feminazi

[Loknar]

http://maddox.xmission.com/feminazi.html




Feminism is in a lot of ways like fascism. Your average Fascist will disregard any scientific argument unless the conclusion supports his existing belief. The ideology comes first and the Fascist looks for anything to back it up, no matter how trivial, unreliable or discredited. Much like today's feminists and their ideology. Fascists attempt to rationalize their beliefs and portray them as truth by twisting the facts. A fascist might, for example, cast blame for unemployment and work discontent on immigrants "stealing" their jobs. Feminists similarly cast blame for women's lower average pay onto another party (men). Both feminists and fascists are quick to cast blame on someone else for anything that goes wrong in their lives. Most feminists seem to conform to feminist stereotypes. I can usually pick out a feminist in a croud of women. She'll usually have short hair, regular pants, a regular shirt, and an unbathed look; she'll look very much like a stereotypical guy. I think why a feminist might appear like this is to make a statement that "if men can do it and be accepted, then women should be able to". How bold, to go around and look like a stereotypical guy as opposed to a stereotypical girl. Who cares? Either way, you're an ass for thinking anybody cares about the statement you're making. If you're trying to prove a point to the average guy that's only concerned with women as sex objects, you're wasting your time. A guy that's concerned with women as sex objects is going to be concerned with women as sex objects regardless of how you look. Not every woman will share feminist ideals, so a possible argument that "if all women did it, then guys would have to respect us" isn't very realistic. If you really want to make a point, surgically remove your breasts. Or is that going too far? Feminism serves as nothing more than a wedge to further seperate the sexes, segregating men and women into cultures that wouldn't otherwise exist.

[Guest1]

I hope a woman cuts off your cock and force-feeds it to you.

I can't believe you would post such misogynist crap.

[SonofRage]

For anyone not familar with that website, it's humor.

[Anti-Fascist]

Feminists desire to exterminate men.

[Moose]

Im always tentative to post my views about gender equalities, because of people like Che y Marijuana. you sure did a whole lot to counter the arguements there! good job!

im also somewhat hesitent because i was raised by two women, my father was never home. Ive always been taught to treat women with respect, and ecuality, and blah blah blah. But heres a question, when there is a rape case, and the women gives a "Stirring testimony" who do you think the jury will listen to? They almost immediatly would side with her i think.

Consider this, there is a bar, and in this bar, no assault laws apply. One man approaches another man, drunk, and calls his wife a whore. First man punches drunk man in face. No one cares. Such is society today "Oh well that guy was being a dick, no big deal, he can take it." Same thing happens, a man is approached this time by a drunk WOMAN. She says 'Your wifes a whore.' The man slaps the women (or hits her depending on how many drinks hes had or if hes an asshole). What would most people in the bar do? "Hey! What the fuck do you think you're doing?! Dont hit a lady! Shes just had too much to drink!"

Now im not saying i should be able to walk up to some girl i dont like and break her nose( or get my arm broken), but i think in society at least, there needs to be more equality. the law dictates that if a women attacks a man she is held just as accountable as a man attacking a woman. This is right. Another thing that is right is that a woman should be payed exactly the same amound as a man if she does the exaxt same job and performs exactly as well.

Ok im babbling i need to find a point...

What im trying to say is that the law does need to find more equality for women. But at the same time, i dont believe its right or fair to wage such a war on men where we become the enemy, where we are suddenly the destroyer of worlds. There needs to be just as much equality in society. In the way both genders are treated.

and now...let the stoning begin.

oh and one more thing, if im treated the same as Loknar for posting my anti-feminist(kinda) views, why should not a woman be attacked so for posting feminist views? I never see that happening! but as soon as a man (or maybe a woman) says anything like "Oh yeah...well...what about guys? Sometimes their treated pretty badly" he(or she) gets torn apart!

Men arent the bad guys. Those against equality are.

[Moose]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2003, 09:14 AM
For anyone not familar with that website, it's humor.
yeah, that ^

[Guest1]

the problem isn't that you say you want equality for both, the problem is you think feminists are somehow against that.

it's just like the civil rights movement back in the 50's and 60's being characterized as wanting to oppress whites. If you said that about the black civil rights advocates, you would be called a racist and rightly so.

feminism is about equality, and has very little to do with whether or not you're allowed to punch someone. last I checked, it would be assault even if it was a man. feminism is about equal pay, sexual liberation, the right nto to be demeaned because you're a woman.

even if it is a joke, it's not funny. it's like posting a joke about blacks living on handouts, or robbing white people. it's unacceptable.

I'm perfectly willing to discuss discrimination against men, there is much of it in a different form than that against women, but that debate should be done in a certain way. this was not the way. the only nazis here are my fellow men who still push the image that any woman who doesn't willingly bend over and take it up the ass in life is a hairy lesbian.

that's a disgusting view of women, and no better than the views the KKK spread about black civil rights activists.

you should be ashamed of yourselves.

i proudly proclaim myself a feminist, because as long as this bullshit continues, we all need to be.

[RedFW]

Brilliant post, Che y Marijuana!

The only thing I would add is that so many people like to post what they think feminists want to achieve, such as 'Feminists desire to exterminate men' or they present scenarios, which may or may not be reflected in reality but most certainly are not the norm, inhabited by men treated unfairly because society's adherence to gender roles (the very thing feminists work against), but the blame is situated with feminism and women for this unfairness. But no one has actually posted anything by feminists and no one has questioned who is to blame for naturalizing gender roles.

As for the argument about juries believing a woman's word against a man's in the case of rape, most cases don't even make it to court because it is his word against hers. The cases that do make it to court usually have unequivocal evidence, and even then this isn't always enough to secure a conviction.


What im trying to say is that the law does need to find more equality for women. But at the same time, i dont believe its right or fair to wage such a war on men where we become the enemy, where we are suddenly the destroyer of worlds. There needs to be just as much equality in society. In the way both genders are treated.

So it is okay to work for equality but not point out the people who are benefiting most (consciously or not) from the inequality and often times working to maintain their privileges?


oh and one more thing, if im treated the same as Loknar for posting my anti-feminist(kinda) views, why should not a woman be attacked so for posting feminist views? I never see that happening! but as soon as a man (or maybe a woman) says anything like "Oh yeah...well...what about guys? Sometimes their treated pretty badly" he(or she) gets torn apart!

Perhaps I shouldn't be attacked for my views because I haven't compared men to fascists, I haven't posted material falsley representing the views of men as the material Loknar posted falsley represents the views of feminists, I haven't resorted to stereotypying any one group of people as the first post did when asserting feminists are easily spotted in a crowd as unbathed and man-like, both of which are entangled with homophobia and the fear of lesbian women (many are feminists). So, you and Loknar may be treated like shit around here because your posts are inflammatory and mine shouldn't be because I haven't resorted to lies and vitriol.

[redstar2000]

What would most people in the bar do? "Hey! What the fuck do you think you're doing?! Don't hit a lady! She's just had too much to drink!"

Actually, people might be nearly or actually just as indignant/outraged if it was a guy who got hit, provided the hitter was substantially larger than the guy that got hit.

Those of us with at least a veneer of civilization are repulsed by the spectacle of an obvious mis-match...it's not "a fair fight".

It's "wrong" for a man to hit a woman or a child "because" they can't defend themselves against your superior strength.

We like "David & Goliath" stories for the same reason. The male bully who attacks a smaller man or a women and who promptly gets his ass kicked is a delightful sight. It is "fitting justice". It "serves the bastard right".

As to Loknar's "humorous" post, I wonder if he thinks this is funny...

A novelty item that you can buy in San Francisco: it's a business card lookalike. On it is written:


You have just offended a woman. This card is permeated with a special poison that has already passed through your skin. In three days, your penis will rot and fall off. Have a nice day.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Loknar]

Ok guys, let me explain my position.

I am a bit indifferent to the feminist cause. I am ok with women fighting for equality ect. It is merely the feminist establishment that I have a problem with. Organization like NOW ect. However to the average individual feminist who isn’t a radical fascist I am ok with and I even agree with them. But it’s the type who would cut their man off if he didn’t listen to her or go along with her feminist agenda.

And moose raises a good point, if we’re all equal then a woman should be able to take a hit just as well as a man can. I hate to say this but there are many women, when they’re drunk, deserve to be slapped. However just because it’s deserved doesn’t mean I’d allow someone to do it as much as I think it should be done.

Then there is the issue of abortion. If a woman’s body is her own then shouldn’t she be responsible for what comes out of it dead or alive? In today’s society, the man will have to pay if she has the kid but he has no say if she aborts it and I think that’s unfair. Either the man has a say in whether it’s aborted or conceived or he is not responsible at all for what happens to the kid (that includes if the woman gives birth).

(the last paragraph was neither pro or anti abortion)

[Urban Rubble]

First off guys, that was taken from Maddox's site, which is all humor designed to piss you off. Also, I think he raised some valid points in the article.


the problem isn't that you say you want equality for both, the problem is you think feminists are somehow against that.

Real feminists want equality. However, there are many so called feminists who are comlpete morons and refuse to see facts. For instance, I was arguing with a woman the other day about why there is far more male construction workers on our job site. She thought that it was some vast conspiracy to keep women out of these jobs, I told her there was a much less sinister reason, that women simply aren't usually as strong as men, physically. This is nature, not a conspiracy. Men are naturally stronger, and because I can recognize nature, she called me a sexist.

The majority of feminists are not this way at all, the are realistic and just want equal rights, which is just fine.

[RedFW]

I am a bit indifferent to the feminist cause. I am ok with women fighting for equality ect. It is merely the feminist establishment that I have a problem with. Organization like NOW ect. However to the average individual feminist who isn’t a radical fascist I am ok with and I even agree with them. But it’s the type who would cut their man off if he didn’t listen to her or go along with her feminist agenda.

There isn't a 'feminist establishment'. NOW is one of many thousands of feminist organizations. It does draw attention to issues affecting women worldwide, but it is American based and the majority of its work reflects this. If you have a problem with NOW, what is it specifically? What do you mean by radical fascist? Which feminists are you referring to when you use it or what sort of ideologies would a person hold under this rubric?


And moose raises a good point, if we’re all equal then a woman should be able to take a hit just as well as a man can. I hate to say this but there are many women, when they’re drunk, deserve to be slapped. However just because it’s deserved doesn’t mean I’d allow someone to do it as much as I think it should be done.

What does this have to do with feminism? You say you wouldn't allow someone to do it (give the woman a slap), even if you feel they she did deserve it and it should be done. Why would you not allow it for a woman but don't seem to have a problem if it is a man? It seems you are the one setting up the very differences you are opposed to. And, for the record, women take just as many, if not more hits than men everyday, from men. In fact, a couple will have died by the time I have finished typing this from the hits they are taking from abusive partners. If we are all equal, these women shouldn't be hit, shouldn't die, something happening a hell of a lot more often and with greater consequences for everyone involved than an arrogant drunk woman calling a man's wife a whore.


Then there is the issue of abortion. If a woman’s body is her own then shouldn’t she be responsible for what comes out of it dead or alive? In today’s society, the man will have to pay if she has the kid but he has no say if she aborts it and I think that’s unfair. Either the man has a say in whether it’s aborted or conceived or he is not responsible at all for what happens to the kid (that includes if the woman gives birth).

There have already been numerous threads about this. Dig one up or start a new one. I am not getting into this in this thread.


First off guys, that was taken from Maddox's site, which is all humor designed to piss you off. Also, I think he raised some valid points in the article.

I wouldn't give a fuck if Redstar authored it. It is offensive to me. It certainly would not be tolerated and would not be dismissed as 'humour' if the sexist stereotypes it contains were substituted for racist stereotypes. Care to share which points you found valid? That would certainly be interesting.


Real feminists want equality.

Who are the real feminists, Urban Rubble? And the fake feminists?


However, there are many so called feminists who are comlpete morons and refuse to see facts. For instance, I was arguing with a woman the other day about why there is far more male construction workers on our job site. She thought that it was some vast conspiracy to keep women out of these jobs, I told her there was a much less sinister reason, that women simply aren't usually as strong as men, physically. This is nature, not a conspiracy. Men are naturally stronger, and because I can recognize nature, she called me a sexist.

Is it moronic? Women have been and still are kept out of jobs people believe they are 'naturally' unsuitable for. And the case for vast conspiracies to keep women out of jobs thought to be 'men's work' is well documented. Men, in general, may be physically stronger than women. But it does not follow automatically that women have less jobs on construction sites because of this. There are women construction workers. They are outnumbered, but they do exist, so 'nature' doesn't really explain it all. Perhaps some women would be more suitable than other women for constructions work? Perhaps even more physically capable than some men? But your assumption is that they would be less effective workers because they are women; women being less strong than men. It is this type of assumption that is perpetuates sexism and inequality.


The majority of feminists are not this way at all, the are realistic and just want equal rights, which is just fine.

All feminists want equal rights.

[Urban Rubble]

Is it moronic? Women have been and still are kept out of jobs people believe they are 'naturally' unsuitable for. And the case for vast conspiracies to keep women out of jobs thought to be 'men's work' is well documented. Men, in general, may be physically stronger than women. But it does not follow automatically that women have less jobs on construction sites because of this. There are women construction workers. They are outnumbered, but they do exist, so 'nature' doesn't really explain it all. Perhaps some women would be more suitable than other women for constructions work? Perhaps even more physically capable than some men? But your assumption is that they would be less effective workers because they are women; women being less strong than men. It is this type of assumption that is perpetuates sexism and inequality.


Is it moronic? Women have been and still are kept out of jobs people believe they are 'naturally' unsuitable for. And the case for vast conspiracies to keep women out of jobs thought to be 'men's work' is well documented. Men, in general, may be physically stronger than women. But it does not follow automatically that women have less jobs on construction sites because of this

Listen, on average, women are less physically strong than men, so, naturally, there is going to be less female construction workers than men. Of course there are women who are strong enough to do it, there are tons of them but to act as if the reason they don't work these jobs because of a male conspiracy is just insane. There are women whodo these jobs, but the majority of women can't or don't want to do this type of work.


There are women construction workers. They are outnumbered, but they do exist, so 'nature' doesn't really explain it all.

You're putting words in my mouth. I never said women can't do this work, I said a majority of them can't, which is true. Nature has everything to do with it, again, if there are less women who can do the job then naturally there will be less of them doing it. It has nothing to do with sexism.


Perhaps some women would be more suitable than other women for constructions work? Perhaps even more physically capable than some men?

There certainly is women who are more physically capable than men, but they are the vast minority. Again, I don't know why you're implying that I think all men are stronger than women.


But your assumption is that they would be less effective workers because they are women; women being less strong than men. It is this type of assumption that is perpetuates sexism and inequality

I work construction and there are some women who do it hoever, these women are stronger than the vast majority of women. The fact is, alot of women just can not physically handle alot of the labor. If the majority of them can not do the job, why does it suprise you that less of them do it ?

I did not say that they would be less effective because they are women. I said they would be a less effective worker if they could not physically handle the task, which many women cannot.

Call me a sexist if you wish, but I am simply being realistic. I hold no biases toward women. The fact that you are implying I am a misogynist without even knowing me is amazingly offensive.

[redstar2000]

For instance, I was arguing with a woman the other day about why there is far more male construction workers on our job site.

I suppose matters are, as always, different in different countries.

In the U.S., it was not until the 1970s that women were allowed to become apprentices in the skilled trades...plumbing, electrical work, carpentry, etc.

The skilled trades unions kept them out...as they also frequently did to men from ethnic minorities.

Was that "a vast conspiracy"?

Or just "nature at work"?

You decide.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[RedFW]

Listen, on average, women are less physically strong than men, so, naturally, there is going to be less female construction workers than men. Of course there are women who are strong enough to do it, there are tons of them but to act as if the reason they don't work these jobs because of a male conspiracy is just insane. There are women whodo these jobs, but the majority of women can't or don't want to do this type of work.

I don't believe one leads to the other, UR. Women have, as Redstar pointed out, been and still are kept out of these jobs. They are kept from them before they have even been allowed to demonstrate whether their individual physical strength is adaquate for the job. How do you know if the vast majority of women can't do or don't want to do that type of work if you are already dismissing 'the majority' of them from the work before they have even set foot on the site?


You're putting words in my mouth. I never said women can't do this work, I said a majority of them can't, which is true. Nature has everything to do with it, again, if there are less women who can do the job then naturally there will be less of them doing it. It has nothing to do with sexism.

No, I am not. I said nature doesn't explain the lack of women in construction as easily as you claim it does. If there are women who are physically capable of working in construction and women have been 'officially' kept out construction jobs until relatively recently and crucially the apprentice jobs in which they can develop their skills and strength, just as men do and the view that the majority of women just are not physically capable of working in construction without judging each woman individually by her own capabilities as men would be, it has a lot to do with sexism!


There certainly is women who are more physically capable than men, but they are the vast minority. Again, I don't know why you're implying that I think all men are stronger than women...I work construction and there are some women who do it hoever, these women are stronger than the vast majority of women. The fact is, alot of women just can not physically handle alot of the labor. If the majority of them can not do the job, why does it suprise you that less of them do it ?


I don't need to imply anything, and I don't have a problem with your assertion that in general men are stronger than women. I have already agreed with this. But when admitting that some women are stronger than other women and some women are stronger than some men what you are admitting is that strength varies from person to person and sex isn't always an indication of one's abilities. If most women have never set foot on a construction site, then how do you know what they are capable of? If you are already assuming the majority of women cannot do the job before they have even set foot on the site, what sort of chance are they going to have ever getting a job there, of ever developing the skills and strength to work there? If you put any man on the street on a site and compared him with one that has been there a few years, there would be a lot of difference in strength and skill. I agree women are generally not as strong as men, I do not agree it automatically follows that the majority of women cannot do or will never be able to do the job because of this.


I did not say that they would be less effective because they are women. I said they would be a less effective worker if they could not physically handle the task, which many women cannot.

I said the assumption was that they would be 'less effective workers' because they are women. You didn't originally offer an 'if' regarding physical tasks. And that isn't what the paragraph I quoted said.

You said:

For instance, I was arguing with a woman the other day about why there is far more male construction workers on our job site. She thought that it was some vast conspiracy to keep women out of these jobs, I told her there was a much less sinister reason, that women simply aren't usually as strong as men, physically. This is nature, not a conspiracy. Men are naturally stronger, and because I can recognize nature, she called me a sexist.

The underlying assumption is that women have been kept out of construction work because they are generally weaker , that they are generally weaker because of nature ie sex. The assumption is they would be less effective workers because they are women.


Call me a sexist if you wish, but I am simply being realistic. I hold no biases toward women. The fact that you are implying I am a misogynist without even knowing me is amazingly offensive.

Where did I say you were sexist? I said: 'It is this type of assumption that is perpetuates sexism and inequality.'

You obviously feel the construction trade vindicated in its exclusion of women from construction based on the generalisation that most women are weaker than men and so must follow they are less capable to do construction work. But as Redstar has pointed out, this isn't even half of the story. Women have been intentionally kept out of these jobs in the past.

I never implied you were a misogynist. Do you think challenging some of your views automatically means I am doing that? And, no, I don't know you; all I have to go on is what you have posted here. If I were to claim you were sexist or misogynist, I would point to your claim that the original article raised valid points. I did ask exactly which points you were referring to, and I would, working from memory, refer to a certain thread about abortion in which I felt some of your comments were misogynistic, and IIRC your past support of Hazard, who is a misogynist.

[Blackberry]

Listen, on average, women are less physically strong than men, so, naturally, there is going to be less female construction workers than men. Of course there are women who are strong enough to do it, there are tons of them but to act as if the reason they don't work these jobs because of a male conspiracy is just insane. There are women whodo these jobs, but the majority of women can't or don't want to do this type of work.

Like RedFW said, "[women] are kept from them before they have even been allowed to demonstrate whether their individual physical strength is adaquate for the job. How do you know if the vast majority of women can't do or don't want to do that type of work if you are already dismissing 'the majority' of them from the work before they have even set foot on the site?"

Plus, doctors have commented in terms of physical sport that even if women are weaker than their potential male competitors, this barrier can be overcome by training.