PunkAssBlog.com

One of the many many things lost within the whole sportset hoo-haa and the subsequent metacommentary on arguements themselves, is that the advert for the sportset is yet another piece of definative proof for the existence of the “blaming lobe”, as all peice of propaganda for the patriarchy are.

Now the importance of the blaming lobe to feminists should be obvious, because it provides a physical source for the way everyone blames the patriarchy, and make no mistake, I mean everyone, from the most hardcore radfem to the most hardcore rapist - none are free from the power of the blaming lobe to urge people to examine their lives for patriarchal oppression.

We know everyone blames because, since time immemorial the patriarchy has used some version of this empowerment culture that all you crusty geezers are chatting about these days.

And the reason that proves the existence of the blaming lobe is simply thus: the empowerment culture is a direct result of everyone’s innate propesnity to blame, turned towards the ends of patriarchy.

Now let me just stop a second before continuing on and explaining my point in detail, so as to avoid a really stupid arguement I see looming upon the horizon.
In a second I will place rape apologising within the whole empowerment culture. Now do not get me wrong, I am not placing rape on the same level of moral repugnancy as sportset or high heels, and while it may cause many to go “pfft” for me to point this out so plainly, several hundred comments might have gone by in which everyone tlaked over each other’s heads over the idea that I just compared wearing a sportset to rape and placed them as equivalent and equal if I did not put this disclaimer in.

Having said that, allow me to continue.

Now the reason I say that all pieces of patriarchal propaganda prove the existence of the blaming lobe is simplly that every bit of such propaganda, on one level or another, overtly, covertly and with a plank in its pants, attempts to subvert the natural habit of people to blame the patriarchy by pushing ostensibly feminist ideas with patriarchal ones.

The most extreme example of this is of course, acidic vagina washes and those nasty starch based “tightening & drying” powders.

Now many of you are no doubt thinking: “MmNuh!?…The FUCK you talking about R? There’s nothing feminist about lysol douches! And there’s certainly nothing empowering about them. This time you have gone too far, surely.”

But alas, you assume that the blaming lobe works on an obvious and entirely concious level.

Think about it for second; a douche ad sells, on the obvious level, the idea that women’s vaginas are, by default, nasty, icky, disgusting, smelly and six kinds of nasty, and the douche, which just happens to be acidic in nature, alleviates this problem. The rationale behind Female fenital mutilation is very similar actually, i.e. many of the women who have had it done to them - usually by other women (often their close female relatives) - often talk about how women who do not have it done to them are “unclean” and/or “dirty”.

but think about those ads on a slightly deeper level; the ad also sells the idea that a woman would want to buy this product, because she wants “her man” to find her vagina not icky, and deign to thrust into it in a manner that she finds pleasurable. Now considering that the cunticide wash ads existed from the 19th century, when women were of course not meant to wnat sex, right up to the period when good women were not supposed to want sex, and these products have always been aimed at those good women. Yet the very concept of the product relies on the basic idea that women want sex, to the point where they will actually wash their tubes (which, I hasten to add, are not like a truck) with acid to stop the nasty ickiness of their hoo-haa-dillies putting men off from acting up those good women.

Now when the dominant patriarchal paradigm is saying that women do not want sex, what could be more feminist than something that says “you want sex, and that’s why you, and most other women, will buy me”?

Well, the first thing that comes to mind is “something that doesn’t involve ingraining into us the idea that our cunts are inherently nasty to the degree that they need to be rinsed out with acid” obviously…

You see, while the blaming lobe is, on the one hand, powerful, it is on the other hand, unless one is properly trained in its use, easily bamboozled by some token blaming that is used to get across the idea of soemthing deeply patriarchal, which prompts the blaming lobe to think “there is patriarchy being blamed here already, pass friend” and let the nastier ideas go straight through without criticism of those aspects of it.

The same thing is happening wiht the sportset, though it is not as obvious as with cunticide squirters.

Go back and look at the ad twisty put a pic up for ridicule.

what jumps out about it? Well first thing is probably the fact that the woman wearing the sportset is “sexy”, in that horribly generic way all advert models are, which of course is the point of corsets; to make the women wearing the things look generically sexy in a patriarchal sort of way, now this gets the blaming lobe riled up at first but, just as the blamedar gets a lock, the sportset lets off a round of chaff in the form of the woman in the ad being active, which disrupts the lock.

Now you may not be too clear what sort of difference that makes to your blaming lobe but here’s how it works:

First of all, the acceptable form generic patriarchal sexiness takes is of course one in which men are active and women are passive, that’s the way it works under patriarchy, a sexy woman is never an active woman, your blaming lobe knows this, it has witnessed it your entire life and blames the patriarchy with all its might, so when it sees this ad it goes “thank fuck, my job here is done, the Sportset is A-OK” because what you have here is something that, on the one hand, makes a woman “sexy” in a patirarchal manner, but allows her to be sexy at the same time, and that conflation between sexiness and activity confuses the blaming lobe of the inexperienced blamer enough for the idea of the sportset to seem acceptable and good.

Of course the blaming lobe, unless exercised regularly, will not realise that the accurate version of the ad would actually show a woman who’s out of breath and gasping for air because she’s wearing a contraption designed to halve her lung capacity.

but do not think that only women have the blaming lobe! Oh no, men have it too, even rapists have a small part of their brain that says “I blame the patriarchy!” whenever they have sex with a woman who keeps telling them no. We know they do because of their justifications for their rape, justifications such as “she was asking for it” or “no doesnt always mean no”, now these justifications are designed to imply that the woman they just forced themselves upon really wanted to have sex with them. Now like the cuntwash ad, this implies that not only do women want sex, contrary to what the patriarchy wants eveyrone to believe, but possibly even that the men were doing exactly what the women wanted them to do, after all, women have been told all their life that they can’t really want to have sex, so obviously they’d say no, just as they’ve been taught to.

And remember, while this seems really stupid, men really buy this because no one’s blaming lobe is as close to atrophy as most men’s are.

Now obviously, I’m not really saying that people have an extra section of their brain that handles nothing but patriarchy blaming, but the simple fact of the matter is that , not only is the whole “empowerment culture” not new, it predates even the start of the “sexual revolution” in the 1910s and 20s, in fact the sexual revolution of hte 60s was another form of this empowerment culture, as women’s sexuality was liberated - and then promptly co-opted by hippies as a way to secure blowjobs for themselves.

the reason for the ubiquitousness of this empowerment phenomena in patriarchy is because, when it comes right down to it, libertarians are so wrong it’s not even funny, far from being highly idividualistic creatures, we’re social animals to a fault, and a major part of any social creature of our complexity is that we know when we’re bieng screwed over, and know when we’re being cheated - it’s neccesary for social interactions and being able to reach agreements - so oppressive systems have to give up something, or appear to us like they’re giving something up, to get us to go along with them.

Well DUH! Why one earth would anyone agree to oppress themselves if they weren’t going to get something out of it really?

And so even Dawn Eden thinks that she’s “empowered” by that modesty crap and a careful denial of her sexuality and the denial of every other woman’s sexuality, because she thinks that by doing so she’ll get her “get out of rape free” card - that she won’t doesn’t matter, the stupid are always going to be just as happy with the illusion of empowerment as they would be with real empowerment.

It’s easier to maintain a dream of a thing than the thing itself, because you’re never disappointed, no matter how screwed over you are by your dream, it’s always enough, because it’s your dream, it, by definition, cannot disappoint.

But a life without disappointments, or flaws or criticism or being wrong now and again and learning experiences isn’t a life - it’s just a dream.

But even the nicest dream gets boring after a while, and if you dream too long your muscles stop working, and then you’ll never get yourself out of bed.

And it’s really past time to get up and blame the patriarchy folks.