Are Some Radical Feminists Child Abusers?
I've wrestled with making this post, based upon a tip. I have no real connection to the people involved on either side of the issue. But given that this is linked to a radical feminist the Lefty blogs, including Amanda Marcotte, Majikthise, Feministing and others raised up to suit their purposes, I wonder, has any of them considered that basically teaching a young man he is evil and destined to rape women simply because he was born with a penis might actually rise to the level of child abuse? If the Lefty feminist blogs know this person and know her mind and this is it, I hope some of them have had the decency to advise her to get some help.
Should a Mother post something like this below on the Internet, simply because her teenage son was caught looking at Internet pornography?
"(I) hate myself for not pouring him down the sink at Planned Parenthood or grabbing a rusty coathanger and doing the job myself even if it killed me."
Or this and the other items below?
I've had him read Dworkin, my site, and other places (namely OAG's site) and I still can't unseat this problem. He can recite feminist literature all day long, he can understand the tenets, the ideas behind it, how it links together but he will not allow this knowledge to stand in the way of his porn use.
"I know, that as soon as my child leaves my home and moves into his own place that he will be looking at porn immediately. I know that I am raising a problem for women. I know that this child will one day grow and will fully absorb the messages that porn sends to men. I know that my child masturbates to degradation of my people (when I use that phrase I mean womyn) and that with every orgasm he will further solidify his own hatred of and superiority over, women.
"I know that there will likely come a day where my son coerces a young woman into sex (rape) and there isn't a damned thing I can do about it. I look into the eyes of my son and they still sparkle like they did when he was a baby, but he's not a baby anymore, he's growing into a man and that man will have trained himself to degrade women before he leaves my home.
Maybe you remember "Biting Beaver," a blogger who had her caused pushed by Amanda Marcotte and others. They even raised money for her.
Well, bad news, everyone. Biting Beaver, who was brave enough to tell us all her horror story about trying to obtain emergency contraception in rural Ohio but only being able to get it basically as the window of opportunity was closing, has discovered that she didn’t take the EC in enough time and she is indeed pregnant.
Update: For people who were asking if they could help Beaver out, she has a PayPal—check the comments here and look on Biting Beaver to get her email address. I would like to add that if you want to continue giving financially in this direction, there are thousands upon thousands of women in this country that need abortions a year and don’t have the money to pay for them.
Evidently there's a war going on around her "Women's Space" Why Men Hate Us
As of about 10:00 p.m. on the day of this post, there were three registered users on my Women’s Space/Margins boards, which women I care about and I created in 2000 and which have been a haven for all sorts of women since then. We’ve supported one another, been friends with one another, cared for one another there for seven years .
Allegedly it came about after posts like this were discovered:
writing about her teen-aged son -- because she caught him looking at Porn on the Internet:
But he is not and the way he treats his girlfriend, his sister, his grandmother, and myself make me hate myself for not pouring him down the sink at Planned Parenthood or grabbing a rusty coathanger and doing the job myself even if it killed me.
And unfortunately, it seems to mirror much of her other writing:
My boys are good boys, they're smart boys, but they are boys and as such, the Patriarchy want them. The Patriarchy is doing it's level-best to assimilate my boys and bring them into the folds of Male Power and Privilege and it's my job to put the spark of empathy, the fire of self-determination and respect into their young minds to make women safer. To make their wives and girlfriends and fuck buddies safe from them, because left unchecked they could rape, they already have the equipment.
Now, if only I can figure out what to say *sigh*


Can we send in troops to prevent gENDERcide?
Posted by: docweasel | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 07:45 PM
Bring body bags ... on, and probably paper ones, too, just sayin. Sad, though, really sad. Their own craziness will likely create the very monsters they fear in some cases.
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 07:57 PM
Holy hell. That woman has been through some sort of trauma and clearly is sick, to the point of mental illness. Frankly, the things she says suggest she has the potential to become a sociopath.
Very very troubling.
Posted by: QWowQ | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 07:58 PM
I wouldn't say anything to her; I'd find out her name and address and sic CPS on her. With her obvious issues (I'm being polite and not calling it psychopathy) about men, whe shouln't be raising boys (or girls) at all.
Posted by: bud | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 08:07 PM
One of the most hateful, hate-filled things I have ever read.
Poor woman doesn't ralize that boys are different from girls, she really believes the propaganda.
Pitiful, just pitiful.
Posted by: N. O'Brain | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 08:31 PM
This crazy woman is raising a future real-world Norman Bates. Poor kid doesn't have a chance.
Posted by: NSC | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 08:31 PM
Wow. Just wow. Those boys probably will grow up to become women haters, but their Mommies Dearest need only look in the mirror for the reason why. And, yes, it is most certainly abusive behavior as it's so very likely to result in (to have already resulted in?) psychological trauma for those boys. By all means, pass her name on to Child Protective Services in her state. Talk about your mother from hell…
On the other hand, here's hoping those boys find themselves a good woman to marry and have a family with, and let the old bat spend her golden years alone and shriveled.
Posted by: Appalled Mom | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 08:45 PM
We need to reinstate the draft. There is a whole generation of young boys like that out there and with all the anger and resentment they're repressing we can probably train them to do ANYTHING.
Posted by: richard mcenroe | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 09:01 PM
Mommy dear doesn't have a clue that junior is probably porking his girl friend as often as he can and just doing the porn and the strokes in between.
Just exactly how many times did mom have sex and what did she think about it.
Posted by: Observer | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 09:14 PM
"Just exactly how many times did mom"
You don't wanna go there, O. But if you do - you can find out via the links.
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 09:23 PM
Call me a woman however, I'm not buying the 'violent male' theory when orated by those who are capable of sucking out their own baby's brains.
I mean really, Medea's barbarism at her finest is nothing to be proud of.
Posted by: syn | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 10:19 PM
"That woman has been through some sort of trauma"
Not necessarily. Some people are just naturally twisted...and there are lots of feminist professors eager to help them down the path to evil.
Posted by: pst314 | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 10:26 PM
Imagine the conversations
MOM: "Hello honey, did you have a good day at school?"
KID: "Yes mom."
MOM: "You didn't RAPE anyone did you?"
KID: "No."
MOM (penetrating look) : "Are you SURE?"
KID: "Uh, yes, pretty sure. I asked Susi if she could lend me her maths book, does that count as rape?"
MOM: "It's a grey area, I'll have to check. It may be safest if you don't talk to girls at all. You're my son, and I love you more than anything on earth, but I have a responsibility to protect the broader community from your disgusting urges."
Yeah, that kid's going to grow up just fine. I like the title on her page, “Exposing the heart of the PATRIARCHY, and destroying it!!” The picture is of a beaver biting a wooden phallus, that picture gave me a hard-on.
Posted by: Amos | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 11:05 PM
Feminism at it's finest. I mean come on, this is what it's all about.
I'm sure the Feminist blogs are 100% in support of this.
Posted by: Jim Rockford | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 11:06 PM
She sounds like she desperately wants to castrate her son. Or kill him.
This is a more extreme version of it but a lesser general disgust with male sexuality is extremely pervasive today. I never plan to have kids unless I could do that gender sperm sorting thing at a fertility clinic since having a male child be born into todays world seems morally wrong.
Posted by: Saul Wall | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 11:27 PM
OK, this is funny....I tried to follow the link to the "Biting Beaver" site...and it was Websensed as "Tastless"
Your organization's Internet use policy restricts access to this web page at this time.
Reason:
The Websense category "Tasteless" is filtered.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL:
http://encyclopediadramatica.com/BitingBeaver
Posted by: rudytbone | Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 11:46 PM
Reading that was like going back to college. I don't miss it one bit. Hopefully those boys will meet some non man-haters before that old sow does too much damage.
Posted by: ck | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 12:01 AM
Someone needs to rescue that boy before she kills him in a fit of man-hate-rage.
Posted by: Jason Marshalls | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 01:19 AM
oh boy, i probably shouldn't put in my two cents on this one, but i will. i can actually see their concern about internet porn. for one thing, it's addicting and can mess with relationships. i don't think it causes rape, however i do think some of the severe stuff doesn't help someone on the edge. almost everytime they arrest a child molester or rapist, the cops find tons of porn. if the kid has a playboy under the mattress, that's normal. if he's looking at internet porn all the time, i'd be concerned. for me, i guess it would depend on what type of porn it was and how often he was looking, if that makes any sense. regardless, these women are still complete idiots. do they not have any common sense?
Posted by: tally | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 03:08 AM
it's one of the things that are *most* contemptible about liberals: their inability to make their politics subordinate to **anything**, even their own families. (well, they'll cut some slack for THEMSELVES, you understand, but nothing else)("sometimes i wish we'd have an epidemic that wipes out 95% of the mankind - not ME, of course - to save gaia from our brutal ravages").
so the feminist alleged human being discovers her son has turned out to be a male, despite her best efforts. ("i had him read dworkin")(she's lucky he didn't butcher her on the spot, just for that.)(that's all it would have taken for me to snap at that age.) but - but - but nothing has worked, and the demon testosterone now has him *lusting* after po' defenseless womyn and their precious sacred little twats, and she just KNOWS he's gonna act on this, and one fine day get himself laid. the horror! if the poor gal he'll despoil would just "read dworkin", she'd KNOW she was secretly being raped! that her enjoyment of the situation is just a patriarchical construct! a male lie!
so now, this woman - his own frickin' MOTHER - wishes she'd **killed him** back when he was defenseless, rather than let that happen.
so sorry for the inelegant phrasing, but liberals are *shit*. sorry, scummy, worthless, miserable, pathetic excuses for human beings. no other way to put it. let's hope the kid takes off as soon as he can, and never looks back. and his "mom" can burn in hell.
Posted by: bloodrage bob | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 04:01 AM
Are you so desperate for traffic you'd risk a libel suit to get there? Did your mother not love you enough, Dan?
Posted by: Amanda Marcotte | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 08:03 AM
Hey, Amanda, how's the job at the Edwards campaign going?
Oh, wait.....er......
Final question: any ultra-feminists who aren't butt-ugly & thus angry at men because the decent guys ignored them, leaving the dregs of society to be the only ones who'll ask them out? (not for the previous commenter. I'm all for easy pickings but, come on, that one's TOO easy.)
Posted by: RW | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 08:41 AM
Amanda:
Did your Daddy not tell you you were his princess enough?
Libel? Are you kidding me. I guess now in your twisted world view any one who has a different opinion is guilty of libel. Did "bitting beaver" post that her 15 year old son looked at porn and therefore would be better off dead? What we are not suppose to have a opinion?
My son, age 15, showed me beaver's post. It was linked in a gaming forum he visits. After we read it, which induced intermittent laughing and sighing, he said, "you know I love you very much." I guess nagging about wet towels on the floor and unmade beds doesn't seem all that bad now after reading beaver's brand of motherhood.
Posted by: Long Island | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 08:57 AM
"This blog is open to invited readers only"
Fascinating.
Posted by: Heather | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 09:06 AM
"Are you so desperate for traffic you'd risk a libel suit to get there? Did your mother not love you enough, Dan?"
Ironic you'd even mention "a Mother's love" given the subject. Do come back if you have anything substantive to say on the issue, or anything substantive at all, actually. Though ypou may want to read a law book, or two, first. Then see a psychiatrist to attempt to determine what sickness inside you it is that would allow you to ignore the sad and ultimately evil worldview expressed in the writing in question.
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 09:08 AM
Beyond believe! And parody. I suddenly feel very dirty. Amanda, you have sentenced yourself to perpetual absurdity. Libel? Go ahead and Sue-ee um that is, sue.
Posted by: ducktrapper | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 09:21 AM
Wow, took the presentable-challenged one only a few minutes to rush off a "my daddy was good to me" post after reading this, didn't it?
Talk about your obvious instances of psychological affirmation, projection and emotional need.....
Posted by: RW | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 09:46 AM
You know what's ironic? The woman's suppression of her own son's sexuality, her treating that boy (and her others) as if all they are, as if their sole point of reference, is as a life support system for a penis is probably responsible for the kid's drive to fulfillment through porn anyway. The focus of my existence at 14 was my models, my airplanes, my bicycle and the other creative outlets my parents nutured and focused on. This woman browbeats her children with the message that everything in their life must be viewed as if corerced at the end of a penis, then they are surprised at the kid's headlong dive into a sexually focused existence.
And Amanda, don't blow smoke up anyone's asses here. Biting beaver knows she wrote that stuff, she knows its bad. She will not file a "libel" suit, because the judicial/jury determination of the "truth" of the matter asserted will be evidence of record when her ex husband shows up with his domestic lawyer to get that boy out of the abusive psychotic environment old 'beaver has created for her kids.
Posted by: Holy Moly | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 10:14 AM
Libel = quoting people accurately. Thanks, Amanda. Glad that's cleared up.
Posted by: Techie | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 10:29 AM
Hmm...I grew up a few years ago, but I do remember one of the finest things that could happen to the group of 13-14 yr. old boys I hung(no pun intended) out with was for one of the older brothers of the group to give us a Playboy. I readily admit I looked at the pictures of those fine women. But do I look at porn now? No. Looking at that stuff at that age is only natural curiosity, and hardly qualifies as anything unusual. It's all a part of growing up. That old bitch known as Biting Beaver needs to get a normal life.
Posted by: templar knight | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 10:31 AM
"Are Some Radical Feminists Child Abusers?"
Uh, yeah, probably. Lots of different kinds of people are child abusers -- being an asshole certainly crosses ideological lines. But taking one post from one anonymous radical feminist and using it to indict feminists across the board is intellectually lazy and, frankly, pretty pathetic. The "feminists are ugly bitches" line that has shown up so many times in this comment section is also pretty tired.
You know what is correlated with family violence? Traditional views of women and our roles in society. Patriarchal leadership. Male dominance. Again, people of all stripes hurt their family members, but people who have the view that men are in charge and women should be subservient -- in other words, people who tend to lean socially conservative -- tend to be the ones who hit their partners and their children. Perhaps you should take a look around your own circles before you start indicting someone over a blog post.
And like Amanda said, this is a libel suit waiting to happen.
Posted by: Jill | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 10:51 AM
So sad.... Emasculating boys like that is the sort of thing that turns one into a rapist. Not the date rape kind, which would be the feminist stereotype overmasculine, I'll have my way with you sort, but the real twisted serial types that make for interesting movies and Law and Order episodes.
These women are raising what they fear, through their actions, not the penis bearers.
Posted by: ef | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 10:51 AM
Jill,
SO you resent being dumped into the same category as B_B's abhorrent comments, but you defend her anyway. And you think its off limits for people to be critical of the feminist bloggers who raised money for this woman even as she sat there describing her unborn as a "parasite" and fantasized that thinking negative thoughts might permit her to force a miscarriage? And WE are in the wrong?
One of the consistent problems with zealots of any stripe is that their maniacal focus on the perception of evil all around them. One of the weirdo philosophers once said that when you stare into the Abyss it stares into you.... Well, in this case, its going to be a self fulfilling prophecy.
This woman is fucking up those boys. By telling them that it is inevitable that they will be monstrous rapists, that their very maleness makes it so, and that any act of sex between a man and a woman is functionally and morally equivalent to rape, she is so skewing their perceptions as to create the very evil she claims to fear.
If that boy is brainwashed into thinking all sex is rape and thus abhorrent, then the "line" no longer exists to be crossed. He forfeits his mother's love for merely having healthy consensual sex with his girlfriend -- she says he's a monster if he does that... Well, then, if he's already a monster in his own mind at even that level, what is to stop him from taking a woman and locking her in the basement in "rub the lotion on its skin" fashion? By deconstructing any moral difference between consensual and brutally non-consensual sex, this deluded "feminist" has potentially crafted and nurtured the very lack of moral boundaries that defines a sociopath.
She made this boy's existence about nothing other than sexuality, and he's running with that in the only way he knows how. How sad that a chemistry set or a telescope at this point would be too late.
Posted by: Holy Moly | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 11:26 AM
"But taking one post from one anonymous radical feminist and using it to indict feminists across the board is intellectually lazy"
Uh, Jill - "I" didn't do that. I posed an open question and rather than acknowledge anything about the issue, feminists in the form of Amanda and now you simply attacked and started foolishly throwing the "L" word around. So glad to see how much you care about the children in this one - NOT!
Were you as responsible as you suggest, you could have simply made a post denouncing this. Instead, you attacked me and circled the wagons around what looks like a true head case destined to poison some number of young male minds, unleashing God knows what on that which you claim to defend - women.
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 11:29 AM
...did you really just wrote "-NOT!"?
Welcome to the playground, Dan.
I know we've argued before, and every time I am thoroughly stunned by just how childish and moronic a grown man can be. So I'm not going to engage this any further. Have fun beating up your straw-women.
Posted by: Jill | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 12:13 PM
Oh. My. Word. Jill.
Honey I've been there, done that feminist thingy and honestly it appears to me that the only people who believe in that 'men are in charge and women should be subservient' mental madness are progressive feminists who need to project their own inadequacies in life and radical Islamists who consider females dirty dog.
Unlike you, I am a woman who has long since moved on from the perspective that I surely must be subservient since I am a woman.
Feminism: an ideal come and gone yet kept alive by drama queens dwelling in tragedy.
Posted by: syn | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 12:19 PM
Seems like the "strong women" always claim victimhood and run for cover, don't they?
*****but people who have the view that men are in charge and women should be subservient****
"You might want to put some ice on that". Ring a bell?
Besides, we all can see the crime statistics and know where the violent crime areas of our country are: the blue counties. Perhaps it's because libs are too busy coddling criminals?
Posted by: RW | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 12:20 PM
What a disgusting "womyn" this Beaver chick is.
No man in his right mind would want to marry such a murderous shrew as her, and it isn't a wonder that those sons of her don't grow up to be as truly sociopathic as she is.
Posted by: seekeronos | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 12:21 PM
"I'm not going to engage this any further"
Um, Jill - you never engaged the basic issue at all in the first place, let alone to any depth. Just be grateful I gave you a hook to hang your "runaway, runaway, I can't face the facts" BS on ... Dear. ; ) Though you would have found one, anyway, no doubt. You can't defend the indefensible, so you attack the messenger. How ... charming of you.
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Hmmm.
When that poor kid grows up and realizes what a crazy person his mother is he'll either cut off all contact with her or commit her to an asylum.
And if he has a son he'd be dumb as a box of rocks to let her within 10 miles of the kid.
Posted by: memomachine | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 01:05 PM
Jill may not agree w/ this crazy woman (womyn?), but she'll never say it. To do so would be to attack a fellow gender-warrior, and that would play right into the Patriarchy's hand.
Posted by: Techie | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 01:06 PM
Techie,
I think 'womon' is the word you're looking for. 'Womyn' is (I think, again) plural.
And don't ask me how I know.
Posted by: Chris of Dangerous Logic | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 02:55 PM
um, chris and technie? nobody actually uses the words womyn or womon. just fyi.
And I believe Jill did come out and state her disagreement with this woman -- she called her an asshole. Unless asshole is a term of endearment in the riehl world (I'm new here, and things here do seem to defy logic), then I believe that's disagreement.
Posted by: elyzabethe | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 03:14 PM
"state her disagreement with this woman"
She stated nothing directly, except that assholes come in many kinds. Gee, that's news. And her equating a political movement with how one sees male / female relationships is either an unserious, superficial, or simply radical feminist view. By defnition, all conservative women are subserviant to men in her logic. Clearly she hasn't met many of them. One to one, I'd wager they are far stronger and more indepenent than the average liberal woman, truth be told.
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 03:21 PM
In earlier times, womon (heh) such as Biting Beaver were usually sequestered in asylums when exhibiting such behavior that put their offspring at risk. Of course, this was during the times of recognizable patriarchy, when men wouldn't put up with their sons being poisoned by the deranged actions of their womonfolk.
Today, most of the asylums are history and the mental health facilities still in existence wouldn't consider such a case worthy of their time or patience. At any rate, the batshit behavior exhibited by Biting Beaver is considered nowadays to be normal and protected by the feminist groups who share similar conditions. Meanwhile, legions of young men held in the crossfire of these womyn's rage and anger will grow to be mentally and emotionally dysfunctional creatures who will either self-terminate themselves or be removed from society after fulfilling the very prophecies embedded into them by the very womyn who raised them.
And God help us all if they stumble upon Islam as a way to reclaim the manhood stripped of them by these womyn. If there is ever a growing trend for disaffected males to turn to the Religion of Peace in lieu of a patriarchal figure, the feminists will be responsible for condemning their fellow womynfolk to a religion which views them in the same regard that the womyn viewed the "evil rapist" men.
Just notice how Islamic cultures don't have the "rabid feminist" problem. And there is a very good reason for that.
Posted by: John Williams | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 03:32 PM
I don't think "Biting Beaver" is the same person who did the "Why Men Hate Us" post. The latter appears to be by some rather self-important nitwit calling itself "Heart".
Jill makes a valid point that she's hardly obligated to police and denounce every offensive post by everyone she's ever linked to. But if she really thinks this is a libel suit waiting to happen, she may want to go back over her notes from first-year torts.
Posted by: Josh | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 03:57 PM
Dear god almighty ... that woman is a fucking NUTJOB! If her son ever reads his mother's idiotoc crap, would society blame him or his mother if he threw her off a bridge? This woman is far more fundamentalist than any evangelical anti-porn crusader I know.
Posted by: MisterPundit | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 05:21 PM
"he's growing into a man and that man will have trained himself to degrade women before he leaves my home."
No, you idiot ... YOU, yes YOU, would have trained him to degrade woman. Given the fact that you were his feminine role-model while growing up, I would be astonished if his impression of woman in general is that they are sane, loving individuals. Sheesh!
Posted by: MisterPundit | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 05:27 PM
amanda and jill have no fear, my penis will NEVER come near you
Posted by: charles | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 06:09 PM
"Unless asshole is a term of endearment in the riehl world"
mmmmmm,,, sometimes
Posted by: charles | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 06:10 PM