Re: Feminists don't speak for women, says Dominican cardinal


"Jill" <asker_w@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8v49i31gajb43ag5e62gd7vdi95ijdgo8d@xxxxxxxxxx

Andre Lieven patiently explained...

A fool seeking a "Free Lunch" cried and lied...

"Free Lunch" lied and cried...
The RCC [Roman Catholic Church] puts men first
and women in subservience.

<giggle>

When the Roman Catholic Church begins teaching that
Mary was crucified on the cross and her son Jesus wasn't,
the the feminist idiots (ah, but I repeat myself) "Free Lunch"
is echoing might have something real to cry about. As it is,
all those whiny claims from the likes of "Free Lunch"
only display the greed feminists have for every last morsel
of female supremacy.

The church 'patriarchy' then, did what
patriarchies did best --protect women and
help men protect women. Which is one reason
more women than men _attend_ church.
And why the more traditional the church,
the more it expects men to play
its savior roles. In these senses,
"patriarchy" served women more than men.

Warren Farrell, _The Myth of Male Power_,
Berkley Books mass market edition;
page 77. (Emphasis in original)

Perhaps "Free Lunch" has been kept intellectually barefoot
and ignorant by feminists who, as Camille Paglia says,
"write obnoxious books" or use such books in their
so-called Women's Studies courses. If "Free Lunch"
is a female, she could cry that the propaganda spread
by feminists, from their Gloria leader on down, have
made her a "victim". Bwuhhahahahah! Remember,
according to feminist doctrine, the female is always
the victim _no matter what!_

"Free Lunch" fits the profile as tightly as spandex over
Rosie O'Donnell.

<giggle>

Men were second class citizens, not women.
Ask the survivors of the Titanic who was being
controlled, er, taken care of.

Nice cherrypicking.

<Projection> The first human right is *to stay alive*.

Of course. That feminists like the Free Lunch seeker blank
that out of their awareness is more proof that "rights" is the
_last_ concern of the feminist. Rather, feminists are only
concerned with expanding the superior privileges women
have enjoyed over men throughout our human heritage.

On that basis, women counted for MORE THAN MEN
even in such allegedly " patriarchal " times.

http://www.anesi.com/titanic.htm

While only 20% of all men lived, its especially telling
that women outsurvived *children*, 74.35% to 52.29%.
I guess that those women had 22.06% 15th trimester abortions...

Good one, Andre. I notice that "Free Lunch" has no response
to that.

Who got to own land and get a divorce?

Speaking of cherrypicking...

Uh huh.

It is only the understanding that men's lives were
subservient to property that allows us to reconcile
women's combined status as equal to property
and "on a pedestal." When we hear that men treated
women as property, we rarely hear that men were
expected to die before their property got hurt -- that
men's lives were, in essence, subservient to property.
Even in nineteenth-century America, federal law
required that if a wife committed a crime, _the husband_
would be tried for _her_ crime and _he_ would be put
in prison if _she_ were found guilty. Similarly, if the
family went into debt, only he went to debtor's prison.

Warren Farrell, _The Myth of Male Power_, p 80.
(emphasis in original)

Who got drafted to DIE ? Duh.

Men of course, with women being actively complict
in sending men off to die. To die for _women's_ class
interests -- class interests that women themselves generally
refused to put their lives on the line for. Sending others
off to die for one's own benefit, btw, is the mark of a
_slaveowning_ class. Being sent and expected to risk
dying for others is the mark of a _slave_ class. These
are facts that feminists blind themselves to every day.

I'll also add that, in this time of so called "equality"
(Which its not really, because women REFUSE to do
the hard and dirty jobs that keep societies running:
How many women do hard rock mining, fire fighting,
or deep sea fishing? How about, pay for dates, even?
Uh huh.), 243 FDNY MEN died at the WTC, and
NO FDNY women. Were they all having their nails done ?

Even as that last stat is true you will *never* hear it repeated
on TV. They always pay homage to the brave men AND WOMEN
rescuers who lost their lives at the WTC as if there were some
sort of parity in those numbers. It makes me sick every time
I hear it.

Me too. IME, the public speakers who are most likely
to hew to that politically correct "brave men AND WOMEN"
shibboleth are the very (so-called) conservatives that haters
like "Free Lunch" claim to oppose.

This coddling of feminists by conservatives (or by anyone
else) must stop!

--
Would the Senate be more balanced on gender issues
than it is now if it had fifty typical women senators and
fifty of the most pro-male senators you can name?

Jack Kammer, _If Men Have All the Power
How Come Women Make the Rules_,
www.rulymob.com - publishers; (1999) page 18.


.

Relevant Pages