They Have A Fetish

I’m rather genteel here, but I don’t feel like being genteel about the issue of idiots banning abortion. Abortion is necessary to let people who get pregnant to control their bodies. As far as I’m concerned a lot of the people who want to ban it or limit it extremely are acting out a sexual fetish by creating and enforcing these laws.

Harsh? Cruel? Well if you read this we probably think alike, so you may agree, but look, I’m on a roll here.

So first of all, let’s note that most of the “for the children” claims come from people who don’t give a damn about actual kids. There’s no concern about immigrant children (quite the opposite). No one’s talking about expanding medical care or heavens forbid universal health care. Schooling is treated as just a chance for indoctrination by the forced-birth crowd. Also if kids are LGBTQIA+ then, well, this crew of womb-controllers seem to be happy to let them die.

Since all the reasons for banning abortion as “protecting kids” are obviously not what the control-freaks say, we can focus on the anti-choice crowd’s obsession with controlling people’s bodies. Yes, it’s an obsession, because it’s everywhere in the usual right-wing control-o-sphere. If you’re familiar at all with these right-wing mindspaces, the overwhelming, constant anti-choice repetition is unmistakable. It is embraced, it is, in short, a fetish.

Now the anti-choice swarm ignores people’s right to control their bodies, ignores their choice of medical treatment, and ignores abortion is a lifesaver in many ways. The need of the pregnant people is tuned out. Again, the utter obsession is beyond anything, into the realm of sexual obsession – of a fetish.

Sounds harsh? Not really. You’ll also notice as much as womb-controllers say they’re “for the kids” they are also obsessed with suffering. Most of the anti-choice people also seem to want to “save the children” from assorted imagined Satanists, evil cabals, etc. They’ll talk endlessly about human suffering, and it’s clear they take pleasure recounting how kids are tortured in their imagination. Again, these people have a weird sexual fetish about control and suffering.

And they go on, and on, and on . . .

But all of these people who want to tell people who can get pregnant what to do with their bodies want to do it with force. With the law, with the police, with threats, and in a few too many cases when you really listen with execution. There’s a sick, bloody, need for control and to punish.

So, yes, the anti-choice crowd as far as I’m concerned are sexual fetishists who want to nonconsensually draw others into their obsession. They’re ready to use the state to act out their twisted desires.

Sure, there’s also issues of control and politics, but this stuff goes all the way into weird, sexual fetishism. These people are obsessed, unhealthily so, and to the detriment of everyone.

And, yeah, this isn’t my usual deep discussion. Or maybe it is in a more angry way. But having a bunch of people who can’t confront their own fetishes and who want the police and government to rope us into them? We should be angry.

– Xenofact

Science Envy, Religion Envy

I’ve noticed a weird kind of science envy in American Christianity as well as various New Age and occult circles. There’s creationism which tries to use science to kinda disprove scientific consensus. There’s incredible abuses of quantum physics by, well, what seems to be 50% of anyone writing on religion or spirituality. There’s a lot of “science” in the same way that someone cosplaying is actually the character.

Too many people want the dignity, applicability, and detail science around their complex spiritual experiences and faith. Or, without that, they want to discredit it. Meanwhile science would like more grant money, thanks.

On the other hand, there’s what we’ve seen break apart various atheist and skeptic groups – a fanaticism that borders on, well, religion. That need to disprove but not prove. The smugly sure atheists who seemed to have driven people from atheism. Atheists embracing bigotry that religious groups promote (oft anti-Islam). Assorted YouTube and TikTok bros that we’ve seen come and go (but not go enough) over the years. There’s a lot of religion among these supposedly scientific types.

Too many people want the surety and breadth of religion, the sense of utter rightness. Religion can’t truly deliver that, and science still wants its grant money as there’s actual shit to do.

Having been all over the religion map, I’ve wondered about this phenomena, of supposedly religious people wanting science to back them, and so-called scientific types being no different than religious fanatics. I’m sure you’ve seen this as well, and I’ve had conversations about it with friends.

Now I could go into my own take on this – and perhaps will, but I think it’s important to address the core. How is it religious types want to have the validity of science (or undermine it) and “scientific” types want the surety of religion? Because of power-hungry assholes.

That’s it.

If you’re a power hungry asshole that uses religion, then you can’t have science get in the way, you have to hijack it, destroy it, or preferably both. Science is a rival to you. Also since you’re all about power any rational thought or analysis is your enemy.

If you’re a power hungry asshole that uses “science” (I have to keep putting it in quotes), then science is not enough. Science is a mix of cooperation and argumentation, half freeform concert, half thunderdome fight with pillows. It’s not the kind of thing that will anoint a king or a messiah, but you can pretend to be one and claim you’re the Most Rational. So you do what you can to try to anoint yourself Brain Pope or whatever, and end up looking pretty religious (and perhaps unconsciously duplicate religion).

What is perhaps saddest is how much of religion and science gets defined by these various battles and personalities and grifters. Forget religion versus science, let’s try to diminish the amount of and power of assholes first.


Trees, Taoism, and Bigots

Recently I saw a certain member of a religious group refer to non-religious people as a social burden. I won’t name names, but the man says he’s Catholic. He belongs to a league of similar followers. Figure it out yourself.

Anyway, this culty creep’s opinion is actually very revealing. He states people who are not religious – and his form of religion – are a burden. He’s pretty damn close to the Nazi idea of “useless eater,” which tells me he’s not just awful, he’s probably afraid of demographic changes towards the non-religious in America. He wants to classify people not like him as a burden, as “not useful.”

Well, not useful to him, because a lot of religious organizations are just about turning people into tools so the bigwigs end up in power. Calling someone “useless” or a “burden” says outright that people should be “useful” to others, like a tool. It also is close enough to saying “non-useful” people should be eliminated.

This reminds me of Taoist tales of trees, and why “usefulness” is highly overrated. In Taoist lore I’ve encountered multiple tales of trees that are relevant to how people view each other. Let’s go into the two I’m familiar with, both of which I encountered in some form in the Chuang Tzu but have heard other variants.

First up is the tale of a carpenter and his apprentice. Seeing a tree, the carpenter comments how absolutely useless the tree is to he, the carpenter, so twisted and knotted and so on he couldn’t do anything with it. After they returned home, the spirit of the tree came to the carpenter and notes that it grew to be so old just because it was useless. The carpenter told his apprentice the experience.

I love this story because it notes that being useful means people may not just use you but use you up – but being useless may mean you live long.

The second tale involves a weird tree which is also useless due to it’s wood (sometimes it has giant useless leaves or huge but foul and inedible nuts). However one of the characters notes that the tree is actually quite useful – you plant it and you get lots of shade. Other stories may include parts of the tree – the weird leaves make great umbrellas, or the nut shells are big enough to use as a small boat.

I like this story because it notes that sometimes just leaving something alone may let you enjoy it as well. The tree is “useful” because you don’t try to use it.

These are great stories because they make you ask what is the use of usefulness? If it kills you off, what good is it? If just being is good, you’re valued but not used. We’d all be better off appreciating whats there (and less likely to destroy it).

I’m all for social cohesion and social responsibility. But turning people into tools, trying to constantly rank who’s “useful” means no cohesion, no responsibility, and eventually no society. We need to appreciate uselessness.

It also disarms people like the aforementioned bigots. It reminds us when someone starts talking how “useless” people are, how they’re “a burden” they’re not caring about people. They want us to be their tools.

Also, they’re assholes.