Feminazis and Pigs – –


Feminists seem to think that males are no damn good, only suitable for siring children. Preferably female children. To be disposed of as soon as medically possible. (Very soon now). Then they should be castrated or shot or some such. If the unfortunate child is male, heaven help him. These gals just don’t like men. I don’t know whether or not most have even had trouble with men. Maybe they had bad relations with their fathers. Maybe not. Maybe they have been discriminated against by stupid men. Maybe not. Maybe they had bad experiences with men as young women. Maybe not. Isn’t it kind of stupid to hate half the human race? Wouldn’t it be better to work on figuring out why the hate is there? Is this hate any better than the hate of low whites for blacks? Is this any better than the hate of Moslems for the rest of the world? Ladies – hate is hate. It doesn’t matter how you justify it.

Lesbianism is a political statement for many feminazis. Now let’s not get into that business about born gay vs. choice. Both are true statements. Some are born that way. Check good current science. Some make the choice. Check the same science.

Male Chauvinist Pigs – A good description, actually. These guys are not gay, they just think that women are no damn good. Oh, they like sex with women – at least until their own orgasm. But they have no use for females other than as a sperm receptacle. And may even refer to women in this fashion. All they think that women are good for is keeping house, receiving sperm, and bearing children. Preferably male children. If the unfortunate child is female, heaven help her. Once the female has borne the children, she may or may not be kept around while the aforementioned MCP uses other women as sperm receptacles. These guys just don’t like women. Maybe they had lousy mothers. Maybe not. Maybe they had bad experiences with girls. Maybe not. Kind of stupid to hate half the human race, isn’t it? Why do these guys need to marry maids? Are they that desperate? Gents – you would be much happier and fuller people if you would work on getting rid of the hate and having better relationships.

Now, maybe I’m not very smart, but I don’t see a lot of difference between feminists and MCPs. Should we talk about Female Chauvinist Pigs? Should we use masculinists? Where is the difference here? Both groups hate the opposite sex. It is irrational in both cases.

Let us be logical here, people. Some of this may come from the horribly awkward business of going through adolescence. Boys are terribly awkward and extremely tender emotionally. They generally cover up fear and uncertainty with extremely boorish behavior. They can hurt adolescent girls horribly. And so many adolescent girls don’t intend harm and don’t realize the power they have over the poor, dumb boys whose brains have suddenly moved into their crotches. Fortunately, most boys come through ok.

Contrariwise – adolescent females are also emotionally fragile. They are changing and growing even more than the boys. New and unfamiliar hormones are driving them more that ever before. It is difficult to cope. The body aches and changes shape almost daily. The crude and boorish and sometimes cruel behavior of the boys doesn’t help. Fortunately, most girls survive ok.

The question is: What are we to do with those who are driven by hate? Now it is unfashionable to allow male pigs to put females down. While they can do it in private conversation without much fear of reprisal, acting like a male pig on the job will eventually get you crucified. None of the legal stuff helps the woman unfortunate or dumb enough to get into a relationship with one of these bastards, though. What to do about the female pigs? It is almost impossible to nail one for bad conduct on the job unless she is so egregious that you can get umpteen witnesses against her. You generally don’t have the private relationship problems with these gals because they won’t date men anyway. There doesn’t seem to be much of a level playing field here. Yet I maintain that the one is the same as the other.

I have probably enraged some feminazis by this writing. Feminazi is disrespectful. OK, so how is male pig respectful? Quid pro quo, ladies, quid pro quo.

Think on that a while.


3 Responses to “Feminazis and Pigs – –”

  1. swandiver Says:

    As both a lesbian and a feminist I can say that your understanding of both is rather limited causing you to come to some pretty off-base conclusions. The first is that feminists hate men. Identifying generations of systemic oppression based on sex is not hate but rather an attempt at leveling the playing field. I guess it could be seen as hateful if you’re part of the group losing the unfair advantage. As far as my lesbianism goes, I think it’s the pinnacle of arrogance that women loving each other can’t be just that, that yet again, men must be the instigatior or even be involved in some small way.

  2. mtriggs Says:

    Herself growls: Didn’t really read the entire post, did you, girl? This man is one of the most “level playing field” people you will ever meet. Watch your agendizing, and save it for your own blog. If you have a point related to this blog, make it: logically and clearly.

  3. risa b Says:

    It sometimes happens that a reader will wander into someone’s mind, halfway through its current rant, and will take things at almost face value. The issue at hand is a big issue; everyone has enough nerve endings rooted in it for communications disasters of all kinds, and when I run into this kind of a discussion I slow down — wayyyy down — to try to see what’s been said, and if its parts follow upon one another. Then I look at the response to see if it’s germane.

    “These gals just don’t like men.” It’s kind of fair to expect some to bristle at this, because the rant doesn’t specify who “these gals” are and what they have said or done, which brings it close to an ad hominem attack. This is a risky way to conduct an exordium and if I did not know (and love) this author personally, as I have for over fifty years, I might have clicked away within the first couple of sentences. “Nothing to see here; move along.”

    But the author then goes on to describe “male chauvinist pigs” in much the same terms. The parallelism here is his “level playing field;” he wants to show that there can be no meaningful trial of fact where there is a predetermined verdict — in either direction.

    Swandiver’s response shows some of the risk the rant takes of putting off the first addressed reader — the feminist — before the parallel point to to the MCP reader develops. She reads the entire rant as addressed to lesbian feminists, rather to to everyone, and against — as I read it, anyway — hatred in all its forms.

    Right response, wrong critic. This one is a little deeper than most, and is working out his salvation with a diligence that has to be known first hand, as Herself does, to be believed.

    “Identifying generations of systemic oppression based on sex is not hate but rather an attempt at leveling the playing field” is well put, and I happen, as a feminist, to agree. I’m not sure where this is in opposition to what the Curmudgeon is positing — which is something along the lines of “can’t we all get along?” — but it is true that if I’m thirty feet from your desk, and someone else is three from you desk, and you tell us both to turn in our application immediately and the first one turned in is hired — that’s a rigged game and men, largely, have rigged that game — so let’s work on that — together — or why try to live at all?

    As for “…that women loving each other can’t be just that,” I don’t read him as having said that, I read him as having said science says some are born so and some choose, which it does (I’m a lesbian by choice myself, for example — it does happen). I don’t think he adds much to his argument with that — it seems a gratuitously critical remark, because the parallel is hard to locate in his description of the exaggerated heterosexism of “masculinists.” But that parallel is there in his thought.

    Umm … do people still actually say that? “Male chauvinist pig?” Or is the Curmudgeon just showing his (and my) age?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: