‘The People Who Peddle This Stuff Deserve Neither Respect, Nor Credit for Good Intentions, Which in Fact They Lack.’

Posted on | November 14, 2011 | 46 Comments

So says Professor Glenn Reynolds about those vicious feminist ax-grinders whose hatefulness is at least partly inspired by their self-interest as brokers at the redemption window where ordinary molehills of hurt feelings can be exchanged for Himalyayas of entitled victimhood:

The words used in workshops — “uncomfortable,” “inappropriate,” “hostile” — are vague, subjective, slippery. Feminists and liberal pundits say, with some indignation, that they are not talking about dirty jokes or misguided compliments when they talk about sexual harassment, but, in fact, they are: sexual harassment, as they’ve defined it, encompasses a wide and colorful spectrum of behaviors. . . . [W]hen I was at Princeton in the ’90s, the guidelines distributed to students about sexual harassment stated, “sexual harassment may result from a conscious or unconscious action, and can be subtle or blatant.”

To explain what’s wrong with the criminalization of “misguided compliments” might require a book, although we could summarize what’s wrong with it in a single word: Everything.

People respond to incentives. The Feminist Victimhood Narrative inspires a culture of grievance, which incentivizes self-pity, scapegoating and vindictiveness. Where grievance multiplies and the list of prohibited behaviors expands, the vendors of feminist ideology are able to enlist their clients as saleswomen to help them generate demand for their product.

It’s the Amway approach to ideological hegemony.

Everyone encounters unfairness and hostility at some point in their lives. Everyone suffers wrongs that make them angry. However, feminism encourages women to think of themselves as members of a permanent victim class encompassing half of humanity, engaged in a daily zero-sum struggle against a demonized enemy, The Patriarchy. And if ever any woman believes herself to have encountered injustice at the hands of a member of The Patriarchy, feminism stands ready to aid her in her heroic struggle against the perpetrator.

Collective empowerment by such means can only be accomplished by the diminution of the individual, persuading people that they lack autonomy and agency, and stigmatizing those who refuse to join in the collectivist enterprise.

When you call feminists out for their totalitarian evil, you will predictably be accused of defending everything ever done wrong by any man anywhere throughout the course of history. Thus do feminists protect their perverse worldview against critical scrutiny, by arrogating to themselves the authority to declare any critic a “sexist” or worse.

Did I mention there will be a Gloria Allred press conference today?

Category: Feminism

Comments

46 Responses to “‘The People Who Peddle This Stuff Deserve Neither Respect, Nor Credit for Good Intentions, Which in Fact They Lack.’”

smitty
November 14th, 2011 @ 1:20 pm

I agree wholeheartedly, and call on @pinkelephantpun to do the right thing and invite feminists to a panel a the next BlogCon.
Joe
November 14th, 2011 @ 1:33 pm

Will there be a swimsuit panel at next years BlogCon? Because I am sure all those feminists look good in swimsuits?

http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2007/02/ugly_i_dont_get.html Remember this classic exchange between Dan Riehl and Amanda Marcotte? She claimed to be all offended, but we all know Amanda looooved it.
Joe
November 14th, 2011 @ 1:36 pm

Blogcon is not sexist, not at all, all bloggers will be invited to participate in the swimsuit panel.
Anonymous
November 14th, 2011 @ 1:38 pm

You are a cruel man, sir.
Zilla of the Resistance
November 14th, 2011 @ 1:40 pm

When I wrote the blog post titled “Femininican” which did indeed call those bitches out for their totalitarian evil, I was accused of wanting to undermine all the advances women have made since back when we weren’t allowed to vote. So if you do not support the perpetual victimhood mentality of man-hating, then you want all women to be chained to a stove barefoot and pregnant – or some such nonsense.
“Feminists” are deranged BITCHES who do not even care about the REAL plight of women, such as what the evil cult of islam does to them, just like their fellow progs, they only care about certain kinds of so called outrages that effect specific pigeonholed demographics.
Hypocritical harpies are what those bitches are and Gloria Allred is apparently their lead crone.
smitty
November 14th, 2011 @ 1:40 pm

@rsmccain: I suppose that was kind of a ‘dick’ thing to say.
JeffS
November 14th, 2011 @ 1:42 pm

Cruel to the feminazis, you mean? Because they will see their “logic” ripped asunder, and their claims of victim laughed into the dimension of no meaning?

I’d call that a win-win.
Joe
November 14th, 2011 @ 1:44 pm

No, cruel to the other BlogCon participants if those wet towels come and spoil the party. It is supposed to be fun!
Joe
November 14th, 2011 @ 1:45 pm

feminists generally do not like dick things.
Stan Brewer
November 14th, 2011 @ 1:49 pm

Only certain kind of women can wear the feminist title. Conservative women need not apply i. e. Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Ann Coulter etc. These women are living what the radical Feminists want, but have gone at the wrong way
Anonymous
November 14th, 2011 @ 1:51 pm

But how do they know what they like, if they’ve never had the best?
Anonymous
November 14th, 2011 @ 2:08 pm

He’s right, I admire that.
CalMark
November 14th, 2011 @ 2:20 pm

Any organization–corporate, government or military–purposely built to consist entirely (or almost) of women is considered praiseworthy and noble, winning contracts, awards, and grants, often regardless of merit.

A similar organization is built on objective meritocracy but consisting mostly of white men is odiously oppressive and treated as a criminal conspiracy by government and “public opinion.”

And this is why we have absurdities like maternity combat camouflage uniforms.
Joe
November 14th, 2011 @ 2:31 pm

Correctamundo!
Joe
November 14th, 2011 @ 2:33 pm

43 year old feminist! I think she may be able to take most of us.
Joe
November 14th, 2011 @ 2:38 pm

BlogCon 2012 Feminist T-Shirts!
Joe
November 14th, 2011 @ 2:42 pm

Feminism Defined.

Here’s another definition.
Bob Belvedere
November 14th, 2011 @ 2:44 pm

It would be a very Oedipusian occasion for those of us not participating.

[Thanks, Joe]
Bob Belvedere
November 14th, 2011 @ 2:47 pm

Cruel, perhaps, but needed to balance the whining.
smitty
November 14th, 2011 @ 2:54 pm

Knew I could count on you, @BobBelvedere
Adjoran
November 14th, 2011 @ 3:07 pm

I’d whine too if I got more attention from Amanda Marcotte than Tabitha Hale.

How much is one man expected to endure for “the greater good” anyway?
Adjoran
November 14th, 2011 @ 3:12 pm

We could settle it once and for all the civilized way: on the fields of honor.

Pick four conservababes against four feminista womyn, competing in a triathlon of sorts: 100 meter bikini dash, jello wrestling, and pole dancing, all in stiletto heels.

Then after the medals ceremony they can fetch all the judges a beer.
Dave
November 14th, 2011 @ 3:34 pm

Come now Zilla, we all know that the only concern women should have is murdering their unborn. As long as they can do that, well, what else would you need? Pre-natal infanticide is all the fulfillment a REAL woman needs.
Joe
November 14th, 2011 @ 3:59 pm

Nice idea at the end, but they would spit in the beers.
Joe
November 14th, 2011 @ 4:49 pm

If she can do SlutWalk, she can do BlogCon’s Swimsuit Panel!
Joe
November 14th, 2011 @ 5:00 pm

“Newt Gingrich on the move politically is as dangerous as a wounded wolverine.”

Okay, how about Dan Rather, Charles Johnson and Newt Gingrich at BlogCon 2012! They can be in the swimsuit competition too.
Christy Waters
November 14th, 2011 @ 5:50 pm

Oh geez, why do you want to get me started? I work in a heavily male-dominated industry, and have for 15 years. I’ve had all kinds of things said to me, and still do. By the Gloria Allred standard, I could own the company. Hell, I was called “sweetheart” just last week, by a coworker, but does that mean I’m willing to destroy the man’s life for it? No… he’s a good guy.

If a woman buys into the feminist dogma, then she engages in the ultimate self-hatred. I’m disgusted that some women are so vacant, that they actually believe that strength comes from victimhood, or that in order for women to be strong, men must be made weak. Neither gender is well-served by that philosophy. We now have a whole industry of products for men that will help them get in touch with their feminine side, for God’s sake! I wish we could go back to the attitudes of 50 years ago, when men were still masculine… even if that meant I might get my ass pinched on occasion. Women can’t hold up the testicle lock box like a trophy, and then complain that there are no good men left.

If Gloria Allred wants to stew in the juice of her own man-hating bitterness, then she’ll decay from the inside. As for me, I’m too busy trying to find the fun in life to be weighed down by a chip on my shoulder because some asshole decides to be crude toward me, or because a coworker calls me “sweetheart”.
JeffS
November 14th, 2011 @ 6:17 pm

And a sammich!
Joy W. McCann
November 14th, 2011 @ 6:58 pm

Ah–then why does Palin call herself a “feminist”?
Joy W. McCann
November 14th, 2011 @ 6:59 pm

If you define the whiners as feminists, you will tend to discover that feminists are whiners, without ever noticing the circular quality of your logic. But I see that you are having a good time, so carry on . . .
Anonymous
November 14th, 2011 @ 7:21 pm

“I wish we could go back to the attitudes of 50 years ago, when men were still masculine…”

Word. My hubby of 26 years has facial AND body hair, none of which he chooses to remove…and I LIKE IT! MWAHAHAHAHA!

Like you, I’m sick unto death of the victimologists. They remind me of a friend who survived a horrific train accident and had a full recovery. Ten years later, he introduced himself thus: “Hi, I’m Jim. I got hit by a train.”

I worked in steel mills and got every kind of comment (and pass) from the mill rats; I was offered a management job at 40% less than male managers, because “they have families to support”; and yes, I’ve even endured a major illness and a rape. But none of that defines me. Those are simply major-bummer moments in a lifetime that’s otherwise filled with joy and love. I define myself by what I’ve done to help others, my efforts to have a successful career, and being part of a large family whom I adore (dysfunctional as they are).

The victimologists don’t want justice; they want revenge. And the quest for revenge is eating at their souls. No wonder they’re a bunch of nasty, evil cats (no offense to actual kittehs, which I love).
Anonymous
November 14th, 2011 @ 7:23 pm

My dad would have loved you like a son…!
Anonymous
November 14th, 2011 @ 7:26 pm

I’ll attend–ONLY IF brain bleach is provided. Sorry, but Stacy, Da Tech Guy, and Jim Hoft in Speedos…EEK!

(Smitty is probably OK because he’s all buff from da service and stuff…you’re welcome, Mrs. Smitty.)
richard mcenroe
November 14th, 2011 @ 7:50 pm

If your little buzzing buddy has a pull-starter, YOU MIGHT BE A FEMINIST.
Joseph G Figliola
November 14th, 2011 @ 10:40 pm

Herman Cain will probably not go into the books as the 45th President. But he just may go into the books as the personality associated with the death of Political Correctness. This is good and just.

d(^_^)bhttp://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/”Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”
JeffS
November 15th, 2011 @ 12:56 am

You might look up the phrase “politically incorrect”.

Or consider the possibility — however faint it might be — that what you consider to be a feminist ain’t what a leftie considers to be a feminist.

I think this is called “framing the message”. Just sayin’, is all.
Joy W. McCann
November 15th, 2011 @ 4:54 am

“[C]onsider the possibility — however faint it might be — that what you
consider to be a feminist ain’t what a leftie considers to be a
feminist.”

That is not a faint possibility; it is a dead certainty. And I’ve never understood why it is that Stacy accepts the definition given him by leftists, rather than by feminist conservatives.

That slavish adherence to The Marcotte Code certainly sets dear RSM apart, doesn’t it?

But I suppose the man has to get through the night his own way.
AngelaTC
November 15th, 2011 @ 6:53 am

The polls seem to indicate that along sexist lines, women are more likely to believe the accusations than men. Which makes me wonder – do men not actually realize that there are other men that do indeed act this way? Maybe it shouldn’t be illegal, but that’s a different argument.

The women filed complaints long before Cain was a presidential candidate, which would indicate that this wasn’t some vast left wing conspiracy theory.

Speaking from years of experience of being a working woman, I would say that 99% of the women who get hit on at work choose to leave the position rather than raise a fuss, precisely because of the nature of men, who predictably respond by viciously calling them liars, sluts and golddiggers.

There’s a difference between having a guy flub a pass and having a guy try to force your head into his lap.
Bob Belvedere
November 15th, 2011 @ 9:32 am

By doing that she’s only showing us that she’s not perfect.

A Feminist is an ideologue; to label oneself one means that you subscribe to a system of ideas developed in the sterile laboratories of various minds, far away from reality.

Conservative women reject ideology.
Bob Belvedere
November 15th, 2011 @ 9:39 am

Because, I believe, Stacy accepts Russell Kirk’s description of what a conservative is – to wit:

…For there exists no Model Conservative, and conservatism is the negation of ideology: it is a state of mind, a type of character, a way of looking at the civil social order.

The attitude we call conservatism is sustained by a body of sentiments, rather than by a system of ideological dogmata. It is almost true that a conservative may be defined as a person who thinks himself such. The conservative movement or body of opinion can accommodate a considerable diversity of views on a good many subjects, there being no Test Act or Thirty-Nine Articles of the conservative creed.

In essence, the conservative person is simply one who finds the permanent things more pleasing than Chaos and Old Night. (Yet conservatives know, with Burke, that healthy “change is the means of our preservation.”) A people’s historic continuity of experience, says the conservative, offers a guide to policy far better than the abstract designs of coffee-house philosophers….

http://www.kirkcenter.org/index.php/detail/ten-conservative-principles/
JeffS
November 15th, 2011 @ 11:01 am

Funny, I thought it was the other way around: conservative feminists insist on being “feminists” when in fact they are actually “classical feminists”, given how the lefties hijacked the feminist movement.

Just like classical liberals insist that they are “liberals”, even though the lefties hijacked the liberal movement.

That’s not working too well for classical liberals, come to think of it. A point that you might consider.
Post-post-post feminism [updated]
November 15th, 2011 @ 2:02 pm

[…] update: more here. Posted by Jeff G. @ 9:10 am Comments (5) | Trackback […]
Joy W. McCann
November 15th, 2011 @ 5:13 pm

“Ideologue”?

Let me direct you to the first definition in Webster’s 11th edition:
“the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes”
That’s all it is, at its root. It’s distorted in a lot of social and political contexts, but what it means is in fact what the Bible teaches: that we are all equal in the sight of God.
Joy W. McCann
November 15th, 2011 @ 5:20 pm

What conservatives want to conserve are the basic advances of Western thought. And the crowning achievements thereof are the abolition of slavery and the expansion of suffrage to include all classes–and females. Other important gains include property rights, which encompass the relatively new notion that women may own property.

Egalitarianism is central to Western thought, and it’s central to the conservative movement.

I applaud you guys when you beat down the anti-free-speech folks, but to expand that to those who fought for women’s suffrage by putting down feminists is patent nonsense.
Joy W. McCann
November 15th, 2011 @ 5:35 pm

I actually don’t know any “classical liberals” who attempt to forego that modifier. Though it’s crystal-clear what is meant when anyone uses the word “illiberal”–it harkens back to the classical meaning of the word, and everyone is clear that what’s meant is John Stuart Mill, rather than Ted Kennedy.

But one cannot compare a word that has been in use since the Middle Ages and has a cornucopia of meanings to one coined in the 1970s to represent egalitarianism and denote the movement that had led to women’s property rights/suffrage. We’re only a few decades removed from that coinage.

Please check a dictionary.

I know that I strike you people as stubborn on this point, but when conservatives paint the conservative movement as being hostile to women’s interests, I have to object–it’s a way that thoughtless people turn others–especially college-age women–off, for no discernible reason.

It’s easy to call out the speech-code people and the “put society in a straitjacket” people without conflating such folks with feminists.

Failing to make that distinction is simply slopping writing–as often as not, it’s a sign of sloppy thinking.
John Rambo
November 17th, 2011 @ 1:37 pm

BOYCOTT AMERICAN WOMEN
Why American men should boycott American women

Boycott American Women

I am an American man, and I have decided to boycott American women. In a nutshell, American women are the most likely to cheat on you, to divorce you, to get fat, to steal half of your money in the divorce courts, don’t know how to cook or clean, don’t want to have children, etc. Therefore, what intelligent man would want to get involved with American women?

American women are generally immature, selfish, extremely arrogant and self-centered, mentally unstable, irresponsible, and highly unchaste. The behavior of most American women is utterly disgusting, to say the least.

This blog is my attempt to explain why I feel American women are inferior to foreign women (non-American women), and why American men should boycott American women, and date/marry only foreign (non-American) women.

Tens of millions of American men have had their lives completely destroyed by American women through the following crimes:

1. False rape accusations (it has been proven that up to 80 percent of rape accusations are FALSE)

2. False DV charges (same as above)

3. Financial RAPE of men in divorce courts

4. Emotional destruction of men by ex-wives who have stolen their children from them and forbidden contact

5. Divorced dads who commit suicide as a result

Not one single American woman has EVER condemned their fellow American women for committing these crimes against men. Silence means consent. Therefore, American women support and enjoy destroying men’s lives and causing men to commit suicide. Therefore, is it any surprise that a huge percent of American men no longer want anything to do with American women, other than using them for easy sex and then throwing them away?

Over 50 percent of American women are single, without a boyfriend or husband; so the fact is most American men no longer want to marry American women. Let these worthless American women grow old living alone with their 10 cats.

BOYCOTT AMERICAN WOMEN!

BRAND NEW: Buy the Boycott American Women book. After reading this book, I promise you that you will never even think about dating an American woman ever again, or else I will give you your money back. That’s right, if you are not convinced by my book, I will give you a full refund!

Buy the Boycott American Women eBook now for just $4.99:
Boycott American Women eBook

Sincerely,
John Rambo