No, we don't literally want to ban men. But 2014 was the year women got even

Submitted by Mastodon on Thu, 2014-12-18 06:39

Article here. Excerpt:

If women were mad, the women-haters were, if anything, madder. But as much as they might like to believe that “put men in a box and put the box in the ocean” is a threat, they never had anything to fear from misandrists. Women don’t have the power to send all men to an island, or launch them into the sun, or even forcibly oppress them into giving a tiny bit of unearned ground in the name of equality. We won’t beat men into unconsciousness and then say it’s their fault. We probably won’t even publish their information online. All we have is the power to say that we’re angry and fed up, and to nod in recognition at the others who feel the same. That’s what misandry is about: the power of recognizing shared anger. And that small amount of power was a bright spot in a cruel year.
...
What will 2015 bring for misandry? My hope is that, eventually, we’ll drop it. Not because it hurts mens’ feelings, or because I imagine some kind of gender-equity utopia is just around the corner and we’ll all get to lay down our arms. You guys have too much work to do. But defining ourselves as misandrists means we are still defining ourselves relative to men, even when avowing that nobody needs ’em. I’m not interested in making men comfortable: men have been comfortable long enough, reclining happily on cushions that just happen to be made by (and from) women. I am, however, interested in making men irrelevant to my self-concept as a woman. I’d rather identify as something that celebrates the togetherness we’ve found under the “#KillAllMen” banner. Maybe a witch.

Realistically, though, the main 2015 application of the term “misandry” will probably be dudes making “ballbuster” jokes about Hillary Clinton. Ban men.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

No, she isn't, and neither are her fellow feminists. Feminists ignore offenses committed by women and see, discuss, condemn those committed by men. They only condemn women who disagree w/ them. Otherwise, women can do no wrong in their eyes. Child abuse, murder, participation in genocides, etc., by women go unacknowledged or rationalized. Those done by men receive only condemnation. The notion of presumed innocence or taking each case on its own merits w/out regard to gender, etc., is, based on their behavior, utterly repugnant to them. Men bad, women good. And their "final solution" is to eliminate men. No kidding.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Sat, 2014-12-20 21:24

One solution I've seen is reducing men to ten percent of the population. Proponents of this view say they wouldn't need to kill men directly, but in fact they would need to do so. At the very least, they would have to mandate the abortion of all male children. Otherwise, the population of males would eventually be replaced. So while women say they don't have the power to kill men, in fact they do.

On the other hand, if they start rounding up men and killing them, perhaps enough men will start to wake up to the truth. Right now, we're the frog being slowly boiled in water.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by el cid on Sun, 2014-12-21 16:28