August 24, 2007

I Get Letters...

I'm amazed at the number of comments I've been getting, though my tiny little corner of the blog world is nowhere near as significant as most. Some people have scrolled past the front page into older posts, to leave their thoughts on a piece of my writing that apparently has meaning for them. To those who take the time to write, I thank you. I understand how easy it is to click on past.

Of course, there's comments...and then there's diatribes. My dictionary defines diatribe thusly: "A bitter, abusive denunciation." I decided to reproduce the following comment to illustrate the sort of crap a lot of women get on their blogs. The comment is in response to this post. You wouldn't think that would get people so up in arms, now would you?

(Since I don't know the gender of the commenter, I will dub thee "it." The sentences in quotes are what I originally wrote; my replies to the comment's idiocy are in italics.)

"...does not demand that his wife work or not work. She is an adult, and that decision must be hers."

How about his decision to work or not work? Oh. That's right, he doesn't have the same choices as his wife does.

And when did I say this? Why shouldn't a husband choose to work or not work, if his wife can support the family and if he wants to stay home? For that matter, why couldn't both of them not work so much, if they can swing it? Oh, that's right, because in this person's mind, the husband is locked into the traditional, restrictive role of provider. Poor guy.

My point has nothing to do with the husband working or not working; it deals with the tendency of some so-called Christian husbands to order their wives around as if they were slaves.

"...does not require his wife to sacrifice her dreams for the children."

What about his dreams? Did he dream of being a musician or artist, but instead ends up working a job he has little to no love for as a sacrifice for his family? Should his wife also not make such sacrifices even at the expense of her dreams?

Oh, for crying out loud. We're back to the same old chauvinist refrain: WHAT ABOUT THE MENZ?? This has about as much relevance as a Tyrannosaurus Rex's dying roars as it is sucked down into the tar pit. Once again, we're not talking about the husband; we're talking about what some husbands try to force their wives to do, simply because they believe it is their God-given, patriarchy-entitled right.

But why should either husband or wife have to sacrifice their dreams? If they set goals and work together, why shouldn't both of them achieve their dreams in life?

"...will not sit on his ass in front of the TV and wait for his wife to cook and clean. If he sees a chore needs to be done, he will do it."

If he works outside the home to provide for the family and his wife works at the home, then the majority of at-home chores are her responsibility. *Period* Any other arrangement would be selfish of her.

Selfish? Who are you to talk about selfishness, you entitled lazy ass? This is the sort of attitude that drives women away. If you think you're so special that you can't get off your butt and help out, then as far as I'm concerned, you can provide yourself right out my door, and good riddance. Talk about demeaning the person who should be the most important part of his life.

"...does not let his sons boss or bully their sisters."

"...does not clamp down on his daughters while his sons get away with murder."

But his daughters bullying his sons is A-OK? Lunacy.

Where did I say anything about that, Commenter Insert-Words-In-My-Mouth? Why does a refusal to let brothers bully sisters automatically convey allowing the opposite? What a twisted view of human nature.

I've always credited my readers with intelligence, so I never thought I would have to be so obvious. Apparently, that's not so. Therefore, let me make it perfectly clear: No one in the family should be bullying anybody. I worded this as I did because all too many pseudo-Christians are guilty of exactly the above sexist male-entitled behavior.

Your list is selfish and irresponsible. You are right, however, marriage is a partnership and couples should strive for equality, not special treatment and privileges. Your list falls short as such, in my opinion.

My list involves no "special treatment," simply the evening out of the power and privilege held in the hands of men for too many years. How ironic that the commenter dares to write "marriage is a partnership and couples should strive for equality," when every other word it says denies this.
Finally: You'll notice that the last three commenters to the original post have the same (pardon the profanity) chickenshit moniker: Anonymous. (No. #2 started out as Anonymous but ended up as Special K, so that doesn't count.) Personally, I don't comment to other blogs very often. However, when I do I use my own name. I feel if I'm going to write it, I should have enough gumption to own it. One wonders what other forms of cowardice the commenters display in their lives, if they can't stand behind some words on the Internet.


Pai said...

MRA types are generally incapable of basic logic. Richie at Crimitism has a pretty funny post talking about them, since he's recently been mentioned on a bunch of MRA forums and is getting a lot of harassment himself:

Shawna Atteberry said...

I love it that you are standing up to these people who are hurling abuse. I'm sure at some point this will happen on my blog as well. I intend to copy your approach.

the bewilderness said...

Trolls is trolling you because you is one of teh wicked feminists who want a share of their troll house cookie privileges, but they are not giving them up, oh noes.

Unknown said...

Troll cookies?

They'd be poisonous anyway, heh.

We'reee nottsss giving upppp thossse
privilegessss, precioussss.