Via Pandagon, I found myself reading this nauseating pile of shit.
"Is motherhood instinctive or learned behavior? Both religion and science tell us that it is instinctive, much to the distaste of the feminist ideologists, who have never been overburdened by a solid grasp on either. But one need only watch the way in which a young girl mothers her stuffed animals to see the maternal instinct at work."
Really, the first paragraph tells you enough to stop right there. The snide, queeny tone delivering a patronizing dismissal of assumed objections is enough to make you laugh, but religitards wielding science to bolster their bigoted-ass claims always raise my ire. Dude, keep your grimey hands off my science and honestly, keep it off my Bible too. If you want to base your opinion of women on dirty jokes told in middle school, sci-fi novel sex scenes, and crude anecdotes told by drunk men at the bar or hunting lodge; do that, but don't try to dress it up as religion and science. You put down and carefully back away from your agenda of framing women as servile bitches that need a big strong stud to swoop them away and help them fulfill their baby factory potential, and we'll discuss instincts and human behavior in relation to evolutionary theory and studies in animal behavior and how that reinforces or contradicts the presentation of gender roles in religious texts. Til then, back away from the religion/science and just say "this is what I think" instead of using the higher power/post-Enlightenment scholarship schtick to try and dress up your dumb ideas.
Anyway, if you want to read volxwagon puppy's how-to-list for ladies to not ruin their life by becoming indepentant strong-willed tramps, you will have to follow the link. I will share this one last little chunk which is just unrivalled for its what-the-fuck factor:
"As for the likelihood that the technological future will eventually solve such problems, it is worth noting that no society that possesses artificial wombs, robot sex dolls, multiplayer video games and 24-hour sports networks is one in which men are likely to show a tremendous amount of interest in relationships or the opposite sex."
Uhmmm... yeah, this is definitely someone who has a strong and clear grasp of interpersonal relationships. This is the fellow I am going to from now on to help me figure out quandries about the kind of future I want and how to get there. Really now, we have 24 sports networks and multiplayer video games and some pretty realistic sex dolls, but do you see most fellows choosing those things over getting laid or thinking of them as substitutes for a relationship? Maybe there are a few fellows that do, just like there are some guys who choose the bottle or a hit over a girl, but technology is hardly leading to this mass exodus of guys from the arms of women into the loving embrace of a PS2 and a silicone vagina.
I went to his blog and read around for a while, but the dude basically just seems kind of crazy, like he doesn't have a whole lot of real interaction with adults. I don't know how old he is, but there is something pretty adolescent pervy about the way he talks about women. Hints in his blog suggest that he isn't in middle school, but his brain still seems to be.
(Amanda, I don't link to Pandagon near often enough, but a general thanks to you for the excellent writing. Keep fighting the good fight.)