The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Teen Mom’s Ex: ‘Sometimes I Don’t Even Know If I Know Who She Is Anymore’

Posted on | August 29, 2016 | 2 Comments

 

Kailyn Lowry is despicable trash, and I know every reader must be wondering: “Who the heck is Kailyn Lowry and why should I even care?”

In 2011, she became one of the stars of the MTV series Teen Mom 2. Trashy reality shows are the MTV “brand” since the network stopped playing music videos and became just another toxic current in the poisonous cultural undertow that is destroying Western civilization, and you need look no further than Kailyn Lowry to see why:

Teen Mom 2 star Javi Marroquin revealed in a new interview with Us Weekly that he and ex-wife Kailyn Lowry have exchanged few words since she filed for divorce earlier this year. . .
“Our first priority is Lincoln’s happiness and Isaac’s happiness. Our second is for them to see both their parents happy, and together we’re both not happy,” he explained to Us. “I think we both decided that this is the best move and she’ll be happy and I’ll be happy.” . . .
As previously reported, the pair split in May after nearly three years of marriage. The MTV stars are parents of Lincoln, 2. Lowry, 24, is also mom to son Isaac, 6, with ex Jo Rivera. . . .

Permit me to interrupt the narrative here to call attention to the fact that Lowry, at age 24, has two children by two different men and is divorcing the father of her youngest son. Now we continue:

“We coparent, that’s it. So unless it has to do with the boys, we don’t talk,” Marroquin, who is in the Air Force, said. “I have nothing to say to her.”
As for rumors that Lowry cheated during their relationship? “I don’t wanna put too much out there, but she knows what she did. It’ll come out,” Marroquin told Us. “What’s done in the night will show in the light. It’ll all unravel. I just gotta keep my mouth shut and watch everything unfold.”
The reality star also claimed that his ex’s best friends were the ones who told him about Lowry’s alleged unfaithful behavior. “People want to be around good people, so when they don’t agree with what you’re doing, it’s gonna be brought to my attention,” he explained. “Just because you thought they were your best friends, clearly they were looking out for me. They let me know what’s going on.” . . .

Interrupting the narrative again, you see that Lowry’s ex-husband has tried to do the right thing. He’s in the military, he was deployed overseas for a while, but Kailyn . . . Well, she’s just trash — blonde, blue-eyed, smiley-face trash, the kind of “pretty poison” that foolish young men can’t resist until they learn their lesson the hard way:

In June, rumors swirled online that Lowry was in a same-sex relationship with her pal Becky Hayter. The MTV star denied the reports, but Marroquin says he doesn’t know what to believe anymore.
“[Becky is] a mutual friend of ours for years,” he told Us on Friday. “So I wasn’t really mad about that. … To be honest with you, [Kailyn]’s changed a lot. I left for six months and a lot has changed, so sometimes I don’t even know if I know who she is anymore. She’s living a different life than I thought we were going to.”

Yeah. “Misled,” as Kool & the Gang might say.

Let me wise you up, young man: Before you get involved with a girl, you’d better know her history, because history tends to repeat itself. Kailyn Lowry’s bisexuality was known long ago, and may have been a factor in her breakup with her first baby daddy back in 2012:

Teen Mom 2 star Kailyn Lowry may have an on-and-off again relationship with her baby daddy Jo Rivera, but she also dates women, a source tells Star magazine.
“Kail was with a girl named Shelby … for about two years [starting in middle school],” the source says. But that ended when Jo came into the picture.
Jo didn’t care about Kailyn’s attraction to girls. “Jo knew about Kail’s relationship with that girl,” explains the source. “He thought it was a phase.”
But it was more than a phase as Kailyn allegedly cheated on Jo with a girl from high school named Gigi Hanna. “He knew and didn’t care,” says the source.
According to Gigi, though, she had something more serious with Kailyn. They stopped seeing each other after Kailyn’s son Isaac, 2, was born, but “we became close again and promised to never leave each other,” Gigi tells Star. “We moved in together.”
“They were both seeing guys [but] would make out and Gigi would sleep in her bed sometimes,” adds the source.

As much as I hate to play armchair psychologist, it was my friend Conservative Lesbian blogger Cynthia Yockey who pointed out to me that bisexual women often suffer from borderline personality disorder — unstable relationships, a tendency to cause emotional “drama,” etc. Something else to consider, and this is my own observation, is that the girl/girl thing frequently seems to emerge in young women who don’t have a good relationship with their mothers. The mom has too many problems of her own, dumps her daughter in daycare, whatever — the bottom line is the girl grows up feeling alienated from her mother and seeks out lesbian relationships as a way to deal with the deficiency of maternal love. But that’s just an amateur observation, and it might be unfair to generalize . . . Oh, wait:

Kailyn says her mom Suzi, who she says has dealt with alcoholism and addiction, called her Chunky Monkey.
‘Don’t most body image issues start at home?’ Lowry writes in her [2014 memoir]. ‘Mine did.’ . . .
Other revelations in the book are stories about two rapes, and an abortion at 16. . . .
She recounts a sexual encounter with a boyfriend named Toby in the ninth grade that turned aggressive.
‘Toby wouldn’t take no for an answer…. I didn’t want to sleep with [him], but he persisted. Denying him seemed fruitless.’
A pregnancy resulted and she had an abortion on her 16th birthday at her mother’s request, she says.

Alcoholic mom, neglected daughter — there is a pattern here, and you see how this kind of dysfunction gets passed on from one generation to the next, as a family inheritance. Failed relationships, substance abuse, mental health problems — does anyone at MTV actually care about the toxic effects of the “reality” they exploit for ratings and advertising revenue? Are we too judgmental in saying that it is wrong to make celebrities of young people involved in such lifestyles? In her 1997 book The Divorce Culture, Barbara Dafoe Whitehead described how the breakdown of the family has “spawned a generation of angry and bereaved children,” inflicting damage that is ignored by the privileged elite. Divorce “has won influential adherents in the society who defend family breakup as necessary for individual psychological growth and freedom,” Whitehead writes:

Society’s principal cheerleaders for expressive divorce have been its most economically advantaged and well-educated women, but only their message, and not their privilege, has been transmitted to their working-class “sisters.” . . .
Even though the state can require certain forms of parental support, mainly for the economic upkeep of children, it can do so at only minimal levels. . . . It cannot require divorced parents to set aside their anger and hostility and to assist each other in rearing their children. Consequently, compared with a system in which parents share a common household and voluntarily invest in their children, a family system characterized by a legally arranged and supervised parenthood is almost by definition one in which the levels of parental investment in children are likely to be low and somewhat fitful . . .

Because family breakdown has become so widespread — 40% of children in the U.S. are now born to unmarried women — it is increasingly difficult for young people to avoid becoming entangled in relationships with the emotionally damaged offspring of dysfunctional parents. Smart young men know the saying, “Never stick your d–k in crazy,” but what happens in a toxic culture that produces so many crazy women like Kailyn Lowry?

 

You really have to feel sorry for her two boys. Imagine growing up as the son of world-famous reality TV trash. Those boys are doomed.

 


Category: Culture

ANOTHER Anthony Weiner Scandal!

Posted on | August 29, 2016 | 2 Comments

The dude can’t stop:

This is baby-sitting — Anthony Weiner-style.
While his wife, Huma Abedin, travels the country campaigning for Hillary Clinton, the disgraced ex-congressman has been sexting with a busty brunette out West — and even sent her a lurid crotch shot with his toddler son in the picture, The Post has learned.
The stay-at-home cad shot the revealing photo while discussing massage parlors “near my old apartment” shortly after 3 a.m. on July 31, 2015, a screen shot of the exchange shows.
Weiner was clearly aroused by his conversation with the 40-something divorcee when he abruptly changed the subject.
“Someone just climbed into my bed,” Weiner wrote.
“Really?” she responded.
Weiner then hit “send” on the cringe-inducing image, which shows a bulge in his white, Jockey-brand boxer briefs and his son cuddled up to his left, wrapped in a light-green blanket.
“You do realize you can see you[r] Weiner in that pic??” the woman wrote.
Moments after forwarding the photo, Weiner freaked out over the possibility he had accidentally posted it publicly — just as he did during the infamous episode that forced him to resign from Congress in 2011.
“Ooooooh?.?.?.?I was scared. For half a second I thought I posted something. Stop looking at my crotch,” Weiner wrote back.
“Whatever. You did it on purpose,” she replied.
“O I see you thought you posted on your TL [public timeline] not DM [direct message]. S–t happens be careful,” she added.
The object of Weiner’s affections is his polar opposite politically: a self-avowed supporter of Donald Trump and the National Rifle Association who’s used Twitter to bash both President Obama and Clinton.

Anthony Weiner is mentally disturbed. And also a Democrat.

But I repeat myself . . .

UPDATE: Hillary Aide Huma Abedin Dumps Husband.

 

Category: Democrats

Rule 5 Sunday: Viva Los Lobos!

Posted on | August 28, 2016 | 3 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

This week’s appetizer is courtesy of the University of New Mexico Lobos Dance Team. You know what the standard disclaimer is by now.

Gonna make you howl.

Gonna make you howl.

Goodstuff leads off with a rainy season twofer this week: Miss Nerdy Pageants and Patricia Velazquez, followed by Ninety Miles from Tyranny with Hot Pick of the Late Night, Morning Mistress, and Girls with Guns, Animal Magnetism with Rule 5 Bribery Friday and the Saturday Gingermageddon, and The Last Tradition with Candice Swanepoel and Camille Rowe.

EBL’s thundering herd this week includes Huma Abedin, Hope Hicks, Sandra Bullock, Andrea Tantaros, End of Summer, Mia Ayliffe, the Burkini Ban, and Amish Kelly McGillis.

A View from the Beach offers No Kok Jokes, Please – Roosmarijn de Kok, Gone Fishing . . .,“Smooth”, More Fun for Clinton.com, So What Are the New Neighbors Like?, I’ve Been Neglecting the Topic of…, Morning Magic, The Death of the Cordillera Ice Free Corridor Hypothesis? (with cave girls), and 15 Minutes of Olympian Rule 5.

At Soylent Siberia, your weekly coffee creamer comes with a veranda view, the Monday Motivationer has bicycle bliss, there’s Tuesday Titillation elation, Humpday Hawtness Ahoy!, Falconsword Fursday Peach Fuzz, Latent Lingerie with Leather and Lesbians, T-GIF Friday Twofer, and Weekender Garden Party.

Proof Positive’s Friday Night Babe is Zoie Palmer, his Vintage Babe is Victoria Hamel, Sex in Advertising is covered by Victoria’s Secret, and there’s pre-season 49ers cheerleaders! At Dustbury, it’s Sylva Koscina and Rihanna.

Thanks to everyone for their linkagery!

Visit Amazon’s Intimate Apparel Shop

Category: Rule 5

FMJRA 2.0: Day Late & A Dollar Short

Posted on | August 28, 2016 | Comments Off on FMJRA 2.0: Day Late & A Dollar Short

— compiled by Wombat-socho


Apologies for the lack of posting on Thursday and Friday; I thought I was going to be able to get some blogging done while on the road to Santa Fe and back, but I thought wrong. Also, we’re missing EBL’s linkagery since something’s gone awry with her website. Updated version to follow, hopefully.


Comedian @KurtMetzger Tells the Truth: Feminists Are Worse Than Lynch Mobs
The Pirate’s Cove

FMJRA 2.0: Not From Kansas City
The Pirate’s Cove
A View from the Beach

Feminist Professor @MarcieBianco Says Academia Discriminates Against Women
Rotten Chestnuts

Rule 5 Sunday: Post-Olympics Edition
Animal Magnetism
Ninety Miles from Tyranny
A View from the Beach
Proof Positive

In The Mailbox: 08.22.16
Regular Right Guy
A View from the Beach
Proof Positive

In The Mailbox: 08.23.16
A View from the Beach
Proof Positive

How Much Does @JessicaValenti Enjoy Her Husband @AGolis’s ‘Male Tears’?
Living In Anglo-America

In The Mailbox: 08.24.16
A View from the Beach
Proof Positive

Human Nature and Rock-and-Roll
Darkness Over The Land


Category: FMJRA Award

Star and Co-Writer of Slave Revolt Movie Were Accused of Raping Girl in College

Posted on | August 28, 2016 | Comments Off on Star and Co-Writer of Slave Revolt Movie Were Accused of Raping Girl in College

Nate Parker (left) and Jean Celestin (right) were Penn State wrestling teammates.

A much-praised new movie about an 1831 slave revolt, which had been considered a possible Oscar contender, is in trouble because of revelations that the film’s star and director was accused of raping an 18-year-old college student in 1999. Birth of a Nation star Nate Parker was acquitted in that case, but his friend Jean Celestin, who co-wrote the film’s script, was convicted. The victim killed herself four years ago.

Parker and Celestin were college roommates and members of the wrestling team at Pennsylvania State University in August 1999 when, according to court documents, both of them had sex with a freshman girl who had been drinking heavily. A third roommate, Tamerlane Kangas, testified that Parker had a “smirk on his face” when he signalled Kangas and Celestin “to join him when they observed Parker and the woman having sex.” Celestin accepted the invitation, but Kangas declined, later explaining in court: “I didn’t believe that four people at one time was — you know, it didn’t seem right.”

Controversy about the case — which was part of a lawsuit a feminist group filed against Penn State — has engulfed Birth of a Nation this month. The film about the antebellum Nat Turner Rebellion got high praise at the Sundance Film Festival and won a $17.5 million distribution deal from Fox Searchlight, but news accounts of Parker’s role in the 1999 rape have spurred criticism and tarnished the new movie’s prospects.

‘You Put Yourself in That Situation’

The victim in the Penn State case twice attempted suicide in the months after she said Parker and Celestin raped her. When the case finally went to trial, Celestin was convicted, but Parker was acquitted because the victim acknowledged she previously had consensual sex with Parker:

According to Parker’s police statement . . . the sex was consensual and his “ordeal” began on Oct. 13, 1999, when the accuser called him “out of the blue” claiming to be pregnant.
During the phone conversation, the accuser falsely claimed to be pregnant, which she later explained was an attempt to get Parker to identify the third sexual partner in the room that night, according to Deadline. Police later monitored a second call during which both Parker and Celestin admitted to having consensual sex but denied any wrongdoing.
At the end of the first phone call, Parker said he told the accuser, who admitted to raising her voice, “to call me back when you are ready to talk to me like an adult.” Parker then confided in a wrestling coach about the phone call, and was told to be “very nice to her when she [calls] again.” Parker said the coach also warned that “these things come up from time to time with girls who feel guilty … or may even find themselves pregnant with a multiracial child and rejected by their parents.” (The accuser is white and Parker is African-American.) . . .
When she asked how Celestin became involved in the sex, Parker replied that his roommate “was still [in the apartment]” when they were having sex, and that “it started happening and you didn’t do anything to stop it.”
“But Nate, I was so out of it,” she replied. “My whole body was numb, I couldn’t do anything about it.”
When she later complained that the sex had left her with a “bad pelvic infection for a month and a half,” Parker replied, “I’m not … trying to be mean, but I felt like you put yourself in that situation.”

In a 2002 lawsuit, a feminist group accused the university of failing to punish Parker and Celestin, accusing them of harassing the victim:

The Women’s Law Project sued Penn State on behalf of a former female student who went to police in 1999 to say that she was raped by two university wrestlers, identified as Jean Celestin and Nate Parker.
The female student also said the two men began stalking her.
“They followed her. They called her names. They publicized her name. They tortured her. And the school’s response was a slap on the wrist,” said Frietsche.
The university allowed the two men to remain in school and as members of the wresting team under scholarships.
Both men were charged. Parker was acquitted, but a jury found Celestin guilty and he was sentenced to six months in jail after receiving letters of support from university administrators. . . .
The university settled the case with the female student, paying her $17,000.

Negative publicity for Parker’s movie became harsher after the victim’s brother told Variety magazine his sister committed suicide in 2012:

She died at a drug rehabilitation facility, where she was found unresponsive by staff with two 100-count pill bottles of an over-the-counter sleep aid with ingredients similar to Benadryl by her side. “It’s just a horrible life’s progression,” the coroner told Variety. “She was a young woman.”
In court, she testified that she had attempted to kill herself twice after the reported rape. Her brother said that she suffered from depression after the incident. Her death certificate, obtained by Variety, stated that she suffered from “major depressive disorder with psychotic features, PTSD due to physical and sexual abuse, polysubstance abuse….”
“If I were to look back at her very short life and point to one moment where I think she changed as a person, it was obviously that point,” [the victim’s brother] Johnny told Variety. He said that prior to entering college, his sister was an outgoing, popular girl who loved animals and school. He envisioned a career in marketing or media for her. “The trial was pretty tough for her,” he said. . . .
“I think by today’s legal standards, a lot has changed with regards to universities and the laws in sexual assault,” he said. “I feel certain if this were to happen in 2016, the outcome would be different than it was. Courts are a lot stricter about this kind of thing. You don’t touch someone who is so intoxicated — period.”
After the trial, the victim left college before graduating, and received a settlement from Penn State of $17,500. “She was trying to find happiness,” Johnny said. “She moved around frequently and tried to hold a job. She had a boyfriend. She gave birth to a young boy. That brought her a good bit of happiness. I think the ghosts continued to haunt her.”

Controversy about the rape accusation prompted the American Film Institute to cancel a planned screening of Parker’s movie “and Oscar voters (and others) are already debating over whether or not to even see the movie. Statements by Al Sharpton and Harry Belafonte indicate that some think the resurfacing of allegations and Parker’s subsequent trial are an attempt to suppress [the movie], and to discredit Parker because he is black.” In an attempt to quell the criticism, Parker gave an interview to Variety Aug. 12 in which he said, “I was cleared of it. That’s that. Seventeen years later, I’m a filmmaker. I have a family. I have five beautiful daughters. I have a lovely wife. I get it. The reality is … I can’t relive 17 years ago. All I can do is be the best man I can be now.”

‘A Threesome Is Normal … Fun’ at 19

Those comments, however, only incited further controversy that Parker attempted to address when he gave an exclusive interview to Ebony magazine this week, blaming “male privilege” for his behavior:

When I think about 1999, I think about being a 19-year-old kid, and I think about my attitude and behavior just toward women with respect objectifying them. I never thought about consent as a definition, especially as I do now. I think the definitions of so many things have changed. . . .
Put it this way, when you’re 19, a threesome is normal. It’s fun. When you’re 19, getting a girl to say yes, or being a dog, or being a player, cheating. Consent is all about — for me, back then — if you can get a girl to say yes, you win. . . .
I called a couple of sisters that know that are in the space that talk about the feminist movement and toxic masculinity, and just asked questions. What did I do wrong? Because I was thinking about myself. And what I realized is that I never took a moment to think about the woman. . . .
What do I need me to do? What do I need to get?
All I can do is seek the information that’ll make me stronger, that’ll help me overcome my toxic masculinity, my male privilege, because that’s something you never think about. You don’t think about other people. It’s the same thing with White Supremacy. Trying to convince someone that they are a racist or they have White Privilege–if it’s in the air they breathe and the culture supports them, sometimes they never have to think about it at all. I recognize as a man there’s a lot of things that I don’t have to think about. But I’m thinking about them now. . . .
I think there is having a behavior that is disrespectful to women that goes unchecked, where your manhood is defined by sexual conquests, where you trade stories with your friends and no one checks anyone. At 19, that was normal. As a 36-year-old man, if I looked at my 19-year-old self as my son, if I could have grabbed him earlier before this incident, or even just going to college. Because for me, it’s about this incident, but it’s about a culture that I never took the time to try to understand. I never examined my role in male culture, in hyper masculinity. I never examined it, nobody ever called me on it.

Four of Parker’s former university classmates released a statement Thursday blaming the charges against him and Celestin on “a violently hostile racial climate that thrived in the Penn State community,” claiming Parker is the target of a “gross and blatant misinformation campaign.”

 

Category: Crime, Education, Hollywood, Movies, Sex Trouble

Behavior Matters: Why ‘Rape Culture’ Rhetoric Is Dangerous Hate Propaganda

Posted on | August 27, 2016 | 1 Comment

 

Feminist “rape culture” discourse “brands half the human race — males, and especially white males — as rapists or rape facilitators,” Wendy McElroy says in her new book, Rape Culture Hysteria: Fixing the Damage Done to Men and Women. By falsely claiming that there is a “campus rape epidemic” at U.S. colleges and universities, feminists are perpetrating a “slander” against male students that “would be denounced as hate speech” if it were targeted at any other group. McElroy concludes: “The rape culture is not only a myth but also a barrier to preventing rape. Adherents show a disregard for victims whenever they excoriate crime-prevention advice and conflate it with slut-shaming.”

As a survivor of sexual assault herself, McElroy is deeply angered by feminist claims that anyone who advises college girls about effective rape-prevention strategies is “slut-shaming” or “victim-blaming.”

One of the slogans that feminists chant — and I heard this at the 2013 D.C. Slutwalk — is “Blame the system, not the victim.”

Question: What do feminists mean when they say “the system”?
Answer: “Patriarchy.”

Feminist rhetoric conveys the message that common-sense advice about avoiding risky situations — keeping yourself safe as an individual — is a waste of time because what really causes rape is “the system,” and what is therefore necessary is collective action to destroy “the system.”

 

“Smash Patriarchy!” Feminism’s mission is essentially destructive, aimed at “social change” that would eradicate “injustice and domination,” as University of Colorado Professor Alison Jaggar explained in her 2013 textbook, Just Methods: An Interdisciplinary Feminist Reader:

Defining feminism as a commitment to gender justice means it cannot be reduced to a matter of personal ethics, choice or style. Instead, feminism is a commitment to social change. . . . “The personal is political” was a powerful slogan expressing radical insights. These included the insights that one’s so-called personal life can be a site of injustice and domination whose inequities stem from social arrangements rather than individual personalities. . . . Although these insights were, in their time, revolutionary, accepting them does not entail that feminism can be equated with “lifestyle” choices. To the contrary, taking seriously these insights suggests another popular slogan of second-wave feminism: “There are no individual solutions.” Personal choices are important, but feminism is more centrally concerned with transforming the social contexts within which such choices are made.

Because “individual solutions” cannot bring about “social change,” then, feminists are not concerned with advising young women to avoid behaviors that might put them at risk of sexual assault. To criticize the binge drinking and rampant promsicuity on university campuses as factors that put female students in danger would be “victim-blaming,” according to ideologues who are not concerned with individual safety, but collective action to achieve “gender justice,” as Professor Jaggar says.

“Rape culture” rhetoric is anti-male hate propaganda. By deliberately demonizing college boys as sexual predators, feminists encourage the college girl to view her male classmates with contempt and suspicion. Inspired with paranoid fear, she must monitor every interaction with male students for evidence of sexist attitudes. According to feminist theory, rape is a political action — an expression of male supremacy — and so the female student is encouraged to begin playing a mental game of “Spot the Rapist.” The rapist is a sexist and vice-versa; the two categories are conterminous. “Rape culture” rhetoric leads the college girl to believe that detecting a boy’s predatory intent is a matter of scrutinizing his appearance, mannerisms and attitude for signs of sexism.

Eradicate sexism — “Smash Patriarchy!” — and you thereby “End Rape Culture,” or so feminists would have the college girl believe.

“Rape culture is a pervasive part of our society because of social conditioning. . . .
“The dehumanization of women spans all areas of American life. . . . She is simply an object to be possessed. An object there for male desire and nothing more. . . .
“We need to focus on the messages that men are getting and about how they relate to women.”
— Zerlina Maxwell, “5 Ways We Can Teach Men Not to Rape,” March 11, 2013

You see, according to Zerlina Maxwell, rape is a result of “social conditioning” and “the messages that men are getting.” Nothing a women can do will reduce her risk of being raped. “Rape culture is a pervasive part of our society,” and we must therefore change “society.”

However, what the reader should notice most in that quote by Zerlina Maxwell is her description of male heterosexual behavior. She accuses men of the “dehumanization of women,” because insofar as a man is attracted to a woman, he views her as “simply an object to be possessed.” In other words, it is wrong for men to be attracted to women.

Feminists have been saying this for more than 40 years, since the 1968 protest against the Miss America pageant, where feminists accused “society” of forcing women “to compete for male approval, enslaved by ludicrous ‘beauty’ standards.” The protesters declared that women were “brainwashed” by beauty pageants, a form of “Thought Control,” the function of which was “to further make women oppressed and men oppressors; to enslave us all the more in high-heeled, low-status roles.”

In other words, feminists believe, women are oppressed because men prefer beautiful women to ugly women. If it is wrong for women to “compete for male approval” — if women are “enslaved” and confined to “low-status roles” because of “ludicrous ‘beauty’ standards” — doesn’t this amount to a condemnation of heterosexuality, per se?

“The view that heterosexuality is a key site of male power is widely accepted within feminism. Within most feminist accounts, heterosexuality is seen not as an individual preference, something we are born like or gradually develop into, but as a socially constructed institution which structures and maintains male domination, in particular through the way it channels women into marriage and motherhood.”
— Diane Richardson, “Theorizing Heterosexuality,” in Rethinking Sexuality (2000)

“Second-wave feminists argued that heterosexuality is an organizing institution containing multiple forms of oppression. Adrienne Rich . . . argues against heterosexuality as naturally occurring, asserting that heterosexuality is, instead, compulsory, constructed, and taken for granted. For Rich, the institution of heterosexuality serves the interests of patriarchy and male dominance. Monique Wittig . . . argues that heterosexuality is a political regime, again serving the interests of male dominance through the marriage contract.”
— Carrie L. Coakley, “‘Someday My Prince Will Come’: Disney, the Heterosexual Imaginary and Animated Film, in Thinking Straight: The Power, Promise and Paradox of Heterosexuality, edited by Chrys Ingraham (2005)

“A core dynamic of patriarchal sexuality . . . is the normalizing and sexualizing of male (or masculine) control and dominance over females (or the feminine). This dynamic finds expression in a number of beliefs about what is natural, acceptable, and even desirable in male-female sexual interaction: that the male will be persistent and aggressive, the female often reluctant and passive; that the male is invulnerable, powerful, hard, and commanding, and that women desire such behavior from men; that ‘real men’ are able to get sexual access to women when, where, and how they want it; that sexual intercourse is an act of male conquest; that women are men’s sexual objects or possessions; and that men ‘need’ and are entitled to sex.”
— Rebecca Whisnant, “Feminist Perspectives on Rape,” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2009)

“Heterosexuality and masculinity . . . are made manifest through patriarchy, which normalizes men as dominant over women.”
— Sara Carrigan Wooten, The Crisis of Campus Sexual Violence: Critical Perspectives on Prevention and Response (2015)

Because feminism is anti-male, it is also necessarily anti-heterosexual, and it is from this radical ideology — condemning heteorsexuality as a “political regime” that “serves the interests of patriarchy and male dominance” — that feminism’s “rape culture” rhetoric emerges.

“Telling women that they can behave in a certain way to avoid rape creates a false sense of security,” Zerlina Maxwell insisted in 2012. “We need anti-rape campaigns that target young men and boys. . . . Let’s stop teaching ‘how to avoid being a victim’ and instead, attack the culture that creates predators in the first place.” However, if the vast majority of young men and boys are not “predators,” why do feminists insist we need campaigns to “target” them all? What do we actually know about rape?

 

“From 1995 to 2005, the total rate of sexual violence committed against U.S. female residents age 12 or older declined 64% from a peak of 5.0 per 1,000 females in 1995 to 1.8 per 1,000 females in 2005,” according to a U.S. Department of Justice report. “In 2010, females nationwide experienced about 270,000 rape or sexual assault victimizations, compared to about 556,000 in 1995.”

In other words, even at the “peak” of sexual violence in 1995, the vast majority of women (99.5%) were not victims of rape. Because of a decline in sexual violence, now 99.8% of women are not victims of rape. However, feminists claim 1-in-5 female college students are victims of sexual assault — a claim impossible to reconcile with the official numbers.

Why would the number of rapes be declining if, as Zerlina Maxwell insists, “rape culture is a pervasive part of our society”? And what do the official numbers tell us about victims of sexual assault?

Victims are most likely to be young women from low-income households. Risk is higher for girls 12-17, for black women and for unmarried women. How do these risk factors correlate with claims of a “campus rape epidemic”? Well, most college students are young and unmarried, but they are also more likely to be white and from upper-income households. Of the 16 million undergraduate students enrolled in colleges and universities in 2008, about 10.3 million (63%) were white, 2.3 million (14%) were black and 2.1 million (13%) were Hispanic. The typical college freshman in 2005 came from a household with a parental income of $74,000, 60 percent higher than the national average of $46,326. To accept claims that 1-in-5 female students are victims of sexual assault, we must believe that — contrary to a common-sense interpretation of data — university campuses are a high-risk environment for young women. Fortunately, we may clarify the matter by consulting a 2014 report from the U.S. Department of Justice entitled, “Rape and Sexual Assault Victimization Among College-Age Females, 1995–2013.”

 

What we see is that the college-age group (18-24) was a high-risk category for sexual assault, with a victimization rate of 4.3 per 1,000 in 2013, which was more than three times as higher than the rate (1.4 per 1,000) of females outside that age group. However, within this age group, women who were not college students generally had higher rates of sexual assault than women who did attend college. And since 2004, the rate of sexual assault for female college students has never exceeded 6 per 1,000 in any year, meaning that 99.4% of female college students were not victims.

Sexual assault is actually rare, contrary to Zerlina Maxwell’s assertion that “rape culture is a pervasive part of our society.” Yet what about college students who are raped? How did they become victims? According to a 1996 study, “90% of all acquaintance rapes involve alcohol.” A 2009 report based on a survey of more than 5,000 students stated: “Most sexual assaults occurred after women voluntarily consumed alcohol” — about 80%. Reporting on this alcohol-rape connection, Emily Yoffe of Slate headlined her article: “College Women: Stop Getting Drunk.”

This is why “rape culture” rhetoric is so dangerous. Promoting hatred of males and blaming the “system” as a way to promote the feminist agenda of collective action for “social change” does not prevent rape. Distorting the facts about rape misleads young women, encouraging them to ignore evidence that campus sexual assault is highly correlated to alcohol abuse.

It is not “victim-blaming” to tell the truth. “Teach men not to rape” may be a clever slogan, but the vast majority of men are not rapists and don’t need any feminist lectures about “rape culture.”

We need to teach feminists to stop lying.





 


Category: Sex Trouble

Human Nature and Rock-and-Roll

Posted on | August 26, 2016 | 4 Comments

“You can find more wisdom about love in old R&B records than you can find in all the gender theory textbooks in the Brown University library.”

Maybe the problem with “rape culture” is that college kids aren’t listening to the right music. That thought crossed my mind while I was pondering an article on Medium.com by Anna Hundert that went viral (and got an interesting response by a guy named Elliot Nichols). Ms. Hundert took exception to understanding sex as a transaction, an exchange in which women are presumed to give sex to men in return for dinner, diamonds, love or whatever. What Ms. Hundert may not understand, having not studied the history of feminism in such depth as I have, is that feminists themselves made this transactional understanding of sex the basis for condemning marriage as a degrading condition of slavery.

This was the argument, for example, of British suffragette Cicely Hamilton’s 1909 book Marriage as a Trade, and the anti-marriage rhetoric of the early (so-called “First Wave”) feminists was resurrected and expanded by the radical Women’s Liberation movement (i.e., “Second Wave” feminism) in the late 1960s and ’70s. Anyone may examine the 1973 anthology Radical Feminism and find Sheila Cronan’s “Marriage” (p. 213) and “The Feminists: A Political Organization to Annihilate Sex Roles” (p. 368) among other treatises condemning marriage.

Whatever else a feminist may be, she cannot aspire to be a wife without abandoning the core principles of feminist ideology. Most women who claim to be feminists don’t recognize this, or at least don’t wish to admit it, because if ever the fundamental logic of feminism could be discussed openly, most people would reject it in its entirety.

Anyone who cares to excavate down to the root of feminist arguments will find it necessary to agree with Professor Marilyn Frye who, in a 1990 speech to the National Women’s Studies Association, declared that “feminism, which is thoroughly anti-patriarchal, is not compatible with female heterosexuality, which is thoroughly patriarchal.”

To be a feminist, Professor Frye said, a woman “cannot be a heterosexual in any standard patriarchal meaning of the word — you cannot be any version of a patriarchal wife.” Instead, Professor Frye told her academic audience, to be a feminist, a woman must be “a heretic, a deviant, an undomesticated female, an impossible being.” My point in quoting Professor Frye is not to argue with her, but rather to express my enthusiastic agreement with her. The feminist project is incompatible with marriage, motherhood and heterosexuality — and until this fact is recognized, we can never have an honest discussion about feminism.

 

The feminist movement was founded and led by women who did not like men and did not like sex, and who especially did not like sex with men. This was obvious to opponents of the original women’s suffrage movement, and was likewise obvious to critics when feminism was resurrected from the radical New Left in the last 1960s. This fact was evident from the rapidity with which “Second Wave” feminism advanced from its first national protest at the September 1968 Miss America pageant to the emergence of the radical lesbian “Lavender Menace” at the Second Congress to Unite Women in May 1970. There is an abundance of evidence and testimony on this subject, but I will merely cite three points:

  1. The most widely-assigned feminist anthology, a textbook in introductory Women’s Studies courses at many colleges and universities, is Feminist Frontiers, edited by three lesbian professors. You may research the careers of Professor Verta Taylor and Professor Leila Rupp (both of UC-Santa Barbara) and their colleague Professor Nancy Whittier of Smith College, and then examine the contents of their textbook Feminist Frontiers, and reach your own conclusions as to what the agenda of Women’s Studies is about. (As of 4 p.m. today, Feminist Frontiers was #6 in “Gender Studies” and #10 in “Feminist Theory” in the Amazon Bestsellers rankings.)
  2. Feminist “gender theory,” as taught in 21st-century academia, is based largely on a single influential book, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity by Professor Judith Butler (UC-Berkeley). Of course, Professor Butler is a lesbian, and her arguments in Gender Trouble rest upon arguments made by other radical lesbians, including Monique Wittig, Gayle Rubin and Adrienne Rich. Professor Butler’s book is so often a required reading in colleges that Gender Trouble is more or less permanently ensconced in the Top 10 of Amazon bestsellers (as of 4 p.m., it was #6 in the category “History & Criticism, Women Authors,” and #10 in “Women’s Studies, Women Writers”).
  3. Charlotte Bunch was one of the founders of the Women’s Liberation movement. A participant in the 1968 Miss America pageant protest, she subsequently divorced her husband and started a lesbian collective that became known as The Furies. In 1975, Bunch was co-editor of a book, Lesbianism and the Women’s Movement, a compilation of writing by members of The Furies, including Margaret Small’s declaration that “heterosexuality is the ideology of male supremacy.” Far from being a marginal fringe figure in the feminist movement, Charlotte Bunch became one of its most influential leaders, a tenured professor at Rutgers University and in 1999 was presented with the Eleanor Roosevelt Award for Human Rights by President Bill Clinton (whose wife is a great admirer of Professor Bunch’s work).

As I say, these are only three data points (although many, many more could be cited) selected to demonstrate the truth of Professor Frye’s statement that feminism and heterosexuality are incompatible. If anyone disagrees with this, they shouldn’t waste their time arguing with me, but rather try arguing with Professor Bunch, Professor Butler, Professor Taylor, et al. Perhaps all these lesbian professors could theorize a post-patriarchal heterosexuality that would be acceptably “feminist,” but the question is whether any males could be induced to participate in such a hypothetical relationship. Feminists are women who hate men and, even if a man hated himself enough to accept feminist ideology, what kind of woman would be attracted to such a pathetic wretch? Well, OK, Jessica Valenti and Andrew Golis, but that just proves my point. Most men would not even want to be in the same ZIP code as Jessica Valenti, much less live as a helpless slave under the sadistic whip of her merciless vengeance. Trying to find the “Feminist Man” is like hunting unicorns, a complete waste of time, since every example of this category ever discovered has turned out to be an illusion like the psychotic pervert Hugo Schwyzer.

Marriage is about voluntary cooperation for mutual benefit, and in order for this to happen, some consideration must be given to what benefit a man obtains from marriage, but feminists never want to hear anything a man has to say on this subject (or any subject, for that matter). Feminism Is a Totalitarian Movement to Destroy Civilization as We Know It, and its success requires feminists to impose silence on men. Feminists constantly mock and insult men, calling them “misogynists” who benefit from “male privilege” and participate in “rape culture.” Everything a man might say in his own defense is dismissed by feminists as “mansplaining,” so that what the feminist actually demands of males is quite simple:

  1. Shut up;
    and
  2. Go away.

Any intelligent person who studies the rhetoric and theory of feminism understands this, which is why few feminists are willing to speak as bluntly to the general public as Professor Frye spoke to her academic colleagues in the National Women’s Studies Association. Indeed, even most academic feminists are less candid about their agenda than Professor Frye and Professor Bunch, so that their students are sometimes left in a state of confusion as to what feminism requires. To quote one anonymous student in an Introduction to Feminist Theory course: “Every time I walk out of this class I just become more sexually confused!”

Well, Anna Hundert is only a junior at Brown University, and perhaps she hasn’t yet recognized the problem with her own “sex-positive” feminism, a confusion that I felt obliged to attempt to dispel:

Every good man ought to be honest, and not let himself be intimidated into silence by his fear of being called names for speaking the truth. No matter what any proponent of gender theory may claim, the difference between men and women is about biology, and the male tendency toward aggression is not a “social construct,” but rather a fact of nature. . . .
What needs to happen is that men must summon the courage to talk back honestly to the finger-pointing accusations of feminist “rape culture” discourse and get beyond the cliché of “Not all men.” We need to talk about the specific contexts in which so-called “date rape” typically happens. We need to talk about the climate of binge drinking and reckless promiscuity on college campuses where these “he-said/she-said” cases keep happening. We need to talk about the unrealistic expectations about sex that young people are absorbing from popular culture. We need to talk about peer pressure. We need to talk the decline of morality and the corruption of manners. . . .

You can read the whole thing at Medium.com. When I say “we need to talk,” what I mean is that these idiotic young feminists need to listen to responsible adults who have some experience of living in the real world, including men who have not surrendered their dignity in an attempt to appease feminist fanatics. Also, maybe it would help if these kids listened to some good rock-and-roll music. Certainly, it wouldn’t hurt.




 

Category: Sex Trouble

In The Mailbox: 08.24.16

Posted on | August 24, 2016 | Comments Off on In The Mailbox: 08.24.16

— compiled by Wombat-socho


OVER THE TRANSOM
EBL: American University In Kabul Under Attack
Michelle Malkin: Leo DiCaprio’s Dirty Dollars
Twitchy: So Is THIS The Pivot? Sounds Like Trump’s Anti-Amnesty Cred Just Took A YUGE Hit


RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: On Homosexuality
American Power: #Crooked Hillary’s Inescapable Cloud Of Corruption
American Thinker: The Enemy Is Us
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Hump Day News
BLACKFIVE: Book Review – When The Music’s Over
Da Tech Guy: Cause And Effect – Louisiana’s Flooding MSM Coverage Edition
Don Surber: Detroit Is Pottersville
Dustbury: Quote Of The Week
Fred On Everything:
Jammie Wearing Fools: The Only Question left For Hillary – What Else Are You Hiding?
Joe For America: Black Louisiana Man Reveals The Real Reason For Obama’s Louisiana Visit
JustOneMinute: Florida Keys To Scientists – Bite Me
Pamela Geller: Pamela Geller Speaks At AFA Convention – “Can Islam Coexist With Western Civilization?”
Power Line: Annals Of Clinton Corruption
Shark Tank: Rubio Paints Doomsday Picture Of A Senate Controlled By Chuck Schumer
Shot In The Dark: Our Loathsome Media, Here And Everywhere
STUMP: Do The Hokey-Pokey – Chicago Public Schools Strike Threat And Debt
The Jawa Report: ISIS Using Child Bombs, Usual Dead Baby Porn Pushers Silent
The Lonely Conservative: #NeverTrump – It’s Not Moral Superiority, It’s Depression
The Political Hat: Hugo Awards – Child Molestation And Puppy Kicking
This Ain’t Hell: Veterans Administration IG Investigation Of Denver Regional Director
Weasel Zippers: LA VA Hospital Loses Thirty Cars, Fires Worker Who Reports It
Megan McArdle: Robbing The New (Uber) To Subsidize The Old (Taxis)


Category: Linkagery
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin