The Beavis and Butthead school of journalism strikes again
Last weekend Slate Magazine, a Washington Post subsidiary, featured on the front page of its website a cartoon showing Sarah Palin on a stool wearing a skimpy red dress, breasts popping out, with a bible squeezed between her bare thighs. In the accompanying article, The Sexy Puritan, author Tom Perrotta mused aloud that Sarah Palin was emblematic of a new breed of Christian women who alternately boast about their pre-marital virginal purity and, once properly wed, titillate their spouses with “anal sex, fisting, and ‘masturbating for your husband.’”
Got that?
Right. Basically the article is about the contents of Tom Perrotta’s head, not anything Sarah Palin has ever done, said, or symbolized.
The New Agenda, the new non-partisan women’s rights group, sent a strongly worded letter to David Plotz, the current editor of Slate Magazine, protesting the publication of the article:
…Perrotta implies that Governor Palin has cultivated “sexiness” in service of her conservative Christian agenda. This is tantamount to claiming that she is “asking for” the graphic sexual imagery which he uses to illustrate his point…In truth, Governor Palin has done nothing to warrant such spurious comparisons, and Perrotta is merely employing the time-honored tactic of using gratuitous and vulgar sexual imagery to demean and discredit a woman in a position of power while implying that she is complicit in her own degradation.
…Have you no shame, Mr. Plotz? As the editor of Slate Magazine, you are responsible for its content, and it is our opinion at The New Agenda that your publishing of articles of this nature about Governor Palin is a calculated attempt to demean her, perhaps in order to compensate for the fact that, as your wrote in your own article, “night after night, she appears in my dreams, always as a scolding, ominous figure.” It should be apparent to all that your and Perrotta’s visions of Sarah Palin have everything to do with your own imaginations, and nothing to do with the actual woman.
In response, David Plotz sent the following reply, which lacked only an animated gif of a man’s hand patting a woman on the head:
October 6, 2008
Thanks for your note, and I’m sorry the article troubled you. Perrotta’s piece is insightful, witty, and provocative. He clearly separates the sexual sites from Palin, and no reasonable reader could possibly claim he was imputing their provocations to her. As to the larger issue of Palin’s sex appeal, only someone living in a cave for the past month could deny that it is an important element in her appeal. Conservative commentators talk about her sex appeal all the time, and with great enthusiasm; Within the McCain campaign itself they call her the VPILF. Perrotta has pointed out what is obvious to every single person who has analyzed her effect on the race—pointed out what her most avid supporters are saying about her.
Needless to say, we will not be removing it or altering it.
Sincerely,
David Plotz
Got that? Gratuitous commentary about anal sex and masturbation = “insightful, witty, and provocative.”
Now you know why that Beavis and Butthead graphic is up there.
As The New Agenda notes on its website:
Why are some men so insecure about their status? Why are some men unable to move forward from a high school-type maturity level?
Haven’t we all noticed where the attacks are coming from? It’s men who don’t feel comfortable in their own skin. Because they are insecure of their standing with other men and in society in general, they choose to strike out at the old comfortable target: women. We say “old and comfortable” as this is reminiscent of their days of adolescence.
Don’t worry, David and Tom. You can peacefully co-exist with women when you can come to terms with your insecurities. We are not the enemy – promise. Degrading and diminishing women by sexualizing them doesn’t make you a bigger man – it makes you a high school boy.
(Or the host of a major news program on MSNBC. Sorry, couldn’t resist.)
This culture of misogyny must stop, and it’s up to us to fight back. We have to start somewhere, so let’s start by letting Butthead David Plotz know exactly how we feel.
His email address is David.Plotz@slate.com
And here’s the standard contact info from Slate’s website:
Slate’s New York office is located at 251 W. 57th Street, 19th Floor, New York, NY, 10019-1894. To contact editors in the New York office, please call Noreen Malone at (212) 445-5330 or e-mail nyoffice@slate.com.
Slate’s Washington, D.C., office is located at 1350 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 400, Washington, D.C., 20036. To contact editors in the D.C. office, please call Chris Wilson at (202) 261-1310 or e-mail dcoffice@slate.com.
For media inquiries, please contact Jennifer Lee by e-mail at press@slate.com or by phone at (703) 469-2671, or Kris Coratti at press@slate.com or (703) 469-2763.
42 Responses to “The Beavis and Butthead school of journalism strikes again”
-
formerhoosier says:
Only read a little, and the vacuous article would be right at home in a supermarket tabloid or fanzine. His authoritative sources for how she is perceived are two comedians, a search engine and talk show host. If this is indicative of where our supposedly ’serious’ periodicals have fallen, there is not any worth reading.
October 9th, 2008 at 12:55 am EST -
Kiuku says:
I just e mailed him. I called him a non-human piece of shit and that I hope he dies.
-
nomobama says:
Thank you for sending the letter to Slate to express your disgust with their Sarah Palin piece. I would have modified your letter ever so slightly to indicate that the writer’s dreams are a reflection of his own prurient behavior, and a relection on Sarah Palin. Sarah is an attractive person who dresses in a nice, conservative fashion. She certainly does not present herself as a bimbo. If anything, she is a role model for how to dress to impress without looking like trash.
It’s interesting how the editor thinks that the article is insightful and witty. I have to agree that it is provocative, though, but not for the reasons that the editor probably believes. It’s garbage talk, masked as commentary that is meant to demean not just Sarah Palin, but any female who has the gumption to take on the men’s club.
In your letter, you were being much too nice to those crass idiots.
-
Kiuku says:
they need to be dragged out from their little manhattan or DC hideout and taken behind the barn, if you know what I mean.
-
nomobama says:
Correction… and “not” a reflection of Sarah Palin.
-
Kiuku says:
We’ve all come across these types of men. They are all middling, bitter, MRA assholes, insecure with women doing anything of serious import and that is why they are so sexist. They can’t stand women in power. So she is a woman in power because of her sex appeal. Yea that must be it. If we all get erections for Sarah Palin and masturbate to cropped photoshopped images of her on porn models then we will be right and her sex appeal will be the serious issue we need it to be to save our insecure and petty penis faces!
-
Briar says:
“I just e mailed him. I called him a non-human piece of shit and that I hope he dies.” Very insightful. Nice to see “freedom of speech” exercised to such effect. I am sure he will bow to the judgment of such an intellectually credible and mature correspondent. Seems there is more than one Beavis to his Butthead out there.
-
Mary Tracy9 says:
Can anyone e-mail this dickhead and tell him that “fisting” is on par with putting dinamite up a man’s penis? If it’s triggering for them, it’s triggering for us.
This alone makes the case for the “pornification” of mainstream culture; the fact that it can be put up there without anyone so much as batting an eyelid. Who wants to take a guess that this idiot wrote this piece with one hand on the keyboard and one eye on a porn video?
-
Perry Logan says:
I fit right into the demographic of these horrible people, which makes it hard to hold my head up these days.
When I confront my fellow (progressive, heterosexual, educated) white males about the misogyny that is swimming all around us, I find that they do not perceive what is going down as wrong, much less as a pathology in themsleves. When women are concerned, these men (and the women who adopt the same attitude) feel there are no restrictions to what they can say.
This means Bill Maher is walking around thinking he has done nothing wrong, when he should be run out of town on a rail.
Plotz’s curt reply to your letter is an example of the blind spot. These guys think this sort of behavior is fine and dandy. Your letter of complaint was an excellent start on raising the national consciousness. But how did we sink so low?
-
kenoshaMarge says:
Here’s the email I sent Mr. Plotz;
Dear Mr. Plotz,As the current editor of Slate Magazine I understand that you approved the misogynistly inappropriate article by Tom Perrotta titled “The Sexy Puritan.
This is a good example of why women who have any self-respect for themselves or hope for their daughters will no longer read nor buy your magazine.
All you filthy-minded little Viagra enhanced adolescents need to go back to masturbating in private with your latest copy of Playboy or whatever floats your boat.
In the mean time, perhaps subjecting women who do not wish to be a part of your juvenile fantasies could be kept out of the pages of your porno mag.
I would suggest you should be ashamed of yourselves but that would suppose that you had any morals or integrity.
Slate has gone from being just a disappointment, to being disgusting.
kenoshaMarge
-
Lexia says:
Thank you for keeping the out sexism that now blankets the public media from left to right up front and in focus.
The prominent Slate ad at Dan Froomkin’s online column caused me to stop reading the one Washington Post writer I still respected. That was about the time that piece of trash featured the constant “Hillary Death Watch” screamer headlines.
I used to feel outrage over crimes the current administration was guilty of and injustices that were among the few that did not hit women first, but tired of sweeping the grounds just outside the prison of women’s “place” and of my only job in the world of men’s rights being to keep it neat and clean for them.
-
Lisa says:
Here is the letter I sent:
I am referring to the article I read this morning here: http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/ .
I read the “Sexy Puritan” article at Slate the day it appeared, and was outraged. To use such a gratuitous and demeaning cartoon, and print such an article as a NEWS article is absolutely hateful.
Would you print an article talking about sex and Obama? Would you have a cartoon speculating about his penis size, or what he does in the bedroom? Of course not.
I had an argument with a man about the article when it was printed. He said that it was of cultural interest, and that articles about male politician’s sexuality did appear from time to time. I beg to differ. Articles about a male politician’s sexuality appear when the politician has done something to warrant it, i.e. having an affair, or being caught soliciting sex from a prostitute. Articles about a female politician’s sexuality obviously are fair game just because they are female. The mere act of being a woman grants you the privilege of having the entire world talk about you in sexual terms. And I am sure that discussing ANY woman in gratuitous and sexual terms is of cultural interest to most men, but does that make it okay? Is this any better than the Japanese magazines of secretaries and working women sitting at their desks on one page, and then the same women sitting in their underwear in the exact same pose on the next page? I am sure the Japanese find that culturally interesting. May I remind you that over half of the population in this country is female, and we DO read.
In your response to the letter that New Agenda sent to you, you write:
“He clearly separates the sexual sites from Palin, and no reasonable reader could possibly claim he was imputing their provocations to her.”
Mr. Plotz… beyond the fact that the sentence is patronizing and insulting (no REASONABLE reader?), how can you possibly believe he CLEARLY separates Governor Palin from the sexual sites listed? You have an article with a picture of Governor Palin naked in a towel with a bible pressed between her thighs, and in the very same article about a candidate running for the office of Vice President, you use the terms “anal sex, fisting, and ‘masturbating for your husband”, and somehow we as readers aren’t supposed to see any connection?
Mr. Plotz, no REASONABLE reader could possibly separate this paragraph from the fact that the article is about Sarah Palin!
I am disgusted with you for printing such an article. The level of sexism coming from the liberal side of the party this election cycle is absolutely beyond the pale.
Sincerely,
Lisa
PUMA ex-Democrat -
salt h2o says:
As a woman who is very much a puritan I had to deal with this crap all through my dating years.
It comes down to this:Men are so offended that an attractive woman won’t open up her legs to them that they have to demean and objectify her.
-
Kali says:
David Plotz is a sick and disgusting creep. I figured that out about 10 years ago when Slate was relatively new. At that time he had written an article about Britney Spears (who was young and popular in those days) and how she brings out his inner pedophile. I stopped reading that piece of shit years ago. I felt like I needed a shower everytime I read Slate. Now I religiously avoid it, even when it is linked or referenced.
-
Sis says:
Write to the directors, addressed to the corporate offices.
http://www.washpostco.com/contacts.htmNeedless to say, you can’t write the same way you would in a blog comment, or in the same tone the two Washington Post Company employees used.
Do not e-mail. Send a snail mail, registered is best. If you do e-mail, back it up with snail mail. If you write to each one of the directors, snail mail addressed to them, they have to give it to them.
Keep it short, use your titles and initials if you’ve got ‘em.
-
Elise says:
Thanks for the heads-up on this. I’m passing your post along to my friends. Here’s my letter sent to Mr. Plotz, the NY and DC offices, and the press office:
Mr. Plotz:
In his article, “The Sexy Puritan”, Tom Perrotta - after listing numerous women and organizations with absolutely no documented connection to Sarah Palin - claims, “God knows, I’m not trying to link Palin to the Christian Nymphos”. Oh, please. I may be both female and blonde, but I’m not stupid. This is simply guilt by association and of a particularly vile form since there is, in fact, no association except in Mr. Perrotta’s mind (to put it politely).
Furthermore, Mr. Perrotta has managed to make clear that Governor Palin is not an independent actor but a sort of wind-up sex toy, captured in the wilds of Alaska and sent forth to serve the purposes of “cultural warriors on the right”. It’s clearly impossible that she could simply be an attractive woman with a conservative ideology, a nuanced approach to issues, and a mind of her own.
Mr. Perrotta’s inability to attribute nuance to Governor Palin may explain his surprise that she has refused to engage in class warfare over issues like global warming, homosexuality, and abstinence-only sex education. Of course, that surprise is explained equally well by Mr. Perrotta’s apparent ignorance of her views and past actions in these areas, an ignorance that also extends to his unquestioning belief that Governor Palin thinks a gas pipeline is God’s will and bans books in her spare time. Apparently, Mr. Perrotta’s obsession with Governor Palin’s sex has atrophied his ability to do research. Or perhaps what has atrophied is his interest in doing research: after all, who cares what a pin-up girl really thinks?
And the picture at the top of the article? It’s disgusting. Close your eyes and imagine a corresponding picture of Senator Obama heading an article written by someone who views him with contempt. Note what you think about that. Now you understand my opinion of you, of Mr. Perrotta, and of your magazine.
-
quixote says:
I’m with Perry Logan: How did we sink so low? HOW?
One of the many problems with this kind of insightful and witty analysis is that usually there’s no way to turn it around. Thinking about the sex lives of most male politicians does nothing but make paint peel. But not this time. Right now we actually have BO. Young, fit, handsome, and rather well-regarded as a sex symbol by at least as many people as Palin.
So, given how witty and insightful the piece was, I’m sure Plotz would appreciate and publish a rewrite that substitutes “Obama” for “Palin.”
-
sister of ye says:
I’ve often thought it’s a good thing that I don’t live in NY or DC.
Because I’d be tempted to show up at one of the Slate office with an effigy of Perrotta dressed in, say, a leather brief with a ball gag in his mouth and a dog collar around his neck. I’m sure Mr. Perrotta and Mr. Plotz would applaud such a provocative expression of free speech - NOT.
But it wouldn’t be worth the chuckle I might enjoy on the way to the unemployment line, my firm, unlike Slate, expecting its support staff to show a modicum of grown-up behavior.
Hmmm. Maybe I’ll corprate that thought into my letter.
-
Anonymous Male says:
Regarding the a**holes at Slate: this is normal behavior for people who are convinced they hold the moral high ground. Extremists (religious or not) who bomb abortion clinics do so because they are certain they hold the moral high ground; thus, anything they do is justified. Most bloody revolutions and civil wars are fueled by the same mindset — it’s okay to murder the Czar’s children if they’re the bad guys and you’re the good guys.
Most extremists have this mindset. What’s troubling is that a large percentage of American progressives and liberals also have this mindset. Even those who are not really “extreme” in their views are nevertheless firmly convinced that the moral high ground belongs exclusively to them. I’m sorry to have to say that on this website, because there are clearly a number of thoughtful and reasonable liberals on this site (it’s very refreshing, I must say — my formerly liberal wife and I love the articles and the quality of the discussions).
There certainly are some conservatives who feel this way too — in particular, fundamentalist Christians can be guilty of this. But they are not the mainstream. When the radicals are excluded from both groups, there is still a significant difference between mainstream liberals and mainstream conservatives. One obvious example is the use of terms like “scary”. I do not often hear conservatives refer to liberals as “scary” or “frightening”. But I am constantly hearing liberals and progressives refer to mainstream conservatives as “terrifying”, etc. Do a google search on “Palin terrifies” and you’ll see what I mean. This is always a clear sign that the speaker believes that he alone holds the moral high ground and that those who disagree with him are not only stupid, but evil.
When your enemy is evil, you’re justified to do or say whatever it takes to hurt them. Hence the blatant and unrepentant sexism from the left.
-
Anna Belle says:
Dr. Socks, great catch. I’m hoping to be able to read all of the links by this evening, but i just had to print off the sexy Puritan before jetting off to class this morning. I had a few minutes to follow the story a bit later in the day, and have posted more details at P&L: http://annabellep.wordpress.co.....yny-watch/
-
RKMK says:
When I confront my fellow (progressive, heterosexual, educated) white males about the misogyny that is swimming all around us, I find that they do not perceive what is going down as wrong, much less as a pathology in themsleves. When women are concerned, these men (and the women who adopt the same attitude) feel there are no restrictions to what they can say.
This means Bill Maher is walking around thinking he has done nothing wrong, when he should be run out of town on a rail.
Plotz’s curt reply to your letter is an example of the blind spot. These guys think this sort of behavior is fine and dandy. Your letter of complaint was an excellent start on raising the national consciousness. But how did we sink so low?
Rage Against the Manchine nailed it awhile ago:
Liberal Dudes abound. Who are they? Liberal Dudes are guys who will jump up and down to tell you that they’re all about equality and prosperity for everyone, but then tell you about the strip club they were at the night before or about the awesome anal porn site they last jerked off to. Liberal Dudes are ready to welcome us into the boardroom, provided we’re still willing to dance on the conference table at the employee party. Liberal Dudes love “sex-positive” “feminists” because Liberal Dudes support women’s freedom and “rights,” up to and including our “right” to strip and to suck dicks for money. Liberal Dudes love to see women embracing pornorific behavior like pole dancing, pube waxing, porn watching, thong wearing, chick kissing, and boob flashing as a means to “empowerment,” because that’s exactly the kind of power they want us to have: the power to give them boners. Liberal Dudes like to compare themselves favorably to conservatives because conservatives are anti-abortion and want to restrict women’s “freedom” to fuck random Liberal Dudes willy-nilly style. Liberal Dudes, on the other hand, support women’s freedom of sexual expression (as long as our sexual expression looks like a reasonable facsimile of their porn fantasies) and are pro-choice, because being pro-choice means they can pressure women into having abortions when they don’t want to take responsibility for impregnating them.
Liberal Dudes, in short, are willing to give us equal pay, let us have abortions, and let us have half the government jobs, provided that we’re fuckable, we don’t try to make them treat us like we possess the same measure of humanity that they do, and we don’t try to impose any limits on their “right” to use our bodies in person or via video. Sweet deal for us, I know.
The whole thing’s fabulous. Go take a look, if you haven’t read it already.
-
Mary Catherine says:
“How did we sink so low? HOW?”
Welcome to the pornocracy, sweeties. ‘Take her off the stage and fuck her’? Well, I guess today’s liberal dudes are a little more subtle than THAT. Just a little, though.
-
Kiuku says:
Telling “Mr.” Plotz that I hope he dies is freedom of speech. If you write something racist, sexist, or incite-ful (not insightful) expect people to loath you and maybe even hurt you.
Maybe even drag you out and take you out behind a barn.
-
Kiuku says:
Mr. Plotz is a piece of shit who uses his privilege to harm other people. He should be killed, quite frankly. The world would be a much better place.
-
Kiuku says:
But I mean they might make him a hero, some kind of liberal vigilante if too many people say that he should be killed.
Boring.
He is an inhuman piece of shit for which no one should apologize.
-
Kiuku says:
Meanwhile, I do not think any of us are fooled at what the article means to do. Other than demean the general population of women, and blame them for what they do in their bedrooms WITH their religious or nonreligious husbands, it is also an attack on Governor Palin.
Obviously they mean to remind men that Palin is a woman, to be sexualized. Someone who is “fucked” maybe even “fisted” AND she is asking for it! She is asking to be sexualized, and she is set up as the example of some perverts misogynist anti-women agenda.
Why is does anyone think it is a good idea to publish sick and perverted shit? I suppose only if the majority of men are sick and perverted. Who could enjoy that? Isn’t Slate a respectable magazine? lol.
Meanwhile more people should tell Plotz what a piece of shit he is. Afterall, I thought that was the reaction he was going for when he approved and called it provocative.
What else could it have been?
-
Pedro Correia says:
Check this:
Mother I’d Love to Punch -
K.A. says:
Dr. Socks, I am reading this from the library, and I was thinking, “Hmmm, the name David Plotz certainly rings a bell!” I happened to have a book he wrote right beside me in a pile that I was going to borrow today. I just reshelved it.
I haven’t checked out that non-partisan womanist group yet, but I’m liking their work so far.
-
Annie Oakley says:
Setting aside the fury I am feeling toward Perrotta and Plotz and our culture in general, I’d just like to say how inspired I am by Sarah Palin. This is a surprise for me, as I used to identify with liberals.
Palin is giving people fits because she is not a sex thing. She is vital, her sexuality integrated into who she is; and who she is is a mother and a successful woman and a leader. In no way does she depend of the approval of horny men. I think this quality that I’m trying to express here is why she’s just so likable and inspiring.
I am going to show this article to my husband along with a cartoon af Palin being hit with a hairy fist that edgeofforever has a post about. I am going to show him this and ask him to reconsider - he has recently said he won’t vote for McCain but cast a protest vote instead - and reaffirm that he will vote for McCain with me in this election. He is a decent and honorable man, and I think he understands how important it is to me to see this defeated.
The McCain campaign treats women with respect. The Democratic Party and these “liberal” men are completely unacceptable to me. I can hardly wait for the Democratic Party to poll me again (They call regularly because I’m an Independent now and the state race is close.) They have lost me.
-
Kiuku says:
It used to be that sex itself for a woman was degrading. She was a slut, etc. With the sexual liberation of women, men have been trying ever since to come up with new ways to make sex degrading and painful for women. Men came up with their new line of desires. When sex wasn’t painful or blow jobs degrading enough they came up with Fisting and Anal sex and gang rape porn. It’s men that do this and it’s men that request it from women. The article is an attempt to shame women for what they do…again holding women in their oppression as moral compasses of men. We are going to demand anal sex and fisting and gang rape porn from our women, but then blame them as hypocrits. If a woman had anything more than missionary 15 years ago, that might be risque. Would we have an article from these bozos about how a woman who was virginal and has sex in some style other than missionary is hypocritical and should be called out with an insightful and witty article in a men’s magazine? She might be a hypocrit for being ‘virginal” and “pure” beforehand. Women are continually in double binds. They are wrong if they are virginal. They are wrong if they aren’t. They are wrong if they give blowjobs, and wrong if they do not. They are shamed, continually, by pervert and insecure and frankly inhuman men, animals.
And to attempt to tear Governor Palin down by setting her up as the idol of the Shamed, the Shamed One, the fucked, the fisted, the she-knows-what-she’s-doing titillator, and the raped.
But you see these men do or do not realize the harm they cause to everyday women, like me. They make my life miserable. Because the men who read this magazine, and delight in the FALSE sense of power it gives them over women, to dehumanize and sexualize women, make them into shamed fuck things, I have to work around. Some women even have to live with them.
Well, I say we stop respecting all men, in return, until men stop the madness.
-
Yanni Znaio says:
People who loudly proclaim that they are offended by this, that or the other, quite frankly, offend me.
But this is offensive, and I am offended by it.
-
tinfoil hattie says:
Sarah is an attractive person who dresses in a nice, conservative fashion. She certainly does not present herself as a bimbo. If anything, she is a role model for how to dress to impress without looking like trash.
This is just another reinforcement of patriarchy. Sarah Palin is okay because SHE’S not a SLUT like some women! SHE doesn’t dress in a way that makes people think she might have SEX!
Another example of how women can’t win. You can’t be slutty because that’s bad. You can’t be a prude because that’s bad. You can’t dress like a Puritan because that prevents boners. You can’t dress in a way the patriarchy deems “provocative” because that causes boners, which is bad except when it’s good, which is when MEN decide they want boners.
You can’t simply exist if you’re a woman. Because regardless of who you really are, you’ll never be viewed from other than a patriarchy-distorted lens.
“anal sex, fisting, and ‘masturbating for your husband.’”
Uh-huh. All things we women have dreamed up on our own, with no influence from the patriarchy. Because we all know our sexuality is about being penetrated in violent or demeaning ways, and about first and foremost pleasing our men.
And we all want it. All the time. Any way any man wants to “give” it to us.
-
marirebel says:
Dear David: I disagree with your assertion that Governor Palin’s “sex appeal” is a significant issue in this election cycle. The only people obsessing about the Governor’s sexiness are the white supremacist males, such as yourself and Tom Perrotta, who view every other person and thing as an object for their own consumption. Usually these obsessed types are like yourself, unattractive and otherwise unappealing, and only able to associate with women by demeaning, degrading and objectifying them. Therefore, rather than writing intellectually lame and false articles making claims that arise only from your own psychological instability, you and Tom might invest in some good long-term therapy, and perhaps do some volunteer work at a rape crisis center or at a place serving families that have experienced domestic violence. Since you are simply pedaling another form of sexualized violence, you may want to experience first hand the effects of your incitement to violence.
-
TheOtherDelphyne says:
tinfoil hattie - I loved what you wrote because it most certainly speaks the truth about the insanity of patriarchy. Thank you.
-
Sis says:
Don’t you get the idea they’re just looking for excuse to say “fisting”? Ask any mother.It happens around age four or five. Little boys just love words having anything to do with their bums; poopie, poo-poo, poop, ka-ka. Fisting.
-
CoolAunt says:
Heh heh. She said “fisting.” Heh heh. Heh. Heh heh.
-
Kiuku says:
I just e mailed their DC office:
Dear Chris Wilson,
Thank you for your “witty” and “insightful” article about degrading women and Governor Palin. Never before have men used sexual practices of women to degrade them! This is completely novel, insightful, and absolutely witty!
BTW, when can I expect an article from Slate about the weirdness of so-called religious men who want to have fisting and anal porn sex with their wives. I can’t wait to read the one about the men who go for religious women when they want to consummate their marriage vows with pornography!
This could be exemplified with a picture of Obama holding a porn magazine about fisting. That would be amazingly insightful and witty! Everyone would appreciate it!
Thanks Slate for being total bigoted morons. Your growing fan base of angry adolescents and pedophiles must be good for business.
-
Foxx says:
I’m tired of writing these creeps. They just get off on it.
We need to spend our energy on ourselves. We are going to need each other in the coming months.
-
CDG says:
Delurking to add that I listed to Slate’s “Political Gabfest” podcast and the most recent one Plotz is woe-is-me-ing over how he is getting inundated with profane emails from the “religious right” over his response to a message from a “second-rate Christian right group that I’d never heard of.”
Seriously.
Oh, and also they all laughed about how super-ironic it is that these wacko Christian righties are complaining about misogyny ’cause everybody knows how Christians are. -
Kiuku says:
What a moron. This is seriously why our country and our world has all the problems it has. Morons with penises.
-
Kiuku says:
But seriously look at the pic. They really do resemble Beavis and Butthead
-
pacifc-cali says:
I think we have underestimated Putz & Parrota’s sleaziness.
They would not have written/published this trash in the first place if they had had any sense of decency or respect for the opinions of women.
We need to be sending our letters to the corporations who buy advertising space in these offensive publications.
All of these corporations know that its WOMEN who make the decisions about which products/brands go into the shopping carts. It is in these corp.s best interests to make sure that the publications they’re advertising in aren’t offending women.
Perhaps major corporations could even be met with preemptively to be made aware of the growing problem of misogyny in the msm - and our efforts to combat it. We could invite them to work in partnership with us to ensure that their customers are treated with respect by the msm.
Putz & Butthead WILL care when its their advertisers who’re holding them accountable for their content.
