The Other McCain

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

David Horowitz Schools Jonah Goldberg: #NeverTrump as Moral Cowardice

Posted on | August 20, 2018 | Comments Off on David Horowitz Schools Jonah Goldberg: #NeverTrump as Moral Cowardice

After a Twitter quarrel that made headlines, David Horowitz decided to make his case against the #NeverTrump crowd at greater length:

The posture of these NeverTrumpers is transparently self-serving. It preserves their intellectual credentials as “conservatives,” and simultaneously takes them out of the line of fire from an increasingly vicious Left whose goal is to destroy Trump and his presidency, and — incidentally — conservative America. Sitting on the fence affords them new career opportunities — appearances on CNN and MSNBC and columns in the New York Times. All that’s required is that they avoid taking sides in the political war that is engulfing the country. All this reminds me of a memorable Trotsky sneer about liberals, whom he accused of being reluctant to step into the stream of political conflict because they were afraid to get their moral principles wet. . . .

You can read the whole thing. Politics is a team sport. In a two-party system, being a team player often forces us to make difficult choices. After the 2012 GOP primary campaign, when I twice went “all-in” on candidates (first Herman Cain, then Rick Santorum) trying to stop Mitt Romney as the “It’s His Turn” establishment candidate, it was understandably difficult for me to get fired up for Mitt’s fall campaign. And yet, I did. By late September, I’d convinced myself that Mitt had a good chance of beating Obama and, even though Romney was by no means my idea of a conservative, I spent the final weeks of the campaign in cheerleader mode, hoping against hope that Obama could be prevented from getting a second term. Alas, we were “Doomed Beyond All Hope of Redemption,” as I declared after Mitt’s loss.

That experience taught me something, namely that my efforts as a journalist to “make a difference” were futile. The primary voters had their own opinions which I was unable to influence, so I vowed to ignore the 2016 primaries and let the voters hash it out for themselves. This yielded Trump as the nominee and, rather miraculously, he won. Now, however, all the GOP pundit types who’d gone all-in trying to prevent Trump’s nomination are so butthurt about their lack of influence that they can’t get over it. They are like petulant children, ruining a birthday party with a tantrum because they didn’t get the gift they wanted.

Trump is not “my guy.” I have always been for free trade, and oppose protectionism on principle. As for Trump’s tone and temperament, I share many of the concerns of the #NeverTrump crowd, but there is one thing I like very much about Donald Trump: He wins.

You cannot argue with success, unless you would prefer failure. That’s the problem with Jonah Goldberg, et al. If they cannot win with their preferred candidates and tactics, they would rather not win at all. Trump’s success demonstrates a weakness in the “respectable” brand of conservatism the #NeverTrump crowd would prefer.

Horowitz is exactly right that we are in a “political war,” one inaugurated by the Left, in which there are only two sides, and where the consequences of defeat would be disastrous. We have already suffered too much damage from the Left’s war against basic American values and, as a practical matter, conservatives cannot hope to continue the fight unless we can maintain the momentum of winning that began with Trump’s shocking upset victory on Nov. 8, 2016.

My prediction? Trump will keep winning. He has so far defied all expectations. If he can do it again this fall, rescuing congressional Republicans from the dreaded “Blue Wave” in the midterm elections, the #NeverTrump crowd will become permanently irrelevant. Selah.



 

Category: Donald Trump

Rule Five Sunday: Barbi Benton

Posted on | August 20, 2018 | 3 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Did you know that one-time Playboy model Barbi Benton was a regular on Hee Haw for several seasons? I didn’t. She also had a decent career as a country singer. Here she is, out standing in her field.

Couldn’t find her overalls.

Ninety Miles From Tyranny leads off with Hot Pick Of The Late Night, The 90 Miles Mystery Box Episode #349, Morning Mistress, and Girls With Guns. Animal Magnetism offers Rule Five Vermont WTF and the return of the Saturday Gingermageddon.

EBL’s herd of Rule Five links includes Laraine Day, The Color Purple, Cochineal & Carmine, Aretha Franklin, Keith Ellison’s Girlfriend, Indigo, Aretha Franklin RIP, Saffron, Katherine Cunningham, and A New Species Of Waterbear.

A View From The Beach brings us The Outlander – Caitriona Balfe, Fish Pic Friday – Spanish Mackerel, Repugnant Russiagate, Chill Out For Another Wet T-Shirt Thursday, R is for Russiagate, SJWs Find Actress Too Cute, Insufficiently Lesbian for Batwoman Role, Blade Runner Babe Busted for Burglary, Can We Conquer Canada Now?, DeBlasio Sought to Block Jennifer Hudson from Going to School, Death Metal Grandma, Recoiling from Russiagate, That’s One Way to Change a Point of View, I Suppose, and Rejoicing in Russiagate.

Proof Positive’s Friday Night Babe is Carice van Houten, his Vintage Babe is Laraine Day, and Sex in Advertising is covered by Victoria’s Secret. At Dustbury, it’s Halle Berry and Omarosa.

Thanks to everyone for the luscious linkagery!

Visit Amazon’s Intimate Apparel Shop
Amazon Fashion – Jewelry For Women

Category: Rule 5

Guilt by Association: White House Ditches Aide for Speaking at 2016 Conference

Posted on | August 19, 2018 | 3 Comments

 

“Are you now, or have you ever been, a white nationalist?”

A speechwriter for President Donald Trump who attended a conference frequented by white nationalists has left the White House.
CNN’s KFile reached out to the White House last week about Darren Beattie, a policy aide and speechwriter, who was listed as speaking at the 2016 H.L. Mencken Club Conference.
The Mencken Club, which is named for the early 20th century journalist and satirist whose posthumously published diaries revealed racist views, is a small annual conference started in 2008 and regularly attended by well-known white nationalists such as Richard Spencer. The schedule for the 2016 conference listed panels and speeches by white nationalist Peter Brimelow and two writers, John Derbyshire and Robert Weissberg, who were both fired in 2012 from the conservative magazine National Review for espousing racist views.
Other speakers from the 2016 conference are regular contributors to the white nationalist website VDare. Jared Taylor, another leading white nationalist, can be heard at the conference in 2016 on Derbyshire’s radio show along with Brimelow.
The White House, which asked CNN to hold off on the story for several days last week declined to say when Beattie left the White House. Beattie’s email address at the White House, which worked until late Friday evening, was no longer active by Saturday.
“Mr. Beattie no longer works at the White House,” White House spokesman Hogan Gidley told CNN on Friday night. “We don’t comment on personnel matters.”
Beattie confirmed to CNN he spoke to the 2016 conference, saying his speech was not objectionable.
“In 2016 I attended the Mencken conference in question and delivered a stand-alone, academic talk titled ‘The Intelligentsia and the Right.’ I said nothing objectionable and stand by my remarks completely,” he told CNN’s KFile in an email on Saturday. “It was the honor of my life to serve in the Trump Administration. I love President Trump, who is a fearless American hero, and continue to support him one hundred percent. I have no further comment.”

In other words, there is no evidence that Beattie endorsed the opinions of anyone else who attended the Mencken Club event. Merely being at the event was considered sufficient cause to fire him. Readers will note that no such principle of second-hand guilt is ever applied to the Left. Many people in Democrat politics have associated with organizations that promote odious ideas and individuals who have committed odious deeds, but the so-called “mainstream” media goes out of its way to defend Democrats against any such claim; e.g., Barack Obama was not disqualified from office for his association with notorious terrorist leader Bill Ayers or the hate-monger Jeremiah Wright. It is only Republicans who must “vet” their schedules to ensure they can never be connected to anyone with an opinion that Andrew Kaczynski would deem offensive.

Here’s the thing: On the issue of immigration, there is no important difference between Peter Brimelow and Michelle Malkin, and on the issue of affirmative action, there is no important difference between Jared Taylor and Ben Shapiro. That is to say, those deemed “white nationalists” by the Left do not fundamentally disagree with mainstream conservatives on major policy issues involving U.S. race relations. The differences are principally a matter of rhetoric, and also one of attitude.

In general, the “white nationalists” are pessimistic about the prospects of improvement through the normal channels of partisan politics, and believe that we are likely headed toward a racial crisis in America that may be more violent than the breakup of Yugoslavia. Twenty years ago, while mainstream conservatives were preoccupied with the Clinton-Lewinsky affair, men like Brimelow, Derbyshire and Taylor were already prophesying some of the effects of racial tensions that led to Trump’s astonishing 2016 election victory. Why, after all, was Obama able to win North Carolina twice, yet Hillary lost the state in 2016? Couldn’t this have something to do with the #BlackLivesMatter riot in Charlotte, N.C., just weeks before Election Day 2016? The demographic and cultural trends of the past 20 years, which Jared Taylor and others were demonized for warning about, have arguably had the effect of making many white people less “color-blind” in their politics. And when we behold the hate-monger Sarah Jeong hired by the New York Times, we can predict that this trend is likely to intensify in the future, so that “white nationalist” views will become even more common.

The reason I put “white nationalist” in quote marks is that it has become a label used to demonize anyone the Left wants to smear. It’s used much like the way “neocon” was used as a smear-label during the post-9/11 years of the Bush administration, or the way “Religious Right” was used to smear conservatives in the 1990s. The Left always does this, although the labels used in their character-assassination campaigns change, as they shift their demonized bogeymen from time to time. If you ever decide to dig in your heels and fight the Cultural Marxists, it’s only a matter of time before they’ll come up with some excuse to smear you.

By the way, this year’s H.L. Mencken Conference is Nov. 2-3. Maybe I’ll ask my friend Paul Gottfried to clear me for media credentials.

Wait — did I just call Paul Gottfried my “friend”? Darn it, I guess I’ll never get that ambassadorship to Vanuatu now . . .



 

Category: Media Bias

Live Like a Millennial Hipster …

Posted on | August 19, 2018 | 1 Comment

 

. . . die like a Millennial hipster:

Jay Austin and Lauren Geoghegan, both 29, last year quit their office jobs in Washington, DC, to embark on the journey. Austin, who worked for the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Geoghegan, who worked in the Georgetown University admissions office, decided that they’re were wasting their lives working.
“I’ve grown tired of spending the best hours of my day in front of a glowing rectangle, of coloring the best years of my life in swaths of grey and beige,” Austin wrote on his blog before he quit. “I’ve missed too many sunsets while my back was turned. Too many thunderstorms went unwatched, too many gentle breezes unnoticed.”
The couple documented their year-long journey on Instagram and on a joint blog. As The New York Times put it, they shared “the openheartedness they wanted to embody and the acts of kindness reciprocated by strangers.”
“You read the papers and you’re led to believe that the world is a big, scary place,” Austin wrote. 
“People, the narrative goes, are not to be trusted. People are bad. People are evil.”
“I don’t buy it,” he continued. “Evil is a make-believe concept we’ve invented to deal with the complexities of fellow humans holding values and beliefs and perspectives different than our own… By and large, humans are kind. Self-interested sometimes, myopic sometimes, but kind. Generous and wonderful and kind.”
However, Austin and Geoghegan’s dream trip came to a tragic and gruesome end when they got to Tajikistan, a weak state with a known terrorist threat that shares a border with Afghanistan, where ISIS and other terrorist groups are highly active. They were riding their bikes through the country on July 29 when a car rammed them, according to CBS News. Five men got out of the car and stabbed the couple to death along with two other cyclists, one from Switzerland and the other from the Netherlands. 
Two days later, ISIS released a video showing the same men sitting in front of the group’s black flag. They looked at the camera and vowed to kill “disbelievers,” according to The New York Times.

(Hat-tip: Stephen Green at Instapundit.) Jay Austin had a master’s degree from Georgetown University, a nominally Catholic school where one might think someone would have taught him that evil is more than “a make-believe concept.” But all the money spent educating Austin and his girlfriend was wasted, as they learned nothing that might have helped them survive in a world where evil does, in fact, exist. Instead, they believed the treacly popular nonsense of dumbed-down Buddhism — all that stuff about life as the enjoyment of sunsets, thunderstorms and gentle breezes — that proliferates on the Internet.

Notice that this young couple were childless? Yeah, childlessness is part of the same cluster of values that defines the Millennial hipster lifestyle. They don’t want to have kids, they want to be kids. Childlessness enables childishness, but they rationalize this as a humanitarian do-gooder project by telling themselves that overpopulation causes global warming. They strive to avoid adult responsibilities as long as possible, so they go to grad school — a master’s degree gives you an excuse to postpone adulthood until you’re 25 or 26 — and they want life to be an endless vacation. “Let’s ride our bicycles around the world!” is the perfect Millennial hipster idea, especially when undertaken with the noble-sounding goal of proving that evil doesn’t exist and that your “fellow human beings” around the world are “wonderful and kind,” despite “holding values and beliefs and perspectives different than our own.”

