The Other McCain

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

Deranged Cyberstalker Bill Schmalfeldt Doubts My Expertise in Crazy?

Posted on | May 24, 2014 | 61 Comments

Bill Schmalfeldt insists he is not a deranged cyberstalker.

“Delusions of persecution and grandiose revenge fantasies are typical of certain personality disorders and, although I have no specialized training in psychology, I know crazy when I see it.
“One of Bill Schmalfeldt’s most noticeable traits is his love of making threats — The Dire Warning of Terrible Consequences — which seems closely related to his sadistic tendency. Schmalfeldt evidently enjoys trying to frighten people and relishes the thought of harming or humiliating others . . .”
— Robert Stacy McCain, Jan. 7

Fail, fail, fail. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Bill Schmalfeldt‘s habits become tedious after a while, and I’ve only bothered to mention him twice in the past month, once because he announced that he had named me as a defendant in a federal lawsuit — a lawsuit that nobody ever actually saw, of course, but now he has sent an e-mail announcing that he is withdrawing the suit:

Then, on May 22, I had an appointment with my neurologist. We discussed the lawsuit. He told me, quite frankly, that it was his opinion that if being harassed and hassled by you fools was enough to make my condition as bad as it is, a protracted lawsuit would kill me. He asked me if getting a measure of revenge against the people who tormented me this last 18 months was worth my life.
You know what? You’re not worth the time I took to write this comment.
When I got home from the appointment (Dr. Stephen Grill, Elkridge, MD), I wrote a letter to the Clerk of Courts telling them to forget about filing the suit. My wife mailed it minutes later. $0.49 postage. $3.30 certified fee. $2.70 return receipt requested. And a shitload of paper wasted.
So. I am not going to sue anybody. You don’t deserve a moment’s more of my time and effort.

En route to that anticlimax, however, Bill Schmalfeldt nevertheless had to exhibit his symptomatic Last Word Syndrome:

Hoge professes Christianity. He is the sort of person Christ warned about, a blind guide, a liar, a hypocrite. He should be despised instead of lauded. But nobody is accusing his followers of being particularly bright.
And on the subject of R. Stacy McCain. Does he have a degree in psychology? Psychiatry? Have I been adjudged to be “deranged” by competent authority? No? Then who the f*ck is R. Stacy McCain to call ANYBODY ELSE “deranged”? Cyberstalking? Have I been convicted of the crime of cyberstalking? No. One judge who admitted he had no idea what Twitter does decided that blocking me on Twitter was the same thing as Hoge having to change his telephone number. One judge, who completely ignored the settled law and the opinion of the state Attorney General, who he called “just another lawyer.”

For some reason, Bill Schmalfeldt resents being called a “deranged cyberstalker,” which is merely a description, rather than a psychiatric diagnosis or a criminal accusation. Regular readers know how, over Thanksgiving weekend 2012, Schmalfeldt sent me more than 200 hostile Twitter messages in the span of 48 hours, including a threat to contact my wife at her workplace.

Was it inaccurate or unfair to describe such behavior as “cyberstalking”? And was this behavior rational, or was it deranged?

Schmalfeldt’s behavior was self-evidently intended to cause me harm, and was also self-evidently motivated by Schmalfeldt’s own irrational impulses — a bizarre and inexplicable obsession. Everyone who witnessed Schmalfeldt’s conduct toward me that weekend in November 2012 was horrified, and agreed that Schmalfeldt must be in the grip of some weird psychiatric disorder.

This general impression of Schmalfeldt as a madman had actually existed for many months before I ever heard of him, due to such of his insane misadventures as the “butt stuff” rant that got him banned from Daily Kos and his hateful “Dead Breitbart” stunt. Yet what finally cemented Schmalfeldt’s bad reputation was his cruel and obscene harassment of Lee Stranahan’s family. Even now, more than a year after Stranahan sought a court order to put an end to Schmalfeldt’s harassment, Schmalfeldt attempts to justify his actions:

People think I harassed Stranahan. F*ck Stranahan. Every problem the man ever had, he brought on himself.

Schmalfeldt then repeats all the wretched evil he perpetrated against Stranahan’s family, without ever bothering to explain why.

This is the problem that Schmalfeldt cannot escape: He has never been able to offer any logical explanation for why he spent months attempting to destroy Lee Stranahan’s family, and we must therefore conclude that Bill Schmalfeldt is a sadistic monster prone to obsessive fixations on scapegoated enemies, dehumanized targets onto whom he pours out the poisonous hatred that fills his perverse mind.

“Bill Schmalfeldt doesn’t have principles. Bill Schmalfeldt doesn’t have values. Bill Schmalfeldt doesn’t have beliefs. Bill Schmalfeldt has enemies, and then nothing, a black and dank and empty void of sullenness.”
— Ken White, Aug. 6, 2013

So, no, I don’t have any credentials or certification in psychology.

But I damned sure know crazy when I see it.




 

 


Category: Bill Schmalfeldt

FMJRA 2.0: Satisfaction

Posted on | May 24, 2014 | 9 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho


Rule 5 Sunday: Armed Forces Day Edition

Hillary Lied, Americans Died

‘Superior Male Mathematical Ability’

Feminism: Love as Oppression and Heterosexuality as Subordination

‘Forget It, Jake …’

Deranged Cyberstalker Bill Schmalfeldt Explores New Frontiers of Failure

FMJRA 2.0: I Can See For Miles

The Progressive Spirit Is Breaking

Let the Politics Commence

Democrat Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Recycles ‘War on Women’ Theme

University Shuts Down Women’s Center After ‘How to Be a Lesbian’ Controversy

If The @GOP Nominates Jeb, I Hope @SarahPalinUSA Runs

Democrats Trail by 7 Points

The @AmandaMarcotte Agenda

LIVE AT FIVE: 05.20.14

Fremdschämen For Towson U.

Dinesh D’Souza Pleads Guilty

The Libyan Disaster

Not Saying It Was Aliens…

The Tea Party is Over: @Allahpundit and Mitch McConnell Declare Victory

Campus Rape Reports Increase?

A Busy Day at Acme Law

Nerd Jokes in Georgia

Like Fish Don’t Notice Water

#RapeCulture Eggs and Omelettes

In The Mailbox: 05.21.14

Obama the Angry

So What If The #VA Scandal Is Just #ObamaCare Meets #Benghazi?

Girl, 14, Met 27-Year-Old Man Online, Hid Him in Her Closet for Five Days

Dumb Songs of Classic Rock

LIVE AT FIVE: 05.22.14

You Had Me at ‘Mariel Hemingway’

Feminists Outraged After Young Actress Shailene Woodley Says, ‘I Like Men’

Adm. McRaven: Mandatory Palate Cleanser

More Arrests in Mississippi Scandal

Obama: Dream and Reality

‘Trigger Warning’: How Feminism Promotes Harmful Stereotypes

In The Mailbox, 05.23.14

CNN: The Homophobia Network?

‘Population Bomb’ Author Predicts Cheerful Future of Cannibalism

Top linkers:

  1. Batshit Crazy News (35)
  2. Regular Right Guy (20)
  3. A View From The Beach (7)

Thanks to everyone for their linkagery, and especially to those dedicated individuals who helped make Rule 5 Sunday the most-linked post for two weeks running!


Category: FMJRA Award

Hollywood Director’s Son Kills Six in Shooting Rampage Against ‘Sluts’

Posted on | May 24, 2014 | 65 Comments

Drive-by in a BMW:

Santa Barbara County Sheriff Bill Brown revealed new details about Friday night’s drive by shootings in Isla Vista during a Saturday morning news conference, including a new death toll and a possible link to an ominous YouTube video.
Brown said the initial call came in to dispatch at 9:27 p.m. Friday night as multiple gunshots.
Deputies in the area found several victims and received information about the suspect and vehicle involved.
Witnesses described seeing a black BMW speeding through the streets, spraying bullets at people and various targets near El Embarcadero and Segovia Roads and the top of the loop along Del Playa.
Brown said at 9:33 p.m. the suspect exchanged gunfire with deputies then veered down Del Playa and crashed into a parked car. Deputies found the suspect inside the BMW dead from a gunshot wound to the head. Brown said he did not know if the suspect was shot and killed by deputies or if the wound was self-inflicted.

A weirdo killer with a weirdo motive:

Investigators believe a 22-year-old named Elliot Rodger driving a black BMW acted alone in the shootings around 9:30pm Friday night in Isla Vista near the University of California, Santa Barbara. . . .
Rodger is thought to be the son of Peter Rodger, assistant director of the Hollywood film franchise The Hunger Games.
Authorities are examining a video posted on social media by the shooter in which he rants about women who supposedly rejected his advances.
The video is called Elliot Rodger’s Retribution.
Rodger, a Santa Barbara City College Student and Isla Vista resident, according to his social media accounts unleashed a tirade about his ‘loneliness, rejection, and unfulfilled desires,’ and blames women for preferring ‘obnoxious brutes’ to him, ‘the supreme gentlemen.’ . . .
‘I’m 22 years old and I’m still a virgin. I’ve never even kissed a girl,’ he says in the video.
‘College is the time when everyone experiences those things such as sex and fun and pleasure. But in those years I’ve had to rot in loneliness. It’s not fair. You girls have never been attracted to me. I don’t know why you girls aren’t attracted to me. But I will punish you all for it,’ he says in the video, which runs to almost seven minutes.
He repeatedly promises to ‘punish’ women and lays out his plan for ‘retribution.’
‘I’m going to enter the hottest sorority house of UCSB and I will slaughter every single spoilt, stuck-up, blonde [slut] that I see inside there. All those girls that I’ve desired so much, they would’ve all rejected me and looked down on me as an inferior man if I ever made a sexual advance towards them,’ he says.
‘I’ll take great pleasure in slaughtering all of you. You will finally see that I am, in truth, the superior one. The true alpha male,’ he laughs like a maniacal movie villain. ‘Yes… After I have annihilated every single girl in the sorority house I will take to the streets of Isla Vista and slay every single person I see there. All those popular kids who live such lives of hedonistic pleasure…’

This attitude is a typical “Nice Guy” rationalization by which losers project onto others the responsibility for their own failures, so that successful men are scapegoated as “obnoxious brutes” and women who reject the Nice Guy are condemned as “sluts.”

At the root of the “Nice Guy” rationalization is a narcissistic blindness to his own shortcomings and a sense of entitlement to female companionship. He cannot admit (especially to himself) that his own resentments are actually motivated by envy, nor that his rage against women is a type of “sour grapes” rationalization: Frustrated desire expressed as rejection of those who reject him.

There isn’t really a political aspect to this kind of maladjustment although, as with every mass shooting, the Left is trying to play “pin the tail on the right wing,” and conservatives are pushing back:

Spoiled Hollywood Leftist Elliot Rodger
Mass Murder in Isla Vista at #UCSB
— American Power

UCSB SHOOTER, ELLIOT RODGERS:
PSYCHO SPEWING POSTMODERNIST CRAP
— Astute Blogger

More reaction at Memeorandum.

UPDATE: Portrait of a Killer: Elliot Rodger Claimed in Video to Be ‘Supreme Gentleman’

 

Category: Crime

High School ‘Death Cult’: Parents Claim Daughters Were Targeted by ‘Coven’

Posted on | May 24, 2014 | 51 Comments

The federal lawsuit Doe v. Mastoloni, et al., demands a jury trial, which would be the biggest thing since the Salem Witch Trials:

A couple have claimed that their three daughters were indoctrinated into a religious cult by their school teachers leaving them with suicidal thoughts and alienated from their loving family, according to a new lawsuit.
The couple, from Avon, Connecticut, filed the civil lawsuit in federal court on Monday against the Avon school district, three teachers and a guidance counselor at Avon High School and Wellesley College in Massachusetts.
The parents alleged that their older daughters, now aged 22 and 19, became ‘reclusive, secretive and distant’ after they began taking Spanish classes at Avon High.
The named defendants are Connecticut residents Tanya Mastoloni (also known as Tanya Romero), Rebecca Kessler; Laura Sullivan and California resident Christopher Esposito. . . .
Their girls began having ‘fantasies of suicidal ideation and martyrdom’, according to the suit.
They also began to speak in a strange language and gathered at Wellesley College in Massachusetts to perform religious ‘whirling dervish’ dances throughout the night.
The couple claimed that the teachers and counselor indoctrinated their daughters into a cult that promotes martyrdom and celebrates death. . . .
The indoctrination by the teachers reportedly continued when two of the girls went to Wellesley College.
According to the 64-page lawsuit, the youngest daughter was also targeted to be indoctrinated into the same belief system, but she broke free. She has jointly filed the lawsuit with her parents.
The two elder sisters have had no contact with their family since last July along with their extended family and friends at the urging of the group of teachers, it is claimed.

You can read the whole thing. It makes perfect sense that the cult leaders would encourage their young acolytes to attend Wellesley College — Hillary Clinton’s alma mater, IYKWIMAITYD.

UPDATE: The lawsuit refers to the parents as Jane and John Doe, and refers to their three daughters as E.D. (age 22), L.D. (19), and J.D. (16), and describes their “indoctrination”:

All three girls experienced sudden and severe personality changes. They became flat and distant, reclusive, secretive, and non-communicative. They lost their humor and their empathy. They began speaking in a bizarre new language. They became unable to think critically or independently. They became dependent on the school teachers and guidance counselor who had indoctrinated them, especially Defendant Tanya Mastoloni.
On information and belief, the two older Doe sisters were indoctrinated into a religious cult that promotes martyrdom, and celebrates death. This has caused the elder Doe sisters to experience fantasies of suicidal ideation and martyrdom.
The youngest Doe daughter, J.D., was targeted to be indoctrinated into the same belief system, but she eventually broke free. …
Defendant Mastoloni would often act as a friend to the students rather than a teacher. She spent much class time socializing with the students rather than teaching. During Spanish class, Defendant Mastoloni often told inappropriate stories to the students. For instance, Defendant Mastoloni freely discussed her abusive upbringing, including stories of kidnapping and forcible rape by her stepfather. . . .
Defendant Mastoloni would often pry into students’ personal lives, and try to [elicit] personal information about them. Defendant Mastoloni would constantly ask the students in class to tell her who is dating who. Defendant Mastoloni would ask the students to describe their dreams, so that she could interpret them for the students. Defendant Mastoloni would frequently talk to the students about her own boyfriends and other personal business . . .
Defendants Mastoloni, Kessler, Esposito, and Sullivan behaved as if they were in a clique. When they liked a student, they would make that student feel like he or she was part of their group. When they did not like a student, they would ostracize and alienate that student. . . .
Defendant Mastoloni freely gave students access to her home address and private cell phone number. Students would go to her house and talk to her frequently and consider her a friend. . . . .
Defendant Mastoloni was not just teaching her students Spanish. She taught her students religion and pseudoscience. Specifically, she taught her students to believe in superstition, magic, and a non-scientific, anti-intellectual worldview. She would discuss spirituality, numerology, astrology, dreams, mysticism, looking for signs, angels, symbols, synchronicity, negativity, seeking the truth, and death.

The lawsuit never gives a specific name to the “religion” into which the parents claim their daughters were indoctrinated, but the description seems generally to be a sort of New Age mysticism.

UPDATE II: More details from the lawsuit:

During senior year, after E.D. turned 18, Defendant Mastoloni’s attention to E.D. became even more intense. Defendant Mastoloni said to E.D., “Now that you are mi hermana, you are an adult and we can be friends outside of school.” …
Defendant Esposito was also being inappropriately intrusive. For instance, he once asked E.D. about the sexual orientation of her siblings. …
E.D. underwent another phase of her personality change in August of 2012, when she was entering her junior year in college. . . . Defendant Mastoloni would constantly be looking to go out with E.D. socially. Defendant Mastoloni brought E.D. into her home. E.D. told Jane and John [her parents] that she wanted to attend Defendant Mastoloni’s graduation from some type of school where Defendant Mastoloni was receiving a degree in spirituality. Defendant Mastoloni claimed it was a masters in conscious evolution. Yet, when Jane and John asked E.D. for the name of the school, E.D. claimed she did not know. Then, E.D. suddenly declared that her major would be philosophy, instead of political science or international relations like she originally decided. E.D. also announced that she wanted to seek a masters in Divinity following graduation from Wellesley. E.D. was unable to offer any real explanation for her sudden interest in religion. …
E.D. was constantly talking about seeking the truth and pursuing a greater purpose. All of E.D.’s conversations involved Defendant Mastoloni. . . .
When confronted by her family about her disturbing behavior, she gave a pat answer, “You don’t understand the person I have become.”

UPDATE III: After the two older girls had allegedly been “indoctrinated” and were both attending Wellesley, Mastoloni then allegedly targeted the youngest sister, with the help of the older girls:

In spring semester 2013, the Doe’s youngest child, J.D., was 15 and had Defendant Mastoloni as a Spanish teacher. . . . Once again, Defendant Mastoloni consistently proselytized her religious views in the classroom, teaching J.D. and the other students to believe in superstition and magic. Defendant Mastoloni constantly discussed spirituality, numerology, astrology, dreams, mysticism, looking for signs, angels, symbols, synchronicity, negativity, seeking the truth, and death. Although Defendant Mastoloni would preach her religious ideas to the whole class, she took a special interest in J.D. Defendant Mastoloni had already converted the two older Doe sisters, and now she was looking to add the third sister to her coven. . . .
At Defendant Mastoloni’s urging, E.D. and L.D. asked J.D. to come to Wellesley during her April break, luring her there by telling her that they would take her to a music concert. J.D. was looking forward to seeing if she could find out some information that would reveal the cause of B.D.’s and L.D.’s bizarre behavior. …
When J.D. retuned after that week, she was cold, lacked affect, and was behaving just like E.D. and L.D. …
When E.D. and L.D. came home from school at the end of May 2013, all three girls were isolating and fearful. They spent countless hours on their laptops, or reading books about mysticism, astrology, dreams, and Carl Jung. . . .
Finally, after a confrontation with her mother, the youngest sister broke down and started explaining:
J.D. began to reveal the details of what had occurred. Jane and John learned that J.D. did not attend any concert while she was visiting her sisters at Wellesley. For the entire week she was there, J.D. was under the total and constant control of her sister, E.D., who was acting at the direction of Defendant Mastoloni. . . . E.D. barraged J.D. with thoughts that turned J.D. against her parents . . .
Most importantly, however, J.D. revealed how Defendant Mastoloni had orchestrated the entire ordeal. . . .
After J.D. returned from Wellesley, Defendants Mastoloni, Kessler, Esposito, and Sullivan used E.D. and L.D. to relentlessly maintain and intensify their control over J.D. E.D. began making bizarre comments to J.D., in an effort to reorganize J.D.’s thinking. For instance, E.D. discussed with J.D. how education was not that important. E.D. told J.D. that she did not want to have children, but that she wanted to give birth to feel the pain. E.D. also told J.D. that she did not want to get married, but if she lived with someone they would have separate bedrooms with one room being strictly for sex. . . .
It was not until J.D. broke free that Jane and John understood that their three daughters had been subjected to religious indoctrination at Avon High School . . .

Here is the full text of the lawsuit:

Mastoloni Et Al Complaint by ABoyd8

 

Category: Education, Religion

The Darwinian Dead End: Feminists Subtract Themselves From the Future

Posted on | May 23, 2014 | 79 Comments

“To live for the moment is the prevailing passion — to live for yourself, not for your predecessors or posterity. We are fast losing the sense of historical continuity, the sense of belonging to a succession of generations originating in the past and stretching into the future. . . .
“Narcissism emerges as the typical form of character structure in a society that has lost interest in the future.”
— Christopher Lasch, The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations (1979)

Earlier today, I mentioned Amanda Marcotte’s revulsion toward motherhood — “this homicidal impulse, this horrifying hatred of the mere thought of having babies” — as symptomatic of the mental illness that inspires much of feminism. Meanwhile, Melissa Langsam Braunstein calls our attention to still more symptoms:

Many adults can’t stand kids. The tragic thing is that some of them are already parents.
In honor of Mother’s Day, feminist website Jezebel scoured anonymous social media site Whisper for posts from parents who regret procreating. One parent shares, “I love my kids so much . . . but I regret having them every single day.” Some Whisper mothers miss their pre-kid social lives and others bemoan their post-birth bodies. There is also this incredibly jarring admission: “I hate my son. I didn’t want a boy. I wanted a girl.”
I can’t imagine ever saying anything like that. I’m thrilled I’m having a second girl, but having experienced a miscarriage last year, I’m over the moon to simply be carrying a healthy baby. . . .

Read the whole thing. Of course, no sane person can imagine saying such things about their children, but these are feminists, eh?

The swirling vortex of modern madness that makes some people envision a future of cannibalism manifests itself in other ways. Or maybe you didn’t hear the news about the Miley Cyrus tour.

“Every time you get in your car, you’re going to hear my fucking song on the fucking radio, you piece of shit. That’s right. And then I’m gonna take all my clothes off, I’m gonna sit on a big, giant dick . . . and then I’m gonna hold the record for the most-watched music video on Vevo . . . So then — you know, you can tell a lot about a person — I think you can tell how big their dick is by how much confidence they have usually, and if I was a dude I’d probably have a really big dick, ’cause I feel really good about myself now. So I’m gonna tell those motherfuckers that broke my heart — particularly one — to suck my fat dick and to enjoy hearing this song for the rest of your life.”
— Miley Cyrus, May 10

This obscene tirade — accompanied by Miley’s use of the, uh, interesting stage prop — was widely interpreted as a denunciation of her ex-fiancé, Liam Hemsworth. But let’s face it: Miley has been having a public nervous breakdown for the past year or so, and this was just her latest psychotic episode. Although she’s getting paid quite well to indulge her exhibitionistic perversion, one must wonder if her acts of self-degradation are somehow a cry for help.

Psychologically healthy people don’t do such things, and the unraveling of Miley Cyrus’s broken mind — she apparently no longer has any sense of personal dignity — is painful to watch. But this is just popular entertainment “in a society that has lost interest in the future.”

Sex is naturally about the future.

Procreation is the biological purpose of sex, after all, and as the Contraceptive Culture encourages us to have unnatural sex — to thwart the natural purpose of sex — it also disconnects sex from love, marriage and parenthood, so that sex becomes a meaningless recreation of no more ultimate consequence than a video game.

Like the pornographic career of “Belle Knox,” the weirdly sexualized performances of Miley Cyrus in some sense express the inherent nihilism of what sex becomes when it is treated like a commercial commodity, a leisure amusement or — as with Miley’s “suck my fat dick” gesture — a competitive sport with winners and losers.

Feminism encourages and celebrates this meaningless kind of sex, telling women that motherhood is oppressive and that abortion is therefore a “right” essential to women’s “liberation.” At the pro-abortion feminist Web site RH Reality Check, Chanel Dubofsky commemorated Mother’s Day with a rant about the “childfree” lifestyle:

Mother’s Day is a great time to remind ourselves that language matters. We already know this; the difference between a “baby” and a “fetus,” between “reproductive rights” and “reproductive justice,” among other terms, are vital to pro-choice politics and the movement. Corporate media outlets misfire with regard to language all the time, and this has created a deep sense of confusion between the terms “childless” and “childfree.”
Recently, in a piece for The Telegraph, writer Sarah Rainey featured actress Helen Mirren discussing her decision to not have children, and the implications of that decision for Mirren and for other women like her in a society obsessed with having children.
“Motherhood holds no interest for me,” said Mirren.
She is referred to in Rainey’s piece as “childless.”
Here’s the problem: While “childless” means the condition of being without children, it implies that everyone who does not have children would like to have them. However, being “childfree,” like Mirren — and like me — means that one does not want to have children at all. . . .
As a woman who’s childfree, I’m not experiencing reproductive challenges. I’m not waiting for the right partner, or enough money, or the perfect geographic location. I don’t feel like something is missing from my life because I don’t have children. I don’t want to have kids. . . .
The experience of not wanting children in a world where women are defined by their reproductive desire and potential — where women are expected to structure their lives around babies — is very different than being a woman who would like a baby or would like to be a parent some day. . . . A cisgender, straight woman who doesn’t want a baby is transgressive, subversive, pathological, a perpetual mystery to be solved.

Certainly, we should not encourage feminist lunatics to procreate. If Chanel Dubofsky wants to become a Darwinian dead end — to subtract herself from the future — far be it from me to attempt to dissuade her from embracing her own extinction. She thinks she’s being “transgressive” and “subversive”? Whatever. Her delusions of significance are of no consequence, but it’s important to recognize that this is just another symptom of feminism as a mental disorder.

UPDATE: Welcome, Instapundit readers!

 

Category: Abortion, Contraceptive Culture, Feminism

‘Population Bomb’ Author Predicts Cheerful Future of Cannibalism

Posted on | May 23, 2014 | 52 Comments

Long ago utterly discredited by the falsehood of his “overpopulation” prophecies, Paul Ehrlich is still taken seriously by liberals. He went on HuffPo Live this week to warn that the depletion of natural resources means soon we’ll be forced to “eat the bodies of your dead,” et cetera:

In addition to being full of wild predictions, Ehrlich was prepared to lay extensive blame on Republicans and the media. He accused “every state legislature” of waging a “war on women” and a “war on the environment.” In addition, he blamed former President Ronald Reagan of “stealing from the poor” — all the pro-forma stuff you have to say to make sure of being invited back on HuffPo Live.
Ehrlich viciously attacked pro-life Americans, somehow accusing them of “trying to kill women by making abortion illegal.” Instead, he called for “backup abortions” for any woman who’s birth control failed, in an attempt to control “breeding,” as he put it.

(Via Memeorandum.)

UPDATE: Donald Douglas at American Power observes that, even while the Left’s “scientific” experts are exposed as fools, the fanatic Amanda Marcotte accuses the Right of waging a war on science.

 

Category: Abortion, Environmentalism, Science

CNN: The Homophobia Network?

Posted on | May 23, 2014 | 43 Comments

Layers and layers of irony here:

A former CNN employee claims he was fired because he’s gay and wore bright colors and mariachi outfits to work that were deemed “too flamboyant,” according to a $60 million discrimination lawsuit.
William Kane, who started working at CNN in 2002, claims nobody at the news network ever informed him of a dress code or complained about the hot pink designer shirt he wore in his employee ID photo. Nor did he get any guff for the bright red track jacket, neon green soccer jersey or yellow track suit, with matching shoes and hat, that he wore at other times.
“It really saddens me,” the 33-year-old Kane said of losing his job as a microphone tech.

(Via Memeorandum.) In their defense, we can expect CNN to assert that they have never discriminated against sissies, fairies, queens, limp-wristed swishes or mincing nellies. Exhibit A, Anderson Cooper.

Case dismissed!

 

Category: CNN, Gays

‘Trigger Warning’: How Feminism Promotes Harmful Stereotypes

Posted on | May 23, 2014 | 63 Comments

Is there any stereotype of women more harmful than the idea that women are emotionally delicate creatures incapable of handling stress, prone to hysterical crying at the slightest provocation? And doesn’t the contemporary feminist trope of putting “trigger warnings” on potentially disturbing material tend to justify that stereotype?

But we are just too stupid to understand these things, which is why feminists like Soraya Chemaly must explain them to us:

In an article title “Warning: The Literary Canon Could Make Students Squirm,” the New York Times yesterday described ongoing debates on college and university campuses about whether or not trigger warnings should be used in advance of discussions that include, among other things, violent, racist and misogynistic content. This argument is a repeat of a long-standing one about the uses and efficacy of warnings regarding possibly disturbing and re-traumatizing content. Conversations about trigger warnings, however, seem more and more like superficial proxies for ones about deeper problems on campuses regarding diversity, equity, the corporatization of education, and, the dreaded word, privilege.
Triggers, images, sounds, smells and, yes, texts, that provoke specific emotional and physical responses in people, are not about “squirming.” They are complex, unpredictable and highly individual reactions to material that evokes pain and fear. The idea of trigger warnings started in feminist spaces because experiences with, for example, sexual and domestic violence, are so common that it made sense, out of compassion, to warn participants before revealing graphic descriptions of incest, rape, sexual assault, domestic violence, self-harm and suicide.

Let us ask: Is it the case that “experiences with, for example, sexual and domestic violence are so common” universally among women or, rather, is this particularly true “in feminist spaces”? Because “the dreaded word, privilege” may reference, among other things, known correlations of socio-economic factors, e.g., the higher incomes of households headed by married couples, so that the offspring of traditional families are “privileged” in comparison to the children of unmarried or divorced parents. And it can be further demonstrated from social research that women and girls in non-traditional households are at greater risk of “sexual and domestic violence,” and to have “experiences with . . . incest, rape, sexual assault, domestic violence, self-harm and suicide.”

What we may surmise — trigger warning for logic — is that “feminist spaces” are disproportionately populated with women who have suffered such traumatic experiences and who, rather than dealing with their psychological problems through therapy, have instead decided that “the personal is political,” so that their feminist politics are actually an attempt to rationalize their personal problems.

It is not at all uncommon for women who identify themselves as feminists to admit that they suffer from mental illness, without seeming to recognize the significance of these admissions.

Women’s Studies Professor Lisa Johnson wrote an entire book about her borderline personality disorder, an affliction the National Institutes for Mental Health (NIMH) describes as “a serious mental illness marked by unstable moods, behavior, and relationships.” And she is just one of many examples of this tendency: Over and over, when you read the autobiographical writings of feminists, you encounter admissions of psychiatric problems — clinical depression, bipolar disorder, substance abuse, et cetera — so frequently that you wonder if the entire feminist movement is on Prozac.

Crazy is an acceptable synonym for feminist, and “trigger warnings” are evidence that the lunatics are running the asylum.

 

Oh, I’m sorry. I forgot: Trigger warning for Amanda Marcotte.

“I don’t particularly like babies. They are loud and smelly and, above all other things, demanding. No matter how much free day care you throw at women, babies are still time-sucking monsters with their constant neediness. . . .
“I don’t want a baby. . . . Nothing will make me want a baby. . . . This is why, if my birth control fails, I am totally having an abortion.”
— Amanda Marcotte, March 14

This kind of bloodthirsty fanaticism — “I hate babies! Kill all the little time-sucking monsters!” — is profoundly abnormal.

Parenthood is often difficult and, even under the most ideal circumstances, parents must deal with unpleasant tasks. (Yesterday, I babysat my infant grandson for several hours and had to change two poopy diapers.) Yet there are more than 6 billion people on the planet, a fact that suggests the vast majority of humans are capable of coping normally with the ordinary duties of parenthood.

So why does Amanda Marcotte have this homicidal impulse, this horrifying hatred of the mere thought of having babies? Even if we could dismiss Marcotte as an extreme example of feminist psychosis, why is it that the feminist movement has such a reverential attitude toward abortion as the ultimate expression of “women’s rights”?

Answers to such questions are possible, and we may speculate why a political movement of women would focus its energies so zealously on the destruction of life in the womb — i.e., despising motherhood as the natural consequence of women’s sexuality. Foregoing speculation about the psychiatric motives behind feminism’s Death Cult, however, we can say simply that women who have such a bizarre revulsion toward their own maternal capacity are emotionally disturbed.

And so . . . trigger warning: The mentally ill feminist writer must warn her mentally ill feminist readers that she is discussing topics that could cause these emotional trauma cases to go spiraling off into the vortex of craziness that swirls around them.

Trigger warning: “You are a victim, permanently damaged by whatever awful things you experienced in your wretched childhood, your unhappy adolescence and your dysfunctional adult relationships.”

Trigger warning: “Embrace victimhood as your identity, and blame all your problems on patriarchy, Christianity, capitalism and the Republican Party, which are all more or less the same thing.”

Trigger warning: “Take another Prozac and vote Democrat!”

So there they go, the Feminist Lunatic Parade, marching toward their delusional utopia of Equality, inviting other women to join them: Kill your babies, become a lesbian and you can be a feminist, too!

And they wonder why normal women won’t sign up for that trip.




 

RELATED:

 

 

Category: Abortion, Feminism
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin