Online Dating Rights. Mail Order Brides
PragueVietnamMoscowGuatemala

FOUR REASONS American men seek romance abroad: Prague, Ha Long Bay, Red Square, small villages in Latin America. Somehow meeting a Czech, Vietnamese, Russian or Peruvian/Colombian/Brazilian woman for a date at one of these exotic places is incomparably more exciting than meeting a hometown girl at the local coffeeshop. Opponents of a man's right to meet foreign women online never stop to consider how enjoyable it is to travel/work/live abroad and learn new cultures and languages while seeking a marriage partner.
Online Dating Rights
August 20, 2017, 09:16:15 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
Author Topic: "Mail-Order Brides" and Feminist Presumptions  (Read 77199 times)
Taylor
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 315




Ignore
« on: January 20, 2007, 12:51:34 AM »

CBS news has accurately stated that no firm statistics exist on the “mail order bride” industry [1].  We have no firm statistics on how many marriages the international dating agencies have facilitated, nor do we know anything about the level of abuse that exist within those marriages.  There is no objective reason to believe that the level of spousal abuse is any worse in these marriages than in domestic marriages.  What we do know based upon government statistics is that the divorce rate in these marriages is significantly lower than the national average [2].  That being stated, much of the debate surrounding the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act (IMBRA) and the international dating agencies is based upon opinions and perceptions.  It is not based upon factual evidence.

The most authoritative attempt to analyze the international dating phenomena was conducted by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and published in 1999.  In the study the government looked at how the agencies recruit women members and appeal to male clients.  Much of the information for the study was derived from interviews with people who had met their fiancées through the auspices of international dating agencies, and were seeking visas for their partners for the purposes of marriage.  In the opinion of the government, they believe that many of the men who use international dating agencies are looking for more traditional women.  They also believe that many of the men are more interested in issues of control, than love. 

With regard to the women, the government believes that many of the women are more interested in “bettering” themselves than in romance.  The INS also believes that many of the women are primarily seeking residency here in the United States, and are not interested in forming a healthy and lasting relationship with an American man.  When these two diametrically opposed interests come into conflict, which they believe is likely to happen, the INS believes that there is a heightened risk for abuse.  The nature of that abuse, and how it would play out was not elaborated upon [3].  What is obvious from the report is that the government is skeptical about the motivations of both the men and women who are involved in the international dating industry.

This report was used by the feminist lobby as a justification for its attempt to regulate the international dating agencies.  This effort culminated in the passage of IMBRA.  Unfortunately, for whatever number of reasons, the feminist lobby chose to focus in on the problems that the government identified regarding men.  Much of this comes from a feminist belief that men who seek control are more likely to be physically and mentally abusive toward their spouses.  When that control is exerted over an individual who is dependant on another individual for support (as immigrant women are) the risk for abuse increases [4].  To that extent, they seek to provide foreign women with background information on their potential suitors so that they can make informed choices for themselves.  This information is to be provided to foreign women at the point of initial contact with their potential American suitor.

In approaching the subject of “women’s protection”, we have to look at the manner in which the feminist lobby approaches the international dating agencies.  There is the belief that the women are trying to escape trying economic circumstances in their home countries where the status of women is much lower than in the United States.  For these women, American men are perceived to be more faithful to their wives, and more respectful of women generally.  The feminists believe that the international dating agencies deliberately encourage foreign women to believe these things. 

Since the relationship between the “mail order bride” and her husband is believed to empower the man at the expense of the woman, the feminists believe that the women often find themselves trapped in relationships that involve exploitation and abuse [5].  Anecdotal stories are used to buttress this claim, which can be very persuasive at face value.  Unfortunately, the articles that address this issue do not seem to have any verifiable statistics.  Specific situations or personal experiences of individual “mail order brides” are used to draw larger general conclusions about the international dating industry. 

One of the primary groups behind IMBRA was the Tahirih Justice Center.  Layli Miller-Muro is the executive director of this feminist human rights organization.  In describing the type of men who pursue foreign women through the auspices of the international dating agencies, the human rights group has made the following statement:

“The International Marriage Broker (IMB) industry (commonly known as "mail-order bride agencies") has grown dramatically in recent years, exploding in response to demands by American men for “traditional wives.” Many of the men who use IMBs intentionally seek women who do not speak English and whom they expect to be subservient.  Some of these men are violent predators who return to IMBs repeatedly to find their next victim.” [6]

Michele Clark of Johns Hopkins University, another human rights activist who supports regulating the international dating agencies made the following description of the agencies and the men who use them:

“Many matchmaking websites advertise their mail-order brides (implicitly, or in some cases, explicitly) as submissive, docile, faithful and loving domesticated wives who are looking to build a traditional, old fashioned home in which they will cater to their man. It is not unlikely that the men who choose to pursue the search for a wife through the mail-order bride path might be looking for just such a woman. It is also likely that a man who is seeking out a submissive woman is not seeking an equal partnership, but rather a relationship of dominance and control.v It is further likely that a man who marries a bride from a mail-order match will expect her to fit this stereotype. However, stereotypes are unlikely to reflect the reality of the personalities of even a minority of the women which they advertise. It then becomes likely that if a wife turns out not to “live up” to the advertised standard, the husband, who was seeking control in a relationship, might turn to abuse in order force the wife to live up to that standard. While little research has been done to investigate this issue, the little information available does point to the fact that men seeking mail-order brides might indeed be searching for the stereotyped women.” [7]

Both of these individuals were very instrumental in ensuring that IMBRA became law.  It is clear from what they have stated that they view the men as domineering and controlling.  Much of this seems to be derived from their interpretation of specific international dating agency web sites.  They are of the impression that the sites present the women in a derogatory manner.  In addition, they deduce from the web sites that the men who use the services of those agencies are likely to harbor views similar to the ones that they saw advertised.   In fact, their deductions are merely inferences based upon what they saw on the Internet, and how they interpreted that information.

Has the feminist lobby presented one methodologically sound study that has even made an attempt to assess the motivations of the men who pursue foreign women?   Apparently Ms Miller-Muro is concerned that the men are looking for submissive wives [8].  Well, lets assume that that is true.  On what basis is that evidence that the man will abuse his wife?  If things don’t work out as planned, there is an assumption that the man will beat up his wife.  On what is this presumption based? Could it not be equally possible that the man may just leave his wife when things do not work out as planned?  This whole mentality seems to assume that when men do not get their way, they become violent.  What is this presumption based upon?   There is ample evidence that women are just as likely to be guilty of violence in domestic relationships as men.  There is a growing body of literature that clearly refutes the notion that men are the sole cause of domestic violence [9]. 

The simple fact of the matter is that no reliable statistics actually exist to make a claim about the potential for abuse in these relationships one way or the other.  The point is that the feminist lobby simply assumes that something is true based upon some anecdotal observations and their own presumptions. 

References:

1. "Mail-Order Bride Bill in Works," CBS News, July 5, 2003.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/07/05/politics/main561828.shtml

2. Robert J. Schloles, Ph.D., "The "Mail-Order Bride" Industry and Its Impact on U.S. Immigration,"
http://uscis.gov/graphics/aboutus/repsstudies/Mobappa.htm

3. Robert J. Schloles, Ph.D., "The "Mail-Order Bride" Industry and Its Impact on U.S. Immigration,"
http://uscis.gov/graphics/aboutus/repsstudies/Mobappa.htm

4. Giselle Aguilar Hass, Psy.D., Nawal Ammar, Ph.D., and Leslye Orloff, J.D. "Battered Immigrants and U.S. Citizen Spouses,"
http://legalmomentum.org/legalmomentum/files/dvusc.pdf

5. Julie Hill Barton, "World Wide Wedlock: Russian Mail Order Brides on the Internet," Women in Mind,
http://www.southernct.edu/departments/womenscenter/wim/articles/mob.htm

Michele A. Clark, Testimony before U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, "Mail-Order Brides: Exploited Dreams," July 13, 2004.
http://www.protectionproject.org/eo1.htm

Donna M. Hughes, Ph.D., "The Role of "Marriage Agencies" in the Sexual Exploitation and Trafficking of Women from the Former Soviet Union,"
http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/marriage_agencies_fsu.pdf

Suzanne H. Jackson, Hearing before the Committee on Foreign Relations United States Senate, "Human Trafficking: Mail Order Bride Abuses," July 13, 2004.
http://www.senate.gov/~foreign/testimony/2004/JacksonTestimony040713.pdf

6. "Campaign to Stop Exploitation by International Marriage Brokers:" Tahirih Justice Center,
http://tahirih.org/?template=imb-legal_policy

7. Michele A. Clark, Testimony before U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, "Mail-Order Brides: Exploited Dreams," July 13, 2004.
http://www.protectionproject.org/eo1.htm

8. Olly Bootle, "Cyber Brides Vulnerable to Abuse?," BBC News, May 18, 2004.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/this_world/3700409.stm

9. Richard J. Gelles, Ph.D., "The Hidden Side of Domestic Violence: Male Victims," The National Coalition of Free Men, Los Angeles Chapter,
http://www.ncfmla.org/gelles.html

Martin S. Fiebert, Ph.D., "References Examining Assaults by Women on their Spouses or Male Partners: An Annotated Bibliography" Department of Psychology, California State University, Long Beach,
http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm



« Last Edit: January 20, 2007, 01:14:39 AM by Taylor » Logged
VeteransAbroad
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1204


This is a subway in Russia. Poor country?


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #1 on: January 20, 2007, 09:25:13 AM »

The "government" believes no such thing. Feminists who wormed their way into the rotting wood of government believed that and such a jackass wrote the 1999 INS Report, which ironically is our best document showing that those of us with passports and the ability to speak other languages are 7 times LESS likely to abuse women of course.

I won't go into it here, but those who observe carefully will see schizophrenia going on inside the government as a lot of male government officials oppose IMBRA and such laws.

Heck, did everyone see the picture of Jeff Hermesmann with the future Natalya Fox? He is a State Department official who clearly feels that Former Soviet Union (FSU) women rock.

Half the men in the State Department are marrying Russian women.

I know officers in the German and Russian embassies and consulates who cannot believe that IMBRA was passed because it is so fascist.

They do not WANT to implement IMBRA. In fact, maybe if ODR had never existed to protest IMBRA, the stupid law would have gone the way of the MOBA which was never enforced (I believe that, this time, the TJC was going to force the government to implement it if European Connections had not intervened.

The fear is that more feminists have wormed their way into the Department of Homeland Security.

American men in government and out have lost their male appendages.

Meanwhile, Michelle Clark is a "human rights activist" and not a human rights activist.

By not putting these description in parentheses, it may appear to others that this woman really cares about human rights, which is the last thing on her mind.

She does not want to face the reality that she is over 40 and the under 30 competition from the former Soviet Union is vacuuming all the best males away.

Also, Taylor, your essay makes it sound like the "government" (again: this was one radical feminist who wormed his/her way into being allowed to write the report), was correct in that supposedly there is more mercenary sex than romance, which is entirely untrue.

My girlfriend has the flu today and really, really needed to talk to me because she loves me. In my experience dating the best looking American women...I have never known romance like I have known it in Russia.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2007, 04:25:43 AM by VeteransAbroad » Logged

Honest journalists will see the Tahirih Justice Center as a front for the NOW that appeals to conservative "Security Moms". Match.com and Yahoo and MySpace are actually working for total Internet regulation because they don't want clients to be anonymous and they want small dating sites/forums dead.
Taylor
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 315




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2007, 02:30:30 AM »

The government does not think that the men are interested in sex, or that the women are engaging in prostitution. They think that many of the men (not necessarily a majority of them) are interested in control.  The government also believes that many of the women who are pursuing American men through the auspices of international dating agencies (IDAs) are interested in garnering American citizenship and money.

As far as I can tell, most people in the government seem to accept Robert Schloles’ report.  Veteran if you know of other government documents that refute the conclusions of the INS study, I would love to hear about them.

I don’t feel comfortable personally attacking Michele Clark.  I don’t know what her motivations are.  It is possible to attack a group though.  It is inconceivable to me, based upon their own literature, that the feminist movement believes its own propaganda about the so-called “marriage broker” industry.

I also doubt that Michele Clark would be interested in the type of men that pursue “mail-order brides”.  This isn’t really about romance for them (feminists).  They are not being motivated, for the most part, by a fear of rejection.  It is a political issue.  They think that the industry (IDAs) demeans women, and it encourages men to harbor ideas that are hostile to feminism.  They are primarily concerned about the viability of feminism here in the United States.  At least that is my impression. 

They are using the government’s report as a subterfuge to go after an industry that annoys them.  In the process, they are misrepresenting the government’s own report.  It is very obvious that they are doing this for their own ends.  IMBRA is not about protecting foreign women; it is about protecting American feminism.

The feminists are certainly more than aware that some “mail-order brides” are victimizing innocent American men, and yet IMBRA, which they created, does absolutely nothing to deal with this problem.  In addition, some of the agencies create differing expectations for American men and foreign women through their marketing strategies, and yet IMBRA does nothing to deal with this problem. 

The only thing that IMBRA does is force men to give up their privacy rights at a point of contact where the women isn’t even under any risk of harm.  It limits American men to only two romance visas in their entire lifetime.  Last, it rewards foreign women with citizenship if they make false abuse charges against their husbands.  None of this has been justified by any rational arguments.  In fact, based upon the government’s own report, the last provision is unconscionable.  If you know that many foreign women are using American men to gain citizenship and money (and the feminists know this!), why make it easier for them (foreign women) to accomplish this?  Unfortunately, I think that we all know the answer to that question.

 
Logged
VeteransAbroad
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1204


This is a subway in Russia. Poor country?


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2007, 05:39:53 AM »

Before we discuss further whether the IMBRA supporters are or are not personally interested in whether men date foreigners or not, let's look at this video:

http://mamonaku187.blogspot.com/2007/01/ps3-vs-wii.html

Quote
I also doubt that Michele Clark would be interested in the type of men that pursue “mail-order brides”.  This isn’t really about romance for them (feminists).  They are not being motivated, for the most part, by a fear of rejection.  It is a political issue.  They think that the industry (IDAs) demeans women, and it encourages men to harbor ideas that are hostile to feminism.  They are primarily concerned about the viability of feminism here in the United States.  At least that is my impression.

Our only disagreement is in the implication that there is a "type of man" who would date foreign women. In an otherwise brilliant analysis of the situation, that one sentence seemed to say, however unintentioned, that the average guy who does this belongs to different social circles and/or belongs to another social class as Michele Clark and ignorant people would then assume, incorrectly, that the social class of these men would be lower.

In reality, men with passports and the ability to speak other languages generally belong to a higher social class, or at least a higher intellectual level, than the feminist hacks who hang around Washington DC lobbying for their destruction.

But we do come into contact with the likes of Michele Clark at cocktail parties in Manhattan.

DC is so close to NYC that the legislative assistants, lawyer associates and professional secretaries will come home or visit friends on weekends there. In fact, the New York City gay and lesbian community considers getting government jobs in Washington to be the height of success and the guarantee that they will eventually control a superpower (a significant percentage of Republican legislative aides in Congress are gay males from this community).

My experience is that women like Layli or Michele Clark, when single, show up at the parties of the lower rungs of professionals, but they certainly could get themselves invited out  to stuffy parties in the Hamptons if they befriend a feminist widow who wants to use her dead husband's money to regulate men.

Anyway, when I was a paper millionaire in Manhattan during the Internet boom, I was amazed by the number of 40 year old women who worked as lawyers and thought they could date me seriously although I was 5 years younger than they were.

Feminists are human and often want the best looking and smartest man...which happened to be me in more than a few cases. Feminists are infuriated at the idea of growing old and cannot accept that a man 5 years younger than they are would date a woman 20 years younger than they are.

What got me is that they acted like it was not possible for me to date a 20 year old..as if they did not see the college students trying to flirt with me.

I had to bitterly disappoint a number of 40 year old women on this issue, unfortunately.

Take a look at the following video. The woman on the left is definitely more interesting as a person and could have been a friend of mine in Manhattan, but I would prefer sex with the woman on the right 10 times out of 10 no matter how high my social class and no matter how intellectually compatible I was with the woman on the left:

http://mamonaku187.blogspot.com/2007/01/ps3-vs-wii.html

Notice the frustration of the woman on the left, which I sympathize with (but could not do anything about as I would be heading out the door with the woman on the right no matter).

Once a woman lawyer invited me to dinner and tried to give her 20 year old daughter $20 to go see a movie. But the daughter liked me and insisted on sticking around. I don't think the mother was amused, but none of that was my fault. I could not help it that the 20 year old daughter was following a biologically logical desire to get to know a 35 year old male. If I had a choice between the mother and her 20 year old daughter, it would be no contest.

Could it be that this lawyer was named Michele Clark? I forget. Seriously, I don't remember her name. It could have been. Stranger coincidences do happen and it is entirely possible that, in the fight against IMBRA, we will come up against a die-hard man-hater who is one of my ex-girlfriends from New York City. The world is a small place.

The problem is that some over-entitled career women are thinking the way men would think in the exact situation. I would be furious if I tried to date a 35 year old woman and my 20 year old son took her away. They are furious that they planned their life like a man would: first get financially successful and then get the great spouse and kids (both Karen Czarnecki and Michele Bernard from the PBS Video are 40 and just had their designer children recently). When the men that they want (and had for a little while) turn around and date younger women, this is outrageous to them and it becomes their obsession to stop this behavior at all costs.

I have learned that married women between 38 and 50 are the most outraged at the idea that any man their age might date women in their twenties.

As outlined on the website www.sexualfront.com, "Nobody consistently spends their time on a cause of helping others or helping an ideology...unless they see a clear personal benefit." IMBRA supporters likely do not want to lose their husbands.

Half of the Tahirih Justice Center's 98 page "Finding of Fact" in the ongoing European Connections Case (EC Case) deals with "Age Difference" as being the worst measure of an "Unequal Relationship". There is no way a person can read this and not be struck immediately by the measure of personal trauma the middle aged female author has over the issue.

Tristan: Please link to the PBS video from the side bar so people can find it and use it as an example in times like this. The PBS video clearly shows that these aging women are personally alarmed that men no longer want them, or in the case of Michelle Bernard and Karen Czarnecki, that they are highly vulnerable to losing their husbands to a younger woman.

If Michele Clark is a heterosexual woman, then she probably HAS been sexually and emotionally attached to a man who HAS indicated to her that he might consider a cutie from Russia or Poland (95% probability these days in yuppie circles where the new Russian wives are very noticeably outclassing the feminists). At least, several American men have left Michele Clark for a younger woman (99% probability).  Hell, since I do not remember all the women who wanted to dance with me at balls in Manhattan (or, for that matter, the names of all the women I've gone on dates with or fooled around with) it could very well be that Michele Clark is an ex-partner of mine and maybe she feels that I, personally, abandoned her for a younger woman. I directly told a good number of women I was dating in New York that they had competition in Russia. A response from the typical feminist was "why don't you stick with a real woman. You have the power to keep me". But I left these financially stable New York City women in the end because I had the money and the time to move out of New York entirely and spend the year 2000 in Russia.

I left for Russia because I wanted to date smart women in their early twenties, not the "Sex in the City" thirty-somethings who considered me a great catch otherwise.

Now, I haven't heard of men being taken off invitation lists to black tie parties and cocktail parties in Manhattan because they were dating nannies from Europe or had gorgeous Russian wives. In real life, the middle aged women of America will not be so crass about their competitors. Quite the opposite: I recently went to a CEOs conference in Brussels and took along my 25 year old girlfriend who wore an evening gown. The same-age wives of the other executives seemed thrilled with her (as were their husbands). They did not show, directly, that they thought my girlfriend threatened them.

But these corporate wives are not the feminists. These corporate wives will only support IMBRA by their silence about it. Most of the support for IMBRA comes from keeping silent about it.

These corporate wives would not openly say that my girlfriend threatened them, but they would be quietly thinking that their husbands shouldn't be getting easy access to their own new girlfriend.

IMHO, the biggest raison d'etre of feminism is that its members have a personal investment in the issue, mainly a desire to rollback human nature or reverse it, mostly in terms of the male desire to date younger women. They only say "but these relationships are unequal" because it allows them to pretend that ideology, instead of personal interest, is at stake.

But they prove that they are not interested in equality when they say "You go girl to women who date younger men". This is why these women hang on to the idea that Demi Moore's marriage to Ashton Kutscher is some kind of banner for how the world should be (Ashton is still in his twenties and he is best friends with Demi's now-18 year old daughter).

The damage feminism has caused is profound and personal. It is all meant to be personal.

Now Taylor's theory that our enemies are directly motivated by a fear that their intellectual ideology is threatened by social globalization is a good one. But I assume that these women have been personally affected by a man, whom they badly wanted to keep, abandoning them for a younger woman.

Taylor's theory goes hand in hand with my personal experience that these women, who belong to my former New York City and Boston social class, are also personally invested in a bitter struggle to stop human nature from biting them in the behind.

The TJC's main argument against men who date foreign women is that they date younger foreign women. There are plenty of East European nannies and college exchange students on the East Coast of the USA mixing it up with the most powerful American married men.

I say that these women are seeing personal threats in their own lives.

That IMBRA's proponents try to pretend that these men who would date younger women are faceless and do not belong within their social class, is bizarre but expected. It is not only denial, but they know that their only chance of winning in the courts (and court of public opinion) is to make very sure that nobody ever realizes that men in their own private social circles prefer younger foreign women to them.

---------------------------------------

I think that, if a reporter closely examined the personal lives of Suzanne Jackson, Layli Miller and Michele Clark, the odds would be very, very high that they feel personally threatened by the whole concept that they are growing old and cannot hold men like they once could. The only difference between this attitude among a group of women at any time in the past 200,000 years and now, is that now is one of those rare times in world history when women control a superpower and can take revenge on the very idea that men should prefer younger women.

So if we take the quote
Quote
I also doubt that Michele Clark would be interested in the type of men that pursue “mail-order brides”.
and translated that to
Quote
I also doubt that Michele Clark would be interested in the type of men who would date much younger women,”
, it might be more apparent why I disagree with the theory that these women are only out to defend feminism itself as their intellectual-religious crutch.

As for Robert Scholes and his "surprise" in the 1999 INS Report that the statistics don't support the theory that men who date foreigners via the Intenet are "controlling"...I have to assume from my own experience that Robert is a beta male whom these women lawyers would NOT want as their first choice at Manhattan cocktail parties (an alpha male who travels around the world would be their first choice if the alpha male keeps quiet about his girlfriends in Russia).

So a man like Robert Scholes writes the kind of reports he did in order to be seen as a "safer bet" by these women...in order to pull them over and away from the alpha males. And for good reason: He knows that women in his social circles are upset with the idea of men going to Russia. I was on a cruise ship in June 2001 and a very attractive 30 year old woman was all over me because I was rich and traveled the world. Then I said that I had spent the past month in Russia. She turned ice cold and no longer wanted to talk with me after that, mumbling something about my obviously being a sex tourist because Russia had only mafia and prostitutes in her mind.

Being a world traveler is sexy to American women...so long as you don't admit to having dated anyone from particular countries. It is easy to keep Russia out of a conversation with a feminist lawyer and still come across as the international traveler she actually prefers to meet over other men.

Robert Scholes was clearly not an international traveler and probably did not make much money in his government job. It is mostly the poor American males who adopt the strategy of condemning the richer ones who travel overseas. You can see this "Please like me because I hate the guys who travel too" in the behavior of Erald Kolasi, the 19 year old son of a Tahirih volunteer who controls the Tahirih Wikipedia article: if you read his other blogs, he is lonely and looking for a girlfriend over the Internet. But he is skinny and covered with pimples and cannot afford to travel to Europe. I talked to him for a long while in back and forth chat at Wikipedia and concluded that, since he is clearly not an alpha male, he has decided that total agreement with all that feminism has to say is going to be his best strategy to win a female.

That is one theory why Robert Scholes wrote his report. There are others.

But the bottom line is that Robet Scholes is surely not an alpha male who can afford to travel much.

Frank may have been crass about it, but there really is more to his theory that the women who support IMBRA really want to date or be married to the type of alpha male who would be smart enough to travel the world...and are repressing this thought in favor of pretending that men who date foreign women are trailer park trash who hop on the Internet to find some ignorant "mail order female" to abuse.

These women have surely seen attractive, successful men with foreign women.

Look at the new Virginia Senator. He married a "mail order bride". And he beat the pants off Republican Senator George Allen who had been planning to run for president.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2007, 07:18:00 AM by VeteransAbroad » Logged

Honest journalists will see the Tahirih Justice Center as a front for the NOW that appeals to conservative "Security Moms". Match.com and Yahoo and MySpace are actually working for total Internet regulation because they don't want clients to be anonymous and they want small dating sites/forums dead.
tristan
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1272



« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2007, 09:42:56 AM »

Vet,

I think you are overanalyzing the situation.  And I must confess if you made your points more succinctly I would have had time to actually read them all.

Michelle Clark and others may think there is a certain type of man who goes abroad to seek romance, and some of us may think there is a different type.

But I don't think there is any type.  I know so many different types of men through this site and personally that I cannot catagorize them.  Some are Republicans and Democrats, intellectual and below average intelligence, rich and working class, sensitive and crude, feminist-supporting and not feminist-supporting, modest and arrogant, bilingual and monolingual, world-travelers and homebodies, worldly and naive, divorced and never-married, fathers and childless, history of good relationships with American women and history of bad relationships with American women, seeking younger foreign wife and not concerned with age, seeking a housewife and seeking a career wife.

Most of them are men who lived all of their lives never considering going abroad for a wife, who always thought romance "just happened".  I am one of those.   But as I got older and found that my ability to get dates decreased in inverse proportion to my age, and that none of those dates had any particular interest in marriage and family, I began to research going abroad for a wife.  At some point the research yielded way to action, and the rest is history.  This is perhaps one way we can characterize all men who do this.
Logged

Advocacy groups that get taxpayer money for "protecting" foreign women and the thoughtless media call foreign woman a "mail order bride" if she met her husband via internet.  This is American imperialism, it is denigrating, insulting and portrays the women as helpless fools.
Taylor
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 315




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2007, 05:24:46 PM »

Vet,

I think you are overanalyzing the situation.  And I must confess if you made your points more succinctly I would have had time to actually read them all.

Michelle Clark and others may think there is a certain type of man who goes abroad to seek romance, and some of us may think there is a different type.

But I don't think there is any type.  I know so many different types of men through this site and personally that I cannot catagorize them.  Some are Republicans and Democrats, intellectual and below average intelligence, rich and working class, sensitive and crude, feminist-supporting and not feminist-supporting, modest and arrogant, bilingual and monolingual, world-travelers and homebodies, worldly and naive, divorced and never-married, fathers and childless, history of good relationships with American women and history of bad relationships with American women, seeking younger foreign wife and not concerned with age, seeking a housewife and seeking a career wife.

Most of them are men who lived all of their lives never considering going abroad for a wife, who always thought romance "just happened".  I am one of those.   But as I got older and found that my ability to get dates decreased in inverse proportion to my age, and that none of those dates had any particular interest in marriage and family, I began to research going abroad for a wife.  At some point the research yielded way to action, and the rest is history.  This is perhaps one way we can characterize all men who do this.

Tristan,

I think that you are correct.  I am probably over generalizing.  My impression of “mail-order bride” clients is based upon an article that I read a few years ago on the Internet.  If my memory serves me correctly it was from CBS news.  I can no longer find the article on the Internet.

In the article it stated (to the best of my memory) that “mail-order bride” clients fit essentially the following profile:

1.   They are typically of northern European ancestry, Protestant, and politically conservative;
2.   Approximately 50% of them have never been married;
3.   They tend to be shy, or are not particularly socially adept;
4.   They are college educated and have income levels from $75,000 annually and higher;
5.   They are typically between the ages of 30 and 45;
6.   They have a traditional view toward marriage;
7.   They view feminist women as poor marriage partners (they think that they are not serious about marriage and commitment);
8.   They tend to prefer younger attractive foreign women who are anywhere from 5 to 15 years younger than they are;
9.   They are primarily interested in marriage, not casual dating.






« Last Edit: January 21, 2007, 05:30:25 PM by Taylor » Logged
VeteransAbroad
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1204


This is a subway in Russia. Poor country?


