Post by: Preacherman on October 22, 2005, 07:20:50 PM
From the Times, London (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1838453,00.html):
October 23, 2005
Feminists trip up on man tax
Matthew Campbell
SPARE a thought for Swedish feminists whose newly formed party is disintegrating after hardliners presented a manifesto advocating a man tax , the abolition of marriage and the creation of gender-neutral names.
Sweden already boasts one of the highest levels of female participation in the workplace and some observers questioned the need for a feminist party in a country whose women account for half the seats in parliament.
When it was founded six months ago, polls showed that a quarter of voters would consider supporting Feminist Initiative in elections next year because of rising domestic violence against women and higher salaries for men.
That goodwill seems to have faded after the partys recent founding congress, however, when radicals such as Tiina Rosenberg, a professor of gender studies, appeared to have secured control of the agenda. The resulting platform included proposals for abolishing marriage and changing the law to let people who undergo sex change operations legally alter their names.
The party called also for the creation of more gender-neutral names such as Robin or Norva that could apply to a boy or a girl. At present parents must choose names from an official list for boys or girls.
Rosenberg resigned from the governing board after complaining of an anti-feminist backlash and insulting personal attacks in the Swedish media, where she was ridiculed as part of the lunatic left .
Gudrun Schyman, another founding member of the party, came to her defence last week. The reason for this campaign against her is that shes a lesbian, she said. The attacks against her are homophobic.
A former Swedish Communist party leader and author of erotic verse, Schyman once demonstrated her sense of fun by posing naked for a newspaper behind a red umbrella. But conservative male politicians do not find her amusing.
She advocates what she calls a man tax to cover the cost of violence against women in the home but has stopped short of endorsing the opinions of Ireen von Wachenfeldt, who until recently ran one of Swedens largest state shelters for battered women. In a recent television documentary called The Gender War, she proclaimed: Men are animals.
The documentary noted that the shelter had printed excerpts of an extremist American feminist manifesto called Scum, which stands for the Society for Cutting Up Men. In it, women are urged to destroy the male sex and seize the chance made possible by science of giving birth only to females.
The spectacle of militant feminism reaching into Swedens official institutions provoked a political scandal in which Wachenfeldt was forced to resign from her job at the shelter.
Since then the traditional Swedish belief in the need for organising politics, business and even ones private life to make it as sexually equal as possible seems to have come under threat. In new opinion polls only 1.3% of voters said they would vote for the feminist party.
Post by: natedog on October 22, 2005, 08:25:24 PM
Post by: Guest on October 22, 2005, 09:34:33 PM
Right?
Or possibly there's some purpose here that I'm missing?
Post by: The Rabbi on October 22, 2005, 11:38:54 PM
(I'm just kidding)
Post by: SalukiFan on October 23, 2005, 01:59:36 AM
Interestingly though, if you read the article, not everything they are proposing in their platform is totally insane.
Parents have to pick their child's name from a state approved list? Blech!
If they aren't going to abolish the practice altogether, I guess adding more gender-neutal names isn't that crazy of an idea. Likewise, I can't think of a compelling reason why the state should be able to tell people who've had sex changes they have to keep the name they were born with.
As far as the abolition of marriage goes, there have been folks with libertarian leanings on APS who've argued for it. I doubt that a government could really abolish marriage anyway - they could just get rid of the federal, state and local regulations and benefits associated with marriage.
Most likely, some other party will co-opt her party's stances on the name issues, dump the ridiculous "man-tax" and the abolitionist stance on marriage and the Feminist party will be forgotten by the next election.
Your woman for all seasons, including political season,
SalukiFan
Post by: Preacherman on October 23, 2005, 05:00:04 AM
1. No insult to feminism in general was intended - that's why the title of the thread referred to "truly radical" feminism. I'm all in favor of a healthy feminism - and a healthy masculinism, for that matter.
2.
Quote
Now I'm going to post an example of Christian extremism and we can all laugh about how stupid those Christians are
OK - and I'll be the first to enjoy a good laugh! Christians, as any other group, can be highly "lampoonable" at times. I've even posted such topics here, to some concern from other Christians, as you may recall (pasta, anyone?). Poking fun at sacred cows is a worthy pastime, IMHO.3. I'm afraid I simply can't take any group (or individual) seriously when they advocate such whacko positions as those outlined in the article. I don't care whether they're male or female, young or old, liberal or conservative, etc. - anyone trying to foist such nastiness on me and mine will receive my open contempt and fervent opposition (and, if they gain any position of power, my outright disobedience!).
Post by: Typhoon on October 23, 2005, 08:02:15 AM
I rather like Preachermans posts. He has an uncanny knack for ferreting out some interesting information, doesnt he?
Extremist views. They are out there and need to be addressed. More so than ever. With the proliferation of information these days, it is critical that a balanced perspective needs to surface. And along with it, a huge dose of common sense.
Andrea
Post by: SalukiFan on October 23, 2005, 08:29:27 AM
) Preacherman and I know that you are equal opportunity when it comes to lampooning people. It's not really Preacherman that I'm worried about, it's the "yeah, me too, feminists are all man-haters" types that often use examples like this to reinforce their, ahem, one-dimensional view of feminism. I suspect, although I can't speak for her myself that Barbara would say the same.
It's kind of like if I was on a feminist forum and someone put up an article about pro-gun folks that line the perimeters of their rural compounds with claymores to blow up the JBTs when they come for them. I think most of us here would groan and just hope that no one used it as a launching point to criticize all people that support RKBA.
So far though, it looks like everyone is being totally civil and taking the article in the spirit it was posted. Ahhh, I love APS...
Post by: Guest on October 23, 2005, 09:56:55 AM
It wasn't the article itself, Peter. I was just waiting for it to turn into yet another thread about the pussification of the world.
Of course those people are kooks, but no more represent me than Timothy McVeigh represents me as an anti-government type.
Post by: matis on October 23, 2005, 10:16:53 AM
I was just waiting for it to turn into yet another thread about the pussification of the world.
_______________________________________________________________
You mean, it's NOT being pussified, pussificated, whatever...?
JUST KIDDING, only foolin' around, just kidding, honest...!
matis
Post by: El Tejon on October 23, 2005, 11:10:04 AM
I've been paying that tax since I was 16. It will never be repealed.
Post by: Standing Wolf on October 23, 2005, 11:26:46 AM
Quote
Men are animals.
So? So are women. So are cats. So are dogs. So are mice. So are bugs. Now, what?
Post by: Guest on October 23, 2005, 12:34:21 PM
Post by: jefnvk on October 23, 2005, 01:46:33 PM
Quote
Men are animals.
That is a point of view. From my point of view, women are the cruel, manipulative animals.I wonder how well a 'black-tax' to pay for gang-related violence would go over, or a 'Muslim-tax' to pay for the WOT would go over?
Post by: Guest on October 23, 2005, 01:56:52 PM
Post by: Justin on October 23, 2005, 02:42:39 PM
Quote
In a recent television documentary called The Gender War, she proclaimed: Men are animals.
Grrrr, baby.Rowr.
Post by: Preacherman on October 23, 2005, 03:17:14 PM
@ Justin...
Post by: Stand_watie on October 23, 2005, 04:18:29 PM
Quote from: Justin
Quote
In a recent television documentary called The Gender War, she proclaimed: Men are animals.
Grrrr, baby.Rowr.
Actually it's ironic that she should choose such an inapt allegory that relagates power, dominance and violence to the (non-human) animal kingdom when they are even more behaviorally divided by sex than humans.
Post by: Sylvilagus Aquaticus on October 23, 2005, 04:56:49 PM
but..but...but....what about being outdoors...and in deep snow?
I can't write my name like THAT!
Regards,
Rabbit.
Post by: Morgan on October 23, 2005, 05:17:06 PM
Quote
At present parents must choose names from an official list for boys or girls.
WTF?
Post by: matis on October 23, 2005, 05:40:49 PM
I've heard that, as a culture, it has been the practice in toilet training males for the past decade or so.
_____________________________________________________________
Right! I read this, too. And with enough training maybe they'll get their men to start menstrating.
Sorry, but to me, the liberal mindset is a form of mental illness.
matis
Post by: matis on October 23, 2005, 05:46:53 PM
If I go out with someone, it's on mutual terms. That's one of my limits. I'm not for sale or rent.
_________________________________________________________
OK, Alright. We understand.
But tell me, Barbara, what about options?
matis
(What the heck? I'm not afraid. Nobody lives forever, anyway. Right?
Post by: jefnvk on October 23, 2005, 08:36:14 PM
Quote
Great. You're as much of an extremist as she is, then.
The whole post was supposed to be sarcastic.But even if that were so, I am not forming a political party based on that belief. She is.
As for the list of names, it makes halfway sense to me. I'd be pissed if my parents named me something like Granola, or Sunshine, or Fragrence, or Lemonjelo (as I believe was posted in the weird names thread). Names like that make me think that the parents think of their kids more as pets than anything else.
Post by: Typhoon on October 23, 2005, 08:50:47 PM
What's wrong with you? (Thanks, Mom for the family names. Quite happy with those...)
Post by: Guest on October 23, 2005, 11:29:42 PM
Post by: RadioFreeSeaLab on October 24, 2005, 08:36:10 AM
Quote
SPARE a thought for Swedish feminists whose newly formed party is disintegrating after hardliners presented a manifesto advocating a man tax , the abolition of marriage and the creation of gender-neutral names.
vomit.
Post by: The Viking on October 24, 2005, 08:55:52 AM
Regarding the list of approved names: Its becoming a trend to get uniqe names for your kids here, and previously, people have tried to name their daughter "Tequila"...the deal with the legislation is to make sure kids don't suffer 'cause of parental stupidity. Adults suffering because of their own stupidity, I don't have anything against that, but kids should not suffer from their parents stupidity...
Oh, and Tiina Rosenberg is a hard core commie. She studied in East Germany, but left...the fact that Gudrun Schyman still have any credibility amazes me. This sorry excuse for a human blamed bag-in-box wine for making her an alcoholic, she sat down and took a piss in public, during the opening of a movie/play or whatever. Drunk as hell of course. I promised to beat her up, together with everyone in the parliament who voted in favor of the man tax if they managed to push it thru...
Post by: The Rabbi on October 24, 2005, 09:08:50 AM
Quote from: Unarmed Shooter
Sylvilagus Aquaticus:
Regarding the list of approved names: Its becoming a trend to get uniqe names for your kids here, and previously, people have tried to name their daughter "Tequila"...the deal with the legislation is to make sure kids don't suffer 'cause of parental stupidity. Adults suffering because of their own stupidity, I don't have anything against that, but kids should not suffer from their parents stupidity...
Why is that the government's job? (Geez, I sound like a Libertarian here).Regarding the list of approved names: Its becoming a trend to get uniqe names for your kids here, and previously, people have tried to name their daughter "Tequila"...the deal with the legislation is to make sure kids don't suffer 'cause of parental stupidity. Adults suffering because of their own stupidity, I don't have anything against that, but kids should not suffer from their parents stupidity...
I think Moon Unit Zappa has done pretty well with her name. No one asks "Moon Unit who?" If kids dont like their names they can always change them when they grow up. I can't say how many "Mikes", "Joes", and "Bills" I've met who were really Aston or Fauntleroy or Jamison.
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on October 24, 2005, 05:45:47 PM
Quote from: Unarmed Shooter
Sylvilagus Aquaticus: Not true. Still got urinals here.
Regarding the list of approved names: Its becoming a trend to get uniqe names for your kids here, and previously, people have tried to name their daughter "Tequila"...the deal with the legislation is to make sure kids don't suffer 'cause of parental stupidity. Adults suffering because of their own stupidity, I don't have anything against that, but kids should not suffer from their parents stupidity...
Ah yes, the famous "it's for the children" line. Parental stupidity is BAD BAD BAD, but government imposed stupidity is perfectly reasonable. Regarding the list of approved names: Its becoming a trend to get uniqe names for your kids here, and previously, people have tried to name their daughter "Tequila"...the deal with the legislation is to make sure kids don't suffer 'cause of parental stupidity. Adults suffering because of their own stupidity, I don't have anything against that, but kids should not suffer from their parents stupidity...
I have two good friends with unusual names. Both of them are proud of it. They like their unique names. I can't wait to tell them that they'd be illegal in Sweden.
As for naming a kid "Tequila"... Well, that wouldn't be my first choice. But I know a woman named Brandy, and her name doesn't slow her down any.
As for feminists... They'd do well to keep their loony fringe on a shorter leash. This kind of commentary doesn't do their cause one bit of good. You'd think they know that...
Post by: Stand_watie on October 24, 2005, 06:10:02 PM
Quote from: Headless Thompson Gunner
Quote from: Unarmed Shooter
Sylvilagus Aquaticus: Not true. Still got urinals here.
Regarding the list of approved names: Its becoming a trend to get uniqe names for your kids here, and previously, people have tried to name their daughter "Tequila"...the deal with the legislation is to make sure kids don't suffer 'cause of parental stupidity. Adults suffering because of their own stupidity, I don't have anything against that, but kids should not suffer from their parents stupidity...
Ah yes, the famous "it's for the children" line. Parental stupidity is BAD BAD BAD, but government imposed stupidity is perfectly reasonable. Regarding the list of approved names: Its becoming a trend to get uniqe names for your kids here, and previously, people have tried to name their daughter "Tequila"...the deal with the legislation is to make sure kids don't suffer 'cause of parental stupidity. Adults suffering because of their own stupidity, I don't have anything against that, but kids should not suffer from their parents stupidity...
I have two good friends with unusual names. Both of them are proud of it. They like their unique names. I can't wait to tell them that they'd be illegal in Sweden.
As for naming a kid "Tequila"... Well, that wouldn't be my first choice. But I know a woman named Brandy, and her name doesn't slow her down any.
As for feminists... They'd do well to keep their loony fringe on a shorter leash. This kind of commentary doesn't do their cause one bit of good. You'd think they know that...
And it serves a hundred ships a day
Lonely sailors pass the time away
And talk about their homes
And there's a girl in this harbor town
And she works layin' whiskey down
They say "Brandy, fetch another round"
She serves them whiskey and wine
The sailors say "Brandy, you're a fine girl" (you're a fine girl)
"What a good wife you would be" (such a fine girl)
"Yeah your eyes could steal a sailor from the sea"
(dooda-dit-dooda), (dit-dooda-dit-dooda-dit)
Brandy wears a braided chain
Made of finest silver from the North of Spain
A locket that bears the name
Of the man that Brandy loves
He came on a summer's day
Bringin' gifts from far away
But he made it clear he couldn't stay
No harbor was his home
The sailor said " Brandy, you're a fine girl" (you're a fine girl)
"What a good wife you would be" (such a fine girl)
"But my life, my lover, my lady is the sea"
(dooda-dit-dooda), (dit-dooda-dit-dooda-dit)
Yeah, Brandy used to watch his eyes
When he told his sailor stories
She could feel the ocean foam rise
She saw its ragin' glory
But he had always told the truth, lord, he was an honest man
And Brandy does her best to understand
(dooda-dit-dooda), (dit-dooda-dit-dooda-dit)
At night when the bars close down
Brandy walks through a silent town
And loves a man who's not around
She still can hear him say
She hears him say " Brandy, you're a fine girl" (you're a fine girl)
"What a good wife you would be" (such a fine girl)
"But my life, my lover, my lady is the sea"
(dooda-dit-dooda), (dit-dooda-dit-dooda-dit)
"Brandy, you're a fine girl" (you're a fine girl)
FADE
"What a good wife you would be" (such a fine girl)
"But my life, my lover, my lady is the sea"
Post by: Sylvilagus Aquaticus on October 24, 2005, 06:58:47 PM
BTW, she's still a real looker
and quite the epitome of a refined lady, Texan or not.Regards,
Rabbit.
Post by: Preacherman on October 24, 2005, 07:01:23 PM
A follow-up commentary in the Times (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,10655-1840965,00.html):
October 25, 2005
Is a man tax really a load of meatballs?
Caitlin Moran
I dont know about you, but everything I read about Sweden makes it seem like a hoot. Admittedly this averages about one and a half news stories a year fewer if theres nothing on a former member of Abba wrestling with her fathers Nazi past but the impression is still one of a country with such terrible television that they have to make their legislative life entertainingly nuts, just for some fun.
Last time I checked out the Swedes, they were wondering whether it might be time to dispense with the official list of names from which Swedish babies must be named. This time around, a popular radical feminist party is proposing, among other policy ideas, a man tax . The idea is that most crimes are committed by men, ergo, men should pay more towards police funding.
Of course, if the radical feminists had thought about it for more than 30 seconds, they would have proposed the eminently fairer and more logical bad man tax instead. After all, theres no point in getting librarian drag queens to pay the same moral tax penalty as Mad Frankie Fraser. Indeed, Im sure that women who wear nylon knickers and drink Dooleys Toffee Liqueur commit just as many crimes as men.
Besides, I think there is a danger that the man tax could do more harm than good to the male rate of offending. Personally, if I were a pleasant Swedish chap being shafted for an extra 10 per cent a year on the automatic premise that I was running around in a loincloth, clubbing all and sundry, Id want to get a bit more value for my money. At the very least Id stop saying thank you when I was given my change. At worst, in a bad mood, I might feel that I was entitled to one free murder a year, and perhaps randomly kill someone in the local planning department, on the rationale that statistically they were quite likely to deserve it.
But if because youre all wife-beating beasts wasnt the reason behind the man tax, the Swedish feminists would have a fairly logical policy idea. After all, men still earn, on average, 10 per cent more than women, while still resolutely not shouldering half the domestic burden. Were not allowed to feel that this could be a taxable perk because, despite their advantage, modern men apparently feel impotent and useless frankly, exactly how someone should feel when theyve reached the age of 42 and dont know how to reshape a woollen garment when wet.
But if you suspect that it might be a little unfair to penalise men just because theyre wily enough to get one over on the ladies, then there are plenty of other taxes that one could consider levying, on equally justifiable moral and economic criteria. Polluters; smokers; repeat offenders; the obese; 4x4 drivers; non-recyclers; the owners of small boutiques that sell only candles and diaries ; local poets; parents who make their children learn the tuba; anyone with the nickname Maverick ; people who are a bit Buddhist (have a pair of Maharishi combat trousers); Nazis; bores; drips; weeds; people who are a bit asthmatic (coughed once in 1982); those who describe themselves as either perfectly normal or a bit mad ; and the unrepentantly vile.
I could wholeheartedly back any putative Lydia tax, under which everyone called Lydia paid 109 per cent. Personally, Ive yet to meet a Lydia whose shimmering blonde good looks werent the perfect cover for being a devious, backstabbing, two-faced creature of the night. Lydias cost the NHS millions in post-traumatic workplace therapy.
Its not as if such taxes are without international precedent. Monaco, for instance, levies no taxes on its own citizens sending tax returns only to businesses and resident Americans. Whenever I recall this detail, it makes me yearn to read more about the apparently productive time when Europes second smallest principality had an economic think-tank run by John Pilger and Rik from The Young Ones.
The only problem with all this random imposition of semi-amusing taxes is that it reinforces the notion that tax is a punishment for being either bad or too stupid to move to Switzerland. Really, the opposite is true. One has only to think about living in some corrupt Stone Age country run by a freak to realise that tax is a privilege; something that should be paid joyously. One should bound to the postbox with ones tax return and accompanying cheque, shouting Yes! Here is my contribution to the country! Today I am going to buy the people of Britain one defibrillator, 46 small chairs for a primary school, half a gun, 6,000 ring-binders and an unspecified item for Dr Liam Foxs lunch! Tax me! .
Post by: The Viking on October 25, 2005, 06:35:36 AM
Post by: Lo.Com.Denom on October 26, 2005, 09:25:51 AM
Caitlin Moran never fails to make me laugh!
Recently I've found myself skipping everything else in the Times and just reading her articles and the obituaries.
Post by: mtnbkr on October 26, 2005, 09:31:24 AM
Chris
Post by: Stickjockey on October 26, 2005, 10:40:03 AM
Quote
Were not allowed to feel that this could be a taxable perk because, despite their advantage, modern men apparently feel impotent and useless frankly, exactly how someone should feel when theyve reached the age of 42 and dont know how to reshape a woollen garment when wet.
For some unknown reason, this just made Mrs Stick go into fits of laughter. She says there is hope for me yet, though, because I'm still only 37.
Post by: El Tejon on October 26, 2005, 01:14:43 PM
42, but women have been calling me useless since I was 16. Hmmm.