We began looking at the development of 2nd Wave feminism in these two posts here and here, not only from printed “official” materials but also from the perspective of inter-personal rivalries and alignments; and statements and treatment in the popular press. We continue now with an contribution from Reader Dani:
In preparation for rising along with 999,999,999 others for Eve Ensler’s V-Day, I gave The Vagina Monologues a fresh reading. In the foreword, Gloria Steinem asks the reader: If men had something like a clitoris, “could you imagine how much we would hear about it–and what it would be used to justify?”
A provocative hypothetical. Being no dummy, I assume it would lead to more male dominance and women would never get a break from men’s demands for attention. Is that the right answer?
It turns out Steinem said more about it in a 1978 essay published in Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions titled, “If Men Could Menstruate.”
Steinem posited, “Whatever a ‘superior’ group has will be used to justify its superiority, and whatever an ‘inferior’ group has will be used to justify its plight.” Freud’s concept of penis envy is cited. (Ginkgo: Ahem – see Golden Uterus and the fetishization of preganancy and motherhood in Anglosphere culture. This goes way back before 1978, so Steinem has no excuse here.)
It’s a presupposition that society is organized around male sexuality, male empowerment and the penis. What follows then are two and a half pages of ironic satire.
“Clearly, menstruation would become an enviable, boast-worthy, masculine event.” A series of juxtapositions in culture, politics and entertainment have men-struation as a focal point–basically, furthering men’s “power justifications.”
“Congress would fund a National Institute of Dysmenorrhea…some men would still pay for the prestige of such commercial brands as Paul Newman Tampons… John Wayne Maxi Pads… Richie and Potsie try to convince Fonzie that he is still ‘the Fonz,’ though he has missed two periods…”
The current blurb on Amazon says this is hilarious.
Fast forward to last year, a piece on The Next Web informed: “Women account for $7 trillion in consumer and business spending… account for 85% of all consumer purchases… control more than 60% of all personal wealth in the U.S.” (Evidence of female-centeredness.)
Also in the jokes list, Steinem said “menopause would be celebrated.”
Last weekend, the top grossing movie was Identity Thief. It’s about a middle-aged (near menopausal) version of Honey Boo Boo on a comedic romp. The advertised trailer shows her punching a guy in the throat. Justin Craig called the performance hilarious on FoxNews.com.
National Retail Foundation projects $18.6 billion in Valentine’s spending for 2013, with men spending an average of $175.61 and women spending $88.78. Valentine’s Day is a consumer holiday predicated on chivalry, and is arguably centered on women’s (hetero) sexual value. Freudian psychology aside, this doesn’t quantify men’s sexual “superiority.”
1978 predates the Oprah Winfrey Network, HBO’s Girls, Women’s History Month, Luna bars–and Hanna Rosin was eight years old. Lena Dunham is quoted on BuzzFeed saying she hopes Girls “contributes to a continuance of a feminist dialogue.” Season one had a majority male audience.In the essay, Steinem envisioned the opposite sex “agreeing to all these arguments with a staunch and smiling masochism.” It may have been more prophecy than parody.
Commenters, please explore the ways in which Steinem was prophetic, even in her own day – in other words, just mistaken and happy to spread a falsehood.
Think of the way menstruation, or rather pre-menstruation, has been celebrated in law as a get-out-of-jail-free card, the whole Golden Uterus thing around pregnancy and childbirth and the loving treatment women’s mid-life crises and the paion and chaos they can cause are handled in the culture.
- The Woman Card - May 2, 2016
- Frat boy bachelorettes and the invasion of gay bars - April 15, 2016
- “Not my kid….” - February 22, 2016
by 
I did a take-off on her menstruation piece in my “If men had hot flashes” post: http://daisysdeadair.blogspot.com/2011/11/if-men-had-hot-flashes.html
Comments went a bit downhill as male posters (MRAs? I think one is) focus on my (totally offhand) remark that there is no Viagra for women (note: there wasn’t any when I wrote it and there still isn’t)… and I respectfully ask that nobody revisit that particular subject please! 😛
” and I respectfully ask that nobody revisit that particular subject please! :P”
I could say about 28 things but your asking me to shut up…
I got one though….
How come I’m a “misogynist” if I don’t like heavier women but it is okay for a woman to like taller men????
A heavier woman can lose the weight but a shorter man can’t grow taller….
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/genders-cant-see-eye-to-eye-over-height-8498247.html
What this type of essay does is something that a lot of gender activists do. They ignore the experiences of one side in order to make them look supremely powerful.
Now I know I’m not a feminist so as far as they are concerned that means I’m automatically wrong on everything in the gender conversation but I am a man. Meaning that despite all the lecturing, reading, and class taking Steinem has logged over the last few decades I think I still have logged more time living and experiencing a male life than she has.
And as a man I post this:
If men could mensturate I wonder if it would become an “enviable, boast-worthy, masculine event” or would it become a source of shame for men much like erections are now. I mean seriously look at how the erections of even young boys who are just learning what an erection is are treated. They are teased about it. Or maybe it would be like male masturbation where its something that is openly acknowledged but is also a mark of shame because it means he isn’t having sex with women (which is a cornerstone of being “a real man”).
It’s real easy for a person from one side to try tell what things would be like for the other side.
And Daisy I’m still wondering why is it when a feminist tries to imagine what something would be like if men experienced it only the absolute best outcomes are mentioned. If a woman trying to climb the corporate ladder were a man she would suddenly be the CEO of a top company. If a woman trying point out a scientific discovery were a man she would suddenly have more Nobel prizes and journal publishings than she knew what to do with. If a woman wanting to become a pro athlete were a man she would suddenly have more championship rings than she had fingers to wear them on.
I would think that people from a movement that is about helping everyone would at least be able to recognize that the lives of men are not all sunshine and rainbows (yes I brought those back). I know that at times when I’ve done the same (talked about what something would be like if women experienced it) I’ve had no shortage of women/feminists jump in to tell me that I’m not taking everything into consideration.
That’s it I think a man needs to write an essay titled, “If male killers were female….” and then only focus on cases where women killed and either got away with it or got off with a light sentence. (just kidding).
SWAB:
How come I’m a “misogynist” if I don’t like heavier women but it is okay for a woman to like taller men????
For the same reason that if you didn’t want to perform oral sex on a woman when she’s on her period for any reason other than a fear of blood you’re a misogynist but if that same woman doesn’t want any contact with your semen she is just exercising her right to practice sex however she wishes.
Ironic it is. The sheer amount of projection in feminist thought is absolutely mind boggling. They say things about men that far more aptly describe themselves. Take for instance the portmanteau “mansplaining.” Predominantly used by ignorant internet feminists who think they know everything and are far more likely to ban men from their “women’s spaces” than to actually hear them out about anything.
And honestly, if I had a dollar for every time a random woman gave me an in-depth analysis of her menstrual cycle, I’d have enough money to buy my own vagina.
“Take for instance the portmanteau “mansplaining.” Predominantly used by ignorant internet feminists who think they know everything and are far more likely to ban men from their “women’s spaces” than to actually hear them out about anything”
In the same way fish don’t have aword for water, we didn’t have a word for femsplaining until recently, even though we all grow up with it, because it is so entrenched in the gender roles, is so normalized, that it is never foregrounded enough to merit a term.
If manpslaining is men explaining women’s realities to them, then feminism is about 80% femsplaining. All its doctrines seem to center around men. Maybe “mansplaining” is pre-emptive, to keep men from talking about our own experiences.
Yeah, “mansplaining” is hilarious. Cause, obviously, for a man to explain something to a woman implies he knows or understands something she doesn’t, and obviously that’s impossible. Complete set of encyclopedias for sale – wife knows everything.
“Gaslighting” is a interesting one, because it’s never been at all clear what it means beyond “disagreeing with a woman”. Supposedly it involves implying her opinions are invalid in some way. Exactly why accusing someone of “mansplaining” or demanding they check their privilege isn’t “gaslighting” is therefore obscure.
I knew about women dominating consumer spending but did not have a citation bookmarked. Thanks!
@dungone:
“Ironic it is. The sheer amount of projection in feminist thought is absolutely mind boggling. They say things about men that far more aptly describe themselves.”
I wonder if feminist conceptions of patriarchy are somewhat rooted in “what I would do if I had the power I assume group ‘men’ have.” It’s just speculation on my part.
“And honestly, if I had a dollar for every time a random woman gave me an in-depth analysis of her menstrual cycle, I’d have enough money to buy my own vagina.”
Are you sure you mean vagina? Because most people when they say vagina what they’re really thinking about is the vulva and it is a continuation of oppression that needs to end! /sarcasm
am I in mod?
what did I do???
“In preparation for rising along with 999,999,999 others for Eve Ensler’s V-Day, I gave The Vagina Monologues a fresh reading. In the foreword, Gloria Steinem asks the reader: If men had something like a clitoris, “could you imagine how much we would hear about it–and what it would be used to justify?””
*furrows brow*
Yes, what would it be like if men had something like a clitoris? What would such a male variant of the clitoris be called? Perhaps something like… the penis?
“In humans and other mammals, it develops from an outgrowth in the embryo called the genital tubercle. Initially undifferentiated, the tubercle develops into either a penis or a clitoris, depending on the presence or absence of the protein tdf, which is codified by a single gene on the Y chromosome.”
– Wikipedia (yeah I know)
Jesus Christ.
“In the foreword, Gloria Steinem asks the reader: If men had something like a clitoris, “could you imagine… what it would be used to justify?”
Clitoridectomy. That was easy.
@Patrick:
From what I’ve heard gaslighting originally meant abusive behaviour where you try to convince someone they can’t trust their own judgment. A good exemple would be moving someone’s keys and then berating them for being scatterbrained when they can’t find them. Of course it get’s overused to the point of uselessness.
I love this sentence:
” Whatever a ‘superior’ group has will be used to justify its superiority, and whatever an ‘inferior’ group has will be used to justify its plight.”, because it describes a common line of thinking: Whatever men have as men is a sign of male privilege, whateve women have as women is a sign of oppression.
Like in, if the male body is celebrated, it signifies that society treats masculinity as superior and normative, if the female body is celebrated it show the objectification of oppression of women.
The logic is incredibly simple:
1.women are oppressed
2. because of 1. what happens to women is oppression
3. you see, women are oppressed, just look at the examples in 2.
“The logic is incredibly simple:
1.women are oppressed
2. because of 1. what happens to women is oppression
3. you see, women are oppressed, just look at the examples in 2.”
What a hell of a fallacy: affirming the antecedent.
A bit off topic so feel free to move.
But I think people might enjoy this story. Sometimes things just go soooooooooo very wrong 🙂
http://gma.yahoo.com/proposal-horror-story-machine-guns-lost-ring-170215087–abc-news-topstories.html
If men had something like a clitoris, “could you imagine how much we would hear about it–and what it would be used to justify?””
Well, the foreskin is the most sensitive part and that we just cut off so not much talk there.
“Well, the foreskin is the most sensitive part and that we just cut off so not much talk there.”
And the justification for circumcision within Jewish faith originally was about making men focus on stuff and making sex less pleasurable (thus less desirable).
They could have achieved the same “focus on work/non-sex stuff” with “and you shall masturbate one time every morning before work, right before your daily shower” or some such thing.
Once you got release, you can focus on other stuff more easily no? There’s no urge, or need then. No need to make sex painful for that.
SWAB: How come I’m a “misogynist” if I don’t like heavier women but it is okay for a woman to like taller men????
Since I don’t judge men by height, you will need to ask someone who does. (Answer: its not okay WITH ME in the least.)
Danny: And Daisy I’m still wondering why is it when a feminist tries to imagine what something would be like if men experienced it only the absolute best outcomes are mentioned.
I don’t think it always is… I am talking specifically about two privileges: the fact that there is next to NO knowledge about hot flashes/menopause, which yes, I do believe is because of WHO gets them (we know lots and lots about childbirth, by contrast) and 2) the privilege to have sex-drugs tested/marketed directly to us. (as I said in those comments, I am told Viagra works well on women, but they can not prescribe it to us since it was not tested on us.) These issues are specific to OLDER women, so we are talking about ‘intersectionality’ (ageism) as well.
The fact is, we DO know all about Viagra and the effects of “Low-T” (which is really “male menopause” but the commercials seem terrified to call it that, so stigmatized is the very WORD) so I am directly comparing this situation to men of my age. That is a pretty sharp contrast, wouldn’t you say?
I was also doing a parody of Steinem’s piece, as I said.
“2) the privilege to have sex-drugs tested/marketed directly to us. (as I said in those comments, I am told Viagra works well on women, but they can not prescribe it to us since it was not tested on us.) These issues are specific to OLDER women, so we are talking about ‘intersectionality’ (ageism) as well. ”
Except Viagra does NOT affect libido.
“The fact is, we DO know all about Viagra and the effects of “Low-T” (which is really “male menopause” but the commercials seem terrified to call it that, so stigmatized is the very WORD) so I am directly comparing this situation to men of my age. That is a pretty sharp contrast, wouldn’t you say?”
It’s called andropause.
The commercials also don’t call adult diapers as diapers. It’s absorbent briefs or some such euphemism.
And I’ll say it again: Viagra does not give higher testosterone, it does not affect libido, it only affects erection for a short time window.
If men needed hormone replacement therapy for negative affects from low testosterone (osteoporosis is caused by the absence of sufficient levels of a dominant hormone, wether this is T or E – even if society ONLY talks about osteroporosis as per women), Viagra would be utterly useless
Sildenafil (Viagra) is probably one of the most misunderstood drugs in history. Its discovery was a happy accident – Pfizer was looking for new anti- high blood pressure drugs (one of the most profitable classes of drugs, along with heart medicines, astma medicines, and acid reflux/heartburn medicines). Sildenafil made it to phase 1 clinical trials, where it was discovered that it had practically no effect on high blood pressure, but it did have the ability to induce erections. Pfizer wasn’t stupid, they saw the potential for the drug and started to market it as a treatment for Erectile Dysfunction. As everyone knows by now, it was a great sucess, and global Viagra sales exceed $1 billion/year.
Viagra’s cousins, Levitra and Cialis, would never have come to market if it weren’t for Viagra being approved and sucessful. Vardenafil (Levitra) is isosteric (the same size as) Sildenafil, so as far as the body is concerned, it’s pretty much the same thing. It is only different from Viagra in that a single carbon atom has been replaced by a nitrogen atom, which lets it get around patent protection. Tadalafil (Cialis) was a drug that the company that is now GlaxoSmithKline had been testing for other purposes, but had the exact same effects in living organisms as Sildenafil (Viagra). Once they saw the massive success of Viagra, they too tested their drug for treatment of ED, and found that it worked in a very similar way.
As Schala pointed out, Viagra has no effect on libido (desire to have sex). It simply makes erections easier to get, and therefore is for the situations where “the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.” From what I understand, Viagra works the exact same way on women that it does on men, i.e. induces erections. If a woman is having trouble obtaining clitoral erections, then Viagra will help her with that. I admit genuine ignorance on this particular subject, I have no idea whether there are women who have trouble obtaining clitoral erections and have it affect their sex life. I am male, so I am only speculating here, but I would think that if a woman went from not having erections, to having erections, sex would be more enjoyable based on the fact that, most of the time, erections feel good.
From what I understand, most so called ‘aphrodisiacs’ which have any effect at all beyond placebo work on similar principles, i.e. they induce erections. I admittedly haven’t read up on this as much, but I believe things like Spanish Fly essentially ‘paralyze’ an erection in place. True aphrodisiacs, things which genuinely increase the desire for sex, are extremely difficult to produce because so many different parts of the brain are involved in sexual arousal. In other words, it’s not one switch you can flip, but rather several dozen.
Daisy:
I don’t think it always is…
From the “when guys have lots of sex they are studs but when women do they are sluts” (which totally ignores the womanizer/perv/creep/leacher side of things), to Steinem’s work here, to meme pics of women who made significant contributions to science that basically say “If I were a man you would know about what I did” (which apparently means that every man in the field of science that did something significant was identified and has become known I guess), to the feminists that tried to say that if Jerry Sandusky had been abusing girls then he would have never been caught (because we know that no girl that has been abused has never had her abuser caught…)…
We’ll just have to disagree.
The fact is, we DO know all about Viagra and the effects of “Low-T” (which is really “male menopause” but the commercials seem terrified to call it that, so stigmatized is the very WORD) so I am directly comparing this situation to men of my age. That is a pretty sharp contrast, wouldn’t you say?
You know where that sharp contrast comes from? From the part of gender roles that say a man’s ability to have lots and lots of sex is a defining part of their manhood. Also bear in mind that Viagra was an accident. It’s not like someone was in a lab trying to figure out how to make erections last longer. No someone f’d up while working on a blood pressure med and got Viagra as a result.
Schala: Except Viagra does NOT affect libido.
I know that. My libido is ferocious. (?) Your point?
Schala: And I’ll say it again: Viagra does not give higher testosterone, it does not affect libido, it only affects erection for a short time window.
Is there some reason you think I don’t know this?
Schala: It’s called andropause.
And they are afraid to name it in the commercials.
Schala: The commercials also don’t call adult diapers as diapers.
Oddly this is rather recent… about 20 yrs ago, called them adult diapers without any reluctance at all, of course.
Pharma geek: If a woman is having trouble obtaining clitoral erections, then Viagra will help her with that.
Exactly. I could use a lift, thanks, like most women my age. In fact, I am starting to understand why women get their clits pierced, although pre-menopause, such an idea would have sent me through the roof. I went from hypersensitive to hyposensitive. This seems to be fairly common, and analogous to what men go through with low-T.
Thus, I don’t see why Viagra can’t be tested on women and prescribed to us?
My points stand, in other words. (?) In fact, not sure what you were both getting at… Oh, I see, the necessity of educating Daisy again, since I obviously don’t know what both of you know. (rolls eyes)
Schala: And the justification for circumcision within Jewish faith originally was about making men focus on stuff and making sex less pleasurable (thus less desirable).
Um, no… lets not start the antisemitic arguments about Jews trying to make sex less pleasurable for men.
The reason for circumcision was to unite the tribe and mark it in some unmistakable way, so intermarriage laws could be adhered to. This law was given during exile, when the tribe split into the sons of Isaac and the sons of Ishmael, and there was literally no other way to tell them apart.
From Genesis 17:
10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.
11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.
12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.
13 He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.
15 And God said unto Abraham, As for Sarai thy wife, thou shalt not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall her name be.
16 And I will bless her, and give thee a son also of her: yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of people shall be of her.
17 Then Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his heart, Shall a child be born unto him that is an hundred years old? and shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear?
18 And Abraham said unto God, O that Ishmael might live before thee!
19 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.
20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.
21 But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year.
Nothing there about Jews conspiring to make sex less enjoyable. Nothing in the bris ceremony mentions this as the reason. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brit_milah
The bris was about rabbis/women learning to identify (up close and personal) who specifically descended from Isaac (Jews) and who specifically descended from Ishmael (those who became the Muslims) –thus avoiding intermarriage, so that the tribe of Israel could continue.
The difference in circumcision of women is that there are no religious reasons for it (it is not even mentioned in the Quran) –and is merely a custom… but therefore it is much harder to fight male circumcision, which has the weight of religious tradition behind it.
Since we (at least in the West) are no longer adhering to tribal customs, there is no reason for any of these traditions to continue, just like eating meat or any other barbaric old customs.
@Daisy
As I said, I am completely ignorant when it comes to such issues. You probably have a point in that they are literally never discussed in the media. I am relatively young, so I hadn’t even considered the possibility until now. I do find it interesting to find out there are women who genuinely desire Viagra.
As for why Viagra can’t be tested on and prescribed to women, for each time a drug is prescribed for a new use, it has to undergo clinical trials again. This is expensive and Pfizer probably feels it isn’t worth the cost, i.e. they don’t think they would make their money back. I can’t say why. My guess would be that the best way to combat this is to spread knowledge that the penis and clitoris and practically the same organ, and behave in almost the same ways. Maybe if Viagra stopped being a drug that gives MEN erections, and started being a drug that gives PEOPLE erections, it would be easier for women to get.
Danny: You know where that sharp contrast comes from? From the part of gender roles that say a man’s ability to have lots and lots of sex is a defining part of their manhood. Also bear in mind that Viagra was an accident.
But the marketing and subsequent profit has certainly not been any accident. Why not test the drug on women and then prescribe it to us?
The primary reason seems to be the billion-dollar marketing campaign: the word “Viagra” comes from VIRILE and NIAGARA. It wouldn’t be as cool (or manly) if women were taking it. If not, why not prescribe it to us and let US decide if it is helpful, as they do men? The fact that doctors are not allowed to prescribe it to us (since it has not been tested on us and received FDA approval for women’s usage) is proof of– what? This is medical gatekeeping, similar to what trans women describe. Why are you defending it?
Danny, sometimes it upsets me that you seem to go out of your way to disagree with me, even to the extent of defending BigPharma. (sigh)
Pharma geek: My guess would be that the best way to combat this is to spread knowledge that the penis and clitoris and practically the same organ, and behave in almost the same ways. Maybe if Viagra stopped being a drug that gives MEN erections, and started being a drug that gives PEOPLE erections, it would be easier for women to get.
Yes, I totally agree! I think the physiological issues are the same.
They’d likely have to give it a trendy “feminine” name if they marketed it to women.
Schala: osteoporosis is caused by the absence of sufficient levels of a dominant hormone, wether this is T or E – even if society ONLY talks about osteroporosis as per women
Its caused by calcium not being absorbed properly, which estrogen facilitates. But that is not the sole cause. Weight-bearing on bones influences the development of osteoporosis and that is why heavier women rarely get it. Its thinner women, overwhelmingly. Men are also heavier than (thin) women and more muscular, which cuts their osteoporosis risk.
In all my years of medical transcription, I never typed up a single case of male osteoporosis.
Danny: We’ll just have to disagree.
Are you saying ageism does not exist, in that case? Why do we know so much about women’s anatomy/physiology and yet the mechanisms of menopause remains almost a total mystery?
Daisy:
But the marketing and subsequent profit has certainly not been any accident. Why not test the drug on women and then prescribe it to us?
The marketing and profit goes back to what I said about the gender role of men being measured by their ability to have sex. Honestly I agree that it should be tested on women and if it works start selling to them too.
The primary reason seems to be the billion-dollar marketing campaign: the word “Viagra” comes from VIRILE and NIAGARA. It wouldn’t be as cool (or manly) if women were taking it. If not, why not prescribe it to us and let US decide if it is helpful, as they do men?
You know why. Because women have their sexuality denied. From what I can see there is a demand from women for sexual aids that are in the vain of Viagra for men. But since women supposedly don’t want sex (and I bet there are also some implications of “its just a hole, long as its wet everything is fine”) they aren’t listened to.
The fact that doctors are not allowed to prescribe it to us (since it has not been tested on us and received FDA approval for women’s usage) is proof of– what? This is medical gatekeeping, similar to what trans women describe.
Exactly.
Why are you defending it?
Who said I was defending it?
Danny, sometimes it upsets me that you seem to go out of your way to disagree with me, even to the extent of defending BigPharma. (sigh)
Dammit Daisy.
Ideally men wouldn’t be pressured to be sexual dynamos and women would be free to be sexual dynamos. Everyone would just have access to whatever help they want or don’t want when it comes sex aids.
The reason for the marketing campaigns and massive profits is because men are raised to believe that their sexual prowess is core to their manhood, while on the other side of the coin women are raised to deny their sexual prowess as a core to womanhood. I don’t think it’s alrgiht, I don’t defend it. But you were making it sound like researchers started out with the plan of, “Let’s come up with a way to help men maintain their erections longer. And when we figure it out priority number one is to make sure women NEVER get access to it (queue maniacal laughter).”
Are you saying ageism does not exist, in that case? Why do we know so much about women’s anatomy/physiology and yet the mechanisms of menopause remains almost a total mystery?
Not saying ageism doesn’t exist. What I am saying is that in the realm of gender when a “if a woman were a man” or similar scenario is presented its nearly always (to where the ones that aren’t are a very small minority) presented to the effect where that woman suddenly gets the best possible outcome.
That’s not to say that women are not denied, mistreated, disrespected, etc…. But are we really going to say that if she were a man then all things would be fixed (which at the minimum denies the reality of a lot of men).
@Daisy
The idea that a woman’s clit was pretty much the same thing as my penis was seriously mind-blowing. I wish I was kidding.
Re-naming medicines based on who is taking them is nothing new, look at Tylenol (acetominophen in the U.S., paracetamol in the U.K.) That’s just based on the drug’s prescription name, no actual serious marketing effort behind it. No reason it couldn’t be done based on gender, and the marketing wizards almost would almost certainly manage to find something more appealing to women.
@Daisy: Heh, I thought you didn’t want to talk about this subject anymore, lol.
Anyways, I wouldn’t attribute the lack of research done on hot flashes not necessarily to misogyny or ageism but rather to fertilism. As societies are also subject to natural selection they mostly tends towards valuing Darwinian Fitness. Since post-andropause men can still reproduce with some simple help but post-menopause women can not reproduce without an ovary transplant (and even then it is inadvisable for women that old to undergo the rigors of pregnancy) it stands to reason that men will get more sexual help.
Also, I read your comment thread linked in your first comment and I find it weird that you don’t think that men taking Viagra is also good for their women. I’m not a woman but it seems to me that cold rubber is no substitute for hot, throbbing flesh. Also, men not getting sexual pleasure is certain to put a strain on any relationship. That’s the beautiful thing about helping people with their sexual problems, it helps others too.
“Since I don’t judge men by height, you will need to ask someone who does. (Answer: its not okay WITH ME in the least.)”
I don’t understand, are you saying that men who dislike fat women are misogynists? Well that’s not true, they hate fatness not women.
@SWAB: If you don’t like fat chicks then I recommend watching a lot of porn (not necessarily of fat chicks.) I’ve watched so much porn and thus become so perverted that womens’ bodies alone just don’t do it for me. Now I’m attracted to emotion, character, and desire. This allows me to be attracted to women who are socially considered ugly. Those chicks are great because they’re easy, they’re desirous, they aren’t pampered and thus aren’t so entitled. Ugly chicks are the best.
Danny: But you were making it sound like researchers started out with the plan of, “Let’s come up with a way to help men maintain their erections longer. And when we figure it out priority number one is to make sure women NEVER get access to it (queue maniacal laughter).”
No, I describe things as they are, and you read me as saying it that way. I do not think there is a secret evilll patriarchal enclave somewhere having meetings and deciding these things.
However, I do think that once women describe something as wrong (or not optimal, in any event) then at that point it becomes a deliberate act of not listening or caring. I mean, we have been complaining about this for well over a decade, since the advent of Viagra. I find it hard to believe they are ignoring the profit-potential, but then Pharma Geek has described how it might actually cost more money than they are willing to spend (to make it available to women).
The fact that they are grossly underestimating how much $$ they would make (it would be astronomical) is part of what you describe: women don’t actively talk about it as much, so they don’t really know that IF IT WAS OFFERED, it would be a massive hit.
As you say, women are taught not to talk about sexual pleasure as a medical thing, especially older women who were raised before ‘Sex and the City’ and all of that.
Danny: That’s not to say that women are not denied, mistreated, disrespected, etc…. But are we really going to say that if she were a man then all things would be fixed (which at the minimum denies the reality of a lot of men).
Danny, the historical basis of medical disrespect for women has been childbirth… the “babies came first” and women’s attempts to control the experience were usually denied. It was feminism that helped redefine it (home births and such) and identified certain now-discredited gynecological practices as abuses. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twilight_sleep)
Iron: @Daisy: Heh, I thought you didn’t want to talk about this subject anymore, lol.
On my blog, no. Here is fine. 😛
But what I was saying in the above paragraph applies to what you were saying here:
Iron: I wouldn’t attribute the lack of research done on hot flashes not necessarily to misogyny or ageism but rather to fertilism.
Good point… and this is obviously why the babies were regarded as more important. I guess this makes sense, if we are out on the frontier or in the Middle Ages or something… just not NOW, LOL.
Iron: Also, I read your comment thread linked in your first comment and I find it weird that you don’t think that men taking Viagra is also good for their women.
I didn’t say that… I said I didn’t think most marriages were broken up by men not being able to have intercourse, as my commenter authoritatively announced. Short relationships, possibly, but not long-term marriages (and this is older people I am talking about). That is what “for better and for worse” means in the marriage vows.
I also said I don’t think intercourse needs to be primary. My own biases, sorry! But seriously, putting all your eggs (haha) in one basket is never a good idea. A repertoire of activities is always preferable than depending on just one thing.
Iron: I don’t understand, are you saying that men who dislike fat women are misogynists? Well that’s not true, they hate fatness not women.
I think men who judge women ONLY on appearances and not other factors, are misogynists.
Likewise, women who judge men only by what they can give them, would be the misandrists, like the woman in this Salon piece I linked some time ago: http://www.salon.com/2013/01/16/divorcing_while_pregnant/
Yeeeccchhh. Just awful. But this gave me a point of reference. I mean, this is Salon… supposedly a liberal media outlet. Hello? What?
I think Warren Farrell used to say, women are sex objects and men success objects? (Does he still use that formula?) I agree with that. This is what we must guard against and change in ourselves. Certainly, it should not be trumpeted as a good thing. (from either gender)
However, I do think that once women describe something as wrong (or not optimal, in any event) then at that point it becomes a deliberate act of not listening or caring.
Well this reminds of some things I’ve been commenting on myself in relation to men but that’s another story.
…but then Pharma Geek has described how it might actually cost more money than they are willing to spend (to make it available to women).
Sounds like the excuse that was given for a long time when it came to male birth control options.
No, I describe things as they are, and you read me as saying it that way.
Like you read me as defending big pharma, possibly for the sake of finding something to disagree with you about?
Daisy:
Danny, the historical basis of medical disrespect for women has been childbirth… the “babies came first” and women’s attempts to control the experience were usually denied. It was feminism that helped redefine it (home births and such) and identified certain now-discredited gynecological practices as abuses. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twilight_sleep)
So about that “if she were a man….” bit.
For the most part men cannot bear children but again, are we really saying that if women were treated like men than suddenly things would be all hunky doory?
“In Of the Special Laws, Book 1, the Jewish philosopher Philo (20 BC – AD 50) gives six reasons for the practice of circumcision.
“5) “signified figuratively the excision of all superfluous and excessive pleasure”
“Maimonides (Moses ben Maimon “Rambam”, CE 1135-1204), who apart from being a great Torah scholar was also a physician and philosopher, argued that circumcision acts to repress sexual pleasure and serves as a common bodily sign to members of the same faith.”
I argue on this basis Daisy. The Bible is only the “official word” on this. It probably did originate as a tribal distinction, but people thought the sexual repression it brought on was a good positive thing.
“@SWAB: If you don’t like fat chicks then I recommend watching a lot of porn (not necessarily of fat chicks.) I’ve watched so much porn and thus become so perverted that womens’ bodies alone just don’t do it for me. Now I’m attracted to emotion, character, and desire. This allows me to be attracted to women who are socially considered ugly. Those chicks are great because they’re easy, they’re desirous, they aren’t pampered and thus aren’t so entitled. Ugly chicks are the best.”
hahahahahahaha….
I was told porno is what gave men “unrealistic” expectations…
I don’t think I’ve got a shot at a healthy family and a supportive wife.
I “could” sleep with 100+ women if I put a tremendous amount of effort into it. I might even be able to become a millionaire but what I really want out of life isn’t within my reach in this lifetime so MGTOW is my best option.
Also, Daisy said not to bring up the viagra thing but people were talking about it. My guess is even though it’s “for men”, it’s really for those men’s wives. Maybe a few of those guys are going on a sex vacation and being a walking hardon for “sport fucking” but I doubt that’s the majority….
I’m starting to see a drop in my sex drive and that’s a good thing. It makes MGTOW easier. I probably will never go on viagra….
Danny, I believe that the basis of sexism was (as Iron was saying) is rooted in women’s role as mother; pregnancy and childbirth, which historically could not be taken on by men. That is the whole point.
Danny: For the most part men cannot bear children but again, are we really saying that if women were treated like men than suddenly things would be all hunky doory?
To be treated like men (see above, MaMu’s comments) means foregoing pregnancy and childbirth. Women who have babies (which is the majority) can’t usually be treated exactly like men in our current society. That’s why feminism evolved, since this is the basis of sexism, the role of women in what Iron is calling “fertilism”…
Are you saying that if men had the babies, they would do it far better? That’s the sort of remarks I got on my blog (“if men menstruated, they wouldn’t complain about it the way women do”). And I see you never objected to any of that. …. so I’m not sure what you are trying to get me to say here?
Basically, as things currently stand, I can’t see “women being treated like men”… MaMu still thinks we should stay home with the babies, for example. Obviously, we have a long way to go yet.
Are you saying that if men had the babies, they would do it far better? That’s the sort of remarks I got on my blog (“if men menstruated, they wouldn’t complain about it the way women do”). And I see you never objected to any of that. …. so I’m not sure what you are trying to get me to say here?
No but I have seen the implication that if men had babies then suddenly child birth and everything associated with it (and parenting) would become all awesome and great. What I’m saying is that when you go for gender swapped, “If ___ were ____…..” scenarios you can’t just presume that they will have the best possible outcome.
Basically, as things currently stand, I can’t see “women being treated like men”… MaMu still thinks we should stay home with the babies, for example. Obviously, we have a long way to go yet.
And I would most certainly say that I don’t agree with that anymore than the idea that men should never stay home to take care of babies because they’re job is to stay outside the home and work. But both expectations exist and we do have a long way to go.
SWAB: Also, Daisy said not to bring up the viagra thing but people were talking about it. My guess is even though it’s “for men”, it’s really for those men’s wives.
Not all men who get Viagra are married, and a sizable number are *not*… I think a lot of men get it so they can masturbate. (Nothing bad about that)
SWAB: I don’t think I’ve got a shot at a healthy family and a supportive wife.
Why on earth do you say this? Anyone can achieve this; most people have spouses and children. Its not impossible. (?)
More and more, the MGTOWs sound (to me) like the lesbian-feminist separatists of the Second Wave. And lotsa those wimminz didn’t come out too happy in the long run, so you might want to reconsider.
Being alone for a whole lifetime is not how humans were intended to live. 🙁
Daisy:
More and more, the MGTOWs sound (to me) like the lesbian-feminist separatists of the Second Wave. And lotsa those wimminz didn’t come out too happy in the long run, so you might want to reconsider.
Correct me if I’m wrong on this but didn’t the lesbian feminist separatists of the Second Wave go that way more for political reasons rather than a desire to go their own way because of feelings on prospects of finding a partner?
Where lesbian separatists were splitting off as a political “Fuck You!” to the system and to men MGTOW seem to be splitting off because of what they see as the state of relationships (not to say that what they see and experience is representative of what its like for all men mind you).
“As a religious ritual, circumcision is practiced by Jews and Moslems in accordance with the biblical account of Abraham’s covenant with God. Even so, the “purpose” of the Jewish ritual of circumcision has been argued by Jews throughout history. Noted Rabbi Moses Maimonides, in the Guide of the Perplexed, explains a rationale for circumcision that merits attention when circumcision is considered relative to human sexuality.
As regards circumcision… [s]ome people believe that circumcision is to remove a defect in man’s formation; but every one can easily reply: How can products of nature be deficient so as to require external completion, especially as the use of the foreskin to that organ is evident. This commandment has not been enjoined as a complement to a deficient physical creation, but as a means for perfecting man’s moral shortcomings. The bodily injury caused to that organ is exactly that which is desired; it does not interrupt any vital function, nor does it destroy the power of generation. Circumcision simply counteracts excessive lust; for there is no doubt that circumcision weakens the power of sexual excitement, and sometimes lessens the natural enjoyment; the organ necessarily becomes weak when it loses blood and is deprived of its covering from the beginning.”
Note the last passages.
“Why on earth do you say this? Anyone can achieve this; most people have spouses and children. Its not impossible. (?) ”
Let’s just say of my immediate family, I’m the only one who hasn’t been in an abusive relationship….
the word I got from reading about prostitution and drugs was “Harm reduction.” That’s what I’ve practiced….
on the height thing….
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/york-man-grows-inches-surgery/story?id=15776730
“More and more, the MGTOWs sound (to me) like the lesbian-feminist separatists of the Second Wave. And lotsa those wimminz didn’t come out too happy in the long run, so you might want to reconsider. ”
no desire to eat cock, I’m not to popular at GL Piggy’s place anyways….
MGTOW is more about an individuals choice, there’s no MGTOW commune that I know of and I’d prefer solitude to hanging out with a bunch of guys. Never been a “guy’s guy”–always hated sports. That’s why I’m not an MRA, lots of machismo. I’d probably better tolerate women if I was allowed to punch ’em in the face. (I jest, but it would be equality.)
my parents did a bunch of damage to me…
there’s no point going to therapy…
there’s a few guys who’ve thrived that I’d describe as MGTOW like Henry Rollins…
“Not all men who get Viagra are married, and a sizable number are *not*… I think a lot of men get it so they can masturbate. (Nothing bad about that)”
hahahahahaha…
you mean they can’t get boners so they need the viagra to get ’em???
I live in a very different reality….
http://stonerwithaboner.wordpress.com/2013/02/23/1853/
“…..so you might want to reconsider.”
you assume my situation is by choice…..
this is the heart of the matter of why I hate feminist’s….
they don’t walk a day in my shoes yet I’m “privileged.”
It’s like a millionaire tycoon telling some guy working two Walmart type jobs to “pull himself up by his bootstraps.”
@SWAB My dad’s father was a child serial killer and an incestual child rapist. My dad is intelligent, empathetic and one of the nicest people that I know (albeit after a lot of primal therapy which, incidentally, has worked great for both him and me.) He slapped me just once when I was a child and he regretted doing so and apologized immediately. My mother is a similiarly wonderful person although she can be a little repressed sometimes. She’s much richer than my father and paid all the bills when they were married. They did divorce but my mother voluntarily virtually bought a house for my father so that he could live half a block from me and my siblings so we could visit whenever we wanted to. No one was forced to pay child support nor alimony.
If my father can do it then so can you.
To me, MGTOW is more about being not independent on women and not necessarily totally excluding yourself from them. Women are like drugs. They’re great fun and never trying them makes your life experience poorer. Sometimes you get a bad trip which can hurt and you have to be careful not to get addicted or you’ll lose all your money and have terrible withdrawal. However, if you’re smart about it your life will be greatly enriched.
“you mean they can’t get boners so they need the viagra to get ‘em???
I live in a very different reality….
http://stonerwithaboner.wordpress.com/2013/02/23/1853/ ”
I don’t get it, how does your experience of the female gaze relate to male impotence? If I was impotent I would certainly take Viagra to masturbate. Hell, I already masturbate 2-3 times a day and I’m thinking of taking Viagra just so I can masturbate more. Even disregarding masturbation it’s certainly a benefit to a man to be able to fuck his girl again.
“you assume my situation is by choice…..”
It seems like it’s by choice to me. I’ve read your blog some and clearly women are attracted to you. There’s no reason to feel like you can’t find a good woman. Sure, you’ve got to watch out for the bad ones but I do not think that bad women are a majority. Most are decent enough people. Trying a little never hurts, just don’t get addicted and you’ll be fine.
@Daisy: You misinterpreted me a little bit which is fine since I used an invented word and I also misinterpreted what you were talking about in regards to Viagra and marriage (impotence won’t end a long-term marriage on its own but it will sour the relationship quite a lot which could still conceivably end it if in addition to other problems.) By fertilism I meant the valuing of reproductive capability in men too and not just women. This is still necessarily a part of most societies because the non-fertilist societies tend to get out-bred by the fertilist societies.
“I think men who judge women ONLY on appearances and not other factors, are misogynists.
Likewise, women who judge men only by what they can give them, would be the misandrists, like the woman in this Salon piece I linked some time ago: http://www.salon.com/2013/01/16/divorcing_while_pregnant/
Yeeeccchhh. Just awful. But this gave me a point of reference. I mean, this is Salon… supposedly a liberal media outlet. Hello? What?”
Agreed, unless they judge the other gender by the same stupid shallow criteria in which case they would just be a scumbag. At least looking on the comments section in that Salon article they were mostly critical of that miserable bitch. I only consider it a big problem when the commenters are also douchebags. It’s like when Metroid: Other M came out, was a horrible, arguably sexist piece of shit, and everyone hated it. It would be evidence of sexism in the games medium if people loved it.
Also, I disagree with you in that we shouldn’t put the baby first during childbirth. Certainly we shouldn’t disregard the mother but the safety of the person who is the most vulnerable and susceptible to lifelong damage should come first. If, for example, the mother is hemophobic but requires a c-section which she doesn’t want due to her hemophobia then I think that the baby should come first. I think the same thing if say, a mother wants to hold her newborn when that newborn requires the breathing machine or some such. Of course, those are extreme examples. However, I think that if a woman would prefer to give birth via a midwife instead of a hospital then that’s fine as long as there’s no complications that require modern medicine. Let the mother do what she wants as long as it doesn’t negatively affect the baby.
Come to think of it, this may be one of those late-night ideas, but I think we should make drinking and drug use illegal for pregnant women and enforce this through regular drug tests at hospitals. Punishment should be a hefty fine and some community service with loss of custody to the father or the state for repeat offenders.
“I don’t get it, how does your experience of the female gaze relate to male impotence.”
I was trying to say, that if anything, I get boners when I shouldn’t…
“To me, MGTOW is more about being not independent on women and not necessarily totally excluding yourself from them. Women are like drugs. They’re great fun and never trying them makes your life experience poorer. Sometimes you get a bad trip which can hurt and you have to be careful not to get addicted or you’ll lose all your money and have terrible withdrawal. However, if you’re smart about it your life will be greatly enriched.”
that’s a great statement…
“Come to think of it, this may be one of those late-night ideas, but I think we should make drinking and drug use illegal for pregnant women and enforce this through regular drug tests at hospitals. Punishment should be a hefty fine and some community service with loss of custody to the father or the state for repeat offenders.”
I don’t think smoking or drinking reasonably (getting regularly smashed blacked-out is something else) should be punished. Harder drugs maybe (heroin etc).
Might as well invent obligations that people never waste money and only take healthy choices about their food etc (meaning it’s no longer a choice but an obligation).
“Maybe if Viagra stopped being a drug that gives MEN erections, and started being a drug that gives PEOPLE erections, it would be easier for women to get.”
Somehow I think that would go over about as well as the male bra. I wouldn’t want to be the company who markets a product for femdicks and have it turn into a PR disaster.
I really don’t get what the feminist and female obsession with Viagra is, beyond an incredible naivety about male reproductive health. Most of the time they seem to equate Viagra with female birth control, as if the expectation for men to be able to get aroused at the drop of a hat is analogous to women not having a baby until they see fit. Instead of, say, comparing female birth control to male birth control. The rest of the time they seem to be confusing erections with pleasure and desire, complete with strong undertones of rape denial.
Correct me if I’m wrong on this but didn’t the lesbian feminist separatists of the Second Wave go that way more for political reasons rather than a desire to go their own way because of feelings on prospects of finding a partner?
They actually felt that they held a trump card with female sexuality. They viewed female sexual manipulation as a way of subverting not just male sexual agency, but every aspect of socioeconomic status. But it’s not as though this was in any way different from plain old female hypoagency. Moreover, there were some really nasty strains of genocidal feminists who wanted to eliminate men altogether, hence one of the reasons they chose lesbianism over simple abstinence. MGTOW, on the other hand, are actually opposed to female hypoagency and, more importantly, they’re generally not against the idea of being proven wrong. They’re practically begging women to meet them half way instead of merely abusing and discarding them. They are everything that lesbian separatism would have been if lesbian separatism was actually about advocating for fairness in relationships.
Daisy,
“(“if men menstruated, they wouldn’t complain about it the way women do”).”
PMS – I saw somewhere that in women with PMS testosterione levels surge. (That’s not what the wiki says though: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PMS#Diagnosis)
Men and especially teenage boys deal with that and on a more daily basis, and don’t display the same behaviors, (or maybe just display them so regularly that they don’t get named.)
Here http://www.genderratic.com/p/2340/parenting-%e2%80%93-%e2%80%9cback-off-stay-at-home-dads%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-in-praise-of-sahds-2/
was a woman saying something like that about SAHMs – tongue in cheek, but her point was dad’s can show mom’s a thing or two about not succumbing to per judgment.
I don’t believe that “most” people have spouses and children to begin with — and then there’s that. A majority of women under 30 now have kids out of wedlock. I also don’t think that a temporary marriage that will end in divorce is the equivalent of being “married” so much as it is a prelude to financial ruin. Even so, up until their 50’s, women are far more likely to find themselves in marriages than men. This may give women the perception that “anyone” can have kids or get married if they want to, but it’s a very gynocentric interpretation of “anyone”.
As far as abuse, I think there’s a strong argument to be made that people who see themselves as likely to be abused will just be happier alone. I think that with the lack of recognition and social support available to men, it’s hard to justify pushing them into relationships. I believe that a lot of the “normal” things that women do – and are expected to do – are actually abusive in nature. From sexual gatekeeping to all out codependency. I don’t think that the “normal” type of relationship is a healthy place for men who have been victims of violence and emotional abuse in the past.
dungone,
” I believe that a lot of the “normal” things that women do – and are expected to do – are actually abusive in nature. From sexual gatekeeping to all out codependency. I don’t think that the “normal” type of relationship is a healthy place for men who have been victims of violence and emotional abuse in the past.”
The traditonal female as inherently abusive – write me a post on this.
And by traditonal, I don’t mena traditional, I mean gender roles as deforemd by industrialization with the final diostortion after WWII. Some topics might include:
– Gynonormativity in homelife, with the attendant marginalization of fathers – mockery, gender-biased family courts, etc.
– Male disposability as it relates to damseling and the provider role.
– Aspects where it abuses females in the gender system – female immunity for abusers and rpaists of girls.
Send it to genderratic.admin.
@DD
1. I don’t think that women should stay home with the babies. I think that the parent with the lower earning potential should stay home with the babies, study and improve their skills as time allows, *then* enter the workforce. It worked for my family (my family is caribbean, so it was a lot easier to partition off the men for steady-money physical labour and allow the girls to go to school to earn the academical brownie points needed to bypass that whole “Blacks are dumb and need extra schooling to do what a white child could do.”, stigma.
It goes both ways. If the husband can earn $20+/hour as a plumber and the wife is stuck earning $12/hour in a good week, her pay is essentially going towards day care (unless the couple lives within ready access to family who can pick up the slack.) Likewise, if a doctor (female) gets married to a historian (male, female, whatever), *I* think that it makes a helluva lot more sense for the person who can spotlight minutiae about the Peloponnesian War for $35K/year to sit home and network, than to take a doctor out of commission for the sake of “conservative values”. Or, to use my family as another example, for a bricklaying husband to take on weekend duty to expedite his mid-level executive wife’s (multi-month) international business trips. I could give a’ about *who’s* home, I’m against the idea of working for the sake of ego. And in a country in which men are still more likely to have steady-earning, middle-class qualifying, low-to-middling excess worker participation jobs than women (never mind the fact that men *still* achieve technical degrees/certification at close to double the level of women), it seems senseless and wasteful to push the “women have to work too” meme unless absolutely necessary. With the Internet, it seems logical for the SAHP to take online courses and ready themselves for full time school or work after the kids can take care of themselves than to hit the workforce and crowd out people who would *need* the job for basic subsistence. Like my uncle, who stayed at home, received his GED (back when it meant something) and got certified to work from there.
1b. Personal peeve: if/when women are working, it helps immensely when they don’t second-guess *every single decision* that the father makes when raising children. As long as the baby isn’t walking around with a diaper tied to its head or the father isnt feeding the child a steady diet of Gummi Worms and Coca-Cola, it’s great to let some things slide, please.
I can remember, as a teenager, getting kid duty on weekends. I had one cousin who didn’t care how the diaper got on the child, one who insisted the the only proper way to diaper a child was to tuck the tape over the waistband and one who would actually use extra tape to secure the diaper on the child. The one with the laxest regulations for diaper attachment was the happiest one (and raised a fully functional child). The other two women raised children who call me constantly and spend as little time with their parents as possible. Coincidence?
2. Viagra has been tested on women multiple times, and the evidence on efficacy has always been inconclusive (whether using a device or tabulating results as given by female users in combination with partners.) As with men, its main function is physiological, not psychological (which meant that women with average to high libidos enjoyed the drug and women who were thinking that the “little blue pill” would get them in the mood just received uncomfortable chafing.) So, it’s most effective for women who don’t have problems getting in the mood (and turns less-libidinous women into the female equivalent of the first boy in school to hit puberty.)
@Mamu, I think that some people shouldn’t even start a family in the first place. Like two struggling artists, or a Marine and a stripper. However, that still begs the question – how do you decide whether you should marry the person who earns more and stay home or to marry the person who earns less and go to work yourself? Your solution would be fair if pairings were made completely randomly and if they were lasting, but as we all know this isn’t the case. I just don’t think it’s solvable at that level.
Women should just stop gravitating towards the worst possible careers when it comes to wrecking havoc on their coworkers and clients. There are plenty of jobs out there where employees can telecommute, but these jobs usually conflict with women’s tendency to seek out work that allows for the greatest amount of social interaction.
And from what I heard about medicine generally, the stereotype seems to be that some women get into it to land a husband and get out. If that’s their goal, I don’t see why they’re willing to go to such lengths to get these kinds of degrees – http://www.myhealthnewsdaily.com/2291-medical-students-prostitution.html What really bugs me is stuff like this:
I think the ethical implications are quite clear. Men and women face identical financial hardships in med school and I don’t want society to make such heavy investments into the ones who are unwilling to cope with hardship. All of this can be remedied by getting rid of the perverse incentives that women have to get into the wrong sort of fields.
@Gingko, I will work on it!
“As far as abuse, I think there’s a strong argument to be made that people who see themselves as likely to be abused will just be happier alone. I think that with the lack of recognition and social support available to men, it’s hard to justify pushing them into relationships.”
Thanks dungone…
I might sound bitter at times but I am fully aware that m MGTOW purgutory is far better than the hell some of the angry men from the-spearhead.com have been through…
“It seems like it’s by choice to me. I’ve read your blog some and clearly women are attracted to you. There’s no reason to feel like you can’t find a good woman.”
Iron Lightning….
I tried online dating recently, I had one “disaster date.” I also noticed that the ladies clicking on my profile were just a little older, divorced, didn’t want any more kids (for the one’s that had them) and didn’t want a “casual encounter.” Some of them were conventionally attractive, one even looked like she could’ve been a model at some point.
Well, let’s take a look. There’d be no point pursuing “anything serious.” They’ve already said they don’t want children. I’ve said before that I don’t want children, but I think I would if I had exactly the right circumstances. According to the stats, someone who is divorced is statistically more likely to get divorced the 2nd time through. Okay, some were attractive so maybe they’d be a fun “casual encounter” but they said they didn’t want that. I know there is a middle ground commonly referred to as FWB. I suppose if I navigated correctly I could have a FWB but call it something nicer.
There was a guy Mr. M3 who I left a link to who was involuntarily celibate for 10 years. Of course Daisy just thought he was throwing a pity party. My situation is far different than his, I arrived at MGTOW from a different path….
Everybody take note.
Dungone has broken his promise and is once again picking a fight.
I did not. He did. He always does. This is like the 5th time he has done this (7 if you count his incessant mewling at NSWATM). He starts arguing with me … and then inevitably winds up crying and pleading with me to leave him alone. So I do. Then he starts it up again. It’s a really sick cycle.
Some weird form of foreplay? Whatever it is, I am tired of it.
Dungone, could you clarify? Insanity is doing something over and over expecting different results, and I have had enough. You begged me and begged me to leave you alone. So, I did. However, as I’ve told you before (six times previously), the price of my ignoring your nonsense is you not replying to me. Now, you are back for more. Could you make up your mind? Which is it?
(sigh) As usual, you come out of the box like gangbusters, but after I peel and eat you for dinner (burp) you will once again squeal like a bitch for me to leave you alone. After you rest up and lick your wounds, you will be back to fight once again. Over and over and over… you have singled out my comments three times in this thread, obviously throwing down the gauntlet and eager to pick up the feud.
Please explain this bizarre behavior.
I do not want to reply to you, only to hear the usual: 1) “I don’t read anything Daisy says!” (your comments in this thread obviously prove that isn’t true and never has been) and 2) “BOO HOOO HOOO leave me alone pleeeeeeease!” Its an enormous waste of time.
And weird too.
Anyway, some of your more amusing comments (thanks for trying to keep it funny, at least):
Dungone: I really don’t get what the feminist and female obsession with Viagra is
This doesn’t surprise me at all, but I do not have time to explain female sexuality, which is obviously a big mystery to you. Some books might help. Check out Amazon, or your local community college might have a course that is time-sensitive and affordable. Clearly, your comment shows that you need to start at the beginning.
Dungone: They actually felt that they held a trump card with female sexuality.
No, they were lesbians. You know what lesbians are, right? (Really, dude. Check out that college course I just recommended.)
Can I ask, how many lesbian-feminist separatists have you known personally?
Dungone: They viewed female sexual manipulation as a way of subverting not just male sexual agency, but every aspect of socioeconomic status.
They were lesbians. They didn’t care about men. Men did not figure into it. That is what the word “separatist” means. They wanted a Joanna Russ world without men. Men were not the point. Some of them (how many separatist meetings did you attend?) would not allow you to DISCUSS men at all in their presence.
You don’t know this, since you were not allowed to go to their meetings.
Men were not the point, most emphatically.
Dungone: But it’s not as though this was in any way different from plain old female hypoagency.
On the contrary, these women were incredible… they fixed their own cars and even built their own houses. How is this hypoagency? SEPARATIST meant NO MEN and that meant ;earning to lift the heavy stuff, too. They often lived out in the wilderness on “lesbian land” (thats how Michfest started) where they could exercise this kind of all-woman autonomy. They farmed, they plowed, they canned vegetables, they did it all. Hypoagency?
Dungone: Moreover, there were some really nasty strains of genocidal feminists who wanted to eliminate men altogether, hence one of the reasons they chose lesbianism over simple abstinence.
And that is why your first sentences are such a hoot. Did you read the first part of the paragraph before reading the last part?
Men’s sexuality was not the point. Men, they hoped, would die off. Joanna Russ got her main concept in “The Female Man” FROM LESBIAN SEPARATISTS.
Dungone: They are everything that lesbian separatism would have been if lesbian separatism was actually about advocating for fairness in relationships.
Um, lesbians DO have relationships, you know that right? They advocated for fairness in their own relationships, which were not with men. They thought men could never understand fairness. (I wonder where they got an idea like that?) Lesbians have relationships, believe it or not. (again, check out that college course if you don’t know what lesbianism is–you sound confused)
Dungone: who markets a product for femdicks
What is a “femdick”? Is this some new anti-trans insult?
Dungone: I don’t believe that “most” people have spouses and children to begin with
“Most” includes the whole world.
The numbers are at around 53% in the USA, not sure of the stats where you are. The rates of marriage are much higher in more traditional areas of the world, of course.
Dungone: Even so, up until their 50′s, women are far more likely to find themselves in marriages than men.
Who are they marrying, in that case? Men.
Dungone: This may give women the perception that “anyone” can have kids or get married if they want to, but it’s a very gynocentric interpretation of “anyone”.
Who are the women marrying? Men.
The idea that “women get married and men don’t” might be the funniest thing I’ve ever heard you say… and that includes all the fun personal hagiography. (How can women do all the marrying without men to marry?)
Anyway, please explain your sudden incursion, after the cease-fire and the pleading that I leave you alone. Can’t do without me, huh? Well, that’s understandable. Willing to suspend my civility pledge for you Dungone. Isn’t that what makes your life worth living? (giggle) At any rate, I think you are incapable of leaving me alone (its quite obvious actually) and I don’t know if you just can’t control yourself or what (giggle)… so if this is not true, how about you leave ME alone? Pick on somebody else, Mr Mythical Marine.
I am tired of the insanity. Please give it a rest?
But if you want to keep on doing comedy, that’s fine. You seem addicted, and I understand how that goes.
MaMu: which meant that women with average to high libidos enjoyed the drug and women who were thinking that the “little blue pill” would get them in the mood just received uncomfortable chafing.) So, it’s most effective for women who don’t have problems getting in the mood (and turns less-libidinous women into the female equivalent of the first boy in school to hit puberty.)
Sounds GREAT! I would really like to try it for myself. I have one good friend who has, and she uses it fairly often with VERY good results. But she is in good health, and I am unsure how it would interact with endocrine meds… and the fact that something has not been tested on women IS a concern.
(PS: explain this to Dungone, that this is why we’d like to have Viagra. Thanks.)
SWAB: There was a guy Mr. M3 who I left a link to who was involuntarily celibate for 10 years. Of course Daisy just thought he was throwing a pity party.
The guy who bragged about all the attractive and/or accomplished women who approached him? Yeah, I did.
He repeatedly bragged that he turned them down, they somehow weren’t good enough. His celibacy was totally voluntary. (Are we talking about the same person?)
I say the same about women who whine that “there are no good men”–yes, there are. They think they are too precious for this world, then complain about the results of being so exclusive.
One of these days, they know they gotta get goin
Out of the door and down to the street all alone
SWAB: you mean they can’t get boners so they need the viagra to get ‘em???
You won’t always be young. You might not find it so funny then.
Yes, if you live long enough, it WILL happen to you, too.
this was the guy…
https://whoism3.wordpress.com/2012/11/17/confessions-of-a-reformed-incel/
I don’t know about him turning down women who approached him….
maybe in another post….
he did brag about getting with strippers–the irony is that “conventional” women who would turn him down treated him worse than sex worker/borderline prostitutes. This is one of the “ironies.” When a guy complains about lack of sex or a relationship, he gets told he is “aiming to high.” There is more to it than that (although that may be part of it.) I have real life experience of being treated very well by attractive women and being treated like dirt by less attractive women. It goes against the PUA/feminist advice of “stay within your league.” Of course it may have had to do with me having traits that those specific attractive women liked and less attractive women didn’t care for.
He even admits that he did cause many of his own problems…
Danny, sorry I missed your comment. Got sidetracked by comedians!
Correct me if I’m wrong on this but didn’t the lesbian feminist separatists of the Second Wave go that way more for political reasons rather than a desire to go their own way because of feelings on prospects of finding a partner?
The personal is political, they would reply. There were as many different reasons as their were separatists.
They thought relationships with men were corrupt, dishonest, manipulative, blah blah… all the things I have heard MGTOWs say. We make ourselves pretty and primp and therefore are dishonest. Etc.
Where lesbian separatists were splitting off as a political “Fuck You!” to the system and to men MGTOW seem to be splitting off because of what they see as the state of relationships (not to say that what they see and experience is representative of what its like for all men mind you).
Another reason was that they felt dependence on men was the problem. That is why the charge of “hypoagency” from Dungone is so ass-backwards. They believed if you depended on someone, it made you hopelessly infantile and you could never be equal. The Furies (to name only one of these groups) thought an equal relationship could not be possible until (example) women learned mechanics and men learned cooking, so nobody in a given relationship was always doing a certain task (which they thought was a cause of inequality in relationships). They thought depending on men was often the real reason women wanted men, that the relationships were therefore not “authentic”… in “Amazon Odyssey” Atkinson called this heterosexual model “metaphysical cannibalism”.
Pretty harsh.
Relationships were front and center, and they thought women could best model this. Of course, turned out not to be true… although lots of women who came out at that time, never went back.
I personally felt that many of these women were lesbians who were waiting for an excuse to come out, that in an earlier generation, would not have. The strain between the “political” lesbians (read Camille Paglia on this, she is hilarious!) vs the “real” lesbians was one of the strains that eventually split these collectives apart.
SWAB, is THIS your idea of “involuntary celibacy”:
Over the course of the next year i would bang 3 more strippers, [stripper game, i had no fucking idea but looky here – link] getting into a casual with two of them for a time. I even fucked one inside the club.. and let me tell you the bouncer was a scary guy so i was playing with fire but damn what a thrill! I’ll never forget how wide eyed that cute Puerto Rican girl got when i eviscerated her buttugly girlfriend right in front of her when she called me ‘gay or something’ when i refused to go for a dance with her entitled ass. Soon as the ugly was gone, Latina heat dragged me into the VIP. 1 condom. 0 dollars. 1 sweet fuck. Priceless.
…
the knowledge of me banging strippers actually played to my advantage [preselection?] and allowed me to once again hook up with my ex-girlfriend who later became my wife. She seemed to enjoy quizzing me every so often as to how she compared to those ‘Ladies of the Night’ as she called them, always seeking validation that she stacked up and cut the muster. And much sexual satisfaction was to be had for a nice long time. Of course that was until the wife became unhaaapy with my reversion to betatude and showed me the door. That’s when i finally delved into the realm of the internet and discovered about Game, dominance, attraction triggers, evo psych, mra’s, pua’s, the manosphere. All the pretty lies perished, like domino’s falling in unison.
What’s he talking about? What’s he bitching about again? Sounds like BRAGGING to me. Pity party, indeed.
How is this ‘involuntary celibacy’? Honestly, you can’t be serious.
I think we must have very different definitions of the word.
5 years ago i’d have be in my room crying over it or worse, apologizing to her for hurting her feelings. Today, i stand tall and say FUCK IT, my own needs and interests come first before anyone else and im ready to move on to find one who desires and deserves all the awesomeness i have to give. I don’t care how angry she got or how any feminist might say i just played nice to get in her pants. I’M THROUGH PLAYING NICE. I’m built, confident, nothing left to prove, cannot be persuaded by the power of pussy, and doing what i like for myself. I don’t fall on my sword for the needs of others. Look to thine own ass first is the creedo.
Or even the credo.
I think womanhood can live just fine without his laughable, arrogant “awesomeness” and bragging over three-ways with strippers. Here’s hoping he stays celibate, involuntary or otherwise.
I’m sure nobody missed him.
Daisy, you will want specific examples….
being treated very well by a girl who was close to looks of a model while being treated like human garbage by overweight white girls. You will probably say-“oh, that’s more about race.” I’m mixed race and so was the girl. Or you will probably come up with some whacko psuedoscience saying they only treated me bad because they knew on a subliminal level that I was fat-o-phobic or because the patriarchy treated them bad I was faced with bad treatment (afterall teh patriarchy occasionally affects teh menz.)
“How is this ‘involuntary celibacy’? Honestly, you can’t be serious.”
he went through 10 years of no sex then a spurt of action most PUA’s would drool over….
“You won’t always be young. You might not find it so funny then.”
I actually said that I found that the feeling of my sex drive slowing down is a good thing….
Ironic, if it’s counterculture to what most manosphere guys and feminists tell me, it probably IS A GOOD THING….
anyways, you missed the point with Mr. M3….
you cherry picked the harsh statements he made ala Futrelle….
he had bigger points about confidence….
also, he didn’t address this but conventional society expects a male to be the initiator….
presumably part of his anger comes from being forced into a role he didn’t like–the initiator. He talked about being “freindzoned.”
anyways, you don’t have to like Mr. M3 or think he’s a great guy…..
however, there is allot to be gleaned from that post….
how come women aren’t freindzoned?
I think this comes back to utility….
it is “okay” to use a man for his utility….
Daisy:
“I think womanhood can live just fine without his laughable, arrogant “awesomeness” and bragging over three-ways with strippers. Here’s hoping he stays celibate, involuntary or otherwise. ”
What, honestly, was so bad about what he said? If he’d been a woman, it would be just another “I am woman Hear me roar” girl-power speech. But, apparently, when a man says it… it’s “laughable [and] arrogant.”
Apparently it’s okay to say fish don’t need bicycles, but don’t you dare suggest that bicycles can do just as well without fish?
Paul: What, honestly, was so bad about what he said?
Not “bad” per se, I was reacting to SWAB’s championing of his comments (he has linked him multiple times here and at his own blog), like he is St Francis or something. And I don’t get “involuntary celibacy” out of this guy’s comments, to be sure. Do you? I mean, say what? Someone who brags that much about getting laid and then complains he is “involuntarily celibate”? Um, am I missing something? (He seems to have confused “involuntary” and “voluntary”–he repeatedly says he is proud of his CHOICE… this makes it voluntary!) It’s not like he is some anti-social nerd or someone low on status, in fact he goes to great pains to assure us of how wonderful he is and that neither of these situations is the case.
SWAB accused me of called it a pity party, and yes, I did; I was defending myself and explaining why I called his post that… I don’t think he is “bad”–just very unlikable and arrogant. (I don’t like arrogance in either gender.)
Double standards, indeed, Paul. Stoner With A Boner can make fun of men for not being able to maintain erections, and nobody challenges him (neither did you, I notice)… but if a woman does that or makes fun of a man’s penis size, etc? She is called misandrist in a heartbeat. Does this mean SWAB is also misandrist for making fun of men who don’t maintain erections, with his hearty “hahahahahahaha” at them? Or is this just garden variety ageism/ableism and therefore considered no big deal?
Does he worry that might alienate some men here? Apparently not.
I consider making fun of how penises work (or don’t) to be very misandrist, SWAB, and I confess, I am surprised at you… I thought you were way cooler than that.
SWAB: being treated very well by a girl who was close to looks of a model while being treated like human garbage by overweight white girls. You will probably say-”oh, that’s more about race.”
Why does it matter so much what these women look like? Why don’t you just treat them as individuals instead of making it about appearance, weight and race?
Since the more attractive women treat you better, then what’s the problem exactly? Isn’t that what you obviously want? I would think that would be pleasing to you?
Are you now complaining that fat girls DON’T like you? (confused)
And SWAB, I don’t understand why you think women aren’t “friendzoned”–I know plenty of women who have been and it happened to me once –back when I was young and cute. Perhaps you didn’t know there is this woman on trial in Arizona named Jodi Arias? Slashed a man 29 times and shot him for good measure? What do you think SHE was so damn upset about? He kept on saying they were “just friends” is what… and then he takes another woman to Cancun. (Well, almost. Jodi put the kibosh on that.)
Happens all the time. (?) Why do you think it doesn’t?
I find it ironic that you ask that question while a famous friendzoned-woman is on trial for murder! Proves that it infuriates women just as much as it does men…
Daisy:
They thought relationships with men were corrupt, dishonest, manipulative, blah blah… all the things I have heard MGTOWs say. We make ourselves pretty and primp and therefore are dishonest. Etc.
But what I’m seeing is a difference in the way that lesbian separatists were trying to make a statement. They wanted EVERYONE to know that they were splitting off and that it should be what everyone should do. On the other hand MGTOW seem like they would be fine if no one gave them the time of day ever again.
And also I think that a MGTOW would be more open to coming across a woman that won’t do them wrong while the separatists wouldn’t care if a man could cook better than everyone on food network and kept a house so clean those little scrub bubble guys wouldn’t even be able to film an ad it (nothing to clean) they still wouldn’t date him because they have already decided that it’s a bad deal (mind you I’m sure there are MGTOW that probably feel that way about women as well so mileage may vary).
Danny, you might want to read this, which is surprisingly accurate. (it was crap the last time I looked–Wikipedia is getting all gussied up these days!)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separatist_feminism
Here is a good point included in the above link:
In a tract on socialist feminism published in 1972, the Hyde Park Chapter of the Chicago Women’s Liberation Union differentiated between Separatism as an “ideological position”, and as a “tactical position”.[4] In the same document, they further distinguished between separatism as “personal practice” and as “political position”.[4]
The ideological position would be the more dogmatic one, but the tactical position would/could allow for women having ‘private’ relationships with men but publicly maintaining separation, and that is what many women did. (Robin Morgan was legally married the whole time she was calling herself a separatist… and lots of people didn’t even know. Ditto Andrea Dworkin, married to John Stoltenberg at some point but kept it quiet.)
Ain’t nobody totally pure! 😉
The Furies thought separatism was an intermediate thing, like an extended summer camp. (time for women to learn to fix cars!) They didn’t intend for it to be a permanent lifestyle, although some who liked it, made it that way. This is closer to what you are describing about MGTOWs.
hahaha, Daisy, you are missreading me and I think it’s intentional (no shots about reading comprehension from me.) –good work if ya can find it though, if you eat 5 fast food meals a day and put the ™ logo behind everything, you could take David Futrelle’s “job” from him.
as far as erections/libido-I have long thought that if I could’ve lowered my libido by 10 notches or so I could save myself a bunch of pain/frustration. Maybe I’m conflating boner’s and libido, maybe they are separate but that’s news to me…
as far as agesim….
well, when I get my gray hairs, I’m not gonna pull an Osama B Laden and get that just for men hair dye….
http://img103.echo.cx/img103/4477/jamesny28wt.jpg
trust me, he could afford just for men if he wanted it…
” (He seems to have confused “involuntary” and “voluntary”–he repeatedly says he is proud of his CHOICE… this makes it voluntary!)”
He states that he was incel for 10 years…
Then he had some action from the woman he married (and later divorced him, described in other posts.) Ironically his cheating with strippers didn’t sour the marriage prospect. He did that before they were married, said it “intrigued” her. Yes, M3 is actually tragic in an ironic sort of way. By becoming a man who is more sexually successful, he becomes a worse human–he is smart enough to recognize this. He even references the dark triad–with all your reading, you should’ve caught that as a reference to sociopathy. It’s analogous to the story of a man who does everything he is told-works two jobs, saves every spare penny, never cheats, never lies. After ten years of drowning in debt, he starts cooking the books, he tells a few lies, he works a few crooked deals. He becomes a millionaire. Maybe he lost some self esteem, maybe he gained some respect. So is he a bad guy or is the system that enables him (and kept him down) fucked?
going to your original quote, he is proud of his choice to “game the system” rather than be it’s pawn…
I’ll pour on the snark full force—
Gee Daisy, if Jodi Arias goes free it will be a huge step for the empowerment of womyn and the advancement of feminism. The SCUM Manefesto has become reality. If a man denies a woman the relationship status she is so naturally entitled too, she gets to cut him up, no questions asked. This is even better Casey Anthony being cleared of murder charges. After all Caylee was a choice not a child and late term, tehehe, 2 years too late but whose counting. That’s progress. And all those limp dicked MRA’s who said “what about the girl?” What about her? Misogyny is hatred of Womyn. Or Distrust. Or disagreeing with Amanda Marcotte. But girls don’t count. They have to wear those Boys are Stewpid shirts and have their first Womyn’s studies course before they are womyn. Donchya know, womynhood, unlike manhood needs to be earned. It’s not about just showing up. Rights and privileges, that’s for the lesser gender.
Oh, and those hideous MGTOW’s like SWAB–they need to man up, get full time jobs and marry the sluts. Alright, if he’s really gay, maybe he’ll get an exemption. But he has to prove it and we get to watch. He doesn’t get off easy, a blowjob from a pretty meterosexual tennis star doesn’t count. He needs to recreate the buttrape shower scene from American History X. All his “favorite” bloggers like Jack Donovan, GL Piggy and Matt Forney are gonna be on this rape train. And if he’s in a fetal position, with tears from his eyes, he was faking his gayness. Well, that means he just needs an extra empowered womyn like Clarisse Thorn for his bride. And you know she’s really empowered. The last pour souls Clarence, dungone and Patrick Brown-well they suicided successfully when they found out she was their match in the forced marriage program. Those gosh dang penis owners with their ultra effective suicide by gun methods. Penis owners, can’t live with ’em, can’t live without ’em. Now SWAB will probably thing he is smart by replacing his Viagra medication with tic tacs. No concern for Clarisse, she has a 9 and a half inch strap-on. Blood on the sheets isn’t just for Islamic women on their honeymoon. SWAB will need transfusions every cuple o’ days. Clarisse has her needs you know….
–out of snark mode—
“Why does it matter so much what these women look like? Why don’t you just treat them as individuals instead of making it about appearance, weight and race?
Since the more attractive women treat you better, then what’s the problem exactly? Isn’t that what you obviously want? I would think that would be pleasing to you?”
It is feminist’s like Amanda Marcotte and David Futrelle who go on and on about Nice Guys ™ and guys being cry babies because they don’t “stick to girls in their own league.” PUA’s oftentimes use similar language.
as far as race, well I am mixed race. Many women don’t find me attractive at all, a few think I am “exotic.” It’s a crapshoot. There’s no such thing as league.
and yeah, Amanda Marcotte has far more in common with GL Piggy, Jack Donovan and Matt Forney than I ever will….
http://dearwhitefeminists.wordpress.com/update/
intersectionality–isn’t that one of those nice buzzwords from Hugo Schwyzer’s indoctrination camp, er gender studies classes? Well, I see a shitload of intersectionality between White Nationalism and feminism. hahaha, just like when a feminist gets all angry when you question the existence of patriarchy, the white power booty boi’s get all butthurt when you question HBD (scientific racism.)
Daisy,
“Another reason was that they felt dependence on men was the problem. That is why the charge of “hypoagency” from Dungone is so ass-backwards. They believed if you depended on someone, it made you hopelessly infantile and you could never be equal. ”
It’s not ass-backwards, it’s on point. These people talked the talk and then contradicted it. They were all separatist when it came ot high-minded declarations, but ten they turned rght around and expected male power structures to deal with rpae, as a special class of especially ehinous crime, they expected male power structure to fund a nation-wide network of DV shelters that served only women and they formualted a hyoagentic theory of heterosexuality that centered on doctrines of “male gaze” and “rpae culture” which attributed all agency to men.
Their so-called independence was hypoagentic to the core.
“I say the same about women who whine that “there are no good men”–yes, there are. They think they are too precious for this world, then complain about the results of being so exclusive.
One of these days, they know they gotta get goin
Out of the door and down to the street all alone”
Very nicely done. Women like you are the futrure of feminism. It’s happening already.
@Gingko, yes it’s quite ironic. The lesbian separatists had a whole lot in common with far-right Libertarians. They drove on roads built by men in cars built by men, but denied their dependence on men because they could check their own tire pressure. Selective reasoning and rampant hypocrisy all the way to the bitter end.
If it isn’t abundantly clear by now to anyone, let me just recap the most obvious difference between MGTOW and LS.
Lesbian Separatists kept heterosexual relationships on the side. They came into it from a political angle and renounced men in spite of benefiting from men’s contributions. MGTOWs aren’t exactly rejecting dating proposals. They come to a political angle by being put upon by women generally and realizing that it takes more out of them than they get back.
Gingko: It’s not ass-backwards, it’s on point. These people talked the talk and then contradicted it. They were all separatist when it came ot high-minded declarations, but ten they turned rght around and expected male power structures to deal with rpae, as a special class of especially ehinous crime,
Incorrect, Gingko–these are not all the same people. There was a **huge split** over law enforcement-involvement in the Second Wave, and most of the separatists were opposed to that. The WOCs had already dealt with such infiltration of the Black Panthers, and the leftists had already dealt with the infiltration of Weatherman, Yippies and the leftist parties (which we called “alphabet soup”–PLP, RCP, PC-USA, SWP, etc).
Cointelpro was a serious matter and a lot of us were scalded by it, myself included. We would never be the same again.
Where do you think I got the title for my post, “On feminist collaboration with the state”? That is what the separatists called it. (I stole their nomenclature, admittedly.)
The split tended to be the reformers and professionals (who wanted jobs as rape crisis counselors, lawyers, professors and such) and the radicals/separatists who wanted no part of it.
Dungone, what was the women’s movement like in Serbia? Isn’t that where you are?
SWAB: By becoming a man who is more sexually successful
See, it isn’t reading comprehension, it is ‘values clarification’–we are coming from very different values systems. “More sexually successful”–does this mean loving relationships with a high degree of satisfaction for both parties (my definition) or screwing a buncha different conventionally-attractive women (probably his definition)? I disagree that he is ‘more sexually successful’ in the first place, but I guess you accept that definition? That might be part of the problem.
We are talking past each other.
Speaking of which, I don’t know from Futrelle. I don’t read him, so I am not getting the constant put-downs. (I assume they ARE put-downs, yes?) I am not willing to start reading some man’s blog just to understand your put-downs of me. Sorry. You should probably stop assuming everyone is just like you and knows what you know and is operating from the same frame of reference.
SWAB: If a man denies a woman the relationship status she is so naturally entitled too, she gets to cut him up, no questions asked.
If she does walk, it will indeed mean this. No argument here. (I already wrote that on two or more threads here, didn’t I? I stopped commenting on the case on this blog, since nobody replied to me and I assumed no one wanted to discuss the trial.)
As I’ve said, you should stay tuned to my post on the Arias trial, which is coming up. Trying to hold off until the whole thing is over, but its been difficult to keep my mouth shut for so long. (I DID go off on the radio, though.)
Not sure I understood the rest of that post. Sorry. Again: frame of reference. Just like you don’t seem to understand me and think I am putting down MGTOWs. FTR, comparing MGTOWs to lesbian separatists was **not** regarded as some kind of insult; I hung with them for awhile, you know… I meant that as simply an observation about the trajectory of the early-MRM being similar to early-feminism.
Just because YOU don’t like the separatists, does not mean I felt the same way. (?) You know that, right? Or are you just fulminating at me because its fun to do?
SWAB: intersectionality–isn’t that one of those nice buzzwords from Hugo Schwyzer’s indoctrination camp, er gender studies classes? Well, I see a shitload of intersectionality between White Nationalism and feminism. hahaha
You slay me! hahahha is right. The term was first invented by Critical Race Theorist Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, who is African-American.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberl%C3%A9_Williams_Crenshaw
It means the intersections of various identities. A similar, related term is Standpoint theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standpoint_theory which comes from postmodernism.
… some people say “standpoint feminism”. Another African American theorist named Patricia Hill Collins was instrumental in developing that concept. Collins uses the word intersectionality these days, which I guess means that word has “won”…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patricia_Hill_Collins
(You might enjoy her book Black Sexual Politics: African Americans, Gender, and the New Racism which is great.) I actually prefer the term Standpoint theory, because I think more people understand it instinctively…but as I said –the word “intersectionality” has “won” and thereby seems to be the term that has caught on here in Blogdonia. Not sure why. Around 02-04 the term “standpoint theory” seemed to be in the lead. I wasn’t aware that Hugo used the term.
Honestly, SWAB, you seem much more current on Marcotte and other feminist bloggers than I am these days. 😉
Gee – they’re feminist but it’s okay because they’re *black* feminists, so if you don’t like what they’re saying guys, take it up with their *blackness* and not with their feminism. Right? /s So it’s just a coincidence that these feminist reconciled the inherently incompatible feminism and racial politics by inventing a system that put themselves at the tip top of the oppression totem pole. Damn, all of the cognitive dissonance must have hurt until they came up with that one. There’s absolutely nothing in postmodernism so inherently contradictory that it can’t be explained away by abstracting it in a higher level of postmodernism.
Dungone, did you miss my question upthread? Why do you continue this little charade? Or rather, a pretty BIG charade.
Your IP address places you in Belgrade. Want me to post it? Since you will (predictably) claim it isn’t yours, no harm done, right?
It’s already on my blog. I think you know where to find it. (Turns out you have quite a fan club. I could never have found that on my own.)
There’s absolutely nothing in postmodernism so inherently contradictory that it can’t be explained away by abstracting it in a higher level of postmodernism.
And yet, frauds are the same all over the world, aren’t they? They all dream of being American cowboys and American military men…. in their dreams if nothing else.
Now, fuck off soldier boy. Do **not** address me again.
Daisy,
“SWAB: If a man denies a woman the relationship status she is so naturally entitled too, she gets to cut him up, no questions asked.
If she does walk, it will indeed mean this. No argument here”
Yes, in that particular case. It occurs to me his comment applies equally well to Lorena Bobbitt and Catherine Kieu Becker – whatever did happen to her? – it usually gets laughed off. The Kieu Becker story in particular was enjoyed by millions of women viewers out in TV land. I think she did get some time.
” I stopped commenting on the case on this blog, since nobody replied to me and I assumed no one wanted to discuss the trial.)”
You did try to discuss it. To be frank your points werre so compelling and the facts of the case so obvious, and getting more obvious all the time – this one makes Casey Anthony look normal – that there just wasn’t much to add.
“Honestly, SWAB, you seem much more current on Marcotte and other feminist bloggers than I am these days. 😉
And me too. Thanks SWAB – you read her so that we don’t have to. Daisy, you know who is worth reading? Katie McDonough, at Slate too. She gets it right at least half the time, which is a damned good rate in this business.
“So it’s just a coincidence that these feminist reconciled the inherently incompatible feminism and racial politics by inventing a system that put themselves at the tip top of the oppression totem pole. Damn, all of the cognitive dissonance must have hurt until they came up with that one”
dungone, I think this was one more of those things that pushed WOCs out of feminism into womanism. I don’t know much about it, but it sure would have been an irritant to me in their shoes.
Yes, in that particular case. It occurs to me his comment applies equally well to Lorena Bobbitt and Catherine Kieu Becker – whatever did happen to her? – it usually gets laughed off. The Kieu Becker story in particular was enjoyed by millions of women viewers out in TV land. I think she did get some time.
What happened to Becker? Well after about 5min of searching the most I could find was someone saying that the trial was scheduled to start Dec. of last year but no coverage was going on. Honestly it seems to have faded.
The ideological position would be the more dogmatic one, but the tactical position would/could allow for women having ‘private’ relationships with men but publicly maintaining separation, and that is what many women did. (Robin Morgan was legally married the whole time she was calling herself a separatist… and lots of people didn’t even know. Ditto Andrea Dworkin, married to John Stoltenberg at some point but kept it quiet.)
So if I’m reading this right, then wouldn’t it be the case that they were using the separation as a tool for their own gain? Why clamour for separation if in fact they were maintaining relationships? I could understand if it were a matter of they kept them private because they just didn’t want their business out there but it seems they kept them private because their business was contradicting the very messages they were pushing?
The Furies thought separatism was an intermediate thing, like an extended summer camp. (time for women to learn to fix cars!) They didn’t intend for it to be a permanent lifestyle, although some who liked it, made it that way. This is closer to what you are describing about MGTOWs.
As in MGTOW are going the other way on the condition that they would return someday?
Danny: So if I’m reading this right, then wouldn’t it be the case that they were using the separation as a tool for their own gain? Why clamour for separation if in fact they were maintaining relationships? I could understand if it were a matter of they kept them private because they just didn’t want their business out there but it seems they kept them private because their business was contradicting the very messages they were pushing?
A lot of this is historical context. Please understand that some of this does not “translate” very well now. (sigh)
I tend to take it for granted people know this stuff and then I am startled by the questions… the questions force me to try to articulate how it was, how I recall it.
Hard to describe now, but it used to be that the only feminists “allowed” (quoted in newspapers, magazines, TV, radio, or getting books published) were either very attractive women like Steinem, glamorous ‘gadfly’ types like Germaine Greer (also: it was okay to be weird if you were foreign) or respectable married women. (being married is what *made* you respectable) Certainly, a feminist getting elected (i.e, Bella Abzug, Shirley Chisholm, Dolores Delahanty) was almost out of the question unless she had a husband. (The huge exception here was Barbara Jordan, not married, and now we know she really WAS a lesbian) No other types of feminists were allowed on TV for a really long time. It therefore became a big deal when some actress was asked about feminism and unexpectedly said “rah rah team” or something like that. (Bette Davis, Susan Sarandon, etc) Even Kate Millett was married… and then publicly admitted (Time magazine covered it, as if it was a riot or something), when asked by a student during a Q-and-A session at Columbia, that she was a lesbian, a rumor that had followed her for a long time. (she really was, not a separatist, but she had married an artist in Japan in 1965). The first thing they would say about you if you were feminist, is that you were a lesbian. I was called a lesbian when I was 14, before I was even certain what it meant.
Whenever it was discovered that a feminist was a lesbian (such as Millett or Robin Morgan), it was this big “Aha!” thing and right wing anti-feminists would use it to say all feminists hated men and were really lesbians. There were major anti-feminist articles in Readers Digest, TV Guide and mainstream places like that, seriously. Please remember how threatening feminism was regarded in the 60s/70s. (It is interesting that Hugh Hefner did not trash feminism initially until feminists trashed him first. He gave to the ERA campaign and NARAL.)
Therefore, the whole “yes, we are all lesbians” and the accompanying line “all women are lesbians except those who don’t know it yet” (credited to Jill Johnston, who really was one too) was a mass-reaction intended to counter this homophobic attack, an in-your-face gesture. Also a way to diffuse the accusation and make it null and void. For awhile, lots of feminists said “yes” when asked, including me. It was a solidarity thing and an effort not to be intimidated. At long last, around about 1978, the ban was unofficially lifted, and journalists stopped asking all public feminists if they were lesbians. At about the same time, ‘real’ lesbians like Karla Jay were like, could yall please stop saying this, because we don’t know which of you really ARE lesbians. LOL. Joan Nestle wrote about how lesbians were pissed about the co-optation of lesbians by feminists, yet very glad to get some new blood too. Camille Paglia wrote that the problem was that you didn’t know who was who, the old rules and identity markers (such as butch/femme) were totally unknown to the newcomers. So it was pretty tumultuous.
Separatism came out of this whole impulse (the in-your-face thing), which is why it attracted (for awhile) some of the most radical women. Also, some women really wanted to experiment (pleads guilty) and find out if there was a big difference (PS: there is). I have no regrets about that… I have considered myself officially bisexual ever since.
After you are called a lesbian a hundred times, you start to think, well, maybe I am. The word loses its ‘power’ over you and stops scaring you. And you start getting curious too.
You might say separatism was a heady mix of the ‘authentic’ lesbians and the radicals. That was my own observation anyway. As I said, I think the reasons were as varied as the women themselves.
Danny: As in MGTOW are going the other way on the condition that they would return someday?
I think some might regard it as temporary, as lesbians separatists sometimes regarded what they were doing as temporary. I think separation, as in black nationalism or religious separatism (thinking of the more benign type: Amish or Jains, etc) can be a good tool for people, either in the short or long run. It can become insular and negative very quickly, though, and that is the danger in it. People start policing each other… it seems almost inevitable.
But MGTOW just reminds me of the same phenomenon. And at a similar “moment” in the MRM as in the women’s movement, when identity is up for grabs and there are attacks on the movement by important people in mainstream media. Really, it strikes me as so similar. Its like a regrouping as well as an in-your-face gesture in the same way. (One thing that greatly interests me is mass movements and the similarities between them, especially feminism and the MRM.)
I didn’t know this simple observation would cause all hell to break loose, but I guess I should know better by now. 😉
Daisy…
here you go…
http://dissention.wordpress.com/2012/02/18/social-atomization-highlights-unwantedness/
MGTOW is happening under a different set of circumstances…
It’s probably closer to “dropping out”–one of the words is going “ghost.” Get a buttload of cash, fly under the radar, if drugs are your bag, pursue that, if prostitutes that, if laying on a beach that, if video games that….
also, there is more of an anti-community vibe, more individualism…
as far as bi-sexuals, you’d probably find that with male feminists and PUA’s as Bi’s tend to have high sex partner counts…
MGTOW is an imperfect solution to a cruel and awful world…
DaisyDeadhead on 2013-02-26 at 3:15 pm said:
Dungone, did you miss my question upthread? Why do you continue this little charade? Or rather, a pretty BIG charade.
Your IP address places you in Belgrade. Want me to post it? Since you will (predictably) claim it isn’t yours, no harm done, right?
It’s already on my blog. I think you know where to find it. (Turns out you have quite a fan club. I could never have found that on my own.)
There’s absolutely nothing in postmodernism so inherently contradictory that it can’t be explained away by abstracting it in a higher level of postmodernism.
And yet, frauds are the same all over the world, aren’t they? They all dream of being American cowboys and American military men…. in their dreams if nothing else.
Now, fuck off soldier boy. Do **not** address me again.
I just went to your blog.The first IP address you friend posted is mine.
I suggest you start explaining yourself.
If I recall correctly I never even spoken to you.Not on this blog or any other blog. And I shure es fack never claimed to be US marin.On my very first post here I said I was from Serbia.
Daisy: “I didn’t know this simple observation would cause all hell to break loose, but I guess I should know better by now”
I agree that there are several similarities between lesbian separatists and MGTOW, enough to perhaps point it out, but there are also enough differences between the two that to draw any kind of conclusion on MGTOW based on what happened with separatism would be erroneous, though I’m sure you had no intention of doing that. No doubt a portion of the response was fuelled by the fact that the separatists were largely crackpots and drawing parallels between the two could be considered offensive.
“I actually prefer the term Standpoint theory, because I think more people understand it instinctively…but as I said –the word “intersectionality” has “won” and thereby seems to be the term that has caught on here in Blogdonia. Not sure why.”
Yeah, intersectionality is a current favourite buzzword in gender studies (and pretty much only gender studies, though you do get feminist academics infesting other disciplines trying to spread it to give it credibility). You’re right to point out the similarities, as both rely on the same fallacious assumptions.
The reason why Intersectionality “won” is that Standpoint theory has already “lost”. To clarify, standpoint theory has already been rejected by most real academic disciplines; the assumptions it is based on have either been shown to be wrong or mere “articles of faith”. So it went through the usual postmodern defence tactic of “discovering” a new idea and basically using a new word for the same idea, modified just enough so it isn’t blatantly obvious to the believers.
Therefore they are not strictly “the same”, but Standpoint theory already incorporated what is now known as Intersectionality. ‘Intersectionality’ also puts more emphasis on “multiple directions of oppression” and, crucially, hasn’t got all the baggage. And to answer your other point, as far as various academics are concerned, the less people understand it the better; it makes it easier to defend.
Adiabat: I agree that there are several similarities between lesbian separatists and MGTOW, enough to perhaps point it out, but there are also enough differences between the two that to draw any kind of conclusion on MGTOW based on what happened with separatism would be erroneous, though I’m sure you had no intention of doing that.
Yes, Adiabat, you are correct.
Adiabat: The reason why Intersectionality “won” is that Standpoint theory has already “lost”. To clarify, standpoint theory has already been rejected by most real academic disciplines; the assumptions it is based on have either been shown to be wrong or mere “articles of faith”.
The reason why Intersectionality “won” is that Standpoint theory has already “lost”. To clarify, standpoint theory has already been rejected by most real academic disciplines; the assumptions it is based on have either been shown to be wrong or mere “articles of faith”.
To me, just means “from your specific standpoint”–duh. I mean, we all see things from our own standpoint, and the good part of that was: all standpoints were regarded as valid. This would be (in theory) good for men too. Men have a standpoint too! Maybe that’s why it didn’t catch on?
“Intersectionality” is rather exclusive. Rednecks (I am allowed to use that word, but you’re not) have intersections too, but we ain’t cool. I count about a dozen TV shows currently making fun of rednecks and hillbillies; we are one of the last groups its okay to hate. I talk about this a lot on our radio show (lets hear it for demagoguery) and manage to stir people up about that, when I can’t stir em up about anything else. But since rednecks are white at (least for now–as I implied in this post–different colors of rednecks may be a trend and the future of the south may be quite different), not much “intersectionality” there, unless we are talking about class. And here in the USA (not in a more class-conscious country like Britain*) people argue about who is middle class and who isn’t. Everybody is defensive about being rich (nobody admits to being rich, even when they are rolling in it–they usually have to be NBA/rock stars before they will cop to it) or affluent, and people are (maddeningly) equally defensive about being poor. So, the result, everybody claims to be middle class, even though there is a wide disparity within the group of people that claim this status. And we know that’s bullshit.
I was initially a proponent of the “intersectionality” label, until I realized it would not include me or my people.
But I don’t think the existence of class differences is “a matter of faith”–I think they are real and measurable. Is this what you mean? Race as a social category is also real and measurable. So when you say “article of faith”–not sure what you mean here.
*I was recently shocked to hear Naomi Campbell matter-of-factly describe herself as coming from a working class family. You rarely, if ever, hear that terminology used by celebrities in the USA.
“Valkina”: I just went to your blog.The first IP address you friend posted is mine.
I suggest you start explaining yourself.
Really? How did you know which post to go to?
Its on an old post, not a new one.
🙂
““Intersectionality” is rather exclusive. Rednecks (I am allowed to use that word, but you’re not) have intersections too, but we ain’t cool. I count about a dozen TV shows currently making fun of rednecks and hillbillies; we are one of the last groups its okay to hate.”
IMO a redneck or hillbilly is someone who is stupid like Jackass-stupid, and is proud of it, in an anti-intellectualism way. Not a “school is wrong nowadays” anti-intellectualism, but a “intelligence doesn’t matter, value only your physical strength and/or your beauty” way.
Schala, exhibiting that sensitivity which has long endeared her to me:
IMO a redneck or hillbilly is someone who is stupid like Jackass-stupid, and is proud of it, in an anti-intellectualism way. Not a “school is wrong nowadays” anti-intellectualism, but a “intelligence doesn’t matter, value only your physical strength and/or your beauty” way.
And “trannies” are men in dresses/drag queens who dress badly and wear too much makeup and bubble-headed wigs, right? Um, how about you keep your offensive stereotypes to yourself?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redneck
Redneck is a derogatory slang term used in reference to poor, uneducated white farmers, especially from the southern United States.[1][2] It is similar in meaning to cracker (especially regarding Georgia and Florida), hillbilly (especially regarding Appalachia and the Ozarks),[3] and white trash (but without the last term’s suggestions of immorality).[4][5][6]
Where do you think the “hill” in hillbillies comes from, if not the mountains?
I AM a redneck/hillbilly, so if you think I am jackass stupid, etc… well, fuck you.
If you don’t, then I guess you are wrong.
@Valkina, I’m sorry, but I laughed about this so hard about this. Sorry it was at the expense of your privacy. I’m pretty sure she nailed this one just like she discovered the Cointelpro spies in her midst.
“But since rednecks are white at (least for now–as I implied in this post–different colors of rednecks may be a trend and the future of the south may be quite different), not much “intersectionality” there, unless we are talking about class.’
I saw someone somewhere argue that Jackson’s invention of whiteness as opposed to blackness was what allowed American society to paper over this class distinction and just deny it existed at all, which of course made it much easier to maintainm, since it was ever going to be questioend without upsetting the whole racial caste system.
“different colors of rednecks may be a trend ”
Thomas Sowell thkns they have been there all along. That’s what he menas by “black rednecks”. He meant it to be provocative, but he was referring to a culture of resistance. he diidn’t mena black people had gottoen their culture of resistance by imitating “rednecks” but that the two cultures were functionally identical.
“Redneck” is a multivalent term, Schala. It is basicaly deeply classist, as in the way you used it, but it has also been adopted as an autonym and as an accusation of racism. I remember years ago when the Army was still running “rap seesions ” (yeah, I said it was years ago) in units to dispel racial tensions, the term came up. Some white soldiers kept calling themselves rednecks and finally the black soldiers said hey, wait, that term just tells us you’re racists. The white soldiers were stunned, because that is not what they were saying at all. when they explained what they were saying, that the term just menat someone who wouldn’t be pushed around and was working class, the standard Scotch-Irish thing, it was the black soldiers’ turn to be stunned. They had never imagined there would be a white culture of resistance.
Now its talking to itself.
I repeat, “Valkina”–how did you know exactly where to find your IP address? Out of almost 6 years of posts?
Over 1550 posts on my blog, and you found it IMMEDIATELY. Amazing. Are you psychic? Did you go through every single post or what? That would take many, many hours… so could you explain that one? Somehow, you went right to it.
In fact, you went straight to that post this morning and to no other posts.
Joke–
Q: What kind of Marine doesn’t recognize a trap deliberately set for him?
A: A fake one.
We are currently debating whether to post the name on the Serbian Broadband account. (It’s not Valkina.) I say no, it might be his dad or mom, and (as Richard Nixon used to say), that would be wrong. But some people hate the troll so much, they don’t care if they hurt its parents or spouse.
Also, its Lent, and I hate doing deliberately-mean things during Lent. Bad luck, you know.
We’ll try to keep you posted.
Another question for “Valkina” (love the name! Must be the name of some fantasy- character or porn-star Dungone likes): How long have you been posting on the same atheist and MRA blogs as Dungone? I mean, since your IP address is apparently on two of them? (giggle)
Wow, looks like you two have lots in common.
Gingko, do you know what Meludgeons are? I wrote about my Meludgeon grandmother, but most people are not aware of the lineage.
Huffington Post did an article about the DNA markers, I was fascinated!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/24/melungeon-dna-study-origin_n_1544489.html
That article was written a few months after my post… I had wondered why I was suddenly getting linkage on it, and then I found the HuffPo piece.
So its true. All these years, and you know, I had never doubted it.
Whatever its name is: I’m pretty sure she nailed this one just like she discovered the Cointelpro spies in her midst.
Um, they were not “cointelpro spies”–they were FBI, which routinely does surveillance on all ‘subversive’ groups, both right and left. They don’t hide the fact. You know that, right?
Cointelpro was a special stepped-up project, and quite different… of course, no one knew about it until it was accidentally exposed in 1971.. Lots of our parents, families and friends were listed therein. It was pretty harrowing stuff for the 60s/70s radical left.
But since you don’t live in the USA, it is understandable that you don’t know any of that history.
Therefore, I recommend the documentary COINTELPRO 101, which we showed at our Occupy film series last year. Live and learn, Valkina!
SWAB: It’s probably closer to “dropping out”–one of the words is going “ghost.”
I love this term! Very evocative! Sharing this term with my “ghost” friend in Occupy… he has ‘dropped out’ and lived with Occupy people all over the country for the past year and a half. We took turns buying him food and other necessities, but he really did not seem to mind living hand-to-mouth. A really smart guy, the opposite stereotype of a homeless person. The thing is, this is what he has chosen to do… at first, I was startled to meet such a smart, refined person who was technically homeless, since this is not something women choose, as you know. But he has turned out to be a great friend.
When he left SC, posted on Facebook, thank yous to all the people who had fed him or gave him warm clothes. I was all teary-eyed when I was included.
He is my favorite kind of “ghost”–I hope there are lots like him.
Gingko: Thomas Sowell thkns they have been there all along.
As a lefty, hate to say this, but I thought his book “Race and Culture” was brilliant. So did Steven Pinker, so I’m off the hook and free to admit it.
Really, I highly recommend it to everyone.
“As a lefty, hate to say this,..”
I know, doesn’t it just burn? OTOH you know for sure you are not committing the ad hominem fallacy.
“Gingko, do you know what Meludgeons are? I wrote about my Meludgeon grandmother, but most people are not aware of the lineage. ”
Synchronicty. I was just reading about those Carolina Siouan tribes – well, Catawba, which were realted to the Siouan groups origianlly in the Ohio and Mississippi valleys.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catawba_people
It turns out they were decimated mostly by warfare with the Iroquis and also the Lenape and Shawnee, and that South Carolina and and maybe North too were their steadfast allies, gave them land and protection, which protection turned out to be useless…. sad story.
Was it the Melungeons who got royally fucked going into the Civil War, or coming out of it, by being classified as black under Jim Crow or whatever black code applied before?
Ginkgo I tried to post comment to DaisyDeadhead fore 4 times 4 hovesr ago.Is this your twisted idea of helping Daisy Deadhead bue sabotaging me.
You frst violeted my privacy and now you treten me.
Listen bitch.It took me enter day to find the past.What do you think I have not responded sooner.If I was alter ego made bue dungone to mess with you.Then why haven’t I talked to you before.
Bue the way there are many anonymous people here,menu that are all Dungone.
Valkina, answer the question. Just answer it. Don’t you know the answer?
How did you find the post with your IP on it?
People have been frantically searching for it all afternoon on my blog (thanks for the hits, yall!) but you found it right away. How’d you manage that? It does not have Dungone’s name on it anywhere, so how did you find it? Its an old post, buried in over 1550 other posts, but you magically pulled the proverbial needle out of the proverbial haystack.
I think that means you are Dungone. And liars never stop at just one lie.
Yes, I am a bitch. You betcha. Not some Eastern Bloc pussy who lets nazis and Soviets walk all over them, but a mean redneck who plays dirty. And I have dealt with REAL Marines my whole life. See the difference now?
Checkmate, baby.
“I think that means you are Dungone.”
Yeah, I don’t get how this proves Dungone is Valkina. If Dungone knew where to find the post it would be because he had already read it. If he had already read it why would he have needed to check it now? What is the significance of Valkina finding the page in one click, which, given that he contests this is now in need of some evidence to back it up (screen shot, maybe?)
I’m not calling you a liar, just in the face of current evidence, it looks more likely that you’ve mucked up than that Dungone isn’t real.
Unless there is something I am missing in your argument?
Gingko: Was it the Melungeons who got royally fucked going into the Civil War, or coming out of it, by being classified as black under Jim Crow or whatever black code applied before?
They were often called Lumbees: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumbee After awhile, many did not know what ethnicity they were, and settled for this compromise term (and many descended from Native Americans too). Some Lumbees were rounded up to forcibly serve in the CSA.
It has been suggested Meludgeons may even have been the fabled lost colony of Roanoke, although of course there is no way to know for sure. (Maybe the DNA will someday be traced to this, which I think is really exciting.) I took a tour up at the Outer Banks one year, and they mentioned this possibility.
Most Meludgeons “sat out” the Civil War; I don’t know if you know the history of WV, but they separated from Virginia over the issue of secession from the Union. It was the Cumberland Gap areas that specifically protested. That goes with what you were saying about “spirit of resistance”!
About 10 yrs ago, I was on a New River (NC-VA) genealogical listserv, and it split in acrimony over the black-ancestors thing. Some (whites) freaked out at the idea that they were descended from runaway slaves, while the rest of us had already heard that story and expected to discover that. The whole feud started when blacks joined the group and informed us that we were all related. I already figured as much, as I said, but some of the old-school southerners nearly had apoplexy over it and stomped off in a huff.
“And “trannies” are men in dresses/drag queens who dress badly and wear too much makeup and bubble-headed wigs, right? Um, how about you keep your offensive stereotypes to yourself? ”
I’ll take my drag queens and raise you a Honey Boo Boo. “Yes, we are rednecks”
Schala: I’ll take my drag queens and raise you a Honey Boo Boo. “Yes, we are rednecks”
Your point? You understand that’s why they are on TV, right?
So *all* rednecks are Honey Boo Boo, in your opinion?
Oh well, I guess I’ve been called worse.
I went on your blog some time ago.When you mentioned that you had interviews Noam Chomsky.I also like for this article on your blog when you and have another pissing match Dungone between you two,when you cold hem fake Marine.After that I used logick. I know that American narcissism is preventing you from seeing this ,but Easternrns are not es dam as you thing.
Yugoslavia was part of non aligned movement,and Tito split with Stalin.Whao is that leting “Soviets walk all over them”
“nazis walk all over them”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uCYuMs_Hzk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvEpKxMrrQw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3d2JjJ_Zm1U
Since you like Noam Chomsky: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjnC436II3A
Bue the way my family members were Yugoslav partisans, including women.And no not as nurses but combatants.
Large number of them were killed bue Ustaše (1) in Jasenovac (2).
1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usta%C5%A1e
2.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasenovac_concentration_camp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L37VZTixuE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0EAnotfv9A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue__fNrvLA8
Jared, lets backtrack:
I told Dungone that his IP was posted on my blog. It was. (posted by someone else, not by me.) I told him “you probably know where it is”–since it is on a post we discussed some time ago.
Also, I should add: this is a post that this particular IP address is obsessed with. This IP address has hit this post approx 80 times, more than any other single IP. Sometimes every day. And it is an OLD post, which is interesting. (it references internet frauds, and quotes Dungone without naming him). His name is nowhere on the post or in the comments.
Dungone did not reply to me further.
Then, Valkina bursts in and the IP says it is hers. Okay then.
I am asking:
1) How did “Valkina” find this post, since no one else seems to be able to?
After I said “you probably know where it is”–“Valkina” hit the post immediately (as I can see from my tracking info) without looking at a single other post on the blog. No searching was even necessary. Can you explain that?
You are welcome to try to find the post yourself. People have been feverishly searching for it all day, to no avail.
Yet, Valkina goes right to it. How?
2) Why would this blog-admin post this IP and claim it was Dungone’s, if its Valkina’s?
This information was gleaned from Dungone posting on his blog. Valkina did NOT post on his blog.
Background–(in case you didn’t know, you probably do, but–)
It is possible to easily ascertain the IP of someone posting on a blog, by matching up the time-stamp of the “out-clicks” (in ‘visitor path’ screen) with the time-stamp of any given post. Statcounter or Google Analytics is best for this; Sitemeter is not as effective, although its good for double-checking IPs and ISPs. (Statcounter also tells you how many times a certain IP address visits your blog and which posts they hit while there, which is how I know that particular post was hit 80+ times.)
Dungone has never posted on MY blog, that I know of.
After being informed this IP was definitely Dungone, it suddenly made sense why this person was ‘stalking’ the post 80+ times, since some other commenter on the post had already claimed that he was from another country. To be honest, I did not initially believe that Dungone would have the stones to be from another country AND claim to be a US Marine, so I really did not think it was him. But yes, it does make sense; I did quote him, after all.
Anyway, standing by this. If I get banned for this, oh well. But I think internet frauds do a great deal of damage and need to be eliminated. Not talking about simple anonymity, which is understandable, but **fraudulent claims** to be all kinds of things one is not, damages the discourse as well as the reputations of the people you are claiming to be. I am tired of Dungone claiming negative things about other Marines, just as he did today in the other thread. (Today he claims six Marines beat him up for not being Christian and he still has a scar from it. Uh huh.) He does far more harm than good. He is lying and he needs to knock it off. And leave me alone besides. If he stops the Semper Fi bullshit AND leaves me alone, I am willing to let it all go.
But if he does not, neither will I. Ban as necessary.
And hey, as I said, the real Marines are taking it lots more personally than I am.
Okaaay, seems reasonable. I’m still going to withhold judgment till I’ve seen Dungone have his say, but I follow your logic.
Thanks Jared. That means a lot to me.
I expected all you guys to beat me up out of sheer solidarity. 😛
Jared, BTW, here is the screen shot you requested: http://www.flickr.com/photos/21295231@N08/8513973555/
I am the one who added “Dungone???” as the label after my correspondent said it was him. The ISP has been confirmed by the other bloggers as Serbian Broadband.
You can see that the IP is the one Valkina claims is hers.
Valkina says: If I recall correctly I never even spoken to you. Not on this blog or any other blog
Right… but she has visited my blog 144 times? Yow. Excessive? Obsessive? That seems odd for one who has never argued or even spoken to me at all, now doesn’t it?
As you can see, after my post here informing Dungone the IP was there, she/he/it went directly to the page in question (around 1:37pm EST). Wondering how s/he instantly knew where it was?
The 9:44am visit was what I call the “daily visit” to the same post (Military fakes don’t help veterans), which as you see, I’ve gotten 144 total from him with, about 80 of those hitting this same post. (The reference to a veteran drinking coffee next to piles of corpses, unfazed, is something Dungone said right here on this blog.)
Is Valkina a fake veteran? Why is she so interested in what I say about fake veterans?
PS: You might also notice that the time-stamp of a couple of his comments criticizing me here, also correspond with his hits to my blog. (keep time-zone in mind, this blog is PST and I am EST)
“Right… but she has visited my blog 144 times? ”
So she’s a lurker? Also that’s an awful lot of doxxing you do. Oh and screenshots? Proof of jack and shit.
This is strangely reminiscent of the time someone didn’t believe that Typhonblue was a woman. I also recall the childhood fairy tale about the boy who cried wolf.
Tamen, true enough. And she showed me, didn’t she? I’d love to see the vlogs from … well, no I wouldn’t.
Interestingly, I think TB has always sounded very female HERE, though. I thought she was a man on a men’s blog (Feminist Critics), but when she was free to writer her own subject matter, she used a very different voice. I’d love to see the blog from… well, no I wouldn’t.
“The Fish” another lurker and first time poster? Also worth jack and shit. 😉
Daisy went off the deep end. I find her megalomania to be despicable. But unlike TyphoneBlue, I have no intention of revealing my real life identity to her. Respect must be earned, not demanded.
I don’t even know what the funniest part of all of this is. Perhaps its the way she thinks that me ignoring all of her ridiculous claims somehow serves to prove her right. But the absolute bigoted xenophobia and nasty personal attacks on military veterans I do not find humorous in the least.
@daisy:
“‘The Fish’ another lurker and first time poster? Also worth jack and shit. ;)”
http://www.genderratic.com/p/2559/prison-rape-statistics/#comment-29164
Although please don’t let facts stop you. 😉
Daisy – Lumbee – that’s the tribe I was thinking of. The Roanoke connection won’t be settled w/o DNA work, and even then it won’t be settled. It turns up some English DNA? – wow that’s real dispositive in the South.
That business of getting all inside out over having black relatives – I understand how people could do that, no excuse for no understanidng racist attitudes if you grow up in this country – but I had the good luck to have that sorted out for me when a retired Sergeant Major with my last nem came up and greeted me and him balck. I later learned that the plantation system started with load after shipload of Irish transportees and these people inter-married with Africans, to the extent people in that legal status could.
On this other business, please drop it. I could give a fuck less about someone’s true identity as long as they are making contributive comments. I couldn’t care less if they are sock puppets as long as it benefits the discussion. I am asking this quite insistently, in fact. Thank you.
Not a problem, Gingko. We aims to please.
This is a really good article you might like, titled
“A History Long Forgotten: Intersections of Race in Early America” (only in pdf form, unfortunately)
http://www.okhumanities.org/Websites/ohc/images/Magazines/summer_2012/history_long_forgotten.pdf This was widely circulated on the Meludgeon group I am on.
In short, Jim Crow and the One-Drop Rule meant that Meludgeons denied their black ancestry out of simple self-preservation; all “free” blacks could legally be caught and enslaved in colonial America, and we tend to forget that now. Blacks who escaped into the wilderness were technically fugitives from the law. Thus, black ancestry was categorically denied, and usually these hill-people called themselves various tribal names, Lumbee, Cherokee, Choctaw, Seminole and Chickasaw foremost among them. At least you wouldn’t be arrested for that. However, that was only until 1830… after the Trail of Tears (which effectively turned Native Americans in the Southeast into fugitives also), the census-takers suddenly heard these same people claiming to be Portuguese and Arabs and so on. They dutifully wrote it all down, and lots of genealogists actually believed that (I never did… Portuguese? Really?) … so imagine how shocked they were to find out the truth.
At least DNA doesn’t lie.
So am just supposed to drop it after her unprovoked attack and treats to reveal my identity.
OK if you say so.
I am starting to sense that I am not welcome here anyway.
See you later.
And for all I know she might be stalking me.Com to ting of it she probably is.
@Valkina, please remember that this woman isn’t affiliated with this website and it was incredibly bad judgement on her part to launch into these attacks here. But it’s not really about you, trust me, it’s a case of mistaken identity. She thinks you’re me and that’s why she is attacking you. The post where your IP apparently got listed on was a defamatory personal attack that she had written on Veteran’s Day here in the US where targeted my military service. She can’t decide if I’m a baby killer or an impostor. Right now she’s in the “impostor” mode.
dungeon I am aware of that,but that doesn’t change the fact that crazy woman has my IP address.And that she is willing to juze it,to harm me.
And no I am not blaming you.
I also want to know who told he.Fore all I know it could be someone even crazier than her.Or some on who know we in real live and has an agenda against me.
Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.
If you say so.
But I had similar thing happen to me in RL,not on internet.
The person ended up taking a gun and training to shut my family member in front of my elementary school.On the bright side they had wery shity aime .
Its talking to itself again. Dungone is white-knighting himself! I’m sure there is a word for that. (I am currently checking the DSM-V so I will have the proper term.)
Dungone/Valkina: And for all I know she might be stalking me.
Says the person who visited my blog 144 times in one month! ROFL, unbelievable.
Valkina, why are you so interested in what I think of fake veterans? Still no answer to that one?
Oh right, you are “leaving” now. What a shocker! In that case, I trust you will not be showing up on my blog anymore, okay? (Especially now, since we are currently deciding what to do about you.)
Gingko, am I the only one that has to shut up? Does your admonition apply to both of us or just me?
I am certainly willing to shut up, but I didn’t know it was a unilateral cease-fire.
Make that 145 times.
Damn, some people are so predictable, you can set your watch by them.
“Gingko, am I the only one that has to shut up? Does your admonition apply to both of us or just me?”
Everyone. I am letting it die down on its own, but I expect everyone to respect that request.
Ginkgo if you wore in my place would you bay down your head end stay silent.Would you let her bully you.Wod you let Honorable Judge DaisyDeadhead decade your fate.
Don’t you get it ,she wants to release my personal information.
She wants to destroy my life,because she got it in to her sick,twisted head that I am dungone.
Lmao, Highschool revisited.
Erm… dungone and/or Valkina if you feel threatened you should contact the FBI. They are the people who deal with threats over the internet including blackmail. (Yes that can include threatening release of information. Yes, the FBI does use inane tricks to expand their jurisdiction.) The FBI can help, the people running this blog cannot.
Also Valkina if you do contact the FBI I recommend getting Open Office and using it to spell check/grammar check any written communication you have with them. It shouldn’t matter when it comes to if they investigate or not, but it might anyway.
tl;dr: The people running this blog have no power the FBI does. If you feel threatened by Daisy contact the FBI.
thefish
Can foreign citizens also contact them.
Yup! No guarantee they will do anything, but if you are feeling threatened its worth a shot.
OK .Thank you.
They don’t seem to handle this type of thing.Plus I am not familiar with US laws,don’t want to close table for more people.Who ever this gave me an idea,that is perhaps better.
Thanks again thefish.
FOR THE RECORD
I’ve looked through our site’s comments dating all the way back to the beginning of Genderratic, and pulled a sampling of IP addresses from Valkina’s and Dungone’s comments at widely varying times throughout the blog’s history. I looked up the locations of those IP addresses.
Valkina’s comments and Dungone’s comments do not come from the same locations as each other. They do, however, come from the same locations for each of them. All of Valkina’s comments come from the same country, region, and city. All of Dungone’s comments come from the same country, region, and city. And they are very far away from each other, and fully consistent with where each of them have claimed they are from.
While it is certainly possible for a person to create false identities with this level of consistency, given the amount of effort and discipline required I think it is extremely unlikely that this is what is going on in this case. That is the kind of effort you put forth when attempting to defraud someone, not typically the kind of effort you put forth when making a parrot identity online for gender blogs.
Well, Xakudo, I have no record of Dungone ever visiting my blog… so how does he know what I wrote about him? I labeled all IPs that went to that post… but okay. (I still don’t understand Valkina’s obsession with fake veterans, to the point of visiting that post 80 times.)
The only hits I got on that post (before linking it here), were from her or other people who I had already labeled. Doesn’t quite ring true. (If he never even saw the post, how can he assure everyone how bad it is?) Something hinky about it, but give me time and I will figure it out. We are discussing this on the post, so if people want to express opinions, I am listening.
But in that case, onward:
I have talked to a lawyer acquaintance downtown (/Stanley Kowalski) who assures me that Dungone can make a case for his civil rights being violated while he is was in the Marines, when 6 other Marines beat him up for not going to church (he reported this incident in the Catholic thread). This is worthy of an investigation, and the USMC takes that stuff very seriously these days. If he is still receiving veterans benefits and/or claiming veteran status, he is able to file a complaint, even many years later. (Not sure of the cut-off point, if there is one, but we can certainly find out all of that.) He could even make some case law with this, I’m told. Parris Island is down on the coast, you know… and this would be regarded as a pretty serious accusation in these parts. I’d love to cover it on my show! Atheists rights are a hot issue around here.
If he wants to pursue this, he can call me at WOLI-FM between 5 and 6pm today (we will be on the air) and we can get this party started.
WOLI/WOLT radio
McAlister Square
225 S Pleasantburg Drive
Greenville, SC 29607
1-866-377-1033
Further, he can inform the FBI that I will be at WOLI during that time, if they would like to pick me up. I know the local field officer already… make sure to mention OCCUPY, because if I am arrested, I want the headline to read LOCAL OCCUPIER ARRESTED.
Call soon, because it takes about 90 min to drive up from Columbia:
FBI Columbia
151 Westpark Blvd
Columbia, SC 29210-3857
columbia.fbi.gov
(803) 551-4200
After the show, we will probably be at the Red Bowl:
http://www.redbowlgreenville.com/
27 S Pleasantburg Dr.
Greenville, SC 29607
(unless we are particularly low on money, in which case we will be next door at the Subway) So please be thorough and tell them where I am, because this would be great PR for our show. I will take my camera, and be sure to get the radio station logo in the background of the shots! Should I notify the Greenville News?
Try to time the bust for 5-6pm (the radio studio) and not our time at the restaurant, okay? Some people get very cranky when their dinner is interrupted.
Thanks.