Thursday, January 31, 2013
Petition to require women to sign up for selective service
Sign the petition to include women in the selective service program. Why should men be the only ones required by law to sign or go to jail and/or be denied educational benefits? Why should women be exempt? If you don't like this inequality then sign the petition. IF we're so equal why are men's lives worth less than women's? We're not inferior to them as they are not superior to us. Signing the petition will guarantee equality.
Defeat H.R. 11
The Violence Against Women Act reauthorization bills introduced recently in the House and Senate ignore well-documented problems.
These VAWA Reform Principals are vital to the creation of an effective and comprehensive domestic violence bill: click here
Today we'd like you to call your Representative. Tell them, "Say NO to H.R. 11 and YES to Real VAWA Reform!"
Find your Representative by zip code here:
p using those phones or email! Thank you!
teri
Teri Stoddard, Program Director
Stop Abusive and Violent Environments
www.saveservices.org
Sounds good. It seems that the feminasties are going for it again and we have to stop them. No problem we can do that so let's do it to it. It might also be a good idea to get in touch with Congressmen John Boehner and Eric Cantor and let them know how we feel about this They are the Republican leadership in the House so it's a good idea to let them know as well.
These VAWA Reform Principals are vital to the creation of an effective and comprehensive domestic violence bill: click here
Today we'd like you to call your Representative. Tell them, "Say NO to H.R. 11 and YES to Real VAWA Reform!"
Find your Representative by zip code here:
p using those phones or email! Thank you!
teri
Teri Stoddard, Program Director
Stop Abusive and Violent Environments
www.saveservices.org
Sounds good. It seems that the feminasties are going for it again and we have to stop them. No problem we can do that so let's do it to it. It might also be a good idea to get in touch with Congressmen John Boehner and Eric Cantor and let them know how we feel about this They are the Republican leadership in the House so it's a good idea to let them know as well.
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
VAWA is back as S.47,defeat S.47
Today we have an urgent request.
As we told you last week, S. 47, a Violence Against Women Act reauthorization bill has been introduced in the Senate. Unfortunately, S. 47 is very similar to last year's VAWA and ignores well-documented problems.
You'd think that with all of the controversy surrounding VAWA, the Senate would afford time for discussion and the possible addition of amendments. But this may not be the case! Word is that it may skip the Judicial Committee and go straight to the floor for a vote!
We believe that these VAWA Reform Principals are vital and urgently needed to create a comprehensive and effective VAWA: click here
Our urgent request: Please call your Senators RIGHT NOW. Tell them, "Say NO to S. 47 and YES to Real VAWA Reform!"
Find your senators here.
Let's show them what we're made of. Use those phones!
Thanks!
teri
Teri Stoddard, Program Directora
Stop Abusive and Violent Environments
www.saveservices.org
P.S. Please help us grow our efforts. And share this e-lert with a friend.
Or you can email them. Looks like they're trying an old game on a new Senate hoping to get their way of putting the burden upon men even more but we've got to tell them it won't work we're not going to take it anymore.
As we told you last week, S. 47, a Violence Against Women Act reauthorization bill has been introduced in the Senate. Unfortunately, S. 47 is very similar to last year's VAWA and ignores well-documented problems.
You'd think that with all of the controversy surrounding VAWA, the Senate would afford time for discussion and the possible addition of amendments. But this may not be the case! Word is that it may skip the Judicial Committee and go straight to the floor for a vote!
We believe that these VAWA Reform Principals are vital and urgently needed to create a comprehensive and effective VAWA: click here
Our urgent request: Please call your Senators RIGHT NOW. Tell them, "Say NO to S. 47 and YES to Real VAWA Reform!"
Find your senators here.
Let's show them what we're made of. Use those phones!
Thanks!
teri
Teri Stoddard, Program Directora
Stop Abusive and Violent Environments
www.saveservices.org
P.S. Please help us grow our efforts. And share this e-lert with a friend.
Or you can email them. Looks like they're trying an old game on a new Senate hoping to get their way of putting the burden upon men even more but we've got to tell them it won't work we're not going to take it anymore.
Monday, January 28, 2013
Boycott Godiva Inc.
I read an article on Godiva chocolate at A Voice For Men and after reading it I'm calling on a boycott of all Godiva chocolate products. There are practicing misandry by excluding men who better society. This Valentine's Day do not buy Godiva products only buy from their competitors. You can also let James A. Goldman,CEO of Godiva Inc. know that you will no longer be buying products from Godiva Inc. His email address is ceo@godiva.com. Don't bother with writing some flunkie in "letters" department when we can write the head guy. Just say "no" to Godiva Inc.
The NCFM starts a Montana State University chapter
Congratulations to the National Coalition For Men for starting their Montana State University chapter. It is good to see that the MRA cause is coming to college and university campuses where it is so badly needed to counteract the feminist garbage that has been heaped upon the men of colleges and universities nationwide. Hopefully there will be more to follow. Things are looking up.
The plight of men today
The amazing thing to day is that college girls do porn videos like this video yet if go you near her you can be accused of some sex crime. I mean think about it. One of those bitches from Girls Gone Wild can falsely accuse a guy and everyone will think she is a vestal virgin about it and that he is the guy in raincoat that hangs around playgrounds. Boys or girls,today's college girl doesn't give a fuck who she fucks but she has no problem fucking over men. Here is an illustration:
We've seen this attitude in the media,courts and society in general. Women insensitive to men's pain:
Even if they inflict the most damaging harm to little boys:
We see this in a society that not only condones it but enables misandry as well. However we are seeing a backlash at women:
We're getting in their faces:
We've tried to be nice. What did that get us? Husband mutilators like Lorena Bobbitt and Catherine Kieu Becker. We tried to be nice. What did that get us? Husband killers such as Mary Winkler and Clara Harris. We tried to be nice. What did that get us? School teachers and other older females who take advantage of the young males in schools and other institutions. We tried to be nice. What did that get us? Misandric lopsided laws that disfavor men even when the men are victims of female on male domestic violence. We've tried to be nice, What did that get us? A kick to the groin and other forms of sexual violence.
No more Mister Nice Guy:
We've seen this attitude in the media,courts and society in general. Women insensitive to men's pain:
No more Mister Nice Guy:
Sunday, January 27, 2013
Matt Dubay,Mel Feit take on Roe vs. Wade's anti-male sexism
Men's-Rights Activists to Sue for Right to Decline Fatherhood
Published March 08, 2006
Associated Press
Contending that women have more options than they do in the event of an unintended pregnancy, men's rights activists are mounting a long shot legal campaign aimed at giving them the chance to opt out of financial responsibility for raising a child. The National Center for Men has prepared a lawsuit — nicknamed Roe v. Wade for Men — to be filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Michigan on behalf of a 25-year-old computer programmer ordered to pay child support for his ex-girlfriend's daughter. The suit addresses the issue of male reproductive rights, contending that lack of such rights violates the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause.
The gist of the argument: If a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood. The activists involved hope to spark discussion even if they lose.
"There's such a spectrum of choice that women have — it's her body, her pregnancy and she has the ultimate right to make decisions," said Mel Feit, director of the men's center. "I'm trying to find a way for a man also to have some say over decisions that affect his life profoundly."
Feit's organization has been trying since the early 1990s to pursue such a lawsuit, and finally found a suitable plaintiff in Matt Dubay of Saginaw, Mich. Dubay says he has been ordered to pay $500 a month in child support for a girl born last year to his ex-girlfriend. He contends that the woman knew he didn't want to have a child with her and assured him repeatedly that — because of a physical condition — she could not get pregnant.
Dubay is braced for the lawsuit to fail.
"What I expect to hear (from the court) is that the way things are is not really fair, but that's the way it is," he said in a telephone interview. "Just to create awareness would be enough, to at least get a debate started."
State courts have ruled in the past that any inequity experienced by men like Dubay is outweighed by society's interest in ensuring that children get financial support from two parents. Melanie Jacobs, a Michigan State University law professor, said the federal court might rule similarly in Dubay's case.
"The courts are trying to say it may not be so fair that this gentleman has to support a child he didn't want, but it's less fair to say society has to pay the support," she said. Feit, however, says a fatherhood opt-out wouldn't necessarily impose higher costs on society or the mother. A woman who balked at abortion but felt she couldn't afford to raise a child could put the baby up for adoption, he said.
Jennifer Brown of the women's rights advocacy group Legal Momentum objected to the men's center comparing Dubay's lawsuit to Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling establishing a woman's right to have an abortion.
"Roe is based on an extreme intrusion by the government — literally to force a woman to continue a pregnancy she doesn't want," Brown said. "There's nothing equivalent for men. They have the same ability as women to use contraception, to get sterilized." Feit counters that the suit's reference to abortion rights is apt.
"Roe says a woman can choose to have intimacy and still have control over subsequent consequences," he said. "No one has ever asked a federal court if that means men should have some similar say."
"The problem is this is so politically incorrect," Feit added. "The public is still dealing with the pre-Roe ethic when it comes to men, that if a man fathers a child, he should accept responsibility."
Feit doesn't advocate an unlimited fatherhood opt-out; he proposes a brief period in which a man, after learning of an unintended pregnancy, could decline parental responsibilities if the relationship was one in which neither partner had desired a child.
"If the woman changes her mind and wants the child, she should be responsible," Feit said. "If she can't take care of the child, adoption is a good alternative."
The president of the National Organization for Women, Kim Gandy, acknowledged that disputes over unintended pregnancies can be complex and bitter.
"None of these are easy questions," said Gandy, a former prosecutor. "But most courts say it's not about what he did or didn't do or what she did or didn't do. It's about the rights of the child."
Source:click here
I want to thank brother Mel Feit for promoting this and not only helping Matt Dubay but other men in this situation. Dubay's girlfriend had the option of abortion which she did not pursue. Matt and other men like him do not have that option. Women can terminate their parental rights merely by dropping the child off at a police or fire station or a hospital with no questions asked. Men are unable to terminate their parental responsibilities no matter what. Kim Gandy referred to the unborn baby as a "child" usually feminists refer to unborn children as "fetuses". I guess if it benefits a woman it is a "child" if it doesn't it is a "fetus". Feminists hate fetuses and want to destroy as many as they can but they hate men even more that is why they want Dubay to fail.
Published March 08, 2006
Associated Press
Contending that women have more options than they do in the event of an unintended pregnancy, men's rights activists are mounting a long shot legal campaign aimed at giving them the chance to opt out of financial responsibility for raising a child. The National Center for Men has prepared a lawsuit — nicknamed Roe v. Wade for Men — to be filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Michigan on behalf of a 25-year-old computer programmer ordered to pay child support for his ex-girlfriend's daughter. The suit addresses the issue of male reproductive rights, contending that lack of such rights violates the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause.
The gist of the argument: If a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood. The activists involved hope to spark discussion even if they lose.
"There's such a spectrum of choice that women have — it's her body, her pregnancy and she has the ultimate right to make decisions," said Mel Feit, director of the men's center. "I'm trying to find a way for a man also to have some say over decisions that affect his life profoundly."
Feit's organization has been trying since the early 1990s to pursue such a lawsuit, and finally found a suitable plaintiff in Matt Dubay of Saginaw, Mich. Dubay says he has been ordered to pay $500 a month in child support for a girl born last year to his ex-girlfriend. He contends that the woman knew he didn't want to have a child with her and assured him repeatedly that — because of a physical condition — she could not get pregnant.
Dubay is braced for the lawsuit to fail.
"What I expect to hear (from the court) is that the way things are is not really fair, but that's the way it is," he said in a telephone interview. "Just to create awareness would be enough, to at least get a debate started."
State courts have ruled in the past that any inequity experienced by men like Dubay is outweighed by society's interest in ensuring that children get financial support from two parents. Melanie Jacobs, a Michigan State University law professor, said the federal court might rule similarly in Dubay's case.
"The courts are trying to say it may not be so fair that this gentleman has to support a child he didn't want, but it's less fair to say society has to pay the support," she said. Feit, however, says a fatherhood opt-out wouldn't necessarily impose higher costs on society or the mother. A woman who balked at abortion but felt she couldn't afford to raise a child could put the baby up for adoption, he said.
Jennifer Brown of the women's rights advocacy group Legal Momentum objected to the men's center comparing Dubay's lawsuit to Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling establishing a woman's right to have an abortion.
"Roe is based on an extreme intrusion by the government — literally to force a woman to continue a pregnancy she doesn't want," Brown said. "There's nothing equivalent for men. They have the same ability as women to use contraception, to get sterilized." Feit counters that the suit's reference to abortion rights is apt.
"Roe says a woman can choose to have intimacy and still have control over subsequent consequences," he said. "No one has ever asked a federal court if that means men should have some similar say."
"The problem is this is so politically incorrect," Feit added. "The public is still dealing with the pre-Roe ethic when it comes to men, that if a man fathers a child, he should accept responsibility."
Feit doesn't advocate an unlimited fatherhood opt-out; he proposes a brief period in which a man, after learning of an unintended pregnancy, could decline parental responsibilities if the relationship was one in which neither partner had desired a child.
"If the woman changes her mind and wants the child, she should be responsible," Feit said. "If she can't take care of the child, adoption is a good alternative."
The president of the National Organization for Women, Kim Gandy, acknowledged that disputes over unintended pregnancies can be complex and bitter.
"None of these are easy questions," said Gandy, a former prosecutor. "But most courts say it's not about what he did or didn't do or what she did or didn't do. It's about the rights of the child."
Source:click here
I want to thank brother Mel Feit for promoting this and not only helping Matt Dubay but other men in this situation. Dubay's girlfriend had the option of abortion which she did not pursue. Matt and other men like him do not have that option. Women can terminate their parental rights merely by dropping the child off at a police or fire station or a hospital with no questions asked. Men are unable to terminate their parental responsibilities no matter what. Kim Gandy referred to the unborn baby as a "child" usually feminists refer to unborn children as "fetuses". I guess if it benefits a woman it is a "child" if it doesn't it is a "fetus". Feminists hate fetuses and want to destroy as many as they can but they hate men even more that is why they want Dubay to fail.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)