17 comments to “Why Women Suck”

1. Lynda:
   22 January 2009, on 10:46 am

   In her NY Times column Gloria Steinem wrote:
   Black men were given the vote a half-century before women of any race were allowed to mark a ballot ….
   So why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one? The reasons are as pervasive as the air we breathe: because sexism is still confused with nature as racism once was; because anything that affects males is seen as more serious than anything that affects “only” the female half of the human race (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/opinion/08steinem.html )

2. AtheistUnderMask:
   22 January 2009, on 11:11 am

   I only watched a few seconds, but I just have to comment on her feminism = culture of victimization.

   Pot. Kettle. Black.

   Thank you.

3. Stardust:
   22 January 2009, on 12:17 pm

   As one commenter at Pharyngula stated “Sounds like the family planning version of Expelled” and that is exactly what it is. More marketing to dumbass Xian fundamentalists and they will gladly fork over their money to see this, and they will nod in agreement and go home and continue to copulate and pump out those babies and bake those cookies and talk about their imaginary friend and study their mythology books. And despite what they want to believe about the film, it will be another big flop, just like Expelled. Only to be used later in their crazyass homes and churches to brainwash their young girls in order to keep them imprisoned in subservience to men.

4. AtheistUnderMask:
   22 January 2009, on 12:37 pm

   Hey, what’s wrong with baking cookies? I happen to enjoy oatmeal raisin.

5. Lynda:
   22 January 2009, on 12:46 pm

   BTW, and off topic, why is the misplacing of a word such as “faithfully” in the Presidential oath of office considered so terrible that the oath was re-sworn by Obama later in the map room, yet the addition of “so help me God” to the end of the oath is of no consequence?
   The US Constitution contains this oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
   There’s no mention of god in it. Why did the chief justice add those words and why did Obama agree to say those words at the end of the oath? It’s clearly unconstitutional.

   Actually maybe there is a link to that horrid film …. how are women suppose to understand the value of feminism if the US Constitution gets so little respect?

6. Aerik:
   22 January 2009, on 6:50 pm

   Oh of course, Phylis Schaffly, who thinks that wives by definition cannot be raped. She’s one to talk about women’s rights. Ugh.

   Culture of victimization? Puh-lease. Women are raped, subjected to violence that is usually hyper-sexualized, blamed for rape and sexual assault, their reproductive rights are constantly under attack, the schaffly’s of the world want to dictate how they use their vaginas, men usually think they can infer what women do with their vaginas simply by their fashion, women are harassed off of the internet at a much higher degree than anybody else, they’re prostituted more…. it just goes on and on and on.

   She was not in the abortion business. She’s a liar. Women who are sexually active automatically get 3 to 5 abortions by the time they’re 18? What is she, insane?

   Calling it the abortion industry explicitly means that there’s profit in it. There’s not. I can’t name a single abortion clinic or something like planned parenthood that isn’t NON-PROFIT.

   Then the crap about feminists wanting all children to be wards of the state. How retarded. We’re welcoming of two parent working households and stay-at-home fathers. And just because classically, genuine marxists consider themselves feminists by default, feminism does not automatically entail marxism or socialism. That idiot doesn’t even know what marxism, socialism, and communism is anyways.

   Then they accuse us of just hating housewives, which we don’t.

   And of course, the “clothes determine what you do with your genitalia” arguments. Naturally. Cuz of course, it’s victims who are to blame for being assaulted, not the criminal. Uh huh.

   And finally the quiverfull wacko. They accuse feminists of treating children inhumanely, and then turn around and literally refer to babies as weapons. Sick, sick bastards.

   Feminists are pretty much the opposite of what we’re made out to be, and we’re fractally better than these folk.

7. Hoffy:
   22 January 2009, on 7:45 pm

   This is pariarchal monotheisms trade mark, lies lies and more lies, the bit about 3to5 abortions by age 18 is not only a disgusting lie it’s deeply offensive, this recalcitrant half wit just helps us as Atheists, we have even more information to discredit these poor misguided miscreants………………………..

8. jimmer:
   22 January 2009, on 10:51 pm

   Hand in hand with that stupid book they believe in. It all fits so well. I have an idea that if you buy into religion of any kind. That a person subconsciously knows that it is full of lies and made-up stories. But in an attempt at making it reasonable they fabricate more lies to make the original lies seem correct.

   3-5 abortions by age 18? Now that is a mental illness talking.

9. Aerik:
   23 January 2009, on 12:43 am

   My opinon of creationists and anti-feminists. (nothing offensive)

   http://i247.photobucket.com/albums/gg130/Tatarize/fractalwrongness.jpg

10. Geoff:
    23 January 2009, on 4:09 am

    GodTube sucks. The stupid video loaded at the pace of continental drift. Fortunately, the first two chicks were enough to make the message clear with their faith-based facts and pious attitudes. I say, keep these bitchez in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant so women with functioning minds and personalities can live their lives with equality and freedom from oppression. (Of course, I’ll let someone else do the impregnating as them gals are fugly).

    P.S. I’d normally not be so derogatory of women but I’d hate to make these uptight hags feel like feminists have enforced their politically correct fascism on my language choices.

11. Inari:
    23 January 2009, on 8:58 am

    Am I the only one who finds it amusing that, despite the fact that the only people shown in the clip are women, at the end it admits to being a “Gunn Brothers film?

12. Dunc:
    23 January 2009, on 9:01 am

    Oh of course, Phylis Schaffly, who thinks that wives by definition cannot be raped. She’s one to talk about women’s rights.

    There’s also the fact that she’s made a very successful and lucrative career out of saying that women shouldn’t have careers and should stay at home looking after their children, whilst paying someone else to look after her children. Umm, cognitive dissonance?

13. Stardust:
    23 January 2009, on 10:18 am

    ^^Dunc, you make a very good point.

    Schaffly’s own mother had to work two jobs during the Great Depression to support her parents and her own family while her father and husband were both out of work.

    And Shaffley herself, who was married and was quiverfull with six children (one being *gasp* a homosexual!) managed to have a very busy life as a career woman. Who was gallivanting around the country and the globe instead of staying home raising those six kids and baking the cookies and taking care of her husband’s needs?

    The feminist activist Gloria Steinem and the author Pia de Solenni, among others, have noted what they consider irony in Schlafly’s role as an advocate for the full-time mother and wife, while being herself a lawyer, editor of a monthly newsletter, regular speaker at anti-liberal rallies, and political activist.[35][36][37] In her review of Schlafly’s Feminist Fantasies, de Solenni writes that “Schlafly’s discussion reveals a paradox. She was able to have it all: family and career. And she did it by fighting those who said they were trying to get it all for her… Happiness resulted from being a wife and mother and working with her husband to reach their goals.”

    And her son Andrew is following in his mother’s footsteps of espousing misinformation for he is the founder of Conservapedia.

14. ChuckA:
    23 January 2009, on 11:46 am

    ^ Hmmm…Stardust?…I sorta like those comments by Florence Kennedy & good ole Harlan Ellison in that Schaffly “Andrew” link.
    Also…James Wood’s “leathery extremist” (a rather subtle ad hominem?) made me think of the “Bush” Iraqi shoe throwing incident.
    “Scenes we’d like to see”…? If not in reality; there’s always my “Imagination”!
    Done! (bulls-eye!…she didn’t “duck & cover”!)

15. fritzy:
    23 January 2009, on 11:56 pm

    Wow, that just got increasingly painful to watch as it went on. I wanted to comment on one mendacity, and then, along came an even bigger wopper.

    3-5 abortions before age 18? Where’s the support for that? Who are these shadowy people making bank off abortions? People hate children? Really? This one coming from a woman who has a litter because some dusty mythology book commands it? Provocative clothing gives men ad hoc permission to treat women as playthings? Considering I’ve seen deplorable behavior by men towards women wearing baggy sweats, calling this woman’s assertion “fatuous” is being generous. And Schlafly–iconic in her hypocricy.

    Gawd, now I’m in a bad mood. Think I’ll go smack and beat a provocatively dressed woman. Metaphorically.

16. sargoth:
    24 January 2009, on 12:32 am

    Hey, what’s wrong with baking cookies? I happen to enjoy oatmeal raisin.

    Blasphemer!! Thou shalt not placeth thine raisins where thine chocolate chips rightfully belong!

17. jimmer:
    25 January 2009, on 6:12 pm

    I know this woman who is always provocatively dressed but I think she prefers to be spanked. Maybe we should let those women in the movie know of this. I know Carlin did a spoof on this at one time but I can’t find it. Somethong aobut spanking them into submission.