GUEST EDITORIAL by Kat Yarborough (archive links)

When I woke up one morning to discover that Kaley Cuoco (The Big Bang Theory) had been forced into an “apology tour” due to her comments about her own femininity, I was outraged. Filled with frustration as a woman who favors true equality, I proceeded to comment about the subject on the Internet myself and eventually it inspired me to write this article. Kaley was simply expressing that she feels empowered instead of subjugated by being a loving wife to her husband; she’s also chosen to find the happiness and the opportunity that comes with being a modern day women instead of creating nonexistent negatives to focus on.

It’s absolutely ridiculous that Kaley feels that she can’t even enjoy providing home cooked meals for her man and being a doting wife without being rejected by radical feminism that is now unfortunately considered mainstream thanks to the mainstream media. That’s obviously one big reason that she can’t bring herself to define herself by feminism as most people recognize it today. There is absolutely no reason that any woman should be ashamed about not identifying with the culture of radical Feminism created by the same types of SJWs opposing Gamergate. The exclusion of beautiful, talented, successful women that hold opposing viewpoints to these SJWs is a sad reality that can only hurt women’s causes, and discourage women from embracing whatever their femininity means to them.

https://twitter.com/Katyarborough/status/553234077424562176

In reality, Kaley Cuoco’s comments got so much hate because they illustrated the typical woman’s frustration with the way modern day feminism has been defined in the face of unparalleled opportunities and freedoms for women in Western society. I doubt that Kaley Cuoco doesn’t believe in equality for women and the ability for women to meet their full potential both culturally and professionally. She is herself a shining example of a woman that has used her full potential to become an independent success, and explicitly acknowledges that women before her paved the way for the liberation that woman enjoy in the first world today. She even uses her own example to show that women’s equality is possible if you only embrace it yourself. There are so many women like Kaley and I. We realize the power you can find as a woman, and the inclusion that you can find alongside men as long as you embrace yourself.

However, women like us are not identifying with the red fem cause. That’s because it’s been hijacked by hypocritical whiners who seek nothing but their own self-promotion and/or an outlet for their delusions. They’ve convinced themselves that they are powerless as women unless they seek professional and cultural superiority, and not simply equality. That is why they feel like they must publicly shame women into conforming to their ideals, or else face the wrath of the SJWs. How inclusive!

https://twitter.com/Katyarborough/status/553726389854437376

Kaley even feels the need to defend her decision to get breast implants in the article, something that has no place for criticism. Being able to get breast implants or any other cosmetic procedure is a personal freedom that anyone should be able to enjoy without their personal motives being constantly called into question. It should not be assumed that it is for any other reason other than personal confidence and feeling happier with yourself; these decisions should never define you as a human being or as a woman. I don’t see any of the SJWs who have had their hair dyed, piercings done, tattoos done, or complete sex changes done being criticized because it made them feel more comfortable in their skin the way that Kaley seemed to have been criticized for the confidence she gained from her breast implants. If something cosmetic like that helps you embrace your femininity, it should always be celebrated and not condemned. And why isn’t the feminist press saying anything about this stuff? We know they would be if it was one of their own.

We can apply that rationale to emotional decisions about femininity as well such as making the choices that Kaley has made in her personal home life, something that she bravely shared with the world. SJWs rationally should not get more public credibility as women because they choose to regurgitate their ill-conceived notions about the “patriarchy,” than a woman like Kaley, who has seized control of her life as a woman in a personally positive way. The point is that all of us are fortunately able to make these decisions as women, and none should be criticized for it because they don’t regard feminism (as defined by SJWs) to represent them.

Shaming women into downplaying what defines them as a woman because it doesn’t meet the politically-correct viewpoint in fact does absolutely nothing but set the cause of feminism back. It causes women such as myself to become angry that we are considered to be against our own sex because our personal choices and our opinions aren’t the same as those who choose to cash in on the cause more than aid in true progress. It causes society to react negatively in certain ways when it comes to the personal choices of women. It’s disgusting that these SJWs are the same women that claim that they their real goal is to encourage inclusion and diversity, and these claims are widely accepted by the mainstream media. It’s a transparent lesson in double-speak and hypocrisy. Yet these SJWs are allowed to keep infiltrating the conversation, and their tactics strategically discourage dissent of any kind.

Women of note, such as Kaley, who express opinions counter the radical feminist line, open themselves up to public condemnation because of the way they use disinformation to convince the media, and much of society at large. Women like Kaley are then defined as radicals instead of the SJWs (the true extremists). Kaley’s experience has only further inspired me to become a warrior of my own who seeks to be a voice against those SJWs who incite division but call it inclusion. GamerGate and others that oppose these radical Feminists must continue to be united, male and female, in order to be a true example of inclusion. We will show them what true freedom and equality is.

123 comments
  1. It’s a strange kind of freedom these radical feminists are pushing if it restricts what women are allowed to do without being harassed for not womaning in the right way.

    1. Many parents and grandparents fought to give women the freedom to be a housewife or a CEO.

      Now their children are fighting to take that freedom away.

          1. Woooh comrade, those words could potentially cause emotional distress. Good citizens dont disrupt glorious nation!

    2. They don’t want freedom, they want SJW power in every facet of society, even entertainment. They claim women are oppressed by the Patriarchy when they want to oppress women themselves by pressuring them to live up to their specific definition of an “empowered” female.

      1. Oh I know that they’re completely full of shit, I just find it funny that they constantly piss and moan about oppression while simultaneously hounding anyone who won’t submit to their histrionic nonsense.

    3. Sadly, I can’t argue with that. There are still plenty of decent feminists out there(including a couple I’ve come across on Twitter who happen to be pro-GG!)….it’s just that not enough of them have gotten some guts and actually come out and called out the radicals on their B.S.; and that’s a damn shame, IMHO.

      1. Yeah, from what I’ve seen there is a problem in that feminism, unlike most other movements, never seems to call out it’s shitslingers. Like when Atheism+ kicked off a lot of prominent voices in the atheist community stood up and essentially said ‘get a load of these assholes’ yet there doesn’t seem to be that same consensus of rational voices in the modern feminist movement doing the same, and I think that’s because too many people still immediately associate ‘not a feminist’ with ‘hates women’ so absolutely any criticism of particularly vocal members, no matter how clearly insane they are, is seen as an attack on all feminists/women.

        I think a bigger problem, though, is that a lot of people who identify as feminists don’t even realise half the shit that goes on under their banner. Hell, if you’d asked me a year ago I’d have said I consider myself a feminist because I believe in equality of opportunity for everyone and I thought that’s what feminism was all about; I didn’t have the first clue that some people had warped it into this twisted pity parade and cultural war, not just against men, but also against women who are able to succeed on their own merit and not by begging for handouts or making people feel sorry for them.

        Anyway, sorry for the long-winded response, I’ve just been thinking about this a lot, lately.

  2. Kaley was a true gem until she caved… No, she still is. I understand why she adjusted to the feminist cause, It would have been PR suicide not to sadly. It will be hard to watch her on TV knowing this, she was such a strong character.

    1. She still is, imo. I doubt she adjusted her views, probably just said what she felt she had to to get these psychos to leave her alone.

    2. I think she was probably tired of being harassed by many of the same women that would like to claim harassment themselves

    3. I don’t think she caved: the “apology tour” was named from a joke that she told on-air. In essence, she’s not taking these radicals seriously.

      Ironically, most of the normal radicals are keeping their mouths shut – probably don’t think it is good press to criticize the leading actress on the most popular show on TV. Those that did write about it are the idiot “true believers” who couldn’t help themselves even though it looks petty and spiteful.

      Seriously, radical feminism can be summed up in two things: Misandry (some of them probably dated real assholes at one point), and seething envy at successful women. (Hence why they want to push all successful women to say they are feminist, so they can co-opt their success).

    4. No, it wouldn’t have been PR suicide to decline to give in. Put it this way–she’s extremely wealthy, her job is secure, she has a great life. If we don’t expect her to stand up to feminist harassment, we can’t expect anyone to do so.

    5. She didn’t cave. She gave a standard non-apology and didn’t try to pretend she was a feminist either. ‘I apologize if anyone was offended’ is a polite way of saying ‘I’m not sorry and it’s not my problem if you got offended, it’s yours.’

  3. Pleasing millions of both men and women as an actress by following a script is somehow ok – but when she does something similar – and worse enjoys it – to please one man who has pledged marital fidelity, somehow it is a horror.

    SJWs are a misnomer in that they do not seek justice in any form, they simply seek to destroy the happiness of others. They are miserable themselves and get some warped pleasure by destroying the joy of others.

    It is not that they would be happy if their utopia came into being – they could go off and create it now. The problem is that it is a dystopia. A hell on earth. But they are in hell where ever they are because they have chosen the misery of hell over the joy of heaven.

    1. I firmly believe a Significant number of the sjw crowd are abused/damaged individuals who feel like they need to fight for everyone. The problem is the battles they pick are not theirs and they turn non issues into these giant bitch fest’s.

      The ones who aren’t in the aforementioned group are most likely very weak minded individuals.. Maybe a bit odd or social outcasts who were never abused or really mistreated but spent a lot of time being lonely and now long to be part of something so bad they give up any semblance of sanity to do so.

      1. Many of the SJWs could also simply be Narcissistic whiners whose egos are only suppressed by their own sense of entitlement.
        That’s the sad thing about this whole thing. It’s a waste of time and creates further division, not more inclusion and unity.
        I think alot of them were also jealous of the popular girls in school or beautiful, feminine women they’ve had to compete with during their lives and blame the male Patriarchy for not being “good enough” themselves in the past.

        1. “I think alot of them were also jealous of the popular girls in school or beautiful, feminine women they’ve had to compete with during their lives and blame the male Patriarchy for not being ‘good enough’ themselves in the past.”

          This is the truth man. I mean they complain about things like “having to shave” when really nobody is telling them they have to – they just don’t like the competition from women who wouldn’t set foot outdoors without shaving. They complain about “fat shaming” and “slut shaming” and then go to “slutwalks” and an attractive woman shows up in MORE clothing (attractive nighty) than their skimpy bikini which they are falling out of and they start slut shaming.

          These people are seriously insecure, and therefore project their own insecurities on all women, and blame all men for how they personally feel as a result.

        2. “Many of the SJWs could also simply be Narcissistic whiners whose egos are only suppressed by their own sense of entitlement. ”

          Some probably are…..just look at Mikki Kendall, she’s probably one of the worst examples. Or the horribly screwed up woman who runs the site known as “Gradient Lair”.

        1. It is sad. Its understandable how many of them became that way and why they are very very standoffish and passionate. It also explains why they take everything as a personal attack.

          What’s truly unfortunate is a lot of them never seek help, even if its just talking to someone. Instead the band together like a pack of wolves and unleash their internal anger at anyone who crosses their path.

          They aren’t all bad people and their overall goals might even be mostly noble but their methods, attitude and targets are generally misplaced. Instead of making allies they make enemies. Instead of starting off with a reasonable dialog they go full tilt attack.

          A perfect example is feminine representation in gaming or gays, trans etc etc. I dont think most gamers would take issue with those topics in gaming. Most gamers dont mind what gender or race or creed that the character the play as is, its not important. A good game and narrative can be established regardless of what the core basis of the main characters are. However instead of bringing up something they would like to see in a reasonable way they made an assumption. That assumption was we were all women, gay, trans hating white guys and they immediately starting attacking and calling us racist, bigots, sexists etc etc.

          It was a horrible way to open dialog especially one that can be as charged as this topic can potentially be.

  4. So let me get this straight…a successful women decided to do certain things in her private life then told the world she does these things by her own choice and enjoys the way her life is.

    Then rad fems decided they needed to shame her into running around saying she’s sorry?

    Wtf is that?! This women living her life how she wants is up to her. If she’s happy that’s it. End of story. Unless this guy is beating her into submission or verbally abusing her into making his dinner the only people who should be shamed are the idiots shaming her. How sad and pathetic. Why must they interject themselves into everyone’s lives?

    In my house my girlfriend and I both cook dinner. There is no set schedule there is no asking we just read each others mood or level of tiredness after a long days work and go to it. Should she be shamed if one week she makes dinner more times than me? She I be shamed when I do? Should I be shamed for keeping her company when she makes dinner but not actually helping her?

    I’ll tell you what’s shameful…she’s farther along in dragon age than I am and she’s not even a gamer =P

    1. Yep. They’re angry that Kaley decided to speak out against what they define as Feminism and had the audacity to suggest equality is already available to the vast majority of women in the first world! She also chooses not the label herself as a Feminist not because she doesn’t believe in female empowerment, she doesn’t identify with the SJW mentality that has come to unfortunately define the Feminist cause these days. I made dinner alot in the past and I never once felt bad for it, I felt proud of it like she obviously does. I don’t make Dinner as much now because I’m alot busier and that’s fine too. I’m sure Kaley’s husband doesn’t get mad when she’s unable to make dinner. No unnecessary complaints from either side. That’s true equality and understanding.

      Haha on Dragon Age

  5. There is no true feminism Kat – and I hate to break it to you but those feminists are the vast majority. Furthermore there is no arguing that feminism hasn’t consistently worked to give cis women vastly more power, without any of the responsibilities that go along with it, while pushing everyone that isn’t a white, cis, (upper) middle class woman down. This dates all the way back to the 1800s when feminists pushed for the Tender Years Doctrine as well as advocating against universal male suffrage and using racist language in order to do so (which was only given due to the civil war).

    I really don’t know where people get the idea feminism has ever been about equality. There is no time in history that it hasn’t advocated for cis women’s sole benefit at the expense of everyone else.

    1. True Feminism is not having to be defined by that term at all because there’s true equality and freedom of the sexes to define themselves without a gender standard socially.

      I agree that the vast majority of Feminist moments haven’t been about equality unless it was about specific issues at times, like voting, etc. It’s time for equality to be the focus as human beings without the need for sexes to be defined by factions on either side. There is no need for anyone to feel the need to be ashamed by how they define their masculinity or femininity if there is true freedom and equality.

      1. Hell, I don’t even think there is a problem with the word “feminism” except the types of people who seem to identify as “feminist” – If there weren’t so many radicals attracted to it, I wouldn’t oppose it at all.

        But most of these people want to tell all women that they should feel as broken and victimized as they do, otherwise they’ve “internalized misogyny” and are brainwashed.

      2. Not sure if I’m following you.

        There’s never going to be a time when there are no standards for gender. Certainly “teach men not to rape” (which is part of the only rape culture there is – minimizing the rape of men, boys, and also transwomen) isn’t about equality and freedom. The feminists that advocated for Prohibition (which as I recall was the majority) was about men “shirking their duty to women”. The feminists that handed out white feathers to men in the first and second world wars to shame men (back) into war was certainly not about equality and freedom. There is no way to keep the name from being associated to its actions.

        >There is no need for anyone to feel the need to be ashamed by how they
        define their masculinity or femininity if there is true freedom and
        equality.

        A laudable, if unobtainable, goal.I doubt very much most self-described feminists would agree with you. I can’t disagree that would be a great place for us as a society to be but given the abject hatred so many people have for those that don’t fit into cultural norms (which generally is more on those born as male) and upon transwomen in particular we have a long way to go.

  6. Hello Kay, and sadly, I have to agree…..I consider myself to be feminist/pro-feminist, but the attacks on Kaley Cuoco were simply not called for, period. She’s a successful & independent woman, isn’t she? You don’t have to be and/or call yourself a feminist to believe in equality!

    Sadly, from my recent experience, many radfem SJWs truly are about as, ideologically insane as their opposite numbers, the more extreme of the so-called “Men’s Rights” “activists”(especially steaming sacks of shit like Heartiste and Vox Day), and their MGTOW counterparts.

    I remember when I first became pro-feminist in those hopeful early days of the post-Bush era. It was thru the YouTube community, and the only noted radical I remember, one “Diana Boston”, was loudly ridiculed by pretty much everyone else…..but now I fear that they may have been driven away.

    1. Exactly. Kaley is a shining example of women’s equality. They are definitely ideologically insane to publicially shame women for not meeting their rigid standards and at the same time demand that entertainment culture itself should conform their specific vision. Shouldn’t women’s rights and representation be about actual freedom and not feeling the need to justify or define yourself by some stupid standard placed upon you?

      1. ” Shouldn’t women’s rights and representation be about actual freedom
        and not feeling the need to justify or define yourself by some stupid
        standard placed upon you?”

        This, just this. The radfems just don’t get it…..they can be as socially and/or ideologically authoritarian as most MRAs(at least in certain ways, if not more!) and yet, they pass themselves off as the ultimate guardians of women’s rights, just as MRAs claim to be the voices of men and boys who have fallen on hard times. But just as most MRAs will eagerly turn on any man who they see as a “mangina”, or a “beta”, etc., many radfems get worked up into a tizzy when another woman happens to disagree with one or more certain key tenets, in part or in whole, whether it be “male privilege”, or “rape culture”, etc.

        I’ve seen the extremists on both sides go nuts, and believe me, I’ve actually been attacked by radfems myself, so I know a little about what that’s like.

        1. There is nothing about MRAs that is “ideologically authoritarian”. You are talking out of your ass.

          Feminism has never been about anything other than increasing female privilege.

          1. No, I’m afraid it comes from lots of research and observation on my part. Now, granted, perhaps there are at least a few decent MRAs out there, but they are definitely on the fringes.

            “Feminism has never been about anything other than increasing female privilege.”

            You might want to do some reading up on your history, then. BTW, I don’t doubt that modern third wave feminism has it’s own problems with extremism; hell, I’ve had to deal with some nuts myself.

            But the truth is, however, unlike with the “Men’s Movement” & their ilk, the majority of feminist/pro-feminist people out there are still moderates, despite the appearances given out by the loudness of the fringe radicals.

          2. Research and observation that’s included intentionally misrepresenting manosphere bloggers with MRAs. Not credible.

            I venture to guess that it is you that needs to read up on your feminism. Kindly show me at any time it has worked to help men when they are disadvantaged. Consistently and since the 1800s they have not. Feminists used racist language to fight universal male suffrage- a fact. Feminists pushed for the Tender Years Doctrine in the 1800s as well. Feminists fought against anti-lynching legislation and partnered with the Klan in the 1920s, supported eugenics ad nauseum, and continue to fight against laws that would support join custody. Feminism has claimed that transwomen are usupers and fakers, that homosexual men are inherently misogynistic ad nauseum. I can go on damn near forever.

            You may wish it to be so but all feminists put ciswomen’s lives and interests above all others. That’s what feminism is. If you had a leg to stand on Christina Hoff-Sommers and Cathy Young would be mainstream instead of the only non-misandric feminists out there. Even they preference ciswomen and their issues.

          3. BTW, I do realize that first wave feminism also had it’s flaws, including, sadly, not paying enough attention to less scrupulous persons hijacking the movement for their own agendas(this was also an issue with the general progressive movement!). However, though, even despite that, feminists as a whole, were still, overall, more egalitarian than many of their fellow Americans.

            “Feminism has claimed that transwomen are usupers and fakers, that homosexual men are inherently misogynistic ad nauseum.”

            Some *radicals* do, yes. But not all, by any means. And, meanwhile, *many* MRAs believe equally, and even more, ugly things about women in general.

            “You may wish it to be so but all feminists put ciswomen’s lives and interests above all others.”

            No, not quite. On the other hand, the large majority of MRAs & fellow travelers DO believe that men’s interests are most important, and, in many cases, that ONLY men’s issues matter.

            And, btw, I do have respect for Christina Hoff-Sommers, but I honestly wish she’d drop her current sponsor.

          4. First wave feminists and all successive waves have been, at their core, not egalitarian. You make excuses for those that were the leading lights. These “good feminists” you claim exist – if they ever existed – were firmly outside the mainstream and continue to be. Feminists were never “more egalitarian”. Unions and labor as well as socialist movements were at their apex at the same time. That’s a stunning bit of revisionist history.

            Hardly radicals. You can look at the entirety of the women on the masthead of Ms. Magazine and to a woman they were all bigots. Nice attempt to move the goalposts.

            Exactly no one believes that in MRA circles. However, there is nothing left to achieve in feminism. Anything at this point is at best a supremacy movement and at worst a totalitarian movement based on retribution for a litany of imagined slights. What’s funny is that feminists have no legitimate issues left and yet continue to smear those who do. As if it weren’t bad enough you’re co-opting legitimate issues that we lgbt people face in order to prop up your hate movement.

            Again – Kindly show me at any time it has worked to help men when they are disadvantaged.Show me all the hard work feminism has done to support joint custody. There isn’t any. It is, at its most charitable, female self-interest writ large.

          5. “That’s a stunning bit of revisionist history.”

            Not at all…..quite the opposite, in fact.

            “Exactly no one believes that in MRA circles.”

            If you’re referring to bigotry(although you sure as hell were being quite vague here!), go look at the background of F. Roger Devlin, as mentioned earlier. Or, better yet, let’s go back to Vox Day, who wrote a column for World New Daily(the far-right wingnut publication).

            http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/wnd-columnist-floats-whites-only-secessionist-movement

            There
            can be little doubt that Cameron’s opinion of UKIP is but a pale shadow
            of the U.S. bifactional ruling party’s hatred and contempt for white
            Americans who still hold to traditional values, believe in their
            constitutional liberties and derive their sense of identity from
            historical America. They mock the secessionist petitioners in Texas and
            other states, celebrate the infestation of even the smallest American
            heartland towns by African, Asian and Aztec cultures, and engage in
            ruthless doublethink as they worship at the altar of a false and
            entirely nonexistent equality.

            And yet, they are afraid and they threaten every American who dares to
            think the unthinkable and speak the unspeakable. Why? Because they know
            time, history and socionomics are not on their side.

            Is the secession of several American states truly
            unthinkable? Is the breakup of the United States of America really
            outside the boundaries of historically reasonable possibility?

            They mock the secessionist petitioners in Texas and other states, celebrate the infestation
            of even the smallest American heartland towns by African, Asian and
            Aztec cultures, and engage in ruthless doublethink as they worship at
            the altar of a false and entirely nonexistent equality.

            This is especially true given that the English people and the Scottish
            people have far more in common than Americans do with the tens of
            millions of post-1965 immigrants from various non-European nations
            around the world, or their urban enablers. The fact that the future
            citizens of Aztlán are presently content to continue collecting tribute
            in the form of state and federal largesse does not mean that they will
            refrain from exerting the political muscle that their growing
            demographic weight provides them once the contracting economy brings the
            gravy train to an end.

            It also seems unlikely that the millions of Americans who have moved
            away from declining school systems, who have retreated from an
            increasingly vibrant communities, and who have fled from high-tax
            jurisdictions will continue to retreat as the people who destroyed their
            schools, their communities and their state budgets attempt to follow
            them.

            They will not because they cannot. The frontiers are closed. There is nowhere else to go.

            This is why it doesn’t matter if one considers the birth of an American
            Independence Party to be desirable or not; it is inevitable.”

            And that’s just one example. ONE example.

            “As if it weren’t bad enough you’re co-opting legitimate issues that we lgbt people face in order to prop up your hate movement.”

            Well, I’m sorry to say that you’ve been badly misled. I can bring up a few examples of MRA homophobia, too, if you’d be willing to listen.

          6. >Not at all…..quite the opposite, in fact.

            Which I see you’ve cited in great detail. Basically you have this bizarre view that feminism is good and anything opposed to it is bad.

            Neither of those people are MRAs which ends any discussion of either of them. Do you want to talk about Germaine Greer? Robin Morgan? Amanda Marcotte? Jessica Valenti? The entire movement has been rotten from day 1.

            Your entire middle section has nothing to do with anything we’ve talked about.

            I am not the one that’s badly misled. When you can show what feminism has done for actual equality you’ll have a point. Since all it has ever done is disadvantage others for the sake of cis het white (upper) middle class women you’re going to have a hard road ahead of you to prove it.

          7. “When you can show what feminism has done for actual equality you’ll have a point.”

            How about the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, for starters? I mean, that’s a pretty huge thing, gaining universal suffrage(whereas previously, only men had the national franchise).

          8. This helped men how exactly? Female self-interest != equality. Equality is when you work for everyone’s interests not just your own. What did they do next? Push for prohibition and hand out white feathers as well as fight anti-lynching legislation.

          9. I do think prohibition was a tragic error, yes. But, apart from a few useful idiots on the fringes, the large majority of feminists didn’t fight anti-lynching legislation…..some actually actively supported it!

            (P.S. to add on to this, however, one thing I forgot to mention is that not all anti-lynching efforts were necessarily in the legal field.)

          10. Then you’d have no trouble citing it. You have painted feminism throughout your discussion on this article as if it were a position as if it were a positive thing. With exceedingly rare exceptions it has not been. Nor would anyone blue collar ever consider it so given how openly hostile to both class conciousness and labor issues feminism is and continues to be.

            It is a net negative to anyone that isn’t a cis het white middle class and above woman.

          11. “Then you’d have no trouble citing it.” Unfortunately, reality shows us that this is not always the case. For example, it’s a historical fact that Southern Dixiecrats and some conservative Republicans, led by Sen. Robert Taft, collaborated in an attempt to stop further progressive reforms from passing into law after the 1938 elections, yet little has been written about it. And then there’s the matter of historical revisionism, etc., which I’ve discussed in prior posts.

            With that said, however, I did manage to find one citation: Frances Willard, a prominent late 19th Century feminist, directed the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union to pass it’s own anti-lynching resolution in 1893.

            http://are.as.wvu.edu/willard.html#_edn32

            So there you have it: there were indeed some feminists indeed aware of the truth regarding lynching, and not only that, but actively opposed it. Of course, you may wish to be pedantic and point out that the WCTU wasn’t a governmental organization: and that is true. But, regardless. this does still prove my overall point, even if not perfectly stated(which I must admit is true), that anti-lynching sentiment was certainly there.

          12. A tiny minority does not absolve feminism of the blood on its hands.

            And of course as a temperance union it too was obsessed with controlling the actions of others – men. This totalitarianist underpinning is what makes feminism what it is.

          13. “A tiny minority does not absolve feminism of the blood on its hands.”

            What blood? Also, hardly a tiny minority at all…..

            “And of course as a temperance union it too was obsessed with controlling the actions of others – men.”

            And there were, and still are, some men who are absolutely obsessed with controlling women–just look at most of today’s “pro-life” movement for a non-MRA example–but of course, I’m sure you’ll just dismiss that as a “misandrist fantasy”, or what the hell ever…..

            “This totalitarianist underpinning is what makes feminism what it is.”

            No, the feminist support of the temperance movement(which was fairly widespread at times, although still not universal) was only one part of the whole scheme of things(hardly an underpinning, either, as feminism as we know it dates back to the Seneca Falls Convention of 1848, whereas temperance only become a majorly popular idea circa 1890 or so).

            Your lack of understanding of what feminism is really about is quite unfortunate…..but perhaps not all that surprising: at this point, I’m afraid I can do nothing to get you to see the truth for what it is…..now, it’s all on you.

            But all I can say is, beware of the leaders and spokespersons of the Manosphere. They are *not* what they often claim that they are…..

          14. You: women have it worse and no matter what evil or perfidy feminism has done and continues in perpetuity is of no importance compared to the fact a single cis het white female is in the slightest bit discomfited.

            The pro-life movement is named that because abortion is ending a life. Whether it’s a potential life or not is of little importance. There are a huge number of women that are pro-life as well. It’s a question of faith. Frankly, since no one other than cis women have any reproductive rights whatsoever why should anyone else be concerned? Furthermore when it’s acceptable to abort is also a contentious argument. Again, many women lean conservative on this. It is a lie and sheer bigotry to lay this at the feet of men – or of anyone doing so for any reason other than faith. Since feminism itself is a faith I find it more than amusing to see this kind of dishonesty.

            Yes, and anyone paying attention to Seneca Falls should realize from the beginning it was never a movement for egalitarianism.

            It’s not my lack of understanding – it’s your whitewashing a harmful cause that if it lived up to its goal of equality should have ceased to exist at some point in the early 90s at the latest. Instead it continues to work avidly against the best interests of the poor, the non-white, the trans*, and men because it has never been interested in serving any of those people.

    2. Don’t be silly a woman isn’t truly independent until she does as she’s told by the high priestesses of feminism.

    3. Vox Day and Heartiste are not Men’s Rights Activists. They have never identified as such. Stop spreading lies.

      And there’s no need to put scare quotes around the term Men’s Rights. As long as men face legal discrimination theit cause is legitimate.

      1. No, Fatherless, I didn’t lie. Was I mistaken? Possibly, but from my experience not all MRAs are going to identify as such, anyway. And, ultimately, regardless of what they may or may not call themselves, they are still the polar opposite of the radfems so what I said is still accurate in the most important sense.

        “As long as men face legal discrimination theit cause is legitimate.” I’m sorry, but it is not. Never has been. I’ve done my own research on these folks over the past few years, and what I’ve found, time and time again, doesn’t speak terribly well of them.

        And, btw, this is coming from a guy who used to be somewhat sympathetic towards the seemingly more moderate faces of the “Men’s Movement”…..only to find that they are very much far and few in betwen.

        1. I said spreading lies. Maybe the lie didn’t originate with you, but you passed it along. Vox Day and Heartiste are not Men’s Rights’ Advocates.

          You were mistaken? Perhaps. But that means that you took your information from incorrect sources.

          That you try to pass off Vox Day and Heartiste as Men’s Rights Advocates speaks very poorly to your ability to conduct research.

          To anyone watching this exchange, all alternativesteve2 had to do was visit Vox Day and Heartiste’s websites and see if they called themselves Men’s Right’s Advocates. The term “Men’s Rights” doesn’t even appear on their home pages.

          This likely means that alternativesteve2 is reading lies about Mens Rights Advocates and believing them without checking sources. He’s not credible. He literally does not know what he’s talking about.

          Anyone who wants an introduction to Men’s Rights can check out Karen Straughan’s youtube channel or Janet Bloomfield’s website, youtube, or Thought Catalog pieces. Don’t listen to alternativesteve2. Go find out for yourself.

          1. “That you try to pass off Vox Day and Heartiste as Men’s Rights Advocates speaks very poorly to your ability to conduct research.”

            Offer me some *legitimate proof* that they’re actually not MRAs at all(and not just refusing the label; after all, some white supremacists, for example, prefer to call themselves “race realists”, but that doesn’t change what they really are.) and I’ll correct it. But, regardless, you have yet to disprove my *key point* of Vox Day and Heartiste as being on the polar opposite end of the spectrum as compared to radfems such as Dworkin, et al.; although somehow, I doubt you’ll be able to.

          2. Offer me some *legitimate proof* that they’re actually not MRAs at all(and not just refusing the label; after all, some white supremacists, for example, prefer to call themselves “race realists”, but that doesn’t change what they really are.)

            Offer me some *legitimate proof* that the president isn’t a sleeper agent for ISIS (and not just denying he is; after all, some Islamists,
            for example, prefer to call themselves “social activists”, but that
            doesn’t change what they really are.)

            If you want to make a claim, you’re going to have to back it up, not demand others debunk it.

          3. “Offer me some *legitimate proof* that the president isn’t a sleeper
            agent for ISIS (and not just denying he is; after all, some Islamists,
            for example, prefer to call themselves ” social activists”, but that
            doesn’t change what they really are.)”

            Wow, really? Mocking is all you got? Kinda pathetic, dude.

            If you want to make a claim, you’re going to have to back it up, not demand others debunk it.

            Although the burden of proof actually remains on your end as opposed to mine, I will go ahead and offer some proof of Vox Day’s extremism.

            Here’s some excerpts from a June 2012 post on his blog:

            http://voxday.blogspot.ca/2012/06/scientist-beats-up-pz.html

            “[E]ducating women is strongly correlated
            with reducing their disposition and ability to reproduce themselves.
            Educating them tends to make them evolutionary dead ends. … 40% of
            German women with college degrees are childless. Does PZ seriously wish
            to claim that not reproducing is intrinsically beneficial to women?”

            “3. Because female independence is strongly correlated with a whole host
            of social ills. Using the utilitarian metric favored by most atheists,
            a few acid-burned faces is a small price to pay for lasting marriages,
            stable families, legitimate children, low levels of debt, strong
            currencies, affordable housing, homogenous populations, low levels of
            crime, and demographic stability. If PZ has turned against
            utilitarianism or the concept of the collective welfare trumping the
            interests of the individual, I should be fascinated to hear it.”

            So, apparently, this guy seems to be okay with women being *permanently disfigured* by acid attacks…..my god. I don’t think even Heartiste ever went this far.

            And there’s other stuff, too; this is just *one* piece of evidence that proves my key point: he is on the extreme end of the anti-feminist side of the spectrum, whether he calls himself an MRA or not.

          4. You are embarrassing yourself now.

            What relevance does Vox Day have?

            Absolutely zero, unless you can prove he’s an MRA.

            And you’ve seemed to have recognized that you can’t with your “OK he’s not an MRA, but he’s very bad, thus proving MRAs are bad” backpedaling.

            If you’re going to claim that there’s no difference because they both dislike feminism, well then…

            The Humane Society opposes animal abuse, Hitler opposed animal abuse, thus, The Humane Society is Hitler.

            That’s not very good logic.

          5. What backpedaling? There was no backpedaling.

            But then again, I guess I shouldn’t have expected any better, given your white-knighting of fatherless here.

            I could honestly go back and pick out quite a few more pieces of info, if I had the time, or the patience. But, after this response, it seems clear already that no matter what evidence I present, you will continue to deny, deflect, etc.

            So I’m not wasting any more time with you. Farewell.

          6. But, after this response, it seems clear already that no matter what evidence I present, you will continue to deny, deflect, etc.

            The problem is you haven’t presented any evidence, merely declared yourself correct and demanded other people disprove your claims.

          7. I don’t accept the frame that it’s my responsibility to prove a negative. At the end of the day, I don’t care what you think. My job is to expose your misinformation and logical fallacies to third party observers.

            I’m happy for anybody who comes along to check out Karen Straughan and Janet Bloomfield, who do call themselves MRA’s, versus someone who does not.

          8. Well, I dunno: there were a couple of times some time ago in which I tried to have a discussion with Mrs. Straughan, aka GirlWritesWhat-I was eventually banned from commenting on her videos, despite having been relatively civil…..showing me that she doesn’t really tolerate opposing opinions all that much.

            “I don’t care what you think. My job is to expose your misinformation and logical fallacies to third party observers.”

            No skin off my nose, but unfortunately for you, you’re doing a pretty piss poor job of “exposing” anything, to be frank.

            At least I offered some actual evidence backing up my point about Vox Day being a hardcore extremist(regardless of whether or not he considers himself an MRA!).

          9. I am an ex feminist woman now turned semi-MRA exactly thanks to Karen (and based mom). I have been blind but have seen the light. Praise them!

          10. I used to feel guilty for being a man before Karen. Her video “feminism and the disposable male” set me out on a healthier path.

            I’m happy for people to be a little more sympathetic to a non-feminist approach to men’s issues, but I’m mostly concerned that the best arguments in the MHRM get a fair hearing. If they have the opportunity to be presented and are considered rationally, I’m happy with that, even if people don’t choose to accept the arguments.

          11. Well I know all about “gender guilt”, so you are not alone in that. I’m just glad you realized it doesn’t make any sense. We need more women like Karen, it is a shame that men are so automatically invalidated for their opinions that a lot of people wouldn’t listen solely because a man is saying them. That in itself shows a problem in how men are perceived and treated, but it also gives hope, it shows that we can work together as people to solve issues, not only as men and women, and not only selfishly deal with our own gender problems alone. If equality is something that we strive for we have to equally work for it, and we have to take the good with the bad. We have to recognize where a gender has or doesn’t have an upper hand and realize that even if we are privileged (god I hate that word) we can be “underprivileged” in other areas and that none of the two situations is right. I know that based on my gender I have privilege in certain aspects of society, and I am ready and willing to give it up, people like Karen showed that to me and I have been raised to never ever accept anything for free without hard work. Men and women need to be partners in both good and bad, and women need to denounce the rabid sjw victimhood addicts as loudly as they can. I have felt “gender discrimination” on my own skin, I can’t say I didn’t, but that doesn’t mean I am a sole victim or a victim at all , it doesn’t mean that the evil patriarchy is out to get me. I was a sjw, I didn’t know any better, and I was unhappy and insecure, and as much as Karen and based mom help men, they also helped me, their arguments forced me to take responsibility, to see a different perspective, to widen my thoughts and to feel empathy(which is only possible when you stop playing the victim who needs empathy), and this made me stronger and happier. Feminism is bad for women, like any other extreme movement is bad for it’s members. MRA, unlike feminism, is not extreme, it’s factual, and it doesn’t play on emotions, but it’s hard to get the message and arguments trough, because in reality, people loooove to be outraged, and love to blame their issues on others.

          12. MRA, unlike feminism, is not extreme, it’s factual, and it doesn’t play on emotions

            Oh, there will be some extremists, there always are in any group larger then, say, 50-100 people.

            The question is, how much power do the extremists have, relative to how much power the moderates have?

          13. The extremists are quite dominant(perhaps even virtually universal!) in the “Manosphere”, sad to say…..one would either have to be totally ignorant, or completely willfully blind, not to see that.

          14. one would either have to be totally ignorant, or completely willfully blind, not to see that.

            Then you shouldn’t have any problem naming them.

          15. I’ve already named Vox Day and Heartiste as two examples of extremists in the “Manosphere”, in case you weren’t paying any attention…..not to mention some actual statements from the former.

            Dalrock is another well-known Manosphere blogger who happens to be pretty extreme, too. Here’s one example:

            http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/11/18/we-are-trapped-on-slut-island-and-traditional-conservatives-are-our-gilligan/

            “Assume we are starting off with 100 sluts
            and 30 alphas/players. The sluts are happily riding on the alpha
            carousel. Now we introduce slut shaming. It isn’t fully effective of
            course, but it manages to convince 15 of the would be sluts not to be
            sluts after all. This means an additional 15 women are again
            potentially suitable for marriage. This directly translates into fewer
            fatherless children. This also makes the next round of slut shaming
            easier. Instead of having 99 peers eagerly cheering her on her ride,
            each slut now has 15 happily married women shaming her and only 84 other
            sluts encouraging her. After the next round this becomes 30 happily
            married women shaming the sluts, and only 69 other sluts cheering them
            on, and so on. This process continues until all but the most die hard
            sluts are off the carousel. You will never discourage them all, but you
            can do a world better than we are doing today.”

