Camille Paglia on Rob Ford, Rihanna and rape culture

Toronto is ‘being absorbed in the psychodrama of an adolescent personality’

by Emma Teitel

Camille Paglia was in Toronto this week for the Munk Debate (Be it Resolved: Men are Obsolete). The dissident feminist championed the reign of man alongside British journalist Caitlin Moran.

Opponents Hanna Rosin and Maureen Dowd didn’t laud the obsolescence of men, or lord it over anyone, they merely acknowledged it. (Rosin cited stats from her bestseller The End of Men and made the very astute observation that men–à la Anthony Weiner–are now as meticulous about personal body hair upkeep as women.)

Everyone was thoughtful and hilarious but it was obvious they didn’t really disagree. Each woman seemed to affirm Rosin’s thesis that a changing economy is leaving working-class men behind. Each woman tried to work a nuanced argument into the framework of a sensational, facetious debate topic. I had a feeling the same might be so when I sat down with Paglia. The Glittering Images author and long-time university professor had nothing particularly damning to say about her opponents’ perspective, though she did have something to say about Rob Ford.

Do you agree with Hanna Rosin’s thesis in The End of Men, that women are now the dominating sex?

A: She’s absolutely right about this transition from the old manufacturing economy to a white-collar economy [and the negative consequences this has on men], but I think her book is a bit unfair to working-class men. I listen to a lot of sports radio—the only place in the world where you can hear working- class voices—and I feel there’s a disconnect in the way I understand working-class men and the way they’re portrayed in The End of Men and Susan Faludi’s Stiffed. My grandfather worked in a shoe factory—he was an Italian immigrant. My father was the first to go to college in the family. There’s a directness and a robustness about working-class men–a vitality and authenticity that is not coming across in these feminist books. The more women succeed and rise up into positions of power, the more remote they become from actual masculine energy. I’m concerned as a college teacher about the romantic and sexual futures of highly successful career women.

Why?

A: Women are being told “you are future leaders.” Meanwhile, we are more than our jobs. One reason Sex and the City was such an enormous hit is that it expressed something that feminism won’t admit: we don’t know what we want. We don’t know if we want children or not. My generation produced the sexual revolution and your generation is stuck figuring out how it’s going to work. I want young women when they’re 14 to start thinking about what they want over the course of their lives. I think it’s criminal—child abuse—that they’re not told to do this [in school]. Right now it’s just sex education and putting condoms on bananas. Girls should be asked to think about what they want in their lives when they’re 50, 60 and 70.What’s been imposed on women is a male model of professional study and achievement.

What’s the solution?

A: If colleges and universities are really concerned about women’s rights, then they must adjust to a far more flexible structure to allow young women students to take leaves of absence if they want to have children early. Schools should say, “you can be married and have children. We’ll have daycare centres for you. You can take 10 years to finish your degree—husbands, too.” The presence of married women and men in the classroom would revolutionize gender studies. It would bring reality into the classroom.

What are your thoughts on the phenomenon of “rape culture” as it’s reported in the media and talked about on college campuses today?

A: It’s ridiculous.  The one place we should be worried about is India. Why American feminists haven’t mobilized against gang rapes in India is an absolute outrage. This obsession with rape [in North America] is neurotic. There are attacks on men also. This privileging of the female victim is a distortion. To see the world in terms of rape is absurd. Throughout history there have been atrocities of every kind. Throughout history honourable men don’t rape.

Can we teach men not to rape, as some argue?

A: You can try to teach people to make ethical judgments. Telling a rapist not to rape? [Laughs] A liberal ideology is out there that people are basically good. It’s a bourgeois version of reality—this idea that the whole world should be like a bourgeois living room and anyone who doesn’t belong, you can retrain. No you can’t! I was raised in the Italian working-class way, which is “watch out!” The world is a dangerous place. It’s up to you to protect yourself, not just from rape, but from anything. The lack of imagination for criminality amazes me. There are people who are evil. The problem here is the inability of women to project themselves into the minds of men. Feminists say [proper, mocking tone] “women have the right to do whatever they want.” Of course we have the right to do whatever we want–to be jogging with earphones on with our breasts going like this [simulates breasts bouncing]. Yes you have the right to but it’s also stupid! I see with the eyes of the criminal. I must have a criminal mind.

Are there any worthwhile voices in feminism today?

A: Feminism is dead. The movement is absolutely dead. The women’s movement tried to suppress dissident voices for way too long. There’s no room for dissent. It’s just like Mean Girls. If they had listened to me they could have gotten the ship steered in the right direction. My wing of feminism—the pro-sex wing—was silenced. I was practically lynched for endorsing The Rolling Stones. Susan Faludi is still saying I’m not a feminist. Who made her pope? Feminist ideology is like a new religion for a lot of neurotic women. You can’t talk to them about anything.

Have you seen that new lesbian movie, Blue is the Warmest Color?

A: No I haven’t. But I adored Desert Hearts—starring one of your fine Canadian actresses. I think that all movies made by lesbians for lesbians have been really dreary with no sense of style. Lesbians are boring. It was a lot more interesting when lesbianism was evil and perverse. Now everything is so accepting and all the heat has gone out. It’s all about Ellen Degeneres and Portia De Rossi. It’s banal.

What do you think the best show on television right now?

A: Real Housewives! My favourite is Housewives of Orange County, but I watch all of them [every series within the franchise]. It’s the only thing I watch on TV besides Turner Classic Movies. I feel Real Housewives captures in a very intensified degree, the way women are with each other. Never before has the camera captured this so accurately.

Beyonce or Rihanna?

A: Rihanna! I am everywhere about Rihanna. I am an enormous Rihanna fan. La Republica contacted me and they wanted me to write a story on Angelina Jolie and I said “I love her but she hasn’t done anything for years. How about Rihanna?” So I’ve written this whole thing about Rihanna and it’s about to come out. I adore her. She is so sexy. And she’s obviously bisexual. I think she’s involved with Melissa Forde. They’re always holding hands. I think Pour it up is truly artistic. I played it in my class. It’s a true work of art. Lady Gaga doesn’t even know what art is compared to Rihanna.

Any thoughts on Toronto Mayor Rob Ford?

A:  Once you have become the centre of a conflict in a complex governmental enterprise you have the obligation to resign. Why are all the energies of one of the world’s great cities being absorbed in the psychodrama of an adolescent personality? I think an honourable man would resign. It’s like a reality show. I think it’s terrible for the city of Toronto and Canada. I’ve heard some anti-Canadian things [in the States], some mocking things about Canada. I don’t think people are saying, ‘oh what a wonderful rollicking place! What a fun place!’ There’s a sense of ‘how is this happening in a major city’? It seems like chaos, like a reductive lowering. It’s very debasing.




Browse

Camille Paglia on Rob Ford, Rihanna and rape culture

  1. Paglia’s still trying to figure out how to make money off feminism I see….however she’s still a failed Phyllis Schlafly.

    • That’s funny, I thought you were a failed Phyllis Schlafly.

      • Well you even advertise that your brain is drained so nobody is surprised at your ‘thoughts’

        • You’re kind of proving her point about Feminism not tolerating dissent. For some feminists, if you don’t subscribe to certain viewpoints or even attempt to be critical of the “movement” then you’ll get lumped into the far right, anti-feminist crowd.

          Which is ironic because some feminists will claim that not all feminists are the same and then go on to be dismissive or disparage anyone who doesn’t agree with them.

          • BrainDrain isn’t a serious part of this discussion….having much the same attitude on any topic. Disruption.

          • Dismissive, huh? It’s such a rare quality in comment streams…probably you are right, it’s only feminists that get a little heated in discussion. Must be hormones.

          • New wave feminists are nothing but misandrists.

          • Hey, thanks for letting me know. Do you have a website? I should probably follow you and learn something about how awful I am.

          • We can tell you that right here.

          • no sense in learning something if it can’t be changed.

          • Nice Sarcasm argumentation, I see your the Reddit SRS Breed of ignorance.

          • I wiling to bet 5$ that your are Lesbian and unattractive !

          • google is your best friend…

          • Modern Gender-feminism, is not yer mothers equality feminism of 30 years ago.

          • I’m an “old” feminist and I love Camille, AND men.

          • Modern US gender-feminism and their perverse Alliances with American law enforcement are in fact turning hetero-sexual relationships into legal liabilities for guys. I believe these “Alliances” are not only perverse…But history will show they are also unconstitutional.

          • That’s humorous since BrainDrainXP jumped all over her first. She deserved EmilyOne’s reply.

        • Protip: brain drain is when smart people leave a company, causing it to die.

          • It’s when smart people leave a country…and s/he hasn’t.

          • No, it’s not on a countrywide basis, like here in the US, you MIGHT be able to say an entire city (like Detroit) has suffered brain drain, but those people haven’t left the damn country, they’ve just moved to a different city.

          • ‘brain drain – The emigration of highly trained or intelligent people from a country or other place.’

          • While you may be right that it is now also used in the way you say, historically it is meant to describe a country losing it’s scientists, computer techs, etc. to another country.

      • Ha! Okay that comeback made me actually laugh out loud :)

    • Emily, I don’t get why people here are so hostile to you, especially when you explain your positions so clearly… except on this. Paglia is less about making money than pretty much anyone else in academia or feminism. Her history amply bears this out, if one is looking for actual evidence. She taught in the trenches of a, shall we say, un-exalted university for years, even though she was a Yale PhD and star student of Harold Bloom’s; all she needed to do was play along and she could have been at the top of the academic game at an Ivy League department. It’s almost by chance that Sexual Personae took off, except for its quality, which is extraordinarily high (did you read it?)

      The truth of the matter, as you know, is that there are many types of feminists, and misogynists revel in pretending they are all the same, all shrill harridans. At the same time, there ARE feminists like Mary Daly (some of whose books are terrific), who refused to allow men into her college courses, or Andrea Dworkin, who certainly had ‘issues’ with men and who thought it was dandy to attempt to turn back the First Amendment and allow women to police what men could read by binarizing things into “pornography”. As Paglia put it so well, when talking about how feminists and the religious Right agreed on this one issue, that it was “an illuminating alliance of contemporary Puritans”. Bingo.

      • People are hostile to me because I’m plain-spoken and not PC. This is considered neither Canadian nor female. However I spent some years in politics, where I had to gladhand, backslap, tread lightly, pretend a lot etc and I don’t need to anymore…..plus I’m 67, so I say what I damnwell please. LOL

        As to feminism …well I was told when I was a kid that I was a suffragette….just born too late….but I knew it would come again, because all we got the first time was the vote….and we needed a culture change. And when it did….in the 60s…I did my bit to help it along.

        It has a very simple premise….women are people, women are human beings….and women should have the same rights under the law, in education and in life as men do. Without a bunch of silly cultural clutter.

        So I promoted anything that made a LEGAL difference….and let everybody else debate….endlessly….all the cultural beliefs. There are literally thousands of them….and women have been oppressed for thousands of years so I knew it would take awhile, and I had other fish to fry. I’ve agreed with some of it…..and rolled my eyes at a lot of it …bearing in mind that we need extremists and the lunatic fringe to show up the sensible demands as reasonable….and it’s rolled along nicely.

        Simone de Beauvoir and Betty Friedan were really all that was needed….but we’ve now had nearly half a century of debate/discussion/argument ……and people seem to have finally chewed through much of the fog.

        We’ve now had female premiers, and governors and PMs, CEOs, chancellors, astronauts and so on….and Malala….and thousands, nay millions just like her…are the face of the future.

        • Well, we’re pretty much 100% eye-to-eye on this. The true goals of feminism — AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT PAGLIA SAYS AS WELL — should be the complete removal of legal strictures that prevent their advancement. Secondarily, and also what Paglia says, society needs to come to terms with the simple fact that women will often wish to have children, an important societal goal that cannot simply be shunted off to Care Agencies so that women can work on a “level playing field” with men. Knowing how the legal system needs to intervene to allow this to happen is tricky. A working mother is going to find it hard to compete with a single man even in the best of situations.

          I’m still wondering, though, why you were so negative on Paglia. Sexual Personae is an ***astounding*** book, one of the best of the last 50 years, IMHO. It is a grand work of synthesis: Apollonian and Dionysian, Eastern and Western, “high” and “low” in art. She makes The West… seamless. And her positions on feminism and many other things only seem outrageous on first encountering them; they have a lot of data to back them up.

          • Well I’m glad you enjoy her work….but I can tell you she did the movement far more harm than good. Made it far more difficult than need be.

            I was glad to leave those years, and those names, behind.

          • Mankind literally carried women on its collective back for 80,000 years. Like Camille said, if women ran the world, we’d all be living grass huts. Your mainline feminist theory that women were “oppressed” is a complete joke examined within cultural contexts. The victim-power movement of modern feminism has been effective at creating a generation of pseudo victims. As the late Doris Lessing said, “(feminism) produced great advances for one group of people but changed nothing else”.

            You and I will be long gone before the victims of your divisive ideology really come to terms with the damage done. Today’s crop of feminists are just corporatists whose “strength” relies upon fossil fuels and global industry for their nonstop indulgences, their political base is all about securing their own short term self-interests, and they don’t care about geopolitics. Mindless self-indulgent hyper-individualism is the order of the day. They’ve created nothing more original than copying a masculine cultural aspect. The backlash is occuring around the world and in the states, rolling back roe v. wade all over, corporations rolling over democracy everywhere, the climate filling with pollution, overpopulation (a women’s issue if there ever was one) exploding globally, the environment being strip-mined for their social media and shopping addictions… and the average woman won’t acknowledge these things or even know about them- that would be unpleasant, and break up their 24/7 party of self-indulgent good feelings.

          • LOL without women….nothing would exist.

          • I give feminists credit for backing roe v. wade in the 70s… feminists and the gigantic proportion of men who supported them. If Roe v. Wade is getting rolled back I am asking where are the feminists? I am in daily contact with young feminists who have an ideology of feminism in place of a rational political philosophy. Ask a feminist what she thinks about overpopulation, and she’ll say “uhhh, wha?” Ask a feminist what she thinks about Roe v. Wade getting rolled back and she says, “Whaa, really?” Ask a feminist- that is, if you can pull her away from her social media device, her doggy, her 80 degree heated apartment, or her television entertainments.

            Best I’ve achieved with this approach are replies like, “Theres no such thing as overpopulation”… as for Roe v. Wade, the opposition’s viewpoint is sympathetically viewed… modern feminists find being “feminine” more appealing than upholding anti-coercion laws, apparently. “Well, maybe they have a point… shoe gaze… (insert hyper-sentimental personal story of pregnancy here)…. OK… back to the 24/7 personal fulfillment regime… lets get some sushi and forget about politics its SOOO boring.”

          • Misogynists are closeted gays, grandpa. Time to open the door and come out.

          • And homophobic bigots have no place in Canadian society

          • I don’t have a Gay bone in my body and I Despise women ! So not all are like that . There are a lot of women who hate women too .

          • Yeah, you’re a closeted gay in heavy denial.

            Hating half the human race indicates a mental illness

          • Are you suggesting that homosexuality is a mental illness?

          • Hating half the human race indicates a mental illness….no matter where the hate comes from. Religion, child abuse, PTSD or denial and inner conflict about gayness.

          • How did you come up with that? She clearly stated two separate statements and you seem to have combined them. If Bulder despises women then he hates half the human race. Simple.

          • i guess i’m a misogynist then even though i have no negative feelings toward women other than the fact that i’m not attracted to them.

          • A misogynist hates women….actively hates women.

          • True enough, but if we could get rid of a few of these power hungry loopy biotches, what does exist would run a lot better.

          • You’re another one that needs to get out of the closet.

          • Well you know what it’s like Emily, ever since Pierre Trudeau croaked out and left me a bushel of sequins in his will I had to find a way to put them to good use.

            Thanks to that fabulous darling man I make a fortune on the annual parade.

          • LOL no doubt.

          • I’m a misogynist. I despise most women, I view them as inferior inasmuch as I hold them to a male standard. I’m not running from anything. I agree with the spirit, not the literal, quote of the late Norman Mailer: “women should be kept in cages.”

            As Paglia herself says in Sexual Personae, and I’m paraphrasing, women ARE the essential problem of civilization. I think this country should segregate schools by gender and then see what happens. Get these crazy b****s away from the children!

          • Well, you’re either gay or crazy. LOL

            Probably both.

          • Even if I was gay AND crazy, it doesn’t make me wrong on this subject. Your contemporaries were nut-jobs, the current crop of corporate sluts are a travesty and they will not be carrying forward the torch of civilization… they will are extinguishing it in an orgy of over-consumption.

          • LOL if you can seriously [which I doubt] say this stuff about 52% of the world’s population…and the part upon which all life depends…..you are gay, crazy…and should be locked up.

          • Demographically, you are right, biologically you are wrong. The Y chromosome long ago took over the aspect of sexual reproduction. I.e., there is no “natural” reproduction without it. So life doesn’t depend on one gender or the other. But since the Y is a much more recent development phylogenetically, it proves Y took over and is in the driver’s seat as far as reproduction goes. No Y, no species.

          • LOL You flunked biology. Women can indeed have children without men. Sorry

          • Yes but only through technology and Any babies born from the process would be female and genetically identical to their mother.Any babies born from the process would be female and genetically identical to their mother.Any babies born from the process would be female and genetically identical to their mother.Any babies born from the process would be female and genetically identical to their mother.Any babies born from the process would be female and genetically identical to their mother.

            Like an endless copy/paste, get it. Although nature doesn’t copy-paste, it types everything out longhand. Therefore after a few generations the errors pile up and what you have is a retarded baby. Way to go, SuperLesbo.

          • Well errors piled up in you long time ago.

            Now then….who do you usually post as?

          • You mean officially….?

          • Officially, unofficially and anywhere in between.

          • ROBERT FORD

          • Nah, yer just another whackjob American

          • ROBERT FORD IS CANADIEN.

          • AND YOU AREN’T.

          • I can be. :) Hehe

          • We have enough crazies, thanks.

          • Too late I’m heading up, I hear the women aren’t shit.

          • No….but you are.

          • I have so many female friends and am admired by all of them. My misogyny is not personal. When I criticize women, it seems like misogyny. But at heart, its just criticism. And women can not handle criticism. So it sounds sensational. Go read Sexual Personae cover to cover. I’m not optimistic you can or will. But her criticism might be easier to take.

          • Sorry, not interested in any of you whackos.

          • I’m coming up to segregate your schools by gender and save you from the hot mess America has become.

            Admit it I’m your only hope. What has Canada got in a bunch of do-nothing feminists? Your country is sliding into shit, admit it.

          • It’s your country that’s crashing, not mine. We aren’t admitting togas….sorry.

          • Who are you kidding? Canuckistan is proving itself to be powerless to stop its slide into a gross parody of the worst aspects of American culture. You guys are backsliding into becoming an over-consuming nation of brainless twinks who think that a fire sale of natural resources and raw materials is in your best interests- becoming a client state of global capitalism, which amounts to capitulation to a global economic order whose endgame is no less that the utter destruction of the entire planet.

            It is the sheer irrationality and helplessness of this position that is too similar to basic feminine pathology to avoid notice. If Canada was a person, it would be that feckless has-been that is letting itself go, living in a dank, cat-infested bower of solipsistic self indulgence whose future is a pointless existence pushing an empty shopping cart down endless aisles, endlessly fantasizing about experiences for sale, with the mind-numbing anesthetic of modern Musak swirling about, on prescription drug cocktails and water accumulating in the extremities.

            Your country’s only hope is an invasion of countercultural ass-kicking commandos armed with the the power to think critically, a historical memory, and copious amounts of testosterone.

          • Mmm how be you worry about Texas, and Kansas et al first before you start worrying about invading Alberta eh?

          • Your reply is like a textbook example of “assume the sale” although no such scenario exists. You’re a pushy salesperson selling crap ideas on a second rate website. A hack with a head shot.

          • I find it hilarious that a bunch of guys are trying to explain women’s lib to women.

            Ciao.

          • We are talking about the knock-on effects of “women’s lib” long after it has been mainstreamed into the cultural zeitgeist. Your concept of women discussing their special treatment and self-interest in and among themselves, if formed in a modern cultural context, is just that. In the larger arena, you cannot protect the evaluation of “feminist” political economy from analysis by other qualitative and quantitative theory. In other words, when you are in your intellectual ghetto, you can conduct yourselves in whatever intellectually disgraceful fashion. In the arena, your ideas are subject to rational analysis. Ms. Paglia’s central thesis is precisely that feminism is a partial, divisive ideology. Of course women’s lib is evaluated highly among its stakeholders in the same way the Wall Street Bankers raise a toast at their shareholder’s meeting.

          • WE are not talking about ANYthing. YOU are blathering on about rubbish.

          • The way my feminist filter works is this: it cancels out the shrill tones. What comes through is a distillation, in this case,

            “… are not talking about …thing. … are blathering on about rubbish.”

            Which is a pretty good description of your conversational style.

          • I said Ciao. Make it so.

          • Being uninteresting, and of dull wit, you take a bow. Get off my stage, you hack. I’ll call curtains when it suits me.

          • America will just be the showcase to the rest of the world, as to what happens when gender-feminists get to form “perversion Alliances” with law enforcement.

          • wtf does that have to do with anything?

          • Modern US gender-feminists are going to continue to pervert American law enforcement, until we reach a point where hetero-sexual relationships are a legal liability for guys. Then modern gender-feminism will be challenged by young women, ( as it is starting to be).

          • It’s simple equality….as guaranteed in your constitution.

            Eventually men will grow up.

          • ??? grow up and dismantle the “perversion Alliances” that have infected basic American law enforcement???

          • Whats the average American male to do, when he witnesses his buddy being dragged off to Jail by the “New pervert courts”???

          • Eventually men will grow up and accept equality… leave religion behind……and move on to something more intelligent than burning crosses/domestic abuse/gay baiting etc

          • Grow up and accept the perversions In US law enforcement that make any hetero-sexual relationship… A legal liability???

          • What are you on, Duke?

          • The younger generations of American women realize the “perversion Alliances” that US gender-feminists have created with American law enforcement…. will backfire.

          • Okay, I give. What are the ‘perversion alliances’ with American law enforcement that you keep talking about?

          • Are we talking true equality under the law, or Your’e perverse definition of equality???

          • Pathogenesis does not occur in humans

          • Women can indeed have children without having a relationship with a man, but you cannot have children without a mans sperm.
            And b4 you rant on about artificial sperm, cloning etc, so far all research in those areas has resulted in living organisms with deplorably short lives and a host of genetic ailments.
            Even as research continues to improve on this, it also is leading to artificial wombs, and the prospect of using animal wombs as surrogate fetal environments.

            Eventually, science amy lead to both sexes being disposable in the reproductive stakes.
            I would actually hate to see this happen, but at least we will all be “equally” miserable in our disposability.

          • Yes, actually you can…..and your biology is years out of date.

          • And yours is mere science fiction.

            Pathogenesis is a feature in some species, but not yet in our own. Even IVF requires a male sperm cell.

          • I believe I said ciao to you Statler. I’m tired of arguing with your ignorance.

          • Then what;s forcing you to post a reply here?

          • Nothing…..which is my point.

            I try and be polite, and answer everybody who talks to me….but when the other person puts in no effort and is just rude and ignorant….I say ciao.

            So off to bed with you. You’re done.

          • Your statement was and is factually wrong.

            You are entitled to your own opinions, but not to your own facts. Parthenogenesis has not been accomplished in humans, despite ongoing research. And yes, even IVF DOES require at least one viable male sperm cell.

            Naopte buna, cap de lemn.

          • Well, I don’t know Emily, you and the poet Burns must hold the same view on this business of propagation.

            I’ve never thought much of it myself because a wild night in the sack seems a better thing to do than just take a cutting of yourself.

            O my Love is like a red, red rose
            That’s newly sprung in June;

          • Ahhh Q….it only needed you. LOL

          • So you think LGBT people should be locked up?

          • why do you hate gay men?

          • Wow, what an extremist.

          • My first reaction would be to whiplash, but I honestly don’t think it would’ve been terrible growing up as a kid. I don’t know about this current generation, but being distracted by girls and hormones wasn’t very productive. From what I’m hearing about teachers shunning rambunctious boys, I think giving them an environment to bond with each other without the stresses of intersex relations wouldn’t be terrible. I’m not saying it’s perfect or the best answer, but it definitely has its merits.

          • Yes, I am sure this concept will require several decades and millions of dollars for lawyers, administrators, the PTA, all the news networks, and various pointy-hat professionals.

            And by the way, I didn’t say anything about “intersex relations”. Although that is a factor. I’m merely stating that is good for boys to be taught by men with other boys. Neither is it about “Bonding” which is a feminist weasel-word and has nothing to do with education or development.

            The only reason I advocate for gender separation is not a problem inherent to a gender. For example, when teaching was a female-only occupation (and in fact, an obligation) we turned out world-beating graduates without computers or electricity. I advocate it today because today’s women are just degenerate personalities. The ranks of early childhood through high school “professionals” are filled by incurious adults with sub-normal IQs, not academic role models.

            “Equality” meant a brain drain from schools to industry, leaving morons in charge of our children. And the adminstrators are a loser class of individuals. We replaced people who were embedded in local social economy who had vested interests in the development of their offspring and the offspring of their community to a corporate system of self-interested careerists without any interest but a paycheck, in an anonymous community of high-fenced enclaves and a gutted political economy.

            You can’t administrate out of this through focus groups or consensus decision making. The toothpaste can’t be put back in the tube here. Its a mess which can never be fixed. It must be utterly destroyed and replaced with a new model. But we don’t do that in America. We are straight-jacketed by a tyrannic amount of not just bureaucratic red-tape but a juggernaut of legislative and judicial encumbrance. We need a top-down mandate but this country is run by a cartel of plutocrats.

          • I’m talking about bonding as in boys building strong friendships without competing over girls (which can often tear at these friendships). I could barely concentrate at all the cleavage, thongs, and short skirts from as early as 6th grade (kind of ridiculous, really).

            Bonding is very important for development, by the way. Getting through academics as a successful student is incredibly hard as a rigid individualist, but working together and striving to help each other is how we succeed. Our relationships with each other should matter, but kids that young can often have a hard time understanding those relationships when their strained by conflicting desires.

            I get what you’re saying about female teachers today, and I can agree with that on some level, but I think that socially men and women often teach very differently. The coolest teachers I ever had growing up were either men or women who mostly fraternized with men. They did the least amount of lying and the most amount of critical thinking and question answering.

            My female teachers were either super sweet and nice or batshit insane control freaks. Not sure what’s up with that, but it can’t be better today than it was 2 decades ago, I think.

          • Here we are at a point in time where we expect “bonding” to be a function of primary education, while “Bonding” in every other sense of the word in terms of family seems to be disintegrating.

            The fact that male display and competition for females is a distraction and fact of biology and behavior should be reason enough to segregate the genders. The only reason to hold a debate on the issue is to provide material for vigorous mental masturbation by the feminist camp, whose motto has always been “our way or the highway”. They would like 100% integration of the schools so that boys don’t, once again, pull ahead of girls- and this time, they won’t be able to point to any cruel male bogeymen.

          • Primary? No. But it still plays an important role. If kids feel like social outcasts, they’re more likely to start failing and causing trouble because they don’t fit in.

            Not identically, but similarly it’s why teachers should strive to be respected and liked by their students, without compromising their curriculum. It means they’ll associate good feelings with education and are more likely to participate and put in real effort because it makes them happy.

            We need good teachers and our kids need strong role models with whom they can identify. Not every kid is the same, but this is certainly a common denominator I’ve seen that is very, very lacking.

          • Remember valentine’s day? Its a female-oriented campaign of forced friendliness where kids are ordered to come up with unique signifiers of romantic or platonic affection for other children for whom there was no prior sentiment.

            Tell me your impression of this lesson plan, and tell me what percentage of male teachers in an all-male classroom would engage in this curriculum.

            I think you are a bit bent. Teachers are there to impart wisdom, and BY EXAMPLE be a role model, not seduce children into being “liked” like a “FACEBOOK” pal.

            A “teacher” who “Strives to respected” is a study in post modern immaturity is not going to productive self-sufficient citizen capable of independent critical thought. He is going to, by example, create a person who believes it is a value to “strive to be respected”… in other words a person whose sense of self-worth is derived from external criteria over which there is no control, leaving this person in a permanent emotional crisis.

            We are invited, in this modern age, to salvage the system on behalf of the system, as if it is a massive idol whose modesty is violated by criticism. I ask you, BioGenX2b, why are you running to defend the modesty of a system which is clearly in crisis and should be torn down and destroyed?

            If we continue to treat the education system like a Windows operating system- just one more patch, one more upgrade- and all will be well- we aren’t going to get “un-lost”.

            Currently that means a ‘teacher’ panders to their charges (who are forced by law to be confined to this system) while forced to “Grade” human beings like produce, according to a centralized list of criteria whose nature is to provide gloabal corporations with ready-made allies and servants, and polticians with ready-made subordinates.

            It all starts with the children. What was a decentralized world-class model is now totally screwed up joke churning through public money while engendering generations of ignorant narcissists.

          • Dude, I don’t even know what you’re going on about anymore. I feel like you’re ranting to rant. Yes, some of what you say makes sense, but either you’re not paying any attention to what I’m trying to say or you’re inserting your own narrative and jumping to its conclusions.

          • I’m sorry, BioGen, are we not bonding? I have things to say. I have a prescription for getting our boys out of this morass of public education. You have nothing but equivocation. I ask questions of you; you whine about our lack of bonding and affection. I’m hurt, dude.

          • What? Whine? I’m talking about improving our education standards while also eliminating this terrible stigma that boys and men either don’t have or should otherwise bottle up their feelings and live as rigid individualists. It might be a great strategy for some, but it’s one of the reasons male suicide is so high today.

            Equivocation? I thought I was pretty clear. No one answer will do the trick, we need to tackle the problem adaptively and focus on the principles that make healthy individuals, while tossing aside all of the ideologies that are starting to unnecessarily burden our children and distract them.

            See? I was right, you’re doing exactly what I said you were. It makes me sad because we’re clearly on the same side, but I feel like you’re sitting on the very precipice and I’m maintaining a balance of what’s practical and what’s feasible, without trying to compromise what I believe is right.

          • Your talk of “improving education standards” is where you and I diverge. I recommend ditching such standards. Standard curriculums should be offloaded to the trash heap of history.

            As far as an individualist ethos and your alleged pathology, one doesn’t necessarily follow from the other. Neither should such a program be instituted, either overtly or by implication. Social engineering is what is baked into the standard curriculum these days.

            You equivocate. You aren’t an effective communicator. I’ll tell you how. You wrote that sentence in the middle without any content, just a bunch of buzz-phrases. Equivocation? I thought I was pretty clear.

            “No one answer will (do the trick), we need to (tackle the problem) (adaptively) and (focus) on the (principles) that make (healthy individuals), while (tossing aside all of the ideologies) that are starting to (unnecessarily burden) our children and distract them.”

            All your weasel words are in parentheses. Words that mean nothing. They fill space, like the phrase “know what I mean?”

            You say there is no answer, I say the solution is to throw the whole curriculum out.

            You say we need to “tackle the problem”, I say throw the whole curriculum out.

            You say we need to “adaptively” “focus”, I say throw the whole curriculum out.

            You leave a gigantic turd in proposing the education system be used to mould children into “healthy individuals” which is bizarre. How about not filling their days with fluff and busywork, and subjecting them to administration by incurious and dim-witted co-eds? This amounts to reiteration of the current “curriculum” which I am frankly unaware of. Probably the viewing of cartoons of dancing, singing vegetables. Lets get real. What programme is going to overcome the cultural intertia of the gluttonous piggery that is the typical family diet?

            You say we should toss aside the ideologies- but what is a curriculum, as practiced, which is not the inculcation of ideology? For example, my boss today had a song stuck in his head. What song? A military marching song. Why? Because his kid was singing it. Why was his kid singing it? Because at this kid’s school assemblies are mandatory, for Veteran’s Day, where all must sing the jingoist military anthems of the various branches of armed forces.

            No matter if it is Canada, or the USA, social curriculum IS ideology. State-sponsored ideology. And what is the state ideology? The imperatives are obvious- read the paper. The agenda takes a bit of digging, though. I recommend Noam Chomsky on the details. Or just read a litany of negative effects of our hegemony through NAFTA. Last week Obama draped the “Medal of Freedom” around Bill Clinton’s neck, who signed NAFTA into law, and consigned millions to a vagabond life as an economic refugee- not to mention turning the Mexican countryside into an open sewer of unregulated factory farms- which incubated the Swine Flu of 2008 which killed children worldwide.

            We live in an extremely treacherous age, with high levels of gullibility, gluttony, and gross stupidity displayed by the putative “leaders” at all civic levels, from the nation, state, and family. We should throw out the curriculum because all we can do is poison children with our corruptions masquerading as wisdom. What you believe is that there is some practical and feasible way forward dragging this kludge behind us. There is no such method. You cannot polish this turd. There is no tweak or upgrade which is worth pursuing. The whole thing must go.

          • Have fun, dude. You can section out my text all day but I’m not going to write a novel here. I don’t mind expanding on my ideas and opinions when asked, but I can’t be bothered if you’re going to badger me about not listing everything exactly.

            I don’t deal in absolutes.

          • I’m not badgering you about listing things exactly. I’m saying you are using fuzzy concepts that have no actual content. You have sentiment, and refer to principles, but upon inspection I find they are not principles at all, just a hazy notion of having a general idea, a collection of feel-good phrases that mean exactly jack squat, and that you don’t deal in absolutes. Which, by the way, IS an absolute and the most coherent thing you’ve had to say so far.

          • You show no soft spots, only rigid, pointy corners. I’ve read everything that you’ve posted and followed your ‘conversations’ with BioGenx2b. He has been nothing but respectful and you are disdainful back. While I agree with much of the concerns you touch on over all the areas you cover (you do tend to rant), I find that what comes through the most is anger. It permeates all that you say and I’m saddened by that. You seem to have a good mind, but are lacking in social graces. There. Now I feel better.

          • And what does sanitizing internet discourse achieve?

            Anger is appropriate and natural. The self-censure that comes from a culture which pathologizes outrage as a matter of course is the very thing I am criticizing. Take your Buddha-brains and go stuff it- I’m a real person who isn’t going to take an antidepressant and pretend its all good. I’m not going to play along as complicit party to your madness.

            This culture’s version of social graces is to ignore the trains leading to the human ovens, and regard the ashes falling from the sky a mere inconvenience that polite society should ignore. In other words, the difference between what we consider social grace and what this society is inflicting is grotesquely disproportionate.

            Sadly, people have a general tendency to defend the oppressors, to salvage for themselves some oasis of comfort in a desert of values. It doesn’t matter to me that courage is scarce, and critical thinking is so atrophied in modern societies. Adults are lost causes. The children aren’t.

          • FTSU, Grandpa. FTSU.

          • I think your are right !

          • You need to be locked in the closet.

          • Another misogynist I see. Yawn.

          • Anyone who does not believe a women has a right to make a false rape accusation whenever she feels the whim is a…misogynist??? The `perversion Alliances between American law enforcement and US gender-feminists… needs to be dismantled.

          • You’ve got to admit that it was funny…

          • EmilyOne, I really like you and am on your side….but you’ve got to stop telling everyone with a dissenting view that they are closeted gays. It isn’t getting you anywhere. Not to mention that there is nothing wrong with being in or out of the closet. Mentally ill is a whole other matter.

          • I didn’t. I said ‘misogynists’….men who hate women…..are closeted gays. They hate themselves basically.

            Hets, straights, breeders….’normal men’….LIKE women.

          • Gay people are normal, you bigot

          • I said ‘misogynists’….men who hate women…..are closeted gays

            It is not normal to hate women.

            If you’re going to trail around after me like a lost child, upgrade your reading ability Q.

          • now, now children, play nice!!!

          • The same is true for both sexes.

            Nobody should be judged on the basis of their sex. Everyone should be judged solely on the basis of individual merit.

          • I believe that the rest of the world will witness what happens to a society in which a small group of gender-feminists get to create perverse and manufactured statistics Alliances with their nations law enforcement. These perverse gender-feminist / law enforcement “Alliances” are turning hetero-sexual relationships into very real legal liabilities. The world will witness what happens when law enforcements “accept the pork bloating dollars”, in return for routinely persecuting the innocent, and manufacturing faulty and Inflammatory statistics.

          • I have no idea what you are trying to say here.

          • Nope, didn’t ask. Not interested in misogynists. Whatever closet they’re in.

        • “Plain-spoken” is not equivalent to being nasty, and expressing hostility without substance.

          Yeah, feminism is born of a good idea. But when you look at what has happened to the latest generation of feminists, maybe it’s time to take a step back and reevaluate.

          It’s not about equality anymore; not when people take seriously the ideas of limiting the rights of one gender for the sake of another. Then you just become a different face of the same old shit.

          Culture change in the 60′s? All your generation did was do drugs, rebel against your parents, and have gratuitous amounts of sex. IT was nothing more than a selfish embracing of teenage impulses. The only accomplishment of the 60′s counterculture movement was to put the pieces in place for the era of unprecedented greed, selfishness and cynicism that has stood at the core of Western values since then.

          • I dunno where you got your info, but counter-culture started out with civil rights, went on to anti-war marchs, and then women’s lib.

            That means equality for blacks and women….and the end of the draft for men. A complete change from life in the 50s.

            I never did drugs, spent 5 years in the military, married and had kids…..there were millions just like me.

          • American gender feminists will continue to pervert American law enforcement, until the point where any hetero-relationship at all becomes a legal liability for guys

          • Then don’t get married….give us all a break.

          • google “the marriage strike” and you will realize the fruits of the gender-feminist perversions to US law enforcement.

          • I’ve never heard of ANY women’s group, or feminists lobbying for the end of the draft for men.

          • Anti-war protests….make love not war…..girls say yes to guys who say no.

            Probably before your time.

          • Anti-war protests are not the same thing as anti-draft protests. As far as I know neither any feminists or any other group of women have lobbied to end the draft (or include women in it).

            Yes, it was before my time, but I do know how to read.

            I hadn’t heard “Girls say yes to guys who say no,” but I have heard of the white feather campaign, for both world wars one and two. Where were the feminists then? If not participating in it themselves, not a peep.

            But that was probably before YOUR time.

          • Anti-draft and anti-war….same thing. White feather was WWI…women didn’t have the vote then.

          • Wow! Anti-draft and anti-war are NOT the same thing.

            A man, who upon turning 18, who doesn’t register for the selective service does not have the right to get a school loan, a driver’s license, faces criminal penalties including thousands in fines and 5 years in prison and other penalties… Just for not signing up for a list. Women get a bye, just for being women.

            This is all outside the context of a war.

            Your conflation between draft and war exposes your ignorance on the topic. Probably because it has never concerned you. Probably because it has never affected you directly.

          • No reason women should have done any of it, since as you say it didn’t affect them….but they did.

            The only correct response is ‘Thank you’.

        • Spent some years in politics? I was right about you and the truth.

      • What point is there in all these so called variances in feminism when the academic and influential feminist all share the same voice with little to no condemnation by the supposedly good feminist?

        Every tenant of feminism all belief in shared values regardless if its in patriarchy theory or certain models that reflect how life was for women historically. The common apologetic tactic that “not all feminist are like”is a dishonest and lazy refutation at best…how many established and well know feminist with considerable repute in the movement have echoed sentiments boarding on misandric,bigoted and at times dangerous?

    • I never thought I’d say this, but you may be right.

    • Your ad feminam attack suggests that, despite not liking what she has to say, you lack the intellectual capacity to demonstrate that any of it is wrong.

      Pathetic.

      Also rather typical of the mainstream feminist thinking that She talks about. What do you do with disagreement or dissent? Excommunicate the blasphemers. Like a religion.

      • What is pathetic is that you have the IQ of a turnip.

    • She tells the truth. That must be very confusing.

      • It is to you apparently.

  2. As always, Paglia is the best, the keenest mind, the best informed, the least conned.

    • She sounds quite thoughtful and reflective, refreshing, and I agree with much of what she said.

  3. She’s right, feminists have no tolerance for anyone who disagrees with them. Its become a rigid movement of hypersensitive women who blame men for every problem in their lives. Its quite sad.

    • It’s also not true.

      • I forgot about the beta males who support them.

        • Feminism is the radical notion that women are people.

          That’s it, that’s all….people.

          Not inferior, not superior, not aliens…..people

          The rest is crap…male and Paglia…crap.

          • Feminism is the radical notion that women are helpless victims of male oppression and as a result, need entitlements from the government.

          • No, that’s the way women were treated before liberation.

          • If women are liberated then why is feminism still necessary?

          • Lessee….burkkas, beatings, rape, honour killings, GM, ‘war-on-women’ laws, low numbers in govt, business, etc

            Why….did you think Nirvana had arrived?

          • I stand corrected, feminism is necessary in The Middle East, but aside from achieving equal outcomes, why is it necessary here?

            Nirvana? Kurt Cobain died in ’94 …move on!

            …For every human you save……..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkK7_FsJE7Q

            (Feminists are just jealous because they don’t have eyes that look like Faora’s.)

          • Women are badly treated everywhere….so feminism goes on.

            What is needed is decent treatment of all people everywhere….but women account for half of humanity so that’s a start.

            PS….Nirvana is union with God.

          • What a steaming load. Feminism is off the rails. Really nothing more than misandry at this point.

          • When you don’t know anything about a topic….stop talking

          • Yet you continue to shine a light on your ignorance. I am sure you can regurgitate the hateful, misandrist views of the new wave of male haters.

          • I have no idea what you’re babbling about. Neither do you.

          • That’s rich, coming from you…

          • List of FEDERAL level female only programs:

            http://www.cultural-misandry.com/female-only-programs/

            Seems you girls have plenty of privilege dedicated to you yet you still complain about being treated badly? Sure, if you were as oppressed as you like to claim to be then that list of federal programs wouldn’t be dedicated to your gender (btw most of those programs/laws are in areas where you girls are already doing far better than men and boys oh but the “oppression”).

          • This is an American site. And please don’t call women “girls” — we prefer “gals,” “chicks” or “dames” depending on our age. “Broad” in certain context is okay, and babe works well too.

          • What god?

          • The perversions and manufactured statistics Alliances between US gender-feminists and American law enforcement is not only a perverse stain on American law enforcement, but it may in fact be unconstitutional.

          • Didn’t I see you claim not to be a feminist somewhere else? You are a feminist.

            You accept and perpetuate feminist dogma. It doesn’t matter if you identify as one or not. You are, from the outside, a feminist, so don’t bother trying to dissociate yourself from them.

          • No, you didn’t…..except in the general sense that every woman is a feminist.

            It’s not a club you know. And there is no dogma.

            “Feminism is the radical notion that women are human
            beings”

            That’s it.

          • Oh my God, you really are a hardcore feminist.
            No, not every woman is a feminist. I know several who are not by external definition and don’t identify either.

            And yes, there’s ALL KINDS of dogma — that basically men are where problems come from and women are those who suffer those problems. This is integral to feminism, and it’s all bull.

            Feminism is much, much more than that trite, tired slogan. Feminism is more closely described as what it does, and it has a long, documented history of shoveling public money to its own special-interest victim group while disregarding the human rights of men.

            This is not new. This has been known and demonstrated for decades and years of documentation of this are readily available for those who wish to see it.

            You’re not fooling anyone with your 2nd-wave nonsense.

          • LOL Sunday morning and you’re bored, so you just make shit up.

          • More empty accusations. These are REALLY old techniques now and they don’t work anymore.

            You need to go back to feminism school and learn about some intersectionality or attempts to “rebrand feminism” by using propaganda that’s, and I’m quoting a feminist in a private feminist meeting, “less like lies.”

            I’m not making this shit up — I have it on record :D

          • You’re spinning fluff out of nothing, and we’re all aware of it.

            Find another hobby….you suck at this one.

          • It is a delusion to think Western women are not already afforded every right and opportunity. And then some. If they haven’t become 51% of the generals, CEOs and Nobel Prize winners, it is not due to some Patriarchal Bogeyman.

          • Just equal pay would be nice.

          • Another delusion of victimhood. Absolute rubbish devoid of logic or facts. What capitalist would overpay a man for the same results as a woman? I would hire a woman or a klingon if I could do it cheaper. In fact, thanks to big Gov. and all the feminist BS hysteria, many companies must go out of their way to hire woman over a similarly qualified man and in doing so, offer her slightly more attractive compensation.

          • Women aren’t victims.

            Equal pay is simple justice….and not having it harms men.

          • The delusion is to think women don’t get paid equally for equal work. It is juvenile paranoia to think that any capitalist enterprise would choose to overpay a man if it could hire a woman more cheaply to produce the same results.

            If anything, once you consider the coercive, market-altering forces of affirmative action and political correctness, women are probably slightly overpaid for the same productivity.

            And then there are these financial breaks for women:

            - paying the same health insurance rates though they use almost twice as much healthcare as men,

            - paying a lower car insurance rate than men because hey.. they do cost less to insure (but the same logic doesn’t and would never apply to healthcare,)

            - social services that accrue mostly to women (housing, food, shelters, etc.)

            - transfers of wealth and children to women in divorce courts,

            - plethora of women only scholarships, the height of absurdity and unseemliness given that they are already the great majority of university students,

            etc.

            They take and take, and yet always they have their hands out for more. Disregarding the true downtrodden (a class which of course includes some women but also plenty of men.) This is why people are tired of feminism’s whiny nonsense. This does not mean one is gay, or can’t get laid, or hates women. It means one hates a selfish, false grievance industry that has the audacity to think it has the monopoly on enlightenment, virtue and the right to debate.

          • Yup, all the figures are wrong. The whole world is wrong.

            Only YOU are right.

            But then you’re gay….and jealous.

          • You groupthink imbeciles are oblivious to the fact that in the West the average woman is afforded a much better deal than the average man. There ARE differences in outcomes, due to biology. Some favor women, others favor men. Yet you keep harping only about the differences that some men achieve on their own. Oblivious to your own immense privilege and any of the pitfalls of being male. Screw you and your false, ignoble sense of victimhood.

          • Misogynists are closeted gays.

          • Quite the opposite honey boo … Numerous extremely satisfied women would vouch for that. In fact, it is the very successful hetero male who can afford to liberate himself from the repulsive groupthink of today. The less successful, younger ones who are still begging for it are the ones likely to be feminist lapdogs.

          • Closeted gays always go over the top….macho bragging is a dead giveaway.

            Open the door and step out dude.

          • You are embarrassing your camp with the low level of your commentary. I am not homophobic. If I was wired gay, believe me, I would embrace it openly and happily. I envy some of their advantages, such as not having to date feminist US women: mostly brainwashed, charmless, ungiving, unhappy and unable to make anybody else happy.

          • I don’t have a ‘camp’….and you m’dear are gay.

          • Have fun graduating from the sixth grade. It fills me with pity how ill equipped you are for this debate. And yet you will probably continue to wreak havoc with your self-righteous nonsense… so scratch the pity.

          • There is no debate.

            There is no camp.

            There is no pity or victimization.

            Men and women are equal….simple as that.

            Get over it.

          • But as a secondary point, most gays likewise don’t empathize one iota with the Feminazi hysteria. And they are an impeccable jury: progressive people who know all about gender issues and discrimination. Why? Because they are not begging for pu$$y, and they see the non-stop whining of privileged American feminist women for the epic, unseemly farce that it is.
            Ask yourself oh enlightened one… where is the gay male support for your agenda? They should be your natural ideological allies, right?

          • CLOSETED GAYS are all over this page… they are the misogynists.

            Hets LIKE women.

            Paglia is gay….fully out.

          • not needed now that you’re here, darling. you’ll save us all from our tiresome selves. nice shades.

          • “Leesee”? Do you think that pretending to slurp your words is witty?

          • Now try spelling it correctly and you’ll figure it out.

            Nothing better to do on a Sun night?

          • So, basically, third world problems justify feminist actions in first world nations… that’s your argument. Didn’t Paglia say something about that in the article… yes… yes she did.

          • So basically, you’re just making it up as you go along.

          • Is that supposed to be some kind of insult or dismissal?

          • hahaha. you’re hilarious. i’m riding on my government hand out as i type this.

          • Ironically, feminists claim all men have privilege, in much the same way women were just accused of getting government entitlements. Difference is, there is evidence for the government hand outs.

          • Men are born entitled.

          • That’s not an argument, it is an assertion that ignores much of the realities of the world, in order to (ironically) strip men of any ability to complain about their own issues… after all, if men are the ones who are entitled, then what, possibly, could they have to complain about? It’s a sexist, demeaning statement (for how it’s used)

          • the reality is yer probably not Joking!!

          • Clever. I’m moved to swallow everything.

          • Yeah, don’t believe facts and correct statistics. Believe what your doctrine tells you and have a blind faith on the feminist dogma.

          • No, I am moved to believe you. Very convincing.

          • Are you kidding?

          • This comment was deleted.

          • It’s still an American sitei of American programs. Dood.

          • Ah, I see the Mens Right movement spends time trolling. Good for you. Keep it up.

          • A typical feminist response to facts they can’t argue against.

            Pathetic

          • In your eyes being pathetic is a total compliment. I’m just surprised my comments aren’t being downvoted more rapidly. I thought you guys were REALLY ANGRY! Kisses.

          • I’ll take that as a compliment. I’m not at war with you, darling.

          • Just checked out your lovely track record of comments and see you really really hate women and liberals! And you wonder why no one wants to actually engage with you? Well, my bad once, but never again.

            Discussion on Breitbart News

            Candy Crowley Wonders if Rand Paul Will Switch Parties

            fools2234 • a month ago

            Fatcuntbitch

            Discussion on TheStreet

            How Women Can Avoid a Health Care Disaster in Retirement

            fools2234 • a month ago

            Like always its all about the women. 7 National health offices for females (none for mens). OH BUT WHAT ABOUT THE WOMENS. Free “well woman” visits to the doctor. WHAAAAT ABOUUUT THE WOMENS. Free birth control and breast cancer screening. WHAAAAAAT ABOUUUUUT THE WOMENS

            Discussion on National Post

            Are men oppressed? Male rights activists maligned as ‘sexists’ fight to have movement recognized on campus

            fools2234 • a month ago

            22,000 word list detailing the MANY ways men are discriminated against.

            http://www.cultural-misandry.c

            Clearly the feminists are right tho, us men don’t face any discrimination at all. Just wondering, how long would a “womens rights” list be? Maybe 50 words, 100 at most and most of them being completely over-exaggerated (“1 in 4″ women raped) or outright false issues (“wage” “gap”).

            Discussion on Upcoming Horror Movies

            Wer

            fools2234 • a month ago

            OF COURSE, if a child/teen dies in a movie its ALWAYS the boy. Society can’t even deal with a “valuable” girl dying in a movie, but a boy dying is alright.

            DISGUSTING, fuc- this male = “disposable” BS

          • Deflect,
            Attack,
            Reverse
            Victim
            Order.

            I think Emily’s comments, that lack any substance, are better defined as trolling.

          • Emily does troll on many topics, however she is correct in this instance.

          • About as much substance in this reply as Emily’s. No counter points? No counter arguments? Just “nuh uh”? If the feminist movement isn’t even willing to self reflect, then it has run t’s course and has simply become a new religion… a victim cult.

          • Yawn. Misogynists are closeted gays.

          • What are misandrists? Keep up the shaming.

          • Very likely…..question is, why are you worrying about it?

          • Don’t mistake apathy marks for worry lines.

          • Then don’t be a concern troll.

          • If you have no astute reply, shaming is your go-to answer.

            At least you are consistent in your circular jerking.

          • Again, you are doing your whole ‘concern troll’ routine over something you claim you’re not interested in.

            Find another topic….or have another coffee….but don’t waste everyone’s time. Ciao.

          • How would you know what concerns me?

          • “Misogynists are closeted gays.”

            Quite an insult coming from a feminist… Are you attacking gays with that comment? or trying to shame any man, as if being gay is something to be ashamed of. Ah, how feminists ditch their own arguments when it no longer suits them

          • Well I’m not a feminist, so you’re safe.

          • ROFL… You certainly spout the rhetoric like one, and defend feminism with the standard dogmatic responses.

          • how about the not so radical idea of changing the name to humanism then? How about accepting that male behavior (such as a cat call) is not “rape culture?”

          • Humanism is something quite different…..and ‘cat calls’ are not ‘male behavior’.

            Males have been explorers, scientists, doctors, writers…..they are not Homer Simpson doing cat calls. That’s socio-economic class….the lowest.

        • Emily is correct here. And if you’ve seen me in any other thread, you will appreciate the irony of those words coming from this commenter.

          Feminism is the notion that all human beings are of equal value, regardless of sex. Since the dawn of the Agricultural Revolution, men have attempted to assert dominance over women. We can see from the hunter-gatherer societies still extant that this is not the natural state of affairs amongst humans, and that for millennia prior to the Agricultural Revolution the sexes were on more equal footing worldwide.

          Now, some men have become quite comfortable in their dominance. They have not earned their position in life, they enjoy it because of a mere accident of birth. Unless you have done something to earn a dominant role, you are unworthy of it, and the mere presence or absence of a Y chromosome is no measure of your worth.

          A man of quality is not threatened by a woman’s equality. Let all humans contribute to society, and let those individuals who contribute the most, either through their minds or their sweat, achieve the status they have worked so hard to earn. As for lazy men who have relied simply on their sex for the status they enjoy, may they sink to the lowest level.

          • I’ve always wondered, how long can a feminist go without discussing or obsessing about gender issues? Its almost like a heroin addict who needs a fix to avoid withdrawal. It seems to consume every aspect of your life. You might be a happier person if you didn’t analyze every aspect of how men and women interact. At at the very least spend some time thinking about how well men and women co-exist.

            In fact, can you give me one example of how men and women co-exist? If you can’t, I truly feel sorry for you.

            P.S.

            Sometimes I think feminists are obsessed with men.

      • EmilyOne, you should check out the popular feminist website Jezebel or the even more extreme Shakespeare’s Sister websites. And then there’s Amanda Marcotte at the mainstream website Slate. Not all feminists are anti-male whackjobs,but a huge number are.

        • It’s like medieval scholars arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

          A pile of nonsense to no purpose. Nothing to do with 99.99% of women in the world….just chatter.

    • “Here’s what feminism is”, says the Travis Bickle avatar.

    • No, some feminists don’t tolerate people who disagree with them. So-called leaders of the feminist movement don’t speak for all feminists.

      • 100+ List of feminists (leaders, groups, and organizations including the largest feminist organization in America) exposing their hate ranging from the largest fem org in the US posting “action alerts” AGAINST shared parenting bills to dozens of campus feminists actively protesting (by blocking the entrance, getting violent with those wishing to enter, and telling those who wish to enter that they are “fing scum”) a BOY CRISIS conference.

        http://www.cultural-misandry.com/feminism-the-hate-group-2/

        It really doesn’t get any more hateful than that, oh but fems are all for “equality” as long as it benefits them. A little experiment, go to any major fem website and bring up any valid mens issue (there is a 22,000 word list on the above website) and watch how feast you are called a “mansplaining”, privileged white male and banned from the site forever. Feminists have NO sympathy for mens issues and truly reveal how hateful they are when a mens issues (such as the boy crisis in education, or shared parenting) is brought up.

        Tell you what, I will believe it when I see it because so far all I see from “equality” fighting feminists is Hate, Hate, Hate toward the other gender.

        • Well some people only see what they are looking for.

          • Explains most feminist theories right there.

    • Oh, this is fun. Here’s a wave from a hypersensitive woman! Kisses.

      • You seemed to take offense enough at his comment to post in opposition… and yet, aren’t actually able or willing to counter his opinion.

        • You don’t want to discuss, you want to shame feminists.

          • I’m more than willing to discuss, when there is something to discuss… not that your last post contained anything of the sort. But shaming feminists is a bad habit I’ve picked up from heavy exposure by feminists, actually. Not that your comment I responded to was any better. Do you believe yourself to be the epitome of feminism? Or do you simply not realize that generalizations automatically imply there are exceptions, meaning, even if you weren’t hypersensitive (which you’re not exactly demonstrating by getting uppity about a snarky comment to your uppity comment), that doesn’t disprove the generalization.

    • Alain Soral hit the nail on the head when he explained feminism as a “great bourgeois Oedipal affair.”

  4. I miss nth wave feminism.

    • I miss feminists with principles. Now it is just about monolithic views and selling books..oh and male bashing, despite women dominating post secondary studies in nearly every field. Also, try asking why more women do t take STEM courses..its not a conspiracy by men to stop them. They’re just not interested.

      • We’ve always had women scientists and mathematicians…enough cultural clap-trap.

        • But, to hear a new wave feminist tell it, the reason more women dont take STEM courses is..men. Ergo, women not choosing careers in these fields represents a failing of society and of men in particular. You have not really thought out your views, have you?

        • Why yes indeed Emily my sweet. I remember when Galilena Galileila improved the telescope and became the Mother of modern astronomy. And physics too!

          There must be a couple of other old girls but their names escape me just at the moment. Tiffany Copernicus comes to mind but I can’t remember what the devil it is she did.

          • Parading your ignorance in public isn’t a good idea, Q.

          • Listen Emily, fie on my ignorance, I won’t be embarrassed by not knowing something. I’m seeking help here.

            My old dear mother before she left us once told me she thought Zsa Zsa Gabore had invented “stud radar” but there was nothing in the encyclopaedia about it.

          • Are you asking for a list of names, or just playing stupid again?

          • Look, you said “always” and it doesn’t sound right. So give me your earliest three so I can go and straighten myself out.

          • In your case of course, it’s not playing.

        • “We’ve always had women scientists and mathematicians”

          Emilyone is quite right. There have been female scientists, mathematicians, doctors, lawyers etc. for centuries.

          … unless we’re talking about women not being permitted to work/go to schools. Then, there were none of those until the 1960′s.

          • Depends on the country and the era.

          • I don’t think so, I think it depends on the context of the conversation.
            Take Mary Edwards Walker, for example. Feminist, suffragette, prisoner of war, spy, and surgeon. Quite a list of accomplishments by today’s standards, and this was during the American civil war.

            But in the 1990′s, when Captain Karen Emma Walden received (posthumously) the Medal of Honor, how quickly did gynocentric ideologues forget Mary Walkers accomplishments… and so thoroughly that a major motion picture was made about the woman who broke a barrier that had already been broken for over 100 years?

            And I see this time and time again. It seems like the gender ideologues are the first to discount the efforts of women, just so they can claim to be “breaking barriers”.

          • Two different centuries.

          • OK, Lilith fair then. In it’s first year it was promoted as “the only womens music festival in America”, despite 2 other womens festivals touring at the same time. National tours, that is, I’m sure there were other more localized tours going on that were not so well known.
            Same country, same year… even the same season.

          • Now you’re worried about advertising for festivals??

            Pick nits much do you?

          • I’m concerned that people are denying the accomplishments of women. You don’t seem to be too concerned… If I didn’t know better, I’d peg you as a misogynist

          • Now you’re just being silly.

          • Why… am I wrong? Are you a misogynist?

          • Like I said, you’re just being silly. Ciao.

          • Backed yourself into a corner, eh? I understand. Buh-bye!

          • Eventually you’ll read the thread, and realize how silly you look

            Buh-bye.

          • Re read it yourself!
            You’ve basically stated that the accomplishments of women have no value if enough time has passed, or if they are artists.

            Yes, you really did!

          • No I didn’t. Don’t be absurd.

            You’ve confused me with someone else.

          • Oh yes you did!
            Why are the accomplishments of Mary Edwards Walker not worthy of remembering? Does it get in the way of your “victim status”?

          • Sorry…..I’m not spending all night on the ‘he said/she said’ crap

            I know what I said….and that isn’t even remotely close.

            Paglia is a misogynist. She is also gay.

            I said all misogynists are gay…closeted or out. However all gays are not misogynists.

            Women have been mathematicians and scientists in any era they were able to….and of course it should be remembered. That’s why we have women’s studies and ‘herstory’ lessons.

            Only Albertans claim ‘victim status’ LOL

            I’m not gay, misogynist, a victim or male.

            So stop being silly, and take yourself off.

  5. Aside from Hockey, Bret ‘The Hitman’ Hart, Skinny Puppy, and Vancouver Cannabis, what purpose does Canada serve for the rest of Western Culture? I realize your all really nice people but so was Ted Bundy. Oh, by the way, is Vito Rizzuto a feminist?

    • My apologies, Canadian Whiskey is also very good :)

      • Except Canadians spell it “whisky.” And it is indeed very good.

      • Well if that’s how you feel, we’re taking our bacon and going home. So there :p~

      • Isn’t all that enough? Shesh… demanding

  6. We need more people like Camille Paglia. What makes her different from many of voices we hear today is that she comes from a generation where common sense was still highly valued. Incorporate common sense with good education and independence and you have a thinker of her calibre. Love her. Admire her. Respect Her. My personally signed pick from her continues to be one of my favourite things.

    • Paglia is a boomer….sex, drugs and rocknroll. And she was considered squirrelly even back then.

      • Feminist shaming..such solidarity. Be a good little parrot.

        • You sit up nights making this stuff up doya?

          • It comes naturally and spontaneously when talking to the brainwashed.

        • No more than what Paglia herself did in the article.

      • Love(d) Molly Ivins (note the spelling of her surname), but I read this piece when it came out, and it’s a huge embarrassment. It’s clear she knew nada of Paglia’s actual work, but just skimmed for dichotomies and easy straw men.

        Paglia has been making that point, about India and other cultures where women’s rights are truly terrible compared with here, for at least a decade. No one seems to listen.

    • what’s a “personally signed pick”?

      an autographed tool used to dig/loosen hard soil?

    • This woman has some valid points but her points about rape culture are apathetic. Just because it is not as bad as India here, doesn’t mean there are still not some huge problems. I define myself as a feminist but that doesn’t mean I don’t care about male issues. Rape culture actually affects males in several negative ways, 1. men are raped and feel like they can’t report it or when they do report it are not taken seriously 2. Our current society teaches many men that they are not in control of their sexual feelings. Then we tell them that women are purposely stimulating them only to refuse them. This causes a lot of resentment. We also teach them that being aggressive will always get you a woman. There are so many conflicting messages. While violent rape may be the work of very evil men, date rape, is often the work of a very sexually confused male. 3. We constantly sexually objectify women, ever increasingly young girls. Then we are surprised that this is what men lust after and expect in real life.
      As a feminist, I don’t think these things are the work of only men. This is a societal problem. I know women contribute to these problems too. One woman would be the woman interviewed in this article. This woman talks about her working class father and pretends that she understands all working class men because of him. My father was a machinist for a mining company on a small island on the east coast. It’s because of him that I am a feminist. While my father did teach me things like don’t walk home alone at night or don’t walk into dark alleys, my father never commented on my clothes or on the clothes of any woman. I never heard him in my presence speak disparagingly about a woman, simply because she was a woman. The words slut and whore were never said in front of me. As a result I never thought that rape was a result of something bad I did. Violent rape, as the woman says is the work of evil men and we can’t expect to understand their motives but then says if you run down the street with your breasts heaving then you should expect trouble. She also says that we should be concerned with India and the rapes happening there but if it is just an awful things that happens in the world that can’t be fixed, what is the point in helping India? Violent rapists like she said don’t think like us. So while you all try to think what might attract you to a woman and say that is why she was raped in reality a violent rapist is attracted to the power. It depends on how they feel they can get it, some will look for those that are vulnerable, they will prey on the young, disabled and elderly. Others like a challenge so they will pick women that will fight. Some like virgins. Others like someone they can justify their actions like a sex worker or someone who might be perceived as a “slut” . The problem is that this covers just about every woman,so telling a woman how to dress and act to avoid being raped is stupid. My father knew this, he knew that people that did this to other people were beyond his understanding and that however I dressed could possibly attract a sicko. Instead he taught me to be strong and to know that whatever happened, I didn’t deserve it and that I knew he would be there to help me through anything. We have more people here in the north america that believe what myself and my family believe then say India, but there are still many who don’t, (see the Steubenville rape case) We have work to do here too. That being said, as a feminist I am very disturbed about what happens in India and would love to contribute in anyway to make that situation better.
      Finally her statements about lesibians made her look idiotic.

      • Her point is that jogging with your breasts partly exposed and bouncing while essentially depriving yourself of hearing by way of headphones, attracting attention and having no situational awareness makes one an attractive target for a criminal. No amount of “teaching men not to rape” is going to change this fact – feminists can either accept it and do the appropriate risk calculus, or pretend that stating this obvious and useful fact is “rape culture” and “blaming the victim.”

        And Paglia was an out of the closet, unapologetic lesbian as a public figure in the 1980s, so she may know of what she speaks.

      • “Our current society teaches many men that they are not in control of their sexual feelings. Then we tell them that women are purposely stimulating them only to refuse them. This causes a lot of resentment.”

        Society is doing nothing of the sort. This is what women do while seeking superior mates. Yes it does cause resentment but so do handsome boys prancing around in front of homely girls who don’t stand a chance with them. These are human issues you assume to be gender issues. The only gendered aspect of significance is the expectation that males risk rejection by approaching these women. That is something society encourages but feminists complicate that by labeling male sexual interest in women objectification and or sexual harassment.

        “Rape culture actually affects males in several negative ways, 1. men are raped and feel like they can’t report it or when they do report it are not taken seriously”

        This is a direct consequence of decades of feminists attempting to monopolize the rape issue for their gender. Of course if their were no activist we wouldn’t even talk about male rape but with it the issue was framed as for women alone. Why would men be taken seriously if rape has been framed as a women’s problem by women’s activists for half a century? Trying to turn that ship around this late in the game with talk of ‘Rape Culture’ that again revolves around female victims almost exclusively won’t change that. In short feminists are ideologically dependent on advancing this bias to pursue their agenda. They won’t correct it.

        “So while you all try to think what might attract you to a woman and say that is why she was raped in reality a violent rapist is attracted to the power.”

        Who isn’t attracted to power? That’s not a revolutionary perspective on someone who is violently dominating another human being. You might also say they enjoy hurting people or think people enjoy being hurt.

        “She also says that we should be concerned with India and the rapes happening there but if it is just an awful things that happens in the world that can’t be fixed, what is the point in helping India?”

        That is a far more conservative country still deeply stuck in a traditionalist mindset which makes them vulnerable to all sorts of irrational prejudices western nations dealt confronted a long time ago.

        ” Violent rapists like she said don’t think like us.”

        No they don’t but I don’t think you understand the cultural differences she was alluding too. Many in that culture don’t think like us, not to say they are a bunch of rapists but they have not embraced some useful perspectives which are dominant in our culture. I’m also sure there perspectives in their culture which we might find worthwhile.The point is pushing a ‘rape culture’ campaign in the West amounts to beating a dead horse. It’s rehashing things we’ve been talking about for generations to maintain the relevance of a dying movement.

        “We have more people here in the north america that believe what myself and my family believe then say India, but there are still many who don’t, (see the Steubenville rape case) We have work to do here too.”

        No you really don’t have work to do. There is a difference between winning the mainstream and having complete control over every human being. You have to know when to move on and it’s time. Rape elimination is an authoritarian fantasy. It doesn’t get better from here, it get’s worse. The fear mongering and moral panic is already toxic at this point.

      • Well stated.

  7. Rape culture?
    More unmitigated bullshit from the femminists.

    • It would be funny if it weren’t so vile.

  8. Feminists have married the government.

  9. Paglia is quite right that modern academic feminism is thoroughly intolerant. But posters like EmilyOne are so indoctrinated with left-wing cant that they can’t see this.

    • It would be unfair to hold either end of the political spectrum responsible for Emily. Her brain-washing is entirely self-imposed. It’s a process that continues to play out live on the Macleans comment threads.

      • Nah. Feminist rhetoric is strongly influenced by leftist politics, or else leftist politics are strongly influenced by feminist rhetoric.

    • Emily is just dumb. But maybe she is dumb like a fox because here we sit talking about her.

  10. Lesbians rule? Let me think about that….

  11. Who is Camille Paglia? Never heard of her. As for men being obsolete, this man is ahead of Camille Paglia on that. That is how narcissistic bitter women gets.

    Reality is more and more men and women are saying no to hook in the nose marriage. Be it last child leaves the home and parents split, or singles not getting married the real-estate growth is in declining in family homes and increasing in singles style. Lots for reasons for these trends based in economics and in sociology. Too busy supporting Ottawa kids with taxes to why put up with a spouse that isn’t prepared socially to work as a couple, makes no difference, the demographics has more and more people living alone at all age groups. Isn’t just women.

    If I could wind back the clock, even though I love my fantastic second wife, I would have never gotten married to my first wife and may have ended up as a life long single. It took 5 years of a great relationship before I married the second time.

    Marriage is on the rocks. It is a slowly disintegrating institution in modern society.

    Oh, and very few minority of men rape. Camille words it as all men are rapists, I can assure you most men are not rapists. Be like saying all women are gold diggers. And both are wrong.

    • No, she’s actually on the other side of that, that rape culture doesn’t exist except in countries like India and she’s dismayed (as most of us are) that the Feminist movement doesn’t speak out more against that, instead of promoting that Western society supports a rape culture in our own cultures. Which we don’t.

    • You didn’t read the article did you? Palglia agrees with you.

    • You pretty much have all her positions backwards. She is making the same points you are, but… better. Surprising that your first line is that you are ahead of her, when you didn’t take the trouble to surmise the basics of a huge body of easily available work of hers.

    • I suspect you read that she is a dissenting feminist and thought … oh, a feminist. She must be wrong and hates men… And normally, you’d be close. But dissenting feminists are the rare exception. There are a few that identify as such. Read the article again, with that in mind.

      • Mark… exactly. That’s pretty much the entire trope.

  12. Paglia remains among the very few relevant feminists. Naturaly, the irrelevant majority of feminists despise her.

  13. Well, hell must have frozen over. I agree with Paglia’s comments about Rob Ford. She’s actually capable of saying something that isn’t a whole lot of narrow minded, inflammatory, pointless bull. Who knew?

  14. “Maybe we should teach men not to rape.” So happy to see someone call this out.

    • Agreed. The vast majority of men don’t rape, don’t want to rape, and want to prevent women from being raped. The others who don’t fit into this broad swath are rapists. Efforts to “teach” them not to rape may not prove to be successful.

      • Second that. The latest numbers I have seen put the number at 1.4% of men committing roughly 90% of all rapes.
        I recently heard one expert in GB state that males were 20% more likely to self-harm (attempt suicide) than to assault a female *in any way*.

      • “Teaching men” not to rape is nothing other than being a nagging b!tch.

        I hate the notion that we all must scrutinize ourselves and each other just to be sure we’re not going to rape anyone today, or that our definition of rape is in alignment with that of a group of professional liars and nagging b!tches.

  15. There’s nothing real about “Real Houswives” of anywhere. People behave quite differently when they’re on camera, and they also know it’s to their benefit to play the “role” they were hired to portray.

  16. The India comments are understandable given the media’s portrayal, but even if we take as granted that there is an epidemic of rape, there is also an epidemic of false rape allegation AIDED by absurd LEGAL definitions of rape so allow them to make the false claims.
    A good link to some news stories posted a while back:
    In other words if we can learn anything from India, the more feminists claim there is a problem of rape, it seems like the more false allegations are happening.

    • That and the male-as-second-class elements like women-only cars, gynocentric laws, public overreaction to offense of women (getting tossed off a train, etc). That needs to be looked at, too.

      I refuse to believe that Indian men are inherently more predisposed to rape than anyone else. If there’s any substance to the claim that gang-rape is more common in India, I would look for social conditions that create and allow it.

  17. The India comments are understandable given the media’s portrayal, but even if we take as granted that there is an epidemic of rape, there is also an epidemic of false rape allegation AIDED by absurd LEGAL definitions of rape so allow them to make the false claims.
    A good link to some news stories posted a while back:

    http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1oykm3/woman_drops_rape_complaint_grant_him_bail_so_that/ccx0rtd

    In other words if we can learn anything from India, the more feminists claim there is a problem of rape, it seems like the more false allegations are happening.

  18. ” Each woman seemed to affirm Rosin’s thesis that a changing economy is leaving working-class men behind”

    That’s not a new thesis in any manner. Check Jeremy Rifkin’s 1995 book “The End of work”.

  19. I think an important aspect of the recent rape controversies that is being ignored is the role that alcohol has played. In so many of these rape cases, you have a young woman – in high school or college – who is black-out drunk being taken advantage of by a boy or boys who are drunk as well. These “sexual assaults” are taking place in a booze-filled party haze where inhibitions and good judgment are impossible. Very rarely do you have a case in which a sober woman is forcibly raped. In large quantities, alcohol shuts down the higher functions of our brains and our animalistic, amoral, instinctual drives take over.

    In Puritan America, where legal alcohol consumption has been postponed to the ridiculous age of 21, binge drinking has an illicit thrill for young people. I’ve always been amazed that in America, you can be drafted and die in war at the age of 18, but no booze until 21. In France, where wine production and consumption is part of the national
    heritage, young people have a much more relaxed and responsible relationship to alcohol. We need to start teaching young people how to drink responsibly, which means introducing alcohol to them gradually, at a younger age.

  20. Great interview.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *