jeff gannon on cindy sheehan's *routine* "hyster"ectomy

[nashville_brook]

while surfing around following threads of this and that... i decided to check in that old Jeff Gannon just to see if he was still pretending to be writer.

he is.

here's something from his blog that caught my attention and i wanted to share it with some like minded people for discussion and deconstruction.

August 25, 2006
The Body Politic Of Liberal Women

Since the heyday of the "Women's Liberation" movement, some members of the fairer sex have been thrusting their feminine body parts into the forefront of American politics. During the 1960s, these women burned their bras as a symbol of breaking the shackles of a male dominated world and unleashing their womanhood. During the 2004 election, antiwar relic Jane Fonda bounced around the country on behalf of her fellow traveller, Democrat John Kerry with her "Vagina Voices" campaign - as if that opening in the middle of her face didn't produce enough toxic rhetoric.

In her latest ploy to regain the attention of the Old Media, antiwar activist Cindy Sheehan has sacrificed her uterus to remind America that she's still around. Sheehan's sister, DeeDee Miller provided the details at New Orleans Veterans for Peace. If you need a refresher course on what qualifies as a moonbat rant, read the entire article. But for those who just want a chuckle, check this out:

"Cindy lost her womb but opened Camp Casey with loving arms as a metaphoric womb to those brave souls willing to say no more. Willing to say that they love their country enough to stand up for what is right and against what is wrong."

With all due respect to someone who has undergone a serious - though routine - medical procedure, it's called a HYSTER-ectomy for a reason.

some things i'm wondering:

what is with the hatred of women? gannon's gay, or at least has plied his sexuality to the same sex. in my experience gay men respect women... so what's the flavor of this man's orientation. it's not garden variety homosexuality. it's violence, imo.

so, what he's saying is that WOMEN discredit the peace movement? considering the source, i'll take that as a big high-sign to our POWER.

"Routine medical procedure." like having your balls removed?

a comment:
i'm not posting this to register outrage. more power to the bald-headed freak for outing himself as a woman-hating wacko. i'm posting it to mull over the *operation* of hatred and power vis a vis women in the peace movement.

to be clear... we're doing something right when the only thing they have to attack is our "routine medical procedures."

[Heidi]

1. I don't see his sexual orientation as an issue.

He's a jackass and blind supporter of the Bush administration. That's the issue. Further, I don't believe a supporter of Bush can speak authoritatively on who is or isn't a credit to the peace movement.

[nashville_brook]

7. i think what i'm grokking is that his public orientation isn't the

garden variety male-centered sexuality. the gay men i know are attracted to men b/c they... are attracted to men. this creature, i think you could say, *hates women.* so, i wonder how that informs his whole persona.

it's not in the liberal experience to know many people who *hate* as a matter of social orientation. so, relevant or not, it makes me wonder.

on the issue of his *authority* -- i think you miss my point. i'm not postioning him as "an authority." i'm positioning him as a "signpost."

[acmavm]

2. We all know what body part he 'thrust' into the forefront of American

politics, or rather, into the forefront of an American politician or military man.

[nashville_brook]

9. that line caught my attention too -- mary daly would love this...

his language is patriarchal in the extreme! it's almost too self-consciously patriarchal -- like a parody of itself.

[peacetalksforall]

16. Let's just say it - he thrust his penis on the internet in a come

hither pose and ran a business of convenience in the State Capital of the U.S. and doesn't deny it. But his duty is to criticize the sister's writing and tell us how routine it is.

Jeff and Ann should be given a show together.

[nashville_brook]

23. they should be given nothing

they've been given too much.

[acmavm]

3. We all know what body part he 'thrust' into the forefront of American

politics, or rather, into the forefront of an American politician or military man.

[MissWaverly]

4. It was released like that to protect her privacy

I will be so glad when normalcy comes back to this country. This vitriolic
hate crap is enough, I can't believe individuals get away with this. Surgery is always a serious matter, nobody chooses to have it done as a political statement or as a whim.
They would say the same about any well known figure. Illness is hard enough w/o having
people making hay out of your problems.

[acmejack]

5. Who takes Gannon seriously?

The dick with ears speaks...

[Berry Cool]

6. Personally, I think the rhetoric he's ridiculing is overwrought too, but

no more overwrought than his.

Guckert's prose is just as purple as that which he criticizes. Not only that, but incorrect (feminists never burned their bras; that was an urban legend) and misogynistic. It would be misogynistic whether he was gay OR straight.

Observe how, right after he references the bra-burning that never happened, he describes Jane Fonda as having "bounced around the country." If that's not purple prose, I don't know what is.

He also appears to believe that women possess two bodily orifices out of which only toxic substances flow, one being their mouths. I won't assume that has anything to do with him being gay, because Lord knows I've met too many other gay men with nothing but respect for women, and too many het men who seem to agree with him on that point.

He also seems to think that Cindy Sheehan's surgery was a mere PR ploy. Nice.

Know what, Guckert? It's called a HYSTER-ectomy for a reason, all right. Because male sexists like YOU decided that if a woman acted "crazy" in THEIR eyes, it must be because her sexual organs made her so.

Wow, Guckert. If I didn't know more about the origins of the phrase than I do, or were more of a sexist than I am, I might accuse you of going off half-cocked.

[nashville_brook]

11. "purple prose" -- !!

hits the nail on the, um, head.

on the sexual orientation thing -- i think you're right about that too. that was my initial feeling. i don't mean to "make a thing" of anyone's orientation, but this critter is a walking contradicktion. the subtext of devaluing all that is feminine is (in my experience) a hetero phenomena. honestly, it kinda makes me wonder if he has ANY sexual/intimate orientation.

i think he's HATErosexual.

[nini]

8. "sacrificed her uterus to remind America that she's still around"

That little phrase says it all. He implies she had this done simply to get attention. I guess the fact she was bleeding so heavily it was affecting her health had nothing to do with it.

They are sick idiots. I guess I'll go out and have one too just for the hell of it. :eyes:

[nashville_brook]

13. this resonates with me. women with illness are ALWAYS attention-seeking

aren't they?

since about 2002 i've had a chronic illness that refuses to be diagnosed (by doctors). if you pick up a book on lupus and compared it with my med records, you'd have to be blind not to make the connection.

if you're a post-30 woman with a "complaint," then you are attention-seeking because lord knows NO ONE is giving you any attention otherwise (that's the attitude... not my position).

[nini]

22. sorry about your situation :-(

I hope you find a doctor that takes the time to work with you. Freaking idiots. Like EVERYTHING is 'hormonal' with us. :eyes:

Good Luck :hug:

[chefgirl]

10. I know I'll probably take heat for this but...

Your question:

what is with the hatred of women? gannon's gay, or at least has plied his sexuality to the same sex. in my experience gay men respect women

Not the gay men I've known. Now, I readily admit I'm only speaking about the gay men I've known, and known well, but every one of them had an underlying, almost violent distate and disrespect for the women around them. Let me also add here, that my VERY best friend, of over 20 years, is a gay man.

In fact, I have absolutely no gripe with gay men or women, or I should say, I never did, until I began to watch the behavior of the particular men I'm referring to here. That attitude has really given me pause to reflect on how I feel about gay men, and for quite a while there, it left a really bad taste in my mouth toward them.

I think I've finally come to the conclusion that an asshole is an asshole, gay or straight, (Jeff Gannon) but I am putting it out there just to say, it does exist, and maybe in larger numbers than one might think.

I'm just sayin :shrug:

-chef-

[MADem]

12. You shouldn't take heat for reporting what you observe

But I'm curious about your statement "...almost violent distate and disrespect for the women around them." Would that be mothers, co-workers, neighbors, other relatives? Just women in general? Do you have any insight as to why?

I'll be honest--I've never tuned in to the point that I've noticed that in gay males I've worked with or who have been my neighbors. The odd gay male relative doesn't count, because one is usually nice at family gatherings even to relatives one cannot bear, but I've never heard gay guys speak ill in vitriolic fashion of women.

Then again, I've never really had those sorts of conversations where the subject would come up. So I guess it's a case of "WhadduEyeNo" anyway!

[chefgirl]

14. I have no instinct as to why

And as I said, these are only the gay men that I've known personally, but being best friends with a gay man affords opportunities to hang out with him and his friends, in their circle, from time to time.

Yes, to answer your question, it is women in general. Perhaps violent might have been the wrong word to use, but what I meant by it was 'vitriolic' 'impassioned' distaste and disrespect for women. Could just be the particular group of gay men I've known, but by the same token, it hasn't been just one or two of them, but all of them.

Like all men when they get together and hang out, (and like all women too, to be perfectly honest) they will discuss the opposite sex in less than flattering terms sometimes. What I've seen with the guys I'm talking about is really something more pronounced, though.

If I HAD to answer as to why, then I would just say, in my less than tolerant moments, it has struck me as a kind of jealousy, maybe, of women. Almost childish attacks against women, even more than the general trash talk men and women level at eachother when alone with their own gender...if that makes sense.

Just my personal observations. I've never claimed to know what I'm talking about though.

-chef-

[nashville_brook]

18. cattiness -- gotcha

that, i'm familiar with.

competitiveness. kind of a need to run other people down in order to feel good about yourself.

[Red_Viking]

19. I've seen the same thing myself

I'm a straight gal, just turned 40, with many gay male friends. My buddies have respect for everyone, and seem to really like women. However, I've met some of their friends who definitely don't like women. Some seem to be disgusted with only women, and some hate all heteros, referring to us as "breeders." I don't know why. One man was overtly rude to me at a party, after having just met me. My very close friend, who threw the party, grabbed my hand and said loudly, "Pay no attention to him. He's just a mean old queen." I did see this same guy again in the future, and although he had no interest in talking to me, he was at least polite and didn't throw food on me or anything.

So, I don't know why it happens, but it does. Could be a kind of "us vs. them" mentality. Thankfully, the hateful folks I've met are few and far between, especially since I moved from Texas to Oregon and stopped hanging out with the Young Republicans. :P


Peace,

RV

[MADem]

21. You gave an excellent summation and brought up some interesting

points.

It could be the old "competetion gene" kicking in--that jealousy you noted. After all, they share the same sexual "target" (probably not the best word choice, but I'm at a loss to come up with something better--I'm no sociologist, either) so they could feel as though they are competing for the same "prizes."

It would be interesting for you to continue your observations, and ascertain if they feel the same way about flat-out, full-time grandmas--you know, the ladies that have put aside the hair dye and high heels, and have gone the "Aunt/Ant Bee" route; the pie-baking, apron wearing grannies who aren't out there scoping the fellahs. Additionally, does orientation factor in at all? Is Rosie or Ellen DeGeneres OK? Could it be that the ladies who aren't 'competing' in the game are exceptions, and get a pass!

[nashville_brook]

17. interesting...

maybe it's a youthful cliche/attitude that i could do with re-examining. i might be over-generalizing from my pool of friends; so like, friend bias.

it's so un-politically correct to publically discuss the social psychology of those outside of our identity group. but, we do it. it's human nature to observe human nature and wonder about it -- to wonder HOW one's subject-position informs their behavior.

[NV Whino]

15. This virulent spewing means only one thing to me...

He's trying to best Ann Coulter.

[nashville_brook]

20. he's a wannabe, for sure