"Arthur Stone" (arthur-stoned@bigot.*****) displays his INabilities:

Andre Lieven wrote:

"Arthur Stone" (arthur-dumber-than-a-stone@misandrist.cow) trolls:

Andre Lieven wrote:

Not according to... *women*...

See the single by choice mommyhood rates, moron.

When *moron* shows up I feel my work is done.

Indeed, you are doing a fine job of letting the world *know* that
you are a sexist moron.

*Moron* says more about the person who types it than the person it's
intended to describe Andre.

<Laughs> PKB, moron. YOU typed it, too...

Petard, meet Feminist scum.

Heres why you are a joke:

Subject: Why I Can't Take Feminists Seriously

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/mikeadams/2006/01/23/183352.html

Dear Daisy:
First of all, let me tell you how thrilled I am to receive hate mail
from a feminist named "Daisy." I can't think of many names - with the
possible exceptions of Coco, Mercedes, and Jasmine - that could make you
sound less like a feminist and more like a stripper in a club that
offers two-dollar table dances. Nonetheless, I will try to answer most
of your questions, sent via e-mail.

In your opening paragraph, you asked me, a) whether my wife hates me as
much as every other woman in America hates me, b) whether I am against
women voting, c) whether I am against women holding elective office, d)
whether I think rape should be legalized, e) whether I think women
should be banned from the workplace, f) whether I think all women should
be barefoot and pregnant, and, finally, g) whether I support female
genital mutilation.

The answers to those seven profoundly rational questions are as follows:
No; No; No; No; No; No; and No.

Unfortunately, your final question, which consumed most of paragraph two
of your e-mail, will take a bit longer to address. But that's okay. The
question "Why don't you take feminists seriously" is an important one.
It deserves a more complete response. So here are my primary reasons:

1. I do not consider 21st century feminism to be a political ideology or
philosophy.

American feminists generally do not become feminists because of some
well-defined political goal. For example, in your email you enumerate
several important political objectives. You want to vote. You want to be
free to hold elective office. You want rape to be illegal. You want to
be able to work. You don't want to be forced to get and stay pregnant at
all times. You want genital mutilation (of females) to be illegal.

I have an important newsflash, Daisy: You have already achieved all six
of these political objectives. But, nonetheless, you continue to rant.
And you continue to live in the past. That makes it difficult to take
you seriously.

2. Generally speaking, feminists get together with other feminists
because it is less expensive than seeing a therapist.

Feminists are usually drawn together by an inability to deal with men.
When they get together, whether in a small group or a large one,
criticism of males tends to dominate the discourse.

Let me give you an example. A few days after I made an appearance on The
O'Reilly Factor - to talk about race and class, not gender - two
feminists gathered outside my office to criticize some pro-life bumper
stickers that were posted on my door. One feminist stated that it must
be difficult to have to come to work every day on the same floor with
such a sexist professor. The other said they should keep their voices
low because I might overhear them. Since I was actually in my office at
the time (with the door shut) I did overhear them.

Despite the fact that the conversation began with one feminist trying to
sooth another, they soon worked themselves into a frenzy. The mere
repetition of words such as "patriarchal," phallocentric," and
"male-dominated" has an effect like the one described in George Orwell's
1984. If you want to see the "two minutes hate" in practice just attend
an annual "Take Back the Night" march or The Vagina Monologues.

Regardless of whether it is a gathering of two, two hundred, or two
thousand feminists, the dynamics are always the same. And those dynamics
make it hard to take feminism seriously.

3. Most feminists don't really want equality.

One good example of this phenomenon comes from a recent argument I had
with one of the stars of The Vagina Monologues. She wrote me to complain
about a column I published criticizing that infamous feminist play. She
told me she was "offended" and "hurt" by my critique. I then asked her
whether the flashing "vagina" sign in front of the school was offensive
to the Greek Orthodox or Baptist churches located nearby. She responded
by saying that she "didn't give a sh*t" what they thought. It mattered
very much that she was offended. It didn't matter at all that she had
offended others. (Take a moment to look up the word "sociopath" in the
dictionary).

Another example comes from a former secretary in my department. One day
she left work crying because I criticized campus feminists (for hanging
racist posters on campus showing Condi Rice standing in a cage holding a
bunch of bananas). The next week she was back in the office tearlessly
(and tirelessly) criticizing her husband for his inability to maintain
an erection.

Increasingly, these campus feminists strive to be a) constantly
offended, and b) constantly offensive. One unanticipated consequence of
the feminists' unequal application of the "right to be un-offended" is
that many people now deem feminists to be emotionally inferior.

That is another reason why people (myself included) don't take feminists
seriously.

4. The feminist love of postmodernism has resulted in widespread
academic and personal dishonesty.

A few years ago, I began to realize that one can seldom trust a feminist
to tell the truth. For example, I once asked a feminist to debate me on
the issue of abortion. She told me she really wasn't pro-choice. I did
an internet search and found that she had repeatedly referred to herself
as "pro-choice" on feminist list serves. She made those references to
herself both before and after our conversation. In other words, she
lied.

When I asked another feminist to debate me on abortion she said that she
didn't discuss such personal topics publicly. But then I read her
biography. After talking about losing her virginity (including details
about how she cleaned the blood off the couch afterwards) she dedicated
countless pages to the issue of abortion and how a "lack of choice"
adversely affects young women. After reading on, I realized why she
didn't tell me the truth. She revealed that she was a postmodernist who
didn't like to use the word "truth."

The next time I got into an argument with a feminist - over whether a
female student who lied about a rape to get out of a test should be
expelled - I understood the postmodern feminist position better.
Feminists just can't help but lie because there really is no such thing
as the truth.

Since so many feminists cannot tell the truth - because it doesn't even
really exist - I simply cannot take them seriously.

Those are just a few reasons, Daisy. I eagerly await your response, so I
can treat my readers to part two of the series. After all, these may be
the best tips you get all year.

Mike Adams is a criminology professor at the University of North
Carolina Wilmington and is a regular columnist for Townhall.com
---------
A dog is wiser than a woman; it does not bark at its master.
Russian Proverb
---------

Now that your sexist idiocy has been truely exposed for the brain
rotted scum that it is... PLONK.

Andre

If this is all true - then why is it that men cause twice as many
accidents as women?

I guess women are such better drivers that even with not knowing all
that stuff they still handle a car far more safely than men.

If this is all true - then why is it that men cause twice as many
accidents as women?

I guess women are such better drivers that even with not knowing all
that stuff they still handle a car far more safely than men.