- Acid Test by Quixote - http://www.molvray.com/acidtest -

Taking up Michael Avenatti’s challenge

Stormy Daniels’ attorney said this:


For those that criticize my client for her profession, let he or she who has NEVER voluntarily viewed ANY form of pornography or gone to a strip club or burlesque show throw as many stones as they wish. As for the others (dare I say over 95%) – BASTA!!! #ownit #dontbeahypocrite


As a member of that tiny percentage —

I’m going to interrupt myself to say I bet it’s a lot larger than 5%. You do seem to be including women in “those” by saying “he or she.” Women are 50% of the population and only a minority have enough Stockholm Syndrome to watch that stuff according to research I remember seeing somewhere. (Yes, impressive, I know.) It was 25% or so. Which right there means about 38% of adults don’t do porn. Add in the 5% of men you generously credit with sense and we’re up to 43%.

Where was I? Oh, right. As a member of that not-so-limited class I get to throw stones.

But why would I want to? All I see of her is a person of huge courage and a sense of humor. (Troll: “your uterus fell out.” Stormy: “Oh shit. Could you pick it up for me?”) It takes a lot of training, whether by porn or otherwise, to despise women so much you can’t even see the stature of someone like Daniels.

So the irony is most stonethrowers are going to be exactly the people with no right.

It’s almost like there’s a pattern. White supremacists are the least supreme whites. Men’s “Rights” Activists are the ones with zero understanding of anybody’s rights. Snooty hipsters putting someone down for lack of cool are the uncoolest people on the planet. It’s always the same.

4 Comments (Open | Close)

4 Comments To "Taking up Michael Avenatti’s challenge"

#1 Comment By PDXPat On 23 Apr, 2018 @ 19:58

Don’t forget the childless “Fathers” of the Catholic Church – the ultimate authorities on family life!

Very good point on who does and does not enjoy pornography. And I completely agree with you on Stormy Daniels’ courage, regardless of how she makes her living.

#2 Comment By PDXPat On 23 Apr, 2018 @ 22:31

Only slightly OT: Avenatti is on Laurence O’Donnell’s show right now. I’m a little weirded out by how much satyresque appeal he has – kinda expect to find out he really has to shave the tips of his ears.

Or maybe it’s just the contrast to the hideous parade of Trump cronies that’s gotten to me 😛

#3 Comment By quixote On 24 Apr, 2018 @ 07:44

Yes. Indeed. The “Fathers” of just about all religions. The whole lot of them. Too many excellent examples of loud statements = loud ignorance.

You’re right about Avenatti. He has that same “Bring it” quality that Stormy has … and then when anybody does, swatting them down like bugs.

#4 Comment By PDXPat On 25 Apr, 2018 @ 16:17

Just wanted to point out that it’s only the Catholic religion that mandates no women and no children at all in their (supposedly) virgin male rulers’ lives. I think their obstinate refusal to grant women recognition as human beings in their own right comes from this: the distance from the chief victims of their bigotry. Their lack of concern for predation towards the other group, children, and for the poverty that comes from forced childbearing also stems from the same source.

Most religions that have allowed their rulers the most common association most men have with women and children, marriage, have evolved into recognizing women as equals. The backward religions that refuse to grant women human status but allow married male leadership either promote some weird primitive version of marriage, like the Mormons, or are locked into tandem bigotries like racism, in areas where these still *equally* define civil, legal and human rights (such as in the American south).

Really, I’m not “anti Catholic” – I couldn’t care less what any religion holds as their sacred tenants *except when it comes to bigotry*.

Those women who are ordering hair shirts in by the dozen and rubbing their heads with ashes, simply for being white and women and part of that very slim majority who voted for Trump (70% of whom were voting as -their- male religious leaders told them to), might consider that the majority of white Catholics have voted Republican in every election since Reagan, including for Trump and against Clinton. [1].

Religions can and have changed their dogma. Women should never ever be governed differently due to their innocent and immutable biology.

Until the media and the public stop accepting the whining justification “But it’s our sincere religious belief” that a woman’s life is worth nothing in its own right, I’ll keep speaking out against this most powerful of bigoted institutions.

[1] [1]
(You have to read carefully to separate out “white Catholic” from “Catholic” in the Presidential voting patterns. It was only the non-white Catholic vote that made the majority of their votes Democrats in any recent election)