Do we desire to be cradled, and then carried throughout life to our graves by this partisan propelled bureaucratic monstrosity? … as individuals of sovereign dignity, are we now so terrified, bewildered, and impotent that our main purpose is to seek asylum from the potential hazards of freedom? Have we no faith in our natural strengths and abilities?
Senate Minority Leader, Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has weighed in on Tara Reade’s sexual assault allegation against presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, Joe Biden. He finds Biden’s “explanation” sufficient.
I have heard Joe Biden’s explanation. I think it’s sufficient. I think he will be a great candidate, I think he will be a great president
— Chuck Schumer
Of course Creepy Uncle Joe’s “explanations” have been nothing be denials without substance or corroborating evidence. But, denial is sufficient for Democrats if and when the accused is a Democrat as well.
It seems like a far cry from their witch-hunt against Brett Kavanaugh but it’s really just the flip-side of the same derangement. They were going to #BelieveAnyWoman and any allegation against Kavanaugh because he was President Trump’s nominee to the SCOTUS and they’re going to #DisbelieveAnyWoman making similar allegations against Biden because he’s their sole chance to unseat President Trump.
At first pass, this may seem counterintuitive since Democrats have proven by their unalloyed support of the alleged rapist, Joe Biden to be hypocrites. Yet, it is truer to state that they are not hypocrites; they’re Democrats, since being a Democrat involves a plethora of cultural, cognitive, and moral shortcomings, of which, rank hypocrisy is only one exemplar.
One of the sad facts of this “woke” world is that Misogyny is like Racism; certain sorts, for their own purposes, “Humpty Dumpty” the term. I.e., those sorts will and do ignore any normative, objective definition of “Misogyny” in favor of their own agenda-driven interpretation of it. Anything is else is rejected.
You see, in the minds of feminists, you don’t have to hate or dislike women to be a misogynist.
All it takes for these sorts to label you as a misogynist is for you to fail to fully agree with whatever the current “point” is that any feminist is trying to make at that moment. It doesn’t even take any act – by word, deed, or facial expression/body language – to be labeled as such. It only takes not making it perfectly clear that you wholeheartedly and with guilt and shame in your heart agree with the point being made.
My initial question was “Is misogyny simply hatred toward women?” The answer is a loud and clear “no.” A misogynist is not simply a person who hates women, it’s a person who does, or would, hate women who are not subordinate, women with power and status, women who can stand up for themselves and make their own decisions.
And yes, this womyn isn’t really a crackpot. She’s a regular contributor to Psychology Today, which is generally considered a respectable professional outlet. Hence, since she’s so published, one can’t claim that hers is an outlier position at all. This is the mainstream feminist position.
And, of course, it’s Dr. Broggard’s sort who are the sole arbiters of what hating women who are not subordinate, women with power and status, women who can stand up for themselves and make their own decisions looks like. Indeed, they only accept their own definitions for: hate, power, status, standing up for themselves, and making their own decisions.
As in all such “Social Justice” matters, Humpty Dumpty reigns supreme.
And They Do Say It’s All Men
Yes, You can forget any idea of claiming to any of this sort that you’re not one of the minority of men who behaves badly towards women. Just being a man is enough to taint you with misogyny. You’re only “out” is to prove to them that you’re ashamed of yourself, your gender, and society; agree with all their points; and are taking concrete steps to further womyn’s success at the cost of your own and other men’s.
Manne tosses out the common thinking that misogyny is equivalent to despising all women, and instead offers that it’s a way to keep women in their place. Misogyny, she writes, is “the system that operates within a patriarchal social order to police and enforce women’s subordination and to uphold male dominance.” Like a shock collar used to keep dogs behind an invisible fence, misogyny, she argues, aims to keep women—those who are well trained as well as those who are unruly—in line. The power of Manne’s definition comes from its ability to bring together various behaviors and events under one umbrella.
Yes, it’s another call to action to end the “Patriarchy.” So, of course, #YesAllMen are guilty of being complicit in it just by the very fact that they’re men. In their minds, all men were born and raised as misogynists, meaning that all men are complicit but no man can be innocent.
Some evidence of this from Everyday Feminism:
Dear Well-Meaning Men Who Believe Themselves to Be Safe, Thereby Legitimizing the “Not All Men” Argument,
Let’s start here, even though this should go without saying: We don’t think that all men are inherently abusive or dangerous. Plenty of men aren’t. There are men that we love very much – men around whom we feel mostly safe and unthreatened; men who, in fact, support, respect, and take care of us on familial, platonic, romantic, and sexual levels. Not every man has violated us individually; for most of us, there are plenty of men that we trust. We know what you mean by “not all men” – because, on a basic level, we agree with you.
But the socialization of men is such that even a good man – a supportive man, a respectful man, a trusted man – has within him the potential for violence and harm because these behaviors are normalized through patriarchy.
And as such, we know that even the men that we love, never mind random men who we don’t know, have the potential to be dangerous. Surely, all people have that potential. But in a world divided into the oppressed and the oppressors, the former learn to fear the latter as a defense mechanism.
So when you enter a space – any space – as a man, you carry with yourself the threat of harm.
Of course, in most cases, it’s not a conscious thing. We don’t think that most men move through the world thinking about how they can hurt us. We don’t believe The Patriarchy™ to be a boardroom full of men posing the question “How can we fuck over gender minorities today?” You would be hard-pressed to find a feminist who actively believes that.
But what makes (yes) all men potentially unsafe – what makes (yes) all men suspect in the eyes of feminism – is the normalized violating behaviors that they’ve learned, which they then perform uncritically.
Make no mistake: When you use the phrase “not all men” – or otherwise buy into the myth of it – you’re giving yourself and others a pass to continue performing the socially sanctioned violence of “masculinity” without consequence, whether or not that’s your intention.
In truth, the only thing approaching defiance against this kind of violence is to constantly check and question your own learned entitlement – and that of other men. But you can’t do that if you’re stuck in the space of believing that “not all men” is a valid argument.
So we wanted to call you in, well-meaning men, to talk about these four points that you’re missing when you claim “not all men” as a way to eschew responsibility for patriarchal oppression.
It’s really just an example of how exactly misogyny is like racism. It’s a nebulous thing, defined solely by those who feel that they’re victims of it or who are those people’s “allies,” and is set up specifically and deliberately as a inherent, endemic, and profound systemic problem that labels huge groups of individuals as being complicit while allow none to escape it taint.
Men don’t even have to do anything to be treated as oppressors. We always carry with us the “threat of harm.”
Oh yeah! And don’t – as I been doing the whole post-issue forth any dissent whatsoever from the feminists’ doctrine and dogma. As the 1st Extrapolation (moving it out of internet comments) of Lewis’ Law states: comments about feminism justify feminism.
The unborn children in America are the new and hopefully last niggers. And yes, I use “niggers” advisedly, pointedly, and to purpose since somehow our own unborn children are considered by too many to be no more persons than the African tribals that were purchased and brought to America as chattel and beasts of burden.
And, in what is no longer even a shade of surprise, it’s largely the same sorts claiming that certain sorts aren’t persons. Then, we were always doomed to repeat history.
The only questions before us now are will the modern-day Abolitionists have the courage to wage another civil war over this issue and, if so, what form of punitive actions will be taken during the next Reconstruction.
Joe Biden’s – aka Creepy Uncle Joe – current woes are actually lamentable, though entirely expected, or almost so. It was likely only a matter of time and “usefulness” before some woman or set of women voiced outrage over Biden’s very well established and documented misunderstanding of people’s, especially women’s, personal space.
So, now Ole Joe is embroiled in debacle and the Left is seemingly split upon the matter, with some siding with Biden and other’s reviling him. And the debacle is exacerbated by both Biden not being able to say he didn’t do it and by his utter inability not to gaffe when put under pressure. And that is, to me at least, both lamentable and very indicative of some of our nation’s current problems.
Yes, Biden has a long history of invading people’s personal spaces and making them uncomfortable. But also yes, all reports indicate that he is a kind man who never once meant anything “appropriateness” by that behavior and held neither disrespect for- or ill will towards anyone he acted in that way towards. And #IBelieveHim! 😉
Yet, according to the Feminists and their enablers, motive and intent don’t matter at all. All that matters is how the woman or womyn feels about whatever happened. Indeed, by the same rules, any argument by a man about his intentions is just “mansplaining,” “patriarchal condescension,” and “enabling Rape Culture.”
But that just brings up the nasty, tangled knot of hypocrisy among the Left over this sort of issue. So many of them made is stridently clear that they “believed” the utterly unconfirmed and refuted accusations against Justice Kavanaugh but believe Biden to the point of accusing the women who complained of being political operatives. But, at the same time, so many of them who signal as true believers of #MeToo, being apparently as against Biden as they were Kavanaugh, seem to be associated with other 2020 Democrat candidates.
Yeah, it’s a lamentable mess. But at least it’s not our problem. It’s the Democrats problem.