Tag Archives: unsafe in any station

When the rules are not enough

“Not to tell the Federalist Society how to run its orientation sessions, but “don’t accept explicit photos from someone litigating in your courtroom” should really be on page one.” That’s how Above The Law sums up the disbarment of right-wing judge Josh Kindred.

As Fred Clark points out, though, “one page is not nearly long enough to list all the specific things that you would need to tell someone not to do if they’re the kind of person who needs to be told specifically not to do that. And even if space one page one were limitless, you would never have sufficient time or imagination to list and enumerate all of the many creatively awful things this kind of person would need to have listed and enumerated for them. You can never come up with enough rules to govern the behavior of someone who has no principles.” See, for example, the Necrotic Toddler’s outrageous use of the pardon power.

As the blogger and ethicist Hilzoy put it some years back, “Our moral lives depend, to an enormous degree, on our ability to stop and think before crossing certain lines; to recognize that it is time to stop acting in whatever ways come naturally to us.” A lot of us are very bad at that.

Consider, for example, the endless whines from misogynists and sexists that criminalizing sexual assault is an attack on men (more examples in this list). Or that sexual harassment is just guys doing what they normally do, hitting on attractive women. The argument boils down to claims that guys ignoring a woman’s “no” is just what men do — it’s the woman’s responsibility to make them stop because men can’t help doing what comes naturally (as I’ve mentioned before, nobody has a lower opinion of men’s self-control that misogynists and anti-feminists)

In the first place, rape is not some natural, innate instinct. Even if it were, part of being an adult human in society is learning to control our instincts. Peeing is natural and it’s a drive we cannot refuse; even so I imagine most rape apologists would be outraged if I zipped down my pants and peed on their leg.

Some years back, libertarian asshat Tyler Cowen said he couldn’t think of any reason an employer didn’t have right to say “give me a blow job or you’re fired” — unless maybe, it was written into the employee’s contract. A blogger pointed out, similar to Clark above, that no contract can cover everything: even if it bans unwanted sexual contact, how about “you have to lick my shoes clean every morning during our meeting.”

As Clark says, this is the advantage of broad principles like The Golden Rule, though making rapists follow them isn’t particularly easy. Particularly if they tell themselves that no means yes and the woman really wants it.

I’m not sure what the solution is but punishment — making wickedness unsafe in any station — is obviously part of it. If people can’t control themselves, the fear of punishment may be what it takes. Not shrugging off Kindred’s conduct gets him out of the courtroom and sends a warning to others. Sometimes that’s the best we can do.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

They’re too safe

As I’ve mentioned before, I’m a great admirer of the sentiment that as evil can flourish in any station or position, it must be unsafe in any station. Which is hard: as Jeffrey Winters says, “one of the greatest challenges in history has been to create legal governing institutions that are stronger than the strongest people in society.”

The Jeffrey Epstein case is a good example of how blatantly we failed. Contrary to the Qanon fantasies about deep, elaborate webs of pedophiles talking in code, Epstein’s associates joke around quite openly or discuss their sex lives with him. Larry Summers’ wife even recommended Lolita to Epstein as an interesting book. And this took place long after Epstein’s sliminess was known.

“Government and Sociology professor Theda R. Skocpol — who frequently crossed swords with Summers during his tense presidency — declined to comment on Summers’ case, but called the web of connections between Epstein and elite spheres ‘sickening.’ “This kind of mutually reinforcing corruption,” Skocpol wrote, “is what one sees in failing societies and empires in decline.””

At no point did Summers seem to feel any discomfort about staying friends with a monster; even after the full expose came out on Epstein’s crimes, they stayed in touch. Summers has assured the public he feels really, really bad about it. I don’t doubt he feels really bad about being in the public eye for this but about asking a sexual predator for dating advice? Probably not. And as Karen Attiah points out, Harvard’s still keeping him on the faculty [Update: No, they’re not, at least until Harvard finishes an investigation].

Meanwhile, the Felon Administration has transferred child trafficker Ghislane Maxwell to such a low-security prison she feels like Alice in Wonderland. It seems the Felon wants to keep her happy to keep her quiet — another example of “mutually reinforcing corruption.”

As Timothy Snyder puts it, “The bigger the grift bubble grows, the less healthy material remains beyond it. It sucks away what it productive. As personal connections become the basis of business, the economy slows. It sucks away what is ethical. As corruption comes to seem normal, citizens lose trust in one another. As basic institutions are scorned and destroyed, people cease to believe in the law. The material which builds a nation — moral, institutional, economic — starts to give way.” Here’s some examples. Here’s another example of how influence and personal connections screw up the system.

Perhaps the Felon’s outrage over the Epstein files discharge petition indicates he’s scared. I hope he has reason to be.

To end on an up note, here’s a case of someone who wasn’t as safe as he thought in his station, a federal judge who lost his judgeship and has now been disbarred over things like “his ‘flirtatious rapport’ with Assistant U.S. Attorney Karen Vandergaw, who sent him nude photos, photos she now says she felt pressured to send, all while she continued appearing before him in active cases.” Fred Clark offers some insight.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

The Felon’s right for once: Jeffrey Epstein is dead

It was just this year that AG Pam Bondi announced the Big Reveal of all kinds of deep, dark secrets from the Epstein files. Only it never happened. And now the MAGA world wants to know why. Who is the Felon administration protecting? What are they hiding?

The Felon’s response is to insist it’s no big deal: “I don’t understand it — why they would be so interested. He’s dead for a long time. He was never a big factor in terms of life. I don’t understand what the interest or what the fascination is. I really don’t and the credible information has been given.” (the media would be screaming about senility if Biden had said anything that incomprehensible).

Unusually, his supporters are outraged at him and not buying it. As No More Mr. Nice Blog says, “Trump and his propagandists have sold the base on a narrative that’s at odds with the facts. The Epstein narrative is that there’s a global pedophile network that includes everyone MAGA hates, that’s much bigger than just the dozens of elitists on Epstein’s flight logs, and that’s central to the liberal/commie/globalist actions of the Deep State.” So far rather than give up the paranoia, they’re criticizing their glorious god-king.

Contrary to FOTUS, Epstein is a serious issue. As David Dayen says, he’s a textbook example of how the rich and the powerful live outside the law. For years he engaged in sex with underage girls (and of course, arranging the same for others) without repercussions; when he was busted and charged, Alex Acosta gave him a sweetheart deal, though one the Justice Department later decided was above board. Given how insanely generous it was, I’m not sure if this translates into “DOJ covers up for a fellow prosecutor” or “the outrageous thing is, DOJ thinks failing victims like this is acceptable.” It isn’t acceptable: as Fred Clark says, “It’s a perversion of justice — and such a perversion of justice is infuriating. “The dozens of teenage girls (that we know of) who were treated unjustly by Jeffrey Epstein were then denied legal justice by Acosta, Dershowitz, Starr, et. al. Their voices were silenced by the very legal system that was supposed to be acting on their behalf.”

For the record, the deal included state prostitution charges instead of federal, a 13 month sentence (he could have gotten life on federal charges), freedom to spend half the day at his office, no further investigation into Epstein’s alleged sex trafficking, and immunity for any co-conspirators. There was no attempt to notify the victims despite Florida law mandating victims hear when their case gets a plea bargain (county jail also didn’t allow work-release for sex offenders). The prosecutor on the case has denounced Acosta’s decisions and his account of events and so have others. Acosta’s defense is that he was really, really concerned about the hardship of forcing the girls to testify … but he didn’t give them the choice.

Did Acosta get a payment under the table? Or was it simply that he decided a long hard legal fight he might lose was not good for his career — er, an efficient use of resources, how did I get that wrong? Did some of Epstein’s co-conspirators have enough clout to shut things down? I’m sure it didn’t help that the victims were nobodies and that our justice system has a long history of ignoring rape victims.

Either way, it’s a horror story. One of the hardest things to do is to hold the rich and the powerful accountable for actions that would get a nobody jailed — to make wickedness unsafe in any station, in the words of Cato’s Letter. Epstein’s crimes and his hundreds of victims show why.

4 Comments

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

Making it safe in every station

Here’s an Orwell quote I’ve always loved: “The point is that we are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right. Intellectually, it is possible to carry on this process for an indefinite time: the only check on it is that sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield.” Or a pandemic taking down those who refuse to believe in medicine. Or the impact of global warming on people who don’t believe in it (and unfortunately on those who do).

What brought it to mind recently was this meme on Bluesky:

The rich are, in other worlds, insulated from bumping against solid reality.

Remember the 2008 financial crash and housing bubble collapse? Lots of financial fraud, lots of bad decisions but almost nobody went to jail or even got prosecuted. Multiple firms got bailed out because they were too big to fail. When Silicon Valley Bank collapsed, businesses that had put way, way more in their accounts than federal insurance covers were still reimbursed (for fear their employees and others would lose out). One tech investor — who’d previous argued that wiping out school debt only encouraged people to take on more debt they can’t afford — suddenly discovered it was vitally important to reimburse everyone because how could they have known having more in the bank than the government insures means the rest wasn’t insured? Yes, literally, he said that.

Or consider that meme I posted recently about AI

AI is crap. It provides bad answers to searches, makes up shit, doesn’t work well in multiple situations. Normally the result of putting out a crap product would be everyone losing their money. Because the techbros absolutely can’t stand that possibility — not only would they lose money but their genius visionary tech would be known to be crap — so they’re pushing and promoting and trying to turn it into the revolutionary tech they think it should be (for example Google paying money to a science website that depends on volunteer contributions to incorporate AI). They’re doing their best to pull strings and manipulate events to stave off the consequences of their bad judgment.

In short it’s Wilhoit’s Law: the system is supposed to protect the in-group and bind the out-group. And society has evolved to back that up. I’ve read multiple accounts of how corporate boards will sometimes give their CEO a spectacular bonus even if the company’s tanking — it’s not his fault! The market was bad, the economy was bad, we need to pay him more to turn things around! If they’re harassers or bullies, the glass floor protects them if they fail. The corrupt officials in the Felon’s corrupt administration deserve to be completely discredited; there’s a good chance they’ll have successful careers in politics or as university presidents or TV talking heads, no matter what crimes they’ve committed.

Step away from the rich and the same is true of white men. For all the endless whining from the right about how society doesn’t give white men a chance, church is too girly, college is too feminized, everything about society, until very recently, was built for men. The educational system was for boys, business was a world of men, churches were mostly male dominated … yet for some men, it still isn’t enough. Pete Hegseth has no qualms identifying women and POC medal of honor winners as DEI recipients; I’m sure he’d scream if anyone suggested a white man benefited from bias.

The idea that straight WASP men are entitled to all the good stuff — power, good jobs, a woman to clean for them, provide sex and care for their kids (as Anna Kendrick observed, men can say “I’d like kids someday” because they can imagine someone else will do most of the childcare) — is an intoxicating one. Part of the anger some men and whites are feeling now is that the idea is crashing up against reality: POC, gays, transpeople, women, they’re all equal. White men being on top is a choice, the cumulative result of multiple decisions, not some inevitable force of nature. Being the king is not something they automatically deserve.

For a lot of people that’s hard to take. How we get them to emerge from “inside of that machine” is one of the challenges we have to face in fixing the country. Otherwise when they crash into reality, they’re going to take all of us with them.

Leave a comment

Filed under economics, Politics, Undead sexist cliches

The media would like the Felon to feel safe in his station

As I’ve written many times, for society to flourish crime and injustice should be unsafe in any station — nobody of any rank should be above the law. This is a difficult thing to accomplish in the best times; it’s worse with a president who’s entire life has demonstrated that if someone as rich as he is breaks the law, very few people want to make him unsafe.

The media should play a part in unsafety, exposing wrongdoing and flaying it unmercifully. Instead, they’ve been consistently willing to cut the Republican Daddy party some slack, particularly FOTUS. For example by refusing to call a spade a spade

Or consider DHS Secretary Kristi Noem having California Senator Alex Padilla dragged out of her presentation because he dared question her. The NYT doesn’t mention that she lied about him not identifying himself and puts him in the context of “volatile responses” to the administration’s actions. Or Chris Cillizza (who wrote endless stories about Hilary Clinton’s bad email practices back in 2016) declaring that Padilla confronting Noem was just as bad as her agents assaulting him. The Daddy Party gets to act tough; the Mommy Party better show some respect.

As someone said online, if Biden had ordered Matt Gaetz or Marjorie Taylor Greene dragged out of a press conference in handcuffs, the NYT would never have left him live it down. Or if he’d sent in troops after a state government defied him. Or if a Democrat lied about a shooter targeting elected Republicans.

There’s also an assumption in the press that everyone respects the Daddy Party, that the administration threatening to overthrow California’s government, is a bit of wildly popular badassery. As Paul Krugman says, it isn’t popular, but it is a terrifying threat to democracy. So is arresting members of congress for not collaborating.

And it’s not just the current conflict in California. They’ve constantly sanewashing the Felon (talk of occupying Greenland is “teasing”) and RFK Jr. Using the military against protesters is a radical step but Politico describes it as the Felon “leveraging his role as commander-in-chief in a much clearer and more urgent way than during his first term.” More like a bureaucratic exercise than an act of tyranny. And it’s laying the groundwork for much worse, if not now then soon.

Some of this is undoubtedly fear that the Felon will sue them, or won’t grant them whatever favors their parent company seeks, if they don’t take his side. Some of it may be press ineptitude — I remember an NYT reporter during the W years saying they didn’t want to challenge W’s WMD claims because he was the president, we were at war and it was all so intimidating! Part of it may be that the media skew more conservative than stereotype. There’s the fondness for the horse-race approach, where, as James Fallows says, the emphasis is on “how it plays,” not the ethics or legality of it. And some of it is definitely the view from nowhere approach to journalism, where taking sides would be biased and wrong. Even if one side is indeed much worse than the other.

This may be one explanation why, as the Lawyers, Guns and Money comment below says, the media make us fight each election on Republican terms.

I’m not sure ownership is the root cause but I think the slant is real.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics

We all know the danger is real

Back in 2024, when Jeff Bezos announced the WaPo would not endorse either candidate for president, I wrote about the implication: Bezos knew if the Felon won, he’d retaliate against everyone who hurt his snowflake fee-fees by not supporting him, while there was never any worry Harris would do the same.

This past week, Fred Clark at slacktivist made a similar point. Walmart recently announced it would start listing the impact of tariffs on its prices; the Felon whined they’d better not do that; an NPR reporter said other companies “don’t want to find themselves in Walmart’s shoes.” What she doesn’t say, as Clark writes, is that “When the thin-skinned Mad King gets peevish and starts calling you out by name, that signals that he is about to abuse his powers through some vindictive act of lawless retaliation … The abuse of power by this president is a given. It is assumed. The only question is whether or not it will also be accepted.”

And even allies will get called out if they dare to step to the deluded monarch.

Requiring applicants for federal jobs to write essays on their favorite felon executive orders. I’m guessing this is either an effort to weed out non-loyalists or some lower-ranked toady hoping to curry favor with the big guy. It also reflects thinking like Elon Musk’s: government employees must never question their orders.

Sheriff Scott Jenkins got 10 years in federal prison for appointing reserve deputies for cash. The Felon pardoned him. It’s not the only egregious pardon — after all, there’s donations and support to earn.

Did I mention President Snowflake cannot stand the heat? Unfortunately he won’t get out of the kitchen.

The government is moving to cancel all contracts with Harvard because the university dared step to the Republican God-King. The felon’s mouthpiece, Pam Bondi, is refusing to let the ABA vet judges.

Then there’s the whole Qatar jet thing. Oh, and the Felon is very, very upset anyone would sell Truth Social stock short. And CBO projections of low growthy are unpatriotic.

Down here in the Republican Banana Republic of North Carolina, Republicans have used their congressional dominance (we got some good gerrymandering here) to dominate the Election Board. I’m sure that won’t be abused, no sir.

It’s not just the Felon. GOP Rep. Andy Ogles wants Nashville’s mayor investigated for questioning ICE policy. Jesse Watters celebrates locking up Democratic politicians. A Newsmax host thinks this whole electing our leaders thing is a bad idea.

Elon Musk is upset because Media Matters has reported on X’s slide into fascist propaganda. So he’s gotten the FTC to investigate. And no, I do not believe any of these claims Musk is withdrawing from running as co-president, he’s just getting quieter about it.

Checking foreign visitors’ social media to decide if they love the Felon enough to enter the country is tyrannical, and, as noted at the link, bad for the economy. Oh, also no visas for foreign nationals who engage in online content moderation. As Paul Krugman says “you can be sure that the criteria for denying entry will go far beyond, you know, advocating terrorism.

A Colorado law protecting the rights of trans people specifically exempts churches. So the right-wing, trans-hating pastors lied that it doesn’t.

ICE really hates Democratic politicians for questioning their storm-trooper tactics.

Whatever the Felon plans if he gets control of the Library of Congress — destroy stuff that’s too “woke”? Steal the best stuff and sell it off? — it’s going to be bad.

I suspect the media would be much more critical of a Democratic administration doing this sort of thing because they’re confident Democrats aren’t going to attack them or sue them for not saying nice things (Republicans can’t stand dissent). There’s also the Republican branding problem: Republicans being bullying ruthless snakes is just accepted as the way it is, a feature too routine to mention. Either way that makes it much harder to hold this blatant corruption to account.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Unsafe in any station: The case of Pastor Robert Morris shows how not to do it

“I was involved in inappropriate sexual behavior with a young lady in a home where I was staying. It was kissing and petting and not intercourse, but it was wrong. This behavior happened on several occasions over the next few years.” So says Gateway Church pastor/Trump spiritual advisor Robert Morris.

Morris, a megachurch superstar pastor, made the confession after the victim, Cindy Clemishire, recently went public. So it’s not like he was trying to do right by admitting his sin, it was just the usual CYA play. And not even true: as Fred Clark (and others) have pointed out, Clemishire was 12. That’s not a “young lady.” And she says “he did touch every part of my body and inserted his fingers into me,” which is a little more than “kissing and petting” implies. Morris makes it sound like some kind of forbidden love; “abuse” is closer to the mark.

I doubt this is a case of “power corrupts” — as writer Robert Caro put it, “power reveals.” Morris found himself in a position where he could indulge his desires, and those desires were indeed revealed. Contrary to Gateway Church’s denial that they knew about this when they hired Morris, Clemishire says she revealed the abuse to them too. They did nothing.

As Cato’s Letter a couple of centuries back put it, wickedness can flourish in any station unless we make it unsafe in any station. In Caro’s terms, we don’t know what wickedness might be revealed once someone gets the power to indulge it, or when they figure out the rules, the unwritten rules and what they can get away with.

Once wickedness starts flourishing it’s very, very hard to put it back in the bottle. In the 1990s, disgraced televangelist and convicted scamvangelist Jim Bakker admitted he’d sinned, had extramarital affairs and abused his pastoral office for personal gain. Two decades later he’d gone from apparently sincere repentance to painting himself as a cancel culture victim and hawking miracle cures and conspiracy theories on his show. The lure of religious celebrity and easy money was too much to resist.

Robert Morris seems to have suffered similar weakness. Morris’ statement to Gateway says that after it happened he confessed to his then-church, Shady Grove, and to Clemishire’s father. They asked him to step away from the ministry for two years and attend counseling, which he did. Except it appears he was lying: ““After a month of working nights as a security guard at Motel 6, I felt I had made great strides toward humility. I decided that perhaps I was ready to return to ministry.” That’s a quote from his book which refers to stepping away from Shady Grove over issues with pride, hence the “humility” reference.

I seriously doubt one month was enough to master his base impulses.

And that’s why, as Christian feminist Samantha Field once said, it’s not enough to trust sexual harassers or abusers to control themselves. The system they’re in has to take a stand and say no. It has to figure out what the organization did wrong that let the abuser get away with it: did they ignore warning signs or complaints? Did they decide the abuser was too valuable to take action (screenwriter Marti Noxon discusses encountering this in Hollywood)? Then fix the problem.

This isn’t easy — changing large organizations has been compared to teaching an elephant to dance — but it’s necessary. Setting new rules or benchmarks won’t do it if leadership doesn’t want to push change through: ““If your leadership lacks the requisite character and experience, no manual will help you. If you have the appropriate level of character and experience, no manual is necessary.”

That’s a problem with any organization. With right-wing churches it’s tougher because misogyny is part of their operating system. It’s easier to blame women for supposedly provoking men to rape than to blame men. After all, uncontrollable lust is part of being a guy: boys will be boys, men sleeping around is completely different from women doing it. If that masculinity occasionally crosses a line, punishing it would be an attack on men. NC Republican and wannabe governor Mark Robinson, for instance, dismisses charges against Roy Moore, Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein as some sort of feminist plot.

And so pastors prey and churches look aside. Or embrace them. No wonder they’re cool with Trump. Perhaps, as Fred Clark says, we should start posting the 10 Commandments on the walls of mega-churches. It seems pastors need it more than schoolkids.

For more examples of misogynist bullshit and double standards, read Undead Sexist Cliches, available as a Amazon paperback, an ebook and from several other retailers.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

Safe in some stations: when the law serves the rich and the powerful

Trump has repeatedly publicized the names of people in his various trials such as judges, judges’ family, witnesses and jurors. He’s been placed under gag orders and violates them … which would get most people locked away in jail. But he’s an important person so he gets a pass. The Republicans who whine about how we have a two-tier justice system think Trump’s being uniquely persecuted; in reality he’s in the top tier, the ones who get treated with kid gloves. Never mind that some of his ranting has inspired attempted violence.

Likewise he’s put up a $175 million bond for his bank-fraud case while his lawyers work on appeals. It seems possible that the bond company can’t pay. If correct and Trump refuses to pay up down the road, the company may default. Will that enable Trump to skate without paying?

This is not new. As author Jesse Eisinger says, the legal system in the 21st century has lost the will to prosecute the rich and powerful. It’s still outrageous. As LGM blogged recently, “while it’s obviously true that at no point in American history has it been close to true that the rich and the poor were equal before the law, our historical traditions have to this point required at most points at least some real effort to keep up appearances, in the sense that open bribery of the judicial system and the like wasn’t an option for the good and the great.”

Trump’s second term would eliminate even the slight possibility that we hold the rich and powerful to account, that we can (as I often say) make wickedness unsafe in any station. This would be a bad thing. It’s bad enough now: convicted murderer Rebecca Grossman stayed out of jail three years while her lawyer kept postponing the trial, got a sympathetic LA Times portrayal and is now fighting for a new trial. Her sentencing has been postponed; I’m guessing if she gets a retrial she’ll once again stay free until it happens (I hope I’m wrong).

Another factor is that many right-wingers are authoritarian followers: they want their leaders to deal harshly with wrongdoers but the leaders themselves are above criticism. Or as Fred Clark writes, they assume there’s nothing to criticize: religious leaders who impose the word of god are obviously going to make the country better. No, they won’t — but deciding leaders aren’t accountable to us is disastrous. “The more authority any given human has, the more accountable that person must be, lest they wield that authority unjustly, as we humans inevitably tend to do.”

As Jennifer Rubin says, it’s not like other rich people are safe if Trump gains office. He and his party, unchecked, will make the world a more dangerous place in every way. And anyone who pisses Trump off could end up the target of a vendetta, as many tyrants throughout history have done. Trump has never shown loyalty to anyone though he demands it from everyone; even so, many people will kowtow or accommodate a Trump dictatorship.

If we want American justice and America itself to survive 2024, Trump has to lose.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Unsafe in any station, part the hundredth

The title is a quote from “Cato’s letter” which warns us in one section “The only security which we can have that men will be honest, is to make it their interest to be honest; and the best defence which we can have against their being knaves, is to make it terrible to them to be knaves.”

There’s often a temptation to go easy on people because they’re our allies or they’re supposedly the good guys or we owe them a favor or because they’re respected members of the cops/legislature/clergy/business community. We shouldn’t. That’s what allows groomers to flourish in churches. Here’s another example. Not that secular abusers and harassers and those who cover up for them are better. E.g., Colorado Republican Ken Buck, who many years back refused to prosecute a rape on the grounds it looked like buyer’s remorse to him (as it does to lots of misogynists).

What makes it worse that people in certain positions get extra trust. To lots of people cops are awesome, priests are trustworthy; I’m sure that helped Eli Regalado, a Colorado pastor who sold bogus cryptocurrency to Denver’s Christian community. His defense: God told him to do it. It definitely helped the New Orleans cop who answered a 17-year-old’s rape report, groomed her, then raped her.

Cops? Slacktivist has an excellent round-up of cops behaving very badly. Like how Houston avoided investigating 264,000 reports, for example sexual assault reports. The DA whose anti-drug ad lied about a schoolgirl who died from touching fentanyl. The death row inmate freed after 30 years for a crime he didn’t commit. The FBI ripping off innocent people in a large score. Plus the depressing reality that kids and teachers get more active shooter training than most cops.

This iss why the Supreme Court helping keep Trump out of jail until after the election is troubling — even if they don’t sign off on his claim of absolute presidential immunity they’re doing their best to keep him safe in his station and make it acceptable for him to be a rogue. The same can be said of Trump’s promises to give immunity to cops to rough up migrants.

This iss why the Supreme Court helping keep Trump out of jail until after the election is troubling — even if they don’t sign off on his claim of absolute presidential immunity they’re doing their best to keep him safe in his station and make it acceptable for him to be a rogue. The same can be said of Trump’s promises to give immunity to cop who rough up immigrants.

Unchanged: Or consider Minneapolis, where settling lawsuits over bad behavior is draining the city of cash. Making it unsafe for cops to be crooks or killers would be better. Mississippi state government just turns a blind eye to cops behaving like criminals.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Taylor Swift is Satan’s handmaiden? Who knew?

Hank Kunneman, a self-proclaimed prophet who claims Trump won in 2020 and markets prophetic merch, claimed recently that Taylor Swift practices “Satanic rituals and witchcraft.” No examples, he just says it’s obvious in her performances. And right-wing twit Jack Posobiec blames Swift’s influence for the pro-choice wins in the election because she mobilized “a childless, unmarried, abortion army.”

I think Fred Clark at Slacktivist nails it: “‘witch’ is just the word folks like Kunneman use for any woman who is not under their control. Swift is talented, famous, richer than even Kenneth Copeland, and doesn’t have to care what people like Hank Kunneman say about her. This terrifies them. If she scares them, and witches are scary, then she must be a witch. That’s just logic. I suspect Taylor lives in their heads for another reason as well — for the same reason that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez does. Because she’s pretty.”

In another post, Clark discusses an evangelical’s worry that Taylor Swift’s concert film is outperforming most evangelical movies because the single woman demographic is larger than married churchgoing women: “And who is to blame for all of that? For the fact that more people went to see the Eras Tour than God’s Not Dead XXIV, or for the fact that white evangelical churches are shrinking, or for the fact that the White People’s Party keeps losing elections? Single women are to blame for that. Unruly, disobedient, uppity single women. And who stands as a representative for all of those single women and the threat they pose to church and to state and to every God-ordained hierarchy? Taylor Swift.”

Single women do indeed upset lots of people on the right. Not just on the right, but as I’ve mentioned before, misogyny has become fundamental to conservative Christianity. They’re women without masters — er, husbands — and for some men that’s insufferable. Men must give commands; women must submit. Misogynist John Piper, for example, thinks women giving men directions when the man’s lost is a spiritual crisis — the man has to do what the woman says, which could destroy his soul! According to Jesse Lee Peterson, even listening to women talk about their feelings is a mistake (more of Peterson’s misogyny here).

Or consider Bill Shannon of the Association of Certified Biblical Counselors. The association has removed him from the approved counselor list because of accusations including:

  • Instructing a woman to cosign a $50,000 loan for her husband without knowing what it was for.
  • Refusing to believe the woman’s claim of her husband’s adultery despite her presenting credible evidence.
  • Reprimanding the woman for attempting to remove her husband’s parental authority by wanting to call the police after he stuffed their children’s mouths with tissues to a degree that hindered their breathing.
  • Refusing to assist the woman after her husband left her to live in a home she didn’t know he had.
  • Threatening church discipline on the woman after she filed for divorce.

The minister at Shannon’s church says “God has designed that men be given the position of authority, and women the position of submission. … A woman, whether she is married or single, must recognize the fact that in general, as a woman, she must have a spirit of submission to all men.” As with Bill Gothard’s church in Shiny Happy People, it’s easy to see how this could lead a man in a position of authority to abuse it. Ditto when the minister, John MacArthur, says flat out that they won’t respond to claims of abuse: “When someone comes to bring a formal public accusation against an elder or a pastor, we are not to listen to that. We are not to entertain that. We are not to investigate that” (sound familiar?).

Complementarians insist and may genuinely believe that they’re assigning women and men their rightful roles based on serious Biblical study. But as I pointed out recently, there is no single, obvious, clearly right biblical worldview. And just possibly having a group of men review gender roles and decide they get all the power and authority while women handle the cleaning and childcare is not an objective approach to analyzing god’s will.

For more examples of Christian abuse, there’s The Lord’s Ranch and Young Life. Though to be fair this isn’t unique to Christian institutions. Sure, church rhetoric can make it worse when it comes to institutionalizing the abuse but judges sexually abuse their staff and prisons are a breeding ground for rape and abuse. What matters is the system’s willingness to make abuse, harassment and assault unsafe in any station.

All organizations are fallible this way; lots of organizations fail to do the right thing. I think religious organizations that fail are particularly bad because like MacArthur above they can institutionalize tolerating abuse as not only standard practice but morally the right choice. And then pat themselves on the back for being holier than thou. But the problem isn’t confined to them.For more on both secular and religious misogyny, Undead Sexist Cliches is available as a Amazon paperback, an ebook and from several other retailers. Cover by Kemp Ward, all rights remain with current holders.

3 Comments

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches