The Other McCain

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

In The Mailbox: 06.03.16

Posted on | June 3, 2016 | 1 Comment

— compiled by Wombat-socho


OVER THE TRANSOM
EBL: Democrat Thuggery – Disgraceful Dem Sam Liccardo And the Promotion Of Violence Against Trump Supporters
Michelle Malkin: Sanctuary City San Jose’s Climate Of Hate And Violence
Twitchy: #PPSellsBabyParts Scandal Gets Even More Disgusting


RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
American Power: Open-Borders Activist Ireri Carrasco Sues Obama Administration Over Deferred Deportation
American Thinker: “Roots” Remake – Snoop Dogg Got It Right
Da Tech Guy: Fausta – David Frum And The Seven Guardrails
Don Surber: None Dare Call It Fascism
Jammie Wearing Fools: High School Principal Praised By DiBlasio Covered Up Gang Rape
Joe For America: Joe The Plumber Endorses Trump, Cracks Up Stuart Varney
JustOneMinute: The Brownshirts Are Coming, But Whose Side Are They On?
Pamela Geller: Qatar Gives Texas School $100K To Push Arabic, Islam
Shark Tank: Debbie Wassermann Schultz Has A Weed Problem
Shot In The Dark: A Rhetorical Question, Sort Of, For The Rev. Nancy Nord Bence
STUMP: Rahm’s “Win” Means Pensions Lose, or, You Can’t Tell Us We Can’t Kick The Can, Rauner!
The Jawa Report: TRIGGER WARNING – Feminist Rage Compilation
The Lonely Conservative: Director Of Georgia ACLU Quits After Daughters Scared By Men In Womens’ Room
The Political Hat: Lady Gaga Praises Her Dear Leader
This Ain’t Hell: The Political Opinions At VFW Halls
Weasel Zippers: Minneapolis Police Union Leader Says “Black Lives Matter Is A Terrorist Organization”
Megan McArdle: A Sad Fact From Today’s Bag Of Hate Mail


Shop Amazon Fashion – Take 20% Off Women’s Swimwear & Cover-Ups
Shop Amazon – Now 100+ Dash Buttons

Category: Linkagery

Is Amber Heard ‘Duplicitous, Untrustworthy, and Indecisive’?

Posted on | June 3, 2016 | 28 Comments

 

Last week, we reported on the acrimonious split between Johnny Depp and his wife, Amber Heard. “Johnny Depp got used, manipulated, set up and made to look like an a–hole,” Depp’s friend Doug Stanhope said. Without regard for whether Heard’s abuse claims are true, it’s obvious that Depp was a fool to marry a bisexual woman half his age who had previously spent four years in a lesbian relationship. When she demanded Depp pay her $50,000 a month in spousal support? Yeah, she’s all about the Benjamins, baby, and she saw Johnny as her personal ATM.

Johnny Depp’s assistant says Heard fabricated text messages that appeared to support her abuse claims, and frankly I don’t believe a word she says, because’s she’s bisexual. “Never trust a bisexual” is probably a good rule because, really, how could you trust someone who lacks the strength of character to decide if they’re straight or gay? It’s like college football, and you can’t decide whether you’re an Alabama fan or an Auburn fan, Michigan or Ohio State, USC or UCLA. Pick a team, OK?

Someone can’t even limit their sexual attraction to 50% of the human race? C’mon, that’s 3.5 billion potential partners to choose from, but no, they’re bisexual, and have to keep the full 7 billion within reach.

Of course, bisexual feminist Carolyn Cox is offended by such criticism:

What’s been surprising to me is the incredible amount of biphobia demonstrated by the media’s coverage of this case. Given that it’s 2016, I hoped we wouldn’t see outlets framing Heard as inherently duplicitous simply because she’s bisexual, but I guess that was way optimistic of me. . . .
The biphobia demonstrated in multiple publications over the past few days is inexcusable, regardless of what transpired in this specific marriage. . . . That, for me, cuts to one of the most frustrating aspects of bisexuality: as a bi woman, I feel I’m always seen as actually gay, or a liar, or both. When I’m with a man, I’m perceived as having chosen men, and when I’m with a woman, I’ve switched teams. I wish more publications, in discussing Heard, would remember that bisexuality doesn’t inherently connote promiscuity, and that it’s possible to be bisexual and be in a happily monogamous relationship. . . .
Bisexuals are often perceived as duplicitous, untrustworthy, and indecisive . . .

Everybody knows bisexual women are opportunistic, selfish and emotionally unstable, which is why lesbians don’t trust them. What Amber Heard did to Johnny Depp shows why guys shouldn’t trust them, either, and if it’s “biphobia” to tell the truth, so be it. Somebody’s got to warn guys against getting mixed up with dishonest promiscuous bisexuals, or else they’ll all end up paying $50,000 a month to Amber Heard.

 


Category: Celebrities

Stereotypes Are Accurate (and Feminists at DePaul Are Man-Hating Witches)

Posted on | June 3, 2016 | 24 Comments

Kate Hardiman reports at the College Fix:

A Rutgers University social science professor set out to research how stereotypes are inaccurate so he could proclaim and promote that to the world with hard scientific data — but eventually made a startling discovery: most stereotypes are accurate.
Scholarly claims of “stereotype inaccuracy” are baseless, Dr. Lee Jussim told The College Fix in an interview.
“When I first began my research, I had assumed all those social scientists declaring stereotypes to be inaccurate were right, so I wanted to know the basis for those claims,” he said. “I would track down the source in an attempt to get the evidence. And slowly, over many years, I made a startling discovery — claims of stereotype inaccuracy were based on nothing.” . . .
Many researchers cite social psychologist Gordon Allport’s classic book “The Nature of Prejudice” in support of the claim that stereotypes are inaccurate or at least exaggerations of real differences. But Allport relied on a few anecdotes — hardly scientific evidence, Jussim said.
“Famous psychologists declaring stereotypes inaccurate without a citation or evidence meant anyone could likewise do so, thereby creating an illusion that pervasive stereotype inaccuracy was ‘settled science,’” Jussim said. “It was only if one looked for the empirical research underlying such claims did one discover that there was nothing there, just a black hole.” . . .

Read the whole thing. This is one of the ways “consensus” among intellectuals is harmful. Beliefs that are widely accepted in academia are never examined skeptically, and contradictory evidence is ignored or suppressed. A classic case was Dr. John Money’s theories of gender which were hugely influential in the 1970s and ’80s based on the so-called “John/Joan” case. Yet it turned out that Money’s research was fraudulent, and the “John/Joan” case actually proved the opposite of what he claimed. (See As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl by John Colapinto.) Still, the lessons of that case have not been fully learned, because feminists have politicized research to such an extent that no one in academia can speak the simple truth: Boys and girls are different (as Lawrence Summers learned at Harvard).

One of the books I most often recommend is Thomas Sowell’s The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy, which examines how certain liberal prejudices distort public policy discussions. Chapter Four, “The Irrelevance of Evidence” shows how liberal beliefs are simply immune to facts. For example, no matter how much evidence you produce showing that the breakdown of the family is a major cause of poverty, liberals insist that racism is the main reason for poverty in America, even though it can be shown that family breakdown causes poverty for white people, too.

The willingness of people to accept explanations that confirm their own prejudices produces myths of “settled science” that can endure for decades within the elite intelligentsia. In his book The Quest for Cosmic Justice, Sowell examines the claims made in Vladimir Lenin’s Imperialism. Lenin asserted that the collapse of capitalism (which Marx had claimed was imminent in the mid-1800s) had been delayed because capitalists had found new sources of profit by exploiting the poor in undeveloped countries. It takes Sowell precisely two pages to destroy Lenin’s claim, showing that the “evidence” provided by Lenin was simply false. And yet, despite the demonstrable falsity of Lenin’s core thesis, and despite the subsequent failure of the Soviet economy, anti-capitalist ideas about “imperialism” and “exploitation” continue to be influential among intellectuals and policy makers. This is just one example of how the leftist prejudices in academia have prevented us from learning useful lessons from recent history. In fact, as John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr explain in their 2005 book In Denial: Historians, Communism, and Espionage, academics refuse even to admit the most basic truths of Cold War history, i.e., that the Communist Party in the United States was controlled by Moscow as an instrument of Soviet policy, used for espionage and subversion. The idea that “McCarthyism” was essentially paranoid — that there was no domestic threat from Soviet agents and that innocent liberals were wrongfully persecuted in a “witch hunt” — continues to be promoted in American universities, despite the abundant evidence that Joe McCarthy was basically right about the Communist menace. (See Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America’s Enemies by M. Stanton Evans.) The world looks much different when you are willing to examine facts that may contradict your own prejudices, but for decades the academic elite in America has ignored evidence that doesn’t conform to the “progressive” worldview. Read more

Category: Education, Intellectuals, Sex Trouble

Lesbian Couple Convicted of Murder in Torture Death of Two-Year-Old Boy

Posted on | June 3, 2016 | 17 Comments

 

Last month we reported on the Liam Fee case in Scotland, where a lesbian couple were charged with murdering a 2-year-old boy that one of the women had from a previous relationship with a man, and then trying to blame the toddler’s death on another boy the couple allegedly had abused. The case involves the March 2014 death of Rachel Trelfa’s son. The boy’s father had been living with Trelfa more than five years when their son was born. A few months later, however, Trelfa moved in with Nyomi Fee, with whom she later registered for a civil union. This week, a jury found the couple guilty:

Rachel Fee, 31, and Nyomi Fee, 29, were convicted [Tuesday] of killing two-year-old Liam by inflicting severe blunt force trauma to his body at a house in Fife, Scotland.
The youngster, who had been subjected to a life of pain and neglect, suffered a ruptured heart after sustaining injuries similar to those seen in car crash victims.
The defendants were both also found guilty of wilfully assaulting, neglecting and abusing two young boys, including the one they blamed for Liam’s killing, over a two-year period.
This abuse involved being imprisoned in a home-made cage, given cold showers, tied up in a dark room where snakes and rats were kept, and forced to eat dog excrement, a court heard. . . .
Now, they are both facing life sentences for the murder of the youngster, who suffered a fractured upper arm bone and a broken thigh bone in the days before his death. . . .
[Tuesday], the couple were convicted of all eight charges they faced, with a majority verdict returned on the murder charge after around 10 hours of deliberations by the jury.
In addition to this charge, the pair were found guilty of assaulting Liam over a period of more than two years prior to his death by jurors at the High Court in Livingston.
They were also convicted of ill-treating and neglecting the toddler January 2012 onwards by leaving him for prolonged periods of time, failing to provide him with adequate exercise and mental stimulation and — in the days leading up to his death — failing to get him proper medical attention for a broken leg and a fractured arm.

Meanwhile, in a related case:

A teenager who hurled abuse at child murderers Rachel and Nyomi Fee outside court has been spared jail.
Her lawyer successfully argued that she might be regarded as “some kind of hero” if she was sent to prison.
At Livingston Sheriff Court the 17-year-old, who cannot be named for legal reasons, admitted shouting homophobic abuse at the couple.
A television news crew recorded her comments as they filmed the pair arriving at court for their trial. . . .
The teenager, from Livingston, pled guilty to behaving in a manner likely to cause a reasonable person fear or alarm by shouting and swearing aggravated by sexual orientation.
Sheriff Jamie Gilmour took other unrelated offences into account when he sentenced her to be electronically tagged on a nine-month curfew.
He also placed her under supervision for two years and ordered her to carry out 200 hours of unpaid work within nine months.

It’s illegal in Scotland to shout homophobic slurs at murderers.

Because that might hurt their feelings, I guess.

 

Category: Crime, Gays

In The Mailbox: 06.02.16

Posted on | June 2, 2016 | Comments Off on In The Mailbox: 06.02.16

— compiled by Wombat-socho


OVER THE TRANSOM
EBL: Erick Erickson Throws Cold Water On Bill Kristol’s David French Brainstorm
Twitchy: State Department Quickly Hits Dead End In Exhaustive Investigation Of Video Glitch


RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
American Power: Professor William Klug Killed In UCLA Murder/Suicide
American Thinker: Anchors Away – Obama Sinks The U.S. Navy
BLACKFIVE: Book Review – Legend by Eric Blehm
Da Tech Guy: Baldilocks – Rooted In Folly
Don Surber: Laugh Of The Day – Hillary To Attack Trump On Foreign Policy
Jammie Wearing Fools: Shocker – Everything About Clinton Appearances Is Staged And Scripted So As Not To Confuse Grandma
Joe For America: Lord’s Prayer Canceled At Ohio High School Graduation – Students Continue 70-Year Tradition Anyway
JustOneMinute: Hillary Claims Donald Is Dangerous On Foreign Policy
Pamela Geller: CNN Finds Muslim War Criminal Working Security At DC-Area Airport
Shark Tank: Grayson Got Married Again?
Shot In The Dark: The Dreamsicle Ghouls
STUMP: Why There Will Be No Bailouts
The Jawa Report: ISIS Issues Death Fatwa Against TV
The Lonely Conservative: New Study Shows Best Run States Are Red, Worst Blue
The Political Hat: High Schools Reward Students For Campaigning For Democrats
The Quinton Report: Army Spending $200K On Transgender Bathroom?
This Ain’t Hell: Eikenberry Denied Academic Post By Pointy-Headed Academia
Weasel Zippers: ACLU Leader Quits After Elementary School-Aged Daughters Encounter Men In Womens’ Restroom
Megan McArdle: Obamacare, Executive Power, And The Rule Of Law
Mark Steyn: Trial Of The Century Update!


Category: Linkagery

Oberlin College Is Decadent and Depraved

Posted on | June 2, 2016 | 29 Comments

 

In March 2013, Oberlin College students staged a “Day of Solidarity” protest against “hate” at their elite private liberal arts school, where annual tuition is $50,586. The alleged incidents of “hate” that had prompted this protest were eventually exposed as a hoax, perpetrated by campus leftists, which was neither the first nor the last time Oberlin worked itself into a frenzy over a phony “hate” hoax. Oberlin is arguably the worst college in America — worse even than such Ivy League sewers as Yale, Harvard, Brown and Columbia — where foolish parents send their foolish children to be tutored in folly by professional fools.

It is impossible to exaggerate just how awful “elite” education in America has become, and difficult to explain why it is so bad. William F. Buckley Jr.first described the degenerate tendencies of modern elite education in his 1951 classic God and Man at Yale. As I have summarized the book’s core insight, “Buckley saw that Yale, originally founded as a Christian school, had quietly abandoned Christianity and adopted a new religion, liberalism.” The outlines of this problem were clearly apparent to Buckley at Yale while Harry Truman was still president, yet academia did nothing to halt the decay of moral and intellectual standards, so that when university campuses erupted in riots in the 1960s — young radicals terrorizing their liberal elders — conservatives could say, “We told you so.” Liberals can never admit they’re wrong, so the lessons that should have been learned from the ’60s were ignored, and meanwhile the radicals were burrowing into the academic bureaucracy. Beginning in the 1990s, a series of purges swept through higher education. The humanities and social sciences were eviscerated and corrupted by the proponents of “critical theory.” If any student wished to learn anything about history without a Marxist filter, he had to do so by reading old books, as all the recent “scholarship” was devoted to reinterpreting the past through a prism of race/class/gender.

Meanwhile, in the name of “multiculturalism,” the curriculum was restructured, admissions criteria were altered and hiring policies were systematically biased in order to create a statistically acceptable representation of “diversity” on elite campuses. We should note, by the way, that the pursuit of “diversity” in admissions was never difficult at community colleges or second-tier state universities. It was only at the top-tier state schools (e.g., the University of Michigan and the University of California-Berkeley) and at highly selective private schools (e.g., the Ivy League) that admissions quotas became controversial. Many in academia accepted and promoted the idea that all ethnic groups had a “right” to be proportionately represented in the student body (and on the faculty) of universities, so that “underrepresentation” was considered proof of discrimination and social injustice. Equality of opportunity was not enough, equality of outcomes was demanded, and this egalitarian mission required the destruction of moral and intellectual standards in academia. Higher education has become a pervasively dishonest enterprise, a corrupt racket wherein parents, students and taxpayers are systematically swindled in order to provide lucrative employment for administrators and faculty whose income is dependent upon the illusion of “prestige” surrounding such schools as Oberlin College.

How bad is it at Oberlin? Nathan Heller of the New Yorker risked a visit to the lunatic campus and here are a few excerpts from his article:

On February 25th, TheTower.org published an article that included screenshots from the Facebook feed of Joy Karega, an assistant professor of rhetoric and composition at Oberlin. The posts suggested, among other things, that Zionists had been involved in the 9/11 plot, that isis was a puppet of Mossad and the C.I.A., and that the Rothschild family owned “your news, the media, your oil, and your government.” The posts did not sit well with everyone at Oberlin, where, weeks earlier, a group of alumni and students had written the president with worries about anti-Semitism on campus; the board of trustees denounced Karega’s Facebook activities. As a teacher, however, she’d been beloved by many students and considered an important faculty advocate for the school’s black undergraduates. The need for allyship became acute. And so, with spring approaching, students and faculty at one of America’s most progressive colleges felt pressured to make an awkward judgment: whether to ally themselves with the black community or whether to ally themselves with the offended Jews. . . .
g, at Oberlin, I tracked down Cyrus Eosphoros, the student who’d worried about the triggering effects of “Antigone.” . . . Eosphoros is a shy guy with a lambent confidence. He was a candid, stylish writer for the school newspaper and a senator in student government. That day, he wore a distressed bomber jacket and Clubmaster glasses. His hair was done in the manner of Beaver Cleaver’s, with a cool blue streak across the top. Eosphoros is a trans man. He was educated in Mexico, walks with crutches, and suffers from A.D.H.D. and bipolar disorder. (He’d lately been on suicide watch.) He has cut off contact with his mother, and he supports himself with jobs at the library and the development office. He said, “I’m kind of about as much of a diversity checklist as you can get while still technically being a white man.” . . .
If the new campus activism has a central paradigm, it is intersectionality: a theory, originating in black feminism, that sees identity-based oppression operating in crosshatching ways. Encountering sexism as a white, Ivy-educated, middle-class woman in a law office, for example, calls for different solutions than encountering sexism as a black woman working a minimum-wage job. The theory is often used to support experiential authority, because, well, who knows what it means to live at an intersection better than the person there? . . .
In the post-Foucaultian tradition, it’s thought to be impossible to isolate accepted “knowledge” from power structures, and sometimes that principle is turned backward, to link personal discomfort with larger abuses of power. “Students believe that their gender, their ethnicity, their race, whatever, gives them a sort of privileged knowledge — a community-based knowledge — that other groups don’t have,” [music Professor James] O’Leary went on. The trouble comes when their perspectives clash. . . .
Aaron Pressman, a politics and law-and-society major, told me that he has always felt free to express his opinions on campus, but has faced “a lot of social backlash.” One of his ambitions is to become a public defender, and he has studied the free-speech work of the A.C.L.U. Last year, when he noticed a broadly worded clause about flirtatious speech in Oberlin’s new sexual-harassment policy, he advocated for more precise language. (His research told him that such broad prohibitions were often used to target ethnic groups.) “A student came up to me several days later and started screaming at me, saying I’m not allowed to have this opinion, because I’m a white cisgender male,” Pressman recalled. He feels that his white maleness shouldn’t be disqualifying. “I’ve had people respond to me, ‘You could never understand—your culture has never been oppressed.’ ” Pressman laughed. “I’m, like, ‘Really? The Holocaust?’” . . .
“Oberlin does a really good job of analyzing intersectionality in the classroom — even in discussions, people are aware of who’s talking, who’s taking up space,” Kiley Petersen, a junior, told me. “But there’s a disconnect in trying to apply these frames of intersectionality and progressive change to departments and this school as a whole.” Some students have sought their own solutions. Earlier this year, a sophomore, Chloe Vassot, published an essay in the college paper urging white students like her to speak up less in class in certain circumstances. “I understand that I am not just an individual concerned only with comfort but also a part of a society that I believe will benefit from my silence,” she wrote. . . .

You can read the whole depressing thing. What’s most depressing about it is that people actually pay money to attend Oberlin. Heck, $50,586 a year is nearly a thousand bucks a week, and imagine all the fun things you could do with that kind of money. You could develop a heroin addiction, for example. A teenage junkie could spend four years shooting up and, by age 22, would probably be less confused than a typical Oberlin graduate.

Oh, sure, it’s probably a bad thing to be addicted to heroin, but you never hear a junkie babbling about “frames of intersectionality,” do you?

 


Category: Education

The Deliberate Ugliness of Feminism

Posted on | June 2, 2016 | 59 Comments

 

Working on a longer piece today, so to get something up quickly, let’s talk a bit about the phenomenon of aposematism in nature:

The function of aposematism is to prevent attack, by warning potential predators that the prey animal has defences such as being unpalatable or poisonous. The easily detected warning is a primary defence mechanism, and the non-visible defences are secondary. Aposematic signals are primarily visual, using bright colours and high-contrast patterns such as stripes.

Many have noticed this “warning sign” phenomenon in the characteristic costumes of Third Wave feminists of the “Social Justice Warrior” (SJW) variety — weirdly colored hairstyles, facial piercings, tattoos, etc. Quite often, we find this aposematic appearance accompanied by obesity (because “fat feminism” is an actual movement) and LGBT sexuality, so that a clichéd type can be discerned in the vicinity of “social justice” activism. Strange appearance is a way for disgruntled misfits to turn their maladjusted anti-social attitudes into a visible display, so everybody who sees them knows how much they hate Mommy and Daddy.

“Only when we recognize that ‘manhood’ and ‘womanhood’ are made-up categories, invented to control human beings and violently imposed, can we truly understand the nature of sexism. . . .
“Questioning gender . . . is an essential part of the feminism that has sustained me through two decades of personal and political struggle. In the end, feminists and the LGBT community have this in common: We’re all gender traitors.”
— Laurie Penny, “How to Be a Genderqueer Feminist,” 2015

This kind of “gender” weirdness is clearly related to the breakdown of family, cultural decline and rampant immorality in post-Christian society, reflecting what Ashton Blackwell has called “Dark Feminism”:

These young women think they are “feminists” because feminism appeals to their frustrations, insecurities, and their bitterness over being used for casual sex. . . .
[Y]oung women in general have become darker and more bitter, and with good reason . . .
The dress style of the alternative scene — piercings, black apparel, combat boots, and surly expressions — broadcasts, “Stay away from me, I’m dangerous.” . . .
Septum piercings and unnatural hair colors have become so common that they have lost their whiff of punk subversion . . . The witchy, neo-pagan look is trendy . . .

More than a half-century into the Sexual Revolution, many young people have become disoriented by the pervasive social anarchy in a Culture of Narcissism that has renounced God and worships the sacred Self. Because they are unable to ignore their own flaws, however, many self-obsessed adolescents become disillusioned and are plunged into existential despair — “Nobody will ever love me!” — that in turn produces inchoate rage and makes them easily recruited to the Cult of Social Justice.

Well, I could continue that lecture, but this is just a quick post for your morning reading while I work on a much longer piece, and so I guess it’s time to explain why I was thinking about this subject today.

Until I started studying radical feminism, I never thought of “normal” as an achievement. Teenage rebellion is nothing new, but many young people are now going off the rails permanently, deliberately wrecking themselves in ways that make it unlikely they will ever fully recover. It is easy to dismiss this as a “fringe” phenomenon — the pierced septum, the strange hair, the deranged look in their eyes — and especially to laugh at the references to witchcraft, astrology and other occult obsessions. Unfortunately, however, these are real human beings, and not fictional TV characters. When you talk to the parents of these freaky misfits, as I occasionally do, you hear tales of a confounding mystery. Their child was a seemingly normal teenager, doing well in school and extracurricular activities until, quite suddenly, they began acting out in bizarre ways.

Perhaps there is an entirely secular explanation. Psychologists and other social scientists can probably provide useful insights into these eruptions of adolescent craziness, but I think it unwise to ignore the spiritual dimensions of this problem. “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools . . . God gave them over to a reprobate mind . . . disobedient to parents . . . without natural affection” (Romans 1:22, 28, 30-31).

+ + + + + +

The Sex Trouble project has been supported by contributions from readers. The first edition of Sex Trouble: Radical Feminism and the War on Human Nature is available from Amazon.com, $11.96 in paperback or $1.99 in Kindle ebook format.





 


Category: Sex Trouble

‘An Alphabet Squad of Weird Genders’

Posted on | June 2, 2016 | 39 Comments

Last week, I posted “More Feminists, More Gender Theory,” about the radical feminist Rachel Ivey’s video declaration: “Gender is a hierarchical system which maintains the subordination of females as a class to males through force.” In the comments, Fail Burton remarked:

The reason gay feminists push comics like Lumberjanes is because they don’t produce children but instead prefer to harvest those of others. As you say, eventually a civilization will run out of children to turn into an alphabet squad of weird genders and the birthrate falls below that capable of sustaining a civilization. Naturally, you will then be raided and conquered by some other civilization which has not learned to hate itself. But then, feminists aren’t the brightest lightbulbs when it comes to figuring out how all this sustains itself in real world terms. I’m having trouble seeing a cult of transvestites harvesting sugar cane using donkeys in central Egypt.

Now, it helps to know that “Lumberjanes” is a sort of cult/fringe comic-book series that is (a) badly drawn and (b) showered with critical praise, as anything vaguely “feminist” tends to be nowadays. Back when I was 13 or 14, I was into Robert Crumb and other “underground” comics, but there was no Internet social media circa 1973, so “The Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers” never got a deal with a major studio, whereas 20th-Century Fox is all over “Lumberjanes.” Anyway . . .

This comment by Fail Burton caused much amusement for the “alphabet squad of weird genders” on Feminist Tumblr:

this is literally the least coherent or logical thing i’ve ever read

HARVESTING CHILDREN I CAN’T STOP LAUGHING

I understand all these words separately but not together

I’m so confused, is this like… insulting even? It’s too incoherent to even offend me

The claim that the comment was incoherent, you see, derives from the lack of context. All these LGBT feminists saw was Fail Burton’s comment, and not the extended discussion of gender theory that prompted the comment. And what I had written was this:

Lady Thatcher famously said, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” She might well have added, the problem with feminism is that eventually you run out of other people’s daughters. . . .
How many children does the typical feminist have? Not many. Insofar as they do not eschew heterosexual intercourse altogether, feminists are more likely to have abortions than to have children.

Why this caused Fail Burton to think of “Lumberjanes,” I don’t know, but you see the relevance: Celebrations of “alternative” gender/sexuality aimed at children and teenagers certainly are intended to encourage such deviant behavior, which predictably will reduce birthrates. This is not a trivial concern, as I have explained: “The demographic collapse of industrialized societies, due to their abnormally low birth rates, is a very serious social problem.” Fail Burton is correct in saying feminists utterly disregard “how all this sustains itself in real world terms.”

Within the Cult of Social Justice, the only problems anyone cares about are racism, sexism, homophobia, global warming, etc. Their worldview is the stuff of Bernie Sanders speeches and Women’s Studies textbooks — the sort of silliness gripping the campus of Oberlin College.

And just incidentally, how do you think sugar cane is harvested in Egypt? Did you know that Egypt is one of the top 20 sugar-producing countries in the world, producing some 2 million metric tons annually?

You can learn a lot reading this blog . . .

 

Category: Sex Trouble
« go back — keep looking »