About these ads

Life Before Feminism: A Map of the Open Country of a Woman’s Heart

An alert reader pointed me to this amazing “map” from the 1830s, posted on Ptak Science Books and originally found here. Described as “A Map of the Open Country of a Woman’s Heart,” it presents a less-than-flattering picture of the supposed shallowness, vanity and selfishness of the female of the species. Click on the pic above to see it full size.

It’s amazing how closely this resembles so many Manosphere “critiques” of evil modern women; the main difference is that it’s a bit more polite in its language. Also, no mention of stinky vaginas.

Manospherians love to talk about “taking the red pill,” as if their ideas are all new and cool and Matrixy. Actually, of course, their ideas are old as fuck. It’s more like they are taking a gulp of Dr. Flimflam’s Electro Magnetic Misogyny Fluid.

Below, another amazing picture also found on Ptak, which presents data on where women’s eyes linger when looking at men. (Again, click on it to see it full size.) I suspect this one would be a bit more confounding to the Manospherians of today, in that it doesn’t show women looking only at the dude’s wallet. The post on Ptak offers a more detailed explanation of what this picture is about.

 

About these ads

Posted on January 20, 2012, in $MONEY$, evil women, life before feminism, misogyny, pics, reactionary bullshit, vaginas. Bookmark the permalink. 664 Comments.

  1. At no time did I suggest that women be forced to join Houses of Entertainment”. At no time did I , despite your repeated assertions, indicate that I wanted women generally to “die of cancer in agony”, I wrote those words to give feminists a taste of their own medicine, and the outrage that resulted showed that I had succeeded. I wanted to show them how repulsive sadistic mutilation was, whether Lorena Bobbitt, Sharon Osborne, or anybody else. Mission accomplished, as far as I was concerned. In a subsequent post, I apologised for any misunderstanding that this may have inflicted upon the feelings of cancer sufferers or their families and that is that!

    Feminists support sadistic mutilation? o_O Specifically, feminists here support it? Is it possible that you didn’t give anybody a taste of any medicine because nobody here supports anything you think they do therefore your “attempt” to teach them a lesson ended up teaching nobody a lesson except make it look like you hate people and are a horrible person? o_O

    If you have proof that people here support cutting off penises, then can you show it? :)

  2. PS. Yes, I think there are good answers to Pecunium’s objections as to the workability of various anarchist/libertarian systems. That doesn’t mean your system has an answer to such objections, is workable, or that you have anything close to a good answer. But you know, the porcelain chicken, keep touching it in ways guaranteed to give it great delight.

  3. Well, Dracula, as Explore Nature tells us, riding a bicycle is an intrinsically masculine activity. Thus Meller is demonstrating his manliness by verbally scrambling for a way to excuse his horrifying statements about families “giving” their female members to fancy brothels.

  4. Meller: At least my suggestions, whether you “believe in them or not”, offer a strong likelihood for different scenarios.

    No, they don’t. Your suggestions, as you term them, are nothing more than declarations that getting rid of gov’t will solve everyone’s problems.

    Nothing more. That’s magical thinking. Without any actual mechanisms Deeply as I disagree with zhinxy on the practicability of her methods, she has some. All you have on offer is gold, the “Free Market” and telling people you don’t like to go away.

    That’s not any pretense to actual systems of living.

    My suggestions of “houses of entertainment” for sexually active women who found monogamy and marriage oppressive or boring was an attempt to give them opportunities to do what they were inclined to do naturally anyway. This would be enhanced considerably if one considered that their activities would be “legal” and hence not subject to corruption by “law-enforcement” or “prohibitionist” authorities and agencies.

    What “legal”? What, “law enforcement agencies”? This is Mellibertopia, there is no government. The problem isn’t the brothels, it’s the blithe way you said, “given over to” because they weren’t being, “moral”.

    I don’t think that offering women a chance to do, and to become expert in, an activity that they wanted to do anyhow, is coercive in any way

    No, except that the only two choices you are willing to give them is monogamous wife, or whore. Men, of course, can fuck around all they please.

    Pecunium, you can believe me or not in discussing the content of my posts! All I can say is if your disbelief leads you to doubt what I say, than you are discussing something altogether different, which I have nothing to do with, and have nothing to really say about. If, upon reading, for example, that you wrote a post describing your extremely unpleasant impressions of a “red wasp”, and I said that I don’t believe you and you elsewhere wrote that “mammary cacti were fascinating” and that therefore your aversion to red wasps was imaginary or untrue, i would be discussing an entirely different subject. Maybe you would be correct about that ‘entirely different subject”, maybe you would be wrong, but it would be entirely different!

    Ah… your problem isn’t that I don’t believe you, it’s that I am reading (and remembering) everything you’ve written (as you keep complaining), and when I compare the things you are specific about (e.g. killing women who don’t become happy slaves), and the things you are vague about (how you intend to have both unfettered personal liberty, and women who are never educated), I have to choose which is more important to you.

    As a reasonable person, I have to conclude the things you have details about, matter more to you than those which you don’t.

    At no time did I suggest that women be forced to join Houses of Entertainment”. At no time did I , despite your repeated assertions, indicate that I wanted women generally to “die of cancer in agony”

    To the former, yes you did. You said women who didn’t want to remain chaste; who weren’t willing to wait for a husband their husband approved of, would be, “given over to”. Not afforded the opportunity to pursue any career they liked, not that they could, should they choose, take up a life of geishadom. “Given over to.

    The latter charge is you mis-reading what I’ve said (perhaps conflating me with other posters). I’ve said you claimed to take joy in the death of women from cancer. You can claim it was some form of pointed commentary, but; given the rest of your rambling rants, and fantastic claims (that women in the sciences have kept us from anti-gravity, etc.), I am (as a reasonable person) allowed to judge the veracity of your claim. That you said it, doesn’t mean it’s true, since it’s quite possible for people to lie about their feelings, and you’ve made your feelings plain, repeatedly.

    What would prevent somebody from hiring a bunch of bullyboys from committing acts of extortion against other people? You (and the bullyboys) for starters, would be responsble for any and all damages caused by you–and them

    To whom? Who can compel us? If we refuse to accept your authority to dun us (pretty much implicit in our rejecting the social contract to the point that we are living, “off the economy”, rather than pursuing a job/farming/minor manufacture) what have you to keep us?

    . Property is sacrosanct, and I don’t think that getting any sort of a reputation among peaceful, decent, hard-working people of starting fights, arson, and thuggery would do you–or your hirelings–any good.

    Hirelings? Poor reputation? What care free companions for the opinion of dirt farmers and townsmen? Did the Huns care about the residents of Krakow? If cattle, gold and women are what we want, and we can take it, and leave, then it matters not to us what you think.

    And there will be townships which cater to us. The Port Royales of the world won’t care. The people you don’t let live near you, or whom you charge too much for the water you have may be more than willing to let us trade your gold for their goods. Money has no memory.

    Don’t forget, the people who would be retained to deal with you are called “conflict resolution/arbitration agencies, for want of something better. Even a hint of POSSIBLE thuggery, e.g. casual association with unruly types–one more reason why rules of access and occupancy would be very carefully upheld for EVERYBODY–would set off opportunity alarms from not only MY agency, but everybody else’s, that there is trouble afoot, and there are troublemakers skulking about. Long before any extortion, kidnapping, arson, or what have you could take place, you, Pecunium, couldn’t fart in the middle of Siberia without everyone knowing about it, and you, along with your companions would be politely–or not so politely–disinvited from the society.

    Dude… we would be living outside the society as it is. And you don’t have a uniform society, remember, just people who choose to live along those lines of demarcation which fall naturally to mankind. How many bullets will your army be willing to take? How much of your production are you giving them? How are you keeping tabs on those who live outside your town?

    What will your kryptomeria cost you? How will your spies avoid standing out, as they skulk about the wilds of Siberia? How will they get inside the councils of the thugs? How will they get the word out?

    Add to this, nothing travels faster than bad news, and gossip is no exception. You, and your bullyboys were expelled from Mellertopia, under VERY suspicious circumstances. No other place will have you, not to sell you food or water, not to rent you (or your companions) rooms, not to provide you with medical care or firearms, and so on.

    Right, because everyone love Mellibertopia. No is unhappy about the way they hog water, or keep “undesirables” out of the neighborhood. Nope, None of the women who weren’t “proper” enough to be kept in town would be talking to the women in places which aren’t so draconian.

    An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure!

    And a third of an ounce of lead is worth a lot of power.

    You’ve not thought past the idea that Libertaria = Perfect Paradise, to look to the means of ,making your Libertopia work, and what means you have… are force.

    And you don’t understand force.

  5. “No is unhappy about the way they hog water”

    Well, maybe that water-lacking but trouserfull Trouser Town he mentioned… Course Mellibertopia isn’t that fond of trading with them now that it’s suspected they’re trying to cut down on the trouser surplus by selling them to women on the sly…

    PS, Meller, what about the women losing custody of their children if they drive a man to hit them thingy? No, not to be HORRIBLY CRUEL AND ETC, which you always bring up to claim you suddenly don’t condone abuse, but your theory that she hadn’t made the happy home and so deserved to lose them. Did we misunderstand you on that, too?

  6. Ah, typical Meller, the “Family” does not include children or abuse victims. Only the adult abuser and their wishes are the needs, wants, and interests of “the Family”. If men can’t beat and murder women (or, I suppose, in a social situation vastly different from the one Meller wants, female abusers could do it to male ones) and children, their rights are being denied!!! He pretty explicitly wants some people to be treated as property.

    It’s shit like this that makes the point about abolishing the Family as a social and legal institution (it’s sort of like the notion of abolishing marriage, some people’s relationships might look similar to one, but it wouldn’t be the mandatory or preferred framework or carry social and legal special status).

    Also, I don’t believe in property rights. And, I think it is damned hypocritical for colonizers and their descendents (or “heirs” if you want to exclude genetic products of forced intergration, such as the people who results from attempts to eliminate the native peoples of Australia) who live on stolen land and profit from its fruits, or those who live on and profit from a history of stolen labor (which is everyone in a capitalism, feudalism, or anyone in a country where slavery and stolen/exploited labor has given some people benefits, so…almost everywhere), to claim that they care so fucking much about property rights. If you cared about property rights as sacred, Meller, you’d be advocating giving the entire US back to the native americans from whom it was unjustly stolen. But, no, it’s “might makes right” only when you fucking benefit, but you expect everyone else to honor your “sovereign property rights”.

  7. I apologised for any misunderstanding that this may have inflicted upon the feelings of cancer sufferers or their families and that is that!

    Yeah, no. You’re gonna actually have to cite that, and it would have to be a bald statement. rather than your usual bullshit of ‘I’m sorry you got offended at the total truth and pwnage of my remarks. You should work on that, and come back and praise me.’

  8. David K. Meller

    Are the screeds of Mellerhate above merely evidence, or proof, of what happens when you give women, or feminists, too much access to “education”, or at least literacy?

  9. You’re repeating yourself, Meller. Are you all out of ideas, or just tired from a night of torrid passion with Irene?

  10. 1) Telling a bigot his ideas are racist and or sexist is not an example of a screed.

    2) Telling a bigot his ideas are racist and or sexist is not an example of hate.

    3) A racist sexist bigot has precisely no room to make snide remarks about anyone else’s literacy or education.

    4) A racist sexist bigot who ignores #3 with a gendered slam is entitled to all the mockery his audience can bring to bear.

    5) A racist sexist bigot who suggests instituting brothels, awarding custody to abusive husbands on the grounds the wife failed to make a happy home while declaring women not to be ‘real women’ if their political views differ from his and suggesting that doing away with racist policies such as sunset towns increased the crime rate is unlikely to ever grasp the difference between hate and contempt.

    tldr: we’re mocking you and you’re too stupid to know how stupid you are.

  11. “Are you all out of ideas,”

    Yep. Looks like.

    Come on Meller, this recent streak of “YEAH, WELL THESE WOMEN ARE MEANIES AND OVEREDUCATED JUST SCROLL UP AND SEE!” defeat messages instead of passionate defenses of your unassailable politics is unbecoming a mighty troll such as yourself. Sad, sad, sad.

    FREE EVAN!

  12. Meller: Screed? Not really. A screed would be ranting about how the horrors of X will lead to the inevitabilty of Y, without any support.

    Say describing how men will rise up, around the world, because women get educated.

    Then again, I’m confused, if education (that is a wide-ranging reading on a variety of subjects, coupled to excecises in critical thinking and analysis) is so bad… how can you teach libertarianism? After all you need to combat the “indocrination” of feminism, right?

    Or might it rather be you don’t have any arguments to buttress your postion, and have run out of effective repetition. Because what I did was to ask questions (and support my posistion on the answers to those questions).

    You’ve yet to answer any of them. I mean you told me that decent people wouldn’t want to have me around. You’ve explained that common decency would keep people who were unwanted from moving into the neighborhood.

    But you haven’t explained why a band of thugs, who don’t care about your society, would be willing to bend the knee and let you tell them what to do.

    So explain it to me, in simple words, that I might understand, and become enlightened.

  13. Need to Know: I am not mocking him (well, that’s only part of it). I am trying to see what it is he actually believes. He won’t tell us. He just blathers about, “The Free Market” and “Gold”, and, “Real Women”, and, “Arbitration Enforcement Agents” and “Sovereign Rights to Property” but seems to have no mechanism to bring it about.

    It’s almost as if it’s a religious belief, rather than a thought out system of practical application.

    It’s not that I can’t think of ways to counteract the sorts of depredation I described, it’s that he can’t.

    And until he can, his Libertopia, is doomed to fail, because there will be people like me, who can see the weaknesses, and will exploit them.

  14. how can you teach libertarianism? After all you need to combat the “indocrination” of feminism, right?

    I’ve tried to touch on this a few times, I asked him specifically about giving my daughter libertarian books to read. He first asked what her father thought about it, then declared that it would be better than the crap she gets at school, but probably wouldn’t have any real effect, because women are inherently statists and collectivists, etc.

    So again we skirt his idea that it’s IMPORTANT to the cause of freedom to lock women up, because women are not only inferior, they ACTIVELY work against a free society. Snakes in the grass, and our “education” will only cause us to glom onto pretty poison we will use against the proper order. (And considering that our slavery seems to be a free society in mellertalk, he might have a point).

    Will he come out and say it? TO ASK THE QUESTION, yada yada yada.

  15. I am happy to admit that I’m just mocking him. It’s so much fun watching him get all pissy about it! Especially when he eventually just gives up and retreats into “see what happens when you educate women? it makes them be mean to me!”.

  16. “So explain it to me, in simple words, that I might understand, and become enlightened.”

    Precisely, Meller. You claim “excellent libertarianism” (Is there a sticker for that?), you claim that you have predictions for the future you’d put up against anyone.

    So you have a chance to be the prophet. You’ll be vindicated, won’t you?

  17. My favorite Mellerism so far is “real men and the women who love us”. Which women would those be? Because so far the only female-identified person we’ve encountered who doesn’t despise him is Irene.

    BTW – free Evan!

  18. zhinxy: I won’t deny that there is mockery in what I am doing, but the core… the fundamental questions about how he intends the authoritarian paradise of Mellibertopia (note the possessive, that it may distinguished from all other Libertopiae) to be managed.

    How the non-education of women, and the houses of entertainment, and the enforcing of “proximity exclusion zones” and the apprehension of malefactors against property, and the selection of arbiters in dispute, etc. will be established and maintained.

    Because I, for one, won’t live in his town. I, for one, won’t allow his private judges to exercise authority over me. I don’t accept their right to tell me what to do, because the rules under which they live; and on which they will base decisions, are unjust, immoral and antithetical to liberty.

  19. “zhinxy: I won’t deny that there is mockery in what I am doing, but the core… the fundamental questions about how he intends the authoritarian paradise of Mellibertopia (note the possessive, that it may distinguished from all other Libertopiae) to be managed.

    How the non-education of women, and the houses of entertainment, and the enforcing of “proximity exclusion zones” and the apprehension of malefactors against property, and the selection of arbiters in dispute, etc. will be established and maintained.”

    Yes, I agree. There’s mockery involved, but I want to establish what it is he’s talking about, as far as his bizarrely unsustainable (AS FAR AS YOU’VE ESTABLISHED, MELLER, CORRECT ME IF I’M WRONG, THAT’S THE POINT) dystopia is concerned, and as far as his day to day opinions right now. Slippery eel of confusion and hate, he is.

  20. We are on the same page. For related reasons.

    But sadly, our prophet is likely to deny us. I think he is jealous of our ability to see the rough with the smooth, which the lack of prevents him from cuddling The Hedgehog of Happiness.

  21. “The Hedgehog of Happiness.”

    Aww! *ow* Awwwwwwwwww! *OW* AWWWWW!

  22. Zhinxy, on the last page: Okay, I misphrased what I meant extremely badly. What I meant was something along the lines of “There are not that many Native Americans left, mostly because the white people killed them all, and America is really really big. So we’re going to have 0.8% of the US population stay in the US, and a whole lot of people crowded into Ireland.”

  23. Is the above a classic example of women’s hypergamous ‘what is mine is mine, and what is yours is ours”?

    All that I have indicated is that people in a given community (for want of a better term) would be united on some basis (pretty tautological here, don’t you think, since a community without “community” would be simply a random bunch of strangers) and mentioned some of the more likely and practical ways that it could
    a)prevent trouble from happening to its people or their property
    b) deal with the trouible, and the troublemakers, as efficiently and expeditiously as possible

    The scenario(s) offered by Pecunium are absolutely correct–FOR STATE-BASED GOVERNMENTS OR PROTO-GOVERNMENTS! They have nothing to do with my non-governmental provision of the services for the people as outlined above in previous posts!

    It is an almost universal mistake that people who are unfamiliar with market alternatives to government provisions of services make. People take the criticism of govenment provision for a service (postal service, law enforcement service, property insurance and recovery service(s), adjudication service (the most important function of our so-called “courts”), and defence service (police–against parasites internal to the community–and army–against parasites external to the community) and so on. as attacks upon the service itself. The two are very different.

    Government maintains a LEGITIMATE authority (through force and fraud) over a particular geographic area. It claims sovereignty, not for those whom it is supposedly responsible for service, but for ITSELF! If you don’t like the government provision of their “service” to you, you may
    1-go elsewhere, probably to face the even worse treatment from another government!
    2-argue your case to a government “court” of law and equity! (lotsa luck!)
    3-offer “competition” to this thoroughly defective and corrupt monopoly, form defence services, conflict resolution and arbitration services, raise and train a militia (provide for defence as outlined above), and, most important, make sure that your affairs are in order, and your wife and children are taken care of in the event of your premature demise, which said government will arrange VERY QUICKLY AND BRUTALLY!

    Obviously, The first step is to find ways to remove government sovereignty, returning it to the smallest possible political units (probably households and families, but it may even be individuals as per some libertarian theorists), remove the monopoly privileges of service advertising, provision, and authority from the State and its apparatus, Open the provision of services to competition and innovation.

    Widespread, if not universal recognition of the fact that taxation, as that magnificent libertarian of the last century, Frank Chodorov, observed, is theft, and nothing but theft. If 80% of a given population, instead of say 3% , understood this, appreciated its implications, and regarded the State as simply a gang of thieves writ large (shades of Lysander Spooner here), no government could raise the number of banditti and looters sufficient for its own payment, much less the rest of the wherewithal to dominate everybody else! Ditto for central banking, debt-based “currency”, and legal tender. Inflation is just one more form of tax, as well as covert wealth distribution from the middle classes to the banking/ landlord and the military elites! Expanding public awareness of this won’t cure government by itself, but it would be a BIG step in that direction. Starve a ‘rat today!

    ‘rat–short for bureaucrat, technocrat or, perhaps most descriptive, kleptocrat!

    I know, Pecunium, and zhinxi, that I have still left quite a few questions unanswered, that there are perhaps some unwarranted assumptions regarding both private communities and governments herein, but it is a better start to where we want to go than anywhere else that I have seen. This has NEVER been undertaken before (even the American revolution was much more a simple replacement of elites rather than any actual liberation, even on the provincial, much less a “national” level) and NOBODY really knows how to peacefully evolve from a primitive society of “bullyboys” to a mature, civilized, privately based society and economy, still less what the mature libertarianism would look like!

    If you think that you can do better, go ahead and try!

  24. Regarding my above reply, at this late date, I have no idea how feminism can contribute to the freeing up of society, still less how this profoundly statist and collectivist ideology can help libertarians debunk and repudiate the state. However, if you have some ideas, go to them. I stand by my observations that feminism, despite occasional (VERY occasional) libertarian influences and personalities), is a force for enforced equality, NOT for liberty in any form or for any person!

  25. The scenario(s) offered by Pecunium are absolutely correct–FOR STATE-BASED GOVERNMENTS OR PROTO-GOVERNMENTS! They have nothing to do with my non-governmental provision of the services for the people as outlined above in previous posts!

    And you keep saying, “The Market will provide”.

    WHich is the only answer you give.

    Care to explain the mechanism of that market?

    What’s interesting is the rare cases of a market solution (why are they so rare) to a lack (say the Pony Express) tend to disappear when a parallel service arrives from the gov’t (the Post Office use of the Transcontinental Railroad).

    But some things, like “vigilance” committees weren’t exactly equitable; and the question of to whom may one appeal a decision which seems unjust, remains unanswered.

    Again… what if someone refuses to accept your arbiter? Who can compel them?

    What if some community decides they wish to be “huns” and live the life of nomadic pillaging and burning?

    How long will your militia stand ready? Who will be pulling the long nights on watch? Who will tend their farms, follow their herds, keep their shops, factories, restaurants going while they are staring into the dark, or the blazing sun for the telltale of marauders on the horizon?

    Who will pay for (and who will build) the walls they stand on?

    Who will provide the weapons they bear? Who will train them to work together?

    Who (and how) will they pay them to share their expertise?

    All you have to say, when the day is done, is, “The Free Market will fix it”.

    That and, “women are too stupid to be let out alone”.

    Your problem is you don’t like women. You like children (when they behave as you think they should). You don’t like equality. You don’t. You pretend that the women, and the people of color aren’t really human; not the way you are, therefore any parity must be imposed (barring the rare mutant freak like George Washington Carver, or Frederick Douglas, or Aleksandr Pushkin, or Rosalyn Yallow, or Marie Curie, or Grace Hopper, or George Sands, or… well the list is almost endless, and that leaves out the nameless women of the past who figured out how to spin wool, or weave it, etc.).

    You don’t really people who diagree with you are human. It’s why your sense of “community” is so narrow-minded, mean-spirited, and small.

    You look at outward form, and pretend that shows inner worth. Real people, with desires, and dreams and talents and passion… terrify you, which is why places like Stormfront are comfortable… because all the people there have the same stunted sense of self, married to an aggrandising vision of how “The Man” keeps them down.

    You aren’t a libertarian, not at core; at core you are separatist, and that’s the real issue. You don’t want people to have liberty, you want the gov’t to stop forcing you to not be a bigotted, racist, abusive (of the rights of your fellow man), weasel.

    And I’m glad the gov’t is there to keep you, and those like you, from being able to set up shop, because they’d have lynchings, and beat “their women” and you would say the really ought not (there are better ways, don’t ya know), but you wouldn’t really hate it. You’d be glad, because that means you’d have, “herd immunity”, “your women” would know how “good” they have it to have you as the Lord and Master, because you are too generous, and good, to raise a hand to them.

    But they’d know you could, or just turn them out (or give them to a “House of Entertainment). That’s why you don’t want women to be equal… because if they could leave you, you are afraid they would.

  26. Still waiting for Meller to cite his apology to cancer victims and their families. One that has no weasel language. Should I just give up and assume that he is full of shit, as always?

  27. Meller, again, that’s just a weird soup of various libertarian talking points. You haven’t strung them together in a way that actually makes any kind of argument. I’m familiar with the ingredients in your soup. What I’m asking is whether you’ve given any actual thought to any of them. And no, just declaring that you are Excellent Libertarian!!!! Doesn’t cover that.

    For example, Pecunium’s objections

    Cannot be answered by THAT’S ONLY TRUE FOR A PROTOSTATE (why??) TAXES BAD FED BAD NOBODY KNOWS WHAT REVOLUTION LOOK LIKE FREE MARKET RARRRRGH!

    It’s hilarious when you do that, but you do understand what you’re doing, right? ;)

    You can’t just scream a libertarian talking point or five and declare you’ve won.

    Once again, as far as libertarianism goes, I’m in contact with people actually trying to advance it in the real world, as far as “trying something better” Why I should listen to you, guy who hangs out with dolls and screams about it while living a life that seems completely bubble-sealed from the rest of humanity, I’m still waiting for you to explain to me?

  28. Kathleen: You were actually expecting something approaching good manners and common decency?

    From the man who intruded where he knew he wasn’t wanted (when he says decent people won’t do that… because Free Markets, or something)?

    I’d say you should have given up before you started.

  29. zhinxy: It’s as if he thinks I am huge fan of The State, in the way he’s a fan of The Agora.

    It’s not as if I’ve not looked at this set of problems and come to conclusions. It’s not as if there aren’t reasonable ways to argue for the problems I’ve pointed out being solved.

    But he doesn’t do that. Nope, his answer is, “Mellibertopia could have worked if only it weren’t for you meddling feminists”.

    And then Scooby and the Gang go have snacks.

  30. I’d still very much like to hear how “Given into brothels* by their families.” suddenly became “Allowed the opportunity to work in brothels.” with no actual retraction of the original wording.

    *Sorry, Meller, but I’m not using your cute little euphemism. We’re talking about brothels here, so that’s what I’m calling them.

  31. Well, of course, if you disagree at any point with the perfect market solution, so perfect it needs no explanation at all, you’re one of the cheerleaders of centrally planned Femifacism.

    As for your dismissal! – I STAND BY WHAT I SAID, ONLY FIVE FEMINISTS OUT OF TWO MILLION COULD HANDLE DOCTORAL LEVEL MYSTERY INVESTIGATING AND SCOOBY SNACKING!

    NEXT CASE!

  32. Pecunium: He claimed that he apologized. I didn’t see it in the actual thread, but dimly recall seeing one later that was pretty much: ‘Sorry you’re too offended to recognize my awesome truthfulness.’

    I don’t expect anything but asshattery from him, but I would like him to acknowledge what he said and that he hasn’t yet apologized for it.

  33. But Kathleen, he told her you only said it to hurt people… so you can’t take it seriously, and if he hurt anyone, well that was his intent, it’s not like he believes it.

    That you, or anyone else got hurt, was just the collateral damage, and you/they should understand that to make omelletes some eggs have to be broken.

    If FEMINISTS, would just stop telling women they don’t have to be slaves then he wouldn’t have to engage in such hurtful things: hough of course it’s not abuse, it’s just a rhetorical corrective, he is against being abusive, or [heaven forbid] violent. It’s just that females who don’t want to be WOMEN, cause unpleasant, if justifiable, reactions in men.

    So you have only yourself to blame. If you were a GOOD WOMAN, you’d not be on a site like Manboobz; therefore, actually he doesn’t need to apologise at all, (because it’s not as if he hurt the feelings of real people, just feminists and renegades), and he was more than graceful in when he was kind enough to blame you for his hurting people’s feelings.

  34. And once again, Meller, I ask you, how would you even notice if feminism did become a larger part of the libertarian movement? Again, as far as I can tell, it’s just you and your dolls, some stuff off of conspiracist sites, and books published before the 90’s.

    See Also… (Well, I don’t suppose there’s any way you would have seen, since, again… It’s you and your dolls) the recent flap over Stephan Molyneux’s tiresome feminism=socialism with panties speech, and the very heartening passing around the libertarian blogosphere of:

    An Open Letter to Anti-Feminist “Libertarians” http://storeyinstitute.blogspot.com/2012/01/open-letter-to-anti-feminist.html

    fuller list of signatories here

    http://www.facebook.com/notes/association-of-libertarian-feminists/an-open-letter-to-stefan-molyneux-and-other-anti-feminists/10150546215122737

    And growing. How fuzzy and warm it makes my black little heart.

    yes yes, I know, you are Meller, you know all, you are excellent libertarian, etc, etc.

    for more –

    http://www.fdrliberated.com/?p=8558

    http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2012/02/the-new-student-libertarian-movement/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 8,522 other followers

%d bloggers like this: