Feb 10 2006

Patriarchy Takes A Day Off

I kid! I kid! Patriarchy never takes a day off! That’s because patriarchy has rules, my young onions, and these rules are not made to be broken. One of the rules is this: somewhere, somehow, some bitch gotta get smacked up, 24/7! Go, male cohesion!

Here’s how today’s patriarchal crime spree is shaping up:

In Manchester UK a “schizioid” guy who’d had a “troubled childhood” got 21/2 years for killing his wife. He’d stabbed her so many times the medical examiner couldn’t count them all. Men always have excellent reasons for plungeing knives into their wives’ faces, and Mr Lumsden is no exception. His wife had been what’s known as “unfaithful.” This means she flouted the rule that says guys own their wives. She was pretty much askin’ for it.

In Australia, in order to buttress the hard-ons in the all-important 18-34 age group, a new lad mag launches! To differentiate it from tasteful periodicals that don’t focus quite so heavily on lower brain function (one of the more popular brain functions), the new mag is called “Zoo.” Its audience is young male primates, so it will necessarily feature porn–the “sexy girls” section– to reinforce the rule that guys own the world’s pussy. “We revere and respect girls,” says the publisher magnanimously. “They don’t have to be naked.” Research, apparently, has shown that “you can do girls in a very stylish way.” “Girls,” incidentally, is slang for “gash” or “trim.” “Stylish” means “wearing a Victoria’s Secret thong.”

In the States, teenage girls are used to being equated with the inanimate objects with which throbbing dudes who buy “Zoo” are obsessed (the other objects: cars, gadgets, and films). Maybe that’s why these girls are turning into drunks and druggies at breakneck speeds. Girls, in fact, have outstripped boys as loser dope fiends, according to WaPo. A Cornell professor opines that girls are snapping under the pressure imposed by the rule that they be rail-thin virgin sexbots, so they’re wearily drowning what’s left of their shattered selves in liquor and drugs.

Young girls, in fact, are of such negligible consequence in Man’s World that teenage boys can no longer distinguish them from the pictures in lad-mags. In Connecticut recently, three college boys were charged with “disorderly conduct” when they jacked off into a live sleeping girl’s face. Having obeyed the rule that says college boys must watch porn on the internet, they congratulated themselves on having lucked into discovering a sleeping chick in their dorm room, and decided it would be a really good idea to spew their hot loads all over her. I bet that felt good!

Boys learn to despise women from birth, but before they move up to porn-encrusted frat boy circle jerks, they must hone their misogynist skills in high school. Frank Vetro, a high school principal in Long Island, recently embarked on an 11-month “dirty phone call” spree. lllustrating the very popular rule that even supposedly educated men must regard women as receptacles for their uncontrollable incontinence, Mr Vetro enjoyed ringing up women in order to make “disturbing comments to them of the sexual nature.” With role models like Vetro, it is no wonder that, according to the Belleville News-Democrat, “one in every five [high school] girls is a victim of dating violence, sexual assault or rape.”

Teenage girls, apparently, are not being taught to recognize that when their boyfriends page them 18 times a minute, call them names, threaten them, and smack’em around, it is “abuse” rather than “love.” Thanks, pornsick patriarchy!

Oh, and I almost forgot to complain about Phyllis Schlafly’s asinine distinction between “spousal rape” and “stranger rape.” It’s just like Jesus says: “You marry it, you own it; plow that bitch, dawg!”


Skip to comment form

  1. Kat

    “State prosecutors acknowledged that the charges in a case like this should be more serious, but contended that they were constrained by the legal definition of sexual assault – which requires “contact” between the accused and victim.”

    You’d think it would count as sexual assault because their SEMEN came in CONTACT with her FACE, but I guess not. I blame the patriarchy.

  2. Hysterical Woman

    One of the sad things in this case is that the woman was sleeping at the dorm because she was afraid she would be sexual assulted if she left. Damn patriarchy gets you coming and going.

  3. laughingmuse


    I think the utter personal difference, and close objectification, of women is horribly but succinctly summarized in the case of the 3 assmunches who ejaculated on the face of a sleeping girl.

    It’s times like this when I’d like a bit more corporal punishment for some crimes – like these 3 boys having to wear big posterboards all the time, with glue or other semen-like stuff on their faces and hair, signs reading, “I am a thoughtless dickwad who doesn’t respect anyone.”

  4. laughingmuse

    I’m sorry, that should read “INdifference”.

  5. Steph

    And a Toronto man murdered his wife and two young children today.


    And Patriarchy’s fucking Handmaiden, Phyllis Schlafly can bite me.

  6. Josef K

    I can confidently predict that where Zoo launches, Nuts will not fear to tread. They’re having a ratings war in the UK at the moment. And the occasional punch-up at the smarter media parties. The last one happened when a guy from Nuts insulted a female Zoo “journalist” and her chivalrous comrades went to her aid.

  7. morgan

    The world is such a sick, sad place. That poor girl. How can you just shut off the thinking, feeling part of your brain and do that to a human being? Well, unless you don’t think of her as a human being. I’m beginning to think that most men don’t think of women as human beings after reading the atrocities on your blog and Biting Beaver’s blog.

  8. Sam

    After reading about some rapes that had made the news a few years ago I came up with an unproven theory about how pornography is influencing and changing rape.

    The rapes I read about were peculiar to me because they included a lot of visuals. Two men broke into a house where several people lived and made them have sex with each other while they watched for a long time before raping the women and shooting them all. A man broke into a woman’s home and tied her up, then dumped all sorts of foods, cleaners, and liquids of various sorts all over while he took pictures. Two men broke into a home and made the two teens girls there touch and penetrate each other before robbing them.

    I wonder if there has been a trend among rapists to more visually humiliate their victims as per the standard porn script than in rapes of the past. It would be an interesting, if massively depressing, study to undertake.

  9. Disillusioned kid

    I’m amused by the claim in the Zoo article that they spent “thousands of dollars in research.” Any of the readers of IBtP could probably have told them what to put in it to capture the 18-24 patriach demographic for a fraction of that.

  10. Christopher

    What the fuck is wrong with Schlafly?

    I mean, jesus, she is a woman right? Because it just baffles me that somebody could loathe themselves so much.

    What’s worse is that this particular case seems like it would’ve gone the same if the victim and perpetrator hadn’t been married. It’s… I don’t know what it is. But the idea that a man should be given more consideration when he’s married to a victimjustmakes no sense at all.

  11. Aja

    I’m from Connecticut, so I’ve been hearing a lot about this story (in fact one member of this disgusting trio is from my hometown, let’s hear it for suburban privilege).

    The article in The Courant elicited some response, but the one that really struck me was from a reader who was, horrified, HORRIFIED to have to read the details of this assault. “Couldn’t you have written the story without all those disgusting details?” said reader pled? Well, you know, I was horrified too. And shocked and saddened and outraged because this should not be happening. The reader who gets offended because s/he reads about an assault should be offended because that assault happened and because someone has been violated. Sexual assault is offensive and disgusting, bottom line. You can put in every detail or no details and that will still be true.

    Also, I wonder if we’re going to see any dramatic change in the law relating to the definition of sexual assault?

  12. flea

    You should see the comments over at Sadly, No! when they posted something about the men ejaculating on the sleeping woman. A bunch of dudes expressing relief that the men wouldn’t be charged with sexual assault because it wasn’t “real rape” and she “didn’t get hurt.” Before I quit reading out of disgust, they (the commenters, not the guys who write S,N!) had changed the language from “sleeping girl” to “unconscious girl.” I figured it was only a matter of time before it became “passed out drunk girl” to “passed out drunken whore” to “asking for it” to “willing participant.”

    Just like the game of Telephone! By the end of the game, the three men are the victims!

  13. Sassy Pants

    Twisty –
    I’ve really enjoyed reading your blog. It inspired me to post and share my own story of sexual assault in high school (http://biggirlunderoos.blogspot.com/2006/02/beast-of-burden.html)

    1 in 5 high school girls huh. Fuckwads.

  14. Nik

    Ah, waht a way to spend my lunch: reading about stupid, cruel men and being reminded that I exist for the service of men.

    Not to nit-pick or anything, but Jesus never discussed women as property. He was actually pretty radical in his views on women. It was his disciples and Paul and the establishment that came after him that kept/keep women down.

  15. Newbie

    At first I misread the number of years the guy in Manchester got – read 2 1/2 as 21 1/2 yrs – the problem of having to read fast because I really should be grading student’s essays. When I checked again, and then read the article out of shock, I couldn’t believe it was only 5 yrs, or really 2 1/2 yrs, for such a brutal crime. When there are so many wounds that the coroner can’t count them!

    Of course, we patricarchy blamers know what it is all about. He was about to lose his property to another man, and, goddammit, no one else was going to screw his wife and thereby cuckold him (isn’t that a lovely word!).

    Goddamit these things make me mad!

  16. Galloise Blonde

    I’m amused by the claim in the Zoo article that they spent “thousands of dollars in research.”

    I think this means they spent thousands of dollars on cocaine.

    I had a pertinent story for your attention about teachers raping schoolgirls in Chennai, India, where the perps thoughtfully provided the morning after pill for any girl unfortunate enough to fall pregnant. Although the guys have fled, parents aren’t letting their girls go to school anymore, so no more education! The patriarchy wins both ways! (I’d link, but it’s been archived and the site won’t let me register.)

  17. Twisty

    Hey Nik. I was being Jesetious. That’s “facetious about Jesus”! Because the Jesus religion pretty much keeps a sista down, no?

  18. Twisty

    Flea! No they di’int! How is it possible to view what happened to the sleeping girl as “she didn’t get hurt”? in what world do you wake up with fratboy jizz all over your face and say, “ah, another beautiful day, I feel so clean and fresh and empowered with this ejaculate from 3 strange penises caked on my chin!”

  19. Nik

    Oooh “jesetious.” I like it! I’m gonna use that, if you don’t mind. I do feminist theology, so I’m all up on the religious references. I’m attempting to make the Jesus religion a little better for women. God/dess knows it could use some help!

  20. Cass

    Twisty, my dear, we love you and your blog, but you really should have more compassion on your more sensitive fans… this is too much horror for one entry.

    Oh, and fuck Phyllis Schafly. The black community pours comtempt and derision on African-Americans who are a little too anxious to curry white favor, and I don’t see any reason why we shouldn’t have the same attitude towards the bootlicking sycophants in our own group.

  21. Amber

    What I don’t understand about Schlafly is that if a spouse WERE found guilty of rape, then wouldn’t it be considered MORE serious than stranger rape? Since they are like, committed and submitting to one another and bound through sacred matrimony and all that good stuff? I don’t understand how ANY woman could softpedal rape, much less if it was done by someone who “loves” you.

  22. Jezebella

    I’d like to hear the uproar if a frat boy woke up to a three-man semen facial. “Nobody got hurt,” my ass.

  23. Sharoni

    The Jesus religion can’t be made better for women because the men that came after jesus, as Nik pointed out, are the ones that actually invented catholicism, and they set it up to oppress, kill, and generally degrade as many women as possible. The only way to escape them is to escape the patriarchy. Twisty, can’t we just all migrate somewhere and create our own nation where you have to live by a MATRIARCHY’s rules or leave? Let’s seccede! I guess the south tried that, it’d have to be an island somewhere or some such. We could take over some little county in the middle of nowhere and Twisty could be our mayor. Then, members of the patriarchy who happened to wander through could be made to suffer random tortures because they didn’t know the rules. All hail Twisty! could be our motto.

  24. Cass

    The traumatic effects of marital rape are as bad or worse than those of “stranger” rape in every study that’s been done. But the suffering of the victims here obviously isn’t her main concern.

  25. Joolya

    These guys are all on Facebook – so anyone at UConn can tell them exactly how classy you think they are.

  26. Former Jose

    I find it interesting and troubling the brush-off of the Connecticut assault because the woman “wasn’t hurt.” Doesn’t that imply that an assault isn’t an assault if there’s no pain suffered by the victim? I think this mentality is probably of a kin with the beliefs about rape where, if the victim didn’t almost die trying to fight off her attacker, it “wasn’t really rape.” Thoughts?

  27. susanjune

    Maybe I’m confused but does semen not have the potential to be carrying all kinds of nasty diseases. AIDS, Hepatitis C to name but two semen-born lethal pathogens. In a sane world it would be attempted murder to squirt a potentially lethal bio-hazard in somebody’s face.

  28. antelope

    Raise your hand if you think the UConn boys basically were just excited about the idea of watching one another jack off & had to throw in some good ol’ female degradation to avoid dealing with their real desires.

  29. txfeminist

    let’s not forget that murdering fucker Neil Entwistle….just to add to the list for the day. Sigh.

  30. Burrow


    No, really, I’m wondering how those UConn biys still have their penises. Grrrrrr….

  31. MM

    Wow, the State of Connecticut has clearly not been majoring in the biological sciences. I am flabbergasted — gobsmacked (!), even: despite the fact that semen is a major venue for the transmission of hepatitis B and C, and HIV, still, according to the State of Connecticut, semen is “not defined as an intimate part [of the body].” Shameful. And how convenient for these three young men. We’re sure they were “merely” watching porn and not also researching legal statutes on the evening in question??

  32. BadBeliever

    But Twisty, the lame lawyer for the litigiously lucky, Sir Lumsden, has a very rare form of muscular dystrophy which– honestly, you know pain, right?–was causing him pain and limiting his mobility–he probably couldn’t stop himself from climbing atop that stool in his tragically awkward and excruciating effort to stab Mrs. Lumsden in the face, incessantly. Do you know how hard that was for him to disfigure her until she was unrecognizable? His muscles ached like crazy the next few days! What else was he gonna do, he had no choice! See? It’s kind of like a tick of fate, see? Thank Gawd the justice system favors the patriarchy–esp. the law-defending kind.

  33. cat

    *raises hand*

    this is why I go to a women’s college.

  34. mythago

    No fair, Antelope. I only have two hands.

  35. SisterJ

    antelope, count two more hands.

    And the DA could be more creative with the charges. Hit them with every imaginable misdemeanor even if you can’t charge rape.

    Here’s a start:

    simple assault (for touching her with anything)
    assault with a deadly weapon (bacteria-ridden semen)
    slander (for the pre-jerk discussion)
    conspiracy (for having the pre-jerk discussion)
    indecent exposure (she was asleep, but they saw each other)
    defamation of character (for the post-jerk discussion)
    improper disposal of hazardous materials (even hospitals get fined for this)
    littering (ugh)
    loitering (can you do this indoors?)
    gang activity (the whole thing sounds ritualistic)

    Feel free to add more charges…

  36. Twisty

    Perhaps they were also “lumpen”?

  37. Kaka Mak

    Flea: Can you post that link to “Sadly, No?” Being a CT resident and minutes from UCONN, I am following this crap intently.

    Also: GOOD NEWS! Now, only minutes from UCONN will be a new STRIP BAR in Willimantic, CT : The Ultraviolet Cafe! Had this bar been opened sooner–those damn protesting zealots slowed things down–those poor UCONN boys wouldn’t have had to blow thier wad on a sleeping girl!
    They could have gone to UltraViolent (typo there, but, I’m leavin’ it)and properly expressed their healthy sex drive there!

  38. deviousdiva

    5 years for stabbing a woman so many times they couldn’t count the wounds! Why? Because he had a troubled childhood and a disease that was causing him “pain and limiting his mobility”? Didn’t see much limit to his mobility when he was stabbing the poor woman to death. Millions of us fucking live with fucked up childhoods and health problems. We don’t go out and stab, rape and murder people though do we? What would a woman have got for the same crime? I can bet my last cent it wouldn’t be 5 years and there would be a fucking riot over it. I am sick of this shit.

  39. flea

    Kaka Mak – Sure, it’s right here:


    When I looked at it last, it had 8 comments. Now it has 23. Some of the comments are what I would call reasonable. The rest, well, I’ll just say it’s lucky that these dudes had a nice safe space to discuss what is or isn’t rape so calmly and rationally, without the presence of women who are so disruptive and tend to cry rape when it clearly isn’t warranted. What a relief it must be that women aren’t lawmakers!


  40. Christopher

    I am thourouhgly baffled that straight guys in American society can’t understand, on a very visceral level, why it would be so hideous to wake up with fucking semen on your face.

    It’s worse considering the woman decided to stay because she thought she might be raped if she walked home alone.

    That detail is what really pisses me off.

  41. Helen

    His wife had been what’s known as “unfaithful.” This means she flouted the rule that says guys own their wives. She was pretty much askin’ for it.

    I meant to call you on this one, being a victim of husbandly infidelity in the recent past and still suffering the psychological fallout. But rereading your sentence, I believe you did not mean to say infidelity is OK, just that killing people for it is not OK. Am I right? Because giving people the goahead for infidelity in monogamous relationships is just telling the male sense of entitlement to go for it!

    A Cornell professor opines that girls are snapping under the pressure imposed by the rule that they be rail-thin virgin sexbots, so they’re wearily drowning what’s left of their shattered selves in liquor and drugs.

    Well, at least they’ve pinpointed something other than the “pressure imposed by trying to Have it All, which the nasty feminists have imposed on them, and which they can’t handle and should go back to the Home” thing. Refreshing, actually!

    Your Phyllis Schafly link took me here where such gems as

    When Time Magazine runs a cover story called “The Case for Staying Home,” and Reuters reports that housework is good for women because it can help prevent ovarian cancer, you know the feminists are on the run. (Phyllis Schafly)

    gave me a good laugh.

  42. Twisty

    Helen, my tone, in the passage you quote, was intended to be facetious, which device I humbly and perhaps ineptly employ in the service of lo-brow humor. However, since you bring it up, it is my position that fidelity is a patriarchal construct, and, while it is a useful quality in a dog, I really can’t advocate it as the primary theme in the narrative of intimate human relationships. So I really really can’t advocate murdering people who decline to go along with it.

    As a matter of fact, I’m more or less against murder generally.

    But, I’m not giving anybody the go-ahead for anything. If, for whatever loony reason, you tell the milkman “I will be faithful to you” and then you do it with the cabaña boy, you are not, perhaps, enbiggening your humanity to its fullest potential, which is bad. But that’s only because lying to milkmen is mean, not because there is anything morally wrong in doing it with cabaña boys.

  43. Cass

    The issue wasn’t infidelity, it was the fact she was about to slip out of his control. Trust me on this one.

  44. firefalluk

    Didn’t you get the memo? The patriarchy officially takes Feb 29th off … so long as noone notices :(

    On the brighter side, it seems that in the UK, Zoo is having subscription troubles – at least, it’s changed it’s day of publication, which I read as such (perhaps I’m just being an optimist).

    As for the Connecticut college lads, how is that not rape? or at least assault with a deadly* weapon. Simply unbelievable.

    *let’s be generous

  45. Sharoni

    What DeviousDiva said.

Comments have been disabled.