The Longhouse Strikes Back

Whereby, as a last strike before their electoral loss, Argentine feminists give themselves nobility titles and codify these privileges into Law.

“These violent delights have violent ends,

And in their triumph die, like fire and powder,

Which as they kiss consume: the sweetest honey

Is loathsome in his own deliciousness

And in the taste confounds the appetite…”

I shouldn’t be surprised by now, but I have to admit this caught me off guard. Last night, in hushed tones and by cover of darkness, the Argentine Senate passed the definitive Longhouse Law: Lex Olimpia. What is this? Well, basically it is a “Digital Violence” bill but the difference is that it ONLY punishes someone if the culprit happens to offend a woman online.

From the Parliamentary Rag: “After returning with a change in its wording from the Senate, the Chamber of Deputies (Congress) gave final sanction in last Tuesday's session to the new Law on Digital Violence, better known as “Olimpia Law”, in reference to the Mexican activist Olimpia Coral Melo, who promotes legislation to fight against this novel type of “violence against women.”

The project was voted on during the session this Tuesday, after its treatment was approved at the beginning of the session, with two thirds of the body, due to not having a commission opinion.

The norm, which received 230 votes in favor, none against, and no abstentions, incorporates the term “political participation” into article 4 of Law 26,485 on Comprehensive Protection of Women, in the definition of violence against women. This modification was included by the Upper House.”

They did this before the Presidential Election that is happening next Sunday because the feminists are aware that they are going to lose bad.

But what does it all mean?

Den Mother & feminist representative Karina Banfi (UCR) celebrated the progress in the project and said she hoped for “its prompt regulation.” “We need to guarantee the respect and dignity, reputation and identity of women in digital spaces,” she emphasized and also highlighted the need for “Congress to advance in the creation of the criminal offense of disseminating videos of a sexual nature without knowledge". So, as you see, it is not enough to punish through civil law. Mrs Banfi, who defines herself as a Radical Liberal demands criminal punishments as well.

As usual, the wording of this legislation is covert enough to promote misinterpretation, which is also the reason it passed without muster. Also, taking advantage of the fact that Milei will populate the Senate and Congress with people who would never allow such a law to pass.

If we consider Banfi’s own words regarding Milei’s people this seems more ominous, I can actually quote her: “Without a doubt, to those who are violent and intransigent regarding institutions (those who disagree with her), we are not going to have any dialogue with them. With them, we are going to impose the law”. I get a sense of deja vu… between “L'État, c'est moi” and Judge Dredd’s catchphrase “I am the Law”.

The Hubris, the hubris!

To further cement the fact that this isn’t something that Argentine women asked for, because this was written by a Mexican lady in Mexico, kirchnerite feminist Mónica Macha highlighted that this law is the product of lobbying by different international organizations. She continued to say: “Something that seems central to me is that our law #26,485, which was passed in 2009, has had particular issues with locating gender-based violence in different areas. In those years the digital environment was not a space of threat or violence, it did not exist, but at this moment it is a territory where we spend a lot of time, and it is also beginning to be a space where we suffer that violence," observed Macha who is of course the president of the Women and Diversity Commission. Interesting fact that women in Argentina make up 53% of the population, an absolute majority. Can’t claim minority victim status, but they still do.

This is a move so reminiscent of Assemblywomen, that it can only be read as satire, even when it isn’t. If my readers aren’t familiar, I highly recommend Ἐκκλησιάζουσαι; also translated as, Congresswomen, Women in Parliament, Women in Power, and A Parliament of Women, it is a comedy written by the Greek playwright Aristophanes in 391 BC. The play imagines a scenario where the women of Athens, through the wiles of Praxagora, wife of Blepyrus, assume control of the government and institute reforms that ban private wealth and enforce sexual equity for the old and unattractive - imagine my shock, how novel!

It’s interesting to note that according to Erich Segal (Oxford Readings in Aristophanes), reading the play as a genuine exploration of female power is incorrect. It follows Aristophanes’ conflict structure of the republic in trouble, a solution suggested and that solution ultimately failing. Aristophanes’ plays mostly derive their narratives on absurd political and social innovations derived from the evolution of the state towards empowering effeminate men while displacing traditionally strong and masculine leadership. The ascent of women in political power in Assemblywomen is yet another commentary on what Aristophanes saw as the shameful effeminacy of the men currently in power in Athens. The fact that women in this instance could enter the assembly and successfully pass as men was a commentary on politicians being indistinguishable from women in costume. So, you see, the contemporary situation is much worse even if the legal impositions by the Athenian women are mostly the same.

It is and has always been about power, sex and compulsion, sharing of all wealth and old women choosing the best young men for themselves - the Longhouse. As always, it’s Eros versus Thanatos. A woman can connect to her higher side, the Athena/Artemis/Hestia archetypes but there is no shortage of those who connect with the Dark Crone or the Devouring Mother archetypes - or worse, the Gorgon. No wonder Assemblywomen ends with the rape of young man Epigenes by two old women and its consequences.

…”A young girl waits for her boyfriend Epigenes to arrive as an old woman is out looking for a date. They exchange vulgar insults and go inside their homes as Epigenes enters the scene, lamenting the new laws governing sex. He and the girl both speak of their desire for one another, but are interrupted by the old woman. Citing the new law, the old woman attempts to force Epigenes to sleep with her first. As the young girl and the old woman fight over the boy, two more old women enter and drag him away against his will.

In the final scene, a drunken maid enters praising Thasian wine and the new laws. She is looking to bring Blepyrus to dinner at Praxagora's request. She finds Blepyrus passing by, already on his way to dinner with two girls in his arms.”

These violent delights have violent ends…

This is the body of the law the Argentine Assemblywomen voted for themselves, to benefit themselves, and much like Praxagora’s plan it will not end well.

Among the changes it introduces to current regulations, the objective is established to guarantee “the digital rights and assets of women, as well as their development and permanence in the digital space.” Likewise, “their dignity, reputation and identity in digital spaces” must be respected and adds the phrase “the analog or digital space” within the global definition of violence against women. Furthermore, through the new law, the modality of “digital or telematic violence” is incorporated into article 6 of Law #26,485, defined as “any conduct, action or omission against women based on their gender that is committed, instigated or aggravated, in part or in whole, with the assistance, use and/or appropriation of information and communication technologies, with the aim of causing physical, psychological, economic, sexual or moral harm, both in the private and public spheres them or their family group.”

Did you read that? How can you quantify an offense of omission? What does that mean? Is ghosting a woman a crime now?

You know this as well as I do, obscure laws have free interpretations. What are these women planning to do to men, now turned into second class citizens in their own country?

On the other hand, it is stipulated that a free and accessible multi-support, telephone and digital service must be implemented” aimed at “providing support, information and advice” on digital violence. This only means public funds used to create more captured bureaucratic institutions.

In another of the modifications, it establishes that digital literacy programs, good practices in the use of ICTs and communication and identification of digital violence must be “promoted, in Comprehensive Sexual Education classes as in the rest of the contents.” in the educational field and in teacher training.” This means that men will be made to endure struggle sessions.

Regarding the rights that must be guaranteed to women in judicial procedures, the “diligent and expeditious safeguarding of evidence in digital media by specialized investigative bodies or corresponding public organizations” is incorporated.

Regarding urgent preventive measures, the judge may “order the alleged aggressor to cease acts of disturbance or intimidation that he, directly or indirectly, carries out towards the woman, both in the analogue and digital spaces.”

Also, “order the prohibition of contact between the alleged aggressor and the woman who suffers violence through any information and communication technology, instant messaging application or digital communication channel.”

And it will have the power to “order, by written or electronic means, digital platform companies, social networks, or electronic pages the deletion of content that constitutes an exercise of digital gender violence.”

Anything else and the new nobility will begin demanding to be addressed in a certain way… oh, but they already do!

Another day, another piece of legislation laid out by fanatical zealots on a warpath, that aided by institutional capture and foreign funds want to change the very fabric of a nation that prevents any title by birth or blood in its Constitution. Once again showing us that they don’t care about any previous rule of law. Only those in their advantage. A feature of anarcho-tyranny.

To note, the Argentine Constitution does not admit prerogatives of blood or birth: There are no personal privileges or titles of nobility. All its inhabitants are equal before the law, and admissible in employment without any other condition than suitability. Not that it matters to these gorgons.

I will close this now lengthy screed by saying this: this is why Javier Milei will win the Argentine election. This is the kind of Hubris that brings the attention of Nemesis.