betsy

Because I don't agree with the deceitful ways these testosterone-laden wimmin are using and exploiting the real issues real women are concerned and troubled with! And to think that taxpayers are funding some of these farcical movements!

The reason why so many do not think abortion is murder is purely because abortion had now become a "woman's right". That's the magic pass-word!

Get with the program. Second wave feminsim is yesterday's news. May I suggest reading up on modern (third wave) feminism before you denounce the movement? It may be yesterday's news...but I bet some radical man-hating feminists nowadays have been inspired by it...and some who had belonged to it are still carrying the torch for it. Well, isn't it odd why a feminist group like the one I described from the other topic had spurned a male's show of support for womens' rights? Why the insensible hostility towards someone supporting the cause? Women's Rights shouldn't be about a "in-your-face-pissing-contest" with men.

Maybe that's why REAL WOMEN group chose that name on purpose? To indicate they're really "Real" women?

The radical male-hating feminist groups that we've been reading about most probably came from the radical Lesbian-Feminist group from the 70's. Here are some excerpts from the site (which I got from another site called "QueerbyChoice"). 1970s Lesbian Feminism While doing research for a video project on early 1970s lesbian feminism, we found few Web resources dedicated to this vibrant, controversial, and radical movement. The materials on this site primarily cover the development and emergence of lesbian feminism, a moment from roughly 1970 to 1975, and addresses the related but separate trajectory of lesbians of color. In 1970, lesbian feminism emerged as a radical political project from within the U.S. left -- the anti-war, student, and civil rights movements; welfare activism; anarchism; second-wave feminism; and also from lesbian subcultures. The early 1970s lesbian feminists, and especially separatists, were mainly but not exclusively white, and came from a range of class and cultural backgrounds. Radical lesbians extended feminist theory even further, pointing out that (compulsory) heterosexuality is key to male dominated society (a.k.a. patriarchy). The logical strategy for feminists is to escape heterosexuality, and embrace lesbianism, in order to free themselves, overthrow the social order, and create a more just society. Lesbian feminist activists aimed to deconstruct, decenter, and destabilize patriarchal society. They organized political actions to criticize homophobia within the women's movement (the "Lavender Menace") and in the larger society. http://womens-studies.osu.edu/araw/1970slf.htm#lesbian ---------------------------- No wonder there's so much male-bashings....they mean to eradicate 'em!

I've mentioned from the topic Scheherezade that women had gained through the movement, but unfortunately we've lost some too. It seems that now when we've supposedly acquire more "freedom", women seems to have been entrapped into a situation where there's palpable "pressure" to "rise" above that position in the kitchen which, a lot of women, suddenly find so shameful and degrading. Ironically, the pressure doesn't come from the men....but from fellow-women who show contempt and scorn to those who prefer to remain in their kitchens. Why is it so surprising to find a lot of women preferring home and kitchen? I think it is our natural habitat. We're natural born nurturers. Way back, it was a big deal that women had finally managed to get men to do their share with house chores. But lately, when you talk to women, most of them admit that they still do the bulk of chores at home. Some even confess that nothing had changed...their husbands still would not lift a finger when it comes to domestic chores, other than the traditional taking-out-the-garbage routine, or handling the BBQ. The reason why a lot of women end up doing the chores is basically identical. Men are so clueless when it comes to cleaning...that either you put up with a sloppy job or end up doing the chore yourself. A lot of women cannot abide by the former, thereby they end up opting for the latter. I think we've been had! Now women do so much more in AND outside the house! They're stressed out and harried more than ever!

fROM THE WEBSITE OF REAL WOMEN. "WHO WE ARE REAL Women of Canada (Realistic, Equal, Active, for Life) is a non-partisan, non-denominational organization of independent women. We come from all walks of life, occupations, social and economic backgrounds. Some members work full or part-time outside the home, while some mainly work in the home. We represent a broad spectrum of Canadian women who, until our formation, did not have a public forum in which to express their views. Objectives We promote equality for all women. One of our objectives is to support policies for women that provide equal opportunity in education, employment and retirement. We believe that social and economic problems and solutions for women today should be resolved by taking into account their impact on the family and society as a whole. Our view is that the family, which is now undergoing serious strain, is the most important unit in Canadian society. We believe that the fragmentation of the Canadian family is one of the major causes of disorder in society today. Our objectives are as follows: To reaffirm that the family is society’s most important unit, since the nurturing of its members is best accomplished in the family setting. To promote the equality, advancement and well being of women, recognizing them as interdependent members of society, whether in the family, workplace or community. To promote, secure and defend legislation which upholds the Judeo-Christian understanding of marriage and family life. To support government and social policies that make homemaking possible for women who, out of necessity, would otherwise have to take employment outside the home. To support the right to life of all innocent individuals from conception to natural death. Motto: Women’s rights, but not at the expense of human rights.

You really believe in Real Women, you're kidding aren't you???? Why would she be kidding, I'd take Real Women over that other radical group, and Real Women do not get government funding. Let's make a separate topic about this so we can really argue to our hearts' content. Will post it now.

I do understand your claim. Statistics show that blacks are prone to crime (boy, that'll probably touch off another round of preaching about poverty and society's fault. Scientific researches show that a certain race is higher than the others as far as intelligence go (? I think, not exactly sure what specifics). There is nothing racist about statements of facts. All I'm saying is that the article reminds me of Hitler. But then again, we are basing all our arguments (at least I am), on that one particular article which for all we know, had been manipulated and worded in such a way so it does give off a negative, racist slant. You know the kind of media we have here like the CBC is adept at that kind of "journalism".....

Yeah, insulting people to try and see if you can incite them to violence is our culture, and they should just respect that. If that is what our culture is, according to you of course....the answer is still the same! We still expect the same courtesy and respect for it from those who had CHOSEN to come to our country. After all, didn't our soldiers respect the culture of others when they go to those countries...a culture that even includes degrading and butchery of human life as part of its daily routine?

Sorry we got side-tracked. It's all Margrace's fault! Now, back to the title. Did you hear about a niece of Bin Laden who allegedly posed semi-nude for a spread? Of course she lives in the west.

Feisty maybe....but not by being "bitchy". The NDP woman and the Conservative Rona Ambrose (who were debating with her) proved to be women of class. From an article a long time ago, a man wrote to a women's group in support of women's rights and help eliminate violence on women. Instead of thanking him for his support, the spokesperson for the group dismissed his letter and more or less told him to get lost. That got me convinced that women shoud be wary of group claiming to speak for them. I find that I identify more with a group called REAL WOMEN. How about that woman who wanted be a fireman? She did not pass the physical test of being able to lift so many pounds (weight)...so she complained. Of course, they lowered the required weight to be lifted....which means the standard got lowered. Imagine being an obese person trapped in a burning building that needs to be carried out by a fireman. Women are fighting for some issues just for the sake of proving something. Did we really gain? Yes, I suppose...but we've also lost a lot.

What are you trying to say that you and the others can not discuss a topic with out showing a little respect or common sense. That you need to insult someone or a group to make a piont. That Canadains are not capable of having a normal conversation or expressing thier ideas without insults. And then try to hide behind freedom of speech. What I'm trying to say is pretty clear! Why do you insist on twisting my meaning? Didn't the soldier you quoted say this? "When we as soldiers move into another country, whether to keep or enforce the peace, we respect the fact that the host country is unique in its beliefs and culture. We try to leave the country (at some point) with minimal cultural impact. We respect their holidays and events; we go so far as to try not to eat or drink in front of Muslims during Ramadan out of respect for their culture, even while in our own camp. " So, why shouldn't we expect and get the same courtesy and respect for our own culture from those who come to our country? Your blind insistence on these insults as reason enough to tweak and modify our own system leaves me to question whether you are truly a military guy or not....and if you are, I do hope you are not an officer! And if I am a soldier and stationed along with you.....I'll most probably be "dead meat." For if we ever get ambushed you'll most likely convince me to drop my gun and instead, try to initiate a group hug session! I'm sorry ...but I'm just starting to find our endlessly looping argument silly...and funny. Obviously your sympathy and understanding lies more to the other group which you are convinced, have been maligned and terribly insulted....so much so that you feel that is reason enough to modify our own culture so it would meet their approval. Your determined refusal to consider the root of this problem says a lot. Coming from one of our allegedly own soldier...it sounds surreal.

Easy to see that you never had to fight for "pay eqity" for your staff. They still threaten one in Canada for standing up for their rights especially women. Then you need new glasses, because I was heavily involved in pay equity and the process and have never been threatened. I'm still not clear on your response, I assume, but correct me if I'm wrong, that you are trying to compare the situation of Muslim women to that of Canadian women in general its not clear. Pay equity is a well meaning attempt to equalize wages by comparing apples to oranges & who would object for equal pay for equal work, but really, think about beauocrats assessing different jobs for their "value" by weighing skill, effort, responsibility and working conditions - how objective is that - its not, -it can't be done. Pay equity is basically a kind of wage control since it takes wages out of the marketplace and turns them over to the arbitrary attention of government workers & their politically appointed tribunals. What they should be doing is comparing wages on a job to job basis. The wage gap is closing as today's women are better educated, choose more skilled positions, have children later, or not at all in order to get ahead, systemic discrimination is no longer an issue for the most part. The fairer way is to make sure that women are paid equally is to guarrantee equal access to education, skills training & job opportunities. Canada is no Afghanistan or Iraq. Ah so I suspected, you were heavily involved in pay equity, Ha Ha. I heard those arguments, you were against it obviously. You were not in a small town where the good old boys gave the plum jobs to their friends and then made nasty comments to because well educated clerks were expected to work for minimum wage and were told that women should not be working anyway and they should be glad to have a job. You had not worked and improved yourself and were told that you were only worth minimum wage. You did not see your staff fired illegaly and saw them forced to accept it because family worked in the community and would be punished if they said anything. People like you are what I am talking about, you have no idea of what some women are up against in this country and it never changes. It will never change until someone stands up to speak about those atrocities. In this day and age, it is baffling why this kind of thing is allowed to go on by the entire community! That it is allowed to go on makes the community partly to blame. Well Betsy if you came here and talked to the women who finally got at least some semblance of pay equity they would probably tell you that if it hadn't been for my fight they would not have gotten what they did. Not only my staff but the municipal staff got fair pay. But you know I was up against women as well as men. Women I find are their own worst enemies and this goes on in the Moslem world big time. Will it change only women can do that. Never having lived in Iraq or Iran we have no concept of what it is like. How can it change, well it is changing here to some extent however I think Belinda's disagreement with Mr. Harper is a prime example. Although I support some of the things that women fight for...I cannot say that I agree with some Women's Rights agenda. Some radical groups have turned it into a man-hating machine. I do not support any groups that believe in having their so-called "rights" by taking away from another. That doesn't solve anything. It only puts the shoe on the other foot so to speak. Women being their worst enemies, I agree with that in some cases. And my opinion of Belinda is not flattering. I have seen her behaviour in numerous times while guesting at a talk show...and the way she handles debates makes me think her attitude only perpetuates the stereotypical image of a "bitch."

Easy to see that you never had to fight for "pay eqity" for your staff. They still threaten one in Canada for standing up for their rights especially women. Then you need new glasses, because I was heavily involved in pay equity and the process and have never been threatened. I'm still not clear on your response, I assume, but correct me if I'm wrong, that you are trying to compare the situation of Muslim women to that of Canadian women in general its not clear. Pay equity is a well meaning attempt to equalize wages by comparing apples to oranges & who would object for equal pay for equal work, but really, think about beauocrats assessing different jobs for their "value" by weighing skill, effort, responsibility and working conditions - how objective is that - its not, -it can't be done. Pay equity is basically a kind of wage control since it takes wages out of the marketplace and turns them over to the arbitrary attention of government workers & their politically appointed tribunals. What they should be doing is comparing wages on a job to job basis. The wage gap is closing as today's women are better educated, choose more skilled positions, have children later, or not at all in order to get ahead, systemic discrimination is no longer an issue for the most part. The fairer way is to make sure that women are paid equally is to guarrantee equal access to education, skills training & job opportunities. Canada is no Afghanistan or Iraq. Ah so I suspected, you were heavily involved in pay equity, Ha Ha. I heard those arguments, you were against it obviously. You were not in a small town where the good old boys gave the plum jobs to their friends and then made nasty comments to because well educated clerks were expected to work for minimum wage and were told that women should not be working anyway and they should be glad to have a job. You had not worked and improved yourself and were told that you were only worth minimum wage. You did not see your staff fired illegaly and saw them forced to accept it because family worked in the community and would be punished if they said anything. People like you are what I am talking about, you have no idea of what some women are up against in this country and it never changes. It will never change until someone stands up to speak about those atrocities. In this day and age, it is baffling why this kind of thing is allowed to go on by the entire community! That it is allowed to go on makes the community partly to blame.

Yes. Claiming "superiority" over another race...that's what's bothering me about that article. It does reminds one of Hitler.

If there is not one common ground to look up and adhere to (such as the foundation of rights and freedom this country is built on), then what will hold us all together?

Exactly. I talked about the "foreseeable shitstorm." My arguments are purely based on what I see as my own self-interest. I can be swayed to any position if I can be convinced it serves me better, and if I have more to lose than to gain by something, I'm against it. Well the foreseeable "shitstorm" that I see with modification and tweakings is a weakened society in the long run! A nation utterly divided into fractions by various "lifestyles, cultures and religions...going at one another over anything or everything because there will be no CLEAR DEFINING RULES! You'll see it in your own life-time...."shitstorms" have already been happening. Just look at all parts of the globe!

This has nothing to do with multiculturalism or immigration because it isn't Canadian muslims who are burning Danish flags or acting violently. Multiculturalism is an entirely different story that I can only defend when I'm playing devil's advocate. It may not be entirely about it, but of course this is attached to multi-culturalism. How can it not be? When we're arguing about offenses and appeasing a group of immigrants whose religious belief clashes to that of our own culture. When Army Guy wants to sacrifice tweaking the basic foundation of our own culture to soothe hurt feelings...hoping to prevent this group from resorting back to the ways of their own culture back from where they came from.

No, no, no. For the Canadian muslims who are offended, they can practice their new-found freedom by writing their opinion to the Western Standard. Letters to the editor, if they like. If we want multiculturalism to have a chance to work out well, everyone ought to go by the system of this country. We cannot accomodate appeasing and pandering to every culture and religion that exist in this country. We'll end up with a tattered mess! That's just plain common sense.

Aren't you confused about this? Aren't we supposed to introduce democracy into that area? That's the whole point isn't it, why Canada is in Afghanistan on a COMBAT mission....to assist that new DEMOCRATIC government to establish itself? What kind of a democracy are you going to give them as "an example to follow?" A farce?The kind of democracy where what they need to do is CONTINUE DOING WHAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING ALL ALONG TO GET THEIR OWN WAY? To be heard thru violent means? That by using violence, definitely some liberal-minded pacifists will do some appeasing? Worse, we tweak and modify our own democratic system to accomodate their way? "Follow our lead and example" indeed.

Army guy, One of the soldiers you quoted wrote: "When we as soldiers move into another country, whether to keep or enforce the peace, we respect the fact that the host country is unique in its beliefs and culture. We try to leave the country (at some point) with minimal cultural impact. We respect their holidays and events; we go so far as to try not to eat or drink in front of Muslims during Ramadan out of respect for their culture, even while in our own camp. " If you could so graciously afford to give that kind of respect and courtesy to a foreign country when you're on their soil....then why can't you expect the same kind from any of them when they are on ours. After all, no one forced anybody to come to our country...in fact, we've opened our doors to anyone who'd wish to take part in this culture! It just so happened that our culture involved having the freedom to express our opinions and the freedom of the press to print what they decide ought to be printed. These people came and most escaped from a culture of abuse where freedom hardly exists. They need to adjust to this new culture that is abundant with all sorts of freedom....not the other way around!

Saying it is one thing. But you aren't just saying it. You're telling others to shut up with their opinions. You even went so far as judging and deciding for everyone....you want to eliminate the freedom to choose, along with the freedom of speech and press....just because a group says they find it offensive. You could've have simply turned to this group and adviced them: "Well then, don't read the bloody Western Standard!" Face it, that is the simplest, most logical, sensible thing to do in this situation. That would've been pure common sense in its simple form! But going through all these contortions and twisting of reality, justifying why you'd rather see clipping some freedom in your OWN SOIL to MAKE AMEND and KEEP THE HORDES from indulging in more bloodletting....in other words, to PACIFY....well, that is unmistakeably callled, 'appeasing".

Betsy what do you call the bombing of the building in Oaklahoma City by a White Suppremist? Now, that, was a crime.

We have done so much for these kids so they can have a future. However, let's face it. Some of these kids will never go anywhere for they've been raised seeing their parents lived off the "pogie system"...so a lot of them will end up doing the same, or they have chosen the path to self-destruction. What about those kids who are doing well? The achievers? They don't have to be specially gifted....but you know, the ones with the positive attitudes and go-getters? I think they are getting lost in the shuffle...in our concentration towards the "lemons"....we are losing sight of these gems. We must show these gems that we take notice of their positive efforts and enthusiasm...offer an incentive of some sort...something that will keep them motivated and going.