Internet stupidity strikes again

Ohma · Post by **Ohma** » 2008-04-17 05:26pm

Zixinus wrote: Actually, in retrospect that is rather stupid.

Yeah, probably, but I can hope.

...and then be disappointed.

Ritterin Sophia · Post by **Ritterin Sophia** » 2008-04-17 06:03pm

Andrew_Fireborn wrote:I'd venture that if one were to look up a few of those "Women who fought back and were punished by the man" you'd find that infact, the situation is a lot deeper than simply "woman injures/kills man in self-defense."

I believe the last study I heard on domestic violence had women initiating it at least half the time.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2008-04-17 07:20pm

There's also a large and unreported problem of physical abuse in lesbian relationships. There's a lot of pressure not to talk about it, too, because it's seen as a problem with men hitting their spouses, and there's a reluctance to admitting that they're "as bad as men" in such an unpleasant capacity for violence against the one they love, and having few people to talk to (due to the homophobia in the wider community).

Ohma · Post by **Ohma** » 2008-04-17 07:38pm

Zuul wrote:There's also a large and unreported problem of physical abuse in lesbian relationships. There's a lot of pressure not to talk about it, too, because it's seen as a problem with men hitting their spouses, and there's a reluctance to admitting that they're "as bad as men" in such an unpleasant capacity for violence against the one they love, and having few people to talk to (due to the homophobia in the wider community).

Yep.

Damn this whole thing is making me sad (well, my fault for searching for another group with similar views on topics like this). It's like every human is mentally four, or completly devoid of empathy/the ability to comprehend the motivations behind other people's actions. "What? I could never hurt someone! EVER! Only Bad People hurt other people! And I resent your accusation that I'm not a superawsomegood person! And that by extension all my friends aren't superawsomegood either!"

Anguirus · Post by **Anguirus** » 2008-04-17 09:34pm

That's still pretty fucked reasoning though.

Won't get an argument from me.

I commented on her last post that it was an excellent and hilarious parody.

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2008-04-21 11:42pm

OK, my morbid fascination got the better of me...

http://runolfr.blogspot.com/2008/04/rad ... refly.html

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2008-04-22 05:42pm

twice...

http://runolfr.blogspot.com/2008/04/mor ... sm-of.html

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2008-04-29 09:43am

My articles got a visit from Allecto (after I sent her the links via the comments on her weblog). At least, I'm pretty sure no one else would visit my site via a link from allecto.wordpress.co*/wp-admin.

She didn't publish my comment. No surprise, there.

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2008-04-29 09:49am

But she did publish a "you are right about everything" comment from another Whedon hater.

Peptuck · Post by **Peptuck** » 2008-04-29 10:28am

Mmmm, delicious double standards.

Junghalli · Post by **Junghalli** » 2008-04-29 08:20pm

That bit where she interprets Inara being friendly with other characters as them using her services makes me wonder if she might not be some kind of sociopath. You seriously must have a truly, deeply fucked up concept of human relationships if you see somebody being emotionally supportive of somebody else and immediately assume they're doing it because it's their job and they should get paid for it.

More likely she's just so profoundly misandristic she cannot imagine that a woman would actually be friendly with a man of her own free will.

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2008-04-29 09:17pm

Junghalli wrote:That bit where she interprets Inara being friendly with other characters as them using her services makes me wonder if she might not be some kind of sociopath. You seriously must have a truly, deeply fucked up concept of human relationships if you see somebody being emotionally supportive of somebody else and immediately assume they're doing it because it's their job and they should get paid for it.

More likely she's just so profoundly misandristic she cannot imagine that a woman would actually be friendly with a man of her own free will.

Well she does cut Inara some slack on spending time with Kaylee, since she says that relationship seems "reciprocal" as if Shepherd Book never did anything nice for Inara. Book actually went out of his way to befriend Inara, make sure she didn't leave the dining hall hungry, and put Mal's crude introduction behind them, showing that he did not think less of her because of her chosen profession.

Ohma · Post by **Ohma** » 2008-04-29 11:13pm

So apparently there's something of a feminist blog war going on. Allecto seems to be on the sex-negative, radical "feminist", transphobic, crazy stereotype side. People like Renegade evolution are what most of us would identify as feminists, however the "Radfems" identify them as sex-poxxys, porn whores, sluts etc.

So yeah.

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2008-04-30 05:30am

Junghalli wrote:That bit where she interprets Inara being friendly with other characters as them using her services makes me wonder if she might not be some kind of sociopath. You seriously must have a truly, deeply fucked up concept of human relationships if you see somebody being emotionally supportive of somebody else and immediately assume they're doing it because it's their job and they should get paid for it.

More likely she's just so profoundly misandristic she cannot imagine that a woman would actually be friendly with a man of her own free will.

Im reminded of the movie PCU, where the super feminists try to deal with men. "You're saying. . . if you're nice to them . .. they bring you stuff?"

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2008-05-02 10:13am

She's back!

loomer · Post by **loomer** » 2008-05-02 11:42am

And yet again, she reveals that she's out with a specific purpose.

Men rape babies, did you know that? I didn't know that men as a whole rape babies. But apparently we do.

She does have a point about the final scene with Mal and Saffron, though, since does have pretty heavy overtones.

Anguirus · Post by **Anguirus** » 2008-05-02 12:20pm

She approaches Whedon's writing as if it is without irony. Raise your hand if you actually thought the only reason Wash didn't fuck Saffron was because he was genuinely afraid of Zoe. He's clearly throwing in a joke to try and defuse the situation.

When it comes right down to it, the only character in that show who attempted to commit murder is the one the author openly sympathizes with. That's rather telling.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2008-05-02 02:06pm

She's a complete moron that can't distinguish what a writer's characters say from what that writer is saying in the episode and what the writer actually believes, as all 3 can be completely polarised to one another. This article should be taken as a "simpleton's guide" to how to not properly critically analyse a text.

Her lack of critical ability is compounded every time she tries to use her feeble shoe-selecting hindbrain (this is irony for those who can't spot it) to analyse a text, and of course "Sigh. Men are such dicks." comments don't really help matters in this regard. Suffice it to say, whatever the source of her misandry, it's really fucking annoying.

How the fuck are women supposed to survive what men throw at us and not go a bit crazy? And weird? Well, if hating my sisters, conforming to white male supremacy by being treated as a sex-object and possession by a white man, conforming to white male supremacy by jumping when the white man says jump and calling the white man ‘sir’ is your idea of ‘normal’ womanhood, Mr. Whedon, then I sure am glad that I am ‘weird’. But thankfully I know that your image of Black womanhood ain’t anything like the courageous, resourceful, angry, compassionate, strong, resilient, tireless, flesh and blood reality of my Black sisters.

I dread to think what this woman's attempts at writing would be if she tried anything dramatic. Well, we all know it would be some retarded gynocratic fanfic offering some sort of female messianism and would be fucking retarded. What a loopy bitch.

Peptuck · Post by **Peptuck** » 2008-05-02 02:39pm

But thankfully I know that your image of Black womanhood ain’t anything like the courageous, resourceful, angry, compassionate, strong, resilient, tireless, flesh and blood reality of my Black sisters.

Didn't....uh, didn't she just perfectly describe Zoe right there? Because as I recall, Zoe fits that description exactly.

Zixinus · Post by **Zixinus** » 2008-05-02 02:48pm

I had to conlcude that she doesn't actually watch the series. She just takes the script somewhere.

Peptuck · Post by **Peptuck** » 2008-05-02 04:36pm

Zixinus wrote:I had to conlcude that she doesn't actually watch the series. She just takes the script somewhere.

Has to be. I mean, she rails about how in this episode Whedon doesn't depict women defending themselves from men and "getting away with" killing men when at the very start of this episode Zoe kills two of the bandits.

Anguirus · Post by **Anguirus** » 2008-05-02 04:49pm

I suspect that she would like Zoe if she wasn't married to Wash and "subservient" to Mal. Never mind that those are the two character features that a) connect her to the rest of the cast and b) don't fit the cardboard cut-out "tough chick" image.

Peptuck · Post by **Peptuck** » 2008-05-02 04:59pm

I love how her entire justification for Wash being a bad husband is literally because he's white. She offers no other evidence of him being an abusive, dominating man beyond his skin color, and yet she complains about apparent racism in the series.

As I said before, delicious double standards.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2008-05-02 06:08pm

An amusing aside, the ad below this topic is for Chinese single women and hydrulic pumps. But I digress.

She's not much different then other zealots. Firm in a view that they are correct and will manipulate all examples to their point of view. And when you differ, you're either insane, dumb or one of the evil haters. Everyone has pointed out how utterly deranged lengths she goes to and her suppositions of what is happening is delusional.

And sadly, she likely does watch the episodes. Course if you watched the episodes with the beer goggles she wears you'd get the similar warped views. Personally? Idiots like this are good for laughs, because when you think you've seen it all, they surprise you with even greater insanity.

Reforming them? I'd have a better time reforming a skinhead into thinking other races aren't subhuman.

Junghalli · Post by **Junghalli** » 2008-05-02 06:40pm

Like most zealots she clearly believes that there's only one acceptable form of art: propaganda that unambiguously supports her viewpoint. This is pretty easy to understand when you remember that as far as a zealot is concerned there's only one acceptable viewpoint: his own. Everything else is evil and must be destroyed.

Just look at the way she openly deletes any responses that aren't of the circle-jerk variety.