Applying logic, facts and accountability to the mindless droning of the feminist hate movement.

Thursday, July 26, 2007

Encouraging aggression without responsibility leads to violence. You don't say?

No I'M the Strongest, Specialest Womyn

In the wake of a vicious stabbing murder of a teenage girl in the UK, this is an article bemoaning the rising levels of violence of the female sex in western culture. Nothing men couldn't have told you, but considering the victims are increasingly female, it has suddenly become a public concern. If you go the article, you can safely ignore most of the comments. They seem to have decided to act like dicks and blame the whole thing on black culture and rap music seeing as there is a picture of the (black) victim at the top of the page. Towards the end someone mentions that in actual fact the perpetrator was a white female, but the discussion had already sort of wound down.

Violent Femmes

The girl gang violence that killed 18-year-old student Sian Simpson is a tragic effect of the way 'fierce' has been ruthlessly sold to young women.

Big Brother's Charley wonders how it is possible that she is not adored by millions. After all, she personifies today's It Girl. Designer clothes - tick. Loud and uncouth - tick. Scantily clad, with hair extensions - tick. So what's the problem?

The problem is, she's an attention whore. Sure she's scantily clad which attracts attention from members of the opposite sex, but her obtuse need for attention brings her level of legitimate interest and potential fidelity into question resulting in their resentment in the end. Women, on the other hand, although it was them who demanded the sexual freedom to act like complete sluts, seemed to be completely oblivious to the fact that the girls next to them had the same ideas about soaking up all the attention they did resulting in their resentment in the end as well.

Nevertheless, she has been told this is the ideal way to be, she wants this to be the ideal way to be, but apparently it is not the ideal way to be. Well, not if she wants to actually get along with other people anyway. The ironic thing is, a primary characteristic of this sort of person (ie. histrionic fucktard) is that they can't fathom why someone wouldn't like them anyway. What's the bet her favourite defence mechanism for denying that men don't like her because of her is some such bullshit as "they are intimidated by strong women"?

Feral girls have always been cool, but have only become a mainstream aspiration since the Spice Girls. The ubiquitous five ushered in a new era in which girls could be as wild as the boys and still represent the UN.

Whereas girls used to worry about getting a bad reputation, being one of the "Mean Girls" a la Lindsay Lohan has become a marketable asset - as illustrated by Bratz dolls and the "ride or die" self-described bitches of commercial hip hop, Lil Kim, Eve and even Beyonce, who flash their bodies and set out their financial and sexual ambitions in hard-edged terms.

In America's Next Top Model, Tyra Banks exhorts her wannabes to be "fierce" rather than pretty, and St Trinian's will soon be coming to our screens with cameo roles by Girls Aloud in shrunken uniforms and visible suspenders.

Actually feral girls were pretty much looked down upon until feminism started turning society into a matriarchy. In the days of more civilised rule, the manners of the upper classes would slowly seep into the lower classes. Under matriarchal systems, the more primitive immediate emotion and instant gratification based manners of the lower class, which run contrary to the constraints of civility, appear to slowly seep upwards.

The whole girlpower, "I am woman hear me roar", thing is typical of the farces feminism perpetrates. It's not about being as wild as the boys and still running the UN. Wild boys are not running the UN - an ineffective, feminized pussy organisation responsible for spreading feminism to third world countries like wildfire - for a start. It's about being sexy, retaining female privileges such as chivalry and not having moral constraints on behaviour as a result of being morally inferior to men, while simultaneously demanding equal opportunity, nay equal outcome, in the affairs of men by claiming "equality".

It's about demanding to be able to take on male behaviour such as acting macho, loud and aggressive, but invoking chivalry and sympathy for their lack of moral equality to not be held responsible for that behaviour.

If they were treated as harshly as men are treated for behaving aggressively, then the first time they acted in such a manner around a man, they would be on their way either to jail or to hospital.

Geri Halliwell did not get a job with the UN because she "acted like a man". She acted like a punk who couldn't hold down a job at McDonalds. She got that job because it was a public relations exercise by the UN to show how progressive they were and get a famous face on board. She's an imbecile who got the job due to fame and female privilege.

"Girlpower" is an excellent example of why people say feminists demand equality but also demand they retain their special privilege.

But the sad reality of these aspirations can be seen on UK streets, in a rise in alcoholism and violent crime among teenage girls. The murder of 18-year-old Sian Simpson (another teenage girl has been charged with the crime) follows many other incidents of girls attacking other girls in "respect killings" over a boyfriend or less.

It is as if a violent reputation has become as glamorous as a Chanel handbag - and the queue of weaponised young femme fatales prepare to seize the "girl power" baton is understandably long. They all want to feel the rush of empowerment they think they see in music videos and on television.

That is, they want to be fierce, sexy women, engaging the world on their own hard-edged terms.

I should know - I wrote about fierce girls in my novel Rude Girls, which was taken up by the media as part of the new ladette trend. It was written at 16, utterly without irony, but back then, Lil Kim had not yet won a grammy for rapping in her underwear, Britney was unknown and even the Spice Girls wore knickers.

Times have changed and young girls today are much more easily persuaded that the more outrageous their behaviour, the greater the returns will be. The marketing gurus sell "fierce" to young women, many of whom are insufficiently equipped with the education and awareness to know the difference between this destructive version of "girl power" and real self-empowerment.

Well, what does she expect if the ideal of the "empowered womyn" is applauded while being immune to criticism? They're not held responsible for their behavior so why not go overboard with it? Problem is the girl next to them has the same idea. Considering aggression and Buffy The Vampire Slayer style violence is generally approved of and considered acceptable for obtaining attention do they expect her to not use it to sort out who gets the monopoly on attention seeking behavior and thus the attention? Fancy an ideal that is synonymous with "power" being corrupted when left unchecked. Particularly when we are dealing with a class of people who have been told they are beyond corruption, always being innocent victims and all.

Naturally the concern about female violence here is only a result of females being the victims of it. We of course, should forget that this whole "empowering" females thing, which has led to females becoming violent, was initiated by feminists in the context of "empowering women - relative to men" and of course, they would never behave like this towards anyone with a penis.

See the link on the right; The Last Time I Hit A Woman.