Friday, October 26, 2012

Felicia Garcia, Reverse Slut-Shaming, et al...

So I'm working on a separate piece about the effect of porn on teenagers, and upon stumbling across the Felicia Garcia story on a feminist website via somebody's Facebook link,  I developed some valuable insights:

1- A male/female/male (MFM) threesome is NOT a threesome. It's a gangbang.. Sorry, feminists. I promise you that if you read this through until the end, we'll find some common ground.

2- Promiscuity and bullying are two separate and unrelated phenomena. The reason for the bullying is irrelevant, unless the bullying is motivated by race or homosexuality, in which case the justice system has designated such as a hate crime. However, last I checked, promiscuous people were not a protected species under hate crime law.

3- The term "Slut Shaming" is utterly hilarious to me.
But we'll get to that momentarily.

Now, any of my close friends know my position that the double standard of promiscuity between the sexes exists for a valid and compelling reason. Namely- We are some jerkoff you met in a bar one night, whereas you are the spiritual glue that holds the family together. I think the reason society holds women to a higher standard re: sexual behavior is because you guys have a more important social role. Yes, i said it- WOMEN ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN MEN. 

 (Insert "Key that opens any lock vs. lock that can be opened by any key" analogy here.)

Anyhow, here's the thing: me personally, if I was to find out that a romantic relationship/lady friend of mine had been previously involved in a gangbang, I am walking away from said relationship at once. I'm turning left, immediatamente. I don't care if I was halfway down the aisle. I ain't goin.

But the thing about that is, I readily admit that it's kind of a dick move to inquire about the hows and whys and how manys of a romantic interest's previous partners. We, as guys, (if we've learned this life lesson yet, anyhow- I have, and my closest friends will assure you it came at great personal struggle) we do our best to NOT think about that kind of shit because it's unpleasant. We try to live in the here and now, assume we're the only one hitting that now, and not ask shit that we don't really want the answer to.

So, there is kind of an assumed covenant between us and y'all that we won't ask you offensive questions about your past, and you, in return, WON'T HAVE ANY GANGBANGS OR RANDOM PARKING LOT BLOWJOBS ON YOUR RESUME. I can't speak for every guy, but if you want to date me, ASSUME THAT COVENANT IS IN EFFECT.

So then, back to Felecia Garcia. A 15 year old who threw herself in front of a subway train. Because her classmates were making fun of her. Because she LET FOUR GUYS FROM THE FOOTBALL TEAM RUN A TRAIN ON HER  THE PREVIOUS WEEKEND. And her peers were teasing her unmercifully about it. And since nobody else will, the Inu Enthusiast came out of retirement to point out a glaring fucking problem in our society. And it's not what you think. We'll get right to that in a second.

That term... Slut Shaming... show me a feminist using that term, and I will show you a woman who probably has a promiscuous past and is trying to justify it. DAFUQ OUTTA HERE WITH THAT. "Slut-Shaming" as a negative verb? As if it were the new "Gay-Bashing?" 


Now, I have a generous, lenient definition of slut, myself. It goes as follows: If you had, at  the time, legitimate romantic feelings for everybody you ever had the secks with, then I don't consider you a slut.

 (I myself fail this litmus test miserably, in case you were wondering.)

But for a woman, be she 15 years old or 35 years old, to let FOUR DUDES run a train on her... is disgusting and reprehensible. Once said encounter has concluded, you are officially NOT MARRIAGE MATERIAL. And I feel sorry for the dude who does marry you.

"But that's just YOUR misogynistic perspective," you say. "Who the fuck are you to judge who is and isn't marriage material?" you say...


But see, here's the twist- Here's the problem with our society that is going woefully unadressed:

WHY THE FUCK are we not angry at the four dudes involved?
Not for teasing her about it afterwords, mind you... We'll let the anti-bullying people worry about that.


Now, I've done lots of womanizing, I've got some drop-dead gorgeous women on my list of conquests. But I'm proud to say that I never participated in an MFM Threesome. In my opinion, guys who do that shit have bisexual tendencies. Sorry, but my penis is in a union. He doesn't work in the presence of other penii. It's in his collective bargaining agreement.

Thrusting simultaneously in some chick with only a thin layer of the back of her vagina separating our broadswords????? Ummm.... yeahhhhhh.... As Riley Freeman would say... "Nigguh you gay."

So while I applaud and encourage "Slut-Shaming," as it were... I think it's time we as a society started ALSO shaming the men (or in the case of Felicia Garcia, young boys) who are DOING THIS DEGRADING ASS SHIT TO YOUNG GIRLS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Quit fucking taking advantage of the fact that young women make decisions with their amygdala. It's not a good look, homie.

And I know you learned that behavior from porn, too, you bisexual little douchebags, you. Kinda makes me glad that I had to wait 40 minutes to see one titty on 56k dial-up when I was your age.

Friday, April 30, 2010


Arizona SB 1070 makes it a state misdemeanor crime for an alien to be in the United States without registration documents required by federal law,[8] and requires police to make an attempt, when practicable, to determine a person's immigration status if there is reasonable suspicion that the person is an illegal alien.

First of all, the term "illegal," used in reference to a human being, is off-the-charts offensive. Say this with me, folks- NO HUMAN BEING IS ILLEGAL. To refer to a human being as an "illegal" is very linear to Palestineans claiming that Isreal has "no right to exist." Refute it. I dare you.

Digging deeper into this terminology- The way I see it, the true "illegal immigrants," if such a thing exists, are the Vikings. Christopher Columbus. The Pilgrims. The Pioneers who settled the American Frontier. Inasmuch as our federal government willfully and intentionally violated treaty after treaty with the Native Americans, the logical conclusion is the the Pioneers of the American West, your forefathers, were ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

THE SOUTHWEST WAS STOLEN FROM MEXICO TO BEGIN WITH. Pancho Villa' s alleged raid on Columbus, New Mexico on March 9th, 1916, was an iffy, false flag event, if you ask me. To me, it just REEKS of The Gulf Of Tonkin. If you are going to use the Monroe Doctrine-esque "might makes right" argument to justify our military conquest of the Southwest from Mexico, then you, by logical extension, should have no problem assimilating yourself to Chinese language and customs if China were to ever successfully conquer the USA. Seriously- If you are going to adhere to a dogma, belief, or argument, you CANNOT selectively apply it when it suits your argument, and ignore it when it doesn't.

Now Then- Arizona has laws currently on the books that explicitly forbid racial profiling. And yet, they have now passed a law that seems to mandate it.

"When practicable?" Really. And we as a society are comfortable letting law enforcement make a determination as to WHEN it is practicable? Is it practicable at a wedding? A funeral? In the delivery room at a hospital? Are we going to have Arizona state troopers walking through a Sunday morning mass at church pulling mexicans aside saying "show me your papers" a-la the third reich? I mean, the vauge language in this bill has established quite a slippery slope.

As for this phrase right here- "Reasonable Suspicion." F'Reals? Now, I have, in fact, read the bill. And unless my analytical skills have suddenly departed, it appears to me that there are NO clearly defined parameters established by the language within the bill, that establish exactly WHAT constitutes grounds to establish a "reasonable suspicion" to question a person's lawful immigration status.

So while a certain percentage of citizens are racist, the fact is that a disproportionatey higher percentage of law enforcement officers are racist, as compared to the overall population. In other words- this law is just DRIPPING with the temptation for law enforcement officers to abuse it.

Arizona, you have just given your law enforcement officers permission, encouragement, dare one say, a MANDATE, to commit racial profiling.

Supporter of this bill- PLEASE tell me WHAT, if not brown skin/obvious mexican heritage, is going to be used as a stimulus for a law enforcement officer to establish "reasonable suspicion."

How many white, elderly retirees (of which Arizona has plenty) are going to be detained under this law and have their legal immigration status questioned?

Weigh the above paragraph against this question:

How many Mexicans are going to be detained under this law and have their legal immigration status questioned?

Are mexicans ever going to be detained under this law based solely on their appearance? If you believe that NOT to be the case, could I interest you in a bridge I have for sale?

It is pretty obvious to anyone with an objective thought process that this law is going to be selectively enforced and targeted against Mexicans. Now, I am no constitutional scholar, but that doesn't sound like "equal protection" to me.

Side note: I get a kick out of Joe Arapio being called "The toughest Sherriff in America." Intentionally emasculating prison inmates by making them wear pink underwear is not "tough." It's cowardly. Forcing inmates to sleep in tents in the desert heat is not "tough." It's INHUMANE. You know what is a TRUE sign of strength? BENEVOLENCE. Joe Arapio is a pussy who uses his job to project his personal psychological inadequacies upon other human beings. Church.

It is my belief that Arizona SB 1070 will never survive judicial review. But unless and until this law is struck down by a judge with a working knowledge of how to practically apply the United States constitution, I urge any and all Americans who support social justice to BOYCOTT ARIZONA IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE. Do not spend a single dime with a company based out of Arizona. Do not go to dog shows in Arizona. Do not go on vacation there. Do not buy a gallon of gas or a pack of cigarettes in Arizona.

Look. The reason people are so desparate to get into the United States is so they can achieve a better quality of life for themselves and their families. How sadistic do you have to be to want to deprive them of that opportunity when, unless you are of Native American descent, YOU YOURSELF are descended from "illegal immigrants?"

The REASON there is such an influx of human beings seeking to gain access to this country is because of the poverty and despair this is prevalent throughout Latin America. Said poverty and despair is a DIRECT result of the genocidal consensus and the economic imperialism that we have directed at latin america since the days of the Moroe Doctrine. Don't put your boot on MY neck and be surprised when I try to escape. Don't piss on my shoes and tell me it's rain, dude.

My grandfather marched with Cesar Chavez. My great-grandfather rode with Pancho Villa. I will be GOD DAMNED if I am going to sit here and listen to you self-righteous facebookers advance your ethnocentric, xenophobic, RACIST viewpoints and not have something to say about it.

I believe in freedom and social justice. Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

CERRAMOS LIBRE PRONTO, bitches. Vote with your dollar. BOYCOTT ARIZONA.