Hey Debaters! Have Your Debate HERE!
EF, of the Exposing Feminism blog, has repeatedly expressed a desire to engage in debate with members of the Crown Princess Marie Chantal of Greece Forum. EF is aware of this, and the "Greecies" are aware of it too. Both sides are intently aware of each other - like the Gingham Dog and the Calico Cat! But the Greecies have been slow to take EF up on his offer, for various reasons which you can discover if you surf over there and read all about it.
Now, I realize that the Counter-Feminist blog is far from being neutral turf, but I'll make it neutral for the occasion, all right? If EF and one designated Greecie want to log in to the comment section on this post, I will grant them a free thread all to themselves where they can slug it out to their hearts' content. How sweet does that sound, eh?
Comments from anybody other than the 2 designees, will be moderated. Yes guys, you'll have the auditorium all to yourselves! Upon my word of honor, I'll let none of my big stupid MRA bully men touch one single hair on the head of the designated Greecie! I grant you safe-conduct in my realm, for I am both a man of my word and a gracious host.
One other thing: I am der blogmeister here! Therefore, I reserve the right to intervene occasionally as referee should anybody, in my masterful opinion, step a mite too far outside of the Queensberry rules. So to speak.
I will use this power at my discretion, but lightly.
Greecies: Discuss this amongst yourselves, select your champion, and send him/her over here to formally introduce him/herself.
EF: Cruise on over here and let me know what you think.
Something tells me that EF might be willing to take me up on this offer. I'm not so sure about the Greecies, BUT. . . if they decline the offer, that would certainly tell me something about them.
Bring it on, folks! ;)
------------------------------
Crown Princess Marie Chantal of Greece Forum
BY THE WAY: anybody who wants to post comments BEFORE the games begin, just to speak your mind about this, is welcome to do so. But after the fun starts, your voices will be silenced.
Now, I realize that the Counter-Feminist blog is far from being neutral turf, but I'll make it neutral for the occasion, all right? If EF and one designated Greecie want to log in to the comment section on this post, I will grant them a free thread all to themselves where they can slug it out to their hearts' content. How sweet does that sound, eh?
Comments from anybody other than the 2 designees, will be moderated. Yes guys, you'll have the auditorium all to yourselves! Upon my word of honor, I'll let none of my big stupid MRA bully men touch one single hair on the head of the designated Greecie! I grant you safe-conduct in my realm, for I am both a man of my word and a gracious host.
One other thing: I am der blogmeister here! Therefore, I reserve the right to intervene occasionally as referee should anybody, in my masterful opinion, step a mite too far outside of the Queensberry rules. So to speak.
I will use this power at my discretion, but lightly.
Greecies: Discuss this amongst yourselves, select your champion, and send him/her over here to formally introduce him/herself.
EF: Cruise on over here and let me know what you think.
Something tells me that EF might be willing to take me up on this offer. I'm not so sure about the Greecies, BUT. . . if they decline the offer, that would certainly tell me something about them.
Bring it on, folks! ;)
------------------------------
Crown Princess Marie Chantal of Greece Forum
BY THE WAY: anybody who wants to post comments BEFORE the games begin, just to speak your mind about this, is welcome to do so. But after the fun starts, your voices will be silenced.
posted by Fidelbogen at 6:45 PM
35 Comments:
I have put an invitation out there also. I would like to hear what an educated feminist has to say and I know you are not a horrible male.
But Julie, remember...this here is just a place for "Exposing Feminism" to have his debate with the "Greecies", from that forum...
Myself, I don't "debate" feminists. I drive bargains with them, as a sovereign power. I also make coalitions with other sovereign powers... ;)
What do you expect to gain??
We will hear that women earn 79% of what men earn, that women were oppressed for 20.000 years, that women are divine, and femmies are their shining light, that if we men have a problem with the world today, that we shall be a man and suck it up...
No fact you provide will be considered, while the lies and manipulations will hold the higher ground of truth.
Logic will not be respected or regarded as a tool, emotions will take logic's place.
Honor, dignity and honesty will not exist, as a world where "I feel this way, so this way is the truth" does not hold any accountability.
Continue educating men, debating with femmies gains you nothing in their ground.
p.s.: Just now, I realized that debating femmies is another tool in educating men in their senselessness, selfishness and evilness...
Yes I know, Ze German, I understand perfectly what you are saying, but...
If EF wants to come over here, and if one of the Greecies wants to come over here, and have their debate, then I have given them a place - true to my word! :)
Besides...the Counter-feminist does not undertake a venture if he does not foresee some profit to be gotten by so doing... ;)
Oh, sorry.
I think ze german is right. There is no point. But at least you will get a few extra hits.
I haven't yet gone on the feminists sites that the guys do. I am too chicken.
Julie, as a woman, they would skin you alive for a traitor. Well, they would pluck you like a chicken and barbecue you. So...I can see why you would be...eh..."chicken"! ;)
But hey, why not just lurk and learn...? I mean, study things closely and catch what the drift is...?
As for the extra hits: the hit count on this blog, these days, is higher than it has ever been. Things are stirring, out there in the world!
Hi CF,
I have received this email:
'Dear exposingfeminism,
Our staff has opted not to approve your account, and therefore it has been
removed. The following reason was provided for why your account was not
approved:
You seem to have an agenda that we do not want here.'
It seems that I am not allowed to resond to the accusations made about me there, nor will they enter into any kind of debate.
I'm not suprised. Feminism is uncriticisable, don't we know that by now? It simply isn't allowed.
I will gladly debate anyone on your site or anyone elses, but I won't hold my breath for it.
Regards,
Exposing Feminism
why not just lurk and learn...? I mean, study things closely and catch what the drift is...?
I suppose I could do that.
Things are stirring, out there in the world!
I am happy to hear that.
Just yesterday, on a blog by the best known German "movement" author, we had a civilized discussion in the comments section about the pros and cons of his new publishing house. In comes a feminist, making herself heard by leaving these "lyrics" [fasten your seat belts]:
"hi, this is Sandra Hofer, from diestandard.at.
i just would like to say that I as a women can only despise people like you.
unfortunately you have zero arguments for your views but 100% male propaganda!
oh, those poor, poor males - tell us another, you honestly don't believe that yourselves!
women are the victims of patriarchy - that's the reality - unfortunately.
male swines! you should all be gassed!
have a nice day."
The German "source text" can be viewed here. For the gist of our replies, have a look here or here ;-) No need raising our collective adrenaline levels, when it's just the wind blowing over the prairie...
Now I'm very curious to see how well behaved the members of the Crown Princess Marie Chantal of Greece forum are.
@EF: EF, good of you to drop by! :)
You reception by CPMCG was predictable, I suppose. However, you may have noticed that people with a similar "agenda" to yours have gotten past the review committee and made their voices heard over yonder. I am thinking especially of "notNOW", who left a rather eloquent statement.
@notNOW: if you are reading this - in case the CPMCG people don't know of my invitation (which I'm pretty sure some of them do by now!), can you help out by making a notation of it over there...?
@Michael: "...just the wind blowing over the prairie."
Ha! I like that metaphor! VERY good! ;)
I'll continue reading the forum, of course.
My guess is that 'notNow' will just be shouted down and silenced like I was..
Exposing Feminism
Yes EF, I've got a hunch your prediction will prove correct. (How can I be so good at predicting these things, anyway.? ;)
Anyway, the CPMC people had their chance to have this debate, in the antiseptic debating chamber which I was (and am) prepared to offer. Really, I am trying to create the ideal conditions here - we'll see if they finally wish to take me up. Something tells me 'no'...but I'll bide my time for a bit. (Although I'm pretty sure they would never condescend to transact with persons like myself - that would be a propaganda defeat of sorts!)
But ya know....that Firefox guy sounded game!
Just back from CPMC: they are stepping back and giving themselves a big group hug.
They have apparently decided that notNow is safe enough to talk to.
NotNow has not made his reappearance yet, however. . .
It appears that they will not engage you, EF, upon any terms.
That's fine by me.
The more feminists shut down debate, the more apparent the undemocratic nature of feminism.
Exposing Feminism
It's also very easy to set up a whole discussion forum at no cost on neutral grounds. Just search Google for "free forum", or go here just for example. It would require of course that at least some channel of communication between the Crown Princess Marie Chantal of Greece forum and our lot has already been established, for sharing the link... It's hard to imagine, but in times of the Internet, there still seem to be problems contacting some people, especially when they live behind the walls of the Crown Princess' castle.
Thanks Michael, but I'm not holding my breath. To be honest, I didn't seriously think that the Greecies were going to take me up on my offer, but I gave it a shot anyway - just for the "drama" value, ya know! ;) Anyway, the fact that they won't deign to notice things outside of their echo chamber speaks tons - about them and their culture. To the denizens of the CP castle (and their brethren everywhere), our lot is just a mob of illiterate peasants: "Let them eat cake" would be a succinct summary of how they view the Movement.
I am following the discussion, however. And it is interesting. They are willing to engage notNow because he speaks in such level, measured tones. And the funny thing is, that he really isn't pulling any punches.
I am seeing a couple of significant things occuring. 1> They are willing to admit injustices to men, and 2> They are disputing that feminism has got anything to do with any of it.
THEIR Greecie little fingers are squeaky clean, you understand... ;-}
So, we see a trend among many self-professed feminists to distance themselves from the "radicals". Problem is, that by doing that, they are watering down feminism - eventually to the point where it becomes pointless as *feminism*. Meaning, that everything GOOD about so-called feminism is not truly original, and everything truly original about it is NOT GOOD.
What the watering-down process eventually leads to is nothing better than a kind of liberal humanism - and the word "feminism" as such becomes superfluous.
This is a subject that I have written about, for example here.
Fidel I have a question for you, is it rape when your wife wakes you up with oral sex, you tell her not to do it and she continues. Also if the man was a stay at home dad and had no income of his own would you say he felt threatened and had no one to turn to. Just asking your opinion. I'm thinking of having my x charged with rape.
Well because of some new laws in Germany "protecting wifes from violent husbands" (note who's implied to be always the violent part), the discussion in our media is cooking and steaming right now... I wish you could read German so I could send you some links. There are reader's letters in the online version of one of our bestselling mainstream newspapers where women write for example that they "demand city districts only for women where women can live without fear of getting raped" or that "men just have to function and otherwise should shut up. They should be kept in boxes!" (Here's the link to the online newspaper and the forum.)
If there's a watered down feminism somewhere, it certainly doesn't exist very prominently in Germany right now.
Oh and here's something interesting just in from Sky News UK. Scientific data that the consequences of feminism are unhealthy for women too (of course they don't name feminism as the culprit, but anyway).
Like you I'm following the "discussion" over at the Crown Princess' castle. It's very... interesting. I mean it's obvious they honestly believe they are right in defending feminism. They are just soo - clueless. If that ignorance could make a sound, it'd sound like fingernails scratching over a chalkboard. "notnow" must feel like standing over a trapdoor, with the trigger mechanism in the hands of fools.
@Ontario Eye: Hey...lawyer I am not, but since you seek my opinion, I'll proffer a bit for what it's worth. Caveat Emptor.
I'd be surprised if such a case as you are describing (your own?) has ever gone to court before.
Therefore, it just might be a chance to set a CASE LAW precedent. . .
Also, it might be a chance to challenge the nonexistent "standards of evidence" that are applied to rape cases in order to obtain a conviction. Normally, these standards are applied to men, who are "assumed" to be the rapists almost all the time. However, with the sex roles being reversed as we see here, it might be a chance for the FEMALE side to challenge the rules of evidence simply by OBJECTING to them. If things were handled right, the case might be thrown out of court on the grounds that the standards of evidence are so ridiculously low. This in turn MIGHT form the foundation for challenging the standards of evidence required in ALL rape cases, and eventually get those standards raised back to something reasonable, i.e. "clear and convincing evidence" - which the courts could then hardly fail to apply to cases involving MALE defendents.
This is only speculation.
Michael.. it looks like the crowd at Princess Castle is circling the wagons and practicing cognitive fragmentation.
It's classic: they are playing the game of "not that kind of feminist", and sealing themselves into their comfortable world with "their" kind of feminism - isolated from larger currents in the social ecology involving those other kinds of feminism which they would hurry to disown!
It would be SOOOO much easier for them, if they would just dump the word feminism altogether!
After swearing to the Oath of Abjuration, of course!
What I mean about "watering down" feminism, is that certain people are distancing themselves from the embarassing 'radical feminists', and by so doing they are cutting themselves off from the root of everything that makes feminism truly feminism in the first place! Meanwhile however, the embarrassing kinds of feminism continue to exist - and not only as an undercurrent, either!
So what I am really saying is that feminism is becoming polarized, like a house divided against itself. In the long run, I don't see how this can bode any good for feminism. It weakens the whole movement by giving it hard borders, and this in turn focuses the attention of the world upon the radical CORE element - which is the REAL feminism in just the same way that "you can't get more Catholic than the Pope!"
"Watered-down" applies merely to the style of so-called feminism which the lessrads are creating for themselves in order to appear respectable. The more you dilute the man-hating, female supremacist part of feminism, the less warrant you have to call it feminism whatsoever!
Michael, this business with the Crown Princess forum makes me think of that forum where you got banned a while ago. Comparisons between the 2 situations would be instructive and revealing.
michael,
Altavista's Babel Fish can translate German to English.
It probably won't do a good job on legal terms etc. but the articles' basic prose should be translated reasonably well.
It has worked ok for me so far, albeit for simple translations.
Ahhh...babelfish. Good for hours to cheap laughings and childlike entertainment by broken english for to translating;}
well, it's a win-win:
Either you get a reasonable translation or a barrel of laughs.
=+)
Well over at democraticunderground.com I basically got banned for stating in a measured tone that the Earth isn't flat (I said that men often have problems getting believed in court cases just because of their gender). I wouldn't have come as far as "notnow" in explaining my views.
I think the feminists at DU are far more militant and self-righteous than the "Greecies". Both groups don't notice their inappropriate behaviour, of course. The Greecies are insofar different to the DUers that they're not that political, they're just sympathizers of feminism. They have a 188-pages-thread about Britney Spears, they can't be political ;-) But of course, as we all know, a mob can be dangerous too.
My time at democraticunderground was insofar revealing in that I've learned that the political and cultural landscape in the U.S. is completely different from Europe or Germany. There's no valid 1:1 conversion where you can say "oh, the Democrats in the U.S. equal the Social Democratic Party of Germany, or the Republicans are similar to the CDU (Christian Democrats)". Not so, but I naively assumed that. It's all far more complicated... but on the other hand, it's probably only important to people who plan to write cross-cultural studies, and I don't lol...
If anyone's interested, here's the link to the DU feminists' inner sanctum: DU Feminist Group. And as if that's not enough, they have a Women's Rights discussion board too. I'm sure you'll find ample material for a new blog post there, fidel. But please don't visit these halls of horrors if you have a weak heart or suffer from high blood pressure! ;-)
The 188 page thread about B.Spears confirms my impressionistic assessment of the CP forum: "Pink Fluff". Oh...but they ARE political you know - but in the primitive sense of struggling for power, like all human animals!
As for American vs. European political sophistication, I think the most revealing thing is that Americans understand the words "liberal" and "left" in their own idiosyncratic, insular North American way - completely divorced from the historical origins and evolution of those terms (which did NOT originate in North America needless to say!).
On the Princess Castle discussion, I notice that they are talking about VAWA (the Violence Against Women Act).
I have a brief statement to make on that. My objection to VAWA is NOT that it might exclude male victims from services (although that is certainly an important concern), but rather....
That it codifies and enshrines the feminist world-view in the language of law.
And even to a certain extent, grafts the feminist world-view onto the machinery of state, via the creation and funding of various bureaucracies.
That may sound a bit abstract, a bit dry and technical, but after all i AM "the counter-feminist", and those are the sorts of things I condition myself to see in the world.
To make me happy, they must at the very least reformulate this legislation so it is scrubbed clean of ALL feminist inspired anti-male political bias.
And the point I have been straining at in the non-threatening sort of way necessary there is indeed the one you have emboldened above. To wit:
"The only time political power is a zero-sum game is between US and THE GOVERNMENT. When government's power rises, citizens' power diminishes. Government is the enemy of civil rights. The civil rights movement of the 60's didn't ask for special treatment, they asked for fair treatment, and they had every right to ask for it. In fact, they had to fight the government to get it, didn't they? The scariest phrase anyone can ever hear is 'I am from the government and I am here to help you.' I will probably never get over my suspicion of modern feminism because it has enlisted the aid of government in its pursuit of its objectives. Again, VAWA serves as a large example. Starting with its very title, VAWA discriminates against men as a matter of law."
The idea that one cannot trust the very government that one "receives help" from is a very frightening and alien idea to most. Presented in harsh terms, it would be rejected out of hand. I am planting seeds. It took me years of reading to come to the firmly-held beliefs I now hold. I cannot expect others to meet me there in a day, even though I now very clearly see it. Firebrand is for rallying the troops and arguing with men, not making a case to middle-aged women who can boot you from their site. It simply wouldn't work, and I knew that going in.
@NotNOW: You know, oddly enough, I would favor an updated version of VAWA that would be even MORE anti-male sexist than the current version.
I would start by re-titling it as MVAWA (Male Violence Against Women Act - pronounced EM-vawa.)
Then I would pick through the verbiage point by point, inserting "male" and "male violence" and the like, in as many places as possible.
I would set this proposal before the legislature for their vote. Having made it feminist to the gills in every way possible, how could the feminists possibly object to it...eh? ;)
Well, I'm toast.
I am quite satisfied with my involvement with the Greecies. It was a good exercise (I am new at this), and I EASILY found a bunch of new material to refute their circular arguments. There truly is a wealth of info out there that shows feminists are lying about everything, or that the ones that aren't lying are simply repeating the bullshit which they've been fed, never having gone and looked for information themselves. Useful idiots, the soldiers of any movement.
It really is amazing how they fall back on "never in our history have men been the property of women blah blah blah and thats why its the Violence against women act" reasoning. They just cannot bring themselves to admit the obvious: they believe they deserve special treatment, and if it comes at the expense of men that is OK with them.
One important note: conspicuously missing were petals and laconic, the ones who spouted the feminist gibberish without appearing to have any idea what it even meant. I guess they took a powder when the shooting started.
Most of their clucking and kvetching boils down to "life is unfair" - which we already knew. It is obvious to anybody who has observed life.
What is perhaps not so obvious is that life is EQUALLY unfair for men and women, but the unfairness is differentially distributed because men and women are. . . different.
I like the bit about "examining your male privilege". Assuming that we "examine" it.... what then?
Ze German said: "Continue educating men, debating with femmies gains you nothing in their ground."
Yes, Ze German! That is what I intend to continue doing. Your assessment exactly coincides with my own.
I gained insight. I exposed them to logic, some, perhaps, for the first time in their lives. The greecies are not all femmies. I plumbed the (shallow) depths of the ideologues among them.
Educating men is important, but educating women is also. Rank-and-file women who call themselves feminists mostly only know that they are women and don't like the way the world treats them sometimes, so feminism must be good for them. Feminism uses lies to convince them that they can have it all, and if the are trying and can't get it, it's all men's fault. Women as a group must begin to consider what they want, and to accept the limitations that everyone deals with in life. When you make decisions, you close off some paths you might have taken. Divorce is the ultimate "do-over".
So, women must consider whither they are being led. Someone has to encourage them to consider it. The end game of the rad-fems is a nihilistic destruction of men AND women. Some are logical enough to see it. We need them too.
First, sorry to hear you got banned, notnow. But I suppose you knew yourself it would happen sooner or later... Imagine how devoid of posts that forum would be if they applied their policy (see #676): "Informing other posters that their beliefs and assertions are wrong and destructive is not appropriate and will not be tolerated. (The offending post has been deleted.)" ... onto their legion of posters defending feminism.
But here's some alarming news via the German-language Genderama blog: There's a new attempt at attacking anti-feminism in development at the university of Vienna in Austria: They currently prepare a study (release date: December 2007, here is their announcement) which tries to establish similarities between anti-feminism and ... - anti-semitism!
In their academic, long-winded project description (I had to read it 3 times) they basically say that anti-semitism and anti-feminism work on the same principles: According to the project team at Vienna University, both anti-semitism and anti-feminism try to employ shame tactics that have (quote) "nothing to do with the real qualities and characteristics of the persons affected".
First thing obvious here is that again, and even on an academic level, there's the wrong assumption of feminism being a gender: They imply that if someone attacks feminism, he or she attacks women, thus attacking individual persons. So again, this time for academic feminists: "Feminism is not a gender. Feminism is a political ideology." (Link)
So now they have a new shame tactic, "anti-feminism equals anti-semitism", and it probably gets test-driven here in Europe this winter. It's kind of fascinating to see how well their new mantra is designed for trying to stab the German-speaking men's movement in the back, but I bet they plan to unleash it on a worldwide scale. Better prepare.
The feminists get out the big clubs, so they must be scared. What does that tell us?
Hey Notnow,
Have a look at 'These Boots are Made for Walking': Why Most Divorce Filers are Women' by Margaret Brinig, a feminist.
The paper gives data proving that most divorces have always been filed by women but what's interesting is the reason why women file.
To quote her abstract "Because of the financial and social hardship faced after divorce, most people assume that generally husbands have instigated divorce since the introduction of no-fault divorce. Yet women file for divorce and are often the instigators of separation, despite a deep attachment to their children and the evidence that many divorces harm children. Furthermore, divorced women in large numbers reveal that they are happier than they were while married. They report relief and certainty that they were right in leaving their marriages. This fundamental puzzle suggests that the incentives to divorce require a reexamination, and that the forces affecting the net benefits from marriage may be quite complicated, and perhaps asymmetric between men and women. This paper considers women's filing as rational behavior, based on spouses' relative power in the marriage, their opportunities following divorce, and their anticipation of custody.
"
The paper proves that women don't divorce out of necessity but rather as a calculated ploy to capture the kids, money etc.
@Michael: I can read French almost as fluently as English, but my knowledge of Deutsch is a bit crippled - it goes on crutches! ;)
All the same, I was able to grasp IMMEDIATELY the translation of the following, with no help from Babelfish:
"Eigentlich müsste man Antisemitismus mit Feminismus (=Antimannismus) vergleichen."
Ahem...yes! I would most certainly vergleichen Feminismus mit Antisemitismus! The comparison does not go amiss.
@All: Your remarks are excellent and most appreciated. Later I shall return to reflect upon some of the points which you have raised.
"Eigentlich müsste man Antisemitismus mit Feminismus (=Antimannismus) vergleichen."
"I would most certainly vergleichen Feminismus mit Antisemitismus! The comparison does not go amiss."
Yes, well spotted, fidelbogen! But feminists and logic - we know that won't happen. That's why they can make up everything they want, but discussing it with them is futile right from the start. And that's why feminism is a cult. It's a cult constantly being renewed by millions of cult leaders eager to contribute to its success story. It's anti-logic on parallel computing, so to speak.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home