Radical Feminist Attacks So-Called “Pence Rule”; Backfires Instantly

In recent days, there has been a lot of talk, mostly from folks on the Right, pointing out how the past few months’ flood of sexual abuse allegations highlights the wisdom of Vice President Mike Pence’s personal habit of not dining alone with women to whom he isn’t related — a stance which liberals had a field day mocking as prudish, misogynistic, and fundamentalist when it was originally revealed.

But there’s at least one leftist commentator still committed to the mockery: incorrigible feminist extremist, Salon columnist, abortion enthusiast Amanda Marcotte.

Twitchy highlights the following tweet, in which Marcotte attempts to discredit the so-called “Pence rule” by contrasting it with a proposed rule of her own:

Was this take the product of idiotic illiteracy or malicious misrepresentation? As is so often the case with Amanda Marcotte, the answer is most likely a mix of both.

Neither the Vice President nor anyone else has suggested this is a good idea because men don’t trust themselves not to assault women. The original moral rationale was twofold: first, to ensure the woman feels comfortable and not at risk, and second, to preempt any possible temptation to consensually indulge whatever degree of attraction might exist on either side of the pairing. If somebody is inclined to force himself on someone else, how many people he dines with is the least of the problems he presents.

More to the point, the reason people are resurrecting the Pence rule today is because the presence of a third party protects the man from false accusations, thanks to an eyewitness who can corroborate or debunk claims of misconduct between meetings of the opposite sex, or more likely prevent accusers from attempting in the first place a smear they know has no chance of working.

Twitchy collected a handful of dead-on reactions to Marcotte’s madness:

A number of Twitter respondents also pointed out that Marcotte had blocked them from her account entirely, either in response to current critiques or past scuffles. The piece’s author, Twitchy editor Sam J., confirms being among the blocked:

Fun fact: Marcotte blocked me years ago as well, after a brief exchange sparked by a piece I had written about her for Live Action News. Good times. It’s enough to make you wonder if there are any substantive critics she tolerates, or if she has simply made her Twitter experience into her own personal echo chamber.

Marcotte did attempt to respond to at least one of her critics, and it went about as well as you’d expect from the blogger so sleazy that not even John Edwards wanted her to work on his campaign:

It’s to be expected that most lefties would dodge the obvious point, that fanaticism like hers drove people away from the Democrats and into the arms of the alternative. But to read into that tweet an admission that Trump voters desired “hurt women and people of color for desiring equality” is either pure Lying Demagogue, or pure Hallucinating Lunatic.

Let us know below which you think is the more likely explanation.