This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

astro.nj's Profile

astro.nj's Avatar Joined about 4 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by astro.nj

More Discussions by astro.nj

Latest Comments by astro.nj

Go to: Women cane morality police

astro.nj's Avatar Jump to comment 76 by astro.nj

LaurieB, I apologize for the condescending tone. I didnt realize it at the time.

Thu, 12 Jan 2012 20:30:15 UTC | #907778

Go to: Women cane morality police

astro.nj's Avatar Jump to comment 42 by astro.nj


You ask why is it that only men have to fight? Actually, I have no idea why they fight at all. I don't want them to do so. I can't relate to war-like aggressive behavior of men. I recommend Steven Pinker's new book, The Better Angels of Our NAture, in the hope that you will gain insight into the war mongering of men.

1) They must all be devils then, huh? Cmon.. you are at a biological-evolution site, and I am sure you know how the violence and the killing instinct evolved in animals, and especially primates. even chimps wage war. Now coming to humans, Jared Diamond in 'The Third Chimpanzee' describes the current situation in Papua New Guinea, the land of 1000 of 6000 remaining languages on earth (IIRC), where there are different tribes every few miles, that arent really friendly to each other. Why? they are masters of their territory and the resources therein, and any intruder is a threat that can take away the resources, and is thereby prompty killed(!). If a man couldnt gather enough resources, no woman would want to be his consort. And thats true of traditional societies to this day. Its just a fight for resources, plain and simple. And even after civilization was established, it stayed the same. fight for resources, and war is the last resort. Weapons and strategies such as the Greek Phalanx was designed FOR QUICK AND DECISIVE victories. Nobody wanted prolonged war.. nobody really wanted to die, but it was necessary. Now.. could men refuse to go to war (who the hell wants to die like that? No sane man I know)? No.. If men wouldnt didnt go to war, amongst other penalties, women would treat them like dirt, even in modern times such as the white feather girls of WW1. Did women in political power NOT make war? No.. lets not forget Indira Gandhi (Indo Pak war 1971), Golda Mier's Yom Kippur War, and Thatcher's Falklands war. How about commoners and aggresive behaviour? There's plenty of data out there that I will dig up if you disagree.. but for starters lets listen to Erin Pizzey, the one who built shelters for domestic violence victimsfor women about Why I loathe feminism... and believe it will ultimately destroy the family

From the very beginning, I waged war against my mother and quickly learned to disassociate myself from the pain of her beatings. Her words, however, stayed with me all my life. 'You are lazy, useless, and ugly,' she would scream. 'You look like your father's side of the family - Irish trash.' They were vicious words that I have heard repeated over and over by mothers everywhere. Indeed, when I later opened my refuge for battered women, 62 of the first 100 to come through the door were as abusive as the men they had left. ... Feminism, I realised, was a lie. Women and men are both capable of extraordinary cruelty. Indeed, the only thing a child really needs - two biological parents under one roof - was being undermined by the very ideology which claimed to speak up for women's rights.

So.. now that we better understand the reality of war.. and in the case of Libya, there's no other option for a long oppressed people.. can the women please stand up and be equal? Can the feminists exhort women to be equal please?


Re: 2 mens issues that feminists have fought for. It is outside the scope of that movement to solve problems that men have as a gender. It is generally agreed that as women improve their circumstances in society, then men inevitably benefit as well.
Thank you for conceding that. Unfortunately that hasnt happened in plenty of instances in law and social norms. I can go on about the happenings in the US. Maybe elsewhere.


I have read through the blog that you referenced above and although I had the intention of addressing her points, I quickly realized that it was so convoluted and had so many points in need of correction that it would require many pages and even perhaps a book of several chapters to deal with the mess she made of things there
Can I request you to find some time to engage her? She's part of the Mens Rights Movement, and we will be grateful if you can prove us wrong. we dont want to take the bad route, like we believe feminism did. You can recommend books for us, and she's more likely than not to have studied them. We strongly believe feminism tells only part of the story.. even in the instance of islamic women's issues you mentioned, even maryam namazie agrees that sharia impacts men as well, and therefore she recommends gender-nuetral solutions.

4) Finally coming to virulent strains of feminism.. the atheist movement has found fault with religious moderates for not engaging the fundamentalists and thus providing cover and legitimacy. Similarly Martin Luther King Jr also berated the moderates in his letter from birmingham jail.

I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

Will moderate feminists confront the utterly man-hating radical feminists who spew vile things such as ideas of reducing male population to 10% with a clear willingness to mass murder as last resort, and tagging young boys as future rapists? I can dig up plenty more stuff from even the leading texts of the feminist movement. In fact, misandry in mainstream media also stares us in the face, tagging men as monsters and boys as future monsters in this verizon ad or openly laughing, celebrating even, male castration showing zero empathy. Can feminists engage them also please?

You can have the last word, and I hope to see you over at GirlWritesWhat.

Thu, 12 Jan 2012 05:02:36 UTC | #907580

Go to: Women cane morality police

astro.nj's Avatar Jump to comment 34 by astro.nj

Comment 30 by LaurieB astro.nj You've never lived in an Islamic country have you..that's obvious.

I grew up in India, right next to a population of muslims, at a time when black-and-white TVs were just making their way to India. Does that help? Maybe I was not clear in my original post w.r.t "oppresive patriarchy". What I meant was "oppresive solely-to-women patriarchy". The URL that I linked to argues about how "women were property, and men were less-than-property". It delinks patriarchy from oligarchy. Either way, my argument was that feminism just focuses on women's issues, often times targeting men and leaving them in ruin. You will be hard pressed to name two mens' issues that feminists have fought for in the West. Even in the middle east, in the same Egyptian/Libyan revolutions, thousands of men have lost their lives but do you hear feminists argue why is it that only men have to fight, even in in the modern day of guns? In fact, when a single woman got battered by the forces (the blue bra case), egyptian women protested and chanted something to the effect "if you hit us, our brothers will spill their blood to protect us". There is tradition staring you in the face.. the disposable male who will lay his life for you. What are feminists doing about that? Nada.. Zilch.. Whats needed is an equitable gender transition movement.

Instead of issuing proclamations that are based on a whole lot of nothing, why not ask questions and try to get a real understanding of what these women are up against and what the American and European feminists are doing to help them.

Kind of non-sequitur. I am well aware of what both men and women are up against in that traditional society . Re: feminists's help I suspect that Aayan Hirsi Ali has adifferent opinion

As an example she asked the audience how many people had heard of the case of Yaser Said: a Texas man suspected of killing his two teenage daughters for dating Western men in 2008. By not criticizing the crimes of men of color against women, Hirsi Ali said feminism had become “a force that protects only white women.”

Wed, 11 Jan 2012 20:23:42 UTC | #907477

Go to: Women cane morality police

astro.nj's Avatar Jump to comment 27 by astro.nj

Comment 8 by Richard Dawkins Now that's real feminism!

I understand the spirit behind that statement, but I just want to dispute the literal interpretation of that. In the sense, why should "feminism" get the credit for that (just as religion shouldnt get credit for any genuinely moral behaviour shown by humans)? Are we to believe that a remote town in the Nile Delta has an understanding of the feminist movement of the west and got the courage to rebel because of that understanding? No.. Its more likely that modernity egged them on, and they were just rebelling against tradition.. a tradition that required both men and women to play very specific gender roles because of the harsh environment and way of life humans had over the last several millenia. Upon the advent of modernity and a significant advance in the quality of life, feminism emerges as one of the rebellions against traditional gender roles. It focuses on just part of the story, views history through the lens of the present, and blames men for what it perceives as oppression through the ages, and has exacted a steep price on many men today. If you are wondering why you havent heard about this "steep price paid by men", well.. its for the same reason you havent heard about a man self-immolating himself in front of a courthouse in broad daylight in America in June 2011. Thats right.. he set himself on fire in public.. and an incident such as this should have been heard around the western world, let alone the US. After all, people know about the vietnamese buddhist monk who set himself on fire in 1963. But it didnt even make it to the national media here.. why? there's the power of feminism for you.

For starters, the lie of an oppressive patriarchy through the ages needs to be debunked, and you can hear it from GirlWritesWhat, a woman who's on a quest for gender equality. Whats really needed is a "gender transition movement" (as suggested by Warren Farrell), that pays heed to both genders' traditional roles, and works out an equitable deal for both. I really hope that the evidence and knowledge oriented people in our atheist movement take the time to study this dispassionately. Do remember, all ideologies should fundamentally be viewed with skepticism and suspicion, simply because they arent grounded in our best tool - science - and feminism is just another ideology.

Wed, 11 Jan 2012 17:12:17 UTC | #907408

Go to: Aid workers describe devastation from Pakistan floods

astro.nj's Avatar Jump to comment 7 by astro.nj

But the wrong thing to do would give aid pending their acquiescence to said requests. Aid needs to be given unconditionally from the entirety of of Western civilization, and hopefully the show of good faith will open a few eyes to the lies about the evils of modernity.

But shouldnt the neighbouring rich islamic nations render aid first? They claim to have great brotherhood, they flock together to wage jihad, and the rest of us are infidels anyway. The US is constantly providing them with monetary support for decades. How many eyes has it opened?
Even if we miraculously open millions of eyes, do they have any say in the policies of the country?

Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:47:38 UTC | #506001

More Comments by astro.nj