Episode 2.2


Beth, Lynnea, Tracie and Jen talk about things rapists say, religions protecting abusers and the not-so-amazing atheist.

  • James

    Another great show girls! Sorry, just had too…. ;) En Jolie!?!?!? Too funny Tracie…that one sure dates you (and me too). :)

    Jan 19, 2012 at 6:18 am
  • elyisha

    Laughed so hard. “I’m married and I don’t do dick” “and she doesn’t mean she’s lazy” ahahahahahaha it was so unexpected that i spit water out of my mouth. Thanks for making my morning :)

    Jan 19, 2012 at 8:48 am
  • Marlo Rocci

    comparing statements made in a men’s magazine with statements made by rapist is a pretty old tactic. It’s sort of the Godwin’s law of the feminist world. Attempting to establish guilt by association.

    And it really doesn’t make sense to make such comparisons. It’s like arguing against freeways because Hitler built the autobahn.

    The truth or falsity of a claim is not dependant on the person making the claim.

    So if you object to a claim, then state your argument against the claim, and don’t go around saying that a rapist “said something like that”.

    Jan 19, 2012 at 9:03 am
  • Lula

    Marlo: The point wasn’t about comparing the mags to the rapists’ comments per se. The poiint was the INFLUENCE of the ‘fact’ that the statement came from a magazine. The issue being that things seem more bona fide coming from a published piece than from ‘prisoners’. And they said at least three times that it was given that they picked the most extreme statements from the lad mags.

    It’s baffling and sort of a straw man to attack the tenets of feminism as a whole rather than taking in what they’re saying about this specific case. Did you listen to the broadcast? I’m just interested in how quickly and easily SOME men turn each fair discussion of how culture influences how women are treated. It IS a show about WOMEN and atheism. Personally, I’m baffled more men aren’t feminists as at its best, it wants to break down narrow, demonizing views of men as well.

    Jan 19, 2012 at 1:22 pm
  • Lula

    It’s also sad if women have these reactionary views of feminism, too.

    Jan 19, 2012 at 1:26 pm
  • Callinectes

    In the English of Middle Ages, or maybe a bit earlier, “girl” meant a child of either sex. Until quite recently, “boy” was how you addressed a servant.

    Jan 19, 2012 at 1:37 pm
  • PLink

    I think there has been a small movement to do away with the whole selective service act since it doesn’t have a real use anymore. Don’t put women on it, get rid of the thing.

    Jan 19, 2012 at 1:53 pm
  • Alex

    I’d say you have to have white hair a walker before girl no longer applies. xD Take it as a compliment.

    Jan 19, 2012 at 2:14 pm
  • ufo42

    Lula: “Personally, I’m baffled more men aren’t feminists as at its best, it wants to break down narrow, demonizing views of men as well.”

    Lula, Right On. All the so called “extreme feminism” I’ve read on this forum and on Skepchick and MoreThanMen seems to be just a matter of demanding basic fairness and full membership in the human race for everyone. As a “normal” (white, hetero, etc) male, I don’t see why anyone should have a problem with that.

    Another great podcast, keep up the great work, fellow humans. :)

    Jan 19, 2012 at 5:16 pm
  • InvincibleIronyMan

    If so many women are bitches (I don’t think they are, but I’ll accept it just for the sake of argument) then we men could club together to *deprive* them of sex! Why can’t we do that? Eh? Eh? Maybe too many men think with the little head instead of the big head!

    Jan 19, 2012 at 5:38 pm
  • Lulu

    Easy there mr InvincibleIronyMan you can be replaced by a zucchini.

    Jan 19, 2012 at 6:16 pm
  • thefeatheredsnake

    Awesome stuff, especially the thoughts and analogies abour how to retort to anti-feminists. I’m writing from Sweden, a somewhat more progressive country with regard to the issues of this show, but man haven’t we heard that kind of lame apologetics for the patriarchate here too. Oh and Marlo - are you out to prove that even a guy who kan refer to Godwins and pretend to have some analytic thinking skills can miss the point ? What the study in question points out is that sexist statements made about women and that get rejected out of hand when one knows it is a rapist who made them, seems to gain acceptance when they are made in a more or less accepted medium such as a lads magazine. The whole issue here is how culturally a statement or declaration of mindset gains or retains authority and acceptance. Lads magazines are not generally equated with pornography, and are seen, in the UK as well as here in Scandinavia, as an accepted cultural phenomenon and something that will not go away soon (or maybe never). But that makes it all the more necessary to study the attitudes towards women, sex and violence that get circulated in those magazines. If it is seen that derogatory and violent language concerning women is spread through these mediums it would be right to point this out. Wouldn’t you object if similar statements concerned say, black people? or jews? It would be rather clear that such statements leaned towards rasism. But point out the same thing concerning sexims and you immediatly get this sort of dance about definitions, or guilt by association, or some other lame excuse for keeping the status quo.

    There is clearly a cultural problem here. A quote from The Guardians reporting on the study (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/the-womens-blog-with-jane-martinson/2011/dec/09/lad-mags-rapists-study): “[the] statement [a convicted rapist discussing his crime: “There’s a certain way you can tell that a girl wants to have sex . . . The way they dress, they flaunt themselves.”] unfortunately sounds like the kind of thing men or women routinely say; last year, a study by haven (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/16/rape-blame-victims-women) showed that women were even less forgiving than men when it came to rape victims who had kissed their attacker, drank alcohol or “dressed provocatively”.

    Blame culture is problematic for obvious reasons, not least because its undefined boundaries occasionally lead, for example, broadsheet journalists to include details about an 11-year-old gang-rape victim such as whether she wore makeup, or looked older than her years, as if a child can be in anyway culpable for her own assault. What’s more disturbing, when looking at the quotes used in the study, is that rapists and large sections of the general public seem to share a softened, “I’m not racist but” attitude for explaining away rape”

    If the lads mag, one of many tools especially young men use when forming their ideas about sex and gender relations, deepens or gives tacit approvals to these kind of sentiments, then that should be pointed out and duly critiqued, as this show has done. And hopefully, will continue to do.

    More Power to Godless Bitches!

    Jan 19, 2012 at 6:18 pm
  • InvincibleIronyMan

    I used to have a housemate, Louise, who I liked very much. I warmed to her right from the moment I met her, when I was interviewing for a place in the household, because she seemed so rational, reasonable, intelligent and also a lot of fun!. I didn’t like to pry, but she dressed in a very androgynous manner, so I thought she may be gay. I still don’t know that for sure.

    One day, I was sitting with her in the kitchen having a cigarette, and she informed me that she thought that all penetrative sex was tantamount to rape. I had feminist leanings back then, but I hadn’t read much about it so I didn’t know whether she had figured that out all by herself, or if she was simply agreeing with somebody else’s theory. Anyhoo, my jaw fairly hit the floor! What craziness!

    It turned out later on that she was a big fan of - you guessed it - Andrea Dworkin.

    Now, I totally disagree with that particular opinion- that all penetrative sex is tantamount to rape - but as a gay female who seems to have spent a lot of time looking at straight porn, I think I can see quite clearly where Andrea Dworkin got that idea.

    Personally, I have nothing against porn. I always liked watching it with my previous girlfriend, and as a single guy I don’t mind watching it now and then on my own. However, and your reference to lad’s mags is really appropriate here, I could never stand the textual content of most porn that I have looked at, so I won’t buy it. I simply don’t like to read unlikely quotes from semi-literate girls confessing what dirty sluts they are. That’s not how I see sex, I don’t find it dirty or shameful, and I don’t find servility and stupidity attractive in a woman. Even in video porn without any textual content there seems to be a completely unnecessary undercurrent of misogyny in most of it.

    I don’t like it, it’s not sexy, in fact I find it insulting not just to women, but to me personally as a consumer and a human being.

    Where is the good, straight porn? And please nobody say Andrew Blake, it’s far too contrived and it looks like a 1980s Athena poster. I’d much rather see young, attractive couples doing what they like best and enjoying it. And I don’t want to have to plow through hours of creepy shite that is about as sexy as a butchers-shop window to get to it.

    That’s more personal than I’d really like to get, but I think it’s about time someone said it. I find it hard to believe I am the only one.

    Jan 19, 2012 at 6:24 pm
  • Katie

    I think the feminists that TJ is talking about don’t actually give a single fuck about the issues of men. He’s wrong to define feminism the way that he does, but there are a lot of people who call themselves feminists and they can be very different from each other.

    The people that TJ interacts with that call themselves feminists are often terrible people. For some reason he doesn’t seem to want to even try understanding that not all feminists are focused completely on women’s rights and issues. He does react this way pretty frequently to being told that he’s wrong, even though he says that he reevaluates his ideas and changes them when necessary.

    Jan 19, 2012 at 7:29 pm
  • mew

    have you heard of Gail Dines, because she’s fucking nuts

    Jan 19, 2012 at 7:44 pm
  • Ben

    Wow, I didn’t realize the real definition of feminism. Thank you for changing my closed viewpoint to an open one! I guess I was a feminist all this time. lol.

    Jan 19, 2012 at 10:30 pm
  • David

    If men didn’t objectify women I don’t think the female prostitutes would be pleased that they had lost all of their customers.

    Jan 20, 2012 at 8:02 am
  • ImaniJ

    To InvincibleIronyMan, maybe look up porn that is classified under “amateur”? From what I’ve seen it usually tries to take a “home video” sort of thing and seems more loving at times. There’s less overdramatic sounds on the girl’s part, which annoy me to death in other porn.

    I’ve also been subscribed to TAA for maybe a few years now and he was one of the first atheists I saw and latched onto on youtube. I admit though that I did not watch any of his newest feminist videos because I knew his stand point on it and don’t agree with it. I saw a bit of his tumblr posts on the matter and his arguments and feelings do not differ much from some I’ve heard in real life. And the surprising thing about it is that it’s not dished out by angry men, but by women! One of my close friends, a female, absolutely HATES the word feminist. She, like TJ, cites the hypocrisy of a few women who, for example, consider themselves liberated, strong women, but still expect men to open the door for them. They seem to believe that feminist means raising women above men.

    I hate arguments on semantics, but I have jumped between ditching “feminist” for “humanist” to recently retaking the label of feminist. I really try not to put too much weight on words and would prefer a word that outright said equality for BOTH men and women. Maybe when people see “feminist” they only see “feminine” and not “male”. At this point I just might call myself a “Sexual Egalitarian”. Much easier, and the definition is right there.

    Jan 20, 2012 at 10:18 am
  • Andrew

    I’ve watched a couple of the Amazing Atheist’s videos, I agree with him part of the time but all too often he seems like an inflammatory jerk who just wants to get in people’s faces and stir things up.

    It may be an unpopular opinion among my progressive peers, but I’m in favor of mandatory military or national service for everyone of both genders, similar to that of Germany or Switzerland. My reasons are threefold: 1) it brings balance to a culture that’s otherwise largely rural, conservative, and relgious, 2) it gives skills and job training to people who might not otherwise get it, and 3) it makes it much harder for presidents to wage wars with impunity and poor justification. Such a military could also be put to work doing things other than defense, such as conservation and public works projects.

    Lastly, I think that people addressing the host as “girls” is a ham-handed and impolite attempt at being friendly.

    Jan 20, 2012 at 10:44 am
  • Adia

    Great show!

    Re: Chivalry. I always say that white women are women but black women are black. Black women were not historically afforded the same gentle treatment based on sex. We were considered to be just as animalistic as black men and society treated us as such. I’m sure we are all familiar with “Ain’t I a Woman” speech, and even 150 years later, it’s still applicable. Even though I’m only 30, I have experienced people (mainly white men) who clearly thought I was a stereotypical oversexed black girl who didn’t have any real feelings or desire to maintain any sense of dignity. When a man of any race stands up for me on the train or opens the door for me, I love it because they are acknowledging that I’m no different than a white woman. I don’t need anyone to affirm me, but considering what my female ancestors went through, I feel obligated to enjoy something that they never could.

    Jan 20, 2012 at 12:22 pm
  • blahface

    Where did Jen get that hunter gatherer societies didn’t have misogyny until they created the concept of private property? That sounds a bit like Marxist propaganda to me.

    Jan 20, 2012 at 6:26 pm
  • Vicky

    Yeah, I was subscribed to TAA a while back, but got tired of his bullshit really quick. At first, I admired his bluntness when it came to atheism, but slowly he began to get on my nerves. He seems to revel in over-the-top points to get attention, and a lot of his points smack of a young twenty-something flirting with libertarianism, without actually reading anything he was talking about. He’s annoying.

    Jan 20, 2012 at 9:03 pm
  • Fizzygoo

    Ahk. Can’t load GB podcasts on http://godlessbitches.podbean.com, can’t download from selected site. “Error opening file.” And (comedically) on top of that…captcha to post is “prayful.” Le sigh.

    Jan 21, 2012 at 8:47 pm
  • Fizzygoo

    w00ts, working now.

    Jan 21, 2012 at 9:58 pm
  • Randomizer

    Sorry Jen, but my grandmother is 80 and I still refer to her group as ‘the girls.’ If it makes you feel better I use the term ‘boys’ for a group of males. For me, it has nothing to do with age, maturity, or sexuality, it’s more a force of habit I acquired a long time ago and never bothered to break. A group mostly comprised of females is a group of ‘girls’ a group mostly comprised of males are ‘boys’ nothing to it, just a generic term.

    Jan 22, 2012 at 5:09 am
  • Emma Snyde

    You have got to get your logo on cafepress. I want a T-shirt!

    Jan 22, 2012 at 1:02 pm
  • John

    The not so amazing atheist is, in my book, an immature dickwad. He is a blight upon the male atheist population.

    “Guys’” has been a ubiquitous linguistic, all inclusive term of convenience, for a very long time, regardless of the constitution of the audience or addressees. From the stage, sometimes I say, “Ladies & Gentlemen,” but more often I ask, “What do you guys want to hear next? ” In fact, I hear single females, refer to each other as “y’all,” as often as, “you guys.” Having been forewarned, I will continue to address y’all as “Ladies,” IF it meets with your approval. I try to be a gentleman, and both of my ex-wives will attest to that fact. Though twice divorced, we never, ever, spoke the word, “shutup,” much less ever cursed or used foul language with each other.

    I have experienced reverse discrimination when being polite, by opening a door for a lady, on so many occasions, that I developed a paranoia in this regard. Don’t be a male in the DC area and open doors or display too much courtesy toward women, if you are male. Do that routinely, and expect to be “bitched out” on occasion.

    I think that all men should be feminists. If we mature, it seems to be late in life. Too many men are just plain assholes, into their power trips. jmo Thanks again for a great show.

    I love your work/show. It never seems too long. As I have previously commented, your conversations are very engaging.

    p.s., I had to change my handle, bactiguy, when I learned that Beth is a Microbiologist. Bacti was my first love. Then I continued my studies to become an ASCP generalist. I wouldn’t hire me as the Micro dept. supervisor anymore. But I can still share rotation with other supervisors.

    Congratulations on your marriage to Matt, Beth.


    Jan 23, 2012 at 5:09 pm
  • Hermes

    Tech comment: Unless I missed it, please add the RSS feed to the Subscribe section. Thanks!


    I was able to guess what the RSS feed was by deleting the front part of the “Add to Google” link, though having the RSS link should be more convenient for folks who use any podcatcher;

    RSS feed - http://godlessbitches.podbean.com/feed

    Jan 23, 2012 at 6:41 pm
  • Ace of Sevens

    I used to be subbed to TheAmazingAtheist. I dropped him over a combination of really sexist shit he said about Laci Greene (IIRC, he thought she was too soft on theists, so he said she had blowjob lips and some similarly sexist bullshit) and him jumping all over Richard Coughlan for trying to have a civil conversation with a theist. I wish YouTube would quit suggesting that I re-sub. They guy’s an arrogant asshole who just likes the sound of his own voice.

    Jan 24, 2012 at 8:54 pm
  • sc0tt


    The story of the gay king being killed by “red hot poker up the ass” is apocryphal.

    The king was Edward II who was the gay character in the movie Braveheart, and the legend is easy to Google.

    Thanks for another fine show, ladies.

    Jan 25, 2012 at 9:50 am
  • Dominik

    Yea. I weep at how retarded my fellow males have become. Sex used to be fun. And just hearing how bad it’s gotten really depresses me. I, like many other males watch pornhub, which is a site that has free porn on it. And it is pretty good. But just lately I’ve seen this new theme they started called ‘18 and abused’. Dude, ABUSED! And it’s on the site. No I’m all for fanatsy and all that. But I really have to question the mentality it takes for a male to get stimulated by this. Personally, my stomach turns when I see women get throw about and abused. And there are lots of fucked up guys out there getting off on this stuff.

    Personally, I love porn. But even myself, I get really disturbed when I see stuff like this. It’s like we’re living in a mad max world.

    Sex use to be fun. Now, from what I see on pornhub, unless you savagely pump the shit out of this woman like a 15 year old on speed and Viagra, then you not doing it right.

    And youngsters watch this, and learn the meme. It’s scary watching the world slowly die.

    Jan 25, 2012 at 11:12 am
  • Muzz

    You ladies are being very honorable giving old Amazing Atheist the benefit of the doubt as reasonable and intellectually honest. He’ll probably dispel that notion soon enough. He’s just trying to be baby Pat Condell. He’s the internet equivalent of a talk radio host and when it comes to feminism he’s one of those guys who knows nothing about it and equivocates like crazy whenever it comes up. If feminism says it is for “equality” and any bias or imbalance that can be detected for whatever reason, then feminism has been caught out as intellectually dishonest.

    The thing about The View video with him is that, if he spots any admitted feminist bloggers or whatever passing around some terrible quote by some man about violence towards women, “Why aren’t they giving equal time to The View? You think the View is ok because it’s women! Your whole philosophy is bankrupt!” etc etc, when, as you all point out, people talk about what they happen to be talking about and don’t necessarily watch The View. He and a lot of other people would probably get all captious at that point and say “Well that doesn’t sound like “Equality” to me”. Facepalms all ’round. (he seems very popular with people who are given to irrationally hate Rebecca Watson, which is probably no surprise). It’s true that maybe there is an interesting discussion to be had about whether feminist bloggers and so on shouldn’t turn their attention to things like that more often, if they hear about it. But this isn’t about honest discussion. It’s about getting “Hell Yeah”s from the fanboys.

    Jan 25, 2012 at 11:05 pm
  • Matt

    Hi GBs, Regarding the amazing atheists comments on feminism, I have to say that the form of the word “feminism” makes it seem like it is concerned with issues pertaining to femininity. I realise (and I believe the amazing atheist also realises) that in reality, the vast majority of feminism is in fact concerning equality and fairness. So the problem, for me at least, is more about the impression which the word leaves rather than the actual current definition. I just think that there are probably better terms to describe what we stand for. Equalism, humanism….idk, something like that would describe my views in a single word alot better than feminism does (Ignoring current practical definitions, of course).

    Hope that makes sense, Matt

    P.S. If I got drafted I would certainly find a way to get out of it… unless I truly believe in the cause of the draft, in which case I would probably already be signed up.

    Jan 26, 2012 at 8:48 pm
  • trew

    I live in the UK and share a house with a 22 year old so I’ve read some of these magazines on occasion.

    It really is unfair to characterise them as pornographic, yes they contain photos of lightly clothed young women but nothing that you wouldn’t find even in quite conservative publications.

    It’s also worth noting that humour is a very big part of the “laddish” culture these magazines are appealing to. Often this deliberately provocative and un-pc humour but it is humour nevertheless. It seems young men often find things humorous simply because they will provoke outrage.

    I haven’t read the particular article(s) referred to but I very much doubt that they were serious.

    Jan 28, 2012 at 9:09 pm
  • Cat

    I am *NOT* a feminist. Please refrain from calling people such if they do not wish to be called feminist. Honestly, it just shows how little you respect those who happen to disagree with you.

    Feb 4, 2012 at 3:14 pm
  • Rilian

    If someone says they’re a humanist rather than a feminist, I would assume they are inventing a new word that just *happens* to sound like that other word “humanist” that already exists. They would just be homonyms.

    Feb 10, 2012 at 2:27 am
  • Brendan

    Women CAN challenge male-only selective service registration. They can demand the forms that young men have to sign upon reaching eighteen years of age and sign and return these forms themselves. I suspect, however, that this won’t be happening anytime soon. Though nobody wants to reinstate the draft today, we can’t predict the future. In the event of a third world war, necessity will mandate reinstatement of the draft, and if young women have to register for selective service, they will be drafted, too.

    Of course the man who protests male-only selective service registration (presumably by refusing to sign and return the form) runs the risk of jail time and unemployability. These are risks that women challenging male-only selective service do not face. To act as if only men can or should challenge male-only selective service is once again to demand chivalry of men and to treat them as disposable utilities in the service of women, just as we do when we demand that men go overseas to fight on the front lines in order to protect women and children at home.

    Feb 10, 2012 at 1:59 pm
  • Brendan

    One other thing: equal likelihood of being drafted does not insure equal obligations among men and women who are conscripted. Are you prepared to demand that women by obligation rather than by option face the same time on the front lines that men do, and in proportionately equal number with the men?

    Feb 10, 2012 at 2:11 pm
  • MrPopularSentiment

    The poker story is a myth. Edward II may have been gay (but who knows? And, frankly, that kind of rigid conception of sexuality is fairly modern), but he almost certainly wasn’t killed in this way. It’s actually a good test of any survey history book - if they mention the poker thing without debunking, put the book back down.

    As for “girls,” I think the term is fine if you’re familiar with someone. For example, when I’m out with my mom, or even with my great aunt (who is 92), we refer to ourselves as “the girls.” My husband and son are both “my boys.” But it’s different when a stranger calls me a girl, especially if it’s done in a creepy/predatory sort of way.

    Feb 13, 2012 at 12:15 pm
  • SG

    Love the podcast, but I think you went a bit over the top on your rant against the use of the word “girl”.

    This surprised me because most of the time, I find that ultimately I end up agreeing with your points (if I initially disagreed or hadn’t thought about the topic).

    But I am still not convinced that there’s a significant problem with “girl”.

    And, even if we could agree that the word is more negative than neutral or positive, why are you comfortable working to reclaim an even more demeaning word like “bitches” but ready to admit defeat on “girl”?

    Feb 16, 2012 at 4:05 pm
  • Ben W.

    It’s highly unlikely that Edward II of England was killed for just for being gay. He was considered an incompetant ruler by many of his nobles and he was overthrown by his own wife and her lover. They imprisoned him and eventually had him murdered simply because it was too dangerous to keep him as a live prisoner whom their enemies might try to liberate. If he actually was killed with a hot poker up the ass it was probably done with the idea of leaving no physical marks on him.

    Feb 25, 2012 at 8:19 pm
  • Poor Lurker

    Around 1:18:00 you say, “there’s this group that supports and agrees with this [that feminism is not for equal rights], and that’s what we’re fighting against.” There’s the problem. *You spend your time fighting against people who are fighting for their own rights.* So their anger is misdirected, so tell them how to spend it. Tell fathers how to fight for their custody rights through feminism. Many who spend their time fighting MRAs do end up bashing men. A lot. And it perpetuates this viscous “my rights, your rights” cycle that serves to cause people to think that feminism is only supporting rights for women. It is not good PR. It’s so nice when people like you can come on with an informed analysis and show how feminism can support men’s issues too — but you don’t see that in most places.

    Feb 28, 2012 at 6:39 am
  • funcpl27

    I adore the godless bitches webcast….but this was a very very weak episode. i’m sorry but your generalizations were lazy and you spoke of men as if they were a mon-lithic voice with the same experiences…a tactic which any feminist should abhor. There was more about this episode which surprised me in its lack of clarity but i will just chalk it up as a bad day and move to the next which i’m sure be, as usual, filled with insight rather than the stale generalizations of this one.

    Mar 14, 2012 at 5:44 am
  • Raymond

    Adia, ‘animalistic as a black man’ HUH?? Have you also been bred to play basketball well, too? How about having a 12″ penis like all black men have? Curious you would say what you said. I see no diff between white or black females and I hope I treat them that way., but we all have blind spots.

    Randomizer, don’t feel bad, not sure why gender ID is so touchy. Maybe we should ID women as ‘cunts’ and men as ‘dicks’ , or women as ‘pussies’ or men ‘penises’ I’m not sure how the terms became derogatory, I strictly mean them as an ID not as a put down. Maybe we could call a women an ‘F’ genital, and a man an ‘M’ genital. ‘F’ and ‘M’ for short. “She’s an F, while I’m an M.” Or maybe, though it is long to say gentle-woman, or gentle-man.

    Racism and ethnic humor is out, I have never liked it, as it is too derogatory.

    The abusive person who is using the excuse that they were treated that way as a kid, though research shows who is likely to be abusive is having been abused themselves, should not be permitted to have any kind of excuse, for there is no reasonable reason to be abusive to anyone. Though anecdote is lowest form of evidence, not sure if anyone has been more abused and treated unfairly than I was in the SC child welfare system, and the 2.5 year stint I pulled in a Pentecostal religious institution, it would be reasonable for me as an adult(61 yrs old now)to be bitter, hate filled and lashing out for what was done to me, as the emotional and psychological scars I have as a result of the sadistic adults over me, and all that was done to me by the Pentecostal indoctrinating religion I ended up having to endure, kept me having to unlearn and to spend the rest of my life just trying to understand what I went through.

    Men(and women too if you see what I see)take this pledge with me: “There is far too much violence, inequality, & disrespect shown to women in the forms of sexism, misogyny and more, around the world and it must stop NOW & I as a human being pledge to do what I can to that end.” -RNash

    I did have in the pledge “as a male Feminist” but thought some men would be turned off by a pledge with the word Feminist(not sure why, as I have been a Feminist since the 70s when trying help promote the passing of the ERA Amendment).

    F**K captcha!!!!!

    Mar 16, 2012 at 5:37 pm
  • Raymond

    Adia, there is an online video at PBS.org called Slavery By Another Name that brought tears to my eyes, as it was about the 13th Amendment and the exclusion of those convicted of crimes from slavery and involuntary servitude. Southern lawmakers found this Mack truck sized loophole and began to make laws against everything imaginable to give an excuse for arresting and convicting black men and women in a system that hired out these prisoners for their businesses and, of course, every black person arrested was found guilty, and given outrageous prison sentences for minor offenses, and oftentimes even though they served their sentences they were kept in prison. The whole thing was a farce to keep black people as slaves, only now they were legal slaves, due to the clause in the 13th Amendment. And many people only know of the Jim Crow laws, but yet all of this was going on since the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments passed. Watch the online video and cry as I did at the inhumanity done to these poor(direness of their imposed lives) black people. When I hear a racist ‘white’ person talk about, Hey, we gave you a black president didn’t we, or that there is this idea of ‘reverse racism’ against white folks, or racism isn’t a problem in this country, I want to bust them in the mouth. Also, do not be happy that you ‘feel’ you are treated as ‘good’ as a white woman, demand that you be treated better as a woman, since there is so much anti-woman rhetoric and anti-woman laws being considered right now. Sexism, misogyny, and disrespect for woman institutionally has to go in this society.

    Mar 16, 2012 at 6:02 pm
  • HJ


    Yes Slavery By Another Name describes terrible injustice (assuming all the sources are correct.) but it’s not relevant or evidence to whether institutional racism exists today.

    “When I hear a racist ‘white’ person talk about, Hey, we gave you a black president didn’t we, or that there is this idea of ‘reverse racism’ against white folks, or racism isn’t a problem in this country, I want to bust them in the mouth.”

    -To dimiss the election of Obama as not a big deal on the part of white people is just ignorance. I’m Korean, Japan did horrible things to Korea, they still try to whitewash the worst of what they did to us. You don’t see Japan electing any Korean prime ministers or doing some kind of equal gesture.

    All I’m saying is african-americans never seem to realize that when you take a look around the world there is no other minority that has suffered injustice anywhere else in the world that has been placated as much as African Americans. Turkey doesn’t apology incessantly or do anything to placate Armenians (who they tried to wipe out via genocide) they just deny it.

    -If there is racism against blacks why is it so hard to believe there can be racism against whites? Just because the past injustice against blacks is tremendous doesn’t mean we can just dismiss anything racist that happens to a white person. It just doesn’t work that way.

    Mar 19, 2012 at 12:11 am
  • get my ex boyfriend back

    I’m excited to find this website. I wanted to thank you for ones time for this particularly fantastic read!! I definitely enjoyed every bit of it and I have you book marked to check out new stuff on your website.

    Dec 30, 2012 at 9:45 pm

Loading Downloads