Feminist protest against Warren Farrell

You know there are varying degrees of feminism right? Not all feminists are extremists.

You guys were born in the wrong era if you aren't for women's rights.

Like another poster has said, I'm for human rights, but I avoid the extremists groups. I support gay rights, I support gay marriage and I have nothing against homosexuals and lesbians, but you will never see me supporting the lgbt crowd or supporting gay pride parades.
 
Last edited:
Judging by your previous posts you don't come off as a person who respects human rights either.

No, no I shit on everything equally. Do you have a rebuttal for the post you responded to?
 
Last I heard, being ugly and loud didn't prevent you from being right. I don't think people should be prevented from speaking, no matter how gross they are as people, but people also have the right to protest. If a :eek::eek::eek::eek:phile author comes around to my hometown, I might very well protest it as well. And I never get why people object to the word 'feminism'. So what if the word is just about women? I don't care that 'history' and human' doesn't have women in it, so why would I care that 'feminism' doesn't have men in it?
 
I suspect you're not serious with that interpretation of Farrell's words, since THE PARAGRAPH DIRECTLY ABOVE IT indicates Farrell almost didn't publish his book/findings for fear of people misinterpreting it and using it to excuse the "exploitation" of women by men.

Farrell is talking about how any contact by parents with children is now seen in a creepy :eek::eek::eek::eek:philic way (a theme that is now a cliche in pop culture and is featured even in standup routines by people like Bill Burr and Louis CK.) It's been talked about endlessly in the mainstream media for fuck's sake. If you can't see how the word "generally" entirely changes the meaning of the quote then I can't help you. He's obviously reiterating the endlessly discussed talking point about how any touching of children by adults/parents is now creepified, probably deliberately, by hysterical types who see sexual motives where there are none.

Repressing the natural urge for normal human contact, furthermore, probably stunts the sexuality of people when they become adults (after all, if you're uncomfortable/unaccustomed with normal touching as a kid, then as an adult you'll probably be somewhat fucked up when it comes to relationships, sex, etc.)

Anyway, I eagerly await further attempts to paint Warren Farrell as an incest-loving creep or perhaps even serial-killer. I'm sure your imagination will come up with something interesting and fantastical!

*Michael_Jackson_eats_popcorn_at_a_movie.gif*
The quote says "genitally", not "generally". Please read carefully before spewing invective at other posters. You self-pwned pretty hard here. This guy is one creepy fuck.
 
DanaEmelianenko was destroyed in this thread
 
Golden Girls on feminism:

18235_563585113656034_1684067502_n.jpg
 
I got no problem with feminist's if they keep doing the topless protests. the one at the whitehouse had a hot red head that looked like a cross between Kate Walsh and Gillian from boardwalk.
 
Four members of the mob have been identified, including that particularly obnoxious one seen acting so abusively at the end of the video. There's now an article on each of them, it will be interesting to see what action the university takes against the worst offenders, particularly as many genuinely seem to hold hateful views about men.

The four identified so far:

Emma Claire / Emma Kadey: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/who-is-emma-claire-and-why-is-she-so-hateful/
Sophia Guo: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/sophia-guo-u-of-t-bigot/
Vanja Krajina: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/vanja-krajina-university-of-toronto/
Danielle Sandhu: http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-ri.../danielle-sandhu-lies-and-violence-at-u-of-t/
 
Back
Top