"The reality may be darker: that the power he derived from his role in progressive politics was intertwined with his abuse. He seems to have used his feminist-minded political work to advance his own career, to ingratiate himself with the women he would go on to harm, and to cover up his cruelties.... It’s impossible to know what exactly was going on in Mr. Schneiderman’s mind. But one has to wonder if his alleged actions were all part of the same pathological craving for the kind of ultimate power that makes one immune from consequence — that he got off on the simple fact that he had the ability to physically hurt women while being perceived as their noble champion. What greater sense of authority than knowing that you can rupture a woman’s confidence (and, reportedly, her eardrum) so thoroughly that she, upon your mandate, removes her tattoos, loses weight and comes back after you’ve hit her; that you can physically overpower and injure women and then scare them out of reporting it; and that you can also convince the feminist and progressive establishments to crown you one of their greatest leaders and strongest advocates? A man who derives satisfaction from riding in as a white knight fighting for women’s rights while he secretly abuses women: It’s so tremendously narcissistic it seems almost fictional.... So what are strong women to do if even the men who seem like good feminists might be misogynists, too? With right-wing men who oppose women’s rights, what you see is what you get. With these bogus male feminists, it can be crazy-making..."
From "The Problem With ‘Feminist’ Men" by Jill Filipovic in the NYT.
It wouldn't be so confusing and "crazy-making" if you hadn't indulged in politically convenient excuses back when Bill Clinton was accused of rape and sexual harassment. Stop giving Democratic Party men a pass and put the liberation of women first.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
127 comments:
With right-wing men who oppose women’s rights
Right wing men don't oppose women's rights. If you were smarter maybe you'd realize the difference between people who seek control and people who seek freedom.
Yeah, there's a problem with feminist men: they are Beta Male weirdos trying get laid. Shouting Thomas calls them sneaky fuckers, which sounds right to me.
"Stop giving Democratic Party men a pass and put the liberation of women first."
It does actually all fit together. These libs are often fussing about rape culture.
And, it seems like it's not that libs are overly exaggerating when they say that we live in a rape culture.
It turns out they do. Cause they tend to hang w/ lib men, this is the reality that they know.
Women put up with so much shit from Democrats on the theory that "right-wing men" are worse.
Rejecting that is practically the only agenda I have here.
Stop giving Democratic Party men a pass and put the liberation of women first.
Commanding water to run uphill won't solve a plumbing problem.
Cons put up with so much shit from Rs on the theory that "libruls" are worse.
Rejecting that is practically the only agenda I have here.
"Rejecting that is practically the only agenda I have here."
Yes, scratch a lefty shiloh and find a fascist rape fantasist.
"Rejecting that is practically the only agenda I have here."
On the post or on the blog?
And perhaps tearing down actual decent men. Like Mitt Romney.
Women put up with so much shit from Democrats on the theory that "right-wing men" are worse.
Rejecting that is practically the only agenda I have here.
Amen!
Yeah, I'd like to see him try it on Gina Haspel
A real woman wouldn’t put up with some bitch like Schneiderman.
My wife would have shot him and my girlfriend would sic some funny talk behemoths on him.
Whoops: talking behemoths.
" With right-wing men who oppose women’s rights, what you see is what you get. With these bogus male feminists, it can be crazy-making...""
Alas, I'm pretty sure the crazy was already made.
Even when I was a liberal atheist I preferred right wing men. Much more likely to treat a woman as an equal.
"Women put up with so much shit from Democrats on the theory that "right-wing men" are worse.
Rejecting that is practically the only agenda I have here."
"Ann Althouse! Modern day feminist party of one, your table is ready!"
Women who fall for “sneaky fuckers” really are stupid.
Feminism is much more a leftist ideology than a women's movement, whatever that means. Consequently, when the interests of women generally do not coincide with the current leftist agenda... well, the predictable happens, does it not? Nor is this just a feature of recent American feminism, one can see the same pattern repeated since the days of Madame de Staël's salon.
(reposted with typo corrected)
"On the post or on the blog?"
The blog.
I just read Lonesome Dove. Democrats are like Jake Spoon. Slick smooth talking users who abuse at will. For some reason biological reason a lot women fall for it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaAAk-uSKhk
This song nails it too.
So I guess Alan Alda is a bad prototype after all? Donald Sutherland played the role muc( better.
Maybe at some point there should be the realization and open admission of a linkage between ideology and anti-woman pathology. And maybe, just maybe, those that they project their evils upon are the real pro-woman advocates.
""On the post or on the blog?"
The blog."
She just outed herself.
There is no way she voted for DJT.
I've known a lot of right-wing men, and in general they treat me with respect. They see me as a person and not as merely an identity type.
Sado-masochism is not a new thing, but on the national evening news it comes rather closer than just reading about among the Victorian upper classes.
"The blog."
I'd love to read more about that.
And perhaps tearing down actual decent men. Like Mitt Romney.
Yeah. Raising up the Republican Hillary Clinton does not help the argument.
Lefty women would be allow "their men" to tie down women, and have them brutally sodomized, if it meant they would get control of congress.
You know, this is the same party that for decades actually argued that they were doing blacks a favor by enslaving them. Even today, when some try to leave the Plantation, they send their fugitive slave catchers after them to tell them what's good for them.
What is the mechanism that allows leftie women to be abused and be silent? I mean some of these women seem to be high class escorts but others are professional women, lawyers. Why could this guy hit, actually strike and hurt, both types and get away with it? Sometimes I think it's this "mentoring" plan, that women look for someone to help them get ahead more than they look for how to do the best job possible. (Daddeeee, I neeed youuu.) And sometimes I think they are a little bit naive about why a guy notices them. ("Attention: Lefty Fool-Girls, He's NOT Dadddeee!!!) And when they realize what it's about they try to keep the mentor while pushing away the man - and that's very naive. They think he's going to realize they are real professionals sometime and stop punching them in the face. And he is going to think "She likes it, good, next time I'll knock her into the wall."
But I don't know. Once or twice someone approached the subject of pain with me and I said it hurt and I didn't like it. I can't really understand any other response.
Democrat Women will "take one for the team"
I've never heard of a Republican or Conservative woman doing that.
Remember the French banker who was slated to the be the next French President.
He rapped a black maid in NYC, but then we learned that was like SOP for him. Then all the French chicks came out and said he'd basically raped them but it was OK, because he was a good Socialist.
Our resident dullard #IngaKnew is pro muslim for crissakes. And she isn't alone. I'm not sure if her Navy hero daughter was sodomized and stoned that she would change her mind. Because you gotta break some eggs you know.
Women are making deals that they don't stick to.
Normal sexual commerce is threatened.
You need a convention of sticking to deals or there won't be deals.
First assumption ought to be that the women weren't abused.
Both sides came out ahead. It hasn't been shown fraud or force was applied.
And right on cue, so predictably, 2 things come to light immediately:
1) schneidermans little "habit" was a long time open secret on the left, because OF COURSE IT WAS...
https://www.city-journal.org/html/eric-schneidermans-inevitable-fall-15890.html
2) the dems are already moving to make this "Americas problem" so lets not dwell on the actions of any particular party...
Some of LLR Chucks lefty allies are already blaming Trump for Schneidermans actions because, again, OF COURSE they are..
Here is the difference between Left Leaning Men and Right Leaning Men
A left leaning man will agree with whatever outrage dejour (there is always something) and then try to get into her panties.
A Right Leaning man will tell a woman when she is full of shit and she can take care of her own panties.
This...confuses them.
Is there a single MSM piece on Schneiderman that doesn't have "Trump" in it?
$20 on CNN's penis head Brian Stelter having a freaky side.
First assumption ought to be that the women weren't abused.
Both sides came out ahead. It hasn't been shown fraud or force was applied.
Not making a police report is one thing. Going back for more is quite another.
Schniederman's brown slave wearing slave collar in public.
https://i.redditmedia.com/nKX7CoMOezrtqu-rDBd9s1vj0UVB5RA1QH2RD9jhj78.jpg?w=709&s=ba9a51de0201bc852a51df582be098dc
Inconceivable!
Did not at least one of Schneidermann's accusers use terms describing a relationship; not just a one night stand?
With four women now coming forward, how many more have there been?
How many people knew about this?
I guess if Feminists owed Bill Clinton a blow job for saving abortion, today's Feminists owed Schneiderman wearing a collar and calling him 'Master'. It is, of course, Trump's fault.
How many men knew?
How does " liberation of women" apply? Where these women slaves? Where these women forced into a relationship by their parents? Where these women bought with money? Where these women blackmailed into a relationship with Schneiderman?
They made a poor choice on their own initially and sadly suffered the consequences and that pervert Schneiderman , if guilty, should be thrown in jail.
This has nothing to do with feminism. It's about choices and horrible behavior.
In NYC the ladies all called him Dr Spankenstein.
“I'd love to read more about that.”
There’s a 14-year archive.
Mostly I react to things as they happen and don’t feel like taking sides. But I do feel strongly motivated to call liberals on hypocrisy about women’s liberation.
Women who fall for “sneaky fuckers” really are stupid.
The world is full of stupid women, then.
Yeah..slave collar to the degree his tie is a noose
The "liberation of women" bullshit lie is what makes this phenomenon happen, Ann.
You keep lying. Your bitch is a lie.
Clever men know how to con you by flattering you by giving your lie credence.
You deserve it.
Stop the drama queen act. Stop believing your own lies.
projection is hard.
By the way, that "liberation of women" thing isn't just a bullshit lie. It's a Marxist feminist bullshit lie.
You have a towering legal intellect, Ann. Shit, I worked with the best and I know.
But you turn into a moron whenever your self-interest drags you into identity politics.
You're pulling down a six figure state pension. You haven't worked hard in 45 years. We've been kissing your ass your entire life.
This demented bitching you do about women is fucking ugly. There are certainly many other admirable parts of your personality. It's not all you are. You're obviously dedicated to freedom of speech.
But this crap about women having some sort of bitch is obnoxious, stupid, demented and it makes you look like an asshole.
Now, the first step toward negating the power of sneaky fuckers like Schneiderman to con women is for you to stop conning yourself and other women with this completely unjustified Marxist feminist bitch.
You're part of the cause, Ann.
So long as you, one of the most privileged people to ever walk the earth, keep copping a ridiculous and unfounded grievance, con artists will be glad to fleece you and the women you help to delude.
"Mostly I react to things as they happen and don’t feel like taking sides. But I do feel strongly motivated to call liberals on hypocrisy about women’s liberation."
If that were true it would be logical for you to be pointing to examples of libs being hypocritical re women's lib. Here we have libs reacting correctly. And, yur reaction is as if they were doing the opposite of what they're doing.
Interesting.
Don't ya think?
I am curious what oppression American women suffer under myself.
I suspect that the things that most of what Feminists rail against is Biology, and not legal issues...at least on an objective scale.
Yeah..slave collar to the degree his tie is a noose
Collar has a ring on it for leash attatchment
It's a common practice of the Pro-Choice, selective, opportunistic, and congruent, Church and people with a twilight or penumbral faith. Beware liberal and progressive sects that deny individual dignity, intrinsic value, and women's franchise (e.g. choice, conception, abortion).
Why does a wolf dress in sheep's clothing?
American "right-wing" men believe, in principle, that men and women are equal in rights and complementary in Nature. However, since philosophy engenders but does not determine outcomes, there are, of course, exceptions. Still, principles matter.
So, prof, here's a common rant I hear from every women on the first or second date, without regard to the woman's political orientation.
She's been trained by media and the educational system to tell me that she loves gay men, trannies, and every kind of pervert and depraved sexual actor. You'd think she loves to wallow naked in a pig sty.
I don't understand the need to deliver this rant, but I do know that it boxes a women into a moral corner.
She's just endorsed every type of deviant, shitty and crazy sex. Now that she has, should I take her up or just regard her prattling as the common, inexplicable habit of contemporary women?
No, anti de..., people are acting correctly now that the secrets they were keeping two days ago for political advantage have become politically disadvatageous. And to forgive the ass hole Dems for the way they acted, excusing terrible behavior, would require contrition.
