Thursday, 31 March 2016

Why do Feminists hate Equality?
A reply to Why Drafting Women Wouldn’t Be “Equality” 30 Mar 2016 19:45:34 UTC

This is an example of why arguments are futile when dealing with dishonest agents. They aren’t discussing equality, they are discussing “equality”.

Suddenly the meaning of the word is subverted - the truth is, they want to be able to redefine it on the fly.

Is there any chance of them having a reasonable exchange of views if they wish to change the meaning of words? None. You are no longer speaking the same language.

I’m not exaggerating. I noticed that particular piece of perfidy was used throughout the original posting here.

“ There was a law that said women have to give birth. “


Name the law, then.

“ Abortion was against the law. “

And so it begins: a quick shuffle of the goalposts. Infanticide has often been illegal, yes. It’s always been a legal compromise between the interests of the parents and the child as to when one can kill the other.

But abortion has nothing to do with conscription. This is a deflection.

In fact, almost all of this is deflection. The OP will do almost anything to avoid the discussion of conscription.

Instead, they want to discuss every other topic under the sun in the hope of doing the good old Gish Gallop.


“ it practically was women’s responsibility to give birth “

I have to laugh at that one tho’ - yes, if women didn’t give birth, the society perished. Only a feminist could decide that a biological necessity was a conspiracy against them by those wicked Old White Men.

“ Therefore, if you’re truly interested in equality, then if you believe it is right to have women drafted for warfare alongside men, then you’d equally believe it’d be right for technology to be built to enable men to give birth also, if there were a childbirth draft. “

A technology that doesn’t exist, may never exist, and logically, wouldn’t require men to be pregnant either. How fucking desperate do you have to be to avoid discussing conscription that you say “it can only apply to us if pink unicorns carry us to and from battle”.


Pregnancy has actually been used as an out for women in countries with  female conscription, so your argument has already been a failure.

But the practical consequence of that is - you have absolutely no excuse not to be drafted if not pregnant. Many women can’t get pregnant ever, and long term contraceptives are readily available. The technological barrier to female combatants has disappeared.

You just don’t want to do it. You have decided that equality means HeForShe - men must die for the good of women. You have decided that just because some women can get pregnant, then all women must be exempt.

Well, so fucking what? Some men are disabled - they are then exempted from most duties - but there are still jobs they can do.

Feminists claim a pregnant woman can run a country - and having given birth, can keep doing so - but never have to get their hands dirty like men do with the business of killing?

It's always important to have a nice nap in the middle of running the fucking country.

I adore the fact that Feminists can be this bloody pampered
and still manage to spin it all into their narrative of being oppressed.

Can anyone tell me how she can be competent enough to organise a war, yet too incompetent to operate a drone?

Pick. One.

I do think it's hilarious that the Topless MP sketch from Tracey Ullman's show would turn out to be less extreme than the Feminist reality.

Further Reading:
Welcome to your new Commander, Marine!
In Marines' new fitness plan, pullups for women won't be mandatory because enemy soldiers will never be so unchivalrous as to fight as hard against a woman...

"“Since the PFT score is tied directly to promotion, there is already a sentiment that the scoring system is not fair,” the officer said."

So in other words, men will be actively discriminated against by female officers who will never have to work as hard as they do. Sounds like a Feminist wet-dream.

Fallout 4 Fashionistas

Had to capture that in a hurry - I'd never seen her say that before.

Cricket is a scary drug-addled nightmare, and is as sexy as fuck.

Seriously, you'd think the surgeons would be able to make ghouls prosthetic noses.

"Well, at least this place isn't full of apes, not like that last planet..."

She's been staring at that cup for ages. 

Mah Waifu. Making chems and admiring teh pr0n. 
 Mad Max meets Madonna!

If you are going to stand on rooves, it's best to do it wearing shoes with a good grip to them!

Wednesday, 30 March 2016

Feminists don't hate men? Part Two!
Are Feminists "Pillow Princesses"?
And what is the claim Feminists make about men?

"Women's Rights News" reveals what Feminists really think 1

Continued from:

Feminists don't hate men?

Have a look at these quotes- what do they tell you about how Feminists see the world?

Do they really believe in equality?

Is "man-hater" an unfair stereotype?
Heather Derringer: "If I had a daughter I'd tell her that men will mess you up!!!

...if you do decide to have kids and a husband be willing to give up everything you love for them.!

You'll be taking care of them till your old and grey!

...get some cats and come home and love alone time! It's so much more relaxing than men and babies!"
Andrea Dohm: "I would tell her to be cautious of the male sex because they can and will fuck you over if given the opportunity ... not let male opinions make her decisions 4 her as they mean nothing."

Sara Mai: "Your treasure is for your pleasure
...  if he can't give you a good head massage and foot rub then don't trust him with more intimate parts of yourself"

Ula Saltibus: This world is awful for women. I will not bring a daughter into the world.

Now you can say these are just isolated statements - but none of the Feminists here speak up against them. Hatred of men is perfectly normal in their circles.

Telling little girls to hate men isn't child abuse, in their eyes - it's just learning to use the Feminist Ideological Lens.

" be cautious of the male sex because they can and will fuck you over if given the opportunity"...

"men will mess you up!"

Uh huh. So every male is an amoral monster.

"if you do decide to have kids and a husband be willing to give up everything you love for them"

It's impossible to have a life and a family, and husbands are just another dependent - tell me again how Feminists don't hate the family?

"get some cats and come home and love alone time! It's so much more relaxing than men and babies!"

And they say the crazy cat lady is a Feminist Stereotype...

"not let male opinions make her decisions 4 her as they mean nothing."
And Feminists claim to be the sole equality movement... a movement where male opinions mean nothing.

"pillow princess":

A woman who enjoys sex, but prefers not to reciprocate as much as he gives. She feels both parties' pleasure should be reached by pleasuring her.

Jane is such a brat, even in bed; she is a pillow princess.

by ethereal4real May 08, 2010 (source)

"Your treasure is for your pleasure"
Wow, you must be a lousy lay. So you see sex as all about pleasuring you? Fuck that, Princess!
Why do Feminists think men exist to pleasure women?
Why are relationships of equality... inconceivable .. to their minds?

" if he can't give you a good head massage and foot rub then don't trust him with more intimate parts of yourself"
This is how Feminists think all relationships have to be.

Don't have sex with someone who doesn't exist to serve you - but don't give anything back to them, of course.
Feminists hate BDSM2 - but love abuse.

This world is awful for women. I will not bring a daughter into the world.
At last, something I agree with. No Feminist should have children, not sons, not daughters, no husband, no-one. It's win-win!

I'll leave the last word up to a feminist I saw on twitter:
Later on, she was complaining about the fact that
spewing bile to people based on their sex and skin colour
tends to create a rather angry response...

There's not a trace of self-awareness in there... just echoing SafeSpace.

1 webpage capture from 30 Mar 2016 04:31:01 UTC

2 Difference Between BDSM & Abuse

Kingsport Lighthouse and Art Gallery

Click on images to view full size.

The water processing plants - the sounds of the sea are lovely, and make me quite wistful.

Visitor Barracks - very basic, but they have free food and water.

I find looking down at the sea washing between my feet rather unnerving.

I have no idea how Ada gets up there. Perhaps she is part cat?

No photos allowed!

Ada looks in the window at the bedroom.

The main sleeping area.
I'm going to imagine they have some
combination of
air-conditioning and light-dimming glass.

Because - as lovely as that looks,
 it's not exactly going to be comfortable in a greenhouse during the summer!
The main sleeping area, jetpack view

Facebook announces: Feminists are a Protected Group. Non-Feminists to be banned.
Social Justice Warriors, hard at work redistributing capital.
When a Feminist called me a "white c*nt", and i reported her, you said that didn't violate your standards. When I replied to a feminist who accused me of being a rapist by calling her a "goblin", you locked my account.

" we define the term to mean direct and serious attacks on any protected category "

"...protected category..."

Feminists are a protected category. Non-Feminists? I've reported posts by Feminists calling for the death of all men, posts that referred to me and my friends as ravishers of children... and you did nothing, because you play favourites.

You are corrupt.
Oh, the irony!
.. and I have to wonder, when your company collapses, because it is run on the basis of ideology rather than business principles, where will you go?

Will your next employer really be thrilled to know that your love of Social Justice will destroy their business next?

As they may edit or delete their statement, I reprinted it here.
29 Mar 2016 16:45:38 UTC

Controversial, Harmful and Hateful Speech on Facebook

Recently there has been some attention given to Facebook’s content policy. The current concern, voiced by Women, Action and The Media, The Everyday Sexism Project, and the coalition they represent, has focused on content that targets women with images and content that threatens or incites gender-based violence or hate. 

Many different groups which have historically faced discrimination in society, including representatives from the Jewish, Muslim, and LGBT communities, have reached out to us in the past to help us understand the threatening nature of content, and we are grateful for the thoughtful and constructive feedback we have received. In light of this recent attention, we want to take this opportunity to explain our philosophy and policies regarding controversial or harmful content, including hate speech, and to explain some of the steps we are taking to reduce the proliferation of content that could create an unsafe environment for users.

Facebook’s mission has always been to make the world more open and connected. We seek to provide a platform where people can share and surface content, messages and ideas freely, while still respecting the rights of others. When people can engage in meaningful conversations and exchanges with their friends, family and communities online, amazingly positive things can happen.

To facilitate this goal, we also work hard to make our platform a safe and respectful place for sharing and connection.  This requires us to make difficult decisions and balance concerns about free expression and community respect.  We prohibit content deemed to be directly harmful, but allow content that is offensive or controversial. We define harmful content as anything organizing real world violence, theft, or property destruction, or that directly inflicts emotional distress on a specific private individual (e.g. bullying).  A list of prohibited categories of content can be found in our Community Standards at

In addition, our Statement of Rights and Responsibilities ( prohibits “hate speech.” While there is no universally accepted definition of hate speech, as a platform we define the term to mean direct and serious attacks on any protected category of people based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability or disease. We work hard to remove hate speech quickly, however there are instances of offensive content, including distasteful humor, that are not hate speech according to our definition. In these cases, we work to apply fair, thoughtful, and scalable policies. This approach allows us to continue defending the principles of freedom of self-expression on which Facebook is founded. We’ve also found that posting  insensitive or cruel content often results in many more people denouncing it than supporting it on Facebook. That being said, we realize that our defense of freedom of expression should never be interpreted as license to bully, harass, abuse or threaten violence. We are committed to working to ensure that this does not happen within the Facebook community. We believe that the steps outlined below will help us achieve this goal.

We’ve built industry leading technical and human systems to encourage people using Facebook to report violations of our terms and developed sophisticated tools to help our teams evaluate the reports we receive and make or escalate the difficult decisions about whether reported content is controversial, harmful or constitutes hate speech. As a result, we believe we are able to remove the vast majority of content that violates our standards, even as we scale those systems to cover our more than 1 billion users, and even as we seek to protect users from those who seek to circumvent our guidelines by reposting content that has been taken down time and time again.

In recent days, it has become clear that our systems to identify and remove hate speech have failed to work as effectively as we would like, particularly around issues of gender-based hate. In some cases, content is not being removed as quickly as we want.  In other cases, content that should be removed has not been or has been evaluated using outdated criteria. We have been working over the past several months to improve our systems to respond to reports of violations, but the guidelines used by these systems have failed to capture all the content that violates our standards. We need to do better – and we will.

As part of doing better, we will be taking the following steps, that we will begin rolling out immediately:

  • We will complete our review and update the guidelines that our User Operations team uses to evaluate reports of violations of our Community Standards around hate speech.  To ensure that these guidelines reflect best practices, we will solicit feedback from legal experts and others, including representatives of the women's coalition and other groups that have historically faced discrimination.
  • We will update the training for the teams that review and evaluate reports of hateful speech or harmful content on Facebook. To ensure that our training is robust, we will work with legal experts and others, including members of the women’s coalition to identify resources or highlight areas of particular concern for inclusion in the training. 
  • We will increase the accountability of the creators of content that does not qualify as actionable hate speech but is cruel or insensitive by insisting that the authors stand behind the content they create.  A few months ago we began testing a new requirement that the creator of any content containing cruel and insensitive humor include his or her authentic identity for the content to remain on Facebook.  As a result, if an individual decides to publicly share cruel and insensitive content, users can hold the author accountable and directly object to the content. We will continue to develop this policy based on the results so far, which indicate that it is helping create a better environment for Facebook users.
  • We will establish more formal and direct lines of communications with representatives of groups working in this area, including women's groups, to assure expedited treatment of content they believe violate our standards. We have invited representatives of the women Everyday Sexism to join the less formal communication channels Facebook has previously established with other groups.
  • We will encourage the Anti-Defamation League’s Anti-Cyberhate working group and other international working groups that we currently work with on these issues to include representatives of the women’s coalition to identify how to balance considerations of free expression, to undertake research on the effect of online hate speech on the online experiences of members of groups that have historically faced discrimination in society, and to evaluate progress on our collective objectives.

These are complicated challenges and raise complex issues. Our recent experience reminds us that we can’t answer them alone. Facebook is strongest when we are engaging with the Facebook community over how best to advance our mission.  As we’ve grown to become a global service with more than one billion people, we’re constantly re-evaluating our processes and policies.  We’ll also continue to expand our outreach to responsible groups and experts who can help and support us in our efforts to give people the power to share and make the world more open and connected.

- Marne Levine, VP of Global Public Policy

Tuesday, 29 March 2016

Feminists don't hate men?

Feminists use the old Marxist paradigm of Class Warfare - the men are the Boss/Oppressor Class, women the Workers/Oppressed.

In the Marxist Utopia, the Workers eliminate the Bosses. Marxists world-wide have taken up the rifle and the bomb. Feminists... prefer to talk other men into doing the violence for them.


The Future is Female?

Imagine if that shirt said "Aryan" instead - it would be denounced as neo-nazi paraphenalia. The desire for genocide has been in Feminism since the earliest days, expressed in books like "The Female Man" and "The First Sex".

It's still being sold.

In fact, it's more popular with mainstream Feminists than it even was with the 'radicals'.

Mainstream Feminism is now more radical than the lesbian separatists.

Man-hating is just... normal.
Annie Clark (a.k.a. St. Vincent) wearing a “Future Is Female” shirt in 2015. Credit MHD/PacificCoastNews

Feminists have no problem hating men commercially,
they just want to make sure the 'right' people profit from it

"The Future is Female",
 by Ashley Thompson
Feminist lie about their hate. They will move the goalposts about what constitutes a Feminist when it suits them, using the "No True Scotsman" tactic".

Yet the moment they let their guard down, hate is what defines them.

They are building the ovens, brick by brick.
It's not too late.
There's time to fight back.