You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Gender Issues’ category.
Okay, first of all, go to Jezebel and read the whole damn article. It is good and does not just apply to the gaming sub-culture, it works everywhere for the most part and is useful to have in the back of your mind as you see stuff go down around you. The excerpt deals with the online gaming community, but can easily be applied to meatspace and the silly douchy “objections” are in the same vein.
- Now I’m going to address some objections from the very juvenile delinquents I’ve been talking about -– if any of them have read this far.
- “What’s the big deal? It’s harmless banter. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the game.” To start with, it’s our game, not yours, and we get to decide what’s acceptable behavior. You meet our standards or you get out. Apart from that, nothing that is done with intent to cause hurt is harmless. The online abuse I have seen goes way beyond banter. Threats are not harmless, they are criminal acts.
- “But this is part of gamer culture! It’s always been like this!” No, it is not. I’ve been gaming for over 40 years, and it has not always been like this. Yours is a nasty little subculture that arrived with anonymous online gaming, and we’re going to wipe it out.
- “This is just political correctness.” Invoking “political correctness” is nothing but code for “I wanna be an asshole and get away with it.” I’ll give you a politically-incorrect response, if you like: fuck that. It’s time to man up. You don’t get to be an asshole and get away with it.
- “You’re just being a White Knight and trying to suck up to women.” I don’t need to suck up to women, thanks; unlike you, I don’t have a problem with them, because I’m a grown man.
- “Women are always getting special privileges.” Freedom from bullying is a right, not a privilege, and anyway, that’s bullshit. Males are the dominant sex in almost every single activity on the planet. The only areas that we do not rule are dirty, underpaid jobs like nursing and teaching. Do you want to swap? I didn’t think so.
- “It’s hypocrisy. How come they get women-only clubs and we don’t get men-only clubs?” Because they’re set up for different reasons, that’s why. Male-only spaces are about excluding women from power, and making little boys whose balls evidently haven’t dropped feel special. Female-only spaces are about creating a place where they are safe from vermin.
- “But there’s misandry too!” Oh, and that entitles you to be a running sore on the ass of the game community? Two wrongs don’t make a right.. I’ll worry about misandry when large numbers of male players are being hounded out of games with abuse and threats of violence. If a few women are bigoted against men, you only have to look in the mirror to find out why.
- “Free speech!” The oldest and worst excuse for being a jerk there is. First, you have no right to free speech in privately-owned spaces. Zero. Our house, our rules. Second, with freedom comes the responsibility not to abuse it. People who won’t use their freedoms responsibly get them taken away. And if you don’t clean up your act, that will be you.
- OK, back to the real men for a few final words.This is not about “protecting women.” It’s about cleaning out the sewers that our games have become. This will not be easy and it will not be fun. Standing up to these little jerks will require the same courage from us that women like Anita Sarkeesian have already shown. We will become objects of hatred, ridicule, and contempt. Our manhood will be questioned. But if we remember who we are and stand strong together, we can beat them. In any case we won’t be threatened with sexual violence the way women are. We have it easier than they do.
It’s time to stand up. If you’re a writer, blogger, or forum moderator, please write your own piece spreading the message, or at least link to this one. I also encourage you to visit Gamers Against Bigotry, sign the pledge, and share it.
Use your heavy man’s hand in the online spaces where you go –- and especially the ones you control –- to demand courtesy and punish abuse. Don’t just mute them. Report them, block them, ban them, use every weapon you have. (They may try to report us in return. That won’t work. If you always behave with integrity, it will be clear who’s in the right.)
Let’s stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the women we love, and work with, and game with, and say, “We’re with you. And we’re going to win.”
Brought to you by people who are not privileged douches.
Thank you to Slender Means for posting this, everything below this disclaimer is hers:
This is a very long post (linked below) but it is worth reading to see what some Christians still want to teach and believe about gender roles and norms, men’s rights to women’s bodies, and women and sex. Further down the post, racist beliefs are also discussed.
When Church teaching is about rape apology and white supremacy. You want to believe that it’s delusion and that we can all laugh at it and him but he has his followers and they believe every word of it. If you have time, I suggest you go to the link at the very bottom of this post and read all of it.
The following is a quote by Douglas (Doug) Wilson, a complementarian pastor, from his book Fidelity: What It Means to be a One-Woman Man:
The sexual act cannot be made into an egalitarian pleasuring party. A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts. This is of course offensive to all egalitarians, and so our culture has rebelled against the concept of authority and submission in marriage. This means that we have sought to suppress the concepts of authority and submission as they relate to the marriage bed.
We cannot make gravity disappear just because we dislike it, and in the same way we find that our banished authority and submission comes back to us in pathological forms. This is what lies behind sexual “bondage and submission games,” along with very common rape fantasies. Men dream of being rapists, and women find themselves wistfully reading novels in which someone ravishes the “soon to be made willing” heroine. Those who deny they have any need for water at all will soon find themselves lusting after polluted water, but water nonetheless.
The quote is part of an excerpt posted by Jared Wilson (no relation as far as I know) to The Gospel Coalition blog, with an approving note that explains the popularity of 50 Shades of Grey and “other modern celebrations of perverted sexual authority/submission.” (h/t Rachel Held Evans.)
It is one of the most horrifying things I’ve ever read. Maybe I shouldn’t be so shocked. It’s not wildly different from from things John Piper or Doug Wilson’s wife Nancy have said about submission and authority in sex.
But Wilson goes much farther than any rape apologist Christian writer I’ve ever read, and that’s a lot of people. His notion of godly sex is little more than sanctified rape. In the name of Jesus.
He also says (as Jared Wilson states in a comment defending this filth) that “rape is judgment upon a culture that does not cherish and protect women.” We should be OK with this, according to Jared, because Doug Wilson isn’t blaming rape survivors for being raped. He’s only blaming all women who want to be treated equally and all of our allies. That’s all.
A second point: Doug Wilson is not only a rape apologist; he’s also a slavery apologist. And contrary to Jared Wilson’s dismissal of commenters who repeatedly tried to point this out, this is absolutely relevant to Wilson’s teachings about obligatory female submission in sex.
Wilson is the co-author with Steve Wilkins, a white supremacist, of a pamphlet called Southern Slavery as it Was, which claims that Southern slavery “was not an adversarial relationship with pervasive racial animosity” but a relationship between “friends and often intimates”:
Because of its dominantly patriarchal character, [slavery] was a relationship based upon mutual affection and confidence. There has never been a multi-racial society which has existed with such mutual intimacy and harmony in the history of the world. The credit for this must go to the predominance of Christianity. The gospel enabled men who were distinct in nearly every way, to live and work together, to be friends and often intimates…
[WPA Slave] Narratives consistently portray an amazingly benign picture of Southern plantation life. Affection for former masters and mistresses is expressed in terms of unmistakable devotion. Testimony to the good treatment, kindness, and gentleness of many so-called “heartless slave holders” abounds. Many of the old slaves express a wistful desire to be back at the plantation.
Slave life was to them a life of plenty, of simple pleasures, of food, clothes, and good medical care. In the narratives taken as a whole, there is no pervasive cry of rage and anguish..abuses came from a distinct and very small minority. [emphasis mine]
If you can stomach any more: video [on link] of Wilson on why he’s a Paleoconfederate, why the post Civil War Reconstruction Amendments – you know, the ones that abolished slavery (in theory) and established black citizenship and voting rights (in theory) – “inverted the meaning of the Constitution,” and why the Civil War wasn’t God’s way of ending slavery and is to blame for racial animosity today.
What does this have to do with rape apologism? Firstly, both Wilson’s rape and slavery apologism hinge on that little word ”patriarchal.” He’s trying to sell a vision in which white male patriarchy rules benevolently over the rest of us, for our own good and protection.
Wilson means for us to accept a theology that revolves around authoritarian hierarchy, with white, straight, cis, Western men at the top, and everyone else knowing our proper place. We’re meant to accept that movements for racial and gender equality are actually the causes of racist and misogynist abuse and violence, and that the real root of such violence – white male patriarchy – is actually its remedy.
This isn’t just about Doug Wilson. It’s about an entire culture of white Christians who promote his teaching of sanctified rape and domineering patriarchy as godly theology. It’s about a culture that conveniently ignores his vile racism when it suits them, thinking they are remaining “neutral.” In fact they implicitly endorse his racism by promoting him as “sound and compelling” while refusing to acknowledge, much less condemn his defense of slavery. This is about an entire culture that majors in perpetuating rape culture and racism by looking the other way.
- Doug Wilson on The Gospel Coalition: How Christian Patriarchy Turns Sex into Rape and Pregnancy into Slavery (barefootchristianfaith.wordpress.com)
- The ‘Gospel’ Coalition? Maybe They Should Call Themselves the ‘Haunt of the Reprobate Rapist’ (zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com)
- If This is What Christian Sex Is Like, No Thank You (patheos.com)
- Rape: A Punishment for Egalitarians? (sarahoverthemoon.com)
I am continually amazed by people and their ability to be rational in one aspect of their life and the ability to completely ignore rationality in other aspects of their life. The example that I often see is people who are in evidence based professions, especially the ones that require the application of scientific rigor, that ignore the same critical thinking skills when it comes to their theism. However I now have a new shining example of this and it saddens me because he used to be a person I had a lot of respect for.
The person I am talking about is Thundefoot of course. For the people who don’t know him, he is a scientist who has gained popularity on Youtube mostly by debating theists. Although debate may be a poor choice of term to describe what usually when on when he talked with these people. Evisceration perhaps? But I digress, this post isn’t really about that. It’s about what happened since he joined Free Thought Blogs. Thunderfoot decided to throw his hat into the ring in a controversy in the greater atheist community.
This controversy started when Rebecca Watson gave a talk at a skeptic conference about sexism and added personal antidotes about how being sexualized at these conferences creeps her out. Later that night (at 4am) she was at the bar and decided to call it a night. Unfortunately another attendee decided to tailgate her into the elevator and ask her to his room for “coffee” in an overt pickup artist move of cornering. When Rebecca Watson got home, she posted a video of experiences and talked about the cornering and said Guys, Don’t Do That. Apparently this act of defiance of male privilege was taking things too far and she was sent a shitstorm of death and rape threats by the skeptical community at large.
The saga continued up until this year’s convention where recently the organizer of the event had the gall to blame her for the extreme reduction of female attendees. And this is where Thunderfoot enters the equation. He entered with a blatant sexist joke with a picture of Darth Vader, jabbed with a “
This isn’t a big problem” (correction , it read “*THIS REALLY ISN’T A BIG PROBLEM*”), a left cross of Talking About Sexism Is The Problem, Not Sexism, and delivered the knockout blow (paraphrased) So STFU About All This Stuff. It was a truly epic saga of bullshit.
After he got called out on this by P.Z. Myers he got all butthurt. And since then he’s been removed from Free Thought Blogs. And the butthurt continues. Once wonders where it will end. For more on this simply google elevatorgate.
Thunderfoot goes all sexist and then gets all butthurt when there is a blow-back from the womenz. Sad days for Bleatmop as someone he used to respect makes a mockery of himself.
There seems to be a lot of chatter in the blogosphere about abortion lately. I’m thinking it could possibly maybe be about CPC MP’s motion to discuss when life starts. This motion is, without a doubt, no matter what the detractors say, a backdoor attempt to try and take away Canadian women’s hard won human right to their own body. Attempts to paint this as anything but that are either disingenuous or misinformed. The only result of Woodworth managing to redefine when life begins at anything before birth is for him to carry on and propose a bill to then introduce limitations on abortion. Supporting this discussion is to support the attack on women’s reproductive freedom.
I bring this up because of what I’ve been seeing on other blogs I frequent, namely Dammit Janet and Unrepentant Old Hippie. They’ve both left progressive bloggers because it seems that suggesting that human rights, in particular a woman’s right to bodily autonomy, is not up for debate is worthy of calling said people idiots and shrill.
My response to said “progressives” is simple.
It’s regressive to think debating the merits of a particular group’s human rights is a good idea.
Stop playing Woodworth’s game.
It makes you a bad person.
Christianity is the religion that keeps on giving. By “giving” I mean keeps on festering. Christianity exudes an oozing rancid pus that encrapulates and taints those exposed to its toxic effects. Dogmatic religious beliefs, like those espoused by Christian Patriarchy, are the putrefying ichor that rots modern secular society.
Pleasantries aside, this is probably one of the worst things you will read all day. I’m going to re-post a article from No Longer Quivering about Matt, a young patriarch in training, and his thoughts on the role of women in a traditional christian family. Trigger warnings for domestic violence, misogyny and homophobia are mandated for such piece.
The Red Pen O’ Snarky-Justice is raising an uproar that cannot be quelled, and thus, my commentary shall appear in red italics lightly treading on the wide trail of fail Matt leaves behind him.
“It’s possible that Matt is a troll and his comments should be ignored or deleted – but his arguments are not at all unlike the “biblical” beliefs which I heard taught/preached regularly during my Quiverfull days. I am assuming Matt is a young man based on his immaturity and know-it-all attitude – of course, given that patriarchs rarely grow up, it’s possible that he is an old man – maybe he’s the pastor of an IFB church.
So, without further ado – here’s Matt:
“I take it from your post that you are dead set on fornicating, although the Bible tells you not to do that.
“Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. [and the bible, like all religious delusional nonsense, is full of shite]”
“Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.[Ownership of one human being by another is a fracking aberration. Claiming that it is endorsed in holy scripture doubles down on the bullshite and vile misogyny omnipresent in the bible.]”
“This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.[translation: Smile while you take your abuse as the bible says its okay, hell, you should be thanking me for letting you fully enjoy your noble roles as incubator, house slave and fuck-toilet]”
You are mistaking voluntary submission with involuntary servitude. As a Christian lady you are commanded to be subject to your husband, it is asked of you to submit. It doesn’t say “men, oppress your woman to all costs!”[I command you to voluntarily submit - this like most christian apologia has a sickening circularity along with a dash of guilt - witness the next sentence]. As a Christian woman who claims to believe in the Word of God, which is inspired/breathed by God, your Creator, is it alright for you to dismiss what that Word says? [Because god is such a fair (ordering genocide) and noble (endorsing slavery) creature, we should trust this derranged lunatics words to the letter - you want to be a properly deluded christian right?]
A woman surrenders to a man so easily when he takes charge [Being afraid of being beaten to death will do that]. That is the danger of having a matriarch with a man in subjection. The woman indeed is the weaker vessel, tossed to and fro, giving in to whims, and judges things according to her motherly instinct [**swoosh!!** Wow, did you hear that it was sound of women being dismissed as fully autonomous human beings possessing all the rights and freedoms men have, embrace being a second class 'semi-person' ; it can be fun because possessing as lady brain automatically makes you retarded] For instance, she would say sodomite couplings are lovely, because love is blind [Funny how woman = love = stupid]. A man who is not of God would say “I don’t care, to each their own”, but not mention love in the equation.
A man of God would not even let a sodomite in under his roof or in the vincinity of his children!![Except in church, because being buggered as an alter boy is a holy experience, praise the lard for that!] Let me tell you something, love is not blind![Wait, didn't you just say it was like a sentence ago?] Even infatuation is not blind. But infatuation and love are two different things. Love is a choice. Hate is a choice [Word Salad is a Choice!]. I will hate the wicked and their deeds [some dude was saying something about turning the other cheek - ya know tolerance and stuff, but I digress, religious are fundamentally intolerant and Matt is doing just a spiffy-awesome job at being a douche-nozzle for jebus at the moment] Yes, hate.
Furthermore, sodomites hate God, and infiltrate churches to spit in God’s face [projection much?]. You might say, “sodomites love each other, so what’s wrong with that”? I love my siblings, does that mean I have sexual relations with them?![ah, the gentle conflation of incest with same sex relations *sigh*] I love men, as brothers. I love women, as sisters. But by God, there is only one person I take sexual pleasure in[mentioning the palm sisters in a godly rant, Matt really is all over the place on this one...]! Love is not sex. Learn it, woman.
So, if you’re a Christian woman, your God that you supposedly love, tells you to submit and be in subject to your husband in every thing[huh, god was a misogynist asshat too, colour me shocked]. Am I a jealous man? Every man of God should be jealous! Just as God is jealous, and wants us only to worship him[my goodness you are a special snowflake aren't you cupcake, you get to be a jealous abuser because god says so, convenient].
And why am I jealous? Because the woman is the weaker vessel[citation needed, and 'god says so' is his magic book does not count], and evil men who have acknowledged this takes advantage, to defile you [because explicitly calling women inferior and infantilizing them isn't defiling them at all].
“This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.[whoa shields up! Unfounded pontificating incoming!] For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth [I'm going to assume that Douche-twaddle is referring to men that are not patriarchal misogynists who don't actually want to enslave women].”
I’m telling you, there’s a lot of weak vessels, silly women, out there, who ungodly men lie in wait for. Am I controlling for keeping my woman away from these evil men? Then so be it. Yes, I am in control, but I love my woman enough to grant her freedom of thought and expression[as long as it completely agrees with my frakked up shite filled point of view; there fixed for ya]. She is as intelligent as I am, but still the weaker vessel, due to her willingness to surrender and submit to a man who takes charge [so she's evil if she does not submit and then she is also evil because she does submit, this like the rest of your circular bullcookery is half-baked, nutty-rotten religious hatred of women].
Ask yourself, how many men adopt the interests and beliefs of their wives [just the ones that care about their partners thoughts and feelings and want to share as opposed to dominate their lives]? None. How many women adopts the interests and beliefs of their husbands? They are in abundance[because you beat the ones that don't submit, you dastardly fuck]. It is clear that a woman submits to a man who rules her, even to the point of abuse, I’m sad to say[the christian Dark Ages are calling, they miss you]. Therefore a Christian man is told to love his woman as himself. What man would abuse himself[most patriarchs don't; they save the beatings and abuse for their wife and children, duh?]? He may abuse drugs or alcohol but not himself.”
Wow. Deep-breath….*whew*. You’ll need a shower after immersing yourself in the rectum-orious musings of ass-spittle like Matt. Religion is an ugly piece of work and of course as mentioned around here from time to time, rotten to the core. The sheer amount of hate for women turns ones guts sour.
Christian patriarchy, like all fundamentalist wack-a-loon religious fappery, is fundamentally anti-woman, anti-child and anti-modern (anti-civilization, while we are at it) paternalistic bullshite. This branch of the christian death-cult ranks up there with the crazy Muslim sects that demand the burka and female genital mutilation from their woman-folk (cultural artifacts/religiously backed…your choice, it is still patently wrong).
How we let the religiously sponsored abuse of Women continue to exist in the so called civilized West is beyond me.