Letters to the Editor
-
Stupid guy
We all live in a gynocracy. It's called the family. Whose idea do you think it is to go look at new drapes while the football game's on?
Remember: if Mama ain't happy, nobody's happy.
-
it may be stupid to claim we have ACHIEVED a gynocracy but a look at the comments in response to the "feminist porn" post should make it obvious that the ASPIRATION to a totalitarian gynocracy
is no right wing fantasy.
-
however there is ZERO rational reason to believe that Hillary Clinton
shares those aspirations.
-
And this is a surprise HOW?
Another male commentator got his itsy rocks off saying something vicious about a woman who happens to be Hillary Clinton and therefore, apparently, a legitimate target.
I am SO not-surprised.
What DOES surprise me, however, is how blatant it is.
At least, genteel and Gentile anti-Semitism used phrases like "ahem...not our kind, dear."
I suppose it's good to have our enemies in plain sight, their mouths flapping in the breeze.
-
C'mon it's Cavuto for God's sake
The man dresses like Mary the Mother of Jesus at home and plays Spank Me games with the Honduran houseboy.
-
Moaning as a substitute for arguments
Well, this is exactly why men shouldn't allow the vagina monologue to become a dialogue… This is a gynocracy. Women have all the rights and privileges… The woman is not called a B-word because she's assertive and aggressive. She's called a B-word because she acts like one." And after all that, with a straight face: "[T]here's no misogyny, there's no misogyny.
Nice try to disguise there is no argument about the non-existence of gynocracy in six entire lines.
Notice: whining and moaning are not arguments. Of course, that something is against the usual way of thinking doesn't mean it is false (or true). Feminism seemed crazy BS when it firstly appeared (well, it seems crazy BS right now, but anyway). Read with a 50's accent: "What do you mean? Are women oppressed? But she is happy at home while I am slaving myself making extra hours for her to live like a queen! After all that, with a straight face "Women are oppressed, women are oppressed".
I haven't had time to read the rest of the article but, if this is the selected line, why bother?
-
wow
How 1970's of him.
-
Oh lord....I'm am getting so sick of this
I am so exhausted with the media trying to tell me I'm either sexist or racist. Never both. Never neither. It's one or the other, and it's all contingent upon who I am voting for in the Democratic primary. How simple. I'm a sexist. Thank you!
Can we have a ticker on the corner of Salon's front page counting down to the Dem convention when all this can go back on the backburner? I understand that misogyny and racism is real. I get it.
Can we start talking about Iraq again now? The ceacefire is dissolving and the shit is about to hit the fan. Tons of our money and American lives are being flushed away over it, and all I'm seeing here is the latest (non) scandal du jour over the Democratic election!
-
Misogyny AND misandry exist!
But only one is generally acknowledged by the MSM. I'm so sick of FOX bashing - I mean, are you really surprised that the Weekly World News of cable broadcasts crap like this?
-
Re: Hillary, stop running for President...
...And make me a sandwich!
Here's a good riposte Hillary can use:
"You're already a sandwich--a shit sandwich!"
Nyuk, nyuk!
-
Of course
what I dub the 'vaginocracy' is real. the average schmo of a guy has less power in his lifetime than does the average woman.
the average joe has fewer of his rights and privileges recognised by government than does the average woman.
poor men (less than $100million in assets) are the RUNTS of the planet, whose rights are neither championed by the rich men NOR by women. Instead, they serve as convenient cannon fodder, slave men for the wives, and useful idiots for the difficult jobs women do not want to touch and rich men do not have to touch.
That feminism, the damned fraud, got in a good forty years of jabs against us men does not make a falsehood a reality. In REALITY women have more privileges and rights than do men. women are generally ON AVERAGE less hurt, killed, mugged than are men. Women have more freedoms, excuses, and options than do men. Women commit as many crimes as do men, but female crimes (blackmail, fraud, etc.) are not considered crimes, so the jails are filled with powerless men.
A woman today can make her way without any input from a man. The same is not true for men, not by a long shot.
I look forward to the day that men become full human citizens with all the rights and privileges accorded to women today, including all the reproductive rights women fight hard to deny men (yeah, screw you too, women).
-
Here is one of the actual quotes
People read the actual interview on mediamatters. Kate Harding linked to it.
The sound bites are out of context as are the highlights on MM.
Half fo the following quote was listed here. The rest follows:
RUDOV: Well, this is exactly why men shouldn't allow the vagina monologue to become a dialogue. Hillary Clinton, who's living by the gender sword, is going to be dying by the gender sword. She sends in Elton John to do her hissing when she's having a catfight with America. It's ridiculous for anybody to throw around the misogyny word. When she was the presumptive nominee, we never heard anything about misogyny. But when things go badly -- when she's not getting what she thinks she's entitled to -- all of a sudden it's misogyny. And that's just as bad as throwing around the racism word.
-
A woman today can make her way without any input from a man. The same is not true for men, not by a long shot.
Men could do the same if they cared as little about sex as a lot of women do. There really is no reasonable way to "compensate" men for the fact that they are more interested in women than women are in them.
-
in case anyone's wondering
Erik De Los Reyes, a student at the University of Virginia, runs the aforementioned facebook group. His phone number at the school is 434-297-5982 and his UVA email address is edw4@virginia.edu. I'm certainly not advocating abusing or harassing this kid, but perhaps some gentle and friendly reminders letting him know that misogyny isn't funny or merely sophomoric. He's just a kid, so he's got lots to learn.
-
Oh Jeez
I had promised my self I would not contribute to this stupid infighting in the primary season. Or respond by putting in letters like the one I just posted to race and sex baters like Salon or Fox News (Is there really a difference - both just want unthinking clicks so they can all claim that they've grown their audience). Seriously how many outrage stories can one paper publish.
And here I did it again. Like a junkie, I've let myself get drawn in again to vapid half-truths and press release arguments that skim articles (and reference half facts). Yes it all worked in Lit class, but there was nothing on the line then, and no money was being made off this pathos.
Anyways here's a real discussion to everybody.
What is the responsibility of accuracy in reporting for a blog like this one? What are the standards of accurate reporting. Should the same standards apply for a newspaper? Was this blog posting accurate? Does it need to be?