This diary is in response to comments in a Front Page diary from earlier today. The diary pointed out the republican response to the hobby lobby decision, which of course contained the predictable amount of slut shaming.
Unfortunately, it seems many people here took this as a perfect opportunity to bash other people for their sex lives.
One poster posted that the following should be the GOP hastags on twitter:
#GOPvirginsSpeakOutBeing offended, I responded by saying:
Not at all funny. Just mean. Yes, most republican men have sex. And pretty much all the pundits cited above. If it isn't ok to shame sex, why is it ok to shame a lack of it?This set off a storm of replies, that, given the amount of virgin shaming that goes on around here, and in society in general, I thought deserved a diary of its own.
As an initial matter, one replier stated:
"I'm so sick of people on dKos scolding other about (18+ / 0-)This comment sadly has 18 upvotes.
being mean. Get a life and a sense of humor."
Can someone explain to me how this is any different from what you would hear from Fox News or Free Republic whenever they say something bigoted or offensive? Blaming the person offended and telling them to get a sense of humor, rather than actually examining whether something might be offensive? How is this response any different to the typical right-wing response when someone calls them out on their offensiveness?
Getting to the more substantive responses to my post, these seemed to fall under 3 main arguments:
1. Why was I defending Repulicans?
I wasn't defending Republicans. I was defending virgins. The original comment, while maybe intended as an insult against slut-shaming republicans, was just as much of an insult against virgins.
Its not much different from using a hashtag like #republicans_are_girls or #republicans_are_gay or #republicans_are_fat or any other number of obnoxious hashtags. It may be a little offensive to republicans, but its really an attack on the group the Republicans are being compared to, by implying their is something wrong with those groups.
If someone used these hashtags, would people more readily recognize why such things might be offensive to more than just republicans?
2. The purpose of the original comment wasn't to insult virgins, it was to point out GOP hypocrisy
There certainly is a double standard when it comes to the different responses to men and women having sex - but that is a difference in the slut-shaming response to men having sex versus women having sex. Virgins don't enter into the equation. Except if people want to use that as an insult.
A proper response to this hypocrisy would be to point out how men who have lots of sex aren't shamed to nearly the same extent as women, and how some men want to have sex with as many women as possible, while calling those same women sluts. Those are examples of the hypocrisy at issue.
Again, virgins don't enter into the equation. Except if people want to use it as some juvenile insult.
3. The GOP launched a war on women's freedom, and thus any means necessary should be utilized in response.
Do people really think that calling republican men virgins - a group that Republican men almost certainly share a similar scorn for - is going to do anything to help women's rights? Will it convince a single person, let alone a single politician or a single judge, to change their views? Or is it just an excuse, like fat-shaming someone on the pretext of caring about their health, to feel superior to other people?
Shouldn't we be trying to reach a point where no one is shamed for their sex lives?
How does shaming virgins further that cause?