            “Start with the same base assumption of 100
            sluts and 30 players. Now apply shame to the players. Unfortunately
            shame is less effective on players than it is on sluts, so instead of
            discouraging 15% of them (4.5) in the first round, it only discourages
            three of them. No problem!, says the Gilligan [the social
            conservative], at least there are now three fewer sluts now that three
            of the evil alphas have been shamed away, and all without creating any
            unhappy sluts! But unfortunately it doesn’t work that way. The
            remaining 27 players are more than happy to service the extra sluts.
            They are quite maddeningly actually delighted with the new situation.
            Even worse, the next round of player shaming is even less effective than
            the first. This time only 2 players are discouraged, and one of the
            other 3 realizes that his player peers are picking up the slack anyway
            and reopens for business. This means in net there are still 26 players,
            more than enough to handle all of the sluts you can throw at them.”

            And, for another Manospherian example, although he doesn’t call himself an MRA, the “Pick Up Artist” by the name of Roosh V is a pretty messed up fellow himself:

            http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Manosphere#Roosh_V

          16. OK, I now understand the source of your confusion,

            MRAs, PUAs, and MGTOWs are all different things.

            The “Manosphere” is basically a myth, a strawman build by SJWs to delegitimize their opponents by tossing a bunch of shit that has little-to-nothing to do with each other besides dislike of current feminism together and pretending it’s the same thing.

            Now let’s put together a similar list for the “Femosphere”:

            1. Every feminist website from Feministing, to Jezabel, to Twisty Faster & Radical Wind’s blogs.
            2. Every women’s magazine from, Cosmo, to Bitch, to Good Housekeeping.
            3. Every “Anti-Rape Culture” organization from the National Organization for Women, to SlutWalk, to the KKK (remember what the most common cause of lynching was?).

            Now do you see how, let’s call it problematic, that is?

            Giving that you’re citing RationalWiki, I can’t blame you for being confused, but the reason no one is agreeing with you is that you’re doing the equivalent of claiming “raising taxes will result in mass famine and killing fields. Didn’t the Khmer Rouge teach you big government doesn’t work?”

          17. There was no confusion on my part….although, yes, there is a HUGE overlap between MRAs, PUAs, *and* MGTOWs.

            And, btw, I just love how you conflated the KKK with feminism, even though said organization was nothing of the sort…..(and yes, I do realize there was a women’s group for a time during the Twenties: that didn’t make it feminist, any more than Concerned Women for America is feminist).

            “Now do you see how, let’s call it problematic, that is?”

            But here’s the thing: I never once denied the problems with extremism that feminism does have.

            “Giving that you’re citing RationalWiki, I can’t blame you for being confused,”

            Nice try, pal, but there were citations to back up the claims…..assuming, of course, that you didn’t just decide to ignore the link altogether.(and, by the way, I don’t think they always get everything right; they were certainly not quite on the dot with GamerGate)

            “but the reason no one is agreeing with you”

            According to whom, exactly? Not everybody who reads this is necessarily going to comment, you know.

            “is that you’re doing the equivalent of claiming “raising taxes will result in mass famine and killing fields. Didn’t the Khmer Rouge teach you big government doesn’t work?””

            Wha…..where did that come from?

            And, by the way, folks, here’s a little snippet of some of Heartiste’s extremist views as well:

            http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2008/03/30/march-2008-comment-winner/

            http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2011/04/20/before-and-after-the-hilarity-of-self-deception/

          18. And, btw, I just love how you conflated the KKK with feminism, even though said organization was nothing of the sort…..(and yes, I do realize there was a women’s group for a time during the Twenties: that didn’t make it feminist, any more than Concerned Women for America is feminist).

            Look, the National Organization for Women wants to protect women from rape, the KKK wants to protect women from rape, clearly this means that they are the exact same in all ways except the NOW prefer to call themselves “feminists” instead of “white supremacists”.

            I mean unless you’re going to say a few points of agreement don’t make them the same, and I’m going to need evidence if I want to claim that NOW’s favorite type of activism is dressing up in white sheets and burning crosses.

            they were certainly not quite on the dot with GamerGate

            Then what makes you so certain they’re on the dot with MRAs?

            If they claim that GamerGate is a misogynistic hate group, and you know that’s wrong, what makes you so sure that when they claim that MRAs are a misogynistic hate group they’re any less wrong?

            Wha…..where did that come from?

            MRAs and Heartiste agree that feminism is bad, therefore they are the same.

            People wanting to raise taxes and the Khmer Rouge agree that bigger government is better, therefore they are the same.

            It’s the same logic.

          19. “MRAs and Heartiste agree that feminism is bad, therefore they are the same.”

            I don’t think that *all* MRAs are quite as screwed up as he is, no. But there are those who do come close, and the few truly decent ones that do exist are either too oblivious, and/or cowardly, to stand up against the wackos and the assholes in their midst.

            “Then what makes you so certain they’re on the dot with MRAs?”

            The citations I found are more than enough evidence; they come right from the minds of the quotees themselves. And the fact that you just resorted to employing a logical fallacy right here(“if they were wrong on issue A, then they must certainly be wrong on issue B as well”) tells me that either you know you’re losing the debate and are now trying to stonewall me, or you’re so hopelessly clueless that you don’t know just how misinformed you really are.

            Regardless of how you feel, however, I know for a fact that I have the evidence on my side.

            BTW, folks, you are more than welcome to check out the links I’ve posted here; this is but a sample of the nasty extremism that dominates the “Men’s Movement”. If anybody would like to find out more, I will do my best to track down some more proof for you to read.

          20. And you are screaming “logic fallacy!” as if that means anything.

            Where is the failure in this logic “they were completely wrong on issue A, why should I assume they’ll do any better on issue AA?”

            I’m not saying that they were wrong before, they must be wrong, I’m saying that they were wrong before, I’m not going to assume they won’t be wrong again.

            And given the quality of those sources (David “it’s not rape when it’s female on male” Futrelle, Caitlin “Anonymous is totally going to stop GobberGrape you guys” Dewey, and a SPLC report that was yanked almost instantly), I’m not going to trust them.

            Besides, how many sources does the GamerGate article have again?

          21. “Besides, how many sources does the GamerGate article have again?”

            That is honestly irrelevant to this discussion.

            “And given the quality of those sources (David “it’s not rape
            when it’s female on male” Futrelle, Caitlin “Anonymous is totally going
            to stop GobberGrape you guys” Dewey, and a SPLC report that was yanked
            almost instantly), I’m not going to trust them.”

            And what about the links I posted that went directly to the websites of, and articles by, the Mansopherians themselves? Did you just ignore all those?(or the Right Wing Watch article?)

            Here’s some more “wisdom” from Chateau Heartiste, this time on race:

            https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2013/06/13/white-majority-in-the-us-gone-by-2043/
            https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/02/24/parade-of-humiliations/
            https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2013/09/20/do-the-white-elite-dream-of-mulatto-sheep/

            Again, virtually all of the stuff I’ve posted ultimately leads back to the aforementioned “Men’s Movement” people themselves, and much of it directly sourced from their own blogs and other writing.

          22. That is honestly irrelevant to this discussion.

            The GamerGate article has a bunch of citations, but it’s completely wrong, the “Manosphere” article has a bunch of citations, why should those citations be any less wrong?

            Here’s some more “wisdom” from Chateau Heartiste, this time on race:

            Well then, let’s check out the Femosphere

            PIV is always rape, ok?:
            Penetration of the penis into the vagina is completely unnecessary for conception.

            UTOPIA: what would a women’s society look like?:
            No male above his age of puberty would be allowed to receive any kind ofservice from a female. Their life expectancy would probably drop to the age of 40, but that’s how things should be. Women’s life expectancy without men would rise to 130 years at least.

            Summary of lefty male anti-feminist tactics:

            https://witchwind.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/male-toxic-influences-on-feminism.png

            This clearly proves that all feminists are biology-illiterate, genocidal, paranoid psychotics and not that lumping everything vaguely related into a giant “sphere” is great for propaganda, but horrible for the truth.

          23. “why should those citations be any less correct?”

            As I’ve pointed out to you before, most of the assorted evidence I posted, apart from the RationalWiki overview, came directly from the blogs and other writings of these people of which I’ve spoke of: Roissy’s Chateau Heartiste blog, The Spearhead, etc.

            “Well then, let’s check out the Femosphere”

            But see, I never denied the extremism on the feminist/pro-feminist side…..I realize full well that it’s there…..only that it’s not actually dominant overall there; this is not, sadly, the case with the “Men’s Movement”.

            “This clearly proves that all feminists are biology-illiterate,
            genocidal, paranoid psychotics and not that lumping everything vaguely
            related into a giant “sphere” is great for propaganda, but horrible for
            the truth.”

            And frankly, I’m not convinced that everyone who calls themselves “anti-feminist” is necessarily an asshole, either: in fact, I’ve actually met some decent ones myself, and they’d be no doubt turned off by the rantings of Vox Day, Heartiste, etc. if they knew about that stuff.

            By the way, folks, here’s yet more evidence of MRA Vox Day’s extremism: He apparently thinks that marital rape doesn’t exist!

            https://archive.today/2Tx6d

            And here’s perhaps the most important part-

            “Anyone with a basic grasp of logic who thinks about the subject of
            “marital rape” for more than ten seconds will quickly realize that
            marriage grants consent on an ongoing basis. This has to be the case,
            otherwise every time one partner wakes the other up in an intimate
            manner or has sex with an inebriated spouse, rape has been committed.
            And for those who wish to argue that consent can be withdrawn, there is a
            word for withdrawing consent in a marriage. That word is “divorce”.

            The concept of marital rape is not merely an oxymoron, it is an attack
            on the institution of marriage, on the concept of objective law, and
            indeed, on the core foundation of human civilization itself.”

            This came straight from his blog……albeit, it was apparently deleted, as it’s been archived, but it’s still there, all there for you to see.

          24. I’m afraid that your ignorance is rather deep, perhaps even more than I initially suspected.

          25. I’m afraid your ignorance of actual history is pretty deep…..perhaps more so than I initially suspected. The sad truth is, the RW revisionism machine has some deep roots here in the U.S., going back some decades; the myth of feminism being inherently bigoted is just one thing-they’ve also claimed that Civil Rights was a Republican project(and that Democrats as a whole were opposed to it, when in fact, it was a bipartisan effort), that LBJ’s “Great Society” was actually a racist conspiracy designed to keep poor blacks on a metaphorical “Democratic plantation”, etc…..I could perhaps go on for hours about the dealings of spin masters like Jonah Goldberg(the writer of “Liberal Fascism”) and David Barton, etc.

          26. So in order to “disprove” my “ignorance” you go on a completely unrelated tirade. Convincing.

          27. Unrelated? Not at all, actually. Rightist revisionism has become a very real problem in the United States of today-the aforementioned myth regarding feminism that I’ve pointed out is only one small part of that-and it’s gotten the point where it’s starting to poison the discourse as a whole.

            Here in Texas, where I live, the unabashedly hardcore rightist-dominated school board just approved a revision to our state school textbooks that states that *Moses*, of all people, was a honorary founding father of the United States…..despite being a Hebrew who lived some four millenia before this country was even conceived!

            http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2014/11/texas-approves-textbooks-with-moses-as-founding-father/

            We also have RW revisionists claiming that the United States was founded as a “Christian Nation” as well:

            http://www.internationalcopsforchrist.com/proof-that-america-was-founded-as-a-christian-nation/

            I could spend hours, even days, tracking down more evidence of the wider problem for you. The disinformation being spread about feminism is indeed just one part of a nasty, tangled web of RWNJ lies and deceit.

            Although given that you’ve not paid attention to any other valid evidence I’ve posted on here, perhaps it might be worthless to even bother at this point.

          28. Oh, and here’s more extremists.

            F. Roger Devlin, a prominent MRA who cut his teeth working for the white supremacist publication called “The Occidental Quarterly”, became well-known amongst the PUA community circa 2008 when his 2006 screed, “Sexual Utopia in Power”, was reposted by Heartiste on his blog.

            http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2008/07/23/decivilizing-human-nature-unleashed/

            Oh, and I can’t believe I forgot about The Spearhead, led by W.F. Price, perhaps one of the worst of the worst of the extremists: one can count “Roissy”, the creator of Chateau Heartiste…..and even RamzPaul, the white nationalist “comedian” so beloved amongst sections of the fringe far-rightists on YouTube.

            Here’s just a couple of “gems” from this cave of horrors:

            http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/09/15/how-female-suffrage-destroyed-western-civilization/

            http://www.the-spearhead.com/2009/12/21/patriarchy-works/

            The evidence just keeps piling up…..

          29. You’re just making me more supportive of MRAs.

            The fact you can’t find anything wrong with them and are reducded to trying to smear them with basic “Hitler-ate-sugar” level hackery proves them to be right.

            I searched those pages and couldn’t find anything in those articles about “MRA”, “Male Rights”, “Men’s Rights”.

            Again, a few agreements about feminism being bad does not make them the same, any more then a few agreements about animal abuse being bad does not make the Humane Society and the Nazis the same.

          30. What “smears”?

            “I searched those pages and couldn’t find anything in those articles about “MRA”, “Male Rights”, “Men’s Rights”.”
            *facepalm*. You are completely missing the point that I’ve made: they didn’t *have* to say anything about “men’s rights” per se, just as radfems don’t need to talk about women’s rights in order for *their* bullshit to be properly debunked.

            I don’t like to be this blunt, but I’m afraid that you are either completely clueless, or willfully ignorant, and/or trolling. There has been a veritable *truckload* of evidence that I’ve posted that MRAs and the rest of the “Manosphere” have a *major* problem with extremists in their ranks.

          31. That is true, however in my mind feminism has been completely taken over by extremists, while the MRA is quick to denounce their own. I don’t care for a few anonymous on random forums, I’m looking at the most popular, vocal and named representatives.

          32. I hate to break this to you, but while feminism does have it’s own problem with extremists, the “Men’s Movement” is basically run by extremists from top to bottom…..and nearly every statement of supposed “denouncement” I’ve ever seen, has turned out to be an exercise in ass-covering, rather than any real rebuttals.

          33. I’m pro-feminist, and all for denouncing the radicals giving feminism a bad name, and in fact, do wish more of the reasonable feminists would stop being so damn timid in calling out SJWs like Mikki Kendall, Sarah Kendzior, etc., on their mistakes and errors.

            But at least feminists do have such a contingent…..whereas, sadly, the MRAs do not, by and large, with the one exception being a few decent individuals who may be genuinely put off by the extremism of Roissy/Heartiste, Vox Day, et al……but they are very few and far in between.

          34. It seems we two had a completely different experience and perception of things, nothing to be done about that. If we disagree on a fundamental level I doubt any discussion will change our perspective. I’ll just have to respectfully disagree with you.

    1. Thank you so much! I was so angry I that I had to write it so I’m glad others can appreciate where I’m coming from.

  7. Well, Leigh Alexander has stated in the past that ‘real women don’t have children anymore’ – these are basically just hyper masculinized, frigid feminazis who want to create a matriarchy because whatever prevailing inferiority complex they have demands it. And you have that retard over at the Guardian, whatshername, who bitches about every little thing she “thinks” women are stereotypically supposed to be doing.

    1. If you dont want to have kids, fine, but it doesn’t make anyone superior to be child-free. I’m also not sure where they get the idea that choosing a typically masculine identity is a prerequisite for being a “strong woman.”

        1. I don’t struggle – It’s definitely Marcotte.

          Valenti comes off as just a hypocritical whiner, Marcotte comes off as a crazy radical devoid of any semblance of reason, manners, or even pretense of being anything other than a walking propaganda piece for feminazis.

          Marcotte is capable of saying “men should all be feminists” and then explain how she can’t stand male feminists three sentences later.

          And Marcotte has “Auntie Alias” commenting on most of her posts via Disqus (I suspect this is one of Marcotte’s own pseudonyms because they talk exactly alike) and they are just as crazy or worse than Marcotte.

          1. omg she got in a fight with me before they banned me on there lol! She got all “pissbaby and shitlordy” and started talking about the size of my dick (lol if only she knew boy would she be REALLY pissed – freud would be pleased). I bet that is her!

            She’s also made the famous claims of “there’s no such thing as a false rape claim” (which reality flatly demonstrates is false) and “you should always believe the ‘victim’, even if they’re making it up, it’s still more harmful to ‘doubt’ the victim”. Odd, I wonder if she’d feel the same way if the rape victim was a man making the claim against a woman?

            Ugh. These people are zoo animals in disguise and on parade.

          2. “I bet that is her!”

            I have yet to confirm it, but anytime I comment on a Marcotte article, she responds and it sounds just like Marcotte.

            “you should always believe the ‘victim’, even if they’re making it up”

            Yeah, ironically, even after the Duke affair was found to be a lie, and people’s lives were literally ruined, and then there was the UVA lies, feminists are still spewing out the “believe the victim” nonsense full speed. Hell, even that doesn’t make sense – a person isn’t a victim if they LIED about being raped – but that doesn’t stop them.

            “These people are zoo animals in disguise and on parade.”

            hehehehe. I usually give them the benefit of the doubt and say they are despicable people who would latch on to any ideology that gives them the right to ruin other people’s lives.

          3. I wonder just how many of them are in it for the money. I mean hell, look at Jim Sterling (although that fat cunt just wanted to be one of the cool kids). Cunt being applicable here as he is British and they kick that thing around like it’s a football (look, I’m cultured!). The man was literally a gross, nasty, abusive asshole to women and especially feminists and then “came to the light”, but mostly because of the infiltration of the media by their heinous ideology and the fact that he found out you can shill to these idiots and they send in money by the droves. It’s the same scam the 700 Club runs: send in money, feel like you’ve accomplished something meaningful with your life.

          4. Another thing I forgot – I accused ‘Auntie Alias’ of such and was never given a straight answer – she literally avoided the question.

          5. lol not surprising. A smart liar will NEVER deny something, in the event they get caught as that just piles up the consequences.

    2. If it brings joy and pleasure to men, particularly Evil White Men, Feminist extremists actively oppose it because Men must be punished, they must do penance for having the genitalia they were born with — the wretched, living symbol of “The Patriarchy”. If they could click their fingers and ensure every man never had friendship, affection, love or sex again, their fingers would be sore in seconds.

      They tell young women “all men are rapists” to scare women away from intimacy with and trust of men. They try to shame and bully gay men by claiming their being attracted to other men is an intentional affront to women and some kind of statement of hatred. Everything is framed in relation to themselves because that is what ego-maniacal narcissists do.

      They don’t want to “create a Matriarchy”; they want to be the wards of a torture chamber and I think we all know who they have in mind for The Rack.

      1. There are definitely some very screwed up people in this world. And the strange thing is that they’re not exercising their depravity based off an imaginary religious figure or a quest for resources and territory… it’s just… this bizarre hatred.

  8. Good try, but it is mainstream, and “true feminism” has almost nothing to do with the contemporary movement.

      1. Perhaps that’s the intent, but all I see is “NAFALT” attempts; trying to segregate the “radicalism” off in it’s little corner and saying that, “yes, they are prominent, but they don’t REALLY have much influence in the movement”. Evidence, however, continually shows that the power does rest in their hands, and social and political harm result from it.

        1. I don’t think it reads like that at all, to be honest with you. It repeatedly talks about the media being complicit in the corruption, for instance, and doesn’t downplay the SJW in any way lol. It’s more about a redefinition of feminism into what it SHOULD be about.

          1. And, honestly, Ralph, I myself would like to see the moderates take back the public stage, as it were, from the extremists who’ve hijacked it. But I’ll have to be truthful and admit that there are a lot of moderate voices out there who are too afraid to speak up because they don’t want to have to deal with the SJWs and their socks spamming their accounts with all sorts of dogmatic bullshit.

            This is rather like how many moderate right-leaning Americans don’t want to deal with the Teabaggers and their ilk for many of those same general reasons.

  9. The shame of SJWs is that an article like this that speaks for the empowerment of women will be condemned as misogynistic hate speech simply because it rejects their brand of feminism. SJWs will body shame. They’ll bully. They’ll belittle your race. They create the atmosphere they claim to exist to fight against and demand that solutions come from them. If GamerGate ended sexism, the SJWs would demonize the results and say that only feminism can end sexism.

    1. “The shame of SJWs is that an article like this that speaks for the
      empowerment of women will be condemned as misogynistic hate speech
      simply because it rejects their brand of feminism. SJWs will body shame.
      They’ll bully. They’ll belittle your race.”

      Which is a real shame, indeed…..especially given how outright fucked up many of their opposite numbers are(I’ve already mentioned some of the figureheads of the Manosphere, such as guys like Vox Day and Heartiste…..both sympathetic to white supremacy, btw, on top of being outright misogynists…..). And not to mention that many social problems remain unsolved.

      I mean, wouldn’t it be nice just to see the extremists on both ends disappear into total obscurity? Feminists and non-feminists don’t have to be enemies. It’s the asshole radfems & the other SJWs, and asshole MRAs/MGTOWs/PUAs/the Manosphere in general and those who ally with them, respectively, who are 90% of the problem, trolls or not…..and those few extremists who might not be so bad overall are still in the way themselves, regardless.

  10. Kattack, a nice article. Do you support gender equality in the sphere of military conscription? Should women in the US register for selective service as men do?

    1. hehehe… There is a really funny video on this: A conservative and a feminist – The conservative woman makes the case that this doesn’t benefit women, and the feminist says it absolutely benefits women.

      I dunno about you, but I don’t really think being forced into the military is a benefit.

      It also kinda gave women a disadvantage where they had an advantage: When citizens (mostly male) were given the right to vote it was in exchange for military service – In most countries, less than 10 years later women were given the right to vote as well – but were still prohibited from military service.

      1. It benefits women because we are then equal i both good and bad. Not just when we have benefits. That’s equality, drinking both honey and shit as they would say in my country.

        1. well of course, however that is sorta my point – modern day feminists are doing what the conservative in the video was doing.

  11. This is really pretty simple. All the SJWs are troglodyte trolls. The entire movement is spawned from their hatred and jealousy of prettier / more successful girls, that they created this giant shadow government conspiracy, eg “the Patriarchy” to explain away their lack of accomplishment because they’ve been told self esteem sheltering, “empowering” lies their whole lives and can’t simply accept the reality that they just might not be good enough for something. Instead of their own ineptitude, it’s an actual malignant force working against them that’s holding them down.

    1. “Align with us or be tried of thought-crime.”

      Quite a few “Manosphere” people are guilty of this kind of thinking, too…..it’s not just the fringe-left SJWs…..(although I’m sure a certain few who’ve responded to me will deny, deny, and deny again until the cows come home.)

  12. I think Cuoco deserves some criticism for apologizing. There was no reason to cave. She didn’t have the excuse of losing her job, not being able to feed her kids, facing professional ruin. A strong, independent woman should be able to stand up to extremist criticism with no power over her, shouldn’t she?

    Consider, too, how a major tv star standing up for her opinion would have emboldened other women to criticize contemporary feminism.

  13. I wonder what type of home life most of these SJW’s had while growing up. was there a lack of support and validation from their parents or are they people that have been so brainwashed that they cant tell the difference anymore?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.