Live From China

So the above doesn't count? Don't get me wrong: in some senses we can use any parameters we wish, as long as "the gate swings both ways." What I find strange is that I often hear women say they were abused because their male partner yelled at theme, or demeaned and insulted them. So I must then ask, "Does this count or doesn't it?" Of course, that is the part of you that doesn't like your prejudices ruffled!

Hmm. I wonder? People may find the following a bit of an eye-opener: Intimate Partner Abuse Against Men Above from:http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/ncfv-cnivf/familyviolence/html/mlintima_e.html (Emphasis is mine). The above data parallels that in the UK and US. From: http://www.batteredmen.com/batrcan.htm My apologies; tried to copy and paste more substantial information from the above but it just wouldn't work.

Every time someone like Lohan has one of these pre-staged, pre-scripted sessions for some publication like People magazine, it just sounds so insincere, shallow and phony. Really, another addicted celebrity just isn't news. I think a fate worse than death for these publicity hogs would be receiving no press at all. Just imagine the only information you get is the latest movie they're in and that's it (And I know there some celebrities who shun the press and lead peaceful lives). Ah, I dare to dream

Ah, yes, the drama. Or more accurately the fake drama. Like DA says, trying to make life "Hollywood style." What's really pathetic is when you hear the bride at a rehearsal say, "If I don't get my way, I'm going to make everyone's life very difficult!" Really, do you actually have that power? Give it up and grow up! In this day and age, way too much importance is placed on weddings!

Probably some sort of health drink or fruit drink. Of course, it is clearly mentioned in the article so that Lohan is painted in as positive a light as possible. What I really notice is that celebrities are the most avid publicity hogs when they are painted in a glowing light, but when the darker side of their existence is exposed they vilify the press. And, of course, when they are portrayed as the most important person in existence, they make sure everything is carefully crafted and staged. They never like being seen as they really are.

There are these so-called reality shows (although I personally think they often use actors) about families heading into weddings. If they are indeed real, then the people portrayed are obnoxious, unreasonable, angst ridden yahoos. I tend to think of weddings in the same way I think of Christmas. People put way too much emotional energy into them.

We can't be talking about the same person. I have read this book twice (once for a discussion group) and have heard the real Dr. Sommers on the radio several times. She has never once alluded to, stated, indicated, etc. that women should just stay at home and have a traditional family. You have been conned, bamboozled, misled, etc. Or you are lying. Of course, had you read the book, you would know that. In addition, Dr. Sommers is a professor of sociology at Columbia University, hardly a stay-at-home mom. And you are spinning your tires I did. I just used the critique to show it. By the way, I know this con game. And I am sure other posters have, too. Even I said, "Oh, it comes from the American Journal of Business and Economics and is an article on wealth holdings in the US. It is written by the feminist Dr. So-and-So. It is in the April 2000 issue, pp. 100 - 125", you still would not accept it as accurate. Depends on what you mean by "disproportionately subject to." Rape and sexual assaults are terrible crimes are need to be dealt with severely. As a group, women cannot cry "victim" because not all women have been raped. All female rape victims (notice how I use that word) can and all efforts should be made to assist them. I find this kind of interesting and maybe someone can point out why the difference: as a male, I am 1.5 times more likely to be assaulted or killed in a violent crime (perpetrated by another male). If I were a black male in a US city (Detroit, as an "up there" example), it would even be worse, especially if I were between the ages of 15-30. Even though this is a fact, men do not cry "victim." And, please oh please, do not say I do not think rape is an issue for women; it is. I know because stopped one once! Speaking of rape, Dr. CHS pointed out a huge disparity in funding between two universities in the US (the pattern was/is repeated nationwide). In a predominately white, middle-class university the rape relief centre received magnitudes more funding than a university in the same city attended mainly by black students. And ratio of rapes per year was something like 9:30. I think it is injustices like these that really need to be rectified.

Just saw a program of CSI where a mouthy mother-in-law gets murdered at a wedding. Even though they arrested the culprits and did their duty, the cops were of the opinion the MIL got her come uppance. This got me to "a-thinkin'". I have heard of brawls breaking out at weddings, mother-in-laws getting hauled away kicking and screaming because they can't "have their way", people breaking up (cancelling a wedding) because someone won't fork out the money they were saving for 5 years for a house down payment, etc. What gives?

No one said it was. I am sensing a closed, hostile mind. You seem to criticize the evidence presented in the book without actually presenting any counter-evidence of your own. And without reading the book. And, to head you off at the pass, I have read books by authors that would be considered critiques of Dr. Sommers. I am interested in both sides of the story. Actually, I did. Several times. To use your it-isn't-a-book-club attitude, it isn't a research article, it's "just" a book review. If you want the source of the data you will have to go to the book (which I guess means you will have to read at least part of it). It is meticulously researched with lots of footnotes which will help to answer your question, "Whose wealth?" and Actually it isn't. Disadvantaged does not mean oppressed. And disadvantaged doesn't entitle you to claim you are victimized. It's too bad you automatically got your hackles up. I tend to think of the book review as a way of saying, "Let's focus on the real issues." Rape, the "glass ceiling", wage disparity (where they exist), etc.

Interesting about the wages. What I see is a huge range! I do not think that $18/h is very good for a truck driver (although I must ask what type of trucking we are talking about), and $21/h or $42K/a for an administrative officer just sucks (of course, what is meant by AO?). I think many people are getting the impression that the streets in AB are "paved with gold." As for this: I am sensing (as posted earlier) we are getting many young people (some thicker than planks) getting paid far more than they're worth. They are in for a rude shock when the booms die and they find out what they are truly worth!

So why do you say this? OK, here goes. A possible explanation. It is related to access to health care. When I was in high school (during the last Ice Age ), women, on average, lived 7 years longer than men. In 35 years, this has increased to 10 years. If the health care (as some feminists claim) is so uncaring about women's health issues, why has it contributed so successfully to increase their life spans? And yes, I am sure there are other contributing factors. Health care is definitely a feminist issue. Of course, it is also a human issue. Read the article. If you cannot answer this question after doing so, I will not be able to explain this to you. I agree totally. But then this claim is never made nor even implied. I get the impression you have not read this book. Correct me if I am wrong. It is meticulously researched and has a substantial number of footnotes and references. Many posters are constantly asking others to provide links, evidence, etc. This book does that; enough to satisfy even the most greedy "evidence hound." Of course, many people do not like to hear its message. Go read it. Then we'll talk.

Your defintion of poor is not being able to eat out in a restaurant when you want? Tell that to the person who cant afford to feed their children. If you think a degree is a guarantee against ever being poor think again. The sad truth of the matter is most of the people living in poverty are disabled, and I do NOT mean mentally challenged, I mean those who have been injured on the job, and single parents. Many of who do have a degree but are considerable "undesirabled" by employers.

Interesting. I "googled" "Christina Hoff Sommers" and got 135,000 hits. There we go, substantiated and definitely not "discardable." You might also want to try Patricia Pearson ("When She Was Bad") and Donna Laframboise (a Canadian; "Princess at the Window"). One of the reason Dr. Sommers received such noteriety was due to the fact that her research - detective work actually - blew the lid off the more-violence-by- men-on-Super-Bowl-Sunday scam. All these authors are strong feminists by the way; they just believe in balance. What are you missing? That people (I extrapolate this to all people, not just women) cannot cry oppression when they have access to more economic, social and political power than anyone has had in the entire history of the world. Oppression is a non sequitur in such a case.

There is a difference between wages and "holding wealth." Dr. Sommers is known for doing fairly meticulous research. This is why her book has stood the test of time. Regardless, you are missing the gist of this quote!

What's funnier is that when you read statistics you don't like, you say they are probably made up. Not too sure where the bit about "celebrities" comes in. Let me try a different approach here; I'll use basic logic. I guess if women hold slightly more than half the wealth, then men hold slightly less than half.

Strange indeed! I think there is a lot of confusion about the so-called Age of Aquarius. I think many people believe it has just started recently. It - if you believe in this sort of thing - actually started centuries ago. Oh well! But a more interesting story about the AOA: Quite a few years ago there was book written (can't remember the name or author) about the rise of Nazism and why people were often keen to join the Nazi Party/embrace Nazism. The author actually took this to a personal level and interviewed people about their motivations. One interview stands out in particular. A woman was asked why her son joined the SS. Her reply? "Oh well, it was the Age of Aquarius you know." Go figure!

I know that the angry "mouths" quoted at the beginning of this thread do not represent all women, and certainly not all feminists. Their rantings stand out not only because of their wild views, but because any of the quieter, more sane feminist voices are drowned out by the angry rhetoric. Or quite simply the more moderate voices are too busy working on issues that matter; too busy to take the time to respond. Along this line, here is some food for thought: (From http://www.reason.com/news/show/29521.html) Specifically, this is a quote from a critique of the book Who Stole Feminism? by Dr. Christina Hoff Sommers.

Given the quotes that were listed in the very first post, I agree with this very strongly. Such choice little bon mots, sometimes hidden under the guise of scholarship, are about power, anger and hatred.

I found this Globe and Mail article extremely interesting. The attached letters are even moreso. What I am finding truly amazing is that so many young women are hoping to "become famous" for doing something so utterly brainless. There seems to be a huge number of these types of shows on TV. What happened to the concept of a challenge? Or an education? I think of all of the women of "my generation" who labored so hard to be recognized for their education, skills and abilities. What amazes me are the contestants who know that they will be rejected in the first 10 minutes because they are too short (I mean, way too short) or too old. And they trot out the ridiculous little bon mots: "Well, you just never know!" Of course you know! The results are largely predetermined. Why not put the time that you spent driving all night into getting an education? I have also talked to young people who seem utterly enthralled by this type of programming. I mean the results were probably decided within the first hour. Anything else is just an elaborate scam.

I will agree that ownership is better than renting. Here is something related to homes that I just cannot "get my head around." I am quite fond of shows on HGTV. I like learning about renos, repairs, etc. What sometimes I don't get are the shows about buying homes. Specifically, someone wants to buy a new home because they are "running out of room." Usually that means junk, knick knacks, etc. They get a new home and then I will bet they fill it with even more stuff. And then, surprise, surprise, 10 years later, the stuff ends up in the landfill (when I was younger, this used to be known as a garbage dump). This occurs after the stuff has spent 6 years in a box in a closet.

OK, a funny story about redneck thugs. I had a friend who posted a survey in a bar. It was a yes-or-no survey; something along the lines of if you answered yes to 10 of these questions, then you know your a redneck, a thug, etc. Anyway, something like that. The funniest question was, "I know important community figures. I make an appointment with a judge and a lawyer at least once a month." It was quite amazing how many of the patrons answered yes.

How could that be done?

I think one of the reasons - and this is only speculation - is that the trades are often considered low class work. If you work with your head, you are somehow better than people who work with their hands. I don't understand it, as you can make a hell of a lot of money, and the trades are a very good career. Easier said than done. First, you want carpenters, plumbers, electricians, etc. trained "to standard." This means apprenticeships, and these, in this province at least, are damned hard to come by.

Duh!

Good in theory, but poor in practice. There is a large shortage of tradesmen in BC, and even though wages are high, young people are not going into these professions. It is becoming a real problem in Canada. It is definitely not a self-correcting situation!