How Feminism, aka worthless feminazi scum is funded

[John Newman]

On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 05:31:26PM -0300, Punk wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 10:38:22 -0500
> John Newman <jnn at synfin.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> > > 	...Feminism is conceptual nonsense. If there are legal restrictions placed on women those have to be abolished based on the principle of equality before the law, but that's a *liberal* tenet not a 'feminist' one. In other words 'feminism' is not needed. And no wonder in practice feminism is just another tool of oppression. 
> 
> 
> > 
> > I have a girlfriend that would disagree with you, at least from a
> > pragmatic point of view. On the way to "true liberty" (i.e anarchy), 
> > isn't it appropriate to fight for such things as suffrage, equal pay for
> > women, abortion rights, etc ? 
> 
> 
> 	abortion rights, yes, unless by that you mean government run 'medicine' in which case the answer is no.
> 
> 	female suffrage? No. Of course, there must not be any 'male' suffrage either. 
> 
> 	http://www.readliberty.org/liberty/1/22
> 
> 	"Women are human beings, and consequently have all the natural rights that any human beings can have. They have just as good a right to make laws as men have, and no better; AND THAT IS JUST NO RIGHT AT ALL. " 
> 
> 	equal pay? In a free market? Different people get paid differently. Wanting to create 'economic equaity' by law is the non-plus-ultra of commie statism. It has exactly nothing to do with anarchy. 

Equal pay for equal work seems fair. For instance, America is built on
slavery. Eventually, within the confines of the statist system (and a
pretty fucking ugly war), this was (sort of) ended. Actually, it
was more or less replaced with Jim Crow, and the "war on drugs",
and mass incarceration, and, umm.. well, yeah. So that's not a great
example, but my point is that as much as America is built on slavery,
it's built on misogyny, although I obviously had trouble squaring
the circle there at the end..

Anyway, she doesn't read this list :P

> >
> > 
> > I suppose she would say you have to get your hands dirty in the
> > existing system sometimes to accomplish anything, which admittedly
> > is a thin fucking tightrope to balance.
> 
> 
> 	The idea that you can get rid of tyranny by voting is just too ridiculous. Actually you can have your 'female suffrage' if you want and see how women vote for tyranny exactly like they did. 

In the modern oligarchic surveillance-state technocracy in which
we live, I don't see any way to get rid of tyranny altogether,
practical, or otherwise. 

In any case, it's enough to just make one want to live life as best as
one can and let the fucking apocalypse sort itself out. Also: don't
have kids. 

Resistance may or may not be futile, but it fucking feels that way.

>
> 	This argument isn't related to 'feminism' per se anyawy. It's the typical position argued by 'practical' people of different backgrounds - commie, libertarian etc. Except social democrats I guess since gradualist tyranny by voting is a basic strategy used by them. 
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > <snip>
> 

-- 
GPG fingerprint: 17FD 615A D20D AFE8 B3E4  C9D2 E324 20BE D47A 78C7
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20190107/4f7dd40d/attachment.sig>