Perplexing MRA Meme of the Day: “Saying She’s Not a Real Feminist is Like Playing Russian Roulette”

Errr… ummm… maybe it is aimed at pick-up artists? And is a warning to never try to pick up any feminist even if you think she isn’t really a feminist and therefore is safe to pick up? Because if she turns out to be a feminist after all and you do pick her up, she might do something terrible to you, like make you think.

The above requires the assumption that only women can be feminists. I think that one isn’t hard for most MRAs to manage.

Might want to call and let the local media know Roosh is in the area, if nothing else.

Yes, some local media might be interested. Some might not be.

Some media people read this blog, after all. 🙂

Off-topic: Time Magazine is wanking about Netflix offering parental leave. Money quote:

As a society, we’d do better to acknowledge the fact that women (and men, for that matter, though in a different way) change as a result of having children, and often do care less about work. And what’s wrong with that? Isn’t that why people have babies? To make life more meaningful? And, dare I say it, less focused on work?

Oops, getting your name wrong even more than usual there, sorry. I’ll have to teach the autocorrect to actually put your whole proper name in at some stage. Obviously, as a bloke and therefore inherently brilliant at STEM things that should be easy for me. I’ll put the fact that it isn’t down to sabotage by feminists or something.

jpageusmc: I looked at your blog and it’s a joke, right? Because if it is, it’s a very funny one. Particularly the Kierkegaard reference.

@ katz

Yeah, I really need to jump back into that, it was a super false start to be sure.

It’s nice writing on comments pages these days, at least.

Meanwhile in Algeria, a man is suing his wife for £13,000 because he saw her for the first time without makeup. His charge against her is “psychological suffering” and he claims she “deceived him” by always wearing makeup before they got married.

http://www.comeonengland.org/2015/08/06/groom-sues-wife-for-fraud-after-seeing-her-without/

When you’re a man in a country that thinks women are chattel, it’s not surprising if you turn into a whiny spoiled brat.

I THINK this is another attempt to accuse feminists of being racist?

I guess many questions will remain unanswered…

The tour of Europe was like a fire baptism for her in a way. Only after that did her local political career begin.

Within the country, she was like a sort of ambassador for Peron, she often handled the negotiations between workers and businessmen herself.

She was also in charge of the Eva Foundation, which provided for urgent matters of the poorest. Millions of sewing machines (an therefore, work for women) were delivered by the Foundation, and even more toys to children all over the country.

This made her some sort of living hotline to the President, and the result seems to show she did a good job.

But then again, I think we won’t find to people -nah, two peronists– who will agree to where the limit was.

I think I will always place my bets on Eva, but I may have my own bias on that 😉

—

Another dimension to this husband-wife binary is the Nestor-Cristina duet.

Unlike Evita, Cristina always had a career of her own, and she carried on by herself after Nestor’s death. [Insert one minute of silence here]

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1395/5125248514_31c47a9a43.jpg

Since Peronism is a movement, or even a community, more than an ideology, there is a certain feeling that it’s somehow redeeming of Peron that the movement he started was able to produce a more equal marriage-leadership 70 years later.

And of course, both followers and enemies have compared Cristina to Evita and Maria Estela, both to paint her in a good and in a bad light.

Argentine politics are weird.

Ah, Cristina.

Over here Argentina generally only conjures up two thoughts in the public consciousness.

The unpleasant incident in the South Atlantic and football (Ossie Ardiles = National Treasure; Maradonna = pantomime villain)

I know that’s a subject you find distressing so I won’t dwell on it; suffice it to say Cristina only really features in the media here when she makes a comment about the islands.

Shifting to more pleasant topics, are you familiar with a woman called Sandi Toksvig? She’s another National Treasure here in England (even though she’s from Denmark). She’s a really funny comedian and broadcaster but of more import she’s been heavily involved in setting up a new political party (which is why I think you might find her interesting).

It’s called (a bit unimaginatively I think, but then again it’s not my call) the Women’s Equality Party.

It sort of ties in with the earlier discussion about “radicalism”. The WEP is obviously a feminist party by any reasonable definition, but it seems very ‘harmless’ if that makes sense.

It’s a bit like Sandi herself. She’s a well out lesbian but of the very ‘non threatening’ sort. She doesn’t compromise her identity of her beliefs but for some reason she doesn’t scare ‘middle England’ (that’s a term we use for the small ‘c’ conservative mainstream over here).

I really think her party could do very well if it gets it’s act together. It seems able to present all the ideas of feminism as if they were the most obvious common sense truisms going. Now of course, they are that, but as we’ve chatted about before, for some reason progressive people often have difficulty in selling even the most self evident of messages.

I probably haven’t expressed myself very clearly there. I’m sure you’ll understand it and be able to articulate it much better than me on account of you (a) being a woman and (b) being somewhat brighter than me.

As a general thing, most political movements (that have any success) develop a large group of people who are focused on getting their group into the mainstream of society or, to put it another way, changing society enough so their group will be accepted in the mainstream. Such people are willing to accept a great deal of diversity in their group and to compromise a great deal, build consensus, form big tents, etc. In the fight for African-American civil rights, this was the group that Dr. King and his allies led.
There is also a much smaller group of people that have a more purist point of view, who are more interested in what the future SHOULD look like than in what can reasonably be attained at the moment. These are the radicals, who in the civil rights movement included leaders like Stokely Carmichael, Huey Newton, and Malcolm X.
IMO a movement needs both these groups, mainstreamers to pursue and consolidate whatever gains become possible, and radicals to keep looking into the future and keep the movement from losing its focus on the eventual ideal while most of the group are engaged in their day-to-day struggles to enter the mainstream. I think you can see both these groups.in the feminist movement, starting in the early days when the mainmstreamers were led by NOW and people like Betty Friedan while the radicals were led by people like Ti-Grace Atkinson.
It is difficult to avoid having some degree of hostility develop between the visionaries and the pragmatists, but a great deal that was radical feminism at the beginning is mainstream today, and much that is radical today will almost surely be mainstream a few decades from now.

Oh, oh, and there’s a creepy twist for the Eva – María Estela transition!

You may have heard of Lopez Rega also know as “el Brujo” (The Wizard). *

He was Maria Estela’s advisor and Minister of Social Welfare until he fell in disgrace for imposing unpopular policies.

He was also leader of the Triple A (Argentine Anti-communist Alliance), a para-state force which basically hunted down and kidnapped left wing Peronists a couple of years

He was a mystic and even wrote at least one book and one manifesto in occultism, the book being about astrological prophecies for the following decades. (I tracked it down but couldn’t afford it).

Apparently he used Evita’s embalmed body to try to transfer her soul into María Estela through the use of magic arts.

Whether this was with or without knowledge of Peron, I could not find out yet.

—

* The young journalist who gave him the nickname paid it with his life. He was one of the beloved heroes of our LGBT resistance.