BarbWire’s Gina Miller used her column today to respond to a piece on the Huffington Post asserting that what is needed is not a new nail polish for women that can detect the presence of date rape drugs in their drinks but rather a concerted effort toward “solutions to shifting rape culture where consent, on both sides, is seen as the norm.”
Miller was decidely unimpressed by the supposed need to “stop blaming the victim [and] educate men on how not to rape” because the only real solution is to get our society to turn to Jesus … plus, all those drunken sluts who are dressing like prostitutes are partially responsible for getting raped because they are sending mixed messages:
Why do you suppose that there might be a “blame the victim” mentality today? Do women ever bear any responsibility for putting themselves in potentially dangerous places and situations, like drunken frat parties? Do they bear no responsibility for the outrageous “fashions” they choose to wear nowadays, clothing that makes them look like prostitutes and porn “stars,” clothing that arguably feeds the “rape culture”? Yes, we know that a man who sexually assaults a woman is always wrong, but why is it considered just fine for a woman to present herself in a hyper-sexual, sleazy way and then expect men to treat her with the dignity and honor she imagines she deserves? The disconnect from reason is palpable.
To many on the Left, the answer to most problems is “education,” but what young man doesn’t already know that it’s wrong to sexually assault another person? Who is unclear that “no” means “no”? There again, can it be argued that a woman dressed like a strumpet, yet saying “no” to unwanted sexual advances, sends a mixed message? Yes, I know it’s outrageous, but this is what our Godless culture has wrought. There are a lot of bad people out there, and no amount of “education,” telling them it’s wrong (they already know this), will change their evil hearts.
[T]here will be no shifting of any rape culture by throwing money at more “rape culture awareness,” or telling young men that it’s wrong to rape, or holding colleges accountable, or not “blaming the victim.” Our nation has turned its back on God. We have kicked Him out of our schools and out of the public square. We have raised several generations of Godless, self-centered, sex-obsessed kids, and the truth is that there can be no positive transformation of any sick culture without the saving power of the Spirit of God through Jesus Christ to change people’s hearts of stone into new hearts of flesh.
Fox News host Keith Ablow defended his attack on First Lady Michelle Obama’s weight, telling Politico that it was “hypocrisy” for her to act as a “role model” on diet when she “has not been consistently a picture of fitness.”
Ablow came under fire for his comments on the August 12 edition of Fox’s Outnumbered, where he argued that Michelle Obama is not a credible voice on school nutrition because “she needs to drop a few” pounds. Even one of Ablow’s colleagues at Fox, Janice Dean, criticized his remarks, tweeting “please keep your comments about women ‘dropping a few’ to yourself.”
Nevertheless the next day Ablow toldPolitico that he was “not taking food advice from an American who dislikes America” and ”has not been consistently a picture of fitness”:
"I do dislike hypocrisy and I really do believe that people speaking about diet should be role models themselves, and I’m not sure if the First Lady is that role model," Ablow said in an interview.
"I’m not taking food advice from an American who dislikes America, who in many photographs during her tenure as First Lady is obviously not fit, and who has a record of saying things that show that she’s two-faced," Ablow said Wednesday. “This should be obvious, I don’t know why it isn’t.”
Ablow is standing by his commentsand saying that people “should be less sensitive about talking about [weight].”
One reason for his criticism, he says, relates to consistency.
"It happens to be the case that the First Lady during her tenure has not been consistently a picture of fitness," he said. "That’s all, it is just a fact."
When many people think of the men’s rights movement, the image that springs to mind is lonely men lurking in chat rooms and railing against women. But in recent years, a group of brash, witty female activists has taken up the cause. And some of them are emerging as the movement’s leading voices. It may seem counterintuitive that women would be helping drive the conversation about a movement that’s fighting anti-male discrimination and campaigning fiercely against feminism. But according to Dean Esmay of the men’s rights organization A Voice for Men, the fact that they shatter expectations is what makes them such good emissaries. “People want to believe we’re a bunch of sad, pathetic losers who can’t get laid and are just bitter because our wives left us,” Esmay explains. “The very presence of women in the movement creates cognitive dissonance.” Often, he adds, this dissonance makes people more receptive than they otherwise would be.
Who are these women men’s rights activists? And why do the embrace a movement that some see as blatantly misogynistic? Below is a rundown of key players. A few of them, including Janet Bloomfield, who was the focus of a recent in Vice News article, have been in the spotlight recently. Others are virtually unknown to the mainstream, but within the movement they’re seen as luminaries.
Karen Straughan: The YouTube Sensation
Karen Straughan Illustrated by Alison Tieman, courtesy of A Voice for Men
In late 2011, Straughan, a foul-mouthed fortysomething Canadian waitress and mother of three, sat down at her kitchen table and began ruminating about the sexes: “I keep hearing from the feminist camp that femaleness has always been undervalued. But I’ve always contended that it’s the exact opposite…If it comes down to a man and a woman in a burning building and you can only save one, the expectation is that you choose the woman every single time. So honestly, whose humanity are we placing above whose?” She then posted a video of her talk on YouTube, where it has racked up more than a million views.
Straughan, who has a brazen air and a taste for ribbed tank tops (a.k.a. “wife beaters”), has since become one of the most visible faces of the men’s rights movement. She has nearly 70,000 YouTube subscribers. Often, she says, she gets emails from men around the world who stumble on her videos and spend hours on end binge watching. The firebrand vlogger, who wrote erotic fiction as a sideline before getting involved in men’s rights, also helped launch the Honey Badger Brigade, a ragtag group of female men’s rights activists. This summer, when protesters threatened to shut down A Voice for Men’s first conference in Detroit, the Honey Badgers collected more than $8,000 in donations and flew to Motor City to act as “human shields.” The Honey Badgers also produce an online radio show, covering men’s issues and geek culture. Recent topics include false rape allegations, the treatment of military veterans, and “the shit feminists say.”
Erin Pizzey Illustrated by Alison Tieman, courtesy of A Voice for Men
Pizzey, a 75-year-old British author and anti-domestic-violence advocate, traces her interest in men’s rights back to her own childhood and years of brutal beatings from her mother. She later went on to found England’s first shelter for battered women. Pizzey maintains that most of the victims who sought refuge there were themselves violent. She came to believe that women deserved a share of the blame for domestic abuse and that the fledgling feminist movement unfairly demonized men by casting them as the sole aggressors. “This huge edifice of radical feminism made this about ‘patriarchy’ rather that human relationships,” she says. “In the process, it pulled the whole discussion away from the needs of people in violent families.”
Pizzey eventually began offering shelter to battered men while crusading against feminism, which she dubs “the Evil Empire.” After a bomb scare and a string of death threats, in 1979 she fled to the United States, where she helped set up domestic-violence shelters in 21 cities. She also worked with lawyers to defend men claiming they had been falsely accused of rape and domestic violence—an endeavor she funded by writing adventure novels. Pizzey later embraced nonfiction, and wrote frequently for British newspapers, such as the Daily Mail (sample headline: “Why I loathe feminism…and believe it will ultimately destroy the family”). She also traveled the world speaking to battered men’s groups. Today, she is editor-at-large of A Voice for Men, and a hero of the men’s rights movement. She feels very much in her element. “For many years, I was this lone voice, and I was hated for it,” she explains. “Now, you just don’t feel quite so lonely.”
Janet Bloomfield: The Social-Media Provocateur
Bloomfield has landed in the spotlight recently as a driving force behind Women Against Feminism, a social-media campaign featuring photos of women with scraps of paper listing their reasons for rejecting feminism. Since the week before last, when the campaign went viral, Bloomfield—a thirtysomething homemaker and doctoral candidate—has been making the network rounds, with interviews on ABC, the BBC, and NBC’s Today Show.
Bloomfield, who lives somewhere in Canada (she keeps her location and the names of her three children secret to shield them from harassment), is an unlikely champion for men’s rights. In college, she studied film theory, and learned to view the world through a feminist lens. But after giving birth to her first child, she decided to stay home and was shocked by the reaction from other women. “It wasn’t so much the disdain for my choice or the idea that I wasted my education,” she says. “It was that they treated me like I was crazy to rely on my husband—as if somewhere lurking inside of him was a sex-starved monster who would toss me out like trash.” Bloomberg began trading letters with her friend, Pixie, who was camped out in the hospital after giving birth to a critically ill baby boy and believed the intensive care staff was treating the sick baby girls more tenderly. Their letters soon morphed into grumbling about the lot of boys and the treatment of stay-at-home moms.
After immersing themselves in the men’s rights blogosphere, in 2012, the pair launched the in-your-face blog, JudgyBitch.com. Bloomfield’s anti-feminist screeds, piled with obscenities and inflammatory theories about rape and domestic violence, made a splash in the men’s rights circles, and the following year she began writing for A Voice for Men, where she now manages social media. She’s also broken into mainstream news and opinion sites, including Thought Catalog, which recently published Bloomfield’s essay, “I’m an Anti-Sexist, Liberal Doctoral Student, Wife, and Mother Who Supports the Men’s Rights Movement Over Feminism, Here’s Why.”
For much of her career, Venker followed the path blazed by her aunt, the anti-feminist crusader Phyllis Schlafly. In 2011, the pair even cowrote a book, The Flipside of Feminism, arguing that freedom and power have only made women unhappy. But their paths began to diverge the following year when Venker, who in addition to authoring books is a frequent Fox News commentator, published a column on FoxNews.com called “The War on Men.” It made the case that men were opting out of marriage because career-minded women had lost their womanly qualities and become angry and competitive. And it urged women to “surrender to their nature—their femininity” if they wanted to find husbands. Predictably, the piece went viral, stirring up a whirlwind of criticism. But Venker was also flooded with grateful emails from male readers. “Men were writing to say, ‘Thank you, thank you!’” she recalls. “‘Finally, somebody gets it!’” Inspired by the outpouring, Venker launch the men’s rights blog Women for Men and shifted the focus of her own commentary to men’s issues. In her recent FoxNews.com columns, Venker argues that white men face oppression “unlike anything American women have faced,” andclaims that men’s “success in fields such as medicine, engineering and technology have done more to liberate women from the constraints of their former lives than a busload of feminists could ever hope to do.” She also maintains that surrendering to male power is an “aphrodisiac” that “grants women access to the deepest parts of a man’s soul.”
In 1969, Cools took part in a supposedly peaceful sit-in to protest racism at a Montreal university. It ended up exploding into one of the most violent student riots in Canada’s history, with protesters setting fires and tossing computers out of windows. Cools, who was sentenced to four months in prison but later pardoned, went on to found one of Canada’s first shelters for battered women. Then, in 1984, the Barbados native became the first black person ever to serve in the Canadian Senate.
According to the Globe and Mail, “Women’s groups applauded the addition of a minority firebrand to the chamber of dozy old white men.” Her belief that domestic violence was a two-way street later put her at odds with the feminist movement, but many Canadians embraced her ideas. In 1995, when Cools told an International Women’s Day gathering that “behind every abusing husband is an abusing mother,” she was inundated with grateful handwritten letters. Many of them were from people who had been abused by their mothers or men claiming they had been falsely accused of domestic violence during divorce proceedings.
Galvanized, Cools—a Liberal Party member turned independent—helped launch a parliamentary committee that traveled the country holding emotional standing-room-only hearings on child custody laws. Critics branded it the “politically incorrect committee” because it heard testimony from hundreds of men, grandparents, and second wives, who spoke tearfully about being cut off from children by a legal system that they alleged favored mothers. For Cools, who lost two siblings to childhood illness, their stories hit close to home. “I understood very early in life what it meant for parents to lose a child,” she told the National Post in the late 1990s. “I’ve always known a parent cannot recover from that. And this is why I will not tolerate the thought of any parent taking a child away from another parent.”
The committee’s final report recommended rewriting custody laws to ensure both parents access to the children and making false domestic violence allegations a crime. Despite overwhelming public support, a decade and a half later, Cools is still fighting to bring these proposals to fruition. Her dogged struggle has won her adoration in men’s rights circles—so much so that A Voice for Men invited the regal, silver-haired septuagenarian to deliver the first speech at its inaugural conference. “The cause that before you and the things that you fight for are valid and just,” Cools told the gathering. “I am on the home stretch of my public career, so you and younger soldiers must come. I encourage soldiers to arm themselves, and to put on battle gear, because it is a fight.”
A growing number of evangelical Christians are standing up against what they say are the homophobic, sexist, and domineering ideas and practices of pastor Mark Driscoll, the influential head of the Mars Hill megachurch in Seattle, Washington.
Several dozen protestors stood outside the Bellevue, Washington campus of Mars Hill Church this past Sunday, holding signs adorned with slogans such as “Stop objectifying women” and “How many atheists will Mark Driscoll/Mars Hill make?” The demonstrators, many of whom claimed to be former members of Mars Hill, told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer that they were decrying the church’s ministerial methods, policies, and problematic theology — particularly Driscoll’s regressive teachings about women.
“I am an ex-member [of Mars Hill Church] who left a couple years ago, because my views on life and women evolved,” one protestor told the Post-Intelligencer. “I come from a Jewish family, a family with strong women. It appeared, at the church, most development attention was given to me. Women were seen as accessories in marriage.”
Rob Smith, a former program director at Mars Hill, echoed this frustration with the church’s stance on women and called for a new theology, saying, “In the church’s view, women are just objectives. They are there to please their husbands. In my theology, Jesus freed women. Jesus was surrounded by strong women.”
Sign-waving protests are a new phenomenon for Mars Hill Church, but Mark Driscoll, 43, is no stranger to controversy — or accusations of bigotry and chauvinism. He has made something of a career for being, as one protestor called it, “the Rush Limbaugh of Christianity,” building up his 17,000-member church and Acts 29 network of worship communities by delivering raunchy, sometimes obscenity-laden sermons about subjects such as “Biblical Oral Sex” and penning bestselling books with eye-catching titles such as Porn-Again Christian: A Frank Discussion on Pornography & Masturbation. He also stoked controversy in 2011 when he joked about “effeminate” pastors on Facebook, and told RELEVANT magazine in 2007 that he believed in a Jesus who has a “commitment to make someone bleed,” and that he abhorred those who revere a “hippie, diaper, halo Christ” because “I cannot worship a guy I can beat up.”
Many Christians, such as influential evangelical blogger and author of A Year of Biblical Womanhood Rachel Held Evans, have criticized Driscoll since he founded Mars Hill in 1996. Most take issue with his image of a hyper-masculine Jesus, his flippant comments deriding gay people, and his embrace of complementarianism, or the belief that men and women are designated different roles by God — namely, men are supposedly tasked with most traditional forms of leadership, whereas women are primarily responsible for rearing children.
“[Driscoll] has consistently used offensive and hateful language to speak about gay and lesbian people, spoken crassly and condescendingly about women, and exhibited scary, bullying behavior toward men who fail to conform to his rigid vision of masculinity,” Evans wrote in an email to ThinkProgress. “That he consistently models this type of bullying behavior to the young men in his church is deeply troubling.”
But while Driscoll has long frustrated many of his fellow Christians — particularly progressive Christians — recent years have seen increasingly grave criticisms lobbed against him and his church, with many coming from within his own community. In 2012, people claiming to be members of Mars Hill began reporting that Driscoll had a policy of “shunning” congregants he and his ministers saw as “unruly,” effectively bullying them into silence and submission. This added fuel to existing accusations of unsettling practices and behavior among Driscoll’s ministerial staff and even Driscoll himself, who was accused by a former Mars Hill leadership pastor of being “domineering,” “quick tempered,” “verbally violent,” and “arrogant.” Then, late last year, Driscoll was charged with plagiarizing sections of his new book, and upset many in his pews for reportedly working with a company to artificially inflate his book sales in order to make the New York Times bestseller list.
The charges against Driscoll appeared to crescendo last month, when a blogger unearthed what appeared to be more than 100 pages of sexist and homophobic comments that Driscoll allegedly posted on an online forum in 2000 under the pseudonym “William Wallace II.” The comments included a number of unsettlingly offensive rants, including postings that referred to the United States as a “pussified nation,” called gay people “damn freaks,” and responded to a female poster by saying “I also do not answer to women … If you are the pastor, quit your job and repent.” This slow-rising tide of allegations seemed to rock the church last month, when two prominentmembers of the church’s “Board of Advisors and Accountability” — which sets salaries for church elders and supervises various church ministries — suddenly resigned.
Driscoll attempted to address the situation in a 30-minute video posted on the Mars Hill website on July 21, but said that “a lot of [the accusers] that we are dealing with remain anonymous” and that he is “not entirely sure who they are.” The video sparked the creation of a Facebook group entitled “Dear Pastor Mark & Mars Hill: We Are Not Anonymous.” The group, which now claims almost 600 members, functions as forum where people who have been negatively impacted by Driscoll and Mars Hill can tell their stories, organize events like Sunday’s protest, and claim “I am not anonymous.”
“During a year of job loss for my family, I did not intend to have my tithe money spent to get your book on the NYT list,” wrote one group member. “Although those [embarrassing] moments have been scrubbed off the internet, I remember them. Please stop.”
The group joins with various other blogs such as welovemarshill.com and Mars Hill Refuge, websites constructed so that people claiming to be former members of Mars Hill can post accounts of how they have been hurt by Driscoll and his ministers. But the protests are about more than catharsis: According to the Post-Intelligencer, the growing gaggle of disaffected parishioners are preparing to release “50 specific new charges” against Driscoll, focusing on “allegations of outbursts and abusive conduct, and — particularly — the shunning of former church members.”
Driscoll has publicly apologized for the plagiarism accusations, and actually preemptively apologized for the internet comments in a 2006 book, where he first mentioned his former pseudonym. Some have called for the evangelical community to accept his apology, but Evans, who has been in contact with many former members of Mars Hill, was less sure.
“…I think we have to be really careful about telling victims of abuse when and how they must forgive, and we have to be especially careful that we not enable abusers to continue to abuse,” Evans said. “An apology without change is not true repentance, and we’ve heard a lot of apologies from Mark Driscoll without any discernible change.”
“I believe in forgiveness. But I do not believe in telling victims of abuse that forgiveness requires they endure it.”
You might remember swaggering, misogynist evangedouche/human Affliction tee Mark Driscoll from being terrible on Glenn Beck, being terrible on Fox and Friends, or being terrible any time he does anything ever, which is all the time. But he’s really ramped up the action in the last month or so! It seems like dude can’t open his praise-hole lately without face-planting in a big pile of PR doodoo.
You might remember swaggering, misogynist evangedouche/human Affliction tee Mark Driscoll from being terrible on Glenn Beck, being terrible on Fox and Friends, or being terrible any time he does anything ever, which is all the time. But he’s really ramped up the action in the last month or so! It seems like dude can’t open his praise-hole lately without face-planting in a big pile of PR doodoo.
"It’s like Romney at the party talking about the '47 percent,'" says protest organizer Jim Henderson (referring to the video capturing the presidential candidate dismissing 47 percent of Americans as idiotic freeloaders who will vote for Obama). "It’s just one of those moments when he served it up for us to hit it out of the park."
And the VERY latest: Former Mars Hill members have dug up some old posts—written pseudonymously by Driscoll—in which he declares that “we live in a pussified nation” and, by contrast, ”hell looks like a good placebecause at least a man is in charge, has a bit of order and let’s men spit and scratch as needed.”
HELL LOOKS LIKE A GOOD PLACE BECAUSE AT LEAST A MAN IS IN CHARGE.
Hahahahahahaha, crash and burn, dong-face. Thanks for confirming what we already knew about you: Faith is just a cover. Oppressing women and gay people is your real religion. You and your hate and your profit margins are your real God.
Here’s just a taste of what Mark Driscoll, “hipster pastor,” says when he thinks nobody’s looking:
We live in a completely pussified nation.
We could get every man, real man as opposed to pussified James Dobson knock-off crying Promise Keeping homoerotic worship loving mama’s boy sensitive emasculated neutered exact male replica evangellyfish, and have a conference in a phone booth. It all began with Adam, the first of the pussified nation, who kept his mouth shut and watched everything fall headlong down the slippery slide of hell/feminism when he shut his mouth and listened tohis wife who thought Satan was a good theologian when he should have lead her and exercised his delegated authority as king of the planet. As a result, he was cursed for listening to his wife and every man since has been his pussified sit quietly by and watch a nation of men be raised by bitter penis envying burned feministed single mothers who make sure that Johnny grows up to be a very nice woman who sits down to pee.
So, Johnny hits youth group one day to hear from his pussified youth pastor that he should perfect his virginity and dating skills. So Johnny tries to be a loving and patient man who looks for a nice woman like mom who will whip him into shape and beat him into submission so that he can one day join a men’s accountability group and learn how to keep his urges under control, which just causes him to be earn a B.A. in masturbation, M.A. in porno, andPhD in knuckleheadology as Johnny is now so terrified of women and his own penis that he sits in his room alone each night on the internet hoping to get some (with the occasional "falling into sin" with a woman as they inevitabaly cross "boundaries" of intimacy) because he’s so afraid of women and has no idea how to take one, or love one, or serve one, or take one to bed and make the Song of Songs sing again.
One day Johnny finally gives in to the pressure of his pre-humpers singles ministry and gets stuck with some gal left on the shelf long after her expiration date that is just like dear old mom who wants him to shut up like Adam, take his beating, and join a church men’s group that is really a woman’s group in disguise complete with cookies and crying andantidepressants to cope with the insanity.
Poor Johnny is by now so completely whacked that he’s afraid of having kids and hold off his taking on any more responsibility as long as he can because Johnny is a boy trapped in a man’s body walking around in a world of other boys all trying to keep their pee pee behind their zipper and do just like their momma told them and be good women.
And so the culture and families and churches sprint to hell because the men aren’t doing their job and the feminists continue their rant that it’s all our fault and we should just let them be pastors and heads of homes and run the show. And the more we do, the more hell looks like a good place because at least a man is in charge, has a bit of order and let’s men spit and scratch as needed. And all their whining and fighting is nothing more than furtherevidence that we are still kings and unless we do our job everyone and everything is getting screwed except Johnny (metaphorically speaking of course).
I know many of the women will disagree, and they like Eve should not speak on this matter. And, many men will also disagree, which is further proof of the pussified epidemic having now become air born and universal.
Reminder: Over ten thousand people attend services at this man’s churches. Hundreds of thousands of people watch his online sermon. Almost half a million people follow him on Twitter. If you live in the Seattle area, it’s pretty much a given that someone you know has left your social circle for Mars Hill’s promise of “cool Christianity”—which encourages members to distance themselves from non-believing friends and family.
This is what they left you for. This is Mars Hill.
Godly men imitate Christ—who praised the gentle and the peacemakers, who stood up for the exploited and abused, who showed compassion for the downtrodden, who valued women, and who loved his enemies to the point of death.
If this Facebook status were Pastor Mark Driscoll’s first offense, it might not warrant a strong response.But Mark has developed a pattern of immaturity and unkindness that has remained largely unchecked by his church. In evangelical circles, he’s like the kid from high school who makes crude jokes at every opportunity, uses the words “gay” and “queer” to describe the things he most detests, encourages his friends to subject the unpopular kids to ridicule, and belittles the guys who aren’t “macho” or “manly” enough to be in his club.
As blogger Tyler Clark put it, “When you put out a call on Facebook for people verbally attack ‘effeminate anatomically male’ men, I find myself back in high school—shoved against a locker, with the bullies calling me a faggot.”
What we have on our hands is a bully.
And this bully is teaching the young men at his church and under his influence that bullying is an acceptable expression of “biblical manhood.”
This has to stop. As followers of Jesus, we are obligated to stick up for the least of these, especially when they are being publicly bullied in the name of Christ.
We are also obligated to use the proper channels to do so. Many have asked that Mark apologize, but he has refused. Many have written blog posts expressing their concern, but he remains defiant. It’s time to take some more practical steps:
Today I emailed Mars Hill Church to request that the elders take whatever measures necessary to stop Mark’s bullying once and for all. No more empty apologies. This behavior must change.
If you wish to do the same, here’s how:
Write: Mars Hill Church 1411 NW 50th Seattle, WA 98107
If you know Mark personally or attend his church, approach him as a friend and request that he get the counseling he needs to deal with this destructive pattern. Bullying is as harmful to the bully as it is to the victim.
And to turn this bad situation into something good, consider joining the “I’m Sorry Campaign" to apologize for the ways that we as Christians have harmed the LGBT community.
Ohio State University marching band director Jonathan Waters was abruptly fired this week, following a two-month investigation of the band’s rumored hazing rituals that found he witnessed and silently approved of the deeply offensive, disgusting and blatantly homophobic conduct happening among its members. According to the report, obtained and published by Deadspin, band members kept…
Ohio State University marching band director Jonathan Waters was abruptly fired this week, following a two-month investigation of the band’s rumored hazing rituals that found he witnessed and silently approved of the deeply offensive, disgusting and blatantly homophobic conduct happening among its members.
According to the report, obtained and published by Deadspin, band members kept a physical booklet that included the lyrics to the vulgar parody “fight songs” they wrote. While many of the songs are directly inspired by the fight songs of rival schools (“Come blow us, Michigan, Our cocks are waiting for you”), some of the most vulgar songs are totally out of left field.
Take, for instance, this one called “Proud to be a Homosexual”. Set to the tune of “God Bless the USA”, the chorus reads:
And I”m proud to be a homosexual, Where at least I can run free. And I won’t forget the fags with AIDS, Who gave that right to me. And I’ll gladly bend over,and spread my cheeks, So you may sodomize me.
The lovely “Pieces of Baritone Shit” is even more shocking:
Bite my ass and lick my balls you mother fucking queers, Get on your knees and tell me how the megaphone fits up your mother-fucking ass YOU GAY FAGS! Lick my balls and lube up your ass, Anal sex gives you nasty gas. Fuck you, you big gay fags. You pieces of Baritone shit!
Another song, titled “Brigham Young is a Goddamn Queer”, is…well…here:
The report also reveals the disgusting nicknames given to underclassmen, almost all inspired directly by sexual acts. A female student “pretending to be a vibrating sex toy” was named “E Row Vibrator”; a male student “conducting a full-body demonstration of a flaccid penis becoming erect” was “Jizzy.”
Other names given to students included “Jewoobs,” “Squirt,” “Testicles,” “Twat Thumper,” and “Twinkle Dick.”
As expected, the news has led to media hunt in search of Waters’ all-time lows. Early this morning, Ohio State University released an audio clip of Waters “disciplining” a band member:
The public, understandably, is outraged:
This Illini fan HATES Ohio State, and this is yet more reason I HATE them.
Keith Olbermann offered up a searing monologue that highlights how women are treated generally by misogynistic fools and then linked it to the disgrace that is the NFL. Roger Goodell’s arrogant two game suspension of Ray Rice for “allegedly” punching the lights out of his girlfriend has set the intertubes a blaze. Some people became heroes like Michelle Beadle, and others became villains like Stephen A. Smith, but in the end it’s the NFL that comes out looking like the real knuckledraggers of this story.
Keith Olbermann’s segment on Ray Rice was strong, indignant TV, resonant with everyone who believes a two-game suspension for punching out a woman is a clear signal that the NFL doesn’t consider domestic violence meaningful violence.
"The message to the women who the league claims constitute 50 percent of its fan base: The NFL wants your money. It will do nothing else for you. It will tolerate those who abuse you verbally and those who abuse you physically."
Rice was suspended for two games after being arrested for allegedly knocking out his then-girlfriend, which led Smith to warn women not to “provoke wrong actions”:
We keep talking about the guys. We know you have no business putting your hands on a woman. I don’t know how many times I got to reiterate that.
But as a man who was raised by women, see I know what I’m going to do if somebody touches a female member of my family. I know what I’m going to do, I know what my boys are going to do. I know what, I’m going to have to remind myself that I work for the Worldwide Leader, I’m going to have to get law enforcement officials involved because of what I’m going to be tempted to do.
But what I’ve tried to employ the female members of my family, some of who you all met and talked to and what have you, is that again, and this what, I’ve done this all my life, let’s make sure we don’t do anything to provoke wrong actions, because if I come, or somebody else come, whether it’s law enforcement officials, your brother or the fellas that you know, if we come after somebody has put their hands on you, it doesn’t negate the fact that they already put their hands on you.
Smith’s colleague and ESPN reporter Michelle Beadle did not take kindly to the rant and responded on Twitter.
UPDATE: Smith issued another statement on Twitter saying he “sincerely” apologizes for poorly articulating his thoughts.
My series of tweets a short time ago is not an adequate way to capture my thoughts so I am using a single tweet via Twitlonger to more appropriately and effectively clarify my remarks from earlier today about the Ray Rice situation. I completely recognize the sensitivity of the issues and the confusion and disgust that my comments caused. First off, as I said earlier and I want to reiterate strongly, it is never OK to put your hands on a women. Ever. I understand why that important point was lost in my other comments, which did not come out as I intended. I want to state very clearly. I do NOT believe a woman provokes the horrible domestic abuses that are sadly such a major problem in our society. I wasn’t trying to say that or even imply it when I was discussing my own personal upbringing and the important role the women in my family have played in my life. I understand why my comments could be taken another way. I should have done a better job articulating my thoughts and I sincerely apologize.
Bill Maher has opinions on the situation in the Gaza Strip and they are loaded with sexist bullshit for some reason.
Bill Maher has opinions on the situation in the Gaza Strip and they are loaded with sexist bullshit for some reason.
On Thursday, thousands of Israeli troops stormed into the region, leaving behind dozens of civilian casualties in their wake. On Wednesday, four children were killed by an Israeli missile.
Thursday evening, responding to the conflict in the region, Maher, the host of HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher and a comedian known for his outspoken stance on a variety of political and social issues (who also hosted a show called Politically Incorrect) tweeted this:
Dealing w/ Hamas is like dealing w/ a crazy woman who’s trying to kill u - u can only hold her wrists so long before you have to slap her
Maher is completely entitled to his opinion about the situation in that region. Agree with his stance or disagree, but no one, certainly not me is here to tell him he doesn’t have a right to take a stance.
But ‘crazy woman’? Dude. First of all, that’s an unoriginal joke that stopped being funny in 1993. Secondly, “crazy woman” is a loaded term with a fucktonof implications for women. Making a joke about hitting a woman to make a point about a country where people are being killed is just gross. It’s not just PC whining, OK? If you really want people to take your opinions about issues that are important to you seriously (as Gaza clearly is to him), how about taking a moment to extend the courtesy to other people and do the same for issues that are important to them? That’s what I don’t get in situations like this. If you want to be taken seriously as a political pundit, how can you be so dismissive in the language you use when referring to women or other marginalized groups?
But I guess it’s not about that. It’s “what shocking thing can I say at a time like this to ruffle the most feathers?” This is the second time today we’ve seen a celebrity use Twitter to make a completely inappropriate “comedic” tweet about a horrible international news story.
People on Twitter of course had immediate reactions to his choice of words. Some took issue and some showed support from him against the “PC police,” which in case anyone needs a reminder is not a real goddamn thing. As my good buddy Jamie Kilstein once put it, “the PC police aren’t real. You’re not going to go to jail. You’re just an asshole.”
@billmaher Jesus dude. People are dying as you tweet that.
A Republican candidate for a seat in the Minnesota House of Representatives is being criticized for outrageous statements about mothers-to-be she posted on her right-wing blog.
Sheila Kihne hopes to unseat state Rep. Jenifer Loon (R-Eden Prairie), who she claims is insufficiently conservative to represent the district. “People want a choice,” Kihne told Minnesota Public Radio. “I was at a point where I felt like I couldn’t vote for [Loon].”
