Shannon Larratt is Zentastic

My healing is progressing well with no apparent complications. I am continuing with the philosophy that served me well with my most recent surgery before this one, that is, to be as active and in as much motion as possible without doing injury. It helps that there are just some internal sutures, which will dissolve on their own, and some tape on the surface — no big metal staples to remove like the last couple times. I expect I will have photos of the surgery itself next week. They were taken on my surgeon’s camera — the very first thing I asked when I came out of the anesthesia (which was supposed to be just a local, but the sedative completely knocked me out) was, “how did the pictures turn out?”, upon which he showed me some nice images of the roughly four-inch long gash held open with stainless steel spreaders.

I will have results in a few weeks, and then I find out what the next step is.

While I was recovering, I read a Robert Jensen book called Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity, written by a “man” (I put that in quotes, because he renounces his status as a man in the book) and ominously dedicated to Andrea Dworkin, who I have little to no respect for. I do agree that pornography that convinces inexperienced young people that forced gag-inducing throat f*cking, ATM, violent sodomy, and so on has a lot more negatives than redeeming qualities, but like most anti-porn crusaders, the author doesn’t even understand why people are drawn to pornography, past projecting his own weaknesses and perversions onto the world (and isn’t willing to educate himself or do any research, choosing instead to grasp at straws to find scenes that let him prop up his idiocy), and spends the book showcasing his own insecurities, self-loathing, and pretentious self-righteousness. It’s this kind of shallow-minded liberalism — which is really just another pseudo-religious extremist stance trying to force its fear-mongering ignorance on the world — that gives feminism a bad name. It’s unfortunate that someone who’s regarded as an expert (a professor in this author’s case) can hold and promote such views. I suppose though that the sheltered world of academia often doesn’t foster intellectual growth, but instead is an environment in which people build up their foolishness with a cadre of women’s studies yes-men egging them on to get more and more disconnected from reality, and more sure of themselves the further away from any lucid reality they travel.

I’ll quote some of the reviews of Robert Jenson’s book here, because I really think it’s important that if someone stumbles upon this blog post looking for the book that they really have it emphasized as strongly as possible what a jackass Robert Jenson is.

A mandatory book for a psychology class which pretty much reaffirms my growing realization that the field in general has become so rife with biases drawn from flawed assumptions that have no accurate basis in fact, history, reality etc. And that pretty much mirrors this book. If one accepts the given tenants of radical feminism, and supposes that masculinity is entirely constructed, and constructed to oppress women, than this book will be your cup of tea. If you live in the real world and think that women are accountable for and play a controlling role in how they shape perceptions of themselves as a group then this book will read like more delirious gender feminist skreed. Also if you reject the enormous assumption that men like porn because it proves they are different from women, and therefore superior to them then you will dislike this book. Moreover if you disagree that masculinity is solely constructed to dominate and screw over others then you will also find this book absurd. The book relies on assumptions and passes them off as facts from which to build its arguments, but unfortunately, the assumptions are broad leaps of intellectual dishonesty, much like the proponents who pedal this kind of tripe from their taxpayer subsidized classrooms, and pass it off as academia. One star is too kind, and the taxpayers deserve better than this.

Robert Jensens logic and rhetoric are in dire need of improvement … One of Jensen’s main arguments on pornography and rape is actually the “textbook” example of “Post hoc ergo propter hoc” as seen on the CSU Northridge website on logical fallacies and debate. Embarrassing. Along with weak analogies and other logical failures, he basically left all his arguments open to easy destruction. By the end of the book, he had done more to hurt his cause then help it. The whole affair is shameful. … his continually repeated thesis that “men hate women.” … His entire attitude is one of divisiveness, men vs. women. His critiques of society are well deserved, but he is going about it all wrong. Blaming entire genders, races or religions for the problems in the world are not going to solve them. … I am scared to think that we have political activists like Jensen out there, if he sees any modicum of success in his vision it will be at our expense. My solace is that I cannot imagine any emotionally healthy person could possibly embrace his message.

Jensen’s liberal humanism is nothing but a guise for thought control. His arguments are puerile, scattered, and inconclusive.

Even some of the positive reviews should make it clear what lunacy this is:

Jensen is such a radical feminist that he thinks the entire system needs to be overhauled; it’s not enough for men to “protect” or esteem women enough to stop looking at porn– they must reject the entire concept of masculinity, because Jensen interprets the patriarchal system as essentially creating a “rape culture.” … I think Jensen is really limited by his moral perspective. In his discussion “What is sex for?”, for example, he refuses to even consider the argument, “For procreation,” because that would disenfranchise gays and lesbians.

Way to continue the trend of making political correctness a joke. Even the University of Texas (where Jensen teaches) President called him “a fountain of undiluted foolishness”, although he didn’t have the balls to fire him. Anyway, I can’t see anyone agreeing with any of this book other than people who already desperately want to believe this junk, either because they hold some sort of extremist feminist view, or they’re a religious nut that spends their life believing even bigger fallacies. I hate it when stupid people masquerade as intellectuals, and I hate it even more when entire institutions of stupid people form to prop up the house of cards. Maybe they’re not stupid, maybe it’s just some sort of “the emperor wears no clothes” collective delusion… I don’t know. And don’t get me started on his whiny rich white man blathering about how rich white men are the real problem in this world. He really makes me sick. But enough rambling about him.

We were going to see District 9 today at the theatre, but the timing didn’t work so we stayed home and watched Pontypool instead, an interesting movie in which a zombie-esque virus is spread by language. We’re off to the mall now to return a non-functioning remote control hovercraft that I got yesterday… Then I’ll grab Nefarious and a friend from school and head off to the park for a while, and play with whatever vehicle I get as a replacement (as well as the super-fun buggy that’s a few entries down from this one).

Might do some old fashioned cooking this weekend, although my plans are never quite what I announce them to be, so I’m not sure why I bother. Perhaps someone reading this will do it, and I can enjoy the food vicariously through a stranger’s blog.