<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;Roe v. Wade For Men&#8221; My Ass</title>
	<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:47:18 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Meanwhile, I get trolled &#171; Touchingly Naive</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-45672</link>
		<author>Meanwhile, I get trolled &#171; Touchingly Naive</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 22:13:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-45672</guid>
		<description>[...] The part I liked was where he said that if a man says he doesn&#8217;t want a child he fathers, and the mother refuses to have an abortion, then he&#8217;s entitled to refuse payment of child support. I&#8217;m not even going to engage with that kid of crass stupidity, but it did remind me of a great Twisty post from the archives. Enjoy! [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] The part I liked was where he said that if a man says he doesn&#8217;t want a child he fathers, and the mother refuses to have an abortion, then he&#8217;s entitled to refuse payment of child support. I&#8217;m not even going to engage with that kid of crass stupidity, but it did remind me of a great Twisty post from the archives. Enjoy! [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pony</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15457</link>
		<author>Pony</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 23:48:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15457</guid>
		<description>I think Kyle would be happier here, with a "real" feminist:
http://www.freemarketnews.com/Analysis/56/3653/2006-02-03.asp?nid=3653&#38;wid=56&#38;pv=1</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Kyle would be happier here, with a &#8220;real&#8221; feminist:<br />
<a href="http://www.freemarketnews.com/Analysis/56/3653/2006-02-03.asp?nid=3653&amp;wid=56&amp;pv=1" rel="nofollow">http://www.freemarketnews.com/Analysis/56/3653/2006-02-03.asp?nid=3653&amp;wid=56&amp;pv=1</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: amaz0n</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15451</link>
		<author>amaz0n</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 23:05:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15451</guid>
		<description>Kyle, Larry Flynt calls himself a feminist, too.  That doesn't make him one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kyle, Larry Flynt calls himself a feminist, too.  That doesn&#8217;t make him one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hedonistic</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15394</link>
		<author>hedonistic</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:40:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15394</guid>
		<description>(Camille Paglia a feminist?  Is he high?)

Kyle, put down the crack pipe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Camille Paglia a feminist?  Is he high?)</p>
<p>Kyle, put down the crack pipe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Twisty</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15371</link>
		<author>Twisty</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 12:44:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15371</guid>
		<description>Great scott, whence cometh this Kyle jagoff? Camille Paglia, "feminist leader?" That's a hot one.

You are invited to put a sock in it, young Kyle.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great scott, whence cometh this Kyle jagoff? Camille Paglia, &#8220;feminist leader?&#8221; That&#8217;s a hot one.</p>
<p>You are invited to put a sock in it, young Kyle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mythago</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15367</link>
		<author>mythago</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 05:54:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15367</guid>
		<description>Kyle, if watching women fight gets you off, I recommend you rely on the porn sites that are probably even now in your Bookmarks folder.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kyle, if watching women fight gets you off, I recommend you rely on the porn sites that are probably even now in your Bookmarks folder.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kyle</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15362</link>
		<author>Kyle</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 05:05:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15362</guid>
		<description>Scholarly quotes from Camillile Paglia, Feminist Leader:

"Anita Hill was not harassed.

"Pornography is sexual reality.

Certain forms of rape "are what used to be called unbridled love. "

"Prostitutes like their work."

Stripping is "a sacred dance of pagan origins" and the money men stuff into G-strings is a "ritual offering." "The more a woman takes off her clothes, the more power she has " and feminists hate strippers because "modern professional women cannot stand the thought that their hardwon achievements can be outweighed in an instant by a young hussy flashing a little tits and ass."

The reason other feminists don't like me is that I criticize the movement, explaining that it needs a correction. Feminism has betrayed women, alienated men and women, replaced dialogue with political correctness. PC feminism has boxed women in. The idea that feminism--that liberation from domestic prison--is going to bring happiness is just wrong. Women have advanced a great deal, but they are no happier. The happiest women I know are not those who are balancing their careers and families, like a lot of my friends are. The happiest people I know are the women--like my cousins--who have a high school education, got married immediately graduating and never went to college. They are very religious and they never question their Catholicism. They do not regard the house as a prison.

The far right is correct when it says the price of women's liberation is being paid by the children.

What I'm doing is pointing out the bind the women's movement has created not only for women but for the culture as well. Children are abandoned.

Of course, the other thing the women's movement has done is caused a destructive division between the sexes. Men are in a terrible position.

The reason women earn less than men is that women don't want the dirty jobs. They aren't picking up the garbage, taking the janitorial jobs and so on. They aren't taking the sales commission jobs that require you to work all night and on weekends. Most women like clean, safe offices, which is why they are still secretaries. They don't want to get too dirty. Also, women want offices to be nice, happy places.

I began to realize this in the Seventies when I thought women could do it on their own. But then something would go wrong with my car and I'd have to go to the men. Men would stop, men would lift up the hood, more men would come with a truck and take the car to a place where there were other men who would call other men who would arrive with parts. I saw how feminism was completely removed from this reality.
Feminism has created a privileged, white middle class of girls who claim they're victims because they want to preserve their bourgeois decorum and passivity.

I maintain that Thomas flirted with Anita Hill, who batted her eyes at him and was a little embarrassed and didn't know what to do. Come on, he was looking for a wife. But how uncomfortable was she? She followed him from job to job. Feminists get around that by saying, "Well, she was ambitious." I say, "Apparently her ambition was greater than any sexual harassment that occurred." She chose her ambition. Anita Hill is just a yuppie. I'm the only leading feminist who went against her, and history will bear me out.

After the Sixties there was a collapse in almost everything we believed in. It culminated in the biological disaster of AIDS--an answer to every one of us who preached free love.
The people who are pro-abortion--I hate the cowardly euphemism of pro-choice--must face what they are opposing. The left constantly identifies the pro-life advocates as misogynists and fanatics, but that doesn't represent most of those people. They are deeply religious and they truly believe that taking a life is wrong. If the left were to show respect for that position and acknowledge the moral conundrum of unwanted pregnancy, the opposition to abortion would lessen. We must acknowledge that people should be a little troubled by abortion. Not to acknowledge that this is a difficult decision is wrong. The procedure snuffs out a potential personality.

Kyle here:  Now you ladies go slit her throat!  LOLOLOL</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scholarly quotes from Camillile Paglia, Feminist Leader:</p>
<p>&#8220;Anita Hill was not harassed.</p>
<p>&#8220;Pornography is sexual reality.</p>
<p>Certain forms of rape &#8220;are what used to be called unbridled love. &#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;Prostitutes like their work.&#8221;</p>
<p>Stripping is &#8220;a sacred dance of pagan origins&#8221; and the money men stuff into G-strings is a &#8220;ritual offering.&#8221; &#8220;The more a woman takes off her clothes, the more power she has &#8221; and feminists hate strippers because &#8220;modern professional women cannot stand the thought that their hardwon achievements can be outweighed in an instant by a young hussy flashing a little tits and ass.&#8221;</p>
<p>The reason other feminists don&#8217;t like me is that I criticize the movement, explaining that it needs a correction. Feminism has betrayed women, alienated men and women, replaced dialogue with political correctness. PC feminism has boxed women in. The idea that feminism&#8211;that liberation from domestic prison&#8211;is going to bring happiness is just wrong. Women have advanced a great deal, but they are no happier. The happiest women I know are not those who are balancing their careers and families, like a lot of my friends are. The happiest people I know are the women&#8211;like my cousins&#8211;who have a high school education, got married immediately graduating and never went to college. They are very religious and they never question their Catholicism. They do not regard the house as a prison.</p>
<p>The far right is correct when it says the price of women&#8217;s liberation is being paid by the children.</p>
<p>What I&#8217;m doing is pointing out the bind the women&#8217;s movement has created not only for women but for the culture as well. Children are abandoned.</p>
<p>Of course, the other thing the women&#8217;s movement has done is caused a destructive division between the sexes. Men are in a terrible position.</p>
<p>The reason women earn less than men is that women don&#8217;t want the dirty jobs. They aren&#8217;t picking up the garbage, taking the janitorial jobs and so on. They aren&#8217;t taking the sales commission jobs that require you to work all night and on weekends. Most women like clean, safe offices, which is why they are still secretaries. They don&#8217;t want to get too dirty. Also, women want offices to be nice, happy places.</p>
<p>I began to realize this in the Seventies when I thought women could do it on their own. But then something would go wrong with my car and I&#8217;d have to go to the men. Men would stop, men would lift up the hood, more men would come with a truck and take the car to a place where there were other men who would call other men who would arrive with parts. I saw how feminism was completely removed from this reality.<br />
Feminism has created a privileged, white middle class of girls who claim they&#8217;re victims because they want to preserve their bourgeois decorum and passivity.</p>
<p>I maintain that Thomas flirted with Anita Hill, who batted her eyes at him and was a little embarrassed and didn&#8217;t know what to do. Come on, he was looking for a wife. But how uncomfortable was she? She followed him from job to job. Feminists get around that by saying, &#8220;Well, she was ambitious.&#8221; I say, &#8220;Apparently her ambition was greater than any sexual harassment that occurred.&#8221; She chose her ambition. Anita Hill is just a yuppie. I&#8217;m the only leading feminist who went against her, and history will bear me out.</p>
<p>After the Sixties there was a collapse in almost everything we believed in. It culminated in the biological disaster of AIDS&#8211;an answer to every one of us who preached free love.<br />
The people who are pro-abortion&#8211;I hate the cowardly euphemism of pro-choice&#8211;must face what they are opposing. The left constantly identifies the pro-life advocates as misogynists and fanatics, but that doesn&#8217;t represent most of those people. They are deeply religious and they truly believe that taking a life is wrong. If the left were to show respect for that position and acknowledge the moral conundrum of unwanted pregnancy, the opposition to abortion would lessen. We must acknowledge that people should be a little troubled by abortion. Not to acknowledge that this is a difficult decision is wrong. The procedure snuffs out a potential personality.</p>
<p>Kyle here:  Now you ladies go slit her throat!  LOLOLOL</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kyle</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15361</link>
		<author>Kyle</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 04:43:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15361</guid>
		<description>No answer?  How can women be leaders if you can't answer simple questions, much less support your female leadership?

Kyle</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No answer?  How can women be leaders if you can&#8217;t answer simple questions, much less support your female leadership?</p>
<p>Kyle</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kathy a</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15347</link>
		<author>kathy a</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 03:30:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15347</guid>
		<description>what is this -- troll week?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>what is this &#8212; troll week?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kyle</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15344</link>
		<author>Kyle</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 02:53:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/03/10/roe-v-wade-for-men-my-ass/#comment-15344</guid>
		<description>Well......is Karen DeCrow, your feminist leader correct when she says that if women can opt out of parenthood via abortion, then men should be treated as equals (what a concept, eh?) and be able to opt out of parenthood as well?

Kyle</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well&#8230;&#8230;is Karen DeCrow, your feminist leader correct when she says that if women can opt out of parenthood via abortion, then men should be treated as equals (what a concept, eh?) and be able to opt out of parenthood as well?</p>
<p>Kyle</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
