Categories
antifeminism evil women imaginary backwards land imaginary oppression incoherent rage men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men playing the victim vaginas

MRA lackwit declares Sheryl Sandberg an “arrogant Lindsay Lohan Look-a-like” who “promotes sexism, bias and hate.”

Separated at birth?
As hard as this is to believe, these are actually different women.

I haven’t been paying much attention to the recent brouhaha over Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg’s new book.  But I feel safe in saying that MRA lackwit Christian J.’s “Sheryl Sandberg, Your Usual “Modern” Crass, Arrogant, Sexist, Biased Female” may be the dumbest thing anyone has written, or ever will write, on the subject.

Mr J’s post on WMASAW – the blog that used to be called What Men Are Saying About Women – starts off with a puzzling description of Sandberg as an “arrogant Lindsay Lohan Look-a-like, [who] Promotes sexism, bias and hate.” (Um, what?) And it only gets worse from there:

It is amazing what these sexist and abusive, addled females get away with while they continually praise themselves and raise themselves as being the “Saviours” of the world with the “If Only Women ran the World” meme. Take Sandberg for example, the bastion of that left-wing mentality … .

Yes, that’s right. Mr. J is describing Sandberg as a “bastion” of left-wing thought. Mr. J and the English language are not good friends.

They make the claim that “Equality” is about the aim of making women level with men, erm! level suggests what?  In every area possible,  even if it means reducing standards and tests and lowering anything that women have problems with. …

Every time they make the same claim that (Lindsay Lohan Look-a-Like)Sandberg bloviates about here, like every other member of that same HATE movement, it was never about anything else but giving women a FREE ride to the top and don’t anyone every dare hold them back because there would be screaming and wailing and it would be introduce another excuse to cry that usual lie of “holding them back”, amazing.

In reality, it’s because job placement used to be based on merit and ability, even though that has been tossed out and replaced with quotas in favour of women. It has everything to do with sexism, v*gina and pro-female “Equal Opportunity” as Sandberg denies is the case. ….

What a sexist loathsome, despicable female.

Mr J. then quotes a couple of not-exactly earthshatteringly controversial comments of Sandberg’s:

“I think a world that was run where half our countries and half our companies were run by women, would be a better world.”

“I hope that . . . you have the ambition to run the world,” Sandberg told Barnard graduates, “because this world needs you to run it.”

As Mr. J figures it, Sandberg is promulgating female supremacy here, “saying that every females alive could out perform any male. Sickening, petty, self-congratulatory, back-slapping and wishful thinking or what !”

I choose “what.”  (They speak English in What?)

Mr J, for his part, seems to believe that, in an inversion of the the man-hatred he attributes to feminists, every male alive could outperform any female:

As far as I can see so far, those countries that have women in charge, are not doing that crash hot at all. …

Yet this odious and tedious Sandberg has the temerity to state that the world would be a better place run by women. What a complete, compulsive liar that women really is, women these days have problems being genuine and real, let alone anything else. But it does demonstrate that standard egotistical side of these “New Women”, who have been granted the easy option and helped along the way, every way possible by compliant men. Do they get any thanks for it, forget that. They just get the knife in the back for their efforts and gloat, even after changing conditions, being sued, forced to comply to changes that women demand and then turn around and state “Look at me, I am so good” .

Was that last sentence even a sentence? If so, please diagram it for me. I dare ya!

What hypocrites they are. It is about time men stopped capitulating to these arrogant and narcissistic females, stopped giving them automatic promotions, a free ride and start giving them some competition and let’s see how well they go then.

It’s always funny when blithering idiots suggest that women’s brains are inferior to their own.

380 replies on “MRA lackwit declares Sheryl Sandberg an “arrogant Lindsay Lohan Look-a-like” who “promotes sexism, bias and hate.””

@The Kittehs’

I read a couple of his comments when the big prostitution fight was going on at Feministe and you and Bagelsan (?) were talking about it here and my curiousity got the better of me.

He was a weirdie! It seemed a little put on to me, but it was hard to tell for sure.

I may have to complain about inhaling poor innocent rodents. Can’t you eat crickets or something like my brother’s bearded dragons?

Funny thing, they live with his “co-owner”/not-boyfriend…who’s place he stays at, without a spare bed…I’m not sure whether to believe the “we’re just friends” or press the “dude, I don’t care” line. Either way, bearded dragons, eat bugs, live not-here because my mother is only okay with creatures who’s food can’t run away.

And it might’ve been Jane Fonda, definitely one of those actresses who’s done fuck all in my lifetime (no disrespect or anything, just not anyone I’ve ever paid attention to, certainly not as a feminist overlady!)

You’d think he could at least pick a more current feminist actress, like Ashley Judd.

Some Gal – I’d thought it was Cassnandra who’d mentioned him (obviously wrong there), but yeah, I think it might have been Bagelsan. I don’t comment much at Feministe, but it’s a handy spot to do a bit of Read My Blog stuff on occasion.

Tomek is decidedly strange, and yeah, I can never figure out whether he’s putting it on or not.

I can’t tell if Tomek is performance art or what. The comment section over there is… a rage-inducing clusterfuck most times.

Well, sometimes the comment section on feministe is a clusterfuck because Jill wants to hold forth on things she doesn’t want to do/know about/really stopped to consider herself.

If I hear one more “choose your choice feminists” comment from jill I’m really going to lose it.

That is true. I get her frustration with “choose my choice” thing, but she does go about it rather ham-handedly.

But there are also people there who seem to exist on oxygen and moral outrage and can’t WAIT to be offended.

Hellkell, true enough.

It would be nice if people there were somewhat more open to realizing that not all feminists have had the opportunity to read every feminist thought ever, and that everyone has to make the best decision they can based on their particular circumstances. What grinds my teeth is that Jill is ready to make this allowance for herself and a few others (who’s particular situation she’s familiar with) but not to every woman.

I’m willing to grant that Jill is only human, I just wish that sometimes she left certain articles to people better able to handle them.

How many threads now have ended in flames?

The part that does bother me about “chose my choice” is not that the women make a particular choice, but that society makes it almost impossible for a woman to make a choice without being disporportionately penalized and judged (often wrongly about what motivated the choice) for it. And that even the most aware feminist is forced to uphold certain parts of patriarchy, though that was never the intention.

The fact that women feel more free to make their own decisions, and that often they don’t give a damn about what other people think of it is to be celebrated as a step in the right direction.

Hey Diogenes, pop over to the more active thread, Virgil might like to hear your thoughts on blowjobs. Note: do not go off about blowjobs here, so over there and reply to the topic. Please and thank you.

@Kittehs

Sometimes I think the commenters at Feministe need a massive humour injection. It does go toxic often enough.

Amen, sister, preach it!

I spent a goodly amount of time lurking there (and here) and a few other places where I’ve also seen your avatar. The posts there are often interesting and thought provoking, but it bogs down in identity politics quite quickly for my tastes. That’s not to say there aren’t smart commenters who post interesting responses, but I’ve grown quite disillusioned at the amount of ‘your privilege is worse than mine’ and ‘your opinion is oppressing me and killing women’ that seems to go on.

Oh, and tomek is the smelliest and most stale of all the socks…

Marie – you got it! Identity politics is all the rage (pun intended) over there. One word out of place and it’s a bloody dogpile. Plus so many of them seem to have NO grasp of reading sarcasm or irony in a comment – I know it’s harder to do with written comments from someone you don’t know, but the number of times I’ve seen regulars slammed for what was so freaking obviously sarcasm or irony is unbelievable. And some of the regulars there play Oppression Olympics all the bloody time. It gets tedious, which is why I don’t comment that much (also it has a touch of US = the world – I know it’s a US blog mostly looking at US issues, but fuck, it gets wearisome in the comments).

Hmm, I must check and see if tomek has got his head around the not-reincarnated concept yet … heheheh. I felt like throwing that blog post into the open thread partly ’cause tigtog was doing it (she’s an Aussie involved with Hoyden About Town, an Oz feminist blog) and partly because I got the feeling it might piss some of the more anti-religious types there off. For all the language squabbles, Feministe doesn’t strike me as being as happy to have a mix of beliefs as this blog.

Never thought my input would be valued here.

Was that your idea of input? You half-assed it when someone WANTED you to participate.

Diogenes, I am very disappointed that you couldn’t drum up a bit more in the Virgil thread. I was reading with bated breath to know what you were going to say, but you didn’t even answer your own rhetorical question. I suppose Virgil’s embanment prevented him from taking the bait, but you could at least have laid out your methods of detecting his socioeconomic status via the Internet for those of us playing at home.

(In the other thread, naturally.)

(More) on-topic, Argenti, thanks for the link to Ozy’s blog. I always love finding myself there, and that post especially was good for clarifying a lot of what I think about choice feminism in my own head.

Ditto on thanks for the link, Argenti – I enjoyed Ozy’s article a lot. Gods, the shitift that went on at Feministe over the names business! And one commenter on Ozy’s doing the same old, same old “Marriage sux and you shouldn’t do it!” while completely ignoring the point that marriage is different things for different people, especially where matters of race or sexuality intersect.

I mean (ignore if you don’t want to read a ME example) I have the privilege of not marrying; I have the choice, it’s not barred to me and my race would not get me branded in the US if I lived there (afaik it’s not the same here). I’d never intended to marry anyone, even if Mr K hadn’t been in the picture. But there is something special for us about being married vs being lovers, and if that were reflected in material matters, it would be nobody else’s damn business to tell me I’m caving in to the patriarchy. I know what marriage has been and is still in many instances, but that does not wipe out the personal significance, however culturally ingrained it is.

(Did that make any sense?)

“(Did that make any sense?)”

Yeah, I knew a pair of gay men who had a lovely private ceremony instead of getting legally married, because of their views in the institution of marriage — their families are both totally cool about it though, so things like hospital visitation will probably never matter. Still, I get that being able to marry is actually a privilege for some (many?) couples.

And no problem on the link, I wish Ozy still posted in these parts!

“(Did that make any sense?)”

Yes, it did.

My wife and I married after living with each other for 15 years. We did it for the medical insurance coverage. I was surprised by how I felt afterwards. A public declaration of how I felt about her became very special to me.

She, on the other hand, took ten years before she stopped calling me her “ball and chain”… crazy hippie. 😉

Whoops! My bad, I forgot Ozy’s preferred pronoun. (Apologies if you see this, Ozy!)

joanimal – LOL to your hippie wife! 😀

I seriously don’t know if Sir and I would marry were he on this plane, though I expect so, if only for tax breaks, welfare, pensions and so on. It’s a good thing we never had to organise it, since bein’ organised is not our strong point. He started thinking of us as married months before I did; then months later we had a sort of “Hey, look, we’re married!” shindig at Home, then months after that he proposed, and a couple of weeks ago (we’ve been married six-years-come-April-by-his-count) I got an engagement ring from a friend. 😛

@Kitteh: hey, if you’re following David’s link to Ozy’s blog, that’s the problem; he never updated the link, so that’s to an out-dated blog. (ozyfrantz.com vs. ozymandius3) Bookmark the new one!

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.