Your Religion Is Your Religion, Not Everyone Elses

I’ve been pretty harsh in my views toward superstitious beliefs in general and religion in particular.  You find what I have to say offensive.  Thats fine, because I find things you have to say offensive as well.  There is nothing wrong with being offended. It happens to everyone about something or other at some point.

What I find annoying and sad is when you feel that I am somehow persecuting you by my stance on these issues.  This is just plain wrong.  That you feel persecuted reflects your sense of privilege and superiority because you feel that  you are right because your god tells you so.  It is exactly this self righteous attitude that I despise and rail against.  It isn’t your beliefs I find offensive, but the effects of those beliefs upon everyone else.

I believe that everyone has a right to believe whatever they want to believe; to worship (or not) as they wish.  The one caveat is that your beliefs and your worshiping are yours, not everyone else’s.   Talk about them to others if you (and they) wish,  but don’t preach.   Express your views on morality, but don’t seek to impose your morality upon others.

This also goes for your actions.  If you believe that prayer alone can cure you, great.  Just don’t insist on only using prayer when your child or someone else you love is ill.  If they are receiving medical treatment and you think prayer will help, fine.  But don’t insist that god will save your loved one by prayer alone because plenty of people have died needlessly because prayer was substituted for sound medical treatment.

Also, don’t try to legislate your morality so that it is imposed upon all of us.  The current GOP/Religious Right’s war against women and LGTB’s is a perfect example.  It is religion that causes the party of small government that does not intrude into our private lives to perpatrate the hypocrisy of passing laws that intrude into the most private parts of our lives: reproductive rights and the right to chose who to love and who to commit your life to.

It has often been said that religion cause good people to do terrible things.  History certainly seems to bear this out.   The imposition of Islam upon those that they conquered; the crusades where the Christian did the same to the Muslims and Jews; the hundreds of years of wars and the burning of thousands at the stake over differing versions of Christianity; the thousands of Muslim and Hindus killed in the partitioning of India.

So, feel free to hold your beliefs dear to you.  Worship as you wish.  But, keep these things out of the public sphere where they can do no harm, or infringe upon the rights of the rest of us.

Advertisements

The American Taliban: For Real

Many writers and bloggers have used the term, “American Taliban”, over the past decade or so as a metaphor for the growing influence of the religious right in politics and the public sphere.  It is meant to highlight those on the right who would like to see everyone live by their religious standards.  It has often been used as hyperbole in order to show the potential dangers of letting religion hijack the political process in this country.  Until now.  It is hyperbole no longer, but a frightening fact.

In Arizona, the state legislature is considering a bill that could require that employees provide proof to their employers that any contraceptives they use are proscribed for medical reasons.

Arizona House Bill 2625, authored by Majority Whip Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale, would permit employers to ask their employees for proof of medical prescription if they seek contraceptives for non-reproductive purposes, such as hormone control or acne treatment.

“I believe we live in America. We don’t live in the Soviet Union,” Lesko said. “So, government should not be telling the organizations or mom and pop employers to do something against their moral beliefs.” *

This is a blatant attempt by the religious right to force their views on everyone else.  Given that this law and other similar ones being passed by state legislatures across the country, this is no longer the propagation of fanatic religious ideology in principle, but in practice.  This is the real American Taliban.

The Taliban in Afganistan forced their version of Islamic Shari’a law, based upon their reading go the Quran, upon the people of that country.  Not only could women not control what happened to their own bodies, they were forbidden to vote, to receive an education, and to even go outside without covering themselves from head to toe in burkas.  Women who were suspected of committing adultery were stoned to death or beheaded.

This is, of course, extreme, but at its core it is no different than the American Taliban who wish to enforce their Christian shari’a law, based on the Bible, upon the rest of us.  Many of the leaders and prominent members of the religious right have stated unequivocally that their goal is nothing less than to turn this country into a Christian nation and replace the U.S. Constitution with the Bible as the guiding document of our laws and government.

Some of these same people have called for the imprisonment, or even death, of homosexuals, and the complete and total submission of women to men.  They call for the abandonment of  science and reason, the guiding principles of which have made this country the world power it is today.  They would joyfully lead us to become a population of ignorant servants to their god who will quickly fall behind the rest of the world in technology, just as other great civilizations such as Rome, Egypt, and Persia have done after religious dogma replaced education and reason.

If you think I am being alarmist, think again.  Laws have already been passed to force women to submit to humiliating medical examinations in order to get an abortion, to force the teaching of religious dogma in place of science in classrooms, and to force doctors to lie to women about the health of their unborn child.  These laws are real and they are just the beginning, unless we, as voters, put a stop to it.

For you Christian women out there, if you ever felt sorry for the poor women of Afghanistan under the Taliban, or the Ayatollahs in Iran, just look no further than these examples to see what your life could eventually be like if the American Taliban continue to push their fanatical agenda upon the American people.

Wether you believe that this country was found upon Christianity or not,  you can’t deny that it was built upon the idea of religious freedom.  Religious freedom means not just being able to practice your own religion and to live your life as your personal set of morals tell you, it also means freedom from having to bend to others’ particular religious beliefs.  You would never want someone to tell you how you can worship or live your life, but that is exactly what the American Taliban is trying to accomplish.  Unfortunately, alarmingly, they are starting to succeed.

 

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2012/03/14/arizona-demonstrates-why-the-pill-isnt-just-for-family-planning-isnt-enough-on-its-own/

If You Care About Women’s Rights, Vote for Obama

 

<!– @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } A:link { so-language: zxx } –>

Obama is running for reelection. I voted for Obama and I will do so again. It is not that I am particularly impressed with his tenure as President, I’m not. He has certainly not lived up to the vast majority of promises he made in his campaign. His failure to roll back much of Dubya’s disastrous social programs is disappointing, to say the least (I’m going with infuriating).

A friend of mine said that one of the reasons she will vote for him again is that he has already appointed two Supreme Court Justices to the high court and that appointments to the high court are possibely the most important, and certainly the longest lasting legacy, any President can hope to have.  Obama’s appointments are two women:

Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Age: 56. Liberal.

Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Age 50. Presumed liberal.

There is also:

Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Age: 77. Appointed by William Clinton in 1993. Liberal.

The reason these women are so important to have on the court (and given their ages we can hope to have all of them there for at least another decade, and two of them for many decades to come) is that we need these liberal, female judges to counteract the conservative bent of the current court.

This is vitally important given the current conservative war on women currently being waged in congress. A republican in the White House would be a disaster for the rights of every woman in this country. Women’s rights are in already in precarious position with laws being introduced in the House to limit women’s reproductive rights, including trying to redefine rape so that women and girls who are raped can’t get a legal abortion.

There is a huge push across this country by conservatives to strip women of their rights, from the national level all the way down to the local level. Even If these rights aren’t yet being limited legally, the idea of doing so is becoming culturally and socially acceptable.   When it becomes culturally and socially acceptable to curtail people’s rights, legal means to do so aren’t usually far behind. Just ask any Japanese American over the age of 60.  

Have I Read The Bible, Hell Yes! That’s Why I’m an Atheist!

A childhood friend on FB responded to my post, The Bible is the Literal Word of God; Except When Its Not. Here is what he said:

“have you read the Bible? or are you simply regurgitating ignorance from others? I have offered answers, yet I have not been taken up on this. Again, it is very irresponsible to propagate unsubstantiated opinions. Why this venom towards Christians and the Bible? If you wish to be an athiest be one, that is your right. Why the all out war on the belief of others. What is freethinking? Oh just freedom to think apart from responsibility and accountablity? Freedom from any form of religious thinking? Maybe free thinking should be folks who examine an issue and think for themselves. Not simply robots who cannot originate a though for themselves. Freethinking is a misnomer”


Yes, I’ve read the bible, cover to cover, at least twice, and many parts of it, the New Testament especially, many, many times over the years. It was this almost continual reading of the bible that made me see more and more contradictions that I just couldn’t rationalize away. Then I studied the history of the writing of the New Testament, how there were originally hundreds of gospels and competing camps of bishops supporting one version of the theology against the others. I learned about the political machinations that took place to arrive at the New Testament we have now. It was, totally and completely, cover to cover, created to fulfill political agendas of the most powerful bishops and the rulers who backed them.

Why do I have such venom toward the bible and the people who misuse it (I refuse to lump all Christians into one group as this would be irresponsible)? Ask Madeline Neumann, a 12-year-old girl whose parents, based on their religion, allowed her to die of diabetic ketoacidosis rather than save her life by allowing physicians to administer insulin and fluids. They thought prayer would save her. It didn’t. Ask the thousands of people who have been killed over the last 2000 years for their refusal to follow the prevailing version of Christianity. Ask the irresponsible ministers and political leaders who wish to brand homosexuals as immoral, second-class citizens. Ask the 156,000,000 women who’s reproductive organs are held hostage by a religiously motivated white, male, privileged class of cretins.

I wage an all out war on anything that conspires to take rights away from people. That includes holier-than-thou Christians, militant, closed minded Muslims, Zionistic Jews willing to steal and kill to get their land, white supremacists who wish to overthrow the U.S Government, wide-eyed, white, privileged Greenpeace and PETA people who would rater see millions starve and die of disease than allow GM foods and medicines tested on animals be developed that could save countless lives.

Christianity is my main focus because, almost without exception, all of the people in this country right now who would seek to take rights away from others self-identify as Christians and claim that their sense of morality comes from their religion. If things change and the largest group of privileged people in power become Muslims or Hindus or Wiccans, I’ll fight them just as loudly and forcefully.

I don’t claim to be able to tell people how to live their lives. As long as no one is being harmed, taken advantage of, or being forced either by law or by custom to kowtow to some group’s beliefs, then I say let people believe whatever they like. You can believe in God and Jesus, you can believe that Homosexuals will go to hell, but keep that belief within your churches and homes, don’t force it on others.

I don’t go door to door trying to get people not to believe in God. I don’t support any law that would outlaw any kind of religion or religious belief. I don’t lobby for my personal beliefs to be the law of the land, but don’t try to tell me that Christians aren’t doing that every day, in every town and state in the country. When the Christian majority (and yes, you are well over a 70% majority) tries to tell the rest of us what we can do and say and believe and think, then yes, I will fight for my rights and the rights of everyone else who are forced to listen to people tell us we are less American and less patriotic than they are because we don’t believe in their god. This country was founded on religious freedom (freedom for and from religion) and freedom of conscience, not on Christianity or any other religion. Yes, I will fight for that kicking and screaming, every fucking step of the way.

Religious Thinking Hits Home

A good friend of mine from my Army days has unfriended me on Facebook. He took issue with my post of the morality of sex acts. Here I present his message and my response. Other that my response to him, I don’t really have anything more to say about this, except that it make me very sad.

Ed Connor February 1 at 2:42pm Report
Jay

I saw your extremist writing on sex not being connected to morality. As a father and a husband, you should really be ashamed of yourself and deeply embarassed and you really need to get a grip on reality. I doubt that hurt spouses whose partners have commited adultery, or prosititutes whose lives have been destroyed or children who have been sexually exploited, or those suffering from aids or other veneral diseases would agree with your bizarre and warped views promoting sexual immorality on a wholesale scale. Your children are in deep trouble given your bizzare views. So given your criterea, I guess your ex “Holly” was justified in engaing in beastiality and other infidelities. I guess the the children victimized by pedophile priests are in the wrong and need to put up with having their persons violated by these perverts. I guess you want one big Soddom and Gommorah to prevail. I see through you and other perverts like you and that is this: You want a life of unrestrained immorality with no accountability or consequences. That is what you promote and I’m sure that is what you teach your children and you deride and insult any people AKA Christians, who disagree with you.

You are not the same person I was friends with and we have nothing in common and I want no part of what you espouse. As such, I do not want to have any further contact with you. Thanks.

Ed

Jay Walker February 1 at 7:32pm
You know, Holly cheated on me. She tore out my heart and ground it into the dust. But it wasn’t the sex, it was the betrayal of trust. It was taking me for granted.

I teach my children to respect each other and other people and to treat people as they would like to be treated (you know, that do unto others stuff from that bible of your). Most importantly I teach them to be honest, with themselves and with others.

I am all about accountability and consequences. I’m about adults being open and honest with each other about their feelings and emotions, their needs and their desires.

Immorality is lying, to yourself and to others. It is hiding the secret desires that you have and pretending that they don’t exist. When you are open and honest about everything then you can decide to act or not act on those desires, but if you do decide to act you must do so with the understanding and support and agreement of the one you love. If they don’t agree or support you, then you have a moral obligation not to act. The morality comes from your respect of one another. The immorality comes from disrespect, selfishness and disregard of other’s feelings and well being, not from the acts themselves. The actual act has no morality attached to it, only the intent and execution makes it moral or immoral.

I am sad that you choose not to have anything to do with me. I certainly don’t agree with your religious views, but I believe you have every right to believe as you choose and I would never let that fact that you believe in some things that I find disagreeable influence our friendship. Unless you have done me harm by believing as you do, then I have no reason to not be friends with you. You haven’t done me harm with your beliefs and I don’t see how I have harmed you in any way with mine.

You must do as your conscience tells you, but your reaction proves one of my main points about the religious: you may espouse forgiveness as a central tenant of your religion, but you don’t mean it and you certainly don’t practice it. The bible also teaches you to judge not lest ye be judged, but I don’t see much of that going on here either.

I don’t follow any book or writings and I don’t let anyone tell me what to believe so I don’t have anything to refer back to to justify how I live my life, only my espoused belief in honesty, truthfulness and respecting my fellow human beings. You may not agree with what I believe, but at least I have the honesty to live my life by own words. You, and those like you, on the other hand, don’t have the honesty to live by the words you claim to revere.

I’ll always consider you a friend, Ed, regardless if you don’t consider me yours. But I will respect your wishes and will leave you alone.

Sex Acts Shouldn’t be a Moral Issue

Sex is one of the most basic activities that we as humans engage in. Next to quest for water, food, and shelter, sex is the most compelling force that drives our actions and emotions. That may sound crass to some, but sexual desire takes many forms such as our longing for romance, companionship, affection, and love of other caring adults.

Here I define sex as responsible, consensual, non-coercive sexual and social relations between adults that takes place in private. This definition applies no matter if the adults involved be straight, gay, bi-sexual, transsexual, transgender, or polyamorous; monogamous or non-monogamous. No sexual act, as long as it is agreed to by all involved, is prohibited and all such sexual acts are considered morally neutral.

I say in the title of this entry that sex acts shouldn’t be a moral issue, but our sexual freedom is and should be. Just as access to shelter, water, and food are moral issues, in that no one can justly keep these things from us, so too is sexual freedom a moral issue. No one has the right to keep us from engaging in responsible, non-coercive and consensual sexual relationships with other adults, or dictate how those relationships must, or must not, be expressed.

There are many people who would try to deny the right of sexual freedom to others based strictly on their own, almost exclusively, religiously motivated beliefs. These people try to make a moral issue out of social and sexual relationships and activities that they have no compelling interest in. How are they harmed or affected by what transpires in petto between responsible and consenting adults? The reality, of course, is that they are not harmed in any way, and any effect the imagined sexual activities of others may have on them is their own issue to deal with, not a matter for public discussion and government interference.

I find it interesting that the same people who attempt to legislate sexual morality are often the same people who cry the loudest about the government interfering with their rights to own firearms, their access to health care, or trying to take away their precious social security and Medicare (where are government programs created by the federal government and which no one has an intrinsic right to).

These same people don’t want to be told by the government how to live their lives and yet they have no problems trying to get that same government to tell others what sexual acts they can and can’t engage in.

The right to practice sexual freedom, as I’ve defined it here, is an intrinsic right that no one except the parties involved have any compelling interest in or standing on. The kinds of relationships that responsible, consenting adults enter into, the sexual acts they engage in, and the various orientations and numbers of people involved in those relationships are sacrosanct as long as they are engaged in openly, honestly and without any coercion.

More Senseless Violence – Why And What To Do

I wrote several entries, here and here, this week about a shooting at a local high school in which a principle and assistance principle were shot by a student angry over being suspended. The assistant principle died and the student killed himself shortly afterwards.

Now we have news of another senseless shooting. This one involves U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona who was shot along with 12 others at a meeting she was holding at a grocery store in Tucson. A federal judge was also among those shoot. So far, 6 people have died, including the judge. The shooter, Jared Laugher, is in police custody.

There have been death threats against both Rep. Giffords and the judge in the past; Giffords for her support for President Obama’s health care bill and the judge for his ruling in an immigration lawsuit. It is too early to say if this shooting was motivated by either of this issues or who the intended target, if any, was.

I’m not a big propionate of gun control, but I do support laws to require background checks of people purchasing guns and laws requiring gun owners to properly secure their firearms. I believe that there should also be laws that will hold gun owners accountable for crimes committed with their firearms if it can be proved that they did not properly secure them.

For those who would assume that I am against gun ownership let me say that I don’t own a firearm, although I have on several occasions in the past. The only reason I don’t own one now is that I have teenagers in the house and I just don’t feel comfortable having one in the home. Personally, I enjoy target shooting and skeet shooting and once my kids are out of the house, I plan on purchasing a shotgun, rifle and possibly a handgun, all for target and skeet shooting.

To get back to the main focus of this post, it is unclear what the causes or solutions are for these sort of events. There will always be angry and violence prone people and they will always find a way to act on their violent impulses.

There are plenty of statistics to be thrown around. From the Brady Campaign and Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence we get:

In one year, guns murdered 17 people in Finland, 35 in Australia, 39 in England and Wales, 60 in Spain, 194 in Germany, 200 in Canada, and 9,484 in the United States. This seems to indicate that the number of people killed in the U.S. is disproportionally large compared to other western countries and when you run the numbers, they seem to bear this assumption out. I used estimate population for 2010 from the CIA Worl Fact Book and here is the number of people killed by guns per 1000 people in each country :

Country Percentage gun related deaths per capita
Number of gun related deaths per 1000
Finland 0.0032349724 3.2349724
Australia 0.001626715 1.626715
England and Wales 0.0006255168 0.6255168
Spain 0.0012901571 1.2901571
Germany 0.002357717 2.357717
Canada 0.0059242159 5.9242159
US 0.0305705847 30.5705847

So the US has 5 times the gun related death than the next highest, Canada. I’d call that significant. The real question is what to do about it?

This, of course, is something that has been debated for decades and this particular incident probably will inspire more debate, but with a Republican controlled House of Representatives you can be sure that no real progress will be made to address the issue of gun deaths in America.

There has been a lot of speculation on the motives for this shooting on twitter with some people pointing to Sarah Palin’s web site that used to have a Rep. Gifford’s district on a map with a target on it. That was removed from the site today after the shooting. Wether it was removed out of respect for the congress woman and other victims or because a target has been eliminated is unknown, but some people are trying to infer the latter. There is also many who are promoting the idea that the shooting was politically motivated, but until the facts are in as to the gunman’s motive, we can, and should, assume nothing.

The new Speaker of The House issued a statement condemning the attack in which he said, “An attack on one who serves is an attack on all who serve. Acts and threats of violence against public officials have no place in our society.” I heartily agree.

My thoughts are with the victims and their families.

The Misogynistic Manhood Academy – The Only Pussies They Will See Is When They Look In The Mirror

I’ve written recently about the Manhood Academy site, here and here. Besides the fact that they refuse to allow comments critical of their site, they have now resorted to personal attacks and threats against one of the commenters and my good friend. They have apparently tracked back to one of her accounts and lifted a few of her images -INCLUDING one of her infant son!! They posted these pictures in a personal attack in the comments section of their blog. Out of respect for her, I am not going to post a link to that.

Who are The Manhood Academy?

According to their web site, the Manhood Academy:

        Manhood Academy is the first worldwide male educational center specifically designed to train men in social competence.

They offer a free e-book entitled, The Principles of Social Competence. Here is are a few quotes from the free, online book:

Relationships give women the opportunity to depend on men (for protection, affection, stability, security, provision, etc.). They also give men the opportunity to depend on women (for sex, companionship, children, support, etc.).

Relationships give women the opportunity to depend on men (for protection, affection, stability, security, provision, etc.). They also give men the opportunity to depend on women (for sex, companionship, children, support, etc.).

Instead of forming healthy relationships with authoritative men, today’s women are ushered into a dysfunctional relationship with the State; police offer protection, courts offers social support, a welfare system provides food and shelter, the media provides approval, business careers provide an illusion of self-sufficiency, fertility clinics provide children, and prescription drugs provide instant pleasure. By usurping the function of men, the State undermines the potential for healthy relationships between men and women.

Ironically, the State’s own dysfunctional authority cannot meet the needs of women. While police and the judicial system work to deter crime, they can do nothing to teach women how to dress appropriately in public or prevent women from creating dangerous situations for themselves.

Giving women independent rights to childbirth will never solve the problem of overcrowded prisons created by single mothers. The state’s inability to exercise proper authority over women results in a thoroughly unsatisfying relationship.

There is more, much more, all in the same vein. It is nothing but a load of misogynistic hate thinly disguised as a self-help guide for men who want to be more successful with women. It does nothing but perpetuate the idea of male privilege that has sadly existed for thousands of years.

These are a bunch of emasculated men who, instead of looking to themselves for the causes of their feelings of inadequacy, have to blame women and the society that protects women’s rights.

The brief research I’ve done in looking through the leaders’ comments and those of their “students’ show utter contempt for women and for the men who support women. Their language is crass, sexist and juvenile. When a conversation between one of the “professors”, Professor Plumb and a student include the following line, “I’ll only jizz on her breasts”, you can be sure that this is site is nothing more than a place where a bunch of self-emasculated, misogynistic, hate-perpetuating jerks get together to commiserate how none of them can get laid. I wonder why that is!

More Stupid Male Privilege Lunacy

My dear friend at pros/e/yes wrote a humorous blog post about a couple of total yahoos filled with male priviliobes. I’m going to quote her post in it’s entirety and then give my response.

There’s this website called the “Manhood Academy” ~ the title evokes imagery of various things like little boys in their tighty-whities pretending they’re men in loincloths, painting themselves in ketchup and dancing around a trashcan bonfire, pounding their baseball bats in the ground and beating their chests to the soundtrack of “Lord of the Flies”…*laughing*

…or of poorly written Harlequin novels in reverse…instead of heaving honey-nectared breasts & throbbing organs, we have a group of lonely, desperate pimply-faced boys living in their parents’ homes fantasizing that their “manhoods” are anything more than the shriveled up puny stacks of dimes that they really are. Of course, while their slappin’ that ol’ salami around, they’re imagining that their dicks are as huge and intimidating as a rhinoceros horns…and in the words of one of the cute little apes, getting off on “a chick’s shaved taco”…oh yeah, I’m ready to cream myself, reading that bit of hot sexy talk.

ROFLMAO…

Yeah, these two boardheads, who call themselves “Dr. LeDice” and “Professor Plum” created this “Academy” to train men how to reclaim their “lost” masculinity. For some strange reason, I keep wanting to call “Dr.” LeDice…DeLice…but I’m sure that minor nitpicky detail would not go over very well with a man of his…*ahem*…stature. As for Prof. Plum, who has a brain about the size of a raisin, has underdeveloped critical thinking skills and an over-developed ego. He behaves as though he truly believes that ad hominem is legitimate debate.

I even got called a cunt. *pats self on back* Been a while since I had a threatened little boy react with that particular word.

He didn’t much seem to like that I asked him for citations and references to back up his assertions. He even tried to turn it around and asked me to present mine…*chortling merrily*…and of course, here I’m being VERY kind. When I say he “asked me”, it wasn’t quite so well-mannered… XD

He. Created a public website. He. Claims to be all about helping men…presumably to get them laid. He. Makes all kinds of assertions about feminism without citation.

I asked him to back them up.

He told me that the sheeple-cave website is a veritable gold mine of references and whathaveyou.

*blink*…baaaahahahahaaaaa…

Professor Prune, it’s not on me to cite you. It’s on YOU to cite you. As a passing, casual observer – a tourist, if you will – there is no call for me to cite myself if I challenge something you’ve claimed is published online to help “everyone”… That’d be like a prosecutor asserting a defendant prove his own innocence. Doesn’t work that way, Snowflake. The burden of proof is on the person making all the nonsensical claims – or in this case, YOU.

And of course the sheeple who want to believe they’re “men”…buy it. Professor Prune has them convinced he’s walking on water, when in fact all he’s doing is splashing around in the shallow end. Poor kid. His mommy must not have breastfed him as a baby.

*still laughing* What a Magoo.

        Can hardly wait to see what they say next.

And my response:

Oh. My. God. What a couple of pathetic losers! These guys have no idea what being a man means. First off, being a man means not needing training in being a man! Geessh!

Why so many men seem so threatened by “feminists” is beyond me. Being a man means being able to have a real conversation with a woman as if she were a (gasp!) real person, with a brain and feelings and shit like that.

I would like to hold training for men on how to be real men. I’d teach them that the world doesn’t revolve around their cocks. I’d show them that a woman is a human being who you can actually talk to about, well, anything. I’d let them know that it takes a hell of a lot more than just a cock (and not even a really large one, any ‘ol size will do) to please a woman. I could write a book about this stuff, but I really don’t want to. I’m too busy trying to point out all the asshole men who feel that their dicks give them some special kind of privilege and the ways they try to hold women back in every aspect of life.

        Jay

I haven’t had the pleasure of reading the “Manhood Academy” site yet. I think I’ll need to make sure I’m physically gaged and subdued so that I don’t start growling, barking and gnawing on the furniture as I am wont to do when I encounter complete and utter idiocy of the sexist kind.

I’ll be writing more in-depth about this very soon, once I’ve amply sedated myself so that I can read the writings of Drs. Dumb and Dumber without suffering a bout of apoplexy.