An American man has decided that he's had enough of American Women and he's been sending in comments to this blog to encourage American men to join him in his boycott of American women.
Of course, none of this comments have appeared on this blog. And they never will.
But this was written about on Jezebel, so I thought I'd let our readers know of the nonsense that I've been getting in my comment moderation queue.
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
To all those who think feminism is dead: there is a freaking boycott of American women. Feminism obviously still has a lot of work to do.
Reported site for hate speech.
That blog (and its admin) is a real piece of work. But the raison d'etre is revealing in just how washed he is with white male privilege and how devoted he is to enforcing it all.
He (and his contributors) makes all kinds of assumptions about "American" women and how these women operate. Interestingly, his definition of what a REAL woman is does include LBTQ women. It is also backflippin' hilarious that his definition of American women is restricted to White women (that handsome, rich, ex-Marine businessman states that he is dating a Vietnamese woman...and fails to make the connection that she TOO is American). Additionally, they follow the same Patriarchal Enforcement Maxim that "Feminists are not REAL Women," because REAL women will act more like June Cleaver and Jane Jetson/Wilma Flinstone (just look at the list on the side and try coming to a different conclusion).
Blogs like that are easy to pick apart.
Reported site for hate speech.
ROFL.
If that site is "hate speech" (get a clue, it's not), then so is this one.
Having a negative opinion of American women, sorry to say, is not "hate speech". There's no advocating of violence or harm, no one is saying to do anything to them other than *not date them*.
Or does the concept that people might actually not want you, upset you so badly that you brand it hate speech?
I agree that the site has not violated any of Blogger's terms of use and that calling it "hate speech" is not appropriate.
But it is wrong to assume things about Anon1, such as they were offended by the thought that someone didn't want them. We know not the gender or the place of residence of this person. Your last line, Anon2, is unnecessary.
Well, from what I've seen on sites commenting on this, it appears to fall under "doth protest too much".
Like, "We don't care about this person/site SO much, that we're going to spend an entire long comment thread not caring at all, by devoting a lot of attention to him/his site!", when the proper response would be to simply ignore/move on with life.
I disagree about the "proper response". Calling out problems and discussing them is important if we ever intend to fix them.
Notice how I chose not to include a link to the blog on Female Impersonator, although I did link to a site that made a different choice.
We can still talk about an issue without giving undue support to a cause we disagree with.
Post a Comment