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #6 on: January 22, 2007, 03:49:16 AM »

I am glad that we've been able to uncover what has apparently been the 800 pound gorilla in the room, because this topic of "what type of man dates foreign women" is something that clearly needs to be discussed before the courts and we are going to need an "expert" to dispel some of the myths that CBS propagated.

I would want your help in preparing a strategy because I am clearly going to tend to be very arrogant about how the pot is calling the kettle black when I hear talk about men with passports being somehow less interesting and outgoing than the actual shy beta males who stay at home.

Men like Glenn Sacks and others in the so-called Men's Rights Activist (MRA) Movement who won't help us...are probably going on the idea that only shy, socially inept men have passports and high paying jobs that send them to other countries.

This makes no sense at all. And if this self-serving propaganda (that benefits American feminists enormously) is ultimately believed by men linke Dave Usher of RADAR and Glenn Sacks and all Republican politicians...they are going to want to distance themselves from us which is insane for American males to do to each other.

This makes American males the most ignorant and stupid males in the world (I am not criticizing Taylor who is clearly courageous enough to post the prejudice that he learned).

In comparison, Taliban enthusiasts are more rational to me than an American male who thinks that the kind of man who has the money and opportunity to date overseas is somehow socially inept.

It wouldn't matter how easy social life was in the USA, the best and brightest males would still be going overseas for variety...to broaden their horizons and see what is out there.

As a paramount concern, we are going to need to dispel the myth that we are shy and lonely misfits. The concept of "misfit" conjures the image of "potentially violent". The enemy is saying that shy men are potentially more dangerous than outgoing men. And the courts will believe that nonsense, so why should we perpetuate the myth that we are lonely, socially inept misfits?

Americans believe the mythology (right or wrong) that a man who could not easily find himself another woman is more likely to kill or maime a woman who wants to leave him.

Therefore, it is highly damaging (even radioactive) to talk about us men who date foreigners as being shy misfits which is what the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article on "mail order brides" says.


If American Alpha Males found it unnecessary to date overseas, there would be more forceful, outgoing alpha males on ODR telling us that we are wrong about much of what we are saying. Believe me, if I happened to find ODR as a strong American male who was perfectly happy with the US dating scene and felt Russians were mafia and prostitutes, I would not hesitate to come on here and bully the beta males around, telling them to grow up and get a spine and stop bitching about America.

I would be the men of ODR's worst nightmare if outgoing, strong males tended to stay at home to date American women and I happened to be one of them.

The fact that we have seen very little of this, says something. Sure, plenty of men in the USA consider themselves alpha males who "don't need to go overseas"...but most of these men are just very young and ultimately know that it is also because they cannot afford to go overseas financially.

Here are some Internet conversations from 2006 that show that alpha males are not against us, but largely are us:

1) On FreeRepublic.com last April when Dave Root and I were talking about IMBRA with thousands of people for an hour or two, a 38 year old male lawyer in Las Vegas tried to hit me hard with the fact that he was an alpha male who did well with American women tourists in Las Vegas. But I convinced him that he was living only half the life he could be living. When he agreed that I had won the argument, a moderator at FR deleted my account and everything I had written (as well as everything Dave Root had written).

2) On GaryBala.com this summer, a man named "LuvinmyBaby" actually showed up and tried to bully us about being shy losers who could not get dates with women normally. He was an alpha male, but as such he quickly realized that he was talking with other alpha males and switched sides (but his scammer wife did not want him to fight IMBRA and he ended up listening to her...and he is probably being accused of abuse now that she is probably finally in the USA).

Nothing could be further from the truth than the idea that the particular males of a superpower who actually venture forth into the world that the superpower supposedly "controls"...would NOT be the alpha males of the superpower, the cream of the crop that Tahirih Justice Center lawyers actually WOULD want to date as long as the man does not mention that he dates women from particular countries that they are prejudiced against.

I speak German, Russian and French. I am 6'2" and I am obviously not shy. What part of that equation would make me initially unattractive to a 40 year old lawyer in DC? What says that I am exception to the rule here? I have seen dozens of top-level American executives with gorgeous young Russian wives. The only thing that would make me unattractive to a 40 year old lawyer in DC is when she found out that I expect to date here 20 year old daughter and not her. And that is why she is pushing to uphold a law like IMBRA. Now I know Taylor says the same thing but he feels that the women are thinking more abstractly, like it is there religion/ideology that they want to protect.

That is where Taylor and I show the most difference. Frank is more with me that these feminist lawyers in DC have personal vendettas to pursue here.

It would not hurt to put the seed of doubt in the courts' mind, via an "expert", that the women who promote IMBRA are, in fact, fearful of the competition for their own personal lives and not just in some abstract way that social globalization threatens their ideology.

If I had been in the USA in September, I would have gone to the Tahirih Fundraiser, possibly with a hidden camera, not to be part of the flier handout operation, but to prove to the world that feminist lawyers in Washington actually are attracted to the kind of man who can travel around the world and show up for dinner in Paris or cross the pond for a fundraiser in DC any weekend of the year with no trouble.

I am saying that, to the IMBRA supporters, this is personal. If the men they wanted, wanted them, they wouldn't be expending energy to create laws like IMBRA.

Instead, these lawyers surely married beta males whom they do not respect. They enlisted beta males like Randi Miller and the Arnold & Porter partner to help them, but they could not possibly be attracted to these sycophants.

It comes down to understanding the true nature of an American feminist activist. Even if I am not correct about how certain feminists ultimately respect the men who stand up to them, we need to push this out at them because this infuriates them the most and upsets the apple cart of all their theories. Please understand that the enemy WANTS to perpetuate the theory that we are shy and lonely misfits. Look at the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article on "mail order brides".

Now I don't have delusions of grandeur, but not only does this prejudice not make sense, in real life Americans perceive the opposite when they meet an alpha male American businessman who has a gorgeous foreign wife or girlfriend. Look at the new Virginia Senator.

Quote
1.   They are typically of northern European ancestry, Protestant, and politically conservative;

Yes. This fits me and logically explains why I've moved back to northern Europe where I belong culturally. Outside England, France and Belgium, northern Europe and Russia are very conservative. Conservative to me means that men stand up to feminism and don't cede power to women completely. I left the USA in 2004 because it was hopelessly liberal. I see the so-called social conservatism of church-going US Republicans as serving the interest of left wing feminism. There is too much of a "men are criminals" attitude.

Quote
2.   Approximately 50% of them have never been married;

Yes. This fits me as well.

Quote
3.   They tend to be shy, or are not particularly socially adept;

No. This is saying that we tend to be beta males and not alpha males. This is saying that we choose the alternatives because American women do not want us. Not only does this not fit me and most of the doctors and lawyers and MBAs heading to Europe, but it is not logical. Those of us who want to date with an age difference are going to have more of a problem in the USA, but even then, if any middle-aged male is going to pull off a relationship with an American college coed, it will be a man who has been dating coeds elsewhere and who, therefore, has the confidence to make it happen in the USA.

And I am saying that the female lawyers on the US East Coast have clearly seen that the alpha males on the US East Coast are interested in the women of the FSU, many of whom work in the USA because of a loophole in the visa law that allows them to be nannies or chambermaids when they are still enrolled in colleges.

It infuriates the female lawyers that the alpha males they want prefer the foreign college students.

Don't take my word for it. They say so themselves: http://www.veteransabroad.com/georgiacase.pdf


I am saying that Layli and I are both well aware that this is a battle to regulate the exact type of man that she and her friends would want to date. Otherwise, we would have to admit that Layli wants to stop shy men from getting married. This latter would not be in her interest.

Furthermore, it will be entirely in our interest if we push this out to the press (with less arrogance than I am expressing). It absolutely infuriated Amy when we made the point that IMBRA is about envy and spite.

I saw hit them hard with this concept. If we push any concept about men who date foreign women, it has to be that we are the most outgoing and interesting that America has to offer. Otherwise, we will lose this fight in the end.

We cannot win by saying "Leave us socially inept introverts alone. We have a right to happiness and you popular people should stop picking on us."

In my experience, men who go after Filipinas seem, however, to fit the description of "socially awkward". There seems to be a different dynamic going on there. But I hope this prejudice causes some alpha male to chime in and set me right that this is also a slander.

When one thinks about it, it is parochial for CBS to choose an "expert" who wants to think this way about men who travel and date. Are men without passports necessarily Alpha Males who do well with women? This doesn't make sense. I find men who have never left the USA boring and I know the most outgoing and intelligent American women feel the same.

James Bond traveled a lot and that made him sexy to women. American women are attracted to the James Bond type. By dating foreign women, especially college students in Russia and Eastern Europe, my confidence level went through the roof and this increased confidence actually helped me get dates and relationships with American college coeds in highly feminist areas of the US like Boston and San Francisco.

If you had a 20 year old American feminist daughter, whom do you think she would find more fascinating: a guy her own age with long hair who knows nothing about anything, or a 32 year old veteran who has been to 20 countries and speaks 3 languages?

Despite her feminism, she would be interested in the man who has been around the world. She would consider him the alpha male in the room.

It makes a man more interesting to travel around the world.

Also: American women often actually prefer a man who has learned (because of experience dating women in other countries) NOT to accept a lot of crap, especially that which emanates from feminist ideology.

CBS or its "expert source" surely squeezed this comment in to completely discredit men who date overseas. American women who would tend to believe this slander would then do NOTHING about themselves. US society will do NOTHING to adjust to social globalization.

Logically, we men who go overseas have ruled out that there is anything wrong with us and, therefore, don't stick around trying to improve ourselves by, for instance, joining Toastmasters and trying to get a personality. The latter type of guy is the kind of guy who supports IMBRA. He thinks it is all his fault that he hasn't met a wonderful wife.

In New York City, I dated the kind of woman lawyer who pushed feminist causes. They wanted strong alpha male types.

Quote
4.   They are college educated and have income levels from $75,000 annually and higher;

I think an income of $6500 per month is a bit high for an average. I don't even average that per month. But this is not a bad myth to have describing us.  Smiley

Quote
5.   They are typically between the ages of 30 and 45;

The Soviet Union fell only after my early twenties had passed. All a young man or woman needs is parents telling them to "see the world". I would advise telling your children to start international dating as soon as they start to date.

It will make them better able to date back in the USA if they get some practice and perspective dating overseas. Dating overseas makes a person more interesting back home.

Quote
6.   They have a traditional view toward marriage;

I don't have any particular view of marriage. But when I date American women, I ask them to cook for me if I buy all the food. So I guess that means that I do expect to be cooked for. But that can change.

Quote
7.   They view feminist women as poor marriage partners (they think that they are not serious about marriage and commitment);

They make poor girlfriends as well. A lot of guys who date foreign women have no intention of getting married for another 10 years.

Quote
8.   They tend to prefer younger attractive foreign women who are anywhere from 5 to 15 years younger than they are;

This describes 95% of the male gender. CBS was trying to pretend that this way of thinking was peculiar.

Quote
9.   They are primarily interested in marriage, not casual dating.

I have often stated that this is an extremely damaging concept and we should be careful pushing it. Americans believe that men who date "mail order brides" don't bother getting to know the woman much before, and thus the slur is used.

This concept allows Tahirih to say that men need to be regulated at the "hello" stage because the men and women are probably going to rush right into marriage anyway, so regulating the "hello" is practically the same thing as regulating the "fiance visa application".

Many of us make the mistake of thinking that American "Christians" will help us because they are supposedly for marriage. In fact, a major American "Christian" organization is looking at ODR today.

But my experience is that American "Christians" are even more infused with victim feminist ideology than most other segments of American society. This has led to the rise of feminist traitors like Senator Brownback who despises American men who marry foreign women while harping about how men are abusers and have bad intentions.

I think we need to get our help most from alpha males in US society where we can find them.

I personally date the women for casual dating purposes and I am totally shocked that my current girlfriend and I are getting so serious.

There are (or were before AFA removed 10,000 profiles) tens of thousands of foreign women online who say that 9 out of 10 men who write to them, don't bother coming to visit and those who come to visit are often not into committing.

Our best strategy is to push that we date women casually just like other American men and that IDAs are ultimately no different from Match.com.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2007, 05:58:25 AM by VeteransAbroad » Logged

Honest journalists will see the Tahirih Justice Center as a front for the NOW that appeals to conservative "Security Moms". Match.com and Yahoo and MySpace are actually working for total Internet regulation because they don't want clients to be anonymous and they want small dating sites/forums dead.
VeteransAbroad
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1204


This is a subway in Russia. Poor country?


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #7 on: January 22, 2007, 06:42:47 AM »

The reason why this topic goads me more than any other IMBRA topic is because, in real life even here in Western Europe, I have constantly found myself having to set a young western woman straight, mostly in a friendly manner, that she does have competition.

Smart western women hear that from a guy they like and nod their head in agreement.

Because it is pure logic and it is true. Radical feminism is about denying reality. That is why they try so hard to paint men who date foreigners as "socially inept."

Although we may get the nastiest part of IMBRA overturned soon, it is going to take $1Billion from an Arab sheik for us to nail home to western women that simple point.

The message is not anti-western-woman or anti-American-woman. The message is plain and simple: Global socialization is underway and the customers will go elsewhere and don't even think about trying to disparage those customers who go elsewhere, by calling them "socially inept".

I am not so sure that the men in the 11th Circuit Appeals Court, however, remember this pure logic that would have been in their brains 20 years ago. This has me very concerned.

It concerns me greatly that there aren't enough confident alpha males reading this who are prepared to intervene as "experts" in the European Connections Case if Suzanne Jackson is allowed to testify before the Appeals Court.
Logged

Honest journalists will see the Tahirih Justice Center as a front for the NOW that appeals to conservative "Security Moms". Match.com and Yahoo and MySpace are actually working for total Internet regulation because they don't want clients to be anonymous and they want small dating sites/forums dead.
VeteransAbroad
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1204


This is a subway in Russia. Poor country?


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2007, 08:02:49 AM »

We have to remember that serial killers, such as the Canadian pig farmer Robert Pickton, are characterized as socially inept (and in need of buying prostitutes) while hating their own countrywomen.

So the most important thing we can do at ODR is show that, for men who have passports and travel to date, the opposite is true about the socially inept part...and that, among many of the men who travel, there is just a very strong objection to the social dysfunctionalism that American society propagates while other countries have societies that do not propagate dysfunctionalism.

There are over 300 journalists camping out in Canada now at the trial of the pig-farmer serial killer. There are 0 journalists covering IMBRA, including Glenn Sacks. That highlights how the US media wants to propagate dysfunctionalism.

Let's not help them.

I just realized that, when the enemy says we "buy" the women we say hello to, they are saying that social ineptitude causes us to "need" to "buy". This is an anglo-saxon notion by the way. In Europe, for better or for worse, the concept is that men who "buy" "cannot commit to someone" or are "too busy for a real relationship". It still looks very bad to "buy" and it would not be attractive to women at all in Europe to know that a man used a prostitute...but her disgust would not expressed in terms of attaching other attributes to the man, such as social ineptitude, that probably don't have anything to do with the behavior.

European feminists do not see dating foreigners in terms of "buying" anyone. Men who date foreigners can be seen as being exactly the kind of guy who CAN commit to someone and who is NOT too busy for a real relationship.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2007, 08:22:04 AM by VeteransAbroad » Logged

Honest journalists will see the Tahirih Justice Center as a front for the NOW that appeals to conservative "Security Moms". Match.com and Yahoo and MySpace are actually working for total Internet regulation because they don't want clients to be anonymous and they want small dating sites/forums dead.
VeteransAbroad
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1204


This is a subway in Russia. Poor country?


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #9 on: January 22, 2007, 08:36:27 AM »

There seems to be a big difference between the way Americans talk about the issue of dating foreigners in real life, when faced with a man who is a lawyer or a doctor or an MBA, and the way they just throw around the concept that the average guy is socially inept on the web.

You don't get to be financially successful by being socially inept.

By the way, apologies to any guys out there who actually are very shy. I see nothing wrong with that. But the feminists (and apparently Glenn Sacks and other so-called Mens Rights Activists) do see something very wrong with that.

Does anyone remember the website I pointed to a few hours before Tristan changed the software last week...where some American men who thought they were alpha males, were laughing about men who would travel overseas for a date? I wrote an excellent rebuttal to that, but I would like to know what responses some of them gave because I clearly showed that it is redneck behavior to think poorly of a man who can fly to Paris on any weekend.

I should get a video camera and make small films that capture how European women (in France and Germany) react to learning about IMBRA. They are shocked because they know that the American men who come to Europe are the opposite of the kind of redneck who would think IMBRA is OK.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2007, 09:14:44 AM by VeteransAbroad » Logged

Honest journalists will see the Tahirih Justice Center as a front for the NOW that appeals to conservative "Security Moms". Match.com and Yahoo and MySpace are actually working for total Internet regulation because they don't want clients to be anonymous and they want small dating sites/forums dead.
Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!


Google visited last this page August 16, 2017, 02:33:17 PM

MKPortal ©2003-2006 mkportal.it