On its web site, Ms. Magazine recently posted an article in which it bizarrely compared Rush Limbaugh to the Taliban. The author of the article, Marcia Ann Gillespie, wrote,
No, they are not the Taliban. No, our internal terrorists aren’t named Osama bin Laden. Our homegrown terrorists have names like the Lambs of God and William Pierce (author of the Turner Diaries). And then there are the Jerry Falwells who clutch their holy books while spewing hate speech, blaming and damning and demonizing feminists and homosexuals for this assault on America. Or Rush Limbaugh who routinely and obscenely labels people who believe in the social, economic, and political equality of women and men — as the dictionary describes feminism — as “feminazis” on America’s airwaves. No, they are not the Taliban, but like the Taliban, the demonization and oppression of women to save us, or purify the race, or preserve the family, or uphold patriarchy is central tot heir beliefs. And like the Taliban, many of them use religion to justify their words and actions.
First, although he holds to some utterly disgusting views, it is a bit odd for Gillespie to label William Pierce a terrorist since he has never been convicted of an act of violence to my knowledge. Pierce certainly writes racist, inflammatory books and gives speeches that advocate violence, but as far as I know he’s never engaged in an act of violence or terrorism.
It was odd that Gillespie mentioned Limbaugh after first mentioning Falwell, because her comments about the radio commentator are just as absurd as were Falwell’s nutty claims that the terrorist attacks occurred because America had turned its back on God by allowing homosexuality and abortion.
Limbaugh is quite clear that “feminazi” applies to the leaders in the pro-abortion movement. Such euphemisms are repugnant, but Gillespie herself is engaging in precisely this tactic when she compares Limbaugh to the Taliban. Or, as kids on the playground might retort, takes one to know one.
The scary thing is that Gillespie refers to Limbaugh’s use of the term “feminazi” as obscene, which may just be rhetoric, but may actually be meant literally given that she characterizes Falwell’s comments as “hate speech.” It’s a bit incongruous to see someone decrying the Taliban while turning around and endorsing the idea of hate speech, which is much closer in accordance with the ideals of the Taliban than is Limbaugh’s euphemisms for abortion advocates.
Source:
Ms. responds to the terrorist attacks of September 11. Marcia Ann Gillespie, Ms. Magazine, undated editorial, 2001.