Men have all the power?

The following article is a slightly edited version of one that was posted to the F4L mailing list 2003 10 07.

You may have seen the last part of this message already, maybe not, because my copy of the message containing that, which I posted very early this morning, hasn't come back to me yet. Perhaps the snoopers aren't done with it yet. If that's the case, I hope they enjoy what they read. Still, the delay puzzles me. I'm not even on the hit-list of Status of Women Canada.

The preamble in the following is a commentary I used to introduce the forwarded statistics to someone who is not on this list. I hope it sweetens things a bit if you should receive the statistics a second time now. If you wish to forward the message, go ahead. It contains no secrets that need to be guarded.

The issues of concern in this article relate to unhappiness caused by controlling and violent women in marriages that never broke up.

The appended statistics relate to the consequences of men's status and position of "power" in society. They show that women are not stepping up to the plate in equitable numbers. The problems inherent in the forwarded statistics and explained in the related web pages were not caused just by feminists all by their lonesome selves.

It wasn't even just feminists and women who caused those problems. If things are to change for the better, men have to come to acknowledge a major share of the guilt.

I wonder how many men permanently damaged their backs by living up to the Hollywood stereotype that carries a bride across the threshold. However, that is only a small one of many manifestations of the problem. A multitude of methods have been devised and are being used by which men's backs are being broken, literally and figuratively.

One of my friends led a down-trodden existence for the duration of his long marriage. He pampered and coddled his wife and became a total slave to her and their two boys, because she was given to having frequent heart attacks. I must have heard at least 30 times during the last 25 years that she had only six months left to live.

She could produce "heart attacks" at will – no kidding – and used them rigorously to get her way. The consequence was that she literally exercised and shaped only her bottom by permanently sitting on it and from that throne firmly controlled all other family-members' activities and minds.

I know the type well, having once been married to a manipulative, selfish woman. She was able to turn her face blue whenever she wished. Too bad for her that she had once bragged about it, many years ago, and that I have a good memory. She tried it on me just once, and I merely handed her a paper bag to breathe into. That cleared up her discoloured face in no time at all, but it didn't do me any good. Although she never again used that particular trick on me, she had far too many tactics in her arsenal, and my refusal to be manipulated through many of them made her very unhappy.

However, although she eventually walked out of our marriage, that is a good thing. Ultimately it made me a free man, even though it took me all of three years after our break-up to realize that. Certainly, I paid for that, big, but what price does anyone wish want to put on one's freedom? Uncountable people throughout history risked even their lives to gain their freedom.

Mind you, the children did not become liberated from my ex. They became stand-ins for me, far more pliable, and therefore all but one came to hate me, although they don't even know me. That is quite common even in married families, where children become a captive audience for indoctrination (as in parental alienation syndrome) even though their parents are not divorced and perhaps often seem to be happily married. One never knows for sure, looking in from the outside. Take my friend's two sons (and his only granddaughter to boot).

My friend's wife passed away a few years ago, and he still isn't a free man. His two "boys" (one is 53 and the other one about 40 — with both of them still being at home and not paying a dime to support themselves or their dad whom they both hate) still love their mom who turned them into useless twits. They never had a chance to grow up.

One works but habitually is at the verge of bankruptcy because he spends more than he makes and tries to force his dad into doing what his mom always did with his dad's money, make up the difference.

The other is a dedicated welfare recipient who hasn't held a job for more than twenty years and is now even cut off from welfare because there is no evidence that there is anything wrong with him other than that he is spine- and gutless. He's got a bachelor's degree in education that it took him about 12 years to acquire, but he only taught for a total of about three months. Having been coddled all his life, he found his students too hard to handle. It seems that there are few things that are worse than well-educated, dedicated welfare bums.

The only grandchild, a young woman by now, became thoroughly indoctrinated against her grandfather, even though it was and still is her grandfather who provided for her and her dad's support. However, thanks to her grandmother and her dad, she has absolutely no respect for grandpa and even demands that he should have respect for her dad. How much is a man supposed to do when he laid his life on the line for three ungrateful generations in a row in his family and that is not enough?

Anyway, my friend is now 77 years old and deserves to be free of the guilt his wife indoctrinated him with and of the state of slavery she imposed on him. He still is a chauvinist but not a happy camper, although he is quite slowly letting go. It took getting together with a real woman who is not addicted to victimhood to open his eyes a bit. He and I can now discuss things that formerly were taboo, and slowly, ever so slowly, he is loosening the emotional shackles that bind him.

Does a man in our brave new world have to live for 77 years before he has even a hope for a glimpse of freedom? That is worse than the way things were in ancient Sparta, where the state apprehended all boys when they were seven years of age and gave them back their freedom when they were 60 years old. At least in Sparta men of the age of 60 were then free, by government decree, and were then respected after that by all of society. Now it is that many children no longer respect their fathers, ever.

Another man spoke to me just the other day. He is married to a violent woman who told me once that she did not like it that I so often bring up domestic violence issues and -perceptions in our discussions. I asked her why that is, and she told me that she is a violent woman who often flies into rages during which she throws anything and everything at hand at her husband, sort of re-arranging the kitchen. Therefore she prefers not to hear about domestic violence issues. Her husband weighs quite a bit less than she does, but, unlike her violence, that was not always so.

Well, that is not exactly logical behaviour on her part, but it is without a doubt a useful and convenient strategy for her. Not only that, it is an instance of an individual's expression of a very popular trend with which the feminists firmly imbued all of society. Most people have their minds so firmly made up about all of this that no amount of facts will confuse them: "Men bad, women good. Men beat women. Women are victims. Men exploit women, their children and the world. Women nurture their families and the whole world." That is what feminist propaganda feeds to us, but that is not how the world works.

When the violent woman's battered husband spoke to me, he pulled his hair back and showed me a scar over his left eyebrow that runs right up into his receding hairline, "See this? Seventeen stitches — my wife did that with a frying pan." Then he opened his shirt and showed me a gunshot wound under his left collar bone, "Gunshot wound, .306 -- my daughter did that." He still postures and believes himself to be a he-man. It's a pity.

He's got two daughters. One of them is back home now, pregnant, after she had left home for a while. The other one also left home, and she already spent time in jail for car theft. I believe she is the one who shot her dad (she never got arraigned or sentenced for that one).

He asked me why nobody wants to marry his daughters and said, "They are pretty good-looking girls, and nothing's wrong with them", and he also asked why our youngest son is not interested in them. I gave him two reasons. First of all, given that his daughters like to give it away for free, with zest and zeal, why should anybody bother to buy the whole cow if a drink of milk now and then is given so freely to the needy? Secondly, anybody that knows their circumstances knows better than to pick him up on an invitation to play a round of Russian roulette with about five out of six chambers loaded. It is a good idea for any man not to fall in love with any woman unless he knows for sure and through personal observation how she treats the men in her life, so that he gains an idea of how he will eventually be treated.

I am afraid of what our society is getting itself into. Absolute freedom (almost exclusively for women only) appears to be a recipe for total chaos.

However, as the appended statistics quite realistically show, for all that men gave up they got nothing in return. Nevertheless, men are still being vilified for having all of the power they never, ever had to begin with.

Statistics that require no explanation

(Note: Figures for 2001 are preliminary and exclude Sept. 11th terrorist attacks)

Annual Fatal Job Injuries by Sex (USA)
	Female		Male
Year	N	%	N	%
1992	443	7.1	5,774	92.9
1993	489	7.7	5,842	92.3
1994	528	8.0	6,104	92.0
1995	539	8.6	5,736	91.4
1996	514	8.3	5,688	91.7
1997	477	7.6	5,761	92.4
1998	486	8.0	5,569	92.0
1999	442	7.3	5,612	92.7
2000	449	7.6	5,471	92.4
2001	471	8.0	5,429	92.0
Source: U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

It seems that the data base contains no information that permits to determine what the numbers of fatalities are in the military. Probably the feminist statisticians involved in compiling the numbers figure that being a soldier isn't much of a job and dying as a soldier is therefore not worth mentioning, and how many women die as soldiers anyway? Still, it is possible to determine what the numbers are for police- and other protective services.

Table 2 – US Job fatalities for selected occupations: police, protective services, guards, firefighting — by sex

(Note: Figures for 2001 are preliminary and exclude Sept. 11th terrorist attacks)

Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries Source: US Bureau of Labor
Occupations: Police, protective services, guards, firefighting (all of the above)
	Fatal Job Injuries
Year	Female	Male
1992	16	491
1993	31	505
1994	23	568
1995	34	548
1996	22	425
1997	31	473
1998	24	434
1999	19	431
2000	13	436
2001	49	463
Totals:	262	4,774
___________________________ Source: U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Imagine how much of an uproar the femicommies would make if those figures were reversed for the sexes! However, the figures are what they are, and men are generally chivalrous and courteous (maybe: "red-necked chauvinists" would be a better term to describe them), so they don't talk much about what they do and sacrifice.

Besides, dead men don't talk, and history is written by the survivors in power, the redfems.

If you have concerns about these and other issues related to the condition of seniors, visit, contact and perhaps even join:

There are in the order of about half a million or more people of age 55 and over in Alberta. If all of them were to join SUN, they would become the most powerful advocacy organization in Alberta; and seniors would no longer be robbed of their comforts and otherwise ignored.
At the price of one package of cigarettes seniors will be able to gain a voice that will be heard by a government that otherwise can and will take from seniors what they worked for all their life to enjoy in their old age.

Statistics that require no explanation

See also: