Don Lemon is still on TV, can someone explain this to me?

Begin angry rant. Don Lemon says terrible things. I know this; you know this. I imagine the people who pay him know this. I also imagine he is profitable, right? Drumming up controversy by saying stupid shit? I mean that is every right wing pundit. However, Lemon is now telling an alleged sexual assault victim she should have fought harder then she wouldn’t have been raped.

I don’t know how to begin this. I really don’t. I mean I could start with some advice my father gave me in junior high, “Don’t pick a fight you can’t win” or I could start by saying that they tell you the most important thing is to survive. But the latter is just something they say and don’t mean, and the first, well that’s solid advice. See the fine print, if you fight back and lose, well then you are a victim, cut and dry, but you may also be killed because rapists are violent and will probably kill you or beat you within an inch of your life, but hey no one will question your victimhood—except when they do anyway. Or you can prioritize survival, and know that it is going to end. At some point he is going to be stop. But then you’re going to have to defend your experience at every turn. People are always going to want to know why? Why didn’t you do all the things they tell women to do so they aren’t raped?

Lemon pretty much says if you’re raped well you should have fought back harder so you’re at fault. I would love just once people to publicly say men who rape are at fault, and we should teach men not to rape (and not you know receive a public backlash and rape threats). I don’t understand why part of my adolescence was about learning how not to be raped. Any of you guys get that talk? Maybe, you got a how not to be a rapist talk? No? Of course not.^ It is wrong to treat all men like rapists; their feelings might be hurt. We can condition all women to expect to be victims though. I mean that can’t have long reaching consequences. And god forbids we me make men mildly uncomfortable. Right?

Better not talk about it, someone might be uncomfortable. Better not talk about it, your boyfriend will feel bad and think you’re broken. Better not talk about it, no one will believe you. Better not talk about it because your father won’t be able to look you in the eyes. Better not talk about it because there is no coming back from that victimhood. No point in talking about it, because you waited too long. The police won’t believe you. He didn’t seem like a rapist, after all they are easily identified by the long black coats. Are you sure it was rape? Were you clear that you didn’t want to have sex?

I think men should be uncomfortable. Women are. Silence and shame go hand in hand, and I’m sorry if you’re uncomfortable because you don’t want to acknowledge someone’s lived experience. But I give exactly zero fucks. I also think people who have nothing to contribute to the conversation should just stop talking. I’m looking at you Lemon, Goldberg, and every other rape apologist. I’m looking at and blocking the people trolling those posting on the #WhenIwasRaped. But Lemon is still on TV, and there are people on this hashtag calling for a #WhyIRaped and saying they are uncomfortable. Well filter the damn hashtag. And as for a #WhyIRaped, sure rapists should be the responsible party, but maybe not asking for it in a place where survivors are sharing their stories? Also, I give zero fucks what rapists have to say. Also, there are studies that interview rapists, and yes, they are disturbing. End angry rant.

^I am putting a note here that of course men can be victims/survivors of sexual assault and women can be perpetrators. However, women are disproportionately the victims/survivors. That doesn’t deny men’s experiences, but it does make one think and the power differential between genders and how structural forces are at play.

I went to this show last week, and it was amazing

Well, things are bit of a mess with the government falling even further into Republican hands, but never fear. My coworkers and I still have jobs. And more importantly, we're banking on the batshit crazy that is about to come out of the Senate will draw people back from the edge.

Let’s be clear, being rejected isn’t the equivalent of living in rape culture.

I can’t even with these people. Honestly, when you write something like this, do no alarm bells go off indicating you sound like an asshat? Well, let me help you out, if you ever feel the need to write anything defending men engaging in pick-up artistry, you are an asshat. If this compels you to compare rape to rejection, you’re definitely an asshat. And if you think for one second that not “getting a girlfriend” i.e. ownership and possession of another person is an affront to you because you are owed this much just for being a special little snowflake, you are in fact the largest asshat.

So what exactly am I talking about, well Sam de Brito wrote an article called “Hating the search for love.” Let’s use a flight of fancy and pretend that is what men who engage in this sort of behavior are doing, which we know isn’t true based on the techniques which encourage men to treat women like objects, and the phrase search for love implies giving and receiving, which objects can’t by definition do. But let’s pretend. Sam graciously agrees that men like Julien Blanc are creeps because he doesn’t respect women. However, then he argues that the “scenes on the Yarra River in Melbourne” (where a protest took place over Blanc and his followers) were mean. *tiny violin* See there is at least one incident of violence at the protest, but let me be clear, most of what I read was protesters yelling about rape culture and “walk of shame” as the men exited the boat. I was called a bitch with my sister when we were walking home from school at 13 or 14 for ignoring grown ass men yelling sexually explicit things at us. Sorry your feelings were hurt boys, but grow a pair and walk that shit off. Women do it all the time, where the threat of violence is very real. So you know, hug it out and move the fuck on. You are after all endorsing a man who regularly assaults people and video tapes it. Consequences of your actions, aren’t they fine.

Sam argues that because he has attended a variety of PUA seminars over the years as a journalist, he knows that they range from men like Blanc to speakers who want to “improve their client’s lives and do so in a respectful manner.” I wonder if Sam is talking about respecting their clients alone or if that extends to their client’s prey remember these seminars often use that terminology.

This is the point in the article where Sam writes a swan song about how hard it is to be one of the guys attending this seminar. He lists off every possibility like minority, disabled, etc. to make you sympathetic,  closing with the line “Imagine you turned up at last week’s event with that mindset and had people screaming ‘creep’, ‘loser’ or ‘abuser’ at you and they were filming it?” Um, well, golly gee, I might not be endorsing a man who assaults women or I would expect a backlash. I expect to be called a baby killer, cunt, d**e, etc. every time I wear my “This is what a feminist looks like” t-shirt, and no one was harmed by my fair trade t-shirt. I know, but Kari, how can these guys be expected to be accountable for how they spend their money and who they endorse? Oh, you mean like everyone else? *side eye*

Sam points out, well these poor guys aren’t the real bad guys invoking the whole women only date jerks meme—citing religious zealots, athletes, the wealth, etc. Because nerds can’t hurt women they just can’t except with the fake geek girl meme, or at cons, or in videogames, or in STEM or, well it looks like there is quite a list of where nerds are capable of hurting and exploiting women.

But it gets better, or so much worse depending on the lens you’re using to read Sam’s piece because, “My point is, the demand of seminars such as the one Blanc teaches arises from a very simple fact of life; the dating game is an uneven playing field.” Oh? Do go on. *rubs hands together like a Batman villain* You can see the car wreck coming for this guy.

“Men and women suffer and benefit from different sides to it.

“No man goes out of a night worried he might be raped, sexually abused or catcalled and these are all serious instances of aberrant male behavior that we must address, punish or discourage as a society.

“The flipside of this is your average man can go out every Friday and Saturday night for five years, buy himself a drink and stand at a bar and NEVER have a woman start up a conversation with him.

“In the majority of social situations, men have to be instigators and, of course, there are a plethora of respectful, non-threatening ways to do this.

“Some women, however, are quite happy to overlook, diminish and outright mock the problem this poses for many, many men—the anxiety of approaching women, the fear of rejection, the despair at being completely ignored by the opposite sex.

“This is an experience 100 percent guaranteed for 95 percent of guys. It happens. Over and over and over again. And some guys need help to deal with being invisible.

“I’m not equating the fear of rejection to the fear of being raped, merely pointing out that men—like most of the ones that attend Blanc’s seminars—do not do it to learn how to manipulate women, to sexually assault them or degrade them.

“They do it to get a girlfriend, to have someone to hold, to find love.”

I know, where to begin? Yes, please tell me about how dating hurts women. Are you going to address the social economic inequities that lead to a power differential between potential partners? What about the new study that says men are happy when their women partners fail? You know, the politics of dating. Oh, no, of course not because the only thing women have to think about on dates is whether this dude is going to rape me. Well, yeah that is there. Dating is actually dangerous for women  (see all the domestic violence and stalking stats). But you’re right Sam, this isn’t about women, why have we been talking about them this long? Back to the dudes. Poor, poor dudes who are ignored and rejected because no one deserves that unless your poor, a person of color, a woman, gay—who never show up in this piece at all—oh, wait you see what I did right there.

Sam’s swan song here is all about how men are owed attention because…well privilege, but Sam never says that. I fear rejection too gents, let’s bond over it. I fear being rejected purely because being a man is more desirable in the workforce (research, academia, writing, etc.) unless we’re talking low-wage service work (and try being a person of color in the workforce). Now, as for my personal life, I implement a take them or leave them approach. I have a firm you can seek me out when you want to deal with me or don’t, your choice, your right approach. See, because I’m a grown up, and I know that I don’t have the right to other people’s time, space, or thoughts.

The piece closes in truly shortsighted fashion with language that implies ownership over your partner. I hate the implication that you have to track and trap a partner and then ze will be yours for always and you can all him squish…sorry, I went all Finding Nemo. Women aren’t pets gents; we don’t need you to feed us and walk us.

What Sam never explains is why these men deserve special treatment. These men shouldn’t be yelled at for bankrolling an abuser because… These men should possess girlfriends if they want them because… These men shouldn’t be treated like women or other marginalized groups being yelled at on the street when they are just trying to get to an obligation because… Because men have male privilege, and we can’t go and treat them like women or other marginalized groups. Repeat after men: I am not entitled another person’s time or space regardless of what society tells me. Repeat this until you believe it, and then maybe I’ll buy you a drink.

My problems with the Duggars, children, and lifestyle decisions

So here’s the thing, I support your right to live however you want. I mean I don’t care as long as what you’re doing doesn’t harm anyone else. See and there is the rub. I have friends who are deeply concerned that I’m judging them, particularly friends with babies. This is always news to me, because while I like playing with your babies, I don’t spend a lot of time thinking about them. I mean occasionally, I’ll think, “Jesus, if I had a girl and had to bring her up in this rape culture like C does” or “L’s baby boy is going to have to navigate these unreasonable gender standards and perform to them.” I don’t care if you want to stay home, if you can afford it more power to you. Hell, if I could I would do nothing but read, craft, and bitch about politics FOREVER. So you want to spend time with your shiny baby, that’s cool.

But back to that rub, I take issue with people who harm others, and that includes the advocating of bigoted legislation. I can’t tell you you’re lifestyle is ok if it advocates for limiting the rights of others so like reproductive choice, medical access, welfare, housing, SNAP, marriage equality, employment equality, and on and on and on.

I say all of this because the Duggars. I can’t with these people. For real. I almost made it through one whole episode! My sister M loves the show. I don’t know how or why. But outside of that one episode where the family got whacky and the boys and girls did each others' chores because what could be zanier than girls doing boy work and boys in the kitchen. *head desk* The show seemed harmless, well it pushed some seriously conservative propaganda, but I wouldn’t want my nephew to have the Kardashians or the Duggars as role models. The Kardashians are uber-capitalists (which reinforces racism, classism, and sexism), and the Duggars are misogynists and zealots. Let’s call it a draw. My real exposure to this family like most celebrities is through politics. See the Duggars stump for anti-choice, antigay, anti-the American way candidates, just kidding on that last one. What else do I know? I know the women in this family spend more time talking to tabloids about their sex lives than the Kardashians. I know they are part of a conservative Christian movement that teaches women have no right to refuse sex to their husbands, and their goal is to out populate liberals and atheists (and probably all other groups that aren’t them).

So let me be clear, almost if not everything this family stands for I am against:

• Antigay, no thanks
• Anti-choice, you can have my rights when you pry them from my cold dead hands
• A woman’s worth is purity, *laughing/gasping for air* Um, no
• Women should be submissive, only if they want to be and preferably with a working contract, and tell me what to do, see what happens
• Men have to perform to rigid masculinity standards, nope, nope, nope.
• Waiting for marriage, not my thing, but I have poor impulse control, whatever works for you and your partner, but see there has to be some kind of discussion with your partner so no one is doing anything they are uncomfortable with and expectations are laid out
• Women should be constantly pregnant to populate God’s Army, I’m an atheist, but when I believed in God it was the turn the other cheek and love your neighbor one, God doesn’t need an Army he had all the superpowers
• I won’t even go near the exclusionary practices of these sorts of Christian cults, I can’t imagine there are many men of color being vetted to marry (all boyfriends/potential husbands are vetted by dad) a Duggars’ girl and absolutely no one outside their own faith.

These are values I would want children I care about far away from. I wouldn’t let them watch this show; I’d read them Harry Potter, which is scientifically proven to increase empathy among readers. I would talk about boundaries and how they don’t have to do anything they are uncomfortable with regardless of what adults may think. And from a young age I would try to explain what social constructs are and how they only have meaning because we give them meaning just like scary monsters. The Duggars are so dangerous because they seem harmless, right? They look like a large happy family with values about faith and love, as long as you conform to the molds they believe are worthy. It is the subtext; those things not actually said, but implied that are dangerous. I’m kind of against anything that teaches children there is an us and a them.

When GOP wins; we all lose

I know we all kind of expected it. But I think my coworker said it best, “Whose excited about elections results?” in the saddest voice ever with slumped shoulders. So the GOP took the House and Senate, which was pretty much expected, and in Maryland the GOP took back state Governor.

A few things, yes mom, I still have a job. Larry Hogan isn’t going to dissolve our contract with the state…he can’t. We are protected by the Legislature. Now, if they turned on us, we’d have to talk.

Second, time to show your colors, conservatives. My coworker and I were talking about how well, if they are going to win now they have to take a stance. Remember when I was bitching about how the GOP controlled House kept passing anti-choice legislation? Everyone kept telling me (and I’m looking at some of you specifically with narrow eyes and general disgust on my face) it will never pass the Senate. Well, now it will pass the Senate. See these GOP Senators are going to have to take a stance or risk not being reelected. So bring on the anti-choice legislation kids, because we’re about to watch the US Congress try to systematically take control of women’s lives and bodies and the disenfranchise people of color. Couple this with the Supreme Court shit show, we’re in for something alright.

The final count is 52 Republicans and 44 Democrats in the Senate with 243 Republicans and 174 Democrats in the House. John Kasich remains Ohio’s Governor, and Wendy Davis lost Texas.  On the good side of things, Baltimore City expanded collective bargaining, and voters fought back personhood amendments in a few states.