Skip to content

The Patriarchy Wishes Death on AROOO

March 12, 2010

I find it hilarious how Margie and I are compared to religious fundamentalists for refusing to metaphorically suck males’ dicks on the internet. Because we will not allow men and/or their female sycophants to blather and lecture on our blog about how we should sympathize with men in the name of equality (when in fact there is no equality in our male dominated society and making way for the many who already put males first will only contribute to our inequality), it is wished on us that we die in a fire.

Yes, isn’t it just so symbolically ironic and spine tingling hilarious. I would suspect anyone living in this western world who has venture out from under his or her rock in the last 2000 years would immediately associate fire and a wish for someone to die in that fire as being quite similar to evangelists wishing eternal damnation on heretics, lesbians, gays, single mothers, whores, divorcees, etc. You know the wish, the whole go to hell, burn in hell, and any other derivative of “horrifyin’ torment, with yer poor sinful bodies stretched out on hot gridirons in the nethermost fiery pit of hell.” To wish someone to die in a fire must be quite popular, or at least popular enough that a ready made image of said desire is available on Google images (see above image).

Moreover, the people who wish that we die in a fire because we don’t want men in our conversations nor do we want to consider how men are affected by atrocities inflicted traditionally and predominately on females are supposedly the tolerant liberal ones, –when in actuality they are nothing but more of the same stale defenders and promoters of patriarchy. They are the same old people who want men to be front and center. Talk about being a fundamentalist, it does not get more fundamental than that.

27 Comments
  1. pseudoadrienne permalink
    March 12, 2010 3:04 am

    Petulance; males seem to excel in it when their widdle feelings are bruised and given a healthy dose of reality. And the reality is this, males are–like everyone/thing else in existence– a mere, insignificant speck within the cosmos, and like everyone/thing else have no legitimate claim to have such free reign to govern over the lives of others. Men probably realized their insignificance in the great scheme of life several thousand years ago (a serious blow to their collective egos), so they fabricated a justification for their hubristic sense of importance and “entitlement” to determine and control the lives of others, ie; female-humanity. And what was that justification? Look at the fucking world around us…religion, politics, socioeconomics, race, color, the environment, sexuality, rape, evolutionary-“psychology”, and so on. And these boys are pissed because radfems and separatists see through their infantile pretentiousness and vile misogyny, and refuse to coddle them. Fuck ’em.

  2. March 12, 2010 4:26 am

    They’re particularly miffed that we don’t care about male children. They keep yapping on about male children being “victimized” by women, but they never ever address the fact that the vast majority of young male victims of abuse (let alone female children, for crying out loud) are attacked by MALES. Yet, you don’t see them denouncing male child-sodomizers (of males or of girls). You don’t see them denouncing girl-rapists. (Girls are raped AND sodomized by male predators; let’s not pretend as if male children are suffering the same thing that girls are, even when the attacker is male.) All you see is their insistence on calling non-rape sexual assault rape so that they can focus their vitriol on the proportionally minuscule number of women who take advantage of boys, while giving a free pass to the males who sodomize them, and also focus on the proportionally minor number of little boys who are attacked by adults of either sex in comparison to the number of girls who are attacked by males.

    • March 12, 2010 4:34 am

      Greedy parasitism. Insatiable parasitism. So on and so on.

      How dare we focus on the twenty billion females being raped when there is possibly one male dangling out there not getting sympathy from 100% of the female population.

  3. March 12, 2010 4:34 am

    And I have to disagree with pseudoadrienne about males being petulant. I refuse to infantilize their behavior. I refuse to frame them as spoiled children to be tsk-tsked. They are rapists and murderers. They are terrorists. And their reaction here, wishing that Kitty and I die in a fire, is more of the same violence they’ve ALWAYS employed, throughout history, whenever women have withdrawn energies from them. They are tyrants, not brats. I wish a torturous, agonizing death on each and every member of their sex.

    • March 12, 2010 4:37 am

      I wish a torturous, agonizing death on each and every member of their sex.

      You done did it now. What you just said is worse than all the girl fetuses in India being aborted, all the girl babies in China being murdered, and all the girl children all over the world being raped simply for existing.

      You are a horrible monster! ZOMG!!!!11111

    • atheistwoman permalink
      March 12, 2010 5:29 am

      Only Arooo can out-evil Arooo. Although presumably TFKG you are automatically less evil than Margaret due to whiteness. You’ve only been led astray by those nasty black ladies, and can still be saved!

    • atheistwoman permalink
      March 12, 2010 5:30 am

      Just in case, that was definitely tongue in cheek.

    • March 12, 2010 5:36 am

      Whiteness? I’m not sure why folks assume Kitty’s white. Interesting…

    • atheistwoman permalink
      March 12, 2010 6:06 am

      Oh, sorry, I thought I had read that in one Kitty’s posts.

    • atheistwoman permalink
      March 12, 2010 6:08 am

      Obviously I hadn’t! And that should be, “one of Kitty’s posts.”

    • March 12, 2010 4:49 pm

      I assume Kitty’s white because:
      a) Renee gave you shit for sharing a blog with a white woman
      b) She (almost?) never mentions her race, which is a white thing to do

    • March 12, 2010 4:59 pm

      Or is it a white thing to assume who ever does not mention race is defaulted as white. That is how white supremacy works isn’t it? Every unseen audience and person are white unless othered beforehand.

    • March 12, 2010 5:02 pm

      But I thought it was the opposite, that white people are so used to thinking of themselves as raceless and the default that they never think to mention their whiteness.

    • March 12, 2010 5:02 pm

      Well, I certainly can’t help that Renee assumed I shared a blog with a white woman. And, actually, while white women might not be willing to state that they hang out in all-white groups, befriend only white women, cater to a white-only audience, and speak on behalf of only white women, they most certainly do go out of their way to make sure everyone knows they themselves are white/blond/blue-eyed/pretty/sexy/long-legged/etc. So, your whiteness radar is off.

    • March 12, 2010 5:16 pm

      There is no formula set in stone. But that is just it. I have said it since the beginning of my blogging. It is my choice and no one else’s. In the pursuit of de-centering whiteness the internet is a good starting point. Because if a person does not mention race, the assumption can only be the projection of the person assuming. Therefore, if the person is interested in cleansing oneself of all racism and/or internal racism they must examine why they assume/project whatever they have assumed/projected. It is not my responsibility to guide a person into a box that has already been constructed for them. Actually, I have no responsibility. However, it is my desire to hold people accountable for their assumptions. In other words, I will not make it easy for anyone, and that includes myself. Because it has not been easy for me to justify my refusal . Nevertheless, it is my desire, and the internet is the only place on this earth that has given me that agency.

    • March 12, 2010 5:17 pm

      …they most certainly do go out of their way to make sure everyone knows they themselves are white/blond/blue-eyed/pretty/sexy/long-legged/etc.

      Tell me about it.

    • March 13, 2010 12:46 am

      sigh. I wonder why so many white women need Kitty to be white lol or need her to be of any race for that matter. I’m not surprised with this obsession with Kitty’s race and good lorde Renee of all people is being believed about something? How about asking the PERSON instead of believing the hype?

    • March 13, 2010 3:35 am

      and good lorde Renee of all people is being believed about something?

      I know! Renee! Renee who goes around calling women bitches and oreos, while allowing her blog to be overrun by trannies has even a crumb of credibility to the women who also read *this* blog? It is absolutely astounding. Women looking for a reason to justify calling other women bitches will say anything, which should be more than obvious.

      It can’t be overstated that logic goes out the window when it comes to white women trying to call one of their “sisters” into the fold.

    • March 13, 2010 7:17 pm

      It can’t be overstated that logic goes out the window when it comes to white women trying to call one of their “sisters” into the fold.

      Absolutely, as evidenced by the display here from Joce Claire and Athiestwoman. I just don’t understand why a woman like Renee would be believed about anything when she displays such gross misogyny. Bitches and Oreos? omg… And yeah her blog is overrun by men and racist ass white folk and goddamn tranny’s to boot. How she has any credibility on anything, much less on the race of another woman she has never met and knows nothing about.

      And this is a form of racism, too. Using the words of one black woman as the basis for your ASSumptions about someone else. Joce Claire, AW, there is a lesson to be learned here about your own whiteness.

    • pseudoadrienne permalink
      March 12, 2010 5:14 am

      That’s all definitely true, Margaret. A great many of them are, and then they have their loyal apologist/enabling groupies (male and female), and yet we’re supposed to be so gullible and optimistic about them? We’re supposed to give every one of them the benefit of doubt and yet a great many of them have proven themselves to be actual agents of misogynist tyranny or at least misogynist apologist/enablers. Funny we’re not supposed to think of them as potential rapists and murderers and yet when you challenge their misogyny and androcracy, that’s their first counter-argument (“don’t call men rapists or I’ll rape you”). I just call them petulant because whenever I hear a male groan about “reverse” sexism (same goes for white people who complain about “reverse” racism) I hear this high-pitch whine, that only comes with people who clearly have an entitlement complex, ie: men. But you’re right that I shouldn’t minimize the damaging (even fatal) effects that male civilization has on women and girls.

  4. atheistwoman permalink
    March 12, 2010 5:26 am

    I guess even the undead hate Arooo. Sinners in the hands of an angry god much?

    Frankly, I can’t remember what part of their twisted-up minds would even allow them to compare you, Kitty and Margie, to religious fundamentalists…and I’m glad I forgot.

    What religion is that again, that you all are being so fundamental about? Because if there’s a religion for man-haters/ignorers/female-centerers hey I wouldn’t mind joining…

    Of course I’m sure it’s something like only religious fundamentalists hate people because of their sex…blah blah blah. But I think this particular batch of assholes might have their x’s and y’s a bit mixed up…

  5. JamiGumi permalink
    March 12, 2010 5:33 am

    These liberal men and third wavers are even worse then the MRA’s and right wing males. Reason being, they are quicker to gain a woman’s trust, feminist or otherwise. MRA’s and right wingers are instantly recognizable as the enemy to women’s liberation and will sometimes even admit it outright. Liberal men and trans have successfully hijacked the movement. Third wave liberal, sex positive feminist will defend these groups to the death. You don’t see it the other way around though.Liberal men and these trans playing make believe hate women, and third wavers worship men. They have these pseudo feminists wanting “equaliy”, not liberation. Feministing, feministe, pandagon are good examples of this. You have men posting, getting their ego’s stroked. I defy any woman to say anything truly critical of men.If you do the third wavers will tell you not to be sexist against men. Criticize gay men and look out, you will be told to check your privilege. Criticize trans and they will say “how dare you! trans are THE most oppressed group in the world! They have it 100000 times as worse then black women!” Mra’s and right wingers could never have pull this shit off. They couldn’t takeover a woman’s liberation movement and convince self proclaimed feminists that: misogyny=freedom, rape fantasy= healthy, porn and bdsm=empowerment, marriage and being a housewife is a feminist “choice”, taking a man’s name giving it to your kids and submitting to a man is feminist if you “choose” it. Oh and of course, women can have penises and men can give birth, after all, biological sex is meaningless.

    “They’re particularly miffed that we don’t care about male children. They keep yapping on about male children being “victimized” by women, but they never ever address the fact that the vast majority of young male victims of abuse (let alone female children, for crying out loud) are attacked by MALES.”

    Nope, these women love and adore men. Especially the mothers of sons. According to them men are hurt by the patriarchy too, boys are an oppressed class and feminists must care about them too. What horseshit. I could give a rats ass if men and boys are hurt by anything. Men and boys have been woman’s greatest enemy and oppressors for thousands of years, so fuck them.

  6. Mary Sunshine permalink
    March 12, 2010 12:59 pm

    Mothers of sons are necessarily “equality feminists” who (very un-explicitly) wish eternal frustration on females seeking to get out from underneath the male boot.

    “Equality feminism” is the ultimate sabotage of females’ struggle for freedom from the innate rapism and murderousness of males.

    Of course they hate separatists. We are the counter-current to that sabotage.

  7. March 12, 2010 4:52 pm

    Well you guys are somewhat fundamentalist in that you are all about getting to the fundamentals (/roots) of male supremacy, and you’re unwilling to compromise. But certainly you have nothing in common with Christian fundamentalists! I’m so sick of radfems being compared to Christians just because we share one position, being anti-porn, for completely different reasons.

  8. March 12, 2010 8:06 pm

    Also stupidly ironic is the way they accuse you, us, of having BLOOD ON OUR HANDS for – literally – written words. and yet some of their lot go about the petty business of taking actual action against you or me or us, whether it be writing threatening emails to you, hacking my emails, posting and linking about AROOO directly or about any of us in chickenshit ways (hi Ruth Moss!) to maximize others’ hateful petty actions against us… how about they all go fuck themselves with someone who’s dying in a fire.

  9. atheistwoman permalink
    March 13, 2010 7:11 pm

    Hi everybody. Just saying sorry for the derail, not at all intentional. At least my stupidity was somebody’s education…

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: