For my next article I thought I would try and focus on one of the key roles of being a parent – that of being a role model to their children.
1) Background
In order to ‘control’ (brainwash?) the children, it is necessary to delete male role models wherever they might be found, starting with the father. I believe that gender-selection at birth will become more prevalent with single mothers preferring to have girl-children. The other articles have identified the various ways in which the mother is encouraged and rewarded for dumping the father and attempting to drive him away from the children, so she can turn round to the kids and say – ‘See, daddy never really loved you anyway’. Since the evidence is overwhelming that children brought up by single mothers do significantly worse on all the negative factors in society, it beggars belief that successive governments’ policies are all targeted towards this self-destructive end. Bizarrely, the government is even talking about paying ‘other’ men to act as a mentor and role model to replace the natural father! Why won’t they simply reverse their anti-father stance and reward and encourage fathers for staying involved
2) Parents
Children are not (usually) born ‘bad’. They are not born racist, sexist or with any other discriminatory or unfair beliefs. They are not (normally) born criminals, benefit dependents, child abusers, violent or with any of the other negative characteristics. They learn these behaviours from the people around them, starting with their parents. Thus the parents are the first and, in most cases, the major role models for all children. Whether this is good or bad depends on the skills, knowledge, motivation, time, experience, awareness and CONTACT that the parents have.
The Jesuit priests say, ‘give me a child to the age of 7 and you give me the man’. The implication being that most of the major characteristics of a child are set by the age of 7.
3) School
I have been told that a primary school headmaster can walk around the reception class (first year at school for 4 and 5-year-olds) and can identify with reasonable accuracy which child will go to university and which child will go to jail.
Another primary school teacher mentioned that she was reading the register at the start of term and mentioned a child’s name. She could see that the child was there, but he did not respond to his name. When she asked him what his mother called him at home, he said ‘you b***d, idiot, stupid,’ and he believed that these were his names. Much of primary school education is now geared towards ‘socialising’ these badly abused children at the expense of the ‘decent’ kids suffering reduced attention and encouragement. School has become more counselling for parent-induced failures than merely educating the kids.
Since 98% of child minders and 90% of primary school teachers are female, a child brought up by a single mother may not experience a man in a position of power until the age of 11, by which time it is almost too late. I have been told that some young children are scared at the strange sight of a ‘man’ and don’t know what it is and run away!
As has been mentioned elsewhere in my articles, there is an absurd presumption that any man who ‘likes children’ must be a paedophile. This is particularly true of male primary school teachers, who are very much at risk. Even the feminist government have finally woken up to this fact and are offering ‘financial’ incentives to male teachers to enter primary teaching.
4) Media
As an alternative to a father, kids could get their role models from television. However, as anyone who watches even a few hours of TV will know, the vast majority of channels show programmes written by women for women. ‘Soap’ operas and ‘reality’ TV shows in particular seem to appeal primarily to women. The overwhelmingly negative images of men and positive images of women (I would argue) are deliberately aimed at creating role models in the minds of children such that women are ‘good’ and men are ‘bad’.
Even newsreaders have to be at least 50% female and the new stories are very much targeted at the female audience, with their obsession with the trivial foibles of minor ‘celebs’, of little or know interest to the majority of men. Similarly, ‘big’ issues like global warming and distant wars are used to ‘distract’ the viewer from the ‘real’ problems closer to home. Complicated issues are reduced to 15-second sound-bites, suitable for disinterested, politically unaware selfish introspective viewers.
The programmes targeted at men are extremely few and far between. Sports programmes are extremely rare on the free-to-air channels, requiring men to pay extra for the ‘premium’ sports package. When I cancelled my long-standing Sky subscription, the saleswoman asked me why – I said because I did not want to pay #20 per month for hundreds of channels with programmes by women for women. She mentioned two channels, which occasionally had ‘trivial’ programmes aimed at men and I said that it was not worth paying #20 per month for two channels. She mentioned the sports and I said I would happily pay just the supplement of #10 per month for the sports package, but she said I would have to pay #20 for the basic package first. That was my point – I did not want to subsidise the female programmes! Needless to say I have scrapped my television and saved (at least) #400 per year and urge everyone to do the same. It is often said, with good reason, that when you ‘turn on the television, you turn off your brain.’
With analogue television broadcasts being switched off progressively over the next few years, now is a good time to do so. Besides, many of the ‘better’ BBC programmes are available for download for free on the Internet at www.bbc.co.uk!
With 97% of households having a television, and web-cams on virtually every computer (if Google can remotely turn on computer microphones to determine which television programme people have on in the background to target advertising at the viewer, how much of a technological step is it to turn on the web-cam?), and CCTV cameras on every corner, George Orwell’s vision of two-way monitoring and control of individuals behaviour, as depicted in ‘1984’, becomes ever closer.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09…ing_software/?
http://news.com.com/2100-1029_3-6140191.html
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=418
5) Fashion
Without advertising, where would the capitalist consumer-driven society be? The role of advertising in shaping perceptions is well-known. Clearly, it is a powerful medium for influencing and ‘brain-washing’ the viewer. Needless to say, the depictions of men are overwhelmingly negative, that of women are overwhelmingly positive.
Iceland (frozen food supermarket) advertises under the grammatically inaccurate slogan of ‘Because all mums are heroes’.
Diamond car insurance tries to persuade female car drivers to buy insurance from them by distorting statistics to indicate that female car drivers are ‘better’ than male drivers. In reality, it is true that women have less accidents than men, but that does not make them automatically ‘better’ drivers than men, since men drive significantly more miles than women. On average, women have 12% more accidents per kilometre driven than men. That is the only objective measure of safe driving. If it were the case that simply having less accidents made someone a better driver, then who would you rather be driven by – my 12 year old son who has never driven any miles and has had no accidents, or me who has driven 500,000 miles and had one accident?
When I approached the Advertising Standards Authority to complain about this advert, I was told that since the statement would not affect where customers bought the insurance from, they wouldn’t do anything about it.
The whole fashion industry is bizarre for many reasons. Whilst much is made of the ‘size-zero’ models acting as negative role models on young girls and possibly encouraging the belief that ultra-slim is the aim and bulimia and anorexia the result, little is made of the fact that lots of girls aspire to become models themselves. It is beyond me as to why anyone would want to aspire to be a ‘walking coat-hanger’! Particularly since the customers for these absurd products are a tiny negligible percentage of the market who can afford the astronomical prices for these ridiculous garments, which appear designed to make the most beautiful women look ugly! If they could design clothes to do the reverse transformation, then that really would be something!
What is also ignored is the effect on men. Since the ‘standardised product’ presented on TV is an incredibly beautiful woman, men are deeply affected by the repetition of these images into believing that they could not ‘fancy’ any other woman than the one presented. ‘Ordinary’ women in comparison have little or no attraction. Thus men are more likely to reject possible partners for reasons based on physical attributes rather than mental compatibility. As a result, the feminist aims of more and more men and women living in distinctly separate lives, becomes more likely.
Certain daily ‘newspapers’ (comics would be a more appropriate title since their daily diet hardly qualifies as ‘news’ in any kind of objective sense) have gorgeous ladies appearing topless. Surely the feminists would stop this if they could? I would argue this works on two levels – a) For the above reasons, it reinforces the stereotypical image of a perfect women that is the only one that men can aspire to have a relationship with and b) many men are therefore ‘encouraged’ to buy the newspaper because of this image, and will continue to read the brain-washing pro-female and anti-male rubbish that fills the rest of the pages, thereby being further brainwashed into believing that men are bad, women are good and that women are still somehow victims in this matriarchal society we now live in.
6) Music
The power of popular music to inspire and emotionally involve the listener is well known. Since the Beatles and the like in the 1960s (and our parents would argue even before that!), the words, music and image of the band have huge impact on the listener. Many people will be able to name a favourite song, which reminds them of a particular moment in time when they were in a highly emotional situation. I have personal memories, for example, of being rejected by some lady I was interested in because she had her eyes on someone else – Sheena Easton ‘One Man Woman’ – “I’m a one man woman and you don’t come near him, no way…”
Whitney Houston – “I believe that children are our future, treat them well and let them lead their way, show them all the beauty they possess inside, give them a sense of pride … I believe we all need a hero, people need someone to look up to… learning to love yourself is the greatest love of all”
Barry Manilow – “We dreamers have our ways, a way through rainy days but somehow we survive, we keep the feelings warm, protect them from the storm, until our time arrives, but then one day the sun appears and we come shining through these lonely years. I made it through the rain, I kept my world protected, I made it through the rain, I kept my self control, I made it through the rain and found myself respected by the others who got rained on to I made it through (and so can you).”
Abba – “The Winner takes it all, the loser has to fall, it’s simple and its plain, why should I complain?”
Traditionally, the few female singers had been singing about needing ‘love to be complete’ whilst the male majority sang about other things. Nowadays, it appears to me, the majority are man-hating females singing about how much better they are on their own, how the men taught them to be horrible and nasty and that ‘men are all b***ds’. It is the men who are singing ‘can’t live, if living is without you’. The implication that men cannot survive without women whilst women are better off without men is entirely untrue and deeply misleading. The further encouragement and disproportionate emphasis on homosexuality, I would argue, is a further attempt to encourage and persuade impressionable men and women to leave each other alone, entirely consistent with the feminist aims of separate living.
7) Films
The wide screen is even more important as a method of influencing people and changing behaviour than the small screen. All the above issues apply and more so. Am I the only one who believes it is bizarre that people go to jail (in one case 200 years for ten pictures) for merely looking at pictures of child abuse, on the presumption that if they look at these pictures, they WILL perform the acts in the future, but that watching extreme violence at the movies, as it appears many (maybe most?) movies portray, has no equivalent effect requiring jail for potential murders?
Interestingly, there have been many attempts at inventing female super-heroes, but none have been anywhere near as popular as the male superheroes such as Superman. These characters are powerful role models, which is why the feminist-controlled movie industry continuously tries to undermine the male heroes (look at the number of father Christmas movies where he is portrayed as actually a bad guy) and replace them with female role models, so far unsuccessfully.
In addition, movies have been put together for the obvious reason of using up as many female actors as possible. So films about five or six sisters in a family, or all female pop-groups are churned out one after the other. Life from a female perspective is the only view that makes it to the screen. Luckily, the movie-going public generally prefers the tiny few male movies, so the moviemakers cannot (yet) justify any of their anti-male decisions on financial grounds alone.
Positions of power
People in power are very important role models for younger people. As a child, you may aspire to be like them. For this reason, it is extremely important that the feminists ensure that as many women as possible are seen to be in control. Since they are unlikely to be able to get there by ability alone, they need to distort the system in their favour using quotas and legislation. Thus they introduced the ‘all-women’ shortlist. It is now legal for the Labour party to require any (not yet all) political vacancies to be selected from a shortlist of entirely female candidates. This was the final straw for me and resulted in my resignation from the Labour party when my local council constituency introduced an all-women shortlist at the city council elections. Since we already had three female city council councillors, a female county council councillor and a female MP, if anything we needed an all-male shortlist! I do not believe in quotas and was happy to campaign for the previous female candidates, freely selected from an all-female shortlist, which was put together without needing the all-women legislation, no male candidate came forward. Even though I managed to persuade the local constituency party to support me in protesting against this policy, it was imposed form above and I resigned. For the first time, since the boundary reorganisation in 1974, which created this constituency, Labour lost the seat. They have not learned the lesson as in south Wales (in the 2005 General Election), when the prospective popular local male candidate Mr Law was replaced by an imposed female from outside, Mr Law stood as an independent and overturned a 20,000+ majority to win the seat as an independent candidate!
The current attack is on the judiciary where (oh no, it must be discrimination!) the majority are men. In order to ensure (ie discriminate against men) that (as a starting point) 50% of the judges are female, the government is in the process of setting up a judicial appointments committee to achieve representation of judges that matches the community. It makes no sense, since the majority of defendants that make it to court are male, why shouldn’t the majority of judges be male? In any case, disproportionately women don’t want the top jobs (see employment article). Even Judge Hale, the highest (and so far only) female law lord, spent most of her 20 years between qualifying and becoming a high court judge, lecturing on law rather than practising as a barrister.
9) Sport
The last substantial location for male role models is sport. Male sports players have traditionally occupied our television screens and sports pages far more than female ones. This has largely been due to the fact that in just about every sport, the male players are overwhelmingly better at the sport than the female ones. Normally, people would prefer to watch the better players than the lower leagues. In football, for example, the premiership attracts many more viewers than the Conference North games. The reason is that the quality of the football is significantly better. In fact, because women are disproportionately inferior at sports, rather than trying to compete with men, they have had to set up entirely separate sporting competitions from which men are excluded. Bizarrely, in tennis for example, the inferior female competitions have demanded, and received, equal prize money! Even though most female tennis games last two sets and barely 30 minutes, they want equal pay, with men who have to win through really competitive five set matches, often from the first round, to win the tournament. How this can be justified as equal pay for equal work is utterly beyond me!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/6389635.stm
Thus it is possible by attempting to give more coverage to the inferior female games that not only do male sportsmen get less coverage, the increased coverage of poor quality women sports means that many people would lose interest in sport altogether, disproportionately punishing men. As a result, male participation in voluntary games is significantly down and many little clubs have been forced to close, thereby depriving men of valuable camaraderie and support, all of which helps the feminists to drive men to the edge of loneliness and to the fringes of society, just where they want us.
When the Olympics comes around, just watch the coverage by gender and see how little male sport is shown and the lower prominence given to it.
Conclusions
It is entirely consistent with the aims of the extreme feminist movement that male role models should be deleted or negatively portrayed wherever possible. As a result, lots of bad news stories about male celebs, and in particular sportsmen, fill the gossip columns of most ‘newspapers’ and TV news slots. The aim is clear, “men are bad women are good”. Without the father to provide the natural balance in the children’s lives, kids will grow up with a badly distorted and misplaced view of society. Particularly boys are worst affected and it is not surprising that children brought up by single mothers are doing significantly worse on just about every negative factor in society compared with those brought up in a two parent family.
Not surprisingly, Britain was recently declared the worst country in the entire (developed?) world for bringing up children!
Tags: children, discrimination, father, female, gender, human rights, male, mother, parent, role model
