You get a bonus post, for what it’s worth, because I’m down and out with the season’s first dose of coma-inducing crud (hmmm, a good description of my blog!), body aches, chills, and a respiratory system packed with fluorescent-green jelly. Yum. This nasty bug prevented me from attending a 3-day seminar in Denver and so here I am, exposing you to my pasty, pale visage and my purple prose.
If you think that’s sick, I submit to you something that’s much sicker, the meanderings of the oxygen deprived Vox Day:
I have to confess that I don’t understand this ceaseless quest for victimhood. Being raped doesn’t confer some mystical moral superiority on a woman, it just makes her a victim. And unfortunately, in all too many cases, it just makes her a stupid one.
I’m just curious what basis the moral relativists have for condemning rape in the first place. If I deem the slaking of my desire for lust - or violence, if you prefer that theory of rape - to be an intrinsic good, who are you to condemn it? Certainly, one could argue that it is a violation of private property rights, but then, what of those moral relativists who reject the notion of private property. If all property is held in common, then how can a woman object if I decide to make use of that which belongs to me?
My own take on this pathetic, pinched turd of a man is that he is over-reaching in his attempt at irony. Neo-conservatives have gotten a lot of mileage from irony the past few years but it’s a limited commodity, with limited effect. The more irony is used, the more it loses its sheen and the tendency is to turn up the volume to give it more punch, to make it seem edgier, more subversive.
It’s difficult for me to believe a thinking adult (so-called) could actually advocate this tripe and so I say he’s just acted up, like some snotty little adolescent trying desperately to get some attention.
However, if he is indeed serious and stupid enough to test his little proposition, he’ll find out just how wrong he is. Whatever intellectual footwork he tries in prison won’t fly; convicts are convinced of the evil of rape and have a particularly savage way of expressing their disgust for rapists. If Vox Day thinks he can equivocate the evil of rape, God help him if he decides to try it out. He’ll change his tune during his first prison shower.
What’s more disgusting is that Elliott Wave International continues to advertise on Vox’s shitty little blog. One would think it would work against its business plan to give the impression that Elliott Wave International condones rape but there you have it. You may want to drop Elliott Wave International an email (as I have) and ask why they believe it’s good for business to advertise on a blog that advocates rape. You’d think a company would be a little more circumspect about where its name is associated but then, maybe rape is what Elliott Wave International is all about. If that’s the case, there should be quite a party in the pokey.
(A nod to Jill at Feministe for the heads up on this horseshit)
------------------
Mixamania! participants: emails are going out this evening, please have your disks in the mail by December 10 - thanks!
4 comments:
First--I'm sorry you aren't feeling well, green is no fun.
Second--I'm not even sure I want to dignify any of that moronic turpitude with a comment. Actually, maybe this guy needs to meet "Bubba" and then he can blog about how he was a "stupid victim". Maybe a trip down the river to meet up with someone who can make him squeal like the pig he is...
Hmmm. Rape humor, eh? Let me think if I can come up with a joke about a terminal illness or something like that to lighten the mood.
Whatdya think?
Jim, I think you and Jill completely missed the point; maybe if Vox capitalized IF you'd have noticed it. "IF all property is held in common." The man is simply asking a question about moral relativism as it applies to condemnation of rape, and it's a question that hasn't been answered in all the cluck-clucking at Feministe. Rather, that site (and the trend is starting here) immediately descends into "What a bad man" and "I feel faint" and "I hope he gets raped." Maybe there's really not an answer.
El B
El B, Jill and I (and several others) were well aware what Vox was doing. It's unfortunate you don't seem to be aware. In fact, he justifies rape in several areas of his repulsive post and yet you prefer to focus on a small word. There is no equivocation by semantics. If you don't see that he advocates rape in his first few paragraphs, you are truly blind. Indeed, he titles his post "The Rape Myth", argues in defense of all kinds of rape. There's nothing to mischaracterize there.
The post is hardly an argument against "moral relativism" (and the boogey man that useless phrase evokes in so-called moral absolutists as yourself) and he only addresses that argument in his final paragraph as an afterthought. For whatever reason you've decided that was the theme of the post. It was not. The theme was to be ironic and stupid and he succeeds only on the last count.
Post a Comment