Feminism and ‘Strong Delusion’

Posted on | May 30, 2016 | 28 Comments

One of the things you notice about feminists, if you pay attention, is how many of them lack basic self-awareness. It seems unfair to accuse them of hypocrisy because it seems they cannot perceive the contradictions of their arguments, which are apparent to anyone outside the feminist cult. We often behold in feminism the neurotic psychology of self-justifying rationalizations, scapegoating and projection. Furthermore, because their worldview is essentially paranoid — a fear-based belief system that relies on an imaginary patriarchal conspiracy — feminists conjure up phantom threats with which to do battle. Consider the claims of Valerie Tarico:

Sexual intimacy and pleasure are some of humanity’s most cherished experiences. The so-called “best things in life” include natural beauty, fine dining, the arts, thrilling adventures, creative pursuits and community service. But love and orgasms are among the few peak experiences that are equally available to rich and poor, equally sweet to those whose lives are going according to plan and to many whose dreams are in pieces.
Religious conservatives think that these treasured dimensions of the human experience should be available to only a privileged few people whose lives fit their model: male-dominated, monogamous, heterosexual pairs who have pledged love and contractual marriage for life. . . .
To be clear, I’m not saying that Christianity’s sex rules are only a function of patriarchal Christian privilege. During the Iron Age, from whence Christianity’s sex rules got handed down, society was organized around kin groups, and the endlessly warmongering clans of the Ancient Near East were more at risk of extinction than overpopulation. Legally enforced monogamy created lines of inheritance and social obligation, clarifying how neighbors should be treated and who could be enslaved.
Also, hetero sex necessarily carried the risk of pregnancy, which made it adaptive to welcome resultant pregnancies. Children do best in stable, nurturing families and communities, and in the Ancient Near East, “No marriage? No sex!” may have served to protect the well-being of mothers and children as well as the social power of patriarchal men. But in today’s mobile, pluralistic societies with modern contraceptive options and social safety nets, God’s self-appointed sex police have little credible excuse save their own compelling need to bully and boss and stay on top.
It should come as no surprise that Church authorities want an exclusive license to grant “legitimate” sexual privileges. . . .
The ways in which God’s Self-Appointed Sex Police try to obstruct intimacy and orgasms are legion. . . .

You can read the whole thing, but you get the drift here. Along with her simplistic anthropology — locating the source of “patriarchal Christian privilege” in the Iron Age in the “Ancient Near East” — Tarico also provides a simplistic sociology in which “mobile, pluralistic societies with modern contraceptive options and social safety nets” have transcended these allegedly primitive “sex rules.” However, when we consider the basic procreative function of sex, the need for “stable, nurturing families and communities” has remained unchanged by modernity. Before there can be a “pluralistic society” with all the features Tarico describes, there must first be human life — children must be conceived, born and raised to adulthood — and it is therefore harmful to sneer dismissively at the family unit (and its attendant “sex rules”) as an obsolete remnant of a primitive past. Consider this list of states, ranked by total fertility rate (TFR, average lifetime births per woman, calculated on 2014 birth rates):

TOP FIVE
Utah ……………………. 2.33
South Dakota ……….. 2.27
North Dakota ………. 2.24
Alaska …………………. 2.19
Nebraska …………….. 2.16

BOTTOM FIVE
Connecticut …………. 1.63
Vermont ……………… 1.63
New Hampshire …… 1.58
Massachusetts ……… 1.58
Rhode Island ……….. 1.56

On average, women in conservative, religious Utah have 49% more babies than do women in liberal, secular Rhode Island. Whatever other socioeconomic or demographic differences there may be between the high-fertility and low-fertility states, we see that the “Birth Dearth” (as Ben Wattenberg called it) is most evident in liberal New England.

You will perhaps not be surprised to learn that Valerie Tarico supports population control as a solution to climate change, because more babies mean more carbon emissions. Unfortunately for the Gaia-worshipping “green” cult, however, the world’s most prolific baby-makers are unlikely to be reading their arguments.

Top Ten Countries by Total Fertility Rate
(Average lifetime births per woman)

Niger …………………….. 6.76
Burundi ………………… 6.09
Mali ……………………… 6.06
Somalia ………………… 5.99
Uganda ………………… 5.89
Burkina Faso ………… 5.86
Zambia …………………. 5.72
Malawi …………………. 5.60
Angola …………………. 5.37
Afghanistan …………. 5.33

Probably the folks in Burundi and Burkina Faso don’t worry too much about their carbon emissions. Meanwhile, in the First World . . .

Total Fertility Rates for
Selected Industrial Nations

South Korea …………… 1.25
Japan …………………….. 1.40
Greece ……………………. 1.42
Italy ……………………….. 1.43
Germany ………………… 1.44
Austria …………………… 1.46
Spain ……………………… 1.49
Switzerland ……………. 1.55
Canada ………………….. 1.59
Denmark ……………….. 1.73
Australia ………………… 1.77
Belgium …………………. 1.78
Netherlands …………… 1.78
United States …………. 1.87

The demographic collapse of industrialized societies, due to their abnormally low birth rates, is a very serious social problem.

“Europe needs many more babies to avert a population disaster” was the headline on a Guardian article in August 2015, and if the problem is not quite so bad in the United States, perhaps we can thank the Iron Age “sex rules” of “patriarchal Christian privilege” that Valerie Tarico deplores.

Yet who is playing “self-appointed sex police” in our society? Where do we see those with a “compelling need to bully and boss and stay on top”?

It is feminists who are the “sex police” on America’s university campuses where, backed by the power of the federal government, they are implementing new laws and policies that deprive students of basic rights in the name of fighting a non-existent “rape epidemic.”

Is America suffering from too much marriage and monogamy, as Valerie Tarico’s argument implies, or is the exact opposite true? Aren’t most of the problems that feminists criticize as “rape culture” the product of a society where random hookups are commonplace and where “sex rules” — the social standards and customs surrounding sexuality — are in a state of chaos and confusion? In a society where dating apps like Tinder and OKCupid make it easy to find partners for casual sex encounters, young people in the 21st century do not lack sexual freedom. What they do lack are meaningful and committed relationships, the kind that those allegedly primitive Iron Age “sex rules” helped protect. We see that Valerie Tarico’s paranoid fear of “patriarchal Christian privilege” has led her into a counterfactual belief system — exactly as the Bible warned.

“And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”
— II Thessalonians 2:11-12 (KJV)

In 1973, radical feminist Mary Daly proclaimed the “spiritual dimension of feminist consciousness” in a movement that manifested itself “not only as Antichrist but also as Antichurch,” as a “rising woman-consciousness” unleashing chaos and terror by destroying the “Christocentric cosmos.” This deliberate destruction of Christian belief — “the myths of patriarchy,” in Daly’s phrase — obviously would have enormous consequences. What sort of culture would we expect to emerge in a society that rejects the divine authority of “Thou shalt not kill” (Exodus 20:13) and other biblical commandments? Oddly enough, we may cite here the testimony of lesbian feminist Suzanne Pharr:

According to the FBI, there are several thousand women killed by their husbands and boyfriends every year. This number does not include the great numbers of women killed by rapists on the street and in their homes. . . .
Men beat, rape and kill women because they can; that is, because they live in a society that gives permission to the hatred of women.

So she wrote in “Hate Violence Against Women,” an essay included in the 1993 Women’s Studies textbook Feminist Frameworks. Is it true that we now “live in a society that gives permission to the hatred of women”? What sort of madness is this? Only in a society that has ceased to value women’s unique role in the creation of human life could this kind of violent “hatred of women” flourish, and what kind of fool would dare attack human life at its very source? Oh, wait . . .

“Marriage means rape and lifelong slavery.”
— Ti-Grace Atkinson, 1969

“Pregnancy is barbaric. . . .
“Moreover, childbirth hurts. And it isn’t good for you. . . .
“Reproduction of the species cost women dearly. . . . Women were the slave class that maintained the species in order to free the other half for the business of the world.”
— Shulamith Firestone, The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution (1970)

“Women’s oppression is based in the fact that she reproduces the species. . . .
“In terms of the oppression of women, heterosexuality is the ideology of male supremacy.”
— Margaret Small, “Lesbians and the Class Position of Women,” in Lesbianism and the Women’s Movement, edited by Nancy Myron and Charlotte Bunch (1975)

“The first condition for escaping from forced motherhood and sexual slavery is escape from the patriarchal institution of marriage.”
— Alison M. Jaggar, Feminist Politics and Human Nature (1988)

“I don’t particularly like babies. They are loud and smelly and, above all other things, demanding . . . time-sucking monsters with their constant neediness. . . . Nothing will make me want a baby. . . . This is why, if my birth control fails, I am totally having an abortion.”
— Amanda Marcotte, March 2014

Feminists condemn marriage as slavery and reject motherhood as oppression, and denounce babies as “time-sucking monsters.” Do they imagine their radical worldview will have no negative consequences? What did feminists expect their death cult ideology would produce?

When Valerie Tarico celebrates abortion as a “blessing,” do she believe that her hateful arguments against life itself will not undermine morality? Doesn’t feminism, by inciting murderous hatred toward the innocent in the name of “choice,” undermine the moral basis of kindness and respect toward others? Yet those in the grip of “strong delusion” quickly lose touch with reality and succumb to all manner of wickedness and folly.

Valerie Tarico praises Satanism, she accuses pro-lifers of “penis worship,” and promotes transgenderism. And have I neglected to mention perhaps the ultimate irony, that Valerie Tarico has a Ph.D. in psychology?

I was 26, in the last stage of my PhD program . . . at the University of Washington. . . .
I said to the god in my head, “I’m not making excuses for you anymore. I quit.” And just like that, God was gone.

When confronted by such a claim, logic requires us to point out that, if God exists, His existence is independent of any individual’s belief. Facts are facts, and you are free to believe whatever you want, but your belief does not alter the facts. The truth is still true. Furthermore, nature abhors a vacuum and, in consequence of the modern assault on Christianity, we constantly see proof of a familiar phenomenon: “When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.”

Valerie Tarico encourages hatred toward Christians in the name of “science,” and encourages hatred toward men in the name of “feminism.” It is useless to argue with fanatical atheists, because arguments require respect for facts and logic, and their hatred is wholly irrational. They are under “strong delusion” and find “pleasure in unrighteousness.”

“Ye shall be as gods” (Genesis 3:5) was the false promise of Satan’s original lie … https://t.co/C7xNUR51oc #tcot pic.twitter.com/Rr6tQeqdUG

— FreeStacy (@Not_RSMcCain) April 1, 2016

+ + + + + +

The Sex Trouble project has been supported by contributions from readers. The first edition of Sex Trouble: Radical Feminism and the War on Human Nature is available from Amazon.com, $11.96 in paperback or $1.99 in Kindle ebook format.

Category: Sex Trouble

Rule 5 Sunday: O Girls!

Posted on | May 29, 2016 | 4 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

While I was momentarily tempted to stir things up by posting the illustration from the change.org petition “Give Elsa A Swastika” a/k/a “Elsa, She-Wolf Of The SS”, I decided instead to go with something less provocative, to wit this illo of a Baltimore Orioles fangirl, since I am in Charm City for the weekend and the locals haven’t burned the place down.
As usual, many if not all of the following links are to pics of scantily clad women (or in EBL’s case, occasionally, women we wish were in burkas if not body bags) and these pics are generally considered NSFW. Whatever evil consequences befall you as a result of poorly timed clicks are definitely not our fault.

An enthusiastic Orioles fan

90 Miles From Tyranny leads off this week with Is That A Tan Line?, Morning Mistress, and Girls with Guns, followed by Goodstuff, in whose megablog Anastasiya Kvitko defies social media experts with her boobery. We also heard from Animal Magnetism with Rule 5 Hunting FAQ Friday and the Saturday Gingermageddon, The Last Tradiion with Bella Hadid and Amber Heard, and First Street Journal with Down Under.

EBL’s herd of (sometimes mutant) heifers this week includes Katie Couric (past her best by date), Amber Heard, Transgender NYT Reporter, and Rosie Byrnes.

A View from the Beach contributes The TSA Milks Rose Byrne, Archaeologists Find Chinese Invented Mass Market Beer, We Had a Better Day . . ., Smithsonian Romanticizes Indian Oyster Industry, Why Waste the Good Stuff?, What’s Wrong With a Little Lesbian Necrophilia?, “Here Comes the Rain Again”, Random Art Post, The Story of Donald Trump and Miss Piggy, and Redskins Refuse to Resent Name Appropriation.

At Soylent Siberia, it’s your Alderaan Coffee Creamer, Monday Motivationer el Fuego, Tuesday Titillation, Humpday Hawtness Casabas, Fursday Perfection, Latent Lingerie Sushi & Snooch, and Wakeup Weekender.

Proof Positive’s Friday Night Babe is Belen Rodriguez, his Vintage Babe was Marika Rokk, and Sex in Advertising is covered by Heidi Klum for Victoria’s Secret. At Dustbury, it’s Ciara and Rebecca Black.

Thanks to everyone for your linkagery! Deadline to submit links to Rule 5 Wombat mailbox for next week’s D-Day Rule 5 Memorial is midnight on Saturday, June 4. Deadline to submit links to the Wombat-socho mailbox for the FMJRA is noon on Saturday.

Visit Amazon’s Intimate Apparel Shop

Category: Rule 5

New York City Is a Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy — Just Ask @JessicaValenti!

Posted on | May 29, 2016 | 78 Comments

Jessica Valenti has written a memoir, Sex Object, that is exactly what you would expect — a vengeful diatribe against heterosexual men.

Like most other feminists, Valenti is oblivious to the fact that her relentlessly negative portrayal of men is just anti-male propaganda. No woman can expect any success as a professional feminist unless she conveys this message: All men are evil, and all women are their victims.

To form your opinion of men based on the writing of feminists is like studying Jewish culture by reading Mein Kampf. Yet like other feminists, Jessica Valenti denies that she hates men. Perhaps not, but she and her comrades certainly incite anti-male attitudes and promote negative stereotypes of men and, most particularly, stigmatize male sexuality.

Normal male attraction to women, particularly male admiration of beauty, is condemned by feminists as “objectification.” While we may deplore superficiality or an idolatrous obsession with physical appearance, there is nothing inherently wrong with the pleasure we derive from beauty, nor is it scandalous that good-looking people (male or female) are highly desired as romantic partners. This is simply human nature, which cannot be changed by any amount of political rhetoric.

Does Jessica Valenti suppose that a “nerd rights” movement could make guys with high SAT scores as popular with women as NBA All-Stars? No, of course not — the geek in the Math Club might become a software billionaire and buy an NBA franchise someday, but young women still chase after the 6-foot-7 power forward, and not the 5-foot-7 nerd.

Why, then, does Jessica Valenti suppose that complaining about the “objectification” of women — feminist jargon for normal male interest in women’s beauty — can accomplish any real change in the social hierarchy? In an excerpt from her book published by the U.K. Guardian, we learn that, as a girl, Valenti was insecure about her looks, and wanted to be liked by cute boys who didn’t like her as much as she liked them:

I wrote in my diary at the time, I’m so ugly I can’t stand it. I have a big gross nose, pimples, hairy arms. I will never have a boy like me or a boyfriend. All of my friends are pretty and I will be the one with no one.
I was feeling that loneliness acutely at the time, because I was obsessed with a boy named Matt. Matt — the first in a long line of blond boys I would fall for — told me once that I would be so, so pretty if not for my big nose. All I heard was, he thought I could be pretty! . . .
I imagined all of the things that would go right if I were just to have a smaller nose. I would have a boyfriend and the girls in school would stop making fun of me.

OK, let’s get a show of hands here: Who was insecure about their looks as a teenager? Everybody? Yeah, that’s what I thought. Unlike feminists, however, sane people don’t turn their adolescent woes into a lifelong political crusade. We do not resort to a crypto-Marxist “dialectic” (thank you, Shulamith Firestone) to rationalize whatever bothered us as kids, nor do we have an all-encompassing theory of our “oppression” to justify ourselves in clinging to childhood grudges and lashing out at scapegoats we blame for our disadvantages and dissatisfactions.

Would I have liked to date Carol Purdy or Vicky Jones in middle school? Would I have been pleased if my fondness had been reciprocated by Janet Howton, Priscilla Yates or any of the dozens of other girls I had crushes on during my childhood and youth? Of course. However, I was an immature skinny class clown and it was not until I was 18 that I began to “hit my stride,” so to speak, and my belated success so greatly exceeded my early failures that I can laugh at the memory of my childish insecurities and adolescent loneliness. Most adults get over their teenage heartbreaks, so why do feminists like Jessica Valenti seem to spend their lives in a campaign of vengeance based on their unhappy youth?

Feminist ideology is mostly rationalized self-pity — a quixotic crusade for “equality” as the imagined solution to personal misery — and as such is an exercise in irrational futility. The Women’s Liberation movement erupted with a protest at the Miss America pageant in 1968, when I was just starting fourth grade. Almost half a century later, Jessica Valenti is getting paid to recycle the same familiar arguments. Beauty pageants “epitomize the roles we are all forced to play as women,” the feminist protesters declared in 1968, proclaiming that “women in our society [are] forced daily to compete for male approval, enslaved by ludicrous ‘beauty’ standards we ourselves are conditioned to take seriously.”

Never mind whether that indictment of the Miss America pageant was fair or accurate. Even if we stipulate, arguendo, that the protesters had some legitimate grievances, still we must ask, what have nearly five decades of feminist activism done to change women’s lives? Are ugly girls any happier in 2016 than they were in 1968? Are women still “enslaved by ludicrous ‘beauty’ standards”? And why, in order to justify their vindictive rage against males, do feminists resort to propaganda tactics?

Feminists seize on atrocity narratives to demonize males, deliberately exaggerating the frequency of “men’s violence against women” in order to promote an attitude of sexual paranoia (“Fear and Loathing of the Penis”) that makes it difficult, if not impossible, for women to form healthy relationships with men.

That’s from “Anti-Male Propaganda: Understanding Feminism’s Use of Atrocity Narratives,” a 3,700-word post I published last week, and do you suppose that any feminist on the planet would acknowledge such a critique? Of course not. Feminists can never admit that what they are actually doing is fomenting a totalitarian ideology of hatred using dishonest methods pioneered from Marxist-Leninist regimes in the 20th century. The Comintern and the KGB, the Red Guards in China and the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia — anyone who has studied Communist propaganda tactics can trace the origins of the slanderous rhetoric of feminism. Males have replaced the capitalist bourgeoisie as the “class enemy” in the feminist adaptation of Marxist ideology, and women are to feminist theory what the “proletariat” was to Marx. Catharine MacKinnon frankly acknowledged feminism’s debt to Marxism in her 1989 classic Toward a Feminist Theory of the State. What Professor MacKinnon did not foresee, however, was that the Soviet empire was on the verge of its final collapse into the “ash heap of history.” Why should we expect feminism to succeed when Marxism failed? This is a question feminists continue to ignore. You can read Kate Weigand’s Red Feminism: American Communism and the Making of Women’s Liberation and find no acknowledgement of the underlying doubts about feminism’s future that are raised by a study of Communism’s historical failure.

Instead, feminists continue their ceaseless campaign of slander. Tales of wrongdoing by male criminals are used to imply collective guilt: “See? Here is psychotic mass murderer Elliot Rodger — typical sexist!” Murderers, rapists, pornographers, pimps — despicable criminals and perverts constantly appear in feminist rhetoric, symbolizing all men as participants in a system of oppression in which all women are victims.

Consider this excerpt from Jessica Valenti’s book:

The two worst times for dicks on the New York subway: when the train car is empty or when it’s crowded. As a teenager, if I found myself in an empty car, I would immediately leave — even if it meant changing cars as the train moved, which terrified me. Because, if I didn’t, I just knew the guy sitting across from me would inevitably lift his newspaper to reveal a semihard cock, and even if he wasn’t planning on it, I sure wasn’t going to sit there and worry about it for the whole ride.
On crowded train cars I didn’t see dicks – I felt them. Pressing into my hip, men pretending that the rocking up against me was just because of the jostling of the train.
The first time I saw a penis on the subway, I was on the platform for the N train three blocks from my house in Queens, on my way to school. I was 12. I had just missed a train, so I was the only person there other than a man all the way at the other end of the platform. He was so far away that I could see only the outline of his shape, but soon I noticed his hand moving furiously – and that he was walking quickly towards me with his penis in his hand. I had always thought myself prepared for something like this; I knew I was supposed to yell or run, but I just stood there. I didn’t look away or turn around, and even though I felt my knees giving out, my feet felt strongly planted to the ground.

Let us ask: Are all men in New York City depraved perverts?

On an average weekday, 5.7 million people ride New York’s subway system, and if half of those passengers are male, then there are nearly 2.9 million men riding those trains. Are all these men just waiting for an opportunity to grope a teenager or flash their penis at a 12-year-old girl?

I hate New York City, and therefore I will answer YES!

Men in New York are certainly the worst men on the planet. Jessica Valenti is correct: Every man in the city is some kind of disgusting freak.

Oh, sure, these men claim they’re riding the subway back and forth to their so-called “jobs,” but feminists know that the real reason men use those trains is to obtain kinky sexual thrills by rubbing up against women or committing indecent exposure. So, because New York City is swarming with so many millions of rapists, exhibitionists, voyeurs, sadomasochists, child molesters and serial killers, Jessica Valenti would have us believe that all men are as bad as the subhuman creeps who ride the subway trains in Manhattan, Queens and Brooklyn.

Just days ago, I said that “as a father, I would never want my daughter living in a wretched hive of scum and villainy like New York City.” Men there are notoriously bad, yet Jessica Valenti still lives in New York, and is raising her daughter there. Having been sexually terrorized all her life by the awful men of New York, why doesn’t Jessica Valenti leave the city? Why not move to a lesbian separatist community in Alabama?

Never expect an answer to questions like that from any member of the feminist cult. Jessica Valenti will continue pretending that the rest of us are too stupid to notice the obvious flaws in her warped worldview, nor will she acknowledge that the profound dishonesty of her anti-male hate propaganda is apparent to any student of rhetoric.

No, Jessica Valenti will never adjust her belief system to reality, because this would require her to get over her childhood grudge about the misfortune of being a big-nosed girl with hairy arms, the kind that blond boys named Matt didn’t like. Instead, she will continue telling atrocity tales — men who ride New York subways are perverts, therefore all men are evil — and pretending that she doesn’t know exactly what she’s doing: Encouraging other women to hate men as much as she hates men, because the basic problem in the world, according to feminist ideology, is that women don’t hate men as much as men deserve to be hated.

Jessica Valenti may get old, but she will never grow up.

Category: Sex Trouble

FMJRA 2.0: Live From Baltimore

Posted on | May 28, 2016 | 2 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

‘Feminist Motherhood’ and the ‘Transgender Kindergartner’
Dark Brightness
Living In Anglo-America
The Pirate’s Cove
The Lonely Conservative
Batshit Crazy News

Rule 5 Sunday: Women In Limousines
Animal Magnetism
Batshit Crazy News
Proof Positive
A View from the Beach
90 Miles from Tyranny

What Happened to Professor Bealer?
The Political Hat

A Balm For Conservatives In Trumpreich
Batshit Crazy News

FMJRA 2.0: Pink Cadillac
The Pirate’s Cove
Batshit Crazy News
A View from the Beach

More Feminists, More Gender Theory
Living In Anglo-America
Batshit Crazy News

On @MattMcGorry, @MeghanEMurphy and the ‘Male Feminist’ Problem
Batshit Crazy News

In The Mailbox: 05.23.16
Batshit Crazy News
Proof Positive
A View from the Beach

Anti-Male Propaganda: Understanding Feminism’s Use of Atrocity Narratives
Batshit Crazy News

In The Mailbox: 05.24.16
Batshit Crazy News
Proof Positive
A View from the Beach

‘Body-Positive’ Feminism
Batshit Crazy News

NY Times Transgender Columnist Was Accused by Wife of Rape and Abuse
The Political Hat
Batshit Crazy News

Feminist @Kat_George Can Read Your Mind, You Heteronormative Misogynist
Dark Brightness
The Political Hat
Batshit Crazy News

Gay Australian Rugby Player Arrested by FBI, Sought Sex With 6-Year-Old Boy
Living In Anglo-America
The Political Hat
Batshit Crazy News

In The Mailbox: 05.25.16
Batshit Crazy News
Proof Positive
A View from the Beach

In The Mailbox: 05.26.16
Batshit Crazy News
A View from the Beach

Did Her Majesty Drop Some Hormones In The Little Pajama Boy, Or What?
Batshit Crazy News

Did Her Majesty Drop Some Hormones In The Little Pajama Boy, Or What?

Posted on | May 27, 2016 | 47 Comments

by Smitty

Everyone’s getting their Twitter riffs on over this:

#ManEnoughforJohnson pic.twitter.com/3uskgF0Azg

— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) May 26, 2016

Added my own little bit of doggerel in that AABCCB scheme that seems to work well:

I guess it’s all fun and games until Trump names Sarah Silverman for VP.

Category: Democrats, Hillary Clinton, humor

In The Mailbox: 05.26.16

Posted on | May 26, 2016 | 4 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
Louder With Crowder: Gay Captain America – He’s Here And He’s Queer
EBL: Trump Agrees To Debate Sanders In California
Da Tech Guy: Fausta – Univision Anchors Make The News Again
The Political Hat: The Alt-Right Is NOT Conservative
Twitchy: Pretty (Lousy) Little Liar – Hillary Offers Up Bogus New Excuse For Violating E-Mail Rules
Shark Tank: Wasserman-Schultz May Get Fired As DNC Chair

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
American Power: Trump Supporter Peter Thiel Reveals Secret War With Gawker
American Thinker: Solar Energy’s Real Problem
Don Surber: Men Have A Legitimate Complaint
Jammie Wearing Fools: Men Pay Me $500/Hour To Be Their “Girlfriend”
Joe For America: Venezuela – As Dead As John Lennon
JustOneMinute: McJobs Gone? No Loss
Pamela Geller: Belgian PM – We Are Not At War With Islam
Shot In The Dark: Don’t Mess With Texas Entrepreneurs
The Jawa Report: Cornhole Watch – Sajmir Alimehmeti AKA Abdul Qawii
The Lonely Conservative: Hilary’s Email Problem Has Gone From Bad To Worse
This Ain’t Hell: Chris Kyle’s Records Questioned
Weasel Zippers: Hillary Has The “Lumbersexual” Male Vote – And The Syphilis Vote?

Shop Amazon – Father’s Day in Handmade
Shop Amazon – 20% Off Sunglasses by Smith Optics, Suncloud and Forecast Optics

Category: Linkagery

NY Times Transgender Columnist Was Accused by Wife of Rape and Abuse

Posted on | May 26, 2016 | 48 Comments

In 2015, Jennifer Marie Russo sought a protection order against her estranged husband Travis Lee Stroud. Ms. Russo, a writer who uses the pen name “Juniper Russo,” and also known as Juniper Russo Tarascio, had married Stroud in 2013 and the couple lived in an apartment in the Chattanooga suburb of Red Bank, Tennessee. In a petition filed July 21, 2015, in Chancery Court of Hamilton County, Tennessee, Ms. Russo alleged that Stroud had engaged in “extreme verbal and psychological abuse” of her daughter from a previous relationship. In her petition, Ms. Russo also alleged that she had been repeatedly sexually assaulted and raped by Stroud, who she said had subjected her to “physical violence.”

Ms. Russo’s accusations against her husband in that case made no headlines, unlike another story six months earlier in January 2015:

Chattanooga transgender woman
lands $100,000 book deal
If Cinderella landed a big book deal instead of a prince, her story might resemble Meredith Russo.
New York-based Flatiron Books, an offshoot of MacMillan, is publishing Russo’s first book, a young adult novel called “If I Was Your Girl.” Russo says she is getting a $100,000 advance for the book, a number backed up by her editor at Flatiron who won’t give an exact number but says it’s six figures.
Editor Amy Einhorn, who oversees Flatiron’s YA division, is the same editor who found “The Help” by Kathryn Stockett and shepherded into print and the top of bestseller lists. It later became a movie that won a Best Supporting Actress Oscar for Octavia Spencer.
Unlike Cinderella, Russo, 28, never relied on magic to change her life. Russo’s success is due to talent, toil — she supported her writing career with unglamorous jobs ranging from dishwasher to call center aide — and courage. Russo, who grew up in Chattanooga, was born male and began living life as a transgender woman when she became an adult. “If I Was Your Girl” is about a beautiful, intelligent, blonde transgender teen girl who forms a loving bond with a straight male high school football player. The story is set in the Chattanooga area with descriptive details based on Rhea County, where much of Russo’s family still lives.

Travis Lee Stroud, aka “Meredith Russo,” apparently has never faced any criminal charges related to the allegations of abuse and sexual assault made in Jennifer Russo’s 2015 petition for a protection order. However, Stroud had been arrested in Hamilton County, Tennessee, in November 2014, on a charge of “interference with emergency calls.”

Travis Lee Stroud, aka “Meredith Russo,” published a New York Times opinion column Tuesday with the headline, “What It Feels Like to Use the Wrong Bathroom.” That column made no mention of the abuse allegations made against Stroud by Jennifer Russo.

Documents related to the July 2015 protection-order case were posted on the Facebook page of Missi Faulkner, who wrote: “And this is the voice that the New York Times thinks deserves to be heard? A man who assaults women and children? This is disgusting!”

Travis Stroud’s estranged wife, Jennifer Russo, is an advocate of “ecofeminism” and “gender egalitarianism.” While she was pregnant with her son, Ms. Russo wrote on her blog, “My family doesn’t ‘do’ gender norms,” and said she had “realized it’s much harder to encourage boys to live confidently outside of restrictive gender norms,” recommending her “favorite books for, and about, gender-nonconforming boys.”

Judging by photos posted to the @Mer_Squared Twitter account, Stroud/”Russo” has custody of (or at least visitation rights with) a 2-year-old son, Darwin, that he/”she” and Jennifer Russo had together.

An online biography states: “MEREDITH RUSSO was born, raised, and lives in Tennessee. She started living as her true self in late 2013 and never looked back. . . . When she’s not busy writing she can be found . . . raising her two amazing children, Vivian and Darwin.” However, an October 2015 affidavit filed in a Hamilton County circuit court indicates that Stroud/”Russo” was only allowed to see one of the children under the supervision of a relative, who was required to swear that the child would never be left unattended with Stroud/”Russo.”

When his/”her” New York Times column was criticized, Stroud/”Russo” retorted on Twitter: “I have a toddler and an eight year old.”

A Twitter message was sent to Stroud/”Russo,” as well as to his/”her” editors at the New York Times and Flatiron Books, seeking comment about Jennifer Russo’s allegations. No response was received.

(Hat-tip: Cathy Brennan on Twitter.)

UPDATE: Steven Crowder actually had most of this story Wednesday evening, and Cathy Brennan says Gender Trender (@GallusMag on Twitter) deserves credit for helping expose the story.

There may be further developments in the story, but right now, the focus should be on the complete absence of standards at the New York Times.

Young feminist Landen Gambill noted the irony:

So Russo's victim gets to see her rapist publicly praised as a hero while liberals ignore violence because it doesn't fit the narrative.

— Landen Gambill (@landengambill) May 26, 2016

Maybe “rape culture” only matters when it involves college boys.

Category: Sex Trouble

Gay Australian Rugby Player Arrested by FBI, Sought Sex With 6-Year-Old Boy

Posted on | May 26, 2016 | 51 Comments

The Bingham Cup is a tournament held every two years since 2002 by the International Gay Rugby Association and Board (IGRAB), and today marks the opening ceremonies of this year’s tournament in Nashville. Alas, one Australian player will have to miss the ceremonies:

Michael Quinn, an avid rugby union player from Melbourne, embarked on a US adventure last week with some of his teammates.
They began the trip with a stay at a Hollywood Hills home, then planned to travel to Nashville, Tennessee, for the Bingham Cup, a global rugby tournament honouring September 11 hero and pioneer of gay rugby clubs, Mark Bingham.
He is locked up in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Detention Centre, charged with attempted child sex trafficking, and faces the prospect of life in the US federal prison system without the prospect of parole.
US authorities allege Mr Quinn, a Monash University-educated geneticist at a Melbourne IVF clinic, kept a dark secret from his travelling companions.
On Saturday afternoon, two days after he landed in LA on Qantas flight 93, Mr Quinn caught an Uber to a hotel where he planned to meet with “like-minded men” and a six-year-old boy, according to the criminal complaint.
In the hotel room, the Cartoon Network was playing on the TV and Toy Story-themed cupcakes were available to eat.
Mr Quinn, according to US authorities, also had $US260 ($A360) in his pocket.
The money was to allegedly pay for the sex he planned to have with the six-year-old, who was yet to be presented by a pimp.
Mr Quinn had also allegedly brought a camera, film and a monopod to support the camera.
About 10 minutes after Mr Quinn arrived in the room, and after he had had a beer, chat and a Toy Story cupcake with the strangers, an undercover agent posing as a pimp came to the door and said “money time”, according to the criminal complaint.
“Quinn, clearly remembering the previous discussions where he had been told the price would be $US250 to sodomise the boy for approximately an hour, he pulled out his money and gave the pimp $US260,” Aaron McClellan, a special agent for US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, wrote in the complaint.
“After Quinn paid the pimp, law enforcement came into the room and arrested everyone.”
Mr Quinn was the target of a meticulous operation by undercover agents from ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations unit.
It began in April when an agent accessed a social networking site with online groups who “expressed their sexual interest in children” and found a post from “Mick” who stated he was travelling from Australia to LA.
Mick, who US authorities say has been identified as Mr Quinn, allegedly told the undercover agent he was “looking for sex with children” and while “he liked both boys and girls, his favourite were boys, aged 5-10”.
“Would love to share one with you mate,” Mr Quinn allegedly wrote.

(Hat-tip: Luke Ford’s @VGB_OPSEC on Twitter.) Here’s video: