Scott Adams says something misogynist; news at 11

Scott Adams thinks rape is a natural instinct of men, and that asking them not to rape is oppressive. Seriously:

If a lion and a zebra show up at the same watering hole, and the lion kills the zebra, whose fault is that? Maybe you say the lion is at fault for doing the killing. Maybe you say the zebra should have chosen a safer watering hole. But in the end, you probably conclude that both animals acted according to their natures, so no one is to blame...

The part that interests me is that society is organized in such a way that the natural instincts of men are shameful and criminal while the natural instincts of women are mostly legal and acceptable. In other words, men are born as round pegs in a society full of square holes. Whose fault is that? Do you blame the baby who didn’t ask to be born male? Or do you blame the society that brought him into the world, all round-pegged and turgid, and said, “Here’s your square hole”?

Won't someone think of the poor, erect penises? How will they exercise their God-given right to have a hole to occupy, if the person attached to the hole is allowed to say "no"?

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

spacelogic
2011-06-17 11:40 pm UTC (link)

I actually know the answer to this one, I think: it's because of the Cult of Domesticity, which came in about when the cultural narrative shifted from women being the sinful uncontrollable ones to being the moral guides of society. See, women are moral and pure, in touch with emotions and spirituality rather than with reason and fact, and so their role is to control men's base urges through gentle guidance (as wives), raise moral daughters and guide their sons to the care of other moral women. If a woman's in the "public sphere" she can't do this, and so that has to be left to men, who rule through reason tempered by female nudging.

Thank you, 19th century!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	violetsquirrel 2011-06-18 04:46 am UTC (link)
	But it still doesn't make sense. How can men be rational and full of facts when they're also so full of base urges that women have to control them? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	spacelogic 2011-06-18 05:57 am UTC (link)
	It's the science vs. religion thing. Being rational/scientific is the opposite of being spiritual/Godly, and therefore is associated with sin (lust, greed, etc.) while women, being spiritual, are morally superior but less able to function in the harsh reality of the world. At least I think that's how it works. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	cmdr_zoom 2011-06-18 06:28 pm UTC (link)
	I think it goes something like this: Men have the power; therefore, Women are always wrong. Because they're wrong. (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -