This is what a feminist looks like

Once again, someone was dumb enough to show how hypocritical they are, as a feminist.  I do so love hypocrites.  I especially love when they are feminists.

Now, this is where it gets really fun!  Let’s knock some hypocrisy down the tube, with the brick of logic™. 

This comes from XOJane.com, written by Kelly Martin Broderick.  The link is down below.  This one, I actually have to start off with the title.  “MY PICTURE WAS STOLEN AND TURNED INTO A FAT-SHAMING ANTI-FEMINIST MEME ON FACEBOOK,” No, it wasn’t stolen.  You put it out onto the internet.  It becomes part of the digital data stream, and you lose all right to it, once it gets out there.  This is you complaining about someone hurting your feelings.  I have a lot more that goes into this specific part, but I am going to save it for later.  For now, let’s continue on with the title.  Specifically let us look at the fat-shaming and anti-feminist accusation.
This is actually your personal feelings about yourself, Ms. Broderick.  You are the one that thinks you are fat, and that there is a problem with being a feminist.  Now, maybe it might also have something to do with the comments that accompanied the picture on the Facebook page, No Hope For the Human Race.  I might feel inclined to give you that.  However, there are an equal amount of comments defending your right to have it pulled down.  This has become a discussion, at this point.

A good portion of your article is about what you did, when you found out that it was out there.  I can’t believe that someone actually let you write for any type of so called news article.  But still, there are the points I talked about, earlier.

That is another article from XOJane.  Link to that article will be at the end.  The article is named: DEAR PEOPLE WHO ARE HURT BY THE INTERNET EVERYWHERE: THE INTERNET IS NOT REAL, ONLY PEOPLE ARE.  This is not normally my style of thing to read.   And I have a few things to knock about with this article, as well.  But this place is for hitting feminists in the head, with the brick of logic™.  And while I loathe this article for certain things stated in it, I have to give credit to the author for putting into words, exactly what needs to be said.  It’s the internet.  Lots of people are going to be crappy people, when on the internet.  If you can’t deal with crappy people, Ms. Broderick, stay off the internet.

And honestly, it really seems like you can’t.  You are allowing yourself to get upset, by words on a computer screen.  Whatever power we are assigning to the internet — is coming from us assigning it that power.  And all the shame you heap upon yourself for being fat and a feminist, it will get brought out, because of the internet.

This is what a feminist looks like.  She is a perpetual victim of society, and of men.  There is no agency in a victim.  She is an object.  Not a human being.  And that isn’t how people should live.  If you want to be a human being, start taking responsibility for your personal self.  That includes posting photos of you on the internet.  You don’t like what you see, and how someone else might use it?  Well, that’s tough.  Stop posting pictures of yourself.  So stop saying your feelings are being hurt, and playing the perpetual victim card.  Act like an adult.

People’s right to an opinion doesn’t stop where your feelings begin.

Links:

MY PICTURE WAS STOLEN AND TURNED INTO A FAT-SHAMING ANTI-FEMINIST MEME ON FACEBOOK – http://www.xojane.com/issues/my-picture-was-stolen-and-turned-into-a-fat-shaming-anti-feminist-meme

DEAR PEOPLE WHO ARE HURT BY THE INTERNET EVERYWHERE: THE INTERNET IS NOT REAL, ONLY PEOPLE ARE – http://www.xojane.com/issues/internet-is-not-real

Women can save the world!

Even though it’s a few years before the next campaign starts, for the popular title of President of the United States, already you hear cries of Hillary Clinton for President.  They sure are getting a huge jump on this campaign for her.  I can’t remember ever seeing someone being propped up in the limelight, less than a year after the previous election was completed.

However, this does not shock me.  Ever since she tossed her hat into the ring for president, back in 2008, I figured she would keep trying to make a grab for that particular office.  I am more surprised she didn’t run against Obama, back in 2012, than the fact that she’s already trying to garner support for 2016.

But what starts getting me annoyed about all this, is how they can say (and as far as I can tell, they are saying this in all seriousness) this stupid idiot, can save the world.  Come the frak on!  Back in 1998, during the First Ladies conference on Domestic Violence, she said that women were the primary victims of war. [1]

And her reasoning for this, was because they lose their fathers, husbands, sons, brothers.  I could continue as men are more than just those things.  But to say that women are so disadvantaged, because they lose someone.  How fucking stupid can one person be?  Apparently very stupid, as she asserts pretty much the same thing, in 2011. [2]

Did no one actually point out to this dumb idiot, that what she said might not be reality?  Come on, are you trying to set her up to look like a complete idiot?

But getting back to the topic at hand, for now, I am noticing lots of re-prints of the same article by Kathleen Parker coming out with how Hillary Clinton can save the world! [3]  Oh yes, girlfriend!  She can!

Give me a fucking break!  Because it is often more of the same feminist bullshit, of how women will do a better job than men.  Let’s get in there, and dig into this horseshit.

“Here’s a thought: She can save the world.”  Wow!  She can do that?  Is she also able to fly?  Is she able to leap tall buildings in a single bound?  Is she more powerful than a locomotive?  This is a completely unfounded assertion.  Oh, but please, prove that it can be done, and that she can do it.

“Let’s begin with a working (and provable) premise: Women, if allowed to be fully equal to men, will bring peace to the planet.”  Provable, huh?  I find that laughable, for multiple reasons.  Not the least of which is how she bashes men for being unable to make the world safe enough for women.  But she doesn’t stop there.

“Three, as women become more empowered, especially financially, countries become more stable. When women have money, they can feed their families, get health care, educate their children, start businesses and so on. The ripple effect is stronger families, stronger communities, and ultimately saner nations.”  I can make statements I can’t prove, too.  Hillary is a radical feminist, and she seeks the enslavement of men.  See how that works?  You just assert something, but provide no factual evidence to back it up.  If you are going to do stuff like that, at least make it believable.  Either that, or make sure people are aware that you are writing a satirical article.  For now, I am taking your article, seriously.

“Women are already the most dynamic and fastest-growing economic force in the world today.”  Hey dumbass, they always have been.  They control at least 65% of discretionary funds, in relationships.  And now, due to being able to suck one man dry while they sponge off another, they can do even more spending!  I will buy you a clue for Christmas.

“To millions, she is a role model and a warrior for women’s right to self-determination.”  Please, gods, no!  This is not a woman I would want my daughters or nieces trying to emulate.  I would much prefer they emulate a woman who can actually think, and put together an intelligent thought.  On her own.

“Under Hillary’s watch, Obama made permanent the Office of Global Women’s Issues and appointed longtime Hillary colleague Melanne Verveer as ambassador-at-large.”  Hey, that’s great!  Create more government jobs, sucking more money away from the people of the country.  And one that is going to be…  what?  The femi-police of the world?  They are going to bring more feminism to the rest of the world?  Doesn’t seem to be working in the US or Canada.  Didn’t work in Sweden.  What makes you think it will work in the rest of the world?

“Her resume can be topped by few and the symbolic power of electing a woman president — especially this woman — can’t be overestimated.”  Really?  You seem to be doing a great job of overestimating this woman.  Especially since you really haven’t brought about one single thing that points to how she can save the world.  Gotta prove your assertions, sometime.  And your article is disappearing fast.

“In 2008, it seemed possible. In 2016, barring a Benghazi surprise, it seems probable.”  Not so probable.  In fact, there is a lot that shows me that it might not be the best thing for this country.  Some of it, I have shown you previously.

This particular woman is no friend to men.  She is firmly entrenched in the ideas of female oppression.  At what point do we stop buying into that particular lie?  Especially considering that this woman will do anything and everything she can to promote female oppression, if she get’s into the White House.  But beyond that, the fact that no one is thinking twice about a woman being President, does not strike me as women being oppressed.

At some point, people need to wake up and realize that feminists are lying to everyone.  Women aren’t oppressed.  In point of fact, the fact that a woman could be so blatantly stupid, and still be considered a good candidate for President…

Sounds to me like women are a bit more favored in our society, than people want to believe.

You have to remember something very important:  Electing a world leader, based upon anything less than how effective they have been in the past, is pure fantasy.  Obama was elected on promises of change.  Nothing really changed.  In point of fact, a real good argument can be made that things have gotten a lot worse, since he took office.  Now, if you elect Mrs. Clinton, what are we going to see?  Are we going to see what this person is promising?  Very doubtful, as too many people will be working against her.

Be smart.  Vote for someone, based upon the ability to get the job done, and because you agree with their policies.  Vote based upon a track record of doing good for the people that are relying upon that person.

Not based upon their genitalia.

Links:
[1] – http://clinton3.nara.gov/WH/EOP/First_Lady/html/generalspeeches/1998/19981117.html
[2] – http://www.pbs.org/wnet/women-war-and-peace/features/our-interview-with-secretary-of-state-hillary-clinton/
[
3] – http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-08-13/opinions/41370775_1_hillary-clinton-role-model-men

Feminist rape propaganda

Oh yeah, they are at it again.  Telling the population how men can stop rape.

Feminist rape propaganda is in full swing, again.  A new website and new campaign for how men can stop rape.
https://skitch-img.s3.amazonaws.com/20120104-1b3tf6b8r4qwrwf9g4mq7gpy7f.jpg
The website, in the lower corner, is right below the slogan of “Men can stop rape.”  I do so love how feminists keep doing this.  They keep giving me ammunition to fire right at their stupid ideas.

Feminists, don’t be stupid.  It is not on men alone.  Women can stop rape.

Yes, I said it.  Women can stop rape.  Because if men can, so can women.  By feminism’s own logic, women can do anything men can.  And they can do it better, and in heels.

Oh wait.  No they can’t.   Because feminists are saying that the onus is on men to stop rape.  Women have absolutely no responsibility to stop rape.  Because it is only men that do it.  Now, this is as far from the truth as you can possibly get, without going into pure fantasy and lies.  The reason I say this, is because rape is legally defined as a male only crime.

Without even going into the hundreds of male victims of rape by women (Yes, forcibly enveloping a man’s penis is rape, feminists), if you ask a man and a woman the same questions about their experiences of rape, you might see some striking similarities in their stories.

Don’t believe me?  Well, if I could point you at the video on youtube, Men’s Own Stories of Rape and False Accusations – Gender Equality Grenade, I would.  Sadly however, it has been listed as private.  It is sad that someone has to hide such a powerful video, supporting men.  However, feminists do not like this getting out.

But you can’t hide it forever, as more and more, people are seeing female teachers raping young boys, in school.  Did this happen, long ago?  Most likely.  Because people haven’t changed much in the last few centuries.  They just did it a lot quieter, back then.

Yes, I know, I got off topic.  Thank you, Ace, for reminding me.  Here’s a doggy treat.

Getting back to how rape isn’t just a male issue.  I was recently talking to a retired law enforcement officer.  He told me that he spent almost 30 years protecting and serving.  And while he caught, and with the help of our legal system and lawyers, prosecuted and convicted rapists, he didn’t stop rape.  Same with all the law enforcement agents he worked with, in his almost 30 years.  The same can be said of the previous generation’s officers.  They did the same thing, catching and helping to prosecute and convict rapists.  However, they couldn’t stop rape.

Feminists, let me again say, don’t be stupid.  This isn’t just men.  You need to step up and stop demonizing men’s sexuality.  Have you ever considered that it’s not all on us?

Act like an adult, and take responsibility for what you can do to stop rape.

Like not raping little boys, and also not perpetuating this culture of rape.

Silencing the opposition

Yes, I know.  We have heard it all before.  And this is not going to be much different.  However, I am not going to talk about big red, beyond saying she’s not a natural redhead (yeah, I know.  Big surprise there), and that her type of silencing the opposition is not what I am talking about in this.

I am actually talking about places like Salon.com, Jezebel.com, and a lot of other feminist friendly places on the net.  Most MHRA’s will know exactly what I am talking about.  The ones that will allow just about anyone to create a post, but hold back comments in moderation.  To make sure it follows community guidelines.

Now, holding comments in moderation to make sure they follow community guidelines isn’t that bad.  It’s actually a decent idea, when that is how they are set up.  However, most of these types of sites set it up to stop people with dissenting opinions from saying anything.

This, by the way, is a violation of freedom of speech.

Now, a lot of people will say that freedom of speech is only guaranteed to a certain extent.  That isn’t true.  Freedom of speech is guaranteed, period.  That doesn’t mean you are going to like what you hear.  Just that the person has the right to say what they have to say.  At the same time, you also have the right to say what ever you want to, as well.  This, unfortunately, includes hate speech.

I am sure someone is going to say something along the lines of how I am advocating hate speech.  I do not advocate hate speech.  In fact, I really despise speech that denigrates or demeans anyone.  Having said that, however, having the ability to silence others, due to something that people label as hateful, is what opened the gates for feminism to control the discourse of gender, until recently.

Labeling something as hate speech does nothing to help people make up their own minds about what is right and wrong.  I have met people, in my years, who have opened themselves up to new ideas.  These people tend to become all the more intelligent, for listening to such things as hate speech.

Just by listening, most reasonable people can figure out what is a good argument against such speech.  I know a couple MHRAs who say they learned to argue against feminism, by listening to what feminists had to say.

But getting back to my point, by seeing the differing points of view offered, people can learn what is right for them.  And often, when people are free to learn, they choose what is basically right.

Somehow, I doubt feminists want people choosing what is right.  Mainly because what is right, doesn’t need to hide from dissenting opinions.

Oppressor/Oppressed Paradigm creates the illusion of Privilege

Ah yes.  That wonderful word that everyone seems to want to bring up, when they want to silence others.  My favorite statement to hear, “Check your privilege,” has been coming to my attention a lot, lately.  For now, I will save my favorite retort.  Though don’t think it will not make an appearance before the end of this.

So let’s talk about privilege.  Let’s talk honestly about it.  Miriam-Webster defines it as thus:  a right or immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor : prerogativeespecially : such a right or immunity attached specifically to a position or an office.

Now feminists will have you believe that privilege is something you are born with.  Even if I was inclined to agree with this, which I am not, it speaks volumes about how entitled people act when they say someone is privileged based upon circumstances of birth.  I would even call it jealousy.  But for now, let’s debunk this idea.

Feminists, and others who buy into the oppressor/oppressed paradigm, will have you believe that someone is privileged, just because of certain things.  And the way they present it, really is convincing.  If you don’t think about it.

Now, as someone who has known numerous people of varying descents, ability, and everything else that people use to divide humanity up, I can say every one has a uniqueness to bring to life.  However, feminists (from here on out, I am just going to say feminists, instead of bringing up everyone who believes in the oppressor/oppressed paradigm, because it was mainly feminists who brought it to the front of our consciousness) will have you believe that you can be oppressed and still privileged.  Like it’s a race to see who can have the most victim status.

Setting aside that trying to have the greatest victim status just makes you look like a child (for now), let me point to someone who feminists would say is privileged, but most average people would disagree.  Meet Sean Stephenson.
http://seanstephenson.com/about/

This man, who has been called the three foot giant, is a lot of things.  But one thing he isn’t is privileged.  However, feminists would call him such, just because he’s a white male.

This man got to where he is, because he did something very few others are willing to do:  He fought to prove he can do what everyone said he can’t.  He isn’t privileged.  He’s determined.  He shows a strength of character that very few people in this world are willing to show.  Remember what Marianne Williamson said, in Our Greatest Fear:

Our Greatest Fear —Marianne Williamson

it is our light not our darkness that most frightens us

Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate.
Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure.
It is our light not our darkness that most frightens us.
We ask ourselves, who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented and fabulous?
Actually, who are you not to be?
You are a child of God.
Your playing small does not serve the world.
There’s nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won’t feel insecure around you.
We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us.
It’s not just in some of us; it’s in everyone.
And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same.
As we are liberated from our own fear,
Our presence automatically liberates others.

This is what buying into the oppressor/oppressed paradigm does:  It creates more of the disconnection from other human beings, that is needed to perpetuate an us vs. them ideology.  In other words, this perpetuates a large portion of the same sexism, racism, transphobia, etc. that feminism says it’s trying to get rid of.

Let me repeat that for those of you who didn’t hear it the first time (Those of you who don’t want to hear it, run to the back of the room, plug your ears, and continue being afraid):  The oppressor/oppressed paradigm is what perpetuates a large portion of the things that feminism claims to be working against, by what has been referred to as “reverse” sexism/racism/etc.  The problem is, it’s still sexism, racism, etc.

There is an old saying:  “An eye for an eye, makes the world blind.”  And that is exactly what this is doing.  It is creating more of the same, in order to perpetually keep people from striving to create an amazing world.

Because, as soon as people realize that feminism is a fraud, a large percentage of con artists will be out of work.  Well, semi-legitimate work, anyway.

 

Oh, and look here.  At the end of the article and I never once said “Suck my privilege.”  Damn!  I was hoping to work it in, at least once.  Oh well, maybe next time.

 

Links:
Miriam Webster Definition of Privilege:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/privilege
Sean Stephenson Website bio:
http://seanstephenson.com/about/
Our Greatest Fear:  http://explorersfoundation.org/glyphery/122.html

Through the Lookism Glass (From a Man’s Perspective)

It came to my attention that Naomi Wolfe wrote a rather amusing article:
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/women-s-appearance-and-workplace-sexism-by-naomi-wolf

Before we get to the article, let’s take a look at the writer:
http://www.project-syndicate.org/contributor/naomi-wolf

(Leaving it to all two of you to read the links provided, before I get on with it)

Now, Ms. Wolfe is a “Third Wave Feminist.”  This means she’s one of the women responsible for pushing women into political office and pushing for stuff like VAWA.  I can’t necessarily blame Ms. Wolfe for that sexist piece of legislature, but she is among the women who were pushing for it.  She’s also a writer of really shitty interesting books on feminism and women.

On to the article…

“Do women suffer from a double standard in the workplace in relation to how they look? Have we gotten past the subtle (and sometimes not-so-subtle) shade of sexism in hiring and promotion – disproportionately affecting women – that I identified in 1991 as “the professional beauty quotient”?”

Yes.  They do.  So do men.  It’s not disproportionate, it’s the exact same, for both sides.  You want to believe that it mainly affects women, but here’s the reality:  The more attractive either sex is, the more likely they are going to get what they want.  I can’t tell you how many times I have had women (and men) tell me about how bad their relationships are.  (If I had a dollar for each time, I would be richer than Bruce Wayne)  And every time I ask the same question:  Why are you still with him/her?  The answer is almost universal:  Because s/he is so hot!

People will forgive a whole lot, from someone who is attractive.  Sadly.  Equally, people are more willing to help attractive people succeed.  

You do go into this, to an extent, but go right back to bitching about how unfair it is for women.  (Life isn’t fair.  Learn to deal with it!)
The issue isn’t that women are disproportionately affected.  Both sexes are affected.  However, there is a cultural bias towards women.  Especially the really attractive kind.  And if you don’t believe me, I can introduce you to women who have pretty much gotten by on their looks, tits, and ass, for most of their lives.  (Pssst…  Men can’t do that, as far as I am aware)

Back to your article…

Ms. Wolfe links a previous article, also social commentary, pointing at the Nelson case.  I will admit, if I hadn’t seen the articles about the case, I would never have believed it happened.  A woman was fired, for being too beautiful (according to some news sources).  But what shocked me about it is, when she sued, the courts upheld the rights of her previous employer.

Now, looking into this, it didn’t seem a clear cut Man Vs. Woman court battle.  It was actually more of a Woman Vs Woman court battle.  She was fired at the insistence of her employer’s wife.  (I won’t get started on the courts, right now)  This isn’t really sexist.  The man did what his wife told him to.  You and your compatriot, Michael Kimmel (Do not get me started on this guy), decide it’s just so wrong of a man to try and save his marriage, by firing his attractive (to him) assistant, at the insistence of his wife.  To those of you who haven’t read about it, go read the articles.

Now, most of your article isn’t even worth reading, let alone talking about.  But there are a couple more points I want to hit on.  Points that you made, without knowledge of what’s really going on.

“We should try to imagine a world in which the Jamie Dimons and Newt Gingriches struggle daily to stay focused on their high-pressure jobs, while torrents of comment and attention are devoted to how “hot” and well-dressed they are, or alternatively, how out of shape, middle-aged, and sexually unappealing they are.”

This amused me, because of one major difference between men and women:  Men rarely give a damn about what others think of them, beyond a certain few people.  And those are usually the ones that are most trusted and cherished.  This, on a man, tends to make him more attractive to females, from what I have seen.

Whereas women tend to worry about every little thing most other people say.  They get disturbed by just about any suggestion that they are less attractive than another woman.  (Pssst…  This makes females so damn unattractive, it drives the good men away)

“Many countries have government agencies whose job is to ensure that women – and men – do not face workplace discrimination on the basis of their appearance. Unfortunately, that task has not been completed.”

Really?  They have something to ensure men don’t get discriminated in the workplace?  Since when?  Oh wait, men rarely call things discrimination.  Unless you’re talking about racism.  Those pesky white males don’t ever get discriminated against.  (Unless you realize that equal opportunity quotas are actually a form of legal discrimination)

But, because the media play a major role in perpetuating this double standard against women in the public eye, legislating or litigating against this kind of workplace harassment will not help. Sexist commentators have to scrutinize themselves; if they do so honestly, they will not like what they see in the mirror.”

Ah, finally!  I am at the end of your piece of shit article.  While you say it’s a double standard against women, it really isn’t.  It’s on both sides, Ms. Wolfe.  You just want to be offended, and protect the rights of women, everywhere.

 

Ms. Wolfe, I think it might be time to let go of what feminism taught you, pull your head out of your vagina (biography), open your eyes, and realize the world might actually be a bit different than you think.

Why we DON”T need feminism

Saw this little ditty, not too long ago:

http://sorayachemaly.tumblr.com/post/50361809881/why-society-still-needs-feminism-because-to-men?utm_content=buffer5f3ac&utm_source=buffer&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Buffer

I just had to laugh at this.  I mean I can go through this and rip it apart, with how mindless this list is.

In fact, I think I will:

“Because to men, a key is a device to open something. For women, it’s a weapon we hold between our fingers when we’re walking alone at night.”
Sorry, sweetheart, but a key is a weapon for men, too.  We use it, when we get mugged, assaulted, or any other violent crime happen to us, if possible.  Might want to check out crime statistics, considering men have the majority of violent crime happen to them, not women.

“Because the biggest insult for a guy is to be called a “pussy,” a “little bitch” or a “girl.” From here on out, being called a “pussy” is an effing badge of honor.”
Really?  That’s supposed to be an insult?  I believe there is a meme out there saying something about how a vagina can take a pounding, said by Betty White.

“Because last month, my politics professor asked the class if women should have equal representation in the Supreme Court, and only three out of 42 people raised their hands.”
Sure, if there are enough female judges, let women have equal representation on the Supreme Court.  But you are forgetting something:  Women make up what percentage of judges in this country?  And while we are at it, might want to get rid of some of those judges that favor women, down in the normal courts.  However, if no women apply for the positions (and most likely, they don’t), why the hell should we force someone into that position, if they didn’t want to be there?

“Because rape jokes are still a thing.”
Hmmm…  Did you hear the ones about the guys getting falsely accused of raping someone?  (Neither is funny, but there are stupid people in this world.  At the same time, why don’t you just tell the people who tell those jokes to go Frak themselves?)

“Because despite being equally broke college kids, guys are still expected to pay for dates, drinks and flowers.”
Word for that:  Narcissism.  And lots of women are perpetuating this, as are their white knights.

“Because as a legit student group, Campus Fellowship does not allow women to lead anything involving men. Look, I know Eve was dumb about the whole apple and snake thing, but I think we can agree having a vagina does not directly impact your ability to lead a college organization.”
Actually, I can argue that Adam was dumb for accepting the fruit.  But let’s boil that down to our ancestors didn’t listen to God, and caused the loss of paradise.  Now onto the important part:  Did you ever consider it might be because you haven’t shown the ability to lead, without whining about things?  “I’m a woman, and I deserve this!”  Go back to what I was saying about Narcissistic women, you might want to get yourself tested for that.

“Because it’s assumed that if you are nice to a girl, she owes you sex — therefore, if she turns you down, she’s a bitch who’s put you in the “friend zone.” Sorry, bro, women are not machines you put kindness coins into until sex falls out.”
No argument there, beyond: are you expecting guys to be nice to you, even if you aren’t going to give them what they want?  Remember, college is a hormone driven time.  It’s at that point that human beings are the biggest slaves to their libidos (and this includes women), due to a natural desire to propagate the species.  If you are willing to take their being nice, but not give anything in return, is that fair?  Again, sounds narcissistic to me.

“Because only 29 percent of American women identify as feminist, and in the words of author Caitlin Moran, “What part of ‘liberation for women’ is not for you? Is it freedom to vote? The right not to be owned by the man you marry? The campaign for equal pay? Did all that good shit get on your nerves? Or were you just drunk at the time of the survey?””
What’s your point?  Do women have to identify as feminists, to believe in those things?  Do men have to identify as a feminist, to believe in those things?  Also, if they don’t, does that automatically mean they are against those things?  Sure sounds like it, from what you wrote.

“Because when people hear the term feminist, they honestly think of women burning bras. Dude, have you ever bought a bra? No one would burn them because they’re freaking expensive.”
Wow!  You need to teach me how to read minds, like you do!  I totally want to learn how to do that!
On a more realistic note:  Go back to what I said about your last point.  I honestly think of Dworkin, Solanas, (Hillary) Clinton, and most of the radical (female) feminists, when someone says they are a feminist.  And if you start NAFALTing, remember that most of the feminist policy makers tend to be those exact hardcore feminists that are attempting to strip rights away from others, to increase their own privilege.  Might want to get rid of them, so people actually have decent role models for feminism.

“Because Rush Limbaugh.”  What about Rush Limbaugh?  I don’t listen to him, as I can’t stand most of what he says.  If you’re going to make a statement, back it up with some sort of reason.

“Because we now have a record number of women in the Senate … which is a measly 20 out of 100. Congrats, USA, we’ve gone up to 78th place for women’s political representation, still below China, Rwanda and Iraq.”
Did you ever consider that is because only 20 women actually ran for Senate seats?  Or that some of the previous ones actually did some really shady shit, and people didn’t want some of those women back in office, due to that shady shit?

“Because recently I had a discussion with a couple of well-meaning Drake University guys, and they literally could not fathom how catcalling a woman walking down University Avenue is creepy and sexist.  Could. Not. Fathom.”
And yet, if they were to walk up to her and try and start a conversation, would that also be considered creepy, crazy, sick, rapey, etc?  Also you might want to consider something:  It takes confidence to walk up to a woman, for most men at that time of their life.  In fact, a good majority of men have been so scared off of women (due to the exact same feminism you love so much), that they don’t have a clue what to do, in order to get a date, much less sex.

“Because on average, the tenured male professors at Drake make more than the tenured female professors.”
Some questions I can’t seem to answer, based upon searches:  Do the tenured female professors make as much as a male professor with the same credentials, time on staff, and time tenured?  Have the tenured female professors been there as long as most of the male ones?
If you look at those two questions, I will bet the reason the average is lower, isn’t due to sexism, but due to the factor of not having been there, as long as most of the tenured male professors.  Also, considering that just under 1/3 of the professors there are female, and the school has a pay scale, and most likely not a raise percentage that can be negotiated, your point doesn’t have enough proof to back it up.

“Because more people on campus complain about chalked statistics regarding sexual assault than complain about the existence of sexual assault. Priorities? Have them.”
Okay, on this I agree.  People should have better priorities.  Of course, your saying this is the pot calling the kettle black.
Also, complaining about something does nothing to fix it.

“Because 138 House Republicans voted against the Violence Against Women Act. All 138 felt it shouldn’t provide support for Native women, LGBT people or immigrant women. I’m kind of confused by this, because I thought LGBT people and women of color were also human beings.  Weird, right?”
Think about this:  You’re painting all the people that voted against VAWA under the same light.  I know a couple congressmen that voted against VAWA, because it did nothing to help men.  In other words, it was written in a sexist bias, in favor of women.  So, women are more important than men?  You want to stop violence against women?  Also have to stop violence against men.  Remember, we are two halves of the whole of the human race.

“Because a girl was roofied last semester at a local campus bar, and I heard someone say they think she should have been more careful. Being drugged is her fault, not the fault of the person who put drugs in her drink?”
No, not guarding her drink is her fault.  Not being with friends that are looking out for her, is her fault.  Hanging around scumbags that would roofie a woman, so they can take advantage of her, is her fault.  The fact that some one did that, makes them a scumbag.  But she still could have taken some actions to prevent that type of thing from happening.  It’s called responsibility for one’s self, and one’s own actions.

“Because Chris Brown beat Rihanna so badly she was hospitalized, yet he still has fans and bestselling songs and a tattoo of an abused woman on his neck.”
And yet, domestic violence is usually bi-directional.  I wonder how much abuse she put him through.  Also, when the violence gets to hospitalization, it is an escalation from previous times.  So why didn’t she leave, before it got to that point?  (Pssst…  She didn’t take responsibility for her own actions)

“Because out of 7 billion people on the planet, more than 1 billion women will be raped or beaten in their lifetimes. Women and girls have their clitorises cut out, acid thrown on them and broken bottles shoved up them as an act of war. Every second of every day. Every corner of the Earth.”
Ah yes.  1 in 3 women will be raped.  Might want to check your facts, that’s been debunked many times (Oh, and it’s now 1 in 3 women are victims of rape or DV, which has also been debunked).  Also, men have the same thing happen to them.  Acts of war tend to be atrocious.  Thus why there is UN sanctions against them.  (Psssst… by the way, criminals don’t follow laws.  Neither do war criminals.  These are horrible people who want to watch the world burn)  One other thing, FGM was banned (pretty much) the day people heard about it.  However, it’s only recently come to light (through several scientific studies) that circumcising males is detrimental to their sexual health.  And yet, Oprah still endorses a face cream that uses the male foreskin.  Trade you!

“Because the other day, another friend of mine told me she was raped, and I can no longer count on both my hands the number of friends who have told me they’ve been sexually assaulted. Words can’t express how scared I am that I’m getting used to this.”
Hmmm…  Actually raped, or raped based upon the duluth model of domestic violence?  Also, did she say she was raped, or was that a conclusion based upon how she got drunk, hooked up with some guy, and then regretted it?

“Because a brief survey of reality will tell you that we do not live in a world that values all people equally and that sucks in real, very scary ways. Because you know we live in a sexist world when an awesome thing with the name “feminism” has a weird connotation.”
Actually, we live in a world that doesn’t value anyone, unless they have money.  As for your weird connotations of Feminism, you have your radical feminists to blame for that.

“Because if I have kids someday, I want my son to be able to have emotions and play dress up, and I want my daughter to climb trees and care more about what’s in her head than what’s on it. Because I don’t want her to carry keys between her fingers at night to protect herself.”
Men have emotions.  We just get shamed for showing them (Are you dating a guy who shows his emotions?).  It really would be nice to live in a world where people don’t have to protect themselves.  However, we don’t.  There are, and will most likely always be, criminals in the world.

“Because feminism is for everybody, and this is your official invitation.”
Last time I accepted the invitation, I realized that most feminists have their head shoved up their vagina.  And most male feminists have their head shoved up a female’s vagina (most likely a female who’s vagina they want to be putting their dick into).

 

Look, lady, feminism isn’t about equality.  It’s about perpetuating the victim status of women, and increasing it.  It’s just showing women how to be children, their whole lives, instead of becoming adults.

This world would be a better place, if it were populated by more adults.

It’s not my job to understand you…

As the title states, it isn’t my job to understand you.  Nor is it your job to understand me.  In realistic terms, it’s no one’s job to understand anyone else.  Ever.

That sucks, doesn’t it?  Hearing that is rather harsh, I know.  It still hurts me, sometimes, when I think about it.

Rather, the only person who has any responsibility for your life (your is used in the context of any single person), is you.  Just like the only person who has any responsibility for my life, is me.

So it’s always wonderful to receive a little gratitude from someone, when you do something for them.

Realistically, we all have a limited time on this earth.  That time may vary from person to person, but on average it’s 78.7 years, according to the CDC.  (Link at the end)

That is 41,393,052 minutes on this earth.  (78.7*365.25*24*60)

Now, that might seem like a lot, but remember most people will spend about 8 hours a day sleeping, and 8-9 (or more) hours a day working.  So that leaves a total of 8 hours (or less) a day for the people we care about.  Leaving a grand total of 13,797,684 minutes of a person’s life that is divided between the things they enjoy, the people they care for, and other pursuits.  Again, that seems like a lot, but not when you put things into perspective.

If I spend 5 minutes each day on each one of my friends (using 200 friends for ease of math), that’s going to take over 1000 minutes, every single day.  In fact, that 1000 minutes comprises over 2/3s of a day.  That means I would have to cut down on work and/or sleep for people.

I already stated that we only have about 8 hours for the pursuits we want to enjoy.  Someone is always going to fall through the cracks.  It sucks, but at times we need to triage some people, so we can spend some quality time for our own self.

Is it any wonder why people are always in such a hurry?  There are so many demands on people, it’s hard to find time for themselves, let alone someone else.

Now, since I usually direct my writings towards feminists, I will explain how this is relevant to the hypocrisy that feminists tend to try and perpetuate.  It came to my attention through RazorBladeKandy’s video “The one that broke me”, a feminist that believes men need to check their privilege, when talking to women.  (Links to both videos at the end)

Here’s the actual reality:  No.  Men don’t.  In actual fact, men can tell you to go fuck yourself.  You’re taking up a lot of someone’s precious time on this earth, and you want more.

That is real demanding of you.

If someone actually gives you anything, especially their time, don’t start saying “Check your privilege.”  You’re just making yourself look like a demanding, entitled, and/or needy little child.

Check your own privilege.  Because you are acting like you deserve more than anyone else on this earth.

And to any feminist that wants to use that statement to anyone, here is my response:

Suck my privilege.

Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go and stop Firefly from torching people’s homes.

Links:
CDC Life Expectancy:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lifexpec.htm
RazorBladeKandy video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usyNFX9vXSE
Melissa A. Fabello’s video on Male Privilege:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnZez9suUT0

Blaming the victim…

Normally, I write against feminism.  Right now, I am going to take some time to write about something that follows the feminist ideology, very well.  Being the victim.

Now, this is also a commentary about Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman.  Feel free to say what you like.

Stefan Molyneux did a great youtube video on this subject, so I won’t bother getting into what happened.  Will link that at the end of the page.  For now, let’s get onto the subject.  I would, however, suggest that you watch it.  Especially if you believe the hype that the media has been feeding you.

People say lots about victim blaming.  There is a problem with this.  Every human being has the ability to make their own decisions.  And based upon those decisions, things happen.  Case in point:  Martin and Zimmerman.  I hear lots of people talk about how Martin would still be alive if Zimmerman hadn’t followed him.  Maybe.  At the same time, Martin would be alive if he hadn’t attacked Zimmerman.  If any of hundreds of little details had been different, Martin would be alive.  And a large number of those are Martin’s own actions.

I can already hear it now.  People saying “Don’t blame the victim.”  And shouts of victim blaming and other such things.  At some point, we need to blame the victim.  The actions of a single person can bring about a great number of things.

“If Zimmerman hadn’t followed Martin, he would still be alive…”  Putting this here, for the people that are going to say it.  Let me throw this back at you:  If Martin hadn’t attacked Zimmerman, Martin would still be alive.

See, this is an important thing people should understand:  We are responsible for our own actions.  I am supposed to be, as an adult, responsible for my actions.  You, as an adult, should be responsible for yours.  By the age of being a teen, most people start developing some form of responsibility for their actions.  Everything that happens, happens in a chain of events, based upon how the people involved act.  And when we choose to act in any way that is violent, violence will tend to be what happens to us.

See, that’s how we have wars.  That’s how we have conflicts that last for centuries.  (Don’t believe me?  How long have Israel and Palestine been fighting?  Link to the wiki page at the bottom.  It’s got good sources, which is what you can look at)

I see a lot of people saying “Racial hatred.”  Really?  You can give that much of a detailed psychological analysis of a person, from…  watching them on TV?  In all actuality, those that say racial hatred are more likely to be racially motivated.  Psych 101, for anyone that has spent time in College.

But that isn’t the issue.  The issue is that as long as we do not hold people accountable for their own actions, this is what is going to happen.  People will suffer and die, and others will continue to say that it is someone else’s fault.  In most cases, both parties should be responsible for their own actions, and the consequences that have followed from them.

It sucks.  I know.  I have to do it all the time, with myself and others.  But that’s a big part of being an adult.  Holding yourself responsible for your own actions.

And until people hold themselves responsible for their own actions, they aren’t acting like an adult.  The only people who act like they are not responsible for their own actions, tend to be victims and children.  And when someone acts like that, they become a victim of their own self sabotage and belief that they are destined for something.

The only thing anyone is destined for, is the grave.  Everything else, is a circumstance of our own making.

Links:
Stefan Molyneux:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bF-Ax5E8EJc
Timeline of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict

Let’s be real here…

Dear Feminists,

Can you be real here?  No, seriously, can you?  Because I have yet to see any realistic arguments about this so called “Gender War.”  In fact, all I see is setting up society to protect women; something that we are already set up for, anyway.  But you seem to want to set it up, at the expense of everyone else.

Now, I have a real big problem with that.  I am all for equality, but is it equal to have one set of people served and protected above everyone else?  Personally, I think it’s a load of $#!^ to protect one set, over another.  In fact, it strikes me as a Matriarchy.  (Let’s not confuse that with Patriarchy, even though it doesn’t exist from what I have been able to find, but that’s a topic for another time)  Now, I don’t have a problem with a woman on top.  I do, however, have a problem with anyone trying to get to the top, by bullying others to lesser positions.

Now let’s get even more real.  I hear Feminists (Please, no “Not All Feminists Are Like That” arguments.  Because my only response will be “Are YOU like that?”) say how wrong it is for women to be stuck in the kitchen.  Well, here’s a mind bender for you:  What if they actually make the choice to stay at home?  There seems to be a problem with that.  Why should you get what you want, and force others to be something other than what they want?  Strikes me as domineering and controlling.  And as a typical Scorpio, I am well aware of those traits.

I find it rather laughable how you can tell people you fight for women’s rights, but only the rights you want them to have.  “Get out of the kitchen!”  “Be who you want to be!”  What if they want to be in the kitchen?  What if a woman has no greater aspirations in life than to be a housewife and mother?

This is, in no way, an argument for the Traditional Conservative lifestyle.  As far as I am concerned, that doesn’t work for me.  However, I know several people who find it perfectly suited to them, and it makes them happy.  So, what is so important about getting women out of the kitchen, if that’s where they want to be?

I am asking these questions in complete seriousness and sincerity.  Why is it important to have women doing things they have no desire to do?  

I think it’s time for feminism to start looking at itself, and asking some tough questions.  Questions like:  Is feminism actually serving women, if we force them into unhappiness?  Are we really serving society, if we destroy half of the population?  Is it possible that feminism has gone too far?  And even this one:  Is the Men’s right’s movement the natural counterbalance to feminism?

Think on that for a while.  I will be back with something new, after I make myself a sandwich.