The Other McCain

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

In The Mailbox: 03.28.16

Posted on | March 28, 2016 | Comments Off on In The Mailbox: 03.28.16

— compiled by Wombat-socho


Rule 5 Monday will be up later tonight after I get back from work.


OVER THE TRANSOM
EBL: Why Am I Persecuted?
Da Tech Guy: Pam Geller – The Prophetess From New York
The Political Hat: Never Trust A Feminist’s Suggested Activities For Boys
Michelle Malkin: Mark Your Calendars – April 22 Rally For American High-Skilled Workers At Abbott Labs
Twitchy: Hillary Clinton Has Reportedly Created Work For A Lot Of People – At The FBI
Shark Tank: Trump Reveals When America Was Great


RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
American Power: Tracing The Roots Of A Modern Populism
American Thinker: The Slow Death of the Leftist Establishment
BLACKFIVE: Book Review – The Watcher On The Wall by Owen Laukkanen
Conservatives4Palin: Paul Ryan Faces Primary Challenge
Don Surber: Obama Deports Two West Virginia Orchestra Members
Jammie Wearing Fools: Sad! Clueless Trump Manhandled By #NeverTrump Wisconsin Radio Host Charlie Sykes
Joe For America: Camille Paglia – “A Vote For Hillary Rewards DNC For Shameless Manipulation & Racketeering”
JustOneMinute: A New Day Dawns
Pamela Geller: Video – German Kids Beaten Up By Muslim Migrants
Protein Wisdom: #CruzSexScandal
Shot In The Dark: Happy Easter. You’re Dead.
STUMP: Chicago Watch – Money, Money, Money…Also, There Went Their Plans
The Jawa Report: Where’s Dr. Rusty? Academic Sacrifice Edition
The Lonely Conservative: What A Shock – Half Of Republican Women Won’t Vote For Trump
The Quinton Report: Report – Abducted Priest Crucified By ISIS
This Ain’t Hell: Daniel Dusek Traded Navy Secrets For Hookers
Weasel Zippers: British Dad Blocked From Taking Son To Church Because Ex Is Muslima
Megan McArdle: Listen To The Victims Of The Free Market
Mark Steyn: Happy Easter From The Religion of Peace


Shop Amazon – Used Textbooks – Save up to 90%
Shop Amazon Basics – HDMI Cables

Category: Linkagery

Ross Douthat Seems To Think @TedCruz Is As Cynical As The Donald Himself

Posted on | March 27, 2016 | 123 Comments

by Smitty

In reply to Who Is Ted Cruz?, I’ve got to say: judge the tree by the fruit. A sample:

With Cruz, though, even the most fervent peroration always feels like a debater’s patter, an advocate’s brief — compelling enough on the merits, but more of a command performance than a window into deep conviction.

Sure. Cruz always seems to be playing verbal chess, as Ross allows two paragraphs later: “. . .Cruz never seemed to take a step on any contentious issue without gaming it out 17 moves ahead.”

But if Cruz is merely cynically phoning in his entire career, then why did he lay on a 21 hour filibuster? Restated, can the detractors get beyond accusing Cruz of being excessively measured, and perhaps show where Cruz is actually inconsistent in his conservative approach? Or is our current state of Sophist decadence such that merely exhibiting principles of any sort is evidence of “his own extremism”.

I can understand a negative reaction to Donald Trump as a used car salesman with hair suitable for a Primus video. There is known audio at the NYT of DJT sounding somehow wobbly on his signature issue, immigration. Can anyone come up with similar examples for Cruz? Are we supposed to believe that Cruz’s immigration bill amendment proves anything beyond the fact that Cruz is. . .a politician?

Limbaugh’s point that “they hate Trump, but they fear Cruz” has the ring of truth. The Donald is the one apparently capable of pretty much anything for 30 pieces of silver. While falling short of accusing Cruz of perfection, he seems the straightest shooter in politics today. And that is the motive for all the innuendo in the NYT: the apprehension that Cruz actually does mean everything he says and does, as stated.

Category: Republicans, Ted Cruz

The Absence of Empathy: Understanding the Psychology of Sociopathic Feminism

Posted on | March 26, 2016 | 45 Comments

Not every narcissist is a sociopath, but all sociopaths are narcissists. Like every other manifestation of identity politics, feminism is ultimately about narcissism, a celebration of selfishness masquerading as “social justice” in which identifying yourself as suffering from oppression serves not only as a rationalization of one’s personal failures, but also as a justification for antisocial attitudes and behaviors.

My encounter with the notorious “Speedway Bomber” Brett Kimberlin was an extraordinary educational experience in this regard. Kimberlin and his associate Neal Rauhauser both exhibited sociopathic personality traits and, as my friend Ladd Ehlinger noted, the key to understanding the sociopath’s behavior is his lack of empathy for others. Selfish, dishonest and cruel, the sociopath is unable to feel remorse for his wrongdoing because his extreme narcissism stems from an inability to imagine others as fully equal to himself. He exploits and manipulates others and, when apprehended, the sociopath lashes out at those who would hold him accountable for his wrongdoing, while imagining himself to be (and trying to persuade others to see him as) a sympathetic victim. Psychologists have labeled this deceptive method “DARVO” (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender) or, as I have called it, “Accuse the Accusers.”

DARVO tactics are quite maddening to anyone who has ever been in such an encounter, and this is a problem highly relevant to dealing with feminists, whose ideology is all about portraying themselves as victims while accusing others of various forms of wrongdoing. Disagreeing with a feminist will inevitably result in accusations that you are a “sexist,” a “rape apologist,” etc. Feminists routinely make false claims (e.g., the bogus “1-in-5” statistic) and then use smear tactics and name-calling in an effort to discredit anyone who tries to expose their lies. The shocking dishonesty of feminists and other “social justice warriors” during the #GamerGate controversy prompted Vox Day to write SJWs Always Lie, the title of which concisely summarizes the problem. Warped personalities like Brianna Wu and Sarah Nyberg, devoid of moral principle, love nothing better than to jump aboard a “progressive” bandwagon, which provides such monsters an opportunity to cloak themselves in the mantle of Crusader for the Righteous Cause.

All of that is preamble to the case study in feminist psychology I wish to bring to your attention today. Feminist Tumblr is full of angry weirdos trying to one-up each other in The Great Man-Hater Sweepstakes. Where do these kooks come from? How do they get so crazy? Let us examine one Tumblrina’s tale, “My Feminist Journey”:

I’ve personally fought against gender norms since I learned to dress myself. I have always thought that femininity was something that limited my potential, abilities, personality, and interests. I have always thought that it essentially hurts women, or hurts me, in any case. At a very young age I considered myself to be more like the boys, ‘one of the guys’ and wanted their approval and respect.
Later in life, middle school and high school, when I learned what feminism was, what mainstream feminism was, I learned that calling myself ‘one of the guys’ and putting down women that conformed to femininity was my own internalized misogyny. I was also told that not wearing dresses, skirts, and not liking anything pink or ‘girly’ was my internalized misogyny. . . .

(You see how the Internet helps disseminate feminist ideology and rhetoric, so that, by the time she finished high school, this tomboy had learned to call her aversion to femininity “internalized misogyny.”)

I actively worked on unlearning my internalized misogyny. I made more female friends, I learned to listen to them, and I learned to think critically about what my male friends said. I began learning how to prioritize women. I am not done unlearning the sexist socialization I have, but I like to think I’ve made a lot of progress. In high school I also learned to be feminine, for real. I learned to sew, I wore skirts (that I had sewn!) and eventually dresses, for really the first time since my parents dressed me. I wore makeup once in a while, but I hated it. I am currently trying to re-unlearn femininity. It’s going ok.
End of high school, beginning of college I sought out more feminist literature. Mostly through social media, I learned about reproductive rights (particularly when I started on birth control) the wage gap, I learned about rape culture. At 17 I had to ask a counselor how I could best help and support one of my best friends, a survivor of rape. I confronted the rape culture I internalized. I am still learning about all of these things, but I have come a long enough way to wish I had known then what I know now.
College- I began learning about feminist issues I never was exposed to before. I learned about the different tools of oppression that the patriarchy uses to oppress women (including but not limited to): religion, capitalism, socialization, (the act of) sex, race, gender.

This is like reading the diary of a German boy from the 1930s, describing how he joined the Hitlerjugend, marched in the torchlight parade, tuned into Der Führer‘s speech on the radio, and so forth. Any sensible adult understands that a jargon phrase like “gender norms” is just a rhetorical trick, a way of making normal life seem oppressive, so that the maladjusted misfit’s unhappiness is converted from a personal problem to a political cause. (“The personal is political.”) By convincing her to see herself as a victim of collective oppression, feminist ideology invites the misfit to turn her self-pity into a rage against the ubiquitous power of “patriarchy,” which uses so many “different tools . . . to oppress women.”

This paranoid conspiracy theory exacerbates the underlying narcissistic tendencies of the disgruntled misfit. It is an appeal to self-pity, expressing “the worldview of every worthless punk who ever lived”:

Duke: The lights are growing dim, Otto. I know a life of crime has led me to this sorry fate, and yet, I blame society. Society made me what I am.
Otto: That’s bulls–t. You’re a white suburban punk just like me.
Duke: Yeah, but it still hurts.

Ah, but these kids never watched Repo Man, and nobody ever bothered to teach them this great lesson: Don’t be a punk. Nobody likes a punk, and blaming “society” for your sorry fate is a punk’s game.

“Reproductive rights!” “Wage gap!” “Rape culture!”

Repeating slogans is no substitute for facts or logic. Whoever raped your friend, the perpetrator was not a “culture,” and accusing yourself of having previously internalized “rape culture” is just a way for you to brag about how much more enlightened you are now.

Feminism’s hegemonic control of higher education means that the Tumblrina never hears any articulate and well-informed criticism of the irrational beliefs of the feminist cult. There were probably followers of Charles Manson, Jim Jones and David Koresh who were not as completely brainwashed as the typical Tumblr feminist. Every cult requires an Enemy to fear and hate, and feminism’s enemy is that foul, loathsome and altogether contemptible creature, The Heterosexual Male.

Permit me here to play Rhetorical Tutor for any young men who may be reading this, because some of you guys really are hopelessly stupid.

NEVER ACCEPT THE PREMISE
OF YOUR ANTAGONIST’S ARGUMENT!

Carve that into your cerebral cortex, young men. One of the tricks by which liberals succeed is by smuggling into the argument some dubious premise that they don’t expect you to question. Take for example, “equality.” Exactly what do we mean by “equality”? Where in human history can we locate this “equality” of which the liberal speaks?

A couple of books worth reading — The Mirage of Social Justice by Friedrich Hayek and The Vision of the Anointed by Thomas Sowell — will do wonders for helping you see why liberal ideas about “equality” should always be viewed with skepticism. Most people, however, never think seriously about glittering generalities like “equality,” “progress,” “rights,” etc., and are therefore apt to let the liberal get away with smuggling an unexamined premise into the argument. The result is that the liberal easily forces his antagonist into a defensive “me, too” position where, having tacitly accepted the unexamined premise, the conservative cannot avoid certain logical conclusions based on this idea.

In regard to feminism, we find that men are too ready to cede the claim that “equality” between men and women is possible or desirable, without ever bothering to ask questions like, “What do you mean by equality?” Or, “Why is equality such a necessity that we must pass new laws or enact new policies in order to have more equality than currently exists?” Or, “Exactly how will the problem at hand be solved by more equality?”

There are all kinds of questions that could be asked along this line, but instead a young man will often simply accept the premise of “equality” without question, and then finds himself trying to win an unwinnable argument — and making a fool of himself in the process.

We return, then, to the same Tumblrina whose “Feminist Journey” we examined earlier. Her devotion to feminism (i.e., her sense of herself as a victim of patriarchal society) permits her to justify her sociopathic absence of empathy toward males. Now she lashes out:

seriously why people always wanna talk about how patriarchy affects men
like how do you hear something like “you throw like a girl!” and not realize that while one boy is being teased, literally the entire female sex is being told they suck at physical activity.
how can you look at that and just want to say “see! patriarchy hurts boys!!” No it doesn’t, not systemically. It tries to train them into actually being stronger than women, meaner to women. It teaches them that weak, and stupid are Girl things, and therefore all things girls do are stupid, inferior to things Boys do. How you want to look at that and say “yes, and look how that can hurt boys’ feelings!!” ???
Like no. i don’t wanna talk about boys. I don’t want to hear how their feelings got hurt when they got called a girl, as if their feelings getting hurt somehow overshadows the fact that being female is a shame, an insult, a curse. And I don’t understand why someone would want to make a boy’s feelings a priority in feminism. It’s a side effect, one that can be easily fixed if men wanted to fix it. They could start standing up for women, the women and girls in their life, they could teach their sons that women are not inferior, that the people who use ‘girl’ as an insult are in the wrong.
But for some reason it has become feminism’s job, women’s job, to take care of boys’ and men’s feelings and comfort them. Just like always. Color me shocked.

What has happened here? The Tumblrina has encountered someone trying to make a “me, too” argument that “patriarchy affects men.” Yet such a claim rests upon the idea that (a) “patriarchy” exists in the sense that feminist rhetoric implies; and (b) feminists care about men.

WAKE UP, GUYS! FEMINISTS HATE YOU!

As soon as a woman describes herself as a “feminist,” the only smart thing any man can do is to avoid her as much as possible. No feminist actually believes in equality, because the hidden premise of feminist ideology is that males are inherently inferior to women. If men and women were equal, after all, then men would not need all these “different tools of oppression that the patriarchy uses to oppress women,” would they?

The Secret Ingredient of Feminist Ideology is Daddy’s Money. One cannot help but notice that it is usually a quite privileged woman — college-educated, from an above-average socio-economic background — who seizes hold of feminist ideology as a weapon, lashing out at men who don’t treat her with the deference to which she feels entitled.

She is a punk, like Duke in Repo Man, rationalizing her unhappiness by blaming “society,” and she never would have bought into the cult mentality of feminism if she had been psychologically healthy. Self-pity and scapegoating are two sides of the same coin. People who feel sorry for themselves, worshiping at the Blessed Temple of Perpetual Victimhood, are always looking for someone to blame for their unhappiness. This is why you should avoid feminists, or anyone else with that kind of punk attitude. You don’t want to be available as their next scapegoat.

People who lack empathy are selfish, dishonest and cruel. Woe unto anyone who is so foolish as to associate with such people.

 


Category: Sex Trouble

FMJRA 2.0: The Shattering Triumph Of Kazika The Mad Jap

Posted on | March 26, 2016 | 2 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Fear and Loathing: ‘Kazika the Mad Jap’ Could Not Be Reached for Comment
The Razor
Watcher of Weasels
The DaleyGator
Stately McDaniel Manor
Viewpoints of a Sagittarian
The Right Planet
Bookworm Room
Nice Deb
Neoreactive
Daily Pundit
Dark Brightness
Instapundit
Adam Piggott
Noisy Room
Trevor Loudon’s New Zeal

Rule 5 Sunday: St. Patrick’s Day Post-Mortem
Animal Magnetism
The DaleyGator
Ninety Miles from Tyranny
A View from the Beach
Proof Positive
Batshit Crazy News

Feminist Tumblr: ‘Broken People’ and the Tragedy of the Darwinian Dead End
The Political Hat
The Pirate’s Cove
First Street Journal

Why Feminists Hate Beauty (And How Capitalism Makes Fairy Tales Come True)
Living In Anglo-America
Proof Positive
Batshit Crazy News

FMJRA 2.0: Corned Beef & Eggroll, $3.99
The Pirate’s Cove
A View from the Beach
Batshit Crazy News

TERROR ATTACK IN EUROPE: BOMB BLASTS ROCK BRUSSELS AIRPORT; UPDATE: ISIS TO BLAME; ‘LET’S STOP PRETENDING,’ OFFICIAL SAYS UPDATE: 34 DEAD, CNN REPORTS
Regular Right Guy
A View from the Beach
Batshit Crazy News

Are Women Paid Less? Try This: Supply, Demand, Some Assembly Required
Batshit Crazy News

In The Mailbox: 03.21.16
Proof Positive

Gnostic Feminism
Batshit Crazy News

In The Mailbox: 03.24.16
A View from the Beach
Proof Positive
Batshit Crazy News

Everybody Hates @PennyRed (And Really, How Can You Blame Them?)
Regular Right Guy
Living In Anglo-America
Batshit Crazy News

Feminism Is a Cult (and Feminists Who Say They Don’t Hate Men Are Lying)
Regular Right Guy
Batshit Crazy News

“Open Up Your Hate And Let It Flow Into Me”
Batshit Crazy News

Recovering Coke Addicts for ‘Equality’!
Adam Piggott
Living In Anglo-America
A View from the Beach
Batshit Crazy News

Feminism: Impossible to Parody
Batshit Crazy News

What Feminism Is and Isn’t
Batshit Crazy News

Top linkers this week:

  1. Batshit Crazy News (13)
  2. A View from the Beach (5)

Thanks to everyone for all their linkagery, especially the members of the Watchers’ Council, who voted Fear and Loathing: ‘Kazika the Mad Jap’ Could Not Be Reached for Comment into 4th place this week in their weekly review of posts on the Intertubes. Deadline to submit links for next week’s FMJRA will be noon on Saturday, April 2.


Conelrad: Sure Is The Risk Made

Category: FMJRA Award

Satan Is Pro-Abortion

Posted on | March 26, 2016 | 160 Comments

Perhaps you already suspected this — I mean, we know Satan is a Democrat — but his followers at the Satanic Temple of Detroit made it clear that the Prince of Darkness supports Planned Parenthood:

It was a showdown that can only be described as biblical: The Satanic Temple of Detroit versus the Pro-Life Action League outside of a Planned Parenthood clinic on Good Friday.
Led by Detroit chapter director Jex Blackmore, who made headlines last December for blogging about her experience with medical abortion, members of the Satanic Temple traveled to Planned Parenthood’s Ann Arbor, Michigan, location to counter-protest the anti-abortion group.
In images from the protest, Blackmore can be seen wearing a crown of thorns and a faux pregnancy belly while carrying a cross meant to symbolize “the burden of oppressive mandates endured by women,” as the Satanic Temple noted in a press release.

(Via Memeorandum.)  The director of the Satanic Temple blogged about her abortion last year and shared such gems of satanic wisdom as this:

Apparently, some believe that women must accept the burden of motherhood every time they have sex. It might surprise you to learn that many people have no intention of procreating when they sleep together. I for one do not believe that sex is a contract for pregnancy.
Many of the messages I’ve received illustrate the resounding assumption that I’m pregnant because I was irresponsible and had unprotected sex. This is not true, but does this really matter? Perhaps it’s easier to demonize a pregnant woman seeking abortion rather than consider that she’s someone like you.

Yeah, don’t “demonize” the Devil-worshipper, you guys.

 


Category: Abortion, Planned Parenthood, Religion

What Feminism Is and Isn’t

Posted on | March 25, 2016 | 8 Comments

Janet Bloomfield (@AndreaHardie on Twitter) is a take-no-prisoners opponent of feminism, who has collected some of her writing in a book called Feminisn’t. Like me, she has actually researched feminist theory and is tired of so-called “mainstream” feminists who want to expand the Feminist™ brand to include anything and everything. In January, the website Bustle published an article about “ways to be a feminist beyond the media-friendly stereotype” that really ticked off Janet.

My favorite part of that video (about the 5-minute mark) is where Janet explains what the feminist term “objectification” means: “The simple act of a man looking at you is oppression. . . . When men look at you, they ‘objectify’ you. When you do things to alter your appearance to encourage men to look at you, you are encouraging their oppression.” This is an apt summary of Laura Mulkey’s concept of “the male gaze,” i.e., the normal perspective of a heterosexual male admiring a women’s beauty is objectification. (“The male gaze . . . is a lens of entitlement.”) This is sexist oppression, according to feminist theory, and any man who admires women in this way is a misogynist (a woman-hater). Therefore, media representations of women which are intended to appeal to “the male gaze” are inherently wrong. Feminist theory condemns heterosexuality, per se, as “a political institution through which male dominance is organised and maintained,” to quote Professor Sheila Jeffreys.

