« Annika interviewed me... | Main | "Further up, further in" and moving towards veganism »

February 04, 2005

Comments

bmmg39

"So stop giving yourselves credit for things you never did, like acting chivalrious to females...you usually do THAT just like I do from common courtesy...I hold doors for people, so what..."

Yeah, I DO believe in common courtesy, and I DON'T believe in chivalry. Thanks for noticing.

bmmg39

"Someone suggested that the use of comic female-on-male violence is something new in the last 20 or 30 years. I've been watching the first season of "Soap," and there was a very funny scene of Chester, the cheater, getting slapped on the face by two of his mistresses."

If that's what's in the scene then it most certainly is NOT funny.

"So it's nothing new."

You're right there, and the millions of abused men in America would like it to stop.

bmmg39

"bmmg39, there are also plenty of men, I'm sorry to say, who don't believe women should do the asking-out either. I tend to think of this as a jerk filter, but you seem to have the idea that every man would love to let women take the reins once in a while."

Oh, no: I place the blame for these ridiculous gender-based systems at the feet of both (some) men and (some) women.

ray

"Hey thanks. I knew that was a very important news article that needed to be discussed regarding militantly enforced chivalry. If we are going to allow our government to send military forces into other countries to kill people so that feminist terrorist governments can be installed, that is a crime against humanity."

hi Ob, the link you had appeared broken, here's where i found the story:


http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/headlines05/0203-10.htm

NBC (News) is the reporting source for the above -- the story was picked up by a variety of "secondary" outlets, but apparently was suppressed by the major media

[i am stunned -- not]

there was a trailer-story through AP [a highly accredited source] reporting that General James Mattis was "counseled" for his remarks by the Commandant of the Marine Corps

here's the link:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2005/02/03/state1520EST0065.DTL&type=printable


the transcript reports that the General also said, "It's fun to shoot *some* people"
[emphasis mine]

given his immediately subsequent comments about protecting women from "the veil" and "slapping around," it is valid for Ob to determine that -- as in the Abu-male- prisoner humiliation strategy -- the military and political intent is to serve as collective Woman's "arm of violence"

to make the world safe for the spread of Western feminism/matriarchy, basically

the General spoke the truth in his heart -- his authentic feelings and motives, and the feelings and motives of MANY of his subordinates and superiors

it's ironic that his honesty betrays, by opening, the fallen heart of femamerica

in the follow-up story, a General Mike Hagee was quoted thus:

"While I understand that some people may take issue with the comments made by him, I also know he intended to reflect the unfortunate and harsh realities of war," Hagee said. "Lt. Gen. Mattis often speaks with a great deal of candor."


in military culture, receiving "counseling" is a way of [wink, wink] providing covert agreement with General Mattis, while publically taking a "disapproving" official action against him [i.e., the counseling]


you're v right, Ob, this little slip-up by the powers is very revealing of their intentions for men and for men's interests worldwide

the men who rule over us with war and cages and violence are servants of the matriarchy, as these articles, and many other real-world examples, demonstrate

these stories haven't seen proper distribution/recognition in public yet

i'll get to work on it, see what i can do, thx again


NYMOM

"I think it's absolutely hilarious that NYMOM would have the chutzpah to call someone else an "a@@"."

Not that I give a rat's a@@ WHAT YOU THINK, but out of respect to Hugo's blog I'll restrain from responding in kind...

Obtestor

the men who rule over us with war and cages and violence are servants of the matriarchy, as these articles, and many other real-world examples, demonstrate

Think about the genius that the US General used when he said he loved to shoot people (anti-feminist men). They have already killed all of the terrorists. Now they have redefined the definition of 'terrorist' as all men who stand in the presence of the 'veiled' female.

Since all men, according to American feminists, are domestic violence predators, the US Marine General's description of men that 'hit females for five years at a time' means 'all men'. That is what it means.

So now these soldiers are using radical feminist objectives to indiscriminately kill all men wherever the soldiers are based in foreign countries in times of war. They are doing it with feminist marketing terms like 'oppressed women', the 'domestic violence' racket, the all women must wear 'veils' racket, ad infinitum.

God help those men in Iraq and Afghanistan because the pro-feminist slaughter against them has begun. We are seeing new martriarchal totalitarian regimes installed that mirror the USA. It is a scary time for this world.

Obtestor

NYMOM

"Hey thanks. I knew that was a very important news article that needed to be discussed regarding militantly enforced chivalry. If we are going to allow our government to send military forces into other countries to kill people so that feminist terrorist governments can be installed, that is a crime against humanity."

This is just more 'spin' from men trying to act like 'chivalry' and protecting women is why you got involved with this war...and it's total bullcrap...

America has been involved with the Mideast for YEARS and most of that involvement revolved around obtaining oil for our industries at cheap prices. AND those men over there have been treating women like crap for years, centuries actually, eons and America never saw fit to say or do a darn thing about it...nothing...ever...

You got involved NOW for the same reason you always get involved with wars because YOUR OWN interests were threatened...

Don't DARE turn around now and act like MEN got involved with this war due to any bogus chivalry bullcrap to help women in those cultures...

NYMOM

"I think it's absolutely hilarious that NYMOM would have the chutzpah to call someone else an "a@@".

I'm beginning to suspect they're the same person."

Although I can see you are trying to provoke me into an argument, I'm doing my best to ignore your very stupid remarks out of respect for Hugo's blog...

NYMOM

"So now these soldiers are using radical feminist objectives to indiscriminately kill all men wherever the soldiers are based in foreign countries in times of war. They are doing it with feminist marketing terms like 'oppressed women', the 'domestic violence' racket, the all women must wear 'veils' racket, ad infinitum."

Ummm...

I wonder if that General ever had a chance to review how many men in the armed forces are guilty THEMSELVES of domestic violence and 'slapping women around' as I understand the numbers are quite high compared to the civilian population...

So MAYBE everytime a terrorist blows up an American serviceman he is REALLY just acting on the code of chivalry trying to STOP you all from coming home to beat up on your wife and kids...

So NOW BOTH OF YOU have an excuse to continue bashing each other's brains out over there and BOTH OF YOU can now blame it all on your wives and mothers...

You're all doing it out of chivalry...

It's perfect...

NYMOM

"You're right there, and the millions of abused men in America would like it to stop."

Sigh....millions now...

AND of course in your next post, Hitler will be invoked, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jesus Christ, the Buddha and God only knows how many others to make your bogus point...

NYMOM

"...the General spoke the truth in his heart -- his authentic feelings and motives, and the feelings and motives of MANY of his subordinates and superiors..."


Yeah sure he did...I wonder how much of a bonus Bush will be giving him NOW that he put this spin on the war...

Boy I'd love to see the inside of the Christmas envelope under this guy's tree comes December...it's gonna be a doozy...

djw

I'm all for cross-ideological dialogue and such, but for the life of me I can't see why any of the thoughtful regular posters around here, left and right, would find it a productive or satisfying use of their time to respond to Obtestor's posts. He's simply begging for attention he doesn't deserve. Let's not give it to him.

Pseudo-Adrienne

I agree djw. His posts are just the rantings of paranoid, belligerently misogynist gynophobe anyway. There are MRAs out there more reasonable, rational, and sane than him. Just ignore him NYMOM and everyone else, you won't get anywhere with him. Let him rave on and demostrate his borderline schizophrenia and venomous misogyny.

Obtestor

Don't DARE turn around now and act like MEN got involved with this war due to any bogus chivalry bullcrap to help women in those cultures...

That is precisely why we are there, to assist in the seating of a global matriarchal totalitarian regime.

Obtestor

Obtestor

I'm all for cross-ideological dialogue and such, but for the life of me I can't see why any of the thoughtful regular posters around here, left and right, would find it a productive or satisfying use of their time to respond to Obtestor's posts. He's simply begging for attention he doesn't deserve. Let's not give it to him.

Appeal to popularity logic fallacy.

Here are some other examples:

1. "My fellow Americans...there has been some talk that the government is overstepping its bounds by allowing police to enter peoples' homes without the warrants traditionally required by the Constitution. However, these are dangerous times and dangerous times require appropriate actions. I have in my office thousands of letters from people who let me know, in no uncertain terms, that they heartily endorse the war against crime in these United States. Because of this overwhelming approval, it is evident that the police are doing the right thing."

2. "I read the other day that most people really like the new gun control laws. I was sort of suspicious of them, but I guess if most people like them, then they must be okay."

3. Jill and Jane have some concerns that the rules their sorority has set are racist in character. Since Jill is a decent person, she brings her concerns up in the next meeting. The president of the sorority assures her that there is nothing wrong with the rules, since the majority of the sisters like them. Jane accepts this ruling but Jill decides to leave the sorority.

-->Source; Nikzor

Obtestor

Obtestor

I agree djw. His posts are just the rantings of paranoid, belligerently misogynist gynophobe anyway. There are MRAs out there more reasonable, rational, and sane than him. Just ignore him NYMOM and everyone else, you won't get anywhere with him. Let him rave on and demostrate his borderline schizophrenia and venomous misogyny.

Another outstanding example of appeal to popularity logic fallacy. I could write a book about the sheer number of logic fallacies used at this blog.

Obtestor

Obtestor

I'm all for cross-ideological dialogue and such, but for the life of me I can't see why any of the thoughtful regular posters around here, left and right, would find it a productive or satisfying use of their time to respond to Obtestor's posts. He's simply begging for attention he doesn't deserve. Let's not give it to him.

Oh, by the way, this is also a fantastic example of an attack the messenger logic fallacy.

Obtestor

NYMOM

"I'm all for cross-ideological dialogue and such, but for the life of me I can't see why any of the thoughtful regular posters around here, left and right, would find it a productive or satisfying use of their time to respond to Obtestor's posts. He's simply begging for attention he doesn't deserve. Let's not give it to him."

Because it's not really a response to him but to the men on other sites who say this crap as well and BELIEVE IT...I guarantee you many of them lurk here w/o posting and then go back and say the same thing as him...and if you ignore this 'spin' on the war long enough, in a year or two or maybe three Women will OWN that war...it will be OUR war started because of feminism or some such crap...

You cannot afford to ignore lies like that as they get bigger over time and then eventually they become a historic 'truth'...

Like I guarantee you that a lot of enlisted men have been fed that spin now and some probably believe it too...

Actually MRAs ARE beginning to show up in mainstream media now, so I guarantee you that a lot of the nutty ideas they are talking about will soon be going mainstream...Already it's happening with Laura Bush buying into the shifting of our gaze away from girls because they've been getting too much attention line now...

So that's where it ends if you don't vigorously engage propaganda...it comes back at you as fact a few years later and then it's too late to disprove...as everyone's forgotten the truth already...

djw

I think you're right that the pernicious discourse and misleading statistics and factual evidence of the MRA crowd should be confronted and refuted for the reasons you give. But the sort of rhetoric obtestor presents is a different story. If he's the mouthpiece of the movement, it'll turn off far more people to their cause than it'll impress. If obtestor was a feminist looking to discredit and embarrass the men's right's movement, he couldn't do much better than what he's doing now.

Obtestor

I think you're right that the pernicious discourse and misleading statistics and factual evidence of the MRA crowd should be confronted and refuted for the reasons you give.

That is just comical. Radical feminists can't refute any of the facts MRAs present because MRA facts are truths that the radical left would just love to ignore like they do everything else of importance to a healthy country.

Feminism isn't going to stop the MRA movement nor is it going to even put a dent in it. The MRA movement is steamrolling now for social change and men will get that change to protect them from feminist evil.

Now, since you advocate the confronting of MRA 'information (facts) with 'feminist evil', confront these facts for me:

1) How is it that a US Marine General can claim that the shooting of non-feminists is 'fun', and yet draw total silence from the feminist left in response? If the US Marine General said shooting "homosexuals" and "Lesbians" was fun, would you still remain quiet about it? Remember, silence is consent.

2) Why do the radical leftist feminists have to make laws to hide domestic violence statistics? If the statistics weren't lies, why hide them?

3) In what ways does the modern American secular hedonist female provide a benefit for the modern man to marry them?

4) Since America has seen over 50,000,000 abortions since 1973, that means on average that the females having abortions are having multiple abortions, sometimes 10, 12 or even 20 of them. How does that benefit a woman's "health"? That is what sold abortion to the American people so I just thought that I would ask.

5) We were promised that abortion would 'save our civilization' if women could do it legally. No more "unwanted" children. The elimination of the "welfare" state. Yada Yada Yada. Well, none of the promises have yet to be realised and over 50,000,000 Americans have been slaughtered in abortion concentration camps. What are your thoughts on these broken promises? (feminism is famous for breaking promises)

There, just five simple questions to start, since you are all warmed up and ready to just 'disprove' us MRAs at will, like it is easy or something. So start with the first question. Why is Hugo's entire forum (except for the men that are concerned) ignoring the genocide of men?

Obtestor


SourAaron

"I think it's absolutely hilarious that NYMOM would have the chutzpah to call someone else an "a@@"."

"I'm beginning to suspect they're the same person."

I second that. Here, here, watch the grudge match - Misogyny vs. Misandry. Watch the rhetorical sparks fly while all other people look on, embarrassed for their gender.

What was the point of the thread again?

Lynn Gazis-Sax

djw's right; at this point I'm regretting ever bothering to respond to Obtestor. We're better off sticking to the MRAs in this thread who don't go around arguing that we're in Afghanistan to impose a matriarchy, and not because planes flew into the World Trade Center. And who haven't yet invoked Godwin's Law. Serious debate about the best policy regarding divorce, etc., is one thing, and arguing about which sex is worse is another.

Obtestor

We're better off sticking to the MRAs in this thread who don't go around arguing that we're in Afghanistan to impose a matriarchy, and not because planes flew into the World Trade Center.

Translation: "Since Obtestor is bringing up incredible MRA facts about radical feminism, facts that we try to hide from American men as much as possible, we have to team up and ignore Obtestor in the hope that he will go away and stop exposing our lies. The US Marine General that said it was 'fun' to 'shoot' men made a very grave mistake that Obtestor was smart enough to point out, and Obtestor's other remarkably to-the-point questions about radical feminism are also a serious concern to us. We must not answer them, because to do so exposes the very agenda that we have waged against men in America, and now to men around the world under the threat of M-16s, helicopter gunships and laser-guided bombs."

Obtestor

ray

fascinating -- and so typical of the censorship and shutdown of any real dialogue around gender (unless, of course, one is promoting feminism, in which case the culture is thrilled to receive -- and often fund -- comments)

not one post in response to what the General said, in relation to the "false-chivaly" issue raised

instead, the usual: attack the poster or MRAs in general, and try to pretend that the issue (the U.S. General acting as Enforcer for American women and the Western matriarchies) doesn't exist

lefties think they're SO Informed and Progressive, when in fact, just like the totalitarian right, they are cocooned in their little worlds of Make Believe with their comfy biases, especially around the Sacred Cow of gender

like it or not, the Men's Movement is here, it's getting stronger every day, and the tactics of shaming and intimidation and censorship won't work anymore

you "progressives" are actually the REGRESSIVE cultural element that is currently Holding Up the Show

many of you are not gonna like the deep, righteous socio-cultural changes the Men's Movement will demand (and eventually win)

too bad, you'll just have to Deal (and feminism will no longer be holding all the cards)

get on board the Men's Movement or get outta the way, we're done forever with second-class citizenship, we ain't your servants no mo -- you'll just have to make do with Hugoboy from now on, and his brand of pandering and self-absorbed "masculinity" is already on the Extinction Endangered List!

LOL!!!

OOOOHHH yah baybeee! i'm gonna LIKE this century!!

NYMOM

"I think it's absolutely hilarious that NYMOM would have the chutzpah to call someone else an "a@@"."

"I'm beginning to suspect they're the same person."

I second that. Here, here, watch the grudge match - Misogyny vs. Misandry. Watch the rhetorical sparks fly while all other people look on, embarrassed for their gender.

What was the point of the thread again?"


This is so typical of you MRAs trying to discredit everybody you don't agree with...

Let's wait for Hugo to come back Monday and he can check the IP of where we're posting from to be the Judge of who this guy Obtestor really is...

I guarantee it will turn out to be one of you MRA idiots...as usual...

You pull the same crap on every site you're on...coming up with these phony accusations about people...

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Regular reads

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 01/2004