Bigotry is bad – no matter who the victim.
When it comes to racism, America has made it clear that prejudice based on color cannot be tolerated. Roseanne Barr destroyed her career with just one racist twitter and had to be removed from her own show for the transgression of an offensive comment.
Equality is in; demeaning stereotyping is not only out but seemingly bad enough to be deemed unforgivable.
Except when one group is the target.
Who are these terrible people exempt from the sin of stereotyping?
They are men…
-Rabbi Benjamin Blech
Hating Men: The New Racism
Yes, I am deliberately writing this in the shadow of Judge Brett Kavanaugh being sworn in late yesterday as the newest Supreme Court Justice. This, of course, followed incredibly contentious confirmation hearings where both sides of the aisle pulled out all the stops in either trying to push through confirming Kavanaugh, or utterly destroying his reputation.
I’m not going to get into all of that. I’ve already written extensively about the Kavanaugh confirmation process HERE, HERE, and HERE.
I want to write about what we can expect next, which is the topic of Rabbi Blech’s essay: misandry, which is:
Noun – Definition of misandry: a hatred of men
Before anyone says it, yes, men have committed terrible, terrible acts against women and children across human history and into the current age. For example, there’s a huge surge in child trafficking in Africa and:
over two million people are trafficked annually, and of this number there is an estimated 30 000 children as young as 4, who are being prostituted in South Africa.
Stories about child abuse are rampant, including a recent story from Ireland about a two-week-old baby hospitalized after being sexually assaulted by a 25-year-old man.
Looking at rape statistics in the United States:
A 2013 study found that rape may be grossly underreported in the United States. Furthermore, a 2014 study suggested that police departments may eliminate or undercount rapes from official records in part to “create the illusion of success in fighting violent crime”. Based on the available data, 21.8% of American rapes of female victims are gang rapes. For the last reported year, 2013, the prevalence rate for all sexual assaults including rape was 0.1% (prevalence represents the number of victims, rather than the number of assaults since some are victimized more than once during the reporting period). The survey included males and females aged 12+. Since rapes are a subset of all sexual assaults, the prevalence of rape is lower than the combined statistic. Of those assaults, the Bureau of Justice Statistics stated that 34.8% were reported to the police, up from 29.3% in 2004.
Given the quote above, we may not have a very accurate picture of how many girls and woman have been raped based on victims not reporting as well as police departments apparently gaming their numbers. This may be why we see such a surge of “believe the victims” statements coming from the #MeToo movement and wider feminism. In fact, going back to the Kavanaugh hearings, once there was a disclosure from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford alleging that Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her approximately 35 years ago, those who had been protesting against Kavanaugh for his perceived stand on Roe vs. Wade and other topics, focused on his guilt as a sexual abuser. From what I could see in the news, many woman projected their own victimization upon Kavanaugh, and now that he’s been confirmed, no doubt they will believe that Republicans in the Senate (and probably in the general public) all tacitly approve of sexual violence against woman.
So we have a perfect storm from which to accuse all men everywhere of participating in rape culture which must be battled at all costs, including violent protests.
I agree that sexual assault must be battled and the perpetrators arrested, tried, and if convicted, incarcerated to the maximum penalty allowed by law (and I think those penalties should be severe), but is it true that all men are evil?
No, but is it true that all men are, if not overt sexual offenders, covertly supportive of the subordination of women, especially as related to the sexual act?
That’s like asking if all white males in America tacitly approve of racism because of their white privilege, simply because we were all raised in a culture that is systematically racist.
It’s a tough one to crack.
Then the Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name. The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. The Lord God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.
–Genesis 2:18-22 (NASB)
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body.
–Ephesians 5:25-30 (NASB)
I’m not going to do an exhaustive search of what the Bible has to say about male-female relationships, but given these two examples, it seems that men and women are literally made for each other, and intended to work together cooperatively within the context of marriage. Further, men are expected to sacrifice themselves to protect their wives (and children), even unto death.
Do you know any men who fit that description? I do, plenty of them. They don’t make the news because men loving their wives and children, providing for them, and protecting them isn’t sensational, and it doesn’t rile people up.
In his article, Rabbi Blech quotes a number of feminist sources saying some pretty rough things about men such as:
“I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.” -Andrea Dworkin
and
“All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman.” -Catherine MacKinnon
I haven’t researched the contexts for those statements, and perhaps their original contexts modify them, but you have to admit, on the surface, they seem pretty raw.
In the days, weeks, and months to come, I expect to see plenty of misandry in the news and social media, specifically because of Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.
What I hope people consider, and especially those who think the Kavanaugh confirmation equals “all men are scum” (although I found this article from last July encouraging), is that you’ll take some time to think of the men who are or were in your life who aren’t or weren’t scum, and in fact, who are or were really supportive.
Maybe it was your Dad, an Uncle, or Grandpa. It could have been a teacher, a neighbor, a bus driver. If national attention has become a raw nerve in terms of Kavanaugh in specific and men in general, it’s important to remember the other side of the coin. Men, from God’s point of view, were not intended to victimize women, we are intended to protect and nurture women, including from men who would harm them.
One of my Facebook (and in real life) friends posted a lengthy quote about a week and a half ago:
Men ask why women are so pissed off. Even guys with wives and daughters. Jackson Katz, a prominent social researcher, illustrates why. He’s done it with hundreds of audiences:
“I draw a line down the middle of a chalkboard, sketching a male symbol on one side and a female symbol on the other.
Then I ask just the men: What steps do you guys take, on a daily basis, to prevent yourselves from being sexually assaulted? At first there is a kind of awkward silence as the men try to figure out if they’ve been asked a trick question. The silence gives way to a smattering of nervous laughter. Occasionally, a young a guy will raise his hand and say, ‘I stay out of prison.’ This is typically followed by another moment of laughter, before someone finally raises his hand and soberly states, ‘Nothing. I don’t think about it.’
Then I ask the women the same question. What steps do you take on a daily basis to prevent yourselves from being sexually assaulted? Women throughout the audience immediately start raising their hands. As the men sit in stunned silence, the women recount safety precautions they take as part of their daily routine.
Hold my keys as a potential weapon. Look in the back seat of the car before getting in. Carry a cell phone. Don’t go jogging at night. Lock all the windows when I sleep, even on hot summer nights. Be careful not to drink too much. Don’t put my drink down and come back to it; make sure I see it being poured. Own a big dog. Carry Mace or pepper spray. Have an unlisted phone number. Have a man’s voice on my answering machine. Park in well-lit areas. Don’t use parking garages. Don’t get on elevators with only one man, or with a group of men. Vary my route home from work. Watch what I wear. Don’t use highway rest areas. Use a home alarm system. Don’t wear headphones when jogging. Avoid forests or wooded areas, even in the daytime. Don’t take a first-floor apartment. Go out in groups. Own a firearm. Meet men on first dates in public places. Make sure to have a car or cab fare. Don’t make eye contact with men on the street. Make assertive eye contact with men on the street.”
― Jackson Katz, The Macho Paradox: Why Some Men Hurt Women and How All Men Can Help
(The first man to minor in women’s studies at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, holds a master’s degree from the Harvard Graduate School of Education, and a Ph.D. in cultural studies and education from UCLA.)
It bothered me, but it took a while for me to figure out why. One man responded thus:
Funny, he never asked what men do to protect their wives and daughters from assault. Let alone the neverending worry that comes with the weight of responsibility of being the protector of the family. Men aren’t heartless mongrels. Unfortunately, they don’t teach that fact in women’s studies.
This is a portion of my response:
This bothered me a lot when I first read it, but I couldn’t figure out why. Then, last night, I had a nightmare about two people trying to take my grandson from me. Even though I stopped it in my dream, I still work up horrified.
I realized the question you ask men isn’t what they do to protect themselves, but what they do to protect their families, because after all, that’s our role, at least once we marry, and especially once we have children, and in my case, grandchildren.
Also, this wee missive assumes there is only one kind of assault, sexual assault. In fact, men, women, and children are subject to all manner of physical assault.
Know that if there are some men in the world who are dangerous to women and children, there are also plenty of us who are not, and in fact, who are dedicated to protecting our families. I hope you know a man like that. If you do, and if he’s around, you might want to talk with him for a while today and remind yourself that men can be good, too.
Morning Meditations 
I don’t know why your posts are showing up in my comment section, but since they are, I have one point: the stops were not all pulled out on the investigation side, by Trump himself, aka king of USA.
I apologize about my posts showing up in your comments and I have no idea why it’s happening. Unfortunately, the general public has no access to Trump’s specific orders to the FBI or the contents of their report, so I have no comment on this.
And the steps that a non-leftist male candidate for SCOTUS confirmation must take against being sexually assaulted (via falsehood) include the collection of character witnesses of both sexes, and a careful review of any events since adolescence that someone might try to exploit by inventing slanderous accusations.
I wonder if somehow it could be codified in confirmation procedures that only professional capabilities and characteristics may be considered once confirmation proceedings begin. Any other type of accusation would be required to be brought forward prior to such proceedings or be dismissed. Circuses like the Kavenaugh and Thomas hearings are inappropriate.
Other protective measures include insistence on the rule of law, as well as personal security measures.
Well said, James. I spoke with a friend recently who is angry because the country she loves is doomed because of the Kavanaugh appointment, which she sees as a subset of Republican rape-the-poor politics and evangelical fecklessness. I listened and nodded, not much more. Not much I could say that would not be throwing gas on the fire.
I’ve seen a number of friendships destroyed because of differing opinions on Kavanaugh. On some sense, people are behaving more badly about this than when Trump was elected. It’s a pity.
Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska seems to be the most of any Senator involved in this mess. Quote from the news article: ‘As the Senate tried to recover from its charged atmosphere, Murkowski’s move offered a moment of civility. “I do hope that it reminds us that we can take very small steps to be gracious with one another and maybe those small gracious steps can lead to more,” she said.’
Women have been victimized since time began. That said, I don’t think there is a hatred of men in the U.S. Anyone who interprets the Kavanaugh uproar like that just doesn’t understand. Women, myself included, simply know that it is very unlikely that someone would go to the lengths Dr. Ford did, after all these years, just to smear Brett Kavanaugh. Something happened there and, apparently, with the second woman as well. You can’t expect a girl of 15, back when Dr. Ford was attacked to tell anyone. It just didn’t happen then. Then there was Kavanaugh’s testimony which was little more than a temper tantrum. To many woman watching, he appeared guilty and was hysterically defending himself. Personally, I could see it on his face and I’ve lived long enough to know. Why didn’t Trump pull the nomination and go to the next person on the list? It would have saved Kavanaugh’s reputation and stopped the circus, though I guarantee you that most women didn’t find it to be a circus but a horrific example of what might have happened had the one out of three of them (who had been attacked) tried to do the same thing. At most, Kavanaugh is a sexual predator, so now we have two on the High Court (Clarence Thomas). At a minimum, he is not suited to be a Justice due to his temperament. Of course, then we have his lack of impartiality, which should disqualify him on the face of it.
Because Kavanaugh was the one justice on the list who believes, sincerely, that the President should not be charged with anything while in office as it would “create a disruption”. Trump could, as he once claimed, shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and, under Kavanaugh, get away with it. There is so much corruption in this administration that Trump is looking for a Hail Mary moment, and Kavanaugh was it.
Women “go through the trouble” all the time.
Women colluded during the Salem Witch Trials – often emotionally.
In To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee pens about the phenomenon of false rape allegations against black men in the South. Emotional allegations. The same can be found in Of Mice and Men when Crooks stands threatened with an allegation by a spurned woman. Then of course there was the murder of Emmett Till.
Just recently, Malik St. Hilaire was exonerated and his false accuser sentenced to a year in the clink for falsely “putting herself through all that.”
The assertion that alleged bravery is somehow proof is absurd. And the assertion that her putative bravery gets to replace hard evidence, witnesses, and forensics is hysterically dangerous to due process.
Then Duke Lacross.
Then the false UVA rape allegation that Rolling Stone had to backpedal.
Then Lena Dunham’s false accusation against a classmate for which she and her publisher were threatened with legal action.
Then exhibitionist faker Emma Sulkowicz.
All these women must have been super brave to “put themselves through all that.” That’s the poorest legal reasoning available.
As for Kavanaugh’s disposition, how is one supposed to take being accused of a horrific crime and smeared without any evidence? Had he help his cool, you would say he was an icy and bloodless sociopath who doesn’t feel.
Dr. Ford lied about claustrophobia, she had no witnesses, no date, no month, no year, no location, no forensics, and she never turned over her polygraph notes. All she had was emotional display. And sorry to say, tears are not evidence and do not put Brett in a room with Christine.
You need more than a woman crying and pointing to destroy a person.
End of story.
Viewing from afar, (even putting aside accusations of sexual assault), that displayed demeanor indicated that he lacks the maturity, restraint and impartiality required of someone in a lifelong appointment to one of the most powerful legal positions in your country.
Methinks the judge doth protest too much! 🙂
That classic temper tantrum was a signal to me that, not only were
the sexual escapades a distinct possibility, there was also denial of
alcoholism and/or substance abuse behaviors. Sexual aggression can
also accompany heavy drinking episodes. My own observation was that
Kavanaugh appeared to be more upset–and dodged more pointed inquiries about–any discussion of his former drinking habits than he was
of the sexual assault allegations.
To reiterate, the purpose of this particular blog post isn’t to excuse or defend Brett Kavanaugh (though, we’ll never know the facts regarding the alleged events, regardless of our feelings), but to focus on the fact that there are good men in the world. The existence of Donald Trump and Brett Kavanaugh does not automatically mean that all men are evil.
I suppose my response to the Huff Post article I Know Why Evangelical Women Support Brett Kavanaugh. I Was Raised To Do The Same by guest writer Carly Gelsinger could be a blog post of its own, but I’ll stick to just a comment for the sake of time.
Ms. Gelsinger paints a pretty grim picture of the 1990s “purity culture” in the fundamentalist church, and I can’t say she’s wrong. I hope it’s not indicative of all churches during that era (or now), but if she’s telling the world that this is the only reason women supported Brett Kavanaugh, I’d have to say she’s wrong.
Again, I’m not writing this to support Kavanaugh and certainly not to approve of sexual assault, but to introduce some balance into the online narrative around his being sworn in to SCOTUS. If the Church (big C) isn’t supportive of women who have been assaulted and is continuing to blame them for being victimized, then the Church is wrong.
I just read the NPR article How Is Kavanaugh Likely To Rule On Critical Issues? Here’s A Look At His Record dated October 8th (today). Now that Kavanaugh has been sworn in to SCOTUS, it might be helpful to revisit his likely views on various issues, including Roe v. Wade, which, in my opinion, is the primary reason the Democrats opposed his nomination, even before Dr. Ford’s disclosure.
Men who identify with Kavanaugh and Trump (even a little bit other than the basics of legal protection) are pussies (via verbal usage and messages created by dominators); we know what they think of those.
Regarding what women do to protect themselves from sexual assault: Not all women are married. Even if they are there are times they will navigate through a dark parking lot, or could be home alone while their husband works the night shift. My mom has been a widow for 18 years. My daughter lives on her own, is young and unmarried.
My Mom is an 86 year old widow, my daughter is 30 and lives alone. My granddaughter is only 3. Make no mistake. I am deeply concerned for their well being every day, and yet, no matter how helpless I feel to protect them because they don’t live in my household, I would be crushed if they were victimized and I was not there to protect them.
Until churches and parents start teaching their male children and adolescents that–in contradistinction to what societies consider “masculine”–God does not approve of predatory behavior and acts foisted upon victims! Unfortunately, dating and courtship even in Christian circles is presented essentially as “predator-prey” interaction;
we employ “hunting” imagery and talk about potential dates/mates as
having been “trapped,” “brought down” and “caught.” We hear things
like “men are supposed to hunt and chase after women,” who are supposed to “wait until he pursues you.” Males quickly learn that they are “supposed to be persistent”, even when the “prey” clearly has no
corresponding interest. Males are taught to “not take NO for an
answer;’ then they are supposed to persist in any number of obsessive,
stalker behaviors. And what happens when the “hunter” finally obtains
his “prey?” They do what all hunters do when they “trap” and “catch”
the prey–they kill it and DEVOUR IT. Hunters feel entitled to destroy and devour whatever they “caught.” Until Christians become serious about addressing our society’s view of “predatory masculinity” and start teaching male children, youth and adults that they really need to stop feeling entitled to “hunt and trap” females, we will constantly see
more sexual violence foisted upon people. And we should not be
surprised if the victims literally return fire as they, too, “stand their ground.”
That sounds pretty horrible, Charity. As the Huff Post article I mentioned above stated, some churches are pretty insensitive to girls and women but I can assure you that doesn’t mean all churches are. As Onesimus said, if you encounter churches or Christians like that, get away from them as fast as you can.
I’ve heard these things in churches, at the workplace, in social circles,
etc. I;ve been in church my entire life, and served in many capacities in
a variety of churches–camp counselor, choir director, Vacation Bible School/Sunday School teacher, etc. The reason I mention the predatory language is because it is so common and so “normal-sounding”, that
most Christians really don’t think about it. Many Christian and secular
books on courtship and marriage do emphasize this predator-prey
ethos, even if cloaked in “respectable” religious language–and make
it clear that males are “on the hunt/on the prowl” because they are
“naturally hunters who want to take the initiative”–and the females are
literally supposed to “wait for him to make the first move” because
“men enjoy the chase and the man wants to feel he’s the hunter.”
The problem with this is that predation/hunting language usually links
this mindset to masculinity–whether it’s used in Christian circles or
secular venues, the result is the same; sexual violence is seen as
“normal for a man.” Ergo, males are pressured–and APPLAUDED–
when they “hunt” females, “run them down” and “don’t take no for an answer.” Once the predator has devoured the prey after his big
“conquest,” he moves on to the next targeted prey.
I don’t know what kind of churches you’ve experienced!
If any church encouraged those attitudes I’d advice getting out of it immediately.
We have someone in this conversation who thinks that unless an assault can be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt, said assault is not real — such that he can say the accuser fantasized the event (which is an accusation itself). Is anyone throwing him out or even standing up to him? (Answer: only me.) Or is that take being aided and abetted and soothed? (Yes.) The message is still, you girls take care of yourselves, now. Hear? But give us credit.
Charity said: Until churches and parents [everyone] start teaching their male children and adolescents [all] that–in contradistinction to what societies consider “masculine”– …
Understand, the extreme things she said are usually said with laughs and chuckles; a notion being floated that society or at least the men laughing about it have moved on and evolved.
James said: … if you encounter churches or Christians like that, get away from them as fast as you can.
1 Corinthians 5:10 10not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world.
We (women) literally would have to leave the world (church/Church included). But no alarm. Promote politicians claiming to be of the church (of the so-called high-morality party).
I linked over to this topic at this site from the general topic at another of James’ sites. While James indicated three previous articles [via saying here, here, and here in the opening missive] or related topics he started there (along with the one here at morningmeditations), there are like at least eight over there (plus this one).
Marleen–the fact is, nothing I’ve said is extreme or even “unusual.” I’ve heard these things in churches, at the workplace, at picnics and outings, etc. That’s the point–the hunter-prey language is so common and so ubiquitous, it “sounds normal.” Nor are men the only ones who say
these things–women also employ predator-prey language in describing
courtship. Society at large constantly uses the language of “the hunt”
to describe what really ought to be “the search.” Predatory language
accompanies predatory behaviors–and encourages people to see
“prospects” for relationships as “prey”–someTHING that needs to be
sighted, scoped and TARGETED TO BE TAKEN DOWN. When people
are encouraged to “see what you want and TAKE WHAT YOU WANT,”
sexual violence is bound to follow.
Since church enthusiasts often tell people they shouldn’t leave a church, because (so it is said) “shopping” around [or, going further and not being with a local church at all] is a way of evading authority or not being committed to a community, it is good to encourage women leaving (as a counteractive). That would most likely have to do with what is coming from the pulpit or clearly sanctioned by leadership.
But that doesn’t take care of what can be accepted in the venue even if it isn’t from the pulpit. And then there are the subtle enabling statements or laughter or smirks joined in that just haven’t been thought through. And besides all that, there are other details to think of with the supposed benefits of Church (universal); one, that dating a Christian is supposed to be not only safe but the proper way of looking for a mate.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/fox-news-andrew-napolitano-kavanaugh_us_5bbc9aa7e4b028e1fe417b9a
…
Trump on Monday told reporters on the White House lawn that Kavanaugh had been “caught up in a hoax” orchestrated by the Democrats. Hours later, while addressing a convention of police chiefs, Trump called the controversy a “disgraceful situation, brought about by people that are evil.”
But Napolitano, during an appearance Tuesday on the president’s favorite TV network, condemned Trump’s aggressive, partisan rhetoric.
“I do not think the best thing that was said was ‘evil’ or ‘hoax,’ and I honestly wish that the president and his people would get past that,” Napolitano said Tuesday …
…….
The FBI launched an investigation limited in scope into the allegations against Kavanaugh. Investigators did not interview Kavanaugh or Ford ― or several people who say they could corroborate her claims. Nonetheless, Trump proclaimed Monday that Kavanaugh had been “proven innocent.”
Trump not only said such things on the lawn but couldn’t help but stir up crap during the formal ceremony. So people who want to see the normal functions of their government couldn’t without their intelligence and sense of decency being insulted.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tucker-carlson-fox-john-mayer-toxic-masculinity_us_5bbc1132e4b028e1fe409d06“
….
[Tucker] Carlson went on to question his guest, political commentator Anushay Hossain, whether lines of Mayer’s song “Your Body Is A Wonderland” constituted toxic masculinity.
…….
Toxic masculinity isn’t about saying ‘Your Body Is A Wonderland.’ It’s actually about men being violent towards women,” Hossain replied. …
Hossain continued: “What’s so controversial about what John Mayer said? What’s so controversial about that he’s saying don’t feel entitled to women and this is coming on the heels of an intense time in this country.”
If you’d all go back and actually read what I wrote, you’ll see (hopefully) that my intent was to say that not all men are evil just because some of them are. Apparently, that point was lost.
James–your point was not lost. The problem is that the good men you mention are NOT in the majority in any place on this planet! The good men you and I know are not the problem. It’s the other 95% (or more!)
of 50% of humanity that believes that anything female is PREY. The fact is, sexual assault of females is so common in MOST civilizations–including the good old US of A, that we know it is vastly under-reported.
It is a horrible fact of life that females often face, beginning in EARLY CHILDHOOD, continuing through early adolescence and well into
adulthood, Toddlers and senior citizens are NOT exempted. Sexual violence and predation really is an Equal Opportunity Sin that afflicts
most human societies of all socioeconomic levels, classes and ethnicities. “Good men” who do not sanction sexual violence are rare,
and they are typically called everything BUT a child of God. These
good men are NOT seen as “masculine” or “a real man.” They are
certainly NOT lauded for being kind, gentle or any other Christ-like
characteristic. Your point stands, because the “good men” you
have mentioned are NOT seen as “masculine” by MOST societies,
including our own.
I have no way to measure who is good or who is evil in their hearts or actions across the whole planet. Only God knows that. I certainly hope that a great deal more than 5% of men worldwide are good.
I agree with this early statement by Rosemary Carlson:
Women have been victimized since time began. That said, I don’t think there is a hatred of men in the U.S. Anyone who interprets the Kavanaugh uproar like that just doesn’t understand. …..
Incredible post! I honestly didn’t know where you were going with it at first….as I felt my jaw and fist clench at the thought of another ” man Hater club” post. Not only am I a woman, a “me too” victim, I am also a daughter of, sister of, wife of, mother of, grandmother of, aunt of…..good men.
Thank you, Laura. I’m glad you have a few good men in your life.
I miss my dad [who has passed away] terribly. I also have five wonderful sons (and no daughters). None of my sons are mama’s boys, in the sense of being dysfunctional without me. And we don’t live in a sharia world. Thus they are not with me twenty-four-seven. I hope conservative men will stop putting out messages that make a free society more rather than less dangerous for women and girls.
And men too. I saw a video recently of a famous mobster who went to prison and was on the Dick Cavett show when he got out. He talked about homosexuals in the old way of considering only a receiver as gay — even if it was forced; the way of denial for Roy Cohn in Angels in America. He spoke in a bit of a fine line or code, but it was clear enough. If you’re not strong enough you’re gay (prey).
I think what I typed in wasn’t blatant enough for some people to surmise, so I’m going to be more clear. The mobster I referenced had participated in sodomising behavior. But since he was forcing it on someone else rather than experiencing it be forced on him, he was defining that as not homosexual (on his part — but, yes, homosexual on the receiver’s part or the part of the person being raped or forced or pressured into or imposed upon or exploited for sexual activity). [In this way, the receiver or victim is bad like females are weak.]
I called this old fashioned because it has been a widespread way of looking at things. It’s not only about mobsters.
I wish I had named the guy when I posted earlier, because I don’t remember his name now. But I’m sure I didn’t because the point was not who he was; it’s an attitude about sex.
I don’t think I I used the word “unusual” while I did use the word “extreme.” James and Onesimus took the types of utterances as extreme, because they’re disgusting [but truly said]. They will be disguised a bit in certain company.
You’re right, Charity — childhood, early adolescent and on. And if the best good men can do is say Wahh, don’t suspect men, then we are not helped. Now Onesimus has not been in these conversations (and obviously is not in charge of this or the other site).
James — to go to what might be your main points in the original missive, I don’t know who needs the sermon that there are some good WHITE men (except a few people [who probably aren’t your readers] that can be drawn to the attention of your readers as if pervasive). I likewise [except that I think extreme Republicans are more likely to be your readers in terms of numbers] am now looking at a Facebook message of a state level committee member who said, Little Ms. Pritchett – you and your comrades stealth attack on Yoder is going to blow up in your leftist face. The REAL REPUBLICANS will remember what the scum DEMONRATS tried to do to Kavanaugh in November. Your radical socialist kick boxing lesbian Indian will be sent back packing to the reservation[too many exclamation points to count]!
I don’t know who Pritchett is other than female and not a hater of minorities (and specifically indigenous people) and not a literal demonizer of another party.
Also I hope my 10:22 A.M. post will go through, as I referenced a few specific people in my life who are men. I think that way ALL THE TIME mostly, while also recognizing the need for cautions.
#HimToo Becomes A Meme And The Internet Delivers | All In
I thought I had a specific video above, in the 10:54 pm, but it’s not.
https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2018/10/9/17955262/himtoo-this-is-my-son-meme-mom-pieter-hanson-milkshake-duck?utm_campaign=theverge&utm_content=chorus&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&__twitter_impression=true
……
By Monday night, the tweet had gone viral enough that Hanson’s friends had alerted him about it; he asked his mother, through family members, to delete the tweet, The Washington Post reported early this morning. She ended up going one step further and deleting her entire account. Because screenshots are forever, though, several users captured and reposted the original tweet, with the reproductions going viral as well. Finally, Hanson’s brother Jon clarified: their mother had completely fabricated the “afraid to be alone with women” part of her son’s illustrious bio.
Peace be to all and a good health.
Hello guys, we still observed simple problems why many could not still understand us! And this is the truth that they could not also admit that they not really know or understand the faith believe that Yeshua have taught to his chosen disciples. But what they were doing in their observance of faith believe is either they apply it to God or to Yeshua Messiah that only come from the teachings of their affiliated religion. And for not also checking that what other religions only create their faith believe teachings from the definition of the dictionary? While others have develop their own formats and other even immitate the literal teachings of Yeshua M. and other teaches idolatrous faith believe and not knowing its been already condemned and abominable acts to God. And from this facts, even Yeshua M. have condemned those pharisee as a hypocrite believers, for not really knowing the whole truth of the faith observance that Yeshua M. always emphasize in his ministry. Although they can say they have faith in God and even to Yeshua M. but the truth if check, it only come in their mouth but not in their heart. Anyhow, A. Paul and A. John have already revealed the condemnation of all the religion in their many revelation letters. Making Yeshua M. was not wrong of calling to come out from their graveyard or religion those believers, Jn. 5:28-29.. This is because Yeshua M. have his own format of faith believe observance, in which the believers must fully observe or else they could be condemn judge if they could not observe it completely! Which A. James also advice in James 2:14-26 “that faith without work is a dead faith.” So, a good person is still not good enough if one do not really know whom God have endorse in the Covenant Plan, and this is must know and must observe correctly. But still many for not really knowing or only rejecting Yeshua M. and cannot instead subtitute God, for its still a contradiction to the imposed Order in the Covenant Plan of God.
And this is the format of faith believe which Yeshua M. have proclaim hidden in the parable style presentation message in Mt. 26:26-28, the eating of his body flesh means to read always and contantly his gospel books, and the drinking of his blood which also means to observe all his teachings seriously and wholeheartedly by doing good works to others or putting them all with work in our whole life! And from this format, the complete faith believe that was ordered can be fully observe by God to a true believer to the truth of the Covenant Plan of God. Without any mediator from any priests, pastors and ministers of any religion to teach or to mediate them! Proving the personal submission is the primary requirement in the believing to Yeshua Messiah. And by always doing it, thou will also be given and be rewarded of the knowledge of knowing his name and his father’s name. And in addition, read Heb. 9:28 and 2Pet. 3:13-14, which requires a clean character now in this our present Parousia Period or the 2nd Advent of Christ to be meet. And analyze this over and over again while there is still a few minute left in this present Parousia Period.
May our living lord God Bless us all.
LOVE : New Jerusalem – Holy City
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hoax#h1
\ˈhōks \
hoaxed; hoaxing; hoaxes
Definition of hoax (Entry 1 of 2)
transitive verb
: to trick into believing or accepting as genuine something false and often preposterous
…
hoax noun
Definition of hoax (Entry 2 of 2)
… an act intended to trick or dupe : IMPOSTURE
….
Other Words from hoax
…
hoaxer noun
First Known Use of hoax
…
circa 1796…
…
….
History and Etymology for hoax
…
probably contraction of hocus
…
I appreciate the time and thought, and heart, which you put into this post. The topic is a tough and sore one. Intellectually, I know there are good men on the planet–I read or watch stories about them, and usually end up in tears. I know good men exist…I just haven’t known one personally. I try not to paint the entire gender with the same broad and scathing brush, but my wounds are deep–and to be fair, they weren’t all inflicted by men…women can be equally cruel to their own. Anyway, God bless you–thanks for visiting my blog so I’d know to come over and “meet” you.