From: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt)
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,soc.men,talk.abortion,alt.flame
Subject: Re: Unfounded Allegations Of Sexism
Date: 14 Dec 92 22:27:44 GMT
Reply-To: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com
Followup-To: alt.dads-rights,soc.men,alt.flame
Organization: Abiogenesis 4 Less

As this thread has diverged from the issue of reproductive rights I am
setting followups to exclude talk.abortion (and to where I won't see
them) and to include alt.flame.

noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer) writes:
# daw@cray.com (Dave Wright) writes:
# >mc@vicorp.com (Mark Charalambous) writes:
# >>bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt) writes:
# >>>The kind of power we're talking about here is really power of when and
# >>>how divorce is to take place.  It strikes me as evidence of great
# >>>naivete that you really don't seem to understand how much more power a
# >>>husband can wield against his wife in most cases simply by threatening
# >>>divorce than a wife can wield over her husband, and the reason for
# >>>that stems from the answer to the question above.
# 
# This does not jive with reality.  Women file 85% of the divorces in
# this country.  Who's threatening whom?

I presume you deleted the context of the above quote for brevity.  I
should point out that it does seem a little cryptic without knowledge
of the previous paragraphs.

Besides, your question really doesn't address my argument.  I don't
care to fill up pages explaining why I think so, unless it's
absolutely necessary -- so I'll put it off until it's demanded of me.

But briefly: threatening is not limited to the act of filing; power is
not always wielded by those who have it.

-----

[ I've deleted Mr. Hoffmeyer's and Mr. Wright's horror stories from
their respective divorces, not because they weren't compelling -- but
because they were long and I don't see the need to reprint them. ]

Mr. Hoffmeyer, you really know how to get under a guy's skin, don't
you?  I suppose you feel some perverse pleasure in provoking this
response from me, but you have flamed me with ridiculous accusations
of the most heinous screwheadedness.  Witness:

# So, your response to Mr. Woodyatt, your story, will probably obtain
# little empathy from him.  Because he has no idea what it is like to be
# a man in a divorce who is treated like a monster and a second-class
# citizen just because he is a man, because he has all his empathies tied
# up in understanding women, because he sees the oppression of women
# rampant in society (as pointed out to him by numerous women), because
# he is so used to thinking in terms of women as perpetual victims, he
# just cannot fathom that there is any arena on this planet where men are
# oppressed, discriminiated against, and degraded and victimized just
# because they are men.  No, he is just like my ex2b in this regards,
# It's Ok to hurt men and to lie, cheat or steal in your relationships
# with men, because men make more money than women.
# 
# So, sorry Dave, but I doubt we are going to convince Mr. Woodyatt of
# anything.  His mind is probably made up and very closed.  His knowledge
# of the reality of things is limited, and he seems intent on
# perpetuating the myths that he has bought into lock, stock and barrel,
# because facts apparently don't mean much to him.  His values are
# directed towards hatred in defiance of perceived oppression.  He can
# lie to us, because he is lying about men.  He is discounting our
# experiences, because they are the experiences of men.  After all, men
# are bad, women are good.  Always and forever.

Those are some pretty harsh things to say about someone you've never
met.  Hey, that's Usenet -- I know.

So's this:

Listen up, you pathetic snivelling wasted shell of a man... just
because you had a horrifying divorce experience does not make you a
martyr for the masculine gender.  Your casual dismissal of arguments
you don't like by re-telling your own personal _War_Of_The_Roses_ saga
and following it with raw sewage intended to paint the source of those
arguments as some kind of Judas to his gender simply because he won't
join you in your brainless anti-feminist backlash, is a clear
illustration of the kind of silliness I've come to expect from the
borderline psychopathic squirrel-cage automatons that are currently
giving the men's movement a reputation for being a campaign entirely
staffed with whining Pecksniffian losers such as yourself who all
seem to be suffering from some kind of Reaganesque self-delusion that
every last man eventually gets tortured by the divorce courts into
slaving to support his ex-wife in luxury, and that sexual equality for
men means putting women into bondage.

So, given that we don't seem to have any common ground whereupon we
may both write sensibly, I leave you with the standard flame:

	Bite my cheezeweasel, you flatulent dog.


-- 
+---------------------------+  ``I guess the government that robs its
| J H Woodyatt              |  own people earns the future it is
| bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com |  preparing for itself.''
+---------------------------+                             -- Mark Twain
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights