🚀 go-pugleaf

James H. Steiger wrote:

> "Michael H." <zoltron@netcom.ca> wrote:

> >       I keep forgetting how absolutely dead-serious some people here always
> >are, not to mention flame-happy. Maybe that guy who sent me the "ignore
> >Amero" e-mail a while ago was right. But if she is really as despicable
> >as you claim above, why do you waste time attempting to reason with her?

> First, let me point out that Amero's response to you fulfilled
> my predictions almost perfectly.

	Yes it did. Remarkably so.

> Second, reasoning with her is not possible. Countering her propaganda
> is. IMHO, anti-male propaganda has reached such a level in our society
> that we have now adapted to it, almost perfectly. We tolerate inferior
> legal status, inferior medical care, and a vast variety of hate
> propaganda, many of us without even realizing it.

	You may be right. I know that in the name of reversing discrimination
against women/minorities it often goes the other way and hurts innocent
men. Nobody seems to care about, say, a young man of European ancestry
who is struggling at school, and then has to go out and be locked out of
a job because of his sex or the colour of his skin. If he is a white
male, he is fair game for the reverse discrimination fanatics. I think
that this is part of the reason the NDP are toast in Ontario: they
enshrined reverse bigotry as law. Unfortunately for them, most voters
don't believe in discrimination.
	I often think that if one were to take the writings of many radical
feminists and replace the word "male" by some other identifiable group,
they would be charged for promoting hate propaganda.

> Perhaps if you lost an excellent job opportunity to a thoroughly less
> qualified person who just happened to be a "minority" woman, perhaps
> if you were unfairly accused (by some wacko fellow employee) of sexual
> harassment and had the full brunt of an ideologically driven star
> chamber brought to bear on your life and livelihood, you'd appreciate
> my motives more.

	I am sorry you have had those experiences. I would be angry too.

> In conclusion, Michael...sure, we don't want to take ourselves
> too seriously here. After all, this isn't Rwanda. And sure, I
> appreciate the generous spirit with which you made your post.

> But make no mistake, gender feminists aren't going to stop the hate
> propaganda just because you're nice to them, or just because you
> ignore them.

	I have noticed with BA that when she has made some point that I do
agree with, and post my agreement, she finds some way of construing my
post so that she can attack it the same as if I had disagreed with her.

> Best regards, and happy holidays,

	Thank you, and I wish you the same.

									Michael