|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feminism is the most insidious evil that humans have ever devised, precisely because this is the first hate movement in history in which the oppressors are raising their victims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday December 23, @05:52PM EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Not really.
A misogynist patriarch might have some girl children. If his wife died, and he didn't or couldn't spring for a nannny, he would raise them. And remember, in the past abuse was hardly something anyone worried about.
Still, in a systematic way: Yes. Though some slave arrangments in the old south came close.
Remo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The problem is that the feminist movement is not eliminating gender bias by creating equality between the "sexes" but undermining men. It is the first movement that has done this. The civil rights movement (in most cases) attempts to eliminate discrimination by demanding equal treatment for all races. The feminist movement unilaterally demands special treatment and attention for their concerns. These stickers are a good example of this. A true feminist movement would recognize that this is gender bashing and demand a change but I never see NOW or AAUW complain about any negative images of men in society.
Tony H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The problem is that the feminist movement is not eliminating gender bias by creating equality between the "sexes" but undermining men.
You should amend that to say "attempting to eliminate gender bias." It's obvious that mainstream feminism hasn't eliminated gender bias at all. It's simply undermined and oppressed men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As extreme as I might sound to some people, I'm still not ready to indict feminism as uniformly anti-male per se. There are ifeminists, after all. I believe in justice; what I object to is the belief that the pendulum has to swing in the direction of undermining men, who are expected to take it like men, on account of some presumed collective guilt that the male gender has to share for "oppressing" women throughout history. Apparently mainstream feminists would have us hate the past, as if all progress has to be utterly painless. I object to the notion of brining an entire gender to justice.
It does seem as though mainstream feminism posits a strict gender dichotomy in its fundamental premise, which is that women's oppression is a trans-cultural, trans-geographical, trans-historical phenomenon that all women have in common. This is a value-laden premise, at least to the extent that ascertaining "oppression" involves a certain amount of interpretation, a notion of rights, ethics, responsibilities and justice. Since these values would appear to vary considerably depending on time, place and culture, it might seem that there is no invariant notion of oppression that would survive--I suspect the foundations of mainstream feminism, if that what this is (another academic explained it to me once upon a time) are pretty shaky; nevertheless, even if we grant the fundamental assumption, it does not follow that we have to permit misandry, whether to help the female gender to get even for all of the "evil" that men have subjected them to "throughout history", or so that the ends can justify the means, or not.
The notion of the strict gender dichotomy has been challeneged recently--I've sometimes wonder how collective guilt is supposed to play out for intersexuals. Anything that tends to undermine the assumption of a strict gender dichotomy threatens the fundamental premise of mainstream feminism, but I digress.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I cannot agree with you more, mars. The term "oppression" is a very relative one, defined by an individual culture through their system of accepted values and ethics. Here lies (in my opinion) the largest fallacy of nationalism: the idea that values (including bad ones, like ideas of oppression) are universal. While I would hardly assert that the mainstream feminist movement is guilty of maintaining ideals associated to nationalism, their agenda definately falls to the theory that there can only be one "right" way. I will never understand why we, as a society, cannot accept cultural relativism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday December 24, @02:59PM EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
"Here lies (in my opinion) the largest fallacy of nationalism: the idea that values (including bad ones, like ideas of oppression) are universal. While I would hardly assert that the mainstream feminist movement is guilty of maintaining ideals associated to nationalism, their agenda definately falls to the theory that there can only be one "right" way. I will never understand why we, as a society, cannot accept cultural relativism"
Wow. An attack on nationalism on a board devoted to gender issues. To this I'll merely append a few comments and then leave the subject.
First off, what is the opposite of "nationalism"? " Internationalism? Anarchy? I would think that nationalism is merely a way of expressing the fact that different peoples live in different areas, and have different ideas, customs, and most importantly-- laws.
As an egalitarian, I have to believe that mainstream femism is 'wrong' in some ways. Perhaps its philosophical underpinnings are faulty , or perhaps its adherents are "evil", or self-centered. In any case, I believe in the individual, they believe in the group. This is a fundamental difference, not amenable to compromise on all points. I'm not gonna say that a dictatorship is the same as a democracy. Many feminists prefer authoritarian rules and role. I don't -- and if possible, and necessary, I will move to another "nation" where presumably the laws might be more to my liking.
I'm an American nationalist and Constitutionalist and proud of it. And I'll die if need be to defend my ideas and the land which allows me to live as I want to. Got it?
Remo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm an American nationalist and Constitutionalist and proud of it. And I'll die if need be to defend my ideas and the land which allows me to live as I want to. Got it?
No, I don't get it; further explanation is needed. I'll explain my position. I'm closer to the authoritarians in the sense that I more or less agree with the political philosophy of Plato's dialogue Crito: if you live in a state, you have an implicit agreement to abide by the laws of that state. The state may punish anyone who breaks the laws of the state; moreover, if you intentionally violate the laws in protest, then you have an obligation to accept whatever punishment the state determines in your case.
I'm a "nationalist" to the extent that I agree with this; I suspect that would be unacceptable for many people who call themselves nationalists, since most nationalists don't ever want to consider the possibility of civil disobedience, much less dissolving their state. "My country right or wrong" seems to exclude the possibility of disobeying unjust laws, and accepting the consequences.
Martin Luther King said, "I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over his injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law. Of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire."
Men died so that mainstream feminism could flourish! Let's consider another culture. Today, with the possibility that the Northern Alliance might not be that much better to Afghan women than the Taliban, the left finds itself disconcertingly silent on what to do about it: it seems that no one from the left is willing to put their life on the line for what they believe in. Apparently, equality of the sexes isn't worth dying for! Note also that Judy Mann's article quotes the feminist Morely as saying that dying for a cause is a bad thing attributable to the worst elements of an outmoded masculinity in need of reform (I'm still harping on that one).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First off, what is the opposite of "nationalism"? " Internationalism? Anarchy? I would think that nationalism is merely a way of expressing the fact that different peoples live in different areas, and have different ideas, customs, and most importantly-- laws.
No, "Internationalism" and anarchy are a far cry from being the opposite of nationalism. Either you have completely misinterpreted my post, or you have a complete lack of understanding of the term "nationalism". What you describe above is not really, at all, nationalism, which leads me to believe that it is the latter (or maybe both).
I, likewise, consider myself an egalitarian, and was merely pointing out (in response to mars' post, BTW) an analogy I observed between feminism and nationalism. The analogy is not between nationalism, per se, but between the mindset that suggests that other cultures which do not share one's own values are somehow inferior and in need of one's own enlightening influence. Of course, I realize that nation and culture are two seperate entities, and should not be confused, so when I speak of nationalism I use the term a bit loosely to describe its effects of cultural mindsets. Perhaps, this leaves room for misinterpretation.
You are correct when you say it was a bit off the subject, although it did, in fact, pertain quite directly to gender issues and the post to which is was responded to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps a dictionary definition would help here, though the meanings of words evolve, since we're speaking English.
My Merriam-Webster defines "nationalism" as "loyalty and devotion to a nation especially (italics theirs): a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Martians like myself would object to Earth nationalism spreading to Mars, but that's another story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A misogynist patriarch might have some girl children.
If you speak of a single misogynist or a number of individual misogynists, who are raising their children, you are not speaking of a movement. And in the racist/slave system of the old south, to a very large extent, the slaves raised their young. Young slaves were not, as a rule, raised by their white owners.
So, my statement stands, feminism is the first hate movement in which the oppressors are raising their victims, and because of that feminism is the most insidious hate movement in history.
in the past abuse was hardly something anyone worried about.
Wrong. Wrong to the point where I am astonished that you would even dream of making this statement. Throughout history many people have been worried about and protested abuse. Even in the old south, many people protested ownership of slaves as well as specific abuses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Getting back to the point of this post, we really ought to write to protest. I've seen a "Boys Lie!" bumpersticker on a car. This level of hatred -- people subjecting little boys to such vicious attacks -- just sickens me. It has to hurt male children horribly to see this sort of thing. It's child abuse.
And there are still people who don't see that the earth must be cleansed of the evil called feminism. My definition of selfishness: Doing something for yourself without considering others. My definition of hate: Getting pleasure out of causing pain. The people who promote this sort of thing enjoy causing little boys pain. They are evil.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here's the text of my letter to Ames Department stores:
Dear hateful misandric monsters,
Ames is stupid.
Ames is brainless.
I make Ames cry.
Ames cheats.
Ames is weird.
Merry Christmas,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is it possible that paedophiles thought these stickers up?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This "misandric sticker" garbage is really hitting new lows. What cretin(s)actually gets paid to think this filth up? They must be "moonlighting" from their day job at Hallmark Cards.
And just where are the mothers who have sons who see this crap and just pass it probably thinking "Oh gee, aren't those misandrous stickers cute?"
Has this society really devolved to the point of accepting this as harmless humor? We will be torturing animals on tv next! No wonder we have terrorists crashing hijacked airliners into our skycrapers.
Anyway, I like the format of the response from "mars" below.
"Dear hateful misandric monsters,
Ames is stupid.
Ames is brainless.
I make Ames cry.
Ames cheats.
Ames is weird.
Merry Christmas,"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just spent the entire day with my nine-month-old nephew, whom I have not seen since September. We laughed. We played. We shopped for toys. He napped. He pulled the hat off my head and tossed it to the ground. I picked it up, he'd toss it again.
The whole day, I thought of nothing but how to keep him smiling, and make his day the most wonderful it could be.
Then I come home, and I find this. And I know that his future is going to be pure hell.
God, sometimes, I am sorry I was ever born.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday December 24, @02:54PM EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
I just sent out letters to both e-mail addresses. As well, I sent one out to the ACLU (though I suppose they will not be interested) simply stating that there are sexist stickers being prominently displayed in Ames's stores. I didn't say specifically that boys are the targets but said that the stickers are targeted toward children. Too bad I have to deceive them into being interested.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's absolutely sickening. Hell, sickening isn't a strong enough word. Repulsive, vile, despicable, are those even adequate?
I would urge everyone to not only write demanding that those stickers be removed, but also demand a public apology from the company. (One which is as prominantly displayed as those stickers.)
Also, perhaps people should start contacting the local CT newsmedia and suggest a story regarding those sexist stickers. (Of course, if they're like most media outlets, they're so biased that they'll probably just laugh.)
"This is John Galt speaking." -Atlas Shrugged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While gender feminist ideology never ceases to amaze me, I must admit that I was rather unprepared to see their agenda include the act of sacrificing our (male) children. The parallelism between these monsters and Heimler's SS is uncanny.
I'm planning on writing a letter to Ames tomorrow; however, I live on the West coast and there are no Ames stores in the vicinity that I am aware of. Does anyone have the contact info for the company? Also, any suggestions to whom I should specifically address the letter to? Thanks for the input.
BTW, I think napnip's suggestion of contacting the local newsmedia is a great idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just realized that the contact info was already posted in the article itself. Nevermind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wrote a short email note to Ames using the link above. BTW one works and one doesn't.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I will not shop at Ames and will encourage everyone I know to not shop there as well until you remove the boy bashing stickers from your store and publicly apologize for ever carrying, selling and endorsing this sexist and damaging product.
Here's what they say:
Boys are Aliens
Boys are brainless
Boys lie
Not interested (in boys)
Boys cheat
I make boys cry
Boys are weird
Let's look at them from the other side:
Girls are Aliens
Girls are brainless
Girls lie
Not interested (in Girls )
Girls cheat
I make Girls cry
Girls are weird
Would you try to sell this message? I bet not. So don't do it for boys.
Male bashing is bad enough but to turn the hatred on boys and encourage girls to think in this manner is bordering on criminal.
Please let me know how you plan to respond to this important matter.
Tom Golden
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feminism in a nutshell, to be sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday December 24, @05:36PM EST (#24)
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you feminists for making sexism OK
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How about a bumper sticker that reads, "Stop the Hate. Boys are NOT garbage."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday December 26, @01:01PM EST (#26)
|
|
|
|
|
My Merriam-Webster defines "nationalism" as "loyalty and devotion to a nation especially (italics theirs): a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups."
Thank you Thomas. :) That fits my beliefs entirely.
Remo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday December 26, @01:03PM EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry for posting my previous comment to the wrong sub-topic. :(
I like your idea for a bumper sicker, Thomas. I'd buy it.
Remo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday January 04, @11:02PM EST (#28)
|
|
|
|
|
The display used to have "girl-power" stickers, and now these have been replaced with "boy-bashing" stickers (I knew this coming?) I also do not think that this change occurred by chance, as I feel someone internal to Ames is part of a larger agenda.
Yeah! Maybe next, Ames will make pink tinfoil hats, so that only the girls will be protected from the government mind control rays! Then feminists will be free to rule the world! MUAHAHAHAHA!
(Your post sounds just as stupid as the above sarcasm. Have a nice day, whiner. For the record, I'm male.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday January 08, @12:19AM EST (#29)
|
|
|
|
|
Let's see if we can change that:
http://www.picknsave.com/htmdocs/contact/contact.a sp
The store location is:
Pick'n Save - Neenah
1425 S Commercial Street
Neenah, WI 54956
920-725-0707
Pick'n save is a large grocery chain in Wisconsin with about a hundred stores.
Thanks folks,
-Rob
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
