MICHAEL DAVIS WORLD

You can't make this stuff up, so we don't!

Anti-Woman… and Pro-Rape, by Mike Gold – Brainiac On Banjo #295 | @MDWorld

October 15, 2012 Mike Gold 28 Comments

The Grand Old Party seems to be having a growing problem with those among their ranks who believe that rape is a swell way to have a grand old party.

Of course we’re all familiar with the man from the Show-Me state, Todd Akin, who showed us there is such a thing as “legitimate rape” and women who have been raped legitimately cannot get pregnant. Now we have the case of Roger Rivard, the Republican state representative in the nearby state of Wisconsin. That would be the same Wisconsin that gave us Congressman Paul Ryan and Governor Scott Walker. They’re a little schizy out there in the Dairy State: as of this writing, Barack Obama is leading Mitt-don’t-give-a-shit Romney by almost six points, on average.

It seems some people do not appreciate Rivard’s allegation that “some girls rape easy” and “If it’s rape, it’s rape. If it’s not, it’s not.” This was in response to the conviction of a 17-year-old Christian Laes for having sex with a 14-year-old girl. The boy’s response was that it was consensual, but only became “rape” after the girl’s parents found out. That’s vicious cliché number one.

Vicious cliché number two came when Rivard said his comment “some girls rape easy” was taken out of context. Hello! The girl was 14 years old. Even if the boy is not subject to statuary rape laws, 14 is still under the age of consent. There is no such thing as “consensual sex” with a 14 year-old person.

Faced with a public relations clusterfuck, Rivard palmed the comment off on his daddy. The Republican said to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel “He also told me one thing, ‘If you do (have premarital sex), just remember, consensual sex can turn into rape in an awful hurry … because all of a sudden a young lady gets pregnant and the parents are madder than a wet hen and she’s not going to say, ‘Oh, yeah, I was part of the program.’ All that she has to say or the parents have to say is it was rape because she’s underage. And he just said, ‘Remember, Roger, if you go down that road, some girls… they rape so easy.’”

It is not known if Daddy Rivard was referring to fucking 14 year-olds; in all fairness, his alleged statement might have been in reference to his opinion of women in general. And, since I’m being fair, Rivard did eventually come out against sexual assault.  This is quite an improvement upon his handling of previous comments. He conflated politicians with cocaine addicts, which is a nasty thing to do to coke addicts, and pro-union demonstrators with terrorists. In response to a voter’s dislike of his party, he thoughtfully asked “You’re not going to vote for that nigger, are you?”

My favorite (yes, I have a favorite) of these misogynistic morons is a Republican State Rep from Indiana, Bob Morris, who condemned the Girl Scouts of America as an organization that turns young girls into “feminists, lesbians, or Communists.” Part of his proof here is that First Lady Michelle Obama as its honorary president.

The Republicans wonder why they are being perceived as anti-woman. They also take umbrage at the growing perception that they are also anti-intelligence.

Mike Gold performs the weekly two-hour Weird Sounds Inside The Gold Mind ass-kicking rock, blues and blather radio show on The Point, www.getthepointradio.com , every Sunday at 7:00 PM Eastern, rebroadcast three times during the week (check the website above for times) and available On Demand at the same place. He also joins Martha Thomases and Michael Davis as a weekly columnist at www.comicmix.com where he pontificates on matters of four-color.

Previous Post

Next Post

Comments

  1. Martha Thomases
    October 15, 2012 - 7:18 am

    Feminists,lesbians or Communists? You mean, I have to choose one?

  2. Rene
    October 15, 2012 - 7:32 am

    And he is from the Party that is so worried about the innocence of children. It seems like, if a woman claims a man has raped her (I used the word “claim” because we all know rape doesn’t happen in God’s world, women are all liars that love to cause trouble for men), then it seems like a program overids every normal concern a Southern Republican has, even concern for a child.

    What matters is that the bitch lied and made trouble for a man. She ceased to be a 14-year old kid and became a lying bitch.

    But maybe what he really is against is pre-marital sex, when he mentions Dad’s advice to not go down that road. Maybe he would be okay with having sex with a 14-year old girl if you married her first.

    I wonder, how many Conservatives who love and idealize the past are aware that old men used to marry minors in the Good Old Days?

  3. Mike Gold
    October 15, 2012 - 8:47 am

    Martha: Only if you’re still a Girl Scout. You can add other labels as you grow, as you would merit badges.

    Please note how much self-control I’m exercising by not making a “cookies” joke.

  4. Jeremiah Avery
    October 15, 2012 - 11:55 am

    It’s really sad how the very things the far right are condemning the fanatics in the Middle East for are the very things they’re doing; only they’re wrapping themselves in the flag while doing so.

  5. Mike Gold
    October 15, 2012 - 12:44 pm

    It is interesting to note the difference between how some Republican men regard 14 year old girls and how some Muslim men regard the same group. Those folks out in the middle east see ’em as potential threats to their way of life. Their American counterparts regard them as sex objects.

    And confronted, both are holier-then-thou.

  6. Rick Oliver
    October 15, 2012 - 12:45 pm

    “I wonder, how many Conservatives who love and idealize the past are aware that old men used to marry minors in the Good Old Days?”

    In the good old days, there was no legal notion of “minor” and you ceased being a child when you were capable of contributing to the gene pool. And people often died before they were 30.

    The age of consent is not a constant, over time or geography. The age of consent in the U.S. varies from 16 to 18, and many states exempt those close in age from prosecution. In Wisconsin, the age of consent is 18; so both parties would be underage in Wisconsin, although I don’t know if the three-year age difference would qualify for an exemption under Wisconsin law.

  7. Mike Gold
    October 15, 2012 - 1:06 pm

    Many states have a four-year age difference. Christian Laes wasn’t convicted of statutory rape; he got nailed for sexual misconduct.

    But some 14 year olds rape easy, according to Rep. Rivard’s daddy.

  8. Pennie
    October 15, 2012 - 2:53 pm

    Girls are supposed to be easy. Women, easier. Right?
    Basically, there is no such thing as rape, right?
    For the right, right.

  9. Rick Oliver
    October 15, 2012 - 3:36 pm

    “Easy rape” is an oxymoron and “forcible rape” is redundant.

    I wonder how many Conservatives are aware of how similar their views are to those of the more extreme Muslims who compel their women to cover practically every inch of their bodies so they won’t entice men to commit wanton sexual acts, since men apparently have no control over their sexual urges and it’s the woman’s responsibility to make sure they don’t do anything to arouse those urges.

  10. Mike Gold
    October 15, 2012 - 4:19 pm

    What about masks? There are those who have mask fetishes. By swathing a woman’s head in fabric, you are creating a mask and, therefore, you are inflaming sexual desire (a.k.a. “lust”) in the minds of some men and women.

  11. Pennie
    October 15, 2012 - 6:02 pm

    Trout mask replica a perfect example.

  12. Peggy Ragsdale
    October 15, 2012 - 6:58 pm

    REALLY! You actually believe this type of thinking and behavior is indicative of the Conservative party. Sexual abuse, misconduct and thinking is in all areas of society. But since you have decided to point to the right — let’s look at the perfect left:

    Gary Hart with Donna Rice
    Bill Clinton with numerous women of various ages in the Whitehouse and governor’s mansion.
    Wilbur Mills with Fannie Fox
    Gary Condit with Chandra Levy
    Mel Reynolds with a 16 year old
    Neil Goldschmidt with a 14 year old
    Brock Adam accused of rape and sexual assault
    Wayne Hays had his mistress on the payroll
    Anthony Weiner
    And let’t not forget the Kennedy’s

  13. Pennie
    October 15, 2012 - 7:53 pm

    You forgot Sex Machine by James Brown.

  14. Mike Gold
    October 15, 2012 - 8:29 pm

    Peggy, if that’s your real name, let me explain something to you. Most of your “accusations” are examples of consensual sex among adults. Others are accusations that were not supported. Mel Reynolds should rot in hell. Try to get this through your addle-pated brain pan: RAPE IS NOT CONSEXUAL SEX. The latter is none of anybody!s business, the former is a violent, predatory act by a man or woman who is a vicious threat to society.

    Your sexual predilections are one thing, and you can be as judgmental as you need to feed your pretty noxious insecurities. But RAPE is not something to casually dismiss and BOTH of the examples I cited were by current conservatives making statements that were very casually dismissive of rape. Do you believe In the existence of “legitimate” rape? Do you believe that predatory behavior can be dismissed “because some girls are easy to rape?”

    And you state that “thinking is in all areas of society.” Obviously, by your own words that conflate consensual sex between adults with RAPE, you disprove that statement.

  15. Pennie
    October 15, 2012 - 10:01 pm

    Peggy you are given to launching wild accusations on two different columns. Attack mode appears to be your style. Not working well would be my assessment.

  16. Peggy Ragsdale
    October 16, 2012 - 5:12 am

    Mike all of my accusations are supported by history and are part of the record. I was not condoning rape. I was pointing out both sides have men that have warped thinking regarding women. To paint or label a group of people because of a few is showing bias and mob thinking and is very dangerous. Pinning a specific group, race, or religion with causing or promoting ills of the USA is exactly what dictators do to achieve their agendas.

    It is amazing, Mike that you cannot have a discussion with someone that does not agree with you wholly without resulting in calling them names. By the way I agree with you and what you have said about rape. What I don’t agree with is blaming this on the Conservative or republican party. By your thinking then the democrates are all womanizing, wife cheating, immoral with no family values that apparently is no ones business and does not make a difference in the running of our country.

    State the facts: Rivard and Akin have warped thinking on rape. Then give a possible solution: Write to our representatives and make it clear that no matter what Party our reps belong to we will not condone or support this type of thinking. Then research your Reps and vote according to your beliefs.

  17. Rene
    October 16, 2012 - 7:42 am

    And I say it again, “family values” shouldn’t mean anything when evaluating a public man. Peggy, if you’re going to marry a Democrat politician, then yes, it’s important to know whether they’re a womanizing creep. Now, if you’re just going to vote for them, it doesn’t mean anything.

    At the risk of invocking Goodwin’s Law… Charles Chaplin was a womanizing creep who bedded or tried to bed every woman that acted on his movies. That guy from Austria that looked remarkably like Chaplin? Had only one steady gal named Eva Braun. He surely had more “family values” than Chaplin, but I still would pick Chaplin over him.

    And yes, it doesn’t make a difference in how they run the country. Bill Clinton was the greatest American president in my lifetime. I wouldn’t want my sister to marry him, and I think he deserves a kick in the balls from any woman, but as a President? I would pick him over Dubya any day, any minute, any second, if I were voting for President. Now, if I were voting “husband of the year”, I’d probably vote for Dubya.

  18. Peggy Ragsdale
    October 16, 2012 - 8:10 am

    Rene, you missed my point …. You should not accuse a group of people for errors done by a few.

    As for your comments about Clinton, I disagree. I don’t consider moral values only part of family values. They show character. If a any person is willing to break vows then how do you trust that person to not blur the line in other areas? Just think how great, as you say, Clinton was how much better he could have been if he gave the U.S. his whole concentration? Instead of figuring out how to get Monica in the Oval Office. If a person is unable to put the feelings of others before their personal gratification then how can we expect them to do so on a National basis or are you giving him a pass because “boys will be boys” and can’t controll themselves when it comes to sex? Clinton made an oath/promise to Hillary that he broke and lied about. If he could do that then what was to keep him from breaking his oath to the American people? If he was not happy in his marriage then he should of gotten a divorce. That is the honorable thing to do.

  19. Mike Gold
    October 16, 2012 - 9:05 am

    Conservatives. Joke ’em if they can’t take a fuck.

  20. George Haberberger
    October 16, 2012 - 10:05 am

    Rene,

    Boy I hate to jump into the middle of this but…
    Just because Hitler may have been faithful to Eva Braun does not mean he had any “family values.” Family values encompasses the entire spectrum of morality and Hitler falls short on that score by several light years compared to Chaplin or anyone else.

  21. Mike Gold
    October 16, 2012 - 11:26 am

    What do you mean, George? Chaplin was a commie! They wouldn’t let him back into the USA because of it! Are you talking “family values” here, or “Communist family values?” And if it’s the latter, why not accept “Nazi family values?”

    Or is there only one definition of Family Values, the one the so-called Conservatives (which, actually have no relation to real conservatives whatsoever) offers in conjunction with the Religious Right? And everybody else, no matter what their faith-structure, be damned? Literally?

  22. Rene
    October 16, 2012 - 2:05 pm

    Peggy,

    I’m sorry, but I find that to be a little simplistic. Being a good husband isn’t necessarily related to being a good leader or a good administrator.

    And who can say? Maybe Clinton-the-loving-husband would have less concentration to give his job than Clinton-the-cheater. Cheating is easy. Being a great husband requires care and sensitivity.

    A personal example. I consider myself a good husband. Just the thought of hurting my wife makes me physically ill. And she will always be my number one priority. I take our marriage very seriously.

    I was offered a promotion at work some months ago. I’d earn slightly more money, but I’d have to work much longer hours, in a high-stress position. I knew what I would be getting into, because I’m number two at work, and I replaced my boss in a number of previous occasions. In those occasions, I would see my wife a lot less, and I’d get home with a much shorter temper.

    I refused the promotion. I’d rather be with my wife than get home too tired to do anything and too stressed to even hold a conversation.

    (No, I wasn’t risking my job by refusing, I work in the public sector)

    The morals of the story? I was a good husband, but probably not so good as a boss. Conversely, I have buddies that are promiscuous and don’t mind working harder, as long as they get to party hard with their girlfriends in the weekends.

    This notion that being a good family man makes you a good leader is a Hollywood notion. The “hero” is always good to his woman and kids. The “villain” is the one that cheats. That is good enough for movies, but in real life, things are not so black and white.

    And that is not mentioning the guys that love their wife and kids so much that they steal at work to help giving the family expensive gifts. Being loyal to one’s family is no indication that one will be honest at work.

  23. Martha Thomses
    October 16, 2012 - 2:58 pm

    Also, Rene, every relationship is different, and, for some, monogamy is not a deal-breaker. We don’t know what goes on between the Clinton’s on this issue (and it’s none of our business). Monogamy and love are not synonyms, nor are they cause and effect.

    A moral relationship is one where all the adults involved get their needs met. Religion doesn’t get to define what those needs might be.

  24. Rene
    October 16, 2012 - 4:19 pm

    There is that too.

    I think monogamy is a great thing. Marriage is a great thing. But I don’t think it’s a great thing for everybody.

  25. Mike Gold
    October 16, 2012 - 6:15 pm

    That’s just the point, isn’t it? We get to define our relationships. That makes it solely the business of those within that relationship. It’s not the business of religion, of society, of the law, or of the damnable holier-than-thou tongue-cluckers.

    Rape is imposed upon its victim. It is an act of violence. It is most often perpetuated by human animals acting in serial. Stopping rape is everybody’s business.

    And we can start by condemning those who condone rape, who seek to trivialize it or explain it away or conflate it with non-violent actions between consenting adults. I have no patience for those like “Ms. Ragdale” who cannot tell the difference or who, for obvious political reasons, chose not to. By her statements and her deliberate obfuscations, she is perpetuating the rape culture.

  26. Pennie
    October 17, 2012 - 9:34 am

    Thank you Mike. That sums it up for me.

  27. Peggy Ragsdale
    October 17, 2012 - 3:39 pm

    Mike and Pennie,

    I flat out said I agreed with you regarding rape. What I did not agree with was labeling all Conservatives as promoting rape.

  28. Rene
    October 18, 2012 - 9:40 am

    Saying they promote rape is a gross exaggeration, but the GOP sure is showing a pattern of wanting to strip back women’s rights to 1950s levels.

    And, unlike the Democrats mentioned, who have “sinned” in their personal lives, we’re complaining that the GOP guys make anti-women statements and take anti-women actions in their public personas.

    I see the GOP as trying to have their cake and eat it too. They want to appear as the Party of Traditional Values, but when such Values conflict with the Rights conquered by women in the last 4 decades and people rightfully call them on it, they obviously don’t like it.

Comments are closed.