Commentary

Making A Mole Hill Out of Man Mountain

Posted by tbaker |

By Rachel Birdsell

Recently, I’ve seen an influx of online articles that are horribly demeaning to women. I’ve decided to not post the links, because I don’t want to give the assbags more traffic to their sites. One article was a list of reasons why we shouldn’t send our daughters to college. The gist of the article was that our little angels should only dream of getting married and having lots of babies. I know as a mother I was severely disappointed watching my daughter graduate with a finance degree. I wept bitterly at the thought of her having a career instead of being a baby machine.

Another article I read was a list of ways to tell if a woman was a slut. It would appear that some women have something known as a “slut face” and it was one way to tell whether or not they’d put out on a first date. You know how you’ll know when a woman is going to put out? When she’s actually having sex with you. There was an entire list of things to look for to determine how the slut factor of a woman such as: tattoos, piercings other than the ears, weight, and other idiotic imaginings.

Why is it that if women have lots of sex, we’re automatically sluts, but when men sleep around, they’re studs and have conquered Man Mountain? Manliness oozes from their every pore, and even as we are choking from all the testosterone we still find a way to be in awe of their hairiness.

Actually, whenever I see a man being demeaning to women, whether it’s telling them that all they’re good for is cooking, cleaning and making babies, or that if a woman likes having lots of sex she’s a slut, I immediately think that the man is severely insecure. And while I may call them assbags, I actually feel sorry for them. Why do they demean women? Do they fear us? If we are educated women in control of our sexuality, are we terrifying? Is it some kind of weird penis envy thing even though one of us has one less penis than the other? Maybe they’re scared that we will rise up like Amazon warriors of old and bludgeon them in their sleep.

While I may not exactly understand why some men feel the need to bitterly demean women, I do know that the one thing that happens when they do is that we become stronger in our resolve to fight back. I don’t mean just women, either. I’m talking about men and women who think women should be educated and that it’s no one’s business how many men or other women she’s boinked, EVEN IF SHE BOINKS THEM ALL AT THE SAME TIME. If you are a man who feels the need to demean women, maybe you should ask yourself why. Then either change or forever be dubbed Sir Assbag of Man Mountain. It’s your call, stud.

Rachel Birdsell is a freelance writer and artist. You can drop her a line @rabirdsell@gmail.com

22 Comments

9224789 October 7, 2013 at 12:55 pm

This article is pointless, thank you for the rant/sarcasm. Penis envy, amazon warriors, “boinking” REALLY IS THIS A GOOD ARTICLE? So the point was to say she’s read alot of articles that are demeaning to women, yet she is demeaning to men the whole time. Hypocrite?

Reply to this comment
Anna October 7, 2013 at 1:55 pm

Don’t feel bad, she does the same thing with conservatives, Christians, Republicans,
Tea Party members, abortion opponents, etc…
pretty much anything that she doesn’t fit into her narrow world view.

Reply to this comment
9224789 October 7, 2013 at 2:21 pm

I was wondering if I was the only one that found this article pure dribble, obnoxious and inflammatory. TBaker come on….what did you hope to accomplish by posting this? Did you get a giggle out of the Sir Assbag of Man Mountain? Is this supposed to stimulate healthy dialogue or drive people further apart?

Reply to this comment
TBaker October 7, 2013 at 2:27 pm

Mainly, it is mean to be entertaining for a group of people who rarely have a forum for which to express their opinions. I realize you think she has a narrow world view, but if you read her articles carefully she is normally disturbed and ranting about people who try and inflict their small world view on others. She merely does that in a column where you are free to express your opinions as well. Thanks for the comments!

Reply to this comment
Rachel October 7, 2013 at 2:30 pm

Well, the article probably isn’t Pulitzer material, but it was good enough that you took the time to comment on it. That has to count for something, right?

Thanks for reading!

Reply to this comment
9224789 October 7, 2013 at 3:32 pm

Rachel- please make no mistake, I commented on how utterly worthless and flawed your “article” was. It is an inaccurate assumption to think that because I commented qualifies that mind vomit you call writing “good enough”, quite the opposite actually. By your “logic” my comments when I step in excrement at the dog park would make dog droppings and your “writing” on par with each other….it’s your call, stud.

Reply to this comment
TBaker October 8, 2013 at 8:57 am

Wow. I’m feeling a lot of hostility here. 9224789, I think you need to understand that everyone has different perspectives and it’s a fact of life that you have to learn to deal with. Rachel in this article is discussing the fact that our society leans heavily towards masculine tendencies and historically has shown little respect for femininity and female independence. This is a fact accepted by many scholars and activists and women, so she is merely trying to stand up for a cause. If you want others to be more patient and understanding then exhibit that in yourself. Thanks for taking the time to be involved with your community, whether or not you agree.

Reply to this comment
9224789 October 8, 2013 at 1:54 pm

Hostility? noooooope just get tired of your blatent agenda and the idea that I should get behind your ridicilous reasoning on publishing this article. Maybe you should require your ranters ie “writers” to be less hypocritical? You don’t need to teach me about life tb, I promise, I understand life and Fayetteville much more than someone born in the corn-belt. I appreciate your condescending remarks though.

Reply to this comment
Anna October 8, 2013 at 10:45 am

“If you want others to be more patient and understanding then exhibit that in yourself,”
I think Rachel needs to take your advice as well Tara! Most if not all of her “rants” are hostile and degrading to anyone who thinks differently than she does.
I laughed out loud at 9224789’s response to this article! It doesn’t feel good when it’s turned back on you does it?

Reply to this comment
Anna October 8, 2013 at 12:22 pm

I’m sure Rachel thinks that I check in every week just to see what inflammatory rant she is on this week, but the fact is that I like reading the Free Weekly…all of it.
I especially enjoy the arts and entertainment sections because I am an artist and musician. I know… “gasp” a conservative artist and musician?! I guess I am one of the rare artsy people that can think with both sides of my brain.
I’m sure that Rachel’s column is amusing to like minded people of her breed but it is often really offensive to many others, and I am sure there are more out there like me.
Just so you know, it is not only the far, far left that read your publication. Oh, and it would be refreshing to read an opposing point of view from time to time!

Reply to this comment
9224789 October 8, 2013 at 1:49 pm

Anna – the Freakly is only here to promote the left, not have a balanced discussion. Just as Rachel complains of articles that are demeaning to women while writing an article demeaning men. (oh the irony!) TB has no interest in being balanced. Her only goal is trying to turn Fayetteville into a progressive cesspool (see articles asking for papers to print wedding announcements of same-sex couples who can’t even marry legally in the state amoung others). Keep using this ridicilous person who calls herself a “writer” to perpetuate your agenda, Birdsell is a joke author and someone who clearly has an axe to grind. Its a shame the Freakly allows this type of “weekly feature”.

Reply to this comment
TBaker October 9, 2013 at 11:12 am

I honestly feel bad for you 9224789, carrying around such fear and anger for outspoken women and same-sex couples must be extremely tiring, stressful, and has obviously made you a little bitter. Lighten up man, and embrace love! ;-)

Reply to this comment
9224789 October 9, 2013 at 2:36 pm

I feel bad for you, living this idea that what you do benefits our area. I have no fear I just would ask that you try, just try to maybe not have such an obvious slant in ALL you publish. I get tired of you progressives trying to shove your “ideas” down my throat. “Outspoken women” don’t need to go around bashing men in their article, that is just an excuse to disguise their anger into an socially acceptable rally cry. Same-sex couples have no rights under Arkansas law, if you don’t like it then GO BACK NORTH.

Reply to this comment
TBaker October 9, 2013 at 3:04 pm

Sir or Ma’m, You are definitely entitled to your opinion, but I may be able to save you some time and tell you I will not be leaving, and there is a place for all of us here as long as we can be civil and patient with one another. And in case you weren’t aware, there are a ton of people from Arkansas who agree with me, so where should they go? Don’t answer that! :-)

Reply to this comment
Anna October 9, 2013 at 3:53 pm

Terrah, if you really feel that we should be civil and patient with one another why do you post the ugly rants Rachel submits week to week? There are so many other ways to get a point across without being crass and vulgar. Do you really think you can change people’s hearts and minds by condoning in her verbiage the very things you profess to despise in others?
There should be no double standard here! 9224789 is no worse than Rachel and yet you defend her right to rant her opinion and scold him for his. It sounds to me like you guys can dish it our but you can’t take it.
You said in another comment “I think you need to understand that everyone has different perspectives and it’s a fact of life that you have to learn to deal with.”
That should apply to both sides, not just the other guy!

Reply to this comment
tbaker October 9, 2013 at 4:17 pm

Anna,

I would agree with you except that I feel Rachel is normally acting in RESPONSE to an injustice being done (gay rights being taken or forbidden, women being belittled in media, etc.), while people like 9224789 are fighting and being hateful for the injustice she talks about. At TFW, we don’t consider gay rights and women’s rights/respect a political issue, we consider it a reality that needs to be addressed. Period. That’s the future, like it or not. I do understand that there are better ways to go about changing peoples’ minds, but the column isn’t meant to change minds. I try to be as unbiased as possible in the rest of the paper, while keeping in mind the interests of our readership, and Rachel has been an extremely popular columnist with The Free Weekly, bringing people who believe how she does many laughs and feelings of “thank God, I’m not alone.” We all need that, and The Free Weekly just happens to be Rachel’s and her fans outlet for that. Believe it or not, we have waaaaay more comments and emails about how much Rachel is appreciated and funny than the alternative. If there are others interested in a column or article that deal with the issues they are concerned about I would love to consider it.

Reply to this comment
9224789 October 9, 2013 at 4:32 pm

TB a couple of points….first your statement should say that you feel Rachel is normally acting in a response to a *perceived injustice; which is a HUGE DIFFERENCE. I like how you keep saying I’m hateful yet I’m just voicing the other side of the argument. GAY “RIGHTS” are a political issue because guess what, it’s not a right in our state, that is the present…like it or not. If you can predict the future then likely you know I’m about to tell you that you’re in the wrong line of work. You have waaaaaaaaaay more comments and emails about how much Rachel is appreciated than the alternative because you have alienated the other side by continually repressing one side and glorifying the other. Might I suggest that if you were to publish Rachels “articles” in a statewide paper it would be 70/30 or more against her vulgar and demeaning slant. On second thought no one but the Freekly will publish her because they know their readers will dislike it. I should write a prison magazine that talks about the best way to stab people and then point to all the praise I receive by email as justification for putting that garbage in print. (right? isn’t this what you’re saying; as long as the minority whom you write for like it then it validates any content, no matter how slanted and worthless) But keep feeding the people who pat you on the back TB because the MAJORITY of Arkansas does not agree with you, whether you know it or not.

Reply to this comment
tbaker October 9, 2013 at 5:00 pm

9224789, unfortunately for people like you, the majority of Arkansas (baby boomers and older) are going to be dying off in a few generations and the new generation has been shown statistically to lean more towards the side of openness, compassion and acceptance (which just happens to lean “left” as you say) than the alternative. I don’t see into the future, I’m young, and like my counterparts, I am the future. Like it or not.

Reply to this comment
9224789 October 10, 2013 at 12:16 pm

TB Can you please provide your stats on the “new generation” in Arkansas that leans toward openness, compassion and acceptance? (because if I disagree with your ideology I’m obviously hateful and not compassionate as you say) I am young as well, so I am happy to fight for our rights to protect what is actual marriage which is 1 man + 1 woman

Reply to this comment
Anna October 11, 2013 at 6:42 am

Actually, I agree with the premise of not changing what the majority of your readers approve of for the sake of the few that might be offended :) Another notion that should apply to everyone!

Reply to this comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. All fields are required.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>