One of the most perplexing opinions about feminism EVAR:
"Men and women aren't the same! They can't do the same things EVER. Why doesn't feminism recognize this?!"
Okay dipshit, here's where your stupid: WE DO RECOGNIZE THE VERY OBVIOUS DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE GENDERS. Do you sincerely believe that we are so dense as to not notice them?
The nuance missing from your opinion is one that is fairly simple to understand. Can you see the logical fallacy in this statement and still hold the opinion above?
"If men are typically taller than women, than all men are taller than all women."
Physically impossible correct? I just disproved your shit. Men and women are not cookie cut according to assigned gender at birth! There are any number of attributes a single person can have and you want me to believe they can only have them from one pool based on gender alone? How fucking small minded can you be?!?
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Saturday, October 6, 2012
Anrachism and Feminism - A Copy & Paste Blog Post
Anarchy101 is a site that allows you post questions you may have about anarchy and have them answered by a knowledgeable community. I read this question and found an epic reply to said question that I just had to share:
QUESTION: "What's the correlation between the two? I've heard some a-feminists say all anarchists are (or should be) feminists. Is patriarchy really that prevalent or that big of a problem?
Feminism just seems like a whiny way of saying women need to be treated equally, but yet different and even better than men. Please relieve me of my ignorance."
EPIC ANSWER: " first - this question seems to be trolling, both in its language and in its content. but since this topic hasn't been fleshed out here much, i will continue on the premise of good faith. for the moment. this answer is not going to be a tome, so it doesn't go into sufficient detail about the complexities around gender vs sex, etc... which if the questioner actually *cares* about this question, would be worthwhile to look into.
a. patriarchy is in fact that big of a problem. women (and women-identified people, which includes tons of people, including entirely straight men in certain contexts) are still attacked as women, paid significantly less then men for same type of work, devalued in many levels of society (politics, etc), ignored, trivialized, etc.
that is just on the bare surface level. if you consider patriarchy to be the thing that keeps us locked in gender binary, which many feminists (and anarchists) do, then the fact that most of us don't get to have the kinds of relationships that we want, or be the people we want to be, regardless of our gender/sex, is based on patriarchy.
b. there are as many kinds of feminists as there are of anarchists (probably more, actually).
c. since on one level feminists are saying that the standard way of doing things is a problem because of inherited and recreated hierarchies that don't allow people our full expression, then yes, feminism and anarchy can be seen as intimately related. on the other hand, some feminists just want there to be more women in government, so those feminists have nothing in common with anarchists.
d. calling feminists whiny makes me want to hit you in the face.
e. while identity politics (the idea that a particular identity is a fundamental issue that is worth organizing around - and *can be* organized around) has a lot of problems and weaknesses, it is one of the easiest ways to (start to) look at many of the inequities of the system we live in. many people get to that stage and make a home there, replicating power trips that mirror (as in reverse-image) the dynamics in the larger society. those people are particularly prone to contradictions in what they are asking for (treat me the same *and* treat me different). however sometimes what appear to be contradictions are taking into account the different contexts of women and men. for example, what self-defense looks like for women vs what it looks like for men can be significantly different, since women and men are mostly socialized with diametrically opposed understandings of physical violence."
QUESTION: "What's the correlation between the two? I've heard some a-feminists say all anarchists are (or should be) feminists. Is patriarchy really that prevalent or that big of a problem?
Feminism just seems like a whiny way of saying women need to be treated equally, but yet different and even better than men. Please relieve me of my ignorance."
EPIC ANSWER: " first - this question seems to be trolling, both in its language and in its content. but since this topic hasn't been fleshed out here much, i will continue on the premise of good faith. for the moment. this answer is not going to be a tome, so it doesn't go into sufficient detail about the complexities around gender vs sex, etc... which if the questioner actually *cares* about this question, would be worthwhile to look into.
a. patriarchy is in fact that big of a problem. women (and women-identified people, which includes tons of people, including entirely straight men in certain contexts) are still attacked as women, paid significantly less then men for same type of work, devalued in many levels of society (politics, etc), ignored, trivialized, etc.
that is just on the bare surface level. if you consider patriarchy to be the thing that keeps us locked in gender binary, which many feminists (and anarchists) do, then the fact that most of us don't get to have the kinds of relationships that we want, or be the people we want to be, regardless of our gender/sex, is based on patriarchy.
b. there are as many kinds of feminists as there are of anarchists (probably more, actually).
c. since on one level feminists are saying that the standard way of doing things is a problem because of inherited and recreated hierarchies that don't allow people our full expression, then yes, feminism and anarchy can be seen as intimately related. on the other hand, some feminists just want there to be more women in government, so those feminists have nothing in common with anarchists.
d. calling feminists whiny makes me want to hit you in the face.
e. while identity politics (the idea that a particular identity is a fundamental issue that is worth organizing around - and *can be* organized around) has a lot of problems and weaknesses, it is one of the easiest ways to (start to) look at many of the inequities of the system we live in. many people get to that stage and make a home there, replicating power trips that mirror (as in reverse-image) the dynamics in the larger society. those people are particularly prone to contradictions in what they are asking for (treat me the same *and* treat me different). however sometimes what appear to be contradictions are taking into account the different contexts of women and men. for example, what self-defense looks like for women vs what it looks like for men can be significantly different, since women and men are mostly socialized with diametrically opposed understandings of physical violence."
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
I'm thinking is all...
Just because you don't think
Doesn't mean I over-think
Just because you don't care
Doesn't mean I care too much
Just because you're a "realist"
Doesn't mean I will stop dreaming
Doesn't mean I over-think
Just because you don't care
Doesn't mean I care too much
Just because you're a "realist"
Doesn't mean I will stop dreaming
Sunday, September 30, 2012
Drug testing the poor is bullshit
So it seems that more states in the US than not want to start drug testing welfare recipients. And my new home, New Zealand is trying to follow suite!
In the US, "If an applicant is found to have illegal drugs present in their system—or refuses the drug test—they will be denied aid." And here in New Zealand, people will be given the opportunity to clean up their acts before their benefits are revoked.
I think this is simply a way for drug testing companies to line their pockets with cash. Corporate greed, nothing more, nothing less.
And fueling this flame are some of those who are already subjected to drug testing in order to keep their jobs. They feel that since they themselves have to endure testing, why shouldn't those who benefit from their tax dollars endure it too?
This line of reasoning makes me think of a toddler who has broken their toy and demands that one of their siblings toys be broken too, you know, to make life fair! Because an injustice (intrusion into their private lives) is done onto to them it must be done onto someone else? FUCK THAT SHIT.....
Second off, its pretty clear to me that this mode of thinking is built on the bigoted notion that the majority of benefit recipients are drug addicts. Florida, the first and only state so far in the US to enact this testing found only 2% of those on welfare tested positive for drug use! BIG FUCKING WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY was the result to put it more bluntly. Yet 28 states in the US and the country of New Zealand wish to engage in this money-wasting witch hunt!
Also, did you know that some drug addicts have children? This will take food out of their mouths!
Seriously, think about the children dickhead!
And last but certainly not least, most of the really really big bad hard drugs flush out of people's system fairly quickly when compared to something as harmless as pot. Here I made a list:
CRACK "Cocaine can be detected in urine for 1-4 days after use."
METH "Meth can generally be detected in urine for 3-5 days after use. 2-5 hours after use the urine drug test detection period begins"
HEROIN "Heroin can be detected in urine for 1-2 days"
CODEINE "Codeine (including Fiorinal with Codeine, Robitussin A-C Empirin with Codeine and Tylenol with Codeine), about 1-2 days." for urine detection.
OPIUM "opiates such as Opium, Laudanum, Paregoric 1-2 days" for urine detection.
OXYCONTIN "oxycodone including Oxycontin, Percolone and Roxicodone, about 1-2 days." for urine detection.
This list can go on and on but I think you get the point. Most drugs are hard to detect especially the really addictive ones. Somebody who smokes a little weed now and then would be more likely to suffer the ill effects of this bullshit. Like I said above, its been proven to be a big fucking waste of time and money so the only reason for this nonsense is to make the rich fuckers at the top even richer. What a surprise!
In the US, "If an applicant is found to have illegal drugs present in their system—or refuses the drug test—they will be denied aid." And here in New Zealand, people will be given the opportunity to clean up their acts before their benefits are revoked.
I think this is simply a way for drug testing companies to line their pockets with cash. Corporate greed, nothing more, nothing less.
And fueling this flame are some of those who are already subjected to drug testing in order to keep their jobs. They feel that since they themselves have to endure testing, why shouldn't those who benefit from their tax dollars endure it too?
This line of reasoning makes me think of a toddler who has broken their toy and demands that one of their siblings toys be broken too, you know, to make life fair! Because an injustice (intrusion into their private lives) is done onto to them it must be done onto someone else? FUCK THAT SHIT.....
Second off, its pretty clear to me that this mode of thinking is built on the bigoted notion that the majority of benefit recipients are drug addicts. Florida, the first and only state so far in the US to enact this testing found only 2% of those on welfare tested positive for drug use! BIG FUCKING WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY was the result to put it more bluntly. Yet 28 states in the US and the country of New Zealand wish to engage in this money-wasting witch hunt!
Also, did you know that some drug addicts have children? This will take food out of their mouths!
Seriously, think about the children dickhead!
And last but certainly not least, most of the really really big bad hard drugs flush out of people's system fairly quickly when compared to something as harmless as pot. Here I made a list:
CRACK "Cocaine can be detected in urine for 1-4 days after use."
METH "Meth can generally be detected in urine for 3-5 days after use. 2-5 hours after use the urine drug test detection period begins"
HEROIN "Heroin can be detected in urine for 1-2 days"
CODEINE "Codeine (including Fiorinal with Codeine, Robitussin A-C Empirin with Codeine and Tylenol with Codeine), about 1-2 days." for urine detection.
OPIUM "opiates such as Opium, Laudanum, Paregoric 1-2 days" for urine detection.
OXYCONTIN "oxycodone including Oxycontin, Percolone and Roxicodone, about 1-2 days." for urine detection.
This list can go on and on but I think you get the point. Most drugs are hard to detect especially the really addictive ones. Somebody who smokes a little weed now and then would be more likely to suffer the ill effects of this bullshit. Like I said above, its been proven to be a big fucking waste of time and money so the only reason for this nonsense is to make the rich fuckers at the top even richer. What a surprise!
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
False Information Numbero Due
UPDATE on the very last quote in this post:
I finally found a place where this quote cited as coming from a book Dworkin actually wrote. It is supposedly in the book called "Our Blood" which I am reading now. If I find this quote, I will let you all know.
If anti-feminist assholes would stop inundating the internet with bullshit & misattributed quotes, I wouldn't have this much trouble finding the truth. Even though these people claim that feminism is horrible, they still need lies to prove their point? If that were the case, they wouldn't have to make shit up - just saying!
Alright, I would be able to take you anti feminist cock snots more seriously if you didn't insist on using fake quotes so often! Here are more of the all-too-ubiquitous bits of misinformation about feminism and the proof that they are just that:
I finally found a place where this quote cited as coming from a book Dworkin actually wrote. It is supposedly in the book called "Our Blood" which I am reading now. If I find this quote, I will let you all know.
If anti-feminist assholes would stop inundating the internet with bullshit & misattributed quotes, I wouldn't have this much trouble finding the truth. Even though these people claim that feminism is horrible, they still need lies to prove their point? If that were the case, they wouldn't have to make shit up - just saying!
Alright, I would be able to take you anti feminist cock snots more seriously if you didn't insist on using fake quotes so often! Here are more of the all-too-ubiquitous bits of misinformation about feminism and the proof that they are just that:
"All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman." Catherine MacKinnon
As you can see here she never said that!
You can look it up very easily and discover that NOBODY fucking said it! Stop using it!
"All men are rapists and that's all they are" -- Marilyn French
She actually did write this, but it was in a FICTIONAL novel! One of the characters said this after her daughter was raped. It was a story! When taken out of context, yeah it sounds pretty bad.
"Marriage as an institution developed from rape as a practice. Rape, originally defined as abduction, became marriage by capture. Marriage meant the taking was to extend in time, to be not only use of but possession of, or ownership." -- Andrea Dworkin.
So I see this one pop up quite a bit. What pisses me off the most about this is that the people using this quote seem to lack the reading comprehension skills to grasp the historical context of this statement. But hey, why would you actually want to try to understand something before you form an opinion on it?
"Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women's bodies." -- Andrea Dworkin
Why is it that so much misinformation about Andrea abounds? There is plenty of ammunition to use against her - you really don't have to make shit up.
This quote came about in 2003 and it came out of the mouth of a fictional character in A Novel by Andrew Lewis Conn.
I have tried my damnedest to find a credible source for this quote, but alas it does not seem to exist. And a search on The Philadelphia Inquirer's website turned up empty. I even went to far as to post this quote on Yahoo Answers to see if anyone else knew where I could find the source I desired, but to no avail. If you can find a good source for this quote, by all means let me. But I highly doubt you can...
She NEVER wrote a book called "Liberty". Do I really have to say anything after that? No, because this quote is blatantly bullshit!
I have plenty more where this came from, but for now I will leave it at this until I write again.
If you are going to dispute any of the writing above, be prepared to cite your sources or I will delete your comment.
The first false information can be found here.
"Marriage as an institution developed from rape as a practice. Rape, originally defined as abduction, became marriage by capture. Marriage meant the taking was to extend in time, to be not only use of but possession of, or ownership." -- Andrea Dworkin.
So I see this one pop up quite a bit. What pisses me off the most about this is that the people using this quote seem to lack the reading comprehension skills to grasp the historical context of this statement. But hey, why would you actually want to try to understand something before you form an opinion on it?
"Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women's bodies." -- Andrea Dworkin
Why is it that so much misinformation about Andrea abounds? There is plenty of ammunition to use against her - you really don't have to make shit up.
This quote came about in 2003 and it came out of the mouth of a fictional character in A Novel by Andrew Lewis Conn.
"Romance is rape embellished with meaningful looks." Andrea Dworkin in the Philadelphia Inquirer, May 21, 1995..
I have tried my damnedest to find a credible source for this quote, but alas it does not seem to exist. And a search on The Philadelphia Inquirer's website turned up empty. I even went to far as to post this quote on Yahoo Answers to see if anyone else knew where I could find the source I desired, but to no avail. If you can find a good source for this quote, by all means let me. But I highly doubt you can...
"Under patriarchy, no woman is safe to live her life, or to love, or to
mother children. Under patriarchy, every woman is a victim, past,
present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's daughter is a
victim, past, present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's son
is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of
another woman," Andrea Dworkin, Liberty, p.58..
She NEVER wrote a book called "Liberty". Do I really have to say anything after that? No, because this quote is blatantly bullshit!
I have plenty more where this came from, but for now I will leave it at this until I write again.
The first false information can be found here.
Monday, May 28, 2012
Silent
So one night, my friend and I were in her car, talking about "attention whores". You know, those obnoxious douche bags who constantly need everyone to smell their summer's eve? Well anyhow, this was our topic of discussion and my friend started to talk about a girl who had informed her that she had been raped. She told me she thought the girl was just trying to get attention. My friend (who actually isn't my friend anymore by the way) went on to talk about how rape survivors NEVER EVER talk about their assault. They are always silent so this girl MUST be full of shit. **I should have told her that silence is one of the reasons people get away with rape so often. And that I found the "attention whore" in her story brave as opposed to dishonest. Why did my friend not understand that speaking out is the best way to fight this; that this woman was simply playing an active role in the fight against these sorts of attacks? I should have given her a piece of my mind but I stayed silent for reasons unknown to me.
**Not saying that people who neglect to report their assaults are somehow at fault. The cards are pretty much stacked against people who report these things so I do understand why some people refuse to do so.
**Not saying that people who neglect to report their assaults are somehow at fault. The cards are pretty much stacked against people who report these things so I do understand why some people refuse to do so.
Sunday, May 13, 2012
False Information
So, in an effort to start a few conversations about feminism with people from all sides, I took to posting links to some of my blogs on anti-feminist Facebook pages. I got one fairly civil debate out of which the inspiration for this blog post was born. There were pieces of misinformation and misquotes a plenty from the other side and I have decided to address them in a more public fashion given the ubiquity of said misinformation.
1.) Do you think you know who coined and used the phrase "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle"? Well some of you out there seem to think it was Gloria Steinem. HOWEVER she did NOT create or use the phrase "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle". According to Wikipedia who cited phrase finder as its source:
1.) Do you think you know who coined and used the phrase "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle"? Well some of you out there seem to think it was Gloria Steinem. HOWEVER she did NOT create or use the phrase "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle". According to Wikipedia who cited phrase finder as its source:
"Contrary to popular belief, Steinem did not coin the
feminist slogan "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle." The
phrase is actually attributable to Irina Dunn." (1)
2.)"All sex is rape" I have seen this quote attributed to not one BUT two different feminists and both have have denied ever uttering the ridiculous phrase. Both Andrea Dworkin and Catherine A. Mackinnon are said to have coined the phrase and both deny it. You would be hard pressed to find it in anything they have written either. SO bearing that in mind, maybe people should stop using it? (2)
3.) Another claim that has been floating around without any real evidence to is that Valeria Solanas who wrote the SCUM Manifesto meant SCUM to be an acronym for Society for Cutting Up Men. It is not found anywhere in the book itself aside from the cover and there is reason to believe that the author had not put it there:
"Though it has come to be said that "SCUM" stands for "Society For
Cutting Up Men".....
this phrase actually occurs nowhere in the text. Heller argued that
"there is no reliable evidence that Solanas intended SCUM to stand as an
acronym for 'Society for Cutting Up Men'."
Susan Ware et al. state that it was Solanas' publisher Girodias who
claimed that SCUM was an acronym for "Society for Cutting Up Men",
something Solanas never seems to have intended. Gary Dexter contends that Solanas called it the SCUM Manifesto without periods after the letters of SCUM.
Dexter adds: "The spelling out of her coded title by Girodias was one
more act of patriarchal intervention, an attempt to possess."
4.) When Andrea Dworkin declared "Marriage is a legal license to rape", she wasn't just talking out of her asshole:
"Until 1976, marital rape was legal in every state in the United States.
Although marital rape is now a crime in all 50 states in the
U.S., some states still don't consider it as serious as other forms of
rape."
"In the US, spousal rape is illegal in all 50 states; the first state to outlaw it was South Dakota in 1975, and the last North Carolina in 1993."
She actually had a valid complaint! How about that? (4)
5.) When Nancy Pelosi claimed that women "would die on the emergency room floor" as her response to the Protect Life Act" plenty of people spoke out against her for supposedly over-dramatizing the situation and some even claimed that she was just making shit up. BUT if you pay attention to the nondiscrimination provision you will find that medical professionals will be able to refuse a woman an abortion under ANY circumstances if it is in conflict with their moral and/or religious views. That means a woman who needs an emergency abortion to save her life might not be able to obtain one simply because it goes against the religious views of her doctor! That means that YES IT IS POSSIBLE FOR WOMEN TO DIE BECAUSE OF THIS PROVISION. (5)
I will be posting more False Information in the future and well as other shit radical MRAs say
(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Steinem#Political_awakening_and_activism
(2) http://www.snopes.com/quotes/mackinnon.asp
(3) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCUM_Manifesto#As_parody_and_satire
(4) http://www.answers.com/topic/rape
http://marriage.about.com/cs/maritalrape/f/maritalrape10.htm
(5) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_Life_Act#Provisions
Monday, April 30, 2012
Shit radical MRAs say about women and feminists
Below are a collection of quotes from men's rights advocates. These people are actually starting to gain the attention of mainstream media and are even protesting against feminism. Even if you aren't for feminism you gotta agree that these guys are fucking creepy:
"Before I get onto why slut shaming is a worthwhile and honorable pursuit in our society, I just want to quickly rehash why Slutwalk was anti-free speech, pro-irresponsibility, and pro-sexual perversion"
"A warning to others: By publicly calling out a person as a slut one is doing a public service. One is spreading useful information about a person. Men informing other men of a woman’s sluttiness are telling them she might carry STDs, that she’s quite likely to commit paternity fraud, and that she’s a risk of “accidental” pregnancy."
"Publicly shaming sluts teaches them to be more sexually responsible"- Jason Sutherland
"There are some good looking women at the SlutWalks. It is an environment where even mediocre looking women, by comparison, can look good enough to be raped."
"C’mon people, Dworkin’s problem wasn’t that she was raped. Her problem, and I mean all along, was that she wasn’t."
"I make the following pledge as an activist, and as an American that believes fully in the rule of law. Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true."
"Better a rapist would walk the streets than a system that merely mocks justice enslave another innocent man."
"The real reason men and women cant be friends is that women lack moral agency."- Paul Elam
"I believe that today’s man can still restore his dominion in a world that is skewing against his favor by doing one thing: becoming a sexist. He must possess sexist beliefs for three reasons:
- To have sexual relationships with women who are at least as pretty as he is handsome.
- To assert his superiority over his female competitors in the workplace by playing the office game as well as they do (e.g. constantly bringing up accomplishments to managers, being outspoken, being two-faced, ass-kissing, and backstabbing).
- To get laid at all."
" You’ve probably read my thoughts about not listening to a woman about dating or relationships, but now I’ve come to the conclusion that you shouldn’t listen to a woman about anything. I’ve observed almost no cases where a man’s status or position has been increased from following a woman’s advice or opinions, and it’s much more likely for him to be harmed from it."- RooshV
"Though many arguments could be made against women's suffrage, though many arguments could be made against giving women the right to vote, this situation right here provides both empirical and prima facie evidence that women are NOT smart enough to vote; they do not have the mental wherewithal to vote. I mean, come on! How stupid do you have to be to DOUBLE your cursings from God?!""Fourthly, the vast majority of American women ARE sluts!"
-Markymark
"So if you’ve got great tits, or a pert, round behind, and you’ve put them on display, of course men are going to stare, princess. You might even get a few comments. Also, the difference between creepy and appreciative in those comments exists almost entirely in your mind, and not in the content of the offered commentary."
-John the other"The real reason for slut walk is that women must never be criticized – ever, and the international show of force is a reminder to men, to know their correct station."
Friday, March 9, 2012
This Just In: Gay Males Might Not Want to Shop With You!
Dear fellow heterosexual women,
I have been noticing a rather revolting behavior amongst our kind for a little while now and i think its time i spoke up:
STOP OBJECTIFYING GAY MALES!
They were not put on this Earth to be your shopping buddy. Believe it or not, some gay men don't FUCKING LIKE SHOPPING! And telling them upon meeting them that they "haffta go shopping" with you when no fucking shopping was mentioned is way too presumptious of you to say at the very least! NO they don't all want to go shopping with your dumb ass nor should you assume that they are fashion conscious simpy because of their orientation! They were not created to keep you in check when you are being stupid < insert feminist rant about how wrong it is for you expect the men folk to keep you in line > you are responsible for that! They are human beings not fucking fashion accessories so stop treating them as such!!!!!!
I have been noticing a rather revolting behavior amongst our kind for a little while now and i think its time i spoke up:
STOP OBJECTIFYING GAY MALES!
They were not put on this Earth to be your shopping buddy. Believe it or not, some gay men don't FUCKING LIKE SHOPPING! And telling them upon meeting them that they "haffta go shopping" with you when no fucking shopping was mentioned is way too presumptious of you to say at the very least! NO they don't all want to go shopping with your dumb ass nor should you assume that they are fashion conscious simpy because of their orientation! They were not created to keep you in check when you are being stupid < insert feminist rant about how wrong it is for you expect the men folk to keep you in line > you are responsible for that! They are human beings not fucking fashion accessories so stop treating them as such!!!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)