May 31, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Which is the worst: global warming, the next ice age or the death of humanity?

The debate of the dangers and causes of global warming is just about over, except for the efforts of those who invested their careers in the issue and are making a living by promoting the global-warming hype. One of the consequences, of course, is that the taxpayers will continue for years to pay for the costs incurred on account of the global-warming hype.

In the mid-1970s, some of the promoters of the present global-warming hype promoted just as intensely fears about the next ice age. The debate of that issue is now being revived. After all, there is nothing more constant about the climate than the fact that it constantly changes, while we—being human—naturally worry.

Worry is one of the biggest money-makers that can be had. Take, for example, the wealth that can and is being transferred from individuals to the insurance industry. As far as the world-wide promotion of hysteria is concerned, global-warming serves as well as does the next ice age. While the global-warming hype is now almost over, the justified fear of the next ice age will be fuel for the ice-age hysteria that is certain to be revived.

To what extent either issue was or will become a calamity is based on how well we adjust and adapt to it. Humanity is resilient and endured for more than a million years. Civilization is a bit more fragile and came into existence just lately, during the last period of warming after the latest ice age in a long series of cycles of ice ages and warm interglacial periods.

Civilization came into existence because of global warming. It it will have to do a lot of work to be able to adapt to the coming ice age, but adapt it will, provided that humanity has the will to persist. The third item on the list of concerns in this posting is the very real crisis of the self-extinction of humanity.

The details of the third crisis of concern follow after the pointers to the first two articles, farther down. All three crises are real, the first on account of the unnecessary costs of a ludicrous, deliberately-created hysteria, the second on account of the necessity to have to adjust to the reality of something that will certainly happen, and the third because it is quite literally man-made, real and deadly. It can be deadly to fool around with nature, but there is nothing more deadly than humanity’s fooling around with nature’s drive to have humanity procreate.

The following two articles address the issue of the end of the global warming hype and the unavoidable problem of the coming of the next ice age.

• MensNewsDaily
  May 24, 2008

  Global Warming: Has Anyone Noticed that it’s Over?
  By Roger F. Gay

  The end of civilization as we know it, is not at hand. Dire warnings on climate change issued by Al Gore, based on an extreme set of computer predictions, are a dead issue. So is the credibility of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN committee that tried to bring credibility to the predictions with claims that its views represent a consensus among scientists on global warming….(Full Story)

• The Australian
  April 23, 2008

  Sorry to ruin the fun, but an ice age cometh
  By Phil Chapman

  Phil Chapman is a geophysicist and astronautical engineer who lives in San Francisco. He was the first Australian to become a NASA astronaut. He sets the record straight:

  ….There is also plenty of anecdotal evidence that 2007 was exceptionally cold. It snowed in Baghdad for the first time in centuries, the winter in China was simply terrible and the extent of Antarctic sea ice in the austral winter was the greatest on record since James Cook discovered the place in 1770….

  The bleak truth is that, under normal conditions, most of North America and Europe are buried under about 1.5km of ice. This bitterly frigid climate is interrupted occasionally by brief warm interglacials, typically lasting less than 10,000 years.

  The interglacial we have enjoyed throughout recorded human history, called the Holocene, began 11,000 years ago, so the ice is overdue. We also know that glaciation can occur quickly: the required decline in global temperature is about 12°C and it can happen in 20 years.

  The next descent into an ice age is inevitable but may not happen for another 1000 years. On the other hand, it must be noted that the cooling in 2007 [a global temperature decline of 0.7°C] was even faster than in typical glacial transitions. If it continued for 20 years, the temperature would be 14°C cooler in 2027.

  By then, most of the advanced nations would have ceased to exist, vanishing under the ice, and the rest of the world would be faced with a catastrophe beyond imagining….(Full Story)

Those two articles are only some of the first few indicators that the main-stream media is getting ready to admit the end of the global-warming hype it helped create and used to bolster its fortunes with.

Now let’s worry about the real problems that should be of far greater concern to humanity: The coming of the next ice age and the global population crisis.

Wait a minute, you say, a global population crisis? What is that all about? Have we not solved the problem of the population explosion? Did we not successfully implement zero-population growth policies to put a halt to the population explosion, an issue that was in the late 1960s and early 1970s of far greater concern than the global-warming hype has been for the past decade and a half?

Well, under the leadership of the UN, our civilization brought about zero-population growth alright. That program of social engineering was and is so efficient and so exceedingly effective that, the implementation and imposing of UN-sponsored and UN-led population-control policies and methods led not only to zero-population growth but initiated rapidly-escalating depopulation of the world.

Yes, that is correct: depopulation of the world! Those who are and have for some years been regular visitors to the website of Fathers for Life and its blog are, of course, aware of the depopulation crisis and of what was done to make it happen.

For those to whom the depopulation crisis is news, the remainder of this posting shows some links to articles and web pages that explain the nature of the problem and how the rapidly-escalating depopulation of the world got launched and became reality.

The problem: Humanity is a cancer on the face of the Earth (a.k.a. Mother Earth or Gaea)

The Cure and ultimate Goal: Reduction of the world population down to between 300 million to one billion people

The Method: The creation and implementation of the international agenda for the planned destruction of the family

Details pertaining to the Program for the Reduction of the World Population:

• Legalization of voluntary and of even compulsory birth-control methods - the darker the skin colour of the people in the country in which those methods are deemed to be required, the more severe and drastic are the population-control methods that are being brought to bear
• Legalization of abortion, even the implementation of compulsory abortion not only on account of peer pressure but through stealth and by government decree
• Using food as a weapon to force compliance by recalcitrant nations
• Destruction of the institution of the traditional nuclear family, through breaking its weakest link, the natural father. First vilification, then active discrimination of men, then persecution and removal of fathers
• Instilling the fear of forming families and having children. In the developed nations, now close to 30 percent of adults have no children and absolutely no intention to ever have children. The number such intentionally childless adults is steadily increasing.
• The destruction of the economy of the developed nations (For example, the global-warming hype served as the motivator for the implementation of programs for massive transfer of wealth from the developed nations to under-developed and undeveloped nations.)

Thereby it is to be expected that the Caucasian population sector of the world will shrink by about 70 percent over the next four generations. For many of the developed nations the population reduction will be more severe than that. For example, Russia’s population will shrink from 140 million down to 70 million by the year 2045. However, the Caucasian population sector is by no means the only one that will shrink. All Asian countries are and will be similarly affected.

Many who read this will be reluctant to spend enough time to look up the details of the program for reduction of the global population. There is help for them in the form of an excellent DVD called “Demographic Winter” (viewing time about one hour), that summarizes the details of the population-reduction program and its consequences. The DVD also calls for the logical solution to prevent the depopulation of the world: The strengthening of the institution of the traditional nuclear family. The DVD features demographic observations, predictions and statistics presented by some of the most outstanding and foremost sociologists on Earth.

Just yesterday we received a copy of that DVD. The DVD can be borrowed from us (for an interval of one day in each instance) by anyone who lives in Bruderheim or vicinity (call 796-2306). The DVD can also be shown on a large screen to any interested community organizations in Bruderheim and vicinity.

Although it was written before we viewed the DVD, here is a fair summary of the contents of the DVD:

The issues outlined by Jimmy Deuchars are by no means unique to Scotland. Those conditions of the lack of intergenerational links between successive generations (and sometimes even the forced lack of links between siblings) exist for the vast majority of children of divorce and separation. They are an escalating social pandemic that to slightly varying extents affects almost all developed nations and ever-increasing numbers of developing nations, regardless of whether those nations are English-speaking or not.

In 80 percent and more of such cases, it is fathers, paternal grandparents and other relatives who are, along with the children whom they are prevented from seeing or even knowing about, the victims of that pandemic of social destruction.

For a large and steadily-increasing number of grandparents and elderly parents, the reality of that is that our social safety-nets will inevitably collapse within a few years from now (they are beginning to do so now). Welfare for individuals will then be handed back from Father State to individual families and to their extended families from whom the right and duty to that responsibility was increasingly removed during the last century.

Unfortunately, there will then be few younger family members who will have to take on that duty and responsibility. Fewer yet will want to take on or even know or care about the burden to care for their elderly parents and grandparents. Even if they wanted to or still can, individually, they will then no longer exist in numbers sufficient to prevent poverty, squalor and outright starvation for the elderly, of whom more than two-thirds will be women.

Update 2008 05 31: Whether anyone will admit that or not doesn’t affect the reality of it. A rapidly increasing number of the elderly is comprised of formerly expunged fathers and their parents and other family members who have lost for many decades all contact with the children whom they were a long time ago prohibited to have contact with. Already, elderly men commit suicides in absurdly large numbers. The frequency of suicides by elderly men will increase enormously in the years to come, especially so as reductions to and cancellations of welfare programs and pension payments will increasingly be the norm as time goes by. (For US figures, see Ages 65 - 74, Ages 75 - 84, Ages 85+; suicide statistics and trends in other nations are similar).

The DVD Demographic Winter: The decline of the human family addresses those problems and strongly recommends that there is only one feasible remedy that can be used to put a halt to that sort of demographic suicide: the strengthening of the institution of the traditional nuclear family.

Source: Government-condoned Child Abuse

As mentioned previously, Demographic Winter strongly recommends a systematic program for strengthening the family, but it seems that there is another recommendation that is just as necessary.

Centrally-planned and -controlled large societies are notoriously inefficient, wasteful and prone to massive corruption to the point of collapsing upon themselves. That is largely due to serious errors being made in setting them up and in running them. Instances of that have happened throughout history from the time of Babylon and Ancient Greece, through the falls of the Roman Empire, German Reich and British Empire, to the collapse of the Empire of the USSR in modern times.

It would be well to prevent history from repeating itself, this time through the doings of the UN and the commercial, industrial and non-governmental global organizations that control and influence it. It is doubtful that the UN and its controllers will be more successful on a global basis than its predecessors were on a more local basis. After all, the fiasco of the global-warming hype as well as that of the crisis of the depopulation of the world are without a doubt UN creations, while the very real threat to humanity posed by nature to all of our civilization, that of the coming ice age, is being ignored by the UN bureaucracy.

The salvation of humanity will not only be in strengthening the traditional nuclear family but also in the decentralization and diversification of the governing of civilization. It seems that, far from being the savior of humanity, the UN will be the cause of its death, death through inaction in addressing the seriously destructive consequences of global social engineering by the UN.

Posted in Social-Destruction Enterprise, Family, Propaganda Exposed, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

May 29, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Grandparents Apart Self Help Group Scotland
Press release. Immediate. 28th May 2008

This is child abuse. And the Government allows it.

By Jimmy Deuchars

The Scottish Government is refusing point blank to allow legal contact between grandparents and their grandchildren. A leading children’s charity has even asked them to allow grandparents information about their grandchildren’s welfare. This has been ignored.

By granting total power to one parent it encourages many parents to use their children as weapons in blackmail and revenge against the other parent/grandparents. This is a despicable trend which is on the increase. Children growing up in this environment are educated that these methods are the normal way to live. Our Government knows this is happening and allow it to go on.

About the MP who was mugged recently, the muggers were said to be the scum of the earth. Could they be some of these children brought up learning lying, cheating, using people and having no respect for anyone? Are the children of today who are growing up without the stability of their family the muggers of the future?

82% of illnesses suffered by grandparents, i. e.: depression, loneliness, etc., are caused by separation from the family. This problem, especially for older grandparents, could be helped enormously if the government encouraged and supported family relationships.

We are not asking for a takeover, as some ministers have inferred, but to be able to know and protect our grandchildren, to be there if they need help. All that is required is a couple of hours a month if geography permits or by mutual agreement, to keep contact by phone, text, letter and be able to send presents at Christmas and Birthdays — which children look forward to. By the governments refusal to acknowledge this problem they are not allowing a very much needed helpline to our grandchildren. This family helpline would give the children extra protection because of the terrible drug and alcohol abuse which the government says is on the increase.

Nothing less than a radical shake up of family laws and the administration of these laws will be good enough.

Jimmy Deuchars

Grandparents Apart Self Help Group Scotland
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk

Grandparents Apart Self Help Group Scotland is non-profit, staffed by volunteers. A Scottish Registered Charity NO. SC 031558

Registered Office:- 22 Alness Crescent Glasgow G52 1PJ . Tel 0141 882 5658 www.grandparentsapart.co.uk

___________________
Comment by Fathers for Life: The issues outlined by Jimmy Deuchars are by no means unique to Scotland. Those conditions of the lack of intergenerational links between successive generations (and sometimes even the forced lack of links between siblings) exist for the vast majority of children of divorce and separation. They are an escalating social pandemic that to slightly varying extents affects almost all developed nations and ever-increasing numbers of developing nations, regardless of whether those nations are English-speaking or not.

In 80 percent and more of such cases, it is fathers, paternal grandparents and other relatives who are, along with the children whom they are prevented from seeing or even knowing about, the victims of that pandemic of social destruction.

For a large and steadily-increasing number of grandparents and elderly parents, the reality of that is that our social safety-nets will inevitably collapse within a few years from now (they are beginning to do so now). Welfare for individuals will then be handed back from Father State to individual families and to their extended families from whom the right and duty to that responsibility was increasingly removed during the last century.

Unfortunately, there will then be few younger family members who will have to take on that duty and responsibility. Fewer yet will want to take on or even know or care about the burden to care for their elderly parents and grandparents. Even if they wanted to or still can, individually, they will then no longer exist in numbers sufficient to prevent poverty, squalor and outright starvation for the elderly, of whom more than two-thirds will be women.

Update 2008 05 31: Whether anyone will admit that or not doesn’t affect the reality of it. A rapidly increasing number of the elderly is comprised of formerly expunged fathers and their parents and other family members who have lost for many decades all contact with the children whom they were a long time ago prohibited to have contact with. Already, elderly men commit suicides in absurdly large numbers. The frequency of suicides by elderly men will increase enormously in the years to come, especially so as reductions to and cancellations of welfare programs and pension payments will increasingly be the norm as time goes by. (For US figures, see Ages 65 - 74, Ages 75 - 84, Ages 85+; suicide statistics and trends in other nations are similar).

The DVD Demographic Winter: The decline of the human family addresses those problems and strongly recommends that there is only one feasible remedy that can be used to put a halt to that sort of demographic suicide: That is the strengthening of the institution of the traditional nuclear family.

Posted in Divorce, Health, Men's Issues, Family, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

May 28, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Robert,

It is a good thing that you caught that error, although it is somewhat debatable that the number of 66,500 chemically induced abortions is true.

Opinions on abortion differ and depend on what one considers to be an abortion.  To someone considering conception as the beginning of a new life, willful termination of the ensuing development of the child at any point during gestation right until the birth of the child is over is not permissible.  Pro-abortion advocates use a different standard. That is not an objective, absolute standard but a constantly expanding, subjective, relative one.  At the present time that standard encompasses the termination of life at any point of “gestation”, from right after conception to just before the last foot of a fully developed baby emerges from the mother giving birth.  Some pro-abortion advocates clamor that the right of women to have an abortion should be expanded to include infants and young children, using the argument that young children are not yet fully developed humans.

Don’t be queasy.  Contrary to the biologically determined nature of the sexes, murder is a social construct and can easily be made completely acceptable, even on an extremely large scale.  The estimated 50 million abortions that are being performed in the world each year are proof of that.  Not a single tyrant in the history of mankind has ever been deadlier than the tyranny of abortion rights.  The only good thing about that horror is that the affected parties are not around to complain.  Fortunately, so far about 70 million potential victims of deliberate killing are permitted to live each year, but the annual number of children that are permitted to live and to be born into the world is shrinking year after year.

The morning-after pill is quite often taken not the morning after but when the first signs of a pregnancy are being noticed (e. g.: a missed period, or the first signs of morning sickness).  Regardless of when it is taken, the “morning-after” pill is an abortifacient, that is, it is intended to cause an abortion — the termination of the development of a child after conception (pro-choice advocates have amazingly many euphemisms for killing).  Even politically-correct Wikipedia flatly states: “An abortifacient is a substance that induces abortion.”

Anna Glasier’s statistics that Deborah Orr put into her article, that “the morning-after pill has prevented more than 66,500 abortions in England and Wales in 2004 alone,” are ludicrous, totally irrational and a prime example of feminist use of dialectics instead of proper logic.  There is absolutely no way that an abortion can prevent an abortion.  A chemically induced abortion merely substitutes for one that is induced by any other means.

