Fathers Canada

Political Commentary and Opinion

More examples of why Familes are becoming a thing of the past
.........................................................................................................................................................................................

Gloria Steinem: How the CIA Used Feminism to Destabilize Society

Also See http://web.archive.org/web/20050527170544/http://www.culturebuster.com/excerpts.html

In the 1960's, the elite media invented second-wave feminism as part of the elite agenda to dismantle civilization and create a New World Order. Gloria Steinem became a media darling due to her CIA connections. MS Magazine, which she edited for many years was indirectly funded by the CIA.

What was this all about in the first place, well back when Gloria Steinem was working with the CIA, they elete had a plan to remove fathers from there children, 

Now today it seems anyone of these militant feminist don't like or what you say they will try to use the terrorist act to justify silencing your views.

Alex Jones from the Info wars explains very clearly what has happened in the US and in Canada with these militant feminist groups lurking about.

Hear the facts; MP1  MP2  MP3

http://www.savethemales.ca/180302.html

Gloria Steinem: How the CIA Used Feminism to Destabilize Society
By Henry Makow Ph.D.
March 18, 2002

"In the 1960's, the elite media invented second-wave feminism as part of the elite agenda to dismantle civilization and create a New World Order."

Since writing these words last week, I have discovered that before she became a feminist leader, Gloria Steinem worked for the CIA spying on Marxist students in Europe and disrupting their meetings. She became a media darling due to her CIA connections. MS Magazine, which she edited for many years was indirectly funded by the CIA.

THURSDAY
JANUARY 23
2003
MATTERS OF LIFE AND DEATH
Feminists joke about
roasting babies
Trendy magazine's online political forum goes south on abortion
Posted: January 23, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern

http://www.prisonplanet.com/feminists_joke_about_roasting_babies.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/archive_moral_meltdown.html

© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

"Roast baby?" "Baby margaritas?" "Bloody baby marys?" These are the sassy intrigues of participants in a discussion about abortion on the website of an international feminist magazine.

Bust magazine styles itself as a hip "girl" resource with a website that offers a "lounge," or discussion forum.

A WND reader who has contributed for about three years to a politics forum on the site, called "As the World Turns," said he recently has become "absolutely shocked by the statements I've read there, of feminists so jaded that they are freely joking about eating dead babies, and of the many ways that they could cook up their own abortions and dine on them."

Earlier this month, a contributor who goes by "isobel123," wrote that "the problem with adoption is, we really enjoy killing babies and would hate to have to miss out on that. We love squishing their little baby heads and watching their little baby brains come out their little baby eyesockets as their little chubby baby arms writhe helplessly in little chubby baby pain."

Last Thursday, "charliebaby," in response to a previous post, wrote "your roast baby sounds like a wonderful thanksgiving/christmas dinner. mmmmmmmm..... "

"Lilacwhine," on Jan. 15, wrote of sipping a martini and twirling "the dead baby around in it."

"Charliebaby" responded that "of course there are baby margeritas! [sic] but you really must try the bloody baby marys!"

"It's a weakness we feminists have, us and our baby killing," wrote "dinaofdoom."

A poster called "angstgrrl" offered a poem: and "This has to be one of the most outragest thing anyone can say, or in reference to harm children.!

 "I kill children
I love to see them die
I kill children
And make their mamas cry
Crush 'em under my car
I wanna hear them scream
Feed 'em poison candy
To spoil their Halloween
So your're in the kids' ward
You're in there cos you're ill
How about some Pavulon
So I can see you chill
Time to hit the scool bus
I think I'll shoot the tires
Offer them a helping hand
Of open telephone wires"

A review of Bust's quarterly print publication on Epinions.com, praising its "professional quality" and "amazing content," said it's what "MS magazine was supposed to be."

"With the edginess and energy of a home-grown 'zine, but the look and readability of a mainstream magazine, Bust does a great job of capturing what modern young women are thinking and caring about," the reviewer said. Another Epinions reviewer said, "In an effort to make feminism appeal to young women, Bust Magazine has unknowingly fallen into the same trap that the likes of every young women's magazine today has fallen into, with the exception of B*tch Magazine. From cover to cover, profanity runs rampant, and hypersexuality is a common theme. Although feminism promotes sexuality, and the right to say what you need to, Bust has over used this aspect to appeal to a mainstream audience."

townhall.com


A wage gap?
John Leo (back to web version) |  Send

March 14, 2005

Do men earn more money than women in comparable jobs with comparable responsibility? Most people seem to think so. During one of the presidential debates, John Kerry complained that full-time working men made a dollar for every 76 cents paid to women for the same work. President Bush didn't challenge the statement, and reporters let it go by as well. "The average woman is cheated out of about $250,000 in wages over a lifetime," said an article in Ms. Magazine. The AFL-CIO estimates that working families lose $200 billion of income annually to the male-female wage gap.

Oh, really? The Census Bureau did find that women earned 76 cents for every dollar paid to a male (now up to 80 cents on the dollar), but that was a raw number, not adjusted for comparable jobs and responsibility. A new book, Why Men Earn More by Warren Farrell, goes further, examining a broad array of wage statistics. His conclusion: When reasonable adjustments are made, women earn just as much as men, and sometimes more.

Some of Farrell's findings: Women are 15 times as likely as men to become top executives in major corporations before the age of 40. Never-married, college-educated males who work full time make only 85 percent of what comparable women earn. Female pay exceeds male pay in more than 80 different fields, 39 of them large fields that offer good jobs, like financial analyst, engineering manager, sales engineer, statistician, surveying and mapping technicians, agricultural and food scientists, and aerospace engineers. A female investment banker's starting salary is 116 percent of a male's. Part-time female workers make $1.10 for every $1 earned by part-time males.

Surprisingly, Farrell argues that comparable males and females have been earning similar salaries for decades, though the press has yet to notice. As long ago as the early 1980s, he writes, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics found that companies paid men and women equal money when their titles and responsibilities were the same. In 1969, data from the American Council on Education showed that female professors who had never been married and had never published earned 145 percent of their male counterparts. Even during the 1950s, Farrell says, the gender pay gap for all never-married workers was less than 2 percent while never-married white women between 45 and 54 earned 106 percent of what their white male counterparts made.

Citing Internal Revenue statistics, Farrell notes that women who own their own businesses net only 49 percent of what male counterparts make. Since it can't be that male bosses are holding them back here, women seem to be seeking certain lifestyle trade-offs-forgoing the highest possible income for more free time and flexible hours. They also seem to be avoiding some high-paying jobs. Female engineering managers make on average $83,000, but only 10 percent of the managers are female, indicating that many women are bypassing careers that could pay them
more.

Farrell argues that many men out earn women by a willingness to take risky and dangerous jobs as well as work that exposes them to stress and bad weather or that requires a transfer to an undesirable location in another city or country. Women are more likely than men to pick glamorous jobs that tend to pay less. A London School of Economics study tracking 10,000 post-1993 United Kingdom graduates from 30 universities found that males were earning 12 percent more than women. The men tended to stress salary and were more likely to take up engineering, math, and computing. The women were more apt to seek socially oriented jobs and as undergraduates had favored majors in education and the arts.

Much of Farrell's book is written in the style of a self-help book. It lists 25 ways women can improve their earnings, 10 of them advising the careful selection of high-paying fields and subfields. In nursing, an anesthesiology nurse can make more than the average doctor. An Army therapist is better paid than many other therapists. In the field of
languages, Farrell advises, skip French and learn Arabic or Farsi. You will earn more.

Farrell was a board member of the National Organization for Women in the early 1970s but broke with the movement over its anti-male excesses. He believes that the academic world and the news media have been incurious
custodians of the myth that male oppression prevents women from achieving equal pay. It's a sturdy myth, and data that contradict it are typically buried or never updated. Given the current campus climate, no broad and honest academic study of women's pay is possible today. Farrell bluntly advises women to put the victimization rhetoric on hold and just do what it takes to get the high-paying jobs. Good idea.

http://web.archive.org/web/20050527170544/http://www.townhall.com/columnists/johnleo/jl20050314.shtml