why should we care for those warmongering middle eastern, african, asiatic extremely hypocrite inhumane religious islamic fanatics bitches who are extremely greedy and power crazy.

why should we care for those warmongering middle eastern, african, asiatic extremely hypocrite inhumane religious islamic fanatics bitches who are extremely greedy and power crazy.

Because THOSE bitches are MEN. o.O

Excellent post, Amy. It makes me sick to think that all of the ideals of freedoms that women have won in the past are being hijacked by idiot feminazis who want to turn me and all other women into victims. They don't understand that we've got it so much better now than we've ever had before! Why is that??

They don't understand that we've got it so much better now than we've ever had before! Why is that??

But Flynne, the DO understand. And that's what frightens them. It's the same thing that drives Jesse Jackson to want to cut off Obama's balls:

If the issue they've been advocating for their entire lives goes away, whatever shall they do with their time?

It's also the reason that the courts will never overturn Roe v. Wade and allow for legislative closure:

Too many people will be put out of work.

I have always been an egalitarian with regard to human rights and opportunities. I cannot understand anyone who wants to exalt her demographic at the expense of another. Also, I've heard this type of feminist demonizing men, and it just stuns me how much of their crusade seems to be less about advancing women than about tearing men down.

Feminism was needed and useful. It got us our equal rights. Now, like most outdated beauracracies, it won't die quietly but wants to take over the world.

I am uber-proud of the feminists that got me the vote and the right to keep my job if I got married or pregnant. I am not proud of the idiots down at planned parenthood who say it's just too MUCH to expect a woman to be responsible for actually using birth control if she doens't want to get pregnant. That's infantilizing women. I am very not proud of the super-idiots who talk about wymen and herstory, etc. Get a life.

My mother was in high school in the early 70's and she, along with many of her peers consider themselves feminists. I grew up hearing her views about women's equality but more importantly I saw her acting like a strong capable person.

I never considered my being a girl to mean I had it any harder than boys or that there was some force out there in society holding me back. In fact I have been more successful than many of my male peers. I'm a 23 year old college grad actually using my degree and planning on entering grad school in the fall. Many of the boys I grew up with and who graduated college around the same time as me are working manual labor jobs and basically living to party, some who are extremely intelligent.

I have never felt "oppressed and subordinated to men." Women who cling to "victim feminism" thinking are only holding themselves back with excuses. I DO NOT consider myself a feminist!

Boys are falling farther and farther behind girls in school.
Almost no one cares though. I've even seen conservative women pundits on TV laughing about it. "Ha,ha ha, those boys sure have it tough all right."
They won't be laughing when their daughters can't find what she considers a suitable husband.
It's a real problem. Imagine how much yelling and screaming there would be if the Girls were the ones falling behind.
Typical "boy behavior" is being medicated out of existence starting in elementary school. It makes me sick to think about it.

Why They Call Her "A Backlasher, A Traitor, Anti-Woman, And A Female Impersonator"

I realize the above is simply the post's headline, but I trust Christina Hoff Sommers is not claiming she's a "victim" of the feminazis?

Since whining about being a "victim" is, of course, the empty tactic of precisely the sort of feminists Sommers says she despises?

I find (from personal experience) that the left attacks women by saying they aren't really women, or look like men, or are transsexuals. In addition to those things, I've also been called "anti-woman" and "a traitor," and had mob attacks on my comments section and my Wikipedia page. To say so is stating a fact, not being a whining victim. The victim thing is a whole orientation toward life. Trust me: I've read her work and spoken with her on the phone, and she doesn't have it. I was most impressed with how stern she is about work and thinking being fact-based, and taking a truthful approach to criticism. (I called her when I was working on a piece about Diana Russell's absurd claims about girls and sexual abuse. Russell basically intimates that most men are abusers.)

http://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2007/05/diddle-he-or-di.html

I was fired from the C-Ville Weekly after that column ran and replaced by a professor who told women to hold up a mirror and look at their vaginas. The editor told me it wasn't because of that column, and the complaints from feminists that ensued. To say I have my doubts about that doesn't make me a victim; it suggests I'm rational.

"why should we care for those warmongering middle eastern, african, asiatic extremely hypocrite inhumane religious islamic fanatics bitches who are extremely greedy and power crazy.

Because THOSE bitches are MEN. o.O"

Word, Flynne! Oft many a truth is spoken in jest.

The vcitim feminists are Victorians in disguise, they are the antithesis of second wave feminsts and the enemies of second wave feminism. Their Victorianism is apparent in their disparagement of men's sexuality and their attitudes towards porn in particular and towards sex in general. It comes out in their rape panic advocacy, in which any approach or contact from a man is construed as rape but even pedophile statutory rape of minor boys by women gets no notice or attention whatever, or is even denied, and their slanted activism on DV and promulgation of the Duluth Model which always presumes women are the victims and men the perpetrators.

>>To say so is stating a fact, not being a whining victim.

Absolutely, Amy.

But one person's whine is often another's objective truth, and vice versa.

(It's all part of the noisy rough 'n tumble of polemics!)

Why do they call her an anti-woman traitor?

For the same reason that the KKK called Viola Liuzzo a nigger-lover, then murdered her. The Klan had no intention of giving up white privilege, and rabid feminists have no intention of giving up theirs. Shrieking about oppression, demanding affirmative action, etc., are all just means to an end, namely power. I know I'm repeating myself here, but when 70 % of physics professors are men, feminazis are outraged & demand that Congress take immediate action. When 90 % of public school teachers are women, that's just the way they like it. The same logic goes for child custody & alimony, etc.

Honestly, does anyone believe they're after anything else? Suppose Gloria Steinem's house caught fire, and a crew of white male firefighters came by to put it out. Can you picture her shouting "STOP in the name of equality! There are not enough women firefighters here. Go away!" No wonder they spew so much bile towards anyone who exposes their absurdity & threatens them.

What disturbs me is those who state that because men oppressed women for so long, it's ok for the gov't and courts to discriminate against men. There are too many of these types of people out there.

> whining about being a "victim" is,
> of course, the empty tactic

Why the quotation marks? Why is it a tactic, and why is it empty?

> one person's whine is often
> another's objective truth

Well, see, one of them is wrong. If it's the second person, the whine isn't objective, is presumably inappropriate, and therefore not even true.

French literary theorists and teenagers (usually operating in responsibility-avoidance mode, or AVM) like to go on like this a lot, too. But in many conflicts, the truth isn't in the middle. One person is right and the other is wrong.

Today, the smart money's on CHS.

>>>But in many conflicts, the truth isn't in the middle. One person is right and the other is wrong.

Don't be a silly billy, Crid.

We are not in math class here!

I even helpfully mentioned "polemics" when I was talking about the perception of truth, in this particular context.

> Why They Call Her "A Backlasher,
> A Traitor, Anti-Woman, And A
> Female Impersonator"

About ten years ago I dated this nurse. We went to her Xmas party and I met all her nurse buddies. They were all busy, hardworking, loving family women... Flat-shoe types, practical in the extreme. They spent their lives in scrubs, cleaning up comatose old people and injecting medicines into the veins of sickly young ones. And this was the one night when they'd put on a skirt and some lipstick and have 1.73 glasses of white wine and pretend to dance.

The vibe was weird, because I'd been working with younger, more carefree women for some time... Starry-eyed 25-year-olds with soft skin and fast smiles. Then I realized: These grownup nurses felt like female impersonators! They were just kidding around at this.

> the perception of truth

Well, it's logic, not math, but I think you need to recalculate. The fact that a person (Sommers, say) notes a fault in another doesn't mean her perceptions have identical merit to those she faults.

Crid,
You also wrote (yours in ital):

> whining about being a "victim" is,
> of course, the empty tactic

Why the quotation marks? Why is it a tactic, and why is it empty?

I was simply cunningly following the style of quote marks around "victim" as used by Christina Hoff Sommers herself, as helpfully quoted by Amy on the front page of this post:

i.e. "The dominant philosophy of today's women's movement is not equity feminism--but "victim feminism." "Victim" feminists don't want to hear about the ways in which women have succeeded..."

The fact that a person (Sommers, say) notes a fault in another doesn't mean her perceptions have identical merit to those she faults.

Crid,
Not sure I quite follow you there?

> I was simply cunningly
> following the style

The "problem" with all the quotation "marks" is that daft and lazy minds "use" them as a "wholly" inappropriate "shorthand" to convey shared "perceptions" or "irony". Soon enough, it "becomes" apparent that these "fuckers" couldn't actually put these "perceptions" or "ironies" into words even if "you" poised a "pistol" at their "temples"... Though, let's "face" it, doing so "might" redemptively "enliven" one's "encounter" with "them".

It's very much like the thing of Valley Girls and lesser female media figures who end every sentence with ascending pitch? Including plainly declarative sentences and wordings? Do you know what I'm talking about here?

> Not sure I quite follow

You said -

> whining about being a "victim" is,
> of course, the empty tactic of
> precisely the sort of feminists
> Sommers says she despises?

I don't think Sommers is like the people she "despises". (Ahem. I don't think she despises them. She's sharp enough to say so if that's how she feels. But she ain't Ann Coulter.)

And by the way, Jody? That thing about the question marks wasn't meant to be critical of your January 14th comment in any way? In a context like yours, ending a sentence with a question mark is perfectly appropriate and clear? I just find the weak use of quotation marks to be as juvenile and offensive as inanely interrogative pitch when speaking?

But it's just fun to type like this for awhile, sometimes? It reminds us all how much we hate teenagers?... And how fun it is to be an adult?

Crid,

I generally agree with you about the lazy use of quote marks.

However, when one has lifted them from a direct quote that appears in the post under discussion, I feel they have earned a generous pass.

You write of Hoff Sommers that "I don't think she despises..." certain feminists..

In the course of the address Amy links, Hoff Sommers writes variously of being intellectually appalled by the poisonous/shameful/twisted anti-male statements of certain feminists.

I do believe "despise" is fair.

I am not proud of the idiots down at planned parenthood who say it's just too MUCH to expect a woman to be responsible for actually using birth control if she doens't want to get pregnant.

The fraking comments dropped my response to the above which was:

Huh? Last time I checked Planned Parenthood was more than happy to provide birth control to women who want it. They also believe that women are competent enough to decide whether to terminante a pregnancy, regardless of whether BC was in use by said woman or not. Is that your gripe?

Good. let them provide you with it, and use it. Too lazy to bother, you shouldn't get a pass killing a kid.

> I do believe "despise" is fair.

There are a lot of kinds of defeat in the world... Sports defeats, political defeats, rhetorical defeats. But all these contentions aren't personal, school-child enmities, but that's what comes to mind when you say "despise". Sommers would, no doubt, happily welcome these women as friends if they stopped saying silly things. I bet they'd get as much personal warmth from her as do admirers with whom she's corresponded but not privately acquainted.

This pattern is especially prevalent in public life, and especially especially in rhetorical realms.

And people can grow, especially when they've been shown the error of their ways with tremendous eloquence. (Who Stole Feminism?: How Women Have Betrayed Women is 320 pages, The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men is 265 pages.)

(more)

Consider this quotation, or go here, use the search box at left for “adversary”, and go to the result on page 163.

Not every disagreement between people is childish. They can't all be answered with youthful snooting about how you have your opinion (“objective truth”) and I have mine.

While I generally agree with much of what Summers says and appreciate what she does in fighting radical feminism or really what is just the common perception of men=bad, women=good, I don't like the term "equity feminist". Feminism is tainted beyond repair IMHO. I'm skeptical of anyone who can still use the term while saying they believe in equality/fairness.

I come across far too many women who denounce feminism/radical man hater types yet have no problem spouting off the standard oppressed women statistics.

>>But all these contentions aren't personal, school-child enmities, but that's what comes to mind when you say "despise".

Point of observation, Crid: the playground parlance would more likely be: "Hoff Sommers thinks those other girls suck!"

You also speculate, on an oddly trivializing note: I bet they'd get as much personal warmth from her as do admirers with whom she's corresponded but not privately acquainted.

You know what comes to mind when you say "personal warmth"?

Fur-lined knickers!

Fur-lined knickers!

Man, I could use a pair of those today! o.O

> the playground parlance would
> more likely be:

What I'm saying is... It's not a playground!

> Fur-lined knickers!

Well, that's not what comes to mind over here. As Amy can attest, we've had a heatwave in Lotusland this week. As friends in chillier climes write emails of frozen windshields and snowbanks, we remind ourselves to stop on the way home from work for party ice. It all began on Sunday, with an afternoon mountain hike here. The the most intense three-dimensional perspective I've had since the last scuba dive, absolutely wonderful views... The Valley, the coast, downtown, Long Beach complex, every mountain range within fifty miles, and the entire L.A. basin... The mild Santa Ana winds had two important effects: They cleared out the smog, and made the day warm enough that you could wear the jacket tied around your waist while you hiked. It's still January, so the gentle breeze cools you off readily when you stop hiking.

I love LA. How's the weather in your neck of the woods?

I love LA. How's the weather in your neck of the woods?

Chicago - -3 is supposed to be the high temperature today. Wind chill takes is down to as much as -40. This is AWESOME weather (and i'm not being sarcastic. I love this)

Um, given that we are mammals arent, baring the use of a razor or wax, everyone's knickers lined with fur?

Enjoy it. Think of me.

(Born in nearby Michigan City.)

PS- When the Northridge earthquake hit LA in '94, more people died from the cold in Chicago than from our shaking.

Um, given that we are mammals arent, baring the use of a razor or wax, everyone knockers lined with fur?

Since you did ask lujlp, technically no!

Unless the women in question sort of moult the whole time, thus shedding their "fur" so it forms a non-removable knicker lining. (Linings are usually permanently attached to the knicker fabric).

And Re: "baring the use of a razor or wax". I read somewhere recently that the use of a razor (ouch) or wax is now so widespread even among the youngest teens, that medical professionals - conducting standard development medicals - now have to ask "do you wax?" before performing a visual check of the aforementioned.

Otherwise, the widespread absence of public hair in the youngest female teen group might be noted as a modern developmental anomaly.

God, I'm totally a Typo Mary (pun!).

PUBIC not public...unless we're talking celebs....

This article is utter bullshit.

For example:

"Victim" feminists don't want to hear about the ways in which women have succeeded. They want to focus on and often invent new ways and perspectives in which women can be regarded as oppressed and subordinated to men."

First of all, what the hell is a "victim feminist"?? You so made that shit up. I, for one, LOVE to hear about ways that women have succeeded! Hooray! Yes I do.

Second of all, women ARE oppressed and subordinated to men. I guess, gee, that's why it is "regarded" that way.

FAIL. Please try again.

love, a feminist.

http://feministing.com/

http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/

If women are so oppressed and subordinated to men, then get over here and make me a sammich, bitch!

First of all, Brian - you crack me up! And Amy, I wish I were "oppressed" the way your boyfriend oppresses you.

Amy Alkon, you are really lucky to have such a nice and generous dad. no wonder, you sound such a super confident lady. being oppressed in such a manner is cetainly preferable than being belittled/ignored/ abused at when thing got tough.