My three favorite types of nonsense have combined into a Megazord of stupidity:
2,000 years ago Mary Magdalene even if impregnated via test tube in the lab on the alien space ship, gave birth via the cunt, so no tight virginity there.
Ever since then, the holy trinity…
1/ God, an ethreal being that no-one ever saw, except jesus, so if he existed he was an alien ship doctor.. eg he was NOT human.
2/ Jesus, who was NOT human, even the biblical teachings stress this point, he was not a man.
3/ Mary Magdalene, the only human, and therefore the MOST REVERED human in the religion is a wimminz, who fucked an alien to get preggers and got Joe the carpenter to pay for it all and feed and house them.
“Chivalry” in the middle ages was literally based on worship of Mary Magdalen’s cunt, and the chivalric symbology and iconography is replete with cunt symbolism, right down to the order of the garter.
The only remotely male centric tenets of christianity were lifted wholesale from other religions and beliefs and incorporated in an early example of embrace and extend.
Christianity has NEVER been a man’s religion.
Hell even the pristhood, the highest echelons of the meme, were not allowed to fuck.
Is it bad that I’m so used to misogyny, religious nonsense, and ancient alien delirium that my main reaction is “Mary (mom of Jesus) is not the same person Mary Magdalene, dumbass”?
(Via Lousy Canuck)
Not bad, because that was my first thought as well.
What’s a bigger concern to me is that you make me feel old by referring to a “Megazord” when my mind goes straight to Voltron. One step worse than that is that even though I’m at least a decade older than you and have my own geek touchstones, I still knew what a Megazord was, by some sort of geek osmosis. Oh boy…
Double bonus points for the Power Rangers reference. Which Power Ranger are you?
“Is it bad that I’m so used to misogyny, religious nonsense, and ancient alien delirium that my main reaction is “Mary (mom of Jesus) is not the same person Mary Magdalene, dumbass”?”
No, since my thought was “how can anybody take seriously someone who doesn’t know there were multiple Marys, and who can’t use “eg” correctly?”
Also, repeated reference to Mary’s cunt is unlikely to win one bonus points in most any circle that values reasonableness. Clearly this person should be dropped in a social oubliette and never heard from again.
– Also, the holy trinity is the father, the son, and the holy ghost (or spirit), no mention of Mary mother of Jesus ever.
– They were all three portrayed as straight up out and out masculine/male, human or not is besides the point
– and confusing Mary mother of Jesus, THE virgin of all virgins, and Mary Magdalene, the whore, is just insane. They represent the only two acceptable female archetypes from christian mentality, white and black, perfect and damned.
Does it really need saying that this author is kind of nuts?
I think I felt my IQ dropping as I read that thing…why do I always look?!
Maybe if I strawmanned feminism like MRA in this article, I can earn brownie points!
Regards, Egalitarian.
No, silly. All ridiculous claims from feminists come from “straw feminists” that are in your mind.
It’s not like there are feminists, like… Asking for a national castration day. Femitheist is a FIGMENT OF THINE IMAGINATION. Or an evul MRA plot to smear feminism.
Lol. I had to look up femitheist. Xe specifically says xe’s not a feminist (either radfem or mainstream.)
Reads like satire to me. But MRAs are so desperate to claim victimhood, they’ll promote an obscure, outre troll as if it were taken seriously by anyone besides themselves.
Spin spin spin.
She said she doesn’t represent mainstream feminism or RadFem Hub. Not that she isn’t a feminist.
Anyone with some brains would know that the fringe doesn’t represent the majority. Except apparently BlagHag.
You beat me to it: my reaction was “holy fuck, reading that hurtz yer bwainz.”
Dude, way to fall for Pope Gregory the Great’s propaganda. Mary Magdelene was introduced in the gospel of Luke directly before a woman accused of harlotry. Gregory deliberately conflated the two to emphasize the redemptive nature of Christ’s grace, and the slander has stuck to her name for 1500 years.
For clarity, I’m not suggesting that feminism or MRA are particularly bad (I don’t think equality between genders is bad at all). However; I’ve seen what the ideologies of MRA and Feminism can do, so I’m not prompt to embrace either since they’re slowly turning in on themselves.
My issue is that the post has MRAs attached to it as an attempt to make MRA sound bad, hence the strawman.
I thought the femitheist was a joke. I wish it were so :( That blog is disgusting.
Femitheist Divine? Seriously? Is that actually an honest question?
Femitheist is a female supremacist. Female supremacy, by definition, is not feminism.
Well, unless of course you’re an MRA, and you think that “females are better than males” and “male and female should be equal” are equivalent statements.
Man, it’s easy to win arguments when you define things in a convenient manner.
Feminism: “Fight for equality”
MRA: “Resistance to equality, misogyny, hatred towards women”
Putting those definitions in play ,you win before the argument even starts. Now. If you can deny self-identified feminists like Allecto from being feminists because it doesn’t suit your own definition…
Please tell me why I can’t simply discard the crazies on the MRA side, and simply say- “Real MRA is concerned with serious men’s issues, like how they are not taken seriously when abused physically or sexually or how they are given greater punishment for equal crime”.
Why can you do it and I can’t?
Because new-age feminism or rather psuedofeminism is full of horse shit.
Go ahead and discard the crazies and the haters.
Please.
Maybe then the three of you who are left can stop whining, and go accomplish something. Like opening shelters for male victims of violence. And closing that 2 to 5 month discrepancy in sentencing between men and women.
2-5 month? You haven’t been reading. Why don’t you see the news of pedophile women getting 30 days in jail?
By the way: Very privileged of you to tell MRAs to do with their own money what women are constantly getting via public funding (like college grants, and women’s shelters).
Yes, I used the word “privileged” because, well… How much more of a show of privilege is it to ask someone to do on their own what the government does for them already?
What the fuck was that? It reads like a bad joke, like bad satire/parody, but I believe someone thought this out, wrote it down, then edited it. Finally, their work done, they looked at it and said to themselves, “Now this is a great argument!”
And I didn’t even notice the error with the Marys. But that is a detail that is easily missed in that maelstrom of stupid.
My first thought, on reading this:
“The only remotely male centric tenets of christianity were lifted wholesale from other religions”
…was that the fetishisation of the virgin Mary by the early catholic church was also lifted wholesale from the cult of Isis.
… or be women.
Huh.
Sure they were. They could fuck anyone they pleased, it’s getting married they couldn’t do. If caught, they’re transferred to another Parish, their bad reputation buried under a secret anthill.
If they really were not allowed to fuck, they would have been defrocked and locked up where they couldn’t actually get at their victims.
No true Scotsman!
It’s what makes it worthy as a point and laugh as opposed to a mere ‘where’s his meds?’
Interdasting.
Regarding the conflation of two Marys, I posted this over on Jason Thibeault’s site:
I’m not 100% sure about this, but the conflation of Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Jesus seems to be a Jesus Myth People conceit. (here follows a list of reasons why Jesus Myth People annoy the crap out of me) For me, it’s pretty clear that the Gospels at least portray Mary Magdalene as Jesus’ girlfriend or wife, and if neither of those, someone who was still at least as close to him as his disciples.
Now of course, we don’t know how much of the gospel accounts we can trust, but I feel pretty safe in saying that there was a Mary known to Jesus’ inner circle who wasn’t his mother.
I don’t know how bad it is that that was YOUR first thought; MY first thought was “The third person in the Trinity is the holy spirit, DUH!”
You can’t generalize from one (or even a few) particular incidents and claim they prove systemic discrimination. There is discrimination, but the stats I’ve read–in nonbiased sources–have the sentencing disparity, overall, to come down to between 2-5.something months.
Lol. They really hate the idea of spending their money, don’t they?
As I told you on Jason’s blog, when feminists first opened shelters for battered women, they didn’t have any funding either. They just did it. With their own money. And considering the income disparities between men and women, it was not easy.
And much of the funding still comes from private donations. Likewise the college funding you’re going on about.
Prove there’s a systemic problem and a need for funding, and agitate for it. Nobody’s stopping you.
Unfortunately, the mainstream MRM is full of misogyny and terminal stupidity. If you want the reforms you’re looking for, you’re better off working with the movement that represents equality between genders–feminism.
I’m not sure what a “Megazord of stupidity” would look like, but I’m having a fun time imagining. Itasha Robo from the parody Super-Sentai [i]Akibaranger[/i] comes to mind as a possible Megazord candidate, but it’s not a combining robot. Maybe something from M.E.G.A.S. XLR? Baka Sentai M.R.Anger?
Looks like we forgot the Rosy Cross. The theory is already incomplete.
codyherrmann
Show us an MRA who sounds good. Double dare ya.
Does it really matter why modern Christians believe that Mary Magdalene was a whore? The author was commenting on modern Christianity and got it way wrong on so many levels. not that it really matters since Christianity gets just about everything wrong all on its own.
The concept of the holy trinity is likely due to an error in translation, and in any case is based on a single line.
The concept of a 6000 year old earth is based on later editors trying to determine how long the stories in the bible would have taken to transpire, not any explicit mention in the original texts.
The funniest thing to me is how the religious go on and on about how their religion is old and valid for being so, yet their religion is nothing like the religion of their ancestors from whom they inherited the religion in the first place.
From the books I’ve read, the commentator’s I’ve engaged, and the videos I’ve watched, it seems to be a fairly accurate summation.
They can call themselves whatever the hell they want. Doesn’t make it so, and for similar reasons to why Creationists can call themselves “Creation scientists”, and it doesn’t make it any less of an oxymoron.
Regardless, historically, feminism has always been about raising women to equal status with men. This has been true of feminism from Mary Wollstonecraft to Ophelia Benson.
So Femitheist and the few who believe in that supremacist nonsense can claim the mantle of feminism, but there’s no reason to take it seriously, given the context.
The rape issue is tied primarily to masculine gender stereotypes and the gender role based idea that men are to be the “strong” ones. Gender roles. You know, the ones feminism seems to abolish?
As to the second, if it’s even true (No opinion; I haven’t seen any data), this can also be fixed by feminism.
Not saying you can’t, but you have one hell of a burden of proof to satisfy. I’ve known quite a few fighters against the gender roles that disadvantage men. I’d say we have at least one on this very collective (https://proxy.freethought.online/alstefanelli/2012/07/12/faggots-losers-and-wimps-a-treatise-on-gender-society-and-real-men/).
You know what they often identify as? Male feminists.
Doesn’t matter, as far as sexism and Christianity. Wherever they got the idea, it’s wrong.
Using this in an apologist argument is stupid. Unless you are proposing a “pure” Christian movement, purged of misogynistic influences from elsewhere. But in a general apologist bit like this… it’s stupid. “We’re completely wrong, but it’s ok, we got the wrongness from elsewhere.”. That’s pretty much the stupidest argument I’ve ever heard. Hell, the popularity of the Bible is a better argument to defend Christianity with. And I doubt anyone here will take that one very far.
Guuuuuuize! It’s totally wrong to think the Christian right is extreme and say so. We can’t let outliers (even when they aren’t) dictate how we talk about a group!
The one I do odd menial work for mostly operates out of donation. Not to say they don’t get government money but it’s still mostly “their” own money. I wonder what the situation is like around the U.S.
Didn’t even recognize the reference until I saw some of the comments … and then I thought: “Power Rangers! Yay!” I used to love them when I was little. I’ll even admit I watched a marathon when I was in high school (during spring break, I think, because I randomly came across it while sitting around at home).
*Hug* (if you’d like one)
Quote from the ridiculousness:
[Fixing the quotes …]
Quote from the ridiculousness:
People’s ability to take one of the most misogynistic institutions on the face of the earth and turn the whole thing around to make it seem like it’s actually favoring women never ceases to amaze me.
I’ve heard before the complaint that many men aren’t going to church, etc. and then people conclude it must be because the church focuses too much on women, isn’t manly enough, etc. This, of course, conveniently ignores all the bigoted teachings in the religion that favor men and basically tell women to live their whole lives in subservience to male relatives.
Don’t nuns have to refrain from sex as well? How is this evidence of discrimination against men? People don’t know what they’re talking about.
As for the story of Mary, Joseph, and Jesus, my own interpretation is that God raped Mary and instructed Mary and Joseph to take care of his son.
Sorry, I’m generally pretty supportive, but even I found that to be a fairly incoherent post and, despite virtually no religious training, I immediately picked up the confusion between two entirely different mythical Marys.
One of my first thoughts was that a virgin would still be able to have a baby. It’s not like virginity magically equips you with the ability to stretch your vaginal wall. This guy knows as much about biology as he does about religion.
Someone watched Prometheus and confused it with a documentary.
Then whatever you do, don’t read the original thread and blog post, which includes such gems as
“I suppose that a parallel could be drawn between the goddess-worshipping Mesopotamian cultures with child sacrifice and fertility rites and its modern feminist variants with abortion and sperm-banks.”
And
“Likely not. It has been a struggle ever since the beginning of time to evade the unconscious rule of woman. It is what our hindbrain tells us to do but what our thinking brain tries to resist. Thus, we have the rise and fall of civilizations. When we follow the female, all things are relative truth and we live in grass huts. When we follow the Absolute Truth by using the male’s ability to reach Objective Truth, we “rise up from being beasts of the fields” and start living a more civilized, structured existence. Marxism as well, btw, is based in 100% Relative Truth, like a woman – thus you can see why they are ideologically opposed to such things as the US Constitution and Christianity, both of which “order the truth.””
Originally priests could have sex though. They changed that because of property rights
What are you talking about? Been a feminist for nearly 20 years and have never heard of whatever this is.
Making up things to throw shit at feminism, or are you that fucking desperate to find something wrong with feminism you’re bringing up shit only you have ever heard of?
Which pathetically transparent trick you pulling?
This broke my brain. The MRA argument, I mean. Either that, or the vodka. Not sure at this point.
Funnily enough, my first thought was, Jesus definitely was a man, and claiming he wasn’t is one of the well-known named heresies (not that I can actually recall the name of it).
TRiG.
Actually in early texts there is some representation of the Holy Ghost not being entirely masculine, though this isn’t common today admittedly.