Feminism’s anti-male/anti-heterosexual ideology is based in a profound hostility to entirely normal behaviors including both men’s admiration of female beauty, and women’s desire to attract male admiration. Not only do feminists hate beauty, but they also hate love itself. Pioneering feminist Ti-Grace Atkinson declared, “Love has to be destroyed.”

This kind of irrational hatred is not, as some would claim, limited to an extremist “fringe” of the feminist movement. This is the core belief system of feminism as articulated by leading professors of Women’s Studies programs at colleges and universities everywhere. Here is a simple fact: Feminist Frontiers is a 576-page textbook described by its publisher, McGraw-Hill, as the “most widely used anthology of feminist writings,” commonly assigned in introductory Women’s Studies courses. The three editors of this popular textbook are Professor Verta Taylor and Professor Leila Rupp (University of California-Santa Barbara) and Nancy Whittier (Smith College). All three of these eminent academic feminists are lesbians. Does anyone think this is a mere coincidence?

“Feminism is a cult whose leaders use mind-control methods to inspire in the cult members a paranoid fear of the scapegoated male enemy. . . .
“The Feminist-Industrial Complex of Women’s Studies programs have turned college campuses into indoctrination centers where radical professors recruit teenage girls to this cult, training them to become activists and organizers for the movement.”
— Robert Stacy McCain, March 15

The warning must be repeated: Feminism Is a Totalitarian Movement to Destroy Civilization as We Know It. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

 

Category: Sex Trouble

Feminism: Impossible to Parody

Posted on | March 25, 2016 | 28 Comments

The thing about covering feminism is that craziness piles up so fast that it’s hard to keep up. No sooner do I get through with one wacko — recovering cocaine addict and topless Bernie Sanders supporter Tiernan Hebron — than someone calls my attention to another nutjob. Or two, as in the case of Katherine Marino and Jennifer Suchland, who are both professors of Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies at Ohio State University. In 2003, Professor Suchland co-authored a journal article entitled “Gender Violence And Hegemonic Projects”:

We discuss why re-thinking the relationship between gender violence and hegemonic projects is important for feminist theory and activism. Moving beyond the narrow, representational approach to ‘violence against women’, we argue that the hegemonic projects of the state are constituted through gender violence. Rather than an effect of power, gender violence is thus instrumental to the very operations and existence of hegemonic projects. We insert the contributing essays within this framework, elucidating their examination of three key issues: (1) how hegemonic discourses operate through gendered violence; (2) how dominant political institutions, ideas and discourses determine what ‘counts’ as gender violence; and (3) how responses to gender violence engage metanarratives about gender, race, class and nation/state, both resisting and sustaining hegemonic projects.

Here’s a concept: “Word salad.” Look it up.

Professor Marino’s Ph.D. dissertation at Stanford was entitled “La Vanguardia Feminista: Pan-American Feminism and the Rise of International Women’s Rights, 1915-1946.”

Obviously, the taxpayers of Ohio and the parents who pay tuition to send their kids to OSU are getting their money’s worth from these two.

When they’re not busy spewing gibberish about “hegemonic discourses” or La Vanguardia Feminista, however, these OSU professors like to talk about rape, which is the subject of their Ms. magazine article, “4 (Intersectional!) Ways to Stop Campus Sexual Assault.” Professor Marino and Professor Suchland assert that ending the scourge of rape on university campuses will require “challenging binary understandings of ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’ that justify the beating up of genderqueer students and that sanction men’s sexual access to female bodies”:

Universities should broaden prevention strategies beyond the current focus on individual behavior . . . to include structural ways that the campus recognizes gender, sexual and racial diversity. For example, in order to combat the persistent harassment and violence that genderqueer and trans students face in gender-segregated bathrooms, universities should prioritize providing gender-neutral restrooms around campus. Campuses could also diversify student-housing options for LGBTQ students and provide readily accessible counseling and health services that include counselors who are not only attuned to the needs of a diverse student population, but who also reflect that diversity themselves. . . .
Curricula should also address intersectional approaches to sexual violence. . . . It is not a radical idea to require students to take courses that would deepen their grasp of sexual violence, racialized sexual violence, and violence against LGBT, non-cisgender, and differently abled people.

So, professors of Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies want to require students to take courses which sound very much like the courses taught in the department of Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies.

Here’s a concept: “Rent-seeking.” Look it up.

It might be too much to ask for actual data regarding (a) the number of “genderqueer and trans students” attending U.S. colleges and universities, and (b) how many “LGBTQ students” are victims of sexual assault as compared to, y’know, the typical male/female drunk hookup scenario. Because while I’m not sure exactly how “binary understandings of ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’ . . . sanction men’s sexual access to female bodies,” I know for a fact that more than 100 male students have sued their universities saying they were falsely accused of sexual assault and denied due process in campus disciplinary tribunals. Perhaps I am not “attuned to the needs of a diverse student population,” but it seems to me that heterosexual male students are being systematically demonized by the “hegemonic discourses” of the kind of feminism promoted by professors of Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies.

Here’s a concept: “Rape hoax.” Look it up.

(Hat-tip: @g56yu on Twitter.)

UPDATE: Speak of the Devil and she doth appear!

The young woman who was the central figure in Rolling Stone’s discredited story about a fraternity party gang rape is locked in a heated standoff with a University of Virginia dean seeking to depose her for a defamation suit against the magazine. . . .
The article made national headlines first as a shocking example of campus sexual violence and then as a journalism scandal when its central claims unraveled and Rolling Stone retracted it with an apology to readers.
Lawyers for “Jackie”, the anonymous protagonist of the article, are battling efforts by UVA associate dean of students Nicole Eramo to question her about what she told the magazine.
Ms. Eramo is suing the magazine over how it portrayed her in the story. The story, according to her defamation suit, cast her as “the chief villain” and falsely asserted that she discouraged Jackie from reporting her alleged gang rape to protect the reputation of UVA. . . .
Attorneys for Ms. Eramo, in a court filing Tuesday stated they have every right to want to question her:

The bottom line is that, as the Court has already held, Jackie is a highly relevant witness in this action. Rolling Stone published a completely false story alleging that Jackie was gang raped as part of a fraternity hazing ritual, and claiming that Dean Eramo sought to cover up and suppress Jackie’s supposed assault. The apparent source for virtually all of these falsehoods was Jackie, and therefore Jackie’s credibility — and whether Rolling Stone acted negligently or recklessly in printing what Jackie told them — are key issues in the case.

The filing says Jackie and her attorneys have “never offered any affirmative evidence or facts whatsoever to substantiate the claim that Jackie was a victim of a sexual assault,” noting that police in Charlottesville, Va. said last year that they found no evidence to support the rape claims made in the magazine.

 


Category: Sex Trouble

Recovering Coke Addicts for ‘Equality’!

Posted on | March 25, 2016 | 20 Comments

A lot of stupid things are marketed as “feminism” in the 21st century, as the Feminist™ brand has become more obviously a racket than a political movement. People get rich peddling the Feminist™ brand, and the gullible young women targeted as the market for this product seldom stop to ask the simple question, “Cui bono?” Who benefits from the feminist racket? What’s in it for them? And what’s in it for you? Idiots never recognize feminism as the crooked three-card monte hustle it really is. They keep buying, buying, buying the brand — expecting to achieve “equality” and “empowerment” — and when the product fails to improve their lives, they are told by the (well-paid) professional vendors that their continued misery is proof of the Evil Power of Patriarchy.

“What you need,” says the feminist racketeer, “is more feminism!”

 

In the 1990s, Susan Faludi became a New York Times bestselling author by telling women that a right-wing Backlash explained why the feminist movement of the 1960s and ’70s had failed to solve their problems. It would not do to admit that, like everything else that emerged from the New Left and the “hippie” counterculture, feminism was simply a bad idea. Go watch Laugh-In reruns, buy a Nehru jacket and start ending every sentence with “man,” if you’re into some kind of Woodstock nostalgia trip, but don’t try to tell me Ronald Reagan is to blame for the disappointing consequences of the Women’s Liberation movement.

Faludi’s Backlash theory helped spark a revival of feminism in the 1990s — the so-called “Third Wave” — and now here we are, 25 years later, and everywhere we look, young women are ranting about misogyny, objectification, “rape culture” and  “dismantling our capitalist imperialist white supremacist cisheteronormative patriarchy.” At what point will women wise up to the fact that feminism is a neo-gnostic cult, insofar as it is not simply a pyramid scheme, a scam by which academics and other professional vendors of feminist ideology enrich themselves?

 

Say hello to Tiernan Hebron, who graduated from San Francisco State University in 2014 with a degree in psychology and a cocaine habit:

When I was nine, I finally found out the real reason why my parents got divorced when I was two. I remember my older sister and I would ask our mom what had happened between her and our dad, and she would always respond that our father would tell us when he was ready. . . . Well that day came. . . .
She explained to us that alcoholism and addiction is a disease and it can cause a person to do things they normally wouldn’t; it can even change a person completely. . . .
I made it to my freshman year of college before I started drinking, and to the end of my sophomore year before I started doing drugs. It’s not that I forgot about my dad and what substance abuse did to him, I just figured it wouldn’t happen to me because I would never let it get that out of control. . . .
Molly, acid, pills; I loved them all. But cocaine, cocaine was my soul mate. . . . Blow just made me feel invincible and confident, like all the problems that usually come with risk-taking and impulsivity just didn’t exist for me. I was the life of the party, I got bartenders to dance on tables with me, I gave and got champagne baths, I did lines off all sorts of body parts, I got invited to every after party I wanted and then some.

“Party girl! Woo-hoo!”

We all know the type. Tiernan Hebron says she stopped doing cocaine in February 2015, although she didn’t stop drinking, and the reader may well be wondering, what does this have to do with feminism? Well . . .

 

I Took off My Top and Walked Down
Hollywood Boulevard for Gender Equality
This summer, pictures of my naked breasts were plastered all over the city of Los Angeles and on social media. . . .
I’m a rally organizer for the Free the Nipple campaign and the walk that took place on Hollywood Boulevard [in September 2015] was the culmination of my work over the last two months. . . .
I felt empowered and free as we chanted, “Free the nipple” and “Desexualize the female body.” . . .

You can read the rest of Tiernan Hebron’s account of her topless activism for “gender equality,” or you could buy an Abnormal Psychology textbook from Amazon.com and read up on narcissistic personality disorder and borderline personality disorder and try to figure out exactly what kind of crazy Tiernan Hebron is. While I don’t have a degree in psychology, I know crazy when I see it, and Tiernan Hebron is definitely crazy.

Also, some readers may be curious what Tiernan Hebron’s naked breasts look like, but trust me, it’s not worth the time to Google. If you’ve seen one recovering cokehead with pierced nipples, you’ve seen ’em all.

McCain’s Law of Toplessness
The probability of a woman going topless
is inversely correlated to the likelihood
that any man wants to see her topless.

Feminism is a way for foolish women to excuse their bad decisions by blaming patriarchy. Given her history of bad decisions, Tiernan Hebron is likely to have a long, successful career as a feminist, which makes me sad. Snorting cocaine and dancing on tables are ultimately less harmful than peddling a bankrupt ideology, and certainly a lot more fun.

Speaking of bad decisions, she’s a Bernie Sanders supporter.

Feminism attracts women too crazy to understand that turning their mental illnesses into the basis of a political movement is never going to solve their problems. Attempting to rearrange society to accommodate the deranged theories of crazy women — the social construction of the gender binary within the heterosexual matrix — will predictably result in a society that produces even more craziness. Instead of lunatics being locked up in mental wards, they’re parading around half-naked in support of a geriatric socialist’s presidential campaign: “Feel the Bern!”




 

Category: Sex Trouble
« go back — keep looking »