It's always been obvious that men attempt to rationalize their misogynistic behavior by blaming the victim -- as if wearing a sweater whose neckline approaches the hemline of a micro-miniskirt should actually force a man to take a second look at the goods on display.  Any fool could see that, no matter what a woman wears, it's anti-feminist to imagine showing a "slut" a display of power for the sheer pleasure of forcing her to submit.  But men seem to think that their sadistic fantasies are completely justified when a woman shows a little skin.  And then they justify it by going stupid and thinking it's all about mixed signals, as if a woman who's dressed provocatively might actually want to be provoked.

The only fair thing for a man to do is self-castration.  This goes double for conservative men, who can't stop fantasizing about being both the rapist and the rape victim.  Rush talks about bending over and taking it, teabaggers--and you know the teabaggers knew exactly what label they were giving themselves--scream and cry about having health care shoved down their throats.  Self-castration would prove a man's good intentions, that he's really interested in a woman for her mind and her soul rather than dreaming about forcing himself into her private spaces, consensually or otherwise.  Once the world is free of testosterone, we will no longer live in a rape culture where women are assumed to be public property.  And there will be no more pregnancy, no more sperm setting up shop in unwilling uteruses, no more protection of the rapist while condemning the victim.  Because when a woman is dressed provocatively, it always means NO!

Posted by: AmandaPandagon at 10:45 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 284 words, total size 2 kb.