Let’s compare two feminists and their hopes for 2015

6 Jan

new year


Jessica Valenti is a professional victim, perpetually whining over the most trivial bullshit she can come up with, simultaneously screeching that men should stop everything they are doing and help her confront the horrors of wrapping Christmas presents and buying tampons, while blaming men for all the problems in the world. Help me, you violent, rapey, drunk assholes!


Cathy Young is also a feminist, although she can’t be a very dedicated one, as she still embraces patriarchal constructs like facts, logic and reason. Unsurprisingly, she is disliked by a lot of feminists, and even made it onto a list of women attacking women’s rights!!! The catfighting between whiny, harpy, bitchy moaners and rational, evidence-based, factual feminists  has never sent more fur flying!




Let’s look at these two and their hopes for the New Year.


Valenti gets off to a hate-filled bigoted start filled with contradiction right out of the starting gate.


Women and men need to do something about feminism in 2015: not just say that they are feminist, nor just share a few articles about feminist issues, but take concrete actions to make the world a better place for women and girls.

[Emphasis mine]

You hear that men??? Get off your asses right now and make the world better for women! And girls! And women, you can get off your asses too and make the world a better place for other women! And girls!


Fuck men and boys! Who cares if the world is better for them or not? Lol!


Cathy, in an affront to feminists everywhere, recognizes that women in other parts of the world needs some very basic rights, but when it comes to the United States, the struggle is for gender equality. Cathy privileges neither men nor women.


Do we still need feminism in 2015 and beyond—and if so, what kind? Advocacy for women’s basic rights clearly remains an urgent issue in many places around the world. Even in the United States and other advanced democracies, a movement for gender equality still has valid issues to address. Here are a few guideposts to keep such a movement from turning irrelevant, toxic, or both.


Jessica then goes on to bemoan the horrid, stupid, violent, frightening, monstrous men with guns running amok shooting up women willy-nilly! Ban the guns! From the men! Domestic violence is unidirectional! Women never shoot their husbands, and certainly not to avoid a messy divorce, amirite?


The intersection of gun and intimate partner violence also needs to be at the forefront of feminists’ minds in 2015. Last month, a Philadelphia cop Stephen Rozniakowski was arrested for killing his ex-girlfriend, Valerie Morrow, who had a protective order against him. Jason Down of Oregon had protective orders filed against him by three different women – including his ex-girlfriend Cassie Wagner. After Wagner ended her abusive relationship with Down, she was shot and killed in her home. Wagner has been charged with her murder.


Most women who are murdered by their partners or exes are killed using guns. The rate of these killings is so high that, according the Violence Policy Center, women are more like to be killed using a gun than “all other means combined”. It’s not enough that men convicted of domestic violence aren’t allowed to have guns. Those who have restraining or protective orders against them should also have to surrender their weapons and be banned from buying guns.


Modus operandi for our Jess – ignore all facts and evidence that suggests intimate partner violence is not only mutual, but women are more likely to throw the only punches. But lol! They’re hitting men, so who cares! We’re only making the world better for women and girls, remember?




Cathy has a disconcerting tendency to see all the humans as inherently valuable, and cannot prevent herself from caring about men and boys in addition to women and girls. If this were Salem, Cathy would be burned at the stake for heresy.




Equality should not mean that men and women must be identical in everything—it should mean treating people as individuals regardless of their gender. Too often, the debate about biology and gender pits dogmatic denial of any innate behavioral or psychological differences between the sexes against broad Mars-versus-Venus stereotypes and claims that traditional sex roles are nature’s way. It’s entirely possible that even absent any gender-specific social pressures, women would be much more likely to become full-time parents, nurses, or kindergarten teachers, while men would be much more likely to become CEOs, professional athletes, or engineers. But while many differences in personality traits and cognitive patterns may be innate, they are tendencies, not absolutes. Flexibility is part of human nature, too; and, just as many feminists exaggerate the role of socialization, many conservative critics of feminism underestimate the impact of cultural biases. We can work to reduce such biases and ensure that nontraditional choices are not stigmatized or discouraged—without demanding 50-50 parity in everything.


The other side of sexism must be recognized. Former Jezebel editor Lindy West has argued that such “men’s rights” problems as unequal treatment of fathers in family courts or bias against male domestic violence victims are rooted in patriarchy and that feminism is already addressing them. Unfortunately, facts say otherwise. On these and other issues, feminist activists and commentators have tended to side with women, oppose measures to help men, and promote women-as-victims, men-as-bad-guys narratives. Such double standards need to be confronted.


Jessica turns her attention to the genuine, life-altering and devastating effects of people being mean on YouTube, Twitter and Facebook, calling for a HugBox in which women are never challenged, confronted, questioned or otherwise treated like adults. She wants some serious technology to carry out her censorship program, because the tools right now just aren’t working. You report someone for offending you with a different opinion, or someone who has the nerve to tweet you your own words, and sooner or later, Twitter figures out no abuse occurred and the whole cycle starts again.


But violence and harassment against women isn’t just a problem in “real life.” We must hold companies like YouTube, Twitter and Facebook accountable for the abuse and harassment that happens on their platforms. GamerGate and a US supreme court case addressing online hate speech put to bed any questions about the ubiquity and awfulness of online harassment. Until social media platforms are forced to take hate speech seriously, we’ll be stuck with a point-and-click band-aid instead of real change. A start? Let’s see these companies put serious dollars behind tech solutions, and work with harassment experts on the best way to implement them.


Cathy, on the other hand, is more concerned about problems in the real world, but she still stubbornly refuses to embrace the hate and just blame men for everything.


The personal is not always political. Men behaving badly to women in personal relationships—unless such behavior has social and institutional support—is not necessarily a gender issue. Neither gender has a monopoly on insensitivity, rudeness, manipulation, dishonesty, or entitlement. What’s more, policing relationships in the name of ideology—for instance, trying to dictate how people should express consent to sex—is always a bad idea. Let us by all means have a conversation on changing sexual norms; but this can be done without using coercion and penalties to enforce someone’s version of healthy interaction, or focusing almost exclusively on male mistreatment of women.


A narrative is only as good as its facts. From “women earn 77 cents to a man’s dollar for the same work” to “one in five college women are sexually assaulted by graduation,” a number of statistics commonly used by women’s advocates have withered under scrutiny. So have some recent tales of alleged misogynist infamy, such as the University of Virginia gang rape and cover-up or the supposedly sexist firing of New York Times editor Jill Abramson. Too often, the feminist response to such debunkings has amounted to declarations that the big picture matters more than specific facts and figures. But the big picture had better be made up of accurate details. Campus rape certainly happens; so does workplace sexism. But addressing real problems requires solid research and reporting. We badly need more of both when it comes to gender issues.


For Jess, the issue is simple: men are assholes and the best way to show them what jerks they are is to pay women more and men less because vagina and equality.  And if Hillary loses it will because voters hate women.  Jess recommends the radical step of writing a strongly worded email to someone somewhere who will do nothing, but you can feel smug anyways.


These issues are hardly the only ones that require more focused action. Campus rape, domestic violence, street harassment, abortion restrictions, unequal pay and access to childcare are as important as they were last year, and, with Hillary Clinton probably running for President again, sexism in politics will likely rear its ugly head just as it did in 2008. If you tweeted about feminism last year, this year consider sending an email to your elected representative in support of a policy about which you care.


Understandably frustrated with trivial feminist bullshit, Cathy has a few more practical and concrete activities in mind. And of course, she keeps asserting that key issues affect all the humans, and the ones with penises matter, too. If Cathy had a penis, she would probably get castrated by the sisterhood for her dogged insistence that men are humans worthy of equal consideration.


Trivial pursuit is not the path to equity. Feminism is now battling the alleged scourge of men who take up too much space on public transit by spreading their legs? Not only is this selective male-shaming (social media users quickly noted that female riders are guilty of different-but-equal sins), it is also a comically petty grievance that could suggests the aggrieved have no real issues. Half of successful advocacy is knowing to pick one’s battles.


The biggest unfinished business of gender equality in the West is “work-life balance” and caregiving. This point was eloquently made by Judith Shulevitz in a recent New Republic debate on feminism’s future. Whatever role discrimination may play, childbearing has a major effect on gender disparities in career achievement. Even women who are satisfied with these trade-offs often feel the conflict acutely. But this tension is not just a women’s issue. In a Pew poll last year, almost as many working fathers as working mothers (50% versus 56%) said it was it difficult to balance work and parenthood. Overall, twice as many fathers as mothers—46% versus 23%—felt they spent too little time with their children.


Like many feminists, Shulevitz sees mainly government solutions. Others would counter that the flexibility and creativity of markets and civil society offer far better answers. But this is the kind of debate people should be having in the big tent of a true equality movement.


Cathy’s argument can be summed up with the following quote:


The perception of pervasive, one-sided male power and advantage can create a disturbing blindness to injustices toward men—even potentially life-ruining ones such as false accusations of rape. A true equality movement should address all gender-based wrongs, not create new ones.


Jessica Valenti? She summed up her own argument quite nicely:




If all feminists were like Cathy Young, I would have no problem with feminism at all. Unfortunately, the vast majority are like Valenti. They don’t care about anything other than themselves. They can barely make other women a priority, never mind men and boys.


Cathy Young might be a feminist according to the dictionary, but judging by her actions, she’s not.


She’s a men’s rights activist.


Welcome aboard, Cathy. Feel free to man-spread all over the damn place.




There’s room for everyone!


Lots of love,





68 Responses to “Let’s compare two feminists and their hopes for 2015”

  1. TMG January 6, 2015 at 22:17 #

    Cathy Young is a treasure. Too bad the bright lightbulbs at AVfM drove a truck over her for some unfathomable reason. Seems like they do that to a lot of potential allies.


  2. Paul January 6, 2015 at 22:24 #

    You do know that Jess doesn’t like being called Jess. Silly me, of course you do.

    She’s right though, Jess that is, if you tweeted about feminism last year you should send an email to your representative, especially if you tweeted that it’s an irrational, hypocritical, bigoted, hate movement.


  3. that1susan January 6, 2015 at 22:41 #

    I’m very impressed with Cathy Young, and especially liked what she said about equal rights proponents needing to be willing to work with other equal rights proponents, without caring about labels like “feminist,” “humanist,” men’s rights activist,” and so on.

    I like Young so much that after going to the link you provided and reading her entire article, I posted that link on a thread I’m participating in at a feminist site I frequent. I hope that little seed bears much fruit.


  4. AdVader January 6, 2015 at 23:02 #

    a pro-choice anti-feminist, whoehaah, idiots, like factual feminists, definitely a fembot is a fembot, by postmodern ‘choices’, always! thereby women’s rights are sexistic some even inhumane, and the pill dehumanzies as postmodern femini$$m does, the making of nracissistic borderlined sociopaths.


  5. mistuhgee January 6, 2015 at 23:23 #

    Jessica Valenti is a narcissist. And narcissists often have huge followings. See, for example, Kim Kardashian. While I can roll my eyes at Kim, Valenti is a narcissist whose drug of choice is conflict. She lights fires and then watches what burns. To suggest that women carry the ‘burden’ of gift wrapping is a dead give away that she had nothing real about which to complain and was able to fall back on her ability to complain about nothing. Run that issue past women in the Sudan and see how it flies. All we really learn is that Jessica is a lousy gift giver. This makes sense if she has a personality disorder like narcissism.


  6. Rodriguo January 6, 2015 at 23:36 #

    “Women and men need to do something about feminism in 2015: not just say that they are feminist, nor just share a few articles about feminist issues, but take concrete actions to make the world a better place for women and girls.”

    >> Ok, let’s go: first, we need to take concrete actions to ban Christmas wrapping, words we dislike, gendered toys and shirts depicting sexy women, criminalize men who speak to women in the streets and who spread their legs in subway, and get our free tampons.
    Then, when the world will be a better place, if we have 5 minutes we could maybe try to do something for women from Third World countries.


  7. Mark January 7, 2015 at 00:13 #

    They did the same for Christina Hoff-Sommers. Unfortunately, there are some there that often betray an insular mindset that tends toward extreme purism. Young, or those like her such as Sommers or Paglia, may not see perfectly eye to eye with all MRAs, but it is petty (not to mention very feminist-like) to throw out everyone who disagrees even when they are clearly sympathetic. And perhaps more importantly, it is strategically moronic. They’re not in a position to jealously guard the membership cards; when you lack any influence in the media and broader society, you have to make friends where you can.

    Some writers at Avfm just seem to enjoy telling people to ‘fuck themselves’ even people who are more friend than enemy.


  8. Mark January 7, 2015 at 00:15 #

    Um, what? Maybe try using sentences.

    See JB, this is why grammar is important. 😉


  9. Mark January 7, 2015 at 00:18 #

    I agree with her though, we need to do something about feminism. Oh yes, something definitely needs to be done about it. What shall we do about it? Toss it into the proverbial dust bin of history, perhaps.


  10. FuzzieWuzzie January 7, 2015 at 00:44 #

    Boiling all this down, it looks like we have two advocates. one divicisive and one unitive. My personal preference is for the one that is unitive. However, since we’re talking about feminists, the unitive ones are in the minority. May the divisive ones reveal themselves to the world as what they are.


  11. AdVader January 7, 2015 at 01:48 #

    maybe try to understand in stead of distracting by cowshitting about grammar?


  12. Mark January 7, 2015 at 02:29 #

    That post is not understandable. No amount of trying helps.


  13. b g January 7, 2015 at 03:48 #

    Yeah, an ally is an ally.


  14. Liam January 7, 2015 at 03:59 #

    I’m so sick of the “Obama beat Clinton because sexism.” If it had gone the other way, there would be those saying “Hillary beat Barack because racism.”

    It was a f***ing AMAZING moment in US politics, for the first time, a major party was going to have a black or female Presidential candidate. We couldn’t have both, and either was a win.

    Anyone who says it went this way “because vagina” seriously needs to get out of the gene pool and let the smart people do the thinking…


  15. AdVader January 7, 2015 at 04:28 #

    that post is understandable, obvious not for you.


  16. Liam January 7, 2015 at 04:43 #

    It really isn’t.


  17. AdVader January 7, 2015 at 04:49 #

    next one saying its not understandable, come on trolls expose urselfs or rather ur altered ego’s!


  18. Ferrum January 7, 2015 at 04:53 #

    It was an amazingly bad moment in US politics. Remember, it’s not about the book’s cover, but the contents. And for either of those two to have a chance at taking the cake, well, that speaks volumes about the nation and none of it’s good.

    I would also note that there were several black candidates on the other side of the aisle, but they were ripped to shreds by the media and talking heads. They just never stood a chance… and that says all you need to say about the media and the voters.


  19. Astrokid NJ January 7, 2015 at 05:51 #

    Cathy Young might be a feminist according to the dictionary, but judging by her actions, she’s not.
    She’s a men’s rights activist

    Yeah right. She will be the shallowest MRA ever, never talks about female forms of power (sexual and emotional), with the least insight into how high-status males and State savage other men out of self-interest.

    Is a men’s rights movement the answer? Advocates of men’s causes such as author Warren Farrell have made needed contributions to the understanding of gender issues. Unfortunately, any movement championing one gender seems doomed to devolve into victim politics and demonization of the other sex. Some leading men’s rights websites such as A Voice for Men offer a steady diet of vulgar woman-bashing that discredits any valid points they may make.

    Perhaps what the 21st century needs is not a women’s movement (which was once essential to secure basic rights) or a men’s movement, but a gender equality movement. The problem today is not a “war” on anyone, but rather biases that limit and hurt both sexes in different ways, and the challenges of adapting to new rules and new roles.


  20. Spaniard January 7, 2015 at 09:19 #

    Hopes for 2015

    *The growing of PEGIDA movement in all Europe.
    *The protection of the institution of prostitution.
    *Promoting “slut walks” and prostitution schools, like the one which is already working in Valencia (Spain).
    *Shaming on the beta males who have children in order to get female attention. The campaing could be: “It is your fault if your wife left you with no penny”


  21. Spaniard January 7, 2015 at 09:22 #

    Personal hopes 2015:

    *Shagging Jessica Valenti.


  22. Spaniard January 7, 2015 at 09:37 #

    I have just seen a video called: “Consent is sexy”. In the video, a guy asks (in the bed) all the time to a girl: “May I kiss you?”, “May I touch you here?”, “May I touch you there?”.
    Well, first time I saw I thought it was a joke, but it is not.
    The more funnny thing is the looks of the guy, who is the typical pro-male the gynocentric culture: hipster beard and full of and tattoos. YEK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


  23. Spaniard January 7, 2015 at 09:45 #

    Sorry about syntax mistakes in last comment.


  24. that1susan January 7, 2015 at 14:47 #

    I agree with both Mark and Liam. When I first saw that post, I’d intended to ignore it, because it seemed to most likely be a feminist troll (of the Jessica Valenti variety and not the Cathy Young variety — I can’t imagine Cathy wasting her valuable time being a troll anywhere) aiming to bulk up the negative stereotypes about MRAs. I still lean more toward thinking it’s a troll post, because even the non-native English speakers I talk with every day can communicate more clearly than that.


  25. that1susan January 7, 2015 at 15:08 #

    You really think she’s shallow? I think she made excellent points demonstrating that there is more than one side to every issue. For example, she emphasized that rape is real, but so are the rights of the accused and there’s a danger in clinging to the idea that the accuser should always be believed without question; that while some men take up extra space by spreading their legs on the subway, some women take up extra space in other ways (and while emphasizing this, she very skillfully interjected the idea that even focusing on this issue gives the impression that feminists have nothing of substance to work on).

    Also, I interpreted her article as saying that we need to move out of the mentality that says men’s and women’s mental, psychological, and social development is either 100% biological and 0% environmental, or vice versa — and in my opinion, being able to embrace the importance of both biology and environment can create a much freer world for boys and girls, in which those who choose traditional career paths for their gender, and those who choose nontraditional paths, are equally valued and supported.


  26. TMG January 7, 2015 at 15:41 #

    I also note that Young’s critique of AVfM is far more mild than AVfM’s critique of the MGTOW community, who they also just threw under the bus.


  27. Emma the Emo January 7, 2015 at 17:42 #

    Cathy Young seems to have nuance when it comes to understanding reality. And that’s very good. I see she criticized MRAs as well. I’m also uneasy about MRAs using too many feminist identity politics tactics. Sometimes it feels a bit like trying to use Sauron’s ring for good.


  28. Astrokid NJ January 7, 2015 at 18:22 #

    shallow MRA.. as in lacking depth for an MRA. And I mentioned what in the rest of my comment ‘ never talks about female forms of power (sexual and emotional), with the least insight into how high-status males and State savage other men out of self-interest‘.

    Of course she made excellent points, but look back at what you yourself said. I think she made excellent points demonstrating that there is more than one side to every issue. There is more than one side to every issue? Now.. is that news? Sure it is news to the world.. the world that blocks mens suffering, and lets feminists air their minutest grievances every day.

    In an earlier comment, you say

    I’m very impressed with Cathy Young, and especially liked what she said about equal rights proponents needing to be willing to work with other equal rights proponents, without caring about labels like “feminist,” “humanist,” men’s rights activist,” and so on.

    And she has been saying the same thing for 25+ years. You can look up her earlier essays. She seems to be an idealist, and certainly not a pragmatist. Mainstream feminists wont even work with feminists Cathy Young, Christina Hoff Sommers, Camille Paglia, Wendy McElroy, let alone others. They havent done it for decades, and that begs an explanation.. one which Young is unwilling to explore.
    While Young mentions the role of biology, I have seen her passing mention of the ‘Women are wonderful’ effect (the work of Alice Eagly) only in the last couple of years

    While British feminist writer Laurie Penny asserts that our culture “hates women,” researchers including feminist psychologist Alice Eagly find that if anything, both sexes view women more favorably than men.

    And even mainstream humanists are largely supporters of feminists. Look up American Humanist Association, which has a feminist caucus, and has awarded Gloria Steinem ‘Humanist of the year’ award, and has trashed MRAs.
    Heck.. Does Cathy herself work with MRAs (other than the rather quiet-in-public NCFM)? at least feMRAs like Karen Straughan, JudgyBitch?

    My contention that she’s a shallow (lacking-depth or level-1) MRA stands.


  29. David Sutton January 7, 2015 at 20:55 #

    Not only is it not-understandable, but it also lacks any pretense of grammar or cohesion. Exactly what message are you trying to convey?


  30. Astrokid NJ January 7, 2015 at 21:22 #

    AdVader is NOT a feminist troll.
    He’s actually one of the unhinged folks from the fathers rights side, pretty much like “Peter-Andrew:Nolan” (aka @EqualB4Law)
    He seems to be from scandidinavia (see his blog) and can be found on twitter (@ontvadering) butting into conversations with the most insane rants, usually contains the word post-modernism. A sample..

    Ad Verdiesen ‏@ontvadering Oct 3
    @BlackBeard20096 @AVoiceForMen postmodernism is ALL about pseudological LIES, to dehumanize, to zombinize, to control, egotistic&hedonistic.

    Ad Verdiesen ‏@ontvadering Sep 30
    @AVoiceForMen blahblah, making a point meanwhile missing the point, avfm is as weakminded as postmodernism, as femini$$m-samesexuality..

    Ad Verdiesen ‏@ontvadering Sep 16
    @AVoiceForMen @deanesmay whatever, postmodernism destroys the world!

    Ad Verdiesen ‏@ontvadering Sep 13
    @AVoiceForMen why is a ‘violent’ relationship unhealthy? and a feminized homophiled relationship healthy? postmodernism is a mindillness


  31. Jason Wexler January 7, 2015 at 23:01 #

    You’re confusing content or coherency with grammar, allow me to demonstrate, by correcting his grammar and the attempting to translate his meaning, in absence of grammar.

    A pro-choice anti-feminist? Whoehaah! Idiots, like factual feminist, definitely a fembot is a fembot, by postmodern ‘choices’, always! Thereby women’s rights are sexist, some even inhumane; and the pill dehumanzies as postmodern femini$$m does. The making of nracissistic borderline sociopaths.

    a pro-choice anti feminist wow thats surprising they’re still idiots even those like the factual feminist though a feminist is a feminist they’re always defined by their insistence on using postmodernism under the guise of choice therefore womens rights are sexist and often inhumane meanwhile birth control is another postmodern dehumanizing aspect of feminism taken together its a recipe for creating narcistic personality disorder and borderline sociopathy

    While I think the second paragraph is more legible and understandable, I admit the absence of punctuation made writing it somewhat painful. Also since I can see possible points of confusion, allow me to post the fully corrected version:

    A pro-choice anti feminist? Wow! That’s surprising. They’re still idiots, even those like the factual feminist, though. A feminist is a feminist, they’re always defined by their insistence on using postmodernism under the guise of choice. Therefore, womens rights are sexist and often inhumane. Meanwhile, birth control is another postmodern dehumanizing aspect of feminism. Taken together, it’s a recipe for creating narcistic personality disorder and borderline sociopathy.


  32. Jason Wexler January 7, 2015 at 23:41 #

    I think his blog is written in Dutch, not Swedish. If it is Swedish he’s as incomprehensible in his native tongue as in English. If it’s Dutch, as I suspect, I’d argue he is just unconcerned with typos. The kind of person that posts and runs, hoping that people care more about meaning than style. In other words, like most of the people on the Internet.


  33. that1susan January 8, 2015 at 00:30 #

    I just see it differently because I think people like young and JB here, too, are stirring up great changes just by getting diverse people talking about these issues. I’m not saying that it should stop with talking, but talking is where it needs to start. Maybe Young’s been saying these same things for 25 years, but it seems like the world is now in a place where those words can be a catalyst in a way that we weren’t ready for before.

    I’ve just had someone (who doesn’t like Young) encourage me, over at the feminist site I also post at, to get involved in organizations I care about, and also to write Young a letter sharing my idea on how to solve a particular problem — which I can of course do without needing her permission. She also accused Young of tearing down the organization of feminism without offering any real solutions to the problems she was introducing.

    I see Young’s first step toward solving the problems she is talking about NOT as her laying out all the solutions and expecting “we the people” to follow her, but rather (as I mentioned above) as her pulling us all together and getting us to talk and share our perspectives, so that “we the people” can use our combined strengths and perspectives to craft much better solutions than any one person could by him or herself.

    I see a lot of change happening because of people sharing ideas and information over the Internet. Look at the Arab Spring — and yes, I know that seemingly fell apart, but it’s kind of like the protests in Hong Kong; oppressors will try to oppress for as long as they can, but these seeds of awareness have been planted, and, much as they try to stuff the cat back into the bag, it won’t fit anymore.

    Words really do have power — which is, I suspect, why that feminist I mentioned above wanted me to quit saying what I was saying in that discussion thread, and just write letters and join organizations instead.


  34. Astrokid NJ January 8, 2015 at 00:55 #

    Sure.. not a problem.
    I do think Cathy Young’s work is very valuable for a certain target audience. She is a good stepping stone, and her good reputation is well deserved.

    If you are passing her work around, may I suggest you also look at the work of others like Camille Paglia, Darwinian Philosopher Helena Cronin, individualist feminist Wendy McElroy.
    I have some of their videos on my YouTube channel.
    To start with,

    When I argue with pro-feminists on the internet, I dont give them MRA material. I too start with these dissident feminists. They are very valuable.


  35. Jack Strawb January 8, 2015 at 03:39 #

    Valenti: “Women and men need to do something about feminism in 2015: not just say that they are feminist, nor just share a few articles about feminist issues, but take concrete actions to make the world a better place for women and girls.”

    I plan to do precisely this, by fighting feminism wherever I find it.


  36. Jack Strawb January 8, 2015 at 03:42 #

    What’s particularly amusing is that once he asked “May I kiss you?” his odds skyrocketed of not being in a position to ask any other questions. Being on the other side of a door tends to do that to one.

    In my case, I refuse to treat the women I’m involved with as if they were idiots. If they don’t want to kiss me, I assume they’re adult enough to let me know without my being condescending about the matter.


  37. Jack Strawb January 8, 2015 at 03:43 #

    Do you have something specific in mind?


  38. Jack Strawb January 8, 2015 at 03:51 #

    Do you have a link? I was unaware of this. Thanks in advance.


  39. Jack Strawb January 8, 2015 at 03:52 #

    Ah. I didn’t realize you were merely full of shit. Thanks for clearing that up.


  40. Jack Strawb January 8, 2015 at 03:54 #

    Ashe Schow is a similar kind of writer who looks clearly into feminism’s soul.


  41. Jack Strawb January 8, 2015 at 03:54 #

    No. Learn to write.


  42. Jack Strawb January 8, 2015 at 03:57 #

    In fact Clinton appeared happy to leave any of her fringe voters believing Obama was either a socialist or had been born in Kenya.


  43. Jack Strawb January 8, 2015 at 04:00 #

    That you think Obama was worse than the absurdities the GOP offered speaks volumes about you. McCain, whose ‘strength’ was foreign policy, could not even tell the difference between shia and sunni muslims. Palin did not know Africa was a continent.

    That the media ripped Herman Cain to shreds is because Mr. Beckybeckystan was an ignoramus who had no business anywhere near a Presidential forum. That he was speaks volumes of the incompetence of the GOP field.


  44. The Real Peterman January 8, 2015 at 04:02 #

    Let us know how that goes!


  45. Jack Strawb January 8, 2015 at 04:08 #

    “…but rather (as I mentioned above) as her pulling us all together and getting us to talk and share our perspectives,…”

    That’s all very nice, but there is no pulling together with contemporary feminism. I may be misunderstanding you, but it you believe it’s possible to find common ground, you’re deluding yourself. Feminists have made it abundantly clear there isn’t any common ground. You cannot point to a single mainstream feminist initiative that has done anything to aid in solving the problems of men and boys, for example, or any moves feminists have made to surrender an inch of the advantages that have accrued to women even where women are doing far better than men.

    For the purposes of discussion, Cathy Young is not a feminist in any meaningful sense.


  46. Mark January 8, 2015 at 04:15 #

    You know, I could’ve almost forgiven the people who voted for him in order to break the racial precedent, a lot of people are quite invested in the symbolism of it, they just weren’t going to be pragmatic about that election.

    But after he was elected, he should’ve been fair game. The president is supposed be one of the most disliked people in the country, right? But today, six years in, after all he’d done, I still get sideways glances from so many people (on my liberal college campus) for even being mildly critical of him; it’s like he’s already enhrined, like Gandhi, George Washington, or the Dalai Lama. I can’t even criticize his trade policy without some people insinuating I’m a racist.

    But get ready for Hilary 2016. ‘War on women’ redux.


  47. Emma the Emo January 8, 2015 at 04:18 #

    It’s mostly a general thing. But one example is whipping up rape and pedophile hysteria, but also for men and boys.


  48. ravenhawk787 January 8, 2015 at 04:43 #

    Reblogged this on valorene.


  49. Mark January 8, 2015 at 04:45 #

    One argument may go as follows: that some ‘milder’ feminists who may be agitated into retrenching and holding ground by scary offensive MRAs may be convinced to give ground and compromise by someone making overtures for common ground. Doubtless it would have no effect on the bulwarks, like the organizations, hardcore activists, and high profile feminists; for they need the gender conflict like an armament company needs a war. But that perhaps broad segments of the public that identify as feminist could be more easily won over by charm than by polemic.

    On Young’s status as a feminist I agree; though I am anti-essentialist so I just define feminism according to the actions of the preponderance of identified feminists rather than by some definition or slogan. But I have sometimes reflected on whether it would be useful to have people like her who identify as feminists. Many of them, especially women, have become emotionally invested in the label of feminist, it has become a part of their self-image and a source of security, and may be more amenable to persuasion to leave behind everything wrong with that ideology if they can keep the label, and in doing so associate with the likes of Young and Paglia.

    Also, there are tactical advantages to letting one’s opponents save face. They may be willing to admit they’re wrong in particular matter, but asking someone to abandon an entire ideological framework wholesale can be taxing on their pride. They may just retrench at the suggestion. Instead, would it perhaps be best to offer them the chance to save face and keep their label and identity, in order to pave way to make gains on more substantive issues?

    That’s not a rhetorical question, I’m not sure of the answer myself. Just thinking about it.


  50. Mark January 8, 2015 at 04:49 #

    For me it’s more like” Personal fears of 2015: well, let’s just say if I see Jess, I’m not turning my back to her for a second, as I’m pretty sure that woman wears a strapon everywhere she goes.


  51. Mark January 8, 2015 at 04:59 #

    Her plea is ironic, because it’s MRAs, not feminists, who have trouble translating internet presence into real world activity. On the internet, MRAs and counterfeminists are all over the place, even outnumbering feminists on some mainstream sites. It is clear in the general population there is a massive fifth column dissenting from feminism. It’s the feminist minority that is disproportionately influential in the ‘real’ media and political sphere.

    If non-feminists should follow Valenti’s advice. feminists would quickly find themselves in a lot of trouble.


  52. Astrokid NJ January 8, 2015 at 05:49 #

    I was pretty sure you were going to say that.
    Thats the insanity of the schopenbecq and eivind berge crowd.

    And iam sure you are referring to typhonblue’s usage of the us some depts survey that shows men engage in unwanted sex nearly as much as women do, amd hence “raped” equally.
    that is a ploy typhon uses, and hardly something that is used widely by other mras.

    One foundational strategy of avfm is “give them the equality they want”. Others like mgtow rob fedders and stardusk have called it “mens problems wont be solved until they become womens problems” , seeing how alimony is seen as an issue only after some women are now forced to pay it

    As such, we will demand that women also be jailed for underage sex. That buffoon schopenbecq calls it “equal injustice for all”
    but thats what it takes to get it done

    Interestingly, those who bitch and whine about us have no solutions at all, so they call us names like “victim politics”


  53. Emma the Emo January 8, 2015 at 05:54 #

    Ok, lets just agree to disagree.


  54. Mark January 8, 2015 at 07:13 #

    Your quips with the GOP seem based on their ignorance or stupidity. But “Women are smarter than men, everyone knows that,” the curtailment of due process, the shafting of working class men by pouring ‘stimulus’ money into female dominated sectors of the economy that weren’t even hit by the recession cannot be chalked up to more stupidity, but rather cynical, demagogical ambivalence, hardly a superior motive in my book.

    Obama basically got elected because he wasn’t Bush. But with after a series of misadventures in the middle east, not only continued but increased spying on American citizens and privacy violations which the administration has actively sought to increase through the supreme court (thankfully those ‘absurdities’ among the judges managed to protect the 4th amendment from it), I’m having an increasingly hard time telling the difference. Perhaps it’s the bonus of soaring deficit spending that was supposed to save the economy like it didn’t save the economy when Bush did it (fun fact: Paul Krugman actually used the exact same argument against deficit spending during Bush’s years that he is now ridiculing when used against Obama). Of course the absurdities in congress reigned forced spending cuts, everyone at the New York Times predicted the apocalypse would ensue, and now three years later the economy is nonetheless doing at least pleasantly mediocre again. Difficulty pinpointing the accomplishments.

    Most importantly, interest rates are still near 0 so my savings are accumulating nothing. But at least Fanny Mae is back to purchasing 3% down mortgages again, so we can look forward to a repeat of the housing crisis in another decade, yay.


  55. Mark January 8, 2015 at 07:17 #

    I take issue with the fact that MGTOW appears to be named after a Fleetwood Mac song, does that count?


  56. Spaniard January 8, 2015 at 08:57 #

    Definetely Jessica is the type.


  57. Spaniard January 8, 2015 at 08:58 #

    I´ll tell you.


  58. Spaniard January 8, 2015 at 08:59 #

    Shooting in Paris.

    What I told you about PEGIDA and Marine Le Pen?


  59. that1susan January 8, 2015 at 11:57 #

    Thanks! I’ll have to look into them.


  60. that1susan January 8, 2015 at 12:11 #

    Well, I was pleasantly surprised yesterday when, following my last post over here, the feminist that I was debating with on the other site posted to me that she agreed with me about all the problems I saw with feminism. She just feels that criticizing without providing solutions is destructive to feminism, so she’d rather see people get busy serving with organizations that can help change laws, writing letters with our suggestions, and so on.

    I agreed with her that it couldn’t just end with talking, but said I felt like there was going to have to be more open discussion first, and I just said I felt like we could agree to disagree on that one point.

    I’m able to find a lot of common ground with most people who identify as feminists, just as I’m able to find a lot of common ground with many of the people who post here. That’s why I think it might be better to have one larger group for everyone who wants to work for real equality.


  61. Rebecca January 8, 2015 at 13:35 #

    Maybe they are trying to reduce population growth.


  62. farkennel January 8, 2015 at 14:25 #

    The french terrorist attack had ALL dead men.If one was a woman the feminist controlled(read ALL) western media would have made a point of letting everyone know.The entire media reported 12 dead “people”.The following day a police”woman” was killed.The day of the attack 2 dead police”officers” both of course were men.This is how obscene the level of feminazi influence there is over the entire media.If ever there was a need for a mens movement….now is that time.No doubt Valenti will find a way to make the 12 dead “people” somehow a tragedy for women(read feminists).


  63. that1susan January 8, 2015 at 15:30 #

    I really agree with you on all of this. If reasonable people can find common ground with other reasonable people irregardless of labels, and more specifically, if people who have a lot in common with some very reasonable people who identify as feminist, also have a lot in common with some very reasonable people who identify as MRA, perhaps those two groups can realize they have more in common than not.

    Over at the feminist site where I post, most of the women seem to perceive MRAs as guys whining about not being able to get an attractive woman to sleep with them, or about American women letting their appearance go. The general idea is that the Men’s Rights Movement has, as its core, a league of woman-hating sexists eager to put women in their place, which is under the feet of the men, whom MRAs ALL see as superior to women not only in strength and intelligence, but also in morality, due to men’s innate generosity and willingness to set aside their own wellbeing to protect and provide for others, as compared to women’s innate selfishness and tendency to view everything as being all about their own petty little feelings.

    My perceptions have changed drastically due to my conversations here, and though I still realize that the non-egalitarian MRAs exist, I feel like most of the men I dialog with here don’t see women’s place as beneath them, and would actually rather not delegate the genders to specific “places” anyway, and just support everyone’s equal right to pursue their own version of a happy life.

    But I’ll admit that I don’t know any actual numbers, in terms of what percentage of MRAs want equality and what percentage want to subjugate women, just as I don’t know what percentage of feminists want equality and what percentage want to strip men of all power.

    With feminists, even though I know the vocal man-haters exist, the man-hating I observe is less direct, and yet more powerful — such as the idea promoted by NOW that child custody laws should be structured in such a way that the default arrangement is NOT shared parenting, but, rather, a visitation schedule wherein a custodial parent gets the child most of the time and a non-custodial parent gets the child maybe four days out of thirty.

    Since I believe our biology influences our parenting in such a way that most small children are going to have their primary bond with their mother, due to practices like breastfeeding and also the tendency for most mothers to want to provide most of their children’s day-to-day care — it’s not that fathers don’t want to do any of this, but that most of us mothers care very deeply about numerous details that we don’t trust anyone else to care about…well, anyhow — this reality generally leads to a situation where most children turn to their mothers to meet most of their basic needs.

    But as children grow into greater independence, they will often experience interesting and important connections with their fathers that they can’t experience with their mothers. For example, I just can’t get into gaming, but both my daughters and my husband love it. I really believe that even when a child has a closer emotional bond to one parent, the other parent is just as important in other ways, and they need to be in regular, frequent contact with both their parents. And I think NOW is being very, very man-hating in trying to set things up in such a way that most children will get very little contact with their fathers after a divorce.

    Another example of indirect man-hating is the idea that anyone who doesn’t want to be labeled a rape apologist needs to wholeheartedly believe any women who says she was raped or abused by a man, with the logical consequence that any man who’s accused of such a crime is assumed to be guilty, and anything he says in his defense is assumed to be big fat lie.


  64. Paul January 8, 2015 at 17:15 #

    I think that’s because most non or anti-feminists have jobs.


  65. Spaniard January 9, 2015 at 13:16 #

    White Christian women converting to Islam show us two things. The funny thing is that losts of the are feminist.

    1. How stupid and fashion victims lots of women are.
    2. How naturally submissive lots of women are.

    If all that women had religious epiphanies, why thet did not went back to church?
    They convert cuz most of them were shagging around with Arab men.


  66. farkennel January 10, 2015 at 04:23 #

    How Dare you say that about Ms Valenti.I will have you know she takes her misandry and penis envy very seriously.You are not helping the cause of male hatred.



  1. Let’s compare two feminists and their hopes for 2015 | Manosphere.com - January 6, 2015

    […] Let’s compare two feminists and their hopes for 2015 […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: