Saturday, January 05, 2013

Why Men (and Women) Hate Feminism

A while ago I received an e-mail from one of my female readers.  She was being honest and polite, but wanted to know precisely what I had against feminism.  It was along the lines of "feminism is about the equal treatment of women, so what is so bad about that?"  However, like many other women, I don't believe she was fully aware as to just how far the feminist movement has gone, co-opting women and how far from the truth it is.  Thus, I believe it would be to everybody's benefit to explain in detail why most readers here in the Capposphere and elsewhere are against feminism (and to see if I'm missing any other reasons).

Reason #1 - Myopic View of the Sexes

If there is a "primary" reason I would have to say this is it.  Feminism started demanding changes in regards to women, with no consideration as to what would happen to the other half of society, ie - men.  They also did not think it through and consider children as well.  It was a very female-centered approach and nobody considered (let alone, cared) how actions/changes/etc. in women would affect the rest of society.  You still see this today based on the policies advocated by feminism in that it is all about women.  A secondary concern is given to the children (more often than not, using children as a means to extract government resources), and maybe a tertiary concern is given to men.

Reason #2 - Lies About Human Nature

A close second is the ludicrous concept that men and women are not just equal, but the same.  Women can do what men can do.  There are no biological differences.  And any difference is viewed as sexism or oppression.

The problem is these differences are what makes men and women great.  Men like women.  Women like men.  Men don't like manly women, and women don't like girly men.  We enjoy the difference.  All feminism has done is ruined the love lives of millions of other women (and men's as well) lying to youth about "being a sensitive 90's man"or a "strong independent woman."  That men are "shallow" and "cheap" for liking long legs and big boobs, and that any man who is worth his weight in salt will "like you for you."  Women now ignore these basic biological facts about male sexuality, even mocking and scorning them, and fail to attract men.

These lies about the "exact sameness" of men and women also destroy a vital component of our economy and society - the division of labor.  Though nobody is ordained or condemned to play these roles, traditionally the wife would stay home, while the husband would work.  This allowed for not only better families, but better reared children.  It also allowed for happier people (as men are predisposed to go out and work and women are predisposed to stay at home and rear a family).  Neither role was inferior to the other.  Both were vital, but it was feminism that lied to millions of younger women telling them the grass was greener on the other side.  The result has been an increase in divorce, less stable family, less financially stable families, and problem children incapable of becoming functioning adults in society.  This has also resulted in women being less happy.

Reason #3 - False Claims of Sexism

The thoroughly debunked "wage gap" is getting mighty tiresome.  It is a false argument used only to gain "victim" status by feminists to result in legislation that unfairly benefits women.  Affirmative action is nothing more than discrimination against men.  Most men resent this

Reason #4 - Not Pulling Your Weight

The wage gap, however, does prove something.  Women, for all their clamor of independence and "what you can do I can do better" are failing miserably and only achieving about 76% of what men do.  This in spite of all the handicaps of affirmative action, a media that is always supportive, and limitless educational and government programs.  Of course, the wage gap is not 100% "proof women aren't pulling their own weight."  Many women still take on traditional roles and rear children, some drop out of the work force to take care of their families.  But when it comes to majoring in rigorous studies, producing things of economic value, and being economically-contributing members of society, they disproportionately fail.  They account for more government workers than men, they account for easier subjects in college than men, and they are nowhere to be seen in dangerous or risky jobs.  Women on the whole are NOT equal when it comes to economic production.

Reason #5 - Poor Stewardship of the Right to Vote

This is more of an opinion, but I believe it is an opinion held by the majority of men (and surprisingly, women) who hate feminism (so you may not agree the the political opinion, but it IS a reason some people hate feminism).  In short, feminists have been poor stewards of their right to vote.  I say this because they have consistently as a group voted for more government and less freedom since given the right to vote.  I believe this is because it is in women's nature to be more caring than men, and thus tend to vote for "nicer" things.  Children, health care, education, etc.  However, "feelings" and "caring" have no place in government finances.  That requires passionless thought and consideration, research, mathematics, and an understanding of history and economics.  It also requires an appreciation for the freedom granted to us by our forefathers and an understanding of the role government was intended to play.  Feminists have proven ignorant about these topics and vote with their hearts, not their heads (and more recently, just for plain politics).

Reason #6 - Replacing Men With the State

Closely related to #5 is that feminists and feminism advocates essentially replacing the husband and father with the state.  This is abundantly clear when you see how much money and support single mothers get not to mention this macabre desire by some feminists to eliminate men from the birthing process altogether.  Not only does this take away the two most important things in a man's live (his theoretical would-be wife and children), but essentially forces men to compete against the government as a much-better financed suitor.  Not only do men lose out on love and family, any children brought into this world via Daddy Government are missing a real father and will suffer incredibly later in life.

Reasons #7 - Hypocrisy

While most hard core feminists will claim they're "independent," they're anything but.  They are usually the first to have some kind of make-work government job, some kind of professorship nobody asked for, or begging and pleading for donations to some kind of "activist group."  They typically produce nothing of value and require the state to transfer other people's money to create jobs for them.  They even point out, point blank, they want more government money for them and/or their children in government policy.  And while, yes, there may be that one feminist computer engineer, the vast majority of them are hopelessly dependent.

Reason #8 - Backlash for the Ruination of Women/Men/Lives

In general and summarizing some of the above, most people haven't sat down to think things through to the point they can articulate why the are so frustrated or angry with the opposite sex, let alone what role feminism played in this angst.  But both sexes are painfully aware of the lower quality men and women of today.  Modern day western women are on the whole unmarriageable, and modern day western men are no where near capable of being a provider or protector.  As they ponder these things, however, they will start to realize just what a bunch of BS and lies they were fed in their youth.  Lies about the sexes, the roles people were supposed to play, how the sexes were to interact with one another, and what people "should and should not like."  As people age, they will see the best thing in their lives (namely, members of the opposite sex) ruined and spoiled, and consequentially the quality of their own lives ruined as well.  Men now have to settle for women they're not attracted to, women have to settle for men who are effeminate and clueless, all because a bunch of women in the 1970's were miserable with their lives and (as far as I can tell) merely wanted everybody else to be miserable like them.  When people put two and two together, they will see it was feminism that warped and thus ruined this aspect of their lives and they will get angry.

Those are the 8 primary reasons I could come up with.  I think there may be more, but at minimum I hope it debunks feminism as simply being the "equal treatment of women" and clears up some things on both sides of the aisle.

(Of related interest is this from a former feminist explaining why she is no longer one).

52 comments:

Anonymous said...

I actually feminism, Cap!

It has freed men more than women! I would have hated being a slave for a woman who doesn't care for me as I see this with some of the older folks as I observe their interactions.

Anonymous said...

On a related note...

I recently read an article about Dolly Parton. Throughout her life she has been heavily involved in the managerial aspects of her career. When Elvis Presley proposed a business affiliation between himself and Dolly, she refused. It was not a smart move for her, and her career trajectory proved her right. She is known among the professionals in her business as "the Iron Butterfly" for her iron will, business acumen and never-let-go-of-it femininity. She is always a lady and never allows herself to sink to the level of those she feels beneath her. She always rises above abuse (from boob jokes to bad reviews) with a smile, brushing it off.

And in her entire life, whenever she is asked if she is a feminist, she says "no."

That says something.

Roberto Severino said...

Bravo, Captain! I think subconsciously, both women and men already knew that extreme feminism is unnatural and not too biological, but this post was necessary to explain why.

On a related note, Julie Borowski's "Addressing the Lack of Female Libertarians" video has been catching a lot of controversy. I saw nothing wrong with the video and she really exposed the feminist hypocrisy.

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

A bunch of humorous, bitter, angry, and cranky "libertarian" snobs had a problem with her video, which you can see here.

http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2013/01/no-girls-allowed/

Bob Murphy comes to the rescue twice. Tom Woods and Bryan Caplan weigh in.

http://consultingbyrpm.com/blog/2013/01/token-libertarian-girl-on-fiscal-cliff.html

http://consultingbyrpm.com/blog/2013/01/why-arent-there-more-libertarian-girls.html

http://www.tomwoods.com/blog/the-central-committee-has-handed-down-its-denunciation/#disqus_thread

http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2013/01/women_liberty_m.html

Daniel Kuehn leaves this on his blog:

"If you think consequentialism, being more thinking rather than feeling, and being well informed about economics is going to make you a libertarian something is very wrong with the way you are speaking to this issue (and probably economics too)."

"The other day, in response to Steve Horwitz and Sarah Skwire's post, I joked that the lack of libertarian women was a sign that they were more intelligent than men... but at least I was joking. I think Bryan actually believes his post (which I know is more nuance than my joke)!"

This reminds of when you posted your "I Am The State" video a while back and you got a lot hate comments from the leftists and "liberals." The "libertarians" who are trying to shred Julie to pieces eerily remind me of those people. I also believe some of the libertarians who had a problem with the video also identified as either feminists or left libertarians, whatever that means. They have no sense of humor and blindly took what Julie was trying to say out of context and also couldn't look at the video objectively and let their feelings cloud their judgment.

This is why libertarianism and conservatism and other right wing philosophies are so hard to sell to the general public now. They are probably right on most things, but you can obviously tell there's a lot of bitter division within the movements and confusion over what libertarianism actually is and what it isn't. Meanwhile, the progressives, liberals and the radical left are winning on every count with their unity and message of equality and giving more damn free stuff to the losers and parasites who don't produce squat and taking from the "evil" rich and making them pay their taxes, or what they often like to call their "fair share." The whole right wing needs to be united over our well grounded in fear in the spread of the welfare state and socialism and stop arguing about how more "conservative" or "reactionary" or "libertarian" we happen to be or obsess over inconsequential labels. In the end, we all want some degree of liberty and economic freedom and hopefully less government intervention in these concepts.

None of us want to be dependent on The State financially, so that should be the number one thing uniting all of us and that's the message that we have to convey to the American people. We have to communicate and emphasize the fact that it's much better to be a producer than an economic parasite without sounding like bitter, dogmatic lunatics. You will have a much better life if you're able to be less dependent on the government for your assorted goodies.

Too bad many people don't see it this way.

Jason said...

In #8 you say "Modern day western women are on the whole marriageable". Should that have been "un-marriageable"?

Anonymous said...

Cap'n:

Grammar police here:

I think your sentence should be:

Western women are on the whole UNmarriageable.

cheers, deti

Roberto Severino said...

For the record, I know that libertarianism isn't really a right wing or left wing philosophy even though there are such things as right-libertarians and left-libertarians, but in terms with wanting less government intervention in our lives, they share a couple of key things in common with conservatives and reactionaries. I just wanted to clarify this so I wouldn't be attacked.

Opus said...

Powerful!

Opus said...

The problem begins with the word 'equal'. Equal is a success word but, in my view, assumes the very thing that it seeks to prove, by assuming that women can be 'equal' to men - or vice versa, much as one might make apples equal to oranges, or gazelles to lions, or 7 year olds to 9 year olds. As we have witnessed over the last fifty years, seeking female equality (being an impossibility) achieves something very different namely - by reason of special pleading, and turning a blind eye to nature - preferrential treatment to women, and at the expence of men, of children and of society in general. Seeking female equality is thus no more coherent than seeking female inequality.

Herb Nowell said...

I hate feminism because not only has it created a world full of Lillian Reardens but they then have the nerve to complain the only men (remember men, the thing they hate and don't need) left are all James Taggarts, Wesley Mouchs, and Lee Hunsacker.

What one wouldn't give to meet a Gwen Ives or Cherryl Brooks in this world.

Anonymous said...

Reason #9: The legislation and politicization of intergender relations and dynamics.

Anti discrimination laws in favor of women and against men in hiring, work assignments, qualifications, work practices, work accommodations, and wage setting.

Insane sexual harassment laws, with "sexual harassment" defined as "sexualized conduct by unattractive men" and "conduct by anyone anywhere that any woman doesn't like".

Domestic violence and "must-arrest" laws that favor women and are insanely punitive against men.

Rape shield laws that exclude evidence of a woman's sexual conduct in a sexual assault trial. Obviously unconstitutional attempts to shift the burden of proof to defendants in sexual assault trials.

Laws designed to regulate male behavior outside the workplace. Women siccing cops on men for looking at a woman in public for too long. A woman claiming "public harassment" when some dweeb approaches her in public and tries to drop some poorly executed Game on her.

The obvious hypocrisy in the exclusion of men deemed attractive from all these policies and practices. All of it is clearly an effort to favor women and allow women to

1. segregate the attractive men for sex;

2. segregate the unattractive men for persecution, prosecution or provision;

3. sanitize and safety-net the world to make life easier for them so they can live without men when they don't want them and get men when they do want/need them.

deti

Herb Nowell said...

I hate feminism because not only has it created a world full of Lillian Reardens but they then have the nerve to complain the only men (remember men, the thing they hate and don't need) left are all James Taggarts, Wesley Mouchs, and Lee Hunsacker.

What one wouldn't give to meet a Gwen Ives or Cherryl Brooks in this world.

Anonymous said...

""feminism is about the equal treatment of women, so what is so bad about that?" "

Patriarchy is equality in reproduction, for the lack of a better word.
Marriage turned into a fraudulent contract by equal treatmenting women, and was achieved way back by the 1st wavers:

en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Legal_Subjection_of_Men#Matrimonial_Privileges_Of_Women.

http://unmaskingfeminism.wordpress.com/2011/01/16/sends-husband-to-jail-to-aid-suffrage-cause/

As for feminists working for the good of women:

"Thus the biggest success of feminism is not domestication of man or rather convincing boys to not grow into one, but the victory over their arch-enemies from their own sex to such an extent that their daughters now repeat feminist jargon against their own self-interests, if they can ever realize where they lie. Or say they support the right of a woman to have a 'choice' when in reality it takes away whatever little choice women could have had before what Elizabeth Warren has described as the two-income trap came into being."

http://endofwomen.blogspot.in/2012/10/the-biggest-success-of-feminism.html

Of course not all feminists are filled with malice, most are merely stupid or ignorant, for instance Catherine Hakim was surprised to find out that a sizeable portion of womankind didn't like to live their lives like she herself did and here she is criticizing the equal treatment fanaticism.

"Her report also suggests that many women do not want to admit they want to be a housewife – even to their partners.

‘It has become impossible to say, “I wouldn’t mind being a housewife,” she said."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1343899/Gender-equality-myth-Women-want-rich-husbands-careers.html

Suz said...

Beautiful. Crossposting.

Anonymous said...

"Not only does this take away the two most important things in a man's live (his theoretical would-be wife and children)..."

You forgot something rather important here.

The three most important things in a man's life (not live) are (1) his FATHER, (2) kids and (3) wife.

Where's a boy's dad in this picture, and what kind of a man does a boy become who has no father figure?

Ofay Cat said...

Women do not value personal freedoms as men do in part, because it is mostly men who have fought and for it ... and also that women have traditionally been somewhat subserviant to men who take care of them.

Retrenched said...

@ Captain

Great post sir.

@ deti

Reminds me of something Zed once said:

"The diabolical thing about criminalizing male desire is that we are all guilty of it - we walk around on the lam just waiting for some woman to drop the hammer on us....

"The reason any culture criminalizes something is to try to stamp it out. Apparently, they are now trying to stamp out 'unsolicited compliments' and any form of male initiative in starting relationships. And guys keep letting themselves get fined and tossed in jail for providing the benefits of relationships to women who aren't doing jack shit to bring them about."

-- from Zenpriest #32

http://no-maam.blogspot.ca/2002/01/wisdom-of-zenpriest.html

allie said...

Beautiful. So well written. I am not a well spoken girl- I always have trouble articulating what I "feel." I have always for as long as I remember flinched at people telling me I could be a doctor or a lawyer or a police office or an astronaut. I never liked it and everyone drilled into me that of course I could do WHATEVER I WANT. It never really made sense. Why would I want to do a man's job, why should I take a job from someone much more capable than myself. I may be "smart" enough but just because one CAN pull something off doesn't mean it is what they are made to do.

I remember telling my parents that I wished to be married and start having children within a few years of finishing high school. WHAT?! What was I thinking, I must attend college, I must be able to support myself (and thus, college being the only way), etc., etc.

It has never made sense. I cringe now when I see a petite female police officer, if nothing else, women are NOT EQUALS. We are not as strong, we are not as capable, and since we are the only gender that CAN produce children, if one desires children, it simply doesn't make sense to try and force a *career* upon a woman while someone else raises her children!

Long rambling post to say THANK YOU. Thank you for articulating what I have often felt and knew but was unable to put into a succinct dialogue.

I will be referencing this post throughout many conversations.

Jacob Ian Stalk said...

I'd condense this whole piece down to the following:

Feminism is hateful because it has wilfully converted what was once only a tendency in women to disregard the care of men as a class, into a legal prescription.

Days of Broken Arrows said...

Great list.

"There are no feminists when the lifeboats are lowered."

rejewvenate said...

Feminism does need to be judged at the margins, and with all of its warts, you're analysis fails at the one key test: from the perspective of women, how many would rather go back to the time before feminism? The answer is just about none. Feminism has resulted in major gains for women in safety, security, opportunity, education, etc. Those gains have to be balanced against losses, sure, but it is absurd to decry feminism when it is the movement that led women to substantial freedoms and protection from predation that the orbits societal structure was not .

And really, if the pie had been reallocated, it is only natural that the folks whose slice has shrunk (men) would be complaining.

The Observer said...

@Reje:

Fun fact: more and more women are already willingly staying at home. Others are looking back at their miserable lives after having hit the wall and decrying that men won't man up and marry their used-up selves, while others bemoan that chivalry is dead.

So yes, there are more and more women thinking that going back is a good idea. Whether men will want to, that's another thing, as Cappy Cap and his lifestyle proves.

Oh, and what about the pie? Who was it who kept on claiming rights weren't a zero-sum game in the day?

Essentially, your argument boils down to "things won't go back to the way they were" and "you're a man, so you're out to badmouth feminism" and ignoring the women here in the comments.

Opportunities were always open for exceptional women - women could always vote as far back as 1850, so long as they possessed the property to do so. Men also had property and head of household regulations imposed on them at the time, so fair was fair. First woman doctor in the US - 1890s, long before feminism. To claim that women contributed nothing to economic production has already been proven demonstratably false by Cappy Cap, and is an insult to my own grandmother, who was a tin panner.

It was technology invented by men that gave women safe environments and all the benefits you speak of. It was the hugely productive amplifications of technology that produced the surplus required for all the required funding for pork and programs. Or perhaps you'd like to talk about biology? My grandfather still remembers being herded out of the birthing room by the midwife because "it was woman's work", and had been that way for millenia. And yet it took men to invent the Simpson's foreceps, sanitary pads, birth control, and all those nice little things which freed women from their biology and massively decreased death in childbed. For goodness' sake, it even took a man to discover why women had periods!

Feminism did none of those things - and what it has was given by men by Big Daddy G's confiscation of funds to buy womens' votes. We did it for you ladies because we loved you - and yet the feminists turned on both men and women the moment they got what they wanted, and demanded more.

And with the way things are going in the economic, social and demographic arenas, there may not be much choice in the future for either sex. 500,000,000 for the reauthorisation of VAWA when the US of A is already 16.4 trillion under? There were riots in Georgia last month when the EBT payments weren't made for one month; what do you think will happen when they stop completely?

Anonymous said...

"And really, if the pie had been reallocated, it is only natural that the folks whose slice has shrunk (men) would be complaining."

and yet the complainers complain about the shrinking pool of men with pies. Martin Sewell writes concisely of male-female differences.

sexes.martinsewell.com

"absurd to decry feminism when it is the movement"

"Feminism is a power grab by (man-hating) women called feminists who have the chutzpah to claim that they have done the most for women by simply positing themselves as a necessary intermediary between transfers of knowledge/resources/technology/opportunities from men to women, and then disparaging and working towards eradicating the source."

http://endofwomen.blogspot.in/2012/10/male-dominated-history-and-definition.html

"protection from predation"

haha
Reading all the stuff coming down from the 70s, one would think the predation had increased to T-rex levels.

Maybe there wasn't enough predation to begin with, as Rothbard muses in this article:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard4.html

Christina said...

A lot has changed in the last 4 years, but nothing to change my mind about Feminism. Creeping around MRM blogs has only solidified and broadened my hatred of Feminism, but this is my reason.

Don't know where it fits in your little list up there.

Take The Red Pill said...

I have noticed for a long time that woemyn "hate feminism" ONLY when:
-- feminism no longer gives them any advantages or special privileges over men, or
-- they can no longer enjoy those same advantages and special privileges (usually due to aging), or
-- they have close male relatives (e.g., husbands, sons, etc.) who have been discriminated against and/or victimized by feminist policies and practices.

The speed at which these hypocrites change their opinions is so quick, that I have been amazed that some of them didn't get 'mental whiplash'.

Anonymous said...

Feminism, while grabbed by many angry women in the 1960s and 1970s was a statist tool to disrupt society and further the cause of dependency and ease of government manipulation. Gloria Stenheim was involved with the CIA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HRUEqyZ7p8)

Anonymous said...

Self-effacing objectivity with self-asserting subjectivity is the name of the delusional game that feminist play. And I've yet to meet a "feminist" that doesn't have a narcissistic mother!

Anonymous said...

Feminism is a hate movement created by the CIA to undermine the American Family (the nations foundation) and ultimately destroy the country. Gloria steinem's "MS" Magazine was funded by the CIA and the Rockefeller Foundation. Interesting? The CIA has no interest in the well being of Americans - it serves the power elite, the huge oil and banking conglomerates. A weakened confused, hate fuelled society is open to communist take over by the huge world wide power elite conglomerates. (the third world order). Steinem is a CIA agent. Face it ladies Ms. Steinem only gives a damn about Ms. Steinem. She even dated the enemy at one time, a big bad evil powerful patriarchial white male named Henry Kissinger.

Anonymous said...

Wow, this article is good, my younger sister is analyzing these things,
thus I am going to inform her.

Feel free to surf to my web site; Non Owner Car Insurance

Sarah said...

I've noticed you post many of these type blog posts that share the same defensive and emotion-based highly opinionated arguments.

Feminism is an empty vessel term -- it can mean many different things. I agree that the liberal version isn't empowering to women, but the idea behind feminism for equality is something in accordance to libertarian ideology.

I think you also need to focus on your weaknesses. This kind of attitude (the opposite of extreme feminism) is a huge problem. Liberty means both women and men should be free to make their own choices, as long as it does not interfere with another person's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Personally, I don't hate feminism, I dislike the ways the "feminism" label has been used outside of libertarian beliefs.

Bibiana said...

As a mother, I do not believe in either feminism or traditionalism. I would not want my daughter or my son to be devalued. I feel the key to relationships between men and women is consideration and respect, regardless of whether there is a traditional family or a two income family. I also believe in equal pay. But to me the bottom line is respecting one another and putting the family first, regardless of who brings home the bacon. Too often men and women act out instead of working things out.

Anonymous said...

That was a really stupid article, like REALLY stupid. Obviously, you have no idea of what constitutes Feminism or Women's theory and clearly, you are clueless about how "oppressed" (for lack of a better term) you are.
Feminism is about breaking gender stereotypes. It's about redefining masculinity and femininity. Yes, it is okay for men to be "girly" or women to be "manly".
YOu have a contorted view on this entire issue. A little knowledge is, after all, a dangerous thing.
Feminism is not about domination and subordination. the "equality" between men and women you are talking about was the issue of the first wave of feminism. We are in the third wave right now and our demands are not emotional outbursts, they are rational demands catering not only to women's rights but also to men's rights. But of course, you didn't know that did you?
Ignorance is bliss, I guess

Anonymous said...

Feminism is about breaking gender stereotypes. It's about redefining masculinity and femininity.

Ahhhh.. No thanks dear.

You can stick your head way back up your va jay jay. I will define myself (for myself, not you).

Feminism is an expression of Borderline Personality Disorder in the herd animals.. women.

- gender dysmorphia
- pathological lying
- histrionics

In asserting my own boundaries, I now suggest to you to STFU & mind your own delusional business. Men no longer will marry you, the secret is out.. 1/2 of women (or more) should be locked up for mental illness.

Anonymous said...

I hate feminism because as a little six year old boy I can remember Feminist man hater Andrea Dworkin on television calling for the extermination (by gas chamber) of men and boys. She also said "I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high heeled shoe shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig." For days after I was terrified of being beaten to death by some hateful woman every time I left my house, or being kidnapped, hauled off and gassed to death! And some people say feminism isn't a genocidal supremist hate movement.

Anonymous said...

I think I've been mindf* cked. I have never agreed more with somebody during my entire life. Chapeau, as we say here in France.

Anonymous said...

As much as I hate TODAY'S Feminism. I will never agree with someone who claims two parent income households are terrible and it's the reason why folks break up. Or claiming women cannot be anything other than someone's wife and mother. That's pure B.S. Also there isn't anything wrong with men who like men or women who like women or men who like both men and women or women who like both men and women. Do your thing.

Anonymous said...

Have you ever noticed how all, and I do mean all! radical feminists are either old, morbidly obese, cruelly ugly or any combination of the above? This combined with their bitter, hateful attitude means no man in his right mind would go near them. Rejection from the opposite sex has only made these gargoyles more poisonous.

Anonymous said...

During the 1970's I clearly remember Gloria Steinem up on her soap box ranting about the "patriarchy" forcing women into "submission and slavery." We were told we lived in a "woman hating" society and the "patriarchy" was the enemy and had to be destroyed. At the time "Ms" Steinem was romantically involved with Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, a wealthy and very powerful white (the worst kind!) of male "patriarch." What's wrong with this picture? Strangely feminists never seemed to question Queen Gloria about this. There's something very strange about this. I have watched many interviews with Steinem and this is never mentioned or discuss. Gloria, tell us what you are really all about you elitist gender cleansing power hungry hate monger.

Debbie said...

My hatred for feminism continues to broaden and deepen. During the late 60s and early 70s 57,000 young American boys, barely out of high school, with their whole lives ahead of them were slaughtered in Vietnam, where were their "equal rights?" At the same time young American women were burning their bras, shaving their heads and marching in the streets screaming about "oppression," the "patriarchy," and "oppression." Poor things. Just another example of how cruel, hateful, insensitive, and self absorbed these vipers were and always will be. Brainwashed to the point of psychosis these maniacs will destroy themselves and all of society if they aren't stopped. Feminists like Gloria Steinem, should be thrown in prison, for crimes against humanity rather than being praised as saviors of all womankind.

Flora Dale said...

And where were the MEN, might I ask, when there were children and family to care for? Away leaving the women to do the things they couldn't be bothered to do. As for the dignity of war, females weren't ALLOWED to fight, were they? So how could we have helped in that? Surely men could have also stayed home to help but noo. They didn't want women to be showing that they are just as important as men. It isn't much different nowadays with the whole 'Men are the ultimate leaders' factor. Let women show how their ferocity was just an act to get through to get the vote. Peace didn't work- men ignored it. DEEDS, NOT WORDS.

Anonymous said...

What the hell was that inarticulate rant all about? Truly the ramblings of a diseased mind. Bits and pieces of nonsense strung together. "And where were the men might I ask when there were children and family to care for?" "Away leaving the women to do the thinks they couldn't be bothered to do." WE WERE DRAFTED, WE WERE AT WAR YOU MORON!!! We had no choice or say in the matter. We were 19 and 20 year old kids we didn't have families and children yet. "Dignity of war" what the hell are you talking about?! I was there and believe me any man who has ever fought front line combat will tell you there is no dignity in war. "Females weren't allowed to fight" - that's right, and we sure as hell never saw them marching in the streets demanding that wonderful male "right" and "privilege" did we? Surely men could have stayed at home to help but noo" - We couldn't have stayed at home without being thrown in prison - WE WERE DRAFTED YOU MORON!! "They didn't want women to be showing that they were just as important as men" - what the f--k does that mean? "It isn't much different nowadays with the men are the ultimate leaders factor." You're right on one count it isn't much different nowadays, but not because men are the "ultimate leaders," it isn't much different nowadays because men are still a disposable utility for war, for industry and for women just like they were back then. "Let women show their ferocity." I think you should have said " let women whine complain and demand special privilege" so they can gain whatever they want without having to work or sacrifice for it. "an act to get the vote" - a few centuries back the vote was only for those who owned land, men who had no land holdings were no allowed voting privilege while women who owned land were - chew on that one. "Peace didn't work - men ignored it. That remark is so stupid I won't even dignify it with a response.

Debbie said...

I hope someone finds Flora Dale and takes her back to the group home before she hurts herself.

Anonymous said...

You were going good until you started with the Randian capitalism BS

Anonymous said...

??

Anonymous said...

And, you're the crazy nut case on the other side of the crazy nut case ideology spectrum.

"Women have been poor stewards of the right to vote."

Seriously, I've got complaints with third-wave feminism. I've called a few people misandrists.

But saying women shouldn't vote is so far over the top misogynistic...

Captain Capitalism said...

Anon,

Did I say,

"Women shouldn't have the right to vote"

or are you putting words in my mouth?

I said women have been poor stewards of their right to vote.

I am not against women having the right to vote.

I am, however, 100% for shaming them and mocking them for their idiotic choices.

John Mathers said...

Feminism is pure evil. All great civilizations start out as strong patriarchies that value the family and male leadership after the society becomes wealthy women start gaining higher status. The problem is that women are hypergamous in nature and seek to marry up, so now there is a smaller pool of men to choose from. And these men having many options will not settle. Feminism destroys the institution of marriage which motivates men to seek careers to provide for their families. If women are giving it up in their 20s and not valuing chastity why would men work hard in their 20s to marry a woman who has not honored her side of the contract when they reach their 30s. Matriarchies and feminism will lead to high divorce rates, single moms, poverty, a huge welfare state, and broken families and communities. It is a lie to say that women are exactly like men and it will destroy our society.

John Mathers said...

Feminism is pure evil. All great civilizations start out as strong patriarchies that value the family and male leadership after the society becomes wealthy women start gaining higher status. The problem is that women are hypergamous in nature and seek to marry up, so now there is a smaller pool of men to choose from. And these men having many options will not settle. Feminism destroys the institution of marriage which motivates men to seek careers to provide for their families. If women are giving it up in their 20s and not valuing chastity why would men work hard in their 20s to marry a woman who has not honored her side of the contract when they reach their 30s. Matriarchies and feminism will lead to high divorce rates, single moms, poverty, a huge welfare state, and broken families and communities. It is a lie to say that women are exactly like men and it will destroy our society.

Anonymous said...

The hateful fear-mongering that surrounds the word feminism in the 21st century is mind-boggling.

I have always been a feminist and will be to the day I die. I do not hate men, nor do I demean women who decide to stay at home and raise their kids. I have no agenda that I want to shove down anyone's throat. However, I do demand the freedom to do with my body and my life whatever I choose to do as long as it does not hurt someone else.

I demand that I make equal pay for an equal job, that I not be discriminated against because of my gender, that I not be talked down to, harrassed, or abused by men who still believe that women are on earth to be helpmates, caregivers and sexual playmates for men. I never wanted to marry or raise children, and I have no regrets. What was important to me was speaking out against provincial attitudes and oppression, empowering other women, and making a meaningful contribution to a world full of exploitation and cruelty.

I want the same opportunities afforded to me that are afforded to men, and since only a tiny fraction of women are presidents or CEOs, feminism is relevant and necessary. Since there are more than a few countries where genital mutilation, gang rape, and killing goes unpunished, feminism is relevant and necessary. In thousands of relationships where a woman stays with an abusive husband and does not have the support or economic resources to leave him, feminism is relevant and necessary.

And, if after reading this, you still believe that feminism is evil, I will conclude that you do not believe that women should have the same freedom and priviledges as men, in which case, feminism is more relevant and necessary than it ever was.

Captain Capitalism said...

Anon 448

I ask in all sincerity and want to be as accuate as possible, so correct me if I'm wrong.

You do not want to be a sexual plaything for men, not a helpful or "dutiful" wife, and would put your career on par with raising children? Am I correct in understanding that?

If that is correct, then what would you want to be then?

Sincerely, and thanks,

Aaron

Anonymous said...

As a 27-year-old female, I hate femenism. Not only because of the obvious havoc its wreaked on women's sense of identity, but also because of what its done to men. I read a few comments above saying how western women aren't good marriage material. I can say the same for men. Femenism has caused boys growth to stunt at about 17. As a tradionalist, I go on dates and am disgusted by the childish men I go out with. The general consensus among many women these days is this: men don't grow up till they're about 35, if ever. So men aren't the only ones griping about femenism. I feel like men have become man-children, never encouraged to grow up and take responsibility because more than likely, a woman will take care of them

Anonymous said...

Shut up, bitch.

Luke is Da Bomb said...

To the feminists who keep saying that you like being a feminist, because you like your right to vote, your right to pick and choose what to do with your lives, and blah, blah, blah... my grandmother went to college in the 1940s... you know, about the same time men were dying to preserve her freedom overseas? Well, her male professor insisted that she pursue a career that she would total excel in. It was a pretty complex subject as a matter of fact. BUT, no man in her life was forcing her or compelling her to goof around, meet men, marry and have kids. She was encouraged by the natural female hormones that you feminists keep wanting to reject in yourselves.

I'm so glad to see men AND women standing up against the psychotic, bullying organization known as feminism. They have done nothing but harm men AND women since the 2nd wave began in the 1970s. They gave every angry, bitter, lonely woman a way to stay bitter, angry, lonely and then, they eventually started becoming depressed, overweight.

Now, we have a generation of women that are so lost and confused, they are self-destructive. Tattoos and other body modifications are running rampant. YES, I understand that is their choice. BUT, I'm trying to figure out the root of these choices.

Women in the past could look up to their fathers as a great guide, to become something, in the eyes of a man or whatever else. Tomboys were not created by mothers, but by daughters and their need for their fathers' attention and approval. Fathers were a model for boys AND girls alike.

Now, with fathers running away from their responsibility, because they were never taught anything about responsibility or the privileges of having a family... including pride (because that would be patriarchal)... we have more generations than ever, raised by single mothers who are all looking for quick answers. That's why boys were so easily diagnosed with ADHD and fed Ritalin, when they were just behaving like normal boys. And that is disgusting.

No society in the history of the world has ever condemned women for being women, like this society is condemning men for being men, boys from being boys.

It's all gonna come crashing down. Look through history for proof. When women were given more executive power in a society, like Rome or Greece, that society was doomed.