How Feminism Paves The Way For Islamism
The piece, by Fjordman, on BrusselsJournal, says it starts with the war against boys and men, and is helped along by feminist demands for "multiculturalism" and the massive immigration it fosters of people unfriendly to Western values (or, I'll add, at war with the West and Western values, who seek the violent overturn of Western society and to install Sharia law). An excerpt:
Didn't feminists always claim that the world would be a better place with women in the driver's seat, because they wouldn't sacrifice their own children? Well, isn't that exactly what they are doing now? Smiling and voting for parties that keep the doors open to Muslim immigration, the same Muslims who will be attacking their children tomorrow?Another possibility is that Western feminists fail to confront Muslim immigration for ideological reasons. Many of them are silent on Islamic oppression of women because they have also embraced "Third-Worldism" and anti-Western sentiments. I see some evidence in support of this thesis.
American writer Phyllis Chesler has sharply criticized her sisters in books such as The Death of Feminism. She feels that too many feminists have abandoned their commitment to freedom and "become cowardly herd animals and grim totalitarian thinkers," thus failing to confront Islamic terrorism. She paints a portrait of current U.S. University campuses as steeped in "a new and diabolical McCarthyism" spearheaded by leftist rhetoric.
Chesler has a point. Judging from the rhetoric of many feminists, all the oppression in the world comes from Western men, who are oppressing both women and non-Western men. Muslim immigrants are "fellow victims" of this bias. At best, they may be patriarchal pigs, but no worse than Western men. Many Western universities have courses filled with hate against men that would be unthinkable the other way around. That's why Scandinavian feminists don't call for Scandinavian men to show a more traditional masculinity and protect them against aggression from Muslim men. Most Norwegian feminists are also passionate anti-racists who will oppose any steps to limit Muslim immigration as "racism and xenophobia."
Totalitarian feminists in Norway are threatening to shut down private companies that refuse to recruit at least 40 percent women to their boards by 2007, a Soviet-style regulation of the economy in the name of gender equality. I have read comments from Socialist politicians and leftist commentators in certain newspapers, such as the pro-Multicultural and feminist -- critics would say Female Supremacist -- newspaper Dagbladet, arguing that we should have quotas for Muslim immigrants, too.
What started out as radical feminism has thus gradually become egalitarianism, the fight against "discrimination" of any kind, the idea that all groups of people should have an equal share of everything and that it is the state's responsibility to ensure that this takes place. A prime example of this is Norway's Ombud for Gender Equality, which in 2006 became The Equality and Anti-discrimination Ombud. The Ombud's duties are "to promote equality and combat discrimination on the basis of gender, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability and age."
Western feminists have cultivated a culture of victimhood in the West, where you gain political power through your status in the victim hierarchy. In many ways, this is what Political Correctness is all about. They have also demanded, and largely got, a re-writing of the history books to address an alleged historic bias; their world view has entered the school curriculum, gained a virtual hegemony in the media and managed to portray their critics as "bigots." They have even succeeded in changing the very language we use, to make it less offensive. Radical feminists are the vanguard of PC.
When Muslims, who above all else like to present themselves as victims, enter Western nations, they find that much of their work has already been done for them. They can use a pre-established tradition of claiming to be victims, demanding state intervention and maybe quotas to address this, as well as a complete re-writing of history and public campaigns against bigotry and hate speech. Western feminists have thus paved the way for the forces that will dismantle Western feminism, and end up in bed, sometimes quite literally, with the people who want to enslave them.
The conclusion of the piece is here:
Daniel Pipes keeps saying that the answer to radical Islam is moderate Islam. There may not be any such thing as a moderate Islam, but there just might be a moderate feminism, and a mature masculinity to match it. In the book Manliness, Harvey C. Mansfield offers what he calls a modest defense of manliness. As he says, "Manliness, however, seems to be about fifty-fifty good and bad." Manliness can be noble and heroic, like the men on the Titanic who sacrificed their lives for "women and children first," but it can also be foolish, stubborn, and violent. Many men will find it offensive to hear that Islamic violence and honor killings have anything to do with masculinity, but it does. Islam is a compressed version of all the darkest aspects of masculinity. We should reject it. Men, too, lose their freedom to think and say what they want in Islam, not just women.However, even a moderate version of feminism could prove lethal to Islam. Islam survives on the extreme subjugation of women. Deprived of this, it will suffocate and die. It is true that the West still hasn't found the formula for the perfect balance between men and women in the 21st century, but at least we are working on the issue. Islam is stuck in the 7th century. Some men lament the loss of a sense of masculinity in a modern world. Perhaps a meaningful one could be to make sure that our sisters and daughters grow up in a world where they have the right to education and a free life, and protect them against Islamic barbarism. It's going to be needed.
To me, any sort of quotas for women, are contrary to what feminism is supposed to stand for, but really doesn't. My problem with feminism, as I've said before, is that it's too often about people demanding special treatment under the guise of equal treatment. And I'm totally against that sort of thing, as any fair person would be.
Wendy McElroy, on iFeminists, writes "good women must speak out" -- and, I should add, not just women:
Stand up for the values that have been ravaged by PC feminism: freedom of speech, parental control of children, the rights of men, and the ability to rise through merit alone.Every day offers opportunities to transform the culture. When a friend launches into a male-bashing diatribe, remind her that she's talking about your husband or son...and object. When a co-worker loses a deserved promotion because of affirmative action, give him moral support. When public schools teach your child values you abhor, complain to the School Board.
But be prepared to argue because political correctness will die as it lived -- kicking and screaming ad hominem abuse as a substitute for arguments. If you defend your husband, you may be called anti-woman. If you protest affirmative action, you'll be slurred as a racist. If you don't want gay teachers "coming out" in school at taxpayers' expense, you'll be labeled homophobic.
...Good women must not let PC feminism continue to affect our culture. Speak out.
My dad told me I could do anything boys could do. However, in making that statement, the assumption was be that I could do anything boys could do if I were willing to do the work and take the risks boys would. Unlike many of those crowing for "equality," I want actual equal treatment. If a man's better than I am at something, or puts more into it than I do, well, then he deserves the job. And vice versa.
Feminism. Not really good. And I'm sure they will not like my not so politically correct jokes;-)
Q Why did the feminist cross the road?
A To suck my dick.
Q How many feminists does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A Two. One to screw in the light bulb, and one to suck my dick.
I'm sure that will get me some femihate mail...
Sterling at April 24, 2009 9:05 AM
I think that's about right. I would go a bit farther. Since feminism so permeates education and media, we see it's effects almost everywhere. The idea of female supremacy is pervasive.
Over 80% of job losses in this recession have been suffered by men. Almost 100% of homeless are men. 20-25% of women stay home and choose not to work, yet women are now poised to be a majority of the workforce.
Companies are responding quite rationally to the layoffs. Women bring an economic value to a business that a man can't. Women reduce regulatory risk, the risk of lawsuits, and the like. Hiring a man increases your regulatory and lawsuit risk. As in family law, as in everywhere else, the law privileges women in the workplace. And men suffer for it.
This is actually seen as progress, by women.
Female supremacy is pervasive. Most men won't stand up to women when they say and do stupid things. Women feel entitled to say and do stupid things as part of an unwritten Entitled Princess Bill of Rights. Worse, most men will reflexively "defend" womanhood. Women use this against men all the time. Men are stupid like that all the time, too.
Long ago, women declared a social and legal war against men and boys. Men are too pussified to fight it. Women win by default.
Most men want to hide behind Amy Alkon and Wendy McElroy. They think, let the ladies do the dirty fighting. Yeah, hiding behind your women's skirts in a skirmish. That's real manly.
Screw that. Men, please wake the fuck up. It's your boy's future and you civilization that's at stake.
Jeff at April 24, 2009 9:08 AM
You know, the women I know who complain most about men are the "traditionalists," the ones who disavow feminism, and buy in to the "man as provider/woman as hottie helpmate" roles. Just saying.
And I don't know any feminists IRL who support Sharia law or Islamic or any other religios fundamentalism, rather they virulently oppose it. I know you like to blame feminists for all the world's evils, but this one's quite a stretch.
deja pseu at April 24, 2009 9:14 AM
deja pseu, you are kidding, right? Real life feminists don't complain about men? You need to come to my office some day, or to my campus, or to the neighborhood bar full of SMU Law School hotties. When I protested those stupid anti-male bus adds here in Dallas, the women entering The Family Place's fund raising gala were virulently misandrist. Shit, meet my neighbor who own a floral shop. She thinks her shops sales suffer because men "disriminate" against women owned shops. Yes, men don't spend a lot of time in floral shops. It's a giant male conspiracy don't have the same interests as women. For fuck's sake.
The world is full of feminists complaining about men. O! is creating a special office in government so women can complain even more about men! Hell, there's an entire publishing industry devoted to feminist complaining about men. Crikey.
It's not that feminists directly support Sharia law. It's that feminists often post-modern, Frankfurt School arguments for multiculturalism. Is it contradictory? Yes!
Feminists simultaneously argue for multiculturalism to bolster their attack on the traditional family structure (which doesn't include stay-at-home moms, by the way), while simultaneously denying multiculturalism for Sharia.
Feminists know the contradiction is unanswerable, so they just remain silent. In this case, silence is assistance. Fjordman is correct.
Jeff at April 24, 2009 9:28 AM
What Deja said. I'm not sure I have any complaint with Amy's thoughts about this or even any of the material in the links. But when guys like our first commenter today offer 'jokes' like that one –in a one that says 'Finally, I can let my hair down and just be bitter!'– something ain't right.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at April 24, 2009 9:41 AM
...in a tone that says....
Sorry
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at April 24, 2009 9:43 AM
Screw that. Men, please wake the fuck up. It's your boy's future and you civilization that's at stake. - Jeff
Fuck 'em, I aint havin kids.
And if I could find a way to detonate the yellowstone volcano or relase half the shit they have stored at the CDC I would - humanity need a major world wide catastophe to cleanse the gene pool
lujlp at April 24, 2009 9:45 AM
the enemy of my enemy is what?
I think it's a mistake to treat feminism like a monolith, this sort of argument belongs to all the western self-loathing out there.
SwissArmyD at April 24, 2009 10:06 AM
It's not that feminists directly support Sharia law. It's that feminists often post-modern, Frankfurt School arguments for multiculturalism.
Exactly. They've built the foundation for Sharia law.
Amy Alkon at April 24, 2009 10:14 AM
I think it's a mistake to treat feminism like a monolith,
The activist forces of feminism tend to stand for multiculturalism, affirmative action, and all sorts of legislated, mandated discrimination in the name of fairness. Because of that, I find it impossible to call myself a feminist, even though there are some feminists (Christina Hoff Sommers, Wendy McElroy, Katie Roiphe) whose thinking I generally share. I'll sometimes say I'm a "humanist," but basically, I find it hard to come up with a good label for myself. In short (but somewhat long), I'm for merit-based promotion and totally against favoring one group over another because of their skin color, type of genitalia, etc.
Amy Alkon at April 24, 2009 10:19 AM
I don't live where you people live. Feminists, even the absurdly stereotypical ones, don't rise to the level of background noise.
I avoid the grievance mongers. In all honesty, I'd refuse to hire an xxx studies major. We have nothing to discuss. I'm happy. They are not.
MarkD at April 24, 2009 10:24 AM
It's not going to be possible to reform Feminism, or any of the other identity movements. These are now organs of the State. Their followers are vengeful bigots and their ideologies are principally rationalizations of malice. If anything, they'll intensify until the only defense against them will be violence.
Jake at April 24, 2009 10:26 AM
As much as I despise feminazis and love Fjordman's essays, I think the first part is overstated. Political correctness & multiculturalism are just aspects of cultural Marxism, and they were invented by men. If radical feminism did not exist in the Western world, there would still be a ready-made grievance culture for Muslim parasites & jihadis to latch onto. Look at gay rights groups, for instance. The debate about gay men in Muslim countries is not over whether they should be able to marry, but over whether they should be executed by bring beaten to death or by being thrown off tall buildings. Yet instead of forming a united front against Islamists, cretins like "Queers for Palestine(!)" are marching, waving Hamas flags, & spewing hatred against Israel, the only country in the Middle East where gay men can be themselves. Look at black rights groups. Arabs in Sudan have been committing genocide against blacks for decades now, raping & slaughtering millions of them just for being black Africans who refuse to bow to their Arab masters. Israel is pretty well the only country in the Middle East that has accepted refugees from Darfur. Yet any day, you can hear Louis Farrakhan & other supposed black leaders spewing hatred at Jews & Israel, and lavishing praise on Muslims & Sudan.
Women are not responsible for the actions of all these fucking idiots.
Martin at April 24, 2009 10:29 AM
crid and his tones, again. Jeeesh.
Jeff at April 24, 2009 11:11 AM
We're talking philosophy here, not dicks and pussies.
I agree. It's a war declared on men and boys, fought with the tools of politics, and men have been very unsuccessful at mobilizing a counter-offensive. We owe the Joan of Arcs - Amy, Wendy, Christina Hoff Summers, to name a few - a huge debt. Huge. But guys need to grow a pair for themselves, dang it.Jeff at April 24, 2009 11:21 AM
But guys need to grow a pair for themselves, dang it.
Jeff, I think you nailed it there. I've seen so many men pull the victim card that they accuse women of playing. Women are the source of all their problems. Women make marriage untenable for men. Women are the downfall of civilization. (OK, maybe I'm exaggerating that last one, but not by much.) Replace "women" with "feminism" and you have the same argument.
If men feel so strongly about this, they should be doing something. Write letters to elected officials and newspapers. Blog. Organize Facebook groups and real-life protests. At the very least, they need to stop having relationships and babies with women who psychologically castrate them.
And before I get the obvious response to that, let me say: Of course it's going to be hard. If you were going to be welcomed with warm fuzzies everywhere, it wouldn't be a "protest." You'll be called misogynists and be laughed out of the room. Do it anyway if you feel that strongly about it.
MonicaP at April 24, 2009 11:51 AM
I think it takes a person with a very shallow and self centered world view to think that women are in some way oppressed in the West today (or ever for that matter)and that men "have it made". Both genders come with upsides and downsides and to conclude that only females have it bad and further that females are actively oppressed by males takes "non-thinking" to an extreme. I think its pretty clear that the average American woman is probably the most priveleged creature that ever walked the planet. Yet of course it's not enough and feminist outrage will continnue until every woman on the planet is "happy". I've personally never met a "feminist" that I could respect intellectually (though I have known and have great respect for many brilliant women). As far as men being "pussified" and needing to "grow a pair," my chivalrous upbringing makes me always want to cut the woman some slack. I can't help it - treating any woman with respect is how I was raised and I've been trained to try to solve women's problems and try to make it better - not call them on being selfish, child-like idiots. I guess the young men will have to grow a pair. Or, better yet, why won't "normal" women shut the feminists up or at least make it clear to the politicians that these female supremacists don't speak for all, or even most, women? This is what really troubles me: like Islam, the "good" Muslims passively support the radicals living among them and allow the radicals to thrive. Many good women, with the notable exceptions of a few women like Amy, passively support feminism (to the detriment of their sons) and allow it to thrive (to the detriment of us all).
OldGuy at April 24, 2009 12:13 PM
Amy, you ROCK once again and distinguish yourself from the cultural rabble! (just by being a reasonable, thoughtful, and even-handed woman, how 'bout that!)
Glad to see some other "bitter woman-haters" chiming in -- I don't feel quite so lonely.
MonicaP > "You'll be called misogynists and be laughed out of the room. Do it anyway if you feel that strongly about it."
Will do, MonicaP, will do!! Thanks for the encouragement! (Like I need it ... ;) )
Not long ago on this very blog some folks accused me of gratuitous woman-bashing when I suggested in a comment that feminism, ironically, promotes the advance of Islam through the relentless maintenance of PC, and by means of its continuing psychological castrastion and gender alienation ("learned helplessness") of the Western "man." This is just another way that feminism -- in all its toxic forms -- is weakening our society and our culture. If we don't assert ourselves culturally, the society we know and identify with will disappear without a shot ever being fired -- all in the name of "tolerance" and "diversity." Don't think that we can't become "strangers in a strange land" in our own country.
BTW, Western feminists chauvinistically assume that Islamic women are collectively eager to abandon their cultural and religious traditions in favor of the mo' bettah' Western-style feminism. It is foolish, and foolhardy, to presume that Islamic societies are forced on their women by men, and exist without both male and female support (just like the bad ol' "Patriarchy").
It is also foolish to believe that Muslim men, having seen what has been happening for the last 40 years to Western men and their families under the malevolent jack-boot of feminists, will not vigorously resist feminism's infestation of their society by any and ALL necessary means.
Western feminism is no friend to Muslim women, but, given its proud role in promoting the increasing decadence of our culture and the destruction of our families, it is a rallying point and thus a "useful idiot" for radical Islam.
Jay R at April 24, 2009 12:45 PM
Amy makes a good point, as usual.
Last year, a bunch of feminists vandalized a church to protest its treatment of women. Right next door, they left a Mosque untouched. That Mosque just happened to be run by an Imam who preaches and released a document in which he states that all Western women are whores and inferior to Muslim women, that democracy should be done away with, and that we should all be dhimmis (typical radical Muslim bullshit).
I actually sent the offending document to a local feminist group by e-mail. Their response was simply amazing. They considered that since Islam was part of another culture, it wasn't any of their business to criticize it.
Charles at April 24, 2009 1:15 PM
It isn't feminism, it is multi-culturalism. It's also the problem that you get lumped into the left, or the right in our culture. If you're gung-ho about one left-wing issue, you're supposed to be gung-ho about them all.
Feminism is one of the reasons I, though I am generally pretty lefty, have a very conservative stance on immigration. Gay rights, too. We can have feminism and gay rights, OR we can have lots of immigration from countries that support neither. We can't have both, people.
I will say that my definition of feminism seems to differ from that of most of the posters here. I'll also say that my stance changed over time... you'd have told me ten years ago I'd be in amazingly traditional marriage now, I'd have laughed. Yet here I am.
NicoleK at April 24, 2009 2:34 PM
The thing is Nicole, despite whatever your private definition of Feminism may be, the term has achieved a common usage, and there are many organizations that promote and enforce this definition.
So claiming that you're a Feminist, but don't endorse the hateful aspects of Feminism, is like claiming that you'd joined the Klan because you enjoy the campfires.
Jake at April 24, 2009 4:41 PM
I remember two things from this article.
1) Why didn't you stoped us?
Men don't like to argue with women, aparently we are programed to protect them and to serve them. Most of polititian are male, but protect women at all cost.
By the way a question
Is there a wife that has been wife gave her life to protect her husband from danger? I haven't heard about it. Apparently we men are programed to be expendible.
2) The war on the traditional family.
Family is the base of society, from a long time ago. Why destroy the family? Is it to tax the individual? So the lambs always need the sheppard? So children belong to the state?
The sad thing is that men will not unite against any women's movement. This is a lost battle, but still I will fight it.
Hulkmania at April 24, 2009 5:40 PM
I call myself a feminist, too, and I don't think the hateful feminists can speak for the rest of us any more than Rush and O'Reilly speak for the Republican party. They are just some of the loudest voices in it.
MonicaP at April 24, 2009 5:55 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/24/how_feminism_pa.html#comment-1644804">comment from MonicaPI don't call myself a Republican -- and I'm not one -- because the party panders to the religious nuttery and is not fiscally conservative. (Of course, I'm not a Democrat, either.)
Amy Alkon at April 24, 2009 6:02 PM
Hulkmania - "Is there a wife that has been wife gave her life to protect her husband from danger? I haven't heard about it. Apparently we men are programed to be expendible."
You haven't heard much then. WWII has lots of stories of extremely brave women, who fought behind the lines in France, for example, and died for their homeland.
But men *are* more expendable than women - that's evolution. Get used to it.
Norman at April 25, 2009 12:55 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/24/how_feminism_pa.html#comment-1644843">comment from NormanBut men *are* more expendable than women - that's evolution. Get used to it.
Norman is right. It's a reproductive thing. It takes only one man to impregnate an entire island of women, and without much effort. A woman carries a fetus around for nine months and then gives birth and nurses. That made us evolve to value a woman's life more. Children, too, are carrying on a parent's genes, so parents give their lives. It's The Selfish Gene.
Amy Alkon at April 25, 2009 5:18 AM
Yes, men are expendable.
A feminist is someone who treats men that way, rather than appreciating their sacrifice.
Jay R at April 25, 2009 7:11 AM
I guess I just haven't seen as many feminists saying guys are evil as I've seen angry non-feminists say that feminists say guys are evil.
Just because you say that feminists go around saying guys are evil and expendable, doesn't make it so.
No one I know personally who identifies as a feminist has ever said anything along those lines.
The only people I see who go around saying guys are evil are bitter people who are down on their dating luck. Coincidentally, the people who I see (in real life, not the internet) bitching about women, are ALSO down on their dating life.
NicoleK at April 25, 2009 7:51 AM
Nicole -
Look to the founders of gender feminism - Catherine MacKinnon, Andrea Dworkin, etc.
You'll find a whole lot of man-hating going on there.
brian at April 25, 2009 8:37 AM
Nicole - I'm guessing that you're not a guy.
You should ask some men that you know what they've experienced.
No one I know personally who identifies as a feminist has ever said anything along those lines.
Is that really true? - no one, ever?!?
I just don't find that claim credible.
I'd grown up being told that I was a congenital rapist by plenty of women who weren't hard core man hating Feminists - they were just rehearsing the conventional diatribes of their peers.
Perhaps you weren't paying attention.
----------
re: expendability
If a person of one type can impregnate many people of another tyupe, the former type is more valuable than the latter - not the other way around. For instance, bulls are more valuable than cows.
You have to be careful with rationalizations based on evolutionary psychology. They're often post-hoc justifications, and many of them can be 'squared' (i.e. be employed to explain exactly the opposite conclusion).
Jake at April 25, 2009 9:03 AM
Jake,
It is true that a breeding bull is much more valuable than any cow. However, the breeding bull reaches that status only after his potential competitors have been turned into steers -- and then into hamburger!
JayR at April 25, 2009 9:09 AM
Jake -
If that is true, then why do ranchers routinely castrate the majority of male offspring?
Simply because MALES ARE WORTH LESS FROM AN EVOLUTIONARY STANDPOINT.
In the wild, competition takes low-value males out of the mating game.
In society, we don't fight to the death, so we have fancy cars and expensive clothes to differentiate the alphas. This system is flawed in significant ways, but it beats having males fight it out.
In husbandry, the males born with undesirable traits are castrated, the females isolated.
So your typical ranch has very few intact males in the population.
Your conclusions about conclusions is wrong. At least in this case.
brian at April 25, 2009 9:10 AM
Parthenogenesis is a form of reproduction in which embryos grow, develop, and are born without being fertilized by sperm cells. It's found in lots of plants & invertebrates, & in fish & reptiles as well. In some species, males don't exist at all. In others, females usually reproduce sexually, but can choose parthenogenesis whenever no suitable males are around. Males (and sex) evolved to add genetic diversity, strength, & vigor. But if they didn't exist, the earth would still be full of life.
"You'll find a whole lot of man-hating going on there"
Yup. But Dworkin & Co reserve a lot of their most vile hatred for women who think for themselves & won't toe their party line against the Patriarchy.
"Yes, men are expendable. A feminist is someone who treats men that way, instead of appreciating their sacrifice"
Not long after the Titanic went down, the Woman's Titanic Memorial Society commissioned & erected a sculpture in memory of all the men who died so that women & children could take their places in the lifeboats. It's still standing in Washington DC today. Pix & story here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootbearwdc/35733167/
Don't know how many radical feminists in DC have ever taken the time to visit this memorial, or if they're even aware of it's existence, but the women of the time certainly did appreciate the sacrifice.
Martin at April 25, 2009 10:33 AM
I believe that women have evolved to be great for taking care of the newborns. The womb, the breasts, the multi-tasking habilities.
But men have also evolved, and that evolution has to be praised and recognized.
We have the strengh, the courage, the will to sacrifice for others (911), the creativity (even today, in any part of the world there are more male artists and scientists than female artists and scientists).
Those diferences must be appreciated.
My point is that society should expect women to sacrifice their lifes for men, because, thanks to the great scientific advances made by men, women no longer die in childbirth.
A little bit of gratitude is all I am asking.
Am I asking for too much?
Hulkmania at April 26, 2009 11:25 AM
Very few women 'male bash' around me these days. When someone starts bitching about her husband/boyfriend I say,
"If the guy is so awful, what does it say about you that you stay with him? Either leave him and support yourself or admit that he isn't a bad guy, he is just imperfect like the rest of us."
Shuts them right up.
I agree that feminism has become synonymous with 'man hating' these days. I am not a woman that hates men, and I stand up for men just like I would anyone else who is being treated inappropriately. However, men need to quit standing for poor treatment as well. We all need to understand that all generalizations are faulty. There are some man-hating feminists. There are some woman-hating men. However, most of us are attempting to live, love, and get along in the most peaceful and enjoyable manner possible. We need to fight the good fight, but not assume a paranoid air. And we all need to develop a sense of humor:
Q: Why did the man want his cock sucked?
A: Because he knew after telling those jokes he wasn't going to get any. The chicken might as well have a good night.
Julie at May 1, 2009 11:00 AM
Leave a comment