Friday freethinking frenzy: yep, the ROCK blogger returns!

First, watch:



Now, read this dead-on post by Amanda Marcotte. Excerpt:

Talking to a full-of-shit anti-choicer, it occurred to me... these sort of deceptive tactics are not only acceptable in evangelical circles, but they are eagerly promoted, and could even be called standard operating procedure. There’s some Biblical justification for it, and that’s all they need to know. In their mind, the end (saving souls) justifies the means (lying). In fact, I’d say that they are so invested in the belief of the all-encompassing rightness of their ends that they are inspired to up the ante on immoral means, to prove how fucking serious they are...

What this said to me was that if evangelical Christians cannot be honest and straightforward about what they claim is the most important part of their lives---their faith and saving souls---then you can’t trust them on anything. Their subculture has inculcated a habit of not only justifying dishonest means to achieve dishonest ends, but in fact encouraging people to lie and feel better about themselves because they lied.

As ever, please note that evangelical qualifier: we're talking batshit, not sane people who happen to be Christians.

On the heels of this comes the two new posts from the ROCK blogger, on the porn episode of Oprah and porn being sold on military bases. About the latter, I can only say that it takes a special kind of sanctimonious asshole to refuse a soldier some porn. [And yeah, I think the rules banning porn on military bases need to go.] But the former post about the Oprah porn episode? Let's dig in!

Here's some silliness:

“Why millions of women are using porn and erotica” was the title of the show and after watching it I wonder why they didn’t add, “(Why aren’t you?)” Seriously, about halfway in I was looking for an “expert” to suggest that porn clears up acne and promotes bone density in women. I guess between the fawning interviews Oprah gave to Jenna Jameson (“The Most Famous Porn Star In The World!”) and to the Chicago mother of four/sex shop owner, and the breathless endorsement from a San-Francisco porn reviewer who’d written a column in “O” magazine, there just wasn’t time to explore the medicinal benefits of pornography...

Aside from that, Oprah’s valentine to libertines failed the journalistic Martian Test. That is to say, a Martian visitor whose only knowledge about human sexuality came from the Oprah show would have to conclude that pornography was the best thing since sliced bread...

If Oprah had really wanted to get provocative and scandalous (i.e., balanced) she might have considered a second show titled, “The dark side of pornography.” She might have spoken with psychologists who increasingly have to try to repair the destruction that internet pornography addiction does to marriage and family relationships.

I'll just take the easy way out:

1. Actually, it would benefit us all if the porn industry understood that women watch porn, and especially what more women might like to get out of porn. ROCK likes to bitch that porn exploits women--well, how better to change that than to have porn catering to women, too?

2. Unless you lie in your Oprah Book Club-endorsed memoir, I don't think Oprah does hard interviews. See also: the Palin interview.

3. Haha. Notice how when more sex-positive women talk openly about being in the adult industry, the ROCK blogger just sarcastically dismisses them because his brainwashing just can't process it.

4. While I find the Martian test to be more of a critical thinking exercise than rubric for journalism, uh, wouldn't it be nice for hypothetical Martians to surmise that Earth women actively enjoy sex?

5. The ROCK blogger is learning! He linked to articles other than garbage produced by Judith Reisman and Morality in Media! Total fail on showing me anything new though. [Links in original post.]

6. Question: where is it fucking provocative or scandalous to say porn is bad? Answer: only in the batshit evangelical mindset. Federal and state laws regulate obscenity, frequently to ridiculous lengths. "Family values" candidates frequently get elected for pandering to bullshit. Our culture associates "family values" with white, heteronormative, fundie Christian sorts of parent-child groups--guess why?

But here's my favorite bit:

Pornography is not normal and it is not healthy. Most people know this, deep down, beneath the faux-feminism and empowerment fallacies.

... really, ROCK blogger? Really? Really?

When ROCK members tend to have read as much feminist thought as ROCK detractors have, when ROCK members tend to have had as sex lives as interesting as ROCK detractors have had, when ROCK members admit that they look at/obsess over porn as much as or more than ROCK detractors do, and when ROCK members tend to understand what privilege means and how it acts as much as ROCK detractors do, then I'll take that statement seriously. Until then, this is just more misguided and nonsensical Christurbation. Best of all, Bryan Wickens [the president of ROCK and sole paid employee] is laughing all the way to the bank, according to their last Form 990 available at Guidestar.

But here's the real point. When I was at the abortion clinic, a protester--of course, a tall very burly man with Bible in hand--said, after he was unable to explain away Numbers 31:17-18, said, "You don't have to read the Bible, you just need Jesus in your heart." If you don't know what the religion that defines your world is actually based in and how it can be interpreted, it can be nothing more than a vehicle for hate and profiteering. ROCK, for all its preservation of Judeo-Christian values bullshit, isn't about what Jesus--a long-haired brown-skinned pacifist whose words have much to do with social justice--taught. It's about social control, fear-mongering, and capitalizing on brainwashing.

I'd ask the ROCK blogger to prove me otherwise--and yes, he does check this blog regularly--but he quite simply cannot.

...

PS: looky how few Louisvillians rely on public transit. *sigh*