Quote of the day—Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Liberal feminists pick and choose which types of violence against women are worthy of this studiously nonpartisan approach. For example, female genital mutilation, forced marriage and honor violence seem not to be considered egregious enough to be taken up by the broader women’s movement. Instead, these barbaric violations of human rights don’t make it onto progressives’ radar. Rather, they’re excused or ignored by feminists because the perpetrators inflicting the violence tend to have brown skin.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali
May 24, 2018
The anti-woman violence feminists are afraid to confront
[I don’t think it is fear.

Progressive feminists also are very anti-gun. A woman who owns and knows how to shoot a gun has become empowered to such a level that in a physical confrontation she is virtually equal to thugs twice her size.

Here we have two very clear examples of where progressive feminists have deliberately made choices to increase the number and severity of the female victims. There can only be one conclusion. For whatever sick reason or messed up emotional decision making process they want more victims.

I think it is some sort of mental illness in which victimhood equates, in their sick minds, to status and/or power.

Give them the gateway drug to freedom, healthy minds, and true equality. Teach them to shoot.—Joe]


11 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Ayaan Hirsi Ali

  1. Their math is as simple as it is disgusting. More female victims means more martyrs to use against the”patriarchy.” The idea being that all women are at risk from anyone with a penis, and the progressive feminists are the only ones who can save the women. As for the brown, muslim, black, or other minority women; well the feminists don’t really care.

  2. “Instead, these barbaric violations of human rights don’t make it onto progressives’ radar.”

    Um, no. This is easily disproven bullshit with a 30 second Google search (or make your life easy and subscribe to human rights organizations directly and they’ll tell you about it all day). All three of her examples get lots of attention by both the press and human rights organizations world wide. I don’t know what planet she’s on, but it’s not this one.

    • What planet do you live on? Ayan Hirsi Ali has been vilified by the broader leftist feminist movement precisely for her advocacy on the three topics she mentions, each of which she has either suffered directly or been targeted for. The sorts of ineffectual human rights organisations you mention rarely accomplish as much in these areas as Ms Hirsi Ali has.

      • I live on a planet where Google provides me with lots of data with which to make fact-based arguments. One of those facts is that her assertion about FGM being something liberals don’t care about is bullshit. I don’t even have to leave the first page of Google results to find dozens of articles from liberals in general and feminists in particular not only protesting FGM, but wanting to eliminate *all* forms of genital mutilation, including male circumcision.

        But maybe I’m not reading the “right” people. Feel free to direct me towards some other version of Google that will produce the desired result.

        • Stoolool search result most emphatically DO NOT equate to actions or events or policy in the real world.

          If you are unaware of that….

        • Hand wringing and posturing do not always translate into actual results. There has been a federal law since 1996 outlawing the genital mutilation of females under the age of 18. It is almost never enforced. Only about half the States have laws forbidding FGM. These too are almost never enforced.

          Then, of course, there are those whose agendas require them to equate male circumcision with FGM. This is a dishonest comparison. The effects, severity, and motivations for the two practices are entirely different. I generally assume those making that comparison to have ulterior motives.

          • The quote says nothing about actual results. It says “Rather, they’re excused or ignored by feminists” and that these issues aren’t even “on their radar.” These assertions are clearly not true.

            Wrt the assertion from Rolf that search results don’t qualify as “real,” I’d suggest you join the 21st century. We don’t create our intellectual artifacts on papryrus anymore.

  3. I believe the left has unwittingly been hijacked to attack Western European societies. Think about how we shut down manufacturing industries in the US in the name of the environmental good, only to then buy products produced in countries where there is much less environmental regulation. The net effect on the environment is actually bad (we all breath the same air). The effect on our nation’s manufacturing has been disastrous. Look at the leftist assault on energy production. Nuclear, coal, and hydro are all under attack. Yet they don’t seem to care that China has been opening hundreds of new coal fired power plants that have fewer emissions controls than those plants we are closing in the US. Feminists only direct their wrath at white males. Environmentalists only direct their wrath at Western European industry.

    The one exception I can think of is Green Peace which does take offense at world wide environmental issues.

    • Bingo!

      Yes, they want more victims. Yes, they love and nurture their own victim status, being “collectors of grievances”, but for what purpose? The purpose is to undermine Western, Judeo-Christian Civilization in favor of global authoritarianism, i.e. the Roman model.

      Men are of course targeted because, traditionally, they’ve been the ones to take more risks, and accomplish more, in the protection of life and liberty, truth, justice and the American Way, and the authoritarians hate both life and liberty, and they despise America. For that same reason, the nuclear family has been under attack also, and they’ve corrupted the education system, all with disastrous results for us and a huge gain for the authoritarians.

      Further, I believe that Rome eventually adopted Christianity (after trying to wipe it out with violence) for the very same reason and with much the same tactics, as the American Democratic Party (the Confederacy) adopted the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s; to destroy it while calling it its own. In both cases the authoritarians merely shifted tactics, from open violence to subterfuge and obfuscation, thus becoming more insidious and more evil.

      The Republican Party, it should be pointed out, is just as bad, being complicit while pretending otherwise, preaching just enough of what we want to hear while never coming out and speaking plain truth with zeal, always carefully skirting issues and mincing words. They’re much like the Romans and the Confederates in that sense. AND many of them belong to, and are thus answerable to, the same globalist organizations.

    • “I believe the left has unwittingly been hijacked to attack Western European societies.”

      No, it’s fundamental. The Left is Socialist/Communist. Western Civilization is the antithesis of the Left. They know that we are mortal enemies. Well, they understand this, unfortunately too many of their opponents are clueless. This cluelessness is deliberate, due to the Left controlling our schools. The clueless idiots don’t realize this is a death-match. We have reached a point that there will be no do-overs after the final bell. The idiots think this is the equivalent of an afternoon pickup game. The surprise will be terminal for them, sadly.

    • Read The Evolutionary Psychology Behind Politics. It explains how this came about.

      Short form: rabbits breed very fast. They assume unlimited resources (infinite grass), put little effort into child-raising, screw anything that moves, don’t mind strangers, etc. Their reproductive strategy is make lost of kids; who cares about fitness or if they get eaten? In fact, they WANT to be surrounded by the slow, the weak, teh stupid… because that means they have a better chance of escaping the wolf. leftists are much the same. They assume unlimited resources, it’s just a distribution problem. Fitness in self and mate, doing anything for the group, is irrelevant or stupid. It’s from a malformed (or under-developed) amygdala. I’m reading the book now, and while it might not be totally exactly on the mark, assuming it’s correct explains a great deal of left-vs-right psych.

Comments are closed.