Better Patriarchy Through Chemistry (Updated: PDN Responds)

I shit you not. H/T to TheOtherDelphyne in comments at The Reclusive Leftist. Here’s the story. Here’s how this gem of a story starts out:

Among the world’s intelligence agencies, there’s a long tradition of using sex as a motivator.

But it goes on to report this additional outrage:

Such was the case with the 60-year-old chieftain who received the four  [Viagra] pills  from a U.S. operative. According to the retired operative who was there, the man was a clan leader in southern Afghanistan who had been wary of Americans — neither supportive nor actively opposed. The man had extensive knowledge of the region and his village controlled key passages through the area. U.S. forces needed his cooperation and worked hard to win it, the retired operative said.

After a long conversation through an interpreter, the retired operator began to probe for ways to win the man’s loyalty. A discussion of the man’s family and many wives provided inspiration. Once it was established that the man was in good health, the pills were offered and accepted.

Four days later, when the Americans returned, the gift had worked its magic, the operative recalled.

“He came up to us beaming,” the official said. “He said, ‘You are a great man.’ ”

“And after that we could do whatever we wanted in his area.”

So we’re basically supplying Viagra to old tribal chiefs with multiple wives so they can keep on violating women who are never given a choice in sexual matters. On the government dime, with their approval. And you still wonder if there is a god. If there is, he’s a dude, and he hates women too, ftr.

And the Washington Post reports this crap without even the hint of awareness about the women involved, how they might feel about powerful foreign agents supplying their “husbands” with the tools of rape. And I don’t know what else you’d call polygamy without choice but rape, institutional rape, specifically. How about that headline, huh? CIA Facilitates Institutional Rape in Afghanistan. Think you’ll ever see that headline? If you guessed no, you’d be right.

This ought to blow up right in their fat little faces, and it would, if American women gave a shit about the patriarchy they themselves live under. But they don’t. They ride happily along, buying every single diversionary tactic said patriarchy sets up. Ooooooh! Aaaaah! Lipstick feminists! You mean I get to participate in my own degradation and still call myself feminist? Cool! I don’t have to miss out on any of the fun now.

For the record, I wear lipstick and I like it. But I’m NOT stupid enough to believe institutional lies like this bullshit flying from the lipsticked mouths of moronic third wavers:

Not according to the American feminist Katie Roiphe. “I think the proper reaction to a beauty pageant these days is to be bored by it. I would have thought that old version of feminism, which was violently opposed to lipstick and high heels, had died out by now. It’s an extinct image of feminism — that you can’t be both frivolous and serious or care about clothes and read books at the same time. And, in a way, it’s sort of depressing that these same old-fashioned battles keep on being recycled.”

Can you just die already, you mindless vaginal bot? Please? Because I think the proper reaction to you replicating institutional/patriarchal memes is to be outraged by it. I also think the proper reaction to the CIA assisting institutional rape is to be outraged, and to get the fuck up off my chair and do something about it: write letters, physically protest the CIA, harass people with phone calls.

But why? No one will join me. Not a single blog out there that I’ve been reading for the past few months is even remotely on the right track, except maybe Reclusive Leftist, but then she’s so busy she’s become, well, reclusive. Half of them are fighting amongst themselves over some obviously emotionally-driven issues (take a step back, people, for fuck’s sake), buying the latest diversion (see Caroline Kennedy), or still propogating the kind of Republican-style hit jobs on Obama that where never going to work to begin with. Meanwhile, Summers got his job, and Favreau is still employed. The CIA is free to pass out little blue fuck pills so 60 year old Afghan patriarchs can screw their 19 year old wives, while third wavers are on the publicity march. Lovely way to end the year, don’t you think? Total apathy meltdown it is, then. Thanks for tuning in.

UPDATE: As you expected, The Progressive Dude Nation thinks the CIA handing out Viagra to Afghan warlords is a novel idea. Clever, says, Yglesias. Spencer Ackerman is very double entendre about the whole thing.


12 comments on “Better Patriarchy Through Chemistry (Updated: PDN Responds)

  1. Anna Belle says:

    Sorry about all the cussing, but sometimes you just gotta let loose. I am working on a couple of more analytical essays, including a piece on Mercy Otis Warren for later next week. The MOW piece will feature at The New Agenda first (before it is posted here) as part of a new twice-monthly column on Women’s History that I’ll be writing for them in the coming months.

  2. I decided to put that picture of Favreau on my blog, because I don’t want anyone to forget it.

  3. Anna Belle says:

    I saw that Kitty, and I was glad for it.

  4. Delphyne says:

    I’m glad you wrote about this, Anna Belle. It really does deserve to be forwarded far and wide. It’s horrifying that our government thinks it is okay to do this – and despite the “assurances” that the pills are not given to young men, you just KNOW that they are.

    I posted on RL along with Uppity and The Confluence – and you know that the PDN would be thinking that it is clever or making very poor double entendres. Idiots of the nth degree.

  5. madamab says:

    Great post…but Caroline Kennedy is not a distraction, Anna Belle. She is the female Obama and represents the further takeover of the Democratic Party by unqualified elitists.

    Moreover, we cannot afford to have a non-entity like her replacing Hillary Clinton. Senator Clinton is a huge advocate for women and reproductive rights. What would Caroline Kennedy do in her place? Who knows? It’s not as if we have a platform or a voting record to find that out.

    We need all the qualified females we can get in the Senate. Caroline Kennedy is not one of them.

  6. Anna Belle says:

    madamab, you and I will just have to (ironically) agree to disagree without being disagreeable on the issue of CK. While I agree she’s elitist and is using her celebrity to shoot to the front of the line, something I as a working class person for most of my life* find utterly onerous, she is a woman. As long we’re not considering what kind of woman it is until we’ve reached 30%, I find intellectual consistency disallows for much criticism of CK at this time. Such criticism is a distraction from the goal of the 30% solution, something I very much support (thanks to you, in particular). Speaking for myself only, of course.

    *I literally just joined the middle class last week. Yay me.

  7. madamab says:

    Hee! Congratulations, you middle-class working-class heroine you!

    As the person who created the name “The 30% Solution,” I must protest that there is no intellectual dishonesty in critiquing Caroline Kennedy. She is not running for any office and thus, we have no say in whether to vote for her or not. She is, however, insisting that she be installed in the seat over more qualified WOMEN like Caroline Maloney, Kirsten Gillibrand, Christine Quinn, Nydia Vasquez, etc. etc. etc., who have all been on the short list at one time. In addition, she is using her money and her famous name to step all over these women – and enlisting the aid of Mayor Bloomberg’s publicity team as well! Not. Cool.

    IF she were not so afraid of facing the voters of NY, and had the ovaries to actually RUN for the office, I might consider voting for her – especially if she were running against a man! But she has said she will not do such a plebeian and tawdry thing as knocking on doors and kissing babies. She either gets handed the office on a silver platter, or no Senator Caroline.

    So that’s my position. If you don’t agree, that’s cool with me.


  8. bluelyon says:

    Excellent post Anna Belle. Those comments over at Ezra Klein’s article were incredibly depressing. There are days, and they are becoming more frequent, when I just want to scream, “Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck!! Get a fucking clue, men! And if you can’t fucking do THAT, at least get that there is another pov that is not penis centric.”

  9. Anna Belle says:

    Thanks for clarifying your position, madam, but I must point out that I used the term “intellectual consistency” not “honesty.” I hope you don’t feel that I was accusing you or anyone else of dishonesty, because that was not my intent. I apologize if that wasn’t clearer.

    That said, of course I would prefer those other women get the job, and maybe they will. I have no idea. No one does right now, and until it is announced. But once the Kennedy news story came along, the Favreau issue was dropped. He still has a job, even though he was mimicking date-raping a sitting U. S. Senator and the future Secretary of State. I personally feel that is much more important issue, one that we could have organized around, beating a drum that could not have been ignored. We’re unfocused, and part of that is due to deliberate diversionary tactics. I don’t know if the Kennedy thing is deliberate or not, but it wouldn’t surprise me in the least.

    What that issue does is allow a lot of people who still have emotional burdens due to the election (honest burdens, of course) to get lost in the expression of that anger and frustration, instead of organizing for something that makes sense to people who don’t pay as much attention as folks like you and I do. What kind of control do we have with regard to the Kennedy issue? It’s Paterson’s call. We could have had the national stage and vindicated ourselves with a focus on an issue that people actually understood. The press was about to jump on it, but a catfight is always more interesting than actual justice, and that’s what this Kennedy issue amounts to–a catfight–in the eyes of the public. Certainly in the eyes of the press it is: Women pissed off over the advancement of a woman.

    Believe me, I understand the nuance of your position, but I still don’t agree with it in light of all this other stuff.

    Couldn’t agree more, as usual, BL! “Fuckity-fuck-fuck!’ is like a mantra in my head these days.

  10. Anna Belle says:

    Oh, about that middle class thing. I guess I should announce or something, right?

    I got hired on full-time at the college where I work. I am now full-time faculty, or will be next month, instead of adjunct. It almost didn’t happen, until I told my boss I had applied elsewhere, and upon hearing the news, the college offered me a job on the spot, offering me a lot more than I guessed they would. Yeah, that does feel good.

    But I’m still keeping that other interview. It’s tomorrow.

  11. bluelyon says:

    Congratulations! But yeah, always do the other interview.

  12. Anna Belle says:

    Thanks! I intend to, BL. But would you believe I’m so inexperienced at this crap that I actually had to call my mother and ask her advice? She advised as you did: always. It should have been obvious, but it wasn’t. Oh well. What can I say? I was head over for BENEFITS! Heh.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s