Any Inkling I May Become a Feminist is Now Gone

While it is true that wasn't likely to happen in any event, this certainly cured me.  A friend of mine pointed out this blog post to me, and oh my.  I honestly don't know what to say about this except there sure is a great deal of crazy out there.  

PIV is always rape, Ok?  

It took me a little while, but I finally figured out that PIV is Penis in Vagina.  Not allowed in the feminist world apparently.  Which I am very confused by.  I was always led to believe that a main tenet of feminism is that you get to "have sex like a man".  Apparently we were wrong for thinking that.  Intercourse, bad.  Always.  Just bad.  

First, well intercourse is NEVER sex for women. Only men experience rape as sexual and define it as such. Sex for men is the unilateral penetration of their penis into a woman (or anything else replacing and symbolising the female orifice) whether she thinks she wants it or not – which is the definition of rape: that he will to do it anyway and that he uses her and treats her as a receptacle, in all circumstances – it makes no difference to him experiencing it as sexual. That is, at the very least, men use women as useful objects and instruments for penetration, and women are dehumanised by this act. It is an act of violence.

I am surprised the word empowered doesn't appear in this paragraph.  After all that is what feminism is supposed to be, right?  Empowering women.  So ladies if you like to have a little somethin' somethin' from time to time, you are anti-woman.  Hear that.  No more penetration for you.  Apparently if you want to have a baby:

 Penetration of the penis into the vagina is completely unnecessary for conception.

Well yes that is true.  One doesn't have to have intercourse to become pregnant.  That can happen if a couple uses the "pull out" method of birth control or if a man doesn't quite make it to the "promiseland" before finishing the deed.  You can absolutely get pregnant without intercourse.  But, speaking of pregnancy:

As FCM pointed out some time ago, intercourse is inherently harmful to women and intentionally so, because it causes pregnancy in women. The purpose of men enforcing intercourse regularly (as in, more than once a month) onto women is because it’s the surest way to cause pregnancy and force childbearing against our will, and thereby gain control over our reproductive powers. There is no way to eliminate the pregnancy risk entirely off PIV and the mitigating and harm-reduction practices such as contraception and abortion are inherently harmful, too. Reproductive harms of PIV range from pregnancy to abortion, having to take invasive, or toxic contraception, giving birth, forced child bearing and rearing and all the complications that go with them which may lead up to severe physical and emotional damage, disability, destitution, illness, or death.

Oh my, when you put it like that I wouldn't want to have a baby either.  Bad, horrible, little creatures aren't they?   While I suppose that some women have complications during childbirth, most don't.  It is a relatively natural process that keeps the human race going.  Maybe that is a bad thing too.  Who knows?  

But I am impressed to hear a feminist say that abortion is inherently harmful to women.  After all you don't hear that coming from that side of the aisle too often.  Normally it is their "right".  I recently saw a photo of young boy, maybe six or seven holding a sign telling me to stay out of his mommy's vagina.  Apparently the next nominee for Mother of the Year didn't get the memo of how bad intercourse, birth control, and abortion are for women.  They must be a bad feminist, or at least very misguided.  

I am not going to go into detail here, but I would venture to say that most women find consensual sex to be pleasurable.  But alas, we have been programmed to believe that is true.  

There’s a reason men need to groom us into it, and why this grooming takes so long- because it’s so grossly violating and traumatising that we would otherwise never submit to intercourse. The only reason we may now not feelraped or have the impression we desired or initiated PIV, is because men broke down our barriers very skillfully and progressively from birth, breaking down our natural defences to pain and invasion, our confidence in our own perceptions and sensations of fear and disgust that tell us male sexual invasion is painful, harmful and traumatic.

Through an all-pervasive and powerful male propaganda, they stuff our minds from infancy with the idea that PIV is normal, desirable and erotic, before we can even conceive of it as something horrifying, and make sure we never see any alternative to their lie – or that if we do, we can no longer take in the information, are punished for thinking and saying otherwise. The fact we may not immediately feel raped doesn’t mean it’s not rape, objectively speaking

I guess we can add bad media, bad hollywood, bad culture.  All of which tells us that intercourse is a normal, healthy thing that both man and women can enjoy.  I personally think it is far better in a committed relationship between two people who love each other as opposed to scratching an itch, but that is neither here nor there in this conversation.  All.Bad.  All of it.  

Lastly, from a structural point of view, as a class oppressed by men, we are not in any position of freedom to negotiate what men do to us collectively and individually within the heterocage. Men, by whom we are possessed, colonised and held captive, are the sole agents and organisers of PIV. Men dominate us precisely so we can’t opt out of sexual abuse by them; intercourse is the very means through which men subordinate us, the very purpose of their domination, to control human reproduction.

I guess just saying no doesn't cut it.  

Seriously?  It is very hard to wrap my head around this type of thinking.  I have to assume this author is a lesbian or asexual.  Not to get into too much graphic detail here, but don't lesbians use sex toys such as a vibrator?  I was always under the impression that they did.  Which is another reason that I have never fully understood being a lesbian.  If you are going to simulate sexual intercourse between a man and woman, why not just be with a man?  But I could be wrong.  Most of my homosexual friends are men, so this has never really come up in conversation for me before.  Nor would I necessarily want it to.  But that has been the impression that I have had for many years, maybe I got it from a movie or book.  I am not quite sure where I got it and I could very easily be wrong about it.  

In any event, this is reason 2,394,294 of why I will never a feminist.  You should read the comments.  Again, oh my.  Apparently people agree with her.  

Here is a Little Something to Add to your Christmas Wish List - Vagina Mouse

I guess no self-respecting feminist should be without one of these.  Notice the play on terms, G Point.  These people are repugnant.

If This is Feminism, I Say No Thanks - Reporter Stages Her Own Rape to Cure PTSD

Mac McClelland had a "friend" of hers violently "rape" her. Why you may ask? She is a civil rights reporter from Mother Jones who was in Haiti covering the continuing aftermath of the earthquake ravaged country. While there she went to the hospital with a woman who was raped and beaten by gunpoint. The culture in Haiti does not look upon women who are raped as victims. As such, she was given very harsh treatment by the doctor she saw. She was no victim, just some slut that got what she deserved. Sadly, this is a mentality across much of the third world. On the taxi ride back to her camp, the woman came across one of the men who raped her. Her emotion overwhelmed the reporter:

Last September, the first time I went to Haiti, I spent my first day out accompanying a rape victim we'll call Sybille to the hospital. The way her five attackers had maimed her in addition to sexually violating her was unspeakable. The way the surgeon who was going to try to reconstruct the damage yelled at her, telling her she'd got what was coming to her because she was a slut, was unconscionable. And the way Sybille went into a full paroxysm when we were on the way back to the post-quake tarp city she lived in was the worst thing I ever saw in my life. We were sitting in traffic and saw one of her rapists, and she started just SCREEEAMING a few inches away from my face, her eyes wide and rolling in abject terror.

After this experience the reporter returned to her life in San Francisco. Or at least tried to. She started exhibiting symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder to the point that she decided to seek help from a therapist. She had her therapy while she was trying to deal with her symptoms. At one point she told her therapist:

"All I want is to have incredibly violent sex," I told Meredith. Since I'd left Port-au-Prince, I could not process the thought of sex without violence. And it was easier to picture violence I controlled than the abominable nonconsensual things that had happened to Sybille.


Eventually her therapist agreed that staging a rape that was violent would be a good idea. The therapist asked her if she knew someone she trusted enough. Apparently, she did:

We'd done this sort of thing before. But at dinner I'd told him, voice shaking, about my PTSD. This time, the fight would be rougher and the stakes higher. And so he paused. "Okay," he said. "I love you, okay?" I said, I know, okay. And with that he was on me, forcing my arms to my sides, then pinning them over my head, sliding a hand up under my shirt when I couldn't stop him. The control I'd lost made my torso scream with anxiety; I cried out desperately as I kicked myself free. But it didn't matter how many times I managed to knock him over to the other side of the bed. He's got 60 pounds on me, plus the luxuries of patience and fearlessness. When I got out from under him and started to scramble away, he simply caught me by a leg or an upper arm or my hair and dragged me back. By the time he pinned me by my neck with one forearm so I was forced to use both hands to free up space between his elbow and my windpipe, I'd largely exhausted myself.


And just like that, I'd lost. It's what I was looking for, of course. But my body—my hard-fighting, adrenaline-drenched body—reacted by exploding into terrible panic. The comforting but debilitating blanket of tension that'd for weeks been wrapped around my chest solidified into a brick. Then the weight of his body, and of the inevitability of my defeat, descended on my ribcage. My worn-out muscles went so taut that they ached. I stopped breathing.


I did not enjoy it in the way a person getting screwed normally would. But as it became clear that I could endure it, I started to take deeper breaths. And my mind stayed there, stayed present even when it became painful, even when he suddenly smothered me with a pillow, not to asphyxiate me but so that he didn't break my jaw when he drew his elbow back and slammed his fist into my face. Two, three, four times. My body felt devastated but relieved; I'd lost, but survived. After he climbed off me, he gathered me up in his arms. I broke into a thousand pieces on his chest, sobbing so hard that my ribs felt like they were coming loose

This women did women who are victims of this unspeakable act of violence a huge disservice. Rape victims don't get to decide who rapes them. Victims don't get a pillow put over their face to lessen the blows. Victims don't get held while they are crying afterwards. Victims have no choices. They are simply a person in the wrong place at the wrong time and become victimized. A trauma that stays with them for the rest of their lives in many cases.


What is most disturbing is the comments at the end of the article. Apparently to the left she is a hero. She went into the "belly of the beast" says one, another thanks her for her courage, and can feel the love and the pain in her story. There is love in this story?


If this is what it takes to be a liberal feminist, I say no thank you. I will pass. Another thing, I am not sure I want a friend like Issac. Call me crazy, but a man who is willing to beat me is not someone I want to hang out with.



 

Where's the Love for the SAHM?

There is all this blow up due to a Politco story about Rick Santorum and Sarah Palin.  Politico wrote the story in the guise that Santorum was taking a swipe at Palin and Politico said he "inferred" that she was making speeches for money.  There are rumors that she turned down the keynote speaking slot on Saturday night due to the money not being there.  Only the people involved in the negotiations know what the truth is.  But, it is well-known that she and the leader of CPAC don't get along.

His comments in part:

“I have a feeling that she has some demands on her time, and a lot of them have financial benefit attached to them,”

“I don’t live in Alaska and I’m not the mother to all these kids and I don’t have other responsibilities that she has,”

Regardless of what you think of Santorum and his voting record, the one thing that you cannot question is his social conservative cred.  He is staunchly socially conservative.  He and his wife have had eight children, one of which that passed away at birth.  His children range in age from 19 to 2.  His youngest child is special needs and was not expected to survive.  While she has many issues, she was a very happy addition to his family.  Since leaving congress he has been working as an attorney and his wife is a stay at home mom. 

Palin was interviewed yesterday by Sean Hannity and was asked about the Politico story.  Her response:

“I think the reports were much worse than what he really said. I think some things were really taken out of context. So I will not call him the knuckle dragging neanderthal that perhaps others would want to call him. I’ll let his wife call him that instead.”

She then went on to say that her children have never stopped her from doing anything. 

Santorum, as a special needs parent, has a unique perspective on the demands of the parents of a special needs child. Again, he is a social conservative and very strict Catholic.  Is it really so crazy that he views motherhood and care giving as the most important role that a woman plays in her life?  I don't think that it is.  Palin has three children at home.  Two of which are very young and one is special needs.  The demands of that are real.  It isn't something that he is making up or just throwing out there for no reason.   

For those who have not spent a great deal of time around a special needs child you may not be aware of those demands.  Change is not something that these kids handle well.  They depend on scheduling.  I once read a book written by the wife of a famous athlete and a line in that book has always struck me.  I may be paraphrasing here, but basically she said that they don't learn to live in your world, you learn to live in theirs.  It is something that has stuck with him ever since.  To give an example of what I am talking about, I know a mom who has masking tape on both her kitchen and dining room table.  The tape is labeled for where the plate, glass, fork go.  If they are not in the exact place that they are expected to be in, the child won't eat, he also won't eat if his food touches on the plate.  Special needs kids have a difficult time with time zone changes, they are not always good with strangers and are not comfortable with new situations.  They find going outside of their comfort zone difficult to handle.  Of course every child is different, but these are generalities that are pretty standard with special needs kids. 

Families of special needs kids have a much more difficult time travelling and simple things like going out to dinner can sometimes be a brutal experience.  I am in no way diminishing the gifts that these kids bring into the lives of their families, but it is a different experience than raising children without disabilities.  The point that Sarah was trying to make is that just because she is a mom doesn't mean she can't accomplish other things.  Which is a true statement. 

I came across an article written back in November.  Apparently this isn't the first time that Palin has used the word Neanderthal when commenting on what women can do.  She made this statement shortly after the 08 campaign came to an end. 

There are still the Neanderthals out there who pick on the petty, little, superficial, meaningless things – like looks, like whether you can or can’t work outside of the home if you have small children – all those type of things where I would so hope that at some point those Neanderthals will evolve into something a bit more with it, a bit more modern, and a bit more understanding that, yeah, women can accomplish much.

No one is saying that every working mother is a bad mother.  But, it wasn't all that long ago that being a SAHM was looked down upon by the "liberal elite".  I do believe that has tampered down some, but many far left woman look at almost everything in their life through the prism of being a woman and are constantly talking about fairness and get very upset when woman were not promoted.  I just recently read some comments on how the left is more than a little upset that Obama's administration doesn't have enough women, and were especially upset by the new press secretary not being female.  I personally don't view the world in this manner.  I want the most qualified person to be hired for a job.  If that person happens to be a white man or a Latino woman than so be it.  I am not believer in quotas and I certainly don't think that Obama is anti-woman simply based on the fact that his latest hire happened to be a man. 

I may be wrong, but I think that most conservatives views are similar to mine.  But, if that is so who are those statements being made to?  Political people have a tendency to talk in sound bites and usually are very careful to craft their conversation and talking points trying to reach out to certain segments of the voting public.  Palin is a politician.  She may be different than many politicians, but she is still a politician.  Because if she is trying to reach out to the people who think that woman can have it all, I think that may be a losing strategy.  Especially if it can be construed as insulting the very people who are her base supporters. 

I remember when the election was in full swing and Palin was being accused of being a bad mother simply based on the fact that Bristol was pregnant out of wedlock at the time.  I would ask the people that said that around me if their mother was responsible for every mistake that they made?  One of the people who said that actually is a single mother.  Her justification was that her mother wasn't espousing conservative values on a national stage.  I felt like saying if she had espoused them in her home she obviously didn't listen to them, but I didn't want to be rude.  But, my point is these woman aren't going to listen to this message anyway. 

It isn't that I don't believe that women can do many things, because I do.  But, what I do question is can women have it all?  I find this to be a lie that has been passed down to young women.  While we can do many things across the entirety of our lifetimes, but can we have it all at the same time?  I think that as women we have to stretch it over longer periods of time than men do.  Is that necessarily fair?  No.  But, I have found that to be true.  Some women have no choice but to go out and work, they can't survive without the additional income.  Others choose to put off having children to get their career on track and have a hard time letting go of the career track in order to raise their children.  Then we have the families that put things over the benefits of having a mom at home.  The Wii, the ipad and the larger home become more important than staying home with little Jimmy.   Gov. Palin, I don't think it is a bad thing that you would be stopped from doing different things because of issues with your children.  I actually would respect it. 

Cross posted at Pot Luck
 

Portman, Skins, Sex and the City, and Abortion - The Ties that Do Bind

The new movie No Strings Attached was #1 at the box office this weekend.  It is a romantic comedy starring Natalie Portman and Ashton Kutcher about causal sex.  The basic premise of the movie is to tell the story of what happens between friends who decide to have a sexual relationship that doesn't include romance.  Now, I have not seen the movie, but I have read the reviews of it.  Some are good, others not so much.  I was going to do a post on the new MTV show Skins and decided that I should watch it to fully understand what everyone was talking about.  Believe me, don't waste your time watching that show, it is horrid.  The storyline is stupid and childish and it is chock full of bad acting.  I can't imagine it will stay on the air as the advertisers are running away from the show very quickly. 

I have read a great deal of the reporting on the butcher that calls himself an abortion doctor in Pennsylvania. There is no other way to describe that man other than evil, pure evil. While reading all the awful stories from the grand jury testimony one must ask themselves where does this type of thought process come from. While it would a leap too wide to say that Skins and No Strings Attached are to blame for it, but it is part of the problem. Especially when it comes to Skins, as this is directed to a much younger crowd. While MTV puts a disclaimer on the show about the adult content, the cast is in high school. There is only a certain age group that is interested in the lifestyles of the young and depraved. It is really the high school version of Sex and the City without the wit and charisma.


We have constant images of casual sex and the meaning of what feminism is supposed to mean. While this isn't a big deal for the more mature of the audience, but is it really harmless to the young? We are telling young adults that sex has no real meaning other than to scratch an itch. We are also saying that they are not real consequences to the choices that we make in life. These shows don't talk about the real consequences of how unwanted pregnancies lead to the debauchery that is being seen in that abortion house of horrors. How there are doctors that are quite literally making millions of dollars off the casual sex that has "no consequences". Can we keep telling ourselves that their aren't real consequences to this types of actions?

In New York City is said that almost about 40% of all pregnancies now end in abortion. Do we really still have to hear the lies that abortion is not used as a form of birth control? New York City has drug stores and family planning clinics galore, the reasoning behind this many abortions cannot be simply due to lack of access to birth control or by instances of violence as the left is always trying to say that it is. There is a lack of responsibility of these people, both the man and the woman.

Take Sex and the City for example, it spent 6 seasons glamorizing a life filled with sex without emotion in the character of Samantha. The series did decide to take the high road at the end and put everyone in a loving and lasting relationship; even Samantha who found love with a younger man who accepted her for who she is. The movie then decided to end that relationship and she decided that sleeping around without commitment was much a better option for a woman who just turned 50. These are the messages that we are telling to impressionable young women. The story of Samantha was an either or situation. She couldn't have a career and love, she had to make a choice. I refuse to accept that as the only option for women. Plenty of woman find real fulfillment from a lasting marriage to man who loves you just as deeply as you love him. There is nothing inherently wrong with this.

While it is true that as a parent it is your job to teach your child values, but the constant images and peer pressure that comes from their friends are sometimes too difficult to overcome and this barrage of bad influences that don't tell the entire story certainly don't make the job any easier on parents of teenagers. Where are the movies that tell them that having a child out-of-wedlock before you finish school will more than likely lead you to a life on public assistance? Where are the movies that show that once you have a child you can't go hand out with your friends on a Friday night because your too exhausted? When do they get told that the person you fall in love with at 18 is not likely to the person you are still in love with at 35?

In No Strings Attached, like most other movies, it has a happy ending. The couple pays no real price for the free sex and end up living happily ever after. When the reality is that almost never happens. I actually do know someone who did marry her friend with benefits after insisting that it was just sex. They now have three children. But, that is not the norm. In the vast majority of the cases what ends up happening is that someone gets hurt. The "free sex" turns into an emotional tie that doesn't bind them together, but since it is one-sided the other person ends up with nothing more than heartbreak and the realization that they were used. I would venture to say that in most instances it is the woman who ends up with the short end of that stick.

It is time that we start telling the truth to young women.  Free sex is almost never really free.  If you are not ready to become a parent, the only sure form of birth control is not having sex.  Abortion is a big business that includes people who are making millions of dollars of the sorrow from the lies we are telling young women.  There is a price a to pay for all the images that are being brought to our kids on the movie and television screens.  We need to tell our kids that we are no longer going to accept the lie that the people on the left keep spreading when they say they want abortion to safe and rare.  If you really want to see what a monster really looks like, go over to Pundit and Pundette; as she has plenty of disturbing reading to show what the reality is.  A story that needs to be told, so thanks to Jill for having the courage to tell it. 


Cross Posted at PotLuck

Conservative Women on the Rise - Fire from the Heartland

A new documentary is set to be released next month on DVD.  It is about the history of conservative women who have stood up and help build this country.  Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, and Ann Coulter are a few of the latest models of conservative feminism.  Women who put the meaning of feminism on its ear. 



You can pre order the CD here