Our dear friend W.F. Price of The Spearhead celebrated Columbus Day yesterday with a post suggesting that “American girls” are too weak-minded to deserve college educations.
Price’s misogyny is nothing new, but what, you may wonder, is the connection to Columbus Day? Well, you see, Price ran across a column in the Daily Nebraskan by a female student named Shelby Fleig that was, well, rather critical of Mr. Columbus, pointing out, among other things, that he kidnapped and enslaved many of those he encountered in the Americas.
Fleig’s piece is a tad simplistic at times — at one point it says that when Columbus arrived in the Americas he encountered a “civilization close to 14,000 years old,” which is just plain wrong; there were people in the Americas around 14,000 years ago, but there were no civilizations anywhere on earth that far back. Still, the piece certainly reflects reality far more closely than anything you’ll find on The Spearhead on any given day.
To Price, though, the column is such an unpatriotic abomination that he considers it evidence that education is wasted on women. No, really.
Little Ms. Fleig certainly has it in for her forefathers, but is it really her fault? Probably not. She, like most other college girls, is simply parroting what’s been fed to her by her profs. Girls are good at that, which is why teachers like them so much — they’re easy.
If you’re the father of an American girl, is this really what you want your daughter to absorb over the course of four years? Does it add any value whatsoever to the family or to the nation?
I’m not sure what specifically Price is objecting to about Fleig’s account — aside from its mild profanity (the word “bullshit”) and its less-than-reverential tone towards an icon of American history. But he offers no rebuttal, perhaps because he really can’t. While Fleig may be a bit ahistorical in her judgment of Columbus, it’s a fact that he kidnapped and enslaved hundreds of natives and committed other atrocities. It’s a fact that he paved the way for conquest and genocide. History isn’t pretty.
But Price is only getting started, telling fathers of “American girls” that
Your money would be much better spent sending her to sewing or baking school. Let’s face it: Ms. Fleig isn’t going to discover the cure for cancer. Despite being an attractive young woman, she isn’t going to colonize Mars, either (at her size, she’d be too expensive to launch out of the Earth’s atmosphere).
Yep, he goes there. No manosphere screed is complete without a bit of gratuitous fat-shaming.
In all likelihood, the best she could hope for is a nonprofit or government job fully funded by her father’s and brother’s tax bills.
Because girls can’t handle real jobs. Because jobs at nonprofits or with the government aren’t real jobs. Because nonprofits are funded entirely by the government. And because only men pay taxes.
And yet she represents 60% of college students. What an enormous, unsustainable waste. It’s impolitic to point it out, but from a cost-benefit point of view, in most cases higher education is entirely wasted on women, and as in Ms. Fleig’s case is often counterproductive.
So that’s Price’s thoughtful and logical rebuttal to Fleig’s article: a post that addresses none of her arguments, posits the natural inferiority of women, and attacks her for her apparent weight.
Let’s see what the highly erudite Spearhead readers have to say about it in the comments.
Gender Foreigner suggests that women, born to obey, are simply obeying the wrong people:
Women don’t know how to think: they know how to obey. So, let’s tell them what to do. What they lack is MEN to obey instead of girls to obey. Barefoot, pregnant in the kitchen, obeying masculine will. As long as they do that they will feign civility.
Dire Badger, for his part, acknowledges that Columbus did a lot of terrible things, but argues that this doesn’t matter because reasons. He also uses profanity, though Price doesn’t step in to rebuke him for that.
[I]n the end, individual racial and cultural atrocities mean NOTHING the moment the last person that witnessed them dies…. but things like achievements in literature, art, science… the true immortality that keeps building as part of a cultural intellectual inheritance. The only meaning that such atrocities have is to teach us NOT TO DO THEM AGAIN. Anything else is beating the dead victim horse for no benefit whatsoever, and merely punishes the people that had NOTHING to do with the original atrocity.
In short, columbus opened up america for expansion. He sailed the ocean blue in a way that hadn’t been achieved for nearly 400 years since the vikings.
As for the rest? FUCK YOU. Get over it already, you pussy.
In a followup comment, he adds:
Columbus rediscovered America by a monumental navigational goofup… funny story… What he did afterwards doesn’t concern me except as an object lesson. I honor the accomplishment but have no reason to diminish it by sorrow over a bunch of people who would still be more than 400 years dead if Columbus had never existed.
Schlomo, meanwhile, is mad at Fleig for not blaming Columbus’ mom for the whole thing:
What irks me is that feminists constantly blame only men– and then mostly white men– for all evil in the world. They don’t look at women’s roles in raising boys to be exploiters; or in bedding “bad boys” (thus rewarding their brutality); or in serving as Nazi prison guards, etc.
White females helped run plantations in the Old South and ran them alone during the Civil War. Ergo, it’s a lie that gals are innately “better” than guys. After all, they became queens of men feminists now demonize… and sometimes were the evil-incarnate leaders of countries themselves.
Nowhere, of course, do feminists praise men for the creating the Magna Carta or washing machines or hi-fi systems. No kudos, either, for males who wiped out polio and provided potable water. Also, no credit for inventing penicillin or making cars safer. Always and everywhere feminists blame-blame-blame. You never hear them collectively apologize for THEIR shite, like their hysterical historical foresisters’ White Feather campaigns… or sleeping with the enemy.
Where is the condemnation of Sacagawea for helping Whitey conquer her “people”?
It’s like domestic violence: fembots never talk about the equal evil women do.
Wilson, meanwhile, decides that Fleig is the truly evil one, not Columbus, based on a bunch of TRUE FACTS about her he’s pulled from his own posterior:
Conquest through genocide is not actually immoral, since there is no “social contract” being violated, though the greed of it may be questionable. Fleig would support a genocide against whites, so she is in no position to judge anyway, and her motivations–spite, malice, nihilism, betrayal–are much more evil than Columbus’s straightforward and productive ambition
But Fleig does have one defender amongst the Spearhead regulars, a fella named Dragnet, who happily declares that “corn-fed” gals like her please his penis. No, really, that’s his argument.
Being from the Midwest myself, I find her buxom, corn-fed heft absolutely delightful. I have had more than a few liaisons with her similarly endowed Midwestern sisters–to this day my manhood rises in salute.
What I wouldn’t give for more women on the east coast to be built like Miss Fleig. There’s a well-built, fulsome hardiness to the women of the Midwest that you really don’t find out East. God bless them all.
Well, I’m glad these superior-brained, independent-minded men have put us all straight on these important historical issues.
I’m getting the sense that Yoyo here has never spent a whole lot of time in academia.
Why? What would human biology teach them? And how far does this rule extend, do biology professors have to start teaching creation myths?
You know that sometimes just because there’s two sides of an argument doesn’t mean they should be given equal weight, right? It’s downright irresponsible and a waste of time to teach some points of view.
Welcome to the Fox News School of Lazy, Sloppy Thinking.
I should make it clear that I don’t think biology is anti-feminist, it’s just pointless in that context and a weird thing to require people to learn about unless you think for some reason that biology ‘disproves’ feminism.
But yeah that ‘non- and anti-feminist views thing’ is really fucking stupid. They do this on the BBC, part of their mandate is to provide non-partisan, unbiased representation on news programmes and things like that, which obviously in theory is a good thing but in practice means they end up giving disproportionate legitimacy to people who shouldn’t be given any attention, like having a doctor and an anti-vaxxer on the same programme. And also, a massive waste of time and resources in a university course. “I know you wanted to learn about this, but we’re only going to teach you half of it so we can spend the other half focusing on people yelling that this woman should be raped and murdered and why they might be right! Pay attention, this will be on the exam!”
@Argenti
Well, there’s more to the story, with the Duke Lacrosse thing.
First off, DNA evidence exonerated the Lacrosse team. Early on. But the prosecutor hid that and charged ahead in a wildly reckless abuse of authority.
And the team was violating all sorts of rules and laws with impunity–underage drinking, having strippers on campus–so there was a whole feeling that, yeah, these guys thought they could get away with anything. So there was a pile-on.
But what gets left out is the little pieces. The other stripper there that night called 911 after they left the party because of the racially charged verbal abuse they were receiving from the players.
And the rape kit found evidence that might have been consistent with rape, but it wasn’t recent enough to have been the Lacrosse team that raped her. Samples of DNA from her underwear were of four different men.
Everything the prosecutor did was a straight-up frame job. The gang of 88 was recklessly wrong.
But if you look at those details for a minute and cross your eyes a little bit… there’s a whole other story right there that we aren’t really talking about, one that ends up a little later with the accuser stabbing her live-in boyfriend to death.
But let’s just talk about the Gang of 88, and how they were reckless character assassins.
Fox News? What? L
Look, I could be wrong, I’ll admit that. I’m open to the possibility, and I’m fact I would like to be proven wrong.
Well, for one thing, women(and men) are organic, biological creatures. Just as our culture and environment affects us, so does our biology. Biology and neuroscience are as valid aspects of gender as much as social construction is. Genes and hormones matter.
You’re right about academia. I’m actually in college still, I just take the courses. In fact I correspond with professors regularly and they are open minded reasonable people. They’re great! And they don’t say ‘fuck you’ to me.
Honestly I don’t get the hostility and accusations of being disingenuous. For telling me to fuck off. How are you different from WF Price?
Great, you don’t agree with my opinions and think I am wrong and naive. I accept that and acknowledge I have much to learn. How is it less lazy on your part to say fuck you to me, and call me a Fox News watcher? If you actually read back you’d see that I’m a moderate, and in fact I’m more sympathetic to the left and right. I have no patience for some of the idiocy on the right. Call me out for the flaws in what i say but quit attacking my character. This may be a snark site but doing what you do on people sympathetic to you isn’t helpful. In fact in actually tilting a bit over the fence onto the side of feminism but if this is what I’d get maybe I should climb back.
And yes, I do genuinely feel compassion for these people like Price. Not because of his views but because these dudes are so freaking miserable. I figured if snark and debate dosent get through maybe I can try compassion and empathy to reason with them, even if I know it’s futile :/
Hey thenatfantastic, thanks for your thoughtful reply. I believe biology is neutral on feminism. Feminism is a moral doctrine that demands equality under the law: difference in biology shouldn’t change that. And keep inked that these manosphereans are deliberately twisting the cherry picking the hard science aspects of gender (biology, neuroscience, physical anthropology) to suit their twisted agenda.
I think I understand your point of the fairness in theory is not necessarily good in real life. I’ve changed my mind a bit. Thanks. I’m glad 20/20 is airing them though. I believe that reactionaries should be brought to attention and not ignored, since ignoring them will not make them go away. Better to let people know they exist.
Howard, you’re right that the 88 were in the wrong. The point of bringing them up wasn’t to harp of them for character assassination but to show how some academics will put ideology before facts. How can you say I harp on them, when during all my posts, they’re hardly the main thing I’ve talked about.
If you read the book ‘until proven innocent’ it should answer most of the questions you have.
And let’s not get too off topic, lol. The duke case isn’t the point, again.
Thing is, we really don’t need conditional allies. You’re in for a long hard road, child, if you think everyone should consider what you say and kiss your ass for saying it.*
I’m not getting paid to be nice and entertain your bullshit, they are. Think about that.
You really aren’t as smart as you think you are. If you took that as me calling you a FN watcher, you need to brush up on your reading skills.
*the vast majority of our young posters are great. This one? Not so much.
Serious question, why would you say the above? Because that’s either an attempt to passive-aggressively shame Cassandra into not mocking you, which is clearly not going to work because a) it’s a mockery site and b) Cassandra is pretty confident in their opinions and therefore not going to be swayed by a comment like that. Or it’s an attempt to tell us that you really don’t have that open a mind to it. Or both I suppose.
Seriously, if you really were open minded to the *ideas* of feminism, a person wouldn’t change your mind on them, just maybe on that person and possibly the group they’re hanging out with. Attributing a trait of someone you don’t like to a whole group is the definition of bigotry. Feminism isn’t a monolith and pretty much every feminist I know disagrees with me on *something*. So assuming that you aren’t actually going to be swayed from feminist critique of social structures because a feminist did something you didn’t like, what’s the point of saying it?
Lots of people do it, and I never understand why…
If we’re not nice, Yoyo won’t support feminism! THE HORROR.
You’re right, humans are biological organisms.
So do history students have to study biology 101? Sociology? Anthropology? Literature? Politics? Law?
Your argument is flawed because you haven’t provided an adequate reason, or explained what you think it would achieve. Your second idea (appeal to the middle ground) is a massive logical fallacy. Sometimes there is no middle ground. If someone were teaching about Galileo and heliocentricity, should they also have to teach that people who think the earth is the centre of the universe ‘might have a point’? If there’s competing theories in a discipline, professors will already teach both/all those that might be valid. They don’t have to start lecturing on all the conspiracy theorists and ninnies too.
There we go, I’ve explained it to you patiently, without snark, and if it will shut you up I’ll even offer you a hug too. Now will you please stop moaning and clutching your god-damn pearls about people on a site devoted to mockery being mocking? WE GET IT. You think if you could only just give them a really AWESOME talking to, their icy exteriors would melt and their hearts would grow three times that day and all that. It warms the cockles, it really does. But not everyone is you, and you don’t get to waltz in and start spitting that we should change our group dynamic. No one is going to give you cookies for being a ‘moderate’, you don’t get an Awesome Human Being award for not being a frothing misogynist, but thanks for playing.
Wrote that before I saw Yoyo’s other reply, I’m not trying to further explain it after that, I think she gets it.
But appears to have mistaken me for a ‘nice person’. *sharpens teeth* *plaits underarm hair* *puts on dungarees*
Ok, let’s see if I can explain this…
Explaining things is tiring. Especially explaining the same topics to many different people about your own oppression. It can be quite draining and everyone expects that minorities will stop and discuss and educate ignorance or bigotry in order to reduce the bigotry but thing is, that’s incredibly unfair. If you have much to learn, don’t expect others to teach you, and especially not minorities about their own oppression. Chances are, they’ve explained it, over and over and over and over again, to many different people and gotten less than stellar reactions to it. And they’re tired of having to explain why something you’ve said it hurtful, harmful, or bigoted; tired of having to spend time educating someone on a topic that the someone just used to reinforce their oppression. Seriously, it’s so unfair to ask someone to explain why you’re being bigoted or ignorant when you’ve said something that just reinforced their feeling of being a minority and reinforced their oppression. Because then you’re adding to it with the expectation that if they want you to not be bigoted or ignorant and treat them with equality and respect it’s their responsibility to fix it.
That’s why (especially on a mockery site) people would rather not have someone come in with the expectation that others should teach them. Hell, I love to educate when I’m not emotionally drained, and I frequently spend time attempting to do so, but that’s me taking my own time to deal with someone else reinforcing my oppression…
also, lol: https://medium.com/matt-bors/c5cc1d098b6c
Nothing but side-eye for someone who repeats over and over again that they’re “on your side!” as if they are a better judge of that than the person who is questioning them.
I also distrust anybody who talks about the feminine, beautiful feminists they know, like it matters. Feminism does not have to be pretty and non-threatening in order to be valid.
Feminism stands or falls on the simple proposition that women are people entitled to the same rights as men.
You have to research and analyse that for yourself and you say you are learning from what you are doing at the moment. I’m old enough to be your grandmother, I’ve been involved in feminism since the 70s, and I’m still learning.
Don’t rush to judgement – and don’t let your judgement be influenced by who you think is or isn’t nice or polite or welcoming or otherwise. Some nice and polite and welcoming people just want to sell you something. Some rather rude people, like me, just get a bit testy with people sometimes despite being generally a nice enough person most of the time.
Okay okay, I get it, there’s problems with my thinking. I know this, I know that there’s much to learn and I am still learning.
Okay, maybe I’m being naive. I already acknowledged that. I’m here because I want to engage with people. So sorry if my stuff comes off as pretentious and naive and flawed and such. It’s hard for me to realize it sometime. I have a really direct way of communicating so I guess I don’t know how I can come off.
And I say falling back over the fence for some dramatic effect, so maybe, and I realize it now, it was passive aggressive and defensive. I couldn’t understand why I was getting so much hostility so I got defensive. I’m sorry.
Who says I think I’m smart? If you knew me you’d know I’m a self doubting person in general.
And yes, I’ll just come out and say it. I guess I could identify as feminist. I’m just uncomfortable with labeling myself because labels bring a lot of baggage, so I guess I’m a passive feminist in that sense. And no, ‘mean people’ aren’t enough to change this. I’m egalitarian at heart and have been since I was a kid.
Look, I get the mocking of me ‘melting the ice layyyerrrsss.’ I know it looks naive and whatever, but I genuinely mean well. Yes its painfully naive and misguided. I said a lot of stuff to set you guys off and made many wrong assumptions. But honest to god, I promise you I mean no ill will. I have my flaws and a lot to learn, and i genuinely do want to!
Read more, type less.
A lot of the stuff I said I realize pissed you guys off. I did not realize it at the time, so now I understand. Look, many of you pointed out the problems onto thinking and I thank you for that. There’s many things I didn’t realize I was doing.
Warts and all, I promise everything’s genuine, even if flawed and mistaken in many areas. I really do mean well and I really am on your side. If it sounds defensive, well, I guess it is. It’s natural for people to feel defensive. I’ll admit that I’m a bit upset, and mixes of other emotions like embarrassment, reflection, and such.
Seriously? It took how many people telling you to get off their feet before you stopped stepping on them? Really?
My advice above your last comment still stands.
Advice taken.
It’s natural to get defensive. I felt ganged up on by some without understanding why, since at the time i thought i was being reasonable. I was wrong on a lot of things.
Um, no, no, I don’t think so.
@Yoyo,
Yeah, that was a really obscure case *eyeroll*
wut?
As for “identity studies” classes, have you ever taken one? On what basis are you judging their intellectual and academic rigor?
Depends on the course. If I’d taken US history in college, the European views on the (non)-humanity of our native peoples would have been relevant, but it didn’t come up at all in my anthro course on Native Americans because it wasn’t relevant there.
Again, I wonder what you’re basing your criticisms on, or your suggestions for that matter. You mentioned Christina Hoff Sommers before – I hope she’s not your primary source of info on this subject.
Why?
@Katz
Because if they just said they agreed with us on XYZ, we might assume they were feminists, and that would be terrible.
I said I was skeptical of Christina Hoff Sommers. I’m getting more and more by day, like I said. Same wit Daphne Patai, after reading her books.
I take lots of social science courses, have sat in on some 100 level ones. Usually I hang at the bookstore and look at the readings they use. I guess you’re right. It’s a hasty judgement, my bad. Like I said I’m trying to work away from right-wing stuff and I’m still in transition mode.
Because labels just bring baggage these days. Though I guess I’m a passive feminist.