If you’re a University of Texas girl with blue hair and “queer social issues,” the sisters of Gamma Rho Lambda are there for you:
UT students established a campus colony of the national sorority Gamma Rho Lambda this semester — the first queer-focused and transsexual-inclusive women’s Greek society at the University, according to the organization’s leadership.
The sorority aims to combat issues regarding the status of queer women in mainstream society and within the LGBT community, Lauren Ferguson, president of the colony and art history and English senior, said. As part of the three-semester colonization process, the organization’s leaders recruited nine members this semester for the Alpha class and will start taking pledges in the fall.
Ferguson is also a columnist for the UT student newspaper, and recently published a column containing some interesting non-facts:
According to a 2001 report from the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, women on college campuses are more likely to be assaulted than women in the general population. And Katherine Hirsch’s study titled “Fraternities of Fear: Gang Rape, Male Bonding, and the Silencing of Women” estimated that one in four college women will be assaulted during their academic career.
Fact: Female college students are actually less likely to be raped than female non-students the same age.
Fact: The incidence of rape has significantly declined in the U.S.
As I wrote when the Justice Department report was released:
According to the report, the actual number of rapes of college-age females is 6.1 per 1,000, a drastically smaller number than 1-in-5. Meanwhile, non-college-attending females in the same 18-to-24 age group had about a 20% higher rate of rape (7.6 per 1,000).
To put it quite bluntly, there is zero evidence to support feminist claims of a “rape epidemic” on U.S. college campuses.
To put it even more bluntly, feminists are lying about rape.
The claim of a “rape epidemic” is a deception, manufactured with “Statistical Voodoo and Elastic Definitions,” as part of a propaganda campaign by feminists to augment their own (already formidable) power within academia. Of course, we don’t expect an art history major to understand that she is a pawn in someone else’s political power-grab. Indoctrination doesn’t work if the subjects realize that they’re being indoctrinated. The blue-haired queer Laura Ferguson is an LGBT celebrity now, interviewed by Huffington Post Live:
“I was really bothered when I first came to Austin and couldn’t find a safe space for queer women.”
Safe space? Safe from whom? The idea that “queer women” are unsafe in Austin — terrorized by heteronormative patriarchy, we might presume — is contradicted by Ms. Ferguson’s own words in another interview: “For every one person who doesn’t like us, there’s a thousand who support us. UT has been insanely supportive of us. . . . They’re not only willing to support us, but they’re excited about it.” One wonders what sort of menace requires these “queer women” to have a “safe space.”
Well, yes — mocking laughter might damage their self-esteem, and so the UT administration is “insanely supportive” of Gamma Rho Lambda providing a “safe space” where the weirdos can gather without being exposed to cruel jokes. This is where the cultural celebration of victimhood leads, to a world in which misfits and malcontents can imagine they are oppressed. (See “‘There Is No Spoon’: Radical Feminism and the Paranoid Matrix of Patriarchy.”) Despite the fact that university administrators are “insanely supportive” of LGBT activism on campus, it is still necessary — for the purposes of this charade of pretended victimhood — for the “queer women” to present themselves as suffering societal oppression and injustice. Does no one in Austin have enough common sense and courage to call bullshit on this bogus hustle?
There are more than 50,000 students at the UT Austin campus, and yet when Gamma Rho Lambda offered “safe space” for “queer women,” they were able to recruit a grand total of nine members. A little more than half of UT-Austin students are female, and if we assume that 2% of those are lesbian, that means about 500 “queer women” on campus. Yet it would seem that fewer than 2% of lesbian students at UT-Austin care enough about “safe space” to join Gamma Rho Lambda.
To repeat: THERE IS NO SPOON.
UPDATE: Why do the president and vice-president of the UT-Austin chapter of Gamma Rho Lambda have the the same name? Thanks to Zohydro in the comments and my brother Kirby for pointing me to this story which clarifies this point:
Lauren, and her sister, Audrey, decided to create a new organization. . . .
“Being a transwoman it’s hard to find places that are completely comfortable, I knew this needed to be an area specifically for female identifying and female queer individuals,” Audrey Ferguson said.
In other words, Lauren’s “sister Audrey” is in fact her brother, who is “identifying” as her “sister.” As Kirby said, “Imagine family Thanksgiving at their house!”
Yeah. It’s like The Rocky Horror Picture Show.
They definitely ain’t got no alibi.
No.
The attempted mainstreaming of deviancy is harmful to the culture.
Seriously though. Imagine how crushed you’d be if you were that dainty little thing’s father.
This is why you should raise boys to be tough and aggressive.
Nearly three-quarters of lesbians are overweight or obese: the rate is 25 percent higher than heterosexual females and almost double the obesity risk of homosexual males.
Of course, being overweight or obese is a (mostly) objective measurement, and thus is easily studied. Attractiveness is a much more subjective judgement, which is why, I suppose, there is no federal study telling us that lesbians are significantly uglier than normal women.
But I’ll give Ellen Degeneris points for great taste in women!
http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/9700000/Portia-portia-de-rossi-9776429-1600-1200.jpg
Did someone say Meatloaf?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOikQWAL8qc
Of course, our host mentioned Rocky Horror!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMRl55U0eDw
OK, let’s look at the GiRL sorority; you can see the photos above. That is pretty much a photograph of failed job seekers.
Let’s be honest: to advance in a career, you have to first get past the initial job interview, and as unfair as you might believe it to be, conventionally attractive and conventionally dressed people have significant advantages over the ugly and the obese. Add to that a “sorority” which is designed to limit contact with men to the minimum amount required to attend college, as well as (probably) encouraging the majoring in useless fields, and these ladies are building a set of norms which will limit the “sisters'” opportunities to succeed in the larger economy. When these ladies leave college, and attempt to navigate their way through the capitalist economy, they are going to encounter job interviewers who are more likely than not to be male, and, if they manage to pass through that barrier, they are going to be working for supervisors who are more probably going to be male rather than female.
Other than becoming professors of gender studies — a rather small-sized field — these ladies are training themselves right out of professional life.
But, not to worry: convenience stores are always looking for clerks!
“According to a 2001 report from the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, women on college campuses are more likely to be assaulted than women in the general population.”
I don’t think we should be too quick to dismiss this idea. At any rate, taking it seriously offers a pretty good way to troll radical feminists.
To whit: universities are, as everybody knows, likely to be significantly more left-wing than the country as a whole. Universities are, apparently, considerably more dangerous for women than the country as a whole — to such an extent that the rape rate is 250 per 1,000 people, rather than 8 for the country as a whole. Maybe the next time one of our radfem friends trots out the 1-in-4 statistic, then, we shouldn’t bother trying to dispute it, but instead ask them what it is about liberalism that seemingly makes liberal environments so appallingly dangerous for young women. Then we could just sit back with a bag of popcorn and watch their poor little heads explode as they try and answer the question.
In fact, people with actual accomplishments now play second fiddle to “victims”.
I’m pretty sure there used to be a time when overcoming victimisation to achieve something was the most coveted status, but now it seems that even this is second-best to being completely emotionally crippled by your experiences. Truly the leftist mind is as mad as a box of mice.
“a more appropriate name for an overtly lesbian”
…Which is, moreover, full of fat people.
They can’t go with Delta Iota Kappa since that can be read two ways!
Just because something deviates from the normal does not inherently make it bad. People used to get persecuted because they were left-handed, but society has since realized that was wrong.
What exactly is your point here? Seems like a lot of conjecture and unnecessary ad hominem. Are you suggesting that these ladies will not know how to function in society simply because they’re talking to other women?
Please also consider Pi Iota Vagina.
Did you mean colony or colon?
https://twitter.com/MsEBL/status/577178268077428736
Ephesians 5:11 isn’t a bad start either.
They all seem in need of a good fat shaming.
Shifting goal posts. If you believe them, their deviancy is a choice for which they desire to advocate. They do not believe it is genetic in any way, like being left-handed. If they intend to advocate for a lifestyle, then they can and should expect counter arguments based upon the sociological effects of that lifestyle. Stated differently, if they wish to foist this upon society, society has the right weigh this lifestyle in the balances to determine if it is wanting or not.
That’s probably what they talk about when brother and sister Go TO THE BATHROOM TOGETHER! !! ewwwww gag gag gag ewww
Let me be blunt here: no, sitting around telling each other how great they are ’cause they are ugly (can’t be helped) and fat (usually can be helped) and adorn themselves like idiots (most certainly can be helped) does not train them for real world economic success. Even if they clean themselves up for a job interview and put on ice clothes, they won’t be as attuned to being cleaned up and wearing nice clothes as people who have been doing so all along; you can always tell who is used to dressing nicely and someone who could only do so for a job interview.
Nor does it help their social skills: people develop their social skills continually, but if these young ladies isolate themselves into an unhelpful economic grouping, they will get behind in the social skills necessary for real world success.
Something like 15% of the population are left-handed; only about 2% are queer.
Homosexuality is simply disordered; it fails at our most basic function, survival of the species. The seven basic characteristics of life include reproduction, and homosexuality is a disorder which prevents that. It is arguable that homosexuality removes an organism from the very definition of life.
Arrgh. Does anyone have brain bleach?
If you have to try to make a boy tough and aggressive, then you’ve probably already lost the battle. I’m a book nerd and a computer geek, and let me tell you a couple of stories.
When I was hardly more than a baby, my parents went to pick me up from the on-site childcare after the church service was over, and saw a larger boy kick me in the shins. I looked puzzled. He did it again. I brightened up and got into the game, and kicked him in the shins as hard as I could. He ran away crying.
When I was middle-school age, I knew how to fall off a bike gracefully, because I did it all the time. That wasn’t because I was bad at riding, but because I always pushed my limits of speed and air on the hill where we lived. That was one of my favorite things in the world, along with reading sci-fi and fantasy and programming computers.
You shouldn’t have to make a boy be a boy. We come pre-programmed.
What about heterosexual individuals that simply choose not to have children, or have an actual disorder that renders them infertile? Should we persecute them as well?
Infertility may be a specific ailment to a particular couple; homosexuality is the inability to reproduce throughout the entire population.
I wouldn’t persecute homosexuals: I feel sorry for them! But that does not mean that we ought to accept homosexuality as normal.
Why not? What is the possible harm?
Also if you’re an infertile person, you’re also infertile to the entire population. Source: logic.
Whether it’s a choice or not (it isn’t) is irrelevant. Name one actual reason homosexuality is harmful to anyone.
Sorry, but that is not how infertility is defined. Your statement is like saying that if one person is blind, it makes the whole population blind.
The harm is the acceptance of a disorder — homosexuality – as both normal and something to be praised. It is not normal, and we ought not to pander in any way which makes homosexuality appear to be a reasonable or healthy choice in life.
There’s always the inclusive Tau Iota Alpha that anyone can enjoy regardless of any oppressively gendered anatomical narratives…
What? If a woman is unable to produce eggs, for example, she’s infertile to everyone. No one can get her pregnant.
Even if homosexuality is a “disorder”, that doesn’t make it inherently bad. Same with being left-handed.
That is always rape!
You may need it after tomorrow’s post.
Jonah Goldberg had him sitting in a canoe in a Bayou eating a catfish he’d caught with his hands. He didn’t have time to finish it as he’d gotten the call that Hillary was in trouble.
That’s why they’re trying so hard to de-program them in schools.
Because as much as they can make it possible, they’re only talking to other dysfunctional women like them.
You can’t argue with him, he invoked logic.
Something no one around here seems to be familiar with.
That’s only assuming being homosexual is a harmful dysfunction. Name one way being gay is actually harmful to anyone.
I thought that what Tumblr was for.
I didn’t say being homosexual is dysfunctional, though it is, but not necessarily cripplingly so. These women are retreating into a cocoon in order to avoid any contrast with themselves and defining that as a ”safe space” they’re already crippled, and working on becoming more so.
Bye, Joe. Take your psuedonym with you.
May I direct you to the fact that the chart coincides with the rise and decline of grunge rock.
The peak point is the first “Lollapalooza” festival.
I did not see it, but now that I have I love it.
Last’s weeks G-file, no pictures.
But Jonah’s words paint a picture!
His/her’s comments are quite revealing. First, he set’s up the straw man that we’re arguing about the effects of homosexual behavior on the part of one person. Obviously, that is not the issue. The issue is advocacy for what s/he admits is a choice. And that advocacy is a social concern because it directly affects the foundations of society: traditional marriage and family.
When you wish to discuss things like advocacy in schools, mandatory service in businesses, elimination of First Amendment protections, etc. All these Leftists suddenly become libertarians.
Daniel, some good points there.
I think there are a lot more sissy kids now than when I was a boy, because of helicopter parenting, feminised school environments, single mothers, and parents being afraid to let their children play outside without adult supervision.
My childhood, and probably yours too, was a bit like in the film Stand By Me, in that boys were allowed and expected to be boys.
That meant being out all day in the summer, roaming as far from home as our legs or bikes would carry us, without having to check in with parents. It meant getting into scraps, and as long as nobody ended up in hospital there was no expectation that adult authority figures would intervene. Nobody thought it was a bad thing for a boy to carry a pocket knife or a toy gun in those days. Nobody threatened to sue the school if their boy broke an ankle playing sports.
We weren’t coddled, and if I stepped over the line I could expect to be corrected by my father’s fists or his belt, same as any other boy I grew up with.
They couldn’t make a film like Stand By Me set in the present day. The boys would be picked up by social services about 20 minutes into the movie.
I think a lot of boys now are raised in an unhealthy, cloying, feminine environment. One where they’re alternately spoiled and pampered and scolded for being boys. I wonder if that’s part of the reason why there seem to be so many gender-confused young people around.
You are automatically in a minority, you are in a minority — if you are male, anyway — which greatly increases your odds of contacting some nasty diseases, you are about four times likelier to attempt suicide (which would seem to indicate, inter alia, that homosexuals themselves have problems with being homosexual), you are more likely to be promiscuous or put yourself in dangerous situations, and, the big one, you are separating yourself from God.