The Other McCain

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

Stephen Collins Is Still Alive

Posted on | October 8, 2014 | 22 Comments

There was a rumor last night that actor Stephen Collins committed suicide. The rumor proved to be false, but you can understand why there were rumors. His estranged wife secretly recorded Collins confessing to having molested at least three young girls:

Collins — who is in the middle of a nasty, prolonged divorce with actress Faye Grant — revealed to her in 2012 he had molested and/or exposed himself to several underage girls years before. Collins and Grant went to a therapist where she peppered him with questions about the incidents . . .
Grant taped the therapy session. . . .
You hear Collins flatly confess to molesting an 11-year-old New York girl — a relative of his first wife — saying, “There was one moment of touching where her hand, I put her hand on my penis.” He also acknowledges exposing himself to the girl “a couple of times” . . . he says when she was 11, 12 and 13.
Grant asks, “When you exposed yourself . . . did you have an erection?” He responds, “No, I mean, no. Partial, maybe I think.”
Grant then inquires about other girls. Collins mentions an L.A. girl who lived in their neighborhood, but says he tried righting the wrong by apologizing to her years later.
And then they talk about yet another girl. . . . We’re told this girl was also from New York and was between 12 and 13 at the time.

TMZ notes that some of Collins’ roles look creepy in retrospect. He starred in “the fantastically awful 1996 Lifetime movie ‘The Babysitter’s Seduction,’ Collins sleeps with his teenage babysitter (played by a 19-year-old Keri Russell).” CBS News reports this:

[Entertainment Tonight] has obtained the declaration from Stephen Collins’ wife of 27 years, Faye Grant. . . .
“I believe that Stephen used his celebrity status to engender the trust of the families of the children he molested,” Grant’s declaration claims. “I further believe that there have been other victims, but he has thus far only confessed to those three girls.” . . .
“The two victims in New York were apparently molested over the course of several years, from the ages of 10-14 years old,” Grant claims in the document. “My understanding is that all three of these victims are now over the age of 26.” Grant says that she believes one of the victims filed a sexual assault complaint in New York. . . .
The documents also claims that the 67-year-old actor’s mental state, “Stephen’s therapist subsequently disclosed to me that Stephen has narcissistic personality disorder with sociopathic tendencies.”

Estranged wife? Narcissistic sociopath? Hmmm.

Will Stephen Collins sue me for quoting court documents?

 

Category: Celebrities, Crime

The Election Thing

Posted on | October 7, 2014 | 106 Comments

Let me say, to begin with, that elections matter. From 2009 (the Doug Hoffman campaign in NY-23) through 2012, nobody argued more strenuously than I did about the importance of winning elections, and nobody covered campaigns with the kind of gonzo fanaticism that I brought to the gig. In the past couple of years, however, it has been very difficult to ignore the evidence that Republicans don’t want my support, and that the GOP Establishment in general is profoundly embarrassed to be associated with conservatives in any way.

What was done during the dishonest and brutal Mississippi primary was definitive in that regard. If ever conservatives needed an argument why they should stay home on Election Day, “Re-Elect Thad Cochran” was it.

The Republican Party reminds me of a Bible verse, which is to say it is “without form and void” (Genesis 1:2).

If the Republican Party were listed on the periodic table of elements, it would be in the right column, among the inert gases.

From the foregoing discussion, you can perhaps understand that I’m just quivering in anticipation at the prospect that Republicans might — just barely, maybe — capture a majority in the Senate on Nov. 4.

John Ekdahl at AOSHQ has a state-by-state breakdown, for those of you who experience spontaneous erection just thinking about the idea of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

See, here’s my problem: It’s not just that I remember all the recent backstabbing and sellouts by Mitch McConnell and his GOP Senate cronies, but I also remember the history of Republican Senate majorities under such paragons of conservative leadership as Bob Dole and Trent Lott. I remember how GOP leaders begged and groveled in their vain attempts to retain the “party loyalty” of such stalwarts of Republican principle as Jim Jeffords and Arlen Specter. And then I think one more time about that Mississippi primary, you see, and the way all these things keep adding up in my mind . . .

Well, maybe Mitch McConnell will be Senate Majority Leader next year. Maybe that gives you a raging boner, just thinking about it.

But speaking for myself, “Meh.”

They haven’t done a damned thing to suggest they even care whether I care or not. And I’m pretty sure I don’t care. Do you? Why?

 

Category: Election

Why California’s ‘Affirmative Consent’ Law Violates Basic Constitutional Rights

Posted on | October 7, 2014 | 38 Comments

Sexual assault is a crime.

Rape is not a school disciplinary infraction, and the attempt by universities to set up a pseudo-judicial system to deal with accusations of sexual assault was always a dubious endeavor. What college administrators have done, in their effort to appease feminists, is to establish phony “courts” where people can be “convicted” of very serious crimes without the due process rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

Notice that California’s new law pertains to a specific category of crime (sexual assault) committed by a specific category of offenders (college students) in a specific place (the college campus). There was apparently no need, in the eyes of California legislators, for new laws changing the standards of proof required to convict someone of theft, robbery or drug possession. Nor does the new California law affect high school students. And a college student accused of rape retains all his constitutional rights, so long as the accusation relates to sex that takes place somewhere outside the campus setting. That is to say, if a student at Cal-Berkeley goes to a Shattuck Avenue bar, where he picks up the waitress who takes him back to her apartment, their intimacies are not regulated by the regime of “affimative consent” so long as (a) the waitress is not also a Cal-Berkeley student and (b) her apartment is not on campus.

To put it as bluntly as possible, the new California law treats college students like an inferior caste. It’s the New Jim Crow, and this law will eventually be challenged in court as a violation of students’ basic constitutional rights. Meanwhile, Jonah Goldberg observes the dishonest rhetoric of the new law’s feminist advocates:

Some defenders of the law say it doesn’t really matter because it will only have an effect when women accuse men of sexual assault. “The law has no bearing on the vast majority of sexual encounters,” feminist writer Amanda Marcotte reassures us. “It only applies when a student files a sexual assault complaint.”
Never mind that it will also likely change the standard of proof in such situations, making it much easier to charge — and administratively convict — students of rape based solely on an allegation. Don’t worry about false accusations, says Think Progress’ Tara Culp-Ressler, they amount to only “about 2% to 8% of cases.” Tell that to people who fall into the 2% to 8%.
Other defenders insist that such concerns miss the point. Ann Friedman of New York magazine rhapsodizes about the law’s positive cultural impact. It will help in “deprogramming the idea that nice girls don’t admit they like sex, let alone talk about how they like it.” She notes that the “law will force universities to talk to all students, female and male, about how enthusiastic consent is mandatory.” And that is great because “Confirming consent leads to much hotter sex.”

You can read the whole thing. The question we need to be asking, however, is how did we get here? What has happened — other than orchestrated activism by campus feminists — that has led to this point? When and why did university administrators begin to treat claims of sexual assault as something distinct from any other crime that might occur on campus? If somebody steals a student’s laptop, call the police. If somebody breaks out the window of a student’s car, call the police. However, if a student says she has been sexually assaulted by a fellow student, we can’t call the police. No, say the administrators, in such cases we must convene a university disciplinary proceeding where the accused rapist does not have the due-process rights normally accorded to criminal defendants. And when this unusual extra-judicial treatment of sexual assault cases fails to produce results that satisfy feminists, evidently, the legislature must then enact laws regulating the specifics of “consent” in campus environments.

The Bottom Line of ‘Affirmative Consent’

What’s really happening here? When you see something happening that seems so inexplicable from a common-sense perspective, you need to ask yourself what is being omitted from the discussion. This “extraordinarily intrusive” effort to “micromanage sex,” as the Los Angeles Times described the California law, must be a reaction to something that nobody wants to talk about.

The new law requires a verbal “yes” at every stage of intimacy, right? Now, let us imagine the situation in which a student says “yes” to X, then says “yes” to Y, but says “no” to Z. In the matter of X and Y, she was enthusiastically consenting. However, when her partner wanted to do Z, she said “no” — and her partner did Z anyway, so that he is now accused of sexual assault. Question: What is Z?

Must we pretend ignorance about what is going on among young people nowadays? Are adults supposed to pretend that they don’t know how a porn-saturated hyper-sexualized culture has influenced the appetites, habits and attitudes of hedonistic youth?

Do you think we’re stupid? Do you mean to insult our intelligence?

Surprise! Teen girls are having anal sex
because they’re being pressured into it

That column by feminist Meghan Murphy deserves careful scrutiny by anyone who really wants to understand how damaged and grotesque sexual culture has become in the 21st century. And we can perceive how it relates to the “affirmative consent” regime that California’s new law has established for college students.

Really, did anyone ever believe that all this noise about “consent” was a result of normal sex between college boys and girls? Were we expected to believe that horny teenage college girls who got drunk at parties and hooked up with teenage college boys were making accusations of sexual assault because of normal sex? Because she only wanted to go to third base and he “stole home”? No, I don’t think that’s it at all.

She’s drunk, he’s drunk, they go back to his place, and a “home run” is the intended outcome. However, the guy’s appetites have been influenced by his porn habits, so that normal intercourse isn’t enough for him. No, he’s seen enough sick videos to believe that the Ultimate Sex Act involves imposing a particularly traumatic degradation on a woman.

She’s drunk enough to agree to a random hook-up, you see, but she doesn’t realize that he is drunk enough to think he can act out the wildest scenes he’s been watching on Internet porn videos. And, furthermore, he has been conditioned to believe this — the Ultimate Sex Act, painful as it may be for her — is what she really want.

Here, let Meghan Murphy explain this problem in a real-life context:

My first boyfriend was [angry] that I wouldn’t have anal sex with him. Not just because he, you know, wanted to try out all the super sexy things he’d learned watching porn, but because I’d done it before — with other guys who weren’t him. No fair, amirite?
The fact that the whole, entire reason I wouldn’t have anal sex with him was because I’d tried it already with a couple of other guys and the experience ranged from completely boring and unpleasurable to extremely painful eluded him. My pleasure wasn’t the point. The point was 1) No fair, wah! (i.e. why did other men “get” something he didn’t), 2) The thought of emulating something he masturbated to in porn turned him on, 3) Possible pleasure for him — the idea that it’s “tighter” or some sh*t. (HA. Anal sex puns, you guys!)
No matter how you do the math, all points add up to barf.

You can read the whole thing, and we should be grateful to Ms. Murphy for her frank (if personally embarrassing) explanation of what’s really happening among our sexually adventurous youth. There is a “monkey see, monkey do” emulation factor involved in the way pornographic videos have invaded the erotic imagination of many young people (and not-so-young people), especially in the 20 years since Al Gore invented the Internet. Whereas 40 or 50 years ago, magazines like Playboy merely offered images of females as “sex objects” — satisfying curiosity as to what the naked female body looked like, celebrating a certain ideal of what women should look like, and encouraging the attitude that females were sexual commodities in a marketplace for male consumption — the widespread availability of porn video provides a sexual script of what men should do with these female objects.

Scripting the Erotic Imagination

The Feminist Confessional Narrative form employed by Ms. Murphy cannot be used by men, and any man is a fool to think he can try it. Nobody is interested in the male perspective on sex, and any man who thinks he can co-opt the True Confessions style used by feminists is merely providing the rope with which his executioners will hang him. However, I will waive my Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination to a limited extent, to say that I never suffered from a lack of imagination. That is to say, when beholding the female body — clothed or naked, in real life or in a media image — I never needed anyone to provide me with a script. A basic biological understanding was all I ever needed to write my own scripts. Thus, the first time anybody showed me a porn video (a VHS tape, circa 1985, when I was in my mid-20s), my reaction was, “Meh.” Nothing on that videotape really interested me because (a) my imagination was far more creative, and (b) my real-life flesh-and-blood sexual experiences were far more enjoyable than being a spectator to phony scenes performed by strangers.

Porn freaks just don’t have enough imagination; they have developed a mental habit of being sexual spectators; their erotic imaginations are warped by their porn habits; and all attempts to replicate porn scripts in real life are inherently problematic.

During the “Sex Wars” between rival feminist factions in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the issue of pornography was central to the dispute. Radical feminists contended that pornography was inherently degrading to women, and specifically contended that pornography was implicated in rape and child molestation. The opposition — so-called “pro-sex feminists” — insisted that pornography was harmless and, indeed, it was claimed that pornography is empowering to women, and that we could not condemn porn without impeding women’s liberation. In that particular dispute, conservatives actually supported the radical feminists. For a brief moment in the 1980s, Andrea Dworkin and Jerry Falwell were de facto allies, and Attorney General Ed Meese was on the same side as Catharine MacKinnon.

The radical feminists who were defeated in the “Sex Wars” have told their side of the story in various places (see, e.g., the collection of essays The Sexual Liberals and the Attack on Feminism edited by Dorchen Leidholdt and Janice Raymond), but neither the radicals nor their “pro-sex” antagonists (nor most conservative critics of feminism) have explained what happened in the 1980s and why it happened. Simply put, the majority of feminists have always viewed the traditional family — the married mom and dad with children — as their primary enemy, and are willing to fight that enemy By Any Means Necessary. When the “Sex Wars” erupted in the late 1970s, many feminists were willing to defend pornography because they understood how pornographic culture subverts the basic moral values associated with the traditional family. Feminists must view porn as “liberating” (i.e., hostile to marriage and motherhood) and if porn results in harm to women? They don’t care.

Furthermore, and this has been insufficiently appreciated, many feminist leaders during the “Sex Wars” were (as many feminist leaders still are and always have been) lesbians. This meant that there was an alliance between feminists and the gay-rights movement that ultimately trumped whatever concerns feminists might have had about the impact of pornography on women.

The compulsive promiscuity and extreme perversion typical of gay male culture could not be robustly defended if the radical feminist arguments about the degradation of pornography were taken seriously. By an accident of history (which was perhaps less accidental than it seems) the feminist “Sex Wars” overlapped the AIDS crisis, during which homosexual activists fought against public-health measures to shut down the gay bathhouses that provided the commercial venues within which the AIDS epidemic had been incubated. (See, e.g., Randy Shilts, And the Band Played On, as well as “A Radical Holocaust” in Destructive Generation by Peter Collier and David Horowitz.) You see that feminists could not logically argue for shutting down pornographic peep shows while at the same time supporting the arguments in favor of keeping open the bathhouses that facilitated anonymous gay promiscuity.

The anti-porn radicals were defeated in the “Sex Wars,” because normalizing homosexuality was ultimately more important to the feminist cause than protecting the health and safety of women.

The Real Trouble and the Phony ‘Epidemic’

Once you understand what happened in the 1980s — and not just what happened, but why it happened, and how the “Sex Wars” were rooted in the inherent contradictions of the Left’s 1960s rhetoric about sexual liberation and sexual equality — you gain a new perspective on what has happened in the past 30 years, and what is happening now.

Are we really surprised that the proliferation of online pornography has inspired a vogue of anal sex among heterosexuals? Are we really surprised that teenage girls report that they are being pressured into this painful, unsanitary and abnormal activity? And are we really surprised that, in reaction to phony claims of a “rape epidemic” on campus, that California has enacted a law that requires “affirmative consent” to each sexual act between two student partners?

Do you need me to draw you a diagram?

The connection between pornography and sex trouble on college campuses is quite real, even if the “rape epidemic” is not.

However, because people are afraid to have an honest conversation about all the factors involved — pornography, promiscuity, underage alcohol abuse, and especially feminism’s anti-male/anti-heterosexual ideology — we cannot address the problem in a common-sense way that would actually make things better. We cannot speak the truth, because feminism is committed to a war against human nature.

Truth is silenced, constitutional rights are infringed, and we are now hurrying toward the gates of Hell by the most direct route.

Oh, look: The Tenth Amendment has been voided by court decree.




 

 

 

Category: California, Crime, Education, Feminism, Sex, Sex Trouble

LIVE AT FIVE: 10.07.14

Posted on | October 7, 2014 | 5 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho


TOP NEWS
Supremes’ Surprise Non-Move Opens Door To Gay Marriage In 30 States

People waiting to enter the Supreme Court yesterday morning

Court declines to hear appeals involving five states, leaving intact appeals court decisions striking down state bans; litigation expected to continue in the fourteen states which still have bans in place

US Plans More Airport Screenings For Ebola
But no travel ban

Neves, Rousseff Advance To Runoff In Brazil
Major parties lose ground in Brazil’s Congress



POLITICS
Texas Abortion Clinics Seek Reprieve From Supreme Court

Abortion Barbie speaks during a Planned Parenthood rally on July 9

Final attempt to save thirteen abortion clinics that shut down Friday rather than comply with Texas law
Wendy Davis’ campaign coffers dwarfed by Abbott’s



Joe Biden’s Gaffe Shakes Anti-ISIS Alliance

VA Finally Fires Four Senior Executives In Response To Scandals

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Wisconsin Voter ID Law

Watch Mark Udall Stuff His Foot In His Mouth Twice In A Week

Seattle Scraps Columbus Day In Favor Of “Indigenous People”

Ted Cruz Tries To Rally Conservatives For Pat Roberts In Kansas



THE ECONOMY, STUPID
Asian Crude Up Slightly Before US Fuel Stockpile Report: WTI $90.40, Brent $92.78
Hewlett Packard To Split Up; Stock Soars
Walmart Adding Health Insurance To Its Offerings
Samsung Earnings Slump As Galaxy Smartphone Sales Struggle
Wall Street Loses Gains, Ends Down
Morgan Stanley: Buy The Whopper, Sell The Big Mac
ITC To Investigate Nvidia Patent Complaint Against Samsung
Apple Sapphire Screen Supplier Files For Bankruptcy
Facebook’s Bus Drivers Looking To Unionize
Redbox Raising Kiosk Prices, Ending Streaming
To Kidfinity And Beyond? iPad Tops All Brands Among 6-12 Year Olds



SPORTS
The Buffalo Bunts, And Bumgarner Throws It All Away

Doug Fister brings the pain to the Bay:
seven innings, 4H, 0 R, 3 W, 4 K

Nationals score three in the seventh on Bumgarner’s throwing error; Storen gives up a run in the ninth but nails down the save


Royals, O’s Sweep Into The Pennant Series

Wilson Leads Penalty-Prone Seahawks Past Redskins, 27-17

Texans’ Arian Foster: I Don’t Know An NFL Player Who Likes Thursday Night Games


NBA Extends Deals With ESPN, TNT

Michael Phelps Suspended For Six Months Without Pay By USA Swimming

LeBron James: NBA Owners Can’t Plead Poverty Any More

Domestic Violence Tops Agenda At NFL Owners Meeting

Florida Suspends QB Harris Pending Rape Investigation

More Sordid Crap About Adrian Peterson

5-Year-Old Signs One-Night Contract With Utah Jazz

Logano Wins At Kansas As Chase Favorites Struggle

Danica: Tony Stewart “Deserves Chance To Move On”

Johansen, Blue Jackets Agree On Three-Year Deal

Angels Face Unclear Future After Playoff Sweep



FAMOUS FOR BEING FAMOUS
“Game Of Thrones” Bosses Burn Through $200K Keeping A Naked Queen Under Wraps

Lena Headey as Queen Cersei Lannister

Making sure nobody saw her in her birthday suit while filming the “walk of shame” scene


Raven-Symone Tells Oprah “I Don’t Want To Be Labeled As Gay”


Teresa Giudice: I Didn’t Understand My Plea Deal

Mariah Carey Panned In Japan

“Twin Peaks” Returns As Showtime Limited Series

Stripper Claims Drake’s People Threatened Her After Sex

Justin Theroux: I Don’t Pay Any Attention To The Pressure

Alfonso Ribeiro Finally Set To Perform The Carlton Dance On DWTS

Blake Lively Is Expecting!



FOREIGNERS
Street Fighting Rages In Kobani As Islamic State Moves In
Mexican Army Disarms Iguala Police After Mass Grave Found
Jammu & Kashmir: Seven Killed In Pakistan Shelling, Firing Spreads To Line Of Control
Spanish Nurse Tests Positive For Ebola
Nork, ROK Warships Exchange Fire Just Days After High-Level Meeting
Explosion At Iranian Nuke Complex Reportedly Kills Two
White House, Netanyahu Clash Over “American Values”
Lightning Strike Kills 11 In Colombia
Cataloonies To Decide On Illegal Independence Referendum By October 15
Socialist French PM Claims “My Government Is Pro-Business”



BLOGS & STUFF
Michelle Malkin: Can We End The Crazy Diversity Visa Lottery Yet?
Twitchy: Kroger Manager Gives Moms Demand Action The Brushoff
American Power: Alison Lundergan Grimes Caught Lying About Support For Coal Industry
American Thinker: Will Ebola Be Death Knell For Democrats?
BLACKFIVE: Verdict Expected Soon In Blackwater Guards’ Murder Trial
Conservatives4Palin: Joni Ernst’s New Video, “Momentum”
Don Surber: Yes, Global Warming Skeptics, Man Caused The Drought In California
Jammie Wearing Fools: Van Jones – “Ebola Is The Best Argument You Can Make For The Kind Of Government We Believe In”
Joe For America: Black Leaders In St. Louis Endorse GOP Candidate
JustOneMinute: If You’re Having Trouble Getting Worried About ISIS
Pamela Geller: Obama Sends Special Note Of Thanks To Oklahoma Beheader’s Terror Mosque
Protein Wisdom: Netanyahu Asks “Why Is Obama Insisting On Ethnic Purity For Israel?”
Shot In The Dark: Chanting Points Memo – Democratic Fakery Labor Party
STUMP: Public Pensions Followup – San Diego Asset Managers Still In…For Now
The Gateway Pundit: Kurds Blast Obama For Sitting Back And Letting Kobane Fall To ISIS
The Jawa Report: Female Kurd Soldier Sacrifices Self To Defend Kobane
The Lonely Conservative: Immigration Facility Still Plagued By Contagious Diseases
This Ain’t Hell: Corporal Jordan Spears – First Casualty Of The War On ISIS
Weasel Zippers: Abortion Barbie Can’t Understand Why Texas Women Aren’t Supporting Her
Megan McArdle: If Chicago Bleeds, It Leads


Category: Live at Five

FMJRA 2.0: Crazee Horse

Posted on | October 6, 2014 | 5 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Rule 5 Monday

FMJRA 2.0: Fire Escape

The American Spectator Folds Like A Cheap Tent, And Other Signs Of The End Times

Brother of the World’s Youngest Blogger: “The Economy Stinks”

The Republican Direction Is The Same Tired One As The Democrats; Just Slower

On ‘Feminist Men’ and Unicorns

‘My Hypothetical Daughter’

LIVE AT FIVE: 09.29.14

‘Shut Up, Because Rape’

LIVE AT FIVE: 09.30.14

‘Could It Be Any More Obvious?’

LIVE AT FIVE: 10.01.14

21st-Century Relationships?

Midweek Open Thread

The Democrat Lifestyle?

LIVE AT FIVE: 10.02.14

“How Would Making Donald Trump Less Rich Make Anybody Else Better Off?”

LIVE AT FIVE: 10.03.14

Because This Never Happens, Right?

If You Have Sex & Make Money Off The Encounter, Are You A Whore, Even If You Don’t Report It & Allege Rape Years Later?

Top linkers this week:

  1. Regular Right Guy (12)
  2. That Mr. G Guy (11)
  3. Batshit Crazy News (8)

Thanks to everyone for all the linkagery, especially those of you who helped Rule 5 Monday rise above a sea of radical feminists and lesbians (BIRM) to take Most Linked honors this week! Deadline to submit links for next week’s FMJRA is noon on Saturday, October 11.


Shop Amazon Pets – 15% Off Select Greenies Products at Checkout

Category: FMJRA Award

Feminist Foreign Policy

Posted on | October 6, 2014 | 32 Comments

Feminists specialize in promoting misery and insanity in domestic life, but they also occasionally stray into international affairs:

Journalist and author Naomi Wolf suggested Saturday that videos of Islamic State militants beheading American and British hostages may have been staged.
The news site Vox flagged a series of Facebook posts in which Wolf questioned the authenticity of the videos, going as far as to imply that they were staged and that both the hostages and their parents were actors.

Wolf later deleted the post at the request of a New York Times reporter . . .
Wolf went on to write several other posts insisting she was not “calling into question the authenticity of the ISIS videos” while arguing independent verification was indeed necessary to authenticate the recorded beheadings. Wolf accused the news media of “badly distorting” her comments Sunday in a rather lengthy, elliptical post and further tried to silence her critics by citing the insight she gained into how political narratives are crafted while advising former President Bill Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore.

See? There is no reality. Just “political narratives.”

Out: Far Left 9/11 Truthers.
In: Far Left ISIS Truthers

You may ask, “How is it that someone as crazy as Naomi Wolf isn’t in the lunatic asylum? Is she living on SSI checks?” No, she’s living on royalties for her 2002 book The Beauty Myth, which is one of the Top 100 bestsellers in the Amazon “Women’s Studies/Feminist Theory” category. Why does it still rank so high? Because it is required reading in many Women’s Studies courses. This is how the Feminist-Industrial Complex works: If enough Women’s Studies professors assign a feminist author’s book as part of the class syllabus, she never has to work a day in her life again. As cushy rackets go, it’s almost as good as being a tenured professor.

 

Category: Feminism

In The Mailbox, 10.06.14

Posted on | October 6, 2014 | 6 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho


Alabama and the Nationals lost and I overslept. Screw the news.


Doug Powers: Fanboy Of Scaremonger Al Gore Accuses Conservative Of Scaremongering About Ebola
Twitchy: Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings Celebrates Liberian Ebola Patient – “He’s Our Citizen Now”
American Power: Thomas Duncan Has Died – First US Ebola Patient, Lied About Exposure To Disease
American Thinker: Is The CDC Playing Immigration Politics With Ebola?
Conservatives4Palin: Democrats “War On Women” Falling Flat In Colorado Senate Race
Don Surber: Every Single Thing This President Has Tried Has Failed
Jammie Wearing Fools: Of Course – Obama Travels With Illegal Aliens On Way To Speech
Joe For America: Hey Barack, When You’ve Lost Leon Panetta…
JustOneMinute: Racist AND Sexist!
Pamela Geller: Hamas-CAIR Rally Against Islamic State Draws About Ten People
Protein Wisdom: “What Isn’t Government’s Job These Days?”
Shot In The Dark: #LetOurCelebritiesGo
STUMP: Public Pensions Watch – Don’t Get Your Hopes Up, Chicago
The Gateway Pundit: ISIS Takes Abu Ghraib – Jihadis Now Within Artillery Range Of Baghdad Airport
The Jawa Report: Libs Say We Can’t Protect Ourselves Against Ebola Because, You Know, Slavery
The Lonely Conservative: Why Did The White House Have The Koch Brothers Tax Information?
This Ain’t Hell: WW2 Vet Andrew Haines Gets His Viking Funeral
Weasel Zippers: More Spreading Disease – NJ Preschooler Dies From Enterovirus, 500 Children Across The Country Infected
Megan McArdle: Ten Recipes Even You Can’t Screw Up


Also, Monday Open Thread.


Shop Amazon Fashion – Men’s Clothing

Category: Blogging, Linkagery

Simone de Beauvoir, Pervert

Posted on | October 6, 2014 | 41 Comments

One of the things they don’t teach in Women’s Studies classes is that pioneering feminist author Simone de Beauvoir was a pervert who was fired from a teaching job for seducing teenage girls:

In 1943, Simone de Beauvoir was fired for behavior leading to the corruption of a minor.
Once again, the apologists of de Beauvoir might rush to say that the 1943 moment was a singular incident . . . But nothing could be further from the truth.
De Beauvoir’s sexual interest for children is a theme spreading throughout her life. She was amongst the first philosophers who tried to unite the genre that had begun in the 1930s (and that lasted until 1980s in Western Europe) of female pedagogical pedophilia. She attempted this unification with her essay “Brigitte Bardot and the Lolita Syndrome,” published for the first time in Esquire magazine in 1959 and then republished multiple times until the mid-1970s. . . .
The 1959 essay was just the beginning. In 1977, de Beauvoir, alongside most of the Marxist French intelligentsia, signed a petition demanding nothing more and nothing less than the legalization of pedophilia and the immediate release of three individuals who were due to serve long jail sentences for sexually exploiting several boys and girls aged 11 to 14. . . .
The 1977 petition triggered an entire discussion at the societal level in France about the laws concerning age of consent, a discussion in which the abolitionist camp (of which de Beauvoir and her lover were part of) united into Front de libération des Pédophiles (FLIP — the Pedophiles Liberation Front) and the intentions of the members of FLIP were explained quite clearly by themselves in the discussion broadcasted on the radio in April 1978 by Radio France Culture. . . .
All these make de Beauvoir not just a pedophile apologist but an active supporter. However, what makes her an abuser is her activity through which she was recruiting pupils, abusing them, and then passing them to Jean-Paul Sartre, sometimes separately, sometimes in an integrated ménage à trois. The Telegraph writes in a review of Carole Seymour-Jones’s book, Simone de Beauvoir? Meet Jean-Paul Sartre, a book meant to analyze de Beauvoir’s relationship with Sartre, the following:

For long periods, the couple became a “trio”, though the arrangement rarely worked out well for the third party: at least two of de Beauvoir’s former pupils found themselves becoming first her lover, then Sartre’s, only for the couple to close ranks against them once the fun wore off. . . .
For Seymour-Jones, de Beauvoir’s affairs with her students were not lesbian but paedophiliac in origin: she was “grooming” them for Sartre, a form of “child abuse”.

For de Beauvoir (as well as for Sartre), age didn’t matter as long as the partners were younger than her and Sartre. The possibility that others might get hurt or sexually exploited wasn’t even remotely on the eminent feminist’s radar, who thought that “grooming” girls in order for Sartre to take their virginity (Sartre’s words, not ours) was in and of itself an act of sexual empowerment for those girls.

 You can read the whole thing at A Voice for Men. It was written by a Romanian writer, Lucian Valsan, who remarks:

A while ago, a group of coffee-shop feminists were trying to convince me that feminism is not as bad as I say it is and that if I just read more about feminism, I would eventually understand. . . . Of course, those feminists were unable to fathom that someone had taken their ideology seriously enough to read its literature and then rationally end up utterly rejecting it. As with any other cult, such a thing is inconceivable for the true believers of the sect.

Indeed. I know exactly what he means. Readers may be interested in Carole Seymour-Jones’ book, A Dangerous Liaison, as well as Bianca Lamblin’s memoir, A Disgraceful Affair:

It is the story of Bianca Bienenfeld, a 17-year-old student who was seduced by her philosophy professor, de Beauvoir, and then passed on to de Beauvoir’s partner/lover Sartre. The three lived in a menage ‘a trois between 1939 and 1940, when the relationship ended and the teenager was abandoned.

Probably won’t find those books in your Women’s Studies syllabus.





 

 

Category: Feminism, Sex Trouble
« go back — keep looking »