nonethefewer: (Default)

Today's awesome quote:

This guy reminds me of a certain type I've run into, the sort who think that they are "independent thinkers" and "dispassionately logical", holding themselves up as paragons of logic and reason. What this really means is, if you actually CARE about something, they count that as a point against you, because you're being "emotional", and thus couldn't possibly be right about anything.

He's got all the signs, like the Latin motto for his LJ, his title of "The Honorable Hammer of Courteous Debate", and of course, his arguments based solely on "balance" and "emotional reporting". This type always, I've noticed, blames victims. Always. They seem to have an instinct for siding with the powerful whenever there's a conflict, and always justifying this by noting that the people in power don't get all emotional about things.

- flewellyn

Originally posted at Xtinian Thoughts.  Comment here or there.

nonethefewer: (Default)

* Where's My Extra Piece of the Pie? Wherein which Anna at Feminists Don't Bake Bread defines privilege in a clear, easy-to-understand method.  Specifically, she discusses the difference between privilege and rewards, since people tend to confuse the two.  She does not, however, have pie.

* Twisty at I Blame The Patriarchy has a new FAQ about MRAs.  (I still want to know why bitter men can generalise about all Feminists, but god help me if I talk about statistical things regarding men.  I doubt I'll ever get a good answer to that.)

* Hugo discusses the pressure between advertising's take on feminism and the patriarchy.

* Lauredhel posts about attacks, emotions, and logic.  I say now that, naturally, logic isn't the sole province of men, just as emotion isn't for women.  By which I mean to say, duh.

Originally posted at Xtinian Thoughts.  Comment here or there.

Page generated Aug. 2nd, 2025 03:38 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios