Calm down Henry. As I said before, I don’t see much of a debate here. Why are you taking it so personally? In no way was anything I posted addressed to you.
I still would like to hear people’s opinions on whether this site might be motivated by something as simple as just getting people to read it so they can get paid for the banner ads.
Actually sailor, you called all of us who didn’t think the site was a joke “fools”, said we were humorless robots of political correctness and opined that we shouldn’t be allowed to vote, bein’ as we’re so weak-minded. Gee, whatever would anyone find to be offended about there? :rolleyes:
I called that number, using a pay phone. I got a recording. It did NOT identify the number. It simply asked you to leave a message, voice or fax. It also told you how you can get a free e-Fax number of your own. I left a message telling them I thought their site was pretty funny, saying no one would seriously advocate the repeal of the 19th Amendment. But I did NOT leave my name, address or phone number, just to be safe.
The fact that the recording did not identify the number (Such as: “Hello, you have reached the Headquarters of the Father’s Manifesto Organization. Leave your name and number and a short message and we’ll get back to you.”) is very suspicious.
beakerxf, you said:
I thought it was Cold War, for the most part.
>> It also told you how you can get a free e-Fax number
This greatly increases my suspicion that the only purpose of this site is to generate traffic for people who sell e-advertising.
Anybody think this might be the case? While I am 100% certain the site was not designed to be serious, now I also have the suspicion the purpose may not be a joke or prank but rather much more practical. Someone said “How can we generate traffic?”
I’m with sailor on this. It’s a joke. Really. And if it’s not a joke, well, then the creator of the site doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
I think the main giveaway are the GDP statistics. I’m surprised no one has brought this up. GDP (Gross Domestic Product) is the total market value of all final goods and services produced in a given economy in a year. In this case, it’d be the U.S. economy.
Now, the site in question uses the argument that since the passing of the 19th amendment, the U.S. GDP has risen. Meaning, the U.S. has been producing more goods and more services (which in turn, makes the U.S. richer), but because of that, we’re worse off.
Infact, the whole concept of GDP wasn’t even developed until 10 years after the passing of the 19th amendment in 1920. So, before 1930, we had no accurate count of the U.S.'s GDP, yet, the graphs at the site somehow have this information. Of course, the graphs could be estimates, but that really doesn’t mean anything, especially on the Internet.
How about this scenario? Anti-feminist group contacts e-fax service and sets up an account. They record their message. E-fax tacks on ITS message, telling callers how to get their own free e-fax account.
I should’ve mentioned that I heard two voices, The first male, asking callers to leave a message, and then a female one informing callers how to get e-fax service of their own.
I, of course, appreciate the irony that the e-fax company employed women, which is something the anti-feminists are against! Apparently, they are not against doing business with the enemy when it suits their purpose!
Vandal, I am glad someone is actually reading the stuff. As you can clearly see it is meaningless mumbo jumbo with no attempt to make any sense. I keep giving examples but it seems many people cannot be bothered to think about it. It is very clear to me the site makes NO attempt to be coherent in any way. BTW, there are many mirrors of this site all over the net.
In the absence of a better explanation I am inclined to think the only purpose of this site is to generate traffic and , possibly, to have a good laugh at all the irate messages they are getting from people who were fooled.
Jab1, the business of selling banner ads, and the business of selling free e-fax… (to sell banner ads) are pretty much the same thing. Doesn’t that tell you something? To me it seems much more likely than the coincidence that some sexist morons would coincidentally be in the business of selling e-fax and banner ads.
I am too lazy (or not curious enough) but I wonder if someone would email them. You can just create a separate email account to be used just for this and never again. It could be this would yield no useful information whatsoever or it may give us a glimpse.
Or call them and leave a message inquiring about the e-fax thing or whatever. If you leave an email or a phone number that is safe (like at work) I wouldn’t be concerned.
The only thing that is clear is that the contents of the site make no attempt to me coherent or meaningful. It’s all mumbo-jumbo, and contradictory at that.
I am not knowledgeable enough to look into this but maybe someone can do it and yield some further insight.
It seems http://fathersmanifesto.org/ is hosted by something called http://www.directnic.com/ which sells banner ads and also hosts a lot of porn stuff (wet teen pussy etc. Maybe it is wet teen pussy against the 19th amendment?).
Can someone with more knowledge about how the internet works gather more info? To me it seems very likely that internic just hosts a number of sites that generate traffic to sell banner ads.
Information about the Father’s Manifesto can be found at http://www.feminista.com/v1n3/wilson.html
The first paragraph from the page says:
Was the author of this also taken in by the joke or is this part of the joke?
Gr8Kat, I am looking at the link you supplied and I would ask otehr people to read it and analyze it critically as it might shed some light on this. At first glance I find some very suspicious things so I wonder if it may be that someone was taken in by the manifesto thing or that it is in fact part of the ploy.
It would take me a while to analyze the whole thing and I would ask other to help out.
The first link to the Manifesto is wrong and links to something else. I have no idea how to interpret this.
The story about the guy who wrote the manifesto may or may not be true. If it is true it seems the story would be that a kook wrote the manifesto and someone put it on the net without his backing. In other words, there is no such active organization trying to repeal the 19th.
The statements about people who have signed the manifesto seem totally made up and unsupported. That takes away credibility to the whole page.
I am of the opinion these people have been taken in by this gag (which seems many other people have too). Since they seem to be sincere maybe someone would want to call them and discuss the matter with them and see what further information thay may supply which would shed some light on this.
In the meanwhile my guess is that the manifesto site is just a ploy to get traffic.
Are we going to have to resort to Cecil himself on this one?
Okay, I’m gonna have to go back to my original assessment that this thing is real. Many of its claims look like bald-faced lies (the federal grant, the plush new headquarters), and Gr8Kat’s recent post seems the clincher to me.
Just because it’s “meaningless mumbo jumbo” doesn’t mean the author doesn’t mean what he wrote. It means he’s a dangerous, angry, ignorant fool. Some people really are that ill-informed. There’s a new poster here who sincerely believes some scientists want to clone Christ. It’s an Urban Legend. It ain’t true. But that didn’t stop this Christian fundie from providing a link to that site from his own homepage. I mean, he also thinks big sunspots are a sign that Christ is returning! How silly can you get?
Or it could be that the author really does want to repeal the 19th Amendment, but he’s doing a very bad job of justifying it.
Yeah, in order to reach as many people as possible.
That isn’t what I said, but perhaps I wasn’t clear: It’s two different groups of people, with no connection other than business! It’s like Ford advertising in Time and Newsweek. The ONLY connection between Ford and those magazines is that Ford bought some advertising space from them. Get it? The anti-feminist is like Time and the e-fax people are like Ford. Get it?
I do not know if this issue will ever be resolved but if we do find out the truth and it turns out the site is what I think it is, I will have to be crowned guy who held out longest against the overwhelming opinion of the other dopers. Of course, if I turn out to be wrong I will be crowned greatest fool to not see what everybody else was seeing.
Jab1, after reading the feminista page I think it has quite a few holes itself.
Can anyone provide any objective proof (not originating at the manifesto site or from one based solely on it) that these manifesto people exist as an organized group? For example, mainstream media cites that show they have met somewhere and have names. That they have activities I could join. That they have done anything to further their cause like lobby, contribute to candidates they like etc. In other words, that they exist as a group and indeed carry out activities to further their ideas?
I mean, if this was a group with a program you would think they would welcome supporters but it turns out they are pretty much impossible to find.
To be honest here, I had great curiosity to discover the truth but I am getting a bit tired and beginning to care less. I do hope someone can resolve this one way or another before we ll decide this is a big waste of time.
sailor, I guess I was wrong for taking you calling me an idiot personally - I don’t know you and you don’t know me, and I really shouldn’t give a shit what you think of me.
Onto the ‘debate’ - it seems we’re not debating over whether the site is a ‘joke’, but over the definition of ‘joke’. You seem to be referring to the site as definitely a joke in the way you might say that TV’s coverage of the Olympics has been a joke, meaning it’s been stupid, missing the point of the competition, having too many pointless interruptions. The fact that the networks haven’t been doing these things because they wanted to have a laugh at the expense of the viewing public, but rather because they have shit for brains, and more money than sense, does not mean it’s not a joke by your definition. By the definition I use - of a joke as something satirical or played for laughs - I still fail to see how the site can be considered a joke.
The essays about Jews running the media and the Talmud as the root of all evil were not written as jokes. They were well constructed pieces of hate literature that would not only suck in a ‘moron’, but possibly anyone who knew little about Judaism, and nothing about the Talmud itself (possibly a very large group of people), as long as they were predisposed to prejudice (hopefully a much smaller group of people). Whether the person putting it on the site believes in this nonsense or not, they are doing a bad thing, in my opinion, by presenting this sort of material. It’s equivalent to a person making money off a child pornography site, even if they personally don’t get turned on by photos of naked boys. It hardly makes them any more admirable.
I’m not sure why you haven’t bothered to actually answer anything I’ve said, but I’ll assume that that’s because you can’t keep defending the website as harmless fun if you take into account the points I’ve made. I hope that the others reading this exchange have a more open minded attitude towards what I’m trying to get across about this site.
HenrySpencer
sailor, I guess I was wrong for taking you calling me an idiot personally - I don’t know you and you don’t know me, and I really shouldn’t give a shit what you think of me.
Onto the ‘debate’ - it seems we’re not debating over whether the site is a ‘joke’, but over the definition of ‘joke’. You seem to be referring to the site as definitely a joke in the way you might say that TV’s coverage of the Olympics has been a joke, meaning it’s been stupid, missing the point of the competition, having too many pointless interruptions. The fact that the networks haven’t been doing these things because they wanted to have a laugh at the expense of the viewing public, but rather because they have shit for brains, and more money than sense, does not mean it’s not a joke by your definition. By the definition I use - of a joke as something satirical or played for laughs - I still fail to see how the site can be considered a joke.
The essays about Jews running the media and the Talmud as the root of all evil were not written as jokes. They were well constructed pieces of hate literature that would not only suck in a ‘moron’, but possibly anyone who knew little about Judaism, and nothing about the Talmud itself (possibly a very large group of people), as long as they were predisposed to prejudice (hopefully a much smaller group of people). Whether the person putting it on the site believes in this nonsense or not, they are doing a bad thing, in my opinion, by presenting this sort of material. It’s equivalent to a person making money off a child pornography site, even if they personally don’t get turned on by photos of naked boys. It hardly makes them any more admirable.
I’m not sure why you haven’t bothered to actually answer anything I’ve said, but I’ll assume that that’s because you can’t keep defending the website as harmless fun if you take into account the points I’ve made. I hope that the others reading this exchange have a more open minded attitude towards what I’m trying to get across about this site.
HenrySpencer
The article is over 3 years old. URL’s change.
I doubt http://www.feminista.com/ would be in on the ploy. They are the Anti-Father’s Manifesto.
Huh? Why, because some links don’t work? Let me reiterate, the article has been around a long time. Pages get taken down or move. That makes research difficult, but doesn’t automatically invalidate the statements made.
If it is a gag, idiots who agree with it have also been taken in making it a dangerous gag.
See: http://www.operationusa.com/suffrage.html
Half the links on this page go back to Manifesto pages. The others go to pages that agree with the Manifesto.
Scoff if you want, but I think it’s too evil just to shrug off and dismiss as satire or parody or a joke (because it’s not).
From what Jab1 says it seems my hunch that the manisfesto site might just be related to a bunch of porn sites may be wrong too. As I said, I just don’t know enough about how the internet works.
Gr8Kat, yes, after looking over the feminista page I agree that they are not part of the ploy and that they are a legit site. Still there are a lot of unsupported things there. I am not saying they are not true, just that they are not supported. It seems the author Trish Wilson knows more than we do about this manifesto and it would be interesting to have the possibility of asking her about it. Maybe somebody would like to invite her to join our discussion. She probably knows more about this than all of us put together.
They say that for every female in the workforce, it takes 14 men to undo the damage in productivity. To back up that claim, they cite, without source, this quote:
The reduced productivity of ONE EXTRA female in the
workforce equals the positive productivity of 14 males.
Which, if you think about it critically, doesn’t even come close to what they’re claiming. Here’s how I interpret that quote: females are so productive that if one were to reduce her output, she would still be doing as much work as 14 males.
Clearly, I have a hard time even buying my interpretation, but hey, if they’re going to twist statistics around, I can do the same.
Researching Trish Wilson, author of the article I cited above, I found these sites about her and her other writings:
http://www.gate.net/~liz/liz/007.htm
http://www.echonyc.com/~onissues/w97paranoia.html (This is the article from which the Father’s Manifesto page gets the quotes it mocks, though I fail to see where she claims they have plush headquarters, etc.; though it appears she’s wrong when she says they’re no longer on the internet.)
http://www.gate.net/~liz/fathers/fathers.htm
http://members.aol.com/asherah/
If it’s all a joke, someone had better tell this woman to stop dedicating so much time and research on it. She’s wasted at least three years of her life!
Gr8Kat, sorry, I forgot to check out the operationUSA link, I just opened it and have not had time to read it but their motto “Repeal the 19th Amendment Before they take our beer” made me think of Al Bundy, of Married with Children and made me chuckle. I’ll look into it later.
BTW, Not to sidetrack the thread but this got me thinking, was it the women’s vote that passed the prohibition amendment?