“Don’t you think that if you’re having a baby — and you’re not married — that you should forego the shower?” she asked. “I also think that if you get married — and are knocked up — you should get married quietly. At a courthouse, at a private home.”
Kihne specifically said that there should be no dancing or dinner for prospective brides who are pregnant. She acknowledge that “I’m seen as very cold-hearted with this issue and it’s caused a couple of big arguments in my family,” but insisted on standing her ground against “the idiots in Hollywood who make it look ‘cool’ to tote a baby around sans daddy.”
In that same post, she complains that an unwed mother included a portable DVD-player on her Target registry, addressing a complaint about the “extravagant lives” of people who are below her station. On her Twitter account, she posts photographs — accompanied by outraged comments — of what she is watching on television:
Kihne bills herself as a “small-government conservative,” but is unafraid to insert herself into every aspect of a person’s life.
She wrote a book with her sister about convincing men that the woman who purchased it is “the one.” According to the “About the Author” section of The List — which promises to teach women how to convince their prospective husbands to “take 7 swift actions to secure [their] love forever” — Kihne is one of a pair of “fiery sisters who share a passion for telling other people what to do.”
Liberal women have been given a free pass for years, and now they’re out of control.
A recent example is the Hobby Lobby case. The U.S. Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling in favor of the arts and crafts store barring the government from forcing small companies with religious objections to provide insurance coverage for abortion-inducing drugs and certain birth control devices has caused uproar among liberal Democrats and feminists.
Liberal women make up the ideological core of the Democratic Party. The party is attempting to resurrect the “war on women” narrative to motivate its base for the upcoming elections.
Feminists hold powerful positions in government, academia, business and in entertainment. They’re passing laws and rolling out policy that is harming traditional families, shutting down free speech and destroying our nation day by day.
Since feminists have gone unchallenged for decades, many have become fascists in pantsuits who tolerate zero dissent.
The feminists’ fake outrage over what men say is absurd. How about the rights and feelings of men? We’re hurt when our jobs are threatened with false accusations of “misogyny.” We have the right to express our views without being shut down.
Women who love their fathers have a logical way of thinking and they want to protect and build, not destroy. They typically become conservatives.
In contrast, the “love” of liberal feminists weakens and damages. They’ve softened sports with Title IX rules that strip funding from boys’ athletic programs with a gender quota system.
This feminist mindset to soften boys and sports is in operation in the White House. Obama recently held a “Healthy Kids and Safe Sports Concussion Summit” and announced $76 million to help athletes “compete safely.”
Feminists are also weakening the military by overturning “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (the former ban on openly homosexual soldiers) and allowing women in combat.
These liberal women are insecure, and they cannot win against a strong, sensible opponent.
We’re allowed to criticize liberal men, but feminists and homosexuals are beyond reproach.
We are fighting a spiritual battle of good versus evil. Strident feminists who push to restrict our freedoms are on the side of evil.
One thing is clear: Liberal feminists need an intervention. Let’s give it to them!
There’s a “Fascist in a pantsuit,” and that’s YOU, Mr. Jesse Lee Peterson!
SiriusXM announced today that it has fired Anthony Cumia, co-host of the popular radio show “Opie and Anthony,” after a he published a racist tirade on Twitter. The outburst occured after Cumia alleged he was assaulted by a black woman on the street. He called the woman an “animal bitch” and “savage,” among other things:
The satellite radio provider said they fired Cumia because his comments were “abhorrent to SiriusXM, and his behavior is wholly inconsistent with what SiriusXM represents.” But the comments also couldn’t have come as much of a surprise.
The show and the “shock jocks” who host it was previously fined by the FCC for a segment in 2000 in which “a 17-year-old girl was instructed to take off her panties and rub a telephone across her pubic area.” They were also fined in 2004 for a contest “in which people were encouraged to have sex in a public area.”
In 2007, the show was suspended by Sirius for letting a man they called “Homeless Charlie” wonder around the studio. The hosts spoke with Charlie about raping Condoleeza Rice and Laura Bush.
Kudos to SiriusXM for canning his ass off the airwaves!
When the Supreme Court released its Hobby Lobby decision Monday creating religious freedom rights for closely held corporations and allowing the religious beliefs of employers to dictate employee health plans, people from all positions on the political spectrum predictably took to Twitter to voice outrage, support, and confusion. But as the afternoon wore on, a pattern began to emerge: Progressive female writers pointed out that the decision singled out women’s health care and was written by five men (the three female Supreme Court justices dissented), calling it misogynist and hostile to female sexuality. Many of the loudest conservative supporters of the Hobby Lobby decision responded by saying sexism wasn’t the issue, religious liberty was, and there’s no War on Women or misogyny or antagonism to women having sex coming from the political right — an argument that inevitably concluded with some variation of, “If you sluts don’t want to get pregnant, then keep your legs closed.”
That women face abuse online is not news. According to the organization Working to Halt Online Abuse, women account for 70 percent of people on the receiving end of online harassment and stalking. In one study, researchers joined chat rooms using fake accounts, and found that the accounts with male names averaged 3.7 threatening or sexually explicit messages per day. Those with female names saw 100.
Particularly striking about the #HobbyLobby comments, though, was how they belied the very premise of conservative opposition to the contraception mandate challenged in the case. Hobby Lobby and its supporters argue the case has nothing to do with being anti-sex or anti-woman; it’s simply about religious freedom. Women’s rights activists point out that opposition to contraception access is fundamentally about control and brings us back half a century to when women were less able to control the number and spacing of their children — and, as a result, significantly less equal.
Demanding that women close our legs and calling us whores for planning our pregnancies confirms the feminist suspicion that opposition to contraception and abortion is less about “life” than it is about a sense that sexually active women are doing something wrong and should be chastened for it.
IF YOU WANT TO BE A WHORE & SLEEP W/ EVERY MAN YOU FIND PAY FOR YOUR OWN BIRTH CONTROL. 10 BUCKS AT WALGREENS. SO GO BE WHORE’S #HobbyLobby
The advent of the birth control pill and the subsequent Supreme Court cases that made both the pill and abortion legal for women in the United States ushered in social changes so vast it’s difficult to overstate their impact. More women attend college and graduate school than ever before, and more women work outside the home. Maternal mortality and injury have decreased significantly, women live longer, and our children are healthier. Many of the rights we take for granted — having our own credit cards and checking accounts, divorcing an abusive partner, being able to report domestic violence to the police — were hard-won feminist victories that went hand in hand with the rights to bodily autonomy and sexual privacy.
And that’s exactly why far-right conservatives are so opposed to contraception: They correctly realize that it allows women freedoms that were once nearly impossible but for a privileged few. And their ideal society hinges on a family with the husband as head and the wife as a “helpmeet.” Contraception inches her closer to being an equal player.
That, fundamentally, is what the online insults and the clashes over Hobby Lobby are about: two conflicting views of what society should be. There’s the heterosexual traditional family model promoted by social conservatives, where sexuality is tightly controlled and unacceptable outside of narrow circumstances, men are in charge, husbands are the heads of households and wives are “helpmeets" — a model that doesn’t work without coercion. And there’s the progressive feminist model, where human sexuality is considered normal and healthy, and a variety of familial and social models are available along with the freedom for individuals to choose what works best for them.
People like to have sex, as evidenced by the fact that 95 percent of Americans have sex before marriage, and the only way to rein that in to reach the conservative ideal is to make sex shameful and dangerous. The stigma and shame once attached to premarital sex has rapidly declined in the past several decades, so right-wing legislators have doubled down on efforts to make sex dangerous. When you hear people complain that women want to have “sex without consequences,” that’s what they’re talking about — that it would be a bad thing if sex didn’t come with some sort of penalty, at least for women. And as technology, medicine, and general social progress attaches fewer and fewer physical and social penalties to sex, the folks who dislike those changes have to create artificial ones.
@JessicaValenti will you host a gangbang…er, I mean a fuck in at my local #HobbyLobby I’ve got 16 biker friends just dying to “meat” you
Hobby Lobby isn’t the first time religious employers tried to assert their beliefs as a justification for denying services or discriminating. In her Hobby Lobby dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg notes other cases where religious company owners objected to generally applicable laws because of their religious beliefs: a restaurant owner who did not want to serve black customers, since his religious beliefs included racial segregation; health care club owners who refused to hire any single women who didn’t have their fathers’ permission to work, any married women who didn’t have their husbands’ permission, anyone living with a member of the opposite sex outside of marriage, and anyone “antagonistic to the Bible,” including “fornicators and homosexuals.”
Hobby Lobby, though, succeeded where those cases largely failed. And in the wake of that success, enter the enthusiastic harassment of women who criticize the decision.
For women, having an opinion on the Internet virtually guarantees you’ll face abuse, often the sexualized kind. But it’s especially rich seeing misogynist and sexually hostile commentary come from the very people who claim women are just being hysterical when we characterize the Hobby Lobby case as misogynist and hostile to sex.
For many women writing about Hobby Lobby online, the volume of attacks on Monday was particularly exhausting. It also handily proved our point.
Right-wing media have launched a campaign of mockery, victim-blaming, and denial to dismiss the sexual assault epidemic, particularly on college campuses, and the Obama administration’s efforts to curtail the growing problem.
While Approximately One In Five Women Experiences Sexual Assault In College
One In Five Women Is Sexually Assaulted While In College. On April 28, the White House released a 20-page report detailing the Obama administration’s strategy to combat sexual assault on college campuses, noting that currently one in five women is sexually assaulted while in college:
One in five women is sexually assaulted while in college. Most often, it happens her freshman or sophomore year. In the great majority of cases, it’s by someone she knows - and also most often, she does not report what happened. And though fewer, men, too, are victimized.
The Administration is committed to putting an end to this violence. That’s why the President established the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault on January 22, 2014, with a mandate to strengthen federal enforcement efforts and provide schools with additional tools to combat sexual assault on their campuses.[WhiteHouse.gov, FACT SHEET: Not Alone - Protecting Students from Sexual Assault, 4/29/14]
Congress Exploring Proposals To Combat Sex Assault At Colleges. The Washington Post reported that Congress is working in conjunction with the Obama administration to explore proposals to combat sexual assault on campus:
Congress is exploring proposals to combat sex assault at colleges, months after taking action to overhaul how the military responds to sexual violence.
"This is an issue that has for far too long been swept under the rug," Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, said Thursday at a hearing on campus sex assault.
Ideas include requiring colleges to survey students about sex assaults and other safety issues, giving the government more options to penalize schools that mishandle assault reports and simplifying the jumble of laws, regulations and federal guidance that colleges must follow. [Washington Post, 6/26/14]
Right-Wing Media Mock Sexual Assault …
Glenn Beck’s The Blaze Mocked Prevalence Of Sexual Assault With Skit Performances Labeled “Rape.”The May 27 edition of Beck’s program The BlazeTV acted out sexual propositions and labeled each skit “RAPE!” in an attempt to mock the prevalence of reported sexual assault, purporting that the epidemic is “completely untrue.” [The Blaze, The Glenn Beck Program, 5/27/14]
Fox’s Jesse Watters: Statutory Rape Of 16-Year Old Boy Isn’t As Bad If Female Perpetrator Is Attractive. During an Outnumbered discussion of a Florida woman convicted of having sex with a 16-year-old boy, Fox News producer Jesse Watters mocked the assault saying, “If you’re a 16-year-old kid and you have sex with your best friend’s mom, you usually get high fives.” Watters further dismissed the gravity of the crime by implying statutory rape isn’t as bad if the female perpetrator is attractive. [Fox News, Outnumbered, 6/11/14]
Fox’s Tucker Carlson: Men Understand That Getting Sexually Harassed By A Female Teacher Is ”The Greatest Thing That Ever Happened.” On the May 5 edition of Fox News’ Outnumbered, co-host Tucker Carlson mocked a student who was sexually harassed by his female teacher, asserting that men understand that such sexual harassment is the “greatest thing ever.” [Fox News, Outnumbered, 5/5/14]
Carlson Responding To A Teacher Sexually Assaulting A Male Student: “Lighten Up, America, Come On.” During an earlier discussion of a teacher accused of sexually assaulting her male student, Fox’s Tucker Carlson insisted “it is not a crime,” and “there is no victim here.” [Fox News, Outnumbered, 4/28/14]
Blame Victims For The Violence…
Washington Post's George Will: Sexual Assault Victim Is A “Coveted Status.” In a June 7 syndicated column, Washington Post's George Will dismissed the epidemic of sexual assault on campuses in the U.S., implying individuals were pretending to be victims because colleges have made victimhood a “coveted status.” [Washington Post, 6/7/14, via Media Matters]
TheWeekly Standard Blamed Feminism For Sexual Assault. In a June 30 article, The Weekly Standard downplayed the seriousness of sexual assault by attributing the blame to women and feminism. Author and Hoover Institute fellow Harvey Mansfield claimed that feminism is to blame for sexual assault, writing that the movement caused sexual assault victims to abandon ”feminine modesty” which provided women “protection while they considered whether they wanted to consent.” Mansfield concluded that sexual assault is merely the result of feminism causing women to “drink themselves into drunken consent—in order to overcome their natural modesty.” [The Weekly Standard, 6/30/14]
Fox’s Tantaros Suggested Feminism Encouraged Statutory Rape Of Student. On the January 22 edition of Fox News’ The Five, co-host Andrea Tantaros blamed feminism for a statutory rape crime, claiming “There’s something about feminism that lets them know that ‘I can do everything a man does, I can even go after that young boy.’” [Fox News, The Five, 1/22/14]
Tucker Carlson: Reporting Statutory Rape Is “Whiny.” On the June 5 edition of Fox News’Outnumbered,Tucker Carlson criticized a student for reporting a statutory rape as “whiny,” diminishing the victim’s report, saying, “He went and tattled to the police.” [Fox News, Outnumbered, 6/5/14]
NRO: RapeIs ‘Instinctive’ Among Some Young Men, So Feminists Are To Blame For Sexual Assault Increase. National Review Online's Mona Charen theorized that feminists are to blame for creating a collegiate climate of “sexual insensitivity and sometimes even brutality” where sexual assaults occur:
The young women who find themselves in a rough world of sexual insensitivity and sometimes even brutality are looking in all the wrong places to lay blame. They should look left; to the cultural left, that is, including the feminists.
The modern campus is a little hothouse of leftist ideas about human nature and the ideal human society. The universities are devout propagators of false nostrums about sex differences and sexuality. The world that the Left (very much including the feminist Left) has created is one that could have been designed by a poorly civilized teenaged boy. Far from teaching that women are more sensitive and vulnerable than men, the Left encourages a sexual free-for-all.
The current climate has encouraged the worst instincts among some young men and doubtless confused many others. Some may find themselves accused of sexual assault when they got mixed signals. Others are predators who pick off easy prey in a world without guardrails. Women have been brainwashed into thinking that this sexual sewer is empowering. [National Review Online, 5/9/14]
NRO: Sexual Assaults Usually Involve ”A Large Degree Of Voluntary Behavior” From Women. In a May 8 article, National Review Online's Heather Mac Donald accused the White House of “parroting over 20 years worth of feminist propagandizing” by releasing a sexual assault report echoing the fact that one and four women face sexual assault, and added that campus-rape could be “stopped overnight” if women stopped getting drunk:
But the main reason “survivors” don’t demand to bring their cases to criminal court is that they know that what they have experienced is something far more complex and compromised than criminal sexual assault, almost invariably involving mixed signals, ambiguity, and a large degree of voluntary behavior on their part.
Girls often drink themselves blotto both before and during parties precisely to lower their sexual inhibitions.
The alleged campus-rape epidemic could be stopped overnight if women’s advocates sent a simple message to girls: Don’t get drunk and get into bed with a guy whom you barely know. Keep your clothes on and go home to your own bed at night. And most controversially: Demand that any boy court you long enough to reveal his character and his respect for yours before you even think about having sex with him. [National Review Online, 5/8/14]
NRO: Efforts To Investigate Sexual Assault On Campuses “Poison The Atmosphere On Campus And Diminish American Life In General.” National Review Online's Thomas Sowell attacked the administration's investigations as “threatening colleges that don't handle rape issues the politically correct way — that is, by presuming the accused to be guilty.” Sowell characterized policies aimed at curbing sexual assault as institutionalized “lynch-mob mentality”:
Why are rapists not reported to the police and prosecuted in a court of law?
Apparently this is because of some college women who say that they were raped and are dissatisfied with a legal system that does not automatically take their word for it against the word of someone who has been accused and denies the charge.
There seem to be a dangerously large number of people who think that the law exists to give them whatever they want — even when that means denying other people the same rights that they claim for themselves.
Nowhere is this self-centered attitude more common than on college campuses. And nowhere are such attitudes more encouraged than by the Obama administration’s Justice Department, which is threatening colleges that don’t handle rape issues the politically correct way — that is, by presuming the accused to be guilty and not letting constitutional safeguards get in the way.
But those who are whipping up the lynch-mob mentality have shown far less interest in stopping rape than in politicizing it. Many of the politically correct crusaders are the same people who have pushed for unisex living arrangements on campus, including unisex bathrooms, and who have put condom machines in dormitories and turned freshman orientation programs into a venue for sexual “liberation” propaganda. [National Review Online,5/13/14]
WSJ Editor: Intoxicated Sexual Assault Victims Are Just As Guilty As Their Attackers.In a February 10 column, Wall Street Journal editor James Taranto claimed that cases of “‘sexual assault’ on campus” that involve alcohol are really victimless crimes in which both parties are equally guilty. [Wall Street Journal,2/10/14]
And Deny Reality Of Sexual Assault Prevalence
Daily Caller Downplayed Government Sexual Assault Statistic As “Bizarre And Wholly False.” The Daily Caller attacked the Center for Disease Control’s findings that one in five women are sexually assaulted while in college, arguing that sexual assaults are often falsely reported. [Daily Caller, 4/30/14]
Washington Examiner: One In Five Women Being Sexually Assaulted In College Is A “Ridiculous Statistic.” In an April 29 post, the Washington Examiner claimed that the CDC’s one in five statistic was “ridiculous” and claimed that it perpetuated “a culture of presuming that a man is guilty.” [The Washington Examiner, 4/29/14]
New York PostDismissed Campus Sexual Assault Epidemic As “Regrettable Sex.” In a May 6 op-ed,New York Post columnist Naomi Schaeffer Riley denied the existence of a sexual assault epidemic, dismissing campus sexual assault as “sexual encounters fueled by bad judgment and free-flowing alcohol.” Schaeffer went on to blame the assault victims for “bad judgment,” describing assaults as “regrettable sex.” [New York Post,5/6/14]
NRO: Women Are Just “Being Taught To Believe They Were Raped.” In a May 19 piece, National Review Online contributor A.J. Delgado claimed that women are being “brainwash[ed] into believing they were raped,” adding that “for every legitimate, actual rape claim there may be another that was not: a girl who cried rape.” [National Review Online, 5/19/14]