English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Only people who know something about her please!

2007-05-02 20:07:27 · 8 answers · asked by withallduerespect42 1 in Social Science Gender Studies

All right let's change that! Please, ANYONE answer! As long as you have the slightest clue who she is!

2007-05-02 20:28:16 · update #1

8 answers

She is a chauvinistic misandrist who practices reverse discrimination and perpetuates sexism.
She advocates the growth of embryo's without male fertilisation. Male-free paradise?

Daly refused to admit male students to any of her classes at Boston College on the grounds that their presence inhibited class discussion. According to Daly, Women's Studies classes with men in them become "dumbed down."
**** her.
She was subsequently fired.
Fantastic!
The statistics she quotes in her work are absurd, unfounded and completely wrong.

Here is her homepage if you want to have a look:
http://www.marydaly.net/

2007-05-02 23:29:10 · answer #1 · answered by Nidav llir 5 · 2 0

First, how do You define the sobriquet 'radical feminist'? I'll bet You a penny to a pound that You have never even held a conversation with a real radical feminist. I have. Now tell me what laws She is breaking by having Her say about a socio-political situation? Is She not entitled to have Her say in just the same way that You have voiced Your opinion? Please, don't hesitate to cite the law(s) that allows You (Male) to have a view, but disqualifies Her (Female) from exercising that same 'right'? Don't let fear hold You back. State Your case, or hold Your tongue.
If I may be so bold as to paraphrase a Man far wiser than You or I shall ever be.....
I may not necessarily believe Her brand of crap, but I will defend Her right to say it ! And so too should We all !

PS: When She demands that all Women should burn together She was not advocating self immolation, but was making a reference to the 'Bra Burning' days of the Women's Liberation Movement.

2007-05-03 00:01:20 · answer #2 · answered by Ashleigh 7 · 1 0

I never knew a strongly committed and active feminist (and I've known quite a few) who was not, angry, profoundly insecure and unhappy.

They look and sound "Strong," and that is sort of therapeutic, but under all the charade is a miserable woman (sometimes a weak or conniving man) who has found a cathartic cover.

With so many real problems to address, many of them focus their energies almost exlusively upon denegrating men, most of whom never took any interest in them at all.

Why are they so often overweight women with Lit. degrees who are too sensitive to get real jobs and so pass their time quarreling with other women in a volunteer job? God! How bitter they become.

2007-05-03 01:52:57 · answer #3 · answered by john s 5 · 1 1

I don't think she'd look very good naked.

Also I think she's a notorious literary careerist whose most obnoxious public stance and semi-sole claim to fame has been to attack other writers that are by light years her superior.

Wikidary. Christ, gimme a break. Writtten in Hypertext, a term coined by a washed-up likely Karposi Sarcoma splattered limpwrist named Theodore Holm Nelson, that never made enough money spewing penned horsepoo to buy a lot in decent trailer park.

But hey, she'd still be my hero, if she'd show up here and pay all my bills. I'd tell everybody she was brilliant.

And that she looked great naked.

2007-05-03 03:52:20 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

there have been and are hardly ever any radical feminists, so it really is not undemanding to make generalizations about them, like no matter if or not they were or are frequently Christian or non-Christian or anti-Christian. countless human beings contained in the bible wondered God, and that i do not keep in mind them being seen evil, so it really is not any longer logical to assume that "every person" who questions God is "inherently" evil. subsequently, no feminist photographs were "dirty". the final public of your statements are generalizations and illogical.

2016-11-24 22:34:02 · answer #5 · answered by boven 4 · 0 0

She is sure proof why history should be left to historians rather than English professors.

Also she is bigot, a true chauvanist.

2007-05-02 22:58:09 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

She's a typical radical, who uses grand propositions and theories.

Basically, witch. XP

Btw, guess who, 'mily....

2007-05-02 20:46:15 · answer #7 · answered by Dark Lord Revan 1 · 1 1

i think she's a witch.
hi emily (:

2007-05-02 20:21:14 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers