The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Feminism and the ‘Friendly Stranger’

Posted on | June 8, 2011 | 59 Comments

“How many coeds do you have to dick-dial behind the back of your pregnant wife before someone notices that maybe that’s not exactly congruent with the teachings of Gloria Steinem?”
– Ace of Spades, “In Which I Confess Some Doubts”

Having resisted the temptation to re-open my long war with Little Miss Attila over the history and meaning of “feminism,” I’m wondering if Weinergeddon isn’t waking some people up to what a lot of people have long suspected about guys who kowtow to feminists. That is to say:

Guys who make a big show of being on board with
the feminist agenda are just doing it to ingratiate themselves
with women, perhaps with the worst sort of ulterior motives.

There – I’ve said it as bluntly as possible and, as I say, a lot of people share that suspicion. Being a cynic means that one expects others to act in their own interests, so that whenever you see someone make an ostentatious display of altruistic idealism, your gut-hunch instinct is to suspect a scam: What’s in it for them?

Conservatism is not hostile to self-interest and, I would argue, requires a certain  philosophical skepticism toward professions of altruism. As Adam Smith wrote in The Wealth of Nations, “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.”

If you go through life counting on the benevolence of others, you’re likely to starve to death. And wise people are always suspicious toward the “friendly stranger.” His friendliness may be sincere. He may have no malign intent. But he is a stranger, and therefore his gestures of friendship trigger our suspicious instincts: What’s in it for him?

This kind of suspicion, I think, is appropriate toward any man who makes himself conspicuous as an advocate of feminism. In fact, I am suspicious of any man who remains silent when feminists start spouting their arrant nonsense. (Some obvious objections: Isn’t feminism really just a way for women to bully men? Isn’t the feminist actually demanding that she receive favorable treatment on the basis of her sex? Hasn’t the feminist therefore elevated her own selfishness to the status of a political philosophy? Why should honest men permit themselves to be pushed around by the adherents of feminism, unless they are such cowards that they are afraid to offend those idiots?)

Yet as I say, it isn’t my intent to rile up Little Miss Attila. Rather I call attention to Ace’s musings about Kirsten Powers and her ex-boyfriend Anthony Weiner — you should read the whole thing — because I wonder why so many feminists seem to lack the instinctive “friendly stranger” suspicion toward their liberal male allies.

Most guys probably wonder the same thing. Don’t these women see that guys who make a big show of being “feminist” are just running a game?

The fact that they keep falling for that same transparent scam might lead us to suspect feminists of naïveté. They are the kind of suckers who are born every minute, and who should never be given an even break.

They deserve Anthony Weiner.

UPDATE: Dan Collins suggests the title of this post requires some good music, and Dan’s right.

UPDATE II: Welcome, Instapundit readers!


Bookmark and Share
Category: Ace of Spades, Anthony Weiner, Feminism

Comments

← Older Comments
  • JeffS

    And it wasn’t just my reputation at stake but that of an innocent
    bystander in Carolina. Thta was the last straw. I had to break my
    promise and try put the record straight.

    (All errors are in the original)

    First of all, Carolina is neither innocent nor a bystander.  She deliberately inserted herself into this thread.  Any wounds of hers are totally self-inflicted.  If she’s an adult, she’ll understand that.

    Second….don’t blame other people for your decisions.  You didn’t HAVE to break your promise.  You could have just moved on. 

    Nope, you never intended to keep your promise in the first place.  Exactly what a leftie would do.

  • Anamika

    …don’t blame other people for your decisions.  You didn’t HAVE to break your promise.  You could have just moved on.

    Nope, you never intended to keep your promise in the first place.  Exactly what a leftie would do.

    Ok, i don’t blame them. Part of the blame is mine and part circumstances. I didn’t even visit ToM for a day after i made the promise (Wombat can see the traffic logs for proof), but when i heard of M.F. Hussain‘s death and was furiously browsing net, during this a ToM window popped up on my browser tab. I couldn’t help but check if the legendary MF was covered. I made my first comment in that thread. And then found my name being discussed here. 

    Here’s my challenge, If Joe, Randy, Bob &  Adobe agree openly that they no longer claim Anamika is ‘gg’ (and others like Carolina) without proper proof (unless confirmed by Wombat from IP sluething etc), then I will not only not comment here, i will not even visit the site for at least an year.

    The ball is in your court.

  • Anonymous

    Anamika/Carolina/gg, you ignorant dipshit, nobody here ever made a bargain with you, said unsaid or otherwise.  None of us particularly give a damn what a raging screechweasel like you might think of us and all of us are incredibly disappointed (though certainly not surprised) by your inability to keep your word and stay the fuck away.

    The multiple identities are really pathetic, by the way.  Just thought you should know.

  • Joy McCann

    Oh, for heaven’s sake. Where does one even begin with that?

    Here, I suppose:

    http://littlemissattila.com/?p=24418

  • http://thecampofthesaints.org Bob Belvedere

    STFU.

  • Bill Dalasio

    I would only add willful self-delusion.  But otherwise, well said.

  • The World’s Biggest Straw Man

    “One of the things that reveals feminism as a false philosophy is the insistence of its adherents that only they are permitted to discuss its meaning or history. ”
    Except that that’s not what Joy said to you. Not even close.

    It’s OK for Joy to disagree with you – disagreement is not a personal affront, an attack, or an attempt to harsh your mellow. The back and forth that results from disagreement is called “discussion”. And a discussion is not something you have to win. Sometimes, the other person gets to disagree with you or [gasp!] not be persuaded by your arguments :p

    In the end, if your arguments have merit, some (but by no means all) people will be persuaded by them. Isn’t that enough?

    Who (besides you) ever said you can’t discuss feminism, it’s history, or its meaning? And how on earth does linking to you all the time constitute an attempt to shut down discussion?

  • Guest

    Here is a critique of RS McCain being too soft on feminists, and too willling to ignore their sinister agenda. 

    http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/06/10/conservative-myopia-in-regards-to-feminism/

  • Pingback: BREAKING: Weiner to Resign : The Other McCain

← Older Comments
Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE