Tag Archives: J.D. Vance

For want of a nail

Well, 2026 is off to a swinging start. We have the ongoing invasion of Venezuela (NC’s Senator Ted Budd thinks that’s a wonderful thing, nobody could have any possible objections) which appears to have happened partly because the Necrotic Toddler’s fee-fees were hurt about not getting the peace prize. And he’s willing to put the opposition leader in charge if she gives him her prize. Which is not only petty, it’s a lousy standard for running a country (as is attacking it and leaving the current regime in charge). Oh, and he’ll turn their oil into a cash cow for himself.

He’s willing to pay Greenlanders $100,000 apiece out of our tax dollars if they’ll switch from Denmark to the US. Why? Because he wants it! “I think that ownership gives you a thing that you can’t do, whether you’re talking about a lease or a treaty. Ownership gives you things and elements that you can’t get from just signing a document.” (at the link, see a prime example of sanewashing his comments). And as I said last week, Republican pundits and elected officials are all in on the American empire.

Then this week ICE murdered Renee Good, a mom in Minneapolis. And as in countless unjustified police shootings, they’ve declared she had it coming (see this related thread). In America we are not legally required to do whatever a cop or an ICE agent tells us and the penalty for not doing it is not extrajudicial execution. Nevertheless, authoritarian GOPers are declaring obey ICE or die is the law. Newsmax is parroting the faux outrage.

“Concentration Camp Kristi” Noem declaring the woman was a domestic terrorist. I’m not surprised; taking responsibility for ICE killing someone (and also shooting two people in Portland) would require a spine and a sense of morals, neither of which seems present in Noem’s toolbox. Likewise Border Czar Tom Homan thinks the problem is people criticizing ICE — of course if you antagonize them, you get shot. As Hilzoy says, “If your officers ate not well enough trained to be able not to kill people who insult them, then not only should they be off the street; you should be out of a job.”

JD Vance agrees, claiming Good was part of a domestic terror conspiracy. Given Vance lied in 2024 about Haitian immigrants stealing and eating people’s pets, and admitted it, I wish someone would ask him why the hell anyone should believe a single word out of his mouth. I’m not holding my breath.

As Paul Krugman says, “Renee Nicole Good’s murder is at most collateral damage, in service to his insatiable need to dominate and feel powerful — so insatiable that he is attempting to create an alternate reality, claiming that that Good ran over an agent although there is irrefutable video evidence that she didn’t.”

Lying behind all of this is the Necrotic Toddler and the 1 percent trying to replace the international nation-state order with neo-royalism, where what’s good for America or Americans is replaced by what’s good for the people in charge. Does it make the Toddler or his family rich? Does it enrich his political allies or the Silicon Valley techbros?

I’m still hopeful Krugman and Bouie were right and the Felon’s influence is weakening. No question, he can do a lot of damage before it’s gone. But I can see people chipping away at it, bit by bit. It’s true the Felon has weathered scandals that would have killed many politicians but every loss, every act of defiance, shows he’s not some juggernaut who can’t be stopped.

As I told a trans activist friend recently who was wondering if she was doing enough, “for want of a nail the shoe was lost.” She’s one of the nails that stayed in the shoe, contributing to the fight. In which spirit, here are more nails.

The town that refused to let Noem use a government-building restroom.

DC residents responding to Good’s death by telling ICE to get lost.

Fact-checking Stephen Miller’s immigration lies.

The protesters who pressured the Avelo airline to stop helping with deportations.

The judges who keep disqualifying the Felon’s illegally appointed federal attorneys. Or overruling his efforts to cut off funding for blue states. (which I suppose could be another form of neo-royalism — kings can do things like that).

Kentucky refusing the Felon’s order to give Republicans more seat.

The blue states suing the DOH over Kennedy’s anti-trans policies.

Brazil.

Republicans defying the Felon on mail-in ballots. Likewise Democratic Rep. Seth Magaziner for calling out Noem as a lying idiot.

Jake Tapper for pointing out Kristi Noem is lying.

The Minneapolis Timber Wolves.

Are we inching towards a tipping point? We can hope — and if we keep being nails, more and more of us, we can perhaps make hope a reality. Not guaranteed, but the fight is worth it. The consequences for everyone if we don’t fight are worse.

I’ll close with a quote from Krugman (same post as above): “Here’s a warning to those directly perpetrating Trump-directed atrocities: He will not be in power forever, and I expect and hope that you will be held accountable, personally, and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.” That should be the minimum to expect from the next sane government.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Zohran Mamdani and James Dobson

(I’d throw in something about Jeremy Epstein but I’m saving that for a bigger post).

It appears China wants Eric Adams to stay mayor of New York. Why? To quash dissent among the 600,000 Chinese-Americans in NYC and because “Beijing is also making a longer bet, she said: You never know which politician might eventually run for Congress at the national level, or become a presidential candidate.'”

Oh, side note, saying that giving reporters envelopes stuffed with cash is a “bold departure from political norms” seems very … euphemistic. Which seems to be NYT style these days. Mamdani responded better: “it is the despair and the disaffection that New Yorkers hold for politics that I am running against. And it is one that I do not blame them for, because if you were to see this each and every day, why would you believe in the promise of local government?”

J.D. Vance complaints, as so many people do with immigrants, that Mamdani should be more grateful to America instead of “attacking the U.S. for all of its problems.” Of course Vance might be grateful for living in a country that allowed him to rise from a struggling, dysfunctional family to vice president but he loves complaining about America’s problems with single women, immigrants, etc. Somehow that never applies to white guys.

Shifting from Mamdani, right-wing evangelical creep James Dobson died last month. As Mark Twain says, I’ve never wished a man dead but there are obituaries I’ve read with great pleasure. This was one of them. This is a man who supported the right of men to beat their wives — and suggests some women provoke their husbands because they know the men will be wracked by guilt (no, they won’t). He supported Roy Moore’s senate campaign, declaring Moore, the man who liked to lech on teenage girls when he was in his thirties, was a man of character. Which is true, but not the kind of character that deserves public office.

“James Dobson was a nasty dude. He liked to beat children and dogs with a belt and to rain misery and punishment on the vulnerable; we know all of this about him because he said as much in public, repeatedly, over a long and rancid public life.”

And one more: “You get one shot to treat your children with autonomy and dignity, and to model for them the kindness and love the world needs. No one is going to be a perfect parent, but treating your children like little soldiers you can train to fight in your culture war comes at a high price.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

The cramped American vision of JD Vance

As someone said a while back (I don’t have the link handy), J.D. Vance’s career has been built on carefully deciding who to sell out to and when. He has few limits on how badly he’ll sell out. Last year he said he wouldn’t have certified Biden’s win (admittedly the lie the election was stolen is now a baseline Republican belief).

After Tucker Carlson gave an admiring interview to a “Nazis were the good guys in WW II” Holocaust denier, Vance refused to back off from his ties with Carlson, while insisting Of Course he didn’t share the guest’s beliefs.

As a law student he expressed outrage over Republican anti-immigrant policies. As vice president, he happily lies about Haitian immigrants eating pets.

He hates universities because teaching facts and critical thinking is antithetical to Republican policy and makes it too easy for nonwhites and women to succeed in life (he phrases it somewhat differently)

(Side note: right-wing bullshit artist Bari Weiss recently claimed it’s impossible to get into college if you’re white or Asian, which is a complete lie. CBS, which just fired Colbert for daring to criticize the Felon, is now looking at giving Weiss a news position of some sort).

After the Wall Street Journal ran its story about the Felon’s letter to Jeffrey Epstein, Vance complained the White House never saw the letter … which completely contradicts his boss’s take (these are not coordinated, well-organized liars).

Then, at a recent speech to the far-right Claremont Institute, he expressed the view that Real Americans are the ones whose families have been here for generations: ““dentifying America just with agreeing with the principles, let’s say, of the Declaration of Independence — that’s a definition that is way over-inclusive and under-inclusive at the same time,:

Overinclusive because it would include “hundreds of millions, maybe billions of foreign citizens who agree” with the principles of the Declaration of Independence. That’s “the logic of America as a purely creedal nation.” Underinclusive because it would reject lots of extremists who presumably don’t believe in things like all men being created equal, “even though those very Americans had their ancestors fight in the Revolutionary War and the Civil War.”

This is some impressive strawman bullshit. Nobody claims that simply because someone in Bhutan or the United Kingdom (or wherever) agrees with the sentiments in the Declaration, they’re American citizens. The premise of America as a “creedal” nation is that if you want to be a citizen, your race, sex, national origin and religion don’t stand in the way of that. The old sentiments that if you play by the rules, you’re welcome here. Not as a tolerated immigrant, but as a fellow American. As noted at the link above about Vance’s speech, that used to be accepted even by a lot of conservatives (even if it wasn’t always how things played out in practice).

Vance’s alternative view is not new. As Richard Slotkin chronicles in Lost Battalions, immigrants, Jews and black Americans hoped fighting for their country in WW I would prove they were real Americans; instead the country veered into heavy anti-immigrant sentiment over the following decade. Former president Teddy Roosevelt said it flat out: to be a real American you have to be Anglo-Saxon. Everyone else is here on sufferance.

It’s a view (as Slotkin shows) impossible to separate from racism, anti-immigration and misogyny. As Kevin Levin says, “Notice that Vance makes no distinction between whether your ancestor fought for the United States or the Confederacy. He doesn’t care. What matters is that they were white and that they were here.

This would be the perfect time for the Confederate heritage community to trot out their stories about Black Confederates and their view of the Confederacy as a multi-racial/cultural experiment. Don’t hold your breadth, folks. Vance also doesn’t want you to remember the roughly 200,000 African Americans who fought for the United States during the Civil War. Just under 80 percent of free born African American men of military age in northern states volunteered to fight for the United States during the Civil War. In ignoring these men, Vance appears to believe that white men, who fought to destroy the United States and create an independent slaveholding republic, are more worthy of inclusion.”

I will also mention we know a number of women fought disguised as men; many women contributed to the war in various ways. Vance would rather we not think about that, either. He loves the pronatalist fiew that women should be breeders. Misogyny seems to be one of the few principles he truly believes in, even though that makes him a bad father. And it aligns well with the old view that white American women need to breed more babies for the Reich — er, the Republican Party, to the extent there’s a difference. More on that view here.

As I wrote five years back, women are not means to an end, whether that end be maintaining the white population or taking care of the kids for J.D. Vance. Women are ends in themselves; all people are. To the extent of their abilities they should be free to choose their own path (with obvious exclusions like becoming an assassin, a rapist, or a Klansman) and figure out what having a meaningful life means to them.

I suspect Vance, and the techbros who’ve supported him, don’t see it that way. That freedom is for the elites like them. Giving it to other people would imply others really are created equal … and the subtext of Vance’s views is that he doesn’t think they are.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

Undead sexist cliche: Men are the oppressed ones!

There’s an old line that when you’re used to superiority, equality feels like oppression. If you’re a man accustomed to the privilege that brings — from an edge at work to not having to be afraid walking home to having someone to clean up your house and take care of your kids — then begin asked to make your own dinner or participate in chores may feel outrageous. You’ve never raped anyone, sexually harassed anyone, you treat your wife great — why are you being inconvenienced? You may be happier not understanding than accepting there’s a problem.

Vice president and misogynist JD Vance offered a recent whine on this topic: “I think that our culture sends a message to young men that you should suppress every masculine urge. You should you should try to cast aside your family. You should try to suppress what makes you a young man in the first place.

“And I think that my message to young men is don’t allow this broken culture to send you a message that you’re a bad person because you’re a man, because you like to tell a joke, because you like to have a beer with your friends or because you’re competitive. The cultural message — and I think the president’s and mine is the exact opposite –but our cultural message is I think that it wants to turn everybody, whether male or female, into androgynous idiots who think the same, talk the same and act the same.”

I’ve no idea what Vance means about “try to cast aside your family” — that’s usually the charge made against feminists, that they hate happy marriages and want women to get divorced as soon as possible. The rest of his rant is a standard complaint dating back to the 1950s: feminists/the radical left are trying to turn women into men! Worse, turn men into women! Because a woman who works and has casual sex or a guy who stays home with the kids have given up the essence of their gender! Ahhhhh!

(I don’t have time to provide links but you can find lots on this in my Undead Sexist Cliches, in paperback or ebook. You can also order it straight from me from the Behold the Book page.)

The line about how men are being judged and condemned because they’re men is also an old misogynist cliche. Nobody I’m aware of is saying a man who tells jokes, drinks with friends or likes to compete is a bad person.

On the other hand if they’re joking publicly about a female coworker’s appearance or telling rape jokes, yeah, I think they deserve some criticism. Like executive sent out a press release announcing a new female hire as a former waitress at the (nonexistent) Knockers restaurant chain — what, don’t you think that’s funny? And if someone can’t control their “masculine urge” to the point they feel up women uninvited or commit assault (like so many of the Felon’s cabinet) — that’s worthy of a lot more censure. For a number of men, however, criticizing bad male behavior is an attack on masculinity itself. Even if they don’t engage in it themselves, they feel like it’s their right to do so.

And what about men who perform masculinity differently? Men are notorious for mocking and judging other men they deem too soft/girly/wimply/haven’t got their man-card punched. Men like Vance who whine about masculinity being criticized are often fine with guys who criticize the “wrong” sort of masculinity: drinking herbal tea rather than beer, wanting to be the stay-at-home parent rather than competing, having the “wrong” hobbies or interests, calling out other guys on their bullshit. If Vance wants to make it okay to be a man, that should include all kinds of men.

I suspect it doesn’t.

I suspect — indeed I’m certain — that some of the guys telling that kind of nasty misogynist joke think they’re edgy, daring, pushing back against a feminist status quo. The truth is, being a misogynist or sexist isn’t at all edgy: it’s conventional. It’s cliched (hence the title of my book) There’s nothing they’re saying that’s new or that the women they’re belittling haven’t heard from other men. I wonder, if they realized that would it make a difference?

Speaking of men, I’ll wrap up with a couple of links —

For every girl who learns that she needs a man to save her, there is a boy who learns that he’s either the savior or he doesn’t have a reason to be alive.” — a look at the messages boys get from fairytales.

Movies about emotionally-distant dads who save their children when violence is needed.

2 Comments

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

The bullshit of Basham (and JD Vance)

As you may have heard, Marko Elez, one of the Muskrats Elon turned loose on the treasury, has bragged online that he was racist before it was cool (spoiler: it’s not cool and never was), that he wants to normalize bigotry against Indians and that he wants to kill the Civil Rights Act. He was briefly dismissed from his post, then rehired after snowflake JD Vance whined it was unfair: ““I cannot overstate how much I loathe this emotional blackmail pretending to be concern. My kids, god willing, will be risk takers. They won’t think constantly about whether a flippant comment or a wrong viewpoint will follow them around for the rest of their lives.”

Marko Elez is 25 years old. That’s not a kid. And if he’s so immature his views shouldn’t be held against him, why are we trusting him on a major government project? And how is describing his views accurately “emotional blackmail”? It isn’t — it’s that Vance doesn’t think his viewpoints are wrong or not so wrong they should affect his career. Which is a common view on the right — it’s their right to be racist shits, but nobody has the right to criticize them for it. Free speech flows one way. Vance has no problem with people being hounded or harassed for being “too woke” — his compassion is for those who are too racist. Because they’re his allies.

Nobody in the Trump camp has any compassion for LGBTQ people. The VA is canceling suicide prevention training because it includes a focus on LGBTQ suicide. “The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) was told this week by DOJ that they’d lose their funding if the org didn’t remove any mentions of LGBTQIA+ issues from their public materials, I’ve learned. Staff were told they need to deadname trans kids in their reports to comply.”

Of course lots of people, even in the Republican camp, might feel slightly uncomfortable about such cruelty. Isn’t that the opposite of what Christ taught us? Vance’s solution is to lie: Jesus, he claims, taught us to “love your family and then you love your neighbor and then you love your community and then you love your fellow citizens and your own country, and then after that you can focus and prioritize the rest of the world.” As noted at the link, that’s completely wrong.

Right-wing Christian pundit Megan Basham takes the same stance, arguing the point of the Good Samaritan parable isn’t that we should help people, it’s that we can’t possibly live up to the Samaritan’s standard so we should just turn to Jesus and find salvation. Which is close to the antinomian heresy — that if we’re not saved by works don’t matter. Though I’m less troubled by that than by the implication we might just as well shrug and pass the beaten Jewish merchant by and then ask Jesus to forgive us. If we find someone beating by the side of the road, the thing to do is help them — not because it’s important to our souls but because they need help! I’m quite sure Basham would expect that if she were the victim — but she’s not paid to be nice to other people. Or to tell the truth.

Compassion for others does not benefit Republicans. Therefore they have to kill it.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics

It really is a never ending battle for truth, justice and the American way

It shouldn’t be. The vast improvements in America since 1776 shouldn’t be up for dispute. Freedom of religion, equality for all (however poorly applied in practice), the end of slavery, effective treatments for countless diseases — these should be the baseline. Instead, there are right-wingers such as racist, misogynist preacher John MacArthur and Joel Webbon (who believes America belongs to white people) who would happily undo it all so they can feel being white with a penis makes them special (as I’ve said before, patriarchy makes you stupid and mean; so does racism). Plus anti-vax crackpots such as RFK (or this guy). As someone said many years ago, if slavery became legal again tomorrow there’d immediately be people driving around with chains in their trucks looking to make money.

Defending the gains humanity has made wastes a lot of energy we could be spending making things better. But it has to be done. The same is true of keeping Republicans out of power. The Felon has made it clear he’s done with democracy, freedom of speech, everything if he gets into office again; Republicans are there with him. Assuming we beat them Tuesday (and in whatever violence and court cases follow—though Cheryl Rofer thinks that’s overstated as a threat) we’ll have to keep doing it. Endless struggle to maintain a functioning democracy isn’t anything I look forward to. For the moment, it’s a necessity, so if you haven’t voted, do it tomorrow (assuming you’re not voting for Trump).

There’s no guarantee anyone now fawning on Trump, such as Kennedy or Musk, will get a post in his administration. Trump has no qualms about stabbing his toadies in the back. But it will be someone bad. They’re now advocating for the economy to crash and getting rid of vaccines. Not to mention ruining Obamacare (“Free market” seems to be a euphemism for letting insurers charge more for pre-existing conditions). And for networks that criticize Trump to lose their broadcast license.

While religious conservatives lie about Harris suppressing Christianity, they’ll happily do it to Christians who disagree with them. To say nothing of the increased calls for violence, including from Trump (which Newsmax thinks are awesome). To Republican fascists, everyone who disagrees with them is the enemy within.

Trump is definitely losing it mentally, but that just gives more of an opening for JD Vance, “the most unqualified man ever to run for vice president” to seize power. And Vance is one nasty piece of work.

I have no idea of the outcome Tuesday. And given all the factors, including just the work of counting ballots, it may be a while before we know for sure. But I agree with Jennifer Rubin, it’s not hopeless. Harris has run an amazing campaign; Trump has been incompetent. Between the electoral college and the voters who think Trump will be better for their wallet or actually want to persecute immigrants or establish a Christian state, that may not be enough … but maybe it will. Don’t give up, ever.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Alpha males are not that smart

Several years back, one libertarian argued that women aren’t libertarians because they’re sheeple who follow whatever political trend is popular and libertarians are always fringe (I blogged about it but can’t find the link). Elon Musk recently linked with approval to a version of the same idea: women and low testosterone men can’t defend themselves so they’ll sheepishly agree to whatever the consensus in their group is. “High T alpha males” and the neurodivergent are the only ones able to look at information objectively.

Evidence offered? None. Like so many undead sexist cliches, they’re going with “well it’s perfectly logical, isn’t it?” Which makes it a useful example of G.K. Chesterton’s line that “ten false theories will fit the universe.” For one thing wouldn’t the ones best able to defend themselves be mixed martial-arts fighters and street thugs, not bazillionaires like Elon Musk or Peter Thiel? For another, if Musk and other technocrats were that analytical and objective, he wouldn’t have turned X into a money pit. Musk wouldn’t traffic in gibberish conspiracy and antiSemitism theories or be arguing companies that don’t want to advertise on an increasingly far-right platform are violating his rights. I don’t think “self defense” in the context we’re talking about translates into “suing anyone who pisses me off.”

Plus the way in which every batshit lie flows through right-wing Twitter/X almost instantly doesn’t indicate much resistance to the consensus. Benny Johnson lies Haitian immigrants are eating pets and suddenly everyone on the right is parroting it.

And if they’re going to hold up Trump as an alpha male — lots of right-wingers do — well, we all know his thoughts are mush (no matter how much some media outlets “sanewash” them). Even given that what he says is a lie, the lies are getting stupider. Photos he doesn’t like are AI-generated. The conflict at Arlington was a lie. Ivanka found jobs for millions of people. And his repeated claims schools provide nonconsensual gender realignment surgery to students.

As for women being sheeple, the very concept of equality is a radical one that went against the consensus. There was nothing sheepish about the suffragettes, the second-wave feminists of the 1950s and 1960s or all the women (and some men) who’ve continued fighting the good fight. They’re way more edgy and clear-sighted than techbros struck by what Paul Krugman calls brain-rotting contrarianism.

I coined the phrase undead sexist cliches to reflect that no matter how often the cliches — men are smarter than women, men are naturally made to lead, men like sex and women don’t — get disproven, they rise again with a new rationale. The idea Musk passed on is just another version of women are stupid and they need men to boss them around.

Or consider J.D. Vance, who went from describing Trump as a threat to democracy to worshipping him as our white male messiah, which is why he’s vice president. Like so many Republicans he saw the party consensus was Trump for President and went with it. Though to be fair, when he says he despises women without children I don’t doubt he’s standing up for what he believes in. Especially despising women immigrants.

As I’ve said before, believing in patriarchy forces you to turn off your brain. It has to be partly turned off to believe crap like Musk was spouting.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

JD Vance and other political links

J.D. Vance’s standard response when he’s caught taking the side of, say, abusive husbands, is to whine about unfair media treatment. i.e., how dare they report his statements accurately! Likewise, blowback after Trump accused Kamala Harris of cosplaying as a black woman is just hysterical over-reaction from the media. No, it isn’t. Nor is Trump making a relatively subtle point about Harris’ “chameleon-like nature,” as Vance claims. He’s lying that the woman who attended an HBCU and pledged a black sorority didn’t acknowledge her black side until there was political advantage. Much the same way some Republicans said Obama wasn’t really black.

As for chameleonic, he’s shifted his positions a lot over the years as it suited him (which makes me wonder how deep his conversion to Catholicism goes). Case in point, “Vance tells us repeatedly that he often did things in law school just because they were expected of him” or “He wants to hold fast to the his wounded Scots-Irish machismo while simultaneously rising to heights of both American capitalism and cultural success.”

Ever wonder what Vance’s mixed-race children think of him trashing Harris’ mixed-race heritage? Well, apparently Vance isn’t willing to risk offending Republican white-supremacist voters even when they attack his wife: “Obviously, she’s not a white person, and we’ve been accused, attacked by some white supremacists over that. But I just, I love Usha.” Which is good. But you’ll notice he’s not criticizing the racists or telling them to back off.

One thing where he’s consistent is his horrible views on women in general. More here. Childless women, according to Vance are pathetic and miserable. More than that, they’re “psychotic sociopaths.” He’s marching in lockstep with the massive misogyny of the right wing. That’s where the advantage for his career lies. And while Republicans are keen on forcing women into motherhood, they won’t do crap to help them afford it. Vance did, however, lie about Harris opposing the tax-credit vote he skipped out on.

In other political news, Rep. Jim Jordan has decided to investigate the daughter of the judge in one of Trump’s trials. Astonishingly he feels no need to investigate Ginni Thomas, SCOTUS wife and 1/6 supporter. Funny, that.

Trump’s birtherist attack on Harris’ ethnicity doesn’t play well outside the base. Within the Republican camp they’re all piling on. I think Harris can take it. At this point in her life, she’s probably used to it.

Our whiny wannabe dictator is pissed that nobody from Google called after his shooting: “Google, nobody called from Google. Google has been very bad. They’ve been very irresponsible. And I have a feeling that Google’s going to be close to shut down,”

If law enforcement prosecutes a corrupt Republican elections official they’ll face “piano wire and a blowtorch” according to Trump toady Patrick Byrne. Expect more of this if we deny them their white supremacist dictatorship in November.

“Trumpism’s potential destruction of liberal democracy in a wave of reactionary authoritarianism with fascist highlights, has at bottom just been another of Donald Trump’s endless stream of grifts.”

1 Comment

Filed under Politics

JD Vance revives an undead sexist cliche

As I blogged about a couple of years ago, Republican vice-presidential candidate J.D. Vance claims parents of children should get more votes as childless people don’t have as much stake in the future. Which as I note at the link is nonsense: someone childless my niece’s age (around 30) has a lot of stake in the future as she’s (hopefully) going to spend 50 years living in it. More than say, someone Trump’s age or Rupert Murdoch’s — they’ll be dead of something long before the consequences of their policies kill them.

After Biden stepped down in favor of Kamala Harris, Vance’s response was to dismiss her and all women without kids as “childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives” and don’t have a stake in America a parent like himself does. Blake Masters — another protege of billionaire Peter Thiel — immediately agreed, as does vapid right-wing talking head Michael Knowles. Vance has since asserted that Of Course he’s not criticizing women without children, he’s attacking Democrats for being “anti-family and anti-child.” Nah, he’s going after the childless.

This is a sibling undead sexist cliche to “feminists are irrationally angry” Rather than feminists being pissed off because they’re too unfeminine to find a man, feminists are miserable because they can’t find a man. Sure, they have college degrees and cool jobs but then they go home and cry while they feed their cats in their sad, lonely apartment. Where they’re alone. With no man. Did I mention they’re pathetic and lonely?

This cliche goes back even before modern feminism got going. In the 1959 film Best of Everything, Hope Lange’s boss (Joan Crawford) is a cautionary tale: she’s spend so long doing unfeminine things like climbing the career ladder, she’s killed her womanly feelings and is incapable of love. After the feminist movement got going, it would be a standard right-wing trope — ignoring that many feminists were happily married and had kids (I know several). Harris, for instance, does have kids, albeit step-kids (worth noting, even though there’s no reason a childless cat lady wouldn’t be better fit for federal office than, say, JD Vance).

It also ties in with the right-wing conviction that women are babymakers first and foremost; if they aren’t willing to assume that role, by golly they should be pushed into it anyway! They are simply means to an end, whether that end is their husband’s wishes or society’s (hence Vance also supporting higher tax rates on the childless — as if parents don’t already get a number of tax breaks).

No surprise that Republicans such as Rep. Glen Grothman want us back in 1960 — before the landmark civil rights legislation of the 1960s, before women got the crazy idea they were ends in themselves and should be treated accordingly.

In other misogynist news:

In discussing the need for the feds to ban interstate travel by women who want abortions, Vance suggests George Soros will help black women get abortions!

Anti-vax, anti-gay attorney Mat Staver says Kamala Harris has a Jezebel spirit. In religious circles, that’s another undead sexist cliche.

One Republican makes it clear that the Republican platform not calling for a national abortion ban won’t stop them banning it.

No, Roe v. Wade did not give women the right to abort any time for any reason. Republicans lie about this.

A woman in Georgia went to a health center with a miscarriage, then left the fetus in the trash (which is legal in that state). Authorities say they’re looking for laws they can use to prosecute her.

In Oklahoma, some prosecutors say a pregnant woman licensed for medical marijuana needs a separate license for the fetus. One woman’s pushing back.

From the perspective of the men running the Southern Baptist Conference, dominating women is more important than defending them from harassment. Former SBC leader Paige Patterson saw shielding churches from harassment lawsuits as perfectly compatible with good Christian behavior.

Independent investigations into sexual abuse cases are good …unless they’re part of the coverup.

Christian-dictator wannabe Joel Webbon says women having influence in society is bad because “it’s going to be really hard for us to get friends hired, enemies fired, those kinds of things because those are things that men do.” This seems like a good argument for Kamala Harris, frankly because Webbon’s idea of a good society sounds horrible.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

When JD Vance (and others) dream of tyranny, they expect to be holding the whip.

Sen. JD Vance is an enthusiastic Trump toady who thinks if Trump wins he should fire everyone in government who isn’t loyal to him, a standard lots of conservatives embrace. When one reporter asked Vance if he wasn’t calling for dictatorship, he didn’t deny it, just whined how unfair the question was. It’s unsurprising that like many conservatives, Vance thinks Hungarian dictator Viktor Orban’s tyranny has a lot to recommend it.

Republican officials are ducking and weaving when asked if they’ll support a Biden win in November. Which I translate as “if we can get away with a successful coup, we’ll support it but we’re not sure it’ll work.”

Meanwhile, Joel Webbon, conservative pastor is one of the right-wing Christians demanding a theocratic takeover: “Men must be governed. Now, ideally, men would govern themselves … but when you don’t have a populace that is capable of self-governance—when the fruit of the Spirit that is self-control has left the building for decades and nobody seems to have it—then men must be governed. And if they will not govern themselves, then someone else needs to govern them.”

What’s implicit in all these arguments (and those of other tyranny-supporters such as Curtis Yarvin) is that Vance and Webbon will be wielding the whip and laying down the law or least loyal acolytes to whatever modern day Fuhrer gets the power. They don’t believe in dictatorship per se; to paraphrase Matt Bai, they want dictatorship as long as it’s their side that lays down the rules or in their interest in the case of Webbon, his church or view of God that spells out the law. If Trump won and Kamala Harris refused to certify the election — something plenty of Republicans argued in 2020 was within Mike Pence’s power — Vance would spend the rest of his career whining about it. If the fascists got their dream dictatorship and wound up on the wrong side of their master (“You got your kid a measles shot. Don’t you know the Supreme Leader just declared vaccines the instruments of Satan?”) they’d be horrified the leopards ate their face. I doubt they’d ever feel bad about letting the leopards eat other people’s faces.

For the religious right, as I’ve mentioned before, there’s also a horror at the thought of people having the freedom to choose for themselves. Webbon’s convinced people are scum who must be kept in line by enlightened rulers like himself; otherwise they won’t live in what he considers a Christian way. Particularly women it seems: Webbon’s freely admitted he doesn’t allow his wife to read books without his permission. And dictates things like what time his four children go to the bathroom, “when we eat, what we eat, what we wear.”

And quite simply he, like Vance, likes the idea of whipping the lower orders into shape. Imposing order and discipline. Why waste time trying to evangelize or reason with people? Why set a Christian example by your loving behavior.

Which puts me in mind of a quote by Isaiah Berlin: “Men may be divided into those who are in favour of life and those who are against it. Among those who are against it there are sensitive and wise and penetrating people who are too offended and discouraged by the shapelessness of spontaneity, by the lack of order among human beings who wish to live their own lives, not in obedience to any common pattern”

I don’t think Vance or Webbon are at all sensitive, wise or penetrating. Otherwise, Berlin’s spot on.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches