The problem is.. I can’t talk about the automatic thoughts and behaviours and moods that really matter.
That half the time I don’t believe in reality. That half the time I’m stuck in this alternate-universe mentality, belief that I’m the only person in all existence and everything else here is just a screwed up computer program designed to keep me from being lonely and destroying myself.
It would take a month of talking for me to explain the whole other “game” that goes on.
And I’ve shortened it down into saying that I have “moments” because I can’t explain any of those moments without the whole 16 year back-story.
Some days it gets worse. Some days I believe my cat hates me. And like THAT even matters.
I had a GOOD day today, and here I am at my computer writing this with tears streaming down my face because I feel like a horrible person, guilty of leaving my cat alone for hours on end in a dark apartment, with very little for amusement. He’s a CAT — we live in a society where it’s deemed okay to do that to “domesticated” animals. I feed and water him and (mostly) give him a clean place to shit. I’m not harming him….. right?
But I don’t believe that our social structure does anything good. I don’t believe we are ‘humane’ even to humans. The way we treat our elderly, our mental health practices, those who live at the fringe, of poverty, of health.
How am I just supposed to SWALLOW all of that and move on with my day. Not think about those big picture pieces, because I can’t do anything to make them any better so I have to focus on me and my life and making my little piece of it better for me and my daughter (and my damn cat)
well that feels like a fucking crap shoot.
And half the time I don’t believe in any of it anyhow …..
it’s all just busy-work for my brain to keep me from seeing the truth.
But I pull it together, wipe my tears, and tell my daughter it’s bed-time… like the good mom that I am.
Showing posts with label political. Show all posts
Showing posts with label political. Show all posts
Monday, May 16, 2016
Sunday, June 28, 2015
Why I'm a feminist!
Time to share another article.... because sometimes, I just get so very
frustrated when people I adore go on and on about how they're "not a
feminist" because it's a dirty term and it would be so much better if we
used the word 'humanist' .... I give in to responses like:
---
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
Surprised to hear me say that? It’s true. There’s no point in avoiding it, so we might as well start with it. Just look around the internet.
In 30 seconds on Google, I found this article (first page of my first search about “radical feminism”) and this delightful collection of quotes (my favorite: “To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo.” Thanks for the gem, Valerie Solanas.).
You don’t have to look very hard to find examples of “feminists” who hate men.
Ever heard the term misandrist? It’s like misogynist but for hating men instead of women.
Yes, misandrist is a word. But feminist doesn’t mean “person who hates men.” Feminist means “person who believes people should have equitable places in society regardless of their gender.”
Some feminists may be misandrists. I linked to a couple above. But it’s by no means a criterion to join the club.
Though they’re not even that loud, but can seem so because anti-feminists like to cherry pick quotes and ignore the much greater number of feminist writings, people, and organizations that say otherwise.
Some individual feminists hate men. A lot of feminists might hate men. You might even argue based on what you find on the internet that most feminists hate men. It’s irrelevant.
What matters is that feminism, distilled down to its absolute core, is about gender equity. The goal of feminism is to create a society in which individuals’ genders don’t restrict them from an equitable shot at success and happiness.
Most feminists actively disagree with the belief that women are better than men and think that feminists who are anti-men are going against the fundamental principles of feminism, which says we’re all deserving and worthy human beings – women, men, trans* – and should be treated as such.
So man-hating isn’t a part of that goal. It’s an unfortunate reactionary sentiment bought into by some people (misandrists) who also identify with the feminist movement.
A lot of people get drunk in college, but we know that college is more than a big drinking club, right? Isn’t it? Maybe I attended the wrong college.
The whole “feminists hate men” thing has been tossed around for quite a long time now. It’s not new. The first “feminist” women who began advocating for equal status of women in the US did so in the late 1700’s, but it didn’t really pick up steam until the late 1800’s.
What crazy radical things were these man-haters asking for? Primarily, the rights to own property, to attend college, and to vote.
In response to these requests, they were were labeled as anti-family, anti-God, anti-men radical hedonists. That labeling has continued to today, because — surprise! — a group with a lot of power (men) tends to do whatever it can to maintain that power (dismiss equal rights as radical).
It’s happened with every oppressed ethnic group (from the Irish to the Africans) that’s immigrated the country. It happened with oppressed religious groups (from the Catholics to the Muslims). And it continues today with the oppressed gender group.
Because people are irrational. One of the ways I know this is true because there’s an entire book written about it. An example of how we act irrationally is called diagnosis bias.
A particularly fascinating study showed that the smallest change in the way you describe someone can completely alter the way you perceive their behavior. How about an example?
A university class (unknowing lab rats) had a substitute professor. To introduce the professor, the class members were given short bios. What they didn’t know was that half the bios had been very slightly altered (e.g., exchanging warm, positive adjectives for cold, callous ones).
After the lecture, the students were asked to review the professor. The entire class saw the same man say the same things, yet the reviews were split 50/50 positive and negative. Half the class said he was personable, considerate, and engaged, while the other half said he was ruthless, would do anything for success, and didn’t care about students or people.
Now, hypothetically speaking, imagine how twisted the perceptions would have been if the students were told the professor was a student-hating, self-serving, radical hedonist.
Oh wait.
Let me bust a few myths.
A lot of people are right.
The thing feminism thinks is bad is the hundreds of years of sexism part, as well as the existence of sexism today. Sexism is the problem — sexism that a lot of men engage in and a lot of women internalize.
Men engage in sexism because they’ve been taught to behave/think that way. Women internalize it for the same reason.
Feminism asks both men and women to critically think about those normalized behavior and its impact, and holds people accountable to sexist thinking and behavior even if they didn’t initially realize it was sexist.
So yes, it’s natural to get defensive when someone brings up feminist issues because it’s likely you never thought you were doing anything wrong. Does that make sexist behavior acceptable? No.
That’s why we need to do a better job as a society to teach people how to treat each other with equity. That’s what feminism is trying to do here.
Working towards gender equity means equity for all genders, right? Then what about men? And what about trans* folks? This is a question that often gets raised by men (about men, not as much for trans* folk).
Feminism in general has mixed feelings about addressing men’s (and trans*) issues.
I’ll be the first person to admit that there are a lot of gender-based men’s issues to address. Like why young men today are less likely to graduate from college, attain a high GPA, be active in
extracurricular organizations or seek leadership roles; or why men in general have always been more likely to be caught up in the criminal justice system or be homeless. These are real issues, surely, and things our society should work to correct.
But do many feminists ignore these issues because they hate men? No.
The mixed feelings about addressing men’s issues tend to stem from the fact that “men’s issues” tends to be the default in our society. We’re a male dominant society.
Many feminists are concerned that addressing men’s issues (or gender issues as a broad goal) will move the conversation completely away from women’s issues, resulting in no progress for the women’s part of the gender progress.
So instead they focus on women’s issues and allow others to focus on other’s issues. Many feminists would like to see pro-feminist men tackle men’s issues in a way that doesn’t blame women and feminism for all their problems (like MRA’s).
However, it’s worth noting that we here at Everyday Feminism are both men- and trans*-inclusive. We take an intersectional approach to feminism and look at how different groups of genders, sexual orientations, races, classes, and more are dominated in our society. Our inclusive approach is a big part of our popularity – i.e. a lot of feminists are also inclusive.
It’s pretty messed up that being born a certain way means you’re going to be less likely to earn as much money, achieve the same tier of success, be treated with respect and fairness, be elected into political office… but those restrictions are objectively measurable.
Those issues mentioned above affect just about every identity group in the US other than people who are White and male (and straight, non-disabled, etc.) — like me!
Instead of dealing with inequality and giving up a bit of unearned power, it’s far more fruitful to change the conversation and put the oppressed group on the defensive.
Blacks are more likely to be imprisoned because being a criminal is part of being black. Have fun arguing about that while we enjoy our unfairly granted innocent verdicts.
Gays can’t be given rights to form families because being a child molester is part of being gay. Go ahead and re-read all of those nonsensical studies and commission some more while we enjoy our access to 1,138 benefits granted solely to married couples.
Women don’t earn as much as men because earning a lower wage for the same work is part of being a woman. Oh, and babies. Don’t forget, you make the babies. What a miracle! That should be payment enough.
Did you know that up until the early 20th century there was an actual medical condition called “female hysteria” (yes, “hyster,” as in hysterectomy, or pertaining to the uterus)?
Some of the symptoms of female hysteria: loss of appetite, nervousness, irritability, fluid retention, emotional excitability, outbursts of negativity, excessive sexual desire and “a tendency to cause trouble.”
In other words, if a woman wasn’t eating, was eating too much, was angry, happy, wanted to have sex, or wanted equal rights for women (you trouble causers, you!), she was mentally ill and her behavior could be dismissed as such.
Guess who came up with that idea? You guessed it! White dudes.
No. I am a White man. That wouldn’t serve me well at all.
What I’m trying to do, and what feminism is trying to do, is bring the woman up.
While an understandable response to this idea for men is a defensive one, considering so many of the bad things in history have been caused by men (by so many, I mean, like, all of them). That’s also a positive response, because it means you’re accessing empathy.
You don’t want to be seen as the “bad guy” (what a misandristic term!). You don’t hate women. You’ve never oppressed women. Of course you haven’t. Oppression doesn’t happen on the individual level.
But it happens. And as a man, particularly one who is White (like me!), you are granted a lot of privileges that stem from hundreds of years of oppression. You get that privilege whether you choose to have them or not.
The only choice you get is what you do with your privilege.
Do you use it to make for a more equitable society for mothers, sisters, and daughters you love all human beings, of all genders?
Or do you keep whining about how feminists hate men and distracting yourself and others from serious issues of inequality?
Your call.
uhh .. no, feminist means -- men have been the ruling gender in the PATRIARCHAL system that currently exists.. Feminism identifies that it is an unequal status for women and that's where the FOCUS is ... a "humanist" term would suggest that men need to be brought up to the position of power _just_ _as_ _much_ as women do -- which is very much not the case.... but you keep fighting for that..........and then I feel awkward because I never truly say what I'm thinking in all the best words in the moment .. so .. HERE is someone ELSE (a white man at that?) saying what I want to say to my friends about why I am a feminist and not yet a humanist ......
---
5 Reasons Why So Many People Believe Feminism Hates Men and Why They’re Not True
written by Sam Killermann was last updated June 3, 2014
“The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
#1 Because Some Individual Feminists Hate Men
Surprised to hear me say that? It’s true. There’s no point in avoiding it, so we might as well start with it. Just look around the internet.
In 30 seconds on Google, I found this article (first page of my first search about “radical feminism”) and this delightful collection of quotes (my favorite: “To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo.” Thanks for the gem, Valerie Solanas.).
You don’t have to look very hard to find examples of “feminists” who hate men.
But there’s a difference between “feminists” and “misandrists.”
Ever heard the term misandrist? It’s like misogynist but for hating men instead of women.
Yes, misandrist is a word. But feminist doesn’t mean “person who hates men.” Feminist means “person who believes people should have equitable places in society regardless of their gender.”
Some feminists may be misandrists. I linked to a couple above. But it’s by no means a criterion to join the club.
A portion does not equal the whole, even if that portion is really loud.
Though they’re not even that loud, but can seem so because anti-feminists like to cherry pick quotes and ignore the much greater number of feminist writings, people, and organizations that say otherwise.
Some individual feminists hate men. A lot of feminists might hate men. You might even argue based on what you find on the internet that most feminists hate men. It’s irrelevant.
What matters is that feminism, distilled down to its absolute core, is about gender equity. The goal of feminism is to create a society in which individuals’ genders don’t restrict them from an equitable shot at success and happiness.
Most feminists actively disagree with the belief that women are better than men and think that feminists who are anti-men are going against the fundamental principles of feminism, which says we’re all deserving and worthy human beings – women, men, trans* – and should be treated as such.
So man-hating isn’t a part of that goal. It’s an unfortunate reactionary sentiment bought into by some people (misandrists) who also identify with the feminist movement.
A lot of people get drunk in college, but we know that college is more than a big drinking club, right? Isn’t it? Maybe I attended the wrong college.
#2 Because People Have Been Told Feminists Hate Men for 200+ Years
The whole “feminists hate men” thing has been tossed around for quite a long time now. It’s not new. The first “feminist” women who began advocating for equal status of women in the US did so in the late 1700’s, but it didn’t really pick up steam until the late 1800’s.
What crazy radical things were these man-haters asking for? Primarily, the rights to own property, to attend college, and to vote.
In response to these requests, they were were labeled as anti-family, anti-God, anti-men radical hedonists. That labeling has continued to today, because — surprise! — a group with a lot of power (men) tends to do whatever it can to maintain that power (dismiss equal rights as radical).
It’s happened with every oppressed ethnic group (from the Irish to the Africans) that’s immigrated the country. It happened with oppressed religious groups (from the Catholics to the Muslims). And it continues today with the oppressed gender group.
Why do people believe it if it’s not true?
Because people are irrational. One of the ways I know this is true because there’s an entire book written about it. An example of how we act irrationally is called diagnosis bias.
A particularly fascinating study showed that the smallest change in the way you describe someone can completely alter the way you perceive their behavior. How about an example?
A university class (unknowing lab rats) had a substitute professor. To introduce the professor, the class members were given short bios. What they didn’t know was that half the bios had been very slightly altered (e.g., exchanging warm, positive adjectives for cold, callous ones).
After the lecture, the students were asked to review the professor. The entire class saw the same man say the same things, yet the reviews were split 50/50 positive and negative. Half the class said he was personable, considerate, and engaged, while the other half said he was ruthless, would do anything for success, and didn’t care about students or people.
The smallest change in the way someone is described can make a dramatic change in the way you interpret their behavior and demeanor.
Now, hypothetically speaking, imagine how twisted the perceptions would have been if the students were told the professor was a student-hating, self-serving, radical hedonist.
Oh wait.
#3 Because Most Men Aren’t Bad But Think Feminism Says They Are
Let me bust a few myths.
- Being a feminist doesn’t mean you believe “all men are rapists.” This quote comes from a book by Marilyn French and it seems to be recited more by anti-feminists (as a means of debunking feminism) than feminists themselves. It’s simply a ridiculous statement that’s been given a ridiculous amount of airtime.
- Being a feminist doesn’t mean you think all men are evil. Following up on the last point, a lot of anti-feminist folks make the argument that feminists believe all men are evil. This is not true.
- Being a feminist doesn’t mean you blame every individual man you know for hundreds of years of oppressive behavior. Just like you wouldn’t point at a random White person today and blame them for slavery, you can’t blame an individual man today for a history of sexism.
A lot of people are right.
The thing feminism thinks is bad is the hundreds of years of sexism part, as well as the existence of sexism today. Sexism is the problem — sexism that a lot of men engage in and a lot of women internalize.
Men engage in sexism because they’ve been taught to behave/think that way. Women internalize it for the same reason.
Feminism asks both men and women to critically think about those normalized behavior and its impact, and holds people accountable to sexist thinking and behavior even if they didn’t initially realize it was sexist.
So yes, it’s natural to get defensive when someone brings up feminist issues because it’s likely you never thought you were doing anything wrong. Does that make sexist behavior acceptable? No.
That’s why we need to do a better job as a society to teach people how to treat each other with equity. That’s what feminism is trying to do here.
#4 Because Some Feminists Aren’t Willing To Address Men’s Issues (Though Some Are)
Working towards gender equity means equity for all genders, right? Then what about men? And what about trans* folks? This is a question that often gets raised by men (about men, not as much for trans* folk).
Feminism in general has mixed feelings about addressing men’s (and trans*) issues.
I’ll be the first person to admit that there are a lot of gender-based men’s issues to address. Like why young men today are less likely to graduate from college, attain a high GPA, be active in
extracurricular organizations or seek leadership roles; or why men in general have always been more likely to be caught up in the criminal justice system or be homeless. These are real issues, surely, and things our society should work to correct.
But do many feminists ignore these issues because they hate men? No.
The mixed feelings about addressing men’s issues tend to stem from the fact that “men’s issues” tends to be the default in our society. We’re a male dominant society.
Many feminists are concerned that addressing men’s issues (or gender issues as a broad goal) will move the conversation completely away from women’s issues, resulting in no progress for the women’s part of the gender progress.
So instead they focus on women’s issues and allow others to focus on other’s issues. Many feminists would like to see pro-feminist men tackle men’s issues in a way that doesn’t blame women and feminism for all their problems (like MRA’s).
However, it’s worth noting that we here at Everyday Feminism are both men- and trans*-inclusive. We take an intersectional approach to feminism and look at how different groups of genders, sexual orientations, races, classes, and more are dominated in our society. Our inclusive approach is a big part of our popularity – i.e. a lot of feminists are also inclusive.
#5 Because Sensationalism Is a Good Way To Distract From Real Issues
It’s pretty messed up that being born a certain way means you’re going to be less likely to earn as much money, achieve the same tier of success, be treated with respect and fairness, be elected into political office… but those restrictions are objectively measurable.
Those issues mentioned above affect just about every identity group in the US other than people who are White and male (and straight, non-disabled, etc.) — like me!
Instead of dealing with inequality and giving up a bit of unearned power, it’s far more fruitful to change the conversation and put the oppressed group on the defensive.
Blacks are more likely to be imprisoned because being a criminal is part of being black. Have fun arguing about that while we enjoy our unfairly granted innocent verdicts.
Gays can’t be given rights to form families because being a child molester is part of being gay. Go ahead and re-read all of those nonsensical studies and commission some more while we enjoy our access to 1,138 benefits granted solely to married couples.
Women don’t earn as much as men because earning a lower wage for the same work is part of being a woman. Oh, and babies. Don’t forget, you make the babies. What a miracle! That should be payment enough.
Social change is slow because the people in power are the ones writing the narrative, and they often choose a distracting narrative.
Did you know that up until the early 20th century there was an actual medical condition called “female hysteria” (yes, “hyster,” as in hysterectomy, or pertaining to the uterus)?
Some of the symptoms of female hysteria: loss of appetite, nervousness, irritability, fluid retention, emotional excitability, outbursts of negativity, excessive sexual desire and “a tendency to cause trouble.”
In other words, if a woman wasn’t eating, was eating too much, was angry, happy, wanted to have sex, or wanted equal rights for women (you trouble causers, you!), she was mentally ill and her behavior could be dismissed as such.
Guess who came up with that idea? You guessed it! White dudes.
Am I Trying To Bring the White Man Down?
No. I am a White man. That wouldn’t serve me well at all.
What I’m trying to do, and what feminism is trying to do, is bring the woman up.
While an understandable response to this idea for men is a defensive one, considering so many of the bad things in history have been caused by men (by so many, I mean, like, all of them). That’s also a positive response, because it means you’re accessing empathy.
You don’t want to be seen as the “bad guy” (what a misandristic term!). You don’t hate women. You’ve never oppressed women. Of course you haven’t. Oppression doesn’t happen on the individual level.
But it happens. And as a man, particularly one who is White (like me!), you are granted a lot of privileges that stem from hundreds of years of oppression. You get that privilege whether you choose to have them or not.
The only choice you get is what you do with your privilege.
Do you use it to make for a more equitable society for mothers, sisters, and daughters you love all human beings, of all genders?
Or do you keep whining about how feminists hate men and distracting yourself and others from serious issues of inequality?
Your call.
“The
feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a
socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave
their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism, and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
“The
feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a
socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave
their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism, and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
“The
feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a
socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave
their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism, and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
“The
feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a
socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave
their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism, and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
“The
feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a
socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave
their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism, and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
“The
feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a
socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave
their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism, and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
“The
feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a
socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave
their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism, and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
“The
feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a
socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave
their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism, and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
“The
feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a
socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave
their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism, and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
“The
feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a
socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave
their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism, and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
“The
feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a
socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave
their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism, and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
“The
feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a
socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave
their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism, and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It’s an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.
Feminism doesn’t hate men.
So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let’s look at a few explanations for this fallacy.
- See more at: http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/#sthash.aNuNzHJm.dpuf
Sunday, January 22, 2012
SOPA?
Back in early 2000 I had the fortune of providing temporary hosting for a website called daterape.org. If you google the quoted "daterape.org" you can read some of the controversy that went around the globe in discussing this site.
(for quick-access, here are two differing views:
http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/03/34941
http://www.fitug.de/debate/0003/msg00737.html
I'd like you to take particular note of the second link)
For my part, I believed the website to be a satire.
sat·ire noun /ˈsaËŒtÄ«r/ The use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues
It was SO over the top and in your face, how anyone could see it as something other than satire is mind-boggling to me. The first link up there gives you a pretty good idea of what was on the site. But it fails to mention some of the other things on the site -- like, directions to boys on their first date, including, for example, how to dismantle the inside of the car door handle so that it will open only from the outside. This one was a complete shocker to me! I had been on many internet dates, as I was twenty years old in the year 2000, but I had never in my wildest dreams conjured up the idea that I should check that the car I am getting into could be opened from the inside, after I was in -- I just assumed this was a given.
This website, from its first 500 viewers, managed to garner national and eventually global attention. What were people talking about? Several issues -- many of them were talking about the disgusting nature of the website, others were talking about freedom of speech on the internet, but one thing was being discussed that generally got very little air time: date rape.
Unfortunately, no matter the campaigns in high school, date rape is still extremely under reported, even though statistics show that it occurs frequently. According to safecity.ca a 1993 survey of female undergraduates at Canadian universities reported that "four out of five women said that they had been victims of violence in a relationship". That is 80% of the female populous, without taking into account men or same-sex partnerships.
This was just seven years before the 2000 website daterape.org came online. Who was daterape.org educating about the realities of daterape? Was it the offenders? Because with a pervasive influence such as 4 out of 5, it seems to me like the abusers already had it under control. But the victims? The victims could certainly use some widely spread information that the abusers already knew. Some insider notes, so to speak.
It is 2012 and you may be asking, why am I bringing up such an odd story from over a decade ago and how does this really relate to SOPA? This daterape.org incident is just one of many. It happens to be one I was personally involved in and so I can speak to it directly. The SOPA bill, in its transparency, fails to be simply about online piracy. Its title "To promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation by combating the theft of U.S. property, and for other purposes." already tosses in the 'other purposes' clause. The first wave of internet censorship is not a solitary wave -- it will be followed by many more and potentially a tidal wave that cripples internet uses entirely.
If free speech and expression are no longer allowed on the internet, where will we turn?
A site like daterape.org is controversial -- but sometimes it takes a controversy to wake up the masses and get them talking about real issues. Date rape is a big issue that gets brushed under the rug far too often. Free speech on the internet is one that keeps getting set aside and its proponents are wide and varied. Some feel that free speech is just a given -- why are we fighting, we can't actually ever LOSE that right, can we? And others feel that H.R. 3261 or S. 968 are about business, they don't have anything to do with free speech.
It has been said, if you lose all your other rights, it is with free speech that you can win them back, conversely, without free speech you will lose all your other rights.
I invite people to get informed and be active about which side you are on.
(for quick-access, here are two differing views:
http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/03/34941
http://www.fitug.de/debate/0003/msg00737.html
I'd like you to take particular note of the second link)
For my part, I believed the website to be a satire.
sat·ire noun /ˈsaËŒtÄ«r/ The use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues
It was SO over the top and in your face, how anyone could see it as something other than satire is mind-boggling to me. The first link up there gives you a pretty good idea of what was on the site. But it fails to mention some of the other things on the site -- like, directions to boys on their first date, including, for example, how to dismantle the inside of the car door handle so that it will open only from the outside. This one was a complete shocker to me! I had been on many internet dates, as I was twenty years old in the year 2000, but I had never in my wildest dreams conjured up the idea that I should check that the car I am getting into could be opened from the inside, after I was in -- I just assumed this was a given.
This website, from its first 500 viewers, managed to garner national and eventually global attention. What were people talking about? Several issues -- many of them were talking about the disgusting nature of the website, others were talking about freedom of speech on the internet, but one thing was being discussed that generally got very little air time: date rape.
Unfortunately, no matter the campaigns in high school, date rape is still extremely under reported, even though statistics show that it occurs frequently. According to safecity.ca a 1993 survey of female undergraduates at Canadian universities reported that "four out of five women said that they had been victims of violence in a relationship". That is 80% of the female populous, without taking into account men or same-sex partnerships.
This was just seven years before the 2000 website daterape.org came online. Who was daterape.org educating about the realities of daterape? Was it the offenders? Because with a pervasive influence such as 4 out of 5, it seems to me like the abusers already had it under control. But the victims? The victims could certainly use some widely spread information that the abusers already knew. Some insider notes, so to speak.
It is 2012 and you may be asking, why am I bringing up such an odd story from over a decade ago and how does this really relate to SOPA? This daterape.org incident is just one of many. It happens to be one I was personally involved in and so I can speak to it directly. The SOPA bill, in its transparency, fails to be simply about online piracy. Its title "To promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation by combating the theft of U.S. property, and for other purposes." already tosses in the 'other purposes' clause. The first wave of internet censorship is not a solitary wave -- it will be followed by many more and potentially a tidal wave that cripples internet uses entirely.
If free speech and expression are no longer allowed on the internet, where will we turn?
A site like daterape.org is controversial -- but sometimes it takes a controversy to wake up the masses and get them talking about real issues. Date rape is a big issue that gets brushed under the rug far too often. Free speech on the internet is one that keeps getting set aside and its proponents are wide and varied. Some feel that free speech is just a given -- why are we fighting, we can't actually ever LOSE that right, can we? And others feel that H.R. 3261 or S. 968 are about business, they don't have anything to do with free speech.
It has been said, if you lose all your other rights, it is with free speech that you can win them back, conversely, without free speech you will lose all your other rights.
I invite people to get informed and be active about which side you are on.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
This is my Staying Power -- Occupy Everything!
If we don't occupy everything now -- what will there be left to occupy later??
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights of Canadians in this country. Section 1 of the charter states that these rights are "subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."
The actions taken by the police during the 2010 G20 protests were anything but justified and they have shown to me that we do not actually live in a free society.
Section 2 of the Charter has to do with fundamental freedom including 2(b) "freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression" while 2(c) states that everyone has the right to "freedom of peaceful assembly."
I envision that October 15th on Bay Street in Toronto, Ontario when people join forces to peacefully assemble and plan for Monday's Occupy Bay Street march, the police of this fine country will begin their battery of harassment and arrests.
This will be the second very public act of violence on the part of those sworn to protect citizens.
If this takes shape the way I imagine it will -- if the police do not allow a peaceful public protest by those who wish to exercise their Charter rights, then I think we shall all have a very strong message delivered loud and clear: Canadian citizens have no rights and freedoms; this is a Police State.
----
At the heart of it -- why march? The placard I saw that captures it best:
"Its only called class war when we fight back"
Bay Street (the Wall Street of Toronto) has been occupied by the over-paid chicly dressed employees of finance for so long they don't even know they're them and we're us.
We trade our time for money and they trade, trade, trade that money away.
The fallacy of what we call an "economy" has been built on mistruths and bogus statistics for so long that finally the house of cards blew over and now those Kings and Queens of the upper crust scrambled together, intent on making the divide between even wider.
The crux is -- everybody in the occupation is just looking for an occupation. A way to keep a roof over their head and some food in their belly. When basic human rights are stripped away there's nothing left to lose and its time to rise up and fight back.
At least we live in a country where we are doing this with our voices and our words. There are other places in the world where this is done with bullets and blood.
What must the government, the police, the rulers of our nation do to push the public to that point? If millions in the streets in American can be ignored, what will happen here?
As stated by a friend when discussing the matter "They don't think we can do it." The fact is, those 1% sit in comfort and don't even begin to quake in their boots. They really don't think we have it in us to cause much of a ripple in the well-oiled machine they've been driving across us for so very long.
Apathy has kept us quiet. How long will we shout before we deem it necessary to fight back? Because frankly, I don't see them listening to our bleating cries -- we've been sheep for such a very long, long, long time.
I know I'm not ready to take up more than a digital pen in this fight, but do you really want to "beat your plowshares into swords..."?
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights of Canadians in this country. Section 1 of the charter states that these rights are "subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."
The actions taken by the police during the 2010 G20 protests were anything but justified and they have shown to me that we do not actually live in a free society.
Section 2 of the Charter has to do with fundamental freedom including 2(b) "freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression" while 2(c) states that everyone has the right to "freedom of peaceful assembly."
I envision that October 15th on Bay Street in Toronto, Ontario when people join forces to peacefully assemble and plan for Monday's Occupy Bay Street march, the police of this fine country will begin their battery of harassment and arrests.
This will be the second very public act of violence on the part of those sworn to protect citizens.
If this takes shape the way I imagine it will -- if the police do not allow a peaceful public protest by those who wish to exercise their Charter rights, then I think we shall all have a very strong message delivered loud and clear: Canadian citizens have no rights and freedoms; this is a Police State.
----
At the heart of it -- why march? The placard I saw that captures it best:
"Its only called class war when we fight back"
Bay Street (the Wall Street of Toronto) has been occupied by the over-paid chicly dressed employees of finance for so long they don't even know they're them and we're us.
We trade our time for money and they trade, trade, trade that money away.
The fallacy of what we call an "economy" has been built on mistruths and bogus statistics for so long that finally the house of cards blew over and now those Kings and Queens of the upper crust scrambled together, intent on making the divide between even wider.
The crux is -- everybody in the occupation is just looking for an occupation. A way to keep a roof over their head and some food in their belly. When basic human rights are stripped away there's nothing left to lose and its time to rise up and fight back.
At least we live in a country where we are doing this with our voices and our words. There are other places in the world where this is done with bullets and blood.
What must the government, the police, the rulers of our nation do to push the public to that point? If millions in the streets in American can be ignored, what will happen here?
As stated by a friend when discussing the matter "They don't think we can do it." The fact is, those 1% sit in comfort and don't even begin to quake in their boots. They really don't think we have it in us to cause much of a ripple in the well-oiled machine they've been driving across us for so very long.
Apathy has kept us quiet. How long will we shout before we deem it necessary to fight back? Because frankly, I don't see them listening to our bleating cries -- we've been sheep for such a very long, long, long time.
I know I'm not ready to take up more than a digital pen in this fight, but do you really want to "beat your plowshares into swords..."?
Monday, June 20, 2011
[]*[] I Am Canadian []*[]
Recently I received an e-mail that tickled me exactly the WRONG way. I'll post it first and then post my response below. Please feel free to comment!! (I apologize ahead of time for some of the language I used in my response, but I'm fairly passionate about this -- it _is_ my country and my home!)
---
The original e-mail:
I am Canadian: The new version...
I AM CANADIAN
I am in the minority in Calgary, Vancouver, Toronto, and every casino in this country.
I was born in the forties, fifties or sixties, yet I am somehow responsible for some First Nations people being screwed out of their land in the 1700's!
I pay import tax on cars made in Ontario.
I am allowed to skydive and smoke, but not allowed to drive without a seat belt.
All the money I make until mid July must go to paying taxes.
I live and work among people who believe Americans are Ignorant... These same people cannot name their own country's new territory.
Although I am sometimes forced to live on hamburgers and don't have a pot to piss in, I sleep well knowing that my taxes helped purchase a nice six figure home in Vancouver for some unskilled refugee.
Although they are unpatriotic and constantly try to separate... Quebec still provides most of my nation's prime ministers.
95% of my nation's international conflicts are over fish.
I'm supposed to call black people African Canadians, although I'm sure none of them have ever been to Africa for that matter.
I am being told that paying a 200% tax on alcohol is fair.
I am also being told that the same tax on gasoline is also fair.
Even if I have no idea what happened to that old rifle my Grandfather gave me when I was 14, I will be considered a criminal if I don't register it.
I am being told that spending $15 billion to promote the French language in the rest of Canada is fair when the province of Quebec doesn't support or even recognize the ENGLISH language.
I am being told that paying $1 million for 3 Stripes ('The Voice of Fire' painting in Ottawa) by the National Art Gallery was a good purchase, even though 99% of this country didn't want it or will ever see it.
When I look at my pension and realize that I take home a third of what I actually make, I say 'Oh well, at least we have better health care than the USA.'
I must bail out big corporations who drive their business into the ground and say, 'yeah that's ok.'
And when they move all their manufacturing plants and jobs to a third world country and say, 'no problem.'
I must fork over my portion of the 11.5 million dollars to show the Queen of England and her family a good time visiting in my country even though I can't afford to visit the province next to me.
My National Anthem has versions in both official languages.
Canada is the highest taxed nation in North America, the biggest Military buffer for the United States, and the number one destination for fleeing terrorists.
The Lord's prayer is not allowed in our schools anymore because of other religions who chose to move here.
I am an angry white person.
I am one pissed off taxpayer, who is broke.
I am Canadian !!
---
My response:
Yay! Being Canadian means something to me, what does it mean to YOU?
1) I was with you until you went and made yourself look ignorant by mentioning casinos .... way to go!
2) Cultural genocide happened as recently as 1936 in this country, and still continues in contemporary ways, maybe you should get a clue? [ let me point out a direction to start: http://www.danielnpaul.com/IndianResidentialSchools.html ] .. then there's always the great Japanese Canadian Internment .. which was a couple years later [ http://www.lib.washington.edu/subject/canada/internment/intro.html ] .. and did you know First Nation's people were only granted the right to vote sometime in the mid 60's ... ? I don't know what this 1700's BS you're talking about is, but get CURRENT!
3) ride a bike?
4) and how would you like to word this petition and have 10,000 people sign it "We the people do not want to be forced to wear a proven life-saving tool, instead, please hike our insurance rates to cover the extra health-care costs from our chosen stupidity. We demand this RIGHT to choose."
5) Gee, if you exaggerate one point by this much, its not likely I'll ever think you will exaggerate any other points, right?!
6) I did a poll of the first 10 Canadians I could talk to readily at this moment: guess what, 10/10 could name Nunavut; guess you need some smarter friends.
7) living on hamburgers is a BAD thing? what? if you can afford some form of protein in your diet, you are eating better than damn near 7/8ths of the world's population! ... and who are you to suggest a new refugee is unskilled? The joke about surgeons and physicists driving taxi cabs in Calgary, Vancouver and Toronto is based in reality - our own government has made it financially improbably for a landed immigrant to port their previous education to our country -- perhaps we should point the finger where it belongs not outwards at those escaping life-threatening living conditions to a better future within our borders.
8) I'm assuming you see the irony in the point you're trying to make with this all on your own, no need for me to bring it to light.
9) and this is a BAD thing why?!!!
10) Since when are you supposed to? I've never met a dark-skinned person from Jamaica who enjoyed being called African Canadian ... perhaps it isn't anything to DO with being Canadian that makes this racial profiling an issue and maybe its a broader issue??
11) no one says you have to drink!
12) and no one says you have to drive!
13) I'll have to research it later when I care more, but I'm fairly sure that firearms older than a certain number of years lie outside the registration laws?
14) Most nations of the world are trilingual, let alone bilingual .. do you not see it as beneficial to the children to learn French? psychological studies have shown that having at least two languages in the brain from an early age can enhance thinking power ....
15) I can't really argue this point, I think $1.8 million for two colours of acrylic is a little mind-boggling, too ... but then, it happened in _1989_ .. are you really still bitching about it??
16) It isn't just health care that is better (that we have it at all is part of it!) .. but we also have better public services across the board. Be thankful of them when you need to access them! and be gracious that you can provide them to those who need to when you don't!
17) If you feel this way - DO something! Don't sit around and write bad attempts at humour on the internets... get out and march in the streets and camp out on the front lawn of parliament hill, collect names, make a stink about it ... petition and lobby for change!
18) I dunno about you, but I imagine there are only so many Canadian Consulates around the world, but if you read the inside of your Canadian Passport, you'll see that bearers of the Canadian Passport have access to every British Consulate the world throughout. I wonder if that's worth 11.5 million? I venture that this is off the top of my head, I'm pretty sure there are one or two other perks that come with out connection to the British "Empire" ... you tell me?
19) This is great, actually. I know it in both -- do you?
20) wait, say that again, Canada is taxed more than the USA and Mexico? really, that's a staggering statistic. I never would have fathomed it in my life. (do I need a sarcasm tag here, or can you hear it loud enough over there?)
21) Ever hear of a guy named Darwin? Don't worry, I wouldn't be surprised if you hadn't. Public schools are non-religious based. Send your kid to a secular school if you want -- you aren't _forced_ to send them to public schools. Besides all of that, the immigrants (you, me, everyone else non-Indigenous) brought the Church to Canada in the first place. Do you know anything about the Medicine Wheel or any other spiritual practice other than Catholicism? Perhaps you should look at _why_ it is no longer spoken in schools, as opposed to hate-mongering on immigrants?
22) Ignorance has a tendency to leave one feeling angry. Get informed!
23) taxes are not the enemy, uninformed voters are! Get informed! Fight the regime :)
I Am Canadian, too .. and I'm damn proud of my country. Now if only we can band together and MAKE something of it, rather than mock it!
---
The original e-mail:
I am Canadian: The new version...
I AM CANADIAN
I am in the minority in Calgary, Vancouver, Toronto, and every casino in this country.
I was born in the forties, fifties or sixties, yet I am somehow responsible for some First Nations people being screwed out of their land in the 1700's!
I pay import tax on cars made in Ontario.
I am allowed to skydive and smoke, but not allowed to drive without a seat belt.
All the money I make until mid July must go to paying taxes.
I live and work among people who believe Americans are Ignorant... These same people cannot name their own country's new territory.
Although I am sometimes forced to live on hamburgers and don't have a pot to piss in, I sleep well knowing that my taxes helped purchase a nice six figure home in Vancouver for some unskilled refugee.
Although they are unpatriotic and constantly try to separate... Quebec still provides most of my nation's prime ministers.
95% of my nation's international conflicts are over fish.
I'm supposed to call black people African Canadians, although I'm sure none of them have ever been to Africa for that matter.
I am being told that paying a 200% tax on alcohol is fair.
I am also being told that the same tax on gasoline is also fair.
Even if I have no idea what happened to that old rifle my Grandfather gave me when I was 14, I will be considered a criminal if I don't register it.
I am being told that spending $15 billion to promote the French language in the rest of Canada is fair when the province of Quebec doesn't support or even recognize the ENGLISH language.
I am being told that paying $1 million for 3 Stripes ('The Voice of Fire' painting in Ottawa) by the National Art Gallery was a good purchase, even though 99% of this country didn't want it or will ever see it.
When I look at my pension and realize that I take home a third of what I actually make, I say 'Oh well, at least we have better health care than the USA.'
I must bail out big corporations who drive their business into the ground and say, 'yeah that's ok.'
And when they move all their manufacturing plants and jobs to a third world country and say, 'no problem.'
I must fork over my portion of the 11.5 million dollars to show the Queen of England and her family a good time visiting in my country even though I can't afford to visit the province next to me.
My National Anthem has versions in both official languages.
Canada is the highest taxed nation in North America, the biggest Military buffer for the United States, and the number one destination for fleeing terrorists.
The Lord's prayer is not allowed in our schools anymore because of other religions who chose to move here.
I am an angry white person.
I am one pissed off taxpayer, who is broke.
I am Canadian !!
---
My response:
Yay! Being Canadian means something to me, what does it mean to YOU?
1) I was with you until you went and made yourself look ignorant by mentioning casinos .... way to go!
2) Cultural genocide happened as recently as 1936 in this country, and still continues in contemporary ways, maybe you should get a clue? [ let me point out a direction to start: http://www.danielnpaul.com/IndianResidentialSchools.html ] .. then there's always the great Japanese Canadian Internment .. which was a couple years later [ http://www.lib.washington.edu/subject/canada/internment/intro.html ] .. and did you know First Nation's people were only granted the right to vote sometime in the mid 60's ... ? I don't know what this 1700's BS you're talking about is, but get CURRENT!
3) ride a bike?
4) and how would you like to word this petition and have 10,000 people sign it "We the people do not want to be forced to wear a proven life-saving tool, instead, please hike our insurance rates to cover the extra health-care costs from our chosen stupidity. We demand this RIGHT to choose."
5) Gee, if you exaggerate one point by this much, its not likely I'll ever think you will exaggerate any other points, right?!
6) I did a poll of the first 10 Canadians I could talk to readily at this moment: guess what, 10/10 could name Nunavut; guess you need some smarter friends.
7) living on hamburgers is a BAD thing? what? if you can afford some form of protein in your diet, you are eating better than damn near 7/8ths of the world's population! ... and who are you to suggest a new refugee is unskilled? The joke about surgeons and physicists driving taxi cabs in Calgary, Vancouver and Toronto is based in reality - our own government has made it financially improbably for a landed immigrant to port their previous education to our country -- perhaps we should point the finger where it belongs not outwards at those escaping life-threatening living conditions to a better future within our borders.
8) I'm assuming you see the irony in the point you're trying to make with this all on your own, no need for me to bring it to light.
9) and this is a BAD thing why?!!!
10) Since when are you supposed to? I've never met a dark-skinned person from Jamaica who enjoyed being called African Canadian ... perhaps it isn't anything to DO with being Canadian that makes this racial profiling an issue and maybe its a broader issue??
11) no one says you have to drink!
12) and no one says you have to drive!
13) I'll have to research it later when I care more, but I'm fairly sure that firearms older than a certain number of years lie outside the registration laws?
14) Most nations of the world are trilingual, let alone bilingual .. do you not see it as beneficial to the children to learn French? psychological studies have shown that having at least two languages in the brain from an early age can enhance thinking power ....
15) I can't really argue this point, I think $1.8 million for two colours of acrylic is a little mind-boggling, too ... but then, it happened in _1989_ .. are you really still bitching about it??
16) It isn't just health care that is better (that we have it at all is part of it!) .. but we also have better public services across the board. Be thankful of them when you need to access them! and be gracious that you can provide them to those who need to when you don't!
17) If you feel this way - DO something! Don't sit around and write bad attempts at humour on the internets... get out and march in the streets and camp out on the front lawn of parliament hill, collect names, make a stink about it ... petition and lobby for change!
18) I dunno about you, but I imagine there are only so many Canadian Consulates around the world, but if you read the inside of your Canadian Passport, you'll see that bearers of the Canadian Passport have access to every British Consulate the world throughout. I wonder if that's worth 11.5 million? I venture that this is off the top of my head, I'm pretty sure there are one or two other perks that come with out connection to the British "Empire" ... you tell me?
19) This is great, actually. I know it in both -- do you?
20) wait, say that again, Canada is taxed more than the USA and Mexico? really, that's a staggering statistic. I never would have fathomed it in my life. (do I need a sarcasm tag here, or can you hear it loud enough over there?)
21) Ever hear of a guy named Darwin? Don't worry, I wouldn't be surprised if you hadn't. Public schools are non-religious based. Send your kid to a secular school if you want -- you aren't _forced_ to send them to public schools. Besides all of that, the immigrants (you, me, everyone else non-Indigenous) brought the Church to Canada in the first place. Do you know anything about the Medicine Wheel or any other spiritual practice other than Catholicism? Perhaps you should look at _why_ it is no longer spoken in schools, as opposed to hate-mongering on immigrants?
22) Ignorance has a tendency to leave one feeling angry. Get informed!
23) taxes are not the enemy, uninformed voters are! Get informed! Fight the regime :)
I Am Canadian, too .. and I'm damn proud of my country. Now if only we can band together and MAKE something of it, rather than mock it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)