NationStates Jolt Archive

Found in a column on feminism by the sort of famous columnist Åsa Mattsson (http://www.aftonbladet.se/ettor/webb/789_normal.html):

"I have a couple of annoying pop-ups that appear on my screen all the time, small grey squares with only a word and a question: "Big tits?", "Fetish?", "Teensex", "Poker", "Airlinetickets", "Penis enlargement?", "Zoloft?", "Viagra?".
I usually click them away and scream angrily when I'm in a hurry, but I'm beginning to think that they are really entertaining, these little pop-ups. Educational, even. Pop-ups say something about society and the times, even if you would prefer that things were different. I see before me a very small man with a very small penis who dreams about teenage girls because he could never get it up with an adult woman. The little man munches on antidepressants and Viagra and hopes to win at on-line poker so that he can travel abroad where women are nicer.
Sometimes I wonder if these pop-ups, among other things, aren't the result of subversive feminist activity, or is men's situation really that bad?"

I really don't know what to think of it, as I've never thought of it that way. Interesting.

Jag har några irriterande popups som dyker upp på skärmen hela tiden, det är små grå rutor med bara ett ord och en fråga: ”Big tits?”, ”Fetish?”, ”Teensex”, ”Poker”, ”Airlinetickets”, ”Penis enlargement?”, ”Zoloft?”, ”Viagra?”.
Jag brukar klicka bort dem och skrika argt när jag har bråttom, men nu börjar jag tycka att det är riktigt underhållande med de där popupsen. Till och med lärorikt. Popups säger något om samhället och tiden, även om man kanske helst skulle vilja att det vore annorlunda. Jag ser för mig en mycket liten man med mycket liten snopp som drömmer om tonårstjejer eftersom han aldrig skulle få upp den med en vuxen kvinna. Den lille mannen knaprar antidepressiva och viagra och hoppas vinna på nätpoker och då kunna resa utomlands, där kvinnorna är snällare.
Ibland undrar jag om inte de här popupsen, och många andra, är resultatet av subversiv feministisk verksamhet, eller står det så illa ställt till med männen?

Heh. Pretty funny, actually!

...so that he can travel abroad where women are nicer.

LMFAO :p

Hmm <Rubs chin>

You mean I shouldn't be swollowing pills I buy off the internet?

LMFAO :p

I thought that was funny too. On second thought, the meaning of the original is closer to "kinder" than to "nicer," but both work.

You mean I shouldn't be swollowing pills I buy off the internet?

Of course. We all know that shoving them up there is the fastest way to digest them.

swalowing pills or shoving them up your ass is stupid no matter what because pharmesudical companies and doctors are only trying to kill tyou because the world is over populated.

swalowing pills or shoving them up your ass is stupid no matter what because pharmesudical companies and doctors are only trying to kill tyou because the world is over populated.

I agree with one of your points.

Hehe, that's amusing.

It makes me wonder if Åsa Mattsson has problems removing adware ;)

It's tough having plenty of hair, no need for herbal viagra, no need to meet hot chicks/men, and to be adequately proportioned in all bodilly areas. I sort of feel like that I don't belong on the internet.

Found in a The little man munches on antidepressants and Viagra and hopes to win at on-line poker so that he can travel abroad where women are nicer.


That's very revealing about how the author views women.

Hmmm a feminist using the stupidity of pop-up advertising to throw little darts of hate to men.

How unusual.

That's very revealing about how the author views women.

Apparently the literary construction of sharing the sentiments of the supposed little man flew completely over your head. Literacy is a good trait to possess, you know.

Hmmm a feminist using the stupidity of pop-up advertising to throw little darts of hate to men.
How unusual.

Someone twisting her words to assemble a straw man instead of dealing with what she says directly because she is a feminist? How unusual.

I find it interesting that the same English words pop up on Swedish internet. Doesn't Swedish have its own words for these things? :confused:

Apparently the literary construction of sharing the sentiments of the supposed little man flew completely over your head. Literacy is a good trait to possess, you know.

Maybe it's more obvious in the original troglodyte. Because it can be read either way in english.

Maybe it's more obvious in the original troglodyte. Because it can be read either way in english.

Not if the context of her being a feminist and a woman herself is taken into account.

Heh .. now that is quite amusing.

Interesting point to be fair.

I find it interesting that the same English words pop up on Swedish internet. Doesn't Swedish have its own words for these things? :confused:
Sorry but internet traffic does not differentiate geographically usually

Not if the context of her being a feminist and a woman herself is taken into account.

So it is impossible for a woman and a feminist to make the objective value judgment that woman who are abroad are nicer? In other words, it is acknowledged that they are incapable of judicious thought? Like I said, that must be more obvious in the original troglodyte, because that certainly is not an assumption that inheres in english.

Sorry but internet traffic does not differentiate geographically usually

Perhaps not, but you'd think that if it were aimed at someone in Sweden, it would be in Swedish.

I find it interesting that the same English words pop up on Swedish internet. Doesn't Swedish have its own words for these things? :confused:

Yes, we do have our own word for it: poppupp. "Pop" = "popp" or "poppa" as the verb, and "up" = "upp" in Swedish. The fact that Swedish and English are both related Germanic languages eases these sorts of constructions from one language to the other, especially since certain words, more specifically the onomatopoeic ones, are so similar between the two. There is a more primitively Germanic sounding word around for "poppupp" and that is "extrafönster."

This writer just seems to have used the former and did not adopt the Swedish spelling, which is regrettable, but her choice to make.

Perhaps not, but you'd think that if it were aimed at someone in Sweden, it would be in Swedish.
Yeah (and now that fass answered it I see that I incorrectly originally addressed you) I was thinking you meant the language in the popup not the name for the popup in the news itself.

So it is impossible for a woman and a feminist to make the objective value judgment that woman who are abroad are nicer?

No, it isn't impossible in certain cases, but in this case it is.

In other words, it is acknowledged that they are incapable of judicious thought? Like I said, that must be more obvious in the original troglodyte, because that certainly is not an assumption that inheres in english.

Pointless semantic discussion, but since she does not change the subject of the phrase from the "little man" and all she is talking about is his sensitivities, one need be completely deficient in reading comprehension, or purposefully pedantic for some reason, to ignore the most apparent meaning in favour of this peripheral and linguistically unsound and deducted one.

to ignore the most apparent meaning in favour of this peripheral and linguistically unsound and deducted meaning.

In other words what is says in plain english!

It is a column and she is a columnist. It is not a novel. When she omits "he feels", or "he thinks" it is reasonable to assume she is reporting her own impressions, and not engaging poorly executed literary devices. As I said, conventions may be different where you are from, but not here. So stop bandying about accusations of who is, or who is not devoid of reading skills.

And if you think about it, it is in fact very revealing. Not least for the fact that her little man is fictional, and therefore any sympathy she shares with him must spring from her own impressions; her own imagination. Because, you see, the little man is fictional; he is a construct of her own thought process. Or, was that not clear to you?

Anyways as to the original post … while normally I would agree that a quantity of advertising might reflect on the wishes the problem is the ease of deployment of internet advertising and the almost costless way to keep it up I have a feeling might skew perceptions a bit

One Viagra (distribution) company essentially could flood the entire internet with advertising for years at a fraction of the cost of conventional advertising

As such the “volume” of popups on one topic is not really representative necessarily of sales quantity nor interest in the subject.

Found in a column on feminism by the sort of famous columnist Åsa Mattsson (http://www.aftonbladet.se/ettor/webb/789_normal.html):

"I have a couple of annoying pop-ups that appear on my screen all the time, small grey squares with only a word and a question: "Big tits?", "Fetish?", "Teensex", "Poker", "Airlinetickets", "Penis enlargement?", "Zoloft?", "Viagra?".
I usually click them away and scream angrily when I'm in a hurry, but I'm beginning to think that they are really entertaining, these little pop-ups. Educational, even. Pop-ups say something about society and the times, even if you would prefer that things were different. I see before me a very small man with a very small penis who dreams about teenage girls because he could never get it up with an adult woman. The little man munches on antidepressants and Viagra and hopes to win at on-line poker so that he can travel abroad where women are nicer.
Sometimes I wonder if these pop-ups, among other things, aren't the result of subversive feminist activity, or is men's situation really that bad?"

I really don't know what to think of it, as I've never thought of it that way. Interesting.

rofl

seriously, if you were to look at the Trash section of my hotmail account, you'd think I was a hideously perverted football fan with terrible credit who's interested in buying multiple houses.

Someone twisting her words to assemble a straw man instead of dealing with what she says directly because she is a feminist? How unusual.

eh. i get just as much spam for breast enlargement, hormone replacement, feminine viagra-like pills and pms relief; furthermore, i don't see how ads for online poker or airline tickets ought to be gender specific and if they are they probably are targetted to women before men.

there are some other things pointed out here that are typical to the feminist ideology. for example, she points out that men use viagra because they can't get it up for their wives....and these women would probably be taking pills, then, because their husbands do not turn them on. it's all the fault of men, right. nobody stops to think that maybe he can't get it up for the same reason that she can't get wet and that any difficulties in the sex life of balding old men and fat old women is probably resulting from the physical hideousness of both parties.

i agree with the sentiment against this woman; there is nothing to really counter in what she's said as she's done little more than offer a rather adolescent and anachronistic viewpoint of reality. i really hope that feminism moves more towards egalitarianism and away from the (obviously flawed) axiom that women are somehow superior to men.....

when it was about voting and working and stopping assholes from beating up their wives, i was all for it. when it becomes pointless and verbose it makes you look like children.

In other words what is says in plain english!

No, Swedish.

It is a column and she is a columnist. It is not a novel. When she omits "he feels", or "he thinks" it is reasonable to assume she is reporting her own impressions, and not engaging poorly executed literary devices. As I said, conventions may be different where you are from, but not here. So stop bandying about accusations of who is, or who is not devoid of reading skills.

Yeah, excuse her for expecting her readers to read at a third grade level. Yes, third graders here are expected to undestand literary devices and understand the portrayal of a character's inner monologue and reasoning. I would expect you to understand that too - my hope is that you're just being anal-retentive.

And if you think about it, it is in fact very revealing. Not least for the fact that her little man is fictional, and therefore any sympathy she shares with him must spring from her own impressions; her own imagination. Because, you see, the little man is fictional; he is a construct of her own thought process. Or, was that not clear to you?

Oh, yes, so any writer who writes about racists and their inner dialogues is a racist themselves... Do you honestly even read what you write as pedantically as you do in such a contrived fashion with the writing of this woman? Perhaps you should.

there are some other things pointed out here that are typical to the feminist ideology. for example, she points out that men use viagra because they can't get it up for their wives....and these women would probably be taking pills, then, because their husbands do not turn them on. it's all the fault of men, right. nobody stops to think that maybe he can't get it up for the same reason that she can't get wet and that any difficulties in the sex life of balding old men and fat old women is probably resulting from the physical hideousness of both parties.

What many people seem to miss about feminist analysis about men is that it is not always an attack. It is often just the same sort of analysis of women's situations applied to men - here being a small observation about a particular view media give us. She is using what she's seen in a medium to, in an ironic way, construct the person whom this is directed towards. The sarcastic critique of the medium is perhaps lost in translation? Or in some people's anti-feminist minds, that seem to have to assume that everything feminist is an attack on men, and could not possibly be shedding light on their situation as well.

Someone twisting her words to assemble a straw man instead of dealing with what she says directly because she is a feminist? How unusual.

Oh, and what is it she says directly that I'm being so unfair about?

"I have a couple of annoying pop-ups that appear on my screen all the time, small grey squares with only a word and a question: "Big tits?", "Fetish?", "Teensex", "Poker", "Airlinetickets", "Penis enlargement?", "Zoloft?", "Viagra?".
I usually click them away and scream angrily when I'm in a hurry, but I'm beginning to think that they are really entertaining, these little pop-ups. Educational, even. Pop-ups say something about society and the times, even if you would prefer that things were different.

Okay, hold it right there. What do pop-ups say about "society?" It's called advertising. If you think pop-up advertising is a reasonable way to make judgements about "society" I think that says a bit more about you than this nebulous society. Or is it so nebulous?

I see before me a very small man with a very small penis who dreams about teenage girls because he could never get it up with an adult woman. The little man munches on antidepressants and Viagra and hopes to win at on-line poker so that he can travel abroad where women are nicer.

Hah, guess its not nebulous at all. No, to her, only males munch on antidepressants or play at online poker. Only males want to travel anywhere. How objective. How revealing. I'm enthralled by the deep message this has for society. Good thing we have feminists to correctly point out how small men are, and how small their penises must be because there is advertising for Viagra.

I mean, I could point out that in fact statistics seem to indicate women munch on antidepressants a bit more than men. Or I could point out the common sense that this is an unfair stereotype dressed as insight about society. I could say hey, I don't think all women have diseased crotches just because there are commercials on TV which purport to solve that problem of "outbreaks." But what do I know. I must be a small man, with a small penis, because brainiac feminist here is making wonderfully productive deductions about "society."

Sometimes I wonder if these pop-ups, among other things, aren't the result of subversive feminist activity, or is men's situation really that bad?"

Or is this the part thats supposed to bowl me over? "Men's situation" has to be bad because there are pop-up advertisements. Perhaps its "subversive feminist activity?" Huh, interesting. Well, not really.

Just another feminist viewpoint criticizing men from a delightfully womynist perspective. Strawman? I couldn't have said it better myself.

Good thing we have feminists to correctly point out how small men are, and how small their penises must be because there is advertising for Viagra.

Not feminists. A feminist. One. You folks are all attributing this one opinion with more power than it actually holds. It's an opinion, a comment, not a fact, not a deep societal study, just a viewpoint. Much like people make in their hideous blogs every single day. And we don't generally think that those people are claiming to speak for a whole group.

Okay, hold it right there. What do pop-ups say about "society?" It's called advertising. If you think pop-up advertising is a reasonable way to make judgements about "society" I think that says a bit more about you than this nebulous society. Or is it so nebulous?
Hm... what's the point to an advertisement? It's to motivate a certain target group to go and spend money on something. Now there wouldn't be any advertisements if they didn't have some effect, so it makes you think that said target group might just exist and what an individual of said target group might look like...

Not feminists. A feminist. One. You folks are all attributing this one opinion with more power than it actually holds. It's an opinion, a comment, not a fact, not a deep societal study, just a viewpoint. Much like people make in their hideous blogs every single day. And we don't generally think that those people are claiming to speak for a whole group.

*claps*

Just another feminist viewpoint criticizing men from a delightfully womynist perspective. Strawman? I couldn't have said it better myself.

Yup, complete straw man because it entirely ignores the critique of the content and message sent by the medium, but volitionally, and happily, construes an attack on men where none exists, so that it can be dismissed with the same prejudice that prompted the entire fabrication of the imagined attack.

What many people seem to miss about feminist analysis about men is that it is not always an attack. It is often just the same sort of analysis of women's situations applied to men - here being a small observation about a particular view media give us. She is using what she's seen in a medium to, in an ironic way, construct the person whom this is directed towards. The sarcastic critique of the medium is perhaps lost in translation?

not at all. it's just a very low brow, childish critique that accomplishes nothing more than making it's author look low brow and childish.

however, i would be equally as foolish to declare all feminists low brow and childish; i've read some very interesting and thought provoking work from, say, emma goldman, for example.

what is unfortunate is that "commentaries" on the order of this seem to make up the majority of feminist writings.

not at all. it's just a very low brow, childish critique that accomplishes nothing more than making it's author look low brow and childish.

however, i would be equally as foolish to declare all feminists low brow and childish; i've read some very interesting and thought provoking work from, say, emma goldman, for example.

what is unfortunate is that "commentaries" on the order of this seem to make up the majority of feminist writings.

Again, the assumption that this is a critique of men when, in fact, it is a critique of the objectification of men to this image of the "little man."

what is unfortunate is that "commentaries" on the order of this seem to make up the majority of feminist writings.
The majority that you might have come accross.

Come on people...get some perspective.
In an article written with his wife, he stated that “…the wife is to subordinate herself to her husband.” He has also blamed the feminist movement for what he believes is the erosion of morality: “It is not coincidental that the feminist movement brought with it artificial contraception and abortion on demand, with recognition of homosexual liaisons soon to follow… No matter how often we condemn abortion, to the extent we adopt the feminist principle that the distinction between the sexes is of no consequence and should be disregarded in the organization of society and the Church, we are contributing to the culture of death.”

Here’s the title of Holmes’s article:
Leon Holmes & Susan Holmes, Editorial, Gender Neutral Language: Destroying An Essential Element of Our Faith, ARKANSAS CATHOLIC, Apr. 12, 1997, at 10.
The above is an editorial. Judge Leon Holmes' opinion. Would you go and say that he speaks for all men, all Christians, all Americans? Or even give a crap about his opinion other than as an opinion? And would you say that the such 'commentaries' make up the 'majority of men's or Christian's or American's' writing?

Well you could, but it'd be a silly thing to say.

Not feminists. A feminist. One.

Actuality of non-plural conceded.

Hm... what's the point to an advertisement? It's to motivate a certain target group to go and spend money on something. Now there wouldn't be any advertisements if they didn't have some effect, so it makes you think that said target group might just exist and what an individual of said target group might look like...

Yeah, but would it be fair to me to start describing what "women" are like based on pop-up advertising? I don't think so. Advertising is not a valid way to judge society, particularly in light of how we have no idea how successful these ads are. Plenty of spam continues despite not being successful whatsoever; this is called a poor marketing decision. But if I were to take it all at face value I might assume a poor marketing decision is in fact a valid and fair way to judge half the people in the world.

Yup, complete straw man because it entirely ignores the critique of the content and message sent by the medium, but volitionally, and happily, construes an attack on men where none exists, so that it can be dismissed with the same prejudice that prompted the entire fabrication of the imagined attack.

Right, no attack on men exists. If I made a similar article pointing out the imagined qualities of "women" based on advertising you people would be screaming "anti-feminists! chauvenist pig!" and worse.

And I didn't ignore the "message." I replied to it. Stop screaming "strawman" like that will magically validate your obvious support of this "critique." I mean come on, using pop-ups to describe "men?" Yeah whatever, maybe my saying women have an obsession with outbreaks of genital herpes is also a "critique."

Again, the assumption that this is a critique of men when, in fact, it is a critique of the objectification of men to this image of the "little man."
I wonder what the response would have been had you attributed the article to a man? I think people see 'feminist' and pre-judge.

not at all. it's just a very low brow, childish critique that accomplishes nothing more than making it's author look low brow and childish.

however, i would be equally as foolish to declare all feminists low brow and childish; i've read some very interesting and thought provoking work from, say, emma goldman, for example.

what is unfortunate is that "commentaries" on the order of this seem to make up the majority of feminist writings.

Fass has been using big words to explain what you all should have understood about the original post. It is not, repeat not, an attack on men. It is an attack on the view society, particularly the part interviewed by advertising companies, views men. The "little man" concept is ridiculous because it's supposed to be . The argument given by the "feminist" in the first post is not a feminist argument. It is an argument that advertising companies have a very unrealisitic pessimistic view of men. Get that through your skulls. If you disagree with that, argue against that, but don't argue against points that don't exist.

I wonder what the response would have been had you attributed the article to a man? I think people see 'feminist' and pre-judge.

Psst! This woman isn't actually all that feminist in the first place (as in, she criticises two actual Feminist Party leaders in the text preceding the one I quoted. :)

I like how this experiment on people's prejudices is turning out - how much the word "feminist" seems to blind them to the actual content of the writing. So far we've seen pointless attacks on semantics, constructions of an attack on men that just simply isn't there, insults to the intellect behind her writing, calling of her native tongue as "troglodyte," the attribution of her imagined attacks to all feminists etc. etc. etc. I'd be lying if I said it wasn't what I expected, but I'm glad that it is this apparent. Perhaps it will cause some people to think about their own prejudices.

Found in a column on feminism by the sort of famous columnist Åsa Mattsson (http://www.aftonbladet.se/ettor/webb/789_normal.html):

"I have a couple of annoying pop-ups that appear on my screen all the time, small grey squares with only a word and a question: "Big tits?", "Fetish?", "Teensex", "Poker", "Airlinetickets", "Penis enlargement?", "Zoloft?", "Viagra?".
I usually click them away and scream angrily when I'm in a hurry, but I'm beginning to think that they are really entertaining, these little pop-ups. Educational, even. Pop-ups say something about society and the times, even if you would prefer that things were different. I see before me a very small man with a very small penis who dreams about teenage girls because he could never get it up with an adult woman. The little man munches on antidepressants and Viagra and hopes to win at on-line poker so that he can travel abroad where women are nicer.
Sometimes I wonder if these pop-ups, among other things, aren't the result of subversive feminist activity, or is men's situation really that bad?"

I really don't know what to think of it, as I've never thought of it that way. Interesting.
I don't see how it is so intellectual to invent stereotypes, just because capitalism has found a weakness it thinks can be exploited.

Psst! This woman isn't actually all that feminist in the first place (as in, she criticises two actual Feminist Party leaders in the text preceding the one I quoted. :) Simply reading the clip you gave us, I wouldn't have assumed feminism anyway:).

I like how this experiment on people's prejudices is turning out - how much the word "feminist" seems to blind them to the actual content of the writing. So far we've seen pointless attacks on semantics, constructions of an attack on men that just simply isn't there, insults to the intellect behind her writing, calling of her native tongue as "troglodyte," the attribution of her imagined attacks to all feminists etc. etc. etc. I'd be lying if I said it wasn't what I expected, but I'm glad that it is this apparent. Perhaps it will cause some people to think about their own prejudices. It'd have been even better had the writer been unveiled as a man :D

Psst! This woman isn't actually all that feminist in the first place (as in, she criticises two actual Feminist Party leaders in the text preceding the one I quoted. :)

I like how this experiment on people's prejudices is turning out - how much the word "feminist" seems to blind them to the actual content of the writing. So far we've seen pointless attacks on semantics, constructions of an attack on men that just simply isn't there, insults to the intellect behind her writing, calling of her native tongue as "troglodyte," the attribution of her imagined attacks to all feminists etc. etc. etc. I'd be lying if I said it wasn't what I expected, but I'm glad that it is this apparent. Perhaps it will cause some people to think about their own prejudices.

Heh! Oh you got me! Purposefully misrepresenting a woman's viewpoint DOES deceive people on an online forum! Boy I feel sheepish! :rolleyes:

Heh! Oh you got me! Purposefully misrepresenting a woman's viewpoint DOES deceive people on an online forum! Boy I feel sheepish! :rolleyes:

It is kind of interesting, though, that everyone assumed that the "feminist" was hostile. Everyone except me, anyway. :D

Simply reading the clip you gave us, I wouldn't have assumed feminism anyway :).

I was afraid that people would notice just that, that it wasn't all that feminist in the first place, but I guess not!

It'd have been even better had the writer been unveiled as a man :D

Since the rules here demand that you link to things you quote, that was unfortunately not something I would have been able to do, what with her huge byline.

Fass has been using big words to explain what you all should have understood about the original post. It is not, repeat not, an attack on men. It is an attack on the view society, particularly the part interviewed by advertising companies, views men. The "little man" concept is ridiculous because it's supposed to be . The argument given by the "feminist" in the first post is not a feminist argument. It is an argument that advertising companies have a very unrealisitic pessimistic view of men. Get that through your skulls. If you disagree with that, argue against that, but don't argue against points that don't exist.

all of this talk of straw men seems to have confused people....

taking her words as they are written - and doing anything else is putting ideas into her head that are not written on the paper - it is very clear that she is:

1) presuming that all advertisements she receives are targetted towards men and not women and then
2) putting together that men in our society must exist in a rather sad state.

that is all that she wrote.

if she meant anything else at all then the article was very poorly written as this is all that any person can take from the article without drawing conclusions that the author does not lead to; as it is written, it is nothing more than a poorly thought out, verbose attack.

if this woman had a more profound point then she simply should have made it. as i will presume that she is competent enough to have made it herself without needing me to tell her this, it then follows that this created viewpoint that you are crediting to her is the one that does not exist.

either option leads to a poorly written articl.

Heh! Oh you got me! Purposefully misrepresenting a woman's viewpoint DOES deceive people on an online forum! Boy I feel sheepish! :rolleyes:

I did not misrepresent her viewpoint. I translated it as faithfully to the original as I could. I led you to believe that a feminist had written it, yes, but the hostility and all the other things you construed from the text were just that - what you yourself with the aid of your prejudice constructed.

The above is an editorial. Judge Leon Holmes' opinion. Would you go and say that he speaks for all men, all Christians, all Americans? Or even give a crap about his opinion other than as an opinion? And would you say that the such 'commentaries' make up the 'majority of men's or Christian's or American's' writing?

Well you could, but it'd be a silly thing to say.

i actually went out of my way to acknowledge that she certainly does not speak for all feminists.

Pop-ups say something about society and the times, even if you would prefer that things were different. I see before me a very small man with a very small penis who dreams about teenage girls because he could never get it up with an adult woman. The little man munches on antidepressants and Viagra and hopes to win at on-line poker so that he can travel abroad where women are nicer.

Could someone show me the point she makes, because all I see is a general bash against males.

I could paint a picture of females after watching a few episodes of Sweet 16, Laguna Beach, and the OC. With the amazing number of women who watch these shows, using this author's logic, you could say they were trying to gain some of their values: Shallowness, cruelty, and selfishness to name a few.

Advertisements and TV shows in no way reflect society as a whole. They reflect a tiny minority they are geared towards (Insecure males for example). As Tyler Durden once said: "You're not your F***ing kakis"

Just out of curiosity, can anyone explain to me why a feminist uses sexual organ size as an insult? I thought one of the fundamental points of feminists was that people are not sexual objects, and would be massively opposed to someone suggesting women with smaller breasts are somehow lesser people.

Just out of curiosity, can anyone explain to me why a feminist uses sexual organ size as an insult? I thought one of the fundamental points of feminists was that people are not sexual objects, and would be massively opposed to someone suggesting women with smaller breasts are somehow lesser people.

*wonders why people don't read the thread before commenting, and thus fail to see the revelation that this woman wasn't a feminist, at all, and that this thread was just an experiment to see how prejudice against feminists would make people react at a piece of writing*

I did not misrepresent her viewpoint. I translated it as faithfully to the original as I could. I led you to believe that a feminist had written it, yes, but the hostility and all the other things you construed from the text were just that - what you yourself with the aid of your prejudice constructed.

No, the things I construed from the text were there. The fact that she is or is not a feminist is in fact irrelevant to her message and the fact of it's inherent stupidity.

No, the things I construed from the text were there. The fact that she is or is not a feminist is in fact irrelevant to her message and the fact of it's inherent stupidity.

You stick to that story. Maybe you'll even manage to convince someone apart from yourself!

You stick to that story. Maybe you'll even manage to convince someone apart from yourself!

Nice argument! As good as every other one you've given here! Creating your own strawman of a thread and then bashing people who took it at face value.

Too bad you've not addressed a single thing about my "story" except the parts where I fell for your "experiment" in trolling.

*wonders why people don't read the thread before commenting, and thus fail to see the revelation that this woman wasn't a feminist, at all, and that this thread was just an experiment to see how prejudice against feminists would make people react at a piece of writing*

Your thoughts are awfully convoluted, are they not? ;)

It was a genuine question out of curiousity - forgive me for not reading every single post on the thread - I often skim read and post before reading the whole thread when I feel an arguement is just going round in circles, thus missing stuff.

Two words


POPUP BLOCKER

Ok - who found out the evil plot I orchestrated to subjegate all men!!!!

Shhhhhhhhhhh, the Viagra and Antidepressents are working; Now if I can just get all you men insecure enough to by the penile enlargers - I'll rule the world! Muuuuuuhhhhhhhhaaahaaahaa!

Since the rules here demand that you link to things you quote, that was unfortunately not something I would have been able to do, what with her huge byline.
No, I don't mean you should've lied...but it would be interesting to take a quote by someone totally unrelated to feminism and present it as feminist thought...to see if anyone bothers to even read it. :eek:

No, I don't mean you should've lied...but it would be interesting to take a quote by someone totally unrelated to feminism and present it as feminist thought...to see if anyone bothers to even read it. :eek:

Ah, well, I guess we'll never know. Seeing as this has apparently upset someone, I won't be repeating it, even though I find it strange that people should have such a reaction when someone confesses a bias and not when someone does not - take the political threads, for instance. They're full of things that are skewed and that let people assume that which is not always correct, profiting off of prejudice and people's own ideas.