In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

FNTT Season 8, Round 1: the CONSTITUTION! edition

Jill

Background on FNTT here. Click through to read this round’s contenders. The usual reminder: Comments below are abusive, insulting and may be triggering.

1. Courage the Cowardly Dog:

To the extent that this blog is made possible by FCC protection of the airwaves and free unencumbered civil discourse by way of the FCC regulated Internet I would submit to you that this blog is not strictly private, but because it enjoys protection by a government agency (FCC) it falls to some extent under government protections and thus posters (both supportive and critical of feminist philosophy) are entitled to first amendment protections. May be I will test that theory in court. Hmmmm!! Adios, Feministe!!!

2. punchenstein

I’m all for abortion. I’m also all for businesses reserving the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason, no matter how retarded it is.

I myself plan to open a convenience store that will refuse service to gingers.

3. Scott

Your portrayal of the bill is disengenuous at best. But would am I to expect from a Fem-bot blog that quotes no portion of the bill proposed. You could say the bill requires the wearing of dresses by all women within the state of Georgia and not only would these dense readers beleive it, they would go rally against it. Word to the wise, read the bill. Then read it again. Then ask a friend that knows something about the law to explain it to you. Don’t get you information from blog nit-wits unless you enjoy being and sounding blissfully stupid when conversing on the topic.
There is no informed debate in this country. Only idiots spewing fifth-hand knowledge from a biased blog that derived their info from an even more biased news source. Think for yourself.

4. Chris

More filth peddling. I bet a Jew is behind this blog.
Maybe you can hook up with Jew Hefner, Jew Flynt etc
I’ll also bet this gets censored. Go on prove me right.

5. KS

Unacceptable content you say?
Thoughts outside of the group and free speech are unacceptable content here.


37 thoughts on FNTT Season 8, Round 1: the CONSTITUTION! edition

  1. I can’t even with this round…they’re all so stupid. I think I have to go with Chris for his blatant anti-semitism. I can’t make heads or tails of the rest

  2. I was going to vote for Courage the Cowardly Dog, but instead I voted for Chris. I am always amused about people bringing Jewism out of no where.

  4. I wanted to go with Chris, because of the awful anti-Jewish conspiracy theories. But I voted for courage because lately I’ve been annoyed with people that love to talk about “freedom of speech” but consider it a chore to look up what it actually means from a legal standpoint.

  7. Courage, for “May be I will test that [ridiculous] theory in court.” And for, “Adios, Feministe!!!” Our loss, I’m sure.

  8. I voted for Courage as the incumbent (isn’t he always in FNTT? I feel like I’ve seen that name many times before, but never in a comment that made it past moderation) and because despite the reams of apparent illegal censorship happening here at Feministe, the blog is still standing! Well, maybe once the FBI is done with pirates, they’ll move on to feminists.

  10. Jeeze, I dunno. On one hand, there’s Courage and his convoluted logic. On the other, there’s Scott who goes on a tirade about how everything in the post is wrong without giving one specific example to back up his own claims.

  12. Courage. For the excessive use of exclamation points and the insinuation that if s/he took Feministe to court it would somehow result in this blog going off-line because of … free speech infringement of some sort? Or … something?

  13. You’re right. Courage the Cowardly Dog appears to be a regular. He’s been on FNTT SEVEN times. Either that or Courage the Cowardly Dog is a very popular troll username…

  14. Courage, for clearly realizing why you won’t let him post but still taking the time to write out a convoluted story about how he might someday force you to let him post. Also: Hmmmm!! For some reason, I’m picturing Lucy from the Peanuts cartoons saying it.

  15. This one was difficult, but Courage nudged Chris and Scott. Chris, because of the wonderful anti-Semitism; he would have won if he had cited some more Jews Who Run The World And Ruin It For Pure White Men, such as Barack Obama and members of the Tri-Partite Commission. Scott, because of his butchering of language and grammar while telling us all that we can’t rely on the OP (presumably).

    But Courage wins it because of his thinly-veiled threat of legal action on a 1st Amendment basis, because your blog on the public Internet constitutes government action, like renting a portion of the 9th Street Garage to a coffee shop that would not serve blacks or enforcement of deed restrictions.

  16. As I am a redhead, I have to give punchenstein some love. He seems to be equating getting an abortion with a trip to a convenience store?

  17. Chris, for his casual assumption that OF COURSE feminist bloggers are in a conspiracy with multi-millionaire pornography tycoons, given their shared Judaism (?), and also his taunting of the mods to reject his post. Excellent fail at reverse psychology Chris.

  18. As I am a redhead, I have to give punchenstein some love.

    Oh, is that what he meant by gingers? I thought it was the name someone he disagreed with had used on this blog! I’m a redhead, too, silly me.

    He seems to be equating getting an abortion with a trip to a convenience store?

    That’s because he’s down the lane and into the Mace (but just a little bit).

  19. Hi Emolee, I think the term ‘ginger’ as a pejorative is common in the UK and in Australia (where I am). I’m not sure I’m a proper ‘ginger’ as I don’t have freckles and have gone dark red with help from the hairdresser, but I’m claiming the title anyhow!

    Here is a little more from wikipedia about anti-ginger sentiment

    Nice to see that Larry C, in true trolly fashion, is expanding his range of bigotry to include hair colour.

    That’s because he’s down the lane and into the Mace (but just a little bit).

    Ugh, wouldn’t surprise me a bit.

  20. Scott! For telling you that you are stupid in a comment riddled with spelling and grammar mistakes. And because I can just see one of the jerks in my law school’s Federalist Society drunkenly writing something like that. Which law was he referring to?

  21. I’m torn. Chris fills so many bingo squares, and a vote for him would certainly follow my trend of voting for the most horrifying troll in each category. Plus, I’m charmed by his brevity and how to the point he is. But punchenstein’s comparison between abortions and convenience stores is also compelling. If he had suggested opening an abortion convenience store, my vote would be his for sure.

  22. Courage gets some points for coming up with a really lousy law school exam hypothetical for how you could sue a private blog for violating the First Amendment. But Chris was the winner for me–drive by anti-Semitism is a troll classic.

  24. Scott came close to winning for his laughable argument that the people who contribute to this blog (and the person who writes most of the posts, Jill, a *lawyer*), know nothing about the law. But Courage won it with his convoluted and tenuous theory on how not only Feministe but the entire internet is somehow protected by the government (what SOPA? what PIPA?), his absurdly smug “hmmmmm!” and his vague threat to “take it to court.” Nothing like the combination of ignorance and overconfidence…

  26. I was tempted by Chris for the completely random anti-Semitism (and I tip my hat to those who selected him), but I really can’t not pick punchenstein for his “I’m gonna open a convenience store and discriminated against red-haired people!”

  27. Tough round. Tough round.
    I believe I’ll have to go with CtCD for the clueless smuggitude of it all, but I must commend Chris and punchenstein for a strong showing, a very strong showing indeed.

  29. Scott, of course. He’s read the Georgia immigration bill but writes worse English than an undocumented child. We love our Peach state, where the peaches come from SC, the intelligence comes from NY, and the crazies come out of the woods like gopher rats.
    @Chris-If your kind killed five million and they still rise to the top like cream, then the problem isn’t them, it’s you, watching Survivor and clueless as hell.

  32. While punchenstien’s desire to descriminate against Ginger’s made me laugh out loud, I had to go with Chris. Because, really?

  33. I love it when they say that you’ll only be proving their point if you delete the post. What do I do?! Do I leave it there, all abusive and stuff? Or do I prove I’m an evil dictator by taking it down?! Censorship!!!!

    My mind is exploding!

  35. I was going to go with the anti-ginger convenience store comment, then Chris came out of nowhere with “I bet a Jew wrote this” and I actually almost fell off my chair. My poor cat is not amused. But I’m still laughing.

    Do people really think like that?

  36. Its Courage the Cowardly Dog hands down! The only think I love more than the proliferation of armchair psychologists is the proliferation of armchair legal analysts.

    You go Dog!

Comments are currently closed.