Refuting these stupid misogynist crap?

[Hexen]

http://www.debunker.com/patriarchy.html

Is there anyway to debunk all this bullshit? Since this has been bothering me for a very long time...

[CartCollector]

Well to start, the claim that a male-only draft means that there's no patriarchy is false. Male-only drafts PROVE that there is patriarchy. Think about it- what are the reasons women aren't drafted in a patriarchial society? Because they're supposedly so much weaker and more fragile and gentler than men. Women have to stay home and get pregnant, because that's what good women are supposed to do. Things that involve strength and killing and leadership, well, that's man's work. This is textbook patriarchy.

[Hexen]

Perhaps Robert Sheaffer and Steven Goldberg (as he bases his argument from) are examples of bourgeoisie scholars/pseudoscientists who are just trying help uphold the Capitalists/Ruling Classes sick ideal society? (I noticed it's rather parallel/identical trend to the "Human Nature" argument capitalists use all the time which I noticed that they use this "biological inevitability" argument to ensure that the workers don't rebel against them or something like that)

[manic expression]

In far too many of history's wars, women were part of the "spoils of war". Whichever side lost, its women would routinely be raped, murdered, sold into slavery...and they had no way to defend themselves. Whatever the reasons for this, it's an inherently unequal relationship to have one group empowered with the defense of "their" lands and homes, while the other was deprived of any real agency in the matter.

Sure, men are forced to fight, suffer and die in senseless, insane wars for the profit of the rich. It is a stunning example of oppression of working-class men. But that doesn't mean women don't face other forms of oppression, oppression that does not apply to men as it does to women.

[Hexen]

For those who don't to read the entire web site (which is a painful process for sure) here is some articles of interest that have been bothering me for a very long time....

http://www.debunker.com/texts/noblelie.html
http://www.debunker.com/texts/fallacy.html

Is there any way to respond to all this?

[AK]

For those who don't to read the entire web site (which is a painful process for sure) here is some articles of interest that have been bothering me for a very long time....

http://www.debunker.com/texts/noblelie.html
http://www.debunker.com/texts/fallacy.html

Is there any way to respond to all this?
Punch this Goldberg guy in the face.

[Hexen]

I think I found a article critiquing Goldberg's bullshit...

http://sc6214.wetpaint.com/page/Critique+of+Goldberg%27s+%22Why+Men+Rule%22

and also this

http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/WarZoneChaptIIID.html

[sponsoredwalk]

wetpaint.com/page/Testosterone+Theory

I think his testosterone-laced theory is hilarious! Also, the guy uses Plato's Republic to advance some of his claims on his site. Certainly using a "bastion of morality" there :lol:

He mentions Plato's "Noble Lie", now am I blind or do I see a link to capitalistic propoganda?

Anyway, I think this Goldberg guy is just so afraid to hold the door open for a woman out of fear of being labelled sexist that he's lashing out :D

(or did whenever his drivel was published...)

edit: This guy got an article into skeptic magazine! The supposedly critical magazine that Michael Shermer is so proud to boast ofwhen amongst the likes of Dawkins & Hitchens!I'm now skeptical of this magazine & their agenda, if they would be willing to let a man publish a piece bashing women uner the guise of talking about the DaVinci code who knows what they'd support...

[Hexen]

edit: This guy got an article into skeptic magazine! The supposedly critical magazine that Michael Shermer is so proud to boast ofwhen amongst the likes of Dawkins & Hitchens!I'm now skeptical of this magazine & their agenda, if they would be willing to let a man publish a piece bashing women uner the guise of talking about the DaVinci code who knows what they'd support...

Looks like Michael Shermer is no friend to the working classes thats for sure...

I think "Skeptic's" main intended audience is the capitalists/bourgeoisie or simply a product of capitalist society (maybe both).