I just saw this now and I’ll be honest, I’m not a big fan of Thunderf00t’s method of arguing, it’s a bit different than what I would have done, but he’s right in standing up against someone who is completely ridiculous. I think she is as shallowly academic as they come.
This may only be a semantic disagreement, but I actually don’t like how feminism is bashed because of it’s dumbest proponent’s. I like feminism, the kind of feminism that helps women who are genuinely in need (not the kind that makes vast generalizations and bigoted assumptions). What she isn’t advocating is feminism. It’s dogma. It’s kind of like how socialists look at the United States and say it’s capitalism gone wrong. It’s not capitalism – it’s corporatism (that borderlines socialism).
Your thoughts?
Xanthippa says:
In my experience, people who self-describe as ‘feminists’ in our culture are very much like the woman in the video: shallow grievance mongers who blame ‘society’ in general and men in particular for their own inadequancies. They promote the dogmas of cultural marxist policies of group identity and group ‘rights’ over individual rights and are part of the politically correct oppressors.
People who want equality of all individuals under the law, regardless of their gender, race or creed (or any other ‘group identity’) are despised by today’s western ‘feminists’ because the very source of income for these ‘feminist studies’ is based on asserting ‘group identity’ over ‘individual liberties’.
Modern ‘western feminism’ is a fascist philosophy at its roots and its adherents are totalitarians firmly opposed against the empowerment of the individual. And these are entrenched in our universities, colleges and government institutions.
The feminists who are actually interested in helping women achieve their potential as individual human beings now-a-days can mostly be found in Muslim countries, where their feminists are fighting against the group identity imposed by Islam on all women. It is precisely because of their rejection of group identities that their ‘western sisters’, the feminists among our ‘cultural elites’ and ‘western intellectuals’ are silent about their plight and refuse to help them.
Don’t kid yourself: feminism isn’t about helping women.
It preys on their psychological vulnerabilities and destroys their ability to be happy and participate in a loving, healthy family. Feminism makes women incompatible with men and then feeds on the resulting disappointment and rage.
Feminism is institutionalized penis envy.
It is instinctive for a woman to challenge and test her mate, first by goading him to fight other men, and later by attempting to undermine his dominance. The man who passes these tests will earn her love and respect; the one who fails will get nothing but loathing and contempt.
Normally, this testing eventually comes to an end as the woman matures and the man has proved his ability to remain in calm control. But modern schooling and media see to it that this cannot happen by creating a society of adult children. The females never grow out of the testing stage, and the males never achieve the maturity to pass the tests.
Feminism gives girls, and boys, an arsenal of high-sounding psychobabble with which to rationalize and justify remaining in their state of arrested development, and propagates this pathological state of affairs by demonizing its natural resolution — the male-dominated family. And the loathing and contempt which women feel for men in modern Western society is the predictable — intended! — result.
Furthermore, feminism is the handmaiden of Marxism.
It is not in the interest of the totalitarian corporocratic state for there to be strong families who look to the father for guidance and protection. This tyrannical corporation-state amalgam has arrogated these roles unto itself. Therefore, the father must be undermined and rendered impotent, causing the mother to abandon the family and turn to the totalitarian system in a Faustian bargain for security. And that is the task for which feminism was created.
The totalitarian corporocratic state — by which I mean the incestuously intertwined nest of snakes born of the unnatural union of big government and big business, which oppresses the people by violating their inalienable individual rights, and exploits them by privatizing the profits and socializing the losses of the entire economy — cannot take root in a flourishing Western society based on classical liberal principles and composed of responsible, self-reliant individuals who belong to strong traditional families embedded in healthy thriving communities.
This is why the Marxist revolutions which swept much of the globe a century ago got no traction in the West. In the intervening decades, the undermining of the moral, philosophical, social and economic foundations of Western society has had one overarching goal, and that is to bring the West to its knees in capitulation to the global totalitarian corporocratic state.
Feminism, from its inception, was — and remains — the thin edge of the wedge which is driving us to that point.
Don’t trust these so-called “good Islamic feminists.”
They are exact analogues of the earliest suffragettes — they do a little good initially, but only long enough to ward off the instinctive distrust of good women and open the door to a much more sinister and corrosive agenda.
They are ideological shock troops, and their disconnection from their shrill, man-hating Western sisters is nothing but a temporary expedient.
The long-term goal, everywhere in the world, is to psychologically and sociologically castrate all men and render them legally and economically impotent.
The method is to seduce the women to get them to betray their men — and then to betray the women, leaving all of civil society in ruins and everyone alone and friendless before the cold, impersonal might of the global totalitarian corporocratic state. Never forget that feminism would have gotten nowhere as a political movement, if not for the money provided by the men who own the world.
Mark Knopfler captured the idea perfectly in his hauntingly poetic song, “The Man’s Too Strong,” on the Dire Straits album, “Brothers In Arms:”
You always were a Judas
But I loved you anyway
You may have got your silver
But I swear upon my life
Your sister gave me diamonds
And I gave them to your wife
Oh father, please help me
For I have done wrong
The man’s too big
The man’s too strong
I’ve found some very thought-full conversation here. Please forgive me in advance if I plagiarize your ideas, all, when I answer the unhappy and discontented brainwashed masses….. I’ll do my best to remember the sources
The unfortunate logical consequence of practicing Marxist Feminism is that all the “diagnoses” for their unhappiness made become self-fulfilling prophecies. These women end up bitter, angry, and alone later in life, without having invested in the lifelong “give-and-take” process of learning to have a wholesome, lasting, love relationship with a man. I see so many of these women who have wasted their youth and biology on ideology. They then stridently blame the wrong source of their discontent on outside sources, rather than squarely facing the truth that they are merely self-indulgent, self-aggrandizing, self-centred scrags that no one except fellow suffragettes wants to spend time with.
Yes, you’ve hit it square on the head. This is corroborated by a very illuminating study conducted by Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers, published in 2009 by the U.S. National Bureau of Economic Research, entitled The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness. The study shows that 1) women were generally happier than men in 1975, 2) the happiness of both men and women has declined dramatically since then, and 3) women’s happiness has declined even more sharply than men’s, so women are now much less happy than men – “in spite of” the fact that they now have more career options than ever before.
Of course, only a feminist could find anything paradoxical about these results. Normal people understand that this is an inevitable outcome of the destruction of the family. And cultural Marxists see it as proof that their methods are working as planned.
Meanwhile, the single, childless career women, studiously ingoring the unsightly chips on their shoulders, are left wondering forlornly…
“Why do none of these beastly, sex-crazed men want to have sex with me?”
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 
March 15, 2013 at 20:11
I just saw this now and I’ll be honest, I’m not a big fan of Thunderf00t’s method of arguing, it’s a bit different than what I would have done, but he’s right in standing up against someone who is completely ridiculous. I think she is as shallowly academic as they come.
This may only be a semantic disagreement, but I actually don’t like how feminism is bashed because of it’s dumbest proponent’s. I like feminism, the kind of feminism that helps women who are genuinely in need (not the kind that makes vast generalizations and bigoted assumptions). What she isn’t advocating is feminism. It’s dogma. It’s kind of like how socialists look at the United States and say it’s capitalism gone wrong. It’s not capitalism – it’s corporatism (that borderlines socialism).
Your thoughts?
Xanthippa says:
In my experience, people who self-describe as ‘feminists’ in our culture are very much like the woman in the video: shallow grievance mongers who blame ‘society’ in general and men in particular for their own inadequancies. They promote the dogmas of cultural marxist policies of group identity and group ‘rights’ over individual rights and are part of the politically correct oppressors.
People who want equality of all individuals under the law, regardless of their gender, race or creed (or any other ‘group identity’) are despised by today’s western ‘feminists’ because the very source of income for these ‘feminist studies’ is based on asserting ‘group identity’ over ‘individual liberties’.
Modern ‘western feminism’ is a fascist philosophy at its roots and its adherents are totalitarians firmly opposed against the empowerment of the individual. And these are entrenched in our universities, colleges and government institutions.
The feminists who are actually interested in helping women achieve their potential as individual human beings now-a-days can mostly be found in Muslim countries, where their feminists are fighting against the group identity imposed by Islam on all women. It is precisely because of their rejection of group identities that their ‘western sisters’, the feminists among our ‘cultural elites’ and ‘western intellectuals’ are silent about their plight and refuse to help them.
March 16, 2013 at 17:11
Juggernaut:
Don’t kid yourself: feminism isn’t about helping women.
It preys on their psychological vulnerabilities and destroys their ability to be happy and participate in a loving, healthy family. Feminism makes women incompatible with men and then feeds on the resulting disappointment and rage.
Feminism is institutionalized penis envy.
It is instinctive for a woman to challenge and test her mate, first by goading him to fight other men, and later by attempting to undermine his dominance. The man who passes these tests will earn her love and respect; the one who fails will get nothing but loathing and contempt.
Normally, this testing eventually comes to an end as the woman matures and the man has proved his ability to remain in calm control. But modern schooling and media see to it that this cannot happen by creating a society of adult children. The females never grow out of the testing stage, and the males never achieve the maturity to pass the tests.
Feminism gives girls, and boys, an arsenal of high-sounding psychobabble with which to rationalize and justify remaining in their state of arrested development, and propagates this pathological state of affairs by demonizing its natural resolution — the male-dominated family. And the loathing and contempt which women feel for men in modern Western society is the predictable — intended! — result.
Furthermore, feminism is the handmaiden of Marxism.
It is not in the interest of the totalitarian corporocratic state for there to be strong families who look to the father for guidance and protection. This tyrannical corporation-state amalgam has arrogated these roles unto itself. Therefore, the father must be undermined and rendered impotent, causing the mother to abandon the family and turn to the totalitarian system in a Faustian bargain for security. And that is the task for which feminism was created.
The totalitarian corporocratic state — by which I mean the incestuously intertwined nest of snakes born of the unnatural union of big government and big business, which oppresses the people by violating their inalienable individual rights, and exploits them by privatizing the profits and socializing the losses of the entire economy — cannot take root in a flourishing Western society based on classical liberal principles and composed of responsible, self-reliant individuals who belong to strong traditional families embedded in healthy thriving communities.
This is why the Marxist revolutions which swept much of the globe a century ago got no traction in the West. In the intervening decades, the undermining of the moral, philosophical, social and economic foundations of Western society has had one overarching goal, and that is to bring the West to its knees in capitulation to the global totalitarian corporocratic state.
Feminism, from its inception, was — and remains — the thin edge of the wedge which is driving us to that point.
Feminism is not about helping women.
Never was, never will be.
March 16, 2013 at 18:35
Xanthippa:
Don’t trust these so-called “good Islamic feminists.”
They are exact analogues of the earliest suffragettes — they do a little good initially, but only long enough to ward off the instinctive distrust of good women and open the door to a much more sinister and corrosive agenda.
They are ideological shock troops, and their disconnection from their shrill, man-hating Western sisters is nothing but a temporary expedient.
The long-term goal, everywhere in the world, is to psychologically and sociologically castrate all men and render them legally and economically impotent.
The method is to seduce the women to get them to betray their men — and then to betray the women, leaving all of civil society in ruins and everyone alone and friendless before the cold, impersonal might of the global totalitarian corporocratic state. Never forget that feminism would have gotten nowhere as a political movement, if not for the money provided by the men who own the world.
Mark Knopfler captured the idea perfectly in his hauntingly poetic song, “The Man’s Too Strong,” on the Dire Straits album, “Brothers In Arms:”
You always were a Judas
But I loved you anyway
You may have got your silver
But I swear upon my life
Your sister gave me diamonds
And I gave them to your wife
Oh father, please help me
For I have done wrong
The man’s too big
The man’s too strong
March 25, 2013 at 06:46
I’ve found some very thought-full conversation here. Please forgive me in advance if I plagiarize your ideas, all, when I answer the unhappy and discontented brainwashed masses….. I’ll do my best to remember the sources
March 25, 2013 at 07:13
The unfortunate logical consequence of practicing Marxist Feminism is that all the “diagnoses” for their unhappiness made become self-fulfilling prophecies. These women end up bitter, angry, and alone later in life, without having invested in the lifelong “give-and-take” process of learning to have a wholesome, lasting, love relationship with a man. I see so many of these women who have wasted their youth and biology on ideology. They then stridently blame the wrong source of their discontent on outside sources, rather than squarely facing the truth that they are merely self-indulgent, self-aggrandizing, self-centred scrags that no one except fellow suffragettes wants to spend time with.
March 25, 2013 at 17:42
Grannie:
Yes, you’ve hit it square on the head. This is corroborated by a very illuminating study conducted by Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers, published in 2009 by the U.S. National Bureau of Economic Research, entitled The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness. The study shows that 1) women were generally happier than men in 1975, 2) the happiness of both men and women has declined dramatically since then, and 3) women’s happiness has declined even more sharply than men’s, so women are now much less happy than men – “in spite of” the fact that they now have more career options than ever before.
Of course, only a feminist could find anything paradoxical about these results. Normal people understand that this is an inevitable outcome of the destruction of the family. And cultural Marxists see it as proof that their methods are working as planned.
Meanwhile, the single, childless career women, studiously ingoring the unsightly chips on their shoulders, are left wondering forlornly…
“Why do none of these beastly, sex-crazed men want to have sex with me?”