The Sweet Pink Rules of Feminism
Wikimannia
Originally at Feministing
January 22, 2006
Sweet Pink Rules of Feminism:
- Feminism requires you to talk about "equality" for both sexes but some sexes are more equal than others.
- God could be a womyn, but the devil is most certainly a man.
- We're equal to men, and this makes us morally superior to them.
- We are equally capable of doing anything a man can do and men can't do anything right.
- We must scorn behavior which is associated with stereotypical masculinity while whooping with praise when the same behavior is exhibited by womyn.
- We must demand that womyn be allowed into military combat because we're equally capable of smashing-in the faces of vicious terrorists. But we also laugh at the idea that a husband could be the victim of a wife's physical abuse because everyone knows that women are never violent.
- We seek to stop "violence against womyn" but girl-on-girl violence and lesbians who batter their partners don't bother us quite as much.
- We attack the gender-stereotypes that portray womyn negatively as we gleefully embrace the ones that portray womyn positively. It's customary to invert this rule for "you-know-who".
- Helping womyn succeed is not nearly as satisfying as seeing men fail.
- "Power" in the hands of men is always destructive, selfish, tyrannical and harmful. This same "power" in the hands of womyn is always democratic, nurturing, honest, good for the environment and good for humanity.
- Men of quality support womyn's equality but womyn never have to do anything to prove that they are "of quality".
- Finally, us feminists are absolutely not anti-male and that's why we rarely have any positive things to say about those penis-having bastards.[1]
- Women are just as good at everything as men are, except for things at which women are better.
- We feminists are equal to men, and that gives us the elevated authority to pass judgment upon them.
- If you're not female then your opinion doesn't count, you sexist bastard.
- Any criticism of feminism is a form of hate speech. A feminist's own speech is allowed to be as hateful as she wants it to be.
- If somebody has the temerity to criticize the behavior of feminists, you should dismissively sneer that they're attacking "strawfeminists" - absurdist caricatures who don't exist. Feel free to resume your usual attacks on strawpatriarchs every day of the week.
- The only feminist you are officially allowed to criticize is Valerie Solanas. That's because a feminist has to literally advocate the extermination of half the planet before the rest of us start to wonder if she's got a screw loose.
- You have 10,000 years of grudges to seek vengeance for in your single lifetime.
- Collective guilt and collective punishment are anathema to a society which fulfills the feminist goal of treating people as individuals, which is why us feminists must constantly intimate the collective guilt of men and suggest that they need collective punishment.
- You must demand that a father shoulder half of any effort to raise "his" children as you simultaneously demand that a mother be granted automatic sole custody of "her" children after divorce.
- Whether or not you feel "offended" is the central principle to how the world should be re-organized.
- A feminist must say "patriarchy" at least ninety-seven times per hour. The ten millionth time you say "Patriarchy" you will trigger a shower of confetti and receive a fabulous prize.
- As a feminist, you are opposed to the spread of stereotypes. But don't let that stop you from constantly stereotyping men as being an over-privileged class of dimwitted exploiters who always get everything they want.[2]
- Ovaries good, testicles bad.
- We believe every woman should have unrestricted access to any kind of abortion, no questions asked. We also believe that abortion should be tightly restricted in China to prevent millions of potential girls from being robbed of their lives.
- If the Chinese were to abort only boys, that'd be so cool.
- We feminists must demand aristocratic levels of deference while never behaving with aristocratic levels of gentility.
- We must grouse continuously about traditionalist expectations of women while we conveniently forget to pay half the check on our dinner-dates.
- Men avoid us because we're too gosh-darned smart.
- If a man works 60 hours a week to support a wife who cooks and cleans, the man is a lazy shit who exploits his wife.
- If a woman works 60 hours a week to support a husband who cooks and cleans, the man is a lazy shit who exploits his wife.
- If the majority of women do not call themselves feminists, the root problem lies with the majority of women and not with feminism.
- We demand respect for all women and their diversity. That is why we dismiss, infantilize, mock or denigrate stay-at-home moms, traditionalist women, pro-life women, Republican women, Catholic women, Protestant women, Mormon women, Orthodox Jewish women, Muslim women who don't object to hijab standards, Hindu women who don't object to dowries, women who care about their weight, women who wear cosmetics, female researchers who study innate behavioral sex-differences, women who look forward to marriage, women who warn about giving birth after the age of 40, sorority sisters, cheerleaders, girls who like playing with dolls and any other woman who doesn't slavishly dance to our tune. Except for them, we demand respect for ALL women and their diversity!
- Falsely accusing a man of rape is a great way of raising his consciousness.
- If a teacher were to beat black boys more than white boys, we'd excoriate him for hateful discrimination. If the same teacher beat only boys, that'd be fine.[3]
References
- ↑ The Sweet Pink Rules of Feminism I[ext], January 22, 2006
- ↑ The Sweet Pink Rules of Feminism II[ext], March 27, 2006
- ↑ The Sweet Pink Rules of Feminism III[ext], May 10, 2006
See also
External links
- 2. Rank on 31.1.2013 Google-Search for "The Sweet Pink Rules of Feminism" for this article.
6 comments:
With slight changes,these could be the same rules liberals have thought up for blacks against whites.Substitute black for women and whites for men.Here are some examples:
1.Racism requires you to talk about "equality" for blacks and whites,but some races (blacks)are more equal than others (whites).
2.God could be a blackie,but the devil is white.
3.Blacks are equal to whites,that makes blacks morally superior to them (laugh track inserted here).
4.Blacks are equally capable of doing anything a white man can do and a whitey can't do anything right.
5.We must scorn behavior which is associated with whites(hard working,lawabiding,intelligent),while whooping with praise the behavior associated with blacks (loud,obnoxious,criminal,lazy).
6.We seek to stop the violence against blacks,but white on white and black on white violence doesn't bother us as much.
7.Helping blacks succeed is not nearly as satisfying as seeing whites fail.
8."Power" in the hands of whites is always destructive,selfish and tyrannical.This same power in the hands of blacks is always democratic,nurturing,honest and good for humanity (not whites,of course,but who cares about them?)
9.Whites of quality have to support black equality,but blacks never have to prove they are "of quality".
10.Blacks are equal to whites,that gives them the authority to pass judgement on whites.
11.If you're not black,then you're opinion doesn't count--you racist bastard.
These could be the blueprinted guidelines for the media,Democrats and blacks against the white population,couldn't it?And they probably are.Be observant and make sure you never vote for a Democrat,unless the Republican is black.Then vote for a third party candidate.
It's going to get difficult for whites in the years ahead unless we make our own rules--and soon.Maybe I'll try to think of a few.
--GR Anonymous-I'm a white man
11.If you're not black,then you're opinion doesn't count--you racist bastard.
Your,not you're(second one) of course.Rushing as usual.
--GRA
jerry pdx
Tis the season for....hate crime hoaxes! Black Santa is slashed by vandals in the Portland suburb of Bethany, the black home owners think they were targeted because white Santas in the neighborhood were not slashed. No mention of how many other houses even had Santas and generally in a typical neighborhood you only see a few anyways so this may just a case of random vandalism. Our local "news"paper covered this story with the assumption it's legit but there are no witnesses and I'd be willing to bet that if it's not random vandalism then it's the homeowners themselves or some local vandal "of color" trying to stage a hate hoax. The neighbors, community and comments in the Oregonian are all jumping on the virtue signaling bandwagon. I left a couple of comments dissenting from popular opinion and will no doubt be excoriated, assuming the censors don't delete them. https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2018/12/after-black-santa-decoration-destroyed-in-bethany-neighbors-pledge-to-put-up-their-own.html
I'm gonna . . . I'm gonna barf . . .
jerry pdx
This is in addition to my previous comment about the so called hate crime in Bethany Oregon. There is a photo of the black Santa that was supposedly slashed. If you look at it carefully you can see the "slash" is partly along the seam of the arm and there are some fold marks along where it extends along the body of the Santa, then below there is a wire that holds the Santa in place pulling on the above seam. The Santa is clearly a cheap one made out of thin material. there is only one "slash" and it looks like it could be a tear where the material could have given out after being overfilled with air. There is also a tree branch in the picture, did the Santa get blown into a tree branch and get ripped by a branch? I have to wonder if the cops who "investigated" were caught up in the need to see this as a "hate crime" and just went along with the charade. One would also think that if this were an act of anger and "hate" there would be multiple slashed designed to send a message.
There are a lot of assumptions being made.If this was done in the dark,it's possible the vandal couldn't see it was a black Santa.Even if it was racially motivated,the reaction is the usual one--media gets called,media assumes it's a racist story,media reports OTHER whites will put up black Santas in solidarity with blacks(just to show you other whites how to think."Support Your Local Blackie" lol).
But the bottom line is,everyone knows,there's no such thing as a "black Santa".Just as there's no such thing as a white Harlem Globetrotter.
--GR Anonymous
Post a Comment