niyad
niyad's JournalFour puke governors want people to think they actually care about the health
of their citizens by controlling more and more of how SNAP benefits are used. Please notice that they don't care about the gmo stuff that is banned in civilized countries, that they don't care about the gutting of health and safety regulations and agencies. No, this all about control and punishment. And since they want to eliminate SNAP anyway, why bother? Please also note that no actual lists were provided to the public, and that there was a reference to "and other items". Does anybody remember that list a few years ago, from a WI idiot, that would have banned cheese? Wisconsin.
The sadly surprising thing to me when they do this is how many people jump on the bandwagon as though something good was being done. "unhealthy!" "poison!" "don't care about their kids!" And on. And on. Amazing how many people are happy with "big brother" when it aligns with their perspective. No taking into account about the legislative processes that abetted our less-than-optimally healthy food industries. No indication of any understanding about food deserts and lack of availability, and expense. No understanding of the intrusive and invasive processes for even getting SNAP, or how little many people actually get. .Nothing except "make them pay" because their choices and options do not agree with mine. We can't control the war machine, the extraction industries, big pharma, etc., etc., but we can control this group, and feel better about ourselves.
It is so very disheartening.
Could somebody please post "t#### lost control: russia targets Ukrainian
civilians in massive strike" from Anna From Ukraine vlog 1023 on youtube. It is heartbreaking. I am still in tears.
FUCK THOSE TWO MURDERING BASTARDS, the orange thing and his master.
Lest we forget: Ludlow Massacre, 1914.
"The bomber's words sound mainstream. Like he won!" President Bill
Clinton on timothy mcveigh, in an hbo documentary "An American Bombing: The Road To April 19".
I came across this in a Guardian article by Andrew Gumbel, titled with those words. I cannot post it here (computer does not let me link, or copy and paste), but it is a deeply disturbing article about the links between mcveigh and the bombing, and the reichwing crazies today, including the current crazies in charge. Amoung the many disturbing things in the article is the assertion that mveigh deliberately targeted the daycare center, as retribution for Waco, and the decison by the government not to investigate or talk about his links to various reichwing groups and ideologies (now actually in our government), but to portray him as a "lone wolf". We are paying heavily for those decisions today.
So when do the talibangelical restrictions on women's rights, activities, dress,
etc. commence in full? We are already being fired, being erased, our autonomy denied. So are they going to go full taliban immediately, or do we get to experience regency/victorian structures/strictures first as a step to gilead?
Has anybody else seen at ice.gov where it says, in a plaque-like image, on
their home page, that it is their job to keep people, products, money, and IDEAS from crossing our borders. I was absolutely sickened, but only a little bit surprised that they are now so emboldened as to say the formerly quiet parts out loud.
An interesting encounter re: alex jones. I was purchasing some
gardening supplies when one of the other employees started saying something about alex jones to the employee checking out my order. I figured he was just coming off his break, and was anxious to share what he had heard (highly unprofessional, of course, but I was amused). He even said it probably was not the place, never knew how people might react, so I said, "alex jones? that lying, horrid monster? I hate the little bastard." The young man got this big smile, and offered to walk me out, where we had a nice little chat about how awful alex, joe rogan, and andrew tate are. I think he was a bit surprised to hear someone my ancient age speaking thus.
I willl be sure to look for him when I go in again, and perhaps suggest that, while I enjoyed it, he might want to be a bit more circumspect at work. We may be in a slightly bluer area of fundieville, but there are magats around (which teminds me, I need to make up some more notes for the magat cars I see). The encounter was a nice little antidote to today's dose of horrors and insanity.
"They want 1939 Germany? Let's give them 1789 France!"
I saw this sign while looking at images of some of the protests. Don't remember which one, though.
Actually, I am glad that TRAITOR** krasnov skipped the dignifed transfer
of those four soldiers. He has nothing but contempt for our military members, zero empathy for grief and loss, and would make it all about himself with some truly awful behaviour and remarks. This way, he is not polluting this sad moment.
The Perception Paradox: Men Who Hate Feminists Think Feminists Hate Men
The Perception Paradox: Men Who Hate Feminists Think Feminists Hate Men
PUBLISHED 4/11/2024 by Amber Wardell
Feminists, on the whole, don’t hate men. We hate sexism and sexist oppression. After all, men are harmed by patriarchy, too.
The perception that feminism is motivated by anti-male sentiment, or misandry, has been used to delegitimize and discredit the movement, has deterred women from joining it, and motivated men to oppose it, sometimes with violence. (Maskot / Getty Images)
The “feminists are man-haters” trope is getting old. For far too long, opponents of feminism have claimed that our movement is rooted in misandry—the prejudice, contempt or hatred against men. Men who have not bothered to educate themselves about what feminism stands for declare loudly and proudly that, if possible, feminist women would subjugate men, destabilize civilization, and summon forth the end of humanity. Until recently, refuting these claims has proven difficult. After all, every feminist-hating man has an anecdotal story of “that one feminist” he knows who definitively hates men. Thankfully, contemporary research has finally given us real, irrefutable evidence that feminists do not, in fact, despise men. A 2023 study measured levels of hostility toward men among feminists, non-feminists and other men. Interestingly, across six experiments conducted in nine nations and almost 10,000 participants, the results revealed that feminist women show no more hostility toward men than both non-feminists and other men. It turns out that just about everyone, including men, has a fair amount of hostility toward men.
Feminists Won’t Coddle Men’s Egos
Something that stood out in the results of the study is that although feminist women appear to have no more hostility toward men than non-feminist women, they are significantly less likely to be benevolent toward men. Whereas non-feminist women are likely to excuse or ignore men’s bad behavior toward women, feminist women will, more often than not, call it out. They will not pull their punches to spare men’s egos. They expect much from men, and will hold them accountable to the behavior they know men are capable of.And it appears that this is where the man-hating feminist trope has its roots.
. . . . .
But the existence of some feminists who hate men does not prove that all feminists hate men. In fact, although feminism is a movement that seeks to center women’s equality and liberation, it has also done much for the liberation of men. After all, men are harmed by patriarchy, too, and feminists seek to abolish all forms of gender-based discrimination that are propped up by patriarchy. Establishing gender-based equality has clear benefits for men. For example, feminists seek family court reform (where things like custody, child support and alimony are determined) because family courts often engage in gender-based stereotypes that are harmful to both mothers and fathers. Mothers may end up with close to full-custody, leaving them responsible for the heavy lifting of parenting, while fathers end up missing out on the majority of their kids’ lives. Feminists also advocate for men’s mental health, believing that patriarchal structures that depict men as weak or “unmanly” if they need help with their mental health are actively harming men (and, as a result, also harming women).
The Mismatch of Perception and Realty
Although feminists will likely never center men in their work, they see men as their partners (but not co-equals) in gender-based oppression. They seek to improve civilization for both men and women by abolishing patriarchy and sexist oppression. In that work, they will often come across entitled, angry men who despise women generally and feminists specifically. When that happens, they will likely choose to go toe to toe with those men, refusing to coddle their egos and addressing their bad behavior instead. Rather than using this feedback as an invitation to challenge their beliefs and join us in the fight to end sexist oppression together, those men will decide to call those feminists man-haters. In reality, it is far more likely that those men simply hate women. They may never change their views about women. But for the many women around the world who choose not to identify with feminism because a man who hates women told them that feminists hate men, we need to correct the perception problem. Feminists, on the whole, don’t hate men. We hate sexism and sexist oppression, and we will not mollify, excuse or enable any man who chooses to uphold them.
https://msmagazine.com/2024/04/11/feminists-hate-men/
Profile Information
Member since: Tue Jul 29, 2003, 02:30 PMNumber of posts: 128,291