Apr 4, 2016 Seriously, how can anyone take liberal/feminist news media seriously? For example, "Hillary Clinton is fundamentally honest" (except for all those times when she's proven otherwise): http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...n-honest-transparency-jill-abramson?CMP=fb_gu I mean f---, the feminist media reporting on Hillary is so ridiculous that I honestly feel sorry for them. Like this "gem" which literally states that simply being a woman in the United States counts as "good training for the presidency", then goes on to (attempt to) explain why it's a good idea to vote for Hillary JUST because she's a woman; http://www.thestranger.com/blogs/sl...ld-vote-for-hillary-just-because-shes-a-woman "In an effort to assert the pretty obvious fact that Hillary Clinton is more than the sum of her lady parts, several writers have emerged to argue against voting Hillary purely on the basis of her gender. Of these, theGuardian’s Hadely Freeman offers the most considered objections. She claims (1) electing Obama didn’t end racism, so electing Clinton won’t end sexism; (2) Thatcher was a woman and look at that mess; and (3) “The reason to vote for her isn’t because she’s a woman; it’s because she’s the best candidate for the US. I want to address all of these points, but let me start with the thrust of the general argument. Freeman et al basically contend that voting ♀ diminishes Clinton’s accomplishments and reduces her to... well... a symbol. But this argument ignores the fact that the trials of being a woman in the US actually do count as good training for the presidency. Women's perceptions and values have never been represented by the person behind the desk in the Oval Office. Telling people that you’re voting for Hillary because she’s a woman raises awareness that a consideration of gender does and should factor into our decisions, especially when those decisions involve putting someone in power.” There's feminists up the a--- on sites like these claiming such nonsense as "it's sexist to not vote for Hillary" or "people just hate her because she's a woman". Clearly a lack of thinking skills in these people. This is just on regards to Clinton. I can go on and on and on and on regarding blatant, moronic double standards in the "reporting" of feminists like Jessica Valenti or Anita Sarkeesian, as well as blatant hypocrisy on Vox on their reporting between Muslims and white people (btw, VERY ironic how defensive feminists can get over Islam). These kinds of people should not be allowed to vote. Absolutely childish.
Apr 4, 2016 Already knew you'd be the first to jump on, seeing how you defend feminists regardless of what they do. Put me back on block, like you did last time you failed to defend your stance
Apr 4, 2016 Toxic thinking like the examples in the sources spreads, and if you had any sense then you'd see why that is a bad thing.
Apr 4, 2016 If there's seriously people on this site willing to defend "you should vote for Hillary just because she's a woman" then I cannot partake in this community. I prefer to associate myself with people who have sense, and the ability to think for themselves. Not mindless SJWs like Cyreides. And no Eminem Stans aka ConspiracyGang DMX
Apr 4, 2016 Typical feminist. "We must prevent people from speaking against our group" fr mf you're literally everything that is wrong with your group.
Apr 4, 2016 It's pretty widely agreed that most of US news media is s---. So I don't understand why, rather than talking about the problem as a whole, and how all news media is laughably ridiculous, you just say that feminist media is. Yes those stories are dumb as f---, but so are most news stories, including the ones that have nothing to do with feminism.
Apr 5, 2016 I've fully come to the conclusion that Kings mom beat the living s--- out of him when he was younger. That's the only explaination to these threads.
Apr 5, 2016 i think most reasonable feminsts wouldnt vote for hilary because she's a woman god you're f---ing stupid
Apr 5, 2016 Because feminist media in general (VOX, Guardian, Jezebel, etc.) take the absolute stupidity to a whole new level. The kind of stupidity where a feminist will write an article bitching about cat-calls, then later write an article bitching about how nobody cat-calls her. The kinds of places that are quick to jump on shootings by white people stating that whites need to take responsibility, while simultaneously hosting articles defending Muslims in cases of Islamic attacks. They take double-standards, as well as general stupidity, to a whole new level. It's amusing how feminists seem genuinely confused as to why the huge majority of Western society refuses to associate themselves with the movement. And for those whining about them being mentioned, guess what happens when you let these babies just do what they want? You get protests for "safe spaces" at university. You get Swedish police launching criminal investigations into "offensive tweets". You get idiot protestors at Donald Trump rallies who, when questioned, can't even answer to what they're actually against (funniest videos I've seen in a while tho). Also have to double check on the case of a Canadian man who was arrested for DISAGREEING WITH A FEMINIST. Literally, that's why he was arrested. No prosecution, but at the loss of gross amounts of legal fees. You people are to almost as much to blame for the pussification of society then the whiney babies who are doing it.
