Bob Jones University cancels sexual abuse investigation--why?

As we reported on Friday's radio show, Bob Jones University has canceled the sexual abuse investigation being conducted by the organization GRACE (Godly Response to Abuse in the Christian Environment). According to our radio show-guest Christopher Peterman, there have been over 80 interviews conducted by GRACE, and their final report was due next month. BJU decided to cancel at the very last minute, maybe hoping no one would notice?


My deepest apologies for not posting this sooner.... I have been too angry at the ultra-careful, kid-gloves treatment of BJU, to settle down and post properly. (I initially wrote two other posts that degenerated into rather mindless cussing/fussing, so I decided to start over.) I got so upset on Friday, I heard myself YELLING (what? me?!?) on the air... and I didn't even realize I was doing it.

Although Peterman was very supportive and respectful of GRACE (and I am sure they are nice folks and all that), some of us thought this should be a matter for law enforcement, from the git-go.

But of course, BJU-tentacles reach everywhere in upstate South Carolina (actually, all over the state), and I have heard that this includes law enforcement.

So, what next? Do they get a free pass to ignore multiple-sexual-assaults on their campus and at their institution? Apparently, they are counting on just that. There is no other follow-up pending. Like the Catholic Church before 2000, BJU is permitted to do whatever they please and destroying the lives of the youngest, most vulnerable faithful? No biggie. Around here, they ARE as powerful as the Catholic Church is in Boston... and you remember how many years THAT took.

Perhaps it's time for lawsuits. Money talks, bullshit walks.

That's probably the only thing they will truly understand, being hit in the pocketbook.

From their website:

Greenville, S.C. (February 6, 2014) – In the fall of 2011, the national news was filled with a steady stream of heart-breaking revelations of sexual abuse on college campuses. These events prompted Bob Jones University to evaluate its processes and procedures for responding to reports of sexual abuse and specifically to ensure the University maintained best practices for a legally compliant and loving, scripturally based response to such reports.

Let's translate.

In these parts, these 'heartbreaking revelations' came PRIMARILY from BJU, who had the highest number of sexual assaults of any school in the area. As battle-weary Catholics can tell you, this makes sense: these freaks go where they know they can get by with it. THEY HAVE A NETWORK. The more there are, the more there are. They are ATTRACTED to cloistered, safe environments where nobody talks about sex, since it is much easier to get away with.

Obviously, there is even a track record proving it.

Either deal with the freaks, BJU, or accept that you will attract MORE AND MORE of them. You simply can't ignore this now.

But hey, watch em try:

To accomplish this, the Board of Trustees appointed a committee external to BJU to review our policies and procedures. The committee recommended some policy revisions and also that the University appoint an independent ombudsman to review past instances in which it was alleged that the University may have underserved a student who reported they had been abused at some point in their lives.

Sounds like just ONE student, doesn't it? Nice spin. In fact, as stated above, there were over 80 interviews conducted by GRACE.

And finally:

Over the last several months, we grew concerned about how GRACE was pursuing our objectives, and on Jan. 27, 2014, BJU terminated its contract with GRACE. It is BJU’s intention to resolve its differences with GRACE, and we are disappointed a resolution could not be reached before our differences were made public. Both BJU and GRACE desire to raise sexual abuse awareness and minister to victims whose lives have been ravaged by abuse. GRACE has been helpful in assisting us in focusing our efforts in this area.

Did GRACE threaten to go to law enforcement or what? WHAT are these "differences" they are describing here? Hm?

GRACE gives their version HERE (pdf). The investigation started 13 months ago, and GRACE was given no notice or indication of any kind, that BJU was getting ready to terminate their investigation-agreement. They claim not to know why the investigation was terminated, but I bet they do.

Who was named? How far up the organizational-ladder do the perps go? Were personnel shuffled around, school to school, department to department, Catholic church-style, rather than outright fired, defrocked and/or dealt with?

And why?

Does the name CARDINAL LAW mean anything to you?

This story is so hot, even Wonkette and the mainstream big blogs are getting in on the act. AND I AM SO PLEASED that our little corner of the Bible Belt is at last getting some much-needed national attention. (Now, if we can successfully shame Senator Tim Scott for planning to speak at Bob Jones University in April, that will be excellent.)

Please folks, keep the heat on.

~*~

EDIT 2/12/2014: THE NEW YORK TIMES! The freaking NEW. YORK. TIMES. has covered this story. Woo hooo! (high-fives to every lefty in the upstate) And my friend, BJU-survivor and former faculty member Camille Lewis got her photo in the Times!

I hope this means the place is down for the count... but of course, I have believed that many times before. (eternal optimist) Again, we just have to keep the heat on. If you have a blog, consider linking to one of these stories. Spread the word and kill the enrollment.

Another one bites the dust

My always-vigilant, intrepid spies tell me the fundamentalist Christian world has been rocked by still another scandal. In addition to the hoopla brought about by Stephen Jones resigning the presidency of Bob Jones University, we learn that Vision Forum Ministries will be permanently shutting down.

And the hits just keep on comin.

Christian Post reports that misogynist nuisance Doug Phillips resigned from heading up Vision Forum, because (nah, go on!) he couldn't keep his hands to himself. As a response, Vision Forum is calling it a day. Good riddance!

But hey, that's a lotta dough:

According to Vision Forum Ministry's 2011 tax returns, the nonprofit wing of the organization, its total revenue was $3,345,150, while its total expenses were $1,734,985.

Phillips announced his resignation at the end of October, describing it as "inappropriately romantic and affectionate," though he denied any sexual relationship between him and the woman, asserting that he had not known her in a "biblical sense."

Yes, we all know what this means... another powerful man who doesn't know what the meaning of IS, is. ;)

(For more, check out Jen's blog; she properly clocks his worthless ass and has been for some time now.)

Phillips is well-known in fundie circles for his infamous "Tenets of Biblical Patriarchy" a guide popular among Quiverfull households. (Phillips and his spouse Beall have 8 children.)

Religion News reports:

Phillips is a leader among conservative Christians who reject birth control and believe that large families are a sign of God’s blessings, as seen in his friends Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar’s family on TLC’s “19 Kids and Counting.” He preaches a message of “biblical patriarchy,” in which a man is called to “rule over his household” and “the God-ordained and proper sphere of dominion for a wife is the household.”

Phillips also takes a dim view of women in the public sphere, saying it is not “the ordinary and fitting role of women to work alongside men as their functional equals” outside the home in business, government and the military.

The damage done by these oppressive, repressive charlatans is hard to quantify, but here is one such example, from Spiritual Sounding Board:

I don’t know where to begin…as I have read through so many of the posts about the [Doug Phillips] mess, I have been forced to reevaluate my own life. Let me state from the beginning that we are not a part of any Integrated Church, and not a part of the “patriarch movement”…but we did, long ago, embrace some of their teachings….like having a large family, homeschooling, courtship, and such.

We have ten children. Six of them are out on their own, five of those are married. Not a single one married with our blessing/agreement….three lived with their spouse before marriage. One son is involved with drugs…one daughter is tattooed like crazy….two remain active in “church work” ……but none “honor” their mother and father…and this is where I find myself…in a time of really re-evaluating what I believe. I feel that for our older six to be who they are must be connected to our wrong beliefs….at least to an extent.

As painful as it is to admit, I am beginning to see that we fostered some pretty difficult beliefs upon our older children all in the name of “protecting” their futures.
We are a divided family now, and my hope that there will ever be a time that we can be all at peace with one another wanes with every passing day.

This Thanksgiving…the children are celebrating without mom and dad…as I just couldn’t host another holiday with all this underlying pain/issues.

My request is to pray for us…as we face this holiday season, as I work through this season of looking at myself and what I believe squarely in the eye…that I will find real answers….maybe for the first time in a long, long time. Thanks for a safe place to express these rather painful admissions.

When I get mad at the Bob Jones people for messing up this town for so long, I try to focus on what I know must be the internal damage that is not readily apparent to the rest of us. This passage, from this mother in pain, reminds me to be compassionate and remember that there is so much more going on than meets the eye. The seemingly-united front and moral superiority that they unfailingly present to non-fundamentalists can be shattered in an instant... because much of it is based on the egos of these selfish, hypocritical religious shysters, who created their empires for themselves, not for God.

And humans are fallible. There is not one righteous. No, not one.

Tuesday links with Crazy Horse

At left: Mac Arnold and Plate Full O Blues at Fall for Greenville... he totally burned the place down! AWESOMENESS! I got more photos on my Flickr page, so be sure to check out my photos of Mac and his famous gas-can guitar.

INCENDIARY BLOOZ!

~*~




:: My favorite reading of the week is Thomas Frank's TED TALKS ARE LYING TO YOU, which is just so right-on. An excerpt:

Those who urge us to “think different,” in other words, almost never do so themselves. Year after year, new installments in this unchanging genre are produced and consumed. Creativity, they all tell us, is too important to be left to the creative. Our prosperity depends on it. And by dint of careful study and the hardest science — by, say, sliding a jazz pianist’s head into an MRI machine — we can crack the code of creativity and unleash its moneymaking power.

That was the ultimate lesson. That’s where the music, the theology, the physics and the ethereal water lilies were meant to direct us. Our correspondent could think of no books that tried to work the equation the other way around — holding up the invention of air conditioning or Velcro as a model for a jazz trumpeter trying to work out his solo.

And why was this worth noticing? Well, for one thing, because we’re talking about the literature of creativity, for Pete’s sake. If there is a non-fiction genre from which you have a right to expect clever prose and uncanny insight, it should be this one. So why is it so utterly consumed by formula and repetition?

Read it all! The next time you hear the word "creativity" spoken from a calm NPR-sounding voice (and my radio consigliere, Gregg Jocoy, can do a bang-up NPR-announcer impersonation!) --you should keep this essay in mind.

In fact, I may never watch a TED talk again! (Jimi Hendrix reference: "You'll never hear surf music again")

~*~

:: A nasty Georgia Tech frat-boy email has recently gone viral, since it's title--"Luring Your Rapebait"--was guaranteed to get attention. It's offensive, and appears to be one of those GAME things (more about which in due course) that plague the internet like winter head-colds.

Danny, who is no feminist, politely takes it on in his ever-graceful fashion. His post is titled Open Letter to a Frat Brother on the view of masculinity:

I can understand that sex is a desirable thing but I worry that you, just like many others, place too much priority on having sex with women as being a necessary part of masculinity.

Have you considered what affects this pressure can have on guys, namely guys who are in a position where they need to gain the approval of others? Don't you think that pressure can lead to them doing things that range from immoral to illegal in order to gain favor and approval?

Yes, you can say that "They choose to do that stuff." That would be true. But why do you exert such pressure in the first place? Why expect those pledges to be on such a vigilant lookout for sex partners? Why not just let nature take care itself and just throw a party and if people want to get together they get together on their own rather because they might get tossed out of the party and shamed for not looking for women?

Why, indeed?

Maybe because "looking for women" is the very DEFINITION of manhood, for these sorts of guys. The idea of NOT looking for women?!? Well, what ELSE would they do?

These men are conditioned from an early age, that this is "what men do." They don't know how to have a good time and just BE. The female equivalent are the Sex and The City gals who spend most of their evenings fussing over their appearance, and won't dance or get rowdy because they might sweat or mess up their hair.

Quite possibly, they deserve each other. I just wish they wouldn't clutter up the parties and fun spaces for everyone else.

~*~

:: If you need something to explain the government shutdown to you, have a look on my Tumblr, where I quoted from a great article on No More Mister Nice Blog, titled The Punishers Want To Run The Country or We Are All Tipped Waitstaff Now.

Check it out, it's a gem. It explains so much. (And if you are now/ever were a restaurant server, required reading.)

~*~

:: There has been LOTS of arguing in cyberspace over the "Pick Up Artist" (PUA) movement, men who claim to know all the evo-psych rules of just exactly what makes those stubborn, mysterious sexy ladies put out. It's called GAME, and they endlessly talk about it on their many forums and blogs (warning: those link are gross, but fairly typical). Like most evo-psych fans, they make everything that happens fit into their concept of GAME, which is damned annoying. (It's exactly the same way very religious people will inevitably see everything that happens as being an answer to a prayer.) This is why you can't argue with them using facts; they will simply claim that your facts prove --GAME is CORRECT!--right after they tweak them a few times, or twenty.

It gets old, so I stopped bothering some time ago... or even reading. If I see a male blogger refer to GAME, I reach for my mouse, clickety-click, gone, GONE WITH THE WIND.

But Echidne recently found an intrinsic contradiction in the statement of Roosh, one of the BIGGEST of the BIG GAME THEORISTS. Roosh went to Denmark (he writes books about how to apply GAME in every country; getting-laid travel guides for men), where apparently, he says GAME doesn't work:

Roosh calls [his book about Denmark] the “most angry book” he’s ever written. “This book is a warning of how bad things can get for a single man looking for beautiful, feminine, sexy women.”

What’s blocking the pussy flow in Denmark? The country’s excellent social welfare services. Really.

...

Danish women “won’t defer to your masculinity,” he writes. “They can fuck you, but no more. What they do have are pussies and opinions you don’t really care about hearing. That’s it.” Advocates of Nordic social democracy should be thrilled to discover a perk of gender-equalizing work-family reconciliation policies: they combat skeeviness.

Roosh comes to the conclusion that women who aren’t as dependent on men for financial support are not susceptible to the narcissistic salesmanship that constitutes phase one: “attraction.” That’s why Roosh fails to advance to the second level—”trust”—without being creepy. Thus “seduction” is almost always out of the question.

Wow, during this awful government shutdown, we see STILL ANOTHER great reason for the welfare state! Then again, haven't anti-feminist conservatives like George Gilder always argued that welfare services for women and children would inexorably lead to women becoming far more picky about who they, um, spend their time with?

The reality of WELFARE means women won't experience the material desperation men have always depended on, to make their case.

Echidne is all over it:

But that refutes his evo-psycho theories about what women want! If women were hard-wired to go for the dominant growling alpha monkey, then women would do that even in Denmark. That they do not suggests that dating rules and what appeals to people is also culture-dependent and affected by economic realities.

Whatever happened to Neil Young's "Welfare Mothers make better lovers?"

I guess the official PUA verdict is in: No they don't.

~*~

Speaking of which, I used to wonder if that was a sexist song or not. During the time *I* was a welfare mother, I remember feeling like persona non grata, not like I was considered a better lover or any kind of bargain. In fact, it seemed to me that this one fact about me would easily scare people away in droves, potential lovers and friends alike. (Maybe they were afraid I would ask them for money?)

I used to listen to the song ruefully and wonder JUST WHO he was talking about, hoping that maybe I was getting some good press in the bargain. But I was pretty sure I wasn't... hard to believe that love is free, now.

But whatever else, it sure does ROCK.

Welfare Mothers - Neil Young and Crazy Horse

Billie: How we've changed, continued

Old movie time! As I've said before, some movies instruct us in great detail about how far we've come as women, since they almost seem like they came from another planet. One such movie is BILLIE (1965), starring a major DEAD AIR heroine, Oscar winner and former union president, wonderful Patty Duke.

I grew up with Patty, adore her without reservations, read her book (needless to say) and watched a bushel of her movies and various TV-guest appearances, including the bad ones like MARCUS WELBY. (Marcus Welby?!?!?--say the kids in one voice. Who?) And as the list here makes clear, THAT IS A WHOLE LOTTA VIEWING, MY FRIENDS!

Young folks mostly know Duke (if they know her at all) as the mother of Lord of the Rings actor Sean Astin or from the camp classic, Valley of the Dolls, wherein she ferociously chewed the scenery as Neely O'Hara, a character too-obviously based on Judy Garland. (Everybody in the film chewed the scenery, okay? Not just Patty! PS: I loved the pulpy novel too!) The film is widely regarded as one of the worst ever made, and therefore terribly watchable... and it also went down in 60s pop-history because one of the lead actresses was subsequently butchered by the Manson family.

I first saw Patty when I was a wee thing, on BEN CASEY (another TV-doctor you never heard of) and I followed her faithfully forever after. Her weekly sitcom was essential viewing for us Barbie-obsessed little baby-boomer girls. (Although I now know she was miserable through it all, she never seemed unhappy.) We watched Patty's show and then excitedly talked about it the next day, all day long, sometimes acting out favorite scenes. She played a dual-role (Patty and her cousin Cathy), and there were lots of people who didn't even realize she was playing both roles. Patty was the American id, all emotions on the surface and totally unguarded (the TV-theme song explained: "Patty loves to rock 'n' roll, a hot dog makes her lose control!"), while Cathy was her "identical cousin"--the polite, ladylike British girl who knew how to behave. It was the internal drama then being fought by ALL OF US! We all wanted to be demure, sweet Cathy, and yet (at least in my working class neighborhood), we knew we were really extroverted, often-scheming Patty ... and hot dogs made us lose control. (Patty gobbled food, Cathy ate delicately and left some on her plate.)

As a child (age 12), Patty blew everyone away playing Helen Keller on Broadway in The Miracle Worker, and then again in the film version, for which she became (at the time) the youngest person to win an Oscar at age 16. The Broadway play ran for two years, which she wrote about in depth in her book, Call me Anna. She and Anne Bancroft (who played Annie Sullivan) actually became furious at each other. It was riveting; they had an extended, violent scene together (Annie Sullivan fighting hard to subdue Helen, who is having none of it) and they had to repeat this raucous physical battle every night on the stage. They started actually hurting each other, "getting even" with each other during the same scene the next night. It is amazing to read, and so very human. (Bancroft actually knocked one of Duke's teeth loose.) Duke finally went full circle, later in her life playing the Annie Sullivan role in the 1979 TV-version of The Miracle Worker, with Melissa Gilbert playing Keller. Duke had always wanted to play Sullivan, the "adult" in the story, and I just love the "recovery" aspect of that choice! Since the 80s, Duke has been a mental-health advocate, which has made me so happy. My grandmother used to sneer at her for going on talk shows and babbling like "a crazy bitch", and I would get so upset, I would cry about it. Leave Patty alone!!!

Later, we had words for that behavior: bi-polar disorder. But at the time? Everybody just talked about how crazy she was... and yes, she would meet people and marry them after partying with them for a week. (I repeatedly defended her as a tortured artist, but privately worried she was popping amphetamines, like my mother.) After learning of her diagnosis, I was very relieved that Patty would be staying with us for a long time. I had long worried she would jump off a bridge, take too much LSD or something. Of course I read all about her tumultuous personal life in the cast-off movie-magazines I discovered in the magical room at the paper-mill (mentioned in #14 here). I sent her autobiography to my AA sponsor and she was the subject of a whole nother round of discussions. So, I learned from Patty as a girl and as a grown-up.

And now, I learn from her yet again, as I dissect her old movie BILLIE.

~*~

I saw BILLIE as a kid, and remembered it as being about a tomboy trying to femme it up for a boy she develops a crush on. And yes, it surely IS, but it now seems far more insidious and awful in its mid-60s har-har-har misogyny than I ever remembered. (I sometimes wonder what it did to me, mindlessly ingesting this kind of thing during my formative years. Yighhhh! Terrifying to contemplate.)

BILLIE is FAR WORSE than the nice girl/hell-raiser dichotomy we ate up on weekly installments of THE PATTY DUKE SHOW. For example, one line intended to be funny, Billie/Patty whines, "I wish I was a boy!" and Jim Backus, her dad, barks back, "Well, so do I, but you're not!"--something like that. Just awful. The movie is about Jim Backus (whom you know as the voice of Mr Magoo or the redoubtable Thurston Howell the III) running for mayor of Anywhere, USA, and he has assured the town conservatives that females should never compete with males... and then the track team coach asks super-fast Billie (at left) to be on the team. (It is understood that this means THE BOYS TEAM, since at that time, there WERE no girls teams.) HORRORS! This might cost her dad the election (!) and Jim Backus/Thurston Howell tries to make her quit the team.

It goes without saying that Billie falls in love with a boy on the team, who is not as fast as SHE is... and the feminist good news is, by the end of the movie, our young prince doesn't mind that Billie can beat him at sports. But it is only since she has properly feminized herself (finally all dolled up in high-school-dance drag, wearing a short dress and heels) and has also given him her HEART, that this is so. An interesting, and very lucidly-presented message about heterosexual romance TAMING the dangerous demon that is women careening about on sports teams and so forth: As long as they are fuckable, cute and know their place, it's okay. Even if she is a famous television star!

There is actually a short blog on the movie, called Billie's got the Beat. It would appear this is ALSO a cult movie now. (shudders)

Long live Patty! We love you!

My problem with "Men's Rights Advocates"

I try to read the Men's Rights Activists... I really do. I try to see their point of view. I have spent hours arguing with the ones who are willing to argue.

And... I... well, I hardly know what to say. Because I usually can't get past the first paragraphs of what the MRAs write. I can't even get to the heart of their arguments, assuming they have any.

For example, take this blog post from earlier this year (recently emailed to me), titled I am Schrodinger's Rapist. This piece was based on a popular, widely-circulated feminist essay titled Schrodinger's Rapist, which was about women's fear of strange men. And just like in hip-hop, a witty "reply post" was inevitably required.

Although I had read the original, I had never read the "reply"--which is why my correspondent just HAD to email it to me. It is definitive!--he promised.

Really? Oh, dear God.

This is my ongoing dilemma with the men intent on improving what we here at DEAD AIR call, The Male Dilemma. I can't read beyond the sarcastic intro-paragraphs of their blog posts.

From the above link:

Hello, average looking, aging, perimenopausal female hipster. Yes, you with the horn rim glasses.

Translation: She's old, and therefore unattractive.

Ageism is a given with many of the MRAs, of course. I've been insulted with "You're old!" more times than I can count. Now, just why this is supposed to be automatically bad is never explained in depth. It just IS, grandma! (When I fully admit that I am old, it means they do not have to reply to me, since I cease to exist.)

An old and/or unattractive woman is not worth taking seriously. She is dowdy, and thus unimportant. She has mousy glasses.

Not that men only judge women by their appearance, you understand! In MRA-universe, this is a SEXIST thing to say; you are a man-hater if you suggest that! Therefore the MRAs can still attack women's appearance with impunity, while trashing you as a man-hater for suggesting they shouldn't do it. Good work if you can get it.

What's wrong with being an average-looking, aging, perimenopausal (us awful post-menopausal women are not even important enough to address AT ALL) hipster? Is it supposed to be self-evident that such a person is simply bad, just from the description? We certainly need LOTS MORE of them here in upstate South Carolina/Bob Jones University-land!

Wait, I think this means the writer of this piece comes from a cool place on the coasts with lots of these people. But don't you DARE call him privileged, you anti-male feminist, you!

Yes those frames which were chic-retro back in the 90′s

OH MY GOD! An unfashionable woman! How horrible!

But as stated above, no anti-male comments about how men judge women purely on appearances, that is SEXIST AGAINST MEN! Man-hater!

Besides, you aren't fashionable enough to have an opinion.

- yes, you, the one drinking soy-milk latte and clutching a purse-sized single-use can of pepper spray in a white-knuckled grip behind your pant-leg. Yes, hello: I’m Schrodinger’s rapist.

Now soy-milk latte is bad, too? Can I ask why? Is this another self-evident thing on the coasts? (For the record, here in upstate SC, we can hardly find a place around here to buy one!)

Oh I get it: she is too unattractive to be raped, so its funny that she has a can of pepper spray! HAHA!

That MRA humor! Ain't they just a HOOT?!

