Skip to content

Fuck Politeness

This is a revolution, not a public relations movement

So initially yeah it was gonna be short bios of chicks who rock. And it probably still will be when I get more than five minutes spare time in a row. But it’s a Wall of Awesome, so anything awesome should go on it right?

I give you Richie’s response to Bettina Arndt

Yes. Yes. And a lot more yes.

[Edited: so Richie posted a link in the comments and I figure that over the next few days I will include any Arndt takedowns here because they bring me joy and in the face of the shock and sadness of JUST HOW MUCH women are still hated and defined and told to put up with the most horrendous shit I figure we all need a little of that joy, just a reminder that not everyone out there is a raving fuckwit]

No sex please, I’m too busy vacuuming by Helen Elliot (there is love in my heart people) with Arthur Unkles fascinating psychological discoveries and the suspected biological basis for gendered behaviour and men’s lower housework libido – thanks to Richie and to Tigtog over at Hoyden About Town

A call to loving arms by Virginia Haussegger in the Canberra Times, as linked to by as mentioned by commenter K and linked to by commentor adira at Hoyden About Town

Lauredhel’s post on this shitfight, Quickhit: Bettina Arndt, rape cheerleader. PLEASE read the as usual wonderful comments thread – it’is full of commentors trying to unpack this shit, each blurting out parts of what is bothering them (since the whole is just too overwhelmingly awful) – though apparently “Michel Foucault” has come back from the grave to tell us we’re all *missing the point* though s/he seems to miss the point when s/he is quite CLEARLY ignored.

Bluemilk’s post Sex to save the family which was apparently cited on Lateline as an example of the ‘savaging’ Arndt has suffered of late. Cited that is with no name, and no context and reduced to one line early in the piece which is ‘Fuck you, Bettina Arndt’…so it’s quite long, and very articulate and happens to say much more than ‘Fuck you, Bettina Arndt’ (which is still a valid point really) so “Fuck you Lateline”. A tiny taste:

Sadly Arndt’s conversation with Susan Davis (Monash University’s professor of women’s health and a world leader in the study of hormones affecting female drive) doesn’t support this theory. Golly gosh, Davis has found that there’s a huge variation in libido in both genders and very little of it is due to hormones.

Never mind the scientific experts, Arndt has an anecdote to support her theory that men are super-charged  sex machines and women are quivvering, virginal types.

[And as Rayedish points out it’s the SAME fucking anectdote she was rolling out in 2007 when she was seeking participants in her research…two years of research and no new anecdote…things are not looking good for Ms Arndt, are they??]

Hmm…so any readers wanting to let people know about other articles, feel free to leave a comment and I’ll whack them in here (my major source of reading as you can probably see is Hoyden – I like it, people discuss what’s happening, they link, they argue and I don’t have the bullshit of mainstream media fuckwittery.

Rayedish has a Note To Bettina Arndt up at The Radical Radish in which she notes that Bettina’s examples of a ‘frigid and unsatisfying wife’ hasn’t changed from 2007 (before research) to now despite her ‘research’. It’s almost like there aren’t that many women out there that back up her whackjob ‘thesis’ isn’t it??

And Helen Pringle has ‘A Wife’s Guide to Marital Harmony’ up at New Matilda in which she rightly goes to town on Arndt’s premise that it is a ‘wifely duty’ to put out even when you DON’T want to have sex, particularly on her use of the judment of Justice Bollen.

Arndt bangs on about how the 60’s and the nasty idea that women were entitled to have sex only when they felt like it – hey, like men then! – meant that his phrase ‘rougher than usual handling’ meant he would have been in trouble but that if you put that phrase to one side some of what he says is quite sensible. We’re expected to believe this despite the fact that she doesn’t know what fucking DECADE this case occured – 1993 dipshit. AND as Helen points out and as law students and anyone cursorily glancing at the judgment could tell you this is an HORRIFIC thing to say.

But if Arndt had looked more closely at the transcript of Justice Bollen’s direction to the jury, she would have recalled that the charges at issue included assault occasioning actual bodily harm, to which the accused pleaded guilty, as well as charges of rape and attempted rape involving penetration of the vagina by a bottle, penile penetration of the vagina, penile penetration of the anus, and attempted fellatio. Possibly then, not the best case around which to make an argument about the nuances in intimate negotiations between a man and his wife.

Read the whole thing, it’s excellent and thinking about Arndt DARING to use that case makes my brain explode.


%d bloggers like this: