From the Independent Women’s Forum http://iwf.org/;-
The Ten Most Common Feminist Myths:
1. Myth: One in four women in college has been the victim of rape or attempted rape.
Fact: This mother of all factoids is based on a fallacious feminist study commissioned by Ms. magazine. The researcher, Mary Koss, hand-picked by hard-line feminist Gloria Steinem, acknowledges that 73 percent of the young women she counted as rape victims were not aware they had been raped. Forty-three percent of them were dating their “attacker” again.
Rape is a uniquely horrible crime. That is why we need sober and responsible research. Women will not be helped by hyperbole and hysteria. Truth is no enemy of compassion, and falsehood is no friend.
(Nara Schoenberg and Sam Roe, “The Making of an Epidemic,” Toledo Blade, October 10, 1993; and Neil Gilbert, “Examining the Facts: Advocacy Research Overstates the Incidence of Data and Acquaintance Rape,” Current Controversies in Family Violence eds. Richard Gelles and Donileen Loseke, Newbury Park, CA.: Sage Publications, 1993, pp.120-132; and Campus Crime and Security, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 1997. *According to this study, campus police reported 1,310 forcible sex offenses on U.S. campuses in one year. That works out to an average of fewer than one rape per campus.)
2. Myth: Women earn 75 cents for every dollar a man earns.
Fact: The 75 cent figure is terribly misleading. This statistic is a snapshot of all current full-time workers. It does not consider relevant factors like length of time in the workplace, education, occupation, and number of hours worked per week. (The experience gap is particularly large between older men and women in the workplace.) When economists do the proper controls, the so-called gender wage gap narrows to the point of vanishing.
(Essential reading: Women’s Figures: An Illustrated Guide to the Economic Progress of Women in America, by Diana Furchtgott-Roth and Christine Stolba, published by the Independent Women’s Forum and the American Enterprise Institute, Washington, D.C. 2000.)
3. Myth: 30 percent of emergency room visits by women each year are the result of injuries from domestic violence.
Fact: This incendiary statistic is promoted by gender feminists whose primary goal seems to be to impugn men. Two responsible government studies report that the nationwide figure is closer to one percent. While these studies may have missed some cases of domestic violence, the 30% figure is a wild exaggeration.
(National Center for Health Statistics, National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 1992 Emergency Department Summary , Hyattsville, Maryland, March 1997; and U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Violence-Related Injuries Treated in Hospital Emergency Departments: Washington, D.C., August 1997.)
4. Myth: The phrase “rule of thumb” originated in a man’s right to beat his wife provided the stick was no wider than his thumb.
Fact: This is an urban legend that is still taken seriously by activist law professors and harassment workshoppers. The Oxford English Dictionary has more than twenty citations for phrase “rule of thumb” (the earliest from 1692), but not a single mention of beatings, sticks, or husbands and wives.
(For a definitive debunking of the hoax see Henry Ansgar Kelly, “Rule of Thumb and the Folklaw of the Husband’s Stick,” The Journal of Legal Education, September 1994.)
5. Myth: Women have been shortchanged in medical research.
Fact: The National Institutes of Health and drug companies routinely include women in clinical trials that test for effectiveness of medications. By 1979, over 90% of all NIH-funded trials included women. Beginning in 1985, when the NIH’s National Cancer Center began keeping track of specific cancer funding, it has annually spent more money on breast cancer than any other type of cancer. Currently, women represent over 60% of all subjects in NIH-funded clinical trails.
(Essential reading: Cathy Young and Sally Satel, “The Myth of Gender Bias in Medicine,” Washington, D.C.: The Women’s Freedom Network, 1997.)
6.Myth: Girls have been shortchanged in our gender-biased schools
Fact: No fair-minded person can review the education data and conclude that girls are the have-nots in our schools. Boys are slightly ahead of girls in math and science; girls are dramatically ahead in reading and writing. (The writing skills of 17-year-old boys are at the same level as 14-year- old girls.) Girls get better grades, they have higher aspirations, and they are more likely to go to college.
(See: Trends in Educational Equity of Girls & Women, Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Education, June 2000.)
7. Myth: “Our schools are training grounds for sexual harassment… boys are rarely punished, while girls are taught that it is their role to tolerate this humiliating conduct.”
(National Organization of Women, “Issue Report: Sexual Harassment,” April 1998.)
Fact: “Hostile Hallways,” is the best-known study of harassment in grades 8-11. It was commissioned by the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in 1993, and is a favorite of many harassment experts. But this survey revealed that girls are doing almost as much harassing as the boys. According to the study, “85 percent of girls and 76 percent of boys surveyed say they have experienced unwanted and unwelcome sexual behavior that interferes with their lives.”
(Four scholars at the University of Michigan did a careful follow-up study of the AAUW data and concluded: “The majority of both genders (53%) described themselves as having been both victim and perpetrator of harassment — that is most students had been harassed and had harassed others.” And these researchers draw the right conclusion: “Our results led us to question the simple perpetrator-victim model…”)(See: American Education Research Journal, Summer 1996.)
8. Myth: Girls suffer a dramatic loss of self-esteem during adolescence.
Fact: This myth of the incredible shrinking girls was started by Carol Gilligan, professor of gender studies at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Gilligan has always enjoyed higher standing among feminist activists and journalists than among academic research psychologists. Scholars who follow the protocols of social science do not accept the reality of an adolescent “crisis” of confidence and “loss of voice.” In 1993, American Psychologist reported the new consensus among researchers in adolescent development: “It is now known that the majority of adolescents of both genders successfully negotiate this developmental period without any major psychological or emotional disorder [and] develop a positive sense of personal identity.”
(Anne C. Petersen et al. “Depression in Adolescence,” American Psychologist February 1993; see also, Daniel Offer, and Kimberly Schonert-Reichl, “Debunking the Myths of Adolescence: Findings from Recent Research,” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, November 1992.)
9. Myth: Gender is a social construction.
Fact: While environment and socialization do play a significant role in human life, a growing body of research in neuroscience, endocrinology, and psychology over the past 40 years suggests there is a biological basis for many sex differences in aptitudes and preferences. In general, males have better spatial reasoning skills; females better verbal skills. Males are greater risk takers; females are more nurturing.
Of course, this does not mean that women should be prevented from pursuing their goals in any field they choose; what it does suggest is that we should not expect parity in all fields. More women than men will continue to want to stay at home with small children and pursue careers in fields like early childhood education or psychology; men will continue to be over-represented in fields like helicopter mechanics and hydraulic engineering.
Warning: Most gender scholars in our universities have degrees in fields like English or comparative literature–not biology or neuroscience. These self-appointed experts on sexuality are scientifically illiterate. They substitute dogma and propaganda for reasoned scholarship.
(For a review of recent findings on sex differences see a special issue of The Scientific American “Men: The Scientific Truth,” Fall 2000.)
10. Myth: Women’s Studies Departments empowered women and gave them a voice in the academy.
Fact: Women’s Studies empowered a small group of like-minded careerists. They have created an old-girl network that is far more elitist, narrow and closed than any of the old-boy networks they rail against. Vast numbers of moderate or dissident women scholars have been marginalized, excluded and silenced.
(Essential reading: everything by Camille Paglia; Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge–Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies; and Christina Hoff Sommers–Who Stole Feminism? How Women have Betrayed Women)
(This image may be freely distributed.)
88 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 22, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Anonymous
Anti-female shaming tactics?
February 9, 2013 at 4:46 pm
cybroo1a
Are you implying to be anti-feminist is to be anti-female?
July 22, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Exposing Feminism
Anonymous,
Women are a gender. Feminism is a socio-political doctrine. A criticism of feminism is not a criticism of women per se – no woman is born a feminist.
February 25, 2012 at 3:51 pm
Sophie Ruffian
Perfect, ! I am tried of being looked at as a feminist , and I do NOT support their doctrine at all .
February 9, 2013 at 4:49 pm
cybroo1a
Then praise you
March 17, 2009 at 2:57 am
Max
As a former feminist, I remember hearing most of these myths in the past.
One thing you’ve got wrong there though…gender IS a social construction. We first need to delineate the difference between sex (male vs. female) and gender. Sex is what you’re born with, it’s your potential. Gender is the role within that sex that society expects and socializes its members to be.
What you are describing are sex differences, which correctly are not a societal construction, but rather a biological one.
The lines get pretty blurry though. For example, a boy raised as a girl: how would you expect him/her to be nurturing or outgoing? Difficult to say, right?
Another point to consider is that both of these categories are not categories at all. They are more of a spectrum. There is a spectrum of biological sex: intersex people, chimeras etc. But there is also a spectrum of societal imposed gender expectations.
Would you expect two men to walk down the road holding hands as a gesture of friendship? Not in the US. What about two girls? More believable. However, there are some countries where men holding hands fraternally is perfectly acceptable and common.
Gender is part of culture and is a social construct. Sex is not.
December 29, 2010 at 8:24 pm
Perceptor
You’re the one who’s wrong here… “Sex” means “what you’re born with”: it’s the _biology_ that defines your social role. Can “culture” make women produce sperm and men give birth? All the “cultural differences” are minor ones and are reflecting the environment in which they were formed; but the differences does not expand to the level of sexuality.
The cultural marxists created an artificial dichotomy by splitting the biological and the social role of the sexes. The term “gender” should be used only in grammatical sense–where it belongs in the first place.
As for the boy raised as a girl case–as long as the boy does not have any hormonal deviations, it will still demonstrate male behavioral patterns: it will still be a boy.
February 21, 2011 at 9:43 pm
Joseph
Thank you for holding strong to your moral and ethical principles! I feel very alone in this perverted world. Men and boys are treated like perverts for normal hetrosexual behavior and natural lust for women while we are forced to aprove of gays and lesbians and all sorts of perversions that strike deep at healthy family and personal structures. Please email me with ways I can help and be helped for the cause.
March 12, 2012 at 3:50 am
Anonymous Anthropologist
Actually Max is right, and the entire Anthropology discipline will back him up on that one. Sex and Gender are indeed two different things. Sex is our biology; one has a penis, the other a vagina. Culture, though determined in large part by our biological sex, is actually much more complicated.
Gender (masculine, feminine, etc) is defined by social norms within society. In our society, we have definitions for gender that are determined largely by habits; boys play with toy cowboy guns, girls play with barbies, etc. And notice I say ‘boy’ and ‘girl’ here; not ‘male’ or ‘female.’ ‘Boy’ and ‘girl’ are gender terms, whereas ‘male’ and ‘female’ denote the biological sex.
Believe it or not, there are cultures which define gender differently than we do. Many tribal societies have a wide range of cultural criteria which determine gender; criteria that can range from how good one is with a bow and arrow to the foods one likes to eat. The Navajo Native Americans for example, actually have three genders; a masculine, a feminine, and an ‘inter-gender community that everyone is born into. For the Navajo, your gender is determined in a ceremony you undergo upon reaching adolescence.
The effect of feminism is the destruction of the traditional feminine gender, but even with that being the case, the biological female sex remains the same.
April 12, 2012 at 9:17 am
A Deeper Thinker
Thank you, Anonymous Anthropologist, for regurgitating the talking points with which political radicals are indoctrinating students in our universities. It is important for normal people to be exposed to the extent to which garbage about sex roles in society is being shovelled onto unsuspecting young people under the guise of legitimate academic scholarship.
Your appeal to the authority of academic anthropologists is an exercise in circular reasoning. Universities are controlled by leftists who seek the radical redefintion of our culture and, therefore, don’t tolerate the opinions of those who do not subscribe to the leftist worldview. The radicals control the hiring and tenuring processes and systematically exclude those with whom they disagree. It is in the nature of academia that universities, despite their self-image as bastions of free-thought, are, in fact, among the most hidebound institutions in existence. Always have been, always will be.
Do some cultures define sex roles differently than our culture does? To some extent, yes, but the differences are generally not all that great and the mere existence of some differences doesn’t mean that sex role definitions are arbitrary or that all definitions are equally useful or equally desireable. Western culture dominates the globe. Why radically change that which has worked so well? In particular, why elevate the sex role definitions in a “noble-savage” fantasy version of Navajo culture above that of our own as you have? There is nothing about Navajo culture that recommends it as worthy of replacing our own other than a dogmatic desire on the part of leftists to tear down our culture as it currently exists by celebrating fabricated versions of other cultures.
You have offered an interpretation of traditional Navajo culture as, unlike our own culture, having three “genders”, masculine, feminine and “inter-gender” with “inter-gender” being the gender that everyone is born into. Has it ever occurred to you that what you are really describing is not a society with three genders, but a society like most others that treats individuals as children until they undergo a rite of passage into adulthood at which point the individual is expected to adopt the behaviors and responsibilities of adult sex roles? I think that if you give it a little thought, you will come to realize that the whole Navajo “three gender” narrative is a load of hooey concocted specifically for the purpose of suggesting to naive and guillible students that sex roles differ greatly from culture-to-culture in order to lessen their resistance to the idea that sex roles in our society can and should be radically altered. The same goes for the “2-spirit” narrative that is sometimes advanced to suggest that Amerindian cultures readily accepted homosexuality.
Girls are girls, boys are boys – live with it.
July 24, 2012 at 6:06 pm
narner
There is a 2000 year old Irish legend about a mother who had lsot her husband and sons to war. she did not want he last son to grow up and find the same fate. So she took only female servants and set up a home far from society. she then cursed her son so that he could never use armor or weapons.
One day two wondering solders rode by their farm. The boy had never seen men. He was so impressed by them and he wanted to be like them. So to get around the curse and be the hero he wanted to be he but a cooking pot on his head and grabbed a long cooking fork and set out on adventure.
The story goes on and on how he had to go through various mystical triles to lift the curse.
Point being is that that story is 2000 years old and is the same story of what happens when feminists mothers deny their boys to be boys.
Another more recent example is my grand father. Up until the Age of 6 my great grandmother not only dressed grandpa as a little girl but told him he was a little girl. I have seen the old photos. They lived on one of the many small Islands in western Canada. When they moved to Vancouver island and he started going to school He went through such hell that he resented her ever seance. By the way after rejecting his mothers attempts and raising him as a girl he grew up to be the best example of masculinity I had as a child. Responsible manly kind ,brave and ready to take action when needed.
October 1, 2011 at 4:01 pm
gothelittle
You’re right, but wrong, respectfully.
Gender roles within society don’t appear out of nowhere. They are formed as a function of the sexual roles, with which you are born. For instance, the man protects the woman. A feminist would say that this is for no other reason than the man wants to be a misogynist. In fact, the bonding hormone in a man, vasopressin, drives his behavior towards protection of his mate and children. His societal gender role is a function of his physical body.
That doesn’t mean that a man cannot nurture or that it is wrong for him to do so. It simply means that he is going to nurture in his own way due to the chemicals in his brain, and societal roles reflect that.
The error of feminists is their assumption that there is no correlation between sexual characteristics and gender roles. They believe that women would be fine protectors and men would be fine primary nurturers if not for the evil patriarchal system set up on purpose to oppress women.
Now men can nurture and women can protect, but they’re not designed to take these on as primary roles. So what you have when feminism takes over is both men and women competing against each other, both of them handicapped in both competitions as a function of not physically being the opposite gender. Society as a whole suffers.
I say again, because this is the key: Gender roles in society are formed as a function of sexual characteristics.
October 18, 2012 at 12:37 pm
Bifocal
Well said gothelittle: Can you remember when Feminists vociferously denied that hormones had anything to do with gender specificity – they claimed it was all male oriented scientific gobbledigook aimed at destroying female equality. They stated (and some still do) that “all” women are capable of doing the same tasks as “all” men. Today, steroid and hormonal supplements have apparently rewarded these naieve females with their greatest fantasies; they can now be men! As for questioning the emotional, psychological and physiological deficiencies they might be suffering, that would just be the work of jealous misogynists. Perhaps but who is actually accused of being the hater of women here? Is it men (every single one of us) or is it those women who have gone too far in identifying themselves as/with men?
Please tell me this is all a bad dream and when I wake up, I will be able to love women for all the things that we men are lacking! Otherwise I think I might become a misanthrope of the (so-called) educated and civilised world and be prepared to let the fanatical (real misogynists) wipe out all human development/invention; the same way the Egyptians, Mesopatamians, Jews, Greeks, Romans and (ancient and current) Americans have let their civilsation crumble from inside.
The decline of our current civilsation will not be brought about by Feminism: It will be brought on by the unending greed of corporate determinism. Unfortunately, Feminism will be the corporation’s greatest ally because for all they can see, feminists still believe that what we men created is the pinnacle of human achievement and corporate domination represents all things masculine, (despite the 70% female uptake in employment).
Feminism has never truly looked forward: Like the Tutsis in Rwanda, it only has revenge in its sights: Feminists will justify retrogressive political vengeance the same way the Taliban reacts to perceived “Christian Hegemonic assaults on their territory”. Feminism at heart is nothing more than a political movement like the Taliban: It seduces women (and some men) prone to grandiose ideals from the Medrassa’s of poverty, Family Court disputation, parental alienation and half-baked academic solidarity.
I suspect if Humanity is to survive; future civilisations will have sorted all this shit out and have recognised that the reason nature created gender was simply to create new genetic parents.
March 26, 2013 at 12:46 am
Anonymous
To assume that because correlation between sexual characteristics and gender roles exists, sexual characteristics and gender roles will always be the same way; is an inherently wrong and erroneous assumption. Correlation doesn’t imply causation first off, an old rule to be honest. Secondly, what the correlation does imply, is that the majority of men are inclined to be men and the majority of women are inclined to be women. This is TO BE EXPECTED.
What it does not say is the following: There are no men born with male sexual characteristics who are inclined to female gender roles. There are no women born with female sex characteristics who are inclined to male gender roles.
Those two statements are false in a very small amount of the population, however they do exist. Just because you have a farm with 1000 white and black horses, does not mean you can claim that brown horses do not exist for certain unless you know that your horses are the only horses in the entire world. If a flip a coin 100 times, you would expect about 50 heads and 50 tales, obviously. However there is a rare amount of times you will get 80 heads – 20 tales or something as drastic. The main issue is people cover eachother with blanket statements which do not apply to the entire population. If you cover the majority of the population, you get this ridiculous idea that you’re ‘right’.
In summary (TLDR); Yes the majority of people with male sex characteristics are inclined to be men, and the majority of people with female sex characteristics are inclined to be women. There however does exist a small number of people who do not fit your categories, and pretending they don’t exist because you want to be right is arrogant and a failure to adhere to academic standards.
March 20, 2009 at 9:01 pm
NewlySingle
Guys,
time to join the free man on the land movement…you can google it…it is everywhere…but you can start here. http://www.freemanhighland.co.uk/index.htm
The idea is that you can reject being governed and then are harmless from all statutes….you can refuse to pay taxes…..and just live under the law of the land….millions of men do this? We kill off our toxic governments who have promoted feminism as a way to divide and conquer the population. After all, feminism was just one tool of the Illuminati to corrupt society and to destroy it to be able to take it over….
July 2, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Rajesh Kumar
The present state is the biggest feminist.
State need reasons for its existence. The inefficient and corrupt instituion, state is, it cannot do much productive work- hence it makes itself relevant by creating one class of person as victim and another class of person as exploiter. Some time it is black and white, men and women- in future it can be humans and animals.
September 27, 2009 at 11:36 am
What is ‘ad hominem’? « Exposing Feminism
[...] ‘The Ten Most Common Feminist Myths’ [...]
December 10, 2009 at 12:59 am
Freeman
FreeWomen & Freemen
http://www.freemanhighland.co.uk/
April 28, 2010 at 7:03 pm
A user
I think men are better at everything, including verbal communication. Great communicators, writers, poets, they are all men.
November 27, 2011 at 10:41 pm
gothelittle
Women used to write under a man’s pen name, and some still do. You might be surprised to find how many women’s-written works you’ve praised.
October 21, 2010 at 9:26 am
Shitload of Conservative Stupid « Geoff's Blog
[...] P.S. The Ten Most Common Feminist Myths’. [...]
January 27, 2011 at 10:41 pm
Human-Stupidity.com
nice work
Picking nice studies to prove your point.
Visit my blog and comment. Feminism is one of the main topics there …….
July 27, 2011 at 12:17 am
WHAT IS MISANDRY? | Exposing Feminism | TRUST CHRIST OR GO TO HELL!
[...] ‘The Ten Most Common Feminist Myths’ [...]
August 9, 2011 at 9:34 pm
Anonymous
Guess what! Sex is constructed, too! Pick up some Judith Butler.
(Link added by myself – E.F.)
December 26, 2011 at 10:22 am
William Braddell
Tell me, what would actually falsify the feminist claim that gender (and in Butler’s case, sex) are a social construction? It seems as if no matter what evidence is brought before them against this view, feminists find some way to explain it all away. Sounds like feminism fails the scientific method and for something claiming to be an empirical ideology, thats deadly serious.
August 21, 2011 at 10:35 am
Anonymous
Feminism is a social construct.
August 21, 2011 at 10:37 am
Anonymous
Feminists say that God is a woman. If that’s true, can the Devil be a woman too?
November 5, 2011 at 9:17 pm
Jeanne-Michelle Lavigne
What a surprise, this post is written by a man.
November 6, 2011 at 2:25 pm
gothelittle
And women agree with it. Does that make *us* irrelevant, too?
November 27, 2011 at 10:32 pm
scatmaster
You sound fat.
Do you own a cat as well?
December 21, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Anonymous
Why would you even ask that? Would being overweight and owning a cat somehow make her words any less legitimate? I’m sorry, I didn’t realize that only fit people who don’t own cats are allowed to post their views on the internet.
December 26, 2011 at 10:23 am
William Braddell
Transsexuals prove that gender is innate. If it were socially learnt then how could they identify with one gender when they were raised as another?
August 28, 2012 at 11:39 am
Jason
This is my favorite point to throw at gender-relativists (most of whom are male do-gooders i argue with). What about transgender? Or gay males and females for that matter. Gays themselves will recognize that they have certain personality traits. Are you going to tell them that’s all a social construct?
September 2, 2012 at 10:36 am
Sally Forth
Some people have a genetic predetermination to alcoholism. But when a significant percentage of a country’s population winds up lying drunk in the streets on a regular basis, you look at the culture, not the genes.
People have certain personality traits, congratulations. The problem with our culture is when it decides that if a boy likes serving tea, or designing clothing, that he must really be a girl inside and he needs to be made to “understand” that and “accept” it or he’ll be “repressed” his whole life.
Forcing a homosexual designation on less dominant males is a brutal act meant to demean and dominate among social animals in nature.
December 26, 2011 at 8:08 pm
BA BA Bull shit!
I can only speak of what i have experenced….I held a job for several years as a mechanic, I hold a degree for welding… and never in my time there had I been written up for any thing…..I made less pay than the people who were hired in and was expected to train them also….I worked more hours than my male counter parts in most instances….I could work that plant from operating, QC , mechanic and group leader…..all for less that some guy that had been there less than 48 hours and with no degree in shit!….Hmmmm , I just wonder where all these studies come from???/…..I wasn’t asked any questions for any study. Just remember that whilr ya’ll are trying all the studies to see whats fair…..IT WAS A WOMAN WHO TAUGHT YOU TO WIPE YOUR ON ASS….Now thats priceless!
December 26, 2011 at 11:29 pm
John Miller
http://Human-Stupidity.com will write about the wage gap myth in the next few days. In the meantime you can check YouTube and Google for Warren Farrell “Why men earn more”
You must be working in a small company. To earn more
a) look for a BIG company that urgently needs female welders for gender diversification
b) consider working on off shore oil rigs or in Alaska. Gets you extra pay for danger, for long hours, for unpleasant environment. Add to that the dearth of women who want to work that way and the despair of large companies that need to employ women, you ought to earn a HUGE salary, more then men in the same situation, and much much more as in an average company
April 12, 2012 at 9:35 am
A Deeper Thinker
Dear BBBS,
if you were paid less than your co-workers, then you should have found another job instead of complaining about how underpaid you were. I don’t know why you think that having a welding degree (certification?) entitled you to high pay as a mechanic and I also don’t know why you believe that you could have held most any job in the facility. The jobs you mentioned have wildly different skill sets and, unless you have actually held similar positions in all those areas, you can’t know that you could have competently performed all those job functions. You don’t know what you don’t know. You may think that you could have been a good group leader, but unless you have experience as a group leader, you can’t know exactly what is expected of a group leader and whether you could satisfy those expectations.
Living on envy, bitterness and resentment is poisonous. Try to adopt a more positive attitude. Cheers.
December 26, 2011 at 8:37 pm
gothelittle
The reason why studies use the word “on average” or “median” is because some women earn less than a man in the same position, while other women earn more.
The median U.S. household income is currently $50,233. Should I get on some political page and rant that the statistic is wrong because my household doesn’t make that much? “I wonder where all these studies come from. Nobody asked me what my household income was. Clearly it’s all wrong.”
You are one woman. There are 157.2 million females in the United States. I am another woman. When I was working full-time as a programmer/analyst and then as a software engineer, I consistently earned higher than my male counterparts.
By the way, who taught you how to wipe your off ass?
December 27, 2011 at 10:08 pm
BA BA Bullshit
My mom you stupid bitch……i guess shit didn’t stick to your higher paid ass…..so glad you were ONE of the Females that didn’t get screwed….and all my counter parts were men…Ever turned a wrench…..oh no…just a heel most likely……didn’t post for you to just so you could be a kill joy…..and why don’t you just get on a plane and bring your higher paid ass over here, I can show better than i can tell ya! The only damn thing your working is a damn pen…
January 3, 2012 at 8:20 pm
gothelittle
Did Feminism teach you that it was ok to hate, demean, and tear down women as long as they didn’t agree with you? I would’ve expected to hear this kind of tirade from the Oppressive Patriarchal Men that Feminism keeps trying to warn me about.
Yet somehow, all the angry, insult-flinging, profanity-screaming people I’ve seen trying to shut me up and take away my rights have been women. Specifically, Feminists.
You also make a myriad of bizarre assumptions that would make the people who know me laugh if they read them. Software Engineer isn’t the only career I’ve ever had, believe it or not. I’m a real person with real experiences, not the strawman puppet Feminists like you think I am. I’ve been a software engineer, a programmer/analyst, a computer lab technician, a computer lab manager, an adjunct college professor, a Calculus tutor, a convenience store worker, a child care worker, a librarian’s assistant, a small business owner, and a personal computer repair technician… The smallest company I worked for had one employee, largest one had over 70,000. And that’s just the jobs I’ve gotten paid for!
Women are human beings too, and it’s time Feminists like you started treating us like it!
November 19, 2012 at 2:16 pm
Milk
Dear Gothelittle, I appreciate most of your comments and deeply convinced that u did performe in the professional field.
April 12, 2012 at 9:45 am
A Deeper Thinker
Dear BBBS,
the anger and hostility in your comments suggest that you are a union worker. Trying moving to a right-to-work state. If being uniionized does not explain your nastiness, than perhaps an unattractive disposition is simply part of your personality.
Maybe your low-pay and a lack of advancement opportunities could be remedied by a sweeter demeaner, especially if you work mostly with men. Most men prefer women with pleasant personalities and, like it or not, getting along with one’s co-workers is an important aspect of one’s job performance.
February 18, 2012 at 2:38 am
Keith Dubois
t
March 5, 2012 at 5:13 am
The Church of Latter-Day Stupor « The Rio Norte Line
[...] in Four women in college have not been the victim of attempted [...]
March 5, 2012 at 9:35 pm
Fausta's Blog » Blog Archive » Common false knowledge
[...] in Four women in college have not been the victim of attempted [...]
March 6, 2012 at 8:22 am
Common false knowledge | FavStocks
[...] in Four women in college have not been the victim of attempted [...]
June 28, 2012 at 4:09 pm
Jesper
5. Myth: Women have been shortchanged in medical research: As all myths go they have a kernel of truth, namely that women were usually excluded as human test subjects when developing new medicine.
However, we must consider the technological level at that time, and if we do that we soon realize that it was a lot harder to test for pregnancy than it is today. So just imagine the catastrophe if pregnant women had been included as test subjects back then: it might have led to horribly deformed or sick children, if it didn’t just lead to stillborn babies and lots of spontaneous abortions due to medicinal poisoning.
So like so many other “strange things” in history this was not done to oppress women or profess negligence of their value as human beings, it was actually done to protect them and couples’ offspring from accidental harm.
9. Myth: Gender is a social construction: the whole nurture vs. nature argument is flawed because one group is comprised of 100% social constructionists that do not understand biology, and thus doesn’t understand that there are innate biological differences that express themselves in the social/cultural traditions of a society. There is a wonderful book that looks into the controversy by Ullika Segerstråle: “The Defenders of the Truth”.
Also, these social constructionists will often gravitate towards – and be reinforced by – Marxist notions that consider pretty much everything to be a function of the social. Hence Communist attempts at creating a utopia on Earth. Also note how almost any Marxist analysis of classes can have a few words replaced and then it resembles pretty much anything feminism has conjured up. Prime examples are: the working class is replaced by women as the oppressed class; anything Capitalism does is designed to hurt workers and in feminism that is replaced by men taking the role of Capitalists, Capitalism is itself replaced by “Patriarchy”, and the family replaces the company; employees that are quite happy are accused of “false consciousness” by Communists, while women who love men and can easily orgasm with them are just “serving Patriarchy”.
July 24, 2012 at 3:04 pm
United Kingdom The Ten Most Common Feminist Myths
[...] [...]
July 24, 2012 at 11:44 pm
ptht!
three people stood in the dark staring at two amorphous shapes in the distance. the first shouted “those are different! the first one is a green cube; the other one is a blue sphere!” the second person said “no, they are both non-existent, and the shapes are the result of the passing clouds.” the third one went out to the shapes with a flashlight and shouted back “well, there are some structural differences; this one has some pointy edges and includes partial shades of green, like the other one, but slightly more so; this other one has a blue spot on it, and some smooth surfaces, but it, too has its pointy qualities. there are also a lot of clouds over here.” Upon hearing this, observer 1 started a big website called I TOLD YOU IT WAS A GREEN CUBE AND A BLUE SPHERE, IT’S SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN, CUBES ARE CUBES AND THEY ARE GREEN AND SPHERES ARE SPHERES AND THEY ARE BLUE DOT COM. Observer 2 was no longer there to make a statement, having gone to hide in a tiny, windowless room at the university, at which meetings were held for many hours a day, in which all of the participants loudly accused the person with the flashlight of being a toady for the person who was posting big fuzzy pictures of cubes and spheres all over the internet. All the people with flashlights rolled their eyes and moved on to a cognitive neuroscience website, where data could just be data and no one would stand screaming in the dark or in tiny rooms about what other people saw.
September 3, 2012 at 4:46 pm
Mathilda
Is being so preoccupied with the ontological status of gender that you spend this much time on a gender blog the result of innate predisposition or social conditioning? I think that’s a more interesting question. My other question is: If gender qualities are entirely determined by biology, does that mean that you guys aren’t ass holes, or just that you can’t help it?
September 10, 2012 at 8:00 am
Jason
Why is is being an ass hole to require the same level of fact checking of feminist sources as any other source? Every ideology has it’s myths and urban legends that get spread because they “sound good”. I’m all supportive of female empowerment, but there needs to be internal fact-checking. Otherwise most of your efforts will be as ineffective as Don Quixote tilting at windmills.
Incomplete or inaccurate information can cause efforts to be misdirected.
@Mathilda: You claim moral superiority, but you come here calling people ass holes, without offering a refutation of a single point raise.
September 10, 2012 at 10:41 am
gothelittle
In other words, you don’t like what the writer has to say, but you can’t really refute it, so you just decide to be a seagull commenter in hopes that some of us will care what some random person who prefers insults to logic thinks about us.
If this is what feminism turns people into, well, I’m not interested!
September 10, 2012 at 8:25 am
Jason
One example worth discussion is that there are claims from some feminist sources that 95%+ of domestic violence is against women, and that “1-5%” is against men (note how they cleverly turned 5% into 1%), and they dismiss that “1-5%” as purely verbal.
When in fact:
“Data from Home Office statistical bulletins and the British Crime Survey show that men made up about 40% of domestic violence victims each year between 2004-05 and 2008-09, the last year for which figures are available. In 2006-07 men made up 43.4% of all those who had suffered partner abuse in the previous year, which rose to 45.5% in 2007-08 but fell to 37.7% in 2008-09.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence
How exactly is saying that victims of both genders should be equally protected “sexist” or being an “ass hole”? if men went around claiming ONLY men could be victims, and only women could be abusers, ignoring the reality of actual victims. that would be equally unacceptable.
September 10, 2012 at 5:01 pm
Mathilda
I’ll make this easy for you. I was joking. Secondly, I wasn’t referring to your comments, which have little to do with the ontological status of gender per se, but rather seek to call attention to people whose mistreatment is unacknowledged in the standardized narratives. I was making fun of people who use this forum not simply to refute the myths of second wave feminism, but to reinforce their own monilithic gender myths. I take their facts and statistics as true, tentatively. It is a great non sequitur to point out the very real evidence for biological differences, and jump to the conclusion that these very real differences actually support one’s own narrow and one dimensional gender templates: “See! Men are Men; Women are Women!” This kind of argumentation attempts to perform surgery with a club. You, on the other hand, appear to be advocating for the great mass of males who do not (italics) fit these standard gender templates, those who are victims of abuse, and thus in unacknowledged social positions, experiencing physical and psychological trauma which has been traditionally labeled as “female.” In doing this, you are specifically addressing the breadth of the spectrum of human personality and gender expression, of which our biological differences are, of course, a part. You are quite the opposite of what I was attempting to make light of. It should be noted that such a binary and simplistic attitude about gender difference is probably one of the greatest crimes of the “Feminism” being refered to here, and it should not be replicated on any pretext. The other problem here–and I have no idea where you stand on it–is the use of the term “Feminism,” as though there were a single, concise, falsifiable body of doctrine with exclusive title to that name. It is as inaccurate as referring to Men or Women or Trucks as total categories when what one means is Soldier, Nurse, Chevy. The “Feminism” that this blog is targeting is also the primary critical target of many other bodies of thought which refer to themselves by that name. In the colloquial terminology of contemporary Anarcha-Feminism, the targets of this blogs vitriol are referred to as “a bunch of PC 2nd Wave Cunts” and other contemptible epithets. In the hifalutin monk cells of academe, they are thought of as the necessary inverse which constitutes the binary totallity of structure which is systematically reinforced by all of their acts of alleged resistance, i.e. an essential component of the problem. Why shoot into a crowd with a shotgun when you need a lazer scope? Again, I don’t think You did that. You’re obviously a verey sensitive fellow. I’m sorry you didn’t think I was funny. I didn’t mean to hurt your feelings
September 20, 2012 at 7:37 pm
None of your business
You really need to check your facts. Feminism is about equal gender rights between men and women. It’s not about cutting down men or getting power. It’s not even about how many women get raped (which, FYI, you really shouldn’t talk about the way you did because it IS a serious issue) it’s about equalitiy.
September 30, 2012 at 11:40 am
Anonymous
“None of your business”, I recommend you look up at the other comments in this very thread… you don’t even have to look further than that… to see how feminists are treating men and behaving about power.
And if we can’t discuss frankly any issue labeled “serious”, our culture will die a horrible death. The more serious the issue, the *more* it needs to be discussed, even – especially – the parts that people don’t like to hear.
September 29, 2012 at 6:53 pm
Jason
I disagree that there’s only 1 “feminism” which is all wine-and-roses. There are factions within feminism, and this article is about one particularly strong branch which dominates Gender Studies faculties at colleges across North America.
Can you provide any substantiation that these pieces of mis-information which have been labeled myths are NOT spread by Gender-studies academia? Feminism is “about” those things because people who SELF-LABEL as feminists spread those “facts”. You’re free to argue that feminisim SHOULD NOT be about those things, and reclaim the term for the equality-feminists.
It’s like a Marxist complaining “communism isn’t about government control”. From a Marxist position, that’s true, as far as Marxists go, but it doesn’t change the reality that Stalinists utilize “Communism” in a completely different way.
September 29, 2012 at 7:01 pm
Jason
BTW isn’t it demeaning to rape-victims to “broaden” the use of the word rape to mean “almost anything”. FEMINISTS have been throwing around the “rape” word in non-rape contexts for years – and they’ve been criticized for this by OTHER FEMINISTS. (Christina Hoff Sommers in this example)
http://www.menweb.org/paglsomm.htm
“MS. SOMMERS: I interviewed a young women at the University of Pennsylvania who came in in a short skirt and she was in the Women’s Center, and I think she thought I was one of the sisterhood. And she said, “Oh, I just suffered a mini-rape.” And I said, “What happened?” And she said, “A boy walked by me and said, `Nice legs’.” ”
…a guy says you have nice legs, so that’s a “mini-rape” according to campus feminists. Isn’t using “rape” to mean stuff like that demeaning to women who … i dunno, ACTUALLY GOT RAPED?
October 24, 2012 at 6:36 pm
Cire Dunnit
It is also a myth that females get better grades. Both in the UK and the USA the education system has been dumbed-down so that the top grades can be achieved by an average student. There are more average female students than males, because males tend to be the best and the worst students.
When the UK had only 10% of students making it to university and curricula and exams that were rigorously designed to be able to distinguish the wheat from the chaff, males were beating females to such a wide extent that the system was feminised and dumbed-down to make girls appear to do better. Course work counted in the grades and the exams were split into modules and failed modules could be retaken until a pass was achieved.
This year in the UK, the first steps were taken to reverse that feminisation by removing course work from the marks and making the exams more difficult and for the first time since the feminisation was introduced males obtained more top grades than females and the media, the BBC in particular, were not able to indulge in their annual orgy of congratulating girls for outperforming boys. As might have been expected boys were not congratulated by the media for making a comeback.
It wasn’t really a comeback. The dumbing-down had given so many average students the top grades (nearly 30% of students got the top grades) that it wasn’t possible to determine who were the top students.
October 24, 2012 at 7:15 pm
Brenda Blessed
The fact that about 50% of the students who take A Level, which is the top school-leaving qualification, go to university is proof that an average student can do so in the UK. The airheads in the Labour Party under Sir Alan Wilson, who has been appointed the first director-general of higher education in 2003, had it in mind to increase that to 70% to meet future demands of the economy. He was so bright that he really must have believed that the standard of education could be maintained if 70% of students make it to university.
When the UK had a first-class academic education system in up to the 1970s, only about 14% went to university.
In the initial postwar period, only seven per cent of 19-year-olds went to university. At the start of the 1960s, just four per cent of school-leavers went to university. After an influential report by Lord Robbins recommended an increase in numbers, the figure rose to about 14 per cent during the 1970s.
October 24, 2012 at 9:10 pm
Cire Dunnit
After a slight tightening of examination standards in this year’s GCSE and A Level school exams, male students got more top grades than females for the first time since the school system was dumbed-down in the 80s to allow the top grades to be awarded to 28% of students and feminised by including course work (that parents can do) and splitting the exams into modules that can be repeated until the exam is passed. It is clear that the dumbing-down that allowed an average student to obtain the top grades encompassed more female students than males, making it appear as if female students were outperforming male students, when what was happening was that the real top students were being hidden by the majority of average ones.
The feminisation of the school system was put into place in order to make female students do better compared to males, who were hogging the university places that only 14% of students could obtain, compared to the almost 50% of UK students who were making it into university.
For the first time in several decades the UK media was not able to indulge in its annual orgy of congratulating girls for outperforming boys. Needless to say, the media did not see fit to congratulate boys for making a comeback from the falsifying social engineering.
November 11, 2012 at 10:13 pm
‘The Ten Most Common Mysogenist Myths’ The Gender Wage Gap is BOGUS! | Telcomil Intl Products and Services
[...] See on exposingfeminism.wordpress.com [...]
November 13, 2012 at 3:48 pm
Peter golding
Now I’m not the worlds most physical guy, but I know what I am, I’m a man, and so’s Lola.
There’s the simple truth, I know what I am, I’m a man, and like women to be women, if they have problems working out what that means, then all the meckanicking with ‘I’m the true genius round here, and I got all the answers’
google informed pseudo intellectual feminists in the world are missing a simple point, and a very crucial one, vis a vis ‘what you got between your legs today?’.
November 17, 2012 at 3:12 pm
bhunter839
“Housewives, not men, were the prey in feminism’s sights when Kate Millet decreed in 1969 that the family must go.”- F. Carolyn Graglia
November 26, 2012 at 6:22 am
Mythic
If you’re calling Feminism “man-hate” you are missing the point. If you’re asking yourself, “What do feminists have to offer men?” you are not ready to be a Feminist.
By inventing and simplifying Feminist theorisation, you undermine the Feminist project – that is to say, Feminism aims to REVEAL social constructs.
Feminism has nothing to do with hating men. There are plenty of men who are feminists. Don’t you understand that “being a man” is its own gender construct?
A real man should be ready to acknowledge disproportionate discrimination because it goes both ways. Neither gender is “free” from social constructs. The fact just remains that women suffer from this ‘more’… But even this notion is only an opinion that one has having been told the so-called “feminist myths” you are so concerned with deconstructing…
How about deconstructing yourself?
How much of what you do is dictated by societal norms?
Since you’re calling Feminism “man-hate”, you are too terrified to take a look at yourself and ask yourself these tough, destabilizing questions.
“Coward.”
November 26, 2012 at 1:20 pm
gothelittle
No, the fact does not remain that women suffer more from social constructs. The fact remains that feminists have this odd notion that the social constructs which evolved from male and female physiology creates an atmosphere of inferiority where women are concerned.
I can understand why. Man’s inherent power is overt and flashy. It is easy to see and quantify. Women’s inherent power is subtle, but deep and profound. A man could go for years without writing home and still find himself, if badly injured, crying for his mother. Consider the adrenaline response between our genders – the man’s is called “fight or flight” while the woman’s is called “tend and befriend”. Both behaviors are vital in a society, but feminists value only the man’s contribution.
I find it fascinating that the first step to refuting feminism, the movement that supposedly recognizes equality of the sexes, is to understand that women are not inherently, biologically, behaviorally inferior to men.
November 26, 2012 at 1:37 pm
Jason Lx
The 10 points at the top of this article in no way rely on labeling feminists as man haters. Nor do they ask ‘what can women offer men’. Both those are “straw man” arguments. Tearing down your own straw-man proves nothing when you haven’t addressed any of the topics of the article.
November 26, 2012 at 2:05 pm
Jason Lx
nobody “invented” Feminist theorisation. All those 10 myths are widespread beliefs printed in real textbooks of women’s studies in college. This is, specifically the dominant school of feminist thought in academic circles in the USA.
Read stuff by “dissident” feminists like Camille La Paglia, Christina Hoff Sommers, Susan Pinker. This interview is very interesting (please ignore the provocative title, everyone interviewed are feminists, just not from the “orthodox” wing)
http://www.menweb.org/paglsomm.htm
That’s the real problem “orthodox” feminism has become as open to new ideas and interpretation as FOX News is open to liberal ideas. They’ve basically made themselves irrelevant to IMPROVING the fight for women’s rights, since they’re totally not open to data which doesn’t match their pre-determined Orthodox stance. the best they can do now is to push back against conservative attacks on reproductive rights.
November 26, 2012 at 9:36 pm
gothelittle
The conservative “attack” on reproductive rights… that phrase amuses me. Right now the “conservative attack” consists almost entirely of claiming that perhaps women do not have the right to force other women’s husbands and Catholic priests to provide them their birth control (but only if it’s in pill form) for free.
In the past couple of years, the liberals have made an incredible leap in the area of reproductive “rights”… and now they are treating their sudden surge as the New Normal. Already it’s hard to convince liberal women and/or feminists that, as shortly as one year ago, women were capable of going into a store by themselves and purchasing their own birth control pills with their own money.
November 27, 2012 at 4:11 am
Jason Lx
@gothelittle: WTF are you serious? First up you have no clue about the entire issue and your whole stance is fundamentally offensive and misogynist. Here are 12 points I’ve numbered which are all separate issues, none of which are the one you mentioned:
Issue 1 – the attack consists of many points including:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Women
1. “In 2011 and 2012, many states passed legislation requiring that women seeking abortions first undergo government-mandated ultrasounds…Since many women’s pregnancies are not far enough along to get an image via a traditional ultrasound, transvaginal ultrasounds, which involve the physician inserting a probe into the woman’s vagina are required. ” <= government probes rammed up ladies private parts.
2. "Georgia legislators passed HB 954, a "fetal pain bill" criminalizing abortions performed after the 20th week of pregnancy. The bill, which does not contain exemptions for rape or incest, has been referred to as the "women as livestock bill" by opponents"
3. "In February 2011, South Dakota state legislators considered a bill that would change that state's definition of justifiable homicide to allow the killing of abortion providers."
4. "In Arizona, legislators passed a bill protecting doctors from wrongful birth suits. Under the legislation, doctors who don't inform mothers about prenatal problems would not be liable for malpractice."
5. A Kansas bill passed March 2012 requires doctors to warn women seeking abortions that they are linked to breast cancer, a claim that has been refuted by the medical community.
6. In January 2011, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act moved to change how rape is treated when used to determine whether abortions qualify for Medicaid funding. Under the language of the bill, only cases of "forcible rape" or child sexual abuse would have qualified. Political activist groups Moveon.org and Emily's List charged that this constituted a Republican attempt to "redefine rape."
7. "The legislative policy initiative described as a War on Women has included a drive to eliminate state and federal funding for Planned Parenthood". <= defunding medical services aimed at women and families.
8. "U.S. Senate Todd Akin made controversial comments in August 2012 asserting (falsely) that women who are victims of "legitimate rape" rarely experience pregnancy from rape." = Spreading false misogynist science.
9 " Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock, when discussing his opposition to exceptions on abortion bans in cases of rape, said, "I think even if life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen." = Pretty damned offensive.
10. "The renewal of the Violence Against Women Act, which provides for community violence prevention programs and battered women's shelters, was fiercely opposed by conservative Republicans in 2012"
11.,"In October 2011, the City Council in Topeka, Kansas, facing a budget crisis, decriminalized domestic violence."
12 "In April 2012, Governor Scott Walker signed into law an act that repealed Wisconsin's Equal Pay Enforcement Act, which allowed workplace discrimination victims redress in state courts." = Repeal of equal-pay laws.
November 27, 2012 at 4:26 am
Jason Lx
@gothelittle: my last post detailed a series of state-level measures which are not in any way related to the health care mandate. now i’ll provided a specific rebuttal of the points you did raise in your post:
A. The attack definitely does not consist “almost entirely” of the objections to the contraceptives mandate.
B. There have be NO incredible leap in the area of reproductive “rights”, we’re talking about rights that became enshrined by roe-vs-wade. If there have bee any special new laws, please detail them.
C. “other women’s husbands” shows you think only men are productive. Load of rubbish. these women are PAID EMPLOYEES. The company generates a profit from their activities, otherwise they would not hire them. The cost is paid for out of the profits the worker generates.themselves.
D. “A priest” has NO RIGHT to tell another person how to live – being “an employee” doesn’t make the priest your owner or your parent. They have no legal right to tell employees what they can an cannot do in their private life. i.e. there’s no legal right to force the owner’s your religious beliefs on company employees. What’s next? If the boss is a jehovah’s witness they can ban the health insurance from paying for blood transfusions? After all, if the principle is that the company should be able to ban health insurance coverage of anything that conflicts wiith their personal beliefs.
E. why is the coverage for birth control pills any different to standardization of any other coverage? birth control actually saves the taxpayer a LOT of money on stuff that would otherwise need to be paid for (he government heavily subsidizes people who have kids).
November 27, 2012 at 1:23 pm
gothelittle
Ok, you’ve flooded a lot of stuff out here, so I’m just going to grab the most egregious, because I’m a little short on time this morning.
1. “Government probes rammed up ladies’ private parts” YOU FOOL. Transvaginal ultrasound is STANDARD for early pregnancy. I’ve had multiple such ultrasounds for each of my pregnancies. Do you have any clue whatsoever what an abortion is? Do you think that doctors should be shoving sharp implements up that same private part BLIND? The proposed legislation would have required that doctors show the result of the ultrasound to the woman before the abortion. Everyone jumped all over the whole transvaginal probe thing, which is (I can tell you personally, despite, according to you, having no clue whatsoever) less uncomfortable than a PAP SMEAR. You do know what a pap smear is, don’t you?
If you or any woman you care about is going to have an abortion, and the doctor refuses to do a transvaginal ultrasound first, RUN AWAY before he KILLS YOU.
2. A lot of these things are “considered”. Not even brought up for vote. I could give you a list of things brought up by feminists that have been “considered” that would raise your hair on end if you are a reasonable human being.
3. Planned Parenthood does not provide women with the services that it is credited for providing. It is a middle manager, increasing health care costs by taking money in order to send women to area doctors. Without their existence, these women would still be able to find free or low-cost services at the area doctors.
4. In bringing up Akin and Mourdock, you have just basically stated that stress does not affect fertility in women (so women struggling to conceive are just imagining things if they think that they can be helped), and that people who were conceived in rape cannot receive God’s blessing. Personally, I find both of those views far more offensive… and, in Akin’s case, the belief that stress does *not* affect fertility is very 80′s… new research shows otherwise. Out of women who have become pregnant from rape, most of them carry the pregnancy and many of those who abort have been pressured to do so. I’m sure they appreciate you telling them that their babies are not human because their plight disgusts you.
5. Other women’s husbands. Yes. EVERYONE pays for the health coverage. There is no extra surcharge permitted on the women who get free birth control. And as for the priest, Of course he isn’t allowed to tell you what to do in your private life. But that does NOT translate to forcing him to use his own money to purchase things for you of which he disapproves.
Do you now also think that a Catholic Priest should have to walk into the local sex toy store to buy vibrators for his female employees, too? Think he should giftwrap them first?
November 27, 2012 at 1:26 pm
gothelittle
By the way, I used strong language in point 1 on purpose, and I repeat it here, because it is vitally important. Do not let feminism lead women into great personal danger. Do not let some Puritanical squeamishness about “lady parts” kill or seriously injure women. An abortion is tricky enough without people like YOU trying to horrify women away from the transvaginal probe with talk of things like “government rape”.
This is serious.
November 26, 2012 at 2:13 pm
Jason Lx
equity feminists and other sub-cultures in feminism, do actually dispute the “myths”. But the fact that other feminists dispute them proves they are real. Don’t fall into the trap of believing that (A) all feminists believe the myths or (B) no feminists believe the myths. Some do, some don’t.
if false information is being spread to ANYONE it’s every right-thinking person’s duty to debate & discuss. Anyone who says certain topics are “OFF LIMITS” but only AFTER dropping a hostile blast of opinion on you, is nobodies friend.
http://www.menweb.org/paglsomm.htm
” MS. SOMMERS: I think she’s right to call it a kind of totalitarianism. Many young women on campuses combine two very dangerous things: moral fervor and misinformation. On the campuses they’re fed a kind of catechism of oppression. They’re taught “one in four of you have been victims of rape or attempted rape; you’re earning 59 cents on the dollar; you’re suffering a massive loss of self-esteem; that you’re battered especially on Super Bowl Sunday.” All of these things are myths, grotesque exaggerations.
MR. WATTENBERG: Well, why don’t you go through some of those myths with some specificity?
MS. SOMMERS: Well, for example, a few years ago feminist activists held a news conference and announced that on Super Bowl Sunday battery against women increases 40 percent. And, in fact, NBC was moved to use a public service announcement to, you know, encourage men “remain calm during the game.” Well –
MR. WATTENBERG: How can you remain calm during the Super Bowl! (Laughter.)
MS. SOMMERS: Well, they might explode like mad linemen and attack their wives and so forth. The New York Times began to refer to it as the “day of dread.” One reporter, Ken Ringle at the Washington Post, did something very unusual in this roiling sea of media credulity. He checked the facts — and within a few hours discovered that it was a hoax. No such research, no — there’s no data about a 40-percent increase. And this is just one of so many myths. You’ll hear — “
November 26, 2012 at 2:31 pm
Jason Lx
” MS. SOMMERS: Well, the average American women, first of all, is rather fond of men. Okay? She has a husband or a father or a brother or — you know? So the male-bashing is out of control right now. I mean — and if you look at a lot of the statistics that I deconstruct in my book. You know, that men are responsible for birth defects, that men — Naomi Wolff has a factoid she has since corrected, but she says 150,000 girls die every year starving themselves to death from anorexia. This was in Gloria Steinem’s book. It got into Ann Lander’s column. It’s in women’s studies textbooks. The correct figure, according to the Center for Disease Control, is closer to 100 deaths a year, not 150,000.
MS. PAGLIA: Three-thousand times exaggerated or something. “
January 11, 2013 at 11:51 pm
Lorna
Only 27% of women whose assault meets the legal definition of rape call what happened to them rape. The ones who don’t call it that are still rape victims. This is caused by denial, minimilization and an igorance about the legal definition of rape. Rape victims can date their attackers just like kidnapping victims can campaign for their kidnappers release and spousal abuse victims can stay with and defend the people beating them. Its called Stockholm Syndrome.
Rape is very common and that is not a feminist myth.
January 13, 2013 at 11:38 am
gothelittle
Lorna, you may be unaware of the definition of rape as used in the study. It included, “Have you ever gone out on a date where you had not initially planned to have sex, but ended up doing so?” It certainly was not the “legal” definition. (I know, because I recognize the percentage that you are quoting.)
Under that feminist-study definition, I have been raped. My husband and I went out to a heavy metal concert. We had an awesome time. He bought me a band shirt out of his pocket money and I danced and flirted with him. Then we drove home. When we got home, we were both still full of energy. It was midnight and we felt young and careless. We continued to flirt, and then…well, according to me, we had sex. (It was pretty awesome sex, too.)
According to the feminists, he raped me.
At the time, we were both working. We had a young child. We planned every sexual encounter, sometimes days in advance. I didn’t go out on that date intending on having sex. It just happened. A marriage counselor would have called that a wonderful and useful thing, because it brightened up our marriage considerably and led to a more casual (and more frequent) approach to sex.
So have you ever been “raped” willingly by your husband after a night of fun? I’m sure that’s very common, as you pointed out. I’m not sure it’s caused by denial, minimization, ignorance, and Stockholm Syndrome.
January 18, 2013 at 9:40 am
otaku
There are other myths not mentioned here:
Myth: Women’s Sexuality is more complex, more interesting/beautiful, than men’s Sexuality.
Myth: Men’s genitals have been totemized, deified, through history.
January 21, 2013 at 9:06 am
Wilhelmina
“The key to the intricate and massive system of thought created by Karl Marx is at bottom a simple one: Karl Marx was a communist.” – Murray Rothbard
Feminism, as a post-Marxist/Liberal religion follows the same pattern. The reason they ignore science, personal experience and all of human history is because they never cared about these things. The sole purpose of their ‘research’ is to generate apologetics and rationalizations.
Like any cult, they draw you in with the reasonable stuff (women shouldn’t be assassinated or raped) and once they’ve got their convert committed socially and emotionally they bring out the crazy bullshit (pretty much every Feminist book ever published).
February 3, 2013 at 4:47 am
Terra
This website is absurd.
I am a feminist because when I don’t wear a bra, I am ostracised.
I am a feminist because when if I don’t shave, I am ostracised and called ugly.
I am a feminist because women around the world shouldn’t be afraid to go to school because they are women.
I am a feminist because I love men, not hate them, and want to be equal to them in my society.
I am feminist because I understand what feminism really is.
February 3, 2013 at 12:25 pm
Anonymous
When I whip my penis out in public I’m ostracised too. Should i become a “masculinist” because of that?
May 10, 2013 at 10:15 pm
Anonymous
Her not wearing a bra and you whipping your penis out are two different things entirely. With not wearing a bra, your body is not exposed. With whipping your penis out, your body is. So to make a statement like that is ridiculous.
February 3, 2013 at 12:30 pm
Jason Lx
Males cares if you don’t wear a bra? What decade are you living in? It’s far more likely to be other females that ostracise you for your fashion statement of not wearing a bra. Not many straight males know or care much about female fashion.
Women can pretty much wear whatever they want, males are far more restricted in the range of fashions they’re allowed to wear without being ostracised. And I cannot just whip my penis out in public. Should I become a “masculinist” because of these two injustices?
February 3, 2013 at 12:36 pm
Jason Lx
I’ll also add in reply “I understand what feminism really is” – well that’s your feminism, but there are many strands of feminism. There is no unified “what feminists think”, and the above listed myths are all published material by mainstream feminists. If you disagree with the material, take it up with those particular feminists (they’re the ones who dominate academia btw).
You can find feminist sources attacking the same material presented on this website (e.g. writings by Cristina Hoff Sommers, Camille LaPaglia, and Susan Pinker all attack these and related beliefs).
February 3, 2013 at 1:07 pm
gothelittle
Terra, if people passing you on the street can tell that you’re not wearing a bra, you probably should be wearing a bra. That’s not “oppression”, it’s decency.
(This is a woman saying this.)
February 4, 2013 at 8:02 pm
Takeawholebunchoflsd
I agree. There’s just nothing more disgusting and indecent than saggy titties. Bras aren’t good enough in my opinion. This stain on our aesthetic life needs to be scraped off and flushed away. Women with saggy boobies need to be kept in sweatshops,where they can manufacture inexpensive sport bras for perky tittied attractive young ladies, out of the sanctimonious sight of you and your husband. Come to think of it, it might be plain decency for you two to refrain from posting pictures of your ugly ass faces on the internet, and to wear masks when you go out in public. You are some god awful ugly mother fuckers. But that doesn’t mean I can make you do that, and Terra doesn’t have to wear a bra either..
(In real life, I like saggy boobies)
(this is a polymorphous perverse androgyne saying this)
March 2, 2013 at 6:24 pm
Anonymous
Mother fuckers . . Why cant the world be like it was in the 50s . . Men like to dominate let em bitches! I love my mommy and daddy equally because my family is a healthy divorce free family and thats possible only when its patriarchal
April 23, 2013 at 10:59 am
What part of ‘you’re lazy and stupid’ don’t women understand?
[...] Proof that women are stupid and lazy is that this is the 18,525th article like this written in the last twenty five years, and women still don’t “get” it because [...]