Archive | Emotional Intelligence RSS feed for this section

Like poetry? Tired of white knight bullshit? Try this on for size

29 Dec

rok

 

Blair Naso, who writes at Return of Kings, has some pretty definite ideas about the state of gender relations in society, and he is unabashed at holding men just as responsible as women for the mess we are currently witnessing. There are a few people in the Manosphere who are convinced that I am an evil traditionalist woman raping my husband of resources and giving him nothing in return (except for the 3 well-mannered, loving biological children, a comfortable, welcoming home that is appreciating in value because I take care of it, healthy, nutritious, delicious food three times a day, clean clothes and frequent sex, but who cares about that stuff, amirite?), and I tend to just avoid the debate for the most part.

 

 

I have had my say on whether I am a traditionalist, and I will engage in the debate no further, because it really isn’t a debate, as far as I am concerned.

 

There are a lot of things that Blair says that I heartily disagree with, and many more things that I do agree with, but ultimately we are unified in our thinking that something has gone very, very wrong with modern relationships between men and women. Blair not only lays the smackdown over at Return of Kings, but he writes creative works of prose and poetry as well.

 

I can’t tell you how often I browse bookshops, picking up titles that have all kinds of awards and praise plastered all over them, only to read a blurb that says something like “after divorcing her husband of 20 years, Susie takes her children…. blah blah blah” and my response is always ugh no thanks with this single mother destroying her children bullshit. I don’t want to read crap like Eat, Love, Pray. It disgusts me. It’s not empowering or enchanting or even interesting. It’s sickening.

 

book

 

So for all those men who have chosen MGTOW as a philosophy, or even just men who are interested in poetry and prose, but who do not want to read gynocentric Princess drivel, I present to you The Death of Ideology by Blair Naso.  This book is an eclectic collection of poems, lyrics, parables, fables, short stories and even an email that discusses love, relationships, sex, gender and life from the perspective of the Manosphere. It doesn’t hold back on the satire, irony or sarcasm, and Blair pulls no punches when it comes to treating women like delicate flowers in need of protection. His words can be sharp and his portrayals of both men and women rather cutting, but underlying it all is a longing for a world in which men and women can love and respect one another beyond ideologies about how men and women should be. Blair is not interested in how men and women should be.

He is interested in how they are.

Here are three short pieces from The Death of Ideology, reprinted with permission.

walking_away_9-1

 

The Physics Of Relationships or Chemistry Is Not A Science

To every sin there is

An equal and opposite reaction,

So was mine the one you expected?

Were you expecting smiles and puppies

In exchange for deceit?

It’d be nice to say that

I’m glad your friends approve of you,

But the reality is that

You’ve turned them all into enemies.

 

duel

 

A Story For The Tavern

Once there was a merchant who was of a certain age when men begin to look to marry. There were two women to whom he was prospecting. One was very beautiful, but very evil. The other, her sister, was very ugly, but very compassionate, and both very much loved him. The man could not choose to whom he should marry, so he decided that they would draw straws. The lot fell on the ugly sister, and so the wedding arrangements were made.

The beautiful sister could not stand this, and so she went to see the Fool, who lay drunk in prison. He was not really a court jester, but he had always been thought of as out of his sanity, and everyone enjoyed making jokes at him, so gradually he became known thus. He was rarely sober, but since he had inherited a coal mine to the west, he had no need to work. The Fool had always loved the Beauty, as did everyone, but she could not feel the same about such an unstable man. Nevertheless, being very evil, she did have some purposes for him every now and then. Today she asked, “If you love me, then kill my ugly sister.” “Iʼll do anything for your pleasure, my lovest.” “Uh, sure…just make sure no one knows I told you to do it.” And then she quickly left, seeking to be as distanced from him as possible.

So after he was sober and freed, the Fool went into the marketplace to find the Ugly. And when he did, he shot her in the back with his revolver. Everyone was shocked at this random shooting. Women fainted and an infant began to cry. The Ugly did not even see him, and the Fool had said nothing. The Beauty saw everything, and only smiled approvingly. “Someone arrest that man!” cried a townsperson. The constable seized the Fool and took him back to jail.

The Groom, of course, was obligated to avenge the Uglyʼs death. And so he called the Fool to a duel, as was the usual custom in those parts. This greatly worried the Beauty, so she went again into prison to see the Fool. “If you love me, then empty your gun and fire blanks so that my Groom will not die.” “Iʼll do anything for your pleasure, my dovliest.” “Right…just remember your promise.”

Meanwhile, the Groom was having second thoughts. Who was he to take a life? Was that not the responsibility of the government? He was just a civilian. No, it would not be right for him to kill the Fool. But he could not back out from the fight, for, if he was to abstain from the fight and marry the Beauty, he through his great-grandchildren would be shamed throughout the whole country. No, he would not fill his gun and instead take a hit, and thus people would cry instead of laugh at his funeral.

The next day, the two men lined up to duel. The whole town came to the village square to watch. A street vendor was selling turkey legs, and another had wooden toys to be bought by children. Suddenly, the Fool realized that he forgot his revolver at his house. “Wait!” he cried. “I will send my boy to fetch it.” So his slave ran off to get him his gun. But when the boy found it, he realized that there were no bullets inside. ‘Silly masterʼ, he thought. ʻHe forgot to load his gun. I will do it for him.ʼ

The gun having been brought back, they lined up again with their backs to each other. They took ten steps as a snare drum rolled, and then they turned around to fire. The Groom fell dead, and the Beauty ran to him, tears down her face. “My love!” she cried. “For whom now shall I hope? My future is my past!” And she took his switch-knife and cut longways her wrist. The brass band continued to play, and the crowd took no notice. A journalist went around asking important people questions, and the mayor said something about the impact this will make on something else.

The Fool saw this and began to twitch neurotically. His purpose lay dead by his own doing. He checked his gun; it was fully loaded. ʻHow!?ʼ he thought. ʻDid I forget to unload it? Surely I havenʼt made such a grave mistake!ʼ With nothing left for which to live, he put another bullet into his head, and he, too, fell dead.

And so the moral is this:

Donʼt waste your short life,

Already full of strife,

On a vain woman,

An emotional omen,

For emotionʼs a blooded knife.

 

 drunk

 

Daddy’s Little Girl

Daddy’s little girl is gonna be a slut tonight.

She’ll put on the drag for the big game.

There’ll be a dance afterward,

And then she and Hot Johnny Rocket will run.

Here is the park where she used to play

As the sweetest little girl in the first grade.

There is the Baptist church where Mama

Played the pipes and daddy smelled

Like mint and oak. She’d be dressed

Up in bows and beauty like a Southern queen.

 

Hot Rocket’s burning, and he lays her down

On the picnic table at the park.

Across the street, the church looks dead.

Groaning, the wood is uncomfortable.

She can’t stretch her back right,

But Johnny has to have his prom.

Mama gave it to Rick before she married Craig.

Daddy took it from Sarah in a tent,

Like the cherry on the top of a perfect rush.

Burning faster, Hot Rocket finishes and laughs

With a tint of embarrassment.

“Wasn’t that fun?” he pretends. And it was.

The Sunday School flower girl fell in love tonight.

Hot Rocket knows how to spread his fire.

 

She’ll graduate and marry Bill,

Then shit out three kids and be the greatest

Youth football mom ever. Her sons

Will grow up to rape cheerleaders

And her daughters will let themselves be raped.

The Baptist church won’t even notice.

 

Want more? Feel free to buy the book, and indulge in some wicked and often wickedly amusing writing, brought to you by Blair Naso.

 

Enjoy!

 

Lots of love,

 

JB

The circumcision “debate” is missing the point: adults can do whatever they want to their genitals. No one gets to carve up a baby’s hoochie!

20 Sep

 

Lots of new folks here, which is great to see, but please be advised:  do not waste your time explaining how girl’s bodies are so much more precious than boys and how male and female circumcision cannot be compared.  To me, you’re arguing that slavery was better for women because they got to be mammies and really, that’s not so bad, is it? 

 

Do. Not. Waste. Your. Time.

 

I will not publish those comments. 

 

Cutting up a baby’s genitals is barbaric.  Full stop.  The whole idea makes me just want to puke.  What are we, fucking stone age cretins imagining that wild creatures inhabit the wind and monsters lurk in the dark?

I have nothing against genital mutilation, per se.  Pierce them, tattoo them, cut them, shred them, go to town with a cheese grater on them for all I care.  It’s your body and your choice.

my choice

Where have I heard that phrase before?

Slate writer Mark Joseph Stern takes on a group he calls “Intactivists” for their supposed denial of sciency facts.

For doctors, circumcision remains a complex, delicate issue; for researchers, it’s an effective tool in the fight for global public health. But to intactivists, none of that matters. The Internet is supposed to be a marketplace of ideas, where human reason leads the best ideas to triumph. There are plenty of other loud fringe groups that flood the Internet with false information, but none of them has been as successful as the intactivists at drowning out reasoned discourse

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2013/09/intactivists_online_a_fringe_group_turned_the_internet_against_circumcision.html?wpisrc=flyouts#

Let’s see just what Mark is talking about, shall we?

The American Academy of Pediatrics recently released its new Technical Report and Policy Statement on male circumcision, concluding that current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks.

…only 1 of the arguments put forward by the American Academy of Pediatrics has some theoretical relevance in relation to infant male circumcision; namely, the possible protection against urinary tract infections in infant boys, which can easily be treated with antibiotics without tissue loss. The other claimed health benefits, including protection against HIV/AIDS, genital herpes, genital warts, and penile cancer, are questionable, weak, and likely to have little public health relevance in a Western context, and they do not represent compelling reasons for surgery before boys are old enough to decide for themselves.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/03/12/peds.2012-2896

pills

So, baby boy dinkies can get infections, which can easily be treated with antibiotics.  No tissue removal required.  I wonder how the AAP recommends treating strep throat?  By their logic, a tracheotomy ought to do it, huh?

The other benefits?  Hacking off a baby’s foreskin can help prevent HIV, genital herpes, genital warts and penile cancer?

Well, aside from the penile cancer, aren’t the aforementioned things you acquire by fucking? How many baby boys are out banging that cute chick from swimming class?  If you’re mutilating an infant in the hopes of preventing the spread of HIV, I think you may have jumped the gun a little.

Babies don’t have sex.

And penile cancer?  It’s pretty uncommon in the West, and rarely seen in men under the age of 50. Again, that is a stupid justification for cutting a baby.

Whether circumcision results in reduced sexual pleasure really doesn’t concern me.  Getting sidetracked by that debate obscures the point:  if an adult freely chooses to surgically remove his foreskin, then the risk is his to bear.  A baby cannot make the decision to cut away part of his flesh, and no matter what the consequences for his pleasure, his basic right to bodily autonomy has been violated in a way that should strike almost all of us as a completely and utterly horrifying.

Who takes a knife to an infant?

girls

And of course, when the infant in question is dressed in pink and sports frilly bloomers, we all respond in EXACTLY that way. Cutting an infant girl’s genitals is barbaric and criminal.

The main reason I am even addressing this so-called debate is because of this double standard.

Feministe: In Defence of the Sanctimonious Women’s Studies Set has a piece about those damn mouthy men who insist boys deserve the same basic rights as girls to NOT have their genitals sliced off, and it’s kind of stomach churning to read the commenters who get all shrieky about how cutting a girl is SO MUCH WORSE than cutting a boy.

Every time female genital cutting is mentioned on Feministe — every time — someone from the “intactivist” community shows up to derail the conversation and make it all about the alleged horrors of male circumcision.

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2013/09/18/how-intactivists-are-ruining-the-debate-on-circumcision/

Alleged horrors?

Alleged?

Are you fucking kidding me?  A surgical blade is used to slice off the skin that protects the end of an infant boy’s penis, usually WITHOUT ANAESTHETIC.

circumcision

Does this picture make you flinch? What part of that is not horror?

Part of the feminist response is ignorance – they just don’t know what is involved in male circumcision, but part of it is the ugly truth that a whole lot of feminists really don’t give a fuck what happens to infant boys, and some are probably even gleeful about the pain little boys endure having this barbarous act carried out on them.

Getting into debates about the specific outcomes or consequences of circumcision lets the main point slide under the bloodied waters:  you either believe in the right to bodily sexual autonomy or you don’t.

There is no reasonable argument to be made that women deserve to reach adulthood with their genitals intact and that boys do not.  Arguing about the degree of cutting, or effects on sexual pleasure or disease prevention or any other aspect of this kind of mutilation is a way to divert attention away from the fact that CHILDREN’S GENITALS ARE BEING MUTILATED.

My advice to intactivists is to stick to the point:

uncut

Every child should be protected from a blade taken to their crotch, full stop.  And every adult has the right to do whatever they like to their crotch.  If you want to cut your genitals as an expression of your faith, go right ahead.

When you’re 18.  Make the choice yourself.

Arguing about what forms of mutilation are acceptable is like arguing about which people it is acceptable to enslave.

Slavery is acceptable or it is not.

Cutting up babies is acceptable or it is not.

When anyone argues that it’s okay to cut boys, but not girls, that tells you a whole lot about that person and how they feel about boys and men in general.  Couching the argument in terms of degrees or rationales or outcomes is pure sophistry, designed to draw your attention away from the fact that women’s bodies belong to women and men’s bodies belong to everybody.

Cutting little boys is the first step in getting them to understand they are mere utilities.  Something disposable, and they should get used to it.  They will be thrown into trenches, jails, dirty, shitty  difficult jobs, and one bedroom flats should they be foolish enough to marry and then face the “fairness” of divorce courts.

Let me clear here:  anyone who tries to argue on this blog that cutting girls is just ever so much worse than cutting boys will be banned.  Cutting infants  is a sick, disgusting, medieval practice and I am not amenable to any discussion of why it should continue.  Perhaps that will result in no comments at all. That’s fine.

My purpose today is to shine a light on the fact that the “debate” about circumcision grants women bodily sexual autonomy automatically, while claiming that men have no such right or need.

And that is bullshit.  Any discussion of infant genital mutilation should center on one topic and one topic only:  bodily sexual autonomy.

baby body

If men can be denied the right to bodily autonomy based on faith, then why can’t women be denied the same right? Abortion should be outlawed based on the faith of the pregnant woman’s parents?  Selective service should be outlawed based on the faith of the male draftee’s parents?

Well, that’s one way to make sure all the rich folks convert to Quakerism, isn’t it?

yarmulke

Orthodox Jews follow a rule that requires them to keep their heads covered.  The men wear a little hat called a yarmulke or kippa.  Lots of Jewish men have decided that there are plenty of ways to observe their faith without following an ancient ritual that singles them out and makes their personal beliefs public.

And holy moly, didn’t the whole fucking world just adapt and move on.  I could spend several thousand words describing which ancient laws we have decided are not worth observing any more, and yet religion still maintains a stranglehold on most people’s lives.

http://www.humanistsofutah.org/2002/WhyCantIOwnACanadian_10-02.html

Whatever.  I don’t care.  Believe what you like, just don’t try to govern my life based on beliefs that have no evidence to support them other than faith.  I require a little more to go on.

So let’s say we outlaw genital cutting until children have reached the age of consent.  How many Jewish men will choose to undergo the ritual as an expression of their faith?  Yeah, probably about the same number that continue to wear yarmulkes.

Give adults the information and choice and you will see this cruel ritual cease to exist almost immediately.  Because it IS cruel and stupid and ugly and pointless and medieval.

big red

Feminists say “hey, MRAs, you don’t need a movement because we’re fighting for all the same things you are.  We’ve got it covered”.

http://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/solution-mra-problems-more-feminism/

Oh really?

Circumcision is a perfect litmus test of just how much faith we can put in that claim.  You either support the right to sexual bodily autonomy.

Or you don’t.

There is nothing else to debate.

Is it your body, and your choice?

Or only your body and your choice when you’re a woman?

That’s a little far off the equality mark, isn’t it?

And of course, that’s exactly the point.  Feminists aren’t arguing for equality.  They are arguing for special privileges and protections that apply only to women and girls.

Yeah, well, fuck you feminists.  Put your money where your mouth is.

Protect little boys as well as little girls.

I’ll wait here for the day that happens.

field

Crickets.

Still chirping.

What a surprise.

Lots of love,

JB

Attention high school girls: please don’t fall in love with a boy because that is an excellent way to get abused. Just give blowjobs instead.

19 Aug

Hook-up culture is STILL getting all the proper lady writers in a tizzy, and it seems like the blame for this sad state of affairs has not been laid squarely enough. It really looks an awful lot like a whole bunch of ladies are just sluts, but then again maybe the whole thing is a figment of everyone’s imagination?

pearls

Hanna Roisin at least takes a stab at trying to understand what it all means, and remarkably, she suggests that “people” have a fraught relationship with sex in general.

Maybe it means that people don’t take sex as seriously as they used to. Maybe it means women are less afraid of it than they used to be. Maybe it means that young people have learned to incorporate sex into their definition of friendship. Maybe it means sex isn’t so loaded, and doesn’t put you on a path to marriage or a real relationship anymore.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/08/15/hookup_culture_doesn_t_exist_new_study_shows.html?wpisrc=flyouts

Well, Hannah clearly needs to be spending more time with her fellow Double XX bloggers, because hook-up culture is far more than just “sex”, my pretty. Hook-up culture is actually a very clever strategy designed to allow vulnerable young women the opportunity to escape the inevitable abuse that comes with having a relationship with an icky, violent, cootie-ridden BOY.

Yuck.

Boys.

First they infect you with their childish crudeness, then they beat the hell out of you because once you admit you like a boy, everyone knows it’s punching bag city from there on out.

bag

Right?

According to Amanda Hess, that’s exactly the risk young women run when they think in terms of anything OTHER than fly-by blowjobs after gym class.

Women in their teens and 20s still face an elevated risk of abuse and assault. But confining their relationships to casual sexts instead of jumping into intense relationships could actually help girls avoid violence from their partners now and later in life.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/08/16/nbc_sexting_story_the_today_show_takes_on_teen_hook_up_culture_internet.html

Hess, who apparently has a sliver of conscience left when it comes to perpetuating deeply hateful stereotypes against boys in particular, admits that rape and domestic violence in the population at large are declining at precipitous rates.

…when it comes to real crimes, modern American relationships have actually become a lot less “extreme” in recent decades. Incidents of rape have declined by as much as 85 percent since the 1970s (and when they do happen, victims are more likely to report the crime). Domestic violence incidents have also dropped precipitously since the ‘90s.

But those menacing boys tipping from adolescence into fully realized adult manhood still scare the bejeebus out of her. Even though women can and will chuck a few head shots themselves, and plenty won’t hesitate to settle their disagreements with a little bloodshed, Amanda is still deeply concerned the poor duckies might find themselves trapped in an abusive relationship with an intimate partner.

During the past two ­and-a-half decades, official statistics suggest that female delinquency has undergone substantial changes compared with male delinquency. Between 1980 and 2005, arrests of girls increased nationwide, while arrests of boys decreased (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2006)

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/218905.pdf

Facts don’t bother Amanda, though.

[Boys] are seen as predators, and girls, their prey.

Boys trapped in abusive relationships with their highschool sweethearts are shit out of luck. Man up, you pussies! Who lets a girl hit them?

http://www.examiner.com/article/male-victims-of-domestic-violence-live-pain-fear-and-quiet-shame

What’s a girl to do? Well, concentrate on school, of course. Give yourself alternatives to endless beatings at the hands of your teenage Romeo! What Juliet needs to do is shift the balance of power into HER corner.

power

…intimate partner violence also drops “as women’s alternatives outside their relationships improve,” they found. As women secure higher educations and increase their earning potential, they’re “able to achieve self-sufficiency in the long-run.” When “battered women can support themselves, they are both more likely to leave and have more power within their relationships if they stay.”

And see how brilliantly hook-up culture fits into that?

Sexting is not “something that creates a very secure relationship,” child development specialist Dr. Robyn Silverman tells Lauer. Kids tell her that “hook up culture makes it so they can get a competitive edge in college and high school. They’re not worried about the relationship. They’re focused on school and the things that matter to them.”

And what things matter to kids, anyways? According to her own article, it’s not the pleasures of random sex with people you barely know.

love

…boys “often expressed a desire for a deeper connection with girls, but felt confused about how to make it happen.”

…when the boy sent her another message telling her that “he liked her,” she became “intrigued” by the possibility of a real relationship with him.

Let’s keep in mind that these are HIGH SCHOOL boys and girls we are talking about. Despite their own stated interests in actually exploring intimate, connected, meaningful, emotional relationships with one another – something BOTH boys and girls aspire to – Hess and her ilk continue to insist that boys really ARE predators, and girls really ARE prey. No matter how ardently, or clumsily the aspiration for a deeper connection is expressed, girls need to always keep in mind that BOYS ARE DANGEROUS.

threat

A disgusting text from a boy is bad, but a serious commitment with the sender could be a lot more dangerous.

Some young ladies, of course, are simply not going to buy into the myth that a relationship with a boy is pretty much asking to be regularly back-handed, and the name we have for those girls is STUPID. No matter. We’ll do our best to help them choose the least rotten apple!

First up, try and avoid the 50% of young men who volunteer and give back to their communities. I mean, sure, philanthropy is nice and all that, but when boys volunteer they still have to be all BOY about it, taking on physically demanding and challenging activities, and helping people younger than themselves learn about fair play and rules and winning and losing and all that sort of nonsense.

coach

Boys were more likely to undertake physical activities such as environmental cleanup or working with younger children in sports, while girls were more likely to help the homeless and other needy people or to work with arts groups.

Boys are just practicing for the inevitable moment they will get to overpower and abuse the girls silly enough to think they are, oh, lovely, caring human beings. Don’t buy the lie, ladies!

http://philanthropy.com/article/Half-of-American-Teenagers/135278/

Stay away from all those boys involved in extracurricular activities, especially sports and student governance, which lead to high self-esteem and the development of leadership qualities! High self-esteem in boys can only mean they feel free to beat the crap out of their girlfriends. Predator/prey, remember?

council

A considerable difference was observed between males and females in athletics and sports team participation in both school- and community-based activities. School-based extracurricular activities were appraised as most beneficial to the development of self-esteem and leadership role development.

http://lin.ca/Uploads/cclr10/CCLR10-112.pdf

And for heaven’s sake, steer way clear of those young entrepreneurial men who are increasingly one of the driving forces of innovation and development, not just in the modern economies, but around the world! Ladies have good reasons not to dirty their pretty mitts with tough and scrabble, live or die BUSINESS.

start up

In other words, in contrast to young men, young women are less likely to see opportunities, have a higher fear of failure and therefore, less likely to engage in entrepreneurship.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/babson/2012/12/05/closing-the-gender-gap-for-women-entrepreneurs/

Those boys are just trying to get money and power so they can abuse their girlfriends.

Teenage boys: more likely to get involved with their communities and schools, volunteer with children, create meaningful business ventures and do the dirty work we need as a culture to survive.

electro

Data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics for all workers suggests that male workers are much more at risk than female. In 2009, 93 percent of the workers in America who died in the job were men.

• Also in July, 17-year-old plumber Benjamin Graham died in Albany, Georgia after being electrocuted while working under a home on a water pipe.

• In August, 16-year-old Damon Springer of Osgood, Ohio was struck by a bobcat frontend loader while working with his father in a family tree service company. Springer’s father did not see the boy and accidentally backed into him, crushing him.

• In September, 17-year-old Stephen N. Tiller was killed when crushed by a garbage truck while working for a family-owned sanitation company. Tiller was riding in the front of a front-loading garbage truck when the truck hit some bumps and sent the boy and another worker flying in front of the truck, which then ran him over.

• In October, 16-year-old Armando Ramirez died in Lamont, California after inhaling hydrogen sulfide in a drainage tunnel at Community Recycling and Resource recycling company

http://www.travelingsalescrews.info/pdf/2012_worst_jobs.pdf

Amanda Hess is rather audacious to draw an analogy between prey and predator in her writing. Does she honestly think that some of us, especially the mothers of sons, won’t see the truth? These grown women who sit in air-conditioned offices with their high heels and manicures, chastising their younger counterparts not to trust or love young men are the predators.

woman

And both young men and women are the prey.

When a grown women who presumably has a modicum of sense and humanity and understanding tells young women that random blowjobs are a good idea because hey, at least you will avoid being abused by that evil boy, it’s time to question who is speaking in our culture, and what damage is being done.

The TODAY show panel talks about that like it’s a bad thing, but “real relationships” don’t erase the potential for abuse; in some cases, they leave girls more vulnerable to repeat offenders.

The repeat offender here isn’t the hapless boy sending poorly worded texts to a girl he likes. The repeat offender is Amanda herself. The need to spin stories ever more crassly, to point blank treat young women as if they are stupid and young men as if they are monsters is telling in itself.

The cracks are beginning to show. The rhetoric of hate is becoming so amplified, it can only lead to one outcome: revolution.

rev

The sadness of the women’s movement is that they don’t allow the necessity of love. See, I don’t personally trust any revolution where love is not allowed.

Maya Angelou

Me either, Maya. And one revolution always follows the next.

Sooner or later.

I’m betting on sooner.

Lots of love,

JB

%d bloggers like this: