A dickwad said what?

I hate that I am expending time and energy on the latest (and hopefully last) controversy generated by a person who gets way more attention than a garden-variety bully with an acute case of potty-mouth like him deserves.

And yet it sickens me to see not only the usual apologists for predatory male sexuality, but people who should know better, defending this shitsack.

So yeah yeah, the right was totally fine with his ongoing, virulent misogyny, racism, and other sickening trolling for attention. Honestly, is it news to anyone on the left that conservatives are overwhelmingly misogynist and racist? If it is, y’all have seriously not been paying attention. But now that they have dumped his sorry ass, you’re mad at them for taking issue with support for pedophilia? It’s a low bar, sure, but honestly I was relieved to see they had one.

Dickwad claims he was misquoted, his words were taken out of context, even that he was guilty of “sloppy phrasing.” But watch this interview (if you can stand to). He’s unambiguously arguing that gay and straight sex between adults and young teens is fine. Maybe that’s because he is an abuse survivor, maybe that’s not what he really thinks, maybe he reconsidered later watching his career go down in flames, but the fact remains that those words, in a public broadcast widely available on the internet, provide support for pedophiles and pedophile apologists, of which there are plenty on both the right and the left. Male sexual predation on girls and teen women is a huge problem. I personally know many women whose psychological, social, and sexual lives have been severely damaged if not ruined by males who felt entitled to abuse them sexually as girls or teens. One quantifiable aspect of this problem is the fact that sixty percent of the fathers of children born to females aged 15-17 were three or more years older.

And I hate to tell you, but gay people doing it doesn’t make it OK. I had an intense emotional entanglement with a high school teacher at age 17, and believe me, I was in no way psychologically prepared for a sexual relationship with someone in her 30s.

Despite how people love to focus on the motivations of the victim where sex is concerned (“those shameless unwed mothers!” “women have a right to sell their bodies!” “children have sexual feelings and who are we to deny them that!” “the bottom controls the scene!”) pedophilia and sexual abuse are about power, not about the desires or actions of children or teens. In a culture that fetishizes youth and still struggles with a legacy of puritanism about sex, it’s true there’s little healthy discussion of adults’ inappropriate desires towards teens. But rational adults know that you don’t take advantage of young people’s desires for your own gratification. Young people need and deserve time to explore sexuality on their own or with peers, if they want to, before they can honestly choose a relationship with someone several years older than them. If you’re a 29-year-old who believes a 15-year-old is a viable sexual partner for you, you are a predator, full stop. And anyone, gay or straight, who says differently deserves to lose their public platform, even if the ones who take it away only do so because they think gay sex is icky.

I might date a dickhead…

…but only because you can’t always tell by looking. A few minutes of chitchat should be plenty though.

And just in general, no one should date anyone they don’t want to date.

I don’t know why anyone thinks feminists would be okay with any pressure to the contrary.

Child of Two Heterosexuals Comes Out Against Marriage

forbidden-marriageListen up you shmucks.

1. Nobody has a perfect childhood, not even in the glorious uberheteropatriarchacapitalisticexpialidocious we currently inhabit in Central North America. I have a hard time believing you did not notice whatever random family-based suckage your heterosexually parented childhood friends may have been experiencing while you were being so horribly abused by your lesbian moms. But then again, you do sound kind of self-centered.

2. Interesting how both of these entitled whiners were raised by lesbians. Now class, would their sniveley illogical arguments be examples of a) sexism, wherein gay men are automatically considered better parents than lesbians regardless of their bona fides because, you know, +PENIS x2, or b) sexism, wherein everything that goes wrong with anyone’s life is always somehow mommy’s fault?

Good work class, the answer is a) and/or b), SEXISM!

3. This may be more or less a restating of point 1, but heterosexual parents are perfectly capable of sucking at the job. My full-on hetero mom and dad both enjoyed smacking me upside the head whenever the spirit moved them, so why isn’t Yahoo (or whatever whackadoodle site published Senor Lopez’s droolings) publishing more articles arguing that straight folks shouldn’t be allowed to get married?

4. Here’s a thought: On pain of seeming to agree with the wingnuts, why don’t we just put marriage back where it belongs — in the purview of the faith community or tradition of choice of the individuals involved? I see no reason the State should be party to anyone’s romantic, sexual or domestic entanglements, nor why certain relationship structures should be deemed socially acceptable while others aren’t.

This guy looks really creepy but even he agrees with me, and he helpfully delineates his major talking points about halfway down his home page.

STAMP OUT MARRIAGE. Think about it.

Dude, it’s not because you’re a “businessman.”

Rachel Maddow on Herman Cain's "performance art"Rachel Maddow has an ongoing critique of the Herman Cain performance art project campaign on her MSNBC show. Some of the fancy-footwork highlights and general Cain nutty goodness from the Nov. 8 broadcast:

CAIN: Will the businessman by the name of Herman Cain step forward? Here I am. Because that’s the person Herman Cain is. But you see? That’s one thing about Herman Cain that I think a lot of the American people know, and that is just because it’s tough is no reason for me not to do what I feel like I have to do. Some people don’t want to see Herman Cain get the Republican nomination and some people don’t want Herman Cain to become president of the United States of America…The machine to keep a businessman out of the White House is going to be relentless.

Uh, whut now?

Other amusing semantic game-playing:

CAIN: I cannot say that it is a conspiracy. We do not have definitive, factual proof. We can only look at some coincidences to suggest that maybe someone is deliberately behind this. So, we have not been able to make any determination to point any fingers or place any blame on anybody at this point. When we step back and look at the fact that there’s no facts, no factual evidence to back these up, we can only infer that someone is trying to basically wreck my character…

Yep, the fact that there’s no facts can only lead to the conclusion that someone is trying to “wreck” your “character.” We couldn’t conclude, of course, that the women you sexually harassed are actually telling the truth. And as far as wrecking your character goes, dude, I think you demonstrated the content of it pretty clearly, when you tried to coerce and force women to have sex with you.

Oh, and on the very important difference between “settlement” and “agreement”:

CAIN: I’ve been criticized by some members of the media that I have changed my story. When the firestorm started a week ago Monday, I was presented with the accusation of some settlement was made. Settlement to me means there were legal implications. Later during that same day, I then recalled after all those years that there was an agreement. That’s what businesses sign with employees who are departing the company. They call it an agreement. Settlement implies legal implications. All of the potential legal implications or ramifications or accusations were found to be baseless.

I have much more confidence in Cain after that, because all my jobs pay me a year’s severance ($35,000) for no reason other than that I’m “departing the company.” Don’t yours?

The most important part of this show, though, was a brilliant conversation between Rachel and Melissa Harris-Perry of Tulane University — an incredibly rare event in mainstream media, a discussion BETWEEN WOMEN of the way women are portrayed in the media and how that affects politics and real life, and how we can talk to each other about it. Watch the clip (Harris-Perry interview starts at about 5:50).

That might seem like feminism 101 to us, but to hear the truth about the matrix spoken from inside the matrix — I still kinda can’t believe it.

Transcript of that interview after the fold for those who can’t access the video. Continue reading Dude, it’s not because you’re a “businessman.”

Ban *this*, my man

certify me godbag freeThe article quotes Cain as further saying, “The people in the community know best. And I happen to side with the people in the community.”

Great, dude, so you’ll side with me when I and others in my community want to ban the churches we don’t like — which would be all of them?