Sunday Church for Human Animals: Those Poor, Poor American Feminists

You can consider this somewhat of a follow up to my post the other day, Women: The State is Not Your Daddy or Husband and Your Sons Know It. Take a peek, to see how women “having a voice” (euphemism for government intervention in everyone’s lives) dramatically increases government taxation and spending.

Now, I don’t recall seeing a study or data on this, but it seems plausible to speculate further: that the real reason many women stayed in the workforce post WWII (now at about 75%) is not because of the “empowerment” and “equality” narrative, but as a direct consequence of rapidly expanding government on all levels and the consequent taxation to pay for it. In other words, massively higher taxation gave families a choice: cut back the lifestyle, or mom goes to work to help pay for it.

…But the real purpose of this post isn’t to slam women who wish to work, compete with men in the workplace, and be compensated competitively with anyone else with similar performance and achievement. This was all bound to happen anyway, because women are as valuable in a work or job capacity they’re suited to as anyone else. It’s analogous to the underlying economic reasons slavery was due to end anyway: slaves can’t compete with skilled workers in complex roles in an increasingly industrial, non-agrarian economy.

Towards the end of that post, I mentioned a thread going on at Robb Wolf’s private, personal Facebook timeline on a video post he tagged public. It was this video on “Why Men Should Always Carry Chocolate!

It Brought Out The Shiite Feminists.

No, I’m not talking about the sort of feminist that demands equal treatment under the law, or the sort who limits her associations with other people to those who believe women are as naturally free to pursue their own lives and passions as anyone, unencumbered by what sorts of genitals they have.

I’m talking about Shiite Feminists. The kind who presume to be entitled to whatever thing they happen to feel entitled to at any given moment, under any given pretense or irrational thought that involves some sort of difference between men and women. Do or say something they take offense to? You owe them something. Hold ideas that run counter to their catechism? You owe them something. Pursued your own passions by your own means and made something more of it than they did by pursuing theirs (e.g., your STEM Bachelors degree vs. her “Womyn’s Studies” Triple PhD)? You owe them something.

Confront them with the reality that no matter how frustrating, they really can’t have their cake and eat it too? You owe them cake.

Don’t take them seriously? You’re a misogynist.

Show admiration for the sort of natural woman who uses her sexuality and the natural flirtatious banter between men and women to her social advantage—such has been going on for eons? You’re a patriarchal misogynist; and any women who do likewise are the equivalent of an Aunt Jemima—traitors to The Cause.

It began thusly in the thread that’s now 175 comments. Here’s a few, including some replies, as well as a few from sane, REAL women.

Neva Strom First woman with the guts to post here: Robb, are you trying to lose all your female followers?

Diana Bacon A man tricking women so he can look up their skirts. Yeah, that’s not predatory at all.

Robyn Brookstone I am a feminist and I thought it was funny! It was totally mild. no denying women are sexy and men love to look at them.

Tori Gray Yeah, that’s creepy. And about as funny as the “upskirt” freaks out there.

Amy Valleau Feminism is about equality. Not better, not worse, just equality. There is a small subset of feminists that are about as true to that as fundamentalism is to true Christianity. It was a cute video. Does it objectify? Yes. But it does it for both men and women. The man in it is as much a prop as the women.

Catherine Isyourhero No. Not funny. Up the skirt shots aren’t funny, especially when it is suggested that the women aren’t aware of what’s going on (the actresses, yes, but the character’s they are playing, no). This is actually quite revolting.

Elissa Casale “Richard”….aka Dick……go back to bed if the objectifying of women tires you so much-

Richard Nikoley “aka Dick” Thanks for objectifying me, Elissa. I quite enjoy it.

Crimson Haggerty Looks like I’ll be one of your last 6 female listeners, Robb.

Robyn Brookstone Men live for women and go to great lengths to win our affection. It is best to understand this as a woman and be ok with the natural order of things. Many women are so repressed they have never even had an orgasm! I am for women enjoying their sexuality in a way that celebrates and embraces it. I will add that we do not need six inch heels in order to do so either!

Lauren McCain Seriously, Robb Wolf, if you have an issue with people criticizing your posts maybe you shouldn’t make them public.

Robb Wolf Rory If the ability to connect the dots = Asshole, guilty as charged. Lauren OR perhaps I close this private page, purge the fucking whiners and leave it at that?

Richard Nikoley Jack, it’s not enough that everyone feels entitled to your time and money in the form of taxes and regulations. Now, they insist on your mind, thoughts and speech too so they never have to feel discomfort outside of their own puny cocoon. I wish them all an ice day.

Carly Caller Nature is nature. Did you know that otters rape baby seals until they drown and then continue to rape the carcass for days after? Let’s all do that! It’s ok, cos, you know. Nature is nature!

Jack Allen So the desire to see a “private” part of a woman’s body, when it becomes visible in public, is comparable to raping the young of another species to death. Can anyone here make a rational statement? please.

Alright, I think it’s time to understand what’s going on here. First, you have your plain misogynist Shiite Feminists (that’s not a typo). Then, you have their fan club followers who are just duped. They feign offense when what’s really going on is that the guy in that video was a bit dweeby, geeky, kitten like. It wasn’t Tom Brady! Watch, and see the difference.

Let’s review:

  1. BE HANDSOME
  2. BE ATTRACTIVE
  3. DON’T BE UNATTRACTIVE

Got it? A couple of months ago I showed that video to my mother-in-law. She and her husband celebrated their 60th wedding anniversary yesterday. They raised six children, including my wife. She watched it, laughed, and said: “that’s true.”

The best way to understand modern or Shiite Feminism, is by its bait and switch nature in order to keep its cadre of dupes in line. It’s not really about genuine historical oppression of women by men (as exists to this day in the Muslim world) as touted, along with the empowerment/equality narrative. Now, it’s mysogynist in nature; which is to say, a loathing of other women who enjoy their natural roles; who derive power as women without all the pouty entitlement bullshit; who enjoy natural sexual and suggestive flirtatious banter and flattery from men; and who know how to use it to their advantage.

In short, they hate women who can do what they can’t—and all without beating men to the ground to do it.

The modern American woman has it so tough these days, here in 2013. They say a picture is worth a thousand words.

Kabul
Kabul, Afghanistan, 41 years ago, 1972, Pre-Taliban

I wonder how many modern feminists simply don’t even have a clue?

Update Afterthought: I had intended to integrate this in my post to illustrate just how ridiculous things have become: Burt’s Bees Apologizes for Lotion That Invites Catcalls. Plum forgot. It was over a phrase on a product label.

Soak in the moisturizing seductiveness of shea butter and indulge in the scent of vanilla and rice milk. And let the catcalling commence.

It brought out the crazies, people who consider catcalls “violence against women.” My friend Karen DeCoster takes it adequately to task on LewRockwell.com, so I won’t steal her thunder.

I’ll just say this: I’ve never issued a catcall publicly in my life, though I’ve been around plenty of fratboy types who do. It simply never struck me as behavior I’d wish to engage in. Plus, I’ve always noticed that catcalls are always issued from amongst a group of guys, as though the guy is showing off for his friends, or they’re showing off for each other.

Me? When I was young and noticed a woman I’d like to meet, speak to, perhaps get to know, I would try to make and hold direct eye contact with nobody else but her and I knowing. That’s far more difficult, more sexy. And it can be very intimate from time to time.


Since Covid killed my Cabo San Lucas vacation-rental business in 2021, this is my day job. I can't do it without you. Memberships are $10 monthly, $20 quarterly, or $65 annually. Two premium coffees per month. Every membership helps finance this work I do, and if you like what I do, please chip in. No grandiose pitches.

17 Comments

  1. Steven on November 17, 2013 at 17:46
  2. Richard Nikoley on November 17, 2013 at 18:49

    Steven

    I’ll take a look. In the meantime, wanna know how Karen and I “hooked up?” It was like 2006 or thereabouts. I well knew about her and about some of the “catcalling” abuse and worse she’d taken from some in the lib community, particularly on a bog that no longer exists.

    This was the era of the market going up and up and she was a Bear, blogged about it. A lot. I was a day trader in derivatives–option credit spreads on the SPX at the time, traded via old fashioned floor traders in Chicago. Yep, I put my trades in via a website, but then had to get on chat with a guy in physical com with another guy on the floor. Heady times. I’m going to blog about this but in short, I got a big head.

    Karen also blogs about being financially responsible, austere to your means and such. John Venlet, a blogger for as long as we’ve all been did some post, Karen commented and I went off on her. She even did a post about it, every bit in my smack style. Unfortunately, I just searched my name on her blog and it’s not going back that far.

    I reflected, emailed her. And it became OK. Then, When I first began losing the weight and blogged about it, she was a total sweetheart and so supportive to me both by email and a few blog posts. Whotta woman. Ended up I had two women to follow through for: the wife and Karen, and it would have been more painful to disappoint Karen…Laf. I love her to pieces. She is a very rare female. Independent to her own “detriment” as if she wanted, she could be pampered by a man. But she chose not to be a mother, so she is behaving perfectly rational and you know what? She enjoys her life.

    A couple of years later, she was out here so we had dinner with a couple of other folks. Then, I saw her again at the first AHS.

    We do not always see eye to eye and sometimes don’t communicate for months but I never have a second thought about that because Karen de Coster is solid.

  3. Richard Nikoley on November 18, 2013 at 10:10

    Steven:

    I just went to check the vid, but it’s not the same Karen (nothing contra her, but I don’t do long vids with low production value, typically—with exceptions given to Molyneux from time to time….simply too much and my readers don’t do long vids, not even mine. Gotta be 5min or less).

    I was talking about Karen DeCoster.

  4. rob on November 18, 2013 at 05:03

    It is all lols for me because I’m at the age where I just don’t care. Not only do I not live for women, I’m not willing to jump through a single hoop for one.

    As humans age the roles get reversed to a certain extent.

    Anyone offended by the rather cute video should go to a gym, every single woman there is dressed in “let me introduce you to my ass” fashion, nothing but sheer tights and sport bras.

    So on the one hand you have women who dress extremely provocatively even though it is not necessary for exercise; on the other hand you have women who are outraged because someone made a cute video about upskirts.

    I’m going to start wearing a codpiece to the gym, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

  5. Richard Nikoley on November 18, 2013 at 15:59

    Well, for whatever reason, all the comments for this post are happening on the Facebook.

    https://www.facebook.com/rnikoley/posts/10151840173916137

  6. JamesW on November 18, 2013 at 16:00

    I think many people who become this aggressive are actually defensive. As you said, catcalls come from a guy in a group many times – he might just feel he has backup. So it’s also very possible that these persons who become very aggressive to try to hide various fears, and to project them on others. They are afraid , but can’t admit it – so they have to find somebody to blame.

  7. Steven on November 18, 2013 at 21:29

    Looks like my day job got in the way of great discussion.

    All I want… everyone to take responsibility for them selves.

  8. Bill Strahan on November 20, 2013 at 12:36

    Here it comes, flying AND sexism for the win:

    When I was building my plane in 2008, I seriously considered some nose art. I was going to get my gorgeous wife to pose for the artwork, and WWII-style it was gonna be her and the airplane’s name on the plane.

    Planes are always named after women, so “Miss Ogynist” seemed an ideal name. :)

    I canned the idea when I imagined my wife having to explain it over and over and over…

  9. CCM on November 20, 2013 at 13:05

    Love the sexual harassment video. Hilarious. I agree with Steven: everyone should take ownership of their own lives and stop blaming and ism-ing others. As a mom of 3 kids – 2 of whom are boys – I have never understood strident feminist rants. Especially it shocks me when my friends who are also mothers of boys go on diatribes about the evils of men, sexism and patriarchy. I’m thinking: if there are nasty men – which no doubt there are – aren’t their *mothers* partly to blame for how they mistreat women? Isn’t it their responsibility, and don’t they have the *power* as the “hand that rocks cradle rules the world” to ensure at least their own sons grow up to be respectful and kind human beings?

    OTOH, as a comment to your previous post about the growth of government spending upon women getting the right to vote, maybe that is because too many men make babies on women and walk away. Women can’t raise children all on their own – or at least not very well. Rather than allow these fatherless children starve, society steps in as the Big Brother to take care of them. All these good-looking womanizers, how many stick around to make sure there hasn’t been an accidental pregnancy? And follow up with 18 years of child-rearing?

  10. jonw on November 20, 2013 at 16:21

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/science/a-cold-war-fought-by-women.html

    Who are the real misogynists – men who appreciate attractive womanhood? or the women who want to shame them?

  11. Robyn Brookstone on November 24, 2013 at 11:45

    Richard, You really have no clue. Who the hell are you to speak about feminism as women experience it in America? Are you a woman? Do you have personal experience as a woman here in the states or anywhere for that matter? You have no idea the kind of systemic sexism that one may face as a woman so how dare you act as though you do. One of the reasons so many women are sexually repressed is due to sexism and the divide between what is socially acceptable for men verses women. As soon as a woman (myself) expresses her sexually, a man comes along and tries to own it, (you). How do you mean, you ask? By thinking that I use it to pander to the male ego. You think it is all about you and your maleness. It is really unbelievable in this day and age. Anyone can start a blog and try to garner readers by being angry and aggressive. I am not impressed to say the least. Try diversifying your reading material and doing the hard core soul searching that is required to bring about real change; and that starts with doing some mental weeding of the junk that floats around in your head.

  12. Richard Nikoley on November 24, 2013 at 11:47

    “Are you a woman?”

    Yawn. Not that fallacy again. You’re dismissed.

  13. Robyn Brookstone on November 24, 2013 at 12:19

    You are an emotional abuser Richard. Get into therapy.

  14. Robyn Brookstone on November 24, 2013 at 12:25

    You have no more right to tell a woman what her experience is any more than I would have to tell what men experience. Don’t try to apply a definition to something that does not fit just because it sounds good to your average eighth grade reader.

  15. Richard Nikoley on November 24, 2013 at 12:43

    “an emotional abuser”

    Look, let me be gregarious and help you out here, Robyn, because it is you who are the one completely operating from emotion. As such, you perceive any failure to validate your emotional feelings as “abuse.” Methinks thou art the one in need of a little therapy.

    Now I’ll explain why you’re just simply wrong. While the form of your “argument” covers a whole slew of logical fallacies (appeal to authority, groupthink, etc.) it’s most basically simple ad hominem. You’re simply attacking me and my gender standing, not my actual arguments. Not a single one.

    To help you understand how it is you’re doing this:

    1. Imagine that instead of a post arguing against _some_ forms of feminism (the radical sort, which I made clear), the post were to argue _for_ them. By your own logic, my arguments are invalid because of my gender, even if a female might happen to make the exact same arguments.

    2. You have automatically disqualified all males on Earth who have argued _for_ feminism of any sort, for any reason.

    3. You have failed to acknowledge the _automatic_ correctness of all the arguments of any women against any forms of feminism. By your logic, their gender standing automatically trumps and makes them correct. Or,

    4. You are minimally asserting that your gender-based feelings of emotion on the topic of feminism automatically trumps opposite feelings of emotion by any other women.

    In short, Robyn, your entire line of “thinking” is an utter mess You aren’t thinking, you’re emoting. May I suggest that in addition to therapy to help you rein in those emotions and to stop feeling abused anytime someone (or only males?) don’t automatically validate them based upon your special gender status, that you also search online for a course in logical reasoning and brush up?

  16. […] comment came in on my post from last week: Sunday Church for Human Animals: Those Poor, Poor American Feminists. Warning: This post contains written material that might cause heads to […]

  17. Richard Nikoley on November 24, 2013 at 13:32

    I’ve moved the discussion with Robyn to a new post.

    https://freetheanimal.com/2013/11/please-little-brookstone.html

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.