Why We Don’t See Eye to Eye (Part III)–Feminist Blogger Labels Critics ‘Male Supremacists’
Background: From time to time I ponder why there is such a divide between the feminist movement and the men’s and fathers’ movement. I wish this divide didn’t exist, or at least that it were smaller. Yet sometimes I read things which make me believe that the divide will never be breached. One example is Why We Don’t See Eye to Eye (Part I), a recent one is Why We Don’t See Eye to Eye (Part II)–Feminist Bloggers on the Duke Case.
In the latter, I discussed the views of feminist blogger “Violet Socks” of the mid-level feminist blog www.reclusiveleftist.com concerning the Duke case. “Socks” believes that the Duke case means “The message is clear: You can terrorize some woman all you want, call her a nigger and threaten to shove a broomstick up her and knock her around and probably rape her, and…win…Any questions about why every single athletic team in this country now has carte blanche to rape and torture any woman they get their nasty goddamn hands on?”
Apparently some of my readers went over to www.reclusiveleftist.com to debate the Duke issue. Socks responds by labeling the referring site–mine, apparently–a “male supremacist site,” and writes a blog post called “Attention men’s ‘rights’ activists, white ‘rights’ activists, neo-Nazis, skinheads, Ku Klux Klan members, etc.” Socks writes:
“Fuck off. Go away. Do not post here. If you do, your comment will be deleted.
“The intertube is a big place and there are plenty of websites where you can indulge your fetid delusions about how the nigras/Jews/bitches have ruined the world and robbed you of your destiny. Not here.
“FUCK OFF.”
I’ve seen numerous feminist bloggers react to criticism from men’s activists in more or less this way, including Amanda Marcotte, Trish Wilson, and others. I can’t help but think that if these ladies were really so sure of their feminist views and the arguments which support them, they wouldn’t have such a meltdown when challenged.
“Violet Socks’” public email address is violetsocks@reclusiveleftist.com.
|
| More from Glenn Sacks
Stumble It!
July 8th, 2007 at 3:03 am
Nah Glenn,
I think these ladies (if that is the correct word) are very much like the KKK or white supremists they accuse MRA’s of.
In other words they, themselves much more resemble the KKK or white supremites groups than MRA’s.
That is they are like a bomb just looking for a place or an excuse to go off.
July 8th, 2007 at 6:16 am
can one imagine having her as a sister? mother? aunt? sister-in-law? say she is your wife’s sister. good lord!
July 8th, 2007 at 7:42 am
Violet said,
“The message is clear: You can terrorize some woman all you want, call her a nigger and threaten to shove a broomstick up her and knock her around and probably rape her, and…win…Any questions about why every single athletic team in this country now has carte blanche to rape and torture any woman they get their nasty goddamn hands on? Fuck off. Go away. Do not post here. If you do, your comment will be deleted.”
Methinks this “dignified” woman is an insult to the color violet. An insult to anyone else who bears the name Violet. An insult to even the most ardent feminist by her LIBERAL use of vulgar & foul-mouth language! It is my observation that she only appeals to the lowest of lows. After politely posting a rebuttal to the ten incidents she listed on her website claiming that men commonly murder their wives and get away with it, by detailing incidents of women who had also murdered their husbands on the exact same days she listed in her blog (Mary Winkler aside), the post was deleted! Another person civilly posted a rebuttal to her position on the Winkler case and that post was deleted as well. As a black man, I find it very amusing to be included with “white ‘rights’ activists, neo-Nazis, skinheads, Ku Klux Klan members, etc.”
July 8th, 2007 at 7:57 am
the new feminist klan rules by victim demagoguery..false rape/domestic abuse hysteria…
Thier power is above the law, as they have shown they can lynche any male at any time…
July 8th, 2007 at 8:12 am
Oh, don’t you see. We’re merely men and can in no way understand women’s intuition, (Tens of Thousands of years of not thinking), or the mult-dimensional thinking they developed once they did start thinking. Dogs learn by assocoation, and apparently these feminists react similarly: “Man hurt my feelings, all men must be bad.” /tongue-in -cheek
These feminist bloggers apparently have an ax to grind; same as men / fathers / children who have been hurt by women in their lives. People of both genders with this attitude are emotionally handicapped, forgetting or not caring that the other has feelings, needs and desires. In effect, they have mentally molded the opposite gender into unfeeling demons and do their best to persuade others to join in their misery. The major difference, IMHO, is that the gov’t has seen fit to deprive men of liberty, equality, and God given Rights, regardless of what you perceive God to be.
July 8th, 2007 at 8:58 am
Feminist sites like that don’t want debate. If you don’t agree with them then they label you a sexist, etc and delete your posts.
July 8th, 2007 at 11:12 am
As I said before, there are some people you can talk sense to and some you can’t. Those like Socks are the latter. We don’t need to waste our time with them. They are not going to change, listen to reason or acknowledge facts. We need to spend our time talking to people who are open to the truth.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
bolwriter#7…….well said.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
I really think that these hysterical feminists could really, reallly do with reading the SECRET!
If they only look for the negative and look at the negative, that is all they will see!
Was it Hoff Sommers or Patai? Who wrote that the students of the gendered war studies learnt how to stoke their anger.
Typically emotive statements would be made, as well as fear mongering and exaggerations. The exact same techniques that has been used by warriors to build up the battle lust, just before a battle.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:46 pm
These women are by their very acts dehumaninizing men,. It is necessary in order to justify being abusive towards men, to dehumaninize men.
By dehumaninizing men, it means that they can avoid introspection and project their own selfloathing onto men.
July 8th, 2007 at 2:39 pm
scottkirk 4,
I like the way you write, succintly. Feminist have also hijacked the courts like Klan and Civil Rights laws and Amendments (14th) has been taken over by rich daughters who want to sent their daugters to private schools is quise of Title IX.
Link to an article
http://www.diverseeducation.com:80/artman/publish/article_8146.shtml
July 9th, 2007 at 7:45 am
those that innitiate an absurd attack control the opposition by controlling the whole dialogue!!!
July 9th, 2007 at 8:40 am
A long while back, Glenn posted a link to a discussion thread about child custody and child support on the site “Alas, a Blog” run by “ampersand”
Me and one other reader of Glenn’s site were posting threads. The topics ranged very far afield of child custody/support. I centered most of my comments around the heaping mounds of stinking hypocrisy feminist theorists leave everywhere, from women in combat and many other things. Because nothing proves your full of sh*t when you say one thing and do something completely different.
In my last allowed post I mentioned the close ties that family courts (and media, and every other government/corporate entiry) have with feminists and how feminists usually get any law they cheer passed.
One of the responses (to my post) was (I picture her screeching): If feminists ran things, all the magazines would (forcibly I imagine) have feminist friendly articles, pharmacies would have to provide contraceptive pills, and yada yada yada.
I noticed that her description of a grand vision of a eutopian heaven was sounding a whole hell of a lot like a TOTALITARIAN STATE!
It became obvious to me why I was banned. Ampersand didn’t want me posting anything to the effect that these bitches are little dictators who (if given the power) will REMOVE FREE CHOICE of people to live their lives how they see fit. Can’t have the less hystrionic ‘converts’ start questioning what kind of storm-trooper empire they had joined with.
These bitches are scary people. And the government (and other entities) just keep shoveling these insane rabid quacks more and more power.
It’s no wonder they have such a hysterical lop-sided view of the duke rape case. They are used to women ending up as the “winner” of every rape/sexual harrassment/dv case (or for women to “get off” for murdering their husbands on spurious now-undisputed-due-to-death claims of abuse). The one time a cheating lying bitch doesn’t win her case they aim to raise such a sh*t-storm everyone will be afraid to let it happen again.
I think this is also why they hate Dubyah. Dubyah has stolen hugely from the liberal/feminist playbook:
Do whatever the hell you want in the face of overwhelming criticism/dissent: CHECK.
Invent names to discredit your critics with name-calling: CHECK. (liberal name-calling: Racist/mysigonist/bigot. Dubyah name-calling: unpatriotic, cut-and-runners).
Lastly, reward (and entrench) your supporters: CHECK.
Dubyah gave huge goverment subsidies to Evangelicals. Feminists acquire huge grant dollars for ’scholars’ who ‘prove’ high rates of DV, and high rates of rape et cetera. These feminists and liberals just don’t like what they see in the mirror.