex, the result was that far more kids did wait until marriage before having sex. And of the ones who didn't, most of them got married to their partner, either before or after a pregnancy made them face the consequences of their actions. The "uptight" attitudes of the 1950s is what created the atmosphere that made marriage a lot more certain of working than the loose and stupid attitudes of today.
   
   As for the women who were single mom, life was hard, like it is today. That is why the lifestyle should be avoided by making wise choices.
   
   
4. The 1950s also had divorcees and widows. Widows were usually cared for by their church and their families. Most people feel great sympathy for a widow. If she is young enough she would normally remarry. That happened to a couple of my Mom's sisters in the 1950s. Others had to tighten their belts and find a job. Their children suffered greatly if that happened and just like today, if the children were left alone, they often turned to crime and got into other mischief. Fortunately, in most cases, there were other family members to help out and take some of the load off from the widow. (It is certainly no better today!)
   
   Divorce in the 1950s was quite different than today. First of all there were very few of them. The vast majority of children lived at home with both of their real parents. So, while today, over 80% of the children are without one of their parents at home, the reverse was true in the 1950s.
   
   Think about it. Would you prefer to drive on a road system that was really safe, and prevented the vast majority of accidents, or one on which 80% of the drivers had accidents but was arguably a little better at taking care of injured drivers? Our society is crushing our children with out divorce rate.
   
   In the 1950s the courts wanted to know who broke up the marriage, because the offending party would be forced to make great concessions to the offended party. If a man cheated on his wife or left her, he would be stuck with big child support payments and lose a big portion of the joint property to his wife. If the wife was cheating on her husband, she could lose custody to the kids and most of her claim to property. Divorce was far less common. There was pain attached to breaking up your marriage, as their should be!
   
   
5. There was domestic abuse in the 1950s, but far less of it than today, because most men were taught that beating up a woman was a unacceptable thing to do. Today boys grow up being told that girls can do anything that boys can do. "Anything" includes being able to defend yourself. Women cannot defend themselves (along with a host of other things) as well as men can. But feminism promotes the lie that they can. To hit a defenseless woman is a disgusting thing to do. Most men of the 1950s believed that. But there is no such thing as a defenseless woman to the man who has been through the feminist brainwashing mill. Hey, women can be policemen, and soldiers. That means women are required to put up their dukes and fight like a man.
   
   The feminist points of dogma, have repercussions. When you say that women are equal to men, that means they have no special rights, or considerations. They are exactly the same as men, and can expect no favors or special treatment. Men who actually believe that nonsense are far more likely to beat up a woman than those who, like myself, feel that woman are not equal with men, but are special, wonderful creatures that deserved to be treated completely differently than men are.

The 1950s were not perfect. They had many of the same problems that we have today. People are imperfect, and any society that is built by humans will be imperfect. If we were wise, we would weigh the two societies, the one of the 1950s, and the one of the 2000s, against each other. If we did that we would find that the 1950s were head and shoulders above what we have now. Forty years of dropping academic achievement, has had a drastic impact upon our society. Forty years of an increasing divorce rate, leaving over 80% of children half orphaned, also has had a drastic impact upon our society. But in order to satisfy the whims and desires of the small number of lesbians, and other ill adjusted women, we have sacrificed more than 4 out of 5 children to the god of feminism, and we have created schools that have no connection whatsoever to excellence. That is what we should be focused on, not the small and insignificant number of lesbians who are unhappy with their lot in life among normal people.

No system is going to cover all circumstances equally well. What a society has to do is to cover the largest majority very well and try to be as easy on the rest as possible. The feminist dominated system today is doing the exact opposite! Our system is very easy on the small minority, while destroying the majority. That is a very destructive way to run a country. What we are doing to our children is criminal. What we are doing to the families of this nation is unforgivable. Feminism is pulling this country down and it is pretty shallow, and even dishonest, reasoning trying to justify feminism by using as supportive arguments the evils of lesbianism, women who refuse to marry, divorce, widowhood, single motherhood, and domestic abuse. With the one possible exception of widows, every one of those categories has been enlarged by feminism. (Even lesbianism is being promoted today as "safe sex" by some feminists!) This reasoning is like shooting both of your parents and crying to the jury, begging for mercy because you are an orphan. Feminism made these social ills, not only worse, but much worse.

The feminists are working hard to produce this attitude in men. They continually beat the drum of equality, as if it were a fact. They force men and women to pretend like women can do anything a man can do. Then with these ridiculous ground rules in place, we are then all forced to deal with the real world, where biology and reality do not care what feminists say, or what the Supreme Court rules.

Women are not morons, they are just different than men, with different talents than men have. Their brains are physically different than men's brains. In business they are at an extreme disadvantage, and I recently saw a feminist on television say that she felt that women would never fill half of the real leadership positions in business because they were not driven towards that role.

I don't get the flower thing either, but I don't care. The smile that a flower puts on my wife's face makes it worthwhile for no other reason. Watching the joy it brings to women warms my heart, just like my wife is warmed by the joy I get from my love of electronics and science, which she has no love for at all. I am so happy that my wife cares for our home, because I live in a tidy, warm and homey place that I could never have created on my own. Together, men and women build things greater than either could build separately. At least they do when feminism gets out of the way and lets them.

Women are nurturing. I remember when I was teaching electronics in the Navy, one of the very few female sailors we had coming through the class, set to cleaning up the instructors' desks and doing general housekeeping duties that she was never assigned. No male sailor ever had the thought cross his mind to do such a thing. But it was a nice thing to do, and women often are like that. That is why they are so great with kids. They tolerate behavior that Dad would punish for, and they care about the little things a child brings to them to share, in a way that only a mother can. Men are inferior to women in this area.

In the areas that you mentioned, women on average are inferior to men, and they always have been. They always will be. But why is that even a concern? Because feminism made it a concern. Feminism is striving to drive a square peg into a round hole, and they are using the government as a hammer to do it with. All of the crazy and destructive side effects from this process are the chips flying from the once healthy society we once had. If the peg and hole are the same shape the fit is smooth and creates few problems. When they differ, the problems are many. So, it was before feminism, where the roles of men and women fit their own capabilities. The divorce rate was very low, and most kids were raised by both of their real parents. Ladies and gentlemen grew old with their families intact. As they grew old, their children and grandchildren were around them and honored them. Today the reverse is true. And families are coming apart as fast they the come together.

Anyone who remembers his childhood, and what his mother meant to him, would never call her a "moron." She was different than Dad, and if you are honest about it, you were happy for the difference. Women have their own kind of genius, and all civilizations have benefited from it. They do not make the best rulers, or the best businessmen, but they make homes the best that they can be. They raise the next generation to be strong and healthy, rather than warped and twisted. For certain areas of life we stand on the shoulders of all the men who have come before us and did their part to make it a better world for their children. But in other areas of our society we are just as indebted to the soft and caring shoulders of the women who came before us.

The point is that women are different from men and should be treated differently than men are. They should have different roles in society and they should be honored for the things they do better than we do, instead of having them forced into doing that which they are inferior at. The real villains in this play, are the feminists who are driving this process along.

Some folks are waking up, and I can testify to that from the email I receive. You would think with a web page like I have, I would be buried with hate mail. But most of my mail is supportive. There are a lot of folks who are sick and tired of the oppressive government, and that my unhappy friend is where revolutions are born. You won't find these people in the Democratic party, or even the Republican party. (Both of these organizations are anti-male and anti-traditional America.) The conservatives are working hard to "conserve" the destructive changes brought upon us by the Left in the 1960s. The ones who are waking up are working outside of those corrupt systems.

You may be right in your pessimism. America may be dead, and finished. If things do not change, America will be a third world country in just a few more decades. But I have more respect than that for the American people who built this country, and I have hope that they will once again ignite the passionate hatred of tyranny that created this great country in the first place. I hope to see them throw down the tyrants and reestablish the Manifest Destiny that drove Americans to raise a great nation upon this land. The race is on and we will see whether the Leftist enemies of America can destroy her completely before the people arise to protect themselves. Join with me in attempting to inspire the people to do what needs to be done! What do you have to lose, besides a yoke around your neck?

Nice try, but that analogy just won't wash. How many "Husband" magazines are out there on the magazine shelves? Now check out the "Bride" magazines. Notice the difference? Women dream of marrying a good man and having a family. They fantasize about it, with their magazines, and their romantic novels. How many people who later became slaves do you know who fantasized about it, or free men who dreamed of how wonderful it would be to be a slave?

Chivalry, is a code of ethics by which a man gives up to the weaker sex, many of the things he could easily demand or take, because of his natural physical dominance (granted by biology), as a form of civilized and gracious behavior. If Chivalry were truly slavery there never would have been a woman's movement because it would have been easily crushed by the male "masters." Women would never have a prayer of physically challenging men if men seriously opposed them.

The traditional roles of men and women came from biology. The natural tendencies of both of the sexes are best served by those roles.

On the other side of the coin, men and women both have selfish tendencies which are curbed by focusing upon creating a strong family. Men naturally tend towards promiscuity, and violence. The family reigns them in and redirects their competitive and aggressive natures towards constructive and productive endeavors in the work place in order to support their families. Instead of being a drain on society, married men are instrumental in shaping the framework of our society. Women naturally tend to focus upon clothes and beauty items, and shopping for trinkets. A single woman is usually frittering her life away. But put her in a family, and her talents are put to excellent use. She runs the home and guides the children. If she has a good husband who properly supports her, and their children, she will be a major force in shaping the next generation.

Sure, taking your responsibility seriously is a big crimp on your free time. For 99.9% of the people, showing up for work is not something they want to do, it is something they have to do, if they want to eat. We are all slaves to our stomachs. We must eat or we die. If we want to live in a crime free society, we must teach our children to be law abiding, and it has repeatedly been demonstrated that this is best done by a mother at home, backed up by a father who lives in the same house as his biological offspring.

Biology is what demands this, and so if we are slaves, it is to our very nature. Whining about it is really rather useless. Instead, what smart people will do, is to make lemonade rather than crying about all the lemons they have been handed. Women are not men, and men are not women. Women logically will take on the responsibilities that they are best suited for, and men will take on those that they are best suited for. If the Federal Government had stayed out of the way and let things go on naturally, you would have seen how incapable women are of actually competing with men in most occupations. (And therefore would have stopped trying. Just like they stopped trying to qualify for men's professional sports.) Feminism is a sham held up by oppression by the state.

For example, if we had not lowered the physical standards in the occupations that very much need them (i.e. policeman, fireman, soldier, etc.) we would have nearly zero women in those professions. Lowering standards does not improve the quality of the employee who has to meet them. Therefore, it is not that women have suddenly became capable of being policemen or soldiers, but it is that policemen and soldiers have become less useful and capable of performing their jobs. Those who promote women into jobs through government coercion are not interested in protecting our society from criminals, or protecting our country from aggression. They are only interested in their own selfish agenda and nothing else. Instead of being happy with whom they are, they look at men with jealousy, and hate the fact that they themselves are women

There is nothing more disgusting about the feminist movement to me than the absurd, and condescending arrogance that feminists ooze from every pour as they insist that the American citizens do not have the right to hire whomever they choose, for whatever reason they choose, and that the Federal Government is obligated to force the feminist agenda down America's collective throat. They have no reason, or biological support for their contention that the sexes are exactly the same except for the plumbing. There is a tremendous amount of scientific evidence to show that they are wrong. But they still expect everyone to play the fool for their sham.

Well, sorry but those days are over. There are more and more folks who are finally standing up and admitting that the Emperor has no clothes. And it is about time too!

Shelly,

You must mean some other web site. I think women are humans too. I think that they deserve to not only be treated as humans, but as the very special creatures that they are. Women are not slaves, and while they certainly are sexual beings they are much more than that. Women are sometimes rational and sometimes not, and in some areas they are as intelligent as men, while in other areas they are not.

A point of disagreement is that women do need men to take care of them. A woman who is not protected by men in one way or another will be living in constant danger. The men of the police and the military give her protection today and so feminists like you think that is enough. Many women are finding that is not the case. As our society continues to deteriorate, more and more women will realize that men who are their protectors are to be valued greatly when compared with the male predators who will make up the bulk of any society where feminism rules. When men start viewing women as being able to take care of themselves, men no longer give women the special consideration that is needed for women to get along in a society where men are present. In the long run, a woman will be either a special creature, treasured and respected, or a sexual object to be used. Men have a natural biological urge to gravitate towards the latter, but civilization teaches them to accept the former. Feminism is destroying that civilizing instruction and creating men who no longer wish to be good husbands and protectors for their women. You and other feminists will one day realize that you have been used as pawns in the power struggle going on in America and many other nations of the world. These power brokers don't care about women and they never have. They use women as disposable tokens, and once used for their purpose, they cast them on the heap of what they consider unimportant females, who have broken homes, undisciplined children, and a husband who left years ago.

Welcome to the wonderful world of feminism, where equal opportunity means that women can work fewer hours and accomplish less, but still complain that they are not making as much money. If you call them on it, you are a sexist pig!

-Al-

I am not familiar with the case you are referring to but when you say, "Congratulations, Sport !" to someone killing a kid, it sounds like you are in support of the action. I am glad to hear that you are not.

Of course I know why you are angry, it is the same reason that I made my web page in the first place. In my essay, Why Boys Don't Count I discuss many of the things that the quote you inserted here is mentioning. When I started this page up, I was sick of listening to the wacked out feminists spewing their disgusting garbage out through the media, and through the government and the schools completely unopposed. Nowhere was there a voice that was taking a hard-line against the basic ideas of feminism. Even this guy you quoted had to make sure that he was politically correct, and lead in with the obligatory feminist obeisance with the statement, " I say this as someone who believes wholeheartedly in equality of opportunity for men and women." Even when you can find someone who says something against feminism, they bend over backwards to appear feminist at heart. That is what the media has done to my country, and yours is no better my Brit friend. Why? Because the same group of people own the media in both countries and don't you doubt it for a minute.

We definitely have our work cut out for us.

Guy ,

Killing baby girls is the one of the most disgusting things that I can think of. If you are so beaten down that you can celebrate that you are already licked. And I do not want anyone to get cancer, even the feminists. If it comes down to war to recover our freedom then so be it but let's not get wallowed down in hate. Healthy anger that moves you to appropriate action is great, destructive hatred will only bring you down. War is the place for bloodshed, and it may come to that, but until it does, we need to find positive things to do to fight these Leftist oppressors.

America is already on the road to destruction. We are displacing the people of America, dismantling our culture and institutions that created this country and replacing them will Marxist egalitarianism. Before the Leftist invasion in the 1960s (about the same time the Beatles did) America was not about equality. America was about freedom and opportunity. Enforced equality destroys both freedom and opportunity, and therefore, Marxist egalitarianism is destroying America. It may not be “buring in Hell” as you put it, but will soon be wallowing in poverty like the Soviet Union collapsed into.

The goal of the Marxist is to sow discontent, and disruption. They wish to cut people lose from their heritage and culture. Marx taught that such people are malleable and easily controlled. That is why the Leftist feminists are pushing for such ridiculous laws to be put in place. Have you noticed that the numbers of women required in the definition of proper “representation” for females in any job is the one provided by those on the extreme Left, and the laws are always based upon their point of view? Instead of focusing upon America and upon women for your hate, you need to study who it is that is driving the Leftists in their cause. Who provides the media support for them, without which they would never have gotten anywhere. Who finances their movement? There is where your anger should be directed.

I have often wondered when the threshold will be crossed. As America is being dismantled, when will the pain of watching your people and your land being destroyed overwhelm the fear of losing your current state of comfort? That is the real issue. At what point will the people be willing to sacrifice their “bread and circuses” in order to regain their freedom?

No, PC language would say, "You must take every opportunity your government hands to you, but you do nothing on your own.

The problem certainly is Demographics, but it is not merely the graying of America. It is a problem brought about on purpose by those on the Left. They have "convinced" (through the oppressive tactics of our government) Americans not have children, and to dismantle their world class school system in order to create the educational nightmare which exists today.

I, like you, hope to see American men rise up and take this country back from the Leftist egalitarians and return us to the land of my forefathers. Things look bleak at the moment, but there is always hope.

Ah yes, a case of full blown feminism is in evidence here. Note the anger and hatred expressed openly. Note the advanced symptoms of repeated name calling. Dementia Feministia has set in and fully blocked reality to her mind as she dreams of power, where none exists. It is very sad to see when the condition goes this far.

It is a "woman's world," in this subject's mind, in countries where nearly all of the power positions are held by men, as they have been in all societies that have ever existed. If she were joking it would be a humorous idea to advance, but since she is serious, we must admit that we are observing the clear indication of the complete distortion of perception by her condition. And to fairly wallow in joy at the idea of women dying is the sign of a very strange and abnormal shift in ethical perception and loyalty quotient, for she is ecstatic at the idea of those of her own group who are being killed. The number of females who have died in battle as "soldiers" are so insignificantly small as to be hardly worthy of mention, if it were not so absurd that any women were ever placed in that position.

Note also the joy expressed at that which is completely the reverse of reality. She is delighted at men being scared, and small. Of course if men were actually frightened by feminism, they would do with feminism what they have always done with anything that they have been frightened by. How many wolves do you see in any major city? Lions, tigers, alligators, or poisonous snakes? When man finds something to be truly threatening, he wipes it out. Since feminism still exists, it is obvious that man has not yet been truly threatened by it. It is most fortunate for this particular subject, in her hallucinatory state. All sane people admit that women are on average, smaller than men. To be delighted in the smallness of men is like being delighted by the brightness of night or the darkness of day. She is a very sad case indeed.

The normal female brain is very advanced in vocabulary manipulation, which allows its owner to be quite adept at choosing the correct words to express her ideas. In the case of advanced feminism, however, it nearly always causes a crippling of that portion of the brain which controls word selection, and they invariably fail to find clear expression in normal speech. Study this "lady's" post and note the repeated need to fall back upon the weakened language skills coping technique of using obscene and vulgar terminology to fill in for the unknown correct terminology, or to create unnecessary emphasis. Most pathetic.

Lauren, thank you for the kind wishes. Of course no two people are created equal. That is a common myth that has been abused beyond belief. We are all created unequal, thank goodness. We are different and therefore have different abilities and talents. We have different desires and goals. Different things make us happy. That is why having the government forcing us to treat each person as if he were some machined part, coming off an assembly line, and interchangeable with all other parts, is ridiculous, counter-productive and even dangerous.

Men and women for thousands of years have put their differing talents to good use so that society could benefit. Though almost no one actually reaches their "highest potential," I would say that probably the largest number of the people who have, were mothers who were homemakers. If you read the biographies of most great men, they have become who they were to a great extent because of what their mothers taught them in their youth. I do not know of any other role, occupation or station in human existence that has been held in such high regard as that of mother. To insult a man's mother is worse than to insult the man himself, and will lead to aggressive retaliatory action quicker.

I am certainly glad you enjoyed your visit to my site. Come back anytime.

I am sorry. :-) I am writing for a couple of other web sites, and my wife's web site and so I have not done much with this web site in a while, except for this guest book. Since you asked so nicely I will try to get another one up this month sometime.

Sam, as I have pointed out in my articles on the web page, feminists hate traditional women more than they hate men. The reason of course is that in order for feminism to succeed in its goal, men and women must be identical and interchangeable in all ways. The homemaker is a nurturing and caring person that is more interested in her family than moving up some corporate ladder. She is different than man, and that is not acceptable to feminists. Therefore, they have attacked the homemaker continuously, calling her names and describing her in the most demeaning fashion. From feminists we have been told that homemakers are stupid, uneducated, slaves, donkeys, and without ambition, drive or merit.

When the movies, schools and government also continually promote this completely false stereotype, it is no wonder that women are ashamed of being "only a housewife." They feel like they need to do something more to properly impress the other women who are avoiding their own responsibilities to their families. It is a little bit like a law-abiding, honest man apologizing to a con man because he doesn't rip people off.

A mother who is a homemaker works as hard or harder than anybody. She does a great work, and an important work, and our society is feeling her loss greatly today. A homemakers should hold her head up high and proudly say, "I am a wife and a mother, who is nurturing my family and raising the next generation to be strong, honest, educated, and well-mannered." It is only the most important job on earth. Feminists realizing this, understand that they must make this critical job look bad in order to justify their destructive cause in the eyes of most women.

The feminist mind shows its true nature to anyone who wants to see it, as it continually takes the wholesome, productive, critical role of homemaker and holds it up to ridicule and hate. A woman who is to proudly be a homemaker today must be a very strong minded individual, to look past the propaganda and see the real value of what she is doing. A man too must be able to move past the lies and rhetoric that he has been exposed to, in order to properly appreciate the role his wife is fulfilling in making a home for their entire family. He must shoulder the difficult burden of supporting his family, so that his wife can be free to raise their children. All the while they must stand up under the constant barrage of hate and anger from the feminists and their disciples in our society, many of whom you have seen dropping off a sample of their mindless hate in this guest book. Traditional life is not for the faint of heart in the current feminist saturated environment we live in, but it is the most important thing a couple starting out today can do!

Paul, have you ever noticed how the Leftists try very hard to belittle IQ test results? The fact is that there is no other test that can be given to as correctly predict job performance (even one that is specifically designed to test job related skills!) than an intelligence test. The Leftist controlled courts have banned the use of an IQ test as part of the job interview process, despite this fact. They claim that the tests are culturally biased or otherwise flawed, but when push comes to shove, IQ matters. Then, they love to use the word "stupid", which really means having a low IQ, as if low IQ is a reasonable concept but high IQ is not. Excuse the digression, but this is yet another area in which common sense is blatantly attacked by the Leftists.

You have put your finger right on the button. Common sense is so sadly lacking in every Leftist cause, that it is only by distracting people away from using it, that they can continue to survive. That is the root cause of why they are such great name callers, and dispensers of ridicule. There is no possibility of calm and rational thought, founded upon common sense, when the whole discussion is about emotionally charged labels and whether or not they apply. This juggling act they are attempting cannot be continued indefinitely, and when it falters, we will see the whole thing fall down around them.

Thanks for your intelligent, and insightful post!

-Al-

Phoebe,

It is nice you have something to believe in, no matter how misguided it may be. This page has been far from a waste of time. Over 26,000 people have visited it and that means it is of interest to a great many folks. Of course it is not the most visited web page on the Internet, or even the most visited of my web pages but it has certainly been worth the time that I have invested in it.

It is rather silly of you to suggest that feminism has nothing to do with men. Men are affected at least as much as women are by the feminist movement. As children they are no longer raised by their mothers but by strangers employed to simulate mothers. As students they are condemned for being what they are, and as adults they are discriminated against for who they are. Their children will be deprived of a mother’s care as they grow up. They will almost certainly have their marriage end in divorce. They will be far more likely to see their children turn to drugs or crime because of the side effects of feminism. At work they will be forced to deal with people who are too sensitive for jokes or other normal male behavior, and they must pretend that they believe other than they really do in order to be promoted or even remain employed. All of these things are things which specifically affect men, and are therefore very much a man’s concern.

What you women want may depend upon you but what you get depends upon men and their malleability to your desires, as has been the case for the entire history of mankind. Women are physically too weak to force men to do their bidding so they must rely on their femininity to coerce men to accede to their desires. This has traditionally been through the role of husband and wife interaction. Feminism has tried to upset that apple cart by getting the government to be their “husband” and have him force their will upon others. As long as men are content to sit still for oppression, your feminist desires will be forced down all our throats. However, oppression has a way of breeding revolt, and there is this little matter of a backlash that will not be pleasant for anyone when it happens.

The third world is moving into the USA at a rate of well over a million a year, and so we will not long have to send money to other countries in order to help third world countries, we will soon be one. But that is another issue. And what do you think I am doing by fighting feminism on my web page? If our families are to survive, we must focus on keeping them together and that means to oppose feminism. If our kids continue to raise themselves then we will continue to see outrageous and illegal conduct in them. That affects everyone , men and women. In order to save kids from drugs we must eliminate feminism, and start having children supervised by their mothers again. This is something that mankind has known all along. The way you shape the young mind affects the way the teenager and even the adult will act. Turning that job over to someone else or ignoring it altogether as feminism is promoting, is a formula for disaster.

Thanks for stopping by, and it is never a waste of time to provide me with an opportunity to show how damaging, oppressive, and pure “rubbish” feminism really is.

To those who want to continue to simply, and unthinkingly, promote the feminist dogma I am sure my page would appear to be a "waste of space." Of course to anyone who likes to use their brains, and think for themselves, they will find a discussion of these issues to be interesting and useful, no matter which side of the discussion they are on.

I suppose that you consider it "intelligent" to be rude and uncivilized in your comments.

Besides being the most wonderful woman that I have ever met, my wife is also one of the most intelligent. My wife's IQ is above that of the average doctor, and yet, in your complete ignorance you try and label her as "stupid."

And of course you try and label me as "stupid" as well. I have already dealt with that ridiculous accusation before in my guestbook (it is about all you feminists can come up with). I find that the only effective weapon that feminists (and Leftists in general) have, aside from the totalitarian actions of the government, is name calling. You call people who disagree with you "sexist," "stupid," "inbred" and/or "Neanderthal," as if passing out those ridiculous labels were somehow an argument in favor of your cause. To those who are perceptive enough to identify these tactics for what they are, it only weakens your case, which was already extremely anemic.

Alie,

Your post was quite entertaining. It is a clear indication of the current state of effectiveness of the feminist propaganda effort. You are right in the mold with other feminists, where you can do little more than call names. You called me dumb twice, stupid once, old once, and also suggested that I was beat and rejected as a child. You have been programmed well. No thought, just vitriol. If you can't argue, call names. You are a perfect feminist clone. The leftist attempt to destroy the influence of those who are older and wiser, who would carry on the culture, the heritage and the wisdom of previous generations, has been exceptionally effective with you as well.

Of course I am not dumb. As I have stated on several other occasions in this guest book (You might try reading a few of the entries. It would be educational for you.) I am in possession of a great deal of external evidence to the contrary, so that accusation is nothing but noise, which destroys your credibility. Just because you disagree with someone does not make him dumb, nor does it make him stupid. You make no points for your position by throwing mud, at least not in this guest book.

The fact that you are in a very small minority, being a child who lives with both of her real parents, is interesting but that is all. Since feminism hit our country, the percentage of children who are raised by both their biological parents has fallen below 20%. That means for every one like you, there are at least 5 who do not live with both of their biological parents. So, your case is an exception. I am glad for you that it is the case but it says nothing about feminism. Before feminism hit, the vast majority of kids lived with both their real parents.

Bill Clinton also goes to church. So what? Have you studied the Mafia at all? Many of their members are Catholics who go to church each week. Stating you go to church means little or nothing as far as this discussion goes. There are a great many feminists who are trying to break down the many Christian churches because they know that those churches are their mortal enemies. They are quite active in their churches! The same is true of other faiths as well, although the progression of destruction has not yet been as effective there.

If you had taken the time to read my page, or even this guest book, you would realize why your question about why not Mr. Mom, is silly. Men are different than woman are. If you would have read the article on my web page called THE BOTTOM LINE you would realize that the female temperament is strikingly different than the male temperament. Women can do a far better job with children than men. They have demonstrated that for thousands of years, which you would know if you had actually studied history, rather than that feminist drivel they have fed you in school. In the book Brain Sex which I reference in THE BOTTOM LINE there is a great deal of scientific evidence that female brains and male brains are physically different, and that is why they function differently.

In my article about abortion, the only point that I made was that two children who are equally developed, one inside the womb and one outside the womb, are equally valuable and equally worthy of the right to live. That does not take a Ph.D. in biology to understand. Even a 16 year old should be able to understand it.

But let us take it a little farther still. Here are a few facts that you may or may not know. The tenor of your post leads me to doubt that you do:

• When an abortion occurs, which is always after 6 weeks, (almost no woman even knows for sure that she is pregnant until she is at least 6 weeks along) the child has a heart that is beating, and his brain is producing measurable brainwaves. When they are deciding whether or not an adult human is still alive these are two of the most important items that they check. When an abortion is done, it stops a beating heart and destroys a working brain. It is obviously taking the life of a living being.
• The unborn baby has his own DNA from the moment of conception. All other cells in the mother's body have only her DNA, but the baby does not. It is a separate human life from the very beginning.
• A newborn infant is not human by your feminist standards. It cannot speak. It cannot walk. It cannot reason. It doesn't even look much like an adult human. It cannot even roll itself over. It is completely dependant upon others for its survival.
• The only difference between a one cell zygote and an adult man is time. All humans were zygotes at one time. All human zygotes, if their existence is not somehow terminated, will become adult humans. If you kill the zygote, or the developing human at any other point along the way, the adult will be removed from existence. To kill a child of any age is to kill the adult it would have become.
• Prior to the feminist movement taking over, the AMA condemned abortion as the slaughter of human life, and abortionists as the lowest possible scoundrels. Those views were held by the vast majority of medical doctors, who as you will note, agreed with what I am saying.

Thanks for giving us the opportunity to see what the feminists have done to a 16 year old mind. It is sad, but it must be faced.

Your post has two component to it. I will deal with the last first.

It is a very sad fact of life that alcohol destroys lives. I wish this were not true but it is. Many men have had to deal with alcoholic wives and many women have had to deal with alcoholic husbands. Believe it or not, it happens to all types of families whether or not they are traditional. Nothing is perfect, including traditional marriage. If you marry an alcoholic, or anyone else with emotional problems you are going to have a sad life. With the way kids are being raised today, there are a lot more people with emotional problems today. So, I do pity you, not for being a "happy traditional" woman, but for making a poor choice in your marriage partner. It is a very difficult choice to make, and seldom do folks use their heads as much as their hearts in making it. In today's society, your situation is so common that you will find little sympathy from the general populous. You are just one more statistic to go along with all the other statistics. That should tell you something about where our society is headed.

The other component of your post is your trying to make it sound as if your life somehow makes feminism more logical or acceptable. It is like trying to say that since you had a car wreck, and were injured, it therefore makes sense for others to walk in front of a car on purpose. You may find this hard to believe, but there are a great many feminist mothers who live at home with their parents too. In fact feminism breeds divorce, and causes more pain and suffering like you have gone through for more people than ever before in our history. Today, over 80% of kids in the USA are not raised by their real mom and dad at home. Over 80%! When I was kid I hardly knew anyone whose parents were divorced and not living together. The few that I did know stood out like sore thumbs and everybody pitied them. There were alcoholics then too. There were divorces then too, but the numbers were extremely small when compared with today. So, don't tell me not to pity the feminist, or their children. They will almost certainly need it sooner or later.

1. "Encouraging" is not "forcing," no matter how many fake coughs you use to try and cover up the word switch. A society can very well encourage intelligent women to reproduce without forcing them to do so.

2. Of course there was no mention of "over-breeding" in the article "The Hidden Factor," and so your "straw man" argument is merely noise.

3. The article did not speak to education but to intelligence. The two are completely separate. You can put a monkey in a classroom for 20 years and he will be no more intelligent than he was when he went in. The same is true of people. You can educate, but you cannot create intelligence. Intelligence, as a base starting point, is strictly a biological quantity. (Of course you can decrease intelligence through diet or damaging the brain in other ways.) You may have 12 intelligent children who never become educated, but they will have the potential to be educated, and their children will too. Therefore, the potential of the society is increased by their presence in it. Education is merely knowledge of various sorts. Intelligence is the ability to manipulate that knowledge.

4. Where did you get the number 12 from? Certainly not my article. You mentioned as an alternative, the number 4 which actually would fit nicely into what the article was saying. Right now those with high IQ's are having about 1.5 children. That is a suicidal birth rate. It will, over time extinguish any group that continues to reproduce at that rate.

5. For the sake of argument, since you brought it up, anyone who saw the movie, Cheaper By the Dozen will realized the spurious nature of your argument. An intelligent set of parents can do wonders with a dozen children. Also, as the older ones grow, they become contributors to the family rather than just takers. They help financially by getting jobs. They help with the younger children's homework, and in supervising the younger children. Thanks to the feminist movement, and other Leftist causes, the piggish government has driven the tax rate up so high that a large family will have to struggle to make ends meet, but I know several families who are doing just that. It can be done.

6. It is absurd to claim that the high end of the intelligent spectrum reproducing will somehow suffocate the food production capabilities more than the low end, which is reproducing in huge numbers right now. Twelve intelligent children are going to be far more able to fend for themselves without turning to crime than twelve stupid children will. That is a fact of life. IQ and crime are inversely related. Also, the intelligent children will be far more likely to make valuable contributions to society than stupid ones would once they grow up.

7. The idea that America could not afford to feed its own children, when it is allowing in millions of foreign immigrants into this country without having any trouble feeding them, is ridiculous. The United States is not in the throws of a population explosion due to its birth rate. Right now the native born Americans are not even reproducing themselves. These women are not having 4 children. On average they are not even having 2 children.

8. While you try and use your wild claims and numbers to cover up the facts, there remains the point of my article, still standing untarnished: if you inspire all the most intelligent women to not reproduce, while the less intelligent women do reproduce, that will have the net effect of removing the genes of the most intelligent women from the gene pool, and over time that will decrease the overall intelligence of the society.

Thanks for the scenic misdirection in at attempt to skirt the issue.

In my guest book I have to deal with all sorts of confused people. I get the adolescent child who parrots what her mother or her teacher has told her, and has not yet had the chance to think a real thought on her own yet. I get the brainwashed, hard core lemming, who is completely intent on following the rest of the fools over the cliff. I get the lesbian who is panting so profusely to become a man, that she no longer has any control over her own thinking process, but you are a special case.

Go back to my main web page and read what it says directly below the buttons for signing and reading the guest book. Too complicated for you? I will put it here for you so even you can find it:

I respond to all signers, so there is a great deal of additional material here!

Unless you are completely illiterate, that is notification in advance that if you enter anything in my guest book it will be responded to. That statement of intent has been there for close to two years. Even though you were so careless as to miss the warning clearly posted on my web page, if you had only bothered to read any of the entries in my guest book you would have noticed that each of them have been responded to from me. So, your accusations are as devoid of merit as are your points of "argument."

Coming from someone like yourself, the accusation of stupidity is a compliment. Not only do I "honestly think [your] entry was so empty" of real content, I will prove it! Let us look at your deep, profound, and parable filled entry:

now, i'm really not sure why i'd want to become a man, if they are this jealous of women. are you afraid to post this entry in your guestbook? i thought so.

As you can see, not only was I not afraid to post your entry once, but now it is up twice. That makes your last two sentences look pretty ridiculous, in addition to being demonstrably, and completely, wrong. That leaves only your first sentence for any consideration at all for content. I have already pointed out that there is no sane reason why you would want to become a man, since it is physically impossible. So that first phrase is either absurd, or insane, or both. The only thing left is your assertion that men are jealous of women. You support that accusation with no facts or arguments. There are not even any reasonable inferences that can be derived from it, because it is disconnected from reality. I am not jealous of women. I do not know of anyone who is. So, your statement is empty of meaning.

Since you frown on stupidity, it would do you well to remove your own and learn the definition of a parable. (Although that technically makes you ignorant rather than stupid, sometimes it is difficult to differentiate between the two.) It is a story that carries with it a moral. When the listener hears the story it will bring the moral into clearer focus and make it easier to remember in the future. For example the old story of The Boy Who Cried Wolf. That was a parable. Your post, on the other hand, had no story, no moral and no content. There was no parable, let alone "parables."

In my guest book you will often see young girls mimic what they heard in their school propaganda. While they, like you, love to call names and spit out cliches, they have no substance to their beliefs. They, like you, are so brainwashed that they could not see a fact if it bit them on the nose.

The feminist never fails to fall back upon the only weapon they really know how to use: name calling. You three times referred to me as "stupid," and when that was not going to be enough, mockingly referred to me as "sweetheart," and "little boy." You may think that is impressive, and perhaps to your adolescent friends it may be, but here you are not dealing with some inexperienced teenager. I know that I am of above average intelligence from IQ tests I have taken, technical training that I have both taken and given, and from numerous other independent sources. Therefore, calling me stupid only shows your own inability to judge intelligence. The other two attempts at insult, are nothing but an indication of your lack of ability to deal with the facts of my web page, and therefore you are reduced to name calling.

The feminist is always asking me to "give up," as if truth was just going to go away because they don't like it. Tough break lady, but that is not going to happen. Also, your feminist hatred came to the surface and exposed itself for a moment. That is always refreshing, because it lets others see how sick your philosophy is. You wish me dead in hopes that my knowledge will disappear with me. But alas for you, truth is truth, and relies upon no one man to perpetuate it. A thousand years from now, when your feminist heroes will be unremembered, there will still be male chauvinists, and there will be women who are mothers and homemakers, and there is nothing that you can do about it. The joke is therefore on you!

Amit,

It is interesting that there is a separate category for female chess players, and while their play is quite good, it is always a little short of the play of the best men. The geniuses with the very highest IQ's are always men as well. Where women excel, feminism is trying to numerically diminish their presence, and where they are inferior, the feminists are trying to numerically increase their presence. When someone honestly answers for themselves the question, "Why do they do this?" Then and only then will they truly understand feminism for what it is. They will then see that feminism has nothing to do with promoting the status of women, or improving their lot in any way. It has absolutely nothing to do with improving our society in any way. It is nothing but a power play by a relatively small number of elitists and nothing more.

It is interesting that you have such a low opinion of your father and your brother. It probably says more about you than anything else you could say.

It is clear that you have not read very much of my web page since you make the mistake of trying to convince me that there are men feminists. I have had to point that very thing out to the dull witted feminists who continually fail to make the distinction between women, and feminists. My page is pro-women and anti-feminist, whether the feminist is male or female, matters not at all. It is the destructive philosophy of feminism that I am against, not women.

Feminism is the driving force behind abortion. Whether you personally are in support of abortion or not is of no consequence. It does not relieve you from your responsibility for supporting a cause that has slaughtered over 30 million children in the womb. While there have always been men who are scum and willing to let their babies be killed by abortion, they never joined together and created a political machine which promoted legalized abortion, and which caused abortion to actually become legal. Feminists did that, and feminists must take the full responsibility for their actions. If you are a feminist, you are responsible.

The feminist religion is quite flagrant in its promotion of abortion to women, as if it were their right to be able to kill their children. While women may not be "forced" to have an abortion by the feminists, they are thousands of times more likely to have an abortion today because they have been brainwashed by the feminists into believing that it is not a bad thing to kill their child. You can pussy foot around that issue all you want but the fact is that abortion is legal today because of feminism and for no other reason. Feminism stands guilty of the murder of over 30 million babies.

You create a simple and stupid straw man in trying to claim that all, or even a significant number, of the divorces that the vast majority of marriages today are ending in, are because of rape and abuse. That is absurd and you know it. Even with the divorces, and women leaving their homes there is more abuse today because of feminism than there ever was before. Men today are taught that women are tough. They can be soldiers, and cops, and firemen. Women are equal in every way with men. So, men who believe that nonsense, have started punching women out, like they would a man. And the feminists go around acting like they have done those poor ladies a favor. That is pretty sick.

It appears from your post that you did not read many of the articles that you are trying to comment on. You say that feminism will not make the people of our civilization dumber, but you completely missed the reason why you are wrong. If the most intelligent women have careers instead of babies, then their genes are lost to the gene pool. That will cause a downturn in the intelligence level of any society which embraces feminism. It is unavoidable. In the past, intelligent women had large families. Today, it is mostly the uneducated women who are having large families. The obvious result of this process is a gradual, but unavoidable, decrease in intelligence in the community.

Your rambling and disjointed statement on women being sex objects is muddy at best. A woman who wears short skirts is viewed as a sex object by the majority of men who look at her dressed like that. She would have to be stupid indeed not to realize that. As I have said many times before, women who dress as sex objects wish to be sex objects. That is not all they wish to be, but unless they are very stupid, they know that is what they are. Women can be very attractive without dressing like a street walker. There is a real difference between beauty (being attractive) and playing to sexual arousal.

It is a shame that you spent no time reading my guest book before you wasted your verbiage upon such repetition. I have repeatedly said that feminist men are as bad as feminist women. I have said that single men are not better parents than single women. I often wonder if all feminists share a single brain cell and pass it back and forth among themselves, because they all say the same thoughtless things.

I am not surprised that your parents are divorced. Viewing the rest of your comments I am forced to think that your comment that your mother was taking "crap" from your dad is as ridiculous as the rest. I was not there to see for myself, so we will have to pass by that single event, which is completely beside the point of my web page.

You make the same silly mistake that virtually all the feminists do. You think that if you can point out one case where kids turned out normally after a divorce, or after a mother abandons her children for a career, then that means that all kids will. That is the same as saying that just because one smoker does not die from smoking related illness, no smoker will die from smoking related illness. The fact is that kids who are abandoned by working mothers, on average are going to be worse off than those who were not. Get over it, because it is not going away.

Perhaps, oh very intelligent one, you will one day be able to couple some education, and some wisdom together with your massive mental capabilities and realize that all people who lived before 1970 were not morons. For thousands of years humans have realized that there are differences between the sexes. Men and women are not the same. They have different capabilities. The vast majority of women are infinitely more adept at dealing with children than men are. The extremely small number of men who can effectively be a "Mr. Mom" are not worth considering. As you would know if you had bothered to read my guest book, I have made it clear repeatedly that society cannot logically shape itself around the miniscule minority at the expense of the vast majority.

There is nothing degrading in being a mother or a housewife. My wife is a just such a person, and so is my mother. My grandmothers, and their mothers were as well. Each and every one of these women was honored and respected by their families and their communities. What is degrading is for someone like you to come along and claim that they were somehow less than you are. That is insulting and just plane wrong. The hand that rocks the cradle has more power than any other in the long run.

Contrary to your confused assertion, wisdom is not ignorance. If it were, you be wisdom itself.

My wife always gets a good laugh at the unthinking and unknowing feminists who mockingly extend their pity towards her. Since she is very happy, and after nearly 24 years of marriage, she finds your comment ridiculous and bred from ignorance. Save your pity for yourself. You are the one who will have to live your life under the yoke of feminist bondage. You will have to suffer the divorce, and collapsed relationships that feminism brings to it adherents. If you have children, they will suffer from your ignorance and neglect. If you do not have children you will remove your contribution to the gene pool of the future, and therefore will have nothing to say beyond your own selfish existence. I truly pity you.

Well said! Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Yes, by the thinking of today, there was something seriously wrong with my childhood. I had both of my real, biological parents living in my home with me. I had parents that cared about me and supervised my activities when I was growing up. I had parents that taught me respect for my parents and for my elders in general. Yes, by your feminist standards, I had a very wrong childhood, filled with love, rules and attention.

As far as inferiority goes, I have discussed this over and over again in my guest book. I do think that women are physically inferior to men for sports, lifting and other things. It is not a vague “some reason” that makes me think that. It is fact, pure and simple, and everyone who has the slightesly open mind agrees with that. So, in some things women are not nearly as “good as men” are. It would be dishonest to think otherwise. When it comes to raising children however, women are far superior to men and that makes them better than men in that area. The point is that women are different than men and therefore should be treated differently than men. Pretty straight forward.

Yes, I am sure that you find all reasoning that you disagree with, or cannot understand, to be “mumbo-jumbo. As I continue to point out, and folks like you continue to let sail right over their heads, I do not blame women for school shootings, or the other problems of society. I blame only feminists, and that includes many men as well as women. When feminists leave their children unattended in order to have a career, they are responsible for the results of their actions. Your whining about it will not change the validity of that fact.

Whether I am going to be “wrong in the eyes of the majority of the people that read this” or I am going to be right in their eyes, matters not a bit to me. What matters to me is whether I am right or wrong with respect to reality. Most people who read this will probably be folks who sit down nearly every night for their brainwashing session from their television. Anyone who is reckless enough to do that, is not someone whose opinion I am going concern myself with. When you intentionally expose yourself to propaganda you are going to be manipulated into the “party line” point of view. That means you give up your right to form your own views and you turn your will over to those in control of the propaganda.

If you compared my views, with those of the average people before the leftist take over of our country, you would find that my views would be mostly middle of the road. You do not care about that fact any more than I care about what the majority of the brainwashed masses today think. What matters is the truth, not public opinion.

It is amazing that people have reached the point today, where someone who actually thinks for himself is considered such a threat. You called me a vulgar name because I think for myself. You are acting like a lemming, a sheep. You are terrified of being different than the crowd. Anyone who does not go along with the group is bad to you. You must blindly attack independent thinkers as the enemy.

Unfortunately for you, it is not I who is asleep and who needs to wake up to realize what I am saying. You are sound asleep, letting others tell you what to think and say. You have been assimilated.

You cannot “become a man,” (unless you are a male child who will one day grow up), so it is just as well that you do not want to. Respecting the differences of women is not being “jealous” of women.

Your entry is essentially empty, devoid of content. Why would anyone be afraid of such a lame attack? Read the earlier entries in my guest book if you want to at least see some real efforts to attack my web page.

Kristina, this is what they call creating a "straw man." You list off a bunch of items, some of which are outright lies, and others which are distortions of fact. Then, since nobody will agree with that false straw man, (not even me!) then you have no trouble knocking him down, and thereby doing away with the idea (my web page) you are attacking, as being totally ridiculous. Nice try but that tactic is a feeble weapon against anyone who is paying attention at all. Then, as a final topping, a dash of name calling is thrown on, to complete the tirade. Rather than discuss what "you come off sounding like," let's look at your dishonest and distorted points one by one:

1. Women want to be dominated? While there exists a whole category of sexual deviation where some women, who call themselves "femslaves", actually do want to be physically and emotionally dominated in a relationship, they are not the norm. The normal woman does not like to be dominated in that sense. The normal woman does like a male that is a leader, but one who takes her opinions, needs and desires into consideration at all times. If you wish to distort the meaning of the words, you can equate leadership to domination, but that would be dishonest. They are not the same thing in reality. Leadership brings the best out in others, and makes them feel good about themselves. Domination crushes the ego, and makes them feel bad about themselves. A good husband who is the head of his family, and a leader, never crushes the ego of his wife or children. He does all that he can to promote high self esteem in all members of the family.
   
   
2. Women *want* to be put down? This one is so far out of bounds that it can only be labeled a complete falsehood, with no connection to my web page. I never said, anywhere on my web page or my guest book, that women want to be put down. In fact I have clearly pointed out that women are sensitive, thoughtful creatures who should be treasured and cared for, listened to and appreciated. Never, ever, would I promote the idea of putting women down!
   
   
3. Women *want* to be denied citizenship? Again there is nothing on my web page or in my guest book that would suggest that women want to be denied citizenship, or that men should deny them citizenship. They have been citizens of this country from its inception, and always will be. It is absurd to suggest otherwise. Prior to the 19th amendment, women did not have the vote, but they were citizens. I think that is the way it should still be. Some women agree with that, and some disagree. However, nobody that I know of is suggesting that women should be denied citizenship.
   
   
4. Women *want* to be denied independence? You don't say independence from what. All people would like to be free. There are some facts of life that must be faced however. The term "independently wealthy" applies to only a small minority of people. Other than that exclusive club, all people are dependent upon either someone else, or working at a job to make ends meet.
   
   You may want many things that would be destructive to have. For example most men, if not all, have a natural instinct to "chase women". Several industries, which are quite solvent by the way, rely on this tendency. In a stable society, it is destructive for men to give in to this tendency. Therefore, they may want to do it, but if they are good husbands, they will hold that tendency in check, and keep their desires restrained. The same is true of an "independent" woman. If she dumps her responsibilities in order to run as she pleases, it will be destructive to her family and her society. It is self-discipline which allows an adult male or female to set their own wants aside to create happiness for their families, and thereby create happiness for themselves. A stable person will do this. A destructive one will not.
   
   
5. Women *want* to be treated like nothing more than sex objects? Here is a distortion of what I said. I never said that women ONLY wanted to be treated like sex objects. You twisted what I said. Many women do wish to be thought of as sex objects. Not only as sex objects, but as sex objects nonetheless. Any woman who wears a short skirt, or a low cut blouse is going to generate many sexual thoughts in nearly all the men that they meet throughout the entire time they are dressed that way. Unless they are of subnormal intelligence, they know this is true. They could avoid being thought of as a sex object by dressing modestly, but they chose not to. Therefore, they must desire to be thought of as sex objects.
   
   This is a basic aspect of the sexual interplay between humans. Females are "hunted" by males, and therefore they wish to be attractive "prey". A man aggressively goes after a woman, and a woman attempts to appear desirable and worthy of being gone after. In the animal kingdom the same type of interplay goes on continually. Just because a woman desires to be a sex object at one level, never means that is all she is, or all that she wants to be. And just because a man views her as a sex object at one level, does not mean that is the only thing he sees about her, or that is all she is to him. Men and women are complex beings, and they have many compartments. To identify a single compartment for what it is, does not in any way remove the importance of the other compartments.
   
   
6. You're blaming women for, basically, all of society's problems. Nonsense! I do not blame women for any of society's problems. What blame that I do assign on my web page, is blame to feminists, both men and women! I do not even blame feminists for "all of society's problems." I do blame them for the problems that result from children being abandoned by their mothers, in favor of a career. Things like teen crime, school shootings and other children related issues are feminist related and only a dishonest person would deny that feminism played at least part role in them. I also blame them for inserting women into the military, police force and fire fighting departments because women weaken each of these organizations and will ultimately cost human lives. There are a great many problems in our society that have nothing to do with feminism. Many of them are caused by Leftists, who happen to be feminists as well, but their stand on feminism is not what led to these other problems, but rather it is their Marxist views and activities that are at fault.
   
   
7. Since we live in a male-dominated society, basically, all of society's problems have been caused by men. Men certainly are not perfect and they have made some very serious mistakes. For one they gave women the vote, which has driven our country right into the arms of socialism. If men had never given the vote to women, feminism could never have inflicted its terrible wounds upon our children, and our society. That was indeed men's fault. While more and more of the blame is being correctly shifted over to the feminists, as they have more time to work on destroying our society, there is still plenty of things that men can be justly faulted for. I have no problem with men being justly accused of wrongdoing, why is it that feminists don't accept the blame for what they have done do you suppose?

Those who have surgically, and chemically, deformed themselves in hope of becoming that which they are not able to become, are pitiful, sad human beings. They, like those who suffer from other forms of homosexuality, or those who suffer from pedophilia, and other perversions do not fit into any normal society. They are in need of help which falls outside the scope of normal society. As I have repeatedly stated in this guest book, society cannot be created and shaped around the bizarre, the perverted or the strange. Society must set its rules and standards based upon normal human behavior. That is why feminism is a failure and universally causes damage to any society which embraces it. Feminism is focused upon the abnormal, masculine minded female, while ignoring the normal, feminine minded female.

My page is focused on what a society should do to make the largest number of men and women happy. In order to do that, we must set aside the demands of the abnormal men and women, or we will suffer the destruction or loss of our society. The evidence is already in. As we have distorted our society to make it comfortable for the lesbian, we have made it very difficult for the normal heterosexual woman. As is always the case with the Leftist causes, the very small percentage of society which has been left out, is used as justification for completely dismantling the system and building a new system which promotes some minority of people, and leaves out the huge majority of people. To any sane mind that approach is totally irrational.

It is always a joy to have you drop in and share your thoughts. Imagine that! Being free to think and reason, to be intelligent, and still be a good housewife. That is the truth that the feminists have always tried to hide. They have painted every woman who ever existed in the past, who was a good wife and mother, as being stupid, unthinking, enslaved, unhappy and beaten down. How absurd! And most Americans today sit still and let their mothers, grandmothers and all their female ancestors before them, be slandered unmercifully in this fashion. It is disgusting. I am so thankful when women like yourself come forward and set the record straight. Thank you!

While you are enjoying your idiotic laugh, whether out loud or otherwise, perhaps you might try using the area of your anatomy between your ears for a change, even though it is probably terribly atrophied due to lack of use. Can you find one other group of people on earth who promotes abortion more then the feminists do? Of course not. Abortion is a feminist sacrament, which is fiercely defended by these children hating totalitarians. They promote abortion as a "woman's right" as if killing children is the most natural thing in the world. The right for a woman to slaughter children in the womb is just as much of a right to feminists as are "life", liberty and the pursuit and happiness. (I had to put that life in quotes, because feminists are hedging on that one pretty badly.)

Think of it! A RIGHT to KILL:

• Not to kill in self defense, which is, if you thought about it for a moment, what a baby would be justified in doing, if he could kill his executioner "doctor," or the mother of his who is trying to kill him. Of course no feminist ever thinks about it that way, at least not for very long.
  
  
• Not to kill an enemy invader, as a soldier would but to kill their very own child.
  
  
• Not to kill a criminal, as an execution would be, where a man who is guilty of taking another's life is justly punished, but to kill the most innocent creature on earth, an unborn baby.
  
  

Welcome back Carolyn. I have noticed that feminists are as duplicitous on the subject of rape as they are on sexual harassment and other issues. They only care about such things when it increases their power, and otherwise they do not care at all. Whether or not there actually was a rape, matters little to them either. It was quite an education, watching the feminist hypocrites dodge and weave to avoid dealing with the fact that Bill Clinton, a man determined to increase the feminists' power, was admittedly guilty of what they have for years been describing as sexual harassment with Monica, and he was also accused of rape by a woman (and women never lie about rape, according to the feminists). The feminists disappeared. They could not be found. But let an ordinary man be falsely accused of rape and the feminists are all over him, screaming for his hide. It is clear from their actions that, to the feminist, women do not matter nor do men. The only thing that matters is the increase of their power over the citizens of this land.

Thank you Paul! I am already proud to be one of those standing up for what is right, and I am happy to have you standing with me.

I suppose you should be pitied for writing something so absurd, as if it were serious. However, my guess is that you have put a lot of work into your intentional ignorance, so pity may not be the appropriate response. In any case let us look at your offering.

You wonder why I live in this country? Such arrogance is hardly to be believed. My ancestors have walked this land for over 350 years. My people have built this land, creating from an untamed wilderness, filled with savages, the greatest nation that has ever graced this planet. So, this land is my rightful inherantence. That is why I live here.

I do not care what the people in Monaco pay in taxes, or anything else about a country that is nothing but a tourist trap and has fewer people in it than a decent suburb does. (29,712 people in 1992.) You think that I should give up my land, still the greatest on earth, in order to move to a French speaking minor gnat of a nation, with less than three-quarters of a square mile of land? The British Virgin Islands have even less population. Perhaps YOU would like to move to Red China, where your views are more in keeping with their traditional politics, and their population is even greater than the US? Such a line of "reasoning" as you propose, is fit for the dumpster, and you know it. So, we will leave it where it belongs.

It is interesting that you are in such support of paying half your money in taxes, fees, and fines, and you find opposition to any further increase in those thefts of our money to be way out of line. How is it that you are outraged by anyone wishing to keep a fair share of his own money? What gives you the right, through the government with which you are obviously sympathetic, to touch one penny of my money for your agenda? Nothing! That is what. And your anger at my objection to being robbed clearly shows your true designs.

I am striving to preserve this nation so my children, and grandchildren, will not have to learn another language but can continue to speak English as their forefathers did. It is Leftists like you that are trying overturn that situation.

It is so gratifying to realize that you, in spite of your absurd suggestions, don't have a problem with me staying here in my own country which was built by folks very much like myself. How very generous of you to say so. And your simulated concern for my happiness, though dripping with sarcasm, is just as gratifying. But since you asked, let me tell you why I "bother with this country."

This country has led the world in scientific advancement. This country has a history of freedom for my people. This country has traditionally opposed those who, like yourself, have striven to create totalitarian oppression of those same people. This country still has the potential to return to the ideals of its golden age and to recover from the overthrow of its government by the Leftists in the 1960s. That is why I bother with this country, and always will.

YOU want to tell ME what Leftists do? Take a good look at the Bolshevik revolution. Look at the 20 million people they slaughtered even BEFORE Stalin began racking up his really serious murder numbers. Look at the slaughter every Communist government has been guilty of whenever it came to full power. Leftists do not have a history of waiting for anything. The only thing that kept them from killing their enemies in the USA was the fact that those who opposed their Leftist ideals were still in the majority. They were forced to work slowly, as they have done, not because that is what Leftists want to do, but because that was the only road open to them. I know the Leftists very well. Truth is perhaps the thing most repugnant to them, because it is a great danger to their cause.

You think that I am "really right wing." That assertion shows very clearly where you are coming from. What I propose would be supported by close to 100% of our founding fathers. If they disagreed at all, they would be even farther to "the Right" than I am. Because of the Leftist revolution in the 1960s our nation has moved so far into the radical Leftist camp that the founding fathers seem to be radical Right wing wackos. That is what I am fighting against! If you took the average man or woman on the street in the 1950s, you would find that they would line up very closely with what I have written on my page. Again, that demonstrates the drastic, and destructive changes that have occurred in our nation since the 1960s. When compared with the vast majority of historical American thought, I am far more mainstream than yourself. And you ask ME why I bother with this country?

One additional point on the Leftists, they most certainly did not wait for the laws to accommodate them. They were actively breaking laws throughout the 1960s, rioting and disturbing the peace continually. They closed down schools, and disrupted every event and institution that they could. As I said, the only thing stopping them from outright military action was that the other side was stronger. The problem with those of my ilk, was that they were too passive, and caring. They did not want to seem to be thoughtless and heartless. They wanted the other side to be heard. What they never realized was that once the Leftists got into power, the majority opinion would never again be given the opportunity to be expressed openly in the mass media. We have been conquered, but not yet subdued.

Michelle, yes I am saying that a man cannot love his child like his wife can. A woman loves her baby like a woman, or in a feminine way, and a man loves his baby in a masculine way. A woman wants to cover the child with protection and let nothing of the world harm him, while a man wants that child to grow and master the world. If a mother and father take their young son to a park, and the son runs over to the monkey bars, Mom wants him to make sure that he doesn’t get hurt and Dad wants to know if he can make it to the top. Both parents do not want the child to be hurt and both parents want the child to reach the top, but the greatest amount of concern of is each is as I said. The child needs both kinds of love. And that is why single mothers make such a terrible job of it, but a child, especially a young child simply must have a mother, because she loves her baby like no one else can. Women have been doing that job for thousands of years and it is instinctual. They do it differently and they do it better than a man can. If you check out the animal kingdom, you will find mother and child is basic to survival of any species.

If you had gone through my guest book, you would find that you feminists are simply clones of each other saying the same stupid things. You all say that I have forgotten that people are individuals. That is absurd but you keep saying it. How many of these different women you speak of are athletic enough to play professional sports with the men? None of them. When you watch female sports is clear that even the best of them are severely inferior in ability to the men. The point is, that while normal women are different from each other, those differences fall within a range of behavior that is normal for women, and that range is not the same range that is normal for men. The book Brain Sex also describes your unfortunate condition. You should read it. You will find that a female brain in the womb, if it is not exposed to the proper hormones at the proper time can develop in abnormal ways. It may become masculine, and not like children like yourself. It can even become lesbian, which the same process but to a different degree. Unfortunately for your theory, women who have gone through such a process are not the same as men, or equal in ability to a man, but instead merely doomed to live in frustration at being driven to be a man without the equipment to be able to pull it off. It is sad, but our society cannot be constructed in such a way that punishes the normal women, in order to satisfy the wants and desires of you and those like you. Remember, that my objection to feminism is not that female feminists are trying to compete with men, because that is a ridiculous desire, doomed to failure. What I object to is the government assisting women in that attempt, and in promoting the feminist agenda in our schools.

FYI, If you had looked it up, as I just did, you would have found that there is an actress by the name Madchen Amick, who played Shelly Johnson on Twin Peaks.She is a very beautiful woman.

Your depiction of women being inferior to men, virtual slaves, running around following orders is distorted and filled with hate. Women who are homemakers are doing a critical job for their family and for society in general. They are not inferior, and they are not slaves. A good husband is not a domineering slave driver. The feminists wish to promote that myth in order to try and convince women who want to be homemakers that they would be fools to attempt it. It is a lie, that is directed at the goal of killing the role of homemaker, so that the abnormal masculine minded female will not appear to be abnormal any longer in our society. The end result is the abandonment of our children, and chaos in our society as those unsupervised children grow into uncivilized, self-centered adults.

Ted Bundy was the sweetest, nicest, funniest person you could ever meet too. That doesn’t mean that there was nothing wrong with him. Lesbians definitely have something wrong with them. If all women had that same thing wrong with them, the species would die out. Fortunately that is not the case.

You are welcome!

Thank you Allison! I really appreciate you taking the time to show your support for this page. I hope that my page will do a small part in helping more men see what their natural role should be in our society, and to be great husbands to women who appreciate them for it.

Amit my friend, you will find that people will visit this guest book who disagree with what you have to say. The number one thing to keep in mind is to fight with ideas not names. Whether someone goes to hell, or doesn't go to hell, is not ours to determine. Whether someone has brains or not may be indicated by a short post in a guest book, but may not provide the definitive answer as to whether they do or do not.

You have made some very good points. Women are inferior to men in certain areas which includes the area of war, both physically and emotionally. In the home, when a man comes in from a long day at work, he is glad that a warm woman awaits him, and not a man. In this case the woman is superior to a man. While the term "inferior" is one of those words that clashes with the accepted PC terminology list, any two things which are different, such as men and women, must have one that is superior and one that is inferior for certain purposes. Otherwise, they would not be different. A gold ring and a gold necklace, are different. For finger apparel a necklace is inferior, but for the neck it is superior. In price one of them may be superior but in sentimental value the other may be superior. A master at the piano may be terrible at chess, while the chess master may not know one note from the other. Difference demands superiority and inferiority which is determined only when judged against the task or purpose to be undertaken.

Politically, feminism has done great harm to our society, and it will take men with passion against that movement to overthrow it. So, I commend your passion.

Your point about Afghanistan is very well taken. The average American knows little about the world except what the media box tells them. They have their little minds nicely washed and formed in just the right manner to please the Leftists in charge. Do not expect much more from them.

Perhaps your most important point is concerning the return to "the natural order of things." What makes feminism so disgusting is that it goes completely against what is natural. We have names for women who want to take charge of a man, and they are not pleasant names. As I was growing up, it was common to say that a woman "wears the pants in that family," when a woman began bossing her husband around. Women as well as men did not respect either her or her husband when a woman did that. It was not natural. It is just as unnatural to have women in supervisor roles over men, or in the boardroom. A return to the natural order of things would be quite refreshing. If we could just get the jackbooted foot of the government from off our necks long enough to make it happen, it would be wonderful!

Thanks for dropping in again.

Vana, Amit does not want to start some war with women. He feels, as do I, that such a war would be too lopsided in favor of men to be worth fighting anyway. Being a gentleman is not what Amit is attacking. Backing down, and being a "gentleman" when feminism makes its demands, is what he wishes to stop. He would like to see male leadership in our society, like we once had, before feminism took over. The blood he is talking about is real blood shed by real men, in real battles that women did not have to participate in, while the media gives them the same credit for it as the men receive.

Also, you must remember that Amit comes from a country that has not been ravished as slowly and as deeply (yet) as America has been. In his country the change has been very abrupt, and there are many people there who remember what it was like before, and who do not like the changes. It appears to me that Amit hates feminism, not women.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Tina may have been just trying to pull our chain, or she may be as sick as she sounds.

I remember a series of books written a few years ago, by a man named John Norman. They were about a planet named Gor, where women were pretty much all slaves. They were branded, had a permanent collar put on them and treated like merchandise. John Norman put forward the idea that all women secretly yearn to be slaves, and to be put under discipline. If all men were as Tina claims that is exactly how planet Earth would be today. So, your point is absolutely valid. Obviously men are far from the animals that Tina (or Norman) thinks we are. Men protect women, from the few men who really are animals. That is why we have policemen. That is why husbands have traditionally been the protector of their wives and daughters. Those acts of civilized behavior, and of love for women by men, have been the staple of Western civilization for thousands of years.

Childbirth is a tough experience. I watched both my sons be born, and it is was not fun for Mom in either case. But it is also a fact that Mom's memory of that experience faded fast, and the joy of having the little guy with us at home was more than full compensation for the ordeal. Women were made to have babies, and I will never argue against the fact that women do it better than men would. You do best, that which you are designed for. I am glad that they have made childbirth a bit easier for women today, but it is still no picnic. But I defy anyone to match that look that a new mother has when she holds her newborn, with any other emotion or joy in life. If there is anything in human existence that is pure giving, pure unselfishness, it is a mother's love for her child. That is why day care is a curse, because the child is taken from the pure love of a mother, and given in replacement the forced civility of a paid employee. That is why latchkey children are bound to be problem children. Mother and child. Child and mother. They are made for each other. It is the cycle of the ages, the real history of mankind.

So, men who hate women, and women who hate men, are fighting against the very biological process that gave them life. Men are gifted in ways that help them provide for, protect and lead a family. Women are gifted in ways that help them rear, nurture and mold a family into a whole unit. This intermeshing of the feminine and the masculine, while producing, protecting, loving and educating the next generation, is the magic of the family. The magic that feminism is aiming to destroy.

Thanks for dropping in and sharing your thoughts Paul!

So much hate. You attack Hitler who was, worst case, responsible for maybe 60 million deaths. You attack Stalin who was responsible for about 100 million deaths. School shooters and all mass murderers combined, are probably responsible for less than a thousand deaths. You on the other hand want to kill 3 billion males. And you call men evil. You hypocrite! Go get some help, you are truly ill.

Brent, where is this coming from? Perhaps you have forgotten about all the millions of wonderful women who have given happiness, joy and completion to their husbands, who have been loving and caring mothers to their children. In every part of my page I have supported women who are homemakers and mothers, who are giving birth to, and raising the next generation. It would be insane to turn on women with hatred, when they are the ones who give us all life. No sir, I do not hate women, and I never will.

If you are asking if I support women who cast off their family obligations for career or some new love, and then rob their faithful husbands of money, children, and their happiness, of course I do not. Anything that breaks up a family is an inherently bad thing.

I hope this clears things up for you.

It is interesting that you come to my page, a page designed to point out the flaws in feminism, and point out many of the very same things that I do, while at the same time claiming to be a feminist. Let's go down your points one by one:

1. Those, whom you refer to, that are upset, and who have signed my guest book, are upset at the destruction that feminism --not women but feminism -- has inflicted upon various societies around the world. Yes they have sometimes made the same mistake that most feminists do, in using two words like feminism and women, as if they were interchangeable. Of course they are not. It is like trying to use the words icicle and water interchangeably. Yes, feminism talks a lot about women, but there are far more women on this planet who are not feminists than those who are. An icicle hanging from a roof, will be made up mostly of water, along with some contaminants, but it is not representative of all water. Most water is liquid and resides in the oceans, not frozen hanging from a roof.

2. I have never forgotten for a second that nature has made women different than men. My page is filled with that fact and the results of that fact. It is completely absurd to ignore that fact, as feminists so ardently try to do. They demand that there are no significant differences and that men and women should be treated the very same, and have the same roles in society. That is completely insane!

3. Yes, women have far more delicate bodies, and they hold the future of our race in their wombs. That is why they should be protected by their fathers, as they grow up, and by their husbands when they are adults, instead of being thrown to the wolves to compete with men in a man's world. It is ridiculous to set up a society where childbirth is a secondary role for women, and having a career is the primary one. That is a suicidal approach for such a society.

4. The pressure to look beautiful is sexual. It is tied together with the winning of a mate in order to reproduce. Since women are weaker than man, and the species requires some system in place to reproduce, the stronger male must provide protection for the weaker female, and provide support for her and their children. That is the natural way that humans have developed as a method of survival. For a man to sacrifice his freedom, his efforts, and possibly his life, for a woman, nature has made it so that women are physically appealing to men, or beautiful. The more beautiful she appears, the more likely she will attract the attentions of a male who will be willing to hang around for the long haul. This has gone on for thousands of years and isn't likely to change real soon. Even the feminists of the 70s have now given up their manly coveralls, and no-makeup look in favor of more attractive attire.

5. Your point about limitations on women has been understood, by myself and most other anti-feminists all along. We never forgot it, the feminists did! Feminism has caused the rape and murder of many women by convincing women that this is a new era for women, and women should be able to do anything that a man can. Some poor women were fooled into believing that nonsense and paid the ultimate price for it. Women must be protected by males. Feminism denies that fact, but it does not make it any less true.

6. I am amazed that you bring up the point on hormones and emotional imbalances, subjects for which male chauvinists have been booed and hissed at for mentioning all along. You speak like the most avid male chauvinist. You point out that women are significantly different than men, weaker than men, and emotionally erratic, as compared with men. All of these things are true. How you move from there to the point where you call yourself a feminist is beyond logic to follow. What logically follows from your points is that society must treat women differently than men. They must have a different role than men. They must be protected by men. Patriarchy, properly administered, has been the primary and traditional solution to this difference in the sexes for thousands of years. In the United States, throughout its history, women have been treated like ladies, and with respect by the vast majority of men. They have not had to become cannon fodder like men. They have not had to die young from heart attacks, black lung disease or other ailments, because they overworked themselves supporting their families like men have. Males die at every age at a higher rate than women do, even as children.

So, your points all support my point of view, and condemn the feminist point of view. Thanks for stopping in and sharing them with us.

I think you are absolute right that the vast majority of men agree with my position, in the privacy of their own thoughts. It is a sign of how weak men have become in this age that they will believe one thing and live another, on such an important issue as this.

Why do you suppose it is that the whole world is following what the USA is doing today? America reached where it was by doing something completely different than what it is doing today. Feminism had zero to do with what made America powerful. Very little of what is considered Politically Correct would have even been tolerated during America's rise to power. All of this absurd nonsense came along after the fact. It is going to pull America down. Why would anyone want to emulate that? If a nation wants to copy America, it should choose the America worthy of emulation, the pre-1960 America. That would tend to build any nation into a greater nation. It is that philosophy that I want to help America to return to. I can only say to you that someone needs to speak up in India and point out that Political Correctness is a parasite on America, not any part of the greatness of America.

Thank you for stopping by and signing my book with your kind and thoughtful words!

If this were all some academic process that only mattered to a few eggheads, I would agree with you that it qualifies as a very entertaining display of absurdity, which merits nothing but laughter as a response. Unfortunately, these twisted lines of reasoning are descending upon our lives with real impact. The Leftist "standard of ethics" has suddenly been raised to the level of divine inspiration. Our society has been forced to kneel and worship at the altar of the god of egalitarianism as if it were the highest divinity of the pantheon of all possible gods. The amazing thing is, as you have pointed out, that religions that are very old, and once very respected by their adherents, are now being disassembled and reformed in the shape of this new god. Old morals and old standards are cast aside. Old gods and old beliefs are abandoned. Now the universal acceptance of the phony Leftist religious system is sweeping the world, metamorphosing into apparent continuations of all the other religions. Christianity is being replaced with it, even though the old name is retained, the beliefs are being exchanged with the new religion's. As you pointed out the Hindus and Muslims are seeing the same transformation in their own doctrines. It is really quite remarkable that these religious people who have clung so emotionally and unswervingly to their religious beliefs for so long, would suddenly just throw them aside in favor of some new, and unproven belief system, especially one which is so obviously flawed. History tells of the Islamic people boldly protecting their beliefs with their lives and their swords. What has happened? Propaganda is more powerful than the sword!

BTW, since it has become come clear that some readers of this guest book do not yet under stand The Axioms of Life Subscribed to by the Chauvinist Corner - See Axiom #1), I should at this point note that I, and I am sure you, do not support beating wives. It is a theological point that we are discussing here. I point this out lest some confused soul misunderstand the conversation as it passes over their heads.

Thanks for paying a another visit to my web page. You are always welcome my friend.

You have cut me to the quick. :-) I am used to being called all sorts of names, and accused of all sorts of horrible things, but never before have I been accused of the appalling crime of being too Gentlemanly. Alas, I stand guilty as charged. I am a civilized man, and not the barbaric caveman that feminists have always accused me of being. However I am something that they can never accept and cannot effectively defend against. I am a man who is willing to speak the truth. People have a natural tendency to like the truth. In fact they often even love the truth. They also have a tendency to despise lies, and especially those who have lied to them. Why do the Leftists become so franticly hostile when anyone says anything that is not Politically Correct? The bloodlust is in their eyes as they go for the jugular of anyone who has the effrontery to speak the truth in public. Why is that so? Because they are defending a house of cards, built upon lies. Even the smallest wisp of a breeze of truth threatens to knock their house down. That is why they cannot tolerate any open discussion of the truth. It is why a man who speaks out against feminism in his workplace will be fired for it. It is why a man who speaks his mind in an interview in Sports Illustrated is suspended from his job for a few months. No breath of truth can be allowed to circulate around the feeble, dark house, lest disaster set upon them.

Do not confuse a Gentlemanly man with a weak man. It is no coincidence that military tradition requires of an officer that he be an "officer and a gentleman." That characteristic has never stopped the military man from fighting bloody battles when necessary. We gentlemen are not wimps.

Thank you for that observation. If I had to stoop to such tactics, it would be a waste of my time operating this guest book, and a complete waste of time for you to read it.

When dealing with those charlatans on the Left, I am continually reminded of the great fairy tale, "The Emperor's New Clothes." What a beautiful depiction of the Leftists is made in that story. The Emperor, and all his people were sold a complete lie. Fabric was woven out of thin air, and purchased by the Emperor, and later it was displayed by that same foolish man. He was told that this material was so special that only wise men could see it. Just like the feminists, who sell their egalitarian fables as if they were real and true. What blew the lie out of the water in the fairy tale? Why, all it took was one small child speaking the truth. Can you imagine what the "tailors" who were selling this lie to the emperor, would have been willing to do to shut that kid up before they were paid? That is a perfect picture of the Leftist at work. He is weaving his lies and selling them to the people, and living in mortal fear of the truth being discovered. Naturally he is violently hostile to anyone speaking out with the truth, because he know he is doomed if the truth ever becomes known. That is why they want to crash your computer.

Thank you for your kind assessment of my posts. And I appreciate your additional insight concerning Katia's post. You are quite correct. The Left has a cutting name for every offence that you can commit against their philosophy. They will open up their little red knapsacks and pull out a readymade hate word to throw at you in reply to any point that you make. That way we will never be able to speak about the facts concerning the issue, and instead we will spend all of our time denying the implications in the name that we have been called. It has worked for them for decades. They will keep using the tactic as long as we let it work. We must reach the point where we no longer care what they call us, and just continue ladling a healthy dose of the truth upon their lying heads until they are exposed for what they are.

This page is not about the races of man, or ethnic differences within the races of man. Should you wish to discuss that topic I am sure there are web pages out there for that. On this page, we are on the issue of feminism and there I will hold my focus.

As is typical of all feminists you missed the point, completely missed the point. Those facts about single mothers demonstrate completely and undeniably that single mothers do a poor job in raising children. If the statistics were gathered on single fathers, even though they are far smaller in number, I would expect that they were doing a poor job of it as well. That is making my case that much stronger. My page is not intended to show that men are better people than women, or better parents than women. Patriarchy and chauvinism does not say that men are better than women, merely different than women, and therefore by definition, women must have a different role in society than men have. It is the joining of men and women together in families that provide the only natural way for children to be raised. It takes the soft and nurturing woman combined with the strong and unbending man. The child needs both of these things to grow to his highest potential, and to have all of his needs met. Only a feminist would care whether a single mother or a single father is better, because their movement demands actions that will fracture families and leave children in broken homes. What is important for people to understand is that single parents of either sex are not going to do the job well. The optimum situation will include the real mother and real father together for the entire process of raising the children, in other words, for life. Anything else will be less, significantly less.

A point of distinction that I am continually forced to make to the unperceptive feminist, is that when I use the term, "women," I am speaking of the vast majority of women. Normal women. It is not intended to say that there are not women who are not normal, who are even masculine in their views and attitudes. Of course there are such women but that does not lessen the truth of my statements. While exceptions never "prove the rule", they do not throw it out either. What is important is that what I say about "women" applies to the prohibitive majority of women, even though some misfits are left out.

I find it interesting that you could even question the fact that women are more socially dependant than men. It is documented beyond any reasonable questioning that women are biologically driven to be "sociable." From birth, as documented in the book Brain Sex, women are people oriented, and far more interested in close personal relationships than men. If you use the term "chick flick" today, anyone will know that you are talking about a relationship movie, a movie which women will love and men will avoid. Your protest on this point is absurd.

As for being weaklings, that has two aspects to it, and one of them is true and one false. So, let's separate them out. If you say that women are physically stronger than men, you are either trying to promote a lie or you are mentally deficient. Anyone who has watched boys and girls grow up into men and women, will realize that men are physically stronger. In addition to that men are stronger in the areas of competition and aggression. These facts are clearly demonstrable beyond any doubt to an open minded individual. If you are saying that because these facts are true, by definition women therefore are "weaklings" then I would have to agree with you, only because you have defined the term so poorly.

The fact is that women are also strong, in a feminine way. They will attempt to face down a much bigger and stronger man if he threatens their children. Women have demonstrated great strength in all the areas of motherhood, and family preservation, in the face of great adversity. Women are not weaklings.

The fact that you are not driven to be a wife and mother is far from surprising. The fact that you are not interested in a relationship with a man is not surprising. As I have said many times before, society cannot be built around the needs and wants of a the abnormal, lesbian or merely masculine minded women. Society must be build around the normal men and women. To destroy the lives of the vast majority of people in order to make a small minority happy is absurd, and that is why feminism is absurd. Of course some women want nothing to do with a normal life, just like some men want to wear dresses. That is completely beside the point.

How often you go to church is of no concern to me. In the 1950s most women were at home with their children and they were not Puritan fanatics. So, this attempted point of yours is both absurd and irrelevant.

Perhaps the most amusing thing that you said is that you are not "an extreme feminist." You don't like kids, you actually think women can do the same job as men to the same level, and you don't want a man in your life. That is pretty funny.

Women are not in all the advanced classes in greater numbers than men. They are in the area of law, and some similar types of courses but in the areas of engineering and the sciences they are not. And of the women who are in those classes many of them will be leaving their professions in order to raise their families. Women are not becoming stronger, they are becoming more confused, because they have been exposed to the government sponsored propaganda at an increased level for a longer period of time. As far as my job is concerned, you could not be more wrong. There are hundreds of men in my company doing a job similar to mine, and only one woman. There are no new women knocking at the door to do the job either. It is a technical field and it requires a masculine brain to do it. Most women do not have it, just like most men do not have the feminine brain required to raise kids well. If you look at the engineering department or the software department of my company, the number of women is also very small, and my company is one of the most ardent celebrators of diversity of all sorts, including gender related diversity.

So, where does that leave us? It appears that you have no idea what you are talking about. No matter, feminists are usually in that condition.

Thank you John. I do not lose sleep over what feminists say, because I am quite confident that they are wrong. My confidence is based on biological grounds, as well as on the evidence of precedent: throughout history the vast majority of folks had my view on the subject. I have my own experience of dealing with women in real life, and there is no doubt that women are completely different creatures than men. From that it must follow that women should have different roles than men in our society. Anyone who challenges that must have an ulterior motive, and they are usually quite blatant in exposing it.

Thank you for dropping in and sharing your kind words. I look forward to hearing from you again.

For someone who is standing in judgement of educational quality, you certainly have a great deal of trouble expressing a clear thought. You cannot spell the word "chauvinist", you leave your second sentence dangling, leaving one to wonder what you are babbling about, (Blame? Blame whom?) and you make a "logical" leap concerning my confidence which is impossible to follow. But you are going to stand in judgement of other people's education. Very amusing indeed.

Perhaps you can follow the reasoning behind your first two sentences, but there is a certain lack of continuity there. If I read you correctly, you are attempting to equate a lack of manhood with someone saying that women are important to society. You appear to be saying that understanding the facts of what is going on in our society is not a masculine quality in your mind, such as it is. That is like saying a tree is not a tree because it has bark and branches.

And since you have nothing left in your mental arsenal, you stoop to name calling. My condolences. Perhaps in a few more years you may grow out of it.

Anyone who has been raised in the United States of America, and probably any Western nation, and who has subjugated their opinions to the media and the school system, will of course find my views to be repugnant. The honest ones will do as you have, and admitted that my site is well thought out, and researched. But they will hate it because it goes against their own personal brainwashing. Once you take propaganda to heart, you will defend it to the death, or until you can be deprogrammed.

There are of course inequalities between the sexes. For the brainwashed egalitarian, that is terrible. The idea that men and women should be different is just horrible. The very world view of the feminists is shattered by the fact that girls and boys are not interchangeable. And since they are not the same, society has never treated them the same. Outrageous!

But is it? Is it outrageous to allow a woman to do what she wants to do and stay at home with her children? Feminists think so, but I do not. Is it outrageous to allow a business to hire whomever it wishes, for whatever reason it wishes? Not in a free country it isn't! Forcing a so called free society to twist into an unnatural egalitarian nightmare is what is truly outrageous.

If only the Leftists would practice what they preach instead of forcing their view of life upon others, all would be well. If every person were treated as their talents, and desires demanded, feminism would die on the vine as the vast majority of women did what came naturally to them, instead of being forced into doing what the feminists want them to do. Since you wish to use humans as resources, as if they were machines or property, you would find that you get a lot more out of a society of people in the long haul, if they reproduce themselves. You see, if you just forget about the future generations, and focus on your selfish wants today, as any child tends to do, you may have a lot of fun today. You may have a great career, and make lots of money for yourself, and society may even have a temporary financial bump. But the price in the future will be a society that collapses into crime, poverty, and chaos. The children are trained at home as to what kind of adults they will be. It is up to the parents to be there to do the training.

The feminist only looks at how much of a loss to society it is to have a woman not performing the role of a man. Of course that is a loss to society of some certain amount. However, where the feminist completely fails to use their brains is in an area where, if you can believe the name they chose for themselves, they should be extremely focused. What is the loss to society if a woman does not perform the role of a woman? I believe that women have performed a vital function throughout history. I believe that society itself is impossible without that role being performed by women. I believe that if women do not perform the role of rearing the next generation, and of holding the family together, society will not be possible to maintain for an extended period of time. In other words, it will be a much greater loss to society to have a woman not perform the role of a woman, than it will be to have her fail to perform the role of a man.

As long as there are men, their role in society will be filled and executed adequately by men. If women try to fill the male role as well, and abandon the critical traditional role of women it will be disastrous for our society, and as any student of history knows, things do not go well for women in a chaotic society. When law and order break down, women will be treated as resources in a most appalling way. I wish to avoid that for our future generations. If you wish to speak of morally superior views, that is it.

I am sure that it brings you great comfort in resting your future, and the future of your country upon the whims of Fate. I however, think that it is the right and obligation for all good men to oppose falsehood when it is forced upon their fellow citizens. When a man fails to oppose evil and destructive activities, he as guilty of perpetuating those acts as if he performed them with his own hands.

I feel that your point of view would make us little more than ants, who think that it was merely fate who has dealt them a mean and fiery blow, when actually it is the farmer who has poured the gasoline down their hole and lit the match. It is not some random action of fate that has taken over our government and our media, and sitting still while hoping that they will change their activities on their own is like hoping the Sun will not rise tomorrow. My web page may not be enough, and it may not solve the problem, but it is important, and it does serve a purpose. Sitting on my hands will certainly not get the job done.

Remember that this feminist movement was not some spontaneous illogical popping of some random cosmic gas bubble. It was planned and choreographed, along with the other Leftist movements, with full support of the media. It continues to be perpetuated by the government and the media. George Orwell strikingly showed what kind of power the media have in his book 1984. He highlighted the fact that whoever controls historical "fact" and the information disseminated in the mass media, controls the minds of the masses. People cannot remember what happened even a few weeks ago, and they rely on the media to tell them what their own history is. Any lie that the media choose to hammer home, over and over again, will be accepted by the masses. ANY LIE. That is a lot of power, my friend.

Thanks for dropping in.

I do not have my page set up to forward articles to people. It sounds like an interesting idea that I may look into. In the mean time, if you go to an article you like, you can hit CTRL-A (or "Select All" in the "Edit" menu) and then hit CTRL -C (or "Copy" in the "Edit" menu). You then will have the article stored in your clipboard on your computer. You can then paste the article using CTRL-V (or "Paste" from the "Edit" menu) into an email to send along, or you can paste it into a text editor so you can save it as a file to send out later. I hope this helps.

You have to get it straight in your mind. It is very difficult to be both the scum and the bag which holds the scum. I know it is a tough concept for some minds to grasp. Perhaps if we started with something simpler…

It is nice to know that you have set yourself up as judge as to which individuals are fit to exist in this world and which are not. We can all rest easier now. Especially someone who is so eloquent, and who can express such deep thoughts in such a compelling way.

Thanks for stopping by.

You are correct that women are treated differently by the criminal justice system. I think the reason for that is that women are not considered the same as men by the courts, or by society in general. Society knows that women are different than men, and have different drives and motivations. That is why our legal system originally built up its double standard to be able to treat women in a softer manner, as becomes the gentle sex. I happen to agree that women should be treated differently than men, because they are different.

The feminists have the luxury of doing hypocritical things like what you have pointed out. Feminists admit that men are naturally far more aggressive than women are in the area of crime, shown by the much higher incidence of violent crime by males. There is no debating this. Yet the dishonest feminists fight tooth and nail to avoid the obvious fact that men, to the very same extent as in criminal behavior, are more aggressive in every area of life, including all areas of business. The media of course never bothers to point out the major flaws in the feminist dogma. The media just quotes feminists unchallenged, allowing them to spread whatever lies they feel will help their cause.

Thanks for dropping in!

No Bo, I am not an avid "pro-lifer." Let us define our terms. I am an avid anti-abortionist, fighting against the pro-abortionists, who are incorrectly labeled "pro-choice." This deceitful practice of finding some label which sounds great but does not accurately reflect your point of view, I find repugnant.

What I am against is intentionally taking the life of an innocent person, whether born or unborn. I have no problem whatsoever taking the life of a murderer or rapist, because they have earned that just punishment upon their own heads. I hope this clears things up for you.

Welcome back Amit! What? You thought I would have gone away and given up? NO way!

All movements must start somewhere. Why not here? When men and women have their noses rubbed in the truth, some of them will realize that what is going on is just plain wrong. That is what fires up the folks who are willing to make changes happen. For decades it is has been the Leftists who have been making change in our society, and you can lay the responsibility for the decadence of our society today upon those very people. We must now find people who are willing to work just as hard to undo that damage. Then we will have a movement.

Thanks for coming back for another visit and sharing your thoughts with us.

Dear Paige,

You started right off with an error. No civilized person is "cut down" on my web page. (Those who are rude or hostile may be treated in like fashion, but that is a different issue.) I expose the fallacies of the Leftist mind. For those who associate their own value and being with those absurd ideas, it is, to them, as if they were personally being cut down. Try not to take this personally.

The removal of the 19th amendment from the constitution would be the single most positive thing done for our country in the lifetime of any person living today. The vast majority of women would have their rights protected by a democratic system where only men voted. So, your claim is false on the face of it. Women did not have the vote for most of the history of the USA and their rights were always protected. The steady trend towards the oppressive chains of socialism we see today is closely tied to the female vote. The liberal politician relies heavily on the female vote to work their destruction upon us all. (e.g. Bill Clinton was elected and reelected by the female vote!) Women, in the long run, will suffer more from this left-sliding trend than will men. In any case, we all will be living lives that will be much less fulfilling, as the totalitarian government continues to grow, fueled by the female vote.

My wife has proofread every single article on my web page and she loves the page. The page, and especially the lead item, the poem "A Woman's Place" is dedicated to her. She is a happy homemaker with an IQ that is above the mean for medical doctors, and she has a web page of her own which is today drawing about 2500 visitors a day. She is a very special woman, and I am a lucky man because she is mine.

There are many atheists and agnostics that agree with my point of view. There is certainly nothing requiring religion to understand the basic scientific truths of biology. Men are more aggressive, tending more towards leadership, more competitive and stronger than women are. These are biological facts, not religious dogma. I have one section of my page that is dedicated to exposing the hypocrisy and absurdity of anyone claiming to be a "Christian Feminist" because that is an indefensible position. It is just as true for the other major religions of the world. Most religions came from mankind trying to understand the world around itself. The answers they found were based upon long standing experience of how humans reacted to the situations of life. If you look at the "rules of the road" created by the world's religion, as to how men should treat each other, completely aside from any view or concept of God or gods, they are an attempt to make sense, and order out of the chaos that humans are capable of producing. The leftists are attempting to tear down that sense and order that America displayed so thoroughly in the 1950s, and pull our society ever closer to the chaos. But, it is a fact of historical life that when a society draws too near to chaos, the rigid rule of totalitarianism raises up to restore order, painfully and cruelly. That is what I am fighting hard to avoid, and those of your point of view are fighting hard to bring to reality.

As feminism becomes more successful, the rights of women, along with those of men, will be further curbed. Why? Because it takes a big, strong, oppressive government to be able to force unnatural things upon people. If you noticed, since the big, strong, oppressive Soviet Union fell, the countries that it was unnaturally controlling through oppression, are now fighting like cats and dogs trying to snap back to normality for themselves. That is always the ultimate result of oppression.

When you say, "Let everyone hold their own views," I am left to wonder what you mean. Do you mean that you are glad that I have the views I have because they are mine, and you are celebrating them with me? Or do you mean what the average Leftist does, that is all those who have been converted to the Leftist ideals must be left alone, to have their "own" ideas, while the non-conformists' views of the non-Left are attacked with great vigor? I have seen how the Left, "leaves folks alone" to have their own ideas. There are law suits, bombs, beatings and other "benign" ways of leaving people alone who disagree with the Left. Couple with that the steady stream of propaganda from the television, movie, and newsprint media, and we see that the Left is hard at work attempting to make sure that no one who disagrees with them will be left alone to "hold their own views."

Thank you for dropping in and signing my guest book.

Welcome back Sam, and thank you for sharing your insight as well as your support! There is nothing that I can add to an excellent post like that. It is upon folks like you that the future of our country is dependant.

-Al-

Thank you Paul! I will endeavor to do so.

-Al-

Wendy,

It is interesting how many times I have heard Leftists tell me, and those like me, to give up, as if standing up for the truth is no longer worth it because the government is on your bandwagon today. I remember what happened in the 1960s. The vast majority of Americans of the 1950s agreed with my position today. If the Left had just given up simply because they were in the minority at the moment, today we would be living in a tremendously better society than we live in now. Our future would be much brighter, and the vast majority of Americans would be happier. But the Left did not give up, unfortunately, and were able to wreak their damage upon our society. And then you have the gall to say, "give it up." Not a chance. What has been done can be undone, and will be undone.

You say this page is sad. I wish I had a dollar for every time I have heard President Clinton, your soul mate, say the very same thing about anyone who ever told the truth about him. He thought it was so very sad that someone would stoop to saying something or other about him, as if it were not true. Then later, it always turned out to be the truth! But he deflected the truth with the line, "I think it is sad…" just like you are trying to do.

What is truly sad, is what has become of the American family. Today, over 80% of our children are no longer raised by their real mother and father in the same home. That is thanks to feminism, coupled with other Leftist ideas. You can call this fact anything you like, but that will not change the fact that it is the truth! The number of single mothers, and the resulting children who are left unattended, and who get into trouble because of it, is outrageously high. Again that is the truth, and it is because of feminism.

What men are bitter about is not "progress" that women have made. Women are women today just like they were one hundred years ago or a thousand years ago. They will never be men, no matter what people like you try to do to change that fact. Therefore, they have not progressed. They have stayed the same, just like men have. The only thing that has changed is that we have a government which has decided that the freedom of the ones, who make up the majority in our society, to run their own lives as they see fit, is not as important as having those same people kneel to the god of Leftist ideals. You applaud that oppression, and pretend that you do not understand why both men AND WOMEN are bitter about having totalitarianism forced down their throats!

We are indeed all human, but we are not all equal! That absurd lie is wearing very thin. Look about you and you will see that some are smart, and some are not. Some are rich and some are not. Some are strong and some are not. In a free society, those who have money are not treated the same as those who are poor. That is as it should be, because that creates a drive in the poor, if they are intelligent, to strive and improve their lot. If we were all truly equal, we would all live in the same sized house, in the same type of neighborhood, and would be driving exactly the same kind of car. But we do not do that, because we are not equal! We are all different, as individuals, and as sexes. You may or may not learn to accept the facts of life as they are, but that will never change them. If you, and your feminist friends had a whit of concern for women, families, children and America, you would "give it up." But you don't so my page, and others like it will continue to exist, and the right will prevail in the end. Tough break for your side.

So, how long have you had this inferiority complex? Didn't your mommy like you?

Think about what you are saying. Traditional institutions are what made us what we are today. These institutions have created a society where women are no longer sold on a slavery block, or merely legal property of their husbands. They have rights, and they have respect because of those traditional institutions. Patriarchy brings with it responsibilities, and obligations. A man who is a leader in his home, is also responsible for the wellbeing of all those in his household. Traditional institutions, such as Christianity, force a man to treat his wife lovingly, and faithfully.

That which we are doing today, in tearing down our traditional institutions which made us what we are, will make us something different tomorrow, with different traditional institutions. One of those new "traditions" that folks like you are so eager to create, is a totalitarian government. It will make us all play nice with one another by jailing or killing us when we decide to go against its wishes. It is clearly the intention of Bill Clinton, and all of the Leftists, both Democratic and Republican, to increase the government's ability to force people to obey. If you choose not to obey the party line, you will suffer the consequences. Of course they do it in the name of "dignity and wellbeing" don't they? Of course they do. They do it in the name of the women. They do it in the name of the children. They do it in the name of the poor. They do it in the name of the elderly. People are fooled into ignoring what the government is really doing, by having their attention drawn to whom the government is supposedly doing it for. In the mean time more and more restrictive laws are being forced upon us, and our way of life is being destroyed. The "dignity and wellbeing" of the average American who either lived in the 1950s, or is descended from Americans who lived in the 1950s, is under severe attack by folks like you. The new institutions are hostile to their way of life, completely hostile. They will terminate it altogether if given enough time, and if people like me do not stand against them.

So, while you worship your goddesses and ignore your gods, while you snivel and worm your way through life as an inferior being, wishing to be what you worship, but never being able to reach your goal, you have lost your chance to be what you were designed to be: a REAL MAN. My condolences.

Hi Lesley!

You covered a lot of ground there and made some very important points, concerning the importance of fatherhood, and some sort of moral restraint that should be shown by women. The Jerry Springer Show is one of the most moral-free outlets for depravity in existence today. It is only rivaled by other, similar talk shows. They get the most outrageous, sick, and twisted people they can find to come and talk about their lives as if they were normal. One of the worst things about all of those shows in the USA is that they are shown at a time of day when all the latch-key children, abandoned by their working/single mothers, are home from school and unattended. Children might as well be watching X-rated movies as to watch that filth.

Thanks for stopping by and sharing your thoughts with us!

Well, I am glad that we agree on so much.

However, since you chose to bring up a point of disagreement, that is what I will discuss. It troubles me that the act of killing babies, as an accepted medical practice, could even be considered something to be seriously discussed, let alone actually be supported (and performed!) by otherwise civilized adults. My article on abortion was directed to the single point that is quite focused, and in my opinion, is totally unassailable from logical attack. My contention was that a child who is developed to a certain point is just as valuable (and therefore an equal claimant for legal protection) as is another child developed to the exact same point. My opinion, as stated in the article, is that killing a child - a viable, fully developed child - is an atrocity, and the fact that your opinion lies 180 degrees away from that, is more than unfortunate.

If you go to the bottom of this page you will find two buttons, one labeled "OLDER ENTRIES" and the other labeled "NEWER ENTRIES". Click on the "OLDER ENTRIES" button. That will take you to the first few entries. Go to entry #1 and click on the link there to move to the rest of my guest book.

Thanks for dropping in and for your kind words. I have not been on any talk shows, so that was someone else that you saw. The last talk show that I used to watch regularly was Phil Donahue before Oprah hit the air. It finally dawned on me that there was nothing to be gained by watching those shows. They loaded up the audience with liberals, with just a handful of conservatives thrown in to laugh at. If they had a guest who was not PC, they usually would have a very PC guest on at the same time to "balance" the show. No balance was needed for the leftist guests of course, when they were promoting their books, etc. Any serious discussion that started to go in a direction that made the conservative point of view look good was terminated with a lying promise that the point being made would be gotten straight back to after the break. It never happened. The net effect of all television talk shows is to push the audience towards the left, always. Even the mislabeled Politically Incorrect show was hosted by a self-proclaimed liberal. How can that be Politically Incorrect?

I watched one guy who came on the Donahue show who did it right. He was talking on the subject of homosexuality, and how he was against the lifestyle. Instead of trying to make a logical case against the deck, that Donahue always stacked against anyone from the right, he came out in a silly costume, that included rubber gloves and other protective clothing that visually got the point across that male homosexuality was a very unclean and medically dangerous lifestyle. I still remember the show, and I'll bet there are others out there who do as well. He specifically stated that there was no way that Donahue would allow an individual with traditional views to actually state his case and make any points, so he was making his point in other ways. Even still, I think the net result was not to make a great deal of ground with the viewing audience, but it did highlight the absurdity of watching talk shows to "educate" yourself about any topic.

My other web pages are on a different, and also politically incorrect topic. This page is dedicated to my wife and so I keep the two topics separate, to avoid distracting from the message here. If you wish to visit my other pages, email me with your request and I will send you the URL to my main page on the topic.

Well Mr. Thinker, we have some points of agreement and some of disagreement. In the agreement category, we are in accord on the fact that the female of the species is precious. In fact there is no debating that the female is the most important component of any species, but that is only true because she bears young. Take that away and she is far less. So, for a mother, she is indisputably the most precious of our species. This is what my page is all about. The fact is that a human child is not born, ready to go. It is not going to be finished with its need of a mother until it is an adult. (Even then a mother is a very important thing to an adult child.) Since a woman's special worth is in her role as mother, it is there that we should entice her to be, where we can focus upon her our attentions, adoration and special praise, not in the workplace where she makes a second rate worker bee.

Also in the agreement column, we are agreed that this façade of feminism cannot last. It is contrary to the biological reality of mankind and will therefore self-destruct at some point in the future. The only thing that has allowed it to progress this far is the iron fist of the government forcing Americans to accept feminist ideas against their will. Once we are rid of that, feminism as we know it will evaporate into the thin air from whence it came. That by the way is not hate, it is reality and nothing more.

In the column of disagreement, we find that our view of the roles of the sexes is not meshing. It is important, for the perpetuation of the species that men start the process off. So, they are naturally driven to do that, sometimes to the exclusion of nearly everything else. It is fun but necessary, which is no doubt why it biologically came to become fun in the first place. Where our views diverge is what the female goes through. A normal female is flushed with excitement when she finds out that she is pregnant. When she is in a good marriage, her husband is excited with and for her. He dotes on her, and follows the progress of the baby's development with her. She shares with her friends her joy and they all discuss the process with her. It is a social event that females all share with each other. It is what she is on earth for, and she knows it. It is instinctual. It is fulfillment that a job could never come close to supplying. There is all sorts of primping and preening that goes on, and a baby shower to top it all off near the end. When that painful delivery is over, she brings home a little child that every woman, friend or stranger, will fawn over and make a fuss about how cute it is. Again it is a social event and as basic as breathing.

Where you error is thinking of women as being men. They are not. They do not view life through the same eyes. They do not have the same needs and desires. The book Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus is a very interesting study in the different ways that the sexes view life. For a man, pregnancy would be hell, for a normal woman it is at the root of her life's instinctual ambition. For a man, children are little bits of chaos that need to be whipped into shape. For a woman they are little darlings that can do little real wrong. (Of course there are moments even for a mother where children are a real pain, but not in the same way that they would be to a man.)

Since men and women live different lives no matter what they do, (even career women are fundamentally different than career men) there is no way to say who has an "easier" life. If a man loves to do work that is very physical, it is "easier" for him to do hard manual labor than to sit quietly behind a desk all day. The man behind the desk may enjoy that work and so it is "easier" to him than hard manual labor would be. What is "easier" is that which you are good at and that which you enjoy. So, the fact is that many women, who stay at home with their children and are supported by their husbands, have an easier life than many men, even though these women may work many more hours doing their job. Some men love what they do for work and they may have it "easier" than a woman who is a single mother and working a job she hates. Who has an "easier" life is the one who is happy, and that is the simple fact. You cannot judge a woman's happiness by what would make a man happy because on average it is not the same thing at all. In the end, it is not who has the "easiest" life that is truly important but who has fulfilled their duty to the next generation, by first producing it, and then raising it.

Thanks for dropping in and sharing your thoughts.

While I agree with you that feminism is inherently doomed, because biology cannot be ignored, and the excesses of the feminist movement have made it appear ridiculous to any objective observer, there remains the problem of the government interference in our lives, in support of the hopelessly flawed feminist ideals. Our government has continued to grow this century, taking evermore power from the people, unto itself. It grows fat and oppressive. It looks for causes like feminism to use as an excuse to grow even more powerful and to justify even more oppression. All the while the feminists prance around and think that they are winning something for themselves, while they are merely the dupes of the Leftist power brokers. My page is needed, and a thousand more like it. Somehow Americans have to be awakened to the fact that their freedom is evaporating before their very eyes, and they better do something about it soon!

Thanks for dropping by.

As with most feminists, you think wrongly. I do not base my page upon only my own marriage, or even mostly upon my own marriage. My own marriage merely makes a clear example of how great a traditional marriage can be. There were millions of such marriages before the 1960s Liberal invasion of this country, and the fact is that the vast majority of those marriages held together! Divorce was the exception not the rule. It is not just the way we do things, or what makes us happy, that is important. What is important, is what makes marriages last, and thereby protects children, and also what prepares the next generation for perpetuating our society, and culture.

The self-centeredness of the feminist is absolutely the defining attribute of the movement. What make you happy is all that counts. To hell with your children, your husband, the society, your culture, the future of all your descendents. Only worry about what makes YOU happy.

What built the USA was a huge majority of the population who thought of others. They worried about creating strong families before worrying about what made themselves happy. They worried about their own children and their spouses more than their own self-fulfillment. They worked hard, and gave much, and in return they had solid families that lasted for life. They had neighborhoods that were crime free. They had honor and they gave to charity even when they had far less money than people do today. Those people built America, and the Left is doing all that it can to tear it down.

There are examples of children who have lived through having two alcoholic parents. (Often these parents remained married for life, call them a success if you like.) These children had to fend for themselves most of their lives, and many have grown up to be "well-adjusted," and "very smart," even "brilliant". They have won scholarships. They have even gone on to have alcohol free lives, and permanent marriages. Does that make a case for being an alcoholic parent, as a positive or even an acceptable thing? Only to someone who was enamoured with the idea of promoting alcoholism. It is just what you are trying to do with your example for feminism.

I will take you at your word that you have been a restaurant manager for your 25 year marriage. It follows therefore that you had absolutely nothing to do with raising your children. I have known several people in the restaurant business, and it is one of the most time consuming jobs there is, more like having two fulltime jobs. In order to do that you had to abandon your children completely to somebody else. Perhaps your replacement was an adequate substitute for a mother, or perhaps your kids just grew up young, and learned to fend for themselves, like the children of alcoholic parents have to. No matter how they managed to replace you, it does not in any way make a case for the neglect that you are guilty of in not being there for your children. However, you are happy, personally fulfilled, and since your kids managed to avoid joining the huge numbers of children who have had their lives completely destroyed by self-focused women like you, you feel justified in your selfish behavior.

Since, because of your demanding job, you have not seen your husband for 25 years, no doubt you feel like strangers more than newlyweds. Look at the millions of marriages that are ending in divorce because of feminism. The vast majority of marriages of today end up in that category. I recently read that over 80% of our kids are living in homes without both of their real parents present. That is as a direct result of feminism. That completely trumps your attitude that it doesn't matter what people do, as long as they are happy. When 80% of our children are impacted by a movement's distorted ideals, then it does matter, and it matters a great deal!

There must be a cloning device out there somewhere, that is producing exact replicas of liberals. They all sound the same.

Perhaps someone like you would not care to notice but there are far more children today who are left in their dirty diapers, or are being changed by short tempered strangers who are far more like to be abusive to those crying babies, because of what mothers choose to do. (If you had the opportunity to check, you would find that most men's restrooms still don't have changing facilities today, and I can't remember ever seeing one of those men's room baby changing stations actually in use my entire life.)

Personal happiness first of all is not the only important thing in life. Secondly, immediate personal happiness, may actually lead to long term misery. Hedonism may be a lot of fun. It may generate tremendous personal happiness in the short term. Many folks jump into an adulterous affair because they are looking for personal happiness. Are they happy? For the short term, I am sure that they are. But in the long term, it can lead to great misery in the form of divorce, or even death, if a jealous spouse finds out. Happiness is transient, and can only be properly evaluated at the end of one's life, when that which has remained will have been separated from that which was only temporary .

My web page is not about any one family. It is about a movement. This movement has ripped our families apart, and left our children without their fathers, or much of their mothers. This movement has led us into socialistic ideas and it is assisting the government in stealing the rights and power of the individual citizen for itself. This has led to oppression of both men and women, and will only lead to more of the same in the future. This process must be stopped, and therefore the feminist movement must be opposed and stopped. If that surprises you, it is time you wake up to what is going on, so as not to be more unpleasantly surprised by events in the future.

Nowhere on my page did I say that women should be restricted from playing sports or with playing with dolls or playing with anything else that strikes their fancy, in the area of entertainment. Your implication that I did is totally unfounded. My only objection to female athletes is when the feminists try and claim that they are the equal of male athletes.

I agree with you completely that Little League is great entertainment. So are the Special Olympics. Also, I enjoy watching females run around in skimpy sporting outfits as much as any man does. Very entertaining. Kids or women playing sports and having a good time is just fine. Nothing on my page says otherwise.

I will not grant you that women are the equal to men in enthusiasm for sports, at least competitive sports. It is no coincidence that female professional sports are over loaded with lesbians. That unnatural masculine orientation of the brain is what supplies them the competitive drive that they have. Girls of course can be competitive, but males are more competitive. Playing hurt, and playing past the point where you know you are going to be hurt is very common among even average male athletes. Winning is more important than it has any real right to be with most males. My wife often says that she just doesn't understand the male drive to win. She wants to win, but having fun is what really counts to her. That is the normal feminine approach to sports.

Professional sports are just a matter of physical ability, at least as the baseline starting point. If you do not have the physical ability, you cannot play the sport no matter what other attributes you may have. That is why women will never be good enough to play real professional sports. Here is where we run into difficulty.

The feminists want to force schools to spend as much money on female athletic programs as male athletic programs. That is absurd, because females on average, do not participate in sports as often or as enthusiastically as males do. Also, at the schools where they sell tickets for sports, usually the male sports draw in more fans because the level of play is superior. Therefore the feminists are acting in a less than fair (big surprise!) or intelligent (another real shocker!) manner .

In the Olympics it is completely absurd to count women's medals as equal to men's for the same event. If women want to take home a gold medal for the 400 meter run, they should have to run the fastest time in that event. Otherwise it is like having a gold medal in a Special Olympics event being counted as equal with a gold medal for the best men's time. You know that this is true and that saying that does not in any way deprive women from playing all the sports their little hearts desire. It is the prestige of being equal, without being equal that feminists want and that is what I am against. The Greeks understood this. They had a completely separate competition for women. It had nothing to do with the men's Olympics. I don't know why feminists are so much less intelligent than the Greeks were.

Women do bring grace to all that they do. That is why watching women's tennis, with the short little skirts, is so popular. Female ice skating is also very graceful and fun to watch. (And you have to love those outfits!) It is like watching dance or some other graceful activity. I certainly don't have any problem with that, and nothing on my page says that I do. It is only when feminists are trying to equate male sporting ability with female sporting ability that I do have a problem with it.

-Al-

Thanks for the laugh. Me a loser? You don't have a clue. I have been happily married for over 23 years and my wife is my best friend. I open her door for her and she likes it. It is a sign of respect for her, not because she can't do it herself but because I want to do it for her. The thing is, unlike leaches like yourself, a good woman not only receives special attention but she gives it. Marriage is a two-way street, and all you one-way type people crash and burn at some point in your lives. What goes around, comes around.

The prostitute has always been out there to sell sex for favors, and if that is what you wish to be that is no skin off my nose. While there will always be women like you, as well as the men who are just as morally bankrupt to use women, that means nothing to society in general. You see, to offset your self-centered damage are all the wonderful women who really do care about their husbands and their children. These women are the backbone of society, something someone like yourself would never understand.

You have two children at home and you don't have them helping you with the housework? What have you been teaching your kids all these years? My sons certainly helped my wife out with the housework while they were home, and when they left the housework became proportionally that much less.

Labor will have to be divided up some way in a household. In my household, I earn the money and my wife spends it. It works out well for us. One thing that I never do is take my wife's efforts for granted. I think many husbands do and that can turn a happy task into pure drudgery. I literally thank my wife several times a day for all the things that she does for me. It is not just a pat routine, or a meaningless "thank you" either. She knows that all her efforts are appreciated. And she lets me know that the work I do for the family is appreciated as well. It is a joint effort. Equally important roles but different roles.

I do think that most women do not know how much men chafe in their roles. Most men tend to keep their problems to themselves. There is always some pain in obligation. For women supervising kids can be thankless work, but it is nearly always rewarded at some point in your life.

Feminists could not care less about you. You are merely a pawn in their power struggle. If they thought killing you would further their cause they would neither hesitate to do it, nor lose one second's sleep over having done it. It is clear that rape is only an issue if it furthers their agenda. Otherwise they are completely unconcerned about it. On every issue that they speak to, you will find that they are only interested in how that issue will increase their political power. They are perfectly willing to draft women into the military (proven by their attempts to do just that) when they know that most women are unwilling, unfit and will be killed, raped and abused in huge numbers. They do not care about what happens to women. It is power and nothing else that they are focused on.

You don't have to show your husband my web page, he sounds like he has his priorities right already. However if you think he is not appreciative enough have him read Women, the Foundation of Civilization. I certainly do not claim that all chauvinists are the best they can be. Traditional marriage is something that you have to work at. Where feminism failed was when it chose to focus on pulling down the traditional family instead of trying to focus on improving the efforts of both sexes in making traditional marriage work better.

My wife and I were waiting in line the other day, at a store, and the clerk asked us, "Are you newly weds?" After 23 years of marriage that is still the way we strike people. If a marriage is done right, there is nothing better on earth. Of course the converse can be just as true. A bad marriage can be hell. That is why our society should be focusing on making good marriages, instead of bad ones.

Rhonda,

If you are saying that women have the right to try on their own to do whatever they want, I agree with you. If you are saying that the government should be assisting that pursuit in anyway, through laws, state financed programs, or court rulings, we are in complete disagreement. Therein lies the disaster that feminism holds in its hands. The absurdity of feminists is beyond ludicrous. You just have to laugh at them to keep from crying. The idea that men would be afraid of equal competition from women is too funny for words. Where men are upset by feminism is exclusively because of the federal government putting lethal pressure on companies to play the feminist game, by the feminist rules. Without that pressure, feminism would have died the miserable death that it deserves.

The facts are there for anyone to see. As women have taken over our democracy, being in the majority, we have moved quickly to the political Left. It will destroy our freedom, our society, our culture and our people. The sad thing is that women are the ones who are going to suffer the most when our standard of living falls down to levels that the Soviet Union considered normal for most of its existence. That is what the female vote has done for us this century. You and all other women are going to pay the highest price for that mistake.

For most of the history of the United States, women did not have the vote. Women were still citizens and protected under the law. So, your assertion that I am trying to take your citizenship away is completely groundless. The vote has done nothing to help the majority of women and has done much to harm them. You will see that harm increase greatly in the future. The Western democracies have treated women better than any other society in the history of mankind. By the female vote turning those societies into socialistic entities, the high standard of living that was possible before will fall away, and what will be left is a dreary life for all, especially women. "Women and children first" will be replaced with "every man for himself." You will not like it.

It is amazing that the hypocritical media even mentioned the story. This is quintessential feminism: kill the kids so you don't have your career held back. That is what abortion is all about. This the very same process at work. While feminists may be too frightened to come out directly in support of this murderess, you know they sympathize with her completely.

Oh, there are a great many brainwashed, fanatical feminists who actually believe that all the differences between men and women are because of the way they are raised. I have these mental defectives visit my page from time to time. They ignore their own experience, and every study that has ever been done on children's behavior, and just assume the world is the way that they wish it was. The Book Brain Sex is filled with evidence beyond debate. Girl babies immediately react to people and things differently than boy babies do. This is before any outside pressures have been applied. From then on the differences only become more obvious, with the chasm climatically widened beyond any possible confusion at puberty. Societal views about men and women came from biology. Biology forced society to act as it does, society did not force males and females to act the way they do, in the area of basic sexual differences.

While this is a settled matter scientifically, politically the feminist does not care about objective reality at all. She will continue to pursue her political agenda regardless of scientific fact, or the destructive results of her activities. If it takes killing all women, the feminist will be happy to do it, as long as all of the women died for the feminist cause.

Thanks for dropping by again,