this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2023
504 points (95.8% liked)

politics

19135 readers
2411 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Close watchers of the MAGA movement have been chronicling the alarming escalation of both violent intimidation and overt white supremacy in recent weeks. Donald Trump, of course, now begs his followers on a nearly daily basis to murder his perceived enemies. But the rhetoric is spiraling, with people like Fox News host Greg Gutfeld openly calling for civil war. Meanwhile, Christopher Rufo — a right hand man for Gov. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla. — recently hosted a forum that pushed establishment Republicans to build a “bridge” to the so-called "dissident right," including some open white nationalists. He may get his wish, as one of the top contenders for Speaker of the House, Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., described himself as "David Duke without the baggage."

The radicalism of the right is growing as the GOP careens swiftly towards nominating Trump as their presidential candidate, despite his 91 felony indictments in four jurisdictions. But, as anyone who has studied cults can tell you, they never limit their escalations to violence or hateful ideologies. There's almost always a weird sexual component, as cult leaders come up with ever stranger rules and regulations to control the sexual expression of their followers.

The MAGA movement is no different. The cult-like following of Trump always had an unsettling mix of incel-inflected misogyny, coupled with a homophobia that is somehow also homoerotic. But it's been rapidly getting worse in recent months. Even more frightening is how determined they are to inflict their sexual hang-ups on the rest of the country.

Gutfeld, who claims to be a "comedian," has long positioned himself on Fox News as an everyman character. He's meant to make audiences feel that normal people can be Republicans, and not just Bible-hugging weirdoes or camo-clad militia nuts. But, as his civil war rant makes clear, lately he's been channeling a more David Koresh-esque vibe, and invariably that comes with some sexual weirdness.

Last week, Gutfeld hosted a far-right figure named Hotep Jesus, who is known primarily for being an apologist for white supremacists and anti-semites. Hotep Jesus, whose real name is Bryan Sharpe, was on the show to promote a "dating" blog that is, in actuality, propaganda for domestic abuse. As Media Matters chronicled, Sharpe regards it as a form of adultery if women are "allowed" to work or vote. "Imagine guts, sweat, and tears shed only to watch your woman get dolled up only to prance around another man’s office while he gives her marching orders," Sharpe writes, claiming, "Women WANT to give up control of their life," and that they only vote, work, or otherwise make decisions because of "the pressure of modern society."

This wasn't a one-off, either. Gutfeld recently joined the chorus of right wing voices defending Russell Brand, after the British "comedian" was accused by multiple women of sexual violence and rape. Gutfeld applauded a teacher who got arrested for having sex with a 16-year-old student. And he claimed men only cry because of "substances in the water that reduce testosterone."

The jokey tone of some of this is there to insulate it from criticism, but Gutfeld isn't joking. The party of Donald "Grab 'Em By The Pussy" Trump shows no limits in normalizing extremely toxic masculinity and sexual violence. That much is evident in new court filings in the first big test case for the abortion "bounty hunter" law in Texas. The author of the law, former Texas solicitor general Jonathan Mitchell, has so far shown no shame that his client — who is suing his ex-wife's friends for helping her abort a pregnancy — displays a long history of abusive, controlling behavior. Mitchell shrugged off reports that his client, Marcus Silva, tried to prevent his wife from working and called her names like "slut" and "whore" in front of her coworkers.

So it's unlikely that Mitchell will mind a new filing providing evidence that Silva threatened to upload sexually explicit videos of his ex-wife, unless she returned home to clean and do laundry for him. Or that he used blackmail methods in an attempt to rape her, saying he would drop the lawsuit if she had sex with him. The document had a transcript of Silva, this latest "hero" of the anti-abortion movement, telling his ex, "You’re just gonna have your fcking life destroyed in every fcking way that you can imagine to where you want to blow your f*cking brains out."

It's not surprising that Mitchell would be fine with this treatment of women. As he argued to the Supreme Court in 2021, women have it coming by not "refraining from sexual intercourse." But now, of course, Mitchell is working for a man whose goal is to force his ex-wife to have sex with him.

One would think, after the political backlash to the overturn of Roe v. Wade, Republicans would not be so eager to advertise how the anti-choice movement is about controlling women and not "life." But, as David Kirkpatrick of the New Yorker writes, the head of Alliance Defending Freedom, the biggest conservative legal group in the country, was open about how the goal is to destroy access to contraception. "It may be that the day will come when people say the birth-control pill was a mistake," Alan Sears explained.

What's notable is this extremism isn't just relegated to the world of fundamentalist Christianity. The more secular and more proudly fascist right — which is increasingly cossetted and promoted by the tech billionaire world of Elon Musk and his buddies — has been aggressively promoting pseudo-scientific arguments in favor of extreme curtailing of sexual freedom.

The most prominent example is Costin Alamariu, a self-declared fascist who has become an "intellectual" darling on the right for putting a faux-intellectual gloss on some of the most evil impulses of the MAGA movement. He's been blogging for a long time under the name "Bronze Age Pervert," which makes him sound fun, but of course, he's anything but. His book, "Selective Breeding and the Birth of Philosophy," has become an Amazon bestseller because he's promoted by the grossest people on the internet. He proposes strict control over human "breeding" on the facetious grounds that it's necessary for the betterment of humanity, which he mostly understands in extremely racist terms. In his newsletter, John Ganz quotes Alamariu's writing:

I make the case in this introduction that this same matter of selective breeding, whether sexual selection, or various societies' management of marriage and reproduction, constitutes the most important part of morality, legislation, or of the "lawgiver's art," and that a sharp awareness of this reality is what led, again, to the discovery of the standard of nature and the subsequent birth of philosophy.

As Graeme Wood at the Atlantic pointed out, on his blog, Alamariu dispenses with the faux-academic language for an earthier version of the same arguments. "He considers American cities a 'wasteland' run by Jews and Black people, though the words he uses to denote these groups are considerably less genteel than these," he writes. Christopher Rufo has publicly praised Alamariu.

The sexual weirdness of the MAGA movement is deeply intertwined with the racism and the violence. Alamariu's writings are just saying the quiet part out loud: Sexual control, especially of women, is largely fueled by notions about "breeding" future generations, especially to look a certain way that racists want them to. Normalizing violence against women is part of that scheme, since, as fascists long have understood, women often don't go along voluntarily.

Because this is so weird, it's tempting to ignore it as the chattering of a fringe group of men are still mad they didn't get laid in college. But that would be a mistake, and not just because some of those men have become wildly powerful:

As the Dobbs decision by the Supreme Court shows, Republicans are never content to keep their massive sexual issues to themselves. They are determined to make everyone else suffer, not only by rolling back reproductive rights but by aggressively normalizing sexual and domestic violence. The throughline here is a belief that women aren't full human beings, but a sexual resource to be put under male control, by violence if necessary. It's a view they're getting increasingly less coy about publicly sharing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 59 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Remember ladies, if a guy says he's not political on his dating profile, that means he's conservative but has learned that won't get him laid.

[–] Reptorian@lemmy.zip 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Same if he says he's a moderate. Moderates do have questionable views.

[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Anyone not left of center is a total write-off of a human. I don't care about their fiscal opinions, but they'd better be socially progressive or I will have nothing to do with them.

I once threw my husband's friend's boyfriend out of my house halfway through dinner for calling people trannies (and also for vaping through dinner without asking).

[–] Comment105@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

We use the same strategy nationally with voters, end up as an ethical minority, and lose real political power.

[–] IdealShrew@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

that's a bit excessive don't you think?

[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not tolerating someone saying slurs us excessive?

[–] pandacoder@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or the vaping without permission inside someone else's home during a meal.

It's impressive the level of mental gymnastics to jump around both and call the act of kicking them out excessive seeing as both are sufficient justification on their own, let alone together.

[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What he specifically said was "oh trannies think they can just chop their dicks off and we're supposed to believe they're female and accept that.'

Just the word trannies by itself would have been enough but that was beyond the pale.

So I said "We are going to wrap up the evening now. Please leave. I don't keep friends who talk this way. Also vaping is disgusting.".

[–] ThePenitentOne@discuss.online 4 points 1 year ago

People who say completely ignorant shit and act like their opinion holds any weight need to learn that it means fuck all. Sadly, there are far too many self-centred people in our society for all of them to be humbled. And of all things, to care about trans people? Really, how often do you encounter them? I think the real cause when people hate on others unprovoked is insecurity of themselves.

[–] pandacoder@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I applaud you for actually saying something to a statement like that. I'd probably just mentally stall out trying to find words after that kind of comment.

[–] dipshit@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not at all, why would it be excessive?

[–] IdealShrew@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

kicking a guest out of your house outright is pretty excessive. could just wait until they leave and simply not invite them again

[–] dipshit@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Can I come over to your house? I promise I will not take a giant shit right on the floor. I will be a good guest, as defined by your defintion of good guest.

Please respond soon, I’m crowning. I mean hungry. what’s for dinner?

In seriousness, that sounds passive-agressive af. Why not tell your guest why you don’t want to see them again? If people don’t communicate, people can’t grow.

[–] IdealShrew@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

i never said good guest, just a guest. i don't know why I even posted my original comment, i don't feel that strongly about any of this

[–] dipshit@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

If a burglar breaks into my house, they are an unwanted guest. Should I wait until they leave? Or are there are certain type of guest which we can be honest with?

[–] greenfish@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I once straight up walked out of a date because a dude tried to hide that he voted for Trump

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That article about trump staffers getting no dates in DC remains one of the funniest pieces of writing I've ever seen.

I think at one point the term Staffcest was coined to describe guys swarming any available girls within the admin.

[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can you link? I need the laugh.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

That's wonderful. I hope they're all miserably alone to this day.

[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ooh tell me more. I bet that was hilarious in retrospect.

God, imagine dating a conservative. I can't. What would you talk about, how he hates women?

[–] greenfish@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Well in those days I was extremely clear on my dating profile about my political views. But you get these guys trying to lie about it because it's tough out there for the maga boys I guess. Anyway he wouldn't stop calling and trying to argue me into giving him a chance 🤣. Meanwhile I ubered to a concert where some friends were, shook it off, and moved on to the next one a week later who turned out to be my awesome progressive husband

[–] greenfish@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As I recall one of the arguments was 'it's batshit crazy' not to date someone because of their politics. Rest assured those screenshots circulated widely in the friend group and were heartily mocked

[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Lol I love it!

Yeah it's really batshit crazy to not want to date someone who believes women and queer and non-white people are inferior. Sure bud.