One would think that movement supposedly built around respecting people’s agency and humanity would avoid anything that would make it appear they do not follow their own standards. For example, if a movement argued that it was wrong to sexually objectify one sex because reducing a person to an object is inhumane, one would expect this to apply to the other sex as well.
Yet one would be wrong. Sabrina Maddeaux argued in a National Post article that it is perfectly fine to sexually objectify men because it is “different”. As she explained:
Male objectification isn’t threatening because men don’t suffer from a severe power imbalance that puts them at risk economically, socially and physically.
A two minute Google search proves this wrong. People judge whether to hire, date, or befriend men based on the men’s appearance. The notion that unattractive men have it easy or that men’s appearances have little impact on how people treat them is nonsense. The evidence suggests that unattractive men do face severe power imbalances due to their looks.
We do not even need to look at studies to demonstrate this. We can follow Maddeaux’s model and use movie stars. Actors like Paul Giamatti and Steve Buscemi do not headline most films. They are fantastic actors, yet they are rarely given the leading man role.
I do enjoy when someone turns another person’s logic against them. Lauren Southern had an exchange with a protester recently after the Deploraball. The protester’s point was that the event was sexist, and after making several arguments and getting shut down by Southern, she turned to claiming that the event only featured one woman. She figured this was a winning argument. She was wrong: Continue reading →
I recently watched two interviews of Christiana Hoff Sommers. The first was on The Joe Rogan Experience. The second was on The Rubin Report. Apparently Sommers gave the interviews a short time apart. That is impressive because the Rogan interview is almost three hours long.
Both interviews cover much of the same topics — feminism, progressive tactics, the pushing of feminist narratives, misandry, etc. The Rubin Report is more focused while the The Rogan Experience is a casual conversation. Both are worth watching. Continue reading →
I came across an article written by a woman raised by lesbian mothers. Heather Barwick argued in her piece that while she supports the gay community, she no longer supports gay marriage. She stated:
Growing up, and even into my 20s, I supported and advocated for gay marriage. It’s only with some time and distance from my childhood that I’m able to reflect on my experiences and recognize the long-term consequences that same-sex parenting had on me. And it’s only now, as I watch my children loving and being loved by their father each day, that I can see the beauty and wisdom in traditional marriage and parenting.Same-sex marriage and parenting withholds either a mother or father from a child while telling him or her that it doesn’t matter. That it’s all the same. But it’s not. A lot of us, a lot of your kids, are hurting. My father’s absence created a huge hole in me, and I ached every day for a dad. I loved my mom’s partner, but another mom could never have replaced the father I lost.
According to Barwick, her mother married her father essentially to fit in. However, Barwick’s mother eventually came out, divorced her father, and found a woman to share her life with. Barwick’s father “wasn’t a great guy” and after her mother “left him he didn’t bother coming around anymore.”
Adolescence: The secret life of boys — I was a cute child, I guess. When I got to school my older cousin took me aside. He said some older boys would come after me—for sex. “That’s how it works,” he said. “It’s dangerous for new boys.” He told me I had to make sure I was never alone. He said, “Don’t go to the toilet alone. Don’t let a senior boy call you out alone.” He told me what places to avoid.
Alabama woman convicted in children sex abuse ring — The conviction Wednesday of an Alabama woman accused of being part of an incestuous sex ring provided graphic evidence about horrendous child molestation, but it didn’t answer a baffling question: What happened to a young victim who is missing and presumed dead? Jurors took two hours to convict Wendy Wood Holland, 35, of sodomy, sexual abuse, sexual torture and child endangerment. She showed no emotion when the verdict was read.
Babysitter Accused Of Raping 10-Year-Old Boy Claims ‘He Forced Himself On Me’ — A babysitter accused of raping a 10-year-old boy is claiming that she was forced into the act. Marybeth Rataic, a 25-year-old Connecticut woman, was said to have had “three or four sexual encounters” with the pre-teen in question, but she shares a different side of the story. According to a report from NBC Connecticut, Rataic claimed that the 10-year-old had a crush on her and “forced himself on her while they were wrestling and tickling each other.” Continue reading →
The Atlantic published two articles about pedophilia recently. The first featured convicted pedophile David Goldberg discussing whether those who view child pornography should face long prison terms. The second featured an interview with Dr. James Cantor discussing whether pedophilia is a sexual orientation.
(Before I comment on the articles, I must say that I am curious as to whether feminists will pitch a collective fit over the Atlantic’s articles like they did when the Good Men Project tried a similar experiment. I suspect they will not.)
In his article, Goldberg described his obsessive need to collect child pornography. He spent every night online searching for new images and videos or looking through his own collection. He got caught when he ordered films with naked boys in them, although the films were not pornographic.
I found his arrest curious. I am not familiar with Canadian law, so I do not know if the government prohibits any depiction of nude children. However, if the films were benign, I fail to see why they would be flagged. Goldberg does not state what exactly he purchased, but I am inclined to assume that it was something more than just the random scenes with nude boys. I would like to know what exactly prompted the police to pay him a visit. Continue reading →
There is a rule most boys learn by the time they reach high school: Be handsome. Be attractive. Don’t be unattractive.
When it comes to attracting the opposite sex, that rule is absolute. No matter how nice, how polite, or how respectful a man or boy behaves, his level of attraction plays the biggest role in whether the woman or girl will consider him likeable or creepy.
That reality poses a problem for feminists like Hugo Schwyzer. As he explains in a recent article:
What SNL played for laughs, many men (and some women) took – and still take – seriously: Some men can’t win with women, these people believe, no matter what they do or say. This attitude is best observed in the recent backlash against calling men “creepy.” […] Others argue that “creepiness” connotes something specific: male homeliness. […] I often hear something similar in my gender studies classes. […] Whenever the subject of sexual harassment or “creep-shaming” comes up in class, someone–almost always a man–makes the case that SNL was right: the only way for straight men to safely express sexual interest in women is to do so while following the skit’s three rules. With almost invariable bitterness, these young men complain that unless a guy has won striking good looks in the genetic lottery, he’s doomed to be rejected and seen as overstepping his boundaries, no matter what he does.
This eye-rolling response is nothing new for Schwyzer. He has previouslyexpresseda disregardfor men’s dating plights and condoned unfair suspicions about men by women. Schwyzer does not see this is a legitimate issue of unfairness on women’s part. Rather, he sees the “backlash” from men against being called creepy as “an unwillingness to accept [a woman’s right to decide whose attention she wants that has] given women unprecedented power to say ‘no’ to the lecherous and the predatory.”
Yet he provides no examples of anyone arguing anything remotely close to that straw man. Continue reading →