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

Posted on 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.

VOTE DEMOCRAT!

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 comments

  1. What an effing delusional world these people live in. They are the ones who are sex obsessed, not the eviiiiil “patriarchy” strawmen they are always trotting out. As a general statement to RadFems everywhere, let me say ” news for you, sweetcheeks, you are not at all on my desirable list. Plenty of normal women out there, so take your attitudes and eff off. If the sane women aren’t available, then I’d rather take care of things myself (you know what I mean), with internet porn than have even a ten second interaction with you. Sasha Gray in pixels tops “you” any day.”

  3. . . . black people have been used in popular culture as symbols of authenticity because of a sort of inferiority complex among white liberals.

    Unremarked upon, however, is the “magical white person” who appears to help the poor, benighted black person succeed. See, e.g. The Help, where it is necessary to have the young, liberal, college educated white girl, lead the black women to the Beulah Land of self-actualization. A perfect Progressive parable, that. It transforms Kipling’s White Man’s Burden from something to be sneered at, what with it’s civilization and Christianity, to decent fried chicken and shit in a chocolate pie.

    Now I’ll go finish reading the rest of the post.

  6. Note this unproven assertion–a throwaway introductory clause–in your second link:

    Race, gender identity and sexual preference have divided feminists since before they were suffragettes,

    Really? Gender identity and sexual preference were of concern in 1898? It’s really quite insidious; a classic Marxist attempt to refashion history in their own image.

  7. As I mentioned when I linked to the Slate article in the comments to your earlier “Equality” post, the reaction provides us a small taste of the inevitable result of identity and grievance politics. Specifically, they wind up cannibalizing each other. Thus is video, specifically meant to document male “oppression” and rape culture, deemed flawed because of the absence of Ur-Oppressor, your Caucasian male. See Durasim’s links above for other evidence.

    Those who revel in their status as “Victim” should remember the rules of Highlander: There can be only one.

  8. I find it ironic that the Radical Feminists are hurling thunderbolts at men in the Western world for petty infractions, which they inflate because DRAMA, and narcissism, of course, while real monsters in the Third World use women as cattle. Perhaps driving men generally more generally towards the kind of behaviors they say they abhor. It almost seems like they’re picking a fight they’re bound to lose.

  9. The actual creator of the video (a man) claimed that there were white men who catcalled their bait-woman, but somehow, the footage of them didn’t make the final cut. Okay then.
    But Allahpundit, and a dearth of other commenters, great and small, have noticed the intersection of racial politics and sexual politics in this video. To get these 100 incidents, the “anti-street harassment” movement had to wander around poorer neighborhoods of people who tend to look like me and are less circumspect about making their attraction to a woman known. Which raises the question of just what do these women consider “harassment”? Is it the words said? The skin color of the person saying the words? Is it mere eye contact?
    I think the answer is simple. The women represented by these “anti-street harassment” agitators think that men they have prejudged as worthy of their womanly virtue, should not even have the right to speak them. Unless you’re Mr. Darcy or Christian Grey, you should never dare to look about a woman who considers herself better than you (how you’re supposed to know what she’s thinking is anybody’s guess). Which then makes me wonder why exactly should the general public care about altering social norms, not to mention making a lateral attack on free speech, to suit the personal preferences of a handful of insecure women.

  10. So secretly in their heart of hearts, they’re actually Submissives demanding that men Dominate them? Well I don’t care how much you clean them up I wouldn’t punish one of them with your whip.

  11. If conservatives can hold some semblance of reality together for long enough we may hope to survive the inevitable implosion of the left.

  12. Due to the crisis of Peak Oppression we don’t have enough resources to hang around on street corners oppressing women one at a time. That kind of personal service became impossible when white males became less than 40% of the population.

  14. $exual hara$$ment i$ what ever any particular women want’$ it to be in any particular time and place. Thi$ i$ e$pecially true in the work place. It’$ almo$t a$ if it were $ome kind of bu$ine$$ or perhap$ a racket. It certainly produce$ a great many $ettlement$ with HR department$.

  15. What I found really shocking while reading this, is that that indoctrination was taking place long before the jargon of feminism became well known.

    I now recognize that we were being indoctrinated in the ’50’s and were well prepared for the outburst in the ’60’s and ’70’s of the feminist dogma.

    This probably only happened to those of us who’s mothers were avid imbibers of the latest theories of child rearing being promulgated by popular magazines in the ’40’s and ’50’s. I know I was well primed as a good little educational unit ready willing and able to absorb the latest pile of crap being spewed by Academe and broadcast through TV shows, Radio and Newspapers and the latest gadget; Video.

    Thank God and Al Gore for the Internet.

  16. The 70s were easy: I found one girlfriend, and stuck with her throughout college at the University of Kentucky, which is, by the way, way better than Jacksonville State, with lots prettier girls.

  17. My Mizzou Tigers will welcome your Wildcats to Columbia this Saturday. You guys aren’t the real “KU” in our eyes, but you’ll have to do until the Jayhawks cease being wussies and agree to play us again in football.

  18. Of course, your question, Exactly Who the Hell Do These White Girls Think They Are, Anyway? was the same one asked by Elliot Rodger. I’m glad that you came up with a saner answer.

  19. Y’all might beat us in football — we haven’t been great since Adolph Rupp ran Bear Bryant out of town — but we’ll kill you in basketball!

  21. The adjectives “unwanted” or “unwelcome” are used, in the discourse of sexual harassment, to describe comments, jokes, or expressions of romantic interest that women find offensive. That is to say, the plaintiff decides that The Wrong Man said something to her which, conceivably, she would not find offensive if The Right Man said it (or if a woman said it). So if there is a co-worker a woman doesn’t like (The Wrong Man), she begins to keep score of “unwanted” comments or “unwelcome” attention — things the male co-worker says or does which could be deemed “offensive” and, when it suits her purpose to claim victimhood, everything in the Dossier of Sexist Behavior she has been assembling will be unloaded against her target, The Wrong Man.

    If you’ve ever seen this happen in real life — and it has happened to more than one person I’ve known — you know how the story ends: Eventually, the company pays her Go-Away Money (a year’s salary is the customary minimum) in a deal where she takes the money and leaves, in exchange for promising never to sue.

    It’s just a hustle, is all it is, but it has been Standard Operating Procedure ever since the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill showdown of 1990. And some of the biggest “discrimination” cases have involved giant media conglomerates (the Washington Post and ABC) so that no one in the media will dare say a negative word against feminism because — the Catch-22 — criticizing feminism can be interpreted in court as evidence of discriminatory intent.

    Feminists have got America by the short hairs, really, and there is a reason why so few people ever take them on directly.

  23. I’m absolutely sure JSU has produced one Miss America, and many, many Miss Alabamas. For a school its size, Jax State is quite famous for the beauty of its coeds.

  25. We’ve got Ashley Judd, who is just way, way sexy! But, for just overall good looks, across the whole coed population, UK is number one!

  26. I’m aware of the difference; hence the quotes around KU. As I said, you’ll have to do, but alas, I cannot muster the appropriate level outrage against your fine alma mater. You must remember, the Mizzou-Kansas University rivalry is the only college rivalry which involved gunfights, cavalry charges, the the destruction of the other side’s town, thereby “starting the ball” as it were: Mizzou 1- Kansas 0.

  30. Before I started researching intersectionalism, it never occurred to me to count up the number of times women I didn’t know had pinched or spanked my behind in college hallways and bars or cat-called me on the street in groups in America.

    The cat-calling included groups of black women yelling out things to a blonde French guy I was walking around with in Rio de Janeiro. I not being blonde was immune to that in that city. That guy scored with women in Rio every night.

    Groups of gay men and straight women have also cat-called me in Guatemala City. That doesn’t include a next door neighbor I’d only met once knocking on my apt. door in America, and laying her head in my lap. There were other knocks on that door from strange neighbors and future lovers.

    With this video, social justice warriors caught themselves out by providing a document of the very stop-and-frisk and racial profiling they say the racist N.York police indulge in for no reason. In fact when one observes white folks commit 2% or less of all N.Y. gun violence, that is ignored by double-thinking radfems. The problem for the PC is cultural differences are captured in that video and like wrong-way anthropologists, they did themselves in and are now trying to backtrack.

    The bottom line is that lying is built into intersectionalism and in such a racial and sexual way it’s no surprise radfems are also a wrong-way KKK. The typical radfem is an Orwellian anti-racist racist, anti-sexist sexist, anti-genderphobic genderphobe and anti-supremacist supremacist. They’re also just plain nuts.

  31. I’m not sure where to begin. You are so full of shit it is unbelievable. Women objecting to street harassment is a Democratic Party plot? Men should be free to harass women because women themselves aren’t morally pure? God, you are a sick, perverted piece of ignorant, blathering shit.

  38. That video was produced for a specific reason. It was a “plot” in that sense. It was part of an ideology called intersectional gender feminism. The video was purposefully made as if it is anthropological science. It was made to smear men. The satire we are pointing out is that exact same video could just as easily been made by white supremacists to smear non-whites. It is not a plot of the Dem Party but part of a sick ideology that hides within liberalism for camouflage in the same way Jew-haters hide within “anti-Zionism.”

  40. Like the KKK, intersectionalism is as much defined by what it never criticizes as by what it does criticize, and how it criticizes. Need I point out how radfems like Sarkeesian portray any male murderer as part of an informal ideology of women-hatred and “toxic masculinity” and any Muslim murderer as a lone wolf detached from a very real and formal ideology. The same paradigm applies for Western-non-Western, white-non-white, and gay-straight. Radfems are liars and supremacist bigots.

  42. The Social Justice left lives in a nightmare fantasy of the 1950s where white frat boys in blazers rampage through the streets raping poor and downtrodden minorities. I give it five minutes before some tool at Salon who has never seen a black person blames those white frat boys for what happened in this video.

  44. One quibble with this fine post, Stacy.

    Concerning this paragraph:

    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 those three cities, the origination point was around 1900.

    In NYC you could argue that it was earlier when the Goddamnirish [it is one word, you know] took over Tammany Hall.

    In Boston, the rises of James Michael Curley and Honey Fitz [JFK’s Grandfather] to prominence and power happened between 1900 and 1912.

  46. Intersectionalism is about getting as close to the top of the victim pile as you possibly can. Thus we have the vast networks and taxonomies of victims, the “lower” of which are enjoined to “check their privilege” and submit to the “higher.”

    A few years back, David Thompson, I think, directed readers to a blog post by a radical black lesbian feminist arguing that privilege existed in favor of lighter skinned black people over those with darker hues. (Such as the author of the post, of course.) The comments to the Radfem’s post were an absolute scream.

  48. “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. “

    LOL is there a single guy in that video who voted for Romney?

  49. Clearly, the subject matter here is far too advanced for your – to be charitable – limited intellect. Go back to the DailyKos where you’ll be more comfortable in the company of your own kind.

Comments are closed.