Jen Gunter rips up George Will on his rape column. (By the way, Gunter talks frankly about her own rape: might cause extreme discomfort for some.)
I have a dream: that the editors at the Washington Post will wake up, realize that Will is a tedious, stupid asshole and will fire him, and replace him with someone like Jen Gunter. With a 10% increase in salary.
It’ll never happen.
busterggi says
“Will is a tedious, stupid asshole ”
Which still makes him better than most other Repubes.
cervantes says
Actually assholes are a good thing. Ask a cnidarian.
Lynna, OM says
I found myself nodding in agreement when reading this paragraph:
violetknight says
He’s received plenty of good takedowns, but the sad part is that few, if any, have anywhere near as big a bullhorn.
redwood says
The likelihood of George Will feeling empathy with or sympathy for a rape victim is right down there with the likelihood of the government curtailing gun possession.
Tashiliciously Shriked says
I honestly don’t want to give the original article any hits, or even force myself to read the drivel. Can someone tell me what in the blazing hells “survivor priviledge” is even supposed to *be*?!
Tony! The Fucking Queer Shoop! says
PZ sez:
Most definitely. It shook me up a little bit, and I was expecting it.
I commented on her blog, thanking her for sharing her story and speaking up against the lies George Will was spreading. A great many of the comments were supportive, but of course there are those few…ugh.
Lynna, OM says
Leaders in the mormon church sometimes go even further. By both actions and words they indicate that the rapist is/was the victim. See http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1295212
Excerpt below:
Lynna, OM says
Uh-oh. This doesn’t sound good:
AlJazeera Europe link.
Lynna, OM says
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/16/world/middleeast/iraq.html
Lynna, OM says
My apologies for comments #9 and #10. I posted them in the wrong thread. I’m headed back to the Lounge to hide in a corner and have some grog.
twas brillig (stevem) says
It’s a response to George Will’s declaration that women cry “rape”, just to receive all the “privileges” the universities are forced (by Progressives) to yield to the victims. She is just trying to clarify George, that the women who cry “rape”, are “survivors” and there is no such thing as a “survivor privilege”. That George is just brainfarting all over the paper that reproduces his brainfarts. for more info look for the previous thread here about, “time for George Will to retire”
Tony! The Fucking Queer Shoop! says
twas billig:
It was far worse than a brainfart.
I had a brainfart a few moments ago when reading a comic book. I came across a new character, a being from another world, and I instantly used a male pronoun to describe the being, despite no gender related clues being present in the comic. I corrected my thoughts immediately, but still, the brainfart happened.
OTOH, George Will did not make one relatively harmless mistake. He spread lies and misinformation (that are easily refuted by a few google searches) that will hurt women and men. Worse still, there are plenty of malicious people (MRAs for instance) and gullible people who will swallow that shit up and regurgitate it. He has a platform that reaches many people, and his “celebrity” will give his words a [false] air of authority.
Seven of Mine, formerly piegasm says
Tashiliciously Shriked @ 6
Will doesn’t trouble himself to define it or describe what any of the benefits are. He just asserts that victim-hood is a coveted status and that women are falling all over themselves to be able to claim it.
What a Maroon, el papa ateo says
Some further reaction to Will’s column (all via the Washington Post):
Alyssa Rosenberg on false beliefs about sexual assault.
Representative Jackie Speier on just how out of touch Will is (this was published on the Washington Post Op-Ed page, the same space where Will’s nonsense first appeared).
A letter from four senators to Will and Will’s clueless response to same.
colnago80 says
Let’s not forget that Will dumped his first wife to trade her in for a younger model. An all around class guy. Not.
smhll says
It seems that Will is disturbingly nostalgic for an era where there was more shame, more stigma and more silence.
mikeyb says
Will proves that looking intelligent and appearing to sound intelligent are far more important these days in the media punditocracy, than actually being and saying something intelligent, with few exceptions such as Paul Krugman once in a while when he’s permitted on a show here and there. I can’t recall Will every saying anything remotely insightful including his trite cliches about baseball. Mostly he just hides his smug bigotry, ignorance and blatant corporatism in grammatically correct sentences.
Tony! The Fucking Queer Shoop! says
What a Maroon @15:
Thanks for those links.
The first (to Alyssa Rosenberg’s column) introduced me to ‘cultural cognition’:
Johnny Pez says
Given that Will’s editor, Fred Hiatt, is even worse than Will, you’re right.
knowknot says
@3 Lynna, OM
requoting:
because that. because seriously that.
and also this, for the sake of clarity:
knowknot says
@19 (as quoted by) Tony:
The quoted writer states that “assessment of the facts in accordance with the ideas that make up your worldview” makes a “certain sort of tragic sense” when considering sexual assault, because
First, I have to admit that I’m having trouble conceiving of acultural cognition, or conceiving of my view of the world and its facts in the absence of my worldview. Or maybe I’m just not good at it. Or I’m missing something. Or “cultural cognition” means “how people cogitate anyway” plus “decieving themselves and anyone else available because wanna.”
And even if I did get the concept, my experience (which I admit is often lacking) would still lead me to believe that this is either overly forgiving (as in, WAY overly forgiving) or twisted away from reality in an attempt to make the cold-bloodedness of these views comprehensible to those possessing an actual awareness of the existence of other humans and one or two mirror neurons.
Meaning: I honestly think the evasiveness of this maneuver is ENTIRELY unecessary to Will and his kind, because either the swell and beneficent nature of creation or the largesse of the ruling class would never allow the latter “monstrosity” (to occur to the undeserving), and because they are already certain of either the former or its softer, gentler more ennobling version:
Women just freaking talk and talk and talk and talk and it’s mostly crap anyway and boys will be boys and everything would fall apart and be all wimpy if they weren’t and then women wouldn’t have anything to talk about and they wouldn’t like it anyway and also that way lieth madness.
Pteryxx says
When I grow up and put on my superhero cape, I want to be Dr. Jen Gunter.
—
Via Tony! over the weekend:
Colleges silence and fire faculty who speak out about rape
Tony! The Fucking Queer Shoop! says
knowknot @22:
re: cultural cognition-
My understanding of the phrase is that individuals will attempt to force reality to fit their worldview. George Will’s conservative worldview doesn’t mesh with the reality of Rape Culture. Attempting to accommodate the two results in denying the extent of the problem (wow, that’s an understatement). His worldview needs to stay intact. Doing so means rejecting the evidence. The world can’t be that unfair. People can’t really act so abominably. So it has to be that women are lying. And of course, that’s confirmed by the Republican echo chamber and Rape Culture.
I don’t see Dr. Gunter as forgiving George Will, so much as trying to understand how the hell he can arrive at his conclusions.
knowknot says
– I’m often obtuse as a duck in a milkshake, but doesn’t all that come down to confirmation / disconfirmation bias? As in, women are “like that” because entitlement / feminism / Obamacare / ladyparts / etc. The boys aren’t really “like that” because ladypartsinladyclothesfault / myfrat / God / tedcruz / etc.
Seems simple. Seems like what I’ve seen: everything denied or affirmed piecmeal, because everything’s a conspiracy anyway.
– I’m probably just being cranky, but I don’t get the sense or the value of the added terminology. And I don’t see any logic, tragic or otherwise, and even the waft of pathos in the struggle against cognitive dissonance is too romatic for heads with this crap in them.