No use trying to “Lean In” — the pay gap is real


Welp, looks like one more sexist canard just bit the dust. When even the Torygraph is reporting this, you KNOW the gender gap in pay is real…and it’s the product of rampant sexism:

The research, from the University of Wisconsin in the US and the University of Warwick and Cass Business School in the UK, looked at 4,600 Australian employees and found there was “no difference” between the genders when it came to asking bosses for more money.

“We didn’t know how the numbers would come out. Having seen these findings, I think we have to accept that there is some element of pure discrimination against women,” study co-author Andrew Oswald, a professor of economics and behavioural science at the University of Warwick, told the Guardian.

He explained that researchers chose to look at data from Australia because it’s the only place in the world that currently collects such data.

The gender pay gap in Australia is about 17 per cent, slightly lower than the 19 per cent gap in the UK.

This study suggests that the pay gap does not exist because women are not as ambitious or as confident as men in asking for more money – but due to some form of discrimination.

So, there you have it. The pay gap is real, and exists even in places like Australia, where it’s not so bad as elsewhere (and where the government is actually bothering to collect that data)!

As for “some form of discrimination”, let’s spell it out for the Torygraph, whose editors can’t seem to handle such words without donning a hazmat suit: S-E-X-I-S-M. (You’re welcome!)

Now, everyone can stop accusing women of lacking assertiveness, and we can all trash any copies of “Lean In” we had kicking around. Time to organize and fight, not negotiate singly and in vain!

Posted in Crapagandarati, Economics for Dummies, Filthy Stinking Rich, If You REALLY Care, Isn't That Illegal?, Men Who Just Don't Get It, Merry Old England, Oceania, The "Well, DUH!" Files, The United States of Amnesia, Uppity Wimmin | Comments Off on No use trying to “Lean In” — the pay gap is real

Quotable: Martha Gellhorn on politics


Posted in Quotable Notables, Uppity Wimmin | Comments Off on Quotable: Martha Gellhorn on politics

Why Robin Camp needs to go

If you ever wondered whether a so-called “independent judiciary” is really such a great thing as it’s cracked up to be, you might want to bear in mind how independent it really is not. And how it treats those of us with the least amount of political, social and economic clout. Case in point: Robin Camp, and an unnamed young woman he gratuitously told off from his bench:

An alleged rape victim asked by a judge why she did not close her knees for protection says the question made her hate herself.

“He made comments: Why didn’t I close my legs or knees or put my ass in the sink. What did he get out of asking those kinds of questions? What did he expect me to say to something like that,” the 24-year-old woman said, her voice breaking, to a hearing before a panel of the Canadian Judicial Council.

Well, in answer to her (probably rhetorical) questions, I have a fair idea of what he got out of asking those idiotic questions: He got a feeling of immense, self-righteous power over a helpless victim. Just like the man who raped her no doubt did. He got reinforcement of his droit du seigneur, so to speak. In other words: He got a big, fat, patriarchal boner. A shot in the arm of machismo.

As to what he expected her to say: Nothing. Nothing at all. Women are supposed to be seen and not heard, didn’t you know, Jane Doe? We’re supposed to be ornamental, not useful. The Sylvia Plath poem above is an extreme, poetically-imaged case, but nevertheless it’s accurate. We revolve in a sheath of impossibles, all right. We’re supposed to be virtuous, and if we are, we will not need to fight. A simple clapping-shut of knees will do! And since this particular woman is a Cree, and was just 19, homeless, and hooked on drugs at the time of the assault, she could not be more powerless in the eyes of Canadian law. His inane question was meant to do nothing but drive home to her the fact that she has no power except the feeble effort it takes to make herself “virtuous”. And men have it all, from the one who raped her literally in the sink to the one who raped her metaphorically from the bench.

But perhaps I’m being too harsh on Hizzoner? After all, the man has a daughter…

Justice Camp, 64, is a married father of three, including one daughter, Lauren-Lee Camp, who attended the hearing with her mother. In a letter of support heard on Tuesday, Ms. Camp said her father’s comments were “disgraceful” and wounded her deeply – because she herself was a rape victim. But in a letter to the panel, she said her father “tackled his disgrace directly” and “now speaks with a new kind of sensitivity and understanding.”


Ms. Camp, a published novelist, said her father is “the opposite of the insensitive, sexist brute caricatured in the media these past few months. … He is not an oaf, woman hater or a misogynist. He is staggered by the mistakes he made and is diligently examining his beliefs in an effort to improve his ability to be a judge.”

She said that she was raped several years ago in her home by someone she knew, but did not press charges – fearing the court process would be traumatic. “When I told Robin what had happened, he was gentle and helpful. He ensured I knew my options and empathized with me. He encouraged me to work with a psychologist to help me decide how I wanted to proceed. Although I’m sure he was disappointed with my decision to not press charges, I know he understood how traumatic it would have been for me to take the case to court.”

Well, that’s lovely. But having a daughter who was herself raped does not make a man a feminist. It does not unmake centuries of patriarchy and purdah overnight. It does nothing at all to deconstruct a system of power which is inherently sexist and violent, one which sexualizes violence, and violates sexuality, as a matter of obscene routine. It merely gives one man excuses to continue to exercise that unrightful power from the bench. And it’s especially awful when the excuses are being offered from the mouth of his own daughter. Because that’s what internalized patriarchy looks like.

“He made me hate myself and he made me feel like I was some kind of slut,” the complainant testified. “I felt ill and dizzy and I hoped I would faint just so he would stop. I was so confused during the trial.” She said she worries other victims who read about Justice Camp’s comments will not come forward.

She is right to worry. Other women who hear or read remarks like those DO not come forward, all the time. When I was raped, I did not come forward, because I already knew what I could expect to hear. Words maybe not exactly the same as those, but to the exact same face-slapping effect: You’re a slut. You should have known he would do this, because he’s a man and that’s his right. What did you expect? Respect? You don’t deserve any, girlie, because you’re just a female. And that’s why you have to work ten times as hard to earn it, and still should expect to have whatever you worked for yanked out from under you at any time. Whereas I, a learned judge, have the right to say whatever disrespectful shit I want, and even if I’m put under the microscope, I’ll still get to keep my job, because I know the right things to say and can even get my own daughter to say them for me. Because I’m a man, and that’s my right. I was appointed by men, to uphold laws written by men, for men. And I mean to keep doing so, and making it look like I’m being fair and unbiased even when I’m not.

And that is how systemic injustices get perpetuated, ad infinitum et ad nauseam. This is why judges — appointed by a male-dominated government — are so damn dangerous. This is why he must go. And why the system that churns out men like him must go, too.

Any questions?

Posted in Canadian Counterpunch, Human Rights FAIL, If You REALLY Care, Law-Law Land, Men Who Just Don't Get It, Teh Injunz, Uppity Wimmin | Comments Off on Why Robin Camp needs to go

Brock Turner finally starts doing some real time

Bawwwww, my heart bleeds. Now he’s about to start facing a small, SMALL fraction of the stigma his victim will be feeling for the rest of her life.

Looks good on you, asshole.

Posted in Law-Law Land, Men Who Just Don't Get It, Schadenfreude, The United States of Amnesia | Comments Off on Brock Turner finally starts doing some real time

Quotable: Lawrence O’Donnell on the crackdown against indigenous protests

PS: The UN apparently agrees with O’Donnell. From the AP wires:

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe must have a say with regard to a $3.8 billion oil pipeline that could disturb sacred sites and impact drinking water for 8,000 tribal members, representatives of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues said Wednesday.

In a statement, the forum’s chairman Alvaro Pop Ac called on the U.S. to provide the tribe a “fair, independent, impartial, open and transparent process to resolve this serious issue and to avoid escalation into violence and further human rights abuses.”

Dalee Dorough, an Inuit member of the forum, which provides representation at the world body for indigenous peoples around the globe, said failure to consult with Sioux over the project violated the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Article 19 of the declaration, which the U.S. endorsed in 2010, says:

“States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them.”

“There has been a lack of good faith consultation with the indigenous people who will more than likely be impacted,” Dorough said in telephone interview from Anchorage, Alaska. “The U.N. declaration is fundamental because President Obama pronounced support for it and that they haven’t been consulted consistent with the rights of that declaration is highly problematic.”

Human rights abuses have already been documented as private security forces have set dogs on the indigenous protesters, as seen on Democracy Now!:

I can only conclude that the white supremacism of the colonial era has never ended. It is very much alive and all too well.

Posted in Quotable Notables, Teh Injunz, The United States of Amnesia | 1 Comment

Bare breasts and burkinis: The hypocrisies of Manuel Valls and France


“Liberty Guiding the People”, by Eugène Delacroix, 1830. This image has been often conflated with that of Marianne, an allegorical figure representing the French Republic, who is typically not shown with bare breasts. And she has also been misused recently by a certain French prime minister, who has seized this image to beat up on women who dare to bathe in modest, head-covering swimwear. Aude Lorriaux, writing for the French edition of Slate, takes him to task:

French prime minister Manuel Valls, who was in a meeting at Colomiers on Monday, August 29, made a declaration much discussed on social media and in the press:

“Marianne has bare breasts because she feeds the people, she isn’t veiled because she is free! That’s what the Republic is!”

With these declarations, the prime minister contrasts the freedom of bare-breasted women, represented by Marianne, to the supposed absence of freedom of veiled women, subjected to an authoritarian ideology.

That’s false from a historical point of view, as historian Mathilde Larrère remarked during a much documented tweet-story, wherein she explains that Marianne is an allegory of the Republic, and has nothing to do with women’s freedom. If they chose a woman to represent the Republic, it was to create “a counterweight to masculine representations of kings”. Claiming that Marianne is free because she is bare-breasted, the historian explains, is to forget that the century of Marianne, the 19th, was also the “century of the Civil Code, which reduced women to the status of minors and forbade them the vote”.

But it’s also a form of political instrumentalization, a swindle full of lies. Manuel Valls makes it seem that he is defending the right of women to show their bare breasts, since the 5th Republic has never condemned bare-breasted women for “sexual exhibition” except under his leadership.

This crime, let us recall, punishes women who want to bare their torsos when it’s hot outside, since men are never bothered when their shirts come off. The penal code specifies, as well:

“Sexual exhibition, imposed upon the gaze of others in an area accessible to the public eye, is punishable by a year’s imprisonment, and a 15,000 euro fine.”

The law does not specify what are “sexual” parts, and whether they are different for men and women, but in practice, the courts have never condemned men for exhibiting their torsos. It’s always been women who were guilty. And the local laws, in general, are more explicit.

At Paris beaches, bathing suits are allowed, but the monokini is strictly forbidden, and considered a sexual exhibition. The regulations of Paris swimming pools also clearly forbid bare breasts. The women of the Les Tumultueuses collective, who tried to bathe bare-breasted at the Georges Vallerey pool in 2009 to protest that ban, were able to prove it, since they were forced out of the pool by gendarmes after just one quarter of an hour.

In 1965, a bare-breasted woman playing ping-pong on the beach was prosecuted and sentenced. Years later, there was still no change in judicial prosecutions. But these recent years have been particularly prolific with regard to a sort of return to moral order, principally against Femen militants who demonstrate bare-breasted.

Éloïse Bouton was sentenced in December 2014 under this law to a month in prison with reprieve for having protested in this manner in the church of the Madeleine. A Ukrainian militant, Iana Zhdanova, was sentenced the same year to a 1,500-euro fine. And three other Femen members were prosecuted for the same reason in Lille in 2015, before being let go. The “Hommen”, male militants opposed to marriage who demonstrate bare-chested, have never themselves been bothered.

Maître Marie Dosé, Iana Zhdanova’s lawyer, presented a prioritized constitutional question on the matter before the Paris court of appeal, which will be examined in October 2016. She maintains that the fact of prosecuting bare-torsoed women, and not men, constitutes a breach of equality of men and women in the eyes of the law.

Why, in fact, consider women’s breasts as sexual parts, and not the torsos of men, who often like to be caressed there? This cliché, that breasts are a particularly erogenous zone for women, has been recently swept away by a scientific study, which asked men and women to note on a scale of 1 to 10, the intensity of sexual excitement created by 41 zones of their bodies. The result appears to show no fundamental difference between men and women. The primary erogenous zones are situated in the same places for both sexes: penis and testicles for men, clitoris and vagina for women.

Women have certainly given higher marks than men to other zones, such as “the back, the nape of the neck, the hips, the inner thighs, the mouth and lips, the shoulders, the belly and the wrists”. But just think — the top of the nape got a higher mark than the breasts (7.5 vs. 7.3). Should one thus conclude that women must cover up their napes, and that exposing them to men’s eyes constitutes a sexual exhibition?

If Manuel Valls really thinks that bare breasts are a symbol of the freedom of women, which they don’t have, let’s take him at his word, and demand of him to apply in fact a strict equality between men and women. He doesn’t have to do anything but imitate New York City, which has allowed bare breasts since 1992, in amending the laws about sexual exhibition. And to send, in addition, an instruction to prosecutors that they cease to prosecute bare-breasted women. After all, the five-year term in which he has been exercising his functions is now the one that has been most condemned by women who dared to show their breasts.

Translation mine.

Goodness gracious me, what a can of worms this opens up! I’m going to have to stop wearing my hair in ponytails, braids or buns on hot days, as it exposes my very tender, very erogenous nape to the elements…and men’s rapacious eyes! No, better to just leave it all hanging in a frizzy, sweaty cloud. Of course, since my hair is long, thick and curly, it’s going to be hotter than Hades, and prickly and uncomfortable. But if that’s what I must do in order not to be arrested for sexual display, well, so be it — right?

And if the above sounds ludicrous to you, well, consider the implications. Women in burkinis veil themselves (and their napes!) for the same reason, when you get right down to it, as women who don’t dare wear monokinis even though they get the steaming boob-sweats in the dog days, and end up longing for cold weather just to see an end of the torment.

The reason? Male sexual harassment.

Yes, mes ami(e)s, that’s right — the women of France, Muslim and otherwise, are all subject to the same basic sexist undercurrent. Male sexual harassment is, ironically, as much at work when a gendarme forcibly strips a Muslima of Algerian extraction on the beach as when he forces a bare-breasted secular Frenchwoman to put on a bikini top. For if the women’s dress (or lack thereof) is being noticed to such a degree that it can be prosecuted, what is that if not the Male Gaze going into hyperdrive? And what is prosecution of women violating a dress code, if not male sexual harassment sanctioned by the state?

And if it’s okay to arrest women for dressing too modestly, or not modestly enough, let’s start arresting men for walking around shirtless — or conversely, for wearing long Arab-style robes, such as a dishdasha, a djellaba, or a kaftan — in summer, too. After all, male chests are sexy! And male modesty for religious reasons is so oppressive!

Notice how that never happens, in France or anywhere? Aha!

No, Manuel Valls, the women of France are not free. The secular as well as the Muslim women are oppressed by your silly dress codes, which sexualize regions of the body which would not be seen as sexual unless centuries of the Male Gaze had been trained upon them, and centuries of stupidity (reinforced by church and state alike) had made them so. And the solution to the dilemma is not to force anyone to cover up, or to strip, depending on what she is wearing or not wearing. The solution is to lay off and let women wear what they want to wear, however they want to wear it, and start prosecuting real crimes…of which there are sadly no shortage, in France or anywhere.

Posted in Artsy-Fartsy Culture Stuff, Cops Behaving Badly, Fascism Without Swastikas, Human Rights FAIL, Isn't It Ironic?, Law-Law Land, Men Who Just Don't Get It, Morticia! You Spoke French!, Pissing Jesus Off, Uppity Wimmin | 1 Comment

Music for a Sunday: The arrangement’s not quite there

Summer’s not gonna be around much longer. Better grab your pink surfboards and parasols while you can…

Posted in Music for a Sunday | Comments Off on Music for a Sunday: The arrangement’s not quite there

Wankers of the Week: Stand up for WHAT?

Crappy weekend, everyone! Well, how about that Colin Kaepernick? I don’t follow football, being a sports agnostic of sorts, but everywhere I looked, there he was, and there was also some asshole claiming he didn’t have a right to do what he in fact had a perfect right to do. And moreover, he was right, so…suck it, haters. And here’s who else was hateful and sucky this week, in no particular order:

1. Jason Fucking Kenney. Nice photo, Jason. Or should I say, nice photoSHOP? Man, it’s just amazing what you can do with image processing these days…although ginning up actual popularity is still not one of its features!

2. Patrick Fucking Brown. And while we’re on the subject of not-so-popular Cons, how about him? He wants to scrap Ontario’s successful, informative sex-ed program, no doubt for some pandering shit from the Religious Reich. He’ll literally say anything to get a vote. Well, I can say something, too: How about NO? PS: Ha, ha.

3. Anthony Fucking Weiner. Sexting a woman who is not your wife…and photographing your barely-clad boner with your small son right next to you (and it) in your bed? Stay classy! PS: And BAM. Looks like somebody’s not impressed with your mad internet skillz, eh Tone? PPS: And BOOM. See what happens when you sext with your kid in bed? You get child-protective services everywhere!


4. Paul Fucking LePage. And speaking of KKKlassy…well, whaddya know, Paulie’s a straight-up racist! And he’s still trying to tap-dance around his own words. KKKute.

5. Nate Fucking Parker. Meanwhile, on the other side of the color line, we’ve got this guy…who thinks he’s somehow “preserving the black man” by trashing the GAY black man. And black women, too. Hey Nate, do your five daughters know you consider them lesser beings on the sole basis of their gender? And about that rape charge, which doesn’t sound like you were actually in the clear?

6. Bryce Fucking Cuellar. And to think that we’re being conditioned to fear veiled Muslim women, when in fact we should be fearing…THIS GUY. Who is not veiled, and who calls himself a “Christian Warrior”. Maybe, next time you’re planning an assassination, bucko, you might want to NOT advertise the fact in advance, eh?


7. Roseanne Fucking Barr. Suddenly, everyone’s a Nazi…except for, you know, ACTUAL Nazis, who hate Palestinians (and Muslims in general) as much as they do Jews.

8. Pete Fucking Evans. Oh lord, is that inane so-called Paleo Diet STILL in existence? And are there idiots who STILL believe that faux cave-man shit? Yup…and here is one of them, apparently trying to kill a woman with osteoporosis. Because EVOLUTION. And because trendy chefs know medicine better than doctors, don’tcha know?

9. İsmail Fucking Kahraman. Che Guevara, legit guerrilla, overthrower of dictators, and medical doctor, a “murderer”? Well, by that token, your own president’s a MASS murderer, pal, because he’s responsible for a lot more deaths than Che ever was. Young Turks should have the right to wear whatever they want on their t-shirts, and if they don’t, then their — ahem, YOUR — government isn’t democratic. The End.


10. Christian Fucking Hine. No, autism and depression don’t cause a person to turn to kiddie porn for relief. You’re thinking of PEDOPHILIA, you moron.

11. Tomi Fucking Lahren. No, you don’t get to decide whose citizenship is conditional, let alone upon a stupid thing like how one acts during the playing of a national anthem, you fucking racist dumbass. And if anyone’s banging on the US’s door, it’s only for the money. Not because they think it’s really such a great country to live in. Most of them are, after all, the victims of the US’s own impoverishing foreign policy. But you don’t care about that, do you? No, because you’re a fucking racist dumbass who only values her citizenship for the “freedom” it gives you to be one!

12. Thomas Fucking Rodgers, Sr. And speaking of fucking racist dumbassery, here’s an example of how it looks when internalized. Dude, remember that your ancestors were imported from Africa, as commodities, IN CHAINS. They were not even considered human! And taking out “dual citizenship” in Africa when most black Americans don’t even know what part of Africa their ancestors came from (because THEY WERE SLAVES!) is just ludicrous. You’re talking about sending them all back there, AS SLAVES. Do you even listen to yourself?


13. Ben Fucking Roethlisberger. Rape is perfectly kosher, but peacefully sitting to protest a racist anthem? That’s dissing the military! Except, you know, it’s totally not. And military vets are stepping up to say so.

14. Ed Fucking Martin. Well, if Phyllis Fucking Schlafly’s fingerpuppet says it’s not racist to hate Mexicans, I guess that settles it. Except, you know, it totally doesn’t.

15. Neera Fucking Tanden. Bernie Sanders “did damage” to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, by proving to be a viable leftist alternative, and incredibly popular with rank-and-file Dems to boot? Uh, actually, she did that damage herself…by pursuing a Bush Lite type of foreign policy, i.e. kinder, gentler imperialism, the Honduras coup, and stealth warmongering. And funnily, a lot of Dems don’t like that shit.


16. Harold Fucking Bornstein. Der Drumpf’s doctor, sued for malpractice by the families of patients he killed by overprescribing pain meds? Well, gollee! And just how are we supposed to trust this fucker when he tells us Der Drumpf’s health is perfect?

17. Heidi Fucking Russo. So…Colin Kaepernick’s birth mother thinks he “shamed” his adoptive family, just because he protested peacefully? Well, that begs an awfully big question: Why did she not raise him herself, then?

18. Dan Fucking Bacon. And the winner for Dumbest Damn Article of the Week is…THIS GUY! Who doesn’t understand that when a woman is wearing headphones, she’s not “testing” your manly confidence…she’s just not interested in hearing ANYTHING from you. And who also doesn’t understand that when a woman doesn’t want to be talked to, that means BY ANYONE. And now that the entire Internet has been piling onto this dumbass all week, do you suppose he’s heard the message? Loud and clear, one hopes? If not, crank the volume to 11. Anyone dense enough to suggest that women might like being approached when their whole look screams Do NOT Approach is gonna need to get blasted. In stereo.


19. Chris Fucking Brown. File this one under “Does Not Comprehend Irony”, because it’s not a bit ironic that he’s had a run-in with the police yet again. He has a long, unironic history of being shitty to women, to the point of physical violence. And I’m pretty sure that the black queer woman who started Black Lives Matter does not appreciate the irony of him appropriating her slogan/movement to his own cynical asshole ends, either. PS: Fastest dick move EVER.

20. Vladimir Fucking Putin. No, NOT the president of Russia, who strikes me as a generally well-behaved sort. This is another Florida Man we’re talking about. Or should I say, Chelovyek Florida?

21. Kellyanne Fucking Conway. No, rape is not a question of who’s physically stronger; rape is a question of who’s more entitled in the eyes of society. Case in point: My own rape, which was not about me being physically overpowered so much as it was about the dude who did it thinking he had a perfect right to do it…and me realizing that was because I had no rights at all. PS: And no, Legitimate Rape is still not a thing, either, you fucking twatwaffle. And neither is “partial-birth” abortion.


22. Manuel Fucking Valls. Marianne has a bare breast because she is a mythical, symbolic figure who can’t be sexually harassed, because she’s not a real, live, flesh-and-blood woman. Women who wear veils tend to do so because they are not mythical, and can therefore be harassed, molested, even RAPED. It’s embarrassing to have to explain this grade-school stuff to a grown man who is prime minister of France, but there you go. You’re welcome!

23. Brian Fucking Jean. It’s tough to say that Rachel Notley deserves applause for being a good premier, but easy to say you’d beat her, physically, like a drum, if it weren’t illegal? Well, if you get easily beaten (metaphorically, of course) by your opponent in the next provincial election, when your seat in the legislature is up for grabs, you’ll see what’s really tough, eh? PS: Ha, ha.

24. Sarah Fucking Palin. Crack your empty skull doing something you probably shouldn’t? Blame it on a woman who will probably be president, which of course you never will. And oh yeah, do so in a rant filled with word soup that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.


25. Steve Fucking Bannon. No, we don’t “hate conservative women” because they’re not well-educated lesbians. We despise them because they’re murderous fucking brainwashed idiots, like #24, #21, and YOU, you fucking white supremacist!

26. Theresa Fucking May. Holy shit, not-so-great-anymore Britain! Are you really sure your Brexit was worth it? Because Nigel Fucking Farage promised that your NHS would have lots more money (Jeremy Fucking Hunt thought that was pretty funny!), and now you’ve got an unelected PM who is determined to break the NHS once and for all…a feat which the last horrid Con-woman in 10 Downing failed to accomplish.

27. Jared Fucking Fogle. Not content merely to blame one of his own victims for what HE DID TO HER, the most infamous kiddie-diddler in the US has now sunk to the point of even suing one of her parents, claiming it’s THEIR fault that she ended up in his pervy buddy’s videos, and then in his own rapey clutches. If somebody in the jailhouse beats the shit out of him again, don’t be surprised. Or sad. As he says of his own victims, he’s practically begging for it.


28. Wayne Fucking Allen Fucking Root. Why the double Fucking? Because that’s how asinine his ideas on voting rights are, and also how shitty he is for uttering them. Making a woman’s suffrage conditional on whether she’s receiving free birth control? I have a better idea: How about all the middle-aged and older men on insurance-funded Viagra lose theirs? That should shut this one up in a hurry, as he seems the type to need it.

29. Donald Fucking Drumpf, Junior. Retweeting a neo-Nazi “academic”? Yeah, that’ll burnish your old man’s respectability…all the way into the toilet!

30. Martin Fucking Schulz. Meanwhile, in Germany, isn’t it nice to see a Social Democrat yet again throwing actual democracy under the bus? Before this one even set foot on Turkish soil, he was already praising Sultan Erdogan and his brutal crackdown on dissent. It’s like his party has learned nothing, nothing from the murders of Luxemburg and Liebknecht!


And finally, to Donald Fucking Drumpf, Sr. Yes, Der Drumpf outdid himself yet again this week, what with his flubbed visit to Mexico (which went over like a solid lead enchilada, as you might imagine), to his paranoid conspiracy kookery and his ever-faster flippity-flopping. And just think, we have to sit through another two months of this. Are we having fun yet?

Good night, and get fucked!

Posted in Wankers of the Week | Comments Off on Wankers of the Week: Stand up for WHAT?

Venezuela: Another major coup attempt thwarted

Madurito addressing a huge rally in Caracas. He’s comparing the latest putsch attempt to April 11 (2002), the infamous date when the opposition managed to kidnap his good friend and predecessor, Chavecito. And that’s not all he’s doing:

Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro said on Thursday that the government has thwarted an attempted coup d’état.

“We have defeated a major putschist attempt,” the head of state emphasized. He said that he gave instructions to the minister of the Interior, Néstor Reverol, and to communications minister Luis José Marcano, to show the proofs “of how we averted the coup and the violent fascist ambush”.

“[Opposition AD party leader Henry] Ramos Allup knew of all these plans, so I denounce him,” said Maduro during a rally on Bolívar Avenue.

Maduro affirmed that a State of Exception decree has been prepared in order to lift parliamentary immunity for all public servants.

He pronounced Ramos Allup “incapable” because, according to his judgment, he did not know how to direct the National Assembly. Maduro said that he had called for dialogue on repeated occasions, but “Ramos Allup’s gang” did not want to participate.

Maduro then addressed the National Assemby president: “Don’t test the Constitution any longer, Ramos Allup. I know quite well what everyone is saying, but this decadent Adeco will not be allowed to fill Venezuela with violence”.

Maduro said that in the opposition gathering in Chacao “there are 5,000 persons, and in the other spot, Rio de Janeiro, there are 250 persons.” He estimated that between 25,000 and 30,000 persons were attending the “Taking of Caracas” [PSUV rally].

“They’ve failed yet again, the victory is ours. I declare that the victory is of the people, peace, and the revolution,” Maduro said.

Translation mine.

So we can see that bullyboy Henry Ramos Allup has learned nothing from his defeats of the past. As Madurito says: Every 11th has its 13th…meaning, for every attempt at a putsch, there will be a huge pushback against it. Venezuela may be under siege from the right-wing, but nobody is about to let the gears of democracy be forced into reverse. Nicolás Maduro, not Henry Ramos Allup, is still president. And if the latter doesn’t shape up and learn to conduct himself like an elected assembly member and president of the assembly, he’ll be shipped out.


Posted in Bullies, Fascism Without Swastikas, Huguito Chavecito, Isn't That Illegal? | Comments Off on Venezuela: Another major coup attempt thwarted

Quotable: Noam Chomsky on the Brazilian coup d’état

“Dilma Rousseff is maybe the one politician who hasn’t — leading politician who hasn’t stolen in order to benefit herself. She’s being charged with manipulations in the budget, which are pretty standard in many countries, taking from one pocket and putting it into another. Maybe it’s a misdeed of some kind, but certainly doesn’t justify impeachment. In fact, she’s — we have the one leading politician who hasn’t stolen to enrich herself, who’s being impeached by a gang of thieves, who have done so. That does count as a kind of soft coup.”

Posted in Brazil is the Bomb!, Fascism Without Swastikas, Filthy Stinking Rich, Isn't It Ironic?, Isn't That Illegal?, Quotable Notables | Comments Off on Quotable: Noam Chomsky on the Brazilian coup d’état