Are we women worth defending?

**Rebadow** · 26th-December-2006

You are probably already familiar with the story about the huge increase in rapes in Norway, with 2/3 of them committed by “immigrants with a non-western background.” (And I wonder who those non-western immigrants might be?) I didn’t even bother to comment on it originally, because LGF had it covered. I’m commenting now because of something Phibian said when he discussed this story, and it’s something that really needs further thought. After relaying the news, Phibian added:

There is hope, perhaps. From what I hear and watching the voting changes in Denmark and even Sweden, the head-in-the-sand attitude is slowly changing. They need to go faster though. A culture whose men will not come to the defense of their wives, sisters, and daughters is a culture that will not last. (Emphasis mine.)

What I wonder is whether Western women have been so abusive of their men, both by denigrating them and by marginalizing them, that men no longer feel either a need or a desire to protect them.

I’m the post-women’s lib generation. That is, I wasn’t one of the bra-burning, consciousness-raising crowd. I came of age after everyone had been assured that women are entirely equal and men are sexist pigs to have kept them in servitude for so long. I went to college at a time (true story) when a young man who had the grace to hold the door open for a young women, even one burdened with books, would find himself roundly scolded for treating a woman like a helpless being.

I along with my generation, read Susan Faludi’s Backlash : The Undeclared War Against American Women and Naomi Wolf’s The Beauty Myth : How Images of Beauty are Used Against Women, both of which assured me that, despite their lip service to liberation, modern American men had as their real goal the subjugation of women by whatever means necessary. I grew to suspect and disrespect men.

What saved me were a few things. I respected my father, a deeply honorable man. I read Arlie Hochschild’s The Second Shift, which pointed out that the more men bought into women’s lib, the less likely that were to help their working wives, and I read Christina Hoff-Sommer’s Who Stole Feminism? : How Women Have Betrayed Women, which exposed the vast divide between equity feminists (those who want equal work for equal pay, and equal treatment under the law), and the more extreme feminists who view men as inferior beings out to enslave and destroy women. Lastly, I got to know more men, some of whom became dear friends, and it was obvious that they were not the enemy. However, not all women have made this journey, and the NOW website amply demonstrates that many women continue to view men as alien beings placed on earth to destroy women.

Men are not stupid (feminist myths notwithstanding). They know that, in Western civilization, women think little of them. Under those circumstances, why in the world would men who have absorbed this message feel obligated to put themselves on the line for these women? I know that any individual man will act for his own wife, his own sister, and his own daughter, but he feels no obligation to women at large, since women at large have made it clear that he is unnecessary except for his sperm capacity.

(By the way, I am a complete equity feminist, with an abiding belief in equal pay for equal work, equal opportunities, and equal treatment under the law. I do not believe men are out to get me. I do not believe that either sex is superior or inferior to the other. I do not believe men are conspiring to keep women barefoot, pregnant, in the kitchen, and out of the boardroom. I do believe men have problems with toilet seats and apologies, but we won’t go there.)

Here is the link to the original page.

**Janus** · 26th-December-2006

Men are not stupid (feminist myths notwithstanding). They know that, in Western civilization, women think little of them. Under those circumstances, why in the world would men who have absorbed this message feel obligated to put themselves on the line for these women? I know that any individual man will act for his own wife, his own sister, and his own daughter, but he feels no obligation to women at large, since women at large have made it clear that he is unnecessary except for his sperm capacity.

I feel that way myself, sadly. If it's a member of your own family, of course you would, but some random woman? No. I've been pushed around and lied to by so many of them, disrespected and mocked simply because I'm a man, and thus must be evil. Why would I ever go to the aid of some unknown woman like that? Would it change a lifetime of hatefull thinking and abuse towards men, would it really matter? Would the potential gain outweigh the risk of offering aid? I really don't know. I somehow doubt it would.

**christianj** · 27th-December-2006

By the way, I am a complete equity feminist

Thats all we need another ****ing quote from another bloody feminist. Want to know what you can do with it or do you already know ?

**dad_savage** · 27th-December-2006

Are we women worth defending?

Do it yourself.

**Feminist_Scum** · 27th-December-2006

Yup. Agreed.

**Commander_Riker** · 28th-December-2006

Women are not worth defending, don't we pay them enough to take defense classes already?

**Janus** · 28th-December-2006

Quote from Commander_Riker

Women are not worth defending, don't we pay them enough to take defense classes already?

I think that a few are worth defending. But thanks to the feminists they are extremely rare. I'd say 1/1000 women is worth defending, or worth bothering with.

It's sad that the people in this thread (including me) say they are NOT worth defending, because that means the minority of women who are actually decent suffer for it.

One of those occasions where the actions of the many idiots ruin it for the few good ones. It's quite sad, and depressing.

**dad_savage** · 28th-December-2006

I do believe men have problems with toilet seats and apologies, but we wonÂ’t go there

**** this. This is why women are not worth defending. They're, by far, loud, obnoxious and mean enough to do the job themselves besides they have the facist kidnapping / death squad (police) on their side and if they keep in up in a few years we'll all either be dead or in jail anyway so harm or help it won't matter what men's intentions towards women are. I hope they enjoy each others company in the four or five years it takes for them to completey destroy the civilization they ****ing stole from us.

**Rebadow** · 28th-December-2006

Quote from Billy

I think this clearly shows that chivallry is dead.

Like hell it is. The day chivalry really dies, womyn will have to change their ways very quickly. But I'm not seeing that now, as a matter of fact it seems to get worse every day.

**Rebadow** · 28th-December-2006

Billy, had that man hit that woman back, 10 guys would step in and kick his arse. The other way around (woman hitting him), he gets laughed at, you go grrl, etc. But the moment he would retaliate, those who just moments ago taunted him for "being his woman's bitch", would kick his arse.

So much for dead chivalry.

**Rebadow** · 28th-December-2006

Just yesterday I was reading this MMA forum and someone posted a fight between a male fighter and a female fighter. He beat her.

Numerous posters chimed in with their "That's not right", "That's gross", etc.

WHY? Why is that gross? Who forced her to step into the cage? What is her opponent supposed to do, just let her beat him, because she has a vagina? And these are professional fighters, btw.

Would they say it's gross if I went to the cage and fight a professional fighter? Like hell they would. Then it'd be a whole different song: "Well, you got what you deserved, who forced you to go in there, etc".

Not to mention, he didn't beat the shit out of her at all. He got her on the ground and landed a few punches and that was it, she tapped out, the end. No blood, no need to call a doctor, etc.

The point is, there is something about a woman getting hit that simply is considered unacceptable, no matter what the circumstances are. People will not tolerate it, period.

**Janus** · 28th-December-2006

Quote from little glutton

Just yesterday I was reading this MMA forum and someone posted a fight between a male fighter and a female fighter. He beat her.

Numerous posters chimed in with their "That's not right", "That's gross", etc.

WHY? Why is that gross? Who forced her to step into the cage? What is her opponent supposed to do, just let her beat him, because she has a vagina? And these are professional fighters, btw.

Would they say it's gross if I went to the cage and fight a professional fighter? Like hell they would. Then it'd be a whole different song: "Well, you got what you deserved, who forced you to go in there, etc".

Not to mention, he didn't beat the shit out of her at all. He got her on the ground and landed a few punches and that was it, she tapped out, the end. No blood, no need to call a doctor, etc.

The point is, there is something about a woman getting hit that simply is considered unacceptable, no matter what the circumstances are. People will not tolerate it, period.

Very true. Even if a woman accepts the risk (like with the cage fight) or even assaults a man, who then hit's her back it's met with the same reaction "that's not right". Nevermind she wanted to fight in a proffessional , full contact bout, nevermind she struck him numerous times, very hard, nevermind she entered into it willingly in both cases. If you hit back you are a monster. While the female who innitiated the violence, or accepted the risk is the "victim". Pathetic.

**Rebadow** · 28th-December-2006

Even if a woman accepts the risk (like with the cage fight) or even assaults a man, who then hit's her back it's met with the same reaction "that's not right".

Yea, it's some kind of reflex or something, a mindless reaction. People just don't think about it, they just react in that way. Why is simply beyond me.

That's why it pisses me off to no end when feminists babble about us living in "a culture that accepts (or even promotes) violence against women". Complete horse shit! People are not only not accepting it, they are allergic to it!

**Timocrat** · 28th-December-2006

I will fight for a woman that I know has proven honor, not maybe or could have honor. That means almost none pass the test. I must be around to fight for others who I know are honorable.

When these women are under threat they will call on your chivalry as unequals to defend the weak and act as the defenceless bunny. When they are taking a man's position to meet a fake quota they become a vulture and take advantage of their unnatural advantage. When on TV or in postions when everyone is watching (and men cannot be direct and honest, for they will lose because they cannot be polite in speaking the truth) these women become talking lions (braver than the bravest).

What we are dealing with is natures template the original single cell that must survive at any cost and breed by any means necessary (sperm bank poking holes in condoms etc.). Most women today are Medusas playing many indirect cowardly roles and following their solipsist religion.

We cannot defeat this by trying to out perform this emotional creature, we must use logic to bring down the old is new again goddess( just as the classics warned & taught us to do).

**Male-Rights-Network** · 28th-December-2006

I think this clearly shows that chivallry is dead.

This "chilvallry is dead" argument is very tiresome. Is it not perfectly obvious to women that they do not act like upstanding, decent people, they will not gain the respect of decent men, which he will show by chivallry. Respect is not a one-way street, ladies.

To answer the question, I don't believe women are worth defending because they do not need to be defended. Government systems, education and the media all concentrate on making the woman so unaccountable and catered for that she does no need to be defended. They are children of the State if you will. That aside, similar to the chivallry argument, any respectable woman deserved to be "defended". Feminsm has made this type of woman almost non-existant however.