Aside from that, where did Anne Glasier get her numbers? I doubt it very much that only 66,500 “morning-after” pills were sold or handed out in England and Wales in 2004. Find out how many of those pills were handed out, and you will come much closer to being able to accurately calculate how many abortions there truly were.

In the article you forwarded, the rudeness of Deborah Orr’s statement, namely that, “…it’s sobering to understand that you really ought to keep your trap shut about abortion because it might put a child off having one,” takes nothing away from the fact that by taking “morning-after” pills, the children (and anyone else) whom Deborah Orr wants to have abortions are having abortions.

Note to Deborah: “What do you think the purpose of sexual intercourse by a man and a woman is?  The fact that sexual intercourse provides pleasure to the participants who engage in it is nothing other than an inducement to produce a child.  Teach children that they must not engage in behaviour that produces children.”

In regard to “the intractability of some of the social problems we face” that Deborah Orr mentioned in her article, the social problems we face are largely a result of our loss of civility and of civilized behaviour.

Civilized behaviour is a product of a well-functioning civilization, and vice versa.  Such civilizations come about through the regulation of human sexuality, through the evolution and promotion of the symbiosis of traditional nuclear families and other features of the civilization whom they relate with.  Take the thin veneer — the regulation of human sexuality — away from any society, and human savagery will soon show itself.

The escalating brutality of the increasingly uncivilized society that then remains demands to make acceptable some of the most atrocious acts that not even monkeys swinging through the trees are capable of committing.  Amongst those acts is the killing of conceived but not-yet-born offspring in what once was considered a sacred and inviolate wellspring of life, the womb.  Worst of all, the societies that promote abortions will help to exterminate themselves — which is what we are busy doing right now.

—Walter

Robert wrote:

I have made a fundamental mistake in some recent calculations.

When I looked up the birth rate and the numbers of children born and found it to be 1.7 (when it needs to 2.1) I calculated that by adding back in the number of abortions (ie surgical) over the same period would have restored the birth rate to between 2.1 to 2.4.

What I did not allow for was the morning-after pill.

In the article below Prof. Anna Glasier states the morning-after pill has prevented more than 66,500 abortions in England and Wales in 2004 alone. RW - - - - -

Deborah Orr: So much for the abortion debate, but what about the women who have them?

The independent, Saturday, 16 September 2006

[The article can be found at What about the women who have abortions?, 31 October 2006, by Deborah Orr, Pretoria News –WHS]

It’s pretty strange, this ever-growing enthusiasm for abortion in Britain, when one considers what a bloody awful ordeal it is for most of the women who experience it. Writing in the British Medical Journal, Professor Anna Glasier offers the grim news that the wider availability of the morning-after pill has prevented more than 66,500 abortions in England and Wales in 2004, but that there were, nevertheless, 185,400 terminations in the same year….(Full Story)

Posted in Social-Destruction Enterprise, Abortion, Propaganda Exposed, The New World Order, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

May 27, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

The top-ten key-word searches:

1. kilauren gibb
2. joni mitchell daughter
3. erin pizzey
4. international suicide rates
5. suicide rates in canada
6. joni mitchell’s daughter
7. radical feminism
8. fatherlessness
9. taboo porn
10. world suicide rates

The top-ten most-often visited web pages:

1. Anorexia Nervosa : Changing Ideal of Beauty or insane Obsession?
2. Suicide rates in countries throughout the world
3. Welcome to Fathers for Life
4. Children of Divorce & Separation — Statistics
5. Population pyramids for selected countries in the regions of the world
6. Family Violence — Main Page
7. Canada Suicides
8. USA Suicide Deaths 1979 to 1996
9. The reunion of Joni Mitchell and her daughter Kilauren Gibb
10. USA Population Figures for the Years 1980 to 1996

Posted in Web Statistics | Print | No Comments »

May 27, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Okay, James [not his real name], got you marked on the calendar.

About keeping emails private, that is not necessary unless I ask for that to be done.

Good thing about your daughter’s soccer. From the aspect of the politics of sex, it is, of course, segregation according to sex. True women’s liberation and equitable rights for the sexes would permit girls and boys to rise to the maximum individual level of proficiency they would be able to *and wanted to* achieve regardless of their sex in any field of endeavour. Affirmative action to achieve that is a feminist aberration. Moreover, it comes without exception at the expense of boys and men - at the cost of a much-widened gap in the respective life expectancies of the sexes.

Ruth and I discussed what we were doing at age 14. She grew up in Alberta, and I in Germany. Neither one of us and few people our age had the experience of having our childhood expanded instead of having our personal development focused on growing into responsible adulthood. Ruth was still going to school and working at home on the farm, and I was starting my apprenticeship and working at home on an acreage, where we had to have a large garden for keeping our family alive. My mom considered herself to be blessed, as she had a total of seven children to whom she could delegate a good portion of her work. Still, we played too, but we far more often had to discuss the affairs and management of the necessities of our lives, so as to learn how to live.

Ruth puts it this way: “We did what we had to, and then we did what we wanted to.” Neither of us have regrets about learning how to live and about the nature of, and the differences between, rights, entitlements, duties, obligations and responsibilities.

Our playing was not organized sports, although some people found time for that. We both were involved to varying extents in ping-pong, bowling, soccer and various other ballgames, cards, chess (my dad taught me that at age ten; and I became a mean player), in youth organizations and in some games that were to some extent popular left-overs from the Nazi era but are also being played by Boy Scout and Girl Guides throughout the world. Our playing was spontaneous, mostly on Sunday afternoons, holidays and vacations. It was not easy to play during the 48-hour work week, as we still worked Saturday mornings. Saturday afternoons were for clean-up at home to get ready for Sunday, a day of rest.

School involved, depending on age, from 38 to 42 hours of lessons a week plus a considerable amount of compulsory home work, upon which in part it was decided whether we would pass to the next grade.

Still, I had it better than did my dad. His standard work week was still 70 hours, and he had not earned any money at all during his apprenticeship (which he, too, had begun at age 14). He had to pay for the privilege of learning a trade, but that included room and board provided by his employer, in turn for which he was expected after hours to help with some of the chores in his employer’s household.

All of that worked out well for us and our siblings, a good number of whom became millionaires, except for Ruth and for me.  Both of us experienced divorces that set us back for a number of years.  Still, that is now so long ago in the past that it seems like it happened in another life.

Posted in Men and Women Work, Family, Feminism | Print | No Comments »

May 26, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Mercatornet

Misandry is the message

Barbara Kay | Thursday, 15 May 2008

A Canadian columnist lifts the lid on the last respectable form of cultural bias.

The family on the sofa is divided, but not equally. On one side a sullen, rather menacing father stares defiantly at the camera; on the other, a waifish, stressed-looking mother is shielding anxious children. The message of the advertisement is one we have heard or seen innumerable times in the media: domestic violence is only perpetrated by men, who are by nature disposed to controlling behaviours, while women and children (an inseparable unit) are always innocent victims.

I call it misandry, discrimination against men, but although the Ontario Human Rights Code bars “discrimination via signs or symbols,” I doubt that any charges of discrimination will be laid against the Canadian Women’s Foundation, which has been carpet-bombing the media with this ad. Its appearance in newspapers, bank statements and on the sides of buses is aimed at promoting awareness of domestic violence:

The image represents a half-truth and therefore a lie….(Full Story)
__________________
Comments by Fathers for Life: Barbara Kay’s article is very important and absolutely required reading. The importance of the article begins with its title “Misandry is the message,” which is without doubt derived from Marshall McLuhan’s phrase “The medium is the message” (1964).

Marshall McLuhan received much attention and praise for his theories on the changing nature of the influence of the media via the impact of its message on social engineering. It seems that Barbara Kay went one step farther and identified the message of the media: all-pervasive and increasingly intensifying hatred of men and boys. It seems that Barbara Kay deserves credit for doing that to no lesser extent than Marshall McLuhan did, identifying the principle of which she illustrated one very important aspect: misandry.

The article has a very small flaw. That is that the definition of misandry it contains is not quite on the mark. More correctly, misandry is not discrimination against men, it is the cause of discrimination against men, just as discrimination against women (today no longer prevalent — if it ever truly was — but merely and almost exclusively only alleged by feminists) would not be misogyny (the hatred of women) but a consequence of misogyny. In other words, institutionalized misandry of the media leads to all-pervasive discrimination against men and boys, as surely as institutionalized misogyny — if it were to exist — would lead to overwhelming discrimination against women and girls.

Although many activists in the men’s movement already decades ago identified the need for the identification of misandry as the male counterpart to misogyny, many popular dictionaries refused for just as long to incorporate a definition of misandry (most commonly through simply ignoring requests for such inclusions). On Jan. 29, 2005, Wikipedia incorporated its first entry for misandry and now contains a much expanded definition of misandry that serves well and is widely accessible:

Misandry …is the hatred of men or boys, as opposed to misogyny, the hatred of women; or misanthropy, hatred of the human species. Misandry comes from misos (Greek …, “hatred”) + andr-ia (Greek anér-andros, “man”). Those holding misandric beliefs can be of either sex….

Mind you, given its politically-correct nature and general lack of academic standards and rigor when it comes to definitions of terms in a social context, and due to the habitually uneasy relationship of feminists in regard to logic, the description of misandry in Wikipedia contains a large jump in logic, such as that an example of misandry provided speaks of “the race of males.”

The use of the term males (much prevalent in today’s media) to identify men is one of many irrational consequences of the feminist re-engineering of the English language and most definitely doesn’t serve well. The term, which includes male animals such as cocks, stallions and dogs, invokes female counterparts: hens, mares and bitches. Nor is there or can there be a race of males. The word male in such a context always refers to the male sex of a species. However, the males of all species do not logically constitute a race; neither do the males of any given species. The correct word for human males is men (or boys).

The sum-total of the prevalence of misandry over that of misogyny manifests itself in discrimination against men and boys that grew into the enormously large difference in the average life expectancies of the sexes.

Barbara Kay quite correctly identified some of the very real manifestations of discrimination against men and boys, such as, “Ninety-nine per cent of funded social services in Canada, even those advertising “family services”, provide counseling and other forms of help only to women victims of domestic violence.”

It is remarkable that that greatly excessive disparity in discrimination against men and boys over discrimination against women and girls is reflected in other sectors of social discourse in Canada, such as in the ratio of incarceration of the sexes (99 men for every woman — in the USA that ratio is about 17.6 men for every woman), and in the bias against men in news reporting in Canada. As Jim Boyce reports,

My study of Canadian newspapers found a similar phenomenon. But in this case, the worthy victims were women and the unworthy victims were men.
I examined coverage of gender and violence in 1242 headlines published in seven major Canadian dailies from 1989 to 1992. (I chose headlines since they summarize news articles and are the most read and remembered part of a newspaper.) Considering that statistics on violence typically show that men are at least as victimized as women, the contrast in the amount of coverage given to each was striking:

Of the 540 headlines which directly referred to the gender of victims, 525 (97.2%) focused on women and 15 (2.8%) focused on men, a ratio of 35 to 1.

A random sampling of the articles accompanying the rest of the headlines suggested the gap was even greater. I estimated that a total of 991 headlines focused on the gender of victims. Of these, 972 (98.1%) emphasized women and 19 ( 1.9%) emphasized men, a ratio of 51 to 1. (Quoted from Manufacturing Concern, by Jim Boyce; the thesis was submitted in 1994 to the Department of Religion & Culture in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts degree at Wilfrid Laurier University.)

Posted in Censorship, Men's Issues, Feminism, Propaganda Exposed, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

May 21, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

News.scotsman.com
Published Date: 21 May 2008

MPs scrap IVF children’s ‘right to father’

By Gerri Peev, political correspondent

THE right to a father for children born after fertility treatment was dramatically dropped by MPs last night, after hours of impassioned debate in the Commons.

The government won its case for scrapping the requirement for IVF clinics to consider a woman’s access to a father for a potential child….(Full Story)

___________________
Comment by F4L: A potential child? Regardless of that illogical consideration, this atrocious piece of legislation violates not only the right of children but also the rights of all fathers. Let’s hope that it serves to wake up all Scotsmen as to who they must vote for.

Better yet, it will without a doubt intensify the growing determination of Scotsmen to forgo the pleasure of donating sperm, but sperm could always be imported and most certainly will if that should become necessary.

The growing determination of men to refuse to donate sperm for artificial insemination is without a doubt due to an equally atrocious power of the authorities to increasingly-often find men who donated sperm guilty of having fathered children that now are no longer entitled to ever be able to see their natural fathers (the anonymity of sperm donors is no longer guaranteed). That is even though those “fathers” can be and increasingly often are punished for their abstract views on paternity, by sentencing them to pay child support “in the best interest of the children” whom they fathered and will not legally be able to see or interact with. All of that to avoid “discrimination” against lesbians of whom only a handful elects to undergo IVF procedures to begin with.

Discrimination against lesbians is not the real issue that is to be addressed through this legislation. That argument only serves to pull the wool over our eyes. The real objective is to obliterate even the last vestiges of the institution of the traditional nuclear family and to permanently assign to all men the status of second-class citizens or, if you wish, to make them the third-millennium-equivalent of Jews in the Nazi regime. Profit motives for the IVF industry are only a secondary and minor concern (see IVF costs). Although those costs range from about ten- to twenty-thousand dollars, the success rate for IVF attempts is only 29 percent.

Millions of men sacrificed their lives (and many more their health) to fight for the protection of freedom and security of home and country, expressively to prevent what is happening now in Scotland and in many other developed nations from coming about. What a waste that was!

So it happens that lesbianism is not merely an evolutionary dead-end but quite literally a tool used to bring about the death of our civilization.

Update June 7, 2008:

Current total fertility rates (TFRs) for countries in the world - Rank Order.  The web page accessible through the preceding link lists the rank order from highest to lowest, with a TFR of about 2.2 indicating a stable population. The TFR required to maintain a given country’s population varies a little from country to country, depending on the life expectancy for the average resident in that country. (Source: CIA World Factbook)

As of June 2008, the CIA World Factbook showed 104 countries (generally the richest and most developed) to have TFRs of less than 2.2.  In other words, in those countries the population is in the process of shrinking. (Related Articles at Fathers for Life)

Posted in Social-Destruction Enterprise, Men's Issues, Family, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

May 21, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Victoria Handysides reported for MetroNews.ca in a May 20, 2008 article that, “The town of Bruderheim lost five homes after a 40 km-wide [sic] blaze began Thursday afternoon.”

That quoted sentence contains two inaccuracies, both exaggerations, one of which is a real whopper, apparently caused by lack of common sense in combination with numerical illiteracy, an inability to comprehend — in realistic and practical ways — numbers that pertain to life in the real world.

It may surprise Victoria Handysides to learn that the town of Bruderheim lost no homes at all in that fire. The homes that were lost comprised homes in the Bruderheim area, almost ten km NW from the town limits, while four families became homeless. Victoria Handysides must have manufactured her facts relating to that; if not, I wonder what news report she used for her claim. She certainly could not have gotten it from anyone from Bruderheim she interviewed. Even if she would have conducted an interview, she should have verified her facts with someone who lives in or near Bruderheim, which she obviously neglected to do.

The real whopper, the “40km-wide blaze”, could have been avoided with nothing more than a bit of common sense, applied through geometry by Victoria Handyside and, more importantly, by her editors. That could and can be done by anyone not living even close to Bruderheim, anyone in the whole wide world.

If the blaze that burned down the homes NW of Bruderheim was 40km wide, then it would have been at the very least 40km long. That would have made the blaze one of the largest ever in Canada, involving at least in the order of 1,600 square kilometres or 160,000 hectares.

In addition, Victoria Handysides reported that,

“It was really intense for a time because of the high winds,” Cote said, adding that the streets in the village of 1,500 people were filled with smoke on Thursday. “It was eerie, because it was coming our way, but we set up defences that made sure it didn’t get farther than it did.[”]

There was never any danger that the fire would have put the town of Bruderheim at risk. There simply are too many open fields between the town and the forested area that burned. Moreover, the size of the area that burned comprised a total of about 250ha, an area of 2.5 square kilometres, very far from being 40km wide.

The news provided by Metro are free but also worthless, at least as far as reporting on the blaze near Bruderheim is concerned. One must wonder, though, whether for MetroNews sensationalizing in news reporting is more important than the truth, and perhaps in more subject areas than just 40km-wide blazes.

At any rate, such whoppers indicate the dumbing-down of our education system in action.

___________
Cc: Victoria Handysides

Posted in Education, Propaganda Exposed | Print | No Comments »

May 19, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

In the year 2000 I found the following definition of Eco-Feminism (on the Usenet, at soc.feminism):

Eco Feminism:

This branch of feminism is much more spiritual than political or theoretical in nature. It may or may not be wrapped up with Goddess worship and vegetarianism. Its basic tenet is that a patriarchical society will exploit its resources without regard to long term consequences as a direct result of the attitudes fostered in a patriarchical/hierarchical society. Parallels are often drawn between society’s treatment of the environment, animals, or resources and its treatment of women. In resisting patriarchical culture, eco-feminists feel that they are also resisting plundering and destroying the Earth. And vice-versa. [CTM]

This is actually socially-conscious environmentalism with a tiny smattering of the radical and cultural feminist observation that exploitation of women and exploitation of the earth have some astonishing parallels. The rest of “eco-feminism” turns out to be a variation on socialism. The Green movements of Europe have done a good job of formulating (if not implementing) an environmentally aware feminism; and while Green movements were not originally considered a part of eco-feminism, they are now recognized as a vital component. [JD]

(If I remember correctly, a couple of feminist groups, including NOW have joined up with Green parties. [CTM])

The influence of eco feminism grew enormously since those days.

According to eco-feminists, men are the enemy of nature and of the female half of all of mankind.

According to reasonable people, the eco-feminists are nuts. Still, eco-feminists have influence in the war against men, fathers, families and the Occident.

I often call Wikipedia politically correct, as apparently the vocal majority decides the nature of the definition of a term, as if that would matter in the debate of a scientific issue. No matter how many participants in a debate claim to be right when in reality they are wrong, they are wrong. Scientific truth is absolute or as near as is possible, it is not a matter of a vote or consensus.

Copernicus and Galileo would not have been able to make an impression through Wikipedia, as their ideas would continuously have been edited out. Fortunately, at Wikipedia that works to normal people’s advantage in the case of the views of politically-correct, extremist minorities, as it shows the nature of extremist beliefs and brings it to the attention of far greater numbers of people than illustrating such beliefs by largely isolated and censored activists would. Wikipedia gives normal mortals an edge in the case of eco-feminism:

Ecofeminists argue that a relationship exists between the oppression of women and the degradation of nature, and explore the intersectionality between sexism, the domination of nature, racism, speciesism, and other characteristics of social inequality. Some current work emphasizes that the capitalist and patriarchal system is based on triple domination of the Global South (people who live in the Third World), women, and nature. (Quoted from Wikipedia)

As I said, according to reasonable people, the eco-feminists are nuts, and, as the article at the preceding link shows, if anyone tells the eco-feminists that their beliefs are wrong, they are apt to throw tantrums and to launch court actions against their very own students. Now, that is political correctness gone on a rampage!

Nevertheless that should not surprise anyone. If no standards for proper behavior are set and no line is drawn, children will test and test time and again how far they can go and what they can get away with, until their parents are forced to set limits to childish behaviour. Unfortunately it often far too late when parents are forced to set those limits, so as to be able to live. Children who are little savages in need of correction but not being corrected will grow into adult savages, extremists or worse (even into eco-feminists) when no correcting is done before it is too late.

Posted in Men's Issues, Censorship, Family, Feminism, The New World Order, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

May 19, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Peter,

There was not enough time yesterday to comment on all of the thoughts you had expressed in your message. Having slept a bit, having recuperated somewhat, and before I get back to the project I could not finish yesterday, I will comment on the conclusion of your message.

As before, I will insert my comments between your lines.

Peter wrote:

….My brief answer to WS from long ago that I never did get to make is that when people specialize in one pursuit they must count on others who specialize in other pursuits to fill the gaps of what they have not themselves done.

You should have quoted or paraphrased what your brief answer relates to.

Still, you are right. The system you describe is called a hierarchical system. It is something that industrial, commercial and bureaucratic enterprises increasingly moved away from during the past 40 or more years, the more so the more liberalism and feminism came to dominate society.

Hierarchical systems are seen as being a socially detrimental legacy of the “patriarchy,” even though quite a few oppressive and not entirely peaceful “patriarchies” throughout history were ruled by women or the sons whom they put on the throne.

It is now preferred to have corporations and organizations being run like collectives, where the workers specialize, and where the managers move through all departments, spending a little time in each, becoming Jacks-of-all-trades and masters of none — based on the assertion that job rotation causes adaptability, whereas specialization in management is alleged to be the cause of rigidity when reorganizations are required due to the changing nature and growth of a business or organization.

So an information specialist must count on communication specialists to put out the material. And other specialists too.

Collectivism depends to a very large part on networking of the sort that some people consider to be a management structure arranged as a matrix.

To varying extents, collectivism leads to mediocrity and growing disconnectedness between management and what its business is all about.

To function well and efficiently, collectivism requires the will by people to cooperate.

Collectivism depends on the members or agents in the system to decide amongst themselves to agree on how they divide the functions and responsibilities of the system of which they are part.

As you so exceedingly well illustrate through your continual complaints against and about men’s-rights activists and -organizations and through your obsessive compulsion to be nevertheless involved with them, willing cooperation does not always exist amongst people in a given system. That makes the system more or less inefficient, at times being so inefficient that the system will either gradually decay or catastrophically collapse or, conversely, punish or even expunge, one or a minority of its members.

Collectivism evolves into forcing its members to cooperate with one another and has been a prominent feature of all totalitarian communist regimes. On the other hand, hierarchical systems tend to evolve into dictatorships.

Both work best by means of the influence of universal religious or ideological coercion or - depending on the effectiveness of social pressure (usually on account of all-pervasive propaganda) - through voluntary and even enthusiastic compliance.

Or there can be no specialization. Each person must make his own group and network and research and be a lawyer, …

Yes, that has already been covered, “the Jack-of-all-trades and master of none.”

In economics it is called economies of scale and is the basis of the theory of free trade. In fact it is the basis of civilization.

Well, I somewhat disagree on that. Families are the foundation and building blocks of civilization. The last ten thousand years of humanity are a thin veneer on a long history comprised largely of swinging in the trees.

More importantly, economy of scale is something greatly different from what you think it is. Economy of scale relates to money, costs, expenditures, profits and income. More specifically, economy of scale relates to the general and generally hoped-for lowering of the unit-cost of production that can come with the increasing size of a system and improved efficiency.

Ostensibly, bigger is better, and mechanization is cheaper, but generally only with the production of a large number of items. That is generally true, but only if cooperation increases along with the size of a system and also if that cooperation leads to peaceful decisions as to how the system needs to be designed and on how to evolve toward the ultimate end, the most effective and acceptable division of the work processes between man and machine, with every sector designed to operate at its maximum efficiency, always aiming at the ideal, the ultimate: no losses of any sort.

Anyone can be replaced with a button, and robots take no sick leave or coffee breaks and never go on strike. Mechanization causes unemployment, but it most definitely is an effective solution for reducing unit-cost of production attributable to worker dissatisfaction.

However, keep in mind that politically it is more expedient to claim that someone is unemployed because he is being punished for “refusing” to make child support payments * or because his Employment Insurance benefits haven’t begun yet or have not run out yet (prior to and after which they are not officially unemployed) than it is to say that he was replaced by a machine. (* In the vast majority of cases there is no question that the “refusal” is in reality the result of nothing more than being guilty of the crime of having fallen into poverty.)

However, the social engineers have a solution for dissatisfaction, too. They simply reduce the world population down to between 300 million and a billion people (the UN’s figure for the size of the 2150 world population is 3.5 billion, but that estimate is most likely quite a bit too high). After all, according to environmentalist and ecofeminist hysteria, if we wish to have Paradise on Earth, then it is necessary to eradicate or at least greatly reduce the world population and primarily the number of men.

Without a doubt, that will reduce both, the number of the unemployed as well as that of the dissatisfied. After having succeeded in making abortion - the killing of unborn children - legal, there are now fewer reservations on the killing of men. As a result of that, the gender gap in the life expectancies of the sexes in the US grew from three years in favor of women in 1929 to six years (eight years in the case of Blacks) in 1996.

So people could have jobs other than growing themselves food. But this link has broken in the mens movement. So I admit I was wrong doing research and counting on anybody for anything. As with other aspects of society divorced men have decided other divorced men are the best marks to victimize. So the only way I can continue doing studies is if I am paid so I can pay groups to publicize them.
They shoot themselves in the feet at every turn. I did meet a few nice people though. Arnie and Guy Lavigne come quickly to mind. They gave more than they took. Guy is now dead and Arnie is growing his own food.

Peter

—snipped—

I’ll leave you with a couple of thoughts:

The “family” in all ages and in all corners of the globe can be defined as a man and a woman bonded together through a socially approved covenant of marriage to regulate sexuality, to bear, raise, and protect children, to provide mutual care and protection, to create a small home economy, and to maintain continuity between the generations, those going before and those coming after.It is out of the reciprocal, naturally recreated relations of the family that the broader communities—such as tribes, villages, peoples, and nations—grow.

— Allan Carlson, in
What’s Wrong With the United Nations Definition of ‘Family’?
The Family in America (August 1994), p. 3

One of the paradoxes of management is this: Most employees usually are happier and more comfortable in a well-structured environment than in one that operates with disorder and permissiveness.

— Telephony, Feb. 6, 1978, p. 61 (author unknown)

Ah yes, that means duty and a system of punishment and rewards, rather than one of entitlements. It means order. All of those concepts were primary features of families and other “patriarchal” systems headed by men. People didn’t talk much about feelings in those days, but a lot of people felt good then.

Now we no longer have much order, and we increasingly lean toward economic and social chaos. It is curious that feelings came to be talked about and to dominate our society to the extent that they are now compulsory, even though far fewer people now seem to feel good.

In the 1950s there was a sense of stability, satisfaction, of confidence in the future. That has been largely replaced with dissatisfaction and dread of the future. The last time something like that happened in the background of my life was during the liberalism imposed by the Weimar Republic. The economic, social and moral rot caused by that cried out for a Messiah to clean house. The permissiveness and disorder of the Weimar Republic produced the National Socialistic Workers Party of Germany (NSDAP) with its leader, Hitler. After the NSDAP took over there was order, a lot of satisfaction and happiness, but not for very long.

The euphoria produced by the NSDAP was a deadly illusion and officially ended with Stalingrad, the beginning of the collapse of Germany and of much of the rest of Europe into rubble and ashes. The deaths of many millions of men brought about women’s liberation and the rise of a new and even more deadly ideology: modern feminism. What could be more deadly than an ideology that literally causes humanity to die out?

Posted in Men and Women Work, Men's Issues, Family, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »