How Feminism Destroys the Femininity in Women and Love

Discuss Anti-Feminism, Men's Rights, and Misandry (hatred of men in America).
DarkMinxMish
Freshman Poster
Posts: 82
Joined: March 26th, 2012, 11:14 pm

Re: Re:

Post by DarkMinxMish »

Jason of Dystopia wrote:Let me just say a few things about the commentary of DarkMinxMash:

She did not respond to anything that was written by Winston or by anyone else who was posting on this thread. She used no direct quotes to indicate what ideas she agreed with or was debating.

She is obviously young or a newly-minted speaker of English as her grammar, spelling, paragraph structure et. al. is without any kind of grammatical organization.

Overall, her post is meaningless as it is filled with cliches, non-sequiturs, and some startling admissions that disprove the overall point I THINK she iwas trying to make.

Why amazing realizations like the following don't condemn the entire "feminist" project as a moral plague on mankind is an indication of how oppressed and asleep we all are. She said:
In terms of the laws I do think it's a double standard and because the female is seen as weaker or more naturally a caregiver she benefits better.
Women do abuse this system and use it to financially and mentally ruin a man.
Feminism has created a sort of entitlement in some women where they feel the world is their oyster and they step over/use people to get where they want. Gold diggers use men for material and don't care for their feelings at all. Bitches use and/or emasculate men, because they can and it gives them a power trip. Women are rude and brush men off w/o reserve and in reaction this has created some wounded men.
So, what she is saying is:

Yes, women will use the law to gain unfair advantage over their former partners, the person who they have been most intimate with. The familiarity with him has bred a harsh contempt.

Yes, since feminism has granted women so much power, there is absolutely no limiting principle on their egos or on the means they choose to pursue their selfish drives.

Yes, women do not care if they ruin a man financially or mentally (meaning, for life), their formerly intimate partner. And some actually do it chronically because they GET OFF on doing it!

All this verifies what Winston has written and what we all know to be true. Thus, I personally feel no need to qualify any of my comments with the typical "feminism is good, but..." Feminism is female dominance and female supremacy pure and simple. The ancients understood that the female energy must be restrained and transmuted into more socially appropriate forms. They thought this about male energy as well. This was done through moral restraint and the appropriate social chastisement for those who stepped out of line.

I realize that this is where Winston, his fans and I will probably part company, but what I am talking about is called "traditionalism." It is a form that has been promoted by the wisest and most learned men (and some women) throughout history.

We return to it or we are doomed to suffer rule by ignorant ,impetuous, and over-confident female teenyboppers like Manx. Perhaps an indication of what she really believes is contained in the quote she uses as her signature. This is a poem called The Goblin Market by Christina Rossetti. Here is a brief feminist analysis of the poem:
“Lesbian� as the Undefined Woman and Female Subjugation

The story needed two women who could represent the “fall of the Lesbian� and the Lesbian who does not buy into the patriarchal roles and forced mind set that women are “supposed to� assume. Every aspect of the Lesbian is at risk of subjugation and the loss of self. “What is at stake is an individual definition as well as a class definition� (Wittig 2018). This means that not only is the individual at stake, but the entire class of Lesbian. By buying into the goblin’s advertising and eating the fruit, Lesbians are buying into the subjugation of their sex.



The Death of Autonomy and the Fetish

Though it seems to refer to the physical death, is can be interpreted as the death of the Lesbian, or the death of autonomy. Despite Lizzie’s pleading, Laura buys the fruit with a lock of her hair. It is important to note that the goblins sell their fruit and that the Lesbians buy into it one way or another. Lizzie’s cutting of her hair is symbolic of her active participation in her subjugation. It is the cutting of her hair and the exchange of it for the fruit that represents her “castration.� According to Freud in his essay The Uncanny, “the fetish is a substitute for the woman’s penis."

Her hair becomes both a fetish because of its value, as well as a phallic symbol representing her power. She gives with her lock of hair a tear. This tear is a symbol of her acknowledgement of her participation in her castration. She has given some of her power away making her become a powerless object of beauty. She has lost herself in the exchange and is no longer Lesbian, but wholly woman—as per Wittig’s definition of “woman.� She has become “woman� through a social relationship defined by men who have spewed propaganda so that she cannot define herself outside of the role they have provided.

Saving the Self through Retention of Autonomy

Lizzie remains Lesbian. She must save herself by gaining the knowledge of the goblins. She sees her sister dying because she has lost her sense of Self. She embodies Cixous “Women for Women� and becomes the catalyst for healing. Cixous says in The Laugh of the Medusa,� in women there is always more or less of the mother who makes everything all right, who nourishes."She seeks out the goblins so that she can obtain some of what they have in order to find a cure for her sister. They try and force the fruit on her but she will not yield. She remains Lesbian and is armed with the knowledge of what she fears.


Being Spirit Mother and Recognizing the "Lesbian"

The reference to the juice being like wormwood to her tongue is an interesting reference to how Lizzie saved Laura. (“That juice was wormwood to her tongue, she loathed the feast� –Rossetti). Wormwood is a bitter plant that has been use for centuries in various cures. Its name is derived from the Old English word wermod and means “spirit mother� in Anglo-Saxon. It has also been called the mind mender (Sebor Absinth). Both of these definitions refer to how the poisonous fruit indeed becomes the cure for Laura after Lizzie transforms it by taking it away from the goblins. She mends her mind from being “woman� and returns it to the state of Lesbian.

In the final stanza, Laura and Lizzie tell their children of their plight against the goblin men and the dangers of eating their fruit. Their most important message is found in the statement; “There is no friend like a sister� (Rossetti). Referring back to the statement “We are all lesbians,� the message is about the purpose of sisters is to help each other remain Lesbian. The message states: “To fetch one when one goes astray, to lift one when one totters down, to strengthen whilst one stands� (Rossetti). The message is a warning not to make women behave, but to not let Lesbians become subjugated women. In other words: Sisters do not let sisters fall prey to goblin men.
Could there be any clearer validation of what I've written in my initial post on this forum!

That's a very expressive and creative analysis of one of my favorite quotes, but since I'm not a feminist sorry I don't see it that way.
I see it as a girl, a sister who is trying to stop her friend from succumbing to a fate that'll leave her half mad with a hunger that cannot be quenched. Since goblins and faeries like to give humans a taste of things that they'll never be able to receive again. They fully know this'll lead to madness or a likely death of some sort. I like folklore, but for you to try to attribute this to some subconscious feminist agenda is unfair and misleading.

As for my point from before yes I did say that and no I didn't any direct quotes, but that was my full opinion on the matter.
How I believe feminism to affect females and society in general and I am a female after all. Who's better to write about that than one.
Feminism has it's positive and negative effects. It's like any other 'ism' in the way it has helped some and screwed others.
To blame it solely for the males plight in society isn't really realistic and not every women is a feminist.
Not all women buy into that and for a major part the word feminist is hardly ever though about.
Most women are just living their lives. Only those who join actively into the movement feel that it still needs to pervade every cranny of our culture. Yes I know some of what I wrote verifies Winston's post, but please read all of it and not pick and choose what you want to be true.
Not All women are like that some are. We have bad apples just like you guys have bad apples.
These people regardless if they mean to hurt, harm, or ruin someone they will find a way regardless of how it's done. These are just hateful human beings.
Pricking up her golden head:
We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots?"
Jason of Dystopia
Freshman Poster
Posts: 70
Joined: April 10th, 2012, 7:01 am

Many Possible Interpretations of The Goblin Market

Post by Jason of Dystopia »

DarkMinxMash:

I read The Goblin Market and listened to some of the songs from the musical from the 1980s.

There are many possible interpretations of Rossetti's poem and many have been given.

I cannot deny, after reading the poem, the obvious sensuality and reference to sexuality which was perhaps not perceived by Victorian audiences.

But your interpretation is also possible, though it denies so much else that takes place in the poem.
Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that all was vanity; but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dream with open eyes, and make it possible.
-T.E. Lawrence
DarkMinxMish
Freshman Poster
Posts: 82
Joined: March 26th, 2012, 11:14 pm

Post by DarkMinxMish »

Jason,

I understand you pointing out the sensuality, sexuality, and imagery of the poem. Fruit is often used for sexual metaphors and I'm sure there is great meaning behind these scenes. Rossetti probably wrote this with these underlying thoughts and how she viewed the danger the goblin men poised to such virtuous women. Their gifts of fruit is a very strong message with themes that probably weren't realized by the intended audience. And the interpretation you presented was astounding in it's steeped prevalence for sisterhood and passing of power. That was okay and I'm sure a dozen more interpretations can be made as well on this subject alone. It's just that my interest in it was more towards the folkloric side of it.
Pricking up her golden head:
We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots?"
Jason of Dystopia
Freshman Poster
Posts: 70
Joined: April 10th, 2012, 7:01 am

Cool

Post by Jason of Dystopia »

Thanks for the response and the discussion.

I tend to equate feminism with a latent preference for lesbianism. I think that latency has all but emerged from the shadows in our society, and it is confusing as well as diabolical.

For instance: There are many dating sites, but some cater to people seeking one-night stands. If you search those sites, there are many females whose sexual preference seems to be "bisexual" as default. When you pry a bit further, they will tell you they "prefer males" or "only date males" or as Meghan McCain recently said after she hinted she may have experimented with bisexuality: "Strictly Dickly."

I find it it amazing that feminism as ideology has had the power to re-arrange female sexuality to such an extent.
Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that all was vanity; but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dream with open eyes, and make it possible.
-T.E. Lawrence
DarkMinxMish
Freshman Poster
Posts: 82
Joined: March 26th, 2012, 11:14 pm

Re: Cool

Post by DarkMinxMish »

Jason of Dystopia wrote:Thanks for the response and the discussion.

I tend to equate feminism with a latent preference for lesbianism. I think that latency has all but emerged from the shadows in our society, and it is confusing as well as diabolical.

For instance: There are many dating sites, but some cater to people seeking one-night stands. If you search those sites, there are many females whose sexual preference seems to be "bisexual" as default. When you pry a bit further, they will tell you they "prefer males" or "only date males" or as Meghan McCain recently said after she hinted she may have experimented with bisexuality: "Strictly Dickly."

I find it it amazing that feminism as ideology has had the power to re-arrange female sexuality to such an extent.
Hey,

Um...well Jason in that regard I don't think feminism itself has rearranged the sexualities of females all that much actually. You are getting feminism and lesbianism confused and mixed up. I guess from a man's point of view they would look extremely similar, but they're not.
Feminism is about uplifting a female and helping her to recognize her own self worth apart from the whole absorption of relationships and motherhood. Even though feminism isn't suppose to have anything against motherhood and etc...it's suppose to acknowledge these roles that all women usually have to go through, their essence and importance.
Now lesbianism is the sexual attraction to other females whether by love or lust, but these women appreciate other women in a more loving manner. They rather partake with their own and as a by product sisterly feelings or feminine community is usually more tight nit.
Now in my perspective feminism is a form of agape love. Agape is love of all regardless of gender or creed; it's all encompassing. But to safely say it could be classified as eros or a erotic sexual lust type of love.

Bisexuality is a definite form of agape, because that individual is able to fall in love and care for a person regardless of gender. See most people are stuck on gender and in some religions it's the sexual energy of a person that is more noticeable then say gender.
As for females being bisexual lol I don't think that's all that strange. You see females are really erotic, sensual, and etc...when with other females that you grow up physically around females go through cycles together, body changes, and etc....
Our bodies aren't all that strange, hidden, or different from each other and females are close. Women understand each other and give support when men are lacking and not understanding. So in a sense women are sort of each others before they become a spouse or lover of a man.
What men may perceive as sexual could be bonding for women. I think these tendencies have been with women forever.
A good example is the Isle of Lesbos where Sappho the famous female poet; who was said to be lesbian/bisexual. She and her followers were just following what was natural for them and they were w/o the influence of men.

Now men can have homosexual tendencies as well. Men have always had them when you think about male bonding and brotherhood. In past cultures men were far more comfortable with each other, then they were with women. I mean they married, but they may have had emotional relationships with other men. They fell in love with boys and other men, they dedicated themselves to each other. In past european cultures men had partners and brothers. In asian cultures men recited poetry and had young lovers. They thought nothing of it. Even in wars men had lovers and partners....so it may not be straight up gay as it is now or lets say flamboyant, but the history of relations between men isn't all that different when it comes to romance. Though I think not as many men are homo or bisexual, but they can be.

~shrugs~ That's just my opinion.
Pricking up her golden head:
We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots?"
Jason of Dystopia
Freshman Poster
Posts: 70
Joined: April 10th, 2012, 7:01 am

So Homosexuality is a Choice

Post by Jason of Dystopia »

Manx,

So, you seem to believe that homosexuality is latent within both genders. That, of course, does not necessarily contradict my point. And, I believe, latency is a belief, not a historical truth, that is obviously relied on by feminists and the "gender rights" crowd to push their agenda.

I have heard the "past cultures" argument for some time now, and it is almost always used as historical proof of a latently homosexual humanity. No one ever brings up the fact that it is historically verified fact that no "past cultures" ever made made homosexual marriage co-equal with man/woman marriage and the few "past cultures," that may or may not have "tolerated" homosexual relationships, eventually constrained them.

Given the history, I do not believe that a strong case for latent homosexuality within both genders can be made on an intellectually honest level. In fact, I think the historical record shows that humanity has been mostly "homophobic" and massively repulsed at the practice.

That we now have well-funded academics who are trying to support the notion that homosexuality is normal, is no surprise. They are part of the same agenda that saw the massive and unearned promotion of feminism.

Besides, if homosexuality was latent within both genders (meaning that all people could become homosexual given the proper conditions), wouldn't the pro-family, pro-child, pro-natal forces have every right to advocate for suppressing this latency?

Think about it, you could not claim it is unjust for those who believe in reproduction to suppress widespread acceptance of homosexuality. They could simply make the argument that if everyone becomes gay, humanity will cease to exist and they would be correct.
Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that all was vanity; but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dream with open eyes, and make it possible.
-T.E. Lawrence
DarkMinxMish
Freshman Poster
Posts: 82
Joined: March 26th, 2012, 11:14 pm

Post by DarkMinxMish »

Jason,

I think humans have a variety of expressions when it comes to sexuality and romance. It just depends on the environment and circumstances, but I look at bisexuality and homosexuality as a bi-product of hetero.

Your right I do agree that no society or civilization before would ever allow marriage between the sexes, because the whole purpose was productivity.
Marriage between male and females bought agreements, property, titles, and etc..It was the correct way nature worked and nothing was/is ever going to stop that. Society let's say tolerates these other varieties of sexuality as long as they're not out in the open or it affects the majority of the population.

Plus people who believe in reproductive rights would see that they are the status quo and for civilization to continue on sex has to happen between a male and female....so they would see homosexuality as a definite threat. I do think being hetero is natural and the most likely sexuality for most people.
It's just that society dictates everything about an individuals life and whats natural, permitted, what's abnormal, and etc...how would people actually know the full extent of themselves and sexuality with all of these dictations?

I see what your talking about in a couple of articles stating the "supposed" sexuality of females as bi and etc...
That type of science is flawed working in boxes and perimeters.
I have gay males friends and I know some men are just born with more interest in men and girls could never do anything for them.
Some animals exhibit homosexual behavior as a past time or take same sex partners.
Human varying sexual behavior is seen quite a bit in the animal kingdom, so maybe they're a mirror to our own sexual dysfunction.

It may not be latent, but I think since sexuality is a lower function society feels that it needs to be ruled with morality most lack in that particular department. So hetero is seen a normal and natural...the rest are seen as dangerous abominations by most people unless your the powers that be that is pushing it to the forefront trying to screw up the already fragile situation between the sexes.
I don't mind homosexuality, but it's when it confuses people and make them unsure. That's where I have my problems with it or they try to make it trendy and it cheapens the already mass marketed appeal of sex. In this society they show sex like it's going out of style why???
It's been here for millions of years it isn't going anywhere... ;3

~lol sorry for the ending rant~
Pricking up her golden head:
We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots?"
Jason of Dystopia
Freshman Poster
Posts: 70
Joined: April 10th, 2012, 7:01 am

Re:

Post by Jason of Dystopia »

Manx, no problem, rant on!

Just a couple of things:

Society does not dictate a sexuality. Those with abnormal personal desires feel the pangs of guilt coming from their own conscience. They create the myth of an oppressive environment in order to re-focus outward, instead of inside where it needs to be.

That being said, it is true that the brain goes through a development process in which it is influenced by the surrounding environment. What we feed the young and adolescent brain, strongly determines the life-path of the individual. Patterns learned in the early years can only be undone with long training and discipline. It is insane to try to normalize painful disorders.

And science has proven with some solid empirical evidence what causes homosexuality. As psychologist Robert Kronenmeyer wrote: " I firmly believe that homosexuality is a learned response to early painful experiences and that it can be unlearned."

Most studies have identified three causes of homosexual behavior. They are:

1) Early childhood emotional/sexual trauma and abuse
2) Child's abnormal relationships with parents (over-anxious mother, detached father, etc.)
3) Socialization into gender non-conforming behavior. (A component of this is feeling "different" around same-sex peers in childhood. So, actually being close to same sex peers up to a certain age is normal developmental behavior. Feeling a certain amount of hostility to the opposite sex up to a certain age is also very normal.) (This brings up a separate question for me: Is feminism a puerile response? Maybe in another post.)

And I agree with you: The "powers that be" today are engaged in an all out war on traditional morality and the family and have been for decades. They are only a few steps away from accomplishing their task.
Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that all was vanity; but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dream with open eyes, and make it possible.
-T.E. Lawrence
Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Anti-Feminism, Men's Rights, Misandry”