Dudes need to chill, self-examine, and then if they still disagree, continue to chill and say “oh well, I think she’s wrong.” Because otherwise, it becomes whining. Which is where we are now.

Why is it that women are supposed to deal with freakin’ rape/death threats on the web, but so many men can’t even take a criticial link? Ay. I’ve had plenty of people say hateful things to me, been deleted, been flamed…and you know, hey. That’s their right, and if it was clear we weren’t going to agree, I moved the hell on.

denies John the right to intellectual participation based on his sex, of all things

Yep, failing to agree with him in all things and pointing out the flaws in his argument = “subtly calling him a sexist” = silencing him = denying his right to participate in discourse = lynching= white liberal dude genocide = worse than the Holocaust

Incidentally, this really had nothing to do with John Cain until he started huffing about how unfaaaaaair it was that I attributed a rather obvious and gaping hole in Matt’s logic (namely, that there are a whole lot of other considerations besides legality that go into a woman’s decision whether to seek an abortion) to the fact that he doesn’t have to recognize or even see what doesn’t affect him personally.

Run along, now. Shoo, shoo.

After a progressively horrifying review of the linked commentary at Quixote and Feministe, I’m not even going to address the study that started all of this, because clearly the validity of the study is not what certain readers have been calling into question. At least Feministe pretends to argue over his analysis while subtly suggesting that John is a sexiste, perhaps even genetically, simply because he is a man and therefore due to his gender is unable to fully understand Feministe’s position on abortion rights. This fallacy, echoed at Quixote with far less sophistication, is offensive on a democratic basis, and denies John the right to intellectual participation based on his sex, of all things. I’d love to put this argument to the test with animal rights activists. In any case, as with handicapped rights (my line of work), certainly the affected group must have their voice heard and included, but you can’t just exclude everyone else, especially if this exclusion is selective to those whom disagree with you. To do so is to a disservice to your own position, argument, and intelligence (intelligence refers to Feministe. Sorry quixote, but I didn’t detect any signs of intelligent life on your blog). So please, feminist blogosphere, please do not dismiss the voice of white male bloggers based on their gender (or race? where does “white” come into play and why did you bring it up?)

Also John is not a sexist.

As I said earlier, Jill over at Feministe responded to my two posts from Wednesday, and she deserves a response. First, I want to say that I was wrong about the abortion study. Reading her take on the studies, as well as re-reading the abstracts (I d…