|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:06 AM October 21st, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
It sounds like Monster, also starring that same dipshit. They took a psychotic serial killer who fabricated assault and abuse stories to justify killing men for profit, and spun it into a "you-go-girl" pile of feminist horseshit about how she was the real victim, then they marketed it as the literal truth.
Please tell me I'm not the only middle-aged man who won't even turn on a television unless it's a film made before 1980 or a documentary/story made by men, about men and for men. As if I'd lay out the coin to go see a movie in a theater - remakes that feminize the TV series and films of the past or girl-power bullshit? I don't think so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:45 AM October 21st, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
AS though the most important film about miners revolves around a tiny bunch of women who were "Discriminated" against.
What about the millions of men who have done this job, the rights they have fought for, those who have died, the tradgedies etc
It's so typical that you could take an industry like mining and the only story they could make a movie about is a tiny percentage who were women.
Theron is certainly turning out to have a track record for being a manhater.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by jimsmith on 10:17 AM October 21st, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:13 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
>>"Theron is a dyke."
Not the wording I would have used, but to be honest I HAVE wondered about Theron's sexuality.
But as the feminists gleefully point out you don't have to be a feminist or even a lesbian to hate men.
So is she a lesbian? Maybe. Is she a feminist? probably. Is she a misandrist? DEFINATELY!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:19 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
Oh I forgot to mention this.
CBS is running that God-awful Jennifer Lopez movie "ENOUGH", some time this month.
You know, it's the same old formulaic, abused woman, every man (but the gay ones) are bastards, she "kicks his male ass" movie that Hollywood likes to crank out because it is run by feminists and wussie-poopie men, that next to nobody goes to see. (but they still crank them out anyway. Do any of you get the same feeling I do that Hollywood is desperate to get out a certain message, even if it costs them several grand?)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Acksiom on 02:31 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
TC, I am really surprised and disappointed to see you passively condoning that kind of behavior like this.
I mean, seriously, people; WTF!? Since when did that become okay? Frankly I consider it INSULTING TO ME for someone to expect me to decode some kind of abstract meaning from a statement like that.
Is that not classic WUSSY-POOPY behavior -- 'nudge-nudge, wink-wink, say-no-more; we all know what you REALLY mean'?
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:19 PM October 22nd, 2005 EST (#32)
|
|
|
|
|
...huh...?
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Acksiom on 06:27 PM October 22nd, 2005 EST (#34)
|
|
|
|
|
Well, after my multiple posts on the subject, what don't you understand?
Tell me specifically, TC, and I'll be more than happy to explain it to you.
Or, I could just say, "TC is a red [word-that-rhymes-with-digger]", expecting people to understand the *unspoken* commentary of how *that* indicates *why* you're not understanding me. . .
. . .would *that* make it clear to you what I'm criticizing?
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:53 PM October 24th, 2005 EST (#47)
|
|
|
|
|
...well, I'm actually a light beige-ish color, not red.
But you can call me a "Red-nigger" if you want to. Believe me I've grown a pretty thick skin when it comes to that sort of thing.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Acksiom on 01:05 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
And this is relevant. . .how, exactly?
Seriously. Make your point explicit, please. Because I'm not seeing it, and I want to know precisely what meaning your "X is a dyke" code is supposed to convey.
Just come right out and say openly what you mean.
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:27 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
I'll respond. Most feminists are lesbians, most feminist hate men, etc. etc.
By the way, hollywood is run by feminists and gays. So is it any wonder the level of anti-male (hetro-male!) vitriol that is produced? Not to me.
If I want to see hot chicks, there are many, many other (generally MUCH better!) sources than standard hollywood propaganda!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Acksiom on 02:45 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
So? That's nothing even remotely like making the point EXPLICIT. I am still every bit as unenlightened as to what the meaning was supposed to be.
And for the record, most feminists are in fact heterosexual, and do not hate men, because most feminists are heterosexual women, and simply *discriminate* against men, JUST AS MOST MEN DO.
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:28 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#24)
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe I don't get what you don't get. Why don't you make a guess?
At any rate, I don't buy that most feminists are hetero. Feminist orthodoxy (now part of mainstream TV, education (K-university), movies, etc.) promotes lesbianism. Thus, to be a feminist today you basically have to be a DYKE. (Oops did I offened anybody with that word? Sorry, but I don't care. Limp-wristed PCer’s don't scare me much.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Acksiom on 03:55 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#25)
|
|
|
|
|
Why don't you register an ID here?
What I don't get is how "Charlize Theron is a dyke," is supposed to be at all relevant to the discussion, and what I want is an EXPLICIT explanation of the how of that. What part of that do you not get?
And why exactly should the femelitists considering the "promotion" (not the term I'd use, but it's your argument) of lesbianism to be ideological orthodoxy require women to be dykes in order to consider themselves be feminists?
And it's not the word "dyke" that offends me, in case you're cowardly trying to imply that without actually coming right out and directing it at me openly. Nor am I a "limp-wristed PCer".
What I am is a person who doesn't take any crap. And as I told TC above, I consider it INSULTING TO ME for someone to expect me to decode some kind of abstract meaning from a statement like that.
It's not the word "dyke".
It's the underlying assumption that I'm like a female chauvanist pigot who rolls her eyes in agreement when one of her friends says, "Well, he's a *man*, you know how *they* are. . . ."
It's no different. And I won't put up with being expected to participate in it. I am *worlds* better than that, and not only do I refuse to be dragged down to that level, but I will get RIGHT up in the face of anybody who tries. COUNT ON IT.
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:31 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
Okay. This is my last post on this topic. (I was just trying to help!!).
The word "dyke" is simply a politically incorrect word for "lesbian". At least that is the way I see it, and (I thought) most everybody else.
My interpretation of course could be wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Acksiom on 06:45 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#29)
|
|
|
|
|
Trying to help *how*?
Yes, dyke is a PF synomym for lesbian. So what? How is *that* relevant, either?
I am STILL waiting for an explicit explanation of how the statement "Theron is a dyke," is supposed to be at all relevant to the discussion at hand.
What RELEVANT *point* were you trying to make, jimsmith? What exactly is Charlize Theron's sexual orientation supposed to have to do with any of this?
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:24 PM October 22nd, 2005 EST (#33)
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Stupid!
Nice attempt to try and change the subject with your half-assed "sincere" querry about Theron's sexuality. The person you have been berating (or nagging as all your kind does) has explained the relevance of his cooment on the fact that Theron may be a lesbian. Its an agenda, she is part or it, and she may have the characteristics of many feminazi lesbos. I won't apologize for this comment, nor will I back down. You see, I don't take crap either; especially not from the whining, nagging half of the species that have vaginas. Your female tactics have been recognized. Now shut up!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Acksiom on 06:40 PM October 22nd, 2005 EST (#35)
|
|
|
|
|
Shoo, troll. Shoo.
Icky old troll. Yuck.
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:04 PM October 22nd, 2005 EST (#36)
|
|
|
|
|
I agree that "X is a dyke" is not relevant to the fact that X is a vicious male-hater. Male-haters can be both male and female, homo and hetero. I don't care less whether womyn womyn's students professors are spewing hate so that they can bed more womyn students or whether they became rabid male haters because one day their vibrator's battery died.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:26 AM October 23rd, 2005 EST (#37)
|
|
|
|
|
I am so sorry Acksiom,
Am I not fitting into your mold of what a good obedient men's activist should be. Are my opinions valid only if you approve? Damn, what a typical feminist tactic! Look in the mirror, ask yourself who the real troll is here. Shoo feminist, shoo icky old troll. Ack, indeed!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:49 AM October 23rd, 2005 EST (#38)
|
|
|
|
|
Anybody who denies a link between feminism, lesbianism and misadry is insane, or just very, very naive.
Evidence? There is tons. Perhaps the very fact the Theron is a dyke is evidence enough. She clearly is a feminist and she clearly presents men in a negative light.
Or, what about the female Swedish politicians (see yesterdays posting on this website). These lovely women (beasts?) characterize in public and to the world, with no repercussions to their careers, men as animals and women who sleep with men as traitors. Do you think these cunts are not misandrous? Not feminist? Not dykes?
It is not PC of course to mention this linkage, and the PC police will try to prevent you from doing so. Sadly, many men wimp-out and back down (or resign, see another post on this website!) in the face of such attacks.
Men everywhere need to speak up and present the truth. Feminism is enshrined by political correctness. To kowtow to political correctness is to kowtow to feminism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:13 PM October 23rd, 2005 EST (#39)
|
|
|
|
|
Hey anybody see this column by Glenn Sacks?
"Raising Boys Without Men: Lesbian Parents Good, Dads Bad"
http://www.glennsacks.com/raising_boys_without.htm
I think this says it all...or,wait a second, maybe the female author of this book isn't a feminist, or a lesbian, or a man-hater...yeah, right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Acksiom on 04:39 PM October 23rd, 2005 EST (#41)
|
|
|
|
|
Shoo, troll. Shoo.
Icky old troll. Yuck.
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Acksiom on 04:53 PM October 23rd, 2005 EST (#42)
|
|
|
|
|
Except that asking people to be explicit about what they meant is essentially incompatible with PC censorship. And we're STILL waiting for jimsmith to explain what he meant, himself.
Again, it's not the word "dyke" to which I object.
It's that as I said above, I consider it INSULTING TO ME for someone to expect me to decode some kind of abstract meaning from a statement such as "Theron is a dyke".
It's the underlying assumption that I'm like a female chauvanist pigot who rolls her eyes in agreement when one of her friends says, "Well, he's a *man*, you know how *they* are. . . ."
It's no different. And I won't put up with being expected to participate in it. I am *worlds* better than that, and not only do I refuse to be dragged down to that level, but I will get RIGHT up in the face of anybody who tries. COUNT ON IT.
That's it and that's all. Anybody who continues to try to misrepresent my views in such a fashion is clearly trolling and will treated as such.
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Acksiom on 05:01 PM October 23rd, 2005 EST (#43)
|
|
|
|
|
Do you have an actual, explicit point to make?
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:19 PM October 23rd, 2005 EST (#44)
|
|
|
|
|
It's no different. And I won't put up with being expected to participate in it. I am *worlds* better than that, and not only do I refuse to be dragged down to that level, but I will get RIGHT up in the face of anybody who tries. COUNT ON IT.
That's it and that's all. Anybody who continues to try to misrepresent my views in such a fashion is clearly trolling and will treated as such.
SIEG HEIL! MEIN FEMINAZI TROLL!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:52 AM October 24th, 2005 EST (#46)
|
|
|
|
|
Achsiom you are a quintessential PCer.
When confronted with the facts and a well reasoned argument, you resort to insults. "Stop the debate at all costs! Everybody who thinks logically and for themselves is evil, in fact, they must be racist, sexist, homophobes! "
Its all very Orwellian, very Feminazi-like, and, above all, very typical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't care about modern movies either. They're all so cliched and pathetic, with women always shoved into the plot - often needlessly and to the detriment of the storyline - just to show how great they are. Even James Bond movies went all PC some years ago with women bossing 007 about and calling him a male chavinist. I won't watch any Bond film made after 1990.
We're not alone in this view either. Film makers and television executives know that men are avoiding TV and movie theatres in droves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Tumescent on 08:24 AM October 21st, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
"We're not alone in this view either. Film makers and television executives know that men are avoiding TV and movie theatres in droves."
This is absolutely the truth. Men would much rather stay at home and watch sports on TV or play video games than subject themselves to paying for some feminist crap being shoved down their throats at the movie theather. Eventually, one has to believe the loss of revenues from men staying away from these man hating movies will change the thinking of movie executives. It shouldn't be so hard for them to figure out. Men are not going to subject themsleves to this crap any longer. I know I'm not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:28 AM October 21st, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a college student, and while I understand every point you guys are making, tell that to all the sexually driven 16-24 yr old crowd that will go to see a movie just because Jessica Alba is a stripper in it. Believe me, if they want men to come to movies, there are ways they can do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:13 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
You've made a good point. Also, Hollywoods little
message to young guys seems to be: you can look at the sexy chick but she gets to kick you in the balls for it.
Ever notice how you can't watch a movie or turn on TV without some demented 5 foot 2 90lb "Woman-Do" specialist kicking the crap out of
a dozen guys once every five minutes - always wearing a cute dress of course.
As for "Char-Lies" and her movies... she should
get an award from us for "Chauvinette" öf the year.
XY Mutant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:24 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah. Theron and Jennifer Lopez
should both get that award. Just to name a couple.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by crescentluna
(evil_maiden @ yahoo.com)
on 08:15 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#30)
|
|
|
|
|
Funny you should bring that one up, Sin City was one of those that apparently feminists had a problem with because it featured Man Protecting Women themes (and women getting killed) - whereas I thought it was slightly skewed to the other side, women presented as victims right, left and center. Though I hear they're making a mini-film of "A Dame to Kill For" which, unless they really screwed up, will definitely have the femmes screaming.
And no, the skewing I preceived didn't prevent me from seeing it three times in theaters, and not just because Jessica Alba was in it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:47 AM October 21st, 2005 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Tumescent notes, "...This is absolutely the truth. Men would much rather stay at home and watch sports on TV or play video games than subject themselves to paying for some feminist crap being shoved down their throats at the movie theather. ..."
Quite right. Show me where women are going into the coal mines and being wildly abused. It isn't happening because women are 1) too damn lazy and 2) the men will respect them when they pull their weight in the mines. Women just need to get off their lazy asses and quite expecting men to do the hard work for them.
What is sad is that so much of the public will actually believe the fiction is founded in fact. They are too dumb to realize the movie is myth.
So, I'll just go into the garage and work on the Harley, meet with other mena to earn my pyro license, and doing men's activities that women hate. It isn’t worth wasting time on women and their hate.
It is really all just too damn pathetic, and women in general put up with this shit. What a bunch of lazy ass whores.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:36 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
You guys are pathetic! I have no problem with "feminist" movies. They're just trying to tell a freakin' story.
I don't care if you call me a wussie I'll watch whatever movie I want!! The real wussies can go on complaining about this sh*t.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Acksiom on 02:48 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
Shoo, troll. Shoo.
Icky old troll. Yuck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Luek on 02:54 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
Charlize Theron?
I read that when she was a young girl she witnessed her mother shoot and kill her father in a domestic dispute.
I guess that gave her the mindset on her attitudes about men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:57 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#28)
|
|
|
|
|
Fine, that explains why she hates men. Doesn't make us all abusers or give her license to label us as such. Get therapy, not a soapbox, Chuck (oops, "Charlize").
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:31 PM October 23rd, 2005 EST (#40)
|
|
|
|
|
Powerlingblog.com has a very insightful blurb on how biased this movie is. Check it out for you self (www.powerlineblog.com) but here is a bit:
"But one jarring note jumped out at me:
Washington Post: 'Inspired by Anita Hill's testimony at the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Josey talks Bill, a local hockey-hero-turned-lawyer (Woody Harrelson, in his best work in years) into mounting a lawsuit. And like Hill, Josey is confronted by the mine owner's "nuts and sluts" defense that focuses on her own sexual past.'
The real Jenson case was filed in 1985, six years before the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearing. So this particular embellishment is pure fiction. Why did the moviemakers throw it in? Why do you think? The Supreme Court is in the news, and Justice Thomas is a hero to conservatives. So the liberals who made North Country went out of their way to slime him, shifting the movie's time line by six years just so they could slander a Republican. No wonder conservatives hate Hollywood.
And, by the way, what's this about Anita Hill being "confronted" by a "defense" that "focuse[d] on her own sexual past"? I don't remember hearing anything about her sexual past; the defense put forward by Thomas and his supporters was that she was a liar, which the evidence seemed to show pretty convincingly."
UNREAL!! I'm going to try and avoid ALL HOLLYWOOD trash from now on after this bullshit!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by mens_issues on 08:53 AM October 21st, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
PBS has a Lewis & Clark special that they put on around fundraising time. For the most part it's good, but I remember seeing it the first time around 1998 where they went into detail about Sacagawea's role in the Lewis & Clark expedition, and what a bastard her husband, a French fur trapper, supposedly was. This included a part where Meriwether Lewis writes about his disdain for Sacagawea's husband when he nearly lost control of a canoe in a river, and how Sacagawea saved the day by remaining calm and regaining control of the canoe.
Why was it necessary to put that in the story?
They ran the same show last night, but I didn't bother to watch it. I won't send PBS any donations either.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:29 AM October 21st, 2005 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
PBS runs a great cover of being neutral, in fact they're just as bad as the rest of em.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:06 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
At least they pronounced Sacagawea's (Or Sacajawea) name right.
(Sack-cog-a-weea)
But that seems to be the only thing they get right on PBS.
Neutral? I think NOT!
They support the feminist agenda 100% in every single show or "documentary" they do on any gender related issues.
Pardon my language but P.B.S. must stand for; "Pulling Bull Shit". Because that's pretty much all they do.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Kyo on 04:03 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#26)
|
|
|
|
|
Thundercloud, I was just thinking about that -- "I bet they spent more time trying to force feminism down the viewers' throats than to actually get the names right" -- what a pleasant surpeise to see that they didn't mess it up!
Kyo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:23 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
Does anyone actually know the story behind this?
I only just read an article this morning on the movie. It sounded quite one-sided, and unquestioned that her male counterparts were extremely hostile towards her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:25 PM October 21st, 2005 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
I'll stick with South Park. :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:27 PM October 25th, 2005 EST (#48)
|
|
|
|
|
You killed KENNY!! You B@$!@rds!!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Acksiom on 07:26 PM October 23rd, 2005 EST (#45)
|
|
|
|
|
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/012028.php
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
