House of Eratosthenes

Ah…fame is on its way. Perhaps in the next month or two, we’ll make Keith Olbermann’s Worst Person in the World. For now, we’ve been identified by a flog, or feminist blog, as a terrible person who must be stopped. So says Ethical Slut.

Once again, we’re reminded that our modern-day feminists don’t actually disagree with anyone about anything. They identify targets, announce to all within earshot how the target makes them feel like barfing, and then demand moral and spiritual support from their peers in their quest to virtually destroy it.

As you can see, mkfreeberg judges women for a behavior that hurts no one. Sure, he tries to make a straw man argument, that Jessica Valenti is bitter and angry and disorganized in her life (we have to protect her from herself!), when simple facts (extremely successful career as a writer at a very young age, good relationships) all say otherwise.

Jessica Valenti’s schtick is to be bitter and angry. She runs a website that is dedicated to bitter and angry behavior. If she isn’t bitter and angry in real life, and has no desire to be seen as bitter and angry, then her communication skills must be truly abysmal.

As for being disorganized — hey, here’s a challenge. Name one single curriculum…or elixir…or some other agent…possessing an inimical relationship to sexual recklessness, particularly within young people — that does not simultaneously earn for itself an inimical relationship with post-modern feminism in general, and the Feministing flog in particular. Name five of those. You probably can’t even find one. To call for sexual discretion, good judgment, monogamy, standards in selecting a partner, et al, is to become an enemy of our modern feminists. Their words say they are all about privacy, people minding their own business, etc. etc. etc. Their actions say something else.

Feminists are not about privacy. Here’s a typical flog post:

1. Embedded YouTube clip, this commercial just started airing
2. It makes me want to vomit
3. When drunk horny dangerous men watch this, they will want to…etc…etc…etc…
4. It objectifies women
5. Did I mention it makes me want to vomit? What were they thinking??
6. Here’s the contact info for you to lodge your protest. Let’s whack ’em now, and make it look like we all got offended at the same time over the same thing, without actually collaborating on this.

But “Ethical slut” isn’t lashing back in the same way as Valenti herself. No, her whole thing is to whine and moan about the double standard.

We’ve been talking about neo-conservatives as if the “neo” meant that their arbitrary condemnation of people is something new. Anyone who has studied the role of religion in our world knows that this sort of thing is as old as time. Women as commodities is as old as time too. You see it in things like honor killings, women killed because their “value” has been damaged, even through rape. Would mkfreeberg ever write a long diatribe about men who use their dicks as jackhammers, cheap meat, who disrespected their own chastity? Never. (Except in the context of “ruining” a future man’s wife).

Yup, men and women are treated differently in our society, Ethical Slut. And, as long as our society remains somewhat strong, it’s gonna stay that way. One stigma for male sluts, a different one for female sluts.

Oh, and yeah, if I saw someone put up a blog about men using their dicks as jackhammers, and then follow it up with several books on the same — especially if the books were about a societal obsession, while the individual writing said books clearly suffered from a counter-obsession — yes, I’d write a long diatribe about it. Male sluts do suffer from a stigma. It isn’t the same as the stigma for female sluts…real people don’t treat the sexes exactly the same, any more than post-modern feminists with feminists blogs do (!). But out here in the world of reality, we recognize that male sluts aren’t exactly elevated to tall pedestals and then worshipped, as feminists seem to think they are.

There’s a certain urgency involved in desiring to cool the behavior of a female slut, and there’s a good foundation of reason for this urgency. There are reasons why their family members are ashamed and sad. There’s the whole thing about women getting pregnant, something men can’t do. Feminists know that, right? And then there’s the time honored position women have in our culture, of resisting. Slowing things down. Putting the brakes on things.

That’s their role. You may not like it, but who cares…you don’t like that men have penises and women have vaginas, but that’s just the way things are. A man is sexually reckless — his behavior is put into check by the lady he is attempting to seduce. A woman is sexually reckless — that’s different. There’s nobody to put that behavior in check. I mean, what…you think the man will do it? Seriously?

I like it when feminists decry that double standard. I like it a lot, because it enables others to see how silly and ridiculous feminists really are. The keymaster-gatekeeper relationship dates back to biblical times, those times when feminists claim women were being treated like property and cattle and dirt and what-not…when in reality, this particular social custom that has spanned so many continents, in which men make things go and women make things stop, is perhaps the one social custom that has conferred the greatest respect upon the fairer sex. And put them in charge of something rather important. Civilization itself, one could argue.

Feminists want to get rid of it. I find that ironic and interesting.

Homosexuals can be wonderful parents. Sluts can be happy, productive people. People who follow religious rules to a T can stone a person to death and watch them die slowly of internal injuries and starvation. This is why you’re a terrible person who must be stopped, mkfreeberg. Is that simple enough for you to understand?

Uh…it will be, as soon as you show me some examples of those, and “prove a negative” with regard to the opposites: That homosexuals can be crappy parents, sluts can be unproductive, people who follow religious rules to a T can do wonderful things for those less fortunate. As to whether I understand how this shows I’m a terrible person who must be stoped, I’m having trouble making the connection because I didn’t say too much with regard to homosexuals being good or bad parents or sluts being productive or unproductive.

But nevermind. I think I understand why Ethical Slut would think I’m terrible, and why I must be stopped. I said something outside her value system. Time for the fire-ant treatment. Let’s all attack mkfreeberg, and can I get an amen here from my fellow nattering-nabob feminists?

Post-modern feminists, for people who are supposed to be champions of freedom, liberty and free expression, are, in their own way, quite puritanical. As I’ve said about other factions of grumbling, snarky outspoken people — they’ve exchanged one religion for another.

You’ve read thing or two of mine that make it clear that I am a huge supporter of well-defined gender roles. I don’t know which sex is more responsible for getting the (traditional) roles where they are, but I do know that “feminists” are the ones who decided to ascribe value to them, and chose, for some damned reason, to make theirs the lesser. A sagacious feminist would have realized that the quickest way to female ascendancy would have been to start a movement to advance men’s interests. It would have been an implicit subjugation of men that would then have provided women instant authority. Poor, poor feminists; they’re always thinking with OUR dicks.
- Andy | 10/17/2008 @ 12:11
It’s weird. Women complain about the double standard with slutty men and women. But when it comes to discussions between men and women, I’ve never heard a man say “you’re just bitter because you aren’t getting any”. Women seem to value men more if he is “getting” some, or lots of it. So what can Men do to make male sluts pariahs? It would seem that the double standard happens because men have higher standards then women. This is a bad thing for men to do?
- Robert Mitchell Jr. | 10/17/2008 @ 12:26
Well, now. I knew all about the rampant misogyny here at The Blog Nobody Reads but the racism thing caught me by surprise. How did I miss THAT? (/sarcasm)
- Buck | 10/17/2008 @ 13:22
You know, the first funny thing is that there’s a monolithic feminist movement just running rampant over the country. Trust me, if there was such an organized movement, we’d be working on things like paid maternity leave for all women like the rest of the civilized world (and some of the uncivilized one). And then we’d move on to punishing jeans makers for making so many damned jeans that don’t fit. I read Feministing but most of my friends can’t name a single “feminazi” to save their lives.

An interesting book that is on the other side of Jessica Valenti’s book is Female Chauvinist Pig. It’s all about how young girls are taught to become hyper-sexual at younger and younger ages. The effect of Girls Gone Wild, Playboy, and things like baby high heels. Check it out.

Second, call me crazy, but doesn’t that make you angry and bitter? I mean, your argument is that anyone who has a blog about current events/politics is bitter and angry? Or just people who disagree with you? Wait, aren’t people who just rabidly attack other people “grumbling, snarky outspoken people”? Damn, this circular logic hurts my head.

Just some thoughts.
- ethical slut | 10/17/2008 @ 18:30
You know, the first funny thing is that there’s a monolithic feminist movement just running rampant over the country.

You should hang around these pages (which nobody reads anyway) when we start discussing McCain vs. Obama. We were v-e-r-y late supporters of McCain over here…we didn’t clamber on board until after he picked Gov. Palin. Many among our “nobodies” who don’t stop by to not read The Blog That Nobody Reads, on the other hand…in fact, I’d venture to suggest, a majority…have been on the “for God’s sake support him, or else that socialist guy might win” side of the fence.

This still presents us with a split between blog-writer and blog-readers. To this day, if I say one little thing that’s less than flattering toward The Maverick, the place erupts. With good reason. We share a common goal, to keep the country out of the hands of the peacenik socialist crowd. But on how to do it, we are deeply split. We each respect the other’s point of view, but debate the issue pretty much every single time it comes up.

That’s called a “schism.” Now, contrasted with that, I don’t see too many schisms on Feministing or at your place either as a matter of fact. I see exactly what I described: “Readers, help me hate this.” “Oh, okay. Moo, moo.”

Trust me, if there was such an organized movement, we’d be working on things like paid maternity leave for all women like the rest of the civilized world (and some of the uncivilized one).

All women have access to paid maternity leave. All they have to do, is land a job that offers it. On the other hand, if you’re such a big fan of choice that you want all employers FORCED to offer (!) such plans, there’s tons of other countries you can move to. You won’t be stopped, so long as you can afford your own moving expenses.

Of course, when employers are forced to offer such plans when they don’t consider themselves sufficiently capitalized to do so, they’ll adapt as best they can. By discriminating against women when they do the hiring. I’m sure the feminists will like *that* just fine.

And then we’d move on to punishing jeans makers for making so many damned jeans that don’t fit.

They’ve adapted to the market. If you have a problem with what’s offered, blame your fellow consumers. Maybe their asses are oversized but their egos are swelled to match. Whatever’s going on, if jeans the size of tents were in high demand, they’d be offering more of them.

I read Feministing but most of my friends can’t name a single “feminazi” to save their lives.

They just need to look in the mirror. Yeah, I think that’s a fair generalization. Read the posts. Teaspons of positive commentary plus barrels of the negative variety. If they like reading this stuff — unless they’re laughing at it, and maybe even then — they’re bitter. I’ve read the material for awhile, as I’ve said. It’s nourishment for bitter people. Period.

An interesting book that is on the other side of Jessica Valenti’s book is Female Chauvinist Pig. It’s all about how young girls are taught to become hyper-sexual at younger and younger ages. The effect of Girls Gone Wild, Playboy, and things like baby high heels. Check it out.

I’ll make a point of doing so. Isn’t it interesting? Myself, Cassy, Mr. Hawkins, et al, accused Valenti of being hostile to chastity. She replied (angrily…yawn) that her book wasn’t about attacking virginity, it was about privacy. Now you’re recommending this other book, that attacks private enterprises that are seen to intrude on this value of virginity and purity with regard to girls of younger and younger ages. That, in itself, is an invasion of privacy is it not?

Second, call me crazy, but doesn’t that make you angry and bitter? I mean, your argument is that anyone who has a blog about current events/politics is bitter and angry?

That would be a very silly argument if it was the one I’m making. I’ve got a lot of blogger friends here who aren’t the least bit bitter or angry. We’ve got people who blog to share knitting secrets, some blog to share recipes, some blog to share their photographs and keep others up to date with what their husbands, brothers and sons are doing in Afghanistan and Iraq.

I see your point, there are bloggers like me who are concerned about where the prevailing sensibilities are drifting, some going so far as to portend some sort of Armageddon just around the corner. You could make the credible argument that’s what the fem-bloggers are doing. But there’s an important difference: People like me bring up the nutty, crazy things other people do, in order to open conversation about those things. And that includes conversation from you, whom I targeted specifically (because you targeted me first).

Feminist bloggers, on the other hand, call out incorrect behavior in others not to open conversation, but to close it. Like I said — here’s the e-mail address of the ad producer, let’s flood him with complaints and get that thing yanked. Then we find another offensive message, and go back, Jack, and do it again. Puritanical.

Damn, this circular logic hurts my head.

Circular logic means A proves B, and B proves A. If I understand your critique, it’s that you make yourself feel good when you pretend my terms are defined in ways that are clearly out of harmony with my intended meaning. That isn’t circular reasoning.

Example of circular reasoning:

Bush called the Constitution a goddamned piece of paper. He certainly did say it, although all our sources have turned to crap and we therefore can’t substantiate it. But if we can’t substantiate it, we believe he said it because it sounds like something he’d say. He has that reputation. Why does he have that reputation? Because we’ve been making up stories that have no substantiation, along those lines, just like this one. So the reputation proves the anecdote, and the anecdote proves the reputation. A proves B and B proves A. That’s circular reasoning.

Anyway, we do appreciate you signing up and taking the time to comment. Wish more feminist-bloggers opened the channels of communication like that, on a regular basis. The world would be a better place.
- mkfreeberg | 10/17/2008 @ 19:01
Um, there is a monolithic feminist movement running rampart over the country, and it is working on paid maternity leave. Punishing the free market for providing the product people buy is a new one for me, but it does give weight to the people who say feminists are just renamed Marxists. And of course you can’t name a single “feminazi”. They are mainstream to the feminists, and those who find them extreme are Liebermaned out of the movement.

We are quite aware of female chauvinist pigs around here. As to the book, why would we read it? Any solution put forward by men will be shot down by feminists as “controlling women”. You may not like Girls Gone Wild or Playboy, but the women volunteer. No, we can’t do anything. The problem is caused by women and will have to be solved by women.

No, writing a blog about current events/politics does not mean that the author is bitter and angry. Our host has noted a pattern where feminist blogs do not have logical thoughts(see the first paragraph of this response) and just try to form a mob. Your rebuttal has not shown any difference in the pattern.

If you can’t handle circular logic, why do you call yourself “Ethical Slut”?
- Robert Mitchell Jr. | 10/17/2008 @ 19:02
“Water? What water?”

I guess I’m just a bitter former blogger who clings to his guns.
- JohnJ | 10/17/2008 @ 20:49

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

I’m a Terrible Person Who Must Be StoppedFriday, October 17th, 2008

I’m a Terrible Person Who Must Be Stopped
Friday, October 17th, 2008