Manly Thor's Day Special

Part 1: Jennifer Fulwiler's slip is showing
We are big fans of Jennifer Fulwiler around here. That said, I think she slipped up in a big way recently.

In case you missed it (and lucky you if you did) some not terribly deep or intelligent person over at Slate suggested that efforts to defund Planned Parenthood could be countered by denying Republican men sex.  Yes, things like that make me feel very good about my decision to not discuss partisan politics here. It's not even original, the folks over at MoveOn were pushing the same nonsense two years ago.

To even respond to such nonsense is to enter into the argument at it's own creepy level. And there is Fulwiler's first mistake.

And thus she [the Slate writer] reveals her understanding of something that everyone knows but nobody wants to admit: Women hold all the cards when it comes to sex. As a gender, men want sex more than women do, and they are willing to go to great lengths to get it. They’ll change their behavior. They’ll reconsider their ideas.

Here's the problem that any manly man will struggle with: Who will teach the teachers?



If women are the teachers because they really do have all this power (they don't but let's imagine they do) what's to say that they will use this power for good? They are corrupted sinners just like us men right? If they collectively or individually use their supposed power, won't they most likely make things worse? Aren't they just as likely to use this superior hand they hold to debase and degrade men? All power corrupts et cetera.

As I said a few days ago, the hidden premise here (and it is something conservative Catholics and feminists line up on) is an unspoken assumption that women are morally superior beings, especially when it comes to sex. And just in case you doubt that, look at the quote from Fulton Sheen that Fulwiler wraps her piece up with:

To a great extent the level of any civilization is the level of its womanhood. When a man loves a woman, he has to become worthy of her. The higher her virtue, the more noble her character, the more devoted she is to truth, justice, goodness, the more a man has to aspire to be worthy of her. The history of civilization could actually be written in terms of the level of its women.

When a man loves a woman, he has to become worthy of her? Well, no more than the exact opposite is the case. (Notice, by the way, the deeper implication in this: "the level of any civilization is the level of its womanhood". Aren't you relieved to know it's all women's fault after all?)