Now I know you’re neurotic and probably taking mood stabilizing drugs, so you might be a little confused. I’m not an actual rapist–well, I might be–but what I mean to say is, I’m a man, and therefore, only a rapist in potential, since I haven’t – you know, raped anyone – that you know of.

Ah, so she is CRAZY, too! So she is DOUBLY ridiculous... or should I say triple, quadruple? Let's tally it up: old, unattractive, unfashionable, drinking the wrong thing... now she is ON SOME LOONEY MEDS, so that makes her quintuply uncool, doesn't it?

Insult after insult after insult... and look at the kind of insults they are.

If you thought I would read that last part of your paragraph and take it seriously after all the insults (assuming I got that far)... why would you think that? You are too busy assuring me how superior you are. I am not GOOD ENOUGH to read your post, obviously!

And after all, I’m a rather bland looking fellow, even though on the daytime TV you’ve allowed to shape so much of your concept of reality, they always seem to have an average looking actor playing the sexual predator role don’t they? Your fear sells more nail polish, Paxil and granola bars than your confidence does.

Daytime TV? Ah, a dimwitted hausfrau! It is simply assumed that she is home watching the dreaded dumbass DAYTIME TV! Dumb bitch!

But don't you call him a sexist, since it is sexist of you to say that.

And the references to nail polish (superficial old biddy) and Paxil (crazy old biddy) and granola (just plain OLD biddy, and likely a hippie too) finish her off.

If the author included a good point in there about TV-casting, and I think he did, I was too busy noticing the insults to catch it.

Remember, I’m not a real man, I’m a probabilistic man. I’m a cloud of possibilities. So here’s another possibility to consider: I’m a peaceful, loving, compassionate human being, and I’m an adult. And despite being subjected to more than a decade of physical, emotional and sexual abuse as a child, I am now totally repulsed by the prospect of violence and abuse – even your hypothetical, probabilistic speculations of violence and abuse.

Repulsed!

Now, since you have alerted me that I am a ridiculous stereotype not to be taken seriously, and likely a crazy, drugged-up hippie who is drinking THE WRONG THING... why would I ever think this about you?

You have just engaged in ageism, stereotyping, cultural superiority and prejudice... and now you want me to know you are peaceful, loving and compassionate? Are you serious?

Why do you judge women negatively based on their advanced age, what they drink, their uncool glasses, their viewing habits and if they might have depression... and then claim to be a compassionate guy?

Do you understand how funny that is?

Do you understand that I have already stopped reading?

Yes, you, Miss LonelyHearts, you who have declared yourself my humble instructor – and who have given to my kindness to children and animals, and to my donations to charity, your approval.

First though, what part of appointing yourself my instructor and judge lead to you also declare yourself humble? What combination of diazapam, seraquel, lorazapam, trazadone and the four Grey Goose martinis you had at lunch led you to imagine your approval or your disapproval was of even slight interest to anyone?

More ableist insults of people who use meds... and by now, I think it's plenty obvious this author is in Canada, since nobody in the USA can afford all of that unless they live on Park Avenue.

But really, this is the kind of nastiness one continually reads on MRA websites. This particular writer recently called all feminists "termites" (and he specified he meant ALL OF US--no exceptions!) on his radio broadcast, and I had actually been listening with interest to some of his economic points (about unemployment) up to that point.

But hey, TERMITES? Really? That was that. Click, off went the broadcast. I guess I never will know the rest of his ideas. Just like I will never read the rest of his post.

I don't think postmenopausal southern termites (that can't find a decent soy-latte anywhere) are his intended audience, anyway.

I do worry about the folks who are, though.

Anti-feminists defend John Edwards, sex machine and role model

Recent John Edwards photo from the Los Angeles Times.





Hey you scandal-mongering folks out there... who among you is currently following the entertaining John Edwards follies?

Here and here are some fairly decent summations of the corruption trial so far. But I have to say, the hands-down BEST commentary came from a proud Men's Rights Marine over at the GendErratic blog, named Dungone -- who explains to us dumb wimmenz that John Edwards is NOT being publicly tried for funneling campaign funds to his mistress and their child (a violation of campaign-finance laws), but instead is being PUNISHED for having a $400 haircut and ROBUST MALE SEXUALITY!!!

Yes, its the feminists again, who made poor John Edwards take Rielle Hunter as his mistress, and in turn made Rielle refrain from birth control and get knocked up. OUR. FAULT.

Got that, bitches?

I can't do any better than to quote some of our exchange, verbatim. Just in case you think I am some crazy feminist exaggerating what this man has said, let me first link the whole thread HERE. And these are his exact quotes.

Dungone:

[Unlike] women, men are actually mocked for caring about their appearance, such as John Edward for his $400 haircut. [links to Wonkette photo of Edwards] If we were sane, we would acknowledge that a good haircut is a common sense investment for anyone who has to appear in front of a national TV audience on a daily basis – but we are not sane because we cannot even acknowledge that man even have an appearance. The fact that it’s even a political snowball in the first place is ridiculous – regular housewives spend as much money as some male celebrities on their physical appearance and no one thinks it’s a big deal. But men are in a double bind – they have to look good but it has to be a bigger secret than Victoria’s Secret or else they’re screwed.

Me:

Dungone, as someone here in Edwards’ neck of the woods, let me clarify… it was all that down-home populism and I-love-the-poor-folks bullshit of his and THEN the $400 haircut –that brought the scorn. There was a context for that… now when the story went national, maybe they just talked about the haircut… but around HERE, it was in the context of his “fightin for the po folks” reputation and alla that.

Dungone:

Please, don’t give me that. It’s straight up bullshit. All the feminists endorsed Hillary Clinton since she supposedly fought for oppressed women. But how much does she pay for a hair cut? Why was that never an issue? Every woman who runs for public office probably spends way more on haircuts than any man, so I guess if expensive haircuts would make a man into a hypocrite then we shouldn’t even consider voting for a woman.

Of course, regular readers know that I did not back Hillary, so already, he is incorrect about "all the feminists"--and our election-year marching orders.

Dungone knowingly continues:

Don’t you think that $400 is reasonable for a haircut when your election campaign which is costing your backers millions of dollars could easily go down the tube over a bad haircut? Opportunists jump on any deviation from masculine perfection in political campaigns. And people, especially women, will in fact vote for the more handsome male candidate. We haven’t had a bald president since hats went out of fashion and women got the vote. Instead, we’ve had presidents who fucked Marilyn Monroe. But I guess you feminists are going to call men hypocrites for getting a decent haircut while you vote to uphold Sarah Palin in the ranks of pro-women women.

Do you know what the biggest irony is? A $400 haircut is money that goes to support a laborer from the working class. And after that “scandal”, Edwards got a $13 haircut at Supercuts. So let’s be clear – under-paying an employee at a big corporate chain = pro labor. Paying good money for good work = hypocrite. Good call, Daisy. You love workers.

Me: [Yes, my Irish was officially up]

And how long did you live in the Carolinas during the 2008 election season? You are now informing me about what local people were talking about? Excuse me, but you do not live here and you do not have a motherfucking clue. My own HUSBAND voted for Edwards and said that, okay?

...

The biggest irony is that you are defending a man who used his ‘status’ as a poor lint-head to con OTHER poor lint-heads into giving him money, then used that money to pay off his mistress for silence. And you are defending this embezzling piece of shit as a decent man. This is why he is on trial TODAY for embezzling and I hope they lock his ass up for it. Yes, I do love the workers, and I don’t like when some shyster politician can’t keep it zipped and then uses the money of the workers that was collected in good faith, to pay off his fucking sex scandals. And yes, I see why you admire such a person. Of course you do.

Are you going to visit him in prison?

Dungone:

Edwards would have seriously helped the working class and I find it deplorable that working class people would call him a hypocrite basically for no other reason than his physical appearance and personality

Me:

Um, he is ON TRIAL RIGHT NOW for his appearance and personality? Are you tripping? Earth to Dungone.

Dungone: [FOR THE WIN!]

He’s on trial for being a male slut and a $400 haircut. He violated campaign rules, which was wrong, but it’s understandable given that men are judged so harshly and unfairly for their sex lives. There are people sitting fat and happy in their mansion who should be on trial for war crimes and you’re talking about daytime talk show crap, including some of the ones that your neck of the woods sent to public office. But god damn, he didn’t “keep it zipped” so it’s over for him any way you slice it. You’re part of the problem, given that you sound exactly like exactly the kind of person who hates it when a man has a sex life. Stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with what he would do for the working class. Kennedy also had a sex life and he was one of our greatest and most beloved presidents. “Keep it zipped,” you say. What a sexist, bigoted thing to say.

Campaign finance rules are supposed to keep powerful millionaires from buying elections. They’re supposed to prevent politicians from covering up real crimes, conflicts of interest, and scandals that are actually relevant to the task of public office. But they do none of those things. They’re used to bring down men who tried to prevent having their sex lives dragged out in front of the public by their political enemies. You can be a truly evil son of a bitch who tortures people all over the world, fails to do a thing about 9/11… but if you get a blowjob or sent a text message, you get impeached. And here we have Daisy Deadhead crying a river over the way female politicians get judged for their looks.

Again, this is why you should not try to talk to Men's Rights Guys. DO. NOT. ENGAGE! This is a Marine, who in other contexts is quite proud of his war-making activities, talking about war crimes. (?) And the accompanying fact that much-lower-paid Andrew Young, Edwards' aide, will be taking the fall if Edwards is found innocent, does not seem to bother Dungone.

Obviously, per Orwell, some men are more equal than others.

Me:

So, let me clarify:

You think that if I gave money to a campaign for a man to run for president, and this politician gives it to his mistress to shut her up and support her in high style, that is “daytime talk show crap”?

Dumbfounded. See, I call that stealing. I know some of the people he stole from.

Amazing.

I hardly know what to say.

....

Do you understand that he was STEALING? Millions of dollars? And trying to pin it on one of his underlings? In all your identifying with Mr Sexpot, what about his employee Andrew Young? Is he just not important enough to identify with?

Ain’t he a man, too?

Dungone, again FOR THE WIN:

I believe that keeping one’s sex life out of the media is a valid use of campaign funds. I believe that our country has gone down the shit-hole because underhanded fundamentalist scumbags keep dragging people’s sex lives out into the open to humiliate them and ruin their careers. If we can’t protect people’s sex lives from public scrutiny then we will never be able to have, let’s say, a president in an open relationship, perhaps even a single president who is dating. You won’t have a gay or a lesbian president, either. Only the most bland, cookie-cutter, dust-web-ridden “family values” liars can survive in our culture’s political climate, and I believe that this is a huge detriment to us all. So I believe that it’s fair use of campaign funds to keep sex lives private.

And I will leave that unbelievable, amoral reply right there, for all to read again and behold for themselves.

Men's Rights Advocate assures us: A politician (in this case, a very RICH politician with a large number of POOR contributors) informing you that your hard-earned campaign contributions will be used for advertising or whatever, and instead using it to pay his mistresses' bills, is perfectly fine. Since nobody (of course!) can be expected to behave morally and honestly, then laws should be changed to allow candidates to use funds to pay off their girlfriends and tell you lies about where your money goes. To do otherwise is to be against MEN and SEX.

And you will notice, I never did get an answer from Dungone about duped fall-guy Andrew Young. Hey, Young is small potatoes, the important thing is that Rich Sexy Senator Who Can't Keep It Zipped can do as he pleases, at taxpayer expense. (PS: why is this "sexist" of me to say? Women do not have zippers now? Huh?)

As soon as I develop any sympathies for the MRAs, I am put in my place by one of them; usually banned from their blogs and/or given some sex-obsessed, thoroughly-entitled, good-old-boy insanity like this as a substitute for logic. Then I remember why I was a feminist in the first place.

So no, I don't believe Edwards should be able to take my friends' money and give it to his girlfriend to live in a pricey mansion, especially since he is a millionaire and can afford to pay her rent himself. Call me old-fashioned.

And yes, my feminism is intact.

I usually need something like this to remind me of how important it is.

Volkswagen sucks

Volkswagen is using Ted Nugent's misogynist "Stranglehold" in a commercial. The major controversy online seems to be why the Motor City Madman (as he is known), would endorse a German car, which is some major Detroit heresy. Nobody cares about the woman-killing in the song.

This isn't the first time the song has been used in ads (the instrumental parts of the song are great), but it IS the first time the lyrics, "I got you in a stranglehold, babbehhhh!" have been included.

It makes me furious enough never to buy a VW for as long as I live, and yes, I AM poor and I WAS considering it, so your loss, Volkswagen!!!

Time for some pertinent questions to all the 'men's rights' folks (anti-feminists, mostly) I have currently been arguing with online:

When is the last time a woman's song about strangling a man was in a TV commercial? For a major world corporation?

Further, when did any woman even RECORD one?

Has a woman ever strangled a man in the history of the WORLD, who wasn't safely drugged or ASLEEP? (The song is obviously about the sheer delight of violent struggle; if she was asleep, he never would have written it, too boring.)

If a woman did indeed write and record such a song, would it be a big million-selling heavy-metal album? Would the woman who recorded it be accepted as a rich Republican donor in good standing (as Nugent is) and given a steady gig at the Washington Times (as Nugent is), or would she be considered a major loony-tune man-killer?

Totally laughable, isn't it?

There simply isn't any equivalent, and that is why I use the word PATRIARCHY: because we live in one.

~*~

Blogger is currently all screwed up and has been for about a month now. It will not allow me (and lots of other bloggers) to update the blog-links list. So if you think your blog belongs on it, and it's not, you are probably right.

Blogs I have tried to add to my illustrious list:

Cheap Signals (Hi Gretchen!)

Shuffle (Carolina's indie music scene)

The Good Men Project (sometimes I can post there, and sometimes I can't, for mysterious reasons)

ClarenceGrad72 (Hi Becky!)

Consider this a consolation prize for not being able to update my link list.

~*~

A little fun on the website titled your past life diagnosis. Here is mine:

I don't know how you feel about it, but you were male in your last earthly incarnation. You were born somewhere in the territory of modern USA South-West around the year 800. Your profession was that of a map maker, astrologer, astronomer.

Your brief psychological profile in your past life:

Timid, constrained, quiet person. You had creative talents, which waited until this life to be liberated. Sometimes your environment considered you strange.

The lesson that your last past life brought to your present incarnation:

Your main task is to make the world more beautiful. Physical and spiritual deserts are just waiting for your touch. Keep smiling!

Do you remember now?

Well, okay, that is a random computer program and relatively dopey... but... do you remember my Groundhog Day post here and how I described feeling unaccountably drawn to Chaco Canyon? That would be the place and time-frame described above, the time of the Anasazi, and now I am a bit spooked. (I love maps AND astrology.)

Probably just a coincidence, she muttered, reaching for her Tarot.

Haley Watch: More More More

For the record, I am ambivalent about linking Will Folks' Republican blog, FITSnews.

Folks is the blogger who claims he got into [South Carolina Governor] Nikki Haley's pants, before she reached her current levels of megastardom. I tend to believe him, simply because I want to... and because he and the governor were "good friends" and close political associates at one point (he didn't invent this out of whole cloth). I certainly haven't seen this accusation bring him any goodies. Quite the opposite. As a Republican blogger, you don't print sex rumors about a beloved Republican rising star without encountering a lot of conservative anger. The subject of haters throughout the state, Will Folks has had to stand up to the kind of scrutiny that makes most accusers melt into a puddle... and he hasn't. Instead, he has been emboldened. He continually threatens a tell-all book about their affair, and has stayed on Nikki's trail like the proverbial bloodhound. (Hell hath no fury like a blogger scorned!) As a result, FITSnews has all the goods on our governor. Will has stepped into the breach and made Haley-watching his CALLING.

Unfortunately, another result: Will has found it necessary to double down and get dirty, which is too bad. There is a rather disgusting, old-boys-network, locker-room vibe in the comments on Will's blog, and for that I heartily apologize. Like me, he rarely deletes anyone, even the people who hate him, so it's all right there, including the nastiness. The guys like to make nasty sexual remarks about Haley, and although Will himself rarely does, his claims about Haley have been the overall catalyst. Like most bloggers, he seeks high-traffic, so he allows it. He shouldn't, but then, it's his blog. But the continued tolerance of nastiness DOES say something about him, which I don't think he quite realizes: It compromises his account of events. Would designer-clothes-clad Nikki crawl into an SUV and copulate with such a FRAT BOY? The more the pesky frat boy-vibe triumphs at FITSnews, the less believable Will Folks' account is.

And yes, I WANT people to believe him. I think he is telling the truth. I think he felt USED by a candidate, who screwed him primarily for political support and good press. And she then left him twisting slowly, slowly in the wind, and he was furious as a result. So, he decided to go after her and make her his raison d'être. In his position, I might have done the same.

This has made for a great blog, with tips coming in across the land, but it has also made for a blog with too much sexual (and sexist) innuendo, which sometimes tips over into racism as well (since Haley is Asian, the first nonwhite governor in SC). He needs to get a handle on that shit if he wants to be taken seriously and go nationwide, which he could. GO BIG OR GO HOME, Will. Grow up and leave the locker room, and muckraking fame could well be yours.

Having said all that, I will now link FITSnews, with the appropriate CAVEATS. Beware misogyny in comments, or just skip the comments. Will's reporting itself is not offensive, except of course for his subject matter: Nikki Haley herself is plenty offensive.

Bold type is from FITSnews.

:: Federal probe into Nikki Haley "Family Temple" Expands - A federal investigation into the finances of the Sikh Religious Society of South Carolina – the temple where S.C. Gov. Nikki Haley’s parents, Dr. Ajit S. “Doc” Randhawa and Raj Randhawa worship – has expanded to include the governor’s personal and campaign finances, multiple sources familiar with the ongoing probe tell FITS.

Specifically, agents are said to be investigating whether Haley and her husband, Michael, received improper payments from the temple – allegations which have revived lingering questions about discrepancies between the couple’s meager pre-gubernatorial income and the lavish lifestyle they enjoyed.

Haley is a former Sikh Religious Society board member as well as the former accountant for the temple. Randhawa, her father, is the current president of the congregation.

In addition to a 2010 scam in which Randhawa allegedly doled out tax receipts to donors in excess of the amounts they actually contributed to the temple, agents are also said to be investigating allegations of possible financial “co-mingling” between the temple and Haley’s 2010 gubernatorial campaign.

:: The Nikki Haley “Family Temple” Files - FITSnews managed to get their hands on the actual pdf files. ((applause))

:: More “Haleynomics?” - The original FITSnews story about the Sikh temple, right before the 2010 election. Prescient as always, Will correctly informs us this won't influence the election, but "could possibly have far-reaching implications beyond it." We can only hope.

:: Sources: Feds Investigating Randhawa - The temple’s poor fiscal management is nothing new. According to Richland County court filings the Sikh Religious Society has been sued four times since March 2010 – including actions to foreclose and debts totaling $116,000. In a court filing dated October 15, 2010, the temple was given a twenty-day notice of an impending lawsuit regarding a lien placed on its property by Hardaway Concrete Company – one of several contractors that is suing the temple for non-payment of invoices.

In addition to failing to pay its debts, there are also questions about how “Doc” Randhawa has managed the temple’s books.

Until last October, shortly before FITS began making inquiries regarding the temple, contributions earmarked for the project were sent directly to Ajit Randhawa’s residence, however in recent months the congregation has been asked to “make a deposit direct to BB&T” and “call your friends and relatives to donate.”

Speaking of donations, one of the sources we spoke with told us that Randhawa has a history of providing donors with tax receipts that are in excess of cash contributions made to the organization – which if true would be highly illegal.

Also – and this is the most damaging allegation – several congregation members claim that Randhawa may have illegally funneled money intended for the temple into his daughter’s gubernatorial campaign.

Needless to say, this story has not really hit the major press AT ALL, except for some passing mentions here and there. The Republican star-machine is busy prepping Nikki for Italian Vogue, and seem to regard this little investigation as just that, little.

We'll see, won't we?

Good work, Will.

Frank would have loved the Occupy movement

Frank on Friday really should be several hours long. Unfortunately, the only time they do that is during "pledge week"--which means I am one of the few people looking forward to WNCW's fund drives. PLAY MORE FRANK! Today, they played Sting and Zappa doing "Murder by Numbers" together in a live performance, simply sublime. Frank kept referring to him as "Mr Sting" which was funny and oh so Zappaesque.

We miss you, man!

~*~

As I said earlier this week, the Occupy movement is under attack. Governor Haley (insert boos, catcalls, thumbs down, other rude gestures) cleared out Occupy Columbia from the Statehouse lawn, claiming protesters were urinating in the bushes. I wish I could have added my urine to the place, to express my dislike of our state government, as well as solidarity with the urinating Occupiers. Nineteen arrests.

First Amendment? What's that?

We need a lawyer to make the case that urine is a form of political protest. If you can artistically dip crucifixes in urine, it seems to me, you can pee on Haley's place of employment and claim that's political.

Alas, this is South Carolina, and we don't have any left-wing political lawyers here.

More nationwide:

Occupiers take over Brooklyn Bridge (Atlantic Wire)

Occupy New Haven meets NY Occupiers on other side of bridge (New Haven Independent)

Occupy Wall Street projects giant 99% logo onto Verizon building (Think Progress) Can you hear us now?

Occupy flash mob in Atlanta Wells Fargo bank (Twitvid)

Occupy Dallas Evicted (KDAF)

Occupy Austin Evicted (Austin Statesman)

Occupy Seattle means business (MyNorthwest.com)

Occupy Chicago protest results in 46 arrests on major bridge (Raw Story)

FBI Director Ducks Questions On Occupy Movement During SF Talk (SF Appeal)

Tea Party and Occupiers find common ground in Memphis (NPR)

Your soundtrack for today's readings!


Revolution - The Beatles



~*~

My husband's home state, Georgia, is next up for the "Personhood for Zygotes" people. They lost Mississippi, but they haven't given up. Not by a long shot.

Hanging out on Twitter last night, I finally got a "pro life" reply to my question: If you make abortion illegal, where will you get the money to build all those new jails? If there have been (as they claim) 53 million murders since Roe v Wade, where will they send all of these murderers? That adds up to the populations of several major cities.

Here is the reply, which was retweeted to me:

Woman who have an abortion should be put to death as soon as guilty gavel cones down. #prochoice is murder.

Silly me, asking about prisons!

I guess I should start asking, where will you get the money in the current economy to pay all those executioners? Or will they outsource that work, like they do call centers?

Pretty honest reply, though. At least the agenda is right out there: we looooove babies, but we don't care about the women who give birth to them and would prefer to kill them off.

Make no mistake, that is the agenda. And at least one of them is honest enough to say so.

Local media blackout about Bob Jones University board scandal continues

Consider all the fuss over the Penn State scandal.

Now, imagine if one of the primary players in the cover-up was re-appointed to the board of Penn State? WHAT?--you exclaim, shocked. That could never happen.

Well, it has, here in Bob Jonesland. And there has been a total media blackout about this, locally. At least Penn State is big enough that they couldn't keep it a secret, or perhaps they would still be attempting to do that.

As many bloggers have written, our fingers numb from typing, slimy Reverend Chuck Phelps, the man ABC's 20/20 informed us made a 15-year-old rape victim stand up in church and apologize for being pregnant, has been re-appointed to the board of fundamentalist Bob Jones University. Oh, and did I mention the rapist who impregnated her had ALREADY CONFESSED to the good Reverend when this happened?

Tina Anderson's story has been covered exhaustively in many different places, and there are lots of angry alumni and petitions circulating, even as we speak. The matter of "what did Chuck Phelps know and when did he know it" -- is now going to the New Hampshire Supreme Court. And still, absolutely no word from local newspapers Greenville News, Anderson Independent Mail or Spartanburg Herald Journal. Silence. Total. And as I have written before, it has been ever thus. The Greenville News, in particular, genuflects at BJU and always has. It is nearly impossible even to get letters-to-the-editor published, if they dare to criticize Bob Jones University. So, don't expect a mere rape scandal to get covered.

And they have the gall to publish stories about Penn State? They should be ashamed of themselves. What about the scandal in their own backyard?

It isn't that the media doesn't care about covering BJU anymore; of course they do. Camille Lewis shares with us how National Journal (co-sponsors of Saturday night's Republican debate at Wofford College in Spartanburg) takes the time to tell us what Bob Jones III is thinking about the election. (Rapists? Who cares about rapists?) I notice they didn't ask BJ3 about the ongoing scandal, but then, they also sponsored a Republican debate that gave a platform to proud misogynist/serial sexual-harasser Herman Cain. I guess we really shouldn't be surprised.

Likewise, this past weekend, the Greenville News gushes about Bob Jones University doing Shakespeare's "Comedy of Errors" like it was set in the 1920s. How creative! How wonderful! (Rape-apologists on the board? What rape-apologists?) Not a single word about the scandal they are currently embroiled in, and the fact that one of their board member's actions are fodder for a state supreme court hearing about condoning the actions of a criminal.

And they wonder why some of us don't believe there is any such thing as "objective journalism"?

~*~

The graphic for this post, comes from this post, from Debunking Christianity, which quotes at length from Bob Jones' famous defense of segregation as Biblically based. (I am told that this is one of the reasons Billy Graham didn't last at BJU and transferred out, among other reasons.)

I used this graphic since BJU's openly-racist history has also been routinely ignored by the local media.

The Herman Cain Follies

The Herman Cain sexual harassment chronicles continue to amuse and amaze.


As you undoubtedly know, such determined individuals never stop at just one--and there is usually a pattern of behavior. Republican rock star candidate (and Godfather's Pizza CEO) Herman Cain is no different than the rest of them.

As was true of Bill Clinton, they are now coming out of the woodwork.

First, the initial accusations, wherein two female employees of the National Restaurant Association (NRA) complained to several co-workers and superiors about nasty behavior by Cain (even quitting their jobs over it, which is why I believed them). Then, a third woman who once worked with Cain, came forward, claiming (among other things) that he sought to party with her privately. She found a way to keep her distance, hence, keeping her job.

Woman number four ain't skeered (hearty applause from DEAD AIR) and is the first to stand up at a press conference and point her finger directly at Cain. As a result, fourth accuser Sharon Bialek is under attack, her personal business, job history and bankruptcy made public. (ASIDE: At the link, you will see one of the things used to smear her is the fact that she has had "nine jobs in seventeen years," and my first thought was, "Is that all?") Cain is supposedly replying to these accusations today. Uh-huh.

Meanwhile, Bialek fires back that she feels sorry for Mrs Cain, saying out loud what many of us are thinking. Cain talks chummy guy-talk to Jimmy Kimmel, chortling over how much he dislikes Bialek's famous attorney, Gloria Allred. (Sounds like he's a little rattled to me, probably because Allred plays for keeps.)

And now, Woman Number Five has arrived! You can't make this stuff up.

This is just too priceless not to quote in its entirety:

A former employee of the United States Agency for International Development says Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain asked her to help arrange a dinner date for him with a female audience member following a speech he delivered nine years ago.

Donna Donella, 40, of Arlington, said the USAID paid Cain to deliver a speech to businessmen and women in Egypt in 2002, during which an Egyptian businesswoman in her 30s asked Cain a question.

"And after the seminar was over," Donella told The Washington Examiner, "Cain came over to me and a colleague and said, 'Could you put me in touch with that lovely young lady who asked the question, so I can give her a more thorough answer over dinner?'"

Donella, who no longer works for USAID, said they were suspicious of Cain's motives and declined to set up the date. Cain responded, "Then you and I can have dinner." That's when two female colleagues intervened and suggested they all go to dinner together, Donella said.

Cain exhibited no inappropriate sexual behavior during the dinner, though he did order two $400 bottles of wine and stuck the women with the bill, she said.

The next time the women heard from Cain was Christmas, when he sent them his gospel CD.

Donella said she felt it was important to describe her encounter with Cain after hearing more serious allegations of sexual harassment brought by other women.

"I couldn't swear that he had some untoward intentions, but we all thought his tone was suspect and we didn't feel comfortable putting him in touch with that woman," Donella recalled.

"I think [Cain] should not be a serious candidate for the presidential nomination because of what I've seen," said Donella, an independent who said she voted for President Obama in 2008 and probably will again next year. "He's not a person I would want running the country."

Cain's campaign did not immediately respond to inquiries from The Examiner.

GOSPEL CD!!!! That really makes the story, doesn't it?

Although there has been concern that this is (or might become) an ugly racist spectacle, so far, I think everyone (except Cain) has minded their manners. In fact, Cain raked in $350,000 worth of campaign contributions in the week following the accusations. It doesn't seem to have tarnished his rock star status with the GOP. Why would it? For conservatives, repeatedly grabbing at women's crotches is a PLUS. Yes, THAT'S the man they want in the White House! Whatta guy! (High-fives all round.)

One of my wittier female friends said he should run on the slogan, "Pizza and Pussy." Republicans will eat it up, you should pardon expression.

Stay tuned, sports fans. Herman Cain implosion imminent.

Fred Phelps attended Bob Jones University; rape-apologist now on BJU board

I initially wanted to title this "A Tale of Two Phelps"--which I think is catchy, but lots of people might not realize WHICH Phelps I am talking about.

Yes, that one.

Bob Jones University is currently pretending that Fred Phelps did not go to their school. Is that FUNNY or what? I can remember when they would have been proud, but demonstrating at the funerals of Elizabeth Edwards and Steve Jobs? Even too embarrassing for BJU!

At left, courtesy of fabulous Camille Lewis (BJU-purge victim), is Fred Phelps' 1948 yearbook photo from Bob Jones University. Although they can try to hide their nasty history, they CAN'T erase old yearbooks owned by students.

~*~

Let's backtrack. When did I first learn about the infamous Bob Jones University Memory Hole?

I distinctly remember driving to work (in the very late 90s or very early OOs) and hearing on local talk radio that Bob Jones IV, BJU heir apparent, had been arrested for drunken driving in "the DC metro area." This would be during his brief stint at Marvin Olasky's influential WORLD magazine, headquartered in DC. I remember cackling in glee [1] and telling several people about it. This fact was also mentioned briefly (one or two lines, at most) in the Greenville News, since I promptly went snooping for it. (I NOW know I should have cut it out and saved it, but I did not yet realize the Memory Hole was in operation.)

At this time, I was borderline Opus Dei myself (saints preserve us) and was in the grip of that Old Time Religion, like really really old. I considered Protestants heretics, and the more Protestant, the more heretical. Since I live in Jesusland (see map HERE), this gave me Major Attitude. I was in the religious minority, and I enjoyed it.

I would compare my self-righteous pseudo-Opus-Dei buzz to the same buzz I got from being a Maoist for a few scant months (nobody lasts long under the Chairman)... it's a feeling of certitude that I often miss, now that I am not certain about so many things. Being existentially certain takes a lot of the hesitation, confusion and fear out of everyday life. Therefore, I totally understand the hypnotic draw of fundamentalism.

Nonetheless, I still hold BJU accountable for the fact that Greenville is just NOW emerging from its status as a cultural backwater (due to international businesses moving into the area). And our cultural-backwater-status can be laid directly at BJU's door.

Greenville County remains (according to Rick Santorum) the most conservative county in the USA. This is because, as I have written before, Bob Jones University-affiliated politicos pack local GOP precinct committee meetings and draw the Republican party to the far right on both social and economic issues. If local Republicans don't genuflect at BJU, they can lose important early-primary support. [2] It is framed as a RELIGIOUS duty (see Dominionism) to pack these meetings, as well as the State party conventions. They can then easily elect each other as delegates to the National party conventions, since they are the ones voting. They were tutored in this process decades ago (remember the Moral Majority?), and they know how it's done. (I wish liberals did, but alas, you CAN'T HERD liberals, one of those truisms that is all too true.)

Short version, we have a very backward area, with lots of nervous people that are reluctant to question BJU. No, let me amend that, SCARED. Its like that LAW AND ORDER episode I saw last night, wherein someone says about the Mafia: Do you know who you are dealing with? Indeed, BJU is the political mafia around here, and their tentacles reach very far. I can't even tell you how many Letters to the Editor I have had censored, and the name of BOB JONES UNIVERSITY edited out. Really. It is verboten to name them, just like the name of G-d.

The argument with the editorial-page-maven always goes like so: "Is it really necessary to name BJU?"

Well, I don't give a rats ass if its necessary or not, that is the LETTER I WROTE and I would like it printed in its entirety.

"But you can make your point without mentioning BJU."

1) No, I can't, since they are the ones running the joint, and 2) Can't you cut the Soviet-style repression and just print it as it is? There are no cuss words and no libelous statements, so just PRINT THE DAMN THING.

Ha. Are you kidding? Dream on, papist!

I finally understood that they were indeed In Charge of the Upstate, when this happened to me several times in succession. The one time I actually got the words Bob Jones University into print (still heavily edited, as all my letters-to-the-editor have been), they allowed a TORRENT of robotic, badly-written Stepford-student responses to it, including one from a self-identified Catholic.

The kicker was when one of my letters-to-the-editor mentioned Bob Jones VI's DUI. This was germane to the topic, which was alcohol sales and the locations of bars in the city limits. BJU had released some predictable Baptist statement about alcohol as the boogeyman and in light of BJ-IV's arrest, I thought that was damned amusing. And I said so.

The editor-maven demanded to know where I got this information... I exhaled in disgust and informed her, HER OWN NEWSPAPER PRINTED IT! She demanded to know when and where, and of course, not realizing this would ever be questioned, I could not provide this information. It was therefore going to be heavily edited, and I said, you know what? Fugedaboutit.

Okay, so I finally got it. As a failed ex-Maoist, I sure did get it: The Memory Hole. Unpleasant historic facts are ERASED by Bob Jones University, which is constantly changing its own history. Oceania has ALWAYS been at war with Eastasia! For example, the fact that their founder, Bob Jones Sr. was pro-KKK, is another little detail they have attempted to erase. (And they certainly don't like it when people celebrate "Founder's Day" by talking about the activities and beliefs of their racist founder, whom they still won't criticize.)

And now, I learn the fascinating (and thoroughly hidden) fact that Fred Phelps is a former student. This makes sense, not simply because he is a crackpot-loony tune (which they specialize in producing over there), but also because when the GLBT Christian group Soulforce came to demonstrate at Bob Jones University (see video in this post), Phelps and his people came to demonstrate against Soulforce AND Bob Jones University, which made no sense to onlookers. Wait, isn't he on their side? Why is he against BJU? Huh?

And now, we understand. Apparently, an old grudge against Dad. (What would Freud say?)

~*~

I first saw the mention of Fred, when another Phelps (apparently no relation, but I wouldn't be surprised if that fact had been carefully deep-sixed too) was appointed to the BJU Board. Many angry tweets informed me that Charles Phelps, a sincere rape apologist, is the Man of the Hour.

And WOW, is he ever.

Some background:

Once upon a time there was 15-year-old Tina Dooley. Tina was babysitting for 39-year-old Ernest Willis, a fellow church member at the Trinity Baptist Church in Concord, New Hampshire. Unfortunately, according to police, Willis was a degenerate who liked to rape teenage girls.

Tina ended up pregnant by her assailant. But instead of turning Willis in — or tuning him up behind the church. Pastor Charles Phelps had a better way to deal with the girl’s rape.

Tina and church members say Phelps forced Tina to stand before the congregation and apologize for the ‘sin’ of getting raped. According to some Tina, Willis (pictured top) offered to send her out of state to get an abortion. He also offered to punch her in the stomach really hard in hopes of inducing a miscarriage, thus saving himself a Planned Parenthood bill.

Pastor Phelps decided that neither of those options were very Biblical. So, Phelps made arrangements to send her to friends from a church Phelps had previously been the youth pastor in Colorado. Apparently, with her mother’s consent, Tina was off to Colorado to have her baby.

Police initially investigated her case, but say the probe went cold when police were unable to locate Tina.

Thirteen years later, Tina (Dooley) Anderson was located living with her husband and 3 children in Arizona.

Willis now admits he had sex with Tina, but says it was consensual. Pastor Phelps claims he reported the assault to the cops back in 1997, but they weren’t interested in pursuing the case, which pretty much sounds like baloney.

This incident was even the subject of an ABC 20/20 show.

And now, Charles Phelps is on the BJU board... they should all get along just fine!

For their part, BJU is claiming Chuck Phelps was on the board before the accusations, which is more bullshit, easily proven this time. [4] (The ex-BJU people, familiar with the Memory Hole, save everything, and God Bless them.)

More information on Bob Jones University's installation of a known rape apologist on their board:

I Support Tina Anderson (contains petition to remove Phelps)

Millstones about the neck (a must-read, to understand the psychological dynamic of the place)

How Pastor Chuck Phelps "Church Disciplined" a 15-Year-Old Pregnant Rape Victim (The well-timed period)

Illegal sexual abuse policy at Bob Jones University (Sharper Iron) [Edit: this is a fundamentalist forum, and at least one person has asked that I post a warning here, notifying readers of this fact.--DD added 10:47pm Nov 4, 2011]

Dear Board: Help Chuck Chuck (contains all the email addresses you need!)

It will be interesting to see how they dig themselves out of the Memory Hole this time. If nothing else, it sends a clear message to Christian parents: It's open season on your sweet, young, virginal daughters at BJU.

Are you sure you want to send them there?


~*~



1) As an alcoholic, I have earned the right to laugh when people get busted for anything related to alcohol consumption. (The first step is admitting you have a problem!) Especially regarding an institution that does not allow its students to attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, let alone have AA on campus.

What DO you expect, in that case? Alcoholism is no respecter of persons... and that includes relatives of the founder. Get a clue.

2) It is instructive to read the list of "notable BJU graduates", which includes greedy pension-collector Senator David Thomas, Terry Haskins (former Speaker Pro Tempore, South Carolina House of Representatives), Tim LaHaye (co-author of LEFT BEHIND novel series), Senator Tim Hutchinson, Congresswoman Wendy Nanney, Congressman Sam Rohrer, Walter Fremont (((screams))) and various other conservative busybodies.

Render under Caesar? Not hardly. Do not underestimate their political influence.

Honorary degree recipients include: John Ashcroft, former SC governor David Beasley, Lindsey Graham, Jesse Helms, Lester Maddox, Ian Paisley, Chiang Kai-shek, Strom Thurmond (of course) and George Wallace.

3) Some time ago, I read an emotionally-wrenching account of a covered-up sexual assault at BJU, that I can't find now. Possibly it has been deleted since. I do remember that she was in the Art Department, if that rings any bells.

4) EDIT: Charles Phelps was, and then wasn't, on the BJU board. (He currently is.) The rather suspicious timeline, in which he is on and then off, and then back on the BJU board, is on Camille's blog, with screen-capture evidence. --DD added 8:45pm Nov 4, 2011.

5) EDIT: Fred Phelps has been added to the Wikipedia page of BJU's "notable persons", apparently since last night. ;) That was when I inspected it last, during an internet conversation about Agnes Moorehead, also mentioned. (Although she played a famous witch on TV, her money was good enough for the Jones boys!)

They have decided to cop to Fred Phelps after all, but only after calling him crazy. Oh well, better late than never!--DD added 1:14pm Nov 5, 2011.