Ever read something so ridiculous, so dumb, that you let out a big fat horse-laugh right when you see it?
That happened to me this morning when I saw: "It's UnAmerican to silence Rush!"
http://www.cnn.com/...
I am having trouble typing the words even now, because it makes me snicker.
So let me get this straight!
I go into the service, I am told as a woman, all those years ago, that "I don't think wimmins ought to be in the service, cause you know like they's delicate and stuff."
That's the nice old church lady version that they tell me, when they don't know that I have a service record, which in their world is almost akin to an arrest record.
Male service members were patriots. Female service members are trouble makers.
Of course people like Flush and Pat Robertson weren't so nice about it.
Oh--You didn't know? Yea, this has been going on for decades~! This has been a multi-front war on our rights and bodies. We have been completely surrounded for years now by people who hate us, and others who seem unaware that there is a problem at all.
All those years ago, I can remember turning on the television and the radio to see the prevailing attitude that let us all know, that women {wimmins} were getting sexually harassed because it was their own fault--I mean what did we expect would happen when we left the house after having showered and put on clean clothes?
Looking like we did, smelling like we did, with our sinful, super-natural powers of post adolescent sexitude!
Of course a proper "lady" isn't supposed to be aware of the paranormal powers of her voodoo pinnani. In fact she isn't ever supposed to touch it, or wash it. Only harlots and whores even know they have one!
And if anyone were to notice that she has one [a magic pudenda], then well we all know that regardless of her appearance, background, mannerisms or church membership--that there lady is really a tramp!
What did we expect when we left the safety of our homes and entered an androcentric world filled with sexually charged hostility? The message? We were breaking all the rules by challenging males for careers and for public visibility, for a voice--and if you could catch us alone or unguarded, or tarnish our reputations, you could do whatever you wanted [whatever] because you cannot harass or assault a slut.
And only sluts leave their homes.
Only sluts wear pants
Only Sluts dress sexy
Only sluts dress like slobs
Only sluts dress like men
Only sluts use curse words
Only sluts say no.
Only sluts know about sex.
Only sluts want to be educated--so she can be even sluttier.
Only sluts go out alone--that's how we let you know we are asking for it.
Only sluts like sex.
Only sluts like to have fun.
Basically you can make this sentence: Only Sluts like to ___ . You can fill in the blank with anything that intimidates you about women, or anything you consider improper.
That is how you build a fence around our accomplishments. That is how you limit our potential. You pick out a strength that a woman has, and you make sure the whole world knows that this attribute is a sign of her sluttiness.
Only Sluts want to be doctors.
If a woman can do higher math, it's because she is a slut.
If a woman is successful, chances are, she got to the top on her back [she's a slut].
Flush isn't saying anything new. I have heard it all before, but usually, that sort of talk is limited to a bar stool somewhere. It's not something you expect coming from a Keynote Speaker of a political convention like CPAC.
(and let me say, that bodes well!)
Flush didn't mince any words, he didn't beat around the proverbial bush all those years ago, and he isn't pulling any punches now.
Uppity Women, Feminists, Divorces`, strong women, educated women, or disagreeable women, ooh and angry women are all to be silenced, ridiculed, harassed, and at times raped.
I know some people will think that last one is over the top, but sadly it's not. It's just the 800 pound assault that everyone pretends isn't in the room. {Don't make eye contact with it!}
In the name of Freedom of Speech, we should though, allow Flush, the venue to keep spewing his venom. That is the gist isn't it? Instead of giving that air time to someone who has something productive, useful, or dare I say new and interesting to say-let's keep flush on the air where he can reach and empower, hordes of hateful people, that we all know--we should be encouraging to influence, if not outright run this country [into the ground].
Lets keep him in the money. So he can be paid obscene amounts of cash, to keep spewing his hate on air, which will then allow him to contribute said cash to candidates and parties that are trying to make his dream a reality. A world where women have no rights.
That's what free speech is for! It's not fair that Flush could be relegated to some obscure blog or even a short wave pirate station. Nope. We owe it to Lady Liberty--the biggest slut of all [hey she is French!] to keep this bloated windbag on the air for as long as possible, to prove how tolerant we are!
Let me just say, as a woman, I have never heard that one before. That I am supposed to just ignore the pig. That's my answer. If I were a guy, it would be okay for me to be angry and take some sort of action, call him out, challenge him!
But women? Anger isn't a good look for us. 9 out of 10 intimidated gasbags agree, that angry women are the least feminine, and the most scary, big trophy animals of all! Any woman caught being visibly angry, should be immediately ridiculed and then ostracized, and then ignored [indefinitely].
I want to know why though, it's okay for the American people to silence someone like David Duke, for racism but it's not okay for women and their supportive male counterparts to silence Rush for his misogyny?
Are we saying that racism less acceptable and more harmful than misogyny?
Because I might have to call bullshit on that one.
And when the people silenced Mel Gibson for his religious bigotry and anti-Semitic remarks--are we saying that Mel's particular form of religious bigotry is less acceptable, and more dangerous than the kind that Flush is supporting?
Because you do realize that Misogyny in it's current form has it's roots deeply tapped into religion.
But women? Well heck, that's not a real problem. I tell you what, you just give her a big fat slap on the ass and tell her to "git you a beer" and that will solve the whole thing.
This idea, being promoted [in the name of Free Speech] doesn't even look good on paper. And what about my free speech? Am I not practicing that right now? Am I not participating in the larger discussion with other men and women all over this country who are offended that someone like Flush be given this venue to rot our country from within?
Should I silence myself in favor of Flush, just because he might loose some money or be publicly ridiculed and humiliated?
What about all those women like me, who have actually lost money, advancement opportunities, or who were publicly ridiculed and humiliated by people who parroted Flush's words?
Why is my pain less important? Why is my job security less important? Why is my voice less important?
I have to say, I am kind of tired of this crap that passes for logic regarding female matters.
I mean you do know why women are really angry right? Because they aren't getting enough nookie! And you are just the guy to slip it to us collectively. Help us release all this pent up tension that we are aiming at poor, innocent, unfairly targeted flush.
And then when you are done "rocking" our world, you can call us all sluts! Or Whores, bitches, piece of ass, cunts, legs, tits, saucy hares, etc., But, whatever you do, don't call us people.
Don't you dare call over 50 percent of our population people! Because Rosie the Riveter, Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Me, my mother, your mother, your grandmother, Ms Fluke--we are not people.
Every day that someone tries to write a law that deprives us of our most intimate privacy, the freedom to control our own bodies, the ability to speak for ourselves and be the rulers of our own destinies--that is, what is unAmerican!
There is so much history here, that I would have to write a book, to educate people like the author of that story, just to get him up to speed. But then I perceive that to be true on most days, during any given discussion, about women's rights.
The movement is not studied at all in public school. That is why the public has no frame of reference. And Flush stepped in to fill the vacuum created by that lack of education with feminazis and sluts.
Anything after the Suffragette Movement is ignored in favor of anything but this issue.
No girl wants to be disliked by boys and by other girls. It's so easy to single us out, with accusations of unjustified anger, or sluttiness.
Slut Shaming isn't just about sex. It is another version of Tall Poppy Syndrome. A phrase used to "describe a social phenomenon in which people of genuine merit are resented, attacked, cut down, or criticized because their talents or achievements elevate them above or distinguish them from their peers."
http://en.wikipedia.org/...
Only by invoking the sexually, charged word, Slut, that disguises the attack on talented or strong women, or independent women--and paints it as an issue about uncontrolled, female, sexual pathology.
So ask yourself: Is Flush really the person you want towering above the rest of us? Is he the kind of person you want to give power to, to destroy up and coming talent?
Women aren't going after flush because he is so great. Women are going after flush because he is promoting a social practice that is used to indiscriminately destroy the lives of women and girls, for the sins of standing up, or standing out.
I just don't see the protection of a bully like flush, necessary to preserve free speech. Especially not in this context.