What happens when Jezebel lets a man take over? Brilliance, quite frankly!

Well, this has been one of the most interesting weekends I’ve ever seen on Jezebel, with virtually all of the posts coming from a man named Mark Schrayber. Mark lectures in psychology at San Francisco State University, and he is a former behavioural health counselor.

Part of me thinks Mark is gonna be in for some hell come Monday for posting a lot of articles that don’t show women off in their best light.  Let’s take a look:

First up, he writes about Wendy Williams suggesting that it is okay to trick a man into getting you pregnant by going off birth control, using the justification that hey, it’s your body, your choice, right?

Oh dear, well that’s not consistent with Jezebel insisting that birth control sabotage is something men do to women, and it’s a form of control and abuse that must be stomped out immediately!  Power-Hungry Men Sabotaging Women’s Birth Control Is a Real Issue, shrieks Katie J.M. Baker!

“Increasingly, birth-control sabotage is viewed as a tool not for baby-crazed female stalkers, but for a class of predominantly male abusers who want to exercise control over their partner’s body, make her dependent upon them, or secure a long-term presence in her life.”

The commenters at the Wendy Williams piece are definitely aware that publicizing the issue has some drawbacks.  For women.

Sigh. This will just be used as “proof” by MRAs and other misogynists that women tricking men into getting them pregnant is a common occurrence.

A helpful MRA at Jezebel points out that the behaviour doesn’t have to be rampant to be unacceptable:

I think MRAs and most nice feminists agree that this kind of deception is reproductive coercion and should be criminalized.

And for the record, I don’t think most MRAs think this kind of thing is “rampant.” It’s just that the legal environment allows and facilitates this is unacceptable.

Then, Schrayber follows up with an article exploring the Cult of Victimization, writing about a woman who is suing the estate of child she killed while speeding, because he inconsiderately caused a “shock to her system” by putting a human sized dent in her SUV and then dying.  Her enjoyment of life has been lessened.  Not as much as the real victim’s enjoyment of life, of course, but $1.35 million ought to compensate the True Victim for the pain she has suffered.

Aaaaaand, it takes Jezebel commenters about ten seconds to find a man to blame: the woman’s husband, who apparently was driving behind her and since paternalism is so beloved by feminists, they quickly embrace the idea that he is responsible for her actions.  I hope he countersigns her checks, too, once she gets that big pile of cash, because consistency is important, right?  He should probably approve her vote, monitor her communications and determine which educational opportunities she is allowed to pursue.  In for a penny, in for a pound?

Don’t forget to mention the part where her husband is a police officer and was driving behind her that night!


It should also be noted that her police-officer husband was following her that night, was first on the scene, and told her to go home after the accident with no breathalyzer. I smell a cover-up.

And of course, there are the obligatory comments that back up cupcake, and understand her anguish at being forced to kill children.  It’s very traumatic, apparently.

It’s good to remember that the woman who struck & killed the victim may possibly be in shock/mentally unwell as well––killing a living person is a huge deal, and killers deal with it in different ways. Maybe she really is just completely callous and a sociopath, or maybe she’s going through her own panic/guilt/fear/nightmare/irrational response, herself. She may feel that she was driving “normally,” after all, plenty of us do speed slightly and it is generally considered socially acceptable––the cell phone use not so much. She may feel a LOT of anger towards these kids for having been irresponsible bikers (and we all know that people on bikes, even the nice ones, sometimes take liberties with stop signs and lights and endanger drivers as well), anger that she doesn’t know how to channel properly.

Next up we have a teacher who gave a student a full contact lap dance that included “rubbing her butt across his lap and swiveling around to put her head between his legs”.

And the commenters backpedal furiously, confronting their own prejudice and straight forward refusal to consider boys legitimate victims, ever, under any circumstance:

The teacher is 100% wrong, whether the kid liked it or not is irrelevant (in that regard anyway). Frankly, if you’re an adult teacher and you can’t stand your ground against middle school kids’ peer pressure, you’re probably in the wrong profession. However, having said that, I highly doubt this kid was “terrified.” I don’t think there is ANY correlation whatsoever to how he felt about the situation and what should happen to the teacher. The two are not connected in any way; she should be penalized in accordance with her school’s policies whether the kid loved it or hated it. But, as far as him being terrified and wanting a journal to write his thoughts in, yeah I doubt that. I’m surprised this article was written by a guy. Were you never in middle school? Every guy I asked (and I asked several) said they would love it. Now, I repeat, that has NO bearing on the fact that that nutbar teacher was 100% wrong. But I’m pretty sure that kid loved every minute of it. Very very very few 14 year old boys care about a new pencil or a journal to write in, over getting a full-contact lap dance from a willing adult woman. Sorry. But yeah that teacher needs to go.

Hell, this kind of crap should not be a crime!  It’s just crazy!

I tend to agree with you, though. Should she be disciplined, up to and including being dismissed? Yes. Should this be a criminal offense? Oh, for God’s sake. HONESTLY.

I’m sure a male teacher who gave a female student a lapdance that included putting his head between her legs would just be good clean fun, too, right?

And speaking of fun, the next story involves a woman arrested for offering to fellate a horse on Craigslist, and no, I am not making this shit up.

Naturally, the woman’s behaviour is excused or downplayed, because …. Oh, fuck, I have no idea why anyone would even attempt to justify it, but here we go:

This doesn’t really have to do with your point, but it’s weird to me that bestiality is considered such a “horrific crime” by most people. We do so much shit to animals without their consent, it’s weird to apply it almost exclusively to sex.

Touching a big slimy horse dick with your mouth is disgusting for sure, but I feel like people are overreacting.

And of course, the woman is the victim here!

Why post the photo of her except to attempt to publicly humiliate her, (not to mention potentially outing her as transgender,) and ostracize her from the community for the duration of her life? That’s pretty damn cold, bestiality aside.

One weekend, one man, and we have women sabotaging birth control, women suing dead children she herself killed, women lapdancing young boys, women sucking off horses and just to round things out, Schrayber reposted an article about how Lauren Cox should not be in Time’s 100 most influential issue, because she’s gasp not that influential.

Oh dear.  Something tells me Mark is in for a spanking Monday morning.  He appears to have missed the memo that women are not to be criticized, their bad behaviours are not to be pointed out and their disgusting sexual proclivities are not to be questioned.


Because the commenters demonstrate beautifully what a pack of hypocritical, contradictory, bigoted, chauvinist zealots modern media feminists are.

I love it, personally!

Keep it up, Mark!  I think you should be editing Jezebel every day of the week!

Schrayber for editor! You’d get my vote. Well, as long as my huband approved, of course.

Lots of love,


Recommended Content

%d bloggers like this: