<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[clovenhooves - Sexism in Media]]></title>
		<link>https://clovenhooves.org/</link>
		<description><![CDATA[clovenhooves - https://clovenhooves.org]]></description>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2026 13:05:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<generator>MyBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Fox Is Airing a Girlboss Version of the Old Testament]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1952</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2026 15:18:17 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=147">Elsacat</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1952</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<a href="https://slate.com/life/2026/03/bible-women-the-faithful-old-testament-fox-hulu.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">Article</a> | <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20260324151625/https://slate.com/life/2026/03/bible-women-the-faithful-old-testament-fox-hulu.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">Archive</a> <br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite><span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">The Faithful </span>isn’t just a dreary show with lifeless dialogue; it’s also, even if the writers don’t intend it, propaganda.</blockquote>
<br />
Oh, I fully believe propaganda is the intent.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<a href="https://slate.com/life/2026/03/bible-women-the-faithful-old-testament-fox-hulu.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">Article</a> | <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20260324151625/https://slate.com/life/2026/03/bible-women-the-faithful-old-testament-fox-hulu.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">Archive</a> <br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite><span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">The Faithful </span>isn’t just a dreary show with lifeless dialogue; it’s also, even if the writers don’t intend it, propaganda.</blockquote>
<br />
Oh, I fully believe propaganda is the intent.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Conservative magazine Evie isn't even trying to hide the handmaidenry any more]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1919</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2026 16:38:06 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=147">Elsacat</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1919</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<a href="https://archive.ph/TpJ8x" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">Patriarchy Protects Women Better Than Modern Feminism</a><br />
<br />
The linked article talks about how much safer we are with patriarchy and how terrible men roamed the streets of San Francisco while she lived there and thanks to feminism, no "good men" were around to keep the "bad men" in check. It sounds so Wild West, it would be funny if it weren't embarrassing. Yes, it's a big city, there is crime as well as good, safe areas. It's not the small town the author came from. It's also not an uninhabitable, un-visit-able Wild West. I've spent a fair amount of time there and have never actually been the victim of a crime or attempted crime. <br />
<br />
But, this rant isn't about defending any particular city. It's about defending women against encroaching attempts to sanewash patriarchy and push it as a good thing that women should want more of in their lives. As if patriarchy doesn't fuel misogyny and crimes against women to begin with.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<a href="https://archive.ph/TpJ8x" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">Patriarchy Protects Women Better Than Modern Feminism</a><br />
<br />
The linked article talks about how much safer we are with patriarchy and how terrible men roamed the streets of San Francisco while she lived there and thanks to feminism, no "good men" were around to keep the "bad men" in check. It sounds so Wild West, it would be funny if it weren't embarrassing. Yes, it's a big city, there is crime as well as good, safe areas. It's not the small town the author came from. It's also not an uninhabitable, un-visit-able Wild West. I've spent a fair amount of time there and have never actually been the victim of a crime or attempted crime. <br />
<br />
But, this rant isn't about defending any particular city. It's about defending women against encroaching attempts to sanewash patriarchy and push it as a good thing that women should want more of in their lives. As if patriarchy doesn't fuel misogyny and crimes against women to begin with.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[The far-right’s new derogatory term for white women has exploded after Renee Good killing]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1876</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2026 15:46:10 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=147">Elsacat</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1876</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/white-women-term-renee-good-conservatives-b2902421.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/white-women-term-renee-good-conservatives-b2902421.html</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://archive.ph/3PjkQ" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://archive.ph/3PjkQ</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>“An AWFUL (Affluent White Female Urban Liberal) is dead after running her car into an ICE agent who opened fire on her,” <a href="https://archive.ph/o/3PjkQ/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/eric-erickson-trump-maga-revolt-b2871750.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url"><span style="color: #eb1426;" class="mycode_color">Erik Erickson</span></a>, a conservative commentator, <a href="https://archive.ph/o/3PjkQ/https://x.com/EWErickson/status/2008982506285187125" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url"><span style="color: #eb1426;" class="mycode_color">posted</span></a> on X January 7. “Progressive whites are turning violent. ICE agents have the right to defend themselves.”<br />
<br />
The acronym has spread on social media, with one user describing it as “the most precisely accurate acronym ever written.” Another wrote: “AWFUL (affluent white female urban liberal) should be avoided at all costs. They will ruin men’s lives just like they’re ruining western civilization.”</blockquote>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/white-women-term-renee-good-conservatives-b2902421.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/white-women-term-renee-good-conservatives-b2902421.html</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://archive.ph/3PjkQ" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://archive.ph/3PjkQ</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>“An AWFUL (Affluent White Female Urban Liberal) is dead after running her car into an ICE agent who opened fire on her,” <a href="https://archive.ph/o/3PjkQ/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/eric-erickson-trump-maga-revolt-b2871750.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url"><span style="color: #eb1426;" class="mycode_color">Erik Erickson</span></a>, a conservative commentator, <a href="https://archive.ph/o/3PjkQ/https://x.com/EWErickson/status/2008982506285187125" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url"><span style="color: #eb1426;" class="mycode_color">posted</span></a> on X January 7. “Progressive whites are turning violent. ICE agents have the right to defend themselves.”<br />
<br />
The acronym has spread on social media, with one user describing it as “the most precisely accurate acronym ever written.” Another wrote: “AWFUL (affluent white female urban liberal) should be avoided at all costs. They will ruin men’s lives just like they’re ruining western civilization.”</blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[The apple-pie-scented world of conservative women’s media]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1771</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2025 01:56:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=147">Elsacat</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1771</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<a href="https://archive.ph/VsWdP" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://archive.ph/VsWdP</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>Whereas the conservatism of Pankhurst and Thatcher was inherently feminist, much of the womanosphere is explicitly not. Brittany Martinez, who co-founded <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Evie </span>with her husband and is its editor, says that she would not call herself a feminist: the label is “kind of cringe”. Ms Owens calls feminism a “failed revolution against biology”. Ms Kirk has called for a revival of “biblical womanhood” (although presumably not Jezebel).</blockquote>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<a href="https://archive.ph/VsWdP" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://archive.ph/VsWdP</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>Whereas the conservatism of Pankhurst and Thatcher was inherently feminist, much of the womanosphere is explicitly not. Brittany Martinez, who co-founded <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Evie </span>with her husband and is its editor, says that she would not call herself a feminist: the label is “kind of cringe”. Ms Owens calls feminism a “failed revolution against biology”. Ms Kirk has called for a revival of “biblical womanhood” (although presumably not Jezebel).</blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[I’m the Woman Who Ruined the Workplace]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1692</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2025 16:55:29 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=147">Elsacat</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1692</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.newyorker.com/humor/shouts-murmurs/did-women-really-ruin-the-workplace" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://www.newyorker.com/humor/shouts-murmurs/did-women-really-ruin-the-workplace</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://archive.ph/2lEaj" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://archive.ph/2lEaj</a><br />
<br />
A McSweeney's Internet Tendency-esque response to all the bullshit about women ruining the workplace:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>On my first day, I arrived with a hopeful heart, excited to serve our clients and become a member of the team. “LOOK SHARP, BUTTHEADS!” I bellowed. “IT’S WOMAN TIME!” Things didn’t improve when I insisted on being called the Cap’n.<br />
<br />
Much of how I ruined the workplace has to do with the accommodations that I, as a woman, require. Because of me, male employees are no longer allowed to make lewd jokes, hold men-only work gatherings, or type with their penises. Yes, this has ruined the workplace, although it has also drastically reduced typos.</blockquote>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.newyorker.com/humor/shouts-murmurs/did-women-really-ruin-the-workplace" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://www.newyorker.com/humor/shouts-murmurs/did-women-really-ruin-the-workplace</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://archive.ph/2lEaj" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://archive.ph/2lEaj</a><br />
<br />
A McSweeney's Internet Tendency-esque response to all the bullshit about women ruining the workplace:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>On my first day, I arrived with a hopeful heart, excited to serve our clients and become a member of the team. “LOOK SHARP, BUTTHEADS!” I bellowed. “IT’S WOMAN TIME!” Things didn’t improve when I insisted on being called the Cap’n.<br />
<br />
Much of how I ruined the workplace has to do with the accommodations that I, as a woman, require. Because of me, male employees are no longer allowed to make lewd jokes, hold men-only work gatherings, or type with their penises. Yes, this has ruined the workplace, although it has also drastically reduced typos.</blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[No, Women Aren’t the Problem]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1669</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2025 01:37:10 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=147">Elsacat</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1669</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/2025/11/the-great-feminization-essay-masculinization/684817/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/2025/11/the-great-feminization-essay-masculinization/684817/</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://archive.ph/1oTVG" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://archive.ph/1oTVG</a><br />
<br />
A response to Helen Andrews'  <a href="https://archive.ph/o/1oTVG/https://www.compactmag.com/article/the-great-feminization/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">“The Great Feminization”</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>America is rapidly becoming the manosphere, but, sure, let’s go after the “feminization” of culture.</blockquote>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/2025/11/the-great-feminization-essay-masculinization/684817/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/2025/11/the-great-feminization-essay-masculinization/684817/</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://archive.ph/1oTVG" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://archive.ph/1oTVG</a><br />
<br />
A response to Helen Andrews'  <a href="https://archive.ph/o/1oTVG/https://www.compactmag.com/article/the-great-feminization/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">“The Great Feminization”</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>America is rapidly becoming the manosphere, but, sure, let’s go after the “feminization” of culture.</blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Misogynistic Article: "Porn Didn’t Destroy This Marriage—Her Porn Phobia Could"]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1641</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2025 15:55:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=166">Auroch</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1641</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[I found this <a href="https://www-psychologytoday-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/sexual-intelligence/202402/porn-shouldnt-destroy-a-marriage-but-porn-phobia-could/amp?amp_gsa=1&amp;amp_js_v=a9&amp;usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_ct=1761147780038&amp;amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&amp;aoh=17611477790259&amp;referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp;ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.psychologytoday.com%2Fus%2Fblog%2Fsexual-intelligence%2F202402%2Fporn-shouldnt-destroy-a-marriage-but-porn-phobia-could" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">article</a> lately, and it is a perfect example of how men will attack and pathologize women to deflect from their own behavior. This "sex therapist" recounts a story of a man who told his wife he doesn't watch porn, then watched it in secret (therefore repeatedly deceiving her). The author frames the woman as a villian who was "too rigid," essentially suggesting she "forced" him to lie by having strict ethics (the horror of having ethics!). He accuses her of destroying the marriage over some "lousy porn."<br />
<br />
This is, obviously, insane. Saying, "If she'd been fine with his porn, the marriage would have been fine," is like saying, "If she'd been fine with his affair, the marriage would have been fine."<br />
<br />
She had a boundary against porn in the relationship, he agreed to it, and then he <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">chose</span> to cross it. All the fallout is from his deliberate choice to cross her boundary and deceive her. The author blames her for destroying the marriage because she reacted to his betrayal. But she is not obligated to forgive his boundary violation because the marriage was "otherwise fine," any more than you're obligated to forgive a partner who was outwardly loving but secretly having an affair.<br />
<br />
When you learn someone has been lying to you, changing your opinion of them is the logical response. You're not "destroying a good relationship," because that good relationship never truly existed.<br />
<br />
If someone is a vegan, they find a partner who claims to also be vegan, and then they learn that the partner has secretly been eating meat the whole time, the vegan has a right to feel betrayed and end the relationship. It doesn't matter what your personal thoughts on veganism are. The problem is the deception.<br />
<br />
By claiming to have the same ethics as someone when you secretly don't, you're denying them the autonomy to choose a partner who shares their values. You're saying, "My right to benefit from this relationship is more important than your right to know the truth." It is a fundamentally selfish behavior.<br />
<br />
Also, "porn phobia" is a disgusting term. It reduces a principled objection to a misogynistic, exploitive industry, to an irrational emotional response. Men always characterize women's negative view of porn as "jealousy," because attacking women is much easier than actually addressing the ethical objections to porn.<br />
<br />
I feel bad for the gaslighting any female patients of this "therapist" have had to experience. He is using a position of authority to tell women that their healthy aversion to seeing their sex degraded is wrong, and they should suppress their feelings of discomfort. Porn is just a "fantasy," after all—who cares that the "fantasy" involves recordings of <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">real</span> women engaged in <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">real</span> actions, popularizes dangerous and demeaning sex acts, and is shown to reinforce misogynistic attitudes? You're just a controlling harpy if you think about all that.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[I found this <a href="https://www-psychologytoday-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/sexual-intelligence/202402/porn-shouldnt-destroy-a-marriage-but-porn-phobia-could/amp?amp_gsa=1&amp;amp_js_v=a9&amp;usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_ct=1761147780038&amp;amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&amp;aoh=17611477790259&amp;referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp;ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.psychologytoday.com%2Fus%2Fblog%2Fsexual-intelligence%2F202402%2Fporn-shouldnt-destroy-a-marriage-but-porn-phobia-could" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">article</a> lately, and it is a perfect example of how men will attack and pathologize women to deflect from their own behavior. This "sex therapist" recounts a story of a man who told his wife he doesn't watch porn, then watched it in secret (therefore repeatedly deceiving her). The author frames the woman as a villian who was "too rigid," essentially suggesting she "forced" him to lie by having strict ethics (the horror of having ethics!). He accuses her of destroying the marriage over some "lousy porn."<br />
<br />
This is, obviously, insane. Saying, "If she'd been fine with his porn, the marriage would have been fine," is like saying, "If she'd been fine with his affair, the marriage would have been fine."<br />
<br />
She had a boundary against porn in the relationship, he agreed to it, and then he <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">chose</span> to cross it. All the fallout is from his deliberate choice to cross her boundary and deceive her. The author blames her for destroying the marriage because she reacted to his betrayal. But she is not obligated to forgive his boundary violation because the marriage was "otherwise fine," any more than you're obligated to forgive a partner who was outwardly loving but secretly having an affair.<br />
<br />
When you learn someone has been lying to you, changing your opinion of them is the logical response. You're not "destroying a good relationship," because that good relationship never truly existed.<br />
<br />
If someone is a vegan, they find a partner who claims to also be vegan, and then they learn that the partner has secretly been eating meat the whole time, the vegan has a right to feel betrayed and end the relationship. It doesn't matter what your personal thoughts on veganism are. The problem is the deception.<br />
<br />
By claiming to have the same ethics as someone when you secretly don't, you're denying them the autonomy to choose a partner who shares their values. You're saying, "My right to benefit from this relationship is more important than your right to know the truth." It is a fundamentally selfish behavior.<br />
<br />
Also, "porn phobia" is a disgusting term. It reduces a principled objection to a misogynistic, exploitive industry, to an irrational emotional response. Men always characterize women's negative view of porn as "jealousy," because attacking women is much easier than actually addressing the ethical objections to porn.<br />
<br />
I feel bad for the gaslighting any female patients of this "therapist" have had to experience. He is using a position of authority to tell women that their healthy aversion to seeing their sex degraded is wrong, and they should suppress their feelings of discomfort. Porn is just a "fantasy," after all—who cares that the "fantasy" involves recordings of <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">real</span> women engaged in <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">real</span> actions, popularizes dangerous and demeaning sex acts, and is shown to reinforce misogynistic attitudes? You're just a controlling harpy if you think about all that.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Jokes Built on Sexual Entitlement]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1613</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 12 Oct 2025 22:12:49 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=166">Auroch</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1613</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[I saw a skit online that goes like this (with a man portraying both the woman and the man):<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Woman: Oh, I don't give head.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Man: What do you call a woman who doesn't give head?</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Woman: Haha, you're always so funny, what?</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Man: An Uber.</span><br />
<br />
Of course, men in the comments were laughing and praising it for being "savage." But the "joke" of the skit comes entirely from the cruel disposal of a woman for expressing a sexual boundary. It only works if you accept the implicit assumption that oral sex is something he is entitled to, and she has therefore wronged him by not providing it.<br />
<br />
I've seen similar jokes online that are built on the same assumption:<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">"What do you call a woman who doesn't give head? Not my girlfriend!"</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">"If your partner doesn't give head, they're a defective model and you need to trade them in for a new one."</span><br />
<br />
"Humor" like this serves as a message to women that if they don't perform certain acts, they're worthless, placing pressure on them to consent to acts they're uncomfortable with. And it serves as a message to men that their anger at women's boundaries is righteous, further normalizing sexual coercion.<br />
<br />
If you try to call this out, some people will say, "Well, people are allowed to look for a partner who fulfills their sexual desires! What if your partner stopped wanting to have sex at all?" But it's one thing to respectfully reject someone due to sexual incompatibility, and another to treat them as worthy of contempt. These jokes aren't saying, "It's okay to reject an incompatible partner," they're saying, "Something is fundamentally wrong with women who have this sexual boundary, and they deserve to be mocked for it."<br />
<br />
I also find it disturbing how, in the skit, he has the woman say, "Haha, you're always so funny." Not only does he fantasize about rejecting this imaginary woman, he fantasizes about her feeling safe and comfortable beforehand, so that she can be hurt even <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">more</span> by the rejection. The level of bitterness toward women for simply having boundaries is depressing.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[I saw a skit online that goes like this (with a man portraying both the woman and the man):<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Woman: Oh, I don't give head.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Man: What do you call a woman who doesn't give head?</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Woman: Haha, you're always so funny, what?</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Man: An Uber.</span><br />
<br />
Of course, men in the comments were laughing and praising it for being "savage." But the "joke" of the skit comes entirely from the cruel disposal of a woman for expressing a sexual boundary. It only works if you accept the implicit assumption that oral sex is something he is entitled to, and she has therefore wronged him by not providing it.<br />
<br />
I've seen similar jokes online that are built on the same assumption:<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">"What do you call a woman who doesn't give head? Not my girlfriend!"</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">"If your partner doesn't give head, they're a defective model and you need to trade them in for a new one."</span><br />
<br />
"Humor" like this serves as a message to women that if they don't perform certain acts, they're worthless, placing pressure on them to consent to acts they're uncomfortable with. And it serves as a message to men that their anger at women's boundaries is righteous, further normalizing sexual coercion.<br />
<br />
If you try to call this out, some people will say, "Well, people are allowed to look for a partner who fulfills their sexual desires! What if your partner stopped wanting to have sex at all?" But it's one thing to respectfully reject someone due to sexual incompatibility, and another to treat them as worthy of contempt. These jokes aren't saying, "It's okay to reject an incompatible partner," they're saying, "Something is fundamentally wrong with women who have this sexual boundary, and they deserve to be mocked for it."<br />
<br />
I also find it disturbing how, in the skit, he has the woman say, "Haha, you're always so funny." Not only does he fantasize about rejecting this imaginary woman, he fantasizes about her feeling safe and comfortable beforehand, so that she can be hurt even <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">more</span> by the rejection. The level of bitterness toward women for simply having boundaries is depressing.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[What Charlie Kirk got wrong about Black women]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1539</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2025 15:05:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=147">Elsacat</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1539</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.ndsmcobserver.com/article/2025/09/what-charlie-kirk-got-wrong-about-black-women" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://www.ndsmcobserver.com/article/2025/09/what-charlie-kirk-got-wrong-about-black-women</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://archive.ph/39Obm" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://archive.ph/39Obm</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>The first is, “If I’m dealing with somebody in customer service who’s a moronic Black woman, I wonder is she there because of her excellence, or is she there because of affirmative action?” The second is as follows, “If we would have said that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama and Sheila Jackson Lee and Ketanji Brown Jackson were affirmative action picks, we would have been called racists. Now they’re coming out and they’re saying it for us … You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person’s slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.”</blockquote>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.ndsmcobserver.com/article/2025/09/what-charlie-kirk-got-wrong-about-black-women" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://www.ndsmcobserver.com/article/2025/09/what-charlie-kirk-got-wrong-about-black-women</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://archive.ph/39Obm" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://archive.ph/39Obm</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>The first is, “If I’m dealing with somebody in customer service who’s a moronic Black woman, I wonder is she there because of her excellence, or is she there because of affirmative action?” The second is as follows, “If we would have said that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama and Sheila Jackson Lee and Ketanji Brown Jackson were affirmative action picks, we would have been called racists. Now they’re coming out and they’re saying it for us … You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person’s slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.”</blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Misogynistic Skit About Sexual Coercion]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1536</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2025 14:50:40 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=166">Auroch</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1536</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[I saw this <a href="https://youtube.com/shorts/KkhCW6cgl6c?si=cvm--NJwezjH6F3v" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">skit</a> on YouTube, where the wife is tired after putting the kids to bed, and the husband asks for a "quickie."<br />
<br />
The wife says, "How quick?"<br />
<br />
To which the husband replies, "As quick as it takes for you to pick up &#36;100."<br />
<br />
She agrees, and then she sees him dropping pennies on the ground.<br />
<br />
The entire premise of the joke is how "clever" he is for tricking her into enduring unwanted sex for longer than she agreed to. It makes me sick how many people find this funny.<br />
<br />
And then of course, there are men in the comments saying that this is why marriage is a trap, this is why men cheat, and so on. They see <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">themselves</span> as the victims when their exhausted wife doesn't "put out" as often as they deem acceptable. No consideration for why she is so exhausted in the first place.<br />
<br />
Being trapped with a man who coerces you into sex is a far worse fate than being "trapped" with a woman who doesn't dispense sex on command. But men see women's emotions and boundaries just as inconvenient obstacle to be overcome.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[I saw this <a href="https://youtube.com/shorts/KkhCW6cgl6c?si=cvm--NJwezjH6F3v" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">skit</a> on YouTube, where the wife is tired after putting the kids to bed, and the husband asks for a "quickie."<br />
<br />
The wife says, "How quick?"<br />
<br />
To which the husband replies, "As quick as it takes for you to pick up &#36;100."<br />
<br />
She agrees, and then she sees him dropping pennies on the ground.<br />
<br />
The entire premise of the joke is how "clever" he is for tricking her into enduring unwanted sex for longer than she agreed to. It makes me sick how many people find this funny.<br />
<br />
And then of course, there are men in the comments saying that this is why marriage is a trap, this is why men cheat, and so on. They see <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">themselves</span> as the victims when their exhausted wife doesn't "put out" as often as they deem acceptable. No consideration for why she is so exhausted in the first place.<br />
<br />
Being trapped with a man who coerces you into sex is a far worse fate than being "trapped" with a woman who doesn't dispense sex on command. But men see women's emotions and boundaries just as inconvenient obstacle to be overcome.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Elon Musk Amplifies Bizarre Claim That 'Women Are Built To Be Traded']]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1440</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 02 Aug 2025 15:34:55 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=147">Elsacat</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1440</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/elon-musk-women-built-to-be-traded_n_688bb945e4b0f5cda486f69e" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://www.huffpost.com/entry/elon-musk-women-built-to-be-traded_n_688bb945e4b0f5cda486f69e</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://archive.ph/JV8zK" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://archive.ph/JV8zK</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>In that interaction, Musk responded to a user who’d asked why “liberal white women hate white people so much” by speculating that “they’ve been programmed to do so by their teachers and the media.”</blockquote>
<br />
It's always education and the media that are the boogeymen. Evil teachers, woke evil college professors, the evil MSM, all conspiring to undermine wholesome American values like being white and women being commodities instead of humans.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/elon-musk-women-built-to-be-traded_n_688bb945e4b0f5cda486f69e" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://www.huffpost.com/entry/elon-musk-women-built-to-be-traded_n_688bb945e4b0f5cda486f69e</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://archive.ph/JV8zK" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://archive.ph/JV8zK</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>In that interaction, Musk responded to a user who’d asked why “liberal white women hate white people so much” by speculating that “they’ve been programmed to do so by their teachers and the media.”</blockquote>
<br />
It's always education and the media that are the boogeymen. Evil teachers, woke evil college professors, the evil MSM, all conspiring to undermine wholesome American values like being white and women being commodities instead of humans.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Sabrina Carpenter's gross new album promo pics]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1268</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2025 00:13:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=147">Elsacat</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1268</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1l8wv2c/sabrina_carpenter_has_announced_her_newest_album/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://www.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1l8wv2c/sabrina_carpenter_has_announced_her_newest_album/</a><br />
<br />
It's way past time to retire this kind of imagery. Sabrina already appeals to the male gaze. Why go for something demeaning that implies violence?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1l8wv2c/sabrina_carpenter_has_announced_her_newest_album/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://www.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1l8wv2c/sabrina_carpenter_has_announced_her_newest_album/</a><br />
<br />
It's way past time to retire this kind of imagery. Sabrina already appeals to the male gaze. Why go for something demeaning that implies violence?]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Misogyny in Music]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1241</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2025 07:54:57 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=7">Iota Aurigae</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1241</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[My (now second) newest post on Rainy Season: <a href="https://rainyseason.substack.com/p/misogyny-in-music" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://rainyseason.substack.com/p/misogyny-in-music</a><br />
<br />
Just a warning that the post discusses themes of sexualization, and if you know anything about how women are sexualized in music, especially hip hop... please sit this one out if you're a kid.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[My (now second) newest post on Rainy Season: <a href="https://rainyseason.substack.com/p/misogyny-in-music" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://rainyseason.substack.com/p/misogyny-in-music</a><br />
<br />
Just a warning that the post discusses themes of sexualization, and if you know anything about how women are sexualized in music, especially hip hop... please sit this one out if you're a kid.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Jenna Ortega Says ‘There’s Something Very Patronizing’ About Being ‘Dressed in the Schoolgirl Costume’ After ‘Wednesday’]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1233</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2025 23:32:37 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=6">Clover</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1233</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b"><span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Jenna Ortega Says ‘I Was an Unhappy Person’ After ‘Wednesday’ Fame and ‘There’s Something Very Patronizing’ About Being ‘Dressed in the Schoolgirl Costume’</span></span><br />
<br />
Variety, May 28 2025<br />
<br />
<a href="https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/jenna-ortega-unhappy-wednesday-fame-1236411814/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/jenna-ortega-unhappy-wednesday-fame-1236411814/</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b"><span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Jenna Ortega Says ‘I Was an Unhappy Person’ After ‘Wednesday’ Fame and ‘There’s Something Very Patronizing’ About Being ‘Dressed in the Schoolgirl Costume’</span></span><br />
<br />
Variety, May 28 2025<br />
<br />
<a href="https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/jenna-ortega-unhappy-wednesday-fame-1236411814/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/jenna-ortega-unhappy-wednesday-fame-1236411814/</a>]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Nicole Kidman Urges ‘Financial Mentors’ to Invest in Unknown Female Filmmakers and ‘Take a Risk’]]></title>
			<link>https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1188</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2025 03:35:35 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://clovenhooves.org/member.php?action=profile&uid=6">Clover</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://clovenhooves.org/showthread.php?tid=1188</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Original title: Nicole Kidman Has Now Worked With 27 Women Directors in 8 Years; She Urges ‘Financial Mentors’ to Invest in Unknown Female Filmmakers and ‘Take a Risk’ <br />
<br />
<a href="https://variety.com/2025/film/news/nicole-kidman-27-women-directors-8-years-1236402401/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://variety.com/2025/film/news/nicole-kidman-27-women-directors-8-years-1236402401/</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>Nicole Kidman has touched down at the Cannes Film Festival, where she is set to receive the Woman in Motion Award from Kering chairman and CEO François-Henri Pinault, Cannes president Iris Knobloch and festival director Thierry Fremaux. Ahead of the awards dinner, Kidman joined Variety’s Angelique Jackson for a Kering Woman in Motion talk in which the Oscar winner spoke passionately about her commitment to uplifting female directors.<br />
<br />
It was in 2017 when Kidman made a public vow to work with a woman director every 18 months. She had no idea if that would even be possible, but she was determined to see it through. And see it through she has. In the last eight years, plus factoring in her current projects in development, Kidman has teamed up with 27 female directors across her her various film and television projects. </blockquote>
<br />
Discussion in r/movies: <a href="https://reddit.com/r/movies/comments/1kplder/nicole_kidman_has_now_worked_with_27_women/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://reddit.com/r/movies/comments/1kplder/nicole_kidman_has_now_worked_with_27_women/</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Original title: Nicole Kidman Has Now Worked With 27 Women Directors in 8 Years; She Urges ‘Financial Mentors’ to Invest in Unknown Female Filmmakers and ‘Take a Risk’ <br />
<br />
<a href="https://variety.com/2025/film/news/nicole-kidman-27-women-directors-8-years-1236402401/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://variety.com/2025/film/news/nicole-kidman-27-women-directors-8-years-1236402401/</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>Nicole Kidman has touched down at the Cannes Film Festival, where she is set to receive the Woman in Motion Award from Kering chairman and CEO François-Henri Pinault, Cannes president Iris Knobloch and festival director Thierry Fremaux. Ahead of the awards dinner, Kidman joined Variety’s Angelique Jackson for a Kering Woman in Motion talk in which the Oscar winner spoke passionately about her commitment to uplifting female directors.<br />
<br />
It was in 2017 when Kidman made a public vow to work with a woman director every 18 months. She had no idea if that would even be possible, but she was determined to see it through. And see it through she has. In the last eight years, plus factoring in her current projects in development, Kidman has teamed up with 27 female directors across her her various film and television projects. </blockquote>
<br />
Discussion in r/movies: <a href="https://reddit.com/r/movies/comments/1kplder/nicole_kidman_has_now_worked_with_27_women/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="mycode_url">https://reddit.com/r/movies/comments/1kplder/nicole_kidman_has_now_worked_with_27_women/</a>]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>