The Other McCain

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

Racism, Classism and Catcalling (or, #Feminism Is for Rich White Lesbians)

Posted on | October 30, 2014 | 82 Comments

Time for a little of what feminists call “intersectionality.” A video went viral in which a woman walking on New York City streets is catcalled or subjected to what feminists call “street harassment.”

Allahpundit analyzes both the video and the phenomenon in terms of why do men do this? Before we address the particulars of that question, however, shouldn’t we first ask, who does this?

It’s a racist production about white women
not wanting attention from black and Latino men.

“The video also unintentionally makes another point, that harassers are mostly black and Latino, and hanging out on the streets in midday in clothes that suggest they are not on their lunch break. As Roxane Gay tweeted, ‘The racial politics of the video are f–ked up. Like, she didn’t walk through any white neighborhoods?’” . . .
What makes these catcalls offensive isn’t that they come from men. It’s that they come from low-status men. Like an unconsented kiss from President Obama, if the catcalls came from George Clooney there’d be much less female outrage.
In fact, maybe these catcalls are a way of striking back at privilege.

One of the ways I offend people — sometimes accidentally, but usually on purpose — is by calling attention to things which are true, but which we aren’t supposed to notice. In the 21st century, it is difficult to tell where courtesy ends and political correctness begins, and there are more and more Things We Aren’t Allowed to Say.

The Left’s long-standing criticism of American culture (from the disciples of Herbert Marcuse, et al.) is that, supposedly, we are repressed, uptight and inauthentic because of our puritanical Anglo-Christian heritage. What went unexamined in the “Magic Negro” controversy (when Rush Limbaugh was excoriated as a racist for quoting a liberal commentary about Obama) was that black people have been used in popular culture as symbols of authenticity because of a sort of inferiority complex among white liberals. (Shelby Steele’s White Guilt is a useful introduction to this phenomenon.) Some WASPs grow up with the feeling that they have no real culture, or that their own culture is actually the cause of the world’s woes — the Genocidal White Capitalists Raping the Planet meme — and never recover from that deficit.

Things We Aren’t Allowed to Say: English-speaking white people are the only Americans who are denied a right to ethnic pride.

There, I said it. Sue me.

You might believe, if you were an unthinking consumer of what is taught in the government education system, that before the arrival of a wave of Irish immigrants fleeing the 19th-century Potato Famine, that the United States was a vast Evil Hate Machine. But then came the Irish (sanctified by their victimhood), followed by the wave of Ellis Island immigrants (Italians, Jews, etc.) and, through their shared experience of suffering inflicted by the Evil Hate Machine, these non-WASP Americans — with the help of their  loyal mascot-sidekicks, The Negroes — achieved the dream of A More Perfect Union.

In other words . . . VOTE DEMOCRAT!

Things We Aren’t Allowed to Say: What is taught as “history” in the government education system is, in fact, a propaganda narrative indistinguishable from the liberal orthodoxy of the Democrat Party.

This orthodoxy extends privilege (yeah, I speak academese quite fluently) to the descendants of Catholics, Jews and other non-WASP immigrants, a sort of “Get Out of Whiteness Free” card, so they can exonerate themselves from the genocidal atrocity narrative of the American founding: “We didn’t exterminate the Native Americans!  We did not enslave African-Americans! My great-great grandfather was [insert Immigrant Nationality here] who came here with nothing! My ancestors were victims of the Evil Hate Machine, too!”

You’re welcome, non-WASP Americans. My WASP ancestors did all that for you, so you could feel superior to me. Glad to help.

The Democrat Coalition and Its Contradictions

The Liberal Narrative of American History, you see, originated in the political rhetoric of urban Democrats in the 1920s, who  assembled a pan-ethnic coalition in places like Chicago, Boston and New York by appealing to the interests (and prejudices) of the Irish, Italians, the Jews and other immigrant groups. “Vote Democrat,” the Irish Catholic in Boston was told, “and we’ll take money and power from those rich Yankee snobs and give it to you!”

In an era when All Politics Was Local — when there was no cable TV or Internet to call attention to these narrowly tailored partisan messages — the Catholic in Boston or the Jew in New York was unaware that, simultaneously, the Ku Klux Klan was campaigning in the Midwest with a different message. “Vote Democrat,” the Indiana farmer was told, “and we’ll do something about those Jews and Catholics and Negroes who are destroying The American Way of Life!”

From that kind of dishonest two-faced hateful divisiveness, the Democrat Party constructed the Great Liberal Consensus that elected FDR, Harry Truman, JFK and LBJ. During a span of 36 years (1933-69) Democrats controlled the White House for 28 years, interrupted only by the eight-year presidency of WWII hero Dwight Eisenhower, whose liberal “Modern Republicanism” was the chief target of William F. Buckley Jr.’s ire in the 1950s. (If you’ve never read Buckley’s 1959 classic Up From Liberalism, you should buy it immediately.)

The Great Liberal Consensus was self-contradicting nonsense that produced bad policy and, when it finally unraveled during the debacle of LBJ’s doomstruck presidency, the liberal intelligentsia were thrown into a state of permanent crisis from which they have never fully recovered. Behind their facade of hubristic liberal arrogance, Our Moral Superiors (as I have dubbed this intellectual elite) are deeply afraid that, at any moment, Americans will see through the Fog of Phony Bullshit from which Democrat electoral majorities are built.

We are “anti-intellectual,” you see, if we refuse to accept at face value The Liberal Narrative of American History we have been taught by the government education system. There should be a sign in front of every public school in America: “Vote Democrat, Because the Teachers Union Needs More Money and Power.” The hypocritical self-interest of government employees supporting the Party of More Government is another one of those Things We Aren’t Allowed to Say, but if you want to know why public schools are more interested in teaching liberal attitudes than teaching facts and skills, it doesn’t take a Ph.D. to figure it out.

“In the hands of a skillful indoctrinator, the average student not only thinks what the indoctrinator wants him to think . . . but is altogether positive that he has arrived at his position by independent intellectual exertion. This man is outraged by the suggestion that he is the flesh-and-blood tribute to the success of his indoctrinators.”
William F. Buckley Jr., Up From Liberalism (1959)

We have been indoctrinated, all of us, and recovering from that indoctrination is a process, rather than an event. Once you start noticing the Fog of Phony Bullshit, you become skeptical of the narrative, and the Democrat Party mythos of ethnos is one of the most obvious elements of that narrative: There are five A’s in “RAAAAACISM!”

From that long but necessary digression, we return to the topic: A white woman targeted for “street harassment” by predominately black and Latino men on the streets of New York City.


C’mon, isn’t that the message of this viral video? “Vote Democrat,” the white woman is told, “and we’ll protect you from the patriarchal oppression of the objectifying Male Gaze.”

The implicit assumption of the Democrat Party’s “War on Women” meme is that the sexist misogyny by which all women are allegedly victimized is officially endorsed by The Republican Party. Never mind the fact — as the viral video ironically demonstrated — that women’s victimization is quite often perpetrated by constituencies of the Democrat Party coalition. Feminism is a left-wing political ideology that serves the partisan interests of the Democrat Party and, when feminists aren’t busy offering to provide oral sex to Democrat men, they are busy accusing Republicans of being The Party of Rape.

It does not really matter whether you are male or female, black or white, straight or gay. The only thing liberals really care about is whether you vote Democrat, because the liberal’s sense of self-esteem is dependent on his belief that, by voting Democrat and encouraging you to do likewise, he proves himself worthy as one of Our Moral Superiors. (Thomas Sowell’s book The Vision of the Anointed explains this brilliantly.)

Androgynous Units of the 21st Century

So, for what it’s worth, here’s my two cents on the multicultural diversity of the New York City street harassers in the viral video: Males who have not been subjected to elite indoctrination in universities, and who have no direct investment in the bureaucratic regime of the suit-and-tie office job workplace, have not learned to be ashamed of their heterosexuality.

College education and professional careers in the 21st century require men to learn that women are oppressed by male sexual interest. The anti-male/anti-heterosexual ideology of feminism — Fear and Loathing of the Penis — has acquired hegemonic institutional authority in the elite culture of academia. We are no longer permitted to believe that men and women are different, or that their differences have any natural function. We are all supposed to be Ungendered Androgynous Units, except insofar as males are inferior to females, and if you are a normal male who has normal attitudes toward normal females, this makes you part of the heteronormative patriarchy.

It is astonishing how deeply some men have internalized this totalitarian feminist anti-male hate propaganda. A properly indoctrinated male nowadays must believe that merely to notice female beauty, to feel sexual desire toward women in a normal way, or to praise women in their roles as wives and mothers, is to participate in misogynistic oppression. Indeed, the properly indoctrinated male feels a duty to denounce you as a sexist if you merely point out that feminism is an anti-male/anti-heterosexual ideology. The belief system of lesbian Marxist baby-killers must never be questioned and, if a popular feminist celebrity is also an admitted child molester, well, how dare you call attention to that fact?

Outside the hyper-politicized precincts where feminist orthodoxy exercises hegemonic control, however, there are still males who have not yet been properly indoctrinated. They dropped out of high school or they couldn’t afford to go college. Maybe they joined the Army or got a muscle-and-sweat job where Doing the Work mattered more than Having the Correct Attitude. Or maybe, as seems to be the case of the lower-class New York City men featured in the viral video, they just accepted their liberal-endorsed status as Authentic Victims and haven’t bothered to wonder if there is anything wrong with their way of life.

One way or another, these men are not invested in the bureaucratic system within which feminist orthodoxy is uncontested. So when they see a good-looking woman, they react.

They are not repressed. They are not ashamed to be male. Their basic animal sexuality doesn’t cause them any psychic conflict.

And I can totally relate to those brothers.

Back in the day, my man Bobby “The Hamp” Shearer and I used to discuss the great social issue of our mutual interest, Exactly Who the Hell Do These White Girls Think They Are, Anyway?

See, Bobby played football at Homewood High and his mother was a respectable middle-class school teacher. I was the product of an at least equally respectable socioeconomic background. By the time we got to college, however, we were both renegade outlaws. Let me tell you, buddy, we were on the hunt, and in the late 1970s it was Open Season.

Bobby and I became friends as the result of an incident in a biology class our freshman year, when somebody managed to steal the teacher’s copy of the mid-term exam, so that class was adjourned and the test was delayed. At the Copper Penny pub (drinking age was 19 then in Alabama, but we all had fake IDs), Bobby told me he had been in on the test-stealing conspiracy and, as we laughed about the aftermath over beers, the topic of conversation drifted to Exactly Who the Hell Do These White Girls Think They Are, Anyway?

There was, at Jacksonville (Ala.) State University back in the day, a very clear social hierarchy. Atop this status pyramid were the Varsity Athletes, the Rich Frat Boys and their Hot Sorority Girlfriends. There was also the Baptist Campus Ministry — at that time, the largest student organization on campus — where Nice Boys and Nice Girls congregated and socialized. Then there was the Marching Southerners Band and its female auxiliary, the Marching Ballerinas. However, almost without exception, the Marching Ballerinas were also Hot Sorority Girlfriends, so that the ordinary male band geek had zero chance of scoring with a Marching Ballerina. (Of course, many male band geeks were gay, so the not-scoring-with-Marching-Ballerinas factor didn’t bother them.) And so it was that Bobby and I found ourselves in the situation of renegade outlaws, on the hunt, trying to figure out how to get Our Fair Share of That Action on a state university campus where a substantial majority of the target population (and nearly all the really prime commodity) was off-limits to us for one reason or another.

Exactly Who the Hell Do These White Girls Think They Are, Anyway?

Bobby’s problem as a black guy in Alabama during the long governorship of the Honorable George Corley Wallace was obvious enough, while my situation as a skinny long-haired rock-and-roll white boy was such that Bobby the Hamp and I had a lot in common.

The Objectivity of Renegade Outlaws

We were both profoundly antisocial, you see. Did I mention I used to be a Democrat? Never mind. The point is, Bobby and I shared a disrespectful attitude toward the status quo, and this became the basis of a friendship and many deep discussions about race and culture and, of course, Exactly Who the Hell Do These White Girls Think They Are, Anyway?

Renegade outlaws have an objectivity about the system of social status that any Ph.D. would envy. When I talk about the psychology of crime, I speak with the authority of experience, unless it behooves me to invoke my Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. I was multicultural and intersectional before it was cool and it so happened that Bobby the Hamp and I had a common interest but different aptitudes.

For some reason, I attracted a certain type of girl, usually named Donna or Tammy, who liked my Bad Boy Clown persona (and my skinny ass) and who hoped that I might be harnessed into the Acceptable Boyfriend role — not that her mother would approve of me, but her mother could be required to accept me. On the other hand, Bobby had remarkable success in playing the role of Latter-Day Mandingo to certain Hot Sorority Girls who felt an occasional urge to defy (quite secretly) the regnant social expectations of northeast Alabama during the long governorship of the Honorable George Corley Wallace.

Me and the Hamp, we knew the score, see? Beneath the veneer of respectable conformity, all kinds of things were happening back in the day — Things We Weren’t Allowed to Say, but the truth was suppressed then for different reasons than it is suppressed now.

Too stubbornly proud to tug the forelock to Our Moral Superiors, I never once played the “Some of My Best Friends” card when hypocritical white liberals accused me of racism. Nor did I play the  “Some of My Best Friends” card vis-a-vis accusations of sexism and homophobia, because I was never going to let those bastards have the satisfaction of forcing me to defend myself except on my terms, as it fit my own purposes and sense of personal honor. People who actually know me, my real-life friends, know who I am and what I believe, and no self-appointed Arbiter of Political Acceptability is ever going to intimidate me into silence.

No shame in my game, see, and it isn’t my job to justify or defend how dudes in New York City play their game. Feminists can go find those guys and dox them — publish their names and home addresses, please — so we can find out whether they’re registered to vote as Democrats or Republicans, and let the chips fall where they may. What the feminists want, however, is to convince women that somehow “street harassment” is a function of the heteronormative patriarchy, and the only way to fight it is (a) vote Democrat, (b) become a lesbian, or preferably (c) become a lesbian feminist Democrat.

Exactly Who the Hell Do These White Girls Think They Are, Anyway?

Hey, sweetheart: Don’t try to run that three-card monte game on me. Before you can demand from me a denunciation of New York City street harassers, you’ll first have to provide me with proof of your personal moral superiority, by which you claim the right to make such a demand. If it suits my interest to respond to your imperious demand, I might answer by saying that if (a) the First Amendment protects the right of Lena Dunham to show her ugly naked ass in every episode of Girls, then (b) the street harasser has a First Amendment right to express his admiration of a genuinely attractive woman. Note the “if . . . might” hypothetical structure of that sentence, darling, because if you want to have an abstract intellectual conversation, I’ll be happy to converse. However, you don’t actually want to have a conversation — certainly not an equal conversation — what you want to do is to make me into a Symbolic Scapegoat and say, “There! See? A white male heterosexual Republican said something sexist! Vote Democrat!”

What part of “fuck you” is so hard for you liberals to understand?

These hypocritical hate-hustling Democrats think they can get away with running the same hustle over and over again, because the rest of us are too dumb to figure out we’re being hustled.

Once their hustle has been busted, however, they have to move their crooked game to the other side of town and try it again. So now their familiar game — “Vote Democrat, Because Whoever You Hate, We Hate Them, Too” — is targeted at a new audience of chumps. Herman Cain once wrote a book called They Think You’re Stupid, the title of which is a perfect four-word summary of the Democrat Party’s basic strategy. And, hey, you can’t argue with success. After 214 years of lies, corruption and bad policy, Democrats are still open for business.

You want to talk about hate? When rich white lesbians start telling women to vote Democrat because of “street harassment,” while at the same time refusing to denounce a celebrity pervert like Lena Dunham for diddling her own sister, you may fairly accuse me of hating that kind of shameless hypocrisy. But unless or until these feminists prove to me that they actually are Our Moral Superiors, they have no right to make any demands of me, or you, or any ordinary law-abiding American citizen trying to get along in the real world.

Don’t let yourself get hustled. And if you’re ever in Homewood, tell Bobby “The Hamp” Shearer his old buddy Spacey Stacy says hello.



82 Responses to “Racism, Classism and Catcalling (or, #Feminism Is for Rich White Lesbians)”

  1. Fail Burton
    October 31st, 2014 @ 1:11 am

    The funny thing is that anyone who has ever said exactly what is reflected in that video is called a “racist” or “tool of the white patriarchy” depending on their race and gender.

    Reality sucks for gender feminists and is also racist. Mother Nature is a bigot and the birds and bees are a social construct and also homophobes. That’s because they don’t have the brains radfems do. Take that how you want.

  2. StevenDB
    October 31st, 2014 @ 1:20 am

    Lines upon a Tranquil Brow
    Walk Kelly, 1956

    Have you ever, while pondering the ways of the morn,
    Thought to save just a bit, just a drop in the horn
    To pour in the evening, or late afternoon,
    Or during the night, when we’re shining the Moon?

    Have you ever cried out, while counting the snow,
    Or watching the tomtit warble “Hello”:
    “BREAK OUT THE CIGARS! This life is for squirrels,
    We’re off to the drugstore to whistle at girls”?

  3. Herb Suhl
    October 31st, 2014 @ 1:45 am

    Black guys like women with large butts.

  4. Mike55_Mahoney
    October 31st, 2014 @ 4:45 am

    What is it about being a cad that’s defensible? You want to cut through the BS? These guys are code talking the message, ” You wanna F?” Its like this secret language everyone can decode except when you want to be ridiculouly coy. The social and political intersections McCain tries to make here don’t really meet. He’s trying too hard and being obtuse and disingenious while at it.

  5. DukeLax
    October 31st, 2014 @ 5:58 am

    American gender-feminists don’t hate all men equally, just the hetero-ones.

  6. DukeLax
    October 31st, 2014 @ 6:01 am

    During protests, Campus white gender-feminists will find a black women in the crowd, and bring her up front for photo-ops, than after the photo op, tell her she can go back into the back of the crowd.

  7. DukeLax
    October 31st, 2014 @ 6:05 am

    There have been more than a few loud mouth gender-feminist lesbians, who later turned into devout muslims wearing a veil over their face…and this is not hyperbole.

  8. DukeLax
    October 31st, 2014 @ 6:06 am

    Maybe she did, which led these guys on to say hi…….but she edited that part out of the “Inflama-prop”

  9. Guest
    October 31st, 2014 @ 6:19 am

    Bumper Sticker:

    “Vote Democrat, Because Whoever You Hate, We Hate Them, Too”

  10. Quartermaster
    October 31st, 2014 @ 6:56 am

    It takes little to exceed the intellectual capacity of the typical leftard. Just read the comment section of any leftard site if you don’t believe me.

  11. Turning Leaves
    October 31st, 2014 @ 8:07 am

    and if you are a normal male who has normal attitudes toward normal females, this makes you part of the heteronormative patriarchy.

    That’s cisgendered heteronormative patriarchy to you, buddy.

  12. Geosystem
    October 31st, 2014 @ 8:14 am

    There are no winners in the Oppression Olympics, only the biggest losers.

  13. mikegiles
    October 31st, 2014 @ 8:55 am

    Just one point, Blacks and Latinos often have those jobs on the lower end of the work ladder. The kind of jobs that Mike Rowe presents on “Dirty Jobs”. Those kinds of jobs – parking cars, moving stock, working on a loading dock – don’t require the suit and tie of a white collar job. To see a minority in jacket, jeans and sneakers and assume they are unemployed says a great deal about the person making the statement.

  14. osis
    October 31st, 2014 @ 10:16 am

    I have begun phoning in my oppression of women these days.

  15. robertstacymccain
    October 31st, 2014 @ 10:34 am

    Good point. The phrases you’re looking for are “day labor” or “casual labor” — they don’t have a full-time punch-a-clock-and-get-a-weekly-check job, but this doesn’t mean they aren’t working. And in the Obamanomics environment, this kind of freelance existence is probably a lot more common than it was in 2007. So it’s wrong to assume that all guys hanging out on the street are just trash.

    On the other hand, some of those guys obviously were just trash, or at least skeezy enough that you wouldn’t want them anywhere near your daughter. It’s like aggressive panhandlers: Anywhere you see that really persistent kind of in-your-face “homeless” behavior (Washington, D.C., is horrible in this way), you know the social order has completely broken down.

    I think we can tell the difference between, on the one hand, a man who utters an appreciative “wow” in reaction to a good-looking woman walking past and, on the other hand, a man who pesters a woman in public trying to get a reaction from her. In the latter case, the behavior can seem menacing to the woman. It’s like the difference between a troll who pops up in my TL on Twitter to jab me a couple of times and the kind of deranged cyberstalking that made Bill Schmalfeldt notorious.

  16. Mailman
    October 31st, 2014 @ 11:02 am

    If she wanted to walk down the street in NYC and not get ogled, leered at or catcalled, all she needed to do was put on a burka.

  17. Fail Burton
    October 31st, 2014 @ 11:16 am

    They should do one in downtown Mosul, as a kinda scientific control mechanism.

    “Hey, baby, nice head. Come ’round to my place and I’ll take that [redacted] right off.”

    Oh, men.

  18. Sean
    October 31st, 2014 @ 11:41 am

    The video of the woman walking around New York plays on very old instincts. That’s why it’s been so successful at doing the rounds. This video
    described succinctly where the Woman walking in New York video belongs. Some things never change.

  19. Behind_You1
    October 31st, 2014 @ 11:45 am

    [channeling Simon]

    Reading is for misogynists, h8r!!1!

  20. robertstacymccain
    October 31st, 2014 @ 12:16 pm

    You’re missing my point, Mike.

    Bad behavior is bad behavior. What the producers of that video were doing, however, was trying to make bad behavior a political issue, implying that the bad behavior witnessed in that video amounts to social injustice — patriarchal oppression. And that’s bullshit.

    Excuse me for being “obtuse,” and not making my point in a 1-2-3 bullet-point presentation, but beating people over the head — “LOOK, HERE IS THE POINT I’M TRYING TO MAKE!” — is not always the most effective way to communicate. It is generally best to assume that the reader of political/cultural commentary is intelligent enough to make inferences, to form his own opinions via gestalt-pattern observations.

    Why did I tell that story about me and Bobby Shearer? First, to establish my experiential authority to speak about that “renegade outlaw” perspective on life. It is perhaps impossible to transpose one’s self across race and culture, to “walk a mile in his shoes,” so to speak. Still, I have both empathy with the perspective of the social outsider, and extensive familiarity with how “The Other” (to use academic sociological terminology) views his behavior toward a certain kind of she-thinks-she’s-all-that woman.

    The slang word is “siddity” — meaning arrogant or stuck-up, someone who is (as my parents from rural Alabama would say) is “putting on airs” as if she is better than you. Rightly or wrongly, the lower-class male perceives in the stuck-up female’s “siddity” attitude an insult, a pose of superiority. In his mind, her refusal to acknowlege him — to smile, to nod, to laugh at what he considers a good-natured joke — is proof that the reason she’s holding her nose up in the air is so that she can look down at him.

    Is the lower-class male’s attitude a fair or accurate assessment of the situation. Maybe, maybe not, but remember that feminist theory insists upon subjective interpretations as the only authentic truth. And is the lower-class male’s subjective viewpoint less authentic than the stuck-up white girl’s subjective truth? No.

    My own (objective) belief is that the lower-class male’s boorish behavior is rooted in wrong beliefs, a failure to see the situation from the female’s point of view. The guy can’t figure out two obvious reasons why the girl acts so stuck-up:

    1. A really attractive female gets that kind of reaction all the time — The hotter she is, the more likely she is to have heard ever line any guy could possibly ever say to her. By the time such a woman is 18, all the streetside “yoww, bay-bee” reactions are just the soundtrack of her life.

    2. Guys routinely misinterpret any friendly gesture from an attractive woman — Here we have the real problem, I think. Long ago, I recognized that the frosty standoffish attitude of attractive women is a necessary defense against clueless males. There are some guys who, if they get merely a warm smile and a friendly “hi” from the checkout clerk, are prone to interpret that as, “She wants me.” And in our highly sexualized culture, this reaction — the obsesive erotic fixation of a potential stalker — is something every attractive female learns to fear as soon as she is old enough to recognize it.

    Some guys just lack the self-awareness or level o0f social perception necessary to tell the difference between courtesy and romantic interest. The have that tendency to walk through the forest and suddenly, “That tree! OMG! Look at that BEAUTIFUL tree!” And it is as if the entire forest around them has disappeared.

    The well-adjusted male, one who has formed a realistic understanding of females, is never too impressed with a woman. Beauty is beauty, of course, but it is only beauty, and on a planet of 3.5 million females, so what? Are we supposed to genuflect, to bow in her presence? And this is another (usually unmentioned) problem with catcalling: Dude, why you got to do that? All that shouting and acting a fool is just inflating her ego!

    Shut up, you dumbass. The catcaller always proves one thing beyond dispute: He’s got zero game.

  21. Frank P
    October 31st, 2014 @ 1:33 pm
  22. Want a conversation
    October 31st, 2014 @ 2:04 pm

    To quote our administration; the video was chickshit.

  23. Nurse Kaci Hickox Can Ride Her Bike | Regular Right Guy
    October 31st, 2014 @ 3:27 pm

    […] Racism, Classism and Catcalling (or, #Feminism Is for Rich White Lesbians) […]

  24. Messenger
    October 31st, 2014 @ 8:11 pm

    Piss off, SJW. You’re annoying, and blind.

  25. mikegiles
    November 2nd, 2014 @ 9:28 am

    Well made points, but one other thing I wonder about. I know this video was edited, so I wonder if it was just a case of the “poor womyn” walking down the street. Lived and worked in NYC for decades. It’s odd to have that much of a reaction, unless there was some kind of contact. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if a portion of the tape where she first smiled at one of these knuckleheads, before the “ice queen” act, was edited out. It would not be the first instance of a “hate crime” hoax from a Leftard.

  26. bilejones
    November 2nd, 2014 @ 10:11 pm

    It is long past time that Blacks stop acting white and that Women stop acting Male.
    There are, of course, a few consequences to this.
    Women and Blacks won’t be using Cars, Buses, Planes, Trains, Bicycles, Motorbikes or Segues to get around. All are “White Men” machines. Oh, avoid the elevators and escalators too.
    They’ll be wanting to burn their books, turn off the TV and Radio, eschew the internet but hey, electricity was harnessed by the same demons, so all that’s gone too: Won’t be able to use any petroleum based products, but maybe can get away with whale oil for lamps.
    They’d need to be more careful with their food: no pasteurized milk of course, but fridge or freezer were verboten anyway: and Birdseye was a Wan Man. Oh, canning goes as well.
    Pretty much all power tools are gone: chainsaws, power-mowers, tractors, ploughs, combine harvesters, bandsaws, tablesaws, electric drills reciprocating saws, etc: All gone, Finito Benito.
    The old clothing issue will be a bit of a problem if you’re reduced to the technology before the power loom but I’m sure they’ll manage.
    But at least half of these politically correct types will be spared from the indignity caused by the fact that it was a white man who invented the modern tampon.

  27. bilejones
    November 2nd, 2014 @ 10:49 pm

    Gender Identity was a meaningless term until about the 1970’s when the liberals, as is their wont, perverted a word, that related to grammar by allying it to another with no connection, to pursue their own ends.

  28. Wombat_socho
    November 3rd, 2014 @ 12:33 am

    Or Latinos, either.

  29. Daniel Freeman
    November 3rd, 2014 @ 1:34 am

    Q: Why did the half-Asian murder his three Asian roommates?

    A: Because he was a homicidal maniac.

    The way the press covered the whole thing, it’s like they were actively trying to miss the forest for the trees.

  30. Jeremy
    November 3rd, 2014 @ 5:33 am

    Republicans and reality?


    Idiots who believe in fairy tales called religion know nothing about reality.

    Liberals are annoying because they always need something to be offended by.

    Both sides should implode and then this country could have a chance to improve.

  31. The #StreetHarassment Meme and #Feminism’s Kafkatrapping Tactics : The Other McCain
    November 3rd, 2014 @ 9:45 pm

    […] hard to understand, really. The “catcall” video that went viral last week — see “Racism, Classism and Catcalling (or, #Feminism Is for Rich White Lesbians)” — was an Alinksy Rule 12 classic: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and […]

  32. Anonymous
    November 5th, 2014 @ 8:36 am

    Because clearly only lesbians would object to being trailed and dogged on the street by these assholes?

    If the protagonist of the video where a white guy in a suit and tie, and the harassers following after him were, instead of saying “I want to f—- you in the ass,” saying “f—- you, you cracker one-percenter, i want to take your money”, you’d probably applaud a Bernie Goetz resolution. But because this problem affects women instead of men, you side with the liberals defending the street-trash. Misogyny wins out over logical consistency and independent thought, as usual.

    If you’re entitled to complain about Lena Dunham’s naked ass making its debut alongside all the ugly, naked male flesh on TV (how many times did we see George Costanza in his boxers?), then women have a right to complain about this behavior, which they can’t opt-out of by changing the channel.

    However, I suspect that confronting the feminists’ argument on its actual terms would be too abstract and intellectual an exercise for you.