Are these people for real?

[boot_the_grime]

So I occasionally stumbled onto this video on Youtube, since it was under 'related videos' to some videos about feminism. www.youtube.com/watch This is a woman ranting about feminism and "male disposability" - i.e. the "women and children first" mentality. The thing is, I agree with her on a lot of things, in that I despise the "women and children

Comments

[kikimay]

I really can't believe it.
But I do know that there are people truly convinced that feminism is a bad thing. I'm very interested in those women who are anti-feminist. Their situation seems to me a paradox.

[norwie2010]

See, and these ideas and non-thoughts (because really: who could call them "thoughts"?!) are a reason why - from time to time - I'm not feeling all that unkind towards Robespierre or Stalin...

[ever_neutral]

....

W O W.

[gabrielleabelle]

(This is totally related, bear with me)

I was watching The Birth of a Nation last night. I'm not sure if you're familiar with it, but it's a silent film from 1917 that's noteworthy for being simultaneously a great work of cinema and horrendously racist. It's a three-hour film about the US Civil War and Reconstruction. The first half is only mildly offensive. The second half, which portrays Reconstruction, is overtly and disgustingly racist.

The premise is that after the Civil War, the "white South" became crushed under the heel of the "black South". by enacted "radical policies" of full equality, black people fully took over, terrorized the white people of the south, disenfranchised them, tried to rape all the white women, etc etc.

The Ku Klux Klan was formed as defenders of the white people and boldly launched a rebellion that put the blacks in their proper place.

It intrigues me because that reflects, I think, current views not only on race but also on gender and feminism. For some people, equality is not equality. It's a

[boot_the_grime]

I'm familiar with The Birth of the Nation since it's such a famous part of film history - and famous for its racism as well; it often gets brought up together with Lenni Riefenstahl's "Triumph of the Will" and the works of Sergei Eisenstein in the discussions about art and propaganda, i.e. films that are considered great artistic/aesthetic achievements while also being horrendous propaganda. But I've only seen some scenes from "The Birth of a Nation", never the entirety of it - and I don't particularly want to. I feel it would be far more annoying than the other works I've mentioned: "The Triumph of the Will" is a documentary that glamorizes the Nazis and Hitler, while Eisenstein's propaganda is to use figures from Russian history to raise nationalistic feelings that Stalin wanted to raise at the time. Neither involve the direct and blatant falsification of contemporary history, and I don't know if I'd be able to watch that

[gabrielleabelle]

Yeah. There's no logic there. It doesn't make any sense.

:/

[misskittydu34]

Wow, I have no words for those comments...