Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed on, even impose on themselves, for their own advantage. – Henry David Thoreau
As far as anyone can tell, Lenin never actually used the phrase “useful idiots” (or its Russian equivalent) to describe Soviet sympathizers in Western countries; it appears to originate with some journalist or historian and first appeared in an Italian newspaper in 1948. But it’s an apt description of ideologues so blinded by their own beliefs that they unwittingly support tyranny. As I’ve pointed out before, neofeminists fall into this category: they are so fixated on their monstrous jihad against men and male sexuality that they don’t realize predominantly-male political establishments used them to help establish the current regime of universal criminality, and continue to use them to further establish women as legal incompetents. If you’re angry at the current US drive to make abortion and/or birth control unavailable to many women, or at fascist “child protective services” in many Western countries, direct part of that anger toward the neofeminists who pushed “mandatory prosecution” laws and the Swedish Model. Once the precedent that a woman is incompetent to make her own decisions about her sexual relationships is firmly established, even a first-year law student can write a compelling argument that she isn’t competent to make decisions about the pregnancies and children which might result from such relationships, either.
But the useful idiots can’t see things like this, and even if they could they wouldn’t blame themselves for it. So they’re entirely unable to comprehend the danger of the weapons they’ve handed legislators via “end demand” rhetoric; consider the Georgia law I discussed in my column of one year ago today which defines a prostitute as a passive contraband object (much as drugs are defined). Or, the push by Washington insider Swanee Hunt to allow the government to take and retain DNA samples from virtually anyone the police feel like pointing a finger at:
For the last six years, police across the United States have been empowered by federal and state law to collect DNA from the people they arrest in order to build a government DNA database…[which] includes those who have yet to face trial as well as people who are later found innocent. Now…[prohibitionists] want to…scare people out of involvement in the sex trade…by threatening [them] with the possibility of being marked for life in a government database…In 2005, a provision added to the re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act permitted the collection and indefinite retention of DNA from, as the Center for Constitutional Rights understood at the time, “anyone arrested for any crime whether or not they are convicted, any non-U.S. citizen detained or stopped by federal authorities for any reason, and everyone in federal prison.”
In the intervening years, there have been several challenges to pre-conviction DNA collection and retention, with some courts divided as to whether or not DNA collection is a violation of the Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure. Despite the questionable constitutionality…[Swannee Hunt’s group] Demand Abolition has commissioned a study proposing that men who buy sex should be added to government DNA databases. Demand Abolition…is engaged in a national campaign to increase arrests and criminal penalties for prostitution…[and] explicitly recognizes and exploits the consequences of being added to a government DNA database for people arrested merely under suspicion of committing misdemeanors, and who have not yet been tried or convicted. In fact, many people arrested for buying sex never go to trial; instead, they are routed to a growing number of scared-straight programs, sometimes known as “John’s schools,” offered by law enforcement. People arrested for buying sex are also disproportionately drawn from low-income communities, communities of color and immigrant communities…Some [are] arrested for not walking away from a decoy cop fast enough, which officers [take as]…”intent” to buy sex…Despite concerns that the…programs are creating an incentive for cops to step up policing…in order to collect fines…they’ve become part of policing practice in dozens of cities [and] are…part of a larger national…[push for] greater punishment…by organizations like the Hunt Alternatives Fund and its Demand Abolition program…
Constitutional considerations are apparently beyond the scope of organizations like Demand Abolition, which advocates for extra-legal means to, as it claims, abolish the sex trade, but which, in practice, threaten and jail people involved in the sex trade…Demand Abolition also advocates for a range of [extralegal] programs that use…public shame against people who pay for sex: placing their mugshots on billboards and Web sites, or seizing their cars and property — before trial or conviction. DNA collection may be an extension of these tactics…but…the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is among those who have argued that the Fourth Amendment applies to DNA…[and that] pre-conviction DNA collection runs the risk of reversing our legal standards of presuming innocence…There’s currently one case…on its way to the Supreme Court, which has yet to decide if it will hear the case this year.
…In its mission to eliminate all commercial sex, anti-prostitution campaigners like Demand Abolition have seized on an issue of inequity that sex workers have long identified. Women selling sex face far more severe criminal consequences than men who buy sex. So it could sound like gender equity to some ears when they claim that the solution is…to increase the consequences of arrest, to stoke a cultural and criminal atmosphere where no man would dare risk his reputation or livelihood over even one arrest. If it sounds a bit Victorian, you’re not wrong. Theirs is an understanding of prostitution that hasn’t advanced much in the last century, including the casting of women from the “helping class” — researchers, clinicians and philanthropists — as those who have the scientific, legal and moral authority to shame men out of buying sex. The difference today is, for activists who want to cloak their evangelism for a world without prostitution in science, there’s far more advanced science to draw from…
Defining men who buy sex as a special class is one way Demand Abolition attempts to make the case for enhanced policing…[but] in order to qualify…[as a] non-sex buyer [men] had to avoid some activities so common that nearly anyone who has been on the Internet twice in the past week may not pass…The claims that men who buy sex are more prone to criminal behavior than other men are what inform the call for a DNA database of men arrested for buying sex. In an interview this week with the Demand Abolition study’s most vocal author, Melissa Farley (who has referred to sex workers as “house niggers” in testimony before the Rhode Island legislature), she doubled-down on the study’s claims, stating that “[men who buy sex] are committing lots more crimes, including crimes associated with violence against women…” The number of men who reported that they committed one of these crimes is, even for the study’s size, not quite “lots.” Six men of the 100 identified as sex buyers reported they had committed assault and battery, as compared to the two men of the 101 non-buyers. Four sex buyers had possessed marijuana, versus two non-buyers…the real purpose of the database…is to act as a deterrent…Even if the establishment of DNA database could improve the lives of people in the sex trade, that isn’t the immediate goal, if it is a goal at all, of the Demand Abolition activists. Their focus, as has been the focus of nearly 150 years of anti-prostitution campaigns, is almost exclusively limited to tactics for scaring men out of buying sex. As they seek to define yet more people as criminals, they are also unconcerned with due process and the law itself.
The article is by Melissa Gira Grant, and is worth reading in its entirety. She and the attorneys she interviews recognize what prohibitionists don’t and won’t: that because there is no real way to distinguish a prostitute from any other woman, allowing the state to collect DNA from those accused of “intent to solicit prostitution” allows it to add any man to the database on the whim of a cop. And when this precedent is combined with that of female incompetence to allow women to be involuntarily added as well (for our own good, of course), you can bet Farley, Hunt and the rest of the usual gang of useful idiots will point fingers at “patriarchy”, the “pimp lobby”, or anybody else but themselves.
(Looks like WP has some log-in issues)
Oooo Raa! Maggie! Spot on again. Damn this stuff gets my blood pumping in the morning!
The pics you put into these columns are surreal – these feminazis look so serous and self-important when they’re just completely full of FAIL.
Your writing reminds me of Thomas Paine except only better than him! 😛
Also … seems Abraham Lincoln REALLY DID have good reasons for ripping up the Constitution … he was dealing with a lot more than bloodthirsty Confederate slave owners (remember – every work of fiction describes an actual alternate reality) …
Thank you, Krulac! I’m especially flattered by the Paine comparison. 🙂
On a lighter note related to the funny movie trailer, have you ever seen Bubba Ho-Tep? If not, allow me to recommend it. Yes, I’m serious; it’s much better than one would think.
Ask not what your nursing home can do for you, ask what you can do for your nursing home.
Ohhhh! I soooo have to find that movie now!! I’ll bet JFK picks up lots of chicks in that movie!
I’ve just checked here at work – and it seems that at least part of “Abe Lincoln – Vampire Hunter” was shot in Lacombe, LA. I’m pretty proud of this effort going on in LA to steal movie making from L.A. It must be a great deal for the studios because we have new movies and cable shows being shot here almost on a daily basis. And of course – we even have the odd celebrity getting drunk in the French Quarter and being arrested … coughNickCagechough …
Actually Mr. Krulac, that line is spoken by Elvis to inspire JFK to action. JFK then accuses Elvis of stealing his bet lines. Yes, you really need to see this movie.
I kind of prefer Steampunk Lincoln myself.
http://i834.photobucket.com/albums/zz261/xXDarkenedDeathCultXx/Steampunk-Lincoln-steampunk-1038417.jpg
Maggie,
“Once the precedent that a woman is incompetent to make her own decisions about her sexual relationships is firmly established, even a first-year law student can write a compelling argument that she isn’t competent to make decisions about the pregnancies and children which might result from such relationships, either.”
As far as I am aware you are the ONLY woman writing the truth about the plan for the PTB for WOMEN. The PLAN is to legally reduce them to blithering idiots who are wards of the state with no rights at all. Only privileges.
They are buying the rights of women with the “trinket” of being able to criminalise a man based on a lie. The women are selling out in their millions. What woman does NOT want to be able to call the blue gun thugs into her home to “show the man who is boss around here”? I was just in an african country and when I told the woman who managed the housemades this she was shocked and said “you can not give a woman power over a man, if you do she will use it!”
Men like me have told them this in spades and for this we are called “woman haters”.
“The eleven most frightening words in the english language are “I am from the government and I am here to help”. ” Ronald Reagan.
No one in their right mind should EVER look to the “guvment” for “help”. Down that path is tyranny. Always was. Always will be.
But what is the COMMON THEME of women and prohibitionists nowadays?
“There ought to be a law about that” which is EXACTLY running to the guvment for “help”.
This article is so good and so clear I will send it to my list as well.
Thank you, Peter. Actually, you’d be surprised how many women DON’T want that; I hear from them all the time. They’re just afraid to fight the neofeminists and to be branded as a “traitor”. Most people – men and women both – are afraid to buck the crowd, and right now the “feminist” crowd is largely misandrist. It will change; in fact it’s already started, as the sexual rights rollback demonstrates. I’m just really afraid of how far the other way that pendulum will swing before it comes back again.
It is quite naïve for prohibitionists to think that they will ever succeed in scaring men away from prostitutes. If the great terror of Syphilis and the threat of eternal hellfire didn’t achieve anything, what makes them think they will?
Good point. Somebody wiser than I pointed out that the first prohibition was in the Garden of Eden.
How many prohibited substances were there? One.
How many places was the substance available? One.
How many people had to be kept away from said substance? Two.
How many pushers were there? One.
Who was the top cop? God Almighty.
Did prohibition succeed? No.
That is totally freaking brilliant, therefore I will steal it. 😀
I hope whoever you’re stealing it from is proud of it. Because it is brilliant.
One definition of a liberal/progressive is; “open to new ideas and progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad minded.” Yet, if you asked Melissa Farley and others of her ilk if she was a liberal or conservative, I bet anything she would declare without hesitation that she was very much a “liberal/progressive”. To me that makes her a sanctimonious, two-faced, hypocrite. And, how anyone can give any credence to her knowing that fact is beyond my comprehension.
I don’t think they are unaware of the dangerous road they are travelling on, I’ve had enough conversations with such people in which once I present to them their actions, as this article does, in terms unconcealed by euphemisms of justification, (and spend what seems like an eternity cutting through the inevitable evasions) that they know they are abrogating freedom for their ’cause’. And they’re fine with it. Proud of it even. They know what game they’re playing, and like you I think they blame anybody else when it bites them in the ass.
Maybe there are those who’ve never had to look in the mirror of truth on this, but it doesn’t take a frickin’ genius to figure out that there is an irreconcilable contradiction from neofeminists with regards to a women controlling her own body as applied to prostitution.
yes… exactly like putting people in death camps and gassing them to death.
and way to go with the african woman example… cause you know, what one woman says is what is inherently true for all women. example: women having power over men which could be abused: fucking serious issues, the other way around: oh, well… shucks.
seriously, this binary way of social issues helps in no way.
many of the points in the article are valid. the way they are presented and argued… it is sending chills down my spine because i can see this kind of attitude being abused towards people suffering toward other people as well.
you said it well, useful idiots…
The problem with fools like this is that they never, never realize that the laws they push today may well be used against them one day when their political enemies come to power. Sarah Palin was driven from the Alaskan governorship by malicious use of loopholes in the laws she herself had signed into law.
Don’t get me started on DNA Databases. In the ’90s the military collected a blood sample from everyone, because as they put it “There will be no such thing as an Unknown Soldier”…with DNA testing of loved ones they can match it to the service member. Sure enough they exhumed I believe two of the service members from The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. I didn’t give it much thought nor did anyone else (well, almost anyone). Sure enough I was watching the news one day and this story popped up; sadly, this is nothing new, except the newscast said they were going to check the prison and military DNA databanks. The military since the child had military style clothing. WTF!!! Now I am a suspect in every crime. You hear on the news and from friends and families, “Support Our Troops!” Well now you can say “Support Our Suspects!” Because of the sharing of our DoD DNA database, I’m no longer a retired serviceman but a permanent suspect.
During the Cold War I should have fought for the other side, because today our country is like the propaganda we used to hear about them, even worse!!!
OK I’m off my ammo crate (soap box).
It is obvious that the neofeminists see themselves as somehow evolved beyond the common herd of womankind, separate and superior. From the agendas that they promote, it is clear that they are unable to feel any solidarity with “normal” women, no matter what they claim. This fact alone should flash a big red warning sign to anyone who is tempted to listen or be cowed by them. When the emphasis shifts from protecting “us” to protecting “them”, something has already gone badly wrong.
They also seem dangerously blind to the fact that hate engenders hate. Their persecution of male sexuality can only result in growing resentment, and an inevitable backlash which, sadly, is unlikely to discriminate between neofeminist and the woman in the street.
Like most collaborators, or what the communists call “running dogs”, the neofeminists are being deliberately blind to the fact that once their utility to the powers that be fades, they will immediately be discarded, and will have friends on neither side of the fence.
Hi VW,
“They also seem dangerously blind to the fact that hate engenders hate. Their persecution of male sexuality can only result in growing resentment, and an inevitable backlash which, sadly, is unlikely to discriminate between neofeminist and the woman in the street.”
Not quite correct. Hatred from women does NOT engender hatred is men. This is why women calling men “woman-haters” is so stupid. I have yet to meet a man who has expressed genuine hatred of women. Never met ONE.
The VAST majority of men REALLY LIKE women. Alas. You women, and I mean 99.9% of you, really treat us very poorly compared to how we treat you. Even eastern european women treat men well below how most men treat them. It is very one sided towards women and women refuse to accept that they have been the MASSIVELY PRIVILEGED of the two. Since we were living in caves men have had the OBLIGATION to fight and die to protect the women and children. And then the women whine about how the cave is too cold.
I never realised just how UNGRATEFUL women were until I took a close look.
There is a HUGE backlash coming. And the “woman in the street” is JUST AS CULPABLE as the neo nazi feminists. Why? Because YOU STAYED SILENT and men were murdered by proxy in the family law courts.
It NEVER ceases to amaze me how women can watch men be victims of crimes, stay silent, and then say “well that has nothing to do with me”. One of the reasons I read and comment on Maggies blog is because sex workers are primarily women and they too are criminally victimised by the criminals in the guvment.
I offered to help sex workers if they would help me on a roughly equal basis. I got no answer which is no. I have also offered to help sex workers for specific fees. So far no answer but the offer was made very recently.
If sex workers do not wish to assist criminally abused fathers why would you imagine anyone would want to help sex workers?
What we are seeing in the west is no one wants to “do the right thing” just because it is the right thing any more. We see people who are astonishingly greedy and selfish. And then when something bad happens to them suddenly they want help!!
So I will ask again. Do sex workers wish my assistance, for fee, with respect to defending yourselves against criminal persecution?
I am no longer willing to offer it for free because not a single sex worker on this blog was willing to assist me on a relatively “equal” basis. Sex workers and abused fathers are pretty much the same in that way.
Oh and Maggie,
just in case you missed it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2115663/Oral-cancer-cases-risen-6-000-year-time-figures-reveal.html
and http://www.youtube.com/embed/okPnDZ1Txlo
I’ve written about that backlash on a number of occasions, and it’s the subject of my upcoming column of April 10th. Short version: you’re absolutely right. And Peter, I covered that oral cancer story (for the second time, actually) in “Thou Shalt Not“.
Hi Maggie,
I thought you just might like to know the story is also getting a run in the mainstream media in the UK too.
Maggie…FYI.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2116207/What-Camilla-didnt-Cheltenham-It-attended-royalty–investigation-reveals-historic-Cheltenham-race-festival-magnet-gangsters-sex-industry.html
For all you who vote Republican, Candidate Rick Santorum has said that if elected, he would ban porn- Printed, video and internet.
He hasn’t got the power to do that, but he does have the power to make life miserable by endless, mindless obscenity prosecutions. I wrote about it in a guest blog for the Nobody’s Business site entitled “Rick Santorum vs. Marc Randazza: A Dichotomy of Zealotry“. Presidents don’t have the power to deliver most of what they promise in their campaigns, but they DO have the power to indulge in military adventurism and the power of malicious prosecution, as both Bush Jr. and Obama demonstrated.
Maggie wrote:
The Randazza story is that there are a lot of Randazza stories today; some mysterious signal, perhaps akin to that which guides migrating birds to fly in formation, has permeated the more libertarian regions of the blogosphere and resulted in a plethora of Randazza stories.
Your style here seems very like Camille Paglia’s writing style.
Just one question though; I know that plethora denotes overabundance but doesn’t it have the slightly negative connotation of “Too Much?”
I consider any comparison to Paglia a compliment. 🙂
But no, “plethora” doesn’t have a negative connotation; you’re probably thinking of “surfeit”.
Blatant vote grabbing of women.
Peter on this one you and Maggie might be looking through the wrong end of the telescope. I cannot open her site to reply to her The predictable proof of this came across on ABC Q&A with Grand Dame feminist on the panel with military men and woman officer disagreeing with her and her still hanging out for equality and not wanting women in roles where they could be killed. Yep feminists hypocrisy under scrutiny at its pinnacle and very best and most obvious. . The day would come as it did then and too regarding sex workers as the victims of men – nah never that it could be a woman’s free choice. But anything so long as it is ‘male blame’. HYPOCRITES.
Feminists the self appointed protectors of all and all things women called military men killers and hated boys who would become men and some military men. While holding out for women’s equality every where and any where. So the day would come that women would end up at the front line as killers too. But nah, equality for everywhere but the front line where killer women might get killed – is when equality goes out of the feminists window and they call it something else that still says the blokes must take the fall to save the women. No matter what women say in the real test it is only something confined to one area because ultimately they close ranks on blokes.
On sex workers the best example was or still is in England. Hookers on the streets touting and inviting gutter crawling vehicles the blokes are taken back to the local police station and abused by a panel of feminists until they submit and ‘confess’ they are victimizing women. Absolutely true Peter. I saw a documentary on it. Maggie may have a point from some wousers but ostensibly it is police being ‘enforcers’ for feminists in their gender war against men. And of course Peter you well know the White Knight Syndrome of ever so many men ‘protecting’ women. Don’t forget police are Government protectors of men too but withhold hat protection in family matters on behalf of feminists to instead ‘solely ‘ male blame in the gender war against men.
Yep I recognize Maggie’s very narrow point in the wider spectrum. Is she in England to check out just how far feminist have driven a similar situation to hers? In Australia Police and blokes White Knights marching with women on White Ribbon Day is one in the same when one realizes it is a feminist fraud in their gender war against men by completely omitting the about 50% of female perpetrators of men AND THE 38% OF VIOLENCE BY WOMEN TO OTHER WOMEN -.and when women attack men 77% of the time it is in the home – viz domestic or family violence. Where police “guvment” go in solely male blame irrespective. Stats from “Guvment” Australian Bureau of Statistics. See attached ex ABS and White Ribbon fraud.
Regards Robert K
——————————————————————————–
Maggie. Here is Peter-Andrew:Nolan(c) over at the woman hating group “The Spearhead”. Here’s how he lurves women. He describes vividly how he would like to see them treated:-
” Try these on for size. How hard is it for any man to figure out things like this.
1. Place poisonous gas canisters into a mall. Detonate at a busy period. 80%+ will be women. The men will mostly be manginas.
2. Poison the water supply in girls schools, police stations, guvment buildings. Full of women and manginas.
3. Make false 911 DV calls and then shoot the cops with a long range high powered rifles. If enough men did this no cop would answer a 911 DV call ever again. There is no way to protect a cop from a high powered sporting rifle at night. None.
Do any of you here realise just how easy it is to ANY of these things?”
Make no mistake Maggie. Peter-Andrew: Nolan is suffering from a mental illness which has now tipped him into the category of a terrorist.
Hi Maggie. Love your blog, lady. For your information, Robert E. Kennedy is regarded as a vexatious litigant (and a mentally incompetent bullying father’s rights member) in Australia. In 2005 he launched an anti discrimination lawsuit against a NON-PROFIT organisation who held a free legal information seminar for disadvantaged migrant and refugee women. Robert E. Kennedy doesn’t believe that migrants and refugees can be disadvanted if they have a vagina. His case was of course thrown out and he was ridiculed. He is another terrorist and is associated with his fruit and nutjob buddy Peter-Andrew: of the calling Swollen Colon Nolan.
Both of these men are in desperate need of mental help.
Ziggy, it really is too much to call “The Spearhead” a woman hating group. What I see currently is real fear from many neofeminists that their awful hateful ideology is being shown up for what it is. Will the public be smart enough to see radfem for the hateful ideology it is? No Way. So neofeminists can rest easy, their dream world is just around the corner.
The real hate groups are in our universities teaching misandry and attempting to roll back the sexual revolution under the guise of “gender studies” to our impressionable students.
Maggie, thank you for your wonderful blog. Please keep continuing. I love people like you and what you are doing.
Thank you so much, Jay! 🙂
Jay B – You sir, are a moron. I do not engage with morons. It’s not healthy for the soul and is a total waste of time.
[…] power of legal precedents, refuse to recognize that slippery slopes exist, and happily support any abrogation of the rights of people they don’t like, blissfully unaware that the noose they’re gleefully tying will fit their own necks as well as […]
[…] laws, especially those against consensual behaviors, are supported by many people suffering from the delusion that these laws (or other, subsequent laws based on the precedent of the laws they supported) will […]
[…] been very successful in achieving those goals. But as I’ve explained before, neo-feminists are useful idiots to whom lawmakers cater because their rhetoric provides a Trojan horse for anti-civil rights […]