And I’m actually being nice there – it’s quite possible she isn’t dumb, just the kind of pathological liar one expects to see spruiking this bullshit.
As everyone knows by now, that girl from the Harry Potter movies has given a lame little speech about the wiminz at the UN and, of course, the internet is just gushing about how wonderful she and the speech were. The first thing I have to ask is, what the fuck is Watson doing blabbing about this subject? Is she an intellectual now? Is she at least a feminist blogger? No, she’s a kewpie doll who makes movies, and about as qualified to give a speech about gender as I am to give one about acting, but as long as you parrot the establishment’s views, qualifications are not needed.
The primary subject of the speech is the suspiciously named HeForShe initiative, something that Watson tries as mightily as she can to portray as some sort of gender equality thing. But alas of her, even before she opens her mouth it becomes clear that this is not about true equality when CNN host Sheep Blitzer tells us straight out that the initiative is about the “inequalities faced by women and girls.” Whoops.
The first thing that strikes me about this video is how scared she looks standing at the podium – all trembly, yet ironically also stiff, poor Emma looks like she’s about to shit herself! Then, summoning up all the courage she can, Watson clenches her tiny bowels and proceeds to complain that feminism is seen as anti-male and that this perception has to change. Well, I have to agree with her on both those points – but not quite in the way she would like. Yes, feminism is seen as anti-male, but for the same reason the Klan is seen as anti-black – because they want to be treated better than those who are of a different and, supposedly, less human group. As an example, only a couple of years ago NOW called for all crimes of violence against women to be considered hate crimes, hence ensuring that they would carry a greater penalty than violent crimes committed against males. If wanting greater protection before the law isn’t bigotry then what the fuck is? As for the way feminism is seen, I too would like to see the perception change, but I would like to see that come about due to an actual change in the truth behind the perception. As Watson makes no mention of changing feminism itself I can only assume that the perception is all she wants to alter, which is why she is up there putting, quite literally, a pretty face on a very ugly movement.
Watson also tells us that “My recent research has shown me that feminism has become an unpopular word.” Claiming to have done research to establish such an obvious fact seems to me both a deliberate attempt to appear intellectual and an unintentional declaration of her own idiocy. She might as well have added, “Also, recent research has shown me that if you don’t plug the toaster in, your bread will stay mysteriously white. Why this is so I have yet to figure out, but it, also, is probably the fault of men.” Our little mouse then claims that people see her as “too aggressive” due to her feminist views and goes on to timorously point out that there is not a single country in the world in which women have gender equality, conveniently leaving out that the reason for this is that women are treated as inferior in the third world and as superior in the developed world, hence there is, indeed, no country in the world in which women have actual gender equality!
And what can Little Miss Bowl Of Jelly offer as evidence of sexism in her own life? Well, after much thought, she came up with that time back in elementary school when she was called “bossy”! Now we know what Kurtz was thinking when he uttered his famous last words, “The horror! The horror!” – he was thinking what an awful world it is in which little girls some times get called bossy! Watson gives no context for the anecdote, so for all we know she actually was a bossy little thing and the adults responsible (probably female themselves) realized that a mini-Hitler shouldn’t be put in charge of the school play. She also complains about being “sexualized” at 14, and that her female friends dropped out of sport lest they be seen as muscly – “Eeew! I don’t want to look like some filthy boy!” is as likely an explanation as any for that strange phenomenon. And then she throws out a sop to the male sex, a soft little nothing meant to make it look as if the menz matter, by mentioning that her male friends are less likely to express their feelz! But even this bit of lip service is somewhat self-serving in that her male friends’ emotional reticence impacts her personal life as well as theirs. Later on, she throws out sop number two by pointing out that society sees daddy as a lesser parent than mommy, but that can be seen as being about her rather than daddy and, much more importantly, child-rearing is an area in which change would benefit women as much as men. After all, if stay-at-home dads become more acceptable it will be easier for women to pursue their career ambitions.
Probably the only truly positive spot comes when she points out that there are young men out there suffering from mental illness who are afraid to seek help lest they be seen as “less of a men.” Realizing that “a men” is something you say in church, Watson nervously throws in “Or less of a man.” See, now I’m actually starting to feel sorry for her… And sure, she goes on to make a good point about male suicide, but you have to throw the dog a real bone once in a while. And given her apparent admiration of Hillary Clinton, she may even be thinking that women are actually the primary victims of male suicide because they lose their husbands and sons! Indeed, this possibility is supported when she follows up with the valid claim that men are imprisoned by gender stereotypes then immediately points out that freeing men from those restrictions would have huge benefits for women!
Towards the end she goes into some kumbaya crap about everyone being free yet finishes off with – you guessed it – yet another call for men to help women out with their problems! She also distorts history by attributing to Edmund Burke something he never said, but it’s not as if she went to a fancy University like Brown. Oh, wait, she did go to Brown! Perhaps she missed the lecture in which someone pointed out that the famous words “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing” are, at best, a paraphrasing of some of Burke’s ideas and, at worst, a fabrication. Note also the total absence of the word “women” in the original quote. It’s almost as if her intention is to state that “Edmund Burke was a great man (he must have been or I wouldn’t be quoting him) and by including women he was being a feminist, hence you should emulate the great man.”
And while I’m on the subject of misrepresentation, I really must make quick mention of the visual aspects of the thing. The tactic of putting a pretty face on a bunch of ugly ideas has already been pointed out, but notice also the broad shoulders on the suit and the pulled-back hair which makes her head look smaller. The combined effect of this is to make her look more adult, less like the frightened baby rabbit that she is and more like the strong, confident woman that she is not. Hell, I could even go so far as to claim the white suit was chosen as a way of signifying the inherent purity and peacefulness of women, but they wouldn’t go that far. Or would they?
For those who can’t be bothered watching the thing, it all adds up to Watson making claims that feminism is about equality of the sexes then proceeding to call for men to help women, though admittedly she does balance this out by calling for men to help women. Watson may as well have said, “Welcome to HeForShe, boys, a solidarity movement where you do a shitload for me and I do nothing for you!” She even complains that men don’t feel welcome in the conversation about gender, which is a bit like Fred Phelps complaining that gays don’t feel welcome at his church. Want us to feel welcome, Ms Watson? Go off and set up SheForHe, an initiative asking women to help men and boys with the many inequities they face in the western world – until you do, you’re just farting through the wrong hole.
And I must admit that until a few minutes ago I was firmly on one of those sides. In fact, this article was originally called “Ray Rice is the Victim.” No matter how many times I viewed the video on Firefox I could not see Janay Rice back hand Ray, nor could I see him spitting on her just before that! I guess the moral of the story is that Firefox has become an unreliable piece of shit and I should start using another browser as the default. In SeaMonkey, the aforementioned events are clearly visible and hence my opinion has changed. What I previously saw as starting when she seems to elbow him in the elevator, now starts when he spits on her. True, it is possible that before they got in front of the camera she spat on him or hit him, and for all we know she may have been abusing him for months or vice versa, but we have to go with the evidence we have today not the evidence we may have tomorrow — if we do otherwise all rational argument is pointless, for tomorrow some creationist may find actual proof that the world is only a few thousand years old!
So, as I see it, this is what happens. He spits on her, she back hands him lightly when outside, once inside the elevator she seems to elbow him, and he retaliates with a fairly soft punch. And yes, it is a soft punch, were it not she wouldn’t have been able to come charging at him right afterwards. At that point he defends himself from what is clearly an imminent attack – surely not even the most addle-brained feminist would claim Janay was rushing forwards to kiss and make up – by hitting her with what is, at the most, a punch of moderate power. At this point I can hear the feminists scream hysterically, “Moderate! Oh, my fucking god! He knocked her out!” But you see, to those who actually know something about fighting it is clear that he is not putting any significant torque behind that punch, hence it is unlikely that he is intending do serious damage. In fact, the punch could even be seen as using a jab to stop an opponent getting too close. As for her going down, of course she goes down, the silly bitch is basically running into the punch! Doing so multiplies the force, hence chances are that even a woman’s punch would have taken her down under those circumstances. Now, if old Ray had stomped on her head once she was down that would have been a different matter, but as it is his was a reasonable and controlled defense.
What all this does is leave me in two minds. On the one hand, he starts the aggression by spitting on her, but on the other hand she is the one who gets physical by slapping him, and once she gets physical she can’t really be complaining that he retaliates. But then there’s that first hand – you know, the one Ray spat on. Hence the ambiguity of the situation. Perhaps the correct view of this incident is quite simply that two assholes got into an elevator and some shit went down. But that’s not good enough for the feminists. As we have seen in the past, the female supremacists are big on taking an ambiguous situation and portraying it as one in which the male is clearly the guy with the black hat and the weird moustache, so once again the feminist hate machine and its ass-kissing supporters have gone into overdrive to lynch a man who may or may not be the guilty party. Amongst feminists the motto is a simple one – when in doubt, blame the male. What matters to them is that they be able to use this case to further feed the all-important narrative of “Woman = Good, Man = Bad” for that is where a huge chunk of their power to stoke female privilege comes from. As for the non-feminists piling on the Big Bad, they are simply going along with our society’s view of men as some sort of second class human being, though I don’t suppose the males doing so are actually aware of this. To such men being the First Sex is part of what makes them “real” men and admitting to not being the top dog is pretty much the same as cutting off their own nuts. And so Rice loses his job (something which, incidentally, does Janay no big favors either!) gets suspended from the NFL and is treated like the most evil thing since Chris Brown.
What the fuck is going on when such an ambiguous situation can lead to a man losing his job and being forever branded that most awful of things – an abuser of women – for the rest of his life? The primary problem here is that, thanks to a disastrous confluence of feminist activism, traditionalist views of women as morally superior, and plutocratic interest, men now occupy a social space occupied by Negroes throughout much of the early twentieth century. Much in the same way that blacks in the old days were not permitted to strike back against whites without facing serious consequences for daring to hit their “betters,” today’s men – be they black, white, or pink with blue spots – are not permitted to strike back against whitey, it’s just that today whitey can be as black as she wants to be as long as she’s got the right anatomy under that skirt. There is no other explanation for this state of affairs. It is certainly not the size difference that is so often mentioned in such cases, we know that because if we keep the size difference but throw out the sex difference the argument changes drastically. “Oh, a 5’8”, 200 lb dude knocked out another dude roughly 5’4” and 150lb? Who cares?” would have been the world-wide reaction had both the people in that elevator been males. And we all know that if the size difference was kept and the sexes reversed, the whole world would be resounding with cries of “You go, girl!” and the woman who may or may not be the villain of the piece would be acclaimed by the media as some sort of feminist heroine standing up against male tyranny. If you don’t think so, consider the reaction when it was thought that Tiger Woods’ wife had beaten him with a golf club after discovering he’d been putting his wood in the wrong hole!
No, this isn’t about size or strength, it isn’t about right and wrong, it isn’t even really about domestic violence. It’s about the sacred rule that a man must never hit a woman, no matter what she does. It’s about female privilege, and it’s about treating half the human race as lesser beings – but that’s perfectly cool with most people, as long as it’s the right half getting pissed on.
Recently in England a truly horrific case of mass rape was uncovered, the kind of thing so lurid one hardly expects to see it outside of some tacky 1970s exploitation movie. Over a 16 year period, organized gangs repeatedly raped at least 1400 mostly teenaged kids in the town of Rotherham, and the authorities ignored the problem, even going so far as to mysteriously “lose” evidence of the attacks. But as outrageous as the case is, and as deserving of long sentences (I would say the death penalty but England doesn’t have it) as the scum responsible may be the case itself is not what this piece is about – that is being handled by plenty of more influential sites.
The aspect I want to talk about is the almost complete lack of outrage on the part of those who pretend to care about rape more than anyone else – The Sisterhood of Rich White Women, or as they prefer to be known, feminists.
While I am sure that some feminist somewhere is giving a shit, the big girls are all falling somewhere between complete silence and just a tiny little mention. According to Google, in the past month there have been no posts at Alternet (you remember them, they are the ones who complained about some store playing The Stones’ “Under My Thumb,”) containing the word Rotherham. A similar search for Feministing.com finds only one mention of the case, and that’s simply a link to the NYTimes, not an actual Feministing article, and a search on Jezebel finds only one or two articles. And who knows, maybe my search engine skills are crap, but surely a story this big should have so many feminist flies all over it that one shouldn’t even have to go looking for the outrage! So why the mysterious silence? Keep in mind that these are the same group of people who not long ago called some boy a rapist because he went down on some smiling girl while they were both pissed as newts. These are the people who continued to label the Duke U. boys rapists after the DNA turned out to be someone else’s. These are the people who still look at DSK as a rapist, and who freak out at the sight of a statue of a man in his underwear, claiming that it will upset women who have in the past been raped by statues. Yet here we have one of the most egregious cases of mass rape in living history, rape on a scale rarely seen outside of a theatre of war, and all is silence. No screaming outrage, no calls for “culture change,” no jumping up and down about yet another horrible case of patriarchal oppression! And you know why? Because the victims were white and the rapists were Pakistani Muslims, that’s why!
Many folks, believing that feminists are some kind of left wing thing, are putting this reluctance down to genuine PC self-censorship but I do not, mainly because I do not buy the bullshit idea that the feminists are leftists. What they are is a bunch of plutocratic lapdogs and stokers of female privilege who care little for leftist concerns – if they did they would be writing about the woes of the poor, which they rarely do. However, even though they are not leftists, their work to increase female privilege is greatly admired by the left — so much so that the latter constantly ignores feminism’s obvious alliance with the plutocracy – and hence their main supporters in the media are left wing outlets that would start to look askance at them were they to start harping on about those awful Muslim men and their undoubtedly racist rapes. As vile as feminists are, in this case the PC sites are just as bad, for both groups are conspiring to stop this case getting as much attention as it deserves simply because of the race and religion of the perpetrators. If both these packs of assholes truly cared about rape victims they would be shouting the news from the rooftops, thereby warning other potential victims that it’s not really normal for a grown man to be taking a romantic interest in a 12 year old girl – even if he is a Pakistani Muslim.
You may be asking yourself, “But wouldn’t the feminists run the risk of pissing off the lefties in order to defend both their race and their sex?” No, they obviously wouldn’t and they obviously haven’t! First, vilifying men and feathering the nests of all women are goals more important to The Sisterhood than the rapes of a few girls and, much more importantly, the girls in question are from the lower classes – there’s a reason why I referred to feminists as The Sisterhood of RICH White Women. If these had been girls from the upper classes – say, students at Yale or Oxford being gang raped by Muslim men – I suspect that even fear of their PC allies would not silence them, but as it stands they simply don’t care. Wrong class, tough titties. You want more evidence of feminism’s lack of concern for the lower classes, there you have it.
Let’s get one thing straight – feminists don’t really care about rape victims. What they care about is using rape as a weapon against men. As long as they can scream hysterically that there is a rapist under every bed and that therefore all men are rapists in training they can continue to portray women as victims of some insidious patriarchal plot. This in turn allows them to claim more privileges for their sex – “Gimme mo’ money just in case I get raped!”– while vilifying men, something which also stokes female privilege, for if men are such scum and women such victims then it is not only acceptable but almost necessary for society to treat women better than it treats men. That is what the rape hysteria is about, not actual concern for victims, and as long as that is the case you can count on feminists to shut their mouths whenever the rapist is someone the left would rather be ignored.
This time the woman who is a veritable gift to those of us who love to mock feminists is putting forward the idea that…
“Feminists will agree to quit it with the misandry jokes if anti-feminists cease making scurrilous accusations that feminists are motivated by man hatred.”
This presupposes a couple of things. The first is that all the “male tears” crap on things like mugs and Jessica Valenti’s beach attire are “jokes.” Coming from women who don’t have extensive records as man-haters these could be seen as such, coming from harpies whose misandry is well established there has got to be more to it than so-called humour – if Ben Stiller makes a joke about his dad hoarding pennies it is one thing, if Mel Gibson makes a joke about Jerry Stiller hoarding pennies it is another one altogether. The other idea we are supposed to take for granted is that accusations of man-hating are “scurrilous.” Well, I guess that they are, in the sense that they are insulting, but Mad Mandy obviously means more than this, she means that they are untrue. The entire thrust (pardon the phallocentric language) of the piece seems to be that feminists don’t hate the menz. She keeps repeating the point over and over…
“ After all, all anti-feminists have to do is promise not to tell lies,”
“Anti-feminists don’t like these gifs? Simple: Stop pretending that one has to hate men in order to believe that men should not be unfairly privileged over women.”
“We should be having a public debate about whether or not it’s acceptable for conservatives to routinely lie about feminists rather than argue with them directly.”
“…the lies anti-feminists tell about feminists are many in number!):”
Yep, the idea that we are lying when we say that feminists, as a group, hate men is a big one with our under-medicated miscreant, so let’s remind ourselves of what feminists actually do out there in the real world. First, they claim that misandry is not real. We know this because Mandy does it herself right here…
“Indeed, that this even has to be discussed shows how misogyny is a real thing and misandry simply is not.”
The very denial of misandry is itself an act of hatred against men, as its purpose is to cover up the multitude of ways in which men get screwed over by society. The fact is that misandry is no joke, it is not only a real problem but also one that inflicts much more damage on its victims than misogyny does. While misogyny is the realm of disturbed outliers like Elliot Rodger, misandry is the province of governments, corporations, and mainstream media outlets. Misogyny is rare, misandry is pervasive. If misandry is funny, misogyny is downright hilarious.
But there’s a lot more feminist man-hating going on out there. Some of it is relatively minor, such as the way feminists use everything from cartoon characters’ wrist sizes to some people’s dislike of cats to make it seem as if women are some sort of oppressed group who need even more privilege than they already have. Some of the acts of hatred are far more obvious, so obvious as to be totally undeniable. This includes things such as getting their stooges in the Swedish government to pass laws which make violent crime against women a bigger sin than violent crime against men, then trying to get their stooges in the U.S government to do the same in Amerika. Then there’s the Argentinean law that makes the murder of a woman (but only when by a man) a greater crime than other forms of murder, the fact that most Amerikan feminists these days support the passing of the ERA with the Hayden rider, which would mean that the so-called Equal Rights Amendment would be a Female Gravy Train Amendment instead, the fact that feminists see 60% of degrees going to women yet still push for more female graduates, the fact that British feminists want to do away with women’s jails, but not men’s, and so on. Believe me, there’s a shit load more I could list, just consider this a sampler of modern feminist evil, like one of those small boxes of chocolates but with less cocoa and a lot more strychnine.
Marcotte the Mad then proceeds to give a whole list of “lies” that us mean anti-fems are out there telling about the poor old feminists, a list which ends with this corker…
“Just any generic screaming that feminists are out to “get” men that is tossed out because you see women pushing for more equality and you don’t like it.”
In other words, men have no real concerns, they just don’t like what Marcotte calls “equality.” And if you want to see what she and other feminists mean by equality, just back up a paragraph or two to the above sampler of modern feminist evil. That’s equality, is it? Yeah, equality as defined by lunatics, blithering idiots and other types of feminist, and, of course, Mad Mandy herself.
In a fine example of what really lurks at the heart of modern feminism, some psycho burger flipper called Victoria J. Duran has been caught on video going totally psycho at the sight of some young men protesting against abortion. While the whole abortion thing is complicated, I have already made my views known and am not about to go into it now.
What matters is that these kids weren’t doing anything objectionable, yet this massive 250lb piece of turd decides that she’s going to get all agro at them. What kind of dirtbag does that? Look at the photo, she’s not only twice as heavy as the kid, she’s also taller! How scuzzy a person do you have to be to get verbally abusive and physically intimidating towards someone so much smaller than yourself? But this is no surprise. This is how most feminists would behave if they had size on their side, and let’s face it, were it not for the law and the witnesses she would probably have beaten the crap out of those kids. Of course, if one of the pro-lifers had been her size or bigger she would probably have pissed herself and then waddled back to Burger King as fast as her slime trail would allow her.
If the sexes were reversed in this disgraceful situation, if a 250 pound man had verbally abused and menaced a bunch of pro-choice women half his size, the feminists would all be calling for the man to be jailed, yet I have yet to see feminists call for Victoria J. Duran to be locked up, or even mention her for that matter. Just more evidence that this nutjob isn’t the only one of her ilk who thinks menacing people half your size is okay as long as you do it for the sisterhood. And there’s no doubt she’s a feminist, as opposed to some other type of abortion supporter, as she spews all the usual bullshit we have come to expect from her sort…
“You’re just a white fucking privileged, racist fucking male, who doesn’t stand for women’s rights,” the raging moron screams at one point.
She then proceeds to use the Gillardian definition of misogyny and to point out that males have no right to talk about abortion and such…
“You’re just a bunch of misogynistic motherfuckers…no uterus, you have no right to talk about it…understand me motherfucker?”
Bigoted and anti-male, as well as verbally, psychologically, and physically abusive – poster girl for modern feminism right there, folks.
According to county records easily found online, Victoria J. Duran has been charged with assault and criminal damage but, being a woman, is unlikely to get into any real legal trouble over this. As I see it, the best bet in terms of making this woman regret her actions would be to cause Burger King a huge amount of bad PR and force them to fire her. Oh, look, here’s a contact form!
Video here. It’s at The Blaze, so I suggest you cover your nose when going in.