Social Justice and the Socially Unjust Attacks on Joss Whedon

Advertisements

NAFALT is no longer acceptable

Tags

NAFALT is nothing more than an excuse that some feminists use to distance themselves from the (often) misandric actions of other feminists.  It is often nothing more than a defensive tactic that feminists deploy, when they feel that they are not like that.  And often, the typical response from men’s rights advocates is thus:  Enough feminists are like that.

While that is a good way of pointing out that there are many that are like that, it’s often just using a band-aid, in order to fix the leaks in a dam.  Not all men are rapists, not all feminists are “like that”; these are comparable in their quantity. If NAFALT is an acceptable answer for doing nothing about the problem, then “we shouldn’t do anything about rape, then” is an equally valid statement by this same line of reasoning.

And here in lies the problem:  Just because the minority might be like that, does not mean they do not cause a large amount of harm.  Regardless if not all feminists are like that, regardless if enough feminists are like that, it’s still nothing more than defending those that are like that.  Regardless of the number of feminists that are or are not like that, regardless of enough of them being like that, NAFALT just serves to deflect from the real issue.

That issue being that those NAFALTS are doing nothing to stop the feminists that actually are like that.

Even more importantly, if not all feminists are like that, what are you doing about those feminists that are?  Are you telling these feminists that this type of behavior is not acceptable?  Are you telling these feminists that the policies they put in place are unacceptable, because they are hurting men and boys?

When feminists started saying “Not all men” was unacceptable, it was at this point that NAFALT became worthless as an excuse.  And now, even though they continue to use NAFALT as an excuse, feminists are bashing the use of “Not all men.”  Since “not all men” is not acceptable, your ability to deflect from the feminists that are like that, has just come to it’s cold and bitter end.  Since “not all men” is no longer acceptable, neither is NAFALT.

So, yes.  NAFALT until the end of days.

Now prove it!  Start telling those feminists that are like that, these types of actions are unacceptable.

A conversation between two female MRAs.

This is a conversation I watched, between two female MRAs.  It explains why so many women are waking up to the hypocrisy that feminism creates in society.

This is what real female empowerment looks like, as well as what two good women look like.

Names are shortened to letters, to protect their identities from those who would use this to harm them.

Even the spelling errors are kept, from the original conversation.

SK: Feminists make it damn near impossible for girls like us to be taken seriously, too many poeple are used to female manipulations, it makes it hard to show that though one knows how to do it one will not.

AJ:  its depressing

AJ: feminism makes me sad

SK: Yarr… feminism in general makes it hard to take women seriously

SK: It’s frustrating; I have to put in so much more effort just to be viewed on par with a guy, but it’s not because guys are given favouritism, it’s because women are. No one can tell if I earned my way to where I am, or if it was simply handed to me by affirmative action and freebies.

SK: That lingering doubt is always present that I don’t deserve what I’ve earned.

SK: It doesn’t help that feminism always tends to run up and yell, flailing wildly “Oh you couldn’t have done any of that without feminism! We carried you the whole way, aren’t you happy!?”

AJ: It makes me so mad that I have to beg poeple to judge me by my actions and not the actions of the majority of my gender

AJ: atleast in western cultures I’m still figuring out how shit works elsewhere, it seems though feminism is a cancerous sore that is found all over this planet

SK: It could be worse, though.

SK: Men have to beg people to judge them by their actions and not the actions of a minority of their gender.

AJ:  thats true

SK: At least with a majority, it’s hard to argue that they aren’t likely correct just by guessing randomly.

SK: When it’s like 2-5% of men are rapists, therefore ALL men are rapists… you can’t even make that argument convincingly. Though that’s still a higher % than I’d care to hear, it’s also unlikely to involve me personally being the victim of that.

AJ: I feel so tired just trying to prove I care about men too

AJ: One day I’m going to start a men’s shelter, it will happen one day that is my goal. I’ll fight the feminists to create a safe space for men

AJ: I’ve been considering doing a fund anything to get it started but even if I get funded I don’t know what all needs to be done to create one

SK: My goals are a little different; I just want to write for games or books or whatever and sneak in little concepts… like men are human too. A little education here and there, a character who’s female who’s well written and not a total bitch/bigot. That sort of thing. Don’t even point it out, simply act as if it’s perfectly normal to say such things and hope people catch on that this is what “normal” can be.

SK: Same goes for all things; women are human too… which includes being flawed creatures, same as the rest of the world. I’d like to show characters that claw their way up from the bottom because they worked for it, and turning down social justice warriors because that defeats the purpose of the climb in the first place. Just get a message out in a subtle manner, rather than shoving it in people’s faces. That’s sort of more my style. I’d like people to simply see it as the world that could be without having to point at it and yell for people to pay attention. It just simply is, and no one questions it kind of thing.

AJ: Women who choose to believe the feminist rhetoric seem to only do it because they had one or two men hurt them. It seems like they find it easier to attack an entire gender rather than acknowledge to actual truth of the matter

Domestic Violence Woozles in Australia

Mens Rights Sydney

By Beverley Armitage

In order to tackle any problem, as far as possible we need to know the extent of, and the reasons for, it. While it is true that statistics about domestic violence are difficult to obtain, there is data available. The 2012 ABS survey reports domestic violence levels at about 7% of the population and that 2/3 of the victims are women, however it does report that there has been a dramatic (175%) increase in men as victims since 2005 (93% by women). Further, that 57 women and 39 men (not all by women) are killed in domestic homicides each year. This is serious problem for some women and a significant problem for some men.

Politicians, police, and women’s organizations have spread the following Woozle far and wide, and it would be considered the truth by those who formulate policy and domestic violence law. As such, it leads to even more skewed legislation and policies. The extensive media coverage…

View original post 666 more words

Threats of Violence and Death Against Doubletree Hilton in Detroit Over Men’s Conference (link to)

Feminists have decided to show that they are unwilling to allow free speech.  Visit the link.

If someone has the power to stop a peaceful conference about the issues that men and boys face, they obviously have a lot more power than they pretend they have.

Firstly, if this were a conference about the issues that women and girls face, society would be up in arms, and the people would be labeled as a hate group.

Second, if a group has the power to silence another group, they aren’t oppressed.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/a-voice-for-men/threats-of-violence-and-death-against-doubletree-hilton-in-detroit-over-mens-conference/

Toxic feminininty

While I am sure everyone has heard of toxic masculinity, which in this day and age is just about any masculine trait that women (and especially feminists) do not like, I think it’s time someone turned the tables and started pointing out the feminine side.

So let’s look at toxic femininity.  There are many things that we could label as toxic femininity, but I will stick with the ones that are the most destructive to society.

1) “Real men” thinking.  This is real easy to find.  If you look for memes about men, you will probably see a good portion of them having some reference to “real men.”  This is toxic, as it is females trying to control what is and isn’t acceptable of men.  Men teach other men what is and isn’t acceptable.  Not women.  The fact that women seem to think that men are not “real” because we don’t meet some arbitrary guideline that exists in their head, is total horse shit.  Especially since that leads very much into the next thing, as they are often seen together.

2) Women are never wrong.  As stated above, this is often seen together with the “Real Man” type of thinking.  Women can’t be wrong.  Women are speshul snowe-flakes, and above all the petty concerns of being right or wrong.  This is toxic, considering that women will fight harder to prove they aren’t wrong, than men ever will.  And no amount of evidence to the contrary (including video evidence) seems to get a woman to admit that they can ever be wrong.  A subset of this one (and plays into others) is how they will actually get aggressive if you even hint at how something they might be mistaken, even for a second.  More on that, in the next one.

3) Women are good.  This is proven false with numerous different points of evidence.  Women are just as horrible as men.  But often, women are far worse to each other, than men will ever be.  Men will jump at the chance to tell women the exact opposite of whatever thing they tell themselves (That’s another topic I will cover in a minute).  Men will rush in to defend a woman, where as women will rush in to attack men.  How is this type of behavior good, exactly?

4) “I’m fat/ugly/etc.”  Women must be the most vain and narcissistic creatures on this earth.  They spend so much time worrying about every tiny flaw, that they can’t seem to forgive themselves (or others, in some cases), for being human.  We aren’t supposed to be perfect.  Get the fuck over it!  I can not count the number of times I have heard women sit and talk about how horribly disfigured they are, just because they gained 5 pounds, over the holidays.  Not to mention how they can’t seem to get themselves motivated to do anything about the problems they bitch about.  Which leads me to my next item.

5) Passive behavior.  Oh dear gods!  I can not count the number of women I have spent time with, that was just so damn passive.  And how they would expect me to do EVERYTHING.  I sometimes believed that I was actually expected to think for them.  Here’s your opinion, honey.  This will suit you just fine, until I change my mind.  How many times have you met a woman complain about how she’s always looking at the cute guy in the office, but he doesn’t seem to get the hint that she likes him?

6) Entitlement.  Oh yeah, that’s a big one.  Women expect the world of men.  “Buy me this!  Do this for me!  Oh, you want something?  What have you done for me?”  Yup, that happens a lot.  Women expect everything, but are rarely willing to give anything back.  Man works 60+ hours a week to provide for her.  Then bitches about how he never has time to spend with her.  He could be completely dead tired from working a 16-18 hour day, and she will still expect him to do things for her.  And then get upset if he just wants to curl up on the couch and watch something.  Or even just go to bed and get some sleep.  But acts like the world has come to an end, if he even thinks about asking for anything from her!  “Hey honey, the dishes are piling up in the sink.  Would you do them?”   Oh hell no!  That’s like asking her to create the Grand Canyon, with just a hose.

I am sure I could come up with a bunch more, but I have other things to do.  I hear Harley Quinn just escaped from Arkham, with Poison Ivy.  There’s a dangerous duo, right there.

Feel free to add your own, in the comments.

Fleet Street Fox, you are part of the problem

Fleet Street Fox has just recently come to my attention.

And in such an impressive way, too. [1]

This is misandry, plain and simple.  This asshole of a person, whom I know from how the article is written, is a female and most likely a feminist.  Yet people never seem to understand how badly we treat men in our society.  Consider this article, written with the sexes reversed.  Outcries of misogyny would pour in from all corners of the globe, and most likely the article would have some form of retraction posted.  And a guaranteed, and well deserved, apology written.  How do people not understand that it is not acceptable behavior to treat others as lesser human beings?

Yes, this really pisses me off!  This is indicative of the world wide lack of consideration and compassion for the issues men face.  And while the author touched on a couple of issues that face men and boys, she completely ignored the majority and some of the most important, just to mock and demean them.  And this is acceptable in our world.  The author just wants to continue her life with her head up her ass.  Even saying things that are completely stupid.  Let’s just look at it.

 

“It’s not just because no-one’s invented the self-washing sock yet, nor because they are so insecure  they’re three times more likely to lie about their sexual abilities and  waste six million hours a year being lost while refusing to ask for directions .”  I am not even going to hit you on the grammar of your sentence.  I have so much more to berate you on.  Self-washing sock?  You do know men are just as capable of doing laundry as women, right?  Oh wait!  No, that’s (in your way of thinking) a woman’s job!  Grow up and realize we are all just as capable of doing household chores, as everyone else.  And to bring out such obviously stupid arguments shows how little you used your brain, while writing this.  Men waste time being lost.  Yeah, and women don’t do the same thing because they are stubborn and don’t want to show any insecurities?

“They even feel like they’re being discriminated against. That women have somehow got the upper hand, and what’s more managed to do it while not running businesses, wars, religions, or governments.”  No.  That’s an extremely small percentage of the male population.  You are going on the basis that men actually have a same sex preference, like women do.  In all actuality, men have a preference for the opposite sex.  It’s in our base nature to protect and defend women.  Well, if you don’t include psychopaths.  Most men actually try and help others, and especially women.  And women seem to want more and more.  At what point is what men do for others going to be enough?  This is, by it’s nature, you keeping your head in the sand and pretending that all that men do for women is expected and required.  The MHRM has a word for that type of thinking.  It’s gynocentric.  If you don’t know what that refers to, it pretty much means you think of yourself first, women second, and men…
Well, from the tone of your article, men come never.

“Sneaky us. I hadn’t even noticed, but then I was busy pouring my curves into clothing men would approve of and make me seem attractive yet unavailable, covering up grey hairs and paying VAT so I can menstruate.”  Wow, and I bet you don’t even realize why you do this.  It’s because you want to show yourself to be sexually available and youthful.  Why?  Because you want to attract a man.  But not just any man.  You want to attract a man who you approve of.  One who makes you the most important person in the world, and more important than yourself, and can provide you with everything your cold, black heart desires.  Congratulations on advancing the cause of women.  I offer you the golf clap.
And it just amuses me how you can’t even seem to see that it’s only what you want.  So what if you put yourself into clothing that men find attractive.  When a guy hits on you, say thank you.  Consider it a compliment, even if it does not come from someone you find attractive.  You might find that your self esteem and need for approval diminishes.

“Anyway, men have started a campaign for some long-overdue recognition. It’s called  International Men’s Day  and it happens every November 19.”  It isn’t about recognition of men.  It’s about recognition of the problems men face in our society.  The ones you completely bypassed and glossed over by your very writing and attitude that men are less important than women.  That get’s show throughout your article and is very obvious later on.  Once again, it’s all about you.  You poor thing.  Maybe Karen Straughan will buy you a pair of big girl panties.  Seems like you really need them.  Maybe then you might recognize that you aren’t the center of the universe, and that everyone suffers differently.  And maybe, even though it’s different, they all suffer equally.  Somehow I doubt it, but a person can hope.

“There can be no harm in recognising dads are just as useful as mums, that gender-specific diseases like prostate cancer need to be stopped, that men too can be victims of domestic violence and rape.”  Normally I wouldn’t give this a second look, but it does touch on something that is a problem in our society.  Rape of men.  Especially the rape of men and boys, by women.  But see, the statistics some people hold up show only men raping men or boys.  Yes, that happens.  I will not even attempt to say it doesn’t.  But due to the definition of rape according to the FBI, it isn’t possible for women to rape men or boys.
Per the FBI website FAQ on rape:  “The new Summary definition of Rape is: “Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”” [2]
Yes, you are reading that right.  There is no possible way a man can be raped by a woman, by that definition.  They do have a term for that though.  It’s called “made to penetrate.”  And it carries a much smaller sentence than rape does.
In the US the average male sentence for rape?  90.7 months.  Made to penetrate average sentence for women?  About 42.5 months.  Men get incarcerated for almost double the time.  You have got to love that male privilege, right? [3]

I have to take this next part all together.  It would not be fair to piecemeal this critique, if I didn’t.
“There can be no harm in recognising dads are just as useful as mums, that gender-specific diseases like prostate cancer need to be stopped, that men too can be victims of domestic violence and rape.
No-one sane can possibly have a problem praising the value of someone being a generally good bloke – whether it’s to his mum, his partner, his children, or the world at large.
It would be mean of us to say the chaps behind this movement must have never been outdoors if they claim there is ‘irrefutable research that mothers typically are nurturing, soft, gentle’ while fathers are ‘playful’ and ‘challenging’.
It would be unkind to point out their  statement  that ‘men make sacrifices every day in their place of work… for their families, friends, communities and nation’ applies just as easily to women.
And it would be cruel of us to mock them just because the best person they could think of as a ‘positive role model’ is rapper-turned-pastor  MC Hammer .”  You keep saying it would be cruel, unkind, etc., to mock and demean men for these things.  And yet, that is exactly what you have been doing, the whole time.  And with impunity, you act like no one has any right to say anything against it.  Mock away, lady.  Show yourself for the absolute bitch you are.  Show people how much of a horrible person you are, while I (and others) sit back and laugh at you.

“No, women, we are above all that. We can see the bigger picture, and we can and should support International Men’s Day in every way that we can.”  Oh yeah, you sure have shown yourself to see the bigger picture, and to be above all the mockery and demeaning of men.  You are such a great and wonderful, loving woman.  You would never hurt or demean men, or treat them unfairly, right?  I don’t think I could put any more sarcasm into this, if I tried.

“We should throw ourselves behind a day that might prompt men into speaking out about rape, and perhaps taking a day off from it.
If it grows and is a success then maybe in the future International Men’s Day will be the one day a year when males campaign against sex trafficking, slut-shaming, domestic abuse and religious persecution, as well as their prostates, educational attainment and car insurance premiums.”  It’s all about you, and your needs, and men are an afterthought, maybe.  If you still can’t see how selfish and horrible a person you are for this, I don’t know how to point it out to you.

That’s all the time I am going to take with you.  You, Fleet Street Fox, are a part of the problem.  You are a gynocentric, misandrist bitch.  And to you, I offer a one fingered salute.

Fuck you, and have a nice day.

 

 

[1] http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/international-mens-day-blokes-already-2805448
[2] http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/recent-program-updates/new-rape-definition-frequently-asked-questions
[3] http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/27008_4.pdf (Pg. 143)

ABC runs and hides

The American Broadcasting Company (ABC) has decided to pull the piece that was done for 20/20, on the Men’s Human Rights Movement and A Voice for Men.  Big shocker, right there.

Well, not really, if you look at the comment section on the article I linked in my previous post.  Will link it again at the end of the page.  With well over 2200 comments, and a bunch deleted, it’s no wonder they decided to ditch that idea.  ABC, which is owned by the Disney Corporation, is supposedly wholesome and family oriented, right?

Maybe not.  Because, while it didn’t seem to have much bias in deleting comments (comments from all sides were being deleted), it sure seemed to have a huge feminist leaning on the article it posted.  I mean it really did try to connect AVfM with the Man-o-sphere, and then to the harassment that Anita Sarkeesian got for her kickstarter campaign.

The general feeling around A Voice for Men was that this was going to be a hit piece.  An attempt by 20/20 and ABC to bring discredit to Paul Elam and AVfM.  And who can blame the feminists?  We have been ruining their plans to show the MHRM as a hate group for quite some time.  For at least a year, which is when I started getting into understanding these issues.  But the problem is that they didn’t have the ammunition to do it.  Almost the whole of their article was discredited within the first dozen comments posted by MHRM supporters.

From there, it became apparent that the leanings of the piece were not going to be well received.  In fact, if you look through the remains of the comment section, you will notice there is a lot more people supporting pro-MHRM comments, than there are supporting feminist comments.  That has to say something, when the moderated comment section of a mainstream media outlet is seeing that kind of support for the people they are outright attacking.

Mind you, this has been going on for a total of two days.  So we averaged 1100+ comments a day (I wonder if they still count the deleted comments) on this wildly entertaining article.  And that was just a preview page for the show that was supposed to air at 10PM on the 18th of October.

That didn’t happen.  While I haven’t gotten confirmation from any East Coast sources (please let me know if the show didn’t air there, either), I know for a fact that it did not air on the West Coast, at the scheduled time.  And checking the page links that we had on AVfM, I noticed the posting of date and time that had been there the previous two days, had completely disappeared.

ABC, you are a bunch of fraking cowards.  You can’t deal with being even semi-controversial.  Wait, maybe you can deal with semi-controversial, but this was more than you thought it was.  Your bias against this issue was such that you were completely ready to try and sell this stack of lies.  However, you were never prepared for the backlash.  Something you found to be far beyond what your “journalists” were saying it was going to be.

You know, those two female journalists that couldn’t even get 10% of their facts straight.  The ones that basically painted you as a news source with absolutely no journalistic integrity.  What are you going to do about it, ABC?

I really can’t wait to see what happens.  Are you trying to find a way to salvage this situation?  Are you trying to find a way to edit the piece together so it fits what your “reporters” said it was going to be?  Are you going to bury this in some dark hole, praying no one ever finds it?

Here’s my suggestion:  Pull your nuts out of the purses of the femistazi, put them back where they belong, and re-do the piece.  Re-do it so it shows how things really are.  Give the MHRM a fair shot, and show the world how things really are.

You might be scared, but in a few years people will say you were the ground breaker.  You were reporting on it first, and showing the truth.

But that will never happen, if you just hide with your tail between your legs, like the frightened little cowards you have shown yourselves to be.

 

Link:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/women-battle-online-anti-women-hate-manosphere/story?id=20579038#disqus_thread

Women battle online blah blah blah…

Here they come to save the day!!!!

Yes, ABC is using it’s power of persuasion (And the show 20/20) to pretty much do a hit piece on the MHRM.  Now someone might ask why this might be a hit piece.  Well, I will link it and you see how it’s written.
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/women-battle-online-anti-women-hate-manosphere/story?id=20579038#disqus_thread

That’s not so bad.  But some of the comments that have been popping up in the comment area are.

Some of my favorites, with the requisite responses by me (only my stuff, as others can do their own):

This gem from Magdalen:
“MRAs love to talk about the bias in the courts against men for custody battles. It’s one of their big pulls and it’s actually quite true. There is a significant bias against fathers in court cases regarding children. But they like to ignore they “WHY” of that. Which is actually rooted in sexism against women. The outdated ideal of women being natural care providers and nurturers regardless of the circumstances. The answer to the issue of court bias against men is rooted in Feminism.”

My response:
“Really?
“We need more feminism over here, because we didn’t have enough to this point!”
Let’s think this out, for a minute. Feminism has had 50+ years to re-educate people.
That’s plenty of time to affect several generations, and pretty much get rid of the “sexist attitudes” that were so prevalent in the world for so long.
Then why do they still exist? Why are they still practiced, if feminists have been working hard for half a century to wipe them out?
Here’s a better question: If those same attitudes are still prevalent in today’s society, wouldn’t that be considered a failure of feminism for not being able to get rid of them in the last 50+ years?”

A nice little discussion (Sarcasm) with a wonderful (Sarcasm) lady named Adela:

Her response to someone else:
Are you saying that men have a higher place in society relative to women or that you think women have a higher place in society now and you want equality?
Your comment is suspiciously old school religious.
What is a man’s “proper place” in society?

My response:
I will guarantee he is saying that women now have a higher place in society, and we are fighting for equality.

Her response:
“Equality?” LOL
Well yes we women have gained a lot. We are not considered a man’s property anymore at least in the United States. We can vote. We can get jobs.

My response:
Ah yes. Because men couldn’t possibly have cared about their mothers, sisters, and daughters through history?
Men were all powerful, and women had no ability to influence men (through shaming men, whispering in their ear, etc). right?
Need I bring out the works of Shakespeare? He even notes in MacBeth that women used their power indirectly.
That’s over 400 years ago. But women had NO power through history, right?
Get educated.

Her response:
Well yes in Shakespeare’s time women voted and worked for themselves. (sarcasm)

My response:
Some did work for themselves, I am sure.
But voting, well all women in the US got it only 70 years after men. Up until 1850, men had to own land, in order to vote.
Oh darn. 70 years after men.
Up until that point, it was only the rich and powerful.
That must be horrible, having to wait an extra 70 years, because some of the most vehement anti-suffragettes (all women, mind you) didn’t want it.
And when they did, they were given it almost immediately. Where as men had to sacrifice and die in order to pay for it.
Must be horrible to be given something, that someone else had to die for their future progeny to receive.

Her response:
Poor victim. LOL I can vote now!
I’m sorry millions of women didn’t die in the process! (sarcasm) I guess in your mind millions of women SHOULD HAVE died.

My response:
Oh yes. Because I am pointing out how things happened, I am wishing that millions of women had died.
Right.
You use sarcasm rather often. I hope you can recognize it when it’s sent your way.

Her Response:
So you are pointing out how things happened?
I don’t believe you are being sarcastic. Why write a long post only to say you were sarcastic?
Usually sarcastic posts are one or two-sentence posts.

My response:
“Oh yes. Because I am pointing out how things happened, I am wishing that millions of women had died.Right.”
That’s the sarcasm. The previous post was the educating you on what actually happened in history. Thank you for playing, have a wonderful day.
(Hint: You can mix sarcasm in with being serious, too)

A fun one with a psychic (well, most likely psycho) calling herself Michelle:

My reply to her acting like she knew what MRA’s were thinking:

All three of your points debunked, in one shot:
Are you a mind reader? No? Then I am pretty sure you can’t say what someone else was thinking. Also, just because Valenti says she supports something, doesn’t mean she actually supports that thing. It’s called actions not matching words. And Valenti’s actions (advocating policies that enable and encourage child abuse), tends to support the claims that are made.

Her response:
Actually you proved my points over and over again, Nice try, but you failed.

My response:
Right.
And Bill Cosby got the conversation correct between Noah and God.
Thank you, come again.

Another one, this from Roxanne, who was a real charmer:
This is concerning your statement of ‘If a man doesn’t want a child, he has no say in the matter’. He does have a say in the matter. He decides if he wants to keep it in his pants or put it into a unknown entity and risk making a baby. It’s called self-control and if he has none then he also has no power.

My response:
Turn that around. Women have that same self control, supposedly.
So if a woman get’s pregnant, it’s all her fault?
(Let me set you straight: If a woman decides she wants to get pregnant, she can lie, manipulate, deceive, etc. to get a man’s sperm. Up to and including going against what the guy she is with wants. If a man wants to have a child or not, his choice is completely co-opted by a woman)

Her response:
Oh thanks Nightwing, you really set me straight. Hahaha. You da man. My comment refuted XIRA statement that men have no control. I know it’s hard for you boys to manage your zippers but give it a try. That is your control. As for sperm, there are sperm banks. If you don’t want a lying, deceiving, manipulating women having her way with you then keep it in your pants. No way can you be deceived unless you made a baby with a loser.

My response:
And you would be a real charmer, yourself.
Obviously you can’t see what I was saying. This happens in relationships. Not as much one night stands.
But obviously you women are completely superior to us men, right?
You never make mistakes, or choose the wrong person to be in a relationship with.
I hope you take your own advice and keep yours in your pants.

(Boom!  Headshot!)

There was plenty of white knights out in force, too.  This from Fred:
Really? You do know that women weren’t allowed to vote in the U.S. until 1920 and that in the 19th century they weren’t allowed to own property, and that under the common law, women were classified as “chattel.” (i.e. “a movable article of personal property”), don’t you? Please tell us about the pre-1850 U.S. laws specifically granting women rights.

My response:
What is this common law thing you speak of?
You mean that same law that allowed men to be conscripted with just a word from the ages of 16-80 to fight in wars that most often got them killed, while women stayed safe at home?
That same common law that created indentured servitude so a man MIGHT own property if he was successful enough to pay off his debt, or pretty much death if not, while women were safe from that obligation?
Want me to keep going?

And last, but certainly not least, an interesting flower named Ashley:
I’m not talking about the choices of individuals. I’m talking about the societal pressure of men and women to take on traditional domestic roles is linked to the societal bias for mothers to be in primary custody.

My response to the delicate flower:
Really? So if I google “female breadwinner divorce”, the first article won’t be New York Magazine stating that there is a problem when women out earn the men they date/marry?
Here’s the reality: Women want to be with a man that brings them upwards in status and financially. As stated in the article: “For women, the shift in economic power gives them new choices, not least among them the ability to reappraise their partner. And husbands, for their part, may find to their chagrin that being financially dependent isn’t exactly a turn-on. According to psychologists (and divorce lawyers) who see couples struggling with such changes, many relationships follow the same pattern. First, the wife starts to lose respect for her husband, then he begins to feel emasculated, and then sex dwindles to a full stop.”
This is reality. Women want to be taken care of, and treated well. (who doesn’t, actually?) But more than that, they lose desire and respect for men they have to take care of. That is biological, not sociological.
So saying these are “traditional domestic roles” and that they are linked to societal bias, is pure bs, as shown by increased divorce rates of women who are financially supporting a husband.

All in all, it was very amusing.  And there is still more to come, as the fun won’t stop until after they air the episode of 20/20 on the 18th of October.  That’s coming up very soon.  I know I am ready to tune in for this.
I hope others are, too.

Straight White Male: feminist’s whipping boys

I enjoy most people.  They really are a wonder.  However, there are certain people that just can’t seem to get things right.  People like John Scalzi.  Now, normally I have nothing against people who do stupid things.  They usually just make me laugh.

But when someone decides to start telling people such blatantly stupid things as this:
http://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/05/15/straight-white-male-the-lowest-difficulty-setting-there-is/
I have to put my mask on, and start getting some reality to people.

“Okay: In the role playing game known as The Real World, “Straight White Male” is the lowest difficulty setting there is.”  No it isn’t.  Life isn’t easy for anyone.  And because of feminism, straight, white males has become the whipping boy.  We get blamed for everything.  Hell, even the black community blamed us for what happened to Trayvon Martin.  Pssst…  It wasn’t the white community.  It wasn’t even a white guy.  Hell, people were even calling racism, and there was way too much evidence to say it wasn’t.  Consider that, while there are some problems for each race, some of that comes from their own way of doing things.  If you dress like a gang banger, people are going to treat you like a gang banger, until you prove otherwise.  Is that part of easy mode?  Being smart enough to NOT act like someone who breaks the law?

“As the game progresses, your goal is to gain points, apportion them wisely, and level up.”  Yes, but the argument can be made that people aren’t spending the points wisely.  Consider it like this:  Some white guy is going through the game using a warrior class.  Strength and Constitution would be the most requisite stats.  With the occasional drop into dexterity and maybe intelligence.  Now, considering those are the most wisely spent way of distributing your points, it’s just plain idiotic to drop points into charisma and looks (Can’t remember the DnD term for that), instead of the ones you should.  Or, here’s another example, dumping all your points into strength, as a frakking wizard.  That’s called not thinking.  Something it seems like you forgot to do, when you wrote this article.

“Likewise, it’s certainly possible someone playing at a higher difficulty setting is progressing more quickly than you are, because they had more points initially given to them by the computer and/or their highest stats are wealth, intelligence and constitution and/or simply because they play the game better than you do. It doesn’t change the fact you are still playing on the lowest difficulty setting.”  No.  Life doesn’t work like that.  There is no frakking manual for life.  If someone is progressing through their life in the way they want, they are doing a great job.  Their skin color/sex has nothing to do with it.  Saying that anyone who is going through life without any type of bonus (affirmative action comes to mind, when I think of real life bonus), should be penalized in any way, is the definition of oppressing someone.  To say they have it easy, after that; well that’s just kicking someone when they are down.

“You can lose playing on the lowest difficulty setting. The lowest difficulty setting is still the easiest setting to win on. The player who plays on the “Gay Minority Female” setting? Hardcore.”  Really?  So Lesbians don’t have tons of programs, protections, etc, helping them out?  They don’t have tons of programs and affirmative action to get them moving upward?  Where is this easy mode for us straight, white males?  Come on, show something that actually proves your assertion.  Or do you just follow the feminist line, blindly, like so many other people?

“You only get to play it once. So why make it more difficult than it has to be? Your goal is towin the game, not make it difficult.”  This is the only thing you have said, that actually gives me hope about your having a modicum of intelligence between your ears.

“Oh, and one other thing. Remember when I said that you could choose your difficulty setting in The Real World? Well, I lied. In fact, the computer chooses the difficulty setting for you. You don’t get a choice; you just get what gets given to you at the start of the game, and then you have to deal with it.”  Apparently I was completely wrong about your being smart.  Firstly, you are blaming someone for being born.  That’s a really stupid thing to do.  Because blaming someone for how they are born makes as much sense as blaming someone for something they had nothing to do with.  Yes, let’s blame people who are born today, for the Revolutionary war!  Makes a whole lot of sense, doesn’t it?  I mean, it must be the faults of people today, that we aren’t still a colony of Great Britain, right?
Secondly, so you’re gonna punish people, just because they were born a certain way?  Here’s one:  Let’s punish all women, because they are women.  Yes, dude, that’s basically what you are saying.  Only you are cutting it down to a specific ethnicity.  So you are being both racist (against your own kind, no less) and sexist. And finally, you must really hate yourself, to write an article that demonizes your own demographic.  If I didn’t feel so much anger and contempt towards you for not having a set of balls, and pretty much being the feminist whipping boy, I might actually feel some sense of sympathy for you.  However, because you are doing things like this, you are just making the lives of every male that much harder.  And more specifically, straight, white males.

“So that’s “Straight White Male” for you in The Real World (and also, in the real world): The lowest difficulty setting there is. All things being equal, and even when they are not, if the computer — or life — assigns you the “Straight White Male” difficulty setting, then brother, you’ve caught a break.”  No you haven’t.  You have just as many struggles and problems as everyone else.  And in some cases, more, due to morons like you, and feminists lying to everyone about how easy it is for straight, white males.  But as most straight, white males don’t complain about everything that doesn’t go their way, it just seems like we have it easy.  And yes, you can sit there and say you’re lucky to be so privileged.  But you really aren’t.  You have just as much chance of being killed, as any other man.  You have just as much chance to be divorced as any other man.  And you have just as much chance to be screwed over by those same feminists that you are sucking up to, as any other man.

Dude, pull your head out and look around.  The world is tough on everyone.  Saying that being a straight, white male is easy mode is just as truthful as saying being a black woman is easy mode.  Life doesn’t work that way.  No matter what, you have to work at it.  You want to get good at anything, you work at it.  But to sit there and say “Be ashamed of who you are, because you’re {Insert race, sexual orientation, and gender of choice}!”, is pure stupidity.  No one has it easy.  Not a white guy.  Not a black guy.  Not the latina woman down the street.  No one has it easy.  Unless you have good people around you who are willing to help you out, when times are tough.  A good family and friends do a lot to get you through this tough thing we call life.