Acting in self-interested ways now, by feigning ignorance and acting outraged, reflects on the hypocrisy of Leftist Collectivists.
As per usual, you have things backward.
Try George Costanzas' opposite thinking.
Shouting Thomas -- just what do you write in your personals?
It’s impossible to know what exactly was going on in Mr. Schneiderman’s mind.
Does this woman ever talk to any, you know, guys?
It's not tough to figure out at all. 1) Schneiderman was a powerful man & 2) he was into rough sex. The power helped get him some high-quality female companionship & he attempted, like any man would, to indulge his favorite fetishes with them. It's just that among his favorite fetishes were some that slid into assault. What sort of imbecilic idea of human nature thinks that political ideology somehow sweeps away something as primal as sexual preferences? Appetites are appetites, and they reside in the brain in an area seemingly impervious to reason. They can be held in check through discipline & habit, but they're still there.
I'm sure if one could ask Schneiderman he would tell you "I believe in a woman's right to an abortion. I believe in equal pay for equal work. I believe that women have been systematically oppressed throughout history. Blah-blah-blah. But, in my bedroom, I like to be a dom, like, big time." And he would see absolutely no contradictions in his beliefs! For him, rough sex was equivalent to having a hankering for bacon cheeseburgers -- a taste he enjoyed indulging. His women, & probably soon the courts, just saw things differently.
Birk, this reporting was not a Veritas project.
Libs policing libs = a good thing.
BTW, here's a thought experiment: imagine O'Keefe busting open an anti-con story.
Can't do it, can ya?
Libs policing libs after decades of covering up? That's the way to play this?
Heads you win. Tails we lose. Double or nothing?
That party line demands your toes. Get your shine box.
Here we have libs reacting correctly.
True, if we’re discussing Ronan Farrow. Untrue if - as appears to be the case - the big-shots in the New York Democratic Party knew and did nothing. Certainly untrue if we’re discussing the victims “friends”.
Can I imagine the need for O'Keefe to bust conservatives? That seems like a saturated market.
Maybe you should try imaging another Liberal as a talk show host. Where is the market for that?
Your questions are absurd. Use the Costanza stance.
Sex as power over submitted beings is all
TheDems live for. All the ideology is a mind control device using fake guilt and fake virtue hypnotism.
And then there are the trafficked children that Dems lust for as proof of their total power on earth.
His women, & probably soon the courts, just saw things differently.
What is the charge?
The Berlin Wall was built to keep people in.
The Liberal, PC Thought Wall was meant to keep the victims in.
These women were inside the Wall and both Schneidermann and the victims' friends threatened to shoot if the women attempted eacape.
And anti de... thinks that is a positive thing.
FullMoon,
Criminal assault? Criminal battery? Rape? Kidnapping? False imprisonment?
The facts alleged could support all those charges.
Misuse of his office or public corruption?
Communicating threats across state lines using wires (federal).
A talented prosecutor could find dozens more.
Jill Filipovic is very far from understanding this at all. She tells us:
"So what are strong women to do if even the men who seem like good feminists might be misogynists, too? With right-wing men who oppose women’s rights, what you see is what you get."
What she means by "strong women" is likely not what I mean or most women mean either. It is what her circle means. Strong women would not be looking for "men who seem like good feminists." They'd be looking for "strong men" - though again not in the sense Filipovic means by "strong." As for "right-wing men who oppose women's rights," does she really believe that is what "right-wing men" do? It's laughable. She lives in a world of "abstract threats," as the line goes, "too noble to neglect," and those have "deceived her into thinking she has something to protect." Poor women - so utterly out of touch.
adSs: "Libs policing libs = a good thing."
This case is literally, l-i-t-e-r-a-l-l-y, the opposite example from what you are claiming.
Schneiderman, like Weinstein, like Clinton, like Kennedy, like all the others were OPENLY known to be pulling the crap they were pulling over years (years!) by hundreds if not thousands of "libs" and those libs pressured women to remain silent, attacked them when they went public, literally hired law firms to employ former Mossad personnel to intimidate them, etc.
