Tag Archives: Today on Sexist Morning Radio

Today on Rape Culture FM

[Content Note:  Rape Culture]

I’ve done a couple of posts that I’ve titled “Today on Sexist Morning Radio” after listening to the morning show on 98PXY on the way to work.  To be honest, I think I could probably write a minimum of one such post a week if I had more time or remembered the incidents by the time I have a chance to do any blogging.

Today’s gem, spoken by Duffy[1], however, goes far beyond sexism.  That’s why I’ve chosen what I consider a far more appropriate title.  After all, I can think of few statements that embody rape culture better than the following:[2]

She’s my wife.  She’s supposed to give me sex anyway.

To be honest, Duffy’s statement doesn’t really surprise me.  After all, he has in the pas indicated that he used to feel that the women he dated owed him sex if he paid for the date.

Now, I’m not saying that Duffy would actually have sex with his wife without her consent (but given that, statement, wow).  But at the very least, he’s reinforcing the idea that men are entitled to have sex with at least some women.  And that’s the kind of idea that emboldens and shields those who would take what they want regardless of consent.  And he used a radio station with a large audience to reinforce that idea.  At best, that’s irresponsible.

So to Duffy (and those like him), I would like to send out this reminder:

You are not entitled to sex from anyone at any time.  Not your spouse.  Not your significant other.  Not the person you bought a nice dinner for.  Not the person you keep doing dozens of favors for in hopes that you’ll hit the sexual jackpot in time.  And I’m disgusted that I actually have to tell you this.

I should note that while I’m focusing on Duffy’s
particularly horrible statement, his co-hosts should not get a complete
pass on contributing to rape culture.  After all, they tried to present the
idea that Duffy should try to make up with the argument he had with his
wife so that he’ll “get to have sex” later tonight.  (It’s their
suggestion that caused him to make that awful statement.)  It seems to
me, at least, that even they are turning sex into something Duffy gets
from his wife rather than an mutually fulfilling experience that they
share.  That’s a problematic understanding of sex at best.

[2]  This is not a verbatim quote.  However, Duffy’s exact words stated the same sentiment and equally as explicitly.

Today on Sexist Morning Radio: Dating Games and Double Standards

This morning on my five minute commute to work, I caught part of a segment on my local morning radio show.  They were talking about relationships, dating, and the games “women” play.  (Granted, they may have talked about games “men” play too and I just missed that part.)  The part of the segment that I caught involved them talking to a female caller who talked about how she broke up with this guy and when he started dating some “hot chick,” she turned around and started dating his cousin, apparently with the purpose of making said ex jealous. She also commented that the guy still wants her back, despite it being five years later.  One of the hosts (Duffy, I believe — it usually seems to be Duffy) called her actions evil and suggested she’s just keeping him around to make her feel better about herself.

Evil?  Really?  Now granted, I would not date someone in an attempt to make a third party — even an ex — jealous.  Nor would I necessarily brag about an ex who still has feelings for me. I’d either take that ex back or encourage them to move on with my life.  I’m not big on games.  I’m also not big on calling such actions, evil though.

I’m also not big on acting as if — as the host does — that these kinds of games is something that all women engage in.  I know several women who wouldn’t do such things.  They’re much more interested in finding men (or other women) they like who also like them and enjoy each others’ company.  When it comes to exes (or other guys there’s not a mutual connection with), they’re much more inclined to cut them loose than play such games.  Tarring all women as such game players is both inaccurate and sexist.

I’m also not big on acting as if only women engage in these sorts of games, either.  Truth be told, I know guys who engage in such games, and other games.  Some guys go by the attitude that they have to “treat a women like shit” in order gain and keep her interest.  Guys are just as capable of such nonsense, and some of them engage in it regularly.

But you know what?  We don’t treat men who play games the same way.  A morning radio host isn’t likely to call such a guy or his action evil.  That’s because we live in a society where we still view guys playing such games as “men being men.”  We ignore it.  We permit it.  Hell, we even celebrate it and make televisions shows glorifying it.

I’m not a fan of games.  I prefer to treat dating and relationships as something much more direct and honest[1].  But I also prefer to be honest and note that a lot of people do this and that it’s not limited to a particular gender or other class.  Nor do I want to support or even ignore a double standard where such games are condemned when played by one group but praised when played by another.

[1]  And there’s a whole separate rant I or someone else could go into about how society tends to frown on women who are so direct and honest when it comes to relationships and their expectations, which often serves to push them towards such games.

Today on Sexist Morning Radio

As is normally the case, I was listening to a local morning show during the five minute drive to work today.  I happened to catch the hosts discussing the question, “How many people have a thing for their boss?”  Having just “established” that there are not a lot of guys with women for bosses (surely a topic that deserves its own blog post or twenty), they immediately started focusing on women who had a thing for their male bosses.

One of them (Duffy, if memory serves) argued that it would make sense that a lot of women would have a thing for their bosses.  After all, bosses “have money and power.”  Because, you know, that’s all a woman is looking for when she’s “on the prowl” for a man.

Let that sink in, all you women and men who love women.  A local radio host just suggested that all a woman needs to be attracted to a guy is for him to have money and/or power.  Things like looks, personality, being interesting, having mutual interests, and oh, I don’t know, being a decent human being don’t factor into the equation at all.  Or if they do, they can be easily overruled by the possession of money and power.

So which tropes are these guys intending to support?  Women as gold-diggers?  Women as manipulative shrews who only want power over others and who are willing to exert it through their man?  Women as weak people who simply want someone else who can pamper and protect them?  I don’t know (and don’t care) what they intended, but they’re certainly propagating all of those notions.

They’re most likely propagating a few others I’m not even thinking of right now.  Readers are welcome — nay, encouraged — to point them out in the comments section.