So, thank you for your firm stand!

I'm not claiming it. The evidence is there. REAL Women puts forth its platform. The hat is passed around. Donations to REAL Women aren't even tax deductible, and yet enough money comes in to keep the group quite active. A fringe radical group is not likely to be able to survive long that way.

It's just about the numbers. REAL Women can make it on its own, therefore, it must be situated somewhere near the middle of the spectrum.

Really! If my blood turned to ice, I'd have difficulty typing this or breathing or staying alive. Perhaps Williams is an alien disguised as a real woman. How can she live with a surname derived from the possessive of a man's first name?

It does not matter which area of society one looks at, the males with serious, life threatening needs are sacrificed so that females with monor needs can be served.

SOW, among others, leads this new and dangerously unfair Canadian way of seeing things. To paraphrase Trudeau: "Allowing injustice to one, ensures injustice to all."

Scott Tribe, would you characterize a women's group which is pro-abortion, pro-universal daycare only, pro-GLTB, anti-men and boys, anti-motherhood as a "centrist" group? This is just the partial agenda of the NAC and SOW, and they're getting close to $25,000,000 a year of taxpayers' money to forward these initiative. Seeing as they post only about $2,000,000 they spend on programs for "underprivileged and disadvantaged" women who are "victims" of a patriarchal society (sic), there are legitmate questions about where the other 20 or so millions of dollars go. Quite probably into salaries and networking and lobbying. So they lobby for their political issues at taxpayer expense. Is this equality, either for most Canadian women who disagree with NAC and SOW's agendas or for men, who get short shrift from the feminists and our government and judiciary?

It's a miracle--and a tribute to REAL Women's common sense approach to parenthool and family life--that they exist after 23 years and, in fact, are a vibrant group despite the opprobrium heaped upon them by their feminist "sisters" and the MSM. They put out a regular newsletter, full of facts you won't find in the MSM, and they make court presentations fairly often--all financed by the donations and contribtions of their own members--who, by the way, include men! REAL Women is not an exclusionary group, unlike the SOW who would never allow a man to be a member. So much for "equality."

Keep all these things in mind, Scott Tribe, when you ridicule Steve's description of REAL Women as a "centrist" group. It is far more centrist than the way-out-in-left-field, $23,000,000/year agenda of NAC/SOW--and the proof is that the membership dues of their members have kept them afloat for almost 25 years. I think it quite safe to predict that if the NAC or SOW had government funding cut off, and had to survive by donations from their members, they'd shut down tomorrow.

"If I am a heterosexual man but I, for whatever reasons, do not believe in marriage am I thus abusing my own human rights?"

The truth of the matter is that groups such as REAL Women are mainstream, centrist, and legitimate groups within Canadian society. The fact that so many Canadians have continued to provide economic support to REAL Women over the years proves that there are many Canadians, from coast to coast who support and believe in such Conservative groups. This is about breaking the liberal/socialist monopoly that exists here in Canada. From the Wheat Board to the Status of Women, the priority of every Conservative and Libertarian alike should be to keep up the pressure on the federal government and the media, getting the message out to average Canadians who are unaware or uninterested in what's going on, and organising opposition to these so-called 'essential' bureaucracies. We can still reverse and undo the damage done by Trudeau and build a better Canadian society, and it starts by taking these groups head on. After all, the devil himself was responsible for creating the Status of Women now, wasn't he?

Seriously, your views on feminism are so . . . well so . . . so . . . dated--and stereotypical, just what the MSM and other small-minded groups want you to believe. Please broaden your horizons and check out the real story. (Not the truncated political propaganda.) I know you can do it!