It's only the courage of the women who broke through to complain DESPITE the solid democrat stonewall that moved the needle.
But for adSs to turn around and claim this example as a point of honor for the libs is so astonishingly tone deaf and self-refuting that it approaches LLR Chuck levels.
And it makes one laugh...
Once again, if you want to beat the snot of brown chicks and call them slaves, be a dem. Cuz you can get away with it openly for years.
But only years...and years...and years....and years....
Filipovic can be understood if you read abortion where she typed "women's rights".
Right?
Birkel: "A talented prosecutor could find dozens more"
Schneiderman will never even be interviewed, much less accused and/or charged.
Ever.
The message must be sent and reinforced that anyone on Team Dem/LLR is safe.
Hence an investigation into "Russian influence in US Elections" specifically EXCLUDES Clinton campaign AND the DNC.
The corruption is completely out in the open.
Next up for adSs: proclaiming the democrats as the Party of those who oppose Senators whacking chicks by drowning them in Oldsmobiles because 50 years after the fact the dems are willing to "entertain" criticism of a certain Senator!
LOL
Narrative writing is popular tonight.
And 4chan hasn't even contributed yet.
Anywho, stylistically, the font change and dashes have a lot of flair, IMHO. So, I'd say Drago wins. This is in spite of his still using one space between sentences, the newest data says that using two spaces, or maybe even hundreds if not thousands of spaces is the best way to type.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2018/05/04/one-space-between-each-sentence-they-said-science-just-proved-them-wrong-2/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.57d84c3e973f
Drago,
I encourage you to use Berlin Wall instead of stonewall because the Leftist Collectivists have guards on the Wall to shoot defectors.
And the Wall is designed to keep victims at the mercy of the oppressors.
Kanye West.
Bimbo eruptions.
Drag a dollar through a trailer park.
Schneidermann's alleged victims.
Weinstein's victims.
The Leftist PC Wall was built to stop people voting with their feet.
Filipovic can be understood if you read abortion where she typed "women's rights".
Of course, by their own rules, that is an extremely bigoted, cis-centric, anti-trans attitude. In today's world, every right-minded person knows that not only women can have abortions.
Filipovic can be understood if you read abortion where she typed "women's rights".
Right?
Pretty much. It's the feminist sacrament.
My favorite example (there are so many to choose from!) of "libs policing libs" (try to stifle your laughter) was the democrats giving noted "bugger-er" of an underage page a standing ovation.
Including John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi and the rest of those "principled" and "self-policing" libs.
A standing ovation.
A sustained standing ovation.
For a "bugger-er" of underage pages.
Because "principled" "libs policing libs".
LOL
adSs: "And 4chan hasn't even contributed yet."
But Democrat Underground is "in da house" with your arrival!
Yeah!
“Liberation of women!”
Hard to believe that a woman of Althouse’s intelligence can crap out this kind of insane bullshit.
I can never tell whether Althouse objects to misogyny or is doing her damnedest to create a shitload of it.
This insane Marxist feminist prattling... really, it’s unbelievable.
Just think, if Gerry Studs had manslaughtered his underage page sodomy victim, he might have made into the Senate.
The missed opportunities must haunt him.....
Filipovic, writing plainly:
Those conservatives think abortion is morally wrong. At least Democrat men only slap us around. Lesser of two evils.
That seems wrong, somehow.
'Sitter is the master of white space privilege..
One wonders what Filipovic thinks about all those Europeans with all their relatively strict abortion laws.
"Even when I was a liberal atheist I preferred right wing men. Much more likely to treat a woman as an equal."
My liberal Democrat fiancé agrees.
However, I consider myself a libertarian, not so bad with liberals, but the worst thing that SJW totalitarians can imagine.
And, yur reaction is as if they were doing the opposite of what they're doing.
Interesting.
Don't ya think?
"I would be happy to give Bill Clinton a blowjob for keeping abortion legal".
Several leftist feminists including a couple, like Eleanor Mondale, who were already doing it.
" same pathological craving for the kind of ultimate power that makes one immune from consequence "
so, his dream was to be a Clinton?
Feminist and male chauvinist rites find new life under a layer of privacy.
It is not abortion that violates human rights and denies human evolution, but rather elective abortion that consciously and with premeditation denies lives deemed unworthy, inconvenient, or unprofitable. It is selective-child, a wicked solution to an albeit hard problem, which is a progressive condition through normalization in a society.
That said, the natural, moral order is: choice, sex, conception. The Pro-Choice is: sex, conception, Choice, which denies women's franchise, and lives deemed unworthy for causes of social progress.
Eric the Fed was looking forward to a high post in the Clinton administration. The Farrow article doesn't say what post, but my guess is Attorney General. I hope someone asks Hillary about her relationship with Eric and her plans for him. He's in the process of being relegated to the status of unperson and no reporter will ever intrude on her privacy, but it would be interesting to learn of the dynamics of their relationship......Here's an idea for her next book. She could write about all the colorful and interesting men who have been part of her life. I'd genuinely like to know the full complexity of her thoughts about Weiner, I wonder if she would have let Weinstein stay in the Lincoln Bedroom. Was there any fondness in their relationship or was it strictly business?
Michael K: "Several leftist feminists including a couple, like Eleanor Mondale, who were already doing it."
And the entire White House Press Corps knew it...and said nothing.
Because "libs policing libs".
LOL
Makes me think about Paul Giamatti’s character in “Billions”
Too bad Andrew Brierbart isn’t here One of his great projects was trying to get people to acknowledge the rape and sexual abuse at the —oh man I can’t even remember the movements name The one where all the lefties lived in tents in public
"One of the women said that her friends dissuaded her from coming forward. “A number of them advised her to keep the story to herself, arguing that Schneiderman was too valuable a politician for the Democrats to lose. She described this response as heartbreaking.”
"libs policing libs"
LOL
So, so very much liberal "principled" "policing" going on there....
Blogger Birkel said...
Filipovic, writing plainly:
Those conservatives think abortion is morally wrong. At least Democrat men only slap us around. Lesser of two evils.
That seems wrong, somehow.
—————
Excellent point
Actually all the more stupid because it isn’t like women married to conservative men are having noticeably more babies than women who are married to liberal men
I wasn't bothered, so much, by rape and/or sexual harassment in the Clinton White House.
I was bothered by sexual DISCRIMINATION in the Clinton White House.
We never did learn what happened to the male interns, or the ugly female interns, or the strictly chaste pretty female interns. But we learned that after Monica gave Bill a blow job, Bill gave Monica a PENTAGON job. (GS-9, security clearance required).
If there were smarter, harder working, more patriotic, better prepared, more intrinsically well-organized ... yadda yadda yadda ... applicants for that Pentagon job, well, tough. The President has exercised his, uhm, discretion. He wants the slot for his slut. No others need apply.
Monica was not the victim. EVERYBODY ELSE who applied for a Pentagon job was a victim. EVERY AMERICAN who depended on the Pentagon to put qualified people into necessary jobs, and had instead got Monica as an unqualified person or doing un-necessary job, was a victim.
Monica was only a "victim" in that she didn't LIKE her Pentagon job. She wanted sugar-Billy to lean on Vernon Jordan to get her some more entertaining or more fashionable job, maybe in the cosmetics or textile industries. Which, maybe, would have been a better thing for Bill to have done, rather than put his bimbo expenses on the taxpayers' dime. Linda Tripp certainly seemed to think Monica would be personally better off "working" somewhere other than the Pentagon. But Monica didn't get the job she dreamed of. If such a disappointment is victimization, well, the girl was not by any stretch the first such victim.
n.n.,
I have a question for you, and I hope you might answer directly.
I believe in a robust self-defense principle. Anything that actively attempts to kill a person, for any reason, can be killed to defend the innocent party.
Therefore, I strongly believe a woman who would be killed by attempting to carry her baby to term has a right to defend her own life.
What do you say?
Birk,
Your hypothetical could also be more dialed in. There are situations that guarantee that the unborn also dies because it's not viable.
https://www.livescience.com/24127-fact-check-walsh-pregnancy-can-kill.html
adss,
When I type an address to you I start with your moniker. Sorry for your confusion. Hope that helps.
Bill gave Monica a PENTAGON job. (GS-9, security clearance required).
--
They probably figure once a prez trusted her with his dick between her teeth..
Occupy now antifa of course you know the stated stance about women at both the sds and the Panthers: hint it was replicated by the sla.
I hope you all do not believe there is a necessary link between political belief and behavior. That would mean you accept the foundational leftist notion that "the personal is political". You would then have accepted that notion and your arguments will fail you. You'd be playing by the leftist rules. It's like accepting the Marxist division of the world into classes of people with its almost Calvinistic determinism. If you argue that people can be fully described and understood due to their class membership, you are accepting that basic premise and playing by the Marxist rules.Your arguments from that point will fail even if you believe you are advocating conclusions in opposition to the Marxist viewpoint. Best to sever ideology from behavior, especially if the topic involves criminal acts where intent or beliefs of the criminal are inferred from the actions. Best minds have always severed beliefs from actions, such as David Hume arguing against causation but admitting when he finished philosophizing he'd go play billiards and thus rely entirely on commonly held rules of causation.
assaulted, choked, then thrown through a glass ceiling.
You've come a long way, baby!
"I just read Lonesome Dove. Democrats are like Jake Spoon. Slick smooth talking users who abuse at will. For some reason biological reason a lot women fall for it."
Simple. Because the kinds of men who are like that are also, generally, the kinds of men who do anything to get what they want - which is, biologically speaking, important for survival in any era/age/civilization. Since survival is the number one goal a mother has for her children, men with this trait are selected for in a sexual way.
The trick is, to be the man that get what he wants at (almost) any cost, not put up with drama and shit tests from women, but still treat them with respect once they've earned it, and to be open to actually falling in love when you meet the right one. "Nice guys" who treat women with sickening deference and are blinded by beauty before discovering character are left in the dust because women sense they can be easily manipulated by a combination of pouting, crying, temper tantrums, and bitch-level shit tests. Those men end up as incels, unless they either man up or lower their standards.
The sexual marketplace is vicious, but one does not need to be vicious to succeed. Confident and self-assured are usually enough, paired with conversational talent (learned or innate).
"A Right Leaning man will tell a woman when she is full of shit and she can take care of her own panties."
If done correctly, this will be more successful than the Left-leaning man's strategy. Women in general don't want a man to fawn over them 24/7, or always agree with them - especially good-looking women. Pretty girls are rarely ever challenged by men, because men are mostly blinded by beauty. A man who calls a woman out on her shit might earn a moment of anger from her, but will also pique her interest, make her wonder what's different about this man, and earn a measure of reproductive respect from her.
Do it right, and enough, and she'll WANT you to take care of her panties.
Namely by removing them.
"She's been trained by media and the educational system to tell me that she loves gay men, trannies, and every kind of pervert and depraved sexual actor. You'd think she loves to wallow naked in a pig sty."
Yeah, I remember this too. I haven't dated in awhile (ya know, the whole married thing), but most of the women I dated proclaimed this at some point, usually if the topic came up somehow. For a year, I rented a nice townhouse near downtown Naperville, and my neighbors were gay (the "gaybors", we called them). I dated three women in that complex over the course of the year, with quite a bit of overlap. Two of them thought my gaybors were just adorable. The third was raised quite Christian and thought different. She was my favorite, though lacking in the bedroom department (good looking but very self-conscious despite my most earnest effort).
The two women who were cool with it took some work, but by the end I had them both agreeing with me (at least, in my presence) that a) being gay was mostly a lifestyle choice, b) being gay was sexually risky and led to dangerous promiscuity (this was easily observed by seeing new cars parked outside their half of the townhouse each weekend and seeing new faces on their balcony most Saturday nights), and c) the sex itself was distasteful and gross.
I don't know if I actually changed their hearts and minds, but one of the two was no longer speaking with the gaybors except when necessary by the time I moved out - and we hadn't been together for a month or so by that point.
Birkel:
Therefore, I strongly believe a woman who would be killed by attempting to carry her baby to term has a right to defend her own life.
What do you say?
Self-defense is a natural, a civil, and moral right. What remains is reconciliation, which has special significance in the case of a mother and child. Ideally, the child will receive care up to but not including the mother's life, but then it is indeed her choice and sacrifice.
Schneiderman,
Schneiderman,
Does whatever a Schneider can . . .
Well, it boils down to abortion rights, doesn't it? That is the great divide. A man can treat women with respect and kindness, but if he is pro-life he will always be seen as "anti-woman." Hell, a woman who is pro-life is seen as "anti-women" by leftist feminists. The shabby behavior of a man will be forgiven or ignored if he is pro-choice.
Schneiderman, Schneiderman
Does whatever Joe Biden can
Slaps a girl, lordy be,
Catches thieves, cuz he's AG
Look out!
Here comes ol' Schneiderman.
Is he a Dem?
But, of course,
He's a liberal action force!
They'll put him back upon the shelf,
He's gonna have to arrest himself
Hey, there
There goes ol' Schneiderman.
He couldn't guess
Hurting girls was a crime
Then it hit the press
And he resigned just in time!
Schneiderman, Schneiderman
Unfriendly SOB Schneiderman
Wealth and fame
That's all gone
Tells the media, "Get off my lawn!"
To him, life is a great big talk show
Probably on CNN, yo,
You'll find ol' Schneiderman!
FIDO,
" I suspect that the things that most of what Feminists rail against is Biology"
You should do way more than just 'suspect' this; it is the heart and soul of feminism.
Birkel,
Don't stop halfway: read "killing babies" where she typed "women's rights".
I was friends once with a woman who periodically attended "take back the night" walks and similar events. She started dating this guy who was SO into going to those things with her. To me, his eagerness to attend was a warning sign... and I was right. He turned out to be an abusive scumbag. He was attending those rallies to attract a certain type of woman, who would overlook his many red flags (chain smoking, vague claims of having been in the Army in "special forces," etc.) simply because he was espousing the proper political point of view.
Kyzer, I had gay neighbors for many years, and they weren't anything like you describe. They had a warm and committed relationship, were not promiscuous, were kind and decent and friendly. They were some of my favorite people on the block. Their relationship with each other, so far as I could ever see, was pretty typical of married couples I know, gay or straight.
Your neighbors may have been promiscuous assholes, I don't know. But it's not their gayness that is the problem, there.
It maybe that when women come to believe in the fables of left wing feminism, they begin to lose IQ points and just get dumber and dumber.
It wouldn't be so confusing and "crazy-making" if you hadn't indulged in politically convenient excuses back when Bill Clinton was accused of rape and sexual harassment. Stop giving Democratic Party men a pass and put the liberation of women first.
Ding ding ding! Althouse for the win!
Of course, the problem with this is that, if the Democrats actually stopped being the Party of "be a scumbag, it's ok as long as you vote Left", they might lose enough votes that they stay in the minority for years.
And they value political power more than they care about women
Steve said...
I hope you all do not believe there is a necessary link between political belief and behavior. That would mean you accept the foundational leftist notion that "the personal is political".
What I believe is that sick monsters who want to abuse people are strongly attracted by the fact that Democrats will give those sick monsters a pass, so long as the monsters vote and talk Left.
You can call that whatever you want. I call it "paying attention to reality."
Oh, and @MayBee, it was "Occupy Wall Street" that had all the rapes Breitbart wanted to expose
"So what are strong women to do if even the men who seem like good feminists might be misogynists, too?"
"Seem like". How does an abuser "seem like" a good feminist?
Simple.
There are words, and there are deeds.
Words matter to the Left. Deeds matter to the Right.
Words matter to the emotional. Deeds matter to the logical.
Words matter to ...
"Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies"... and I won't care if you slap me around a bit.
This is why Trump is doubly-vexing to the Left. Not only is he doing right-wing things, he's saying right-wing things! At least the Romneys of the world would only speak the correct platitudes...
> put the liberation of women first.
what a '60s concept.
in 2018, what are they to be liberated from?
And transitioned to?
by who?
Post a Comment