'The Harassment Of Online Women' by Wendy McElroy

In feminism, the biggest victim gets the most recognition. So its no wonder that they engage in oneupmanship to make themselves out to be the biggest victims. Being raped, abused, assaulted etc is a badge of honor for these victims.

For instanct, Andrea Dworkin claimed to have been raped and gangraped multiple times. Google for a picture of her and watch your dick shrivel up.

http://petepatriarch.blogspot.com

Gandy writes:
"Try to put yourself in this picture: Imagine you are a woman with two children and you live in perpetual fear. "Your husband hits you frequently, and threatens to put you on the street if you ask for money to buy groceries or clothes for the kids. As primary caregiver to your kids, and due to lack of money and other resources, going to school is not an option.

Gandy’s, and thus the government’s, answer to this potential (however rare) is to empower EVERY woman to put her husband/boyfriend “on the street” for any reason, or no reason at all. Just say the magic words – “I’m scared” – take the kids and jump on that gravy train. Apparently that's not enough for Gandy.

You used to work part time at a factory where you were harassed by your bosses, who often denied your full wages. You would have protested, but knew there would be nothing to protect you from being fired if you did so. You were fired anyway, once you became pregnant with your third child.

Gandy’s, and thus the government’s, answer to this potential (however rare) is to assure that deserving men are passed over for promotions and every woman is empowered to ruin any male co-worker’s career and reputation. Apparently that's not enough for Gandy.

You have no access to contraceptives, nor can you afford pre- or post-natal care. Your husband beat you for getting fired. You want to call the police, but you are afraid that they will arrest you, or take your kids away. So you have no recourse, and no way out."

God!! Where do you even start with this one? As if men have access to modern contraceptives (as opposed to those used by the Romans), and it’s women who get arrested, have their kids taken away, and have no recourse. Sheesh!!! Further response to this pathetic propaganda risks dignifying it.

Maybe Gandy’s visiting from a parallel universe. Then again, maybe she's just another bigot with influence.

Deleted

(Wendy) -- "I don't have a deep message here. I post the 'hate email' only because I had heard so very much about how men's rights activists (MRAs) are threatening women bloggers and creating an atmosphere of hatred/fear across the Internet. I don't have a good word to say about rage-filled MRAs who issue threats rather than arguments, especially since I receive a goodly chunk of hate mail from them as well. I merely point out that, in my experience, viciousness and hate-mongering are equally prominent in email I receive from women. If you disagree with gender feminism, then (surprisingly often) you will receive emails wishing you become a rape victim. Sometimes they go into detail. And, remember, for gender feminists being raped is a fate worse than death."

*** I don't have a good word to say about rage-filled MRAs... ***

Yes, Wendy, we know you have decided that men are not entitled to feel anger, let alone rage.

You are so marginally irrelevant, Ms. McElroy.

With those women threatening you with rape and pillage, you have proven to us that you are no saint and instead a joke! It's like I've said before...don't trust feminists even if they bust the heaviest set of balls to inflict prejudicial pain on their fellow man...FOR A HOUSEBOY!!!!

Eman
Emma.noelle.blay@hotmail.com

*****masculism is a black male's best friend!!!!!*****

N.O.W.'s President declares 500,000 paying female feminist members --- yet N.O.W. declines to verify this membership.

Kim Gandy has power.

Becuase no male member of Congress will vote against any bill N.O.W. backs.

It's called the Oppressive Matriarchy, gents.

Forget all the feminist crap about gender oppression.

Do not ever marry, if you are a young man.

If you have made this mistake, get a lawyer and retrieve your freedom.

Kim Gandy is the poster girl for gold-digging vampire parasites who wish to harvest men....

"Your husband beat you for getting fired. You want to call the police, but you are afraid that they will arrest you.."

Hey Gandy, it's the other way around, stupid..the MAN calls and HE gets arrested.

Here's my standing offer as of today:
I will pay $20, in the form of a U.S. postal money order, to anyone who can cite a verifiable case where a woman has called police reporting she has been struck by her male partner, in a domestic voilence dispute, and is subsequently arrested when the police arrive (arrests for drug posession or some extraneous issue do not count - it has to be directly related to the DV). You guys can contact all your friends about this offer. Anonymity will be preserved in the awarding of these funds.

-ax

Fakelle McNotrealington

She was arrested for being beaten by my husband, Notarealman McNotrealington

A postal money order in the name of Fakelle McNotRealington, will be mailed to: 123 Horseshit Street, Bogus Claim, Oklahoma.
-ax

oops..I said I'd preserve anonymity, didn't I?

At the risk of irritating some of my MRA colleagues, I think we ought to be fair to Wendy McElroy and recognize that she makes a reasonable and worthwhile point. Come on guys. She's giving us a clear example of how hateful and malicious women can be toward other women who don't tow the victim-feminist party line.

She also points out, as a side issue, that she's been on the receiving end of some angry MRA insults as well. That worries me (but does not surprise me) because her comments seem pretty fair and reasonable to me -- and I've been reading her opinion pieces for years now. Let's not alienate our female friends just because they're not 100 percent ideal. We need all the female allies we can get. Right?

gregory - (to quote Cher in Mystique Pizza or Mermaids or some old chick-flik - "SNAP OUT OF IT!") --

"Let's not alienate our female friends just because they're not 100 percent ideal. We need all the female allies we can get. Right?"

A man who fears alienation from "female friends" has already (to quote Chris Rock) put his manhood in a feminist emergency box mounted on the wall of her apartment with the label "break glass if in need of dick."

There are no trustworthy female allies.

None.

They are all trojan horses.

Get it?

"Wave Four Feminism" -- redeeming the lies.

