The Radfem Hatfields vs. The MRA Hack McCoys

Remember when I had posted on the hacking attacks and threats posted on Heart’s blog??

Well, it seems that things have blown up faster than Hurricane Katrina did in the Gulf of Mexico before devastating New Orleans.

To update so far (and you will notice that I will not provide any linkage for obvious reasons of driving any of the hacks or attacks my way, just use Google if you wish to see more):

1) Heart had attempted to place an autobiographical profile of herself based on an article that she had done for the radfem site off our backs on Wikipedia….only to be stoned when some regulars complained that it violated Wiki’s rules about degree of importance.

2) Meanwhile….Heart goes off the deep end (understandably) on the attacks on her, claiming it to be the prime example of how “yaypornies” work to destroy all women radical womyn like her. She then goes of on how she caught her young son looking at and masturbating to nekkid women, and her attempts to….well, shall we say, disuade him of that instinct. Which includes everything short of throwing out the computer.

3) Then, here comes Biting Beaver (aka BB or Beeb) into the tempest with her own story of catching her son doing the same thing….and then dropping the wish that she wished that she had never birthed him to begin with.

4) That bolt of inspiration arouses the crew at Encyclopedia Dramatica, an outfit of mostly Bevis and Butthead-grade MRA wannabes who basically get off on smacking down “political correctness”; they proceed to launch a major campaign against Heart and Beeb’s sites; up to and including DoS raids; Photoshopped images of both ladies; and the usual “feminazi”/”evol whore”/sexual innuendo rhetoric.

5) And now, they’s greatly expanded their campaign to include not only a few other radfem celebs like Luckynkl and Ginmar; but also Feministe (mostly because of a comment posted there that was critical of the lads engineering the attacks. 

Needless to say, what I said last time still applies here.  No matter how I think that Heart and Luckynkl and Ginmar and Beeb are supreme loonies and whackjobs and completely off their rockers; not even they deserve to have their private sites vandalized or to have rape threats put up against them.  And even if I do happen to think that Heart et. al.’s attempt to milk this for all the victimhood sympathy that they can muster and to rally the radfem troops to smack down the “yayporn” crowd for aiding and abetting such behavior (which is nothing less than the ultimate smear and a huge damn LIE), it still doesn’t justify any of this behavior…EVER.

So..if any of you ED loonies want to come here to bitch and moan about how your “heroic” campaign is meant only in self-defense for what Heart and Beeb said….save if for someone who actually cares. I go after ideas and acts, not people.

And for any radfem extremists on the other side who want to attempt to bait me into this: you can save your bandwidth, too. I’ve said my peace on this, and that will be all.

[Comments will remain open for this thread, but will be highly moderated for even a hint of spamming or hacking; violators will be kicked out on the spot.]

Welcome to the Fighting 101st, Earthside…

In the midst of my anger over the Dimocrats craveness, I may have discovered a new soldier for the Fighting 101st Progressive Headbussa Brigade(TM).

Say hello to the blog Earthside, who has been excellent in revealing the truth about the Dimocrats and their latest spinelessness, and the real agenda behind the Bush "surges". To with, this nugget:

Okay … this isn’t hard to figure out.

The propaganda ‘leak’ is that the Iranians and al Qaida and the Sunnis and the Shias and CHAOS and Smersh and all the forces of the Illuminati are going to join together to force the U.S. military out of Iraq this summer.

So, Bush is planning to send even more troops into Iraq, to double-up on the ‘surge’. Naturally, this means that any kind of judgement about the effectiveness of the ‘surge’ in September is going to be way too premature. Maybe by December, okay?

With no timetables in the Iraq funding legislation that the Democrats are reportedly working on, well, Bush will have achieved a political triumph, he will crow that his plan has been ‘approved’ for all intents and purposes — and U.S. troops will be in Iraq indefinitely.

In other words, the ‘surge’ plan of January this year was a lie … and the Democrats are preparing to cave-in because Bush and Cheney and Rush Limbaugh will call them nasty names and they don’t want that!

What a country, eh?

Other than forgetting Unka Karl Rove, and the mendacity of "liberals" like MoveOn and Kos, I’d say that he’s exactly on target.

Duly racked, and I will place in the Blogroll when I get back from work.

…And While Dimocrats Retreat; Dubya Surges…Again

And. right on the cue, this is how Dubya rewards the Dimocrats for giving him basically all he wants: by grabbing more and more.

Say hello to the "second surge" plan…thanks to the San Francisco Chronicle:


Bush could double force by Christmas

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

(05-22) 04:00 PDT Washington — The Bush administration is quietly on track to nearly double the number of combat troops in Iraq this year, an analysis of Pentagon deployment orders showed Monday.

The little-noticed second surge, designed to reinforce U.S. troops in Iraq, is being executed by sending more combat brigades and extending tours of duty for troops already there.

The actions could boost the number of combat soldiers from 52,500 in early January to as many as 98,000 by the end of this year if the Pentagon overlaps arriving and departing combat brigades.

Separately, when additional support troops are included in this second troop increase, the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq could increase from 162,000 now to more than 200,000 — a record-high number — by the end of the year.

The numbers were arrived at by an analysis of deployment orders by Hearst Newspapers.

"It doesn’t surprise me that they’re not talking about it," said retired Army Maj. Gen. William Nash, a former U.S. commander of NATO troops in Bosnia, referring to the Bush administration. "I think they would be very happy not to have any more attention paid to this."

The first surge was prominently announced by President Bush in a nationally televised address on Jan. 10, when he ordered five more combat brigades to join 15 brigades already in Iraq.

The buildup was designed to give commanders the 20 combat brigades Pentagon planners said were needed to provide security in Baghdad and western Anbar province.

Since then, the Pentagon has extended combat tours for units in Iraq from 12 months to 15 months and announced the deployment of additional brigades.

Taken together, the steps could put elements of as many as 28 combat brigades in Iraq by Christmas, according the deployment orders examined by Hearst Newspapers.

Army spokesman Lt. Col. Carl S. Ey said there was no effort by the Army to carry out "a secret surge" beyond the 20 combat brigades ordered by Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

"There isn’t a second surge going on; we’ve got what we’ve got," Ey said. "The idea that there are ever going to be more combat brigades in theater in the future than the secretary of defense has authorized is pure speculation."

Ey attributed the increase in troops to "temporary increases that typically occur during the crossover period" as arriving combat brigades move into position to replace departing combat brigades.

He said that only elements of the eight additional combat brigades beyond the 20 already authorized would actually be in Iraq in December.

The U.S. Joint Forces Command, based in Norfolk, Va., that tracks combat forces heading to and returning from Iraq, declined to discuss unit-by-unit deployments.

"Due to operational security, we cannot confirm or discuss military unit movements or schedules," Navy Lt. Jereal Dorsey said in an e-mail.

The Pentagon has repeatedly extended unit tours in Iraq during the past four years to achieve temporary increases in combat power. For example, three combat brigades were extended up to three months in November 2004 to boost the number of U.S. troops from 138,000 to 150,000 before, during and after the Jan. 30, 2005, Iraqi national elections.

Lawrence Korb, an assistant defense secretary for manpower during the Reagan administration, said the Pentagon deployment schedule enables the Bush administration to achieve quick increases in combat forces in the future by delaying units’ scheduled departures from Iraq and overlapping them with arriving replacement forces.

"The administration is giving itself the capability to increase the number of troops in Iraq," Korb said. "It remains to be seen whether they actually choose to do that."

Nash said the capability could reflect an effort by the Bush administration to "get the number of troops into Iraq that we’ve needed there all along."

I’m sure if this strategy works as well as the first "surge" did (like, not at all), then the next step will be formal reinstatement of the military draft.  I wonder how many Dimocrats will cave in on that??

Two-party system, my ass. Maybe time for an alternative.


From Man-On-Dog to Man-on-…Dolphin?!?!? Anti-Gay Opponents Go Wild!!

Just when you think that the Christian FRight can’t get any loopier and more desperate…

The following two YouTube clips are from mikect of, a progressive blog based in Connecticut (hat tip also to Pam Spaulding of Pandagon as well) depicting the heights of lunacy at a legislative hearing on a recently passed Conneticut law granting equal protection to same-sex marriages. Suffice it to say, they are at the very least, quite interesting. (Even with the added visual production by Mike to aid the confused.)

First, we have a gentleman named Robert Muckle, named as head of Connecticut Right To Life, testifying on the dire and evil and satanic effects of the "sexual revolt" on decent White Christians.



And now, here’s a collage of other dear Christian FRight opponents of same-sex marriage testifying at the same hearing…and be forwarned, there is reference to "man on dolphin sex" later on in the clip.



WOW….and I thought that only antipornradfems could stoop so low in their desperation.

BTW….for those of you in The Nutmeg State and elsewhere who aren’t nearly as nutty as these fools and would like more info on the Marriage Equality Act in Connecticut, MyLeftNutmeg has all the details along with a full transcript and more testimony from the hearing (including from supporters); you can find it here.

The Passion of the Coultergeist (Or….Bait Liberals as “Fags” By Day; Back Gay Porn Stud Rightists By Night

It would be so easy and so righteous to get into a frothy rage over Ann Coulter’s latest venture of "Mouse Davis Syndrome"* regarding her CPAC conference "faggot" smack against John Edwards…but other liberals do that so very well.

But, when same basher of gays (and liberals and Democrats assumed to be such) is caught with her hands down the pants of former gay porn stars turned fellow wingnut rightists (figuratively speaking, that is)….well, that catches your eye kinda quick.

Turns out that one of the invitees at the very CPAC (Conservative Political Action Committee) confab where St. Annie got off her blast (and who even happened to score a nice portrait of him with her) just so happens to be a pretty well endowed ex-Marine turned "conservative" columnist…..who managed to star in gay male porn films and even do escorting.

The consolidated version of the complete story, courtesy of Joe.My.God., with an assist from the lovely-but deadly Troll Killa known better as Sabina Becker:

If you are familiar with Cpl. Matt Sanchez, you probably know him as the handsome 36-year old Columbia University junior and USMC reservist who recently made the rounds of right-wing talk shows like O’Reilly Factor and Hannity & Colmes, where he received praise for coming forward and complaining about his treatment at the hands of Columbia’s "radical anti-military students" who called him names and mocked his military service. Sanchez was then feted at the CPAC conference where Ann Coulter made her "faggot" remark. Sanchez wrote an op-ed piece on the Columbia experience for the NY Post and began a blog and MySpace page chronicling his media exposure.



Now, if you’re like me, you might think, "Hmm, 36 years old and he’s a junior in college and only a corporal in the Marines?" Odd, but not totally implausible. But Sanchez’ face tinkled a few gay bells out there in fairyland, and last night I began to get emails letting me know that his rather late appearance on the Ivy League scene was because Sanchez has had a lengthy career in gay porn, working under the names Rod Majors (NSFW) and Pierre LaBranche, starring in such art films as Jawbreaker, Donkey Dick, and Glory Holes Of Fame 3, where his "11-inch uncut monster cock" earned him a devoted following.

