Peterson: Feminists Trying to Destroy the NFL!

Jesse Lee Peterson, the deeply misogynist preacher who thinks women shouldn’t be allowed to vote, is back with another moronic feminist-bashing column at the Worldnetdaily, this time declaring that feminists are trying to destroy the NFL because it’s just so manly. And so is beating up women, apparently.

The movement to weaken men and destroy the order of the family is accelerating.

The latest target is the NFL. Why? It’s very simple. It’s a male-dominated sport and celebrates masculine attributes. And it makes a lot of money. That’s attractive to parasites.

What’s going on here? And who’s behind the effort to destroy the NFL?

NOW, the National Organization for Women (Who Hate Men), is accusing NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell of failing to prevent the domestic violence “crisis.” He’s also been accused of covering up a videotaped altercation that showed Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice knocking out his now wife, Janay Rice, in an elevator. After feminists screamed, the Ravens released Rice, and Goodell suspended him indefinitely.

Following that incident, the Minnesota Vikings deactivated Pro Bowl running back Adrian Peterson after photos surfaced of his 4-year-old son that showed marks on his body from his dad’s discipline.

It turns out that Commissioner Goodell has been consulting with Kim Gandy, president of the National Network to End Domestic Violence, or NNEDV, and the former head of NOW.

On Planet Wingnuttia, trying to prevent men from beating their wives, girlfriends and young children is a plot to destroy football and the family. How does someone manage to navigate this world believing such staggeringly stupid things? Oh yeah, it pays well.

POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • reddiaperbaby1942

    “On Planet Wingnuttia, trying to prevent men from beating their wives, girlfriends and young children is a plot to destroy football and the family.”

    Ed is being sarcastic, but in their world that is in fact true. Not necessarily about football (I don’t know enough about it to say), but certainly about the family.

    What RWNJ was it that said showing European football (soccer) on TV is a sinister and probably gay plot against American-style football, where real men get to beat each other up?

  • colnago80

    Hey, ole Jesse is a grifter and grifters got to grift. By the way, just for his information, last time I heard, beating up women and abusing children was against the law.

  • D. C. Sessions

    By the way, just for his information, last time I heard, beating up women and abusing children was against the law.

    It might be against Unconstitutional [1][2] Liberal Law, but it’s not against God’s Own Law!

    [1] Freedom of Religion: you can’t forbid us to follow God’s Law, which gives us authority over our property!

    [2] Establishment Clause forbids the establishment of Godless Secularism as the Religion of the United States!

  • eric

    He’s also been accused of covering up a videotaped altercation that showed Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice knocking out his now wife, Janay Rice, in an elevator.

    That misses the point. The decision whether to release the video wasn’t the NFL’s, it was the court’s (prosecutor and defense attorney’s, defendant’s, judge’s, whatever). What was wrong about Goodell’s conduct is that he knew what had happened but didn’t do anything about Rice until it became public. IOW he was clearly more concerned about league image and negative press than Rice’s behavior. That’s wrong. You either stick to your no-penalty guns and say external behavior is not the NFL’s concern, or you say it is the NFL’s concern and you punish it when it happens. Either of those options is more ethical than letting the guy keep his job until it becomes public, and then firing him.

  • alanb

    How does someone manage to navigate this world believing such staggeringly stupid things? Oh yeah, it pays well.

    This may or may not be Jesse’s main motivation, but it doesn’t account for the thousands of his knuckle-dragging followers who clearly believe Jesse’s words to be true.

  • http://www.facebook.com/den.wilson d.c.wilson

    D. C. Sessions @ 3:

    It might be against Unconstitutional [1][2] Liberal Law, but it’s not against God’s Own Law!

    Just wait until they invoke the Hobby Lobby decision to declare that beating your wife and/or child is your “sincerely held religious” and the government can’t force you to stop.

  • Dave Maier

    I know I’m not the only one who saw the title of this post and thought “Adrian Peterson said that?!”

  • Who Cares

    Strange. Usually a community confinement center is a place where prisoners up for probation/release get sent to adjust living outside a prison again. I wonder what kind of environment the judge thinks D’Souza has been living in.

  • http://timgueguen.blogspot.com timgueguen

    Lots of people who would likely hold some bad ideas about feminism have denounced Rice and Peterson as well. You don’t have to be progressive to figure a man beating on a woman, or his children, is wrong.

  • eric

    Just wait until they invoke the Hobby Lobby decision to declare that beating your wife and/or child is your “sincerely held religious” and the government can’t force you to stop.

    Ah, but you’d have to incorporate your family so that it’s a closely-held corporation. Because those have more religious rights than mere people.

  • http://Reallyawakeguy.blogspot.com somnus

    If demanding that the NFL crack down on off-the-field violent criminal behavior is equivalent to trying to “destroy football,” doesn’t that suggest that in this guy’s view off-the-field violent criminal behavior is somehow a necessary component of football?

    That’s deranged enough, but the conclusion he reaches from that is even more disturbing. He’s essentially saying that since violent criminality off the field is necessary for football, then we must allow it to continue in order to preserve football. I would think someone with an actual moral sense who believed violent criminality was required for football would conclude football is not worth preserving at that cost.

    Note: I don’t actually believe violent criminality is necessary to preserve football, I’m just pointing out the moral bankruptcy of his line of reasoning.

  • dhall

    Beyond all of that, Peterson doesn’t seem to understand that the NFL, like so many big sports, is heavily reliant on corporate sponsorship. The stadiums are named after corporations that buy the right to have their names on them, the players wear uniforms and shoes with manufacturers’ logos, more corporations are throwing money into the sport with commercials that often feature players, and there are other, abundant ties to corporate sponsorship and advertising. Those corporations are capable of exerting a hell of a lot of pressure on a team to do something about players that might damage the desired image, even beyond what the team owners, coaches and the NFL itself might decide. Despite the prevalence of beer and Viagra commercials, companies are aiming other commercials at women and children too, and they don’t want the public to associate their product with someone who beats up women and children. That association could be bad for not just the NFL and the team, but bad for business.

  • Jackie

    He sounds as paranoid and hyperbolic in the face of feminism as Dawkins and Shermer and as gender existentialist as Harris.

    This isn’t just the sort of thing you hear on Planet Wingnuttia.

  • Dave Maier

    Jackie @ 13: “Gender existentialist” sounds more like Simone de Beauvoir than Harris (I think you mean “gender essentialist”?)