Usually these things are written by Porky, but this one is by Michael as i was the one who posted the comment at Shamaya’s that led to this. We’ve received a response to “American Psycho Otep Shamaya wins Misandrist of the Month” and even though it’s not from the organ grinder but rather one of her monkeys it nonetheless gives me an opportunity to point out some common feminist tactics so instead of publishing it in the comments i am giving it a post all it’s own. You may wonder why i am publishing this mentally ill man’s tirade at all. Well, it’s too early for me to go out here in the Emerald City, and i thought it might be fun to do an analysis of this kind of thing so here goes. His stuff, all of it – no edits have been done – are in quotes, my response is below said quotes.
I should point out that Josh Olson is the guy who wrote A History of Violence and is also doing something or other with Ms Shamaya (whose “Confrontation” i am, ironically, listening to as i write this). Chances are of course that this man is not the actual Josh Olson, but just a coward hiding behind a famous name – i doubt the real Josh Olson has the email address “upyours@fuckoff.com” !
Our friend starts thus…
“Of course she published it, you hydrocephalic imbecile.That’s because Otep has a sense of humor, and enjoys exposing the inane peregrinations of the mentally challenged. (Buy a dictionary, schmuck).”
Notice the use of big words. This is often done by irrational people trying to establish that they are “smart” and therefore worth listening to – usually the only difference between these people and Dan Quayle is that just before they open their mouth someone whispers in their ear “Spanish not Latin”. Also, the conclusion that my comment was published because Shamaya has a sense of humor is not valid, for even if she rather than her webmaster chose to publish it she may have done so for a variety of reasons, we simply don’t know which. Notice also the resort to ad hominems so common amongst supporters of not only feminism but also of other types of hatred.
“Speaking as a proud member of the male gender,”
I just don’t see how a man can be proud of being so and also defend someone who thinks men are scum. Do proud gay men defend homophobes?
“I’d also like to take a moment and point out that not all of us are terrified and threatened by strong women as. ”
As what? He doesn’t say. Perhaps he couldn’t come up with a big enough word so he just left a blank space. Note also the claim that Shamaya is “strong”, you know just like a Klansman, or some skinheads kicking the crap out of a lone gay guy in a dark alley. Personally i don’t know if Shamaya is weak or strong nor do i care, just like other hate mongers it is her spreading of bigotry that matters. The tactic here seems to be to make those of us who oppose feminist hatred look weak for doing so – when women stand up to sexism against their gender they are strong, when men stand up to sexism against their gender they are weak. In other words, if you know i can knock you out the best thing to do is convince me that i would be a wimp to hit you back. Alas, for the feminists i’m not hydrocephallic enough to fall for that.
“I often wonder what the source of these terrors are.”
Note the claim that i am scared. This helps to define anti-feminists as weaklings, and also distracts the audience from what i have actually expressed, which is outrage.
“Is it really as simple as having a tiny pecker? Did a woman once laugh at you during a sensitive moment? Did your mother make you wear dresses during your formative years? Did a woman steal your job cleaning toilets at the gas station?”
Another common tactic of feminists is to attack the sexuality of any man who opposes them – it’s like their equivalent of the extreme right’s view that feminists are all dykes or fuglies who can’t get laid. As for the gas station thing, i’m not allowed to work in a gas station as both my parole officer and my psychiatrist tell me i would do well to stay away from anything that can be used to start fires.
“Or are you just another thumbless, toothless half-wit who actually believes the misogynistic rants of Rush Limbaugh come from a place of intellectual rigor, and not the simple and obvious panic of the latent (and self-loathing) homosexual?”
Note the implication that i am a right winger ( how many Rush fans aren’t?) Those who know my writings know i’m left wing on everything except feminism and multi culturalism ( and if i were a conservative i wouldn’t even oppose the latter), but amongst the mouth breathing radical left nothing is worse than a right winger, so if you want someone’s argument dismissed out of hand simply claim they are right wing. There is also a certain hypocrisy in someone who appears to be a liberal using the word homosexual as an insult – this may very well be the kind of man who is in favor of gay marriage but will call you a faggot whenever it suits him.
“Seriously, man, what drives someone to express so much anger at a group of people whose only sin is that they don’t bow and scrape before intellectual midgets, cowards and sissies?If you put half as much effort into losing your virginity as you do into lambasting strong women, you might actually enjoy life for a change.
Give it a try. You’ll thank me some day.”
And there’s another attack on my sexuality, and the repeating of the claim that Shamaya is “strong” rather than hate-filled. I do thank him though – i thank him for helping me to kill some time.
And did everyone notice what is missing in the midst of all these logical fallacies? That’s right, folks, an actual argument. Never does “Josh” say “You are wrong because of this that and the other thing”, but then how do you rationally defend a woman who writes gendercidal crap like “Menocide”? You can’t.
I mentioned at the start that i am listening to Otep’s “Confrontation” as i write this. Amongst the lyrics in this very cool song is the all too true line “Its a rich man’s war but it’s the poor that fight.” This seems rather appropriate writing music for this post given that this man ( a member of an underprivileged group) is fighting on behalf of a woman (a member of a privileged group). Congratulations “Josh”, on being the gender equivalent of a white man’s nigger.
PS, any response not containing valid arguments will be deleted – i don’t always get up this early. Now if you will all excuse me, i have a fire to start.
Michael Claymore
Look at this woman. Michelle Williamson doesn’t exactly look like a monster does she? Even in this mugshot she looks like a harmless innocent, albeit a rather thick one.