antifeminism evil women idiocy misogyny MRA oppressed men rape reactionary bullshit sex

Women wearing makeup, nutshots, toilet seats in the down position, and other signs of male oppression

In my last post, I referred (albeit obliquely) to a discussion taking place in the comments section over on The Frisky about an article called How to Teach Boys to be Feminists. With a title like that, it’s hardly surprising that the topic drew MRAs like, well, I was going to say like flies on shit, but it was more like the other way around. (Even our friend NWOslave made an appearance.)

Reading through the comments, I noticed a couple from a commenter calling himself “Really?” — with a question mark – that laid out point by point why he thinks men are getting the short end of the stick. His points were an equal mixture of wrong and silly. So I decided I would offer point-by-point responses to them all.

If any of you want to fill in more detailed responses to any of his points (or to challenge or correct my points), please do so.

So let’s give the floor to Really?

If you ever think women have it harder in modern society, just think of this:

Why is it that women complain when men leave the toilet seat up, but men don’t complain when women leave it down?

Really, Really? You’re going to lead with this? This, to you, is the most salient example of female privilege? My answer: I don’t know because this literally never happens in my life. I put the seat and the lid down because I don’t want things to fall into the toilet.

Why do women complain about men that only want one thing, but men don’t complain about women that want everything?

Huh? Men complain about women who “want everything” all the time.

Why do women have the choice between abortion, adoption, dropping an unwanted baby off at a hospital, raising the child with a father, or raising the child without a father, but the only choice men have is to agree?

Because these are rights that are reserved only for those who can make babies inside their body. (Women who are infertile, post-menopausal, or transwomen don’t have these rights either.)  When (cis) men develop this ability, they can have the same rights. Remember that pregnant (trans) man? He had the same rights as a pregnant women.

Why do women dress in makeup, short skirts, bare midriffs, and low-cut blouses but complain about men that stare at them?

You actually think that heterosexual men are oppressed by women wearing makeup, showing cleavage and wearing short skirts? Most heterosexual men manage to steal glances at women they find attractive without being a creeper about it. And for the most part, women don’t get upset if a guy looks at them; what’s upsetting is when guys pull up in a car and ask “can you give me directions to Pussy Avenue?”

Why do we pretend that men are the ones that abuse children when it is a well-known fact that women abuse children more than men?

Who pretends that? Feminists acknowledge that women abuse children. And yes, women do abuse children more than men —  because women, on average, spend much more time caring for children than men. If you adjust for the amount of time spent caring for children, men are more likely to abuse. But it’s not some sort of gender competition here. Abuse is a horrible thing, regardless of the gender of the abuser.

If single mothers have it so bad, why do women initiate about eighty percent of divorces and routinely commit perjury to win custody?

I’m guessing for the same reason men initiate divorces: because their marriages are terrible, and they’re miserable. [Citation Needed] for the claim about perjury.

Why do we have a Violence Against Women Act but nothing for men when women cause domestic violence just as often as men?

At the time the bill was passed, people were only just beginning to understand the prevalence of domestic violence towards women. Nonetheless, despite the name of the bill, VAWA is gender neutral, designed to protect male victims as well as female ones.

Why is it funny when a woman kicks a man in the groin but terrible if a man did the same to a woman – won’t the man be in more pain?

I don’t know why it’s funny. You’ll have to ask any of the sixteen gazillion guys posting videos on YouTube of themselves getting hit in the nuts, often on purpose.

Why is it terrible for a woman to be raped once but funny when male prisoners get raped over and over?

No feminist I know thinks this is funny. Here is more information on the subject.

Why is a man a wimp if he lets his wife beat up on him but a criminal if he defends himself?

I know of no feminists who would consider him a wimp; they would consider him to be what he is, a victim of domestic abuse. No one is a criminal for defending themselves; they can be a criminal if they respond with disproportionate violence, responding to a slap by beating their partner unconscious.

Why does women’s health get much more attention when men die about seven years younger than women?

Many of these issues are related to (cis) women’s reproductive health. Men have a smaller number of issues specific to their gender. If men want to help increase awareness of men’s health issues, they are free to organize awareness campaigns just as women have done over the years.

Why do we complain about legislators being mostly male when they always promote women’s rights and never promote men’s rights?

[Citation needed]

Why is it sexist to have clubs for only men but empowering to have them for only women?

Depends on the club.

If women only make 72 cents for the same work where a man earns a dollar, why don’t companies hire only women and put the competition out of business?

Women do get paid less. That’s simply a fact. The question is why, and that’s complicated. Sexism plays a part. See here.

How do police know who to arrest when there is a domestic disturbance involving lesbians?

The same way they know who to arrest in cases of domestic violence involving heterosexuals: by determining who is primarily responsible for the violence. This may involve collecting witness statements (if there are witnesses), by looking for visible signs of injury and other evidence of violence, and so on. Women – heterosexual women and lesbians alike – are regularly arrested for DV. Sometimes both partners are arrested.

Why do married women complain that their husbands don’t want to change a baby’s diaper but divorced women say their ex-husbands can’t take care of a child?

I’m having a hard time seeing the contradiction here. If a married man doesn’t regularly care for his children, he is less likely to be awarded custody.

Why do men that don’t pay child support go to prison but nothing ever happens to women that don’t allow visitation?

Women cannot unilaterally decide to cut off visitation. This is something determined by the courts. If a man is denied visitation, there’s generally a good reason for this – he may, for example, be an abuser.

If women-in-the-military is such a good thing, why don’t they have to register for the draft?

Feminists don’t actually run the military. Generally, feminists support women’s right to serve in the armed forces, and NOW has petitioned to include women in draft registration. But most feminists I’ve ever met are opposed to the draft for anyone, male or female.

Why are we so concerned about girls under-performing boys in math and science but not concerned about boys under-performing girls in everything else.

Because the ratio of women to men in the sciences is seriously skewed against women; STEM professions are heavily male-dominated. And this is no coincidence: girls and women are often told that women are “naturally” worse at math and science. There is no similar prejudice against men in, say, the liberal arts.

Why do fathers have to pay the mother to take his children away from him in divorce?

Child support is intended to help support, er, the children. Women tend to be the primary caregivers, so they are more likely to win custody. When men win custody, child support payments go to them.

Why is it legal for women to lie to men about who the father of a baby is to get child support, but a crime if she tells the same lie to the government to get Social Security or military benefits?

This is a difficult situation, with no easy answers. Courts put the interests of the children first, as they should.

Why do women have to prove they spent the money on the children when they collect welfare but don’t have to do the same when they collect child support?

Do they? I don’t think aid recipients should have to prove what they spent the money on.

Why do we have to cut men’s sports that have fans to create women’s sports that don’t?

That’s not how Title IX works. It’s intended to give female athletes the same opportunity as male athletes, not to “cut men’s sports.”

Why do women tennis players win the same prize money as men when they only play three sets and men play five – isn’t that equal pay for less work?

Again: Really, Really? You’ll have to take that up with the people handing out the prize money. The amount of money athletes make is pretty arbitrary, largely determined by how popular their sport is, how good their agent is, and what sorts of endorsement deals they get. Female gymnasts work pretty hard. How many of them earn big bucks? There are far more millionaire male athletes than there are women.

Why is it called sexual freedom when a married woman commits adultery but called cheating when a man does the same?

It’s cheating either way, unless you’re talking about people in open or polyamorous relationships. Who exactly is lionizing female cheaters? Not the show Cheaters, in any case.

Why are female murderers presumed to be mentally ill but male murderers presumed to be killers?

Outside of a few cases in which women who murdered their children were indeed suffering from postpartum psychoses, this is simply not true. Lawyers defending murderers often press for their clients – male or female — to be considered not guilty by reason of insanity, but they rarely win.

Why are there thousands of “father’s rights” groups but no “mother’s rights” groups?

Are there? I doubt it. And if so, what difference does it make? There are various feminist organizations that deal with issues related to motherhood (and parenthood in general) like parental leave. What on earth is your point?

Why do we have so many fathers groups fighting for more time with their children when there are so many social problems attributed to fatherlessness?

The fact that there are social problems attributed to fatherlessness does not mean that all fathers should get unfettered access to their children. Divorce is messy, and generally there are good reasons why certain fathers are prohibited from seeing their children. Giving a father who is a child abuser access to his children will not solve any social problems.

Why do men have to support women at the same standard of living following divorce when women don’t even have to cook and clean his new apartment?

Uh, yeah, that’s not how that works. Many divorced men (and some women) pay child support, with the amount determined by the needs of the children and of the non-custodial parent’s ability to pay. This support is meant for the children. Alimony is only awarded in about 15 percent of divorces; roughly 4 percent of alimony recipients are men.

If divorced women have it worse than divorced men, why do divorced men commit suicide eight or ten times as much as divorced women?

[Citation needed]

Why do we pretend that men walk out on their wives and children when women initiate about eighty percent of divorces?

Because the person who initiates the divorce is not necessarily the person who has “walked out” of the relationship.

Why is it considered sexist to have a couple of television shows geared towards men when there are several channels catering only to women?

There are a number of networks aimed mostly at men. While sexist shows are often criticized for being sexist, the idea of appealing to a specific demographic isn’t terribly controversial.

Why are television moms always portrayed as wonderful and loving and television dads always portrayed as inept buffoons?

Are they? The wife on King of Queens is a bit of a shrew, isn’t she? And Kevin James is the star of the show, isn’t he? (Newsflash: comedians often portray buffoons.) In any case, feminists generally aren’t big fans of shows that reinforce old stereotypes about the genders – including the buffoon dad and the humorless mom.  Every feminist I know is appalled by the new sitcom Whitney, which reinforces a lot of old stereotypes, many of them misandrist.

Why is it politically incorrect to say anything negative about women but funny to put men down?

Huh? Comedians say misogynistic things all the time.

Why are women without a job considered to be exercising free choice but men without a job considered a bum?

These are getting weirder and weirder.  I can only assume you’re talking about women who choose to be stat-at-home moms (or whose husbands choose this for them). Women who do this are more likely to be traditionalist than feminist. Every feminist I know wants men to have the same option to be a stay-at-home dad. That’s why feminists push for better parental leave, not simply better maternal leave.

Why do feminists demand that women be equally represented in high paying and powerful jobs but don’t complain when low-paying, dirty, and dangerous jobs remain mostly done by men?

Feminists want women to have the same employment opportunities as men. Women have in fact fought to get into dirty, dangerous fields heavily dominated by men, like mining, for example. (Darksidecat could give you more on this.)

In a second post, Really? asked a bunch more questions. As you’ll see, they got sillier and sillier as he continued:

Why do we have to say “Chairperson” and “Congressperson” but its ok to say “garbage man” and “bad guy”?

You don’t “have” to say anything. You can say whatever you want, though people might look at you funny if you were to call a female chairperson a “chairman.” As for “bad guy,” well, men make up the overwhelming majority of criminals (in real life) and villains (in movies, TV, and fiction generally), so it’s not altogether shocking that the term used to refer to the baddies is gendered in this way. You don’t have to use the phrase if you don’t want.

Why do we always hear the phrase “innocent women and children” but never hear about “innocent men” or “men and children”?

Huh? Could you give examples of this (that don’t involve the Titanic)? When talking about wars, people generally use the phrase “innocent civilians.”

Why do news headlines use the terms “student”, “spouse”, or “parent” when a girl or woman, or mother does something wrong but use the terms “boy”, “husband”, or “father” when a boy, man, or father does something wrong?

[Citation needed]

Why do feminists demand equal results for traditionally male roles but object to equal or shared parenting after divorce?

The issue of shared parenting is complicated, and it’s often not the best option for the children. Generally speaking, the person who was the primary caregiver gets primary custody, and this makes sense to me. If more men were stay-at-home-dads, men would get primary custody more often. Every feminist l know is supportive of stay-at-home dads.

Why does the term “angry mother” sound like someone that needs our help and support and the term “angry father” sound like someone that needs to be arrested and forced into anger management classes?

Huh? Could you give an example? I think it largely depends not on gender but what the parent in question is angry about – whether they were angry because of cutbacks at their kids’ school, or because they’re an asshole  with a giant sense of entitlement. Angry asshole mothers need anger management classes as much as their male counterparts.

Why is it that when men are more successful than women it’s because women are oppressed, but when women are more successful than men it’s because men are lazy?

I’m going to let Don Draper respond to this one for me.


Why are only women free to criticize other women without being labeled anti-women, but both men and women are free to criticize men?

Gross generalizations about men and women are sexist no matter who says them. But anyone can criticize individual men or women – or groups of men and/or women who hold specific beliefs – without being considered sexist.

Why are feminists pushing for laws that prevent new laws from being passed that protect men from women, such as with domestic violence against men, false allegations by women, or paternity fraud?

What on earth are you talking about?

Why is it that when a woman accuses a man of rape, the man’s name is made public and he is presumed guilty, but when he is proven innocent the woman remains anonymous and the man is still ruined?

Because our legal system works in the open, the names of accused criminals (regardless of gender, regardless of crime) are made public. In the case of rape, accusers are often demonized and shamed and threatened, so we protect their identities. Or try to: in many cases their names have been made public. Accused criminals who win acquittal can move on with their lives; in some cases where the jury’s verdict is controversial, like OJ Simpson’s not guilty verdict, they may be seen as guilty by many people. The law has no control over people’s opinions.

Why is it considered woman-hating or whining to point it out when women have something better than men, but we rush to pass new laws if men might have something better than women?

[Citation needed.]

Why is it that we’ve had forty years and billions of dollars going into women’s rights and men’s responsibilities, but it’s taboo in most circles to even suggest that maybe it’s time to consider men’s rights and women’s responsibilities a little bit for a change?

Uh, yeah. Very few MRAs suggest merely that we “consider men’s rights and women’s responsibilities a little bit for a change.” Instead, they write out long crazy lists like yours, attempting to portray men as horribly oppressed slaves at the hands of evil feminazi matriarchs. When MRAs set aside this nonsense and bring up specific issues that affect men disproportionally or exclusively, like circumcision, they generally are taken much more seriously.

If those who always side with women are feminists and those who always side with men are chauvinists, why don’t we have a wing of a political party and billions in funding going to chauvinists when we have that for feminists?

Feminists don’t “always side with women,” whatever that means. They have raised a number of  issues that affect women disproportionately or exclusively, and tried to win some redress. Feminists also work on initiatives that help both men and women, like parental leave, as I mentioned earlier. Whatever political power feminists have stem from years and years of organizing and lobbying. Other groups – like Christian conservatives, who are generally antifeminist – have also won themselves a degree of power through organizing and lobbying. (Do you remember that whole debate about Planned Parenthood?) Men’s Rights Activists are free to do the same.

For those who believe men had it better than women in the past and believe now it’s time for women to have it better than men for a while, why don’t they advocate whites being forced into slavery to blacks?

Dude, did you really just ask that?

Why are men considered more privileged than women with so many double standards against men?

Uh, maybe because they still are more privileged, a fact readily apparent to everyone who doesn’t live in MRAland.

182 replies on “Women wearing makeup, nutshots, toilet seats in the down position, and other signs of male oppression”

“Now, maybe if we had a situation where the girl could be taught that “you ARE his property” and “respect men”, there would be some ground for an interesting comparison with “respect women’ awaiting instructions.

What do you think?

David K. Meller

PS–A girl who was taught from puberty onward that it was her job in life to please her man would NOT be likely to be abused, would she? I should think that she would be treated with great tenderness, love and patience by the man in her life! DKM”

Not even trying to fucking hide it.

red locker: He has never tried to hide it. His first appearance here was to tell us that in the future, when the failed experiment of feminism was gone women would be happy slaves.

They could either come to their senses and ask for it, or men would rise up and impose it. It might be necessary to kill a lot of women, perhaps almost all of them. If Feminism was eliminated before artificial wombs and advanced robots were designed then women would just be eliminated, except for the few, really pretty ones who were kept as the playtoys of the powerful.

This is his idea of peace and freedom.

A girl who was taught from puberty onward that it was her job in life to please her man would NOT be likely to be abused, would she?

Saudi Arabia trains girls from birth to be subservient to men-and yet they still are beaten by their husbands.

So as usual, you are wrong.

A girl who was taught from puberty onward that it was her job in life to please her man would NOT be likely to be abused, would she?

Sure she would. All one need do is to keep shifting the goalposts of what they consider “pleasing” in order to ensure that they are never quite “pleased”.

You gotta love the logic here. Saudi society – still not sexist enough for MRAs.

PS–A girl who was taught from puberty onward that it was her job in life to please her man would NOT be likely to be abused, would she? I should think that she would be treated with great tenderness, love and patience by the man in her life! DKM

On the contrary, she would be the very most likely to be abused. She would sacrifice and ignore her own needs for another man, and if he was STILL horrible, she would only try harder and sacrifice more because it must be her fault if he beats her, right?

Honestly, this is disgusting

What. The. Fuck. No.

If you’ve been taught your whole life that your goal and purpose is pleasing men… that doesn’t stop you from getting married to someone pathologically jealous, petty and cruel, controlling and/or suddenly angry for no reason. Abused people often become people-pleasers for a reason: they’re trying to please their abusive partner. It doesn’t work.

DKM, go back to Decent Human Being 101.

If Spousal abuse and Domestic violence can be blamed on women being allegedly “too accomodating and submissive” in traditional moslem societies such as Saudi Arabia, why is so astonishing that the same phenomena may be ’caused by’ women not being compliant and docile enough in the USA, Canada, and Europe.

Youall join in saying that women are “still beaten in Saudi Arabia” but Christendom (or what is left of it) also has many troubled relationships and violent marriages. If women have too little freedom in the backwaters of the Moslem world, do they have too much in the USA?Does it have the undesirable–but inevitable–consequences of violence, or even murder?

Maybe spousal abuse and domestic violence–all too frequent in both places–have altogether different causes, and cures, and the status of women in the larger society has very little to do with it.

David K . Meller

Meller: Maybe if women are being abused in places which are the model you advocate, that model is fucked up.

Maybe spousal abuse has altogether different causes, like abusive people, and your “solution” has fuck-all to do with it.

Just a thought.

If there are as many “abusive people” in feminist countries like this one here as there are in traditionalist ones, why is it only, or even mainly, places like Saudi Arabia which are “f****d up, as you so elegantly put it? Maybe they know something that we don’t know, or maybe both of us are wrong, and DV and spousal abuse have altogether different causes than those attributed to either us or them!

You might be drummed out of the sisterhood from hell for admitting that I have a point here, but give me the benefit of the doubt!

David K. Meller

If Spousal abuse and Domestic violence can be blamed on women being allegedly “too accomodating and submissive”

Let me stop you right there; no it can’t. Spousal abuse and Domestic Violence can only be blamed on abusers because they are the ones doing the abusing. My point was merely that a women who had not grown up in an environment where her sole purpose was pleasing men would be more likely to to have the mental tools to look at an abuser and say “Fuck you, I’m out.” (In Mellerland, these women are called “bitches”. My mama did always tell me that there are worse things a woman can be then a bitch.)

NOTE! This does not mean that women not in possession of those tools are stupid, or deserve to be abused, or are at fault for abuse! As always, abuse is always, always always 100% the abuser’s fault.

“Abuse” is NOT always EXCLUSIVELY the abuser’s fault. We all know about couples who sometimes escalate their fights to serious levels of violence, who, it turns out, simply need a good fight before a good night! These are couples who are visited by the police two or three (sometimes more) times a week, and even when one is taken into custody, the other partner or spouse is there for bail the next day, begging for the release on his own recognizance…

Human relationships are far too subtle to be covered under a simplistic label of one being the “bad one’ and the other being the ‘victim”.

Another is the case where the “victim” knowingly pushes “all the right buttons”! She ( it usually is, but not always, the she) knows very well what will happen from hard and frequent experience, but she does it anyhow, and then gets the silent satisfaction of seeing a large part of a police precinct’s manpower, along with significant taxpayers’ funding, go to respond to her 9-1-1 piteous pleas! Of course, once he is taken to the hoosegow, she than goes crying to the welfare board, crying heartrendingly what should she do since she put the breadwinner behind bars for the better part of a year (more, if they can pin other crimes on him).

None of this excuses, or is meant to excuse, the really gruesome and appalling abuse that sometimes takes place to everyone’s surprise where the usual observation is on the order of “I thought that they were such a loving couple, they always got along so well together!”. before one, or both, are in the hospital, if not the morgue! But we all know that such cases are NOT the entire story!


Maybe if women are being abused in places where you (and most of the rest of the manboobz crew) advocate, then, maybe YOUR model is f****d up!

Maybe your solution has altogether different causes… and your so-called “solution” has nothing to do with it!

David K. Meller

Meller: If there are as many “abusive people” in feminist countries like this one here as there are in traditionalist ones, why is it only, or even mainly, places like Saudi Arabia which are “f****d up, as you so elegantly put it?

Elegant…not really. Succint, and as blunt as needed to get into your head.

But your complaint is, among others, that there is so much domestic violence here, because femisism is fucking up society. You argue that making it more like Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iran, would bring about an earthly paradise.

I merely point out that on this, as on so many other things, you are wrong, and full of shit.

I also happen to think the US is fucked up. Why? Because we allow so much DV/Rape/Abuse to go on. I think people like you make it worse, by doing all you can to prevent improvement.

Why? Because you think Saudi Arabia/Afghanistan/Iran are the ideal for which to strive. In my opinion, no small part of the reason this culture isn’t less fucked up than it is, is idiots like you, people who threaten women with violence if they don’t “submit” to the “loving attentions” of the man who is their, “lord and master”.

A fucking abusive notion of love… “do it my way or die.”

DKM, I was going to type a rebuttal…. but the thought of analyzing the shit you just smeared all over my computer screen makes me vomit into my mouth a little. So I’m just gonna echo ozy;

Go back to Being a Decent Human Being 101.

There’s no way to “rebut” DKM’s fantasies, because that’s what they are: fantasies. He wants the world to be a certain way, because that’s his fetish – cheerfully submissive women, manly man dominating them – and that’s really the end of the discussion. That’s how cognitive dissonance works: if A is true, and you present me with contradictory information B, then I need to either reject A, or find some way to harmonize it with B. If, like DKM, I am utterly unwilling to reject or modify A, then I need to do something else. Outright rejecting B, bringing in facts C and D to try and make them congruent, whatever.

But since in my mind, A cannot be disproven, then it doesn’t matter whether I have to contradict myself, make shit up, present an argument full of logic holes big enough to swallow all of Sarte’s collected works, whatever. A is true, therefore anything that suggests otherwise is false, QED.

TL;DR: like Utah Phillips says, it’s like opening a refrigerator – the light goes on, the light goes off, it’s not gonna do anything different. You are not going to get DKM to let go of the death-grip he has on his Gor fantasies.

Another is the case where the “victim” knowingly pushes “all the right buttons”!

Yeah, like when the victim has the temerity to try and keep her job, or visit her family, or spend time with her friends, or parent her children, or say anything about anything, or stay silent about anything, or wear/not wear the right things, or have such a punchable face… Button pushing!

So, the use of scare quotes means the victim really wanted to be hit, that’s why she, “knowingly pushes all the right buttons”.

We can add that to the ways your, “love” of women is hateful.

Bagelson–October 5, 2011 @10:20pm

“…the victim has the temerity to try to keep her job, or visit her family, or spend time with her friends, or parent her children, or say anything about anything, stay silent about anything, or wear/not wear the right things…”

I already in many different posts, condemned and excoriated cruelty to spouses in the strongest terms, but I said that understanding, as opposed to merely denouncing “abuse” or violence, is necessary and important. An ounce of prevention, they say, is worth a pound of cure!

Lets take some of YOUR examples: Trying to keep her job. Suppose the man has grown up with, firstly, a strong tradition that men are the breadwinners doing work outside the home–certainly common enough throughout the world–and is also worried about his nearest and dearest keeping her purity and fidelity in a workplace alive and swarming with men! He tries to discuss why she should leave, but she decides to play the American woman, argue with him about the importance of finding herself, he doesn’t earn enough money at his job (OUCH!!), she wants to “reach out to other adults” in the world outside, (which includes MEN–see objection #3 above) spend time with her family (who probably hates him anyway) and uses every opportunity to tell her how much ‘better’ she could have done marrying someone else like her sister(s) and cousin(s), or spend time with her goofy girlfriends who are even more bitter toward him then her family is, and never hesistate to put him down every chance they get, or wear or not wear the right things (nobody wants his nearest and dearest to go out of the house looking either like the town slut (available to any man for the asking) or looking like something the neighbor’s cat dragged out of the rain, as if he was neglecting her or something! Even style that doesn’t project a “message” can damage a marriage or relationship–as per the arguments over women wearing trousers here on a few months ago!

None of this excuses abusive behavior, but you can’t tell me that human nature (especially female human nature) being what it is, she is going to bring out the worst in him before long! If she would be a good wife and mother, and work toward healing the differences with her husband, he would probably treat his better half with kindness and love, but he can’t do this in the middle of a power struggle so beloved of you feminists!

Of course, if more wives (or long term girlfriends, for that matter) would look toward understanding men, and improving your harmony with them, rather than fighting with them, you feminists on (and other such websites and blogs) would have nothing to do, and would probably have to stand around twiddling your thumbs, talking about pretty kitties, and talking to yourselves about how awful men–especially white men–all are, and how women (at least the ones like yourselves here) are so miserable because of them

Oh, you girls–or is it grrrrrlz–do that anyway don’t you?

David K. Meller

Actually, I have to disagree with one thing:

“Women cannot unilaterally decide to cut off visitation. This is something determined by the courts.”

Women may not be able to *officially* cut off visitation, but they sure as hell can make it effectively impossible for the father to visit his kids.

(Small disagreement; the rest is pretty much spot-on.)

Men can simply kidnap the kids when they do get a hold of them, though.

Anything you say about “but that’s illegal” or “but women can do that too” also applies, mutatis mutandis in the latter case, to yours.

DKM, is it really so hard for you to envision a relationship where both people are equal (and thus no need for a power struggle) and trusting (and thus with no need for one spouse to control the other’s behavior/clothing choices/social life)?

Human nature being what it is, if a human being tries to control another human being like that, there’s likely going to be a lot of pushback, a lot of fighting, and a lot of resentment. Even the meek and the subservient quietly seeth under such controlling behavior. Someone who’s quietly seething with now way to communicate their needs or desires is NOT fun to live with.

Look, if you try to take away someone’s independence, their need for a social life, their need for their family, and isolate them and get angry when they don’t make all of THIER needs and desires YOUR needs and desires, they’re gonna get mean, argumentative, and bitter.

And no, that is NOT because of feminism

(also please note my use of gender neutral language. This shit goes ALL WAYS)

Wow, DKM’s rebuttal to my “beatings for work/family/friends” list basically boils down to “yeah, so?” But hey, just because he is almost word-for-word quoting the abuser’s handbook doesn’t mean his ideas about marriage are wrong! :p

DKM-no he would not suddenly start treating her with love and kindness because he would keep pushing to prevent her from doing anything.

In other words: “Okay, I will resign from work and stop hanging out with Sally.”

“You also need to stop going to PTA meetings.”

“Okay, I will stop going to PTA meetings.”

“You need to stop going to the store.”

“Okay I will stop going to the store.”

“You need to stop calling your mother.”

“She is my mother, and she has cancer.”

“How dare you talk back to me!” *proceeds to hit her until she submits to not talking to her mother.*

Later: “How come you are not going to the store to purchase food for dinner?” “You told me not to.” “How dare you!”

She cannot win against an abuser. Not once. And the sooner you get that, the sooner you will stop claiming it is anything except an abuser being abusive.

So, women can’t be trusted to pick out their own clothes or stay faithful when they come into contact with other men, but shoulder the responsibility of men’s actions towards them? The only way I can see this as plausible is if you believe that all women are naturally evil and all men are incapable of taking responsible for themselves and their actions.
Ozy’s Law in full effect.

” Why is it terrible for a woman to be raped once but funny when male prisoners get raped over and over?

No feminist I know thinks this is funny.”

So? You can find lots of non feminists making jokes about it. Also just because you don’t know any feminists who think it’s funny doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.