...but I'm still not likely to trust this lady's intent, given what's been written about her habits around here. I do understand why she's alienated MRAs in the past, me among them. She is still a self-described feminist, even if she's not the usual misandric type, and feminism is about female superiority before all else. Her choice to identify herself as such is reason enough to maintain a healthy suspicion around her, even if she regularly writes and publishes much-needed, male-positive pieces.

So, while the fact that she's highlighting female aggression is definitely a good thing for us, and she regularly publishes ideas and opinions that the MSM wouldn't touch with a 10-foot-pole, I'll continue to take her just as seriously as she herself claims to take MRAs, i.e. not at all. She's just another woman calling us a bunch of angry men as far as I can see, even if she occasionally does something that helps us.

There's a big difference between an ally you trust and someone who accidentally gives you a hand once in a while as they're helping themselves.

I have never seen McElroy take issue with men as a class. As I have said before on this board, some MRA's tend to forget that McElroy herself is not an MRA, nor is she obligated to be. After all she is a woman. It is true she declares herself a feminist, but that maybe is just the anarchistic streak within her. She does seem to be about true equality, not female superiority.

I think McElroy is one of our true rare female friends, in most ways. It concerns me that so many guys on this board are delivering low blows to her.

-ax

Deleted

I don't think 100% of women calling themselves feminists hate men. Like I said, some people are anarchists. I think McElroy is far left. When you combine "female" with "anarchy" you are bound to get, among whatever else depending on the cause, some level of feminism. It seems at this point in history, women of almost every culture feel the need to express their famale-hood in whatever they are doing..whether it is politics, activism, writing, art etc. That is why, for example, Harold Bloom can write a book about Western literature and just talk about Western literature; but Camille Paglia cannot write a cultural studies without constantly injecting some feminist issue on every page. (of course some may argue that Bloom is writing about mainly the works of white men, so by definition, he himself is engaged some sort of "patriarchal" writing. But there is a differnce between this, and injecting an ideology which is often overtly hateful, for the sake of the ideology. (i.e. Bloom is not trying to indoctrinate followerrs, whereas feminist writers usually are).
In short, women have found a voice and an audience and they are damns sure going to use it. It is like when a baby first learns to cry, and sees that the crying gets results.
Maybe I should not have used the term "low blow", besides she has no testicles so that would n ot matter anyway ;-)
-ax

Specifically, the type of arguing used like, say, when I mentioned "some may argue that Bloom is engaged in some sort of patriarchal writing.."
It is feminist using what I call the "goose and duck" argument:
First of all, if something looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, that means it is something that looks like a duck and quacks like a duck..it is not necessarily a duck.
Now a goose has white feathers, and so does a duck. And a goose can swim and so can a duck. And a goose has a bill and so does a duck. But no matter how many similarities, everyone know that a goose and duck are two different things.
Now for the issue at hand, a femnist may claim that like a feminist writer, Bloom is speaking from a "gender" standpoint , in that he is a white male writing about white men.
And he is writing about white men who themselves were among the domininat patriarchal figures, at least in the intellectual sphere; and he (Bloom) is using "male thinking"; and so on; so that all things considered, he is pushing a patriarchal view, and what's the difference between this and what some accuse feminists writers of doing?
But my contention is this: that everybody fucking knows, including most of the feminists themselves, that just like a goose is not a duck, Bloom is not engaged in the same sort of thing as Paglia is. What is the point in denying there is a fundamental difference? Any idiot can see it is not the same. This intuitive observation doesn't much depend on a person's level of intelligense. Incessant demands to point out more and more specific differences between the two, is just an extension of being in a state of denial. (although I did point out some differences in my post below).
It is thus a result, that those on the left are mores likely to support feminists than those on the right: because liberals are adept at self-delusion, for example a white liberal pretends that if two black guys mug him in a shitty neighborhood, that he "deserved it" since he "owes" the two robbers something on a larger scale, like say better socio-economic situation, . This also points to the fact, that feminism and liberalism go together since women themselve are practiced at self-deception.
-ax

...but I'm afraid it was a bit too extreme to put up, even for me.

It was a lengthy justification for why I consider any feminist my sworn enemy.

All I can say is this: don't ever ask me to ally myself with anyone who chooses to call himself or herself a feminist. It will never happen.

That being said, I respect your right to see things otherwise, ax, and you're perfectly entitled to see McElroy as an ally if you believe that to be the case. I'll simply agree to disagree with you on this.

I'm with RandomMan on this one.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/

I'm with you guys.
Feminism=/= my ally. I know it's usually the faggot's ally, but I'm ubersexual (gay who acts straight, not necessarily closeted) and my friend who acts gay is also antifeminist.

...homosexuals too. Just as it hijacked the civil rights movement and helped itself to something intended to help blacks and other minorities, feminists are very busy making sure that ANY measure intended to help homosexuals achieve equality is instantly amended to include "gender". Feminists only do feminists so if you're a minority, your only purpose in their world is to serve as fodder for them.

Feminists are like a spoiled, younger sibling. If they see you have something of any "value", they instantly demand one for themselves!

That's exactly what those hussies do. They steal, steal, steal.

Most fags don't see it the way I do, and think feminism is their friend, depressingly.
I, however, have decided to sit back and watch the ride.

...I know more than a few gay men--that I speak with in-passing ans such--that can't fucking stand women that fit the feminist bill. These men are sick of these women just like the men that have to deal with them are.

The article I posted from YOUTUBE about the two gay men and how they fell they don't even need women pretty much sums up this attitude that is starting to spread amongst gay men that have found out that gay or not they are still men which means they are still being aimed at by the women.

http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm