The Sweet Pink Rules of Feminism

May 8th, 2009 by Pelle Billing

Today I want to share a tongue-in-cheek list about feminism that was originally posted on feministing.org.

Feministing.com is a well-known feminist blog, and to the best of my knowledge, feministing.org was a spoof site pretending to be the real Feministing blog. It is now long gone, but here is a quote from the spoof site:

Young, middle-class, college-educated white women are rarely given the opportunity to speak on our own behalf on issues that affect our lives and futures because we’re so horribly and obviously oppressed.

Feministing.org provides a platform for us to comment, analyze, whine about our unending victimization, and (best of all) COMPLAIN CEASELESSLY!

One of the texts posted on the site was a list that made fun of feminist ideology, both to have some fun but also to critique the internal inconsistencies of the feminist framework. Please note that I’m not posting this list to make fun of equity feminists and other feminists who are honestly fighting for equality between the sexes (however, those feminists are not very vocal in the gender discourse).

The list below is addressed to the feminists who take up space in the media, the blogosphere, and yes – even in political circles:

  1. Feminism requires you to talk about “equality” for both sexes but some sexes are more equal than others.
  2. God could be a womyn, but the devil is most certainly a man.
  3. We’re equal to men, and this makes us morally superior to them.
  4. We are equally capable of doing anything a man can do and men can’t do anything right.
  5. We must scorn behavior which is associated with stereotypical masculinity while whooping with praise when the same behavior is exhibited by womyn.
  6. We must demand that womyn be allowed into military combat because we’re equally capable of smashing-in the faces of vicious terrorists. But we also laugh at the idea that a husband could be the victim of a wife’s physical abuse because everyone knows that women are never violent.
  7. We seek to stop “violence against womyn” but girl-on-girl violence and lesbians who batter their partners don’t bother us quite as much.
  8. We attack the gender-stereotypes that portray womyn negatively as we gleefully embrace the ones that portray womyn positively. It’s customary to invert this rule for “you-know-who”.
  9. Helping womyn succeed is not nearly as satisfying as seeing men fail.
  10. “Power” in the hands of men is always destructive, selfish, tyrannical and harmful. This same “Power” in the hands of womyn is always democratic, nurturing, honest, good for the environment and good for humanity.
  11. Men of quality support womyn’s equality but womyn never have to do anything to prove that they are “of quality”.
  12. Finally, us feminists are absolutely not anti-male and that’s why we rarely have any positive things to say about those penis-having bastards.
  13. Women are just as good at everything as men are, except for things at which women are better.
  14. We feminists are equal to men, and that gives us the elevated authority to pass judgment upon them.
  15. If you’re not female then your opinion doesn’t count, you sexist bastard.
  16. Any criticism of feminism is a form of Hate-Speech. A feminist’s own speech is allowed to be as hateful as she wants it to be.
  17. If somebody has the temerity to criticize the behavior of feminists, you should dismissively sneer that they’re attacking “strawfeminists”– absurdist caricatures who don’t exist. Feel free to resume your usual attacks on strawpatriarchs every day of the week.
  18. The only feminist you are officially allowed to criticize is Valerie Solanas. That’s because a feminist has to literally advocate the extermination of half the planet before the rest of us start to wonder if she’s got a screw loose.
  19. You have 10,000 years of grudges to seek vengeance for in your single lifetime.
  20. Collective guilt and collective punishment are anathema to a society which fulfills the feminist goal of treating people as individuals, which is why us feminists must constantly intimate the collective guilt of men and suggest that they need collective punishment.
  21. You must demand that a father shoulder half of any effort to raise “his” children as you simultaneously demand that a mother be granted automatic sole custody of “her” children after divorce.
  22. Whether or not you feel “offended” is the central principle to how the world should be re-organized.
  23. A feminist must say “Patriarchy” at least ninety-seven times per hour. The ten millionth time you say “Patriarchy” you will trigger a shower of confetti and receive a fabulous prize.
  24. As a feminist, you are opposed to the spread of stereotypes. But don’t let that stop you from constantly stereotyping men as being an over-privileged class of dimwitted exploiters who always get everything they want.
  25. Ovaries good, testicles bad.
  26. We believe every woman should have unrestricted access to any kind of abortion, no questions asked. We also believe that abortion should be tightly restricted in China to prevent millions of potential girls from being robbed of their lives.
  27. We feminists must demand aristocratic levels of deference while never behaving with aristocratic levels of gentility.
  28. We must grouse continuously about traditionalist expectations of women while we conveniently forget to pay half the check on our dinner-dates.
  29. Men avoid us because we’re too gosh-darned smart.
  30. If a man works 60 hours a week to support a wife who cooks and cleans, the man is a lazy shit who exploits his wife.
  31. If a woman works 60 hours a week to support a husband who cooks and cleans, the man is a lazy shit who exploits his wife.
  32. If the majority of women do not call themselves feminists, the root problem lies with the majority of women and not with feminism.
  33. We demand respect for all women and their diversity. That is why we dismiss, infantilize, mock or denigrate stay-at-home moms, traditionalist women, pro-life women, Republican women, Catholic women, Protestant women, Mormon women, Orthodox Jewish women, Muslim women who don’t object to hijab standards, Hindu women who don’t object to dowries, women who care about their weight, women who wear cosmetics, female researchers who study innate behavioral sex-differences, women who look forward to marriage, women who warn about giving birth after the age of 40, sorority sisters, cheerleaders, girls who like playing with dolls and any other woman who doesn’t slavishly dance to our tune. Except for them, we demand respect for ALL women and their diversity!
  34. Falsely accusing a man of rape is a great way of raising his consciousness.
  35. If a teacher were to beat black boys more than white boys, we’d excoriate him for hateful discrimination. If the same teacher beat only boys, that’d be fine.

Tags:

43 Responses to “The Sweet Pink Rules of Feminism”

  1. Enric Carbó Says:

    I learn so much with this blog! Today it’s even better, adding intelligent humor

  2. Bj0rnborg Says:

    Haha, that was fun and actually adresses several of the innate problems of feministic theory that it have yet to provide a theoretical solution to.

  3. Pelle Billing Says:

    I’m glad you enjoyed the post guys.

    It is a fun list, and I think even a few feminists laugh when they read it.

  4. Danny Says:

    That is some good shit right there!

  5. Just a metalhead Says:

    I’d laugh if it wasn’t unfortunately so often true. I often read the site though I don’t post there, for obvious reasons, disagreement is not well tolerated from men, however there are a few equity feminists who comment on posts and bring a bit of sense into the discussion when they start saying really ridiculous things.

    The point about repeating “patriarchy” reminds me when some of the posters started adding “This post is a big fuck you/a blow/a knee in the groin to Patriarchy” at the end of their posts, at the recommendation of one of them. The posts could talk about anything, but they added that sentence at the end. This more than anything convinced me that the feminists there themselves didn’t know exactly what they meant when they said “patriarchy”, they simply used the word as a catch-all scapegoat for everything that’s wrong. A word that has the added advantage of indirectly placing the blame squarely on the shoulders of men.

    They’ve stopped doing it, fortunately.

  6. Danny Says:

    I didn’t know they did that metalhead but I’m glad they stopped. Mind you they still have no problem declaring what men think, feel, say, do, etc… while at the same time attacking anyone that does the same to women. There is a thread over there called “Female Genital Mutilation Versus Female Circumcision” going right now and it already 200+ comments. Notice that it took almost no time for someone to declare:

    As for the comparison to male circumcision, I think its fundamentally different because it just doesn’t cause men health problems and pain throughout their life. The worst I’ve heard is that it might make them require more extra lube when they masturbate.
    I guess that means if FGM is cleaned up a bit it’ll be okay then.

    and

    You’re opening up yourself to attacks by equating a western practice of male circumcision at birth (often done in hospitals by trained professionals) to human rights violations in Africa. This is not a path you want to walk down.
    Yes cutting up an infant boy that can’t consent is not on par with cutting up a preteen girl who can’t consent.

    Honestly the only reason I read that site is to laugh at the hypocrisy…then cry over the fact that, despite what other feminists will say (you know how they “they don’t represent us!” when called out but will go right back to quoting them the next minute), this site is a heavy hitter in the feminist blogshere.

  7. Pelle Billing Says:

    Interesting stuff, metalhead and Danny.

    Now I remember why I don’t follow any feminist blogs ;)

  8. Albert KLamt Says:

    Hi Pelle,

    lok….thanks for making my day in this humorous way:) Will no twitter it to share this fun:)

    Have a great weekend,
    Albert

  9. Pelle Billing Says:

    Thanks for spreading the word Albert, you have good weekend too.

  10. Just a metalhead Says:

    Danny, to be fair I think their relativization of the seriousness of male circumcision is due more to the fact that they’re American than the fact that they are feminists. Since a majority of American males are circumcised and the number was even higher in the past, they’ve accepted the normality of circumcision and are shocked to have that normality contested, even in the name of principles they hold dear. FGM is not however part of American culture and is thus easy to oppose for them. If they should be made aware of this, they might get a better understanding of why many African women resent their opposition to FGM.

    BTW, as to the fad of adding “this post is a blow to the patriarchy”, it was in the community section. It was proposed at the post: http://community.feministing.com/2009/03/in-addition-to-problematic-apo.html

    To be fair, she recommended other more affirmative comments, but the “blow to the patriarchy”-thing seemed to be the most popular for a while.

  11. elementary_watson Says:

    ;ay i be the disagreeing voice saying that I find this list not very amusing and think of it as a really cheap shot at feminists and feminism? It is made out of (comprehensible) frustration, and it shows, IMO.

    Although, there is some fun in inventing rules, like: Putting an argument against a feminist position on a Bingo-card invalidates said argument.

    But all in all, this list is just an attack against straw-feminism (although the list oh so cleverly predicted and mocked this reaction in rule 17), which deeply offends me and therefore should be purged from the internet and not perpetuated by weak men who are afraid of smart and powerful feminist women. Oh, and just to displease y’all: Patriarchy! Patriarchy! Patriarchy!

  12. Danny Says:

    metalhead:
    Danny, to be fair I think their relativization of the seriousness of male circumcision is due more to the fact that they’re American than the fact that they are feminists.
    Perhaps but aren’t feminists usually patting themselves on the back for being so openminded and progressive? They expect men to open their eyes to the problems facing women while they willfully turn a blind eye to the problems facing men. If one claims to want to help all people why turn around and try to minimize someone’s issue just because they aren’t of their preferred group.

    That commentor could have very easily said that that thread in question was about FGM and not MGM and they didn’t want to talk about MGM there. Its one thing to avoid a topic for the simple reason of, “that’s not what we’re talking about” but its quite another to try to avoid a topic by claiming its not an issue.

  13. Just a metalhead Says:

    elementary_watson, I can see where you’re coming from, but I disagree that it’s all bad. Of course, this list isn’t a valid argument, it’s a satire, a (politically-charged) joke. It is a thing of frustration as you said, but frustration sometimes should be expressed and not simply repressed. This list serves to mention every point that leads to frustration from the feminists on the internet without having to detail each one as one would do in serious discussions, as jokes don’t and shouldn’t be explained in detail.

    I think if feminists take the time to read the list and analyze it instead of taking it only at face value, they’d get a better glimpse at the emotions and positions of those who wrote it or spread it than they would get in long discussions. It would also make them understand better why there is resistance to their comments, and where they may have holes in their arguments that they should question.

    For instance, point 7. Feminists in general, when confronted by cases of violence between girls, don’t approve of it despite what the point 7 says. However, by digging a bit deeper, you find that point 7 issues forth from the fact that when they describe violence against women as a tool of men as a class oppressing women as a class, then cases of violence not perpetrated by men therefore fall outside of the description of “violence against women” and victims therefore are denied their experience, as if what they lived through wasn’t actually violence and wasn’t as important as “real” cases of violence.

  14. elementary_watson Says:

    just a metalhead: There is such a thing as “hypocritical humour” which can be used against feminism, like “Each woman is a unique individual, and men are bastards for not realizing it”, which is really pretty elegant *and* often applicable. The items on the list are simply to blunt for my taste. For example, I would have phrased item 18 more like this: “Feminism is not about man-hating. We can tolerate a critical view of Valerie Solanas for wanting to kill all men, provided it is not hostile misogyny.”

    I’m all for exposing double standards, but if possible in a way that starts sounding like something a real feminist who isn’t a totally raving radical feminist would say.

    “Double standards based on gender are harmful and should be abolished. However, double standards where men get the short end of the stick are less bad, because men are still in positions of social power. Which may be a double standard based on gender, but since men come off worse, it is okay, so there are no inconsistencies or hypocrisies in our thinking.”

  15. Danny Says:

    metalhead:
    I think if feminists take the time to read the list and analyze it instead of taking it only at face value, they’d get a better glimpse at the emotions and positions of those who wrote it or spread it than they would get in long discussions.
    And since they love to say that men should think more critically it would do them good to take their own advice sometime.

    While there is some straw in this list there is plenty of valid criticism as well.

    Following metalhead’s example and looking at point 6.
    We must demand that womyn be allowed into military combat because we’re equally capable of smashing-in the faces of vicious terrorists. But we also laugh at the idea that a husband could be the victim of a wife’s physical abuse because everyone knows that women are never violent.
    This speaks to the double standard of “selective equality” that some feminists go by.

    Women have sexual tastes and desires just like any man and they should be spoken about openly…except when it comes to sexual crimes.

    Women should have the equal access to a college aducation but when is the last time you’ve seen a feminist say that either Selective Service should be done away with or that women should have to register as well?

    Women should have as many opportunities to back out of parent as possible but at the same time once a man ejaculates its suddenly a case of “well you should have thought of that before you got her pregnant.”

    When a man commits a violent crime against a woman it must be the result of him trying to exert his patriarchal power over her. When a woman commits a violent crime against a man it must be the result her defending herself from his efforts to exert his patriarchal power over her.

    They work to maintain a positive image for feminism while actively trying to paint all men’s rights activists as rapists, rape apologists, whiners, abusers, trolls, and any other negative terminology they can come up with.

    and finally…

    They have no problem calling out men on why they are not addressing women’s issues and issues in which they have privilege over women…while staunchly ignoring men’s issues and denying the existence of female privilege.

    We are supposed to believe that women are equal to men yet when it comes certain situations in which gender really doesn’t have anything to do with it we constantly see examples of where men and women are held to a different standard.

    This list serves to mention every point that leads to frustration from the feminists on the internet without having to detail each one as one would do in serious discussions, as jokes don’t and shouldn’t be explained in detail.
    Nothing wrong with venting but given the seriousness of the items in question perhaps there is need for detailed discussion on each of them…

  16. Pelle Billing Says:

    @elementary_watson
    But all in all, this list is just an attack against straw-feminism (although the list oh so cleverly predicted and mocked this reaction in rule 17), which deeply offends me and therefore should be purged from the internet and not perpetuated by weak men who are afraid of smart and powerful feminist women.

    I agree that the authors of the list exaggerate to make it funny. But that’s how you create a joke! You take something from real life, something that is true, and then you make it stronger/sharper to make it funny.

    But they are not attacking straw-feminists. they are very much joking about actual feminists, albeit making their rhetoric stronger and cleaner.

  17. Pelle Billing Says:

    @metalhead:
    I think if feminists take the time to read the list and analyze it instead of taking it only at face value, they’d get a better glimpse at the emotions and positions of those who wrote it or spread it than they would get in long discussions.

    Exactly

    @Danny:
    Women should have as many opportunities to back out of parent as possible but at the same time once a man ejaculates its suddenly a case of “well you should have thought of that before you got her pregnant.”

    Even women who don’t self-identify as femininists usually have muddy thinking around this issue, wanting men to have no rights whatsoever, but complete responsibility.

    Women should have the equal access to a college aducation but when is the last time you’ve seen a feminist say that either Selective Service should be done away with or that women should have to register as well?

    Could you speak some more to this? I guess it’s an American phenomenon that I’m not familiar with.

  18. Mark Davenport Says:

    Selective Service

    This is the U.S. program for registering all young men at age 18 so that, in the event of “emergency,” they can be forcibly conscripted (we say “drafted”) into the army.

    It was a very big deal during the years it was of personal concern to me during the war in Vietnam. I never hear people speak of it now that there is no “draft” but technically those who fail to register can be denied, for example, loans for college, govenment employment, etc.

    I can’t imagine a situation where the draft would be taken seriously today. It would be unenforcible for anything short of an attack from Mars!

    But maybe then it could become a “privilege” extended also to women.

  19. Jim Says:

    EW,

    12:56 was teh awesome!

    But if you were serious, this is what I would say to your protest that the list is attacking only “straw fweminism”. I think the standard they use at Feminist Critics for determining who is an isn’t a feminst applies to what is and isn’t feminsm. Their statndard is a feminst is anyone feminsts accept as feminist and no one that feminsts deny are feminists. So when we start seeing mainstrean feminists, not excommunicates like Camille Paglia or Christine Hoff-Sommers, denouncing these attitudes and positions I will begin to agree that they are not real feminist positions.

  20. Pelle Billing Says:

    Mark,

    Thanks for the info.

    Jim,

    So when we start seeing mainstrean feminists, not excommunicates like Camille Paglia or Christine Hoff-Sommers, denouncing these attitudes and positions I will begin to agree that they are not real feminist positions.

    Excellent point. You just turned the tables on feminists who are always claiming that the only feminists who are attacked are straw-feminists.

  21. Bj0rnborg Says:

    elementary_watson:

    Just because its not attacking your personal adaptation of feminism dosent mean its attacking strawman-feminism. As Jim says, there are plenty of feminists (that you may very well denounce) that claim “truths” along the lines that are critizised in the jokes above.

    For instance, going through the first 10 quotes:

    Quote 1. = male suffering is constantly made invisible, and female privilege constantly made invisible in feminist rhetorics. Anyone who claims there is an oppression of women are while not mentioning that men have suffered equally, but in a diffrent way,(and thus implicitly claims men are opressors) are doing this. Directed towards majority of feminists?

    Quote 2,8, 10 = how positive values are remade/declared feminine values, and negative values are remade/declared maskuline. A critizism of third wave feminism.

    Quote 3,4,5 = Logical deductions from feminist rhetorics, even though it might not find support in feminist theory. That means that feminist rhetorics does not have support in feminist theory. Its called bigotery. That means its free to joke about.

    Quote 6,7; Once more about making invisible that wich implies that womens (moral superiority) is just a myth. Once more about making negative values male, and positive values female.

    Quote 9. = These are the ones that I fail to see any real connection to feminism.

  22. Danny Says:

    Pelle:
    Could you speak some more to this? I guess it’s an American phenomenon that I’m not familiar with.
    Ah my apologies. Along with Mark Davenport’s comment I’ll say that (at least 10 years ago when I was look at colleges) the top portion of every college application I saw had something to the effect of:

    “If you are a male of at least age 18 have you registered for Selective Service? Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this application as well as denial of financial aid services and if punishable with a fine of $5,000 and up to 5 years in prison.”

    Yes, ONLY men (in America anyway) MUST register for the possibility of being drafted into military service in order to attend college. Another one of the “privileges” we have over women I suppose. Mind you like Mark says the likelyhood of a draft is slim but I’m sure no matter what country you’re from you can think of an old law or two that, while not used anymore and would likely not come into play now, would be a major problem if it did come into play.

    Bj0rnborg:
    Just because its not attacking your personal adaptation of feminism dosent mean its attacking strawman-feminism. As Jim says, there are plenty of feminists (that you may very well denounce) that claim “truths” along the lines that are critizised in the jokes above.
    I agree. Feminists love to remind us that they are not a monolith and that there are many different brands of feminism….and each variation opens itself to a different set of critiques.

    Quote 1. = male suffering is constantly made invisible, and female privilege constantly made invisible in feminist rhetorics. Anyone who claims there is an oppression of women are while not mentioning that men have suffered equally, but in a diffrent way,(and thus implicitly claims men are opressors) are doing this. Directed towards majority of feminists?
    I personally have no problem if they don’t mention male suffering. My problem is when they outright deny and minimize male suffering.

    Quote 2,8, 10 = how positive values are remade/declared feminine values, and negative values are remade/declared maskuline. A critizism of third wave feminism.
    I’ve been noticing this one a lot lately. Its as if declaring that something is a feminist something suddenly adds a level of urgency and validity that wasn’t there before. (For a good example of this go look up posts at Feministe on the Sean Bell murder from a few years ago.)

  23. unomi Says:

    Young, middle-class, college-educated white women are rarely given the opportunity to speak on our own behalf on issues that affect our lives and futures because we’re so horribly and obviously oppressed.

    The fact that many gay activists are middle class, university educated and white is sometimes, weirdly, used against them (add “urbanite”, “loft living” and “latte sipping” to that).

    Most political activists in the Western world are white, middle class university graduates. It’s not great from a democratic perspective, but it doesn’t mean they can’t be at a disadvantage because they’re gay, women, disabled, etc.

    And personally I would rather have a community leader who went to university than one who didn’t. But that’s just middle class, elitist me.

  24. Danny Says:

    And personally I would rather have a community leader who went to university than one who didn’t. But that’s just middle class, elitist me.
    If I may did you go to university? If so I would not blame you too much for wanting a leader you can identify with (meaning you have similar education, experiences, etc…). Now if you were to think that such a leader would encompass the only issues that matter then yes I might call you elitist.

  25. Jim Says:

    “The fact that many gay activists are middle class, university educated and white is sometimes, weirdly, used against them ..”

    Yes, and it’s a form of bigotry. But that and your comment have nothing to do with the point that’s being made. The point that’s being made is that it is spectacularly false victim-mongering to claim that middle-class, white university-educated women are rarely “given the opportunity to speak on our own behalf…..”

    Oh my God, what pathetic whining bottoms they all are. Nobody “gave” Frederick Douglas or W.E.B DuBois or Susan B. Anthony or for that matter Thomas Jefferson much of an opportunity. They simply stepped up and took the opportunities they wanted.

    Not that there’s anything wrong with bottoms, God love’m.

  26. Jim Says:

    Here’s an example from history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_Wu_Di

    Higher stakes, higher drama.

  27. Pelle Billing Says:

    Unomi:
    Most political activists in the Western world are white, middle class university graduates. It’s not great from a democratic perspective, but it doesn’t mean they can’t be at a disadvantage because they’re gay, women, disabled, etc.

    Women are not intrinsically at a disadvantage, whereas gay and disabled individuals are. That is a huge distinction.

  28. unomi Says:

    Gay men are not “intrinsically” at a disadvantage. However, they are sometimes discriminated against, as are women (albeit perhaps more often than women). This blog’s theory that women aren’t discriminated against in the workplace simply because it would be bad for business is a little naive. Subprime mortgages were bad for business too, doesn’t mean they didn’t happen.

  29. elementary_watson Says:

    Yesterday, I wrote a reply, which I then lost by clicking on the wrong symbol at the wrong time, and I was too lazy to repeat the effort.

    I do see that many feminists often do/say what the list claims they do/say, and that no mainstream feminists call them out on it. And I have experienced the wild rationalization, dodging of points and name-calling that happens when a non-feminist points these things out in a respectful manner.

    Damn it, I wrote a play of a Sherlock Holmes type detective trying to argue with feminist theorizers who couldn’t say two consecutive sentences without being contradictory; so yeah, I agree that the list is not built on straw (my rant at 12:56 pm in the last paragraph was meant as a joke (Thanks, Jim, for getting it)).

    But: The tone is so hostile, that I think a feminist is as likely to consider whether or not the list has some truth about feminism in it as I or anyone else here is to consider whether the SCUM-manifesto has some insight into masculinity or not. (Not, that a less hostile tone could do the job.)

    To me, the list is annoying by listing annoying contradictions in feminism, and hardly doing anything else. Aych’s “one-act-plays” at Feminist Critics were far funnier, they were witty.

  30. Pelle Billing Says:

    Unomi:
    This blog’s theory that women aren’t discriminated against in the workplace simply because it would be bad for business is a little naive. Subprime mortgages were bad for business too, doesn’t mean they didn’t happen.

    I haven’t said that women are never discriminated against, if you believe that you haven’t understood much of my core beliefs.

    What I’ve said are that research shows that women get paid the same salary for doing the same job. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t expectations on men and women in the labor market. Men are expected to perform dangerous jobs where they risk their life and health, and women are expected to become pregnant and potentially leave their job.

    However, companies that systematically ignore talented people because of race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc – do so at their own peril. In the long run you cannot stay competitive unless you use all the available talent.

    Subprime mortgages were bad for business too, doesn’t mean they didn’t happen.

    Subprime mortgages only lasted a short while, then they crashed. Using your own logic, any discrimination against any group in the labor market would crash and disappear fairly quickly.

  31. Pelle Billing Says:

    e_w:
    my rant at 12:56 pm in the last paragraph was meant as a joke

    D’oh! Didn’t get that.

  32. Jim Says:

    “Subprime mortgages were bad for business too, doesn’t mean they didn’t happen.”

    That depends on whose business we are talking about. They were great for the mrotgage brokers’ business, the people who were making them. That was the flaw in the business model; the decision-makers were not the risk-takers. and that was bad business.

    “This blog’s theory that women aren’t discriminated against in the workplace simply because it would be bad for business is a little naive. ”

    Women get discriminated aginst in the workplace enough that we had to pass a law in the US to remedy the kind of situation that Lily Ledbetter found herself in. This kind of discrimination does happen. And men get discriminated against in the workplace, especially but not only in female dominated fields such as education, but the in general level of pain has not risen to the same level yet. We are starting to see men filing complaints, and getting favorable decisons, now that there are more women in positions of power – a perfectly natural development.

  33. Danny Says:

    “This blog’s theory that women aren’t discriminated against in the workplace simply because it would be bad for business is a little naive. ”
    And the theory that simply being born male automatically gives us the upperhand over women….?

    …the decision-makers were not the risk-takers.
    Good point Jim. That’s what many discriminations and -isms boil down to. People trying to decide how other peoplw should live based on their own standards (even when its something that may not involvle a risk). High level politicians decide to go to war but they aren’t the ones dying in combat. Law makers dictate legislation on birth control for all people based on their personal beliefs.

  34. unomi Says:

    Subprime mortgages only lasted a short while, then they crashed. Using your own logic, any discrimination against any group in the labor market would crash and disappear fairly quickly.

    And everything in this life has to have the same lifespan as a bad US mortgage? Ethnic minorities from ex-European colonies have been discriminated against for centuries now in places like France, Holland and the UK.

  35. Jim Says:

    “And everything in this life has to have the same lifespan as a bad US mortgage? Ethnic minorities from ex-European colonies have been discriminated against for centuries now in places like France, Holland and the UK.”

    If only! Have you ever wondered why a system that wastes so much talents remains in force? Why is it so advantageous, and to whom, that it doesn’t collapse of it’s own weight? Of course it’s obvious that it is advantageous to the indigenous populations that don’t want to share, but how does it advantage the immigrants enough that they choose to stay in such a system? It’s not as if they are a native caste of peons that has nowhere else to go. The blatant injustice and the obvious wastefulness of the sytem are not enough to make it collapse. if a system doesn’t collapse, it must be adaptive.

  36. GW Says:

    I experience many of these things first hand when I separated from the mother of my children. It’s a joke, but really it’s not! When feminism started to gain steam in the 60′s, it was all about taking the pill, burning your bra, and having sex with whomever you wanted. What happenned? I believe feminists of the time were so wanting to embrace all of their ‘sisters’ that they took in a bunch of bitter, nasty dykes and tried to make them happy. Which is impossible. The end result was that the bitter attitude of these psudo-women has now made all women miserable and turned them against men. Sad.

  37. Just A Guy Says:

    My wife is the perfect woman, she cooks for me, cleans for me, watches the children, has sexual intercourse when ever i want and i do nothing to be absolutly sincere. She was not accepted into the academy i was accepted into because she was a female. She was my competiton I got in because men grant more success than women. I find that politically incorrect and extremely sexist and i am a man and i admit that us men find littel things acceptable and unacceptanle like when a woman is a boss of a major fashion industry that is acceptable that is okay that is whatis acceptable but then put a man in the chair and he is automatically critisized and the number one asumption of him will be that he is a homosexual because a feminine man is to us MEN a fag. Now lets turn it around lets say the woman is a coach of a football team. yes guys i brought our sport into this the following assumtions is she is a dike, tomboy, or what you guys are makeing fun of … a feminist. Well there are many female foot ball coaches. my son has transfered highschools 6 times and was in the football team all six times and each time he got a Guy coach but evey time i talk to a coach there has always bee these women who want to coach a team but are not accepted because thy are women and i find that to be completely sincere fucked up and if i had a vagina i would absoulutely be protesting against this sexist list but you know there are no real feminists left any more and im the only descent guy left that knows this list is bullshit and i guess ill be the only one protecting women in these comments. come on guys you should know why your lonely dont fuck with the pussy do your job and be a man and respect it.

  38. T. Rose Says:

    I fear that’s what the MRA movement will become,all these rules except gender reversed.
    That’s just the problem with any movement,once they spread out they only have one goal,eliminate the common enemy which in most feminists case is men.That’s why there are so many and why I cannot laugh.It gets to the point the “opposing” sides end up not so different and do nothing constructive.

    And no this isn’t a sexist list,it’s a damn truth,you proved that with your last line which should be a rule up there

    Men should just be men whenever we are taking away their privilege in anything instead of getting in our way,but should not lie down whenever we are being discriminated. Only we should be in fashion,but we have every right to become football coaches.

  39. PrivlegeBingo Says:

    Men generally don’t get it (comprehending the current subject) and to add to it, they derail. They find every way in which they can derail a discussion and make it about themselves as men personally rather than just maleness and the misogyny used to run maleness. That is why men are often disagreed with–aside from blatant trolling.

  40. Mastermind Says:

    This was pretty funny. It does however accurately address the hypocrisy within the feminst. Feminist are absolutely rediculous. They still complain about equality. It’s not like we need it in the year 2010. They are able to wear T shirts that bash men. Here is an example; “Boys are good for the team” on the front and “They can be waterboys” on the back. Let me rephrase that. There is no equality. The inequality in divorce preceedings can prove that. Here is an example. I know of a case where a father got college funds started for his kids before they were born, paid all the bills, did all the housework, and doing all the taking care of the kids while the woman just laid in bed. The injustice was when she wanted a divorce and started filing, the man had to pay her lawyer while having to pay his own which he could barely afford. He also got the kids every other weekend while her house, after the man left became what appeared to be a “death trap” for the kids to unwittingly walk into. She was also caught making out amoung other things in a parking lot and didn’t even have charges filed against her. She also got away with hitting him. Say what you will but the favortism in the legal system towards women is a prime example of the inequality.

  41. The Rules of Feminism Says:

    [...] If a teacher were to beat black boys more than white boys, we

  42. fashionfoodfeminism Says:

    This is amusing. The list highlights the problems within the movement of feminism and amongst feminists, but it’s also full of stereotypes. Oh, and in case anyone didn’t know God is a MAN according to George Carlin
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6RT6rL2UroE

  43. Elaria Says:

    Good lord, what a load of hateful crap. Looks like someone doesn’t know the definition of “straw man.”


Google