Attack of the Feminazi

So, my post goes right along with Andrea's and reaches back to our discussion of Mackinnon. Also, it's basically an angry feminist rant. This week, I've been following Rush Limbaugh's comments on the controversy surrounding birth control availability. Here are a few articles that address the issues.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/01/10552338-limbaugh-contraception-advocate-should-post-online-sex-videos

http://jezebel.com/5889443/rush-limbaugh-calls-birth-control-advocate-a-whore

It's the first article that really got me thinking about what we've been discussing in class. Clearly, Rush Limbaugh is offensive on so many different levels that it's impossible to discuss them all in one blog post, but this week he is really on his game. His claim that women should post sex videos online if taxpayers have to pay for their birth control is particularly ridiculous. He calls an advocate for birth control availability a slut and of course throws around his hilarious and clever term Feminazi a few times for good measure.

This rhetoric isn't unusual for Limbaugh. I've heard similar things when riding in the car with my relatives who listen to him or when reading blogs/commentary on his crazy comment of the day. In high school, my science teacher, a regular listener, called me a feminazi on more than one occasion. The problem is this: Limbaugh's program is the most listened to talk radio program in the US. He reaches a wide audience with his condemnation of female sexuality and accessible female reproductive health.

This is what his listeners heard this week: Women who need birth control are sluts. Women who need and dare to ask for help to pay for their birth control are particularly offensive. We have no obligation to consider, much less cover, the reproductive health needs of women but if we're going to be MADE to provide birth control, we deserve a little something in return. Sluts who use our money should at the very least film their sexual activity for our viewing pleasure.

Limbaugh isn't producing traditional pornography on his show, but the completely degrading and shaming language he is using reminded me of Mackinnon. His language and tone are angry. This talk show host, whose product is widely consumed, sounds, at best, like he has no respect for women that step outside of his mold of a "good woman", and at worst, like he genuinely hates them. His "joke" about women posting their sexual experiences online as a reward for those who helped pay for birth control fits exactly into Mackinnon's claims about our culture. Men are free in this situation. He says nothing about the slutty men who have sex with these slutty women. This man wants women to be pure but thinks that those who are not should be exploited and enjoys that exploitation. After all, he saw the filming of sex as a reward for his monetary contribution to the distribution of birth control. Basically, these women are prostitutes; he tries to make this analogy in his first comments. Anyway, these are the messages that reach a very large audience.

Clearly, I am biased. There are few people who make me so angry, and listening to him literally makes my stomach upset. The thought of my family members subscribing to his show makes me sad. So, am I being unfair to him?

What do y'all think it says about our society that Limbaugh has such a wide audience? What impact do you think his show has on us and on our political conversations at large? Andrea talked about the importance of social media. Every article, blog post, FB status, and podcast that responds to Limbaugh only gets him more attention. Is there a better way to respond? Finally, to reach back to our discussion of pornography, what does it say that Limbaugh at once wants women to be chaste and sees viewing pornography as a "reward" for himself and other good people and a just punishment for women who are sexually active and on the pill?