Oh, swell…..another Semper Fi Gung-‘Ho of the Jeff Gannon/Jim Guckert school.

Oh, but it gets even better…turns out that Senor Sanchez also, like Gannon/Guckert, did some escortin’ on the side, too. The Joe.My.God. entry includes links to his escort page and his Amazon home page where he reviews several gay porn vids, among other things.

To give him credit, though, Sanchez has been a bit more honest and open about his gay porn sex life than most righties; he has done countless interviews and even blogged about his life as a gay porn stud and the consistency of being a right winger and a gay man.

But this really isn’t as much about Matt Sanchez as it is about ‘Da Coultergeist" slamming Democrats as gay while consorting with gay male porn stars.  Question for Annie: Aren’t you being more than a tiny bit hypocritical or cynical about blasting liberals for their "evil acceptance" of the "gay lifestyle" even while you defend the right of ex-gay pornsters and prostitutes?? Is it really the "gayness" of John Edwards that you hate that got you to get off that blast…or is it more of the same Democrat/liberal bashing that you are inevitably known for?? Or….perhaps, you really, really do want to get yourself some of that uncut 11" wood for yourself and "turn" Mr. Sanchez out into a "normal" wingnutter?? (Not that I as a sex rad libertarian would oppose your personal right to lust after him and his dick, mind you, Ms. Annie; but it seems kinda hypocritical that you would deny regular gay folks who don’t share your wingnuttery the same rights of consensual lust-seeking under the guise of  "defending Chirstianity".)

And what of the many "conservative" fundie Christians who follow your every word and who may feel more than a bit betrayed and wronged that you are willing to consort with the hated enemy of all things holy and moral…you do know about the latest proposal by the head of the Southern Baptist Convention ruling committee about intervening in the development of preborn fetuses to block the supposed "gay gene", do you?? 

But, then again, it’s not as if Annie hasn’t been know to run her mouth and shoot from the hip..only this time, the political climate has changed to the point that people are a bit less forgiving of such talk. Enjoy your final descent downward into ignobility, Coultergeist…it seems that your 15 minutes of fame is just about to expire.  Maybe you could put all that energy attacking Democrats to better use…, say, seeking better dates or a proper hairstyler??

[*"Mouse Davis Syndrome" is in honor of football coach Darrell "Mouse" Davis, who was the founder and inventor of football’s high-flying "Run-and-Shoot" offense which thrived and then died in the college and professional ranks during the late 80s and early 90s. The "syndrome" is my tribute to those who tend to let their mouths run a bit more than usual and who occasionally shoot their own feet when doing so. It is no reflection on the actual offense, which I actually tend to favor…being such a radical and all.]

Note #2: Please not that the last post contained no references to Annie’s supposed "mannish" looks or her "gender-bending"; in my view, her noxious right-wing Repub ideology and her reputation as a fascist bomb thrower are more than sufficient for derision. Her gender identity is her own business and nobody elses.



In Memoriaum: Miss Molly Layeth ‘Da Smack Down Upon Camille Paglia

I’m not sure that I can ever do justice to the many kind tributes to Molly Ivins — journalist, progressive populist, humorist, feminist, and all around badassssss who left this mortal world almost a month ago – but rereading this particular essay flambeeing right-wing cultural critic/Ayn Rand wannabe Camille Paglia brought back such great memories that I felt the need to share it with the rest of ‘ya.

A grateful thanks to Avedon Carol of The Sideshow for pointing me to the column, and to Erich Schneider for having the forethought to save the original Mother Jones column and post it on the Internet (via his Caltech home page).

Erich’s original posting was done in 1990s Newsgroup syntax; I have altered it slightly to fit more modern standards.


From _Mother Jones_, September/October 1991, pp 8-10
(Italics are indicated like _this_.)
Impolitic, by Molly Ivins.
I Am the Cosmos

Austin, Texas --- ``So write about Camille Paglia,'' suggested the
editor. Like any normal person, I replied, ``And who the hell might
she be?''

Big cheese in New York intellectual circles. The latest rage. Hot stuff. Controversial.

But I'm not good on New York intellectual controversies, I explained. Could never bring myself to give a rat's ass about Jerzy Kosinski. Never read Andy Warhol's diaries. Can never remember the name of the editor of this New Whatsit, the neo-con critical rag. I'm a no-hoper on this stuff, practically a professional provincial.

Read Paglia, says he, you'll have an opinion. So I did; and I do.

Christ! Get this woman a Valium!

Hand her a gin. Try meditation. Camille, honey, calm down!

The noise is about her oeuvre, as we always say in Lubbock: Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson. In very brief, for those of you who have been playing hooky from the New York Review of Books, Ms. Paglia's contention is that ``the history of western civilization has been a constant struggle between ... two impulses, an unending tennis match between cold, Apollonian categorization and Dionysian lust and chaos.'' Jeez, me too. I always thought the world was divided into only two kinds of people --- those who think the world is divided into only two kinds of people, and those who don't.

You think perhaps this is a cheap shot, that I have searched her work and caught Ms. Paglia in a rare moment of sweeping generalization, easy to make fun of? Au contraire, as we always say in Amarillo; the sweeping generalization is her signature. In fact, her work consists of damn little else. She is the queen of the categorical statement.

Never one to dodge a simple dichotomy when she can set one up, Ms. Paglia holds that the entire error of western civilization stems from denying that nature is a kind of nasty, funky, violent, wet dream, and that Judeo-Christianity has been one long effort to ignore this. She pegs poor old Rousseau, that fathead, as the initiator of the silly notion that nature is benign and glorious and that only civilization corrupts.

Right away, I got a problem. Happens I have spent a lot of my life in the wilderness, and also a lot of my life in bars. When I want sex and violence, I go to a Texas honky-tonk. When I want peace and quiet, I head for the woods. Just as a minor historical correction to Ms. Paglia, Rousseau did not invent the concept of benign Nature. Among the first writers to hold that nature was a more salubrious environment fro man than the corruptions of civilization were the Roman Stoics --- rather a clear-eyed lot, I always thought.

Now why, you naturally ask, would anyone care about whether a reviewer has ever done any serious camping? Ah, but you do not yet know the Camille Paglia school of I-am-the-cosmos argument. Ms. Paglia believes that all her personal experiences are Seminal. Indeed, Definitive.

She credits a large part of her supposed wisdom to having been born post-World War II and thus having been raised on television. Damn me, so was I.

In addition to the intrinsic cultural superiority Ms. Paglia attributes to herself from having grown up watching television (``It's Howdy-Doody Time'' obviously made us all smarter), she also considers her own taste in music to be of enormous significance. ``From the moment the feminist movement was born, it descended into dogma,'' she told an interviewer for New York magazine. ``They stifled any kind of debate, any kind of dissent. Okay, it's Yale, it's New Haven in '69, I am a rock fanatic, okay .... So I was talking about taste to these female rock musicians, and I said the Rolling Stones were the greatest rock band, and that just set them off. They said, `The Rolling Stones are sexist, and it's bad music because it's sexist.' I said: `Wait a minute. You can't make a judgements about art on the basis of whether it fits into some dogma.' And now they're yelling, screaming, saying that nothing that demeans women can be art.

``You see, right from the start it was impossible for me to be taken into the feminist movement, okay? The only art they will permit is art that gives a positive image of women. I said, `That's like the Soviet Union; that is the demagogic, propagandistic view of art.' ''

Well, by George, as a First Amendment absolutist, you'll find me willing to spring to the defense of Camille Paglia's right to be a feminist Rolling Stones fan any hour, day or night. Come to think of it, who the hell was the Stalin who wouldn't let her do that? I went back and researched the '69 politburo, and all I could find was Betty Friedan, Bella Abzug, and Gloria Steinem, none of whom ever seems to have come out against rock music.

I have myself quite cheerfully been both a country-music fan and a feminist for years --- if Camille Paglia is the cosmos, so am I. When some fellow feminist doesn't like my music (How could you not like ``You are just another sticky wheel on the grocery cart of life''?), I have always felt free to say, in my politically correct feminist fashion, ``Fuck off.''

In a conversation printed in Harper's magazine, Paglia held forth on on of her favorite themes --- Madonna, the pop singer: ``The latest atavistic discoverer of the pagan heart of Catholicism is Madonna. This is what she's up to. She doesn't completely understand it herself. When she goes on Nightline and makes speeches about celebrating the body, as if she's some sort of Woodstock hippie, she's way off. She needs me to tell her.'' I doubt that.

Bram Dijkstra, author of a much-praised book, Idols of Perversity, which is a sort of mirror image of Sexual Personae, said that Paglia ``literally drags the whole nineteenth-century ideological structure back into the late-eighteenth century, really completely unchanged. What's so amazing is that she takes all that nineteenth-century stuff, Darwinism and social Darwinism, and she re-asserts it and reaffirms it in this incredibly dualistic fashion. In any situation, she establishes the lowest common denominator of a point. She says, `This is the feminist point of view,' and overturns it by standing it on its head. She doesn't go outside what she critiques; she simply puts out the opposite of it.''

``For example,'' Dijkstra continues, ``she claims, `Feminism blames rape on pornography,' which is truly the reductio ad absurdum of the feminist point of view. Of course, there are very many feminist points of view, but then she blows away this extremely simplified opposite, and we are supposed to consider this erudition. She writes aphorisms and then throws them out, one after the other, so rapid-fire the reader is exhausted.''

Tracing Paglia's intellectual ancestry is a telling exercise; she's the lineal descendant of Ayn Rand, who in turn was a student of William Graham Sumner, one of the early American sociologists and an enormously successful popularzier of social Darwinism. Sumner was in turn a disciple of Herbert Spencer, that splendid nineteenth-century kook. Because Paglia reasserts ideas so ingrained in our thinking, she has become popular by reaffirming common prejudices.

Paglia's obsession with de Sade is beyond my competence, although the glorification of sadomasochism can easily be read as a rationalization of bondage into imagined power, a characteristic process of masochistic transfer. Dijkstra suggests that the Sadean notion of the executioner's assistant is critical to her thinking, though one wonders if there is not also some identification with de Sade the Catholic aristocrat.

Paglia's view of sex --- that it is irrational, violent, immoral, and wounding --- is so glum that one hesitates to suggest that it might be instead, well, a lot of fun, and maybe even affectionate and loving.

Far less forgivable is Paglia's consistent confusion of feminism with yuppies. What does she think she's doing? Paglia holds feminists responsible for the bizarre blight created by John T. Molloy, author of Dress for Success, which caused a blessedly brief crop of young women, all apparently aspiring to be executive vice-presidents, to appear in the corporate halls wearing those awful sand-colored baggy suits with little floppy bow ties around their necks.

Why Paglia lays the blame for this at the feet of feminism is beyond me. Whatever our other aims may have been, no one in the feminist movement ever thought you are what you wear. The only coherent fashion statement I can recall from the entire movement was the suggestion that Mrs. Cleaver, Beaver's mom, would on the whole have been a happier woman had she not persisted in vacuuming while wearing high heels. This, I still believe.

In an even more hilarious leap, Paglia contends that feminism is responsible for the aerobics craze and concern over thin thighs. Speaking as a beer-drinking feminist whose idea of watching her diet is to choose either the baked potato with sour cream or with butter, but not with both, I find this loony beyond all hope --- and I am the cosmos, too.

What we have here, fellow citizens, is a crassly egocentric, raving twit. The Norman Podhoretz of our gender. That this woman is actually taken seriously as a thinker in New York intellectual circles is a clear sign of decandence, decay, and hopeless pinheadedness. Has no one in the nation's intellectual capital the background and ability to see through a web of categorical assertions? One fashionable line of response to Paglia is to claim that even though she may be fundamentally off-base, she has ``flashes of brilliance.'' If so, I missed them in her oceans of swill.

One of her latest efforts at playing enfant terrible in intellectual circles was a peppy essay for Newsday, claiming that either there is no such thing as date rape or, if there is, it's women's fault because we dress so provocatively. Thanks, Camille, I've got some Texas fraternity boys I want you to meet.

There is one area in which I think Paglia and I would agree that politically correct feminism has produced a noticeable inequity. Nowadays, when a woman behaves in a hysterical and disagreeable fashion, we say, ``Poor dear, it's probably PMS.'' Whereas, if a man behaves in a hysterical and disagreeable fashion, we say, ``What an asshole.'' Let me leap to correct this unfairness by saying of Paglia, Sheesh, what an asshole.

No one like her; and very few to replace her, too.


An Open Letter In Support of Amanda

[UPDATE: Shakespeare’s Sister lead Melissa just announced that she’s resigning from her position at the Edwards campaign as well.  Sad to see that, too.]

I know that I have had many differences with Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon….mostly on her incomprehension of liberal versus radical Left policies and her quite passionate advocacy towards feminism and women’s rights. (Her approach I’ve argued…not her base politics.)

There comes a tiime, though, where you have to suspend the pettiness and join in social solidarity in defense of a fellow or sista progressive who is under the barrel of a gun….and this is definitely the case with Amanda and the ensuing battle called "Bloggergate".

To reset; Amanda —  along with Melissa Ewen, the lead voice of Shakespeare’s Sister —  was approached by the John Edwards for President campaign to run their website and basically run interference with the A-list liberal bloggers.  Naturally, both accepted the offers, since it would give them major credibility and engage the progressive netroots with the larger political climate.

Not everyone was so happy, though — some from the further Left such as Dennis Perrin  of Red State Son decried the deal as a sellout of progressive principles; quoting some of Edwards’ latest statements implying that he would have no problems with bombing Iran or continuing the war in Iraq.  But that was mere politeness compared to the howls coming from the Right…and especially the Catholic wing of the Christian FRight led mostly by Michelle Malkin and William Donohue, chief spokesman for the Cathollic League for Civil Rights.

The latter two (especially Donohue, using his media cred on MSNBC and FOX News) then launched a bitter and brutal campaign against Edwards, mostly rehashing some past quotes from Amanda’s blog implying "bigotry" against Catholicism and the Roman Catholic Church, to taint Amanda and Shakes’ Sis as "dangerous anti-Catholic bigots" and called for the Edwards campaign to immediately remove these evil feminist radicals from their campaign.  There were also noises coming from the more traditional "centrist" media as well, with Fightin’ Joe Lieberman leading the verse that Edwards was pandering to the "far Left" by hiring such dangerous women on his payroll, and that he was risking alienating those key Catholic "swing voters" unless he relented and removed them quick.

For a while, it seemed to succeed; on last Thursday released a story claiming that Edwards had indeed fired the two women (followed up by another story the next day saying that they had been rehired)….but this set off a firestorm in the progressive blogosphere in defense of Amanda and Shakes’ Sis as martyrs of freedom of speech and decrying Edwards as a craven chicken allowing a right-wing extremist to dictate his campaign strategy. 

On Friday, Edwards himself released a brief but terse statement at his campaign site basically admonishing the two women for stirring up controversy and asking them to cool it down…but allowing them to stay on. Seperate statements by both of the women apologizing for their ways were also released simultaneously.  

That sorta ended the controversy….actually, it didn’t, since Donohue announced that he would turn up the heat on Edwards and the two women for their "bigotry"….and some others (like Brownfemipower over at Women of Color Blog) openly asked if the actions of Amanda and Melissa amounted to back door censorship for past actions.

Finally, on Monday, Amanda announced at her blog (Pandagon) that she had resigned from the Edwards campaign, citing the wish to not inflame the campaign with excess baggage and the affect of squelching her own freedom of speech in responding in kind to the lynching antics of Donohue and his allies. The original note was released at Pandagon, but wasn’t accessible due to an Denial of Service (DoS) attack launched by Donohue’s allies to silence and shut down her blog. (It is currently open for the moment. Fortunately, Steve Gilliard of The News Blog reprinted Amanda’s statement at his blog, it can be found here.)

In addition to all that, Amanda found herself buried in an avalanche of hate email launched by Donohue’s followers…and most of it was pretty ugly and even explicit in its loathing and hatred for her stances. A couple of examples, as posted by Amanda recently to her blog:

[from "R.R." in Tallahassee, FL]
after reading your vile screed against Catholics and the Holy Spirit, I just had to see what you looked like. (I envisioned you eyebrow-less, with no visible pupils, and a blank, dead stare.) I see I was correct about the blank, dead stare, but other than that you’re not too bad. I then thought maybe you were mad at God (and by proxy Catholics) for making you ugly, but now I’m figuring you’re just mad at him for making you a woman.

 [from Vivian Thomas]
Catholics are concerned about killing unborn children, you stupid bitch. Chop away if it suits you, but we don’t have to accept that as moral. That’s why it’s called a religion. Look into it

 But those are virtual love letters compared to the more…..shall we say, expressive and explicit greetings thrown at Amanda from what appears to be sexually frustrated Christian men…or MRA wannabes. ByrdBrain would probably blow his wad be mighty impressed at the following screeds:

[from Andy Diggers of Dallas]
Problem with women like you, you just need a good fucking from a real man! Living in Texas myself, I know you haven’t found that real Texan yet. But once your liberal pro feminist ass gets a real good fucking, you might see the light. Until then, enjoy your battery operated toys b/c most real men wouldn’t want to give you the fucking you deserve b/c the shit that would come out of you ears.

I guess someone forgot to tell that asshat that Amanda is already hetero. 

 [from Paul Bernard of Scottsdale, AZ]
i like the way you trash talk i don’t particularly want to have sex with you but i would like a blow job.

Oh, but I thought that she was one of ‘dem radicallesbians that don’t do men, huh???

And then there is this typical wishful wingnutty greeting from someone named Bud Phelps (no relation to the "Reverend" gay baiter Fred Phelps, no doubt):

It’s just too bad your mother didn’t abort you. You are nothing more than a filthy mouth slut. I bet a couple of years in Iraq being raped and beaten daily would help you appreciate America a little. Need a plane ticket ?

Oh, goody, goody….does dewd know that most of the raping and beating in Iraq is being done by…you know..FREAKIN’ AMERICANS?!?!?!? And how about a Christian who is supposedly "pro-life" and "anti-abortion" openly wishing that Amanda was…well, aborted??  I guess that some fetuses are more sacred than others.

But the grandaddy of all roundhouse insults — at least the ones Amanda chose to print — comes from a fella named Romanco de Lorne who is so passionate about defending his church from "bigotry" that he resorts to all caps:


Yup….nothing like  good, solid Christian men defending their religion, isn’t it??

Amanda herself hits the nail square on the head when she riffs:

Reminder: Donohue was claiming to be so hurt by my “bigotry”. Yet, for some reason, his supporters write me and they are more interested in telling me that my womanhood is repulsive to them. Interesting—almost as if his claims to speak for Catholicism were in fact dog whistles to scare people about women’s equality.

As I told some close friends in the days that Donohue was on the news, spraying code words about “get the feminists” (which explains why he roped Shakespeare’s Sister into this, even though she really had nothing to do with any of this—except she’s pro-equality, which is what is really what offends Donohue and all the people who gave that anti-Semite airtime), a good half of my hate mail could be summed up, “You have a pottymouth, you stupid cunt.” 


Right wingers right now are pretending like sexism has nothing to do with me, which is an argument that works if you think a) men get emails about how they need to suck a dick on a regular basis and b) that there’s nothing whatsoever sexist about allowing men to curse but hitting the fainting couch if a woman does.

Oh, but Amanda…try being a gay man, or someone who fits the type….I’m sure that they’d get the same treatment.

Time to wake up and smell reality—real bigots follow the siren call of the fascist right wing. Why would they even bother with liberals and all our equality and human rights and other tedious ideas?


But I shan’t belabor the point. I haven’t even begun to scratch the surface of the hate mail the Bill Donohue’s “Christian” campaign against me has inspired. This is all stuff from days ago—I’ve gotten more than 100 since. Hell, from the looks of my email from last night, I’ve had more than 100 in the past 12 hours from self-proclaimed Christians who want me to know that I have hurt their feelings and this has nothing, nothing whatsoever to do with their own misogyny and tendency to witch hunt.

In short, this is nothing more than the classic "slut-baiting" that happens to any woman who dares to challenge the wacky Christian FRight’s principles on sexuality or women’s position in society.  This could have been launched just as strongly and just as easily against Nina Hartley or Joycelyn Elders, or Dr. Susan Block or Dr. Carol Queen or Dr. Gloria Brame, or Renegade Evolution or the Queer Bitch or Brownfemipower or Blackamazon, or Vicky Vette or Bridgett Lee, or Kira Reed or Shauna O’Brien, or Annie Sprinkle or Susie Bright, or even Lani Guenier or Hillary Clinton…it’s just that Amanda Marcotte and Melissa Ewen happen to be strong women and feminists who dare to be open about calling the fascists out on their bullshit…and happen to get way too close to real politifal power for the wingnutter’s comfort.

This is what you get, Clones, when you don’t defend to the death the basic principle of "My body, my choice, my damn business and nobody else’s"…and that other principle "Keep your Jesus off my penis (or clit) and your morals off my balls (and wombs)". An injury to one is still, in the long run, an injury to all.

Well done, Amanda….go get that mountain of human crap, and don’t ever let him up when you get his ass. The can of Whupass is at your full disposal if you need it.

Like I said….sometimes you put principle ahead of personal differences.  I’m backing Amanda on this one.  How about thou7??


The “Alas, a Porn Portal” Controversy: A Bibliography

Here is a full list of [almost] all of the blog contributions to the “Alas, a Blog” controversy. My sincere thanks to the folks at Creative Destruction for sending them over.

You will notice that Heart’s Women’s Space has the majority of posts, since she was the most exercised over Amp’s “betrayal”; you will also find Kevin, Belledame, Witchy-Woo, Ginmar, Hugo, Lisa Sabatier, and a few other bloggers you might know…and a few you may not. Link at your own risk.

If I missed anybody, please let me know.


Intermission Special: The “Alas, a Porn Portal” Controversy

I promise….I will get to Part Deux of the Great Burqagate/Feminist Whiteout shortly; bu I would be totally remiss if I didn’t bring my quarter’s worth on another Blogophoric disturbance amongst the Feminist Force.

In case you have missed the fireworks, the more activist wing of the Radfem Anti-Porn Blogospheric Caucus is all in a big collective snit because of the circumstances involving the Alas, a Blog site, which has been a major playa for A-list feminist bloggers ever since Barry (aka Ampersand or Amp) founded and financed it about four years ago, or so.  Mostly thanks to his leadership and evenhandedness, his blog has maintained a solid and diverse readership, as well as a safety zone for feminists who might not feel comfortable blogging in the more testosterone-fueled zones….and his reputation as a feminist symphatizer who is open to all viewpoints while defending his own has earned him basic respect be even those who may not agree with him.

All, of course, except for the small cabal of the more….shall we say, passionate wing of the RadicalFeminist caucus; who believe that only their kind of radicalfeminism (the kind that distrusts men fundamentally as a tool of patriarchy unless he truely adopts to the letter their theories of male rapicity and female submission under Teh Patriarchy) should be promoted by those who call themselves “feminists”.

Just last year a few of them –mostly led by the likes of Pony, Sam Berg (of Genderberg) Heart (of Women’s Spaces), the irrepressible Witchy-Woo, and Ginmar (of the “gender trumps race”/”Black women simply use the excuse of race to beat up on White women” school)  — got so bent because Amp apparantly allowed one too many MRA’s (Men’s Rights Advocates, the He-Men of the Right who serve only to bash feminism as destroying men) to post without censure, that they even proposed that he dedicate an entire section of his site to radical feminists only to fire off their missives free of criticism…a proposal he rightfully dismissed. They mostly distrust Amp because: (1) he’s a man, and men are basically pollutants who only serve to divide and conquer women for Teh Patriarchy, in the activist radfem view; and (2) he shows waaaay too much tolerance towards the “enemies of feminism”…..including those feminists who don’t quite want to march in perfect rhythm to an antiporn/antiprostitiution rally.  Of course, the fact that Amp is mostly sympathetic to the antiporn/radfem cause, and gives them more than ample room to vent their spleens means little or nothing to the purists; the fact that he is a man is more than enough for them.

Well, that…and the fact that he sold his domain to a porn portal didn’t help.

“Say wuh???” I hear you thinking.

It goes roughly like this: Last September, Amp posted a cryptic message to the blog saying that he was under some real financial strain, and due to that he had decided to put his domain name “” up for sale for some quick cash. What he did not mention then, though, was that he had sold to domain to what is called an “optimizer” portal, which basically uses the traffic count in highly surfed sites to up the rankings of their own sites….and due to the consistently high readership of Alas, a Blog, it stood to really raise the rankings for whomever owned the domain.

The problem was…the new owners promptly decided to use Amp’s domain to link to….you guessed it….a site mostly consisting of reviews of porn sites.

Now, it was done quite discreetly: the only clue as to the new content was a tiny link at the bottom of Alas’s page linking to “reviews software” ; none of the general content of Alas was affected in any way.  Part of the agreement for the sale was that none of the actual bandwidth for Alas would be used expressively for actual porn; nor would there be any direct links to explicit adult material.  (Indeed, not even the “review” site has any direct images to explicit porn; you had to actually click on the individual site review page to even find a link to the actual porn.)

The “review site” itself was also a bit more discreet; it was mostly your typical porn portal offering the usual galleria of sex freakery; with sites ranging from the interracial faire of Lexington Steele to the usual “big tit” and anal vids to the “MILF Hunter”/”Bang Bros” school of “find ’em, fuck’em, and leave ’em variety.  Nothing particularly trailblazing, but nothing particularly extreme.

But for a blog which offered themselves as an explicitly feminist site open to the radfem antiporn viewpoint led by a man who mostly opposes porn as “degrading” and “objectifying” to women, it was explosive enough….one of the Alas regulars (actually, Hugo) ultimately discovered the “review” site and privately (and publically) outed and busted Amp for his “hypocrisy” and not being upfront with his readers on the sale. 

Amp responded by publically revealing the details of his financial condition and why he did the sale, and all the inner conflicts he had about not just the sale but his antiporn beliefs.  For the most part, most of the readership of Alas, while a bit saddened and feeling more than a bit betrayed that Amp would resort to that alternative without publically hashing it out in the first place, nevertheless was willing to forgive the situation as a case of financial survival.

For the Antiporn Radfem Caucus; though, the revelations of Amp’s action were just the ultimate proof of his innate evil…showing once and for all that he was nothing more than a typical male, exploiting feminism to impose his misogynic, injurous agenda…if not an actual double agent for the “pornographers” and “pimps”. From pillar to post, they vowed never to support him again (as if they were that supportive to begin with in the first place); and that by doing this sale without their approval and without seeking alternatives (such as allowing THEM to buy the domain and convert Alas to a full blown man-baiting, antiporn radical site, I guess). Amp was simply showing himself as the sellout and patriarch and pimp that all “feminist men” (those who don’t totally pimp antiporn radfem ideology, that is) ultiimately are.

Naturally, Heart was the leader of the anti-Amp lynch mob; she got off a series of blasts at her blog in righteous condemnation of his “sellout”; but other well known antiporn luminaries such as W-W, Delphyne, Violet Socks (of Reclusive Leftist), Pony (who got off a particulary nasty crackback connecting Amp’s porn linkage with his posting of his daughter, all but calling him a pedophile), Ginmar, and Sam (of Genderberg) vented their spleens on Amp as well.

[Note: I’m not providing links to any of the detractors or the particularly nastier comments, since it’s my stated policy to avoid giving these….ladies any more of my bandwidth; however, you can reference either the Alas discussion at the thread here, or this blog, which contains links to the various blog rants pro, con, or indifferent.]

However, Amp did have his defenders and less hostile critics: such as Soopermouse, Kevin Andre Elliot,  Richard Jeffery Newman, Jenn (from Reappropriate) and a few others did express their understanding of Amp’s financial condition which prompted the sale; and did credit him for ultimately coming correct and reappraising the situation.  For his part, Amp has posted recently that he regrets doing the sale, and that he would do his best to be more forthcoming henceforth (and there is the slight chance that the sale might be voided due to breach of contract, since there may have been no warning from the buyer that he would do such linkage to porn).

As for my own take on this:  Well, far be it for moi, who is generally openly pro-porn (at least to the extent of its right to exist and being pro-free sexual speech), to jump into a battle between mostly principled anti-porn feminists; but I just don’t think that Amp deserved the ton of crap he received. 

First off, the principle of “My blog, my ules” comes into play; Amp paid good money for that domain, and as such it is HIS and HIS alone to regulate what happens there. It was on his graciousness that he offered the Radfem Caucus his bandwidth for them to preach and moan; and they have rewarded him with nothing more than potshots at his being male and not being pure enough in his hatred of porn….so I figure that they have no business dumping on him for “betrayal”, since he wasn’t on their side to begin with.  But then again, that’s par for the course with them…as amply experienced before.

Now, those more regular contributors of Alas do rightfully have a far better case of feeling aggrieved by Amp’s actions, mostly because he could have been a bit more forthcoming and open about his financial troubles back then, and sought their help in resolving the issues before making this sale.  There is nothing wrong with asking your friends for assistance in a time of need, Amp; and I’m sure that they would have been more than kind to help you out.

The bottom line for me is this: I am soooo glad that I will never have the noteriety to have to sell my domain name (although with a domain name like and my below the bottom site ratings, I can rest assured that no porn portal will be knocking at my door looking for deals). Then again, considering how pro-porn I am (tempered, of course, by my radical Left/feminist/libertarian socialist principles), that probably wouldn’t matter much to some people….ehhhh??

Give me some time to rest up a bit…then it’s back to the Boob/Burqagate smackdown.

[UPDATE: The folks at Creative Destruction have been kind enough to send me their link list for all the players and commentators on the Alas controversy; I am sincerely grateful and thankful to them.  See the second comment below.]

[Update #2: Since some of the links are broken; and the links are so many; I will repost them as a seperate entry….stay tuned.] 

We Interrupt This Diatribe To Bring You….Joe Lieberman Bears All

I promise, I promise…..I will get to Part 2 of my thoughts on the Great Feminist Blowjob Wars momentarily..but in the internim, get a load of the latest crapola that Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman (HDIC*) is throwing at his Democratic primary opponent, Ned Lamont:

If the Flash player doesn’t show up, here’s a link to the actual ad (using YourTube):

[Update: As of today (August 21st), the clip is no longer available over at YouTube…they say that it violated their “terms of use”.  I guess there are some pretty conservative folks there.]

Yep, you Connecticutians are right…that’s similar to an “Bear Cub” ad that Lieberman used against incumbent liberal Republican Lowell Weicker to gain the seat to begin with in 1988. Apparantly, this is in response to Weicker endorsing Lamont’s campaign to topple Fighting (for the GOP) Joe in the Dem primary come August 6.

I don’t know what’s funnier: The sixth-grade quality of the actual ad; or the balls of steel that Fightin’ (for the GOP) Joe must have in attacking Lamont as a Republican plant…especialy considering Lieberman’s proven record of aisle crossing and ass-kissing for Dubya and the GOP!!

Also, this ad was released just after Lamont pledged to be a good Democrat and support Lieberman if he managed to win the Democratic primary. By contrast, Lieberman has been dropping not so subtle hints that if he loses the primary, he would still run as an “independent” (polls are saying that if he did, he would still beat Lamont and Weicker, who is running by default as the Republican candidate).

And, to further the inanity of it all…the chairman of the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee (DSCC), Senator Chuck Schumer (NY) has already pledged that even if Lieberman does go “independent”, the DSCC would continue to support and finance his campaign…his GOP crossovers included. (No word on whether the DSCC would do similarly with Lamont.)

Yup….this is the Democratic Party that we are supposed to trust as the opposition to the Republicans. Why am I freakin’ surprised…or not???

Memo to Ned Lamont: Please kick Lieberman’s ASS….and then, please run as an REAL Independent and stick it to the DLC and DINOs, too.

NOTE on the Gloss:

DINO = Democrat In Name Only (used to describe your typical DLC/Dixiecrat who flaunts his Democrat label while voting with right-wing Republicans most of the time)

HDIC = Head DINO In Charge (used similarly as HNIC (Head Negro In Charge; preferably pronounced with the acronym “H-Dick”….LOL