Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Second most misogynist man in Wellington

I posted a letter to the paper yesterday, but there was another letter in Monday's paper that deserves a wider readership:

Your articles about women saying 'no' to casual sex shows hypocrisy because if a United States naval ship docked in Wellington tomorrow, girls from all parts of this nation would rush down, waving their knickers, to meet marines hungry for sex.

It is no different from what happened in World War II, when Yanks and Kiwis fought among themselves in Wellington's Pigeon Park.

Kiwi women have not changed over the years. Their santimonious, hypocritical atitudes live on. They are home-grown.

I should know - I was around as a Kiwi soldier and saw it all happen
60 years is a long time to hold a grudge against all women because someone found an American soldier more attractive (and good on her, I wouldn't sleep with him either).

I'd try and explain to him that just because that it's not hypocritical to say no to casual sex with one man, and then sleep with another. But I fear it would be a waste of time.

20 comments:

  1. Anonymous5:04 pm

    I sometimes wonder at the authenticity of some of the letter writers.

    Sometimes I think its the editors and their mates having a bit of a lend.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Who would have thought that this sort of neaderthal testosterone fuckwit could still exist.
    Explains the state of the world doesn't it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Max Bygraves6:36 pm

    Jesus. You're a bit harsh Maia. All the guy is saying is that women are not the anti-promiscuous types that they often claim to be.
    You might have respectable values yourself, but I wouldn't assume that other women think like you do.
    Your posts are coming across more and more anti-male these days.
    Are you a true feminist, or do you secretly hold a grudge against the male species?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Max Bygraves11:09 pm

    Maia - you can't be both.
    A true feminist doesn't hate men.

    You come under the definition of a 'feminazi' as you clearly have a distaste for men.

    Please explain why you hate men...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Max there is no such thing as the definition of a 'feminazi', feminazi is a random term of abuse used by misogynists to attempt to discredit women who are trying to stand up for themselves.

    As for men, I hate men who rape women, I hate men who allow other women to rape women, I hate men who won't listen to women when they say men raped them, I hate men who make jokes about raping women, I hate men who don't stand up to men who are raping women, I hate men who don't listen to women when they say we live in a culture that not just tolerates and encourages rape.

    This doesn't mean that I hate all men, but sometimes, it comes pretty close.

    Please stop posting on my blog.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous5:17 am

    Yes Max u must follow zee line - there is no such thing as feminazi

    ReplyDelete
  7. Maia, you are accusing men of being misogynists (women haters) but you and your loony feminazi friends get upset when you are referred to as man haters. You are a very hate filled individual. You need help. Are you a lesbian by any chance?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Chuck I don't get upset when I'm called a man hater.

    But I think you're right being a lesbian is the source of all my problems.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think the term "feminazi" should invoke Godwin's law. I think it's fair to suggest that those who use the term have a degree of hostility towards women. It's hard to think of any other explanation for comparing people who hold strong feelings about how power is distributed between the sexes, with a political movement responsible for killing millions of people.

    On one hand, you have misogynists who kill, rape, abuse, and belittle women, who rail about how feminism destroyed their spot on the top of the heap, and who caricature those who have tried to change things. On the other, "man-haters" who, um, stage a few noisy protests from time to time to try and bring this to the attention of the world, and maybe refuse to go along with some of the more meaningless female social customs. I know whose side I'd rather be on.

    I'd like to join Maia in inviting those who think that respectability is the opposite of promiscuity, and that lesbianism is a mental illness, to piss off back to one of the many NZ blogs that cater to their particular prejudices. If I ever need to know what a real feminist is, I'll know where to go to ask.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous11:49 am

    A man writes (tentatively)...

    The trouble with 'man hating' is that it hardens responses from a huge number of men in the middle. They may not be your most radical comrades but they are support the idea that women should be treated with respect. They're strongly against rape and abuse. They try to be decent human beings.

    But this isn't enough. The more aggressive wing of feminism classes these men with the worst kind of rapist. Faced with this dialectic, the average male can accept his portrayal as the Enemy or switch off.

    I dont get it. Is this some sort of stalinist approach to force the class enemy out in the open, by attacking all males for the sins of the minority. What sort of mea culpa would be acceptable? It's hard to join the movement for reform if your place is to be the perpetual scapegoat.

    Or maybe men should just commit mass suicide and leave the world a better place.

    Ok, so you couldn't give a toss about what the average male thinks. In that case, be prepared to have your disdain reflected back at you.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I've never heard Maia conflate rapists with "men who support the idea that women should be treated with respect". You've got a straw woman of an argument there, anonymous.

    You don't need a certificate from Catharine McKinnon or Andrea Dworkin before you can join the movement for reform. You do need to grasp the idea that you may not have the full picture on understanding a group you don't belong to. Treating a woman with respect means different things to different people. In my book, it doesn't include telling someone off for what others may or may not have said, and accusing them of not caring enough about what you think.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous12:54 pm

    Hi Trouble

    Quoted from a few posts above this one:

    "As for men, I hate men who rape women, I hate men who allow other women to rape women, I hate men who won't listen to women when they say men raped them, I hate men who make jokes about raping women, I hate men who don't stand up to men who are raping women, I hate men who don't listen to women when they say we live in a culture that not just tolerates and encourages rape."

    Sounds like a whole bunch of conflation to me. Starts with rapists and finishes with men who don't buy the depiction of our culture as encouraging rape. Most men would fit under that last category.

    Correct, I don't have the full picture on groups I don't belong to. Do you have the 'full picture' on men?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Whether or not it's a large group that's covered by a behaviour, the statement still focuses on the behaviour, not on the identity of individuals. Can't say I'm too fond of anyone, male or female, who makes jokes about rape.

    I'm not claiming to have the full picture on men (you're assuming I'm not one) or any other group I don't belong to. Because of this, I don't complain about other groups not being accommodating enough in letting me join in their struggles for liberation.

    Try arguing with something someone's actually saying.

    ReplyDelete
  14. As male i have never felt that maia's posts have been aimed at all males, sometimes their angry and they may be aimed a a fair number of men but in the culture we live in i'm of the opinion thats completely justified - just my 2 cents

    Thanks so much for the blog maia

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous3:13 pm

    Trouble,

    Not too impressed by rape jokes myself. And I still think this whole debate quickly slides into aggressive anti-male rhetoric. So be it. I was just making a point that the hate speech is a turn-off to most men. A valid expression of anger? Fine.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Tell you what, when you find some:
    a) anti-male hate speech, and
    b) people who care about turning off most men,
    you can tell them about it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "I hate men who don't listen to women when they say we live in a culture that not just tolerates and encourages rape."

    Given that almost all men would fall into that category, including me, there's your anti-men hate speech right there. I don't have any problem with that though, because the concept of hate speech is bullshit - everybody hates somebody, and far be it from me to tell anyone that my hate is better than theirs. Maia's as free to hate men as I am to hate people who drive badly - it doesn't make her blog less interesting so why all the complaints? Bleating about hate speech is no match for having a convincing argument and making it.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I'm afraid the original subject of this post was completely outclassed by Chuck, whose hands seem to be so sweaty they can't manage the cut and paste.

    Chuck him out Maia. That's bordering on a threat.

    ReplyDelete
  19. The funny thing is, if there really *were* all these 'man-hating feminazis" running around by pathetic choads' definition, we wouldn't be able to walk for the bodies.

    ReplyDelete