I am just trying to get THIS malware infected site up and working again….it won’t let me upload any images. Will it let me make a post? Let’s see!

This, Too, Serves a Purpose






While I am the FIRST to admit I have been missing my daily Amanda Marcotte fix while she is livin’ it up at SXSW, I disagree with this article. In it Marcotte states that Steinem, Morgan and Fonda have gone TOO FAR in bringing up the idea that MAYBE we should as a nation consider the idea that the unbelievably toxic Rush Limbaugh ought to be banned from the public airwaves.

While it is true that censorship is by and large a bad idea, open to all sorts of abuses, there are many things we do not allow on our public airwaves and outright Hate Speech really OUGHT to be one of them. But more importantly, I think that WE, the “progressives”, need to allow for voices TO THE LEFT of the middle  to be heard. The Right has allowed FAR FAR RIGHT pundits, so far Right as to be throwbacks to several CENTURIES ago, to speak, and has thus been VERY successful at moving the “middle ground” to the right. So successful, that it can be truthfully stated that Nixon (NIXON!!!) would be considered A Liberal DEMOCRAT NOW!

Yet when a position is taken by a Feminist or other Liberal that is to the LEFT of the middle ground, the Progressives try to talk them back from the edge. “Come back! Come Back! You are going to get called names! We here in the middle may start to feel mildly embarrassed to be seen with you!”

We don’t let the Fringe-y Left do their part, which is to PULL THE MIDDLE GROUND LEFTWARD. Instead, we just keep letting the For-crying-out-loud QUIVVERFULS! and SLAVERY-ENDORSERS (and THIS GUY) pull the debate to the RIGHT!

We need to take a lesson from the Right: we need to LET the FAR-LEFT express their views, without policing by the Moderates. (And not to say that Fonda, Steinem and Morgan are THAT far left! The Far Left view on the Limbaugh situation would be, I dunno, advocating for the Fairness Doctrine?)

The First Stirrings of Thought

While reading about the whole “Just put an aspirin between your legs” comment by Some Idiot Somewhere, I was stimulated to think about the conundrum, if ALL the ladies are supposed to be keeping their legs together, who exactly are all these Conservative male pussyhounds supposed to be fucking? Why don’t the OBVIOUS LOGISTICAL PROBLEMS in half of the Heteros (the females) being celibate, and the other half (the males) Completely Depraved seem to occur to these idiots?

And then I thought, this is so blatant that it MUST be a feature, not a bug. What would they get out of it? Well, they would get to keep on having that Framing of Sexuality that goes like this: Man is the HUNTER!! The Pussy Hunter!! The women don’t want to/get to give it up, so then we (the males) get to use TAKE IT! In other words, Rape Culture. The “Game”. The Dominance Game.

Plus, the obvious benefit that if a woman “gets herself pregnant”, the entire male subset of the population doesn’t have to Give a Shit, because, she was slut who broke the rules! The rules that the males made up so that they would always “win” in every situation!

It’s pathetic.

More Ideas

One idea I would like to put in the novel is, there is a sympathetic male character, and although he tries to be taken seriously as a person by the women, nothing he does works and he finds himself an object of ridicule, and it is Very Confusing for him (just as it is for Us, NOW!).


ALso, and this is G*R*E*A*T, MEN are considered to be the more dumb, more romantic sex, who are fed fairy tales about finding a perfect woman, a “Princess Charming”, and having their lives be great, (and this DOES happen to a FEW men, to make it more frustrating and heartbreaking for most men) and then they are mocked for being so dumb as to BELIEVE anything like this could happen to them. Men are considered more clingy, and more loyal, and there is a saying in the society along the lines of, “No Dog is more Loyal than a Neutered Male”. (This actually IS a saying in the DOG breeding community!) Women who have espoused theirselves to a male generallly take the male totally for granted TOTALLY, because, economically the male is FUCKED if he ever leaves, for starters, and also, usually these males can be counted on to be grateful and loyal and loving, because that is their NATURE! Not like Women, who are naturally more adventurous!

Rebecca West

“I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is. I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat or a prostitute.” ~ Rebecca West.


When my Mother and my Aunt Jeannie used to write letters to each other (back in the days before the internet, way, way back when normal middle-class people only used LONG DISTANCE twice a year (Christmas and Birthdays) because it was perceived as SO EXPENSIVE) they used what I remember as a bizarre writing style, with virtually no punctuation at all, other than Dashes. (?) Now, my Aunt Jeannie was an english major who graduated from Boston University, she KNEW HOW to use punctuation. But a typical letter, written by either my Mom os my Aunt, would go like this:


The cats are all in, huddled around the fireplace- Mother can’t stop complaining about the cold-Don thinks he is going to make a million dollars with his new thing-do you have that recipe for pork roast-no one knows what to do about Aunt Helen-well I gotta go-

Love Jeannie”

Now, when I can no longer ask either of them (because they are dead), it all seems so mysterious somehow….why just dashes? I think because, written in that sort of stream of consciousness way, there was no pretense of even TRYING to write well, so it was IMPOSSIBLE to FAIL.

How deep are our fears, that so many of us don’t even TRY? To do a simple thing? Or, were they just SO RELAXED with one another, that there was no point in exerting themselves? Or, was in an epistolary style they developed when utterly sleep deprived as young mothers?