Pacific Views
You've been had. You've been took. You've been hoodwinked, bamboozled, led astray, run amok. - Malcolm X
|
| Pacific ViewsYou've been had. You've been took. You've been hoodwinked, bamboozled, led astray, run amok. - Malcolm X |
I wrote a brief post the other day about men who get why feminism is important. In the comments, I was asked to post a link here at this site to the commenter's MRA blog. Perhaps he was of the opinion that, being a woman, I'm too stupid to understand what I read. MRA, of course, means men's rights activism. Because men are so oppressed. I'm not posting an HTML link, but for the sake of having a discussion with you lovely folks, you can go follow along on your own if you think you can stomach it: mikeeusa.blogspot.com
These are the things MikeeUSA thinks he and other males have a right to, from the first two posts on his site when I went and looked at it today.
Age of Consent
... It all comes down to our people's talent of finding anything that men like and then dutifully destroying it or destroying the men that seek to obtain it. Our society (the people in it) hate men, bar none, and wish to punish us untill we no longer exist due to mass suicide. America, and all of the west, and much of the rest of the world deeply and profoundly hates men.
The truth of the matter is that, on a world wide average, girls are ready to have children at age 13 (13.5 years from birth is the exact average). Some girls are ready earlier, some a half a year later. The marraige age for girls should reflect that with the wording "once a girl had hit menarche she can be married" (as menarche is the biological indicator that the plumbing is now working, so to speek).
... Sometimes I debate with family members and strangers about this. My first proclaimation is that females should be married once they are able to have children, and the world wide average for that is at 13.5 years. Using science like this disarms their kneejerk reaction of "PEDOPHILE" or "PERVERT OLD MAN" and leaves them with their other argument:
"Yes girls are BIOLOGICALLY capable of having children at such an age, but they are not intelectually mature enough and must finish schooling first (a young female will not challenge you enough)"
To which, ofcourse, my respose is always: I do not want a girl who has learned, through schooling and through trial and error, how to manipulate and control men. I do not want a girl who will fight with me. I do not want a girl who has "been around" if you will. If they pull the "it's dangerous to have children that young" my response is that it's always dangerous to have children, we have hospitals to guard against this. And finally when they pull the "you immoral, you go to hell" I inform them that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was pregnant at these young ages... thusly does he or she say that God himself is a sinner? If it's a woman's rights activist I'm talking to I then get told that God is a woman... and I just walk away from the heathen bitch.
So there you have it: girls can and should be married in the age range of 12 to 14, America and the West's people hate men, much of the rest of the world hates men too, and things need a'changing. ...
Promoting Women's Rights in the Middle East reduces National Security.
... It is well known by now that the Islamic Terrorists who marytr themselves for their cause of killing us have the goal of obtaining servile virgins in the next world. Because they cannot aquire the nice girls they want in this life (due to dowery costs etc) they look to the 'next life' for their pleasure.
If these men had good wives they would be much less willing to kill themselves or risk killing themselves to kill us and our soliders of the USA, but they don't so they do.
Promoting women's rights in the middle east will (and does) reduce the pool of suitable and desireable wives in the Middle East even further by:
1) Convincing/Socializing girls that it is OK to be not nice to men and be a genrally bad and worthless wife thusly.
2) Raising the marraige age for girls.The result is even more men without good wives in the Middle East and more men looking elswhere for them (such as an afterlife), thus more men attacking us in maryterdom operations for a sure ticket to their heaven of many young female companions which they were unable to procure on earth. ...
The words of a proud patriot indeed. Someone who loves America and hates the terrorists so much that he'd like to see the US turned into Afghanistan under the Taliban. A man who has so much love for his fellow men, so much respect for their autonomy and dignity, that he thinks they can't be prevented from killing others or themselves unless they're allowed to access for breeding stock as many docile, 13 year old virgins as they like.
Why it never occurs to men like this to move to the paradise on Earth that is Saudi Arabia, this heathen bitch just can't divine.
Posted by natasha at June 4, 2007 11:24 AM | Women | Technorati links |That is just gross, natasha. What a weirdo. I suspect he would love Thailand or Burma where you can find a very young virgin who hasn't been infected with AIDs for not much money.
Posted by: Mary at June 4, 2007 10:15 PMAs far as I can tell, feminism holds men collectively responsible for rape and domestic violence. So I have no problem holding women collectively guilty for the wrongs they've committed against me. Feminism seems to be more about infantilizing women and rendering them irresponsible for every action they take than it is about equal wages, access to the best jobs, and being treated equally by society. If women treat men bad, it's because of the patriarchy! If men don't want to date women, it's because porn has made them unable to get it up for normal woman!(of course, if women don't like me, it's because those men are scumbags who set their standards too high). If a woman's had one two drinks, she's no longer capable of saying yes or no, but men are completely and utterly responsible for their actions if they've drunk an entire six-pack. It's hard to take a movement seriously that doesn't police it's own and reign in whack-jobery.
Despite this, what the fuck is up with these people's desire to screw little girls? Christ, this sounds more like a NAMGLA than it does any kind of special interest group. We'd all like women to be a little less shallow in their mate selection, I'm sure women would love men to be as such as well. It just makes a lot more sense to try and combat the all-pervading shallowness of our society than it does to try and marry a 14 year old. Kind of like I said above, it's hard to take a movement seriously if they don't keep the whack-jobs away from the microphone. I'm a bitter fucking guy, and I know people like me have no place as a spokesperson for a human rights movement. Neither did Andrea Dworkin, nor Abyss2Hope, Biting beaver, Echidne(of the "penis's are funk-filled bratwursts fame')
Posted by: soullite at June 5, 2007 11:51 AMNo individual man is personally responsible for the structural sexism of the society he lives in and benefits from any more than an individual white person is for the structural racism of the society they live in.
Which is to say that they are personally responsible to the extent that they choose to perpetuate it. If you refuse to perpetuate sexism through your own actions, you shouldn't have to feel as though you're being personally addressed when women talk about sexism.
But it isn't an abdication to say that sexism exists, harms women, and deprives them of opportunity. It isn't an abdication to say that men collectively benefit from it, and many do participate in perpetuating it.
Posted by: natasha at June 5, 2007 01:03 PMsoullite, allow me to respond to a few of your comments:
As far as I can tell, feminism holds men collectively responsible for rape and domestic violence.
why do you have a problem with being held responsible, as a man, for things that in the clear majority are done by men? i don't. what's so bad about "being held responsible"? it's not the same thing as "being blamed". it means it's your - our - responsibility to change it, not women's. who else is going to take responsibility? mom? fuzzy rabbits? sorry to sound like an a**h*** about this, but i think this attitude - "well i didn't rape or beat any women, so it's not my problem" - is part of the reason it remains so deeply ingrained in our culture that men have the right to do whatever they want to women. and if you don't see that in our culture, i'm wondering whether we live in the same culture.
So I have no problem holding women collectively guilty for the wrongs they've committed against me.
i think it's interesting that we go from "holding us responsible" to "holding them guilty" - see argument above. i'm sorry to hear that a woman or women raped and beat you and condescended to your allegedly inferior intellect and made sure you got paid 60 cents on the dollar for every woman in the same job.....i hope you can see where i'm going with this.
Feminism seems to be more about infantilizing women and rendering them irresponsible for every action they take
i cannot for the life of me figure out what you are talking about.
... than it is about equal wages, access to the best jobs, and being treated equally by society.
sounds like feminism to me.
If women treat men bad, it's because of the patriarchy! If men don't want to date women, it's because porn has made them unable to get it up for normal woman!(of course, if women don't like me, it's because those men are scumbags who set their standards too high).
i am interested in reading the academic paper on feminism that states these positions. hell, i'm interested in even meeting a single woman who holds any of these positions. it sounds like straw man projections to me. on the other hand, i HAVE heard guys say "she won't date me because she's a f?!?in' man-hatin' dyke feminist...." or, "she just needs a good f?!?". yes - i have actually heard men say these things.
If a woman's had one two drinks, she's no longer capable of saying yes or no, but men are completely and utterly responsible for their actions if they've drunk an entire six-pack.
this just makes no sense at all. how can you possibly conflate an inability to defend oneself from intimidation, coercion and/or attack due to intoxication, with an inability to control onself from intimidating, coercing and/or attacking? talk about avoiding responsibility and blaming the victim.
It's hard to take a movement seriously that doesn't police it's own and reign in whack-jobery.
you don't read much if you don't think there's any internal debate in feminism.
okay, maybe i'm opening myself to being flamed by you, but i just felt like it was my responsibility to speak up and at least argue with you a little bit about these things you're saying. have a nice day.
Posted by: r@d@r at June 5, 2007 01:14 PMI wish I could think of something pithy or profound to say in response to Mike's postings, but I'm nearly speechless. I can't get past the idea that this moron's perfect world would have my nearly-15yo daughter married for the past 1.5 years, and probably pregnant with her second child.
I feel fairly certain in saying that Mike's view of marriage, with 13/13.5yo brides wouldn't include boys under 18. Of course not, because it takes a "real man" to "train" a young woman, huh, Mike?
As far as I can tell, feminism holds men collectively responsible for rape and domestic violence. So I have no problem holding women collectively guilty for the wrongs they've committed against me.
Wow, soullite. Poor dear. Not enough women want to see you nekkid, is that the problem? Try shaving the back hair, or perhaps walking upright.
I do not hold all men responsible, just the bastards that rape and commit domestic violence. I also blame a culture of misogyny that teaches young men that it's acceptable to treat women (and girls) as possessions that often need to be "beat down" or "taught a lesson" and condones those actions by older men.
Until two years ago, I was the warehouse manager at an electronics salvage firm, overseeing about 50 employees. I earned the job by virtue of seniority, working my way up from forklift driver.
In the entire time I worked there, there was never a woman that told me "all you need is a good fuck to lighten you up" after being warned or counseled about problems with their job performance. I never had a female warehouse worker drag me into a storage area and attempt to rape me. I've never had a female worker grab me by the hair and threaten my life for giving her a poor performance rating. I never had a female coworker who called me Bitch or Cunt instead of using my name, nor told me I shouldn't be warehouse manager because of my gender. Only males.
Hmm...interesting coincidence there? I think not.