Ugliest man in America and talentless hack Howard Stern, and his sidekick, disgraceful excuse for a human Robin Quivers, have launched a vicious, hate-filled, misogynist, racist attack against Gabourey Sibide, who was recently nominated for an Academy Award for her lead role in “Precious.” Quivers and Stern are outraged and disgusted that Sibide should be allowed into Hollywood, given that she’s [as Stern describes her], “the most enormous fat black chick I’ve ever seen.” I picked up this story from FishBowlLA, which writes: “Of course, fat actors have been working in Hollywood since the film industry began. But they’re usually white and male, the sort of folks Stern prefers.”
“Everybody is pretending that she’s a part of show business,” Quivers says on the show, totally incredulous that someone who isn’t a size 0 white woman is allowed to appear in a film and at the Oscars. Of course, Quivers is part of show business because she’s a traitor to her race and gender and lacks even a single shred of integrity. Sibide got to Hollywood through her talents, unlike Quivers, who sold her soul to a white dude.
I write a lot on this blog about The Obesity Epidemic™ (soon to wipe out America, much the same way an asteroid wiped out the dinosaurs). On this tape of Stern and Quivers, they insult Sibide relentlessly, but they are careful to add that she needs to lose weight for her health or she’s going to die. It’s a perfect example of The Obesity Epidemic™ in action – hate-mongering (often mixed with sexism and racism) disguised as concern for a person’s health.
On the tape, Stern introduces a clip of Oprah talking about Sibide at the Oscars, saying, “Here’s Oprah telling an enormous woman the size of a planet that she’s going to have a career.” The sad truth is, Howard Stern is right. Hollywood is run by the Howard Sterns and the Robin Quiverses of the world – hateful, shallow, ignorant people. Gabourey Sibide is unlikely to ever have a long career.
Sean Penn says Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is a model democrat and that those journalists who label him a dictator should be imprisoned.
Ah, the irony. You gotta love it.
In the article in which these idiotic comments appear, the Guardian describes Penn as an “Oscar-winning actor and political activist.” They forgot to add “abuser of women.”
One of the big news stories here is the re-arrest of Jon Venables, who, along with Robert Thompson, tortured, sexually assaulted and murdered 2-year-old James Bulger in 1993. Venables and Thompson were both 10 years old when they committed this crime. I’m sure my American readers remember this, since the murder of Jamie Bulger was big news in the States when it happened, being one of the most shocking and barbaric crimes committed in recent decades. Even now, given how violent our world is, the murder of Jamie Bulger still stands out as something so horrific one can barely even think about it.
In 2001, after serving 8 years, Venables and Thompson were released from prison; the parole board, in their infinite wisdom, had decided the boys were no longer a threat. Apparently, torture and murder can be chalked up to mere youthful folly. What reality do these parole board members live in?
I have written many times on this blog that the justice system here, and in Europe in general, is way too lenient. The biggest problem is that it is focused almost 100% on the criminal, totally disregarding the rights of the victims and society. I know the American system has problems and of course, Europeans always point to the death penalty, which allows them to feel morally superior. Well, in my view, letting rapists and murderers walk free with little or no punishment is its own form of immorality, not to mention presenting a grave threat to the public. Just the other day, a guy who pushed a woman onto the train tracks was jailed for…drumroll…4 years, and he’ll only serve two of those. Two years for pushing someone onto train tracks, which was an obvious act of attempted murder. [And I doubt he'll even be deported once he serves his sentence.]
The case of Venables and Thompson is a perfect example of a justice system focused entirely on the rights of criminals. The two boys who savagely murdered Jamie Bulger were released from prison, given new identities and protection, all at a great cost to the taxpayer. Any of us could be living next door to these guys and not know it, since all that matters is their rights as criminals, not our rights to safety. Not surprisingly, Jon Venables has now been re-arrested, but the justice department will not reveal his crimes or his new identity. However, it’s being reported that his crime involves child pornography and he is also apparently an abuser of drugs and alcohol and has had a psychological breakdown in recent weeks.
Everyone like me who is outraged over this situation seems to understand something the justice system doesn’t. If you torture, sexually abuse, mutilate and murder a two-year-old baby, there is something wrong with you. There is something fundamentally wrong with you as a human being and this cannot be fixed by therapy, medication or anything else. You are a damaged person. A history of parental neglect, abuse and mental illness may help explain some of it, but it doesn’t change the end result. The fact that they were children when they committed this crime makes it even worse. How many children do this? Thankfully, very few, which just shows how extreme Venables and Thompson are.
People like this might be able to avoid committing further crimes if they are monitored constantly, but they should never be released back into society under an assumed name. Do these men have children? What a horrible thought. What about women or men they’ve become involved with? Do these people know what their partners have done? Because they have a right to know. No one should be given a clean slate after committing such a savage crime. Any parole board or justice department official who says these men are not a threat to society should be sacked, since anyone with an ounce of common sense knows these men are a threat and will be till the day they die.
The do-gooders out there, who focus 100% on the criminal and not the victims and all the potential victims in society, think it is unfair to punish these two men for the rest of their lives for something they did at age 10. Well, there are some things that are so horrible they cannot be made right, they cannot be made better. The murder of Jamie Bulger falls firmly into this category. If you commit a crime like this, then you cannot have a normal life. Sorry, but it’s just not possible. The government should not be participating in such a charade and using all of us as guinea pigs.
Thanks to the BBC and their craptastic Olympics coverage, I didn’t get to see Evan Lysacek beat that whiny Russian jerk at the men’s figure skating. [What's up with the haircut, Russian dude?] I don’t care about the Olympics that much, but I do like the skating. It seems that the Winter Olympics are not popular here at all. Most of the coverage is on in the middle of the night and even then they just show bits of it. I guess because no Brits are really in contention, no one cares. Also, this isn’t really a snowy, wintery place. If they had the Spring or Autumn Olympics, where all the events invovled being soaked with rain, then the Brits would have something to relate to and want to watch. Snow and ice and mountains? Not so much.
Oh well. We miss out on a lot of things here. The Oscars too! Maybe people with cable TV get to see all this stuff, but I’m just a plebeian.
I do think the male figure skaters are awesome though (with the exception of that Russian guy), because we live in a world with such rigid, bullshit notions of “masculinity,” yet these guys are out there on international TV wearing sequins and feathers and skating to music. It’s a big eff you to all the macho assholes in the world and I love it. I love to see guys who have confidence like that, because you know they were probably beaten up a lot while growing up for wanting to figure skate. It’s what annoys me so much about the Russian guy with the hideous haircut – he’s basically saying Evan Lysacek isn’t manly enough to win the gold, because he didn’t do a quad. I’m glad this jerk and his neanderthal notions of what’s “manly” got a big ass whooping on the world stage.
Via Kate Harding, the film director Kevin Smith was kicked off a Southwest flight last night because he’s too fat. Smith was seated, arm rests down, seatbelt fastened when the captain of the flight – Captain Leysath – had him removed because he was a “safety risk.” This is The Obesity Epidemic (TM) in action, folks. This isn’t about BMIs and theoretical concepts and public policy – this is about real people. You know, human beings.
The good news is that the Nazi bastards who run Southwest Airlines have really stepped in it this time. Instead of bullying, humiliating and terrorizing an anonymous fat person (for Southwest Airlines, a fat person is no different from a farm animal) they picked on a famous fatty with millions of Twitter followers. OOPS! Now they’ve gone and created a big shitstorm.
In a recent post, I wrote that in Michelle Obama’s America, there may soon be “obese sections” on buses, in restaurants, etc. Well, I was wrong about that. Fat people aren’t even accorded that much dignity. Kevin Smith was kicked off a flight and humiliated in front of hundreds of passengers for no other reason than sheer, spiteful hatred of fat people. And because we live in the age of The Obesity Epidemic (TM), this blatant discrimination and complete disregard for human rights is not only perfectly okay, it’s cheered.
Kevin Smith will have a podcast about this whole disgraceful episode up on his site soon. He tweeted everything as it happened, which you can read here (where he refers to Southwest as “Air MasterRace”).
In closing, fuck you, Southwest Airlines, you immoral, discriminatory, scum-sucking pieces of shit. May you reap what you sow. To all my American readers, I urge you to boycott Southwest Airlines. Today they come for the fat people. Tomorrow they may come for you.
Michelle Obama wants to eliminate childhood “obesity” within a generation. Calling obesity an “epidemic,” she outlined a comprehensive two-part plan. The first part focuses on preventing obese children from even coming into existence in the first place, including:
-Offering pre-natal screening so fetuses that look fat can be aborted;
-Sterilizing people who have a genetic predisposition to “obesity” so they can’t plague the world with their hideous offspring;
-Feeding fat babies diet infant formula;
-Removing porky toddlers from their homes and placing them into foster care with parents who will starve them.
Unfortunately, there are already a lot of fatties out there. While they cannot be simply eliminated (at least not yet), the White House advocates making their lives a living hell unless they lose weight. This can be achieved by doing the following:
-Organizing a network of bullies at schools across America to terrorize, beat and torture fat children so they’ll understand that being “obese” isn’t acceptable (the President said so!);
-Using the White House to shame, humiliate and stigmatize fat children even more than they already are;
-Separating fat people from the rest of the population, with “obese sections” on buses, in movie theatres, in restaurants, etc., so fat children will see that their kind is not wanted in civilized society;
-Banning the manufacture and sale of clothes for obese children, thus forcing them to go naked;
-Equipping all new motor vehicles with horns that MOO and OINK so that when drivers see fat children, they can honk at them;
-Using the “dog catcher” method, have government inspectors with giant nets patrol the streets for fat children, capture them and lock them up.
This should eliminate childhood “obesity” within a generation. It may seem harsh, but Mrs. Obama is only worried about their health.
In other news, check out this set of photos on Flickr that shows what “overweight” and “obese” actually looks like.
I’m still feeling a little wobbly, but January is over now, which always makes me happy. A few news items have caught my attention today:
In the Daily Beast, Nobel Laureate Wole Soyinka calls England a “cesspit” for allowing Islamic radicalism to flourish within its borders.
In the Times, I was absolutely aghast to read that both Michelle and Barack Obama have publicly discussed their daughters’ weight. Apparently, Michelle Obama fancies herself to be a new crusader against “childhood obesity” (the “obesity epidemic” brought to you by its proud sponsors, The American Health Industrial Complex). To launch the campaign this week, Michelle Obama discussed that her children’s doctor told her the girls were becoming fat; back in 2008, Barack Obama is reported to have said Malia was “a little chubby.” I am just astounded by this. We live in a culture where the female body is public property, where as females our bodies are critiqued, scrutinized and evaluated by everyone, beginning when we are children. To have the President and First Lady of the United States discuss their young daughters’ bodies in front of the world is sickening to me. This is unbelievably reckless and irresponsible for two people who act like they are such perfect parents (but then perhaps that’s the issue here – two body-obsessed overachievers are terrified of having fat kids). I fear these comments will do great damage to these girls, who could very well develop eating disorders because of this. They didn’t ask to be public figures and going through puberty is difficult enough – they don’t need every journalist writing about their body size and monitoring it. Can you imagine how mortifying that would be? And if the Obamas say such things publicly, I wonder what they say privately? You do not instill healthy attitudes about eating in children through this kind of behavior. It will have the opposite effect from what it’s intended to do.
I guess if the Obama girls become desperate to lose weight (and with parents like this, they will), they can always follow their father’s lead – I hear that nicotine is a great appetite suppressant. And so healthy too!
What the U.S. Supreme Court did this week is a horror beyond words. It’s absolutely outrageous that these vile, evil Supreme Court justices, who are not elected and are accountable to no one, can wield this much power and with the stroke of a pen, destroy what little American “democracy” we have left. Abolishing the Supreme Court should be seriously considered. I don’t know what it can be replaced with, but there has to be a better way. Not only do the Supreme Court justices wield god-like power (despite the fact that most of them do not possess an impressive level of intellect), but every presidential election is held hostage by the issue of appointments. If there is a movement afoot to abolish the Supreme Court, someone please let me know so I can join.
I was just reading an article in the Telegraph called Air France to charge obese passengers for two seats. I was reading the comments for this article when one of them made me burst out laughing. From someone called ‘Airline Executive’:
The extra revenue generated from the additional seat purchases should go to a special fund.
This fund could be used to eventually dispose of the larger passengers all together.
France established close ties with Germany in world war II and Germany has shown great success in similar situations.
Maybe they could be helpful in developing a plan for this.
This week marks the first anniversary of Barack Obama’s presidency. Last night I read this post at Black Agenda Report about “Progressives for Obama” having to change their name, since Obama – or is it Obomba – isn’t the least bit progressive. I would like to highlight some of this post, since it’s relevant to Obama’s first anniversary:
The organization formerly known as “Progressives for Obama” has changed its name. After almost a year of President Obama’s massive transfers of the people’s wealth to Wall Street, his escalation of U.S. wars in South Asia, his shameless alliance with insurance and drug corporations, and his callous disregard for Depression-level Black unemployment, even the president’s most loyal sycophants on the Left are running for cover. It’s not a pretty sight.
“Progressives for Obama” are now calling themselves “Progressive America Rising.” Two of the founding members, Bill Fletcher and Tom Hayden, are making uncharacteristically loud anti-Obama noises and acting as if they played no role in convincing Obama that he could make war and serve corporate interests to his heart’s content, without fear of any trouble from the Left. They had his back.
The left-wing Obamites were the nastiest of all. They viciously libeled anyone that advanced a Left critique of their hero, calling them enemies of a new “people’s movement,” when in fact it was they who were shutting the movement down in favor of a fan club and cheering section for Obama…Bill Fletcher and Tom Hayden stuck with Obama like little sorcerer’s apprentices as the president methodically savaged virtually every item on the progressive agenda. What else could they do? To break with Obama would amount to an admission that they were wrong about the progressive “potential” of their candidate; that he had always been a thoroughly corporate politician who would lurch to the Right as soon as he took office; and that, by failing to criticize Obama early in the campaign, they were guaranteeing that he would disrespect and ignore Blacks and progressives, once in office.
“The left-wing Obamites were the nastiest of all.” This resonates with me, since I experienced it first-hand during the campaign. What bothers me the most is that so many of Obama’s most strident supporters, particularly in the blogosphere, are virtually silent about Obama now. They don’t even mention him. I received so many lectures during the campaign from self-righteous people claiming that they refused to vote for Hillary because she was in favor of the war in Iraq. Well, to those people: How’s your “anti-war” vote for Obomba working out for you now? I hear nothing but silence on this issue. I wish you would take ownership of your behavior during the campaign and have the guts to admit you were wrong. Not only is Obama pro-war and in bed with corporate America, he’s turned his back on women’s rights, but Obama’s mainstream liberal feminist cheerleaders are largely silent on this matter. “Stop Stupak!” is a familiar refrain, as if Stupak came from outer space and not from a Democratically controlled White House and Congress.
Barack Obama mania was really just a successful advertising campaign. There was a product – Obama – and people were whipped into a frenzy over him. Now, not surprisingly, they’ve lost interest. Obama mania was a fad and an opportunity for people to feel smug and pat themselves on the back – it wasn’t about real change. No candidate in favor of real change would have gotten anywhere near the reins of power.
Would Hillary Clinton have done any better than Obama? No, she wouldn’t have. She would have sold out just like him. The reason I was upset during the campaign was not because Obama supporters were attacking Hillary – it was because they were being dishonest about Obama and just being dishonest, period. And they still don’t have the courage to admit it. [And of course, the rampant misogyny, a lot of it coming from the Left, disgusted me the most.]
As for me, I can’t imagine ever voting Democrat again. In order for things to change, we must address the root problems. Placing Democrats and Republicans into office will never result in change. Never. I have also broken off from mainstream liberal feminism and have embraced more radical feminist ideas as a result of this whole Obama experience. “Radical” is from the Latin for “root.” It means going to the “root” of the problem and overthrowing systems of power that oppress people. This cannot be done within the status quo of Washington politics. Without radical reform, change will never happen. If more of us have learned this lesson as a result of Obama’s campaign and election and presidency, then at least something good has come out of this very ugly time in American politics.
Before making a donation to the efforts in Haiti, I wanted to do a bit of research. I don’t simply want to donate money to make myself feel all nice and charitable – I want my money to actually help people. The American Institute of Philanthropy has released their list of the top-ranked charities working in Haiti. The charities on the list have all received an A grade and meet the following criteria:
1) A charity should spend at least 75% of its budget on program services.
2) Charities should spend no more than $25 to raise $100.
This is important to me. I avoid charities that spend too much money on admin (and many of them do). I ended up choosing the International Rescue Committee, which is rated A+. This organization appealed to me, but I’m sure that any of the organizations on the list are worthy of your donation.
One of the big news stories of the day is the announcement that travelers from 14 mostly Muslim countries will be facing additional screening measures before they board planes to the U.S. I suppose Obama is responding to criticism that he’s soft on terrorism. The countries targeted include Nigeria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Algeria, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Iran, Sudan, Syria and Cuba. Cuba?
The country I don’t see on this list is the UK. Most of the major airplane bomb attempts since 9/11 have involved British citizens. Richard Reid, the “shoe bomber,” is British. The liquid bomb plotters of 2006, who planned to blow up 7 airliners heading to North America, were British. The guy who tried to blow up the plane on Christmas Day is Nigerian, but by all accounts seemed to have been radicalized when he was studying at University College London, where other students have also become radicalized and then committed acts of terrorism. So as for real terrorist threats to American airliners from foreign citizens, the UK seems to be the biggest threat of all. A British passports gets you right into the U.S. without a visa, unlike the other countries on the list, thus making the threat even worse. Thousands of British citizens travel to the U.S. each day. I doubt that many citizens of the 14 countries on the watch list can even afford to leave their own countries.
My point is not that UK citizens should be subjected to extra profiling based on nationality, though I can’t help but wonder what the fall out would be if one of these British-born terrorists is actually successful one day in carrying out a catastrophic attack. My point is that in light of the new measures, it’s important to point out that the immediate threat posed by a small segment of British society is much more serious than the threat posed by Cuba or some of the other countries on the list, making these new security measures ineffective, politically motivated and hypocritical.
An absolutely shocking case in China, where a British man has just been executed for smuggling 4kg of heroin into the country. While the British government and others are basing their outrage on the fact that Akmal Shaikh was apparently mentally ill, the real shock is that China executes people for committing non-violent crimes, including drug smuggling and tax fraud. This fact alone isn’t news, but China’s secretive executions are not normally covered in the Western media, so to read about what’s happened in the Shaikh case is shocking.
Of course the U.S. has the death penalty, but there is a vast difference between executing a person for taking a human life and executing a person for drug smuggling or tax fraud. [Even the savior of humanity, Barack Obama, is in favor of the death penalty in certain cases.] Think of how easy it’d be for anyone to slip drugs into your suitcase while you’re traveling in China, you get busted and then…executed? What’s even more shocking is that crimes against women and girls are widespread in China and often go unpunished, yet a mentally ill foriegner with heroin in his suitcase gets a lethal injection. This case highlights the human rights gulf between China and the rest of the world, which is vast. While outrage about human rights abuse is normally focused on countries like Iran, China too often gets a free pass for obvious reasons. I have been to China once before, but I would think long and hard about traveling there again.
I just read an article in the Guardian about Muntazer al-Zaidi, the Iraqi journalist who threw his shoe at George W. Bush. The point of the article seems to be that al-Zaidi is unhappy that since his release from prison, he’s not rolling in cash and other loot, which was promised to him while he was behind bars. From the Guardian:
Numerous pledges were made in Arab media, from across the Middle East and beyond, of gifts including virgin brides, gold-saddled horses, cars, houses and camels. Al-Zaidi was told of the offers in prison, during visits from his brothers.
You’ll notice how the Guardian doesn’t put “virgin brides” in quote marks or anything like that, but just includes these women in a list with other gifts that includes cars and camels, as if this is perfectly normal and acceptable. It’s sad how such sheer barbarism passes without comment from the holier-than-thou Guardian editors. I guess that, like al-Zaidi, they’re upset he hasn’t received the young female flesh he was promised – female flesh that he could use to pleasure himself, likely through rape, since there’s no mention of whether these “virgin brides” would have consented to having their bodies given to this shoe-thrower as part of his spoils.
“I blame the media because they said I would become rich for doing what I did, that I would become a multi-millionaire,” al-Zaidi said from Switzerland, where he is receiving treatment for several health problems. “Though I thank them for their concern for me, all the promises about gifts I heard when I was in prison were just empty.”
Don’t be so sad, al-Zaidi. Perhaps through this pointless article in the Guardian, someone will decide to send you a virgin bride or two. FedEx could ship something like that pretty quickly, I think, even during the holiday rush. I just hope that when you do receive your virgin bride, the sender keeps the receipt so you can exchange her if you’re not satisfied with the color, shape or size.
Well, it’s a happy day for The British Media™. Evil American slut Amanda Knox has been convicted of killing British student Meredith Kercher in an Italian court. As I wrote two years ago when this crime occurred, this story exemplifies so much of what is wrong with the British press. Meredith and Amanda were turned into the British Madonna and the American whore, respectively, and this of course reflects the way that most women are portrayed in the press here, as one or the other. I have taken a screen shot of the Times this morning – I love the headline in the bottom right corner: She-devil or all-American girl? Because you know, those are the only two choices. These sorts of categories are fluid, however, so taking Katie Price as an example, one can go from whore to Madonna and then back to whore again.
Everything about the coverage of this story has been nauseating, not only the sexism but the Team Britain vs. Team America aspect to the coverage. Anything that can be turned into America vs. Britain is irresistible. See also: Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi. See also: England’s World Cup draw. Whether it’s mass murder or a football game, it doesn’t matter – all opportunities to feel superior to America are seized upon with gusto, no matter how crass.
Meanwhile, we’ll never know who killed Meredith Kercher because the Italian “justice” system has exceeded Inspector Clouseau levels of sheer incompetence in this case. The aforementioned sexist attitudes about women also seemed to infect the Italian trial and probably affected the verdict (see this Guardian article for examples of the Italian sexism). Three people have now been convicted of this crime and yet there’s really no convincing narrative of what happened and why. And the sad fact is, we’ll never know what happened.
[2]
And now for Tiger Woods. I am quite happy that Tiger Woods has been knocked off his pedastal. Finally! I’ve been waiting ages for this to happen. I just don’t understand Tiger Woods’s appeal. I realize he’s the greatest golfer ever (apparently), but who cares about golf? He’s also white, black and Asian all rolled into one; this apparently makes him the perfect symbol of our multi-cultural society. Well, great, he checks all the boxes on paper, but the end result is a man who is utterly bland and charmless, with no shred of charisma or personality whatsoever. He is a walking corporate brand, not a human. He might as well be a robot.
Now it turns out that Tiger Woods is also a womanizing pig. I don’t understand the shock over this. I would assume that every famous male athlete is a womanizing pig unless there is evidence presented to the contrary. What told me everything I needed to know about Tiger Woods was his marriage to a Swedish model. He clearly chose this woman because of her appearance and that told me everything I needed to know about his character and his views on women. Oh, I can hear people disagreeing with me, saying that Mrs. Woods probably has a great personality and the fact that she looks like Barbie is a mere coincidence. If you believe that, then you’re probably one of the people who is shocked over Tiger Woods’s affairs.
It’s interesting that so many people are shocked that Tiger Woods would cheat on his wife because she is apparently so beautiful and so perfect. Well, there are plenty of beautiful, “perfect” women whose husbands have cheated on them (such as Jennifer Aniston and Cheryl Cole, just to name two), but there is always shock when this happens. Of course, rich and powerful men have huge egos and a major sense of entitlement, so that’s part of why they may cheat on their “perfect” partners, but that’s not the whole story. A man who is interested in women primarily because of their looks, such as Tiger Woods and so many rich and powerful men, is superificial. End of story. A man like this is likely not capable of having a deep, meaningful relationship, since “superficial” and “deep and meaningful” cannot co-exist. When Tiger Woods’s wife became pregnant and her body less attractive, it’s not surprising that he cheated. For a man like this, women’s bodies are products to be consumed. If you don’t like the product or you get bored of it, find something new to replace it. Of course, the women in these relationships are not totally innocent. Many are only interested in men who are extremely good-looking and or/wealthy, so they are superficial as well. They also willingingly use their bodies as products. In general, these kinds of people deserve one another, so I can’t feel much sympathy for any of the parties involved when things go wrong. Mrs. Woods is clearly outraged, which is why she tried to scratch out her husband’s eyes and destroy his car with a golf club. But you know, when you enter into a relationship with a man who is interested in you because you look like Barbie, then you can’t be surprised when he turns out to be a pig. Sorry sister. While life sucks for her, I hope the rest of us will get to see less of Tiger Woods from now on.
Now that the week from hell is behind me, I can write this post I’ve been meaning to write…
Last week, the identity of Belle de Jour was finally revealed. Belle de Jour is the so-called high-class “call girl” who wrote a blog and a couple memoirs (which were made into TV movies) about having sex for money in London. I’m not sure if she is well-known in the States or not. She came forward to reveal her identity last week before the Daily Mail exposed her. Belle de Jour has been a darling of British pop culture and the media for years, not surprisingly. Her appeal is obvious: She puts a glamorous face on prostitution; she’s the perfect symbol for a culture where women’s bodies are commodities, a culture where so many misguided women use the language of feminism to recast their sexual subservience in a patriarchal culture as “empowerment”; she also plays into the idea that at heart, all women are really just “whores.”
I’ve read some of Belle de Jour’s blog. It reads like fiction to me and I believe that’s what it is. She may have been a prostitute in real life and I will take her at her word that she was, but I don’t believe her blog.
It turns out that the real Belle de Jour is Brooke Magnanti, who has a PhD in the sciences and now works at a research lab. According to her, she enjoyed her time as a prostitute, has no regrets, wasn’t ever brutalized and isn’t scarred by the experience. Well, good for her, but whether you’re a high-priced “escort” or a “call girl” or you’re a “hooker” walking the streets, there is no escaping the fact that prostitution is this:
A woman reduced to three holes that men can rent, use and discard.
That’s the reality of it, no matter how it’s dressed up in silk stockings and lingerie.
Britain is certainly the place to come if you’re a man and you want to kill your wife. This is outrageous. I think I’m going to start a new blog feature – British men who kill their wives and get a slap on the wrist or in this current case, just walk right out of court a free man. You can kill your wife if she’s a ’slut’ and practically get away with it, you can kill your wife if you’re ‘asleep’ while you’re doing it and not surprisingly, you can rape while you’re ‘asleep’ and a jury will acquit you.
In other news from the British “justice” system (they use these quote marks on their letterhead), three months after the Lockerbie bomber was released from prison on compassionate grounds because he was on death’s door…it turns out he’s still alive and kicking. I know, what a shock. This report brought to you by:
Boys exposed to high levels of these [plastic toxins] in the womb were less likely than other boys to play with cars, trains and guns or engage in “rougher” games like playfighting.
Elizabeth Salter-Green, director of the chemicals campaign group CHEM Trust, said the results were worrying.
…
She acknowledged that the boys who have been studied were still young, but she said reduced masculine play at this age might lead to other feminised developments in later life.
These “feminised developments” include peeing with the toilet seat down, liking the color pink and an obsession with calorie counting.
[Okay, I made that last part up.]
I find this study – and the way it’s reported – to be fascinating. First of all, it’s being accepted as fact that “normal” boys prefer to play with cars and guns (GUNS!!!) and that this is a biologically determined behavior, not a result of cultural conditioning.
And secondly, being “feminine” is apparently some kind of mutation.
There are all sorts of assumptions being made here about sex, gender and identity, the kinds of assumptions that underpin society at every level – sadly, this even includes the “sciences.”
On the subject of cultural conditioning, an interesting story. I know a woman who had a baby boy recently. We were talking in the reception area of a building and while we were talking, the baby began to cry. He was only 3 or 4 days old. A male security guard walked by and said to the baby, “Hey little man, don’t cry! Be a man! Don’t cry!” Babies are subjected to these messages during their first week of life, so it’s ridiculous to assume that even very young children act in a “masculine” or “feminine” way because its natural.
The Democrats in the House have sold out women’s rights and voted for a health care bill that effectively bans abortion. This article from the NYT offers a good recap of what has happened. Anti-abortionists in Congress and the Catholic Church – known collectively as the American Taliban – are celebrating their victory today in their fight to control women’s uteruses. You know who’s not celebrating? All those “Obama feminists” (as I call them) who are stunned and outraged that this has happened. All I can say to them is: Welcome to reality.
None of this is surprising to me at all. I turned my back on the Democrats in last year’s elections because I saw their true colors. I didn’t vote in the presidential election last year and if I do vote again, it certainly won’t be for the Democrats (or the Republicans, obviously). As I’ve already written about extensively, Hillary suffered tremendous abuse during the campaign because of her gender and a great deal of this came from Democrats. Sadly, many Democrat-feminists participated in this. Those of us who turned our backs on the Dems and refused to fall into line like good girls and vote for Obama were branded traitors, bitches and racists. I guess the official name was “PUMA.” But see, now I think Obama feminists are finally starting to get it. Gee, what took you so long? The Democrats are not a feminist party. In many ways, they are anti-feminist. That’s why I didn’t vote for them.
First, they made sure that women’s medical needs would not be considered part of basic healthcare. Then, today, they added in an extra special amendment to make extra-double-plus sure that abortion wouldn’t be covered. Even by private plans! That’s right: any insurance plan that participates in any way in the new exchange, or receives any federal subsidies, or is paid for with any tax credits, will not be allowed to offer abortion coverage. Gosh, it’s almost like making abortion illegal.
And to think that Barack Obama lobbied hard for this bill and is celebrating its passage. It doesn’t seem likely to pass the Senate as it is now, but who knows.
The Reclusive Leftist also has an interesting post about the PUMA movement, looking back at it one year later and in light of this disgraceful health care bill. I will include an excerpt here, but the whole post is really worth reading:
The PUMA movement alarmed the Democrats (briefly) because it threatened to disrupt the party’s blackmail-hold on women’s votes. You know the deal: the Democrats pretend to be pro-choice, and in exchange women let them get away with anything. The problem, obviously, is that the Democrats really aren’t pro-choice anymore, not in any reliable, consistent way. Any woman who votes Democrat “because they’re pro-choice” is basically running on muscle memory. It’s more like a rumor now, or a legend from the past.
But the blackmail still works, amazingly enough. Last year: apocalyptic warnings that if John McCain were elected, then Sarah Palin — his vice-president — would magically assume dictatorial powers over all the nation’s uteruses. Only Obama could save us! ‘Cause, you know, the Democrats are pro-choice. So Obama gets elected, and what does he do? Appoints the pro-life Palinesque Tim Kaine as head of the DNC. Appoints another pro-life Palin clone to Health & Human Services. Cuts women’s reproductive health from the stimulus bill. Retains the Hyde Amendment. Promises that health care reform won’t cover abortion. Psych!
It’s going to be very interesting to watch the coverage of the Ft. Hood massacre play out in the media. I don’t have access to CNN and Fox News, but I imagine it’s non-stop coverage. The mainstream-right media is going to play up the fact that the killer is Muslim (as in these headlines from the Times and the Daily Mail), whereas the mainstream-left media will go to great lengths to downplay it and turn the killer into a victim because of it (this lead report from the Guardian doesn’t mention the shooter is Muslim until the 5th paragraph and introduces it this way: “Family and fellow officers said Hasan complained of harassment by other troops about his Middle Eastern ethnicity and Muslim faith.”) Last night I was watching the BBC news coverage of this event – before the shooter’s identity was known – and it was clear that Christmas had come early for the BBC. A mass shooting in America? YAY! On an Army base? YAY! A soldier turning on other soldiers? YAY! In Texas? YIPPEE! I imagine now that the identify of the shooter is known, the BBC just wants this story to go away, since it’s their worst nightmare. On the other hand, I’m sure Fox News is feeling just the opposite way. So to sum up, I think this story will really show the biases of the various news organizations in a unique way.
Anglofille is an American living in London, finishing up a novel and a PhD, taking photos, and blogging about expat life, books, feminism and perpetual angst.
Spring…wishful thinking.
m Andrea: To see their callousness stated so causually is shocking, and thanks for posting that quote. Some...
Ken: P.Viktor is correct: this story has been out there for years. These Asian societies are conducting the most...
P.Viktor: The quote you pulled is beyond shocking, even though I have read about this issue before. To dehumanise a...
