irategary: September 2008

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Vasectomies: The only choice left for men

More and more young, single and unmarried men are choosing a radical form of birth control- vasectomies. According to the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, half of all pregnancies in the United States are unwanted. As a man, there are traditionally two methods of birth control; condoms and relying on a woman’s word that she has reliable birth control. There are clear drawbacks to both methods. Major pharmaceutical companies have recently shelved near-ready male birth control pills and injections. They cite “lack of interest” as their reasoning to cease the multi-billion dollar investment, but that choice has left young men who do not yet want to face the enormity of being a father dangerously turning to vasectomies.

Many media commentators, pro-women advocates and even legislators subscribe to the ideology “if a man doesn’t want to father a child, he should have used birth control.” The bias in that argument is very simple- couldn’t you say the same thing about women? Yet, if a woman gets pregnant, wanted or not, she then has the option of aborting or keeping the child. She alone has the decision, and should she decide to keep the child, the man has no choice but to financially step forward and pay child support or face jail time.

One and a half million American women legally walk away from motherhood every year by adoption, abortion or abandonment, yet somehow nobody labels them “deadbeats” or “deserters”. In over 40 states, a mother can return the baby to the hospital within a few weeks of birth- completely opting out of motherhood and any child support responsibility with as much ease as going to the dry cleaners. Yet, if the mother decides she wants to keep the child, she can demand 18 (or in some states 21 or 23) years of child support from the father, and he has no choice in the matter.

Feminists have long based their support for Roe v. Wade around the slogan “My body, My Choice.” Yet, men who share in the responsibility of child rearing and financial support have no choice, with their own bodies or futures. Fatherhood is not a right or a privilege that they can opt into when they feel ready. It is instead something that is thrust upon them, partly due to a lack of choice in their options of birth control.

Research shows that many men are unwillingly drafted into fatherhood. The National Scruples and Lies Survey of 2004 conducted in the United Kingdom found that 42% of the women in the survey said they would lie about contraception in order to get pregnant, regardless of the wishes of their partner.

Experts, politicians and pro-choice advocates claim that the current system is necessary because it protects children. In reality, over time, choice for men would greatly benefit American children. If men had the same birth control options that women have, then the number of unwed births (and the huge social problems associated with them) would be reduced. Choice for men means better parenting for children because more men will be able to become fathers when they are married, willing, and stable- a huge benefit for children and society as a whole.

Women’s advocates correctly note that pregnant women often have legitimate reasons for not wanting to be mothers, including youth, finances and the lack of a suitable relationship or marriage. Yet, all of these apply equally to men. Women have a choice- men should, too.

Jeffery M. Leving

See Article

Thursday, September 18, 2008

Riding the Estrogen Express

by Marc H. Rudov

In my article “Will Women Halt the Death of Marriage?” I wrote that, for men, marriage is a sucker’s deal. Before you fume at me, ladies, count the number of times you’ve seen a divorced mother writing child-support and alimony checks to her mansion-dwelling ex-husband from the card-table desk of her one-bedroom apartment. Enough said.

See article here

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is a globally known radio/TV personality, relationship coach, and author of 100+ articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables (ISBN 9780974501727) and The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth (ISBN 0974501719). Mr. Rudov, the 2008 recipient of the National Coalition of Free Men’s “Award for Excellence in Promoting Gender Fairness In The Media,” is a frequent guest on Fox News Channel’s Your World with Neil Cavuto and The O’Reilly Factor.

Rudov’s books, articles, blog, radio/TV archives, and podcasts are available at TheNoNonsenseMan.com.

Marriage as an Investment

Marriage as an Investment by Barry BeVier

Would you rather buy:

A. a low-cost insurance policy that immediately repaid you dividends
each month. And if you filed a claim you receive a large lump sum
settlement and even higher monthly dividends for many years. Guaranteed
to pay back higher returns than what you put in to it whether you cash
it in or not.

B. A stock that is guaranteed to NEVER increase in value.
Pays no dividends.
Stands a 50% chance of dropping a MINIMUM 50% in value at
some point while you own it.
After you sell it you have to pay 10-50%
of your income to the company for many years.

Option A is available only to women.
Option B available only to men.

It's the same investment, marriage

Monday, September 8, 2008

The Matriarchy is Aghast

"There are two kinds of feminists: Those who want to see the presidency available to women, and those who want to see the presidency available to card-carrying, licensed and agenda-certified female feminists. No accidental, willy-nilly women need apply.

Sen. McCain's choice of Sarah Palin made the second kind livid."

--George Jonas, National Post

Friday, September 5, 2008

Now Men

Great site: nowmen.net

Their Mission: To Educate Men on How to Enter Into Marriage Correctly

"Do unto women as they do unto men"

"Marry for wealth and power"

Wednesday, September 3, 2008

AntiMisandry.Com

Check out one of my favorite sites

The Farce of 18 Million Cracks

Great article by Marc H. Rudov

Women Under Glass

Within minutes of Senator John McCain introducing Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, as his vice-presidential running mate, the talking heads on radio & TV were consumed with one question: Will Joe Biden, Barack Obama’s choice for veep, be able to debate her with his trademark brusque, adversarial manner? The answer was, universally, no. Why? She’s a woman.

Nothing is more condescending to women than kid-glove treatment, yet most men reflexively provide it and few women protest it. Such hypocritical deference, in a country where women “claim” to want equality and men “claim” to honor it, is tantamount to keeping them under glass — like Barbie Dolls arrayed on a toystore shelf.

Ironically, women who desire to be coddled and placed in a protected class — where they receive free wining & dining from men; are allowed, with impunity, to falsely accuse men of rape and domestic violence; get automatic child custody; benefit exclusively from Roe v. Wade; and are encouraged, with EEOC endorsement, to wear cocktail wardrobe at work — actually wish to be encased in glass.

The result is the so-called “glass ceiling,” an imaginary boundary that many women believe men built to prevent them from advancing into executive positions. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy: boundaries exist only if one believes they exist. Ask Michael Phelps, the Olympic swimmer who this year won eight gold medals by believing anything’s possible. Beginning any journey with the belief in failure will, in itself, cause failure. And, blaming others for failure, as the glass-ceiling adherents do, is also failure.

If you’ve ever watched me debate women on Fox News, you know I refuse to participate in this anachronistic but still-popular custom of deference. Instead, I treat them as equals, focusing on their words — not their genitalia. Secure, fair-minded women appreciate obeisance-free discourse, and the men with the balls to engage them in it.

Vintage Victimspeak

Everything I’ve read about Sarah Palin indicates that she’s one tough cookie who will easily withstand and counter the in-your-face salvos of VAWA Joe. If that’s not the case, she’s unfit for the VP job. Trust me: Putin, Achmadinijad, Asaad, and Chavez won’t put Governor Palin under glass.

When Hillary Clinton conceded to Barack Obama on June 7, 2008, she bragged about having received 18 million primary votes, a US record. Quite an accomplishment, right? Not after she diluted it by equating each vote to a crack in “the glass ceiling.” Clinton didn’t come clean to admit that her campaign was rife with problems. No, instead, she bloviated with vintage victimspeak: Ladies, men are the reason we women fail.

As I listened to Sarah Palin accepting John McCain’s invitation to join him on the ticket that historic Friday in Dayton, she instantly impressed me with her intelligence, style, gravitas, strength, vision, independence, and energy … until she transparently pandered to Hillary’s voters:

“It was rightly noted in Denver this week that Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America. But it turns out the women of America aren’t finished yet, and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all.”

What glass ceiling? If it exists, how did Palin, with virtually no experience, ascend from mayor of her small town to governor of Alaska — a very macho state? She did it with brains, guts, hard work, sharp elbows, and no victimhood whining. Despite being antithetical to her own experience, she felt that the “glass ceiling” would resonate with Hillary’s acolytes. Frankly, I think she blunted her otherwise powerful message.

The Wage-Gap Crap

Another form of the farcical glass ceiling is the oft-mentioned wage gap between the genders. It’s crap. At the DNC in Denver, Barack Obama said: “And now is the time to keep the promise of equal pay for an equal day’s work, because I want my daughters to have exactly the same opportunities as your sons.” Senator Obama, your daughters have more opportunities than our sons. Stop your nonsense.

In American universities today, 42% more women than men graduate. Women in their 20s outearn their male peers in cities such as Los Angeles, New York, and Dallas. Women on corporate boards of directors outearn their male peers.

If men in similar jobs aren’t paid equally — and they’re not — how is it possible to mandate equal pay between genders? It isn’t. Everyone is paid what he or she is worth, and that compensation is determined by job skills, job requirements, personality, geography, industry, company size, and negotiating skills. When a company offers a woman a salary, and she accepts it — without negotiating a better deal — she is agreeing to the amount. She can’t later complain that some man outearns her.

People often cite, and blindly accept, a mysterious “statistic” indicating that women earn 70 cents for every dollar a man earns. Surprisingly, few ask how that figure was derived. It’s meaningless. Moreover, it does not factor in child support and alimony, which women receive in at least 90% of cases. And, let’s not forget the imputed income to women when men pay for their entertainment and travel. All told, according to Allianz, the financial-services behemoth, women control 60% of American wealth.

Take a man earning $2M per year and another living under a bridge, earning nothing. Lump them together: each has an average annual salary of $1M. Makes sense on a calculator but not in reality. Men and women, in general, have different jobs. In addition, more women than men are in low-paying, part-time jobs. Yes, there are men and women with equal jobs in the executive ranks. But, rarely do you find women welding steel atop bridges or men changing diapers in daycare centers. So, if you take a group of women, ranging from CEO to secretary, and a group of men, ranging from CEO to Navy SEAL, the arithmetic averages of their wages will not be equal. But, because most men feel guilty for being alive, let alone walking upright, they easily succumb to this glass-ceiling wage-gap crap.

Biden’s VAWA Trap

In an amazing twist of fate, Joe Biden may fall into his own misandrist trap. Biden created the unconstitutional Violence Against Women Act in 1994 to vilify men and encase women in glass. Ironically, if he attacks Sarah Palin in the presidential debates, she would, according to VAWA, be justified in calling 911 to have him arrested.

That’s right: by making Governor Palin fearful with his hostile tone, Joe Biden will be breaking his own hateful law — thereby cutting himself on a shard from one of the cracks in the proverbial glass ceiling. What sweet justice. So, it remains to be seen whether Biden will assail Palin or keep her under glass. I guess we’ll have to wait a few weeks, won’t we!

The NoNonsense Bottom Line

In the short term, victimhood sells the feminist cause, but in the long term, it fells the feminist cause. Men never will respect women who want special treatment. The “glass ceiling” and victimhood are synonymous. Never confuse deference with respect: they are mutually exclusive.

If women want to shatter that so-called glass ceiling, all they need do is drop their desire to be kept under glass. Then, they will discover, magically, that there is no glass ceiling — only the myth of a glass ceiling, which is both a farce and a crutch.

Women have two choices: Either stay home to bake cookies as unequals, with reduced rights and deferential treatment, or compete and coexist with men as equals, with equal rights and equal treatment. Trying to have it all by cherry-picking the best features of each is a blatant attempt to be kept under glass — engendering disrespect and resentment among men.

Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, Meg Whitman, former CEO of eBay, and Carly Fiorina, former CEO of Hewlett-Packard — all in the John McCain circle — made it to the top. How was this possible? Because they didn’t let boundaries, glass or other, stop them. Do they have bruises? Of course: that’s life in the fast lane.

The glass ceiling is a farce, as are the 18 million cracks in it. In fact, the only ceiling on your success is the one you put there.