You may recall that all-dude panel of “experts” at that recent congressional hearing on contraception. One of the reasons it was an all-dude panel was that congressional Republicans wouldn’t let Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke testify on the costs of birth control. (She later testified at a separate hearing held by Nancy Pelosi.)
Apparently stating publicly how much contraception costs when it’s not covered by insurance is basically the equivalent of pooping on the flag to some misogynistic assholes, among them the always charming Rush Limbaugh, who has denounced Fluke as a “slut” and a whore, saying, at one point, that she
went before a Congressional committee and said she’s having so much sex she’s going broke buying contraceptives and wants us to buy them.
Actually, she didn’t testify about her own experience at all.
Also, does Limbaugh even know how contraception works? Yes, the number of condoms one buys depends on how often you have sex. (Or at the very least how often you hope to have sex. Who knows how many boxes of condoms, purchased in moments of optimism, have quietly expired on the shelf waiting for their purchasers to finally get their mojo working. )
But the costs of many other forms of contraception have no relation whatsoever to the frequency of sex. Women on “the pill” take a pill every day, regardless of whether they are having sex that day or not. Women using IUDs don’t run down to the health center to have one installed every time their vagina expects a visitor.
Birth control, in short, doesn’t work like Oxycontin or Viagra, the two pills about which Limbaugh seems most knowledgeable.
Sorry to belabor the obvious, which apparently isn’t so obvious if you’re a right-wing, woman-hating asshole.
Anyway, now Limbaugh seems to think he’s entitled to watch Fluke having sex:
So Miss Fluke, and the rest of you Feminazis, here’s the deal. If we are going to pay for your contraceptives, and thus pay for you to have sex. We want something for it. … We want you post the videos online so we can all watch.
Dude, what the fuck is wrong with you?
Here’s the excerpt from his radio show in which he makes this creepy demand.
You think antifeminists earning more validates your position somehow? What crackpot breed of logic is this?
IR/FF, you know that nobody talks about being Aryan except neo-Nazis, don’t you?
You talk about your superior feminist intelligence a lot, by the way.
Dude, you’re the one with the gleaming opulent horse. Someone calling you dumb isn’t touting their own intellect–they’re just saying you’re dumb*.
*(Sorry for the potentially ableist language.)
They just published a study that shows that the richer you are, the less ethical you are. Ergo, anti-feminists earn more. 😉
You think antifeminists earning more validates your position somehow? What crackpot breed of logic is this?
Feminist position: Antifeminists are more likely to be virgins and virgins are bad.
Why it is invalid:
1. There is no impartial research to suggest this is the case.
2. What research there is suggests that the contrary of the first argument is true because:
a. Male feminists earn less
b. Women are more likely to date rich men
Based on the current evidence, the claim that antifeminists are more likely to be virgins is false. 🙂
Statement assumes facts not in evidence. AFAIK, this is only said about MRAs, not antifeminists on the whole.
…Oh that’s cute, did you think you’re the real force of antifeminism?
What the fuck? You really are dumb, FF.
I’ve never heard a feminist say virgins are bad.
I’ve never heard a feminist say virgins are bad.
You have, you just repress it.
Oh it’s probably happened more than once; there’s a lot of feminists, after all. But I think he’s confusing those of us who talk about MRAs’ desperate desire for sex they’ve never had with run of the mill virgins.
Well done old chap. Now, if you could just find where anyone here (or even in the wider feminist community) made this claim I’ll get right to grooming that horse for you. I mean, that’s almost as stupid as thinking there’s some army of lifelong incels out there.
I like how his example is directly in response to antifeminists doing the same thing, but more than that, that he considers Cracked a particularly feminist thing XD
IR/FF, how do you expect us to take anything you say seriously after the Aryan horse remark?
Oh, oh, I get it now! So you don’t actually hate virgins, you just think they should suck up and take some collateral damage if it suits your agenda. That’s what you’ve been babbling about this whole time and you are just trying to phrase it more delicately. That actually explains quite a bit.
Cracked is SERIOUS FEMINIST SCHOLARSHIP, YO.
Yeah, I don’t doubt that there are feminists who look down on virgins. What I do doubt is that feminists claimed that antifeminists, as a group, don’t get laid because that requires a permanent vacation from reality, not to mention a complete ignorance of any feminist works.
FF/IR, no one here but you seems to give a fuck about virgins.
LOLLL
considers Cracked a particularly feminist thing
No, just the writer. Cracked is a humor site rather than an indoctrination site, which is why the author’s feminist propaganda was so poorly received. To be fair about every fourth or fifth comment was supportive, but then many of those were posted from accounts which had been registered after the article was written. My favorite quote:
*Thud!* The sound of my feminist panties falling after reading your article.
Yeah if treating women like people prevents you from getting laid I’m perfectly happy with that ‘collateral damage’.
I mean, you do realize that “You’re just doing this to get laid” is basically the same sort of thing, right? Why doesn’t that bother you half as much as some dude continuing the virgin shaming that is a big part of dude culture in general? Also, if “Virgins are bad” was a feminist addition to patriarchy, wouldn’t it, you know, include female virgins? XD
IR/FF, do you consider Prego Punchout a humor game or an indoctrination game?
Why doesn’t that bother you half as much as some dude continuing the virgin shaming that is a big part of dude culture in general?
It does bother me, but not as much as when you feminists do it. It’s kind of like when a black person calls me “n***er” – it bothers me, but not as much as if someone else did it.
I think it would help if IR understood that “feminist” isn’t, like, a species, or even a political party, but a person who holds a particular opinion.
I’m not responsible for every word out of the mouths of everyone who believes in women’s equality, any more than I’m going to answer for everything ever said by someone who likes cheese.
I’m not responsible for every word out of the mouths of everyone who believes in men’s equality, any more than I’m going to answer for everything ever said by someone who likes cheese.
The sheer irony of this all is making me giggle like mad, yo.
Dude, virgin shaming is a thing because dudes are supposed to get sex from women because that’s a dudely thing to do. It’s patriarchy. That thing you tend to support. I’m annoyed that a feminist is propagating it, sure, but you complaining about it is just precious XD
Said the maker of Preggo Punchout. ‘scuse, that’s wannabe maker of Preggo Punchout.
I mean, men’s equality means men losing out relative to women, because men are advantaged compared to women. So you’re not really for that, and don’t pretend otherwise, but still. You’re not really different.