Friday, August 3, 2012

The Empire Strikes Back

Graphic courtesy of the Feminist Majority Foundation blog.

Millions of poor chickens have to die en masse, all to prove that Christians hate gay marriage. I am one of the minority of folks who worries about the innocent chickens in this whole fiasco. (waves to fellow vegetarians)

As you are undoubtedly aware, the Chick Fil-A hoopla continues, as everyone in the world continues to brawl on Facebook, Twitter, Blogdonia and beyond. (The pro-gay kiss-in protest was held today, in various areas of the country.) The gay marriage debate has now reached every corner of the USA. People are being defriended right and left.

Meanwhile, the beleaguered, hard-working Christians who head up the nation's soup kitchens and homeless shelters, wonder why they can't get even one-eightieth of these Christians to assist them, when they put out their constant pleas for help.

Maybe its the food? The soup kitchen fare is no match for fried-fowl sandwiches, apparently.

Or maybe it's easier to grandstand, pose in a fast-food line for TV cameras, then eat and run. POOF, you are a devout Christian! No caring for the poor, no mopping floors, no boring bake-sales, no ladling out soup for dirty junkies who have been sleeping out in the used-car lot. No work necessary. No need to leave your comfy suburb and associate with filthy lowlifes, publicans and sinners. In fact, you do not even need to leave your air-conditioned vehicle if you decide to go to the drive-thru. Its much easier, quicker, AND you get to be on TV! All your friends will see you! You can take a photo of yourself and put it on Facebook so your parents, preacher and other buddies can see what a good Christian you are! Mike Huckabee will sing your praises on Fox News!

Serving the poor and such, as Jesus actually advised his followers to do? The Franciscans have been doing this since forever, and as we know, nobody puts them on Facebook or TV. They are boring, poorly-attired and do not understand good PR, as Dan Cathy obviously does.

Too bad we can't get these Christians to care about the poor and homeless as much as they care about hating gays. Society might actually change for the GOOD, and we certainly can't have THAT!

More on this topic tomorrow, on my radio show. I taped it today, ranted and raved, and even shouted once. (What, me worry?) It's entertaining and lots more fun than Mike Huckabee.

Tune in tomorrow!

And speaking of Mike Huckabee, what happened to his concerns about weight, wholesome foods and health? He goes from talk of healthy eating, to exhorting us all to eat fried garbage? Huh?

He used to talk about the importance of Americans eating good food, but I guess he can't now that he has his Fox News marching orders. I mean, he's under contract, you know.

Locally, here in Bob Jones University land, we actually had a PROTESTOR! More on the show tomorrow. In the meantime, eat HERE instead of nasty Chick Fil-A. (check out the show for the reasons why)


A few other links:

[] South Carolina Boy wrote about his tarot reading... I love it when people write cool stuff about me. :)

My best wishes are with him at this time, as always.

[] Private prisons spend $45 million on lobbying, rake in $5.1 billion for immigrant detention alone.

[] And finally, Harry Reid decides to go after Romney in a big way:

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid is unabashed as he makes a serious, unsubstantiated claim about Mitt Romney: that the Republican candidate for president did not pay any taxes for 10 years. That, the Nevada senator says, is why Mr. Romney will not release tax returns beyond those he has already made public, his 2010 return and an estimate for 2011.

Senator Reid, in fact, is so certain he’s doing the right thing that he repeated his charge on the floor of the Senate Thursday night, and put it out in a statement.

Let the games begin!


And did you all see THE DARK KNIGHT RISES yet? Did you notice the trashing of Occupy Wall Street?

I did find it very interesting that Bruce Wayne has now lost his money... do filmmakers think a rich hero is no longer sympathetic? As one of my friends also said, the tumultuous economy means we find this new plot-development totally believable, if alarming: Good Lord, even BRUCE WAYNE IS POOR NOW? Is nothing sacred?

The director, Christopher Nolan (whom I have admired ever since his wonderful movie-masterpiece MEMENTO) said in his Rolling Stone interview:
We put a lot of interesting questions in the air, but that's simply a backdrop for the story. What we're really trying to do is show the cracks of society, show the conflicts that somebody would try to wedge open. We're going to get wildly different interpretations of what the film is supporting and not supporting, but it's not doing any of those things. It's just telling a story. If you're saying, “Have you made a film that's supposed to be criticizing the Occupy Wall Street movement?” – well, obviously, that's not true.
For the record, I don't think its "obviously" not true at all... someone is trying to have his cake and eat it too.

Meanwhile, the new game Call of Duty is also taking direct aim at Occupy. And the two have something in common, it turns out. From SALON:
Reporting on the upcoming new edition of the game “Call of Duty” and the imminent release of the film “The Dark Knight Rises,” reports:
The game’s main villain is Raul Menendez, described as the “idolized Messiah of the 99%” – a Julian Assange-like character who’s old, experienced, and hell bent on starting a global insurrection against the status quo…

The character, as with the rest of the story, is the creation of David S. Goyer. Goyer is the co-writer of “The Dark Knight Rises,” which also shares a similar story featuring Bane as Batman’s primary antagonist, who starts a class war aimed against the rich and privileged of Gotham City with the backing of the common man.
In 1988, a Konami executive said pop culture industries were looking to “take anything remotely in the news and make it a game.” Obviously, this move to put the headline-grabbing “99 percent” concept into video games and movies shows what that enduring strategy looks like in practice — and it doesn’t look very good.
It has also been pointed out to me that the new villain in the next James Bond movie, Skyfall, (named "Silva" and played by Javier Bardem) has whitish-blond, Julian Assange-ish hair. No kidding?

As Ryan Gilbey of the UK Guardian wrote:
One unwritten rule of the series is that 007's opponents tend to personify the perceived threats or preoccupations of the era which spawns them. We can discern from the plot titbits present in the Skyfall trailer that the security of British spies is compromised when a disc containing information about their identities is lost. So we have a potentially hazardous leak of top-secret data, presided over perhaps by this bright-haired man named Silva. As if Julian Assange hasn't got enough to worry about, he won't even be able to pop to the local multiplex in October without seeing a menacing supervillain modelled on him.
The Empire Strikes Back.


Xakudo said...

Hi Daisy, not sure how else to contact you. Just wanted to let you know that, no, you have not been banned from Genderratic in the least. We really appreciate your contributions (at least I do), and you are not only welcome but encouraged to be present there!

Your comments simply got caught in the new spam filter for some reason. I have freed them now, and notified the thread.

D. said...

As soon as I get back, I'll be linking this because even though I'm a hypocrite I like your logic.

bryce said...

great stuff, d


JoJo said...

I confess that I find it odd that Chick Fil A is where people have chosen to draw their lines in the sand....I agree w/ what you said though.

Haven't seen Dark Knight but we did see Ted and can't recommend that one enough!!! We also saw the new animated Ice Age flick, in 3D and that was cute as well.

Anonymous said...

Hi Daisy,

This is Vince's partner Stuart. I enjoyed your radio show on Aug 4,2012. Thank you for pointing out the old testamnet definition of "traditional marriage and what thes so-called Christians are fighting for.

As a gay man in a relationship and a Christian, I have a slightly different take on the Chick Fil-a Issue.

First I have no problem with Dan Cathy the owner of Chick fil-a expressing his personal opinion on Gay Marriage. As an american he has every right to do so. I also do not have a problem with Chick fil-a operating their business based on the Christian values they set forth. They have every right to do that in America.

The problem I have is the corporation of Chick fil-a donating over $2 million (without the approval of the Franchise owners) to organizations that promote discrimination .
The Chick fil-a Corporate website states that they do not discrminate on the basis of Race, Belief, age gender or sexual orintation. This sounds very hypocritical to me. (I wonder how many would support this company if they donated to the Ku Klux Klan or other hate groups)

I would encourage all Christians to boycott This company based on their hypocritical stance. As I recall, Jesus disliked hypocrites and condemned them for their actions. Jesus promoted diversity, equality, Love, understanding and kindness. These are the types of Christian values we should all aspire to.

SCB said...

"The gay marriage debate has now reached every corner of the USA. People are being defriended right and left."

Hahahahahaha this is the truth.
I have deleted so many people off of Facebook that I went a school with. Because I am intolerant of their intolerance. (Of that and other issues.)

Sevesteen said...

More important than the CEO's obnoxious stand on gay rights is the Chicago and Boston government's abuse of power to promote a viewpoint or stifle speech. Government permits, licenses and approvals should be granted based on objective criteria. They absolutely should not be granted or hindered based on the speech of the applicant. This is true even when the viewpoint in question is one I oppose.

High Arka said...

My dear Daisy, you're playing right into Dan Cathy's hand...

The best thing to do would be to ignore his little game.

DaisyDeadhead said...

I guess you don't live in the south, where there were huge traffic jams all around CHICK FIL A, extending all the way to the interstate exits? Around here, its no LITTLE game, its a HUGE game. Three of my co-workers were very excited about the whole day, it was major news. (Were your co-workers scheduling CHICK FIL A visits, and asking everyone if they wanted to chip in? How many did?)
I assure you, we couldn't ignore him if we wanted to.

No offense High Arka, but once again, you give yourself away as living in a well-behaved liberal zone. Around here, we have very different battles to wage and I am well aware of what those battles are.

Can I also ask, how many of your Facebook friends bragged to you about going to CHICK FIL A to fight the dreaded fag influence? (What SCB has described in his comment, above)? I am willing to bet you don't even know or associate with those people, do you?

This is GROUND ZERO of the culture war. It's literally "brother against brother" around here. This is where values are fought over and where the battles are won and lost. If it wasn't Chick Fil A, would be something else as offensive and dopey, but it WOULD be something else.

And I am VERY tired of people who have the luxury of sitting out those battles, telling the rest of us how to fight them.

Politicalguineapig said...

Hmm, by Julian Assange do you mean..the man who raped two women, leaked classified info internationally for the lols*, and left his accomplice to twist in the wind? That Julian Assange?
Yeah, I can't imagine why they're basing villians off him either. Also, see Saturday Night Live's take on him. Brilliant.

SCB: Hah, so true. So far I had to defriend one of my high school friends. He kept spamming my wall with Christian/rightwing bullshit.
I often get annoyed at two of my high school friends since they get really catty about the one classmate who transitioned.
I don't talk politics with most of my friends, as they're sheltered suburban girls (well, women, but point stands.).

*I know you're sort of an anarchist, but anarchy's one of many philosophies (including philosophy)that I just cannot take seriously. Anyone who thinks humans can function without rules is either a self-serving bastard or a naive cloud-cuckoo-lander who has no idea what humans are really like.

DaisyDeadhead said...

PGP, you must have missed THIS post of mine. It was considered pretty controversial at the time, so take a deep breath first.

In short, I don't believe most of what they say about Assange, just as I didn't believe most of what they said about the Black Panthers. I take it all with a huge, healthy dose of skepticism.

I have anarchist sympathies and as a young woman, briefly defined myself that way... but I am officially a member of the Green Party, the sponsors of my weekly radio show.

High Arka said...

(Daisy, as to Facebook, quite a few, actually! They're very good customers, being more than willing to purchase, and talk about, Cathy's products because of the issue they care about.)

Politicalguineapig said...

Yeah, I read that post; in my opinion it was bullshit then and it remains bull shit. If you think women would get *any* justice or any regard in an anarchist society, you are dreaming. I am not, by any means, a fan of the justice system, but any alternative is probably going to be worse. (Which is why I'm a big fan of vigilante justice when done by minority groups/fictional characters.
See, where I diverge with a lot of leftists/anarchists/greens is their idea of human nature. They think it's easy for people to be good. I disagree: it's HARD for people to be good. It's hard for someone to understand that anyone different from them can or should have rights.

DaisyDeadhead said...

"You may say I'm a dreamer/but I'm not the only one"--some English guy who got shot in New York in 1980.

Politicalguineapig said...

John Lennon made some good points, but like most people in the 1970s, he didn't understand how people work. That people always want to destroy the weak, and hate anyone who isn't like them. "Make love not war" is a nice slogan, but it's nothing more then empty words.

I've seen it myself; the only reason I even *have* friends is that I have managed to master the art of acting dumber and sweeter than I am. "Be yourself' is stupid advice.

I believe the state is a neccessary evil. Otherwise men and women could never live together and never interact. White people and minorities would have to live in different cities, and the chances of ever crossing paths or being friends with a person of a different race would steadily diminish. (The only positive thing about that future would be finally getting rid of Texas, Arizona, Alaska and Florida. I could live with that.)

DaisyDeadhead said...

I wondered when MORE insults would start. (sigh)

I foolishly allowed the first insult (calling my writing bullshit), out of the goodness of my heart. I never learn! Where there is one insult, there are invariably more to come. Its the only rule I have: don't insult me. But some of you just can't wait to break it, can you?

This: but like most people in the 1970s, he didn't understand how people work.

... makes me ask for the creds. What work have YOU done? Like, real political work? Please provide an introductory list. I'll wait.

We didn't understand how people work? Excuse me? At least we got off our asses and didn't just contemplate our belly-buttons and/or post on the net, and call it politics. If you have actually organized people, ANY people, for ANY thing, perhaps you have earned the right to say that to me. But if you are just another know-it-all college grad with absolutely ZERO political-organizing experience, coming here to school me about what I should and should not be doing or should or should not have done in the 70s, I will politely ask you to fuck off. Or provide the list of your REAL LIFE political experience, to illustrate that you are not simply mouthing off and sounding authoritative. If its as pathetically scanty as I think it probably is, please save all of that self-righteous preaching for someone else who cares. I am a 70s person and I don't understand how people work, so of course, you are wasting your time here.

But I gotta say: Don't know how people work? Aren't YOU the one who subscribes to unsubstantiated, state-sponsored fables about Assange? Excuse me, but I understand exactly how smearing enemies of the state works, since I DID live through the Cointelpro attacks of the 70s. Some of those attacks were on my friends and groups I was affiliated with.

Further, John Lennon did more POLITICAL ACTION in his life than you will ever dream of doing. I guess you didn't know about his work supporting John Sinclair, Angela Davis, Jill Johnson, etc? Before you trash us dinosaurs from the 70s, maybe you should study the era in depth first.

You do not get to insult me with your ageist shit about how you know SO MUCH MORE than the people in the 70s. Especially considering that your generation can't seem to take their heads out of their asses long enough to end your own "endless war", they are too busy fucking with their iphones and posturing on the internet. What have you DONE with this superior knowledge about people, exactly? Go end your OWN FUCKING WAR and stop insulting me, since your knowledge is so superior to me. You should have it ended by lunchtime.

BTW, /why are you going on and on about anarchism when I was careful to say I am no longer an anarchist? That was all a very, very long time ago. I told you, I am a member of the Green Party and I now participate in electoral politics (Democrats AND Greens)... there are countless posts here about elections, candidates and the electoral process. I have written about local candidates I have worked for. WHO ARE YOU TALKING TO?

I think you don't understand how people work.

One piece of advice: most people don't like it when 1) you call their writing bullshit and 2) you make ageist comments about how much more intelligent you are than they are and 3) you insult their work over several decades.

Now, run along.

(((makes note to self: no more allowing ANYBODY to break the only fucking rule I have)))

DaisyDeadhead said...

Correction, Jill Johnston, not Johnson. My error.

Politicalguineapig said...

Daisy: Let's see: I was a delegate in 2004, I wrote for the newspaper in college, did a bit of fundraising and I volunteer at both a local museum and the library. I also gave some money to the anti-amendment group; I hope to help more in September when one of my current positions expires.
I have no illusions that I can save the world, so I just help at the margins.
I think the same can be said of my generation; I meet people who work their butts off for awful pay or no pay every day at various places. There's really not much we can do in politics, but we can make very small differences on the ground.
I do respect the work done in the 60s, but like I said, peace and love are great ideals. They just don't tend to work in the real world. And I'm not ageist, I just dislike the naive and don't think non-violence works. (There's nothing worse then deliberately weakening your group by refusing to even consider tactics like property destruction or self-defence.)
Actually, the charge against Assange is believable, though I think the agencies involved are an exercise in overkill. Men have a ridiculously low bar of consent. If I talk with a man, I don't even make eye contact or smile, since it's far too easy for them to mistake that as interest.

High Arka said...

Political, you're basing your "peace doesn't work" conclusion on the modern American temper. It's taken generations to get there, though. In World War 1, recruits were so unwilling to shoot enemies that it was a major problem for officers to get them to start killing the right kind of Europeans. It took modern day boot camps, physical abuse, and economic coercion to drive rural Americans off their farms and into factories and BDUs. And it takes a substantial amount of social conditioning--through physical child abuse, civics requirements, mass media and movies--to keep that level of anger stoked so that the wars can go on. What Americans are now can't be said to be "natural," in the sense that you're implying it's impossible for humans to be naturally peaceful and loving.

DaisyDeadhead said...

PGP: And I'm not ageist

Do you make that call, or do I? I suppose you think whites decide what is racist, too? No, that isn't how it works.

When you judge other eras you have not lived through and decide you could do it better (since you have the insights WE gained for you; and you're welcome!), you ARE ageist. Feminism exists because of us, or you wouldn't even have the word.

You are Nietzsche's Last Man come to life: "We know everything that has ever happened, and there is no end to derision."

One difference: someday you will understand just how offensive you are. Men do not become women and people of color do not become white... but the young DO age, and someday, I am confident, you will not enjoy arrogant young people preaching to you about things they admit (as you have admitted here) they know absolutely nothing about and did not live through themselves. Someday, yes, you will age and you WILL get it.

BTW, can you read my Blogger profile? It's right there. What does it say? One thing it says is "ex-Yippie"... did you think the Yippies were non-violent? Why did all those coalitions throw us out, in that event? For example, Why did the Clamshell Alliance try to get us to sit out the Seabrook Occupation? Because we wouldn't take the nonviolence pledge, of course. We NEVER took it.

Now, why don't you know this? Why are you preaching to ME about property destruction, in that case?

Have you ever destroyed any property yourself, or is it just this theoretical concept you hold dear?

I said, run along. Now, do it please. You have really pissed me off.

Sevesteen said...

Do you make that call, or do I? I suppose you think whites decide what is racist, too? No, that isn't how it works.

Minorities don't get to be the absolute authority either. I worked with a black woman hired as a team leader who was convinced that racism was why a white man was promoted to her level, then past her--and abused the morning meeting she ran to ask us to go to HR and support her. She was incompetent in her current job, and certainly didn't deserve promotion.

(I'm not claiming that -ism didn't exist there--Blacks were far, far more likely to get stuck in the hot, physical and slightly lower-paying jobs, the one all-woman department had a male lead supervisor brought in from another department)

Politicalguineapig said...

High Arka: Well you've done some reading in history, just not remotely enough. The entire history of Europe is war, war, genocide, with occasional learning and subsequent inquisitions going on. There were also plagues and Christianity.(Although that sentence is redundant.) The same goes for most of the continents without the Christianity.

If you took away the boot camps, abolished all religion, raised kids in a creche and got rid of all the nuclear missiles or drones..there would still be war. Heck, chimpanzees go to war. So please stop pretending war isn't a natural part of humanity.
I'd also like to know if you've ever observed children or teens in a classroom. Cause some of the most vicious shits I ever saw were privileged, white urban/suburban children who'd never had a hand laid on them in their lives.

Daisy: Hopefully, I'd be gracious enough to entertain the idea that the younger person might have a point.
Your generation did some great work, but they had religion on the mat and they blinked. All that spiritual stuff that crept in during the sixties undermined the advances of the various movements. Because of the hippies, we now have to live with the likes of Dobson and Robertson.
You're right that I didn't live through the sixties or seventies, but I don't have to live through a time to be able to judge it. Why do you think the study of history exists? We have to be able to understand the past so we can make sense of the world today and avoid the mistakes that people back then made.

DaisyDeadhead said...

PGP, if an uneducated redneck like myself continued to force participating onto a blog after being asked to leave, I'd be called a troll. With your rude arrogance, you also succeed in giving your class background away. You continue to give your opinion, as if I am reading it and as if I consider it worthwhile and important. It isn't and I don't. But I can tell you have always been treated that way, haven't you?

I am allowing your comments only because you are addressing High Arka. And once again, I see you came here to start trouble... OR (as we have already established) you are too arrogant to read blogger profiles. I love religion. (You obviously came here to pick a fight about that, too.)

I believe arrogant assholes who do not understand how to properly direct the spiritual impulse, are the problem. YOU, in other words.

This conversation was pronounced over some time ago, but you are too arrogant, rude and presumptuous (again giving away your class background) to get that.

Sevesteen: Minorities don't get to be the absolute authority either.

In Lefty Blogdonia, they certainly do. Apparently you don't hang out there too much.

The rule among the know-it-all, politically correct kids like PGP: they are never, never allowed to think otherwise and therefore (to properly show their coolness-factor and qualifications for participation) provide, endless near-constant lip-service to this rule. But as we see, they REALLY don't believe this rule when it is not a popular or cool group being trashed, as ageism against baby-boomers is considered all cool and edgy right now (translation: they hate their parents).

Thus, to sum up: they are never ever allowed (by the PC rules of Lefty Blogdonia) to say "I'm not racist!" if they are white. Never, ever. And they live by that. Likewise, men are not supposed to say "I'm not sexist"--it is understood that ALL men intrinsically ARE. If you are of the privileged group in any exchange, every thing you say is suspect... UNLESS (ah! the leftist hypocrisy enters!) the group is not a "cool" and "approved" oppressed group. Thus, you can still be ageist, anti-fat, ableist, and classist (specifically anti-redneck, since there is often an overlap in classism/racism, so the classism must be manifested against either foreign interlopers or dumb white southerners).

I am covering the alarming, media-sponsored anti-redneck blitz on my radio show tomorrow, so stay tuned!

2b continued

DaisyDeadhead said...

Reply to Sevesteen, continued.

As we see with PGP, knee-jerk, ignorant anti-religion prejudice is ALSO currently on the rise, as in: conflating all religions together and not differentiating historically between them and which ones have perpetrated abuses. Thus, you have the bizarre spectacle of small minority religions like Sihks and Jains, conflated with the sins of the The Majors (as I call them), Christianity and Islam, which (speaking of history, Ms Know-it-all) is laughable and ridiculous. But this is increasingly acceptable due to the New Atheism and its increasing popularity. Their rule (borrowed from Mao, although they will never admit that) is: ALL RELIGIONS ARE THE SAME AND BAD. Period. Just because they are religion.

In most lefty circles these days, as you see with PGP, these biases are EXPECTED and even considered GOOD. This is a big reason an authentic left has been nearly extinguished in America... what Marx and Herbert Marcuse warned us about: splintering over BULLSHIT.

Thus, my intention in that phrase was to expose PGP's double standard and hypocrisy. She will NEVER EVER say a black person is wrong to accuse a white person of racism.... since that is verboten in the circles she posts in. But she thinks nothing of saying "I'm not ageist!" The very fact she argues with me about that, instead of going off to obediently cover herself in ashes in sackcloth and repent (sorry bout that religious reference, PGP) is because ageism is not taken seriously, and in fact, is winked at and tacitly encouraged.

Time for a reprise of my popular HOW THE LEFT LOST THE WORKING CLASSES (which got a new round of linkage recently), and Part 2: How White Flight brought down the economy.

Thanks for your comment.

High Arka said...

(Political, you might find it more enjoyable to tussle with me at High Arka, where you'll not run the risk of upsetting Daisy as much.)

Politicalguineapig said...

High Arka: Thanks, I'll do that. I have a bit of a tendency to shoot from the lip in internet discussions. That little bit of willfully mangled history kinda triggered it.

Daisy: Geez, way to generalize. I've never been treated like 'my opinion is the only one that matters.' Ever.I've actually almost been banned a few times from various blogs. In real life, you wouldn't even notice me.

I find it funny that you're leveling charges of ageism at me, when you're writing off an entire generation at the same time. All I'm doing is pointing out that the boomers weren't the be all and end all of social justice.

From what I've seen, most Abrahamic religions devalue the brain and education, and the flock quickly learns to let their priest/rabbi or imam to do the thinking for them.

All religions are terrible for women. Even Sikhism has arranged marriages, and most Sikhs-like most of the Indian population- prefer boys over girls. Buddhist nuns are treated like dirt by their spiritual leaders too.

Spiritualism tends to get my goat too, since it is composed of willfully fuzzy thinking. Sure, you can go about full of love for the universe, but don't act surprised when the universe screws you over. It also provides fertile ground for nonsense like the Secret.

DaisyDeadhead said...

Am I the only one that finds it bleakly hilarious that PGP worries I am "writing off an entire generation"... right after she, um, wrote off an entire generation?

That was sort of the point. Sorry my "mirroring technique" passed you by.

PGP, further schooling us idiots: All religions are terrible for women.

So is government and capitalism. What feminists have done (right or wrong) is try to improve women's lot within those frameworks, not overthrow the entire thing (although some feminists have proposed that). For some reason, religion doesn't rate that same reformer impulse. Probably because the women's studies crowd/hipster feminists don't like religion in the first place, or they would back the feminist reformers within these religious traditions. Instead, they write these women off. Who cares about the women oppressed within those religions, right? Fuck them. If they don't leave, they DESERVE to be oppressed, right? And you don't have to care about them.

Nice work if you can get it.

Please take High Arka's advice and stop aggravating me. I am trying to take a mini-vacation here. (sigh)

Politicalguineapig said...

Daisy: Before I go to Arka's blog (which looks like fertile ground) I have to ask- Nietzche? Really? You do know that he was discredited ages ago, right? Only alienated teens take him seriously any more.

There's a fairly simple reason feminist write religion off. Most religious women hate themselves and don't want reform, and reforming stuff that's centuries old rapidly becomes a waste of time. Waiting for them to totter and fall is the best course. Besides, God hates women, so who needs him?

DaisyDeadhead said...

If arrogant, ridiculous, self-important, solipsistic college kidz like you have pronounced him "discredited" (LOL! and what does THAT mean? Did he not really exist or something? ROFL) then I guess he must have been a genius. Obviously, there can be no other explanation!

I am not an alienated teen, so wow, I guess you don't know everything. And I guess the people in the online group I am in, who are now discussing BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL don't exist either, since you would know about that too, since you know everything. (BTW, not a single one is an alienated teen.)

Are you TRYING to sound like the Disney-network stereotype of a know-it-all, disdainful, egotistical, pompous, pretentious, presumptuous, thoroughly silly, suburban-raised spoiled brat, or is this really you? How do you look yourself in the mirror? How can you stand yourself? Because I'm very sure no one else can.

Most religious women hate themselves

Take your ignorant, classist stereotypes of the vast majority of women in the world and FUCK OFF, okay? You can't hold this opinion and call yourself feminist, which means caring about the well-being of most women in the world-- and take note, most women in the world ARE religious, you stupid, self-righteous, elitist ass. But of course, you know what 95% of the women in the world should do, since you know everything. Your rich kid arrogance is astounding.

At least these religious women READ better than you do. I have insulted you and told you to go away countless times... and here you are.

WHO hates themselves? Obviously, you love my verbal abuse, so it must be YOU. Physician, heal thyself.

Now, please fuck off. I will not approve any more of your navel-gazing, college girl horse-manure. You are the problem with the world today, and particularly THE LEFT, not the solution.

Go fuck the rest of feminism up, but stay out of here, okay? This is a spoiled-brat-FREE zone.

bryce said...

lol - love it when u freek out


author! !


Mama Moretti said...

We need another book to read now? or we're aleinated teens? & how depressing is that?

This 'girl' is just trolling for lulz. Banhammer time.

DaisyDeadhead said...

Bryce and MM, haha, okay, point taken. :P

I just wonder what world these people are living in, you know? It REALLY aggravates me, this enormous disconnect between the elite, educated lefties and the regular working class... its the whole reason the left has LOST in this country and the right wing is setting the agenda. I hate to see it, right in front of me like this; makes me nauseous in the extreme.

If you went onto any bus in this country and asked every single passenger, "Who is Nietzsche?"--85% would have no clue, or think he was some actor they were supposed to know. Maybe 10% could name him as a philosopher or writer of some kind... possibly 5% or less would be able to sum up any idea of his and/or actually name his works. And yet, this person authoritatively announces that "no one" takes him seriously, as if the majority of people would even be able to tell you who he is or what he is about... this tells you all about the life she lives, the people she associates with, the kind of person she is. She seems to have no clue about the majority of people... the same way she preaches feminism to me earlier in the thread, and then sees no contradiction in announcing that the majority of women in the world (92- 96% of the world believes in a God or religion of some kind) "hate" themselves. (?) What world does she live in? It's no world I live in or ever have. It scares me that this person thinks she is progressive and yet has such open derision for the majority of people. How did it come to this? (sigh)

As I told her, she is the problem. And she is, but I would like to know what created her, how she came into existence so clueless and so removed from working class life. How does one even live that way? How do you get to be in that rarefied atmosphere... and still fancy yourself as being on the left?

Puzzling and disturbing... and a totally perfect illustration of how the left is fucked. THIS KIND OF PERSON, with no clue at all, is who we are trying to "organize"--and of course, they have too much arrogance and derision for working class people to listen to one of US, or be organized by US.

My God, we are screwed. Really, really screwed. Mary Harris Jones, call your office.