Comments

1. Posted by: Pankaj on 3/14/2009 9:41 PM
   
   No no, this type of bigotry needs to be highlighted. You see, rarely do these feminist types respond logically, so you cannot expect them to say "I see your point, let me see what the real situation is like". They would rather shout you down, because facts and reality does not support their claims. Internet has made it harder to do that - text does not scream louder even if you capitalize it. So the emotional overtone is lost - the mere logical reality of the thing remains and seems completely absurd (because the ideas behind feminism are absurd).
2. Posted by: Archivist on 3/15/2009 2:41 AM
   
   What an inane rebuttal, the blather of a self-righteous young woman who has never had a serious relationship with a man.
3. Posted by: Mith on 3/27/2009 5:22 PM
   
   Oh boy...
   
   I love it how these feminists seem to blame men for every God damn problem under the sun (that should be a hint that something is wrong...when you start blamming everyone for your problems, you're in trouble), yet a great deal of our technological advancement by men has allowed us the many comforts that we enjoy now. That is not to say that women haven't contributed to it at all, but it is rather obvious that more men have shaped the world for the better than women have. Granted, this is due to the fact that it is just recent in human history that women have been given more power, but this simply disproves the idea that men are just evil on principal. Men had done plenty of good and bad things, just as women have. This lady is seriously off her rocker if she thinks that by eliminating males, you'd solve the world's problems. Hell, you'd probably bring about its collapse and the same would be said if women were to suddenly vanish as well. You can't run one society with just one gender. It just doesn't work.
4. Posted by: Peter on 3/27/2009 10:38 PM
   
   Mark,
   
   This is spot on. I also love your videos on youtube.
   
   The more I debate gender issues with feminists (or women in general), the more frustrated I become. I was a feminist myself until I began to realise that the movement is not about equality any more. Instead, it is about equal outcome (i.e., discrimination against men) in areas where women are not equally involved. In areas where women are ahead (e.g., education), feminists oppose any efforts to help the opposite sex.
   
   They also are conspicuously silent about, or openly support discrimination against men, including "affirmative action," the bias in our "family" courts, female only scholarships and academic programs, the Violence Against Women Act, breast cancer research funding, women only clubs and business networks, etc., etc., etc.
   
   It is sickening to hear women who would not tolerate such discrimination in reverse try to justify these things. They are so hypocritical I can't believe it. What a bunch of self-serving, greedy, narcissistic assholes.
   
   Colour me disillusioned and angry.
5. Posted by: Kiroku on 3/27/2009 10:52 PM
   
   Mith is right. Men and women are like two halves of a coin. You can't have one without the other. I feel most feminists know at least half of that, the part where men need women. As for them needing men? Well, most aren't so sure. What's funny is the fact that a lot of women have no clue that they are the ones setting everything off-balance for equality, but still speak of it. 'You did this to yourselves, and now you are paying up.' So now automatically, just because what past males did, all males today must burn in holy fire for things we had no part in? Now to this female Bri, for all the cruel men there were/are out there, every male(cruel, benevolent, young, old, etc.) must make women the last chance at peace on Earth.
   
   I say listen to feminists. Listen to everything they have to say. What they think will help everyone, what will end all important issues(I'm sure this one will be answered with something like "If women were in charge, that'd be the solution". Just tell them to answer with something else if it comes up.), and what will make everyone equal.
6. Posted by: Isabelle on 6/30/2009 5:08 PM
   
   Feminism has never,from the start been about gender equality. Because gender equality just does not exist! It has always been about emasculating and eliminating men because only men make society go forward (women conserve it through childbearing). Men were created stronger physically and intellectually (invention,genius of creation)and only patriarchy can let them pove their genius. Only in patriarchy can they be fathers with a real function (and not mere sperm donors as society want them to be nowadays...). Men need to be the head ,otherwise they do not exist anymore.
   As such,feminism is the hate of man, engineered by ...men! Men on top,the "elite" ,the Rockefellers,the Rotschilds and the others who finance all kinds of organisations to get rid of men,so that the elite can dominate the whole emasculated Western world...but that is not all! they want the WHOLE world at their feet,that is why they keep spreading out that crap all over the planet,called "feminism" .
7. Posted by: Jeff on 11/6/2009 6:42 PM
   
   @Isabelle: Hmmm... Feminism as a plutocratic plot; an interesting thought, that. There are many who argue that central banks are to the same purpose. The Adam Curtis documentary, 'The Century of the Self' (available at archive.org, Google video, The Dossier, and other archives) tells the story of the rise of the cult of consumerism. (See also 'The Trap', which raises some related points.) What Curtis (carefully?) did not say is that the bulk of the new PR and advertising was (and still is) aimed primarily at women (though many of the images that accompany the narrative make that point). An often quoted statistic in the US is that women account for at least 80% of discretionary spending. An increasing number of women are looking to leverage this sort of economic power to obtain other gains.
   
   @Mark: Looks like she achieved her apparent aim of getting under your skin, and getting you angry and flustrated. But you got in the end when she blew her cover, and admitted that a certain amount of feminism is a vindictive reaction to, and seeks vengeance against men. I offer for the edification of you and your readers, some snippets (without comment) from a particular genre of amateur fiction that focuses on the behaviour, thoughts, and motivations of women. Where the narratives mentions aggression and physical force, substitute logical argument, since we are discussing the arena of political and social debate. (Note that I do not exclude fighting, for this *is* a fight in many respects.)
   ------
   ...my Robert's, your Bob's and, presumably, my grandson's dispositions are quite gentle due to their dual nature. At times, they may have a loud bark, but when it comes right down to it, they are kind and considerate of others, and will not take the harsh measures that are sometimes necessary. As natural women we have an ingrained vindictiveness and drive to save our families at all costs that they simply lack; we are capable of unspeakable harsh acts that, while rarely necessary, are sometimes necessary.
   ------
   I had been friends with a girl who decided that I was more interesting than her then current linebacker boyfriend. She tried to kiss me one night and, when I politely told her that I wasn't interested in her, she freaked out and told him that I had tried to kiss her. Needless to say he wasn't happy. I ended up with a black eye and multiple bruises.
   ------
   Tucker finished drawing the rough circle in the sand [...]
   
   "Don't we have to bow or something?" Diane snickered.
   
   "Okay, you want to do it that way," Tucker smiled, and bowed.
   
   As Diane bowed in return, [... Tucker] took a quick lunge towards Diane and body-checked her outside the ring, evading her grasping hands.
   
   "Lesson one: fighting fair is for guys!"
   ------
   I tried to tell myself that there's nothing about being a girl that means I can't fight. Some of the nastiest fighters I've seen are girls. So why can't I fight back? Why haven't I ever been able to fight back?
   
   [...] when the answer to my question flashed into my mind. Girls are nasty fighters, they will do WHATEVER it takes, while boys usually have unspoken rules in their fights. Girls are the more dangerous. I should have known, I couldn't overpower or out-struggle the older boys, I had to fight like a girl!
   ------
   "Remember, Sun Tzu said that the art of combat is also the art of deception. You may be a ball buster, but you don't have to look like one," said Melissa. "You yourself said that any man with half you skills could physically overpower you. This is how we turn that factor around."
   ------
   "One thing I've learned about this woman thing is that, instead of brute force and intimidation, one has to rely on surprise, deception and psychological manipulations to defeat a more often than not stronger adversary."
   ------
   "I ate their lunch," she said gleefully. "I would have been happy if I got half of the things I presented to them. I mean, I got all of them."
   
   "Why is that?" I asked.
   
   "I've found that men often take women for granted. [ie. underestimate them] They came in thinking that it would be a cakewalk, and they were totally unprepared. It won't happen again, at least not if they realize what happened in there."
8. Posted by: Jeff on 11/6/2009 8:04 PM
   
   I should like to make another observation. I have notice that men seem to be under the misapprehension that women save this sort of vitriol particularly for us. This is, in fact, not the case. Women employ some of the same range of stratagems and tactics among themselves that they use with us (with us, however, they additionally use their femininity to advantage)-- when two women go at it "hammer and tongs" in this way, you have what we men sometimes call a "cat fight." This results in two things: 1) With practice, they grow to be very good at it ("it" being to throw the opposition off balance), and 2) they develop defenses and counter-strategies in order to cope with the same from other women. We men, however, are conditioned not to engage women in this way. (I got into a good spat with a woman, once-- all the observers' disapproval was directed at me.) We are taught to "play by the rules" (see my comment above). We argue with logic and evidence in the effort to "prove" that we are RIGHT (and thus have a RIGHT to WHAT WE WANT, or that what we want is somehow beneficial or just), while women by and large fight with whatever means necessary (including logic and evidence, so long as they serve the purpose) in order to WIN WHAT THEY WANT. Ever hear the expression about bringing a knife to a gun fight? Because of these differences (and certainly others, as well), the average man, when confronted with the angry, vindictive woman, is not armed with so much as a pea shooter! It is not particularly surprising that men walk away angry, frustrated, and feeling powerless in relationships, as a result.
   
   This aspect of women, which could be considered an archetype, and perhaps labeled "The Vindictive Bitch," is very much part of the dark side of the feminine; "The Ice Queen" is yet another. Feminists have focused on the dark side of masculine energy, what I have come to call "The Raging Cave Man"; the feminine, too, has a dark side. Hopefully, that is not all there is to us humans, male or female.
9. Posted by: ArgusEyes on 11/11/2009 8:55 AM
   
   I agree Jeff. The masculine and feminine natures have their own set of problems and advantages.
10. Posted by: Adi on 12/1/2009 9:45 PM
    
    Thanks for your efforts. I appreciate it greatly.
    
    We might want to look into that eternal claim of men being more violent. Experience has shown that, under EXACTLY the same circumstances, women and men behave exactly the same - that includes violence.
    I argue, that the reason women didn't fight or use violence, is because they didn't have to. They had men to fight for them when they were needed. Just as they still have men to do all the dirty work in the world (i.e. "the secret of the glass floor" which will be the title of my book if I ever write it).
    
    Regards
    
11. Posted by: shane nolan on 12/7/2009 10:00 AM
    
    lol..maybe the next debate for feminists will be.. men are the cause of rain fall or men are the cause of earthquakes..... i see women as equals its just these feminists that i find really ignorant