Post: #1

Post from R TRP . This story has gone by quietly, I don't get why.

--------
Video: Christina Hoff Sommers sides with feminists on Michelle Fields hoax and calls Trump a bully

Summary: C.H Sommers is a typical feminist after all.

Body: C.H Sommers is the "good"feminist who wrote the book "The War on Boys". She is notorious for attacking fanatical feminists and she did some events with Milo.

But this time, she is exposed.

Indeed, everyone now knows about the Michelle Field hoax, the girl who falsely accused Trump’s campaign manager of assault. Everyone knows the story and the video evidence is clear. There was no assault, just a gentle grab of the arm.

But Christina Hoff Sommers and other feminists have signed a petition to have Trump's campaign manager fired, even after reviewing all the evidence. In an interview, she doubled down on it, even if it would ruin the man's life by branding him as a woman beater.

In addition, we learn from Sommers in her interview from last week that she thinks Trump is a bully, an unstable man. She didn't talk about his policies, but him as a man. That’s funny considering she defended boys for decades, but when a real man shows up and bravely fights the status quo, she demonizes him and use the typical SWJ tactics to attack him.

Worse, she said she supports John Kasich. The guy who conveniently stayed behind the scene, who didn’t tackle any of the tough issues, who stayed PC all the time. If she supports that guy, then it means she thinks he's a good man, and that Trump is a bad man.

Lesson learned: always trust your gut about women, even those who appears to be on the right side.

Post: #2

Here's the video for those interested:






She's a woman. Not surprised one bit. Listen to her, she talks like a child. I'll admit I liked her Joe Rogan interview and think it's great that she tried to advocate a little bit of reason in the feminist movement (I shit you not, yes, she tried to do that). But after all, she's still a woman. Just like Milo, who she held some speeches with, is still a homo. They're useful as long as they help bring our agenda to wussies but never bet on them to hold course. She just showed herself to have the "reasoning" of... a woman. - Who would've thunk.
In the same way, as much as I currently like Milo and his work, I'm just waiting for him to let his fag-side get the best of him and stab us in the back or at least abandon course. Not a matter of if, but a matter of when.

Stereotypes are there for a reason.

Post: #3

I'm not familiar with her work at all, but in that interview she comes across as a typical daffy older woman whose opinion you would never take seriously.

Post: #4

Her instincts are right when it comes to boys, but when it comes to men - specifically alpha male men like Donald Trump - she feels threatened and/or left behind by them, and wants to take them down a peg. Sailer's Law of Female Journalism: The most heartfelt articles by female journalists tend to be demands that social values be overturned in order that, Come the Revolution, the journalist herself will be considered hotter-looking.

Post: #5

Old women will always hate Trump no matter what. And it has nothing to do with his policies, or even his attitude. It's entirely because he trades his wives in once they wear out and that's poking at the biggest insecurity post-wall women have: the fear that once their looks are gone they have nothing of value.

Post: #6

American Enterprise Institution cuts her cheques and they're pro-Cruz, meh.

Post: #7

(04-12-2016 01:59 PM)Aurini Wrote:  Her instincts are right when it comes to boys, but when it comes to men - specifically alpha male men like Donald Trump - she feels threatened and/or left behind by them, and wants to take them down a peg. Sailer's Law of Female Journalism: The most heartfelt articles by female journalists tend to be demands that social values be overturned in order that, Come the Revolution, the journalist herself will be considered hotter-looking.

Little boys don't reject her; alpha men do.

Post: #8

Very disappointing.

Post: #9

I've been taking a break here, but felt the need to chime back in since I've long been a fan of Christina Hoff Summers (check my previous posts).

The first point I want to make is she's built her assumption on a wrong fact. In that interview, she states at 4:07 that Michelle Fields was from a right wing publication (Brietbart), so she's "not out to get (Trump)."

Incorrect.

It's already been determined that Michelle Fields was part-Honduran (this came up on Twitter when Heartiste and others were trying to figure out if she was Jewish). Well, the GotNews site reported that Michelle's mother is a Honduran activist who runs a business whose existence depends on a steady stream of illegals entering the country. She's opposed Trump on her Facebook page -- which she's since taken down.

The Web site states: "The elder Fields runs a nonprofit for illegal immigrants in Los Angeles that receives a substantial portion of its funding from the U.S. and California tax payers." The full story is worth reading.

I've stated before that Hoff Summers helped set the groundwork for the manosphere with her book "The War Against Boys." How did someone with such a pedigree get this so wrong? Because of a reason that BortimusPrime already touched on: She's old. I'd like to expand on what he said, though.

1). We are all products of our era in how we view the media.

Christina is 65 years old. She still thinks the mainstream media tells the truth because that's the media she knew growing up. That's not the case anymore. She didn't think to go to the GotNews site. She still thinks the Washington Post is going to be honest. But there is such a thing as a "lie of omission," which is what the media did here.

2). We are all products of our era in how we view male-female relations.

Christina came of age in the mid-1960s and thinks, deep down, it's "inappropriate" for women to be "manhandled." What she doesn't get is that women today aren't the same creatures that inspired romantic Beach Boys and Temptations songs. Today's men grew up with women who were more like Rhianna than Shelley Fabares (look her up).

So for a man to grab a woman, it's not the high crime it would have been in 1965, when she was attending the senior prom in a dainty party dress. Today, that woman might have played more sports than the average guy (thanks Title IX) or the guy might have played against her in a competitive sport. You can't blame guys of Corey Lewandowski's era (Generation X) for treating women exactly the way the school teachers taught them to treat women -- as one of the guys. As someone to compete with.

***

There's a movie from the '80s called "I'm Gonna Git You Sucka," where a character gets out of prison after 15 years or so, and goes out dressed in a garish '70s pimp outfit, not realizing things have changed. I was reminded of this scene while listening to Hoff Summers speak.

Her landmark book "The War Against Boys" came out in 2000, when she was 49 -- still young enough to be of her era and to comment on current events with a sharp eye. That work should still be appreciated (I'd recommend reading it), but what she says now should not, sad to say.

She still looks good and has great legs, though. So maybe someday some GILF appreciator will be able to get her up to speed. What's Stiffler doing these days?

Post: #10

(04-12-2016 01:49 PM)Requiem Wrote:  Just like Milo, who she held some speeches with, is still a homo. They're useful as long as they help bring our agenda to wussies but never bet on them to hold course. She just showed herself to have the "reasoning" of... a woman. - Who would've thunk.
In the same way, as much as I currently like Milo and his work, I'm just waiting for him to let his fag-side get the best of him and stab us in the back or at least abandon course. Not a matter of if, but a matter of when.

Stereotypes are there for a reason.

Not disagreeing, but what possible scenario can you envision Milo/other gays abandoning or betraying mens' issues?

Women have interests and objectives diametrically opposed to men's, therefore they cannot be fully trusted. But are the interests of gays in any way necessarily at odds with those of hetero men? As long as they're not pedos and aren't pushing their politics on anyone. The gay agenda seems to have more to do with globalism and socialism than serving actual gays. As Milo said, gay men are natural libertarians.

Post: #11

She came out two weeks ago on Twitter with this nonsense.

I already blasted her for it in the Trump Thread: /thread-48360...pid1265827

My point was all female "allies" of the Manosphere will return to their true nature sooner or later, likely without realizing it.

Post: #12

^^ @R_Niko:

Some examples how he could turn on us:

- He claims he's Christian, yet he's gay. It's a conflict he has to live with for now. Since there's no way in hell he'll start liking pussy, at some point he might get fed up with the cognitive dissonance and throw his religion over board. I'm not Christian and so this alone is no reason for me to blame him for anything but he could use his "newly found freedom" to advocate full on degeneracy.
Example: he used to argue against gay marriage, then I saw an interview all of a sudden where he said he was wrong about that.

- He could also, as already mentioned several times, abuse his growing popularity increasingly for self-portrayal, making it more and more about himself and his lifestyle rather than the cause. It's already unbearable because his constant postings about cocks and all that is already a form of advocating his lifestyle and while I personally think it's somewhat funny, I also see the issue of it being a bad influence on younger generations (or maybe even older folks). They might look up to him because he's talking about the issues they're dealing with but then they see him as this raging faggot and maybe start thinking this is "cool". He's helping the leftist agenda by glorifying homosexuality with his behavior.

- He could also do a full Shapiro on us out of nowhere. Shapiro only belongs to one of the three main categories of people to be wary of as political allies. Milo belongs to two.

And so on and so forth. The possibilities are endless to be honest, I don't know why this seems hard to imagine.

Post: #13

(04-12-2016 03:23 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  So for a man to grab a woman, it's not the high crime it would have been in 1965, when she was attending the senior prom in a dainty party dress. Today, that woman might have played more sports than the average guy (thanks Title IX) or the guy might have played against her in a competitive sport. You can't blame guys of Corey Lewandowski's era (Generation X) for treating women exactly the way the school teachers taught them to treat women -- as one of the guys. As someone to compete with.

Since when grabbing a woman is a high crime? Probably since feminists decided it was. I don't think it ever was especially in the 60s. Just look at the movies of the era, men still slapped women and pushed them around, along with other men. If anything, it was still the norm at the time and Sommers along with other feminists didn't like it.

Sommers might be reasonable, but she's a feminist nonetheless. This particular issue isn't about the media, because she saw the video evidence, and she still thinks it's a crime. She wants the man fired from his job. How can she reconcile this position with everything she said about SJWs?

I did what Corey did to both men and women in bars and clubs a few times when I was in a rush, I said "excuse me" and I had to move them. So I'm a criminal according to her, I should be an outcast, branded a woman beater for the rest of my life. Give me a fucking break, her position is insane, and she has no excuses.

Post: #14

(04-12-2016 04:01 PM)Requiem Wrote:  ^^ @R_Niko:

Some examples how he could turn on us:

- He claims he's Christian, yet he's gay. It's a conflict he has to live with for now. Since there's no way in hell he'll start liking pussy, at some point he might get fed up with the cognitive dissonance and throw his religion over board. I'm not Christian and so this alone is no reason for me to blame him for anything but he could use his "newly found freedom" to advocate full on degeneracy.
Example: he used to argue against gay marriage, then I saw an interview all of a sudden where he said he was wrong about that.

- He could also, as already mentioned several times, abuse his growing popularity increasingly for self-portrayal, making it more and more about himself and his lifestyle rather than the cause. It's already unbearable because his constant postings about cocks and all that is already a form of advocating his lifestyle and while I personally think it's somewhat funny, I also see the issue of it being a bad influence on younger generations (or maybe even older folks). They might look up to him because he's talking about the issues they're dealing with but then they see him as this raging faggot and maybe start thinking this is "cool". He's helping the leftist agenda by glorifying homosexuality with his behavior.

- He could also do a full Shapiro on us out of nowhere. Shapiro only belongs to one of the three main categories of people to be wary of as political allies. Milo belongs to two.

And so on and so forth. The possibilities are endless to be honest, I don't know why this seems hard to imagine.

Is Milo a ??? I thought he was Greek, at least on his dad's side (and in his butt).

Also: you make good points, but keep in mind what Milo said on Joe Rogan's podcast: that he doesn't feel gays are entirely equal to straights (though he did argue separately for gay supremacy, which I took to be a bit satirical), and also that if he had the choice, he'd make himself not gay. He seemed utterly sincere and uncharacteristically humble when he said that.

I can't see someone who admits he'd rather not be gay trying to "convert" anyone's kids, though you never know, power does funny things to people. Still I think that Milo's grandiose personality is a bit of an affectation--he's so shameless he must know exactly what he's doing, meaning he's highly self-aware, meaning he's less likely to get up his own ass than the person who feigns modesty, ie most liberals.

Post: #15

(04-12-2016 04:08 PM)Daddy Wrote:  

(04-12-2016 03:23 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  So for a man to grab a woman, it's not the high crime it would have been in 1965, when she was attending the senior prom in a dainty party dress. Today, that woman might have played more sports than the average guy (thanks Title IX) or the guy might have played against her in a competitive sport. You can't blame guys of Corey Lewandowski's era (Generation X) for treating women exactly the way the school teachers taught them to treat women -- as one of the guys. As someone to compete with.

Since when grabbing a woman is a high crime? Probably since feminists decided it was. I don't think it ever was especially in the 60s. Just look at the movies of the era, men still slapped women and pushed them around, along with other men. If anything, it was still the norm at the time and Sommers along with other feminists didn't like it.

Sommers might be reasonable, but she's a feminist nonetheless. This particular issue isn't about the media, because she saw the video evidence, and she still thinks it's a crime. She wants the man fired from his job. How can she reconcile this position with everything she said about SJWs?

I did what Corey did to both men and women in bars and clubs a few times when I was in a rush, I said "excuse me" and I had to move them. So I'm a criminal according to her, I should be an outcast, branded a woman beater for the rest of my life. Give me a fucking break, her position is insane, and she has no excuses.

Women are so delusional, even a hand-gesture could be a "triggering"

You could grab a woman by the arm to pull her out of oncoming traffic, she'd still freak and think you were assaulting her after you just saved her life......

Post: #16

(04-12-2016 03:23 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  Christina came of age in the mid-1960s and thinks, deep down, it's "inappropriate" for women to be "manhandled." What she doesn't get is that women today aren't the same creatures that inspired romantic Beach Boys and Temptations songs. Today's men grew up with women who were more like Rhianna than Shelley Fabares (look her up).

Post: #17

Anyone who has seen the video footage of the incident and maintains that Trump's campaign manager did anything significantly wrong is out of their mind. Anyone who attempts to justify that position on television while said video footage is playing is absolutely, totally nuts.

This case is on par with the woman who claimed that a man who walked past her in a London subway station sexually assaulted her. There was CCTV footage which clearly and unmistakably showed that he did not assault her — yet people still "believed" her, and prosecutors proceeded to charge him with sexual assault. (He was cleared of wrongdoing.)

No matter how intelligent a woman may seem, how well she might express herself, or the views she (apparently) espouses, ultimately, women are women. And women have a nature — emotional, unpredictable, prone to bouts of weird, inexplicable behavior, often feeling no strong need for consistency in their actions or ideas from one moment to the next.

Post: #18

You will never agree with anyone 100 percent of the time. Christina is still ok in my book. I agree with Roosh most of the time, I am sure he would not like my stance on Affirmative Action, that doesn't mean I will not deal with him anymore, that just means we disagree on Affirmative Action.Roosh is ok in my book.

See my point?

Post: #19

(04-13-2016 07:51 AM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  You will never agree with anyone 100 percent of the time. Christina is still ok in my book. I agree with Roosh most of the time, I am sure he would not like my stance on Affirmative Action, that doesn't mean I will not deal with him anymore, that just means we disagree on Affirmative Action.Roosh is ok in my book.

See my point?

There's a difference between disagreeing on principles and disagreeing about an incident that has video evidence.

The video I saw does not show an assault. And anyone who saw the same video and says that it shows an assault is dishonest. This is not about a difference of opinion, this is about flat out lying because she doesn't like someone.

Post: #20

(04-12-2016 02:51 PM)Kingsley Davis Wrote:  American Enterprise Institution cuts her cheques and they're pro-Cruz, meh.

Bingo. No need for further explanations.

AEI is riding the manosphere tailcoat but they have their own agenda: neocon über alles. She's shown her hand here.

Also, Sommers is published in the MSM (Huff, Time, Slate, NYT etc), so she has those interests too.

Screw her.

Post: #21

Bill Maher showed the video on his show and mocked the assault charge.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T0Jw5MhtxY

There was an article on I believe it was Politico, which outlined how supposedly Corey Lewandowski is a huge asshole. If true, that's not a crime, nor would he be the first person in politics to be a huge asshole.

It's all wrapped up in how they hate Trump, and when some people, women in particular, don't like someone or something, it becomes the worst thing ever and the ends justify the means. No matter what is said or done, they come to their conclusions based on their emotions instead of actually looking at evidence.

Post: #22

Didn't see anyone mention this, but Somners is also on the payroll of an organization which holds Anti Trump sentiment, similar to how Ben Shapiro turned almost immediately after the Fields-Lewandowski incident.

Post: #23

The charges have been dropped and a bunch of bizarre things happened in a row.

1) the police did not consult the DA before pressing charges, this put the DA office in the position of having to put out a video reenactment / analysis to show why they felt no crime was committed.

2) on Morning Joe ,Mika roasted Michelle and a white knight that was a guest for making this non story into a story. Donnie and Mika both basically said had Michelle been Micheal , this would have never made news.

3) once again Trump did not play by conventional political rules and cave to the manufactured outrage machine. He showed LOYALTY ( all caps because all of us men on RVF know it is an imprtant male virtue ) to his people instead of slavery to to political media machine and won out. Once again the MSM wonders how he gets away with it, and once again the MSM misses the point- they don't get to make the rules any more, they have failed the public too many times.

Post: #24

(04-13-2016 07:51 AM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  You will never agree with anyone 100 percent of the time. Christina is still ok in my book. I agree with Roosh most of the time, I am sure he would not like my stance on Affirmative Action, that doesn't mean I will not deal with him anymore, that just means we disagree on Affirmative Action.Roosh is ok in my book.

See my point?

The difference is intent.

You are an individual with privately held views and opinions. She's a relatively public figure involved directly with the culture war. Her views have an influential and compounding effect.

Misrepresenting key events and joining up with people obviously trying to legally and publicly tar and feather someone is a low integrity type display.

There's no reason for anyone to defend Sommers this wasn't a slight slip up.

Post: #25

(04-15-2016 01:21 PM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  The charges have been dropped and a bunch of bizarre things happened in a row.

1) the police did not consult the DA before pressing charges, this put the DA office in the position of having to put out a video reenactment / analysis to show why they felt no crime was committed.

2) on Morning Joe ,Mika roasted Michelle and a white knight that was a guest for making this non story into a story. Donnie and Mika both basically said had Michelle been Micheal , this would have never made news.

3) once again Trump did not play by conventional political rules and cave to the manufactured outrage machine. He showed LOYALTY ( all caps because all of us men on RVF know it is an imprtant male virtue ) to his people instead of slavery to to political media machine and won out. Once again the MSM wonders how he gets away with it, and once again the MSM misses the point- they don't get to make the rules any more, they have failed the public too many times.

As if anyone needed any more proof to not vote El Rato or Golly Gee, both of them said they would immediately fire Corey if it was their campaign. Trump cares about his people. El Rato only cares about himself and protecting his disgusting image.