MovieChat Forums > Dogma (1999) Discussion > Only men getting killed in boardroom sce...

Only men getting killed in boardroom scene=bull**** feminist Dogma


Anyone else annoyed that all the men were killed in the boardroom and only the oh holier-than-thou, infallible, fallen to earth angel female was the one that lived?

Feminist DOGMA, anyone?

What's even more ratbastardly sickening is how most of the men killed were for reasons involving harming, but not even violently harming, women. *vomits* What kind of abhorrent gender feminist propaganda delusion is this self-hating fool Kevin Smith guy (who has ONE good movie to his name I might add, that being Clerks, maybe Clerks II) infected with?

Funny that ten years+ on justice department and FBI stats, Centers for Disease Control, the American Journal of Public Health, and many other reports, stats, and studies show women physically abuse and murder their children more (and often get away with doing that, as well as murdering adults, as I'm sure you've all by now at least witnessed in the news more than a few times), abuse their spouses and partners more, even female sex abusers are on the rise, females committing violence/assault is on the rise, women cheating on their men almost if not as much as men (despite recent sensationalist media spotlighting on celebrity male philanderers) tend to attract. I wonder if he could still get away with that kind of propaganda today.

Smitty seems to have a bad self-hating male streak and some extremely misguided ideas about men and women. This dungheap should be pelted, not with cigarettes (ha ha), but with rotten fruit for his self-defeating promotion of misandry and sexism towards men.

Well that's enough ranting for now. Any thoughts from men or women out there in IMDb land? And please, preferably not from gender/ideological feminist women or men, or men who aren't walked all over, self-hating chumps with no dignity or self-respect (which feminist agitprop movies like these more than likely contributed to making)?

reply

You get mad over the wrong things.


I'll bet you could suck a golf ball through a garden hose.

reply

I get mad over a lot of stupid, unnecesary, bad things. What do you think I should get mad over?

reply

Dude, it's not just Smith, it is MOST guys who live on the East Coast, in the so called blue states. They seem to really have been brainwashed to accept that all women are good and perfect and pure and all men bad and evil, one reason I finally left Connecticut for Texas over a decade ago.

http://OilVentures101.org - The Definitive Resource on This Most Sage of Investments.

reply

Finally! I was surprised that nobody else ever pointed this out. This is just very wrong and really stood out to me.

Imagine it the other way around, with 10 guilty women and 1 innocent man. People would cry sexism. Well, sexism works the other way around, too.

reply

[deleted]

Well, she didn't say "Bless you"...

reply

Hey buddy, that isn't feminism. The notion of women being the "moral sex" existed long before feminism, maybe as far back as the age of chivalry. Yes the scene was annoying, I get the vibe that Kevin Smith likes to put women on pedestals. This is coming from a feminist (who you apparently don't want to hear from due to your strawmanning ways).

As for your statistics, a lot of it either sounds fabricated or like you cherrypicking facts to match your own ideology. It's pretty common knowledge that men are in general more likely to commit violence and assault.


Let's take out some puppets

reply

Hey buddy *rolls eyes*

Yes, you're right about this variety of BS existing long before feminism but many feminists felt/feel no shame (as they should) at all in exploiting and manipulating these chivalric tendencies/impulses in order to gain an unfair advantage while hypocritically claiming to want equality (ie, no special treatment or being placed on a pedestal). And many feminists over the last decade in a half or so have actually advocated a return to chivalry a "new chivalry" as they called it in the late 90s, proving that chivalry and feminism go together like bread and butter. They've basically co-opted it.

I'm not fabricating anything, no way no how. All are legitimate statistics from Justice Department, FBI, BBC News, Centers for Disease and Germ Control, etc. If you don't believe me there's something called google you can use to research. A library reference section and bound journal section are also good places to look. Yes, men are more likley to commit assault and violence in society in general (men are also more likely to be the victims), but within intimate relationships there is a wealth of data that show women to be as almost as likley, as likely, and even more likely to initiate violence (not in self defence). If you don't believe me here's a bibliography of over 200 peer-reviewed studies that support this http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm Happy reading.

reply

" A library reference section and bound journal section are also good places to look. Yes, men are more likley to commit assault and violence in society in general (men are also more likely to be the victims), but within intimate relationships there is a wealth of data that show women to be as almost as likley, as likely, and even more likely to initiate violence (not in self defence). If you don't believe me here's a bibliography of over 200 peer-reviewed studies that support"

Lol, or simply turn on the tv and watch the all day marathons (forget which network) of the show, "Snapped"

reply

As for your statistics, a lot of it either sounds fabricated or like you cherrypicking facts to match your own ideology


Oh, kinda like how feminism infamously creates information that it does its best to protect from peer-reviewing, then infamously tries to censor and even threaten anyone who wants to put forth opposing or invalidating information? Making it easier to then promote their somewhat too convenient propaganda points under the title of "common knowledge"?

The fact you were quick to blindly deny thoroughly detailed and source-quoted statistics (he wasn't posting an opinion there), makes it pretty priceless that you'd accuse somebody of "not wanting to listen" and of having a motive of ideology.

reply

I urge you to watch 6 hours of television with a note book.

On the note book draw a line down the centre.

On the left hand side put a hash mark for each time a woman physically assaults a man (slaps his face etc) that is portrayed in such a way as if to say 'he deserved it'.

On the right hand side put a hash mark for each time a man physically assaults a woman (slaps his face etc) that is portrayed in such a way as if to say 'she deserved it'.

I can almost guarantee that there will be a staggering number of hash marks on the left hand side and next to none on the right hand side.

The point I'm making is that 'in movie land' it is absolutely fine for a woman to be violent against a man. The reverse is not true.

I know it's fiction, but it's an indication of what is expected or accepted by society.

To the same degree, violence by women against men is drastically under-reported. I don't doubt that many MANY rapes by men go unreported by women because of the horrible way the judicial system works (and shame) but I'm almost certain that the vast majority of violent acts by women against men are not reported. If I am correct in this, statistics on gender violence is worthless.

It's not a case of violence by men or by women being wrong... VIOLENCE itself is wrong. It doesn't matter who does it.

SpiltPersonality

reply

are you a gay? would explain everything. not that theres anything wrong with that..

reply

Am I "a gay"? lol, who even words it like that? "a gay", what are you 100 years old? lol loser....since your question is obviously dumb and not worth answering let me ask you one, are you a retarded child?

reply

They're quoting Little Britain...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrlzaBNgz-M
Start watching at 0:44 for it.
That being said someone who's so easily offended by merely being asked tends to be overcompensating ;)

I don't feel there's a sexist hint, what would be sexist is that there are 10 men on the board and 1 woman...

reply

"I don't feel there's a sexist hint, what would be sexist is that there are 10 men on the board and 1 woman..."

That wouldn't be sexist, what a simple reduction if there ever was one.

10 men on the board just means that there are 10 men who, in order to make themselves attractive to women and keep a wife (all while being held under the gun of the constant threat of divorce which is far more of a disaster for men -- and children -- than it is for women)are thrust into in an often oppressive and suffocationg corporate dominance heirarcy, competing at each others throats instead of getting to know each other as human beings.

They are 10 men who are all far more likely than women to get ulcers, die of heart attacks, commit suicide, and die 5-6 years earlier due to this very pressure, the pressure of working 80 hour weeks so you can kiss your bosse's A$$ and live with the constant fear that if you slow down one bit you may be fired or at lest demoted (and so look less attractive to their wives). If women make a life choice to avoid this soul, body, and mind killing stress, that's not sexism when you see less of them in the board room. In fact, legal sexism actually exists against men in the hiring policies of many of these companies (they call it "affirmative" action), all while THEY are the ones who are far more likely to be only valued as a human being by a woman according to what job they have and how much they make. Men don't judge women this way.

And yes absolutely there's at least a "hint" of sexism. An easy litmus test for people like you to understand these things: just reverse the genders. Would you find it sexist if, say, 10 women were mowed down and the one surviving male would be spared because of his alleged innate goodness? If you think you're clever by saying something like "well there wouldn't be a situation where was ten women and only 1 man in the first place" Wrong. I've come across many business boardrooms where the majority were women, such as in PR departments, etc, no dobut at least some were chosen unfairly over men who's only chance of attracting a mate and passing on his genes to the next generation is to have job, remember the same just isn't true for women. Women for the most part select for money making men, men for the most part don't select for women in this way.

THAT'S why a company may have something like 10 men and 1 woman, of course assuming it's not a company that uses discriminatory hiring practices.

reply

" Women for the most part select for money making men, men for the most part don't select for women in this way."

No...men select "for the most part" the women with the 'smokin' T&A. I totally understand and respect your opinion but I think its unfair to lump all us women together like that in one gneralized discription. While I agree that there are many women out there just looking for meal tickets and sugar daddies, I can assure you Im not one them :)

reply

Probably most women are not merely looking for meal tickets and sugar daddies, but on average they definitely tend to be more attracted to men who are reasonably "accomplished". That's traditionally been an important part of female attraction, similar to the way a beautiful and healthy physique is important for males. The traits compliment each other, and they aren't really harmful so long as it doesn't become a shallow fixation.

reply

[deleted]

Well that's enough ranting for now. Any thoughts from men or women out there in IMDb land? And please, preferably not from gender/ideological feminist women or men, or men who aren't walked all over, self-hating chumps with no dignity or self-respect (which feminist agitprop movies like these more than likely contributed to making)?


So basically any man who didn't choose to take offense and just thought the scene was funny is a self-hating door mat with no dignity or self respect? Well, that's something else I choose not to take offense at. It don't confront me. But at the risk of making your head explode, let me remind you that Smith used Alanis Morissette (a woman !) to represent The Supreme Being!!


How do the angels get to sleep when the Devil leaves his porch light on?

reply

To the OP; Dude, grow the fvck up!!

reply

Grow the f up? Are you kidding me? lol Do you honestly think for a second that your silly interjection is at all convincing to anyone? Is that all you have to contribute here? Go back to the land of annoying people who say "dude" in front of everything, ugh. (That's a joke, yes grown-ups joke too in case you didn't know.)

reply

Yeah, gee, great *rolls eyes*

reply

*smirk* Whatever, Sheldon. You're the one with his panties in a bunch over nothing. Absolutely nothing

How do the angels get to sleep when the Devil leaves his porch light on?

reply

Promoting the killing of men and misandry in an era where they're killing themselves at 4 times the rate of women, that rate TRIPLING in the last 40 years alone, yeah i'd say that's at least something. If you don't care or acknowlede that, it would be yet another dopey headed contribution to the pervasive culture of misandry and that lack of caring which is probalby a big reason why so many kill themselves in the first place, either that or you're just an apathetic, ignorant douf. I imagine you have men you admire and, dare i say it, love? A father, brothers, male friends and other family? Do you not get that very simple connection there in simply caring about what happens to the men you love and respect in your life? What about yourself? (your username begins with "Mr" so i assume you're male). Do you not see YOURSELF as worthy and ANY consideration, care, or concern at all? If you don't you're a self-defeating buffoon firmly shooting yourself in the foot. How embarrassing and pathetic. You're not a solider boy anymore Siegal, stop seeing yourself and other men as nothing but meatbags to be mowed down like chattle. Grow up.

reply

If your rant wasn't so pathetic it would be funny. Yeah, I'm a man and as a man I'm embarrassed for you.



How do the angels get to sleep when the Devil leaves his porch light on?

reply

Try to actully use your brain and address some of the points I'm making, instead of simply brushing it aside and sweeping it all under the rug by calling my argument "pathetic" or "funny". Your little adhominem criticisms are thoroughly unconvincing MrSiegal and are what's truly embarssing and pathetic. As it stands now, you seem like you're not even capable of having a proper argument, at least on matters like this. Please unplug your eyes and ears and prove me wrong.

reply

LOL, good for you, Sheldon! But there isn't much to discuss regarding your panties-in-a-bunch whine because a corporate boardroom full of predominantly male executives were all damned because of their loathsome sins while the lone female was spared. Barely. It promotes nothing. There's nothing to argue. You're seeing things that don't exist. Here's a suggestion for you though. You can set your preferences to be notified when someone replies directly to one of your posts. That way you can make a timely response instead of months later.

How do the angels get to sleep when the Devil leaves his porch light on?

reply

Pfff, nice fake "LOL" laugh, gotta love that.

It will probably just fall on deaf and dumb ears again but I'll counter what you're claiming anyway.

I'm seeing, and have been seeing, a lot of such man bad/woman good messages for years now in media productions. Dogma is just one among many, part of a wide pattern of negative media representation which I think is important to address and do what little I can to address the potentially damaging, negative messages such productions may impart (espeically to younger, more vulnerable people). Yes it's fiction, but fiction can nontheless socialize and influence millions of poeple to think in certain ways, and a society's fictional stories, and the messages they impart, are often reflections of the society in which they exist. And when I look at how trampled over men are during and after divorce and what little legal recourse they have to fight it, how in many countries and states males can resort to no legal action (not even proof by DNA testing) when they're victims of paternity fraud, how men have gone to prison for years based on false rape accusations because rape shield laws have weakened their defence, how there's airlines that won't let men sit next to children, how men are separated to the backs of buses in some countries because they're assumed they will harrass women, abuse of men by women getting ignored and laughed at, how the male suicide rate is four times that of women's, etc, etc, and then I look at a scene like that in this movie, and it very likely IS a reflection of all these other things going on in reality. That together with the fact that for many young people things like music/tv/movies/novels/comics can be even more powerful, influential, and convincing socialization agents than parents or school is why I'm not seeing nothing here and that's why things like this bother me. "Panties in a bunch"? Pfff are f-ing kidding me?

And who cares when I respond, believe it or not I have other things to do. Today I found some time for it. Simple as that. These things are archived, so you can respond to them at any time.

reply

*Smirk* Out, Sheldon

How do the angels get to sleep when the Devil leaves his porch light on?

reply

[deleted]

Promoting the killing of men and misandry in an era where they're killing themselves at 4 times the rate of women, that rate TRIPLING in the last 40 years alone

Well it only takes one man to impregnate countless numbers of women at a time.
An ample male population is quite redundant.
Sorry, but that's the way humans have been designed. All hail the sperm banks.

Well what use are MY brains if I'm tied up with a dumb clunk like you!

reply

Wow, I tell you how the male suicide rate has tripled in such a short period of time and continues to increase and that is how you respond? Would that be your response if the female suicide rate tripled too? With that kind of callous and hateful attitude towards boys and men's lives it's no wonder so many of them are killing themselves.

But actually, an ample male population is what keeps the wheels of society greased and going. You could never get all women to do all these dirty, dangerous, physically demanding hard labour jobs that keep modern society moving. A large male population also protects a society, but if you don't treat those males like human beings with respect and dignity you'll see it decline, which is what's happening. It doesn't have to, things can change.

Anyway, you can make the same redundancy argument for women; on an already overpopulated planet why do you need so many women for procreation? It only takes one woman to have multiple kids anyway. And you don't even need a woman's uterus anymore to incubate a child.

All hail artifical womb banks! :)

Of course such hypothetical scenarios/arguments are pointless and rather antihuman, right? What you're saying says nothing about the realities and complexities of living as human beings in a human society.

Btw, it's not a "countless" number of men who can impregnate one woman. There is a limit to how much viable sperm one man can produce, even though it is a significantly higher number than the number of viable eggs a woman can produce.

reply