You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Feminism’ category.
The Neo-Liberal dogma that attempts to shroud us from the realities of the world is on display in not one, but two cartoons for your edification.
Ah, here we see Neo-Liberalism invade our thinking. The thoroughly naive notion that we are all equal in society and if we just acted “nicer” (by ignoring systemic inequalities society) things would be peachy-freakn’-awesome. In dogmatic Neo-Liberal thought we are just individuals making choices – no class, no sex, no position in society. The structural factors of society are simply ignored.
Boom! Class analysis based in a grounded historical perspective. Radical Feminist/Political theory appreciates this notion and uses it in analyzing our society. On the contrary our choosy-choice 3rd wave Liberal Feminists/Liberals almost always overlook the insidious nature of the neo-liberal agenda and its toxic effects to community and people. Choices are never made in a vacuum.
A big thank you to Francois Tremblay over at The Prime Directive for such a clear and concise break down of why its okay to hate prostitution and work to end it. He knocks this one out of the park in his post titled “The assumption sex is power“.
“In prostitution and pornography (which is, after all, organized prostitution), the imbalance is, at least on the surface, financial in nature; johns and porn directors trade money for sex, either with themselves or other people (and for those who object that pornography cannot be prostitution because porn directors don’t make actresses have sex with them, some johns have prostituted women have sex with each other too). Prostituted women and porn actresses are often coerced into unwanted sexual acts so they can get the money they need, and are exposed to high risks of sexually transmitted diseases, extremely high death rates, and extremely high percentages of PTSD (equal or higher to that of war veterans).
As has been pointed out by feminists, making women have sex with you by giving them money means they wouldn’t want to have sex with you in the first place. They’re doing it because they need the money, which makes it non-consensual. Furthermore, if consent is granted beforehand, and cannot be given or revoked for specific sexual acts as they happen, then it’s not consensual either, simply because it’s then very easy for a john or a porn director to decide to add new sexual acts and force the woman to do them under the threat of not getting paid.
And all of that is predicated on a capitalist society which makes work contracts and organized prostitution possible, as well as normalize the position that everything is potential property, including people’s sexuality.
But the more profound power imbalance, I think, is psychological: psychologically healthy men who have no qualms exploiting women who have been abused in childhood and devalue their own sexuality, or otherwise have bought into their “womanly” duty.
I can already hear the pro-prostitution advocates hissing like the snakes that they are, “see, you do hate sex workers!” I don’t hate prostituted women, I listen to the voices of ex-prostituted women who speak up about their experiences and who tell us that it was their devaluation of their own sexuality that led them to accept prostitution as a way of life. Pro-prostitution advocates tell us to listen to the voices of prostituted women, but they want you only to listen to the privileged white women who got what they wanted out of prostitution and then joined pimp-led advocacy groups. Of course such women have a vested interest in hiding the truth.
But to pro-prostitution advocates, anyone who disagrees must hate “sex workers.” To pro-pornography advocates, anyone who disagrees must hate porn actresses. As if hating an industry means hating the people who work at the lower echelons! Hating capitalism has never meant hating the workers, it means hating the institutions that exploit the workers. I hate prostitution and pornography and the people who defend those institutions, not the women whose sexuality is exploited by them. The power is generated by those institutions, not by a woman taking her clothes off.”
Go over to the Prime Directive and check out the rest of FT’s work, you won’t be sorry.
Well colour me “sex-negative” I guess, but I’m having a lot of trouble finding *any* value associated with the debasement and objectification of women.
And that, fair readership, is the first and last argument you will ever need for discussing the “benefits” of pornography with misguided people.
Taken from a blog post on the Feminist Current.
Also, it is the full decriminalization and/or legalization that has “produced more victims,” not the Nordic model, which is what Canada’s new laws are modeled after. Also — key point — prostitution produces victims. The demand for ever more (younger, fresher, newer) prostitutes is what supports the entire industry. Johns = the demand. Johns victimize women and girls in prostitution — not laws. And if it is the perpetrators we are after, than a feminist solution would be to go after the perpetrators. A law that criminalizes a man who seeks to abuse prostitutes will not abuse a prostitute. Rather, that law will serve to deter the man from seeking out a prostitute in the first place and make it easier to charge him if he does assault a prostituted women or child.
The fact that the new law, which will criminalize those sweet old johns out there prowling the Downtown Eastside, perhaps and likely looking for a young, vulnerable, Aboriginal girl to satisfy his “needs,” will come into effect on December 6, the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women, is perfect.
December 6th is the day we remember and take action on violence against women. That is the name of the day. What better action could we take on that day than to say to perpetrators of violence: no more. It is not your right, these women and girls are not for you. They deserve better and are more than a series of holes for you to penetrate on a whim. Women who are poor and racialized deserve better options than prostitution. They deserve better than to be left on the street for the Robert Picktons of the world to pick up. So let’s criminalize those men before they have a chance even to get to them.
Ms.Murphy knocks it out of the park with this quote. I suggest bookmarking and following her site, as it as excellent feminist resource.
One of the most refreshing experiences a feminist can be graced with, it is positively bracing I do declare, is having an entitled white dude explain to them what is wrongity-wrong-wrong with Feminism. I’m not sure what is more alluring, a dude’s decisive grasp of the basic tenets of feminist thought or their keen focus on what feminism should be about. Both are lobe expanding/enhancing experiences.
The influx of dudely commentary on the feminism tag seems positively correlated to the collective male apoplexy otherwise known as “GamerGate” a loose organization of dudes purportedly about ethics in game journalism (who the fuck cares about game journalism?) which, in actuality, is a movement committed to defending the misogyny that permeates much of gaming “culture”. The defense of misogyny in society is always accompanied by the harassment of women who dare to speak against the dude-approved status quo; let me assure you their is no lack of harassment toward females in this grand movement.
I digress from the twittering musings of the RPOJ, but I feel that a little background was(is) necessary to adequately frame where our next featured writer is coming from. Imagine, gentle reader: Hadrian’s Wall or the Black Gate from Tolkien, or even “The Wall” from Game of Thrones. Our dudely protagonist clearly places himself defending these bastions of masculinity against the ravening feminists hoards that seek only to pull down all that is good and just, not only the arena of gaming, but dare I say, the world. Our embattled protagonist must mount a fierce defense of his fiefdom as clearly, being in the majority, at the top of the social and cultural power gradients, basically the world being designed for him – is in moral peril of the threat of women being included in his world and being treated as human beings. This is a grave threat that cannot, nay… belay that, must not be ignored.
The fainting whirling you hear in the background is the stirring of the eyebrows of feminists who see this sad/enraging/sardonic (stupefying?) metaphor constantly being used by dudes to frame the oppression of men by the evil forces of feminism – only ruin can follow if the feminists are not put to a halt.
See if you can spot “The Wall” in the musty musings of this anal polyp also known as The Asylum. Our friend The Ass-Plum (I know, it writes itself some days) has written a real charmer of a post entitled “Fuck Off Feminists – part 1“. Catchy title, but do you think that with his laser like concision, our dude will stay on target and deal with this weighty statement with the due amount of charity and accuracy or; will he make shit up while beating straw feminism to death and recycle MRA talking points while talking through his hat?
The wiggling Red Pen of Justice cannot be forestalled any further – Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more. But when the blast of war blows in our ears, Then imitate the action of the kitteh!!
“OK so the title has probably got some people’s backs up, and to be honest good, as it will later be stated that those are the people who in fact just prove my point further.”
Fascinatingly enough, starting by insulting the group you’re about to pontificate about is a fairly common tactic. Do note that being as asshole is the Plan A here. Fuck discourse, fuck measured debate, and of course a heaping plate of fuck you to civility.
“Firstly, I am not for one second that the great voices of the female past such as Pankhurst should be forgotten, merely that the movement, along with many others, has now been bastardised beyond recognition.”
Nor are you keen with the proof reading, but full marks for telling us who women should venerate and who they should not – clearly within your dudely purview.
“I will take this moment now to state I am not going to use “scientific answers”,”
In best “Data” Voice: But captain, this is magnificent case of rectal cranial reversal! He is saying the facts of the situation don’t matter, but his very important opinion does. Oh, to what depths will you fall you magnificent Ass-Plum of a human being.
“I am merely using my site to state that I am sick to the back teeth of so many pro women feminists out there twisting every single article or statement into a debate about how women are suffering at the hand of the tyrannical male, newsflash – its people who suffer at the hands of people not just women at the hand of man.”
Those women. They are responsible for everything bad about the world, it is and always shall be their fault. Oh, and I’ll throw in some bullshit equality talk in a Pyrrhic attempt to make me look like less of douche.
“Oh, and by the way I am Not a woman-hater in any shape or form,”
Ah, then Ass-Plum dearest, how do you explain the title of this article? Hmm?
“nor am I deliberately or intentionally misogynistic,”
But if it happens, so be it? – *watches ass-plum shrug*. Yep, a true gentlemen we have here.
“however I do believe that no matter how much we advance there are always going to be certain roles that either Gender is predisposed to have a better “success” rate at.”
Really? And how would you measure that binky? How would you control for the wide variation in male and female socialization to be able to make that sweeping claim. And really gender is about oppression and is a societal construct that must be dismantled, along with patriarchy in order for our society to evolve.
““You don’t understand!” ” You’re just being a typical man!” “We have always had it harder than men so we are entitled to this attitude!” and the great one “we only want equality””
But Ass-Plum, **you** really don’t understand, you exhibit demonstrable white male privilege and entitlement and as we’ll see are generally clueless about the topic you’ve chosen to discuss.
” Well hello even a look at the dictionary definition of Feminism highlights just how warped the movement has become the correct definition being”
Ah, because the world is precisely demarcated by what the OED says, especially when it comes to complex sociological topics. Dealing with qualities that individuals possess though, woo, dictionaries are great take for instance this, as it applies to you (As an aside: since when does looking shit up in a dictionary qualify as ‘research’):
“ignoramus – [ig-nuh–rey-muh s, –ram–uh s] – 1.an extremely ignorant person. ” Well, if that isn’t you down to a “T” I don’t know what is.
Ass-Plum having at least a little bit of clue in finding definitions went to the OED, but was completely stumped by the second part of the definition he found.
“A ‘second wave’ of feminism arose in the 1960s, with an emphasis on unity and sisterhood; seminal figures included Betty Friedan and Germaine Greer”
“So there in a nut shell is how warped it has become, the original movement was to give women the same rights as men – which is more than deserved and should not ever be thought of as anything but correct. However, then the second wave started promoting sisterhood, creating an “all girls together” us against the world, we can do as we wish and man has to put up with it, attitude.”
I hate to break it to you Skippy, but the the only ones who get to say when the feminist revolution is over are women. Our fruit-enhanced punter also seems to think that women organizing and displaying signs of solidarity within their class is a somehow a bad thing. He, like most men attempting to mansplain feminism, miss/ignore the historical relevance of what each wave brought/brings to the table. I’m not your history teacher, Grasshopper, read more about the Waves of Feminism here.
“Which is itself prioritising one gender at the disregard of the other.”
I see this so fracking much in discussions of feminism. What is “this”, well this dear reader is the dark shard of ignorance that drives so much of hot air that eminates from people when they have “serious” discussions about feminism.
It starts with a mindset that somehow the here and now that both women and men are treated equally in society. Evidentially speaking, this is not the case, see socialization, pay gap, harassment etc. Here is my theory – because generally many white dudes get a fair shake in society (that and having their norms reflected and embedded) they somehow think that others that don’t look like them, have the same experience.
The other aspect of why dudes say the stupidest things is a keenly developed ahistorical narrative in which the oppression of women is minimized or erased entirely. Please dudes just read History Matters and Against our Will they will serve as preventative tonics against you sounding so earth shatteringly ignorant.
“Not Equality and therefore not true Feminism, so to those who state read the definition, I Say to you, I HAVE.”
You sir, would not know Feminism if bit you in the ass.
“Further to that now I believe there is a much more damaging 3rd wave of feminists about who thanks to a friend who uses the term so well, we will
call “feminazi” and their intent is to completely reverse the times of old and create essentially a female controlled and led society where males are seen as a lower species. “
Wow, just wow. Because the liberation of women is just like Fascism!!! Right here, right now witness the manly construction of a straw argument. Third Wave feminism is about creating a society dominated by women, essentially replacing patriarchy with matriarchy!
Jesus-fuck. The hysterical men-children have broke loose because the big bad feminists are encroaching on their domain. By encroaching I mean demanding that women be treated as full human beings.
*sigh forever*
“You may think this is a bit of an extreme over reaction,”
No shit, Sherlock.
“sadly it is not, nor is the use of the word “feminazi” in fact you could dissect the word two ways and it would still make the current movement inseparable from the phrase.”
*thump* It was sound of hundreds of heads hitting hundreds of desks. But at least Ass-Plum is doing definitions again, as it has been so helpful to his cause…
“[1] Femi-Nazi – A movement designed to seek control over society, through manipulation of the community and through an environment of fear. “
Oh you mean like the environments women must navigate through *all the time* in society because their status as human beings is almost always in question?
“[2] Femin-azi – “A spin on Papparazi , the horrible scurge of the Human race who, think they have a right to invade people in their own personal space and spread some idle gossip or half truth in order to glorify themselves and or promote their own self-worth and gain, who will think nothing of terrorising and controlling individuals until they achieve their end goal”
Ah yes because men are regularly sent rape and death threats for speaking out in female dominated spheres of interest…
“See Both work.”
Both actually prove that the three working neurons you possess took the fucking day off.
” Not to mention the trivialisation of RAPE. Yes People, I said it, the worlds second most abhorrent crime is being trivialised by supposed pro equality and pro female rights groups, in many ways and this is a major worry for me. “
Wait, what?
“Sadly we will never irradiate this act but again,”
The rest of his commentary must be positively glowing with fact.
“Point One, it does happen to Men as well as women, there is no need to either hide or promote a “certain statistic” that will validate your claim, Rape is about power, Power is not gender specific, Sorry but it’s not.”
1.What about teh Menz!
2. Power gradients in society, what the fuck are they?
3. I know nothing of history therefore I can be this much of fuck-wit.
I need Ass-Plum to come up for air soon, the stupid is becoming suffocating. Power is not gender specific, also just in: The Sun orbits the Earth…
“If I go out and get a bit drunk and end up waking up next to a girl who I didn’t know the night before, then that is a pretty good night,”
Because your experience is everyone’s experience. Dammit, I’m going to need a heavy grade shower-poof to exfoliate all this dudely entitlement off.
“It is not me becoming a sex pest, if that was the case then most men in the world would be serial rapists, and again I state so would many women.”
Because consent is hard (?). Treating women like they were a part of humanity is not that big of a stretch, try it some time.
“People should not have to get written consent before every single act of a sexual nature takes place for fear of being put up on charges, and while im on the subject and just to clarify further”
Because making sure she wants to participate with you in said activity might ruin your boner. You can fuck right-off jerkstick.
“Anyway, basically what im trying to say, in my own clumsy way, is that Rape is a disgusting and vile act and the actual “act” should not be lessened by the over use or application of the word to situations that in fact are just “mistakes” or in some cases, Fun.”
Oh because those darn women mistaking rape for FUN! You contemptible asshole of the first degree. Your defense of rape culture is disgusting.
“Sadly, I am not sure how we can move forward from this, as it appears to just be another example of how modern day society is intent on tearing itself apart, however , let me try to put it to you really simply,”
We can move forward when dipshits such as yourself are struck repeatedly with a clue by four until you get some basic contextual idea of what is actually happening in society and not the nilly-willy full of shit-to-the-gills self-serving narrative that you’ve had excruciatingly turned to “11” this entire post.
“Does anyone have the “right” to be racist , just because they’re ancestors were wrongly treated?”
I don’t even know what this means. My best guess is Clownus-Maximus is trying an inverted racism argument because uppity black people/women/minorities disquiet his precious status-quo.
“Does anyone religion have the “right” to control other belief systems just because of theirs?”
Awww Br
o! Why Can’t We All Just Get Along? – And by get along we do mean the way in which society functions that continues to directly and indirectly benefit me (the great white-dude).
“No, and nor does any one GENDER have a right to Control the other.”
Ass-Plum, your ignorance must constantly endanger your life. Get yourself to a library, stat!
“Now, I could continue by going into the rights and wrongs of gender specific roles and situations, and how we as society create these situations ourselves, almost from birth, by the “preconceptions” of Boy is Blue, Girl is Pink, Barbie vs Action Man, etc,”
Oh god, please don’t! My irony meter just committed seppuku like three paragraphs back…
“however to be honest, im getting a bit hungry and tired now so am off to find the nearest Tavern and local wench ;) so that will have to wait,”
There are small mercies in this world, the firehose of ignorant bullshit has ceased. Hallelujah!
As a new added feature of the RPOJ we get a Shakespearean Insult hand culled from the internets.
Dear Ass-Plum,
See Above.
Have you ever met someone who initially, seems intelligent, but then opens his mouth and forcefully repudiates that notion? Well, that isn’t even close to the case here. The cranial-anal link here is strong with this one, so strong in fact, that stupid flows freely from almost every paragraph, every sentence – hell – every word screams, “I’m a vacuous cretin whose greatest achievement to date has been walking and chewing gum at the very same time.”
The Red Pen Of Justice has a savage wiggle on for Lucien-Maverick and the stupid shit he regularly defecates onto the wordpress #gamergate tag. In this post he manages to get just about everything factually wrong and manage to come off as a massive douche exemplifying how not to be a decent human being.
I know you are excited as I am to delve into this dark hole of stupidity and misogyny, so we shall not tarry any longer!
First off the title of the post: “Is the Puritan Feminist-Left Helping The Religious Right?”
Oh you know this is going to be good and filled with accurate depictions of Feminism. Let me assure you, gentle readers, no straw versions of Feminism will be beaten to death here…
“My cousin shared a rather interesting article with me today. It is from a VERY conservative publication called The Weekly Standard. This article talked about a concept called “Neo-Victorianism on Campus.”
Well, well, well. Using the Weekly Standard as your source already puts you firmly in stupid country. The tl;dr of the article linked is that we should be blaming women for male behaviour; case closed (you’ve been warned, the head to desk ratio is frightfully high following that link).
“In the article, they talk about a contradiction that they see on modern college campuses that plays into their hands. See, I have long made a point about how the Puritan Feminists have been making things worse for women.”
I really need to know what a Puritan Feminist is. Lucien-Maverick never really defines the term, but from the gist of what he says we can 
define a Puritan Feminist as any woman who dares to curtail the power of dude-boners.
“Now I was given a new perspective.”
Is it one that isn’t maxed out on idiocy and a palatable hate of factual information?
“It’s no secret that I am annoyed by the new campaign against what these people see as an epidemic of rape at college campuses. These people are delusional, and what’s more – their delusions are working against them.”
Oh, Lucy-Mavey! You just saved this article by not turning over a new leaf. Now muffin, you are the one who is holding on to beliefs that are not based in reality.
Rape is endemic on college campus and in society in general.
1 out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in her lifetime (14.8% completed rape; 2.8% attempted rape).1
17.7 million American women have been victims of attempted or completed rape.1
9 of every 10 rape victims were female in 2003.2
“One in four college women report surviving rape or attempted rape at some point in their lifetime. These are anonymous reports on multi-campus surveys sampling thousands of college students nationwide (Fisher, Cullen & Turner, 2000; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006). This rate has remained the same since studies in the 1980s (Koss, Gidycz, & Wisniewki, 1987).”
Looks like you’re the mayor of Wrongsville. Congratulations!?
“The article points out that whole movement for sexual liberation of women in the 60’s. It was a vibrant culture war against the prudishness of the 40’s and 50’s, running on the coattails of the larger culture wars being played out in the 60’s. This war got women to be able to be more sexually expressive.”
LOL forever. Vibrant culture war my ass. Dudes wanted and got access to women. This so called “sexual liberation” was cover for the reality of more dudes being able to dip their wicks into women without social repercussions.
Let’s be straight here, there were good glimmers for women in the 60’s, but good things started happening when women started organizing to protect themselves and promote their rights as human beings – a little movement you might have heard of – called Feminism.
“If only the women who fought those battles, who were worthy of the term “feminist” could see things now.”
Ah yes, because only with Male Approval can we identify the “true” Feminists. I’m not sure if Lucy-Mavey is being more stupid or more ignorant. I’ll let you, avid readers, choose his poison.
“With the Puritan Feminists on college campuses trying to make VERY strict guidelines and making those in positions of authority enforce them, we are seeing the liberation that so many women fought for being gradually taken apart, one rape allegation at a time. “
Whut? Are you really trying to say that codifying consent is somehow restricting women’s liberation? Why would women restrict their libert….. Oh wait…I get it now – If you replace “liberation” with “dudely access to pussy” your semantic confusion just clears the fuck up in hurry. How very noble of you and your crusade.
“Of course, that’s how it works nowadays. If a woman makes an allegation [of] rape, the Puritan Feminists and the public at large seem to take it at face value. “
Moving in this direction is a good thing considering the piss-poor conviction rates when it comes to rape and reporting rape. It’s almost like there is a systemic bias against women and their reporting of being sexually assaulted.
Hmm. The likely-hood of seeing their abuser walk free and the certainty of having their name and history dragged through the mud, women tend not to report being sexually assaulted.
“Why this is is beyond me.”
Sadly, you’re a fairly dim bulb Lucy-Mavey; this foundational truth is the cornerstone of the monument of fail you posted.
“The whole idea of “innocent until proven guilty” is gone. The article about UVA is proof of this. It’s now, “innocent until accused, which the social justice echo chamber will validate”. And if you think about it, it’s madness.”
All gone. The systemic privilege bestowed on males to rape nearly at will is in jeopardy! Who will defend this noble right?? Lucy-Mavey of course, because now his “rights” are in the cross-hair and that is a fracking big deal. (Never mind, of course, the rights of the women who have had their rights trampled on since, oh well, the beginning of civilization – oh no – we have to prioritize!)
“After all, they say that 1 in 5 women are sexually assaulted or raped. That would mean that 20-25% of women on campus are the victims of sex crimes. As my cousin pointed out, that would make both men and women very afraid of going to college, if this sort of thing was proven to be accurate.”
Women are afraid to go to on many campuses because the threat to their persons is real.
‘But it hasn’t been.’
Because apparently having a penis allows you to blatantly disregard the facts of a situation.
” The reality is that the 1 in 5 statistic is marketing. Brilliant, brilliant marketing. Something people forget is that most of the SJW women have degrees in Communication or Marketing or things like that. They know how to sell a product.”
Huh. Those communication and marketing degrees are made of pretty heady stuff. The assertion Binky makes here takes us, with certainty, into the tinfoil hat region of ‘rational’ argumentation.
“And the product here is – women are constant victims and men are bad. “
Well you’re half right, women are the majority of people who are sexually assaulted. As Rainn.org cites – 9 of every 10 rape victims were female in 2003.2 No mystery there.
“The worst part about it is that they are using actual rape victims as props in a thinly-veiled misandry campaign.”
I’m not sure how this even works, but I do get that Lucy-Mavey is blaming women for the stupid shit men do. Oh hey! Misandry isn’t a thing. It cannot by definition exist as the societal systemic nature of society inherently favours, rather than discriminates against men. See this short informative video for further elucidation.
“I find that kind of sick, personally.”
I find that making a choice between a stinking sack of shit and you Lucy-Mavey, I’d choose the sack of poo every time.
“In the end, though, there is a much darker implication. Think back to the women who fought for sexual liberation. Now, think about the women who are trying to make women constantly afraid of men.”
Women should be afraid of men as they constitute the majority of perpetrators of violence against them. Lucy-Mavey doesn’t get causation.
“Women see men as the enemy and will do whatever they want in order to punish men for whatever the Puritan Feminists say is wrong, based on a crisis that they manufactured wholesale by using real victims as props.”
Wow, this is all about punishing men and playing the oppressed dominant majority card isn’t it? Enough men act shitty within the boundaries of society, thus appearing as a real threat to women, and somehow it is a crisis manufactured by women? Lucy-Mavey certainly goes to the venerated chestnut of misogyny – blaming women for men’s poor behaviour – with rabid commitment.
“Well, to men being in the Puritan Feminist Inquisition, where they can be accused of rape, because they didn’t ask a girl for permission at every single step of the process from kissing to getting their freak on. Yes, it’s a bold new world.”
What??!? Treating women as if they were fully human and their consent is required? Unpossible!
“The Religious-right should be in awe. I kind of am. “
Actually, I’m in awe of how much jaw-dropping stupid is being put on display by you Lucy-Mavey. Your dedication to the liberation of bonerz is admirable on so many levels…
“In less than 5 years, these people have decided to roll back all the work that women who actually cared about other women worked so hard to do. It amazes me.”
Who are these women who were campaigning so vigourously for their right to be fuck-toilets? It seems that more likely that seeing that the status-quo that favours your particularly odious worldview is being rolled back a bit and rather than up and up say that, you overlay your bleatings on women that simply do not exist.
“What it all boils down to is this – these people are manipulative con-artists who are using real victims as props for their own agenda. Or, in the case of Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian, they will exploit whatever controversy they can find in order to sell their line.”
Because receiving rape and death threats is “exploiting the controversy”. *Sigh*
Well, we should thank Lucian-Maverick for his important contribution(s) to the progressive egalitarian ideal.
On second thought, we should mock the glaring ignorance of this man-childe and rightly categorize his utterances as fool-fodder that can be safely ignored once properly ridiculed. Hell, lets let Willy S have the final comment on his character : “Thou are a boil, a plague sore, an embossed carbuncle in my corrupted blood.” (King Lear).
RPOJ out.
Funny how many dudes fail to get that.
““No” is a word that must never be negotiated, because the person who chooses not to hear it is trying to control you.
Declining to hear “no” is a signal that someone is either seeking control or refusing to relinquish it. With strangers, even those with the best intentions, never, ever relent on the issue of “no,” because it sets the stage for more efforts to control. If you let someone talk you out of the word “no,” you might as well wear a sign that reads, “You are in charge.”
Another common response that serves the criminal is to negotiate (“I really appreciate your offer, but let me try to do it on my own first”). Negotiations are about possibilities, and providing access to someone who makes you apprehensive is not a possibility you want to keep on the agenda. I encourage people to remember that “no” is a complete sentence.”
-Gavin De Becker: The Gift of Fear
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…