OMF’nG….Heart(less) Sweeps The Lunacy Sweepstakes…Again

Just when you think that she couldn’t find new depths of lunacy in her crusade to defend “radical feminism” from the scurge of erection-wielding men, transfolk and sexbot women, Heart(less) digs deep into her yoni (or would that be the other end??) and breaks out this nice little rant at her place against the latest in “radfem slogging” (to steal Stormy’s apt phrase) and trashing of her “critique” of transfolk who pollute her sacred womynspace.

Interpretation and added emphasis by me is included just for entertainment purposes only.

A Few Words About the Latest Round of Anti-Radical Feminist, Pro-Men’s Rights, Propaganda

A few responses to the latest anti-radical feminist tactics, screeds, attacks, propaganda:

Radical feminists are no more “transphobes” than we are “manhaters.”  To allege that we are is to indulge in sexist, misogynist, anti-feminist propaganda.   The herstoric position of radical feminism is that those who are born male into this world enjoy male privilege, for all of the years they live as males and as men.  It is never “_phobic” for an oppressed people group — which females certainly are – to castigate its oppressors, even in harsh and mean-spirited terms, with name-calling, swearing, and hyperbole.  It might be mean-spirited, we might be generalizing, we might be stereotyping, we might — and likely are — angry, but we aren’t “manhaters” because we denounce what men do or because we denounce male privilege, which again, all who are born male into the world have or have had.    Male to female transsexuals/transgendered persons have enjoyed male privilege, for all of the time that they have moved and lived in the world as males or continue to.  To call them out for their sexism whenever we see it, find it, hear of it, know of it, are targeted by it,  are impacted and affected by it  is not “transphobic.”  It is feminism.

Ahhhh…eeeeee-yah. Of course, when “radical feminist” women trash transsexuals as simply rapists and “chicks with dicks” trying to get into real womyn’s panties, it surely isn’t bigotry or hatred or even “transphobia”…it’s just decent classic feminist critique of “male privilege”. Now, the fact that most transsexuals don’t have the choice to lop off their dicks and become real womyn (not that even that would suffice in the deranged den of cobwebs that consists of Heart(less)’s brain, since only “biowomen” can be truly oppressed as women by the patriarchy), or that such “privilege” that they are alleged to retain usually comes at the steep risk of getting beaten down by other men of “privilege”, doesn’t seem to register at all with her radfem manifesto.  And besides…some of those evil transfolk happen to be born with vaginas, too; but never mind that….just having a dick makes you powerful enough. So why am I not a freakin’ millionaire, Heart, just by osmosis??

 Female-to-male transsexuals/transgendered persons are situated much differently than male-to-female transsexuals/transgendered persons.  Transmen have not enjoyed male  privilege for any of the years they lived as females and as women, and they never enjoy male privilege as men do.   When radical feminists call out transpersons, we are calling them out on their sexism.  This means that most of the time, we are calling out transwomen or trans-identified men, not transmen. 

Ahhh…hold up a sec……so, FTM “transmen” (I assume that Patrick (nee Pat) Califia would be an exception, because he’s against everything Heart(less) stands for), who now live as men, are exempt from being part of the evol patriarchy because they lived as women prior to their surgery and their change in sexual orientation?? But by that logic, shouldn’t they be the ultimate sellouts to womynhood for abandoning their natural “sex” and taking on that penis??? Why should they get a free ride??  Oh, and if male power is so overwhelming, then shouldn’t MTF “transwomen” actually get some credit for rejecting and repudiating such “male privilege”??  Oh, but nooooooooosiree…..it’s all about their schlongs attempting to distort and destroy the purity of natural womynspace.  Oh, and the fact that they might attempt to seduce real biowomyn in bathrooms out of the sisterhood doesn’t help their cause, either.

Were that the worst of Heart’s rant, I could barely let it slide…..but then she attempts to seperate herself and her transhating minnions from the Religious Right….and only ends up making things that much worse.

To compare radical feminists to the Religious Right is propaganda, it is a smear campaign, it is disingenuous, and it is transparently and hatefully misogynist.   Shame on “progressives” who can’t find more positive ways to articulate their perspectives than to engage in down and dirty cheap shots of this nature.

Oh, but she must be right…..I mean, giving the nod and wink to the likes of Luckynkl and MarySunshine and delphyne comparing transsexual women to evil gay men cruising public restrooms is certainly much different than the lunacies of NARTH or the ex-gays.  Really, it is. And woe to such “progressives” who simply attack the fundamentalists who rip on the perversity of “the gay/tranny lifestyle” without understanding the subtle nuance of radfem theory which is at least more “positive” in its willingness to suck up to….errrrrrr, criticize traditional conservatives for their beliefs against sexual dissidents.

I was personally put out of business by the Religious Right.  I sued eight fundamentalist organizations including several fundamentalist churches in federal court in 1997 and I won by a unanimous jury verdict.   It’s silly to attempt to lump me in with the Religious Right.   Having said that, I would much rather deal with the open and unapologetic misogyny of the Religious Right than with the veiled and unapologetic misogyny of white leftist liberal men.  At least with the Religious Right, all the cards are on the table, and I do not have to, for example, deal with someone who is calling himself a “feminist” who prostitutes women, makes, uses, or benefits from the making of pornography, and engages in other acts of male oppression and privilege while pretending to be my ally .

Translation: “No, I’m not a fundamentalist antisex hatemonger, but when fundies happen to share my fear and loathing of evil ‘white leftist liberal men’ (hey, Heart, I’m not a liberal or White; so am I exempted from your wrath??) who defend porn, prostitiution, and other evil “male oppressive” sex acts, I can work with them anytime.”

There are plenty of transgender/transsexual people who are religious fundamentalists and the Religious Right does not take any unified  or unitary position as to transgender/transsexuality.  To suggest that it does is to participate in, and be guilty of, the willful ignorance around issues of religious fundamentalism and religion in general of which far too many liberals, self-identified feminists, and “progressives” so-called are guilty, which ruins whatever shreds of credibility remain so far as the Left goes and clouds the credibility of progressive movements in general.  

Ahhhhh….I get it now; Heart’s brand of antipornradicalfeminism is really a page from her conception of the “Religious Left”; a nice means of retaining political credibility while appealing to social conservatives. But I guess that “credibility” amongst the Left can only be found by parroting the Right on social policy and making sexually Puritanical women the new vangard of the progressive movement.  Didn’t the Democratic Leadership Council already try that tact for the last 20 years, and fall flat on its face??

People need to do their homework about the Religious Right if there is to be any productive confrontation or challenge to fundamentalisms (as opposed to tickle-for-a-nickle demonizing and scapegoating).  There are female persons, girls and women, being horrifically oppressed by fundamentalist men.  They deserve and need our educated and intelligent SUPPORT.  Women and girls in fundamentalist religion are not similarly situated with men in fundamentalist religion and should not be lumped in with men in fundamentalist religion.  Women in fundamentalist religion are an oppressed people group .

Yeah….Phyllis Schafly and Kathleen Parker and Mona Charen really are radicalfeminists, however they may deny it. They just don’t know it yet…because they are soooo oppressed.

Mary Daly did not “compare transsexuals with Frankenstein.”  This is a lie.

Well, we’ll just let Daly’s own words be the judge of that. From a comment (which was altered by Heart for “snarkiness”) by nexyjo, quoting directly from GYN/Ecology (pp. 70 – 71):

“Today the Frankenstein phenomenon is omnipresent not only in religious myth, but in its offspring, phallocratic technology. The insane desire for power, the madness of boundary violation, is the mark of necrophiliacs who sense the lack of soul/spirit/life-loving principle with themselves and therefore try to invade and kill off all spirit, substituting conglomerates of corpses. This necrophillic invasion/elimination takes a variety of forms. Transsexualism is an example of male surgical siring which invades the female world with substitutes.” 

[Emphasis added by me.]

Remember, this is the same Mary Daly who proposed “Misterectomy” as a cure for all of womyn’s ills.

Going back to Heart(less), who’s never, never out of control (often):

Male-to-female transsexuality/transgender is really about men’s rights.  It has nothing to do with feminism.  As such, as feminists,  just as we oppose men’s rights, in general,  we oppose this manifestation of men’s rights as well.

Because, of course, in a perfect womynhood, men would have no rights that womyn would be bound to respect…in fact, men would probably be reduced in population for the survival of the human race and the good of society in Heart’s grand vision of “progressive radicalfeminist” society. And, of course, transsexualism would not even exist, since technology and womyn’s wisdom will be able to nip any such deviancy in the bud through “natural selection”…or merely trashing “male nanates”.

And finally, Heart concludes with the grand finish:

One more.  Critiques of transgender/transsexuality are no more meant as attacks on individual transgender/transsexual persons than critiques of prostituting women are meant as attacks on prostitutes or critiques of pornography are meant as attacks on women in pornography or critiques of motherhood are meant as attacks on mothers or critiques of marriage as an institution are meant as critiques of married women or critiques of high heels are meant as critiques of those who wear them or critiques of lipstick are critiques of those who wear it or critiques of shaving are critiques of those who shave or critiques of boob jobs are critiques of those who have them, and on and on and on, infinity.   Some ought to get over themselves and learn the difference between critiques, analysis, opinions, politics and them.  I can critique the hell out of your politics and your theories and ideas and go to the mat for you,  love the hell out of you, and be willing to lay down my life for you.   This is what any mother knows.  This is what any lover knows.   If you want to know how to critique and analyze the hell out of something without making it personal, try unconditionally fucking loving somebody, would you?  Then you’ll understand.  Maybe unconditional love is just so goddamn rare right now, nobody knows what it is any more.  And if people don’t learn, then there will not be any revolution, not any time soon.

So, now, all you funk-filled bratwurst lovers, you lipstick faux-lesbians, you stripper prostitute sexbots, you patriarchy/mixed gender fuckers…listen up; Mama Heart has only your best interests at heart (sorry for the pun) when she tells you that you are betraying the sisterhood by getting those implants or dabbing on lip gloss or shaving your legs or putting on those stilettos for your oppressors. How can she show such unconditional love for you if you don’t reciprocate by adopting her ideas to the hilt?? If you’d just stop taking yourself so seriously and just give in to her and her whacked-out beliefs, then she and her Womyn Nation will love you forever and ever….and all will be right with the world. After all, it’s only analysis and science, it’s not personal.

Sure, Heart.  Nothing personal about The Bell Curve or Birth of a Nation, either.

Ann and Nancy Wilson (of the 80’s rock group Heart) oughta sue this woman for libelling their good name. Most decent progressive people should do the same out of general moral principle.

The Nigeria Tribune Takes On The Masturbation Menace

Gotta hand it to them….for all of the twisted stats and bloated claims they use to debunk self-pleasure, they do have a way with words.  A proper fisking follows.

Taken from the Nigeria Tribune: 

MASTURBATION: Temporary sexual pleasure with many dangers

There is a secret sexual practice common to both the young and old and it is known as masturbation. Seye Adeniyi in this report examines the causes, and the negative impacts it is having on health.

THERE is a secretive sexual practice common to both men and women, as well as young people, and it is known as masturbation. A team of scientists in Australia recently found that 98 per cent of men engage in this sexual act, while many women cannot also feign ignorance on this sexual act. In fact, they revealed that 89 per cent of females also practise masturbation. Your Health findings show that this habit is no respecter of age, as many young boys and girls are also aware of what masturbation is all about.

Oh, yeah..it’s so “secretive” that almost everyone participates in the act of self-pleasure without remorse or harm….except, perhaps, certain writers for a supposedly national newspaper who are so obsessed with regulating other people’s sex lives.

Many of the medical practitioners who spoke with Your Health agreed that masturbation, which is the self-stimulation of one’s sexual organ by hand or by other means to achieve sexual excitement, satisfaction and ultimately, to ejaculation, is generally, secretive, but a bad practice common with teenagers.

Yup…really bad, like spitting in public and jaywalking, I suppose.

Though Dr. Adewale Oguntuase says adults also masturbate, but scientists have different opinions on its effect on health. Some say that masturbation is an act that must be resisted and that those already into it should find a way to stop it because it has harmful effects on the body, especially the brain.

Yeah, right…..like simply having men rape women unabated and reducing women to baby factories for God and nation is that much better??

Of course, there are some others that say that masturbation is a normal and healthy practice if done privately and discreetly…but let’s not give our own biases away, mmmmm-kay???

Another research also indicates that more children are masturbating. The survey indicates that about one-third of all girls and about half of all boys have masturbated to orgasm by the time they reached the age of 13, with boys generally starting earlier than girls.

“Another research”??? Ahhh….are y’all so busy fighting Ponzi schemes to mix in a proofreader for syntax??

For instance, an American social historian, Edward Brecher, in a research work published in a book about sex among older people in the United States entitled Love, Sex and Ageing (1984), reports that 33 per cent of women 70 years of age and older and 43 per cent of men in the same age range still engage in self-stimulation of their sexual organs.

“Sixty-five per cent of married women and 59 per cent of married men in that age range,” the researcher stated, still have sexual intercourse with their spouses. This means that even some of the old people still masturbate.

Oh, the horrrrah!!!  We have OLD PEOPLE who can’t keep their hands out of their pants and panties!!! This.  Must. Stop. Now. Next thing you know, we’ll have brothels in the geriatric wards of hospitals!!!

The next question then is: Does masturbation have any ill-effect on one’s life, sexual life, libido and most especially, one’s health? Going by submissions of medical experts, sexual coldness in women is far more common than lack of sex drive in men. Many women that practise masturbation develop the habit as a result of many factors, including peer influence.

Now…notice the intro of the phrase “sexual coldness”…of which we can readily translate to “women who won’t open their legs for their husbands/boyfriends/whomever and make for the babies for the glory of God, family, and country. How this is blamed on rampant masturbation may be a loss for most of us mormal folk…but I do digress….

In many women, the trouble often arises from lack of normal sex instructions during the early years. Many have been indoctrinated by their parents or elders that all matters pertaining to sex are shameful and wicked.

According to a health instructor, who simply wants to be addressed as Mrs. Oyemade, “it is a strange fact that some women can enjoy sex while away on vacation, but fail to do so on returning home and assuming the normal burdens of everyday living. This shows how important it is that all women and girls should be made to understand fully the real functions of their reproductive organs at the early stage of life, and the part they play in building and maintaining a happy home.”

Many girls and women don’t have this knowledge, and that is why some of them engage in unwholesome sexual habits like lesbianism and masturbation.

In other words, if Nigerian women would just remember that God created them to make plenty of babies and that they should just be quiet when their hubbies want to mount them, men wouldn’t “abuse” themselves quite as much. And….they would probably be soooooo satisfied by the magical working of such “swordsmanship” (so to speak) that they would never want to touch their clits again. 

And this woman is a “health instructor”???  Eeeeeee-yeah.

And for Mr. Bosun Banjoko, an immunologist/public health specialist at Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Osun State, “masturbation can actually affect one’s sexual life in future and also has both psychological and social effects on the doer.”

Mr. Idowu Bakare of Movement Against HIV/AIDS and Poverty (MAAIDS) and Olubowale Gbolahan, of Centre for Rural and Reproductive Health Development (CRRHD), also share the same view with Bosun Banjoko. Another health practitioner, Mr. Femi Adereti described masturbation as a secret act of sexual excitement which he said can be definitely harmful, especially when carried to excess. “Often the individual tends to become secretive, living in a kind of dream world where fantasy plays a dominant part. Many highly nervous older women freely admit that most of their troubles stem from some form of self-stimulation, indulged in for over a long period of time.”

For Dr. Bayo Omole, any young person who engages in masturbation is only exposing himself/herself to nervous problems. “In fact, nervous problems are always more common in those who indulge in this sort of thing. Many of them seem unable to face reality. Frequent masturbation, with its tendency to day-dreaming, can be harmful, particularly to those who are subject to nervous depression. So, I would advise young people, especially anybody who wants to enjoy his/her life to avoid the dirty, unholy sexual habit called masturbation,” Dr. Omole said.

Now, you do happen to spot the trend here towards citing numerous psychoanalyst “experts” to prove their case about the ultimate evil threat of masturbation to Nigerian civilization……because, quite simply, it’s a distraction f from doing God’s work, or so I guess.

From a religious point of view, Pastor Yemi Aduloju, an Ibadan-based man of God, in one of his sermons, submitted that masturbation is a sexual sin with dangers to health and most especially to one’s spiritual life. According to him, masturbation opens one to sickness and diseases as spelt out in biblical passages like Proverb 6: 32 – 33. Pastor Aduloju said: “Sexual sins like masturbation bring down great men and has also brought down great destiny in life. It makes God turn His back on you, even immediately you commence the dirty, unholy, sexual act with temporary pleasures.”

You mean, it’s not just about Lot defying God by spilling his seed??

For Okeke Uzoamaka, a senior social worker with CEREHAD – a non-governmental organisation, increasing cases of unwholesome sexual habit like masturbation, lesbianism and homosexuality among youths can also be traced to the advent of the internet. “Many young school boys and girls now go to cybercafe to watch pornographic films on the internet. Though many of them would tell you they are going to browse, but ask them what actually are they browsing? It is either X-rated films or blue films or they are looking for ways to commit internet fraud or crime. So, this is where they learn all these dirty sexual habits like masturbation which eventually would mar their health later in future,” Uzoamaka stated while speaking with Your Health recently.

Memo to Amber Rhea: You can forget about starting up a Sex 2.0 branch in Nigeria anytime soon.

Howeover, some people who spoke with Your Health do not see anything bad in masturbation. Many of them believe that masturbation is a normal sexual behaviour which almost everybody engages in. A medical doctor who will not want her name mentioned stated that for many people, masturbation remains a taboo subject and a practice that is still regarded as perverse or immoral. “Some medical practitioners and psychologists had condemned masturbation as destructive to mental health, even recommending amputation of the penis as a way to cure the habit in compulsive males. But today, many medical experts are beginning to change their belief.

“But for me, there is no ill-effect attached to masturbation. There is nothing wrong in it. It is not against the law, it is not immoral. It is perfectly a normal healthy thing done by 98 per cent of men, but the other two per cent are liars, who will not want to say the truth, but yet practise it,” she stated. In the opinion of Dr. Andrew Weil in his report entitled: “Dr Weil’s Vitamin Advisor for your Body, he states: “Now it appears that masturbation is not normal, it may be healthy and protective, especially for men. Said he: “In my view, masturbation can be a normal expression of sexuality in both men and women, when done compulsively or addictively. It can be irritating or exhausting, but in moderation it is medically harmless and may even be healthy, so if the Australian Scientists’ findings are confirmed, they should be part of the advice doctors would give men for protecting their repoduction systems.”

So….first off, why not publish the name of the “medical doctor” who offered a defense of masturbation….or for that matter, the names of all those who are not so reticent about defending mutual masturbation as a perfectly harmless (when done privately and consensually and respectfully) act of self-pleasure??  Could it be because that would really destroy the (il)logic of this entire article??  Naaaaaah…

Nonetheless, other dangers of masturbation as spelt out by medical experts include psychological guilt. A chance masturbator stands the risk of nervous-depressing permanent insanity, premature death, especially for those with high blood pressure, diabetes, blood diseases, inability to perform sexual act naturally, etc. Other dangers attached to masturbation sexes include inability to pull out of the act. It has even been documented to cause more deaths among boys in Europe than any plaque or war. Masturbation also results in total loss of sexual feelings and desire due to lack of sensation when it is time to actually engage in legitimate sexual intercourse. Quick, early or premature ejaculation is also one of the rewards of regular masturbation.

WOW.  If we are to believe that, masturbation causes death…more death than the Middle Ages wars, the Bubonic plague, cancer, lung disease, malnutrition, and violence….combined. And…it also leads to premature ejaculation in the “main event” of conception, too.  Really.  For sure.  Experts prove it!!!!

In girls, the breast development is arrested or retarded and the individual also stands the risk of experiencing spinal irritation resulting from epilepsy as a result of loss of seminal fluid in a male.

Oh, please….so loss of sperm count leads directly to epilepsy and spinal injury in women, as well as smaller breasts???  Gee, you forgot smaller, less rounded asses, too!!!

In.  Freakin’. Credible.  And I thought that only the Mormons and Paul Cameron had the exclusive monopoly on sexual crackpottery and wingnuttery.

Aborigine Troubles Down Under?? Just Ban The Porn And Booze!! (Or..Newt Gingrich Goes To Austrailia)

I didn’t know to ask whether Newt Gingrich must have moved to Austrailia, because only that can explain this kind of racist Puritan colonial nonsense (from the Guardian; h/t to Susie Bright):

Aborigines face ban on alcohol and porn

James Sturcke and agencies
Thursday June 21, 2007
Guardian Unlimited 

Pornography and alcohol will be banned for Aborigines in Australia’s Northern Territory, the country’s prime minister, John Howard, announced today, after a report found that “rivers of grog” were leading to rampant child abuse.

“This is a national emergency,” Mr Howard told parliament. “We’re dealing with a group of young Australians for whom the concept of childhood innocence has never been present.” The sale, possession and transportation of alcohol would be banned for six months on Aboriginal-owned land in the Northern Territory, Mr Howard said, and sales would be reviewed after that.

Some Aboriginal leaders immediately attacked the plan as “disgusting and paternalistic”, saying they were not consulted and that they objected to restrictions on how indigenous people spend their welfare benefits.

The child abuse report, Little Children Are Sacred, released last week, found drinking was a key contributor to the collapse of Aboriginal culture and neglect of children, and created opportunities for paedophiles.

The report said hardcore pornography was rife in Aboriginal communities and available to children, who had become desensitised to sex with adults. The sale and possession of pornography is also to be banned.

“A river of grog [alcohol] is killing people and destroying our communities,” Pat Anderson, who co-chaired the inquiry, told reporters last week. “There is a strong association between alcohol abuse, violence and sexual abuse of children.”

About 60,000 of Australia’s roughly 400,000 Aborigines live in the Northern Territory. They are consistently the nation’s most disadvantaged group, with far higher rates of unemployment, alcohol and drug abuse, and domestic violence. Their life expectancy is 17 years shorter than that of other Australians.

Alcohol kills an Aborigine every 38 hours and accounts for a quarter of deaths in the Northern Territory.

Under Mr Howard’s plan, new restrictions would be placed on welfare payments for Aborigines, forcing parents to spend at least half of the money on essential items such as food – a measure meant to prevent wasting money on alcohol and gambling. Family welfare payments would also be linked to children’s school attendance.

Aboriginal leaders said it was the kind of government behaviour that disenfranchised their people and created the problems in the first place.

“I’m absolutely disgusted by this patronising government control,” said Mitch, who uses one name and is a member of a government board helping Aborigines who were taken from their parents under past assimilation laws. “And tying drinking with welfare payments is just disgusting.

“If they’re going to do that, they’re going to have to do that with every single person in Australia, not just black people.”

The report said banning alcohol sales in some Aboriginal communities had dramatically reduced sexual abuse and violence: “Alcohol is being used as a bartering tool to gain sex from children, either by offering it to the children themselves or in some cases to adult members of their family.”

One Aboriginal woman from the Yolngu tribe said “white man’s water is a curse” and called for alcohol outlets to be closed.

“Eradicate this curse that is killing us physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually,” she wrote in a letter published in the report.

The report said: “Many of the Aboriginal people spoken to by the inquiry were not aware of legal issues such as age of consent.” 

Oh, so let me get this straight…

First, “we” (by “we” I refer to universal White privileged people) steal their land from under them by means of force, rape, and any other means;

Then, “we” use their men for slaves and women for sperm deposits, not caring about their free will;

Then, “we” abandon them after using them to fetter for themselves, and throw alcohol and Bibles and meaningless trinkets of cash at them as cures for “their” apparant lack of morality;

And then, “we” issue reports decrying how immoral they have become and the results of “their” immorality, and thusly, in a fit of care, pass even more repressive and reactionary laws to control their lives that much more…all because “we” care sooooo deeply.

And yes, we absolutely must take away the porn and teh alcohol from the nigg…errrrrr…the Aboriginies, since unlike “us”, they have been proven unable to handle the stuff for themselves.

On second thoughts, maybe Newtie isn’t the role model that Aussie premier John Howard (who also happens to be the chief booster for Dubya’s war games, too) is trying to copy.  Perhaps David Duke would be more appropos here.

Now, the idea that perhaps the continuation of White racism and gross neglect of the Aboriginies might have a bit more to do with their lack of well being than the demon water and porn could have crossed the mind of those who created this report….but naaaaaah, that would be too liberal and would scare off the liquor companies.  So much easier to blame the victims and create more repression.

I kinda like Susie’s suggestion:

I’d like to see the Prime Minister ban drinking in his neighborhood for six fucking minutes.

Nice try, Susie, but that law probably wouldn’t last three minutes.

Aborigine Troubles Down Under?? Just Ban The Porn And Booze!! (Or..Newt Gingrich Goes To Austrailia)

I didn’t know to ask whether Newt Gingrich must have moved to Austrailia, because only that can explain this kind of racist Puritan colonial nonsense (from the Guardian; h/t to Susie Bright):

Aborigines face ban on alcohol and porn

James Sturcke and agencies
Thursday June 21, 2007
Guardian Unlimited 

Pornography and alcohol will be banned for Aborigines in Australia’s Northern Territory, the country’s prime minister, John Howard, announced today, after a report found that “rivers of grog” were leading to rampant child abuse.

“This is a national emergency,” Mr Howard told parliament. “We’re dealing with a group of young Australians for whom the concept of childhood innocence has never been present.” The sale, possession and transportation of alcohol would be banned for six months on Aboriginal-owned land in the Northern Territory, Mr Howard said, and sales would be reviewed after that.

Some Aboriginal leaders immediately attacked the plan as “disgusting and paternalistic”, saying they were not consulted and that they objected to restrictions on how indigenous people spend their welfare benefits.

The child abuse report, Little Children Are Sacred, released last week, found drinking was a key contributor to the collapse of Aboriginal culture and neglect of children, and created opportunities for paedophiles.

The report said hardcore pornography was rife in Aboriginal communities and available to children, who had become desensitised to sex with adults. The sale and possession of pornography is also to be banned.

“A river of grog [alcohol] is killing people and destroying our communities,” Pat Anderson, who co-chaired the inquiry, told reporters last week. “There is a strong association between alcohol abuse, violence and sexual abuse of children.”

About 60,000 of Australia’s roughly 400,000 Aborigines live in the Northern Territory. They are consistently the nation’s most disadvantaged group, with far higher rates of unemployment, alcohol and drug abuse, and domestic violence. Their life expectancy is 17 years shorter than that of other Australians.

Alcohol kills an Aborigine every 38 hours and accounts for a quarter of deaths in the Northern Territory.

Under Mr Howard’s plan, new restrictions would be placed on welfare payments for Aborigines, forcing parents to spend at least half of the money on essential items such as food – a measure meant to prevent wasting money on alcohol and gambling. Family welfare payments would also be linked to children’s school attendance.

Aboriginal leaders said it was the kind of government behaviour that disenfranchised their people and created the problems in the first place.

“I’m absolutely disgusted by this patronising government control,” said Mitch, who uses one name and is a member of a government board helping Aborigines who were taken from their parents under past assimilation laws. “And tying drinking with welfare payments is just disgusting.

“If they’re going to do that, they’re going to have to do that with every single person in Australia, not just black people.”

The report said banning alcohol sales in some Aboriginal communities had dramatically reduced sexual abuse and violence: “Alcohol is being used as a bartering tool to gain sex from children, either by offering it to the children themselves or in some cases to adult members of their family.”

One Aboriginal woman from the Yolngu tribe said “white man’s water is a curse” and called for alcohol outlets to be closed.

“Eradicate this curse that is killing us physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually,” she wrote in a letter published in the report.

The report said: “Many of the Aboriginal people spoken to by the inquiry were not aware of legal issues such as age of consent.” 

Oh, so let me get this straight…

First, “we” (by “we” I refer to universal White privileged people) steal their land from under them by means of force, rape, and any other means;

Then, “we” use their men for slaves and women for sperm deposits, not caring about their free will;

Then, “we” abandon them after using them to fetter for themselves, and throw alcohol and Bibles and meaningless trinkets of cash at them as cures for “their” apparant lack of morality;

And then, “we” issue reports decrying how immoral they have become and the results of “their” immorality, and thusly, in a fit of care, pass even more repressive and reactionary laws to control their lives that much more…all because “we” care sooooo deeply.

And yes, we absolutely must take away the porn and teh alcohol from the nigg…errrrrr…the Aboriginies, since unlike “us”, they have been proven unable to handle the stuff for themselves.

On second thoughts, maybe Newtie isn’t the role model that Aussie premier John Howard (who also happens to be the chief booster for Dubya’s war games, too) is trying to copy.  Perhaps David Duke would be more appropos here.

Now, the idea that perhaps the continuation of White racism and gross neglect of the Aboriginies might have a bit more to do with their lack of well being than the demon water and porn could have crossed the mind of those who created this report….but naaaaaah, that would be too liberal and would scare off the liquor companies.  So much easier to blame the victims and create more repression.

I kinda like Susie’s suggestion:

I’d like to see the Prime Minister ban drinking in his neighborhood for six fucking minutes.

Nice try, Susie, but that law probably wouldn’t last three minutes.

An Open Letter To The ByrdBrain (aka Birdeye)

Hey, jackass:

I really tried to give your brown nosed, MRA-sniffing, right-wing ass the benefit of the doubt, but when you decided to drop this lovely turd onto Renegade's blog, you crossed the line and earned yourself a serving of The Can of SmackDog Whupass(tm):

You do realize that the bodycounts racked up under Marxist/Commie regimes (like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc) – as far left as you can possibly get – absolutely DWARFED the absolute WORST estimates under Nazism (just to use your revisionist definition of it as "right-wing" for argument's sake)?

Anyhow, it's obvious the only reason you support "women's lib" is so you can get in their sex+ panties easier. 😀  

 Now, let's examine all these memes one by one, shall we??

1) Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot — as far left as you can possibly get — dwarfs the worst estimates under Nazism…

OK…I guess that you can say that as a general statement.  If you manage to avoid the fact that most of the supposed 2 million people allegedly squashed by Stalin during his regime happened to die as a result of World War II…when his country was actually invaded by Hitler and Nazi Germany.

Or…the basic fact that Pol Pot was so "far to the left" that his regime actually got the support of those evil socialists at the Reagan Administration when the Khmer Rouge-led government decided to launch a war with Vietnam during the 1980s??? (Not to mention that Pol Pot actually came to power following the invasion of his country by American forces, which followed a coup where the previous leader was toppled in favor of a much more right-wing govenor who was more amicable to the US??

And what is so "revisionist" about calling the Nazis "right wing"??  They were backed by the wealthiest sector of German industry and defended the socially conservative values of the most reactionary institutions.  They targeted homosexuals, women who didn't follow their standards of German social and sexual "purity", Jews, the Roma ("Gyspies"), and other scapegoats of their "Aryan supremacy" ideology. And they developed a mass propaganda and social machine for controlling and punishing deviant thought.  But, since they mocked the name "socialist", they can be attached onto anyone on the Left for you to slander, right??

And what would you say about the governments of Mussolini and Tojo in Italy and Japan, respectively?? They never called themselves "socialists", yet they too decided to team up with Hitler for their own reasons….and they have their own record of repression and violence.  I guess that that makes them left-wing, too….right??

But this is so inmaterial piffle compared to your feeble attempt to smack me down:

 Anyhow, it's obvious the only reason you support "women's lib" is so you can get in their sex+ panties easier. 😀 

Yeah. Right. 

I mean, every word of defense of Ren (who doesn't even see herself as a feminist that much anyway) and Belledame and Trinity and Amber Rhea is designed not as a means of social solidarity or a statement of support and respect….it's designed merely as a ploy by me to get into their panties.

Ahhhh, dewd…why go there?? 

As much as I consider Ren to be quite teh sexy (and she damn well IS, too, in addition to being smart and compassionate), I have this thing about breaking up healthy relationships….and last time I remember, she was already attached. I don't know her or any other of the women I meet online, and since I have this thing I call a JOB (not a handjob, ByrdBrain, but an actual JOB) that consumes much of my time, I really don't think that I'll be quite able to attempt to even meet them in person….heaven forbid, try to hook up with them.

But..guess what, BB? If they actually wanted me to get with them, I wouldn't mind it one damn bit, since these women, in addition to being decently attractive, happen to have something that you frankly don't show much of: a heart, some compassion and empathy, and a working brain.  They actually represent what's right about feminism, even if they are a bit estranged from the concept due to getting burned by the likes of Witchy-Woo.

I am soooo sorry to disappoint you and your strawman fantasies, ByrdBrain, but I don't support "women's lib" merely to get free sexual conquests (these days, my hands get me through quite well, thank you very much), but because it is the right thing to support. Either women are to be treated as fully human beings, or they are not. That some people who use the feminist label can on occasion abuse it as a club to beat other women down or as a crutch for their own myopia does not diminish the need for feminism one iota.

At least I respect women enough to value their brains and their humanity as much as I do their sexuality.  Can you top that..or is all your bluster nothing more than the rantings of a scared little man who can't stand women more powerful or smarter than he is??

As Beyonce would say: "To the left." (As in, either SYAD and pour yourself a tall glass of STFU; or waddle your sorry ass somewhere else and find somebody who really gives a damn.) 

Oh..and stop reading your faxes on the blogs, too.

 

A Hater Bigot At The Hands Of A Pissed-Off Henchwoman

Oh..but you just HAVE to go over to Renegade Evolution’s blog today, and read where she just broke off Witchy-Woo in the proper way.

Apparantly, W-W, in all her finest arrogant assholery, decided to post a comment in this thread in defense of the manager at the domestic violence shelter who decided that Ren wasn’t good enough to volunteer there due to her chosen profession as a sex worker. An excerpt of one of the jucier bits:

[…] 

2. Many of the resident women and children are seeking safety from the effects of what you do – the effects that it has on their own lives. Sexual violence? Ever heard that that ‘fun’ thing you do has repercussions on the real lives of real women (and children)? Well, yes, I know you have because I’ve told you. 

As the manager of a Women’s Refuge (shelter) there’s no way I’d accept a pornography performer as a volunteer because pornography harms women and anyone who has women’s interests at heart would know that. Ergo: porn performers have a somewhat different agenda. Refuges (shelters) don’t exist to help the volunteer’s feel good – we exist to help stop women and children from being killed and to enable their recovery process.

Perhaps the former director’s boundaries were a tad blurred – whatever, I don”t know – but, for all your suck-up’s, saying “asshole – how awful for you”, maybe you should prioritise the life-safety of abused women and children above the needs of a comfortable and wealthy prostitute who has no idea of the damage she does to other real live women…Totally behind the new shelter manager – that’s how things should be done – if you’re a feminist with women’s interests in mind.
 

Feel free to note the “I’ve told you” bit…as if W-W has, by self-decree of her being a radicalfeminist, given herself the all the powers of presuming to represent all of womanhood in her reading the Scarlet Letter of “slut” and “sexbot” onto Ren…and her dictates that even all the good that she has done can’t erase the permanant taint of her apparant stain of being a porn performer and a sex worker….which, in W-W’s twisted mind, automatically disqualifies Ren from ever blackening the doors of any true “feminist” women’s shelter.

And of course, there’s the usual explicit vent (quite unlike the implicit, thinly-veiled assaults of alisalives, if you will remember) that by virtue of her mere existence and her profession, Ren and any other sex worker who does not completely dance in total unity to the radicalfeminist antiporn hymnal, is responsible for all the evil acts that men impose on women for all eternity.

And…”comfortable and wealthy prostitute”.  Goodness, is Ren hiding her mansion from us??

Anyways…after removing the knife from her back (since W-W had been previously playing the moderate “good cop” role in the side while folks like StormCloud and Heart and delphyne launched the real stinkbombs), Ren went on full “red alert rage” mode and read the full Riot Act at W-W. 

Witchy:

And to think I EVER considered you someone worth making bonds with…Here’s the deal, Witchy. I never told, she fucking asked. I worked my fucking ass off at that shelter, and MY EVIL male driver sent a few abusive male boyfriends, ex’s, pimps and whomevers on their way AWAY from those women. AND FUCK YOU, you think what you do and say doesn’t have repercussions on me, on Kim, on Amber, good women all shot to shit by things you’ve said? Don’t talk fucking woman-hating without looking in the goddamn mirror. Shit, you, someone I actually DARED to believe in as a damn middle ground burned me on feminism, period. I never DID this to feel good about myself, Witchy, you fucking forget that I WAS ABUSED, but by a WOMAN so I guess that was okay? That does not MATTER? I had no help, I grew up with not a whole lot and no one was there to HELP me when I needed it? When my arm was a mess of bloody burns or when MY ribs were broken AND MAYBE I want to help people because NO one was there to help me?

SO NO, WITCHY, FUCK YOU. I have HAD it with this…I grew up with NOTHING, in case you fucking MISSED that, and I want to help people, and more than ANYTHING I am damn burned that you DARE speak ill of the old director, Vi, who, sorry, unless you have LIVED in DC…well, cupcake, you have NO idea of what you speak.

[…]

All your fucking work? Shit, woman, I spent time in Kenya setting up space for raped children and OTHER abused people, I’ve marched on DC, I’ve helped women who do not enjoy the work I do out of the business, and I’ve fucking cleaned blood and grey matter of of floors where I would one day sleep….so don’t you tell me. Don’t you ever tell me ever again. I do what I do because I have to, I want to, and it’s right, everything I do. So no…don’t you tell me.Unless It is to say what a fucking FOOL I was for EVER believing in YOU.
 

You know…if people fascist, sex-hating smug asshats like Witchy-Woo are the future of feminism, then I may have to do as Queer Dewd ended up doing and just say: “Fuck feminists”.  (And not in the sex-positive meaning of that phrase, either.)

 

Radical[Right]Feminism Rears Its Head Again

[Written in social solidarity with Ren]

I guess that the moral to this is simple:

In the APRF world, all women are created equal.

That is, until some women decide to engage in professions that become anathema to APRF ideology.

Then, of course, they become pariahs, and slightly less equal….and must be purged to protect the purity of the "sisterhood".

Regardless even if they volunteer their time and effort to help actual victims of the very abuses that radfems want to abolish.

Because, you see, freezing out women for the sin of getting paid for sex is so much more important than having effective workers who help victims of domestic violence.

Just like it’s far more important for the Boy Scouts to maintain their "Christian" purity standards and purge out gay men.

Or for a "women’s only" rape crisis center to deny services to a transsexual so that "women-identified women" can get special privileged treatment…at the expense of other rape and DV victims.

But, I’m sure that the likes of Heart(less), Stormcloud, and the rest of the posse are nodding their heads in agreement.  That’ll show that sexbot bitch how not to mess with "us".

So much for antipornradicalfeminism being anything other than a clone of the Christian Right.

Fight on, Henchwoman…and just fuck ’em all.

 

LiveJournal: Tough on “Pedophiles”; Soft on Bigots?!?!?!

You will not believe this shit that I just found out from Trinity (via The Strangest Alchemy).

It seems that LiveJournal is currently in a big stink for doing a mass purge of accounts due to a thinly-veiled campaign accusing them of allowing pedophiles and sexual predators to use their sites.  To that end, they went and "struck through" (i.e., shut down) dozens if not hundreds of LJ accounts and pages which basically were associated with themes of rape or incest or pedophilia.  Problem is, a great deal of the groups targeted for censorship were mostly innocent sites which merely either discussed those taboo subjects WITHOUT ever advocating them…or happened to be merely fan sites of slash fiction or GLBT or erotic fiction .  One site which was nuked only dealt with discussion of the novel Lolita…and still got axed.

The chief spokesperson for LJ, who calls himself SixApart, defended the purge against critics by saying that they were just following procedure and enforcing the Terms of Service that all their accounts are subjected to. (Yeah….and perhaps a visit from Abu Gonzales’ henchmen may have been a factor too…naaaaah.)

But here’s the fun part: turns out that the primary group responsible for most of the complaints leading to the purge just so happens to have a few skeletons in their own closets.

And a few hoods and robes.

And plenty of Stars and Bars flags.

And lots and lots of guns, too.

I’ll just let Dark Christian (through Trinity) take the story from here:

Here is the personal blog of the woman who sent in all those complaints to LJ (the Warriors for Innocence woman).

CHECK OUT ALL THE CONFEDERATE FLAGS SHE’S DISPLAYING!!!!! SHE’S ALSO ANTI UNITED NATIONS!!!!!

Nice Confederate battle flags, lady…one of which is a banner for a group known as the REDNECK MAFIA??? She’s a total right wing NUT JOB!!!

Her blog: http://suesviews2.blogspot.com/

I can’t believe Six Apart got railroaded by an ultra-conservative xenophobe! What a bunch of dumb fucks!

Here’s where she got her ‘Redneck Mafia’ banner: http://redneckmafia.blogspot.com/

One banner she has on her blog reads: "America, Saving Europe’s Ass Since 1917" and another banner on her blog proudly bears the words: "United States of America Deportation Squad". It’s reassuring to know that Six Apart and Live Journal listen and take heed to the rantings of an individual who carries such negative feelings toward non-Americans and immigrants…huh.

Good job, Six Apart! *shakes head*

Here’s her Blogger profile: http://www2.blogger.com/profile/03449943067796255822

And here’s her email: warriorsforinnocence@gmail.com

Here’s where I located this information: http://digg.com/tech_news/Livejournal_suspends_hundreds_of_accounts

Pass this info around, please. I’ll be damned if I give my money to a company who bends to the will of a person like this woman…

First off, she links to a write-in campaign for Cary Cartter for the 2008 presidential race; a bit of digging around shows Cartter is explicitly dominionist and may in fact be linked with the "Christian Patriot" militia movement. At the very least, he is definitely part of the "Joel’s Army" movement; his blog includes links to a plethora of fellow "Joel’s Army" bloggers (including one named "Third Wave Dave"; "Third Wave" is a codeword for Joel’s Army theology in the Assemblies and other neopente churches) and a number of dominionist correspondence-school bloggers (as well as at least one explicitly Christian Reconstructionist journal called "Sovereign Joy").

The "Redneck Mafia" seems to be a collection of neo-Confederates and neo-Confederate sympathisers; the Blogspot site not only hosts essentially a webring of neo-Confederate sympathisers, but also a Texas-secessionist webring and an anti-UN webring; the Texas secessionist webring in turn also hosts a neoconservative webring and a secondary neo-Confederate sympathiser webring ("Children of the Confederacy"). Pretty much all of the members are almost identical between these Blogspot webrings.

In fact, almost *all* the blogs cross-link to each other (acting as essentially a web-ring of "Joel’s Army" folks connected to the owner of TexasFred, which is registered via DomainsByProxy (a service used to anonymise whois registration, and commonly abused by spammers). The main "Texas Fred" site includes a Java game entitled "Shoot The Wetback" and is a major promoter of the Minutemen militia group (which itself has extensive ties to "Christian Patriot" dominionist militia groups, racists, and in particular the Constitution Party (itself a de jure Christian Reconstructionist party and a de facto "Militia Party" to boot)). Other fun blogs in the same general "network" include "Beast Media" (which is a particularly obnoxious neocon site that actually makes "Mallard Fillmore" look humorous in comparison, a guy calling himself "Minuteman1776" (whose website links in turn to other parts of the "TexasFred" network including a site called "Radioactive Liberty"–which literally calls for war for oil–as well as a group calling itself "Marine Mom Militia". Almost all of these sites seem to be out to out-Ann Coulter Ann Coulter.

The same site also confirms something that a lot of folks have suspected–they are, in fact, simply searching Google for specific keywords (no matter the actual content) and sending complaints directly to Six Apart based on what they are finding on Google without any attempt to verify the actual content of sites. (As an aside, this could put Dark Christianity in danger–we actually have a "child abuse" tagline in our community, and have posts (searchable on Google) in regards to religiously motivated child abuse as well as sexual scandals (including paedophile pastors in dominionist denominations and the almost complete lack of policing in these denominations) that do come up on Google searches.)

….In other words, with the "Warriors for Innocence" scandal, we may actually be dealing with part of a fairly extensive network of neo-Confederate, militia-sympathiser (if not flat out militia-member) "Christian Patriot" God-warriors-with-guns "Joel’s Army" nutcases on our hand…one that potentially makes Focus on the Family or even the American Family Association look like the friggin’ Society of Friends in comparison.

WOW.  Just plain f’n WOW.

So now LJ allows racists and Dominionists not only to roam free and harrass other users, but censors their victims??

Dark Christian’s LJ has much more info on both the controversy and the group here.

Just scroll down Trinity’s LJ home page for the latest articles and links.

[Update: It seems that LJ is trying to right itself now: see this latest post from Trin for details.]

Wingnuttery Plus Manifest Destiny = Whiskey? Tonto? Foxtrot???

The following is a classic result of what happens when you consume a little too much of the right-wing Kool-Aid.

The New York Sun, who obviously must see the New York Post as a bastion of evil liberalism in comparison, decided to bring forth an editorial on the “sellout” of Dimocrats in Iraq. (For them, though, the sellout is not in backing Dubya’s war, but in having the gall to criticize Dubya’s noble mission in the first place.)

And to that end, they envoke the earlier period of “Manifest Destiny”; the acquisition (or, as real honest historians would call it, the outright theft) of half of Mexico to justify the present campaign.

Nezua does such a good job of dissecting this pile of horse dung over at his place..but this deserves a special can of SmackDog Whupass(TM) on its own.  So, if you will pardon my indulgence, on with the fisking.

Iraq and Mexico

New York Sun Editorial
May 29, 2007

News that Senators Clinton and Obama, acting on the eve of Memorial Day weekend, cast their votes against funding our GIs in Iraq put us in a mind to read about Abraham Lincoln and the Mexican War. This had been suggested by Governor Cuomo, in his spirited letter to the editor in response to our editorial about how President Lincoln turned away the editor of Chicago Tribune, Joseph Medill, and a delegation that had gone to see him, late in the Civil War, in hopes of getting him to back off a draft call from Cook County.

Of course, we all know the reality of that vote (and how Hilary and Barack really maneuvered themselves to act like they were in opposition…but why let facts get in the way of a good McCarthyite smear??

Lincoln had listened to the Illinois pleaders in the cavern of maps that was the office of his war secretary, Edwin Stanton. As Stanton recited the sanguinary statistics that illuminated the need for yet more men for the battle, Lincoln bowed his head. Then he turned on Medill, long a supporter, reminded him of how the Tribune had supported the war and called for Emancipation and told him to go back to Chicago and get the men. Medill retreated, saying that it was the first time he’d ever been whipped and that he didn’t have an answer.

The better analogy, Mr. Cuomo argued in his letter to the Sun (http://www.nysun.com/article/54464) , is the war that President Polk started with Mexico. “As a Congressman in the late 1840s,” Mr. Cuomo wrote, Lincoln, “objected passionately to America‘s war with Mexico.” The former governor quotes the man who would become the 16th president as warning, on the floor of the House on January 12, 1848, of the “exceeding brightness of military glory that attractive rainbow, that rises in showers of blood that serpent’s eye, that charms to destroy.”

The more we read about Lincoln and the Mexican War, however, the less it strikes us as offering a historical harbor for Democrats seeking to legitimize their appeasement line in Iraq. It is certainly true that Lincoln objected to the war, demanding that Polk show him the spot where the first firefight took place, Lincoln believing that it was not in America at all but in Mexican territory. Then a Whig congressman, Lincoln reckoned that the war would lead to an expansion of slave territories. Much of his term in the House was consumed to his opposition to the war.

OK…so tell me how giving the President a virtual blank check with timetables that he can basically ignore like so much chaffe in the wind amounts to legitimizing “appeasment”??  I guess that according to the Sun editorialist, only outright boosting for the war and unswerving allegiance to the President will count as anything other than “surrender”.

But what does this illuminate that could possibly help the Democrats in their current predicament? In contrast to Lincoln, Mrs. Clinton did not object to our entry into either the global war on terror or the battle of Iraq. On the contrary, she voted for it. Mr. Obama, who was not yet in the Senate, opposed Iraq expedition. In any event, there is another difference; once our military was engaged in battle in Mexico, Lincoln always voted to supply our soldiers, a point underlined for us by one of the city’s notable Lincoln scholars, Harold Holzer, co-author of part of Mr. Cuomo’s ” Why Lincoln Matters, Now More Than Ever.”

Lincoln’s support for our soldiers in the Mexican war is something that the Illinoisan boasted about in his debates with Judge Douglas. After all, his opposition to the war with Mexico, however high-minded, was costing him votes. This was particularly true because, even if Polk’s motives were ignoble and the fight seemed unjust at the beginning, the Mexican war had a favorable outcome for America. The Mexican Cession, made under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo that ended the war on February 2, 1848, established our border at the Rio Grande, ended any dispute over Texas, and gained us not only California, Nevada, and Utah but also parts of Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico.

Translation: Hey, who cares about moral considerations….WE WON!! And who cares about principles if it costs us votes??

But here’s where the cesspool really meets the Cat 3 hurricane (and this is exactly the money paragraph that Nez grabs):

Can it be that Mr. Cuomo and his fellow Democrats want to go into the 2008 election questioning the bona fides of the states of Texas, California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Arizona, and New Mexico? That’s a lot of electoral votes. The fact is the fate of those states illustrates one of the great truths about America — that those who either threw in with us or were won by us prospered and lived more freely than any of them would have under the ancien regimes. This is something that has been learned by other peoples, in Europe and in Asia, even into the late 20th century.

Oh, yeah….like the brown folk down there really do appreciate everything that the gringos have done to “liberate” them..just as the Iraqis really do, despite popular protests to the contrary, appreciate all the freedom that “we” have brought to them through the democratic means of torture chambers, carpet bombs, and pilfering their assests. Why, there really are flowers underneath those suicide bombs.

I wonder what these asshats would say about Black folks benefitting from slavery and Jim Crow. Or…maybe I shouldn’t.

 

***

As for Lincoln, his comprehension of the responsibilities of leadership changed radically when he acceded as president. He prosecuted the Civil War relentlessly, and his generals knew who was in command or suffered the consequences. Lincoln’s officers arrested the most troublesome of the Copperhead Democrats. In the case of Clement Vallandigham, who was discouraging enlistees in Ohio, Lincoln himself sent that particular Copperhead down through Confederate lines and into exile. Lincoln tested the Constitution as it had never been tested before. He fought his war to win.

 

Now…not that I as a Black man don’t appreciate the fact that the North won the Civil War and slavery was vanquished…but what the hell does that have to do with Iraq??  That because Honest Abe was the Commander-In-Chief who did manage to run the war and outgun his critics, that justifies his running roughshod over the Constitution??  And how does that justifies Dubya’s war games during a war in which 3/4ths of Americans do not support, that the supposed “benefactors” of such war (read, the citizens of Iraq) do not support, and was justified on base lies about Saddam’s invisible WMD and ties to al Queda and September 11th???

Oh, but I didn’t know…to the editorialists of the NY Sun, Saddam was in cahoots with bin Laden making nukes with Iran’s mullahs with the full connivance of those “cut-n-run” Democrat appeasers….which more than justifies making Dubya our supreme Emperor and protector against Islamofascists, illegal aliens, and evil socialists/liberals/radical feminists/whatever the particular right-wing panic button is.

It’s hard to imagine what Lincoln would have made of Mrs. Clinton, who started out in Illinois, when she claims to “fully support our troops” but votes against funding for the war in which they are risking everything. Or what he would have made of another Illinoisan, Mr. Obama, when he declares, as he did last week, that “enough is enough” and that the president should not get a “blank check,” or even, at least on these terms, any check. The more one reads about it, the more one gets the sense that Lincoln might have wondered why Mr. Bush has been so punctilious about the legal niceties. It’s hard to imagine Lincoln would not have understood Mr. Bush on the larger issues, particuarly his understanding of, and his willingness to shoulder, the responsibilities of the president in a time of war.

 

 

How nice that these editorialists have such wonderous powers of mindreading, that they can extrapolate the motives of a President who passed from this earthly coil nearly 150 years ago, and read him exactly to fit the mindset of our current occupant of the White House…and be so perfect to say that Lincoln would be smiling at Bush today, cheering him on to do more shredding of the “goddam piece of paper” that the former took to heart to defend the unity of the nation against the Confederates.

Ahhh…the mind of a right-wing wingnut….so simple in its complexity, so brutal in its subtlety….and so genocidal and arrogant in its equnamity.

 

 

The “Janet Parshall” Doctrine (APRF Update)

When the facts don’t jibe with your particular faith, attack the messenger as unpatriotic/patriarchial/radical.whatever.

Case in point: This shorthand of an online rumble:

Anti-Porn Radfem (aka Faith of Feminist Nation): Oh, rats….look at all those nasty Google search terms loading up my other blog about what men surf for in porn; just proves why we oughta wipe it out!!!

Sex-PosFem (aka Trinity of The Strangest Alchemy): Oh, really?? You do know that most of those "searches" could have been generated through spam bots, right??  And that that says nothing about the overwhelming majority of porn surfers who go towards legal adult consensual porn, right??  Try being a bit less emotional, OK??

Faith: Emotional???  I’m being emotional???  Why, you no good pro-porn sellout, I have PROOF of how porn destroys women and distorts men; get the fingers out of your damn ears and listen, you Janet Parshall wannabe!!

Trinity: Oh, please….that’s your proof??  And, OMG….thery’re all from right-wing antifeminist Christian fundamentalist right groups and right-wing think tanks!!! You know, the ones who want to destroy feminists like you???  For shame!!

Faith: What???  You calling me a right-wing fundamentalist?? Look, now…you just don’t want to admit that in your heart, I’m right and that porn really is evil and should be banned. And stop lumping us radfems with the Christian Right; we are fundamentally different!!

Pro-Porn Supporting Men (played by Iamcuriousblue and moi): Ahhh, Faith…is the shoe fitting a bit too comfortably here?? the complicit alliance between APRF’s and the Christian Right isn’t a figment of the imagination; it’s proven FACT and HISTORY.  Who’s doing the denial now??

Faith: Oh, there you pornified liberal men go again! Of course you’d defend porn….what would you say about defending Larry Flynt’s racist, misogynist ass?? Don’t blame us radfems….ahhh, I mean, feminists if we want to protect women and children from you men!!

Moi:  Ahhhh…Flynt has not a damn thing to do with this…unless you have proof that other than some nasty book covers and  a few satirical cartoons, Flynt and HUSTLER represents the heart of "trafficking of women". And what about those women who fight against everything you say you are against, but stop short of endorsing your brand of sex-shaming and male-baiting…I guess that they aren’t feminists now?? But the likes of Judith Reisman and Alberto Gonzales are, their antifeminism on other matters aside??

Faith: OK, OK…I changed the links to a less homophobic and more neutral source.  Happy now??

Moi: You call that "neutral"?? You do know that the founder of that group was the very one who prosecuted Mapplethorpe and Flynt on obscenity charges, right?? And that he once said that even softcore simulated sex scenes in cable and satellite TV should be prosecuted and banished under his interpretation of obscenty law?? Hell..James Dobson would be merely "conservative" in your mind??

Goodness. With "feminists" like Faith, who needs Pat Robertson???