BDSM: Abuse Any Way You Like It

torture2A friend of mine called me yesterday and told me some very shocking news.  She moved in with a guy not long ago who is wealthy, owns four homes, and is about to inherit a large sum of money from his father who is in his nineties and isn’t expected to live much longer.  She’s known him for several years, but had never before lived with him for any extended period of time.  Now she is finding out, to her dismay, just what kind of guy he is.

Jamie, as I will call her, has a small child. Her number one reason for moving in with this man was for security, so that she could raise her child and look after it as a stay-at-home mother.  She loves that child dearly and believes, as I do, that there is no substitute for the care that a mom can give her child. She cared for the man and knew that he had some faults, but was willing to make some compromises if she could give her baby a decent home.  He’s a photographer and spends most of his time taking photos of nude models.  He could make a living from it because he is an excellent photographer, but for some reason chooses not to, perhaps because financially he doesn’t need to, and pursues it more as a hobby than as a profession.

Yesterday, Jamie, who considers me one of her best friends and confides in me frequently, called me and told me that he had been spending a lot of time on the internet looking at porn.  And it wasn’t just porn.  It was photography of BDSM, or “bondage, discipline (alternately domination), sadism and masochism.  On top of that, he had asked her if he could photograph her child in a bondage situation.

This was of course absolutely outrageous.  I couldn’t believe it.  The stories that she had been telling me were bad enough, but this really went over the top.  BDSM is legal in most states, but participants must be of legal age to give their consent. That he is into this sort of thing explains some of his actions, and how he has treated her. Using her child in some kind of exploration of bondage was clearly criminal and could land them both in jail and cause her the loss of her child to Child Protective Services.

His behavior had already been raising questions about his motives for having her there.  He had invited her to live with him in his condo but did not provide a room for her and the baby. It’s a two bedroom condo in an expensive neighborhood, and he uses one of the bedrooms to store stuff he doesn’t need, and did nothing to clear it out and provide private space for her and the baby despite repeated promises to do so.  He is conspicuously a hoarder, wants everything just as it is, and even keeps food in the refrigerator so long that it turns moldy.  He feigns illness or breathing problems when she asks him when he’s going to make a space for her.  Meanwhile her belongings sit in a U-Haul storage lot.

He wanted to sleep in the bed with her and her daughter, which she refused, because it caused her consternation, and he has so far done nothing to baby-proof the apartment after two months have passed, despite promises to allow her some breathing room and make the  home liveable for the child. He complains loudly if the baby touches anything.   He demands that she do all the cleaning, cooking, and general maintenance of the household, including even the purchase of the groceries, her gas and all her own expenses.  It wasn’t supposed to be a “Dutch” arrangement.  Yet he pays for almost nothing, despite his wealth.  He did buy some groceries on one occasion, and then demanded that she go out to the car and bring them in.  He came home early one morning about 1 AM and woke her up and demanded that she get up and wash the sheets on the bed.

She had spent all the money she had traveling to California from the Midwest and having her personal belongings shipped there with a U-Haul shipping box.  Now she is broke, and doesn’t know how to get out of the situation.  There is no housing for moms like her, no agency that will help that we know of, and she is trapped in an abusive situation that clearly threatens her child’s safety. His behavior suggests clearly that his interest in BDSM reflects a desire to reduce her to complete submission, completely under his control, with no alternatives but to give in to his every whim.  The chance that he would use a photograph of her child to blackmail her seems probable, in order to even further gain complete control over her.

I knew almost nothing of BDSM, so I had to do a little research. What is clear is that in bondage, you have a dominant role and a submissive role.  The submissive is usually strapped in with belts, handcuffs, and other devices, including straight jackets, and placed into a situation in which he or she cannot escape by themselves. This permits the dominant to do whatever he or she wishes, very often punishment and sometimes torture.  The pictures I’ve seen on the internet are horrendous.

In my friend’s circumstances, her boyfriend is using a dominant mentality to try to crush her into complete submission not through conventional consensual BDSM methods but through financial ruin and extreme male oppression.  That was becoming clear with each day that passed, except the BDSM aspect of his psychology wasn’t apparent until his porn habits became obvious, and most significant in his asking her to involve the child.

Studies show that the majority of people involved in BDSM are middle to upper middle class.  Because kinky sex is so deeply a part of it, many of the participants are gay males or lesbians.  Almost all of the photographs I’ve seen involve same sex relationships.  One participant has written that the social groups who engage in this practice are riddled with rapists, because the opportunity is ready made, and anyone who wants to remain in these groups better shut up or give up their place in the practice.  They are so obsessed with it that everyone stays silent and protects one another. Yet the fundamental need that is being satisfied is about power, not sex.  Group leaders, who are typically the hosts who provide a home for these practices are very often those most guilty of rape, and more likely to take advantage of it than others, because of their controlling position. Submissives use “safe words” to indicate that the dominant abuse has gone far enough, but many do not stop.

It would seem to many, I would think, that we live in an enormously sick society. Interestingly the American Psychiatric Association removed BDSM as a category in the 1980s from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, but continues to regard it as “problematic,” and law enforcement regards it with deep suspicion. More than that, it would appear that child abuse is a central theme used in the theatrics of BDSM. Submissives very frequently wear diapers and are strapped inside a child’s crib.

In an article in the Guardian, Pamela Stephenson Connolly wrote that she had “carried out an extensive psychological study of people in the BDSM community – the largest empirical study ever done at the time – to examine their psychological attributes and determine if there was any justification for the notion, commonly held, even within my field, that they were all psychologically disturbed. After giving each of the 132 participants [the study actually indicates 32, not 132] four hours of psychological tests, as well as a face-to-face interview, I found that, in fact, the group was generally not mentally unhealthy, and the instances of early abuse that had long been associated with the adult practice of BDSM were present in just a few.

“BDSM,” she said, “played in a safe and consensual manner, is not proof of mental or physical illness, essential badness or emotional damage from trauma or abusive parenting, and that people cannot – and should not – be treated to cure.”

So we are to believe that people who exploit the weaknesses of others are normal?  And those who want to be exploited, and who immerse themselves in alternate identities solely to do so because presumably the ones they have are dissatisfying to themselves, are also?  Is a mother who beats her child normal too?  Why should we believe that someone who wants to beat on another who represents a child to him or her is anything close to sane or is safe with real children?  It is bad enough that the psychiatric profession has determined that dealing in drugs is the solution to all our health problems. I suppose that it is also a national catharsis for our nation to have conducted 13 years of constant war around the globe, taking advantage of weak nations, destroying billions of dollars of infrastructure and hundreds of thousands of lives. It would seem that our nation’s leaders are all practicing a form of BDSM. And this we now consider normal.

In a review of the widely popular book trilogy which celebrates the practice, Fifty Shades of Grey, writers M. Catharine Evans and Ann Kane say that

“In a normal world, the author [E. L. James]would have been ostracized by literary critics for her lack of plot and her juvenile language.  But much worse than the poor writing are the disguised themes of pedophilia and child abuse.

“After a review of the language used in the book, and having done research on pedophiles, we agree.  We would be hard-pressed to claim that the trilogy is anything but a sick story of an adult 27-year-old male dominating through coercion, sex, and complete control a young lady claiming to be 21 years old but who acts and talks like a child.”

The book evolved out of an original fanfiction work based on Twilight. “In the original fanfiction version,” on the issue of Fifty Shades association with pedophilia, a commenter wrote,

“Christian/Edward was the long time child/teen victim of his mother’s friend who taught him BDSM, and due to his age (I think he started the relationship when he was 13/14 with her) was the victim in their pedophilic relationship.  Christian/Edward makes it clear he doesn’t view it as pedophilia, but then again, we also know he’s a diagnosed socio/psychopath. Christian/Edward poo-poos Ana/Bella’s cries that he was abused in this relationship, that his previous lover/abuser should be in jain, and the author pretty much gives the thumbs up to women of a certain age seducing young teen boys, because it helps them mature and gets them through their wild teen years with more discipline and focus.”

According to Wikipedia, the combined novels have sold over 35 million copies in the United States, and over 70 million copies worldwide, setting the record as the fastest selling paperback of all time.

In 2012, the author was added to Time magazine’s list of “The 100 Most Influential People in the World, named by Publishers Weekly as “Publishing Person of the Year., won the National Book Award in the UK for “Popular Fiction Book of the Year, and a National book Award for “Book of the Year.  E. L. James topped the Forbes list in August 2013 of the highest-earning authors with earnings of $95 million.

Whether the American Psychiatric Association thinks so or not, it behooves us to ask why anyone would find pleasure in hurting another human being. Why does it feel good to see someone else suffer?  And why is it that those who achieve the most material success in life those who are the most interested in doing so?  Why is that “erotic”?  What kind of disease does our nation suffer that we have come to believe that this is quite normal?  Why has this abuse been legalized in so many states?  And why do we have so many submissives in a society that promotes in tandem with it the concept of feminism, or the liberation of women?  And why is it that women themselves have been so taken with this incomprehensible aberration?  The majority of these people, I’ve read, appear to lead normal lives in other respects and raise families.  What kind of children are they raising, and what is this doing to the fabric of society?



Progressive and Pro-Family

Family1 copy

People are certainly going to wonder how I can combine the positions of being pro-child and pro-family with pro-choice. Pro-family organizations are usually conservative and anti-abortion. The truth is that I am very anti-abortion, because I have great respect for life and I don’t set artificial demarcation points at which a child becomes a child. I’ve come to realize that abortions in fact occur well after a child is born. I use that word loosely, meaning that mothers who don’t want children do great and irreparable harm to their children by simply not wanting them. I see mothers frequently who seem to have no love whatsoever for their children. They order them about like dogs. Get over here! Eat your breakfast! Where are you going? Shut up and sit up straight! I’m the boss here. I’ll whip your ass if you don’t do as I say. And they call that parenting. They have no sense or realization whatsoever that they have a fully conscious human being they are dealing with, with a fully developed need for dignity and respect and a sense of equality, and they believe that being a little dictator and keeping all that child’s rights forever in suspension will somehow produce a balanced and psychologically healthy full grown adult.

If you’re going to kill a child, the best time to do it is before it is born. It’s that simple. Don’t let that child grow up to be a monster because you didn’t care about it and had no sense of its deeper needs..You can provide all the toys in the world and give the child everything it wants, but if you take away its dignity, you might as well have had an abortion, because that’s one life you have already crushed.

Our society is sick enough as it is. There are large numbers of mothers, I believe, who don’t want the responsibility of nurturing and caring for a child. They want to get back to the cruise they were on before they got pregnant. They want to continue the social life and be the queen of the party like they were before. I’m not sure why they want children at all. Did they have children because it was simply a consequence of having unprotected sex? Did they want a little puppet to push around? Did they need something to beat on?

Child rearing is probably the most important responsibility anyone can have in life, and so many treat children like they are just chattel, animals that can be ordered about. I have a neighbor like that. I have yet to hear one word of sweetness come out of that woman’s mouth toward her children. If you’re that kind of person, and you find yourself pregnant, please, please get an abortion. Don’t clutter the world with more sickness and hate. If you’re going to have children, then be prepared to make sacrifices. Forget the extra job so that you can live in a nicer house. It’s not the house that makes the child. It’s the heart and soul that you build inside that child’s consciousness. Find a husband who will support you so that you can stay at home and give that child what it really needs. Support your husband psychologically so that he can grow in his career and have the confidence and strength to get that bigger house. Breast feed your child. Hold it close to you for as long as you can for as many years as you can. It’s the love and caring that will give that child its true strength.

Essay competition on Kashmir conflict



Essay competition on Kashmir conflict

World Kashmir Awareness (WKA) — a Kashmir advocacy group, based in the United States — is sponsoring an essay contest on the subject of Kashmir. The contest is open to all individuals across the globe. 

The contestants must focus on the following topic: 

Do Kashmiris have a right to Self-Determination?

Essay Competition Rules & Guidelines:

1. A panel of three judges will consider all submissions, regardless of the ideological inclinations of the writers, as long as their positions do in fact support the ideals and principles of peoples’ right to self-determination and democratic norms. 

2. The contestants should recommend potential peaceful solution to the Kashmir conflict.

3. Such potential solutions should include, but not be limited to, elements of conflict resolution, international mediation and negotiation, respect for international law and human dignity, religious pluralism and established democratic processes for the civil society. 

4. The contestants should clearly address the topic and complement their arguments with appropriate objective criteria. 

5. Opinions and recommendations must exclusively be those of the writers and not copied from others.     

6.  The top three essays will be published in the World Kashmir Awareness website and will also be sent for possible publication in news outlets. 

7. The length of the essay should be between 1,800 to 2,000 words.

8. The deadline for the online submission of the essay is midnight of Sunday, August 24, 2014

9. The following prizes will be awarded to the winners of the contest.

Category 1: Adults:  20 years and older:

Top three winners from this category will be awarded Rs. 20,000, 15,000 and 10,000, respectively for the first, second and the third place.

Category 2: Undergraduate:  Under 20 years:

Top three winners will be awarded Rs.15,000, 10,000 and 5,000, respectively for the first, second and the third place.

(If the winner resides outside the Subcontinent, s/he will be awarded equivalent amount in U.S. dollars).

10. All essays will become the property of the WKA.

11. Any enquiries about the essays should be directed to:

12. To know more about World Kashmir Awareness, please visit:

Racism or Truth: What are the Jews Doing in Ukraine?

Charges of racism were leveled against my last piece, Jewish Gangsters Responsible for Civil War in Eastern Ukraine.  In one case, a woman asked why Christian Gangsters weren’t identified as Christian also, implying that pointing out the fact that the gangster was Jewish was over the top.  Another commented, “WHAT A GREAT STEAMING PILE OF RACIST PROPAGANDA SHIT.”

Well, ok.  To identify the gangsters as Jewish was a question that I seriously deliberated, because the implication is clear.  What does his Jewishness have to do with his gangsterism?  

An article that appeared in the Jewish Chronicle March 27, 2014, raises several Jewish voices on the matter. The statements make clear that these are not men who just happen to be Jewish.  There has been a very conscious effort by the Jewish community to engage this dispute militarily as Jews with a specific Jewish interest in mind.  

Gennadiy Korban, a multimillionaire [$127 million] businessman and deputy head of Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine’s second largest city, “this week gathered national commanders to prepare a defensive plan, including how and where military resources should be deployed.”  According to Wikipedia, “Gennadiy Korban is a member of the Dnepropetrovsk Jewish community Board of Trustees, the patron of the Krivoy Rog Jewish community.  Korban strongly supports the revival and development of Jewish life in Krivoy Rog. He financed the construction of the kindergarten “Beit Alon Ganey Korban” and a sports complex for children.”

Korban told the Chronicle that Dnepropetyrovsk, home to the country’s largest and most influential Jewish community, would be a prime target for Russia.

The article points out that “members of the 50,000 strong Jewish community in Dnepropetrovsk have been in discussions over whether to form Jewish brigades within the force being organized by Mr. Korban or to sign up to the army individually.

“Dnepropetrovsk Chief Rabbi Shmuel Kaminezki said: ‘People are saying we must not let this situation be a replay of the Second World War. Then, Jews thought that the Germans had benign intentions because of their experiences of the First World War. On Simchat Torah in 1941, 11,500 Jews were marched to a park and shot dead.’”

The Chronicle reported that Igor Kolomoisky, the principle involved in making death threats alleged in my previous article, gave $25,million to the Ukrainian army’s southern command to pay for fuel for military vehicles and aircraft.  

,Gennadiy Bogolyubov, Kolomoisky’s partner in PrivatBank, the largest bank in Ukraine which, because of its lending power, wields enormous influence in Ukraine’s economic community signed a document “saying that he will personally take up arms against Russia. 

“Mr Korban, a major donor to the Ukrainian Jewish community, said he had little confidence that Ukraine would receive any external military assistance and stressed the need for all citizens to unite.

“’We are ready to fight. I invited all the heads of the military and emergency forces to join me to prepare a plan in case of invasion.’”

In my previous article, I pointed out also that Kolomoisky had committed his own paramilitary forces to the struggle.  In addition to a force being organized by Mr. Korban, the Chronicle implies that NATO forces are working closely with the heads of military command in Ukraine, which Korban oversees, so it’s clear that not just Jews but the Jewish community itself are running practically the entire military operation against Eastern Ukraine.  They are strategically in charge of it, they are financing it, committing their own troops to it, and engaging in acts of terrorism against innocent civilians. 

Jewish Gangsters Responsible for Civil War in Eastern Ukraine


Igor Kolomoisky, a presidential candidate and an oligarch who is said by Forbes to be the third richest man in Ukraine, has reportedly threatened the life of a former national presidential candidate and prominent spokesman for the Eastern Ukraine referendum alliance.  An audio recording of a call he made to Oleg Tsarov suddenly appeared on YouTube on May 14 in which Kolomoisky also threatens the lives of his family.

“And tomorrow first they find your relatives m***f*** and we will hang them just on the main square. M***f**.”

The source of the audio is unknown,. It suddenly appeared on YouTube on May 14. Tsarov has confirmed on his Facebook page with a link that such a conversation did take place. In addition he later posted that day that an attempt may have been made on his life when black uniformed men dressed as National Guard troops mistakenly attacked a neighbor’s house, setting it on fire and firing shots into the compound. The YouTube audio of the conversation with Kolomoisky has since been removed “as a violation of YouTube’s policy against spam, scams, and commercially deceptive content.” However, it is available on Rutube at

The audio is roughly translated as follows:

Kolomoisky = K:

Oleg Tsarov = T:

K:  Hi

T: Hello

K.  Where are you? Are you still there?

T:  Yes

K:  How are you?

T:  Fine

K:  There had happened one big trouble. One Jew from the Dnepropetrovs Jewish community died. (In Mariupol)

T:  What happened?

K:  One Jew died. From Dnepropetrovsk Jewish community. Right now I’m in synagogue.

T:  What was he doing there?

K:  Not important. They said now they (the Jewish) give a big money for your head.

T:  For my head?

K:  A million. For yours. Yes. And they said they will look everywhere. So i wanted to say – you better stay in Moskow and don’t come back.

T:  I wanted to tell you one thing. In Africa there is such a tribe…

K:  Tomorrow they will hunt your people here. (In Dnepropetrovsk)

T: … So this is such tribes.. there is such poison…

K:  I don’t fucking care what is there in Africa! Don’t tell me this bullshit! I tell you that now these Jews prayed before Shabbat, and they prayed for this guy, Mr. Shlemkevich, the Jew who was killed in Mariupol m***f**k…

T:.   So this….

K:   And they said that it s all the fault of Tsarev… And tomorrow first they find your relatives m***f*** and we will hang them just on the main square. M***f**.. I m saying also, say to Markov ( Ukrainian deputat) never return here. To Ukraine. Not for any conditions!

T:  Don’t call me anymore.

K: Don’t call you? That s it.

T:  Yes. Don’t call me anymore.

K:  Ok. Bye.

The audio is credible because Kolomoisky is known for his Gestapo-style habit of using “quasi-military forces” to enforce hostile takeovers of companies.  He reportedly sent a team of “hired rowdies armed with baseball bats, iron bars, gas and rubber bullet pistols and chainsaws” to forcibly take over a Kremenchuk steel plant in 2006, and has used “a mix of phony court orders (often involving corrupt judges and/or registrars) and strong-arm tactics” to replace directors on the boards of companies he purchases stakes in.

“Indeed, in the rough and tumble Ukrainian business world, the term ‘violent takeover’ takes on a much more literal meaning. Controversial billionaires like Igor Kolomoisky and Gennady Bogolyubov of the Privat Group, known colloquially in the Ukrainian business world as ‘The Raiders’, have perfected their own brand hostile takeovers. A minimum stake in a company is acquired by one of the many companies Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov control and then a mix of phony court orders (often involving corrupt judges and/or registrars) and strong-arm tactics are deployed to replace the existing members of the board of directors with men loyal to Privat. In the takeover of the Kremenchuk steel factory in 2006, Privat’s raid was literal, with Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov hiring an army of thugs to descend upon the plant with baseball bats, gas and rubber pistols, iron bars and chainsaws. Needless to say, Kremenchuk’s steel production was soon under Privat’s control.”
The Hill

According to a story in the Guardian, on April 17, he offered “a $10,000 bounty on for the capture of any Russian ‘saboteur’ and promised another half-million hryvnia (£27,000) to the national guardsmen who successfully repelled an attack by pro-Russian militia April 16, killing three.”

Tsarov posted the following on his Facebook page on May 14, along with an image of a scanned document:


Internet got one interesting scan of the document. This is a copy of the order by the SBU. The first Deputy Head of the SBU Krutov ordered subordinates to citizens of the Russian Federation.[ citizens of Russia] ,…… to select from among those who have no relatives in Ukraine, and make them “saboteurs”.

Tsarov has indicated that the Sluzhba Bezpeky Ukrayiny, or SBU,  the Security Service, Ukraine’s special purpose law enforcement agency, tasked with maintaining government security “in a sphere of counterintelligence activity and combatting terrorism” has ordered its agents to seize Russian citizens in Ukraine who are there alone without relatives, charge them with being “saboteurs,””falsify their testimony or knock them out.”  He believes that the order came from Turchinov and Yatsenyuk as well as the SBU.  Oleksandr Turchynov is the elected Speaker of the Ukrainian Parliament.  Arseniy Yatsenyuk is the current Prime Minister.

Kolomoiski is an energy tycoon who was appointed governor of the Dnipropetrovsk region in eastern Ukraine in March.  He has also offered rewards for handing in weapons belonging to insurgents: $1,000 for each machine gun turned in to the authorities, $1,500 for every heavy machine gun and $2,000 for a grenade launcher.

The threat allegedly made by Kolomoiski which he further alleged to have originated in the Jewish community was in connection with the killing of Bogdan Shlemkevich, a soldier from Ukraine’s National Guard on May 9 in Mariupol, southeastern Ukraine. He was shot in clashes between anti-government protesters and soldiers sent by Kiev in an ‘antiterrorist’ operation in eastern Ukraine. This is a video of what happened that day, which shows unarmed protesters being shot in the street.

In addition, another audio surfaced on YouTube which characterizes  conversations between the President of the Suppliers of the Customs Union Oleg Noginskogo and someone named Jana Borisovich. That conversation confirmed that Mr. Kolomoysky announced the award of $ 1 million to anyone who would kill Oleg Tsarov.  The conversation also intimates that the massacre in Odessa was financed by Kolomoisky.

“Besides, it was he [Kolomoisky] who hired the guys in the Odessa [massacre]… the situation went out of control. Their task was to beat them [anti-government protesters] so they would be taken to hospital and to destroy the camp [on Kulikovo Pole Square] completely,” RT

“Ten days before the tragedy a secret meeting was held in Kiev, chaired by the incumbent president Olexander Turchinov, to prepare a special operation in Odessa. Present were minister of internal affairs Arsen Avakov, the head of the Ukrainian Security Service Valentin Nalivaychenko, and the secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Andriy Parubiy. Ukrainian oligarch Ihor Kolomoiskiy, the Kiev-appointed head of regional administration of the Dnepropetrovsk region, was consulted in regard to the operation.

“During that meeting Arsen Avakov has reportedly came up with the idea of using football hooligans, known as “ultras,” in the operation. Ever since his time as the head of the Kharkov regional administration he has worked closely with the fans leaders, whom he continued to sponsor even from his new home in Italy.

“Kolomoisky temporarily delivered his private “Dnieper-1” Battalion under the command of law-enforcement officials in Odessa and also authorized a cash payment of $5,000 for “each pro-Russian separatist” killed during the special operation.” Information Clearing House

Kolomoisky, 49, heads Ukraine’s PrivatBank and is president of the country’s Jewish community., the European Jewish Union.  The EJU was founded last spring by Igor Kolomoisky and Vadim Rabinovich, two Ukrainian oligarchs who in recent years have invested millions of dollars in Jewish philanthropic activity.

Rabinovich, who has made a fortune in the natural gas business, and like Kolomoisky, holds dual Israeli and Ukrainian citizenships  (although dual citizenships are not recognized in Ukraine), was expelled from Ukraine for four years in June 1999 after being accused of links to organized crime or contract killings, illegal shipments of heavy weapons to Yugoslavia, and other corruption. His U.S. visa in 1995 was revoked and he was placed him on the list of undesirable foreigners after the CIA accused him of illegal arms trading and money laundering.

Kolomoiski’s motives are in plain site.  The KyivPost reported on December 7, 2010 that “Ukraine’s business tycoon and president of the European Jewish Council Ihor Kolomoisky said that the desire to unite the Jewish communities of Europe can become a driving force that will facilitate Ukraine’s entry into the European Union. “As for the Ukrainian Jewry and Ukraine itself, which in fact has always been a part of the European family, it is possible that it will be the Ukrainian Jewry that will become the driving force that will lead Ukraine into the European Community,” he said in an interview with the Stolichnye Novosti Newspaper published on Monday. Stolichnye Novosti is owned by Rabinovich.

“I see my mission in helping the Jewish communities, which are in every European country. There are goals and objectives that need to be implemented over the next five years. Most of them (the countries which have Jewish communities) are members of the European Union and Ukraine, unfortunately, is not a member yet. As a person occupying the post of the leader, the chairman of the Jewish communities of Europe, I believe that the Jewry of Europe should become a common family, like the nation of the united Europe,” Kolomoisky said. reported on February 15, 2012, “A recent meeting between American Jewry’s primary umbrella group for Israel and other foreign affairs, and a controversial new European group has sparked heated exchanges among European and American Jewish leaders.

“In the days leading up to the meeting, communal officials on both continents warned the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations against its plans for an official exchange involving the American umbrella group and the European Jewish Union.

“Some American Jewish officials are wary, in particular, of the EJU’s leadership, which includes a Ukrainian oligarch with whom American government officials will not meet because of questions regarding his business activities. Meanwhile, the group is viewed by other European communities as seeking to take over their representation of organized European Jewry.

“The Presidents Conference, however, did not change its plans and was hosted for part of its visit to Europe by the EJU. Nevertheless, Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Presidents Conference, denied to the Forward that any such meeting had ever been scheduled. But the Forward has obtained documents that detailed the group’s plans for a visit to Brussels by members of the Presidents Conference in coordination with the EJU. Among other things, the EJU offered to help enlist donors to sponsor events scheduled for the visit and to cover the Presidents Conference’s flight to Tel Aviv from Brussels in an EJU-chartered plane. Indeed, the EJU’s website touts the Presidents Conference’s visit at the top of its home page.”

According to the World Jewish Congress, The Jews of Ukraine constitute the third largest Jewish community in Europe and the fifth largest in the world. Jews are mainly concentrated in Kyiv(110,000), Dnepropetrovsk (60,000), Kharkov (45,000), and Odessa

It is obvious, aside from his dubious standing in the European Jewish community, that Kolomoisky believes himself to be the spokesperson for the Jews of Ukraine, and that has also been challenged.

Masked men attempted to assassinate Jewish Ukrainian business tycoon Vadim Rabinovich near his offices in Kiev, Yedioth Ahronoth learned Monday [March 4, 2013]. The assassination attempt was unsuccessful.

Rabinovich, 59, left the parking lot of his office building around 3:30 pm when suddenly an incendiary device was thrown at his car from the direction of a nearby empty house. A large explosion was heard in the area and windows in nearby buildings shattered. YNET News.

Rabinovich is the founder of the Jewish cable news channel JN1, co-chairman of the European Jewish Parliament and president of the All-Ukrainian Jewish Congress.  He was asked by the Jerusalem Post about a possible anti-Semitic motive, and he replied that he “no longer has any businesses in the Ukraine” except for “Jewish” endeavors and “Jewish mass media,” implying a connection to these matters.

What is of obvious concern is that the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations are listening to the EJU and are doing so behind the backs of their supporters and constituents, the real Jewish community.

‘Global partnership for sustainable development in the context of the post-2015 development agenda’




Dr. Ghulam-Nabi Fai
Secretary General

World Kashmir Awareness

May 14, 2014

I am honored by the opportunity to share my views with such an esteemed audience who are participating in the ‘United Nations Conference on Trade and Development’ at UN headquarters in New York. The issue of global sustainable development is the issue of the twenty-first century. Never before have so many suffered amidst liberty and luxury for the few. The wealth of single individuals exceeds the wealth of many nations. In highly developed countries, the number of persons living past 80 years is soaring. In deprived and convulsed countries, the average longevity is but half that age. While citizens of some African and Asian countries are starving, the rich countries are beset with obesity. Discrepancies of these types are morally disturbing. The United Nations is ideally suited to ending these shocking inequalities because it hosts all the nations of the world and endows each with identical voting power in the General Assembly. The poorest and the weakest are equal to the richest and the strongest.

(1).       The most urgent approach to promoting global partnership for sustainable development is the ending of warfare. War, whether intramural or international, wreaks havoc on the elements necessary for health, housing, education, employment, the rule of law, the environment, and happiness generally.

i. War is enormously expensive. It diverts resources from schools, hospitals, roads, and telecommunications to AK-47s, Kalashnikovs, missiles, bombs, and artillery shells. Moreover, wars regularly entail the use of child soldiers, for example, in Sierra Leone, Angola, Sri Lanka, and Sudan. The children are deprived of educational opportunities. Their skills in killing are non-transferable to a civilian economy. Many are maimed and become permanently disabled from productive employment. Others become emotionally and psychologically disturbed, an ailment that routinely finds expression in criminal or sister anti-social behavior. By killing or deracinating the flower of youth, war keeps a country immersed in misery and underdevelopment;

ii. War also arrests economic development. Capital flight is staggering. Foreign investment withers. Infrastructure is destroyed. Lawlessness hikes the risks of any business enterprise. The consequence is widespread poverty;

iii. War also fosters disease and physical ailments. Individuals are more susceptible to crippling bacterial and viral illnesses when their housing and food is shortchanged. Further, war destroys hospitals and handicaps the supply of medicine. Medical workers frequently shy from dangerous conditions. And refugee camps are notorious for insalubrious quarters;

iv. War also creates a culture antithetical to democracy and the rule of law. It teaches that disputes should be resolved by the bullet in lieu of the ballot box. It engenders suspicion and distrust that confound democratic politics resting on a confidence that elections will be free, fair, and accurate;

v. I admit that denunciation of warfare is easier than prevention. The Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928 outlawed aggressive war. But wars of aggression soon followed in Manchuria and Ethiopia. But if mankind can assemble knowledge to send men to the moon and Land Rovers to Mars, the knowledge necessary to end wars cannot be far behind. As is said in the Song of Solomon, “They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.”

Accordingly, the United Nations should summon all Nobel Peace Prize winners to devise principles of international law and conduct that will abolish the scourge of war from the face of the planet. These exceptionally gifted individuals can be trusted to succeed by standing on the shoulders of other great men and women who have crusaded for the cause of universal peace, justice, and non-violence. The goal may be ambitious. But as Robert Browning versified, “Ah, but a man’s reach should exceed his grasp, or what’s a heaven for?”

(2).      The second urgent global sustainable development objective should be universal literacy and education. As Socrates explained, the unexamined life is not worth living. Or as philosopher Sam Johnson amplified, there is the same difference between the learned and unlearned as between the living and the dead. These observations are made not to deride or degrade the uneducated, but to underscore the criticality of education to making life morally meaningful and fulfilling between ashes to ashes and dust-to-dust.

i.          Education is also human capital that fuels economic growth.

A worker’s productivity and compensation general rise commensurate with educational achievement. In addition, education correlates with a worker’s ability to shift jobs and master new skills in an ever-changing global economy. Education also is a central ingredient to self-government and freedom. As United States President Thomas Jefferson lectured, “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be;”

ii.         Mean-spirited and wicked politicians regularly exploit ill-educated voters to pursue divisive racial, ethnic, or religious agendas. That explains why free and compulsory public school education is a feature of every flourishing democracy;

iii.        The United Nations should thus develop educational yardsticks that a nation must satisfy to receive economic or military aid from third parties, including the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The yardsticks should be incorporated in a treaty to be ratified by all United Nations members. Moreover, every United Nations official and employee should be required to donate 0.5% of his or her salary to sponsor the education of a child in poverty. A civilization lives by symbols, and what could be more inspiring than United Nations personnel sacrificing on behalf of underprivileged children;

iv.        The idea of educational yardsticks with teeth creates an agonizing moral dilemma. Suppose a misgoverned nation falls short. Economic aid ends, but the suffering is felt by the common citizen, not the typically coddled rulers. That juxtaposition seems unjust and immoral at first glance. But think of the consequences of continuing aid to a brutal government, either directly or through international or private indigenous organizations. The aid relieves misery, and dulls the popular incentive to revolt and to install a more enlightened regime that would eagerly educate the nation’s citizens. Future generations would forever inherit an uneducated nation and despotic government. Morality in public life should be the greatest good for the greatest number. And to decline sanctions on a living generation despite the greater wretchedness visited on posterity would seem to fail that test.

(3).     Third on the global sustainable development agenda should be the elimination of poverty and the securing for every man, woman, and child a right to flourishing health, a clean environment, comfortable housing, and nutritious food. The goal is not a choice but a moral obligation. A preferred position for the poor is the North Star of all religions. Thus, rich countries should transfer much of their riches to poor countries.

i.          The rich should cancel debts;

ii.         They should provide at least 1 percent of gross domestic product for international humanitarian assistance;

iii.        They should eliminate all tariffs, quotas, or other trade restrictions on imports from impoverished nations;

iv.        They should grant royalty free licenses on intellectual property, such as patents or copyrights;

v.         They should provide tax credits for donations to poverty-stricken nations;

vi.        But poor nations must undertake reciprocal actions;

vii.       They should embrace free enterprise and privatization;

viii.      They should fiercely punish public corruption;

ix.        They should embrace low tax schedules and strict spending limitations;

X.        They should celebrate the rule of law and enshrine independent and

impartial judicial systems;

xi.        They should entertain the employment of private customs collectors to thwart a prevalent source of corruption and anti-competitive behavior;

xii.       And they should permit the free importation and exportation of capital and labor to fuel an economic takeoff;

xiii.      There is no moral excuse for regimes in poor nations to forfeit the rich self-help opportunities for economic growth. As Hong Kong, Singapore, and Japan teach, economic prosperity turns more on human capital and the rule of law than on the flukes of natural resources. Think of some oil rich nations mired in misery and destitution.

(4).     A fourth global sustainable development should be the eradication of  AIDS. It has been characterized by no less an authority as the United States CentralIntelligence Agency as a national security priority. And AIDS is a question of virtual survival for some nations. In Africa, for instance, the incidence of AIDs or HIV infection are staggering.

i.          The ramifications of the AIDS crisis are enormous. It creates orphans with the attendant difficulties of overcoming the many economic, mental, and physical handicaps of orphanage. It kills productive workers. It spikes medical costs. It occasions intra-family torment and tragedy;

ii.         The United Nations through the World Health Organization (WHO) has a key role to play in curing or mitigating AIDS. First, an international convention should be established that would prohibit the sale of drugs to treat the disease for a profit. No one should profit because of a hideous disease. It would be like profiting by arms sales to a nation engaged in aggressive war. And the regulation of human organs is instructive. In the United States and many other countries, the sale of organs is a felony even when indispensable to saving a life. It is thought immorality would blight the profiting off another’s misery or plight. Further, if organs were sold, the rich would outbid the poor and live longer and more pleasantly. That shocks the conscience. Similarly, drugs to treat AIDS will be dominated by the wealthy if the price is not fixed and depressed to a level affordable by the penurious. How can persons be equal if they do not enjoy equal access to life-saving drugs;?

iii.        The WHO should also sponsor research seeking a cure or vaccine for AIDS. It should be endowed with power to levy a tax on every medical provider in the world to create a pool of research funds. The tax should be a credit under national income tax laws. All research results should be transparent. No patent protection should be permitted. And all new discoveries should be provided free to all persons suffering from AIDS. A goal should be set by the year 2020 to make AIDS as rare as smallpox.

(5).      Next on the list of global sustainable development priorities should be the ending of all racial, ethnic, or class hatreds or enmities. Think of the horrifying quantity of violence in the world whose fundamental cause can be traced back to such social divisions. It infects every country on the planet. And if even one person suffers from invidious discrimination, then all are threatened and civilization has been tarnished. The United Nations Human Rights Council is ideally suited to fashion a program to achieve the desired result. It can assemble the best thinkers and models to draft laws and educational programs that will deter and prevent the abomination of sharp social divisions.

(6).     The attainment of equality for women is another pressing yardstick of global sustainable development. Experience and intuition both demonstrate that women are as intelligent as men. They are as entrepreneurial and disciplined. They contribute every bit as much to economic growth and social cohesion as men. It is thus imperative that women receive the same legal rights and social dignity as men if global sustainable  development is to advance.

i. The United Nations should spur this goal by sponsoring a code of conduct for all member nations. Persistent and egregious violations should occasion a member nation’s exclusion or expulsion from the General Assembly;

ii. Females should receive the same educational, employment, business, and professional opportunities as men. They should be equally eligible to serve in public office or to seek elective office. Women should enjoy the same social rights as men, including the right to drive a vehicle.

(7).    Trafficking in women or children to provide sexually decadent pleasures for the rich and squalid also should rank high on the agenda of global sustainable development. Degradation as commercial sex objects is morally repulsive. The United Nations must do something to end the vile practice. It scars women and children both physically and emotionally. It enriches the wretched and rewards the worst lusts.

i. The United Nations should urge all nations to punish such trafficking with unforgiving criminal penalties. It should demand that every country make illegal the travel abroad by any of its citizens with the purpose of patronizing traffickers in women and children;

ii. It should appoint a commission to consider making the trafficking and patronizing crimes under international law subject to trial and punishment in any jurisdiction. It seems morally indistinguishable from the war crime of rape.

8.         Similarly repugnant is trafficking in children for slave labor. The parental sellers, the buyers, and the users of child slave labor should be held accountable as criminals. Any nation found complicit or tolerant of the criminality should forfeit economic and trade benefits. And every nation must ban imports or exports of any goods produced either directly or indirectly with bonded children as workers. Children are the future of mankind. They cannot be permitted to groan, suffer, and wither to satisfy the greed and lust for pleasure of the wicked.

(9).   Global sustainable development also requires universal access to the Internet, a technological marvel that brings the excitement of knowledge and the joys of instant communication to every user. The United Nations should play a key role in the universal access quest.

i.          Every member nation with per capita gross domestic product exceeding $10,000 should be taxed to support a universal access fund. That fund would be employed to purchase broadband service for remote communities in impoverished nations;

ii.         Recipient nations would not be permitted to censor Internet websites, except for pornography or other criminality. And no user charges would be permitted;

iii,        Internet communications can dissolve ancient enmities and overcome mutual distrust. Ignorance between races, ethnic groups, or religions breeds fear and prejudice. When two human beings communicate and share ideas, apprehensions recede and stereotypes die. They see each other as equals, with equal rights, equal aspirations, and equal dignity;

Iv,        The spread of Internet access thus may prove to be instrumental to promoting reconciliation and peace among long-estranged peoples.

(10).      A clean environment is also essential to global sustainable development. Pollution is more than twice cursed.

i. It damages crops;

ii. It kills lakes and rivers;

iii. It occasions disease and illness through water and air, for example, lead poisoning or cholera;

iv. It may spike the risk of cancer by depleting the ozone layer;

v. And it may even cause the submersion of entire island nations through global warming, a variation on the biblical flood.;

vi. The poor are invariably the worst affected by environmental pollution. They are least able to afford medical treatment. They are least able to move or change their occupation. They are least able to pay for the costs of self-protective measures. A clean environment, therefore, is a key element of community fairness and justice;

vii. The United Nations should thus consider drafting a convention on global pollution. The idea would be to make nations pay in damages for the injuries caused to the people of other nations by pollutants which cross international boundaries. The recipient nations would be obligated to distribute the damages to injured citizens. Generally speaking, such a system of reciprocal compensation should operate to the betterment of the poorest nations at the expense of the rich. The industrialization and development of the latter have characteristically been associated with high emissions of pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide or carbon dioxide. Poor nations consume less, make less, and thus pollute less than their rich counterparts. They seldom are responsible for pollutants that stretch across international boundaries.

(11).       Let me with great humility offer a few closing observations about the entire global sustainable development enterprise. It is characteristic that national or international organizations employ quantitative benchmarks to measure success in meeting enumerated objectives. For instance, a longstanding objective has been for each nation to contribute a specified percentage of its gross domestic product for humanitarian or foreign aid. Companion quantitative benchmarks have been set for literacy, vaccinations, annual income, longevity, smoking, etc.

(12).      There is nothing inherently mischievous about these development yardsticks. But they should never distract from our recognition that the highest in sustainable development consists of non-quantifiable characteristics. These would include acts of charity, humility, courage, benevolence, magnanimity, self-restraint, and non-vindictiveness. It would seem to me to turn logic and morality on their heads to award higher sustainable development acclaim to a nation whose citizens were universally economically prosperous, literate, healthy, long-lived, non-polluting, but also mean-spirited, selfish, and egotistical than to a nation whose citizens were impoverished, plagued by disease, but were generous in time, effusive in hospitality, austere in habits, and selfless for the community.

During our chapters between ashes to ashes and dust to dust, let each of us live and comport ourselves so that our tombstones will inspire and uplift for the ages.

Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai is the Executive Director of the Washington based Kashmiri American Council /Kashmir Center.  Dr. Fai is the founding chairman of the California-based World Peace Forum. He is the Chairman of the International Institute of Kashmir Studies. He is also the Chairman of the Kashmiri American Foundation & the London-based Justice Foundation. Dr. Fai is also the Member of the Board of Director of Istanbul-based the Union of the NGOs of the Islamic World.

Dr. Fai holds a Ph.D. in mass communications from Temple University, Pennsylvania, and an M.A. from the Aligarh University in India.

Preliminary Discussion on A Survey on Male Attitudes About Relationships

I posted the following comment on my Facebook page on May 13, 2014:

”I’m going to create a survey on which will attempt to gain an insight into male attitudes toward relationships. Conversations with female friends indicate that there seems to be a disconnect between what women expect in a relationship and what men are willing to give. Attitudes toward gender roles seem to be changing in modern society, and old traditions such as holding a door open for a woman or taking the trash out being the man’s job have become issues that make or break a marriage or partnership. Who cooks? Should both work? Should women stay home and take care of the baby, despite a potential loss of a second income? If both are working, who cleans the house? Who washes the dishes? How much should a man contribute to the home workload? If only the man works, how much of his income above and beyond household expenses does the wife deserve for the workload she bears at home?

“Anyone can comment, but I’m looking for some comments from women especially on the type of questions that should be asked, because it is from women that I hear the most complaints.”

What follows is a day-long exchange of views on the subject, as well as an occasional digression.  The discussion is interesting because it identifies some diverse attitudes about the subject and the challenge ahead in attempting to frame the proper questions. 


Redhwan Ahmed Al-Naggar Can I join you in this study and collect data from Malaysia

Yesterday at 12:37am · Unlike · 2


Paul Barrow Can you explain how you would “join”?

Yesterday at 12:39am · Like


Redhwan Ahmed Al-Naggar I will share the links to all university students and university staff in Malaysia
And we can publish this data in international journal for the people to know what is the outcome of this study

Yesterday at 12:42am · Like · 1


Paul Barrow Sounds very interesting. I’ll be happy to cooperate any way that I can.

Yesterday at 12:45am · Like


Redhwan Ahmed Al-Naggar Thanks and we keep in touch

Yesterday at 12:46am · Unlike · 1


Paul Barrow I have some further questions. I believe that men, and many women too, fall down as parents, primarily out of ignorance of a child’s needs, but also because we live in an all-about-me world in which the pursuit of power (money) and pleasure (watching NFL games, sex, getting high) takes precedence over everything else, including the wife’s needs. So what kinds of questions should be asked to bring focus to this problem?

Yesterday at 7:26am · Like


Linda Calder Wow, deep stuff, Paul Barrow! We (women) live in a misogynist society that permeates every aspect of male/female relationships. The entire structure wound have to be completely overhauled. Is it possible to iron these issues out one on one within the confines of individual relationships? Many of us are attempting it. The task is monumental and an ongoing evolution. I would like to contribute more to your project, perhaps as a note here.

Yesterday at 7:29am · Like · 2


Paul Barrow I definitely agree with you, and I also think that the problem goes much deeper. What is a misogynist? A person who dislikes, despises, or is strongly prejudiced against women. It’s a chicken-egg problem in determining which comes first, because I think that women hate or are prejudiced against men equally as much. They feed on each other’s hatred for their own. If I don’t like you, it’s going to become obvious, and you’re not going to like me because of it.

Yesterday at 7:35am · Like


William Harper You know what, Mr. Barrow. I met your son at MTSU years ago, and I have not seen or talked to him in a long time. I am grateful, however, very grateful to have met him and become your Facebook friend. You are DA MAN!

Yesterday at 7:37am · Unlike · 1


Linda Calder Paul, that is a bit like saying black people don’t like whites because they don’t like them. Hatred/contempt/whore-Madonna prejudice came FIRST, just as mistreatment of other minorities did. Women’s behavior towards men, just as other minorities toward their oppressors, is REACTIONARY.

Yesterday at 7:42am · Edited · Unlike · 5


Paul Barrow Wow! That’s immensely kind of you to say that, William . My son has moved to Denver and is into his music. He just texted me a link last night to his latest song.

Yesterday at 7:42am · Like


Linda Calder SISTERS, good morning! Can I get a witness???

Yesterday at 7:43am · Unlike · 4


Paul Barrow I completely agree with you, Linda. I was going to comment further when William got my attention.

Yesterday at 7:44am · Like · 2


Paul Barrow However, the problem is bigger than that, and that’s why I also say that it is self perpetuating.

Yesterday at 7:45am · Like · 1


Paul Barrow Misogyny has become an institution, through cultural norms, and as a consequence, hatred for men has also.

Yesterday at 7:48am · Like


Linda Calder Yes, consequence due to years of oppressing women. BUT, I know many men who are aware of the problem and are taking steps to be part of the solution.

Yesterday at 7:52am · Unlike · 1


Paul Barrow More than 50% of moms are single moms. The dads aren’t there. We can go into that, but the point is that moms who raise children without dads are going to explain to their children why there’s no dad in the rudest terms, and engender hatred in them for men in general, because the problems men have are indeed very generalized and permeate society.

Yesterday at 7:52am · Like · 1


Linda Calder I raised both of my sons alone and did my best to engender respect for their father because I knew that would be best for THEM despite any personal feelings. Be careful of making generalizations, Paul.

Yesterday at 7:56am · Unlike · 5


Linda Ballard Huge can of worms in this day and age when genders and rolls are skewed 

Yesterday at 7:57am · Unlike · 2


Paul Barrow I suspect you are in a minority, Linda, but that can also be one of the issues addressed through questions.

Yesterday at 7:57am · Like


Paul Barrow I think you raise a good question, Linda. I really wonder if they are skewed or just withdrawn, because the loudest voice in the room is skewing them. So many of the conservative traditions respected in relationships often reveal themselves when you dig past the surface of a lot of social theatre.

Yesterday at 8:03am · Like


Linda Calder Which Linda is in a minority, Paul?

Yesterday at 8:09am · Like


Paul Barrow You, Linda Calder. Sorry, I’m getting confused too.

Yesterday at 8:10am · Like


Linda Calder I HIGHLY DOUBT promoting respect for fathers as a single mother makes me a minority!
Good luck with your research.

Yesterday at 8:12am · Like · 2


Paul Barrow I appreciate your opinion, Linda Calder. That’s right to the point of all this. Don’t walk away. Surprise me. Show me the truth.

Yesterday at 8:15am · Like


Paul Barrow In fact, Linda Calder, I would suggest that if you believe that most men are misogynistic, full of ” Hatred/contempt/whore-Madonna prejudice” , you’ve already proven my point. Haven’t you shared that with your children? Or am I mistaken in thinking that this is a generalization you do make about men?

Yesterday at 8:24am · Like


HEidi PEterson Don’t forget to mention the lack of ( affordable )housing forces woman and families to live accept what ever conditions the one who houses them puts them in… meaning men don’t have to commit when they have woman doing everything they would get from marriage already. Poor families are places in a poor position of bargaining power and although the society knows the dangers they don’t provide housing for most families, in times of need which are then passed around and subject to possible abuse.

Yesterday at 8:32am · Edited · Unlike · 3


Linda Calder Paul, I said our society subscribes to that attitude. Absolutely. I don’t hate men, I hate the system that promotes such nonsense. My children are both male and very feminist. As a man, you were born into a system of oppressors. It is possible to override this belief system, but surely difficult.
You have crossed a boundary with me by commenting on what I have or have not taught my children. I am withdrawing from this conversation. Choose to see that as a victory if you so desire.

Yesterday at 8:34am · Edited · Unlike · 2


Paul Barrow Well, I apologize for offending you. I was making points in the broadest terms about single moms, and I did generalize. Nothing was intended to target you. I think that explaining to me that you differ in your approach was good, and I appreciate that. This is a difficult subject, obviously, and I’m sorry if personal feelings get entangled.

Yesterday at 8:40am · Like


Paul Barrow Yes, HEidi PEterson, economic conditions contribute enormously to this problem. I think the job market has become almost schizophrenic between general labor jobs and skilled and professional jobs. It’s either $10 bucks an hour or $100 bucks an hour, or better. Everything else in between has been shipped overseas.

Yesterday at 8:47am · Like


Marcia Everett I bet you would be surprised to find out that MOST women DO NOT put the father down when he is out of the picture. That he has a way of putting himself down all by himself. Why don’t you just ask the men what they like or what they expect to happen in order for them to be being considered treated fairly. And then tell them SO DO WE.

Yesterday at 8:49am · Unlike · 3


Marcia Everett This is a similar conversation that I had as a non-believer. Is my stating that Belief causes a danger to my life, the same as attacking believers? Stating that misogyny exists does not mean there is hatred toward men. Also our consumer culture has affected us all negatively. We look at each other as objects to be bought and sold, rather than as living things to be experienced. And while I just said that oh so intellectually, I too am infected.

Yesterday at 9:00am · Like · 1


Paul Barrow Marcia Everett, I’m interested in hearing more. Its possible that I’m making an unfair assumption. But when we are told that male oppression and misogyny are so prevalent, the logical conclusion is that this has contributed greatly toward divorce and single motherhood. Frankly, I think that the war between the sexes is highly exaggerated, when you get down to the true feelings people have. The war is in some degree a facade,

Yesterday at 9:00am · Like


Marcia Everett I think the war is about being heard. Everyone’s story is different, yet the same. The hardest part is being able to tell your story without someone getting defensive. It is very hard for people to hear I’ve been doing XYZ to you and I didn’t know it, didn’t want to know it, and now that I do know it I don’t want to fix it because that takes effort.

Yesterday at 9:05am · Unlike · 1


Paul Barrow

Yesterday at 9:06am · Like


Marcia Everett I’m particularly speaking this way because I’m having three different issues at once. I am having this male female debate, I’m having a Christian Atheist debate, and I’m having a Monogamy, Polygamy debate and I listen in on a transgender, cis (which I forgot the meaning of again) debate.

Yesterday at 9:08am · Unlike · 1


Paul Barrow You’ve really hit the nail on the head, Janet Ivey-Duensing. It’s a level of maturity, a willingness to contribute to the success of a relationship and knowing that it takes effort.

Yesterday at 9:11am · Like


Marcia Everett We’ve come a long way baby. At least many of us speak up when we don’t like how we’re being treated. The next wave of people speaking up are the transgendered, the polygamist and the atheists, and in this country it will be the atheist having the hardest time finding a friend. Too many people feel that if they don’t agree with something, then that is how the law should be written (drawing back on this conversation think about the women’s suffrage movement and era) It’s very much an issue of HEARING, how you hear criticism (sometimes it doesn’t always come out well)

Yesterday at 9:15am · Unlike · 1


Marcia Everett BTW I would like to do a survey monkey on Guns. da da da daaaaa.

Yesterday at 9:16am · Unlike · 1


Paul Barrow Janet Ivey-Duensing‘s comment has disappeared. I hope that doesn’t mean second thoughts. Janet, what happened?

Yesterday at 9:20am · Like


Paul Barrow There are a lot of surveys that need to be done, for sure, Marcia. If we had direct democracy, we’d have a much truer picture of real politics, but we might not like it either.

Yesterday at 9:22am · Like


Bunny Munene I think there are a lot of relevant scholarly studies on this subject that you should read before launching into a survey. And I am wondering why the interest in the subject. Usually adults learn through dilemma and stress so I am thinking it’s a personal problem behind this. and if the tenor of this thread is any indication of your knowledge of women you have a long way to go Paul. 

Yesterday at 9:41am · Unlike · 4


Paul Barrow Well, thanks for your observation, Bunny Munene. Actually, the issue was raised through a friend who has issues. As to my knowledge of women, I welcome your enlightening me. Actually I have been very disturbed by the attitudes I see in men toward women and have just observed a conversation on another page with a man who wouldn’t give a vagina a job, because that’s all women are.

Yesterday at 9:48am · Like · 1


Paul Barrow And i think it’s unfortunate that the only way we can learn in our society is through dilemma and stress, Bunny Munene. That’s a breakdown in our culture, because we lack processes and methods of evolving maturity in constructive ways. Diversity of values is great in many respects, but it has a huge toll as well.

Yesterday at 9:52am · Like · 1

Nalidy Nido I am talking from Gaza/ Palestine. at our society before few years women were imposed to bear all the workload at her house. even before marriage. a wife or daughter used to be imposed on serving. nowadays for some fathers noticed that females are more willing to get any occupation or job they (the parents ) began sending their daughters to universities then after graduation the females are expected to get any good occupation (at unrwa or the government institutions). those fathers who choosed to send their daughters to uni after they (daughters) get the job they are prevented to marry and they are sent (the very fast majority) only to help their fathers in earning money beside helping their moms at home. ! this was happening till the previous 2/3 years. now what’s happening is that fathers allow their daughters to get married but they refuse for their sons to marry but a female that have an occupation. in gaza as arabs males chooses the girls who suits them and fathers only decide wether to accept the proposal or not. fore always you will hear from any male ” I need a woman who have an occupation” and the women who dont have marry with a huge difficulty. women who you may find too ugly recieve much more proposals than a beauty queen that doesn’t work. femals at gaza after marriage work as servants at homes. nanny for their babies.(note that females don’t have the right to negotiate about the number of children she has to give birth too.. males sometimes marry the second wife in order to have more children if their wifes fall sick or became tired. females go to work and imposed to give their wages or any money they earn for their husbands. )

Yesterday at 9:56am · Unlike · 1


Nalidy Nido  listen islam is the opposite of what’s happening. in the Islamic religion women are allowed to learn to work but not imposed to serve or even to take care of children. males who are imposed to bring food and clotbes for the wife and to give her some money to spend on what she likes. marrying a second wife isonly allowed for males whom their wife cant make love for. healthy reasons.

Yesterday at 10:03am · Unlike · 1


Paul Gottschalk Men, as a group, are no better, no worse, not even DIFFERENT when it comes to the things that make Us human, when compared with women. Yes, we have different genitalia, and isn’t that fun – but ultimately unimportant.
And neither men nor women are more nor less responsible for problems in relationships with other people – independent of which gender they’re having a relationship with.

Yesterday at 10:14am · Edited · Unlike · 1

Bunny Munene I didn’t say dilemma and stress is the “only” way Paul but it is an established fact that when you are fostering critical analysis in adults the use of dilemma and stress is a natural function. For example if you had a heart attack or someone you know has cancer, you will search out information about that subject because it directly affects you. A “teachable moment” is what most educators look for to garner interest in a subject and expand it. When it comes to the dynamics of interpersonal relationships It is truly a man’s world and for a woman to navigate through it she has to learn how men think but men usually do not have to do that. Often people do not know the dynamics of their relationships or what cultural or religious norms they are built on and that poses a another problem in itself.

Yesterday at 10:35am · Unlike · 3


Nalidy Nido you know for me I find mingling the expected social role is the best. both should share every thing . I trust this way of living . with finding out a logic financial relationship that makes both males and females satisfied.

Yesterday at 10:39am · Unlike · 2

  • Paul Barrow I agree, Bunny, that it’s a patriarchy in the larger society as a whole, but when it comes to interpersonal relationships, this is very often not the case. A lot of women rule the household, and its a negotiated tradeoff in more successful relationships because men realize that they have the upper hand in the workplace. However, women have the bully horn right now on that subject, and they have men backing into a corner, at least psychologically, so the power of patriarchy is reduced proportionately. But I don’t agree that men don’t have to learn how women think. The divorce rate and the single mom situation tells us that there are a lot of men out there who are crying in their beer because they don’t have the productive meaningful relationship that they like, simply don’t understand women and wish that they did. I hear it.

    Yesterday at 10:47am · Like

  • Paul Barrow That’s what Janet Ivey-Duensing said in so many words earlier,Nalidy Nido. If either one in the relationship doesn’t carry his or her load and give willingly, even though it might seem like more than the other gives, then it becomes this “why don’t you get off your ass and do something, you bum. Why do I have to do everything?” and the relationship is on the rocks. We must give because that engenders love, and love begats (I like that Biblical word) a desire to give back. If everything has to be negotiated, then you might as well talk about an employment contract, how much your service is worth in dollars and cents, and forget the rest.


Paul Gottschalk To even begin to try to solve the problem by men “trying to understand how women think” is as wrong at its core as White people “trying to understand how Black people think.”

Yesterday at 11:02am · Unlike · 1


Paul Barrow Traditions have been diminished in our society, Paul Gottschalk, which usually takes the place of having to understand how people think. Traditions are a code of conduct that is widely accepted. New ways of thinking are not wrong, but if you destroy the house without having built a replacement, you’re homeless. We have a multitude of attitudes regarding relationship structure that have emerged in multicultural America, and Nalidy’s comment about relationships in Islam and Gaza makes that very clear. We need to be very careful about tearing them apart or attacking them because they differ from our own, however seemingly unjust they might be in respect to male or female. And there might be a hundred studies out there that tell us these problems, Bunny, but I find such discussion enormously useful in helping us all deal with them.

Yesterday at 11:26am · Like


Paul Gottschalk No, we do not have to be “culturally sensitive” when it comes to how we react to something wrong that has cultural approval, even cultural support.
Imagine going into a community that still thinks slavery is okay. No, we don’t have to make sure we don’t “disrespect their culture” by saying clearly that what they’re doing is wrong.

Yesterday at 11:28am · Like


Paul Gottschalk Sometimes, it’s not about tearing down a house (which implies it’s doing something Good). It’s about removing a POISON.

Yesterday at 11:30am · Like · 1


Paul Barrow As long as you are free to hit and run, you can say that, Paul. The people’s lives you are messing with are not so free. I’m just saying that we need to use good judgment. One of the things that you see in certain parts of Pakistan is the acid in the face thing because some woman was raped. Yes, there are inhumane things that occur that we should all vehemently oppose.

Yesterday at 11:37am · Like


Paul Gottschalk I believe that truth shouldn’t be hidden just because some people aren’t ready to deal with it.
When I’m talking with a man and a woman, and the man has the belief that I should only be addressing him, and ignoring his wife like she isn’t there, I don’t let HIS vision of what is right dominate, just because I’m in what HE thinks is HIS neck o’ the woods.

23 hours ago · Like


Paul Gottschalk We shouldn’t just oppose things that are wrong on the scale of acid thrown in a woman’s face. But ANYTHING and EVERYTHING that is wrong. As in, “Excuse me, but I couldn’t help noticing that this [Black] woman was waiting here before this other [White] woman walked in. And I notice that this [Black} woman seems like she feels disrespected. So perhaps you wouldn’t mind waiting on ALL of Us in the order we came in? Thank you so much.”
As OPPOSED to thinking to MYSELF, “Well, I AM in Mississippi, so I suppose I should respect their CULTURE here.”

23 hours ago · Like


Paul Barrow It’s THEIR vision that’s important, Paul.

23 hours ago · Like


Paul Gottschalk No, it is NOT, Paul.
What is RIGHT, what is MORAL, what is Good, is what is important.

23 hours ago · Like


Paul Barrow The tyranny of Good. That’s an interesting paradox.

23 hours ago · Like


Paul Barrow American exceptionalism takes that stance.

23 hours ago · Like


Paul Gottschalk I’ll pass over the fact that was unfair, and just stick with the facts, that your response was just as invalid as attempting to diminish the value of my perspective as being due to the thinning hair on my head.

23 hours ago · Edited · Like

23 hours ago · Edited · Like


Paul Gottschalk The “tyranny of Good”? That’s like someone talking about the power of love and respect, and you calling that “tyranny.”
But, yes, Good does TRUMP everything else. If you don’t know that, the problem isn’t with the actual importance of Good, but rather with your lack of sufficient commitment to it.
Sure didn’t think I’d have to be defending Good itself with you – as though “cultural sensitivity” is more important than Good itself….
Go take a nap, Paul: you’re usually MUCH better than this.
Or maybe you just dislike EMOTIONALLY that I’m raining on your parade of “Yes, we men are SO inferior to you higher-developed females, so I’m just doing a survey to discover all the ways our inferiority MANIFESTS itself.”
Because it FEELS like you’re PANDERING to women, which isn’t respectful to women any more than it is to men.

23 hours ago · Edited · Like


Paul Barrow Ha, ha, ha. good one, Paul.

23 hours ago · Like


Anna Maliere Who cooks? Seriously? I’m of the millennial generation, married for 4 years, we are both 26 and we both love to cook and find it fun, sometimes I hold the door for him, sometimes he does for me, we both have jobs that we try to find a way to do creatively. We play music together, we both clean equally and both hate doing the dishes equally but we do all that, we both go out equally there’s not even a question Of equality, we both don’t want children right now but if we do he is excited about taking time off to take care of them. I’m a feminist and humanist and so is he.

23 hours ago · Like · 4


Paul Barrow I do have to go check on my car. It was flooded last night in the parking lot from flashflooding and a huge deluge of rain. I can see what’s going to happen when i open the doors. Anna Maliere, beautiful comment.

23 hours ago · Like · 2


Paul Gottschalk Good luck with your car, my wonderful brother. Much love to you.

23 hours ago · Edited · Unlike · 1


Bunny Munene there are so many different types of relationships and the ability to sit down and discuss how the household will run is a hallmark of good communication skills and compromise.

22 hours ago · Edited · Unlike · 2

22 hours ago · Edited · Unlike · 2


Paul Barrow A friend of mine, who has some celebrity status and does not want to post publicly shared this with me privately:
Because truly Paul, love for me isn’t the grand gestures, it’s the make coffee and bring me my first cup in bed, it’s getting it on with your hubby, when you’d rather eat chocolate and wear flannel. People have lost all ability to be ‘another’ focused. If everyone is always into……what’s in it for me?” then why want or try relationships. We have to sail away from the shores of what happened to us as kids and teens and adults, love our own selves to health and then partner with a person that allows us to be, grow and evolve. I have seen time and time again, the girl fall in love with the musician or artist, only to want them to truly be an accountant and bring home the bacon.
There are double standards on both sides. I’ve known husbands who love their wives and think it’s entirely fine to have a play thing on the side. Usually these are men who are afraid of losing pace with their youth and desperately looking for that elusive…’excitement.’ Women do it too, and to me the argument for westerners is…can i imagine growing old, and smelling and taking care and doing a sundry of un fun things when the time comes because I made a life with you and there was much joy and laughter? Love isn’t movie magic…yes it can be and there are moments of bliss that cannot be put into words, but love is also action, and that means putting your ego on the shelf, daring to make another person important, in spite of what your heart longs to do, and then reaping the benefits of love unconditional in those acts. I’m not perfect, neither is my husband and we have considered throwing in the towel a few times, but in the end, we realize we are better together. And if we weren’t we’d both be adult enough to walk away.
Women should never be used as slave labor or a sex slave or made to feel less than. It bothers me immensely what happens to women globally all in the name of some deity. Genital Mutilation, Child Brides, Rape, Sex Slaves, it’s all savage to me. And the men who look at , perform heinous acts and think they are righteous because of the way they degrade women are nothing to me, they are not men.
What makes a man a real man, is when you will strip down to a shirt and shorts, (after you are completely dressed and ready to go the wedding) to change the tire of our next door neighbor. A real man admits when he’s been a dumbass and asks for forgiveness. Yes I like chivalry, and a guy who can check the air pressure in my tires and yes maybe I should be able to do that as a woman, but I don’t really want to. And a real woman loves and loves and adores and adores and doesn’t use sex as a weapon or hold her husband hostage and keep it from him.
It comes down to the golden rule. You want to be treated well? Be respected? Adored? Admired? Loved? Taken Care of? Then do it to the person standing right in front of you. Drop the ego.
And if you are being abused in any shape form or fashion then you have chosen wrongly and get the hell out.

19 hours ago · Like · 1

19 hours ago · Like · 1


Kelli Arena Paul, if you are looking for one size fits all answers–they will not come. Every relationship is unique. Any long term relationship will continue to morph just as the people in it continue to change. This is why communication is so important. Expectations are based on so many factors. We will not have our needs met if we don’t express them. I remember an old story about a husband who always gave his wife the heel of the bread. She suffered silently for years until she finally told her husband she couldn’t believe he always ate the best part of the bread and left the heel for her. His reply? I was saving the best for you–the heel is my favorite part. Even if we know someone for years, we can never guess at their motivation for doing or not doing certain things. We must always keep the lines of communication open.

19 hours ago · Unlike · 2


Paul Barrow I’m interested in developing a survey, Kelli, so it is less about what I want and more about understanding the shape of attitudes and what the expectations of men are. There are so many attitudes flying around about what men are all about, that I felt that it would be a good idea to try to identify through a survey what men really think. I’m not sure at all that this will have any scientific strength in measuring men, but I will try to form questions that address many of the issues that have been raised in this thread.

19 hours ago · Edited · Like


Anna Maliere Paul, i truly don’t think though, that you can assume all men want the same things. And that women want the same things from men. No two men are exactly the same.

19 hours ago · Unlike · 1


Paul Barrow The survey will identify what men want, and I agree that they won’t all be lumped together. I’m really very interested in how the results will turn out, because I want to know what men expect in a relationship. They certainly won’t all expect the same thing, but we might be surprised by what they do expect.

19 hours ago · Like


Paul Barrow The purpose of this thread is to try to gain insight into the type of questions to ask.

19 hours ago · Like


Paul Barrow I tagged all women because I want their opinions about what bothers them and what makes them happy in a relationship. Women are the best source for identifying questions that focus on a man’s ability to be successful in a relationship.

19 hours ago · Like


Paul Gottschalk Wow, not content to sprinkle a little manure on our plate, you left and came back with a TRUCKLOAD of it to dump on the entire KITCHEN.
WOMEN – you (claim to) THINK – are the best source for identifying questions that focus on a MAN’s ability?
Do you REGULARLY make a HABIT of pandering to women so shamelessly, Paul, and I just never noticed it before?
And before any women it’s WORKING on have a chance to reply, allow me to encourage you to PAUSE and consider THIS statement for the EQUAL – no less, no more – manure IT would be:
“Men are the best source for identifying questions that focus on a woman’s ability to be successful in a relationship.”
Anyone STUPID enough to make THAT statement around any intelligent and strong women, may I suggest that you give yourself a head start and already be running away as fast as you can when you say it?

18 hours ago · Edited · Like · 1


Jean-Marie Lacobee What makes a man uncomfortable in the initial commitment stage of a relationship?

17 hours ago · Like


Elizabeth Kaplan What Paul said

16 hours ago · Like


Paul Barrow Paul Gottschalk, all you’ve said is that what I’ve said is a bunch of shit, and that I”m pandering to women. That’s not an argument against what I’ve said. Haven’t you got anything better than that?

16 hours ago · Like · 1


Paul Barrow The best judge of whether an artist is good is his audience.

16 hours ago · Like · 1


Betty Molchany Paul G. seems compelled to act out every day, I suppose, because he is unable to do so with his clients. He is very angry and hostile continuously.

16 hours ago · Edited · Like


Paul Barrow Jean-Marie Lacobee, your question needs some clarification. There’s an obvious answer, that a relationship for life, or until lack of money do us part, is one of the most important decisions anyone makes, and having reservations would be natural. I’m not sure if you are probing for something else.

15 hours ago · Like


Paul Barrow Elizabeth Kaplan says on a post she tagged me in, “But I do think you are single-handedly extending the war between the sexes by trying to codify relationships with a survey, when everybody seems to realize it depends on the people, their backgrounds, baggage, culture, etc.”

14 hours ago · Like · 2


Elizabeth Kaplan I also said:
For example, I have no idea what you mean by “a real man.”. Letty Cotin Pogrebin, powerful feminist from the ’80s who took on this question with regard to child rearing and said, ” To be male is masculine; to be female is feminine. Everything else is propaganda.” And I have seen over the past 3 decades that she was right.

13 hours ago · Like · 1


Paul Barrow I’m looking for the reference, E. Maybe you can point it out.

13 hours ago · Like

3 hours ago · Like


Paul Barrow the only reference I see to “real man” in my comments was not actually my comment. If you look at the introductory remark, “A friend of mine, who has some celebrity status and does not want to post publicly shared this with me privately:” We all have our opinions of what real men are, and I find nothing wrong with that. However, I would certainly use that expression much more guardedly, because it is entirely subjective.

13 hours ago · Like · 1


Paul Barrow I also do not believe that a survey would in any way codify relationships. It’s merely an examination of behavioral attitudes, which can then be used to interpret relationships to some degree, and why some work and some don’t. You’ll have to explain that point.

13 hours ago · Like


Paul Barrow there seems to be a lot of criticism on the left toward cultural expressions, as though, because it does not have some scientifically objective basis in biological truth, that it is therefore illegitimate. it tends to be a rejection of anything that labels, or establishes an identity, because it makes one vulnerable, perhaps. Having male and female roles distinct from one another seems to be the primary target. There is a distinct movement afoot to abolish all trappings of gender, and i think that’s not only silly and a waste of good intellectual resources, it defies history and the inevitable tendencies of human nature. it does codify relationships, and I think that’s a good thing.

13 hours ago · Like


Paul Gottschalk Paul, do you know how a professionally educated, trained and licensed counselor (psychotherapist) – especially an experienced one – works with same sex couples?
EXACTLY the same as they do with heterosexual couples, because the PROBLEMS in RELATIONSHIP are EXACTLY THE SAME.
Because problems in RELATIONSHIP have NOTHING to do with GENDER.

2 hrs · Edited · Like · 2


Paul Gottschalk Your survey is INVALID from its CONCEPTUALIZATION.
You’re trying to build a house, but you start off by saying, “But I’m only going to use sand for the foundation.”

Paul Barrow I’m primarily addressing the issues between men and women in heterosexual relationships, and that’s how my survey will be structured.

3 mins · Like