F is for... Feminazi.


One of my favourite ever days was the day I found this website. A WHOLE SITE dedicated to slut-shaming women who think they're equal to men! This brought me a lot of lolz.


Here's a few extracts that, let me tell you, gave me some hot tips for if I ever decide to marry:

"I'm not going to sugarcoat this article in an attempt not to offend anyone. Feminism is rebellion against God's AUTHORITY! I don't know where the term "feminazi" originated, but it accurately describes the Feminist Movement. So many pastors today are afraid to preach against the evils of feminism. The truth needs to be told!"

Ok, feminists = Nazis. Got it.

"I don't mean to be unkind, but America is filled with foolish women, what the Bible calls “silly women,” who have destroyed their marriage and home. A wife is COMMANDED by God to submit to her husband. Many marriages today are two-headed monstrosities, because of a rebellious wife who refuses to submit to her husband's instruction. The end result is often the wife filing for divorce, which is a sin. Jesus said Matthew 5:32 that it is adultery for her to remarry."

Rebellious.... Right. Don't rebel. Submit.

"By the way, I'm not condoning domestic violence here, which is the first excuse every feminist clings to. A woman needs to leave if she feels threatened; however, this is NOT a Biblical ground for divorce. There are NO Biblical grounds for divorce! Say what you will, divorce is a sin! People nowadays have the attitude that divorce is ok, but it's surely not ok with God. For anyone to teach that Jesus permits divorce in the case of fornication, is to say that Jesus also approves of breaking lifetime commitments and sacred wedding vows made. This is not what the Bible teaches. There are NO Biblical grounds for divorce."

Ok, in the case of abuse I can leave, but I can't divorce my husband. (What about restraining orders...?)


"Tragically, many of today's judges are lesbians..."
OH, that well-known fact (?)

"...See the International Association of Lesbian and Gay Judges. In San Francisco, 20% of all city appointments have been granted to homosexuals because of Affirmative Action laws. Where do you think the U.S. is headed? If you guessed "Hell," you are correct. Feminism and lesbianism are synonymous."

Synonymous. Right.

"A good wife will likely submit to a decent husband who loves her and provides for her. Unfortunately, some women can't be pleased. A man once told me once how unhappy he was because his wife bought a new living room set without his permission, placing them into more debt. She is rebellious. Another man told me that he was cutting the grass, and asked his wife for a glass of water, but she refused. She is rebellious. Feminism is rebellion. God hates feminism! I could tell you story after story. A wife's purpose in life is to be a "help meet" to her husband. Like it or not—a woman's place is IN THE HOME (1st Timothy 5:14). A man's wife is to help him (i.e., be a help meet)..."

Don't buy things without asking. Always fetch your husband water when he asks for it. Got it.

I wonder what the other terrible examples are?!

"I don't care what the Supreme Court says, the Word of God condemns homosexuality! America is filled with demented homosexuals and murderous abortionists who boast of being respectable citizens, who commit their sins with the government's permission; but, God will judge them for their wickedness (Romans 1:32). I am not trying to be unkind, I am taking a proper stand against a moral menace to society."

"Moral menace to society", now, this is when things stop being funny for me. Like, who is the actual menace to society here? Gay people who accept all different forms of love, and people who have an abortion because they are not in the right position to care for a child? THEY are a menace to society?

No, fundamentalist Christians; the only people who are a menace to society in this scenario are you. You are the ones spreading all the hate.

I thought God loved everyone? This sort of hating doesn't strike me as very Christian!

"No one is born “gay,” because God doesn't make mistakes."

"The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a Communist, anti-family, anti-Christian, political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their babies, practice witchcraft, abandon homemaking, and become lesbians."

Insane.

Earlier this week, I was reminded of this rant, when I heard a ridiculous clip from radio show Generations with Vision...

The super-conservative radio show, hosted by Kevin Swanson and Dave Buehner, actually caught my attention a little while ago when I was writing my Chick-fil-A post. These idiots then declared, after the Muppets broke ties with Chick-fil-A (because Chick-a-Fil are right-wing pr*cks) that they "hated" the Muppets and "wanted to eat them". Err... right, ok. True story though.

(What is it with fundamentalist Christians being more comfortable having dialogues with imaginary creatures than with real people?)

Anyway, this pair of morons have caught my attention again, by airing their incredible (literally) view of feminism on Generations with Vision a few days ago.

Swanson and Buehner (who are obviously women's issues scholars) want you to know that giving your daughter the gift of upper schooling will launch her future in "selfish, narcissistic, family-destroying whoring." (Feminism. They mean feminism.)

They also inform listeners that there are actually two sects of these man-hating, Godless floozies to look out for:


"There are two forms of feminism, and it actually has to do with a division of how attractive a woman is."
Tell me more...

"So, you have the group that is very attractive, they're in the sororities, they're gonna be in the beauty contests. They're actually going to get the good jobs. They're going to leverage their attractiveness in the marketplace because it has a market value. Marketing. It helps market who you are. They're going to proceed, now they will probably some of them become the Sarah Palin-style feminists, they'll get themselves a husband, but they'll never be dependent on the husband, they'll never submit to the husband, in fact they will use their power probably to make their husband submit to them."

So that's... the good kind? Verdict: Whore (?) On the other hand, the second group is:

"Attractively challenged. Optically challenged. These are the kinds that will look for careers mostly likely in academia [and] they're generally very angry about it because their attractive… or their lack of attractiveness has not given them access to power that they wanted in the marketplace... Academia's actually the best place because you can be angry, ugly and you can also get tenure."

Which highlights the ugly academic women who go to the library when they're not in class mind-melting everyone. Verdict: SUPER Whore.

Which one are you?! Is there a test for this? Like the Sorting Hat from Harry Potter?

You can listen to the clip here (go on, it's brilliant. They even do that Christian sarcasm thing that gets me every time!):



This isn't really news, I mean we all know that this is how Christian conservatives really feel (though they usually play it cooler, with the angle of "God's design", and a sanctimonious smile). But with the Republican defeat last November, all pretence seems to have vanished. This isn't sugar-coated. This is just plain and simple hatred of women. Swanson and Buehner's shared loathing of women, who these two idiots have no control over, is a clear view of today's seething, frustrated Authoritarian.

Now, I appreciate I could be accused of being hypocritical. I know I haven't been shy in picking apart feminism in the past and, don't get me wrong, I do have a problem with feminists who make men feel as though they are the enemy. That they somehow are opressing women; because, largely, I think that's unfair.

This being said, feminism does seem to have its advantages. I mean, I rate the findings of a recent poll of 1,000 British parents, commissioned by the insurer Scottish Widows:

  • When asked whether their daughters thought their financial future was dependent on having a husband, only 31.9% agreed.
  • By contrast 37.7% of those with sons thought having a wife would make them financially secure.
  • Parents were also asked to choose what they thought their child would see as providing the greatest financial security from a list of options including matters like getting a good job or getting married.
  • Only 7% of parents with daughters chose "marrying well" as a top priority – with another 1% chosing "marrying a celebrity".
  • By contrast 57% thought that their daughters should prioritise getting a good job and 22% singled out the importance of doing well at school or university. Only 4% ranked starting a family as a top priority.
  • Among parents with sons almost 14% chose either marrying well or marrying a celebrity.
  • Meanwhile only 47% singled out getting a good job as the most important option for their son.
This is all positive, is it not? And a great leap for society who 200 years ago would have put "marrying well" at the top of the determining factors in their girls' longterm success.

So another brief conflict for me this week has been well and truly won by an unlikely group of people: Feminists.

I've changed.

Eat sh*t Swanson and Beuhner!

L.