maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Wed Jan 17, 2018 10:59 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Women's March
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:01 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 27264
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 16848
Problem with the women's march...

http://freebeacon.com/culture/white-cis-women-march/

Quote:
Transgender Activists Upset Over ‘White Cis Women March’
Women's march 'dangerous space' with 'oppressive message' that 'having a vagina is essential to womanhood'



BY: Elizabeth Harrington
January 23, 2017 4:10 pm

Transgender activists are upset that the women’s march over the weekend was not inclusive to biological men who identify as women, as the protest presented an “oppressive message” that having a “vagina is essential to womanhood.”

Saturday’s event to oppose the inauguration of Donald Trump was largely a “white cis women march,” with too many pictures of female reproductive organs and pink hats, according to trans women and “nonbinary” individuals interviewed by Mic.com.

A fight is brewing between “trans-exclusionary radical feminists,” or “TERFs,” and transwomen, according to the article, “How the Women’s March’s ‘genital-based’ feminism isolated the transgender community.”

The women’s march had an over-reliance on slogans and posters depicting gender norms, like using pink to represent women and girls, said some transgender activists who boycotted the march.

“The main reason I decided not to go was because of the pussy hats,” said one transwoman from California. “I get that they’re a response to the ‘grab them by the pussy’ thing, but I think some people fixated on it the wrong way.”

“I believe there’s a lot of inequality that has to do with genitals—that’s not something you can separate from the feminist movement,” the transwoman added. “But I feel like I’ve tried to get involved in feminism and there’s always been a blockade there for trans women.”

The “saturation of vagina-related messages and imagery,” such as a giant hand-knit uterus, “set the tone for a march that would focus acutely on genitalia at the expense of the transgender community,” writes Mic.com staff writer Marie Solis.

The signs referencing Trump’s infamous comments made on a hot mic during an Access Hollywood taping more than a decade ago were too heteronormative, trans activists said.

Signs that said “Pussy grabs back,” “Resistance is Fertile,” and “Pussy Power” sent a “clear and oppressive message to trans women, especially: having a vagina is essential to womanhood.”

The article explained that transwomen are weary of “trans-exclusionary radical feminists.” “TERFs” are people who “equate womanhood with having a vagina” or feminists who “argue trans women are actually men in disguise trying to infiltrate their spaces.”

Mic.com also quoted a “nonbinary” individual—a person who does not identify with either male or female, has multiple gender identities, or a gender identity that changes over time, among other things—whose girlfriend is still a biological male.

“For 20-year-old Sam Forrey, a nonbinary student in Ohio, and their girlfriend Lilian McDaniel, who is trans, there had been other warning signs that the Women’s March might be a dangerous space for them,” according to the article.

The couple was upset by the “genital-based womanhood” espoused by the women’s march.

“Since legally McDaniel’s sex is still male, she worried that if she were to be arrested she would be placed in a men’s jail, a concern she said always lingers at the back of her mind,” according to the article. “McDaniel said she’d planned on attending the march despite these fears—until she saw that people were using it as an excuse to invoke what she called ‘genital-based’ womanhood.”

“I think it ended up being a white cis women march,” McDaniel said.

Forrey added that the march—focusing too much on genitals—represented a “rigid, Western concept of gender.”

“This two-gender system, of course, is excluding of Forrey, too,” Solis wrote.




I'm not sure that I even understand many of those terms used in the article....but from what I can figure out, one group of (sort of) women are upset with another group of women.

Please, carry on.

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Women's March
PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:55 am 
Online
First Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 9766
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 11156
They shoulda just called it a "Female March" . . . skip all the histrionics and tantrums.

Sex: autosomal sex configuration. XX "Female;" XY "Male;" various other "Intersex" (XXY, XXX, etc.)

Gender: an identity, defined historically by prevailing cultural ideological forces in society (e.g., Abrahamic religions have a distinct view of gender than did many older polytheistic religions) but which has been in part decoupled from traditional social facts.

Sexuality: what makes the individual hot and wet round the naughty bits?

Dudes who pluck their hair out, use hormones to grow titties and hips and in those most abhorrent extreme cases, get a "cutitoffofme" are not females, though if they say they are "women," we have only 2000 years of Abrahamic religious traditions on which to base a dispute of that, i.e., sort of shaky grounds. So pretty much if they want to call themselves "women" they are. If they look like it then others may even think of them, refer to them and imagine them to be both "women" and "female" (Oh Lo Lo Lo Loo Laa!).

Sex cannot be changed . . . well I suppose that if one had the technology and LOTS of money (and zero ethics) one could interfer in embyrogenesis early enough and change a genetic female to a male. Changing a male to a female might not be so easy, but that is just my gut intuition . . . been too many years since I kept up to date on that literature and what I knew is even getting fuzzy now.

_________________
Nero: So what is your challenge?

Anthro: Answer question #2: How do "Climate Change models" mathematically control for the natural forces which caused the Ice Age(s) to come and go . . . repeatedly?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Women's March
PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 10:58 pm 
Offline
Oppressive Tyrant and Enemy of Truth
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 6:06 pm
Posts: 15342
Location: under the porch
Reputation points: 14517
Image

_________________
First, we must kill moose and squirrel


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Women's March
PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 11:34 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 24311
Reputation points: 17550
Oh...you are so going to Hell. :lol:


My wifey posted something on HER facebook page about being pissed off at all the posturing by marchers after she worked a 15 hr shift at the hospital.

Jesus Christo! It was like the pizza lady in Indiana Part Deux. It was like a digital zombie apocalypse. Crazy, single issue abortion on demand nutcases with identical avatars descended like locusts. I had to help out...standing there with the minigun in one arm firing into the jungle. They are literally insane with hatred of Trump and they all get digital marching orders with updates. Pretty soon you can tell it is chiefly about abortion on demand and the Planned Parenthood vote.

Get ready for some fireworks. :lol:

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Women's March
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:11 am 
Online
First Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 9766
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 11156
jack t ripper wrote:
Oh...you are so going to Hell. :lol:

My wifey posted something on HER facebook page about being pissed off at all the posturing by marchers after she worked a 15 hr shift at the hospital.

Jesus Christo! It was like the pizza lady in Indiana Part Deux. It was like a digital zombie apocalypse. Crazy, single issue abortion on demand nutcases with identical avatars descended like locusts. I had to help out...standing there with the minigun in one arm firing into the jungle. They are literally insane with hatred of Trump and they all get digital marching orders with updates. Pretty soon you can tell it is chiefly about abortion on demand and the Planned Parenthood vote.

Get ready for some fireworks. :lol:


Something like 40% (40 to 50% I'd guess . . . ah yes, 41% Overall) of women voted for Trump.

54% voted for Clinton. At the millions large sample size, that difference in means is likely into the <0.05 alpha range, so it would (probably) be safe to say that "significantly more" women voted for Trump than did not vote for Trump.

But the protesters are a small segment of the 54% who voted for Clinton, we're talking tens of millions of voters versus less than a million of "protesters" in the U.S. Perhaps 2% of all female Clinton voters actually feel impassioned enough to protest?

All this to say: STFU, he won. You loud-mouthed Ninnies are a tiny fraction of the country and, unless you are honestly planning a revolution, your 1st Amendment rights do not include proclaiming the votes of the majority of the country to be invalid.

Not only that, but, your presumptuous that you speak for all females is disrespectful to the 41% of female voters who did vote for Trump. This is little more than a tantrum by a segment of the population who feel they deserve to get their way, even when their way was beaten in a fair and legal election.

The question these "Not My President!" cry babies need to ask themselves is: how do you explain the 41% of females who did vote for Trump?

_________________
Nero: So what is your challenge?

Anthro: Answer question #2: How do "Climate Change models" mathematically control for the natural forces which caused the Ice Age(s) to come and go . . . repeatedly?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Women's March
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 5:45 am 
Offline
His Most Gracious Majesty, Commie of the Year
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 12:44 pm
Posts: 7394
Reputation points: 15171
Anthropoid wrote:
jack t ripper wrote:
Oh...you are so going to Hell. :lol:

My wifey posted something on HER facebook page about being pissed off at all the posturing by marchers after she worked a 15 hr shift at the hospital.

Jesus Christo! It was like the pizza lady in Indiana Part Deux. It was like a digital zombie apocalypse. Crazy, single issue abortion on demand nutcases with identical avatars descended like locusts. I had to help out...standing there with the minigun in one arm firing into the jungle. They are literally insane with hatred of Trump and they all get digital marching orders with updates. Pretty soon you can tell it is chiefly about abortion on demand and the Planned Parenthood vote.

Get ready for some fireworks. :lol:


Something like 40% (40 to 50% I'd guess . . . ah yes, 41% Overall) of women voted for Trump.

54% voted for Clinton. At the millions large sample size, that difference in means is likely into the <0.05 alpha range, so it would (probably) be safe to say that "significantly more" women voted for Trump than did not vote for Trump.

But the protesters are a small segment of the 54% who voted for Clinton, we're talking tens of millions of voters versus less than a million of "protesters" in the U.S. Perhaps 2% of all female Clinton voters actually feel impassioned enough to protest?

All this to say: STFU, he won. You loud-mouthed Ninnies are a tiny fraction of the country and, unless you are honestly planning a revolution, your 1st Amendment rights do not include proclaiming the votes of the majority of the country to be invalid.

Not only that, but, your presumptuous that you speak for all females is disrespectful to the 41% of female voters who did vote for Trump. This is little more than a tantrum by a segment of the population who feel they deserve to get their way, even when their way was beaten in a fair and legal election.

The question these "Not My President!" cry babies need to ask themselves is: how do you explain the 41% of females who did vote for Trump?


I hear their moot has seceded and come up with an answer to that snap.

_________________
All scientists across the world work for US Democratic Party


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Women's March
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 10:39 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 24311
Reputation points: 17550
Get this..51% of White women who voted...voted for Trump. That alone is quite astounding. Now, he did not do that well among Hispanic or black women but he did get the same percentage of the Hispanic vote as The Mormon

How many times did we hear of Trump's "problem with women"? Pollsters were either deliberately wrong or wrong through monumental incompetence. The other thing is the Trump team somehow had the insight to campaign in Michigan and Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Shillary essentially NEVER campaigned in Michigan or Wisconsin after the primaries and she literally STOPPED going to PA after polls showed her up 12-14 pts there.

You can sort of understand why the womb-broom crowd is so shaken. Bye bye federal funding for Planned Parenthood.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Women's March
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 10:46 am 
Offline
His Most Gracious Majesty, Commie of the Year
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 12:44 pm
Posts: 7394
Reputation points: 15171
If anything I am most stunned at how biased the media is in it's attempt to deliberately control the public voting to a certain specific answer.

As in, stunned at how blatant it is.

We're not talking about Western media, the masterful puppeteers who hide subtle cues into their lines that discreetly encourage population in certain direction.

We're talking of the Soviet style "The famine was caused 100% by Enemy Spies and 0% because of corruption and incompetence. We won't even mention the recent land reforms and collectivization of farms or how millions of tons of grain was traded for tools to build tanks with"

We're talking of getting caught red handed, repeatedly on both sides of the pond.

_________________
All scientists across the world work for US Democratic Party


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Women's March
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 11:26 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:44 am
Posts: 10853
Reputation points: 12691
Yeah, the western media usually lies by omission if it lies. Or it uses emphasis, or de-emphasis. Subtle.

It's been full on maximum overdrive lately though, entirely counterproductively I imagine. In the internet age they are just going to wreck their reputations.

_________________
“The gap in EU finances arising from the United Kingdom’s withdrawal and from the financing needs of new priorities need to be clearly acknowledged.” - Mario Monti


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Women's March
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 11:29 am 
Offline
Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 11:46 am
Posts: 1384
Reputation points: 7388
Quote:
Transgender activists are upset that the women’s march over the weekend was not inclusive to biological men who identify as women, as the protest presented an “oppressive message” that having a “vagina is essential to womanhood.”


Don't feel bad. They also told women who were pro-choice to get the hell out too. I'm sure most of them had vaginas and not the ones you put on your head like a baseball cap. :shock:

Remember: "Some vaginas are more equal than others." - Women's March motto (2017)

_________________
Image

The bedfellows politics made are never strange. It only seems that way to those who have not watched the courtship.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group