Tag Archives: Communism

LAF says plastic pollution gets women infected with feminism

I am glad someone came down on the really dumb article by Mrs Elliot titled: “Could environmental factors contribute to feminism?” at the LAF site.

The F Word, Contemporary UK Feminism, in an article, titled “Feminism caused by environmental factors” lambasts the stupidity of LAF.

Mrs Elliott seems to truly believe that “hormones from the pill and hormones from our insatiable appetite for synthetic goods” are leading to the rise in women asking for equality. How? Well apparently because:
Some years ago now, a widely publicised study carried out on genetic gender “mistakes” leading to a rise in reproductive disorders (among other problems) within the polar bear population alerted society to the dangers we’re storing up for ourselves from nearly half a century of the pill and synthetics. (The concentration of hormone levels in Arctic waters is greatest there due to ocean current patterns.) Plastics have also been shown to effect gender in developing unborn mammals. A web report deals with alarming changes in rodents exposed to very low levels of plastic-related hormones whilst developing.

From (I kid you not) Ladies Against Feminism

I do love the idea of plastics “effecting” gender in unborn mammals, as if gender wouldn’t happen without it! Plus the sheer misinformation conflating biological sex and cultural here is staggering. I suspect Mrs Elliott means “affecting” gender which deals with the first, if not the last criticism. However this isn’t an exercise in pedantry – althought Mrs Elliott goes on to misuse (perhaps abuse would be nearer) the concepts of post-modernism, Marxism and Communism too. Mrs Elliott, of course, ignores the fact that the women’s movement, calling for equality, predates the manufacturing discovery of plastics. It’s a fact to be conveniently forgotten, apparently, that suffragists were not exposed to similar environmental factors which were a result of scientific advances some forty years later.”

Do read the full article at this link.

Leave a comment

Filed under Ladies Against Feminism

In which, Lady Lydia calls Karl Marx a lazy bum


There was this really stupid and ridiculous book review of the Communist Manifesto onBrotherJudd‘s blaming Stalin’s World War II activities on Karl Marx, who died in 1883. A big time-gap, but the addle-brained can explain away anything.

It is long past time to stop flagellating ourselves about the supposed irremediable flaws and built in contradictions of capitalism, time now to speak the truth:  this is an evil book and Marx was an evil man.  Together they were responsible for much of the murder and mayhem of the Century just ended.  To pretend otherwise, even in a mere attempt to be charitable to Marx, is to dishonor the hundreds of millions of innocent people who were murdered in the brutal process of proving that Communism is an inherently homicidal totalitarian utopian mirage.

There were of course a lot of reactions (most highly sensible compared to Lydia’s) to it:

Dave on Dec-06-2006, 12:23 says: “Marx was an evil man” what!!!! you cant judge if a man is evil just by a book or what happened because of the book. if i am correct neither marx or engles were alive when the communist government started treating people badly. all they did was construct a book about how they think government should be. sure maybe their intentions were not pure and parts may sound mean (not evil) but no man or woman is perfect. so if saying that they are evil would be like saying that every man is evil. and in that sence you would be evil for reviewing an “evil” book and i would be evil for reading it
Mason on Sep-20-2005, 15:53, says: “I have never heard reviews in my life that have failed to understand the historical and sociological context to such an extent. Shame on you!!”
USA on Apr-07-2005, 14:56 says: “Silly reviewer, don’t you realize that Marks’ proposals number 2, 5, 6 and 10 have been introduced by capitalist states long time ago? Proposals 3, 4 and 7 were partially used, too (in the form of inheritance tax and confiscation of enemy combatant-owned assets).
What is left? Proposals 1., 8. and 9. Looks like Marks succesfully pushed through 70% of his proposals.”
Archereon on Jan-07-2005, 09:34 says: “so no one cares to comment about Marx and his time spent as a newspaper editor where the govornment sent two censors to try and keep a handle on him, and he got around both”
Smith on May-21-2003, 11:23 says: “preposterous closing paragraph – really, really stupid.
i’m not communist or even socialist, but the evils perpetrated by stalin etc do not make marx evil. any half-wit can make that intellectual leap.
you would not like me to blame the evils of the crusades and the spanish inquisition on the authors of the bible.”
“This is an evil book and Marx was an evil man.” marx was a theorist. the corruption and failure of his theories as they were set into practice has little to do with marx himself. although his commentary on the capitalist market was exaggerated, it was not without basis; but i’m sure that you’ve read the manifesto and are well aware of that. as for all the “hundreds of millions of innocent people who were murdered,” i highly doubt that marx took up pen and paper one fine 
morning with the intent to destroy his own nation. then again, i have the funny feeling that if i 
were to slap the word “communist” (or even something that sounds a hundred times less 
liberal) on any book – regardless of content – it would automatically find a “grade f” stamped across its broadside, the second you heard of it.
But of course Lady Lydia had to put in her two bits worth:

Lady Lydia says: You are right about Marx. Any serious investigation of his life, reveals he was a lazy good for nothing bum, who didn’t want to support his own wife and children. No wonder he wanted the state to care for the family. He left his wife in squalor and his children to starve, while he studied philosophy at the University. Hundreds of naive students are still following his example. (One is tempted to remind her that she is also living in poverty and her daughter on charity. Her jobless son-in-law is not supporting her, her daughter or his own family, while he is living off Lady Lydia and is financed by her to boot….and anyway what has that got to do with a book review of the Communist Manifesto is beyond me)
Lady Lydia says: Don’t forget, it was the capitalistic endeavors of Engle’s father that enabled Marx to attend University and become a philosopher. While vilifying capitalism, he lived off of it.
Brit on Oct-14-2003, 09:27 says: appropriately enough, here in england ‘sherman’ is cockney rhyming slang for a certain activity
That comment on “sherman” kind of dampened her enthusiasm for spouting fabricated nonsense.

Leave a comment

Filed under Lady Lydia