‘You are what you wear,’ and other dumb advice.

As I’m sure everyone is aware, the plethora of allegations coming from the Don Draper aspirants over at Fox News have pushed the issue of sexual harassment into the light – where it should be, quite honestly. Additionally, the news about Mike and Karen Pence and their rule prohibiting one-on-one meetings with the opposite sex also came out within the last month. Regardless of how you feel concerning either debacle – personally I couldn’t care less what the Pence family does if both parties are in agreement and careers aren’t being stalled – the controversy surrounding both issues made every club wielding neanderthal in Conservative media decide that it was time for them to exit their caves in unison, thumping their chests and throwing feces at anyone who questions their superior opinions.

The Federalist, Erick Erickson, and Matt Walsh have produced some disturbing cringe-worthy material before, but lately it feels as though they found all the diaries men kept on Warren Jeffs’ compound and are now publishing them. The best part is that women are writing a good portion of these articles, because what a great way to try and create a defense of nonsense material. They’re also having Jews write articles critical of Jews, it’s a fun new shtick. Back to the point, instead of articles telling men to behave themselves and learn some self-control – since, after all, women were the ones in the “victims” column at Fox News – we get articles like this:

federalist

Related image

And maybe it’s been this intense for a while and I just don’t frequent those publications anymore to witness it, clearly this isn’t a new shtick for the anti-feminist right – I mean, let’s take a moment to remember that time Steven Crowder asked his adoring fans “If a feminist is raped in a forest, and no one is around to hear it, is she still heinously unattractive?”   (Get it? Rape is so funny!)but it seems as though the rise of Trumpism has also welcomed a new level of pride in conservative circles regarding the rise of sexist apologia.

It doesn’t just exist, it’s celebrated!

So… Feminism, the title of the shrewd and a movement no longer necessary, or an ideology in desperate need of a broad and inclusive revival?

As a society we’ve been groomed to broad brush movements and issues, to put them under the blanketed imprisonment of all-or-nothing. So the Muslim woman who teaches her child respect for all people and life is forced to bear the burden of a commonality with monsters who prey on the innocent. Rachel Bloom’s obnoxious song about a vagina’s voice is somehow connected to ALL of the Left and Feminists, while a man who disregards laws and mercilessly end lives is somehow connected to ALL of the Right and responsible gun owners. The thin blue line is wrapped around the abuser of power at one end, and fastened to the hero who sacrificed his life at the other, and if we try to loosen its grip on the former we’re charged with disregarding the latter. You get the point. Our hatred and mockery of a group is far too often postulated by the concept that the individual is no more, the majority is meaningless, and the fringe represents the whole; Feminism is a victim of this mentality. But the hypocrisy doesn’t end there, as my Twitter friend (@TheOneSoleShoe) noted, the label of “Social Justice Warrior” as a blanketed term is nurturing a safe space for Conservatives where they can ignore societal failings:

“The Right will allow that we can condemn people like Bill O’Reilly when the most incontrovertible evidence reveals him a scumbag, but the Right pretends that nothing led to that event. That there is no surrounding culture or chain of escalating behaviors that lead to it, and while it will pour out derision and criticism when the worst actually occurs, you’re not allowed to address any of the root causes or you’re a SJW. Now the Right is fairly certain that Islamic Terror has roots in Islam and sees concentric circles of baddies ranging out from the center. Or it sees how the Left’s actual attempts to silence political opposition begin with more subtle attempts to stamp out speech. So with groups it sees itself in opposition with, there is a very nuanced chain of progressing behavior that we can root out. With racism/sexism/bigotry, it’s just an anvil falling out of the sky. And if you try to address any of the root causes, again, you’re a SJW.”

As I explained in this post, the rise of Trump forced me to disregard the fear of being compartmentalized with fringe radical Feminist factions and embrace the “Feminist” label:

“In order for Trump to be elected, individuals – both men and women – had to minimize his treatment of women, which speaks poorly of the value they placed on those he attacked, demeaned, and objectified. Donald Trump being sworn in today is proof that our nation is willing to accept women as less worthy of the respect, dignity, and protection we deserve in this nation.

I watched as fellow women, adorned in their Trump paraphernalia, brazenly celebrated a man who speaks of women as though they are animals for him to own, and playing apologist for the men who defend him. I found myself telling women – WOMEN – that it is not okay for a man to brag about being able to sexually assault them. Why must I tell women that sexual assault is not “locker room” talk? That openly discussing your conquests and the romps you have behind your wife’s back is a sign of sewer level character that is not befitting of the Oval Office? Why must I tell women that it is not okay for a man to refer to them as a “piece of a–,” and treat them as brainless entity that can easily be replaced?

The fact that such things must be explained has exposed a societal breakdown in which many women have embraced their assigned degraded value as though it is a crown.”

So, in short: We need Feminism, regardless of what fringe the Right believes represents the whole. And to explain why (beyond the election, of course), Matt Walsh, Erick Erickson, and various Federalist writers are here to help… almost on a daily basis. I’m honestly touched by how much effort they’ve put into making sane men and women realize how crucial Feminism still is in America.

Image result for grateful gif

Let’s start with the lowest hanging fruit: Erick EricksonErickson.PNG

Sayeth the Christian.

Erickson says, rather blatantly, that women complaining about Pence’s “rule” are humorless and ugly hearted. And if that wasn’t enough, they’re women who can’t get dates. *Infomercial voice* But wait, there’s more: And anyone who WOULD want them is just a beta male footstool, of course. Apparently they also can’t get ahead in life without seducing their boss.

Erickson1.PNG
So, in short, he’s painting ANYONE who has a meal with the opposite sex as a talentless harlot who wants to screw her boss to get to the top, because – obviously – the only thing women have to offer professional men is sex. If a man makes an argument, men like Erickson give a rebuttal to the content, but when women say he’s wrong he devolves into personal attacks: You’re not wanted, and you’ll never be wanted by a real man unless you submit to what I, a real man, deem is of value. Oh, and you’re obviously a whore.

But, I mean, this is the guy many on the right applaud as a bastion for the Christian Conservative movement:

Erickson

It only gets better, guys. The Federalist figured out how to outdo Erick Erickson, something I never dreamed could be done.

federalist.PNG

I’m not even going to dive into the awkward racist undertones found in this post, but just know they’re there (see for yourself here). Now, despite the site’s editors defending the piece as something to be taken seriously, the writer has defended himself by claiming that he was being sardonic and overboard, or so I’ve heard (feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, I’m not going back to look). However, in reading it you can clearly tell that he agrees with the content of the article he wrote, with or without the added attempts to be funny.

“Being caught in the Friend Zone is an inarguable drag on fertility rates, as a man who spends several years pledging his heart to a woman who will never have his children is also a man who most likely won’t procreate with anyone else during that time of incarceration.”

Get it? Women can’t provide anything men truly need outside of sex, including conversation, friendship, or cultural enrichment. Being around them without sex is “incarceration.” Isn’t that a hilarious joke? And I guess the way he goes into making an entire article filled with absurd excuses backing up that theory just lends itself to the joke, right? You know what IS funny, though? How women are constantly being told to not only set aside romantic non-interest in men who want them, but to gracefully accept that being told to do so isn’t sexist despite the fact that asking men to do the same would be met with mockery and laughter.

In short: Ladies, the price for existing, according to Hans, is that you now owe any man who pretends like he actually wants to hear what you have to say matrimony and sex, and if you can’t offer that you have to be the one to walk away. Congratulations on being born.

But the problem is that the rot goes even deeper. They attack the term “rape culture” while proving that it exists, and marginalize the Feminist movement down to a list of rights they proclaim women already have. For example, who can forget Matt Walsh’s greatest hits from this gem:

walsh

This man constantly derides the social justice warrior victim mentality, yet every empty diatribe he writes is dripping in the defense of his feelings of victimhood.

It’s almost like he feels entitled to seeing his gender be the lead in action movies, and if they’re not he’s a victim of the PC culture.

Moving on.

walsh 2

Yes, we are on the winning side of justice. That’s why Brock Turner only served six months in jail. That’s why John Albert Gardner III was able to brutally murder Chelsea King after violating his probation seven times, probation he was on after serving a pathetic five years in prison for molesting a girl. That’s why according to the latest study available, rapists spend an average of 5.4 years behind bars. Women are brutalized and their lives destroyed while our justice system slaps rapists on the wrists. The low ball estimate from the DOJ shows that roughly 800 women are raped every day in the United States, and the actual number is assumed to be quite higher. And if you’re lucky enough to only be harassed, the friendly folks over at The Federalist will tell you it’s because you were too nice and your shirt was too tight, not that the man who did it lacked control; Now that would be crazy talk. But lucky us, Matt, we benefit from the legal privilege of not being discriminated against because we wear a bra. My word, we owe you men so very much.

I get it, it’s easier to say that we’re just petulant and entitled broads when you can yell about how we “already have equal pay” and “benefit from profound legal privileges,” so that’s become their diversion of choice. And the awaiting masses feast on their surface level lazy arguments while women on the Right flock to appease the conservative gods and collect their pats on the head by constructing their own “I’m not a feminist” posts. And round and round we go, solving nothing and causing even more division, but Walsh, Erickson, and The Federalist sure get their clicks.

Like I said, the objectification of women that I’m seeing isn’t new, but more and more right leaning pundits are proudly wearing it as a badge of honor. They’re pushing the envelope, and then the tribal mentality kicks in and people I once regarded as reasonable devolve into intellectually dishonest rebuttals.

“At least you got to be born and weren’t aborted! You think you’ve got it so bad? Look at how women are treated in the Middle East?!” 

So women can’t comment on serious issues regarding the treatment of their sex if ANYONE else in the world is suffering, but men can be offended about their sex not being the lead in a Star Wars movie?

Image result for oh really gif

Which brings me back to this most recent gem:

federalist

“There’s no way to say, “Okay, men, we women are going to join you in the workforce, but at no time are you allowed to think of us as anything other than a man. Just ignore our breasts, our behinds, our perfume and our legs. Ignore the sound of our voices and the softness of our touch.”

Just tossing this out there: If I were a man, I’d be pretty offended at the fact that their entire article portrays men as mindless stray animals searching for a female in heat.

Image result for just saying gif

“Truly strong women in the workplace know how to keep sexual propositions at bay.”

Hear that, ladies? It’s weak women who get harassed and assaulted.

According to the article, strong women dress appropriately, they don’t flirt, and they “nip it in the bud.” It’s just that easy! (I’m rather curious as to whether the writer of said article has spent even one day working in an office setting.)

The article itself (read if you must here) wasn’t even the most disturbing part, it was those defending it who really blew my mind.

“Her point is to not become the victim in the first place. This article is not victim-blaming.”

“It’s practical advice.”

“This is the same thing that happened when somebody created the date-rape detection nail polish. People said it contributed TO RAPE CULTURE”

No it’s not. It’s not even CLOSE to the same thing. I fully support date-rape detection nail polish, I think it’s a great step in leveling the playing field for women. I also support a woman’s right to carry a gun; in fact, I DO. I also support a woman’s right to carry pepper spray or nunchucks and a katana if that’s what it takes to keep more women safe. I know bad people exist, and no matter how much we preach against sexual assault and raise kids who reject the rape culture mentality, monsters are still going to prey on the innocent. But conflating these two issues is so obnoxiously and deliberately ignorant that it’s breathtaking.

We’re talking about the difference between protecting yourself from a predator who WILLINGLY rejects self-control, and comparing that to the behavior of every other decent man in the world. Women should do their best to prepare for the former situation because we’re preparing for the unlikely chance of encountering depraved monsters who have already happily stripped themselves of accountability to social etiquette and morals, but we shouldn’t have to wear a turtleneck to keep Bill the boss from harassing us, because he should be accountable for his actions as a decent member of society. The apologists for such articles are actually making the argument that the average man in the cubicle next to you is just as weak willed as the rapist in the parking lot, so obviously it’s on the woman to control both situations, and it’s her fault if things go awry (How are men not angry at this characterization?).

“She should carry mace because a Bundy character might be in that dark park.” 

“She should wear a turtleneck and be sweet with a gentle demeanor but not too flirty, because Bob down in the mail room can’t control himself since he’s just a typical guy.”

If you tell me that you don’t see the difference in these two set of directions, you’re being intellectually dishonest.

And finally, I’d like to discuss a hotly contested label: Rape Culture

Lately I’ve watched articles like those mentioned above, and witnessed the apologetic commentary to go along with them. I’ve also witnessed plenty of men and, sadly, women decrying the use of the term “rape culture.” But what is rape culture? The best description I can give is one I heard months ago, “Rape culture is the idea that society tolerates, excuses, and minimizes rape, harassment, and sexual assault.”

Now we have to ask ourselves if it exists in our society.

When society tolerates jokes about rape, is it minimizing it? When society accepts the idea that a girl’s alcohol level is partly to blame if a man brutalizes her, are they excusing it (“No, he was wrong, but….”)? When society puts the burden of prevention on a woman’s choice of outfit are they tolerating a man’s lack of self-control? When society tolerates a pathetic punishment for sexual predators and repeat offenders over, and over, and over again, is it minimizing the impact of sexual crimes? When society is willing to put a man who bragged about sexually assaulting women in the White House, and they describe his behavior as “typical male behavior,” is society tolerating sexual assault?

As Ali Owens put so eloquently, women bear the weight of this issue on a daily basis.

As women, we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t. We grow up receiving these conflicting messages from all angles.

Be nice ― but not too nice, or your intentions might be misinterpreted and you could get raped by someone who assumes you were flirting.

Defend yourself against rape, fight as hard as you can ― but not preemptively, because that just makes you a bitch.

Don’t put yourself in situations that test a man’s alleged animal instinct to rape ― but don’t fear the poor innocent Uber driver, because not every man is a rapist, you oversensitive, judgmental misandrist.

Don’t be paranoid, relax, rapists aren’t hiding around every corner ― but always be aware of your surroundings, because rape happens when you’re careless, and you could be next.

Don’t assume that men are saying creepy, vulgar things about you ― but understand that they actually are saying creepy, vulgar things about you, and it is in fact so common that you don’t even get to be upset about it, because it’s just the way things are.

As women we are raised to walk on eggshells and people like those mentioned above try to remind us that if we’re hurt, it’s kinda our fault. If we’re harassed, we could have prevented it. If we’re raped, our clothing choice could be at fault. If we’re assaulted, we asked for it. The Federalist even tells us that if our marriage is failing, it’s because we didn’t put out when we didn’t want to. Don’t be fooled into believing that what they’re doing is simply sharing a healthy message about modesty and relationship advice. Just scan the latest articles found in “The Sexes” category on The Federalist, and you’ll find a heaping scoop of tough love for women, and nary a whisper about a man’s responsibility to exhibit self-control. Apparently all of the worlds problems could be solved if women just knew when to dress like a Mennonite and when to spread our legs.

fed2
What a time to be alive. So many of the individuals and publications I had so feverishly supported and adamantly defended have been outed as tools of the Right Wing who see women as objects. For those who clearly have such a sad little view of women, they sure expect us to own the majority of the responsibility for their actions.

Advertisements

29 thoughts on “‘You are what you wear,’ and other dumb advice.

  1. Pingback: ‘You are what you wear,’ and other dumb advice. – Christa MacDonald

  2. As much as you hate to admit it, human nature is human nature. SOME men are animals. That’s just a fact of life. How you deal with it is your business. I prefer to dress appropriately and professionally and keep myself from being alone with men not my husband. I didn’t always do that, and have the scars to prove it. So, you can sit around and whine about how unfair it is, and how all men should learn to control themselves, or you can get about the business of protecting yourself. It would certainly help of those men with the instincts of a raging hormonal teenager wore signs around their necks to warn us, but they don’t. As my Mom used to say, “better safe than sorry.” I suggest you take that advice.

    Like

    • Hello, Identon. I get the feeling that you didn’t actually read the post, or at the very least merely skimmed it. Which is fine, but let me clarify: At no point did I tell women not to protect themselves, actually I have a CCW and a Concealed Carry License, I believe that strongly in the concept of self-defense, and I note that in the post. This post is about a culture that puts more responsibility on women than on men.

      Like

      • Actually, I did read the whole article. Protecting oneself is not just about conceal carry, It’s about the way we conduct ourselves in public. As for the culture putting more responsibility on women – well, as I pointed out, SOME men are animals. THAT will never change, no matter how much we wish it would. So of course we have more responsibility. That is, if we want to protect ourselves. That’s just the way it is. Whining and complaining will not change that. We are bucking more than culture – we are bucking human nature.

        Like

      • Women should be equipped to protect themselves from animals, but you’re conflating two different issues. You say “SOME” men are animals, and so women need to treat all men as animals. I refuse to take the responsibility of acting like a decent human being from everyday men. Protecting oneself from animals is one thing, treating all men like animals is another.

        Like

      • So let me get this right: If my shirt is complementary to my figure, and a coworker reaches out and grabs my breasts, I’m not allowed to “whine” about how it was their responsibility to not violate my body because I shouldn’t have worn the shirt in the first place because all men are animals? Is that what I’m hearing?

        Like

      • Um, no, that’s not what you’re hearing. I’m at a loss to guess where you got THAT from, but I guess if you’re battling common sense, you have to come up with something.

        Everyone, including men, are expected to dress appropriately for their work, are they not? I mean, do you see any male bank tellers or officers with torn jeans hanging low, form-fitting t-shirts, hats on backwards, etc. etc.? No, you do not. Do you want to know WHY that is? Or can you figure it out yourself?

        If the shirt you’re wearing to work is inappropriate for work, then guess what? You’ve opened yourself up to being treated according to the way you’re dressed.

        Even those who dress appropriately are sexually harassed. But thanks for using an example to prove my point that SOME men are animals, and we should be aware of that no matter what the situation.

        Like

      • The article from The Federalist wasn’t talking about women wearing tube tops or bras into work, they’re talking about clothing that IS allowed at work already being too revealing. They’re blaming the way women talk to the men at work for harassment. Their argument was never postulated on the idea that women get away with wearing inappropriate work attire, and thus deserve harassment. It was built off of the concept that appropriate work attire men see as attractive is enough to blame women for their harassment.

        Like

      • So, you readily admit that SOME men are animals, no matter what the circumstances. Got it.

        I suggest a basic book on human sexuality for you. Men are sexually stimulated by what they SEE. Women are sexually stimulated by what the FEEL. This is basic human nature. No matter how much you whine and complain, it is what it is. Next, we’ll hear about how it isn’t “fair” that women have to be more concerned about the way they dress than men are. Before you submit that, let me just say that whoever told you life was “fair” lied to you. Big time.

        Like

      • Ummm… I admit in the post that some men are animals, so you’re late to the party there. Women should protect themselves from the actual animals using weapons, not turtlenecks. If a man rapes you because of what you’re wearing, he’s at fault, and he’s an animal. Wearing workplace attire that accentuates your shape is not “asking for it,” and it’s not making men turn into animals. And making assumptions about my life when you don’t even know me – including the lessons on fairness I was taught – will end in you looking like an ignoramus.

        Like

      • The only one who looks like an ignoramus in this discussion is you. Men don’t rape women because of how they look. Even the most basic understanding of rape and what it is would prove that to you. Here’s a link for your further education. http://well.wvu.edu/articles/rape_myths_and_facts

        Listen, I get it. Feminism today is no longer about equality. It’s about tender little snowflakes who demand that all men exhibit total and complete self-control while women exercise none whatsoever.

        Again, I suggest a good book on human sexuality. Perhaps if you took the time to educate yourself you wouldn’t be trying to defend the indefensible.

        Like

      • Going to respond to both comments here:

        It’s like you’re fighting yourself.

        “So, you readily admit that SOME men are animals, no matter what the circumstances.”
        “Men are sexually stimulated by what they SEE.”
        “Men don’t rape women because of how they look. Even the most basic understanding of rape and what it is would prove that to you.”

        That last comment makes no sense, because I was never debating it. You’re digging up strawman arguments to make points because I don’t even think you understand what you’re defending.

        “Feminism today is no longer about equality. It’s about tender little snowflakes who demand that all men exhibit total and complete self-control while women exercise none whatsoever.”

        Weird. I don’t know any Feminists who think it’s morally acceptable to go up and grab their boss’s butt, no matter how good his pants may look on him. Do you see the difference here? You’re basically comparing a woman who wears a flattering outfit to a man sexually assaulting that woman, and saying that it’s wrong to demand self-control from him without telling her not to look less pretty, even if she’s in a work appropriate outfit. Women who sexually assault their coworkers should be held accountable, regardless of what he’s wearing. Men who sexually assault their coworkers should be held accountable, regardless of what she’s wearing. Women in an office setting are exercising self-control, even if they’re not dressed like the Amish. Are you really saying that wearing a flattering shirt is comparable – in terms of lack of self-control – to sexual harassment?

        “you say you should be able to wear workplace attire that “accentuates your shape.” So, who exactly are you trying to impress? Why is it so important that you “accentuate your shape”? Is it because you want others to admire your package? Why is that? I get it. “Look, but don’t touch”, right?”

        Women shouldn’t have to wear potato sacks so that men won’t be tempted. I see women in my worship team at church, and even pastor’s wives, wearing clothing that is flattering. No one goes to the store and says “What makes me look boxy and homely? Set me up with that.” This article wasn’t in defense of women wearing corsets and underwear into work, it was in defense of women being forced to bear the responsibility to change what is work appropriate because the authors of the articles I chastised contested that it’s STILL tempting to men. But why stop there??? Some men are turned on by feet, or lips, or hands, or arms, or necks, or eyes, etc., etc., etc., and I find it interesting that you use the exact same argument as men who force women to wear burqas do. “Men are visual, best not tempt them! Why would you want to be admired? Why would you want to feel beautiful? Have some self-control!” Admit it, the arguments you’ve constructed make it impossible for you to refute their reasoning.

        Like

      • Another question arises – you say you should be able to wear workplace attire that “accentuates your shape.” So, who exactly are you trying to impress? Why is it so important that you “accentuate your shape”? Is it because you want others to admire your package? Why is that? I get it. “Look, but don’t touch”, right?

        Like

  3. Please keep writing! And please, make an effort to get onto the Sunday morning talk shows. Hell, with the 24 hour news cycle, get on any show. We need your voice! We need your thoughtfulness!

    Like

  4. I get the feeling that you believe all bad behavior, covering up of the bad behavior, trying to rationalize the bad behavior,etc etc, comes only from the conservative side of the aisle. Maybe you could revisit the 90’s and the Clintons….there are cretins on all sides.

    Like

    • Absolutely not, I’m a Conservative myself and have been critical of the left for years. But I’m not interested in constantly rehashing the 90s because that doesn’t change what’s happening today and the issues that need to be addressed today. I know it’s popular to say “HAH! Well, Bill Clinton is a predator, how about you address that” instead of actually facing the issues in the post, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to go along with it.

      Liked by 1 person

      • The problem is that if the Right is just as bad as the Left on these issues, they have no moral high ground to stand on. The best course of action is to improve our message and our behavior, regardless of what side we’re on, and go from there. The division between the two sides has created a toxic environment for real change. Instead of feeding it, we need to overcome it. That involves calling out publications on our own side that are making a mint off of continuing the divisive rhetoric.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Thanks for your article, this acceptance of the idea that men have no self control or personal responsibility or their actions has bothered me for years from both the left and the right. I’ve gotten tired of being told in church that women have to dress modest and not be platonic friends with men because I’m causing men to lust and that I’m at fault because men can’t control their urges but at the same time men should be in charge and women need to submit to their authority. To me feminism means I just want to be treated as a human being instead of a sex object but apparently that means I must be ugly, bitter, and single…

    Liked by 2 people

  6. “The best course of action is to improve our message and our behavior, regardless of what side we’re on, and go from there.”

    YES!

    Back in the 1970’s and 80’s women were registered Democrats, Republicans and others working together for a common goal. And so were the men who worked alongside them in the feminist movement to improve the lot of the women in their lives.

    I love your blog.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. I think Matt Walsh might be a Men’s Rights Activist in hiding. Who else would advocate for men never being alone with women, as if all women are looking for men to falsely accuse of harassment? I was actually a fan of his until recently.

    I eventually had to stop scrolling through the comments on The Blaze regarding what’s happening at Fox because it was too disturbing. I’ve been harassed, and it bothers me when people act like I could have just “stood up for myself” or that I made myself into a victim. Those people have probably never been in a situation where they’ve experienced any kind of harassment, they don’t know what it’s like.
    The harassment I experienced was verbal and physical, but not sexual, just constant touching, rubbing, patting and non-stop comments about my clothes and jewlery. The person was female. The truth is I probably could have dressed differently to avoid the comments, but I just couldn’t bring myself to do it. I knew that I was not responsible, the abuser was, regardless of what I was wearing.
    The thing is if the harassment had been sexual, people would have blamed me for it. “You shouldn’t have been wearing that” kind of thing, but it wasn’t so I get a pass and nobody thinks that I invited it because of my clothes. Sad how when the harassment is sexual it’s viewed differently. You always hear “if you didn’t want that kind of attention why did you dress so sexy?” but you never hear “if you didn’t want that kind of attention why did you dress so nice?”

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Thank you for the article MB. I am your international reader from Europe. I found your blog during my unhealthy obsession with US 2016 elections and I’ve been checking your posts ever since. I admire your well-balanced views and clear sense of justice, especially against the background of the apparent conservative value collapse of 2016. Keep up the good work! 🙂

    One line that caught my eye was “How are men not angry at this characterization?” – well, I for one, am upset about this characterization of men. I am a male human being, with healthy sexual drive, but by no means a horny animal who just can’t help himself, that’s ridiculous. On top of obviously being wrong towards women “Men just naturally do it” – view is in fact demeaning for men, saying “You can’t do better than that, you’re horny animal who’s nature makes it impossible for you to respect other human beings.” – Well not buying it and not saying sorry for not buying it.

    I can recall you asking for wishes for future topics, and there is one political phenomenon I’d like to read your thoughts about. There seems to be a common mentality among more statistically aware portion of American left, these people thinking that since the US is becoming less white and less Christian all the time, all they need to do to win in long run, is to wait it out. No need to seek for common ground, no need to even try to settle the conflict, just let the clock tic and the vote count will eventually put the left in charge, or alternatively transform the right to become more like the left. Since you seem to be an advocate for seeing the other side as non-monsters, I’d be interested to hear what do you think about this? How this changing demographics (racial diversity, secularization) – time bomb looks like from the place you’re looking at it?

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Reading the blog has been absolutely my pleasure!

    As for speaking out, it’s of course nice to be thanked, but I find it to be moderately messed up that not being okay with victim blaming is still in this century not one of the universal “all normal, decent people, please check this box and let’s move on” – kind of a thing, rather than it being something be thanked for! But, it does seem like we don’t get to choose the times we live in, as a wise wizard once said..

    I look forward to reading your future post about the topic of demographics swift!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s