Why do so many assholes think that rights for women somehow negate the rights of men? Men do not have a RIGHT to better pay, better opportunities, better health, better access to respect, better safety, etc. Just because something has been a certain way for a long fucking time doesn't make it right.

Kinda preaching to the choir here, but I just had to vent a little. :)

So wait... my rights are ...dessert?

Wow, that makes no sense at all.

So, what's best for women isn't what's best for everybody?

I was under the impression that when we have women who are successful and have more rights, it's better for everybody.

what a steaming pile of non-sequitur metaphoric poop

Actually what follows your quote is far more problematic.

His argument about the fetus being a human being is where he falls off the cliff.

Is a seed a tree? No? What is a seed then? If a seed is fertilized (pollenated) is it a tree then?
What about when it falls on the ground? Is it a tree then? At what point does the seed become a tree?

Just because the seed is not sitting inside a tree for 9 months while it grows roots and branches, doesn't classify it as a tree. Everybody knows a seed is simply a potential tree (or whatever plant).

How is it the same sturdy logic does not get applied across the board? That's the problem with the author's argument.

I don't get it, either. What is this "better" and "best" thing he's blathering on about? Isn't it "best" if everyone in society was free to do the "best" thing for them without gender stereotypes preventing them from doing so?

Just going from your excerpt, he had a pretty good argument going until he fell into the fallacy hole.

I agree, we should definitely not settle for "better than nothing." It just doesn't make sense that achieving the best means placing women above all others.

Then I read the rest of the article, and his argument makes even less sense. "Why aren’t women’s rights groups lobbying for" aborted female fetuses specifically? WTF?

I'm so ashamed that I go to school just 8 miles of the U of I

I read the whole thing. Pardon me a moment while I wipe my bleeding eyeballs.

His whole premise is wrong anyway. Women's rights supporters only want the same rights for women that ALL humans should have, so there's no dichotomy, no conflict. I agree, if we were pushing for abortion rights ONLY for pregnant women, we'd be putting women first, which would be bad. However, we all of course fully support the right for any pregnant men and fetuses to obtain abortion on demand as well. See? Feminism IS humanism. Jeesh. :)

Well, no, no one gender should be more important than the other. But methinks this gent has no problem with men being thought more important than women. That is the natural order, after all. Gag!!

"However, whether we understand it or not, sometimes we treat the good things as though they are actually the best things...Of course, I will say it is better to have women's rights than not to have women's rights."

So he's saying women's rights are good, but paying lip service to women's rights without actually making them a reality is best? And here we all are, confused, thinking that actually having women's rights is what's best?

I kinda feel like giving him a tapeworm, then campaigning for the tapeworm's right to life.

Don't forget, this is Palin's Alma Mater!

so...why did you even post this blog? this guy is totally dumb!! i'm going back to bleuclothing.com i'm stressed i need to do some shopping now!

My mind has just been blown in the worst possible way. Okay it's back...nope, it's gone again.

His /thesis/ is fetus rights are better than women's rights. His proof is non-existent because I aborted it. End of story.

I couldn't help but get the feeling that he thought fetuses were more human than women are.

???

And I can't stand when the pro-life side always says "don't deny that it's human!" Because, well, I don't deny that. The embryo is human. The fetus is human. The baby is human BEING, who lives in it's own body, no longer dependent on one other body. Yes, it's alive and human.
When I scratch my arm, skin cells collect under my fingernails. The cells are both alive and human, but that doesn't make them people. So, obviously there is something other than being human and alive that makes you an actual person.
Am I right?
eh? ehhh???

Well woman's right are the best things, but I think I understand what this dude is talking about.

Some radical militant feminist groups can get pretty bad. I wish those groups would remember that feminism is about equality not dominance and control. We should aspire to be equal with men, not think we are better than them. If feminists adopt that mindset, then we become no better than sexist men.

vaseline,

I've always found the "is the fetus a human or not?" argument beside the point in the whole pro/anti choice matter.

A fetus is human. It's alive, it's a person, sure.

But there is absolutely no other law that requires a person to provide the use of his or her body to another person who needs it to live. I can't be compelled to give my kidney to someone who needs it and will die without it. I can't be required to donate blood. I can't be required to even be an organ donor after I'm brain dead or dead. We get choices in all of THOSE matters. We can decline to save someone's life with the use of our body, and maybe people will be morally outraged, but it's our right.

My body is my body is my body. No one else can use it against my will.

The best part is that his argument could actually be used for women's rights...some rights for women are good, but having equal rights is best!

Tool.

Okay, so I get part of where's he's coming from. He actually is sort of saying "We should focus on all people's equality," but he's committing severe idiocy by dismissing women's rights because they're only focusing on one sector. Are people so incapable of multitasking?

Women's Rights does not equal abortion. Yes, abortion rights are a big feminist issue, but there's a whole bundle of rights we're interested in, too. When you evaluate "women's rights" as if the entirety of our rights is abortion... well... You sound like an idiot. "Women's rights," indeed.

God, talk about some bad press for my alma mater. I swear not all Idaho Vandals are as terrifying as this guy and Palin are. Also, you have to remember that Idaho is the most red state in the country, so take what he says with a grain of salt.

Hmm, that statement doesn't really make much sense -- other than that women's rights are not as important as everyone having rights?...but we knew that, and the movement is to help everyone have rights? Who really knows?

On an unrelated note, is the "Feeling Fat"/Why chinese women stay slim advertisement on the right sidebar really feminist? :-/

I'm actually a student at the UI, I swear, it's not all filled with Palins and Ledfords(the editorialist). I've actually got a Facebook group going if anyone wants to join, along with some other choice quotes of his .... http://www.new.facebook.com/group.php?gid=78365325183

emmakitty, I live in Moscow and graduated from UI, so I know how you feel. Nice to know another feministing reader's on the Palouse - email me sometime, and we should meet up!

But wait, wait, wait a minute.

What on earth does he believe the other school subjects are? As I read that first paragraph, I was imagining, "Ooh yeah, so the BEST thing is also covering gay rights, civil rights for minority races, rights to transcend classism--but wait, then what's missing? 'Cause feminists tend to be pretty vocal abou those things too..."

Psh, naw, forget about those. The other school subjects are Men. Men, men, men, men, men. You're only getting an A+ if you pay attention to the MEN.

Big sigh.

Not to hijack the thread, but emmakitty, riot_alex, and saraeanderson, there is another rabid feministing reader up here in Coeur d'Alene! (waves hi!)

So, um, how many children has this guy adopted? Mentored? Fostered? Is he a Big Brother? I love how few of these people railing for the rights of the fetus have done any volunteer work for children.

Keri

I was seriously disturbed to read see this for many different reasons. I am a U of I alumni, I work for a Rape Crisis Center here in town, and I actually know the kid who wrote the article. He is quite a bit younger than I am, but we grew up in the same community and I graduated with his older sister. His father is a VERY conservative pastor and leads a VERY conservative/fundamentalist church within the community. I cannot say that I am surprised by the rhetoric that he is spewing, it sounds alarmingly familiar to that of his father.

On another note, I would just like to say that Sarah Palin does not speak for me, or anybody that I know who went to the U of I. Most Vandals that I know are actually very embrassed that she went to school here.

I also find it very disheartening that some of the comments say things along the lines of "what can you expect from Idaho?" Idaho is in fact a very beautiful state with a lot of great things to offer. Just because we are rural does not mean we are all ass backwards. Moscow is a very vibrant community and I have very much enjoyed living here almost a decade. I have lived on three continents and Moscow is actually my favorite place. I have a large group of feminist friends, and nobody that I know (other than my partners crazy family) is voting for John McCain. I own a home, and my entire neighborhood is covered in Obama/Biden lawn signs.

That being said, yes, Idaho is a red state. Feminists living in a rural community tend to face barriers that urban feminists may never think of. Our feminism is challenged on a daily basis, and yes, we have to deal with people like Ben Ledford in our daily interactions. I can only speak for myself, but I believe that this has made me a much stronger feminist and I feel ready to handle any kind of crazy misogny that comes my way. For those of you who might be inclinded to write this off as "what can you expect from Idaho" remember that stereotypes can be very dangerous. You have feminist allies in Idaho, as you do in every state, no matter how red. We are all fighting for the same cause. Let's not break each other down.

"Some radical militant feminist groups can get pretty bad. I wish those groups would remember that feminism is about equality not dominance and control."

JennyOlson, could you please provide us with examples of "radical militant feminist groups" who think that feminism is about "dominance and control"?

The author comes across as a young man who's read lots of books with big, big words and hasn't yet figured out what they all mean.

I'm with ShifterCat, JennyOlson. Provide some proof of these radical militant feminist groups, because to me, you sound like Bill O'Reilly. That's where you got the phrase, isn't it? I hate to ask, because just reading your post gives me the "Heads up! Troll!" vibe.

Logical FAIL.

He's basically saying that women's rights are good *in theory*, but since women are not *technically* people, and only men are truly people (and thus are, by themselves,"humanity"), and since women having rights makes it difficult for men to be the only ones to get the best of everything and/or control the world, then women's right are double-plus-un-good for men (aka "all people").

See!? PERFECT SENSE!!! *brain explodes*

Someone please explain to this moron that Women's rights are part of what is best, like one of the delicious courses in that all out "Best meal" he's talking about. Equality is what's best, shit for brains, and Women's rights are part of equality, so yes, they are what is best, just like men's rights, civil rights, age rights, political rights, etc. They are all "best" beause they are the fabric of equality and equality is what is best. You're not putting humanity aside, you're fighting for it when you speak of women's rights. Or are women not a significant part of the human race? I forget.

Working hard to bake cupcakes as tasty as everything else actually just means you'll burn the thick, manly steaks, because everyone in lala-land is too stupid to multitask.

@Wendy: Women are dessert, see, which is not a significant part of dinner. You can decide to have it or not, depending on whether it's convenient. So I'm guessing he means he'll support women's rights when it suits him (ie, gets him laid or saves him money on dates), then stop when it gets inconvenient.