Feminazi bitches

        

What is it with Feminuts and labels?

by Doug Hagin

 

The Left loves labels, in fact, I think it is safe to say they obsess over labeling everyone. African-American, Asian-American, this community, that community, and of course, Feminists are big on their labels too, take this gem of a label that the Other McCain writes about

‘Unintentionally Heteronormative’!

Now, if you are like me, you have heard the term Heteronormative before. It is something that people obsessed with their sexual orientation have come up with to show everyone how big a victim they are. A quick fact about Liberals, they love to be or pretend to be victims. as I have said before, Liberalism is an ideology for the perpetually pessimistic. Anyway, The Other McCain has more, on how someone could be “unintentionally Heteronormative”

Emily Nagoski is a Ph.D. “college health educator in Massachusetts.”Both an atheist and a progressive, Nagoski has “worked for well over a decade in the field of sexuality education and has grown into an impassioned advocate for social justice through sexual fulfillment.”

Social justice is code for Communism, which is never just and is pretty damned anti-social if you ask me, but, apparently Nagoski believes we can get us some social justice while we are getting us some!

So, in the fall semester of 2010, Professor Nagoski was eight weeks into teaching an entry-level course in Women’s Sexuality when she gave her lecture on the subject of “gender”:
After it, I received an email that, among a great deal else, described my curriculum — the entire curriculum, mark you — as “unintentionally heteronormative.”
Which made me stare, with one eyelid twitching, at my computer, because it means that for the last 8 weeks I have been failing, for two hours each week, over and over again, to make the most fundamental point of the class.
Because my class is neither unintentional nor heteronormative.
What’s the problem? In a word, science:
I’m, like, SO active in not assuming that anyone has any particular sexual orientation or gender identity and in teaching students not to make assumptions, to think critically about the science and the politics that live in the science. And of course I have an entire lecture on gender variation and another entire lecture on sexual orientation and identity (that’s next week).
But I AM teaching that humans are a sexually reproducing species wherein some have sperm (males) and some have eggs (females).
I suppose I’ve been relying on students to find their own way to embracing biology as a valuable way to think about sex. But this point of view is so foreign to many of them, many of them Sociology or Women’s Studies majors who have never thought about sex in terms of biology or reproduction, many politically active around these issues without ever having studied them academically. And I suppose it was too much to ask that they get there on their own.
I wanted them to find their way to the notion that it’s not “heteronormative” to recognize that sex is an evolutionarily adaptive reproduction strategy that, in humans, involves males and females; it’s just our biology, and there’s a complex, mutually interacting relationship between the biological and the social. I’ve been working toward that all semester. But they have not gotten there.

So, in a nutshell, Nagoski, as McCain points out dared to talk about a basic biological fact, and that is a SIN in the Left’s Bible of Political Correctness! She is therefore, in the demented minds of her fellow Leftists Heteranormative! Again with the labels!
Life would really be so much easier for Feminists, and all Liberals if they dropped their labeling campaign for a while. I mean we Conservatives do not get all worked up over labels, and that makes life easier. Allow me to give you an example. A few weeks ago I was at the gun range, when the guy who had been shooting in the next lane asked me what if I was shooting a Glock. I replied no, I had a Sig Sauer, and he then remarked at how accurate I was, and we chatted about his gun, a Ruger, and some other firearm related things. He asked about my grip, and stance, and how he could improve his accuracy, and I gave him some tips. And, after talking a bit more I left, and went home to clean my guns (I also had my little Taurus .40 caliber with me that day). And you know what Liberals, at no time in our conversation did it matter that this gentleman was Black, or that I was White. We talked about a common interest, shooting, that is all. Skin color? Who cares? It is, say it with me Liberals, IRRELEVANT! It would not have mattered if that man was Gay, or what his religion was. To Conservatives, those things are unimportant. Here, then, are some differences the Left and the Right
Conservatives do not care who you sleep with, Liberals do. Yes it is true that Conservatives do not want to have a Gay person’s sexuality flaunted in our faces. The same is true for a Heterosexual’s sexuality. That is your private business.
Conservatives do not care about skin color, Liberals do.
Conservatives also do not really care if you are Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, Catholic, Jewish, Hindu, or whatever. Again that is YOUR business. Hell, we do not even mind if you are an Atheist. Now we DO mind if you are an Atheist who tries to belittle people of faith as stupid. But still it is not you Atheism that causes us offense, it is the fact that you are a complete asshole!
In short, we do not get into labels, we see people as individuals. We do not expect people to think, or vote in a certain way because of their sexual orientation, or gender, or race. Again, to a Conservative the INDIVIDUAL is important. To Liberals, it is always the Collective. And yes, I will say it again, every difference between Left and Right goes back to Collectivism (the Left) and Individualism (the Right).

From TDG: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/