Carl Gallups, an evangelical extremist “pastor” who spoke at numerous Trump campaign rallies during last year’s election, is back in the news for being something other than just a guy with incredibly poor taste in presidential candidates and no sense of actual morals.
On Friday, Carl sat down with his batshit-crazy website‘s editor-in-chief Mike Shoesmith, and they proceeded to have a completely rational discussion of how women wearing “provocative clothing” is totally the same thing as when a man physically overpowers a woman and rapes her.
By “rational,” I of course mean totally in keeping with the batshit-crazy theme Carl has going on with that site.
The segment is called “Freedom Fridays,” and it’s a lot like how Thom Hartmann used to have that Friday segment “Brunch With Bernie” on his radio show with Bernie Sanders back when he was in the House of Representatives. Only, you know, batshit-crazy.
Mike wrote a piece on Thursday for the (say it with me) BSC website they run together that recapped a Facebook post he’d made earlier that day that posited the following:
If a woman wears sexually suggestive clothing around a man is that not also sexual assault? Men are visually stimulated and unwanted stimulation should meet the basic definition of assault … women need to understand that by walking around in their little sister’s skirt they are guilty of indecent visual assault on a man’s imagination … Something to think about.
Without asking you to read the article, which I quite unwillingly linked, I will tell you that Mike includes a gratuitously cleavage-baring photo of the beautiful Jennifer Aniston in his think-piece, which I guess is “assisted rape” in his world?
Now, I’m just gonna pluck two things from that big jumble of batshit-crazy. Let’s take the end first, because it’s the most widely-used and nefarious tool of evangelicals in their quest to force people to adhere to their religion: “Something to think about.”
That’s some bullshit right there. It’s right in line with “I’m just asking questions.” No, it’s something you’re thinking about, you fucking sicko. As with nearly every utterance of the charlatans of the post-Jesus age, it is kookery of the highest order.
But Mike positively breezes past what’s possibly the most offensive definition of rape I’ve seen since Baby Boomer moms started excusing their douchebag sons’ behavior by saying “NICE girls used to call that a mistake.” Mike ham-handedly calls this “sexual assault” by women on men “unwanted stimulation.”
Now, not to put too fine a point on it, and at the risk of way over-using a phrase in a single article: That is batshit-crazy. It is patriarchal, it is demeaning, it is all manners of outrageous, and it is incorrect. Rape is not “unwanted stimulation.” The notion that it could be “stimulation” of any kind makes me want to literally throw up on my keyboard right now, but the level of passivity you have to ascribe to the violent, life-ruining crime of rape to simply call it “unwanted” is frankly disturbing. It implies that if the contact were wanted it could be enjoyed, which is what right-wingers think anything having to do with genitals amounts to. Icky, nasty, bad, sinful sex. To them, rape is just sex where one person doesn’t actually want it.
Bluntly, because they’re stupid: That is not what rape is. Rape is not ANY KIND OF SEX.
Mike Shoesmith and Carl Gallups should both share a cell with the Pussygrabber-in-Chief. They can all commiserate about how often they’re “sexually assaulted” by all the pretty women whose collarbones and knees drive them into fits of lust and make them feel all rape-y inside.
If you really need to, you can listen to these garbage humans here:
Note to our readers: Please share/tweet our articles. Trump supporting trolls targeted our site’s account and reported it en masse, without cause. This triggered a seemingly automatic suspension. Twitter support has failed to address this issue. Thank you!
Featured image via screen capture