Fox News Doctor Dude: The Hunger Games Will Make Teen Girls Violent, Unfeminine
Do NOT catch this fever. Symptoms include: Being a girl. Shooting people with arrows. Catching on fire.
Apparently there’s a movie in theaters now by the name of The Hunger Games – it’s sort of obscure, so you may not have heard of it. Despite the title, it does not have anything to do with food. No, apparently it has something to do with young people fighting to the death on TV, or something.
Over on the Fox News website, Dr. Keith Ablow – described as “a psychiatrist and member of the Fox News Medical A-Team” – is shocked to discover that this film contains:
1) Attractive young people
2) Violence
This deadly combination alarms Dr. Ablow, who warns:
The Hunger Games … adds to the toxic psychological forces it identifies, rather than reducing them. …
It is an entertainment product of complete fiction and great potency, given its intense level of fantasy and violence. As such, it only conveys young people closer to “expressing” in a virtual format their powerful and primitive instincts (potentially kindling their desire to truly express such instincts) while conveying them further from their daily realities and a little further still from their real selves.
And apparently the film fails utterly in inculcating hostility towards the Kardashian family.
Almost no one will emerge from a theater swearing off shows like the Keeping Up With the Kardashians, or Jersey Shore because they are produced by adults happy enough to make a buck off of stupefying teenagers.
As I am sure you are all aware, inculcating hostility towards the Kardashians is the aim of all great art, as Aristotle explained so many centuries ago:
A tragedy is the imitation of an action that is serious, and also, as having magnitude, complete in … with incidents arousing pity and terror, with which to accomplish its purgation of these emotions. Those Kardashian girls are such stuck up bitches — “ooh i got a big ass, everybody look at me!” And don’t even get me started on Snooki.
Hey, can I get a goddamn gyro here?
That quote is, of course, from Aristotle’s famous treatise “Ho-etics.”
In addition to not inculcating hatred towards the Kardashians, Dr. Ablow warns us, The Hunger Games will make its viewers
more likely to come out of theaters having shed some measure of the healthy psychological defenses (which are, luckily, partly reinforced by socialization) that keep them at a distance from their violent impulses. …
Other than entertaining millions and millions of teenagers and making millions and millions of dollars, the net result of The Hunger Games is likely to be:
1) Females will be further distanced from their traditional feminine characteristics that … suggested they were not being real “girls” if they were extremely physically violent.
2) Young teens and many pre-teens will be awakened to the fact that they are capable of extreme violence, given the right set of circumstances.
3) A few psychologically vulnerable teens—who would have come to no good anyhow—may be inspired to replicate the film’s violence.
So I’m guessing that’s a big “thumbs down” from Dr. Ablow.
Given that the mainstream media is but a tool in the hand of our gynocentric matriarchal overlordsladies, I’m not quite sure how this article slipped through. But we’re lucky it did.
Over on What Men Are Saying About Women, where I found big chunks of Ablow’s essay quoted without any explanation of where they were from, our good friend Christian J. explains that:
This movie is straight out of the slut-feminists’ arsenal of the “You Go Grrrllll” mantras. They have promoted violent women and will continue to do so (think Valerie Solanas). Slut-feminists justify this action under their delusional and blatantly false claim that women should be able to protect themselves as they are constantly attacked and physically abused on a daily basis, everywhere they go..
Where they get that from is ofcourse by generating their own falsified and doctored statistics which they have done for too long to remember.
If anyone suggests you go see The Hunger Games, they are probably a slut feminist. You should run far away from them in case they decide to punch you.
Go watch old episodes of The A-Team instead, a show which is totally not violent in any way.
Posted on March 28, 2012, in antifeminism, evil women, hypocrisy, I'm totally being sarcastic, irony alert, MGTOW, misogyny, MRA, reactionary bullshit, Uncategorized, violence. Bookmark the permalink. 359 Comments.
Nah, they will be too busy freaking out over Rep. Moore pointing out that violence against women is “American as apple pie.”
I think it’s good for females to be, “further distanced from their traditional feminine characteristics.” Those traditional feminine characteristics were the result of a male dominated society that expected women to be weak in order to feed the male ego. Ever wonder why we don’t faint regularly anymore?
Why is it that the same two-three names keep cropping up as feminism’s gods, yet only the MRM even mentions them? -_- If I didn’t know better, I’d say that they were trying to convince themselves that feminists believe in things that they actually don’t.
Also, are slut-feminists different from regular feminists? What other types of feminists are there?
@Ruby Probably because women aren’t lacing themselves into boned corsets and constricting their diaphragms anymore. Done of course for “beauty.” Had to have that teeny tiny waist.
I wonder if that’s part of what’s got them pissed off. Because we know they don’t care about those “few psychologically vulnerable teens—who would have come to no good anyhow”. I mean, who cares about them, amirite?
Tangentially, I always feel this “they’ll come to no good anyhow” schtick is kind of a self-fulfilling oft used thing of the conservative right.
“Why should we put more money into schools? Public education sucks anyhow.”
“We should get rid of Social Security. Seriously kids, you think Social Security will be there for you in 50 years?”
etc, bootstraps, etc
Antz is the MRM attack dog for sure.
Fourth happiest day of my life! Obamacare takes a knockout punch! Justices invoke equal protection arguments — the same ones that I pointed out to the boob brigade! Feminist discrimination and bigotry is coming to an end! Supreme court considers men human! VAWA is next! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA :)
Cry me a river, build a bridge, and get over it!
Antz, seriously, I post as you better than you post as you. Just leave it to me.
For example, your latest post says “HAHAHA FOR THE SUFFERING OF WOMEN AND THE POOR NO I’M NOT A BIGOT, YOU’RE ALL THE BIGOTS.”
See? Mine was way better and more accurate.
Lady Zombie, agreed, but I think many ladies back then faked fainting spells, probably because many men valued women who were fragile little flowers.
Ever watch old movies? I love them, but roll my eyes when I see women acting like children, being emotionally weak, and sometimes crying like a baby. So glad we have stronger female characters nowadays.
@lauralot
If Obamacare was gender-neutral, I would not have any problem with it. However, under Obamacare, health care is a right for women, and a privilege for men. Not cool. Flush it down, along with its maker.
Uh. Does planet Z [Ant] have some sort of pipeline to the SCOTUS that CNN doesn’t have? Also, why is he writing headlines in the comment section?
Zarat, I’m a Feminist and I’m hoping Obamacare gets struck down by the SCOTUS. I think it’s unconstitutional for the government to force us to buy a product. Obamacare would eventually cause insurance companies go belly-up causing the government to take over the health care industry. Then it will be Uncle Sam who says who gets what treatments. I’m not fine with that. Just my opinion.
“A few psychologically vulnerable teens — who would have come to no good anyhow — may be inspired to replicate the film’s violence.”
This passage in particular had me fighting back the urge to scream “Go fuck yourself a hundred times over Dr. Ablow!” out loud in my living room. I was a psychologically vulnerable teen, am now a slightly-less-but-still-somewhat psychologically vulnerable adult, and not only was/am I not doomed to some tumultuous, “no good” downfall, but I know the difference between fiction and reality enough to not even feel the slightest urge to go all “Natural Born Killers” on anyone’s ass. Or “Hunger Games”, or “Lord of the Flies” (unless of course in the unlikely event that I wound up in the exact situation as Piggy and Ralph and co.), or whatever kids these days are watching/reading.
Oh man, Antz, congratulations! All your hard work including totally doing stuff that influenced the Supreme Court in some way has really paid off. And now you can feel completely justified in viewing this as your big personal triumph over everyone who comments here, who generally have no affiliation with the health care statute, no affiliation with any one particular political party, and many of whom aren’t from the US. WTG, Antz. This is clearly something that you should feel really good about, and not just because you have nothing else to be proud of in any way.
Allow me to translate your latest post, Antz: I HATE WOMEN AND ALSO THE PRESIDENT SHOULD BE KILLED.
Yep, not at all a bigot.
Apparently the health-care overhaul is being challenged because of the mandate that all people need to have healthcare of some sort. source
According to AntZ, this means that its being challanged because the healthcare bill only covers women, but all the male politicians and lawyericians but challange it on something unrelated because of the vast feminist regime.
Oh, damn, I forgot to mention the part where he doesn’t understand healthcare at all.
Antz, dude, the Court hasnt’ decided the case yet. They wrapped up public arguments on the case. Now they will go and think about it and discuss it themselves. They’re expected to decide in June. Also, none of what they talked about had anything to do with the imaginary issues you raised.
I’m not quite sure you’re the constitutional expert you think you are.
I’m not sure he’s an expert on anything, actually.
lololol
Seriously, Antsy, where are you even getting your information?
Er, the decision hasn’t been announced yet. Also, the court is hearing two cases together, one which goes after the entire bill, and one that only attacks the individual mandates. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-health-care-hearings-conclude/2012/03/28/gIQALpFIhS_story.html
Considering the long standing virulent hatred of the US left for the individual mandates, I don’t see why a severing and striking of just the mandate would be considered a right wing victory at all.
Also, I’m seeing no reports of the equal protection clause being utilized in the judges questions.
Obamacare is being challenged because everyone needs to have “qualified” health care.
“Qualified” health care is defined by a series of explicitly feminist institutions, that will determine what is covered, and what is not. They are all to be run by “women’s experts”. What do you think that means? What do you think these fair, balanced, unbiased “women’s experts” are going to demand should be covered? When it becomes too expensive, what will they decide should NOT be covered? Equal protection, all the way:
Making me buy a product that only benefits you = feminist bigotry
Sort of like … family courts and criminal courts, after VAWA put “women’s experts” in charge of the Judical branch. That is next. Say “adieu” to your favorite little pet, because we will flush that down next.
Angwy? Cwy a wiver, bwild a bwidge, and get ower it :)
Terrific translation. I name you NewAntz. Or BetterAntz, as you wish.
At least not in the sense of your utterly bullshit sex discrimination shit.
Translation: I’M GOING TO DEFLECT THE FACT THAT I DIDN’T UNDERSTAND HOW THE COURT WORKED BY PUTTING RANDOM Ws IN A SENTENCE. ALSO, I HATE WOMEN AND I STILL DON’T UNDERSTAND HEALTHCARE OR VAWA.
Okay, wow, your last comment is so very wrong about so very much of the law and legal terms, I don’t even know where to start.
OOOOoooooh.
VAWA, cry me a wiver, I get it!
As for all that other stuff, it doesn’t make any sense on Planet Earth.
This may be why MRAs avoid all forms of activism that don’t involve harassing individual people or whining on the internet — because they have absolutely no idea how the government (or the world in general) actually works.
I think the day is near where MRAs advocate randomly shooting at people in the streets because it can hurt a woman or even a feminists. Or throw poison in the water main.
Now if only AntZ actually cited sources… Though I get the feeling that every single one would be something from avfm or the spearhead.
So an accountable government deciding who gets treatments = not okay but a for-profit company accountable only to its major shareholders making the exact same decision = hunky-dory?
Naughty boobz, you did not do your homework! Last time I came here to give you lessons, I gave you a reading assignment:
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3590/text
I have the feeling maybe boob-king read it, and is aware of the horror that this bill imposes on men, boys, and fathers.
1) The bill mandates that everyone buy “qualified” healthc are.
2) The bill creates a series of institutions to determine “qualification” requirements.
3) The bill puts all of these institons under the oversight of feminist gestapo (“women’s experts”).
.. three months later ..
4) Feminist “health care” insitutions determine that female birth control, tubal ligation, cancer prevention, breast health, smoking cessation, and STD treatment MUST be provided (with no provision sfor male BC, vasectomy, cancer prevention, prostate health, smoking cessation, or STD treatment).
.. a few years later ..
562754) Boys are denied life-saving medication, to free up funds for “women’s emotional health by proxy”, meaning care and well-being of animal companions (paid for with public money).
See?
Translated Antz: I HAVE NO READING COMPREHENSION AND I AM A CONDESCENDING ASS.
Antz I’m canadian. So I really don’t have a dog in this fight. What I don’t get is what kinda liberty is involved in suffering from a chronic but manageble condition or dying when medicine could have saved you. What’s liberating about getting saddled with medical debt when your child is born but you can’t afford insurance?
What do americans have against the poor being healthy and better able to contribute to society and qa businesses bottom line?
Lauralot: I love your translations of AntZian. Spot on.
@cloudiah
No this is more like AntZ:
As opposed to your insurance company, who hires people for the exact and specific purpose of barring you from your treatments if there is any justification whatsoever.
Two “naughty”s in one comment thread? Am I missing something? Is Antz trying for sexy schoolmarm or ironic sexy schoolmarm?
I think Antsy must write Congressional fanfiction for prisonplanet.com.
Also, that is not a citation for your assertions about equal protection being invoked and there being a “knockout blow” to Obama’sAnEvilMuslimAndAlsoFeministLizardmanCare.
Is Antsy maybe a crummy chat bot? I think I have seen more coherent and sensible patterns of conversation from actual computers.
Seriously Antz is like a cartoon villain.
>>>What do americans have against the poor being healthy and better able to contribute to society and qa businesses bottom line?
How do I know I’m *WINNING AT LIFE* if I can’t lord it over the losers? Seriously now, if everybody had three meals a day and decent healthcare, then I couldn’t enjoy MY three meals a day and decent healthcare. That burger is only super delicious if it happens to have been taken directly out of the hands of a starving African child.
/sarcasm
Seeing as the you’re already required to buy car insurance, I’m not sure what the big deal is. My feminist-slut socialist ass would love to see a single payer option.
AntZ, you are so dumb. Really really dumb. Seriously, read something other than GMP and find out how shit works.
Antz, Esq. offers the following Amicus brief to the Supremes for their consideration:
And this is why the ACA will inevitably be struck down in June.
p.s. Lauralot, I also love your translations.
Because, as the old saying goes: Her dog is a man’s death knell
So in MRM fantasy land, striking down “Obamacare” (give me a fucking break) and the VAWA, which would benefit a lot of people, is a good thing since hopefully, HOPEFULLY, it will harm women. Never mind harming a lot of men. Fuck ‘em. AS LONG AS WOMEN GET HURT MOAR! RAWR! Amirite?
I was not under the impression that ObamaCare was actually going to deny people treatments, regardless of the puling from the “death panels” ostriches.
No, I thought the decision to deny folks treatments was still going to be held by the insurance company, and what ObamaCare does is say 1) everybody has to buy health insurance because one of the problems is young, healthy people opting out and so therefore the health insurance companies have to jack up prices on the old, healthy people to maintain their staggering profits; and 2) insurance companies cannot deny coverage to people for “pre-existing conditions” which basically means they can’t say “we think we can’t make enough profit off of you because of your condition, so fuck you,” because one of the other problems is unhealthy people are not profitable to insure, so instead ObamaCare says they can only say “we think we can’t make enough profit off of you because of your condition, so therefore we’re going to charge you for coverage which we will then try our damnedest to weasel out of actually providing, oh and fuck you.”
Admittedly, I haven’t read the whole thing.
@Maya Touché. Or this?
You know, all of these puppies are too cute to stand in for Antz. He’s more like a killer shrew, but less effective:
@Shadow:
I figured cats? You know, because we’re all sad cat ladies that no man could love?
I went back and added a terrible pun to the post.
First person to find it wins a pony*
—
* All ponies must be purchased and paid for by the winner, and not me.
Or maybe…
You can see Antz take down David (sorry, David) at 0:32.
Okay, let me ask you Antz, to try and get you into the most basic understanding of what is going on here let me ask you a few questions:
1) On what constitutional grounds does the federal government claim right to institute the health care bill?
2) On what constitutional grounds have the plaintiffs sued?
3) On what grounds have federal appeals courts ruled in favor of the bill?
4) On what grounds have federal appeals courts ruled against the bill?
5) Commerce Clause. Do you know what that is?
6) Seriously, do you know what that is?
7) How about the Taxation Clause, the General Welfare Clause, the Tenth Amendment?
8) Can you find a single court case against the healthcare bill that invokes the Equal Protection Clause
9) Do you know what it means for a court to “sever” parts of a statute or regulation?
10) Do you understand how lawsuits work?
11) Do you understand how the US federal courts work?
12) Do you understand how appeals in the federal courts work?
Here’s a link that explains, for those who already know a bit about US legal systems and Constitutional law. It won’t help you though, Antz, because you aren’t one of those people. http://www.healthaffairs.org/healthpolicybriefs/brief.php?brief_id=54
David how bout chickens. I’d really like some chickens.
Blackbloc, you made me spit out my drink, with laughter.
David: over-lords-ladies? I don’t remember if it was there before.
Ho-etics? If so, please fax me my pony.
Ho etics
Oh, it really was ho-etics. He oculdn’t give me the ponies I want, so no worries XD
(Twilight Sparkle, Rainbow Dash, or Rarity)
Aww crap! I really want an excuse to get some chickens..
Yep, it was ho-etics. Ponies for everyone!
I am really grateful we have free health care at the point of need in the uk and I don’t really understand the American fear of providing health care as a universal benefit. Still I am obviously a Marxist feminist for that belief alone. If these guys are threatened by “the hunger games” what the hell did they think of “kickass” or “Leon” ? Sorry once again on my phone – and too tired to think of a brilliant response but love what I have read so far!
But but David…I wanted chickens! Beloved thinks I’m a few nuts short of an oak tree, but I want chickens!
CHICKENS!!!!!!!!
For Rutee:
For pillowinhell:
Those videos didn’t embed because they are BIGOTS!
Are those two things related? Doesn’t everyone have chickens now? What’s weird about chickens?
I’m considering buying a small goat-related businesss. True story.
Awwww….baby chickens!!!!! Thanks!
I live in a city, and bylaw won’t allow chickens. I also live in an apartment building and they won’t allow chickens either.
Still waiting for Beloved to win the lottery so I can buy a small farm…='(
Oh gawd, Kickass was fantastic in so many ways. (Now all MRAs hate it XD)
Seriously though, it was pretty great. Especially loved how the dad is treated as a complete *jackass* for doing this to his daughter.
On the topic of the actual thread (ahem) may I nominate Maya’s linking of The Hunger Games to Beethoven’s Fidelio as a potential thread-winning comment? The music geek in me leapt for joy.
On the derail: wow, knocking back the Obamacare health care reforms is a win for MRAs when you have fifty million uninsured people in your country? That must be reality on planet Earth-212, I think, rather than the planet we inhabit. What a twit.
If Obamacare was gender-neutral, I would not have any problem with it. However, under Obamacare, health care is a right for women, and a privilege for men. Not cool. Flush it down, along with its maker.
That’s not true. It’s not even the massaging-the-truth or deliberately-misunderstanding-information type of lie that MRAs usually engage in. It’s just straight-up making crap up.
I mean, it’s not that I don’t enjoy your fanfic where you come up with a bunch of imaginary amendments to the bill hundreds of years in the future that will require health care for men to be revoked so women can buy more cats, but… you understand this is stuff you made up five minutes ago, right? You remember making it up? Surely?
Anyway, what will you do if your FOREIGN WIFE gets sick? What about those two sons of yours; don’t you appreciate that your insurer is now required to cover them?