Ha! Of course, by posting these, my guess is it will lead to even more extreme emails. A runaway selection process where these guys try and outdo each other to see who can write the most offensively hilarious post and get it on the website.

Of course, that might not be a bad thing. The more hate mail filled with horrible beliefs, the more evidence of just why feministing.com is so important.

Is use of the word 'femme' code for something? It seems so oddly specific and yet two separate pieces of hate-mail used it today. It's funny.

"Really disgusting porn to"

Haha, dumbass used the wrong "too."

Please tell me that this sweet-talker is still on the market! I have been looking for a guy with tiny balls to keep me in a cage with cooking and cleaning breaks!

By the way, what would possibly be the point of writing an email to an "insignificant piece of meat"??

Is use of the word 'femme' code for something?

sgzax, I've usually seen "femme" in the context of role-playing and gender identity in some lesbian sub-cultures. The complementary terms "butch" and "femme" refer to both gender performance through dress and behavior ("femme" being the more "feminine") and also to the roles they prefer in sexual relationships ("femme" women usually not the initiator, the more passive partner).

Granted, most of my knowledge comes from more historical research (eg lesbian subcultures in the mid-twentieth century), so this may not perfectly describe the meaning of these words today.

What's unclear to me is if these writers are using it as code for "lesbian" or if they're NOT aware of the lesbian connection, and are just using it to mean "female"?

So maybe this is getting out of hand, I definitely see your point UCLAbodyimage, maybe feministing shouldn't post these so we don't get more crap hate-mail dumb boys trying once again to out do each other... I hope we're keeping names though so that we can track these jerks down if they say anything threatening or extra stupid...

Oh jeeze, and I was eating, too. This person is utterly terrified of women, isn't he?

Seems like this guy needs a biology lesson, too. A "cunt" is not an "ass", and vice-versa.

P.S. Some of these are so extreme and stupid that I can't help wondering if they're just TRYING to get people riled up?

My brother and sister sometimes blithely say extreme, sexist things just to see if they can get me to react before I realize they're baiting me . . . nothing this hateful, of course, but it makes me wonder if we're maybe just giving them what they want? (As UCLA suggested . . .)

"By the way, what would possibly be the point of writing an email to an "insignificant piece of meat"??"

You took the words right out of my mouth, Token.

And when will these boys get new material? Geez. If you're going to attempt an insult, at least be creative.

I love the recap, as if he had not just expressed the same idea over and over again.

"femme cunt"?? I don't even know what that means, but I want it on a shirt.

Dear Sad Little Man,

Too* - means also
To* - is a preposition

So what you meant was, "really disgusting porn TOO (meaning, in addition to my point)."

Now, if you'll excuse me. I have to go sit in my cage and not be smart.

P.S. Some of these are so extreme and stupid that I can't help wondering if they're just TRYING to get people riled up?

Of course. What else could it be? It's not like this guy is saying anything of intelligence here. He's just repeating the same bullshit any other anti-feminist would when trying to get feminists all riled up.

By the way, when someone becomes desperate to piss someone off, and it becomes overwhelmingly OBVIOUS, then it really doesn't piss me off. It's just too easy to make fun off. This guy has no life, I'm sure.

What exactly is a 'cunt ass'? Do all women have one, or only 'femmes'?

I agree with tofutti 100%

While I am all for shining a spotlight on sexist idiots showing their true colors (and poking fun where fun is due) these mailbag posts from today just look desperate for attention and trying as hard as they can to come up with as many things that they can to "piss you off."

It seems very falsified, clearly the people writing these letters are asshats but these just seem purposely exaggerated and not very believably.

DIBS!

"By the way, when someone becomes desperate to piss someone off, and it becomes overwhelmingly OBVIOUS, then it really doesn't piss me off."

Yes, exactly... this guy is just what the internet calls a "troll." While I'm sure that he is a dyed-in-the-wool woman-hater, he only wrote that email just to get people riled up.

If someone REALLY wants to get me riled up, they should be like commentators on FoxNews and couch their misogyny in bullshit and say something like, "I am a supporter of women because what women REALLY want is to stay at home and raise their family." Grr!

I actually just used mouth wash before I read this. Now, I have to go wash my brain. All the hate is gross. And yeah . . . even if he is purposefully 'baiting,' it's still pretty damn hateful and I think 'wow, dude, I NEVER want my brain to think anything close to that.'

My man is very good for cooking and fucking (better at the first than I am, actually). I am the philosophy major in the couple and so my logic naturally exceeds his. Still, I value him for other things as well. Memo to anti-feminist idiots: straight girls can be kick-ass feminists and bend gender roles, too.

Jessica --

Do you get letters like these often?

I think it's odd that something as (relatively) inane as panties would provoke such disgusting responses. I mean, you've talked about considerably more touchy things in the past.

Okay, I call shenanigans on this one. This is somebody trying to be an ass, but he's still being revealing. I'll peel it like an onion:

Layer one: on its surface, an absolutely vile screed towards women expressing an outrageous, violent, and frightening attitude.

Layer two: writing this is an outwardly confident frat boy type who considers himself to be a funny, witty guy. He enjoys "pushing the envelope" with his humor and prides himself on being "un-PC." He enjoys 4chan and Dane Cook. He thinks this email is satire but he wouldn't know satire if it wore a sign.

Layer three: inside that confident frat boy persona is a scared, insecure little man who doesn't understand women and is deeply unnerved by women who stand up for themselves. His proud "un-PC" persona is an accurate depiction of his insecurity with himself as a man, which is where his deep held misogyny stems from.

Amiright, guys?

Dead on exelizabeth!

exelizabeth is right on the money.

Jeez, Jessica. Thanks for the work you do. I'm sorry it results in this pathetic crap.

ten bucks says he masturbated as he wrote this.

Men are also apparently good at getting fucked in the ass. Now women –– we have vaginas!

"Now women –– we have vaginas!"

Not just any ole vaginas, but crafty ones, that make our lives easier.

Does a "cunt ass" also make mu life easier?

It's nice to see recipients and readers have a sense of humor, but are complaints of harassment, terroristic threatening or any other kind, being lodged for these?

Word, Tofutti. This business of clumsily going through a checklist trying to push our buttons is just sad.

The real threats, as ForbiddenComma points out, are those who couch their sexism in polite language which sounds reasonable to a less-informed audience.

Dear Sir:

After reviewing your file, we appear to have discovered your problem.

The cunt and the ass are, in fact, two different orifices. Please refer to the enclosed diagram. We think that this information explains some of your past problems with those cunt bitches, and hope that you will find making this distinction in future relationships will greatly improve them.

Best wishes,
Least of Your Problems Mental Health Clinic

Does a "cunt ass" also make mu life easier?

Oh yeah! I know my cunt ass is much more productive than my vagina (she can be a bit lazy sometimes).

poor guy can't find anyone to gargle his balls. i wonder why.

and yeah, what the fucks a femme cunt ass or whatever? lol

Let's not take this too personally, guys. Remember, he's talking about femmes with cunt asses, not women.

I mean... I guess it's sort of flattering that they all seem to assume that you're a complete wiz in the kitchen. If I didn't know better I would have thought this one was fake.

Oh my god, I just learned a new comeback.

Go gargle some balls.

Trying to get a mental picture of this turd is just too funny. Wow, just wow. What a terrible human being!

When I read "If you were my wife," I thought that sentence was going to end with "I would have wheelbarrowed you to the funny farm on day one, as only a woman who has completely lost her mind would choose a slimeball like me over plastic dicks in the cunt ass."

And, yes, I just used "wheelbarrow" as a verb.

It's kind of fascinating that of all the posts and causes on this site, this hostility has been triggered by a campaign to stop little girls being sexualised. You would have thought conservatives and feminists could agree on that one.

"Have a great, anti-feminist free weekend everyone!"-Jessica

I'd wish you the same if it weren't so obviously irrelevant. Well, I hope the majority of your mail is kind spirited.

As for this guy...oh dear. All that fucking...I hope he's willing/ready to be a father, since he'll probably sabotage your birth control.

Sexual frustration really makes some people mean. Oy.

Okay, that was so fucking ridiculous that I can't believe it's legit. It's way too outrageous. Please, "gargle my balls" - that line is from Knocked Up. Wait a second! I'm starting to notice a trend here...

Um...it really bothers me that anal sex is used as a degrading threat. Because that's all our bodies were meant to provide, right?

This guy is disturbed. I'm willing to bet good cash money (that I earned myself outside of a kitchen, thank you very much) that he masturbates frequently to violent porn.

I know we all get this kind of crap once in a while, but it just kinda wears you down after a bit. It makes my heart sad that this kind of anger can be stirred up so easily. But, on the plus side, I think you're right in pointing out it's probably because he's threatened by awesome, ass-kicking women. And that makes my heart feel much better.

KATE21

HAHAHAHA...

sweetheart, you can have him

(sorry, I went back and read all the awesome comments and that one just jumped out at me - seriously, I needed that laugh)

I find this one rather disappointing. He's trying way too hard.

The images with each new mailbag goodie have been the ultimate punchline. Clever, those :)

First, as an avid reader of this blog and first time commenter, I have to say that this hate mail made me laugh, not because it's funny but because it's ridiculous. This person can't even distinguish the difference between "to" and "too" (and cunt/ass? What's that about?!) which, is a pretty big deal for someone who is trying to argue that we are the less intelligent sex who are incapable of reason and logic. Second, I'd like to thank you Jessica for being a positive role-model for all those intelligent, independent, self-assured young women out there (and for those who have yet to find their route to feminism).

P.S. I just ordered your book online..Can't wait to read it!!

First, as an avid reader of this blog and first time commenter, I have to say that this hate mail made me laugh, not because it's funny but because it's ridiculous. This person can't even distinguish the difference between "to" and "too" (and cunt/ass? What's that about?!) which, is a pretty big deal for someone who is trying to argue that we are the less intelligent sex who are incapable of reason and logic. Second, I'd like to thank you Jessica for being a positive role-model for all those intelligent, independent, self-assured young women out there (and for those who have yet to find their route to feminism).

P.S. I just ordered your book online..Can't wait to read it!!

It's good.

My dildo never tells me I'm ugly or I'm doing it wrong or that I'm a whore. My dildo doesn't come before me. My dildo follows my lead and I can make it touch exactly where I'm interested without giving it a how-to guide. My dildo vibrates. A dildo is what every man wishes he had.

Where's the problem with that?

Dear Frat Boy,
You're gross. You're REALLY gross. I know that you were joking, but seriously dude. Gross, depraved humor is not my bag, baby. Please, do humanity a favor and give up on dating entirely. If most women knew that your sense of humor was actually sick and depraved, I'm positive that they wouldn't go out with you. In my ideal world, a Realdoll would not exist, but for you, I'd be more than willing to make an exception. It wouldn't be able to cook for you though, sorry. But after many years of partying non-stop through college and being kicked out of a couple of private colleges, you'll probably end up living with your parents anyway. Taco Tuesdays, eh?

Toodles, ya wanker.

What all you guys said, plus...

"not capable of using logic, and therefore must be treated like dirty little whores"

Wow, I would hate to know what he does to his pets then o.O

"8 hours later, the letter was finally finished. Mr. Schmuckerson was now free to retire to his parent's basement for a romantic evening with his favourite RealDoll - He fucked her in the cunt ass."

WTF! Since when did "femme" start being an insult? Or start having significance for English speaking, straight dudes?

It's popped up in two of the recent hate mail letters.

Maybe I'm in the dark about this one since I live in Québec and "femme" is the French word for women, or maybe it's because my best friends self-identify as Femmes, or maybe it's because I have "Hot Femmes on Bikes" spoke card for my bike, still WTF?!

It's this genius' secret dream one day to be bare-naked with a girl!

But kudos to Jessica for so generously taking on his case. His admission of his problem is an important first step in healing.

I can't say much about this pathetic text, it's just very sad and very, very badly written. And I'm sure there's a sad life of frustration behind it.

The responses are amazing! Thank you, all who commented. You rock:-) Your wit makes a wonderful Christmas gift for us all.

I don't know what's more pathetic; this letter, or that you fools think it's genuine.

Um, yeah, I'm sure it was just to get readers riled up. But, hey, dnx-x1- you're being a true ass, when you call readers on here fools.

You're the fool. Get it straight.

dnx-x1 -- you should think twice before you call participants of a discussion "fools." Typing is easy and fast, and hence often leads to leaving disparaging comments that are completely amiss.

Do you really think that it's a question of the letter's authenticity? Whatever the author thought when writing it, the issue is that it's full of unnecessary vitriol and misogyny. Wordas aren't just letters strung together -- the letter, whoever wrote it for whatever reason, is a verbal expression of aggression.

And please keep that in mind next time you feel the temptation to type the word "fool" when responding to a discussion. If you don't like what is sad, make an actual argument (not ad hominem, but about the topic). Or keep your dissatisfaction to yourself and comment on your own website. Don't troll around.

Hey, Januaries, et al: go to dnx-x1's blog. It's great for laughs. Oh, and I'm sure he has a girlfriend or wife. *laughs*
I think we're free to go ahead and pity that piece of fiction, as well.

Peepers, thanks--I tried. ;)

And La Femme, hope you like the book. Let me know when you're done...

Dear Jessica:

I regret that you have to slog through this level of stupid. If this one was your favorite, I can only cringe imagining the kind of tripe you get on a regular basis. Ugh. For the record, I quite admire the level of grace, class & wit on display in your response.

Cheers,
Smartpatrol.

Attn: the author of FH-ME!, dnx-x1, & all their friends. GWAR summarizes my feelings about you very well.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=PFNqi6fcjcc&feature=PlayList&p=D5024E10E149C192&index=169

Jessica: YOU ARE BEING TROLLED. You will get more E-mails like this until you stop posting them. Stop posting them, and they'll go back to a dull roar.

holly--this letter, while it may reek of misogyny, is intentional. It's purpose was to anger the girls on here, and it worked! Furtheremore, I didn't call every participant here a ''fool'', but rather those who honestly believed those are the letter's author's thoughts.

Januaries--yes, I have a girlfriend. What's your point? What is wrong with my blog?

I see everyone here is ''one (un)happy, tight family.'' It's pretty pathetic some of you ''ladies'' have to gang together to try to ridicule someone.

''To/too''--he probably made a typo. It happens, but obviously, you all have to jump on this one little mistake s/he made.

hlynn--so if you're not a feminist, you're an idiot? Well, you'll be glad to know 66% of women are not feminists. http://ms.cc.sunysb.edu/%7Elhuddy/neelyhuddy.pdf

Not that I actually believe this guy but if he really had a wife and kept her in a cage, he'd get arrested, and sent to jail, where he'd live in a cage and be some bigger guy's "wife." Irony is a bitch, isn't it?

you all have to jump on this one little mistake s/he made.

OK, this cracks me up even more than the original letter did. Man, you make one tiny mistake, and all the feminists jump on you!

Dude. That is the smallest of the many mistakes this guy made.

And...

. It's purpose was to anger the girls on here, and it worked!

I believe you mean the women here. While there are feministing commenters who are under 18, the majority of us are not. And do work on your reading comprehension. The vast majority of comments here are mocking the letter, not expressing anger.

I know it's probably not PC to say, but I sure hope the letter writer doesn't use innocent people at a mall or college campus to exorcise his disappointment with life.

I realize it's supposed to come off as over-the-top trolling, but I got a premonition of a sexually confused young man (bitter about his own internal inconsistences, with poor coping mechanisms, and unable to reconcile himself with social rejection even though he's tried to follow "the rules") climbing into the tub with a revolver and respectfully pulling the shower curtain closed so as not to mess up mommy's pristine white tiles.

Perhaps I'm just a bit weary what with the rash of disturbed young men expressing themselves through mass murder of late. I suppose we should all just chuckle and hope that with Jessica allowing this pathetic soul a bit of attention, he might decide to stick around for Christmas afterall.

BluePencils--not sure why you're attacking me, but whatever. I said the ''girls'' and I meant it. To me, it seemed they were expressing anger. Obviously, different people are going to detect different emotions from words, but you just have to attack me, don't you? Why don't you work on your grammar a bit? Didn't your English teacher ever tell you never to start a sentence with ''and''?

It's purpose was to anger the girls on here, and it worked!

First, as someone else said, we're women, although I suppose there may be a few girls who read this blog. And good for them! Anyway, we're not angry. We're amused, and a bit saddened. We do understand that these letters were written with the desire to anger us, that they're not "real," but who would write a letter like that, except someone who does have some serious anger issues towards women? Maybe that anger is hidden in real life, these may be the sort of guys who think it's just hilarious to bait the feminists, but...why would they bother unless they really believe some of it?

And I find it interesting how "you need to get naked, pregnant, and in the kitchen" keeps coming up, when these are the same guys (I assume) who also love to accuse women of using their vaginas for gain, either through sex, marriage, or child support. But then I guess I can't expect trolls to use logic.

BluePencils--I see you've changed your tone. My apologies for the above response to your comment, then.

I see you've changed your tone. My apologies for the above response to your comment, then.

Dude--I think you have me confused with another poster. Although that wasn't me, when you make aggressive posts on a blog, you should expect aggressive responses. And, there's nothing wrong with using "and" to start a sentence in informal discourse.

He lost me at "if you were my wife."

Yeah, if we were in Bizarro-World.

What makes these guys think that there's any reality in which a feminist would marry such a sorry, sad sack of hate and bitterness?

BluePencils--You're right; I did have you confused with someone else. I thought the commenter's name appeared at the top of each comment, like they usually do in most blogs. The blue lines' emplacement make it even more confusing. Anyway, my first post was not offensive. Using ''and'' to begin a sentence is improper English. One should not attack another's grammar if theirs is poor.

Using ''and'' to begin a sentence is improper English. One should not attack another's grammar if theirs is poor.

Using "and" to begin a sentence is improper only in formal writing. In other contexts, it's perfectly acceptable. There is no context, however, in which "too" and "to" are interchangeable.

"Didn't your English teacher ever tell you never to start a sentence with ''and''?"

Didn't your English teacher ever tell you never to use contractions in formal persuasive writing? And aren't you now ashamed that you did?

Also, didn't Fievel Mousekewitz teach you to never say never?

EG--as I said previously, the man/woman most likely made a typo. Don't tell me you never make typos?

UCLA--yes, she did, and yes, I'm ashamed. lol.
''Also, didn't Fievel Mousekewitz teach you to never say never?'' I'll let you think on how this is a contradiction. Tell me when you find out.

As for him saying ''cunt ass'', it's a common insult. It's usually followed by the world ''bitch.'' Do you fem girls never listen to rap music? Also, he said ''femme'' before ''cunt'', so I am guessing he meant ''femcunt'', which is just one word.

Dnx, I think most of us here refrain from listening to rap music. You kindly demonstrated to us how most rap is, lol..

:-p

From http://antimisandry.com/feminists_emails_me_after_reading_my_blog-t8837.html?t=8837:
I was on feministing.com, posted a comment, and 2 minutes later, I checked back and they were ALL ganging up on me!

Dude! What would happen if any of us went to anti-misandry to post about our devotion to feminism. That's right. We'd face a lot of vocal opposition. If you don't want opposition stay in your own corner. If you come here with bullshit you're going to get called out on it.

Also, that's real classy the way you posted another person's e-mail address in a hostile forum.

I love how many of them feel threatened by vibrators. It's such a loss, too, that there are so many men burning with hate because they suck so badly that they feel threatened by plastic toys. I firmly believe that anyone can be good enough in bed to see masturbation as supplemental to their partnered sex life, but for these guys, of course, it would require so much personal work and growing up it will never, ever happen.

funny. never would have guessed it. dnx-x1 is an MRA. go figure. and he gets dates, damnit! oh, no, wait... he has a girlfriend.
God, she must be a mess!

Anyway, notice how he stopped linking to his blog? amusing.

Don't tell me you never make typos?

Tons. And if I were so dense as to make typos in a hate letter, I would fully expect the object of such a letter and her friends to make fun of me.

Do you fem girls never listen to rap music?

Ah...I think we may have a clue as to why this particular MRA thinks we're being so unfair.

I was on feministing.com, posted a comment, and 2 minutes later, I checked back and they were ALL ganging up on me!

Aw! The poor widdle anti-feminist! All those mean girls are picking on him!

Oh, man...

I've just fallen in love with
antimisandry.com

that shit is too funny! they are scared of the wimmins! oh, noes!

man, my music snob came out reading that thread, where they assumed the catherine wheel email address was about catherine the great. dumb fucking assholes, a 2 second google reveals thats a band. guh. and while i kno nothing about catherine the great, im pretty sure most feminists arent big fans of the idea of rule by king or queen, as deciding who leads a country based on bloodline is far from democratic. guh guh guh.

im going back to the thread about our magical vaginas, its pretty much my favorite thing ever.

"""I love how many of them feel threatened by vibrators. It's such a loss, too, that there are so many men burning with hate because they suck so badly that they feel threatened by plastic toys."""

I don't know about that being the only reason. In parallel, I think alot of women would be uncomfortable with bringing in a vibrating vagina into the bedroom.

This might be a TMI but these things are pretty cool:
http://www.extremerestraints.com/humm-dinger-vibrating-cock-ring-3-pack_1506.html

Well UCLA, a woman can have sex with her male partner AND use a vibrator. A man using a vibrating vagina has limited options as to what he can do to you at the same time. So that'd be pretty shite.

OTOH if my partner wanted to use a Fleshlite or something seperately from me I wouldn't care. I'd be somewhat amused - he won't let me buy him one actually. LOL

"Well UCLA, a woman can have sex with her male partner AND use a vibrator. A man using a vibrating vagina has limited options as to what he can do to you at the same time."

Oh, I think two people could come up with quite creative uses. But I wouldn't let my gf buy me one either, I'd worry that she'd ultimately be uncomf.

Anyway, my first post was not offensive. Posted by: dnx-x1

If people are offended by it, it is in fact offensive.

And check Snopes.com for the subject of your most recent blog post, fool.

Sibylle,

I'm listening to Lupe Fiasco as I read that. Let's not lump all rap together, 'kay?

Also, I *love* the way we're being portrayed as a gang of women making fun of these poor iddle haters. As if we went LOOKING for them?

Why would I give a shit about displaying her email address in a hostile forum? This ''woman'' made a fake email address just to bother me. Not my problem.

As for me being an MRA--not true. I just go on antimisandry.com because they have *some* interesting stuff from time to time, just like I come here and other GOOD feminist websites such as the Independent Women's Forum. So please, if you don't know something, either shut the fuck up or research it. Before I forget, did I mention I fell in luv3 with feministing.com? They're afraid of men! Lol.

http://www.feministing.org is 200x better. :)

snobographer, just because people find something offensive does not make it so. I find your post offensive.

sgzax, nice stalking. I don't suppose you could stalk me to my house so we could have a threesome? ***awaits angry feminists lecturing on how I'm degrading women***

Roxie-
Which is why I said "most".

dnx-x1,

I read all the way through the comment thread just to say what misogynistic thing you would come up with next. It was worth it.

P.S. maybe you should comment on your own blog - then you could celebrate your first comment!

what i find most disturbing about these types of emails is that you just know, some of the people who write them have a girlfriend or wife, what must her life be like?

I know some of the emails are just written to upset people, I did some of that in my teens with various political groups but there are people out there who think this way.

@UCLABodyImage: I bought my husband a Mermaid sleeve. No more friction burn!

For people of either sex who are uncomfortable with masturbation sleeves that look like bodily orifices, I suggest buying one of the ones that looks like a flower, or like a simple jelly tube or pad.

(apologies for the OT.)

Mmmmm...I am willing to bet that the composer of that joke of an e-mail probably doesn't go out much and lives in his mother's basement surrounded by his Star Wars memorbilia. Possibly even a virgin who learned about "cunt asses" while watching his "disgusting porn". Eh, just a theory. I've known plenty of those types of losers, but this one in particular takes the cake.

/First post, be kind.

is Star Wars memorbilia.

Are you cracking on my beloved Millennium Falcon, my Star Wars figures, and my C3P0 carrying case?

Heh. I'm kidding. Sort of. I mean, I'm not kidding about owning my Star Wars stuff, but I am kidding about being offended.

As for me being an MRA--not true. I just go on antimisandry.com because they have *some* interesting stuff from time to time, just like I come here and other GOOD feminist websites such as the Independent Women's Forum.

Wow. Another troll trying to tell us how we should be *good* feminists, which, according to him is to be completely anti-woman. Is it time Jessica broke out the TrollAway? ;)

The responses to this blog are so damn hilarious. I've been dying of laughter for like an hour.
I hope the little boy who wrote that is happy with himself! I bet he is watching porn as we speak...poor thing.

bubblex--where have I said one misogynistic thing? Oh wait--I failed to agree with the majority of the crowd, is that it? Must be.

UltraMagnus--how am I a troll? Because I said something disliked. The IWF is not anti-woman, it's a women's forum.

I don't know if all of the hate mail you are receiving is just humorous or really sad. I think it's a bit of both.

dnx-x1, how many misogynistic assholes does it take to ruin a good thread? One.

The "Independent" Women's Forums a "good" feminist website? Please, don't make me laugh. Oh wait - too late!

"UltraMagnus--how am I a troll?"

I'll answer that for you - because you deliberately came here to start trouble and be annoying to regular readers. Now do us all a favor, and scram.

dnx-x1- "Cunt ass" is not a common insult. I listen to rap and I think I'd be more familiar with it if it were. Also, it's misogyny when *women* ask you several times not to infantalize them by referring to them as girls and you keep doing it. No one here is referring to you as a naughty little boy, rather they are referring to you as a confused adult. Also, linking to the other feministing to bother the women here does make you a bit of a troll, but if you didn't want the title, you wouldn't be antagonizing people.

Ha, dnx-x1, if you think women can't be anti-woman, you really just have no idea what you're talking about.

the14thoppossum--I listen to rap all the time, from mainstream rap, to underground rap that has never been released. Listen to some of Em's songs; he does say it in a couple of them. Royce Da 5'9'' is another one. So it's misogyny when I disobey women and still call them girls? LOL! Call me a naughty little boy if you want; I don't give a shit. Anyway, I'm going to call misandry on everyone who dared comment on my comments. :) I mean, it's only fair if I can get accused of misogyny for disobeying someone.

Annejumps--I was thinking of something else. This was not what I meant to say. Anyway, you want to know who's anti-woman here? All gender feminists. This place is a gender feminist heaven.

It isn't just sex toys that these men hate, Amanda. These MRAs hate Playboy and other non-degrading porn. They can't get their jollies off on underground porn, so they have to resort to the misogynist porn.

Quite frankly, I don't even understand how they are even allowed to breed in this world.

snobographer, just because people find something offensive does not make it so.

Look up the definition of "offensive." You're not the almighty arbiter of what people are allowed to be offended by.

I find your post offensive.

Then, by definition, my post was offensive - to you. I'm sorry you're offended by people pointing out facts like what the word "offensive" means and that the subject of your most recent blog post has been debunked. That sucks for you.

So it's misogyny when I disobey women and still call them girls?

Feminism 101: It's misogyny when you infantilize women by calling them girls, just like it's racist to call an adult black man a "boy." Matter of fact, next black man you meet, go ahead and call him "boy" and see how far you get trying to tell him that that's not offensive.

Dear dnx-x1:

please get a good dictionary and look up the terms you're using.

"Anyway, I'm going to call misandry on everyone who dared comment on my comments. :) I mean, it's only fair if I can get accused of misogyny for disobeying someone."

So disagreeing with you is misandry already, but you patronising the other commenters by calling them "girls" is not a manifestation of misogyny? Interesting...

Furthermore, it's not disobedience you're accused of but bad manners. You mention typos and "proper English" a lot and yet you're completely oblivious to how disrespectful your comments have been so far.

If you are not a misogynist, as you say, then prove it by a proper tone and level of argumentation.

You use the word "misandry" very often. Are you sure you know what it means? If you read carefully, you will realize that none of the commenters has expressed any sense of general men-hatred. You will also realize that feminism is absolutely not about that. Perhaps that is what angers you about it so much: that it isn't male-centered?

"Gender feminism"? Please... Just look up the meanings of the word "gender." Is it really hurtful to realize that the societal construction of gender has little to do with biological sex? I'd call it valuable knowledge, but maybe you believe that ignorance is bliss.

Please know those you want to call your enemies first. That's just basic homework.

Thanks Sarah, I'd logged off the computer for the night.

I listen to rap all the time, from mainstream rap, to underground rap that has never been released. Listen to some of Em's songs; he does say it in a couple of them.

And I think it's pretty established that "Em" as you so affectionately call him has severe issues with women, which only proves the point further.

So it's misogyny when I disobey women and still call them girls? LOL! Call me a naughty little boy if you want; I don't give a shit.

No one here is your mother or your "owner" so why the use of "disobey" (oh, wait, nevermind...) You have been asked not to address the women here as girls and yet you do it repeatedly because you're enjoying it and trying to get a rise out of people. The only thing the other commenters are doing it trying to point out to you that it's disrespectful and if you show them disrespect then they don't have to show you any and it makes you a troll.

Anyway, I'm going to call misandry on everyone who dared comment on my comments. :)

Look everybody! We had the NERVE, the GALL, to point out to dnx-x1 how he was in the wrong! FOR SHAME!!! FOOOOR SHAAAAAAAAAAAAME!! Don't you know women should NEVER correct menz? NEVER EVER!!! No stifle those laughs and hang your head in SHAME!! Poor, poor, dnx-x1. He's so wrong and someone showed him why. [/snark]

And now, I'm no longer feeding the troll.;)

You know, if I didn't know any better, I'd say it was dnx-x1 who wrote the letter to Jessica. It would make sense that a troll would send a nasty e-mail and then come back to see how we all reacted to it. Just a thought. Now to feed the troll whatever is in my pantry.

So what you're saying is that if we even so much as dare to disagree with a man, it's automatically misandry? Misandry would be making a general degrading statement about men that is false. An example of misandry would be, "All men want to do is get into your pants." An obviously false statement, it is nevertheless used commonly to apply to all men. What we are doing by disagreeing with you is not being misandrous. We are simply choosing to disagree with you. There's a big difference between the two, dude.

And do not call me a girl, because I am an adult. I live on my own, pay all of my own bills, and am a full time student and employee. By the ethical definition of adulthood, I am an adult because I am entirely self-sufficient. And as an adult female, I am called a WOMAN because that's what adult females are called. You would not be "disobeying" us to call us girls, you would just be an asshole.

dnx-x1, if you are still out there:

I went to that IWF to see what it is the readers disagree with. Initially I didn't get it, other than seeing they were whitebread and boring, certainly with no forum for discussion such as this one. Then I went to Wikipedia, and other sites critical of it. It's quite clear what is wrong with them. They are not too subtly rightwingers who want to maintain traditional gender roles and spit upon the modern woman.

I've also been to your antimisandry website and believe I have made my way around the entire site during the night. The only place I saw them open to exchange was in the Feminist Flipside forum, where they were willing to be polite, but it was clearly hostile for the lone feminist in one thread anyway. As one admin posted once, "How are women treated unfairly?"

You're in the wrong place, dude. I suggest you read your way through the resources here. I don't agree with every single thing, but I won't attack them for it.

I do not believe dnx-x1 wrote that e-mail. That message, despite its grammatical errors and open hostility, is very efficient in length, pretty much hitting all buttons, and fairly well planned out to do so. I wouldn't be able to write something like that in less than 2 or 3 pages single spaced with numerous anecdotes and cites, in sentences of paragraph length.

dnx-x1 is openly insecure and even more simple. He's down to one liners. He sounds like he is in his early 20s or younger, without a steady girlfriend he would be able to communicate with.

I suggest you read your way through the resources here. I don't agree with every single thing, but I won't attack them for it.

A Male, you grasped one of the crucial points about feminism in these words, one that dnx-x1 and many other opponents keep missing.

Feminism is about free thought. Feministing and the exchanges on the forum reflect the fact that we're not here to form some sort of a feminist militia or front but discuss issues that are important to us in a civilized manner (yes, this is to you, dnx-x1). It's logical that we're not here simply to nod to each other's responses or put each other "in place," and so we won't agree 100%.

If you understand and respect this rule then you're welcome here irrespective of your sex. (So, logically, we're not here to exercise misandry.)

I went to that IWF to see what it is the readers disagree with. Initially I didn't get it, other than seeing they were whitebread and boring, certainly with no forum for discussion such as this one. Then I went to Wikipedia, and other sites critical of it. It's quite clear what is wrong with them. They are not too subtly rightwingers who want to maintain traditional gender roles and spit upon the modern woman.

Okay... silly question of the day.

If you read IWF's stuff (I moseyed on over and saw that they had policy papers about getting women to financial independence in college so that they can start saving for retirement; and another which talks about the participation of women in politics in the Middle East), then why take second-hand sources as a better exemplar of what they are all about?

Being right-wing doesn't mean anti-woman. You can be fiscally conservative and want to see women succeed on their own. You can be for the war in Iraq and want to see women succeed in Afghanistan. (Shrug.) It's a different way of approaching the same problem.

So, I guess the question is this: if you looked at their site, their policy papers, and their work, and found them to be unoffensive, why take someone else's word for it? Presumably, you like Feministing; would you listen to what Bill O'Reilly says about it and then decide that you don't like it?

One should not attack another's grammar if theirs is poor.

LMAO. You lack subject-pronoun agreement there. Subject: "One" - i.e. singular.
Pronoun: "theirs," i.e. plural.

Re-write as, "People whose grammar is poor should not attack that of other people," or similar.

As for "good" feminism: Please. The results or methodologies of certain schools of thought do not render one brand of feminism "better" than another. Should the premise be the same (i.e. women are the equals of men and our society ought to reflect that equality and inherent worth), then it is good feminism.

/rant

" . . . why take second-hand sources as a better exemplar of what they are all about?"

Because I do not expect the average organization, including this one, to be critical of themselves or promote such criticism. Why not ask other readers why they would laugh upon simply hearing the name IWF associated with "good" feminism? I trust they know more than I, and I don't want to get into what I believe "good" feminism to be.

"Being right-wing doesn't mean anti-woman."

Maybe. But I wonder how Cheney's wife, her compatriots, and their "conservative" members/supporters vote, despite claiming to be nonpartisan? And no official position on abortion or same-sex marriage? How can they possibly ignore them as an issue? That would be like a men's rights organization with no official position on legal rights of fathers or traditional family values. Know any without them? They may exist, but I can't imagine.

I can see a lot of reason at that site, but I can see why people here may choose not to stand by them.

Whatever happened to "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all"?

I would reply to all you dear ''ladies'' (is this better than ''girls?''), but you've all made such long replies, it's impossible for me to do so. If you're really eager for a debate, I guess you could just email me.

I'll just reply to ''a male''. I'm not using ''one liners'' anymore than anyone else. So what if IWF has no forum? This site doesn't either.

P.S. UltraMagnus, you're an idiot lacking comprehension skills. Please, go to your local doctor, ask for a year's supply of IGF-1, use it, read some books and go back to English class, then read what I said again.

"Whatever happened to 'if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all'?"

OK I'll make it short and sweet: dnx-x1 - You may find it productive to learn why the others disagree with you. You can decide for yourself.

I did. I was willing to spend an entire night on it. And common sense should suggest why you shouldn't call them names to their face, so to speak. I won't do it at that men's forum, either.

This is not a "forum," but it is a forum for discussion.

ULTRAMAGNUS "Wow. Another troll trying to tell us how we should be *good* feminists, which, according to him is to be completely anti-woman. Is it time Jessica broke out the TrollAway? ;)"

Ha, ironically, this is the one thread where trolling actually is appropriate. It further illustrates the main point of the post :-).

EG "Heh. I'm kidding. Sort of. I mean, I'm not kidding about owning my Star Wars stuff, but I am kidding about being offended."

Niiiiice. Have you seen this? Absolutely hillarious for star wars fans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP8r8lhuA2Q

"Have you seen this? Absolutely hillarious for star wars fans."

I like TROOPS.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWr6ec2zEyE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5blbv4WFriM&feature=related

A male--alright. Not that I really care why they disagree with me, but alright.

To everyone else: why do you [select appropriate term] disagree with me?

The Star Wars video games are pretty good for a game based on a movie, eh?

A male,

When you divide the country into rough halves (the conservative/liberal divide is pretty close to that) and have a sizeable amount of both men and women on each side (obviously, there is some skew towards women being left-leaning and men being right-leaning), I find it frankly incredible that you can make that claim.

You really think that half the country - and at least 1/3d of the women - are anti-woman?

I've dragged up the stats before, but more women than men are pro-life. This begs the question: what on earth is your definition of "anti-woman?" Would you please at least replace it with "anti-third-wave feminism," because they are entirely different kettles of fish. My pro-woman reasoning does not lead me to the same conclusions as does other pro-woman reasoning, and there are a lot of women who agree with me.

Final point: as a logical matter, if you go out and say that a movement representing at least 50 million active voters is characterised by TWO people, you need to seriously reconsider your stance. Feministing readers would go crazy if feminists were characterised as all thinking the exact same way as, say, Jessica or Vanessa or Cara. They woudl point out that, as PEOPLE, there is diversity of opinion. Feminism is at least a discrete social issue, unlike the conservative/libertarian divide, which encompasses everything from social security, Medicare, the proper role of the federal government, infrastructure, military spending, state education standards, immigration, environmentalism, drugs... okay, yeah, my fingers are going to fall off listing all of the things that come under the left/right divide in politics.

50 million people, many disparite issues - I'm sorry, I simply CANNOT buy your argument. Re-think it, because it's absolutely unsupported by anything remotely resembling evidence.

It's pretty pathetic some of you ''ladies'' have to gang together to try to ridicule someone.

I would reply to all you dear ''ladies'' (is this better than ''girls?'')

To everyone else: why do you [select appropriate term] disagree with me?

(Oh, the poor thing.)

Loud, slow English: That's women, dearie.

"You really think that half the country - and at least 1/3d of the women - are anti-woman?"

No, though I can easily imagine people who might think so. Please don't ask.

"I've dragged up the stats before, but more women than men are pro-life. This begs the question: what on earth is your definition of 'anti-woman?'"

I'd really prefer not to answer in present company, because I haven't studied the issues in-depth and I'm not trolling, but I'd say, to be "anti-woman" [whatever your term means to you] is to restrict choices for women by maintaining tradition and traditional gender roles, for the sake of tradition, much less actual misandry? Is that reasonable?

Sorry, I meant "misogyny."

Oenophile:
The problem with IWF is that it's antifeminism disguised as feminism. They use terms like "personal choice" in their mission statement, but have a firm stance against reproductive rights (I don't know if what you say is true that more women are against abortion than are pro-choice but either way, being pro-choice I'd firmly stand by my conviction that no woman who doesn't want an abortion should ever be forced to have one). One of their greatest fears seems to be the nonexistant "boy crisis." And they argue with straight faces that anti-sexual harassment policies stifle free speech.
Other than the MRA stuff, it's all pro-Republican talking points peppered liberally with "it's good for women." Ending the FMLA is good for women. Tax cuts are good for women. Corporate deregulation is good for women. Traditional family values are good for women. Globalization and free trade is good for women... They don't explain how any of this is good for women, they just assert that it is.
It's Splenda to feminism's real sugar. It's a dupe to convince women that a vote for - say - Mike Huckabee isn't a vote for Colonel Sanders.

I'd really prefer not to answer in present company, because I haven't studied the issues in-depth and I'm not trolling, but I'd say, to be "anti-woman" [whatever your term means to you] is to restrict choices for women by maintaining tradition and traditional gender roles, for the sake of tradition, much less actual misandry? Is that reasonable?

That's incredibly reasonable.

I'm not sure, though, how IWF's recent white paper about teaching college-aged women financial responsibility so they can plan for retirement (HUGE assumption: women are in college to get careers, not an MRS degree, and should rely on their own sense to plan their financial futures) falls within any reasonable definition of "traditional gender roles."

You mentioned sexual harassment and chilling effects on First Amendment rights.
1. The First Amendment isn't just there to protect speech that you happen to like. It's there to protect speech that you don't like.
2. Here's the policy brief. They are NOT arguing for the overturning of all sexual harassment laws; they are arguing for reasonable laws that are not so overbraod as to make asking a girl on a date into a freakin campus crime.

One of their other campus articles discussed the obesity problem in women in regards to Love Your Body Day (i.e. LYBD should address the obesity issue as well as the anorexia issue). Oh, wow, so anti-woman....??

It is blatant on IWF from the statements made in it that they are after "marriage and family values" and that those traditional rolls are what make women happy. You can find it in the books they cover, it is even subtly there in the mission statement.

I agree with snobographer and ghettocr42 -- the IWF has a pretty apparent right-ward bias. With a little bit of digging I can see the anti-woman skew. However, giving them the benefit of the doubt, this doesn't mean that everything that they published is horribly biased, so I don't think it's appropriate to make generalizations. So, oenophile, maybe the LYBD article isn't anti-woman but some of the others are?

Like which ones?

Seriously. Your complaints amount to this: They are "right wing" (economically) and some people don't like them.

I call b.s. on the anti-woman thing. Total, unfettered b.s. that masquerades in "feminist" clothing. They just don't follow third-wave feminism (abortion on demand, government subsidies, etc), which is NOT anti-woman.

So they don't have the same thoughts on universal health care as y'all. So apparently they aren't real women, or they hate themselves, or any other number of groundless attacks that you can dream up.

oenophile:

Allegedly, they have "no official position" on abortion or same sex marriage, because the organization considers itself secular. Are those issues only religious? Can't they be deliberated in terms of human rights? I thought their current president was an attorney.

Their mission statement states they "[build] support for . . . strong families." Does that include LGBYQQ relationships and households? Their mission is to "rebuild civil society." I wish they were a little more explicit. RE-build? Was there a recent breakdown in civil society? What could possibly have caused such a breakdown, prior to their founding in 1992, when they were an offshoot of "'Women for Judge Thomas,' that was created to defend Clarence Thomas against allegations of sexual harassment and other improprieties." (Wikipedia). [Women for what? Feminists for what? zomg. The IWF can withhold judgement on the Duke rape case prior to trial if they want, but to have have their roots in defending Judge Thomas?]

What could have caused this pre-1992 social breakdown . . . Hmmm. What could it be, let's see here . . .

SATAN?

[No, the IWF challenges "radical feminist positions." (Wikipedia).]

Do you see anything odd about this? I can tell those are fairly important issues to feminists. Can I call myself a [good] feminist if I am unwilling to even publicly choose a side? [Pro/Pro] And I don't even consider myself feminist.

If I dared to make the assumption where the loyalties of self-proclaimed "nonpartisan" but also self-described "conservatives" like the wife of the Vice-President and her compatriots lie, which side would I assume they side with? Sure, most Republican candidates claim to be pro-choice, but they would be perfectly happy to limit access to abortion like Bush.

I repeat: I do not like the idea of terminating pregnancies for birth control, and I do not like intact dilation and extraction, the "partial birth abortion." But I wouldn't restrict reproductive freedoms.

Sigh. *LGBTQQ* relationships and households.

"Splenda" vs. "real sugar." I love it.

It's obvious these letters are written just for the reaction they can get. They are over-the-top with the stereotypes. Duh. Not worthy of acknowledgment, in my opinion.

Nightingale, while the goal of the letter-writers might be to get a reaction, no man who wasn't a misogynist would write stuff like that as a "joke." Their goal is to piss off the feminists because they're anti-feminist woman-haters. Would a person write misogynist letters to a feminist group if he/she was neutral re feminism or pro-feminist? I don't think so.
_________

The IWF is intent on preserving the white male power structure. You can see this in all their positions.

Jeez, I take a weekend off and all hell breaks lose! ;) Troll-be-gone is back. Sorry for the MRA distraction, folks.

I loves me some Jessica.

As for "good" feminism: Please. The results or methodologies of certain schools of thought do not render one brand of feminism "better" than another. Should the premise be the same (i.e. women are the equals of men and our society ought to reflect that equality and inherent worth), then it is good feminism.

/rant

I disagree. The fact that the goals are ostensibly the same does not make them equally good.

Consider: Two groups have the goal of ending poverty.

One group believes that the best way to do this is to give a penny to each poor person that asks for money.

Another group believes that the best way to do this is by focusing on increasing access to education, child care, and health services among other things.

I have no problem saying that the second group is better than the first. Claiming to believe X doesn't mean anything if your actions routinely fail to show X, or, worse, if your actions actually seem to work against X.

“"You really think that half the country - and at least 1/3d of the women - are anti-woman?"

Is it really inconceivable that 1/3rd of women have patriarchy instilled in them to such a degree that on certain issues their position is anti-woman?

Also, I have said this before without getting a response form you:
You posit that abortion is murder. Does that mean you are calling 35% of American women murderers? Because 35% of American women will have at least one abortion in their lifetime.

Let me give you another example. I am willing to bet that the majority of women in Saudi Arabia are in favor of, let’s say mandatory head to toe covering, or other discriminatory laws in that country.
Does that make those laws no longer anti-woman? Or does this argument that “if x% of women support it then it can’t be anti-woman� only applies to women in western countries?

Is it bad that after reading all 130+ comments, I'm still laughing at,
"What exactly is a 'cunt ass'? Do all women have one, or only 'femmes'?"

oenophile- really?

I am having trouble understanding your blindness re: the missions of the IWF. As another poster has said: just looking around at their website, is enough to know that they are (strictly my words) all about keeping women in their place.

I'm just having trouble understanding how a regular commenter, on here, can possibly be giving the IWF the time of day. All it takes is a cursory glance at their concerns. Actually, their positions on many feminist/women's issues, make me suspicious that IWF is really a bunch of men trying to make it sound like their misogyny is supported by women. Yes, that ridiculous misandry site had a "women"'s section, but it was plain to see that it was merely there to bolster their assertion that so many women agree with their positions. Oh, and yes, I did see that many "women" do post on their site. They either really hate being female, or are so indoctrinated into the patriarchy, that they truly believe that they are incapable of making rational decisions. Or, of course, they're men... posting as women.

Holly,

If a "cursory glance" at IWF would reveal their woman-hating so much, then:
1) why did the above poster not see it until he googled IWF (i.e went outside their site)? and
2) why can't you find a single article by them that is anti-woman?

Sojourner,

Oh, Lord, here we go. Um, hon, the abortionists are the murderers. Now, if that isn't enough to throw you into orbit, consider this: six times as many post-abortive women are part of National Right to Life as are in NARAL. I feel ZERO desire to condemn them for what they did; I'm quite certain that nothing I can say will do anything to ease their grief (or compound it).

Maybe you just don't know post-abortive women, or have never held one in your arms as she's cried about wanting to kill herself because she let someone end her baby's life.

Many women feel this years down the road, once they bring a pregnancy to term. They realise that each pregnancy is different, both for their bodies and their children. They see how, even early on, the different experiences and how that shapes their kid.

If you're trying to get a "gotcha," tough luck. I have nothing but the deepest sympathy for women who have been lied to by the likes of you into believing that they can "just" have an abortion, or that the "hardest decision they'll ever make" is the moral equivalent of a condom.

[Women for what? Feminists for what? zomg. The IWF can withhold judgement on the Duke rape case prior to trial if they want, but to have have their roots in defending Judge Thomas?]

THANK YOU!

You're revealing your ignorance of what went on during the Senate hearings. Most people who listened to those left believing JUSTICE Thomas to be innocent. Not being the racist that Maureen Dowd is, I don't believe that all black men are horny little jerks who get "x-rated tingles" at the thought of harming other people.

oenophile -

I found it in several places on their website, it is there and not hard to see. It is in the books they support as well as the articles the regulars have posted, and I didn't have to spend much time browsing to see this.

Here's where Eric goes OT again:

oenophile: "You're revealing your ignorance of what went on during the Senate hearings."

Thank you for what? I admit to ignorance on a great many things including the IWF.

I do not care about the Senate hearings, or what went on in them. I am only concerned by what really did or did not occur, which is quite irrelevant to whatever is revealed or not through investigation. For example, the vast majority of incidents of sexual harassment or sexual assault goes unreported. Victims suffer. Offenders continue life as usual, perhaps to strike again. BTW, the Senate barely confirmed Thomas, while popular opinion was not in favor, if you care to bring up who believed what. Hill's accusations are backed by witnesses, including at least one other alleged victim (yes, the fired Angela Wright, who was not heard). I choose Hill's side.

So what does Thomas' being accepted to the Supreme Court, his implied innocence, or the incident's implied irrelevance to his position mean to you about Hill's accusations? Is she a liar? Do you side with her detractors? Do you side with the "Conservative Hit Man" and character assassin David Brock who wrote and later recanted a book dedicated to smearing Hill? Do you agree with Justice Thomas that Hill was merely touchy and apt to overreact? * Was it just a conspiracy (racist, feminist, or left wing) using a highly educated, intelligent black woman to keep a black man down? ** To "Bork" him?

So how many readers came out on the side of Duke lacrosse players in the interests of innocent until proven guilty? Did any major new feminist groups spring into being just to defend their reputations? As far as the law goes, they are innocent, too. Would you suspect the motives of any major women's organization that was created explicitly to defend Duke lacrosse players? I would. ***

* I thought the rule of sexual harassment was, if the victim says it's harassment, it is harassment. Why is Hill's accusation any different from any other?

** What does this have to do with racism, or what I believe the nature of "black men" to be? [e.g., to NOT be horny and get "x-rated tingles" or imagine "harming other people"] I bring up the then Judge Thomas, because apparently defending him is how the IWF got their start, NOT to study women's issues or assist women in Afghanistan and Iraq. [Since you bring up race, though, it is an interesting coincidence that one male African American Justice be replaced by another.]

*** I know this is a very unpopular subject, and I wonder if my comments will be posted. I agree with the IWF that the media published too much incriminating information prior to trial, as well as unjustly besmirching the reputation of the accuser.

However, I do not join in any celebration of "I told you so," or MRA cries of "false accusation" because all this proves is that the prosecution was incompetent. No matter what, that woman deserves help, whether it be for the rape and injustice suffered, or for any mental condition in general that might lead a person to be less than truthful. She should not be attacked and no action should be taken against her because I agree other victims must not be cowed into silence due to fear of not being believed or having their lives and reputations publicly ruined. Those men, well, they can go back to what is left of their lives, and I do hope they are not unduly burdened during employment searches, et cetera. I look forward to seeing if a civil suit from either side goes forward.

Oh, about the IWF and "good" feminism. I will not bother to research or discount any of your abortion claims, because I fail to see how any rate of post abortion regret or even threat of suicide should stand in the way of the choice a person freely makes. In the health care field, we can see choices that may cause up to 100% premature death of the patient, like refusal to undergo radiation therapy and chemo, refusal to stop smoking, refusal to treat their HIV, or deciding to go ahead with surgery that has a minimal chance of success like separating conjoined twins, much less knowingly removing a weaker conjoined twin to die (note even already born children lack right to medical consent - are parents of unsuccessful surgical patients and their surgeons murderers as well?).

I share your distaste of the possibility of termination being used as birth control, I really do. I am pro-choice. I would prefer people choose to have children. However, aside from it not being my business, one cannot generalize abortion as murder. In even introductory nursing classes, we learn just how unlikely it is that a fertilized egg or even successfully implanted embryo will ever be born alive, not lost through natural processes or anomalies. Those missed periods or false alarms followed by resumption of the cycle? Perhaps the woman actually experienced a miscarriage, which is what we in the health care field refer to as "abortion." I have even seen healthy babies come out of their mothers blue, needing oxygen or resuscitation. The rule of "beyond a reasonable doubt" necessary for any criminal conviction does not apply. Or do you support rough justice to put a halt to abortions [termination of pregnancy]?

"The hardest choice a woman will ever make" is just that. It is not the moral equivalent of putting on a condom, and I don't know and don't care who may say so. It is an invasive medical procedure, with risks, as you well know. I agree with people who comment they would like abortion to be legal, safe, accessible, and rare. I hope you or any organization you may be affiliated with can provide support for the traumatized women you describe, and that they can find peace. If I ever encounter such a woman, I will try to make the proper referrals, as well. It was a choice they had a right to make.

OT: Sorry, I was referring to popular opinion siding with Thomas or Hill, not Thomas' being confirmed.

More OT:

"consider this: six times as many post-abortive women are part of National Right to Life as are in NARAL."

How silly of me for not thinking! How very clever of you for neglecting to mention! I do have a question:

How many (tens of) millions of other women simply wanted to put it behind them, not motivated to join either cause; and suffered no significant lasting trauma? Can you provide me with a pie chart to show me how relevant your figures are? P.S. It still doesn't matter.

Because you see, my wife is one of those women - twice over since we've been married, as far as she is willing to tell me. If I hadn't noticed the hospital receipt (woman's a mad organizer), I would never have known at all.

Early in our marriage, before our current children, there were some problems. My wife was unsure who the fathers were - twice. She decided not to "burden" me, and went in for her procedures and made her weeks long recovery all alone. How sad for her to feel she lacked my support and needed to keep the secret. I have since sat her up in bed, taken her by the hand, looked her directly in the eye, and made clear to her that any child in my house will be accepted and loved as my own. That was when she cried.

As a matter of fact, it would have been quite interesting in Japan, if my wife had later given birth to caucasian or dark skinned babies.

Nice retorts, A male!! You will see that oenophile has a knack for turning any thread into a thread on "abortion is murder."

um, yeah, oenophile:

just this year IWF was celebrating the drop of the Duke Larosse case. you know, all of those nasty false rape charges women make./snark

oh, and, yes- your views on abortion- just stop.

I remember the Hill-Thomas hearings. I, like most people I know, watched them. Every single person I know--and not just me, go back and check out the polls--came away believing Hill, as she had nothing to gain and a lot to lose by coming forward.

I find it interesting to see how accusations of racism are deployed by white conservatives. Apparently, believing and supporting a black woman is racist, but writing off the experiences and testimony of a black female law professor isn't. Fascinating.

For anyone who doesn't get it: I am not on a victim's side simply for being a woman, or on a minority's side simply for being a minority. Accusers deserve to be heard and given full consideration until given reason to believe otherwise, particularly by advocates such as feminist groups. And for the sake of other victims, they should not be penalized if reasonable doubt is cast upon their stories.

More unpopular viewpoint: I don't believe Tawana Brawley. Not anymore. However, I won't elaborate, won't attack her reputation, and would consider it inappropriate at best to sue her personally for any damage done. The accused can sue her most outspoken advocates and media outlets for millions, if need be. But other victims suffer enough.

"I remember the Hill-Thomas hearings. I, like most people I know, watched them."

As a matter of fact, I watched them myself. I was still job hunting after graduation at the time. Loved CNN and Court TV. I just have a poor memory in my old age. Yes. Professor Hill, PhD, *Justice* Thomas.

Those were very intelligent, insightful, and civil responses, A Male. Your medical perspective on abortion in particular was quite interesting.

If an abortion opponent would really like to get down and dirty, they would need to mourn every lost sperm and egg that *would* have met to produce future babies, if only man X had had unprotected sex with woman X on a given day, at a given time, in a certain method or position, to allow that single sperm cell out of 100 million, and that ova to meet. And maybe the "good" sperm would only have come from the fourth ejaculation while hanging head down in a love swing.

How many Einsteins has humanity been deprived of, simply because we are not screwing everyone around the world, popping out children, all the time, to obey God's command in Genesis and to take full advantage of all our genetic possibilities? If a woman has a period in January without being impregnated, have we lost the only cure for AIDS and cancer? If a man masturbates on Friday because his wife refuses sex, have we lost the bringer of peace to the Middle East? If a woman gets her tubes tied at 30, have we lost the next Elvis? Lame.

Or is that what the Catholic Church really has in mind?

I do not mean to discourage or frighten any future mothers, but it is true. The simple fact a child is born healthy and survives is a miracle. But it's not for everyone.

Eric