Monday, April 18, 2011

The Ladies Auxiliary of the Ladyhaters Club

Women in groups: Always trouble.
One of the strangest places in the burly world of Men’s Rightsers and MGTOWers is The Spearhead’s Shieldmaidens forum. And no, I am not making that name up. It’s a forum, essentially, for women interested in being a sort of Women’s Auxiliary to a bunch of guys who are all about hating women.

Given that such a role – trying to help dudes who don’t much like you or your whole gender -- is a bit of a tricky one, the forum moderator Hestia has written a long introductory post explaining just what new gals should and shouldn’t do to support their menfolk. It’s kind of a masterpiece of doublespeak.  Let’s look at some of its highlights.

Hestia starts out by warning the ladies that these rough men sometimes talk in a rough manner:

As this is a male environment, us girls can expect styles of communication that we might not use ourselves or readily relate to. For the purpose of this post, I will call all of this "locker room talk". … Topics and expressions women may find crude are likely to occur and generalizations about women (or white, western, whatever) used to adequately get a point across. These differences, while bothersome to some women, are not wrong in and of themselves and are not reason to shame men into expressing themselves differently. As women in the locker room, we are the ones who need to look the other [way] and make accommodations; not the men for whom this website is for.

In other words: the guys here may call you sluts and whores and worse, but really, that’s your fault for being here in the first place, so don’t complain.

Welcome aboard!

Hestia continues:

We must also respect this place as one of the few politically incorrect sanctuaries that men have in today's misandrist world. … We should not be bullying men into saying, "yes, indeed not all women are like that!" to appease our own egos. … This is sacred male friendly ground and should be treated as such. … We are but guests on this website and must know our place and respect certain boundaries for the sake of the men here and for the work towards gender peace.

Hard to be more abject than this. So how have the menfolk responded?

It appears that not too many men actually read the Shieldmaidens forum, but among those who do, the reaction has been a little less than enthusiastic. Our friend GlobalMan, one of the more excitable Spearhead regulars, basically tells her (and all women) to fuck off entirely:

I have voiced my opinion many times women should be banned all together from here. They are contributing nothing and they are taking up a lot of time and energy of the stupid young men who do not realise that women are just attention whores who won't actually do anything at the end of the day. ….

You women pretty much fuck up everything you stick your nose into. And you never, ever tire of fucking things up for men under the delusion you have 'something to contribute'. You don't. Get over it. You pop out babies. That is your one and only 'claim to fame' and it used to be enough for a man to love a woman for her whole life and to provide for her and the kids. Now it is not. So you women need to 'act like men' and suck it up.

Indeed. If women had any class at all you would leave of your own accord and let the men sort out what you refused to. The only posts from women here should be 'Men, please tell us what to do'.

A fellow calling himself Diogenes offers his two cents:

That Hestia has to write this thread proves that indeed women who come to this board do exactly that which she complains against. They have such a cozy and male-coddled life that they are shocked when some men rightly express their scorn and foul language towards their attitudes and manipulative behaviour. Women BREED misogyny because all they do is constantly manipulate and get the attention and protection of men by trying to look sexy all the time. Every time a man turns his head towards a pretty lady, she knows she is being looked after and will be rescued by a man if ever her poor little ass does something stupid. They are CHILDREN at heart. One female college student mentioned to me how according to her "every girl" has gone on dates just to get free dinners. How much more proof do we need that women are NO GOOD WHORES?

I guess that’s some of the "locker room talk" Hestia was warning the ladies about.

Granted, it's been awhile since I've seen the inside of a locker room, but I don't remember much of the talk in the locker rooms I've been in revolving around the no-good whorishness of all women. I think that might be because most men are not in fact hateful assholes who think all women are NO GOOD WHORES.That's just a theory though.


--

If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the "Share This" or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.

*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.

275 comments:

  1. I think Hestia is a bit delusional if she truly believes there is any chance at all of achieving "gender peace" with those hateful creeps. Not sure why she would even bother trying.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What on earth do you have to do to NOT count as a stupid whore for these people?

    ReplyDelete
  3. @Ozymandias

    Be born as a man, obviously.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Speaking of doublespeak, it boggles the mind that a group of men who bemoan women's supposed lack of accomplishments, and some of whom assert that women better suck up to men because they're physically weaker, would have a portion of their board named after a class of female warriors.

    Also, next time someone argues that MRAs don't hate women as a group, link them to this post.

    Now I'm going to go think about how awesome Éowyn (the context in which I learned the word "shieldmaiden") is.

    ReplyDelete
  5. *yawn*

    I am sure if me or any man showed as much obsession over misandrists, I would get told to get a life and stop dwelling over how awful women are.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I believe Hestia is married to another moderator on The Spearhead forum. Maybe her writing is a response to years of emotional abuse and brainwashing. Maybe this is her way of coping with living her daily life with an MRA. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em?

    Note: I would probably still try and beat 'em.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This one made me laugh:

    Women BREED misogyny because all they do is constantly manipulate and get the attention and protection of men by trying to look sexy all the time.

    As usual, Flight of the Conchords has a lyric for just such an occasion:

    I gotta tell her how hot she is

    But if I tell her how hot she is she'll think I'm being sexist

    She's so hot, she's making me sexist... bitch


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT5AQIlmM0I

    ReplyDelete
  8. nicko81m said...

    *yawn*

    I am sure if me or any man showed as much obsession over misandrists, I would get told to get a life and stop dwelling over how awful women are.


    Nick, get a life and stop dwelling on how awful women are.

    There--happy now?

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. “Nick, get a life and stop dwelling on how awful women are.”

    For one, I am not an MRA and I don't hangout in MRA sites.

    Secondly, I am not a feminist; the only feminist site I even bother to look at (more than a few times) is this one.

    Thirdly, 99 percent of the time, I am not hanging in this site.

    Which all means that I am not dwelling and obsessing over misandry/misogyny like the feminist zealots here and the MRA zealots in them sites.

    Why aren’t I dwelling and obsessing over this? *drums rolling*.....because I have a life.

    Having a life means I have other things/multiple things on my mind and agenda which involves being off of this blog and off of the internet altogether.

    Being a feminist zealot would be a very sad sheltered life. Nearly 99 percent of things that are cruising around in your mind are poor women wahhh, misogyny wahhhh. But what about the other things in this whole world? Surprise, surprise, there are actually things to feel happy about it. But feminist zealots seem to be very unhappy and depressed people. Not to mention, they have a serious chip on their shoulder towards men. I guess the mind of a feminist zealot is not capable enough to fit in them other things in life.

    What you have to realise is that you have a major problem if you dwell and obsess over female issues and misogyny as misogynists (the people you dwell and obsess over) also have major problems. I sure wouldn’t want to hang with someone who is like this no matter what direction this is going, either for it to be feminist or Men’s Rights. The zealots like the people in this blog and at the other side of the fence need serious help.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I have to say I think it's possible to be a feminist zealot (I am a proud, proud, flagrant, radical feminist) AND lead a happy and normal life. I have a career in the arts (I'm self-employed), I work out, I visit my family, I watch $2 movies on Tuesdays with my *gasp* feminist boyfriend, and I have extremely interest conversations with other flagrantly feminist people. It's a great and happy life I lead :)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Nicky, I'd say something to you, but it wouldn't make a difference.

    ReplyDelete
  13. And yet you comment here every day, Nick. Isn't it a little late to pull the cynical "I'm above it all" routine now?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Okay, what I'm really not getting is the characterization of Manboobz as a radical feminist site. It mostly just has quotes from MRA blogs. Sure they're not flattering quotes, but it's hard to find flattering quotes--I'd say the quotes David pulls are pretty representative.

    So why do these same quotes, pulled with fairly little commentary, but recontextualized for entertainment and criticism, suddenly become the most extreme feminism ever? I suspect David is a feminist, but he doesn't even really talk about that here. He just reposts what MRAs are saying.

    If quotes of your own words strike you as vicious mockery of your cause... maybe it's time to rethink your cause.

    ReplyDelete
  15. You beat me to it Captain.

    For someone so disdainful of feminists he spends a lot of time here.

    ReplyDelete
  16. there's a simple reason why women try to appease sexist men. It's because they want to meld with the world and they (misguidedly) feel that by pandering to these type of men that they are going to get ahead.
    I sexy ozymandias's statement. Any MRA's are once again welcome to respond to the question of what would make a woman acceptable in their eyes.

    ReplyDelete
  17. What's funny is that when Hestia pretends that women are the privileged ones and men the unprivileged, she ends up with an almost reasonable disclaimer.

    Now if the MRAs would reverse the genders maybe they'd realize why their constant whining on feminist blogs is so tiresome.

    ReplyDelete
  18. So, a woman who sees a bunch of men who are misogynistic to the core tries to appease them?

    That's like giving your own leg to a Great White Shark to calm it down.

    ReplyDelete
  19. @Holly...These are quotes from your leaders not just mere commentors.

    "All men are rapists and that's all they are"
    -- Marilyn French, Authoress; (later, advisoress to Al Gore's Presidential Campaign.)

    "Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience." - Catherine Comins

    "If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males." --Mary Daly, former Professor at Boston College, 2001.

    "The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race." -- Sally Miller Gearhart

    "You grow up with your father holding you down and covering your mouth so another man can make a horrible searing pain between your legs."
    -- Catherine MacKinnon (Prominent legal feminist scholar; University of Michigan, & Yale

    "The institution of sexual intercourse is anti-feminist" -- Ti-Grace Atkinson

    "Men love death. In everything they make, they hollow out a central place for death, let its rancid smell contaminate every dimension of whatever still survives. Men especially love murder. In art they celebrate it, and in life they commit it. They embrace murder as if life without it would be devoid of passion, meaning, and action, as if murder were solace, stilling their sobs as they mourn the emptiness and alienation of their lives."
    -- Andrea Dworkin

    Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman." -- Andrea Dworkin

    "I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig." -- Andrea Dworkin

    "I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." -- Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor.

    "The nuclear family must be destroyed... Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process." -- Linda Gordon

    "We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage." -- Robin Morgan

    "I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which man structurally does not have, does not have it because he cannot have it. He's just incapable of it."
    -- Barbara Jordan; Former Congresswoman.

    These are State officials, professors of higher acedemia, ms magazine editor and others in positions of power to make law. And these are just a scant few. If quotes of your own leaders strike you as vicious mockery of your cause... maybe it's time to rethink your cause.

    Silly me, thinking feminism was a Marxist hate ideology designed to destroy the family and transfer all social, economic and political power from men to women with the State as the ultimate authority. I guess you can always pick and choose what tastey fruits you wish to pick from the feminist tree while claiming innocence.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Hey heres some more of your leaders

    "Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release."
    -- Germaine Greer.

    "Men's sexuality is mean and violent, and men so powerful that they can 'reach WITHIN women to ****/construct us from the inside out.' Satan-like, men possess women, making their wicked fantasies and desires women's own. A woman who has sex with a man, therefore, does so against her will, 'even if she does not feel forced.'
    -- Judith Levine

    "All men are good for is ****ing, and running over with a truck".
    Statement made by A University of Maine Feminist Administrator

    "The ****ing Molesters Society". (Miami Herald, April 3, 1995) The ACAA is a lobbying group, which includes Ellen Bass (co-author of THE COURAGE TO HEAL), and Rene Frederickson, leading feminist psychotherapist

    "Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women's movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom for women cannot be won without the abolition of marriage" (feminist leader Sheila Cronan

    "Overthrowing capitalism is too small for us. We must overthrow the whole...patriarch!" (Gloria Steinem, radical feminist leader, editor of MS magazine

    "In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them" (Dr. Mary Jo Bane, feminist and assistant professor of education at Wellesley College

    "The most merciful thing a large family can to do one of its infant members is to kill it." (Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood

    I can go on and on. First of all you do realize we don't live under a capitolist anymore right? How silly of you if thats what you think. Lets see the goals of all your upstanding leaders. Destroy the family, transfer all social, political and economic wealth from men to women. The Marxist State we live in is the ultimate authority. Hmmm, sounds familiar.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Another quote list to pull apart! I'll place a wager right now (without checking) that at least half of these are from before 1990.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Actually, funny story: I do pick and choose which tasty fruits I pick from the feminist tree. I don't hold with every woman who ever used the "feminist" label. That's not cheating or being evasive. That's critical thinking.

    The problem with the MRM is not that you have lunatic misogynists in your ranks. Every sufficiently large movement has distasteful people saying terrible things in its name. The problem with the MRM is:

    1) Those lunatic misogynists seem to be your current popular leaders. The places you currently see a lot of mainstream feminists--Feministe, Feministing, Jezebel, Bitch Magazine, etc.--are pretty damn short on man-hating.

    Whereas the main MRM sites (The Spearhead, In Mala Fide, reddit/mensrights) seem to be about nothing but woman-hating. Hell, advocating for men often seems like Priority 2, coming well after advocating against women.

    2) The lunatic misogynists never seem to catch any flack from your side. Jezebel ran a post just today that went a little too easy (not approving of it, but just not disapproving ENOUGH) on an anti-male video game (http://jezebel.com/#!5793232/choke-and-tase-your-boyfriend-in-charming-video-game), and you can see that their commenters absolutely POUNCED on them for it. This was not something Jezebel commenters were going to let slide. Misandry within feminism gets called out.

    Where are the Spearhead commenters saying "well, yeah, I agree that men get a shit deal and deserve better from society, but you went way too far there, man"? I don't see a lot, and when one does speak up, they get horrendously shouted down.

    3) Y'all could learn some plain old MANNERS. I think MRAs are misogynists--that's not an insult so much as a descriptor--but I don't refer to them as "MRAtard hate bastard monsters" every time I talk, because that's just a little too... frotthy, you know? Your movement could use, at an absolute minimum, some serious de-frothing.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Hey heres a little dillema for you. Since women now recieve 56% of all college degrees you would think Title IX would go away, right?

    Not so, in fact it's tentacles are reaching ever further. Title IX is now above the law with its own far reaching powers. Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Not if you're a man. The new standard is "preponderance of evidence." In other words a womans word will get any man booted from college. Sweet huh? http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/2011/apr/13/univ-to-revise-sexual-misconduct-policies/

    As for the false wage gap it seems women make more than men, because if you don't pay them more or promote them faster they sue from "sexism." Also more men are unemployed than women, yaaaaay. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576250672504707048.html

    So if women make more than men and are getting more college degree's you'd think Affirmative Action and Title IX would go away, right? Oh no they'll be getting oodles of billions of extra dollars and more power for the State to incarcerate men, well cockadoodledoo.

    So much more I could leave you with but hwo about that fine woman from the Duke Lacrosse Case. She up and knifes hey boyfriend to death. Awww but don't worry, she'll claim, oooh, I don't, know PMS or bi polar disease. That bi polar thingy is the flavor of the year for women right now. Don't fret you can all rally to the cause, I'm sure you can get her 2 years of "help" in a mental spa. Funny when men need help we send them to prison.

    Men are Imperfect Women. Men are Broken.
    Men are the burgiousse oppressor class.
    Women are the peasant victim class.
    Man =Bad.
    Woman = Good.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Thanks for the quote from Andrea Dworkin. I had been wondering if we should disavow her, given the obvious man-hatred that is always referred to. But here you are supplying a really valid quote, that explains much of the hatred we see on the spearhead site. The men who long to kill women (the V3NOM quote, the quote from Peter Andrew Nolan) are explained perfectly by her. A beautifully written bulls-eye:

    "They embrace murder as if life without it would be devoid of passion, meaning, and action, as if murder were solace, stilling their sobs as they mourn the emptiness and alienation of their lives."
    -- Andrea Dworkin

    ReplyDelete
  25. @Holly...Funny story, Marxist also picked and chose what they liked as they murdered 20 million Ukrainian peasants. Incarcerated innocent men who dared to disagree with their hate movement all on a Marxists word. I wonder what the outcome of this fun little social experiment will be?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Hey, do you ever wonder what exactly is a restraining order? It's when a woman calls up for one, she doesn't even have to go in person, it's a phone call away to get a man barred from his own home. The State gives out over 3 million of these a year.

    It seems once a man is given one of these he is banned from his own home or domicile if you will. Theres no trial, no nothing. Just the State enforcing a law written, lobbyed and passed by feminists. Yet again more power for the State given to women. It all sounds quite Marxist, doesn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Okay, that doesn't even make sense. "You know who else picked and chose things? HITLER!"

    Now go read more than the first sentence of my comment. I'm not retyping it, it's still up there.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Heres a fun story, women getting men to kill for them in defense of a false rape. Too damn sweet.

    Exactly one year ago, on April 18, 2010, Felisha Hardison, 25, from Latrobe, Pennsylvania, along with her mother, picked up a group of young men, ages 19-22, and drove them to the home of Cody Wightman, 25. Hardison and her mother then sat in their minivan while the young men proceeded to kick in Mr. Wightman's front door, then punch and kick him, and finally, beat him with a claw hammer. They cut Mr. Wightman's head and bruised him, but, thankfully, Mr. Wightman survived the attack relatively unscathed.

    The attack occurred because Hardison had told her mother and the young men that Mr. Wightman had raped her. Police say the rape claim was false.

    Last Friday, Hardison, her mother, and four of the young men pled guilty to charges in connection with the attack.

    It turns out that several weeks before the attack on Mr. Wightman, Hardison had falsely accusing another man of raping her. She pled guilty to that charge, along with charges related to the attack on Mr. Wightman, last Friday. In that earlier false rape claim, Hardison told police she had been raped by a man with whom she has three children. She claimed the man forced her to have sex with him, punched her and choked her, and videotaped the act with his cell phone camera. The man denied the allegations and said Hardison made the accusations to get custody of one of their children. A review of the cell phone camera footage contradicted Hardison's claims of rape and showed the two had consensual sex, police said.

    Last Friday, two of the young men in the attack on Mr. Wightman were given maximum sentences of 23 months and two years respectively. Hardison's mother was given a sentence of nine to 23 months in jail, but she was given credit for time already served and is no longer in custody. Hardison and two other young men were given sentences of two to four years. But note, Hardison's sentence also included her unrelated, prior false rape claim, so, presumably, Hardison received a more lenient sentence for the attack on Mr. Wightman than the two young men who merely exacted her vengeance against Mr. Wightman.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Wow, restraining orders, huh? THAT'S what you're going after as a crime against men?

    So I have a question: Say a woman has assaulted you. Say she hasn't been convicted for whatever reason, or maybe it wasn't all-out assault but she's just been persistently extremely threatening, and you're very afraid of her and don't want her near you. How would you like the law to deal with this?

    Don't say "ARGLE BARGLE THE LAW HATES MEN AND I WOULD BE CASTRATED AND SHE WOULD GET A MILLION DOLLARS," I mean how would you like the law to deal with this?

    Maybe they could issue some sort of... order... an order that... restrains... her from coming near you? Wouldn't that be a better solution than living in fear?

    (Also, no idea where you got the idea that this could be done over the phone, seriously. At a very minimum you have to sign stuff.)

    ReplyDelete
  30. Christ, lay off the ctrl-v, dude. You don't have to copy-paste the entire Spearhead in here.

    We get it, sometimes women harm men. I actually don't deny this. Women are people, and sometimes people are assholes. Nonetheless we as a society give people rights, and that's a good thing.

    ReplyDelete
  31. @Holly...I guess it's lucky were not in the same room. Under VAWA if a man uses "logic" on a woman it's considered DV. You could have men incarcerated. Sounds like Marxism.

    I read your comment Holly and you read mine, but apparently you couldn't make sense out of it? Come now you'll have to do much better than that. You understood.

    As Aristotle said, "Women do quite well under Tyranny."

    ReplyDelete
  32. @NWOslave: could you actually, y'know, source these quotes and stories? Cause as it is, we have no idea if you're just pulling these out of your ass.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Did you just threaten to hurt me?

    Or do you just not understand how hyperbole works, so you're saying things like "Under VAWA it's considered DV if a man rides a unicorn past a woman eating peas!"





    All I can say is I don't even know how women are DIFFERENT from men, most of the time. I got born with a vagina, is all. Trying to make the best of it. Working a job, dating a nice fella, arguing on the Internet with people who want me to, I don't know, stop being so darn vagina-having or something. If you were born with a vagina you'd do the same.

    ReplyDelete
  34. It's not even true that there's no trial with a restraining order. Anyone has the right to challenge a restraining order in court. I know someone who did it successfully.

    NWO, you're just spouting bullshit with the occasional kernel of truth--again. You have not a grain of credibility with anyone here.

    ReplyDelete
  35. NWOslave-restraining orders require preponderance of the evidence and in Arizona at least, emergency orders can be granted over the phone only from a peace officer's request. Not merely the plaintiff's request. It only lasts until the next judicial day unless there is a reason to extend it.

    Note in my link it says nothing about only women getting those orders-men may get them as well. As for the county I live in, Maricopa-one court does video orders from people still in the hospital.

    Yale also is a private business, if they wanted to throw anyone out for any reason, they could. Preponderance of the evidence is a reasonable standard to remove someone the campus when you are dealing with someone who could, oh, I do not know murder one of the students.

    ReplyDelete
  36. This...no longer even slightly resembles a conversation anymore. Summary:

    various people: Some points about the MRA movement

    NWO: Terrible things said/done by women!

    various people: Rebuttal or reply to NWO

    NWO: More terrible things done by women!

    various people: More rebuttals and replies

    NWO: More terrible things done by women!

    ReplyDelete
  37. Why quote a story about a guy who did not die and claim that women are having men murdered on false claims of rape? Having men beaten yes, but murdered? That is not evidence of it.

    ReplyDelete
  38. @Holly...Oh no, no, no. "Rights" are for women not men.

    Lets run down the list of rights.

    Men have NO reproductive rights. Don't even think of saying men have the right to not have sex, because after the man and woman have sex and conception takes place they BOTH could've not had sex but they chose to.

    We went trhu it yesterday that after divorce men have NO rights to their children. Women get default custody, this cannot be denied.

    A restraining order means men have NO right to even dwell in an apartment with a woman if she chooses to evict him.

    Under VAWA, in a domestic dispute a man always is the "predominant aggressor" And under VAWA someone MUST go to jail, even if the man is the one bleeding HE will go to jail. He has NO rights.

    Title IX which I just showed you extends like a venomous snake, usurping the right of innocent until proven guilty, further under the new Title IX the accused, (man) will not even be able to confront his accuser. Both of these are against the constitution.

    Under Affirmative Action in 2012 50% of all CEOs will manditorily have to be women, no merit is required, only gender. These men will be fired. I have felt first hand the quota system when applying for employment as a maintenance manager. The fellow doing the interview leaned in close like it was a conspiracy and said, "you're perfect for the job but I NEED a woman to fill the position." I have NO rights to equal opportunity employment. I didn't fill the quota.

    You speak to me of "rights." We live in a Marxist country, where one rule applys.

    Men are Imperfect Women. Men are Broken.
    Men are the burgiousse oppressor class.
    Women are the peasant victim class.
    Man = Bad.
    Woman = Good.

    ReplyDelete
  39. You want sources? When I give them you discount them, whats the point? You want a source for VAWA, google it. Stop pretending like you don't know what I'm talking about. Any other time you're all geniuses, now all the sudden you're helpless know nothings?

    ReplyDelete
  40. I think that guy was just using it as an excuse to not hire you. "Psst, I am not hiring you, not because you are an unqualified weirdo who would scare our clients but because we need a woman."

    ReplyDelete
  41. @Elizebeth...Oh so a woman falsely accuses a man of rape, like that never happens right? Then she rounds up a bunch of friends to teach that evil rapist a lesson. He dies and they go to prison and this isn't a prooblem for you? A dead man and men in prison who ran to save a womans honor. Go feminism. This happens all the time, but I guess sometimes men falsely accused of rape can learn something. Isn't that what one of your great leaders said?

    ReplyDelete
  42. @ Elizebeth...Yea that it lizzy, 25 years as a machinist, wireman, machine designer, installer and assmbler yet a 2 year college girl was better qualified.

    ReplyDelete
  43. NWOslave-I gave clear evidence that disputes your points about restraining orders and private business controlling access to their property.

    And where in the VAWA says that men are automatically stripped of all constitutional rights? Considering the SCOTUS easily smacked down some of the law, you would think they would have noticed a provision that said "ALL MEN LOSE THEIR RIGHTS UNDER THIS ACT AND WOMEN ARE NOW THE SUPERIOR SEX."

    ReplyDelete
  44. You haven't answered my question, NWO. (You haven't answered ANY questions except "would you like to unfocusedly rant some more?")

    If a woman had threatened you and was stalking you but could not be incarcerated, what would you like the law to do about it?

    ReplyDelete
  45. No NWOslave, it does not happen all the time. It did not even happen in your example. So if you are going to claim there is mass slaughter of men over false rape accusations, find some actual evidence or admit you are wrong. (And no, I do not expect you to admit you are wrong.)

    Also, again, the guy probably was not going to tell you the real reason he was not going to hire you-it would hurt your widdle feelings.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Wow, I am not even a feminist and I agree with most of the quotes NWOslave presented. I am guessing that was not the intended effect. But what is so bad about most of these? I don't agree with the ones about beating up men or running them over, because I kinda like not getting beaten up or ran over. But apart from that, it's a pretty good collection of quotes, if you believe in that sort of thing.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Under Affirmative Action in 2012 50% of all CEOs will manditorily have to be women, no merit is required, only gender.

    And nobody told us feminists? How could that be? Must be a conspiracy...

    ReplyDelete
  48. @Holly...Oh I see, someone "could" murder someone else? Sounds just like all men are potential rapists to me. Maybe the State can offer more protection. More power to the State, yaaaayyy!!! Better yet why not just have a man kill another man by false accusation, or does that never happen. This way you can kill two birds with one stone. Plus you can ask the State for even more "protection" Go State.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Now all we need is for NWO to demand to see Obama's birth certificate.

    Come on, NWO, you know you want to go there! Get out that tin foil hat!

    ReplyDelete
  50. Uh, she is asking if YOU a MALE has a female in YOUR life who is not leaving you alone despite repeated requests and her not violating the law in a way that would send her to jail, what would you do about it?

    ReplyDelete
  51. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  52. I'm starting to think that NWO is, um, it's not too much of an ad hominem if I go with "drunk," is it? Under the influence of something--internal or external, temporary or permanent--not giving him full use of his cognitive functions. Maybe drunk.

    Never even mind content, I'm just talking about the typing here.

    ReplyDelete
  53. None of my question have ever been answered. It's time to put on my tin foil hat and go to sleep. Got to get up early and risk my life in a low paying hazardous job, and yes I do risk my life(I'm so damned privileged for that $19 bucks an hour). Look on the bright side, this might be my last post.

    ReplyDelete
  54. One last post, I never drink, ever. Rots brain cells ya know.

    ReplyDelete
  55. If you'd asked a question, actually, it probably would have been answered. But "WOMEN ARE EVIL MONSTERS" isn't a question.

    Next time, try "ARE WOMEN EVIL MONSTERS?"

    ReplyDelete
  56. There was a question (oh and $19 an hour is not a low paying wage. $8 is a low paying wage) about Title IX funding. Title IX says: No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance..."
    —United States Code Section 20

    Since it does not specify which sex, it applies equally to both. And if you want to complain about men not having access to colleges, first find out why they are not applying in greater numbers-that is a key question that no one seems to be asked much less answered.

    ReplyDelete
  57. NWO, we went over all this the last time someone cut and pasted one of these evil feminist lists here: These lists are typically so full of mistakes and distortions that I don't want them posted here UNLESS you can give specific citations for each quote and, preferably, a link so we can see these quotes in context.

    Some of these quotes I remember from the list that I went through here:

    http://www.manboobz.com/2011/02/factchecking-list-of-hateful-quotes.html

    The Marilyn French quote that starts off your list is in fact a quote from a fictional character in her novel The Women's Room; it is not a reflection of her ideology.

    Judith Levine is not by any stretch of the imagination a "radical feminist." I suspect that quote is from her book "My enemy, my love," a book ABOUT misandry, not a book promoting it, and is in fact a summary of other people's views, not her own.

    You can see more about that book and her other books here:

    http://www.judithlevine.com/books/

    The Csatherine Comins quote is not actually a quote from her, but someone else's paraphrase of what she said. She's not a prominent feminist.

    I've never heard of Sally Miller Gearhart.

    The Catharine MacKinnon quote doesn't sound like anything of hers I've ever read.

    Some of the quotes I know are true: the Dworkin quote about death, the Barbara Jordan quote. The rest are probably a mix of true and made up (or taken completely out of context in a way that distorts their meaning).

    Many if not most of these quotes are from the 1970s, some from the 80s and 90s. Dworkin and other radical feminists have been thoroughly critiqued by numerous feminists, and most of those who call themselves feminists today implicitly or explicitly reject their ideas. Some of those quoted have also changed and moderated their views since then. And some of them have died.

    In short, these are NOT the "leaders" of feminism today. Some of them WERE prominent feminists who had their heyday decades ago, and whose ideas have been rejected by most feminists today. Others were never prominent, and are only remembered today because MRAs keep putting them on lists like this.

    ReplyDelete
  58. NWO: You realize that that ruling out the possibility of drunkenness only makes your behavior more absurd.

    ReplyDelete
  59. David: Do I win my bet (more than 50% before 1990)?

    ReplyDelete
  60. @Will Narbon, I'm pretty sure he IS getting all these "facts" from the rectal repository, honestly.

    ReplyDelete
  61. "Yea that it lizzy, 25 years as a machinist, wireman, machine designer, installer and assmbler yet a 2 year college girl was better qualified."

    Ever think maybe it's your charming personality that got you let go?

    ReplyDelete
  62. Wait a minute...what questions was he even asking?

    ReplyDelete
  63. Couldn't find any new material in your daily trawl, Futrelle? You had to dig up this old stuff?

    Globalman has long ago been (unjustly) banned from the Spearhead forums, which I'm sure you're well aware of, given how much time you spend obsessively smearing MRAs.

    ---

    You know what, Futrelle? This website gives me hope for the future. The fact that feminists like you have gone from ignoring us to actively fighting us is a sign of progress. Judging by your actions, we are clearly a real threat to you now.

    Manboobz.com should give much moral support to anti-feminists everywhere.

    ReplyDelete
  64. "“Nick, get a life and stop dwelling on how awful women are.”

    For one, I am not an MRA and I don't hangout in MRA sites.

    Secondly, I am not a feminist; the only feminist site I even bother to look at (more than a few times) is this one.

    Thirdly, 99 percent of the time, I am not hanging in this site.

    Which all means that I am not dwelling and obsessing over misandry/misogyny like the feminist zealots here and the MRA zealots in them sites.

    Why aren’t I dwelling and obsessing over this? *drums rolling*.....because I have a life.

    Having a life means I have other things/multiple things on my mind and agenda which involves being off of this blog and off of the internet altogether.

    Being a feminist zealot would be a very sad sheltered life. Nearly 99 percent of things that are cruising around in your mind are poor women wahhh, misogyny wahhhh. But what about the other things in this whole world? Surprise, surprise, there are actually things to feel happy about it. But feminist zealots seem to be very unhappy and depressed people. Not to mention, they have a serious chip on their shoulder towards men. I guess the mind of a feminist zealot is not capable enough to fit in them other things in life.

    What you have to realise is that you have a major problem if you dwell and obsess over female issues and misogyny as misogynists (the people you dwell and obsess over) also have major problems. I sure wouldn’t want to hang with someone who is like this no matter what direction this is going, either for it to be feminist or Men’s Rights. The zealots like the people in this blog and at the other side of the fence need serious help."

    Don't worry, Nick. You'll be a Feminist soon enough. You can't stay perched up on that fence forever, and fence-sitters tend to fall on the safe side of the fence, in the end.

    ReplyDelete
  65. So you agree with everything those two posted about women Forweg?

    ReplyDelete
  66. One particularly irritating thing that NWO and other MRAs constantly do is refer to Title IX like it is the root of all evil. Title IX reads:

    "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.."

    Sounds quite sinister, doesn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  67. Wow, I must live a cloistered life. I had no idea that imbeciles actually put their woman-hatred up on the internet like that.

    Of course, NWOslave is also a rightwing nutjob as well. How surprising.

    ReplyDelete
  68. forweg, GlobalMan is Peter Nolan, right? I gather that at one point he was banned, but he's back and posting like a madman, and mostly getting lots of upvotes.

    Also: stuff posted a year ago is somehow not fair game for me? You'd better tell that to NWOslave here, who is still blaming feminists today for shit Andrea Dworkin said in the 70s.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Have you heard of any of them celebrating The Screwfly Solution David? Especially since that Peter Nolan person seems to think this is the best solution for all of his ills.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Dammit. Internet ate my post.

    Anyway, I actually saw that a week or so ago; it's pretty good in a Twilight Zone sort of way.

    It's based on a story by sci-fi writer James Tiptree Jr., which was actually the pseudonym of Alice Sheldon, who wrote as a man so as to get her stories taken seriously by the not-exactly-enlightened male editors of the sci-fi magazines at the time. (And this was not in the 30s or 40s; this was actually in the late 60s and 70s.)

    She had a very strange life, which included trips into the jungles of the Congo as a child with her gorilla hunting/studying parents, and a later stint in the CIA. A friend of mine is reading a biography of her.

    http://www.julie-phillips.com/africa.htm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Tiptree,_Jr.

    ReplyDelete
  71. "So you agree with everything those two posted about women Forweg?"

    No, I don't. But I feel no particular need to renounce them, either. Why should I?

    Sentiments such as theirs are an inevitable consequence of feminism. Misandry breeds misogyny.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Forweg...

    I am not a feminist either. I just think that the MRAs are giving the rest of the men in the world a bad name and that women should be treated as equals to men.

    Dave really hasn't asked for anything out of the ordinary for women (albeit in fancy words)

    ReplyDelete
  73. Man, I am on the fence about the whole feminists vs MRAs thing, but even I find that shit repugnant and scary. Both the women and the men.

    ReplyDelete
  74. @Holly

    Don't forget, In Mala Fide is filled with "giant racists too" thus producing a two headed attack on attractiveness to women (Sexist and Racist)

    Sure there maybe women who are racist too but you are better off chatting up women on the Stormfront. Ironically they are quite likely to like the whole "I am a dumb thug, hear me smack bitches and whine loudly about the darkies" attitude that a lot of MRAs have.

    They have the same "if women don't like me there must be something wrong with them" attitude.

    ReplyDelete
  75. NWO has just demonstrated that he knows as little about Marxism as he does about feminism, the law, history, anthropology, or any other part of reality.

    PS NWO, we have already debunked most of the claims you have just made on other threads. Sheer volume of ridiculous crap does not make it worthy or profound.

    ReplyDelete
  76. I am not a feminist either. I just think that the MRAs are giving the rest of the men in the world a bad name and that women should be treated as equals to men.

    Don't worry Avicenna, most feminists are quite aware that reactionary misogynists aren't representative of all men...

    I do have to say, though, this is the second time in three days that someone has said "I'm not a feminist... I just want women to have equal rights." Leading me to ask--which is it? If you want women to have equal rights... well, that's feminism, in a nutshell. Maybe you don't agree with specific policy positions associated with feminism, like, say, mandatory paid parental leave, but that doesn't make you a not-feminist.

    It's like saying, "I'm not a supporter of the Civil Rights Movement, I just think black people should be able to eat at any restaurant they like, and vote freely, and not be denied housing or jobs because of their race..." What's stopping you from identifying as a supporter?

    ReplyDelete
  77. Maybe because they don't want to be associated with people like you? I don't blame them. Thanks to the efforts of specimens like yourself, ginmar, cynickal, and many others, feminism in average people's minds equals 'group of shrill, irrational, abusive, man-hating dimwits'. One can be for equality of the sexes without wanting to belong to such a group.

    ReplyDelete
  78. So, NWOslave is a teetotaller, eh? Colour me "unsurprised grey."

    Let this be a lesson to all of us about the ravages of a life lived in the absence of alcohol's moderating influence.

    ReplyDelete
  79. The idea is that feminists often speak in incredibly confusing ways using "waffle" (scientific term for using big words when simple ones suffice). It's an idea that we are trying to make the most difficult of subjects as easy as possible to read while a lot of feminist theory is very complicated.

    It's simple "genders are equal except on nuclear submarines" (It's unfair to request women to take the pill for long periods of time to completely eliminate their periods. And indeed there is a side effect of hormonal drugs in that they can cause depression particularly if using the higher dose COCPs as I have some experience with a friend whose condition improved significantly after being moved onto low dose COCPs with the placebo period.)

    I agree that I am a "bit sexist". When I see a pretty woman I get distracted. I carry shopping, hold open doors and so on. People say it's patronising, I feel awkward not doing it. You may want someone to have equal rights but the idea is that traditionally men are expected to behave a certain way and a lot of women expect that.

    Would it be a bad thing to lose any of this? Would life be so much worse if marriages turned into indian ones where both sides sit down and plan out a wedding as if they were planning the invasion of Poland rather than the guy attempting to pull of some harebrained scheme to surprise the woman? Trust me the second way is far better than the first.

    I would be against that. Not all the old ways are bad.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Because standing up for women would get him labeled pussywhipped by other men.

    And can we stop using misandry like it's a valid concept? It's like whining reverse racism.

    Forweg's such a hypocrite. He doesn't bitch at what's his face---can't tell 'em apart----for posting long unsourced undated but probably decades old quotes from non-feminists, but he sure whines about David quoting current quotes. The classic hypocrisy of the privileged class, trying to make reduction of privilege seem like the loss of human rights.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Wasn't Ion flouncing on another topic? Why is he still here?

    ReplyDelete
  82. I don't want to sound like a pop psychologist, but I wonder if Hestia and the other "Shield maidens" have codependent personalities. They are blaming themselves for the misogyny on the Spearhead website. I would not be surprised if they have been in abusive relationships and so they think that being put down and insulted is normal, or that they deserve it just for being women. I sensed that the posters Globalman and Diogenes are narcissistic with a strong sense of entitlement, as in entitled to beautiful, meek women to dominate. Narcissists tend to be attracted to codependents with low self esteem.

    The Spearhead moderators quickly ban moderates who could acts as a voice of reason, and so these unhealthy people are around only other unhealthy people. They get caught up in their little world/cult together and don't realize how far they have strayed from normal.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Ion-you did not come on here with any sort of basic respect you claim you have for any person. You came on here spoiling for a fight and got one. And now you are claiming "well since you reacted the way I demanded, not only are you stupider than I, you also are terrible man haters."

    No, they are perfectly normal people who stood up for themselves.

    Forweg-that is not feminism they are reacting to. In fact, what Globalman said is essentially the same thing that Aristotle said about women over two thousand years ago. The difference being that Aristotle said it in more refined language and was more accepting of the role women had to play in society. Nor has anything feminists have put out in the past 150 years the equal to anything those two said. A little from the two women you constantly cite as proof all feminists are evil misandrists perhaps-but they were thoroughly refuted by mainstream and even most of the fringe feminists. You not only do not refute them, you excuse their misogyny as if they have just cause to feel that way.

    ReplyDelete
  84. I don't read NWO posts, I just read Holly. All the content and 100% more humor.

    Also, yes, you always have a right to challenge a restraining order with a hearing.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Or they genuinely believe that modern women have lost something intricately feminine that defines them.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Ion-you did not come on here with any sort of basic respect you claim you have for any person. You came on here spoiling for a fight and got one. And now you are claiming "well since you reacted the way I demanded, not only are you stupider than I, you also are terrible man haters."

    No, they are perfectly normal people who stood up for themselves.


    May I suggest you are really stretching the definition of "perfectly normal". My basic respect went out the window when I saw how people were talking here. Tell me, was SallyStrange "standing up for herself" when she called T4T an 'idiot loser' for disagreeing with her - politely, I might add? Was ginmar "standing up for herself" when she was ranting and cursing like a lunatic? I suppose making the umpteenth statement about "flouncing" (there's that original insult again) or "inflatable dolls", those fine folks were just "standing up for themselves?" Give me a break. Oh, and lest you keep assuming I see myself as some kind of victim, trust me, I'm not. I simply gave as good as I got. It's actually been pretty fun. :)

    ReplyDelete
  87. On the nuclear submarine thing - if a woman feels it's her calling to serve on a nuclear submarine, and wants to take birth control to eliminate her periods, she should be able to. Maybe she's post-menopausal. Maybe she's had a hysterectomy. Maybe she's willing to take the risks. Maybe she'll use the Diva cup, which is reusable. Birth control is getting better and better, it's possible.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Acivenna-why do you think it is sexist to admire someone's good looks? Generally if a person gussies up they are seeking admiring looks and that goes for men to. Being polite is also not sexist (in other words, holding the door open for someone or helping a little old lady with her groceries-notwithstanding Terry Pratchett's belief that little old ladies can carry double or treble their own weight-is just being mannerly.)

    ReplyDelete
  89. @NWOslave:

    About your signature:
    Men are Imperfect Women. Men are Broken.
    Men are the burgiousse oppressor class.
    Women are the peasant victim class.
    Man =Bad.
    Woman = Good.


    "Burgiousse" is not a word. I suspect what you mean is "bourgeois." If you want to be taken seriously, anywhere (not just by feminists), it's a good idea to use proper spelling.

    ReplyDelete
  90. The idea is that feminists often speak in incredibly confusing ways using "waffle" (scientific term for using big words when simple ones suffice). It's an idea that we are trying to make the most difficult of subjects as easy as possible to read while a lot of feminist theory is very complicated.

    I find this difficult to follow. You don’t like using big words when small ones will suffice, therefore, not a feminist? This only follows if you assume that a.) it’s true that those big words really are 100% replaceable with smaller ones and b.) all feminists are in agreement that only the big words will do. I don’t think either of those is the case.

    It's simple "genders are equal except on nuclear submarines" (It's unfair to request women to take the pill for long periods of time to completely eliminate their periods. And indeed there is a side effect of hormonal drugs in that they can cause depression particularly if using the higher dose COCPs as I have some experience with a friend whose condition improved significantly after being moved onto low dose COCPs with the placebo period.)

    Again, this doesn’t really follow, without certain assumptions. Assumption a: you have to cease menstruating in order to serve on a submarine. Assumption b: there is, and never will be, any medical advances that will allow women to do so without debilitating side effects. Assumption c: all feminists agree that… what? Women should be able to serve on a submarine, AND menstruate all over everybody while they’re on board?

    I agree that I am a "bit sexist".

    This is a sexist society. We are all “a little bit sexist,” just as we are all a little bit racist. Only fools and bigots proclaim "I'm not sexist/racist AT ALL!"

    ReplyDelete
  91. Ion-Sally was calling him what he is. He has, on more than one occasion, acted exactly like that. He is no different then NWOslave with the sole exception he does not use the kind of language that NWOslave uses.

    Ginmar has her/his reasons for being the way s/he is. I do not always agree with the reaction (like with Kave) but I also think that most of the time, s/he is correct in the tone used.

    Also, the word flounce is a pretty accurate description of the way you were acting. Kind of like when Cartman flounced off saying "screw you guys, I am going home."

    ReplyDelete
  92. ...Continued from previous post...

    When I see a pretty woman I get distracted.

    So don’t we all (or substitute pretty whomever, according to preference). Feminism doesn’t ask you to stop experiencing distraction thanks to physical attraction. It only asks you to keep your penis’ opinion to yourself unless you’re actively trying to strike up a romantic relationship with a particular woman.

    I carry shopping, hold open doors and so on. People say it's patronising, I feel awkward not doing it. You may want someone to have equal rights but the idea is that traditionally men are expected to behave a certain way and a lot of women expect that.

    That’s just politeness. I open doors for anyone and carry shopping if it’s necessary, regardless of gender. Whether it’s “patronizing” or not is something only you can know. Do you do it because you regard women as inherently weak? No? Then it’s not patronizing regardless of what someone else may think.

    As far as what behavior is expected by SOME (clearly not all) women--So the fuck what? Some men expect me to simper and giggle and flirt whenever I speak to them, regardless of the situation, and judge me negatively when I don’t. Are you saying that you aren’t a feminist because some women aren’t feminists, and will judge you negatively for not opening doors for them? I mean, that doesn’t make any sense in the first place, but when you add in the fact that feminism has fuck-all to say about the desirability of opening doors or carrying things for people (only about making assumptions of strength or weakness based on gender), the illogic of this train of thinking becomes undeniable.

    Would it be a bad thing to lose any of this?

    It would be a good thing if you could lose your unexamined and inaccurate assumptions, yes.

    Would life be so much worse if marriages turned into indian ones where both sides sit down and plan out a wedding as if they were planning the invasion of Poland rather than the guy attempting to pull of some harebrained scheme to surprise the woman? Trust me the second way is far better than the first.

    Bit of a non sequitur here. Arranged marriages vs. love marriages? Certainly a question feminists grapple with, but ultimately the only truly feminist goal is to make sure that every woman AND man who enters into such agreements does so informed and of his or her own free will.

    …Not all the old ways are bad.

    Agreed, so let’s be more judicious and deliberate about choosing which old ways we get rid of, and which ones we preserve.

    ReplyDelete
  93. About T4T--he may not swear much, but his rank dishonesty is far more uncivil than 1,000 "fuck"s could ever be.

    ReplyDelete
  94. ...Continued from previous post... If this is a double post, please ignore--I think it got eaten the first time, for no discernable reason.

    Avicenna was speaking:

    When I see a pretty woman I get distracted.

    So don’t we all (or substitute pretty whomever, according to preference). Feminism doesn’t ask you to stop experiencing distraction thanks to physical attraction. It only asks you to keep your penis’ opinion to yourself unless you’re actively trying to strike up a romantic relationship with a particular woman.

    I carry shopping, hold open doors and so on. People say it's patronising, I feel awkward not doing it. You may want someone to have equal rights but the idea is that traditionally men are expected to behave a certain way and a lot of women expect that.

    That’s just politeness. I open doors for anyone and carry shopping if it’s necessary, regardless of gender. Whether it’s “patronizing” or not is something only you can know. Do you do it because you regard women as inherently weak? No? Then it’s not patronizing regardless of what someone else may think.

    Some women expect that behavior? So the fuck what? Some men expect me to simper and giggle and flirt whenever I speak to them, regardless of the situation, and judge me negatively when I don’t. Are you saying that you aren’t a feminist because some women aren’t feminists, and will judge you negatively for not opening doors for them? I mean, that doesn’t make any sense in the first place, but when you add in the fact that feminism has fuck-all to say about the desirability of opening doors or carrying things to people, the illogic of this train of thinking becomes truly apparent.

    Would it be a bad thing to lose any of this?

    It would be a good thing if you could lose your unexamined and inaccurate assumptions, yes.

    Would life be so much worse if marriages turned into indian ones where both sides sit down and plan out a wedding as if they were planning the invasion of Poland rather than the guy attempting to pull of some harebrained scheme to surprise the woman? Trust me the second way is far better than the first.

    Bit of a non sequitur here. Arranged marriages vs. love marriages? Certainly a question feminists grapple with, but ultimately the only truly feminist goal is to make sure that every woman and man who enters into such agreements does so informed and of his or her own free will.

    …Not all the old ways are bad.

    Agreed, so let’s be more judicious and deliberate about choosing which old ways we get rid of, and which ones we preserve.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Incidentally, for some reason my username is showing up as Sally Lichtenstein instead of Sally Strange. I don't know why. Neither is my real name, so I don't really care. Just letting people know, in case they're confused.

    ReplyDelete
  96. You know, I always wondered, what is it about periods that makes so much of a difference as far as sewage disposal goes? I mean, guys still have to pee and poop, and if somebody gets sick, the mess has to get cleaned up. What makes it so easy to dispose of that waste, but so difficult to dispose of period byproducts? Is it a matter of having to clean the bathrooms a little more often, a matter of guys not wanting to be tainted by girly stuff, or what?

    It confuses me, and if somebody else has more insight, I'd be happy to hear it.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Ion, on the other hand, is one of those people who wouldn't have anything to do with the Civil Rights Movement, because, "That Malcolm X is so ANGRY! And that MLK fellow is a communist." IOW, argumentum ad hominem, without even using accurate ad hominems.

    ReplyDelete
  98. "RAnting and cursing like a lunatic"? Hey, asshole, you're the one who comes up with these elaborate posts about----what was it? Bars, bullshit, and booze?

    You get what you give. You gave complete and utter hostility and then you whine because women aren't sucking your cock.

    You flounced. You're still here. No backbone, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Elizabeth, you tell me exactly what you thnk of this little creation of Ion's and then tell me what's wrong with my response to him.

    Ion:

    Weird, every time I had enough of a feminist's nonsense and announced I was leaving, they'd triumphantly call it a 'flounce' and take it as a sign of victory. Maybe I should do the same? Nah. But don't go, I have the first part of the script for you!

    SCENE 1 - Outside a Sleazy Bar, Nighttime
    ginmar: What do you mean I'm getting kicked out! This is a blatant example of the patriarchy keeping a woman down! I swear you'll pay for this!!!
    Bartender: Sorry lady, no more drinks until you pay your tab. You want me to call you a cab or what?
    ginmar: OOOH, sure, I'm just a helpless woman who can't call her own transportation! Good thing there's a strong man here to take care of me! Isn't that right? You make me sick! *vomits on sidewalk*
    Bartender: What? Look, I just meant you're in no condition to drive and-
    ginmar: Spare me your -BLEARGH- mansplaining! -ARGLBL- You sexist *cough* *cough* small-dicked *hack* bingo card *splutter* MRAs *cough* loser!
    Bartender: Whatever, lady. You're on your own. *walks back inside*
    ginmar: That's right, you're just another loser who can't handle a strong woman like me! Ughh... now where did I park... *smacks into streetlamp* Aha! A phallic symbol placed here by the patriarchy to oppress women! I'll get you too, don't you worry *stumbles away, muttering*

    more tomorrow if I don't get banned :)



    Ion's nothing but an MRA asshole, and people tend to forget just how much shit he's pulled.

    I won't. And if people don't like the way I respond to the little cockpuller, then too fucking bad. BAn him or nail him, but don't expect me to tolerate his shit.

    ReplyDelete
  100. The US is moving towards having women serve on subs but there is of course opposition but that seems to be more about "well we never did it that way before" then anything based on women not being able to serve. And if there were issues with mixing the two, why is it not possible to have all male and all female crews?

    ReplyDelete
  101. Oh yeah, that was a time when ginmar said she was leaving but came back to rant some more! She didn't stick the flounce! lol. Also, check out her response to me even before I wrote that.

    Incidentally I'm quite proud of that script. I think it reflects reality, as art should. :P

    ReplyDelete
  102. I did say that you were correct on the tone Ginmar in most cases-and Ion certainly fits in with those cases.

    He also has been going too far with the sleazy "Oh do not tell anyone about our love affair" comments. Ugh. It is a very repellent way of being dismissive and sexist all rolled into one big ball of yuck.

    ReplyDelete
  103. It does not reflect reality or the way women, drunk or not, really act Ion.

    It reflects what you think women are like though. And that reflection is a poor one.

    ReplyDelete
  104. I'd rather have one ginmar watching my back than a dozen like you, Ion. Even if I fucked up I could count on her to tell me to my face what I'd done wrong. With you or anyone like you I'd have to constantly worry about getting hung out to dry or outright shanked in the back for breaking some unwritten rule of being a Real Man.

    ReplyDelete
  105. "You not only do not refute them, you excuse their misogyny as if they have just cause to feel that way."

    Nobody made any excuses. They are responsible for their own words. But it's still important to understand what caused them to feel the way they do.

    Mr. Nolan has many times told his tale of woe. If he is to be believed, feminist laws caused him to lose his children and his finances. I have no reason to not believe him.

    "I am not a feminist either. I just think that the MRAs are giving the rest of the men in the world a bad name"

    You know what? Due to recent events, I'm starting to agree with this sentiment, for entirely different reasons.

    The MRA movement is becoming so bloated with racists, nationalists, pick-up artists, and "man up" idiots that it's losing its purpose. Combating feminism is an entirely necessary and justified goal, but when my "allies" are nearly as repulsive it's difficult to associate with them. All of these parasitic hangers-on need to be eliminated before men's rights can advance.

    ReplyDelete
  106. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  107. I don't subscribe to many of Ion's points of view, but give him his due- that "Andrea Dworkin Leaves the Bar" scene is actually pretty funny.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Thank you kind sir! I'm working on a second scene, gathered quite a bit of inspiration around here these past few days. :)

    ReplyDelete
  109. I didn't find it funny... perhaps because I recognize that it doesn't reflect any sort of reality except the twisted version inside Ion's head.

    ReplyDelete
  110. Frankly, I don't see HOW you could find it funny unless you DO subscribe to Ion's viewpoints.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Nice use of shaming tactics to drive people away. "If you're not with us, you're against us!" Too bad it's so transparent.

    If someone else finds it funny, will the terrorists have won?

    ReplyDelete
  112. @forweg

    The MRA movement is becoming so bloated with racists, nationalists, pick-up artists, and "man up" idiots that it's losing its purpose. Combating feminism is an entirely necessary and justified goal, but when my "allies" are nearly as repulsive it's difficult to associate with them. All of these parasitic hangers-on need to be eliminated before men's rights can advance.

    Yeah, guys! Can't we go back to hating women, like we did in the old days?

    ReplyDelete
  113. @forweg
    Y'know, not telling you how to live your life or nothin', but when these are the kinds of people your movement is attracting, (in your words "bloated with") it may be time to just step back and take the timefor some frank introspection.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Ion, I think you're missing something important here... that is, that you really SHOULD be ashamed of yourself, for being such a total jerkwad.

    Hating women is something that normal people view as shameful. Kind of like people are (somewhat) ashamed to admit they are racist. That's why you get people like that Orange County Republican sending out blatantly racist emails and then claiming, "But I'm not racist!"

    ReplyDelete
  115. Forweg, I am impressed that you choose to distance yourself from the most fringe elements in the MRM. People like that aren't going to sell their ideas well to the mainstream. I think it is disturbing that there are so many radicals and extremists on websites like the Spearhead. Even the moderate stuff there is too extreme, in my opinion. If those people toned down their anger and hatred, maybe they could better express their problems.

    I have read Peter Nolan's life story, and agree that if it is true, it is sad for him. However, that does not justify his decision to rant and rave against all women like he does. Have you seen this quote of his? Look for his quote near the end of the comments section on the link I am providing. His bitter divorce is not an excuse for such violent rhetoric. Notice that of the Spearhead readers, only three have yet given him a thumbs down, yet 37 gave him a thumbs up.

    http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/02/22/the-high-road/

    Ion, I don't think there was a "you're with us or against us" argument used. I think it's true that if someone got a kick out of that bar story, they probably agree somewhat with it. That seems like a reasonable assumption, and not any kind of "shaming tactic". Those shaming tactics are simply arbitrary debating rules used by people that don't want to hear valid criticisms of their opinions. Sometimes people should feel shame, if they are expressing ideas other people find abhorrent.

    ReplyDelete
  116. "How dare you reply in kind to our attacks! You're just a mean poopoohead who hates women!"

    Yawn.

    ReplyDelete
  117. Man, I am on the fence about the whole feminists vs MRAs thing

    No you're not. This faux voice of moderation form of trolling is extremely common, dude. You're not some relentlessly rational observer, you're not above the conflict, you're not a lone voice of reason. And making false equivalences between MRAs and feminists doesn't make you a moderate.

    ReplyDelete
  118. I have plenty of reason to disbelieve Mr. Nolan's account. So do you-Mr. Nolan is what we call a Constitutionalist or a Sovereign Citizen. He refuses to recognize any authority beyond his own over him. That means that regardless of who thought the law up, such as the founding fathers (who no one can claim were a bunch of feminists), he will not follow the law. So if he lost his kids, it was very unlikely it had anything to do with any kind of child custody laws and more to do with his refusal to follow any law period.

    ReplyDelete
  119. trip:

    It's not trolling; it's the fallacy of the golden mean. Someone who wants to be fair and open-minded may think that they're not being open-minded if they disagree with everything one side says.

    The problem, of course, is that it's perfectly possible for someone's opinion to be completely wrong, and compromising between a view that's provably false and a view that isn't is not being fair, it's being stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  120. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  121. "No, they are perfectly normal people who stood up for themselves"

    Perfectly normal people? ahahahaha Being a feminist zealot makes you far from normal.

    As it seems, no feminist on here is normal as they keep constantly screaming at men about how they are somehow the privileged class and this invisible imaginary patriarchy is to blame for all their problems. When you ask them to prove it, they direct you to what some other nutter feminist said and explain that just because another feminist said so, it's undeniable truthhhh I tell ya. And about the privilege crap, riiight. There are more women employed than men and men have to do all the most dangerous and dirty jobs. Not only that, political correctness favours women when it comes to gender issues.

    Seriously, more than anything, all I see from the feminists here is a disturbing mental illness.

    ReplyDelete
  122. So far we have:

    NWO - "WHARGLBLARG!!!! mENZ GETz TOO TELLZ U WHO UR LEdERSz R!!!"

    Forweg - "I get to tell you what you can be offended by"

    And Ion "I get to tell you what's funny."

    Sadly, I was hoping for more analysis in Sheldmaidens and their codependencies.

    ReplyDelete
  123. "Forweg - "I get to tell you what you can be offended by""

    Hahaha. Feminists and projection are peas in a pod, as usual.

    You know, I'm a pretty self-absorbed guy. I remember talking about myself a lot here, but I don't particularly remember telling others what to be offended by.

    In fact, it's not a behavior I normally engage in either. Strange.

    Oh, wait. Memory loss must be another perk of the patriarchy. Wow, it feels awesome to be given so many magical abilities in life just because I'm male. Cool beans.

    ReplyDelete
  124. Elizabeth, I agree about Nolan. And given the sort of nonsense he believes in and promulgates, I can't trust a single thing he says on any subject, including himself. He has zero credibility.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Nick, do not let easily found information impede on your worldview. "There are more women employed than men..."

    "Women comprised 46.8 percent of the total U.S. labor force [in 2009] and are projected to account for 46.9 percent of the labor force in 2010."

    (from the US department of labor http://www.dol.gov/wb/stats/main.htm)

    Women are 50.7% of the US population.

    (from the Census Bureau http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html)

    Ah, reality, it is a harsh mistress...

    ReplyDelete
  126. Those guys tend to be really nasty and loud in court-at one point, one of the ones who showed up here locally had to be gagged because he refused to be quiet despite repeated requests during his trial. Security also had to be increased because these guys no qualms about getting violent with anyone.

    ReplyDelete
  127. Wow Darkside Cat, you may have proved me wrong in that point. Considering that the US department of Labor also indicates that the wage gap theory is NOT due to discrimination against women must be true also. As the same source (US department of Labor)has something that's in your favourable opinion.

    Speaking of the awful males being so privileged and all, I forgot to mention that it's a fact (I won't bother looking up the stats as it's well known) that most homeless people are men.

    ReplyDelete
  128. Mr. Nolan is what we call a Constitutionalist or a Sovereign Citizen. He refuses to recognize any authority beyond his own over him.

    And yet he is quick to preach that women should have no sovereignty nor autonomy of any kind, that they should be the chattel property of men and LOVE it because it's for their own good. Yep, no yoke around his neck, but if you're not a penis-bearer then, by golly, you'd better have a yoke around yours!!

    Relayed a story at (I believe it was) the Spearhead, about how he had to lock himself in the bathroom in order that his wife (now his ex) not feel his wrath over her refusing him sex when he wanted it... thought himself a hero for doing so. Yep, can't imagine why any woman would want to ditch that self-described "perfect husband and father".

    ReplyDelete
  129. Most homeless individuals are male-families are usually headed by females. Source

    And just because I am nice sometimes: The Statistical Abstract of the United States for those of us who live in the US is an excellent place to start when looking for stats. This is Australia's. Enjoy...

    ReplyDelete
  130. Elizabeth and Pam, that is some scary stuff Peter Nolan believes in. He calls himself a Sovereign? Then his majesty needs to look around and realize he has no territory or people to rule. In the US, people like that are thrown in prison for tax evasion and harassment. I could only imagine how awful women would live if he actually had jurisdiction over real people in the real world.

    The more I learn, the more I feel sorry for his ex wife. I don't blame her for refusing to have sex with him. His side of the divorce story makes him out to be such a victim, but why would a helpless victim advocate mass violence against strangers?

    ReplyDelete
  131. Ion whines about shaming language while he trots out his pathetic little fantasies---and calls me Andrea Dworkin. Flounce, Ion, flounce. Aren't you supposed to be gone?

    Jeez, are all MRAs as petulant as Scott Adams? Because that's who Ion is acting like.

    ReplyDelete
  132. you know what, I'm tired of the fucing MRM claiming that all feminists are bad because of andrea dworkin
    so, I'm going to give the MRM a couple of other feminist quotes
    Every time we liberate a woman, we liberate a man. ~Margaret Mead
    Men weren't really the enemy - they were fellow victims suffering from an outmoded masculine mystique that made them feel unnecessarily inadequate when there were no bears to kill. ~Betty Friedan
    First and foremost, I'm a feminist. And basically that stems from a strong belief that all people and creatures deserve equal opportunity, rights and respect.
    Kathy Najimy
    The feminist movement has helped open minds and kitchens to the notion that men can be at home on the range.
    Rene Veaux
    You don't have to be anti-man to be pro-woman. ~Jane Galvin Lewis
    One of the things about equality is not just that you be treated equally to a man, but that you treat yourself equally to the way you treat a man. ~Marlo Thomas
    I do not wish them to have power over men, but over themselves. ~Mary Wollstonecraft
    The little rift between the sexes is astonishingly widened by simply teaching one set of catchwords to the girls and another to the boys. ~Robert Louis Stevenson
    All this pitting of sex against sex, of quality against quality; all this claiming of superiority and imputing of inferiority belong to the private-school stage of human existence where there are sides, and it is necessary for one side to beat another side. ~Virginia Woolf

    ReplyDelete
  133. UK stats:

    A greater proportion of men than women of working age in the UK were in employment in 2008. In the second quarter of 2008 the employment rate was 79 per cent for men and 70 per cent for women, unchanged since 1999. The employment rates for men have been rising since the second quarter of 1971, levelling off in more recent years. Over the same period the female employment rates have generally increased, although almost half are part time jobs.

    http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=1654

    From the Office of National Statistics. Follow the link, it has lots of pretty graphs!

    ReplyDelete
  134. Ginmar

    A couple of questions

    Do you believe that foul language and calling people disparaging names, even if you disagree with their world view helps make the world a better place?

    Is this your blog? If not wouldn't it be better to leave telling people to leave to the owner of this blog?

    Do you believe that your comments are good representation of feminism for the non-ifeminists and non mra's that may (and do) look into this blog as being something funny, and also become educated on the horrors of the mra?

    ReplyDelete
  135. It's not trolling; it's the fallacy of the golden mean.

    In Ion's case, it's trolling. He's clearly a misogynist, but he's pretending he's some dispassionate moderate who's neither feminist nor MRA.

    I mean, there are people who sincerely push for a "golden mean" position, I agree with that. But it's also a common facade for trolls to adopt.

    ReplyDelete
  136. About T4T--he may not swear much, but his rank dishonesty is far more uncivil than 1,000 "fuck"s could ever be(Sally)

    Priceless.

    Thanks Ion. Do you have a blog?

    ReplyDelete
  137. Kendra-they tend to view reality as a ceaseless war in which those who do not believe are enemies of their state. So killing others is not that big a deal because enemies should die during war.

    ReplyDelete
  138. “A greater proportion of men than women of working age in the UK were in employment in 2008. In the second quarter of 2008 the employment rate was 79 per cent for men and 70 per cent for women, unchanged since 1999. The employment rates for men have been rising since the second quarter of 1971, levelling off in more recent years. Over the same period the female employment rates have generally increased, although almost half are part time jobs.”

    This stat and the other stat presented seem to be before or in the beginning of the recession. It would be nice to see a stat in 2011. Most jobs lost were by men in the labouring and manufacturing fields. The hard sweat shop jobs men do while women are mostly in luxury in their safe and aircon environments.

    That said, the unemployment rate Darkside presented is only a .1 percent difference. Holy fuck! That said, I guess most of the gender in hard labour and dangerous jobs compared to easier jobs must be the privileged after all. *yawn*

    "Most homeless individuals are male-families are usually headed by females"

    For one, where about in this source does it say this. Secondly, the point is that more males than females are homeless.

    If the tables were turned, feminists would be crying out oppression left, right, and centre. But when it's males, there's silence.

    Not to mention

    Most tax payer’s money goes towards women’s health compared to men’s.

    Billions of tax payer’s money goes towards women’s DV shelters, not men’s.

    Child custody in women’s favour.

    Women get taken more seriously in DV and rape claims.

    Women are likely to get more lenient sentences compared to men in the justice system.

    In most cases in a public stance, men get laughed at for expressing their issues while women get sympathy all around.

    More men die in work accidents compared to women as they are the ones expected to do the dangerous jobs that women are capable of doing.

    Males the more privileged class? My fucking ass.

    ReplyDelete
  139. You know, there's no way to win with an MRA when it comes to employment stats.

    If more men than women are working, it's because the noble men are slaving away to support vicious harpies busy having other men's children. If more women than men are working, it's because they've shoved men aside and want all the power for themselves.

    That's because they don't actually have a reality based philosophy of life, they just adjust the interpretation of statistics to fit their preconceived notions of 'women = evil.'

    Currently, women initiate 70% of divorce, which only indicates to an MRA that she's only using her soon-to-be-ex husband for alimony and child support and never really loved him or wanted the marriage to work. If it were flipped around, and men initiated 70% of divorces, it would be that men were miserable to be saddled to nagging bitches and were finally freeing themselves from marital bondage.

    And if you really care about things like male victims of domestic violence, the suicide rate among men or the amount of homeless men - talk about them in and of themselves. Don't use them as cheap shots to try and support your case that feminists are awful people. These are actual, suffering men and they deserve your compassion and support - not to be used as a cheap trick to try and put a feminist in her place.

    ReplyDelete
  140. Outside of breast cancer, what other female health care issues are given more funding? In fact, until about 20 years ago, most drugs/medical treatments/operations were geared towards males because no one thought about including women. Some research was done on female specific disorders but as a whole, nothing was done. Take the example of heart attacks-male symptoms are completely different then female symptoms. Males have a different reaction to treatments involving surgery then women do. That is one reason why in the US, the FDA now requires that researchers pay attention (not they do but they are required to) to the differences between the sexes.

    ReplyDelete
  141. Child custody disputes are responding to the complaints about the "tender years doctrine" that awarded automatically custody to mothers (a reversal from when the Declaration of Rights and Sentiments called for women to be awarded custody since courts automatically gave them to fathers). Of course this does not mean that divorcing parents (mothers or fathers) will have an easier time of splitting custody.
    "There are about 2.2 million moms in this country like Julie, moms who don’t have primary physical custody of their children. And the number of working moms who lose primary custody has been rising steadily." This country being the US.

    ReplyDelete
  142. Men have NO reproductive rights. Don't even think of saying men have the right to not have sex, because after the man and woman have sex and conception takes place they BOTH could've not had sex but they chose to.

    Um... what?

    Men CAN use contraceptives before conception, stupid. WTF are you talking about? Do you mean abortion? Hey, I'm down with men having the right to get an abortion. I doubt they'll ever need to use it, since men rarely get pregnant, but sure why not?

    ReplyDelete
  143. As for being laughed at for expressing male needs? When Representative Howard Smith added the amendment regarding women to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the laughter was so loud that it was noted in the Congressional Record. It took a long time and a hell of a lot of effort to change that perception. As Molly Ivins (she is funny read her) pointed out about Aunt Susan (B. Anthony): "When she started, God and Nature were assumed to be aligned in the subjugation of women."

    So stop using the fact that someone laughs at a man demanding to be heard on an issue he cares about as an excuse to do nothing. Because that is all it is.

    ReplyDelete
  144. So stop using the fact that someone laughs at a man demanding to be heard on an issue he cares about as an excuse to do nothing. Because that is all it is.

    Oh great, now Elizabeth wants to take away our excuse to do nothing! Will our oppression never cease, my brothers?

    ReplyDelete
  145. And finally, men die in higher numbers because of the choices they make.

    One thing they could do to stop it is unionize, make different risk assessments, and pay attention to safety manuals, tips and requirements.

    And Nick, treating women in the traditionally male dominated fields like crap tends to make them not want to work in the dangerous jobs. So get that to stop, and you solve the problem of more men dying then women. (Well probably not, women tend pay attention to instructions.)

    Sorry about the repeated posts David but it would not all fit in one.

    ReplyDelete
  146. Notwithstanding your wonderful takedown of that which passes for an argument from Nick, how much you want to bet that he'll be back tomorrow spouting the same old bullshit?

    ReplyDelete
  147. I bet you bacon scented air freshener he will learn nothing and complain my links are too complicated and he is not going to bother reading any of it.

    ReplyDelete
  148. I can sit here and refute all these ridiculous claims you zealots are making which pretty much all means "everything in the whole world is the men's fault"

    How sexist is that, huh?

    But there is no point as it will just get twisted once again to “it’s all the fault of the menz” I am wasting my time gathering up the research.

    The simple fact is that WHEN MEN DO TRY TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, NO ONE LISTENS. THEY GET LAUGHED AT AND CALLED CRY BABIES AND MISOGYNISTS. THEIR MANHOOD GETS BELLITTED TO NOTHING AND THEY BECOME SOCIAL OUTCASTS. If that’s not the definition of “underprivileged”, tell me what is.

    People like Glenn Sacks with their supporters and others alike Glenn have protested about issues like DV in the past. Where did that take them? No where of course because it is about men’s issues. Yep, solely because it’s about men’s issues. It just get’s pulled under the rug. You privileged princesses get listened to while any complaint men make about male issues gets buried under the sand and laughed at.

    No wonder why nothing gets done about male issues. No wonder why many men don’t bother trying a battle that will never be won. Have you heard of the word “nymphotropism”? Yet, you femitards sit here and tell men it’s all their fault. How fucking oppressive and sexist is that?

    If I and a group of men started protesting in public to fix men’s issues, we would get laughed at and ridiculed. In other words, it would fall in deaf ears. Next thing, there would be anti-protesters hijacking the whole scene with “what about women who have it hard”…just like when the topic of male issues even comes up without a protest in place.

    Feminists are way too blind to see this or they do and totally ignore it for a justification of why these problems exists. It's as silly as me saying “well before tax payer’s money ever went to female DV victims, it's all the women's fault for why there wasn't any to begin with.

    In one equal and non-sexist society, instead of a female favoured society, one would think "Oh just because tax payers money goes to female victims, that means the same should apply to male victims" (without anyone actually shouting about it). But of course, in this so called patriarchal society, men's issues take a back seat…right at the very back of the bus. And yet, farting feminists still have the audacity to call it a patriarchal and male privileged society. Fucking laughable!

    If it was a male privileged and patriarchal society after all, one would think that such help for men would already be in place. Does that make you think?

    That said, it's fucking funny how feminists call anything...yep anything… in the world regarding to decisions that male politicians make as "patriarchy". Yet the female prime minister and the premier of QLD are both women. So that must mean that just because they make the major decisions in the society I live in, anything that goes wrong is the fault of” matriarchy”, right? Tell me how I am wrong?

    But wait, oh wait....my brain is going insane, how can this be? There is a double standard here. This type of standard can only apply when men make decisions in society that other men don't agree with. But when its women making decisions that other women and men don’t agree with, the accusation of "matriarchy” is a billion miles away.

    “Face palm”

    ReplyDelete
  149. Nicko, why don't you do some research into suffragettes, first wave feminism, or the first women's shelters or rape crisis centers that were built. Learn about everything that went into making them happen, and really pay attention to all the men (and women) who opposed them. Whether you think these shelters are immoral or not is beside the issue, what's important is that you're able to grok the tremendous amount of sacrifice and struggle that went into those first groundbreaking programs and buildings.

    These brave people were not afraid of being called names, or being made social outcasts. They were not even afraid of being hurt, because they knew that their work was important. They were secure enough in themselves that namecalling wasn't a sufficient deterrent. They were committed enough to their cause that, no matter what they were threatened with, they kept going.

    They didn't throw up their hands and declare that it wasn't worth it because men just hated them too much. They didn't say that men were going to block them, so it was pointless anyway. No, they saw a job that needed to be done, and they did it. They knew it was hard, and thankless, and that they had no guarantee of success - but they knew they had to try.

    If you think that men need their own DV programs or centers or shelters, then go for it. Get your friends together and start organizing. But focus on the issue itself - don't continually drag feminism into it. If you really care about the plight of homeless men, or men who are the victims of DV, then no obstacle will be too big for you. You'll be so committed to the cause of making life better for suffering men that you won't have time to dwell on what the feminists are doing.

    ReplyDelete
  150. Anyone interested in learning more about the bizarre phenomenon of sovereign citizenship should read Dave Neiwert's articles over at Crooks and Liars (such as this).

    ReplyDelete
  151. Thanks Ion. Do you have a blog?

    Nah, sorry. I don't care enough about this stuff. It's more of a hobby. Like poking monkeys with a stick.

    ReplyDelete
  152. 'What's stopping you from identifying as a supporter?' (Sally Strange)
    Claiming the status of a feminist or even an ally can get you into tiresome and unproductive arguments. It's just a word, better leave it to people who have an unassailable claim to it.
    YMMV

    ReplyDelete
  153. Lady Syrus - The rules for getting on a nuclear submarine are insanely hardcore and any extra weight needed to be carried on one is a "liability" and this is a world where a period pain is an incredible liability. Most nuclear submarines have at best a MO rather than a proper medical facility like on most ships.

    It's a world where women at the moment are not as good as men simply due to biology except in rare cases of women who have had the misfortune of needing a hysterectomy. And indeed the pill needs to get a lot lot better before we make it standard issue.

    ReplyDelete
  154. Nicko...

    You are 10 times as likely to be abused as a woman than as a man.

    In male abuse, the majority of the attacks are in self defence. AKA the woman loses it and fights back. There are few genuine cases of male abuse.

    However you are fighting for the douchebags who abuse women and indeed regarding men who are abused not as victims but as compliant in it.

    I gave you an example of a field where there is a heavy domination of women at all stages. Nursing. If you want to improve male rights here is a good cause. Fight for more men to go into nursing to break the female stranglehold on a profession. Until then your mouth is filled with too much talk and not enough cock.

    Women's shelters! is your answer? Seriouly? There are more women abused than men by a huge factor. Having shelters aimed at them is perfectly fine. However what has your movement done to open more shelters? Have you opened a Man Shelter? Nope. Then you are just talking and not doing anything.

    Women's medicine exists as a separate genre because it was developed in secret and away from normal medicine because women were a lot more secretive about their bits during the early years. Men however have fewer issues with dropping their pants and showing off the goods and so medicine actually evolved around treating male illnesses. I don't need special training to deal with hydrocoele since that is taught as the medical base. Women's medicine is taught as a specific subject that you replace your norm with as and when required.

    ReplyDelete
  155. You are 10 times as likely to be abused as a woman than as a man.

    In male abuse, the majority of the attacks are in self defence. AKA the woman loses it and fights back. There are few genuine cases of male abuse.


    These are indeed the popular beliefs but I've read some stuff recently that made me wonder how true they are. Could it be possible that many men who suffer abuse never report it for fear of being ridiculed and not taken seriously? Not to mention a police force and law system which almost always favors women in domestic violence cases? Not saying that violence against women doesn't exist, or that it's not serious, just that the picture might not be as one-sided as previously thought.

    ReplyDelete
  156. Nick,

    I'm in a city called Winnipeg this week and it seems like every forth billboard shows a roofer with the message "Tie One On".

    Why would the government spend all this money on a campaign to reduce the number of foolish men being injured and killed because they do not take basic preventive measures?

    One of the things I've found with online mra's is they almost 100% of the time have jobs that allow them to post on forums all day. Not a very high-risk employment. It's like hauling out the number of homeless men card, you don't give a dam about them you just want to use them to complain.

    One of the things that is pretty much universal in today's safety conscious modern western workplace is when people get hurt it is through risk-taking or just plain stupid behavior. Any guy who actually works at a job with any risk will tell you that in a heartbeat.

    ReplyDelete
  157. Ion - it's certainly possible. In fact, under-reporting of domestic violence by men is a thing that happens. However, it would have to be a 90% non-reporting rate in order for the abuse rates to be equal between men and women. Here's a little challenge for you, since you present yourself as slightly more rational than the average MRA commenter. Go out, do a little research, and see if you can find a number that's a likely candidate for the rate of under-reporting by men experiencing domestic abuse. See if it's in the 90% range or not. Think you can do that? If not, be resigned to the fact that your half-assed speculation about under-reporting has no credibility, and mostly sounds like you being in denial about the nature of this society.

    ReplyDelete
  158. And here's a pithy quote for Nicko, who's afraid of being laughed at--

    "First they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win." --Mohandas Gandhi, aka the Mahatma

    Adult up. If your cause is worth fighting for, then mockery should be no deterrent. If Gandhi could handle it, AND go on to win independence for his country in a peaceful transfer of power, so can you.

    ReplyDelete
  159. @Avicenna

    If a submarine can't accommodate the needs of people, it's a problem with the submarine, not the people. The focus needs to be on making submarines fit human needs, not the other way around. By doing that, we allow more people to participate in such programs, and open the door to more advancements in the field.

    ReplyDelete
  160. Yeah, I'm not seeing the issue with submarines. I do use hormonal birth control to suppress my period. No deleterious side effects yet. And if I do have my period, I use a cup that weighs 0.5 ounces. This is not an insurmountable obstacle by any means.

    ReplyDelete
  161. Also, Ion, there is research in the field, about the specific question of under-reporting of domestic violence by men. So here's a little challenge for you: go out, do a little research, and come back with a number that you think is the most likely candidate for under-reporting by men who experience domestic violence. See if it's in the 90% range. You do understand why it's of interest to see whether it's in the 90% range, right?

    ReplyDelete
  162. You might as well say that people can't serve on nuclear subs because they have to take shits, and that produces more waste. If the engineers for the submarine can figure out a way to handle daily shits by everyone on the sub, they can figure out a way to handle what is, when compared to a bowel movement, a negligible amount of extra waste. The actual volume of blood expelled is not very much at all.

    And it can easily be controlled by the Diva Cup. All she'd need is a little extra water to rinse it out.

    And birth control works just fine to suppress menstruation. If a woman wants to serve on a nuclear sub, and takes birth control to stop menstruation, then that should be her choice.

    ReplyDelete
  163. Ion, I agree that battered men do not get as much sympathy as battered women, and that's wrong. Part of the reason is that men tend to be bigger and stronger than women. I am 5'2" and 125 lb. while my husband is 6'2" and 275 lb. I would never be able to overpower him in a million years. That makes other people skeptical when men are genuine victims of husband beating. I would recommend that a man being attacked by a woman to leave the house, call the police, and ask for a restraining order, since fighting back would likely end up with both partners being arrested.

    If women were equally strong as men physically, then the domestic violence arrests might be more like 50/50. That's just my guess, though. What are the statistics for gay and lesbian couples? That would give good insight into gender differences in partner violence. Those relationships would be more telling since the couples are more likely to be equals in physical strength.

    Now if a woman attacked a man with a weapon, that is a different crime called assault with a deadly weapon or attempted murder, not battering. I agree with other posters, though, that if MRA's are concerned about the plight of battered men, then they should focus their energy into starting battered men's shelters rather than arguing with feminists. They don't need to argue with most of us since we already agree that partner violence is wrong, regardless of the genders of the perpetrators or victims.

    ReplyDelete
  164. Well, it'd be kind of hard to find statistics if nothing gets reported in the first place. Still, I am going to do some reading on the subject but I won't post anything here because there would be no point. Even if I came up with studies and articles, people here would just be like "oh, that article isn't valid because blah blah, that one doesn't count because blah blah, that study is flawed, that author is wrong, etc etc"...

    ReplyDelete
  165. Kendra: the above post was directed at sallystrange, not you.

    Part of the reason is that men tend to be bigger and stronger than women. I am 5'2" and 125 lb. while my husband is 6'2" and 275 lb. I would never be able to overpower him in a million years.

    Right, that's actually part of it. One article I've read states that "Many times a physically stronger male will tolerate the abuse rather than escalate the incident or cause more serious physical harm in response. Other male victims are reluctant to defend themselves against a female assailant because they are too shocked or embarrassed to admit they have been overpowered by a woman. Unfortunately, the abuser doesn't have to be bigger or stronger than the victim to inflict physical and psychological harm.

    A domestic violence call is also treated by police as a criminal case, and many men are reluctant to get the police involved or press formal charges against the assailant.

    BTW, I agree that if MRAs cared about this they should try to organize men's shelters and raise awareness of the issue in the eyes of society and the law.

    ReplyDelete
  166. I have a story about domestic abuse that may be of interest.

    I had a boyfriend once who was jealous. I have never been jealous (look at porn! look at other women! or men! just be honest with me!) so at first I didn't really understand it. He started by asking me where I was and who (what men?) I was with. Then he would look thru my phone to see who had messaged/called me. And then ask me about any male names. After an argument, he once came to me place drunk and wouldn't leave till I let him in. He once punched a bathroom door and broke it, during an argument. Would he have eventually hit me? I don't know, I left because of work after about a year and a half. But in retrospect, it is amazing to me how much I let him control and proscribe my social activities. It started out small and later became huge.

    My current boyfriend had an ex like this: jealousy, phone-checking, controlling. She would become completely, unreasonably angry, and he would remove himself from the situation. She would then follow him down the street in her car, demanding he come back. He, to this day, has this avoidance tactic when I'm upset with him. Once she stabbed him (with her keys) and the police had to be called. HE STAYED WITH HER for several months after that. Because he was in love. I remembering how I felt about my ex, I can relate.

    My Point: Current BF can (and will) punch walls in anger. His apartment used to have several holes from his days with his ex. But he never, ever, laid a hand on her. Because no matter how much damage she could have inflicted on him, he could have done much, much worse to her, even in self-defense.

    What would I recommend? Mandatory anger management/conflict resolution classes for every teenager. It wouldn't solve the problem, but I think it would help a lot.

    ReplyDelete
  167. Yep CB, he learned nothing. He did not even read my posts.

    All that effort...not wasted because someone else might have read it and learned something. :)

    ReplyDelete
  168. Well, it'd be kind of hard to find statistics if nothing gets reported in the first place.

    Yes, it's "kind of hard."

    "Kind of hard" =/= impossible. They do it for rape statistics. It would be interesting to see what crossover there is in the methodologies that are used for both.

    ReplyDelete
  169. Shorter Nick: I can't be bothered to actually learn about the things I whine about...that would take precious time away from whining.

    ReplyDelete
  170. Why the fuck can't Peter Nolan go away? I had no idea who he was until he popped up on my blog long enough to tell the man who'd sexually assaulted me and was trolling my blog to seek recourse under "common law." Which was terrifying, and also stupid, since our law is based on English common law anyway and I haven't the faintest idea to what else he'd refer to. He does consider himself a Sovereign, as has already been mentioned. Also terrifying. I wish he would stop harassing survivors, and I also wish he'd disappear off the face of the Internet. We've got enough creepy, thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  171. Sometimes I feel like I'm not angry or upset enough to participate in these conversations.

    ReplyDelete
  172. "You are 10 times as likely to be abused as a woman than as a man."

    CRAP!

    "In male abuse, the majority of the attacks are in self defence. AKA the woman loses it and fights back. There are few genuine cases of male abuse."

    OMG the anti-male bigotry is rife. No wonder why you don't see men protesting to help male DV victims because it's a battle that will never be won when there are too many narrow minded people like Avicenna. Why get your self publicly ridiculed when there is a 99.9 percent chance that you will never win the battle anyway. The oppression against men is so damn obvious but of course feminists will deny it to the end.

    All in all, with every male problem, I find it completely misandristic when feminists and others tell men they should publicly humiliate themselves to get a right that should simply be given without this nonsense.

    As the old saying goes; "what's good enough for the goose is good enough for the gander"

    So for DV and men's health for example, if women (the goose) are getting benefits that men are not, it's such simple bloody logic to give the same to men (the ganders) as men are equal human beings to women.

    As I was saying yesterday, if this is a male privileged society after all, such help for men would already be in place without anyone having to make heavy demands for it. So much for that "male privilege" theory heh

    For starters, I don't believe women are discriminated against when it comes to the wage gap thing. Anyway, let's say that women do get paid less for doing the same job, same hours, with same experience, same qualification, same everything etc etc etc.

    Would it be sexist if employers were holding a pay check that is the correct pay for women while telling women that they have to publicly jump up and down, shout, and protest for it if they want it or else they get the lower unfair pay while men already get their fair pay?

    Is this the fault of women or is it the fault of sexism? Yes or no?

    This would be extremely sexist, right? So of course it's the fault of sexism. So why isn't it sexist when women already have certain things they need but when men don't have these things, they are told to publicly jump up and down, shout, and protest for it?

    This is the whole point, any feminist who tells men that they have to do all of this to get something that women already have are raven sexist bigots.

    What's good enough for the goose is good enough for the gander. If women already have something, there shouldn't be any nonsense or such obstacles for men to get the same.

    Stop calling this a male privileged society because its miles and miles and miles away from being anything close to that.

    The real truth is that we live in a anti-male sexist society and the funny part is that feminists (who are supposed to be against sexism)help keep the anti-male sexism prevailing as they endlessly tell us that we have to go through all this nonsense to get what women already have.

    When accusing MRAs of sexism, take a good look in the mirror.

    ReplyDelete
  173. Um Nick-how do you think the funding came about for the women's shelters?

    ReplyDelete
  174. So for DV and men's health for example, if women (the goose) are getting benefits that men are not, it's such simple bloody logic to give the same to men (the ganders) as men are equal human beings to women.

    Look, it's ridiculous to decide to build a men's shelter for the sole reason that women have shelters, too. Shelters for men should be built because there is a need for them, and no other reason. Otherwise, they're nothing more than the Bridge to Nowhere - a pointless waste of resources that could have been better spent somewhere else. Currently, society as a whole does not believe there is a need for men's shelters, and so they are not built.

    All in all, with every male problem, I find it completely misandristic when feminists and others tell men they should publicly humiliate themselves to get a right that should simply be given without this nonsense.

    What, like the right to vote? Why don't you look into how many people 'publicly humiliated' themselves for the right to vote, women and minorities both. They knew what they were getting into, they knew that in a perfect world, they would just be handed the right to vote - but this isn't a perfect world, and sometimes people have to suffer humiliation, injury, violence, harassment and even death in pursuit of justice. If you're scared off because of a little humiliation, then you don't honestly believe in your cause and just want to use it to try and make fun of feminists and put down people who actually *are* trying to solve the world's problems and bring it closer to that perfect place.

    No one is saying that you *deserve* the obstacles that will be in your way for building a men's shelter or setting up a domestic abuse program for men. You're trying to do something good, to help other people, and no one should be ridiculed for that. All we're telling you is the lay of the land.

    ReplyDelete
  175. Elizabeth

    I am well aware, but when women ALREADY HAVE SOMETHING that men haven't got yet, why should men have to fight for it? If both genders didn't have a certain something, that's when it would be justifiable to tell people that they have to fight for it.

    This is the thing, feminists such as your self are being hypocrites.

    Read very carefully to what I am about to say.

    Women having to fight for rights that men already have is "sexism" as women should have had these rights to begin with or if they wanted these things, there shouldn’t have been a fight to get it.

    You agree with that don't you?

    What created sexism for women in the past was...

    1. They didn't have the rights that men already had to begin with.

    2. They had to fight for the rights that men already had instead of it simply being handed to them as they are equal human beings to men so they deserve it.

    So if it's "misogyny" if men already have rights that women don't have and women have to fight for these rights instead of these rights being handed to them because "what's good enough for the goose is good enough for the gander", why isn't it misandry when feminists tell us that we have to fight for rights that women already have?

    It's time to stop being sexist shameless hypocrites. What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  176. We're not saying that's the way it should be, Nick. We're just telling you that that's the way the world works. If you want justice, sometimes you have to fight for it. Social change is hard work.

    You have a choice: you can get to the hard and thankless work of changing the world, or you can spend all of your time complaining about it on the internet.

    I think I know what your choice will be. But go ahead--prove me wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  177. Also, Nick, I think most of us here disagree with you that men are as oppressed as you make them out to be. Even if men are oppressed, women are not generally the ones doing the oppressing.

    ReplyDelete
  178. Also, it's not like shelters are some great luxury for women that men are cut out of just out of female pique. It's not like shelters are a total extravagance doled out to unworthy women. They're not resorts or vacations.

    Women who are in abusive relationships go to shelters because otherwise, they will be beaten and may be killed by a vengeful ex-partner. Women go to shelters because they have nowhere else to go. Men aren't excluded from these places because women secretly hate men; they're excluded from these places because the women who use shelters have been so badly abused that they may not feel comfortable around men (and should men's shelters decide to exclude women for this reason, I won't say they're wrong). You might think it's sexist to exclude men from the shelters, but the shelters aren't put there to make men feel better - they're put there to serve and protect abused women, and in this case, their needs come first.

    And why do women end up in shelters? Because they were abused, likely by a man (I'll grant that lesbian abusive relationships are possible, but since lesbians only comprise a small percentage of the population, abusive lesbian relationships would be even less common). A man who thought that it was perfectly okay for him to insult, degrade, threaten and abuse a woman - and then blame her for 'making' him do it. Do you want to know why you can't find the addresses of women's shelters through Google or Yellow Pages? Because the risk is too high that this abusive man will track her down and kill her (and possibly her children) for the crime of leaving him. THAT is sexism.

    Being told "We agree this is a problem, but we don't have time to fix it for you?" That isn't sexism, that's just pragmatism. You only think it's sexism because the people who run women's shelters aren't immediately willing to drop what they're doing and do what you think they should be doing instead. I bet you think it's sexist when you demand your girlfriend make you dinner and she says you'll have to wait till she's done reading her book.

    ReplyDelete
  179. For what it's worth, I agree that the relative dearth of resources for men who have been abused is an example of sexism--sexism rooted in the belief that men are naturally the more aggressive sex and that women are weak and helpless. That's a traditional belief--a patriarchal belief, if you will. This is what we are talking about when we say that patriarchy hurts everyone, men as well as women. It's also true that some women are complicit in maintaining patriarchal beliefs. Nevertheless, the fight for services for male victims of domestic violence is primarily a fight that should be fought by men. If we wish to gain the support of women, then, I think, we have our work cut out for us in convincing them that we are not acting in bad faith (i.e., helping abusing men who use claims of abuse to get access to their victims).

    I know that what I write will have zero impact on you, but I thank you for the opportunity to think about these issues nevertheless.

    ReplyDelete
  180. I am not asking about rights.

    I am asking about "how do you think the funding came about for a woman's shelter?"

    ReplyDelete
  181. Nick, It is not fair to demand that feminists fight on behalf of men's issues when they are already busy with other issues. I believe you that there is a need for battered men's shelters. This is something men's rights activists could spend money and time on.

    I agree that people shouldn't have to fight for equal rights. Unfortunately, the political reality is that we do. I have been called names and ridiculed when I joined groups and protested for gays and lesbians to have the right to marry. In a perfect world, they would already have this right. Since this is not a perfect world, I think it is up to each of us to do something to make it better.

    ReplyDelete
  182. Sometimes I feel like I'm not angry or upset enough to participate in these conversations.(Renee)


    Yep, I hear ya. Trust your gut, its probably right.

    ReplyDelete
  183. You might think it's sexist to exclude men from the shelters, but the shelters aren't put there to make men feel better - they're put there to serve and protect abused women, and in this case, their needs come first.(Lady Vic)


    Of course its sexist. Because the truth is, if we are all about equality then it is about protecting the victims of violence. And THAT shouldnt be about gender. I know, I know, it was a man that beat the woman so obviously she wouldnt be comfortable if a man was in the same shelter with her, regardless if he was abused he still might hurt her, right?

    ReplyDelete
  184. Like I said, in a shelter constructed for abused women, the needs of the clients come first. If that means that men can't stay there, then men can't stay there. I don't believe an abused man is likely to abuse a woman also staying at the shelter, but I do believe that their presence might be disruptive to women trying to recover from abuse. I believe an abused woman in recovery deserves as much peace of mind as she can get, and that's part of what the shelters are there to do.

    What's the alternative? Women might not want to go to the shelter if they know that men will be staying there, and that could prove to be a very bad decision for the woman - most abused women are at greatest risk for injury and death when they're leaving the relationship.

    If a men's shelter had a similar policy and would not allow abused women in order to protect the needs of their clients, I would not complain.

    Also, relationship violence has a different dynamic when it's man on woman or woman on man. I suspect that a woman-oriented shelter would not even have the appropriate resources to properly serve the needs of an abused man. I mean, you've implied or stated before that some men can be so badly abused that they seriously contemplate suicide; but I don't think the same is true for women (though I'm open to being proved wrong in this). In that case, the people running a domestic violence shelter for men would need more suicide prevention training than those running a shelter for women. They would need access to legal counsel who specialized in their sorts of cases, and access to doctors and therapists who knew how to treat male victims. They may also need child therapists who specialize in treating children abused by their mother.

    Also, let's assume that there is a shelter which primarily serves women, but decides to accept a male client in a particularly dire situation. What's to stop his ex from posing as an abused woman herself to try and get access to him? In a men-only shelter, that situation is avoided completely and the people running the shelter don't have to waste time verifying that someone looking for the shelter's services isn't just a vengeful ex.

    Again: Women's Shelters Are Not Built To Serve Men's Needs. Women's Shelters Are Built To Protect Women Because There Are Women Who Need Protection.

    The people running shelters aren't demanding that men perform rituals of public humiliation before they use their resources to open men's shelters. They're not withholding their time and energy on a whim. They just don't see that they should be obligated to change the course of their careers because a couple angry men are screaming 'sexism!'

    No one here is going to tell you that you can't or shouldn't try to build shelters and programs yourself. Go for it. Hell, if I was employed right now, I'd kick a couple dollars towards any reputable program you care to name - no one should be abused, and people who are abused deserve to be protected from their abusers, regardless of gender. But you can't provide that protection by taking it away from someone else who also needs it. You provide that protection by creating it from your own resources.

    So go ahead - make your own efforts to raise awareness. Hold your own fundraisers. Get your own people trained. Make sure the people who need to know about your shelter are aware of it. I seriously wish you all the best, and I hope your project succeeds. You might be laughed at, but isn't the ability to save some people worth putting up with some mockery from the ignorant?

    ReplyDelete
  185. It's amazing, the extent to which even a feminist such as myself can instinctively slip into a misogynistic double standard. I recall an episode of The Office in which Michael invites a few co-workers to a dinner party at his house. During the dinner party, an argument ensues between him and his live-in girlfriend, and she hurls something at him (or hits him, I don't remember). At this point, he breaks down in front of his friends and tells them, as I remember, that this is not the first time his girlfriend has attacked him. His friends commiserate and wisely advise him to pack a change of clothes and head to a shelter.

    And I remember thinking instinctively: "Wait a minute, wait a minute, this is bullshit. She beats him, and HE is the one who is supposed to leave his residence and go sleep on a bunk somewhere?" Except, of course, had the victim been a woman, telling her to go to a shelter wouldn't seem so weird, but the "normal" way to handle the situation. It's neat how, reversing the genders casts a whole different light on the situation. And yet, here we have people who believe that for a woman to go to a strange place with the minimum of possessions while her abuser remains comfortably in the marital residence is a privilege.

    ReplyDelete
  186. Amused

    Here is the real irony, they wouldnt let the guy in.

    ReplyDelete
  187. I have a longer comment in moderation.

    It's a strange world where the MRAs are jealous of battered women, and manage to turn attempts to protect them into yet another way in which they believe men are oppressed.

    ReplyDelete
  188. What's the alternative?(Lady vic)

    Well, here's an idea.


    http://titfortat6.blogspot.com/2011/03/domestic-violence-equality-and-justice.html

    ReplyDelete
  189. Hey I'm back evrybody, I'm sure you'll all be glad I didn't die in my haha high paying job which you all claim I get paid well to do. I banged out a coupla 17 hour days since them but I'm alright, aren't ya happy?

    On the comment from nick about shelters for battered men, well it seems Canada has agreed to federally donate $5k a year to this worthy cause. Thats right $5k. So it seems men are worth about one millionth as much as women in DV. Sweet huh.

    Oh and for all you women who say you had to "fight" for those shelters and such, get real you suffered not. It's all about control. Inflate the lying statistics, (create the marxist problem) then offer the solution, (more marxist security forces). More power for Big Daddy Guv, (cause he loves his harem, right?)

    Oh and on your right to vote, keep in mind that men as a whole didn't have that right nationwide until around thirty years previous. Thats right in the entire history of mankind. Mankind by the way means men and women, where womankind only means women.

    Anyway, back to that voting thingy. After men as a whole were given the right to vote, the Guv pretty muched staed the same. After women got the right to vote the Guv doubled in size in just 10 years, freaky huh? And it grows and grows to where today it's over 22 million bloodsucking, money grubbing leaches of which over 70% are.........women. But ya got no power right? But don't worry the jobs in the Guv that men have are the sewerworkers, consruction, wiremen, ect. ya know all the dirty dangerous jobs where people (men) die.

    Hey, do you ever wonder how in an equal society when a story comes out about when a men gets his man parts cut off or glued to him or sliced or bitten off by some vindictive woman, the mainstream media plays it up like a joke and all the women giggle about it. I mean this is the mainstream media, not some obscure blog somewhere. I know, I know, you gender feminists wanna end all that bad patriarchy stuff.

    Anyway I'm kinda tired, I just got back from dallas but I wanted to say that I took someones advice and read up a bit in gender essentialism, (as much as I could stomach), and as far as I can tell feminists just looked at reality and basically wrote a reverse philosophy based on fantasy. Kinda like lord of the rings but not nearly as entertaining.

    Maybe if Dave posts something good I'll debunk it for ya. Oh yea, if you want sources, look it up for yourselves, (I hear women are superior at multitasking). Big surprise there. Or you could you womens intuition. I hear women have intuition because the intuit they have intuition. What a sweet deal. I may have misspelled somethings or used improper punctuation, a sure sign of my inferior intellect, so discount everything I've said.

    ReplyDelete
  190. Tit for Tat: Oh, but it's not nearly as ironic as if the abuser could follow his victim into the shelter claiming he was abused too, and continue to abuse her there.

    You missed the point -- which was that abused women in our society are expected to leave their homes and seek shelter in a communal dormitory, because a woman's house is really her husband's, and she is there at his pleasure. Once you reverse the genders, the bias becomes apparent.

    ReplyDelete
  191. Amused

    I know, I missed your point. Though it does seem you missed mine. Did you ever consider that the abuser of the male could follow him too?? Equality cuts both ways.

    ReplyDelete
  192. "I know, I missed your point. Though it does seem you missed mine. Did you ever consider that the abuser of the male could follow him too?? Equality cuts both ways."

    Oh, I got your point -- and it lead me to conclude that the possibility of the female abuser following her male victim into the shelter just isn't a concern for you. Which, in turn, confirms my suspicion that most of the clamor for shutting down women's shelters or giving men access to them is merely a rhetorical device in support of the basic argument that women shouldn't enjoy legal equality to men unless they give up the last recourse against their abusers.

    ReplyDelete
  193. If you want to make claims about Canada (which has less then forty million people) you might want to actually look up the stuff and cite it.

    That is one reason we think you are an idiot. The other reason is that you are so wrong that you show us you ARE an idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  194. Amused

    Really, you can make that leap that I dont have concern for a human because I point out an obvious double standard?

    ReplyDelete
  195. @NWO

    Maybe if Dave posts something good I'll debunk it for ya.

    That would be a nice change of pace. I'm not holding my breath, though.

    I may have misspelled somethings or used improper punctuation, a sure sign of my inferior intellect, so discount everything I've said.

    We probably will, though not for the reasons you state. We discount things you say because you consistently pull stuff out of your ass and then fail to back it up. This is why the debunking of which speak has not, strictly speaking, occurred yet. Still, tomorrow is another day.

    ReplyDelete
  196. My longer comment is up, and actually addresses the idea of an abuser following the victim to a mixed gender shelter, as well as the fact that a women-only shelter just might not be equipped to help men deal with their abuse.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Sociable

ShareThis