The Continuing Guilty Pleasures Of Feminist “Philosophers”

**Trigger warning: those suffering from immense selfishness, hypocrisy, stupidity, and moral retardation cloaked as philosophy may get their feelings hurt by this article.**

Those of you who read my blog know that I have a guilty pleasure—“feminist philosophers.” This guilty pleasure is better than chocolate. They are usually a bit more challenging than typical feminists in that they at least try to obscure some of their misandry, dog-shit ideas, and immense stupidity within the container of philosophy. They are usually a bit more cunning.

However, over at “feministphilosophers,” I found this article disguised as “Some Thoughts On Epistemic Responsibility.” I’m not going to bore the reader with a discussion on epistemic responsibility. I am, however, going to show the immense selfishness, hypocrisy, and stupidity of this “feminist philosopher,” one who calls herself “Themistokleia,” named after the teacher of Pythagorus—“the father of philosophy.”

In her own words:

I have experienced attempted rape. Surely I would feel differently had my attacker been successful, but for me, what was most traumatizing was not the assault but rather what happened next. It was in a public park. I was able to get away. I ran to a man reading on a bench and told him what happened. He saw I was being followed. He offered to sit with me until it looked like it would be safe to walk home. But that was all he did (and I do mean that was all: he did not offer to take me to the police, to call any one, etc., and it didn’t occur to me to ask for those things). I sat with him for two hours on that bench in silence. In retrospect, I’m sure he just didn’t know what to do and didn’t know what to say—but in those two hours, and in some months that followed, I felt like what happened must not really matter because it didn’t seem to matter much to him. I thought that I was being silly for feeling angry, violated, and scared. In those later moments where I didn’t doubt myself, I doubted the world at large—the capacity of my fellow humans to do right, to be even minimally decent.

I don’t ever want to be the man on that bench to someone else, whether I think I know what happened or not.

This woman “ran to a man” for protection. She specifically and deliberately brought danger and the threat of harm to this man. He voluntarily allowed himself to remain in harm’s way for two hours to protect her. He was willing to offer up his male body as a sacrifice to this damsel in distress.

Greek goddess

As such and according to our “feminist philosopher,” this man’s sacrifice was more “traumatizing” to her than assault and attempted rape. The two hours of his risking bodily harm to protect this damsel was not sufficient. He should have done more. He should have risked more for her, “but that was all he did…”

Such is the mentality of many men, women, feminists, and even feminist philosophers—people who should know better. Such is a total lack of other-awareness—total gynocentric selfishness. She was not aware of the sacrifice that this man made by allowing his male body to endure the risk of violence for two hours—all to protect her.

What if he had an anxiety disorder? What if he had PTSD and was suffering from previous experiences of violence against his body? What if he was a survivor of rape or assault and running to him for protection forced him to relive all those feelings of powerlessness, helplessness, and suffering? Selfish people like Ms. Themistokleia do not consider these other possibilities. Doing so would require something contrary to their total gynocentric selfishness: empathy.

If she wasn’t so selfish, she’d have realized that this man could have been assaulted, maimed, mutilated, stabbed, shot, or otherwise also be made into a victim of violence that she brought to him—making him responsible not only for her safety, but his as well. She was not aware of the danger that she put him in to protect her. She does not value his body at all or even care that she put this man in harm’s way by deliberately running to him for protection. She does not acknowledge, at all, his sacrifice, or the sacrifices made by men who have been cultured to perpetuate violence against men in defense of women like her.

Such are the expectations placed on men in our society—to “be a man,” be brave, and make your body an object-of-utility for women and for society in-general. She used this man, only to berate and shame him later for not doing even more to protect her. Women like this “feminist philosopher” demand obeisance and say that if a man doesn’t sacrifice enough, then he is worse than the possible rapist who tried to assault her.

This is another way in which the male body is made the most culturally acceptable locus of violence by women like “themistokleia.” As she writes her “thoughts” on the morality of epistemic responsibility, she neglects to fix her own moral retardation and hypocrisy.

As a philosopher, one would think that she’d have the clarity of thought needed to identify hypocrisy. However, as a “feminist philosopher,” she may lack the clarity needed to realize that she is simultaneously arguing for and against the actions of men who rescue damsels in distress.

As a philosopher, she is arguing that a man didn’t do enough to rescue her. On the other hand, as a feminist she believes that men who rescue damsels in distress are perpetuating the soft-sexism of benevolence—a form of white-knighting, where men rush in to rescue the poor and weak women who are believed to be incapable of defending their own stupid positions or rescuing themselves from their own stupidity.


I’m not going to rescue you from your own stupidity, Ms. Themistokleia. I’m going to point at it, laugh, and enjoy it for all its guilty pleasure. Such things are better than chocolate. If you’re too stupid to see your selfishness and hypocrisy, you have no business in any philosophy department. You have no business doing any philosophy at all. The only academia for you is some solipsistic “women’s studies” department where you are free to escape any and all rigorous and critical thought.

Only there will you be free to perpetuate a culture of violence against men. There you will have the freedom to be callously indifferent to male suffering and sacrifices that are made for you by men who you don’t even know—free to be as stupid as you like.

As you wrote, “I don’t ever want to be the man on that bench to someone else,” without realizing that man on the bench was probably not too happy to be stuck there either: babysitting your sorry little ass, and probably sweating at the thought that he might have to take a bullet or knife wound on your behalf. At least the man on the bench had sympathy, compassion, and enough morality to recognize that you were in distress…and that’s a lot more morality than you have, given that you completely fail to recognize that he doesn’t owe you jack.

Fuck off with your moral retardation, Ms. Themistokleia. Also, drop the mockery you are making of Pythagoras’ teacher. You’re not worthy of the name.

About Jason Gregory

These are the words of a retired gigolo, small business owner, and philosopher who mashes together some Nietzsche, Kant, Sartre, pragmatism, and rum. Holler, bitches!

Main Website
View All Posts
  • The Real Peterman

    I don’t suppose Ms. Themistokleia thinks of herself as a strong, capable woman who can do anything a man can do?

    • Christopher Wedge

      She’s a feminist.
      She probably thinks you need a penis to rape, or something. Hah!

  • Wylie2

    Lots to talk about here.

    The first thing that stands out is that she says he “didn’t offer to take her to the police.”

    This one sentence is a glaring red flag. IMO this statement, plus the fact that she’s totally devoid of a single detail that describes the “attempted rape” leads me to believe that the incident either didn’t happen of is highly exaggerated.

    He didn’t offer to take her to or call police because it was not even immediately apparent that there was any kind of real threat. It was likely a situation where she perceived a man was following her and in her mind she connected the dots that the man was about to prey on her.

    And if she was so scared wouldn’t she just say “can you take me to the police?” Or does she not have a cell phone to simply call the cops herself.

    Her whole story is such a blatant lie that it doesn’t even make sense.

    • Dean Esmay

      “Me me me, you need to do more for mmeeeeeeeee!”

    • The Real Peterman

      She shouldn’t have to ask for help, he should read her mind!

    • earth one

      But that was all he did (and I do mean that was all: he did not offer to take me to the police, to call any one, etc., and it didn’t occur to me to ask for those things).

      So, she didn’t have the sense to ask for ‘those things’ but it’s his fault for not immediately providing ‘those things’ to her.

    • Jason Gregory

      Rape apologia!

    • Eon24

      Guys, the chick was clearly hitting on the fella sitting on the bench

  • Bombay

    During elementary school my friends protected me from bullies. When I reached junior high, they told me I needed to learn to protect myself and no longer did that. There was no shaming, just a nudge in growing up. That was good advise then and now. It seems that Themistokleia has some growing up to do.

  • DavidicLineage

    Why would a feminist ever run to a man on a park bench for help? Doesn’t she know he’s just as likely to rape her as the guy she’s running from?

    That particular form of cognitive dissonance melts away the second a man has something they need. Interesting development.

    • nick

      That is my concern right there. I have more often then not gone out of my way to help people to only get the raw end of the deal. What if she gets confused or “scared” of me? I would have done the same thing that guy did. Besides who knows if she is a Professional lair?

    • aewehr

      You keep forgetting, only men feminists DON”T find cute are “rapists in waiting”.

      The guy she sat next to was probably fanciable enough to pass by the “flirting while ugly” tripwire that is sexual harassment law.

      • JGteMolder

        Or was a kindly old father figure, only increasing his risk even more.

  • kronk3

    …also because in the total lunacy of her female mind, had she actually made it in front of the police that day, and they, seeing nobody around (I refer specifically to males now) in which to arrest, the woman would then turn and point her spiny little finger at the gentleman who so kindly offered to help her. With men being guilty until proven innocent, what would this guy be able to do then??? He would be arrested on the spot with “put your hands behind your back. Let’s go figure this out downtown you nasty perp”!
    No sir! If any female comes asking me for help IN ANY CAPACITY, I will remind her that “I thought women could do anything a man could do?” as I walk away quickly before she can acuse me of anything.

    FUCK CHIVALRY!!! ‘I” am more important than any female!

    This is what feminism has brought to them and it is WAY BEYOND well deserved…

    • The Real Peterman

      Good point. Either that, or being a man standing next to a woman yelling “I was raped!” is a good way to receive a beating.

  • Robert St. Estephe

    I have had very little exposure to “feminist philosophy.” The discussion of the text you offer her is of interest, yet that text seems to be pretty much a “response”-type text or an illustration of a principle proposed by feminist philosophers. It is, as you point out, a shallow, flat piece of storytelling rather than an exploration of any principle..

    I am eager to see articles on AVfM that take on the texts and ideas of feminist philosophers themselves, so that we can get a primer on the field of feminist philosophy, which, as far as I can tell, hardly even gets close to being actual philosophy, yet, because it is “feminist,” is being taught in colleges — most likely with the result that its students end up with the inability to follow reasoned philosophical texts, leaving them cognitively impaired (albeit satisfyingly affectively vibrant)..

    • Jason Gregory

      “I am eager to see articles on AVfM that take on the texts and ideas of feminist philosophers…” –RSE

      Here is one such take-down I did last summer:

      If there’s an interest in such take-downs, I’ll be happy to do it more often, but philosophy does tend to be dry and “boring.” I suppose I can dress it up with some hyperbole and make it more interesting to a wider audience. :-)

      • Jay Boppana

        As a long time member and commenter here, I’m all for that. The legendary Kyle L. wrote some nice summaries of some radfem nonsense.

  • Mickster66

    There is far more in heaven and Earth than she dreams of in her feminist philosophy. How did academia reach this nadir? Why does anyone take these idiots seriously! Great article Mr G.

  • nick

    Poor little miss special. That man should have done more for her! He Is sooo selfish. She needed him to … No. the world to look out for little miss independent! She is the fish and he is the bicycle. I actually am surprised she didn’t try to accuse him of rape.

  • Copyleft

    If you want to be treated as an equal, you are no longer entitled to special protections and privileges such as chivalry. You demanded equality, you got it. Enjoy.

  • Lastango

    I recall seeing a life-like bronze sculpture of a man sitting on a park bench reading. It would be a good monument to the fellow we’re talking about here.

    The plaque, heavy with irony, might read: “Indifferent Man, 2014 – it didn’t seem to matter much to him.”

    It will mark a midpoint, when men went from white knight to doing just enough, and only in pressing circumstances, to help entitled women.

    Hopefully, a few years from now, feminists wanting to have their cake and eat it too will look back on it wistfully as they realize men on park benches are now telling them to go to hell.

    Then we’ll need a new bronze: “Man walking away from genderpriviliged misandrist.”

    She’s sitting on the bench, alone, screeching after him.

  • Fredrik

    I find it telling that she appreciated his quiet male nurturance at the time, and only resented it later, when the solidity of his presence had faded in her memory.

  • The_Other_Steve

    Speaking of philosophy and feminists:

    It seems the University of Colorado at Boulder’s philosophy department is getting “sanitized” to make it more friendly to females. Apparently, philosophers are a bunch of misogynistic pervs, or something.

    This, according to The American Philosophical Association Committee on the Status of Women Site Visit Program.

    I’m sure that they haven’t got any agendas or axes to grind. No sir, none whatsoever.

    • S. Misanthrope

      99% of the time, when someone claims “X field of study/department is sexist toward women,” that person is full of shit. Not so with philosophy. I have several close friends and many acquaintances who are philosophers, most of them male, several of them anti-feminist, and all of them highly skeptical of claims of sexism/racism/what-have-you. Every single one of them agrees that philosophy departments are incredibly sexist against women. It’s the exception that proves the rule.

      I have an acquaintance who did her dissertation at Boulder, I believe. I’ll ask for her input on this particular development you’re pointing to and will let you know if she has anything of interest to say.

      Here’s a blog on the topic. It’s similar to the (ridiculous) Everyday Sexism Project, but try not to be put off by that fact or by the posts that are whining about entitlements like the most recent one. Women in philosophy probably have it as bad a non-feminist cis men in the Gender Studies department.

    • Jason Gregory

      @The_Other_Steve, philosophy departments are a kind of last-stand within the humanities. You gotta be able to argue and make your case. If you’ve got stupid feminist arguments, like Ms. Themistokleia, you won’t last long. That foolishness simply won’t fit under the umbrella of philosophy.

      @ S. Misanthrope, on being a woman in philosophy…is that a play on Nagel’s “what it’s lIke to be a bat?” I’ll check out the blog, but I’m pretty skeptical to the idea that all these brilliant philosophers are too stupid to notice and check their misogyny, that they are too stupid to notice that they are being sexist. What it’s like to be a woman in philosophy probably goes more like this: “They all mocked my argument, saying that it was dog-shit…and so, misogyny and sexual harassment! Sexism!”

      Colin McGinn suffered the fate of being purged from his philosophy department for “sexual harassment.”

      McGinn even shut down his blog:

  • earth one

    “I ran to a man for help. He helped me. That’s when I realized I had been twice-victimized, by his actions.”

    This man created, for the sake of her safety, a protected space. He sat there for two hours with her! But because he is a man, he is guilty of not ‘doing more.’ It sounds to me that she ran to the first person (a man) she could find, and projected the rapist’s malice of intent toward her, onto him, a total stranger. And so, we learn from the Feminist philosopher, that not only was the rapist guilty, but so was the man who helped her.

    It’s entirely possible that this man, with whatever subjective experience made up his life, sensed that she was projecting something on to him, and chose to protect himself – and yet for two hours he sat with her, so she would be ok.

    Maybe he didn’t want to get involved because (a) he saw nothing of the attempted rape, yet he would inevitably have to become part of some kind of police action and (b) he was in the middle of a city park, and could have just as easily fallen victim to some kind of scam that involved a woman who had rushed up to him out of nowhere and claimed she was nearly raped.

    • Kimski

      “I ran to a man for help. He helped me. That’s when I realized I had been twice-victimized, by his actions.”

      And that just about validates every single perfectly understandable advise I’ve ever heard over the years, to just call the police, leave her alone to let her deal with her own problems, and never even care enough to look back.

      “I don’t ever want to be the man on that bench to someone else, whether I think I know what happened or not.”

      In my case, that man has no reason to believe your claims in the first place, doesn’t really care anyway, and has most likely left the premises several minutes ago.

      Besides that, interfering in a crime being committed is against the law, since putting myself in harms way is deemed illegal as ‘obstruction of justice’.
      A woman was attacked in the subway some years ago in N.Y., (as far as I recall), and a couple of blue collar workers standing nearby did nothing to help her. She ended up suing them for not coming to her aid when the police couldn’t find her assailant, and they were later acquitted of charges in a court of law, based on the above.

      • Turbo

        I am a bit confused mate, did she sue them for not helping her, can you do that? Or did she accuse them of the attack?

        • Fredrik

          It sounds like she sued them for not helping. You can sue anyone for anything; the only question is whether you will win. (A robust civil court system is actually one of the keys to our economic success, as was discovered when the Soviet Union collapsed and Russia failed to become a capitalist paradise.)

          In fact, that’s the reason for Good Samaritan laws: men are much less likely to help a stranger when they know that they could be sued for not doing a good enough job.

          • Kimski

            Yes, she sued them for not helping, and it didn’t exactly work out quite like she expected.

            What’s more important is that the verdict made precendence in the court of law, when it comes to being illegal to put yourself in harm’s way, and by definition that would include protecting women from physical danger.
            So, there’s absolutely no point in putting on ye olde White Knight armor and saddling up, ’cause you’re likely to find yourself behind bars as a consequence.

            And as Fredrik pointed out, if the law doesn’t get you, she probably will.

  • Maleman

    I remember as a teenager walking home from parties (smallish towns) late at night and no one around back in the seventies and on more than a couple of occasions I was followed by a woman about 100ft behind (unknown to me) if I happened to be going in her general direction. She was using me as protection. I must have looked like a “nice boy”. It annoyed me greatly and I would try and shake her off. No matter how fast I went she would keep up. I was annoyed because my journey was already dangerous enough, I was already seriously concerned for my own safety and I was taking a calculated risk and she made it much more dangerous. I would say to myself “you’re on your own lady” but I knew I would have probably helped. She expected me, a total stranger, just a young kid, to protect her. It was coercion. Society’s coercion of men. Funny, the thought that she would help me never crossed my mind.

    • SlantyJaws

      Just stop walking, that’ll put a stop to it in a hurry. Advice for future young men of course.

      • MrWombat

        Nothing good comes of that. Suddenly, you look creepy. Just keep walking.

    • Fredrik

      I’m going to give you a different perspective.

      I drive a lot, mostly in a metro area, but ultimately all over two states. When it’s dangerously foggy, as it often is on a winter night near a river, then I like to pick a semi that isn’t going too slow and hang way back. Either he knows what he’s doing (since he has a commercial driver’s license) and won’t hit anything, or his collision will give me time to stop and pull over before reaching the obstacle.

      She was just treating you like a truck driver. Like a pro that knew what he was doing, and if he didn’t, would give enough warning to avoid the trouble.

      You might’ve known that you would help if she got in trouble, but she didn’t know that unless she talked to you, which apparently she didn’t. She was just using you as a lead truck, which you would’ve been whether there was a car behind you or not. Nothing personal.

      • Maleman

        They knew the road as well as I did, licensed or not. Probably better. I should have better set the scene.

        But if I am to have the first ‘collision’ (which I think is your point) then I serve the same function. I am sacrificial.

        And you don’t really think they didn’t anticipate help if needed do you???

        Maybe you just had to be there………

  • giantsandwarfs

    His shaming is justified only if males are guilty by virtue of sex association. The Nazi’s had their blood-guilt laws, the feminists have their chromosome-guilt laws.

  • Andres

    And let us not forget that at the end of it all, she objectified him. Was she interested in his feelings? In what he wanted or needed? Did she ask herself if maybe he had kids?

    No. All she saw was a shield. And she used him like one.
    And then she complained that all he was to her was a shield, and not an emergency phone. Or better yet, a taxi. Or both.

    Maybe he had had an appointment he missed because he sat in this park with this strange woman. Probably he had better things to do than sit in a park on a bench for two hours. That’s longer than a lot of feature-length films.
    And yet he did it. Not because of any evidence that she was in real danger. But simply because she felt threatened and put her need to feel safe before any need he himself might had.
    And what does it get him? “Man, you cannot do anything to my satisfaction. Even though I do not say what I want (or probably know myself), I expect you to do exactly do, say and think what I need you to. And when your usefulness is gone, I will view your behaviour as even worse than that of someone who actually tried to rape me.”

    But it is never feminists who trivialize rape and its victims with such stories. No, no, nooo.

    Entitlement and hypocrisy neatly rolled into one. And the real sad thing is that most feminist are so blinded by their righteousness and anger, their ideology and echo chamber communications that even when you point it out to them, they will not see it.

  • Turbo

    Yeah right. So Ms. Themistokleia, having escaped an attempted rape, didn’t think to report this event to police, thereby potentially allowing another attack on someone else to occur. Yet she chastises a man that helped to protect her, for not suggesting same.

    Good god, the entitlement is strong in this one.

    “I don’t ever want to be the man on that bench to someone else”

    Do not fear Ms Themistokleia, you never will be.

    You will never be simultaneously reviled and mistreated by society and expected to be it’s protector at the same time.

    Why you ask?

    Because you are not a man.

  • Correctrix

    The sense of entitlement of that woman is astonishing.

  • Eon24

    I prepared a strategy for the described situation long ago. When approached and informed by a woman that a man attempting to assault her is following her..

    I just yell “Distract him while I call the cops!!” as I easily speed away from her

  • Caprizchka

    I would like to personally thank the anonymous man who sat with an hysterical woman even if she herself is an idiot and ungrateful. I want to thank all the heroic men who have been there for me my entire Penelope Pittstop existence. Thank you! If I have ever seemed in the least bit ungrateful it was doubtless because I was clouded by my own mysterious and heady powers of being in the midst of my peak fertility years with no compelling female role models showing me the way. I had no idea that I wasn’t just a charming human being that men fell over themselves to assist and protect. What a fool I was. I believed all the lies.

    What a nightmare it would be if women like “Themistokleia” were to replace real philosophers who aren’t necessarily ruled by the ruthless vagaries of biology.

    What a nightmare it would be if there were no longer any men interested in being protective out of the misguided sense that women like “Themistokleia” are actually universal thought leaders.

    Reblogged original post with this comment. The original post however, seems mysteriously uncommentable.

  • Andy Bob

    Ms Themistokleia has cleverly discovered a way to cast herself as twice-victimized.