Congratulations to Team Douchebag on their first major victory

It’s war once there’s casualties, right?

Jen McCreight and her commenters dubbed the necessity for a third wave of atheism — a wave that actually gives a shit about people who are getting forced out of the movement by a cloud of vile hatred just because they’re not cis males — as “atheism plus”. A forum is built and a thousand members join within a week. Organizations form to shore up some social justice movement intersections with the atheist community. We built something good. Something energizing. Something that portends a great swamp-draining. A way for movement atheism to heal itself.

Then a whole antifeminist and anti-woman wing of the atheist movement rallies to show us why we can’t have nice things. They amp up the hatred, the vitriol, the vileness. They steal Jen’s resources and leave her drained and incapable of contributing, by making her clean up rivers of bullshit aimed at tarring her personhood, slut-shaming her, and threatening her job by taking the same bullshit to her employers. They make her dread contributing her writings to this movement. This movement which she loved. This movement in which she gathered fans of her writing as easily as some people breathe.

She was a bright shining star in the atheist community when she joined, with all the energy and motivation in the world — but because she was young, not ugly, and made the mistake of mentioning that she has boobs, she started gathering the wrong kind of attention. Then she realized her mistake and started fighting, and the same community that once welcomed her energy and motivation turned on her.

Not everyone, of course. Just the terribly entitled ones who registered her demands that people stop being such assholes as “being divisive”. The people who take “stop being such assholes” as a challenge to prove exactly how big an asshole you can be.

And the irony of it is, this is why a third wave of atheism is entirely necessary. The same people who would bully Jen McCreight out of the community do the same to any female voice that speaks up. Some of them do a victory lap about pushing Jen out of the movement (and yes, this is a shameless bit of self-congratulation on having done damage to the movement!). And they simultaneously ask, “why is atheism plus necessary?”

It’s necessary because of you. It’s necessary because of the colours of Team Douchebag that you so proudly wear while you’re attacking vital new members of the community who dare to talk about issues that might only affect, say, women. It’s necessary especially because there are some among you who won’t wear your colours off the field. It’s necessary because of the divide — the “Great Rift” in our community — between normal, reasonable people, and people who hate as a matter of course. It’s necessary because some people think that if you stomp on sadists who get off on bullying people, then YOU’RE the bully. It’s necessary because some people need to destroy to make themselves feel important.

Some people say you can’t win a war on trollishness.

Maybe not, but you can make the trolls wear their colors off the field. You can show the world exactly what kind of hate-filled monsters some of your supposed “leaders” are. You can prove that the antifeminist and anti-woman factions — our largest single issue for movement cohesion at the moment — are the ones driving the divide and are the ones that make atheism plus a necessity. They are the ones drumming people out of the movement. They are the ones embracing tribalism. They are the ones making atheism plus a divisive idea — because they cling tenaciously to the idea that giving offense is sacrosanct. These people WANT an “us vs them” war, but the reasonable people who recognize that hatred has no place in our movement to be the “them” in the equation. All because they worship offense as its own greatest good, and hold the status quo of privilege as our golden cow.

And here I thought we weren’t supposed to have gods or idols in this community.

So congratulations on your victory, those of you who consider “atheism plus” to be an evil that one must fight. You’ve managed to push out one of our brightest stars.

Know, though, that I’m not going anywhere. And you won’t win the war.

Update: To avoid giving anyone any misperceptions, Jen did not say that she was quitting blogging, or the community. She’s taking a break. But that means she’s taking a break because of the hatred she’s incurring, which amounts to bullying, which amounts to a subset of our community forcing her out. This changes nothing in the above post except that Jen’s taking a breather, not a bow.

{advertisement}
Congratulations to Team Douchebag on their first major victory
{advertisement}
The Orbit is still fighting a SLAPP suit! Help defend freedom of speech, click here to find out more and donate!

112 thoughts on “Congratulations to Team Douchebag on their first major victory

  1. 51

    I don’t know how to respond to vicious people in real life. I usually just shy away from them so I’m not sure what I would do with that finger once I lifted it and decided I was going to stop the attacks. Maybe you have some advice?

  2. 52

    @PG:

    Not to mention she has a tendency to conflate legitimate criticism with her harassment, and more often than not conclude that the legitimate criticism (of feminism, of atheism+) *is* harassment.

    Citation, please.

  3. 53

    Just an observation – nohellbelowus sounds very similar to Franc Hoggle. Any chance to do an IP comparison?

    Great response Jason. I wish these filthy bastards were just an extinction burst I don’t believe they are. The only way we can win is by being as loud and prominent as them and making our position the default one. We will win but it won’t be easy

  4. 56

    This is directed to PG and like minds:

    The comparison my be odious, but I suggest an analogy with the paedophilia problem in the catholic church.

    Atheists, of course, strongly condemn this behaviour, but are we not almost as appalled by the church’s response, which is typically to trivialise, dismiss or conceal the problem? How do we react when the church says, “Oh, but this is just a few isolated incidents! You shouldn’t condemn the whole church. Most priests aren’t paedophiles. Why make such a fuss? Focus on the good, not on the bad!”. Aren’t we especially disgusted when they resort to blaming the victim? When someone within speaks out and acknowledges the problem, don’t we praise them?

    There is a misogyny problem within the atheist movement. It is well documented. Let us not trivialise, or dismiss, or sweep the problem under the carpet. Nor complain that is it isn’t representative of the atheist movement as a whole. And most of all, let us not blame the victim. We must do just what we would expect of the church – focus on the problem, highlight the problem, condemn the problem in the strongest possible terms, and set about fixing it. The people who have been doing this should not be attacked for exaggerating the problem, or for calling the movement into disrepute. They should be thanked for the courage to take a stand.

    We must hold ourselves to a higher standard than we would hold those we oppose.

  5. 57

    PG:

    Her blog posts contain more support than abuse, and yet the latter is the one being touted. Ridiculous.

    Indeed. Because support and abuse are like matter and anti-matter and totally cancel each other out. On days when I get 30 fluffy snuggles and 10 punches in the nose, it all adds up to 20 wonderful fluffy snuggles and the nose-punchers don’t even register.

    Arsehole.

  6. 58

    @nohellbelowus, 55:

    “Hoggle writes very well, even if you don’t agree with his views, so I’ll take your comment as a backhanded compliment.”

    …since most of us would likely disagree with that assessment, I would take it as a backhanded insult if I was you.

  7. 59

    There is a misogyny problem within the atheist movement. It is well documented. Let us not trivialise, or dismiss, or sweep the problem under the carpet. Nor complain that is it isn’t representative of the atheist movement as a whole. And most of all, let us not blame the victim. We must do just what we would expect of the church – focus on the problem, highlight the problem, condemn the problem in the strongest possible terms, and set about fixing it. The people who have been doing this should not be attacked for exaggerating the problem, or for calling the movement into disrepute. They should be thanked for the courage to take a stand.

    This. Right here. THIS.

    I can understand honestly not recognizing that this is a problem. (And then doing what you can to help fix it once you’ve been clued in, of course.)

    I can NOT understand deliberately dismissing it out of hand because it doesn’t affect you personally.

  8. 61

    We don’t hold beliefs of any sort, nor do we try to influence another person’s behavior.

    Wow. That’s possibly the single most foolish thing I’ve seen in this whole mess, which has been a riot of weapons-grade foolishness.

  9. 62

    Silentbob:

    There is a misogyny problem within the atheist movement.

    Yes. There is. This cannot be stated enough. It’s become terribly apparent since ElevatorGate.

    I think this cuts to the heart of the problem. There are some atheists that just don’t believe this.

    I don’t know why they don’t believe women when they say they’ve been harassed.

    I don’t know why they don’t believe women when they say they’ve gotten rape threats.

    I don’t know why they blame the women who are being targeted with harassment.

    I don’t know why some of these people choose to step up the harassment by spewing venom to bloggers on their blogs, on Twitter, or through their email.

    I don’t know why these people are perfectly comfortable accepting the sexism within the atheist community.

    I don’t know why some people are so worried that A+ wants to create a space where they don’t have to deal with the above scumbags.

    I don’t know why these people come to FtB when all they want to do is harass, dismiss, demean, antagonize, and berate bloggers who are speaking up about issues of sexism or harassment. I don’t wander over to the Slymepit because that’s not a community I want to associate with. So *why* are they coming here?

    What I do know:
    These unconscionable scumbags who drove Jen away…who harass, dismiss, demean, antagonize and berate people

    NEED
    TO
    STOP.

  10. 63

    PG:

    I’m more than happy to tell the assholes to go fuck themselves, in fact I have, but I’m not exactly jumping for joy to have Jen misappropriate the entire atheist community for her childish campaign.

    If you’re more than happy to do so, then please tell the asshole that is you to go fuck hirself.

    STOP. PLAYING. THE VICTIM. JASON.

    How is he playing the victim when he’s got you to coming here and harassing him? You’re part of the problem in this community.

    Are you so eager to play the blame game? So eager to make yourself out to be the victim?

    The people who are being harassed by people like you *are* victims. You’re doing the harassment by coming here and spewing your bile.

    The harassment that Jen has endured IS NOT THE NORM. IT IS NOT THE NORM OF THE COMMUNITY. Stop making it out to be such, because it’s PISSING ME OFF.

    It. Doesn’t. Matter.
    Why the fuck are you getting pissed off at this strawman you’ve set up? None of the bloggers at FtB have said that this harassment is the NORM for the community. You pulled that out of your ass. They’ve said there is a problem with harassment. Whether it’s the norm or not is besides the point. It’s wrong. Period.

    For a year, Jennifer McCreight has made unfounded accusations of misogyny and sexism of atheists, within the atheist community, within TAM, within JREF. Does she expect making broad accusations like that will fly without a hitch? Without criticism?

    Really? She has? I guess you have some links to back this up? Cite. Now. Or STFU.
    Moreover, it doesn’t matter. Even if she did everything you said, it still does not justify the shit that’s being thrown her way.

    Not to mention she has a tendency to conflate legitimate criticism with her harassment, and more often than not conclude that the legitimate criticism (of feminism, of atheism+) *is* harassment.

    Cite. Now. Or STFU.

    That’s called bullshitting, Jason. I trust you know of it?

    I’m sure he does. You’re demonstrating that you passed Bullshitting 101 with an A+.

    STILL, there’s plenty of atheists — plenty more than the loud minority who fling abuse — who’ve supported her, who’ve decried the harassment she’s received (including me). Her blog posts contain more support than abuse, and yet the latter is the one being touted. Ridiculous.

    Let me get this straight: Since she’s gotten more support than abuse, that’s supposed to magically negate all the abuse? It’s not ridiculous. She’s frequently thanked the people who have supported her. Did you want a cookie for decrying the harassment she’s faced? Here’s a nice Slymey cookie for you.

    I mean, is your wish to promote modern feminists as fragile and weakwilled, or strong and independent? If the latter, maybe it’s time to grow up?

    Says the person who dismisses what Jen is going through. Grab a mirror. Look at it. Tell yourself to grow up.
    After you do that, take a refresher course on how to be human. People…all of us can be strong, independent, fragile and weakwilled. Jen displayed amazing strength to endure the venom as long as she did. I’m surprised more bloggers haven’t already taken a break, what with people like you coming here spitting on them.

    And don’t exploit this incident to confirm your aspirations on a “third wave of atheism.” Are you seriously going to stand by McCreight and Reed in their complete generalisation of the entire atheist community?

    Do you really not know how to argue honestly?
    Where have any of the bloggers made a generalization about the *entire* atheist community?
    How do you get from “there’s a problem with sexism and harassment in the atheist community” to “the entire atheist community is a bunch of harassing sexists” ?

    Then to call it A+, to make you feel morally superior to anyone who didn’t — or doesn’t — join your new clique? Fuck you. As you’re so keen to point out, feminists are not a monolith, and neither are atheists, as well you should know, Jason, you dishonest snake.

    Yes, it’s called A+. Perhaps it’s difficult for you to comprehend, but there are atheists who are concerned with social justice. Clearly you have a comprehension problem.
    Once again:
    Atheist+ is a subset of the Atheist Movement concerned with addressing not just the pernicious influence of religion around the world, but with advancing social justice .
    If you don’t want to join, then don’t. It doesn’t automatically make you a piece of shit.
    If you’re an atheist who works *against* social justice, then you *ARE* a piece of shit.
    Since comprehension is so difficult for people like you, let me spell it out:
    The people who choose not to join A+ are NOT misogynist scumbags for not joining. You’re a misogynist scumbag if you act like a misogynist scumbag.

  11. 64

    richardwatkins:

    Maybe I have the wrong idea of what it means to be an atheist.

    No.
    You just have a problem understanding what the PLUS sign in A+ denotes.
    To wit:
    The “A” means ATHEISM.
    The “+” means plus social justice.

    Is this really that incomprehensible for you? A group of atheists come together because they have similar goals beyond just fighting against religious beliefs and you cannot understand that?

    Would you have a problem understanding a group of atheists who wanted to climb mountains together and fight against religion?

    Would you understand if a group of atheists decided to form a group that fights religion PLUS like to sky dive?

    I’m still waiting for someone to explain the difficulty in grasping that A+ =/= Atheism.

  12. 65

    Is this really that incomprehensible for you? A group of atheists come together because they have similar goals beyond just fighting against religious beliefs and you cannot understand that?

    But those aren’t REAL atheists. They’re just WOMEN. Women stealing the A-word that rightly belongs to men.

    I’ve got a challenge for y’all who claim A+ is harming or misappropriating atheism. Name an atheist woman. That’s it. I dare you to write the sentence “[Woman] is an atheist.” I bet the cognitive dissonance gets to you.

    I’m also betting on a lot of cop-out mentions of Paula Kirby or Abbie Smith because those are the Right Sort of woman, safely arrayed against the uppity feminists.

  13. sbh
    68

    Ever since I was a kid, growing up in the fifties and sixties, I’ve run into self-described “atheists” who were loud-mouthed assholes, misogynist jerks, opinionated right-wing free-marketeers and the like–people, in other words, whose one virtue was that they hadn’t fallen for one particular popular misconception out of many. I would have felt the same respect for them as I would for a group of supposed adults who patted themselves on the back for not believing in the tooth fairy while still putting out milk and cookies for Santa.

    On the other hand I’ve been enjoying weblogs by such self-described atheists as Jason Thibeault, Jen McCreight, and Stephanie Zvan for years, long before they came to Freethoughtblogs. This is not because I have the slightest interest in atheism as a concept–I don’t even know what that would mean (how many different ways can you write there is no tooth fairy?)–but because they have interesting things to say, and generally come at them from a rational perspective.

    There’s no particular virtue to being atheist–look at Ayn Rand and the Marquis de Sade, as well as certain commenters in this and related threads. And I sure as hell didn’t need Jen McCreight to tell me there is “a whole antifeminist and anti-woman wing of the atheist movement”. I got that straight from various atheist misogynists themselves. I see no virtue whatever to their atheism minus; they’re welcome to keep it, and I would suggest they keep it to themselves.

  14. 69

    Jason, I agree with you on the need for pseudonymity, but I wonder if there might be other ways to discourage trolls, or at least minimize their impact. Have you guys discussed things like sharing your ban lists, or implementing some sort of Like/Dislike comment reputation system?

  15. 70

    Wow…just wow.

    A few thoughts. I joined the A+ forum yesterday because it aligns with my personal philosophy. To me it seems that the ideals being espoused by A+ are nothing more than simple human decency.

    That out of the way…I am appalled by the vitriol being directed at Jen, Surly Amy, etc… by people who claim to embrace reason and rational discourse. I have been guilty of retreating to insults and ad hominem attacks with people I have disagreed with in the past and I cringe with embarrassment when I recall said remarks. I cringe because I am trying to hold myself to a higher standard.

    A+ is there, whether people agree with it’s goals or not. No one is being held at gunpoint or threatened with eternal hellfire if the don’t want to join. Not affiliating with A+ doesn’t de-value others thought and opinions. To me, however, it does speak volumes about the people who are slinging mud at the people who support A+, and not in a positive way.

    This is not to say that the A+ bloggers are totally without blame. Richard Carrier made some comments that made me cringe again (sorry for repeated use of ‘cringe’, but that is the best word for how I felt), but to his credit, he realized he was a little over the top and stated so publicly. That to me exemplifies how reason can overcome emotion and I have much more respect for Richard as a result.

    Let’s attack bad ideas – not the person behind them. Ad Hominem is still a logical fallacy and we embrace it at our peril. And attacking spite, vitriol, misogyny and hatred IS attacking a very bad idea.

  16. 71

    Why is ‘douchbag’ a term of derison? What are the connotations that make it so awful? It’s just an appliance, what is the problem with it? Is its usual function disgusting or what? Disgusting to whom?

  17. 72

    None of the bloggers at FtB have said that this harassment is the NORM for the community. You pulled that out of your ass.

    Yes! There has been a very large amount of reading comprehension failure.

  18. 74

    One more time: “douchebag” largely became an insult thanks to body shame originally, but the word has been retaken because douching generally employs caustic chemicals and is harmful to the orifices it’s used on (which includes anal). It’s a product sold to women (generally, by society, targeted at women but not sold exclusively to them mind you) to shame them for having orifices that don’t smell like petunias, that aren’t dry as a bone. And it empirically harms them to convince them of those memes, as well as employing the “fix” for those supposed issues. It was sold to women as necessary but turns out to actually be harmful.

    See the parallels yet?

  19. 75

    @Jason,

    Well said. But it does make me wonder why you, as one who obviously strongly supports gender equality, used the term.

    This is not meant as criticism – you may have sub-text here that I am missing.

    Cheers…

  20. 76

    Because, as I said, douching is harmful to any orifice, and most of us have assholes. I also sort of prefer it to “asshole” generally, because of the body shame issue that brings up — some people enjoy their assholes and I don’t want to stigmatize that either.

    I AM, however, perfectly willing to shame people / ideas sold as beneficial but are empirically harmful.

  21. 78

    I don’t think the fact that regular douching with commercial agents or even water is generally discouraged by gynecologists account for the popularity of the term. I doubt if most users of the term, who incidentally seem to be usually men, even are aware of relevant medical opinion.

    No this pejorative has to do with the vagina. For its effect, it uses conscious or unconscious negative feelings about female anatomy.

    Perhaps there are other examples where an unhealthy personal appliance has become a common object of derision, but I can’t think of any.

  22. 80

    The argument my feminist sister offers for why she uses “douchebag” as an insult:

    “It’s a useless thing foisted onto women by the patriarchy that no woman should allow anywhere near her vagina.”

  23. 81

    Stephanie,

    I did read it. I disagreed with his analysis, I think it’s a stretch to justify the term. I find it hard to believe that merely the medical assessment that douching is harmful accounts for the wide popularity of its usage as a pejorative.

    It seems to me the term is most often used by those who could care less about that fact even if they knew it.

    It seem to me my position offers a fair argument.

    If you were to encounter the term as a disparagement for the very first time today what would you think?

    Also I think the notion that it is an invention by men foisted on women by the patriarchy would be hard to fact check. Don’t you think it likely sheep’s bladders were used thousands of years ago? How would we know at whose instigattion?

    Who are these “foisting” men? Doctors, have been against douching for a long time now.

  24. 82

    joel, if you were really interested you could do a Google search on the history of douching and educate yourself. If you did, you’d find that, while douching has been around for a long time, it was originally intended as a type of birth control, but as marketing culture overtook America in the early- and mid-20th Century Madison Avenue started selling douches as a “personal hygenie” issue by shaming women over their “womanly odors.” As more effective means of birth control became available the relative value of douching as birth control, already low, sank to virtually nil. In the late 1970s a series of tests showed that douching, especially with the most common consumer products, was actively harmful and their use has been discouraged for several decades now except in very specific cases. So to answer your final question, the advertising agencies were the ones “foisting” douching on women by using female body-shaming to get women to purchase a harmful product.

    Of course, you may be obliquely trying to work the conversation around to a ‘gotcha’ moment where you can accuse Jason of misogyny for using a sexist term. If that’s the case, I can assure you, we’ve ALL heard it before, so why don’t you go play your game someplace else?

  25. 83

    joel @71, 78, 81–

    You just keep repeating the same argument over and over again. We all get that you don’t like the term douchebag. Okay, you don’t like it. But please get this through your head– you don’t have any power here to change it. You can keep reading and posting about it until Jason gets tired and puts you in moderation. OR You can keep reading and stop posting. OR you can go do something else entirely. BUT– you cannot bully everyone else into dropping the term.

    What you’re doing here is a good example of what people mean when they talk about privilege. Somehow you seem to think that if you’re just adamant enough everyone will do things your way. Well, sorry about that, but no, they won’t. That doesn’t mean you’re being picked on. It just means you’ve developed an exaggerated idea of your own entitlement. Welcome to the real world. It’s not such a bad place, as long as you remember it doesn’t revolve around you.

  26. 84

    stakkalee;

    I appreciate your google search (could do without the ad hominem and mindreading)

    What do you think of my question? Does the term douchbag as an insult primarily owe it’s popularity to the fact that it is an unhealthy procedure foisted on women by marketers?

    Or is it likely popular mainly as thinly disguised projection of archaic fears of the mysteries of female bodies (menstruation, childbirth)

    Is that a stretch? I don’t think any more stretchy than what appears to be the consensus here on FtB

  27. 85

    joel, I think your question is very interesting. Since you’re the one primarily expressing that interest in this thread, why don’t you conduct some research into the etymology of the term and its history as a derisive slur? You could report back here with what you discover. I can assure you, we’ll all await your return with bated breath.

  28. 86

    Or, you know, joel, you could pay attention to Jason, who covered that already.

    One more time: “douchebag” largely became an insult thanks to body shame originally, but the word has been retaken because douching generally employs caustic chemicals and is harmful to the orifices it’s used on (which includes anal).

    Gosh. Look. Jason said what you then said–as though he hadn’t said it–then continued to act as though he hadn’t said after being told he had said it.

    Confused by that sentence? I’m confused by your behavior.

  29. 90

    I guess I also need to write a post about the etymology of “douchebag” as an insult. And when feminists appropriated it. You know, to keep people from going “you’re a misogynist for using a term that feminists reappropriated!” every damn time the word is used.

  30. 91

    What’s this whole business about not having beliefs, therefore if you support feminism/women’s rights issues you are just like a religion spouting dogma?

    Someone please clarify?
    Thank you 🙂

  31. 92

    joel:

    What do you think of my question? Does the term douchbag as an insult primarily owe it’s popularity to the fact that it is an unhealthy procedure foisted on women by marketers?

    Or is it likely popular mainly as thinly disguised projection of archaic fears of the mysteries of female bodies (menstruation, childbirth)

    If douching was necessary, was *just* for women, and used as an insult, calling someone a ‘douchebag’ would be a sexist insult.

    Douching is *not* necessary.
    Douching is not just done by women*.
    It is an insult used against men and women.

    *I’m a gay man. Without going into detail, I have some experiences with douching (prior to knowing the harmful effects).

  32. 93

    some people enjoy their assholes and I don’t want to stigmatize that either.

    All people enjoy their assholes*. Some people just enjoy them in more than one way.

    *Fun fact: Jews in their morning prayer thank their god for creating humans with assholes.

  33. 95

    The insults and verbal assault upon McCreight (and many others, especially women atheists) needs to be confronted and challenged in the same way that racist insults and sexist jokes are confronted everywhere else.

    This is a rare case where “If you’re not with us, you’re against us,” is actually true because silence equates to consent for the trolls. Speaking out against the abuse is the only acceptable response. Our actions tell the victims and victimizers whose side we’re on.

  34. F
    96

    Douchebag: Want some older perspective? Read Even Cowgirls Get the Blues. Published & cult-to-popular fictional use reference inside. Villain makes douches and other “hygiene” products for against women.

  35. 97

    @leftover1under

    You make a good point. While I am generally against the whole in group, out group – us vs. them thing, in this case it is pretty plain and simple. This behavior is unacceptable and I agree with you that silence implies assent.

    I do not tolerate this type of behavior IRL and I will not tolerate it in my online life either. Once again, I do not understand how someone can claim to embrace reason and harbor these attitudes. Apparently some atheists are nowhere as enlightened as they think they are.

    @Jason, @Stephanie, @joel, etc…

    As to the ‘douchebag’ argument. While it is a term I do not deploy, I see Jason’s point and understand his reasoning. Just because I am uncomfortable with it is no reason to criticize anyone else for using it – especially when they understand the etymology of the term far better than I.

  36. 98

    I find it hard to believe that merely the medical assessment that douching is harmful accounts for the wide popularity of its usage as a pejorative.

    So what you find “hard to believe” is the fantastic sociological and historical support for your opinion? The vast majority of the times I’ve seen someone use the word “douchebag”, it’s come from feminists (female or male) who are using it from exactly that etymology.

  37. 99

    Carlie writes: ” The vast majority of the times I’ve seen someone use the word “douchebag”, it’s come from feminists (female or male) who are using it from exactly that etymology.”

    Granted some of the in-folks use it that way, but however it is used, the basic point is that they are “using” it. The are using women’s bodies to emphasize their points. They drag an aspect of women’s bodies and their care into a discussion that is usually unrelated. Can’t we leave women’s bodies out of it when it is not pertinent? (an anal douche is commonly referred to as an enema, let’s not pretend douchebag refers to that)

    You may have noticed, I have, that the most interesting bloggers on FtB and elsewhere are able to communicate very well without resorting to ‘douchbag’ to get your attention and/or your feelings up. If you don’t know who they are, watch for it.

Comments are closed.