Author: VD

But Wendy McElroy fails to grasp the gander-goose principle:

An ideological conflict underlies the attempt by either sex to force open the doors of ‘exclusive’ businesses: individual rights versus egalitarianism. Under individual rights, every human being has control over the peaceful use of his or her own body and property. Under egalitarianism, access to and use of property is equally distributed across society, with or without the consent of owners.

I come down on the side of individual rights.

In terms of Body Central, I don’t believe any man or woman has a legal ‘right’ to exercise on someone else’s private property. I do not believe anyone has a moral obligation to provide another person with exercise. Freedom of association means that individuals, including property owners, have a right to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ at their own front door.

Unfortunately, an emotional element also underlies the conflict.

Some men applaud the turn-around as an opportunity to give feminists a taste of their own medicine. In doing so, they adopt the very principles they allegedly decry: egalitarianism, the legal imposition of gender policy, the use of collective ‘gender-think.’ In short, they become feminists.

Body Central may become not only a test case but also a trial of conscience.

Women who believe in egalitarianism will either apply that principle to men or be confronted by their own hypocrisy. Men who believe feminism’s door-busting has been wrong will have to decide whether they value revenge more highly than justice.

While I c0mpletely agree with McElroy on the larger point – private enterprise should be free to discriminate against anyone for any reason – the idea that men who use the law to give women a taste of their own feminist medicine are doing so for merely emotional reasons and have “become feminists” is deeply stupid.

Since women were the only ones pushing for these anti-freedom of association laws, it is only through eliminating their ability to have their cake and eat it too that the right of freedom of association will be restored. I suspect McElroy is being mildly disingenuous here, as there’s no reason to believe that allowing women’s businesses to violate the freedom of association will restore it for men.

Mr. Bruce doesn’t see what is flying over his head:

So, VP–we have here a staunch feminist, a rude, thoughtless, ill-bred young woman, who demands that she not be treated any different than a man, who may be facing a real threat of physical harm. Does she deserve to be hoist on her own petard? And will you snicker behind your hand if she is harmed?

I doubt that you will, but you do seem to rejoice in her present discomfort, as do some of your posters in their comments.

That is a partially inaccurate summary. It is obvious that Jill of Feministe wishes to be treated very differently than a man, as she is playing host to numerous threats of violence against me. Since I regularly face threats of physical harm far more explicit than those which so intimidate Jill – even from her readers – I’m nothing but amused by her typically strong, independent female response.

Does she deserve to be hoist on her own petard? Absolutely she does. Will I snicker behind my hand if she is harmed? No, because I don’t care what happens to her. She’s a self-proclaimed big girl eschewing the oppressive protection of men, she can fend for herself. In any event, she’s facing no more genuine threat of harm than any other woman in New York. There have been millions, if not billions of Internet-based threats made over the last five years and I’ve yet to hear of one of them being followed through.

Jill is a lovely demonstration of the timorous nature of women. Yet again, we see the Strong Independent Woman is all bark with no bite to back it up, and prone to scurrying away like a panicked lapdog whenever anyone barks back. I don’t rejoice in her discomfort, but neither does the humor in the hypocrisy escape me.

UPDATE: Bonehead appreciates the irony.

Early this morning I went to see the thread at Feministe, and saw a post by Mr. Bruce saying

“Hey Jill– I’m a new reader over at Vox Popoli and I followed a link from there to here. Although I left a lengthy comment there, all I want to say here is that I hope you notify the appropriate authorities, if you have not done so already.
Good luck!”

I submitted a post saying that Vox had published a list of threats published by Jill from time to time. My post appeared for a couple of hours with “pending moderation” beside it. The last time I checked, it had been “moderated” out of existence.

Welcome to the marketplace of ideas…

Yes, they do love debate, don’t they. I wonder why Mr. Bruce doesn’t seem to think that I should similarly notify the authorities about the violent threats from Jill’s readers?

Eagles assistant Brad Childress was hired as coach of the Minnesota Vikings on Friday…. “Coach Childress was the elite NFL head coaching candidate,” owner Zygi Wilf said at a news conference. “He embodies class, character and discipline and is a great family man. Bottom line, Brad Childress is a winner.”

I don’t know much about Childress, and given the performance of the Eagles’ offense – for which he didn’t call the plays as OC – over the last few years, there’s nothing that makes me want to sing and dance about this hire. Not that I have anything against it either; I certainly prefer him to Cottrell or Williams, the other two names that surfaced. And not being Mike Tice should be good for at least two additional wins a year.

But he has been with two winning programs, Reid in Philly and Alvarez at Wisconsin, so that’s theoretically a good sign. And the Vikes have done rather well with a low-key coach before. Think he’ll mind if we call him Bud instead of Brad?

Digital needs to brush up on his Italian history:

Get your facts straight. Fascists opposed women and forced feminist organizations to disband and put a stop to feminist publications.

Believe what you want however, I just wanted to offer some truth.

I find that it is typically those who are fear filled and emotionally unbalanced that have the greatest difficulty with truth.

Which, no doubt, is why Digital will have trouble absorbing the verifiable historical facts. From The Manifesto of the Fascist Struggle, written by Benito Mussolini and published in The People of Italy on June 6, 1919:

Italians! Here is the program of a genuinely Italian movement. It is revolutionary because it is anti-dogmatic, strongly innovative and against prejudice.

For the political problem: We demand:

a) Universal suffrage polled on a regional basis, with proportional representation and voting and electoral office eligibility for women.

As I stated, it’s the very first plank in the Fascist platform. This really shouldn’t be that hard to grasp. Totalitarians always turn on those who bring them to power, just ask Ernst Röhm and the Sturmabteilung or Georgi Plekhanov and the Mensheviks. In a democratic system, statist totalitarians will always favor the women’s vote, because women reliably vote for them. This is even true in Islamic democracies such as Turkey: “Both female and male MPs admitted that male leaders easily coopted women through women branches to extend their control over women at the same time as providing them access to politics.” (Yesim Arat, “Patriarchal Paradox: Women in Politics in Turkey,” Associated University Press, 1984. p. 103) Once safely in power, statists then favor using women as brood mares in service to the state; from each according to her abilities, and all that.

Today, the female prediliction for “diversity” and multiculturalism is being used in precisely this manner by the Wahhabbists.

When mere mockery can’t keep pace with reality. From the Rabbi’s column on WND today:

The image of American women in the popular media has taken yet another blow with the announcement and launch of the massive promotional campaign by the Oxygen network to promote its new show, “Campus Ladies.” The show revolves around middle-aged women who return to college and decide to indulge in “age-inappropriate” behavior with young, male college students….

I find it astonishing that in my lifetime I have seen the feminist dream become a nightmare, where not a single feminist leader will speak against the tsunami of misogyny that has opened up against American women. Feminism’s highest objective was once the emphasis on female higher education. But this has now devolved into a cultural portrayal of women going to college not because they want to discover Aristotle and Shakespeare, but because they want to have orgies with men.

She laughed, she cried. Much better than cats. What the Rabbi fails to understand that this sort of thing was inevitable from the start, and desperation is never pretty. Feminism is the only ideology that makes both Communism and National Socialism look practical, sensible and humane by comparison.

I’d been having some problems with my hands while lifting; I’d have minor palm pain in my right hand for a day or two after doing anything reasonably heavy. But Spacebunny bought me a pair of these for Christmas and I can testify that they make a big difference. The neoprene is twice as thick as a regular neoprene lifting glove, and about four times thicker than leather gloves.

When benching yesterday, the NewGrips made it possible to hit two more reps on my last set repping out at 225; normally, my leather gloves tend to slip just a little, sliding my grip out just enough to make the last reps too risky past a certain point. They’re also quite comfortable, the neoprene keeps your hands from getting calluses and they provide both an excellent grip as well as some support for your wrists from the straps to which the pad is attached with velcro.

Best of all, no pain whatsoever. The thickness of the neoprene absorbs enough of the weight that it doesn’t strain whatever tendon or ligament wasn’t liking things. They may look a little odd and take a few minutes to get used to, but if you’re at all serious about lifting, they’re worth checking out.

Bandersnatch notes an amusing little kerfluffle:

Oh man, Vox, you’re missing out on quite the dramafest. Some students at feministe blogger Jill’s campus are considering a Miss NYC calendar – this has upset young Jill for obvious reasons, she posted on feministe about this, some students read her posts and have been bashing her on a public forum, Jill found out about it, she posted about that, they dissed her some more, etc, etc and now there’s talk about campus police getting involved, sexual harassment, etc. This is hilarious for three reasons:

1) I remember a post you made last week about wimmin not being strong enough to take blunt criticism – behold, a real world example happening before our eyes in real time!

2) I recall Jill has blogged about you a few times and the comments posted about you weren’t very nice and pleasant and I think a few even hinted at physical violence. Funny, how it’s only a police matter when a precious dainty little feminist is being verbally insulted.

3) I always get a kick from seeing strong independent wimmin being reduced to little scared cats crying to the big brave campus police to protect them from a bunch of guys calling them fat and ugly online.

And just how does Jill prove my earlier point about those tuff, tuff Zeta feminists?

She writes: “Unfortunately, supporters of the calendar are coming out in full force, and seem to be choosing to counter feminist questions with personal attacks instead of having a reasoned discussion…. What’s more interesting is how they choose to discount feminist arguments — calling us “hairy,” “overzealous,” “hippies,” “ungrateful bitches,” and “ugly.””

She later adds:“A Follow-Up… to yesterday’s very short post on the discussion board about how I’m hideous and a fat ugly pig…. I was a little bit in shock, and a little bit upset, when I first read the message board, so I didn’t really get into why I even posted it or why it bothered me so much…. The fact is that it feels threatening to know that people I go to school with are reading this board and posting on it. It’s gross, it’s cowardly, and it’s intentionally hurtful. It shows a remarkable amount of cruelty toward a person that, as far as I know, they’ve never met.”

Naturally, the response of the little friends of this strong, independent woman is to recommend running to Daddy… the Dean of Students. The great irony, of course, is that this is the very girl – how completely unsurprising to learn that she’s a college student – whose blog features the following gross, cowardly and intentionally hurtful comments showing remarkable cruelty – sniff – to someone she’s never met:

“So in case you ever wondered how conservative assholes like Vox Day actually view women, it’s as straight-up property.”

He’s clearly a borderline sociopath and a full-on misogynist.

He’s just a vile idiot.

Can we castrate all these people? Please?

will someone please shoot this man in the face?

“V.D.” has no female friends at all, guaranteed. And boy oh boy, is he ever pissed off about it! And it’s all their fault.

Nothing more irritating than an in your face bible thumping maniac who spouts scripture like a broken faucet. The only thing worse is an out and out chauvanist. Guess what, this guy’s both. If in fact someone does find where he lives, I have some fun ideas of what to do with him involving my fencing equipment.

He’s the most female-hating piece of shit I’ve ever seen on the internets, bar none–and I myself am very much a conservative. Frankly, anyone who identifies himself as a “Christian Libertarian” freaks me out, like a David Duke or Timothy McVeigh.

But y’know, all that angry misogyny…he just screams “self-loathing closeted queen” to me. He practically broadcasts it. I know stereotypes are unreliable at best, but I’ll be damned if he doesn’t fit it.

Wow, the anti-Semitic defenders of the Jew-hating Vox Day are now turning around and calling Cindy Sheehan an anti-Semite! You guys project better than a Bell and Howell tungsten-bulb unit. (Note – this comment is especially weird, since it wasn’t any of my readers who got on Sheehan, but other Feministe commenters. I’ve never written about Sheehan and she’s never been discussed at VP.)

I say Cindy Sheehan is an anti-Semite, and I say that Vox Day is a piece of shit.

I think Vox Day’s tune might change if HE were the one to be raped, especially if the prepetrator is a 350lb black guy; Vox Day sounds a little racist, doesn’t he?

He should be anally raped with the thick end of a baseball bat with rusty fishhooks and see how HE likes it!

Read the comments on Vox’s website- you realise most of the commenters there aren’t decent people after all. Assholes.

Clearly, we insufficiently civilized denizens of the Right have a great deal to learn about etiquette and intellectual consistency from our moral superiors of the Feminist Left. And Jill, you’re absolutely right, it was totally unnecessary for those people to call you fat and ugly. Given that you’re a feminist headed for law school, everyone already knew that.

Kim waxes optimistic:

All people want the same basic things out of life. We want to be happy, most of us want to love and be loved, be successful, have a good family, have good friends ect. Having different paths to the same goal doesn’t change the goal.

No, they most certainly do not. Because Kim, being a generally decent individual, does not slaver after power over others like a dog salivating after a large steak, she makes the common mistake that no one else does.

This is manifestly untrue. Even a thirty-second survey of history demonstrates otherwise. My libertarianism does not stem from rosy-hued optimism as some self-professed pragmatists claim, it is an ideology that stems from a profoundly skeptical view of humanity and human desires.

Man is dual-natured. Both the Dark and the Light call to him. The man who tenderly tucks his beloved children in at night may harbor a secret desire to bury an axe into the head of his neighbor. The woman who selflessly gives of herself to her friends, family and church may dream of seducing the twelve-year old neighbor girl next door. The vegetarian animal-lover painting harmlessly on the street corner may burn inside with visions of Teutonic supremacy.

There are no universal goals; even an individual harbors inherently conflicting desires.

From the Star & Sickle:

Many thought the older, more experienced women who beat Team Canada last weekend in a warmup to the 2006 Winter Olympics would win against the high schoolers. Especially after coaches agreed to a no-checking rule.

But the young Warroad Warriors lived up to the town’s long history of hockey honor, winning 2-1 by beating the women at their own game of finesse and speed.

I find it curious that it is still considered a major political event for a professional women’s tennis player to have beaten a 55-year old man in an unsporting match – it’s seldom mentioned that Riggs had to cover the doubles court and still only lost 6-4, 6-3, 6-3 – while one of the world’s top women’s teams can’t beat a squad of high school boys.

Interestingly enough, it’s seldom either the male or female athletes who get worked up about sex issues in sports, since everyone who plays a sport knows perfectly well how things stand. It’s only the feminist propagandists, the dweebs with two left feet who go into academia, and the clueless wonders who take both types seriously that think there’s anything to discuss. Remember when the media was prattling about how the US women’s soccer team would beat the US men? To their credit, Mia Hamm and company didn’t want any part of that claim.

One of the many reasons I quit critiquing amateur fiction at the Critters Workshop is that I kept running into writers of both sexes who insisted that a Xena-style uber-warrioress was perfectly credible; that no magic sword or divine heritage was needed to explain why a woman was inexplicably faster and stronger than the trained warriors she was dispatching with ease. They would defend their silly stories with tales of a cousin who was a martial arts champion and so forth… naturally, not a single one of them had ever so much as witnessed a round of fencing, sparring or any other related activity.

VOX: “Can’t you just make her a half-elf or something, all right?”

WOULD-BE WRITER: “You’re just being sexist! My sister….”

VOX: “Okay, look, if she suddenly started flying, would you feel the need to explain it?”

WOULD-BE WRITER: “Um… well, yeah, of course!”

VOX: “You’ve described her as a peasant farm girl. She’s strong, she’s independent, she’s survived the tragic murder of her parents, etc. Fine, if cliched. But the reader will find it no more credible for her to suddenly dispatch 15 elite warriors of the Kingsguard than it is for her to inexplicably fly.”

WOULD-BE WRITER: “That’s because no one can fly. But women are just as tough and strong and fast as men. My sister….”

VOX: “You’re right. Keep it just the way it is. No, I have no more suggestions, I’m sure it will be a best-seller.”