Erick Erickson Proves His Own Misogynistic Theory Wrong By Submitting to Megyn Kelly

megyn kelly erick erickson

When Erick Erickson of Redstate infamy made a fool of himself by inventing science in order to claim that men are dominant because animals make them so, I told you he didn’t strike me as a dominant person. It took him less than 24 hours to prove my point.

Erickson slobbered onto Fox again in order to grovel at Megyn Kelly’s feet like the scolded runt of the litter he is. He’s sorry, he didn’t mean to offend, but of course it wasn’t her he was talking about and sure he self selects but gays and the single women and the feminists, oh my! And oh, Megyn, please don’t be mad at me because I need this job!

Watch Erick try to save his job at Fox:

Partial transcript via Media Matters (my bold):

KELLY: So I’ll start with you, Erick. What makes you dominant and me submissive, and who died and made you scientist-in-chief?

ERICKSON: Oh, it doesn’t have anything to do with submissiveness per se, and it was certainly poorly constructed how I said it (the total opposite of what he said, actually). What I meant by that was, when you look throughout society, look at other animals, the male of the species tends to be the protector, the dominant one in that regard, and we’ve gotten to a point in this country where you have a lot of feminists who think that the male and female roles are completely interchangeable, that there is no need for a man to support his family. You’ve got men walking away, you’ve got women becoming single mothers not by their choice, you’ve got a lot of people thinking it’s a lifestyle choice. This isn’t healthy for society when we think that roles of gender are completely — can be interchangeable. No one’s saying women can’t be or shouldn’t be a breadwinner or even the primary breadwinner. It’s just that when we forced ourselves to this point in society where they have to be, that’s not a good, healthy thing for society.

KELLY: All right, but that’s not what you have been saying over the last couple of days. You got in trouble on Lou’s show — we’ll get to you in a minute, Mr. Dobbs —

DOBBS: Can’t wait.

KELLY: — but you made these comments, and then you posted a blog at RedState trying to expand on your comments…..

ERICKSON: You know, Megyn, I tend to dispute that data largely because it’s been so self-selective. if you take the most comprehensive study, for example, of gay families….

(More Erick trying to defend himself with self selected science, skittering over to blaming the gays and the middle class and any other target he could find. Kelly was not biting.)

KELLY: You are judging them. You are, though.

ERICKSON: No, I’m not judging them.

KELLY: You are. You are because you come out very clearly and say you believe women who choose to work, instead of staying at home to, quote, nurture their children and instead have the father do that, are imposing a worse future on their children than women who make a different choice, the one you and your wife made.

ERICKSON: Megyn, I don’t view it as judging, I view it as a statement of fact that when you’ve got a mom who’s working full time and that coming home and trying to be a full-time mom as well, it’s very difficult. And I think three-quarters of the public, according to the Pew poll, agree that —

KELLY: Just because you have people agree with you doesn’t mean it’s not offensive.

ERICKSON: Look, I understand it’s offensive. (What took so long?)

KELLY : I know in your blog you talk about how you believe it’s feminists and — I don’t know what the word is, something, some sort of liberals — eco-liberals? What did you call them?

ERICKSON: Emo-liberal. They’re whining about it.

KELLY: I don’t know what that is, but I don’t think I’m an emo-liberal, and I don’t describe myself as a feminist —

ERICKSON: I don’t think you are either.

KELLY: — but I will tell you, I was offended by the piece nonetheless. I didn’t like what you wrote one bit, and I do think you are judging people.

No, Erick wasn’t talking about wanting to protect the delicate flowers yesterday. No, he wasn’t saying how tough things are. He was saying men are dominant because animal science makes them so. Poor Erick. A duly whipped Erick Erickson can probably be found skulking about the Fox cafeteria showing how docile and helpful he can be.

Kelly isn’t the only one kicking Erickson’s sad self today. Greta Van Sustern was none too pleased either, very shocked to find out that her colleagues think like this. Who would have ever thought that the network that makes women get plastic surgery and whose motto is skin to win (for women only) would advance sexism to the point where they let some know-nothing toad of a man spout such laughable “facts”?

Yes, we are all shocked. We had no idea when they were championing Sarah Palin’s brand of exploiting her sexuality to distract from her lack of knowledge that it would result in this. Really. This might be why Democrats advance policies that would actually help single parents and their children. Just a thought.

Here’s a clue for Erickson: The reason there are single mothers is because women want the freedom to leave men like you, and they would rather be alone and work two jobs than listen to you. Also, you have managed to unite several Fox anchors with liberals on this issue, if even for a moment. Well done.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.