Arbourist The Happy Abortionist’s Impeccable Logic.

images

Arbourist the Happy Abortionist happily reminds us of what her version — the feminist version — of equality entails. And, unsurprisingly, as it happens, it entails less rights for men, too.

Arbourist responds to my statement on my previous post — where I said it would have been both amusing and morally justifiable had one of the praying argentine men decided to introduce a single woman-attacker to his fist — with:

“Like using violence against women, uppity or otherwise, is anything new under the sun. Glad you condone it, as it speaks highly on what you think of women.”

I take it that Arbourist would have us believe that she wouldn’t consider punching a man who whips out his dick on her face then spits on her while spray-painting her crotch because to do so would be “using violence against [men], uppity or otherwise”.

See, in Arbourist’s feminist utopia, women aren’t just equal to men, they are superior to them; Arbourist and her ilk love to shout equality between the sexes but what they really mean is supremacy for women.

If it was the other way around, and we had the Argentine men doing to the women what had been done to them, we’d be seeing a lot of men in jail right now, charged, no doubt by people like Arbourist, with sexual assault. In other words, to Arbourist the Happy abortionist, violence should only be done to men and not to women, because equality!

In more other words: Feminist women, go ahead, spit on the men, spray paint their crotches, whip out those saggy titties on their praying faces, burn stuff up, vandalize a church — that’s all well and fine. While.. Argentine Men, go ahead, physically protect yourself from those women-lunatics — Oh no! No!! That’s violence against women! What an outrage!!

Arbourist, again, amuses:

“And here I was under the impression that feminism was about freeing women from male oppression and moving toward a more just society. “

Right. And there you were under the impression that “freeing women from male oppression” means giving them the right to do violence on men.

Arbourist further amuses by reminding us that abortion is O.K. because fetuses aren’t human:

“Let me know when fetuses start acting like full members of society, fetal voting rights, fetal driving age etc.”

Someome please remind Arbourist The Happy Abortionist (I’ve tried at the combox of another post, it didn’t work) that infants, toddlers, or even pets, who have the right NOT to be killed, likewise aren’t, in her words, “full members of society”, who can vote and drive, too.

Advertisements

Posted on December 13, 2013, in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. 3 Comments.

  1. I take it that Arbourist would have us believe that she wouldn’t consider punching a man who whips out his dick on her face then spits on her while spray-painting her crotch because to do so would be “using violence against [men], uppity or otherwise”.

    Wow, my very own post. I appreciate the vitriol and furious whinging going on all for me benefit. Thank you.

    You seem not to realize that using violence is almost exclusively in the realm of men. It’s all fine and well to faff on about some specific case of women behaving badly, but it is certainly not the standard for society.

    See, in Arbourist’s feminist utopia, women aren’t just equal to men, they are superior to them; Arbourist and her ilk love to shout equality between the sexes but what they really mean is supremacy for women.

    Wow, you had better call in the MRA’s and MGTOW’s to fight this feminist revolution. Feeling all oppressed while being the dominant class in society is hard work, mostcertainly.

    In other words, to Arbourist the Happy abortionist, violence should only be done to men and not to women, because equality!

    Well, violence would certainly be decreased if men would stop killing each other no? But we certainly can’t have that, much better to blame women for the problems of men. You certainly have that talent down cold.

    whip out those saggy titties on their praying faces, burn stuff up, vandalize a church — that’s all well and fine.

    I don’t recall supporting the women’s actions on the video. But if you’d like to erroneously attribute things to me that I didn’t say, do be my guest.

    means giving them the right to do violence on men.

    Actually, *you* said that. Thanks for trying though.

    Arbourist further amuses by reminding us that abortion is O.K. because fetuses aren’t human:

    Sorry to interrupt your fetus-worship but again, mischaracterizing what I say doesn’t make your argument any stronger.

    Fetuses are not sentient during much of their development, giving them more rights than women is quite asinine.

  1. Pingback: Responding to Arbourist the Happy Abortionist Part Deux | The Apologist

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: