The list of Greatest Hits for my very favorite Really Awful Political Candidate keeps growing. In a discussion about the GOP war on women, a political gadfly once again tried to derail the discussion by calling President Bill Clinton a rapist. ~yawn~ What perked up my interest, however, was a comment from candidate Norma Duffy (slogan: Fuck off and get a life!) It was typically reactionary, and full of her trademark mangling of the written word. She wrote:
Ah Ingy, let’s just say there were no victims in the Clinton /Lewinsky thing. She was an immature sleaze( yes a woman can call another a sleaze, but a man shouldn’t) who had done this sort of thing before and President Clinton was an Testosterone accident looking to happen.
Let's just disregard, for a moment, that men have "Testosterone accidents" (I think I've only really had those while sleeping, and it's kind of embarrassing), and the implication that women's sexual desire is simply an 'estrogen accident' .?. The part that stands out is the claim that women can call each other "a sleaze", but a "testosterone accident" prone man shouldn't. Hmmm.
Now, it could be the case she was alluding to the idea that the term can rightly be used ironically or as a bridge of conspiratorial comradery, the way that some folks use "nigga" or how girlfriends might call each other a 'slut' or 'bitch' in fun. But that's not the manner in which Norma Duffy used it. She referred to Monica Lewinski in purely judgmental terms as a "sleaze", a mark of shame for desiring sex with a man who is attractive, powerful and receptive. By extension, it was okay that Ann Coulter referred to Sandra Fluke as a slut, but not that Rush Limbaugh did so. Hmmmm.
My response was inquisitive:
This is only tangentially related to the topic, but someday, just once, I’d love to read you posting a moral, or even rational, foundation for such idiocy, Norma.
It is my bad for calling her pronouncement "idiocy". After all, it's possible that she did have a moral and/or rational reason for why women can judge other women's sexuality and men "shouldn't". After all, we don't have 'estrogen accidents' the way women do. Ms. Duffy's response was - disappointing. Certainly not moral and absolutely not reasonable.
And then we Hear from the Righteous Man who continually believes he is better at knowing a woman’s definitions about others, then the woman herself.
So, apparently, I was wrong to even ask for a definition. Two things:
This kind of bullshit is what makes it very very difficult for men to get involved in the ideal and cause of feminism, or be accepted if we already are. There are apparently some unwritten rules which we aren't even allowed to ask about. (that isn't typical of most women who espouse feminism, but very typical of RAPC Duffy.)
If I were Jeffrey Welborn, I would publicize this comment from Norma Duffy widely across Beaverhead County. I'm certain every voter who believes in gender equality would love to know that, as a legislator, Norma would reserve to herself the right to decide what you are allowed to think and questioning what she thinks is merely 'sexism', if you are prone to testosterone accidents, of course.