The Other McCain

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

Feminism, Darwinism, and the Extinction of Women Like Sophie Vershbow

Posted on | March 18, 2019 | 2 Comments


Adaptive behavior refers to behavior that enables a person . . . to get along in his or her environment with greatest success and least conflict with others. . . .
“In contrast, maladaptive behavior is a type of behavior that is often used to reduce one’s anxiety, but the result is dysfunctional and non-productive.”

Has it ever occurred to any feminist that her ideology is self-destructive? That whatever emotional benefit she gains from the sense of collective solidarity comes at the cost of her long-term happiness as an individual? Does any feminist have the objectivity necessary to step back from herself and evaluate whether the alleged “oppression” she has devoted her life to battling really exists? Can an intelligent woman ever examine the feminist movement critically and ask herself, “Cui bono?

Sophie Vershbow is the senior social media manager for Random House who, in October 2018, unleashed an anti-Kavanaugh rant that went viral.


That tweet inspired an online backlash that Sophie described last month in a Huffington Post column, but I’d never heard of her until I was researching a certain phrase used by the pickup artist (PUA) community, which led me to a post about Sophie at Chateau Heartiste. (Sophie, if you’re reading this, don’t click that link.) Whenever I encounter such a person, I become curious: Who is this? What’s their backstory? What makes them tick? Twitter infamy is like mass murder. A person doesn’t suddenly one day erupt in an act of senseless violence (or Internet stupidity). No, there are always warning signs that foreshadow the catastrophic incident. Every time some deranged wackjob commits an atrocity, TV reporters interview the neighbors, who always say the same thing: “He was a quiet guy. Kept to himself a lot. Kind of a loner.” But then the police report finding a massive stash of neo-Nazi literature in the guy’s trailer or somebody identifies his Reddit profile where he’s raving about the CIA or the Rothschilds or whatever, and the mystery of the mass murderer’s motive becomes slightly less mysterious. And the same is true when a young woman ruins her life with an idiotic feminist rant.

Make no mistake — becoming notorious as a feminist lunatic had disastrous consequences for Sophie Vershbow’s romantic life. Six weeks after her anti-Kavanaugh tweet went viral, she got dumped by the boyfriend she had been dating since 2014. Coincidence? I think not.


Since then, her Twitter feed has regularly featured Sophie’s snarky putdowns of the men she encounters via dating apps, none of whom is good enough for her. “All these men are inferior” — thus does the rejected 29-year-old rationalize her inability to find a replacement for the cute, fun boyfriend with whom she wasted her best years.

Let me explain, for anyone who may need this explanation, why FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER is not a good look for any woman who is not a lesbian employed by a left-wing 501(c)3. Like, if you’re on the payroll at Planned Parenthood and have zero interest in male companionship, you can rant in capital letters to your heart’s content, but if you’re a heterosexual woman employed in the private sector . . . Well, it’s not a good look. Maybe because she works for a major publisher and lives in Manhattan, this isn’t so apparent to Sophie Vershbow. Random House publishes a lot of books by feminists (e.g., Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie) and never publishes any anti-feminists, so that Sophie works inside an echo chamber where feminism is not controversial. In fact, feminism is more or less mandatory in Sophie’s workplace, because if any man employed at Random House ever said anything vaguely sexist, he’d be fired for harassment in a heartbeat.


This is why Sophie is trolling for Tinder trash. People use dating apps because fear of a harassment accusation now makes it impossible for people to date anyone they work with. There may be guys at Random House who think Sophie’s cute, but none of them would ever ask her for a date, because asking a woman for a date could be “unwanted sexual advances” and — boom! — your career at Random House is over, sir.

By the way, this is why your college daughter doesn’t have a boyfriend. Heterosexuality is now more or less illegal on college campuses, thanks to the “rape culture” hysteria. Any guy smart enough to attend college is smart enough to understand that if he hooks up with a girl at a party and she later feels remorse over their hook-up, she can accuse him of rape and he’ll be expelled by one of the kangaroo-court campus tribunals that exist for no other purpose but to find male students guilty of sexual assault, no matter what actually happened. The smart thing for a college boy to do nowadays is to avoid any social interaction with his female classmates, who have been indoctrinated to believe that every male on campus is a rapist. This anti-male attitude, instilled in the minds of every college girl by feminist “consent workshop” instructors on Day One of freshman orientation, makes dating impossible on the 21st-century university campus, and this attitude gets carried over into the workplace where any male expression of romantic interest in a female co-worker could result in an accusation of “sexual harassment.” This means Sophie can’t date any guy she works with, which is why she’s swiping through profiles on Tinder, Bumble, OKCupid, whatever. But I digress . . .

FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER is not a good look in a world where any guy Sophie Vershbow meets can Google her name and avoid the risk of getting involved with a man-hating lunatic. Did I mention that Sophie has a history of eating disorders, depression and anxiety? Like, she once starved herself down to 98 pounds and then, a few years later, ballooned up to 140, then went through a phase of bulimia, and is apparently still in therapy, but despite all her psychiatric baggage, she was able to find a tall, muscular, blond boyfriend and for her to let him slip through her grasp — whoa, foolish blunder.


Oh, yeah — so “empowered”! You’re five months away from your 30th birthday and if you think your chances of happily-ever-after are going to improve after you hit the big three-oh, you’re deluded. All these losers from dating apps you mock on Twitter? A couple of years from now, even those losers will be swiping left on you. Your tall, muscular, blond ex-boyfriend probably won’t have any problems finding someone new and your FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER certainly won’t change the odds in your favor. On the contrary, that’s like the third strike against you. Guys might tolerate a certain amount of craziness in a girlfriend, but when you add in the anti-male ideology? Scratch.

In 2015, when she was already a year into her relationship with blond muscle guy, Sophie Vershbow wrote a column at a feminist site explaining why she would never date a Republican, concluding thus:

No matter how pro-choice you claim to be, it’s all just meaningless words if you vote for a candidate who is willing to rid millions of women of the right to control their own bodies, or to defund organizations like Planned Parenthood that support reproductive health.
Living in liberal New York City, it’s easy to take access to safe, legal abortion for granted. But for millions of women in the United States, it’s a very different story. Every vote affects people across the entire country, and being supportive of just your girlfriend’s right to choose does not make you pro-choice. It’s about supporting every woman’s right to choose.
My mid-20s dating is, at its core, an audition process for the role of my “life partner.” And I’m not interested in casting a man who puts his wallet in front of his morals. So gentlemen, remember: If you want to have sex with me, then you need to get in bed with a candidate who supports my right to choose.

Well, how did that “audition process” work out for you, ma’am?

The plural of “anecdote” is data, as they say, and it’s actually not difficult to explain why feminism is making life worse, rather than better, for women like Sophie. Take a look at the 2016 exit polls for Pennsylvania, a state that swung from blue to red for Trump. In Pennsylvania, white men preferred Trump over Hillary Clinton 2-to-1 — 64% to 32%.

“Well,” you scoff, “that doesn’t mean anything. That’s just because white guys in Pennsylvania are a bunch of ignorant, unemployed losers.”

Nope — Trump got an 17-point margin (56%-39%) over Hillary among college-educated white men in Pennsylvania. Explain that any way you want, but the reality is that Hillary’s feminist-themed campaign drove male voters into the Republican column in large numbers. The numbers may be different in “liberal New York City,” but the general trend is clear: Men don’t like feminism, because feminism is an anti-male ideology.

This is why I think it’s not a coincidence that Sophie Vershbow’s boyfriend dumped her on Nov. 12, which was 38 days after her Oct. 5 FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER outburst against men who supported Bret Kavanaugh. Any reasonably intelligent and objective observer of Kavanaugh’s confirmation process had to conclude that all of his accusers, including Christine Blasey Ford, were lying. Everything known about Kavanaugh’s character prior to his nomination to the Supreme Court contradicted the portrait of him as a teenage gang-rapist, and once Michael Avenatti proved (unintentionally) how easy it was to find women willing to lie about a Republican, reasonable observers concluded that the whole thing had been a dishonest partisan smear from beginning to end. Even if you were willing to stipulate that maybe there had been some unpleasant encounter between Kavanaugh and young Christine Blasey circa 1982, there certainly wasn’t enough evidence to justify making this accusation the subject of a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. Kavanaugh was treated unfairly, and while we have become accustomed to such brass-knuckles tactics in politics, it is wrong to disparage those who objected to the lynch-mob treatment Democrats inflicted on Kavanaugh, whose reputation was previously impeccable.

Thirty-eight days later, Sophie gets dumped by Will, the tall, muscular, blond guy she’s been dating since 2014. Not a coincidence.

My hunch is your boy Will got red-pilled, the hard way.

Like any young guy in New York City, Will was able to tolerate a certain amount of feminism from his girlfriend. It comes with the territory. Hillary got 87% of the vote in Manhattan, so a guy in that dating scene has either got to adjust to the political climate or do without. It’s like, if a guy is living in small-town North Alabama, he must either adjust to dating redneck girls or do without. For more than three years, Will was OK with dating Sophie, who didn’t seem much worse than any other woman in Manhattan until the Kavanaugh thing happened and she suddenly turned into the FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER, and then he was like, “Wait a minute . . .”

Given the self-evident unfairness of how Democrats treated Kavanaugh, don’t you suppose Sophie’s maniacal anti-Kavanaugh screed gave Will a frightening glimpse of his own possible future? What would happen to Will if he married this woman? What would it be like if she ever aimed this sadistic, vindictive rage against him? A scary thought!

He wasted little time making his exit from that death trap, and I suspect Sophie will have difficulty finding volunteers to replace Will.

Insofar as Sophie values intelligence in her male companions, she has given those men every reason to avoid her. Only a stupid man would date the FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER.

From a Darwinian perspective, such women are facing extinction. It’s not just that Sophie is pushing 30, but that she has publicly devoted her life to feminism, an ideology that is not only anti-male, but also anti-marriage and anti-motherhood. Even if her likelihood of finding a replacement for Will were good — and it’s not — what are the chances that Sophie will ever produce offspring? Even in the best-case scenario, by the time she could wrangle a man to the altar, she’d be 32 or 33, and would the newlyweds wish to procreate immediately? So she’s maybe 34 or 35 before they’re even ready to start trying to have a baby, and reproductive biology is not your friend at that point.


Did I mention that Sophie is an only child? That her parents are 66?

One might imagine that atheists, who profess Darwinian evolution as their substitute for religious belief, would be more mindful of the danger of their own extinction, but generally they are oblivious. In general, the more devoutly religious people are, the higher their birth rates, and vice-versa — atheists seem to be anti-parenthood.


How weird is it that Sophie Vershbow feels “constantly accosted by religion” in America, without considering whether religious people feel “constantly accosted” by her atheism? Which side is the aggressor in the Culture War? Since the 1960s, our public institutions have become entirely secular, if not indeed anti-religious, yet those who advocate the eradication of Christianity feel they are being “accosted.”

Like her feminism, Sophie Vershbow’s atheism is maladaptive. Her beliefs and behaviors may be emotionally comforting to her, but “the result is dysfunctional and non-productive.” She depicts herself as a victim, harassed by “Trump’s army of Twitter champions” who interpreted her FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER outburst “as a personal attack on them and their values” — but wasn’t that exactly what she intended it to be? Hasn’t Sophie made it clear that she hates every one of the 63 million Americans who voted for Trump?

This is why Sophie’s dating life is likely to get worse, not better. Even in Manhattan, how easy will it be for her to find a bachelor who shares her hateful anti-Trump rage? Her ex-boyfriend Will wasn’t any kind of right-winger, but even a liberal guy couldn’t deal with having an enraged FEMINIST RANTING IN ALL CAPS ON TWITTER girlfriend.

Say what you will about the Trump era, but it’s pushed feminists over the edge, like mastodons trapped in the La Brea Tar Pits.



2 Responses to “Feminism, Darwinism, and the Extinction of Women Like Sophie Vershbow”

  1. The Other McCain on NYC-style Feminism | 357 Magnum
    March 19th, 2019 @ 2:45 pm

    […] This would be funny (and parts of it are) but the truth is, it’s really a sad commentary on the state of our society. Feminism, Darwinism, and the Extinction of Women Like Sophie Vershbow. […]

  2. News of the Week (March 24th, 2019) | The Political Hat
    March 24th, 2019 @ 9:05 pm

    […] Feminism, Darwinism, and the Extinction of Women Like Sophie Vershbow Has it ever occurred to any feminist that her ideology is self-destructive? That whatever emotional benefit she gains from the sense of collective solidarity comes at the cost of her long-term happiness as an individual? Does any feminist have the objectivity necessary to step back from herself and evaluate whether the alleged “oppression” she has devoted her life to battling really exists? Can an intelligent woman ever examine the feminist movement critically and ask herself, “Cui bono?” […]