the ladies of feministing are attending a conference this morning. we’ll be back later this afternoon.

and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  1. Voxper Advertising Inc.
    Posted January 29, 2005 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

    But while we’re gone, we’ll have a little commercial break…
    Hey all you ladies out there in Internet-land, do you ever claim that you have been discriminated against for thousands of years when you’re only in your twenties?
    Do you ever claim the right to call someone “sexist” using a special definition of the word which never applies to your own behavior?
    Can almost any critical remark by a man be called “asshollery”, but the meanest, nastiest, most humiliating things that you can say are “speaking your mind”?
    Do you ever claim to dislike traditional gender-roles while occasionally exploiting traditional male deference to you when it is to your advantage?
    Do you ever make emotionally-manipulative appeals to people’s chivalrous instincts by claiming to be a victim?
    Then look no further! is the right place for YOU!
    If you join today, you’ll get a free t-shirt with a logo positioned in a way that allows you to indignantly yell: “don’t look at my breasts, ya pervert!”

  2. Posted January 29, 2005 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

    I take it that no one can be in a class that faces discrimination because history doesn’t count, then? What were all those black people whining about then?

  3. Jessica
    Posted January 30, 2005 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

    you have way too much time on your hands. not to mention an “analysis” that you pulled out of your ass.

  4. Posted January 30, 2005 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

    Hey Vox, we know you think educating women is wrong. And yes, education does help people pull themselves up, and yes, that’s a huge threat to your privilege.
    But lay off on the upper or middle class shit. I come from a blue collar background and still live that existence. And yet I’m still a feminist! The mind does reel.

  5. Voxper Advertising Inc.
    Posted January 30, 2005 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

    Hey ladies… do you ever demand ‘contraceptive equity’ by hyping the supposed unwillingness of insurance companies to cover birth control pills while covering Viagra– without you ever managing to notice that Viagra is *NOT* a contraceptive and your analogy is completely bogus?
    If anyone comments on the blatant hypocrisies, double-standards, dishonesty and infantile assumptions underlying your dogmas, do you simply accuse them of hating women and wanting to oppress them?
    Do you ever make remarks about your detractors’ penis size or sexual inadequacy when any kind of similar remark about your own genitals would cause you to bellow in protest?
    Then consider joining feministing! Where the women are rough and tough when it suits them– but are easily-offended and oppressed when it suits them as well.
    (I have too much time? No, you make it too easy for me.)

  6. Posted January 30, 2005 at 5:36 pm | Permalink

    I agree with Vox. Clearly there’s no reason that a drug that makes it easier for men to have sex (Viagra) can in any way, shape, or form be compared to a drug that makes it easier for women to have sex (birth control pills). That’s because men are from Mars and women are from Venus.

  7. james
    Posted January 30, 2005 at 6:16 pm | Permalink

    Anyone else think amanda and vox would make an hilarious couple – as a premise for a reality show (or at least for an entertaining episode of Blind Date)?

  8. Posted January 30, 2005 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

    When I meet RL sexists like that, I don’t actually tease like this. I just stare at them until they leave me alone, so no, I don’t think it would be too funny.

  9. james
    Posted January 30, 2005 at 9:01 pm | Permalink

    Actually, anyone ever see the blind date episode where this guy didn’t say a WORD to the date thew ENTIRE date after he introduced himself. They had cricket chirping sound-effects and stuff. It was the funniest episode i’d ever seen! =)
    Think about Amanda and Vox as a couple- anyone else think “Jesse Spanow” and “A.C. Slater” from Saved By The Bell?

  10. Vox
    Posted January 30, 2005 at 10:30 pm | Permalink

    Hey Amanda- when insurance companies start covering condoms but refusing to cover birth control pills, we can talk. But until then: *Not all pills are the same.*

  11. g
    Posted January 31, 2005 at 12:26 am | Permalink

    i think a reality show with vox would be boring. it would just be him sitting in front of the computer all day waiting for the next feministing post to comment on.

  12. Vox
    Posted January 31, 2005 at 12:27 am | Permalink

    You know, james– it’s although it’s easy to ironize this bunch, it becomes depressing to realize that there is precisely zero intellectual integrity among this lot. Zero.
    Rather than reply to me with “Voxper, we get the hint already- you think we can sometime be sexist”, they instead reply with barrages of counter-insults or extremely specious claims (ie: Viagra and birth-control are the same thing, so HAH!) Why do they act this way? Because they lack the basic sense of honesty which is required for them to look in the mirror and question themselves for half an instant. Much less even care.
    It’s hard to enjoy making fun of people who don’t have a shred of shame.

  13. Ryan
    Posted January 31, 2005 at 2:24 am | Permalink

    For half a second I thought that one of you ladies was actually making a joke.
    “you have way too much time on your hands. not to mention an “analysis” that you pulled out of your ass.”
    Jessica- Do you accuse all your regular posters of having too much time on their hands or just the ones that you don’t like? Realistically to have a website like this *you* are required to have too much time on your hands. So, Pot, you have now called Kettle black numerous times; WE GET IT.
    Vox- I think that in real life Amanda is rarely given the opportunity to speak on her own behalf on issues that affect her life and future. Feministing provides a platform for her to bitch and moan about anything no matter if it is accurate. So lay off would ya? These ladies have had a long day of plotting the fall of the patriarchy and they are tired.

  14. james
    Posted January 31, 2005 at 3:22 am | Permalink

    From a neutral party, posting from work laaaaaaaaate sunday night. One think you each got right/wrong:
    Amanda right/vox wrong – you’re right in nailing vox’s presumptions about everyone on this site coming from an elite northeast college and being rich. I’m not sure where that comes from, and I doubt vox can explain it any more than by stereotypes of what he thinks of the people on this site.
    Vox right/amanda wrong – you seem to be right (based on later replies in this thread) that whenever you ask a million questions, you either get labeled a sexist or are made fun of, but either way your questions aren’t answered. I’d say it’s either because a) it’s just too many questions b) you’re just not really liked around here c) you don’t really ask them in a respectful manner (it’s more in a “hey you hypocrites! answer this!” manner – i’d probably ignore you too). This is just from a neutral 3rd party view – i have no idea why people really don’t reply, but i’d guess it’s one of those.
    Oh, and you’re BOTH wrong about the perscription issue (in my opinion). Vox, you’re wrong if implying that, regardless of application, viagra should be covered and pills not – both should be covered. Amanda, you’re wrong in saying that the pill is the same medically as viagra when you described both as “making it easier for (men/women) to have sex.” Viagra allows some men to physically have sex (without it, they cannot) – it doesn’t make it “easier,” it makes it “possible.” Without a pill, a woman still can have sex (there are other alternatives). I’ve never read a medical case of a woman not able to have sex because of lack of a pill. Also Vox, you’re wrong, comparing condoms to the pill isn’t really accurate in this case either – there ARE medical benefits to having a pill other than BC, there aren’t real benefits to wearing a condom.
    Regardless, both should be covered (or, i guess, both should be uncovered).

  15. Posted January 31, 2005 at 7:16 am | Permalink

    Didn’t say they were exactly the same. Just pointed out that it was a deliberate misreading of the situation in order to get the wished-for result that men have a right to an erection but women do not have a right to protect themselves from pregnancy.
    Actually, the pill does make it “possible” for women to have sex who simply cannot afford to get pregnant. Men who are impotent can always perform oral sex, you know. Yep, and that bile the men feel rising in their mouths at the suggestion is exactly how women feel when told that we just have to go without contraception.
    If anything, birth control pills are much more necessary. They prevent a medically fraught condition–pregnancy. Viagra just fixes something that doesn’t really hurt you–impotence. Any man who suggests that impotence and pregnancy are similiar as dangerous medical conditions needs to get a grip.
    That said, both should be covered. I don’t think men should be denied Viagra if it’s an effective drug for them, of course. But trying to suggest that men’s need to get an erection is far more important than women’s need to prevent pregnancy….well, I guess I should be used to ridiculous “white man’s burden” type arguments, but there’s always new lengths of loony to aspire to.

  16. Voxper
    Posted January 31, 2005 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

    james- in case you haven’t noticed it by now, the women on this web site consider themselves to be unfalsifiable and they do not respond to rational criticism, no matter how politely it’s voiced. They always fall-back on some variation of “we’re oppressed, so shut up” every single time. It’s the very definition of anti-intellectualism.
    “Regardless, both should be covered (or, i guess, both should be uncovered).”
    I agree that birth control ought to be covered by insurance policies. Never said that it shouldn’t be. I just think it’s utterly phony and misleading to conflate it with Viagra because (as you pointed out) they’re not equivalent. If one is going to insist on birth control being covered, then why not also cover condoms which also play a vital role in preventing the spread of STDs? Women benefit from the use of condoms, do they not?
    I don’t mind if you want insurance to cover birth control. Fine with me. Just don’t claim that Viagra and contraception are equivalent things. The analogy is entirely phony, comparing apples and oranges… but in the feminist world-view, any lame argument that paints women as being an underdog in need of assistance is always correct by default, isn’t it?

  17. Voxper
    Posted January 31, 2005 at 3:29 pm | Permalink

    “Yep, and that bile the men feel rising in their mouths at the suggestion is exactly how women feel…”
    Yeah, my bile. Whatever. Do you make a habit of projecting your own insecurities onto other people very often?

  18. Xasthur
    Posted January 31, 2005 at 5:13 pm | Permalink

    “I should be used to ridiculous “white man’s burden” type arguments, but there’s always new lengths of loony to aspire to . . . ”
    This could interpreted as a sexist and racist statement in its subtext, but I won’t bite. At least this time.
    No, Amanda, impotence and pregnancy are not as dangerous . . . right?
    Well, let’s see. Erectile dysfunction is medically linked the following problems;
    Diabetes, kidney disease, chronic alcoholism, multiple sclerosis, atherosclerosis, vascular disease, smoking, and neurologic disease. They are involved in the majority of cases, but don’t forget, men with diabetes experience often experience erectile dysfunction as well.
    Also radical prostate and bladder surgery can cause ED. Injury to the penis, spinal cord, prostate, and bladder can also led to this.
    Impotence is clearly a sign of major medical trouble in an assortment of examples. So are you going to tell me impotence may not be inherently serious? Think again.

  19. Jessica
    Posted January 31, 2005 at 5:53 pm | Permalink

    Xasthur, I didn’t realize that Viagra helped all the numerous medical conditions associated with ED. Oh wait, it doesn’t. You’re taking Amanda’s point out of context. Regardless of the CAUSES of ED, Viagra is taken solely to get a hard on, not to cure diabetes.

  20. Posted January 31, 2005 at 6:10 pm | Permalink

    Vox, before you accuse me of making a bad comparison between two prescribed medications for sexual health, I would refrain from comparing an over-the-counter device (condom) to a prescribed medication (the pill).
    Of course, you’re only quibbling to distract from the real problem, which is insurance companies that refuse to cover women’s sexual health medications like the pill didn’t hesistate to cover men’s.

  21. Xasthur
    Posted January 31, 2005 at 9:36 pm | Permalink

    Never said Viagra helped with all the conditions causing ED. However;
    “Viagra just fixes something that doesn’t really hurt you–impotence.” This is what Amanda said.
    If you think I’m nitpicking, I’m not. Impotence is often a sign of serious problems.
    But you’re right. Viagra is supposed help with erections, not cure or curtail possible life threatening diseases. I’m legitimately surprised it is covered by insurance.
    Vox is correct, however, that Viagra and contraceptives are two different things.

  22. Voxper
    Posted February 1, 2005 at 11:09 am | Permalink

    Oh, silly Xasthur- you should know by now that they don’t care about any of the medical conditions that men have. If one should die, then so much the better! One more oppressor gone from the world. Viagra isn’t birth control- but it’s symbolic. Symbolic of the fact that men always get 100% of everything they want, but poor women always get stuck with nothing. Boo hoo.

  23. lauren
    Posted February 1, 2005 at 10:27 pm | Permalink

    Congratulations, dude, you have just become a caricature of yourself. I generally don’t agree with the things that you say and find your tone condescending and extremely off-putting, but that statement just takes it to new levels. Are there really people out there that think feminism is all about hating on men? PLEASE! I can’t even believe that you would have the balls to suggest that feminists are pleased when a man dies because it means there’s “one less oppressor in the world.” You can say that you were just using hyperbole, but statements like that show such a misunderstanding and mischaracterization of what feminism really is that I’m not sure why anyone would pay any attention whatsoever to your criticism of it.

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

180 queries. 0.746 seconds