Archive for the ‘hall of shame’ Category

Rainbows and ponies.

August 23, 2010

Now today, dear ones, I want to show you a lovely littl


Mwahahaha. Mwahahahhahahhaha. Mwahahahhahahahahahahha. Do not adjust your monitors, America. Your so-called rainbows and ponies have been hijacked. BY DR. HORRIBLE. I have hacked into your internetz to tell you that intelligence is dead. That’s right, sofa monkeys, no more “book-larnin’.” The future of rational thought? Is not. Why pay attention to silly little things like FACTS when you can just reject people out of hand for not being like wonderful you?

I give you, “We’ve Got to Stop the Mosque at Ground Zero” by Trade Martin.

(ps, the blogger who alerted me to this piece of crazy, a cute non-sequitur, commentated, “oh god. i am sick of hearing about GROUND ZERO MOSQUE HURRR but oh my god. they’ve gone and turned their arguments against it into a used car jingle.” RIGHT ON, CUTE. RIGHT ON.)


Actually yes, this is offensive. Only without the quotation marks.

December 23, 2009

[via, originally from the Boortz Blast…can you tell?]

No, I didn’t write this. I wish I did. Because it’s the painful truth. And you know how much I love to stir the puddin’. This list was actually forwarded to me from a friend of mine…Ain’t this the truth? -Neal Boortz

1. If a conservative doesn’t like guns, he doesn’t buy one.
If a liberal doesn’t like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

2. If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn’t eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

3. If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy.
If a liberal sees a foreign threat, he wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

4. If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.

5. If a person of color is conservative, he sees himself as independently successful.
If a person of color is liberal, he sees himself as a victim in need of government protection

6. If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
If a liberal is down-and-out, he wonders who is going to take care of him.

7. If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host, he switches channels.
If a liberal doesn’t like a talk show host, he demands that those he doesn’t like be shut down.

8. If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn’t go to church.
If a liberal is a non-believer, he wants any mention of God and religion silenced. (Unless it’s a foreign religion, of course!)

9. If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
If a liberal decides he needs health care, he demands that the rest of us pay for his.

10. If a conservative slips and falls in a store, he gets up, laughs, and is embarrassed.
If a liberal slips and falls, he grabs his neck, moans like he’s in labor and then sues.

11. If a conservative reads this, he’ll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
If a liberal reads this, he’ll delete it because he’s “offended”.

Me again, your lovely ship’s Cap’n. I’ve taken the liberty of numbering these little laugh riots for easy reference. Here’s a short list of things I find offensive (sans quotation marks) about this friendly piece of spam…

-The use of male pronouns when referring to hypothetical people of any gender
-The implication that all conservatives are quiet, respectful and polite, and all liberals are rude, conniving bitches
-The implication that all conservatives have sensible, measured reactions to everyday events, while all liberals take everything to the extreme and make mountains out of molehills
-The implication that the conservative mindset is obviously superior to the liberal mindset
-The implication that all conservatives want is the freedom to live their life the way they want to, and all liberals want is the freedom to control everyone else’s lives for them
-The implication that people from other nations who disagree with us or don’t like us are therefore our “enemies” and should be dealt with accordingly…because the US must (and deserves to!) rule the roost
-The further implication that, since conservatism should be the default ideology and liberal the aberrant, liberal people are actually enemies of the US themselves and should also be dealt with accordingly (How dare you  not hate foreign people! Prepare to defend yourselves!)
-The implication that non-heteronormative people don’t deserve equal rights, they should be grateful for whatever scraps we throw them because as we all know, human rights don’t really exist. We should start using the term “human privileges”
-The implication that all people of color need to do to really be equal is vote Republican
-The implication that voting Republican is the roadmap to success for everyone, while voting Democrat is the road to hell
-The implication that conservatives love hard work and would work hard all day for free (unless, that is, you were giving their salary to someone else…) and liberals are lazy bums who watch television all day and can’t be bothered to get a job
-The implication that only conservative people have brains, and only liberal people can be leeches
-The implication that it’s always within a person’s grasp to lift themselves out of poverty, and therefore the poverty that still exists is evidence of some kind of moral failing
-The implication that it’s easy to find work…if one is lacking money, one simply needs to choose at leisure one of multitudes of available jobs
-The implication that all conservative people possess level heads, always remain calm, never lose their temper when faced with someone of an opposing political persuasion, while all liberals want to banish their opponents…from Planet Earth
-The implication that the only legitimate religion in the US is Christianity and all other religions are “foreign religions”
-The implication that adherents to said “foreign religions” should be content to see their religious freedoms and protections legislated away while we write Christianity into the Constitution and enforce it as the national religion
-The implication that being a Christian is somehow the same as being a patriotic American…God and the US of course are working toward the same goals! All the time!
-The implication that health care is neither a necessity nor a right that belongs to all of us as humans, but rather an exclusive luxury available only to those with big enough wallets, and that’s the way it should be
-The further implication that since health care isn’t a human right, we, the wealthy West, have no obligation to do anything about world crises (for example, AIDS)
-The implication that this whole email forward is hilarious and anyone who doesn’t think so is a lamo idiot who deserves to be put under house arrest so the rest of us don’t have to look at his or her ugly face anymore
-The implication that this whole email forward is true
-The unfortunate divisions and stereotypes this email forward does nothing but reinforce. It’s not us vs. them, blue vs. red. Or it shouldn’t be. And you wonder why we can’t accomplish anything?

What’s up with you, right-wingers?

December 14, 2009

You hate it when girls won’t wear dresses to formal dances. Sooo…the more girls wearing dresses, the better, right?

Wrong! You also hate it when too many members of the wedding party are wearing dresses!

So, um, what’s left? Oh, I know! I bet you’d be happy if everyone would only throw off the shackles of clothing and run around naked as the day they were born. Oh, but wait…darn! So what say you, right-wingers? What, exactly, ARE women allowed to wear?

Oh, I see, it’s not the outfits you have a problem with? So, hmm..when you refuse to let girls wear tuxes to school dances, it’s not really a fashion issue or in any way political, it’s just because you hate the girls.

Oh, but wait! you say. We don’t hate anyone! We hate the sin, love the sinner! Then, um, if you neither hate these people nor their clothing in itself, what’s your deal, hm? Go on, paint yourself in a corner. We’re going dancing, see you later.


December 10, 2009

I was browsing Missed Connections–don’t lie, you know you love it too!–and something someone said, not sure what it was, I believe it was a line of poetry–triggered one of those Google moments when it’s completely necessary to open just one more tab and pray Chrome doesn’t crash. Hahahha. So I Googled this literary line and ended up here. If this isn’t the stupidest (and also the saddest) product I’ve ever seen for sale, I don’t know what is.

Want to capture their heart? It’s easier than you think! Ignite the passion with LoveLettersNow. LoveLettersNow has dozens of originally written love letters and emails that you can send instantly, without having to write a single word! You can send or email the letters as they are, or add your own words and paragraphs. It’s a great alternative to greeting cards and perfect for those who have a tough time expressing their feelings on paper.

They also advertise it this way:

Introducing Your Love Letter Generator!
– 250+ Pre-Written Love Letters
– Extra Bonuses: 45 Love Poems
– Creative Ideas for Sending Letters
– Your Own User Password
– Unlimited LIFETIME Access
– Shhh…no one ever has to know you had our help!

And they continue: If you’re looking for inspiration to write your own love letter, here is a collection of love letters to inspire your romantic soul. All love letters have been submitted by RomanceStruck visitors.

Here, I’ll print a couple of ’em for you. In case you want to copy off of them, too. I mean, an originally-written love letter’s an originally written love letter, right? How could your honey object? I know, right? So here’s one entitled “Long Distance Love.”


It is very important for me to express to you how much you really mean to me*. I wish I could do this in person while holding you in my arms and gazing into your eyes. But since we are physically separated by miles of emptiness, this expression must come in the form of letters such as this.

Dear, I know it is difficult for you, as it is for me, to be separated for so long. Life seems to be full of trials of this type which test our inner strength, and more importantly, our devotion and love for one another. After all, it is said that “True Love” is boundless and immeasurable and overcomes all forms of adversity. In truth, if it is genuine, it will grow stronger with each assault upon its existence.

Dear, our love has been assaulted many times, and I am convinced that it is true because the longer I am away from you, the greater is my yearning to be with you again. You are my Charming Prince, and I am your devoted Princess. I cherish any thought of you, prize any memory of you that rises from the depths of my mind, and live for the day when our physical separation will no longer be.

Until that moment arrives, I send to you across the miles, my tender love, my warm embrace, and my most passionate kiss.

Love always,
Your baby

And here’s one submitted by Ashley Dunn, entitled simply, “I Love You.”

I Love You
I love every little thing about you —
Your sexy smile, the sound of your voice, the magic in your eyes. I love your gentle touch and the warmth I feel at your side … I love dreaming about you. And letting go with you. I love each and every once-in-a-lifetime moment I share with you. Today, tomorrow, forever.

*Just kidding, I’d MUCH rather shell out $39.95…for a love letter GENERATOR. That’s how much you mean to me, my love!

I can’t help but laugh, but at the same time I think it’s depressing and it also kind of scares me. This is being marketed to people who want to connect with the person they love. So they send this automated email, and suppose (ha!) that their magic person happens to fall in love with them. Only once again, just kidding, they’re really in love with LoveLettersNow! How fun! No “connection” ever occurred. What we’re looking at, my friends, isn’t love, it’s infatuation, and an unhealthy amount of it to boot.

I can’t decide what’s worst about this product..the fact that you’re encouraged to keep your copy/pasting skillz a secret so your lover stays in love? The fact that every letter is completely generic and could legitimately be sent to every person in the world? The fact that apparently there are people out there who are so desperate for even the illusion of affection that they’ll send away for something so ridiculous, Ali Hakim would have been embarrassed to sell it? The fact that an emotional connection–that love!–isn’t for sale but people still try to sell it? Ugh.

In case you’re interested, this lovely little item contains more than just “I love you so much I would be the Juliet to your Romeo” kind of letters that would make any sane person throw up. No, included in this package, you get all of the following! It’s so nice to know that you now have the option to send vague and hollow greetings and assurance of fondness to everyone you know, including your own children, your parents, your friends, your coworkers (AND your boss), the bright young grads you’re so proud of, service men and women, and that guy you were juuuuust introduced to at that party. I’m sure they will all appreciate your completely thoughtless and entirely meaningless gesture of nothingness.

– Enduring Love
– Erotic
– Love and Laughter
– Famous Celebrity
– Just Met
– Valentine’s Day
–  First Time “I Love You”
– Wedding
– Friendship
– Long Distance Romance
– Secret Admirer
– Expressions of Gratitude
– Unrequited Love
– I’m Sorry, Please Forgive Me
– Love at the Office
– Breaking Up
– Love On-Line
– Child to Parent
– Parent to Child
– Lunch Box Notes to children
– Love Fantasy
– Anniversary
– Birthdays
– Graduation
– Military In Love
– Support For Our Military
– Mother’s Day
– Father’s Day

To COMPLETELY FLIP THIS POST AROUND, you wanna see the absolute coolest and most heartwarming way I’ve ever seen to try to say the L-word to someone you dig? This post. Right here. Hands down, my favorite.

How can you sit there calmly and defend torture?!

December 2, 2009

You, you sitting at home in your armchairs or at your kitchen table, you who sing in church on Sundays and keep asking God to “bless America”–you, with your cold, calculated formulas and your bullet points of exactly why it’s important that we as Americans should be allowed (should have the right!) to abuse, rape, murder human beings in the name of “information,” or for no reason at all! You, who cry bloody murder when the same thing happens in your own backyard.

This is why I’m anti-torture, anti-war. This is why I’m anti-military. This makes me sick.

And you thought the presidential campaign Cabbage Patch Kids were stupid?

July 12, 2009

Haha, you must not be aware of the Young Cons! A “rap” duo peddling the “love that’s behind the conservative movement,” they wear suits because, of course, they’re not “regular rappers.” Oh well. At least they admit they have an agenda..that’s progress, isn’t it? Actually no. There’s so many things wrong with this “song”, if you can call it that, I don’t even know where to start. I’m torn between pointing and laughing, and worrying about how many people actually think Jesus and Ronald Reagan are practically synonymous, for one thing. And I guess I forgot that even God’s an American…silly me!

Here’s the lyrics, haha. But I’m warning you ahead of time, they’re the worst rap lyrics I’ve ever heard, and in general I’m not too impressed with the genre, so take from that what you will.

[Serious C:]
Yo…one time…
I rep the Northeast and I’m still a young con,
Let your voice release, you don’t have to be Obamatrons.
I debate any poser who don’t shoot straight,
Government spending needs to deflate,
Your ideas are lightweight,
Ya careers in checkmate,
I frustrate. I increase the pulse rate.
I hate when
Government dictatin’, makin’ statements ’bout how to be a merchant,
How to run a restaurant, how to lay the pavement,
Bail out a business, but can’t protect an infant.
Deficiencies are blatant, young con treatment,
I stand one man, outnumbered at my college.
Thank you Miss Cali for reminding us of marriage.
Can’t support abortion and call yourself a Christian.
I support life, you’re a puzzled politician.
Terrorists were imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay,
Now they’re in our neighborhoods, planning out Doomsday.
No such thing as Utopia,
No government can control ya, baby ya.
Reap the benefits, hard work, self-reliant.
Listen to Stiltz, my dude’s a lyrical giant.
Yo Stiltz, make it two time…please.
I’m 6’9″, head and shoulder above the rest.
Liberals playin’ checkers, I’m playin’ chess.
My conservative view is drill baby drill.
You can say you hate me but I’m praying for you still.
My dislike for thee most def is not hyperbole.
Taxes are the subject and I will spit them verbally.
I’m just livin’ life, a conservative philosophy.
Sorry Hillary, not a right-wing conspiracy.
We need more women with intellectual integrity.
I’m talkin’ Megyn Kelly, not Nancy Pelosi.
My main motto is you best work hard.
It’s not the hand you were given, but how you lay down your cards.
I don’t speak lies, but I spit the facts.
28%, the new capital gains tax.
Porkulus bill lacks a few stats.
The more money we spend, the more mine is worth jack.
The Bible says we’re a people under God, usin’ radar for radical jihad.
AIG was hooked up by Chris Dodd.
A classy gift ain’t an iPod.
The standards of my crew ain’t Republicans, dude.
I’m reppin’ Jesus Christ and conservative views.
Study history and true conservative moves,
Every single time they refuse to lose.
I’m starting to see a modern-day Jimmy Carter,
When really nothin’ but a Reagan-era starter.
[Serious C:]
Yo, we Americans, son.
Hit ya with some knowledge, the movement has begun.
Everyone can succeed because our soldiers bleed for us.
I said in in the verse, now I’ll say it in the chorus.
We young conservatives, son,
Hard work is our motto.
The movement has begun.
Everyone can succeed ’cause our soldiers bleed daily.
My views are rock solid, no chance you can break me…
[Serious C:] Phase me, make me, into something that ain’t me.
Serious C…can’t nobody shake me.
Great like the Gatsby, poppin’ posers like acne.
Don’t matter if you’re gay, straight, Christian or Muslim,
There’s one thing we all hate, called socialism.
It’s loathsome, and America ain’t the outcome.
Raise taxes on the people,
And you’re gonna feel symptoms, problems.
I got a mesage for a young con:
Superman that socialism, waterboard that terrorism.
I fulfill the role that’s inherently mine
Teaching politics through my rap and my rhyme.
I’m signing off on this track with a question in mind:
How will this country get its precious change in time?
Three things taught me conservative love:
Jesus, Ronald Reagan, plus Atlas Shrugged.
Saving our nation from inflation devastation.
On my hands and my knees praying for salvation.
[Serious C:]
Yo, we Americans, son.
Hit ya with some knowledge, the movement has begun.
Everyone can succeed because our soldiers bleed for us.
I said it in the verse, now I’ll say it in the chorus.
We young conservatives, son.
Hard work is our motto.
The movement has begun.
Everyone can succeed ’cause our soldiers bleed daily.
My views are rock solid, no chance you can break me.

“I think you have possibly misunderstood his theology on women.” [4]

June 17, 2009

Here’s the second conversation that began as a result of Mark Driscoll is a Misogynist. My commentary, once again, will be in {these} brackets. Whatever they’re called. I used to know, I believe, but I’ve forgotten. The other party will be referred to as Two.

Two: Can I ask why you made this group?

Me: I made it to counterbalance all the other Driscoll groups available; at the time I made this, the others were all extremely supportive of Driscoll and his teachings. I don’t have it out for Driscoll himself, but I do want to call attention to some of his more questional/unbiblical/offensive views and teachings.

Two: I simply want to know what of his unquestionable/unbiblical/offensive views and teachings are. I respect your opinions and would just like to know what they are. {I didn’t think it was that hard to deduce. ;P }

Me: I would direct you back to the group description. Yes, these are “isolated” quotes, but as you can see, a lot of them closely resemble each other. It’s a recurring theme, and I feel it accurately sums up his theology on women. He preaches that women and men are not and shouldn’t be treated as equals; that men are inherently strong and women are inherently weak; that men who aren’t into beating people up for fun aren’t “real” men, they’re sissies, which is akin to saying they’re stupid and laughable because they’re “like women,” or as he likes to say, “chick-ified.” He frequently reduces women to sexual objects and has compared the women’s rights movement to voting for cute baby bunnies to lead the church. All of which is extremely offensive to me, and I don’t believe it accurately portrays Scripture, either.

Two: Ok. I have read these quotes on the group page. Many of these quotes I would like to see them within their context. Also, I also am wondering {side note: I’m leaving this exactly as written, so that double-also isn’t my fault} if you actually heard them in a lecture/sermon, read them, or if you possibly read them out of context. I think you have possibly misunderstood his theology on women. He does not think that men and women should not be treated as equals, but I think he is simply saying that the roles of the man and woman are entirely different. {He says both.} Because their roles are so different you cannot treat women as though they are men, just as you cannot and should not treat men as though they are women. {So how, exactly, should one treat a man vs. a woman? I would like specifics. Even if their roles were different, and I don’t believe they are, I fail to see how different treatment of the sexes would be justified because of this.} They have different roles, but are simultaneously equals. That is what Mark Driscoll actually tries to express every time he preaches. {Every time he preaches he reinforces ridiculous gender roles? I have no doubt of that whatsoever.} This separation of roles between genders but equality at the same time. {…What?} I hope you understand what I am saying and I apologize if I am being confusing. {I think he just won the game How Condescending Can I Get?} Also, you mentioned that you don’t believe he accurately portrays Scripture in what I think you would call his anti-feminine ideals. {Personally I would just call them anti-woman. “Feminine” is getting into that whole gender-role thing that I don’t buy into, remember? Haha, oh yeah!} I am wondering what YOUR theology of 1 Peter 3 is where Peter talks about women as the weaker vessel in verse 7 if Driscoll’s is wrong. I do not mean to come off disrespectful in any way, but I am simply attempting to understand where you are coming from. Where you said to me that men who aren’t into beating people up for fun aren’t “real” men, they’re sissies, which is akin to..I would like to point out that none of those quotes seem to be quotes by him {Yes. He actually has called less macho men “sissies,” “girls,” “limp-wristed,” “chick-ified,” and more} and when you say, “which is akin to..” you are applying your own ideas to someone else’s words to prove them wrong. This is a philosophical and interpretive fallacy. {It would be, if I were putting words in his mouth, but I’m not. It’s his own words that damn him.} You cannot prove your point to me by saying it is “akin to this” or “akin to that”…to me that is simply your input, not what he has said. Also, I would like to know where Driscoll would say you aren’t a real man unless you beat people up. That seems to be his past life before he was a converted Christian and he continuously says how he was living in a life of sin and violation against Jesus. {At this point, I like to recall this pleasant little image: “In Houston, Driscoll was intent on making absolutely clear that he is in favor of masculinity. At the 2 hour, 15 minute mark, he invited five pastors from the audience to take the stage, put his hands behind his back, stuck out his chin, and said, ‘Hit me with your best shot. Go on. I won’t hit you back. I want to show everyone what this is all about.’ When none of the five took a swing, Driscoll had them escorted from the building and proceeded to hit himself five times. ‘This is  what being a pastor is about, guys. If you can’t handle it, go back to teaching yoga or playing My Little Pony with the other girls.'”} When you say that he reduces women down to sexual objects, I would like to object to this claim. If you have heard his peasant princess teaching series along with his marriage and men series you would understand that he is simply and utterly disgusted with men that mistreat their wives as sexual objects, views them in unnatural ways, or anything else that is totally degrading to women. {And yet, he blames the wives of men who cheat. And yet, he equates “getting a wife” with “getting a job” or “buying a house”…just acquiring another possession. And yet, he seems to feel the main purpose of “getting a wife” at all is so you can “ask her to get naked” instead of watching pornography. Want me to go on?} He would never say that man and woman are not for each other’s pleasure but again, he would view them as equals with separate roles. He would never reduce them down to sexual objects. He also holds women as the most precious, important, most valuable things in God’s creation, and turning them into sexual objects is contrary to what he teaches. {What planet exactly are you from, my friend?}

Me: I’ve heard several of his sermons, read his blog, etc. It’s not possible for me to provide a transcript of everything he says, but yes, taken in context, I believe these quotes are still an accurate representation of Driscoll’s teachings. For instance, he teaches that a woman’s place is at home; that is very much advocating different treatment of men and women. If you have separate ways of treating men and women, then by definition you aren’t treating them as equals. I suppose where we differ, for starters, is our understandings of gender roles in the first place. I believe men and women are equal in role as well as in personhood.
My theology of 1 Peter 3, if you would like to call it that, is closer to the way The Message by Eugene Peterson puts it: “As women they lack some of your advantages. But in the new life of God’s grace, you’re equals. Treat your wives, then, as equals so your prayers don’t run aground.” It has to do more with the disenfranchisement of women, and in no way does Peter signify that that is a good thing or even okay; he sets a clear new standard of equality that was unheard of at the time. If Christ was the second Adam, obliterating the curse, there went all the so-called justification of male domination.
When I used the phrase “akin to” I in no way meant to put words in Driscoll’s mouth, but I don’t think it’s unfair to compare his words to each other and connect the dots. He does claim that men who like yoga or tea, for example, are “sissies” or “chick-ified,” which is in fact a derogatory way of insulting men he sees as being too “feminine” to be real men, and by extension, that’s very demeaning and insulting to women as well.
If you want examples of Driscoll’s opinion that violence and macho-ness make people (but only men) worthy of leadership, here’s his description of how his first church met his criteria: “Firstly, the pastor was a man who had been in the military and knew how to kill people in self-defence. Second, he taught through the Bible verse by verse so that I could learn to trust the Scripture and to love Jesus without feeling like we had a thinly-veiled homosexual relationship.” His description of how his second church met his criteria: “First, the pastore (who looked like Mr. T) had been an NFL linebacker and knew how to kill people in self-defence. Second, he taught through the Bible verse by verse in a real way, one that enabled me to have a relationship with Jesus that did not feel like he was my lifelong prom date.”  He has commented multiple times on how the problem with church today is how “feminine” it is. He attaches a gender to everything, no matter how ridiculous, and if he feels someone or something doesn’t measure up to the appropriate level of manliness, they’re not man enough to pastor. {I canNOT believe I forgot to cite this direct quote: “I cannot worship a guy I can beat up.”} It seems like the worst insult he can find for a man is the word “effeminate” or one similar, and he employs them often, whenever he wants to quickly dismiss someone. That says a lot about not only his view on men who differ from himself, but also his view on women and whatever he thinks it means to be a woman.
I’ve not heard that series, but I have heard his series on Ruth, in which he did reduce Ruth to a sexual object for Boaz’s pleasure. I also take issue with his apparent need for women to be weak (think: damsel in distress. in need of protection). Perhaps he thinks a woman’s weakness magnifies a man’s strength? I don’t know. I’m not Driscoll and I’m not trying to speak for him, but his views, even clarified as much as possible, hold no appeal for me.
Oh, and I certainly understand what you’re saying and where you’re coming from. I basically grew up in it. ;]

If/when I receive more messages, I’ll post ’em up too, haha.

[EDIT::As I told this fellow, I haven’t heard the Peasant Princess series, but I have now read a bit about it, and it sure sounds like it proves his point that Driscoll supports equality! Just kidding! Here’s a summary of the summary I read, which also includes commentary on his Spiritual Warfare series, oh joy: Women are dangerous and prone to gossip. Men never have a problem with gossip. The only problem men usually have is when they’re not getting laid often enough. Which is the women’s fault. Friendships between women are dangerous. (He even uses the word “Satanic.”) Men must protect their women from friendship with other women, which, as we all know, is just a front for female manipulation. “Women’s ministries” are permitted, but only just. “You have to be very careful,” he says. “It’s like juggling knives.” Women who want to be in leadership and/or lead women’s groups are “the wrong kind of women.” They are “gossip mamas and drama queens.” Of course, as we all know, the only women fit to lead anyone are the sweet, submissive, quiet women–in other words, the ones who’ve been brainwashed into believing women can’t lead. So the ones who want to lead aren’t fit, and the ones who are fit won’t lead. See? The easiest way in the entire world to completely disenfranchise women, blocking every single one of us from leadership!]

Part 1: Mark Driscoll is a Misogynist, or How to Start Theological Debates With People You Don’t Even Know.

Part 2: The fastest way to attract male attention is to make an anti-misogynist Facebook group.

Part 3: Criticizing Mark Driscoll’s views on women draws its own criticism.