December 27, 2012, - 12:36 pm

CNN Says Schlussel a “2012 Low for Women in Hollywood”; Twitter Feminazis Call for Violence Against Me

By Debbie Schlussel

The feminists at the Coran/Crescent News Network, CNN (a/k/a are Al-Jazeera English #2), are upset with me and list one of my movie reviews as one of the “Lows for Women in Hollywood” of 2012. That’s a badge of honor. My “crime” is pointing out that all of these “she-man” warriors in the movies of late aren’t realistic, that they are absurd fantasies of the Rosie O’Donnell/”View” Hags/Gloria Steinem/Eleanor Smeal crowd on crack, and that men are still the physically stronger sex in real life. But these idiots would rather stick to their delusional cinematic propaganda that Kristen Stewart and Jennifer Lawrence can best men twice their size and weight.



This year’s influx of big screen heroines appears to be a leap toward equality, prompting praise from film critics such as A.O. Scott of The New York Times. Off screen, however, things were a little more complicated. . . . The sheer increase of strong female characters isn’t enough . . . .

Back on the big screen, Stewart’s Snow White character was berated for being too masculine by critics such as Debbie Schlussel.

“I know it’s a fairy tale, but since when was Snow White a she-man warrior?” Schlussel wrote on her website in June. “Uh, sorry, but reality check: men are the strong ones and the ones in physical fighting who win and best women.”

Come on, Stephanie, you really think Kristen Stewart can actually beat up and slay any of the guys like she did in “Snow White and the Huntsman” (read my review)? Just ain’t gonna happen . . . in the real world. And in the fairy tale, the story wasn’t Snow White as the swashbuckling prince with the male being her effeminate sidekick (the storyline of the movie). It was kinda the other way around. Just sayin’. On the other hand, at least Ms. Goldberg gave both sides (sort of). And thanks for spelling my name right and quoting me accurately.

It’s funny how CNN celebrates delusions of non-existent female supremacy over men in the West, and yet the very same network celebrates the one religion and culture–Islam–that treats women like property, baby factories, human burqa hangers, and occasional convenient homicide bombers and terrorists (probably because it’s the same religion that, along with the feminists, is helping to destroy the West–an apparent mutual goal of them and CNN).

At the same time that I’m attacked for this, CNN Entertainment reporter Stephanie Goldberg praises the fugly, depraved, sex-obsessed pig, Lena Dunham, creator and star of HBO’s disgusting, semi-pornographic, and stupid “Girls.” She’s the voice of the perverted Obama “Your First Time” campaign commercial and had gross fat chick sex with a stranger in a concrete tunnel in her “Tiny Furniture” movie (read my review). Yup, that’s the ticket!

Oh, and in the true feminist orthodoxy form, I’m not allowed to have a differing (and realistic) opinion, and so some creepy feminazis on Twitter (follow me on Twitter) are expressing their one-sided Lesbionic fantasies of violently attacking me and calling me a bitch:



The thing is, if you try to slap me, this “bitchy woman” will bring a guy to the fight to protect me, and despite what they tell you in the movies, he’ll kick your ass.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: , , , , , , ,

76 Responses

Interesting article…I am surprised at the author though, with a surname like Goldberg I am assuming shes jewish (Could be a JINO) but why is she attacking you another fellow jew movie critic? In any event this article will probably give you a little more exposure and get more traffic for the website

George A. on December 27, 2012 at 12:56 pm


    StinkyBird on December 30, 2012 at 10:35 pm

We live in an increasingly delusional world caused in part by PC correctness, where Islam is a religion of peace, women can beat men in fights, and tax increases on the most productive will lead to economic growth. Women, who are more clever and discerning than men, had been portrayed in the movies as using their wits, femininity and sexuality and not their brawn to get what they want. I am reminded of Barbara Stanwyk’s character in “Double Indemnity.”

Concerned Citizen on December 27, 2012 at 1:05 pm

Hey George A-Hole you REALLY must not read the articles here (and your Liberal stance shows you don’t) IF you are “shocked” that DS is getting heat from a JINO. DS reports on more Kapo Jews than true Jews like herself. Also, that you seem to be clueless as to why the feminazi is attacking DS shows that indeed you DON’T read DS’ columns and you struggle with reading comprehension. I’m not shocked by that.

DS it INDEED is a badge of honour. ANYONE that is a feminist and celebrates feminism in soon to be 2013 is an idiotic dupe to the nth degree. Feminism was absolutely shown to be a fraud by 1993…almost 20 years ago.

DS happens not only to be correct on her stance on crap movies starring sour-pussed face Kristen Stewart (who in a fairytale fashion kicks men’s arses…yep THAT’s realistic….as realistic as rocking-horse crap!) but her stance on beastly, humiliation whore Lena Dunham.

I’m proud CNN took a swipe at DS. It proves I am on the RIGHT side and that I am not lead astray.

Feminazi’s will only see the horrible truth about women and men fist-fighting when they actually have to fist-fight a male. The man, even if a 98 pound weakling can knock out the feminazi quick and definitively. That’s the truth.

Once in my life I would have LOVED those movies like “Salt” and Anne Hathaway in “The Dark Knight Returns” but now I HATE them and roll my eyes because I am not into fantasy and pipe dreams (and dumb enough to believe feminism has a leg to even stand on in 2013) and reality rules my world now…not nonsense dogma.

Go to YouTube and watch that male bus driver round-house that big-mouthed, ghetto-trash female aggressor. THAT puts the fantasy to rest.

And when men brawl where do you find the females…crying in the corner. Because that is all they can do. Deal with it!

Skunky on December 27, 2012 at 1:17 pm

    Thanks for your kind comments on the Wheel of Fortune post, Skunky. I also enjoy reading your posts, and find them among the most straightforward and perceptive on this blog.

    Little Al on December 27, 2012 at 2:47 pm

      Right back at ya, Little Al!

      I very much enjoy your contributions and when you have someone with a negligible IQ trying to act as if they are Mega-Mind, it’s hard to sit back and let their narcissistic and unfounded arrogance go unanswered.

      But it’s even worse when the smug low-info. know-nothings refuse to read DS’ articles yet still act as if they know heaps more than we do.

      Your posts are the perfect antidote to the blatant stupidity. To everyone but the arrogant fool but we don’t need their acquiescence to know the truth.

      Skunky on December 27, 2012 at 4:19 pm

        Happy New Year, Skunky. Although I’m not optimistic, maybe next year will be better than this year.

        Little Al on December 27, 2012 at 4:37 pm

My wife rented the “Hunger Games.” Let’s see. A bow against a rifle. Guess who would win in the real world? A 120 pound women against a 180 pound man. Who would win? A 130 pound woman against a 130 pound man. The man would STILL win.

It was a stupid, anti-capitalist movie.

If these women who act in and watch this type of garbage feel so empowered, let them go at night into a bad neighborhood with a high number of rapes, and challenge the men who live there. Go ahead, let’s see how long you will last. In fact, go into that neighborhood with a bow and arrow and see how well you do against Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson. Moronic.

As to the show “Girls,” these women are the most unattractive, sexless creatures in this boring excuse of a television show. Heck, even Sarah Jessica Barker had a decent body, and was doable if you put three bags over her head (two are not enough, sorry environmentalists).

If I am going to watch women in movie, they should be hot and sexy. If they are going to take on bad guys, they should be carrying a Glock or a Colt. Your tiny little fists or kicks simply won’t do the job. Just as short men can’t defeat big shtarkers (muscled men), at least without using a knife, baseball bat, or gun, neither can women.

Jonathan E. Grant on December 27, 2012 at 1:19 pm

    It is possible for a little guy to beat a large guy with his fists. Of course, the little guy needs to be a former world boxing champion, and the big guy needs to be some untrained big barroom fighter (I looked up the name of the boxer and I cannot find it—Army in WWII, I believe). Or Mickey Walker. Or Bruce Lee.

    But unless you are a freak, a small man will lose to a big man. And a man can easily out-push a woman who outweighs him by one hundred pounds. (I’ve had physical confrontations with large obese women who have tried to slam me into walls when they were psychotic.)

    Occam's Tool on December 29, 2012 at 8:50 pm

“Michael Knight, a scary looking loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the intelligent and moral woman in a world of stupid feminazis who operate without common sense.”

I don’t know how well you know Mr. Knight, but the last line of your column immediately brought this to mind. I was a big fan of Knightrider, back in the day.

cirrus1701 on December 27, 2012 at 1:28 pm

Shouldn’t that “Girls”[sic] show be called “Skanks,” if “truth in advertising” laws were to be followed to the letter? Because essentially that’s what Lena Dunham and the rest of the cast portray themselves in what passes for a TV show.

As for those two feminazis who called for violence against Debbie – I can pinpoint at least two who should not be allowed to own or carry guns, given the recent (what passes for a) debate in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre.

ConcernedPatriot on December 27, 2012 at 1:33 pm

    YES! These round-healed skanks are so low life and unattractive I felt I needed a shower after watching two episodes (only) of them. Yuck!

    Rochelle on December 28, 2012 at 5:41 pm

Someone named Valerie Douglas had the following comments after the article:

“And let’s hope people ignore the usual, and predictable, reaction from some men whose masculinity is threatened by strong women.”


“As an author who writes strong females as the leads,” … “Thanks Debbie Schlussel for continuing the stereotype that women are the ‘weaker’ sex in an age where the women got the gold in the Olympics, not the men.”

I just Googled Valerie Douglas, and even though I have never heard of her before apparently she is an author.

I_AM_ME on December 27, 2012 at 2:08 pm

    What a dope! Doesn’t she understand that that’s a women against women competition? If they women were competing against the men, who’d get gold then?

    Some idiot tried to get me into the women in combat argument last night on FB. I simply told her I wouldn’t argue with someone who had no concept of her own femininity or what a real man was and that no real man would subject any woman to the horrors of combat. She may have thought I was completely nuts but she backed off.

    Italkit on December 28, 2012 at 3:44 am

I_AM_ME – I just googled Valerie Douglas after reading her stupid response in the comments section – apparently her books suck because no one has ever heard of her. What a dumb b***h

George A. on December 27, 2012 at 2:19 pm

    George A., you might want to go look at the comments at CNN before they take mine down.

    Jonathan Grant on December 27, 2012 at 2:42 pm

      Jonathan Grant on the CNN Comments page – “Keep announcing that you are a female writer; otherwise people may think you are a guy with long hair.”

      LOVE IT!

      I_AM_ME on December 27, 2012 at 3:02 pm

        [“Jonathan Grant on the CNN Comments page – ‘Keep announcing that you are a female writer; otherwise people may think you are a guy with long hair.’

        LOVE IT!”

        I_AM_ME on December 27, 2012 at 3:02]

        So do I.

        JeffE on December 27, 2012 at 9:58 pm

          that’s an insult to men.

          Italkit on December 28, 2012 at 3:45 am

What’s the phrase that comes to mind? oh, yeah…. multiculturalism is tribalism recycled. And here the women want to considered as ‘equal’ in all ways. And it’s of course, silly, sad and absurd.

The only feminist I care to read is Phyllis Chesler. She’s from the real world and lived that slightly delusional, fantasy world as a young adult, marrying a muslim, I believe and almost not getting out of Afganistan alive, let alone equal. Back in the 60’s I think. Since then, she’s become a senior author, a more than realistic commentator and sensible sober thinker. But these movie reviewers who squash any realistic criticque of faux heroine actions also follow the tyranny of the left- all those who don’t follow the line- are to be squashed.

Numb as a boot.

mgoldberg on December 27, 2012 at 2:28 pm

Any woman write who has to point out that she is a woman, well, that’s just sad. It means one of two things. The first is that people mistake her for a man. The second is that her writing is not good enough to stand on its own; she has to get people to buy her book because she is a woman.

Thus, acceptance is dependent upon her identity as a woman, which is antithetical to feminism.

Jonathan Grant on December 27, 2012 at 2:36 pm

….so the Lara Logan Egypt thing wasn’t faked?

General P. Malaise on December 27, 2012 at 2:43 pm

A badge of honor, indeed, to be vilified by them who live and breath hypocrisy. Truth to them is a commodity to be shunned when it disturbs their comfort zone of politically correct convenience.

Those speaking truth, like D.S., in violation of sacred liberal dogma can expect–count upon–the hectoring of the sanctimonious worthies preaching from on high.

True today as it was many years ago when observed by I can’t remember who, “When going out to speak the truth, don’t wear your best suit of clothes.”

lee of the lower case "l" on December 27, 2012 at 2:46 pm

For the record, I don’t mind a strong female character in a movie once in a while.

The problem, though, will always be in the delivery and context: “The Hunger Games”, the “Twilight” series, “Salt” and even “Kill Bill” all feature some subliminal message, whether it is “eat the rich” or “2 legs good; 3 legs evil”.

Up here in Canada, “Girls” (a non-cougar “Sex in the City”? FEH) is getting rave reviews, mostly by males. I wonder how many of these reviews were not written while fapping?

But if you want to see believable female characters these days, look no further than… porn.

They look strong (albeit surgically enhanced), they take their hits, the tame men (and sometimes other women), and they always come out on top (or bottom).

Come to think of it, isn’t most entertainment these days porn?

The Reverend Jacques on December 27, 2012 at 2:47 pm

    Rev, I know why the men like “Girls/Skanks”. It’s elementary. In the pseudo-Feminazi culture, they have actually given men a scummy gift that is all win/win for sleaze-grinder men. Sex on demand sans commitment. In the end it’s un-edifying (even for the men) but men and women are DIFFERENT physically and psychologically. Men like the cheap thrill (it’s like bad pizza…they still enjoy it) and the women get all messed up no matter how you slice it. Women who wear the pants in their relationships are no happier than the miserable hen-pecked, feminized men. It’s all lose-lose (but for the INITIAL loads of free sex) in the long run.

    “Girls/Skanks” makes the sleaze-grinder men feel LESS guilty for the free, non-committment sex because the girls are neurotic and not worthy of being committed to (but they should all be “committed”) but they sure do drop their pants at a drop of a hat. Can’t blame men for that.

    That’s why smart peeps see thru’ the trash of Lena Dunham. What is so happy and celebratory of a neurotic, ugly skeevoza who delights in her own humiliation? Not a damn thing. It’s undignified and those in the know blanche at the thought of the lack of dignity and self-respect.

    Feminism couldn’t win on it’s OWN manifesto (because most females will ALWAYS defer to a man…I am not happy about it it just happens to be the TRUTH…and I’m “man” enough to accept it now) so it had to change the rules and *pretend* that acting like a slutty skank was empowering. Nope. Not even on the best day.

    As for porn, I am ok with men viewing it (men will be men) but it is also UNDIGNIFIED to openly talk about it. It makes people think less of you when they felt more of you at an earlier time. Honesty is NOT always the best policy and some things should be kept private. Just sayin.

    Skunky on December 27, 2012 at 3:59 pm

Everyone sing:

I am woman, hear me roar,
My periods flowing down to the floor!
And I’ve got to go and mop up all the gore!

Jonathan Grant on December 27, 2012 at 2:48 pm


    next verse:

    I am woman, every day,
    I don’t like men that are not gay,
    ’cause you know that I’m a lesbo, all the way!

    CornCoLeo on December 27, 2012 at 3:33 pm

Debbie, since these bitches (sorry for my misogynistic term) are inciting violent behavior towards you, you can report them and prosecute their sorry asses. Last I checked, making a threat to anyone in this country is the equivalent of yelling “fire” in a crowded building, making threats to anyone is NO longer about freedom of speech or freedom of expression!

Anyway to the main article, let’s be honest with ourselves and the folks at CNN Entertainment ought to be honest with themselves rather than living in their wives-tale world, in reality in real life, a female doesn’t over-power and man-handle a man who’s mainley muscular and built up, impossible. The reason why these films where created where the woman is seen as the strong person from a physical standpoint is that it’s plain old “fantasy”, that’s what films are, pure fantasy. It’s like playing fantasy football, fantasy basketball, fantasy baseball or fantasy hockey, where you can have any star player you want on your team and the team will do great, whereas in real life, their’s NO such thing as a perfect team, perfect image, etc.

And you’re also a film critic DS, so you basically know what your talking about, had you been another person on the street who’s not a film critic, you wouldn’t have been mentioned in this CNN piece, you’ll be dismissed as a “nobody”!

“A nation is defined by its borders, language & culture!”

Sean R. on December 27, 2012 at 2:49 pm

I’ve been thinking recently about why Debbie’s movie reviews often enflame people more than the out and out political comments.

Maybe the reason has to do with the narcissism of the elite. Their lives are built around instant gratification, doing whatever they want, with an endless expansion of ‘rights’ and being able to do whatever they want. When movie reviews here point out the fallacy of that approach in daily life situations, it hits them directly with regard to their lifestyle. It is as if Debbie is telling them, themselves, that their powers and ability to get whatever they want, whenever they want it, is impaired.

And that is more important to them than anything, and is one more indication that cultural discussion is, indeed, important.

Little Al on December 27, 2012 at 3:04 pm

You’re right Debbie. That the “Clinton News Network” is upset with you is a true badge of honor. That the same network that hires leftwing bitches like Soledud O’Brien and Wolf Blitzer is wrong again is no surprise. The dopes are up in arms because
they are reminded that the portrayl of women in movies is not realistic? Boo freaking hoo. Sane people know that there’s NO way that a 110 pound woman will beat a 170 pound man. Unless she knows martial arts or is packing heat. You “girls” want to know something. We real men think that you guys are a really stupid. Sure you think in your heart of hearts that we men are all like Matt Lauer, George Snuffaluppagus or Greg Gutfeld but I’ve got news for you. Unlike them we real men would be the guys Debbie would bring to kick your unattractive asses. I tell you feminitwits at CNN what. When a woman can beat down my cousin in the Marines(who’s 6’4″ 260lbs)them you can yammer all you want. Until then STFU.

Ken b on December 27, 2012 at 3:06 pm

Congratulations Debbie you must have got under their skin somehow.

Frankz on December 27, 2012 at 4:18 pm

You mustn’t force people to accept their view of reality as fantasy.
The shock of it is too much for their system to handle.
They prefer to live in the Matrix.

ebayer on December 27, 2012 at 4:21 pm

All this is just part of the cess pool that is pop culture in the U.S. now. I get a kick out of that new term “Low information voters”. All this crap is their world. Could it be designed to make money on, by selling the constantly changing latest trend, and then, at election day to “Rock the vote”-vote Democrat? Don’t forget, when there is a P.O.T.U.S. election, two people run. They get to vote for Santa Claus, and also get to vote for Larry Flynt. Santa Claus gives out the free cell phones, the immigration amnesty, the bridge cards, and Larry Flynt guarantees your access to porn and any kind of freaky sex you desire, with no responsibilities.

RT on December 27, 2012 at 4:31 pm

Well at least you knoyou’re probably getting under their skin.

Frankz on December 27, 2012 at 4:40 pm

They are the ones whose wombs and breasts will be filled with cancer and whose other organs and joints will be filled with autoimmune diseases. YSV to them.

martin on December 27, 2012 at 4:47 pm

    I agree, martin but that doesn’t do much for my rheumatic arthritis. Sometimes it IS physical and that puts an unfair burden on the blameless.

    Italkit on December 28, 2012 at 3:53 am

The biggest point this criticism from the left shows is the influence Miss Schlussel has in the media. Her work is too greatly followed to ignore!

Great job, Debbie!

PDMac60 on December 27, 2012 at 5:12 pm

Well, at least they are reading and quoting you. I wonder if they realize how much of a confession that’s is…. of their lack of having their own original ideas.

On one hand, they adore Islam with its subjugated women and on the other they try to rewrite biology with a crazed distortion of the sexes to meet their progressive delusions. Are they ever mixed up!?

The strength of women is real, but not found in musculature nor typically in fire power or superhuman skills winning duels. It is in faith, endurance, intelligence, courage and love. What The human race needs more of.

Cat K on December 27, 2012 at 5:14 pm

Wow,CNN quoted you. You must be so proud.

Ghostwriter on December 27, 2012 at 5:46 pm

    What you are proud of Ghost? Tell us.

    Worry01 on December 28, 2012 at 2:50 am

Reasoning and insulting is not the way to go. An ideology is what motivates “reasoning”, not the other way around, so argument doesn’t really work (since the argument is a “smokescreen”/distraction from an agenda). I’d would like to see more articles on feminism here.
The last line of the article, however, could draw fire where people claim that you are promoting male violence on women.
Quiet Riot Girl (Elly Tams) has written about how she was turned against after she broke ranks with feminism. She has good stuff to say about the movement. I recommend.

MH on December 27, 2012 at 5:57 pm

Here’s a scene you’ll never see:

Gang of Muslim men insult or mistreat woman (Muslim or otherwise, doesn’t matter). Hollywood heroine goes full martial arts mode on Muslim gang. We did see it with Liam Neeson in Taken, but I’m still waiting for the female version.

It would be unrealistic, but it would be a breakthrough nonetheless.

adam on December 27, 2012 at 6:04 pm

I would like to see an actual fight match between a man and a woman – both of similar weight and height, but with various fighting skills. Let’s see who wins the fight, blood and all.

Bob on December 27, 2012 at 6:08 pm

    The man would win. Testosterone and muscle mass per pound of body weight. Hell, take any 150 lb woman you want, put her against Abe Attell in his prime. Put any 150 pound woman weight lifter you want to pick, put her against Jake laMotta in his prime.

    I do not walk down dark streets and tense up when I see a woman of whatever size come towards me. No man does.

    Occam's Tool on December 27, 2012 at 11:16 pm

    Take your porn fantasies elsewhere Bob.

    Worry01 on December 28, 2012 at 4:11 am

Movies featuring a strong female lead aren’t a problem per se. Helen Mirren, surely one of a dozen of the world’s greatest movie actresses, insists on taking on such roles. “Strong” can refer to physical as well as verbal strength, however. I don’t think that in this age of Title IX collegiate sports that a film such as “The Hunger Games” or “Mirror, Mirror” is all that far-fetched. Women ARE physically stronger than they were decades ago. That’s indisputable.

Seek on December 27, 2012 at 6:16 pm

Still LOL’n @ “Gross fat chick sex with a stranger in a concrete tunnel” !!!!!!!

AnusPresley on December 27, 2012 at 6:19 pm

Hollywood is so far removed from reality it beggars belief.

Michelle on December 27, 2012 at 7:13 pm

Since when is Hollywood supposed to represent reality? They’re movies and are all based on “the land of make believe” and not on reality. If hollywood was real every lesbian would have a 34-24-36 figure and not look the way that most real women do!! I’ve never heard of this “Girls” show on hbo so I can’t really speak on that, but I did find this little blurb in this article to be disturbing:

“The thing is, if you try to slap me, this “bitchy woman” will bring a guy to the fight to protect me, and despite what they tell you in the movies, he’ll kick your ass”

I understand that you’re trying to get back at the threats that these people are aiming your way Debbie, but I don’t think that glorifying female abuse by men is cool regardless of your intent and there are better ways to get back at those clowns anyways! Any man that lays his hands on a woman is a coward and deserves to rot in hell!

I don’t think CNN is a jihadist network trying to destroy America and the west nor is it Jewish run Hollywood propaganda with a Zionist agenda! CNN is simply a tv “news” network that wants to gain as many viewers as possible so that they can charge advertisers top $$$ for air time on their network! The reason they’re not succeeding is because their delivery sucks! Lets not kid anyone that when it comes to entertainment (cable news is entertainment no different than MTV) the masses aren’t going to be attracted by what you say, they are going to be attracted more to HOW you say and deliver it!

Kershaw on December 27, 2012 at 9:11 pm

Shalom Debbie-lah. I’m back from my extended foray in the Belgian Congo. The deli there is unspeakable. I haven’t watched CNN since the first gulf war but still I’m proud of you for making their caca list. Perhaps we could catch up over a bowl of missionary stew?

A1 on December 27, 2012 at 9:48 pm

Congratulations on being mentioned by CNN, Debbie. Like you and others have said, being criticized by them means that you must be doing something–as in a lot–right.

Now I know that I’m being overly optimistic, but hopefully their negative reaction is just a first stage in their processing your movie reviews. After this, hopefully, when they calm down, and they decide what new movies they want to make, they will study your movie reviews and determine what kinds of movies that you love, and what kind that you hate, and will then make the new movies in such a way so that you will give them Reagans instead of Marxes (and other bad people), and then they will get more people to see the movies.

Now cue my parody of the closing of John Lennon’s “Imagine”:

You may say I’m a dreamer.
But I’m not the only one.
I hope some day they’ll join us.
And their movies will be much better.

JeffE on December 27, 2012 at 9:55 pm

@Debbie, Debbie, Debbie,

Some “attack” – the article simply notes that not everybody buys into the narrative, and quotes you as an example of same. And they also quoted you accurately (as you admitted).

Do you ever think that maybe you have a persecution complex?

Of course, you ARE a “low” for the year – mostly for letting Gay Obama and the Skuzz use your website the same way that most people use toilet paper. You got something brown on your nose there, Debs. It’s a chunk of something, some of it looks like part of a peanut.

Wouldn’t your mother be proud of you.

S tatu S on December 27, 2012 at 10:21 pm

    S, you should have your caregiver look over what you type before sending it out. Your remarks are not so insulting as they are utterly incoherent. You should arrange for a field sobriety test before coming here. I will let your caregiver attend to your changing now. You should only have her use the better talcum powders to avoid those nasty rashes.

    Worry01 on December 28, 2012 at 2:55 am

I’m sure you will have no shortage of men willing to lay waste to these Feminazis for you, ma’am. Let me know.

Seek, women are NOT all that much stronger now than they were then; although there are more women athletes. However, let’s look at me, for instance. I am what Debbie would refer to as a “fat slob.” 50 years old, 44 inch waist, 5’8″, 233 lbs. I also have 50 inch shoulders and a 17 and 1/2 inch neck. I’m also trained to take down agitated psychotics, and I have.

Unless a woman got lucky or had VERY SERIOUS military training, it would be highly unlikely that even a well conditioned woman (and I have treated a world class woman swimmer, and there is no WAY that lady could best me) could take me in a fight. My female nurses, when dealing with potentially violent men patients, either negotiate of wait for male staff top provide suficient muscle to do takedowns.

Now, obviously, guns change things. But if you are talking a one on one physical confrontation with Angelina Jolie, for example, no way she wins. Most fancy kicks, etc. take you off your center of mass and are just ways to get more brutally beaten. Protect your nads, stay focused, and win.

That’s why gentlemen don’t hit women.

Occam's Tool on December 27, 2012 at 11:06 pm

“negotiate or wait for male staff to provide”—I’m embarrassed by the typos.

As someone who has seen my share of physical violence, and the sequalae to same, I don’t care for scumbags who talk about “slapping bitches.” Stupid, ignorant Liberal women who cannot argue properly threaten like children.

Oh, year, Seek—Babe Didriksen. Look her up.

Occam's Tool on December 27, 2012 at 11:22 pm

That’s “oh, yeah,” seek. Bedtime for this Bonzo.

Occam's Tool on December 27, 2012 at 11:23 pm

I look upon such women as the real misogynists. They push careers and activities that virtually no woman could cope with unless the overall standards were lowered. In fact, that is what often happens. Quotas and set-asides will be given to women for being women(which has already been happening in some areas for quite sometime). As in any workplace situation, the genuinely qualified and competent people will have to pick up the slack for those who really cannot perform.

Traditionally, you have seen this sort of thing with family firms and machine run local governments. Nepotism reared its ugly head in family firms, while political connections were more the norm with local government jobs. During the twentieth century, family run businesses had to compete with franchises and chains which operated on a strictly bottom line basis. These family run restaurants or repair shops had to either operate more efficiently or close up. Rum Dumb Willie could could no longer be kept on the payroll while he slept it off in the attic. In the civil service, even if to a lesser extent, openly corrupt hiring practices declined. Such organizations were forced to do what they were originally designed to do, which was to furnish a product at reasonable prices or to provide a public service respectively. This form of fairness and equality has been turned on its head.

Pushing women into situations where they cannot cope will go beyond annoyance and inefficiency, into the realm of maiming and lethality. If you place women in true combat situations, which would be the norm in the infantry, their deficiencies will become apparent very rapidly. G.I. Jane will be unable to hold her own. She will lack the upper body strength to cope with a non-female assailant. In fact, G.I. Jane will require the assistance of a male to bail her out of a situation she never should have been in. Instead of being an asset to the team, this woman becomes a dangerous lead weight. Through her need to be rescued, either actually or potentially, the squad’s strength is reduced by two soldiers. This consists of G.I. Jane, and the body guard that is effectively assigned to this “Special Needs” soldier. If G.I. Jane is not given this form of protection, she will either be captured or killed. Unlike Lara Logan, there will be no rescuers. Gang rape, mutilation, and death are very real possibilities if she is captured in a Muslim country. How will feminists view that situation? Will it even be reported? Non-reporting is a preferred tactic when one of the left’s little endeavors goes haywire. If you talk about people dying in a preventable fiasco, you are called “obsessed’. There is a touch of evil in all this, which should be laid at the feet of our misogynistic feminists.

Worry01 on December 28, 2012 at 12:12 am

While they are in fantasyland, why don’t they show some Muslimahs giving Muslim men cans of whoop-ass in the movies, like they did for Snow White? Show Jasmine whip the crap out of Aladin, or Morgina kill all the 40 thieves.

Infidel on December 28, 2012 at 2:33 am

    Actually, that just happened in Egypt the other day when some Salafist morality squad tried to shut down a beauty salon. The ladies grabbed their canes and gave the men a whupping.

    Italkit on December 28, 2012 at 4:20 am

Oh, yea a, on that FB thing I mentioned above, some gay guy called me sexist and prehistoric. Well, prehistoric I take exception to but sexist, YUP all the way and proud of it. MEN AND WOMEN ARE DIFFERENT!
I was raised as an only child by a father who showed me that women could do almost anything a man could but by treating me like a LADY, he showed me which were the better choices.

Italkit on December 28, 2012 at 3:52 am

As a retired Soldier who busted my ass to do as well as the men my whole career, I never lived in the fantasy world that these feminists have and never will. Although I am very tall and stronger than a few scrawny men, I would be nuts to think I could go toe to toe with a man my size and win without a weapon. These are the same women that believe women can serve in combat arms and do just as well as the men. If that were true there wouldn’t be different physical fitness standards between men and women and they would be expected to carry the large heavy ruck, weapon and full combat ammuntion load without assistance. I believe women can serve and do exceptionally well in the armed forces, but there are limits. I hope the military never succumbs to this feminist campaign and if it does, they need to make the physical fitness standards exactly the same. THAT would be the definition of “equality.” These Hollywood actors can make their movies showing strong female characters, that is fine. But like all fictional entertainment, they need to accept the movies are just that: fictional entertainment.i

Lisa on December 28, 2012 at 9:33 am

    Indeed, ma’am. And there are things you could do very well—shoot, follow orders, think strategically and tactically, monitor things, maintain databases,do intelligence work and command work etc.—anything that didn’t require brute musclemass. Fighting spirit, intelligence, and devotion to duty are important, as well, and, in most cases ranked above rifleman level work, more important. Troy Middleton, an excellent WWII general, was physically incapacitated by an arthritic knee. However, as his superiors said about him, he was a superb general, because he didn’t have an arthritic head. They were willing to see him carried on a litter.

    Let’s be real, as you are and were.

    Thank you for your service.

    Occam's Tool on December 28, 2012 at 9:59 pm

Miss Debbie, You are doing a good job. Keep it up ! The coast’s live in make-believe-ville, the rest of the country live in real-ville.

William on December 28, 2012 at 11:09 am

As an old Okinawan karate black belt, I’ve seen a number of black belt women, a handful or two, over the years who could kick the sh*t out of most untrained/non-karate men and did once in a while. I’ve also seen six year old junior black belt boys who could kick the sh*t out of most untrained/non-karate men. However, I’ve only seen one or two women who could stand toe to toe with equally trained karate men. However, there are many more today than there were when I was training all the time. Women can be very tough, but, in general, they simply don’t have the physique to be so.

This takes me to the Hollywood glamor ninja chicks. Yeah, they can mimic the moves to a degree, but simply look at their musculature and you know they’ve not done a day’s training in their lives … rather like Ralph Macchio in his Karate Kid jokes. Difference with me is that I have no expectations when it comes to obviously idiotic movies involving martial arts. I just figure stupid movies and characters are made for stupid people.

Pray Hard on December 28, 2012 at 11:34 am

And, oh, who cares what CNN says? I figure if they hate your guts, you’re probably doing a good job. You’re always tops in my reviews, Debbie!

Pray Hard on December 28, 2012 at 11:36 am

There are many cogent remarks on this subject, but I paticularly liked Skunky’s observations that male/female relations suffer on more levels than just physically in what is acceptable, rather foisted, on us by the feminists of today; I also liked MH’s idea of keeping things in perspective and not following the status quo feminists. Men today seem to have hit glass ceiling in our relations with most indoctrinated women today.
On the subject of physical prowess, I still prefer reality vice political correctness and refer to an MSM hour-long special from the mid 90’s. In this show they were debating evil men of the Los Angeles Fire Department who had the gall to release video footage of women incapable of physically completing required tasks in their academy. Some talking head interviewed a woman who had served in Congress and asked her opinion of that bruhaha du jour and her reply was that: she having put on a few pounds, like Occam, later in life that she would prefer to be carried from her second-floor bedroom in the arms of a strong fireman rather than dragged down her stairs, hitting her head on each one, by a strong firewoman if her home caught fire. That same bobble head fool interviewed Steinem and her witty retort to the Congresswoman was that in a fire the safest place to be was near the ground and that being dragged by a woman down the steps is preferable because then she wouldn’t be exposed to the noxious smoke. At that point I began to ignore anyone who would join NOW or many others who would claim that they have a woman’s best interest in their heart.

nadie on December 28, 2012 at 12:28 pm

MY idea of a strong woman character is a woman who knows who she is and what she wants, and uses all of the resources at her disposal to get it. Now, morality is a completely different thing, so a strong woman character can be moral, immoral, or amoral.

A strong MORAL woman character may have problems using all the resources at her disposal, but if she refuses to do something for moral reasons, then that just shows that what she wants INCLUDES morality, and thus she still fits my definition of a strong character.

Now, I have met a few abnormally large and strong women. They are few and far between, and still cannot compete, physically, with a male counterpart. That is, the glandular disorder that makes these women so darned big would make a man so darned BIGGER.

That said, small people can be very effective fighters. You can use your opponent’s momentum against him. Small fighters tend to be faster and more agile. If a fight is presented this way, on screen, I can certainly believe it. But that is NOT how they are presenting these fights these days. They show a man pinning a woman down, and she somehow manages to use brute force to push him off her. She punches through walls with the best of them.

Show me a fight where the woman out-runs the man, leading him through an obstacle course where she can avoid the obstacles by her agility, and he, following behind her, is caught by them, instead.

Show me a fight where a woman jumps on a man’s back and bites his hear off. Well, no, because that is just gross. But it is a whole lot more realistic. Just sayin’.

Women CAN be excellent fighters, but their fighting style must be completely different from a man. There is a reason why poison is traditionally the weapon of choice for a woman.

I’m getting tired, too, of the modern TV shows that include women fighters back in the middle ages. Women WERE NOT trained to put on armor and wield a sword back then. OK, so it makes for an interesting story, but it is NOT AT ALL believable. Those few women who did take up martial arts did so in disguise, and if their identity as a woman was revealed, they’d be sent to the stocks, or worse. It was quite often illegal for a woman simply to wear trousers. That’s the middle ages for you.

Women have plenty of resources to use, though. Their wits are their most important weapon.

Michelle on December 29, 2012 at 2:14 pm

I would, however, like to point out that on Buffy, the Vampire Slayer, Buffy’s superior strength was magical.

There was an episode where her strength was drained from her, and guess what? She was getting beaten up, until she used her brain to save her.

That, to me, made it believable, if I started on the “belief” that magic of that sort actually existed and there really were vampires and other such monsters. The fact that when her magical power was taken away, she was not a match for the men, nor monsters, made a big difference in that show.

Michelle on December 29, 2012 at 2:21 pm

Reading that CNN article actually makes me sick. It (proudly) lists all the she-man women of the year’s movies, and it is a lot. Kind of puts it in perspective about how out of hand it has become to make ridiculous she-man women the de-facto heroes.

Confession here: I’m a huge Batman fan, and was enjoying the recent Nolan versions (especially the Joker as portrayed by Heath Ledger, probably as close to my personal idea of the Joker)… but recently watched the latest (Rises) and absolutely hated it. Batman barely has any prowess in this one, shows none of his trademark intelligence, awareness, strength. Meanwhile, it has not one but two she-man women roles. Speaking as a man that has often had dirty thoughts involving Catwoman… this version of Catwoman was a complete putoff. Total hollywood BS, unbeatable in a fight even against dozens of males. Icy cold, like a man, etc. It had absolutely none of the complex good/evil struggle you see in that character (and the difficulties of her relationship with the Bat) portrayed in the books and previous shows/films.

I almost didn’t finish watching it. It’s gotten to the point when I see yet another “sci-fi chick” (that’s what I call them, since it’s often nerdy men who create these uber-hot, unbeatable women in their comics and stories) in a film… I don’t even bother to watch. Other than Milla Jovovich, who I would pay to watch read the phonebook.

PitandPen on December 29, 2012 at 11:19 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field