Sunday, February 19, 2012

Saurs response log

In the event IOZ starts getting trigger happy at the unpleasant, as even very intelligent humans have been known to do before, here's a moment of posterity for the archives.

Saurs, inspired to anger by a vaguely feminist hornet's nest stirred up by IOZ on purpose, complained about evil men (no joke) as follows:

I want to reiterate what's been said above, puppylander, that every man wants the best for his daughter as he defines a woman's happiness and fulfillment. What women the world over may want and need, what they are capable of achieving with the privileges and advantages that men are granted and that they themselves are barred from enjoying, is something probably radically different, may in fact make you very unhappy, indeed. It's a wonderful sentiment, but it's largely a platitude that means nothing. The material and nonmaterial things you want your daughter to have, would you mind if every woman had them? Are they the same things a son ought to have? What if her possessing them means you have less? It's sometimes stressed that the eradication of oppression is not a zero-sum game, and it isn't. We can all be happy in that Great Feminist Utopia in the sky, where feminism is no longer necessary because its aims have been achieved. But to get the ball rolling, men are going to have to give up a lot, question their assumptions, undergo some serious ego surgery, more than they realize. Are you willing to do that for your daughter? Can you even put into words what that means? Can you sort out of your life, and pinpoint the ways in which you've benefited from living in a patriarchy as a man? And, even if you can, how are you going to convince every other man on the planet to do the same? Welcome to our dilemma. The world will not be a welcoming and safe place for girls and women until men stop hating them and thinking that they exist solely to do men's bidding, categorizing and sorting them into good girls and bitches, whores and wives, resenting them and othering them through biology and trying to control them and when they can't be controlled, blaming all the world's problems on them and their bad behavior, excusing systemic violence against them and coming up with reasons why they have "chosen" to be second class. By virtue of your class, the color of your skin, what you do for a living, the sacrifices you make, you'll probably give your daughter a leg up over a good many women and a huge chunk of men. Is that enough for you? If it is, you're not a feminist, you're just a guy with a kid. Feminism is not about addressing your personal happiness, which can be achieved quite easily by fucking other people over to your heart's content. Some of the happiest people on the planet: right wing dudes in cushy jobs with plenty of women around to suck their cocks and make their dindins and wash their drawers, plenty of people of color around being casually exploited as slave labor, living in a country whose philosophy is rugged goddamned individualism, dude achieved this all on his own pinkyswear and no lies. The world's greatest and most violent misogynist, the kind that goes on a killing and raping spree: he probably knows some women too, probably likes them a great deal, probably makes exceptions for them and excuses them for their silly inferior female traits. It's not enough to say you have a wife, you have a mother, you have a daughter, and you want the best for them. Some of my best friends are X. You're one of the good ones, not like those fucking Xs. The bigot always have to rationalize why the problem isn't with hir, it's with those fuckers, and zie knows this because zie's capable of the grand gesture of making an "exception." Well, congratulations, you special snowflake, you.

Aside from 1) the rather murderous insults to a parent, 2) the assumption of personal ownership over a cause of epic scope that transcends the wealthy white blog-reading chick's limited cultural experience, and 3) name-dropping loaded terms, the 4) sexism resulted in the following response:

Saurs, you arrogant, terrible beast, you've just slurred the entire male sex by saying "every man wants the best for his daughter as he defines a woman's happiness and fulfillment." Men cannot possibly know, or even realistically contribute to, what makes women happy and fulfilled? Turn that logic back on us: sure, every woman wants her sons to be fulfilled and happy, but only inasmuch as she can understand men. And she can't. Therefore, patriarchy is required to free men from repressive women. You've just justified either repressive patriarchy or repressive matriarchy. You've also just said that men cannot parent happy daughters. I.e., two male partners could not raise a happy daughter, because they could only understand her needs "as they define a woman's happiness/fulfillment." How truly loathsome. Was that a stupid typo, or do you actually feel men are that inadequate? Your sexism is so blatantly offered that it's like talking to an old-school KKK member about why niggers suck. You are willing to denigrate an entire group based on your own psychosexual repressions. Unfortunately, while it did become unacceptable in mainstream society for blacks and women to be slurred by disgusting bigots, a new breed of bigotry has arisen to take its place, and empowered people like you to say the most derogatory things about roughly half the planet's human population. By the way, are you American? Okay. Then you're going to need to get the ball rolling to head toward utopia. Turn over all your money to the tribal officials of the nearest Native American tribe, and then kill yourself. Give back what you've taken. Time to sort out the ways that you've benefited from the genocide. And then, go to Hell. Because that whole "original sin" thing has been really pissing the men off. Time to pay the piper for the apple. It'll be tough, and you won't be able to convince the rest of the non-100%-Native-blooded population to do it...welcome to my dilemma. Not gonna do it? Still alive and living on the stolen land? Then you're not into racial equality; you're just into talk. Racial equality is not about addressing your personal happiness, which can be achieved quite easily by blathering about "feminism" on top of the American graveyard of millions upon millions. You special fucking snowflake, you. You're so completely different. Very rude; very unpleasant. We've shared that today. Would you like to actually discuss what made you so angry that you wanted to slur all males? This one's happy to. E-mail; show up on a different blog; do it here. Or just wail angrily about how other women are sucking richer cocks than you've got access to, make this one part of the problem, and you'll find no shortage of increasing support as sexism needle swings from one side to the other over the next many years. @anon 8:11, this one would rather not just sit in a chamber of people who echo the same viewpoint. How else to grow, improve and learn? Opinions could be right or wrong; wrong could be corrected, right could help others. Is the purpose of the internet just to vent or to find people who agree with you and be validated by them? As you'd know if you watched this one argue with "conservatives," "neoliberals," et cetera, there's no particular discomfort being highly unpopular. If present humanity never validates this one's faith that viewpoints can be changed patiently, then see you in the memory hole once you've shifted to unpopular.

End recording.  Click.  


  1. I dunno, Saurs was sort of the voice of reason in that abortion thread and here, well, she's saying nothing more different then what you said in the evil within post albeit in angry hyperbole.

    1. One of Saurs' problems is that she claims all men are incapable of being able to contribute to women's happiness (except, perhaps, by "getting out of the way," which she implies but does not type).

      Presuming all "male" humans guilty is tantamount to presuming all "female" humans guilty. Same story, different century.