Advertisements

Google images: “Saleswoman”

Google Images: “Salesman”

I have noticed traffic coming to my blog from this link , where a blogger states that;-

If you have the stomach for it, type “misandry” into Google, and take a gander at what you’re rewarded with. The internet is chock full of self-righteous misogynists who think us “female supremacists” just need to “have some sense fucked into us” (because nothing inspires faith in your concept that sex equality already exists like your reinforcement of rape culture, and the idea that us little ladies just need a good deep dicking to set us straight).

A fine example of a straw man argument if ever I saw one! Without references, the blogger states that supporters of mens rights also advocate rape. The blogger fails to show how she reached this argument, and this ‘gap’ in reasoning is formally known as a non sequitur . After this the blogger continues in fine style;-

Yes, men are the victims of domestic violence, and yes, men get raped. As acknowledged at the start of my last post, ten percent of rape victims are male. But you know what that leaves? 90 percent who are female. Should that ten percent get ignored, should their crimes not be prosecuted? Of course not. But focusing on so few while so many suffer is not going to in any way affect the long-term problem.

Let’s imagine for a moment that the blogger is using verifiable sources for this statistic (she does not). The blogger argues that most victims are female, and also that this fact would legitimise a gynocentric focus with regard to victim support. However, this is an appeal to popularity – should we likewise ignore hunger in a small  Third World country in order to buy extra pizza for the larger population at home? The blogger continues.

How many television shows feature a conventionally unattractive, rude, obese women with her Chippendale-double husband? It’s not an insult to men that they’re told they can be as slovenly, ill-mannered, and lazy as they wish and still expect a beautiful, capable wife. It’s a statement on how we, as women, should have low standards because we should be grateful for any and all male attention that is granted to us.

However, this argument confuses a sequence of events . Advertisers tailor their products to appeal to a target audience, and will soon change if that audience does not enjoy that product. The Stupid Dad advertising phenomenon is most often designed to appeal to an audience who buy domestic products, and it is a recognised fact that most homemakers are still female . Therefore, this phenomenon is dictated by females, rather than dictated to them.

So, what can men do when confronted by this kind of faulty reasoning? It might be tempting to assail bloggers such as the one above, but I would suggest that it is better to become acquainted with some knowledge of logical fallacies . This would equip you to disassemble arguments such as the ones above, in the same way that I have.

After all.. feminists are stupid. Throw logic at them!

Feminism purports to concern itself only with equality – but in reality propagates mistrust, tension and hatred between the sexes.

Here is a thread with some feminist responses to the Catalogue of Anti-Male Shaming Tactics .

Some selected quotes;-

DAMMIT WHY ARE WOMEN ALWAYS TRYING TO MAKE ME STOP WATCHING TV, GET A JOB, AND PAY CHILD SUPPORT. YOU ARE INFRINGING ON MY MALE RIGHT TO BE A DEPENDENT SLOB.

so pretty much the entire website is “WITHOUT THE GENDER BINARY LIFE IS SCARY AND I HAVE TO FOCUS ON BEING INTELLIGENT AND FAIR, OH GOD NOT THAT”

I’m so mad I can’t find that cat macro that says “ya’ll don’t know what it’s like…being male middle class and white.

( Nowhere on this site do I disclose my ethnicity or social status. This is to prevent ad hominem arguments like this one. E.F. )

Whoever wrote this has very little knowledge of feminism AND is terribly afraid of women at the same time. Pathetic.

I think that after being verbally brutalized for trying to help people understand my feelings about sexism that it’s good to know that there’s a website where they can research how to do it in advance.

You’d better hope he’s gay. Else he’d fail logic yet again, having to sleep with the sex that represses him so. On second thought, I don’t want him in my sexual orientation.

Oh, the poor poor repressed men. How you’ve suffered through the centuries, what with being castrated all the time and having no power.

Get back in your cribs and suck on your binkie, little boys.

Ugh, what a bunch of wankers.
 
They’re whiny, impotent little douches that can’t deal with women on any level except as mute sex toys in their porn-based fantasies. And probably can’t deal with any part of society outside of their parent’s basement, to be frank.
So, a typical feminist response to a discussion of shaming language might be.. more shaming language.
Feminism purports to concern itself only with equality – but in reality propagates mistrust, tension and hatred between the sexes.

Harriet Harman, the feminist Minister for Women and Equality in the UK has been recommended by the Office Of National Statistics to present “gender wage gap” statistics differently in this report in order to give the figures in a fairer light. There is more evidence that her use of statistics are causing consternation in Whitehall. Previously to this, Ms. Harman has claimed that “on average women are paid 22.6% per hour less than men”. However, this figure is based on total hours worked by both sexes – but does take into account the actual amount of hours worked by women.

From the Office Of National Statistics report (emphasis mine) ;- 

The measure for all employees showed a pay difference of 22.5 percent in favour of men and the pay difference for full-timers was 12.8 per cent in April 2008. When looking at part-time employees, the difference was -3.5 per cent, meaning that part-time men were paid less on average than part-time women.

However, Ms. Harman’s own Equality and Human Rights Commission continues unabated with their own investigation on how best to provide the figures for public consumption.

Why not read the report and judge for yourself?

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/paygap1109.pdf

From The Guardian :-

The New Dudes are drunk, faithless, feckless and dark. But are they dangerous modern misogynists? Or desperate for female attention?

..Could it be our (women’s) fault? We asked for the New Man (feminised, housebroken), and then when we got him, we mocked him for being a sap. It’s almost as though men are saying: “You women keep trying to invent new kinds of men. Well, here are the men we invent, left to our own devices.” That said, for all the bluster, what a bumbling shower this dick power mob seems. Many don’t even seem to understand their own woman-hating credo. Here’s a clue, guys: if you despise certain people, ignore them. As it is, while feminism is generally accepted to be all about women, masculinism turns out to be… all about women, too.

The feminists haven’t worked this one out yet, have they..? You may immediately notice the standard feminist modus opperandi – the stunning avoidance of self-criticism, the gratuitous Shaming Language..

You may also wish to read The Marriage Strike – It’s Because You Have A Small Penis on this blog, which was posted back in February 4th 2008 where I originally commented..

 ..Thanks to feminism, marriage has become a financially and emotionally unviable proposition for modern men.

Let’s leave the feminists to think about this a bit longer shall we? I am sure that they will get there in the end.. unless they read Mens Rights blogs of course!

One of the more pervasive aspects of feminism is an absolute refusal to critically exmamine its own ideology, and an abolute insistence on maintaining and propagating its own dogma.

Recently, this has taken a bizarre twist in the manifestation of several feminist ‘churches’. Read these links at your own peril!

http://www.womanthouartgod.com

http://www.cybelians.com

Feminism purports to concern itself only with equality – but in reality propagates mistrust, tension and hatred between the sexes.

From The D.C. Writeup;-

Feminists everywhere, rejoice! Your day has finally come! The groundwork laid by the Suffragettes, sown by the bra-burning flower womyn of the 60s, fertilized by the sexual liberation of the 70s, and watered by Roe v. Wade has finally borne fruit! The glass ceiling is shattered! Women are finally in a position to … sexually harass other women? Women are finally in a position to … find their husbands (or fathers … or brothers) without jobs?

In two honest-to-goodness, not-making-this-stuff-up stories this week, the USA Today and the legal blog Above the Law have covered two stories that should make feminists cringe, not rejoice. But rejoice is exactly what they’re doing.

In a story that makes normal people blush, but has made some bloggers a little *ahem* hot-and-bothered, a Delaware law firm has been hit with a sexual harassment suit after they failed to deal with creatively titled “girl-on-girl sexual harassment.” In this case, a female partner allegedly sexually harassed a female associate in the firm, telling her sexually explicit things that I don’t really feel comfortable repeating here. Some commentators admitted that this illustrates that “women can be just as creepy as men” and “just as capable of creating a threatening work environment” at the same time. Others have used the story to show that career women are finally in a position to “break from the stereotypical harassment situation of a female victim going up against an old boys’ network.” Depicting this story as a boon for the women’s movement disgusts me.

The other story is less perverse, but no less disheartening. In a banner week for feminists, the USA Today also reports that the recession has hit men the hardest, where of the 6.4 million jobs lost this year, 26% of those jobs were lost by women and a whopping 74% of those jobs were lost by men. The story cites to the fact that a lot of the jobs “typically” performed by men, such as construction and manufacturing, are part of industries hardest hit by the recession, whereas “women’s jobs,” like health care, education and local government, are being laid off less (some even seeing growth) and are receiving the most stimulus money.

Instead of raising the concern that perhaps these women are now going to have to work two jobs to support their family or considering the psychological effects this may have on men (and the negative impact these statistics may have on women because of their husbands’ unemployed status), feminists see this as a good thing. The President of the Institute for Women’s Policy Research (as a side note – is there an Institute for Men’s Policy Research?) actually stated, “It was a long historical slog to get to this point.” Another woman, who wrote a book often used in feminist study classes entitled Creating Rosie the Riveter, was cited as saying that “the image that the man has to be the breadwinner has changed.”

So congratulations, feminists, you now have equality. But equality at what expense?

This is really another example of people who are trying to “help” or trying to “represent the voiceless” completely losing touch with reality. Is having the equal opportunity to harass another human being really a boon for the feminist movement? Is having males lose more jobs than females really the equal opportunity that the Suffragettes imagined? Neither of these stories are good situations for anyone. These are things you wouldn’t wish on humanity in general, let alone on an entire gender. They shouldn’t be seen as a boon to the women’s equality movement, they should be seen for exactly what they are: tragic events that affect and damage everyone together. That’s equality.

More here..

http://www.thedcwriteup.com/2009/10/for-feminism-a-pair-of-pyrrhic-victories/

~0Oo~

“How will the family unit be destroyed? …[T]he demand alone will throw the whole ideology of the family into question, so that women can begin establishing a community of work with each other and we can fight collectively. Women will feel freer to leave their husbands and become economically independent, either through a job or welfare.”

Roxanne Dunbar (1969) Female Liberation As The Basis For Social Revolution

 

“Sexual harassment law is very important. But I think it would be a mistake if the sexual harassment law movement is the only way in which feminism is known in the media.”

Judith Butler (2001) LOLApress Magazine No. 2

Visit virtually any college campus and you will find “women’s studies” classes that wave the flag of victimization and promote gender warfare. They are filled with hippie-generation professors who seek to convince female students that having children is beneath them, that men are the enemy, that their fulfillment lies in wallowing in self-pity. Students are pressured to attend male-bashing plays like “The Vagina Monologues.” Oppressors of femininity also control much of the programming geared toward young women. Witness MTV and the prime-time lineup where women are taught that the only way to advance in the world is to dominate and manipulate men through “sexual power.”

More here;-

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/28/hagelin-fight-campus-feminist-follies/

ATLANTA, September 15, 2009—The abuse of campus sexual harassment policies to punish dissenting professors has hit a new low at East Georgia College (EGC) in Swainsboro. Professor Thomas Thibeault made the mistake of pointing out—at a sexual harassment training seminar—that the school’s sexual harassment policy contained no protection for the falsely accused. Two days later, in a Kafkaesque irony, Thibeault was fired by the college president for sexual harassment without notice, without knowing his accuser or the charges against him, and without a hearing.

More here;-

http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/news/995/DHHarvardSummerscolumn031605.htm

~o0o~

“Feminist education – the feminist classroom – is and should be a place where there is a sense of struggle, where there is visible acknowledgement of the union of theory and practice, where we work together as teachers and students to overcome the estrangement and alienation that have become so much the norm in the contemporary university.”
bell hooks (1989) Talking Back: Thinking Feminist, Thinking Black Sheba, London, p.51

“Feminism recognizes education both as a site for struggle and as a tool for change-making.”
Linda Briskin & Rebecca Coulter (1992), Feminist Pedagogy: Challenging the Normative, Canadian Journal of Education 17/3, p. 249.

More quotes evidential of socio-political indoctrination in education here;-

http://pers-www.wlv.ac.uk/~le1810/fpq.htm

Quite simply, “ad hominem” is a debating technique where one makes a personal attack on the character or credibility of the speaker instead of addressing arguments that are presented, such as these.

In other words.. a cheap shot”!

Here’s a great example of a person making “ad hominem” personal attacks in place of evaluation or discourse.

http://mrashavecooties.blogspot.com/

Enjoy!

Feminism purports to concern itself only with equality – but in reality propagates mistrust, tension and hatred between the sexes.