Posted on 01/14/2018 3:50:45 PM PST by EdnaMode
It seems that I am a "Bad Feminist." I can add that to the other things I've been accused of since 1972, such as climbing to fame up a pyramid of decapitated men's heads (a leftie journal), of being a dominatrix bent on the subjugation of men (a rightie one, complete with an illustration of me in leather boots and a whip) and of being an awful person who can annihilate – with her magic White Witch powers – anyone critical of her at Toronto dinner tables. I'm so scary! And now, it seems, I am conducting a War on Women, like the misogynistic, rape-enabling Bad Feminist that I am.
What would a Good Feminist look like, in the eyes of my accusers?
My fundamental position is that women are human beings, with the full range of saintly and demonic behaviours this entails, including criminal ones. They're not angels, incapable of wrongdoing. If they were, we wouldn't need a legal system.
Nor do I believe that women are children, incapable of agency or of making moral decisions. If they were, we're back to the 19th century, and women should not own property, have credit cards, have access to higher education, control their own reproduction or vote. There are powerful groups in North America pushing this agenda, but they are not usually considered feminists.
(Excerpt) Read more at theglobeandmail.com ...
Margaret Atwood has turned Victimology into an Art Form; Performance Art, to be exact.
Feminism has always been about portraying women as oppressed and men as oppresive.
I’ve never been a feminist and never will be. These people are a bunch of self righteous hypocrites.
“If they were, we’re back to the 19th century, and women should not own property, have credit cards, have access to higher education, control their own reproduction or vote.“
In the United States at least, women could do and have all those things, except own credit cards or vote. No one had credit cards, and early in the 19th century at least, voting was not even universal among white males.
As for controlling reproduction, I know she means abortion, but there were other ways.
There are no good feminists. The idea of feminism in itself portrays weakness and victimhood, but above all else a hatred of men only secondary to hatred of self.
What is it that Rush says, feminism was invented to give ugly women a platform? Bella Abzug certainly proved that.
And money was invented to give fat men with obnoxious personalities access to beautiful women.
Two very truthful and accurate posts.
I think anyone, male or female, who has good character and a kind personality can inspire romantic love. Sure, there are plain people, homely people, but what’s inside makes a person “attractive” in the absolute sense, and people who would never make a magazine cover have long, happy marriages and a boatload of grandchildren.
On the other hand, people who aren’t kind and loving are ugly, no matter what they look like.
Did you bother to read the article or did you just assume anything Atwood wrote would not be relevant. It is not pushing victimhood to state that procedures that protect the rights of an accused person are fundamental in a free society. Which is her basic argument regarding how UBC acted.
Thankfully I believe you are right.
Goodness knows I would never make the list of beautiful people but my husband still loves me.
Kindness covers a multitude of physical flaws.
Thank you for redirecting me back to the article.
Your opinion was correct.
I am an average-looking person, myself, but I’m widely regarded as nice. And tidily-dressed.
One thing I’ve noticed, over these many years, is that Free Republic’s judgment of a person’s appearance is almost 100% correlated with the perception of the person’s political views. A woman gains 50 pounds overnight if she says something the boys don’t like!
Specifically, Bella Abzug isn’t bad-looking. Like many people of Middle Eastern heritage, she’s got nice bones and good hair. Got heavier in middle age, but a lot of us do.
She did not become a radical feminist because she was ugly. If she became ugly, it was a co-result of the same factors that caused her to become a radical feminist.
Good Democrat and feminist Okra offering up a fresh chick to chicken hawk Weinsteinberg.
Her opus “A Handmaid’s Tale” is the embodiment of the liberal statement “tyranny will come wrapped in an American flag and carrying a Bible”. It was written out of irrational liberal fears that the conservative movement would morph into an American Taliban.
She was right in predicting the future but wrong on the religion. But liberals ignore the influence of Islam in the Taliban, ISIS and Boko Haram that created that world she predicted.
Her sin today is saying ‘let’s have the information on the accusations and evidence’ instead of “he’s accused, he’s guilty, lynch him”.
The Handmaid’s Tale Author Margaret Atwood Accused of Crimes Against Feminism for Defending Due Process
https://reason.com/blog/2018/01/14/handmaids-tale-margaret-atwood-feminism
The day I find myself agreeing with Margaret Atwood on ANYTHING is the day the control-left is truly too extreme.
Liberals are now adopting the same tactics as Islam.
* Accusation of heresy is sufficient to lynch someone.
Just as Muslim mobs will form to murder someone once they’re called a blasphemer.
* That words equal violence.
That criticism of the ideology OR one of its members is equal to violence, so you can justify killing the critic.
* That society should have a tiered moral structure based on group identity.
Your rights are defined by group membership, and groups have different rights. The only difference is that Muslims consider women x 0.5 while liberals say women are x2 and atheists and homosexuals are x0 in Shariah law while they are x10 in liberals’ system.
* That the central ideology should be the basis of law as a matter of faith.
Liberals invest social justice, the political ideology, with religious levels of fervor while seeking to have it written into law as Canadians did bill C-16 on sexual identity and the U.S. does on “civil rights”. Islam uniquely mandates a government set up to privileges Islam.
Ironically, liberals’ social justice system also privileges Islam, because they classify it as an oppressed class to be elevated in the name of fairness ... and Muslims go along with liberals today because both agree on that point.
Liberals’ mistake in this regard is failing to understand that Muslims, unlike weak Christians of the past century, won’t assimilate into liberal secular culture. Liberals think they are gaining allies who will convert to liberalism when “educated”, instead of realizing they are importing a people whose meme is far better reinforced (including demographically) and willing to abide for now until they could dominate.
Feminism seems to have a hatred of women. They don’t want women to think for themselves. And they seem to hate the wisdom/pursuits of all the women who came before. They seem to be saying women can only be valid if they follow what were previously thought as male pursuits and ways of thinking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.