>
 |
| Pre-internet bloggers in action. |
Just a note: For the rest of the week — through Sunday — I’ll be guest blogging on Feministe. My first post there is a slightly reworked version of my recent Scott Adams post here. (I also posted something introducing myself to the Feministe crowd.) I’ll post pointers here every time I post something there. Just so you know, comments there are a lot more heavily moderated than comments here.
I’m also going to be posting here too, of course, though my posts may be a little on the short side.
>Shame on you, David, posting a photo from the welfare-statist, commie-infested, anarcho-dandyist 1930s. It was the low point of manliness in this nation's history. Thank God for a world war which cleansed us of all that.
>Awesomesauce! Congrats! *goes to read*
>Are you sure you won't be getting a Flogging on Bemeniste?
>yah! It'll be good to see how some of them respond to the vitriol over here
>I used to like reading Feministe a lot until every comments section turned into a big derail about "ableism" because the writer used the word "lame" or "moron" or some other word that hasn't been used to refer to disability in a thousand (exaggeration) years.So I hope that doesn't happen to … oh wait. It already started.
>Anarcho-dandyist = <3
>what exactly is an anarcho dandyist?
>Feminists, would you be willing to skim this news article and answer whether this situation would exist without feminism? I certainly have been forced to read feminist texts* from elementary all the way through college, so a voluntary perusal of one brief article should not be too much to ask.I look forward to your courteous and insightful responses.* Such as excerpts from Andrea Dworkin's "Feminist Mystique" during Social Studies relaying a supposed conspiracy from corporate leaders to keep women unemployed and hence encourage them to embrace consumerism.
>Edit: News article should be opinion article. I am only human, and can acknowledge my flaws and limitations. This knowledge prevents me from stymieing the autonomy of others in the name of a dogma, but rather working to encourage liberty, free speech, and justice for all.
>Hi, e-string,If she's trying to keep the truth of her misconduct secret why would she appeal to the state Supreme Court? Without further evidence, I would say her behavior seems terrible–but abusing a system is what unscrupulous people of any persuasion do, it is not specific to feminism. And she she seems to have been tacitly reprimanded by the judge ordering a new trial. To the usual posters: I've been delightedly lurking here for a while and decided to come up with a rubric of typical MRA maneuvers. I found it so cathartic I thought I might go ahead and share. MRisogynist Rubric** In actual MRisogynist practice, these propositions are often used in conjunction with one another (whatever logical inconsistencies may arise from that conjunction)(1) Daddy government always sides with the wimmenz. And he is in the bedroom. And he is watching you.(2) Patriarchy is a myth; however, men are, have been historically, and will be (once feminism meets its inevitable demise) dominant. This is so because men and their needs being the center of the universe is nature, not patriarchy.(3) False rape accusations are a bigger problem than actual rape(4) When it comes to domestic violence, women are half the problem (this is because numbers trump the structural inequalities of patriarchy because patriarchy doesn’t exist)(5) Men are naturally dominant. Evolutionary psychology and my spearhead say so. (6) All women are feminists; if they say they are not, they are lying. (7) All feminists: (a) lie (b) are lesbian male-bashers, but (i) this does not preclude them wanting to be taken care of my alpha male sugar daddies(c) want men’s wallets and sperm(d) do not believe in economic independence or self-reliance for the wimmenz(e) are ugly, slutty, cat lovers(f) don’t want to give birth to children but they do want to (i) kill or abuse their children (ii) use them to emotionally blackmail men (g) are emotional: this includes being emotionally fragile; being incapable of emotional self-discipline or restraint; constant emotional manipulation of men; and pre-menstrual emotionalism (although all women are pretty much pre-menstrual all the time—a woman is pre-menstrual if she is angry with you)(h) think like Andrea Dworkin(i) will be replaced by sex bots(j) get tinglies in their lady parts from every Y-chromosome carrier who isn’t a “mangina.” You are a mangina if you are not, or do not agree with, he whose name is the mirror image of m.a.l.e. Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who’s the manliest one of all? Oh, yes, it’s me. Thank goodness my buddies (the people who swarm to assist me in debate even though—glory of nature than I am—I fight my own battles) and me are rank and file generals and not those other non-dominant people. Now that I’ve explained that to you: get out of my comment area—I want to be alone with my mirror.(k) are incapable of intelligent thought. This includes:(i) logic(ii) understanding someone else’s argument(iii) being able to read in full an article provided as evidence in support of an MRA position(iv) being able to provide evidence for one’s own position(v) the ability to grasp irony
>Well, without feminism, women wouldn't be allowed to testify in court. So I guess it's true that feminism is All To Blame for any time there is a miscarriage of justice that involves female persons in any way. Oddly, though, the false reporting rate for rape is no different than the rate for any other crime, so I really think the Ebil Femnazi Hordes need to pick up their game.
>The Feminist Mystique was, in fact, written by Betty Friedan, who is a very different person from Andrea Dworkin.
>@Aydan – yes, it seems I was mistaken. It was The Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan. The book seems to make a variety of incendiary claims without evidence to back it up. I could not even find a bibliography at the end, and very few citations. You can do a search through the etext here for the phrase "without any clothes on" and count the number of unverifiable claims.
>Oddly, though, the false reporting rate for rape is no different than the rate for any other crimeHow do you know that? The threshold of evidence is so low that these "miscarriages" keep happening. This means a lot of innocent men are inevitably imprisoned. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of simple deduction. The false rape accusation rate isn't just the men who are exonerated – some of those men go to jail.How do we deal with overzealous DAs like Mike Nifong who just want to put men away to further their pet cause? What kind of justice system allows a case like the Duke Lacrosse one to even get so far?
>"Feminists, would you be willing to skim this news article and answer whether this situation would exist without feminism?" I skimmed the "article." Let me ask a question, feel free to ignore it: You do know that for a long time -long before The Feminine Mystique and any burning bras- a Black man in the American South could be killed just for looking at a White woman, right? I mean, no police procedures, no courts of any kind and no evil feminist district attorneys were required. An accusation of rape from a White woman, or her husband, or brother, or father, or any White man at all could result in a gang of townspeople showing up at the man's residence in a mob. They would drag him from his home, hang him from a tree, set his body on fire and take pictures.So, to sum up, yes. This kind of situation could and did exist without feminism.Now, that said, if the Assistant DA Mary Kellett is truly this corrupt, or hopelessly compromised by bias or just completely evil, then the citizens of Maine need to organize and do something about it.
>Here is an appellate decision regarding the case String cited He was granted a new trial and the decision was affirmed and they said that there was sufficient evidence for the directed verdict to be denied.For those wishing to see an unbiased view of the matter anyway.
>"The book seems to make a variety of incendiary claims without evidence to back it up."The Feminine Mystique? Really? I thought that the thesis of The Feminine Mystique was the widely accepted, yawn inducing, completely un-incendiary idea that housework sucks. Well, live and learn. I guess.
>What in fuck is going on with comments? I've the shittiest time trying to get one fucking comment to post.
>@ briget: "what exactly is an anarcho dandyist??"Basically someone agitating for positive cultural change while being well-groomed, well-spoken, and wearing snazzy yet inexpensive clothing. The average urbanite in the 30s dressed as nicely as s/he could afford to as a point of self-worth. It was only with the Generation Gap that it became a weenie move to look one's best. Which approach is style over substance? You tell me.
>I'm just catching up here. A couple of things:1) There's a nice long comment by thefemalespectator that was caught by the spam filter but is up now, and worth scrolling up to read. 2) ginmar, no idea what's with comments not posting. None of yours were caught in the spam filter, FWIW.3) Anyone who thinks that The Feminine Mystique was written by Andrea Dworkin does not actually know enough about feminism to be worth debating on the subject. It would be a bit like debating US politics with someone who doesn't know who the vice president is.
>Miscarriages of justice happened before feminism, and they still happen today. I doubt, for example, that the Scottsboro Boys case had anything at all to do with feminism.
>How do we deal with overzealous DAs like Mike Nifong who just want to put men away to further their pet cause?By having him fired and disbarred? You know, like he was.What kind of justice system allows a case like the Duke Lacrosse one to even get so far? Where people are charged with a crime, and then the charges are subsequently dropped for lack of evidence? Off the top of my head, I'd say nearly any legal system worth the name. People get charged with a crime only to have the charges later dropped or reduced all the time. People get railroaded by overzealous prosecutors all the time as well. Usually, the latter happens to people of color, poor people, and other groups traditionally oppressed or discriminated against. I'm going to go out on a limb, here, and speculate that the reason the Duke LaCrosse case pisses you off so much is that it happened to people with whom you identify. Ask yourself honestly: if the Duke LaCrosse players had been black gang-bangers from South-Central, and the alleged victim had been a white coed from USC, would they have become the poster boys for the false rape movement that they are now? I tend to doubt it.I'm not calling MRAs racist, by the way; I'm just asserting my belief that MRAs' concern about false rape allegations has less to do with justice and more to do with fear that it could happen to them or people like them. When it happens to someone else, I can't really imagine them giving much of shit, since I haven't noticed that any of them are especially gifted in the empathy department.
>I'm sorry, but I'm loving string's contributions to the thread thus far:1. Claiming to have read a book called The Feminist Mystique by Andrea Dworkin.2. When it's pointed out that he got both the title and author wrong, hurriedly Googling for an online copy of the text so he can still pretend to have read it.3. Asserting, with no further explanation, that The Feminine Mystique is best understood by searching for the phrase "without any clothes on" (which occurs on page 335, for the interested).4. DUKE LACROSSE!!!Seriously, isn't the Duke Lacrosse case pretty strong evidence against the idea that it's easy to falsely convict someone of rape? It didn't even go to trial, much less get anyone convicted.
>But, shaenon, the Duke Lacrosse case is the Worst Miscarriage of Justice Ever. I mean, sure, they didn't get wrongly convicted and sent to prison for many years like Dreyfus or the Scotsboro Boys, but, dammit, these are privileged white guys here! We must ensure that such a travesty Never Happens Again–to people of that particular group at any rate.(Short version for String: yeah, it sucked for the Duke Lacrosse defendants, but get some fucking perspective for Chrissakes.)
>Also if my memory is correct their WAS alot of slut shamming and victim blaming in the MSM in the Duke case…..As well as with Kobe Bryant…