Indeed, the “values and beliefs and perspectives” of Tajikistan are different. The total fertility rate (TFR, average lifetime births per woman) in Tajikistan is 2.63, ranking 72nd in the world, according to the CIA. Women in Tajikistan have more babies than women in Bolivia or Botswana, and about 40% more babies than are born to the average woman in the U.S., where the TFR of 1.87 ranks 143rd in the world.

The total fertility rate of Lauren Geoghegan, of course, was zero. There will be no grandchildren for her parents, as is the case for so many Boomers who have indulged their offspring by sending them off to prestigious universities where they absorb the Mlllennial hipster worldview. To live a regular life, according to the hipster, is to waste one’s life “in swaths of grey and beige,” when instead you could be enjoying picturesque sunsets while biking across Tajikistan. Until you discover — alas, too late! — that evil is not a “make-believe concept,” and that maybe staying home would have been a better idea.



 

Category: Terrorism

FMJRA 2.0: Talk Dirty To Me

Posted on | August 18, 2018 | 2 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Rule 5 Sunday: Guess Who’s Having A Baby?
Animal Magnetism
Ninety Miles From Tyranny
A View From The Beach
EBL
Proof Positive

The Party of Hate (Continued)
357 Magnum
EBL

Further Correspondence Regarding Deranged Ex-Professor Deborah Frisch
EBL

Crazy People Are Dangerous
EBL

How @CNN and Other #FakeNews Media Are Now Working to Silence Dissent
Small Dead Animals
The Political Hat
A View From The Beach
EBL

FMJRA 2.0: Fair Warning
The Pirate’s Cove
357 Magnum
A View From The Beach
EBL

The Lesbian NYU Professor Who Sexually Harassed Her Gay Male Student
EBL

In The Mailbox: 08.13.18
A View From The Beach
Proof Positive

Russia! Russia! Russia!
The Pirate’s Cove
EBL

Ruby Rose: Not Lesbian Enough for SJWs
357 Magnum
A View From The Beach
EBL

In The Mailbox: 08.14.18
Proof Positive
EBL

Sudanese Immigrant, 29, Identified as Perpetrator of London Terrorist Attack
EBL

CNN’s Chris Cuomo Goes Full Antifa
EBL

Crazy People Are Dangerous
EBL

The Rocky Horror Democrat Party Show
EBL

The Rocky Horror Middle School Show
EBL

In The Mailbox: 08.15.18
A View From The Beach
Proof Positive

The ‘Deep State’ Is Real: Whistleblower Punished for Pentagon Spy Complaint
A View From The Beach

Late Night With In The Mailbox: 08.16.18
A View From The Beach
Proof Positive

Denver Teenager Murders Nephew, 7, After Argument With Lesbian Girlfriend
EBL

Poll Finds Most Young Women Do Not — Repeat, DO NOT — Identify as Feminists
A View From The Beach
EBL

More News About ‘Rape Culture’ That Feminists Won’t Notice, for Some Reason
A View From The Beach
EBL

In The Mailbox: 08.17.18
A View From The Beach
Proof Positive

Top linkers for the week ending August 17:

  1.  EBL (18)
  2.  A View From The Beach (10)
  3.  Proof Positive (5)

Also, a tip of the Wombat’s fedora to long-time linkers Animal Magnetism, Ninety Miles From Tyranny, The Pirate’s Hat, and The Pirate’s Cove. Every link helps!


Featured Digital Deals
Amazon Warehouse Deals
Try Amazon Music Unlimited Free Trial

Category: FMJRA Award

‘Gender-Neutral Parenting’ and the Problem of Unintended Consequences

Posted on | August 18, 2018 | 1 Comment

Megan Fox and her ‘gender-neutral’ sons.

The actress Megan Fox and her husband, Brian Austin Green, have three sons, but things are a little weird at the Green-Fox household:

Growing up in the South, Fox was labeled a tomboy. When her peers were playing dolls, she was playing outside, climbing trees and getting dirty. Being called a tomboy informed her sense of self and is still present in her life.
“Much of my ego has been constructed around this idea that I’m not like most girls”, says the 31-year-old mother of three boys with husband Brian Austin Green, 44. “I’m somehow more masculine, tougher, less permeable or feminine.”

(Look, “tomboy” behavior is a phenomenon that existed long before feminism, and which certainly predates this kind of Gender Studies discourse about what “masculine” and “feminine” mean. Why do people believe that constantly jabbering on like this about “gender” signifies superior intellect or moral virtue? But please, continue . . .)

Fox is not into labeling herself or others, especially her children. The “Transformers” actress faced backlash in the press and on social media after her oldest son, Noah, now 5, was photographed wearing princess dresses.
“When I became pregnant with Noah, I could feel, through my mother’s intuition I suppose, that he was not subscribing to gender stereotypes, so I decided to provide an environment for him early on that would allow him to discover how he wanted to express himself,” she says. . . .

(OK, I’m going to rant about this at length later, but just note that Fox invokes “mother’s intuition” — a highly gendered concept — as authority for knowing that her son “was not subscribing to gender stereotypes” before he was even born! But please, continue . . .)

“If a boy loves princesses and a girl loves baseball, that’s not indicative of their sexuality,” Fox says. It’s indicative of their communication and creative expression. We can’t limit children by telling them how they should play.”
Trying to control how kids play sends them subtle, constant messages that their instincts are wrong. All those attempts to control, “will only lead them down a complicated and difficult path full of self-criticism and emptiness,” she says.
Her advice? If a child’s innocent play triggers a negative emotion, use the situation as an opportunity to expand their awareness and heal old wounds.
Fox encourages other parents to implement non-gender binary lifestyles for their children. Start by giving kids “the space to find the things that resonate with them,” she says. Then encourage them.

(Pardon me for interrupting again, but what is the basis for assuming that Megan Fox is an expert qualified to advise other parents? For all we know, 20 years from now, he children might be drug addicts or violent felons. But please, continue . . .)

For example, when a boy shows interest in painting or dancing, he should be given an art set or signed up for a dance class.
“Don’t insist on buying him a football for Christmas,” she says, explaining a child’s soul is pure and knows what feels right.
She emphasizes parents need to respect children as individuals and not try to control them.
“It’s not our job to shape them into the people we think they should be,” says Fox. “It’s our job to receive, with grace, the lessons they bring us. Children are mirrors that reflect back to us our shadow selves, our shame and our insecurities.”

(What deranged nonsense is this? It most certainly is the job of parents to shape our children “into the people we think they should be,” to equip them for success in life, to teach them proper behavior — courtesy, moral virtue, etc. — for otherwise we might as well just abandon them to foster care and let them be raised by strangers hired by the government social-services bureaucracy. But I remind myself I intend to rant about this at length later, so please continue . . .)

“I think most mothers feel a pull on their hearts to let their children be who they are but because of their own conditioning and because of their current environment they acquiesce to pressures to raise the children in a more rigid traditional way,” says Fox.
She wants other parents to know it’s okay to let kids be themselves. “If by speaking out, I can validate any of those latent feelings, any of those small whispers in a mother, then I am incredibly grateful to have used my voice for something so honorable.”

Where to begin excavating this mountain of bovine excrement?

It might help to know that (a) Megan Fox’s parents divorced when she was only 3 years old and (b) she doesn’t have any brothers. Also, not to put too fine a point on it, but she’s kind of kooky. In a 2010 interview with Allure magazine, she used the F-word 24 times, described herself as afflicted with obsessive-compulsive disorder and said she has such a fear of germs that she won’t eat in a restaurant or use public toilets.

Promoting this notoriously neurotic woman as a parenting expert is so irresponsible that only the liberal media would think it’s a good idea.

We cannot at this time know how Megan Fox’s children will turn out, and this is a fundamental problem with any innovative theory of parenting.

It is rather easy for anyone — whether a professor or a neurotic actress — to deride “a more rigid traditional way” of raising children, to wax enthusiastic about the need for parents “to let their children be who they are,” or to praise “not subscribing to gender stereotypes.” This kind of rhetoric sounds benevolent and caring, positing an implied contrast to those bad parents who, supposedly, are forcing their children into “rigid” stereotypical gender roles, limiting their self-expression. However, we can point to functional, successful, happy, well-adjusted adults — actual living human beings — as evidence of what outcomes are likely (or at least, optimally possible) as a result of more traditional parenting. The argument for so-called “gender-neutral” parenting, on the other hand, suffers from a lack of evidence, simply because this “non-binary” approach is a recent fad among a small group of trend-conscious parents.

Megan Fox has told us why she’s raising her children in this unusual manner, avowing her idealistic goal of letting her son “discover how he wanted to express himself” — good intentions, which proverbially pave the road to Hell. The problem with any such innovation is not benevolent intentions, but unintended consequences. For more than a century, Americans have been subjected to a series of social-engineering projects that liberals have foisted upon us by via court rulings, legislation, bureaucratic regulation and the public school system. Many of these innovations have yielded obvious catastrophes (e.g., public housing projects like Chicago’s infamous Cabrini-Green) whereas in other cases, we have more difficulty identifying a cause-and-effect relationship between liberal good intentions and various social problems. In some cases, the catastrophic outcome still looms in the future, as with the unsustainable actuarial basis of Social Security and Medicare. Liberals may claim certain projects have “succeeded,” but conservatives must stipulate that (a) anything might “succeed” if one had many billions of dollars of taxpayer money to spend on it, (b) the beneficial outcome you claim might have been achieved by less costly policies, and (c) the whole thing could go disastrously wrong at some point in the future.

However, why must we concede that liberals always act in good faith? Liberals certainly do not extend this courtesy to their opponents. Disagree with a liberal and you’ll be accused of malign intentions — racist! sexist! homophobe! — without any evidence whatsoever. In the case of Megan Fox’s enthusiasm for “gender-neutral” parenthood, why should we suppose that her justification of this is sincere? As I’ve pointed out, Ms. Fox came from a dysfunctional family backgroound and has publicly described herself as suffering from serious psychiatric problems. She speaks of herself using therapeutic jargon, recounting a youthful “tomboy” phase as explaining why her “ego has been constructed around this idea that I’m not like most girls.” In justifying why she has publicly displayed her son wearing a princess costume, Ms. Fox speaks of her fear of leading her children “down a complicated and difficult path full of self-criticism and emptiness” — as if dressing a boy like a boy was inherently harmful. All of this suggests that Ms. Fox’s unusual parenting methods are not the result of any noble concern for her children’s well-being, but rather are an expression of her own personal frustrations, neurotic impulses and leftover resentments about her own unhappy childhood.

It is by no means a great leap of logic to guess that her son is “not subscribing to gender stereotypes” (something Ms. Fox claimed she knew before he was even born) because his mother has deliberately encouraged this behavior: Munchausen syndrome by proxy.

Having a “gender-non-conforming” (GNC) child is very en vogue among a certain clique of liberals, who are perfectly willing to exploit their children as a sort of political fashion accessory: “Hey, mom, turn your son into a ‘girl’ and get your own cable-TV reality show!”

This isn’t just about transgenderism, however. Remember how creepy it was the first time you saw those photos of Jon-Benet Ramsey dolled up for kiddie beauty pageants? And who can forget the weird pedophile vibes emitted by the TLC series Toddlers and Tiaras? Or what about that popular exercise in trauma-inducing childhood, Dance Moms?

When we see children exploited as a public display for the sake of TV ratings or to satisfy some weird parental whim, our common sense tells us that this is wrong. It may be legal, and it may even be popular or fashionable among certain people, but we ought to trust our gut instinct that there is something basically wrong about TV shows like I Am Jazz or Here Comes Honey Boo Boo. Whatever justifications are offered to rationalize this kind of programming, it offends our sense of human dignity that parents would permit their children to be exhibited like carnival sideshow freaks for the amusement of a TV audience. We expect bad things to result, both for the young reality-TV “stars” themselves, and also among viewers, a consequence of the “monkey-see-monkey-do” effect as such programming serves to normalize deviant behavior.

Liberals expect us to believe that Megan Fox’s son Noah just “wanted to express himself” by wearing a princess costume in public, and to believe that more boys would do this if parents weren’t afraid to “let their children be who they are.” We are also expected to remain silent while we are lectured by this self-declared parenting expert, rather than to express our common-sense hunch that this child’s abnormal behavior is being actively encouraged by his abnormal mom.

Here’s a question: If the only reason boys exhibit masculine behavior is because parents raise them in “a more rigid traditional way,” why is it wrong to believe that Megan Fox’s son exhibits effeminate behavior because of how his mother has raised him? That is to say, doesn’t her own explanation of how she thinks traditional parenthood operates imply that Ms. Fox has deliberately trained her son to be effeminate?

Parents shouldn’t buy their son a football for Christmas, Ms. Fox tells us. Why not? She doesn’t really explain that, does she? Where is the evidence that you are harming your son by getting him a football for Christmas? The parenting “expert” Megan Fox offers us no such evidence, even while expecting us to believe that it is entirely harmless for her to take her son out in public wearing a princess costume. Common sense tells us that there is something deceptive about these claims.

Skepticism is not paranoia. As a general rule, it is correct to suppose that abnormal behavior doesn’t emerge randomly in children, but rather is symptomatic of some disturbance in the normal developmental process. Something has gone awry in Megan Fox’s son’s life, but in a liberal community like Hollywood, it’s doubtful that social workers at Child Protective Services would intervene in this case. In fact, given how widely the idea of “gender-neutral parenting” is now promoted in academia, you’d be more likely to be reported to Child Protective Services in California if you were raising your son to be normal.

“Hello? . . . Yeah, there’s a family in my neighborhood who are stifling their children’s self-expression. . . . Well, I’ve noticed the boy spends a lot of time playing football, and they’ve got a little girl who always wears dresses. It must be abuse!”

The decadent cultural elite — including academics, journalists and Hollywood liberals like Megan Fox — have embraced a worldview where normal behavior is stigmatized, and perversion is celebrated.



 

Category: Celebrities, The Transgender Cult

In The Mailbox: 08.17.18

Posted on | August 17, 2018 | Comments Off on In The Mailbox: 08.17.18

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
EBL: Rome, You Have A Problem
Twitchy: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Attempts To Explain Her Town Hall Press Ban, Makes It Hilariously Worse
Louder With Crowder: Trevor Noah Slams Leftists, Peter Strzok Raising Money Over Trump Hate
According To Hoyt: From Where You Dream
Monster Hunter Nation: August Update Post
Vox Popoli: 75% Certainty

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: Friday Hawt Chicks & Links – The Spartan 300 Edition
American Thinker: Donald Trump & The Professional Conservative Class
Animal Magnetism: Rule Five WTF Vermont Friday
BattleSwarm: LinkSwarm For August 17
CDR Salamander: Fullbore Friday
Don Surber: The Official Trump Schadenfreude List, also, HUD Sues Facebook – Could Jeopardize All Internet Ads
Dustbury: Feel The Shrink
The Geller Report: Massive Muslim Brotherhood Show Of Strength To Be Held In Minnesota, also, John Brennan’s CIA “Acted Like An Office Of The Hillary Campaign”
Hogewash: I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means, also, The Evolving Universe
JustOneMinute: Just Don’t Call It “Fake News”
Legal Insurrection: Keith Ellison’s Accuser Karen Monahan Describes Alleged Abuse To CBS News, also, PragerU Claims They’ve Been Shadowbanned On Facebook
The PanAm Post: The United Nations – A Bastion of Corruption & Scandals
Power Line: Democrats Frighten Manafort Jurors, also, How The Left Is Outsourcing Censorship Of The Internet
Shark Tank: Jacksonville’s Mayor Curry Endorses Ron DeSantis
Shot In The Dark: Disastro
This Ain’t Hell: Horsing Around Southwest Airlines, also, Air Force Veteran Reality Leigh Winner
Victory Girls: John Brennan Steps On A Rake
Volokh Conspiracy: Fifth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenges To “Campus Carry”
Weasel Zippers: Fauxcahontas’ Batty Plan To Nationalize Everything, also, Louisiana Denies Citibank, BofA $600 Million Over Gun Control Push
Megan McArdle: We’re Not Doing Enough To Fully Integrate American Cities
Mark Steyn: The Constitutional Right To A Security Clearance


Featured Digital Deals
Amazon Warehouse Deals
Amazon Renewed – Guaranteed Refurbs

Category: Linkagery

Friday Fiction: 100 Word Challenge

Posted on | August 17, 2018 | Comments Off on Friday Fiction: 100 Word Challenge

by Smitty

“It’s wet,” he mumbled, working with a patient fury. Innocuous.
Guards scowled. The forty prisoners in the castle bailey were to work on pottery for their own use, and for Geneva Convention reasons of fair treament, they were told. They knew a trace element in the clay was killing them.
He shaped his piece with shaking hands. It’d been obtained and smuggled in at great risk while they were out burying the dead. They’d little time or energy. He looked at his conspirator, pale and feverish, who’d the detonator.
Nodded.
Ran to the wall.
Guards yelling.
Charge set.
(BOOM)
Freedom!
—
via Darleen

Category: Friday Fiction
« go back — keep looking »