Princess Smartypants By Babette Cole (Puffin, £5.99)
A riotously subversive read. "Princess Smartypants did not want to get married. She enjoyed being a Ms." Princess Smartypants keeps giant slugs as pets and challenges her geeky prince suitors to roller-disco marathons. When one of them finally wins her over, she kisses him, intentionally turning him into a toad. "When the other princes heard what had happened to Prince Swashbuckle, none of them wanted to marry Smartypants. So she lived happily ever after." Excellent. Although, interestingly, the children seriously struggled with the idea that anyone might not want to get married.
_______________________________
The Pirate Girl By Cornelia Funke (Chicken House, £5.99)
Molly is in her boat, sailing off on holiday to her granny's, when she is kidnapped by Captain Firebeard and his vicious band of pirates. But they chose the wrong girl. Molly's mother is Barbarous Bertha and when she comes to rescue her daughter she brings her own ferocious crew. Brilliant – although I worried slightly about the male pirates. At the end they are forced to polish Barbarous Bertha's boots 14 times a week. Punishing the oppressor is not true feminism, it's just role reversal. Still, this was the most successful read and I would recommend it to anyone.
Posts
17 comments:
Ms Princess Makes A False Rape Accusation (Puffin, £5.99)
After whoring around with all the boys in her local area (cuckolding her husband in the process), Ms Princess has a sudden twinge of guilt, and decides to make a false rape accusation to assauge her barely functioning conscience! You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll shake your head in disbelief at her statements to the police and to the jury at the subsequent trial! Things take a turn for the worse when her accused ex-lover Billy provides evidence against her claims, but this is quickly swept under the courtroom rug thanks to a well-funded, ideological lobby group and the collaborationist judge's invocation of rape shield laws. Oops! Now Billy's bankrupt and rotting away in jail for a crime he didn't commit. Thankfully, though, this story has a happy ending, as Ms Princess receives a substantial cash payout and remains free to ride the neighbourhood dicks.
Two can play at this game ... and I'd wager we can do it better, too.
In fact, await post on my very blog ...
Oh, Snark, that is beautiful! Beautiful! I can't wait to read the post on your blog.
P.S. It's about time I got a link to your site up on our list, Snark. Excellent site, and keep up the great work.
More feminist satire -- this one is so dead-on, it is scary:
A Feminist’s Reaction to a Statue of a Fallen Male Soldier
It is sick and evil. They lead you to believe they are for equal rights, equal pay for equal work but in reality they are destroying the very essence that makes men men and women women.
We are not the same, if so there wouldn't be 2 sexes.
IMO, they are out to destroy and take over the world. OK that may be a bit dramatic but I do believe it.
The real feminists are evil and they 'do it' through deception.
CBGirl
I am all for showing girls that anyone can do anything they want. Nothing should hold anyone back if he or she wants to be an astronaut OR a loving parent OR both. But that's not what this is about. They are trying to "counterbalance" the messages they think our children are being fed that girls can't do anything aside from be some guy's sex object and a mother. The trouble is, that's not what children are being fed. They are being fed images of incredibly smart, wise, competent women, and buffoonish men. But in their imaginary feminist world, girls are considered to be useless. So, they cling to this subversive trash where girls are strongly discouraged from doing anything nurturing -- even if they want to (which is kind of nutty given that girls can have babies and boys can't), and boys are shown as having ZERO abilities, aside being evil. And most important: women do not need men. That last part sums up their philosophy of life, doesn't it?
It seeks their twisted notions of equality by tearing down an entire gender. They are devotees of an evil belief system. Period.
"Punishing the oppressor is not true feminism"
Indeed. True feminism (well at least today's gender feminism) is about punishing totally innocent males solely on the basis of their gender.
"Excellent. Although, interestingly, the children seriously struggled with the idea that anyone might not want to get married."
Actually it would be useful to teach children that certain people don't wish to get married.
Or more accurately DO wish to get married but are prevented from doing so to do so by the insane divorce payouts and hideously sexist family courts and child support agencies.
Not "rape", but:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34483145/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/
"No one deserves to see it, certainly not a young child," Birnbaum said.
No one deserves the awful transgression of seeing a man naked!
Williamson, a commercial diver who has since moved out of Fairfax County, said he was shocked by the verdict. He suggested after the hearing that he was the victim of a double standard.
"If I was looking in her window, I think we'd be having a whole different conversation," he said.
INDEED. What's ommitted in this article is that the mother and son who saw him were -trespassing- through his property, and that is how they were able to view him through his window.
According to this principle, I shouldn't take a shower naked, in case a woman trespasses through my bathroom. Same deal.
And were the roles reversed, he would be a 'peeping tom' and his trespassing would be brought up as evidence of his 'intentions'.
So why isn't it here? Why isn't this woman being held on charges of trespass, voyeurism, and exposing a minor to nudity?
It's here! An early Christmas present for you all.
IMHO, women never needed feminst to tell thme who or what they were/are. We men know just they should, that women are human beings and as such, are people. What woman wants to be labeled?
Feminists decried the labelling of women yet, they have labelled women themselves. What woman wants/needs to go through her life with the word opressed hung around her neck and the word victim carved into her forehead. How can any woman who calls herself liberated or a person/human being allow such to happen? I am a male and I consider each woman to be not only a human being but, also a person of her own free will. Is there a feminist who will dare to say otherwise?
Snark,
Thank you so much. Hilarious.
Egads, by 10 I was reading David Eddings and Piers Anthony!
Both authors include strong female characters who are capable of holding their own.
David Gemmell included female warriors in his novels (he died about two years back :( ), and other strong women in both traditional and non-traditional roles.
Terry Pratchett's "Monstrous Regiment" includes a group of all-female soldiers pulling the wool over the eyes of their superiors (an hysterical read, I love that book).
Jacqueline Carey's "Kushiel's Dart", "Kushiel's Chosen" and "Kushiel's Avatar" all have a female protagonist.
And my favourite of all, Anne Bishop, has some of the best male/female relationships I've ever seen in a novel. In her books, it's usually the women who hold the balance of power, offset by the males. The Black Jewels Trilogy does it best with the males being required to hold to 3 simple rules of serving a woman:
1. Honour, cherish and protect
2. Serve
3. Obey
and if the situation calls for it, obedience can be tossed out the window in order to keep from breaking the other two rules.
Feminism is a house of cards built out of anger and hatred.
Post a Comment