Don’t get me wrong. I love a lot of the concise, reference-supported articles I find on RationalWiki, especially when it concerns pseudoscience such as the HHO/water-powered car. It’s a handy shortcut to refuting ridiculous things that aren’t scientifically accurate, and nothing makes me feel much more joy than when a bunch of Internet conspiracy theorists are told that they’re wrong and it really rustles their jimmies.Sadly, rational thought and scientifically backed information dissemination are thrown out the window with a ferocity when you start looking up anything that touches the feminist agenda. Look up “feminism” on RationalWiki and you’ll immediately find weaselly, highly subjective statements that lean squarely in the favor of a radical feminist’s perverted perception of reality. For example, the section entitled “Academic Criticism” begins the heading “Seeing rape everywhere” with these two sentences: “Feminists have in the past, and continue in the present to emphasize the importance of addressing modern rape culture. Something no one but the most aggressive MRA types think is a bad goal.” For one thing, there is no such thing as “rape culture,” as seen by the fact that I can drive for four hours and not only see no one being raped, but not even be exposed to anything that comes remotely close to mentioning rape….that is, unless we’re re-defining “rape” as feminists are constantly attempting to re-define it, where it effectively becomes “being a male near a female,” at which point the term “rape” would become irrelevant to most people and lose all of its power and importance. The other thing that’s quite ridiculous is the notion that “the most aggressive men’s rights activists think stopping (implied rape) is a bad idea” along with all of the notably absent supporting references attached to it. Hmm…But wait! Let’s not jump to conclusions based solely on the fact that no substantive criticism of feminism exists in a criticism section of a feminism article on a “rational wiki!” Let’s see if the same treatment is given to articles that cover opposing viewpoints! Aha…we’ll look at the text for misandry, the antonym for the oft-used and heavily abused term “misogyny.” Uh-oh…it doesn’t look good at all, since there’s an entire SECTION of the article entitled “Concise explanation of why the concept is bullshit.” Let’s see what’s under this damning title…oh, here we are: “Sexism, like racism, is an institutional oppression on basis of sex.”No, sexism isn’t institutional oppression on basis of sex; in fact, there’s nothing “institutional” about it. Wikipedia and Merriam-Webster agree: “sexism is prejudice or discrimination based on a person’s sex.” I don’t see anything institutional about that definition; do you? “Oh, but you’re ignoring OTHER DEFINITIONS!” the clever feminist might bleat, to which I respond with the other definition: “behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex.” Wait, that doesn’t support “institutional oppression” either, does it? D’awwww, call in the waaambulance because the astute feminist needs to fill out an Internet butthurt report form to squelch the horrible feeling of one’s religion being proven wrong in yet another increment.
This post will be short I am glad MSNBC was shut down it needed to be served its ass on a platter. A question I am always wondering is have humans been responsible with our technology. Specifically in the information age, we have unlimited amounts of data mostly cats being cute, but when it comes to finding out what is going on in the world around us its nearly impossible without it being covered in biased opinions you have a better chance at finding a unicorn than you do have a news source. MSNBC and FOXNews well there you have two sides of the same coin idiots. I mean there isn’t a single news source or article that doesn’t have an opinion with it. I am biased but the thing is I am not a journalist! I never took the oath of integrity unlike everyone on TV. Then again anyone can be a journalist in their mind through something called blogging. I mean the Huffington post is a blog site not a news agency yet it gets called that be everyone! I mean if humans have squandered the information age’s gifts its not wasting time looking at ninja cat its the fact we have a generation of self declared journalists.
I come from a long line of matriarchs, women who either ruled over their husbands, or ran away from them. My mother is an intimidating figure. She has always served as the neighborhood watchdog, taking on bullies and running the co-op board with an iron fist. If you met her, it would be obvious why I was open to possibility of female dominance, because she embodied it long before it became the defining trend of our era.Men are failing in the workplace,
Well at least Hanna Rosin is honest about gynocentric America. In Time Magazine she makes the following comments.
The traditional household is vanishing
Men are increasingly subjected to violence from female partners
Working and middle-class fathers have become non-existent
Men have become feminize
And what workplace would that be? The one that keeps our infrastructure up and running?
Statistically speaking, 100% of power plant operators, distributors and dispatchers are men.
- 91% of the nation’s electrical engineers are men.
- 97.6% of electrical power line installers and maintenance workers are men.
- 95.5% of water and liquid waste treatment plant and system operators are men.
- 95.9% of aircraft pilots and flight engineers are men.
- 98.4% of aircraft mechanics and service technicians are men.
- 91.9% of computer network architects, who design and implement all our computer based communications systems are men.
- 94.2% of radio and telecommunications equipment installers and repair technicians are men.
- 93.4% of garbage collectors are men.
- 78.2% of all workers in production, transportation and material moving occupations are men
- 82.4% of all industrial production managers are men
- 97.5% of all extraction workers, providing the raw materials to run our economy are men
Transportation, energy, communications, water treatment, resource extraction and waste management. Those are the things that provide us with a little something called civilization as we know it, and they are overwhelmingly provided by men.
While it is true that the manufacturing sector has taken a hit in recent years, the United States remains the world’s largest manufacturer, with a 2009 industrial output of $2.33 trillion. Its manufacturing output is greater than Germany, France, India and Brazil combined.
- 70% of that total workforce is male.
- Primary metals manufacturing? 85.6% men.
- Apparel manufacturing? 68.3% women.
- So ladies in manufacturing are basically just sewing clothes?
- How shocking! How surprising! How very housewifely!
- What are the ladies doing in the workforce anyways? Most common job categories for women in 2010?
- Secretaries (96.8% women)
- Nurses (92% women)
- Primary and elementary school teachers (81.9% women)
- Cashiers (74.4% women)
- Nursing aides (88.5% women)
- Retail sales (51.9% women)
- Retail sales managers (44.1% women)
- Waitresses (71.6% women)
- Maids (89.9% women)
The G-spot is a Canadian women’s show similar to “The Talk” and “The View” it ran for the better part of a year until the show was canceled for well who knows but the members of the show, thanks to the net have continued their idiocy. This time the subject is the male Birth Control pill. They feel it is a dangerous thing and should not be allowed to exist.
“What I’m worried about are all the other men – the unmarried, uncommitted, casual daters who can walk away from a situation if an accident happens because they forgot to take their birth control, or just lied about taking it altogether. Never mind the large increase in STIs and AIDS that would probably arise from the inevitable decrease in condom use.”
Walk away? Yeah right, men are NEVER thrown in jail for failure to pay child support and we are all just an ignorant bunch of jackasses who have no idea how STDs are spread.
No doubt pharmaceutical company executives, in lieu of very expensive market research, will take note of these voices and conclude that spending the money to develop and viably market such a method might pose more a financial risk than it’s worth. If there are so many opposing voices and not much observable support for these methods why put up the money? This like abortion is yet just another one sided benefit from feminism. Just like how abortion, Roe v. Wade declared that the “imposition of parenthood” on an individual was just too much of a burden for the state to rightfully impose …on women. This meant that even after conception women would have a right to decide whether or not the pregnancy would come to term. Men however were not to enjoy that same option. Consequently, men were given the legal burden for someone else’s choices, men cannot at anytime abort fatherhood specifically child support. Also a father’s rights and status as a human being are solely dictated by the mother, who then will tell the court to deny him visitation rights while enforcing child support payments. The system is so broke that women who rape 15 year old boys can receive child support(he was 2 years under the age of consent), and women without custody of children can receive child support payments.
1) the presumption of innocence;
2) the burden of proof is on the Crown;
3) proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; and
4) proof is made during a fair and public hearing.
To find oneself in the star chamber requires one simple accident of birth: you have a penis.
Violent crimes have now been segregated into two types: violence, and violence against women. The explanation for this separation is that feminists feel women are more vulnerable than men and require a unique status in court that serves to ‘enhance’ their equality with men.
In 2000, feminist scholar Sara Hinchliffe, described her concerns with this demand for special treatment of women by the courts.
The debate about equality raises serious problems for conceptions of women as freely choosing, rational agents. If a different standard is required by which to judge women because they are unequal, then social inequality may be formalized in law. The fact that battered woman syndrome has become an acceptable defense to murder in the United States is one contemporary example. If women are not susceptible to the same assumption of equality and rationality as men then women may be excluded from the presumption that they are capable actors.
In cases of rape or sexual assault, the disturbing changes to the legal system are thus:
- The presumption of guilt;
- A shift of the burden of proof onto the accused;
- Removal of mens rea or “guilty intent” as a requirement for conviction;
- Rape shield laws that interfere with public hearings and defense rights.
It raised very few eyebrows and is now standard practice. And it looks like the policy is about to grow like a tumor.
The message here to female criminals is clear. Do whatever you want, you will not get punished. Indeed, you will be rewarded. Need a food allowance? Assault someone. Want to move into new digs? Kill your husband. Hurt someone, steal from them, lie about your husband or boyfriend in court, embezzle money from your company, sell drugs to school children (then make videos of them having sex), molest your children, drown them in a bathtub or just put out cigarettes on them out of frustration when your favorite TV show gets cancelled. Its all good you won’t do time, because it is some man’s fault.
Basically its a free pass at giving feminists their wet dreams, Kill all the menz. Even if it would result in the end of the very society that they take for granted.
So it seems that feminist at large can’t seem to take any criticism what so ever. Their counter points are lame, easily debunked, or just plain ridiculous. They say radicals contribute nothing to the movement, but not even Wikipedia is stupid enough to lie about that. Andrea Dworkin, Joanna Russ, and Gloria Steinem huge founding members are sexist bigots. Then you have male feminists like Manboobz and Arthur Goldwag who label the men’s rights group a hate group after it finds out the identities of radical feminists that use forums to discuss how they would murder little boys at the schools where the women in question work. In fact, the SPLC had to rescind the hate group claim for libel, the fact the MRAs not only proved Goldwag wrong yet again. I honestly hate Goldwag for making women into over grown infants, and condones banning the second amendment for what to make sure women have guns to protect themselves? Not to mention a good sum of feminists have a very long track record of silencing Battered Men, sexually abused boys, and even supporting forced circumcision to end AIDS and HIV of all things. As for anyone supporting male victims of anything expect a small riot ensue if meet publicly. Arguments against Anti-feminist range from grasping at straws to barely making sense. Case in point, Warren Farrell in 1978 had an interview with Penthouse on sexual fantasies involving incest. Apparently that means he condones actual incest. Then there is the Anders Behring Breivik argument its really lame saying he was an actual MRA when he seemed to be supporting more of a traditionalist view, I say seemed since his writings are more like the rantings of a man in need of serious mental help, and I mean like a straight jacket intervention help. Not to mention I couldn’t understand most of his manifesto. No one actually supports what he did, and he had no real connections to the MRM hell some MRAs used his actions to increase mental heath funding for men, to prevent more people from dying. Are there reasonable feminists sure but honestly the more you whine about being judged the less seriously I take you. I mean literally ousting radicals isn’t that hard to do, I mean really stop funding feminist groups that have radicals in them until they are fired. Plus when you ask have them have they made any petitions end infant circumcision, or make rape laws that include women as rapists. No, not one and since that is the case you can’t really sit around and whine to me that I am being unfair. In fact, most of the hate feminists claim anti-feminists have is actually feminist hate for women and men they don’t agree with. No one is above hating someone or some group for disagreeing with them. Sometimes a person can be more prone to it if they have a decent amount of self righteousness behind their intentions.
Then there is the line that says, “Tell every woman in your life why you are against equality” when someone judges feminism is a total cop out of debate and a lame one at that. I mean whats next benevolent sexism, you realize you can’t make hate into a good thing. Its not possible, its an oxymoron the last time I checked the KKK lynched black people not bring them a cookie platter. I am not going to support telling women to check their privilege, that is ignorant and I won’t resort to such low levels of “debate”. Privilege is concept used generalize and insult a person for being different. I honestly think its time feminists try to figure out why people hate them and fix that issue instead of getting pissed off.
If I admit here and now feminist if society is truly against you, will you stop making it a self fulfilling prophecy. If false rape is so common such as a November 24, 2010, WABC/Good Morning America weather forecaster Heidi Jones, 37, made a false police report when she claimed that two months earlier, a Hispanic man in his 30s or 40s grabbed her from behind in Central Park while she was jogging, then dragged her into a wooded area, and attempted to rape her. The man bolted when two tourists saw the incident, she claimed. Jones also reported that the same man showed up near her Manhattan apartment almost two months later to threaten her. He allegedly told her: “I know you went to the police.” Police treated the claim very seriously but eventually grew skeptical, and Jones finally admitted she made it up. “I made it up for attention,” she admitted. “I have so much stress at work, with my personal life and with my family.” The Jones case would be a garden variety false rape claim if it weren’t for the widespread attention it has attracted due to the false accuser’s minor celebrity.
The definition of rape can really have as wide or narrow a definition of “sex” as the party creating it wants, but that definition should be designed to be consistent and egalitarian; perpetrators or victims should not be excluded simply due to demographics. The perception that men really don’t get raped much at all is reinforced by almost everything that has anything to do with rape. Laws and the courts that interpret them give far more attention to male perpetrators and female victims. So do nongovernmental organizations like RAINN which create campaigns to “teach men not to rape”. Lots of people don’t even realize male rape has happened when they witness it because it just doesn’t cross people’s minds that sometimes, men just don’t want to have sex. It’s a vicious self-perpetuating cycle of victim erasure where ignorance of the problem is used as proof of its absence. The fact feminists are the lobbyist for these laws and organizations only lead to more people hating you, and I obviously can see anyone in their right mind want to be hated when they claim to stand for equality. I am merely saying that the only logical results you will receive is misogyny.
Poor western white women how terrible it must be to educated and overly valued
White women throughout the world and online are apparently championing their fight for civil rights. Sounds silly right, well its beyond silly its fucking hysterical! Really though how many people have seen white women every truly oppressed? When white women marched and set fire to things in the UK back in the early 1900s it was their husbands and fathers that took the blame for them it was very rare for a suffragette to even get arrested. Only a few of the more violent women were arrested. This arrest however was far from anything a man would face. Oddly even if these women admit their privilege don’t expect them to make it something objective so much as victimizing of themselves. Yes I am calling “patriarchy” a conspiracy theory. I mean really it is, you have the three needed pillars of a conspiracy. It divides the good and the bad clearly and makes the good guys the under dog. In this case feminists label themselves the under dog despite their the dominant social ideologies of our time, they receives millions (directly and indirectly) of dollars in government funding and has more lobbying power than any other social movement including the President of the United State Barrack Obama. The two others are rather obvious the skin deep patriarchy is generally accepted as the Us president is a man, but no meaningful evidence of a global male conspiracy oppressing women exists! Finally Latour’s assertion that a “conspiracy theory” is largely derived from Marxist inspired theory. Oddly almost all feminist thoughts and actions are inspired directly from Marxism and Anarchism. So if the Patriarchy was real in the feminist mentioned ways then why is it women, and in result feminists turn out to be the numerical majority of all things good. Women live longer have more medical research and treatment option then men and despite controlling 88% America’s 1% they only pay a fraction of the taxes men pay and only work in the white collar world largely because the opertunities in American are largely reserved for women, most often white women of Feminism.
Lets understand the beginning yes the very beginning of whiny white women is the very beginning of feminism. It started with Suffrage, and I don’t seen any black or Hispanic women. Don’t believe what I am saying, well here we are several images all about the Suffrage movement. Look at the white women in white marching, such brave strong women, yeah no more like privileged rich women with nothing to do. I mean literally throughout nations like Africa, South America and across Native American cultures Patriarchy did exist, but that never meant women had no poweror choice as most feminist declare. For feminism destroying the Patriarchy is their single unifying lynch pin, even if it is nothing more than a myth at best and more often a bogus Conspiracy theory as I have already mentioned.
Where the non white women were
The life of women in Africa was more matrilineal, they contributed to the economy in equal numbers as the men. While hunting was a mainstay for meat it was not the main food, men would often fish farm and even do so with the help of their wives and daughters. This of course was long before the Dutch and British slavers. Hell Native American women worked side by side with the men while the tribes were over all run by men it was heavily influenced by women. When white settlers appeared in the New World the fact women were working is what made the Native Americans appear to be savages. After all they had created a system to pamper their women as ladies or consumers of products.
In the New world the British established a heavy reliance on slavery. So a man in Africa would soon be no more than a pack animal. He couldn’t marry or keep his family together nor could he prevent or exact justice when his wife and daughter were raped. In the mean time the master’s wife and or daughters would sit around fanning themselves and playing dress up with their slaves. So in the end they really had very few issues about having their sexuality oppressed or abused.
With the people we now call Hispanic they lived in a Patriarchy although their power in society was not like a stay at home mom they had to prove their ethics and their value of their to a man. They were never allowed to go from pampered daughters to pampered wives. They proved their skills as farmers or at handling game and medical practices of the tribe. While men went through their passages of manhood the girls had to study and learn trades to become a woman worthy of marriage and a valuable tribe member.
Now it must also be noted, lest you think this is strictly a white vs. non-white dynamic. I’m trying to establish. Its not, Eastern European white women of today can’t adopt the western feminist narrative either because communism also saw them “liberated” from traditional gender roles. This is far from true unless you mean only from gender roles, and not actual freedom. So when western white women were whining about patriarchy the women of the East were probably to busy working. It was this very fact that they and other women (native american, Hispanic and African Americans) would not see traditional gender roles as something not so oppressive or harmful.
Now for the women I just mentioned the way a white woman lived in the 1950s and 1960s was something very rare for a black man to be able to provide. In fact not many white women even cared for their own homes or children.
In the south and across America the wealthy white women who made second wave feminism often paid black women to raise their children, clean the home their husband paid for, and cook the food for the husband and his wife. I honestly wonder how many of the black women that served these women could ever adopt feminism? The feminists were treating them just barely better than a slave cutting their pay if they used the toilets they kept clean. How could these women buy into Patriarchy if the men they saw were coming home every day to a woman that couldn’t even be bothered to cook him dinner? The man’s wife pays no attention to his child or home. From the place of a white woman and from the black woman is it any wonder why feminist or racial animosity between the two is more tense than white men and black men? The White Generation Y men grew up the Children of the lazy entitled feminist women, and the minorities grew up watching these spoiled white women whine about women’s rights so long as the woman was white and well off of course. So now we are in the generation of Attachment parenting.
The List of White women
Sally Miller Gearhart
The entire writing staff of Jezzeble
Well that’s as many feminist I can list and yes they are all western gender feminists. As for Feminism as we know it today, is a middle/upper-class white, western female supremacist group with many members dedicated to killing all the men or at the very least making us into less than human. Feminists focus their energy on minimizing the value of traditional gender roles and on the promotion of unrealistic gender superiority of the poor opressed white women. The fact their cause was founded on the status those women elite women that enjoyed, and continue to enjoy living the most well-protected, pampered, adored, and privileged life, and it is designed largely to inflict serve problems upon to those who serve them.
“Male disposability” theory, made popular by GirlWritesWhat, is not a proper model to explain how males in specific areas of society may be disadvantaged. It is a viable model at the population level, but not the individual level, and does not take life history strategies into account, which are crucial to understand male-female sexual selection and the evolution of behaviors often termed “gender roles”.
Male disposability theory posits that females are less disposable than males because they are the limiting factor in population growth, and that males are disposable because a single male is capable of inseminating numerous females. This makes sense when you consider r-selected species (species that produce numerous offspring and little to no parental care). However, in K-selected species (species that produce few offspring and provide a great deal of parental care, like humans), male disposability theory falls apart because, at the population level, both males andfemales limit population growth optima. Males with such life-history strategies typically contribute to the reproductive success of their partners by providing direct benefits such as nest guarding, feeding young, and so forth. Therefore, if the male in a mating pair were to run off or be eaten, the reproductive success of the pair would be critically compromised.
She does touch on anisogamy a bit as a method to explain why females are more “valuable” to populations, but does not further continue to explain that life-history strategy in humans has evolved to accommodate females due to the massive amount of energy and risk invested in reproduction (9-month incubation periods, risk of maternal mortality during childbirth ect.). She notes that the importance societies placed on women was necessary for their survival, but neglects to mention that both females and males provide critical services for each other in such survival conditions. An argument could be made that population growth dynamics have made favored the evolution of a mating system that provisions for females and children due to population dynamics. But GirlWritesWhat does not mention that such provisioning for both children and mothers is in the best interests of males as well, if said male wishes to propagate his genes over multiple generations. In short, males have always been important, especially in K-selected species like humans.
Its often a subject of intense debate, how radicals have tainted the feminist movement. I’ve seen many feminists respond to this with simple dismissals at best when anyone requests the ousting a few radicals. Upon such questions towards removing them feminists have taken defensive positions and stated,
You can’t actually kick someone out of a movement. You can kick them out of an organization, but that doesn’t stop them from identifying as feminist, or starting their own organization. Plus, I’ve learned from experience that if you spend all your time getting your movement down to just the people you want, you don’t actually meet any of your goal. So they’ve “kicked them out” by identifying as people who care about equality and woman’s rights.
Honestly that isn’t really the case, now I have see the response to comments like the one above with the following
Education equality like how feminists and the state believe women making up over 60% of college students isn’t enough? Gender stereotypes like the kind which say that all men are rapists, pedophiles, and abusers [link] So basically, because NAFALT, we should not speak out against all the harm feminism has done to society, is that right? [link][link] [link] [link] If your friends don’t like people thinking that they’re misandrist, tough. Your feminism isn’t the kind taught in gender studiescourses, the kind influencing family law, the kind which influence UN aid agencies which provide aid only to women.
There only response to issues in the United States is to go aboard, re-frame the issue and change the geographical region in question as seen bellow,
The entire world isn’t the United States of America, nor is it entirelycollege graduates. Don’t you remember Malala Yousafzai, the girl who was shot in the head for being vocal and wanting to go to school? Or what about the girls in countries who get married at 13, and even if they were in school before they have to drop out? You responded to a very specific part of my post,and took it out of context to boot. I wrote education for all and equality, which they take to mean things like advocating for laws that would raise the amount of money public schoolsget, and improving working conditions.
Calling feminism, and by extent all my feminist friends, harmful to society because of a few people you don’t like, is like calling white people racists because of the Klu Klux Klan. You’re against a very specific group of people calling themselves feminists but you’re attacking the group as a whole.
By now you’ve noticed a trend, the feminist keeps mentioning things to debate yet provides no evidence to support any of her claims. When men’s issues in the USA come up with overwhelming evidence that it is in fact the fault of feminism, the feminist promptly moves abroad. Change the subject and resorts to petty insults. I honestly don’t know how many times I’ve seen threats of murder, rape, castration, torture, and the ever popular “Fuck you”.
Most feminists aren’t willing to even admit that there’s a problem, but the few that do tend to ask a simple question: “how do we fix it?” This is for you guys.
Being me, brutally honest my opinion is that for the most part feminism has long since missed its chance at salvation. To prove my point Christina Hoff Sommers attempted to do this very thing a few times and was promptly labeled anti-woman by other feminists. However, I am magnanimous on hope as well so please take these given suggestions, to heart:
- Feminist academia. The biggest reserves of bigotry, it’s been a sanctuary for radscum, and it’s creating much of the….academically suspect research that the bigots in the rest of the movement feed on, in addition to creating bigotry in people who aren’t themselves bigots, but ignorant of the facts. Commit yourselves to finding accurate information and getting accurate results, even if those contradict the things you believe. Lies only fuel distrust and give ammunition to your opposition.
- Most of what feminist think they know is the product of the aforementioned radicals. This includes about 90% of the statistics that most feminists “just know” are true. Rape, the wage gap, domestic violence, glass ceiling, you name it, there are serious problems with the existing research. Myth and lies do not help your legitimacy.
- Attack the radicals when and where you can. When radscum hold a conference, or vent their bigotry in public, fight back and condemn their actions . Even most of the nastier MRAs do genuinely want equality, they just default to tactics similar to the earlier waves of feminism because the MRM is now where you guys were then. A handful of nutballs managed to pull together almost a hundred people for a screaming, angry mob to protest Warren Farrell, one of the least objectionable guys in existence. Don’t tell me you can’t do better for people who are far, far worse than even the the worst lies regarding Dr. Farrell.
- For More things to do see the following lists
Put this list together, and mainstream feminism shall deny radfems their refuge in academia, mainstream media, and the world in general. The radicals will share the status of the KKK and Neo Nazis. The rejection their “research” and “statistics” terms used loosely as their work is largely inaccurate over 90% of the time. Seriously Feminists stop letting them walk around unopposed, worked with other people seeking equality to demonstrate your commitment to it, they won’t stick around for bigotry for long. Radicals must be denied leadership positions pretty much every where. They won’t be able to keep claiming your support when every time they speak they have to do it over a chorus of “we don’t support you”, especially when they can no longer use you to cover their own expenses you will look a lot less culpable for their actions.
The day when you can genuinely say that you [your feminist organization] works towards and ideally succeeds at all of these, true Egalitarians will have no quarrel with you. We may think you’re idealistic, but idealistic is a much better than appearing hypocritical.