Dumb and Dumber……as only a feminist could be!


Daniel Murray over at End Misandry and Toxic Feminism Now posted a link to this article, Why feminism doesn’t need a makeover by Hadley Freeman in The Guardian, Tuesday 12 November 2013

She jumps right into it with this statement, handily positioned right under the title.

There is a growing clamour for feminism to be rebranded. Clearly, it’s a word that a lot of people just don’t understand

Because you see, ONLY feminists “understand” feminism, yep the rest of us need to be educamacted,  anyone who isn’t a feminist, such as yours truly, simply does not possess the comprehension skills, the analytical skills or perhaps reading ability to read, understand and reach a conclusion of ANY feminist diatribe or screed independently of what feminists say it is or isn’t.

Well now, perhaps Ms. Freeman would like to take a look at this? It’s called Feminism Poisons Women by the inimitable Fidelbogen at The Counter Feminist. Link to the site at the side.

Apparently without the “guidance” of feminists no one, other than feminists of course, can look at the history of feminism, at the whittling away of men’s and boy’s Human Rights, the legally culturally and political sanctioned abuse of Human Rights of men and boys and really understand that all this is, and was necessary because “what about the womeeeeeeeeenn” who have historically been “oppressed” and continue to be “oppressed” by mean nasty men. I’ve already written about this here, so am not going to rehash it at the moment.

Nope, this isn’t what I want to talk about,  it’s the whole “rebranding” thing that has Ms Freemans’s knickers in a knot, she is miffed, affronted at the nerve of anyone suggesting that feminism needs to be rebranded. Even other feminists.

Ms, Freeman does witter on a bit using the metaphor of a “makeover” a la the film Pretty Woman to make her point and takes a couple of bitchy swipes at some well known women who have rejected the feminist label, that apparently is compulsory, because….well because feminists say so!

Like Gerri Halliwell for instance, a former member of The Spice Girls, and nope have no idea what she does now, nor do I care, but Ms. Freeman, in typical bitchy female fashion  puts this hugely successful, probably enormously rich woman down, and but good.

This will certainly make noted modern thinker Geri Halliwell happy, as she once posited: “Feminism is bra-burning lesbianism. It’s very unglamorous. I’d like to see it rebranded. We need to see a celebration of our femininity and softness.” Bra-burning lesbianism?! The horror, the horror! No wonder Elle needs to rebrand it!


She also takes a swipe at two other hugely successful and probably very rich women who have made statements rejecting feminism. Susan Sarandon and Lady Gaga, for example get a lash of Ms. Freeman’s kitten claws

What it’s rapidly beginning to mean to this modern woman is that it’s a word a lot of people in high places don’t understand. Celebrities prove this on a weekly basis (“I’m not a feminist – I love men,” Lady Gaga; “People think of feminism as being a load of strident bitches,” Susan Sarandon.)

It would appear that being famous and female is a handicap when it comes to having an informed opinion on feminism.

Because you see, only feminists get to define feminism, everybody else, especially rich, successful famous women are totally and utterly incapable of making their own minds up, must not be allowed to express an opinion that declares feminism to be a load of bollix.

Ok, I admit, I fell around the place laughing at this next bit, at the sheer level of stupidity that it took to make this next statement.

I wish feminism were more complicated because it would explain why so many people misunderstand it. But it is actually amazingly simple: it is a belief in gender equality. There are complications within it, but that’s all it is. The reason it has a special name is because equality is not the human race’s default position and only a very wealthy, white, heterosexual man could possibly think otherwise.

Let’s just examine this a bit closer, according to Ms. Freeman, feminism is easy peasy, it’s just “amazingly simple” to understand one presumes, ergo anyone who doesn’t get feminism is obviously as dumb as a bag of hammers. But wait, there’s more, apparently the ONLY people who are dumb enough NOT to understand this simple “special” ideology is a  “very wealthy, white, heterosexual man”

Ooooh, right, you mean Like Gerri Halliwell, Susan Sarandon and Lady Gaga? Those kinds of “very wealthy, white, heterosexual man”

This is my next favourite statement of Ms. Freeman.

As I grew older, I came to like makeover scenes a lot less because it became obvious to me that it wasn’t the woman who needed making over, it was everyone else who needed an open mind. Feminism doesn’t need a makeover, a rebranding, a softer sound or even a gold necklace: some people just need an education.

Because she finally got something right, feminism doesn’t need a makeover, there isn’t enough makeup, cosmetic surgery, rebranding or massive PR in the entire universe that would change a toxic vile hate filled doctrine which IS what feminism IS, to anything even remotely palatable to any decent human being with HALF a brain, never mind a fully functioning brain.

I just love the snippy little comment that correlates a woman getting a makeover with those who wish to give feminism a makeover, and opine’s that that the poor unfortunate woman was just fine the way she was, and it was “everyone else who needed an open mind”

Here she’s taking a little swipe at other feminists, the ones at Elle magazine behind this “lets tart feminism up” campaign.  Tut tut, how dare they, how very dare they, if people reject feminism, if people make up their own minds about feminism without consulting feminists then obviously their minds are just closed.

Nosireebob, having an open mind means……………………NOT questioning, rejecting or criticising feminism. Duh!



4 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. CitymanMichael
    Dec 14, 2013 @ 17:45:30

    Feminists seem to be trying to rebrand feminism recently. I wonder what is really going on?


    • Anja Eriud
      Dec 14, 2013 @ 21:16:45

      There is indeed a disturbance in the eeeeemm force, what do you think is going on Michael?


      • CitymanMichael
        Dec 15, 2013 @ 01:53:26

        Under normal circumstances, I would think that they are losing support & kudos (especially amongst young women) and therefore trying to re-establish themselves as a strong force. I am not so sure that this is the case.
        I really would like to believe that it is the deathnells of a dying institution, but something inside tells me it is not.
        Perhaps there really is a fourth wave starting and they are morphing into a new super-feminism, where they already have bludgeoned society into a sort of politically feminist correct, brain stupored semi-awakedness. They simply need to finish the job and leave men completely emasculated to the point of acceptance of whatever women want is what is required of men. Thereafter follows the end of men & therefore that society.
        Truth is – I simply do not know. Time will tell.

  2. daniel
    Dec 19, 2013 @ 13:46:20

    They are blowing any pretense at subtlety, which they couldn’t really manage anyway. So their true moronic and ugly “beliefs” and extreme sense of not just “women god men bad” but “when women don’t achieve society bad, where they do… well that’s ’cause they are better than men”

    Their view of education shows this. When women weren’t achieving as much in third level education, the education system was sexist and needed to change. Now when men are falling of and achieving less than women, it’s waved as a flag of female superiority” . No change needed, except “it’s a disgrace with women’s superiority in the now in the “”fixed”” education system, clearly the lack of CEO’s of companies must be because of sexism, the patriarchy… anything but women not going for the jobs or not as suited for them.

    You notice they never talk about the amount of women who go into politics, become heads of big companies…. they never mention how many go for those areas/positions. Which no matter what you are talking about makes stating the fact irreverent.

    If a tech company employs 100 new employees, 80 men 20 women but 200 men apply and 20 women apply… that would indicate, just based on the figures. 100% prejudice towards women.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: