dianeduane: (Default)
[personal profile] dianeduane

Oh, cousins, you could NOT make this up. The theory espoused by this (almost certainly) Thin-Lipped White Guy With A Two-Dollar Haircut is that Romney lost because he didn’t get the Slut Vote.

Women make up about 54% of the electorate.  It is very hard to win without winning that segment, or at least losing it only narrowly while winning men big. While the right usually wins married women, the fact is that married women constitute an ever-decreasing share of the female population.  Women want to delay marriage as long as possible so they can “have it all,” and usually “have it all” means “have as much hot alpha sex as possible without any consequences.”  And thus, less married women and more sluts (not that these two groups are mutually exclusive, per se)

This doesn’t begin to hint at what else is in this guy’s (unsuccessfully privatized) G+ posting. If you’re a person of color or a spoiled suburban brat-princess, he’s got you figured out too. Just go read it. 

(eyeroll) I. can’t. …EVEN.

Date: 2012-11-11 02:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] a-cubed.livejournal.com
Of course there's no way that these attitudes themselves (i.e. "that if you're an unmarried woman you're obviously so because you're a slut") is the cause of the votes of women going to the other party. No, it's all the fault of the demographics and those sluts. Why, we should do whatever it takes to try to stop them voting....
Thus do democracies fall. Democracy only works when the losers agree that they lost in a fair enough (it's never going to be perfect) election. The way the US is going, the Reublicans won't accept that they're losing because they're out of touch and the Democrats won't accept places where they lose because the system is going to be so patently unfair (seven hours waiting in line to vote? having the wrong polling day told yo ou in an automatic phone message? being stopped and harrassed by police on the way to the polling station on the basis of racial profiling, for no reason that brown people are likely to vote democrat and they want to delay them even more; electronic machines registering votes for Romney when you hit Obama on the touch-screen unless you hit the bottom 5% of Obama's box - pur happenstance that it went from Obama to Romney like that and didn't effect any other candidates, yes sir! Allegations that the voting machine manufacturers are in cahoots with one party and refusing to allow code audits by accredited professional bodies...)

Date: 2012-11-11 02:52 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] evil-little-dog.livejournal.com
I am appalled and horrified, and more than somewhat disgusted reading that article. And half of my family wants to know why I don't vote Republican. I point these things out to them and they tell me I'm taking it out of context. Oy.

Date: 2012-11-11 03:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wazira-sharira.livejournal.com
I love the "taking out of context" argument. What context would make this any more appropriate, apart from its actually being in The Onion?

Date: 2012-11-11 05:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] starcat-jewel.livejournal.com
At a guess, it's "He's just an exception, most Republicans aren't like that." Which is true only by degree -- a great many Republicans are like that, just not as much or as overtly. At what point do the number of bad apples indicate that the barrel is indeed spoiled?

Date: 2012-11-12 01:39 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] evil-little-dog.livejournal.com
I have no idea, and I'm afraid if I ask, they might actually tell me. Since I have to keep peace, I try not to get into political discussions in my family's houses.

Date: 2012-11-13 12:50 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] feetnotes.livejournal.com

a woman's right to slut^W do whateverthehell she chooses

without asking the leave of any damned fool man - or woman - unless that is her choice, too

and it's the job of damned near every adult to help bring up the kids so they make the best choices they can
- adult woman, man, martian or frizzy blue thing from betelgueuse

Date: 2012-11-11 04:36 pm (UTC)
batyatoon: (chibi!)
From: [personal profile] batyatoon
What amuses me here -- although I'm not entirely certain amusement is the appropriate reaction, but what the hell -- is that I have seen almost precisely the same phrase ("the slut vote") being used by a feminist, sex-positive poster on DailyKos. I can't tell whether she's using the word "slut" ironically or is genuinely trying to reclaim it; either way works for me. Essentially: "yeah, we have as much sex as we want to with whoever we want to, we're proud of it, we're not going away, and we vote."

Myself, I'm married and monogamous, and I vote too -- and, funny thing, I prefer to vote for the party that doesn't openly despise my friends who aren't married and/or monogamous.

One of the commenters on the Jezebel post you linked to described the original article as "the death rattle of the irrelevant." I rather like that.

Date: 2012-11-11 05:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] starcat-jewel.livejournal.com
I've seen this piece of crap all over the liberal blogosphere, and the thing that really surprises me is that no one else has mentioned the (IME unprecedented) use of "slut" as a VERB. Have I completely missed a major change in language usage?

Date: 2012-11-11 06:16 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dewline.livejournal.com
Part of the ongoing trend in linguistic evolution, most likely. I've been guilty of aiding and abetting the conversion of nouns to verbs as well.

Date: 2012-11-11 06:18 pm (UTC)
kengr: (Default)
From: [personal profile] kengr
Well, I've run into phrases like "slutting around" before, and I think that usage goes back at least a decade, more likely two.

Date: 2012-11-11 11:42 pm (UTC)
rhi: Stone gryphon, ready to leap off a pillar onto its prey (irritated gryphon)
From: [personal profile] rhi
At least three decades in my experience.

Date: 2012-11-11 06:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dewline.livejournal.com
I'd heard something about this...commentary...but now after reading it? More rear-guard action by the dinosaurs of human civilization is what this looks like.

Of course, not being an intended victim of the worldview of such people, he'd no doubt declare the likes of me utterly and completely brainwashed. Collateral damage of some sort.

SFX in Charles Schulz-style lettering: *sigh*

Date: 2012-11-11 06:29 pm (UTC)
occams_pyramid: (Default)
From: [personal profile] occams_pyramid
He doesn't make it clear whether he thinks that men having no-consequence sex with lots of women is manly and good and to be approved of while women having sex of any kind outside marriage is vile and sluttish and depraved, or whether he thinks that lots of women can have no-consequence sex with lots of men without any men having no-consequence sex with women.

Or whether he's just so barking mad that the contradiction simply hasn't occurred to him.

Date: 2012-11-11 07:58 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] martianmooncrab.livejournal.com
this person doesnt get it that Women are people too, and I noticed that he didnt say if Mittens got the Male Slut Vote or not... because one cant have hot monkey sex and get preggers if a penis isnt involved.

Oh, that sexual revolution? It also gave Women the right to say No, to sex with people they didnt want to have sex with, and to getting married because it was expected of good girls.

Date: 2012-11-11 10:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ricevermicelli.livejournal.com
And thus, less married women and more sluts (not that these two groups are mutually exclusive, per se)

Right, well, how nice of him to acknowledge that married women can be sluts too.

Posts like the one you quote keep presenting me with this freakish divide. On the one side are "sluts" who want both constant, consequence-free sex, and welfare payments for the babies with which they are overrunning the system. They are personally responsible for the entire national deficit. On the other side, not quite all by herself, is Michelle Duggar.

There is no middle ground. On the one side of the divide, even a single baby is evidence of irretrievable moral failing. On the other, any attempt to not have babies is just as bad.

There are no men involved. The role of the man in the species is to stand at a distance and lecture. It's a very important role, and men shouldn't be interrupted.

Date: 2012-11-12 02:23 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ursulav.livejournal.com
It's so damn bizarre.

I won't claim all Democrats are decent people who never hold freakish ideas, but what sane person couldn't understand that I prefer not to align myself with the party that people who think I am incapable of reason have aligned themselves with?

Date: 2012-11-12 07:42 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] murphys-lawyer.livejournal.com
One thing one has to remember about women, especially slutty ones: They usually don't make decisions based on reason.

You, sir, are Dave Sim and I claim my $5.

Date: 2012-11-12 04:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jaxomsride.livejournal.com
It's a miraculous world we live in where you can have sex and an abortion and yet still have a child! Did the abortion fail?

Yes,this delineates exactly why the Republicans lost the election!

Date: 2012-11-12 05:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmdr-zoom.livejournal.com
As someone 'explained' in the comments on Jezebel: no, see, you abort every other child of the vast litter you're pumping out of your welfare womb(tm).

Date: 2012-11-16 10:42 am (UTC)
ext_157015: Girl Genius (Charles Darwin)
From: [identity profile] noirrosaleen.livejournal.com
This is one of those laugh/cry things. You gotta laugh to stop the crying...or perhaps the Grammar Sporking(TM) (also good for beyond-ignorant blogs!). It huuuuurts.

May 2017

S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617 181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 22nd, 2025 02:55 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios