Dispatches from the Creation Wars

Readers of the Worldnutdaily are by now familiar with a columnist who goes by the pseudonym Vox Day. His real name is Theodore Beale and his rich father is on the board of directors of the Worldnutdaily, which is the only explanation for how he got his position as a columnist there. It’s bad enought that he actually puts his membership in Mensa in his bio, but on top of that his writing is just so bad. For an example of just how insipid his writing is, look at this column in which he rails about the evils of women’s rights. He annoys me right off by invoking Bill Simmons (the infamous and brilliant Sports Guy at ESPN) to introduce his argument:

The greatest media scribe of these latter days, Bill Simmons, is known for a certain pithy mantra. “The lesson, as always: Women ruin everything.” While one does not usually expect to find deep sociological truths in the sports pages, so great has been the degradation of the acerbic art once known as the editorial, so filled with fear are the vanilla-minded commentators, that one finds more veracity on a single page of ESPN than in opinion pages of the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal combined.

Mr. Day is apparently unaware that Simmons is a comedy writer, not a political commentator. The quoted statement above is a joke. He also frequently uses the phrase, “The lesson as always: I’m an idiot.” To invoke a throwaway bit of humor as a serious argument in favor of his own misogyny is quite absurd. But he’s not done by a longshot. How could one even to begin to parody this astonishing bit of insecurity wrapped in arrogance:

Now, at this point, it is customary for women to immediately reject any assertion that women’s rights are wrong as the Talibanistic ranting of an embittered man who has been denied ready access to attractive women’s bodies. In the interest of dismissing this red herring, I merely note that few men fortunate enough to possess a turbo Porsche and a record contract at 23 have any reason to be bitter about the hand that life has dealt them.

In fact, I very much like women and wish them well, which is precisely why I consider women’s rights to be a disease that should be eradicated.

Wow, he drives a turbo Porsche. What a stud! Jesus Christ, does it get any more pathetic than that? Well yeah, it does. Just look at the bad mohawk he sports in his picture. Dude, you’re just so hip and edgy. Strike a pose, there’s nothing to it.

Brent Rasmussen had a couple of funny posts about this guy a while back, but I can’t seem to find them now. Hopefully he’ll chime in here.

Comments

#1 Raging Bee
August 9, 2005

And what’s with his handle? “Vox Dei” means “voice of God,” but he seems to have distorted it to “voice of the day.” Whiskey tango foxtrot?

I vaguely remember a “Vox Day” on the “Right Reason” blog, spouting similar drivel before they banned me for trashing Ann “Brainstem” Coulter.

Oh wait, I can’t diss him, he drives a turbo Porsche, so he’s more of a stud than I am. Never mind, just leave me in my patheticness (patheticity?)…
#2 Maudie
August 9, 2005

The Theodore’s of the world deserve only a swift knee to the nuts. That is, if they had any.
#3 Oolong
August 9, 2005

I must admit — I’m shocked here. So are conservatives now straight out admitting that women should lose their rights? Heck, maybe next they’ll try to get rid of the rights of them uppity black folk. Cause’ you know the country has just gone to the dogs since them folks got those despicable rights. Where are the right-leaning folks out there who should be denouncing this garbage?
#4 Brent Rasmussen
August 9, 2005

Hi Ed,

Here you go:

http://brentrasmussen.com/log/vox_popularitas

http://brentrasmussen.com/log/vox_day_author_musician_libertarian_christian

http://brentrasmussen.com/log/more_on_vox_day
#5 CPT_Doom
August 9, 2005

This guy is in Mensa and thinks the ultimate goal for women should be marriage and the “right” not to work? I suppose we would have all been better off without Marie Curie, Amelia Earhart, Eleanor Roosevelt and Jackie Onassis? Incidentally, isn’t it interesting that the last of these women had more than enough $$ to stay home, and CHOSE to work so she would have some purpose in her life other than breeding.

I’m tempted to call him an idiot and call it a day, but the really scary part of his column is his insinuation that the only thing women provide to a society is children. The contributions of women are varied and vital to our economy – although certainly the increase in working married women, which began in the 40s, did lead to a lowering of wages, it also led to an increase in productivity, which is good for the entire economy.

But I agree with Ed on the quality of the column – pretty standard for Vox – he veers off from the specter of a Europe in decline because of low birth rates (doesn’t he realize the US is ALSO below replacement level? our increase in population has been totally due to immigration over the last few years – just like Europes!) to the low numbers of female children in China – which BTW is just as due to abandonment of girls, including abandoning them to die, as to selective abortions, given the relative poverty of the country. The two topics have nothing in common, and one certainly cannot argue that the women of China have had a dose of Western Feminism.
#6 Orac
August 9, 2005

If Vox notices your little rant, be prepared for a little onslaught from his sycophants, as I experienced:

http://oracknows.blogspot.com/2005/04/i-thought-taliban-only-existed-in.html

http://oracknows.blogspot.com/2005/04/someone-noticed-me.html
#7 raj
August 9, 2005

Wow, he drives a turbo Porsche.

I would post that we’ve laughed at men who drive these “muscle cars” (even in Germany) usually are not “well endowed” and they’re using their “muscle car” to correct for their perceived deficiency.

But I’ll refrain from that.

On the other hand I guess I haven’t.

BTW, this is very much tongue in cheek.
#8 Raging Bee
August 9, 2005

Wow, Orac, I see your point. You managed to get the woman-bashing-non-sequitur brigade (or is it a battallion?) out in force. That crowd got EVERYTHING wrong: feminism, women, men, libertarianism, history, fascism, the Taliban, Christianity, basic logic… I’m sure I left some things out there, but that’s only because I don’t have time to read all of the responses.

Hey, I get bitter when women don’t jump into bed with me, just like most other guys, but I at least try not to let it affect my thinking.
#9 Ed Brayton
August 9, 2005

Oh joy, that will be fun to deal with. I just can’t take seriously anyone who answers charges of being bitter toward women by saying that he drives a Porsche. I can’t take seriously anyone who could take such a person seriously either. This is simply self-parody.
#10 SharonB
August 9, 2005

Quote:

Consider the two great laments of the modern American woman. For the unmarried woman, it is the reality that she must marry later in life than ever before, if she is able to marry at all. For the married woman, it is that unlike generations of women before her, she cannot afford to stay home with her children unless she is fortunate enough to have married to a man of the financial elite.

/Quote

Is he for real? He really must live in a 15th century world.
#11 Matthew
August 9, 2005

People like this guy see women as nothing more than personal servants and baby factories. It’s not about being rejected by women, it’s about being raised by parents with poor moral values, who passed their bigotry and fear of change onto their children.

His words surprise me little; what’s surprising is that this absurd extremism actually has an audience outside of the David Duke crowd.
#12 Leni
August 10, 2005

Why, Why do I click the links?? I swore I’d never do it again after I ended up in that vapid hell-hole of freepers.

I just can’t seem to force myself not to. Must be because I’m Jewish. Oh wait no, it’s the female.

Wow Orac- What a mess. Nice blog otherwise =)
#13 Ed Brayton
August 10, 2005

Matthew wrote:

People like this guy see women as nothing more than personal servants and baby factories. It’s not about being rejected by women, it’s about being raised by parents with poor moral values, who passed their bigotry and fear of change onto their children.

Matthew, you obviously do not understand the most important thing here. He drives a Porsche.
#14 Raging Bee
August 10, 2005

The REALLY sad thing is, a LOT of women are in complete agreement with this sort of tripe — and not always without reason. First, not all regions have decent jobs aplenty for both men and women. Second, many women find child-rearing far less stressful and more rewarding than the lame jobs that are available to young women entering the job market. (I have a friend who is liberal, feminist, educated, and totally appalled at the Christian right’s misogyny and homophobia, who chose the stay-at-home mom track for exactly that reason.) Third, living under a Talibanesque regime is a great way for women to avoid the equal responsibility that comes with equal rights: who needs all that rough adult stuff when you can be a mommy and stay in the sanitized and sheltered world of childhood instead?

None of this justifies Vox Day’s unconcealed bigotry, of course; but it does explain why such rubbish is taken seriously in some quarters.
#15 Raging Bee
August 10, 2005

I also notice that that famous failed propheteer Hal Lindsey is still writing for WorldNutDaily. Has he apologized for misleading all of us about how the USSR was gonna ally itself with the ten-nation European confederacy led by the Antichrist (of course the Antichrist is from Old Europe!), attack Israel, and bring about the end of the world in 2000?
#16 Rick
August 10, 2005

Not that I have any use for this guy buy I think that is was not himself he was referring to when he made the “I merely note that few men fortunate enough to possess a turbo Porsche and a record contract at 23 have any reason to be bitter about the hand that life has dealt them.” statement. Unless he does have the record contract. He was more stating that a 23 yr. old male with a turbo porsche and a record contract gets laid a lot and does not have much to complain about. What that had to do with womens rights I am unsure of.
#17 Rick
August 10, 2005

Damn, I should have read the link first. I guess he is that much of an ass. I retract the first post.
#18 CPT_Doom
August 10, 2005

Hey, I get bitter when women don’t jump into bed with me, just like most other guys, but I at least try not to let it affect my thinking.

Raging Bee, honey – some of us alternative men are thrilled that women don’t jump into bed with us, but then again we also tend to bemoan how men are pigs and only care about physical stuff.
#19 Gregg
August 10, 2005

Some people never get the flavor of the stone.
#20 HHS
August 10, 2005

Do you have anything of substance with which to counter the article’s assertions? If you read the article and not just the headline, you’ll have seen it was about the negative impact of the massive increase in labor supply when the military forces returned from WWII to find few jobs left.

Your jealousy over a car doesn’t help your position.
#21 Ed Brayton
August 10, 2005

HHS wrote:

Your jealousy over a car doesn’t help your position.

Ah, I see his followers have found me. How…delightful. The fact that you interpret my criticism of his pathetic insecurity as jealousy says it all, I think.
#22 Scintan
August 10, 2005

“Ah, I see his followers have found me. How…delightful. The fact that you interpret my criticism of his pathetic insecurity as jealousy says it all, I think.”

Come on, give it a rest. You didn’t combat anything he said with facts. You just fired off insults and didn’t even grasp the article you were insulting. The Porsche comment was simply by way of pointing out he was not bitter. Your followers here, on the other hand, offer not a single bit of evidence/proof to combat his point. It’s not surprising, given some of the names of those I see posting here. I’m sure he’d love to debate you on this issue. Instead of firing off unsubstantiated insults, why don’t you offer to debate him? You can both agree on the parameters and go at it. Post, Response, Rebuttal and Rebuttal response would probably make it a fair enough exchange. Try that tact instead of mindless attacks. He’s got a link to his email right on his site.
#23 Ed Brayton
August 10, 2005

Scintan wrote:

The Porsche comment was simply by way of pointing out he was not bitter.

The funny thing is that he made that comment in reply to what he called a “red herring”, which means essentially an irrelevant argument that doesn’t respond logically to the claim it’s intended to respond to. But then, apparently without recognizing it, he was engaging in exactly such an argument himself. It does not logically follow that because he drives a turbo Porsche that he’s not bitter toward women. The kind of car he drives is as irrelevant to the argument he intends to respond to as what kind of cologne he wears or what color hair he has. It is intended solely for him to strike a pose as a young stud. And it’s incredibly pathetic.

Your followers here, on the other hand, offer not a single bit of evidence/proof to combat his point.

His point that he drives a Porsche?

I’m sure he’d love to debate you on this issue. Instead of firing off unsubstantiated insults, why don’t you offer to debate him?

Debate him on whether he was being pathetic? No thanks. I think it’s pathetic. I’m sure he doesn’t. End of argument. I didn’t really attempt to make a factual argument in response to his position on women’s rights. I think it’s an idiotic position, but that wasn’t the point of this post. This post was simply to point out that he’s a poser. I’m sure he disagrees; I don’t much care.
#24 Gregg
August 10, 2005

I smell horse manure. I swear I smelt it as soon as I came in here. *Sniff* I still smell it. Whew wee this place stinks. Ya know guys and gals, it is so unfortunate that all you can do is beat people up. None of you ever made one single point that refuted Vox, you only said he was a moron. Ya see where I come from it is the morons who call people morons without any basis other than you don’t want to believe what they say. Back it up. Does an increase in labor force increase or decrease wages? Do women who choose not to have children increase of decrease consumption? And how does this relate to supply and demand?

How does a 1.17 child born per woman sustain a culture? If women are not averaging over 2 children per woman the culture vanishes. It’s math! That’s why you abortion blue state freaks are losing every election.

Keep you women in the work place and we will kick your butts.
#25 Ed Brayton
August 10, 2005

Gregg wrote:

I smell horse manure. I swear I smelt it as soon as I came in here. *Sniff* I still smell it. Whew wee this place stinks. Ya know guys and gals, it is so unfortunate that all you can do is beat people up.

If the best you can do is childish bullshit like this, you’re not gonna last long here.

None of you ever made one single point that refuted Vox, you only said he was a moron.

I didn’t say Vox was a moron. In fact, I suspect that he’s quite intelligent. But that has nothing to do with this post. I said he’s pathetic, and he is. I’m guessing reading comprehension is not your strong suit.
#26 Gregg
August 10, 2005

Like I said Ed. You never addressed one of my points that matter. Ya’ll keep it up, keep your women barren and we will own this country.
#27 Ed Brayton
August 10, 2005

Gregg wrote:

Like I said Ed. You never addressed one of my points that matter. Ya’ll keep it up, keep your women barren and we will own this country.

I didn’t even try to, because it’s not relevant to anything I said in this post. I didn’t make any argument whatsoever about birth rates or women working or anything like that. I said that Theodore’s attempt to dispute a strawman argument by bringing up the fact that he drives a Porsche is pathetic. Bringing up something he said that you think he’s right about has precisely nothing to do with what I said. So why should I bother to address it?

And I know I’m going to regret asking this, but I just can’t help myself. First you claim that allowing women to work reduces birth rates and that means “the culture vanishes”. Now you say that this means that “we” – whoever that is – will “own this country”. What on earth does that mean? Who is “we” and why will you “own this country” if, as you previously said, the culture will “vanish”? Or is this just a bunch of empty rhetoric, as I suspect?

Man, I know I’m gonna regret asking that.
#28 Scintan
August 10, 2005

“Debate him on whether he was being pathetic? No thanks. I think it’s pathetic. I’m sure he doesn’t. End of argument. I didn’t really attempt to make a factual argument in response to his position on women’s rights. I think it’s an idiotic position, but that wasn’t the point of this post. This post was simply to point out that he’s a poser. I’m sure he disagrees; I don’t much care.”

You called him a Poser about something YOU got wrong. Let me give you some advice. When you are going to insult someone and attempt to hold them up to ridicule, it’s important that you actually be correct. If you go off on a rant like you did, and you’re wrong like you were, you look like a complete idiot, like you do.

I suggested that you debate the man, which would have involved actual knowledge. Instead, you show your inanity by focusing on something without grasping its meaning. There’s nothing wrong with disagreeing with his position, but have the stones to point out why. Or is your entire blog just devoted to insults without correct evidence?
#29 Ed Brayton
August 10, 2005

What on earth was I wrong about? I didn’t address his position at all, nor did I intend to. I said his mention of driving a Porsche was pathetic because A) it’s not a logical answer to the argument he intends to answer (I was right), and B) because he’s basically trying to brag about getting laid as a means of aiding his credibility. He admitted as much in the comments on his blog, so I was right about that too. The conclusion that he is pathetic is not an empirical issue, so right or wrong doesn’t really apply to it. It’s my judgement. So basically, you’re talking out your ass. Much like he is.
#30 Leni
August 10, 2005

That Theodore’s response to a red herring with another red herring (involving a Porche of all things) was pathetic is self-evident.

I that that fully substantiates the insult.

(I would have called it an observation, though.)
#31 Scintan
August 11, 2005

Because, genius, the point of the car was simply to note that he had nothing to be bitter about. It was to note the follow of declaring his opinion the “…Talibanistic ranting of an embittered man who has been denied ready access to attractive women’s bodies…”

I’m sorry that you were being too stupid to realize that. I’m more sorry that you chose to continue insulting people rather than try some meaningful debate and discussion. I’m not sorry to see that, however, as it shows how very hypocritical the ‘open minded’ people on the left are. Someone put forth an opinion that you opposed, so you insulted him. And, again, you insulted him over something you misunderstood. True genius that must make your mother proud.
#32 HNS
August 11, 2005

What do you Vox followers do–scour the internet for criticisms of the guy?

Don’t forget, it’s not just a turbo Porsche, he also had a record contract. (Guess that record contract panned out as well as his writing *career*.)
#33 Raging Bee
August 11, 2005

Gregg and Scintan: Ed’s point was that Vox’s non-sequiturs about cars and bitterness diminish his credibility as a commentator on social issues. It was, in fact, just the same old fake persecution complex we’ve been hearing from faux-Christian extremists for centuries: “It doesn’t matter what I say ’cause I’m gonna be persecuted, I know it, good little Christians like me are always persecuted by evil monsters who hate God, and the fact that I’m being persecuted proves I’m right…”

We didn’t comment on the substance of Vox’s commentary, because there wasn’t much substance to address. He totally failed to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between women working and…anything. “Post hoc ergo propter hoc” doesn’t work, especially when one is talking about something as complex as a whole global society.

Furthermore, he also failed to describe why, exactly, the current situation was worse for women than the previous patriarchy where women had no opportunities to do anything other than make and raise babies. He simply argued from his own prejudices and pretty much blamed women for not choosing to stay in his idealized picture of a bygone golden age.
#34 An Onlooker
August 11, 2005

“Hey everyone, look how pathetic he is!” Eddie shouts with glee, as he points a finger in the direction of the man with the funny hair-cut. Immediately all of Eddie’s friends snicker and laugh, although most are unsure of what they are laughing about.

“If you continue in your current practice, only destruction will result,” Vox patiently warns.

Irritated, Eddie responds, “But look at your hair-cut, now that’s pathetic!” Again, the half-stoned crowd surrounding Eddie, begins to laugh.

“Eddie, do you understand what I am saying? My hair-cut has nothing to do with our impending doom,” says Vox, in an attempt to clarify the true topic of discussion.

Eddie stares at Vox. He received Day’s comments with a confused stare, then as usual, confusion turned into frustration and desperation. Unable to formulate a response, Eddie quickly works to regain the pseudo-respect of his followers.

“If a person has a funny hair-cut and drives a funny car, then they are pathetic. You have a funny hair-cut and drive a funny car. Therefore, you are doubly pathetic!” Eddie responds, with his best know-it-all voice. As the crowd buckles over with laughter and continues to mock Eddie’s opponent, Eddie silently returns thanks to his god of Cracked Logic and Silly-gisms.

Vox silently walks away wondering how bad it must get before it gets better.
#35 Ed Brayton
August 11, 2005

Scintan wrote:

Because, genius, the point of the car was simply to note that he had nothing to be bitter about.

I am fully aware of that, and was from the moment I read it. But as I’ve not said multiple times, without any attempt at dispute from you, his argument is a non sequitur. It simply does not follow that because one drives an expensive car and gets laid a lot that they’re not bitter toward women. Given that his argument doesn’t logically answer the argument it is intended to answer (which was a straw man in the first place), it’s only possible function was to strike a pose. If you can’t understand why the claim “I’m not bitter toward (or hateful of, or disrespectful of) women because I drive a sports car and get laid a lot” is a stupid, shallow and pathetic statement, I really can’t help you any further. But the problem here is not that I misunderstood, it’s that I understood exactly what he meant and I find what he meant to be pathetic and shallow.

Oh, and my mother’s dead.
#36 Jim Lippard
August 11, 2005

Ed:

That Vox Day piece could appear verbatim in The Onion, and it would fit perfectly.
#37 Sotek
August 16, 2005

Man, the people who follow these reactionary “commentators” crack me up.
#38 REM
September 23, 2005

The comment was:

In the interest of dismissing this red herring, I merely note that few men fortunate enough to possess a turbo Porsche and a record contract at 23 have any reason to be bitter about the hand that life has dealt them.

I could be wrong, but isn’t he talking about someone else and not himself? Record contract would mean a singer or a rapper, wouldn’t it? He could have a writing contract, though, but that is a stretch. Seriously, is he a singer, cause I don’t know. I care little about who wins this argument, I just would like to make sure everyone rereads those lines to make sure you all are not missing the points here. I could be wrong, but zeal has blinded men the past. Let me know. Later.