Feminists Contradict Themselves, Tell me something else new.... | |
Oh, man, this made me laugh so hard, but then I remembered they're serious. And politically correct. But they're so damn stupid! And self-contradictory! I left a comment. I'm actually surprised it got posted, but I don't think they read it. It only took a few minutes to show. http://feministing.com/archives/007530.html Quote:
August 09, 2007
Common ground between feminists and men's rights groups?
No, seriously! Last week's New Yorker featured an awesomely snarky profile of men's rights activist Roy Den Hollander, who is going about the noble work of trying to get Ladies Nights banned. Den Hollander, who is into "black and Latin chicks, and Asian chicks," drinks Absolut vodka gimlets, keeps his age a secret, and likes the music quiet (otherwise he has trouble hearing the woman he's hitting on). In other words, he sounds like a total tool. This cracked me up:
The club was filling up as Den Hollander held forth on Title IX (“Sports isn’t a big thing to girls, but it’s a big thing to guys”), pickup tactics (“You sort of cut the person you’re after from the herd”), his personal finances (“Have you heard of the dot-com bubble?”), and his belief that “the Feminazis have infiltrated institutions, and there’s been a transfer of rights from guys to girls.” Too bad, it was suggested, that his lawsuit is set to be heard by Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum, herself a known female.
But, as the New Yorker piece points out at the end, many feminists (myself included), for various reasons, think bars should charge men and women the same price for cover and drinks. A NOW lawyer remarked about Den Hollander's case,
“It probably wouldn’t be very fun to go out to dinner with him,” she said, “but, insofar as you’ve told me about his theory, I agree with it.”
Yeah, I wouldn't want to sip a vodka gimlet with Den Hollander, either.
Our previous posts on Ladies Nights are here and here.
Posted by Ann at 03:32 PM | in Anti-Feminism , Humor , Law
Share this post:
digg del.icio.us reddit newsvine yahoo stumble
Spotlight this post to the media
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
xhttp://feministing.com/movabletype/...784.1464412851
Comments
On one hand, it's a sexist idea from the start. The point is purely to get more women into the bar and get drunker, so that the more paying men come, and everybody supposedly wins- especially the men that coerce women into drinking themselves into oblivion, and then don't even have to worry about coercing them into sex.
On the other hand, how dare those men demand that women buy their own drinks, when there is a long tradition of women getting free drinks on Ladies Night?
No... it's a gross ploy for men to get more women drunk enough to have sex with them. Anybody who says otherwise is either (a) deep in denail, or (cool.gif has never set foot in a bar.
I always thought "Ladies Night" was a gross idea.
Posted by: alexmlwallace [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 9, 2007 04:15 PM
Here's a quote from Hollander in the article:
"Every guy will have ten or fifteen more dollars in his pocket, which the girls will then manipulate into getting more drinks out of him. If they drink more, they’ll have more fun, and so will us guys. And then when she wakes up in the morning she’ll be able to do what she always does: blame the man.
I'm sorry, I guess I must be missing something, but isn't that exactly what he's doing? Why do men still continue to blame women when they spend money on them? This guy is such a creep and he seriously needs to take responsibility for his own actions instead of blaming women . Men will spend money on women who show no interest in them. Then when they are rejected, they'll claim it's because the woman wanted more money.
Uh... no. Maybe she just doesn't like scumbags?
And I agree... I think the prices for entrance to a club and drinks should be the same for everyone. I don't see any "feminazis" fighting for cheaper priced drinks for women.
Posted by: tofutti [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 9, 2007 04:17 PM
Well, of course not-the feminazis are next door in the lesbian bar, silly.
How would this whole scenario work out in the lesbian bar next door? Do they have a 'femme' night, where the girls in lipstick and heels get in for free, and the butches try and get them drunk so they can get laid? What if you're wearing a dress, but no lipstick? Or vice versa? What do you get charged then? (and yes, I'm joking when I use these sterotypes.)
Posted by: JPlum [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 9, 2007 04:29 PM
I wrote about this asshat on my blog:
xhttp://journals.aol.com/redwall33/T...br-update/2413
However sexist of an idea "Ladies Nite" might be, I despise this guy entirely and am disinclined to support anything he does. The parts of this article that piss me off the most?
"He reached into his pocket and produced a typed forty-one-point list headed “Discrimination against men in America.” (Sample gripes: child-custody laws, circumcision, “5% of females have borderline personality disorder.”
and
"“What I think will happen,” he said, “is that clubs will reduce the price for guys and increase it for girls. Every guy will have ten or fifteen more dollars in his pocket, which the girls will then manipulate into getting more drinks out of him. If they drink more, they’ll have more fun, and so will us guys. And then when she wakes up in the morning she’ll be able to do what she always does: blame the man.”"
Ass. hat.
Posted by: UneFemmePlusCourageuse [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 9, 2007 04:43 PM
I don't see any "feminazis" fighting for cheaper priced drinks for women.
Obviously, Hollander has access to secret feminist writings that the rest of us do not, including that long lost Mary Wollstonecraft missive, "A Vindication on the Rights of Women to drink Free Booze" and Simone de Beauvoir's "The Second Sex wants Your Vodka Gimlets -- FOR FREE!"
Posted by: elyzabethe [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 9, 2007 04:46 PM
Not just any NOW lawyer...she's quoting one of the people who brought the 70's lawsuit that determined men-only bars were illegal, a decision that Den Hollander is citing as a precedent in his case. Awesome.
Posted by: tps12 [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 9, 2007 05:02 PM
Yeah, I've always felt like Ladies' Night was gross. Whenever clubs have special rates for women or lower age limits, it just makes me aware that they're using women's presence to make money off of the men that want to sleep with them.
Everything this guy says is a strawfeminist argument. Feminists are for equality, not all good things for women and all bad things for men. If more men's rights activists would stop being sexist assholes (not that all are, but the ones I hear of), I would totally team up with them on child custody laws and Ladies' Night.
Posted by: judgesnineteen [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 9, 2007 06:42 PM
Somehow making men-only bars illegal sounds more that vaguely homophobic to me...
Oh! And eh, JPlum! "Ladies' Night" in a gay bar would sound to me like a cutesy way to say 'drag night'. Because we seriously need more of them. wink.gif
But maybe "Ladies' Night" in a lesbian (and bi) bar... might also be to kick out the perverted straight boys (but not allies) who always come to leer.
Or I dunno. I'm hopped on caffeine right now...
Posted by: Faerylore [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 9, 2007 06:58 PM
Your comment cracked me up, elyzabethe.
Posted by: ShifterCat [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 10, 2007 12:17 AM
I wouldn't go out to dinner with that guy, just on general principles. I'd be wondering what he'd be trying to put in my drink...
Posted by: Interrobang [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 10, 2007 12:27 AM
I've recently found myself under fire as a man-hater... which is baffling, what with my admiring so many men, living with one that I greatly respect, and reading literature written by men, but whatever... Apparently I'm a man hater for calling Bill O Reilly intellectually impotent.
It still got me thinking, though. I've always agreed with a lot of men's rights issues. Their overall attitude, though, which is really just a reaction to the wimminz getting uppity, has been a huge turnoff. If they weren't so much about getting back at Feminists, they'd probably find we were pretty sympathetic to some of their goals.
I'm so glad my boyfriend is a feminist...
Posted by: Cola [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 10, 2007 01:54 AM
judgesnineteen, child custody laws do not favor women. This is a huge myth. Since the 1970s they have been rewritten in "gender neutral" terms. I think most of us know what happens when something is gender neutral. Men generally don't seek custody of their children but when they do, they have a greater than even chance of "winning."
Posted by: Kali Ma [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 10, 2007 10:54 AM
Call me anti-feminist but I agree with Mr. Hollander. The whole reason for Ladies Night is sexist. The club owners know that most men want to be where there are a plenty of attractive women, so how do you get the paying man to come to a club, tell women they can get in for free.
With that said the reason feminists aren't challenging this is because it is in their favor they know it is sexist and unfair but who cares we get in for free. No equal rights group challenges anything that is in their favor you don't hear the NAACP challenging affirmitive action. There are deep social reasons for this unequalness. One reason is that men generally get paid more than women so they will have the money to spend and corporations generally owned by upper-middle class white men would only tend to hire other upper middle class white men so there is affirmitive action to make sure everyone gets a chance. I'm not saying it's right but that's just the way it is.
Posted by: HardCandy [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 10, 2007 02:16 PM
How is what you just said anti-feminist, HardCandy? Feminists don't support "Ladies Night" policies because we know it's a ploy to get us drunk so men can use us. Ladies Night is something club owners do for their MALE patrons. Whatever. NOW and the Feminist Majority aren't going to take on Ladies Night as an issue because it's number 5,000 in a long list of more important grievances.
I generally don't go to bars/clubs with Ladies Night anyway because they tend to be trashy and full of snotty women & fratty bros. :shrug:
Posted by: SarahMC [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 10, 2007 02:22 PM
On one hand, it's a sexist idea from the start. The point is purely to get more women into the bar and get drunker, so that the more paying men come, and everybody supposedly wins- especially the men that coerce women into drinking themselves into oblivion, and then don't even have to worry about coercing them into sex.
LOL women are getting coerced into drinking, and then coerced into sex? What happened to being a strong, independent woman?
Posted by: KellyMac [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 11, 2007 01:32 AM
QUOTE
On one hand, it's a sexist idea from the start. The point is purely to get more women into the bar and get drunker, so that the more paying men come, and everybody supposedly wins- especially the men that coerce women into drinking themselves into oblivion, and then don't even have to worry about coercing them into sex.
LOL women are getting coerced into drinking, and then coerced into sex? What happened to being a strong, independent woman? I don't know about you, but if I don't want a drink, I have a little trick I like to use. I say "no, thank you."
Posted by: KellyMac [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 11, 2007 01:35 AM
Yes, technically, women and men should pay equal.
If men and women are charged the same for drinks, now guys are going to have to pay way more to get chicks drunk. You can't change our culture overnight. Men still insist on impressing women with money.
|   |
11th-August-2007
